Afghanistan- A War For Gas And Oil Pipelines…

Wednesday, 5 August 2009

Image – US army bases in Afghanistan

Image – Oil and Gas pipeline routes

Image – oil and gas pipe line routes through Afghanistan

Is there anything dumber than a journalist who writes for the Times.

Take Bronwen Maddox and her article here ;

Usually when a journalist idiot wants us to become entangled in another war / social work action using the British army / policing role / Oil Imperialism escapade then they either use the usual ‘Think of the children’ routine or now the ‘what about the women’ routine.

I cannot believe that such people are allowed to write for The Times, unless the Times is still ‘seeding public opinion with lies’ as Carol Quigley stated in his books was its main role.

We are not in Afghanistan for any of the following reasons ;

1) Helping the children
2) Helping the women
3) Stopping the heroin
4) Fighting terrorism
5) Stopping terrorism in the UK

There is in fact two reasons why we are in fghanistan, and why British soldiers are dying, and that is for ;

1) Oil

2) Gas

The maps above show you the proposed Oil pipe line and gas pipe line planned for Afghanistan – The Eurasian Corridor.

An agreement has been signed in the Turkmen capital, Ashgabat, paving the way for construction of a gas pipeline from the Central Asian republic through Afghanistan to Pakistan.

The Global research Group states that ;

The Eurasian Corridor

Since the 2001 invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, the US has a military presence on China’s Western frontier, in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The U.S. is intent upon establishing permanent military bases in Afghanistan, which occupies a strategic position bordering on the former Soviet republics, China and Iran.

Moreover, the US and NATO have also established since 1996, military ties with several former Soviet republics under GUUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and Moldava). In the post 9/11 era, Washington has used the pretext of the “global war against terrorism” to further develop a U.S. military presence in GUUAM countries. Uzbekistan withdrew from GUUAM in 2002.(The organization is now referred to as GUAM).

China has oil interests in Eurasia as well as in sub-Saharan Africa, which encroach upon Anglo-American oil interests.

What is at stake is the geopolitical control over the Eurasian corridor.

In March 1999, the U.S. Congress adopted the Silk Road Strategy Act, which defined America’s broad economic and strategic interests in a region extending from the Eastern Mediterranean to Central Asia. The Silk Road Strategy (SRS) outlines a framework for the development of America’s business empire along an extensive geographical corridor.

The successful implementation of the SRS requires the concurrent “militarization” of the entire Eurasian corridor as a means to securing control over extensive oil and gas reserves, as well as “protecting” pipeline routes and trading corridors. This militarization is largely directed against China, Russia and Iran.

Take a look at the maps above – then note how the army bases are in prime positions to protect the oil and gas pipelines.

That is what this ‘war’ is about.

The Afghanistan war is about securing the territory through which the oil and gas pipelines will have to pass through in order to ensure Russia, China and Iran are outmanouvered in the last great wars for the last of the global oil supplies on the planet.

Only yesterday the Independent reported that the Peak Oil process is even close than the ‘experts’ have been so far admitting.

The world is heading for a catastrophic energy crunch that could cripple a global economic recovery because most of the major oil fields in the world have passed their peak production, a leading energy economist has warned.

Higher oil prices brought on by a rapid increase in demand and a stagnation, or even decline, in supply could blow any recovery off course, said Dr Fatih Birol, the chief economist at the respected International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris, which is charged with the task of assessing future energy supplies by OECD countries.

This is what the Iraq War and Afghanistan War are about.

This is also why China is exporting millions of its people into Africa in order to colonise the African continent as Lebensraum for the Chinese state – and to steal its oil and resources from the indigenous African people.

British troops are being slaughtered in Afghanistan for gas and oil pipelines.

That is the truth behind the lies the government spin.

They lied to get us into Iraq and they are lieing now about why we went into Afghanistan.

The Taliban are not Al Qaeda.

The Taliban are mainly local Afghans who do not want to be occupied by any invading army, local Afghan nationalists resisting occupation, ISI pakistani agents fighting a proxy war against the US, drug smugglers and opium growers protecting their drug territories, foreign jihadists working with the pakistani ISI and the angry relatives of Afghans killed by coalition forces getting revenge.

The Taliban are not a threat to us – the fact we are over there means Islamists will attack us over there and over here.

We must withdraw and seal our own national borders, deport all islamists from the UK, execute all conviccted islamist terrorists in the UK, deport all those that fund, support and assist Islamist terrorism in the UK – and most important of all create a 100 % national energy production system that means we do not have to depend on any imports of energy from the Middle East oil, Russian gas or Eurasian oil and gas supplies.

We are at risk of being attacked here in Britain, because we are over there in Islamic nations stealing their gas and oil, or stealing their land to allow us to pump the gas and oil of other nations into our nations.


31 responses to “Afghanistan- A War For Gas And Oil Pipelines…

  1. Saturday, 08 August 2009
    Barracks and Burger King: U.S. Builds a Supersized Base in Afghanistan

    ‘Bagram Air Base, Afghanistan — Anyone who thinks the Afghanistan troop “surge” is a temporary, one-time deal should watch the construction here of a vast new $17 million barracks building. It’s not temporary. It’s three stories of concrete.’

    Read more…


  2. Why the World Trade Center Was Allowed to be Crash-Bombed

    Scroll ahead to the hightlighted sections for the substance

    Testimony By
    John J. Maresca
    Vice President, International Relations,
    UNOCAL Corporation

    To House Committee On International Relations,
    Submmittee On Asia And The Pacific
    February 12, 1998
    Washington, D.C.

    Mr. Chairman, I am John Maresca, Vice President, International Relations, of Unocal Corporation. Unocal is one of the world’s leading energy resource and project development companies. Our activities are focused on three major regions — Asia, Latin America and the U.S. Gulf of Mexico. In Asia and the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, we are a major oil and gas producer. I appreciate your invitation to speak here today. I believe these hearings are important and timely, and I congratulate you for focusing on Central Asia oil and gas reserves and the role they play in shaping U.S. policy.

    Today we would like to focus on three issues concerning this region, its resources and U.S. policy:

    The need for multiple pipeline routes for Central Asian oil and gas.

    The need for U.S. support for international and regional efforts to achieve balanced and lasting political settlements within Russia, other newly independent states and in Afghanistan.

    The need for structured assistance to encourage economic reforms and the development of appropriate investment climates in the region. In this regard, we specifically support repeal or removal of Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act.

    For more than 2,000 years, Central Asia has been a meeting ground between Europe and Asia, the site of ancient east-west trade routes collectively called the Silk Road and, at various points in history, a cradle of scholarship, culture and power. It is also a region of truly enormous natural resources, which are revitalizing cross-border trade, creating positive political interaction and stimulating regional cooperation. These resources have the potential to recharge the economies of neighboring countries and put entire regions on the road to prosperity.

    About 100 years ago, the international oil industry was born in the Caspian/Central Asian region with the discovery of oil. In the intervening years, under Soviet rule, the existence of the region’s oil and gas resources was generally known, but only partially or poorly developed.

    As we near the end of the 20th century, history brings us full circle. With political barriers falling, Central Asia and the Caspian are once again attracting people from around the globe who are seeking ways to develop and deliver its bountiful energy resources to the markets of the world.

    The Caspian region contains tremendous untapped hydrocarbon reserves, much of them located in the Caspian Sea basin itself. Proven natural gas reserves within Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan equal more than 236 trillion cubic feet. The region’s total oil reserves may reach more than 60 billion barrels of oil — enough to service Europe’s oil needs for 11 years. Some estimates are as high as 200 billion barrels. In 1995, the region was producing only 870,000 barrels per day (44 million tons per year [Mt/y]).

    By 2010, Western companies could increase production to about 4.5 million barrels a day (Mb/d) — an increase of more than 500 percent in only 15 years. If this occurs, the region would represent about five percent of the world’s total oil production, and almost 20 percent of oil produced among non-OPEC countries.

    One major problem has yet to be resolved: how to get the region’s vast energy resources to the markets where they are needed. There are few, if any, other areas of the world where there can be such a dramatic increase in the supply of oil and gas to the world market. The solution seems simple: build a “new” Silk Road. Implementing this solution, however, is far from simple. The risks are high, but so are the rewards.

    Finding and Building Routes to World Markets

    One of the main problems is that Central Asia is isolated. The region is bounded on the north by the Arctic Circle, on the east and west by vast land distances, and on the south by a series of natural obstacles — mountains and seas — as well as political obstacles, such as conflict zones or sanctioned countries.

    This means that the area’s natural resources are landlocked, both geographically and politically. Each of the countries in the Caucasus and Central Asia faces difficult political challenges. Some have unsettled wars or latent conflicts. Others have evolving systems where the laws — and even the courts — are dynamic and changing. Business commitments can be rescinded without warning, or they can be displaced by new geopolitical realities.

    In addition, a chief technical obstacle we face in transporting oil is the region’s existing pipeline infrastructure. Because the region’s pipelines were constructed during the Moscow-centered Soviet period, they tend to head north and west toward Russia. There are no connections to the south and east.

    Depending wholly on this infrastructure to export Central Asia oil is not practical. Russia currently is unlikely to absorb large new quantities of “foreign” oil, is unlikely to be a significant market for energy in the next decade, and lacks the capacity to deliver it to other markets.

    Certainly there is no easy way out of Central Asia. If there are to be other routes, in other directions, they must be built.

