False Prophets of War!

Were the Taliban an enemy of the US?

Was Bin Laden responsible for the 9/11 World Trade Center attack?

These are two questions that have daunted the American psyche since the US attacked Iraq under “knowingly” false pretenses. Allegations of weapons of mass destruction, the US government knew did not exists, were the cause that beat a war drum and marshaled the might of our military against a lesser army, in short we wanted Iraq’s Oil and we took it.

We also wanted the Unocal Pipeline across Afghanistan, and as discussions faltered we forced the Taliban out to put our own puppet in, now that Pipeline has been secured.

Our latest focus, the Caspian Sea‘s rich oil resources, so Iran is another enemy that must be dealt with, allegations of uranium enrichment has become the drum beat and propaganda of this seemingly inevitable confrontation.

With war after war as our centerpiece, we have become bullies of the world, sacking the resources of nations at our will. As the early Roman warrior, and before them Alexander we seek global dominance. America does not free mankind through democracy it enslaves it through that illusion.

We have become that which we abhor most, terrorists, war mongers, and politically totalitarian. We are the American generation of imperialists who chant the illusion of democracy, while we torture our victims in the name of salvation.

Yet, just as war with Iran is not necessary, neither were Afghanistan or Iraq.

After almost 9 years of continuous war, documents have been declassified and released that establish, the US made a false case to attack not only the Taliban, and initiated a war of choice, but were actually the terrorists we seek to destroy.

Evidence is now available from multiple sources, including recently declassified U.S. State Department documents, which shows that the Taliban regime led by Mullah Mohammad Omar imposed strict isolation on Osama bin Laden after 1998 to prevent him from carrying out any plots against the United States.

The evidence contradicts claims by top Barack Obama administration officials that Mullah Omar was complicit in Osama bin Laden's involvement in the al Qaeda plot to carry out the Sep. 11, 2001 terrorist attack. It also bolsters the credibility of Taliban statements in recent months asserting that it has no interest in al Qaeda's global jihadist aims.

Mullah Omar's willingness to allow bin Laden to remain in Afghanistan was conditioned from the beginning, according to documents, on two prohibitions on his activities: bin Laden was forbidden to talk to the media without the consent of the Taliban regime or to make plans to attack U.S. targets.

In retaliation for the bombings of two U.S. Embassies in East Africa on Aug. 7, 1998 The US Government believing Bin Laden guilty, in August 1998 engaged in cruise missile strikes against bin Laden run training camps in Afghanistan. This attack by the US appears to have had a dramatic impact on Mullah Omar and the Taliban regime's policy toward bin Laden.

Two days after the strike, Omar unexpectedly entered into a phone conversation with a US State Department official and one of his aides, he told the U.S. official he was unaware of any evidence that bin Laden "had engaged in or planned terrorist acts while on Afghan soil". The Taliban leader said he was "open to dialogue" with the United States and asked for evidence of bin Laden's involvement, according to the State Department cable reporting the conversation.

Only three weeks after Omar asked for evidence against bin Laden, the al Qaeda leader sought to allay Taliban suspicions by appearing to accept the prohibition by Omar against planning any actions against the United States.

In an interview with al Jazeera, (The mid east version of CNN), bin Laden stated "There is an opinion among the Taliban that we should not move from within Afghanistan against any other state, he added "This was the decision of the Commander of the Faithful, as is known." Mullah Omar had taken the title "Commander of the Faithful"

During September and October 1998, the Taliban apparently sought to position itself to turn bin Laden over to the Saudi government by obtaining a ruling from the Afghan Supreme Court that bin Laden was guilty of the Embassy bombings.

In a conversation with the U.S. chargé in Islamabad on Nov. 28, 1998, Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil, Omar's spokesman and chief adviser on foreign affairs, referred to a previous Taliban request to the United States for evidence of bin Laden's guilt to be examined by the Afghan Supreme Court, (according to the U.S. diplomat's report to the State Department).

