WeAreChange confronts Zbigniew Brzezinski 3rd time

Where is any evidence for Brzezinski's involvement?

It seems like too broad a brush is being used to involve Brzezinski in anything 911 related.

He is on record raising his concerns publicly, that a false provocation implicating Iran would be used to justify attacking that country.

He is opposed to what is going on in Iraq and he is also now saying we shouldn't continue a military buildup in Afghanistan.

It was conventional wisdom to oppose the Soviet's in Afghanistan in the 1980's so how does that lead to anything nefarious today?

I believe his book "The grand chessboard" is being taken out of context.

I would like to hear evidence, circumstantial or otherwise, other than "he attends the Bilderberg meetings" to justify suspicion of this man.

Research Bilderberg

Remember, we've had moles inside of Bilderberg for years. Jim Tucker's internal sources as well as Daniel Estulin's sources have named Brzezinski as a frequent attendee, as covered in the video. Why would Bilderberg release the guest list for the first time ever in 2008? Probably because all the previous guest lists that were leaked from the inside were legitimate. And Brzezinski's name has been on many of them. Tucker and Estulin's sources have proven to be accurate time and time again.

Heck, even Brzezinski's Wikipedia say's he's Bilderberg:

Rising Influence

"He also became a member of the Council on Foreign Relations in New York and attended meetings of the Bilderberg Group."

And according to Wiki's 'List of Bilderberg Attendees"


Brzezinski has been a guest in 1966, 1968, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1978, and 1985.

We all know that Wikipedia is not the most reliable source in itself, but they are known for censorship. The fact they they admit it is quite interesting. But the key is Tucker and Estulin's sources. Read Estulin's 'The True Story of the Bilderberg Group' for more sources and documentation. Photographic evidence of Brzezinski at Bilderberg would be nice. I'm not sure if any exists.

You need more than that to accuse him of anything

Even if Brzezinski attends Bilderberg meetings there is no evidence for Bilderberg involvement in 911 and you don't provide any here.

It is interesting that you bring up these supposed moles, but apparently have no information from them as to what was discussed at these meetings.

Most of us don't like secret meetings of powerful private individuals but they aren't illegal. I think using the Bilderberg thing, against Brzezinski and others, without even circumstantial evidence for complicity in the events of Sept. 11, 2001, is premature and can cause the movement to be looked at as sloppy with a corresponding loss of credibility.

There are plenty of people who have a direct or circumstantial connection to the events of 911, or who have the ability to further investigate it and aren't, who need to be continuously confronted. A partial and far from complete list, would include people like Rudy Giulliani, Bernard Kerik, Larry Silverstein, Marvin Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, General Richard Myers, all signatories of the PNAC document, former FEMA director Joseph Allbaugh, Fire Chiefs like Daniel Nigro, members of the 911 commission, those involved in the FEMA and NIST investigations like Gene Corley and Mete Sozen, members of Congress, the mayor of NYC, the district attorney of NYC, the attorney general of NY State, etc. .

Brzezinski isn't one of them and there simply is no evidence whatsoever that he would have had any involvement or motive to do so. The fact of the matter is that Brzezinski is publicly on record as being opposed to most of the things that 911 appears to have been staged as a pretext for, but it seems that hasn't entered into the equation when deciding to confront him on this issue.

Have you read Estulin's 'The True Story of the Bilderberg Group'

? And I don't remember accusing him of being behind 9/11. You are defending a man lying about his involvement with a secretive group that is deciding policy behind closed doors with no oversight. You are obviously unfamiliar with the great work of Jim Tucker, Daniel Estulin, and others. Sounds like someone needs to do their homework!

I thought the point here was 911 and potential proof

I am not defending secretive decision making with no oversight. I don't approve of it and I don't like it personally. I think I touched on that in my second post. While I haven't read the specific books you mention, I have been railing about the Trilateral Commission and the CFR seeming secretive power structures probably longer than you have been alive, but an investigation into 911 can't just cast a net on these type people because we think maybe they might have used their secret power to cause it. That is raunch conspiracy theory with no basis, and Brzezinski's opposition to what is going on foreign policy wise is diametrically opposed to that notion and shows it is much more complicated than some of you guys seem to think.

It sounds like some at We Are Change have decided the Bilderberg group is part of the problem, based on it being a group of powerful people that has private meetings, and feel the need to attack them. However, you have no proof of anything related to 911 so what is the point in confronting these people concerning 911?

