Let´s have a fresh one – did anybody bring drinks?
Back to Main
July 17, 2004
Open Thread
Comments
Now Time says 9/11 Commission Finds Ties Between al-Qaeda and Iran.
First thought before reading the article. Iran is feverishly shia, Al Quaeda is Sunni – how does anybody wants to explain a cooperation?
A senior U.S. official told TIME that the Commission has uncovered evidence suggesting that between eight and ten of the 14 “muscle” hijackers—that is, those involved in gaining control of the four 9/11 aircraft and subduing the crew and passengers—passed through Iran in the period from October 2000 to February 2001. Sources also tell TIME that Commission investigators found that Iran had a history of allowing al-Qaeda members to enter and exit Iran across the Afghan border.
hmm – Senior US offical, sources
The senior official also told TIME that the report will note that Iranian officials approached the al-Qaeda leadership after the bombing of the USS Cole and proposed a collaborative relationship in future attacks on the U.S., but the offer was turned down by bin Laden because he did not want to alienate his supporters in Saudi Arabia.
Reading further – the “information” seams to be from a (tortured?) AlQaeda prisoner and from NSA intercepts.
When did they made these intercepts? If they made them during 2001, why was Iraq attacked, not Iran. If tehy made them later, why would anybody in Iran talk about this on the phone after 9/11?
Oh it´s gona play big in the SCLM
Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 17 2004 18:57 utc | 1
and oll in preparation for the October Suprise
… in response to an American-Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Such an attack may very well be on the agenda as the “October Surprise,” the distraction George Bush desperately needs if the debacle in Iraq is not to lead to his defeat in November.
Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 17 2004 19:48 utc | 3
October surprise will be a very “dirty” bomb, Iranian passports will be found to have survived ground zero.
Deja vu
Tactical nukes unleashed. Fox need the fireworks show for the braindead right wing nuts to drag their nuckles to the voting machines.
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 17 2004 19:54 utc | 4
And here I thought Syria was the big bugaboo we’re supposed to be afraid of next. I wish they’d make up their minds. I guess after the neocons dumped Chalabi it’s on to the Shia front, and forget about those horrible Ba’athists…
Posted by: x | Jul 17 2004 20:01 utc | 5
But x, why should they have to make up their minds? The US can take them all on, and at the same time if they want to. Whatever it takes to make America safer…
You, what are you looking at? Want some? — Oh, you’ve got nukes. That changes everything, of course.
Posted by: teuton | Jul 17 2004 20:13 utc | 6
@x
I saw a report about Russia sending 40,000 troops to Iraq on WhatReallyHappened. Must be a bogus report.
Do you have to do the “ejaculation” bit to the world to show you have nuclear capabilities?
My take is that Iran has nukes in the closet, Egypt had them in 1967.
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 17 2004 20:17 utc | 7
Ha, Ha, HA
if true, this is priceless:
Now comes the good part. After waiting around for about 45 minutes, the motorcade passed by us again. A few police cars, followed by a van or two, drove by. Then, a Bush/Cheney bus passed, followed by a second one going slower. At the front of this second bus was The W himself, waving cheerily at his supporters on the other side of the highway. Adam, Brendan, and I rose our banner (the More Trees, Less Bush one) and he turned to wave to our side of the road. His smile faded, and he raised his left arm in our direction. And then, George W. Bush, the 43rd president of the United States of America, extended his middle finger.
I tell ya, he crackin’ up… the pressure, the strain of constant rightousness. He’s gonna have a meltdown before Nov rolls around. Or so I hope!
Posted by: æ | Jul 17 2004 20:29 utc | 8
While having drinks, how about some music in the background.
Elton attacks ‘censorship’ in US
Posted by: Fran | Jul 17 2004 20:41 utc | 9
They’ve been floating a lot of trial balloons with Syria written on them. I wouldn’t be at all surprised. Sad, but not surprised.
Posted by: Kate_Storm | Jul 17 2004 20:42 utc | 10
@Fran
“Saturday Nights all for Fighting”
We here are just candles in the wind.
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 17 2004 21:06 utc | 11
‘Flawed’ data led to war: Report – U.S. Senate study puts blame on CIA – Cites `global’ Iraq intelligence failure
Wonder what makes them think the intelligence about Iran is any better?
Bedtime for me, enjoy your drinks.
Posted by: Fran | Jul 17 2004 21:07 utc | 12
Looks like Sir Elton isn’t aware of Bands against Bush and a number of other musician-based organizations- PunkVoter also comes to mind.
Probably too busy writing for Disney.
Posted by: æ | Jul 17 2004 21:20 utc | 13
Just took a quick glance through this thread before going out for the night. Now I’ll be chomping at the bit to get back tonight to really read it. Sounds delicious yet scarry.
Plan to have a good time anyway.
Cheers all.
Posted by: Juannie | Jul 17 2004 22:21 utc | 15
@Everyone:
Let’s not get all excited. The US has a 13 division ground force(active).
The Neoclowns have so overstretched the military, that, even after Iraq, for 2 years or more, we will be hard pressed to deal with any
serious situations. That is the real and very serious danger here. Think North Korea.
Our armed forces are utterly exhausted, by incompetent civilian mismanagement, that borders on treasonous.
In the last thread, I mentioned that the great French poet V. Lestat’s metaphor for the world–“a Savage Garden” was applicable to finance. It is equally applicable to the world of nations. Remember also the Sweeney Todd corrolary:”some need to be eaten; some need to eat”.
In short the little mammals and their military staffs, all over the world, have learned the lesson about that big Velociraptor, full of SHOCK AND AWE(US):
1.Buy in all the primitive, cheap,but very effectice weapons you can buy: AK47s, RPG7s, Stingers, and a few others.
2.Lure BIG BAD into a confined space.
3.Play AK-RPG boogie all over BIG BAD’S ass.
4.Bring out the cockail forks and smallish carving knives.
5.Give thanks to the Neo-Clown show in Washington that gave you this bounty.
I imagine someone at the U.S. Army War College and the Center for Strategic and International Studies have written very serious papers, expressing very similar thoughts.I think their names were Jeffrey Reccord and Anthony Cordesman.
