Afghanistan - A war for Gas and Oil Pipelines

Image - US army bases in Afghanistan




Image - Oil and Gas pipeline routes



Image - oil and gas pipe line routes through Afghanistan





Is there anything dumber than a journalist who writes for the Times.


Take Bronwen Maddox and her article here ;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/bronwen_maddox/article6739302.ece

Usually when a journalist idiot wants us to become entangled in another war / social work action using the British army / policing role / Oil Imperialism escapade then they either use the usual 'Think of the children' routine or now the 'what about the women' routine.

I cannot believe that such people are allowed to write for The Times, unless the Times is still 'seeding public opinion with lies' as Carol Quigley stated in his books was its main role.

We are not in Afghanistan for any of the following reasons ;

1) Helping the children
2) Helping the women
3) Stopping the heroin
4) Fighting terrorism
5) Stopping terrorism in the UK

It is total hypocrisy to say the UK and US are in Afghanistan to 'fight islamic extremism and Al Qaeda' when Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda and the Taliban were all creations of the CIA during the Afghan War against the Russians.

The US created the Taliban and sponsored its growth, long enough for it to grow to such a size that it then gave the US the opportunity to invade Afghanistan and take control of the country under the pretext of 'fighting Islamic terrorism'.

If it wasnt for the US there would be no Islamic extremists undertaking terrorism - as the US built up those terrorist groups, funded and armed them.

There is in fact two reasons why we are in Afghanistan, and why British soldiers are dying, and that is for ;

1) Oil

2) Gas

This war was started in 1999 with the passing of the Silk Road Strategy Act in the US.

Note the contents of the act here ;

http://www.eurasianet.org/resource/regional/silkroad.html

Note section 6 of the act ;

(6) The region of the South Caucasus and Central Asia could produce oil and gas in sufficient quantities to reduce the dependence of the United States on energy from the volatile Persian Gulf region.

and further ;

`(c) ACTIVITIES SUPPORTED- Activities that may be supported by programs under subsection (b) include promoting actively the participation of United States companies and investors in the planning, financing, and construction of infrastructure for communications, transportation, including air transportation, and energy and trade including highways, railroads, port facilities, shipping, banking, insurance, telecommunications networks, and gas and oil pipelines.


The act was revised in 2006 to include the energy interests of the US as one of the primary reasons for the US to be in Afghanistan - note no reference to Osama Bin Laden or Al Qaeda ;

http://www.theorator.com/bills109/s2749.html


(b) Findings- Congress makes the following findings:

(3) The liberation of Afghanistan from Taliban misrule and the new course in Afghanistan toward political and economic openness make possible the country's reintegration into Central Asia.

(4) The ouster of the Taliban from Afghanistan has diminished threats to that country's neighbors in Central Asia, allowing for accelerated progress toward democracy, open economies, and the rule of law across the region. Afghanistan's embrace of popular sovereignty and political pluralism demonstrates the universal applicability of these values.

(5) The Governments of Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, which have contributed to United States military deployments in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Kosovo, are key United States partners in diversification of energy sources and transportation routes, enhancing and contributing to United States energy and security interests.

(6) In recognition of global and regional threats to stability, prosperity, and democracy in Afghanistan, including terrorism, political-religious extremism, and production and trafficking of narcotics, and in recognition of Afghanistan's geographic location and cultural and historical identity, Afghanistan should be considered to be among the countries of Central Asia, and not separate from them.

(7) In recognition of security cooperation from the Government of Kazakhstan, including deployment of the Kazakhstan contingent in Iraq, progress toward a market economy, United States business participation in energy and infrastructure development in Kazakhstan, and an ongoing Government of Kazakhstan policy of ethnic and religious tolerance, a relationship with Kazakhstan is of high importance to the United States. "


The maps above show you the proposed Oil pipe line and gas pipe line planned for Afghanistan - The Eurasian Corridor.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Afghanistan_Pipeline


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2608713.stm

An agreement has been signed in the Turkmen capital, Ashgabat, paving the way for construction of a gas pipeline from the Central Asian republic through Afghanistan to Pakistan.



The Global research Group states that ;

The Eurasian Corridor

Since the 2001 invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, the US has a military presence on China's Western frontier, in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The U.S. is intent upon establishing permanent military bases in Afghanistan, which occupies a strategic position bordering on the former Soviet republics, China and Iran.

