David McGowan, October 12, 2004
It has become apparent that many people have
misinterpreted my 'Peak Oil' rants. I know this because I get e-mail with
messages like, "thanks for giving me hope," and "thanks for changing my view
of the future." I am sorry to have to report here that the newfound optimism
of some of my readers is entirely unwarranted. After reviewing my past
writings, I realize that the fault for this misunderstanding lies with me,
since I haven't done a very good job of articulating exactly what my
position is.
This, my friends, is the harsh reality, so pay very close attention: the
fact that 'Peak Oil' is an entirely manufactured construct does not mean
that the doomsday scenarios painted by the 'Peak' crowd will therefore not
become our new reality. This is not just another scam to further pad the
pockets of the oil industry and other financial elites. The stakes are much
higher than that. Much higher.
In order to clarify my position on 'Peak Oil,' it would be instructive to
briefly review the areas of agreement, and the areas of disagreement, that I
have with those who are selling the scam.
The Peakers claim that 'Peak Oil' is the single most important issue that we
are facing today. I agree with that assessment (but not because 'Peak Oil'
is a valid concept).
The Peakers claim that much of America's military might has been directed in
recent years at conquering the key oil and gas producing regions of the
world. And that is obviously quite true. Central Asia and Iraq have been
seized, Venezuela has suffered through constant meddling by the CIA, the
Sudan has been targeted for a future assault, and Saudi Arabia and Iran have
been subjected to saber rattling.
But the Peakers also claim that these military ventures have been motivated
by America's desire to seize what will soon be the last drops of the world's
precious reserves of oil -- and that is entirely untrue.
The Peakers claim that we will very soon be facing a world where chaos
reigns supreme -- a world of war, famine and death on a scale unknown in
recorded human history. And that does, in fact, appear to be the case. And
we're not talking about the distant future here, folks; we're talking about
the very near future.
But the Peakers also claim that this global "die off" will be a regrettable,
but quite natural, and entirely unavoidable, consequence of the world's oil
taps running dry. And that is the really big lie. That is the lie that will
very soon be used to rationalize the killing off of hundreds of millions,
possibly billions, of the world's people. There are, you see, simply too
many people in the world who, by merely being alive, are standing in the way
of the aspirations of the global elite.
The people that the 'Peak Oil' pitchmen are fronting for are deadly serious
about selling 'Peak Oil' to the masses -- and not just in theoretical terms,
as a cynical ploy to raise prices and increase profits. No, it has become
clear that the real goal is to actually cut off most of the world's oil
supplies under the ruse that the oil simply no longer exists. The desired
result is massive social unrest, widespread famine, and endless war. The
majority of the world's people will not survive. Those that do will find
themselves living under the overtly authoritarian form of rule that will
quickly be deemed necessary to restore order. And if you think that we here
in America are exempt, you are sadly mistaken.
In order to pull off this stunt, all the world's major oil producing regions
must be solidly under the control of the U.S. and it's co-conspirators,
otherwise known as 'allies.' In other words, the puppet-masters have to
control all the major oil taps, so that they have complete control over the
flow of oil -- or lack of it. And that, in a nutshell, is the real reason
for America's recent military ventures. The goal, you see, is not to steal
Iraq's oil, or the oil in the 'Stans, or in the Sudan, or in Venezuela, or
anywhere else. We don't want to take their oil, because the truth is that we
don't really need it (http://www.oilandgasreporter.com/stories/090101/cov_opinions.shtml).
What we want to do is sit on the taps so no one else can get to the oil.
The Peakers have claimed that the Central Asian adventure - launched with
the invasion of Afghanistan, but certainly not limited to Afghanistan - has
largely been a bust. We have all heard the spin: the hoped-for reserves
aren't there, what has been found can't be extracted economically, the grand
plan simply didn't pan out, yadda, yadda, yadda.
Frankly, I find all of that a little hard to believe. After all, hasn't
Central Asia been the subject of intense interest and study by geologists
and the petroleum industry for the last century or so? You would think that
the lords of oil were operating on more than just a hunch when they drafted
this gameplan. And I couldn't help noticing that the United States has
established a massive military presence in the area, and it looks very much
like it was designed to be a permanent military presence. If the oil and gas
aren't there, then what exactly is it that our troops are standing guard
over?
At least one researcher has doggedly claimed that the Central Asian and
Middle Eastern military ventures are but a prelude to military
confrontations with Russia and China. But that hardly seems to be the case.