Posted by: FLASHHARRY | Jul 18 2004 1:22 utc | 16
@Flash
Next 911, Iran blamed. US AirForce aren’t that busy at the moment.
Fuck, Blair is still in power, we’re mugs.
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 18 2004 2:58 utc | 17
/rant
Totally OT, I think, but I couldn’t contain my glee this evening, and had to let it out somewhere. The hubby and I went out to dinner at a small pub in the nearest community (pop. 250 or so) here in very rural central NY. On the bulletin board, prominently displayed over the photos of family and grandchildren, fat fish held on docks, and trophy deer heads, was a printout of anti-Bush bumper sticker slogans.
“Silly comment.” you say, “the discussion here is so much more esoteric!”
Yes, I agree, but I am probably the lone Progressive in a sea of generations of “Republican come hell or high water” voters here, so this trivial event is a real turning point for me.
I have long believed that the “polls” just don’t have it quite right; I think that frustration with the current Shrubco is much deeper then we know, because no one would ever poll these folks in the middle of nowhere. Even real conservatives are now jumping ship…I saw it tonight.
/rant
Posted by: nearpass | Jul 18 2004 3:12 utc | 18
Let’s not get all excited. The US has a 13 division ground force(active).
The Neoclowns have so overstretched the military, that, even after Iraq, for 2 years or more, we will be hard pressed to deal with any
serious situations.
Crikes, we’ve got 59 year old guys manning Apache gunships. How much more streched can you get??
Posted by: Richard Cranium | Jul 18 2004 3:40 utc | 19
Bush lacks the needed credibility to push for a draft of any kind, and so our stay in Iraq should keep him out of temptation where Iran and other places are concerned (having already stiffed Afghanistan in his lurid way).
But Kerry, assuming office, can make a seductive pitch after he’s fired the neo-cons: assuring us that he has no intentions of acting up outside of Iraq, he can argue that he has to enlarge our forces there to “finish the job”. And once the expeditionary force seems a little stronger, other adventures elswhere can start to suggest themselves.
There has to be some way–call it the “Juan Cole” way–to track, and to denounce, Kerry’s every step in that direction.
Posted by: alabama | Jul 18 2004 5:05 utc | 20
I also have a feeling–given the bad press from Abu Ghraib et al–that some parts of our foreign policy may no longer belong to Israel at this time.
For example, I don’t foresee any Americans helping Israel set up a “trail of tears,” driving Palestinians into Iraq any time soon. Sharon may have to wait a while for that one.
If Americans lack the resources to bring this off, and if Sharon can’t export his ethnic cleansing, then he may finally have to settle for larger, systematic massacres of Palestinians within the confines of Israeli soil.
Posted by: alabama | Jul 18 2004 5:08 utc | 21
ernhard, would you, in one of your moments of financial wizardry, be so kind as to send us a post explaining why it’s important, arguably, to occupy, with troops, the territory from which oil is being extracted?
I’ve never been convinced about this. Oil’s like gold, or silver. Unless you plan to engineer in a corner on the market, the stuff just trades on the market. If the Chinese can buy American money without sending over an army to occupy the lower forty-eight, then surely we can do the same with mideastern oil.
Or have I missed something along the way? Is it the case that the people installing and maintaining the extraction and refining and shipping hardware get a signifant break on the market price?
Posted by: alabama | Jul 18 2004 5:09 utc | 22
Why do the strains of the Iran/Contra scandal keep playing somewhere as background noise in my head? It’s the old familiar refrain: the great Satan, our arch enemy fundies, Israel threatened…and there we were, dealing with them all along through Israel as broker. Why does this keep playing in my head and nagging at me so?
Posted by: x | Jul 18 2004 5:22 utc | 23
Cloned:
Russian troops would not surprise me. They’re desperate to make deals to expand Nato to enforce policies in the region, istm. They just had that Nato meeting in Turkey. What’s a defense budget for? Wonder what we did to sweeten that pot? Note I say “we” but I can only wonder what I’ve got to do with it anymore, except pay for it all and suffer whatever fallout or consequences…
Posted by: x | Jul 18 2004 5:25 utc | 24
Some interesting reading to go with the morning coffee.
William Pfaff: Europe or the US? Britain must choose – America’s decision on Bush looms. And it’s time for Blair to get off the fence
Is this a ray of hope? Poll: Public Support Slips for Iraq War
More lies falling apart! PM admits graves claim ‘untrue’
Posted by: Fran | Jul 18 2004 6:24 utc | 25
@alabama
It is not really important to have soldiers sitting on the oil wells. But to have the ability to press the owner of the oil well to open and close it whenever one likes and to be able to decide who gets prefered access to that oil/gas. Having the ability to do so would go a far way should China/Europe ever become a (military) rival to the US.
Financially the money is in the oil developing / transport / refinery business. So to have Exxon manage Iranian oil wells would make for a nice contribution for a campain trough. But the real issue is strategic control IMHO.
Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 18 2004 6:57 utc | 26
I’ve never been convinced about this. Oil’s like gold, or silver. Unless you plan to engineer in a corner on the market, the stuff just trades on the market.
A (perhaps naive) comment and naive question on this issue.
I believe Saddam started trading Oil for Euros not too long before the war drums started beating. Is this not the crux of the matter? If the USA can secure all the oil it needs in exchange for “paper money” then they control the real wealth. Is it not that the basis for money is some sort of commodity (like copper, silver, and gold coins which originally were just a simplified means of trading in these commodities that also had a real use.)
Perhaps if the basis of monetary exchange was a “barrel of oil” (backed up with a “real” barrel of oil) rather than a US$, the power of the US would be greatly diminished.
Posted by: DM | Jul 18 2004 7:45 utc | 27
meanwhile Air Strike in Iraqi City of Falluja Kills 11
This is the fifth time that a “save house” of al-Zarqawi-Goldstein is bombed in Fallujah in recent weeks.
Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 18 2004 8:51 utc | 28
@ Bernhard
What a difference a day makes, eh?
