Revealed: Pipeline Negotiations & the Afghan War

For all those who tell you that the wars which were unleashed by the Bush I & II / Cheney criminal regime were not purely for oil, are lying. Both Afghanistan and Iraq were wars which were necessary for U.S. energy security in the 21st century and for establishing military control within the Eurasian ring.

Afghanistan lies at a very critical point, one where the Trans-Afghanistan-Pipeline is meant to pass through. The Trans-Afghanistan-Pipeline is an effort being financed by the Asian Development Bank, something that needs to be considered. Before we get to these new revelations, lets look at why this pipeline is so important. It runs oil obtained from the Caspian Sea, through Turkmenistan, then Afghanistan, Pakistan, and finally out into India, but China also has interests for Caspian Oil. India and China are both HUGE rising economic powers and they are both industrializing heavily, they need energy to support this transition, who better to sell them this oil than American oil cartels?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/873a1f94834b.gif[/atsimg]

The Caspian region has one of the largest reserves of oil in the world and it is currently the only place in the world, where the three global powers (U.S., Russia and China) all have vested interests . In a 1998 Unocal Statement to the Committee on International Relations, the then Vice President John Manesca stressed the importance of opening up the oil markets within the Central Asian region and exporting them through to the Indian Ocean. Since going through Iran was out of the option, ”the only other possible route is across Afghanistan”. CentGas refused to further the project of the new pipeline until “an internationally recognized Afghanistan Government is in place’. With the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and the almost immediate installation of Hamid Karzai as President it became suspicious when only in the next year; Afghan, Turkmen and Pakistani leaders signed a pipeline deal. Karzai stated that “Unocal was the ‘lead company’ among those that would build the pipeline". When examining the fact that Karzai was a former Unocal consultant, one can begin to see a geopolitical maneuver at play.

THE NEWS - Foreign Policy

Released State Department Documents Mention ‘Failed Pipeline Negotiations’ With The Taliban Right Before 9/11

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.

The invasion was necessary in order to install a U.S. friendly regime which would allow for the go-ahead of the pipeline. The Afghan government is expected to get less than 8% of profits made from their own oil.

It is already known that the U.S. had demanded in secret discussions with the Taliban that bin Laden be handed over for more than three years prior to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. The talks continued “until just days before” the attacks, according to a Washington Post report the month following the attacks. But a compromise solution such as the above that would offer the Taliban a face-saving way out of the impasse was never seriously considered. Instead, “State Department officials refused to soften their demand that bin Laden face trial in the U.S. justice system.”

Officials described the U.S. decision to reject Taliban offers as a missed opportunity. Former CIA station chief Milt Bearden told the Post, “We never heard what they were trying to say…. We had no common language. Ours was, ‘Give up bin Laden.’ They were saying, ‘Do something to help us give him up.’” Bearden added, “I have no doubts they wanted to get rid of him. He was a pain in the neck,” but this “never clicked” with U.S. officials.

State officials ignored the Taliban's pleas to take bin Laden from them. They used him as a pawn and as an excuse for the invasion, under the pretext that he was the perpetrator of 9/11. It's plainly obvious as to why they didn't take him in. It left a government which had its own national goals that didn't necessarily comply with U.S. big oil interests and certainly wouldn't have complied with the 8% profit being offered to the current U.S. friendly Afghan government.

This shows that the Taliban were willing to work with the U.S. government, to extradite bin Laden, but its clear why this offer wasn't expected, pipeline negotiations were more important than any 'terrorist attack'.

reply to post by serbsta

For all those who tell you that the wars which were unleashed by the Bush I & II / Cheney criminal regime were not purely for oil, are lying.

I agree the wars are about resources, not helping either country or seeking revenge for 9/11 but your map is for the TAP Gas pipeline, not oil...

reply to post by scitpeks


Yes, correct, my bad. Should have been more general and stuck to energy security instead of specifically oil.

reply to post by serbsta


No probs. I still agree with the concept that the US etc only seems to help [invade] countries where there are abundant resources that they don't already control..

