Ready for $262/barrel of oil?

by **professorpan** » Fri Jan 27, 2006 9:52 pm

<a href="http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/27/news/international/pluggedin_fortune/index.htm?cnn=yes">money.cnn.com/2006/01/27/...tm?cnn=yes</a>

by **Floyd Smoots** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:14 am

pp, didn't even bother to go to the link. C'mon it's CNN fer Bhuda's sake!!! We're ALL gonna DIE anyway, any day, so what's your problem? Gonna stop 'em, gonna drop 'em, gonna hop 'em? Bad Boyz, Bad Boyz, whutcha gonna do, whutcha gonna do when deY come for you, Bad Boyz, Bad Boyz........ Ever seen an epsode of "Cops" on America's Most Stupid network, also known as, FOX???

by **slimmouse** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:31 am

Is it not completely obvious to EVERYONE on this fucking board yet, that this entire energy 'problem' is little more than probably the ULTIMATE money making -control mechanism. Not to mention the greatest lie /fraud perpetrated on all of us, since the organised religion fraud, or perhaps the Banking fraud, or perhaps the 'democracy' fraud, or the 'free media/freedom of speech ' fraud ? Out of all of these out and out frauds however, the energy deal should be the easiest to mention in casual conversation. Can we not work on that ?

by **heyjt** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 5:42 am

Come on! Even if "Peak Oil" is some kind of scam, that doesn't mean that the present market isn't being manipulated! Read the article Uncle Floyd, whatever the cause, prices will increase, especially if there is a phoney war against Iran now...

by **StarmanSkye** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 6:52 am

CNN -- Oh THAT'S a real credible news source alright -- citing Iran's regime which is 'heading towards a confrontation with the west', (which is as idiotically and ridiculously maladroit as claiming the innocent bystander 'recklessly threw' themselves into the path of the stray drive-by shooting bullet), Venezuala's 'strongman' Chavez (the glib CNN editors apparently following the White House lead in referring to individuals who have tremendous broad-based public support in terms of hysterical circus-image metaphors -- no less bizarre for the inverse LACK of broad-based public support and legitimacy of the Bush Regime), or that the US's decline in power (sic) resulting from its disasterous, irresponsible and grossly mismanaged Iraq and Afghanistan wars creates the 'incentive' for 'troublemakers'. While the article makes such absurd suggestions as Iran declaring an oil embargo, Chavez shutting off the oil spigots, or Nigerian civil war and Algerian violence as affecting the availability and price of oil, the reality is that the biggest sole source creating regional instability and threatening oil exports has been the US with past and present intrigue in each of these nations -- from waging psychological and economic warfare throughout Africa (with major implications for Nigeria and Algeria), arming rebels and enlisting mercenaries, provoking civil strife and destroying social institutions via IMF and World Bank privatization schemes and Structural Adjustment Programs, to provoking and supporting a coup in Venezuala and the witholding of critical oil industry information by a US oil industry management company (needed to restore oil production following a strike by Venezuala's oil industry executives), and provoking a diplomatic crisis in Iran that the US (or its proxy-client state Israel) may well escalate to a war -- which is SURE to interrupt oil supplies in the entire region, spike oil prices and speculation to unprecedented levels, and could well provoke serious retaliation by other nations with critical regional trade and national security energy interests, ie. Russia, India and China. It's remarkable that CNN's audience is SO uninformed and naive that CNN would try to pull this crap. You can bet most of the rest of the world knows the score that the world's biggest rogue state and terror threat is the US. The following is almost too stupid for words -- suggesting that a national 'policy' of staying home on Sundays and reducing unnecessary trips would provide evidence of the US getting 'serious' about its chronic oil-energy dependency: "Although there are long-term answers like ethanol, what's needed is a crash conservation effort in the United States. This doesn't have to be command-and-control style. Moral suasion counts for a lot, and if the president suggested staying home with family every other Sunday or otherwise cutting back on unnecessary drives, he could please the family values crowd while also changing the psychology of the oil market by showing that the U.S. government is serious about easing any potential bottlenecks." But the reaL KICKER is the final line -- essentially excusing failure of the Bush regime to lessen the impact of escalating prices and oil shortages by reducing US's dependency on oil imports, as 'just' Bush's unwillingness to offend longtime allies. That special interests can have more influence on foreign policy than the needs and best interests of the mass of the public is yet another pathetic sign of government's shameless pandering to corporate greed -- the trend of fascism that began with Truman now accelerated under Bush: "But it would require spending political capital, and offending traditional White House allies, and that's something this president doesn't seem to want to do." Such 'special' relationships have NO place in a true democracy. But then historically, the US has always favored state privelege and subsidies and unregulated industries that perpetuate the myth of a 'free market' over the requirements of participatory self-rule government. Officials who have confounded and obstructed the development of a wise, practical, effective and progressive long-term National energy policy are among the nations most criminal traitors. Starman

