Les 30 000 indigènes et paysans qui ont réalisé l’impossible

 

Équateur : CHEVRON-TEXACO doit payer le plus grand dédommagement de l’Histoire.

Lors d’un procès, inédit dans le monde entier, en janvier 2012, la justice Équatorienne a confirmé la condamnation émise un an plus tôt : l’industrie pétrolièreChevron-Texaco est coupable d’avoir déversé des millions de tonnes de produits toxiques pour la forêt amazonienne et doit payer une facture de 19 200 000 000 de dollars, chiffre le plus élevé dans l’histoire des indemnisations prescrites par la justice.

Les avocats des 30 000 Indigènes et Paysans qui composent l’Assemblée des Victimes deTexaco, n’ont pas tardé à entreprendre des démarches pour recouvrer cette somme. Pas en Équateur, d’où l’entreprise américaine a retiré ses fonds il y a un moment, mais au Canada, au Brésil, en Colombie et en Argentine.

C’est dans ce dernier pays que les démarches ont donné leurs premiers résultats. Le 7 novembre la justice argentine a décrété la saisie de tous les fonds de l’entreprise. Une nouvelle que n’ont pas spécialement apprécié les investisseurs : la neuvième industrie pétrolière dans le monde a commencé le mois de décembre avec de fortes chutes en Bourse. Le premier pas pour réparer un des plus grands épandages toxiques de l’Histoire est maintenant franchi.

Le premier baril de pétrole

Le 27 juin 1972, le premier barril de prétrole de l’Amazonie Equatorienne est arrivé à Quito, et a été reçu avec tous les honneurs dus à un Chef d’État. Il était exposé sur un coussin en haut d’un char et le cortège avançait au milieu de la foule jusqu’à ce qui représentait le Temple du Collège Militaire. Au bord des rues se bousculaient les habitants de Quito qui souhaitaient la bienvenue à une nouvelle « ère de prospérité », selon la voix nasillarde de la presse nationale. Continue reading

Of Goldman Sachs & Tenghizchevroil

20121203-204408.jpg
Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein tesifies before the Senate in April 2010

By Dean Henderson, Left Hook

In July 2010 those poor billionaire chaps at the bloodsucking firm otherwise known as Goldman Sachs, admitted no fraud and got slapped with a $550 million fine by the SEC. Should have been ten times the money and jail time, but hey, these same guys stiffed us for a trillion in the “banker bailout” two years ago, so who’s counting.

The first $250 million went to Royal Bank of Scotland and the German bank IKB Deutsche Industriebank AG. The other $300 million will go to the US Treasury. Seems fair that some banksters should get half, don’t you think? Glass half full: Any time you deal with a banker and come out with more than half, well hell, you did alright.

The fine amounted to 14 days of profits at Goldman Sachs. As Adelphi University professor and former Bear Stearns managing director Michael Driscoll put it, “That is a steal (for Goldman)”. Goldman shares and options surged on the news.

On the bright side, it was the biggest fine ever levied against a corporation by a US government agency. And the Justice Department is now bringing criminal charges against Goldman’s Rajiv Gupta. Citigroup found itself recently explaining how it cooked its books. And German police raided every office of UBS (Union Bank of Switzerland) on German soil in a single day, demanding records of wealthy German tax evaders.

Not well rested the heads of Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan Chase, Deutsche Bank and Bank or America, either. All spent the week waiting for the next SEC subpoena and word has it they are forthcoming.

Continue reading

US-Created “Syrian Opposition” Led by Big Oil Rep

20121126-095200.jpg
By Tony Cartalucci, Land Destroyer for Activist Post

A year ago, it was reported that Libya’s new NATO-installed prime minister, Abdurrahim el-Keib, was in fact a long-time US resident, having taught at the University of Alabama and was formally employed by the Petroleum Institute, based in Abu Dhabi, UAE and sponsored by British Petroleum (BP), Shell, France’s Total, the Japan Oil Development Company, and the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company. El-Keib is listed as a “Professor and Chairman” in his Petroleum Institute profile which also describes extensive research conducted by him sponsored by various US government agencies and departments over the years.