    Two major energy infrastructure projects are seeking to meet this challenge. One, under the aegis of the Caspian Pipeline Consortium, or CPC, plans to build a pipeline west from the Northern Caspian to the Russian Black Sea port of Novorossisk. From Novorossisk, oil from this line would be transported by tanker through the Bosphorus to the Mediterranean and world markets.

    The other project is sponsored by the Azerbaijan International Operating Company (AIOC), a consortium of 11 foreign oil companies including four American companies — Unocal, Amoco, Exxon and Pennzoil. It will follow one or both of two routes west from Baku. One line will angle north and cross the North Caucasus to Novorossisk. The other route would cross Georgia and extend to a shipping terminal on the Black Sea port of Supsa. This second route may be extended west and south across Turkey to the Mediterranean port of Ceyhan.

    But even if both pipelines were built, they would not have enough total capacity to transport all the oil expected to flow from the region in the future; nor would they have the capability to move it to the right markets. Other export pipelines must be built.

    Unocal believes that the central factor in planning these pipelines should be the location of the future energy markets that are most likely to need these new supplies. Just as Central Asia was the meeting ground between Europe and Asia in centuries past, it is again in a unique position to potentially service markets in both of these regions — if export routes to these markets can be built. Let’s take a look at some of the potential markets.

    Western Europe

    Western Europe is a tough market. It is characterized by high prices for oil products, an aging population, and increasing competition from natural gas. Between 1995 and 2010, we estimate that demand for oil will increase from 14.1 Mb/d (705 Mt/y) to 15.0 Mb/d (750 Mt/y), an average growth rate of only 0.5 percent annually. Furthermore, the region is already amply supplied from fields in the Middle East, North Sea, Scandinavia and Russia. Although there is perhaps room for some of Central Asia’s oil, the Western European market is unlikely to be able to absorb all of the production from the Caspian region.

    Central and Eastern Europe

    Central and Eastern Europe markets do not look any better. Although there is increased demand for oil in the region’s transport sector, natural gas is gaining strength as a competitor. Between 1995 and 2010, demand for oil is expected to increase by only half a million barrels per day, from 1.3 Mb/d (67 Mt/y) to 1.8 Mb/d (91.5 Mt/y). Like Western Europe, this market is also very competitive. In addition to supplies of oil from the North Sea, Africa and the Middle East, Russia supplies the majority of the oil to this region.

    The Domestic NIS Market

    The growth in demand for oil also will be weak in the Newly Independent States (NIS). We expect Russian and other NIS markets to increase demand by only 1.2 percent annually between 1997 and 2010.


    In stark contrast to the other three markets, the Asia/Pacific region has a rapidly increasing demand for oil and an expected significant increase in population. Prior to the recent turbulence in the various Asian/Pacific economies, we anticipated that this region’s demand for oil would almost double by 2010. Although the short-term increase in demand will probably not meet these expectations, Unocal stands behind its long-term estimates.

    Energy demand growth will remain strong for one key reason: the region’s population is expected to grow by 700 million people by 2010.

    It is in everyone’s interests that there be adequate supplies for Asia’s increasing energy requirements. If Asia’s energy needs are not satisfied, they will simply put pressure on all world markets, driving prices upwards everywhere.

    The key question is how the energy resources of Central Asia can be made available to satisfy the energy needs of nearby Asian markets. There are two possible solutions — with several variations.

    Export Routes

    East to China: Prohibitively Long?

    One option is to go east across China. But this would mean constructing a pipeline of more than 3,000 kilometers to central China — as well as a 2,000-kilometer connection to reach the main population centers along the coast. Even with these formidable challenges, China National Petroleum Corporation is considering building a pipeline east from Kazakhstan to Chinese markets.

    Unocal had a team in Beijing just last week for consultations with the Chinese. Given China’s long-range outlook and its ability to concentrate resources to meet its own needs, China is almost certain to build such a line. The question is what will the costs of transporting oil through this pipeline be and what netback will the producers receive.

    South to the Indian Ocean: A Shorter Distance to Growing Markets

    A second option is to build a pipeline south from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean.

    One obvious potential route south would be across Iran. However, this option is foreclosed for American companies because of U.S. sanctions legislation. The only other possible route option is across Afghanistan, which has its own unique challenges.

    The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades. The territory across which the pipeline would extend is controlled by the Taliban, an Islamic movement that is not recognized as a government by most other nations. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of our proposed pipeline cannot begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders and our company.

    In spite of this, a route through Afghanistan appears to be the best option with the fewest technical obstacles. It is the shortest route to the sea and has relatively favorable terrain for a pipeline. The route through Afghanistan is the one that would bring Central Asian oil closest to Asian markets and thus would be the cheapest in terms of transporting the oil.

    Unocal envisions the creation of a Central Asian Oil Pipeline Consortium. The pipeline would become an integral part of a regional oil pipeline system that will utilize and gather oil from existing pipeline infrastructure in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia.

    The 1,040-mile-long oil pipeline would begin near the town of Chardzhou, in northern Turkmenistan, and extend southeasterly through Afghanistan to an export terminal that would be constructed on the Pakistan coast on the Arabian Sea. Only about 440 miles of the pipeline would be in Afghanistan.

    This 42-inch-diameter pipeline will have a shipping capacity of one million barrels of oil per day. Estimated cost of the project — which is similar in scope to the Trans Alaska Pipeline — is about US$2.5 billion.

    There is considerable international and regional political interest in this pipeline. Asian crude oil importers, particularly from Japan, are looking to Central Asia and the Caspian as a new strategic source of supply to satisfy their desire for resource diversity. The pipeline benefits Central Asian countries because it would allow them to sell their oil in expanding and highly prospective hard currency markets.

    The pipeline would benefit Afghanistan, which would receive revenues from transport tariffs, and would promote stability and encourage trade and economic development. Although Unocal has not negotiated with any one group, and does not favor any group, we have had contacts with and briefings for all of them. We know that the different factions in Afghanistan understand the importance of the pipeline project for their country, and have expressed their support of it.

    A recent study for the World Bank states that the proposed pipeline from Central Asia across Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Arabian Sea would provide more favorable netbacks to oil producers through access to higher value markets than those currently being accessed through the traditional Baltic and Black Sea export routes.

    This is evidenced by the netback values producers will receive as determined by the World Bank study. For West Siberian crude, the netback value will increase by nearly $2.00 per barrel by going south to Asia. For a producer in western Kazakhstan, the netback value will increase by more than $1 per barrel by going south to Asia as compared to west to the Mediterranean via the Black Sea.

    Natural Gas Export

    Given the plentiful natural gas supplies of Central Asia, our aim is to link a specific natural resource with the nearest viable market. This is basic for the commercial viability of any gas project. As with all projects being considered in this region, the following projects face geo-political challenges, as well as market issues.

    Unocal and the Turkish company, Koc Holding A.S., are interested in bringing competitive gas supplies to the Turkey market. The proposed Eurasia Natural Gas Pipeline would transport gas from Turkmenistan directly across the Caspian Sea through Azerbaijan and Georgia to Turkey. Sixty percent of this proposed gas pipeline would follow the same route as the oil pipeline proposed to run from Baku to Ceyhan. Of course, the demarcation of the Caspian remains an issue.

    Last October, the Central Asia Pipeline, Ltd. (CentGas) consortium, in which Unocal holds an interest, was formed to develop a gas pipeline that will link Turkmenistan’s vast natural gas reserves in the Dauletabad Field with markets in Pakistan and possibly India. An independent evaluation shows that the field’s resources are adequate for the project’s needs, assuming production rates rising over time to 2 billion cubic feet of gas per day for 30 years or more.

    In production since 1983, the Dauletabad Field’s natural gas has been delivered north via Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Russia to markets in the Caspian and Black Sea areas. The proposed 790-mile pipeline will open up new markets for this gas, travelling from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Multan, Pakistan.

    A proposed extension would link with the existing Sui pipeline system, moving gas to near New Delhi, where it would connect with the existing HBJ pipeline. By serving these additional volumes, the extension would enhance the economics of the project, leading to overall reductions in delivered natural gas costs for all users and better margins. As currently planned, the CentGas pipeline would cost approximately $2 billion. A 400-mile extension into India could add $600 million to the overall project cost.

    As with the proposed Central Asia Oil Pipeline, CentGas cannot begin construction until an internationally recognized Afghanistan government is in place. For the project to advance, it must have international financing, government-to-government agreements and government-to-consortium agreements.


    The Central Asia and Caspian region is blessed with abundant oil and gas that can enhance the lives of the region’s residents and provide energy for growth for Europe and Asia.

    The impact of these resources on U.S. commercial interests and U.S. foreign policy is also significant and intertwined. Without peaceful settlement of conflicts within the region, cross-border oil and gas pipelines are not likely to be built. We urge the Administration and the Congress to give strong support to the United Nations-led peace process in Afghanistan.

    U.S. assistance in developing these new economies will be crucial to business’ success. We encourage strong technical assistance programs throughout the region. We also urge repeal or removal of Section 907 of the Freedom Support Act. This section unfairly restricts U.S. government assistance to the government of Azerbaijan and limits U.S. influence in the region.

    Developing cost-effective, profitable and efficient export routes for Central Asia resources is a formidable, but not impossible, task. It has been accomplished before. A commercial corridor, a “new” Silk Road, can link the Central Asia supply with the demand — once again making Central Asia the crossroads between Europe and Asia.

