Questions about the Taliban/Bin Ladin (page 2)

heathen

That's quite a theory you have .This would even tie in nicely with the theories that the US was responsible for 911 in order to gain world support for attacking afghanistan.Following the money is a good way to get to the truth about things although you may not be able to prove anything.

Crazy151drinker

Let me see, lets blow up the trade towers, crush the economy, get into a very expensive war- just to get some oil??????? Sorry, but it would be soooooooo much easier to give Isreal $50 Billion and let them take over the middle east. People, the $$$$$ doesnt add up. 9-11 cost more than any 'magic' oil fields in Afghanistan. Last time I checked, the Soviets didnt go there for Oil. Wake up people.

bluesapphire

Yeru, it wasn't my "drivel". I was asking for opinions on an email I had received. Sheesh!

Double Edge

Double

The tape was presented well after the war started.

 The afghanis were asking for proof before the war.

I worked well on the american public, though.

Within days of 9/11 the government had put enough evidence together to know it was the work of Bin Laden... heck, if you listen to Bill Clinton he said that after the second tower was hit he said to himself "this is Bin Laden" because he was privy to all the prior information from his administration. Top that with Bin Laden boasting...there can be little doubt.

Double Edge

Taliban offered to negotiate to turn over Bin Laden if we showed them
>some proof. We refused; we bombed.

The Taliban were playing a game for a naive world, and apparently for some it worked.

siegswife

I did a brief search on UNOCAL and came up with the following info. If this is true, it seems that some US oilmen can benefit from the current war in Afganistan.

http://www.oilandgasinternational.com/departments/from_editor/10_29_01.html

Unocal & Afghanistan

(10/29/01) There can be no doubt that the tragic terrorist attack on New York City and Washington requires apprehension and bringing to justice those responsible. They and their organization were in all likelihood led by the terrorist linchpin Osama bin Laden, who is harbored in Afghanistan, from which he is believed to have directed, trained, and financed this and other terrorist acts. And there can be no question that the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan are aiding and abetting him and his al-Qaida organization. But, despite how much this terrorist and his henchmen and the Taliban themselves are despised by most of the civilized world and the majority of Afghans themselves, can that be a justification for the present bombing of the country and soaring number of innocent casualties? Or, as is being said throughout the Middle East, is there an ulterior motive? Is it to put another regime in power that may be more favorable to the West?
Author Ahmed Rashid has revealed that since 1995, Unocal has sought to build US$1.9 billion, 790-mile oil and gas pipelines from the 25 Tcf Dauletabad Field in Turkmenistan across Afghanistan to Pakistani ports on the Arabian Sea as an alternate route for transporting Caspian region oil and gas to the enormous Indian subcontinent markets and perhaps beyond to Southeast Asia. But, Rashid points out, this requires an agreeable administration in Afghanistan, which the Taliban no longer is.
Unocal tried courting Taliban leaders after they took Kabul in 1996, taking them to Houston, where they were treated royally. They were offered US$.15 per 1000 cf of gas that passed through Afghanistan, and they agreed after US Assistant Secretary of State Robin Raphael lobbied them for the Unocal pipeline. During their first year running the country.
The Taliban were unopposed by the US government. Rashid says in 1997, he was told by an American diplomat, "The Taliban will probably develop like the Saudis did. There will be Aramco, pipelines, an emir, no parliament, and lots of Sharia law. We can live with that." But when the Taliban began to enforce strict sharia edicts, particularly against women, policies began to change. Nevertheless, Rashid says, Unocal told a 1998 US congressional hearing that Asian energy demands and the sanctions against Iran made Afghanistan "the only other possible route" for its proposed million b/d pipeline, but when the Taliban demanded more than the $100 million a year in rent for the pipeline route in the form of the construction of roads, water supplies, telephone lines, and electricity power lines, as well as a tap in the pipeline to provide oil and gas for Afghanistan, Unocal balked, and finally dropped its plans after the East Africa embassy bombings.
The US Energy Information Agency says, "Afghanistan's significance from an energy standpoint stems from its geographical position as a potential transit route for oil and natural gas exports from Central Asia to the Arabian Sea. This potential includes the possible construction of oil and natural gas export pipelines through Afghanistan."
If the Taliban is overthrown, terrorism may take a major blow, but in doing so, the primary stumbling block to the Caspian-Pakistan pipeline will also be removed. In the Middle East, where oil has always dominated political decisions, this is the rationale for the US-led strike against Afghanistan. The question is asked, if bin Laden were still in Saudi Arabia, would the same punishment be given that country?