Accordingly with Omar’s request, the US failed to provide the Afghan Supreme Court such evidence supporting their claim that bin Laden was involved. The court thus ruled that no evidence had been presented warranted the conviction of bin Laden.

Muttawakil said the court trial approach had "not worked" but suggested that the Taliban regime was now carrying out a strategy to "restrict [bin Laden's] activities in such a way that he would decide to leave of his own volition."

Meanwhile, the US Media and public officials were blaming the Taliban of protecting bin Laden.

In the face of a new Taliban hostility, bin Laden sought to convince Mullah Omar that he had given his personal allegiance to Omar as a Muslim. In April 2001 bin Laden referred publicly to having sworn allegiance to Mullah Omar as the "Commander of the Faithful".

Even in summer 2001, as the Taliban regime became increasingly dependent on foreign jihadi troop contingents, including Arabs trained in bin Laden's camps, for its defense against the military advances of the Northern Alliance, Mullah Omar found yet another way to express his unhappiness with bin Laden's presence.

In Late January, Geoff Morrell, the spokesman for Defense Secretary Robert Gates, suggested that the United States could not negotiate with Mullah Omar, because he has "the blood of thousands of Americans on his hands," implying that he had knowingly allowed bin Laden's planning of the 9/11 attacks. Yet no such evidence exists to support the US storyline. In fact this story seems to be wholly inaccurate in face of what we now know.

It is more likely that the US wanted to attack and remove the Taliban, and after we succeeded, the Taliban now appear to be waging war in retribution.

Why did we really invade Afghanistan?

We knew that the Taliban were not protecting Bin Laden and we had no information that Bin Laden was behind the World Trade Center attack, but we do know this the hijackers were all Saudi Nationals, and we needed oil and lots of it

In 2001, the U.S imported 54% of the oil it required, importing 11-12 million barrels a day and producing about 8-9 million a day. The US was consuming about 20 million barrels of oil daily.

Of those imports, 48% came from the Western Hemisphere and 30% came from the Persian Gulf region, with the rest came from Africa and Europe.

The Persian Gulf Region contains 590 billion barrels of known reserves. Add Iran, Libya and Algeria and you have another 130 billion barrels. This enormous pool of oil that stretches from Algeria to Iran is estimated at 720 billion barrels. The reserves expected from the Caspian Sea in Central Asia will be added to this total shortly. Those reserves are estimated to be another 44 billion barrels of oil reserves and possibly more.

The Afghanistan war is about securing the territory through which the oil and gas pipelines will have to pass through in order to ensure Russia, China and Iran are out-maneuvered in the last great wars for the last of the global oil supplies on planet Earth. Iran and Russia within the past month have secured a cooperative agreement over the Caspian oil reserves and have possibly out maneuvered the US interests.

Unocal a company now owned by Chevron in 1995, entered the picture and began negotiations with the Taliban to construct an oil pipeline:

Unocal signed a tentative agreement with the Turkmenistan government to research the possibilities of constructing an oil pipeline to Pakistan by way of Afghanistan. As the project developed, Unocal began to seek an agreement with the Taliban, who had recently risen to power, to construct a pipeline across their country. On two separate occasions, in February and December 1997, Taliban officials were flown to the US to meet with, and be wined and dined by, Unocal executives. One of those executives was claimed to have been Hamid Karzai (Currently the US Installed President of Afghanistan) Although Karzai denies his involvement with Unocal, there is strong evidence to support his connections.

Background on Karzai, Bush and UNOCAL

This information is quoted from an article by the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG), globalresearch.ca, January 23, 2002 (Reprinted here with fair use permission)

According to Afghan, Iranian, and Turkish government sources, Hamid Karzai, the interim Prime Minister of Afghanistan, was a top adviser to the El Segundo, California-based UNOCAL Corporation which was negotiating with the Taliban to construct a Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline from Turkmenistan through western Afghanistan to Pakistan.