Fallujah savors its most peaceful spell in a year – July 17th
There ought to be an ‘Iraq rule’ for journalists – stop writing ‘feelgood’ stories, it’s too soon for that kind of nonsense.
Posted by: Nemo | Jul 18 2004 9:12 utc | 29
Wait just a damn minute! Why is the US attacking a “sovereign” country? Again?
I am talking about the story just above. I wish someone in the SCLM would have the intestinal fortitude to bring this up on one of the talking head shows today.
What utter hypocrisy.
Posted by: Dan of Steele | Jul 18 2004 9:12 utc | 30
@ Dan of Steele
It looks like the US military strategy is to slowly but steadily kill everyone in Fallujah, then when there’s only one man left standing they’ll know for sure it’s Zarqawi, unless he’s been in Jordan all along of course.
‘Destroying the city in order to save it’ is a quantum leap from the rustic ambitions and slogans of Vietnam. Now it’s apparently quite routine to bomb residential homes in a city whenever you like, as long as nobody points out that it’s actually a war crime.
Posted by: Nemo | Jul 18 2004 9:18 utc | 31
Cameron Kerry: Bush War Against Terrorism Not Effective Enough
By Julie Stahl, CNSNews.com Jerusalem Bureau Chief, July 16, 2004
Jerusalem (CNSNews.com) – Cameron Kerry, the younger brother and close advisor of Sen. John F. Kerry, said President Bush is not waging an effective enough war against terrorism, according to an Israeli newspaper on Friday.
The media here, however, tend to see his visit as a proxy campaign trip for his brother, who is running for president. (…) Accompanied by his wife and Kerry’s senior campaign advisor on the Middle East and Jewish affairs, Jay Footlik, Cameron Kerry has met with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and opposition Labor Party Leader Shimon Peres. (…) In an interview with The Jerusalem Post published on Friday, Kerry was quoted as saying that Bush’s war on terrorism had not been effective enough. He also was quoted as saying that Bush “has been timid about challenging Saudi Arabia.” (…) He also has been pressed to explain comments John Kerry made about Israel’s security barrier when he called it a “barrier to peace” before an Arab American audience.
Crosstalk
Posted by: Blackie | Jul 18 2004 10:16 utc | 32
… be so kind as to send us a post explaining why it’s important, arguably, to occupy, with troops, the territory from which oil is being extracted?
As B. said the issue is control. To put it even more simply, you can’t buy from a seller who refuses to sell, and can’t can’t count on a seller who is capricious, domineering, difficult, and charges whatever he pleases. Oil is not a commodity like any other. It is the life-blood of modern industrial nations as well as essential for armies, and the end of the supply is in sight. Therefore, it may even become necessary to have soldiers sitting on oil wells.
For example, from the Brookings Institution (my bold):
Considering the cost in blood and treasure involved in the continuous disruption of Iraq’s oil production, and the potential implications for the global economy, the Coalition forces and Iraqi security services must greatly increase their efforts to combat both looters and saboteurs, even if it means a less benevolent occupation. Stretched to the limit, the Coalition clearly cannot deploy troops along every mile of Iraq’s pipeline system; however, in many cases technology can fill the void. Sophisticated surveillance systems to enhance infrastructure security, including unmanned aerial vehicles, electronic motion detectors, video cameras, and other sensors can be deployed in critical locations. New technologies for seismic sensing of underground vibrations can provide early warning when saboteurs approach the protected area. Such systems would be expensive, but by making possible the remote monitoring of much of the pipeline network can eliminate the need for large numbers of troops and instead allow the system to rely on smaller numbers of rapid-response teams.
Given the growing threat to offshore terminals, further steps should be taken to beef up security in and around them. This should include extending security zones surrounding the terminals, deploying naval forces and Marines in the vicinity, and changing their rules of engagement to a more aggressive posture. An Iraqi naval force and coast guard units should also be trained and deployed as soon as possible.
(…)
The Coalition must also make a major effort to deter oil terrorists or looters. Because of the strategic implications of pipeline sabotage, acts of terrorism against Iraq’s network should be treated as acts of war rather than petty crime. Of greatest importance, the Coalition and the new Iraqi interim government should declare a strip of at least a half-mile on either side of the pipeline route to be a closed military zone, fenced off and out of bounds to unauthorized personnel. The rules of engagement should allow Coalition forces and Iraqi security personnel to open fire at anyone who enters this buffer zone. Those who come near the lines should know they put their life at risk. If caught, they should be subjected to severe punishment. To prevent innocent civilians who unintentionally enter the buffer zone from being hurt, this policy requires not only proper fencing along the pipeline routes, but also the placement of ample warning signs.
Finally, a massive public-education campaign is needed to communicate to the Iraqis the importance of infrastructure security to the rebuilding of their country. This will hopefully make the Iraqi people more willing to accept whatever hardships are necessary to protect the oil network, while tarnishing the saboteurs’ image and making them into enemies of the Iraqi people.
Iraq oil sector: Brookings
If such an approach is the right one or not is another question.
Posted by: Blackie | Jul 18 2004 10:44 utc | 33
Found this on xymphora
Chess genius Bobby Fischer has been arrested in Japan, and is apparently going to be extradited to the U. S. – now get this! – on charges of violating United Nations sanctions because, in 1992, he participated in a chess match in Yugoslavia at a time that country was under U. N. sanctions. Do you think the Americans are going to start enforcing violations of U. N. resolutions (if so, Israel should be very worried)? Do you think John Ashcroft cares about a breach of U. N. sanctions twelve years ago? Do you think the war on terrorism is going to catch up with the fearsome chess terrorists? Are Americans finally going to be freed from the horrors of castling and mating? Or does all this have something to do with what Bobby Fischer said immediately after September 11?:
“This is all wonderful news. It is time to finish off the US once and for all. I was happy and could not believe what was happening. All the crimes the US has committed in the world. This just shows, what goes around comes around, even to the US. I applaud the act. The US and Israel have been slaughtering the Palestinians for years. Now it is coming back at the US.”
