It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WAR: US Had Secret Plans for Iraq Oil from 2001

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 02:47 PM
link   
It has emerged from a BBC Newsnight investigation that the US administration had plans to overthrow Saddam and take control of Iraq's oil from 2001. The investigation features former members of the US Administration and high ranking person's from the Oil industry, including the former CEO of Shell Oil US. The program was aired on 17th March in the UK.
 



news.bbc.co.uk
The Bush administration made plans for war and for Iraq's oil before the 9/11 attacks, sparking a policy battle between neo-cons and Big Oil, BBC's Newsnight has revealed.


Iraqi-born Falah Aljibury says US Neo-Conservatives planned to force a coup d'etat in Iraq
Two years ago today - when President George Bush announced US, British and Allied forces would begin to bomb Baghdad - protesters claimed the US had a secret plan for Iraq's oil once Saddam had been conquered.

In fact there were two conflicting plans, setting off a hidden policy war between neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, on one side, versus a combination of "Big Oil" executives and US State Department "pragmatists".



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


It appears the BBC have taken seriously the accusations against the Bush Administration that they had planned a takeover of Iraq long before 9/11.

It shoots down their claims that it was to remove WMD, or get rid of a terrorist regime in Iraq, as the rather extensive report with some big hitters in Washington and the Oil industry seems to lay credence to the many claims that Bush wanted Iraq's oil.

I wonder what political fallout there will be from this, if any? And will people now start to question the whole "War on Terror" that has been much vaunted by the US Government over recent years, as it is apparent that there are hidden agendas at work here behind the scenes.

I have included a link to the video below, so that people from outside the UK can examine it for themselves.

Related News Links:
news.bbc.co.uk




posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 03:48 PM
link   
There wont be any political fallout. It'll be swept under the rug


Do we still think 9/11 was an act of outside terrorists? LOL..

I tell you this is a little much, even for me

Osama, Mr. Bush has much to be thankful to you for.


[edit on 20-3-2005 by dgtempe]



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Yeah, I posted it. I had to re-submit it though



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Stumason, Thank you for a great story


This was ridiculed when linked from other news sources, lets see what the response is now that the BBC has the story.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 04:33 PM
link   


Stumason, Thank you for a great story


Not a problem, hopefully the first of many ATSNN stories.

Had to rejig the opening paragraph, as it was too short apparently, and this one seems to be fairing better in the votes than my last attempt (had alot of no votes, wonder why.......?), so with just one more vote.......



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 05:08 PM
link   
I am just surprised that the occurance with the war in Iraq to maintain control of Oil reserves was not maintained from the first Iraq war. The opportunity was there for Goerge Bush Senior but the control was passed back to Iraq... why would this happen if they had already gained political control of Iraq at that time? We know that Iraq was aware of the importance of Oil to the west, why else burn the oil outlets during the first and second Iraq war, they would not cut off their nose's to spit their faces.. it may have just been the belief that they would rather burn it that let the US and coalition forces take control of the countries only main asset.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 05:33 PM
link   
I had thought more people were aware of the PNAC and it's plans, this stuff has been long discussed, do a search on ATS or google PNAC and see how long this has been talked about.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 05:41 PM
link   

From the Source Article
Iraqi-born Falah Aljibury says US Neo-Conservatives planned to force a coup d'etat in Iraq


Again, I'd like to point out that U.S. law demanded the policy of the U.S. to be the overthrow of Saddam Hussein since 1998, when Bill Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 into law:



Public Law: 105-338 (10/31/98)

Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government.

Source: Iraq Liberation Act of 1998


[edit on 3/20/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 05:43 PM
link   
Maybe so Worldwatcher, and thankyou for intensely watching everyone of my ATSNN posts!

But the point being here, and what made it newsworthy, is the fact that the BBC have picked up the ball, and along with another program tonight about MI6 being aware of the US "fixing" the case for war, seem to be lending alot of weight to the theories many of us have had for a while now.

EDIT: And Dj, it might well have been US law, but what exactly does that mean? Just because you have a law saying something, doesn't make it right, or legal for that matter in INTERNATIONAL law!

Especially seeing as the US will ignore other countries laws and international treaties when it suits them.

