Thursday, October 21, 2010

Connecting the dots from TAPI and IPI pipelines through Afghanistan,9/11, Israeli approved US/Saudi arms deal to Iran attack

What a tough piece to title!!!

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.

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.
So, Saudi Arabia is, as usual fully subservient to their Washington and Israeli masters.
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.”[23]

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

Cui bono?

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.”[24]

Was it just PNAC putting forth the requirement for a new Pax Americana and a catalyzing event, a new Pearl Harbor?
If only.

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.


  1. But there is one pipeline that is going thru, if not already working.

    The one coming out of Iraq and ending up at Israel's port Haifa.

    If and or when completed, it's supposed to bring in wealth to help Israel's "Clean Break Strategy: Securing the Realm" I believe is the name of the paper.

    Just think how much money they could make, charging for refining and shipping that oil out Israel.

    And another that was going to come thru Turkey, then go underwater to Israel, but since the attack on the aid ship, that one might be in doubt... for now.

  2. Like an idiot, I went to Wikileaks to check on Haifa and noticed a few lies about Apartheid Israel, so I inserted some truth.

    Bet it doesn't last two hours before they go back to the previous BS, about Israel's borders being SEALED by its Arab neighbors after the 1948 war. I just added that Israel's western border was the Med and that her Arab neighbors sealed their borders after the 1967 Israeli War of Aggression.

    Here's my more accurate version that I inserted:

    Until the beginning of the 20th century, Acre served as the main port for the region. However, the port eventually became clogged with silt, and was unable to accommodate large ships. The first person to comprehend the tremendous possibilities of a port in Haifa was Theodor Herzl, the father of Political Zionism, who in 1898 wrote a prophetic description of the town in his book AltNeuland. Construction of the port began in 1922, and officially opened on October 31, 1933. [2] The port allowed Haifa to blossom, and in 1936, the city had over 100,000 inhabitants. The port served as a gateway for thousands of immigrants to Israel after the Second World War.[3] With Israel’s western borders the Mediterranean and the eastern borders sealed by its Arab neighbors after the 1967 Israeli War of Aggression, Haifa served as a crucial gateway to the rest of the world, and helped Israel develop into an economic power. Today the port brings both passenger and cargo traffic to a bustling metropolis, much as Theodor Herzl predicted over a century ago.

  3. "And another that was going to come thru Turkey, then go underwater to Israel, but since the attack on the aid ship, that one might be in doubt... for now."

    that was Bluestream, either 1 0r 2.
    or Nabucco

    I've done a number of post on the various pipelines.

    The pipeline label at the bottom should bring a bunch of them up.

  4. Let me know how long your edit will last. It will be gone sooner then you think..

    wikipedia, sheesh.

  5. Thanks for that Penny. A tidy package tied up with a bow.

  6. The TRUTH is still in that Wiki post, damn near 12 hours later.

    Someone at ZIOPEDIA is asleep at the switch.

  7. good post Pen. the maps show why the corridor (or wedge) from Balochistan to Manas is key to stopping these pipelines. wouldn't want India making nice with Iran, for instance.

  8. hey greg, I just checked it is still there!!! I will check back later to see if it get's the axe

  9. Hey Peter!
    isn't it amazing how the dots connect from the past to the present?

    Helps to understand what is happening now, why it is happening and how it got to this point.

    Amazing the long term planning the ptb's put into their manipulations of the planet?

    They are tireless.

  10. ". the maps show why the corridor (or wedge) from Balochistan to Manas is key to stopping these pipelines."

    Such a small bit of land, so all important.

    Stop the pipelines, stop the dominance plan.(Something Russia and China may want to keep in mind)

    "wouldn't want India making nice with Iran"

    nope, couldn't have that.
    Better India makes nice and buys weapons off of the US

  11. Will the Saudis ever learn?

    - Aangirfan

  12. US apparently is not happy with Iram going on with the nuclear enrichment program, moreover IPI is likely to stabilise strained relation between Pakistan,Iran and India ,not to a large extent but atleast it'll open the doors for further negotiations on various issues.
    Moreover given India and Pakistan's point of view and the energy demands IPI is far better that TAPI.Even security threats are much less in case of IPI.
    If India fails to finalise on IPI, China would be involved for its accomplishment which is certainly not a good sign for US.
    so US wants Pakistan also to back down from this Project.
    Hence as a substitute US instigated TAPI to meet the same objectives, which however is seems distant in realising its goals.
    Now the point to be seen is whether the Govt's of India and Pakistan go ahead with Tapi or IPI. because as far as objective is concerned both compliment each other.

  13. Fallen Poet:

    thanks for that interesting comment.

    I had never thought of the pipelines, on vs the other from a perspective of stabilizing relations.

    But you make a good point with the fact that the IPI pipeline would go a long way in improving relations between India, Pakistan and Iran.
    Which would not serve western interests (British/American/Israeli)

    But would be beneficial for the people of those nations and the region in general.

    "IPI is far better that TAPI.Even security threats are much less in case of IPI."

    Because TAPI has to pass through Afghanistan, which has always been a tumultuous area??
    I am assuming that is the cause for security concerns?

    BTW thanks for a most excellent comment. Helps to give a more complete picture.