Moreover, the US and NATO have also established since 1996, military ties with several former Soviet republics under GUUAM (Georgia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan and Moldava). In the post 9/11 era, Washington has used the pretext of the "global war against terrorism" to further develop a U.S. military presence in GUUAM countries. Uzbekistan withdrew from GUUAM in 2002.(The organization is now referred to as GUAM).

China has oil interests in Eurasia as well as in sub-Saharan Africa, which encroach upon Anglo-American oil interests.

What is at stake is the geopolitical control over the Eurasian corridor.

In March 1999, the U.S. Congress adopted the Silk Road Strategy Act, which defined America’s broad economic and strategic interests in a region extending from the Eastern Mediterranean to Central Asia. The Silk Road Strategy (SRS) outlines a framework for the development of America’s business empire along an extensive geographical corridor.

The successful implementation of the SRS requires the concurrent "militarization" of the entire Eurasian corridor as a means to securing control over extensive oil and gas reserves, as well as "protecting" pipeline routes and trading corridors. This militarization is largely directed against China, Russia and Iran.

Take a look at the maps above - then note how the army bases are in prime positions to protect the oil and gas pipelines.

That is what this 'war' is about.

The Afghanistan war is about securing the territory through which the oil and gas pipelines will have to pass through in order to ensure Russia, China and Iran are outmanouvered in the last great wars for the last of the global oil supplies on the planet.

Only yesterday the Independent reported that the Peak Oil process is even close than the 'experts' have been so far admitting.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/warning-oil-supplies-are-running-out-fast-1766585.html

The world is heading for a catastrophic energy crunch that could cripple a global economic recovery because most of the major oil fields in the world have passed their peak production, a leading energy economist has warned.


Higher oil prices brought on by a rapid increase in demand and a stagnation, or even decline, in supply could blow any recovery off course, said Dr Fatih Birol, the chief economist at the respected International Energy Agency (IEA) in Paris, which is charged with the task of assessing future energy supplies by OECD countries.



This is what the Iraq War and Afghanistan War are about.

This is also why China is exporting millions of its people into Africa in order to colonise the African continent as Lebensraum for the Chinese state - and to steal its oil and resources from the indigenous African people.


British troops are being slaughtered in Afghanistan for gas and oil pipelines.

That is the truth behind the lies the government spin.

They lied to get us into Iraq and they are lieing now about why we went into Afghanistan.

The Taliban are not Al Qaeda.

The Taliban are mainly local Afghans who do not want to be occupied by any invading army, local Afghan nationalists resisting occupation, ISI pakistani agents fighting a proxy war against the US, drug smugglers and opium growers protecting their drug territories, foreign jihadists working with the pakistani ISI and the angry relatives of Afghans killed by coalition forces getting revenge.

The Taliban are not a threat to us - the fact we are over there means Islamists will attack us over there and over here.

We must withdraw our troops from Afghanistan, return them to the UK and deploy them at British ports in order to seal our own national borders and assist in the removal of all illegal immigrants from the UK, we must deport all islamist supporters from the UK, execute all convicted islamist terrorists in the UK, deport all those that fund, support and assist Islamist terrorism in the UK - and most important of all create a 100 % national energy production system that means we do not have to depend on any imports of energy from the Middle East oil, Russian gas or Eurasian oil and gas supplies.

We are at risk of being attacked here in Britain, because we are over there in Islamic nations stealing their gas and oil, or stealing their land to allow us to pump the gas and oil of other nations into our nations.

Is this Racist ?

Rule Number 1 of Obamaism - Though Shalt Not Mock the Messiah.




Apparently the image above is racist according to various black liberals, white leftists blah blah blah.

It appears that Blacks in the US are above criticism or mockery, even if they are half white.

Whilst it appears that Whites, especially poor whites / rednecks/ hillbillys/ trailer park trash / southerners / country folk etc etc can all be mocked with impunity by the media / liberals / leftists etc etc - thou shalt not mock the messiah.

Bollocks.

Obama is just another filthy scumbag politician, regardless of what dominant gene gave him his skin colouring.

He aint the messiah, he is just another maggot in the political maggot farm.

The Judge That Roared

The role of a Judge in modern Britain is to serve the interests of the government, not the interests of Justice.