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 18 2004 11:39 utc | 34
Blair to resign Wednesday!
Your kidding ? Where’s the link ?
Posted by: DM | Jul 18 2004 12:08 utc | 36
Cloned Poster
Getting excited here – but I can’t find your link or any reference to Blair other than that he will face “further pressure”.
I want the little bastard out. When he is out of power – that will not be the end of the story for him. All the other obsequious little pommie bastards that allowed this fantasist to commit mass murder will no longer be so constrained. I fully expect that when he does resign, this will just be the start of his tribulations. As there is no capital punishment is the UK – perhaps he can be persuaded to do the right thing.
Posted by: DM | Jul 18 2004 12:24 utc | 37
18 March 2003, House of Commons
“We are asked now seriously to accept that in the last few years-contrary to all history, contrary to all intelligence-Saddam decided unilaterally to destroy those weapons. I say that such a claim is palpably absurd.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3054991.stm
Not as palpably pompous and absurd as these pretentious pommie (limey) pricks.
Posted by: DM | Jul 18 2004 12:46 utc | 38
hi guys
I’ve been reading you faithfully in the past weeks or so, but it is hard to reply as I only have access to internet via my phone… but I cannot resist alabama’s call re oil. please go check my site (go through the May archives, sorry if I cannot give you a more precise link) as I already wrote about that there in some detail.
Posted by: Jérôme | Jul 18 2004 13:25 utc | 39
Re Blair
I was listening to BBC 5Live and out of the blue some guy who wrote the prick’s biography say the prick will resign Wednesday. No other news services reporting it, and not being carried in BBC news.
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 18 2004 14:40 utc | 40
”The regime in Havana, already one of the worst violators of human rights in the world, is adding to its crimes. The dictator welcomes sex tourism,” Bush said at a conference on ”human trafficking” — forced labor, sex and military service. (bold mine)
The US soldiers is Iraq are going to love this comment, and will appreciate that they will be able to leave the army, not being forced to stay on longer.
I have been wondering with all this moral issues Bush has, I do not think he will invade Iran next – no, now that he is also worried about sex tourism it is going to be Europe. He will have to save the Europeans from all those women enjoy topless sun-bathing on our southern beaches!
more here
P.S. I am aware that human trafficking is a sickening topic, but when it comes from Bush I just can’t take it serious anymore.
Posted by: Fran | Jul 18 2004 14:56 utc | 41
Slightly OT: Election, Cuba and putsch, all in one.
Has anyone heard of ‘Operation Northwoods’ before? Those plans sound pretty scary , even after such a long time.
Will There Actually Be a 2004 Presidential Election?
Posted by: Fran | Jul 18 2004 15:20 utc | 42
Jérôme —
A Topic for you to comment on . . .
Ghawar Is Dying — by Chip Haynes
“Ghawar is dying.” Could those three simple words signal the beginning of the end for the industrialized human civilization on Planet Earth? No one in a position of knowledge or authority has uttered them publicly yet, nor are they likely to for a few years to come. So we do have some time–but not much. Then again, they may have been said quietly two years ago and we would never know. Life’s funny that way. Too bad this isn’t a laughing matter.
Some two hundred kilometers east of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, is a stretch of uninhabited and unremarkable desert in the Empty Quarter. This hot, desolate landscape sits above the largest oil field in the world: the Ghawar. It’s a big chunk of nothing one hundred and fifty miles long and twenty-five miles wide, but thousands of meters below its surface lie seventy billion barrels of oil patiently waiting to be pumped out. They’ve waited for millions of years. A few more won’t matter. And after that? After that, Ghawar will no longer be dying. It will be dead. Nothing left but sand and sinkholes.
Before you sit back, all smug and comfy with that seventy billion barrel figure, let me do a bit of quick math for you: that’s only an 875 day supply of oil for the world at the current rate of use. (And that rate rises every year, just as the Ghawar’s not unlimited oil reserves get lower.) Admittedly, the Ghawar is not our only source of oil. (And unless you happen to be Saudi, its not even your oil at all, now is it?) Still, the Ghawar is The Big One, and when it goes, things will change–forever. The only questions are: When will it happen, and how will we know?
The when is easy, if vague: it could happen at any time from two years ago to twenty years from now. But how will we know? That’s a far more difficult question to answer.
Two related articles from TomDispatch.com
Tomgram: Oil wars
Note the complete exclusion of U.S. energy companies in all prominent new Saudi energy ventures; this is hardly consistent with an ostensible pledge to flood the market with oil around October to guarantee the election of a President viewed to be fundamentally hostile to Islamic interests by the vast majority of OPEC nations. It is equally salient that the officially stated OPEC price range of $22-$28 per barrel has largely been ignored by virtually all OPEC members …
The new, largely unarticulated high oil price strategy should be viewed in the context of Saudi promises to invest billions in the development of the Russian energy industry, and suggestions of an emerging Russo-Saudi oil alliance.
Tomgram: Marshall Auerback on oil surprises
Ghawar, the largest field in the world and all of Saudi Arabia’s other large fields are old and tired. In recent years, the Saudis have resorted to both water injection and so-called “bottle-brush” drilling to maintain production — techniques that tend to accelerate decline and damage reservoirs.
For a country with an allegedly huge marginal surplus of oil production, turning to such extraction techniques is likely to prove an unwise move. With bottle-brush drilling, a shaft is drilled horizontally over long distances with a number of brush-like openings. Water is then forced under pressure into the reservoir, forcing the oil upwards toward the well heads. Extraction is thereby increased. However, when the water table hits the horizontal shaft, often without warning, the whole field may go virtually dead and production will immediately drop off to virtually nothing.
Examples of what has happened in other oil producing countries when “bottle-brush” drilling was employed abound. Syria’s oil production is now in terminal decline. Yemen is following, according to Ali Samsam Bakhtiari, Vice President of the National Iranian oil Company, who has long suggested that Saudi oil production might have peaked in the spring of 2003. Adds analyst William Kennedy, “For the record, Ghawar’s ultimate recoverable reserves in 1975 were estimated at 60 billion barrels — by Exxon, Mobil, Texaco and Chevron. It had produced 55 billion barrels up to the end of 2003 and is still producing at 1.8 billion per annum. That shows you how close it might be to the end. When Ghawar dies, the world is officially in decline.”
