posted on October 25, 2001 03:34:41 AM new
The entire world is objecting in some degree to the continuation of the bombing of Afganistan, yet the bombing goes on. The military moguls brave enough to approach the press admit that there are no viable targets which merit the expenditure of so much ordnance, yet thebombing goes on.
All manner of political platitudes are offered up by the bushbaby for that bombing, but do they hold water?
Here's a viewpoint that might tend to discount all reasons other than a long term plan to build an oil pipeline across Afganistan. We used to call the fighter-bombers "Fast Movers" in Vietnam, but now it looks like they might best be called Earth Movers"--flying dozers, graders, and backhoes flying at minimal risk for the defence of the great oil company profits.
Nina Burleigh has written for The Washington Post, The Chicago Tribune, and New York magazine. As a reporter for
TIME, she was among the first American journalists to enter Iraq after the Gulf War.
Recently I attended one of those legendary Washington dinner parties, attended by British cosmopolites and Americans
in the know. A few courses in, people were gossiping about the Bush family's close and enduring friendship with the
Saudi ambassador, Prince Bandar, dean of the diplomatic corps in Washington. By the end of the evening, everyone was
talking about how the unfolding events were going to affect the flow of oil out of Central Asia.
I left wondering whether 6,000 Americans might prove to have died in New York for the royal family of Saud, or oil, or
both. But I didn't have much more than insider dinner gossip to go on. I get my analysis from the standard all-American
news outlets. And they've been too focused on a) anthrax and smallpox, or b) the intricacies of Muslim fanaticism, to
throw any reporters at the murky ways in which international oil politics and its big players have a stake in what's
unfolding.
A quick Nexis search brought up a raft of interesting leads that would keep me busy for 10 years if the economics of this
war was my beat. But only two articles in the American media since September 11 have tried to describe how Big Oil
might benefit from a cleanup of terrorists and other anti-American elements in the Central Asia region. One was by
James Ridgeway of the Village Voice. The other was by a Hearst writer based in Paris and it was picked up only in the
San Francisco Chronicle.
In other words, only the Left is connecting the dots of what the Russians have called "The Great Game" -- how oil
underneath the 'stans' fits into the new world order. Here's just a small slice of what ought to provoke deeper research
by American reporters with resources and talent.
Start with father Bush. The former president and ex-CIA director is not unemployed these days. He's been globetrotting
as a member of Washington's Carlyle Group, a $12 billion private equity firm which employs a motorcade of former
ranking Republicans, including Frank Carlucci, Jim Baker and Richard Darman. George Bush senior and colleagues
open doors overseas for The Carlyle Group's "access capitalists."
Bush specializes in Asia and has been in and out of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait (countries that revere him thanks to the
Gulf War) often on business since his presidency. Baker, the pin-striped midwife of 'Election 2000' was working his
network in the 'stans' before the ink was dry on Clinton's first inaugural address. The Bin Laden family (presumably the
friendly wing) is also invested in Carlyle. Carlyle's portfolio is heavy in defense and telecommunications firms, although
it has other holdings including food and bottling companies.
The Carlyle connection means that George Bush Senior is on the payroll from private interests that have defense
business before the government, while his son is president. Hmmm. As Charles Lewis of the Washington-based Center
for Public Integrity, has put it, "in a really peculiar way, George W. Bush could, some day, benefit financially from his
own administration's decisions, through his father's investments. And that to me is a jaw-dropper."
Why can we assume that global businessmen like Bush Senior and Jim Baker care about who runs Afghanistan and NOT
just because it's home base for lethal anti-Americans? Because it also happens to be situated in the middle of that
perennial vital national interest -- a region with abundant oil. By 2050, Central Asia will account for more than 80 percent
of our oil. On September 10, an industry publication, Oil and Gas Journal, reported that Central Asia represents one of
the world's last great frontiers for geological survey and analysis, "offering opportunities for investment in the
discovery, production, transportation, and refining of enormous quantities of oil and gas resources."
It's assumed we need unimpeded access in the 'stans' for our geologists, construction workers and pipelines if we are
going to realize the conservation-free, fossil-fueled future outlined recently by Vice President Cheney. A number of
pipeline projects to carry Central Asia's resources west are already under way or have been proposed. They would go
through Russia, through the Caucasus or via Turkey and Iran. Each route will be within easy reach of the Taliban's thugs
and could be made much safer by an American vanquishment of Muslim terrorism.
