The War
On Terrorism

Site Meter

Big Oil and the War on Drugs and Terrorism


The "Big Oil" chessgame, aided and abetted by the so-called wars on drugs and terrorism, has made most of humanity its pawns and has expanded corporate control over our lives

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


BLOOD, TOIL AND OIL


The year 1859 saw the publication of The Origin of the Species by Charles Darwin as well as the founding of the Red Cross by Henry Dunant, after he'd experienced the suffering of the ordinary soldier during the Battle of Solferino (France and Sardinia under Napoleon III fought Austria under Franz-Josef I).1 This progressive humanitarian measure was paralleled by the founding of the conservative elitist Anthropological Society of Paris by Dr Paul Broca, who had started to "pickle" the brains of eminent deceased personalities.


Strange things were happening in a world where artificial lighting had turned night into day and where man extended his effective life-span by some 30 per cent.2 The first oil-well near Titusville in Pennsylvania had been drilled; John Davison Rockefeller and Maurice Clark formed a trading company which would soon become Standard Oil, forming a huge monopoly by concentrating 96 per cent of the refining capacity of the USA in the one hand.3 In the beginning they profited from provisioning troops in the War of Union against the Confederates, then later from outfitting (arming) "pioneers" in their war against nature and humanity.4


The year 1859 also saw the start of huge migration of Ashkenazi Jewry from what is now the region of Ukraine into western parts of Europe. The "Eastern Jews" swamped Europe and brought with them little else but the shirts on their backs as well as intellectual and artistic brilliance. Immediately these immigrants made their presence felt in all walks of life. Scientific research and discovery took a giant leap forward when Ashkenazim ability was seeded into the fertile soil of a continent which was still in the process of emerging out of the age of feudal reign.


When in 1863 the carnage due to modern weapons had taken a huge toll on the largely volunteer forces of both combatants in the American War of Secession, conscription was introduced (first by the Confederates). Until then, the landowners of the South had been fighting for their "rights" while the soldiers of the North had been spilling their blood in order to maintain the tax income for the Union. The new Union President Abraham Lincoln 5 had the "daring" idea to get motivated fresh blood into the reservoir of cannon-fodder by promising Blacks their freedom if they helped to defeat the South.6 In two years, the war was won for the North and the Negro was then nominally freed but still stayed a de facto slave. Almost 140 years later, one wonders whether emancipation was the same kind of labeling fraud as was the eventual outcome of the Civil Rights movement.


It is now hardly ever commented on, but the American Civil War "happened" while the oil industry was being established. Some 600,000 lives were ruthlessly wasted between 1861 and 1865 for "ideals" which, when viewed today, were phony (at best) and to no material effect (as in the betterment of people's lives). What had really happened was that a very few people had laid the foundations for very great wealth and dominance.

 

ROCKEFELLERS AND ROTHSCHILDS


John D. Rockefeller was born in Richford, New York, on 8 July 1839 (d. 1937) and educated in the public schools of Cleveland, Ohio. He became a bookkeeper in Cleveland at the age of sixteen. In 1862, he went into business with entrepreneur Henry Flagler and Samuel Andrews, the inventor of an inexpensive process for the "refining" of crude petroleum. In 1870, their company was renamed as Standard Oil (of Ohio) Company. In 1872, J. D. Rockefeller founded the South Improvement Co., which by 1887 had amalgamated all but a few per cent of America's refining capacity in one hand and became a corporate giant of such vast might that it was, in effect, "running" America. The USA was fighting another brutal "War of Independence" (this time from Standard Oil), which it won in 1911 when the Rockefeller monopoly was dismantled. Just as in the case of the other War of Independence, victory was an elusive concept.


The rest of the 20th century has been called by many in very simple terms as "Rockefeller's revenge". To all intents and purposes, this was a "re-volution", as it effectively re-established the dominance of the oil industry over American politics and the American people. What has changed is that not only have the American people been pushed around the chessboard, but most of mankind has been made into pawns in the game of "Big Oil".


In 1823, US President Monroe declared (in wise prescience) the Americas "off-limits" to any other polity, and the world was divided into the "Western hemisphere" and the rest. Zischka7 gave a chronological account of the oil industry's early development. It turns out that in the early 20th century there were two major players on this stage, with an early contender for "second place":


• John Davison Rockefeller, son of a Rabbi-cum-haberdasher and purveyor of comforts to the men in the Pennsylvanian oil fields, focused his attention on the "downstream" side of the oil industry and by the late 1880s established an almost total monopoly on transport and refining of crude oil.

• Henry Deterding, an enterprising young Dutchman, was a clerk in a bank in Batavia (Jakarta) at the turn of the century when the Duri oil field in Sumatra was discovered. A fast learner, he became involved in the company holding the lease over this oil field and by 1902 had risen to the position of president of this company. Deterding was determined to seek domination over the oil industry via the ownership of concessions.


The "side show" developed in the northern foothills of the Caucasus mountains. Ludwig Nobel (brother of the inventor of dynamite, Alfred Nobel) was sent by his father (who at this time was an arms manufacturer supplying the Imperial Russian Army with guns) into the Caucasus region to secure a supply of walnut wood to be turned into gun stocks. Instead, he came back with ownership of the oil concessions on what is now known as the Baku region of Azerbaijan.


The House of Rothschild, through its various branches established in London, Paris and Vienna by the sons of Amschel Mayer8 (named "Rothschild" after the "red shield" sign on his house in the Frankfurt ghetto), financed:

• the Rockefeller oil empire in America;

• the emerging alliance (soon to be named Royal Dutch Shell) of the Dutch and English royal houses to take control over the oilfields in the Far East; and

• the Russian oilfield operations controlled by the Nobel family.


As always, the third player got mangled up in the tussle between the two stronger ones.9 After oil was discovered in the Persian Gulf region and the British secured control of it, the Nobel family was forced by a "no holds barred" price war between Rockefeller and Deterding to "sell out". In order to win this fight, Deterding teamed up with Lord Samuels of London, who had established the oil shipping industry.


While it would be too cumbersome to detail this epic struggle here, just one fact should make the attentive reader sit up: Josef Stalin spent his early political life as organiser of the Oil Workers Union in and around Baku! Another fact to ponder: the Russian Revolution kept Russian oil off the world market for quite some time.

 

OIL, WAR AND TERRORISM

 

The Bush Coalition & the New Middle East

In the early 20th century, the British Empire began to fray around the edges and First Lord of the Admiralty Captain (later Lord) Fisher argued for (re-)fitting the Royal Navy with oil-powered engines to give these ships a definite speed advantage over coal-powered steamships. With the closest supply then being in the Persian Gulf, the British meddling in Middle Eastern affairs becomes understandable. This sounded the death knell for the Ottoman Empire, which was in control of this region until the end of World War I.


That virtually all the oil supplies for the German Empire came from the Mosul field in present-day Iraq explains the fighting in the Dardanelles (Gallipoli) during World War I. The German oil supplies had to be disrupted. When you look at the geography of the region and follow the railroad line from Mosul to Berlin, you will notice that, with the exception of a stretch of less than 100 kilometres, this line ran entirely in Entente territory. The little piece of land missing was Serbia! The assassination of the Austrian Crown Prince, Archduke Franz Ferdinand, on 28 June 1914 in Sarajevo (the capital of Serbia), takes on an entirely different "flavour". The rest is "bloody history", as Kronberger so bluntly puts it in Blood for Oil.10


After World War I, the domestic oil industry in America swamped the country with cheap oil. After the discovery of oil in Venezuela, the Smoot–Hartley Act enacted by the American Congress was ostensibly designed to keep oil from Venezuela destroying the price of this abundant commodity. However, what it did in effect was it exported American recession globally. The rest is—yet again—bloody history.


One of the (other) remarkable results of World War II was that the American oil industry got involved in the exploitation of the Persian Gulf region.11 From that time on, the Middle East was racked with one after the other war that sent the oil price spiralling skywards.


At the end of the 20th century, the American war machine had become so awesome that in the absence of a credible opponent a "replacement monster" had to be found.12 This is where the perpetual "side show" of 20th century history comes in: the systematic terrorism with which Israel perpetrates genocide among the Palestinian owners of the land promised (but not given) to World Jewry by the British Empire causes symptomatic terrorism.13 The entire situation, caused by the Balfour Declaration, is unsolvable by peaceful means, as no amount of goodwill (from either side) will ever overcome the need for instability in the region to "justify" inflated oil prices and provide "use" for over 50 per cent of industrial production, which is arms related.


This is where "terrorism", yet again, rears its ugly head. Alexandre de Tocqueville described régime de la terreur as a methodology to make the masses familiar with the realities created by elites.14


While all this was happening, events unfolded on the other side of the globe that went entirely unnoticed by most then, and hence their eventual outcomes (which determine the lives of a large portion of mankind at present) seem mysterious. That need not be, as there are sinister "games" at work which are so plain and obvious as not to be cases of the proverbial needle in the haystack!