Most judges are arse licking, career chasing, pension pot accumulating, politically correct middle class tossers who were picked as judges because of their family connections, old school tie or because they ticked one of the right politically correct boxes - such as Peter Herbert the judge who is the head of the Black Lawyers Association.

It appears that a judge who tells the truth is to be regarded as a threat.

It appears that a judiciary that has the temerity to regards itself as independent of the government must be threatened and an example sent out to the rest of them.

Go to your local court.

Go the listing section and see the cases listed for that day.

Note the names of the people before the court.

In most cases they are foreigners unless you are blessed to live in a white area.

Most judges know the extent of crime involving foreigners but they are paid well to keep their mouthes shut.

This judge didnt.

Expect him to be sacked or disciplined to send a signal out to the rest.

This is also why any soldiers who dare speak out about lack of kit, crap equipment etc are also threatened.









FACING PROBE, JUDGE WHO CRITICISED MIGRANT CHEATS

Judge Trigger could be sacked from the bench

Tuesday August 4,2009
By Chris Riches

http://www.express. co.uk/posts/ view/118330/ Facing-probe- judge-who- criticised- migrant-cheats

A JUDGE who spoke out to highlight Britain’s “completely lax”
immigration system faces an investigation that could lead to his
removal from the bench.

Supporters of Judge Ian Trigger were left outraged yesterday on
hearing of the probe following concerns he made while sentencing a
Jamaican drug dealer who should have been deported years ago.

He noted that Lucien McClearley, 31, had remained in the UK to sell
drugs and said “hundreds of thousands” of illegal immigrants were
flooding here, placing a huge burden on the taxpayer.

His comments were cheered by politicians, pressure groups and
think-tanks for highlighting the UK’s border problems but infuriated
Gordon Brown’s Government.

Now the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, has referred the outburst to
the Office of Judicial Complaints to rule on whether it was too
political.

But last night there was outcry that the probe might have far-reaching
effects on other judges who wish to raise genuine concerns.

Sir Andrew Green, founder of MigrationWatch, said: “There is a great
deal of concern, privately expressed, in the judiciary about the
number of cases involving failed asylum seekers. There ought to be
some way in which this concern can be expressed without infringing
judicial guidelines.”

Matthew Elliott, of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “It is disgraceful
that political correctness is now intervening in the judicial
process.”

Judge Trigger made his scathing comments last Tuesday after his court
heard McClearley had entered the UK in 2001 on a visitor’s visa.

He was arrested in 2002 after overstaying his welcome but appealed for
asylum and was released while this was pending, allowing him to
“disappear”.

His application was finally rejected in March 2004 but he was arrested
only last February when police noticed his car reeked of cannabis.
Liverpool Crown Court heard how police found £3,700 of cannabis, a
fake driving licence and passport and a gram of cocaine.

Judge Trigger jailed him for two years for drugs offences, stressing
that he hoped he would be deported after serving his sentence, saying:
“Your case illustrates all too clearly the completely lax immigration
policy that exists in this country.

“People like you, and there are literally hundreds and hundreds of
thousands of people like you, come to these shores from foreign
countries to avail themselves of the generous welfare benefits that
exist here.”

The final decision on whether the judge stepped out of line will be
made by Lord Judge and the Lord Chancellor, Jack Straw. If the
complaint is upheld, sanctions include reprimand or even dismissal.

Race Relations Laws = Communism

The BBC have sent an undercover reporter to investigate if landlords are refusing to allow as tenants foreigners.

Apparently some landlords dont want foreigners such as asylum seekers and migrant workers to live in their property - and this is illegal !

This is how private property became owned by the State.

You have a house. You want to rent YOUR property only to British people.

But the Race Relations Act says that if you dont want Vietnamese Cannabis growers, Polish pissheads, Latvian prostitutes, Albanian gun dealers, Russian gangsters, Jamaican crack dealers or any one of the myriad nationalities involved in crime present in this country to live in your house then that is illegal.

BOLLOCKS.

Its your house.

You should be entitled to only allow people in that property that you want to be in that property.

This is why the State has destroyed the concept of private property with all this politically correct crap.

The principle of private property is that you own that property and you should be allowed to do with as you wish, with one exemption which is if you do something on that property that threatens the life of people such as your neighbours eg you store gallons of petrol on the land.

That is the only legitimate reason for any state to get involved in telling you what to do with your own property.

All these laws should be abolished.