siegswife

More:

http://www.counterpunch.org/tomenron.html

http://www.odwyerpr.com/washington_report/0110unocal.htm

http://pwkr.oregonpeaceworks.org/news/OilWar.htm

Unocalgate" War for Big Oil? ( Not our only oil war story <../breaking/story.php?storyid=2002/1/11/4> ) On September 14, 2001, Unocal posted the following note on its website: "Unocal does not have--nor do we plan to have any projects in Afghanistan. We do not support the Taliban in any way whatsoever." Yet in 1996 the Eurasia Research Center had asserted that "It has long been suspected that UNOCAL and Saudi Arabia's Delta Oil have financed the Taliban's destructive marauding in Afghanistan." What has been Unocal's role in Afghanistan in recent years?
According to one internet website posting in December 2000: "In January 1998, the Taliban signed an agreement that would allow a proposed 890 mile, $2 billion, 1.9 billion cubic-feet per dan natural gas pipeline project led by Unocal to proceed...In March 1998, however, Unocal announced a delay in finalizing project details...As of June 1998, Unocal and Saudi Arabia's Delta Oil held a combined 85% stake in Centgas (which was the name of Unocal's projected gas pipeline consortium project in Afghanistan)."
In December of 1998, Unocal ended its participation in the proposed Centgas consortium. According to the same internet website, "Unocal had previously stressed that the Centgas pipeline project would not proceed until an internationally recognized government was in place in Afghanistan."
But if the Pentagon now bombs, invades and occupies Afghanistan in order to put in place "an internationally recognized government," it's possible Unocal may once again go ahead with its proposed natural gas project.
According to the December 2000 internet posting, "Afghanistan's significance from an energy standpoint stems from a geographical position as a potential transit route for oil and natural gas exports from Central Asia to the Arabian Sea. This potential includes proposed multi-billion dollar oil and gas export pipelines through Afghanistan..."
In the 1970s it was estimated that Afghanistan's proven and probable oil and condensate reserves exceeded 95 million barrels. And Afghanistan also contains significant coal reserves of more than 400 million tons of coal.
The U.S. Ambassado to Pakistan who played an important role for the CIA in aiding the Afghan Mujahadeen in the 1980s, Robert Oakley, was subsequently employed by Unocal. And the man who was Secretary of the Air Force when Commander in Chief Bush's father, George Bush I, was the president--former RAND Corp. CEO Donald Rice--now sits on the board of directors of Unocal. Another member of Unocal's board of directors is the former Commander in Chief of the U.S. Navy's Pacific Command, Charles Larson.
In 1999, Unocal contributed $125,000 in soft money to the Republican Party and spent over $1.4 million in lobbying expenditures to insure that its special corporate interests would be represented by the U.S. government.

Crazy151drinker

9-11 for a $1.6 Billion pipeline?? Please............................................................

So let me get this straight:

Bin Ladin got all of his $$$ from the family construction business which got paid by the Saudis who were paid by the U.S. for the oil. We then allowed Bin Ladin to blow up the Trade Center so we could invade Afghanistan so Unical could build some stupid pipeline to transport oil from Turkey. Common folks. Use your heads.

Crazy151drinker

The whole 9-11 thing led to a huge implosion in the economy. Trillions of dollars were wiped out in the Market and entire industries (such as the airlines) are falling apart. And you think Bush and Co. planned all of this (for $125,000 no less!) just so Unocal could build a pipeline??? Think how much money Bush and Co. and all the CEOs have LOST do to 9-11. How much money has Unical LOST due to decreased travil and stock depletion, and you are trying to tell me they were all for 9-11???? WAKE UP PEOPLE. We could have Killed SADDAM in 1991 and Unical would have made a lot more money from all that FREE OIL.

WAKE UP. This is as bad as that French idiot who claimed the 9-11 planes where remote controlled and a Missle hit the Pentagon. Bunch of idiots.........

Double Edge

Bin Ladin got all of his $$$ from the family construction business which got paid by the Saudis who were paid by the U.S. for the oil

Not only that, but Japan bombed Pearl Harbor so we would go to war for 4 years, devaste their country so we could build it back up, become their friends, but secretly all the time they were really trying to take over the American car market by selling us all those Toyotas and Hondas..... no really, it's the truth....I think I saw it on the internet.

Questions about the Taliban/Bin Ladin

Share this