Most of you already know this, however I believe it is good to put it out there anywhere.

This nat-gas pipeline was the most likely reason for the Taliban being invited to Texas (Source #2 Source #3) in 1997, when GWB was the Governor. Apparently, there visit to the Lone-Star State was to negotiate the pipeline deal, where it is rumored that they were offered "a carpet of gold or a carpet of bombs".

Apparently, they refused the offer because only a few years later, we gave them our carpet of bombs. There are many reasons why they would have refused the offer, to include their inability to secure the area, being that General Ahmed Massoud, the outstanding military tactician and Commanding General of the washing of Taliban opposition groups that we know as the Northern Alliance, had control over a key aspect of the land needed for the pipeline. In the book "Jawbreaker" (Which is heavily censored with much of the information redacted by the CIA), written by Gary Berntsen, the former CIA field commander reveals that he personally visited with Gen. Massoud in the years leading up to 9/11, to include the years that the neo-cons and oil companies were wheeling and dealing with the Taliban. It makes one wonder if that CIA support to the "Northern Alliance" wasn't also to provide security for the planned pipeline route.

Another reason that the Taliban could have or would have refused the offer, is that the Taliban didn't solely control Afghanistan, practically speaking and not even the parts of the country were that were oficially under the control of the Taliban. You see, you had mujahideen that was a growing influence in the region, once again and it is my belief that the Taliban put up with this group out of necessity. I also believe that it wasn't as friendly a relationship as we are lead to believe. In other words, it wasn't only the Taliban's decision to make and even if helped by big oil, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the neo-cons, it wasn't a burden that the Taliban could afford to take. Remember, they were most of all a religious organization that was young in stature.

Finally, they may not have taken the deal on religious grounds, as it would be seen as offensive to their religion for various reasons.

Whatever the case, they didn't take the deal and just a few short years later, the most convenient reason for invading Afghanistan surfaced, 9/11. The timing alone, in conjuction with the Taliban visiting Texas, is suspicious enough, irrespective of the plethora of evidence surrounding the event itself to suggest that 9/11 wasn't not committed for the reasons we are told.

We also have to look into the President of Afghanistan, the American installed President, Hamid Karzai, who just happened to be a representative of UNOCAL, the corporation who was to administer the pipeline. I find it funny that the US would install Mr. Karzai after the invasion. They seemed to have just produced this former exile from their back pocket. Was his appointment to the Presidency of Afghanistan, solely to allow this pipeline? Why else would they install a UNOCAL representaive to lead the post-invasion government?


--airspoon

Sources:

BBC - Texas Taliban

Salem Taliban in Texas

Asian Times - Taliban in Texas 1997

Ahmad Massoud

Jawbreaker - Gary Berntsen

Gary Berntsen

Northern Alliance

Mujahideen

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamid_Karzai]Hamid Karzai

Unocal Corporation

edit on 15-10-2010 by airspoon because: (no reason given)

reply to post by airspoon


You really should stay away from so many conspiracy sites. Most of the items in your post were debunked long ago.

This may be news to some but not to those of us who are aware of the ultimate goal. [Central Asia] The fuel reserves there are in play. NATO/US, Russia and China all have their hands in the cookie jar.

Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan have all played their part in the game. Here are a couple of links to threads I've written about this topic. Don't let the thread titles fool you. They're all related to the GAME.

The New Great Game
AND
Iranian revolt Explained - Wake Up!

reply to post by vipertech0596


No they weren't. What do you think has been debunked? The Taliban in Texas? Hamid Karzai a former UNOCAL representative? Gary Berntsen's testimony? Neither of those has been debunked because the first two are true and Berntsen's testimony comes from a very credible witness, himself. I like how you claim they have been debunked, yet fail to provide any kind of evidence, though I know why, because you can't and that is called trolling.

What, because it doesn't fit in with your world-view, you would rather embrace and propagate ignorance? You seem to be doing a lot of that in these threads. LOL


--airspoon

reply to post by airspoon


According to UNOCAL, Karzai never worked for them. The source for that was a poorly researched article in Le Monde. Long ago discredited.

The Taliban, did visit the United States, at the invitation of the Clinton Administration.....not George Bush.

UNOCAL gave up on the pipeline in 1998....




Better yet, how could Governor George Bush promise the Taliban a "carpet of bombs" in 1997 as you seem to be insinuating?
Like I said, get better sources.

This might be a little off topic, but concerning the Chilean miners who were just rescued, a top-rate driller American driller was brought in from Afghanistan to help with the rescue. Drilling crews in Afghanistan? Hmmm...kinda makes me wonder!

reply to post by serbsta


Here are some older articles I read a while back that were written on Central Asian oil and how Russia and China are also playing their parts in the Game

Russia, Central strike pipeline oil deal

AND

New Gas Pipeline From Central Asia Feeds China

reply to post by vipertech0596


You are wrong again, the Taliban did not visit the United States at the invitation of the Clinton Admin, they actually came to Texas indepedent of the federal government and didn't even meet with the Clinton's. The Taliban were invited to Texas by the oil companies, with the apparent permission of the then Governor of Texas, GWB.

People often like to think that the Taliban was officially invited to the US for diplomatic reasons, though seeing that they weren't even recognized by the US government, that wouldn't have happened anyway. This is usually based on the premise that the Clinton admin was in full swing in 1997, and so it's easy for people covering up the truth to plant that inherent wrong notion. In other words, it is a silly rumor designed to obfuscate the truth and it has no logical basis, other than to obfuscate the truth. So, just because they came here during the Clinton admin, certainly doesn't mean that they were invited by the Clinton Admin. This is not even mentioning the fact that they came to Texas, not DC and they met with oil execs, not government officials.

Check your information and quit blindly beliving those propaganda sites that seem to only want to obfuscate the truth.

As far as Karzai, your wrong again. UNOCAL says that Karzai never worked for UNOCAL itself, though refused to say whether he was a part of one of UNOCAL's subsidiaries, which a subsidiary is what you would expect, However, you surely shouldn't even believe what they tell you at face value, as any suspect will claim "I didn't do it".

It's important to note who is admittedly responsible for ponying Karzai up to lead the post-inavsion government of Afghanistan, according to official sources. Zalmay Khalilzad, a National Security Council member and RAND program director and Bush envoy to Afghanistan member. He also headed Bush's transition team and served under US Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz in the Reagan State and Bush I Defense Departments, and is also the guy that allegedly recommended Karzai. It's important to note that according to Khalizad, both Karzai and Khalizad advised (that does not necessarily mean official employee) the American oil company from the years 96/97, and 1997 just happens to be the year that the Taliban visited Texas, on behalf of the oil companies, not the Clinton admin.

So again, you are either clearly confusing your information, or intentionally obfuscating it. Either way, you are wrong. Again, maybe you shouldn't put too much stock in those websites that "try" and debunk the truth. You are clearly getting your information from websites that are designed to cover-up the truth and sadly, these sites don't even use reasonable logic, at least not to anyone who still has the ability of critical self thought.

Again, you have not yet debunked anything in my previous post (and neither has the information been debunked) but instead, you have offered an unreasonable -and untrue- anecdotal reply.

The Taliban didn't come to Texas at the invitation of the Clinton admin, nor the federal government. They did not go to washington, rather they went to Texas, where they met with oil execs and were even a guest in at least one oil exec's house. The Taliban were not recognized by the US government and so wouldn't haven't been invited by the government, and even if they were, then they would have at least met with government representatives or they would have visited DC (maybe NY if the they were there at the behest of the UN). Again, Clinton played no apparent part in their invitation. Furthermore, according to Khalizad himself, both Khalizad and Karzai advised UNOCAL in that same year, 1997 and possibly even further down the road, to which case, his partner and a close ally to the neo-cons, from Wolfowitz and Reagan, to Bush I and Bush II is the officially admitted lobby behind Karzai leading the US installed post-invasion government of Afghanistan.

