[political-research] No, the Iran Oil Bourse is not a casus belli.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticlecode=%20EN20060310articleId=2076 No, the Iran Oil Bourse is not a casus belli. by F. William Engdahl Global Research, March 10, 2006 A number of writings have recently appeared with the thesis that the announced plans of the Teheran government to institute a Teheran Oil Bourse, perhaps as early as this month, is the real hidden reason behind the evident march to war on Iran from the Anglo-American powers. The thesis is in our opinion mistaken for many reasons, not the least, that war on Iran has been in planning since the 1990's, as an integral part of the US Greater Middle East strategy. More significantly, the Oil Bourse argument is a Red Herring that diverts attention from the real geopolitical grounds behind the march towards war which have been detailed on this website, including my piece, 'Calculating the Risk of War in Iran' which was posted on GlobalResearch.ca on January 29, 2006 In 1996, Richard Perle and Douglas Feith, two neo-conservatives later to play an important role in formulation of Bush Administration Pentagon policy in the Middle East, authored a paper for then-newly-elected Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. That advisory paper, 'A Clean Break: a New Strategy for Securing the Realm,' called on Netanyahu to make a 'clean break from the peace process.' They also called on Netanyahu to strengthen Israel's defenses to better confront Syria and Iraq, and to go after Iran as the prop of Syria. More than a year before President Bush declared Operation Shock and Awe against Iraq, he made his now infamous January 2002 State of the Union address to Congress in which he labelled Iran, along with Iraq and North Korea, as the 'Axis of Evil' trio. This was well before anyone in Teheran was even considering establishing an oil bourse to trade oil in various currencies. The argument by those who believe that the Teheran Oil Bourse would be the casus belli, the trigger pushing Washington down the road to potential thermonuclear annihilation of Iran, seems to rest on the claim that by openly trading oil to other nations or buyers in Euros, Teheran would set into motion a chain of events in which nation after nation, buyer after buyer, would line up to buy oil no longer in US dollars but in Euros. That in turn, so goes the argument, would lead to a panic selling of dollars on world foreign exchange markets and a collapse of the role of the dollar as reserve currency, one of the 'pillars of Empire.' Basta! There goes the American Century down the tubes with the onset of the Teheran Oil Bourse.Reality is a little different. Some background considerations That argument fails to convince for a number of reasons. First, in the case of at least one of the Oil Bourse theory writers, their argument is based on a misunderstanding of the process which I described in my book, A Century of War, regarding the creation in 1974 of 'petrodollar recycling' in the wake of the orchestrated 400% OPEC oil price hike, a process with which then-US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was deeply involved. The dollar then did not become a 'petrodollar' although Kissinger spoke about the process of 'recycling petrodollars.' Instead what he referred to was the initiation of a new phase of US global hegemony in which the 'petrodollar' export earnings of OPEC oil lands would be recycled into the hands of the major New York and London banks and re-lent in form of dollar loans to oil deficit countries like Brazil or Argentina, creating what soon came to be known as he Latin American Debt Crisis. The dollar at that time had been a fiat currency since August 1971 when President Richard Nixon first abrogated the Bretton Woods Treaty and refused to redeem US dollars held by foreign central banks for gold bullion. The dollar floated against other major currencies, falling more or less until it was revived by the turbo change of the 1973-4 oil price shock. What the 1973 oil shock achieved for the sagging dollar was a sudden injection of global demand from nations confronted with 400% higher oil import bills. At that time, by postwar convention and convenience, as the dollar was the only reserve currency held around the world other than gold, oil was priced by all OPEC members in dollars as a practical exigency. With the 400% price rise, nations such as France, Germany, Japan and other importers suddenly found reason to try to buy their oil directly in their own currencies-French Franc, German Deutschemarks or Japanese Yen-in order to lessen the pressure on their rapidly declining reserves of trade dollars. The US Treasury and Pentagon made certain that did not happen, partly with some Kissinger secret diplomacy, bullying threats, and a whopping big US military agreement with the key OPEC producer,
Re: [political-research] No, the Iran Oil Bourse is not a casus belli.