[edit on 20/3/05 by stumason]



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by worldwatcher
I had thought more people were aware of the PNAC and it's plans, this stuff has been long discussed, do a search on ATS or google PNAC and see how long this has been talked about.
I think this is the first time the newsource is "legitimate" though.



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 06:20 PM
link   
fyi, i look at all atsnn submissions with equal interest, so stu you're not that special after all
(that's was my attempt at humor)

and people like Richard Clarke and Paul O'Neill also mentioned this, but people said they were just trying to sell books.
www.cnn.com...



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 06:24 PM
link   


fyi, i look at all atsnn submissions with equal interest, so stu you're not that special after all (that's was my attempt at humor)


Ahh, dammit! And I thought I had a fan (and not a bad looking one judging by your avatar!)

Anyway, I just thought it was good that the BBC have not only taken an interest initially, but their investigation has lent weight to what we have been talking about for years!



posted on Mar, 20 2005 @ 11:58 PM
link   
If war plans were indeed drawn up before September 11, 2001, exactly what was the Bush administration thinking would happen that would get the public to accept a new very long and costly invasion and occupation? Was 9/11 just simply a fluke of a dream come true for an administration just itching to look for a reason to start a conflict? Or was something more down to earth and conspiratorial involved in getting a conflict starting event to happen?



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 12:35 AM
link   
Was there a plan to do something about Saddam before the Bush administration?.... You bet....



December 16, 1998
Web posted at: 8:51 p.m. EST (0151 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- From the Oval Office, President Clinton told the nation Wednesday evening why he ordered new military strikes against Iraq.

The president said Iraq's refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors presented a threat to the entire world.

"Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said.


Excerpted from.
www.cnn.com...

Let's see more evidence of when was such plan laid out for regime change in Iraq....


In 1998, Saddam Hussein pressured the United Nations to lift the sanctions by threatening to stop all cooperation with the inspectors. In an attempt to resolve the situation, the UN, unwisely in my view, agreed to put limits on inspections of designated "sovereign sites" including the so-called presidential palaces, which in reality were huge compounds well suited to hold weapons labs, stocks, and records which Saddam Hussein was required by UN resolution to turn over. When Saddam blocked the inspection process, the inspectors left. As a result, President Clinton, with the British and others, ordered an intensive four-day air assault, Operation Desert Fox, on known and suspected weapons of mass destruction sites and other military targets.

In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad.


Excerpted from.
clinton.senate.gov...

Deny Ignorance.......



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 12:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
There wont be any political fallout. It'll be swept under the rug


Do we still think 9/11 was an act of outside terrorists? LOL..

I tell you this is a little much, even for me

Osama, Mr. Bush has much to be thankful to you for.


You actually have any evidence the US had something to do with 9/11?....i don't think so...

I guess Spain also caused 3/11 and all the evidence they got not only about 3/11 but also about 9/11 and who was behind the attacks is wrong....


Is this how we deny ignorance?...



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 12:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muaddib

Originally posted by dgtempe
There wont be any political fallout. It'll be swept under the rug


Do we still think 9/11 was an act of outside terrorists? LOL..

I tell you this is a little much, even for me

Osama, Mr. Bush has much to be thankful to you for.


You actually have any evidence the US had something to do with 9/11?....i don't think so...

I guess Spain also caused 3/11 and all the evidence they got not only about 3/11 but also about 9/11 and who was behind the attacks is wrong....


The Bush administration did have motive and opportunity to commit either the direct order for 9/11 or intentional neglect. As far as 3/11, I'm not sure what that has to do with 9/11, are you insinuating the US had something to do with the Spanish train bombing as well? Sometimes I get confused by such leaps in logic.

[edit on 21-3-2005 by Jamuhn]



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frith
If war plans were indeed drawn up before September 11, 2001, exactly what was the Bush administration thinking would happen that would get the public to accept a new very long and costly invasion and occupation? Was 9/11 just simply a fluke of a dream come true for an administration just itching to look for a reason to start a conflict? Or was something more down to earth and conspiratorial involved in getting a conflict starting event to happen?


The 1998 Iraqi Liberation Act was precipitated by PNAC members (including Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld, Douglas Feith) writing a letter to Clinton, calling for the removal of Saddam Hussein as he was a threat to the U.S. and Israel if he obtained WMDs. The letter strongly denounced the U.N. & it's containment policy.

