Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, Members of the 96th Congress, fellow citizens:
These last few years have not been an easy time for any of us. As we meet tonight, it has never been more clear that the state of our Union depends on the state of the world. And tonight, as throughout our own generation, freedom and peace in the world depend on the state of our Union.
The 21st century has been born in turmoil, strife, and change at home and around the world. This is a time of challenge to our interests and our values and it's a time that tests our wisdom and our skills.
At this time here at home, Americans are still held captive by an oligarchy of petroleum cartels known as the Seven Sisters. Over 100 years ago, following intensive investigative journalism by an everyday American citizen named XXXXX, outrage swelled and Congress acted to split up Standard Oil which at the time was the greatest monopoly in our nation. However, clearly Congress did not go far enough. The descendants of Standard Oil continued to monopolize global oil markets and continued their abusive practices of racketeering, price fixing, price gauging, war mongering, speculation, and may other despicable practices that can only be called predatory capitalism.
These actions over time, along with our own foreign policy based on poor intelligence, a lack of empathy for people's of the world, and extreme greed, lead to fanatical views within the Muslim community, and eventually lead to acts of revenge, which we called terrorism.
At the same time, for over 100 years, we allowed our own Federal Reserve and monetary policy to be dictated by a banking cartel that chose to pursue wealth at all costs, regardless of the impacts of their actions. This has lead the American city, state, and federal government into a situation of extreme debt, while destroying our middle class with severe inflation. Abroad it has caused civil unrest as the speculators in the commodities markets traded food for profit and
Walmart, Monsanto, climate change, peak oil, ...
These xxx actsxxxx present a serious challenge to the United States of America and indeed to all the nations of the world. Together, we will meet these threats to peace.
I'm determined that the United States will remain the strongest of all nations, but our power will never be used to initiate a threat to the security of any nation or to the rights of any human being. We seek to be and to remain secure—a nation at peace in a stable world. But to be secure we must face the world as it is.
Three basic developments have helped to shape our challenges: the steady growth and increased projection of Soviet military power beyond its own borders; the overwhelming dependence of the Western democracies on oil supplies from the Middle East; and the press of social and religious and economic and political change in the many nations of the developing world, exemplified by the revolution in Iran.
Each of these factors is important in its own right. Each interacts with the others. All must be faced together, squarely and courageously. We will face these challenges, and we will meet them with the best that is in us.
And we will not fail.
In response to the abhorrent act in Iran, our Nation has never been aroused and unified so greatly in peacetime. Our position is clear. The United States will not yield to blackmail.
We continue to pursue these specific goals: first, to protect the present and long-range interests of the United States; secondly, to preserve the lives of the American hostages and to secure, as quickly as possible, their safe release, if possible, to avoid bloodshed which might further endanger the lives of our fellow citizens; to enlist the help of other nations in condemning this act of violence, which is shocking and violates the moral and the legal standards of a civilized world; and also to convince and to persuade the Iranian leaders that the real danger to their nation lies in the north, in the Soviet Union and from the Soviet troops now in Afghanistan, and that the unwarranted Iranian quarrel with the United States hampers their response to this far greater danger to them.
If the American hostages are harmed, a severe price will be paid. We will never rest until every one of the American hostages are released.
But now we face a broader and more fundamental challenge in this region because of the recent military action of the Soviet Union.
Now, as during the last 3 1/2 decades, the relationship between our country, the United States of America, and the Soviet Union is the most critical factor in determining whether the world will live at peace or be engulfed in global conflict.
Since the end of the Second World War, America has led other nations in meeting the challenge of mounting Soviet power. This has not been a simple or a static relationship. Between us there has been cooperation, there has been competition, and at times there has been confrontation.
In the 1940's we took the lead in creating the Atlantic Alliance in response to the Soviet Union's suppression and then consolidation of its East European empire and the resulting threat of the Warsaw Pact to Western Europe.
In the 1950's we helped to contain further Soviet challenges in Korea and in the Middle East, and we rearmed to assure the continuation of that containment.
In the 1960's we met the Soviet challenges in Berlin, and we faced the Cuban missile crisis. And we sought to engage the Soviet Union in the important task of moving beyond the cold war and away from confrontation.
And in the 1970's three American Presidents negotiated with the Soviet leaders in attempts to halt the growth of the nuclear arms race. We sought to establish rules of behavior that would reduce the risks of conflict, and we searched for areas of cooperation that could make our relations reciprocal and productive, not only for the sake of our two nations but for the security and peace of the entire world.
In all these actions, we have maintained two commitments: to be ready to meet any challenge by Soviet military power, and to develop ways to resolve disputes and to keep the peace.
Preventing nuclear war is the foremost responsibility of the two superpowers. That's why we've negotiated the strategic arms limitation treaties—SALT I and SALT II. Especially now, in a time of great tension, observing the mutual constraints imposed by the terms of these treaties will be in the best interest of both countries and will help to preserve world peace. I will consult very closely with the Congress on this matter as we strive to control nuclear weapons. That effort to control nuclear weapons will not be abandoned.
We superpowers also have the responsibility to exercise restraint in the use of our great military force. The integrity and the independence of weaker nations must not be threatened. They must know that in our presence they are secure.
But now the Soviet Union has taken a radical and an aggressive new step. It's using its great military power against a relatively defenseless nation. The implications of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan could pose the most serious threat to the peace since the Second World War.
The vast majority of nations on Earth have condemned this latest Soviet attempt to extend its colonial domination of others and have demanded the immediate withdrawal of Soviet troops. The Moslem world is especially and justifiably outraged by this aggression against an Islamic people. No action of a world power has ever been so quickly and so overwhelmingly condemned. But verbal condemnation is not enough. The Soviet Union must pay a concrete price for their aggression.
While this invasion continues, we and the other nations of the world cannot conduct business as usual with the Soviet Union. That's why the United States has imposed stiff economic penalties on the Soviet Union. I will not issue any permits for Soviet ships to fish in the coastal waters of the United States. I've cut Soviet access to high-technology equipment and to agricultural products. I've limited other commerce with the Soviet Union, and I've asked our allies and friends to join with us in restraining their own trade with the Soviets and not to replace our own embargoed items. And I have notified the Olympic Committee that with Soviet invading forces in Afghanistan, neither the American people nor I will support sending an Olympic team to Moscow.