Posted by: ck | Jul 18 2004 15:30 utc | 43
replying to posts further up in the thread:
Dan of Steele — sovereign country indeed!
Blackie — “Cameron Kerry, the younger brother and close advisor of Sen. John F. Kerry, said President Bush is not waging an effective enough war against terrorism, according to an Israeli newspaper on Friday.”
When I read this stuff, I just don’t know what to think or what to say. I haven’t much confidence at all that neocon policies are going to go away, or that neocon advisors will either.
Posted by: x | Jul 18 2004 15:56 utc | 44
The Poodle to resign? If only! But I dont believe it.. For ex:
Sun. 11 July, Scotland on Sunday: Cabinet allies urged Blair not to resign….
TONY Blairs future as Prime Minister was once again the subject of fevered speculation last night after it emerged several Cabinet colleagues urged him to stay during a leadership crisis last month.
S on S
Posted by: Blackie | Jul 18 2004 16:12 utc | 45
“The Saudis are out of capacity. That’s my opinion… They have no infrastructure or extra pipes or gas, oil, and water separators [very expensive large globes used to separate what comes out of a water injection well]. They have very heavy oil which, through a conventional refinery, produces asphalt. We don’t need asphalt. We need gasoline. It takes a complex refinery to make gasoline and it only takes 7-10 years to build one.”
— Matt Simmons, July 13, 2004.
“The country’s reported reserves are highly suspect, being a State secret. A 2002 paper suggested that as little as 160 Gb are Proved , while the ex-head of Aramco recently stated that only 130 Gb were Proved Developed. The country reported 167 Gb in 1989, before it had reason to inflate its reserves to protect itself in the “OPEC quota wars”, quota being based on reserves. It now transpires that the 263 Gb claimed as Reserves actually represents the total it has and hopes to find, not what is left, as commonly assumed. This explains why the reported numbers have barely changed for almost twenty years despite production.
Despite statements to the contrary, it is clear that Saudi Arabia is producing at its present capacity, and has to work hard to maintain even that. Production stands at about 8.5 Mb/d, which can probably be held until around 2015 before terminal decline sets in at about 2% a year. It will take huge investments to bring in the smaller discoveries to step up production but the country has little incentive to do so as such action would serve to depress oil prices and accelerate the depletion of the resource on which it so totally depends.”
— Colin J. Campbell, “The Troubled Monarchy of Saudi Arabia ”, July 12, 2004
From: PrudentBear
I wonder what Jerome thinks about Simmons and Campbell.
Posted by: Blackie | Jul 18 2004 16:43 utc | 46
There was a lot of discussion of the possibility of a Blair resignation the last few days on BBC radio World Service – no clear picture whether he will or won’t and the debate seems, at least acc. to the Beeb, to have a lot to do with his “promise” to Brown to play PM for a while and then let Brown have a turn. Brown’s folks are furious that Blair is not keeping his promise, Blair’s folks saying there’s no plan to step down, etc …
Posted by: Siun | Jul 18 2004 16:55 utc | 47
I guess Bush is not the only one who’s convinced himself he’s some sort of saint.
Posted by: x | Jul 18 2004 16:57 utc | 48
@ x – Why do the strains of the Iran/Contra scandal keep playing somewhere as background noise in my head?
They keep playing x because many of the same folks are back in the picture.
Iran – Contra
Posted by: sukabi | Jul 18 2004 17:09 utc | 49
Guys, I’ll try to answer – sorry if it is too brief – due to technical limitations.
Saudi oil – two things not to be confused are
(i) the reserves under production (like Ghawar) are running out – this is very likely, although hard to know with limited outsider presence in SA. (Remember that in the past 30 years, the recoverable reserves from large fields have been increased by 50% thnaks to better reservoir management and technology)
(ii) overall reserves running out.
SA has been living off past investment for many years, and may have production bottlenecks today – to be solved by new investment. This is not a rererve problem, but an investment problem. The issue for them is whether to allow foreign investment in or not.
(Foreign means US or Europe – Russian oil is not able to invest meaningfully outside its borders yet). They cannot make up their mind – thus announcements of big contracts, later rescinded. At stake, as usual, the perception that they are “giving away” their wealth to foreigners. It’s usually not true; current PSAs (production sharing agreements) are very favorable to host countries, who can capture most of the “rent” (see my posts on that topic on my site). The issue is political and psychological more than anything else, with an touch of vulnerability as they NEED the foreign investment + expertise to get things going now, due to scale + technology requirements.
SA has plenty of reserves, cheap to produce (per barrel, the aggregate investment is big) and of the requisite quality (“Arabian Light”).
Regarding physical control of the oil, again, see my posts, it has importance ONLY in situation of actual war (as in Iraq now, where oil infrastructure is a target), otherwise, it has NOT. The sellers are even more desperate to sell than the buyers to buy, because of their mono-industrial, corrupt economies. Very few producers have managed to manage their oil wealth intellingently (Norway, Dubai and that’s it, basically).
Posted by: Jérôme | Jul 18 2004 17:23 utc | 50
I just heard a report on CNN from a woman who has been reporting on Iraq for a long time.
She was talking about honor killings of women in Iraq, and said that there were 100 reports of the murder of females in a household. The overwhelming reason given for these killings is that the female has disgraced the family because she’s not sufficiently virginal.
These same killings, she said, took place under Saddam. I wonder if anyone has any reliable figures on something like this.
Because I wonder if this is in any way connected to the prison abuse scandals.
Would some organization have been able to keep track of human rights/female honor killing over time?
Posted by: fauxreal | Jul 18 2004 20:21 utc | 51
From the Economist —
What If?
Terrorists are now targeting Saudi Arabia’s oil infrastructure. How bad could things get?
