Oil Conspiracy?

Oil Conspiracy?

A Story by The Archangel Gabriel
"

My first stab at explaining the alleged conspiracy between Bush and Blair for world domination based upon oil strangulation. Bear with me as the facts have yet to be developed; Bush and Blair have them, and I want them.

"

Oil Conspiracy?

 

Introduction

 

U.S. drivers can expect to shell out more than $4 a gallon, on average, for gasoline for the rest of 2008 and prices will keep rising until November, the U.S. Energy Information Administration said on Tuesday.

 

Oil prices, meanwhile, will remain under pressure from the tight market for crude and international demand.

 

Regular-grade gasoline in the United States is expected to average $3.84 a gallon in 2008, up from last month's forecast of $3.78 a gallon, the agency said.

 

For the rest of 2008, pump prices are projected to remain well above $4.00 per gallon, peaking in November at $4.25 a gallon, the agency said in its Short Term Energy Outlook. Gasoline prices normally peak in the summer driving months.

 

"This forecast reflects very weak gasoline margins, because of the decline in gasoline consumption and growth in ethanol supply," it said.

 

Retail diesel fuel prices, which averaged $2.88 in 2007, are projected to average $4.35 per gallon in 2008 and $4.48 per gallon in 2009.

 

Oil prices, meanwhile, are expected to average $127 a barrel this year, up from the previous forecast of $122 a barrel, the agency said. In 2009 the oil prices are expected to average $133 a barrel.

 

"Global supply uncertainties, combined with significant demand growth in China, the Middle East, and Latin America, are expected to continue to pressure oil markets," the agency said.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080708/us_nm/usa_oil_gasoline_dc

 

Ever since the US price for gasoline climbed past two USD per gallon, there has been heated debate in America and around the globe as to the underlying forces which are driving this seemingly sadistic plague upon humanity.  Oil is, with steel and coal, one of the primary building blocks of the industrialized world and simply irreplaceable given decades of alleged unfair industry promotion through regulatory abuse of discretion. 

 

People generally think of oil most often as being the natural resource from which we derive gasoline, but oil is also the primary raw material for such a wide variety of chemicals and consumer products as plastic, fertilizer, and nylon.  So, not only does an increase in oil affect the shipping cost for your garden salad at Wendy’s, it also contributes to the production and packaging costs as well as the price of the clothes that you wear while eating it and the disposable silverware you use to eat it.  It could be that the reason that nobody can be all things to all people is that oil already fulfills this obligation.

 

International Oil Cost Chaos

 

Around the globe, the hardships that have been induced by this increase in the cost of oil have been staggering both in human and economic terms.  Not only have families been forced to make reductions in their normal spending patterns such as canceling their vacation plans; there have also been lives lost in fuel related incidents, decreased charity donations of food due to increased costs, and an ever increasing threat to Third World economies.

 

A Portuguese driver was killed after he was hit by a truck as he manned a barricade filtering traffic near Alcanena, north of Lisbon.

 

A police spokesman quoted witnesses as saying the 52-year-old man climbed onto the side of a truck in a bid to stop it and fell off under the wheels, Lusa news agency reported.

 

Later Tuesday, a truck driver in Spain was run over and killed by a van as he manned a picket line outside a wholesale market in the southern city of Granada, police said.

 

Road haulage representatives suspended strike negotiations with the Spanish government following the incident.

 

Other trucks in Portugal and Spain have been stoned or had their windows smashed and tyres punctured for working during the national strikes.

 

A total of 15 people, most of them manning picket lines, were arrested in Spain Tuesday for disturbing public order, assault or threats, Spanish media said.

 

Tens of thousands of truckers are on strike or joining the protests to demand government help to offset the higher fuel costs.

 

Authorities in northern Spain ordered emergency measures after many petrol stations in the Catalonia region ran out of fuel.

 

Forty percent of petrol stations in Catalonia have run out of fuel, according to Manuel Amado, president of the Catalonia Federation of Service Stations.

 

Arrivals of fresh meat, fish and fruit in Madrid have come to a near halt, according to officials at the Mercamadrid market, Spain's biggest wholesale market. They said that fish would be in short supply from Thursday but stocks of other foods should last until the end of the week.

 

Automakers in Spain said most of the country's automobile plants, including those of Nissan, Mercedes Benz, Seat and Renault, have had to cut or halt production.

 

Spanish fisherman were keeping up their strike against fuel prices but most French trawlers have decided to go back to work after several weeks of blocking ports and access to oil refineries.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080610/ts_afp/europeinflationprotestenergytransport

 

In America, the lower and middle classes are increasingly feeling the pinch of the cost of living increases.

 

Like a plague that does not discriminate by economic class, race or age, soaring gas prices are inflicting pain throughout the U.S. Nine in 10 are expecting the ballooning costs to squeeze them financially over the next half year, an Associated Press-Yahoo! News poll said Monday.

 

Four dollar a gallon gas has stolen a beach vacation in South Carolina from Julie Jacobs' family and exotic bath washes from Angela Crawford. Phil English had to sell his beloved but fuel-guzzling red pickup.

 

Nearly half think that hardship will be serious. To cope, most are driving less, easing off the air conditioning and heating at home and cutting corners elsewhere. Half are curtailing vacation plans; nearly as many are considering buying cars that burn less gas.

 

As the price has spiraled upward so, too, has the public's ire.

 

Two-thirds consider gas prices an extremely important issue, edging the economy and outpacing health care and Iraq as the country's most distressing problem. In November, when gas cost about $1 a gallon less than today, just under half rated it extremely important.

 

"Do you think there's an end in sight? I don't," said the 33-year-old Crawford, a Dallas homemaker, said in an interview.

 

"It's depressing and it makes you nervous," she said.

 

"You're saddened prices are going up and you can't do the extra things you would have done," said Amy Pysarenko, 35, of San Antonio, whose concern about gas prices has grown since November. She says while her family has cut back on amusement park visits and saving for their children, "I feel fortunate because maybe someone else eats beans instead of hamburgers."

 

The 47 percent in the most recent survey who expect higher gas costs to cause serious hardship is about the same as in last year's poll, but an increase from the 30 percent who said so in an AP-Ipsos poll in June 2004. Then, regular gas averaged $1.97 a gallon nationally, according to the federal Energy Information Administration.

 

"Lower-income people, of course, are bearing the brunt of it. As higher prices push grocery, pizza delivery and other costs upward, just over half of those without college degrees — and about the same number earning less than $50,000 a year — are expecting serious personal financial problems to result.

 

There also is a strong sense of powerlessness. One-third do not think either candidate can deal with the problem. That includes half of independents, one-third of Republicans and one-quarter of Democrats.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/page/election-2008-political-pulse-gas-prices

 

In recent commentary, former Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee warned that “A recent surge in gasoline prices is proof the U.S. should increase its energy independence.  It's affecting the capacity of people to put food on their tables,'' he said.  http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080618/pl_bloomberg/av1uvggn8jqo  I must agree with Huckabee on these matters, and hopefully, some people will take action soon to find some ways to make it happen instead of merely giving us more lip service like George W. Bush!  It is easy enough to put yourself forward as a champion of the American people in word, but actually achieving such lofty ideals is another matter entirely.  For Bush, this appears to be about as difficult as achieving The American Dream in a nation plagued by such wildly excessively fuel costs from an entry level position making minimum wage.  If the Democrats had not recently increased the minimum wage, it might not even cover the gasoline that is required to make it to and from work these days.

 

A particularly grave threat has been assessed to the emerging marketplaces of the world due to global inflation from increased fuel costs.

 

Most emerging economies beyond a handful of crude producers are suffering from record oil and food prices, with Asian markets in general and China's in particular likely to be notable losers.

 

Until late May emerging equities in particular had been doing relatively well, more or less recovering losses earlier in the year when worries over Western banks sparked global risk aversion. Some investors even moved into emerging markets, seeking diversification from a developed world downturn.

 

"The credit crunch was very much a Western phenomenon," said Mark Hammond, investment director for fund manager Fidelity covering global, U.S. and emerging markets. "Inflation is much more global."

 

Hedge fund monitor EPFR says fund flows into emerging markets had been broadly positive this year but have now turned negative everywhere except the Middle East and Africa.

 

Emerging markets have in some ways been a victim of their own success. Their resilient and ever-growing demand for natural resources, particularly food and fuel in India and China, has prompting price rises that have in turn sparked inflation.

 

Investment bank Morgan Stanley says Asia stands to lose out the most from oil's rise as the region, especially China, is more energy reliant than other emerging markets. Moreover, higher oil prices may also prompt Western buyers to seek suppliers closer to them due to higher delivery costs.

 

"The monumental energy price increases will be a 'game change' for Asia," the bank said in a research note. "While there is some scope for remedial policy action ... (Asian currencies outside Japan) will likely weaken against the dollar and assets should underperform in the period ahead."

Foreign and Colonial head of emerging equities Jeff Chowdhry says he is particularly worried about markets such as South Africa and Turkey, which already have high current account deficits and domestic political problems. "That is a particularly unappealing combination," he said. "If the oil price rises further they are the ones that are going to suffer."

 

Managing around $2 billion, he says India's stock market has now fallen enough that it is offering good value and he is adding to his position there. But his other key picks are the Gulf and Russia, both taking advantage of higher oil prices.

 

Other managers are following suit. "Most of the world's provable remaining oil reserves are in emerging markets," said Fidelity's Hammond. "So what you are seeing is a huge flow of money into emerging markets."

 

Even the popular Gulf economies will see their new oil wealth, as well as the higher fuel costs their own consumers will pay, stoking inflation and straining their economies even as money pours into their coffers.

 

"This story is negative for everyone," said Morgan Stanley head of foreign exchange strategy Stephen Jen. "There will be a direct reverse of the decoupling story. It's going to be a rough ride."

