ESTABLISHMENT CIVIL WAR?: Brzezinski’s Brass Knuckles – Murdoch’s Pretty Piefaced – Norway’s Puzzle Pieces

Is there a campaign being carried out by the left-wing elements of Western imperialism, against the right-wing elements? Are we witnessing a cutthroat civil war within the Western Establishment?


Firstly, if the reader feels mystified by a terminology of “right wing” or “left-wing” imperialism, they should understand that these terms are employed only as a matter of convenience, and identify political differences which are for the most part superficial and mild. We might describe, for example, Leo Strauss as “right-wing” and Halford Mackinder as “left-wing.” Both types tend to be abide by the Platonic concept of inspirational mythology as a means to affect public consciousness; the difference being Plato was not a bloodthirsty lunatic hell-bent on world domination. 


The reader can acquire an appreciation for what I am theorizing here by first watching this CNN video. Wolf Blitzer interviews Benjamin Netanyahu in September 2009 and the viewer should pay particular attention to Blitzer’s asking Netanyahu to respond to a statement made by Zbigniev Brzezinski a few days prior. Also note how the questions are designed to first establish whether or not Netanyahu would act without US approval in regards to military action against Iran. Note too Blitzer’s countenance throughout the interview, it is quite intense. Netanyahu is having a very tough time here and it is quite unusual for CNN to treat an Israeli prime minister this way. What prompted this very intriguing development? In exactly what context is this interview occurring?

It is not a coincidence that Brzezinski made those remarks just prior to Netanyahu’s US visit and subsequent meeting with President Obama. This Blitzer/Netanyahu interview is nothing less than a very public smack down being delivered unto the Israeli PM on live television. The neoconservative/Zionist element must have become much too aggressive in their push for war against Iran, necessarily causing US military leaders a great deal of anxiety. So Brzezinski brought out his sledgehammer and cracked some skull.

 I would theorize that Brzezinski, whose direction President Obama is under, understands perfectly well that an attack upon Iran would be disastrous for the United States, in imperialistic terms, and could very well initiate WWIII. He knows that the US would only wind up becoming an isolated pariah, and in my opinion Brzezinski feels that the US relationship with Israel always acts as an impediment to his imperialist designs. Of course, the US military and Joint Chiefs of Staff appreciate their vulnerability to Iran’s inevitable response to being attacked, as US military bases in the region would become targets of Iranian missiles and large numbers of US soldiers could be killed. Bear in mind that Brzezinski had also said “it could be a Liberty in reverse,” meaning Israeli fighter jets could wind up being shot down by the United States Air Force. This refers to an incident in 1967 when the USS Liberty was bombed by Israeli jets and torpedo boats, north of the Sinai peninsula. So Brzezinski’s rather stunning “we are not exactly impotent little babies” remark is his way of saying “the United States does not take orders from Tel Aviv, who the hell do you think you’re talking to?” and should be regarded as a kind of psychological offensive maneuver.

Clearly, there is a serious problem between the different factions within the Western establishment. The right-wing faction prefers straight military attack and are obsessively preoccupied with attacking Iran, while the left-wing faction prefers “humanitarian intervention” following covert subterfuge, as in Libya and now Syria. Both sides, of course, employ manufactured “color revolutions” as a strategy as well.


Recall that after the Murdoch phone-hacking story first emerged, it was reported that an anonymous former NYPD detective, who is now a private investigator, accused News of the World reporters of offering him or her money in exchange for the phone records of 9/11 victims. A very suspicious accusation in my opinion. The former cop is not named and the disturbing information is reported as coming from a “source.” A “source” had told of this accusation and not the former detective his or herself.

Think about this now. If you were a NY police officer/detective and someone offered you such a bribe, would you not feel a bit outraged ? If this is to be believed, why did this policeman not report this when it happened? Why only now?? If a reporter offers a cop money in exchange for information of some kind, that’s a crime isn’t it? Indeed, doesn’t this anonymous detective need to account for his or her self? Will he or she ever become known to the public? How would a police detective gain access to those records anyway and for what purpose would a reporter seek them? Should we imagine the reporter asking something like “I have the names of several 9/11 victims, can you get me their phone records?” What might a reporter do with that kind of information?

