BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!!! The Somalia thing was about OIL, now??! My goodness, some people NEVER fail to amaze me!!! Fact #1: PRESIDENTS CANNOT OWN STOCK. IT IS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND IS NOT ALLOWED. Fact #2: George Bush Sr. had a very short, set timetable for our extraction from Somalia. CLINTON extended our presence there, not only in length of time, but in NATURE OF MISSION. The switch from feeding the hungry and securing the peacekeeping effort to CAPTURING AIDID was made by CLINTON. The BHD/Ranger/Delta Force incident happened under CLINTON’S watch. The Rangers and Delta weren’t even IN Somalia during Bush’s tenure. This is the very “mission creep” that Bush senior denounced. Was it Clinton, then, who owned stock in the oil companies?? Or was he just trying to make George H.W. Bush, the man he just defeated in a bitter election, some money? Get real, man. Just because you throw a bunch of shit against the wall doesn’t mean it will stick. Now I ask of you: PROVE YOUR ALLEGATIONS. (The one about Bush - hee-hee! - owning stock in oil companies at the time, and the one that we were in Somalia in order to drill for oil). This should be fun.
Great posts guys. I was starting to think I was all alone here. Maybe we can help wake up the “flock”. Please do yourself a favor and get a book by Noam Chompsky called Manufacturing Consent. It will help reveal the true nature of the U.S. mass media. If you want to know who Rodney Stich is put his name in a search engine like google. He is the confidant of dozens of former and current deep cover ops who work for the C.I.A., F.B.I., D.E.A., D.I.A. and every other alphabetical agency out there. Peace.
By the way, everyone should feel free to read all the Chomsky, Stich, etc. that they want, and it’s always good to take into account “fringe” views as well as “mainstream” views when forming an opinion. However, for those of you who aren’t familiar with his work, Chomsky is widely viewed as being a complete and utter wack-a-doo. But then again, maybe he’s just figured it allllll out. 
Of course Chompsky is viewed as a fruitloop by people in the mainstream. These are the very people he takes to task. Did you ever see him interviewed on any major media outlets? The reason has to do with the stranglehold the press has on what information will be seen or heard by the public. As a professor of philosophy and linguistics at M.I.T. I hardly think that qualifies him as a wacko. Have you ever read his work? If not I suggest you do so. Even if you don’t agree with it at least you can see things from a completlely different perspective than that which is given by the mainstream press. What’s wrong with some balance? Look your a T-man, right? Go to a mainstream gym and watch the so-called personal trainers and everyone else working out. Most don’t have an inking of what they are doing because they follow all the garbage advise given to them by the “mainstream” fitness industry. But you are different because you decided at some point to seek out an alternative voice in the iron game. You can go into a gym and be absolutely sure you know more than 95% of the people(personal trainers included)in there. If you were to follow the advise of an A.C.E. certified trainer, where would you be? Look at the bruhaha over steroids and ephedra. You know that the benefits far outweigh the risks if used judiciously. So how come the media has to lie and demonize the stuff? They don’t just dream up this stuff they get their orders from higher up. Surely you can see my point. Again I’m not saying you have to believe Chompsky but why critcize him on what other people say about him. Read him and decide for yourself. A friend of mine tried to get this former dittohead to read Chompsky for years and I resisted. But when I did I certainly was impressed. So much so that it changed my perspective. Anyway take care.
Agreed, and like I said, everyone should feel free to read all they want from all sides of the political spectrum, including both “fringe” and “mainstream” players. That said though, and being familiar with his work, I will personally stand by the assertion that Chomsky is a certifiable Looney Tune. Trust me, being a professor at a major university these days does NOT in any way prove the validity of your thought process – if anything, it likely means that you’re so far out in left field you can’t even see the pitcher. I certainly see nothing wrong with pointing out to potential future readers that the majority of people (call it “mainstream thinking”) think that Chomsky is a wack-a-doo – it’s true. Your analogies about thinking differently being beneficial are all true. However, when 99.999% of the educated population (and no, I’m not claiming that number to be perfectly accurate) dismiss someone’s ideas as being those of a Looney Tune, chances are preeeeeeetty good that that person – well – is a Looney Tune (although there are, of course, exceptions). If you’d like to debate the specifics of what some of Chomsky purports, I’m all for it.