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080707/india_nm/india344140

 

Also, the increase in the cost of food due to fertilizer and shipping cost increases has come at an already extremely difficult time for the world food market due to climactic difficulties, possibly attributable to Global Warming, another issue that Bush has failed to decisively address in favor of big business and especially the multi-national oil corporations.

 

In a year when global harvests need to be excellent to ease the threat of pervasive food shortages, evidence is mounting that they will be average at best. Some farmers are starting to fear disaster.

 

American corn and soybean farmers are suffering from too much rain, while Australian wheat farmers have been plagued by drought.

 

“The planting has gotten off to a poor start,” said Bill Nelson, a Wachovia grains analyst. “The anxiety level is increasing.”

 

Randy Kron, whose family has been farming in the southwestern corner of Indiana for 135 years, should have corn more than a foot tall by now. But all spring it has seemed as if there were a faucet in the sky. The rain is regular, remorseless.

 

At a moment when the country’s corn should be flourishing, one plant in 10 has not even emerged from the ground, the Agriculture Department said Monday. Because corn planted late is more sensitive to heat damage in high summer, every day’s delay practically guarantees a lower yield at harvest.

 

“This is pushing my nerves to the limit,” Mr. Kron said one recent morning, the sky as dark as the unplanted earth.

 

Last winter, as the full scope of the global food crisis became clear, commodity prices doubled or tripled, provoking grumbling in America, riots in two dozen countries and the specter of greatly increased malnutrition.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/10/business/10planting.html?em&ex=1213243200&en=7d008c6abcb1f8fa&ei=5087%0A

 

The increase in the cost of food that has been partly caused by Global Warming and partly by the increase in fuel costs was a major topic for discussion at the most recent meeting of the Group of Eight, and those wealthy nations agreed to try to double their foreign aid to Africa by 2010.

 

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, who attended talks on Monday with African leaders, said the drive to reach eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) set by the U.N. General Assembly to reduce world poverty by 2015 was being directly hampered by global warming.

 

He urged the G8 to send a strong political signal by setting a long-term goal of halving greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, backed by intermediate targets that would set market forces in train to reduce energy consumption.

 

The G8 will set out its positions on climate change, aid to Africa, rising food prices and the global economy in a raft of statements due to be issued later on Tuesday.

 

Japan's Yomiuri newspaper said on Monday that the leaders' communique would highlight downside risks to the world economy and label rising food and oil prices a "serious threat."

 

The higher price of oil, which hit a record high of $145.85 a barrel last week, is taking a particularly heavy toll on the world's poor. A World Bank study issued last week said up to 105 million people could drop below the poverty line due to the leap in food prices, including 30 million in Africa.

 

"How we respond to this double jeopardy of soaring food and oil prices is a test of the global system's commitment to help the most vulnerable," World Bank President Robert Zoellick said on Monday.

 

"It is a test we cannot afford to fail," he told reporters.

 

To help cushion the blow, officials said the G8 would unveil a series of measures to help Africa, especially its farmers, and would affirm its commitment to double aid to give $50 billion extra in aid by 2010, with half to go to the world's poorest continent.

 

The summit wraps up on Wednesday with a Major Economies Meeting comprising the G8 and eight other big greenhouse gas-emitting countries, including India, China and Australia.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080708/ts_nm/g8_dc

 

 

Speculation over Speculation

 

In recent months, there have been a variety of theories put forth as to the underlying cause or causes for the increase in the cost of oil.  Two theories seem to dominate the current discussions over such matters: classical supply and demand economics and arrogant and destructive market manipulation by the oil speculators to increase their shares of the world economy while spreading destitution and despair throughout the globe.

 

In a time when America and Iran have been constantly sparring over occupied territories in the Middle East, Iran’s nuclear program, and American imperial interests, the rising cost of oil has been yet another bitter bone of contention.

 

"At a time when the growth of consumption is lower than the growth of production and the market is full of oil, prices are rising and this trend is completely fake and imposed," President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said in a televised speech.

 

The market is full of oil and the rising price trend is "fake and imposed," Iran's president said on Tuesday, partly blaming a weak U.S. dollar which he said was being pushed lower on purpose.

 

"It is very clear that visible and invisible hands are controlling prices in a fake way with political and economic aims," he said when opening a meeting of the OPEC Fund for International Development in the central Iranian city of Isfahan.

 

"As you know the decrease in the dollar's value and the increase in energy prices are two sides of the same coin which are being introduced as factors behind the recent instability," Ahmadinejad said.

 

Iran, the world's fourth-largest oil exporter, has repeatedly said the market is well-supplied with crude and blames rising prices on speculation, a weak U.S. currency and geopolitical factors.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080617/ts_nm/iran_oil_ahmadinejad_dc

 

In the Western world, the insights of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are too often dismissed as Islamic extremist propaganda as I believe that he gives the world an honest and scholarly opinion upon the facts while England and America offer only the contorted and misleading worldly view that supports the political and economic ambitions of the New World Order.  I believe this to be largely caused by an English and American campaign of propaganda, character assassination, and defamation of character upon a good man who is struggling to provide for an impoverished, oppressed nation despite the unfair personal and national risk that has been imposed by Western imperialist powers primarily for economic reasons. 

 

Regardless of what much of the mainstream media says about the Iranian President, we should not dismiss his words here in America merely because he has a bad reputation.  In American jurisprudence, it is a hallmark of justice to allow the defendant to speak in his own right, and this fundamental tenet of law can and should be extended in kind to “rogue nations.”  If we cannot listen to one another, it is unclear how we can peacefully resolve our international conflicts other than through brutish dictation, a hallmark of the Bush administration’s foreign policy for eight long years.  There are good reasons why America tops some lists as to the largest bully on planet Earth!

 

Indeed, it appears to be highly likely that Iran is supporting Shiite militant factions in Iraq, but the cause for the eviction of the West from the East is noble and just.  America went to Iraq on the Bush assertion that this was to fight for the removal of a cruel dictator from power with the self-determination of Iraq being the ultimate goal as well as the containment of weapons of mass destruction.  If these were our goals, I question what Bush means by “completing the mission,” a justification commonly given for our lingering presence in Iraq.

 

I must note that Iran is not alone in their suspicion of an international intrigue driving the cost of oil to record levels and the resulting human hardships.  Recently, Saudi Arabia put forth a similar opinion upon such matters at a high-level oil summit.

 

Al-Naimi, who was expected to formally make the announcements in a speech later Sunday, reiterated his government's position that the recent run-up in prices has not been caused by a supply shortage. But he said he also believes each country must do what it can "to alleviate these difficult conditions."

 

It was unclear if Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi's remarks Sunday at a high-level oil summit in the port city of Jiddah would quell concerns.

 

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080622/saudi_oil_summit.html

 

Earlier Sunday, King Abdullah also said Saudi Arabia was not to blame for soaring oil prices and instead pointed his finger at speculators, high fuel taxes in consuming countries and increased oil consumption in developing economies.

 

"There are several factors behind the unjustified, swift rise in oil prices and they are: Speculators who play the market out of selfish interests, increased consumption by several developing economies and additional taxes on oil in several consuming countries," the king said.

 

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080622/saudi_oil_summit.html

 

However, the speculation about the effects of speculation upon the price of oil is anything but homogeneous.  The multi-national oil companies, for example, are blaming other factors including the classical balance between supply and demand in the economic crisis de jour.

 

The heads of some of the world's biggest oil companies countered on Monday OPEC claims that speculators were driving high oil prices, blaming instead a dearth of new supplies.

 

BP's CEO Tony Hayward said the argument that financial investors buying oil futures were behind a four-year rally that pushed oil prices to new records above $143/barrel on Monday was a "myth."

 

He said the problem was a failure of supply growth to match demand growth. "Supply is not responding adequately to rising demand," he told thousands of delegates at the World Petroleum Congress.

 

The chief executives of Royal Dutch Shell Plc (RDSa.L), BP Plc (BP.L) and Spain's Repsol YPF (REP.MC) told the oil industry's biggest gathering in three years that restrictions on where they can invest and high taxes meant they could not help boost supplies as much as they might.

 

High taxes have also limited investment, the executives said. As oil prices rose in recent years, producing countries from Russia to Venezuela have boosted oil taxes sharply.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080630/bs_nm/energy_congress_speculators_dc

 

The rising cost of oil on the international market has even recently entered into the Presidential campaign with both candidates accepting opposite interpretations of the underlying facts.

 

The cost of gasoline has also become a sore point in the U.S. presidential race, with U.S. President George W. Bush and Republican candidate John McCain calling for lifting of a long-standing ban on offshore oil and gas drilling to increase domestic oil production.

 

But Democratic candidate Barack Obama has said such steps will do nothing in the short term to ease American consumer's pain.

 

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080622/saudi_oil_summit.html

 

Possible Bush Complicity in the Oil Conspiracy

 

There are good reasons to suspect complicity in the rising cost of oil by the Bush administration including Bush’s family ties to Texas oil interests and the Bush invasion of Iraq that appears to have been driven by the world hunger for “black gold.”  36% of Americans now believe that high level administration officials conspired with Usama Bin Ladin for 9/11 to help justify a new era of American imperialism in the Middle East, and Iran is not alone in their suspicion of “the powers that be.”

 

Prior to the 2003 invasion, foreign companies had limited to no access to the Iraqi market. Only Iraqis or citizens of Arab nations could own a business in Iraq, the oil sector was fully nationalized, and other than a few marketing deals through the UN oil-for-food program, no US companies had oil contracts with Iraq.

