The old stalwarts are disappointing me.
First, Engdahl unnecessarily explains his abandonment of the silly ‘Peak Oil’ theory by taking up the still very controversial – some would say ‘flaky’ – Russian theories concerning the creation of oil. The Russians may well be right, but Peak Oil falls on its own. There’s tons of oil around. In the United States itself, there is enough oil in the oil shales to satisfy current levels of American requirements for over 100 years. The problem is cost of production. Let me state it clearly: the reason why the American Establishment agreed to the attack on Iraq, an attack they knew was going to be a disaster and would indeed lead to insecurity over Middle East oil supplies, was to force the price per barrel of oil up over the amount where exploitation of the Canadian oil sands would become economically viable. There. I’ve said it. The long-term plan is to base American oil security on the sane and dependable Canadians, and not leave it to the whims of the fruitcakes in the Middle East, the fruitcakiest being the Israelis and their American ‘friends’. The Americans don’t get much oil from the Middle East, but it is important oil, and the price of oil remains dependent on decisions made by people who aren’t Americans, and don’t have America’s interests at heart. The war had nothing to do with controlling Middle East oil supplies, something which should, at least by now, be obvious. In the long term, the war was about separating the United States from Israel (the American strategists must find it funny that the neocons fell for it, as the Iraq war created the perfect petri dish to grow the new idea that American national interests are different from those of Zionist colonialists). When the oil sands peter out, we’ll need another war to force the price over the amount required for the Americans to exploit the oil shales (experimentation on oil shales development has already started).
I should note that the general lumpen-leftist view that the war was about forcing the price of oil up doesn’t make sense. The American establishment are both producers and consumers of oil. There is a ‘sweet spot’, where they maximize their profit, but a war is too blunt an instrument to get there, if you could even determine what the sweet spot is. The other point, which I keep making (to no avail), is that the American oligarchs have absolutely no interest in depriving their new manufacturers (the Chinese) from a source of energy. Globalization happened and the strategists are still writing like it’s 1970.
Peter Dale Scott
Cheney and his ilk are terrified that the next attack will involve the destruction of the United States’ ability to plan a response, so have created elaborate – and no doubt unconstitutional – plans for continuity of government, some kind of dictatorship led by people like Cheney. Those plans collapse if the enemy can determine what people like Cheney will be doing after an attack. Thus the intentional creation of confusion. There is no need to drag Flight 93 into the mix, and doing so detracts from consideration of the wisdom of allowing freaks like Cheney to take over the American government in cases where they can claim, without anything other than their own say-so, that they have to. The evidence actually supports Scott’s thesis about the key role of continuity of government better if we leave out the shooting down of Flight 93. That would leave room for reasonable discussion of the necessity of some sort of doomsday plan for when all the usual ‘deciders’ – Bush’s name for it – were dead.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
Weird and Stupid
A list of “The World's Weirdest/Stupidest Conspiracy Theories”. A few comments:
What about the idea that the Dead Sea Scrolls are medieval forgeries? There is something deeply suspicious about Dead Sea Scroll scholarship, another area, like Holocaust studies, where you have to be glatt kosher in order to sit at the table. Dead Sea Scroll scholarship is part of the pseudoscience that attempts to show the links between early Christianity and Judaism, links with an obvious political purpose. At least some of the scrolls were stolen from a Palestinian museum, and all of them are arguably the property of the Palestinian people. Their provenance is shrouded in enough mystery, with a discovery at exactly the time that the new State of Israel was building its arsenal of myths and legends, that you have to wonder what they really are.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
The Sunday Times is back to its old tricks, more of the same lies with more of the same neocon agenda regarding the Israeli attack on Syria. Had the Israelis really found anything in Syria, we would have heard about it immediately, or immediately after the attack. The Israeli lack of immediate response to allegations by Syria follows no known propaganda pattern. The Israelis are making up excuses as they have to. It appears that my original guess was right. The attack, in northern Syria, was intended to test the Russian defenses for their new port/base. Apparently, the defenses worked well, as the Israelis had to leave in an embarrassing hurry, leading to the reticence in admitting that anything had actually happened, and the ad libbed flow of excuses we are now seeing. The latest Murdoch lie is based on:
Despite the fact the Syrians were allegedly caught red-handed with North Korean nuclear material, and the Israelis told the Americans, who blessed the Israeli attack, Condi just invited the Syrians to participate in Middle East peace talks!
Monday, September 24, 2007
A good week It has been a good week for t-shirt slogans:
|probably not sent to you this was --appended for PWH to explicate: |
Ver.2/ US's evangelical syndrome illumiNATED by James Carroll "American Fundamentalisms"
What does "no comments-just BOLDs" mean ?Hi P. - You are correct that is unclear - and it means I didn't write any comments inside the text, just BOLDEDor made RED some of the original words. Sometimes I insert comments within a text, and use teal-coloredfonts for that, but didn't do comments here. It is a good story, although I should add some references where I see a deep connection to Chris Hedges 2003 book War Is A Force That Gives Us Meaning SUPERB_excerpts_at: 1] http://www.thirdworldtraveler
and 2] http://www.thirdworldtraveler
interview with Amy Goodman about his book "American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On America"
which CSPAN /Book TV covered by showing him [I happened to watch and tape the program]
give this speech at a chain bookstore. #3]
I don't know if these ideas challenge your Religion or your Politics - but that could be constructive.
I went to a singles-group for 3 years at the nearby megachurch, and agree with this sharp quote from link #3]:
[typed above this box]