Clinton Does Fulfill some Campaign Promises

The main point of my E-mail is in relationship to the current events in
Kosovo and Serbia.    Like you,  I have been concerned about risking Nuclear
War,  and Clinton, Albright, & NATO's motives for the swift military actions
against Yugoslavia.

Granted, I do not like the suffering of refugees, nor ethnic cleansing, but
something here is amiss.   I have also been concerned at the dangerous
depletion of our advanced weapon stockpiles over such a distant region of the
world.

We the American people are not getting the full story on Yugoslavia.
Clinton seems unable to identify our American interests there as a cause for
war, outside of being "nice".   Yet we may commit ground troops there soon.

Several nights ago I watched a report on Rwanda in 1994.  800, 000 people
were killed in short order.  I was struck at the neglect of the US on this
matter.   I was also struck with the forewarnings that Albright allegedly
received regarding the Nairobi, Kenya bombings and her neglect there.   What
strikes me is that there was very little geniune compassion from either
Albright or Clinton on the decisions relating to these serious matters.

The compassion with which we are being appealed regarding Kosovo therefore
seems extremely disproportionate.   Larger numbers are killed in hotspots
around the world with less fanfare.  Many of the atrocities seem unverified
exaggerated and merely rumor, though I am sure that many thousands have
indeed suffered gravely.

I find that various accounts of Clinton's biography reveal that he can often
have very little genuine compassion.   He is a faker.  But why would he fake
this one?  How was he able to lead NATO into this risky endeavor?

I was in Brussels, Belgium last October and met with some people who mine
ores in Rwanda.   I was struck by the vast world class mineral wealth beneath
the lands of Rwanda and how perhaps the people who occupied the lands, were
"in the way".

Journalist Michael Isikoff mentioned in his latest book on Clinton, that as a
young man Clinton was saved from the Vietnam Draft through the interventions
of then Governor of Arkansas, Winthrop Rockefeller.    There is evidence that
sometimes Clinton still meets regularly with a  certain David Rockefeller.
There appears to be a number of Rockefeller connections to William Jefferson
Clinton.    We may be correct in our suspicions that there is someone behind
the scenes that has coached and groomed Clinton for the Presidency, and
furthermore sustains his continued existence, against all odds.    Clinton
could have been preserved into power just for the occasion of the next few
months and year.    He probably feels that he cannot be impeached or harmed
signicantly for failure.

To the point:
What ever became of Roger Tamraz?   The Oil man that gave money to the DNC
and had personal visits to the President?

He lived in Egypt and Lebanon.   Did Hillary visit with him or his
confederates while in Egypt during the commencement of the Yugoslavian war
just a few weeks ago?

Oil is a great motivation for World War.    The Japanese and Germans in WWII
slaughtered for access to it.    Oil motivated Desert Storm.     Our Nation
is in debt over $5 Trillion dollars.   Many of our Allies have purchased
hundreds of millions, even billions of our debt via Treasury Notes, Bonds and
other monetary instruments.   For Desert Storm, we were obligated to act as a
protective umbrella to the nations whom we owed, acting to protect their
interests.   Today, many if not most of the NATO nations also own much of our
national debt, and feel that we are obligated to protect and prosecute wars
on their behalf,  for their interests.

Furthermore, if Clinton is beholden to say a David Rockefeller, he is
personally in debt and must obey.   Suppose both debts could be answered by
starting a war?

Suppose Clinton is willing to play high stakes poker,  risking our national
security, angering both the Russians and the Chinese, for a cause that if
successful would please both obligations and bring him future financial
rewards as post President?

Suppose Clinton was willing to recklessly use his position, power and office,
as the leader of the free world, to place both our national security (risking
Nuclear War) and our men and women of the armed forces into harms way for
personal gain?

What about the pipeline from the Caspian Sea through Turkey?   Has it's
western junction been considered?  I was gazing at a map of Albania the other
day and I could see it is possible for a pipeline corridor from Istanbul West
through a mountain pass over Yugoslavia and into Europe, via Germany.
Wouldn't this be more environmentally friendly than using an ocean Tanker?
However Yugoslavia would need to be stabilised.   And what if a Tanker
crossed the Black Sea from Georgia,  would it not be safer with unstable
Yugoslavia out of the way?

