Factors of the conspiracy that depended on pure dumb luck

[1337m4n]

Gosh, it sure seems like the Evil Bad Guys depended on dumb luck for a lot of things. Help me list them.

Here's what I have so far:


WTC-7: The only reason that the Evil Bad Guys even had an alibi for WTC-7's demolition was that it was severely damaged by debris from one of the nearby Towers. It was by pure dumb luck that this debris caused enough damage and fires to create an alibi convincing enough to most engineers. What would the Evil Bad Guys have done if the debris had caused little or no damage?

The firefighters didn't speak out for fear of losing their pensions or whatever: It was by pure dumb luck that EVERY SINGLE FDNY FIREFIGHTER turned out to be a coward. What would the Evil Bad Guys have done if even one of the FDNY firefighters had turned out to be brave enough to risk his pension?

NOC Flight Path: The Evil Bad Guys needed to plant evidence such as downed light poles, plane parts, etc. It was by pure dumb luck that not one single eyewitness saw this evidence being planted. What would the Evil Bad Guys have done if even one person had gotten a peek at the Evil Bad Guys cutting down light poles and planting truckloads of plane parts on the Pentagon lawn in the middle of the night?



Please contribute by adding your own examples of just how darned lucky the Evil Bad Guys are.

[ozeco41]

WTC 1 & 2 - it was pure luck that had two planes hit two buildings spot on the only floors where demolition charges were installed.

[roundhead]

Pure dumb luck........


That all 4 hijacked planes captains werent able to flip on the highjack code, even though it only takes an instant.


that a guy who couldnt even fly a Cessna a very short time before 9/11 could fly an airliner at 30+ thousand feet for hundreds of miles and fly it into a building at ground level.

That a high school physics teacher had to get the NIST to admit that wtc7 came down(at least partially)in free fall. Something all those mighty engineers seem to have missed studying it for 7 years....



that the guy supposedly behind the attacks changed his mind about claiming responsibility(he didnt on video initially)then decided months later to take full blame...what a thoughtful terrorist

I could post scores more, but you get the point.

[ozeco41]

Pure dumb luck........


That all 4 hijacked planes captains werent able to flip on the highjack code, even though it only takes an instant.


that a guy who couldnt even fly a Cessna a very short time before 9/11 could fly an airliner at 30+ feet fot hundreds of miles and fly it into a building at ground level.

That a high school physics teacher had to get the NIST to admit that wtc7 came down(at least partially)in free fall. Something all those mighty engineers seem to have missed studying it for 7 years....



that the guy supposedly behind the attacks changed his mind about claiming responsibility(he didnt on video initially)then decided months later to take full blame...what a thoughtful terrorist

I could post scores more, but you get the point.
..actually no!

The OP is a parody not a parroty.

[mark4mark]

By pure dumb luck the perps implemented silent explosives that the scores of thousands of WTC office workers, security guards and others didn't see installed.

And how lucky was it that the collapses-although the product of invisible, silent explosives-were initiated at the point of plane impacts.

Or that the explosives were installed after the impacts as quickly as they were.

And that the explosives in the cores of both wtc 1 and 2 managed to a allow both inner structures to stand some moments after the floors and perimeter columns fell.

How very lucky...

[ozeco41]

...Or that the explosives were installed after the impacts as quickly as they were.....
By suicide workers wearing fireproof suits :)

[roundhead]

By pure dumb luck the perps implemented silent explosives that the scores of thousands of WTC office workers, security guards and others didn't see installed.

And how lucky was it that the collapses-although the product of invisible, silent explosives-were initiated at the point of plane impacts.

Or that the explosives were installed after the impacts as quickly as they were.

And that the explosives in the cores of both wtc 1 and 2 managed to a allow both inner structures to stand some moments after the floors and perimeter columns fell.

How very lucky...


How lucky that the roof antenna(attached to the core of the building, which suffered little if any damage)dropped before anything else.

Its nice the big bad fire decided to weaken the massive core enough that it gave away like spagetti

[WildCat]

Pure dumb luck that the only people who saw through the whole nefarious plot were mentally ill, incompetent conspiracy kooks.

[kookbreaker]

Pure dumb luck that the first time Thermite, err Thermate, errr...magic Nanothermite was ever used to demolish a building and it worked!