Extracting the two key paragraphs from this excellent analysis: [begin quote] In 1996, Richard Perle and Douglas Feith, two neo-conservatives later to play an important role in formulation of Bush Administration Pentagon policy in the Middle East, authored a paper for then-newly-elected Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. That advisory paper, A Clean Break: a New Strategy for Securing the Realm, called on Netanyahu to make a clean break from the peace process. They also called on Netanyahu to strengthen Israels defenses to better confront Syria and Iraq, and to go after Iran as the prop of Syria. More than a year before President Bush declared Operation Shock and Awe against Iraq, he made his now infamous January 2002 State of the Union address to Congress in which he labelled Iran, along with Iraq and North Korea, as the Axis of Evil trio. This was well before anyone in Teheran was even considering establishing an oil bourse to trade oil in various currencies. [end quote] The neocons, and their friends in the mainstream and alternative media (like Greg Palast), have concocted a wide array of bullshit explanations to direct attention away from the real drivers and motives behind the the Clash of Civilizations and the Global War on Terror. Quite a few gullible and poorly informed folks have fallen for this nonsense -- but not F. William Engdahl. To understand what is going on, simply review neoconservative policy and propaganda channels from the early 1970s to the present, especially Commentary. Figuring this stuff out *should* be a no-brainer, but I suppose not everyone was privileged to have some neocons as classmates. Vigilius Haufniensis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticlecode=%20EN20060310articleId=2076 No, the Iran Oil Bourse is not a casus belli by F. William Engdahl Global Research, March 10, 2006 A number of writings have recently appeared with the thesis that the announced plans of the Teheran government to institute a Teheran Oil Bourse, perhaps as early as this month, is the real hidden reason behind the evident march to war on Iran from the Anglo-American powers. The thesis is in our opinion mistaken for many reasons, not the least, that war on Iran has been in planning since the 1990s, as an contacted through his website, www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net.
[political-research] Re: [Jakes_Political_War_Room] 2001 CNN Video: NO PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON
You wrote: If a aluminium cylinder filled will gas and people can punch a hole through 3 reinforced concrete walls why would the Pentagon need to develop bunker busters Your logic displays the common logical fallacy known as a non sequitur. What do aluminum cyllinders carrying thousands of gallons of jet fuel smashing at over 600 mph and smashing into a ground-level building have to do with bunker busters, designed for deep earth penetration? With your logic, why would a small piece of lead fired from a weapon put a hole in anything? And sad to say, your lack of logical analysis doesn't entitle me to any of your juvennile accusations. The differences in our credibility is visible to all. Ben Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ya thats what I figured If someone gets to this point in life and sees invisable airplanes there is no hope for them There was no airplabe that hit the pentagon thats a fact albert and you and the invisible thousands are either fools , or liars or agents of the NWO every shred of evidence PROVES no plane hit so take your pick Al fool. liar or NWO stooge at any rate nothing you say has any credibility and is a waste of time you are useless ps my final proof If a aluminium cylinder filled will gas and people can punch a hole through 3 reinforced concrete walls why would the Pentagon need to develop bunker busters you are an idiot Albert Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As you seem unable to follow the logic of the conversation, the EVENT I referred to was the plane hitting the pent-a-gone. You seem to think that if you didn't see it on CBS, it didn't happen. Using your logic, I can assume that you would argue that no plane crashed at Lockerbie, either. Your logic points up the significance of the impact of the lack of news coverage in the US. Ben Noyes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What event? another propagandist telling lies What event was seen by thousands??? and if there were thousands, why is the videos kept locked away? Thousands were mind controlled and you are a liar Albert Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You seem to miss the obvious fact that the pentagon is located at the intersection of a number of very busy highways -- a traffic mess called the 'mixing bowl' in the DC area -- and that thousands of people saw the event. John Stroebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From another poster, this was included in several links It is the report by CNN the afternoon of Sept 11, 2001. This was shown ONCE, then PULLED by CNN. NO EVIDENCE OF A PLANE HAVING HIT THE PENTAGON See it yourself. For you Bush 911 Report supporters, watch it and THEN call the doubters conspiracy theorists http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.tv/altnews.php -- ... But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. ***U.S. Declaration of Independence*** - Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta. Keep the faith BAN Reasearch stuff an stuff BaNoyes.tripod.com - No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. - Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos. Keep the faith BAN Reasearch stuff an stuff BaNoyes.tripod.com - Never miss an email again! Yahoo! Toolbar alerts you the instant new Mail arrives. Check it out. - Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
