9/11, Energy Monopolies, & Oil

[Greenwich]

The answer would be if they have alternative sources. WHY DON’T THEY USE THEM. They talk about them to the ding dong day. They play with this idea unceasingly and at convenient points for them. Having an unquestioning ingsoc belief in leaders that take you either on a conservative or liberal direction. I know when I am dealing with a mind saturated by propghanda of either persuasion. The idea is to stroke you every once and and while and keep you happy. Once you understand chessboard politics better you will know they will never carry out with alternative fuel sources. There isn’t enough money in it and it can be produced by anyone and that just won’t do.

[Roger the Horse]

Definitely agree with your point about alternative sources Greenwich.

[Greenwich]

In the UK they have something similar they use the title "project". I do not know the particulars on the actual name. I think of the Elton John song Leave on. Just who are the Heralds of Sun and how are you tossed in. At that point you were getting way to close for comfort. Am I a pawn in a game of lets get all the resources the world has? Do your Rothchilds have such a control over the Banking that they can use the IMF which they started to devalue currency in third world nations so there resources are valued at nothing. After all they made the family of Saud happen. They were camel nonsense shovelers before they found them and have been close allies ever since.

They have virtual control over your banking. How in the world did that happen? Not being English one wonders where they came from and how they got control of all of that. Being considered clever isn’t quite good enough you have to have a lot of backing to be in that position. One also wonders how the Rockefeller got control of BP oil when Amoco merged with them. Now there are BP stations all of a sudden all over the U.S. Who owns Ford, BP, Barclays, RBS, Disney, BBC and all of your major companies? Not the people of England. Bought with your tax money though. Both families are considered myth. As if they died off long ago. They did not. They still exist are alive and quite well. Some may have drowned and some may have died from cut throat. But the root is still there. When the apple is rotten you have to look to see the rotten core. The great battle of timor is turned into an argumentative conversation piece somewhere way off in the other sea again you got to close.

Greenwich

[Robert Martin]

I do not get your connection bettween oil and 9/11. If that was the case then why not just buy the oil. The countries that are unfriendly after all the world put the oil embargo on Iraq not the other way around.

[Greenwich]

It is simply this. The world is running out of oil. This is an undeclared policy. So it does not matter if they buy oil or not. It is the control of the oil. If they do not have that then they are at the mercy of whoever does control the oil. So if Iraq decides to sell oil to China the United States is out of business and has to ration oil. Some of the countries that have nationalized the oil will not sell to the United States directly. This also means they control the priice of oil. So they must by whatever means get control of the oil for the sake of National Security.

[John White]

Peak Oil raises a lot of controversy: some people are convinced its an Oil company Scam to put us all on "forced rations", others that its the real defining truth about everything

There are three main positions:

1) Peak Oil: Oil is passing/has past/will immanently pass the point of global Peak production

This means, effectively, that at least half the Oil has been extracted from the average of known global reserves (hence "peaked")

This is especially significant becuase Oil Wells have a particular cyclical nature to them, and the deeper Oil is far more difficult and energy intensive to extract, ultimately to the point where the energy value of the oil is less than the energy cost of extraction: hence, when a well has "peaked", it can only become increasingly un-economic and prices can only increase and availability diminish...well, in theory and an open market

2) "Problem what problem?"

this position is that, yes Oil will peak one day, but its not today. Or tommorow. Maybe 50 or a 100 years away, at least. We keep finding more, after all

Having looked into this, I dub it the "Ostrich" position, especially since there have been no really significant finds since the 1960's

3) Deep Hot Biosphere

This position postulates that when it comes to Oil, we dont know half as much as we think we do, and that Oil is formed from a completely different process than commonly believed. The major point is the theory that Oil is self-replenishing, and therefore we cannot run out

A small problem with positions 2) and 3) is the undeniable facts of both global Oil consumption and ever rising demand

In 2004 it was equal to 4 barrells a year for every human being on the planet

Of course, adjusted for "by country" consumption the figures are a lot less balanced: in the case of the USA, 28 barrells per year per citizen

Its difficult to know where to go with this, becuase how can any of us know whats going on under the surface of the planet? We are at the mercy of "experts"

However, if position 1) is wrong: so what? we arnt going to run out of Oil, phew!