Suppose someone who belonged to the CFR was involved in the 911 conspiracy. Would that implicate the entire group? I certainly believe Dick Cheney, who is a member of the CFR, was involved. However, what proof is there that others in the group were in on it?

What policies do you know have been decided by the Bilderberg group? What policies do Jim Tucker, Daniel Estulin, and the others say were decided by the Bilderberg group and what is their evidence for it?

I believe the Trilateral Commission and the CFR have had a say in U.S. foreign policy over the last thirty-five years, and I don't think that should have been allowed. I do think the founder of these groups, David Rockefeller, has wielded far too much power for a private citizen, which has affected the lives of many others. However, I am not sure all of the people in those groups would have been involved in 911.

Finally, all I am saying is that there is no evidence of any connection, of those attending Bilderberg meetings, to 911. So if you do confront them, even implying they were somehow behind it (which has been done) then that is a big chance being taken without sufficient basis. This could definitely hurt the credibility of the movement. This is especially true in the case of Brzezinski, who abhors what has been going on with U.S. foreign policy in the name of 911.

I would be more careful with my rage.

Again, you are putting words in our mouth

Not once in this video did we mention Brzezinski's involvement or the Bilderberg's involvement in 9/11. We have never made such a claim so you are watching the wrong video. Although that connection most likely exists, we are an activist organization before a research group. And it is not only our right, but our DUTY to confront corrupt politicians who decide policy behind closed doors with no oversight. You admit that the people behind Bilderberg are involved in great evil, yet you apologize for the rest of the people meeting behind closed doors with these evil men. You also admit that you have not read Daniel Estulin's 'The True Story of the Bilderberg Group' but then you mockingly ask what policies have been decided. I'm not gonna do your homework for you Tony. I have enough work to do making videos for We Are Change. I recommend you get yourself a copy. It's a great book. I will leave it at that.

I agree completely.

Ignorance on ZB does not spell good news.

The CONSTITUTION is NOT going to "collapse" into pulverized dust no matter how much thermate/explosives or planes they throw at it

Your point is well stated.

Your point is well stated. Let's focus on high-yield subjects regardless of how tough their protective shells. We see excellent researchers uncover important clues even after all this time, by relentlessly pursuing topics and subjects of the highest relevance. I believe the movement is gaining ground more than ever. In aviation history the expression was to "push the envelope" meaning to increase the speed and altitude profile of emerging aircraft. Sometimes it happened in large jumps and sometimes in painfully small bits. Constant effort and perseverance is the key to this game.

Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.


"Brzezinski is publicly on record as being opposed to most of the things that 911 appears to have been staged as a pretext for"

Um, no. He's backpedaling faster than Fukiyama, but his words speak for themselves:

"Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some five hundred years ago, Eurasia has been the center of world power."- (p. xiii)

"... But in the meantime, it is imperative that no Eurasian challenger emerges, capable of dominating Eurasia and thus of also challenging America. The formulation of a comprehensive and integrated Eurasian geostrategy is therefore the purpose of this book.” (p. xiv)

"In that context, how America 'manages' Eurasia is critical. A power that dominates Eurasia would control two of the world's three most advanced and economically productive regions. A mere glance at the map also suggests that control over Eurasia would almost automatically entail Africa's subordination, rendering the Western Hemisphere and Oceania (Australia) geopolitically peripheral to the world's central continent. About 75 per cent of the world's people live in Eurasia, and most of the world's physical wealth is there as well, both in its enterprises and underneath its soil. Eurasia accounts for about three-fourths of the world's known energy resources." (p.31)

“The momentum of Asia's economic development is already generating massive pressures for the exploration and exploitation of new sources of energy and the Central Asian region and the Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea." (p.125)

"For America, the chief geopolitical prize is Eurasia... Now a non-Eurasian power is preeminent in Eurasia - and America's global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained.” (p.30)

"Two basic steps are thus required: first, to identify the geostrategically dynamic Eurasian states that have the power to cause a potentially important shift in the international distribution of power and to decipher the central external goals of their respective political elites and the likely consequences of their seeking to attain them;... second, to formulate specific U.S. policies to offset, co-opt, and/or control the above..." (p. 40)

"Henceforth, the United States may have to determine how to cope with regional coalitions that seek to push America out of Eurasia, thereby threatening America's status as a global power." (p.55)

"Uzbekistan, nationally the most vital and the most populous of the central Asian states, represents the major obstacle to any renewed Russian control over the region. Its independence is critical to the survival of the other Central Asian states, and it is the least vulnerable to Russian pressures." (p. 121)