His long history of serving and working in coordination with Western governments and corporations made him and his collaborators the ideal candidates to prepare Libya for its place within the Wall Street-London international order.

Now it is revealed that the US-handpicked opposition, announced in Doha, Qatar earlier this month, is led by a similarly compromised figure, Moaz al-Khatib. The corporate-financier-funded Carnegie Endowment for International Peace reported of al-Khatib that:

Moaz al-Khatib, an oil sector engineer and former imam of the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus, has garnered substantial praise since his designation, while Riad Seif and Suhair al-Atassi bring their own credibility to the coalition. They have now set up shop in Cairo and have received the full endorsement of France, Italy, the United Kingdom, Turkey, and the members of the Gulf Cooperation Council as the ‘sole representative’ of the Syrian opposition. The European Union and the United States have endorsed the group in a more general fashion.

Even more importantly, from Syrian citizens of various affiliations with whom I have met recently, it is clear that al-Khatib and his associates seem to draw praise for their opposition to the regime—as an imam, al-Khatib refused to follow the speeches imposed by the regime and was imprisoned—their resistance, and their tolerance. These endorsements are a first achievement, but a number of steps are necessary before Moaz al-Khatib becomes the real head of the Syrian opposition and enters into a substantive relationship with EU leaders.

However, this resounding praise should be kept in the context that among the Carnegie Endowment’s sponsors are in fact many “oil sector” giants including British Petroleum (BP), Chevron, Exxon, and Shell.

Continue reading

ARAMCO & The House Of Saud

20121024-192717.jpg

The only thing that was more striking than America’s cynicism- from paranoid right and jaded left alike – toward’s the Arab Spring was this nation’s collective journalistic ignorance about the Middle East region.

Pundits compare revolutionary Iran, where a still-nationalized oil sector has Big Oil licking it’s profit-inflated lips, to Algeria and Yemen, where CIA intrigues installed reactionary governments to replace progressive one’s which opposed the Gulf War in 1991. They compare socialist Syria with US puppet monarchies in Bahrain and Jordan.

There are generally two types of Arab governments in the Middle East. The democratic one’s have been our enemies. The monarchs and dictators have been our friends. And the game has been all about oil.

20121024-192759.jpg
(What follows is excerpted from Chapter 3: JP Morgan & the House of Saud: Big Oil & Their Bankers…)

By Dean HENDERSON, LEFT HOOK

With 261 billion barrels of crude oil lying beneath its soil, Saudi Arabia remains the lynchpin in the international oil grab presided over by the Rothschild/Rockefeller-controlled Four Horsemen. If revolution in the Middle East really hits its stride, then it must pay a visit upon the most crooked monarchy of all- the House of Saud.

As Joseph Story, Middle East analyst and former ARAMCO executive once said, “Only one factor is involved in where the price of oil is going to go, and that is Saudi Arabia”.

In 1933 Standard Oil Company of California (Socal) negotiated the first oil concession in Saudi Arabia with Saudi Finance Minister Abdullah Sulaiman. The Saudis were to get a 30,000 British pound loan and 5,000 pounds for the first year’s rent, all payable in gold. But US President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) had just embargoed gold exports in response to the Great Depression and Socal’s request for an exemption was turned down by FDR’s Secretary of State Dean Acheson.

Socal circumvented the embargo by procuring the gold from the London branch of Morgan Guaranty Trust. When the Saudis asked Socal officials what they should do with their newfound wealth, Socal recommended depositing it at Morgan Guaranty Trust. The Saudis complied.

