View Full Version : Iraq and Oil....
Gayle in MD
05-02-2006, 08:44 AM
While we all know that our present situation with oil is the result of several factors, atleast two of those we hear listed among the causes, Katrina and lower production in N.Orleans oil, greater demand from other countries, the war in Iraq, world jitters over what the United States will do about Iran, are directly related to our own foreign policy, the Iraqi war, and our threats to Iran, which are causing jitters in the market around the world, and affecting oil prices.
Dan Bartlet, Counselor to the President, on April 19, standing in front of the White House, said this...
"The President, nor no one else, ever said that this war was going to lead to cheaper gas prices."
On September 16, 2002, in his arguments to Congress on why we should go to war in Iraq, the President's Chief Economic advisor, Lawrence Lindsey, made this statement...
"The key issue is OIL, and a regime change in Iraq would facilitate an increase in world oil, which would tend to lower oil prices here. It's hard to say whether economic effects of war would be positive or negative, there are enormous uncertainties over what might happen. It depends on the prosecution of the war, but, under every plausable scenario, the negative effect is quite small relative to the economic benefits that would come from a successful prosecution of the war."
Gee, I guess Mr. Bartlett, forgot about this?
We all know that Wolfowitz insured us, during these same kind of rosey expectations on results from war in Iraq, that the Iraqi oil wells would pay for the re-building in Iraq, and lead to cheaper oil prices for us.
We also know that the people, and the markets, are nervous worldwide over our position with Iran, another major oil producer, whose production could be affected in the same way that our war in Iraq has affected their oil production, so much so that it is now being reported that even if we could secure the country, (where 18, of the forty provinces are said to be unstable,the areas with the most population) estimates are that it would still take atleast two years to re-build the oil resources in Iraq.
Wonder what would happen, if the United States, changed their war policy, instead of staying the course with Rumsfeld in charge sent in another one hundrend and fifty thousand troops and smashed the insurgency, civil war, whatever you want to call it, once and for all, and protected those oil wells, and got them up and running, and then told the sluggish Iraqi parliament, that we're taking over these wells until we recoup all the money we have spent protecting your asses while you've been dithering over religious dogma for the last three years! It might also place an added fire under the Iranian's asses to get resonable about being forthright with the world about what they are doing in secret.
Anyway one looks at it, I think that it is safe to say the Rumsfeld's incompetency in prosecuting this war, has led to great human loss, and monetary loss, to our country. Here we are, three years after George doned his flight suit to announce the end of major military operations, and the Iraqi's STILL don't have their $hit together! Wouldn't you think they would have made keeping those refineries running their top priority after smashing Baghdad? Have you ever seen so much unrest in the world?
Gayle in Md.
05-02-2006, 10:18 PM
The world is now going into depression.
You think we have it bad here.
It's terrible for most of the other non-oil producing nations right. Just pathetic.
Fkk it, I'd rather have Hussein in power with gas at less than 2 dollars a gallon.
WTF happened to all that oil in Afghanistan? /ccboard/images/graemlins/confused.gif
Gayle in MD
05-03-2006, 02:54 AM
That's the same thing I've been wondering. It seems we never hear anything about that.
Democrats have now taken to writing books to outline their solutions, atleast two have been launched in the last several weeks.
If one looks at the percentage of increase per barrel, and compares it to the percentage of increase we've seen in oil profits, the latter is MUCH greater than the former. I don't deny we're in a crises, but I still think they're gouging us.
05-03-2006, 07:55 AM
You ever get the feeling your at a movie and all the Actors,and Actresi forgot their lines?
Gayle in MD
05-03-2006, 08:07 AM
HA HA HA...and, sometimes, I get the feeling that someone picked me up in my sleep, and dropped me on an Alien Planet!
Gayle in Md.
I,m bumping this because its been ignored.
[ QUOTE ]
Odigo says workers were warned of attack
By Yuval Dror
Odigo, the instant messaging service, says that two of its workers received messages two hours before the Twin Towers attack on September 11 predicting the attack would happen, and the company has been cooperating with Israeli and American law enforcement, including the FBI, in trying to find the original sender of the message predicting the attack.
Micha Macover, CEO of the company, said the two workers received the messages and immediately after the terror attack informed the company's management, which immediately contacted the Israeli security services, which brought in the FBI.
"I have no idea why the message was sent to these two workers, who don't know the sender. It may just have been someone who was joking and turned out they accidentally got it right. And I don't know if our information was useful in any of the arrests the FBI has made," said Macover. Odigo is a U.S.-based company whose headquarters are in New York, with offices in Herzliya.
