UPDATE
- DECEMBER 14, 2010 RICHARD HOLBROOKE'S LAST
STATEMENT
BEFORE SURGERY, "YOU'VE GOT TO STOP THIS WAR IN AFGHANISTAN".
(1)
HOLBROOKE DEAD AT 69, WAS PHYSICALLY ATTACKED
BY HILLARY
CLINTON ACCORDING TO SEVERAL SOURCES.
Af-Pak War
Racket: The
Obama
Illusion Comes Crashing Down
By David DeGraw
The
economic elite have escalated their attack on the U.S. public by
surging military operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
As
Obama announced plans for escalating the war effort, it has become
clear that the Obama Illusion has taken yet
another horrifying turn. Before explaining how the Af-Pak surge is a
direct attack on the US public, let’s peer through the
illusion and look at the reality of the situation.
Now that the
much despised George W.
Bush is out of the way and a more popular figurehead is doing PR for
Dick Cheney’s right-hand military leader Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who
is leading his second AF-Pak surge now, and with long time Bush family
confidant Robert Gates still running the Defense Department, the
masters of war have never had it so good.
Barack Obama,
the anti-war candidate,
has proven to be a perfect decoy for the military industrial complex.
Consider all the opposition and bad press Bush received when he
announced the surge in Iraq.
Then consider this:
The Bush surge
in Iraq
deployed an extra 28,000 US troops. Under Obama,
back in March, a surge in Afghanistan,
that also further escalated operations inside Pakistan,
deployed an extra 21,000 troops. However, in an unannounced and
underreported move, Obama added 13,000 more troops
to that surge to bring the total to 34,000 troops. Obama actually
outdid Bush’s surge by 6000 troops and brought the overall number of US troops in Afghanistan
to 68,000, double the number there when Bush
left office.
Where
opposition was fierce to Bush’s
surge, barely any opposition was expressed during Obama’s surge. Part
of the reason for so little political and public backlash was the
cleverly orchestrated psychological operation to announce the beginning
of US
troop withdrawal from Iraq.
While the drawdown in Iraq
has been greatly exaggerated in the US
mainstream media, as of October, Obama still had 124,000 troops deployed in Iraq
(not counting private military contractors).
When Obama
casts the illusion of a 2011 withdrawal from Afghanistan, one just
needs look at the reality of the situation with the over-hyped
withdrawal in Iraq.
Now, with
Obama’s latest surge
announcement he will again be adding a minimum of another 30,000 US
soldiers. This means that Obama has now led a bigger surge than Bush…
on two separate occasions within the past nine months of his new
administration.
Obama has now
escalated deployments in the Af-Pak region to 98,000 US
troops. So in Af-Pak and Iraq, he will now have a total of 222,000 US
troops deployed, 36,000 more than Bush ever had - 186,000 was Bush’s highest total.
PRIVATE MILITARY AND NATO DEPLOYMENTS
The amount of
private military contractors deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan is rarely
reported on in the US
mainstream press, but a Congressional Research Service investigation
into this revealed that a record high 69% active duty soldiers
are in fact private mercenaries.
Although the
administration is yet to
disclose how many private mercenaries will be deployed in the latest
surge, it is believed that the 69% ratio will remain in tact.
The
Pentagon released a report showing that Obama already had a total of 242,657
private contractors in action, as
of June 30th. 119,706 of them in Iraq,
73,968 in Afghanistan,
with 50,061 active in “other US CENTCOM locations.”
Back in June,
Jeremy Scahill reported on these findings:
“According to new statistics released by the Pentagon, with Barack
Obama as commander in chief, there has been a 23% increase in the
number of ‘Private Security Contractors’ working for the Department of
Defense in Iraq in the second quarter of 2009 and a 29% increase in
Afghanistan….”
Plus, we must
mention, the immense
dangers of having private military contractors as 69% of our fighting
force. For those of you unaware, private military contractors are hired
from all over the world. Any former soldier, from any country, is
welcome to come and fight for a salary - a salary that is often
significantly more than what we pay our own US
soldiers.
These
mercenaries have a vested
interest in prolonging the war, for as long as there is a war, they
have a well paying job. So it is easy to infer that a significant
percentage of these contractors will not have the US soldiers, or US
taxpayers, best interests at heart.
Obama
continues to feed this out of
control private army by pouring billions of taxpayer dollars into shady
and scandalous companies like Blackwater, who recently changed their
name to Xe Services, because they destroyed their reputation by
committing numerous war crimes in Iraq.
A recent investigation by Jeremy Scahill revealed the extent to which Blackwater is involved in covert operations
inside Afghanistan and Pakistan. In some cases, Blackwater is
not working for the US,
but were hired by covert elements inside Pakistan.
When it comes to private contractors, the fog of war grows ominous,
exactly who is fighting for whom is unclear. The crucial factor is who
paid them the most that particular day.
The US
military can give them $1000 today, and an enemy can give them $1000
tomorrow, when you have people who fight for a payday and not for a
country, you get chaos. This leads to a breakdown in the chain of
command, effectively turning a military operation into a covert
intelligence operation, where you’re never really sure if the person
you are fighting with is on your side or not.
A federal
investigation by the Commission on Wartime Contracting in Iraq
and Afghanistan, revealed in June: “More than 240,000
contractor employees, about 80 percent of them foreign nationals, are
working in Iraq
and Afghanistan
to support operations and projects of the U.S.
military, the Department of State, and the U.S. Agency for
International Development. Contractor employees outnumber U.S.
troops in the region. While contractors provide vital services, the
Commission believes their use has also entailed billions of dollars
lost to waste, fraud, and abuse due to inadequate planning, poor
contract drafting, limited competition, understaffed oversight
functions, and other problems.”