 

EUROPEAN COLONIALISM AND THE "OPIUM WARS"


From 1757, the British had a trade agreement with the Chinese Qing Dynasty which limited all trade between the two nations to the harbour of Canton (Guangzhou). In the early 19th century, British ships were carrying millions of kilograms of Chinese tea to England, while bringing as return freight only silver bullion.


When declining to open the Chinese market to British industrial products, Emperor Qianlong declared in the classic statement to King George III: "We possess all things. I set no value on objects strange or ingenious, and have no use for your country's manufactures."


Opium had long been known as an intoxicating drug in China, but its use was forbidden by imperial decree dating back to 1729.15 The English East India Company (EEIC) was cultivating huge poppy-fields in India16 and selling the drug illegally to China. So the earlier ban on the use was given added currency in 1796 by another imperial decree which banned the trading/sale of opium in China. When in 1833 the monopoly of the EEIC was broken up (an early case of "liberalization"—with the usual catastrophic effects of unbridled deregulation!), China was swamped with opium from India and not only the idle rich but the common man became addicted to the drug. In late 1838, Emperor Qianlong sent his emissary Lin Zexu to Canton to stop the opium trade. This audacious man simply held the foreign traders hostage and demanded their departure under threat of their lives.


The British Trade Commissioner Charles Elliott collected all the opium from the (British) traders and handed it over to Lin Zexu, who proceeded to wash nine million Mexican silver dollars (the international currency of the time) worth of opium into the sea. The British despatched an expeditionary force, which easily won (due to modern arms and strategy) against a vastly superior number of ill-equipped soldiers, led by generals who had no idea of what modern warfare was all about.


With the signing of the Treaty of Nanjing (Nanking) on 29 August 1842, Great Britain's original goals were fulfilled: the cohong (the Chinese trading association through which foreigners—effectively, British traders—had to work) was abolished, four more Chinese ports were opened to trade (Fuzhou, Ningbo, Shanghai and Xiamen), and the island of Hong Kong was ceded to the British.


Just as World War II effectively had its roots in the insidious Versailles Peace Treaty, the Second Opium War was an inevitable outcome of the Nanjing agreement. When in 1856 the Arrow, a ship owned by a Hong Kong resident, was searched by a party of Chinese officials looking for a notorious criminal, the British flag was taken down and this escalated from a shouting match into a shooting war. This is when the French joined the fray and together British and French expeditionary forces threatened the capital, Peking (Beijing).


In the dictated Peace Treaty of Tianjin, trading rights and the rights to establish diplomatic representations in Peking were granted. When this treaty was to be ratified the next year, the British delegation (some 400 men on three ships) was routed and this then resulted in the forceful ingression of British and French forces into Peking in 1860. The Qing Dynasty lingered on until 1911, when it finally broke up under Western pressure. What Voltaire had once called the most advanced and enlightened form of government had been reduced by "Western" dum possum volo ("because I can, I want") to an ineffective puppet regime.


This is one facet of the evil game which was played in the 19th century in East Asia. Another was the occupation of Vietnam by French forces in 1862.17


As France had no strategic interests in that part of the world at that time, this venture had to finance itself. It was of no material economic importance either, and one seriously has to wonder why France started nearly 100 years of misery for an untold number of people on the opposite side of the globe. In order to raise the money required to establish a multinational crime syndicate, the new colonial power began to regulate the drug trade in the country. Until 1954, when the French were unceremoniously "kicked out" of Vietnam, elements of the French Secret Service were controlling the French military presence in Vietnam (French Indo-China). An (effectively private) army of up to 40,000 troops and some 350 French officers (Foreign Legion) had to be financed by the drug trade.


The entire French "colonial" enterprise in that part of the world was a largely private enterprise based on organized crime sanctioned at the highest political levels.

 

AMERICAN COLONIALISM AND THE "HEROIN WARS"


It now seems very strange that out of a French private adventure (which had made a few French entrepreneurs very rich) could develop the American nightmare of the Vietnam War. The old colonial powers had been running the colonial charade for centuries: entire nations were pressed into service to generate vast wealth for a very small number of people who were the froth on the sociologically fermenting vats that the "mother nations" to the colonial states had become.


America had to learn that one cannot break a deal with one of the oldest civilized nations, Russia, for the simple reason that one was able to (the USA used nuclear bombs to shock Japan into surrender, and the deal that Stalin and Roosevelt had made regarding the sharing of the territorial spoils after World War II was "off"). The Korean War was the outcome of this broken promise. What was "sold" to the unknowing populations as a clash of ideologies was little more than the grandstanding of intellectual midgets: "Look! I have a bigger nuke than you!"


The Korean Peninsula was brutally separated into two halves in order to achieve what had been arranged by Stalin and Roosevelt a decade earlier: a sharing of the region! While the people in the North had no political rights by law and were slaves to a "one size fits all" economy, the ones in the South also effectively had no "rights" and were pressed into the service of Korean and American economic tyrants.

 

To the average American citizen (especially in those days), the "developing" situation in Vietnam seemed to be a continuation of the clash of ideologies that had gone on a decade earlier on the "other peninsula over there".

 

Plotinus, the Alexandrian philosopher of the second century AD, cautioned that every evolution had to be preceded by an "involution". So what wound the clock in Vietnam?

 

In 1954, when French General Navarre lost the strategic, fortified city of Dien Bien Phu to the Vietcong under the brilliant leadership of General Giap, the colonial adventure of the French in the Far East became an orphan in need of a generous "uncle". Always happy to prop up a repressive regime which provided the "freedom" for corporate economy to wreak havoc, the USA was drawn into the next vortex of military conflict. What started as a loan of military "advisers" developed into a full-blown military conflict of epic proportions.

 

The sociopolitical effect of this scenario on the entire world was incredibly hefty. All of South East Asia was turned into a brothel for American soldiers on R&R, and again this war was largely "run" by the American Secret Service. Air America, the aviation wing of the CIA, was for a long time the biggest airline in the world.18 While the military was fighting a war in accordance with political doctrine and within the framework of international law, the CIA financed the destruction of much of South East Asia and American (Western) society by drug running.

 

Only few ever saw that the arrow was also the target: a logically thinking democratic society would not permit its own dregs to pervert the methodology of government into the modus operandi of an organized crime syndicate. Blum points out that over the two decades of (official) American military presence in South East Asia, the region was turned into the (clandestine) producer of some 70 per cent of the heroin and opium supply that is consumed in the USA.19 The dealing of drugs and arms is an essential part of the destabilizing tactics 20 which have been and still are visited on the most populous region on Earth.

 

It is interesting to note that while in the 19th century the British used China as their playground and sold drugs there which had been produced in India (using the military power of the Empire in order to do so), the USA used a phoney war (financed by the American taxpayer) to set up the logistics needed to produce the drugs required to turn the American people into zombies. In both instances the "social cost" was immeasurable, the beneficiaries were an extremely small number of "personalities", and neither of the two episodes had been possible without the knowledge, condoning and complicity of the highest levels of government (and "high society").

 

Who can be surprised to learn that the Israeli Secret Service, the Mossad, "runs" a similar operation in Lebanon? Local opposition to this illicit drug industry is (as Robert Fisk pointed out in the Independent of 11 December 2002) the major drive behind the Hizbollah "terrorism". In early 2003, the newspapers and TV news channels were having a jolly good time "informing" the world how Israeli-based operations were swamping the yuppie scene with the drug ecstasy. That the largely Jewish-owned media was reporting on such antisocial Jewish activities hinted at a more important agenda.

 

This was closely followed by the media-induced SARS hysteria. The "Rape of Iraq" will relieve Israel from having to buy expensive oil and ensure that "Big Brother" for a long time to come will render ineffective Arab opposition to the kind of treatment handed out to the Palestinian people.

 

The Iran–Contra Affair overshadowed much of the Reagan administration, and the shady "activities" at the Mena Air Field in Arkansas (while Bill Clinton acted as Governor of the state) led up to the G. H. W. Bush presidency. All this will surely be followed by disclosures of similar "activities" in the meantime (if and when the present stranglehold over the media is broken). Robbins21 details the involvement of the CIA (through Air America) in all of these strange affairs.

 

One is tempted to suspect that the surest way to stop the trafficking of drugs and rid the world of the drug industry menace would be via the immediate disassembly of the secret services. Countless numbers of lives would be saved (or made less miserable). Will this ever happen? The answer is simply, "No!" Such a move would remove one of the most effective "tools" of government (elitist) control over the masses: the ubiquitous use of the chimera of "national security" as a smokescreen behind which "secret" actions take place which ostensibly are in the interests of the nation.