If position 2) or 3) are wrong, we are in one huge heap of trouble

[Greenwich]

John has an answer to what I am trying to get across. This is a real policy internal of the U.S. and U.K. government. This overrides even the administration in power. This means there is a security and danger to the general public due to dangerously low oil reserves. The countries survival itself is at stake with this hypothesis of theirs. Peak oil is only a public statement. Heretofore all that has been thought about going on is certain rich oil men with a lot of influence putting all of this together. This left a large part of the functioning government out of the picture. The influence is there. Now they must get the cooperation of the government and the agencies to follow orders and be silent.

How is this now done. An internal policy of this magnitude. If someone did speak would mean criminal prosecution or worse if divulged. This goes from the head of state right down to the agent on the street. Now we have the glue that holds the government together, national security of the highest order. Not only that we have the ability to tap at will, to detain without reasons. This fear is from the doers and is cause to clamp down on anyone who may talk.

This policy not only gives us loyalty it also gives our government agents and lawmakers a good conscience about what they are doing its entirely justified. The entire means of what has to be done may be below the surface for the average lawmaker but accepted as necessary to the survival of the nation as a whole. Mr. Bin Laden has been used in the past. They have invaded everything they can or are trying. The very man that helped cause this is not a focal point. So we may have a small group that is privy to the means. While the rest acquiesce to internal security policy.

Now things can be done. If things aren’t going well they can take some people off the street and claim a potential terror threat. That would keep your people supporting a policy they are unaware of and cant know because it would cause widespread panic and is of a nasty nature. The general public may have a conscience we have to do what we must.

Terror is all of a sudden everywhere even though no Muslim country has declared war on us. Anyone with a brain knows its not possible to protect all our assets its just not possible and nothing whatsoever has happened!

I want to mention one more thing you may not know. The hijackers were not on the manifest and let right through no one new the names or where from. The one thing that blew this whole thing wide open is the fact an agent with media contacts got hold of Atta’s briefcase and gave it to Fox News. He of course was compensated. By the time the people involved caught onto this it was all over the airwaves. This is the ONLY reason why they new where the hijackers were from. This put them to a GREAT deal of trouble. Instead of being able to pick and choose where they were from. They had a great deal of trouble explaining why they were Saudis. Not to mention the lame WMD they had to concoct Some of the cover had to be more trouble and puzzling to the public so they had to give out the fact that some of the Saud royal family and some Bin Ladens were flown out of restricted air space when no one could get off the ground the former was not given any attention.

Also not mentioned is that they were trained Saudi Arabian Air Force many of them. The box cutter statement is totally stupid. You could beat the hell out of someone with a box cutter asking you to ram a plane.

[John White]

Coming back to this thread, I heartily recommend British Comedian Robert Newman's classic and highly informative 45 minute stage show, "The History of Oil"

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=7374585792978336967&q=newman +history+of+oil

A little outside the usual net of 911 connections, but most definately worthwhile, especially considering Iraq's October 2000 switch from selling Oil in $US to Euro's...

[Mark Gobell]

We had a huge discussion about this on Wednesday evening with Webster Tarpley and a couple of very intense peak oil chaps.

As I understand it, the position of peak oilers seems to be based largely on an act of faith or a belief.

A back foot position was at least conceded by these guys, that being, the cheap oil is coming to an end. This then led to the debate about the dark heavy stuff which as I understand is the basis for the abiotic position due to it's lack of biology.

It was interesting to note also, that the peak oil position was being supported on one level, among many of course, that energy cannot be created of destroyed and so something with energy must have died to provide the resulting energy we get from oil.

The thought of all that latent energy in those ancient microbes seems a tad off the mark to me.

Anyway, if the 911 Wars are really about oil hegemony then the point about cost and extraction etc needs to be weighed against the cost of the 911 Wars which at the time of this post stood at:

$314,738,770,403

http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=182

Thats an awful lot of exploration and oils isn't it ?