The Soviet Union is going to have to answer some basic questions: Will it help promote a more stable international environment in which its own legitimate, peaceful concerns can be pursued? Or will it continue to expand its military power far beyond its genuine security needs, and use that power for colonial conquest? The Soviet Union must realize that its decision to use military force in Afghanistan will be costly to every political and economic relationship it values.
The region which is now threatened by Soviet troops in Afghanistan is of great strategic importance: It contains more than two-thirds of the world's exportable oil. The Soviet effort to dominate Afghanistan has brought Soviet military forces to within 300 miles of the Indian Ocean and close to the Straits of Hormuz, a waterway through which most of the world's oil must flow. The Soviet Union is now attempting to consolidate a strategic position, therefore, that poses a grave threat to the free movement of Middle East oil.
This situation demands careful thought, steady nerves, and resolute action, not only for this year but for many years to come. It demands collective efforts to meet this new threat to security in the Persian Gulf and in Southwest Asia. It demands the participation of all those who rely on oil from the Middle East and who are concerned with global peace and stability. And it demands consultation and close cooperation with countries in the area which might be threatened.
Meeting this challenge will take national will, diplomatic and political wisdom, economic sacrifice, and, of course, military capability. We must call on the best that is in us to preserve the security of this crucial region.
Let our position be absolutely clear: An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.
During the past 3 years, you have joined with me to improve our own security and the prospects for peace, not only in the vital oil-producing area of the Persian Gulf region but around the world. We've increased annually our real commitment for defense, and we will sustain this increase of effort throughout the Five Year Defense Program. It's imperative that Congress approve this strong defense budget for 1981, encompassing a 5-percent real growth in authorizations, without any reduction.
We are also improving our capability to deploy U.S. military forces rapidly to distant areas. We've helped to strengthen NATO and our other alliances, and recently we and other NATO members have decided to develop and to deploy modernized, intermediate-range nuclear forces to meet an unwarranted and increased threat from the nuclear weapons of the Soviet Union.
We are working with our allies to prevent conflict in the Middle East. The peace treaty between Egypt and Israel is a notable achievement which represents a strategic asset for America and which also enhances prospects for regional and world peace. We are now engaged in further negotiations to provide full autonomy for the people of the West Bank and Gaza, to resolve the Palestinian issue in all its aspects, and to preserve the peace and security of Israel. Let no one doubt our commitment to the security of Israel. In a few days we will observe an historic event when Israel makes another major withdrawal from the Sinai and when Ambassadors will be exchanged between Israel and Egypt.
We've also expanded our own sphere of friendship. Our deep commitment to human rights and to meeting human needs has improved our relationship with much of the Third World. Our decision to normalize relations with the People's Republic of China will help to preserve peace and stability in Asia and in the Western Pacific.
We've increased and strengthened our naval presence in the Indian Ocean, and we are now making arrangements for key naval and air facilities to be used by our forces in the region of northeast Africa and the Persian Gulf.
We've reconfirmed our 1959 agreement to help Pakistan preserve its independence and its integrity. The United States will take action consistent with our own laws to assist Pakistan in resisting any outside aggression. And I'm asking the Congress specifically to reaffirm this agreement. I'm also working, along with the leaders of other nations, to provide additional military and economic aid for Pakistan. That request will come to you in just a few days.
In the weeks ahead, we will further strengthen political and military ties with other nations in the region. We believe that there are no irreconcilable differences between us and any Islamic nation. We respect the faith of Islam, and we are ready to cooperate with all Moslem countries.
Finally, we are prepared to work with other countries in the region to share a cooperative security framework that respects differing values and political beliefs, yet which enhances the independence, security, and prosperity of all.
All these efforts combined emphasize our dedication to defend and preserve the vital interests of the region and of the nation which we represent and those of our allies—in Europe and the Pacific, and also in the parts of the world which have such great strategic importance to us, stretching especially through the Middle East and Southwest Asia. With your help, I will pursue these efforts with vigor and with determination. You and I will act as necessary to protect and to preserve our Nation's security.
The men and women of America's Armed Forces are on duty tonight in many parts of the world. I'm proud of the job they are doing, and I know you share that pride. I believe that our volunteer forces are adequate for current defense needs, and I hope that it will not become necessary to impose a draft. However, we must be prepared for that possibility. For this reason, I have determined that the Selective Service System must now be revitalized. I will send legislation and budget proposals to the Congress next month so that we can begin registration and then meet future mobilization needs rapidly if they arise.
We also need clear and quick passage of a new charter to define the legal authority and accountability of our intelligence agencies. We will guarantee that abuses do not recur, but we must tighten our controls on sensitive intelligence information, and we need to remove unwarranted restraints on America's ability to collect intelligence. The decade ahead will be a time of rapid change, as nations everywhere seek to deal with new problems and age-old tensions. But America need have no fear. We can thrive in a world of change if we remain true to our values and actively engaged in promoting world peace. We will continue to work as we have for peace in the Middle East and southern Africa. We will continue to build our ties with developing nations, respecting and helping to strengthen their national independence which they have struggled so hard to achieve. And we will continue to support the growth of democracy and the protection of human rights.
In repressive regimes, popular frustrations often have no outlet except through violence. But when peoples and their governments can approach their problems together through open, democratic methods, the basis for stability and peace is far more solid and far more enduring. That is why our support for human rights in other countries is in our own national interest as well as part of our own national character.
Peace—a peace that preserves freedom-remains America's first goal. In the coming years, as a mighty nation we will continue to pursue peace. But to be strong abroad we must be strong at home. And in order to be strong, we must continue to face up to the difficult issues that confront us as a nation today.
The crises in Iran and Afghanistan have dramatized a very important lesson: Our excessive dependence on foreign oil is a clear and present danger to our Nation's security. The need has never been more urgent. At long last, we must have a clear, comprehensive energy policy for the United States.
As you well know, I have been working with the Congress in a concentrated and persistent way over the past 3 years to meet this need. We have made progress together. But Congress must act promptly now to complete final action on this vital energy legislation. Our Nation will then have a major conservation effort, important initiatives to develop solar power, realistic pricing based on the true value of oil, strong incentives for the production of coal and other fossil fuels in the United States, and our Nation's most massive peacetime investment in the development of synthetic fuels.
The American people are making progress in energy conservation. Last year we reduced overall petroleum consumption by 8 percent and gasoline consumption by 5 percent below what it was the year before. Now we must do more.
After consultation with the Governors, we will set gasoline conservation goals for each of the 50 States, and I will make them mandatory if these goals are not met.