 

CORPORATISM VERSUS DEMOCRACY

 

The New Political Order which comes hand in glove with the merging of Communism and Capitalism into globalist practices is a house of cards without any real sustainability. It is a sombre fact that some 200 multinational (transnational) corporations control and their shareholders own over 95 per cent of all "private" business which is not owned by individual privateers and are reaping most of the benefit. The flipside of this coin is the fact that all of this economic activity employs only some 0.3 per cent of the global workforce. 22

 

From this it follows that the corporate economy, which accounts for the majority of activities which continually and progressively degrade the quality of life (all life), is supported in all this by the private and public sectors: they not only provide the vast majority of all employment, which is to say the wherewithal to purchase the products of the corporate sector, but also generate yet again the majority of all tax revenue.

 

Yet corporate enterprises and entrepreneurs in 1983 paid 13.1 per cent of all taxes levied in Germany; after 13 years of the Kohl government, this figure had been reduced to 5.7 per cent.23 The Canadian corporate sector in 1955 paid some 25 per cent of all taxes; by 1998, this had been reduced to 12.2 per cent. 24

 

Moore 25 gives figures for the USA which tell the same "story":

 

• between 1979 and 2002, the income of the richest percentage of the American population rose by 157 per cent, while that of the poorest 20 per cent fell;

• profits of the richest 20 "concerns" of the world rose since 1983 by 362.4 per cent;

• after the latest round of "fusion" in the oil industry, the profits of oil companies rose by 146 per cent—at a time when the oil moguls decried the fact that they were "not making any money"! (It is a sore fact that the global economy, as some 80 years ago, is again literally drowning in cheap oil!);

• 44 of the biggest 82 corporations in the USA paid taxes at a rate of 17 per cent in 2001, while the "man on the street" paid 35 per cent; 17 per cent of US corporations paid no tax(!), while seven corporations (among them General Motors) in their 2001 tax returns claimed to be due amounts paid over and above that required;

• 1,279 corporations with incomes in excess of US$250 million or more paid no taxes and declared no taxable income in 2001.

 

During the 1980s when the term "globalization" became a catchword, many began to talk of the "two-thirds society". Martin and Schumann26 spoke at the turn of the millennium of the 80:20 society. How much longer until "democratic" societies decay into a 90:10 or—as has to be feared with ever more reason—even a 99:1 "society"?

 

In the knowledge of all the above facts (which are little more than the tip of an iceberg), the only meaningful question can be: how can this have come to pass? Is this not an age where we have almost global democracy, where only a few rogue states still totally disregard human rights (with concentration camps and genocidal tactics aimed at ethnic minorities)? Is this not the "Information Age", where the news is reported "live" and we can know everything there is to know?

 

In Venezuela, a country which for the better part of a century has not been permitted stable government by an oil industry which thrives on instability, a former military officer is fighting a pretty hopeless war against American Secret Services. Army General Melvin Lopez said in an interview with the Venezuelan state-owned radio station on 21 April 2002 that American agents were behind the attempted coup d'état against President Chavez on11 April 2002. Official American denials abound and have to be weighed against the "noises" from the White House: US President G. W. Bush, himself an appointed "Führer", has been heard to demand the replacement of Chavez (who has been elected twice by overwhelming popular vote) with a "democratic" leader. It is not so much the intellectual level of the person that is permitted to make such idiotic statements, but rather that of his audience, which is cause for great concern.

 

AMERICA TERRORIZES THE WORLD

 

The 11th day of September was a most remarkable day in the 20th century and early third millennium:

 

• in 1920, the League of Nations promulgated a decree giving the Balfour Declaration a status of international "respectability";

• in 1973, a CIA-sponsored coup led to the ousting of Salvador Allende, the democratically elected President of Chile;

• in 1995, a New York court found a group of Iranian exiles guilty of having placed and detonated a bomb in the underground parking space of one of the World Trade Center towers;

• in 2001, both World Trade Center towers collapsed after "Hollywood-style" attacks on them. None of the "evidence" presented by authorities appears to merit any credibility; and it is not surprising that dubious language is used when the media crank out yet another "report" on the alleged perpetrators of this heinous act.

 

The entire world is effectively terrorized by a nation which has freed itself from all that was ever good about it.


Former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill has written a book on his time in government. Most elucidating is that he mentions that President G. W. Bush issued orders to his government almost immediately after taking office (more than half a year prior to 9-11!) for actions which were later "sold" to the public of America (and the world) as retaliation for 9-11. In a 60 Minutes interview on 11 January 2004, O'Neill talked to CBS News correspondent Lesley Stahl about this remarkable situation. This lets all the doubts which surround the entire situation disappear.

It is high time for the thinking people of the world to take notice. The actions of "Big Oil", the "War on Drugs" and the "War on Terrorism" are turning our little blue planet into what German scientist and philosopher P. J. Beumer already recognised in his 1858 Naturgeschichte ("Natural History"): "a graveyard within which higher developed life will exist in the future"—presupposing that "present" life will prepare this "graveyard". ∞

 

About the Author:


Austrian-born Dr Siegfried E. Tischler received his PhD in Geosciences in 1977 from Leopold-Francis University, Innsbruck. Since then, he has worked on five continents as a geoscientist in academia (with the Austrian Mining University), in government (as Director of Mining in Transkei, a former South African "Homeland" where he established a Geological Survey Department), and in industry (as Mineral Exploration Management Consultant).

 

In 2001, he took on an assignment as Visiting Professor in the Department of Sociology, University of Graz, Austria, to teach Ethics of Science within the framework of a course dealing with the management of crises and catastrophes offered to post-graduates within senior positions in government and industry. Since May 2003, he has been a Visiting Professor at the University of Riau, Indonesia, setting up a Centre for Ethics of Science. He is presently establishing a tanker ship cleaning business on Batam Island, Indonesia.

 

For a more detailed biography, visit http://resumes.yahoo.com/setex01/siegfriedtischler.

 

Endnotes:


1. As with all "inventions", there is chauvinism clouding the issue. Anglo-American dictum has it that the nurse Florence Nightingale is to be credited with forcing the emergence of this humanitarian measure during the Crimean War (which "happened" some years later). For all it is worth, this simply shows that the inhumanity of technologically assisted warfare allowed people to "wake up".

2. It is amazing, but there is not one single investigation into the effects of this most extraordinary change in the "human condition" by institutionalized science. Nobody seems to have been concerned about the artificiality of it all—just like the way nobody seems concerned about the effects of industrialised agriculture and farming...

3. Zischka, A., Ölkrieg: Wandlung der Weltmacht Öl ("Oil–War: Change in the Global Power of Oil"), Goldmann, Leipzig, 1939; Kronberger, H., Blut für Öl ("Blood for Oil") Uranus, Vienna, 1998, ISBN 3-901626-08-5, six decades later updated the gruesome story of the second biggest "business" after the drug trade; Yergin, D., The Prize: The Quest for Oil, Money and Power, Touchstone, New York, 1993, ISBN 067-1799-32-0, has an encyclopaedic history of the oil business (caveat lector: this book is a factual treasure trove, but all too often it is apparent that "conclusions" reached are largely "whitewashes" of white-collar criminality).

4. The corporate successor to Standard Oil (in a joint venture with I. G. Farben) was operating concentration camps in Germany during World War II. See Tarpley, W.G. and A. Chaitkin, George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography; find a PDF file on the web with Google.com.

5. Lincoln now looks like quite a bit of a "straw man". Every respectable encyclopaedia will tell that the representative (and relative) of the Rothschild dynasty, Judah P. Benjamin (1811–84), acted at different times during the American Civil War as Attorney General and Minister of Foreign Affairs, Finance and War for the "South". The "Architect of the Secession" was able to flee to England after the Confederates had been defeated and worked there as a successful barrister. That his Treatise on the Law of Sale of Personal Property (1868) became a legal classic in Britain speaks a clear language.

6. This could be phrased as: the president of one nation promised the people of another nation something that he had no right to do; on top of that, the fulfilment of that promise was conditional upon winning a war. The Rothschilds repeated this strategy with the "Balfour Declaration caper" with equal success some 60 years later, and the labelling fraud regarding "intentions" continued unabated.

7. Zischka, ibid.

8. We forget at our peril that Amschel Mayer Rothschild should be remembered for his saying that "the best times for making money is when blood is flowing on the streets".

9. This is the "exclusion principle" at work: one ecological niche, one species. See Gause, G.F., The Struggle for Existence, Williams & Wilkins, Baltimore, 1934

10. Kronberger, ibid.

11. Yergin, ibid.

12. Tibi, B., Die Neue Weltunordnung ("The New World Disorder"), Econ-Ullstein, München, 2001, p. 57, ISBN 354-87501-1.

13. Hoffman, M. and M. Liebermann, The Israeli Holocaust Against the Palestinians, Independent History, 2002, ISBN 097-0378-42-4.

14. de Tocqueville, A., The Old Regime and the French Revolution (translated by S. Gilbert), Anchor Books/Doubleday, New York, 1955, ISBN 0-385-09260-1. Will historians ever forgive him for having questioned the significance of the French Revolution for the "development of humanity"? When Jürgen Habermas views the American and French revolutions as pivotal points in human history, he surely only thinks the history of elitist domination (Habermas, J., Der philosophische Diskurs der Moderne ["The Philosophical Discourse of Modern Times"], 12 Vorlesungen, Frankfurt/M., 1985).

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion (translated by V.E. Marsden) and "The Protocols of the Meetings of the Elders of Zion" (in Ford, H., The International Jew, Global Publishers, Johannesburg, 1992, p. 185) take responsibility (in fact, "demand" to be given credit) for these "revolutions" and the emergence/establishment of "Zionism".

Turner, J.H. and L. Beeghley, in The Emergence of Sociological Theory (Dorsey Press, Homewood, Illinois, 1981, p. 19, ISBN 025-6024-16-2), call these revolutions the evolutionary culmination of economic, social, political and intellectual changes; as usual with cases of labelling fraud, they give no causative principle but offer only an alphabet soup.

15. It also has to be noted that paper, gunpowder and the compass had been in use in China for many hundreds of years before they were "discovered" in Europe. So why did China not use them to "rule the world" as Europe did?

16. That this operation was owned by the Montague family should not come as a surprise. A century later, Norman Montague, as Governor of the Bank of England, "installed his protégé Hjalmar Schacht as Finance Minister into the Hitler regime" (Tarpley and Chaitkin). What is depicted as "necessity" for the masses almost always turns out as a "chance" for the elites.

17. Robbins, Ch., Air America: From World War II to Vietnam – The Explosive True Story of the CIA's Secret Airline, Macmillan, 1979, p. 234, Corgi Books, 1988, ISBN 974-8303-51-9.

18. Loy, D.A, "Can Corporations become Enlightened? Buddhist Reflections on TNCs", in Camilleri, J.A. and Ch. Muzaffar (eds), Globalisation: The Perspectives and Experiences of the Religious Traditions of Asia Pacific, JUST, Selangor, Malaysia, 1998, S. 5ff, ISBN

983-9861-09-3.

19. Blum, W., Rogue State, Zed Books, London, 2002, ISBN 184-2772-21-X.

20. Calder, K.E., Asia's Deadly Triangle: How Arms, Energy, and Growth Threaten to Destabilize Asia Pacific, Nicholas Brealey, 1997, ISBN 185-7881-61-3.

21. Robbins, ibid.

22. Loy, ibid.

23. Martin, H.-P. and H. Schumann, The Global Trap: Globalization and the Assault on Prosperity and Democracy, Zed Books, 1997, p. 101, ISBN 185-6495-30-2.

24. Klein, N., No Logo, Flamingo/HarperCollins, London, 2001, p. 472, ISBN 000-6530-40-0.

25. Moore, M., Stupid White Men, HarperCollins, 2001; published in German by Piper, München, 2002, p. 79, ISBN 349-2045-17-0.

26. Martin and Schumann, op. cit.

 

 


 

 

The New U.S.-British Oil Imperialism


Norman D. Livergood

 

The U.S. invasion of Iraq to loot its oil and politically restructure the Middle East, is part of a policy of military imperialism that the American and British ruling circles have been engaged in for several centuries. The American revolution was fought to bring the United States under new, non-British rulers, with the new regime sold to the public as a democracy. Beginning in the twentieth century, these American ruling elites have revolved around the Rockefeller, Brown, Harriman, and Morgan family dynasties. The Bush family, beginning with Prescott Bush, have served as satraps of the Rockefeller, Brown, and Harriman interests.

The British and American ruling cabal decided that the energy of choice for the world would be oil and natural gas (not coal)--just as the drugs of choice would be alcohol and tobacco.

To overcome the problem of his oil holdings being broken apart by the U.S. government in 1911, John Rockefeller set out to control the world's energy reserves. World War I was the strategy of the world oil cartel (Standard, Shell, British Petroleum) to take over the colonies of France, Holland, Spain and Portugal. The engines of war now ran on petroleum-based products, so ownership of oil could determine who won or lost a war--therefore who would rule the world. Oil, instead of gold, became the token of power.

 

By 1919, the Oil Empire, not based on countries or nations, but on private corporations, ruled the world.

 

The Big Three oil cartel, which controlled oil in the Persian Gulf and Southeast Asia areas, wanted to gain control over the vast oil reserves in the southern part of the Soviet Union. They financed the fascist regimes in Germany, Italy, and Japan with the hope that they would invade and control Russia. The Oil Rulers planned to defeat the German, Italian, and Japanese regimes and take control of the oil reserves in the Soviet Union. The Rockefeller circle also planned to take control of Persian Gulf oil from the British-Persian Oil cartel and seize control of southeast Asian oil from Royal Dutch Shell.

The United States was brought into the Second World War when in July 1941, President Roosevelt signed an embargo to stop all shipping to Japan. This was said to be in retaliation for the Japanese invasion of French Indo-China. Roosevelt's U.S. embargo cut off the Japanese oil supply, which would have quickly shut down Japan's entire economy. In late November 1941 the Japanese sent a written "war warning" through diplomatic channels to Washington, demanding that the embargo be stopped, or else American sites in the Pacific would be attacked in retaliation. That formal diplomatic warning was ignored and the U.S. made no reply. Just two weeks later the Japanese bombed the American embargo ships located in Pearl Harbor.

 

In 1939 and '40, the Germans and Italians did not attack Russia as the Big Three had planned. Instead, German General Rommel rushed across North Africa to grab the Suez Canal and control all oil shipping through the canal. Rommel then planned to drive through to Persia and toss out the British from the British-Persian oil fields. Meanwhile, after a failed attack on Russia in 1939, the Japanese swept through Southeast Asia and seized all the oil holdings of Royal Dutch Shell. With the defeat of Japan in 1945, most of those Royal Dutch fields came under the control of Rockefeller's Standard Oil.

 

Hitler had planned to capture the oil fields in Romania by 1939 so Germany would have its own supply of oil. This was accomplished. Then Rommel was to have captured the oil fields in Persia by 1941, the oil fields in Russia in 1942. Only then would Hitler have sufficient fuel for prosecuting a war with the United States. But less than a week after the Pearl Harbor attack, the Japanese convinced Hitler to declare war on the United States. Hitler agreed only if the Japanese would attack Russia, since German troops were now bogged down in Russia and Hitler would gain strategic advantage if the Russians had to defend themselves from Japan on their eastern flank. When the Japanese failed to attack Russia, Hitler was driven out of Russia and now was without a fuel source. The Romanian oil fields in Ploesti were insufficient for Germany to carry on a war on two fronts, and Germany's war effort began to collapse.

The last major German campaign was the Battle of the Bulge, in which Field Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt was to attack the invading allies with his tanks, then capture the Allied fuel dumps. This would stop the American and British forces and obtain the necessary fuel for Germany to continue its war effort. But General Eisenhower ordered the Allied fuel dumps burned and Germany was defeated.


At the end of World War II, the British-Persian Oil Company controlled the vast oil fields in Iran. The Persians had declared their alignment with Adolf Hitler's Nazi "Aryan Race" movement and were fully expecting German General Rommel to come rushing across Africa and "free" them from the British. They had even proclaimed their alignment with Hitler by changing the name of their country from Persia to "Aryan," (or "Iran" in the Farsi language), but the Germans failed to save them.


To take control of Persian Gulf oil from the British, in 1954 Kermit Roosevelt, nephew of Franklin, led an American CIA coup to take control of Iran and place in power the American-backed Shah of Iran. The Shah expelled the British, and Rockefeller's Standard Oil now had control of the British-Persian petroleum fields.

 

 In the early 1950s, Occidental Petroleum's Armand Hammer, a satrap of the Rockefellers, negotiated a deal with Russian dictator Josef Stalin to buy his oil--thus effectively stealing it from the Russian people. Russian oil was then sold on the world market at a much higher price than Stalin could get by marketing it himself, because few countries were willing to buy oil from Stalin.

 

Occidental Petroleum and Russia built two large pipelines, from the Russian oil fields down along both sides of the Caspian Sea, terminating in the old British-Persian--now Standard Oil--oil fields in Iran. For the next 45 years, Russia secretly sent its oil out through those pipelines and Standard Oil sold the oil on the world market at the "West Texas Crude" price by calling it Iranian oil. For almost fifty years most Americans have been using Russian oil in their cars.

 

Standard Oil refineries, which produce gasoline from crude oil, are located at large sea ports like San Francisco, Houston or Los Angeles, not near any of the large American oil fields. Most oil from the Persian Gulf is shipped in oil tankers to those large American refinery-ports.

 

In 1979, the Standard Oil-backed Shah of Iran was thrown out by a British-backed coup and the long-time British asset, Ayatollah Khomeni, put into power. The flow of Russian oil through Iran suddenly stopped. Other oil pipelines were constructed through Iraq and Turkey. The Russian oil was now called OPEC Arabian-Middle Eastern oil and marketed at the even higher "spot market" price. So in 1979, in America and Europe, we suddenly experienced gasoline shortages and huge increases in the price of gasoline. Also in 1979 Standard Oil-Russian oil interests tried to secure an alternate, short, safe oil pipeline route from Russia through neighboring Afghanistan, but this only resulted in a prolonged war and the project was abandoned.