In 1938 Socal, which later changed its name to Chevron, struck oil in both Saudi Arabia and Qatar and founded the Arabian American Oil Company (ARAMCO). Chevron quickly brought in Standard Oil of New Jersey (later Exxon), Standard Oil of New York (later Mobil) and Texaco as partners. This American half of the Four Horsemen would grow ARAMCO into the largest oil company in the world, nearly three times the size of Royal Dutch/Shell.

Continue reading

The Gulf Cooperation Council: Rockefeller/Rothschild Puppet Monarchy

20121022-080527.jpg

(Excerpted from Chapter 5: Persian Gulf Rent-a-Sheik: Big Oil & Their Bankers…)

By Dean HENDERSON, LEFT HOOK

It shouldn’t have surprised anyone when the six nations which make up the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) called on their Western protectors to enforce a no-fly zone in the skies over Libya last year. Why would these Arab nations- Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, UAE, Oman and Qatar- clamor for an act of war against another Arab oil-producer? A brief history of the GCC is in order.

The Iranian Revolution of 1979 was a watershed event. With the Shah deposed and the Iranian Consortium nationalized, the Four Horsemen- Exxon Mobil, Chevron Texaco, BP Amoco and Royal Dutch/Shell- and their Rockefeller/Rothschild owners sought to create a more comprehensive security system for the safeguarding of Persian Gulf crude oil. The House of Saud was fast becoming a lightning rod for Arab nationalists, who saw the monarchy as a Western surrogate.

The State Department sought to take pressure off the Saudis by finding other regional leaders willing to embrace the same oil for arms quid pro quo that had been in force in the Kingdom since the early 1950’s. That arrangement involves the US arming the House of Saud to protect it from enemies both foreign and domestic. In return the Saudis serve as “swing producer”, ensuring the West a steady and relatively cheap supply of oil. While US spook outfits like SAIC, Booz Hamilton, TRW and Vinnell Corp. trained the Saudi National Guard, Pakistani and Egyptian pilots (Saudi nationals were not to be trusted) were trained to fly US F-15 fighters in protection of the Kingdom. The Saudis in turn became the primary funder of CIA/MI6/Mossad covert operations worldwide, including those aimed at Libya from bases in Exxon Mobil-controlled Chad.

Continue reading

Afghan History Suppressed: Part II: Socialism, al Qaeda and Chevron

20121019-231246.jpg
(Part two of a three-part series excerpted from Chapter 8: Project Frankenstein: Afhanistan: Big Oil & Their Bankers…)

By Dean HENDERSON, LEFT HOOK

In the mid-1980’s the UN tried to broker a peace deal in Afghanistan involving a complete Soviet withdrawal in return for an end to US and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) support for the Afghan rebels. The Reagan Administration refused the UN deal. It wanted to “give the Soviets their Vietnam” as part of a grander scheme to rip apart the Soviet Union. It also wanted the socialist Karmal government out of Kabul. In 1986 US military aid to the mujahadeen increased dramatically to $1 billion/year.

In 1988 the US and the Soviets signed the Geneva Accords which called for an Afghan arms embargo. Both countries ignored the deal and the fighting continued. Mujahadeen fighters routinely tortured and mutilated captured Russian and Afghan soldiers- often in the presence of American advisers. [1]

In 1989 the Soviets pulled out of Afghanistan. Their hand-picked Prime Minister Babrak Karmal had been replaced by the democratically-elected Mohammad Najibullah Ahmadzai in 1986. But Najibullah was also a socialist and democracy was never a State Department priority. He represented the Parchom faction of the Communist People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan.

Though the Soviets were gone, the US kept funding the guerrilla campaign against the duly-elected government in Kabul. In 1992 Najibullah was overthrown. One of seven fighting mujahadeen factions led by Burhaddin Rabbani took power. Six of the seven rebel groups laid down their arms and got behind Rabbani.

The one that did not was CIA-favorite Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s Hezbi-i Isbmi, which proceeded to soak the streets of Kabul in yet another round of blood. Though the UN now recognized the Rabbani-led faction as Afghanistan’s legitimate government, the CIA still saw Rabbani as too much the leftist.

