Wednesday, 5 August 2009

Afghanistan - A war for Gas and Oil Pipelines



Image - US army bases in Afghanistan




Image - Oil and Gas pipeline routes



Image - oil and gas pipe line routes through Afghanistan





Is there anything dumber than a journalist who writes for the Times.


Take Bronwen Maddox and her article here ;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/bronwen_maddox/article6739302.ece

Usually when a journalist idiot wants us to become entangled in another war / social work action using the British army / policing role / Oil Imperialism escapade then they either use the usual 'Think of the children' routine or now the 'what about the women' routine.

I cannot believe that such people are allowed to write for The Times, unless the Times is still 'seeding public opinion with lies' as Carol Quigley stated in his books was its main role.

We are not in Afghanistan for any of the following reasons ;

1) Helping the children
2) Helping the women
3) Stopping the heroin
4) Fighting terrorism
5) Stopping terrorism in the UK

It is total hypocrisy to say the UK and US are in Afghanistan to 'fight islamic extremism and Al Qaeda' when Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the Taliban were all creations of the CIA during the Afghan War against the Russians.

The US created the Taliban and sponsored its growth, long enough for it to grow to such a size that it then gave the US the opportunity to invade Afghanistan and take control of the country under the pretext of 'fighting Islamic terrorism'.

If it wasnt for the US there would be no Islamic extremists undertaking terrorism - as the US built up those terrorist groups, funded and armed them.

There is in fact two reasons why we are in Afghanistan, and why British soldiers are dying, and that is for ;

1) Oil

2) Gas

This war was started in 1999 with the passing of the Silk Road Strategy Act in the US.

Note the contents of the act here ;

http://www.eurasianet.org/resource/regional/silkroad.html

Note section 6 of the act ;

(6) The region of the South Caucasus and Central Asia could produce oil and gas in sufficient quantities to reduce the dependence of the United States on energy from the volatile Persian Gulf region.

and further ;

`(c) ACTIVITIES SUPPORTED- Activities that may be supported by programs under subsection (b) include promoting actively the participation of United States companies and investors in the planning, financing, and construction of infrastructure for communications, transportation, including air transportation, and energy and trade including highways, railroads, port facilities, shipping, banking, insurance, telecommunications networks, and gas and oil pipelines.


The act was revised in 2006 to include the energy interests of the US as one of the primary reasons for the US to be in Afghanistan - note no reference to Osama Bin Laden or Al Qaeda ;

http://www.theorator.com/bills109/s2749.html


(b) Findings- Congress makes the following findings:

(3) The liberation of Afghanistan from Taliban misrule and the new course in Afghanistan toward political and economic openness make possible the country's reintegration into Central Asia.

(4) The ouster of the Taliban from Afghanistan has diminished threats to that country's neighbors in Central Asia, allowing for accelerated progress toward democracy, open economies, and the rule of law across the region. Afghanistan's embrace of popular sovereignty and political pluralism demonstrates the universal applicability of these values.

(5) The Governments of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, which have contributed to United States military deployments in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Kosovo, are key United States partners in diversification of energy sources and transportation routes, enhancing and contributing to United States energy and security interests.

(6) In recognition of global and regional threats to stability, prosperity, and democracy in Afghanistan, including terrorism, political-religious extremism, and production and trafficking of narcotics, and in recognition of Afghanistan's geographic location and cultural and historical identity, Afghanistan should be considered to be among the countries of Central Asia, and not separate from them.

(7) In recognition of security cooperation from the Government of Kazakhstan, including deployment of the Kazakhstan contingent in Iraq, progress toward a market economy, United States business participation in energy and infrastructure development in Kazakhstan, and an ongoing Government of Kazakhstan policy of ethnic and religious tolerance, a relationship with Kazakhstan is of high importance to the United States. "


The maps above show you the proposed Oil pipe line and gas pipe line planned for Afghanistan - The Eurasian Corridor.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2608713.stm

An agreement has been signed in the Turkmen capital, Ashgabat, paving the way for construction of a gas pipeline from the Central Asian republic through Afghanistan to Pakistan.



The Global research Group states that ;

The Eurasian Corridor

Since the 2001 invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, the US has a military presence on China's Western frontier, in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The U.S. is intent upon establishing permanent military bases in Afghanistan, which occupies a strategic position bordering on the former Soviet republics, China and Iran.

Moreover, the US and NATO have also established since 1996, military ties with several former Soviet republics under GUUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and Moldava). In the post 9/11 era, Washington has used the pretext of the "global war against terrorism" to further develop a U.S. military presence in GUUAM countries. Uzbekistan withdrew from GUUAM in 2002.(The organization is now referred to as GUAM).

China has oil interests in Eurasia as well as in sub-Saharan Africa, which encroach upon Anglo-American oil interests.

What is at stake is the geopolitical control over the Eurasian corridor.