I've established an import ceiling for 1980 of 8.2 million barrels a day—well below the level of foreign oil purchases in 1977. I expect our imports to be much lower than this, but the ceiling will be enforced by an oil import fee if necessary. I'm prepared to lower these imports still further if the other oil-consuming countries will join us in a fair and mutual reduction. If we have a serious shortage, I will not hesitate to impose mandatory gasoline rationing immediately.
The single biggest factor in the inflation rate last year, the increase in the inflation rate last year, was from one cause: the skyrocketing prices of OPEC oil. We must take whatever actions are necessary to reduce our dependence on foreign oil-and at the same time reduce inflation.
As individuals and as families, few of us can produce energy by ourselves. But all of us can conserve energy—every one of us, every day of our lives. Tonight' I call on you—in fact, all the people of America—to help our Nation. Conserve energy. Eliminate waste. Make 1980 indeed a year of energy conservation.
Of course, we must take other actions to strengthen our Nation's economy.
First, we will continue to reduce the deficit and then to balance the Federal budget.
Second, as we continue to work with business to hold down prices, we'll build also on the historic national accord with organized labor to restrain pay increases in a fair fight against inflation.
Third, we will continue our successful efforts to cut paperwork and to dismantle unnecessary Government regulation.
Fourth, we will continue our progress in providing jobs for America, concentrating on a major new program to provide training and work for our young people, especially minority youth. It has been said that "a mind is a terrible thing to waste." We will give our young people new hope for jobs and a better life in the 1980's.
And fifth, we must use the decade of the 1980's to attack the basic structural weaknesses and problems in our economy through measures to increase productivity, savings, and investment.
With these energy and economic policies, we will make America even stronger at home in this decade—just as our foreign and defense policies will make us stronger and safer throughout the world. We will never abandon our struggle for a just and a decent society here at home. That's the heart of America—and it's the source of our ability to inspire other people to defend their own rights abroad.
Our material resources, great as they are, are limited. Our problems are too complex for simple slogans or for quick solutions. We cannot solve them without effort and sacrifice. Walter Lippmann once reminded us, "You took the good things for granted. Now you must earn them again. For every right that you cherish, you have a duty which you must fulfill. For every good which you wish to preserve, you will have to sacrifice your comfort and your ease. There is nothing for nothing any longer."
Our challenges are formidable. But there's a new spirit of unity and resolve in our country. We move into the 1980's with confidence and hope and a bright vision of the America we want: an America strong and free, an America at peace, an America with equal rights for all citizens-and for women, guaranteed in the United States Constitution—an America with jobs and good health and good education for every citizen, an America with a clean and bountiful life in our cities and on our farms, an America that helps to feed the world, an America secure in filling its own energy needs, an America of justice, tolerance, and compassion. For this vision to come true, we must sacrifice, but this national commitment will be an exciting enterprise that will unify our people.
Together as one people, let us work to build our strength at home, and together as one indivisible union, let us seek peace and security throughout the world.
Together let us make of this time of challenge and danger a decade of national resolve and of brave achievement.
Thank you very much.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Monday, August 1, 2011
1929 Stock Market Crash Brought Glass-Steagall
Amplify’d from en.wikipedia.org
In 1932, the Pecora Commission was established by the U.S. Senate to study the causes of the crash. The U.S. Congress passed the Glass–Steagall Act in 1933, which mandated a separation between commercial banks, which take deposits and extend loans, and investment banks, which underwrite, issue, and distribute stocks, bonds, and other securities.
The Roaring Twenties, the decade that led up to the Crash,[4] was a time of wealth and excess. Despite caution of the dangers of speculation, many believed that the market could sustain high price levels. Shortly before the crash, economist Irving Fisher famously proclaimed, "Stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau."[5] However, the optimism and financial gains of the great bull market were shattered on "Black Thursday", October 24, 1929, when share prices on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) collapsed. Stock prices plummeted on that day, and continued to fall at an unprecedented rate for a full month.[6]
The Wall Street Crash of 1929 (October 1929), also known as the Great Crash, and the Stock Market Crash of 1929, was the most devastating stock market crash in the history of the United States, taking into consideration the full extent and duration of its fallout.[1] The crash signaled the beginning of the 12-year Great Depression that affected all Western industrialized countries[2] and that did not end in the United States until the onset of American mobilization for World War II at the end of 1941.
Anyone who bought stocks in mid-1929 and held onto them saw most of his or her adult life pass by before getting back to even.
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1a4vn
Financial Sector Looking at Laying Off 80,000? Unemployment Heading Up? @JeffReevesIP
Ouch! This is not a good sign. So why is oil up?
Amplify’d from money.msn.com
30,000 HSBC layoffs only the beginning
The financial sector has seen lots of job cuts, and Wall Street should brace for more -- perhaps 80,000 by year's end.
In July, as financial-sector layoffs mounted, a top executive search firm estimated as many as 80,000 jobs might go in this coming round of financial layoffs.
"This is kind of like the beginning of a tsunami," said Richard Stein of Caldwell Partners. "You don't get it in one go -- it comes in sort of short shock waves."
Well, those shock waves have kept coming, with Monday's brutal announcement from HSBC (HBC) in London that by 2013 it will cut an additional 25,000 jobs on top of 5,000 posts already being eliminated. But if recent news is any indication, the layoffs are far from over.
Financial-sector layoffs have reached a fever pitch as bank earnings have rolled out. Just a few of the announcements include:
- Barclays (BCS), another top England bank, announced it will lay off several hundred workers soon in addition to 600 earlier in the year.
- Switzerland's UBS (UBS) has been rumored to be considering layoffs of up to 5,000 people in July.
- Credit Suisse (CS), another Swiss bank, plans to ax about 2,000 staffers, mostly in Europe, despite weathering the financial crisis better than eurozone peers.
That's a staggering total, and it doesn't include layoffs we haven't had confirmed or had leaked to the press yet. And if you haven't noticed, most of those big banks are abroad.
- Related: 7 mega-banks going bust
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1a4p5
Zero Progress on Fuel Efficiency Despite Record Gas Prices
Amplify’d from en.wikipedia.org
Corporate Average Fuel Economy
The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) are regulations in the United States, first enacted by US Congress in 1975,[1] and intended to improve the average fuel economy of cars and light trucks (trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles) sold in the US in the wake of the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo. Historically, it is the sales-weighted harmonic mean fuel economy, expressed in miles per gallon (mpg), of a manufacturer's fleet of current model year passenger cars or light trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 8,500 pounds (3,856 kg) or less, manufactured for sale in the US.