Karzai, the leader of the southern Afghan Pashtun Durrani tribe, was a member of the mujaheddin that fought the Soviets during the 1980s. He was a top contactor for the CIA and maintained close relations with CIA Director William Casey, and then Vice President George HW Bush, and the Pakistani Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) Service. Later, Karzai and a number of his brothers moved to the United States under the auspices of the CIA.

According to Middle East and South Asian sources Karzai serve the agency's interests, as well as those of the Bush Family and their oil friends in negotiating the CentGas deal.

When one peers beyond all of the rhetoric of the White House and Pentagon concerning the Taliban, a clear pattern emerges showing that construction of the trans-Afghan pipeline was a top priority of the Bush administration from the outset, and why we invaded Afghanistan.

Although UNOCAL claims it abandoned the pipeline project in December 1998, the series of meetings held between U.S., Pakistani, and Taliban officials after 1998, indicates the project was never off the table.

Note: According to European intelligence sources; Meetings between the Taliban and the US Government over the pipe line are said to have continued even after the September 11, attack and the beginning of the war.

Governments lie, and we are the ultimate victims of their treachery.

Why the surge in Afghanistan ? Conclusion

Conclusion of this 6 Part series

War during the Bush administration was inevitable, even as Clinton had alienated all prospects of resolving issues with Bin Laden, Bush would take advantage of the mid east anger, which they held, more rightfully then wrong, over their perception of American imperialism.

Money and Oil, coupled with the mind set of the elitist, and the teachings of a man whose political insight was damaged, Leo Strauss, and his followers so firmly implanted in the Bush administration, set the stage to influence every corner of the Bush mania.

They created the mix and the primary ingredient, the excuse to attack some country in the mid east. Iraq had always been the country of choice, but the Unocal Oil Pipe line, became the first priority. Just as quickly as we went into Afghanistan we made an about face and went into Iraq . We stopped looking for Bin Laden because our intelligence knew he had died on December 16, 2001, but he was still of use even in his death.

In Afghanistan there was need of a scapegoat, why not Bin Laden? As plans for war were already on the table, and this was long before Bush assumed office.

Bin Laden could also be used, even knowing he was already dead, as a fear card to attack Iraq . After all as the media so eloquently disclosed, he was behind the attacks on our troops.

Contrary to media and Bush administration propaganda, our research failed to uncover any real evidence that Bin Laden admitted to the 9-11 attacks against the WTC. In fact some of the evidence was incredible, and not in a positive way.

Even as the passport of TWO 9-11 hijackers were found in the rubble intact. Intact while the rubble had been reduced to fine particulates of sand, unbelievable, yet so many of us fell into this intelligence void.

It’s as if the Passports belonging to the alleged hijackers, Satam al-Sugami, and Mohamed Atta were each placed, then found, on the street minutes after the planes they were aboard crashed into the World Trade Center towers. If in fact they were even aboard those planes. Passports could not have survived those crashes and the resultant fires.

The fireballs created by the WTC attacks melted structural steel that was designed to withstand heat of 2000 degrees F. They completely destroyed both airplanes and their cockpit voice-recorders (situated at front)*and* the black-box data recorders (located in the rear of the aircrafts). They vaporized human bone and flesh.

And yet those same fireballs somehow weren't strong enough to do anything to a pair of surviving passports found in pristine condition. No surface scratches, scuffs, abrasions or burns.

So consider, are we fools for not asking the right questions?

The media however in their frenzy to support the administration, gave up their right and entitlement, to investigate and report, instead read prepared scripts provided by the administration officials, just as they continue to this day. Never once did anyone from the media question the allegations that were used to support the war with Iraq . Let alone questioning the tapes where Bin Laden allegedly admitted his complicity in the planning and implementation of the WTC attack.

What Bush needed however, aside of an excuse, was a force to bring the nation together, that force was the Fundamental Christian Right, who fell right into the trap. Hitler used this same Christian following to support his political agenda along with his rise to power.

The republicans used religion and the tactic of fear to generate the fervor for war. No one questioned anything, the people fell right in line, and if you didn’t, there was the ongoing threat, supported by the patriot act! you are either with us or against us!

