read this HOT story about uncovering connections between Oil, Bush and The War on Terrorism !!
t r u t h o u t | Tuesday 14 May, 2002
Some months ago, a book was published in France entitled ‘Osama bin Laden: The Forbidden Truth.’ The authors, Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasique, described a connection between the September 11th terrorist attacks and a stalled plan to build a pipeline to exploit the vast natural gas fields along the Caspian Sea in Turkmenistan. Their story pointed damning fingers at American petroleum companies and the Bush administration, citing instances where U.S. anti-terrorism efforts were thwarted in order to smooth the way for the pipeline deal.
Brisard and Dasique were paid little mind by the American news media. Many of their allegations were based upon conjecture, circumstantial evidence, and the words of a dead man named John O’Neill. Their argument seemed plausible enough ? the interests of the Bush administration and the energy industry are, in essence, one and the same – but without proper corroboration, there was nowhere for the story to go.
In the last 100 hours, however, the substance behind Brisard and Dasique’s accusations has been amply augmented.
The story begins in 1998, with an American petroleum corporation called Unocal. Unocal was heavily invested in a planned pipeline that would run from Turkmenistan, through Afghanistan and Pakistan, and out to a warm water port. From there, natural gas piped down from the Caspian Sea would be made available for sale to American and Asian markets. The deal required approval from the governments of all three nations, including the Taliban. If terms could be met, Unocal and its investors stood to reap enormous profits.
The deal was destroyed along with two American embassies in Africa, victims of terror attacks by Osama bin Laden. Because bin Laden was based in Afghanistan and supported by the Taliban, the Clinton administration forbade any American company from dealing with them. A blizzard of cruise missiles soon followed this order, and Unocal was forced to wait for calmer days before it could continue to pursue the pipeline deal. Without Afghanistan, the puzzle piece at the center of the arrangement, everything crashed to a halt.
On a frigid, rainy January day in 2001, Unocal was given reason to rejoice. George W. Bush had just taken the oath of office, and was now President of the United States. The power of the American government was immediately brought to bear in the situation. Enter Afghan-American Zalmay Khalilzad, who in the early 1990s served Unocal as an advisor on the nascent pipeline project. In 1997, Khalilzad was present with Unocal representatives when they hosted a delegation of Taliban officials in Houston.
Khalilzad was part of a full-court press by the Bush administration to see the pipeline deal through to completion. Their main objective was to bring the Taliban, who had become decidedly disinterested in then project, back on board. The American pitch to the Taliban, which was still hosting Osama bin Laden, became so intense that the Taliban hired an American public relations expert named Laila Helms to broker negotiations. High-level meetings between the Bush administration and the Taliban continued through August of 2001, with little gain. The Taliban simply was not interested in becoming part of the deal.
It was at this point, according to Brisard and Dasique, that the story takes a darker and more dangerous turn.
Pakistani news agencies reported in the weeks before September 11th that America had threatened war against the Taliban if they did not agree to the pipeline deal. “Accept our carpet of gold,” the Bush administration is reported to have said, “or be buried under a carpet of bombs.”
At the same time, John O’Neill was quitting his job in protest. A Deputy Director of the FBI, O’Neill was America’s chief bin Laden hunter. He had been in charge of the investigations into the bin Laden-connected bombings of the World Trade Center in 1993, the destruction of an American troop barracks in Saudi Arabia in 1996, the African embassy bombings in 1998, and the attack upon the U.S.S. Cole in 2000. Simply put, no one person in America’s counter-terrorism apparatus knew more about Osama bin Laden than John O’Neill.
Two weeks before September 11th, John O’Neill left the FBI in anger and disgust. He believed his government was actively hindering his ability to pursue dangerous Islamic terrorists because such investigations were discomforting Mideast regimes like the Taliban that were being courted by American petroleum interests. Brisard and Dasique quote O’Neill as saying, “The main obstacles to investigating Islamic terrorism were U.S. oil corporate interests, and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it.” Connections between the Taliban and Saudi Arabia, a nation bin Laden and a dozen of the 9/11 hijackers once called home, are too glaring to ignore.