In light of this fact, it isn't hard to believe Richard Clarke's claims that Iraq was on the table as soon as Bush-Cheney took office in 2001.

If you read PNAC's Septeber 2000 report Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, And Resources For A New Century , in order to start a premptive war with public support, a catastrophic & catalyzing event is necessary (see page 51.) The report actually says "like the new Pearl Harbor."

This is not proof that the government was complicit in the 9/11 attacks, but it is clear that they did use 9/11 as an opportunity. Osama bin Laden and 9/11 were mentioned in almost every speech justifying the war in Iraq--and evidence that was tenuous at best was used as solid proof to link Hussein and bin Laden.



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jamuhn
The Bush administration did have motive and opportunity to commit either the direct order for 9/11 or intentional neglect. As far as 3/11, I'm not sure what that has to do with 9/11, are you insinuating the US had something to do with the Spanish train bombing as well? Sometimes I get confused by such leaps in logic.

[edit on 21-3-2005 by Jamuhn]


The Chinese government had more of a motive for helping terrorists in the attacks in 9/11...hell two of their military colonels drew plans on how to fight the next war and win against the US...one of those tactics was.....


"What's coming will be more devastating to the U.S. economy than any nuclear strike..."
- The Asia Times

I. Unrestricted War



Unrestricted War: China’s Master Plan to Destroy America is a treatise for world domination written in 1999 by People’s Liberation Army Colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui. In order for China to become a dominant global power over the United States, the PLA emphasizes “The Final War over Resources”, must be won.



The Colonels state that the aggressor nation “must adjust its own financial strategy, use currency revaluation or devaluation as primary weapons, and combine means such as getting the upper hand in public opinion and changing the rules sufficiently to make financial turbulence and economic crisis appear in the targeted country or area, weakening its overall power, including its military strength. Whether it be the intrusions of hackers, a major explosion at the World Trade Center, or a bombing attack by bin Laden, all of these greatly exceed the frequency bandwidths understood by the American military..."


Excerpted from.
news.goldseek.com...

Let's see some other links with information from these two chinese military colonels.



BEIJING—In 1996, colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui were in Fujian province for military exercises aimed at threatening the island of Taiwan. As Chinese M9 intermediate-range missiles splashed into waters off two main southern Taiwanese ports, the United States dispatched two aircraft carrier battle groups to the region.

Like most Chinese officers, the colonels were furious at the U.S. move, seeing it as another sign of American interference in China's internal affairs. But to Qiao and Wang, the first crisis in the Taiwan Strait was also a lesson.

"We realized that if China's military was to face off against the United States, we would not be sufficient," said Wang, an air force colonel in the Guangzhou military district's political department. "So we realized that China needs a new strategy to right the balance of power."
.........................
Among their sometimes creative and sometimes shocking proposals for dealing with a powerful adversary are terrorism, drug trafficking, environmental degradation and computer virus propagation. The authors include a flow chart of 24 different types of war and argue that the more complicated the combination -- for example, terrorism plus a media war plus a financial war -- the better the results. From that perspective, "Unrestricted War" marries the Chinese classic, "The Art of War" by Sun Tzu, with modern military technology and economic globalization.

"Unrestricted War is a war that surpasses all boundaries and restrictions," they write at one point. "It takes nonmilitary forms and military forms and creates a war on many fronts. It is the war of the future."


Excerpted from.
taiwansecurity.org...





Editor: Following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack in the United States, the authors of the seminal 1999 Chinese People's Liberation Army text on 21st Century "assymetrical" warfare, titled Unrestricted Warfare, were interviewed in the September 13, 2001 People's Republic of China-owned Ta Kung Pao newspaper in Hong Kong. The following are excerpts from the interview with the military theorists, Senior Colonels Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui:

September 25
Hong Kong Ta Kang Pao: Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui foretold such a scenario of terrorists using high technological means to carry out attacks beyond the military scope in the 21st century to achieve military goals in their book Unrestricted Warfare, published in 1999. The large-scale terrorist attacks in Washington, D.C. and New York unfortunately were just like what they predicted.