Not so long ago, a certain well-known international figure penned a heart-felt speech he called his “Letter to the American People”. In it, he said: “You steal our wealth and oil at paltry prices because of your international influence and military threats. This theft is indeed the biggest theft ever witnessed by mankind in the history of the world.” The author was Osama bin Laden.
The article also has a map of Saudi Oil assets.
Posted by: ck | Jul 18 2004 21:31 utc | 52
@ck, essentially OBL is correct, given the level of taxes that are levied on fuel here in Europe. And, we still pay (here where I live) approx $6.50 a gallon.
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 18 2004 21:57 utc | 53
Geeeeeeee, the Canadians and the Europeans have launched the World’s largest commercial satellite.
Well done!
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 18 2004 22:05 utc | 54
CP —
A month ago, after the terrorist attacks on in Saudi Arabia, Robert Baer wrote that Osama Bin Laden thinks Saudi oil prices should be around $140 a barrel.
If the Saudi oil fields are nearing depletion, and are being damaged aggressive extraction procedures, a case can be made that the House of Saud is acting on behalf of western interests, rather than the best interests of the Saudi people.
In a few years time, here in the States we are going to be looking back at the good old days of $2 per gallon gasoline.
Posted by: ck | Jul 18 2004 22:20 utc | 55
@ck……….. The Invasion of Iran might (in the mind of the lunatic Neocons) might forestall that inevitability for four more years.
We’re bulging, we’re fat and overpopulated and over producing. I fear for my kids generation.
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 18 2004 22:43 utc | 56
Interested to hear American comment on: This article
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 18 2004 23:20 utc | 57
‘Reconstruction’ American style – poor bookkeeping, no receipts, slush funds, sticky fingers and no accountability
Accounting for Iraq
Posted by: Nemo | Jul 18 2004 23:49 utc | 60
Cloned:
Russo’s book sounds intriguing, I’ll take a look for it.
One thing I always wondered about: the Red scare and its effect on unions and how that might tie in with mob influence. I have no clue about this but so much worked hand in glove it seems to me, for some reason.
Anyway, back to regularly scheduled current affairs…oh wait, did someone say “Accounting for Iraq”, uh, could be related topically, couldn’t it?…..
Posted by: x | Jul 19 2004 0:42 utc | 61
Freelance American torturers arrested in Afghanistan claim Pentagon contacts
Torturing bounty hunters claim Pentagon links
As the leader of this pack of money hunting vigilantes has a track record of lying and deception not unlike Walter Mitty’s this story might have no foundation – but then again, given what we know about the American administration it might.
Posted by: Nemo | Jul 19 2004 1:29 utc | 62
I have finally, at long last, listened to the entire Seymour Hersh speech at the ACLU.
Sadly, he verifies a lot of my worst feelings about the election and what is going on in our country in other ways: Rummy’s denial of anything that doesn’t support his egomaniacal fantasies, the cult-like nature of the neocons and their taking over of our government, the billions that are missing from accounting of this war — and the fact that it may well go into the trillions in cost — and the “no criticism allowed” nature of the influence on Capitol Hill. I’m not quite sure what he meant by categorizing the election as “Bush vs. Bush.” (Anybody have any thoughts on that one?) But I suspect that he’s alluding to the “sameness” problem we’ve discussed here, from some of the other remarks he made, although he holds out hope for some sort of change. And of course the fact that this war is only “achieving” the precise opposite of its claimed intentions.
I did not understand clearly before that the boyus who were sodomized in prison were children of women who were arrested (and not boys rounded up as “suspected” helpers of insurgents, for example), and that makes it an “even worse” crime than I thought originally.
But my main conclusion in all of this that is slightly different from before is that we are not just in an election year choice, but we are in a situation that is, in effect, an assault on our sanity. This is the way that I feel. It is not just that we are being lied to, but that the lies are in the category of self-delusion in the service of self-serving egomaniacal fantasy. And the collective schizophrenia that seems to be going on among our “business as usual” lawmakers is in the service of self-delusion, obvious self-delusion. So, that’s why I can’t just see this election as business as usual, a clear choice for change.
We’re in a different place. Our sanity is being assaulted daily. And to my mind that requires a somewhat different re-orientation, and a clearcut search for the way of thinking that will lead us out of it, and an effective appropriate response. I don’t say don’t vote. Lord knows I hope for change from the evil I don’t know yet. But something else is being required of us, and I’m suggesting to my fellow barflies that we need to think hard about it, and debate about it, and somehow start to thrash that out a little bit (aside from the question of the election).
Posted by: x | Jul 19 2004 2:48 utc | 63
PS I also think that other points he makes about Wolfowitz are important: that this is seen as a “permanent revolution” (Hersh calls Wolfowitz the greatest Trotskyist of our time.) This seems to me to be an appropriate categorization, or at least a way to think about, the neocons’ desired permanent goal of instability in the region. In addition he makes the point that this is not really just about oil. I think the idea that this is all done in support of what is essentially a fantasy is crucially important to understand and to think about, and to think about an appropriate and effective response to, not just on a grand scale, but on the personal as well. It affects us all personally too, this assault on sanity; it is not just about something that is happening “out there.”
Posted by: x | Jul 19 2004 3:00 utc | 64
PPS re sexual assauls on children: I don’t mean the crime was worse for the children, I mean in terms of the layers of criminal behavior and possible war crimes there are more. This was targeting relatives(and children at that) in addition to whatever else they were doing. I think most of the women in prison are there for the crime of being related to some important Ba’athists in the first place, aren’t they?
Posted by: x | Jul 19 2004 3:57 utc | 65
@x
I get your drift and go back and forth on this issue, arguing with myself “re: is it worth going to the mat for a centrist democrat?” almost daily….
My take on the crux of ‘Bush vs Bush’ is that the neoCarvillians have come to the conclusion that the only way to actually win, at least in campaign terms, is to out Rove the Rovians.
So, the real question is, do the horses being run by the neoCarves in turn believe that the only way to effectively govern is to out PNAC the PNACKWANKers?
If the latter is, indeed, the case I agree that we may have to think in terms more extraordinary than just winning a single election.