 

Following the invasion, the Bush Administration implemented orders that have the effect of law allowing for the privatization of Iraq’s state-owned enterprises, 100 percent foreign ownership of Iraqi businesses, and repatriation of 100 percent of profits earned in Iraq by foreign companies. These orders were enshrined in the October 15 Iraq constitution. However, knowing that Iraqis would not sit still while the US government overtly privatized their oil industry, the orders specifically excluded the extraction and initial processing of Iraq’s natural resources, including oil. Thus, while the Bush orders laid the groundwork for US corporate access to Iraq, a new national Petroleum Law currently making its way through the Iraqi Parliament will seal the deal.

 

http://www.leftturn.org/?q=node/384

 

From the start of the War in Iraq, it has been argued that Bush was more interested in a Middle Eastern oil colony than in the liberation of an oppressed nation.  5 years later, Saddam Hussein has been out of power for a long time, and the claims of weapons of mass destruction have been repeatedly debunked.  However, America has not left Iraq leading us to question the real motivation behind the Bush expansion into the Middle East.

 

Maybe those people who gave the green light to invade Iraq really did have a crystal ball. Maybe five years ago they could have foreseen record energy prices and a frenzy about oil supply and demand.

 

Because amidst all the panic about dwindling supply, one country has actually increased production. Iraq has raised oil exports to a post-war high, its oil minister has conceeded. In an interview with Reuters, Hussein al-Shahristani said he expects oil revenue to reach $70 billion this year if crude prices stay high and output flows remain stable.

 

http://priceofoil.org/2008/06/02/iraq-exports-reach-post-war-high/

 

Signing the contracts is just the beginning, the oil companies also need a safe place to work. This is where the US military comes in and it is one very important reason why President Bush refuses to bring our troops home anytime soon.

 

http://www.leftturn.org/?q=node/384

 

The new law is being enacted by a puppet regime, established by the US and UK, which has effectively handed over control of the main assets of the country to foreign agencies for a period of 30 years. The irony is that the regime is unlikely to be in existence for this time period and many estimate its life expectancy in months rather than years.

 

http://www.wellestates.com/iraq_oil.htm

 

Despite the massive American public outcry over the price of oil, the Republican Party has repeatedly fought even a modest increase in taxation to offset the damages caused by this alleged world economic extortion by the Reptilians.  There is a battle for the long-term economic viability and distributive justice of the world and America being waged, and the Democrats are also looking out for American oil interests to a degree.  However, the Democrats are seeking a balance between reasonable profits for the oil corporations and the needs of the American public, and the Republicans are simply being obstinate and brutal, in my opinion.

 

Senate Republicans blocked a proposal Tuesday to tax the windfall profits of the largest oil companies, despite pleas by Democratic leaders to use the measure to address America's anger over $4 a gallon gasoline.

 

The Democratic energy package would have imposed a tax on any "unreasonable" profits of the five largest U.S. oil companies and given the federal government more power to address oil market speculation that the bill's supporters argue has added to the crude oil price surge.

 

"Americans are furious about what's going on," declared Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., and want Congress to do something about oil company profits and "an orgy of speculation" on oil markets.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080610/ap_on_go_co/congress_oil_profits

 

This should not a matter of crashing the world economy for the sake of a control freaky thrill ride as well as gluttony and greed ad absurdum.  This could be a matter of a stable "give and take" relationship between supply and demand whereby the needs of both the oil companies and the population of the world and America at large are fulfilled.

 

Meanwhile, Bush is trying to pin the responsibility upon the Democratic Congress for the rise in the cost of oil.  That has been the standard operating procedure for the Bush administration: try to hog the credit for anything of which the public approves and then try to pin the rap for negative impacts upon somebody else.  For example, that has been the case with the Palestinian peace process where he was not active until it appeared that renewed efforts from the Islamic community and Israel were already looking promising.  Then, with a single conference (in the middle of many negotiations), he attempted to claim credit for the whole peace process while many feel that he is not doing nearly enough to even be listed as a “major contributor.”

 

President Bush on Saturday tried to pin the blame on Congress for soaring energy prices and said lawmakers need to lift long-standing restrictions on drilling for oil in pristine lands and offshore tracts believed to hold huge reserves of fuel.

 

"It's time for members of Congress to address the pain that high gas prices are causing our citizens," the president said. "Every extra dollar that American families spend because of high gas prices is one less dollar they can use to put food on the table or send a child to college. The American people deserve better."

 

With gasoline prices above $4 a gallon, Bush and his Republican allies think Americans are less reluctant to ban drilling offshore and in an Alaska wildlife refuge that environmentalists have fought successfully for decades to protect. Nearly half the people surveyed by the Pew Research Center in late June said they now consider energy exploration and drilling more important than conservation, compared with a little over a third who felt that way only five months ago. The sharpest shift in attitude came among political liberals.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080712/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

 

That is the standard Bush solution for any problem: expand the powers of the executive branch.  However, that happened from 2001 until 2006, and the State of the Union only got worse and worse and worse during those years.  It appears that the more power the President has, the more he abuses it.  And, the Democrats in Congress have an opposing theory.

 

Democrats say they are for drilling, but argue that oil companies aren't going after the oil where they already have leases. So why open new, protected areas? they ask. Democrats say there are 68 million acres of federal land and waters where oil and gas companies hold leases, but aren't producing oil.

 

"Americans are fed up every time they go to fill up and they're right to demand action. But instead of a serious response, President Bush and his allies simply repeat the same old line more drilling," Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said in the Democrats' radio address.

 

"Democrats support more drilling," he said. "In fact, what the president hasn't told you is that the oil companies are already sitting on 68 million acres of federal lands with the potential to nearly double U.S. oil production."

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080712/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

 

If the oil companies are not exploiting the resources that they currently have, it is unclear what more access to pristine nature refuges would do other than run a risk of the destruction of natural splendor.  And, it would allow Bush to sell off oil contracts for pennies on the dollar, something that must seem appealing to Bush when the Republicans have already cut the multinational oil corporations sweetheart deals such as a reprieve on “windfall profits taxes,” an alleged product of our botched Bush foreign policy in the Middle East as well as rampant oil speculation.  What America needs is solutions and not more problems for the next administration.

 

Bush repeated his call for Congress to lift the restrictions, including a ban on offshore drilling. A succession of presidents from George H.W. Bush to Bill Clinton to the current president have sided against drilling in these waters as has Congress each year for 27 years, seeking to protect beaches and coastal states' tourism economies.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080712/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

 

I do not consider it a solution to destroy the economy of the states in a push for more power for the executive branch.  What happened with the Patriot Acts?  Have we captured Usama Bin Ladin after an alleged 200 CIA secret prisons as well as a host of infringements of our traditional American freedoms?  No, we haven’t!  That was just one more failed Bush domestic policy, and now he want to try another policy when the existing options have not been fully exploited for the benefit of the American public.

 

Biblical References to the Antichrist

 

The Antichrist (governmental leader) will first be revealed by confirming a seven year peace agreement (covenant, contract - Daniel 9:27) that will allow daily sacrifice by the Jews in the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem.

 

Today, whoever controls the world's oil, controls the world. Today, with some maneuvering, O. P. E. C. could control the world. After negotiating the covenant that will allow re-establishment of daily sacrifice, the Antichrist will start his rise to complete world leadership by gaining control of a percentage of the world's oil. This will catapult the Antichrist to world power as he cripples and extorts the world financially. Once he gains a percentage of the world's oil, he will control the world.  From this point, he will direct a One World Government and the Mark of the Beast:

 

The formation of nations that agree to the "covenant" that allows the re-establishment of daily sacrifice by the Jews, is a coalition of seven Arab/Muslim countries allied with the Antichrist, and ten "Judeo-Christian" world leaders or kings allied with the Jewish False Prophet (Pope). He will be over the oil states:

 

Daniel 11:24:  "He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that which his fathers have not done, nor his fathers' fathers; he shall scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches: yea, and he shall forecast his devices against the strong holds, even for a time."

 

The word "fattest" comes from the word "shiman", which means to oil or grease. The word "province" comes from the word "medina", which refers to the median desert in the middle east. Medina is also in Saudi Arabia.

 

http://www.cynet.com/Jesus/Prophecy/Empire.htm

 

I note that it appears that Gabriel taught Daniel dream interpretation about 3,000 years before Jung and Freud.  Daniel could sure do some good, obscure, references that may relate to oil and the Antichrist!  3,000 years ago, prophecy was in its infancy around the globe, and the results were somewhat ambiguous.

 

Who signed the Bush anti-terror treaty whereby everybody gives up their laws to America to fight terror while America forces everybody to follow ours – the lack of the rule of law?  I think that North Korea, Iran, and only one other nation had the common sense to just reject that alleged 7 year treaty.  It is arguable whether America is fighting terror under Bush or simply being terror, but I believe the latter is more accurate.

 

Here is my Daniel 11:24:  "During a time of peace, he will come into the richest parts of the province and do what his fathers and predecessors never did.  He will lavish plunder, loot, and wealth on his followers, and he will make plans against fortified cities, but only for a time."

 

I don't think that Bush’s plans to take over the fortified nation of Iran will come to fruition.  There seems to be a stall in place due to Iranian clever diplomacy over nuclear weapons that do not exist much like in Iraq about 5 years ago with similar arguments.  If the EU and America can just wait until January, 2009, it is likely that Iran will just submit to an IAEA search of their nation with no weapons program found.  I believe that it is rude to ask seeing as the EU and America are not allowing these searches in their nations, but Iran can and might go for it just to ease tensions in the Middle East.  The Western imperialists can be so rude and undiplomatic!

 

And, who did not get some of the loot from Iraq and Afghanistan other than Iran, me, and Iraq?  It seems that England is doing really well, even though the international community agreed long ago that we were not going to just loot nations in war.  That sort of warfare went out of vogue with regular armies being fielded by the major powers.  It seems that there were a lot of wars when people just looted other nations as they pleased, but the number went down when people had to pay for their own wars with regular armies.