If you own your own property then you should be entitled to do as you wish with it in regards having tenants.

If you dont want whites, blacks, pinks, browns - whatever - in your own property then that should be down to you.

This is why the entire race relations legislation should be scrapped.

Private property is private property.


The whole process of immigration and multi-culturalism required that the law force people to accept foreigners amongst us - or be taken to court under these pathetic laws.

Whilst the government shipped them in - the government then passed laws that forced us to accept them living amongst us.

Those that did not want them in their own property were prosecuted - and this is how multi-culturalism was built - with fear, threats and terror - it was never built with consent, good will and with genuine acceptance.

Multi-culturalism was forced upon our country via the threats of arrest, prosecution and fines.

This is why multi-culturalism will fail - as it was constructed without good will and genuine consent.

The old chestnut about 'No Blacks, No Dogs, No Irish' should be met with a big 'so what ! '.

I am half Irish and no doubt some of my relatives were told they couldnt stay in some hotels etc when they came to the UK.

So what.

It was their property and they were free to do as they wish with it.

If that meant my relative had to look for alternative accomodation then - so what. I am sure they were able to cope with the rejection.

Just as BNP members have to face being rejected by the police service, prison service and various trade unions - we just get on with it.

It appears though that rejecting the BNP from such organisations is okay, but individuals saying they dont want foreigners in their own proerty is unlawful.

It appears that some forms of discrimination are lawful and moral, whilst other forms of discrimination arent.

The law is therefore an ass.

These laws were designed to facilitate the imposition of multi-culturalism, and therefore they should be scrapped.

Britain never wanted multi-culturalism, and now its time for the whole process to be scrapped, revered and a New Britain created out of the multi-cultural chaos.

Bankers Bonuses = Politicians Keeping Their Funding Going

Great video here ;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7c3J-iTigRM&feature=related


Wanna know why the banks were paid billions by the US and UK governments ?

Wanna know why the bankers are paying themselves massive bonuses ?

Its because the bankers fund the political parties and that money gets them elected.

Therefore the funding from the government to the banks was merely to ensure their campaign funds were still going in their bank accounts to allow them to stay in power.


Just because there are no queues in soup kitchens doesnt mean there isnt a depression - its just the media arent reporting it so as to keep their puppet political parties in power.

The Decline and Fall of the American Empire

Decline And Fall Of
The American Empire
By James Quinn
8-3-9

"The decline of Rome was the natural and inevitable effect of immoderate greatness. Prosperity ripened the principle of decay; the causes of destruction multiplied with the extent of conquest; and as soon as time or accident had removed the artificial supports, the stupendous fabric yielded to the pressure of its own weight."
Edward Gibbon ­ The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire

After ruling much of the known world for centuries, Rome fell due to a number of factors that, historians believe, would not have been fatal in isolation, but that proved terminal in combination. Military overspending and overreach, an untenable economic system, and currency debasement all played a role. As has been well documented, the Roman emperors attempted to distract the populace from the increasingly dire reality of their situation by providing bread and circuses. But entertainments could not stop the nation-state from yielding to the pressure of its own weight.

There are numerous parallels between the end of the Roman Empire and the path the 226-year-old American republic is now on. One difference in these fast-moving times is that empires can rise more rapidly, but are also likely to decline more rapidly.

Conquest & Overreach

"The decay of trade and industry was not a cause of Rome's fall. There was a decline in agriculture and land was withdrawn from cultivation, in some cases on a very large scale, sometimes as a direct result of barbarian invasions. However, the chief cause of the agricultural decline was high taxation on the marginal land, driving it out of cultivation. Taxation was spurred by the huge military budget and was thus 'indirectly' the result of the barbarian invasion." Arthur Ferrill ­ The Fall of the Roman Empire: The Military Explanation

The Roman Empire's economy was based on the plunder of conquered territories. As the empire expanded, it installed remote military garrisons to maintain control and increasingly relied on Germanic mercenaries to man those garrisons.

Ultimately, as its territorial expansion waned and began to contract, less and less booty became available to support the empire's widespread ambitions and domestic economy. The outsourcing of the military and the cultural dilution from the bloated empire led to lethargy, complacency, and decadence amongst the formerly self-reliant and hard-working Roman citizenry.

In the modern context, as the only major power whose productive capacity was not destroyed during World War II, the American Empire emerged from the ashes of that conflict.