Posted by: RossK | Jul 19 2004 4:01 utc | 66
Well, here goes our final “We’re not as bad as Hussein” argument. Apparently we’ve exceeded him in quantity of innocent Iraqi deaths — and in about one-tenth the time.
Saddam’s Mass Grave Numbers ‘Untrue”
Posted by: SusanG | Jul 19 2004 4:02 utc | 67
RossK
Thanks for that cogent assessment of the situation. I think that, even before the election, there are things I need to keep in mind just to stay focused on priorities.
Re sexual crimes on children again: am I wrong or is it my impression that these things were done to these boys in front of their mothers, and/or in order to put yet more pressure on and torture the mothers?
Posted by: x | Jul 19 2004 4:18 utc | 68
am I wrong or is it my impression
See? The sanity is going. (shaking my head)
That’s my impression. Is it correct? is what I was trying to ask…
Posted by: x | Jul 19 2004 4:20 utc | 69
Once more history repeats itself: ‘Shocking ingratitude’
This is funny, if just for its hypocrisy: Lawmaker arrestedfor alleged lewdness – Rep. Brian Blundell of Lahaina is accused of groping a male HPD undercover officer I am impressed by those family values and now can understand why there is a need for a amendment against gay people. (sarcasm)
Posted by: Fran | Jul 19 2004 5:20 utc | 71
In Baghdad it’s morning already and people are busy greeting the new day…
Suspected car bomb kills 8 near Baghdad police post
Posted by: Nemo | Jul 19 2004 5:24 utc | 72
Seymore Hersh is calling Wolfowitz a Trotzkist. Raimondo has a good piece on this:
THE CULT OF POWER – FROM LEON TROTSKY TO PAUL WOLFOWITZ
see also
NeoCons: Radical Foreign Policy for U.S. Global Empire for a graph about Trotzkis Permanent Revolution and the Neocons.
A Tragedy of Errors Michael Lind in The Nation about the history and relations of the Neocon Cabal
Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 19 2004 6:13 utc | 73
@ Fran….you might like this from the wonderful Mark Morford
@Bernhard….thanks for the education (here above and on economics thread).
Posted by: RossK | Jul 19 2004 6:33 utc | 74
The October attack on Irans nuclear industry. This tin foil hat article Guest Column: The October Surprise?
says there will be an Israeli/US air attack on Iranian nuclear infrastructure in October.
Now Washington post comes up with U.S. Faces a Crossroads on Iran Policy
Acting CIA Director John E. McLaughlin said yesterday that the United States has known for “some time” about the al Qaeda passage through Iran, although he said there is “no evidence” of a connection between Iran and the Sept. 11 attacks.
…
Since May, Congress has been moving — with little notice — toward a joint resolution calling for punitive action against Iran if it does not fully reveal details of its nuclear arms program. In language similar to the prewar resolution on Iraq, a recent House resolution authorized the use of “all appropriate means” to deter, dissuade and prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weaponry — terminology often used to approve preemptive military force. Reflecting the growing anxiety on Capitol Hill about Iran, it passed 376 to 3.
That is a free ticket for Bush to do what ever he likes with Iran. The chances that the October Suprise is real just raised to some 75% in my view.
Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 19 2004 7:01 utc | 75
@ RossK
thanks, I read this Morford already. You know I start to belief that the Bible might be true after all. Somewhere it says ‘you reap what you sow’ or something in that sense. This could also be called the principle of Karma, which states that every action has a reaction. It’s interesting, that it’s mostly Republicans that get caught, or maybe liberals actually have better ethics and a live by them too.
Posted by: Fran | Jul 19 2004 7:06 utc | 76
@RossK
– hey – its not me to “educate” – hope we just share some knowledge and lots of opinions here
Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 19 2004 7:08 utc | 77
@Bernhard
this is scary, it seems as if American politicians, Democrats inluded as they where needed to make this pass 376 to 3, are suffering from a severe learning defecency.
Posted by: Fran | Jul 19 2004 7:10 utc | 78
Why should citizens elect the President? Tehy shouldn´t, the Governers should:
Usurping the Voters
The Supreme Court said in Bush v. Gore:
“The individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States,” the court said, “unless and until the state legislature chooses a statewide election as the means to implement its power to appoint members of the Electoral College.”
Jeb to George W. “No problem brother!”
Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 19 2004 7:15 utc | 79
This is the fifth session of Iraq’s big board after a U.S.-backed reorganization of the exchange, and all is well.
Last Sunday it was a little noisier.
“We were selling and buying and around us they were fighting and bombs and explosions and nobody cared, nobody gave it a second thought,” said chairman of the Iraqi stock exchange, Talib al Tabatabaie.
anybody around here find this as twisted as I do???
talk about jumping right in there and creating the haves and have nots. while my reaction is purely emotional, i would love to know what some of the patrons in the profession think.
Posted by: esme | Jul 19 2004 8:15 utc | 80
@Bernhard
I’m having an argument with someone about the economic viability of the oil shale deposits in Canada, I recollect this was discussed a while back by your good self. Any links to relevant articles?
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 19 2004 10:15 utc | 81
@CP and Bernard:
Seems like, in the late 70s, pretty good extraction tecnologies existed vis-a-vis oil from shale. Fields in NW US and Canada were enormous.
Don’t remember what the estimated costs were to take a gallon to market.
Enthusiasts for shale back then were saying that shale would be for the Oil Age what the Mesabi Range was for the U.S. Steel Age.
And they were quite evangelical about it.
And Cp , I hope that golfer babe this weekend soothed that little snark in you.
Posted by: FLASHHARRY | Jul 19 2004 11:55 utc | 83
CP
I have some info, but hard to convey in a short message. will try to convey more info by e-mail, if I can find the hard data (not with me these days).
Try also to google “opti oil sands”, it’s a project that’s come to the banking market very recently. Public info about it may be enough for your purposes already. The short answer for everybody is that it will be viable with current high oil prices, but as it requires very heavy initial investment, investors need to be confident enough that prices will stay high for long enough to get their return. (banks usually want a project they finance to be viable with 15-20$/b oil ; this one is probably in the 20-25 range, which is now becoming acceptable).