[johnny karate]

The firefighters didn't speak out for fear of losing their pensions or whatever: It was by pure dumb luck that EVERY SINGLE FDNY FIREFIGHTER turned out to be a coward. What would the Evil Bad Guys have done if even one of the FDNY firefighters had turned out to be brave enough to risk his pension?

A near statistical impossibility to which our good buddy roundhead personally subscribes (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164), possibly out of a startling lack of rational thought, or just an irrational contempt for firefighters.

Also applies to the world's population of structural engineers, investigative journalists, and law enforcement officials. I'm sure roundhead would gladly characterize all of them as cowards, too.

[TK0001]

What amazing luck that the same evildoers with unlimited funds and resources who executed the 9/11 attacks didn't get to people like Alex Jones or Dylan Avery before they exposed the entire operation via youtube.

[roundhead]

Pure dumb luck that the first time Thermite, err Thermate, errr...magic Nanothermite was ever used to demolish a building and it worked!


Pure dumb luck...the first time an office fire was ever used to demolish a steel framed building

[roundhead]

What amazing luck that the same evildoers with unlimited funds and resources who executed the 9/11 attacks didn't get to people like Alex Jones or Dylan Avery before they exposed the entire operation via youtube.

why spank your own kids

[beachnut]

Pure dumb luck........
911Truth spews lies, hearsay, and fantasy; pure dumb luck you lack enough knowledge on a broad range of topic to fall for the fraud of 911Truth.
That all 4 hijacked planes captains werent able to flip on the highjack code, even though it only takes an instant.
The 8 pilots were killed first before they could set the code, it is not instant they have to set it, but I am a pilot and understand while warm blood runs down my chest from a cutthroat I may not be able to set the code in the transponder. But you are such a big man you could! Right! How pathetic; you have zero knowledge on this.
that a guy who couldnt even fly a Cessna a very short time before 9/11 could fly an airliner at 30+ thousand feet for hundreds of miles and fly it into a building at ground level.
A kid could fly a 757/767 into a building with ZERO training. Only the p4t expert pilots can’t hit buildings in the safety of a simulator.

Hani was not allowed to rent until further flight, but the runway he was landing on was 40 feet wide, hit target over 70 feet tall and over 900 feet wide. Ooops you did not do your research again! He also had a commercial license to fly and he studied the 757! Too bad you lost this knowledge test!
That a high school physics teacher had to get the NIST to admit that wtc7 came down(at least partially)in free fall. Something all those mighty engineers seem to have missed studying it for 7 years....
WTC7 took much more time than freefall to collapse and supporting the delusional rant of the HS physics teacher is proof you lack the skills in physics to understand how stupid his ideas are.

that the guy supposedly behind the attacks changed his mind about claiming responsibility(he didnt on video initially)then decided months later to take full blame...what a thoughtful terrorist
UBL said he would kill us, you must of missed that too in the 90s.

I could post scores more, but you get the point.
You never post evidence you post hearsay and opinions that have failed for over 7 years.

[TK0001]

Pure dumb luck...the first time an office fire was ever used to demolish a steel framed building

Whoops, forgot about those pesky passenger jets again. See, what happened was they flew into the buildings. That made really big holes and damage and stuff. It was on the news and everything. Surprised you missed it.

[roundhead]

911Truth spews lies, hearsay, and fantasy; pure dumb luck you lack enough knowledge on a broad range of topic to fall for the fraud of 911Truth.

The 8 pilots were killed first before they could set the code, it is not instant they have to set it, but I am a pilot and understand while warm blood runs down my chest from a cutthroat I may not be able to set the code in the transponder. But you are such a big man you could! Right! How pathetic; you have zero knowledge on this.

A kid could fly a 757/767 into a building with ZERO training. Only the p4t expert pilots can’t hit buildings in the safety of a simulator.

Hani was not allowed to rent until further flight, but the runway he was landing on was 40 feet wide, hit target over 70 feet tall and over 900 feet wide. Ooops you did not do your research again! He also had a commercial license to fly and he studied the 757! Too bad you lost this knowledge test!

WTC7 took much more time than freefall to collapse and supporting the delusional rant of the HS physics teacher is proof you lack the skills in physics to understand how stupid his ideas are.


UBL said he would kill us, you must of missed that too in the 90s.


You never post evidence you post hearsay and opinions that have failed for over 7 years.


I need to remind myself why i havent put you on ignore.........