 

An Underlying Theory of a Control Oligarchy

 

When one studies the machinations George Bush and Bill & Hillary Clinton, they too have worked with front companies.  The CIA is great at creating front companies which are sold to other fronts, and whose control eventually gets hidden and obscured. Three examples of Illuminati families with a great deal of power but who have their extensive financial holdings obscured are the Payseurs, the Springs, and the Van Duyns. The national media of America have continually run expert damage control for George Bush and Bill & Hillary Clinton. The Whitewater scandal, Vincent Foster and the Waco incident should have sunk the Clintons but the media has run excellent propaganda campaigns that have stood the truth on its head. Under the appearance of doing unbiased investigations, the New World Order’s media has really done sophisticated damage control.

 

Bloodlines of the Illuminati, Fritz Springmeier, 1995

 

A Colored Past for the Multinational Oil Corporations

 

Over the years, the multinational oil conspiracy has managed to amass a huge number of complaints from around the globe merely begging the question, “Who is controlling the oil conspiracy?”

 

Paramilitary Wars of Expansion

 

Rather than live in peace with indigenous populations, it appears that the oil companies have been waging private wars for oil bearing lands around the globe.

 

Militants in Nigeria's southern Niger Delta, whose campaign of sabotage has sharply cut the country's oil output, announced a ceasefire on Sunday but stopped short of agreeing to participate in peace talks.

 

The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) declared the ceasefire just days after one of its most daring attacks so far, which forced Royal Dutch Shell to halt output from its main Nigerian offshore oilfield, Bonga.

 

"We are respecting an appeal by the Niger Delta elders to give peace and dialogue another chance," it said.

 

"Effective 12 midnight (2300 GMT) on Tuesday, June 24, MEND will be observing a unilateral ceasefire in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria until further notice," the group said in an e-mailed statement.

 

The bombing of oil pipelines and kidnapping of oil workers by MEND -- mostly in the labyrinthine creeks of the Niger Delta -- have cut Nigeria's oil output by at least a fifth in recent years, helping drive world oil prices to record highs.

 

The announcement by MEND -- a loose coalition of armed groups with an ill-defined leadership -- comes weeks before a peace summit called by President Umaru Yar'Adua's government.

 

Asked if the ceasefire meant it would take part in the summit, MEND repeated in an e-mail to Reuters that it would only do so if Henry Okah -- one of its suspected leaders who is on trial for treason and gun-running -- was allowed to attend.

 

It forced Shell to stop production at the field, which has a nameplate capacity of 220,000 bpd, and to declare force majeure on Bonga exports for June and July, meaning it cannot guarantee to meet contractual obligations.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080622/wl_nm/nigeria_militants_ceasefire_dc

 

It could be that the bold move of Palesrael's leaders to declare a six month cease-fire has spawned another peace attempt!  I had not anticipated the possibility of secondary peace movements in the foreseeable future. 

 

You had to suspect that Shell, Chevron, or Exxon was involved!  It is pretty much those three that go militant with the oil industry, allegedly.  I believe that the Nigerian people and Shell have had issues for a really long time, and Shell was to blame for them.  If it is not England or America that is causing the human misery in the early 2000’s, it is the oil companies, largely.

 

A Dismal Environmental Record

 

Perhaps, the most paradigmatic example of oil conspiracy malfeasance is the Exxon Valdez disaster roughly 20 years ago.  After all this time, the issue of damages has finally made it to the US Supreme Court where Bush appointed justices eagerly awaited the opportunity to smite the environmental movement.  In a case that many people expected to favor big oil, the punitive damages (damages to punish wrongdoing) were reduced by 80 percent. 

 

Mike Lytle, a third-generation fisherman from the coastal village of Cordova, said many residents there were walking around stunned, shaking their heads.

 

A lot of people he knows were planning their retirements with the $2.5 billion in punitive damages that Exxon Mobil Corp. was expected to pay the nearly 33,000 victims of the worst oil spill in U.S. history.

 

But the Supreme Court dashed their hopes Wednesday, deciding to cut the punitive damages for the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster to $507.5 million. That translates to an average of $15,000 per victim.

 

"I always felt that big oil was going to win," said Lytle, 56. "But now I found out what true meaning of punitive damages is: puny."

 

A jury decided in 1994 that Exxon should pay $5 billion in punitive damages. In 2006, a federal appeals court cut that verdict in half.

 

"This turns America's resources to the oil industry and only the U.S. Congress can do something about it," said Jim Ayers, vice president of the advocacy group Oceana. "If the Congress doesn't act, this means that America's resources, including our marine life, are now in serious jeopardy and can be bought and destroyed for a mere pittance."

 

Justice David Souter wrote for the court that punitive damages may not exceed what the company already paid to compensate victims for economic losses, or $507.5 million.

 

The 5-3 ruling, which reduced the amount owed by 80 percent, comes almost two decades after the Exxon Valdez supertanker ran aground, spurting 11 million gallons of crude into the rich fishing waters of Prince William Sound that so many Cordova residents rely on for their livelihoods.

 

Sylvia Lange, also of Cordova, used to fish commercially for salmon and haul for the doomed herring fishery. But for her, the spill was about more than lost money.

It also was about the end of Alaska Native traditions and a subsistence lifestyle for several villages in the region. Because of the spill, many Alaska Natives were forced to stop harvesting seal, salmon and herring roe and move to urban areas, never to return, said Lange, who is part Aleut and Tlingit.

 

"A cultural link was definitely broken," she said.

 

The spill killed hundreds of thousands of birds and other marine animals, inflicting environmental injuries that have not fully recovered, according to numerous scientific studies.

 

On the question of whether Exxon Mobil was liable for punitive damages at all, the court split 4-4, which leaves standing the appeals court opinion saying the company was liable. Justice Samuel Alito, who owns Exxon Mobil stock, took no part in the case.

 

First-quarter profits at Exxon Mobil were $10.9 billion. The company's 2007 profit was $40.6 billion.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080626/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_exxon_valdez

 

Iraqi Food for Oil Scam

 

Bush in 1992:  "Queen's rook to rook 5.  Take knight's oil."

 

Bush in 2003:  "Queen's rook to rook 6.66.  Take knight and take knight's oil."

 

The move into the Middle East during the War in Iraq was nothing new for the wonder team of Bush/Bush.  What is it that they really wanted?  The liberation of an oppressed people?  Why haven’t they liberated the Darfur region of the Sudan?  I suggest that this was really a move to takeover some new oil reserves and to eliminate some of the competition such as Venezuela and Iran.  Corruption is nothing new for the Bush administration, and I wonder how much money the Republicans made in the Iraqi Oil/Food Scam Job.

 

The Iraqi government sued dozens of companies, including oil giant Chevron Corp., for more than $10 billion on Monday, saying they paid kickbacks to former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's government under the U.N. oil-for-food program.

 

The civil lawsuit, filed in U.S. federal court in Manhattan, seeks to recover damages from companies investigated by a U.N.-commissioned inquiry, claiming they cheated the Iraqi people out of benefits of the $67 billion U.N. program.

 

The lawsuit says billions of dollars were lost, "all of which were directly translatable into food, medicine and other humanitarian goods that were supposed to reach the Iraqi people."

 

"The corruption of the United Nations Oil-For-Food Programme (OFFP) has been described as the largest financial fraud in human history, but its impact on the people of Iraq went far beyond financial loss," the lawsuit begins. "The corruption of the OFFP affected the very lives and health of the Iraqi people."

 

Other companies named in the lawsuit include European bank BNP Paribas, drug makers GlaxoSmithKline and Roche Holding, and units of drug company Schering-Plough, as well as several units of Switzerland's engineering company ABB Group.

 

Among the individuals named in the lawsuit are Texas oilmen Oscar Wyatt and David Chalmers, who both admitted to paying millions of dollars in kickbacks to Saddam's regime.

 

The U.S. criminal prosecutions found Wyatt and Chalmers, who acted on behalf of his two oil corporations Bayoil Supply and Trading and Bayoil USA Inc. and other companies, including El Paso, complied with the then-Iraqi government's demands to pay secret surcharges, in violation of U.N. sanctions and U.S. law, to front companies and bank accounts controlled by the Saddam's government.

 

Wyatt, the founder of Houston's Coastal Corp, met directly with Saddam and became the most prominent figure imprisoned over the scandal when he was sentenced to one year in prison in November.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080701/wl_nm/iraq_oil_un_dc

 

After all the commotion, one of the primary conspirators only received one year in prison.  And, the United Nations Oil-For-Food Program seems to implicate Texas oil, the drug companies, and Middle Eastern politics, three traditional favorite areas for Bush control mechanisms for the world.  While the jury is still out on this case, I have to suspect the first Bush administration of considerable influence in this case to the detriment, once again, of the Iraqi people.

 

Two Possible Major Contributing Factors

 

War in the Middle East and the Resulting Tension

 

I believe that most of the war in the Middle East would completely disappear if America and Israel were to withdraw from occupied territories.  That would also mean that oil would, in theory, stabilize in price to some degree as much of speculation appears to have been caused by tension in the Middle East that America caused with our invasions and occupation.  In this case, the multinational oil companies would be forced to pay for their own security instead of pushing off the expenses upon the American taxpayers in the form of the US armed forces.  Why would the multinational oil companies prefer that remedy when it is the world that loses the civilian and military lives that cost the oil companies nothing?  It seems that every time somebody becomes anxious in the Middle East about anything, the price of oil jumps another couple of dollars per barrel.

 

U.S. light crude was up $1.64 at $141.85 a barrel by 10:59 a.m. EDT, after a record high of $143.67 a barrel, supported by concerns over tensions between Israel and Iran over Tehran's nuclear program.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080630/bs_nm/energy_congress_speculators_dc

 

For a double incentive with excessive speculation, in America, voters rush to Bush's "Republican Party" for security as it has the reputation for being better for dealing with international crisis situations and war.  While this is the generally accepted belief by the voters, I believe that a more accurate picture is that they create the crisis situations and war for profit motives and merely tell us that they are handling them.  With voters drawn to the alleged strength of the Republican Party, there is little incentive for them to deal with global crisis conditions preemptively instead of creating the conditions to appease the oil conspiracy and appeal to the voters.  However, the reality of the circumstances matters little if the voters can not see the light.