[John White]

Yes Mark, but it is US dollars: they are simply created at a whim by the Federal reserve, as long as the US Dollar is a currency heavily traded in Oil, the dollar cannot collapse

Without oil its an utterly hollow pack of cards, its not a gold standard, its just credit created by a cartel of private banks: A dollar is a "magic checkbook" becuase dollars have to be traded in when other countries make transactions with each other, including every transaction involving Oil (since the early 70's), so not all the ones going out come back: that is a license to print more: lots more (IMF, World Bank, ergo Conquest by Economic Warfare)

But if countries switched to, say, the Rouble (Putin has rumbled about this) or the Euro (Which Iraq tried, and as Robert Newman hypothesises convincingly, got a punishment beating for, on top of whatever else it has endured) the US Dollar would be in serious trouble

Without Oil, The US Dollar is Mickey Mouse!

Or did I miss a class?

[Greenwich]

Operation Dangerfield,

About a week ago I started a thread. The subject was about internal U.S. and U.K. policy. The internal U.S. Policy is Operation Dangerfield. It exists as an internal security policy of the United States. The policy is real. It says there are only ¼ of the existing oil supplies left in the world. This is the policy that they have used to give the government cohesion in justifying what they call democratization of the Middle Eastern countries. It has also justified their every action. It is operative in all leadership of the U.S. government and several key politicians. Many don’t know, many will.

On Sept 15th morn my original thread was moved you can go look and see. Every comment I made on this subject was deleted and replaced by some public speculative policy called peak oil. Along with a lot of silly talk. I suggest that some of your moderators are FEDERAL MEN. Not to mention they clumsily like everything else they do. Tried to pass themselves off as Englishmen. Whoever did this obviously couldn’t delete the topic. I think you will find that there are FEDERAL GOVERNMENT on here using disinformation to throw people off. If this is the case do not be so trusting. With all of this they think they can intimidate me.

On top of all this I was in AOL chat beliefs christian 20 and lo and behold I had several veiled threats as to leaking sensitive government information and the penalties. I guess they though all this would bother me. It very well doesn’t. The integrity I have as many writing on this board does not bother me at all. You people obviously do not have any.

Now I am going to say something that will really piss them off. Something they fear greatly and have gone to great lengths to cover over the years. Something them and there bagel eating friends have used to deceive the English many over the years. You might call it their worst nightmare. You see it is how I will sign this letter. This is by the descendant of every Henry England has ever had.

I am not the fakes you have set up on the chessboard. AND I AM BACK AND I AM DAMNED WELL UPSET AND YOUR GOING TO KNOW IT BECAUSE YOU’VE NEVER FACED ANYONE LIKE ME. LIKE EVERY OTHER CRIMINAL OUTFIT PASSING THEMSELVES OFF AS AUTHORITY. YOUR NOTHING BUT CRIMINALS AND THE LAST DAMN THING IM AFRAID OF IS A CROOK. SO GO CALL ON YOUR FAKE FRIENDS THEY ARE NOTHING BUT LIMP WRISTED FAKERS WITH NO AUTHORITY, SEE WHAT THEY CAN DO. SITTING WHERE I SHOULD SIT? NOT FOR LONG.

By the way hello England I won’t be long. I have to clean up this mess they have made. The weather here in the U.S is getting chilly. My girl is fine. I can not wait to get back. See how I sign this now.

WINDSOR

[Mark Gobell]

LOL looks like I missed the class John.

OK, point taken.

So the main reason for 911 Wars is to preserve dollar hegemony and the US economy.

So where does Peak Oil fit in with that ?