Thanks for letting me know all the pilots had their throats slashed instantly, not even fending off the evil box cutter attack with their hands, and scuffling.And taking the 2 seconds to set the highjack code and possibly save other lives. Unlike you, i dont think the pilots were cowards.

Your slurping ideas are for placement in a garbage can, nowhere else.

How can you type that stuff and believe it with a straight face, if you are indeed blessed with more than an amoeba like amount of cranial matter??

[twinstead]

So you have to admit a lot could have gone wrong with the government's evil plot, right Roundhead? I mean, they even got it right that all of the intrepid truth seekers like yourself who see through their nefarious plans would be so impotent that 8 years later they couldn't even get their theories off the internet, more less get anywhere toward bringing these dastardly fiends to justice.

And they even knew that people like you would just get all arrogant and call us shills and idiots for daring to disagree with them, further alienating them from just about ANYBODY who could possibly EVER do anything about it.

Yup. NWO Omnipotence. It's the only answer.

[ozeco41]

What a shame - a potentially interesting PARODY thread derails into a PARROTY thread....

[johnny karate]

i dont think the pilots were cowards.

A classification you reserve for the FDNY (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164).

[JihadJane]

It was just pure dumb luck that US multi-billion defense and intelligence buffoons were so totally incompetent at a time when the US needed to do something very, very violent about its long-term energy "requirements".

[UNLoVedRebel]

Pure dumb luck that the only people who saw through the whole nefarious plot were mentally ill, incompetent conspiracy kooks.
Bingo.
It was just pure dumb luck that US multi-billion defense and intelligence buffoons were so totally incompetent at a time when the US needed to do something very, very violent about its long-term energy "requirements".

[beachnut]

I need to remind myself why i havent put you on ignore.........

Thanks for letting me know all the pilots had their throats slashed instantly, not even fending off the evil box cutter attack with their hands, and scuffling.And taking the 2 seconds to set the highjack code and possibly save other lives. Unlike you, i dont think the pilots were cowards.

Your slurping ideas are for placement in a garbage can, nowhere else.

How can you type that stuff and believe it with a straight face, if you are indeed blessed with more than an amoeba like amount of cranial matter??
Explain completely exactly what they have do to set the hijack code include diagrams or photos?

Explain useful conciseness of your throat being cut?

Explain how a pilot who faces forward can see someone cutting his throat with a knife?

Your complete lack of knowledge on flying and your inability to do real research, and your failed Hani statement are your problem and keep you from understanding 911

I see you are superman and terrorist can’t cut your throat! Is it some bias or bigotry that you think you are superior and your throat is immune to a sneak attack? Are you saying Arab terrorist are not man enough to kill you?

The pilots were dead! How do you set a hijack code after death, and why would you drop everything you are doing to set a hijack code when someone is killing you with a knife? A surprise attack code? Why are you making up stupid stuff about 911? Does it take great skill to make up stupid stuff like you do on 911?

Hani can’t fly? LOL, a kid can fly without training as well as Hani did! He hit the Pentagon, the largest office building around; it is hard to miss it! LOL (do you make this up yourself or just repeat stupid from the internet)

[roundhead]

Explain completely exactly what they have do to set the hijack code include diagrams or photos?

Explain useful conciseness of your throat being cut?

Explain how a pilot who faces forward can see someone cutting his throat with a knife?

Your complete lack of knowledge on flying and your inability to do real research, and your failed Hani statement are your problem and keep you from understanding 911

I see you are superman and terrorist can’t cut your throat! Is it some bias or bigotry that you think you are superior and your throat is immune to a sneak attack? Are you saying Arab terrorist are not man enough to kill you?

The pilots were dead! How do you set a hijack code after death, and why would you drop everything you are doing to set a hijack code when someone is killing you with a knife? A surprise attack code? Why are you making up stupid stuff about 911? Does it take great skill to make up stupid stuff like you do on 911?

Hani can’t fly? LOL, a kid can fly without training as well as Hani did! He hit the Pentagon, the largest office building around; it is hard to miss it! LOL (do you make this up yourself or just repeat stupid from the internet)


Hani took over the plane at 30, 00 feet hundreds of miles away from his target.

He couldnt even make turns and land a Cessna by himself while seeing the runway from a low altitude..

[beachnut]

Hani took over the plane at 30, 00 feet hundreds of miles away from his target.