by **Dreams End** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:14 pm

IN a "real" war, there is a sense of shared sacrifice...as in collecting tin or whatever during World War 2. I think it would be a real propaganda victory (as well as $$$ for oilcos) to get the oil price jacked up so we are all "sacrificing" to help the war on terror. On a note that may be related only in my own mind, I keep hearing these NPR stories about the wiretapping etc, which feature several regular folks talking about how it's perfectly fine to wiretap to keep us safe (including an Iraqi immigrant) who welcomes monitoring of his calls home. bush has been clumsy, luckily because it actually should have been easier to get more of us thinking along the same lines. Must sacrifice materially as well as in terms of my civil rights to aid the war on terror. And starman, thank you for consistenly substantive and quality posts.

by **thurnandtaxis** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 7:36 pm

Chevron's 4th quarter profits up 20% to 4.14 billion. <a href="http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/business/3617982.html">www.chron.com/disp/story....17982.html</a>

by **professorpan** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 2:43 am

Floyd, I'm in full agreement that CNN is essentially a government mouthpiece -- a lesson I learned long ago doing Gulf (tm) War I. However, I don't believe in living in a parapolitical echo chamber, avoiding sites like CNN and other mainstream sources and getting all my information from RI and the like. After all, if you don't read the mainstream, you can't critique it. And as a general rule, if I post a link, it doesn't mean I'm fully endorsing the message. I found the thinking of Soros and the others quoted to be worth reading -- if only to see the thought balloons they're floating... as an indication of what is coming down the pike.

by **professorpan** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 2:48 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Is it not completely obvious to EVERYONE on this fucking board yet, that this entire energy 'problem' is little more than probably the ULTIMATE money making -control mechanism. Not to mention the greatest lie /fraud perpetrated on all of us, since the organised religion fraud, or perhaps the Banking fraud, or perhaps the 'democracy' fraud, or the 'free media/freedom of speech ' fraud ? Out of all of these out and out frauds however, the energy deal should be the easiest to mention in casual conversation. Can we not work on that ?<hr></blockquote> No, I think there is some validity to peak oil. My question is how much is reality and how much is hype -- and I haven't been convinced that it's *all* hype. It's a complicated subject, and I don't think it's "the greatest lie/fraud" ever perpetrated. No one should assume that there is a homogenity to other's thinking on this board -- I've certainly never seen evidence of that!

by **wintler** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 7:13 am

"Is it not completely obvious to EVERYONE on this fucking board yet, that this entire energy 'problem' is little more than probably the ULTIMATE money making -control mechanism." Indeed, its so obvious that theres no need to provide trivial details like how, who, why, or what. Dreams End is the only one who's made ANY ground in that direction, others just parrot the reactionary anthropocentric excuse, one which reinforces the power of the powerful. The sheer lack of reason, evidence, or even humble supposition contributes to a severe dumbing down of this board, and i think repels anyone with a rigorous bone in their body. Shame.

by **slimmouse** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 11:16 am

My profoundest apologies. You have obviously spent large periods of time away from these boards, and havent read the trillion accounts of such devices. Here for what its worth to you is a couple of starting points. No doubt, you will skip over them and then come back and suggest to me that these people are ALL charlottans hucksters etc, who waste their time ( usually prior to ending up dead ) telling people that such things are real. I guess you can please yourself. I know who I believe. <a href="http://www.artistictreasure.com/learnmorecleanair.html">www.artistictreasure.com/...anair.html</a> <a href="http://befreetech.com/energysuppression.htm">befreetech.com/energysuppression.htm</a>

by **professorpan** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 7:56 pm

Slimmouse, Nowhere have I said I don't believe cheap alternatives to a petroleum-based economy exist. They do. That has nothing to do with the possible collapse of the current, petro-based system, whether or not it's intentional or just the product of greed and stupidity. And there appears to be no large-scale movement of the major world control systems to move in the direction of cheap, clean and efficient energy. Nor do I see Americans car pooling, giving up their SUVs, and demonstrating in the streets for alternative energy. It's sad, but true. Therefore some of us believe in a version of "peak oil." You may disagree, but casting aspersions on us is a weak and ultimately pointless exercise.