The Rockefellers knew of the Caspian reserves even at the beginning of this
century.  Perhaps they have been scheming to access it all along.

What if Clinton is really pleasing his handlers and NATO nations by causing a
war against parties who have been too difficult to negotiate terms for
pipeline passage.
The Kosovo refugees in this cold calculation of Billions of dollars, are
merely chips on a poker table.  Never mind that they have suffered without
food, or have been killed, or have no shelter.

 Something on this scale would explain the strange behaviors of this war.  It
would explain why we the US seem so willing to spend approximately $4 Billion
to fight it.  The level of compassion urged toward this war,  by the media as
propaganda, is merely a cold smoke screen.    Yet I am saddened by the
hundreds of thousands of innocent people, displaced, hungry and many dead,
who are suffering as the results of a regional strategic chess game.

If this is really what Clinton and his associates are up to, they are
ruthless.

Best Regards,
Marshall Houston
Portland, Oregon
=============
http://www.seattletimes.com/extra/browse/html97/tamr_092297.html

Copyright � 1997 The Seattle Times Company
Monday, Sept. 22, 1997
Tamraz: Visits `put my peers in their place'
by Associated Press
WASHINGTON - Contributing $300,000 to the Democratic Party to socialize with
President Clinton was worth it to millionaire oilman Roger Tamraz, who said
the donation made oil-industry executives view him as a major player.

"It was a good investment," Tamraz said yesterday on ABC's "This Week." "If
it allows you to be in the club of the big boys, it's fine."

In testimony before the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee last week, the
oilman said his donation gained him entry to the White House over the
objections of Clinton's national-security aides.

Tamraz is the subject of a federal grand-jury investigation into his
donations. And he is an international fugitive, wanted in Lebanon on a charge
of embezzling $200 million from a collapsed bank he headed. He denies the
charge.

"Do you know that in Japanese golf companies you pay $400,000 just to become
a member of the golf (club) so that you bump into the Toyota chairman and the
Sony chairman? It doesn't mean they'll play with you, but you're there," he
said.

Tamraz spoke of two brief encounters with Clinton at the White House. At a
March 1996 dinner for about 120 big Democratic donors, he asked the president
to support his Caspian Sea oil-pipeline project. In June that year, he spent
three hours at the White House.

Asked yesterday the purpose of attending the social events, Tamraz replied:
"Who refuses to go to the White House and to sit with the most powerful man
in the world and to eat popcorn and to see him relax and to know he doesn't
come from the divine right of kings?"

"There are other pleasures to going to the White House," he said. "One of
them is to put my peers into their place, so they know that we have an even
field."
============
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/azeroil.htm

STEPHEN KINZER, "A Perilous New Contest for the Next Oil Prize," New
York Times, September 21, 1997