Hekmatyar’s forces finally seized Kabul. Rabbani and his government fled north into the Mazar-i-Sharif region where, under the command of military chief Sheik Ahmed Shah Massoud, the ousted mujahadeen factions reconstituted themselves as the Northern Alliance. In 1995 Hezbi-i Isbmi suddenly stepped down, ceding Kabul to a new creation of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) already in charge in Kandahar- the Taliban.

Continue reading

The Rothschild’s South Sudan Oil Grab

20121011-093018.jpg
By Dean HENDERSON, LEFT HOOK

On July 9, 2011 South Sudan became the world’s 193rd nation. Less than a week later violence has erupted in South Kordofan, an area on the new border between Sudan and South Sudan which is controlled by Sudan and rich in oil. Not content with the seizure of South Sudan’s oilfields, the Rothschild-led Eight Families banking cartel looks set to push the new border further north, grabbing yet more crude oil from the Sudan ese people.

For decades Western intelligence agencies backed the Sudanese People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) in an attempt to lop off the southern half of Sudan for the Four Horsemen of Oil. The region contains 75% of Sudan’s oil reserves. What became Africa’s longest running civil war finally came to an end when Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir was pressured into ceding the southern part of his country to the IMF/World Bank vampires after the conflict they created left more than 2 million people dead. [1]

Within days of declaring itself a sovereign nation, South Sudan’s state oil company, Nilepet formed a joint venture with Glencore International Plc to market its oil. Glencore is controlled by the Rothschilds. The PetroNile joint venture will be 51 percent controlled by Nilepet and 49 percent by Glencore. [2]

On Friday South Sudan’s new President Salva Kiir Mayardit signed a law formally establishing the Central Bank of South Sudan. Sudan is one of five countries – along with Cuba, North Korea, Syria and Iran – whose central bank is not under the control of the Rothschild-led Eight Families central banking cartel. It is therefore no coincidence that the currency of this newest Rothschild oil fiefdom is called the South Sudan Pound. [3]

Continue reading

The Eight Families’ Rigged Oil Game

20121002-195524.jpg

By Dean HENDERSON, LEFT HOOK

(Excerpted from Chapter 7: The Four Horsemen: Big Oil & Their Bankers…)

After World War II – during which Royal Dutch Shell Chairman Sir Henry Deterding loudly supported the Nazis, while Exxon and Texaco collaborated with the Nazi I.G. Farben combine – the Four Horsemen turned their full attention to the Middle East. There the cartel operated under names like Iranian Consortium, Iraqi Petroleum Company and ARAMCO.

With the rise of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) as a producer cartel, the companies devised increasingly sophisticated ways to diminish OPEC’s collective bargaining ability.

Nationalistic governments were destabilized, discredited and overthrown by the CIA at the behest of Big Oil. Henry Kissinger set up his International Energy Agency (IEA), which the French called a machine de guerre.

Both Nixon’s Twin Pillars Policy and Reagan’s Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) were efforts to divide OPEC between wealthy banker nations and poor industrializing nations, with the Saudis playing the key role of swing producer in both schemes.

As oil trader George Perk once commented of the Four Horsemen/Saudi relationship, “The oil markets are not free markets. Oil company officials bribe officials in Saudi Arabia. They only get into the market for a fix.”

Following the Gulf War Jordan’s King Hussein commented of the Saudi role in diminishing OPEC’s bargaining power, “At the grassroots level, long-submerged feelings of resentment on the part of most Arabs toward the Saudis are now out of the bottle. We resent the fact that they buy everything – technology, protection, ideas, people, respectability… the Arab people are saying that the US and Saudi Arabia are indistinguishable, and from this they conclude that the Saudis are backing Israel. Have the Saudis no shame?”