by **wintler** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:38 pm

Thanks slimmouse for entering into dialogue, i'm more than happy to swap data across disagreements. Hemp oil has potential, is a genuinely 'suppressed technology' that has been demonstrated to work and is accordance with the known laws of physics. Shame we'd have to turn over so much of our food growing land to grow oil for our cars. Or cut down remnant tropical forests.. check out this on the impact of Europes biodiesel (from oil palm) rush: 'The most destructive crop on earth is no solution to the energy crisis' by George Monbiot <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0,5673,1659036,00.html">www.guardian.co.uk/Column...36,00.html</a> Just because its a cockup now doesn't mean it has to be, we may be able to grow enough hemp on 'idle' land and i look forward to meeting you on the barricades as we help make that happen. Many of the inventions vaguely described in your second link do not however make sense and your suppression conspiracy doesn't explain how the auto companies beat off the military, who would genuinely love a tank that ran on water - just for starters it would free up the half of the troops in iraq who are occupied shipping oil and mean the AirForce could afford to keep building new planes <a href="http://energybulletin.net/7701.html.">energybulletin.net/7701.html.</a> The 'suppressed energy' meme thus assumes that GM is stronger than the Pentagon, GE and Boeing, which you must admit is pretty hard to believe, even if you can swallow energy-from-nothing promises.

by **slimmouse** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:31 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Many of the inventions vaguely described in your second link do not however make sense and your suppression conspiracy doesn't explain how the auto companies beat off the military, who would genuinely love a tank that ran on water - just for starters it would free up the half of the troops in iraq who are occupied shipping oil and mean the AirForce could afford to keep building new planes<hr></blockquote> It is my firm contention, that half of the wars we DO fight , and particularly this last one are DRIVEN by the Oil Cartels. How about the last gulf war ? As for freeing troops up. Do you seriously believe the PTB give a flying fuck about the cannon fodder. The more dead the merrier as far as they are concerned - Just ask ole Henry kissinger. And of course, courtesy of flying the dead home under cover of darkness, much of the political fallout is conveniently swept under the carpet - Not that these weasels even seem to care too much about that anymore. Which of course leaves us with the injured vets ,left to die slowly from DU poisoning, go half insane, or live the rest of their lives deformed,and/or in poverty, And finally, what ha'peth of difference does it make to the MI complex what they run their vehicles on. They dont pay for the damn fuel - WE DO. Im sorry to go on like a worn out record, but it flies in the face of real belief that any kind of discussion regarding "oil shortages" actually even gets time of day here. And finally, as for your point about the 'wishful thinking' nature of free energy inventions, I know from a personal friend that anyone suggesting that this is simply wishful thinkin can go fucking howl at the moon as far as Im concerned. WAR, ENERGY, BANKING - The three greatest scams and control mechanisms indulged by the madmen that run this planet. Throw in Pharmecuticals - legal and illegal, Organised religion, ' democracy', and a media that convinces the majority of the sheep that it is free and impartial, and the deal is done. As good old David Icke said on TV over here recently , "The people have even outsheeped the sheep". I think thats what really bothers me about this topic being discussed on a board such as this. If were arguing the pros and cons of peak oil and the like on here - amidst what society might still percieve to be the black sheep, then what chance do rest of the flock have ? <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/ohwell.gif ALT=":\"> Not that any of this concerns me personally. Im well out of that game, trust me. It just pisses me off to think that people are dying and suffering needlessly as a result of this madness. All that said, its still a beautiful world. Gotta make the most of it I guess. Peace to y'all.

by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:37 am

Sorry, slim, but I'm not convinced yet. As a matter of fact, what if the conspiracy isn't that there is no peak oil at this time, but that the conspiracy is that "peak" was reached quite a long time ago in the usual oil production places, like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait? Sometimes if you want to see the vampire, you have to look in the mirror or look for its shadow. The shadows, in this case, would almost seem to be our subtle involvement in other oil-producing countries, such as our "defense of Kuwait" (a country which was slant-drilling into Iraqi fields) back prior to the first Gulf war, or our incursion into Iraq the past three years, or our adventures into some of the African countries, or into Argentina, when Chavez was deposed by our manipulation for a whole two days. It is not time yet to make assumptions. Maybe, just maybe, it is worse than we think. I, for one, am keeping an open mind.

Ready for $262/barrel of oil?

Ready for $262/barrel of oil?

Ready for a REALITY CHECK???

Energy should be the spark.

Are you guys kidding?

Re: Ready for $262/barrel of oil?

Re: Ready for $262/barrel of oil?

Re: bring on the profits!

posting links

slimmouse

yadda yadda

Yadda Yadda Yadda.

Peak oil ad nauseum

..

Re: ..

Re: Energy should be the spark.

Who is online