BAKU, Azerbaijan -- In donating $300,000 to Democratic Party organizations
during the 1996 campaign, an ambitious businessman named Roger Tamraz sought
access to President Clinton
and other senior officials so he could ask them to support his project for a
new oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea.
Last week Tamraz's efforts to buy access to the White House emerged as a key
issue in Washington's campaign finance investigations. But in the drama now
unfolding around the Caspian, Tamraz is a bit player and $300,000 a laughably
small sum. The big players are nations including Russia, Iran and the United
States, companies like Amoco, Pennzoil and Exxon and lobbyists with names
like Kissinger, Haig, Baker and Brzezinski. They and every shark east of Suez
have recognized that over the next decades, the greatest of games will be
played around the Caspian. Forget mutual funds, commodity futures and
corporate mergers.
Forget South African diamonds, European currencies and Thai stocks. The most
concentrated
mass of untapped wealth known to exist anywhere is in the oil and gas fields
beneath the Caspian and the lands around it, regions at best dimly familiar
to even the mostassiduous newspaper readers.
The stakes are enormous; the value of the vast reserve, capable of fueling
the industrial world for years to come, is measured in trillions of dollars,
and foreign companies are expected to invest $50 billion or more merely to
extract it.  The strategic implications of this bonanza hypnotize Western
security planners as completely as the finances transfix oil executives. Once
Caspian oil begins flowing, they dare to dream, they will never again have to
kowtow to OPEC or maneuver to prevent oil-thirsty nations from dealing with
Iran and Iraq.  With that relief, however, will undoubtedly come new
troubles, for the competition involves not only governments and oil
companies, but also warlords and clan chiefs who control or move through the
remote regions where the pipelines needed to bring the treasure to market
might be built.
Depending on where the lines are laid, power over the West's energy supply
may fall to Chechen rebels, irredentist Armenians, government-connected
cliques of Russian or Turkish gangsters, Iranian mullahs, Kurdish guerrillas
or mercurial chieftains of the Avars, Lezgins, Swanetians and other Caucasian
ethnic groups that nurse ancient grievances of which the outside world knows
almost nothing.
"All the options are complicated, and none is trouble-free because they all
either pass through politically unstable areas, involve high costs because of
distance and terrain, or are politically risky because they offend the
sensibilities of one or another of the regional powers,"
Rosemarie Forsythe, an American diplomat who specializes in international
energy issues, wrote last year.  That there is oil beneath Azerbaijan has
been known for centuries. The 13th-century explorer Marco Polo reported that
springs here bubbled with black goo that was "good to burn." Between 1880 and
1910 the Rockefeller, Rothschild and Nobel families made fortunes here. In
World War II Azerbaijani oil fueled the Red Army, and Baku, the Azerbaijani
capital, was a great prize that Hitler tried but failed to capture.
Over the entire Soviet period, however, only modest amounts of oil were
produced here as the Soviets preferred to develop fields in Siberia and other
parts of Slavic Russia rather than invest in  peripheral Muslim republics.
But certainly they did not realize that beneath the Caspian is not a pool or
lake of oil, but an ocean.  The proven reserves beneath Azerbaijan's portion
of the Caspian total 17 billion barrels, the equivalent of the North Sea
field. Geologists believe that at least 20 billion to 30 billion barrels more
remain to be found. The other oil-rich corner of the Caspian belongs to
Kazakstan, with proven reserves of 10 billion barrels and perhaps three times
that not yet found.  Some specialists in Baku believe these figures may be
low. Estimates
of total reserves in the Caspian and the lands around it run up to 200
billion barrels, enough to meet the entire energy needs of the United States
for 30 years or more.   After declaring independence from the crumbling
Soviet Union in 1991, Azerbaijan and Kazakstan fell into turmoil from which
they are now beginning to emerge. Foreign oil companies began large-scale
investment in the region in September 1994, when the Azerbaijani state oil
company signed what was called the "contract of the century," a $7.4 billion
agreement with a consortium of 10 companies from the United States, Britain,
Norway, Russia, Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
Four more contracts have since been signed, with French, Italian, Japanese
and Iranian companies among the new arrivals. Mobil paid $1.1 billion for a
stake in Kazakstan's biggest oil field, followed  quickly by Russia's
state-owned oil conglomerate; Malaysian and Chinese
interests are negotiating for the second-largest field.
In neighboring Turkmenistan, U.S. and British companies have bought
permission to search for oil in an 8,000-square-mile tract along the Caspian
coast.
The first consortium, Azerbaijan International Operating Co., is already
drilling in the Caspian and expects to begin producing oil before the end of
this year. The main competition now is over pipeline routes, and the outcome
will have far-reaching political as well as economic effects. Whoever
controls the route or routes will be able to count on steady income from
transit fees and to exert pressure on both producing and consuming countries.
 "If you can't get the oil out, it's no good to anyone," an American oil
analyst in Baku said. "But every way of getting it out presents its own set
of problems."  The first flow of oil is to be sent through an existing
pipeline that  runs north from Baku through Chechnya to the Russian port of
Novorossisk on the Black Sea. Russian leaders would like to expand this line
so it can be used for the far larger flows to come, but to do so they must
cooperate with Chechnya's secessionist rebels.
Russian and Chechen leaders finally reached an accord this month on splitting
the transit fees, but reflecting their mistrust, the Russians immediately
announced that they want to build a new alternative route through North
Ossetia, a region that is marginally more stable politically.
The only existing alternative pipeline does not run through Russia at all,
but westward from Baku to the Black Sea port of Supsa in Georgia. It passes
through potentially explosive regions of Georgia, but Georgian officials say
they can guarantee its security.  Once the oil reaches Supsa, however, what
should be done with it? One option is to ship it in tankers across the Black
Sea, through the Bosporus into the Mediterranean. But Turkish officials
strenuously object to such heavy tanker traffic because of the environmental
risks.
The Turks propose to build a 650-mile pipeline from Supsa across eastern
Turkey to their port of Ceyhan on the Mediterranean. But some oil executives
worry about the time and expense of building such a pipeline, and they cannot
ignore the risk that Kurdish guerrillas in eastern Turkey might try to attack
it.
Another possibility would be to ship or pipe oil from Supsa across the Black
Sea to Bulgaria or Romania, sending it by pipeline from there to a Greek
port. Azerbaijan's president, Heydar Aliyev, has even suggested that he would
consider a pipeline through Armenia if the two
countries can settle their dispute over the occupied Nagorno-Karabakh region.
When oil planners look at maps, however, they cast their eyes on a
tantalizing alternative: simply tie Baku to the existing pipeline network in
neighboring Iran and send the oil south to the Persian Gulf.
This proven route leads to ports already equipped for shipping oil and avoids
the baffling range of political, ethnic, national and religious conflicts
bubbling across the Caucasus. But the United States, which rejects virtually
all cooperation with Iran, strongly opposes it. Some influential figures in
Washington are quietly suggesting that it may be time to reappraise policy
toward Iran, particularly after the election there in May of a relatively
moderate president, but they have not had any visible success.
An even more daring possibility is to run a pipeline from Turkmenistan south
to the open sea through Afghanistan, where the ruthlessly fundamentalist and
anti-Western Taliban movement is in control. At least one U.S. company,
Unocal, has reportedly held pipeline talks with Taliban officials.  Sitting
at the heart of this conundrum is the president of the  Azerbaijani state oil
monopoly, Natik Aliyev. From his window in a stately old Baku office
building, Aliyev, no relation to the president of his country, can gaze out
on the Caspian and ruminate on the black gold beneath it.
"There are so many interlocking interests in this region, not to mention
among outside powers and the oil companies themselves," Aliyev mused. "Our
job is to balance them and still protect our own interests. Believe me, we
don't underestimate the importance or complexity of it
all."
=======================
http://www.wps.ru/digest/oilgas.html#TIT1.1

THE RUSSIAN OIL AND GAS REPORT
No.2, January 13, 1999.
FORMER US SECRETARY OF STATE HENRY KISSINGER JOINED SUPPORTERS OF
BAKU-DJEIHAN ROUTE

       Former Us Secretary of State, one of the most influential social
scientists of America, Henry Kissinger seems to join supports of the oil
pipeline route Baku-Djeihan. This was the opinion of the observers in Baku
about his statement, saying that he considers this route "politically
expedient" as the main route for the Caspian oil transportation to the West.
The oil problems were the main theme of Kissinger's visit to Baku and
Tbilisi, which was subsidized by the
American oil companies.
       Quite recently Kissinger together with another Secretary of State
James Baker (in the past he was the advisor of the Azerbaijani international
operational company) and former British premier Margaret Thatcher (advisor of
British petroleum) spoke for construction of the
main export pipeline through Russia and Ukraine, hooking it to Druzhba
pipeline. It is believed that the current negotiations of Kissinger in the
Transcaucasia reflect the change of the positions of the influential circles
of American establishment. This is not accidental that during his meetings
with the managers of the oil companies and Geidar Aliev Kissinger permanently
stressed that he "likes the route Baku-Djeihan", but with the reservation
that everything "depends upon the economics of the project". The fate of the
pipeline has to be defined by spring.
Despite the "political expedience", confirmed by the Ankara declaration in
autumn of 1998, participants of the project are embarrassed by its
expensiveness ($3.5 billion) and unsolved problem of the Turkish Kurdistan,
which the pipeline has to cross. After their meetings with
Kissinger representatives of Tbilisi believe that Washington will support the
Western Georgian route Baku-Supsa, but refrain from it not to irritate their
ally, Turkey. On the eve of Kissinger's visit to Tbilisi the first tons of
oil were delivered from Azerbaijan to Georgia through the new pipeline.
Several days later the oil was delivered to the terminal in Supsa. It is
planned to pump 18-20 million tons of oil through this pipeline annually.
       It is interesting that right after Kissinger Georgian parliament
speaker Zurab Zhvania flew to the US with the 12-days visit by the invitation
of the American oil tycoons. He plans to conduct negotiations with the oil
business leaders in Dallas. Before his departure to the US Zhvania did not
hide that his visit was completely financed by the American part, and the
goal of his visit is to convince the American businessmen of reliability of
Georgia.
Vremya MN, January 12, 1999, p. 6
==================
Commando force to guard new Caspian pipeline

By Lawrence Sheets
TBILISI, April 16 (Reuters) - Showing off a commando force backed by
warplanes and helicopter gunships on Friday, Georgia declared it would ensure
security for a new pipeline for Caspian crude which opens this weekend.

The $560 million pipeline, running 830 km (516 miles) from the Azeri capital
Baku to Georgia's Black Sea outlet at Supsa, is seen by analysts as an
important step in diversifying export routes for Caspian basin crude.
Georgia also sees it as pivotal for developing the Caucasus country of 5.5
million as a key transit state between Asia and Europe, and not just for oil.

Defence Minister David Tevzadze presented a special force of camouflage-clad
crack troops to visiting foreign dignitaries and army brass on Friday morning
during a military training exercise near the capital Tbilisi.
Russian-made Sukhoi warplanes screamed overhead as Kalashnikov-carrying
soldiers scrambled from helicopters onto a smouldering simulated battlefield.
 ``Georgia is ready to defend the pipeline. These troops can go into action
in just a few hours,'' Tevzadze told Reuters.  The line will carry Azeri
crude oil mainly for the BP Amoco-led Azerbaijan International Operating
Company consortium which paid for its rehabilitation and upgrading.

It crosses through territory rife with strife and political unrest in recent
years.  In Azerbaijan, it comes within 30 km (20 miles) of front lines
between Armenian and Azeri forces who have been at odds for over a decade
over the disputed Karabakh region. Shooting and skirmishes are common.

Western Georgia, through which it crosses, has been a hotbed of strife ever
since independence in 1991.  The area is home to armed groups who do not
recognise the government of President Eduard Shevardnadze. Civil wars were
fought between backers of the 71-year-old former Soviet foreign minister and
militants loyal to the now late nationalist former president Zviad
Gamsakhurdia in 1992 and 1993.

Last October it was the scene of a military mutiny led by a rogue commander,
Akaki Eliava who briefly marched with his troops on the country's second
city, Kutaisi, and demanded Shevardnadze leave office. Eliava is still on the
run.  ``There is definitely concern in the West over the security of the
pipeline,'' said Zeyno Baran, a research associate at the Washington-based
Centre for Strategic and International Studies.

But U.S. government officials, who have backed the new route, capable of
handling 100,000 barrels per day at present as a good way to diversify
Caspian export routes, say they have full confidence in Georgia's ability to
guard the pipeline.
Extraordinary security measures never before seen in Georgia have been taken
for Saturday's opening ceremony, in which the first tanker will begin filling
at Supsa.

