Yeppers, it wasn't all about oil, was it?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Unk's Troll-free Private Saloon : One Thread

Karzai to discuss pipeline project with Pakistan: Afghan govt to ensure security

KABUL, May 12: Afghan interim ruler Hamid Karzai will hold talks with his Pakistani and Turkmenistan counterparts later this month about plans for a pipeline through his country to export Turkmenistan's rich oil and gas reserves to the Indian sub-continent , an Afghan minister said on Sunday.

The summit follows a meeting earlier this month between Karzai and Turkmen President Saparmurat Niyazov about the giant project estimated to cost two billions dollars, said Mohammad Alim Razim, minister for Mines and Industries.

"The meeting will take place later this month in Pakistan. It is hoped that they will reach an agreement after thorough talks over the nuts and bolts of the project," Razim told Reuters in an interview.

Building of the 850 kms pipeline, described by many as the new "Great Game" of the new millennium, was a serious competition issue between the American oil company UNOCAL Corp and Bridas of Argentine during the five years' rule of the Taliban regime, which the United States toppled from power as part of its war on terrorism.

Razim said UNOCAL was the "lead company" among those that would build the pipeline, which is aimed at injecting 30 billion cubic meters of Turkmen gas annually to Pakistan and beyond it through southern Afghanistan.

He said Karzai would propose during the summit the building of a road parallel to the pipeline, subsidiary pipelines to villages close to the main line and also the injection of Afghan gas from northern areas, as well as from the south-western province of Helmand for export.

"The work on the project will start after an agreement is expected to be struck at the coming summit," Razim said.

Afghanistan would demand transit fees for the export of gas and oil on the basis of international norms. He also said the Afghan government would press to take over ownership of the pipeline after 30 years.

Razim said the pipeline, the biggest foreign project in Afghanistan's history, would provide job opportunities for thousands of Afghans.

"The Afghan side assures all sides about the security of the pipeline and will take all responsibilities for it." He said the Asian Development Bank (ADB) has been surveying routes for transferring local gas from northern Afghan areas to Kabul and also to iron ore mines at the Haji Gak pass to the west of Kabul.

"ADB will announce its conclusion soon. One pipe is planned to bring gas to Kabul and the second one will pass through the mountains to Haji Gak for iron exploitation purposes," Razim said.

The pipeline will be built using funds from donor countries for the reconstruction of Afghanistan as well as from ADB loans, Razim added.-Reuters



-- Cherri (whatever@who.cares), May 13, 2002

Answers

Are you a Turkmenistanophobe? Shameless racism!

-- (Hasim@Turkmenistan.Chamber of Commerce), May 13, 2002.

911 was a NWO plot all the way. Wonder how many will die in the next stage of their plan for global domination?

-- Dubya's Fascist NWO Nazis (killing Americans @ for. money), May 13, 2002.

Cherri,

Have a look at any recent picture of NYC. You will see that two very large buildings are now missing. Thousands of people died in these buildings when Muslim extremists, followers of Osama Bin Ladin and supported by the Taliban, flew some planes into them.

(You might have heard about it on the news.)

This is why we attacked Afghanistan.

-- Stephen (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 13, 2002.


Stop it Stephen, you are confusing Cherri. She believes everything she reads from her liberal mailing lists, how dare you throw sane thoughts at her.

-- (dumbya@demolished.WTC), May 13, 2002.

"Who is in charge of the clattering train?

The axles creak and the couplings strain;

And the pace is hot, and the points are near,

And Sleep has deadened the driver's ear;

And the signals flash through the night in vain,

For Death is in charge of the clattering train."

--1883, Punch (often quoted by Winston Churchill in the 30's as he tried to warn of the Nazi threat)

-- (lars@indy.net), May 13, 2002.



"Have a look at any recent picture of NYC. You will see that two very large buildings are now missing. Thousands of people died in these buildings when Muslim extremists, followers of Osama Bin Ladin and supported by the Taliban, flew some planes into them."

That's pretty good Poole Foole, but you left out one small detail...