I don’t believe that this retired NYPD cop even exists and this “Murdoch reporters offered bribes for 9/11 victim phone record info” claim strikes me as propaganda designed to demonize Murdoch. What better way to slander Murdoch could be devised than this? “He did what? To 9/11 victims? OUTRAGE!!!!” It is also worth mentioning that it was Senator Rockefeller(D) who first called for an investigation into whether or not Murdoch’s hacking extended into the US, followed by two other prominent Democratic Senators.

 Can Murdoch be likened here to Bernie Madoff, insofar as Madoff’s criminality was well-known beforehand and only revealed for strategic reasons, for the sake of appeasing public anger. Very wealthy and powerful people are for the most part above the law and are usually protected and umbrella-ed by their contemporaries. Where was his wife’s right-hook when it was really needed? Was Murdoch’s downfall engineered for the sake of weakening the loudest voice representing the right-wing imperialist faction,  for a strategic reason?


Brzezinski understands that Netanyahu and his gang have got to, or at least be reduced to a position of great weakness, for the US to acquire some kind of leverage in its dealing with others in the region. That depends upon the US appearing to be an “honest broker” and all of that standardized bullcorn-talk. We can also be sure that Brzezinski is endlessly maddened by AIPAC and Obama’s need to appease to win reelection.

Have a look at this video from March of 2010. In it, CNN’s Jack Cafferty reports that a “middle east reporter” thinks that Obama may be interested in a “regime change” in Israel and characterizes US public opinion as having turned negative toward the Jewish state. Asking if the US needs to start “getting tougher,” he provides a commentary that casts Israel in a very poor light and notice how the single pro-Israel person cited by Cafferty comes across as a bit over the top.

A few months after this broadcast, thousands of Orthodox Jews staged a protest in Washington D.C. strongly condemning the Netanyahu government and accusing it of persecuting Orthodox Jews in Israel. The speakers uniformly describe the very existence of Israel as illegitimate, dismissing Zionism as do many Orthodox Jews.

Is it a coincidence that this large anti-Likud protest in Israel – which began on a smaller scale a couple of months ago and is middle class in character – is peaking right at the time of the Oslo massacre? It has grown exponentially since the below video was taken. When was the last time such large-scale civic action took place there?

Is it a coincidence that on August 3rd the new US ambassador to Israel tells the press that President Obama is interested in visiting Israel in the near future, saying this while Netanyahu is under such pressure? Is this perhaps psychological warfare? We should note too the reports spinning these protests as a case of the Arab Spring being exported to Israel.  The “Arab Spring” of course has been orchestrated by the various corporate-sponsored think tanks, the Brookings Institution, Chatham House, the Council on Foreign Relations et al, along with subversive fascist institutions such as the National Endowment for Democracy and the International Republican Institute


Coming on the heels of Murdoch’s fall from grace is the bombing and mass slaughter in Norway; a large explosion in Oslo is followed by an appalling mass killing and is allegedly carried out by a Muslim-hating right-wing Christian Zionist named Anders Breivik.

As usual we can see all the obvious holes in the story. Somehow the police can’t get there for an hour or so, just like no fighter jets appear for 90 minutes on 9/11. The absurdity of the “lone gunman who had no help” argument. All the reports of two shooters quickly repressed etc.

The more enlightened media, which exists exclusively on the internet, seems divided into two distinct camps in terms of the nature of this horrid operation. The overwhelming majority feel that this was clearly an Israeli operation. They highlight the strong pro-Palestinian character of both the Norwegian government and the children at this camp, who are the sons and daughters of liberal Norwegian politicians. They call attention to Norway’s efforts to promote the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign and the fact that they announced almost a year ago that they will no longer invest any money from their oil fund with any Israeli companies involved in building settlements within the Occupied Territories. The fact that Norway’s oil ministry was bombed is of course stressed, as is the photograph of Norway’s Foreign Minister walking through the camp, just days beforhand, while a young boy in the background holds a “boycott Israel” banner. Israel’s guilt could not be more clear in their opinion.