Furthermore, we know that the Caspien has natural gas that would be much cheaper to move through a pipeline. So, we know that the oil companies would benefit greatly had there have been a pipeline. We can also look at a map and determine the only possible route for a pipeline, given terrain and socio-political climate of the region. This would logically point to Afghanistan or Iran being the only logical choice for this pipeline and we all know that Iran wasn't an option.


--airspoon

reply to post by SLAYER69


Interesting pieces, thanks. It is so blatantly obvious to anyone really looking into it that it is ALL about resources; oil, gas, minerals, as you have pointed out in your threads. Don't just stop at Iraq and Afghanistan, look at the declaration of independence for Kosovo just 2 years ago. That region was taken over the by the US in order to allow stable control of oil from the Caspian then into Bulgaria, Macedonia and Kosovo & Albania up into the main ports like Rotterdam. It's all an absolute joke.

To the member who wasn't sure about Unocal and Karzai, this is an interesting, and very credible read.

A Creeping Collapse in Credibility at the White House:
From ENRON Entanglements to UNOCAL Bringing the Taliban to Texas and Controlling Afghanistan

Everybody getting in on the action?

Already, some countries have recognized the lucrative opportunities that are available in Afghanistan. For example, India has invested $1.3 billion in transportation, healthcare, education, hydro-electricity and electrical transmission. And China has won a $3.5-billion bid to develop Afghanistan's giant Aynak copper mine.

This is a little fluffy but it shows up.

China in Afghanistan

It was here, in the Aynak valley, that al-Qaeda trained and planned for the 9/11 attacks that triggered the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. And it is here, seven years on, that Afghanistan – with the help of British geologists and a Chinese mining company – will lay the foundations of a new economy in the next few weeks.......Somewhere beneath the valley’s floor lies one of the world’s biggest untapped copper deposits, estimated to be worth up to $88_billion (£44 billion) – more than double Afghanistan’s entire gross domestic product (GDP) in 2007. In November, a 30-year lease was sold to the China Metallurgical Group for $3 billion, making it the biggest foreign investment and private business venture in Afghanistan’s history. Last week the Afghan Government approved the contract, clearing the way for the revival of an industry that dates back to Alexander the Great. -2008

China In the Copper Biz-Aynak Valley

The Rest of the Story

"You have to see this in the context of China's great western development program, which has led to major investment into the western provinces [of China] and, of course, also crossborder connections to Central Asia, South Asia, and Iran," Norling says. "In order to develop the west [of China], they need energy resources, and they need other resource materials. So far, Afghanistan has remained virtually untouched by Beijing's concerns, in contrast to China's involvement in Central Asia, Pakistan, and Iran.

"The past few years have seen investments into the Karakorum Highway in Pakistan, the Gwadar port [in Karachi], [and] a multibillion-dollar pipeline from Kazakhstan to Xinjiang [Uyghur Autonomous Region]. China has signed a $100 billion, 25-year energy contract with Iran. And so on and so on," Norling continues. "So, of course, this forms part of a greater strategy."

Context of China's Great Western Development Project

Originally posted by serbsta
reply to post by SLAYER69

 

To the member who wasn't sure about Unocal and Karzai, this is an interesting, and very credible read.

Karzai has a few more bed fellows other than Unocal.

reply to post by serbsta

It is so blatantly obvious to anyone really looking into it that it is ALL about resources; oil, gas, minerals, as you have pointed out in your threads.

Yepper. The thing is, everyone wants to blame this on the U.S., but it is the oil industry that drives all of these moves. The wealth generated by oil has created a powerful international cabal that is doing everything in its power to survive, as the decline of Saudi oil wells marks the beginning of the end of their reign of terror in the world, usurping of democracy around the globe, and in the spread of fraud and violence. By the way, my mentioning of Saudi oil does not mean that this is all being done by the House of Saud. It is oil ICs pulling the strings that create these conflicts for their own mad power grabs.