Before this
latest surge, there were over 123,000 US and NATO troops in
the Af-Pak region, and 200,000 Afghan security forces, supporting the US
effort. According to US intelligence sources the total number of
Taliban and al-Qaida fighters in the region was estimated to only be
about 25,000, giving the US
led forces a minimum of a 12 to 1 troop advantage.
When you add
in estimated private soldiers, you get an approximate minimum of a 17
to 1 advantage.
Although Obama
opened his war speech by mentioning al-Qaida as the main justification
for this war, consider this AP report:
“national security adviser James Jones said last weekend that the
al-Qaida presence has diminished, and he does not ‘foresee the return
of the Taliban’ to power. He said that according to the maximum
estimate, al-Qaida has fewer than 100 fighters operating in Afghanistan
without any bases or ability to launch attacks on the West.”
Does it
seriously take a
surge of hundreds of thousands of troops to contain what amounts to
“less than 100″ al-Qaida members?
Any serious
war strategist will tell
you that the most effective way to combat the remains of the al-Qaida
network, is through an intelligence operation, and statistics prove
that escalating more troops into the region will only fuel further acts
of terrorism.
DRONE
DEPLOYMENTS
Speaking of
fueling hatred toward the US,
other than a huge troop increase, there has also been a sharp increase
in the use of unmanned drones. The New
Yorker reports:
“According to a just completed study by the New America Foundation, the
number of drone strikes has risen dramatically since Obama became
President. During his first nine and a half months in office, he has
authorized as many C.I.A. aerial attacks in Pakistan
as George W. Bush did in his final three years in office.”
The unmanned
drones have caused major controversy due to the high number of civilian causalities
they cause. However, as the study stated, the Obama Administration
continues to increasingly rely upon them.
So summing up
these statistics, we have
the most fierce and technologically advanced military force in history,
vastly outnumbering what amounts to be a ragtag army of peasant farmers
with guns, and our best option is supposed to be an increase in troop
levels?
Obviously,
something doesn’t add up.
After
thinking
about all of this, you begin to see through the smokescreen of what
this war is said to be about and get a glimpse of some of the sinister
forces at play here.
OVER EXTENDED TROOPS
With
the rise in deployments, the US
military is stretched to a breaking point. Obama is “deploying
practically every available US Army brigade to
war, leaving few units in reserve.”
As this war
enters its 9th year, many soldiers are forced into deploying on their 3rd or 4th combat tours, and
morale is fading fast.
The past year
has seen a dramatic increase in US
soldier deaths, with the number of wounded drastically rising as well. 928
US soldiers have died in Afghanistan
thus far, with last month being the deadliest
month since the start.
AP reports
that “nearly four times as many troops were injured in October as a
year ago. Amputations, burns, brain injuries and shrapnel wounds
proliferate in Afghanistan,
due mostly to crude, increasingly potent improvised bombs targeting U.S.
forces…. Since 2007, more than 70,000 service members have been
diagnosed with traumatic brain injury — more than 20,000 of them this
year…”
US
soldier suicides are also on the rise. In 2008, 197 army soldiers
committed suicide. Thus far in 2009, there have been 211 army suicides.
McClatchy recently reported: “An
Army task force has found that a growing number of soldiers serving in Afghanistan
are suffering from some kind of mental stress and is urging the
military to double the number of mental health professionals deployed
there. The study, conducted by the Army Mental Health Advisory Team,
found that soldiers’ morale in Afghanistan
is ’significantly lower’ than it was in 2005 and 2007 studies…”
As wounded
soldiers return from Afghanistan
and Iraq,
they are finding a healthcare system that is increasingly more
difficult and costly to get care from. In fact, 2,266 US veterans died in 2008 due
to lack of healthcare, and “researchers also found that, in 2008, 1,461,615 veterans between the
ages of 18 and 64 lacked insurance.”
“For the first
time in more than 35 years, the U.S.
military has met all of its annual recruiting goals, as hundreds of
thousands of young people have enlisted despite the near-certainty that
they will go to war.
The Pentagon…
said the economic
downturn and rising joblessness, as well as bonuses and other factors,
had led more qualified youths to enlist. The military has not seen such
across-the-board successes since the all-volunteer force was
established.…
‘We delivered
beyond anything the
framers of the all-volunteer force would have anticipated,’ Bill Carr,
deputy undersecretary of defense for military personnel policy, said at
a Pentagon news conference.
Overall, the
Defense
Department brought in 168,900 active-duty troops, or 103 percent of the
goal for the fiscal year….”
What we are
witnessing here with such high enlistment levels during this economic
crisis has many parallels to Germany
in the 1930’s. Just like the United States
now, the German economy in the 1930’s was devastated by an economic
crisis brought on by Wall Street. With rising unemployment and poverty,
German men turned to the military for income and health benefits that
their family severely needed. With over 25 million US
citizens unemployed and underemployed, over 50 million with no
healthcare, and over 50 million living in poverty, military service is
now a last resort for a growing number of desperate Americans as well.
The record-breaking enlistment numbers are expected to continue to rise
as the economy continues to decline.
“Such
a perfect democracy constructs its own inconceivable foe, terrorism.