[Referring to an area he calls the "Eurasian Balkans" and a 1997 map in which he has circled the exact location of the current conflict - describing it as the central region of pending conflict for world dominance]
"Moreover, they [the Central Asian Republics] are of importance from the standpoint of security and historical ambitions to at least three of their most immediate and more powerful neighbors, namely Russia, Turkey and Iran, with China also signaling an increasing political interest in the region. But the Eurasian Balkans are infinitely more important as a potential economic prize: an enormous concentration of natural gas and oil reserves is located in the region, in addition to important minerals, including gold." (p.124)

"The world's energy consumption is bound to vastly increase over the next two or three decades. Estimates by the U.S. Department of energy anticipate that world demand will rise by more than 50 percent between 1993 and 2015, with the most significant increase in consumption occurring in the Far East. The momentum of Asia's economic development is already generating massive pressures for the exploration and exploitation of new sources of energy and the Central Asian region and the Caspian Sea basin are known to contain reserves of natural gas and oil that dwarf those of Kuwait, the Gulf of Mexico, or the North Sea." (p.125)

"Once pipelines to the area have been developed, Turkmenistan's truly vast natural gas reserves augur a prosperous future for the country's people.” (p.132)

"For Pakistan, the primary interest is to gain Geostrategic depth through political influence in Afghanistan - and to deny to Iran the exercise of such influence in Afghanistan and Tajikistan - and to benefit eventually from any pipeline construction linking Central Asia with the Arabian Sea." (p.139)

"It follows that America's primary interest is to help ensure that no single power comes to control this geopolitical space and that the global community has unhindered financial and economic access to it." (p14

"Without sustained and directed American involvement, before long the forces of global disorder could come to dominate the world scene. And the possibility of such a fragmentation is inherent in the geopolitical tensions not only of today's Eurasia but of the world more generally." (p.194)

"With warning signs on the horizon across Europe and Asia, any successful American policy must focus on Eurasia as a whole and be guided by a Geostrategic design." (p.197)

"That puts a premium on maneuver and manipulation in order to prevent (preempt) the emergence of a hostile coalition that could eventually seek to challenge America's primacy..." (p. 198)

"The most immediate task is to make certain that no state or combination of states gains the capacity to expel the United States from Eurasia or even to diminish significantly its decisive arbitration role." (p. 198)

"In the long run, global politics are bound to become increasingly uncongenial to the concentration of hegemonic power in the hands of a single state. Hence, America is not only the first, as well as the only, truly global superpower, but it is also likely to be the very last." (p.209)

"The attitude of the American public toward the external projection of American power has been much more ambivalent. The public supported America's engagement in World War II largely because of the shock effect of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.” (pp 24-5)

“It is also a fact that America is too democratic at home to be autocratic abroad. This limits the use of America's power, especially its capacity for military intimidation. Never before has a populist democracy attained international supremacy. But the pursuit of power is not a goal that commands popular passion, except in conditions of a sudden threat or challenge to the public's sense of domestic well-being. The economic self-denial (that is, defense spending) and the human sacrifice (casualties, even among professional soldiers) required in the effort are uncongenial to democratic instincts. Democracy is inimical to imperial mobilization." (p.35)

"Moreover, as America becomes an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly massive and widely perceived direct external threat." (p. 211)

"...To put it in a terminology that harkens back to the more brutal age of ancient empires, the three grand imperatives of imperial geostrategy are to prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and to keep the barbarians from coming together." (p.40)

Ruppert on Ziggy

A War in the Planning for Four Years


Zbigniew Brzezinski and the CFR Put War Plans In a 1997 Book -
It Is "A Blueprint for World Dictatorship," Says a Former German Defense and NATO Official Who Warned of Global Domination in 1984,
in an Exclusive Interview With FTW

Michael C. Ruppert


"THE GRAND CHESSBOARD - American Primacy And It's Geostrategic Imperatives," Zbigniew Brzezinski, Basic Books, 1997.

These are the very first words in the book: "Ever since the continents started interacting politically, some five hundred years ago, Eurasia has been the center of world power."- p. xiii. Eurasia is all of the territory east of Germany and Poland, stretching all the way through Russia and China to the Pacific Ocean. It includes the Middle East and most of the Indian subcontinent. The key to controlling Eurasia, says Brzezinski, is controlling the Central Asian Republics. And the key to controlling the Central Asian republics is Uzbekistan. Thus, it comes as no surprise that Uzbekistan was forcefully mentioned by President George W. Bush in his address to a joint session of Congress, just days after the attacks of September 11, as the very first place that the U.S. military would be deployed.