As an instant messaging service, Odigo users are not limited to sending messages only to people on their "buddy" list, as is the case with ICQ, the other well-known Israeli instant messaging application.
Odigo usually zealously protects the privacy of its registered users, said Macover, but in this case the company took the initiative to provide the law enforcement services with the originating Internet Presence address of the message, so the FBI could track down the Internet Service Provider, and the actual sender of the original message.
05-03-2006, 09:30 AM
Say, how did you sneak this here post in....without any negative replies by the Republican Guard??
You didn't scare them off.....with facts....did you?
And the facts are that every Bush promise has either been erroneous, or an outright lie....and if we were so concerned about Genocide...we'd be over in Africa.....fact is....it's all over oil, not aluminum rods, nor yellow sponge cake, nor Camel cruelty
Fer Christ's sake......the guy ain't even a real conservative.....he even lied to his own party.
05-03-2006, 09:45 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> Say, how did you sneak this here post in....without any negative replies by the Republican Guard??
You didn't scare them off.....with facts....did you? <hr /></blockquote>
<font color="blue"> If we let facts get in the way of our beliefs, we'd be poor Republicans indeed! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Remember the fact that this war was all about oil? Well, it sure doesn't look like that worked if lower prices and available oil was what you were saying.
Look at it this way, my friends, if we start using fact based information, pretty soon you'll be expected to do the same and all this fun debate will be for naught. Better is the system we have where hard working smucks like us can do one of two things, buy less gas or buy more oil stocks. After the last two weeks of seeing perfectly good money go from a stock account to a futures gamble, you lilly livered grunts had better not start some kind of boycott that drops the fuel prices (this means O'reilly in particular), at least not for 60 days from last Monday. Thanks for your cooperation. /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif</font color>
buy more gas, give gas as a gift, Mother's day would be a great time to give a tankful, provide free gas to illegal aliens.....
05-03-2006, 10:17 AM
We don't want to let oil prices get in the way of oil profits...
If'n yer investing...stocks, junk bonds, options.....you should also read the book I suggested to Chopstick
"The Trillionaire Next door"
There's insider info there....like....walk into McDonald's, and if yer a savvy investor...what's the first thing you notice???
All of the employees are wearing large caps!!
Or take trading futures....yers looks pretty grim, atrip to korea, while i plan to get some golf in...why would I trade with you?
And $35 a share should be yer limit...if the stock costs more....go to EBay and see what you can buy for $35.
Look for trends...like the charts for Beanie Babies, pokemon cards, and the S&P seemed to be parallel.
then there's the Elliott Wave, a mathematical model that predicts movement in the market. Have you ever hit yourself in the head repeatedly with a big wooden bat? That's how much your head will hurt studying the Elliott Wave theory.
An from my own lerning....probably the sexiest woman on TV is Maria Bartiromo....when Maria says things are going up...she's right on, and ifn it's yer stock she's talkin bout, it orgamsmic...like tantric sex.
I used to have romantic dreams about Maria....but they were offset by nightmares about Alan Greenspan. Just when I was about to reach for Maria in her see through negligee, Alan would show up in leather with a whip
9 Ball Girl
05-03-2006, 10:24 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> HA HA HA...and, sometimes, I get the feeling that someone picked me up in my sleep, and dropped me on an Alien Planet!
Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>Wait. It gets better:
Venezuela Dictator Vows To Bring Down U.S. Government
Venezuela government is sole owner of Citgo gasoline company
Venezuela Dictator Hugo Chavez has vowed to bring down the U.S. government. Chavez, president of Venezuela, <font color="blue">told a TV audience</font color> (http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10704025/): "Enough of imperialist aggression; we must tell the world: down with the U.S. empire. We have to bury imperialism this century."
The guest on his television program, beamed across Venezuela, was Cindy Sheehan, the antiwar activist. Chavez recently had as his guest Harry Belafonte, who called President Bush <font color="red">"the greatest terrorist in the world."</font color>
Chavez is pushing a socialist revolution and has a close alliance with Cuban dictator Fidel Castro.
Regardless of your feelings about the war in Iraq, the issue here is that we have a socialist dictator vowing to bring down the government of the U.S. And he is using our money to achieve his goal!
The Venezuela government, run by dictator Chavez, is the sole <font color="blue">owner of Citgo</font color> (http://www.citgo.com/AboutCITGO.jsp) gas company. Sales of products at Citgo stations send money back to Chavez to help him in his vow to bring down our government.