What proof would you require to satisfy your interests. No matter what you will still not be satisfied. You ask me for proof that he held stock in oil companies. I ask you to prove he did not own stock in oil companies and possibly did not act on their interests and behalf while in office? You say you want proof that we were drilling for oil I ask you to disprove myself and the four others that were standing gaurd over the oil drillers in Bardera while someone took core samples? In addition I would like you to prove that Somolia is not rich in untapped oil? I do agree with you on one thing though, just because you throw shit on the wall does not mean that you can make it stick or can you? You tell me when a conflict of interest has ever stopped the government or a politician from acting out on his own agenda? You need to wake up and stop kidding yourself. You really think the US cares about starving children? We have starving children and people right here in America and the US government is not doing anything about that now is it? What motivates America? OIL. If you had to pay 5.00 a gallon I bet your viewpoints sure the hell would change because now it is directly affecting you and the one thing that makes the world go around, money. What would it do to the American economy if the price of crude oil went through the roof? Everything and I mean EVERYTHING would go up in price. He who controls the oil controls the world. The difference between a recession and a depression, a recession is when your neighbor is out of work, a depression is when you are out of work. I am not asking you to change your beliefs because you are set in your ways. You have your opinions and I have mine and there is no debate here and I do not feel the need to prove anything to anybody but myself and I my friend have already satisfied my interests. Remember my views and interest may not reflect the views and interest of all. These views and opinions are mearly my own views and opinions and everybody is entitled to their own.
Ugh…well, so many opinions have been well-spoken here so I’m not going to get into most of the debate…but could we PLEASE lose the bullshit idolization of the Ivy League? The Ivy League has always held the tradition of not only accepting sub-par students from influential families, but even giving them a ‘Gentleman’s Pass’ when they don’t perform that well once in the school. Stanford also does this, to a lesser extent. One example among hundreds, if not thousands – John F. Kennedy, Jr. Crap high-school record that would barely get him into a community college, yet he’s accepted to both Harvard and Brown. WTF? And if crap grades at an Ivy League university are worth honors at most other universities, shouldn’t he have passed the bar the first time around?
And as just an aside, the Bush’s are major stockholders in both oil and defense contracting companies (through the Carlyle group)…look it up if you’re curious. That’s not meant to prove anything, by the way, it’s just a statement of public record. Bush’s defense contracting company even worked with Bin Ladin construction during the prep. for the (1st) Gulf war, of course Osama wasn’t ousted from his family nor was he a stated enemy of the United States at that time.
Hmm, I guess I have one more thought…Hussein is obviously one of the world’s nasty bastards of history, no doubt, certainly displaying some of the same genetic dominator/dictator traits found in people like Pol Pot, Stalin, and Hitler. I do believe in the elimination of people like this, simply for humanitarian reasons. However it is…funny…that we ignore some genocidal dictators and try to smash others. It’s also funny that whatever happens with the US and Iraq, I don’t see any evidence that we aren’t just continuing the same crap which will get us into another situation like this in the future. You see, as some mentioned, Hussein’s forces used nerve and mustard gasses, on the Kurds, and against Iran. But when he was fighting Iran, he received training, funding, and quite possibly weapons from the United States.
If Hussein and family are eliminated, will the united states help create a country based on law and justice, or will we create another freak who will kill more people next decade? We’re already forgetting Septmeber 11th, because we’re starting crap with another country while Afghanistan is facing the same disaster as was present after the Soviet withdrawl…if we REALLY cared about stability, justice, peace, and democracy,
The thoughts keep coming, sorry for the ramble…but we know that Saudi Arabia, in addition to being a fundimentalist country that operates under something very similar to Shariya law (Koranic legal code), also uses torture on prisoners, carries out public executions and amputations as punishment, and is run by an incestuous group of slimy princes worth billions of dollars each while the average, non-connected citizen, lives under third world conditions. Again, I’m trying to avoid conclusions, just trying to stimulate thought…to ask why the United States decides what it decides. Yes, this was an over-caffinated editorial. I’ll probably regret pressing the button below…
Oil, Insider Trading and George Bush
Posted By: Fyahman
Date: 30, October 02, at 11:31 a.m.