This system would have changed with the introduction of "Footprint" regulations for light trucks binding in 2011, but the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals returned that rule for reconsideration for, among other things, being "arbitrary and capricious".[2] The most recent revision of CAFE, passed in 2007, bumped the light-truck exemption (which includes SUVs and passenger vans as well as pickup trucks) from 8,500 lb (3,900 kg) to 10,000 lb (4,500 kg) GVWR, but continued to maintain separate standards and separate bins for "passenger cars" and "light trucks", despite the majority of "light trucks" actually being used as passenger cars. More than half a million model-year-1999 vehicles exceeded the 8500-pound GVWR and were omitted from CAFE calculations.[3] In 2011, the standard will change to include many larger vehicles.[4] The US and Canada have the weakest standards in terms of fleet-average fuel economy rating among first world nations, e.g. 25 mpg in the US, versus 45 mpg in the European Union and higher in Japan (2008).[5]
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regulates CAFE standards and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) measures vehicle fuel efficiency. US Congress specifies that CAFE standards must be set at the "maximum feasible level" given consideration for:
- technological feasibility;
- economic practicality;
- effect of other standards on fuel economy;
- need of the nation to conserve energy.
Historically, the EPA has encouraged consumers to buy more fuel efficient vehicles, while the NHTSA expressed concerns that smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles may lead to increased traffic fatalities.[6][7] Thus higher fuel efficiency was associated with lower traffic safety, intertwining the issues of fuel economy, road-traffic safety, air pollution, and climate change. In the mid 2000s, increasing safety of smaller cars and the poor safety record of light trucks began to reverse this association.[8]
If the average fuel economy of a manufacturer's annual fleet of car and/or truck production falls below the defined standard, the manufacturer must pay a penalty, currently $5.50 USD per 0.1 mpg under the standard, multiplied by the manufacturer's total production for the U.S. domestic market.
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1a4iy
#Obama Surrenders #2012 to #GOP w/ #Debtceiling #Compromise
Say goodbye to your 401K, hello WW3.
Amplify’d from www.jornada.unam.mx
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1a4az
As USG Publicly Links AlQueda and Iran, Is WW3 Imminent?
China, Russia, and Germany are heavily invested in Iran for their oil. The USA could never make an offensive move without upsetting three of the most powerful governments in the world.
Amplify’d from seeker401.wordpress.com
The U.S. for the first time formally accused Iran of forging an alliance with al Qaeda in a pact that allows the terrorist group to use Iranian soil as a transit point for moving money, arms and fighters to its bases in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
The Treasury Department outlined on Thursday what it said was an extensive fund-raising operation that uses Iran-based operatives and draws from donors in oil-rich Persian Gulf countries such as Kuwait and Qatar. The Treasury said it had sanctioned six al Qaeda members for allegedly overseeing this network.
The U.S. has long been concerned about alleged Iranian support for the terrorist group, though Iran and al Qaeda hold differing interpretations of Islam and divergent strategic interests.
But Tehran, anticipating the U.S. troop withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan, has been moving increasingly to assert its regional influence. Iran has helped smuggle sophisticated weapons into those countries to hasten the withdrawal of American forces, the U.S. says—a charge Tehran has denied.
U.S. officials said on Thursday that they believe Iranian assistance to al Qaeda is driven by the same motivation: ridding the Middle East and Central Asia of U.S. forces. “The Iranians are allowing their territory to be used by this network…I think it stands to reason that Iran is getting something out of this as well,” said a senior U.S. official.
Officials at the Iranian mission in New York called the allegations “totally baseless.” Alireza Miryousefi, the mission’s spokesman, said “the Islamic Republic of Iran itself has been a victim of acts of terrorism in the past which have resulted in the loss of hundreds of innocent Iranian lives.”
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1a44f
PIMCO CEO Says Despite #Compromise & #Debtceiling, StockMarket & #USD Will #Collapse
Get out of your stock market positions now! Gold, silver, food commodities are safer. UK Pound perhaps, but currencies will tank along with global stock markets. The official collapse of the American Empire begins now
Amplify’d from abcnews.go.com
PIMCO CEO Mohamed El-Erian: Budget Deal Will Only Bring Short-Term Relief
By IMTIYAZ DELAWALA
One of the most prominent global investors says that a potential budget deal in Washington will only bring short-term relief, and it won't remove the threat of a U.S. debt downgrade by credit rating agencies.
"I think this compromise will lead to an increase in the debt ceiling, and therefore avoid default," said Mohamed El-Erian, CEO of PIMCO, a global investment firm and one of the world's largest bond investors said today on ABC's "This Week With Christiane Amanpour." "But this relief will be short."
"We have one rating agency out there that said it would downgrade unless certain things happen, and these things are not happening fast enough," El-Erian said of the budget framework being negotiated.
"If the U.S. loses that AAA status, it will be much more difficult for the U.S. to restore growth, so it's unambiguously bad," El-Erian added.
The potential budget deal may not settle world markets concerned about the U.S. financial outlook, he believes.
"The rest of the world is watching, and this will do very little to reduce the concern that the rest of the world has about the role of the U.S. in the global economy," El-Erian said.
The potential budget agreement "does nothing to restore household and corporate confidence. So unemployment will be higher than it would have been otherwise, growth will be lower than it would be otherwise, and inequality will be worse than it would be otherwise."
El-Erian questioned the impact of discretionary spending cuts that will likely make up the short-term budget savings in any final agreement.
"We have a very weak economy, so withdrawing more spending at this stage will make it even weaker," El-Erian said.
ABC News' Jonathan Karl reported overnight that negotiators had reached a tentative framework for a deal that would include a debt ceiling increase of up to $2.4 trillion and guarantee an equal amount of deficit reduction over the next decade.
But Karl cautioned that the mantra on Capitol Hill remains the same -- "nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to." And ABC's Jake Tapper reports that White House officials put the odds of reaching an agreement before Tuesday's deadline at 50/50."
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1a434
Saturday, July 30, 2011
1978: Pivot Point In American History
In 1970s something changed in our economy: many Americans wages held steady or fell - an entire generation began to live worse off than their parents and their children's future looks even bleaker. 80,000,000 Americans fell off the cliff. This is the lower class that used to work in factories and now work 3 jobs, commute 2 hrs a day, etc.