It does not appear as though there is any urgent need for 'regime change' in
Russia or China, since the West seems to already have 'friendly' regimes in
place in both countries. And I have to add here that if the ruling regimes
of Russia and China really are enemies of the United States, they will
undoubtedly go down in history as the stupidest enemies of all time for
watching approvingly as the United States entrenched its military machine in
their backyards on the most transparent of pretexts.
Contrary to conventional wisdom, I believe that the Central Asian adventure
has been wildly successful. True, the West hasn't reaped the bounty of the
region's oil and gas reserves -- but I don't think that was ever the goal.
To the contrary, I think the U.S. has done exactly what it set out to do:
deny anyone else the opportunity - by force if necessary, and it will become
necessary - to exploit the area's resources.
Also contrary to conventional wisdom, I believe that the Iraq adventure has
also been successful. Again, the goal was not to steal Iraqi oil; the goal
was to shut down or severely limit the flow of Iraqi oil, and that goal has
obviously been accomplished. Indeed, some reports have held that American
troops (and American mercenaries) are responsible for at least some of the
pipeline bombings and other attacks on the Iraqi oil infrastructure.
Interestingly, Michael Ruppert began one of his recent "Peak is the Word"
rants with an ominous quote attributed to an "Anonymous Middle Eastern
Participant at the Third Conference of the Association for the Study of Peak
Oil and Gas - Berlin, May 2004." The quote, which Ruppert presents without
comment, reads as follows:
The one thing that every Middle Eastern leader, manager,
and planner who dreams of holding his country together fears now, is that
there will be a widespread uprising, inspired by the perceived victory
against Spain after Madrid, and Spain's withdrawal from Iraq, that it
might prompt much of the Muslim world to start attacking oil facilities
everywhere. This is the way they see that has worked to defeat the West
and to avenge their grievances. May God help us all if that happens.
(http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/062104_berlin_peak.html)
This statement, if taken literally, is patently absurd --
beginning with the Bill O'Reillyesque claim that the 'terr'ists' somehow
scored a victory in Spain, and continuing through the astounding leap of
faith required to equate manufactured attacks on commuter trains to
widespread attacks on oil facilities. The only way that the uncredited
statement makes any sense at all is as a tip-off that the CIA's future
playbook is packed with false-flag terr'ist operations directed at critical
oil facilities -- especially in countries that haven't yet been convinced
that their vast oil reserves don't really exist.
In order to carry out the 'Peak Oil' agenda, the powers-that-be need to have
all the major oil producers on board. Some of them have been on board all
along. Some have to be recruited through military force (Iraq, for example).
Some will be compelled to join the team through covert operations (e.g.,
Venezuela). And some are being brought on board through threats,
intimidation, and saber rattling.
The two most sought after recruits, of course, are Russia and Saudi Arabia,
since they are the world's two top oil producing nations. As of this past
April, Saudi Arabia apparently hadn't yet received the latest memos on
'Peak.' Much to the consternation of Ruppert and his handlers, Saudi
officials announced on April 28 that the Kingdom's estimate of recoverable
reserves had nearly quintupled! (The article below says "tripled,"
but the math isn't that hard to do.)
Saudi Oil Is Secure and Plentiful, Say Officials
Tim Kennedy, Arab News
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6§ion=0&article=44011&d=29&m=4&y=2004
WASHINGTON, 29 April 2004 - Officials from Saudi
Arabia's oil industry and the international petroleum organizations
shocked a gathering of foreign policy experts in Washington yesterday with
an announcement that the Kingdom's previous estimate of 261 billion
barrels of recoverable petroleum has now more than tripled, to 1.2
trillion barrels.
Additionally, Saudi Arabia's key oil and finance
ministers assured the audience - which included US Federal Reserve
Chairman Alan Greenspan - that the Kingdom has the capability to quickly
double its oil output and sustain such a production surge for as long as
50 years.
[...]
"Saudi Arabia now has 1.2 trillion barrels of estimated
reserve. This estimate is very conservative. Our analysis gives us reason
to be very optimistic. We are continuing to discover new resources, and we
are using new technologies to extract even more oil from existing
reserves," the minister said.
Naimi said Saudi Arabia is committed to sustaining the
average price of $25 per barrel set by the Organization of the Petroleum
Exporting Countries. He said prices should never increase to more than $28
or drop under $22.
[...]
"Saudi Arabia's vast oil reserves are certainly there,"
Naimi added. "None of these reserves requires advanced recovery
techniques. We have more than sufficient reserves to increase output. If
required, we can increase output from 10.5 million barrels a day to 12 -
15 million barrels a day. And we can sustain this increased output for 50
years or more. There will be no shortage of oil for the next 50 years.
Perhaps much longer."
1 -
2 -
3 -
4