Its wish is to be judged by its enemies rather than by its results.” –
Guy DeBord,
Comments On the Society of the Spectacle, 1988
The amount of
money necessary to keep the US military machine
growing has reached astonishing levels. Considering the increasing
amount of troops and contractors, the White House estimates that it
spends one million dollars per soldier, per year
in Afghanistan,
“not including the added expense of training and maintaining a security
force.”
According to
these calculations, 30,000
troops for this latest surge will add an additional $30 billion to the
annual budget, just in troop related costs. Also consider the price of
moving fuel around, AFP reports: “Moving soldiers and
supplies across the rugged Afghan landscape costs more than in Iraq,
with the military consuming 83 liters or 22 gallons of fuel per soldier
per day.” The Hill adds:
“Pentagon officials have told the House Appropriations Defense
Subcommittee a gallon of fuel costs the military about $400 by the time
it arrives in the remote locations in Afghanistan
where U.S.
troops operate.”
Other than in Iraq
and Afghanistan,
you have an unprecedented number of military bases spread throughout
the world. Officially there are “900 military facilities in 46 countries
and territories (the unofficial figure is far greater). The US
military owns or rents 795,000 acres of land, with 26,000 buildings and
structures, valued at $146bn. The bases bristle with an inventory of
weapons whose worth is measured in the trillions and whose killing
power could wipe out all life on earth several times over. The official
figures exclude the huge build-up of troops and structures in Iraq and Afghanistan over the
past decade, as well as secret or unacknowledged facilities in Israel, Kuwait, the Philippines
and many other places. In just three years of the Iraq and Afghanistan
wars, £2bn was spent on military construction.”
There was
public outcry when Bush
drastically raised an already bloated military budget to record highs.
But in comes the admired anti-war candidate Obama, in the middle of a
severe economic crisis, and what happens? Obama drastically increased
Bush’s record budget to $651 billion in 2009. Yes, during a severe
economic crisis, Obama actually increased Bush’s budget. US
military spending is higher than the rest of the world combined. The
2010 budget, which doesn’t account for war-related spending yet, is
already set to grow to $680 billion.
However, these
budget numbers are
deceiving because the Obama Administration has been getting better at
hiding extra spending in other budget items. The actual total 2009 budget was over $1 trillion.
And much like
the staggering giveaway
to the economic elite in the Wall Street banker bailout, no one is
really sure where a significant percentage of this money is actually
going. On September 10, 2001, Donald Rumsfeld announced that $2.3 trillion in military spending was
unaccounted for. As CBS News reported: “$2.3 trillion -
that’s $8,000 for every man, woman and child in America.”
At that time,
Pentagon auditors admitted that they couldn’t account for a staggering 25% of all military spending. And
the budget has exploded since then, with fewer people accounting for
where this money is going.
Once again,
just like the $23.7 trillion that went into
propping up the Wall Street elite - which totals $80,000 for every American - you
have trillions more in taxpayer money vanishing and very few regulating
and accounting for it.
Economists
Joseph E. Stiglitz and Linda
J. Bilmes, in their book “The Three Trillion Dollar War,” report that
military spending on the war in Iraq
has created over a trillion dollars in loses to the US
economy.
With the
country already operating at a record $12 trillion deficit, members of
congress don’t know how we can afford increasing an already huge war
expenditure.
WEAPONS SALES
In this
struggling economy, weapon sales have become one of America’s
most booming businesses. US
weapon sales have hit a record level under the Obama administration. Foreign
Policy In Focus reports:
“In fiscal
year 2008, the foreign
military sales program sold $36 billion in weapons and defense
articles, an increase of more than 50% over 2007. Sales for the first
half of 2009 reached $27 billion, and could top out at $40 billion by
the end of the year. In contrast, through the early 2000s, arms sales
averaged between $8-13 billion per year….
But last year,
the United
States sold arms or
military services to well over 100 nations….
… the majority
of U.S.
arms sales to the developing world went to countries that our own State
Department defined as undemocratic regimes and/or major human rights
abusers. And over two-thirds of the world’s active conflicts involved
weapons that had been supplied by the United States.”
Selling all
these weapons, especially during the biggest global financial crisis,
will lead to one thing… terrorism.
Given these
statistics, it shouldn’t be
a surprise to hear how US taxpayer dollars are still funding the
Taliban. Prior to the 9/11 attacks, the Taliban government was funded
by the US
taxpayer. In fact, the Taliban still receives a significant portion of
their funding courtesy of the US
taxpayer. As The Nation recently reported: “It
is an accepted fact of the military logistics operation in Afghanistan that the US
government funds the very forces American troops are fighting. And it
is a deadly irony, because these funds add up to a huge amount of money
for the Taliban. ‘It’s a big part of their income,’ one of the top
Afghan government security officials told The Nation in an interview.
In fact, US military officials in Kabul
estimate that a minimum of 10 percent of the Pentagon’s logistics
contracts–hundreds of millions of dollars–consists of payments to
insurgents.”
As former CIA
Station Chief John Stockwell explained: “Enemies are necessary for the
wheels of the US
military machine to turn.”
However, they
all seem to be missing
the point, before explaining this in more detail, let me start by
referring you to a quote from a journalist who had firsthand experience
operating inside a militaristic empire:
“The war is
not supposed to be winnable, it is supposed to be continuous…
all for the hierarchy of society… The essential act of war is
destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of
human labor. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the
stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which
might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence,
in the long run, too intelligent… it helps to preserve the special
mental atmosphere that a hierarchical society needs. War… is now a
purely internal affair.” — George Orwell
“Come you masters of war
You that build all the guns
You that build the death planes
You that hide behind walls
You that hide behind desks
I just want you to know,
I can see through your mask…”
Many of the
weapons manufactures and
private military contractors are seen as the primary war profiteers.