    Thank you.


    View Full Version : OIL MAN KARZAI DOES HIS JOB: Trilateral gas pipeline agreement signed


    Info.31-05-02, 05:33 AM
    Trilateral gas pipeline agreement signed: Musharraf, Niyazov & Karzai vow to boost trade

    By Faraz Hashmi

    ISLAMABAD, May 30: Pakistan, Turkmenistan and Afghanistan signed a trilateral agreement on Thursday for a multi-billion dollar gas pipeline which would run from Daulatabad gas-fields in Turkmenistan to Gwadar.

    The agreement was inked by President Gen Pervez Musharraf, Turkmen President Saparmurat Niyazov and Interim Afghan Administration Chairman Hamid Karzai following a summit of the three leaders.

    Besides signing the agreement for laying down the 1500-km pipeline, the three leaders decided to take concrete measures for developing road and rail links and improving trade among the three countries. They set up three working groups: one would supervise the implementation of gas project, and the other two would push for the development of rail and road links, and increasing the volume of trade.

    “This mega-project has been on the anvil for the past many years but it could not be implemented because of instability in Afghanistan,” President Musharraf told a press conference.

    Flanked by Mr Karzai and Mr Niyazov, Gen Musharraf hoped that with the return of normalcy in Afghanistan this project would be realized soon.

    A plant of liquefied natural gas would be installed at Gwadar for export of hydrocarbon to the markets of Far East and Japan, he added.

    He pointed out that a feasibility study had been conducted a few years ago which would be reviewed and updated before inviting international tenders and seeking finances from international financial institutions.

    Trade and economic cooperation also came under discussion and three leaders were unanimous that the existing level of trade among their countries was far less than the optimum potential, Gen Musharraf said.

    Giving details of the measures the three leaders agreed to take, he said visa restrictions would be eased and trade barriers would be removed. The development of road and rail links would open enormous economic opportunities for the Central Asian states to reach warm waters, he added.

    President Niyazov said that Turkmenistan had known gas reserves of 23 trillion cubic-feet in Daulatabad alone. He said the project was in the interest of all the three countries and added that Afghanistan would earn $300 million by providing conduit for the pipeline.

    In reply to a question about the recent violence in some parts of Afghanistan where the proposed pipeline would pass, Mr Karzai said peace and stability was fast returning to Afghanistan.

    He said that over 800,000 Afghan refugees had returned to Afghanistan from Iran and Pakistan over the past few months. Afghan immigrants from the United States and Europe were also returning in big numbers, he added.

    Mr Karzai said that Loya Jirga was slated for June 10 and added that would be another step towards the establishment of a legitimate government and restoring stability in the war-torn country.

    He said that Afghan people who had gone through the miseries of war for the last two decades, had the resolve to have peace and prosperity.

    Answering a question about the proposed Iran-India gas pipeline project, President Musharraf said Pakistan was committed to the project as it was in the interest of all the three countries.



  5. Deviate From the US Line and End Up Like a Kleenex
    … too, and the recipient of a “made in the USA”’ state-of-the-art arsenal, … A former UNICOL executive Hamid Karzai ended up as Afghanistan’s president and … Like Chalabi, Karzai initially believed he had real authority and days …


  6. It ain’t our concern- bring our troops home while we still have a country.

    There’s a fight here to be had!!

    Taliban…no shoes-no decent gear to wear- yet comrade tells you-these guys will come here————what for?

    Afghanistan in their home – here is ours!



  7. And so the U.S. military presence remains in these corrupt and ungrateful countries (Iraq and
    Afghanistan), not to bring democracy, not for
    the ‘fight’ against terrorism, not to build schools
    and hospitals, but indeed for only two clear
    reasons—oil and gas. The American oil monopolies are determined to have their 440 mile long pipe line, running through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Arabian Sea>Indian Ocean.
    There really is a military/industrial complex that
    dictates and controls. In the meantime, they in turn benefit from the sacrifices of our young troops and the wasteful spending of $16 billion a month, by our government to ‘secure’ corrupt and ungrateful countries. It’s tough to swallow,but do we really need to be there? Is access to the Siberian oil and gas reserves really worth it?
    Congress and the Administration have some difficult challenges in the weeks ahead.

    • The young troops from all Western nations’, that we should rely on to replenish the race of our peoples’ in the UK it’s mainly white guys that are sacrificed, for what is just
      The oil and gas is the sole reason Obama and co want to bring Turkey’s 70/80 muslims into Europe, these leaders couldn’t care one jot about the people that pay their salaries’
      I’d place lead in their heads had i that choice, better still let them go fight the Taliban for their pipelines’.

      Tribes cannot be forced into a system they don’t understand nore i guess want, our own Democracies are being removed, so their talk of spreading Democracy is pure B/S.
      Communism isn’t democracy no matter how much imagination we can muster.
      Brown and Obama are Fabian Socialists’ neither are thinking democracy!!
      The Serbs paid too high a price for being too close to the Caspian see pipelines,’ who will be next?

  8. Image – Satan whispers to the Anti-Christ – ” You are a God. Now press the goddamn button and start the Apocalypse “.

    Another superb article from John Pilger below.

    We all know that the primary aim of the war in Afghanistan is to secure the gas and oil pipelines planned for the country as part of the US Silk Road Eurasian Strategy followed by the plan to destabilise Pakistan by driving the Taliban out of Afghanistan into Pakistan and thereby allowing the US to send troops into a Pakistan riven by civil war and remove its nuclear warheads on the pretext of ‘stopping Osama Bin Ladens computer generated ghost and Al Qaeda from seizing them’.

    The picture above is by David Dee’s, the man I consider the worlds greatest political artist at this time.

    The ‘whisper’ of Rahm into Obama’s ear is chillingly brilliant.

    Anyone notice how yet again the strange, and very long list of Al Qaeda terrorism has allowed the US to go into a nation and steal its oil, gas or weapons ?

    Kosovo (KLA trained by CIA and SAS)

    I wonder how soon till the media tell us that Al Qaeda is helping Iran build WMD and 45 minute missiles of mass destruction on London and New York.

    Oh yeah, we are two thirds the way there already.

    Lets now just wait for the next Holywood production of ‘Osama Bin Laden in his cave says Iranians must fight the US and Israel’ video or audio tape to appear.

    No doubt Hollywood and the agents of the US Military-Industrial Block Shadow Government are working on it right now.

    Barack Obama, winner of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize, is planning another war to add to his impressive record. In Afghanistan, his agents routinely extinguish wedding parties, farmers and construction workers with weapons such as the innovative Hellfire missile, which sucks the air out of your lungs. According to the UN, 338,000 Afghan infants are dying under the Obama-led alliance, which permits only $29 per head annually to be spent on medical care.

    Within weeks of his inauguration, Obama started a new war in Pakistan, causing more than a million people to flee their homes. In threatening Iran – which his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, said she was prepared to “obliterate” – Obama lied that the Iranians were covering up a “secret nuclear facility”, knowing that it had already been reported to the International Atomic Energy Authority. In colluding with the only nuclear-armed power in the Middle East, he bribed the Palestinian Authority to suppress a UN judgment that Israel had committed crimes against humanity in its assault on Gaza – crimes made possible with US weapons whose shipment Obama secretly approved before his inauguration.

    The old dog whistle test
    At home, the man of peace has approved a military budget exceeding that of any year since the end of the Second World War while presiding over a new kind of domestic repression. During the recent G20 meeting in Pittsburgh, hosted by Obama, militarised police attacked peaceful protesters with something called the Long-Range Acoustic Device, not seen before on US streets. Mounted in the turret of a small tank, it blasted a piercing noise as tear gas and pepper gas were fired indiscriminately. It is part of a new arsenal of “crowd-control munitions” supplied by military contractors such as Raytheon. In Obama’s Pentagon-controlled “national security state”, the concentration camp at Guantanamo Bay, which he promised to close, remains open, and “rendition”, secret assassinations and torture continue.

    The Nobel Peace Prize-winner’s latest war is largely secret. On 15 July, Washington finalised a deal with Colombia that gives the US seven giant military bases. “The idea,” reported the Associated Press, “is to make Colombia a regional hub for Pentagon operations . . . nearly half the continent can be covered by a C-17 [military transport] without refuelling”, which “helps achieve the regional engagement strategy”.

    Translated, this means Obama is planning a “rollback” of the independence and democracy that the people of Bolivia, Venezuela, Ecuador andParaguay have achieved against the odds, along with a historic regional co-operation that rejects the notion of a US “sphere of influence”. The Colombian regime, which backs death squads and has the continent’s worst human rights record, has received US military support second in scale only to Israel. Britain provides military training. Guided by US military satellites, Colombian paramilitaries now infiltrate Venezuela with the goal of overthrowing the democratic government of Hugo Chávez, which George W Bush failed to do in 2002.

    Obama’s war on peace and democracy in Latin America follows a style he has demonstrated since the coup against the democratic president of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, in June. Zelaya had increased the minimum wage, granted subsidies to small farmers, cut back interest rates and reduced poverty. He planned to break a US pharmaceutical monopoly and manufacture cheap generic drugs. Although Obama has called for Zelaya’s reinstatement, he refuses to condemn the coup-makers and to recall the US ambassador or the US troops who train the Honduran forces determined to crush a popular resistance. Zelaya has been repeatedly refused a meeting with Obama, who has approved an IMF loan of $164m to the illegal regime. The message is clear and familiar: thugs can act with impunity on behalf of the US.

