Re: Blood for Oil (was The Pig Boy was really squealing today
at Thursday, February 20, 2003 1:28 AM, Harmon Seaver [EMAIL PROTECTED] was seen to say: No oil but lots of dope, especially lots of high grade opium and the CIA and the US scum military has been just desperate to get control of the world heroin trade again like they did in Vietnam days. They don't need to build a pipeline though Afganistan any more then? I know they were pretty annoyed when the taleban refused to let them, prior to 9/11
Re: Blood for Oil (was The Pig Boy was really squealing today
I'm trying to think of something I'd personally be less interested in investing my own money in than an oil pipeline through Afghanistan. Lots of money invested up front, literally hundreds of small groups who could threaten to damage it as a way of demanding a share of the loot, very hard to defend, etc. What an opportunity! And best of all, neither oil wells nor customers at either end!!
Re: Blood for Oil (was The Pig Boy was really squealing today
So the US killed a lot of people there, so as to spread respect for freedom and democracy, and installed another dictator without elections, or any plan for elections The current leader was elected, not in accordance with western democratic norms that some people want to impose of Afghans at gunpoint, but in accordance with Afghan democratic norms.
Re: Blood for Oil (was The Pig Boy was really squealing today
At 10:50 AM 2/20/03 +, David Howe wrote: ... They don't need to build a pipeline though Afganistan any more then? I know they were pretty annoyed when the taleban refused to let them, prior to 9/11 I'm trying to think of something I'd personally be less interested in investing my own money in than an oil pipeline through Afghanistan. Lots of money invested up front, literally hundreds of small groups who could threaten to damage it as a way of demanding a share of the loot, very hard to defend, etc. What an opportunity! --John Kelsey, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Blood for Oil (was The Pig Boy was really squealing today
On Wed, Feb 19, 2003 at 09:20:16PM -, lcs Mixmaster Remailer wrote: On , you wrote: You are anti-Bush anti-Iraq invasion. We got it. He's just trying to convince us that he's *really* serious about it. Hey Chaka: everybody here has already formulated their own opinion on Iraq some time ago - but we're not going on on on about it. Remember when our whole 'real' reason for going into Afghanistan was all about oil too? Look how much we're getting from them nowadays. --- JLG No, the real reason was because terrorists hate freedom and democracy, That's right, or at least the state terrorists in the whitehouse do. and the US wanted Afghanistan to be free and democratic. So the US killed a lot of people there, so as to spread respect for freedom and democracy, and installed another dictator without elections, or any plan for elections. And if you will check out a little geology, you'll learn that Afghanistan doesn't have any substantial oil. No oil but lots of dope, especially lots of high grade opium and the CIA and the US scum military has been just desperate to get control of the world heroin trade again like they did in Vietnam days. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