Wars are political devices that use religion to draw a nation together. This was personified during the 2000 to 2008 term of George W. Bush, and long before by Leo Strauss. Of the few books Bush is said to have read, one in particular was written by Strauss.

George W. Bush is the perfect example of a leader that used religion and deception to garner support for war, the neoconservative extreme right wing of the Fundamentalist Christian movement marshaled and motivated their own people to support the mid east war machine, then took control over the military, and combined patriotism, moral servitude, and the military to launch one of the greatest travesties of American history and with it a complete disenfranchisement of a people.

Obama will follow in the footsteps of Bush, he is after all the newly elected puppet, and we by now know who pulls those strings. His administration is a through over of the last. War will continue, until we as a people say stop, we have had enough. Until we refuse to accept the deception of those who seek to control us, and to place us in harms way. Until we learn to ask the right questions, and after we have received those answers, to seek the truth.

We in good conscience and in the name of the various gods we affirm have no right to take over governments, to marshal support for regime change, to put puppets in office to do our bidding, this is imperialism, and, we have become imperialists!

Oil Prices Continue to Rise in Anticipation of Dollar Collapse

American Taxpayers have given Wall Street Banks almost 14 trillion dollars in bailout money, yet they fail to do what they promised, to loosen credit, help those facing foreclosure and provide the liquidity that businesses and consumers need to jump start an economy trashed by these very same bankers.

While we go in debt for future generations, the Banks use our money to hire lobbyists who work to prevent legislation planned to help us and the economy.

And who stands up to stop them?

Certainly not Congress and certainly not President Obama! In short we have the best government money can buy, and the price isn’t all that much. The Legislative Ethics Law forbids a Legislator or a member of his or her immediate family from accepting a “gift” (other than a campaign contribution) from persons affected by legislation or who have an interest in a business affected by proposed legislation, where it is known or reasonably should be known that the purpose of the donor in making the gift is to influence the Legislator in the performance of his official duties or vote, or is intended as a reward for action on his part. For more information, please see Section 1014(B) of the Legislative Ethics Law. The caveat here is “other than a campaign contribution” luckily all bribes to members of Congress are now paid in campaign contributions.

This has been a problem not only in Washington but in each state as well and there seems to be no way to end the practice, as such we will never have meaningful legislation to protect the consuming public from the banks and their unlawful control over our lives, which includes the confiscation of the wealth of our country.

The Bankruptcy provision to cram down the debt of owner occupied homes was a very good law aimed at preventing foreclosures, yet it was defeated with the aid of 12 democrats who favored the bankers’ interest over their constituents’ interest, and we can only surmise why! It will be interesting to see which banks provide their campaign money.

The Credit Card Bill of Rights is not all it purports to be, it does not rain in the banks control over credit card interest rates, nor the effect of the Bankruptcy code which does not allow the discharge of credit card debt except under strict guidelines.

Thanks to us, the taxpayers, and a Congress easily bribed, bankers still and always will "own" the US Senate, as Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Illinois) put it. Thanks to us, the taxpayers, and a Congress easily bribed the insurance companies and health maintenance organizations still have the clout to keep single-payer health care "off the table." And thanks to us, the taxpayers, and a Congress easily bribed the huge financial supermarkets like CitiBank can still block a reenactment of anything like the New Deal's Glass-Steagall Act, which since 1933 kept the high-rollers in investment banks from gambling with "our savings". For those who forgot, Wall Street pushed the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999 and Bill Clinton signed the repeal into law.

Why we as Americans put up with - and pay for - Wall Street and our own Congress's continued corruption, and the corruption of the Federal Reserve System that allows and promotes it, is a question that still needs to be answered. Wall Street's power remains a fact of life, kept alive by taxpayer dollars, government printing presses, and a Congress easily bribed.