priceof crude oil has risen 24 cents a gallon," Mobil stated, “[while]gasolineprices have also gone up an average of 24 cents a gallon.”[Mobil Corp.Ad,NY Times, 1990.] The company said that the statistics "refute theill-conceived notion that there has been any ‘price gouging’ on ourpart."Shell Oil claimed that it, too, had exercised “restraint in passingthroughthese cost increases to consumers.” At one point, prices at thewellheaddoubled to a high of $41 per barrel (there are 42 gallons of oil in abarrel) even though there had been no reciprocal decrease in theworld’soil production. In fact, by all accounts there had been an oil GLUT.SaudiArabia even expanded its output by two million barrels a day to morethanoffset the amount of oil “lost” to the invasions, sanctions andboycott. Bythe capitalist law of supply and demand, prices to consumers shouldhavecrashed. But they didn’t.Contrary to Mobil’s claims that it was just “passing along” toconsumersnothing more than what the company had to pay at the wellhead, inrealityprices at the retail pump rose far faster than the increased costs tothecompany. But, just as today’s press barely touches George Bush and thelarger context in which his relationship to Harken Oil takes onprofoundsignificance beyond a little “insider trading,” the oil companies’arrogantstatements and outright lies twelve years ago simarly wentunchallenged bythe press.In fact, petroleum companies oiled their slick propaganda machines andspent millions of dollars on ads portraying themselves as the biblicalDavid fighting against Saddam Hussein’s Goliath. They asserted thattheywere champions of the consumer demand for cheap oil, and yelped thatit wasSaddam, not them, who was causing US consumers to get ripped off. Tohearthem, you’d think they were barely able to keep up with rising costsintheir efforts to keep prices down; how could anyone possibly accuse"our"oil companies of exploiting our helplessness for their own profit?So it was with great interest that I looked up the business reportsfor thefinal quarter of 1990. In the course of the military build-up, Mobil’sprofits increased by an astounding 46 percent. Far from simplylimitingthemselves to passing along additional costs to consumers, the giantcorporation made $651 million off of consumers in that single quarter.Shell’s profits jumped 69 percent to $446 million.Exxon’s profits were up 21 percent in the last three months of 1990,for aquarterly profit of $1.4 billion. (Its profits were actually up 220percent, but Exxon used sleight of hand accounting, amortizing allsorts ofdebts. Here’s another set of accounting procedures for theEnron-watchersto examine!)Texaco’s profits were up 35 percent.Amoco’s profits were up 46 percent.Chevron made $633 million.All together, the top five oil companies made $4.8 billion in profitsinthe last quarter of 1990 alone. Meanwhile, the average rate they paidintaxes was slightly less than 4 percent – equal to the tax-rate for anindividual earning under $5,475 a year.It is in this context that we have to look at George W. Bush’sinvolvementwith Harken Energy Corporation a context that the press has notcovered.The US military build-up in Saudi Arabia began in August of 1990.GeorgeBush Sr. was the President, and he gave his famous speech calling fora NewWorld Order on September 11th of that year. He said: "We have beforeus theopportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a NewWorldOrder, a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle,governsthe conduct of nations."The “rule of law,” as it turns out, was a boon to his son George BushJr.,who was a director, large stockholder and $120,000-a-year consultantto theHarken Energy Corp. until a month before the US troops arrived in thePersian Gulf. Harken “just happened” to hold a “rule of law” contractguaranteeing it “exclusive rights to develop, produce and market oilandgas off the shores of Bahrain.” The contract had begun in January1990. Thecompany was actually $150 million in debt by the time hundreds ofthousandsof US troops began arriving in the region. One Houston-based energyanalyst, Charles Strain, told Forbes Magazine that such an exclusivecontract was "an incredible deal, unbelievable for this smallcompany.“None of this has appeared in the American press. One would think thatthecurrent President’s economic investments, which were fostered by theUSmilitary build-up in Saudi Arabia and the subsequent bombardment ofIraq,would be a subject worth examining! As it was, the US bombardmentkilled200,000 people outright and destroyed the countryside, drinking water,sanitation facilities for a generation.How was it that George W. Bush could profit so handsomely from “therule oflaw” while other investors in the company were forced to eat the $150million deficit? Who else was in the know?Harken’s Board of Directors included a who’s who of the Bushadministration, then and now. In addition to one of South Africa’swealthiest and most powerful industrialists, a number of peopleinvolved inthe notorious Nugan Hand Bank conspiracy of 1982 – one of the mostimportant and yet hardly reported bank collapses in history with tiestothe CIA, drug dealing and the Iran-Contra scandal – sat on the Board.(George Bush Sr., as Vice-President, had done a remarkable job ofcoveringit up. Shades of his involvement with the Carlyle Group today, itsbilliondollar dealings in Saudi Arabia and its involvement with the Unocaloilpipeline now slated for Afghanistan!) Among those on the Harken Boardwereprincipals in the $1.4 trillion Savings & Loan bail-out. The leadattorneyfor Nugan Hand Bank was William Quasha, the father of Harken’s CEOAlan G.Quasha. One Nugan Hand launders the other.In May of 1990, a classified U.S. State Department report warned ofSaddamHussein’s growing frustration with Kuwait’s undercutting of Iraq’s oilpricing in violation of longstanding agreements. At the time, SaddamHussein was an important ally of the United States; the CIA even had ahandin installing Saddam Hussein to power in Iraq. Iraq had just emergedfrom 9years of bitter warfare against Iran at the United States’ behest,leavingmore than 1 million people dead. But then Kuwait’s