The CIA, as ordered by the Bush family scum and their NWO comrades, looked the other way when they had intelligence to indicate this would happen, so that the Fascist Dumbya administration would have the opportunity to take over Afghanistan and pursue their oil ventures.

-- (devil@in.details), May 14, 2002.


devil,

Of course, you have proof for this.

Of COURSE you do. :)

Of course, I've asked you to provide this proof in the past and all I get is more sans-medication ranting, but hey; I NEVER interrupt a moron on a roll.

Do continue to contribute, though. Exercising your basic motor skills on the keyboard will help your recovery.

-- Stephen (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 14, 2002.


The CIA, as ordered by the Bush family scum and their NWO comrades, looked the other way when they had intelligence to indicate this would happen, so that the Fascist Dumbya administration would have the opportunity to take over Afghanistan and pursue their oil ventures.

Teufel,

You got the right idea bro, but the CIA didn't just look the other way; the CIA actually planned, bought and paid for the WTC operation. Doncha know nuttin? What a sucka for TPTB!

-- (Robt Welch@JB.Society), May 14, 2002.


You ignorant fools don't know what you're talking about. Who was only BLOCKS away from the WTC when this happened?

Chelsea Clinton.

She was in league with her criminal parents to bring down the WTC and with it, the entire government of this country. Once she succeeds, Bill Klintooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooon will declare "Marshall Law", start World War III, and make himself President For Life. Then he will send us all to the American Death Camps presided over by Osama Bin Laden himself. Monica Lewinsky will be Vice President.

THAT will be when the Y2K bugs start coming out of hiding and bring down the entire infrastructure of the planet. You'd better have your preps ready or you'll be dead. Dumb pollies!!! It won't be long now!!!!

-- (stupid@doo.mer), May 14, 2002.


http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/05/12/inv.moussaoui.fbi/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) --The head of the FBI told a Senate panel last week that an agent warned the bureau last summer that Zacarias Moussaoui, the first man charged in connection with the September 11 terrorist attacks, "could fly something into the World Trade Center."

FBI Director Robert Mueller admitted the bureau "should have more aggressively pursued warnings" from a Minneapolis-based agent about Moussaoui, a flight student and French national of Moroccan descent.

Mueller testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee, telling Illinois Democrat, Sen. Dick Durbin, he disagreed that the FBI "ignored a clear warning about ... September 11th by not responding properly" to the agent's memorandum.

In it, the agent "mentioned the possibility of Moussaoui being that type of person that could fly something into the World Trade Center," Mueller said.

While admitting "the recommendations of the agent are something that we should have more aggressively pursued," the head of the FBI said, "I do not believe that it gave the signpost of that which would happen on September 11th."



-- Cherri (whatever@who.cares), May 14, 2002.



It is perhaps safe to say that the Bush administration did not give the same weight to possible terrorists activities as the Clinton administration did.

NEWSWEEK

There are doubts concerning the FBI's insistence that it had no advance warning about the deadly 9-11 attack on the World Trade Center

Unheeded Warnings

FBI agent’s notes pointed to possible World Trade Center attack

NEWSWEEK~May 20 issue — The FBI has insisted it had no advance warning about the 9-11 attacks. But internal documents suggest there were more concerns inside the bureau’s field offices than Washington has acknowledged.

ONE FBI MEMO, written by a Phoenix agent in July 2001, warned about suspicious activities by Middle Eastern men at an Arizona flight school. Last week, in little-noticed testimony before a Senate panel, FBI Director Robert Mueller referred to another internal document that may prove more explosive: notes by a Minneapolis agent worrying that French Moroccan flight student Zacarias Moussaoui might be planning to “fly something into the World Trade Center.”

