What the US knew before 9/11
- Richard Knox

I'd like to weigh in on the subject of what the US knew before 9/11.

First my background - where I’m coming from. My Dad was a petroleum geologist a pioneer in seismology - ultimately promoted to be President of the Canadian exploration subsidiary of Chevron. In the 1930’s he mapped the oil fields of Southern California and the oil fields of Mexico, to see them nationalized, to his fury. His buddy Max Steinicke mapped the fields of Saudi Arabia. I’ve invested in oil wells and have been given the chance to invest in the Central Asian fields. So I’ve followed this subject all my life.

To understand the oil business you must understand that oil companies plan on a 50-year horizon. The oil you use today was discovered by my dad and his friends in the 30’s.

The US oil industry is very interested in the oil of Central Asia. This is no secret. Russia is opposed to our being involved, again no secret. This week Condoleesa Rice gave a speech in Russia assuring them that our goal in Afghanistan is not related to our oil interests. I have met Condoleesa I believe in her honesty. No doubt she believes what she said. However in my opinion she is naïve. Sooner or later the US will move on that oil perhaps years after she has left Washington. If forced to, the US may split the bounty with Russia.

The Congress of the US has discussed the desirability of getting this oil out of the control of the Russians. It has been stated as the policy of the US.

Here I quote from 1998 U.S. INTERESTS IN THE CENTRAL ASIAN REPUBLICS HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ASIA AND THE PACIFIC OF THE COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FIFTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION, FEBRUARY 12, 1998

“Stated U.S. policy goals regarding energy resources in this region include fostering the independence of the States and their ties to the West; breaking Russia’s monopoly over oil and gas transport routes; promoting Western energy security through diversified suppliers; encouraging the construction of east-west pipelines that do not transit Iran; and denying Iran dangerous leverage over the Central Asian economies.”

While at the moment we are awash in oil, industry analysts predict that the fields of Central Asia probably will be the world’s major source of oil in 2050.

The only pipelines that come out of this area go through Russian controlled territory. The better routes are through Iran to the Persian Gulf or through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Arabian Sea. Iran will not give permission for US companies to build a pipeline there although I believe a French company is doing so. The other route out is through China, long distance and through difficult terrain.

The route through Afghanistan/Pakistan is short. It goes through the western part of Pakistan, which is pretty well controlled by the General/Dictator in Pakistan. It is the preferred economic option. The problem is Afghanistan. Unocal has a plan to build that pipeline but says they have to wait until there is a government in Afghanistan that is stable and friendly to US business interests. The Muslim hardliners in Afghanistan have to go before that pipeline can be built.

Point your browser here to read the Unocal testimony before congress:http://www.house.gov/international_relations/105th/ap/wsap212982.htm

I am personally convinced to the point of total certainty that the plan to attack Afghanistan was set in motion one or two years ago.

Understand that the serious policy planning of the US government does not come and go with individual presidents and is not a response to chance events.

I’ve seen the following quote attributed to George Kennan mastermind of the US Cold War strategy “ ...we have about 50% of the world’s wealth, but only 6.3% of its population ... Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity... To do so, we will have to dispense with sentimentality... We should cease to talk about vague and unreal objectives such as human rights, the rising of living standards, and democratization”. Somebody make me feel better, tell me he didn’t say this.

Digression. I’m an Apollo rocket scientist turned software entrepreneur. Years ago I had a programmer who would come in once a year when he was responsible for something hot and tell me that he had been offered a better job and had to leave. I would give him a big raise to get him to stay. Finally I decided that the next time it happened I would take him up on it. I didn’t know when it would happen, and I didn’t know exactly what he would say, but I knew what I would do. Next time I congratulated him and wrote him a check and said goodbye.

I believe that what happened here is essentially the same. Bush II may or may not know the background just as Kennedy did not necessarily know the preparations that had been made for the Bay of Pigs. I would assume that Bush’s father and VP Cheney know the background. The people who sign the multi million-dollar campaign checks wanted to go into Afghanistan and were waiting for an event that would justify it.

Given that background it is just too much co-incidence that when some Egyptians financed by some Saudis did this deed, within a day Bush II announced that the US would attack Afghanistan. Afghanistan said they would turn bin Laden over to a neutral country. Bush II turned them down. Gimme a break! Believe our statements and you have to believe in the tooth fairy!

When I was half my age I would have thought that people who talk like this were paranoid. I’ve since seen enough of the world to realize that in fact this is how the world works. I had a client who contributed $100,000 to the Reagan campaign and got to be part of the “kitchen cabinet”. According to him, he told Ronnie what to do and Ronnie did it. My client got richer in the process.

What preparations did we make? Over the past 2 years we built a military circle around Afghanistan and positioned troops in the major areas that would be destabilized when we went in. We got Uzbekistan to allow our military there. We have a large military presence in Saudi Arabia one of bin Laden’s major gripes. We have major NATO operations going on in Egypt (78,000 troops) and Turkey. Coincidentally we had extra aircraft carriers close to the Persian Gulf.

Is all this bad? It sure is bad for the civilians who live in Afghanistan. I also believe it is bad for the common folk of the US since in the modern interdependent world you can’t afford to be a monster without paying the price. It also is difficult if you are interested in morality rather than realpolitik.

It is not clear to me whether bin Laden ordered this deed but it is clear that he is a danger not only to the power structure of the US but also to the people of the US. His grievances are just but no matter what, I don’t condone killing innocents. Not here, not there.

I personally believe we should stop this military action and start a massive ground food delivery to Afghanistan. At the same time, accept the offer of the Taliban to put bin Laden on trial in a neutral country.

I personally believe we should phase our military out of Arabia, giving the royal family time to take their money and run, and giving the people of Arabia the option to decide for themselves what kind of government they want. Some might think that the option of having a king who chops off heads is an anachronism. Contrary to popular propaganda we would not be hurt by this. The house of Saud would be hurt and Aramco (Chevron/Texaco) would be hurt. The interests of the US man on the street would not be hurt. As someone pointed out, the world is awash in oil. The Saudis do not set the price.

I also believe that we should support Israel in some very different way, a way that provides equal support for the Palestinians.

The problem with doing anything is the reality of how the US Government works. The US and the USSR both managed to give the illusion of democratic power when in fact there was none. In Soviet times you could and were pressured to vote, but you had to write in a name if you didn’t accept the party choice. On US ballots there are two names, but both candidates must be backed by lots of money because it takes at least $1 million to buy the TV time to run for congress.

Most of the current politicians do not seem willing to vote for campaign reform since they have sold themselves to the sources of money. The dilemma is that the only solution is to get people to vote for candidates who do not appear on TV and people consider that throwing away their vote.

One would hope that education would be the answer, but the money controls the spread of information. Just after 9/11 a group called ANSWER held a daylong demonstration in Washington. They said everything that needs to be said. Nobody heard unless they listened on CSPAN. The Los Angeles Times buried the story and did not discuss the information shared rather the clothing they wore and the posturing that went on.

All this notwithstanding there is the power of compounding. Multi level marketing. If each person who took the time to read this to the end could just convince two of their friends of (1) the nature of the problem, and (2) the obvious solution (vote for people who can’t afford TV time) there just might still be time.

Copyright 2001 Richard Knox all rights reserved. Feel free to circulate for non-commercial purposes.