Join the discussion below, or Read more at Los Angeles Times.
#286924 Mar 11, 2013
Its also exciting to the Bush Administration. According to the authors of Bin Laden, the Hidden Truth, one of the FBIs leading counter terrorism agents, John ONeill, resigned last year in protest over the Bush Administrations alleged obstruction of his investigation into bin Laden.(A similar complaint has been filed on behalf of another unidentified FBI Agent by the conservative Judicial Watch public interest group.) Supposedly the Bush Administration had been meeting since January 2001 with the Taliban, and was also reluctant to offend Saudi Arabians who ONeill had linked to bin Laden. Mr. ONeill, after leaving the FBI, assumed the position of security director at the World Trade Center, where he was killed in the 911 attacks.
As Americas New War now begins focusing on other rogue nations, UNOCALs stars have magically aligned. About two months after the Houston parties, UNOCAL executive John Maresca addressed the House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific and urged support for establishment of an investor-friendly climate in Afghanistan, 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. Meaning that UNOCALs ability to construct the Afghan pipeline was a cause worthy of U.S. taxpayer dollars.
#286926 Mar 11, 2013
On August 10, 2005, Unocal merged with Chevron Corporation and became a wholly owned subsidiary. Unocal has now ceased operations as an independent company, but continues to conduct many operations as Union Oil Company of California, a Chevron company.
Leaving a wave of controversy in its wake, one of the most visible reminders of the Bush administration's ties to big oil - the 129,000-ton Chevron tanker Condoleezza Rice - has quietly been renamed, Chevron officials acknowledged yesterday.
"We made the change to eliminate the unnecessary attention caused by the vessel's original name," said Chevron spokesman Fred Gorell.
In March 2005, the Chinese National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) tried to acquire Unocal with a bid that valued Unocal at between $16 billion and $18 billion. Following a vote in the United States House of Representatives, the bid was referred to President George W. Bush, on the grounds that its implications for national security needed to be reviewed. CNOOC withdrew its bid. Soon after, Unocal merged with Chevron.
The merger was seen as U.S. protectionism in the involvement of political interests where CNOOC was made aware of a "harsh political reaction" to a take over of American companies. American congressmen cited "national security" as a reason for being alarmed by the takeover option.
Unocal was one of the key players in the CentGas consortium, an attempt to build the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline to run from the Caspian area, through Afghanistan and probably Pakistan, to the Indian Ocean. One of the consultants to Unocal at that time was Zalmay Khalilzad, former US ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq, and the United Nations.
In the 1980s, CIA chief Bill Casey had revived the agency's practise of gaining intelligence from traveling businessmen. Marty Miller, one of Unocal's top executives, conducted negotiations in several Central Asian countries from 1995, and voluntarily provided information gained on these trips to the CIA's Houston station.
In 1996, Unocal opened an office in Kandahar, Afghanistan, while the Taliban were in the process of taking control of the country.
Unocal rented a house in central Kandahar directly across the street from one of [Osama] bin Laden's new compounds. They did not choose this location deliberately. Most of the decent houses in town straddled the Herat Bazaar Road. Also near was the Pakistani consulate, which housed officers from [the Pakistani military Inter-Services Intelligence, the] ISI.
Steve Coll, Ghost Wars
#286927 Mar 11, 2013
Warning the world (September 11, 2001)
Group of former Soviet militarymen, led by Col. Leonid Khabarov (center,) standing by the Massouds Tomb, commemorating his memory (2009)In the spring 2001, Ahmad Shah Massoud had addressed the European Parliament in Brussels, saying that Pakistan was behind the situation in Afghanistan. He also said that he believed that, without the support of Pakistan, Osama Bin Laden, and Saudi Arabia, the Taliban would not be able to sustain their military campaign for up to a year. He said the Afghan population was ready to rise against them. Addressing the United States specifically, he warned that should the U.S. not work for peace in Afghanistan and put pressure on Pakistan to cease their support to the Taliban, the problems of Afghanistan would soon become the problems of the U.S. and the world.
Declassified Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) documents from November 2001 show that Massoud had gained "limited knowledge... regarding the intentions of [Al-Qaeda] to perform a terrorist act against the US on a scale larger than the 1998 bombing of the US Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania." They noted that he warned about such attacks.
#286928 Mar 11, 2013
July 31, 2010
CIA AND ISI NURTURED MUJAHIDEEN AND TALIBAN
#286929 Mar 11, 2013
Who We Are
Paul Fitzgerald and Elizabeth Gould, have been a husband and wife team since 1977. In 1981 we were the first American journalists permitted to enter Afghanistan behind Soviet lines. We covered the war first for CBS News, produced a documentary for PBS. We returned in 1983 for ABCs Nightline with Harvards "Getting to Yes" negotiations expert, Roger Fisher in the hopes of advancing the prospects for negotiating the Soviets out.