The notes are especially eerie because Moussaoui faces charges that he was part of the 9-11 plot. Sources say the notes Mueller referred to were written in early September 2001—days before the attack. The author was part of a counterterrorism team desperately trying to figure out what Moussaoui was up to. He had been arrested in August on immigration charges after a Minnesota flight instructor reported that he showed a suspicious interest in learning how to steer large airliners. When agents learned, from French intelligence, that he had radical Islamic ties, they sought a national-security warrant to search his computer—and got turned down. From his e-mail traffic they found he wanted to learn to fly a 747 from London’s Heathrow to New York’s JFK. The agents held “brainstorming” sessions to try to figure out what targets might be en route. The agents were “in a frenzy,” “absolutely convinced he was planning to do something with a plane,” said a senior official. One agent wrote that “one possibility” was that Moussaoui might be planning to crash into the Twin Towers But the official said the agents were only “speculating” about possible scenarios.

Congressional investigators believe there are more embarrassing documents to come. Another sensitive issue: the CIA’s failure to aggressively follow up on information provided by Malaysian authorities in January 2000 about a meeting in Kuala Lumpur of Al Qaeda operatives—including two men who turned out to be among the 9-11 hijackers. Malaysian officials passed along photos to the United States, but they never heard back and stopped monitoring the suspects, one Malaysian official told NEWSWEEK. CIA officials said the significance of the meeting didn’t become clear until much later. But by the time the CIA alerted the FBI, it was too late.

-- Cherri (whatever@who.cares), May 14, 2002.


Stephen, perhaps when the Senate panel finishes their investigation, you will read their conclutions and believe what they discover.

-- Cherri (whatever@who.cares), May 14, 2002.

No sense providing Poole Foole with the facts Cherri, he only believes what his master Rush Limbaugh tells him.

-- lol (ignorance@is.bliss), May 14, 2002.

Cherri,

Let's nip this in the bud right now: are you trying to say that you honestly believe that 9-11 was planned, or that the Bush administration knew that it was going to happen and permitted it for some agenda (in this case, oil)?

Don't dance around, go ahead and say it if that's what you believe.

While this *particular* revelation is a recent development, there have been stories since 9-11 about FBI agents monitoring suspicious activity involving people of middle eastern descent. An entire host of warnings were ignored.

And you know what? It's a terrible thing.

But you know what else? It happens. From Pearl Harbor (for which there was a *TON* of warning, right up to the morning of the attack -- for crying out loud, they had intercepted a Jap mini-sub a few hours earlier!) to the WTC, hindsight is *always* 20-20.

Think about it. When something like this happens, BY DEFINITION it is a failure of intelligence, at the very least, is it not?

Sure, I'll read the Congressional report, but I can go ahead and tell you (free of charge) what it'll conclude: that the CIA and FBI dropped the ball.

And you know what else? Bush's detractors will continue to believe that he knew about 9-11 in advance, and will continue to call people like me "blind" or "unwilling to see the truth" because we won't follow their chain of (il)logic ... when in truth, there is no chain.

I'll say the same thing that I did during all the Clinton scandals: if there's really something there, SOMEONE will talk. They always do. There's ALWAYS a John Dean, someone with more conscience than politics.

Republicans couldn't understand how Clinton kept "getting away with it" and -- this is the truth, and it's funny[g] -- they wondered why Clinton's White House was so "loyal" to him; why, no one WOULD come forward and indict the man once and for all!

It never, ever occurred to them that maybe the real reason for this was because Clinton had never overtly broken a major law. Bad decisions and terrible judgement, yes; sheer politics and sleeze, you bet. But no "smoking gun."

(Of course, they thought the "lying under oath" thing would get him, but that was mostly contrived.)

I think it's hillarious to see the Bush-bashers saying the SAME THINGS, using the SAME ARGUMENTS! It's absolutely hysterical to me. It will never, ever occur to them that maybe the REAL reason why no "John Dean" ever comes forward to say, "Bush knew about 9-11 and it was all about oil!" is because HE DIDN'T AND IT WASN'T.

Amazing how history repeats itself. Absolutely amazing.

Amusing, too, if you have my sick sense of 'yumor. :)

-- Stephen (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 14, 2002.


will declare "Marshall Law", start World War III, and make himself President For Life.

Boy, you're bringing back memories. Remember, some people were saying that Clinton "knew" that Y2k "would be bad" and that he would use THAT as an excuse to declare martial law and make himself King.

Heh. :)

-- Stephen (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 14, 2002.