 

You can look at the alleged false intelligence that has defamed Iran such as the American Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, a former oil conspiracy executive, pushing Iranian nuclear weapons threats upon America and the world to increase tension as well as her alleged stock prices.  She is also pushing terror and despair out upon the world's children, and I am very upset with her repeatedly horrible diplomacy that appears to be pushing American dictation off upon the world and further degrading our diplomatic and economic advantage around the globe for short-term gains.  While America does prefer to try to inspire people around the world to respect human rights and self-determination, brutal oppression is not the best manner in which to achieve this result.  I prefer the "carrot and stick" approach of giving something to get something instead of leeching people dry either way as is Bush foreign and domestic policy.

 

Why was Bush pushing a war with Iran upon the world?  Well, it seems that Iran is somewhere between #2 and #5 for oil production in the world, and they also have huge reserves.  Japan is one of their biggest trade partners.  What would happen if America were to knock Iran completely out of the international trade?  Japan would have to buy its oil elsewhere.  What if Venezuela were to fall?  Again, we would see essentially the same phenomenon.  So, it appears that there is quite likely a huge economic incentive to defame the competition and invade them on false pretenses, allegedly like the program in Iran.  People keep wondering when America is going to leave Iraq, but I suggest that this will not happen until America has new leadership; it is simply too profitable to say in that nation despite the desire of the Iraqi people to finally taste some freedom in their own nation.

 

Oil Speculation Vicious Circle

 

I suspect that there is a conspiracy between the multi-national oil companies to suck the world dry at the expense, in particular, of the impoverished and underprivileged people around the globe.  I recently read that global charity efforts have been undermined by the cost of food that is dependant largely upon oil.  In a world where we build with oil, fuel our vehicles with oil, and manufacture about everything from oil, oil is a lynch pin of society.  If a few companies work together to continuously push up the price of oil through the illusion of speculation, this could be enough to make this happen in fact as other companies are forced to join into the fray.

 

Another theory is that speculation on a continuous upwards line simply leads people to continue to speculate upwards, and this may be partly responsible for the increases.  At some point, the cost of oil can not support itself because people are completely broke and have to seek out alternatives such as hydrogen and electric cars.  The backbone of the oil marketplace is not the super-wealthy.  They are few in numbers and probably do not consume much more per capita than the middle class and lower class.  If the lower two classes simply cannot afford oil, you can expect the entire market to collapse a practical matter.  However, it does not appear as though the oil companies are interested in their own long-term viability and profitability at this time; it looks like a handful of old, extremely wealthy men are looking to make a quick fortune before they die.

 

Possible Remedies for the Situation

 

The OPEC Conference, A Saudi Move

 

Saudi Arabia will call for a summit between oil producing countries and consumer states to discuss soaring energy prices, Information and Culture Minister Iyad Madani said Monday.

 

"The Saudi Cabinet has instructed Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi to call for a meeting in the near future that will include representatives of oil-producing countries, consumers and companies that work in extracting, exporting and selling oil to look into the price hike, its causes and how to deal with it," said Madani.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080609/ap_on_bi_ge/saudi_oil

 

The kingdom called for Sunday's unusual meeting in Jiddah between oil producing and consuming nations as a way to show that it was not deaf to international cries that high oil prices have caused social and economic turmoil.

 

The Gulf nation also has become increasingly concerned that record oil prices could hinder growth in the U.S. and other major industrialized economies, potentially leading to a decline in oil demand and a sharp drop-off in prices.

 

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080622/saudi_oil_summit.html

 

It is unclear what a conference could possibly do under the alleged circumstances, but I like it anyways.  If there is a conspiracy among the oil speculators to raise the price of oil, that probably will not be broken until either they agree to do so or nations pass new laws to make this illegal and go after the leadership for this movement.  However, at least, it should get people talking about the problems with oil industry and looking for possible solutions. 

 

Jim Ritterbusch, president of the U.S.-based energy consultancy Ritterbusch and Associates cautioned that such meetings have taken place in the past and could be more an effort to calm the market without taking concrete measures.

 

"In the current circumstances, every barrel that can be used is being used," said Addison Armstrong, director of market research at Tradition Energy. "Unless the Saudis and OPEC suddenly produce some oil that nobody has heretofore known about, then this meeting is likely to produce no meaningful outcomes."

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080609/ap_on_bi_ge/saudi_oil

 

Increases in Production, A Saudi Contribution

 

Investors last month shrugged off news that Saudi Arabia had increased production by 300,000 barrels a day after a visit from President Bush, who sought a major production increase.

 

Energy experts say most producers have little ability to expand output. The exception is Saudi Arabia, which is producing about 9.4 million barrels a day and has the ability to increase production by about 2 million barrels a day, but has not done so.

 

The kingdom will work to ensure there will be no "unwarranted and unnatural oil price hikes that could affect international economies, especially those of developing countries," said Madani.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080609/ap_on_bi_ge/saudi_oil

 

Oil steadied on Tuesday after touching a record near $140 the previous day, with traders caught between a weaker dollar and expectations that top exporter Saudi Arabia will ramp up output to its highest rate in decades.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080617/ts_nm/iran_oil_ahmadinejad_dc

 

For the remainder of the year "Saudi Arabia is willing to produce additional barrels of crude oil above and beyond the 9.7 million barrels per day which we plan to produce during the month of July, if demand for such quantities materializes and our customers tell us they are needed," al-Naimi said in the speech, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press in advance.

 

Al-Naimi also said that the kingdom was willing to invest to boost its spare oil production capacity above the current 12.5 million barrels per day planned for the end of 2009, reversing previous statements that the country would not go beyond that figure.

 

"In addition, we have identified a series of future crude oil mega-increments totaling another 2.5 million barrels per day of capacity that could be built if and when crude oil demand levels warrant their development," he said.

 

The U.S. and other Western nations have put increasing pressure on Saudi Arabia to increase production, saying insufficient oil production has not kept pace with growing demand.

 

Saudi Arabia increased oil production by 300,000 barrels a day in May, and a Saudi official confirmed Saturday that the country would add another 200,000 barrels a day in July -- for a total of 9.7 million barrels a day.

 

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080622/saudi_oil_summit.html

 

If the increase in the cost of oil is caused by simple supply and demand, it stands to reason that increasing the supply should create at least a modest decrease in the cost of oil.  I applaud the efforts of Saudi Arabia to help out the global economy and impoverished people around the globe in a time of need, but I have my doubts as to whether such efforts will make much of a difference as the price increases appear to have been caused by other factors.  At least, Saudi Arabia tried to make a difference in the world, and I appreciate their efforts whether they are successful or not.  When dealing with factors that are beyond your control, all you can do is try.

 

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown also called for future commitments from producers for increased oil and gas supply but urged that all countries should improve energy efficiency and develop alternative sources of energy, including nuclear power.

 

Earlier Sunday, U.S. Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman again called on Saudi Arabia to increase production, saying it has not kept pace with growing demand.

 

Bodman said world oil consumption growth has averaged about 1.8 percent per year since 2003 with the largest share of that growth coming from developing countries like China, India and countries in the Middle East, he said.

 

But for the past three years, global oil production has remained constant at roughly 85 million barrels a day, and OPEC production has remained largely flat, he said in a written statement.

 

"I believe that most of us agree on one thing: Prices are too high at present. And unless we act, the situation will remain unsustainable," he said in the statement.

 

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080622/saudi_oil_summit.html

 

Recently, Saudi Arabia opened the largest oil production capacity expansion in history at Khurais, a field in Saudi Arabia’s eastern desert.  At a cost of 10 billion USD, this additional capacity for production could have a serious impact upon the cost of oil unless conspirators deny the Saudi efforts the benefits of supply and demand economics and the American, EU, and world publics a reprieve upon the alleged brutal upwards spiral of costs.

 

This massive oil field surrounded by the desolate sands of Saudi Arabia's vast eastern desert feels like the middle of nowhere.

 

But what happens over the next year at Khurais, one of Saudi Arabia's last undeveloped giant oil fields, could hold the key to what drivers will pay at the pump for years to come.

 

Under way at Khurais and two other smaller fields nearby is what Saudi Arabia calls the single largest expansion of oil production capacity in history.

 

With consumers howling over record fuel prices and the United States pushing Saudi Arabia to produce more oil, this patch of sand 100 miles west of the Saudi capital of Riyadh has become one of the most important places in the world economy.

 

Saudi Arabia's state-owned oil company, Aramco, is spending $10 billion to build the infrastructure to pump 1.2 million barrels of oil per day by next June from the Khurais field and its two smaller neighbors. That alone would be more than the total individual production of OPEC members Qatar, Indonesia and Ecuador.

 

The project forms the centerpiece of the Saudi plan to increase the total amount of oil it can produce to 12.5 million barrels per day by the end of 2009 -- up from a little more than 11 million barrels per day now.

 

Consuming nations have pushed Saudi Arabia to boost production capacity even further and also want the world's top oil exporter to begin pumping more crude immediately to bring down record oil prices hovering near $140 a barrel. They say oil production has not kept up with increased demand, especially from China, India and the Middle East.

 

Saudi Arabia plans to produce 9.7 million barrels of oil per day, or 11 percent of the world's total, in July. It is the only nation with significant excess capacity that it could put on the market quickly.

 

But the kingdom has resisted calls to increase production further, saying financial speculators and the falling dollar are to blame for high oil prices, not a shortage of supply.