Amplify’d from www.npr.org
Today's podcast is a recording of the live show Alex and Adam did in DC this week. In keeping with the vibe of the nation's capital, they talk a lot about America.
Key themes:
1. Disco destroyed America.
2. Now there are two Americas: Broken America and American-Dream America.
3. A three-step plan for solving America's problems.
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a1a0c0
Friday, July 29, 2011
All BigOil Are Descendants of Standard Oil #gashole
Standard Oil provided Germany the gas it needed to bomb everyone. Here's a description of the Standard Oil umbrella.
Standard Oil Line (Rockefeller)
*Exxon, *Mobil , SoCal , *Gulf , Chevron , *Texaco , UnoCal , Marathon , Conoco
Imperial Oil (Canada) , Amoco - Owned by BP but was originally a Standard Oil subsidiary. Arco (Atlantic Richfield with a subsidiary APTI -ARCO Power Technoligies Inc -that built HAARP, and was acquired by British Aerospace in 2003)
Standard Oil along with the 4 companies shown as an asterisk (*), were the 5 American companies that held 40% of control in BP as is quoted below from www.morphcity.com...
In 1954 the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company changed its name to British Petroleum and became an international consortium that shared profits with Iran at a 50-50 split. The company was 40% owned by Iran, 40% owned by 5 American companies and 20% owned by Royal Dutch Shell and the French Petroleum Company. No Iranians were allowed on the Board of Directors or to audit the company. The 5 American companies include Exxon, Gulf Oil, Mobil, Standard Oil and Texaco; all of which were controlled, merged or or owned by parent companies affiliated with the Rockefeller family over time.
Churchill, Stalin, Roosevelt met in Tehran in 1943 for the Tehran Conference to ensure full cooperation and assistance from the Soviet Union for their war policies against Germany
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tehran_Conference
At this time, British petroleum interests (which later became BP) controlled ALL of Iran's oil production. This was nationalized by Churchill at one point.
Great record of oil company history here:
http://www.virginia.edu/igpr/APAG/apagoilhistory.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Persian_Oil_Company
In 1979 the Ayatollah Khomeini broke all contracts and gave 90% ownership to BP oil and Iran retained a 10% interest.
In 1998 Peter Sutherland was the non- executive chairman of BP for 13 years, until the end of 2009 and is an example of the the type of leadership that rules the world. His "accomplishments" include being non- executive Chairman of Goldman Sachs, director of the Bank of Scotland (until it was taken over by the UK government to avoid bankruptcy), former Director General of GATT (now the World Trade Organization), a chairman of the Trilateral Commission and a UN Goodwill Ambassador. Sutherland was instrumental in the UK's immigration mess, negating Ireland's ban on abortion and is reported to be on the steering committee of the Bilderberg group.
Judging from this quote, BP basically became the proprietary owner of Iranian Oil.
And from this link www.wetfeet.com... we discover that:
Standard Oil evolved into what is known today as the world energy giant BP
Both 2008 and 2009 have been busy years for BP. In 2008, BP signed a deal with Enbridge to pipe Oil Sands crude from Canada to the Texas Gulf Coast. The same year, BP and Husky Energy teamed up to create an integrated North American oil sands business through two joint ventures: BP-Husky Refinery LLC, operated by BP, and the Sunrise Oil Sands Partnership (SOSP), operated by Husky. BP also acquired 90,000 acres of natural gas assets in Oklahoma’s Arkoma Basin Woodford Shale from Chesapeake Energy in 2008. It also purchased a stake in Chesapeake Energy’s Fayetteville Shale assets in Arkansas.
In 2009, BP announced the discovery of a major oil field in the Gulf of Mexico. The oil field contains 3 billion barrels of oil, which will boast production 50 percent to 600,000 barrels per day.
And from an article on BPs own website www.bp.com...
Like most companies, Amoco started small. Unlike most companies, however, it had the backing of a big name in American industry, John D. Rockefeller. Standard Oil of Indiana, as the company was officially known for many years, took shape in 1899
And from this link islammyreligion.wordpress.com...
Standard Oil of New Jersey (SONJ) – or Esso (S.O.) – renamed Exxon, now part of ExxonMobil. Standard Trust companies Carter Oil, Imperial Oil (Canada), and Standard of Louisiana were kept as part of Standard Oil of New Jersey after the breakup.
Standard Oil of New York – or Socony, merged with Vacuum – renamed Mobil, now part of ExxonMobil.
Standard Oil of California – or Socal – renamed Chevron, became ChevronTexaco, but returned to Chevron.
Standard Oil of Indiana – or Stanolind, renamed Amoco (American Oil Co.) – now part of BP.
Standard’s Atlantic and the independent company Richfield merged to form Atlantic Richfield or ARCO, now part of BP. Atlantic operations were spun off and bought by Sunoco.
Standard Oil of Kentucky – or Kyso was acquired by Standard Oil of California – currently Chevron.
Continental Oil Company – or Conoco now part of ConocoPhillips.
Standard Oil of Ohio – or Sohio now part of BP.
The Ohio Oil Company – more commonly referred to as “The Ohio”, and marketed gasoline under the Marathon name. The company is now known as Marathon Oil Company, and was often a rival with the in-state Standard spinoff, Sohio.
Other Standard Oil spin-offs:
Standard Oil of Iowa – pre-1911 – became Standard Oil of California.
Standard Oil of Minnesota – pre-1911 – bought by Standard Oil of Indiana.
Standard Oil of Illinois – pre-1911 – bought by Standard Oil of Indiana.
Standard Oil of Kansas – refining only, eventually bought by Indiana Standard.
Standard Oil of Missouri – pre-1911 – dissolved.
Standard Oil of Louisiana – always owned by Standard Oil of New Jersey (now ExxonMobil).
Standard Oil of Brazil – always owned by Standard Oil of New Jersey (now ExxonMobil).
Other companies divested in the 1911 breakup:
Anglo-American Oil Co. – acquired by Jersey Standard in 1930, now Esso UK.
Buckeye Pipeline Co.
Borne-Scrymser Co. (chemicals)
Chesebrough Manufacturing (now Unilever, manufacturer of Vaseline)
Colonial Oil.
Crescent Pipeline Co.
Cumberland Pipe Line Co.
Eureka Pipe Line Co.
Galena-Signal Oil Co.
Indiana Pipe Line Co.