 

When the new British-controlled regime in Iran came into power, the Rockefeller-influenced U.S. government immediately threatened to seize $7.9 billion of Iranian assets located in the U.S. On November 4, 1979 Iranian "terrorists" captured and held hostage 65 Americans. Essentially, Standard Oil was being blackmailed by the hostage strategy. After lengthy negotiations, the Rockefeller-created President Jimmy Carter approved the electronic transfer of 7.9 billion dollars from U.S. accounts to the Iranian regime on January 20, 1981.

 

On Wednesday January 27, 1988, as announced in the Wall Street Journal, Standard Oil merged with British Petroleum. This actually represents Standard Oil's buyout of British Petroleum, the name of the newly merged company being BP-America. The Wall Street Journal did not see fit to mention worries about the world-wide predatory marketing practices of a deceptively titled Standard Oil regime.

 

During the last 13 years, BP-America has merged with, or controls, all of the old Standard Oil "mini-companies" which existed before the original break-up by the U.S. government in 1911. The new Standard Oil regime is now known as BP-AMOCO, and few people in the world realize what has happened. It's now possible to understand why British Prime Minister Blair has become the spokesman for the new wars against terrorism (actually the war for Caspian Sea and Iraq oil).

 

At the end of WWII, General Douglas MacArthur became the military Governor of Japan. MacArthur's assistant was Laurence Rockefeller, one of John D. Rockefeller's four grandsons. As the second world war was drawing to a close, the U.S. was preparing for a massive invasion of the Japanese home islands.

 

The military had stockpiled vast supplies of weapons and munitions on the island of Okinawa. Some sources claim that with Vice-governor Laurence Rockefeller's assistance most of the armaments were sold to the leader of Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh, for something like one U.S. dollar and Ho’s "goodwill." One might wonder why these expensive and critical military supplies were "given" to the North Vietnamese. 

 

To answer that question we have to go to an almost unknown study in the 1920's prepared by a man named Herbert Hoover, later to become President of the United States. The study showed that one of the world's largest oil fields ran along the coast of the South China Sea right off French Indo-China, now known as Vietnam. This was before offshore drilling had been invented and before a man named George Herbert Walker Bush was to become the CEO of a world-wide offshore drilling company.       

 

In 1945, Vietnam was still a colony of the French. Laurence Rockefeller, it appears, had given the extensive store of weapons to Ho Chi Minh with the hope that Vietnam would drive out the French so that Standard Oil would be able to take over the as yet undeveloped offshore fields. In 1954, Vietnamese General Giap finally defeated and drove out the French at Dien Bien Phu with weaponry provided by the U.S. However, Ho Chi Minh reneged on the deal since he could read too, and he was well aware of the Hoover resource report and knew there was a vast supply of oil off the Vietnamese coast.

 

In the 1950's a method of undersea oil exploration was perfected which used small explosions deep in the water and then recorded the sound echoes bouncing off the various layers of rock below. The surveyor could then determine the exact location of the arched salt domes which hold the accumulated oil beneath them. But if this method were used off the Vietnam coast on property Standard didn't own or have the rights to, the Vietnamese, the Chinese, the Japanese and probably even the French would quickly run to the United Nations and complain that America was stealing the oil, and that would shut down the operation.

 

In 1964, after Vietnam was divided into North and South, and the contrived Gulf of Tonkin incident, several U.S. aircraft carriers were stationed offshore of Vietnam and the 'war' was started. Every day jet planes would take off from the carriers, bomb locations in North and South Vietnam, and then using normal military procedure when returning would dump their unsafe or unused bombs in the ocean before landing back on the carriers. Safe ordnance drop zones were designated for this purpose away from the carriers.

 

Even close-up observers would only notice many small explosions occurring daily in the waters of the South China Sea and thought it was only part of the 'war.' The U.S. Navy carriers had begun Operation Linebacker One, and Standard Oil had begun its ten year oil survey of the seabed off of Vietnam. And the Vietnamese, Chinese and everybody else around, including the Americans, were none the wiser. The oil survey hardly cost Standard Oil a nickel, the U.S. taxpayers paid for it.

 

~Marshall Douglas Smith,  Black Gold Hot Gold

     
So twenty years later and 57,000 Americans and half a million Vietnamese dead, Standard Oil had enough data and the war in Vietnam could end. Nelson Rockefeller's personal assistant, Henry Kissinger, represented the U.S. at the Vietnam/Paris Peace talks and won a Nobel Peace Prize in the bargain.

 

After the dust had settled from the war, Vietnam divided their offshore coastal area into numerous oil lots and allowed foreign companies to bid on the lots, with the proviso that Vietnam got a percentage of the action. Norway's Statoil, British Petroleum, Royal Dutch Shell, Russia, Germany and Australia all won bids and began drilling within their areas. Strange it was that none of them struck oil. However, the lots which Standard Oil bid for and won proved to have vast oil reserves. Their extensive undersea seismic research appears to have paid off.

 

Unfortunately, Big Oil's greed has not abated a whit. The American and British rulers have a new imperialistic strategy by which they hope to gain total control of the world's energy supplies and the strategic Eurasian land mass. First, they sell armaments to a regime (for example, Panama, Iraq, Yugoslavia/Kosovo, Afghan/Pakistan/Taliban Mujaheddin, Saudi Arabia). Then, they demonize the regime to which they sold the armaments and declare war on it (e.g. Panama Invasion, Gulf War, UN Kosovo war, Afghanistan war, Iraq War). After the war, they station permanent military bases in the country and use the military bases to control the energy resources in the surrounding countries. Current U.S. foreign policy is governed by the doctrine of "full-spectrum dominance": the U.S. must control military, economic and political developments everywhere.

 

If you want to rule the world, you need to control oil. All the oil. Anywhere.

 

~Monopoly, by Michel Collon

 

This new strategy began with the Panama invasion, next created the so-called Gulf War, continued with the UN-sanctioned war in the Balkans, and now expands with the new wars against terrorism (Afghanistan, the Philippines, Iraq, and beyond). On January 20, 2001, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that he was willing to deploy U.S. military forces in "another 15 countries" if that is what it takes to combat terrorism. The reason the so-called "War Against Terrorism" began in Afghanistan is because it is critical to the U.S.-British rulers' plans to control the Caspian Sea area oil and gas.

 

The UN-sanctioned war in the Balkans was all about oil and the pipeline easement for Caspian Sea oil to Western European markets through Kosovo to the Mediterranean Sea. When Yugoslavia refused to play ball with the International Monetary Fund, the U.S. and Germany began a systematic campaign of destabilization, even using some of the veterans of Afghanistan in that "war." Yugoslavia was broken up into compliant statelets, and the former Soviet Union was contained. The outcome: the de facto U.S. occupation of Kosovo--where America built its largest military base since the Vietnam War

 

The Caspian Sea area has proven oil reserves of fifteen to twenty-eight billion barrels plus estimated reserves of 40-178 billion, a total of 206 billion barrels--16 percent of the earth's potential oil reserves (compared to Saudi's 261 billion barrels of oil and America's own 22 billion barrels). Even at today's low prices, that could add up to $3 trillion in oil. With the Saudi regime tottering--an aging king about to die, widespread internal corruption creating calls for revolutionary overthrow--and a new source of oil and gas in the Caucasus, the Standard Oil suzerainty is looking to create a new regime in Saudi Arabia and develop a new center of operations in Southern Asia--think Iraq.

 

The huge oil and gas reserves in the Caspian Sea must either be moved west to European markets or south to Asian markets. The western route is to move oil from Chechnya, across the Black Sea and through the Bosporus to the Mediterranean, but the narrow Bosporus channel is already clogged with oil tankers from the Black Sea oil fields. An alternate route would be to move the tankers from the Black Sea, bypassing the Bosporus, up the Danube River and then through a very short pipeline across Kosovo to the Mediterranean at Tirana, Albania. However, that process was stopped by the Chinese who have supplied and armed the Albanians, as a client state, since 1949.

 

The other difficulty with the western route is that Western Europe is a tough market, characterized by high prices for oil products, an aging population, and increasing competition from natural gas. Furthermore, the region is fiercely competitive, now being serviced by oil from the Middle East, the North Sea, Scandinavia, and Russia. Western Europe is not a very attractive market, because substantial infrastructure would have to be developed to bring that oil from the Caspian to an already overly-competitive European market.

 

The only other ways to get Caspian Sea oil and gas to Asian markets is through China, which is too long a route, or through Iran, which is politically and economically inimical to U.S.-Standard Oil objectives.

