Bush Sends Money to Taliban While Planning War

But there are still more oil ties to follow. If it helps media to remember, the US under Bush as President would funnel millions of dollars, arms, and covert intelligence and other assistance through CIA to help the Afghani Mujahadene fight Soviet forces in what would prove to be Russia's Vietnam. While a "victory", a chief benefactor of all the training, weapons, and money would prove to be Osama bin Laden, essentially a CIA backed operative. The establishment of the Taliban was thus assured, thanks to bin Laden, CIA, and George H.W. Bush.

And just in time to turn, and bite the hand of the son of the man who fed them? What it is, and what it seems, are often two different things. Since the war, money continued to flow to the Taliban from the current Bush administrations - right up until the air attacks of 911. Even while Colin Powell was arranging for war with the Taliban, we were sending them money. Here are excerpts from TASHKENT, Aug 08, 2001 (Itar-Tass via COMTEX)

The George W. Bush administration is to provide additional financial assistance to the people of Afghanistan... The total volume of U.S. financial help to Afghanistan will amount to over 132 million dollars this year. Thus, the USA will become the world's biggest financial source for Afghanistan.

These investments stopped only after the air attacks of 911? We now know that as recent as May, Secretary Colin Powell was announcing money for Afghanistan. $43M in additional assistance, in fact - but within that same time frame he was secretly making plans for war against Afghanistan? These two facts fly in the face of logic, unless, of course, there is a broad covert conspiracy outside of official US government - a shadow government of profiteers and criminals. Someone is double crossing someone, and getting paid well for it. The question is how they will get paid.

The trillion dollar gas and oil fields (an arbitrary dollar estimate, perhaps) in Iran and the Caspian Sea region to its north... and the pipeline to serve these fields may be financial incentive enough for such a double cross, but there is an icing to the cake. Everybody makes money in a war - if they are a part of the military industrial intelligence media complex (MIIM - a term I first coined in 1996 in my unpublished book, Fatal Rebirth). But some people want more than their fair share. Just in time for a looming oil shortage caused by the conflict, which always spells profits in the oil industry, certain CIA entwined oil industry players are shifting into high gear... The Bush-bin Laden investments in Harken Energy didnít really seem to go anywhere, the company certainly not immediately taking advantage of its Middle-East oil leases except to attract investors. After all, it was a land drilling operation when founded, and had no experience, expertise, or floating drill rigs. But a "new" focus was established for Harken Energy once it was put the hands of a "blind trust" as required when entering public office. This new direction was to enter into offshore exploration, regardless of any inherent abilities or resources to do so. But it happens you can subcontract such things. One such company you can subcontract with is Global Marine.

Same Investors, Oil Companies Merge, Poised for War Profits

Who is Global Marine? A company which coincidentally was formed within months of the formation of CIA, and which was essentially a Union Oil holding by the time it got rolling. In 1973 it undertook a contract for CIA to design, have built, and operate the Glomar Explorer (virtually all Global Marine vessels are named Glomar something or other.) Construction was contracted to be undertaken at Howard Hughes Shipyards.

Yet More War Profits with White House Ties

T V Parasuram (PTI - a Hindu Television Network, India) reports from Washington, September 28, that in the war on terrorism, defense spending will benefit the Carlyle Group, a Washington D.C. bank s pecializing in buyouts of defense and aerospace companies. A major investor in the Carlyle Group is the bin Laden Brothers. Parasuram cites as their source Wall Street Journal intelligence dispatches (like a wire service.)

In recent years, former president George H W Bush, ex-secretary of state James Baker and ex-secretary of defense Frank Carlucci have made the pilgrimage to the bin Laden family's headquarters in Jeddah (Saudi Arabia). Ex-president Bush makes speeches on behalf of Carlyle Group and is senior adviser to its Asian Partners Fund, while Baker is its senior counselor and Carlucci is the group's chairman.

So here we are. Poised to unleash our military might in a war for oil profits which was planned months before the 911 terror. You and I would never have supported a war on the Taliban before the air attacks. But someone knew that. Someone calculated that in order to get you and me to sign off in the name of American pride and loyalty, and perhaps in the name of revenge and blood lust - would require an extremely catastrophic and horrific event. Someone calculated that to get Pakistan to risk civil war would require some super compelling event which would justify their aid to the US. Someone figured out that to get Iran to remain soft on US actions in their backyard would requires such an event, as well. What I fear, is that someone figured out what such an event might should best be. They next figured out how to engineer it, to fund it, and to execute it - in a way that made profits. Did Osama bin Laden act alone? Was he the architect? Follow the money. Look who benefits. Look at who's fingerprints are on the war plans. These are the people who have much to answer for... before I will sign off on this war. Unless someone can answer some tough questions about all this, I'd rather sign off on the arrest warrant of the entire White House Staff.

Family Ties: Taliban and Former CIA Director Richard Helms

At hand is a low-profile briefing on international narcotics by a top State Department official, who has recently returned from a United Nations trip to inspect the poppy fields of Afghanistan, source of 80 percent of the world's opium and target of a recent eradication campaign by the fundamentalist Taliban. The lecture begins as every other in Washington: The speaker politely informs the crowd he has nothing to do with policymaking. And, by the way, it's all off the record. Lecture over, the chairman asks for questions. One man after another rises to describe his own observations while in the foreign service. The moderator pauses, looks to the back of the room, and says in a scarcely audible voice: 'Laili Helms.' The room goes silent.