The parallels with Rome do not repeat, but they do rhyme.

Rather than plunder, the U.S. used its unique status to dictate terms that made the U.S. dollar the world's de facto reserve currency and positioned its robust new manufacturing sector to supply the world with the cars, machinery, appliances, and electronics it so desperately needed. The U.S. trade surplus with the nations of the world led to escalating U.S. wealth and prosperity.

Meanwhile, the U.S. military, about which I'll have more to say in a moment, was increasingly asked by the nation's politicians to take on the role of the world's policeman, leading to action in dozens of conflicts. And even where no direct military role was taken, the U.S. has shown a keen willingness to exert coercive power ­ including threats, sanctions, and even assassinations ­ if it was seen to advance American interests.

Simply, in the 20th century, the U.S. became an empire in all but name.

Bread and Circuses

"Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military command, high civil office, legions - everything, now restrains itself and anxiously hopes for just two things: bread and circuses." Roman Poet Juvenal ­ 77 AD

British historian Andrew J. Toynbee convincingly argues that the Roman Empire had a rotten economic system from its inception and its institutions steadily decayed over time.

The government didn't have proper budgetary systems, and so it squandered resources maintaining the empire while producing little of value. When the spoils from conquered territories were no longer sufficient to cover its many expenses, it turned to higher taxes, in effect shifting the burden of the immense military structure onto the back of the citizenry. The higher taxes forced many small farmers to let their land go barren. To distract its citizens from the worsening conditions, Roman politicians played the populist card by providing free wheat to the poor and entertaining them with circuses, chariot races, and other entertainments.

The American Empire has reached the point where it now faces similar structural imbalances, but to pay its bills, it has largely chosen to borrow from foreign countries in recent years. And the bills are large.

The $765 billion of annual military expenditures by the United States equals the military expenditures of the rest of the world combined.

The social safety net put in place over the decades by politicians attempting to get reelected has resulted in a large number of Americans now almost totally dependent upon the almighty state for their well-being. Threatening to rip apart the country's social fabric, the "new American" will vote for anyone who promises to sustain his dependency even as the nation increasingly struggles under the weight of $56 trillion of unfunded liabilities.

The non-farm workforce in the United States totals 133 million people. Of that number, the government directly employs 22.5 million. Millions more are employed by industries heavily dependent on government spending, such as defense, construction, and healthcare. The annual maintenance cost of the country's safety net now costs American taxpayers hundreds of billions.

Medicare and Medicaid annual spending $682 billion
Social Security annual spending $612 billion
Food stamps & other food programs $60 billion
Federal unemployment payments $45 billion

America has evolved from a nation of savers to a nation of consumers with a throw-away mentality and driven by little more than the desire for instant gratification. Worse, large segments of our society are convinced that they are owed something. To most, civic duty has become a quaint, outmoded concept. Happy to accommodate ­ in exchange for a reliable vote come election time ­ the government keeps the public satiated and sedated by providing them with an ever-increasing list of "public services."

Roman poet Juvenal described how the Roman citizens abdicated their duties to the state and turned to bread and circuses. The programs listed above represent just some of the bread that American citizens now feel entitled to.

Here in America, we know how to provide circuses on a grand scale. Roman citizens were satisfied with a good chariot race. In these modern times, Americans can find entertainment and distraction with 24-hour-a-day cable TV, the Internet, iPhones, iPods, Blackberries, 1.1 million retail stores, 1,100 malls, 17,000 golf courses, Britney Spears, Kim Kardashian, Housewives of Orange County, New York, Atlanta, and New Jersey, American Idol, Survivor, Rock of Love, Flip That House, 660 stations with nothing on, Las Vegas, Disney World, MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL, WWF, porn, and mega-churches all competing to fill the void in people's lives.

There isn't enough time in the day to take in all of the circuses, but with what little spare time we have available, we are now able to check our email anywhere on Earth and stay in constant contact with the office even in the middle of the night or, more typically these days, in the middle of dinner. And we can text and twitter our every thought to our circle of friends and followers, providing next to no lasting purpose or benefit to anyone.

Approximately 12% of the U.S. population (36 million people) is considered poor, and many of them are totally dependent upon the state. Yet that term seems out of sync with the fact that many of those individuals have cell phones ($500/yr.), cable TV ($900/yr.), Internet access ($500/yr.), cars ($5,000/yr. lease), houses ($6,000/yr.), eat fast food ($1,000/yr.), and can smoke a pack a day ($1,500/yr.).