emirocracy wasdiscovered to be “slant drilling” into Iraqi territory and stealingIraq’soil. Saddam openly discussed the pros and cons of an oil embargo andpossible incursion into Kuwait as a means to rectify Iraq’s legitimategrievances. Under instructions from the Bush White House, US StateDepartment emissary April Glaspie met with Hussein in Baghdad and gavehimthe “green light” to go into Kuwait to protect Iraq’s sovereignty.In June 1990, George Bush Jr., who had borrowed almost $200,000 fromHarkenOil, suddenly sold most of his Harken stock for $848,560. In August,Iraqitroops moved into Kuwait, Harken stock plummeted by 25 percent, andJuniorsaved himself $212,140 by selling his shares just before the militaryoperations began. What luck! (And still nothing about any of thiscontextin the press today other than an occasional query of whether Bush knewthathis stocks would drop!)Writing in the Houston Post, reporter Peter Brewton noted thatHarken’s"potentially lucrative drilling rights in the Persian Gulf are beingprotected by American troops” sent there, ostensibly, to face Iraq.[Guardian, Dec. 12, 1990.] It took a full two years after the end ofthebombing of Iraq before Timothy Phelps, reporting for NY Newsday, brokethestory that a former U.S. ambassador to Bahrain named Sam Zakhem – apolitical associate of brewery magnate Joseph Coors – and two leadersofthe conservative movement in Washington were indicted on charges ofpromoting American intervention in the Persian Gulf while secretlypaidmillions of dollars by Kuwait between August 1990 and June 30, 1991.[Timothy Phelps, “Ex-Envoy Indicted in Gulf War Fraud,” NY Newsday]Brewton was investigating the CIA connection to the Savings & Loanscandalin which the Bush family figured heavily from both the CIA and the S&Lends. He wrote story after story for the Houston Post exposing theBushfamily’s sordid theft of billions of dollars from the people of theUnitedStates, but few other media wanted anything to do with it. Onecertainty:the war buildup did boot the Savings & Loan bail-out scandal off thefrontpage just as today it is doing the same with Enron and the rest --RalphNader calls the orchestrated war hysteria a “Weapon of massdistraction” --saving the Bush offspring from public exposure and contempt. [e.g.,MartinTolchin, “Mildest Possible Penalty Is Imposed on Neil Bush,” The NYTimes,April 19, 1991.] While blue-blooded “dimwit” George Junior and hisbrothersNeil and Jeb raked in the cash, Papa Bush sent the blue collar sonsanddaughters of working class Americans to kill teenage Iraqi draftees,burying thousands alive beneath tons of desert sand.****************************************SIDEBAR:Bush progeny, Neil, was also involved in an oil company with interestsinthe region. In fact, he was at the time running Houston-based ZapataOffshore Oil & Drilling Co., founded by his dad, George H.W. Bush Sr.Zapata Oil eventually evolved into the giant Pennzoil company, basedinHouston Texas, and owned nearly 9 percent of the stock of Chevron --worthover $2 billion. Chevron’s Gulf Oil subsidiary has historically beentheU.S.-based transnational oil company with the biggest special interestinKuwaiti politics.In a Nov. 13, 1990 Pennzoil Co. stock report, Standard & Poor’s wrotethefollowing: "Revenues and profits in the near term could be highlyvolatileowing to uncertainties following the Aug. 2, 1990 Iraqi invasion ofKuwait."George Bush always did his best to eliminate those “uncertainties” andcertify his company’s profits. He hired the lawfirm of Baker & Botts torepresent the interests of Zapata Oil (and later, Pennzoil). This firmwasheaded by James Baker, a multi-millionaire oil corporation lawyerwhosefamily held extensive investments in Exxon, Mobil, Atlantic Richfield,Standard Oil of California, Standard Oil of Indiana, and Kerr-McGee,thecompany exposed by worker-activist Karen Silkwood for its radiationpoisoning of workers and which has been blamed for her murder. Aroundthetime of the Gulf war, Papa George named Baker U.S. Secretary of State.Corporate establishment figures sitting on the Board of the Bakerfamily’sTexas Commerce Bank included former U.S. President Lyndon Johnson’swife,Ladybird, and former U.S. President Gerald Ford (who also sat on theLBJ-appointed Warren Commission which had preposterously attributedJohn F.Kennedy’s murder to the work of a lone gunman). Gerald Ford, it turnsout,was at the time of the Gulf War a director of the U.S. subsidiary oftheKuwait Petroleum Corporation.Also on Baker’s bank’s Board: Exxon Coal & Mineral Company directorTerryKirkley; Exxon Oil and Gas Company director Forrest Hoglund; MosbacherEnergy Company Chairman Robert Mosbacher (who doubled as Bush Sr.'sSecretary of Commerce); CONOCO’s chief executive officer ConstantineNicandros; Tenneco director Kenneth Reese; Oil and Gas producersRichardMoncrief and Cyrial Wagner; and Scurlock Oil Company and Ashland OilCompany director Jack Blanton. [Bob Feldman, “The Bush/Baker OilConnection,” Downtown Weekly, New York City.] All of these oil men satonthe board of Baker’s family bank and helped shape US governmentpolicy,despite the fact that several years earlier, in 1986, Texas Commercehadbeen fined $1.9 million for not reporting cash transactions (moneylaundering). Then, as today, the corporate honchos who ripped offbillionsof dollars from small investors, trade union pension funds andretirementaccounts while sending the youth of America off to kill Iraqis (and toreturn with Gulf War Syndrome), faced little in the way legal charges.TheDemocrats, like the Republicans, just went on with business as usual,whilethe rest of us paid the price.[For more on the Bush boys, see Stephen Pizzo, “Family Value$: Theinsidestory of how three of the Bush boys built private fortunes by tradingontheir father’s name, running with con men, lining their own pockets,andleaving financial ruin in their wake,” Mother Jones, Sept./Oct. 1992.Also,Tim Wheeler, “The Bahrain Connection: Live skeletons in the Bushfamilycloset,” People’s Weekly World, April 6, 1991; and, Jonathan Kwitny,“TheCrimes of Patriots – A True Tale of Dope, Dirty Money, and the CIA”}
Thanks for reading. ru12nvme.