But those who believe Mossad carried out this operation should pay closer attention to their own thought processes. On the one hand, it is understood that the “manifesto” must be something manufactured, an unreality created by intelligence operatives. Many parts are alleged to have been copied verbatim from the Unabomber’s manifesto, though slightly adjusted to fit a right-wing profile. On the other hand, that same manifesto is then cited as evidencing Breivik’s right-wing Christian Zionism, his strong pro-Israel sentiment.

These two perceptions contradict one another and cannot be maintained simultaneously. Was Breivik the actual killer, acting out of hatred for Muslim immigration and cultural liberalism, and a strong supporter of Israel? Or was this an intelligence operation, designed to appear to have been carried out by a Christian Zionist? Furthermore, if this were an Israeli operation, why would the propagandists design a manifesto wherein the killer and his ideology are strongly pro-Israel and anti-Islamic? Does that make sense? Wouldn’t that amount to a public relations catastrophe for Israel? Is it not much more likely that the killer would be described as being anti-Jewish, as opposed to anti-Muslim? The propaganda within the manufactured manifesto should seek to distance Israel from the whole affair, no? What of the e-mails Breivik is alleged to have sent to so many pro-Israel/anti-Muslim European politicians and prominent pro-Israel right-wing Americans? Is that element of the propaganda a Mossad construct as well? We might also ask about the timing. What prompted the Israelis to conduct this operation at this moment in time? Finally, what are we to make of the nonexistent “Helpers of Global Jihad” who were first to claim responsibilty? What would be the purpose of that? A distraction, a misdirection? But why bother if they had already decided on the Christian Zionist profile, of course the immediate reaction from the masses would be “Muslims” so it’s nonsensical. The prepared profile of the killer is quite contrary to what we should expect from Israeli operatives. 

Since the manifesto was manufactured by the perpetrators of this horrid affair we should seek to uncover why it’s authors wanted the public to believe that the killer was a right-wing Christian Zionist. So what’s the answer?

Then there are those who feel that this was a NATO revenge operation, reminiscent of the Operation Gladio networks. This argument maintains that Norway is being punished and terrorized as a consequence of their withdrawing fighter jets from NATO’S war on Libya/Qadhafi assassination campaign on August 1st. This argument is also very weak and nonsensical.

Norway was originally scheduled to end its involvement with NATO on June 24th, but on June 10th they voted to extend their involvement until August 1st, so it’s simply not true that Norway was not cooperating with NATO. They’re contribution was reported as being 10% of the protecting(attacking) forces. NATO had no reason at all to conduct such a vicious attack upon Norwegian teenagers. If we entertain this NATO-revenge theory, we would also have to conclude that the operation was put together and carried out with breathtaking speed. Finally, the NATO-revenge theory does not account for the peculiar nature of the manifesto, nor for the accompanying accusatory propaganda offensive against all of these right-wing European and American politicians and pundits, alleged to have received e-mails from Breivik just before he carried out his attack.

We can characterize Operation Gladio and the depredations of the Red Brigades et al during the 60’s and 70’s as a right-wing attack upon Europe’s leftist elements, wherein the public is told that the dreaded commies and anarchists are attacking them. Today we may have a left-wing attack upon the right, wherein the public is told that the Islamophobic right-wingers are to blame. This writer contends that this characterization of the Oslo massacre makes far more sense.


At this point I must ask the reader to take a deep breath. We are about to alter our course. There are a number of elements here that are just baffling. They do not add up and while conducting my research my intuition kept whispering “something’s weird here.” I will confess right up front that there is no answer to these questions provided afterwards. I simply cannot put the pieces of this puzzle together, I cannot make them fit.