In March 1999, the U.S. Congress adopted the Silk Road Strategy Act, which defined America’s broad economic and strategic interests in a region extending from the Eastern Mediterranean to Central Asia. The Silk Road Strategy (SRS) outlines a framework for the development of America’s business empire along an extensive geographical corridor.

The successful implementation of the SRS requires the concurrent "militarization" of the entire Eurasian corridor as a means to securing control over extensive oil and gas reserves, as well as "protecting" pipeline routes and trading corridors. This militarization is largely directed against China, Russia and Iran.


Take a look at the maps above - then note how the army bases are in prime positions to protect the oil and gas pipelines.

That is what this 'war' is about.

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 outmanouvered in the last great wars for the last of the global oil supplies on the planet.

Only yesterday the Independent reported that the Peak Oil process is even close than the 'experts' have been so far admitting.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/warning-oil-supplies-are-running-out-fast-1766585.html

The world is heading for a catastrophic energy crunch that could cripple a global economic recovery because most of the major oil fields in the world have passed their peak production, a leading energy economist has warned.


Higher oil prices brought on by a rapid increase in demand and a stagnation, or even decline, in supply could blow any recovery off course, said Dr Fatih Birol, the chief economist at the respected International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris, which is charged with the task of assessing future energy supplies by OECD countries.



This is what the Iraq War and Afghanistan War are about.

This is also why China is exporting millions of its people into Africa in order to colonise the African continent as Lebensraum for the Chinese state - and to steal its oil and resources from the indigenous African people.


British troops are being slaughtered in Afghanistan for gas and oil pipelines.

That is the truth behind the lies the government spin.

They lied to get us into Iraq and they are lieing now about why we went into Afghanistan.

The Taliban are not Al Qaeda.

The Taliban are mainly local Afghans who do not want to be occupied by any invading army, local Afghan nationalists resisting occupation, ISI pakistani agents fighting a proxy war against the US, drug smugglers and opium growers protecting their drug territories, foreign jihadists working with the pakistani ISI and the angry relatives of Afghans killed by coalition forces getting revenge.

The Taliban are not a threat to us - the fact we are over there means Islamists will attack us over there and over here.

We must withdraw our troops from Afghanistan, return them to the UK and deploy them at British ports in order to seal our own national borders and assist in the removal of all illegal immigrants from the UK, we must deport all islamist supporters from the UK, execute all convicted islamist terrorists in the UK, deport all those that fund, support and assist Islamist terrorism in the UK - and most important of all create a 100 % national energy production system that means we do not have to depend on any imports of energy from the Middle East oil, Russian gas or Eurasian oil and gas supplies.

We are at risk of being attacked here in Britain, because we are over there in Islamic nations stealing their gas and oil, or stealing their land to allow us to pump the gas and oil of other nations into our nations.

11 comments:

gatesofvienna said...

I bang on about this, how these wars are about Unicol And BP.
The Caspian sea wars is what i call the wars.
Checkout Kosovo where we now have Camp Bondsteel another oil pipeline war.
This issue makes my blood boil.
We are sacrificing white British males the future of Britain for big bucks.

Karzia was employed in the US oil companies before being planted in the Afghan government.

Lacnunga said...

Excellent article Lee! Please DIGG this right here:

http://tinyurl.com/lfamnz

Every DIGG will get this article around 1,000 extra views.

odin said...

Why can't they all see this? I have been saying it since the start.
They are all so dumb, it's beyond belief.

gatesofvienna said...

Lee- Have just come across this little gem.
Why the world trade centre was allowed to be Crashed-Bombed.

Snippet here...

The only other possible route option is across Afghanistan, which has its own unique challenges.

The country has been involved in bitter warfare for almost two decades. The territory across which the pipeline would extend is controlled by the Taliban, an Islamic movement that is not recognized as a government by most other nations. From the outset, we have made it clear that construction of our proposed pipeline cannot begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders and our company.


Testimony By
John J. Maresca
Vice President, International Relations,
UNOCAL Corporation

To House Committee On International Relations,
Submmittee On Asia And The Pacific
February 12, 1998
Washington, D.C.



http://www.criminalgovernment.com/docs/rel/afghan_pipe.html

alanorei said...

Thanks, Lee, right on the money - and your article raises some questions about 9/11 as well. What a splendid 'casus belli' for going into Afghanistan (and later Iraq, together with eliminating Saddam the bogey-man who wouldn't 'play ball' with the US).

On some of his WND/Creators Syndicate articles, columnist and martial arts expert, Chuck Norris, has pointed out that US environmentalists have long put pressure on successive US Governments to desist from exploiting large reserves of shale oil which would satisfy US needs indefinitely. The US therefore has to secure reserves from elsewhere and their and our service personnel pay the price. American white owls (or whatever) are judged to be more important than (mostly, 95%+) white Americans and Britons.

