Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Hello??? I'm not going jump you, screaming RUNNING DOG IMPERIALIST PIG!!! (Oh wait...dog... pig.... does that work?)

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
I hope your sister comes home safe.

---

Quote:

---

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/4354269.stm
Secret U.S. Plans For Iraq's Oil
by Greg Palast
The Bush administration made plans for war and for Iraq's oil before the 9/11 attacks sparking a policy battle between neo-cons and Big Oil, BBC's Newsnight has revealed.
Two years ago today - when President George Bush announced US, British and Allied forces would begin to bomb Baghdad - protestors claimed the US had a secret plan for Iraq's oil once Saddam had been conquered.
In fact there were two conflicting plans, setting off a hidden policy war between neo-conservatives at the Pentagon, on one side, versus a combination of "Big Oil" executives and US State Department "pragmatists."
"Big Oil" appears to have won. The latest plan, obtained by Newsnight from the US State Department was, we learned, drafted with the help of American oil industry consultants.
Insiders told Newsnight that planning began "within weeks" of Bush's first taking office in 2001, long before the September 11th attack on the US.
...
Secret sell-off plan
The industry-favored plan (coup d'etat, replacing Hussein with a compliant leader) was pushed aside by yet another secret plan, drafted just before the invasion in 2003, which called for the sell-off of all of Iraq's oil fields. The new plan, crafted by neo-conservatives intent on using Iraq's oil to destroy the Opec cartel through massive increases in production above Opec quotas.
The sell-off was given the green light in a secret meeting in London headed by Ahmed Chalabi shortly after the US entered Baghdad, according to Robert Ebel. Mr. Ebel, a former Energy and CIA oil analyst, now a fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, flew to the London meeting, he told Newsnight, at the request of the State Department.
...
Privatization blocked by industry
Philip Carroll, the former CEO of Shell Oil USA who took control of Iraq's oil production for the US Government a month after the invasion, stalled the sell-off scheme.
Mr Carroll told us he made it clear to Paul Bremer, the US occupation chief who arrived in Iraq in May 2003, that: "There was to be no privatization of Iraqi oil resources or facilities while I was involved."
Ari Cohen, of the neo-conservative Heritage Foundation, told Newsnight that an opportunity had been missed to privatize Iraq's oil fields. He advocated the plan as a means to help the US defeat Opec, and said America should have gone ahead with what he called a "no-brainer" decision.
Mr Carroll hit back, telling Newsnight, "I would agree with that statement. To privatize would be a no-brainer. It would only be thought about by someone with no brain."
New plans, obtained from the State Department by Newsnight and Harper's Magazine under the US Freedom of Information Act, called for creation of a state-owned oil company favored by the US oil industry. It was completed in January 2004, Harper's discovered, under the guidance of Amy Jaffe of the James Baker Institute in Texas. Former US Secretary of State Baker is now an attorney. His law firm, Baker Botts, is representing ExxonMobil and the Saudi Arabian government.
Jaffe said "There is no question that an American oil company ... would not be enthusiastic about a plan that would privatize all the assets with Iraq companies and they (US companies) might be left out of the transaction."

View segments of Iraq oil plans at: www.GregPalast.com/opeconthemarch.html

---

Quote:

---

if the US were only interested in Iraqi Oil we wouldn't have put restrictions on US oil companies to begin with.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
I have NO idea what you mean by this. Do you mean before the war? (when the US was locked-out by Iraq.) Or do you think it was after the war? (Not then either - the US oil companies wanted national ownership to keep an in, AND to protect the price of oil.)What ARE you referring to?

---

Quote:

---

Uzbek troops shoot at protesters

ANDIJAN, Uzbekistan (CNN) -- Soldiers have opened fire on protesters in an eastern Uzbekistan town where anti-government rebels were holding hostages in a regional headquarters, witnesses have said.

Journalists said the shooting came from a tank and a truck full of soldiers which had sped to the center of Andijan where the protesters had gathered. A Reuters correspondent later said he saw one body lying on the ground.

The Uzbekistan government said the rebels had refused to compromise during talks with authorities. {mmm-hmmmm. SignyM}

Thousands had been demonstrating, calling for the resignation of Uzbek President Islam Karimov and his authoritarian government. The president's office described them as criminals and extremists.

---

Quote:

---

Thousands of refugees today fled fierce fighting in eastern Uzbekistan -- where human rights monitors say clashes between soldiers and rebels have left hundreds dead.

---

Quote:

---

Heated criticism was growing last night over 'double standards' by Washington over human rights, democracy and 'freedom' as fresh evidence emerged of just how brutally Uzbekistan, a US ally in the 'war on terror', put down Friday's unrest in the east of the country.... Critics said the US was prepared to support pro-democracy unrest in some states, but condemn it in others where such policies were inconvenient.