    Obama, the smooth operator from Chicago via Harvard, was enlisted to restore what he calls “leadership” throughout the world. The Nobel Prize committee’s decision is the kind of cloying reverse racism that has beatified the man for no reason other than he is a member of a minority and attractive to liberal sensibilities, if not to the Afghan children he kills. This is the Call of Obama. It is not unlike a dog whistle: inaudible to most, irresistible to the besotted and boneheaded. “When Obama walks into a room,” gushed George Clooney, “you want to follow him somewhere, anywhere.”

    Extreme and dangerous
    The great voice of black liberation Frantz Fanon understood this. In The Wretched of the Earth, he described the “intermediary [whose] mission has nothing to do with transforming the nation: it consists, prosaically, of being the transmission line between the nation and a capitalism, rampant though camouflaged”. Because political debate has become so debased in our media monoculture – Blair or Brown; Brown or Cameron – race, gender and class can be used as seductive tools of propaganda and diversion. In Obama’s case, what matters, as Fanon pointed out in an earlier era, is not the intermediary’s “historic” elevation, but the class he serves. After all, Bush’s inner circle was probably the most multiracial in presidential history. There was Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas, all dutifully serving an extreme and dangerous power.

    Britain has seen its own Obama-like mysticism. The day after Blair was elected in 1997, the Observer predicted that he would create “new worldwide rules on human rights” while the Guardian rejoiced at the “breathless pace [as] the floodgates of change burst open”. When Obama was elected last November, Denis MacShane MP, a devotee of Blair’s bloodbaths, unwittingly warned us: “I shut my eyes when I listen to this guy and it could be Tony. He is doing the same thing that we did in 1997.”

  9. Subscribe
    Unsubscribe DontBeObamaZombies
    15 January 200
    Obama wants to Bomb Pakistan. RAW STORY-Columnist: Draft is needed because we may have to invade Pakistan… Rangel To Push Universal Military Draft Legislation Once M…



  11. Pingback: About Afghanistan and the Powerlessness of Obama and the American People | Democracy for Vancouver

  12. Sozialisation of Amerika…

    Fabianism at the heart of the American establishment- just as in Britain-Oz-Nz-Canada….the Western world!!!

    Fabian Fascism.


    Oil and Gas Industry Task Force 1

    Mike Bowyer
    Managing Director of PES International (Petroleum Engineering Services), a subsurface oil and gas production and well technology company. Their turnover in 1997-8 was £22.6 million.
    The Oil & Gas Industry Task Force was set up under Lord Gus Macdonald, former Chairman of the Scottish Media Group (where he was voted Corporate Leader of the Year at the Scottish Business Insider Awards in 1997). In 1998 his salary at SMG was £307,000. He also made £726,600 from share options in 1996. Although the Labour Party threatened to tighten the tax regime in the North Sea before 1997, after the election they changed their minds and in July 1999 they actually cut tax by extending Capital Gains Tax Rollover Relief to oil industry asset sales – the oil companies now pay £2 billion a year less in tax than under the Tories.
    Malcolm Brinded, a former Tory policy advisor, is Chairman of Shell UK and Managing Director of Shell Expro (the UK’s largest offshore operator). He has been responsible for several ‘cost-reduction’ (job-cutting) exercises throughout different sectors of the Shell Group since 1984. He went to Cambridge University and is a member of the Scottish Business Forum. The Royal Dutch/Shell Group is the most profitable oil company in the world, responsible for more oil and gas production than any other private company. They have had staff working on placement in the DTI since 1997. Shell were named as one of the worst polluters of UK rivers in 1992 and were fined £20,000 in 1998 for polluting the Manchester Ship Canal with 140 tonnes of oil.

    Shell have de-recognised unions at their Stanlow and Haven refineries and blacklisted workers who took part in a sit-in. They consistently broke embargoes to prop up South Africa’s apartheid regime through the 1980’s. In 1995 they caused a worldwide scandal when they tried to dump the Brent Spar oil platform into the North Sea. Shell imported weapons and financed military operations in Ogoniland, Nigeria, in an attempt to stop protests by the Ogoni people against pollution, exploitation and repression. At least 2000 deaths have resulted from industrial and military activity in Ogoni (including the execution of protestor Ken Saro-Wiwa in 1995). Shell is also directly involved in repression and pollution of the Indian homelands of Peru, complicity with the Indonesian Government’s repression of the East Timorese people and the exploitation of the U’wa people’s homelands in Colombia. Sir Mark Moody-Stuart, Chairman of Shell, was appointed by Tony Blair as Co-Chair of the G8 Renewable Energy Task Force. He was paid £668,822 in 1999. In 1990 John Collins, then Chairman of Shell UK, said that the solution to global warming was to ‘see this great challenge as a spur to ingenuity, the free market and…economic development. Shell makes £24.6 million a day.

    Malcolm Brinded
    Chairman of Shell UK. He worked on secondment to the Tory Government’s Department of Energy from 1982-4. Vice President, UKOOA.

    Syd Fudge
    Former Chief Executive of Kvaerner Oil and Gas. Chair of the Offshore Contractors Association.

    Francis Gugen
    Managing Director of Amerada Hess, Vice President of the Offshore Operators Association and Chair of the CBI Environmental Affairs Committee.

    Mark Hope
    Technical Director of Enterprise Oil.

    James McCallum
    President of Global Marine Integrated Services and Chair of Stretch Performance Network Ltd.
    ‘Syd Fudge, former Chief executive of Kvaerner Oil and Gas, resigned in 1999 to concentrate on his role as Chair of the Offshore Contractors Association. Kvaerner is a supplier of off- and on-shore production facilities and pipelines. Their construction branch have had key staff working inside the DETR since the 1997 election. They have operations all around the world, including Brazil, the USA and Canada, Angola, the Middle east, China, Indonesia and Kazakhstan.
    Francis Gugen is the Managing Director of Amerada Hess and Vice President of the Offshore Operators Association. Amerada Hess have been severely criticised by the Health and Safety Executive for safety failures on their AH001 Gas installation, including a gas leak in December 1999 which caused 3 men working in the affected area to ‘run for their lives’.

    Mark Hope is the Technical Director of Enterprise Oil. Enterprise Oil is the company created by the privatisation of the former British Gas UK Continental Shelf production and exploration companies in 1983. The company operates in the North Sea, Ireland, Italy and the Gulf of Mexico. They made £289.2 million profit in 1999.

    James McCallum is the President of Global Marine Integrated Services, part of the huge US Global Marine Group. Global Marine is an offshore drilling contractor which owns 32 mobile drilling rigs. Global Marine Integrated Services is a ‘turnkey’ company, operating on a ‘no-oil no-fee’ basis.

    Canadian John McDonald is the Managing Director of Texaco North Sea Ltd, in overall charge of all Texaco’s North Sea production in the UK and Danish sectors. Texaco, the 3rd largest oil company in the US, were responsible for the 1996 Sea Empress disaster at Milford Haven in South Wales, an oil spill of 72,000 tonnes of North Sea crude oil which ruined 175 miles of coastline. They have operations in countries all over the world, including Colombia, Nigeria and Brazil. They operated in Ecuador for 20 years until 1992, during which time they have spilt more than 17 million gallons of oil, 20 billion gallons of toxic wastewater and abandoned hundreds of unlined toxic waste pits in the Amazon rainforest. The Oil & Gas Industry Task Force’s first report in 1999 included an iniatiative for the industry to generate £1 billion a year from ‘environmental services’. Presumably that means they can earn money from clearing up their own mess, with us to pay the bill! Texaco was listed as one of the 10 worst corporations in 1996 by Multinational Monitor. Texaco makes £6.2 million a day.

    Sir Ian Wood is Managing Director of the John Wood Group Ltd, which has engineering operations in more than 25 countries. He was paid £192,000 in 1999.

    John McDonald
    Managing Director of Texaco North Sea Ltd, in overall charge of all Texaco’s North Sea production in the UK and Danish sectors. Vice President, UKOOA.

    Tom Smith
    Managing Director of Nessco Ltd and Chair of the Aberdeen branch of the Institute of Directors.

    Sir Ian Wood
    Managing Director of John Wood Group Ltd and JW Holdings. He is Chair of Scottish Enterprise and received the Corporate Elite ‘World Player’ award from Business Insider in 1996.

    Alan Jones
    Former Regional President of BP Amoco Scotland. Replaced by Steve Marshall who sits on OGITF 2.

    Alan Jones is the Former Regional President of BP Amoco Scotland. He was replaced by Steve Marshall (who sits on OGITF 2).BP rebranded itself in 2000 as a caring environmental company, announcing a £250 million investment in renewable energy. However, this pales into comparison with its spending on oil and gas, including £67 billion to buy Amoco and £16 billion to buy ARCO, both in 1999. BP has seen an opportunity to cash in on the CO2 emission limits set by the Kyoto Summit on Global Warming by switching its emphasis towards gas (which emits half as much CO2 in power stations as coal) and funding an expensive green PR campaign it has passed itself off as environmentally progressive (whilst continuing to expand its profits). BP Amoco makes £28.8 million a day.
    Syd Fudge, Francis Gugen and James McCallum are all members of the CRINE Network Executive Committee, a cost reduction initiative founded by the oil industry in 1992. Although admitting that the North Sea oil industry had lost another 10,000 jobs by March 1999, Syd Fudge denied that this was affecting safety. At that time injuries on the Mobil Beryl platform (just one example) were running at an average of one a week. Incident Investigation sheets documented the underlying cause of some of these accidents as ‘excessive stress due to impending redundancies’. At an Aberdeen Chamber of Commerce meeting in 1997 Syd Fudge defended the main North sea contractors, who were being accused of exploitation, and said that the biggest problem in the North Sea was a skill shortage. Two years later he is defending 10,000 job losses!