For an example of grotesque war profiteering, let’s look at Dick
Cheney’s former company Halliburton. In a report headlined: “U.S. War Privatization Results in Billions
Lost in Fraud, Waste and Abuse,” Jeremy Scahill reports on
KBR, a Halliburton subsidiary.
“KBR has been
paid nearly $32 billion
since 2001. In May, April Stephenson, director of the Defense Contract
Audit Agency, testified that KBR was linked to ‘the vast majority’ of
war-zone fraud cases and a majority of the $13 billion in ‘questioned’
or ‘unsupported’ costs. According to Agency, it sent the inspector
general ‘a total of 32 cases of suspected overbilling, bribery and
other violations since 2004.
According to
the Associated Press,
which obtained an early copy of the commission’s report, ‘billions of
dollars’ of the total paid to KBR ‘ended up wasted due to poorly
defined work orders, inadequate oversight and contractor
inefficiencies.’
KBR is at the
center of a lethal scandal involving the electrocution deaths of more
than a dozen US
soldiers, allegedly as a result of faulty electrical work done by the
company. The DoD paid KBR more than $80 million in bonuses for the very
work that resulted in the electrocution deaths.”
With numerous
scandals over KBR
operations, Halliburton ended it’s relationship with the company.
However, “Halliburton reported $4 billion in operating profits in
2008, while KBR recently said its first quarter revenues in 2009 were
up 27%, for a total of $3.2 billion.
Its sales in 2008 were up 33%, and according to the Financial Times,
the company had $1 billion in cash, no debt, and was looking for
acquisitions.”
Beyond these
blatant examples of war
profiteering, there are more insidious forces at play that most people
don’t see. These war profiteering companies are funded by the same
banks that have destroyed the US
economy.
Consider this
example concerning
Alliant Techsystems and Textron, two manufactures of cluster bombs, the
controversial civilian killing WMDs. The
Guardian reported:
“The deadly
trade in cluster bombs is
funded by the world’s biggest banks who have loaned or arranged finance
worth $20bn to firms producing the controversial weapons, despite
growing international efforts to ban them…
Goldman Sachs,
the US
bank which made £3.19bn profit in just three months, earned $588.82m
for bank services and lent $250m to Alliant Techsystems and Textron…
Last December
90 countries, including the UK,
committed themselves to banning cluster bombs by next year. But the US
was not one of them. So far 23 countries have ratified the convention.”
Before going
into further detail on how
these banks make a lion’s share of war profits, let’s look back at the
origins of these wars.
GEO-STRATEGIC OIL OPERATIONS
With all due
respect to people who have been force-fed Pentagon propaganda by the US mainstream
media, any serious observer of the Iraq
and Af-Pak wars knows that these are geo-strategic conflicts based on
controlling the world’s oil supply. Anyone in the “news” media who
tells you otherwise is either unaware of what is actually going on, or
is a well-paid propagandist working for the very people who profit off
of them.
ORIGINS OF THE IRAQ OCCUPATION: CHENEY ENERGY
TASK FORCE
As an AlterNet report put it:
“In January 2000, 10 days into President George W. Bush’s first term,
representatives of the largest oil and energy companies joined the new
administration to form the Cheney Energy Task Force.”
Secret Task
Force documents that were
dated March 2001, which were obtained by Judical Watch in 2003 after a
Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, contained “a map of Iraqi oilfields,
pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as two charts detailing
Iraqi oil and gas projects…” They also had:
“… a series of
lists titled ‘Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts‘
naming more than 60 companies from some 30 countries with contracts in
various stages of negotiation.
None of
contracts were with American
nor major British companies, and none could take effect while the U.N.
Security Council sanctions against Iraq
remained in place. Three countries held the largest contracts: China, Russia and France
— all members of the Security Council and all in a position to advocate
for the end of sanctions.
Were Saddam to
remain in power and the sanctions to be removed, these contracts would
take effect, and the U.S.
and its closest ally would be shut out of Iraq’s great oil bonanza.”
Project Censored highlighted a Judicial
Watch report that stated: “Documented plans of occupation and
exploitation predating September 11 confirm heightened suspicion that U.S.
policy is driven by the dictates of the energy industry. According to
Judicial Watch President, Tom Fitton, ‘These documents show the
importance of the Energy Task Force and why its operations should be
open to the public.’”
ORIGINS OF THE AFGHANISTAN OCCUPATION:
“STRATEGY OF THE SILK ROUTE”
Up until 9/11,
oil companies, with the
help of the Bush administration, were desperately trying to work out a
deal with the Taliban to build an oil pipeline through Afghanistan.
One of the world’s richest oil fields is on the eastern shore of the
Caspian sea just north of Afghanistan.
The Caspian oil reserves are of top strategic importance in the quest
to control the earth’s remaining oil supply. The US
government developed a policy called “The Strategy of the Silk Route.”
The policy was
designed to lock out Russia,
China
and Iran
from the oil in this region. This called for U.S. corporations to
construct an oil pipeline running through Afghanistan.
Since the mid 1990s, a consortium of U.S.
companies led by Unocal have been pursing this goal. A feasibility
study of the Central Asian pipeline project was performed by Enron.
Their study concluded that as long as the country was split among
fighting warlords the pipeline could not be built. Stability was
necessary for the $4.5 billion project and the U.S.
believed that the Taliban would impose the necessary order. The U.S.