[political-research] Theft is forever
Mr. Olmert said that the refugee problem was caused by the Arab attack on Israel in 1948 and called it a moral issue of the highest standard. He said: I will not agree to accept any kind of Israeli responsibility for the refugees. Full stop. Then he added: I dont think we should accept any kind of responsibility for the creation of this problem. Full stop. He said the return of even one Palestinian refugee to Israel was out of the question. from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/31/world/middleeast/31mideast.html - Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
Re: [political-research] Re: CNN Video: NO PLANE HIT THE PENTAGON
8) The nose of the plane just barely jutted out into A/E Drive (the street that runs around the inside of the building). It made a perfectly round, 5-foot hole in the wall. There was one set of landing gear (presumably from the nose) out in A/E Drive. But most of the plane's skin was in pieces not much bigger than a piece of notebook paper. (From a letter by an employee of the Pentagon) http://www.humanunderground.com/11september/comments-general.html 9) I thought it was a terrorist bomb. . . .But then I saw the landing gear. It was on the ground in the alley between the B and C rings. When I saw it there, not only did I realize an airplane had struck the Pentagon but it was clear that the plane had come through the E, D, and C buildings to get there. (Paul K. Carlton, Jr., U.S. Air Force surgeon general, quoted by Dean Murphy, September 11: An Oral History, p. 216 10) Rep. Ted Tiahrt wrote: In the C and B rings the plane had punched a hole you could a drive a truck around in, and I saw an airplane tire. It made it very real. http://wichita.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2002/09/09/story1.html 11) When LTC Victor Correa went back inside the Pentagon, he found out what caused the horrific attack he survived earlier that morning; he saw the nose cone and the landing gear of the airliner. http://www.army.mil/usar/news/2002/09-11anniv/herotellsall.html Rosalee Grable [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Flight 77, the one that theoretically hit the pentagon, never even took off. It was cancelled at least a week in advance, or else it would have been originally listed in the BTS database. http://iinet.net.au/~holmgren/1177.html DID AA 77 REALLY HIT THE PENTAGON ? EYEWITNESS ACCOUNTS EXAMINED. First published June 2002. Posted on this site with minor corrections, January 2005 http://members.iinet.net.au/~holmgren/witness.html Physical and Mathematical Analysis of the Pentagon Crash http://www.serendipity.li/wot/holmgren/ INTRODUCTION PART 1. PLANE SPECIFICATIONS PART 2. ESTIMATIONS OF HOLE DIMENSIONS PART 3. ENTRY IMPACT CALCULATIONS AT 90 DEGREE FUSELAGE ANGLE PART 4. EXPLOSION ANALYSIS AT 90 DEGREE FUSELAGE ANGLE PART 5. ENTRY CALCULATIONS - FUSELAGE AT 45 DEGREES PART 6. FUEL LOAD ANALYSIS. PART 7. WERE THE LAWS OF PHYSICS DIFFERENT ON SEPT 11? PART 8. BUT WRECKAGE WAS FOUND. PART 9. DNA TESTING PART 10. THE HOLE IN THE OTHER SIDE OF THE WALL PART 11. WHAT ABOUT THE EYEWITNESSES? SUMMARY Albert Underwood wrote: It should be a relatively simple matter for you to use the technique described by Sean McBride on this website to do a semantic search and find the dead relatives from the flight. John Stroebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hey, CNN reported it, not ME pal. But let me ask, where can I find the names and testimony of 'thousands' of people who saw something clearly enough to identify it as a 757 while driving their cars or as passengers? Or is that one of our newest 'urban legends'? On 3/30/07, Albert Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You seem to miss the obvious fact that the pentagon is located at the intersection of a number of very busy highways -- a traffic mess called the 'mixing bowl' in the DC area -- and that thousands of people saw the event. John Stroebel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From another poster, this was included in several links It is the report by CNN the afternoon of Sept 11, 2001. This was shown ONCE, then PULLED by CNN. NO EVIDENCE OF A PLANE HAVING HIT THE PENTAGON See it yourself. For you Bush 911 Report supporters, watch it and THEN call the doubters conspiracy theorists http://www.surfingtheapocalypse.tv/altnews.php -- ... But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. ***U.S. Declaration of Independence*** - Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta. -- ... But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. ***U.S. Declaration of Independence*** - Don't be