 

These disagreements came to a head June 22 at a rare meeting of oil producing and consuming nations hosted by Saudi Arabia. In the end, Saudi Arabia said it could increase oil production capacity to 15 million barrels per day if needed in future years. But it gave no indication that step, or an immediate increase in output, was necessary or planned.

 

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080629/saudi_giant_oil_field.html

 

I find both the Bush and Brown administrations’ suggestion that OPEC is fully responsible for the status quo to be offensive.  Either nation could have already increased the taxes upon the oil corporations’ windfalls, but they have chosen to push the blame onto others once again.  Why should OPEC work so hard to remedy a situation for which they are unwilling to contribute any effort at all?  That has been the policy of Bush and Brown since day one: try to claim the credit and pass the buck on the blame.  Well, the buck stops here – I am not buying into their political games one bit!

 

Multi-currency Oil Purchasing

 

Iran has often said it sees no need for the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to boost output.

 

Ahmadinejad reiterated his view that oil should be sold in a basket of currencies rather than U.S. dollars, an idea which has failed to win over other OPEC members, except Venezuela.

 

"The ever-increasing decrease in the dollar's value is one of the world's major problems," he said.

 

Iran, embroiled in a standoff with the West over its nuclear program, has for more than two years been increasing its sales of oil for currencies other than the dollar, saying the weak U.S. currency is eroding its purchasing power.

 

"The planners for some big powers are acting to decrease the dollar's value," he said. "For years they imposed inflation and their own economic problems to other nations by injecting the dollar without any support to the global economy."

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080617/ts_nm/iran_oil_ahmadinejad_dc

 

This possibility has its merits.  With America driving the world economy to a very large degree, a recession in America tends to create a world recession.  Likewise, a change in the purchase power of the US dollar affects people around the globe.  I have suggested that the world could use the old American gold standard for the purchase price of oil, a subtle variation upon the Iranian plan, and gold has maintained a relatively stable value over the years.  This would provide some stability for the oil marketplace as currencies increase and decrease substantially and are more subject to currency manipulation by corrupt Western governments.

 

Economic Aid from More Wealthy Nations

 

Also Sunday, Abdullah called for the creation of a $1 billion energy initiative for poor countries to help them combat the rising cost of fuel. He also said Saudi Arabia would contribute $500 million to help give poor countries loans to finance development and energy projects.

 

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080622/saudi_oil_summit.html

 

Whether their wealth comes from oil or other sources, wealthy individuals, corporations, and nations around the globe have the capacity to give back to the communities that built their wealth.  You can argue that a billion dollars won’t make much of a difference in the world, but that is simply not the case.  The GDP of many nations is still below 10,000 USD, and some nations such as Sri Lanka are at about 1,500 USD.  In an already impoverished nation, even a small amount of money can make a really large difference.  And, a billion dollars is a lot of money even in an affluent nation such as America.  I commend the Saudi king on his efforts to help people though a difficult time and willingness to contribute to the remediation of suffering around the globe.  Also, we must consider that a billion dollars is roughly .5% of the Saudi oil revenues for a nation that is struggling with expansion.  If Western nations could show such generosity, times would not have been nearly as troubled as they have been.

 

But the Saudi technician says Americans shouldn't be jealous. Inflation that has hit 30-year highs on everything else in the kingdom is making Saudis feel poorer despite the flush of oil money.

 

"I tell the Americans, don't feel envious because gas is cheaper here," said al-Mazeen, 36. "We're worse off than before."

 

While Saudis don't feel the pain at the pump, they feel it everywhere else, paying more at grocery stores and restaurants and for rent and construction material. While the country is getting richer selling oil at prices that climbed to a record $145 per barrel last week, inflation has reached almost 11 percent, breaking double-digits for the first time since the late 1970s.

 

Moreover, Saudis are grappling with unemployment — estimated at 30 percent among young people aged 16 to 26 — and a stock market that is down 10 percent since the beginning of the year.

 

Many Saudis are realizing that this oil boom will not have the same impact as the one in the 1970s, which raised Saudis from rags to riches. This time, the wealth isn't trickling down as fast or in the same quantities.

 

One reason is the kingdom's growing population, says John Sfakianakis, chief economist at the Saudi British Bank. In the 1970s, the population of Saudi Arabia was 9.5 million. Today, it's 27.6 million, including 22 million Saudi citizens.

 

That means the state, which controls nearly all oil income, has to spread the wealth among more people. Besides a generous social welfare system that includes free education from pre-school through university and other benefits for citizens, the public sector employs some 2 million people and 65 percent of the budget goes to salaries.

 

"The state, yes, is wealthier, but the state has close to three times the amount of people it has to cater for," said Sfakianakis. "Even if Saudi Arabia had lower inflation (in the 1970s), the country and the needs of the country are bigger than what they used to be."

 

As a result — contrary to their image in the West — Saudis are far from the wealthiest people in the Gulf. The kingdom's per capita income is $20,700 — compared with $67,000 for Qatar, which has a population of around a half million citizens.

 

In a recent interview with Kuwait's Al-Siyassah newspaper, King Abdullah said "officials have suitable solutions" and plans to fight inflation.

 

"The government can use its money to offset the soaring prices of basic commodities. The kingdom will also use its financial reserves to combat inflation and bring everything back to normal," the king asserted, without elaborating on how.

 

Economists say the main source of inflation is higher domestic demand for apartments, office space and food — at a time when world prices for food and raw materials is rising. A statement issued last week by the Economy and Planning Ministry said the rental index, which includes rents, fuel and water, has soared 18.5 percent, while food and beverage costs have increased by 15 percent.

 

Saudi inflation is also exacerbated by the weak dollar, because the riyal is pegged to the U.S. currency, increasing the cost of imports — and the kingdom imports most of its essential goods.

 

The influx of oil money into the economy also is a factor, but it is not as major a cause of inflation as the other issues, said Sfakianakis and other economists.

 

Still, the kingdom is set to enjoy a large budget surplus because of high oil prices this year. Oil export revenue is expected to reach $260 billion this year, according to a report last month by Jadwa Investment, a private Saudi firm. This compares with an average of just $43 billion per year throughout the 1990s, the report said. It forecast the budget surplus will be $69 billion in 2008 compared to $47.6 billion in 2007.

 

But Saudi Arabia puts much of its oil income into investments and assets abroad, in part as a hedge in case oil prices drop in the future, squeezing the budget.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080708/ap_on_bi_ge/saudi_where_s_the_wealth

 

Closing the Enron Loophole: Barack Obama

 

At this time, the cost of gasoline is one of the most pressing issues facing America.  Both Barack Obama and John McCain have put forth their strategies to meet the needs of the American public on this issue.  Barack Obama’s plan is highly developed as well as extremely coherent leading me to believe that he has been considering the options for some time in anticipation of this day.

 

With the cost of gas a top issue in the presidential campaign, Barack Obama on Sunday will announce a plan to crack down on oil speculation by tightening regulations on energy traders.

 

The announcement is further evidence that an Obama administration would take an activist, populist approach to regulating business.

 

Obama wants to close a loophole in federal law that exempts some energy traders from regulations that govern other exchange-traded commodities. Democrats call this “the Enron loophole” because it benefited the Houston energy-speculation firm that collapsed in an accounting scandal.

 

In response, John McCain campaign spokesman Tucker Bounds said: “The truth is Barack Obama is following John McCain’s lead to close a Wall Street loophole that was signed into law by President Bill Clinton. John McCain has supported bipartisan efforts to close this loophole and will work to address abuses in oil speculation.

 

"Barack Obama has voted the party line for Democrats who claim the loophole is fixed. The fact that Barack Obama is attacking John McCain, despite McCain’s leadership on the issue, shows that Barack Obama is driven by the partisan attacks that Americans are tired of.”

 

Obama said in a statement: “My plan fully closes the Enron Loophole and restores common-sense regulation as part of my broader plan to ease the burden for struggling families today while investing in a better future.”

 

The campaign calls the loophole “one example of the special interest politics that put the interests of Big Oil and speculators ahead of the interests of working people.”

 

Obama said: “For the past years, our energy policy in this country has been simply to let the special interests have their way — opening up loopholes for the oil companies and speculators so that they could reap record profits while the rest of us pay $4 a gallon.”

 

Here are excerpts from the text of the four-part “Obama Plan to Crack Down on Excessive Energy Speculation,” as provided by the campaign:

 

1)      Fully Close the “Enron Loophole”: One of the reasons our energy market is particularly vulnerable to excessive speculation is the so-called “Enron Loophole” … [which means] Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) is unable to fully oversee the oil futures market and investigate cases where excessive speculation may be driving up oil prices. This regulatory gap is dangerous because: 1) the absence of government oversight has the potential to facilitate abusive trading or price manipulation. And 2) the failure of a large derivatives dealer could trigger disruptions of supplies and prices in energy markets. As President, Barack Obama will go beyond the changes included in the recently-passed Farm Bill and fully close the Enron loophole by requiring that U.S. energy futures trade on regulated exchanges. He will call for new, disaggregated data on index fund and other passive investments to increase transparency and oversight of the growing number of institutional investors participating in commodities futures markets. And he will support legislation directing the CFTC to investigate whether additional regulation is necessary to eliminate excessive speculation in U.S. commodities markets, including higher margin requirements and position limits for institutional investors.

2)       Ensure That U.S. Energy Futures Cannot be Traded on Unregulated Offshore Exchanges: CFTC oversight of oil market speculation is also limited by rules that allow energy traders to engage in unregulated transactions through foreign subsidiaries of U.S. exchanges. Currently, about 30 percent of U.S. oil futures trades fly below the regulatory radar because they are transacted on a U.S. exchange that works through a subsidiary in London. Similar arrangements are being pursued by U.S. exchanges in partnership with Dubai as well. Barack Obama would limit the price impacts of excessive speculation by preventing traders of U.S. crude oil from routing their transactions through off-shore markets in order to evade speculation limits and also impose reporting requirements.