How can this be?

For the answer, look no further than Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, and the Federal Reserve, in cahoots with the financial geniuses on Wall Street, who made it standard practice to create money out of thin air and encourage anyone with a heartbeat to avail themselves of it in the form of low-cost loans ­ no proof of income or assets required.

The arrangement worked just fine until the banks could no longer hide the bad debt or sell it to the greater fool. Now it has collapsed onto the backs of American taxpayers.

Debasement

"The supply of foodstuffs in the cities declined. The people in the cities were forced to go back to the country and to return to agricultural life. Consequently, the emperors made laws against this movement. There were laws preventing the city dweller from moving to the country, but such laws were ineffective. As the people did not have anything to eat in the city, as they were starving, no law could keep them from leaving the city and going back into agriculture. The city dweller could no longer work in the processing indus tries of the cities as an artisan. And, with the loss of the markets in the cities, no one could buy anything there anymore." Ludwig von Mises ­ Human Action

Economist Ludwig von Mises argued that flawed economic policies played a key role in the impoverishment and decay of the Roman Empire. He contended that interventionist economic policies, including price controls that resulted in prices substantially below their free-market equilibrium levels, ultimately led to inflation.

Further, Rome was spending more than it could afford. The free food rations for the poor of Rome and Constantinople ­ as well as the many entertainments ­ were costing a fortune. The purchasing of exotic spices, silks, and other luxuries from the Orient bled Rome of its gold gold that didn't return. Soon Rome didn't have enough gold to produce coins. And so it debased its coins with lesser metals until there was no gold left.

To cover the trillions it is spending each year propping up its empire, the U.S. government is now increasingly forced to rely on printing and borrowing the funds to do so, steadily debasing the currency in the process.

But the nation's currency debasement is nothing new. Rather, it began in 1913 with the creation of the Federal Reserve. It accelerated when FDR confiscated all the gold in the country in the 1930s. When Richard Nixon took the U.S. off the gold standard in 1971, the show really got on the road, as that freed the Federal Reserve to print unlimited amounts of dollars. As a result, the dollar has lost 93% of its value versus gold since 1970.

The Military Complex

Lessons from ancient Rome regarding the cost of maintaining a far-flung empire have been ignored. Today, U.S. boots stomp on the ground of over 117 countries. Even the use of mercenaries, in the form of thousands of Blackwater guards and other private contractors filling roles formerly left to the military, has become commonplace.

Using military assets to pursue political goals, as is the norm in empire building, has led to unintended consequences and wasted opportunities.

One of the most egregious of those lost opportunities came following the bankruptcy and collapse of the Soviet Union. The United States had won the Cold War, but failed to recognize the cautionary signs on the path ahead.

As the only remaining superpower on earth, America fell into the same trap that has befallen previous empires. Instead of concentrating on proactively confronting domestic challenges, such as unfunded Social Security and Medicare liabilities, and developing a comprehensive energy plan to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, we continued to intervene in costly foreign adventures.

Including, among many others, supplying both Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein with weapons and money during their fights against our enemies, leading to unintended consequences we live with to this day.

Seeking to maintain its widespread interests and to defend itself from the many enemies created by building and protecting those interests, the American military complex has grown to the point where it now spends an amount equal to 44% of all taxes collected from its citizens.

Since 1991 alone, the U.S. has interceded in Kuwait, Somalia, Bosnia, Sudan, Afghanistan, and Iraq, among others. In no case has Congress fulfilled its obligation of declaring war. Instead, it has delegated sole responsibility for waging war to the president, weakening the structure of our three-branch government. Over that period of time, the U.S. has spent $7 trillion on defense.

The National Debt in 1991 was $3.2 trillion. Today, it is $11.6 trillion, a 360% increase in eighteen years. In 2001, spending on defense was 17% of the government budget. In 2008, defense, Homeland Security, and war spending accounted for 26% of government spending.

Collapse

Economic history books will likely mark 1980 as the year that the rapid phase of the decline of the American Empire began. That's when the first wave of the Baby Boomer generation reached the age of 35 and turned its attention to living the American dream ­ on borrowed money. Since that year, household debt has surged from $1 trillion to $14 trillion, while the savings rate has plunged from 12% to below 0%.