State Department and Pakistan’s
ISI, impressed by the Taliban movement to cut a pipeline deal, agreed
to funnel arms and funding to the Taliban in their war for control of Afghanistan.
“Until 1999 U.S.
taxpayers paid the entire annual salary of every
single Taliban government official.”
The U.S., Saudi and Pakistan
intelligence alliance that created the terrorist financing bank BCCI
reunited to facilitate the rise of the Taliban. BCCI was a US
intelligence bank, which served as the financing arm for the creation
of the al-Qaida network. BCCI was involved in many covert operations
throughout the 80’s. They played a pivotal role in arming Saddam in Iraq, creating the Iran
hostage crisis, even selling drugs through Manuel Noriega and other top
drug dealers. BCCI gave nuclear weapons to Pakistan, which led to North Korea and Iran
obtaining pivotal nuclear secrets as well. BCCI was also a driving
force behind the Savings and Loan scandals that were a precursor to our
current economic crisis.
“The alliance
between American
capitalism and Islamist fundamentalism is not limited to the creation
of the Taliban; it also produced business ventures designed to extract
favours from the new regime. To strengthen its bargaining power with
the newly formed Islamist state, Unocal joined the Saudi Delta Oil
Corporation to create a consortium called CentGas. Delta Oil is owned
by the bin Mahfouz and al-Amoudi families [pivotal BCCI players], Saudi
clans which have strong links with Osama bin Laden’s family…. Mahfouz
has been sponsoring charitable institutions used as fronts for bin
Laden’s associates through the National Commercial Bank, which his
family controls….
Naturally, as
soon as George W. Bush was elected president, Unocal and [UK’s]
BP-Amoco… started once again to lobby the administration, among whom
were several of their former employees. Unocal knew that Bush was ready
to back them and resumed the consortium negotiations. In January 2001,
it began discussions with the Taliban, backed by members of the Bush
administration among whom was Under Secretary of State Richard
Armitage, who had previously worked as a lobbyist for Unocal. The
Taliban, for their part, employed as their PR officer in the US Laila
Helms, niece of Richard Helms, former director of the CIA and former US ambassador to Iran.
In March 2001, Helms succeeded in bringing Rahmatullah Hashami, Mullah
Omar’s adviser, to Washington….
As late as August 2001, meetings were held in Pakistan
to discuss the pipeline business….
While
negotiations were underway, the US
was secretly making plans to invade Afghanistan.
The Bush administration and its oil sponsors were losing patience with
the Taliban; they wanted to get the Central Asian gas pipeline going as
soon as possible. The ‘strategy of the Silk Route’
had been resumed….
Paradoxically,
11 September provided Washington
with a casus belli to invade Afghanistan
and establish a pro American government in the country. When, a few
weeks after the attack, the leaders of the two Pakistani Islamist
parties negotiated with Mullah Omar and bin Laden for the latter’s
extradition to Pakistan
to stand trial for the 11 September attacks, the US
refused the offer….
In November
2001… Hamid Karzai was elected [Afghanistan’s]
prime minister… Yet very few people remember that during the 1990’s
Karzai was involved in negotiations with the Taliban regime for the
construction of a Central Asian gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through
western Afghanistan
to Pakistan.
At that time he was a top adviser and lobbyist for Unocal… during the
anti-Soviet jihad, Karzai was a member of the Mujahedin. In the early
1990’s, thanks to his excellent contacts with the ISI, he moved to the US
where he cooperated with the CIA and the ISI in supporting the
Taliban’s political adventure.”
So it is not
all that surprising to see
recent reports revealing that Hamid Karzai’s drug kingpin brother,
Ahmed Wali Karzai, is also on the CIA payroll.
With this, a
new Senate investigation just revealed evidence that Donald Rumsfeld
made a conscious strategic decision to let Bin Laden escape.
AFP reports:
“Osama bin
Laden was within the grasp
of US forces in late 2001 and could have been caught if then-defense
secretary Donald Rumsfeld hadn’t rejected calls for reinforcements, a
hard-hitting US Senate report says….
It points the
finger directly at
Rumsfeld for turning down requests for reinforcements as Bin Laden was
trapped in caves and tunnels in a mountainous section of eastern Afghanistan
known as Tora Bora.
‘The vast
array of American military
power, from sniper teams to the most mobile divisions of the marine
corps and the army, was kept on the sidelines,’ the report said.”
So now that we
see how these wars are
driven by oil, let’s look at how the oil industry is benefiting from
them. Since the invasion, the industry has experienced record profits
across the board, setting new profit records quarter after quarter,
year after year, as these wars rage on.
IRAQI OIL DEALS
With Exxon and
Shell just signing new oil contracts in Iraq, it’s obvious why
there are still over 100,000 troops in Iraq.
In a Daily Mirror report headlined, “Oil Billions and Weapons of Mass Deception
In Iraq,” they report on the new oil deals:
“Exxon-Mobil
and Royal Dutch Shell won the development rights of a massive oil field
— West Qurna near Basra
in Iraq’s
south. The two oil giants hope to boost daily production from the
current 300,000 barrels to 2.3 million barrels a day at West Qurna, which the ousted and
hanged Iraqi President Saddam Hussein wanted to give to a Russian oil
company.
Last month,
British Petroleum (BP) and
the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) won a contract to
develop another oil field. The invitation to China to join the
plunder of Iraq
is probably a payoff by the US so
that this Asian economic powerhouse and rising military power would not
rock the pirates’ boat.”