Please decide that you will not be shopping at a Citgo station. Why should U.S. citizens who love freedom be financing a dictator who has vowed to take down our government?
05-03-2006, 10:27 AM
Q, I checked that out yesterday...interesting...
If you go to prisonplanet...and listen in to Alex Jones...he claims that the Israelis moved out of their office the day before the attacks????....
I hope none of it is true....
Gayle in MD
05-03-2006, 11:05 AM
Thanks Wendy, Even if it isn't true, I won't be stopping at CITGO, I only buy that Designer Oil, from Exon, lol.
Gayle in Md.
Will someone please tell the Bush's, there's an S in doesn't ...Laura sound so intelligent this morning on CNN, "It dud'n bother him, he dud'n watch the polls." /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif
05-03-2006, 11:47 AM
Get you some of that new BP gas, at only $16 a gallon.
You Dems can afford that, living off of all the welfare deals yer party voted in....an taking away all our hard earned cash
Wolf, thanks for the reply.
For most Americans, they are happy with the Govt spin even when the facts dont stand up to examination because the alternative is unthinkable. Like I said in my other post- 'Pearl Harbour'- there is a lot of evidence to suggest that the attack on PH was allowed to happen, just to bring a reluctant USA into the war.
Again I ask a simple question- what suicide bomber takes two suit-cases and hand luggage onto the plane he is going to crash? I can understand that to blend in he might have taken luggage, but TWO siutcases? [ TWO siutcases I might add that conveniently didnt make the flight! What are the chances? ]
If this report is true [ and I have no reason to believe it isnt] it implies conspiracy or at least more knew about the attack than only the 'alledged' bombers.
There is no doubt in my mind that the neo-cons would consider 3000 dead and 2 buildings as neccessary 'collateral damage' in order to execute the grand plan.
Gayle in MD
05-04-2006, 04:12 AM
Isn't there a sight which addresses the issue of facts, vs. rumors and myths that are circulated? I'd really like to try and get to the bottom of this. Any links would be appreciated.
I wouldn't put anything at all past the neocon movement in this country. A quick review of the signing statements which George Bush has added to one hundred and seventy-six bills tells the story of an autocratic president. I am hoping that Arlen Specter is serious about the promised investigation into Bush's tactics, and his refusal to let Congress in on both his secret, and blatant refusal to abide by our laws during his total autocracy.
Gayle in Md.
Gayle in MD
05-04-2006, 04:15 AM
I don't think so, Wolfie, one has to recognize something, before one can generate fear, LOL.
Gayle in Md.
05-04-2006, 04:16 AM
This oughta upset everybody
How they vote in the United Nations:
Below are the actual voting records of various Arabic/Islamic States which are recorded in both the US State Department and United Nations records:
Kuwait votes against the United States 67% of the time
Qatar votes against the United States 67% of the time
Morocco votes against the United States 70% of the time
United Arab Emirates votes against the U. S. 70% of the time.
Jordan votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Tunisia votes against the United States 71% of the time.
Saudi Arabia votes against the United States 73% of the time.
Yemen votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Algeria votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Oman votes against the United States 74% of the time.
Sudan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Pakistan votes against the United States 75% of the time.
Libya votes against the United States 76% of the time.
Egypt votes against the United States 79% of the time.
Lebanon votes against the United States 80% of the time.
India votes against the United States 81% of the time.
Syria votes against the United States 84% of the time.
Mauritania votes against the United States 87% of the time.
U S Foreign Aid to those that hate us:
Egypt, for example, after voting 79% of the time against the United States, still receives $2 billion annually in US Foreign Aid.
Jordan votes 71% against the United States
And receives $192,814,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.
Pakistan votes 75% against the United States
Receives $6,721,000 annually in US Foreign Aid.
India votes 81% against the United States
Receives $143,699,000 annually.
Perhaps it is time to get out of the UN and give the tax savings back to the American workers who are having to skimp and sacrifice to pay the taxes (and gasoline).
Pass this along to every taxpaying citizen you know.
Gayle in MD
05-04-2006, 04:32 AM
LOL, yeah, I don't even know what kind of gas is in my car, my chauffeur always fills my tank, LMAO /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Gayle in Md.
05-04-2006, 05:29 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> Hi Q.,
Isn't there a sight which addresses the issue of facts, vs. rumors and myths that are circulated?<hr /></blockquote>
I use snopes.com
Here is one that you can try and find out more about. Whats really strange about this is that after googling 'whistleblower Kevin Ryan', in the first 3 pages, not one single link is to a national newspaper, a tv news station! Nothing from the mainsteam news soures, not AP or CNN or Reuters.