Alas, 'twas ever thus, in a way. This is from a comment I forwarded to Chuck Norris's site back in December, about Iraq. I apologise that it is long but I think it reveals UK (and US) Gov't priorities to be then as now.

I see an uncanny parallel between events now and those of 90 years ago, at the end of WW1, in what was then Mesopotamia, now Iraq. Especially with the apparent significance of the town of Mosul for the Coalition forces. In his book The First World War, published in 1956, British military historian, the late Captain Cyril Falls explains, p 383-5 that "When it was clear [by early October 1918] that the Turks were definitely seeking an armistice, Mosul and its oil potentialities at once became an extremely attractive goal." Fighting continued for another month, by which time, the victorious British, having shattered the Turkish army, were nearing Mosul. Captain Falls explains "The [British] cavalry brigades were ordered to make for Mosul as soon as possible...On 1 November, twelve miles south of Mosul, they learnt that the armistice had become operative at noon the day before. The Turks expected to be allowed to remain in Mosul and even requested the British to go back to the point reached at noon on 31 October. Not at all, wired [the Commander-in-Chief, General] Marshall when he heard of this pretension; Clause 7 [of the armistice conditions] gave the victors the right to occupy any strategic point. Now what Clause 7 actually authorized was such occupation 'in the event of a situation arising which threatens the security of the Allies.' Here one could not find a threat with the strongest magnifying-glass. But the British were going to have Mosul. In the discussions that followed the Turkish Government was told that if the Turkish remnant would take itself off quietly the British Government would not insist on demanding its surrender under Clause 16, which laid down that all garrisons in Mesopotamia...must surrender. The [Turkish] Army commander argued with some point that his army, or what remained of it, was not a garrison but a field force, so the clause did not apply. But the British were going to have Mosul. In the end, the matter was amicably settled. The Turks marched out and the British marched in." Captain Falls describes the British offensive as "a very fine one" though he notes that the British occupation of Mosul, though "It could not be called immoral...some foreign observers and historians have found it slightly unseemly." He notes further that "Mesopotamia [1915-1918] cost 92,501 casualties, 15,814 killed in battle, 12,807 dead from disease" and concludes that "It is hard to believe that the oil-wells and pipes could not have been protected more cheaply...."

Prophetic in a way.

Anonymous said...

Yes we need to localize here in the UK and prepare for the future ethat peak is oil is rapidly going to create. 100 percent self -reliance in terms of energy and supplying alternative self -sustaining materials.

Nationalism is the future of this Great Britain.

Localism,Conservation,Preservation
Nationalism

Sharpy said...

Do you know of any links to documentaries online that I can watch to get myself up to speed on the real reason for the afgan occupation?

Thanks in advance

Defender of Liberty said...

Hi sharpy,

go to my article ' The Military-Media Complex Unmasked on the 21st July 2009 and the list of videos at the top of the article are the ones you really need to watch.

Paste the URLs into your toolbar and they take you straight to the videos - including one all about Afghanistan

Regards,

Lee

martha said...

I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.


Susan

http://8080proxy.com

martha said...

I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.


Susan

http://8080proxy.com

Anonymous said...

This article is making sense, In the respect that we Britain's, Americans, Europeans, & Australians are the bullies in the school yard (world). We can and will do what we like. However I quote you "fight Islamic extremism and Al Qaeda". This religion is a scourge.
I watched a current affair show last night about the Afghan elections and the candidates are criminal. Its like the wild west over there. Why I agree with your article is that the Russian's turned off the gas on Ukraine and all of Europe last winter and the Europeans want to run pipelines so they don't have to rely on the Russians.
The big solutions is alternative power sources.IE Wind,solar etc.
Also you mention CHINA Wow that's a whole issue on its own, Why do you think Britain is struggling with a mini recession right now. Because all the cheap stuff bought from China & India, the profits were pumped into US bond and US & British Banks and silly financial institutions when mental with the money. If that is not covert financial warfare I'll run naked down the main street of Sydney.
Yes I am Aussie, still loyal to good old mother England and I love the Queen
After the last 30 years of open immigration Britain is not Britain its Black & Paki like the episode from The "GOODIES" Ha Ha
Its something that Britain has to deal with, I just commented in another post about this Islamic religion problem.
I have no concerns about people following there beliefs but this religion is suspect as the Islamic follows change their Koran interruptions to suite what cheeses them off!.
We are getting it here in Australia.
A few lebo's got a punch in the head from the cronulla boys and made it out to be a racist thing when in fact it was to do with meeting girls and selling drugs to them. The cronulla boys were sick of the Muslims hanging at the beach and not fitting in. To pacify the situation the Government here introduced Muslim Life savers at the beach and Muslim women joined the surf club in these BurQINI's (like a burkur but made out off sunscreen material). The are not practical in the surf and they must be hot in the summer. That is what was in the news yesterday in France were that Muslim woman was thrown out of a pool for wearing a BURQINI made in Australia.