Let’s look
back over the years since the start of the War on Terror, here’s a 2005
MSNBC report:
“By just about
any measure, the past
three years have produced one of the biggest cash gushers in the oil
industry’s history. Since January of 2002, the price of crude has
tripled, leaving oil producers awash in profits. During that period,
the top 10 major public oil companies have sold some $1.5 trillion
worth of crude, pocketing profits of more than $125 billion.
“This is the
mother of all booms,” said
Oppenheimer & Co. oil analyst Fadel Gheit. “They have so much
profit, it’s almost an embarrassment of riches. They don’t know what to
do with it.
So an oil
field that was profitable
with oil selling for $20 a barrel is much more profitable with oil
trading around $60…. Since January 2002, stocks of major oil companies
have gained 88 percent; during that period the Standard and Poor’s 500
index has gained less than half as much.
Oil producers
have also given investors a raise by gradually increasing the dividends
paid out to shareholders.”
“Since George
Bush became President in
2001, the top five oil companies in the United States have recorded
profits of $464 billion through the first quarter of 2007:
Oil giant
makes corporate history by booking $11.7 billion in quarterly profit;
earns $1,300 a second in 2007.
Exxon Mobil
made history on Friday by reporting the highest quarterly and annual
profits ever for a U.S.
company, boosted in large part by soaring crude prices.
Exxon, the
world’s largest publicly
traded oil company, said fourth-quarter net income rose 14% to $11.66
billion, or $2.13 per share. The company earned $10.25 billion, or
$1.76 per share, in the year-ago period.
The profit
topped Exxon’s previous
quarterly record of $10.7 billion, set in the fourth quarter of 2005,
which also was an all-time high for a U.S.
corporation.”
“Exxon Mobil
finished a roller-coaster year in the oil markets with an all-time
record $45.2 billion in profits…
The world’s
most far-flung oil giant
broke its own record for corporate profits in a year that saw oil
prices climb to $147 a barrel in July… Exxon Mobil still beat analysts’
expectations by registering $7.82 billion in profits, or $1.55 a share,
for the final quarter of the year. Exxon Mobil and Chevron’s revenue
combined for 2008 exceeded the gross domestic product of all but 16 of
the world’s nations, according to Bloomberg.
Royal Dutch
Shell, Europe’s
largest oil firm… posted a $26.3 billion profit for the year.”
Once again,
beyond these blatant
examples of war profiteering, there are more insidious forces at play
that most people don’t see. When you take a closer look at the oil
profits, you see the true driver and ultimate beneficiary of these
profits are none other than the same people who benefited the most from
the stock market collapse and the ensuing $23.7 trillion taxpayer “bailout.”
As the
Washington Post reported, the
huge oil profit margins were the result of the soaring price of a
barrel of oil, reaching “$147 a barrel in July.”
The InterContinental Exchange (ICE)
In 2000,
Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and several oil companies “founded the InterContinental
Exchange (ICE)…. ICE is an online commodities and futures
marketplace. It is outside the US
and operates free from the constraints of US laws. The exchange was set
up to facilitate ‘dark pool’ trading in the commodities markets.”
A Congressional investigation into this
exchange
found that these companies were fraudulently inflating the price of oil
by executing “round-trip” trades where one company would sell shares in
oil to another company who would then sell the shares right back. This
would drive the price of oil to however high they wanted it to go to.
“No commodity ever changes hands. But when done on an exchange, these
transactions send a price signal to the market and they artificially
boost revenue for the company. This is nothing more than a massive
fraud, pure and simple.”
So when oil
was selling at $147 a barrel, the actual worth was most likely closer
to half that price. Phil’s
Stock World summed up the situation:
“How
widespread are ’round-trip’
trades? The Congressional Research Service looked at trading patterns
in the energy sector and this is what they reported: This pattern of
trading suggests a market environment in which a significant volume of
fictitious trading could have taken place. Yet since most of the
trading is unregulated by the Government, we have only a slim idea of
the illusion being perpetrated in the energy sector.
DMS Energy,
when investigated by
Congress, admitted that 80 percent of its trades in 2001 were
’round-trip’ trades. That means 80 percent of all of their trades that
year were bogus trades where no commodity changed hands, and yet the
balance sheets reflect added revenue…
…the
InterContinental Exchange; that
is, the online, nonregulated, nonaudited, nonoversight for manipulation
and fraud entity run by banks in this country….
Under
investigation, a
lawyer for J.P. Morgan Chase admitted the bank engineered a series of
’round-trip’ trades with Enron….
ICE… turned
commodity trading into a
speculative casino game where pricing was notional and contracts could
be sold by people who never produced a thing, to people who didn’t need
the things that were not produced. And in just 5 years after commencing
operations, Goldman Sachs and their partners managed to TRIPLE the
price of commodities.
Goldman Sachs
Commodity Index funds
accounted for $60Bn out of $100Bn of all formula-managed funds in 2007
and investors in the GSCI lost 15% in 2006 while Goldman had a record
year. John Dizard, of the Financial Times calls this process ‘date
rape’ by Goldman Sachs…
It is not
surprising that a commodity
scam would be the cornerstone of Goldman Sach’s strategy. CEO Lloyd
Blankfein, rose to the top through Goldman’s commodity trading arm J
Aron, starting his career at J Aron before Goldman Sachs bought them
over 25 years ago. With his colleague Gary Cohn, Blankfein oversaw the
key energy trading portfolio. According to Chris Cook: ‘It appears
clear that BP and Goldman Sachs have been working collaboratively – at
least at a strategic level - for maybe 15 years now. Their trading
strategy has evolved over time as the global market has developed and
become ever more financialised. Moreover, they have been well placed to
steer the development of the key global energy market trading platform,
and the legal and regulatory framework within which it operates….