There are many ways to use credit, some quite intelligent and practical. Rotating credit card debt to buy the latest non-necessity does not fall into that category. Today in America, there are $956 billion of credit card debt outstanding, or $9,000 per household. The average American has nine credit cards. A credit card allows every person to live above their means for awhile... just as did the home equity loans taken against artificially elevated house prices anchored on mortgages people couldn't afford.

This is where reality and fantasy meet. People can only borrow and spend if the Federal Reserve and bankers provide the funds to do so, and without asking a lot of questions about suitability. By creating money out of thin air and handing it out to people with no legitimate means of repaying it, the financial elite and their friends in Washington have played an essential role in bringing the U.S. and even the global economy to its knees.

Yet, for all the evidence, a large swath of Americans still believes the nation hasn't gone off course. These people consider borrowing in order to live beyond their means a rational choice. They expect the government to save them when they get into trouble and think that taxing the rich to pay for a bigger and bigger safety net is a reasonable idea.

In a truly free-market society, this sizable segment of the public would have already learned a brutal lesson they'd remember for the rest of their lives. Instead, the brutal lesson is being learned by people who played by the rules and didn't take ridiculous risks, but who are now being coerced by the government to pay for the misdeeds of the over-indebted fools who did.

The crushing levels of debt resulting from decades of excess; the far-reaching military presence; the politically motivated social safety net and other popular but unaffordable programs have now reached the point that the economic decline of the American Empire is a foregone conclusion.

The current downturn is not going to be like previous recessions that lasted on average 16 months. Even as the government responds by trying to borrow and spend the country back to prosperity, there is no ignoring that the economic base has been gutted and the future social program liabilities have essentially bankrupted the country.

As was the case in the final stages of the Roman Empire, the unsustainable military, social, and political excesses have reached the point that, in combination, they are now likely to prove catastrophic.

A Final Thought

"For over a thousand years, Roman conquerors returning from the wars enjoyed the honor of a triumph ­ a tumultuous parade. In the procession came trumpeters and musicians and strange animals from the conquered territories, together with carts laden with treasure and captured armaments. The conqueror rode in a triumphal chariot, the dazed prisoners walking in chains before him. Sometimes his children, robed in white, stood with him in the chariot, or rode the trace horses. A slave stood behind the conqueror, holding a golden crown, and whispering in his ear a warning: that all glory is fleeting." George C. Scott as Patton [emphasis added]

Which begs the question, who is now standing behind the current political leadership, reminding them that their elevated positions are temporal? Unfortunately, the excesses they have created, and the dislocations caused by those excesses, will be with this country for generations.


Reprinted with the permission of Casey Research. Sign up for the free Daily Dispatch for more great insights.

© 2009 James Quinn
Editorial Archives

Bio - James Quinn is a senior director of strategic planning for a major university. These articles reflect the personal views of James Quinn. They do not necessarily represent the views of his employer and are not sponsored or endorsed by his employer.

The 911 Saudi / BAE Nexus Becomes Clear

Interesting news from Saudi Arabia that a CIA asset in the royasl family, Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, has been arrested for initiating a coup against the monarch using 200 members of the security services - and from this we can deduce that these are the saudi security network that assisted the 911 terrorists with money and training to undertake the attack.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=102313§ionid=351020205

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=112832.0;wap2

Now we know who was the 911 Saudi contact man and also the members of the security services he used to run the 911 hijackers. The utter arrogance of the man to send money via his wife direct to the 911 hijackers to pay for their flight training costs is proof that the conspirators thought they were above the law.

A man who is prepared to initiate a coup against his own family for money and power is a man more than capable of organising the 911 hijackers.


http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=102313§ionid=351020205

What is shocking is that not only is Princess Haifa the husband of the Saudi Prince Bandar who directly passed funds to the 911 hijackers passed to her from the BAE slush fund ( worth tens of billions of dollars) that derived from the Al-Yamamah arms deal.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7244051.stm

http://www.armedforces-int.com/news/2008/04/10/sfos-bae-systems-inquiry-drop-unlawful-high-court.asp

The astonishing fact that a British company BAE through its illegal slush fund to bribe members of the Saudi royal family to award them contracts for amrs deals were the ones who funded the 911 hijackers via Princess Haifa is something the British media refuse to even mention. Yet it is a fact.