 

As soon as the Soviets discovered the vast Caspian Sea oil fields in the late 1970's, they attempted to take control of Afghanistan to build a massive north-south pipeline system to allow the Soviets to send their oil directly through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean seaport. The result was the decades long Soviet-Afghan war. The Standard Oil-influenced U.S. government saw the danger of a Russian north-south pipeline and the CIA trained and funded armed terrorist groups, including Osama bin Laden, who defeated the Soviets in the late 1980's.

 

 The Russians then tried to control the flow of oil and gas through its monopoly on pipelines. The Southern Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union--Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan--saw through this Russian monopolistic ploy and began to consult with Western companies.

 

The Standard Oil-influenced U.S. government now plans to thrust further along the 40th parallel from the Balkans through these Southern Asian Republics of the former Soviet Union. The U.S. military has already set up a permanent operations base in Uzbekistan. The so-called anti-terrorist strategy is clearly designed to simultaneously consolidate control over Middle Eastern and South Asian oil, and contain and neutralize the former Soviet Union. With that strategy, Afghanistan is exactly where they need to be.

 

Russia, realizing its weaker position vis-à-vis the United States, has been making noises as if it fully agreed with the U.S. incursions in Afghanistan. But Russia has joined the Shangahi Cooperation Organization (SCO) which includes China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Takijistan and Uzbekistan. China is using the SCO to try to align Russia economically and politically towards China and northeast Asia. Russia's membership in the SCO is an attempt to maintain its traditional hegemony in Central Asia. The underlying rationale of the SCO is the control of its members' enormous reserves of oil and gas.

 

Despite the misgivings of Russia, China, India, or any other nation, Afghanistan and Iraq will now become the base of operations in destabilizing, isolating, and establishing control over the South Asian regimes and the Middle-East. [Note that Iran stands between Iraq and Afghanistan and you can understand why bush included Iran in the "Axis of Evil."] After the conquest of this area is complete and the permanent military posts are set up, they will begin construction of a pipeline through Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan to deliver petroleum to the Asian market.

 

UNOCAL, the spearhead for Standard Oil interests, has been trying to build the north-south pipeline through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Indian Ocean for several decades. In 1998, the California-based UNOCAL, which held 46.5 percent stakes in Central Asia Gas (CentGas), a consortium that planned an ambitious gas pipeline across Afghanistan, withdrew in frustration after several fruitless years. The pipeline was to stretch 1,271 km from Turkmenistan's Dauletabad fields to Multan in Pakistan at an estimated cost of $1.9 billion. An additional $600 million would have brought the pipeline to energy-hungry India.  

 

In the spring of 2001, Halliburton, Vice President Dick Cheney's company, signed a major contract with the State Oil Company of Azerbaijan to develop a 6000-square-meter marine base to support offshore oil construction in the Caspian Sea. The base will be used to assist Halliburton's catamaran crane vessel, the Qurban Abbasov, in upcoming offshore pipe-laying and sub sea activities, according to a statement the company released May 15, 2001.

 

UNOCAL cut off its earlier agreement with the Taliban in 1998 when it became clear that the Taliban could not control all of Afghanistan and provide a stable political environment for a north-south pipeline construction project. It was likely at this juncture that a new "war against terrorism" ploy was conceived by the Standard Oil-influenced U.S. government. The "war against terrorism" in Afghanistan has come to a hiatus, with war-lords once again ruling the country, and the Bush administration has put their own man, Karzai, in power to control Afghanistan.

 

Karzai was a top adviser to UNOCAL during the negotiations with the Taliban to construct a Central Asia Gas (CentGas) pipeline from Turkmenistan through western Afghanistan to Pakistan. Karzai is the leader of the southern Afghan Pashtun Durrani tribe. A member of the mujaheddin that fought the Soviets during the 1980s, Karzai was a top contact for the CIA, maintaining close relations with CIA Director William Casey, Vice President George Bush, and their Pakistani Inter Service Intelligence (ISI) Service go-between. After the Soviet Union left Afghanistan, the CIA sponsored the relocation of Karzai and a number of his brothers to the U.S.

 

The real motives for the Bush administration's war in Afghanistan are clear for all to see. The U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan, Wendy Chamberlain, met with Pakistan's oil minister, Usman Aminuddin, in January, 2002 to continue plans for the north-south pipeline, encouraging the construction of Pakistan's Arabian Sea oil terminus for the pipeline.

 

President Bush says our military will continue its presence in Afghanistan, which means that while the U.N. forces serve as a paramilitary police force, U.S. soldiers will be guarding the construction of the north-south pipeline.

 

To assure that the pipeline project will proceed apace, the Afghani-American Zalmay Khalilzad, a previous member of the CentGas project, became President Bush's Special National Security Assistant. Khalilzad has recently been named presidential Special Envoy for Afghanistan. Khalilzad is a Pashtun and the son of a former government official under King Mohammed Zahir Shah. Along with being a consultant to the RAND Corporation, he was a special liaison between UNOCAL and the Taliban government. Khalilzad also worked on various risk analyses for the project under the direction of National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, a former member of the board of Chevron.

 

Now that the Afghanistan portion of the "War on Terrorism" is concluded--with permanent U.S. military bases in Uzbekistan and Afghanistan in place--where next will the Standard Oil-influenced U.S. government look to gain further control over oil in the world? Coincidentally, most of those places are in countries which have been branded as harborers of terrorists: Iraq, Syria, Iran, and South America, among others.

 

Bush Sr.'s Gulf War in 1991 resulted in securing access to the huge Rumaila oil field of southern Iraq by expanding the boundaries of Kuwait after the war. This allows Kuwait, controlled by Standard Oil, to double its prewar oil output.

 

Iraq, which recently discovered an oil field in its western desert, is widely regarded as having more oil than Saudi Arabia once its deposits are developed. Prior to the 2003 U.S. pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, Iraq was producing 3 million barrels a day, funneling most of it to world markets through a United Nations-monitored program that directed the proceeds to food and medicine for the Iraqi people. Saddam Hussein was still exporting his oil to Syria, which was glad to resell Iraqi oil as if it were Syrian. The United States was one of Syria's biggest customers, because it liked the low sulphur content of Iraqi oil, according to Nimrod Raphaeli, publisher of the Middle East Economic News, a Washington-based newsletter. Iraq earned $1.5 billion a year from oil smuggling and oil sales outside UN controls, through Syria, Turkey, and Jordan, as well as by ship down the Gulf.


Beginning in September of 2001, the Bush regime threatened to include Iraq in its "War on Terrorism." Any incursion into Iraq had to deal with the reality that American companies, such as Cheney's Halliburton and G.E. were making billions in Iraq by selling them goods and services. Also, the difficulty that the eradication of the Saddam Hussein regime would seriously compromise America's establishment of bases on the Arabian peninsula on the pretext of protecting poor Arab sheikhs against the Iraqi Evil Monster.

 

Prior to the 2003 Iraq war, Saddan was desperately trying to ingratiate himself with the Gulf Arab Cooperation Council (GCC) members: Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to gain support for the lifting of the U.N. sanctions against it. Russia, Iraq's closest U.N. Security Council ally and a major beneficiary of contracts to purchase Iraqi oil and to sell Iraq humanitarian supplies, was demanding "a comprehensive settlement" of the sanctions issue, including steps leading to lifting the military embargo against Iraq. On January 24, 2002, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov made a formal statement that Moscow was opposed to any U.S. military operation against Iraq.

 

Russia's Lukoil Oil Company and two Russian government agencies had a 23-year contract to develop Iraq's West Qurna oil field. By the terms of the contract, Lukoil was to get one half, Iraq one quarter, and the Russian government agencies were to get one quarter of the oil field's 667 million tons of crude, potentially a $20 billion deal. Iraq still owed Russia at least $8 billion from the old cold war days when Russia armed Iraq, considering it a client state. Is it any wonder that Russia opposed Bush's war on Iraq?

 

But because of United Nations sanctions on Iraq, Lukoil had not pumped a drop from West Qurna since it won drilling rights in 1997. In 2001, Saddam gave Russia $1.3 billion in oil contracts under the United Nations oil-for-food program that allowed Iraq to sell oil to buy supplies to help Iraqi civilians. In September, 2001, Saddam announced plans to award Russian companies another $40 billion in contracts as soon as United Nations sanctions were lifted.

 

In February 2002, Russia's foreign minister, Igor S. Ivanov, said that Russia and Iraq saw eye to eye on questions of extremism and terrorism and that the American-backed sanctions against Iraq were counterproductive and should be lifted. He then emphasized that Russia solidly opposed "spreading or applying the international antiterror operation to any arbitrarily chosen state, including Iraq."

 

The 2003 Standard Oil-Bush junta war against Iraq ended all the prior Iraqi agreements with nations such as Russia, Germany, and France. The opposition by these Eurasian nations to Dubya's pre-emptive attack on Iraq was understandable--and Dubya's rush to war with Iraq now makes sense.