3)      Work with Other Countries to Coordinate Regulation of Oil Futures Markets.

4)      Call on the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice to Vigorously Investigate Market Manipulation in Oil Futures.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080622/pl_politico/11252

 

Democracy In Action: Congressional Involvement

 

Recently, a plan was put forth by the congressional Democrats to force the multinational oil companies to expand their current production or lose their leases.  Also, they have suggested the option of tapping into our Strategic Petroleum Reserve to increase the supply of oil to the marketplace.  If demand were truly the problem, either of these approaches should help.  And, the loss of the leases would allow a more fair and just President to increase the price of the leases to something more acceptable to the American public if the oil corporations fail once again to perform a reasonable service to the American and world public.

 

(Rep. Chris Van Hollen  said,) “(C)ongressional Democrats will vote on 'Use It or Lose It' legislation requiring the big oil companies to develop these resources or lose their leases to someone else who will."

 

"But we know that drilling by itself will not solve the problem of high gas prices," Van Hollen said. "We cannot drill our way to energy independence."

 

He cited Democrats' calls to tap the nation's Strategic Petroleum Reserve, because it is full and "America's rainy day is now." And he said the country must focus on new energy policies that focus on alternatives to oil.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080712/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush

 

Invading the World: Iraq and Beyond

 

As the world rapidly runs out of oil, one place seems to be swimming in the stuff, and no prizes for guessing who that is …

 

Iraq has dramatically increased the official size of its oil reserves after new data suggested that they could exceed Saudi Arabia’s and be the largest in the world.

 

The Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister has said that new exploration showed that his country has the world’s largest proven oil reserves, with as much as 350 billion barrels. The figure is triple the country’s present proven reserves and exceeds that of Saudi Arabia’s estimated 264 billion barrels of oil.

 

Salih also added “There is a real debate in the Government and among political leaders about the type of oil management structures we should have. I am for liberalising this sector and allowing the private sector to come in to develop these vast resources.”

 

But it is these private companies – such as Shell – that everyone is worried about. That is why there is a protest taking place today outside Shell’s AGM – the message: Hands off Iraqi Oil.

 

http://priceofoil.org/2008/05/20/iraq-%e2%80%9chas-largest-oil-reserves%e2%80%9d/

 

The long wait may finally be over to claim the last great prize left for the oil industry.

 

But not, importantly, how the oil industry, or the Bush administration wanted it to.

 

Some 36 years after losing their oil concession to nationalization as Saddam Hussein rose to power, four Western oil companies are in the final stages of negotiations this month on contracts that will return them to war-torn Iraq.

 

Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP — the original partners in the Iraq Petroleum Company — along with Chevron and a number of smaller oil companies, are in talks with Iraq’s Oil Ministry for no-bid contracts to service Iraq’s largest fields.

 

The deals are expected to be announced by the end of the month and, in the words of the New York Times “will lay the foundation for the first commercial work for the major companies in Iraq since the American invasion, and open a new and potentially lucrative country for their operations.”

 

As the Times puts it. “There was suspicion among many in the Arab world and among parts of the American public that the United States had gone to war in Iraq precisely to secure the oil wealth these contracts seek to extract. The Bush administration has said that the war was necessary to combat terrorism. It is not clear what role the United States played in awarding the contracts; there are still American advisers to Iraq’s Oil Ministry.”

 

So it is unsurprising that to American, British and French go the spoils of war. In an interview with Newsweek last Autumn, the former chief executive of Exxon, Lee Raymond, said: “There is an enormous amount of oil in Iraq. We were part of the consortium, the four companies that were there when Saddam Hussein threw us out, and we basically had the whole country.”

 

http://priceofoil.org/2008/06/19/the-long-wait-to-claim-the-prize-draws-to-an-end/

 

Viewed by themselves, Iraq and Afghanistan appear to be only two questionable steps in the US War on Terror.  Even if we were to assume that Usama and Bush were not aligned against the interest of the world, neither of these steps was particularly well advised.  From one perspective, what does it say to the world to invade a nation merely to look for a single criminal?  Does that mean that the Russians should feel free to invade America to look for Bush in 2009 after he is replaced by a different leader for America if his location is unknown because we are a likely location for a Bush hideout?  I believe that set a horrible historical precedent that should be denounced as counter to the interest of international peace and security.

 

However, I believe that Iraq and Afghanistan fit very well into a larger Bush plan for the world: control the oil of Venezuela, Iraq, and Iran as well as eliminate the competition for the Bush-owned multinational oil conspiracy.  I believe that Bush and Blair have been stealing 20-30% of the national budgets of England and America for a very long time.  Over the years, this has allowed them to buy controlling interests in the major multinational oil corporations and to shield their control using CIA covert corporate technology.  Therefore, Iraq, Iran, and Venezuela were major blocks in a conspiracy to control essentially all of the world’s oil resources and distribution, the very lifeblood of the industrialized world at this time.

 

There were many cynical analysts, both in the West as well as the Middle East, who viewed the invasion of Iraq as a scarcely concealed attempt to take control of the country's immense oil wealth. It is remarkable that oil has continued to flow since the invasion of Iraq. This is due to the deployment of US and UK forces to protect oil fields and installations together with infrastructure repairs carried out by expatriate civilians. The allies now deem the time is right for the Iraq oil industry to receive investment, but the cost of investment is the handing over of the oil industry to multinationals.

 

In 1999, when Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton, he asked the rhetorical question ‘Where is the oil to come from?' and then gave the answer ‘The Middle East, with two thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies'. George Bush also has a background in the US oil industry, and the opportunity to take control of oil production in Iraq must be a dream beyond the wildest imagination of most Texan oilmen.

 

Since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, US companies and in particular KRB, a subsidiary of Halliburton, have received contracts to maintain and repair the decrepit Iraq oil infrastructure which was a result of international sanctions. Oil production in Iraq has continued during the turbulent aftermath of the war and is at some 2.3 millions barrels a day.

 

Bush and his associates are seeking to secure their position as controllers of oil production, export and exploration in Iraq for the next 30 years by means of a new Hydrocarbon Law which is now being approved by what is euphemistically described as the government of Iraq.

 

http://www.wellestates.com/iraq_oil.htm

 

The Bush administration has been very active in Iraqi oil regulation and law to the detriment of the Iraqi people over the years.  Much of the Iraqi oil planning appears to have been conducted by the US State Department and merely ratified by the Iraqi puppet regime.

 

The new Petroleum Law will be passed by Iraqis, but its roots are in the US State Department’s Future of Iraq Project’s Oil and Energy Working Group. Meeting four times between December 2002 and April 2003, the Group found that Iraq “should be opened to international oil companies as quickly as possible after the war” and that the best method for doing so was through Production Sharing Agreements (PSAs). None of the top oil producers in the Middle East use PSAs because the agreements favor private companies at the expense of the exporting countries. PSAs turn the entire exploration, drilling, and infrastructure building process over to private companies under contracts with terms of twenty-five to forty years that lock in the laws in effect at the time the contract was signed. This means that while a future Iraqi government could change Iraq’s laws, including Bush’s economic orders, its changes would not impact oil contracts signed while the current laws are in effect.

 

The plans for Iraq’s new Petroleum Law were made public at a press conference in Washington, DC, hosted by the Bush Administration. On December 22, 2004, Iraq’s Finance Minister, Adel Abdul Mahdi joined US Undersecretary of State Alan Larson at the National Press Club and announced Iraq’s plans for a new Petroleum Law to open the oil sector to private foreign investment. Mahdi explained, “So I think this is very promising to the American investors and to American enterprise, certainly to oil companies.” He described that, under the proposed law, foreign companies would gain access both to “downstream” and “maybe even upstream” oil investment in Iraq. (“Downstream” refers to refining, distribution, and marketing of oil. “Upstream” refers to exploration and production.) A few weeks later, Mahdi became one of Iraq’s deputy presidents and today he is a front-runner to become the new Prime Minister of Iraq.

 

Before new oil contracts could be signed, however, the existing contracts had to be erased. Back in May 2003, Energy Intelligence reported that the US-appointed senior adviser to the Iraqi Oil Ministry, Thamer al-Ghadban, announced that few, if any of the dozens of contracts signed with foreign oil companies under the Hussein regime would be honored. In June 2004, after being appointed Iraq’s Minister of Oil, al-Ghadban told Shell Oil Company’s in-house magazine that 2005 would be the “year of dialogue” with multinational oil companies.

 

Iraq’s current oil minister, Ibrahim Bahr al Uloum––who served on the US State Department’s Future of Iraq Project’s Oil and Energy Working Group––aims “to begin signing long-term contracts with foreign oil companies during the first nine months of 2006,” according to Platform’s report, “Crude Designs.”

 

Signing the contracts is just the beginning, the oil companies also need a safe place to work. This is where the US military comes in and it is one very important reason why President Bush refuses to bring our troops home anytime soon.

 

Antonia Juhasz is a Visiting Scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies. She is the author of The Bush Agenda: Invading the World, One Economy at a Time, Regan Books, to be published in April 2006.

 

http://www.leftturn.org/?q=node/384

 

This is one of those stories that although you should be outraged about it, you re not surprised at all about it, because you suspected it all along.

 

On the day that five foreign oil companies get their grubby hands on contracts to help develop Iraq’s oil, the NYT reveals that a small State Department team played an integral part in drawing up the contracts. The American government lawyers and private-sector consultants provided template contracts and detailed suggestions on drafting the contracts.

 

The disclosure is the first confirmation of direct involvement by the Bush administration in the Iraqi oil deals. It is, in the words of the Times, “likely to stoke criticism.” “We pretend it is not a centerpiece of our motivation, yet we keep confirming that it is,” Frederick D. Barton, a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies told the Times. “And we undermine our own veracity by citing issues like sovereignty, when we have our hands right in the middle of it.”