http://visibility911.com/jongold/?p=137

Late 1990s: CIA Director Tenet Has Direct, Private Channels to Saudi Leaders
George Tenet, appointed as CIA director in 1997, develops close personal relationships with top Saudi officials, especially Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the US. Tenet develops a habit of meeting with Bandar at his home near Washington about once a month. But CIA officers handling Saudi issues complain that Tenet doesn’t tell them what he discusses with Bandar. Often they are only able to learn about Tenet’s deals with the Saudis later and through Saudi contacts, not from their own boss. Tenet also makes one of his closest aides the chief of the CIA station in Saudi Arabia. This aide often communicates directly with Tenet, avoiding the usual chain of command. Apparently as a favor to the Saudis, CIA analysts are discouraged from writing reports raising questions about the Saudi relationship to Islamic extremists. [Risen, 2006, pp. 185]


April 1998: Hijacker Associate Receives Saudi Money; FBI Fails to Investigate
Osama Basnan, a Saudi living in California, claims to write a letter to Saudi Arabian Prince Bandar bin Sultan and his wife, Princess Haifa bint Faisal, asking for financial help because his wife needs thyroid surgery. The Saudi embassy sends Basnan $15,000 and pays the surgical bill. However, according to University of California at San Diego hospital records, Basnan’s wife, Majeda Dweikat, is not treated until April 2000. [Los Angeles Times, 11/24/2002] Basnan will later come under investigation for possibly using some of this money to support two of the 9/11 hijackers who arrive in San Diego, although the 9/11 Commission has concluded that evidence does not support these charges. [9/11 Commission, 6/16/2004] Prior to this time, the FBI had several chances to investigate Basnan, but failed to do so. In 1992, they received information suggesting a connection between him and a militant group later associated with bin Laden. In 1993, they received reports that Basnan hosted a party for al-Qaeda leader Sheikh Omar Abdul-Rahman the year before, but again they failed to investigate. [US Congress, 7/24/2003 pdf file] According to one US official, Basnan later “celebrate[s] the heroes of September 11” and talks about “what a wonderful, glorious day it had been” at a party shortly after 9/11. [Newsweek, 11/24/2002; San Diego Magazine, 9/2003]

December 4, 1999: Saudi Ambassador’s Wife Gives Funds that Are Possibly Passed to 9/11 Hijackers

Princess Haifa bint Faisal, the wife of Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the US, begins sending monthly cashier’s checks of between $2,000 and $3,500 (accounts differ) to Majeda Dweikat, the Jordanian wife of Osama Basnan, a Saudi living in San Diego. Accounts also differ over when the checks were first sent (between November 1999 and about March 2000; a Saudi government representative has stated December 4, 1999 [Fox News, 11/23/2002] ). Basnan’s wife signs many of the checks over to her friend Manal Bajadr, the wife of Omar al-Bayoumi. The payments are made through Riggs Bank, a bank which appears to have turned a blind eye to Saudi embassy transaction and also has longstanding ties to covert CIA operations (see July 2003). [Newsweek, 11/22/2002; Newsweek, 11/24/2002; Guardian, 11/25/2002; Washington Times, 11/26/2002] Some later suggest that the money from the wife of the Saudi ambassador passes through the al-Bayoumi and Basnan families as intermediaries and ends up in the hands of the two hijackers. The payments from Princess Haifa continue until May 2002 and may total $51,000, or as much as $73,000. [Newsweek, 11/22/2002; MSNBC, 11/27/2002] While living in the San Diego area, al-Bayoumi and Basnan are heavily involved in helping with the relocation of, and offering financial support to, Saudi immigrants in the community. [Los Angeles Times, 11/24/2002] In late 2002, al-Bayoumi claims he did not pass any money along to the hijackers. [Washington Times, 12/4/2002] Basnan has variously claimed to know al-Bayoumi, not to know him at all, or to know him only vaguely. [ABC News, 11/25/2002; Arab News, 11/26/2002; ABC News, 11/26/2002; MSNBC, 11/27/2002] However, earlier reports say Basnan and his wife were “very good friends” of al-Bayoumi and his wife. Both couples lived at the Parkwood Apartments at the same time as the two hijackers; prior to that, the couples lived together in a different apartment complex. In addition, the two wives were arrested together in April 2001 for shoplifting. [San Diego Union-Tribune, 10/22/2002]