 

Also to be considered in any plans to extend the Standard Oil/Bush oil imperialism is China's growing interest in supporting Middle-East nations in their struggle against the U.S. During Jordanian King Abdallah II's January, 2002 visit to China, Chinese President Jiang Zemin said that China wanted stronger ties with Arab countries to help promote peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Yeah, sure, that's the reason China wants to put its foot into the Middle East, to promote peace. China has supplied military weaponry to Pakistan and may intervene if the Standard Oil/Bush imperialists continue to expand their empire in the Middle East.

 

But the Standard Oil/Bush imperialists don't concern themselves with the threat of China in the Middle East. They've seized control of Iraq's oil and now have their eye on Syria's and Iran's oil as well. We're now in phase two of the war on terrorism: invading countries that Bush says harbor terrorists, with the real intent to seize those countries' energy sources. And since U.S.-British a.k.a. Standard Oil imperialism now--since 9/11--results in the killing of American civilians, we can say that the next phase of the war on terrorism will soon be at a theater near you.

 

U.S. soldiers are now guarding the north-south pipeline as it's built in Afghanistan. In the meantime, the hypocrisy of Bush's "War on Terrorism" is apparent for all to see in Colombia where Bush proposes to spend $98 million to protect Occidental Petroleum's 480-mile-long pipeline which runs from Colombia's second-largest oil field to the Caribbean coast. The $98 million will follow the $1.3 billion the U.S. has already given to Colombia, ostensibly to fight the "drug terrorists." In 2001, the Cano Limon pipeline was closed for 266 days, due to holes blasted in it. The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) rebels have blown holes in the pipeline for the past fifteen years, resulting in 2.5 million barrels of spilled oil oozing into Colombia's rivers and streams, about ten times the amount of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska.

 

If Bush enters this 38-year old conflict in Colombia which has resulted in 40,000 deaths in the past decade, he'll be involving the U.S. in a dead-end power struggle among FARC, the Cuban-inspired National Liberation Army (ELN), ultra-right paramilitary groups and the U.S.-supported fascist government. The excuse for spending U.S. taxpayers' money in Afghanistan was that Bin Laden was responsible for the September 11th attacks. Now the only pretext for spending taxpayers' money in Colombia is to combat the FARC and ELN "terrorists" who only threaten U.S. oil company resources, not American lives.

 

Invading Colombia follows the British-U.S. oil imperialism pattern: going where the oil is. According to the U.S. Department of Energy, Colombian oil production rose from only 100,000 barrels per day in the early 1980s to approximately 844,000 barrels in early 1999 -- an increase of nearly 750 percent. Colombian oil exports to the United States have also risen sharply, and today Colombia is this country's seventh largest supplier of petroleum. Colombia harbors large reserves of untapped oil and natural gas, possibly as much as 20 billion barrels (and Venezuela has 73 billion barrels in proven reserves); hence Colombia--and its oil-rich neighbor countries--become one of many new oil imperialism targets. The United States imports more oil from Colombia and its neighbors, Venezuela and Ecuador, than from all of the Persian Gulf.

 

A revealing feature of the South American "War on Terrorism" is that, unlike the Taliban and al Qaeda, the Bush administration is not destroying the numerous South American drug terrorists. Why? Because the Bush administration and its plutocratic controllers are at the center of the $1.5 trillion per year in U.S. cash transactions that result from the international drug trade.

 

A drug terrorist, like a Carlos Lehder, a Pablo Escobar, an Amado Fuentes, a Matta Ballesteros or a Hank Rohn, constantly has something like ten billion dollars of useless illegal money that he has to put in a cooperative bank or business venture that will launder it for him. The drug lord is then more than happy to loan the laundered money at five percent interest to underwrite the large corporations and crooked politicians throughout the world.

 

Wall Street and the Bush administration depend on the South American drug barons for hundreds of millions of dollars for corporate income and election campaign finances. For every million dollars of increased sales or increased revenues that a company like Enron realized from a buyout, the stock equity of the one per cent who control Wall Street increases twenty to thirty times.

 

 In June, 1999, Colombia's president Andres Pastrana arranged for Richard Grasso, head of the New York Stock Exchange, to meet with Raúl Reyes, the head of FARC finances, in the cocaine-producing DMZ of Colombia. The two were caught in an infamous embrace that saw very little exposure in the media.

 

Grasso, however, wasn't the only American big-money representative to cozy up to Colombian drug terrorists. Several months after Grasso's visit, two wealthy members of the American Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) captured world headlines by flying to a FARC redoubt in the Colombian jungles to palaver with the terrorists' founder, 70-year-old Manuel Marulanda. After meeting with the communist drug terrorist, James Kimsey, co-founder and chairman emeritus of America Online Inc., and Joseph Robert, head of J.E. Robert Company, a global real estate empire, flew to Bogota to consult with Colombian president Pastrana. On returning to Washington, the CFR representatives said they were convinced that Marulanda and FARC are sincere in their claims of wanting peace and economic reform.

 

It may seem hard to believe that U.S. banks and corporations would be involved in laundering drug money from South American terrorists. Even the supine media have had to report some of this criminal behavior. A 1983 ABC News "Close up" on drugs and money laundering fingered Citibank, Marine Midland, Chase Manhattan, and most of the 250 banks and branches in Miami. When Ramon Milian Rodriguez, a top accountant and money launderer for the Medellin Cartel, testified before a Senate subcommittee in 1988, he implicated a veritable "Who's Who" in U.S. finance:

 

Citibank

Citicorp

Bank of America

First National Bank of Boston

 

 "In every instance," said Rodriguez, "the banks knew who they were dealing with...." The evidence indicates that Rodriguez is right; the banks often play dumb, but they know what they're doing.

 

A 1998 investigation of Citibank by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) revealed that Citibank had secretly transferred between $90 million and $100 million of alleged drug money for a Mexican client, using many creative methods to camouflage the movement of the assets.

 

Oil imperialism rests on our continued dependence on oil, which not only threatens the future of humanity through prolonged and bloody conflict, but through another even more insidious threat--climate change and ecological collapse.

 

Oil imperialism flourishes when a supine press cheers and a groveling congress grants unconstitutional authority to the oil-saturated Demonic Cabal. Despite our grief and rage over terrorist atrocities, a "war on terrorism" cannot be fought with bombs and missiles alone. Citizens throughout the world must awaken to this new U.S.-British imperialism and reclaim their governments. Once democracy is re-established, we can start a war on homelessness, poverty, and economic and political inequalities, and begin work to achieve ecological sustainability for our planet.

 


Bibliography

 

Brisard, J, and Dasquie, G. Forbidden Truth, 2002

 

Rashid, Ahmed, Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia, 2000

Pilger, John, Hidden Agenda

 

Klare, Michael, Resource Wars

 

Yergin, Daniel, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power, (1991)

 

Pepe Escobar, The War for Pipelineistan, Asian Times (1/26/02)


British Petroleum (BP) Chairman Lord Browne has complained that state-owned petroleum companies from
Asia where skewing the oil market. He claimed that oil producing nations could be best served if only they made deals with private international companies like BP. He said the Asian firms benefited from government-to-government deals, which did not always make economic sense. Lord Browne would have been right if we did not have things like the BTC pipeline. This project is evidence to the fact that Big Oil can leverage funds that exist beyond their balance sheets. Why else would the U.S. government pour billions of dollars of American taxpayer's money setting the stage for a largely British project in which American companies have only marginal investments?

Billed as "the project of the century", the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline is now complete.

BP says it cost $3.6 billion* to build - making it the costliest oil pipeline in the world. The pipeline starts in Azerbaijan, goes through Georgia and ends in Turkey, connecting the landlocked Caspian Sea with the Mediterranean. The ideal route to take Caspian oil out to its markets would have been through Iran or Russia but this is something the West has been keen to avoid.

 

The U.S. has established an airbase near Ceyhan at Incirlik. A massive military deployment around the pipeline has been planned.

 

The 1,770 kilometer-long pipeline will take 6 months and 10 million barrels of oil to fill from end to end. Oil filled at Baku will take 10 days to reach Ceyhan. The pipeline is expected to carry 1 million barrels a day from the Caspian sea. But, where is this oil going to come from?

 

Production in the entire Caspian region currently stands at only 2 million barrels per day (bpd). The Caspian sea has proven reserves of 33 billion barrels of oil, making it the third largest in the world. (The Persian Gulf has over 700 billion barrels.) Turkey has no oil. Georgia has lots of mineral water.† And, Azerbaijan? Well, it is suspected that Azeri authorities vastly overestimated their reserves and sold the idea to the Americans, who seemed to have swallowed it whole. Either that or the Americans have some secret information about the oil reserves that they are not telling anyone.