Continue reading

A Portrait of False Activism and Deceptive Democracy: Aung San Suu Kyi Receives Fascist Seal of Approval

British FM William Hague awards her the “Chatham House Prize”

By Tony Cartalucci
Source: Land Destroyer

In the first visit to Myanmar by a British foreign minister in 56 years — since the British were expelled from the nation, then called Burma after its declaration of independence in 1956 — William Hague took it upon himself to present “democracy icon” Aung San Suu Kyi with the “Chatham House Prize.”

Hague hands Suu Kyi the “Chatham House Prize.” Nothing quite says “democracy promotion” like a prize from an organization consisting of Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, BP, Exxon, Chevron, BAE, Boeing, Lockheed, and many more. This is just the latest in a long line of self-aggrandizing stunts the global elite pull to lend themselves otherwise non-existent legitimacy.

The “Chatham House Prize” is given annually to a “statesperson who is deemed by Chatham House members to have made the most significant contribution to the improvement of international relations in the previous year.” The decision process is conducted by research teams and the Chatham House’s presidents who are currently John MajorPatricia Scotland, and none other than Paddy Ashdown, who just finished defiling the spirit of innovation and pragmatism at the TED Talks with his sales pitch for global governance run by the corporate-financier elite.

The prize is given to those “deemed by Chatham House members” to have made contributions to the improvement of “international relations.” The Chatham House membership is described as “individuals, companies and organizations who share a deep interest in international affairs, independent thinking and debate.” Their membership includes, “academics, diplomats, the media, NGOs, politicians, policy-makers, researchers and business people.” Continue reading

NATO’s War Crimes in Libya : Who Grieves for the Fallen Heroes?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

by Prof. James Petras

‘The conquest and occupation of Libyan is first and foremost a military victory for NATO. Every aspect of the military offensive was spearheaded and directed by NATO air, sea and ground forces. The NATO invasion of Libya was basically a response to the “Arab spring” : the popular uprisings which spread from North Africa to the Persian Gulf . The NATO assault formed part of a general counter-attack designed to contain and reverse the popular democratic and anti-imperialist movements which had ousted or were on the verge of overthrowing US-client dictators.

Political and military considerations were foremost in motivating the NATO invasion: As late as May 2009, the U.S. and European regimes were developing close bilateral military, economic and security agreements with the Gaddafi regime. According the British daily, the Independent (9/4/2011), official Libyan documents found in its Foreign Office described how on December 16, 2003, the US CIA and British MI6 established close collaboration with the Gaddafi government. The MI6 provided Gaddafi with details on Libyan opposition leaders exiled in England and even drafted a speech for him as he sought rapprochement with the outside world.

U.S. Secretary of State Clinton presented Mutassin Gaddafi to the Washington press during a visit in 2009 stating, “I am very pleased to welcome Minister Gaddafi to the State Department. We deeply value the relationship between the United States and Libya . We have many opportunities to deepen and broaden our co-operation and I am very much looking forward to building on this relationship.”(examiner.com 2/26/2011).

Between 2004-2010 the largest oil and petroleum service multinational corporations, including British Petroleum, Exxon Mobil, Halliburton, Chevron, Conoco and Marathon Oil joined with military-industrial giants like Raytheon and Northrop Grumman, Dow Chemical and Fluor and signed enormous investments and sales deals with Libya (examiner.com op cit).

In 2009, the U.S. State Department awarded a $1.5 million dollar grant to train Libyan civilian and government security forces. The White House budget for 2012 included a grant for training Libyan security forces. General Dynamics signed a $165 million dollar deal in 2008 to equip Libya ’s elite mechanized brigade (examiner.com ibi).

On August 24, 2011 Wikileaks released US embassy cables from Tripoli , which described the positive assessment a group of leading Republican senators had made of US-Libyan relations in during their visit in late 2009. These cables highlighted ongoing security training programs involving Gaddafi’s police and military, as well as the US’ strong support for the regime’s repression of radical Islamists, many of whom are now leading the NATO-backed ‘rebel forces’ now occupying Tripoli.

Continue reading