ru12nvme, you stated that you were overseeing someone who was drilling for water, complete with water purifiers at the ready, and he came up dry. This does not prove that he was drilling for oil. Secondly, you state that “Bush held stock” in this company. I refer you again to the fact that PRESIDENTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO OWN STOCK. Look it up. Thirdly, you stated that, “One of our key missions in Somalia was to first and foremost restore the government.” How, prey tell, would the First Battalion, Seventh Marines go about “restoring the government?” And what were you guys specifically doing to that effect? Finding and providing protection for a leader that the US govt. backed, and helping to “install” him into power (ala Karzai)? I think not. The Marines’ main goal there, if I’m not mistaken, was to protect the Pakistani and Bangladeshi peacekeepers, not to directly hand out food. And by all accounts, you succeeded. After the arrival of the US Marines, the famine was effectively ended.
I’m not claiming there are no oil reserves in Somalia – there are. But you can come up with knee-jerk conspiracy theories for every foreign involvement of the US, claiming that it’s always about oil. Oil exists in SO many countries (and offshore locations) around the world it would make your head spin. To suggest that Bush would go so far as to involve US troops purely to secure an outlandish little, one-of-a-thousand drop of oil like the one in Somalia (not that oil isn’t there, it just isn’t all that much) is – well – outlandish. I’m familiar with the game of claiming that ALL of the US’s foreign involvements were over oil. Some are, maybe, but certainly not all. Some Chomsky-like folks even try to make that claim about our involvement in Afghanistan. (PLEASE tell me you’re not one of those)! Bush Sr. publicly stated, many times over, that he had a set goal and timetable for Operation Restore Hope. He wanted it all over and done with by May of 1993. The goals were to open supply routes, get the food moving, and pave the way for a more longstanding UN peacekeeping force. I ask you: How could Bush Sr. possibly benefit financially from supposedly having the Marines defend some oil workers in one of the most lawless lands on earth for 5 months, and then completely STOP defending them 5 months later? That WAS, after all, EXACTLY the plan that he set in motion. Clinton even went about pulling out most of the Marines by May of ‘93, as planned. BUT, Clinton THEN CHANGED THE WHOLE MISSION, and decided that HE (NOT Bush – CLINTON) wanted to capture Aidid, so he sent in the Rangers and D-Boys. Are you now telling me that CLINTON was acting on behalf of Bush’s financial interests, essentially saying, "You know, George, I know you wanted all those Marines out in May, and I pulled them out, but you’d make a LOT of money if all I did was capture Aidid for you and stabilize the govt. there. Whaddya’ say?" YOUR THEORY MAKES NO SENSE!!! Bush was not in charge at this point, and had nothing to do with our involvement in Somalia post-May '93!
Now, I fully understand the importance of oil to this country, our economy and our way of life. I’m no fool. For the most part, this nation acts in its own best interest, as well it should, within reason. I keep flopping over each side of the fence as to whether or not we should currently go to war with Iraq – I’m sure oil plays a part in that one (although I’m also sure it’s not the only issue there). Is that wrong? Not necessarily. But you CANNOT convince me, unless you provide some VALID EVIDENCE, that our involvement in Somalia (which I disagreed with in the first place – no national interest), Kosovo (which I disagreed with in the first place – no national interest) or Afghanistan (which I agree with with every fiber of my being) were about oil. I do, however, believe that this administration could do a lot more in terms of proactively pushing for the development of alternative fuel sources (previous administrations should have done so as well). Developing alternative fuel sources, if at ALL economically feasible, and drilling in ANWAR are 2 absolute no-brainers that would help us rid ourselves of our dependency on these lunatic regimes.