[John White]

Well, were are speculating of course: this is a vast subject and I dont pretend to know more than on overview of it

However, it Peak Oil does hold up, or perhaps even on the basis that there is a chance Peak Oil holds up, it changes the balance of power around which OPEC has functioned, becuase demand cannot be matched by supply via capatilism if the supply is becoming restricted by geological reality

It then becomes a Military nessecity to secure those dwindling supplies to avoid another power securing the oil fields for themselves and being forced to go cap in hand to them to run the country...and let us not forget that, in the case of the USA, 4% of the planetary population have consumed 25% of the Oil produced for many many years

Then there is the food issue: Food production has doubled since the 1960's and its all down to oil in the form of nitrate fetilizers and insectisides. If global oil became restricted, there could be real problems feeding the planetary population (let alone the problems the World has with fresh water supplies). Without Oil, there is a high chance of deaths and suffering caused through basic want

Its interesting that you mention:

[James C]

[graphicequaliser]

[Mark Gobell]

[graphicequaliser]

[Andrew Johnson]

[James C]

[graphicequaliser]

James, you have a simplistic way of looking at things. You decide (for some unknown reason) that to run socities of large numbers of people, we need an "economy". You did not define what this "economy" thing is, let alone prove that it even exists.

My solution is for everyone to form small communities globally, no more countries or governments, and local decisions are made by the community on behalf of the community, never elected representatives. The community advisors will change from day to day. No more 7-day weeks, no more countries or their borders, no more forced financing of war machines.

James, you have to snap out of the way you are thinking at the moment. We cannot preserve any of what we may have traditionally entertained as an existence.

[James C]

[Greenwich]

One more fact that is highly upsetting to the people involved in this. The other item posted they moved and deleted all of my posts. Somehow they couldn’t delete the thread.

The hijackers were not on the manifest for the plane. The reason for this was they did not want the fact that they were Saudis known. The names were Saudi.

The only reason this was found out. Was the fact that the briefcase containing all of the names was found. This was found by an FBI agent with media connections. He handed the names to FOX news and was compensated for this. By the time they caught onto this. It was all over the media. THIS CAUSED THEM A GREAT DEAL OF TROUBLE. The situation being they were going to use other names specifically Iraqi in nature. Then later Iranian.

That mistake forced them to go with the WMD. It was a huge mistake and causes them trouble to this very day.

[optimus79]

So where does this fit in with the notion that Saudi Hijackers DID fly planes in to the Twin Towers/Pentagon/Shanksville?

Are you suggesting that the original story is accurate, but that they allowed it to happen and helped cover it up rather than orchestrate the whole thing and get their remote control airplanes out?

[marky 54]

[Greenwich]

Saudis were used. They were NOT supposed to be identified. They pulled the manifest because they used Iraqi names. This was on the twin towers.

When the FBI agent with media connections. Who was part of the team. That found the briefcase with the Saudi names. Sold the copied names to Fox. They had to pull the Iraqi names they were going to use. This makes them very very nervous. One thing they flinch on.

One very large bit of disinformation is the pentagon plane. It was real. They used that to confuse things. They love to through the absurd in among the information that makes sense.

Now for the twin towers. Look at the videos. That building did not come down floor by floor. You notice it cascaded down like a waterfall on all sides leaving ash all over NYC and NJ.

I will tell you how they did this. They drove a truck loaded to the top with plastic explosive enough to make a small nuclear explosion near the center support system. They exploded the truck and the center supports blew out. That is why it came apart on all sides and cascaded down. THIS IS ALSO WHY THE FIRE WAS MOLTEN BELOW THE TOWERS FOR SO MANY DAYS. You have seen the side ground view from across the river where the bottom blew out then the smoke from ground level before the buildings fell. Why?

[Robert Martin]

So what you are saying is that it was not a controlled demolition? What about the puffs of smoke on the side of the buildiing? Also I have not seen the view you are talking about from the side and the river?

[Andrew Johnson]

[chek]

[John White]

Its kind of inevitable that a discussion about Oil as a motivating factor behind 911 is going to have to get into Peak Oil, on the basis that, because it is a theory proposing increasing scarcity ahead, Peak Oil appears to be a theory that fits apparent facts

The problem is its an absolutely massive topic and vastly more research is needed to get a clear picture

Greenwich, I'm enjoying your posts, there are very interesting ideas in them: can you put forward any hard data to back them up? The "hijackers were not supposed to be revealed to be Saudi's" angle is certainly an interesting suposition: any coverage of the story you can link to that isnt CT?

[John White]