Before ICE,
the average American family
spent 7% of their income on food and fuel. Last year, that number
topped 20%. That’s 13% of the incomes of every man, woman and child in
the United
States of America,
over $1Tn EVERY SINGLE YEAR, stolen through market manipulation. On a
global scale, that number is over $4Tn per year - 80 Madoffs! Why is
there no outrage, why are there no investigations. Well the answer is
the same - $4Tn per year buys you a lot of political clout, it pays to
have politicians all over the world look the other way while GS and
their merry men rob from the poor and give to the rich on such a vast
scale that it’s hard to grasp the damage they have done and continue to
do to the global economy.”
The congressional investigation into
ICE concluded that they couldn’t do anything about it because the
exchange was set up offshore.
How convenient!
So here we can
see, that behind almost
all of our societal problems and suffering, you have this small elite
group profiting on destruction and misery at record highs.
When Gold
Sachs CEO Llyod Blankfien says that he is doing “God’s work,” one has to wonder,
who is the God he is praying to?
Famed two-time
Congressional Medal of Honor recipient US Brigadier General Smedley D. Butler
accurately summed up the situation when he said:
“I spent 33 years in the Marines, most of my time being a high-class
muscle man for big business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short,
I was a racketeer for Capitalism…. The general public shoulders the
bill. This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed
gravestones, Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes.
Economic instability. Back-breaking taxation for generations and
generations.”
WHAT IT ALL COMES DOWN TO…
In the global
economy, the economic elite don’t need the US
public anymore. When you see Obama taking trips to meet with the leader
of China,
and having his first official White House State Dinner in honor of the
Prime Minster of India,
you should know that the elite have moved on. There are billions of
people in just these two countries that they believe can do all the
work we do for much less pay. It is a race to the bottom, and we are
considered obsolete to technocratic leaders who think it is better to
hire cheaper workers in foreign lands.
As the US
continues to collapse, the technocrats have already moved on to the
next country to rape and pillage. The economic elite don’t have a home
country, to them the entire globe is theirs, and the majority of the US
can collapse into poverty for all they care, and that’s exactly what
they want to happen.
The US
working class is the biggest threat to them and they want us eliminated.
As the IMF
would say, there has been a structural adjustment program
in place, and the US
working class is obsolete.
When you
understand this, you can understand how the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan are wars
against the US
public. Wars that weaken and drain the US
working class of vital resources and social safety nets.
In the overall
picture, the
technocratic elite see everyone as a number on a spreadsheet. To them
you are what your economic net worth says you are. Considering this
perspective, most in the US
public have much more in common with an Afghanistan
farmer than the billionaires on Wall Street. And the billionaires have
put us in the same category as those in Afghanistan.
To them it really doesn’t matter if it’s an American life ended or an
Afghani life ended in the war, as long as the profits keep coming in…
they can care less.
Common sense
and statistics demonstrate
that the more troops you send into war, the higher the causality count
will be, and the more costs will rise, leading, of course, to higher
profits.
So as the
Obama illusion and the
motives behind this war become exposed, and the massive theft by the
economic elite becomes known to a critical mass, the elite are ramping
up their psychological operations on the US
public by turning up their mainstream media distraction machine.
With the
healthcare debate losing
steam, and the people starting to understand that the final bill will
do little to create much needed change, and as “health care reform” is
exposed as another gift to insurance company executives, and as
unemployment rates remain high, the Economic
Death Squad vitally needs some new distractions.
Never mind the
criminals on Wall Street: It’s time to… Wag the Dog and
Shake the Mohammed
By Wag
the Dog, I am of course referring to the old political trick
of distracting public consciousness away from a
crisis by starting, or in this case drastically escalating, a war.
Don’t worry
about the $23.7 trillion of
public wealth that was given to Wall Street as a reward for destroying
the economy, we are at war and it’s time for you to support
our troops.
Ah, yes,
another racket to pile up more of the economic poor.
Barack
W. Obama, once again, bows to… the elite… and serves up yet
another gift by sending more US
citizens to the Af-Pak region.
50
million US citizens are already living in dire straights, so
what’s the big deal if you just throw another 220,000 US
lives onto the fire, not to mention the millions of Afghani, Pakistani
and Iraqi lives.
But a war in a
distant land just isn’t enough, is it?
American
public opinion has long been saturated in the distraction of
war, and given the severity of the economic crisis, the
elite policy makers figured another surge in Eurasia
just wouldn’t be enough of a distraction.
So the psychological operations PR
department has decided to also Shake the Muhammad.
Yes, bring the 9/11 “mastermind,” Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, back to the
scene of the crime and create a New Yorkmedia
frenzy. Now that’s a distraction!
Not only will
it cause a media frenzy, it will also reaffirm public opinion in the
war effort… win, win!
I don’t know
about you, but as someone
who grew up a New Yorker and spent the last five years of my life
living three blocks from Ground Zero, I have to say, take your psychological
operations to a different location.
You are going
to have the “9/11
mastermind” in a courtroom right around the corner from the biggest
terrorists of all… Wall Street.