    Shell, Texaco, BP and Amoco have all funded the Global Climate Coalition, a multi-million dollar American-based lobbying group set up to fight measures aimed at curbing global warming by discrediting scientific evidence and getting rid of ‘unwanted’ environmental regulations.

    The Oil and Gas Industry Task Force 1 was wound up in December 1999 and a new Task Force re-named PILOT was formed. Click here to go to the OGITF 2 page.

    go to task force page

    · Creative Industries Task Force
    · Oil & Gas Industry Task Force 1
    · Oil & Gas Industry Task Force 2
    · Better Regulation Task Force

    This section of the website will bring you the details of the various Friends of Tony – multi-millionaires like Lord Levy, the Labour Party’s chief fundraiser and Lord Falconer the man Blair put in charge of the Dome.
    We will also feature figures from the internal hierarchy of the Labour Party, like General Secretary Margaret McDonagh and unelected Government Ministers like Lord Simon and Gus Macdonald.

    In this section you will find all those who revolve around Tony Blair’s New Labour ‘Project’, including those with power and influence at the highest level, yet who remain in the background. Philip Gould (the focus group guru) for example, has no formal position in the Government or Party, yet is one of Tony Blair’s most influential advisers.

    To open this section we have:
    Lord Levy – the Labour Party’s most important fundraiser
    Gavyn Davies – the influential economic adviser
    Lord Simon – the former Minister for European Trade and Competition
    Rupert Murdoch – billionaire media magnate

    The 58 business leaders who wrote to the Times in May 2001
    The 6 Bioscience Bosses who wrote to the Times in May 2001



  14. Pingback: AMERICAN PIPE LINE WARS « Colonel6's Blog


    Zbigniew Brzezinski,

    sgentlemanjack112 | 19 September 2009
    In order to win a battle, one must know thy enemy.
    Zbigniew Brzezinski is responsible for the death and misery of millions of innocent people. He’ s had influence in U.S. foreign policy for over 30 years. The man is a criminal, an imperialist & a danger to free humanity.

    News & Politics

  16. martysoffice | 30 July 2009
    Shocking: New World Order Elite Pro-Communist Banker Zbigniew Brzezinski had one of his sons in the McCain campaign, and his other son in the Obama campaign.

    Aired live on the Savage Nation 7/30/09

    News & Politics



    There is growing concern over mounting evidence that the “War on Terror” military campaign against Iraq and Afghanistan is motivated by a hidden agenda of oil, profit and financial factors, rather than national security.


    The construction a massive oil pipeline through Afghanistan will now begin, after the final agreement was signed today. The U.S. government gas been planning the pipeline since the 1980s, but a regime change was needed before construction could begin.

    None of the declared objectives of the American-led conquest of Afghanistan were achieved. The military campaign in Afghanistan did not capture or defeat Osama bin Laden, al-Qaeda was not found or destroyed, and no peace has been established to date. The one success of the American-led Afghan war was to clear the route for the American-led oil and gas pipe-line through the country.

    Despite the failures of the previous war, the U.S. government is now planning a new crusade against Iraq, the world’s second greatest source of oil.

    [ BBC News, “Central Asia pipeline deal signed”, 27 December 2002. ]


    The American government can no longer justify attacking Iraq or Afghanistan by claiming that these countries have supported al-Qaeda, because the world now knows that the main source of support for al-Qaeda is Saudi Arabia. We must therefore look for other reasons why America wants to conquer Afghanistan and Iraq, and there is substantial evidence that the true motive for the “war on terrorism” is oil.

    America has justified their conquest of Afghanistan and their planned conquest of Iraq by claiming that these countries support al-Qaeda. But why were Afghanistan and Iraq singled-out for attack when there is a more convincing case against Saudi Arabia? The U.S. government has now been accused by their own advisors of lying to hide the true supporters of al-Qaeda.

    U.S. government advisors have yet again accused Saudi Arabia of supporting terrorism, making Saudi an obvious target for the “war on terror”. The Council on Foreign Relations, which advises the White House on foreign policy, has accused Saudi of supporting al-Qaida and Osama Bin Laden. In a press-release on 17 October, CFR called Saudi Arabia “the most important source of funds for Al-Qaeda”. The press-release quoted a new report which repeats this accusation in two separate paragraphs, word for word.

    “…it is worth stating clearly and unambiguously what official U.S. government spokespersons have not: For years, individuals and charities based in Saudi Arabia have been the most important source of funds for al-Qaeda; and for years, Saudi officials have turned a blind eye to this problem.

    “This is hardly surprising since Saudi Arabia possesses the greatest concentration of wealth in the region; Saudi nationals and charities were previously the most important sources of funds for the mujahideen; Saudi nationals have always constituted a disproportionate percentage of al-Qaeda’s own membership; and al-Qaeda’s political message has long focused on issues of particular interest to Saudi nationals…”

    [ CFR Report on Terrorist Financing, ‘Nature of the Problem’ section, paragraph 8. ]

    The new CFR report accuses the U.S. government of deliberately lying to cover-up the fact that al-Qaida is supported by Saudi Arabia, not Afghanistan or Iraq.

    “…when U.S. spokespersons are only willing to say that “Saudi Arabia is being cooperative” when they know very well all the ways in which it is not, both our allies and adversaries can be forgiven for believing that the United States does not place a high priority on this issue.”
    [ CFR Report on Terrorist Financing, ‘Strategic Recommendations Applicable to the U.S.’, paragraph 1. ]

    [ SOURCE: Terrorist Financing: Report of Independent Task Force Sponsored by CFR, October 2002. ]

    In August 2002 the RAND Corporation, which officially advises the U.S. government on military strategy, “recommended” that America should invade and capture Saudi Arabian oil-fields if the Saudis continue supporting al-Qaeda. The White House attempted to disown this plan when it was accidentally leaked to the press, but RAND was set-up by the U.S. military, is run by senior U.S. ex-military and ex-political personnel, and funded by American tax-payers.

    The CFR was founded by an elite group of business-men, is run by senior U.S. ex-military personnel and top U.S. business executives, and funded by donations from sources which cannot be identified because the relevant pages are mysteriously missing from the annual reports on CFR’s internet website.

    The section on CFR’s financing on their FAQs web page boldly claims that the sources of their funding are not secret and: “A list of donors appears in the annual report.” However, on CFR’s Annual Reports web page the information about their funding is not available. CFR’s Annual Reports from 1998 to 2002 are all available on their website, but the pages about their funding have all been removed. For example, the contents page of CFR’s Annual Report for 2002 lists ‘Budget and Finance’ on pages 93 to 100. Unfortunately the entire finance section of CFR’s 2002 Annual Report is missing from the website and the file for pages 93-100 does not exist.


    The U.S. security services did not simply fail to stop the terrorist attacks on September 11 – they are being accused of deliberately interfering with attempts to prevent the 9/11 disasters. This is extremely disturbing, especially when senior politicians and their supporters are guaranteed to profit substantially as a direct result of the ‘war on terror’ that has been justified by the attacks.

    There were “serious failings” by the American intelligence agencies before last September’s terrorist tragedy, and attempts to stop the attacks were obstructed at high levels.

    According to the latest reports “the CIA had failed to share crucial information with the FBI. Early in 2000, the reports said, the CIA knew that two of the future hijackers … had met suspected members of al-Qaeda.” FBI headquarters has been accused of setting up a “roadblock” to the investigation ahead of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington.

    An official congressional inquiry investigating intelligence failures leading to the 11 September attacks heard that the FBI deliberately “hindered an investigation of a terrorism suspect.” In the July before the September 11 attacks an FBI agent “issued a memo calling for an investigation into the large number of Middle Eastern men enrolled in pilot training programmes.” Complaints were made by an FBI agent, about “lack of co-ordination, mix-ups and even obstacles put in the way of her office’s investigations from FBI headquarters before the September 11 attacks.”


    The U.S. has been granted immunity from crimes prosecution by United Nations International Criminal Court. American peace-keeping troops can now officially never be tried for war crimes.

    It is impossible to think of any reason why the U.S. would need to seek immunity from prosecution for war crimes unless they either have committed a war crime or expect to do so in the future.

    “The United Nations Security Council has voted unanimously to exempt U.S. peacekeepers from prosecution by the new war crimes court…”

    “The Bush administration, which considers the court an affront to U.S. sovereignty, had said it would veto such missions wherever it believed American troops might be prosecuted [for war crimes].”

    [ SOURCE: BBC News, “Dispute over war crimes court settled”, 13 July 2002. ]

    If soldiers from any country commits a war crime, why shouldn’t they be brought to trial? Why should America be treated differently from other countries?


    U.S. Government advisors are talking about extending the objectives of the “War on Terror” to include an invasion of Saudi Arabia and the “seizure of its oil fields”.