Elegua, you make some good points about the US supporting some wretched regimes while attacking others. I agree that we have to find a way to change that quickly, and start promoting democracy in places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. I’m not quite sure how to do it, though. National interest (oil, in the case of Saudi Arabia), does of course play a part. But the Bush administration could be a LOT more outspoken about the regimes of our so-called allies, to say the least.
In summary, though (ru12nvme), to go along with the conspiracy theorists who claim that everything is a plot of the money-grubbing, oil-loving, evil Bush Carlyle group is pure childish lunacy. To suggest that the leader of the free world (or former leader of the free world), who is ALREADY a multimillionare, would literally steer his country and the world toward the potential brink of nuclear apocolypse purely so he could make a few MORE millions when he gets out of office is so beyond the pale of acid-induced fantasy that it does not warrant further intelligent discussion. Wealthy people don’t need more wealth that badly. What you’re suggesting, especially if you’re suggesting that Bush’s personal fortune is a key element in his planning for Iraq, would mean that he is such an evil, kniving, devil-may-care, fuck-the-consequences, psycopath that he would literally have to be the Antichrist himself. Hey, I dislike (some might even say LOATHE) Bill Clinton, but I don’t go around suggesting wacky things about him. Please delve further into things before following the theories of those (A.) with clear agendas and (B.) with a screw or two loose. Thank you.
This is in response to your last post, which hadn’t appeared before I finished my last post. (Your last post, by the way, should be a lesson to us all on why not to do cut-and-paste jobs. Nevertheless, one begets another). First and foremost, to put to bed once and for all ANY looney suggestion that our Afghanistan ops had ANYTHING to do with oil, read this (FULLY) and then remain forever silent on the subject: http://www.prospect.org/print/V13/14/silverstein-k.html
Now, I will only address your conspiracy theory post in part, because, admittedly, that’s all my brain can handle after reading it. The sheer size of it, combined with its incoherently rambling nature, fries brain cells. Oil companies, along with all other companies, exist to make a profit – pure and simple. IF they were claiming they were being philanthropic do-gooders at the time, the were full of shit. My only beef with them, then, would have been with their claim of being do-gooders, as it would’ve been a lie. There is nothing wrong with, and NO ONE should EVER claim that there is anything wrong with, companies trying to make profits. That’s what they do. This is NOT bad. Secondly, whoever wrote the piece clearly does not understand how either corporations or financial markets work. The writer claimed that George W. Bush profited (on Harken) while the company’s shareholders were “forced to eat the $150 million deficit.” !!! (Pardon me while I clear my throat). “Deficit” and “debt” are very different words. Learn the difference. NO ONE was forced to “eat” anything. Debt on a company’s books is usually a long-term thing, and the directors of the company typically plan to pay it off over long periods of time. GWB’s selling of stock at a profit would not have “forced” anyone to “eat” anything. The debt would still be on the books, as it had been the day before, and probably would be for a few years to come. Shareholders can very possibly make bucketfuls of money while the company whose shares they own has, and even accumulates more, debt. SHARE PRICE and AMOUNT OF DEBT ON THE BOOKS do NOT necessarily correlate inversely! Share price is based on what the investor community thinks the company is worth (based in large part on its future earnings potential). Carrying debt on the books for a period of time is often all a part of the company’s long-term plan. This demonstration of a sheer lack of understanding of what the HELL he’s talking about comes only about 10% of the way through this “essay.”
The State Department never had April Glaspie “give the green light” to Iraq to invade Kuwait. What a pathetic piece of fantasy! If Iraq’s reason for invading Kuwait had been that they were mad at Kuwait for renegging on agreements and “side-drilling,” don’t you think that, in the thousands of media statements Saddam’s regime gave in '90 and '91, they would’ve said, “We’re pissed because Kuwait has renegged on their agreements with us and they’ve also been side-drilling in to our territory?” HELLO? The world would’ve UNDERSTOOD their beef! Maybe they wouldn’t have OK’d the invasion, but they would’ve gotten some sympathy! But, do you know what Iraq DID say was their reason for invading Kuwait? “Historically, Kuwait is the 19th province of Iraq. It is a part of Iraq – always has been. We’re just talking it back.” BLATANT IMPERIALISM!!!
The writer then goes on to make claims involving every oil company under the sun, to the JFK assassination, to US troops burying Iraqis alive in the sand. Such rambling schizophrenia does not credibility build. Compare that lack of focused thought to the well-written piece in the link I just provided. The contrast in clarity of thought is astonishing. I’m going to bed now. Goodnight.