Now consider, we have given the banks some 14 trillion dollars, which they are holding in reserve, because of our fractional reserve system (The Federal Reserve System) - this 14 trillion dollars would allow the banks, if they were inclined to loan money, to loan 140 Trillion Dollars. Investors around the globe are concerned about hyperinflation, as such large capital investors are hedging against this impending inflation by buying oil futures, the purchase of which is driving up the price of oil and subsequently the price of gas at the pump. In short the dollar is actually collapsing because of the volume of it, and this is again being promoted and advantage taken by none other than Wall Street!

Wall Street Bankers take our money then use it to compound the problem by deflating the currency and making more money as the price of oil rises.

Does anybody care?

Kent State and Jackson State

Kent State, May 4, 1970: and Jackson State, May 14, 1970: The Dates America Killed Its Children

Remembering:

39 years ago, a time and parallel in application, we were at war with Vietnam, a country that had neither attacked us nor was any threat to our way of life. However Vietnam had something we wanted, “Drugs and Oil”. Viet Nam has proven crude oil reserves of 3.1-3.3 billion barrels, located in 60 mainly offshore oil and gas formations. It also has the drugs the CIA was after in the Golden Triangle.

Iraq has the Oil we want, and Afghanistan has the Drugs.

Do you see any similarity?

In the Spring of 1970, campus communities across this country were characterized by a chorus of protests and demonstrations. The issues were the escalation of the war in Vietnam and the U.S. invasion of Cambodia; the ecology; racism and repression; and the inclusion of the experiences of women and minorities in the educational system. No institution of higher education was left untouched by confrontations and continuous calls for change.

Thirty Nine years ago for many of us was just yesterday and we can still recall that students came out on the Kent State campus and scores of others to protest the bombing of Cambodia-- a decision of President Nixon's that appeared to expand the Vietnam War. Some rocks were thrown, some windows were broken, and an attempt was made to burn the ROTC building. Governor James Rhodes sent in the National Guard. When The Kent State shootings ended, four students were killed and nine others were wounded, one of whom suffered permanent paralysis

On May 14-15, 1970, Jackson State students were protesting these issues as well as the May 4, 1970 tragedy at Kent State University in Ohio. Four Kent State students -- Alison Krause, Sandra Scheuer, Jeffrey Glenn Miller and William K. Schroeder -- were killed by Ohio National Guardsmen who opened fire on unarmed students.

Seventy-five city policemen and Mississippi State Police officers armed with carbines, sub machine guns, shotguns, service revolvers and some personal weapons, responded to the call. Their combined armed presence on the Lynch Street side of Stewart Hall, a men's dormitory, staved off the crowd long enough for the firemen to extinguish the blaze and leave. After the firemen left, the police and state troopers marched along Lynch Street toward Alexander Center, a women's residence, weapons at the ready.

Falling back before the approaching officers, the students congregated in a thick knot in front of the dormitory. At this point, the crowd numbered 75 to 100 people. Several students allegedly shouted "obscene catcalls" while others chanted and tossed bricks at the officers, who had closed to within 100 feet of the group.

The police opened fire at approximately 12:05 a.m., May 15, and continued firing for more than 30 seconds. The students scattered, some running for the trees in front of the library, but most scrambling for the Alexander Hall west end door. When the order to cease fire was given and the gunfire ceased, Phillip Lafayette Gibbs, 21, a junior pre-law major and father of an 18-month-old son, lay dead 50 feet east of the west wing door of Alexander Hall. Two Double-0 buckshot pellets had punched into his head while a third pellet entered just beneath his left eye and a fourth just under his left armpit.

Across the street, behind the line of police and highway patrolmen, James Earl Green, 17, was sprawled dead in front of B. F. Roberts Dining Hall. Green, a senior at Jim Hill High School in Jackson, was walking home from work at a local grocery store when he stopped to watch the action. He was standing in front of B. F. Roberts Hall when a single buckshot blast slammed into the right side of his chest.

Twelve other Jackson State students were struck by gunfire, including at least one who was sitting in the dormitory lobby at the time of the shooting. Several students required treatment for hysteria and injuries from shattered glass.

Can this happen again, unfortunately it can!