Note: Richard Helms and George Bush were key CIA managers involved in the Bay of Pigs matter according to Mark Lane in his book, Plausible Denial, and thus, both tied to the assassination of JFK as mentioned earlier. Both would eventually become directors of CIA. In CIA, there are axioms seldom left unapplied: Once CIA, always CIA. The son of CIA becomes CIA. The wife of CIA is from CIA. Considering these axioms, it is most curious that the son of former CIA Director George Bush does business with the Brother of Osama bin Laden in the setting up of businesses which seems very tied to CIA - while at the same time, a woman with CIA ties and who is married into the family of former CIA Director Richard Helms represents the Taliban, protector of Osama bin Laden, who has CIA ties. This coziness among the CIA and bin Laden families all suggests to me that perhaps Osama bin Laden may still very much be a CIA protected operative, and makes me very nervous about who really orchestrated the 911 attacks.

Laili Helms, his niece by marriage, is an operative, too - but of a different kind...

In 1999, Helms says, she got a message from the Taliban leadership that they were willing to turn over all of bin Laden's communications equipment, which they had seized, to the U.S. When she called the State Department with this offer, officials were at first interested, but later said, 'No. We want him.'

Note: Convenient answer. Rather than take away the capability of bin Laden to direct his people abroad (and perhaps, to communicate with his CIA overseers), a line is drawn in the sand demanding that which was not possible. Why not take the gear and still seek the man, having weakened his ability to avoid capture and engage in terrorism in the process? Perhaps because getting the man is NOT the actual goal. Perhaps he is more useful where he is, doing what he does?

In the same year, Prince Turki, head of Saudi intelligence, reputedly came up with a scheme to capture bin Laden on his own; after consulting with the Taliban he flew his private plane to Kabul and drove out to see Mullah Omar at his HQ. The two men sat down, as Helms recounts the story, and the Saudi said, 'There's just one little thing. Will you kill bin Laden before you put him on the plane?' Mullah Omar called for a bucket of cold water. As the Saudi delegation fidgeted, he took off his turban, splashed water on his head, and then washed his hands before sitting back down. 'You know why I asked for the cold water?' he asked Turki. 'What you just said made my blood boil.'

Bin Laden was a guest of the Afghanis and there was no way they were going to kill him, though they might turn him over for a trial. At that the deal collapsed, and Turki flew home empty-handed.

Note: What does Osama bin Laden know that makes him more valuable dead than alive? In the world of CIA (or Saudi Intelligence) operations, you don't generally double cross one of your own agents and set them up for a patsy to some crime unless you insure they are not captured alive. It might prove embarrassing if they were given the opportunity to tell their side of the story - especially if a double or triple agent.

Early this year, the Taliban's ambassador at large, Hashami, a young man speaking perfect English, met with CIA operations people and State Department reps, Helms says. At this final meeting, she says, Hashami proposed that the Taliban hold bin Laden in one location long enough for the U.S. to locate and destroy him.

The U.S. refused, says Helms, who claims she was the go-between in this deal between the supreme leader and the feds...

Again, we see the government refusing to take an opportunity to stop Osama bin Laden cold. Why? Because there would be no body produced. They want him 'brought to justice', but only it would seem they only want him brought out as a corpse - if the clues assembled herein are taken at face value.

Perhaps we should ask why we are really going to war, and who really ordered the 911 attacks. As my friend and author Alex Constantine has said in his own newsletters on the topic...

The entire case against Osama Bin Laden rested on the claim that the identities of the hijackers were known. That claim fell apart when even the US admitted that the hijackers had used phony identifications with the stolen identities of mideastern arabs on them. Moreover, the hijackers had made a conspicuous display of themselves in various locales to make sure that the stolen identities would be remembered. The forged IDs wreck any chain of evidence that leads from the hijackers to those who controlled them.

So, where are we? Well, it looks like we're about to invade Afghanistan. We don't know for sure that Osama actually had anything to do with the attacks on the World Trade Towers but we are still going to invade Afghanistan. We don't even know that Osama is still inside Afghanistan but we are still going to invade Afghanistan. It is rapidly becoming clear that Osama was just the excuse; the real goal all along was to invade Afghanistan, which is, of course, what the US was telling other countries it intended to do last summer...While American media gave us all Condit all the time.

US Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson... 'The Caspian region will hopefully save us from total dependence on Middle East oil '.

Tad Sauk (writing about Caspian resources)...

' Much of the future of the world's economy ... may hinge on who gains access to this wealth '.

The following excerpted quotes are the most interesting and revealing, since they are from a James A. Baker Public Policy Paper written sometime in 2000 for him and copyrighted by the CFR.

'Meanwhile, the Unocal consortium, intent on building a pipeline through Afghanistan , will have difficulty attracting the necessary financing until Afghanistan's civil war is wound down and a government acceptable to the country's many ethnic group is established ... routes through Afghanistan will not become commercially financeable until a coalition government is put in place that is acceptable to all of Afghanistan's diverse ethnic groups .

Halliburton is uniquely placed to profit from either eventuality.

[ Ed. Note : This is not the end of the article, you will have to go to his website for the entire article. The point being the media has not told us the truth about the 9/11 attack!]