A many miles-wide area around Supsa has virtually been sealed off in advance
of the event, in which Azerbaijan's President Haydar Aliyev, Shevardnadze,
and Ukraine's President Leonid Kuchma are taking part, along with high
ranking officials from many other countries.

Journalists covering the event, as well as participants, are not being
allowed to carry mobile phones within about a 50-km (30-mile) radius of
Supsa. Military helicopters buzzed over Tbilisi all day on Friday.
12:26 04-16-99
Copyright 1999 Reuters Limited.
=============
During the retaliation against Bin Laden  Unocal was forced to leave. Was
this missile attack secretly designed to remove competing Oil Interests?
Marshall
======================
Bombings Worry Overseas Businesses
Terrorist Expert Says Anxiety at 'Top of Scale'

By MICHAEL WHITE
.c The Associated Press
LOS ANGELES (Aug. 21) -- Pinkerton Global Intelligence Services was swamped
Friday with calls from U.S. corporations looking for ways to protect their
overseas employees and property from possible retaliation by terrorists
targeted in U.S. missile strikes.
``It's chaos today,'' said Frank Johns, a terrorism expert and managing
director of Pinkerton Global, a branch of Pinkerton Service Corp. ``Awareness
increases with anxiety, which is at the top of the scale.''

The cruise missile attacks Thursday on suspected terrorist sites in Sudan and
Afghanistan and the Aug. 7 terrorist bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and
Tanzania have prompted companies to review security measures and, in some
cases, halt work.

Unocal Corp. suspended work on a proposed natural gas pipeline that would
cross Afghanistan to connect gas fields in Turkmenistan with markets in
Pakistan and India.

``It was actually in response to the action Thursday, and there also has been
renewed fighting in the country,'' said Terry Covington, a spokesman in
Unocal's Houston office. ``I believe the consortium feels ... it needs to
review the status of the project.''

Construction had not begun on the project. Unocal, as leader of a
seven-company consortium building the line, had conducted preliminary talks
with the fundamentalist Taliban and the Northern Alliance, two groups
battling for control of Afghanistan, she said.

Last weekend, Unocal closed a small office in Pakistan and evacuated four
U.S. employees after the State Department issued an advisory warning that
Americans could be at risk there, Ms. Covington said.

Atlantic Richfield Co. has been in communication with its overseas employees
about possible risks, but a spokesman declined to elaborate further about
precautions the company has taken.
``In general, yes, we've alerted our people, but I can't say exactly what
we're doing,'' said Al Greenstein, spokesman at the company's Los Angeles
headquarters.
Arco has about 600 employees, including 12 American and Canadian workers, at
a southeastern Pakistani oil field that produces about 25,000 barrels of oil
a day. The company has taken ``appropriate measures'' to protect the work
force there, as well as at smaller operations in Qatar, Dubai and Tunisia,
Greenstein said.
Arco operates an oil field in Algeria already under tight security because of
a conflict between Muslim insurgents and the government.

Terrorists typically prefer to attack official government installations, such
as an embassy, because of the greater symbolic value, said Ian Lesser, a Rand
Corp. senior analyst specializing in terrorism. But as embassies and
consulates beef up security, businesses could become more attractive targets,
he said.

``Terrorists will always look for relatively soft targets and to the extent
that security at official U.S. installations gets better, businesses should
take appropriate measures,'' he warned.
The difficulty in predicting a terrorist attack means there is a limit to
what corporations can do to protect themselves, the Pinkerton's Johns said.
Companies like Pinkerton can help clients find security weaknesses, create
evacuation plans and anticipate situations in which a company might become
vulnerable to attack. In one case earlier this week, he advised a client to
cancel a planned trip to Pakistan.
Johns declined to identify the company's clients, but said Pinkerton
represents more than 80 percent of the U.S. companies on the Fortune 1000
list.
``We try to do for them what the CIA and FBI do for the government:
anticipate and point out what we think are the most important security
incidents over next 24 hours,'' he said.
AP-NY-08-21-98 1849EDT
Copyright 1998 The Associated Press.


Reply via email to