All of these oil companies, with important ties to the U.S. media, have interests in the Middle East crucial to their profits. Another company, Unocal, was the major player in a January 1998 agreement with the Taliban to build a natural gas pipeline across Afghanistan. (The U.S. had covertly funded the Taliban to bring stability for the pipeline deal.) In December 1998, they put the project on hold "until an internationally recognized government was in place." Unocal runs its own political action committee and is a major donor to the Republican Party. They spend about $1.5 million every year for lobbying. <the whole thing>
http://www.kirbymountain.com/rosenlake/media_oil.htmland
THE "WAR ON TERRORISM"
Why do so many people outside of the US seem to think that the war on Afghanistan is related to oil? This article gives an overview of a number of sources that examine the many links between oil policy and events in Afghanistan, and gives the gist of their arguments on subjects such as the rise and fall of the Taliban.
http://www.afgha.com/article.php?sid=13313&mode=thread&order=0 Appointments to the region since the war are also indicative of an oil connection. For example, Zalmay Khalilzad was appointed as envoy to Afghanistan in January of 2002. Khalilzad is a former aide to the Texas-based oil company Unocal. He drew up Unocal's risk analysis on its proposed trans-Afghan gas pipeline. Hamed Karzai, the president of Afghanistan, is also a former consultant for Unocal.
http://www.corpwatch.org/news/PND.jsp?articleid=1149 Unocal formed the CentGas consortium in the mid-90s with the intent of building the trans-Afghan pipeline. Unocal then withdrew from the pipeline project in 1998, after the US bombed Afghanistan. At the time, the statement issued by the company said that "Unocal will only participate in construction of the proposed Central Asia Gas Pipeline when and if Afghanistan achieves the peace and stability necessary to obtain financing from international lending agencies for this project and an established government is recognized by the United Nations and the United States."
http://www.unocal.com/uclnews/98news/082198.htm The conditions Unocal wanted currently exist. So is the trans-Afghan pipeline project going through? You bet--it is the major Afghan "reconstruction" project. Other sources estimate that building could begin in mid-2003.
http://www.afgha.com/article.php?sid=14728&mode=thread&order=0 Although earlier reports suggested that Unocal was the top company being considered to build the pipeline, currently it appears that Unocal will not have any direct involvement. In fact, thus far the company has made a point of distancing itself from the project, especially in response to reports that have highlighted Unocal's former attempts to court the Taliban in order to pave the way for the pipeline.
http://www.unocal.com/uclnews/98news/centgas.htm The war on Afghanistan allowed the US to place military bases in the nine surrounding countries, all rich in oil and natural gas. In fact, oil can be linked to any number of US policies around the world that are being pursued under the guise of the "war on terrorism."
http://www.utnereader.com/bMedia.tmpl?command=search&db=dArticle.db&eqheadlinedata=Oiling%20the%20War%20Machine A number of countries with interests in oil have reason to worry about what a new US presence in Central Asia and possibly the Persian Gulf could mean for them. This US presence could also trigger more terrorist attacks aimed at disrupting the world economic system.
http://www.yellowtimes.org/article.php?sid=853 US dependence on Saudi oil has forced te Bush administration to maintain an alliance with the country that may be interfering with the goals of the "war on terrorism." This article quotes Edward L. Morse, former deputy assistant secretary of state for international energy policy under President Ronald Reagan, who has said, "The stark truth is that we're dependent on this country that directly or indirectly finances people who are a direct threat to you and me as individuals." This is apparently why the US government has remained fairly silent about the obvious Saudi connection to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/ntn14772.htm
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