Hey Harkonnen I spent 7 months working in Kosovo on a military deployment. I worked a interment facility with both Albanians and Serbians detainees they were all there for different reason such as rape and war crimes and any type of weapons or drug violation. While I was there I spent some time in towns such as (forgive my spelling I am going to spell it as it sounds) jewl-e-on-e, and prish-teen-a. I took my r and r in Macedonia at lake orchid. As a soldier of the Military police corp. I can tale you that I think we were on the wrong side over there. Hey granted we stopped the killing but we pretty much gave Kosovo to the Albanians. Was that enough… no… Now they are doing the same crap in Macedonia as they did in Kosovo… move in populate and overtake. Now I am not a Muslim basher, I try to understand why people do the things they do. Even after 9-11 I could see why how they might fell justified in kill non-combatants. I will tell you this…(my belief)
NATO did not move in to Kosovo to stop the blood shed. If that was the case then we would have been in Africa a long time ago. The only reason we went to Kosovo was because it had strategic importance to the U.S. . It is the perfect jumping off point to anywhere in that part of the world. That is why the U.S. went in. Let me tell you another little secret. The camp that I was on, Camp Bondsteel is the most SINGLE largest U.S. military installation in Europe. So hey don?t feel alone about the whole Serbians getting the bad end of the stick. It is the same Muslim, Christian struggle since the dawn of time. Look at all the recent military campaigns and actions 1.desert storm 2.bosina 3.the Cole bombing 4. the world trade center. 5. and our current situation. There is one common thread. Just to give you some insight. I was over there during the time the sss Cole had its guts blown out. I wanted to see what a fellow Albanian/ Muslim thought about what happened. So I asked our interrupter (who was Muslim) Her response did not only scare me but almost got her killed by our medic… She said the they (muslins) would do what they needed to do. I know that these actions are those of extremist but when I left that country. I for the first time in my life had distrust towards a certain group of people. I hate the fact that I feel that way.
All that and you still have not proved your point, in fact what point is it that you are trying to make? I did not come here to impress anybody nor did I come here to make a point as it seems you are trying to do(my opinion). I just offered up a suggestion and information that, in MY OPINION, based on information and knowledge I obtained through various sources while deployed over there, Somolia was not just a humanitarian mission. Whether you chose to believe it or not is YOUR OPINION. You can have your opinions all day long and I can have mine. Bottom line, unless you were there you have no clue as to what went on. Sure you could say that I have no clue either just because I was there does not make me a know it all, fine and dandy, but it sure gives me the edge over you. General Adid, gees if we wanted him so bad we could have gotten him whenever we wanted, I met the guy at the US embassy one time, I suppose you want proof of that too. I never said/wrote half of the things you are claiming, it is you that is saying/claiming for me. You need to stop putting words into peoples mouth/responses and re-read the posts I put before you. Re-read them very carefully and look at each and every word and you might get what I was saying. You asked for proof and I posted some proof for you. Not only did I post it, Elegua posted as well making a similar statement. OK your right, you got me, he did not directly have stock, he used somebody else to benefit himself, which to me is the same as directly owning that stock himself because he was making money off of it, go ahead and deny that too. You no longer carry any validity in my eyes because you are the one that cannot provide proof of the things I have asked. It seems as if all you want to do is make argument and then backpedal and change your tune once you get your tit in the ringer. If you were not in Somolia or stationed any place near there or in any way shape or form involved in Operation Restore Hope, I would really prefer and would greatly appreciate that you did not share your opinions directly with me because you have no idea what went on over there and you have been tainted by second hand information. Have a nice day.
Interesting article, it definitely provides some valuable insight. A few things troubled me . . . I was mistaken I didn’t know it was a natural gas pipeline. I read the Chicago Sun-Tribune article last year in my senior government class so I also had the companies wrong. My bad, I apologize. However, regardless of the type of fossil fuels, American businesses still stand to make a profit. Regardless of where the oil was being SHIPPED, who is shipping it and who is the recipient paying for the natural gas? Yeah, US business. Regardless of the feasibility of the Unocal pipeline, it is simply a model of what US foreign policy is geared towards since the fall of the Soviet Union. Securing the cooperation of foreign governments to allow US business to operate freely within foreign borders. Look at China, communist only by name now, the skylines of Beijing and Hong Kong are dominated by the names of American companies. Now I’m no anti-globalization isolationist activist, but I do have a problem with a statement you made. Something to the effect of American businesses have the right to make money. Of course, but at what cost? Is it right to install new governments in every country that is not willing to not only let American corporate interests over run locally owned business, but to exploit their impovershed people to boost profit margins? Don’t give me the BS argument about “They’re better off working for us. They’d be begging on the streets yada yada yada.” We already don’t pay a living wage to American workers, we pay less than half a living wage to these foreign workers. A living wage that might only cost 34 cents an hour, but we’ll pay 15 or 10. If you think that is acceptable, then there is an obvious difference of opinion. Elegua made a good point about selectively ousting certain governments, right now the US is involved in Venezuela attempting to remove a democratically elected president, Chavez. I don’t know particulars behind the ousting, but it is suspicious that we allow countries like Kuwait and Saudi Arabia to keep oppressive dictatorships and monarchies, while Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran (past present and future) etc. are targeted for coups and the like. Anyways, thanks for setting a clearer picture on the Afghanistan pipeline issue, and thanks for being a truly well informed conservative . . . you guys are few and far between. Keep training hard and have a good holiday season.