Look at this photograph:

This photograph appeared very quickly, not long at all after the story broke and is alleged to show several victims laying dead on the rocks. The placement of the bodies is impossible to reconcile; if all of these youngsters were running away in fear for their lives and then gunned down their bodies would never wind up in such positions. The pixelation of the victims of course would be explained as a matter of showing respect for the dignity of victims. Clearly, this photograph was prearranged and staged beforehand. But why? We might think to ourselves “well, they produced this fake photo to produce shock and horror within the public consciousness.”

Consider this very carefully. Imagine the conspirators during their planning stage, before the operation was carried out. As they are plotting their operation, would it ever occur to them that there was a need to produce such a picture? To stage a “here are the victims” propaganda photo? Would such a thought ever enter their minds if they were planning a mass killing?

I maintain that it would not. Think about it. If there were going to be 70+ dead teenagers after this operation was carried out, why would the conspirators feel that such a photograph was necessary? Wouldn’t the reality of all the murdered victims be horrific enough, in and of itself? Why would they feel that the public’s conscious would require such manipulation?

Now look at this photo:


This is alleged to be the killer as he is in the middle of his rampage.

Again, from what we understand of intelligence operations, this is also counterintuitive. Would the thought “we’ll produce a picture of  Breivik in the process of killing the victims, taken from the air” enter the minds of the conspirators? Wouldn’t that be a giveaway, given the fact that the long delay between the beginning of the rampage and the arrival of police rescue teams is accounted for via an abscense of available helicopters? Are these conspirators rank amateurs? If one of the plotters had suggested such an thing, wouldn’t it be rejected? “if we did that, people would ask “who took a picture from the air” and how would we account for it?” Again we have to wonder why the plotters would feel this was necessary.

We might respond to this by saying “they know the public doesn’t question what they’re told” but that still would not answer why they would feel it was necessary in the first place, again because the plotters would have anticipated an overwhelming public reaction of horror.

Now study this photo:

 This gives us the impression of rescued victims on their way to be attended to, while other rescue workers are on their way to help others. Why would the rescue workers be walking, pushing their gurney’s toward the scene instead of being transported by vehicle?

Here’s another curious photo: 

Not a very safe place to hide from a crazed killer, is it? The young man with the blue baseball cap and white striped jacket, what does his body language suggest? Brave photographer too, right? Deranged gunman on the loose and you’re on your boat exposing yourself to danger? This looks staged.

Consider this picture here:

Why does the spreading of the debris appear unnatural to me? It looks as though someone arrived with a dumptruck and spread things around. Big chunk of concrete on the right side Notice how on the left side the debris just ends at the curb there? And is that a firetruck or some kind of crane? The men with the blue headgear, are they firemen? See any ambulances or police cars? Look closely at the sky, see the two helicopters? We were told that they only had a single helicopter available on that day weren’t we? That’s why they couldn’t get there sooner. It’s all very perplexing.

I’m going to stop at this point and do some more research. This investigation began with a theory that I now feel is entirely inadequate. Please stay tuned for further updates.

About Richard Kurdt

Richard Kurdt. Citizen Journalist and Unrepentant Troublemaker.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to ESTABLISHMENT CIVIL WAR?: Brzezinski’s Brass Knuckles – Murdoch’s Pretty Piefaced – Norway’s Puzzle Pieces

  1. Mirza Ghalib says:

    Absolutely new approach. And beautifully presented. Of great benefit to us all. From now on we’ll keep this framework in mind before rushing to judgement on any given event.

    • R. Kurdt says:

      I’m glad you enjoyed it Mirza. That’s funny for you to say “we’ll keep this framework in mind before rushing to judgement” as that was exactly the point., but I don’t think it was stated directly. I’ll edit that in.

      My love and friendship, Richard.