By 1987 we knew the time was not right foretelling the Afghan story. We started to develop reality based screenplays out of the accumulated materials and research. By the end of the 1980's, we had completed four. The EX-FILE* was one. Written in 1989, it was based on a real US government Black Project that used military personnel for mind-control experiments. As the new decade arrived, we began to experience a consciousness shift. Our geopolitical perspective became the key to discovery into the deeper motivations of the players behind the most important event of our time, the war in Afghanistan.
Ultimately we found a psychic link to a blood world of Norman Geraldine (Fitzgerald) holy warriors linked to the Crusades and the holy warriors of Afghanistan today.
We met Oliver Stone in 1992 to introduce him to The Voice, a research paper we developed after years of struggling to tell the unknown geopolitical story of our experience with Afghanistan. With Stones encouragement and through his power of dreams we brought our mythic dream world into waking reality.
The story eventually became the holographic door through which the geopolitics of Afghanistan in the current era walked to meet the spiritual ground of its existence; a world with rules of its own, playing out in our time. It reveals the mystical struggle for the future that underlies and drives our consciousness and goes right to the heart of understanding the true destiny of the Western Dream.
Our story will take you back to the birth of the ancient Grail quest 5500 hundred years ago, what that means for the restoration of the Grail through electronics today and why this will restore the Grail for eternity.
A story based on our dreams and visions, The Voice is our answer to the question, what is the meaning of life?
Return to Top of Page
#286930 Mar 11, 2013
#286931 Mar 11, 2013
Even less understood is how the political decisions of the late 1970s are tied to the current simultaneous financial and foreign policy crisis. Nor is it understood how Washington and Wall Street set the stage for Americas financial downfall by using Afghanistan as an investment bank throughout the 1980s to renew the Cold War instead of reinvesting in Americas civilian economy.
Much like today, the America of 1979 faced a crossroads. Vietnam, two oil shocks, a disintegrating infrastructure, a beleaguered manufacturing base and the loss of strategic ally Iran had shown that America was a vulnerable colossus. Thirty five years of economic Cold War against the Soviet Union and China had produced a vast arsenal of nuclear weapons that were proving as useless as they were unusable. World War II had set the stage for the happy marriage of war production to business pulling the U.S. out of the depression by doubling the Gross National Product in one year (1940). The Cold War ushered the financial benefits of the 1940s into the 1950s and 1960s. But these expenditures came at a massive expense to the civilian economy and not just in terms of tax dollars. Weapons development of the post World War II years lured Americas best and brightest away from the civilian economy and even the real world of guns, tanks and armies into a world detached from time, space and money. While Germany and Japan rebuilt their civilian industries free from defense spending, the U.S. moved into ever higher levels of technology, glorifying and expanding the influence of the defense industry into every fabric of American life.
Originally termed Military Keynesianism to describe the buildup of the German defense industry prior to World War II, Americas military Keynesianism of the Cold War was the unseen hand of government supporting the American economy, balancing the cyclical ups and downs of the market by providing 16 percent of the Gross Domestic Product in 1950s and 9 percent in the 1960s. By 1963 defense spending accounted for 52 percent of all the research and development done in the United States. But by the mid-1970s, a stagnant American economy combined with the Arab oil embargo and inflation brought on by the Vietnam War exposed the weakness in the system. As German and Japanese manufacturers battered their American competition in the marketplace, the defense-heavy American economy faltered.
#286932 Mar 11, 2013
My guess is the CIA /NSA /FBI and Mossad already knows where you are.
Israeli Secret Intelligence Service
Power Surge / The Constitutional Record of George W. Bush
#286933 Mar 11, 2013
Mystical Imperialism: Afghanistans Ancient Role
#286934 Mar 11, 2013
#286935 Mar 11, 2013
#286936 Mar 11, 2013
You should feel HONORED enough to realize that you have some non-muslim friends who actually care about you and are only hoping you are safe and well...
#286937 Mar 11, 2013
Not to worry, the NRA is on it and have offered shooting squads in lieu of...
#286938 Mar 11, 2013
You'd have to change that to NSA - yemoron :-)
#286939 Mar 11, 2013
Speaking of moron...what little district has the TOUGHEST gun laws of anywhere in this country?
Eleven people have been taken to hospitals after a shooting outside an apartment building in the District, police said.
The shooting took place at about 2 a.m. Monday in the 1200 block of North Capitol Street. It appears that the incident was a drive-by shooting, and police are looking for two vehicles that were traveling at a high rate of speed southbound on North Capitol Street, Assistant Police Chief Peter Newsham said.
Five women and six men were taken to hospitals, although police are not sure how many of them were shot. One of the victims is in serious condition, but none of the victims have life-threatening injuries, Newsham said.
Perhaps another ban is warranted? I wonder if those guns were re-registered this year?
Since: Jan 13
#286940 Mar 11, 2013
Washington should pressure Baghdad to increase the allocation for oil cost recovery
Posted on: Mar 11th, 2013 - 9:25 pm
#286942 Mar 11, 2013
Put the fork in it, the War is done now!