 

But peel beneath the surface, he argues “and the contracts start to look very strange. For a start, the deals are with the wrong companies. The companies which usually carry out TSCs are specialist service providers, like Schlumberger, Saipem or Baker Hughes. They are often hired in for geological, construction or drilling expertise, or to install a piece of technology.”

 

“In no other country are the likes of BP or ExxonMobil carrying out such TSCs”, says Muttitt. But then in no other country is the prize so big. Or been waited for, for so long. .

 

http://priceofoil.org/2008/06/30/guess-who-helped-draw-up-iraqi-ministry-oil-contracts-the-americans/

 

The new Iraqi oil laws are extremely favorable towards American business interests.  It is as if the Iraqi government is not aware that even in Baghdad there are currently only eight hours of electricity per person five years after the US-led invasion.  Who is the Iraqi government representing?  It appears as though they are not fairly representing the interest of the Iraqi people; that’s for certain!

 

The main features of the new law are as follows – Firstly, it will effectively place control of oil resources in the hands of multinational oil companies for some 30 years. Secondly, decisions concerning the flow of oil and the levels of production will be made by a consortium which could be controlled by the oil companies themselves. Thirdly, the percentage of oil revenues which are to be retained by the Iraqis will be distributed among the various regional and provincial authorities and not handed to the national government.

 

In addition, the costs of extracting oil from Iraq are relatively low. Estimates are in the region of 1 to 2$ a barrel and the sales price is some 60$ a barrel. This is indeed an oilman's dream.

 

It is to be expected that the major multinationals will play a leading part in the regeneration of Iraqi oil production as they alone have the necessary skills and capital required for the task, what is interesting is the nature of the contracts which appear to be on the table. In other OPEC producers, the government of the host country exercises firm control of the level of production and takes an agreed and substantial share of the revenues.

 

The new law is being enacted by a puppet regime, established by the US and UK, which has effectively handed over control of the main assets of the country to foreign agencies for a period of 30 years. The irony is that the regime is unlikely to be in existence for this time period and many estimate its life expectancy in months rather than years.

 

However, if the regime does nothing else, a cynic could argue that it has served its purpose. Firstly, it presided over the execution of Saddam Hussein, and secondly, gave away control of Iraqi oil to foreign companies. Henceforward, the nation state of Iraq can continue to disintegrate into partition based on the Kurds in the north, the Shi'ites in the south and east, and the Sunnis in the west. Each region will receive a secure revenue stream under the new law.

 

It is no surprise that the leading contenders for contracts are Exxon, ConocoPhillips and Total from the US, together with BP and Shell from the UK. However, Russia's Lukoil and the Chinese are seeking a share of the action. Whether the Russians and the Chinese, given their lack of support for the war, will be granted access to this bonanza remains to be seen. It would be diplomatic for the US and UK to invite TPOA from Turkey and representatives from Saudi Arabia and Iran to participate, but such niceties are probably wasted on Messrs Bush and Cheney.

 

http://www.wellestates.com/iraq_oil.htm

 

Conclusions

 

The oil conspiracy is much like the other alleged Bush companies: instead of protecting the world and enforcing the laws, the Bush companies allegedly rape the world, use law enforcement to attack the competition while protecting the Bush interests without review, and constantly bleed the world dry of capital, natural resources, and our most valuable commodity, Allah's children. 

 

Look at the countries with which America has fought over the last 25 years!  Are any of them not still fighting (perhaps attributable to CIA destabilization efforts) in civil wars or not considerably more impoverished than when we entered their nations "to help” them?  What kind of help is that?  I suggest that this is America’s "help yourself" foreign policy much like that which is covered in Iraq for Sale.  That was not America's nation to sell in the first place! 

 

How are Americans to fight an oil conspiracy when it is allegedly the oil conspiracy that also controls the government antitrust regulators?  It is the regulators that are supposed to fight such abominations against the Godgiven right for people to choose their own destinies.  It would not be so oppressive if Bush were munificent and wise like Allah and cared for the people under his economic and military domination, but we have yet to even see inside a single CIA secret prison to compare their alleged torture to Guatanamo.  And, my theory is that there are far fewer of those than Bush claims to have leaving us to wonder, "What happened to all those people?" 

 

What are Bush's alleged businesses?  I believe that they are best described as: catastrophes and war.  Those were not services that America preferred to be buying at this or any other time, and he is liable to the American public for his damage to our public, Iraqi civilians, and the starving people of the world.  Such damages are expected to be largely reconciled by the new American leadership through disproportionate charitable donations, but you can not recompense a loss of life due to starvation to somebody who is already dead.  That is about the worst possible way to die, but I expect that there are considerable worse ones waiting in the handful of CIA secret prisons that actually do exist.  Fortunately, it is expected to be only another 7 months until this abysmal stench can be removed from America and the world once and for all.

 

Sadly, with a global bottleneck at the oil industry, the US economy turned against itself was allegedly just enough strength to actually turn America and the world inside out for the edification of Bush.  The human suffering, on the other hand, has been astronomical.  People around the world are making cutbacks on such vital commodities as food and some of the better parts of life such as family vacations to continue to pay for the worst nightmare in American politics to date.

 

The world needs oil, and George Herbert Walker Bush is one of the few people on the planet that allegedly supplies it en masse.  So, why not just use a "squeeze play" to force everybody on the planet to give him more money?  His American puppet-son is going to be forced out of the office of President in 2009, and there is the possibility that he will find a way to hide the money from the people from whom he allegedly stole it.  When would this utter insanity end, then?

 

My theory is that the fair market value in a capitalist marketplace for gasoline is roughly 2.15 USD per gallon with the applicable price for oil by the barrel.  But, with tension fueled by alleged "faked incidents" such as the Iranian capture of British sailors in what I suspect were actually Iranian waters as well as American occupation of Islamic lands fueling resistance movements, the price of oil is unlikely to change much.  And, there is also the alleged oil conspiracy fueled speculative bubble with which to contend.  My belief is that with the increase in demand from India and China, a free market would roughly double the price of oil from 2001, and this is a Godsend for struggling nations such as Iran where the additional revenues could fund quality of life improvements for the indigent and wealthy alike. 

 

The President of Iran recently said something to the effect of, "Oil has yet to find its real value in the global marketplace."  There is much wisdom and truth in what he puts forth to the world unlike, allegedly, Bush's black and white picture of him always being right and a true champion of peace and prosperity.  Where is the prosperity that he champions other than in his own back pocket where it is wasted upon power hunger and greed ad adsurdum?  At least, in Iran such windfalls have a way of finding a home with the people that need it the most: the forgotten people below the poverty line.

 

© 2008 The Archangel Gabriel


My Review

Would you like to review this Story?
Login | Register




Featured Review

Wow! That was detailed...but greatly explains a lot of things going on in this world and country...yeah gas prices have me penny-piching...it is very difficult...it seems as if things are nevr going to get better and that they keep getting worse and worse...The only way that these issues can be fixed is if americans would stop complaigning and do something about them...like protesting and stop using gas and fuel..which is nearly impossible..but if we were to all band together it would work..but people are not willing to and therein lies the problem...I am glad that you took the time to once again inform..and inform you did...another great piece by you..Great Job! Thank you so very much for the information once again....=0) BTW..I am still working on my other pieces about secret societies..and the like of the subject..as well as the New World Order..it is very lengthy and I hope it opens the eyes of others as your works do....=)

Love always,
Berserk

Posted 16 Years Ago


2 of 2 people found this review constructive.




Reviews

we also expect this unbelievable price here, 1 litre of gas lead-free is 1,75 � (1 gallon = 2.7 litre) and we experience the highest inflation of 4.5 % on food prices in Germany. I enjoyed your information on this, it was carefully examinated with a good structure, thanks for posting this for us. Also thank you for your time, words and patience while reading my "Once upon a life time", it was really a long piece. Hope all is well and you have a great vacation in Maine.

Posted 16 Years Ago


1 of 1 people found this review constructive.

You're the truth Arch! Karma should crush the b******s who think they can get away with pulling strings. Not a lot of people's eyes are open to the situation. They figure they'll just keep paying for gas and hope something works out. Man, it's crap like this that makes me angry... I don't think the common man has any idea that he's being used as a puppet for a Secret Societies wealth.

F**K EM.

Posted 16 Years Ago


2 of 2 people found this review constructive.

Wow! That was detailed...but greatly explains a lot of things going on in this world and country...yeah gas prices have me penny-piching...it is very difficult...it seems as if things are nevr going to get better and that they keep getting worse and worse...The only way that these issues can be fixed is if americans would stop complaigning and do something about them...like protesting and stop using gas and fuel..which is nearly impossible..but if we were to all band together it would work..but people are not willing to and therein lies the problem...I am glad that you took the time to once again inform..and inform you did...another great piece by you..Great Job! Thank you so very much for the information once again....=0) BTW..I am still working on my other pieces about secret societies..and the like of the subject..as well as the New World Order..it is very lengthy and I hope it opens the eyes of others as your works do....=)

Love always,
Berserk

Posted 16 Years Ago


2 of 2 people found this review constructive.


Share This
Email
Facebook
Twitter
Request Read Request
Add to Library My Library
Subscribe Subscribe


Stats

224 Views
3 Reviews
Rating
Shelved in 1 Library
Added on July 7, 2008
Last Updated on July 12, 2008

Author

The Archangel Gabriel
The Archangel Gabriel

Heavensgate, TX



About
My Contributions: A Summary Statement THE PAST I am changing around my area substantially. I am going to concentrate on love, flowers, and cute animals for a while for content... EDITOR'S NO.. more..

Writing

Related Writing

People who liked this story also liked..