Upon leaving the FBI, O’Neill took a position as head of security for the World Trade Center, and was killed doing his job on September 11th.
The implications of all this are profoundly disturbing. If Brisard and Dasique are to be believed, the Bush administration was actively courting the Taliban, protectors of Osama bin Laden, on behalf of Unocal. That courtship gave way to dire threats of war, believable enough that the September 11th attack could well be seen as a pre-emptive strike by bin Laden and the Taliban. Bin Laden’s ability to successfully attack the continental United States was made far easier by the Bush administration’s standing-down of American anti-terrorism agents like John O’Neill, so as to avoid discomforting the very regimes they were seeking to bring into the pipeline deal.
In light of Brisard and Dasique’s allegations, the last several days have offered a number of corroborating news stories. A twelve year veteran agent with the FBI named Robert G. Wright, Jr. has filed suit in Washington D.C.’s District Court alleging that the agency willfully ignored terrorist threats from Hamas. According to Wright, the FBI intentionally thwarted his efforts to curtail Hamas activities in America that threatened American citizens. Wright’s lawsuit came one day after Congress chastised the FBI for failing to look into warnings from Arizona agents about suspicious Arab men seeking flight training at American aviation schools.
Wright has compiled a 500-page manuscript detailing the FBI’s failures on the anti-terrorism front entitled, “Fatal Betrayals of the Intelligence Mission.” If his work is allowed to be published, it may well authenticate concerns voiced by John O’Neill before his death. As it stands, the fact that an FBI agent has brought suit against the agency for intentionally ignoring terrorist threats against America lends a great deal of credence to the claims levied by Brisard and Dasique. The American television news magazine ’60 Minutes’ has entered the fray, recently airing a program that questioned the FBI’s failure to follow up on a variety of leads prior to 9/11 that, if pursued, may well have thwarted the plot.
Meanwhile, the interim leader of Afghanistan, Harmid Karzai, will announce later this month the inking of a deal between his nation, Turkmenistan, and Pakistan, to run an 850 kilometer pipeline through all three nations for the purpose of exploiting natural gas in the Caspian Sea region. Unocal has been tapped as the lead company for the project, as it has always espoused the viability of the deal once stability was returned to Afghanistan. Representing a consortium of companies from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Turkmenistan, South Korea and Japan, Unocal expects the pipeline will bring 30 billion cubic meters of gas to market each year.
Of course, this deal would never have been possible without the obliteration of the Taliban by American military forces, and the subsequent installation of Karzai as interim leader of Afghanistan. A former Unocal consultant in the days before leadership was thrust upon him, Karzai has been greatly helped in reassembling Afghanistan by former Unocal consultant Zalmay Khalilzad, who was appointed U.S. special envoy to that nation the day after Karzai was sworn in.
In the aftermath of September 11th, we were told the terror was brought upon us by people who hate our freedom and resent our way of life. In point of fact, however, it appears the attacks came as part of a broader game. The Bush administration willingly entered parley with the Taliban, despite their care and feeding of wanted killer Osama bin Laden, so as to further the goals on an American petroleum interest. In the process, they watered down American anti-terrorism measures to such a degree that a Deputy Director was compelled to quit in protest, and another has since filed suit against the agency.
Did the threats of war levied against the Taliban on behalf of Unocal spur Osama bin Laden into murderous action on behalf of his host nation? Was his attack made easier because the Bush administration willfully weakened our intelligence apparatus so as to avoid offending potential client states? Is it possible that the dust and ruin in New York and Washington are byproducts of a pipeline deal that was pursued before the attacks, and has been allowed to come to fruition in the aftermath?
Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasique would have us believe so. Recent news has vigorously bolstered their allegations. If further revelations come to light, there will indeed be hell to pay.
By William Rivers Pitt
Source: http://truthout.com/docs_02/05.15A.WRP.Hell.5.htm
Hell to Pay Part 3: http://truthout.com/docs_01/01.20A.Hell.2.Pay.htm
Hell to Pay Part 2: http://truthout.com/docs_01/01.19D.Hell.2.Pay.htm
Hell to Pay Part 1: http://truthout.com/docs_01/01.18A.Hell.2.Pay.htm