Dammam, Saudi Arabia
#286943 Mar 11, 2013
News you will not see or hear on CNN and FOX News
The Law of War Does Not Shield the CIA and John Brennan's Drone Kill List
The US prosecuted Omar Khadr in Guantánamo for not being a lawful combatant. Exactly the same applies to the civilian CIA
By Morris Davis
February 12, 2013 "The Guardian" -- The disclosure Tuesday evening of the Department of Justice white paper on targeted killing (pdf) has sparked a lot of debate, much of it focused on the Obama administration's extraordinarily broad interpretation of what constitutes an "imminent" threat that justifies lethal force as an act of self-defense. As Senator Rand Paul (Republican, Kentucky) told reporters during a conference call on Wednesday, "only a team of lawyers could define 'imminent' to mean the exact opposite" of what the word means in the real world.
There are, no doubt, many Americans alive today who should be thankful their healthcare providers did not apply the administration's interpretation of "imminent" to decide if they had crossed over the line of imminent death and said pull the plug.
Some people have acquired power and profits in post-9/11 America by pandering to and perpetuating fear. As has been the case on a range of legal issues torture, indefinite detention, warrantless surveillance, kill lists all it takes is for someone to say "terrorism" and "threat to security" in the same breath for the vast majority of the public to handover its principles. Rather than a serious discussion on the proper law/liberty/security balance, too often the public accepts the false syllogism that whatever it takes to stop "them" from hurting "us" is obviously, as White House spokesman Jay Carney might say, "legal, ethical and wise".
Targeted killing falls into that category. The discussion tends to glom what should be several discrete inquiries where will the lethal operation take place; who is the imminent threat and why; who will conduct the operation; and what laws apply, among others into one big ball that slides through with little scrutiny.
The DOJ white paper discusses the right to take military action against a US citizen who is part of the enemy forces, law of war principles that govern application of military power, judicial deference to military judgments in the conduct of warfare, and combatant immunity that gives legal sanction to a deliberate killing by a member of the armed forces acting in compliance with the law of war. In and of themselves, those are all very valid points.
What the white paper ignores, however, is that the US has both a military and a CIA drone program, each one subject to its own rules. The CIA is a civilian agency with civilian employees and civilian contractors. It is not part of the US armed forces and its drone program is not immune from liability by the law of war principles that might apply to the military drone program.
The deliberate killing of another person is generally murder unless it is excused by some valid legal justification, like the law of war's combatant immunity. For example, the United States charged Omar Khadr with committing murder in violation of the law of war for throwing a grenade and killing a US service member during a battle in Afghanistan.
At his military commission trial at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, the military judge explained to Khadr that the law says a "killing is unlawful when done without legal justification or excuse" and that "the phrase 'in violation of the law of war' means a person acting as a combatant [who] did not meet the requirements for being a lawful combatant." Khadr pled guilty to the charge and is now in prison in Canada serving a sentence for war crimes.
Jubail, Saudi Arabia
#286944 Mar 11, 2013
Under what authority is the CIA legally excused for deliberately killing?
The United States has never made nor should it the argument that the CIA is part of the US armed forces and governed by the law of war. The fact that the two entities are separate and operate under distinct rules is clear. John Brennan, President Obama's nominee to head the CIA, made the point in his answers to prehearing questions (pdf) from members of the Senate select committee on intelligence:
"The president must have the ability to select which element [the CIA or Department of Defense] is best suited for the particular mission. Factors to be considered in the selection of the personnel and authorities include the capabilities needed, the material required, and whether the activity must be conducted covertly."
Stated another way, Brennan says that President Obama needs to have a paramilitary force at his disposal to carry out operations the military is prohibited from conducting by the law of war.
Jack Goldsmith, former assistant attorney general in the George W Bush administration and now a professor at Harvard Law School, argues the past decade shows that the United States needs a new statutory framework governing how it conducts secret warfare. Perhaps that would be a positive step, but a new domestic statutory scheme would not make a civilian working for a civilian agency a lawful combatant entitled to immunity under the law of war for acts committed outside the United States.
Neither Congress nor the president has the power to create a legal justification for killing in violation of the law of war.
Dammam, Saudi Arabia
#286945 Mar 11, 2013
Why no "drones" visited me then?
You think I am "lower" in rank?
Lower than the cook of OBL who is in GITMO?
Add your comments below
|Is the IS caliphate here to stay?||16 hr||VENUS||32|
|Christians given ultimatum by Islamic State fig... (Jul '14)||19 hr||Anonymous||3|
|IS and the IRA - a comparison||Jun 23||LJC||5|
|Obama works to get Europe behind him on Ukraine||Jun 22||Cassandra_||425|
|Dempsey doubts need for deep US role in Iraq, u...||Jun 21||Pope Closet Emeritus||50|
|Chris Kyle Posthumously Awarded Texas Medal Of ...||Jun 20||Dont Strip My Mind||2|
|Shaped by war, Dempsey doubts wisdom of deep US...||Jun 17||Rev Don Wildmoan||21|
Find what you want!
Search Baghdad, Iraq Forum Now
Copyright © 2015 Topix LLC