Hedo you said Bush is a real T-Man. Please your going to make me split my side laughing. Bush is a Deserter and a Coward. He Deserted his National Guard unit during Viet Nam, while others served their country with Honor.
We all saw how he ran like a Coward and hid in a bunker on 9/11 and didn’t come out of his hole until well after any danger had passed, in fact his advisor a woman showed she had more balls than Bush when she addressed the nation from the lawn of the White House while Bush hid in his bunker in Nebraska.
So let’s not try and make Bush out to be something he is not. His incompetence and the lack of concern for the safety of the American people led to our enemies being able to pull off the worst attack on American soil. No matter how conservatives try and spin it ,9/11 happened on Bush’s watch and that’s what history will record.
Being familiar with someones work is not the same as actually reading it. Why would you form an opinion on what other people have told you? Just because he is on the fringe doesn’t mean he is a lunatic. What 99% of the population were you refering to? University proffs, mass media, dittoheads? If you are talking about everyday educated people I will bet they haven’t even read one of his books. They just uncritically form thier opinion on what the mainstream media tell them. All I can say is that I had the same opinion you did until I finally gave him a read, along with a few other books (Defrauding America by: Rodney Stich and The Federal Mafia by : Irwin Schiff) I was a slave to the mainstream press for 8 years. I had subscriptions to The National Review, The American Spectator, and The Wasington Times Weekly. I watched all the political pundit shows and would watch William F. Buckley Jr.'s Firing Line on Sunday morning instead of watching football. I devoured the stuff. Hell 99% of the people in the fitness industry (including the leaders)would think your crazy if you told them that steroids won’t kill you and squats actually strengthen the knees. Read some back issues of T-Mag and you will see the conspiracies that go on in the small world of supplementation. If you do not think that thier are conspiracies at the highest level of government then you have bought into that conspiracy, my friend. Truth is stranger than fiction. One more thing. I think if you look back in history, those who are closest to the truth are always demonized by the status qoe. Christ and Socrates are the two most obvious examples. Anyway, if you ever feel the inclination read Manufacturing Consent. If you want I’ll even mail you my copy. Take care.
Damici, I have appreciated your posts. I think it would be quite hard to argue with your position. I agree with nearly everything you have written. The fact that you didn’t serve in Somalia, does not invalidate your points. You earned the right to be heard.
ru, I thank you for your service to the country. I believe you also have given your points thought. It is OK to disagree and leave it at that. However, I still think you have stained the reputation of our former Commander-in-Chief. He didn’t own the stock. Your lame retort about using “someone else to benefit himself” is puzzling. Frankly, I think that you owe President Bush a sincere, public apology. Read Damici’s post. The fact that you were there doesn’t detract in the slightest from the force of his argument. Remember that that is only a question of geography.
tim, you deserve scorn.
Eggnog, it’s not me who deserves scorn,I served my country.It’s the one who deserted his unit ,it’s the one who hid like a coward that deserves scorn. The Bush admin is full of ChickenHawks, and they are more than happy to send others to fight when they themselves would never dare to serve.If your such a Bush supporter then list for me the accomplishments of the Bush admin? You can’t because there aren’t any unless you are one of his campaign contributers.Bush has been a disaster for this country.Remember his words"We had no prior warnings before 9/11". What a lie that was, and we continue to get lies and half truths from this admin.
You say Bush Sr fought valiantly in WW2 well there is a lot of controversey about that, witnesses claim he panicked and bailed out of his airplane even though there was little damage and left his 2 crew members to crash and die.
If you want to support the policies of the bush clan fine but don’t make ridiculous statements about the bravery of the Bush’s.
I can appreciate and even admire in some way the fact that you are so “hung up” on one of our former presidents. Eminems song “Stan” comes to mind. I am sure our former president would be honored and pleased of your opinions of him. I am curious about just one thing though, what exact personal involment did you have with Mr. Bush that could allow you to put him so high on that honesty horse? That still has not been answered yet. Whether you like it or not I am entitled to my opinion just as you are entitled to yours. Please, do not ask me to apologize to anybody for anything unless you are prepared to apologize to me for thinking Bush is so honest. My, as you said, lame statement is not so lame. It is quite simple, Bush go to Carlyle group, Bush have Carlyle group buy stock for him, Bush get money and profits from stock, Bush get major contributions from American oil companies, Bush have hidden agenda. Simple.
Amen Tim. Not only do you not owe an apology for those cowards, they(Bush family) ought to apologize to Americans for their treasonous behavior.