There's also lots of oil beneath the turf of our politically precarious newest best friend, Pakistan. "Massive untapped gas
reserves are believed to be lying beneath Pakistan's remotest deserts, but they are being held hostage by armed tribal
groups demanding a better deal from the central government," reported Agence France Presse just days before
September 11.
So many business deals, so much oil, all those big players with powerful connections to the Bush administration. It
doesn't add up to a conspiracy theory. But it does mean there is a significant MONEY subtext that the American public
ought to know about as "Operation Enduring Freedom" blasts new holes where pipelines might someday be buried.
posted on October 25, 2001 10:04:00 AM new
What's it been? 2 weeks of bombing so far? These retards killed alot of innocent people. The Taliban must be stopped. Geez, they're even thinking of poisoning the food given to them by the U.S. so they can say Americans poisened the Afghani's. IMO, every bomb that destroys Taliban controlled sights is worth every day of bombing.
When Bush said we need to be patient and that this would be a long "battle", I think he had more than 2 weeks in mind.
posted on October 25, 2001 10:19:14 AM new
Finding convoluted logic to fix the blame on "Big Oil" for whatever hurts does not seem a very productive pastime.
posted on October 25, 2001 10:20:09 AM new
Uh huh. The Afganis did it. Uh huh.
but if this is true.....
Report by China News Service quoting Japanese source in Tokyo per the following (translated by AIT from Chinese from the site at:
http://www.chinanews.com.cn/2001-10-24/26/133210.html/ in Chinese, and http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/05/20011024id36.htm in Japanese):
"Chinese News Service Reports: Osama bin Laden Killed?"
Filed by Hiroyuki Sugiyama, Yomiuri Shimbun Reporter based in Beijing.
Based on Japanese sources in Tokyo, news report (s) has been received that on October 16th, both the leader of Taliban Afghanistan Omar and the leader of AlQaida, Osama bin
Laden, were both shot and killed in Afghanistan, by elements within their ranks. However at this time no other news sources have confirmed the assassinations.
The CNS news report stated that it is reported that Omar and Bin Laden had returned to one of the underground Taliban bases near Kandahar in the south, at approximately 11 a.m.
local time in Afghanistan on 16 October. As the two and others were entering the underground base, it was reported an ally fired upon his (Omar's) back from the rear. The report is
that Omar was hit in the upper torso, and bin Laden was hit once in the chest and once in the upper left shoulder area. Both expired at that location.
The report goes on to say that accompanying bin Laden were one of his sons and this son's wife, who were also hit with gunfire in the chest, waist and shoulder areas, and they too have
reported suffered fatal wounds from this attack. The second eldest son of Omar also suffered a gunshot wound to the right side of his lower torso, and escaped the shooting, but expired
on the following day." End of Text
posted on October 25, 2001 11:39:56 AM newMaybe someone could explain to me how big oil has helped the world.
Don't you think some of these conspiracy theorist would get tired if they could only blame the CIA? I think the oil companies have served some well. Any conflict can be linked to them in some way. If krs wasn't able to spoon feed some with his conspiracies the number of threads on this message board would dwindle dramatically.
The head of the oil conspiracy corporation toured the Alaska pipeline facilities several times, once I was able to capture his picture at great risk to my own safety. This is the man that krs is trying to alert us about.
I applaud the courage of krs, someday I'm sure the man pictured will be targeting krs for his Chicken Litt.... errr his Paul Revere actions.
posted on October 25, 2001 11:45:29 AM new
Some people didn't need spoon feeding. Some people are already thinking the same things. As I recall some of us were discussing just this type of thing before the last presidential "election".
posted on October 25, 2001 12:11:49 PM new
140 years ago I remember on this message board (you have to go into the archives) warnings of the railroad barons engineering the Civil War so they could standardize track widths and take over the southern lines.
posted on October 25, 2001 12:16:32 PM new
My goodness uaru, you did such a bang up job you've convinced me. Allelujah! I've seen the truth. I'm so easily led, don't have a single original thought in my puny little head. Quick now, tell me more before I switch sides again.
[ edited by rachelcrisscross on Oct 25, 2001 12:17 PM ]
posted on October 25, 2001 12:25:19 PM newQuick now, tell me more before I switch sides again.
Are you interested in the oil companies engineering the attacks in Afghanistan or about the railroad barons engineering the Civil War? Which one are you shaky on?
posted on October 25, 2001 12:33:05 PM newYou choose, I'll follow. Maybe. Whoops! Missed your chance. Someone else has already convinced me of something else.
Hello,hello,hello, is there anybody in there?
[ edited by rachelcrisscross on Oct 25, 2001 12:40 PM ]
