He's dead, Jim.
(Click here or on the pic).
Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my Viking Kitty/ZOT ping list!. . .don't be shy.
Posted on 09/22/2004 7:45:10 AM PDT by jtesh
Here's the second thread he started after he got discovered:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1223564/posts?
Have his intentions become clear yet?
You misspelled K-E-R-R-Y withB-U-S-H. Those are his quotes aren't they? T-R-O-L-L.
Oh yep. I was just giving him a chance. He flunked and got paved.
Aren't you a little wary of guys who speak about themselves in the third person?
Tin foil hat time, IMHO>
This is a very weak story. There's no proof that the oil pipeline negotiations which were widely known had anything to do with 9/11.
Secondly, what motive would the FBI have in suppressing the information from other intelligence agencies. Enron stock options for all hands? Please.
Which path do we take? IMO, You chose a higher road...giving some benefit of the doubt. So, you were off the mark. Most of these trolls shed their skin fairly soon. And the truth wins out in the end.
When you doubt, abstain. - Zoroaster
To believe with certainty we must begin to doubt. - Stanislaus
"Secondly, what motive would the FBI have in suppressing the information from other intelligence agencies."
Depends on what time frame we are talking about.
Under Clintons they appointed a "wallbuilder" in the DOJ.
It's not like we haven't seen these quotes before. Everyone thought Saddam had WMD, John SKerry did too. Regardless, Saddam supported terrorism. Bin Laden may not (and I say may) have been supported by Saddam but he very overtly paid palastinian families. He would have done anything to hurt America and he needed to be taken out.
Even this Enron thingy you post about can be lain at Clinton's door.
You guys seem to think that a president is God. He's not. He has made some mistakes but you've got to be pretty dingy to believe that Bush would not have done everything in his power to prevent 9/11 and to even hint that it was for money is insane.
What are your feelings about Jamie Gorelick and how she killed domestic and international intel gathering? You do know that, right? Do you know she did that to save Clinton's behind from illegal campaign financing? Do you know she is the architect of 9/11?
I'm sorry, but there is and was no pipeline coverup.
It helps if we understand that oil companies do not "conspire" to pump oil, they pump oil, its their business. There isn't anything secret about what they do beyond normal commercial discretion.
Unocal and a number of other companies sent their people into Central Asia as the Soviet Union teetered and fell, looking for opportunities, and what they found was a ramshackle oil infrastructure, a KGB/mafia administration, but potentially lots of opportunity. The problem was getting the oil and gas to market at a time that the Russians were still smarting over the loss of their near-abroad territories, and trying to use their pipeline monopoly to exert pressure.
The oil companies announced their intention to build a pipeline network that bypassed Russia, the Baku Ceyhan line, and the infamous Afghan line. This basically woke the Russians up to the fact that we were going to operate there with or without their help, and they responded by getting fully into the game, partnering with US companies, expanding their own pipeline network, and building new pipelines themselves.
In other words, the threat to build these lines had the desired effect of opening up the Russian bottleneck.
Since the Russians still like to play games, Baku Ceyhan is going ahead, but so are a lot of other pipelines. China is building a pipeline into the region, they are building pipelines into Iran, and expanding their network to eastern Europe.
I will predict that the Afghan line will not be built in the near term, and maybe never. This is a line from a very spooky place, through a war zone, through another very spooky place. Anyone with a grudge and a souvenir hand grenade can shut you down anytime. And all this to feed gas to a subsidized gas market. The idea of selling gas to India sounds great, but it requires India to change their laws. Enron gambled on that with $3 or $4 billion dollars in generating plants and lost their shirts when India failed to come through with their part. Even Clinton couldn't collect for Enron, which is a big part of why Enron ultimately collapsed.
After the war, Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan held a conference to attract investors to their pipeline, and have fairly begged investors, China included, to look their way, but no one is interested, and who could blame them? I wouldn't risk my $3 billion. Turkmenistan is now looking west, to build a pipeline under the Caspian to eastern Europe. Its safer.
John Kerry said in an MTV interview that he would sign Kyoto in exchange for troops from Germany and France to go to Iraq.
Why nobody bothered to run with this is beyond me.
The thread was posted here on FR with a link.
"John Kerry said in an MTV interview that he would sign Kyoto in exchange for troops from Germany and France to go to Iraq.
Why nobody bothered to run with this is beyond me.
The thread was posted here on FR with a link."
Thanks, I missed that little promise.
No wonder the world is supporting JFKerry, next he will be demanding that the world get to vote for the leader of the worlds only superpower.
See my post 57, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1223545/posts?page=57#57 , about India and Enron?
Tidbit.
Remember NJ's 2 year missile sting August 2003, Star Ledger?
Hemant Lakhani was an independent broker to find investors for an oil venture in India.
I don't have details beyond that; but it is interesting to note.
The pipeline negotiations were on the Clinton watch and very well might have involved Enron. Enron was heavily involved with the Clinton administration in India, why not Afghanistan too? There is plenty that the public doesn't know about Enron in the 90s that has been covered up, but not by Bush, and probably has no bearing on 9/11 either.
You are aware that 20,000 Iraqi scientists where in Libya working on Nuclear and bio weapons? in other words we did find nuclear and Bio weapons built and in large production by Iraq.
Let's keep in mind that back in the days of the Soviet Union, we supported the Muslims against the Communists, and rightly so.
Then gradually things changed.
It was not clear that the Taliban were our mortal enemies until after 9/11.
Notice that the story from The Enquirer posted among the replies traces this business back to the clinton years:
' "When Clinton was bombing Bin Laden camps in Afghanistan in 1998, Enron was making payoffs to Taliban and Bin Laden operatives to keep the pipeline project alive. And there's no way that anyone could NOT have known of the Taliban and Bin Laden connection at that time, especially Enron who had CIA agents on its payroll!"
'Said an Enron company source, "After the Taliban came to power in 1996, Tliban leaders were invited to Sugar Land, Texas, by Unocal and Enron executives.
' "The Taliban's mullahs were given the royal treatment for four days in 1997!" '
If the agencies are still sitting on this story, it's because they are covering for clinton, not Bush. But the whole business is a non-story. We had good reasons back then to seek other oil sources. And the whole picture has changed over the last 20 years.
He's dead, Jim.
(Click here or on the pic).
Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my Viking Kitty/ZOT ping list!. . .don't be shy.
Missed another ZOTTED Troll thread.
there have been other FR threads on this story in the past, this is not the first.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