    A report leaked to the Washington Post newspaper revealed that this action was recommended to the U.S. Defence Policy Board, which advises the Pentagon on military policy, by the RAND Corporation, an official expert advisory group to the U.S. military.

    “A briefing given last month to a top Pentagon advisory board described Saudi Arabia as an enemy of the United States, and recommended that U.S. officials give it an ultimatum to stop backing terrorism or face seizure of its oil fields and its financial assets invested in the United States.”

    [ SOURCE: The Washington Post, “Briefing Depicted Saudis as Enemies”, 06 August 2002. ]

    The U.S. government now wishes to distance its self from the policy recommended by its advisory groups, but these groups are run by people with close and top-level connections with the U.S. government, and their advice is ultimately paid for by the tax-paying American public. Nevertheless, this high-profile controversy has reminded the public that oil appears to be a recurring theme in the war on terror.

    The RAND Corporation was created in 1946 by the U.S. Air Force, and is currently led by Dr James A. Thomson, a former member of the National Security Council staff at the White House. The Defence Policy Board is an influential group of elite intellectuals and former leading U.S. officials, including Henry Kissinger, James Schlesinger and Newt Gingrich, and chaired by Richard Perle.

    This new direction in the “War on Terror”, which is being proposed to the U.S. government by its top advisors, raises yet again the extremely serious question of whether or not it is ethical to deploy military force, unprovoked, to overthrow a foreign government just because the country doesn’t agree with the way you are doing things.


  18. While reading your interesting article my old question nobody so far was able to answer, resurfaced. Can you do it?

    My question is very simple: why not build oil pipes across Saudi Arabia and ship oil from Red Sea, instead of allowing Iran to hold the world economy hostage, utilizing Hormuz. The distance is relatively short, all desert-meaning easy to defend, and inexpensive when compared to the damage oil flow interruption would cost. Only two powers could stop building additional oil pips: Saudi Arabia and US. What is the reason? Is it US desire to force its presence in the region?

    I would appreciate helping me understand this international game playing. Thanks.

    Wayne Leposavic
    Las Vegas

    • Journalists without frontiers.
      Oil corporations’ priced this job up in the early 90s…the Afghan route proved to be the most cost effective and do-able once the Taliban are gotten rid of.

      Note the date- Before 9/11!
      But after they had gained control of the Caspian sea area–KOSOVO- pity about the poor Serb’s!!

      The Great Game for the Oil & Gas of the Caspian Region

      September 26, 2001

      President Bush’s “crusade” against the Taliban of Afghanistan has more to do with control of the immense oil and gas resources of the Caspian Basin than with “rooting our terrorism.” Once again an American president from the Bush family is leading Americans down an oil-rich Middle Eastern warpath against “enemies of freedom and democracy.”

      The focus on religion-based terrorism serves to conceal important aspects of the Central Asian conflict. President Bush’s noble rhetoric about fighting for justice and democracy is masking a less noble struggle for control of an estimated $5 trillion of oil and gas resources from the Caspian Basin.

      One of the material results of the elder Bush’s Desert Storm campaign in 1991 was to secure access to the huge Rumaila oil field of southern Iraq, which was accomplished by expanding the boundaries of Kuwait after the war. This allowed Kuwait, a former British protectorate where American and British oil companies are heavily invested, to double its prewar oil output.

      The Trepca mine complex in Kosovo, one of the richest mines in Europe, was seized last year by front companies for George Soros and Bernard Kouchner, two members of the New World Order gang who devastated Serbia. A similar geopolitical strategy, influenced by Zionist planners, to control the valuable mineral resources of the Caspian Basin underlies the planned aggression against Afghanistan, a Central Asian nation that occupies a strategic position sandwiched between the Middle East, Central Asia and the Indian subcontinent.

      Central Asia has enormous quantities of undeveloped oil resources including 6.6 trillion cubic meters of natural gas, waiting to be exploited. The former Soviet republics of Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan are the two major gas producers in Central Asia. Today, the only existing export routes from the area lead through Russia. Investors in Caspian oil and gas are interested in building alternative pipelines to Turkey and Europe, and especially to the rapidly growing Asian markets. India, Iran, Russia and Israel are working on a plan to supply oil and gas to south and south-east Asia through India but instability in Afghanistan is raising a great threat to this effort.

      Afghanistan lies squarely between Turkmenistan, home to the world’s third largest natural gas reserves, and the lucrative markets of the Indian subcontinent, China and Japan. A memorandum of understanding has been signed to build a 900-mile natural gas pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan via Afghanistan, but the ongoing civil war and absence of a stable government in Afghanistan have delayed the project. Afghanistan was at the center of the so-called “Great Game” in the 19th century when Imperial Russia and the British Empire in India vied for influence. Today, its geographical position as a potential route for oil and natural gas pipelines makes Afghanistan extremely important to energy magnates seeking control of these precious resources.

      Enron, a Texas-based gas and energy company, together with Amoco, British Petroleum, Chevron, Exxon, Mobil and Unocal are all engaged in a multi-billion dollar frenzy to extract the reserves of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan, the three newly independent Soviet republics that border on the Caspian Sea. An array of former cabinet members from the George H. Bush administration has been actively involved in negotiations with the former Soviet republics on behalf of the oil companies. The deal makers include James Baker, Brent Scowcroft, John Sununu and, notably, Dick Cheney, now vice president.


      Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan are also closely allied with Israeli commercial interests and Israeli military intelligence. In Turkmenistan, a “former” Israeli intelligence agent, Yosef A. Maiman, president of Merhav Group of Israel, is the official negotiator and policy maker responsible for developing the energy resources of Turkmenistan.

      “This is the Great Game all over,” Maiman told the Wall Street Journal about his role in furthering the “geopolitical goals of both the U.S. and Israel” in Central Asia. “We are doing what U.S. and Israeli policy could not achieve – controlling the product,” he said.

      “Those who control the oil routes out of Central Asia will impact all future direction and quantities of flow and the distribution of revenues from new production,” said energy expert James Dorian in Oil & Gas Journal on Sept. 10.

      Foreign business in Turkmenistan is dominated by Maiman’s Merhav Group, according to the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA). Maiman, who was made a citizen of Turkmenistan by presidential decree, serves as Turkmenistan’s “official negotiator” for its gas pipeline, special ambassador, and “right-hand man” for the “authoritarian” President Saparmurad Atayevich Miyazov, a former Politburo member of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.

      The Merhav Group of Israel officially represents the Turkmen government and has brokered all of the energy projects in Turkmenistan, contracts worth many billions of dollars. Merhav has been contracted to modernize existing natural gas infrastructure and will build new facilities in an oil refinery in the city of Turkmenbashi on the Caspian Sea. Merhav refuses to disclose its sources of financing. In keeping with Israeli political interests, Maiman’s planned pipelines bypass Iran and Russia. Maiman has said that he would have no objection to dealing with Iran, “when and if Israeli policy allows it.”

      Iran has accused the United States of trying to keep regional pipelines from passing through Iran. Creating a counterbalance to Iran’s regional influence was a cornerstone of the Clinton administration, which was concerned that Iran could gain too much control over Caspian exports. “This is a common interest for the U.S. and Israel,” said Dr. Nimrod Novik, vice president of Merhav. “The primary interest is to prevent the development of Turkish strategic dependence on Iran, given the unique emerging strategic relationship between Turkey and Israel.”

      Russia and Turkmenistan are in a battle to conquer the Turkish gas market, and the supplier that offers the best price will emerge as the winner. “This is a great race,” Maiman says, “Whoever takes Turkey first wins. Whoever comes second will have lean years.” Although the United States needs Russian assistance in its campaign against Afghanistan, when I asked Alex Chorine of Caspian Investor what kind of relationship existed between the Russian and Western/Israeli energy companies doing business in the Caspian Basin, Chorine said, “They act as enemies.”

      One of Maiman’s proposed pipelines would bring Turkmenistan’s gas and oil to Turkey via Azerbaijan and Georgia. Maiman’s Merhav Group is also involved in a $100 million project that would reduce the flow of water to Iraq by diverting water from the Tigris and Euphrates rivers to southeastern Turkey.

      Israeli officials boast of having “excellent relations” with Azerbaijan, where an Israeli company, Magal Security Systems, has a contract to provide security at Baku airport. Magal is one of several Israeli companies that will “turn Israel into a major player in Azerbaijan” by providing security for the 1,200 mile pipeline taking oil from the Caspian to the Turkish port of Ceyhan on the Mediterranean Sea.

      Enron, the biggest contributor to the Bush campaign of 2000, conducted the feasibility study for a $2.5 billion trans-Caspian gas pipeline, which is being built under a joint venture agreement signed in February 1999 between Turkmenistan and two American companies, Bechtel and General Electric Capital Services. Maiman acted as the intermediary between the Turkmenistan and the U.S. firms, but won’t discuss “his cut” or whether he will receive a stake in the pipeline. The Merhav Group hired the Washington lobbying firm Cassidy & Associates and spent several million dollars to “encourage” U.S. officials to push for the trans-Caspian pipeline.


      During the Clinton administration, Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson and “special adviser to the president” Richard Morningstan promoted the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline, calling it “critical to the economic survival of Turkmenistan.” The relationship between Israel, Turkey and the United States is the major factor for the selection of the Baku-Ceyhan route, which could be extended to bring oil directly to energy-deficient Israel. Energy experts, however, question the wisdom and expense of this route. Companies are under pressure from the United States and Israel to invest in east-west pipelines, although most companies would prefer cheaper north-south pipelines through Iranian territory, according to WRMEA.

