The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Welcome to Orwell's world 2010 > Comments

Welcome to Orwell's world 2010 : Comments

By John Pilger, published 15/1/2010

Only the terminally gormless remain true to the Obama brand of 'world peace'.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All
What does it take for people to wake up? Hamid Kazai the puppet leader,used to work for UNOCAL[Union OIL] They want to get an oil pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the ocean.

The Bin Laden family were friends of the Bush family.Bin laden is said to have died at Tora Bora in late 2001.Note the sham photos they put out since,that looking nothing like Bin Laden.They wanted keep the terror campaign going so the people of the West would beg to have their freedoms curtailed under the ruse of being safe.

John Pilger has a reputation for honesty and integrety.I'm not a socialist but respect him for the courageous stand he has taken.There is no way he would sully his reputation based on a lie.

It is time for the rest of us to look at all the evidence.Only the small secrets need be hidden,since the really big ones are hidden by our incredulity.

If they can lie to us at Copenhagen about a secret agenda for a world Govt and try to cover up fraud at climategate,what else are they covering up?
Posted by Arjay, Sunday, 17 January 2010 6:57:29 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
People who disbelieve Pilger are not looking very hard.There are many ref on the WEB about the fact that the Foreign minister of Pakistan Niaz Naik did say well before 911 that the USA had plans to invade Afghanistan.

This is a BBC ref. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1550366.stm
Naik said that no doubt after the WTC bombings the attack would proceed within weeks.He did not refer to them as plane crashings but bombings.Did the foreign minister have a motive for lying or did the USA and it's allies have greater motive for lying?

Just because the wider corporate media do not publish something,it doesn't mean it didn't happen.This is why Murdoch wants to have more control over the internet, ie user pay basis, and Kevin Rudd wants to censor it under the guise of controling pornography.Obama is jumping up and down about cyber terrorism. "Weapons of mass disruption"

Before the US invasion of Afghanistan the Taliban had stopped the heroine production and there was a world wide shortage.Now under the US, production of heroine is at record levels.The US could quite easily destroy the poppy plantations but now the Taliban have money for war to buy from international arms dealers.
Posted by Arjay, Sunday, 17 January 2010 9:31:03 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Stezza,

If you don't believe that International Diplomacy works in strange ways or believe that we are told the complete and utter truth about everything, here's something from July 2001 that was published in November 2001 -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/nov/01/afghanistan.terrorism

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0111/S00018.htm

Osama was already on the "Most Wanted" list for missile attacks in Somalia. They could have had him just before 911 if they wanted to.

Before this was leaked to Asian Media by the French Secret Service, there was a lot of anti-French sentiment coming from the US because of their reluctance to support the US invasion. Afterwards it strangely went quiet.

The plan that the US would have "troops on the ground in Afghanistan by October" was actually printed in the Sydney Morning Herald as a quote from Colin Powell on addressing business concerns over the stalled progress of the Unacol Pipeline across Afghanistan.
Of course that was before the 911 attack.
Posted by wobbles, Monday, 18 January 2010 1:09:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks for the links,

My point was that Pilger should cite supporting evidence himself, and I definitely do not "believe that we are told the complete and utter truth about everything. Especially by politicians (including Niaz Naik) or from intelligence organisations (including French Secret Service). Obviously we can only speculate over motives and goals.

However I have no doubt that USA had plans to invade Afghanistan prior to 9-11. As for the oil pipeline, is there any reason why any government of Afghanistan would not want this built in this resource poor country?
Posted by Stezza, Monday, 18 January 2010 10:37:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Stezza. You did not read the article or the comments that explained the reason for the pipeline through Afghanistan.How can you comment on what you have not read or comprehended?
Posted by Arjay, Monday, 18 January 2010 4:33:21 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Arjay,

My question was "is there any reason why any government of Afghanistan would not want this [oil-pipeline] built in this resource poor country?"

After reading your comment I read the article and comments again, twice, looking for an answer to this question. The only reference to the pipeline was; "The Taliban regime... was no longer regarded as “stable” enough to ensure America’s control over oil and gas pipelines to the Caspian Sea." ; "Hamid Kazai /UNOCAL... want to get an oil pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the ocean." and "troops on the ground in Afghanistan by October" addressing business concerns over the stalled progress of the Unacol Pipeline across Afghanistan."

As you can see, these references do not answer my question. Perhaps it is you who should have carefully re-read my comment before responding. However, hypocrites aside, I have attempted to find an answer my own question.

The Taliban were negotiating with both Unocal (CentGas) as well as Bridas regarding the construction and operation of a trans-afghan oil pipeline, with an expected 8% of the project's revenue going to the government. Whether or not USA invaded Afghanistan to influence/control this pipeline was irrelevant to my question. The fact is that the government of Afghanistan (Taliban/Karzai/other) would want to build this pipeline as it could produce revenue that could be used to lift the standard of living for all Afghanis (well we wish that this was the case).

Obviously I am no expert on these matters, so please contribute if you have any relevant knowledge regarding this issue.
Posted by Stezza, Monday, 18 January 2010 6:01:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy