Interesting article, cobbled together from some newly released documents-
Documents, obtained through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and recently posted on the website of the George Washington University National Security Archive
Seems relevant for a number of reasons, the latest unverified audio visitation from the Ozombie Laden and the war on Pakistan, being just two of them.
To refresh your memory for some of the info in this post you may want to go back here, to talk of UNOCAL and pipelines. Or click on the Pakistan label at the bottom though I suspect, if you have been following along, you may not need to refresh, still, it can't hurt.
Now onto the latest article:
One of the recently released State Department documents, from March 2000, notes that a proposed "gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan to Multan, Pakistan figured prominently in discussions” about the mutual goal between the U.S. and regional players of stabilizing Afghanistan.
I believe this pipeline was initially called TAP, but then became TAPI, when the plans were made to extend it to India. I had this map up previously, and it seems a good time to bring it back. From Turkmenistan, through Afghanistan, we can see Multan, Pakistan and then the extension through to Pakistan.
This was not the only prominently discussed pipeline post 9/11.
Discussions on another proposed pipeline from Iran to India via Pakistan had also been proposed, that were “more advanced”, and the Pakistanis had gone to Tehran to meet with Iranian officials “to pursue these negotiations”.
So a pipeline was in the works, more advanced ( in planning?) even then TAPI, emanating from Iran, through Pakistan and onto India?
Now, looking at that map, I am reminded of this bit of news. From today, the US is announcing a massive arms sale to Saudi Arabia! All the better to launch an attack on Iran with.
The proposed deal — one of the biggest single U.S. arms sales — is clearly aimed at countering Iran's rising military might and efforts to expand its influence.
You think Israel would be against this, but, no. According to this article the US sought Israel's approval before going through with the deal.
So, Saudi Arabia is, as usual fully subservient to their Washington and Israeli masters.
The US says it has sought Israel's approval before agreeing to a massive arms sale to Saudi Arabia which is to become the largest US arms deal in history.
Hence their warning to France about imminent terror attacks earlier this week?
And their massive arms purchase!!!
Let's get back to these recently released documents! An interesting statement from OBL made way back. Osama always denied any involvement with the 9/11 attacks. I will not spend too much time on the fact the Taliban attempted numerous times to give the man to the US. That is addressed in the article. The US didn't want him. It was all a ruse. They knew where he was, because he was always in their corner.
Here is what Osama said on September 16/01:
“Following the latest explosions in the United States, some Americans are pointing the finger at me, but I deny that because I have not done it…. Reiterating once again, I say that I have not done it….”
Then just 12 days later Osama makes this statement:
“I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. Neither I had any knowledge of these attacks nor I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children, and other people…. Whoever committed the act of 11 September are not the friends of the American people. I have already said that we are against the American system, not against its people, whereas in these attacks, the common American people have been killed.”
He went on to suggest that the attacks were an inside job:
“Then there are intelligence agencies in the US, which require billions of dollars worth of funds from the Congress and the government every year. This [funding issue] was not a big problem till the existence of the former Soviet Union but after that the budget of these agencies has been in danger. They needed an enemy. So, they first started propaganda against Usama and Taliban and then this incident happened…. What is this? Is it not that there exists a government within the government in the United States? That secret government must be asked as to who made the attacks.”Of course Osama Bin Laden would understand well the "secret government within the government" concept. Since it was the one that had nurtured him so well.
Zbigniew Brzezinski & Osama Bin Laden
Bin Laden was correct in his observation that U.S. policymakers perceived the need for an external enemy in order to pursue their policy goals. Without such a threat, the goal of many after the end of the Cold War not only to maintain U.S. military expenditures, but to effect a “transformation” of the military into a force for U.S. global hegemony, could not be realized.
Quite simply, with the old USSR boogey man gone, it was the US and her allies that benefited the most from creating a new scary monster and hammering the bogus story home. Repeatedly. To catapult the propaganda.
The neoconservative think tank The Project for a New American Century (PNAC), acknowledged this in its September 2000 manifesto “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces, and Resources for a New Century”, which argued the case for maintaining U.S. preeminence and global hegemony, and to “extend the current Pax Americana” through a buildup of the military. But this “process of transformation” was “likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event—like a new Pearl Harbor.”
Was it just PNAC putting forth the requirement for a new Pax Americana and a catalyzing event, a new Pearl Harbor?
This assessment echoed that of Andrew Krepinevich, Executive Director of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities on March 5, 1999.
“There appears to be a general agreement concerning the need to transform the U.S. military into a significantly different kind of force from that which emerged victorious from the Cold and Gulf Wars,” he noted that “this verbal support has not been translated into a defense program supporting transformation.”
He stated further that
“While there is growing support in Congress for transformation the ‘critical mass’ needed to affect it has not yet been achieved.” In conclusion, he said, “in the absence of a strong external shock to the United States—a latter-day ‘Pearl Harbor’ of sorts—surmounting the barriers to transformation will likely prove a long, arduous process.”Along comes 9/11, blame Bin Laden and the Taliban. Invade Afghanistan, get those pipeline plans a rollin'. Expand the wars from there, as we have seen in the attack on Iraq, Pakistan, and soon Iran. To control resources. To cut off other nations. To control land, people, finances, resources, enrich bankers, etc., etc. Who benefited?
Now to end off this rather lengthy post, some food for thought.
-To this day, the attacks of 9/11 are not listed as being among the crimes for which Osama bin Laden is wanted by the FBI, because there is not enough evidence against him to bring an indictment against him in a court of law
-The U.S. never produced the white paper it promised that was to present the evidence against bin Laden in making its case for war
-The British government did present a paper Tony Blair insisted demonstrated his guilt. Yet “Downing Street acknowledged that the 21-page dossier did not amount to a prosecutable case against bin Laden in a court of law.”
The papers used by Tony Blair at Downing Street (the bogus Downing Street memos) were short on truth and long on propaganda, but, nonetheless Blair saw fit to use them to wage war.
The threshold of evidence required for waging a war is apparently much lower than that to issue an indictment in a court of law.Curious?