      The U.S. firm Unocal was leading a pipeline project to bring Turkmenistan’s abundant natural gas through Afghanistan to the growing markets of Pakistan and India, until the turmoil in Afghanistan led them to withdraw from the project in 1998. The planned pipeline would carry gas from the Turkmen Dauletabad fields, among the world’s largest, to Multan in Pakistan, with a planned extension to India. The line from Dauletabad through Afghanistan is planned to transport 15 billion cubic feet of gas per year for 30 years. This pipeline is on hold until the political and military situations in Afghanistan improve.

      There is a second Unocal project to build a 1,030-mile oil pipeline called the Central Asian Oil Pipeline Project, which would start at Chardzhou in Turkmenistan linking Russia’s Siberian oil field pipelines to Pakistan’s Arabian coast. This line could transport 1 million barrels a day of oil from other areas of the former Soviet Union. It would run parallel to the gas line route through Afghanistan and branch off in Pakistan to the Indian Ocean terminal in Ras Malan.

      Before the sun set on the apocalyptic day that New York’s gleaming twin towers collapsed, the U.S. government had already decided to blame the attack on Osama Bin Laden, the Saudi-born guerrilla leader, and the Taliban government of Afghanistan which harbored him. Although the U.S. government did not present evidence in support of its case against Bin Laden, Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Sept. 23, “I think in the near future, we will be able to put out a paper, a document, that will describe quite clearly the evidence that we have linking him to this attack.”

      When it was reported that the Taliban might turn Bin Laden over to face justice, the Bush administration said that surrendering Bin Laden would not prevent an American-led attack on Afghanistan. An international plan to remove the fundamentalist Islamic Taliban from power has been a subject of international diplomatic discussions for months and was reportedly raised by India during the Group of Eight summit in July in Genoa, Italy.

      The Indian press reported in June that, “India and Iran will ‘facilitate’ U.S. and Russian plans for ‘limited military action’ against the Taliban if the contemplated tough new economic sanctions don’t bend Afghanistan’s fundamentalist regime.” The invasion plans described in the Indian press in June may come to pass in October: “Tajikistan and Uzbekistan will lead the ground attack with a strong military back up of the U.S. and Russian. Vital Taliban installations and military assets will be targeted.” The economic reasons for the multinational assault against the Taliban were explained: “Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, and Turkmenistan are threatened by the Taliban that is aiming to control their vast oil, gas, and other resources by bringing Islamic fundamentalists into power.”

      China and Russia both would like to control these vast resources…

  19. Bob marshall

    What a wonderful site! Why are Americans so blind. All the unjust wars and regime changes by the US should be a flag. The atrocites commited by the CIA where they are responsible for the death of more than 6.000,000 civilians from 1947-1998 doesn’t seem to bother anyone. War is big business for the US. I always believed the plan for gobal conquest for the US begin when Harry S. Truman decided to drop two atomic bombs on Japan. three days apart. How humane. Not to save American lives because Japan had lost its Navy and almost their total air force. The Toyoko B52 raids and the fire bombings killed one million people. the Japanese people were on a sub-stravation diet. This action was to show the USSR how powerful we were and also to take control of Japan. Japan tried to surrender numerous times. Truman refused. is generals asked him not to do this. Since that war the US has been involved in fifty conflicts. After reading the above reports it is clear what Obamas objectives are and this mean there will be a invasion of Pakistan and Iran. Afghanistan is practially under US control. Bases in Iraq and Afghanistan will help control the region. Obama will not have to try very hard to convence the American people that we need to invade Pakistan to get rid of the terrorist and the people who harbor them. Americans follow him like cattle to a slaughter. He had better hope that the US either doesn’t run out of money or the people don’t awake. The last one isn’t likely. I definately plan to keep up with this site. When i tell people that the Iraq War was a lie i am called a traitor among other names. Being a Marine who served three tours in Vietnam i know about our goverment lies.

    • The Truth only will set us all free- not lies!
      Its’ easier to call someone a traitor than it is to face the truth. that they’ve have followed blindly behind their country regardless of what crimes it was guilty of.
      America has just a few honest Congressmen- these need supporting not the traitors that are destroying America.

      The CFR is the American cell of the Fabians- it’s no accident each American president is a member of the CFR.

      They have brought the system to America through an extremely brilliant system that has been openly accepted by the voters of this country without the hint of suspicion on their part that they were voting a Socialistic system into place.

      Now, make no mistake about it, Fabian Socialists are Statist, they are absolutely authoritarian in their philosophy. Their long-term goal has always been a Socialistic Dictatorship with full-imposition of a very legalistic society where the individual is simply a part of the collective. An example of this can be found in the writings of one of the founders of the Fabian Society, George Bernard Shaw speaking of the Socialist Utopia,

      This I swear is TRUE!!
      In spring 2001 when nursing privately a titled Lady with terminal cancer- we listened late into the night the BBC night service.
      We heard a group of people military etc discussing going into Iraq- planned was an airdrop of 150.000 USA troops around OIL installations- was 150.000 enough they queried.
      What if the Iraqis kicked off- not a problem one guy said- we would quickly zone off the area- we’d be safe inside the protected area. they meaning the Iraqis can then fight each other all they want- the dollar was mentioned too- Saddam was apparently to start using the euro.
      The Lady looked at me- asked why?
      I shrugged my shoulders saying- I have no idea.
      A few months’ later the Lady died- then came 9/11 and talk of Bombing Afghanistan- which later turned to Iraq- at that point my mind went back to what we’d heard that night.this was what they were planning an attack on Iraq – the MO changed thats’ all.
      Tony Blair et al. knew what they were doing. was a crime- but the people had been stirred up into a fury after demonisation of Saddam. and BINGO the War was on. SIMPLE REALLY!

      The New Drama…

      The mainstream corporate media—following approved CIA/White House narratives—is spewing and regurgitating a tidal wave of red herrings that add to the inconsistencies.

      Seasoned observers will not be fooled, no matter how many Obama lies, doctored photos, fake footage, lurid new testimonials and CIA pronouncements are pushed forth. As put simply by Paul Craig Roberts:

      “As the alleged body has been dumped into the ocean, nothing remains but the word of the US government, which lied about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction and al Qaeda connections, about yellowcake, about Iranian nukes, and, according to thousands of experts, about 9/11. Suddenly the government is telling us the truth about bin Laden’s death? If you believe that, I have a bridge in Brooklyn that I’ll let you have for a good price.”

      The “war on terrorism” is a fabrication, war propaganda that continues to serve as the eternal pretext for global resource war. That 9/11 was a false flag operation—that the official story is a lie and cover-up—has been definitively proven in numerous investigations, such as Mike Ruppert’s Crossing the Rubicon, Michel Chossudovsky’s America’s “War on Terrorism”, the work of Paul Thompson, and others.

      Osama bin Laden is a product and asset of the CIA. “Al-Qaeda” is a covert operation, a “database” of intelligence legends, exhaustively detailed in the work of Chaim Kupferberg (Part 1 and Part Two). Pakistan’s ISI, a virtual branch of the CIA, was central to 9/11 and a player in subsequent “terror” operations. It is not surprising that Pakistan and the ISI is at the heart of the “death of bin Laden” as well.

      The “death of bin Laden” changes nothing about the factual record that indicts (among others) Bush/Cheney, Anglo-American military-intelligence, and elite war/oil interests.

      Tragically, none of this matters. The minority of individuals with unscrambled brains is not the target of this imperial charade.

      Euphoria, brainwashing, and “imperial mobilization”

      To borrow from the lexicon of world planner Zbigniew Brzezinski, 9/11 was a successful attack “on the order of Pearl Harbor” that “united” the American people behind an “imperial mobilization”—the “war on terrorism” for oil. With 9/11, the masses fully supported nearly a decade of war, atrocities, subversion, and unprecedented government criminality.

      The militant and unquestioning public embrace of “war on terrorism” lies underscores how that the 9/11 has succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of the Anglo-American war criminals who orchestrated it.

      Now Barack Obama, who has spoken incessantly over the years about wanting to “unite” America again “just as it was after 9/11”, has been granted his moment to “unite” the masses again, but do an even better job of population control than Bush/Cheney (who, in their clumsiness and hubris, partially “squandered” their “political capital”). The swaggering Obama will “get it right”. He is a better actor, the more devious and mendacious corporatist who was selected for this specific purpose.

      Obama has been itching to be the “Osama killer” since before he was elected.

      The 9/11 “shock effect” remains fully potent, as evidenced by the frenzy, euphoria, and stomach-turning jubilation of crowds of Americans joining in celebration orgies over a fictional murder of the fictional Osama bin Laden, a fictional revenge. Even the “intellectuals” and “experts” are treating this charade as if it is real. Corporate media headlines have declared that “the world has changed”, and the masses love it.

      The post-9/11 era has spawned an entire generation of vicious and ignorant drones, whose moral compass has been shaped by war, lies, violent entertainment, and brainwashing. The future American police state will be built upon this new culture of thuggery. This is “Obama’s Animal Farm”.

      To Obama, this is “what makes America great”.

      Rescripting reality

      In Orwellian fashion, the legend of the death of Bin Laden changes nothing in reality, but turns the mass perception of this reality upside down.

