In my previous diary entry entitled Conspiracy 101. I laid out very simply the barebones of a conspiracy. What it entails i.e. more than one person involved in a crime.
I then very simply showed that profiling for a crime that involves a conspiracy is different then that for a crime by a single person.
Motive for crimes involving conspiracy especially conspiracy to murder vary; However, political assassination is very rarely the work of lone nuts. Certainly the ones that get thwarted are. The ones that are effective involve a conspiracy to stand down the forces usually responsible for protecting the leader. Often in foreign countries these palace guards have been trained at American facilities by the CIA. Political assassination is easy if you own the palace guard. We are putting these measures in place this very instant in Iraq. Allawi a known CIA asset is training the security for the new government. This same pattern is seen over and over, modus operendi. Of course here the politician is some buildings and the weapon some airplanes.
The prosecution does not have to prove motive. That said juries like to see it, and, in the case of 9-11, such a heinous act, even for the fascist regime of the CIA, and their tool/patsy Bush and the "neocons," its hard to imagine anyone doing this. We need, I believe, a strong and clear motive or set of motives for the jury of our peers to review.
I am writing this because these were my thought procesess when I first became convinced beyond just gut level that the US Government in some capacity is guilty for 9-11.
The crime by its very nature is a conspiracy, more than one hijacker, a global network, sleeper cells, compartmentalisation
The crime could not have been perpetrated if the National Defense, NORAD followed SOP. Even the Whitewash Commission for 9-11 has concluded that 9-11 was preventable.
These two things reek of an inside job. But why?
MOTIVE:
Mistakes
In his presentation, Matthew Simmons, CEO of Simmons and Company International, the world's largest investment bank reeled off a litany of "mistakes" made by the energy industry over decades. He described some of these mistakes as:
- Demand was never understood properly;
- Supply was merely aspiration (not actual reality)
- Decline curves became waterfalls
- We didn't have enough rigs (infrastructure)
- There was little fuel substitution
- There were few technology gains
Simmons used last year's Northeast US blackout to highlight some of the counter-productive reactions that had appeared during its worst moments. These, he suggested, paralleled the global rationale that had been brought to bear on current energy policy. "People were idling their car engines just to charge their cell phones. We couldn't refine or pump gas. You need electricity to do that."
Simmons described these mistakes as cascading and compounding over time and suggested that the underlying cause of all of them was the inherent assumption pushed by the financial markets that growth could possibly be infinite when nothing else in the physical universe is; when no organism or species has ever avoided the cycle of growth, maturity and decline that governs the natural world. He chided that financial analysts on today's markets remember the false alarms about shortages in the 1980s and said that those crises (which never materialized), where many lost jobs by predicting permanent shortages had failed to understand that they were describing and reacting to political events rather than geologic ones. Many in the markets, he said, were still saying to themselves, "That's never going to happen to me again."
He likened them to the French Army which in 1940, having spent hundreds of millions to build the Maginot Line of fortresses, had just become ready to fight World War I on the eve of World War II.
We know how that turned out.
The Bill Collector Calls: German Conference on Peak Energy: M.Rupert
Something to do with Enron and Oil, and whole lot of creative reporting and accounting. Wow and guess what this entire administration is heavily divested in ????? OIL! and War!
The massive effect this will have on the economy is being hidden from the general public. The urgency is being played down. Its being blamed again on the alledged perps of 9-11 who are held without access to lawyers by known torurers in secret prisons. Why? not only is it Un American, its a shitty way to get to the truth. Inquisitions do not work. Unless they are exceedingly bloody. Plus they are illegal and if we are preparing to bring the accused to trial no one will believe the result after we know it has been attained through coercion, even if that stink is on it, the evidence is inadmissable.
Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia's promise to increase production to meet US and world economic needs was the hot topic. Much discussion and hard data was devoted to the fact that Ghawar, the largest field in the world, along with all of Saudi Arabia's other large fields, was old and tired. In recent years both water injection and so-called "bottle-brush" drilling have been employed to maintain production and both of these techniques tend to accelerate decline and damage the reservoirs. They are desperate measures.
With bottle brush drilling, a shaft is drilled horizontally over long distances with a number of brush-like openings. As water is forced under pressure into the reservoir, the oil is forced upwards toward the well heads and extraction is thereby increased. However, when the water table hits the horizontal shaft, often without warning, the whole field is virtually dead and production immediately drops off to almost nothing. This comes as surprise in most cases. As several at the conference noted, this is exactly what had already happened in Oman, Syria and Yemen.
As William Kennedy, a UK observer at the conference noted afterwards, "For the record, Ghawar's ultimate recoverable reserves in 1975 were estimated at 60 billion barrels - by Exxon, Mobil, Texaco and Chevron. It had produced 55 billion barrels up to the end of 2003 and is still producing at 1.8 billion per annum. That shows you how close it might be to the end. When Ghawar dies, the world is officially in decline."
No one, not even from the major oil companies or the economic camp rose to defend Saudi Arabia's claim that it could increase production rapidly. The BBC's Adam Porter nailed the International Energy Agency's chief economist Faith Birol over his confident assertion that there was still plenty of oil.
In public, Mr Birol denied that supply would not be able to meet rising demand, especially from the buoyant economies in the USA, China and India.
But after his speech he seemed to change his tune.
"For the time being there is no spare capacity. But we expect demand to increase by the fourth quarter (of the year) by three million barrels a day."
He pinned his hopes for an increase in production squarely on troubled Saudi Arabia. "If Saudi does not increase supply by 3 million barrels a day by the end of the year we will face, how can I say this, it will be very difficult. We will have difficult times. They must invest."
Can Saudi deliver?
But even Mr Birol admitted that Saudi production was "about flat".
Three million extra barrels a day would mean a huge 30% leap in output in just a few months.
When BBC News Online followed up by asking if this giant increase in production was actually possible rather than simply a desire he refused to answer. "You are from the press? This is not for you. This is not for the press." [F - BBC Porter]
Terrorism or lack of supply? Real lack of supply as in can fall off rapidly, just like in the other countries where the same drilling methods have been applied. hmmm ... We haven't heard Move On discuss this supply problem the world's top investment banker Mathew Simmons is talking about. We haven't even seen a real hew and cry to see the notes of Cheney's Energy commission.
What we hear is a bunch of mumbo jumbo about Hydrogen fuel cells and LNG both pie in the sky.
We hear that Europe will need Russian NG to get through the Winter.
Hmmm ... perhaps the Caspian reserves of NG and Oil and the pipelines needed to deliver them have something to do with the invasion of almost the entire Caspian region by hook or by crook of the US government.
Perhaps the people using terrorism to get our kids to kill for them throughout Central Asia are the ones responsible for the terrorism.
On 11-02-01 Prof. Michel Chossudovsky of the University of Ottawa produces proof from the Congressional Record that the Islamic nation that aided Osama bin Laden was Pakistan. There is evidence that the CIA used Pakistani intelligence to fund the attacks on Americans in order to start the war and win public support.