National Transit Co.
New York Transit Co.
Northern Pipe Line Co.
Prairie Oil & Gas.
Solar Refining.
Southern Pipe Line Co.
South Penn Oil Co. – eventually became Pennzoil, now part of Shell.
Southwest Pennsylvania Pipe Line Co.
Swan and Finch.
Union Tank Lines.
Washington Oil Co.
Waters-Pierce
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a19wnj
Thursday, July 28, 2011
American Evolution
History repeats itself whether we like it or not. Those who understand that benefit.
Standard Oil was formed in the late 1800's and was broken up in the early 1900's into 7 companies, which proliferate until today. The 7 sister companies, Shell, BP, Texaco, Amoco, American Oil, etc (check GasHole) formed a cartel. The stockholders remained the same. They continued to rule the planet.
remember it was these 7 companies that controlled the entire world oil production. then OPEC was formed when revolution in the midle east resulted in new leadership and nationalizazation of their local oil production.
the 1970's saw the peak of oil production in the united states along with bad foreign policy, along with the empowerment of the oil producing nations that nationalized their production.
Remember that Mexico kicked out Standard Oil in the 1910's when Lazaro Cardenas nationalized Mexico's oil and created PEMEX. In the late 1990's, Chavez did the same in Venezuela and he was demonized by the American media and US government. The were several coup d'etats but he still won with local support.
In all the crises of the late 1970's, Jimmy Carter lost the eletion of 1980 to Reagan, an actor, and George Bush Sr, a former CIA director.
Standard Oil was formed in the late 1800's and was broken up in the early 1900's into 7 companies, which proliferate until today. The 7 sister companies, Shell, BP, Texaco, Amoco, American Oil, etc (check GasHole) formed a cartel. The stockholders remained the same. They continued to rule the planet.
remember it was these 7 companies that controlled the entire world oil production. then OPEC was formed when revolution in the midle east resulted in new leadership and nationalizazation of their local oil production.
the 1970's saw the peak of oil production in the united states along with bad foreign policy, along with the empowerment of the oil producing nations that nationalized their production.
Remember that Mexico kicked out Standard Oil in the 1910's when Lazaro Cardenas nationalized Mexico's oil and created PEMEX. In the late 1990's, Chavez did the same in Venezuela and he was demonized by the American media and US government. The were several coup d'etats but he still won with local support.
In all the crises of the late 1970's, Jimmy Carter lost the eletion of 1980 to Reagan, an actor, and George Bush Sr, a former CIA director.
Economic Collapse
In The Day After the Dollar Crashes, Vickers presents a possible 14 day time line for the crash of the U.S. dollar and the subsequent collapse of global markets. He outlines the New World Order that may take shape over the next decade and the impact it could have on nations, businesses, and individuals.
Post Collapse Society Alternatives
1. Agrarian Society. Life of the land, produce our own food
2. Pioneer society, local community, local commerce
3. Post industrial society - utopian Jacques Fresco, using technology to live in a perfect and equal world
4. Post Apocolyptic, nomads, homeless, fortified compaounds, ultra wealthy
indepdne, personal , hard work
trigger: destrutive war or plague (pandemic)
Government is plannign for some of these events (FEMA, National Guard)
5. Chaos. Privitization of everything, Oppresive, increased government role in all aspects of life, curfews, military presence near fuel and food distribution sites, protests, rampant crime, homeless squatters, tent cities, pandhandling, begging, gangs, begging, foreclosures are halted but its too late, hyperinflation - similar to collapse of USSR after 1991. This last about 10 years. Government work programs, hotels become no income housing, young , poor and desperate, many will join the military, waiting in line for food, vouchers,
China, IMF, other stronger economies will enjoy seeing the Americans suffer
http://youtu.be/6DvEiiEiHlo
2. Pioneer society, local community, local commerce
3. Post industrial society - utopian Jacques Fresco, using technology to live in a perfect and equal world
4. Post Apocolyptic, nomads, homeless, fortified compaounds, ultra wealthy
indepdne, personal , hard work
trigger: destrutive war or plague (pandemic)
Government is plannign for some of these events (FEMA, National Guard)
5. Chaos. Privitization of everything, Oppresive, increased government role in all aspects of life, curfews, military presence near fuel and food distribution sites, protests, rampant crime, homeless squatters, tent cities, pandhandling, begging, gangs, begging, foreclosures are halted but its too late, hyperinflation - similar to collapse of USSR after 1991. This last about 10 years. Government work programs, hotels become no income housing, young , poor and desperate, many will join the military, waiting in line for food, vouchers,
China, IMF, other stronger economies will enjoy seeing the Americans suffer
http://youtu.be/6DvEiiEiHlo
Oil War Profiteers - Why Congress Should FREEZE Prices
Amplify’d from www.whale.to
OPEC - the cartel of oil producing states have an extreme interest in high
oil prices, given that their actual costs to pump the oil out of the ground do
not vary except according to their own nation's rate
of inflation, which can impact on labor costs and replacement parts for
machinery. Chief among these are the Saudi Royal Family, the Fiasals -- many of
which are close buddies and business partners with the Bush Family, partners
with American oil industry firms, and co-investors in CIA proprietaries and
military contractors with Bush and his Administration friends through their
investment and leadership roles in the Carlyle Group, which is a holding company
for dozens of military contractors (and oil industry firms)
Oil Companies (anywhere in the world) get to raise their prices IMMEDIATELY
when any expected shortage of supply exists -- the old supply and demand
formula. So even though they have yet to pay higher costs to the producers, the
price of oil products (heating oil, gasoline, etc.) rises quickly well in
advance of any change in actual expenditures for oil at higher prices. Once the
shortage manifests in actual higher costs, prices would at some point level out
and represent normalized profits (in terms of percentile, but still higher in
terms of net profit volume).
As a rule, war has NOT genuinely suffered a stifled supply in any dramatic
way, because various oil producers (those not directly involved in blockades or
other war induced production roadblocks) simply increase production rates
--further increasing their profits by virtue of a temporarily larger market
share. Of course, once the war goes away, the prices come back down -- but never
seem to come anywhere near their starting point. The overall profit level of the
oil companies is much higher after the war, and the consumer never gains back
what it had lost. We consumers are too dumb to notice that, apparently, and no
one in government seems interested in monitoring on our behalf.
