Nettime's compiler on Wed, 12 Dec 2001 21:22:26 +0100 (CET)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> No longer in the Wilderness

Table of Contents:

   Re: <nettime> No longer in the Wilderness (fwd)                                 
     Steven Foster <>                                               

   Re: No longer in the Wilderness (fwd)                                           
     Will Meister <>                                                 


Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2001 22:52:01 -0700
From: Steven Foster <>
Subject: Re: <nettime> No longer in the Wilderness (fwd)

Also without detailed comment -  here is another article in two parts
concerning the irregularities around Sept 11.  Particular emphasis is on
deviations from normal interception procedures for planes hijacked or
 off course.

- --------------------------------

Keith Sanborn wrote:

> I pass this along without detailed comment. Perhaps someone on list could
> offer enlightenment on the credentials or credibility of the person involved.
> It has all the earmarks of classic conspiracy theory, but it could well
> be true, for all I can tell. But then, the Bushes given us so much to be
> paranoid about up to now.
> Keith Sanborn


Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:18:12 +0000
From: Will Meister <>
Subject: Re: No longer in the Wilderness (fwd)


No direct comment on the reliability or otherwise of Mike Ruppert (I leave
that for US nettimers), but it is clear that US-Russian oil interests had
begun planning military strategies in Afghanistan long before September
11. Some of the best discussion I've read on this subject came up right
here on Nettime: you might like to retrieve Ivo Skoric's Media Watches, or
Andy Mueller-Maguh's post of October 31.

Quoted below are a couple of pieces that I guess most nettimers won't have
seen, as they come from Gary North, a right-wing US commentator. North's
'Reality Check' newsletter is extremely critical of present US Middle East
policy. He has written much too much on the war for me to quote here, but
the subscription address for the newsletter appears at the end of this


>X-From_: Thu Oct 11 16:43:41 2001
>To: <>
>Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 10:22:02 -0500
>From: Gary North & Bill Bonner <>
>Subject: The Russian-American Anti-Taliban Alliance
>                Gary North's REALITY CHECK
>Number 81                                  October 11, 2001
>     On June 26, the following story appeared in India's
>Web news site, Indiareacts.
>           India in anti-Taliban military plan
>     India and Iran will "facilitate" the planned
>     US-Russia hostilities against the Taliban.
>                   By Our Correspondent
>     26 June 2001: India and Iran will "facilitate" US
>     and Russian plans for "limited military action"
>     against the Taliban if the contemplated tough new
>     economic sanctions don't bend Afghanistan's
>     fundamentalist regime.
>     The Taliban controls 90 per cent of Afghanistan
>     and is advancing northward along the Salang
>     highway and preparing for a rear attack on the
>     opposition Northern Alliance from
>     Tajikistan-Afghanistan border positions.
>     Indian foreign secretary Chokila Iyer attended a
>     crucial session of the second Indo-Russian joint
>     working group on Afghanistan in Moscow amidst
>     increase of Taliban's military activity near the
>     Tajikistan border. And, Russia's Federal Security
>     Bureau (the former KGB) chief Nicolai Patroshev
>     is visiting Teheran this week in connection with
>     Taliban's military build-up.
>     Indian officials say that India and Iran will
>     only play the role of "facilitator" while the US
>     and Russia will combat the Taliban from the front
>     with the help of two Central Asian countries,
>     Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, to push Taliban lines
>     back to the 1998 position 50 km away from
>     Mazar-e-Sharief city in northern Afghanistan.
>     Military action will be the last option though it
>     now seems scarcely avoidable with the UN banned
>     from Taliban-controlled areas. The UN which
>     adopted various means in the last four years to
>     resolve the Afghan problem is now being suspected
>     by the Taliban and refused entry into Taliban
>     areas of the war-ravaged nation through a decree
>     issued by Taliban chief Mullah Mohammad Omar last
>     month.
>     Diplomats say that the anti-Taliban move followed
>     a meeting between US Secretary of State Collin
>     Powel and Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov
>     and later between Powell and Indian foreign
>     minister Jaswant Singh in Washington. Russia,
>     Iran and India have also held a series of
>     discussions and more diplomatic activity is
>     expected...
>     Three months later, on September 27, Reuters released
>the following story:
>     WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States is not
>     now contemplating joint military operations with
>     Russia in the war on terrorism but such
>     cooperation remains an option for the future,
>     Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said.
>     How can both of these reports be true?
>     I believe the June 26 report.  It explains why the
>formation of the Russian-U.S. alliance has taken place so
>smoothly during the last two weeks, despite earlier
>protests on both sides that such an alliance was unlikely.


from 'Reality Check' 15 Nov 2001

Things seem to be coming together nicely for the
United Nations and also for those nations with an interest
in subduing bin Laden, and whatever else they have planned,
such as building an oil pipeline from the Caspian Sea
through Afghanistan and Pakistan, to the Indian Ocean.  On
this point, see the 1999 maps, published by the Council on
Foreign Relations, relating to the Caspian Sea.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

To subscribe to Reality Check go to:

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


Will Meister | | 07771 562863


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  archive: contact: