Hamid Karzai, the Afghan gas pipeline and 911 - connections?

In the "Why be Diplomatic with N.Korea???" thread Raven mentioned that the Taliban had refused permission for an oil pipeline to be constructed in Afghanistan.

The curious thing is, Hamid Karzai, the current Afghan president, was indeed formerly connected to an American oil corporation as I stated, in reply to Raven, in the same thread. He was <em>not</em>, as I mistakenly said, actually a director of this company with a place on the board in that capacity, but in fact acted as an advisor to the company, specifically with regard to the construction of a gas pipeline (not an oil pipeline) running from the former Soviet republic of Turkmenistan, through Afghanistan and Pakistan and terminating at the Indian Ocean. As Mike also pointed out in the NK thread the company he worked for was Unocal, based in California and it was this proposed gas pipeline that the then Taliban government in Afghanistan refused to give permission for. This information about Karzai is easily verified btw, just do a Google search on "Karzai oil" and plenty of sources come up, including reliable ones.

The possible connection with all this to the terrible events of 911 are that a regime change in Afghanistan was achieved just a few months after that horrifying day, as a part of the "War on Terror." Karzai was, of course, then installed as the new President of Afghanistan. A little TOO convenient perhaps ... ?

There are plenty of discussion groups and web sites on the internet (not neccessarily "reliable" ones I hasten to add,) that promote all sorts of theories about the many unanswered questions surrounding the events of September 11th. Many people seem to believe in some kind of conspiracy by the US government to have an excuse to go into Afghanistan, get rid of Mullah Omar and replace him with Karzai. The most bizarre theory being promoted is that the the US government actually engineered the 911 attacks themselves in order to bring this about. (see also the other thread I started "Mystery of Flight 77 Pentagon crash - where's the Boeing???")

Any comments anyone?

I don't believe the government had anything to do with 9/11. Many people who worked in the twin towers were furious that our open media were basically telling how the towers could be brought down after the failed attempt in 1993. There's a high price one pays for freedom of the press.

Yes it is an eerie coincidence. Then again, Karzai was probably made leader because he was familiar with the United States. Besides, oil is a good alternative source of money as opposed to drugs.

9/11 pushed the American economy into recession, there's no reason why anyone would do that. As for Mr Karzai, from what I know of him he seems to be a a whole lot better than the Taliban, so I don't mind too much if he has a few slight oil connections.

However, if Saddam's replacement is from an oil company then that'll be a coinincidence too far for me

Of coarse the next leader of Iraq will be an oil man. Why should Bush change now.:|

As Sunev said that the media told how the twin towers could be taken down after the '93 attempts, in Grand Forks, North Dakota, I awoke a few weeks after Sept. 11th to find the GF Herald with a map of GF on the cover saying the top ten spots for terrorists to strike and why, such as the schools (obviously), a few factories, and the Anhydrous Amonia tanks located for the sugarbeat and potato farms. Brilliant media indeed, make the enimies job a little more easier why don't ya, might as well place the bombs so they just have to push the buttons.

Frov

Another thing is the media seem to be obsessed with telling terrorists exavtly where to get teh material for a dirty bomb and what the effect would be. They probably wouldn't have thought of it for themselves.

I'm in agreement that the media hasn't always made the smartest decisions. Putting someone in power in Afghanistan that is familiar with how the U.S. works as well as oil and Islamic culture seems smart to me. Putting someone similar in power in Iraq would also make sense to me. War is always fought because one country wants something the other has. Its always been that way, and will probably never change.
At the end, the country with the most toys wins.;)

...because we must all meet our maker.

As for the mass exploitation of oil rich lands which on the face of it have a name, an identity such as Iraq, Afganistan, Saudi etc., we must never forget that these identities were created via the League of Nations after World War One. Prior to the war, these vasts amount of land belonged to the Ottoman Empire hence, were simply known as the Ottomon Kingdom and NOT Iraq, or Saudi etc., which then leads me to my point that the West is not at war with the countries...because after all, it was the West that created these countries...they are at war with the people who no longer want to be a part of the Western Agenda and want freedom from the West's Shackles via the IMF and World Bank.
What you have to remember is that prior to Kharzai's (puppet) government, the Taliban ruled Afghanistan WAS the only country in the world not have taken out a loan with the IMF or World Bank, even though for many years, the IMF and World bank had tried to incentivise the rulers of the Taliban regime with money beyond their wildest dreams. However, the reason why the Taliban Leaders refused to accept the money was because they were too busy implementing 'Shariah' Law, the Islamic Law which forbids Usuary (interest based loans) at all levels. Although this worried the West, they seemed to be content with the passive atitude of the Taliban leadership even though the Taliban refused to become bonded in slavery to the West. However, during 1999, with the passing away of a very senior 'mole' of the west within the Taliban Regime who made sure every major decision of the Taliban was reported back to the Establishment, the West began to Wrrry. And why shouldn't they? It was only a matter of time (June 2000 start) before construction of the oil pipeline would begin in Afgahnistan as per the deal with the old Taliban Regime, and the leader of the new regime was very reluctant to give the West the go-ahead it needed.
Something had to be done, and that something had to involve a large scale bombing campaign. But how could the West justify the Bombing of Afghanistan under the then present ( and unvolatile) government.
They had to engineer a reason...
and I am sure we all know by now what that reason is ...yes September 11th.