Military Contractors/Suppliers. That one is not very hard to figure out. All
those destroyed weapon systems and platforms, and expended munitions will need
to be replaced. So much the better if selling to both sides, even if your own
troops end up fighting an enemy armed with weapons your country manufactured. It
is an age old story, and no one is better at it than the US Military Industrial
Complex -- which I call MIIM (Military-Industrial-Intelligence-Media Complex). A
great example is the Carlyle company, which is Of course, that brings us to...
The Military and the CIA. The military always wins in a war, its
appropriations going through the roof, and Generals tending to get more stars
with victories. The CIA is itself deeply enmeshed in the oil industry and in bed
with military contractors, having proprietaries in both industries. In fact, two
of three Bush appointees to the US occupied Afghanistan (see next) are actually
former CIA operatives, both recruited and thrust directly into the White House,
the Department of Defense, and oil industry, and back into Afghanistanís new
puppet government at the same times (two for one special, we might presume.)
Individuals important for the purpose: The George Bush family has extensive
holdings in the oil industry at all levels, including the service industry,
which are firms providing services needed by the oil industry, such as Carlyle
Groups Halliburton. The Bush family further has significant interests in the
war industries through Carlyle Group. James Baker of Baker and Botts who has a
long list of clients in both the oil and war industries. Dick Cheney hails from
Halliburton, and has profited from Caspian region pipeline projects. Condoleeza
Rice hails from Chevron. All three George Bush appointees to US occupied
Afghanistan, John Maresca, Zalmay Khalilzad as Special Envoy and Hamid Karzai as
Interim Prime Minister -- all worked on Unocalís Afghanistan pipeline project,
Maresca as a Unocal Vice President.
Now lets take a brief look at the wars. Oil prices are adjusted for
inflation/recession to reflect constant 1995 $, and come from the US Dept. of
Energy. Their
figures are averaged for the year, and thus, the actual highest prices for
the year are not reflected. Despite this, the numbers are still rather
revealing...
WWII (1941-1945) : Oil prices had held between $11.00 and $13.42 for a ten
year period. But in the war years, oil dropped to as low as $9.32. By 1949,
after the shooting war had stopped and the cold war had begun, oil prices had
peaked to above $16, and remained in that strata for some time, and then slowly
started downhill. Clearly, WWII in Europe was not about oil, but the Pacific war
was -- the US was essentially blocking Japanís access to it. Regardless, it
impacted on oil prices and profits.
Vietnam (1964-76): Oil had started to
approach to the old $11 strata. The war in Vietnam started when oil was in the
mid $12 range, but by the time the war had ended, it was an all time high of
$20.39. Again, we probably agree this war was not about oil, but it clearly
impacted on oil prices.
Afghanistan-Russia (1979-1991):
This war was argued by various experts as being ideological, religious,
political, and oil related. It is largely coincidental to a larger (in death
tolls) war between Iran/Iraq (see below). For this reason, the data is
essentially identical for the two wars, which could be argued as one in net
effect. While Afghanistan was itself not an oil industry player, the bordering
Russian states were extremely oil rich -- the Caspian basin. Further,
Afghanistan had long been identified as a central key to political power in the
region and was often referred to white papers on Grand Game constructs by the
New World Order groups. The Grand Game is control of the oil in the region, as
promoted by such groups as the Council on Foreign Relations. The CFR and its
think tanks, though its primary goals are very much against US sovereignty in
favor of a one world government, is probably the most influential power group in
Washington DC. It virtually dictates US foreign and domestic policy as well as
policy regarding national security (CIA, NSA, FBI, Department of Defense.)
The Falklands War (1982): This
short war between Great Britain (British Petroleum) and major oil producer,
Argentina, should also be combined into thinking about the Iraq-Iran war, below.
Though it was a very short lived war, it kept prices high (above $44) for the
year -- though otherwise representing a mere hiccup in oil exports from South
America. Yet lessons learned from the 'double whammy'
effect of wars effecting oil producers on two continents would prove useful,
later.
Oil War I, Iraq-Iran war
(1980-1988): This was clearly and ideological war, but between two major
oil producing states, it illustrates to the oil and war industries where the
money comes from. When combined with the Falkland war and the more localized
impact of the Soviet-Afghanistan conflict, which bordered both Iraq and Iran,
the impact on oil supply and demand is significant. Oil prices had slipped from
the $20 level to near $19 when war talk started to send oil prices back upward.
By the second year of the war, prices had peaked at $52.42, a new all time high.
It remained above $30 until the war started to die down and other oil producers
had taken up the slack. As the war ended, however, there was a glut on the
market from the increased production and the renewed access to Iraqi and Iranian
oil, and oil immediately plunged to a low of $16.81. The first gas lines were in
this period.
Oil War II,
Iraq-Kuwait/US war (1990-1991): Iraq is feeling a financial bind, and
oil prices are not what they used to be. Further, other OPEC nations seem bent
on pumping a lot of oil which means both a low profit to Sadam Hussein and a low
market share. That may be, in part, why he invaded Kuwait. Regardless, all
experts agree that he was after their oil fields, if not their oil customers --
and better seaport access for oil exports, Iraq being largely land locked. From
a low of $15.76 entering the period, oil shoots up as Desert Storm looms to a
high of $23.01. This war is definitely about oil, and I call it Oil War I.
The Fall of the Soviet
Union (1991-1997): This was not exactly a war, but the Soviets had
fallen victim to the Cold War. The date of the actual collapse (Dec 1991) is not
as important as are the dates shown in parenthesis, which are the dates
representing a flood of US oil company investments in Soviet oil resources.
These involved a series of bribes in order to gain control at ridiculously low
investment costs. This resulted in roughly a 75% ownership or control of all
Caspian region oil and gas reserves (a trillion dollar value.) It is mentioned
here because it helps explain why George Bush the Fist did not take control of
Iraq when the chance existed. To do so would have adversely effected the oil
companies attempts to get good prices for ownership of Soviet oil. Oil prices
needed to drop as quickly as possible and it would not do to have the Soviets
see America as owning the region at that time.
Oil War III,
the War on Terrorism (2001 - current): By 1994, oil prices had dropped
to $13.49, facilitating reasonable prices for Soviet oil fields to American oil
companies. But now, they needed a way to export the oil -- and to get prices
back up. The only viable way was the pipeline project through Afghanistan. But
the Taliban and their civil war were in the way. So, per other NOILWAR!
articles, Osama bin Laden became terrorist, and was moved to Afghanistan to
befriend the Taliban. While there, 911 happens and the US immediately associates
bin Laden and the Taliban as one. Retaliation commences and, soon enough,
attention swings to Iraq and 'Weapons of Mass
Destruction.'