Khalid Sheikh
Mohammed, Llyod
Blankfien, Jamie Dimon and John Mack are all going to be in one place,
at the same time! We will have the “9/11 mastermind,” Goldman Sachs, JP
Morgan and Morgan Stanley all in the same zip code… HELLO!
Can you say
here comes the next Timothy McVeigh?
Yes, the USA…
is an insane asylum! So just Wag the Dog and Shake the
Mohammed.
As a growing
number of American lives
are directly negatively impacted, media propaganda operations will lose
their ability to confuse and distract. Studies of societal breakdowns
prove that having such a large population experiencing severe and
prolonged economic decline will result in violent outbrakes.
Other than the
50 million US civilians
living in dire straights, what will happen as thousands of bitter
soldiers and US intelligence agents — who have given their lives to
these wars, only to return home to find an economy in ruins and a healthcare
system that has thrown them overboard
— begin to make these connections and understand that a small
group of men on Wall Street are at the root of their suffering?
Well, some
former military and
intelligence agents, including a growing number of current serving
members, have already made this connection, and they are organizing,
training and strategizing tactical operations. They are factions inside
a quickly growing - heavily armed - militia movement that now numbers
over 200 active cells, within the US.
The mainstream
press gives some passing
attention to the fringe factions that make threats against Obama, but
the more experienced soldiers understand that he is just a figurehead
and they have connected all these dots and have come to the conclusion
that this war is actually a war to create profits for the economic
elite at the expense of the US public.
Llyod
Blankfein, Jamie Dimon and John Mack can arm themselves
and hire all the security they can get, but will it actually keep them
safe when you have a population of millions living in dire straights as
a direct result of their actions? At this point, even their own
security members may be conspiring against them.
The Obama
illusion is fading fast. Every time you see through it, you get a
glimpse of them. The Economic
Death Squad is exposed under the bright light of inspection
and investigation.
Take a look at
many of the major
problems facing us today, as a country and as a species, and then you
will understand that these problems exist because the economic elite
are profiting off of them.
Obama is just
their mask, an illusion
to pacify the masses. The economic crisis and the wars have now
shattered this illusion - it has come crashing down… upon us.
It has become
clear that an opinion has emerged among a growing segment of the United States
population: If the government will keep pouring money into banks and
war, and won’t stop the theft of US
taxpayer money by holding accountable those responsible for it, WE
MUST.
And the
question that arises after that: Can it be done non-violently?
I certainly
hope it can.
However, this
growing segment of the population uses strong rhetoric and is prepared
to take up arms.
With over 200
active militia cells, who
are equipped with weapons, training and strategizing, the government
must take swift action to rein in the economic elite. Otherwise, we are
heading to war, not in a distant foreign land, within the US.
The economic
elite are well aware of
the threat of a violent uprising within US borders. US Army documents
have revealed that strategic plans are already formed for this
situation. Chris Hedges explains:
“The military
must be prepared, the document warned, for a ‘violent, strategic dislocation inside the
United States,’
which could be provoked by ‘unforeseen economic collapse,’ ‘purposeful
domestic resistance,’ ‘pervasive public health emergencies’ or ‘loss of
functioning political and legal order.’ The ‘widespread civil
violence,’ the document said, ‘would force the defense establishment to
reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and
human security.’
‘An American
government and defense
establishment lulled into complacency by a long-secure domestic order
would be forced to rapidly divest some or most external security
commitments in order to address rapidly expanding human insecurity at
home,’ it went on.
‘… this might
include use of military force against hostile groups inside the United States.
Further, DoD [the Department of Defense] would be, by necessity, an
essential enabling hub for the continuity of political authority in a
multi-state or nationwide civil conflict or disturbance,’ the document
read.
In plain
English… this translates into
the imposition of martial law and a de facto government being run out
of the Department of Defense. They are considering it. So should you.”
We could have
a situation where the government deploys private soldiers, mostly
foreign nationals, on US
soil to fight against US citizens. Blackwater and DynCorp already had active duty soldiers deployed within the US
when Hurricane Katrina hit.
In New Orleans,
they were essentially a foreign occupying force.
An irate
majority of the responses have
consistently stated that they have repeatedly contacted their
representative through multiple forms of communication, and no action
was taken. A growing segment of the US
population has now lost all faith in our government
and they are on the verge of taking violent action.
Personally, I
believe that non-violent
action is a much more strategic and effective move. We are 99% of the
population, and the enemy is less than 1%. We are a sleeping giant;
they are a small group of clueless greed-addicted people who
desperately cling to the Administration, Treasury, Fed and a few other
firms like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan.
If we can take
action on a mass
non-violent scale, the rule of law and economic justice can be
obtained. In our nation’s history, the stakes have never been higher.
If we cannot organize a mass movement to non-violently oppose outright
theft, then violence will ultimately tear our nation apart.
The question
on my mind: Can we swiftly mobilize such a heavily propagandized
population to take mass non-violent action?
A growing
population does not believe we can do so, and is on the verge of
launching a heavily armed insurgency.
So in the
months ahead, while they are Wagging the Dog and Shaking
the Mohammed, the US
public vitally needs to understand that the stakes have
never been higher.
And the clock
is ticking . . .
Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the
author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research
on Globalization. The contents of this article are of sole
responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on
Globalization will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or
incorrect statements contained in this article.
The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research
articles on community internet sites as long as the text &
title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be
displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or
other forms including commercial internet sites, contact:
www.globalresearch.ca
contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been
specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such
material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in
an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and
social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit
to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for
research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted
material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission
from the copyright owner.