      Suddenly, an unpopular Obama and his failing presidency are recast, in true Bush/Cheney fashion, as a heroic—and now successful— “war president”. He is now Obama the 9/11 avenger, protector of the American people, and the great military master.

      This burnished new image, which is preposterous as the one given to George W. Bush during his reign of terror, grants Obama his own new “political capital”. Two years of flummoxing and failure, wiped out. Attacks from all sides, stopped. Obama has a political weapon to fend off attacks from the right-wing. They can no longer attack Obama for being weak on foreign policy. At the same time, Obama’s corporate liberals (who care only about gaining political points on the Republicans) can return to deluding themselves about Obama’s populism, appeal and effectiveness, despite two years of absolute failure and purposely broken campaign promises. With one stroke, Obama is being handed the 2012 election.

      Suddenly, Obama is not only just as “great” as Bush, but an even “cooler customer”, who singlehandedly ordered and carried out a covert operation that Bush/Cheney could not.

      (This writer had expected the “I Killed Osama” prize to be granted to Bush/Cheney. Apparently, their handling of Iraq/Afghanistan did not earn them the permission.)

      What real objectives will be met with this new propaganda? As noted by Paul Craig Roberts:

      “My initial interpretation of the faked bin Laden death was that Obama needed closure of the Afghan war and occupation in order to deal with the US budget deficit. Subsequent statements from Obama regime officials suggest that the agenda might be to give Americans a piece of war victory in order to boost their lagging enthusiasm. The military/security complex will become richer and more powerful, and Americans will be rewarded with vicarious pleasure in victory over enemies.”

      Just as the Nixon administration declared a false “victory” in aborting the disastrous war in Vietnam, Obama can declare a similar “mission accomplished” with his “Osama Kill”. This will allow the administration to redeploying forces from Afghanistan to elsewhere in the region. Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and other critical oil-related geography remain in US cross-hairs. The new image of Obama the “heroic anti-terrorist” will convince at least some international leaders to cooperate with the administration. The mass resistance to the US-backed regimes in the Middle East, Africa and Central Asia will be at least partially neutered.

      The CIA, soon to be under the command of Iraq/Afghanistan war criminal David Petraeus, is also given a new green light to continue their “war on terrorism” atrocities. This massive criminal mafia is viewed as a heroic protector of America.

      A redeployment of forces back to the US is long overdue, for the continued buildup of “Obama’s Animal Farm” within US borders. The militarization of the US homeland will be ratcheted up, in order to stop domestic unrest, union protests, and popular responses to the continuing collapse of the US economy.

      “Al-Qaeda”, under new leadership, will be continue to be unleashed. The next phase of the CIA deception is likely to involve the legend of jihadists avenging Osama bin Laden, including, if necessary, “new 9/11s”.The so-called Al-Qaeda number two man, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who himself has “died” multiple times, will be the new boogeyman, along with other recently named “operational chiefs” such as Adnan Shukrijumah.

      The final atrocity

      To add a grotesque and sickening final insult, the swaggering Barack Obama will grandstand at New York’s Ground Zero, in a staged celebration of a fictional murder, on the hallowed ground where thousands of people actually died at the hands of the US government and its covert operatives.

      Obama even invited George W. Bush to share his “victory lap”.

      This act of exploitation will dispel all illusions about the criminal nature of this liar who has done Bush/Cheney one better by stooping even lower into the depths of depravity.

      The original Big Lie gets its bookend Big Lie.

      This guy needs protection

      Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations Steve R. Pieczenik says he is prepared to tell a federal grand jury the name of a top general who told him directly 9/11 was a false flag attack

      Top US government insider Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a man who held numerous different influential positions under three different Presidents and still works with the Defense Department, shockingly told The Alex Jones Show yesterday that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001 and that he was prepared to testify in front of a grand jury how a top general told him directly that 9/11 was a false flag inside job.

      Pieczenik cannot be dismissed as a “conspiracy theorist”. He served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations, Nixon, Ford and Carter, while also working under Reagan and Bush senior, and still works as a consultant for the Department of Defense. A former US Navy Captain, Pieczenik achieved two prestigious Harry C. Solomon Awards at the Harvard Medical School as he simultaneously completed a PhD at MIT.

      Leading us to the 3rd World War!!



    Uploaded by jennydov123 on 29 Apr 2009

    1 The Other Israel – The Whole Story Of Zionist Conspiracy [The Perverted,Disgusting & Filthy History Of Pedophilia,Murder & Bigotry]
    The letter:
    Foreign Office
    November 2nd, 1917
    Dear Lord Rothschild,
    I have much pleasure in conveying to you. on behalf of His Majesty’s Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:
    His Majesty’s Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.
    I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
    Arthur James Balfour


    1 The Other Israel – The Whole Story Of Zionist Conspiracy Part 1 of 7





    I am American.

    I’m 16 years old, and I was considering going into the Marines for my Junior year of High School.

    After seeing the pictures in RollingStone and on the internet, it changed my whole view on our military.

    I knew things were horrible for the people in Afghanistan, and I knew we were making things worse. I wanted to make a difference.

    Now the Marines are marked off of my list.

    And I’m sure, for good.

    I’m sorry to everyone in Afghanistan for my country’s stupidity, and for our racism.
    Sub0DonkeyPunch 1 month ago

  22. Pingback: A bad day for casualties :(



    JINSA: This Goes Beyond Bin Laden
    0 0 0
    WASHINGTON, Sept. 13 /PRNewswire/ — In the face of horrendous acts of
    terrorism against the United States, JINSA calls on the American government
    and on all world leaders to be decisive in their actions to confront the
    terrorists and their supporters, who rely on our taking half measures in
    We must begin by condemning them and their organizations by name; we know
    who they are. Osama Bin Laden, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Islamic Jihad are only
    the most prominent. The countries harboring and training them include not just
    Afghanistan — an easy target for blame — but Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, Syria,
    Sudan, the Palestinian Authority, Libya, Algeria and even our presumed friends
    Saudi Arabia and Egypt.
    We must make them believe there is not one inch of soil on the planet that
    is a haven or training ground for them.
    The United States can have no political relationship with any country or
    group whose citizens celebrate the death of innocent Americans. There is
    nothing to justify dancing in the streets and rejoicing over an American
    tragedy. This behavior tells us who our friends are, and who wishes our
    mortal enemies well.
    A long investigation to prove Osama Bin Laden’s guilt with prosecutorial
    certainty is entirely unnecessary. He is guilty in word and deed. His
    history is the source of his culpability. The same holds true for Saddam
    Hussein. Our actions in the past certainly were not forceful enough, and now
    we must seize the opportunity to alter this pattern of passivity.
    In response to the attack on September 11 JINSA calls on the United States

    * Halt all US purchases of Iraqi oil under the UN Oil for Food Program and
    to provide all necessary support to the Iraq National Congress,
    including direct American military support, to effect a regime change in

    * Bomb identified terrorist training camps and facilities in any country
    harboring terrorists. Interdict the supply lines to terrorist
    organizations, including but not limited to those between Damascus and
    Beirut that permit Iran to use Lebanon as a terrorist base.

    * Revoke the Presidential Order banning assassinations.

    * Overturn the 1995 CIA Directive limiting whom the U.S. can recruit to
    aid counter-terrorism in an effort to boost our human intelligence.

    * Freeze the bank accounts of organizations in the US that have links to
    terrorism-supporting groups and their political wings. Ask other
    countries and financial institutions to do the same.

    * Demand that Egypt and Saudi Arabia sever all remaining ties with Osama
    Bin Laden, including ties with Saudi-sponsored nongovernmental
    organizations and groups abroad that raise money for Bin Laden and other
    terrorist organizations.

    * Suspend US Military Aid to Egypt while re-evaluating Egypt’s support for
    American policy objectives, and re-evaluate America’s security
    relationship with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States unless both actually
    join in our war against terrorism.

    * Ensure that American technology, arms, technical support and personnel
    are not supplied to countries that do not fully support American
    objectives regarding terrorism, and through which terrorists might
    acquire American materiel. Ask our allies and other countries to
    undertake similar restrictions.

    * Reassess the visa process by which nationals from hostile nations are
    permitted to enter the United States. And tighten controls at the
    Canadian and Mexican borders to prevent access by people without
    appropriate documentation.

    * Strengthen American law enforcement efforts to identify and eliminate
    terrorist cells operating in the United States.

    * Take immediate steps to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil.

    The terrorists who struck on Tuesday changed the physical and political
    landscape of America. We in JINSA trust that our government and our people
    will make them regret that day.

    Visit JINSA at .

    CONTACT: Thomas Neumann, Executive Director of the Jewish Institute for
    National Security Affairs, +1-202-833-0020.


    SOURCE Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs




    This behavior tells us who our friends are, and who wishes our
    mortal enemies well.
    A long investigation to prove Osama Bin Laden’s guilt with prosecutorial
    certainty is entirely unnecessary. He is guilty in word and deed. His
    history is the source of his culpability. The same holds true for Saddam
    Hussein. Our actions in the past certainly were not forceful enough, and now
    we must seize the opportunity to alter this pattern of passivity.
    In response to the attack on September 11 JINSA calls on the United States

    * Halt all US purchases of Iraqi oil under the UN Oil for Food Program and
    to provide all necessary support to the Iraq National Congress,
    including direct American military support, to effect a regime change in


  25. Enjoyed the presentation. Very well put. No lies, all actual facts.

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