Her it is.
UL Executive Speaks Out On WTC Study
Friday, November 12, 2005
(911Truth.org news service -- updated 11/13, 11/14)
"The buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel." - Kevin RyanAn executive at Underwriters Laboratories (UL), the company that certified the steel used in the construction of the World Trade Center, has questioned the common theory that fuel fires caused the Twin Towers to collapse.
<font color="blue">The letter. </font color>
From: Kevin R Ryan/SBN/ULI
Having recently reviewed your team's report of 10/19/04, I felt the need to contact you directly.
As I'm sure you know, the company I work for certified the steel components used in the construction of the WTC buildings. In requesting information from both our CEO and Fire Protection business manager last year, I learned that they did not agree on the essential aspects of the story, except for one thing - that the samples we certified met all requirements. They suggested we all be patient and understand that UL was working with your team, and that tests would continue through this year. I'm aware of UL's attempts to help, including performing tests on models of the floor assemblies. But the results of these tests appear to indicate that the buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel.
There continues to be a number of "experts" making public claims about how the WTC buildings fell. One such person, Dr. Hyman Brown from the WTC construction crew, claims that the buildings collapsed due to fires at 2000F melting the steel (1). He states "What caused the building to collapse is the airplane fuel . . . burning at 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. The steel in that five-floor area melts." Additionally, the newspaper that quotes him says "Just-released preliminary findings from a National Institute of Standards and Technology study of the World Trade Center collapse support Brown's theory."
We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F (2). Why Dr. Brown would imply that 2000F would melt the high-grade steel used in those buildings makes no sense at all.
The results of your recently published metallurgical tests seem to clear things up (3), and support your team's August 2003 update as detailed by the Associated Press (4), in which you were ready to "rule out weak steel as a contributing factor in the collapse". The evaluation of paint deformation and spheroidization seem very straightforward, and you noted that the samples available were adequate for the investigation. Your comments suggest that the steel was probably exposed to temperatures of only about 500F (250C), which is what one might expect from a thermodynamic analysis of the situation.
However the summary of the new NIST report seems to ignore your findings, as it suggests that these low temperatures caused exposed bits of the building's steel core to "soften and buckle"(5). Additionally this summary states that the perimeter columns softened, yet your findings make clear that "most perimeter panels (157 of 160) saw no temperature above 250C". To soften steel for the purposes of forging, normally temperatures need to be above 1100C (6). However, this new summary report suggests that much lower temperatures were be able to not only soften the steel in a matter of minutes, but lead to rapid structural collapse.
This story just does not add up. If steel from those buildings did soften or melt, I'm sure we can all agree that this was certainly not due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone the briefly burning fires in those towers. That fact should be of great concern to all Americans. Alternatively, the contention that this steel did fail at temperatures around 250C suggests that the majority of deaths on 9/11 were due to a safety-related failure. That suggestion should be of great concern to my company.
There is no question that the events of 9/11 are the emotional driving force behind the War on Terror. And the issue of the WTC collapse is at the crux of the story of 9/11. My feeling is that your metallurgical tests are at the crux of the crux of the crux. Either you can make sense of what really happened to those buildings, and communicate this quickly, or we all face the same destruction and despair that come from global decisions based on disinformation and "chatter".
Thanks for your efforts to determine what happened on that day. You may know that there are a number of other current and former government employees that have risked a great deal to help us to know the truth. I've copied one of these people on this message as a sign of respect and support. I believe your work could also be a nucleus of fact around which the truth, and thereby global peace and justice, can grow again. Please do what you can to quickly eliminate the confusion regarding the ability of jet fuel fires to soften or melt structural steel.
-- Update (11/16) : Kevin Ryan apparently fired
http://www.911Truth.orgFor background see also...
UQ Wire: Underwriter Speaks Out On WTC Study
According to Nic Levis, east coast director of 911truth.org, "David Ray Griffin has received confirmation that Kevin Ryan, site manager of the Environmental Health Laboratories (Underwriters Laboratories), was fired today by the parent company, Underwriters Laboratories, apparently for writing a letter questioning certain common theories of the Twin Towers collapses to the leader of the U.S. government NIST team researching the World Trade Center events..."
<font color="blue"> Here we have an expert- probably THE best expert- on the steel that was used in the WTC. He hardly sounds like a deranged 'conspiracy theorist'. He is persuaded by the facts and makes a good case but nobody wants to know.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.