Witnesses and analysts familiar with the region said most protesters were complaining about government corruption and poverty, not espousing Islamic extremism. ...

Washington has often been accused of being involved in a conspiracy of silence over Uzbekistan's human rights record since that country was declared an ally in the 'war on terror' in 2001.

Uzbekistan is believed to be one of the destination countries for the highly secretive 'renditions programme'... The CIA has never officially commented on the programme. But flight logs obtained by the New York Times earlier this month show CIA-linked planes landing in Tashkent with the same serial numbers as jets used to transfer prisoners around the world....

Critics say the US double standards are evident on the State Department website, which accuses Uzbek police and security services of using 'torture as a routine investigation technique' while giving the same law enforcement services $79 million in aid in 2002. .

The aid paradox was highlighted by the former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, who criticised coalition support for Uzbekistan when they were planning invading Iraq, using similar abuses as justification.... The support continues, seen by many as a 'pay-off' for the Khanabad base.

---

Quote:

---

Mind you, it is even worse to be in a country without a despot " owned " by the US

---

Quote:

---

Kissinger, who does not find room to mention East Timor even in the index of his three-volume memoir, has more than once stated that the invasion came to him as a surprise, and that he barely knew of the existence of the Timorese question. He was obviously lying. But the breathtaking extent of his mendacity has only just become fully apparent, with the declassification of a secret State Department telegram. The document, which has been made public by the National Security Archive at George Washington University, contains a verbatim record of the conversation among Suharto, Ford and Kissinger. "We want your understanding if we deem it necessary to take rapid or drastic action," Suharto opened bluntly. "We will understand and will not press you on the issue;' Ford responded. "We understand the problem you have and the intentions you have." Kissinger was even more emphatic, but had an awareness of the possible "spin" problems back home. "It is important that whatever you do succeeds quickly," he instructed the despot. "We would be able to influence the reaction if whatever happens, happens after we return.... If you have made plans, we will do our best to keep everyone quiet until the President returns home." Micromanaging things for Suharto, he added: "The President will be back on Monday at 2 PM Jakarta time. We understand your problem and the need to move quickly but I am only saying that it would be better if it were done after we returned." As ever, deniability supersedes accountability.

---

Quote:

---

Uzbek toll rises as unrest spreads
Unrest is the bloodiest in Uzbekistan's post-Soviet history.
ANDIJAN, Uzbekistan -- The death toll from a crackdown by Uzbekistan security forces is mounting amid reports that unrest has spread from Andijan to at least three other towns.

More than 700 people reportedly have been killed in clashes last week in the region bordering Kyrgyzstan, The Associated Press reported Monday.

---

Quote:

---

U.S., UK Split Over Uzbek Violence
Condemnation by Britain of Uzbek soldiers who opened fire on protesters contrasts markedly to the near silence coming from its allies in Washington.

In London, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw on Sunday slammed the violence in the city of Andijan as "a clear abuse of human rights."

He was speaking as witnesses described how Uzbek soldiers fired into a crowd, including women, children and their own police comrades begging them not to shoot./quote]

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:


Now I'm not saying that the root of ALL tyrannies lies with the USA. Pol Pot, as far as I can tell, was an entirely home-grown creation. (However, if you read "Confesssions of an Economic Hit Man" you'll get a view of how we engineered their creation.)

---

Quote:

---

But we so often find ourselves on the side of tyranny that, since WWI reconstruction- and with the exception of our involvement in Serbia- I cannot find a single instance in which we actually supported democracy over tyranny.

---

Quote:

---

That's a pretty sad record. With our economic and military might, we could have done some good but we threw our weight behind the dark side.

---

Quote:

---

AFA Burma is concerned - I can't imagine why the USA would want to destabilize the Burmese government -except possibly to light a little fire under China's *ss (Since they don't cooperate or trade extensively, that doesn't seem like much of a reason.) I think that like all unpopular governments it's easier to point to a "enemy", even a fictitious one -dubya does this all the time- to whip up support than it is to address the root causes of the problem. Look how they managed to tie their resident cause celebre to the explosions.

---

Quote:

---

Burma: China has developed close ties to the military regime in Rangoon and turned a nation wary of China into a "satellite" of Beijing close to the Strait of Malacca, through which 80 percent of China's imported oil passes.

China is building naval bases in Burma and has electronic intelligence gathering facilities on islands in the Bay of Bengal and near the Strait of Malacca. Beijing also supplied Burma with "billions of dollars in military assistance to support a de facto military alliance," the report said.

---