Hope this helps.
Posted by: Jérôme | Jul 19 2004 12:15 utc | 84
Where ever you look there is more BS coming up. Don’t they have enough trouble with Iraq, and now going after Iran that they have to provoke China too.
Now Bush Saber-Rattling Is Unnerving China – By Chalmers Johnson
Posted by: Fran | Jul 19 2004 15:08 utc | 85
@Fran:
You ought to check Yahoo’s news today that China has recently started teaching sex education
in kindergarden. This might be the real cause of tensions.
Just kidding, but funny.
Posted by: FLASHHARRY | Jul 19 2004 15:52 utc | 86
this is scary, it seems as if American politicians, Democrats inluded as they where needed to make this pass 376 to 3, are suffering from a severe learning defecency.
We already have a “sanctions” style resolution passed for Syria, too (Aipac was pushing it). Who else is on that list?
Posted by: x | Jul 19 2004 16:49 utc | 87
Fran, warning off China is a preparation for action on Iran, China and Iran have common interests in energy projects and military equipment. If Iran is attacked, China would like to help Iran, though probably not publicly. This is the early warning they get not to interfere.
Posted by: Bernhard | Jul 19 2004 18:21 utc | 88
Thanks Jerome and all re shale deposits.
BBC 5Live New 4.30pm today regarding the helicopter crash, 1 dead and 2 wounded.
Wounded in an accident?
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 19 2004 18:23 utc | 89
@Cp:
Went to google to check out the company I was talking about–TOSCO(the Oil Shale Corporation.)
Found this Jewel: scroll down 2/3 way to Conoco-Phillips.Poor little TOSCO disappeared.
John D. Reckafellow (Carneigie’s spelling) been mighty durable since 1911.
Sweeney Todd’s been mighty busy too.
http://www.us-highways.com/sohist1999.htm
Posted by: FLASHHARRY | Jul 19 2004 19:01 utc | 91
this is scary, it seems as if American politicians, Democrats inluded as they where needed to make this pass 376 to 3, are suffering from a severe learning defecency.
Can’t you smell it in the air?
The stink of World War has been wafting ever since the Supreme Court’s decision made a Christian fundamentalist emperor.
I hold this truth to be self-evident:
All fundamentalists are antagonistic to a dialog of peace, and instead categorically insist on their vision of reality.
If this is so, then Bush couldn’t help but play the role of a bully. His behavior was fundamentally determined.
From the beginning BushCo saw themselves as muscular Christians. Not at all like the dirty-trick-playing, CIA-undermining, under-the-table-dictator-supporting crumbs of the past. No way! Not these brutes.
Instead: These bullys would bestride the world like a colossus. Fuck exisitng treaties. Fuck the UN. Fuck global warming. And while we are at it: Fuck you and you and you–who dare to doubt us-too.
If that was their attitude before 911… what do you suppose there attitude was post 911?
Metaphorically 911 had this meaning for them: Our glorious Christian nation got its two front teeth knocked down its white throat.
Add the fact that it was the most videotaped and replayed Pearl Harbor in human history.
Add to that those brown-skinned monkeys with diapers on their head leaping for joy in their sandals…
And Voila! That day of infamy could be used to justify any and all infamous responses.
Could be used to justify preemption. Could be used to justify torture. Could be used to justify the powerful poof of an H-bomb.
And so here we are…a nation at war. The die has been cast. We are now totally incapable of the language of peace. Which is to say: the precursor to any violence is the necessity that those who use the language of peace be branded as traitors.
Ergo: 376 patriots and 3 traitors.
The world is not slouching towards a global confontation–it is goose-stepping towards it.
Heil Christianity. Heil Judaism. Heil Islam.
Bush, Sharon, Osama bin Laden.
The people in charge of the world’s dialog are all insane goose-steppers. They know no better way. They are incapable of behaving any differently. They are fundamentally flawed.
The stink of them is redolent in the air. Their goal is to rend this world in war.
Day by day and inch by inch…they are leading us there.
Posted by: koreyel | Jul 19 2004 20:06 utc | 92
@Koreyel
Powerful Post. So true and when will the nukes hit Tehran and Damascus?
Posted by: Cloned Poster | Jul 19 2004 23:30 utc | 93
Pensioners – Uncle Sam needs YOU!
Alabama doctor reactivated for Iraq war at age 68
Don’t any of you go thinking that you’re too old to die for your country now!
Posted by: Nemo | Jul 20 2004 0:08 utc | 94
Sandy Berger in trouble
Berger removed highly classified intelligence documents from terror file
Posted by: Nemo | Jul 20 2004 4:33 utc | 95
Koreyel
Thanks for that last call of truth way out here at the end of the thread…………….Will go to sleep now, maybe with that old Iris Dement recording of “our town”.
Posted by: anna mist | Jul 20 2004 8:17 utc | 96
need some props here,seems i’m suddenly surrounded by bush supporters,i’m gonna vote my conscious,whats the difference between the two and my least favorite i’m just not going to vote. all of a sudden,all but my gay friends are losing steam. i hope the convention will make a difference but…shit can’t they see we are about to lose our standing altogether in the world? our freedom of speech,a multitude of else. i’m not fired up for -as much as against myself. but if we lose this election we will most likely never have a third party choice. over 100,000 voters taken off the roles in OH in one county out of 87! this is down and dirty eeek! i”m feeling frustrated. sorry just had to vent. thanks for listening
Posted by: onzaga | Jul 21 2004 3:49 utc | 97
@ onzaga
maybe this is an argument you can use. Was in the Guardian this morning – showing the concequences the Iraq war has on the US.
War call-up cuts US ability to fight disasters
Posted by: Fran | Jul 21 2004 5:40 utc | 99
From the Independent this morning:
‘Rejoice over Iraq’: fury at Blair’s echo of Thatcher
Well, at least English MP’s and news papers still dare to critizise the Poodle – where as the US Congress seems to have become a member of the species of Lemmings.
Posted by: Fran | Jul 21 2004 5:59 utc | 100