  2. John says:

    Regarding the final photograph, the debris would probably have been cleared away so that the firetruck could access the area and so that its stabilising legs could be used. The two ‘helicopters’ are actually lights suspended on wires, as can be seen using google street view. The photograph was taken on the street called Grubbegata.

    • Appreciate your comment John and I thank you for clarifying what is seen in the sky. I should have studied more closely. No harm done in wondering out loud, trust me on that.

  3. Aangirfan says:

    I’ll add a link to my blog.

  4. Greetings from Norway says:

    Your theories about Oslo are so retarded that you should be ashamed of yourself.

    One of my friends got killed in the attacks. Nothing staged about that…

    You should pay respect for the victims insted of pissing on their memories!

    Fucking retard!

    • What’s my theory and what’s your friends name?

    • Harry Ecks says:

      If, as with 9/11, your friend(s) died for the global elites furtherance of their dominion, you should thank the author for raising vital issues. There is no shame or dishonour in considering such things.

      The story behind the Brevik “atrocities” are so full of holes they’re like a sieve. Grow up.

  5. “The placement of the bodies is impossible to reconcile; if all of these youngsters were running away in fear for their lives and then gunned down their bodies would never wind up in such positions”

    WHY? Just SAYING they never would…what good is that. Come with evidence, not useless speculations.

    “Clearly, this photograph was prearranged and staged beforehand”
    Again, you present NO proof what so ever. you start with a conclusion upfront, then trying to confirmt it as you go along. You are a complete piece of shit person showing no respecct for those 69 kids dying that day. Shame on you

    “Not a very safe place to hide from a crazed killer, is it? The young man with the blue baseball cap and white striped jacket, what does his body language suggest? Brave photographer too, right?”

    Again, showing what a moron you are; brave photographer? ever heard of lenses with more than 300mm? Its “only” 400 meters accross…no problem for the photographer to be on land shooting that picture.

    And not a very safe place to hide? It was maybe THE ONLY PLACE TO HIDE. Jesus….

    “Somehow the police can’t get there for an hour or so,”

    Wrong…it took them 35 minutes to get to there….and it is a 35 minute drive from oslo. Please get your facts straight. It did however take some time to get a boat. You know…there had just been a big exposion in oslo. Why do you ignorant conspiracy morons always look at things in retrospect, and have all the answers on how things REALLY should have been done; in the comfort of your own chair??


    • So the real conspiracy involves photos being taken from outerspace with the 300 MM camera, as Breivik is in the middle of his rampage? The aerial photo? And how did Breivik change his eye color BTW….

      • Greetings from Norway says:

        What’s with you conspiracytheorists anyway?

        I meen, we have a brain, right?

        Why don’t you use it?

        How on earth can you make an argument of a staged photo because of the posision of the bodies?

        Jon Vegard was my friends name…

      • Vegar says:

        For your information, those pictures of ABB in the middle of his rampage were taken by VGs (or NRKs, i dont remember) photograper in a helicopter circling a few rounds over Utøya, while taking random shoots of the Island.

        It was not untill after he got on the ground, the photographer realised he had taken pictures of ABB.

        So AGAIN…your wild speculations are miles off target.

        I repeat Greetings from Norways’s words…. you are not very good at this investigation stuff are you?

      • Vegar says:

        Im also looking forward hearing where the color of his eyes come in to the picture

  6. “I’m going to stop at this point and do some more research. This investigation began with a theory that I now feel is entirely inadequate.”

    I rest my case.

  7. Greetings from Norway says:

    The last picture where you see 2 helicopters is quit funny;

    It’s lights, my friend. Street lights…

    You’re not very good at this investigation stuff, are you?

  8. Greetings from Norway says:

    There was of course no photo taken from “outer space” either. There was, however a helicopter with a cameraman from NRK, the national television broadcast.

    They arrived on the scene at the last minutes before the terrorist was arrested.

    The most impressing thing with this “article” is how totaly wrong you are in every assumption you make…

    How is that possible?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s