Those carrying out the attacks were terrorists but not career military personnel, what they used were civilian airplanes but not military weapons, and what they attacked were international trade buildings but not military targets; however, the casualties and shock caused by the attacks were even more serious than those caused by a war. This is "unrestricted warfare" -- it goes beyond the scope of a military warfare but it achieves the objectives of fighting a war.

Colonels Qiao and Wang: "The series of attacks taking place in the United States were very dreary and terrifying, but they must not be viewed from a single perspective. While the thousands of innocent people killed or injured in the attacks were victims of terrorism, they also were victims of US foreign policy. The September 11, 2001 very likely is the beginning of the decline of the United States, as a superpower."


Excerpted from.
www.afpc.org...


As for what 3/11 have anything to do with 9/11, you seem to be well behind on the evidence that is coming out from Spain.

The spanish intelligence have found evidence that the plan to carry out the 9/11 attacks on the US were done in Spain, along with the attack of 3/11 and other plans that Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations had, and still have in store for Europe.


Spain links suspect in 9/11 plot to Baghdad

David Rose
Sunday March 16, 2003
The Observer

alleged terrorist accused of helping the 11 September conspirators was invited to a party by the Iraqi ambassador to Spain under his al-Qaeda nom de guerre, according to documents seized by Spanish investigators.
Yusuf Galan, who was photographed being trained at a camp run by Osama bin Laden, is now in jail, awaiting trial in Madrid. The indictment against him, drawn up by investigating judge Baltasar Garzon, claims he was 'directly involved with the preparation and carrying out of the attacks ... by the suicide pilots on 11 September'.


Evidence of Galan's links with Iraqi government officials came to light only recently, as investigators pored through more than 40,000 pages of documents seized in raids at the homes of Galan and seven alleged co-conspirators. The Spanish authorities have supplied copies to lawyers in America, and this week the documents will form part of a dossier to be filed in a federal court in Washington, claiming damages of approximately $100 billion on behalf of more than 2,500 11 September victims.

The lawsuit lists Saddam's government in Iraq as one of its principal defendants, claiming it provided 'material support' to the al-Qaeda terrorists.


Excerpted from.
observer.guardian.co.uk...



I don't even know where you get that i am implying the US had anything to do with 3/11.... i have presented evidence that shows the contrary several times.... i know that both 9/11 and 3/11 were attacks perpetrated by terrorists groups, including members of Al Qaeda...


SPAIN'S 9/11: THE MOROCCAN CONNECTION
By Kathryn Haahr-escolano
July 01, 2004


Following the March 11 attacks in Madrid, the nature of the Islamist threat to Spain has become a sensitive matter for all Spaniards, including Spain's Muslims. As evidence emerges indicating that foreign terrorists linked to al-Qaeda committed the attacks, many within Spain's North African community are now uncomfortably aware of the fact that a large number of the terrorists who entered Spain were from Morocco.

It appears that the main threat to Spanish security comes from various militant Islamist groups in North Africa and the Middle East aligned with al-Qaeda. Spain, and potentially Portugal, has emerged as a new base of operations for transnational terrorism. The bombings in Casablanca in May 2003, coupled with the violence from Islamic militants in Algeria and Mauritania, demonstrate the growing importance of Northwest Africa to militant Islamist groups that espouse al-Qaeda's philosophy.

