Alexandra Bruce
April 13, 2013
See Part 1 here:

Here is a transcript I made of the more interesting passages of Part 2:

“The point of having Obama is that you’re going to have the same sort of Imperialism, only you’re going to give it a face-lift, you’re going to give cosmetic surgery. The goal, for Africa, is to kick the Chinese out. To deprive China of the oil – we’ve seen it, with Sudan; oil, raw materials and other things they give to China – and ultimately what they’d like to see is to isolate China, where China would have nowhere to turn for oil except the Russian oil wells in Eastern Siberia. The end product of this entire policy is to play China against Russia – and get rid of both of them – destroy them both – and then the US and the British can settle in for another 100 years of world domination.

“Now, there’s also another angle, for Europe. With Bush and McCain, the US is disliked; the policy is discredited – nobody wants to go along with us. The Demagoguery of Obama is that somehow, with this new face, you can get throngs and throngs and dupes and individuals who have really no clue what they’re doing. In other words, Obama wants Europe as a tool against Russia…

“This is the policy that Brzezinski has been following: NATO expansion, far beyond what has been previously agreed in 1990-1991, where we said the US would not go east of East Germany – but now we’ve gone past Lithuania, Georgia and Ukraine.

“What we’re getting into is a Polish Missile Crisis, much like the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962, which was bad enough. The Polish Missile Crisis is going to be worse because there are elements in Poland, there’s an element in the Czech Republic – there’s even an element in Lituania; a forward tentacle of that system, attempting to move forward, right on Russia’s doorstep. What is the goal of that? It is the ability to have a first strike, surprise attack, to destroy the Russian nuclear deterrent on the ground and somehow, the second strike by the Russians can somehow be suppressed by these missiles in Poland.

“It is a step towards WW3 and it is Brzezinski. Another angle that goes with it: the independence of Kosovo, under a criminal organization, in my view is another one of Brzezinski’s projects.

“The Neocons at least had one benefit: they picked on relatively defenseless states…But with Russia and China, they can defend themselves; they have Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles and H-bombs and they will use them. So, the Neocon game is over but you can see that at least they had some limits to their insanity, whereas, with Brzezinski, the insanity is essentially unlimited.”


Steady Freddy
October 29, 2008

Especially in politics it is of the utmost importance to try to look behind the facade: who makes up the team of the presidential candidate? The future president of the United States of America is for a large part dependent on and being fed by his team of advisors and future cabinet members. Webster Tarpley wrote a book on the men and women behind presidential hopeful Barack Obama. He argues that there is more to Obama than his charismatic appearance and that some of his advisors pose a danger to the US and the world in case Obama might be elected to become the next US president. Whether Tarpleys view is correct for now is a matter of opinion and remains to be seen, but for the public debate it is relevant to take note of his facts and arguments. Therefor DeepJournal interviewed Webster Tarpley on the topic of his recently published book Obama, The Postmodern Coup,The Making of a Manchurian Candidate.

Contributed by


You Might Like

Alexandra Bruce

View all posts

Add comment


Most Viewed Posts