Simultaneous to all this, we have the Argentina oil shortage going on, which
forces South America and countries relying upon Argentine oil to get it from the
Middle East -- putting more demand on oil from that quarter and sending prices
even higher. Guess what? It turns out that the labor dispute and political
disruption in Argentina seems to be getting its cue from the George Bush White
House and the CIA. The effort to overthrow the Democratic government through
labor revolt is being secretly stimulated by George Bush for no apparent reason.
There is no fit to US foreign policy -- but it is a fit to oil industry profit
motives. For more on this, take a look at an article by W. Clark at the
Independent Media
Center.
This all sends oil prices skyward, steadily. As of this writing, they have
eclipsed $30 a barrel - that being in 2003 dollars, not 1995 dollars. Using the
gold standard as a guide, 1995 to 2003 conversion is ten to one (it takes ten
times as many dollars to buy an ounce of gold - $35 vs. $350); making it $300 a
barrel equivalent. Ergo, gasoline is predicted to be $2 a gallon by spring,
perhaps $3 by summer. Now that's a lube job! But it gets worse. What we are
looking at is another 40% potential boost due to arbitrary manipulation of
monetary standards...
We could name this section ëWhy War Canít Wait.í If we do go in and take
control of Iraq ëtemporarily on behalf of freedom loving Iraqisí, what impact
will that have on oil profits? Well, as it happens, it will significantly
impact on them. It will, in fact, represent a whole new formula. This new
formula has to do with a kind of ëwild cardí situation which has never before
existed -- the creation and emergence of a dominant new monetary standard in the
world, the Euro Dollar. As it happens, the US dollar is dwindling rapidly
against the Euro. Currently, they are almost at parity (1 Euro = $1), though
when the Euro first came out, it was worth much less than a dollar. This has a
significant role in American oil company profits -- and indeed, all major US
corporations doing business abroad (megacorps.) It even effects certain ëalliesí
of George Bush in his war efforts in the same ways and for exactly the same
reasons:
As it happens, Iraq had been forced by the US embargo and other pressures to
switch Iraq from US dollar (pretend money -- Federal Reserve I.O.U. notes) trade
to Euros (based on a real Gold standard). This involved not only his oil sales
but his $10 billion in cash reserves held in European banks from oil sales -- a
fund established as part of the embargo in order to provide food and medical
supplies for Iraqi civilians. Seems that instead of buying those goodies, he is
borrowing Euros against it, and spending that wherever he pleases. But the real
story is that this has strengthened Iraqís financial picture significantly, by
up to 30% over what it would have been with US dollars. The rest of OPEC
has eyed this and is considering switching, too -- or perhaps establishing their
own money standard based on oil (black gold.)
And this brings us to why Tony Blair is such a stuanch Oil War III supporter,
and the Germans and French are not. Blair, like Bush, is not really worried
about weapons of mass destruction... he and those in British Petroleum's
Boardroom are worried about the same thing the American oil companies are
worried about. If the exchange standard for oil changes, economic experts
predict a virtual recession for the US, and American oil companies may stand to
loose another 30-40% in attempting to convert US dollars for Euros in order to
buy oil. Great Britain is in the same fix, because they refused the Euro in
favor of the English Pound which is also failing against the Euro almost
as badly as the American I.O.U.s.
France and Germany, on the other hand, use the Euro, and thus, hope the war
is a bust. That means a strong Euro and better buying power -- especially for
oil. But if the US invades Iraq and takes control, one of the first things
expected of George Bushís puppet government officials installed there is to
revert Iraq back to US Dollars for petro -- especially in sales to Europeans. In
such a move, OPEC would be hard pressed to move ahead to any conversion
strategy, because it might result in a production war which sends prices low
(for both standards.) In addition, George Bush is in a key position to blackmail
select OPEC leaders (especially the Saudi Royals) for their funding of Osama bin
Laden... ëPlay ball, Faisal, or you might be next in line for Americaís New
War!í Itís that same old carpet of gold or carpet of bombs argument, all over
again.
Thus it is no coincidence that virtually every country in favor of war with
Iraq is not using the Euro standard (i.e., all those Slavic/former Soviet
states)... or is partnered with America in oil ventures in the Caspian (i.e.,
Turkey...) and every country which has come out publicly against the war is a
Euro nation. The only noted exception is the Soviet Union, which while both
partnered with the US and not on the Euro, has non the less opposed the war.
This may be because they view with alarm and suspicion the series of Oil Wars
for profiteering in the region, and the ultimate price they may have to pay if
the US controls the bulk of the entire world's supply of oil short of the
Argentines. And perhaps they know about Bush and friends adventures there and
fear more trickery is afoot akin to that used against the Soviets, resulting in
loss of control of their own oil reserves.
So the new formula is War = Euro x 0 = (US$ and £) x 1.7 x Oil Profits x
Caspian Reserves. Perhaps a million people will die before it is over, but
the equation does not factor that in. Boardroom math is like that; better to
spill red blood and have black ink on the bottom line than to save lives and
have red ink at the bottom line. So every one but Bush and friends gets it in
the end. So, I guess there is only one last thing to say: Please pass the
Vaseline. On second thought, I probably canít afford it, since it is petroleum
based. I'll use butter.
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a19sgh
Is BigOil and religious fundamentalists behind the Energy Non Crisis movement?
It is interesting that Lindsay Williams is a religious person (ordained Baptist minister) that is asking us to trust HIM because he has access to the global elitists that are planning WW3.
and he is asking us NOT to trust the peak oil movement, who are primarily driven by SCIENCE and MATH.
Meanwhile Alex Jones and Lindsay are suggesting to get into GOLD and SILVER and that the USD will collapse and that there is an enormous amount of untapped oil reserves in Alaska that our government wont let us touch because... they want the economy to collapse.
Just doesnt make any damned since.
What does make sense is the peak oil movement supported by real SCIENCE and the correlation between oil price spikes and global recessions.
GasHole shows you that oil companies are enjoying the end of oil and the tight energy market for price gauging for the MOST ENORMOUS PROFITS EVER RECORDED. How does this benefit the USG?
Alex Jones either purposefully follows misleading information for the purposes of generating hype and attention to his media channels OR he is misguided.
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/a19sfg
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)