Yeah a little flashback! LOL

Stephen, I agree with you. By definition intelligence failed but also by definition, it's extremely vague. They could put all the pieces together and say, 'something's goina happen'. But exactly what and exactly when are never ever known. So even if the intelligence was there what should the government have done? Evacuate NY and DC? For how long? Arrest whom? Charge them with what? The ACLU would certainly get involved with that one! I'm still amazed that people continue to pursue this smoke and mirrors logic - it does remind me of the doomers. Too funny!

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 15, 2002.


The government gets terrorist threats every day. If they acted on every single one of them, it would cost billions and restrict personal freedoms. Then you would hear the complaints about how wasteful the government is and how they're invading our privacy, etc. etc. Actually, you're hearing a lot of that stuff today.

During Y2K, the Clinton (or perhaps "Klintooooooooon") bashers used the same contradictory arguments. On the one hand, he and the government were too stupid to keep the Lewinsky affair quiet. Not only that, they were supposedly too stupid to properly handle Y2K. Yet, the same people saying this were also claiming that he was deviously setting up WWIII behind everyone's back. Quite a feat for someone who can't even hide a few blow jobs in the Oval Office.

Now the same is happening to Bush. Let's face it, one can either be stupid or devious, but rarely both. People should really make up their minds which way they want to bash him.

-- (what@i.think), May 15, 2002.


Let's nip this in the bud right now: are you trying to say that you honestly believe that 9-11 was planned, or that the Bush administration knew that it was going to happen and permitted it for some agenda (in this case, oil)?

No Stephen, I do not say Bush or his people planned and carried out the events of 911. What I am saying is that the administration sent some people to talk to the Taliban about building a pipeline through Afghanistan, when the Taliban broke off (Bin Laden was having fits~remember he was their war lord), the administration's people told the Taliban that they would pave their streets with gold if they would allow the pipeline and if not, they would pave the streets with bombs.

Anyone with the least amount of knowledge of the history and people in that country would have known the threat would be an affront to them and cause repercussions. After all, Bush sr. had sent aircraft into Iraq, antagonizing Saddam enough that he sent his flyers after ours...ending up causing a war. It's history. But those facts are not widely publicized these days.

The threat WAS made, it has not been disputed. I honestly believe the administration (especially those who were with Bush sr.) expected some form of retaliation. I don't think they honestly believed it would be such a bitch slap as we were given, perhaps they expected hijacking of some aircraft or some bombing of one of our embassies which would justify going to war with the Taliban, changing the makeup of the government to one which would allow the pipeline.

The "games" they have been playing recently in Venezuela due to their threat to cut of their oil to us and the BS that was given out about Cuba, just backs up the impression that they do not hesitate to use whatever influence they can to control the directions of other countries.

Taking the extreme view that any "blame" placed on the administration means they planned and carried out the acts of 911 is just a form of clouding the actual actions that WERE taken which may have caused the backlash we were victims of.

-- Cherri (whatever@who.cares), May 15, 2002.


"the administration's people told the Taliban that they would pave their streets with gold if they would allow the pipeline and if not, they would pave the streets with bombs."

Cherri--

Please cite your references for this claim

-- (lars@indy.net), May 15, 2002.


Cherri,

That's only one level above the nonsense coming from people like Jeff Rense. C'mon, Cherri, you're smarter than this. Look: you can be opposed to Bush and his policies; you can believe that he's a crook and a puppet of Big Bidness, whatever you want.

But this stuff? You're smarter than that, and what I've been trying to get across to you is that you are falling into the Bush equivalent of the "Who Killed Vince Foster?" bullcrap that Clinton's enemies regurgitated (ad infintum) year after year, one ridiculous article after another.

The only ones who buy this crap are the hardcore anti-NWO nuts. Don't be one of them.

It's one thing to be opposed to Bush, even to work against him in 2004. Have right at it; you have my blessing. But when you start believing rumors and garbage just because it suits your predjudices against someone, you are NO BETTER than the Clinton-haters were.

THAT'S what I meant about history repeating itself. Some people will believe anything. You are smarter than them. Think for yourself.

