September 11 Commission Report - Gnostic Liberation Front

with Afghanistan, and secure access to Central Asian oil and gas reserves. There are two
(at least) versions of this theory
1. In one version of this explanation, the first Bush administration, under the guidance
of Zbniew Brezinski and Henry Kissinger, formulated and initiated a strategy to
control Central Asian Oil. U.S. covert activities in the region were guided by that
strategy. Prior to his departure from office of the Presidency, Bush put into motion a
number of covert activities that would ensure the continuation of his strategy, despite
prohibitive legislation to the contrary. Those activities would include sending his
former Iran-Contra operatives (Richard Secord, Richard Armitage and Farhad Azima)
into Azerbaijan, and James Giffen in Kazakhstan.
2. In a second version of the Oil cartel explanation, oil industry executives unduly
influenced the American political process through massive contributions to political
campaigns, thus ‘purchasing’ secret influence over policy, regardless of the law of the
land. Under this latter hypothesis, in it’s simplest form, the Taliban government had
reneged on a deal with Unocal (US) and Delta Oil (Saudi) in August of 2001, to allow
Unocal & Delta to build and control a pipeline from the Caspian Basin through
Afghanistan; and awarded the contract to Bridas, an Argentinean firm. The Bush
administration - heavily populated by former energy sector professionals (Bush- Bush
Exploration, Harken Energy, Spectrum 7 Energy Corp. Arbusto Energy Inc; Cheney-
Halliburton; Condoleezza Rice – Chevron; Secretary of the Army, Mr. Tom White –
Enron, to list a few), and with the energy lobby representing the single greatest source
of Bush campaign contributions, planned, executed and covered-up the attack on the
WTC to justify a war with the Taliban government, and a subsequent invasion of Iraq.
According to this explanation of the attack on the World Trade Center, the attack
provided an all-too-convenient excuse for a series of actions that benefited the oil
industry, actions that could not have occurred without the “excuse” of 9/11 being
used to mobilize the American public and “justify” attacks on Iraq and Afghanistan.
With either theory, there are seven arguments that support the premise that the energy
industry was the primary beneficiary of the attack on the World Trade Center.
• U.S. companies were allowed to benefit from the regained pipeline construction
contracts;
• Enron’s investment in an Indian energy plant, and a Pakistani docking facility at
the Arabian Sea terminal were to have been salvaged, possibly helping Enron
avoid bankruptcy;
• The U.S. strategic interests (both economic and defense) were served by
preventing the flow Caspian Oil through either Russia or Iran,
• The attack allowed the US to create a permanent footprint of US military bases
throughout the area, setting up a sphere of influence in the fourth largest oil
region in the world and establishing a launching pad for an invasion of Iran.
Additionally the establishment of U.S. bases in Afghanistan geographically
mirrors the route of the planned natural gas pipeline. The U.S. had been locked
out of the bidding for this pipeline, just months prior to the invasion. A major
investment by Enron in the region was threatened by the loss of this pipeline.
Now, in a fortuitous change of governments caused by the destruction of a
THE SEPTEMBER 11 COMMISSION REPORT Page 57