As FTW has documented in previous stories, major deployments of U.S. and British forces had taken place before the attacks. And the U.S. Army and the CIA had been active in Uzbekistan for several years. There is now evidence that what the world is witnessing is a cold and calculated war plan - at least four years in the making - and that, from reading Brzezinski's own words about Pearl Harbor, the World Trade Center attacks were just the trigger needed to set the final conquest in motion.


FTW, November 7, 2001, 1200 PST (Revised Jan. 21,2002) - There's a quote often attributed to Allen Dulles after it was noted that the final 1964 report of the Warren Commission on the assassination of JFK contained dramatic inconsistencies. Those inconsistencies, in effect, disproved the Commission's own final conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone on November 22, 1963. Dulles, a career spy, Wall Street lawyer, the CIA director whom JFK had fired after the 1961 Bay of Pigs fiasco - and the Warren Commission member who took charge of the investigation and final report - is reported to have said, "The American people don't read."

Some Americans do read. So do Europeans and Asians and Africans and Latin Americans.

World events since the attacks of September 11, 2001 have not only been predicted, but also planned, orchestrated and - as their architects would like to believe - controlled. The current Central Asian war is not a response to terrorism, nor is it a reaction to Islamic fundamentalism. It is in fact, in the words of one of the most powerful men on the planet, the beginning of a final conflict before total world domination by the United States leads to the dissolution of all national governments. This, says Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member and former Carter National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, will lead to nation states being incorporated into a new world order, controlled solely by economic interests as dictated by banks, corporations and ruling elites concerned with the maintenance (by manipulation and war) of their power. As a means of intimidation for the unenlightened reader who happens upon this frightening plan - the plan of the CFR - Brzezinski offers the alternative of a world in chaos unless the U.S. controls the planet by whatever means are necessary and likely to succeed.

This position is corroborated by Dr. Johannes B. Koeppl, Ph.D. a former German defense ministry official and advisor to former NATO Secretary General Manfred Werner. On November 6, he told FTW, "The interests behind the Bush Administration, such as the CFR, The Trilateral Commission - founded by Brzezinski for David Rockefeller - and the Bilderberger Group, have prepared for and are now moving to implement open world dictatorship within the next five years. They are not fighting against terrorists. They are fighting against citizens."

Brzezinski's own words - laid against the current official line that the United States is waging a war to end terrorism - are self-incriminating. In an ongoing series of articles, FTW has consistently established that the U.S. government had foreknowledge of the World Trade Center attacks and chose not to stop them because it needed to secure public approval for a war that is now in progress. It is a war, as described by Vice President Dick Cheney, "that may not end in our lifetimes." What that means is that it will not end until all armed groups, anywhere in the world, which possess the political, economic or military ability to resist the imposition of this dictatorship, have been destroyed.

These are the "terrorists" the U.S. now fights in Afghanistan and plans to soon fight all over the globe.

Before exposing Brzezinski (and those he represents) with his own words, or hearing more from Dr. Koeppl, it is worthwhile to take a look at Brzezinski's background.

According to his resume Brzezinski, holding a 1953 Ph.D. from Harvard, lists the following achievements:

Counselor, Center for Strategic and International Studies

Professor of American Foreign Policy, Johns Hopkins University

National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter (1977-81)

Trustee and founder of the Trilateral Commission

International advisor of several major US/Global corporations

Associate of Henry Kissinger

Under Ronald Reagan - member of NSC-Defense Department Commission on Integrated Long-Term Strategy

Under Ronald Reagan - member of the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board

Past member, Board of Directors, The Council on Foreign Relations

1988 - Co-chairman of the Bush National Security Advisory Task Force.

Brzezinski is also a past attendee and presenter at several conferences of the Bilderberger group - a non-partisan affiliation of the wealthiest and most powerful families and corporations on the planet.

The Grand Chessboard

Brzezinski sets the tone for his strategy by describing Russia and China as the two most important countries - almost but not quite superpowers - whose interests that might threaten the U.S. in Central Asia. Of the two, Brzezinski considers Russia to be the more serious threat. Both nations border Central Asia. In a lesser context he describes the Ukraine, Azerbaijan, Iran and Kazakhstan as essential "lesser" nations that must be managed by the U.S. as buffers or counterweights to Russian and Chinese moves to control the oil, gas and minerals of the Central Asian Republics (Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan).