 

To make the pipeline more viable, Azerbaijan offered to let Russia send its oil through the pipeline. To add pressure, Turkey placed restrictions on Russian oil tankers that currently take oil across the Black Sea through the narrow Bosphorous straits. Russia has so far refused to join the project adding that its oil will bypass the Bosphorous with the new Burgas pipeline, which runs over Bulgaria to Greece. Thus, the only other country that can make the project viable is Kazakhastan. However, President Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhastan is a cool player who does not place all his eggs in one basket. He likes to keep a safe distance from both Moscow and Washington. Today, companies from Russia, North America, and Europe are already working in Kazakhastan. There is a possibility that Kazakhastan's oil and gas go East to China. If it did, then the BTC pipeline would be doomed. So, many observers wondering if the U.S. is giving shape to a "color revolution" for Kazakhastan.

 

A study of the color revolutions of Eastern Europe and Central Asia are a good way to measure how much money the U.S. has spent to help make Western oil companies like BP richer. During elections in Ukraine, the U.S. embassy was seen in great action. Special camps were conducted to train journalists in "democratic values." The U.S. financed the exit polls, which predicted a huge win for the pro-Western candidate Yushchenko. When Yushchenko lost, the "pro-democracy activists" from the youth movement called Pora (It's Time) (which again was financed by the U.S.) effected the "Orange Revolution." Elections were conducted again and the pro-US candidate Yushchenko won. In Azerbaijan, a "good dictator" (pro-American) Haidar Aliyev was in power when the pipeline talks began.

 

When Haider Aliyev died, his son Ilham Aliyev succeeded him in an election that was rigged but to the U.S. was fair. But, things are not going very well for him. The U.S. is now financing opposition groups fashioned on the Ukrainian Pora. Central Asian republics lying in the direction of a possible Kazakhastan-China route are now facing serious threats. A radical Islamic movement led by Hizbut-Tehrir (HT) and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) is operating from the Ferhana valley whose stated aim is to create a pan-Central Asian caliphate covering Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan. Hizbut Tehrir operates from Whitehall, London. Britain has refused to ban it although Germany has already done so. Interestingly, the group is now headed by an IT professional named Jalaluddin Patel.



 

* - The project was financed by the International Finance Corporation (IFC), which is owned by Western countries.

 

‡ - They literally coached him - no metaphor is used here.

 

† - The pipeline goes through the Borjomi region of Georgia. Borjomi is home to Georgia’s mineral water industry, which contributes 10% percent of Georgia’s exports. It is also the largest employer and contributor to the budget in this economically depressed region. While the BTC consortium has pledged to adopt extra safety measures in the Borjomi region, such as thicker pipes and additional block valves, members of the mineral water industry worry that the market for mineral water is dependent on image and reputation, and that the Borjomi brand could suffer irreparable harm, even if there is no spill or leakage. Georgia is known throughout the former Soviet Union (FSU) for its mineral water resources. The Borjomi brand of mineral water has been distributed throughout the FSU for more than a century and is widely recognized. There have been reports that the BTC did not really fulfill the promises in their haste to complete the project ahead of schedule. The Georgian government is powerless to do anything because as part of the agreement with the BTC consortium it has ceded sovereignity over the narrow stretch of land where pipeline has been laid. This has prompted many commentators to refer to the BTC pipeline as Pipelineistan.

 

UPDATE: Last year (2005), China acquired PetroKazakhastan, a Canadian company with operations in Kazakhastan. China also built the 988-kilometer-long Atasu-Alashankou pipeline a record 10 months to carry the oil from the oil fields of PetroKazakhastan.



Landlocked and resourceless
Afghanistan is a victim of the ‘Great Game’. The only chance for real progress for Afghans came when the communists came to power. Unfortunately, Americans decided to repay the USSR for their defeat in Vietnam and decided to make an example out of Afghanistan. They first lured the Russians into invading Afghanistan. Then, they plunged the country into civil war by supporting the Mujahideen. They also encouraged poppy cultivation to buy arms and ammunition for the Mujahideen. (The narcotics ended up in North America and Europe -, the authorities there knew all about it but were powerless to do anything.) When the Russians left, the only thing most Afghan men knew was either fighting or cultivating poppy. With Russians gone, America lost interest in Afghanistan and the country returned to anarchy. But the possibilities of American oil and gas pipelines (built by Unocal) bypassing Iran and Russia brought them back. No wonder that a former advisor to Unocal (Mohammed Karzai) is the President of the country today. Another former advisor to Unocal (Zalmay Khalilzad) was until recently the American ambassador to Afghanistan. (Interestingly, this guy is now in Iraq as the U.S. Ambassador.) American support for democracy is simply an alternative arrangement. They need a cover for unfettered exploitation. Why are they not supporting democracy in other countries in the Midddle East, say for example Saudi Arabia?


Appeasement of the Taliban


In 1989, the former
Soviet Union was forced to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan after fighting a prolonged guerilla war with the Mujahideen. The Mujahideen grew opium, which was then marketed in Europe and North America. Law enforcement agencies in these countries also turned a blind eye to the trafficking business. Proceeds from the trade were then used to buy weapons for the Mujahideen. The Russians left behind a government headed by the former intelligence chief Najibullah. The breakup of the Soviet Union made Najibullah's position weaker and he offered to step down in March 1992. This news triggered a wave of defections by Uzbek and Tajik militias, which were allied to his government. In April 1992, a prominent Mujahideen commander Ahmed Shah Masood (Lion of Panjshir valley) moved into Kabul. Najibullah then took refuge in the UN compound in Kabul. Between 1992 and 1996, Afghanistan was in semi-anarchy, as the country was carved into individual fiefdoms by the warlords.

In 1996, Unocal of the U.S. and Delta Oil of Saudi Arabia became interested in mineral wealth of Central Asian republics of the former Soviet Union. The ideal route to bring oil from the Caspian sea and gas from the Daulatabad gas field (in Turkmenistan) would have been via Iran. Because of US policy of isolating Iran, Unocal and Delta oil thought of building a pipeline via Afghanistan.

 

Unfortunately for them, Afghanistan did not have a strong regime in place, which could guarantee security for the pipeline. For this purpose, Pakistan created the Taliban with funds from Saudi Arabia and UAE. They took into their rolls thousands of Pasthuns who had enrolled in madrasas adjoining Afghanistan. Because these men had never taken part in war, they were secretly trained and led by officers from the Pakistani army. Arms and ammunition including tanks, howitzers, and other military vehicles were provided Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. In 1996, The Taliban crossed the border into Afghanistan. Initially, they were dismissed as a joke but in September 1996, they had captured Kabul.

 

However, the Taliban could not occupy all of Afghanistan. (They did occupy 90% of it at one time.) At one point when the Taliban was overstretched and the Northern Alliance was poised to attack, the Clinton administration dispatched UN envoy Bill Richardson and Assistant Secretary of State Karl Inderfurth to Afghanistan to broker a ceasefire and an arms embargo. While the Northern Alliance was being bamboozled, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan sent several planeloads of arms and ammunition to Kabul and managed to fully rearm the Taliban. Soon after, the ceasefire failed. This was six months before the US embassies in Africa were attacked and two months after al-Qaeda issued a declaration of jihad to "kill the Americans and their allies - civilian and military."

 

In 1998, the Al-Qaeda attacked U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Despite this, money continued to flow. Both the Clinton and the Bush administrations gave hundreds of millions of dollars to the Taliban under the guise of aid. As late as July 2001, Christina Rocca, the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia, met Taliban officials in Islamabad and announced $43 million in food and shelter aid, bringing to $124 million the U.S. contribution for that year alone. The U.S. government did not insist on knowing how the money was spent and the flow of dollars did not stop until the attacks on the World Trade Center occurred. It is quite possible that that American taxpayers' money was used to finance the attacks.

 

To save serious embarassment to the Bush administration, the U.S. media, led by the New York Times, Washington Post, Newsweek and others, has created a notion that the Taliban fought Soviet forces in Afghanistan by tracing its origins to the Mujahideen. The truth however is that the Taliban was not in existence at that time. Taliban was created to fight the Mujahideen, not the Soviets.


Taliban played host to top US officials including former
US assistant secretary of state for South Asia Robin Raphel, her successor Karl Inderfurth, deputy secretary for political affairs Thomas Pickering, and the then-US ambassador to the UN, Bill Richardson.

 

Within hours of Taliban's capture of Kabul, Washington moved quickly to announce that it would establish diplomatic relations with the Taliban government. However, the rash statement was quickly retracted. Afghanistan continued to be officially represented at the UN by the defunct government headed by Banruddin Rabbani and the Taliban greatly resented this. Robin Raphael went to the UN to lobby the international community to ignore the extremist threat posed by the Taliban and recognise the government headed by the group.

 

Contrary to popular belief, Afghanistan has significant oil and gas deposits. During the Soviets' decade-long occupation of Afghanistan, Moscow estimated Afghanistan's proven and probable natural gas reserves at around five trillion cubic feet and production reached 275 million cubic feet per day in the mid-1970s. Nonstop war since has prevent further exploitation, but that soon changes. According to the Houston Chronicle, the country may also have as much copper as Chile, the world's largest producer, and significant deposits of coal, emeralds, tungsten, lead, zinc, uranium ore and more.