I rest my case.

you know, weishaupt786, your insights are VERY intriguing. not exactly far off of conspiracy theories, but tends to tie in with alot of what I'm finding to be the "truth". of our existence. as slaves. to a larger power. unseen. but without enough evidence to prove it.

where do i go to learn more? besides the Chatham house? am reluctant to believe in the freemason/Illuminati front.

"What is the Matrix?"

I am curious..why do you think it is important that the leader of Afghanistan is familiar with the workings of the United States?

Why should the leader of a country on the other side of the world be bothered about the US?

But then you agree that we go to war to take something we want from someone who has it, so i am not sure if you are agreeing that he was only put in place to serve the US, and not the people of Afghanistan?

Not flaming, It just seems you were saying the war and the regime change was not suspicious or wrong, but then you admitted that war was for greed?

Not necessarily for greed but to the victor goes the spoils of war. After a conflict or war with a country, you think we don't want someone friendly to the West in power? What would be the point if not?

I don't think the government had anything to really do with 9/11. There was talk about invading Afghanistan prior to 9/11, however. I do think Bush has a major tie in this pipeline. I don't think it CAUSED 9/11, but I think Bush and his cohorts took advantage of 9/11 and invaded Afghanistan to set up shop.

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>After a conflict or war with a country, you think we don't want someone friendly to the West in power? What would be the point if not? [/quote] Why to help the starving, oppressed civilians of course. You can't criticize a country for being undemocratic and then appoint its ruler.

Its just the interim ruler Mike. Until they can democratically elect someone we...er...I mean they want.

[copernicus]

Hello My name is Dean Roger Ray and I am a Democratic sympathiser and I am on the list. I have been denied work hunted down by government narcs hired to put pressure on anyone resistant to the Communism fast approaching. My site reveals other victims of a group of social misfits that have circumvented a system that once protected us all. The transformations have been subtle but still very noticable if we just take a look. Paris is on fire I am not sure wether or not that is part of the secret societies plan. I studied carefully the things posted on this site and have found that the rising oil prices can manipulate the same effect that is happening to paris now. I have been threatened by a man named John he has pretended to be several characters including a Italian mafia gangster. My Computer has been assaulted many times and I am thankful I can still fix it enough I can write to you now. I believe we should watch carefully what happens in paris as it is a precurser to what is happening here. I realize early on that teen gangs are used to stalk anyone who speaks against the system now in place. Crime has risen as the police pull back their protectionand become more and more corrupt. I have witnessed a man named Robert L Thompsett train people off the street and offer them jobs in the police force. More and more jobs that needed dedication are offered up as gifts to reward a soon to be starving public. Gangs tear away small things like parking stalls while agents tap on walls to keep the target tired. Once again tyranny has engulfed the western countries and if they succeed in their plans we will suffer and this time we will suffer without television. They have already shut down essential news services and the odd time we here of good reporters being chased down by police. They own the media the television you tune in everyday and all they need to do to set us off is to just turn it off. One day they will and we will suffer the same fate as paris blindly destroying each other.

[Defiant Noquisi]

Copernicus, welcome to the forums. Unfortunately I've had to edit your post. The posting of personal websites and invitations to join them are not allowed within the forums. Please review the rules located at the bottom of the page HERE for more information. Also, two of the links you posted did not work.

Again welcome to the forums. Your participation is appreciated and I'm sorry to have had to edit your posts.

[MacRasta]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Hello My name is Dean Roger Ray and ........ Paris is on fire I am not sure wether or not that is part of the secret societies plan.

What do you mean with Paris is on fire?

Originally Posted by copernicus

I studied carefully the things posted on this site and have found that the rising oil prices can manipulate the same effect that is happening to paris now.

WTFunk are you talking about?

Originally Posted by copernicus

I have been threatened by a man named John he has pretended to be several characters including a Italian mafia gangster. My Computer has been assaulted many times and I am thankful I can still fix it enough I can write to you now.

Aahhh yess, now I see....

Originally Posted by copernicus

I believe we should watch carefully what happens in paris as it is a precurser to what is happening here.

You mean the thing that is finished now?

LeMac

[Defiant Noquisi]

Being anal, the fires are occuring outside of Paris, in the poorer sections of the suburbs.

[MacRasta]

Originally Posted by Defiant Noquisi

Being anal, the fires are occuring outside of Paris, in the poorer sections of the suburbs.

In fact, the fires where occuring all around France (even some cars in Monte Carlo) and Belgium, where, I said, because it's been a few days now that it's finished. Still some 120 cars a day that are torched in France, but that's the normal rate.

These fires started because 2 guys where running for the cops and hid in an electricity cabin, (you guys probably know what I mean) and got fried...all of a sudden a minister, can't remember his name right now, gets the blame for it all by those thugs, resulting in torched cars all over France. Well, that's a fun thing to do when you're bored...yeeeh, yipie, and so on...but after a week or two....And they said all over the news that they would continue and things would get worse untill that minister (shite, still can't remember his name) demissionised...

Well that didn't happen and now 10 Maroccans I think are ready to be exported to their home country, even people with legitimate I.D.'s, like green cards, as punishment for their deeds...And no one reacts anymore....it was fun but now it's boring.

Copernicus here, tells us that oil is the cause...and yes, he's right, a lotta oil in a car to burn!!

MacTouFeuTouFlame

[stewey]

Actually, Taliban was OK with the pipeline, but it was nixed for a totally different plan.