And I repeat my key argument: there will always be a John Dean who spills the beans. There has been no John Dean in this case (or in Clinton's, for that matter), and I dare say that there won't be.

Hey, I can assure you that if there ever IS a John Dean who can support some of this crap with hard evidence, I'll be the FIRST to call for Bush's head. But until that happens, I gotta see more than a smeared link to Rense's monomaniacal rantings.

Now, just for the record:

What I am saying is that the administration sent some people to talk to the Taliban about building a pipeline ... they would pave their streets with gold if they would allow the pipeline and if not, they would pave the streets with bombs ... the threat WAS made, it has not been disputed.

To start with, the majority of the negotiation for this pipeline occurred during the *CLINTON* administration, not Bush's, and said negotiations were primarily between Unocal and the Taliban. That's point one.

Point two, this most assuredly HAS been disputed (the chronology, in particular). In fact, it has essentially been discounted and the only people who continue to repeat it are those who WANT very badly to believe that Bush is evil, or is a puppet, or [whatever].

Again: think, "who killed Vince Foster?" The media didn't bite on that circus and they haven't bitten on this one. For the SAME REASON.

Anyone with the least amount of knowledge of the history and people in that country would have known the threat would be an affront to them and cause repercussions.

Sure it would ... if it had happened that way. But again, this *HAS* been disputed. I'm not about to take the Taliban's word for anything.

Bush sr. had sent aircraft into Iraq, antagonizing Saddam enough that he sent his flyers after ours...ending up causing a war. It's history. But those facts are not widely publicized these days.

Cherri, who in the HECK are you listening to? You're beginning to worry me.

On anything like this, chronology is the key. We attacked Iraq because Iraq invaded Kuwait. Now THAT is not in dispute.

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 15, 2002.


Cherri, you should stick to your normal cut and paste posts and avoid making ludicrous statements. How would you be in possession of this critical knowledge? Was it printed on the back of your food stamps?

Stupid woman.

-- FatOlsonLand (home@2.fools), May 15, 2002.


Lars,

I did both Google and Alta Vista searches on that phrase (and variants) and found nothing. I do vaguely remember seeing it in a rant on either David Icke's or Jeff Rense's website (I'm going from memory here, don't hold me to that), but it seems to have disappeared in general from the Web.

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 15, 2002.


Irony.

Former "Polly" who used good sense and logic to debunk Y2K now refuses to apply those same skills to politics, but instead searches out data that supports her fore-gone conclusion.

Cherri's a doomer now, how funny.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeeD@yahoo.com), May 15, 2002.


I thought a doomer was someone who feared disastrous events in the future. In this case the disaster has already occurred and Cherri is posting factual information to support a conspiracy theory. That hardly makes her a doomer.

-- (get it @ straight. Unk), May 15, 2002.

Just watch the national news. It's starting to come out now....

-- Cherri (whatever@who.cares), May 15, 2002.

I'm watching the national news and nothing at all is coming out now. Perhaps you could be more specific?

-- (what@i.think), May 15, 2002.

What Cherri is talking about is information that was available to the government during the Bush Administration that should have been responded to with a great deal more intelligence.

-- Peter Errington (petere7@starpower.net), May 15, 2002.


Come, Cherri. I would be very easy to post a link to this assertion if it's "not even in dispute."

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 16, 2002.

Peter,

Absolutely! There is no question about that.

But just for your own edification, read sometime about the chain of events that led to Pearl Harbor. The United States had FAR more warning of that attack than we did for the WTC ... and yes, there were -- and still are, to this day! -- conspiracy theories that FDR "knew" what was coming and let it happen so that we could join the war on Britain's side, etc.

Again: it's amazing how history repeats itself. Some said back then that FDR didn't know *specifically* what was going to happen (many Naval Intel types thought the attack would be on US possessions closer to Japan) and was surprised at the severity of it -- the same thing that's being said now by some of Bush's detractors (those who don't want to believe that he knew about WTC in *detail,* but wanted SOME form of attack to occur to suit his agenda).