He also notes, quite clearly (p. 53) that any nation that might become predominant in Central Asia would directly threaten the current U.S. control of oil resources in the Persian Gulf. In reading the book it becomes clear why the U.S. had a direct motive for the looting of some $300 billion in Russian assets during the 1990s, destabilizing Russia's currency (1998) and ensuring that a weakened Russia would have to look westward to Europe for economic and political survival, rather than southward to Central Asia. A dependent Russia would lack the military, economic and political clout to exert influence in the region and this weakening of Russia would explain why Russian President Vladimir Putin has been such a willing ally of U.S. efforts to date. (See FTW Vol. IV, No. 1 - March 31, 2001)


The Horror - And Comments From Someone Who Worked With Brzezinski

Brzezinski's book is sublimely arrogant. While singing the praises of the IMF and the World Bank, which have economically terrorized nations on every continent, and while totally ignoring the worldwide terrorist actions of the U.S. government that have led to genocide; cluster bombings of civilian populations from Kosovo, to Laos, to Iraq, to Afghanistan; the development and battlefield use of both biological and chemical agents such as Sarin gas; and the financial rape of entire cultures, it would leave the reader believing that such actions are for the good of mankind.

While seconded from the German defense ministry to NATO in the late 1970s, Dr. Johannes Koeppl traveled to Washington on more than one occasion. He also met with Brzezinski in the White House on more than one occasion. His other Washington contacts included Steve Larabee from the CFR, John J. McCloy, former CIA Director, economist Milton Friedman, and officials from Carter's Office of Management and Budget. He is the first person I have ever interviewed who has made a direct presentation at a Bilderberger conference and he has also made numerous presentations to sub-groups of the Trilateral Commission. That was before he spoke out against them.

His fall was rapid after he realized that Brzezinski was part of a group intending to impose a world dictatorship. "In 1983/4 I warned of a take-over of world governments being orchestrated by these people. There was an obvious plan to subvert true democracies and selected leaders were not being chosen based upon character but upon their loyalty to an economic system run by the elites and dedicated to preserving their power.

"All we have now are pseudo-democracies."

Koeppl recalls meeting U.S. Congressman Larry McDonald in Nuremburg in the early 80s. McDonald, who was then contemplating a run for the Presidency, was a severe critic of these elites. He was killed in the Russian shootdown of Korean Air flight 007 in 1985. Koeppl believes that it might have been an assassination. Over the years many writers have made these allegations about 007 and the fact that someone with Koeppl's credentials believes that an entire plane full of passengers would be destroyed to eliminate one man offers a chilling opinion of the value placed on human life by the powers that be.

In 1983, Koeppl warned, through Op-Ed pieces published in NEWSWEEK and elsewhere, that Brzezinski and the CFR were part of an effort to impose a global dictatorship. His fall from grace was swift. "It was a criminal society that I was dealing with. It was not possible to publish anymore in the so-called respected publications. My 30 year career in politics ended.

"The people of the western world have been trained to be good consumers; to focus on money, sports cars, beauty, consumer goods. They have not been trained to look for character in people. Therefore what we need is education for politicians, a form of training that instills in them a higher sense of ethics than service to money. There is no training now for world leaders. This is a shame because of the responsibility that leaders hold to benefit all mankind rather than to blindly pursue destructive paths.

"We also need education for citizens to be more efficient in their democracies, in addition to education for politicians that will create a new network of elites based upon character and social intelligence."

Koeppl, who wrote his 1989 doctoral thesis on NATO management, also authored a 1989 book - largely ignored because of its controversial revelations - entitled "The Most Important Secrets in the World." He maintains a German language web site at www.antaris.com and he can be reached by email at jbk@antaris.com.

As to the present conflict Koeppl expressed the gravest concerns, "This is more than a war against terrorism. This is a war against the citizens of all countries. The current elites are creating so much fear that people don't know how to respond. But they must remember. This is a move to implement a world dictatorship within the next five years. There may not be another chance."

Its not "America's interests"

The New World Order sits above nation states and exists to preserve global elite status for its membership.

It starts wars and funds both sides. It rigs elections in the United States, Canada, Mexico, England, France, Australia, et . . and installs it "managers" as heads of states.

America is not the enemy of the world. Americans are then enemy of the New World Order because of our belief in individual rights and our constitution.

We are being taken apart piece by piece. The 700 Billion dollar bailout is just part of that continuum.