Fourteen of the 18 people provisionally charged in connection with the March 11 attacks are Moroccans. Six out of the seven bombing suspects found dead in a Madrid flat in April in an apparent mass suicide after police surrounded them, also were Moroccan. Among the suspects is "Mohamed the Egyptian" (Rabei Osman Sayed Ahmed). According to Spanish authorities, Ahmed recruited a man called "the Tunisian" (Sarhane Ben Abdelmajid Fakhet) at a Madrid mosque. Police in Milan, Italy, arrested Ahmed on June 7 for his involvement in the attacks: he is believed to have supplied the explosives expertise and Spain has begun extradition proceedings.
................
Information which has emerged following March 11 attacks almost certainly points to a connection between those arrested in Spain and militant Islamist groups in Morocco with ties to al-Qaeda. According to French private investigator Jean-Charles Brisard, Jamal Zougam, one of the Moroccans suspected of helping to plant bombs on the trains, allegedly met with Mohamed Fizazi, spiritual leader of the Moroccan extremist group as-Salafiya al-Jihadiya. Moroccan security services identified the perpetrators of the May 2003 Casablanca bombings as Moroccan members of as-Salafiya al-Jihadiya. Furthermore, in a 700-page indictment, Spanish Judge Baltasar Garzon identified Zougam as a follower of Imad Yarkas, alleged leader of Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network in Spain. Yarkas is currently jailed in Spain on charges stemming from the September 11, 2001 attacks.
...........
Judge Garzon recently concluded an eight-year probe into Islamic extremist activity in Spain. The report names fifteen suspected militants accused of helping to plan the September 11 terrorist attacks – the results will form the basis for formal charges and trials for these individuals. Garzon names Yarkas, Zougam, and others in his report. Yarkas, according to Spanish news reports, is described as the leader of an al-Qaeda "sleeper cell" in Spain. According to the report, a significant amount of the planning for 9/11 took place in Spain.


Excerpted from.
www.tharwaproject.com...


---Edited for errors---


[edit on 21-3-2005 by Muaddib]



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 01:12 AM
link   

as posted by Imgnyc
Osama bin Laden and 9/11 were mentioned in almost every speech justifying the war in Iraq--and evidence that was tenuous at best was used as solid proof to link Hussein and bin Laden.

That may be true, but what is also true is that the previous administration was aware of the/a 1999 CIA Report that warned that Al-Qaeda [Bin Laden and his 'outfit'] were possibly planning to use commercial jet airliners to target significant government buildings [like the Pentagon].
'99 Report Warned Of Suicide Hijacking
Report Warned Of Suicide Hijackings

Sparing the typical partisan politics here, did the Clinton Administration pass this information on to the incoming Bush administration? And if so, would such a report and 'heads-up' still have prevented the events of 9/11 [as indicated by PNAC and the "like the new Pearl Harbor" mention]?




seekerof

[edit on 21-3-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Mar, 21 2005 @ 01:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
That may be true, but what is also true is that the previous administration was aware of the 1999 CIA report that warned that Al-Qaeda [Bin Laden and his 'outfit'] were possibly planning to use commercial jet airliners to target significant government buildings [like the Pentagon].
'99 Report Warned Of Suicide Hijacking
Report Warned Of Suicide Hijackings

Sparing the typical partisan politics here, did the Clinton Administration pass this information on to the incoming Bush administration? And if so, would such a report and 'heads-up' still have prevented the events of 9/11?




seekerof


Well, the August 6th PDB said that Al Qaeda was going to hijack planes and fly them into buildings, but that was just a historical document....

I have a hard time believing that the Bush Administration couldn't imagine "planes being used as weapons", particularly involving Al Qaeda, the WTC, and the Pentagon. Just 10 weeks prior to 9/11 at the G8 conference in Genoa, President Bush had to be protected in a secure location and anti-aircraft missiles were installed around the conference center because intelligence was received that Al Qaeda was going to attempt an assasination by flying an airliner into the conference center. I can't imagine that Rice & Bush weren't aware of this situation--especially as it was all over the news and Bush must have noticed that he was being kept in a bunker away from the other world leaders.

archives.cnn.com...

There were NORAD exercises that simulated attacks on the WTC with hijacked airliners--and a simulation involving the Pentagon was considered, but not carried out because it was thought to be too extreme.

www.boston.com...
www.usatoday.com...

But what really points to the fact that the White House had to know about these drills and terrorist scenarios was that in May 2001, Cheney was put in charge of the Office of National Preparedness. He must have been aware of the NORAD/DoD terrorism drills and tabletop simulations that went on that summer that addressed the issue of hijacked commercial planes flying into buildings--especially as these drills are coordinated across multiple military units (like the drills that occurred on 9/11) and had to involve White House staff, if not coordinated by someone in the ONP located in the White House.

www.whitehouse.gov...

And then there was Richard Clarke running around with his hair on fire.

So either there are some people who are extremely myopic working in the White House and/or someone lied under oath in an act of CYA--and perhaps that is just to save face, but it still is something that shouldn't be overlooked... and I think that it may indicate there is more to the story....




top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join