To keep this in perspective, the FBI and CIA get hundreds of leads per HOUR. At the same time that the FBI was learning about suspected terrorists in flight training, they were also getting reports about US militia types, Mexican/Aztlan activists in southwest, and dozens of others. The government simply did not have the manpower to run down all of these leads. They had to choose which they would follow.

They chose wrong, and heads will probably roll because of it (and should). But looking for deeper, darker conspiracies behind the thing is something of a stretch. THAT'S what I'm addressing here.

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 16, 2002.


Best said. Shit is shit unless not paying attention to it can get you either sued or voted out of office. Given such a threat shit transforms itself into either an item of serious consideration or better something spun off onto the other guys porch. Ain't politics fun?

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), May 16, 2002.

LOL! I can just imagine how you Pugs would be whining if this had happened on "Klintoon's" shift! Hee-haaaw, we'd never hear the end of it!

-- morning chuckle (rolling on floor @ laughing. ass off!), May 16, 2002.

Carlos,

Of course, I'm *sure* the fact that there's an election coming in November and that Democrats are worried about Bush's popularity and a possible "coattail" effect have nothing to do with any of this. :)

-- Stephen (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 16, 2002.


What's being brought to light should be being brought to light. If the political fallout favors the Democrats, so be it.

-- Peter Errington (petere7@starpower.net), May 16, 2002.

And I might add that I would bet my house against a donut that however the Democrats comport themselves, they will be accused by the Republicans of trying to profit politically from the tragedy. So fuck them in advance.

-- Peter Errington (petere7@starpower.net), May 16, 2002.


I think Cherri works for the CIA investigating oil smuggled from South America. There she toppled over some news about a Bush operative who wants to reactive the oil fields in Texas. So he decided to burn the oil in Kuwait but was foiled by South American smugglers. How else could she come up with this stuff?

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), May 16, 2002.

“How else could she come up with this stuff?”

That’s easy. Cherri is a fat lazy welfare leech that has 24/7 to sit around letting her med-soaked mind wander off into fantasyland. People who don’t blend into society are prone to mental delirium, as they have little or no physical interaction with other humans. This is a common trait with aging recluses.

-- Old (maid@never.laid), May 16, 2002.


LOL! I can just imagine how you Pugs would be whining if this had happened on "Klintoon's" shift! Hee-haaaw, we'd never hear the end of it!

But it did happen on the Clinton shift (USS Cole, WTC bombing in 1993, 2 Embassies blown up in Africa, God knows what else). Worst of all, Clinton vitiated Intelligence capabilities. (Oh we can do it all high tech, no messy spies, especially if they have a criminal background). 9/11 = roosting chickens courtesy of the evil Clinton-Reno axis.

Not to worry, Jimmy Carter will fix everything. LOL, hee hee, ROTF licking your ass off.

-- (Democraps@Auntie Christ.Convention), May 16, 2002.


"Worst of all, Clinton vitiated Intelligence capabilities. (Oh we can do it all high tech, no messy spies, especially if they have a criminal background)."

Counterrorism, Antiterrorism Clinton Years

Terrorism Legislation and Executive Orders:



-- Cherri (whatever@who.cares), May 16, 2002.

Hey Cherri, I notice you have attracted quite the crowd at your site:

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a.tcl?topic=Exposing%20Rightwing% 20Corruption

Get off your fat ass and do something productive.

-- Oink (oink@welfare.hog), May 16, 2002.


That's odd, no one has posted except me. Why do you assume I have attracted a crowd? Most of the things there are the same as I post here? Thank you for pointing out the site here though, maybe some will go read it.

-- Cherri (whatever@who.cares), May 17, 2002.

Cherri, several people have asked you for references of the claims you make against Bush. Could you please give them to us, or admit this is just conjecture on your part?

-- dr. pibb (drpibb@new.formula), May 17, 2002.

“That's odd, no one has posted except me. Why do you assume I have attracted a crowd?”

Cherri, I’ll go out on a limb here and guess that ‘Oink’ was being caustic regarding the lack of participants at your site. All that corruption and nobody to expose it to!

-- Send (mo@money.please), May 17, 2002.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