He couldnt even make turns and land a Cessna by himself while seeing the runway from a low altitude..
Too bad the instructor who flew with Hani just before 911 said Hani would have no problem flying the 757 into the Pentagon. So your failed research is cherry picked tripe and you are wrong; again.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/77hanicntlandpentagoncan.jpg

What people don't tell people about Hani is the fact the runway he was trying to land a Cessna on was only 40 feet, and the skill to land on a 40 foot wide runway is much greater than crashing a 757 into a LARGE office building.

But who used logic!? NOT 911Truth believers.

Look at runway, 40 feet wide. Look at Pentagon, hundreds of feet wide. Why was Hani picked to hit the biggest target! Did Atta fly with Hani? Questions~!?

This is easy stuff, why are you so messed up with failed logic?

[roundhead]

Too bad the instructor who flew with Hani just before 911 said Hani would have no problem flying the 757 into the Pentagon. So your failed research is cherry picked tripe and you are wrong; again.
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/77hanicntlandpentagoncan.jpg

What people don't tell people about Hani is the fact the runway he was trying to land a Cessna on was only 40 feet, and the skill to land on a 40 foot wide runway is much greater than crashing a 757 into a LARGE office building.

But who used logic!? NOT 911Truth believers.

Look at runway, 40 feet wide. Look at Pentagon, hundreds of feet wide. Why was Hani picked to hit the biggest target! Did Atta fly with Hani? Questions~!?

This is easy stuff, why are you so messed up with failed logic?



What you an other slurpers seem to forget about that" Hani could fly it into the Pentagon quote" is its context.

That quote never said he could do it from hundreds of miles away, barely able to see the earth.And navigate the plane that far.

If he was directly above the Pentagon, i MIGHT believe that quote,(actually flying it into the roof) but as its referenced, it holds zero cranial worth.

[beachnut]

Hani took over the plane at 30, 00 feet hundreds of miles away from his target. ...
So you now understand a knife can cut a throat and a dead pilot cannot set the hijack code, or were you unable to research the transponder to tell us all how the code is set? You need help, I was a USAF instructor in large 4 engine 300,000 class jet aircraft; I could instruct you how to set the code if you wish, or I can get a 757/767 pilot to explain it for you/ to you.

OMG, Hani like all pilots studied the plane he was going to take. He also was trained on how to use the VOR/DME. By placing the frequency for the VOR in the NAV radio set to DCA; Hani had an arrow pointing to DCA right next to the Pentagon! Darn, don’t you hate posting your failed ideas to a trained pilot? So Hani could navigate with ease to within thousands of feet of the Pentagon; OH MY!

Questions?

[Corsair 115]

Thanks for letting me know all the pilots had their throats slashed instantly, not even fending off the evil box cutter attack with their hands, and scuffling. And taking the 2 seconds to set the highjack code and possibly save other lives.


See: FedEx Flight 705. Attempted takeover of the aircraft. No hijack code was sent. No emergency transmission was sent. The air traffic controllers had no idea what was going for several minutes as the aircraft made a number of violent maneuvers. It was not until after the crew had temporarily subdued the attacker that they were finally able to send an emergency call.

Reality does not conform to your Hollywood notions of how it should work.


It was just pure dumb luck that US multi-billion defense and intelligence buffoons were so totally incompetent at a time when the US needed to do something very, very violent about its long-term energy "requirements".


You keep making this energy claim and yet you keep failing to support it with actual evidence. Indeed, the data that is available works against your claims. For your claim to work one would have to ignore such data as the U.S. is importing 30% less oil from Iraq than it did in 2001; it imports more from Canada than it does Saudi Arabia; imports from Persian Gulf nations have fallen by one-quarter compared to 2001, even though overall consumption was up 8%; and so on.

[roundhead]

[Flight Academy] Staff members characterized Mr. Hanjour as polite, meek and very quiet. But most of all, the former employee said, they considered him a very bad pilot. "I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon," the former employee said. "He could not fly at all." [New York Times]


This guy could not solo a Cessna 150 ... and what I mean by solo is a pilot's first time out without anyone in the cockpit with him. It's the most simple, the most fundamental flying exercise one can engage in..."
WMV video download (588kB)


Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm, possibly one of the hijackers. Someone even knew how to turn off the transponder, a move that is considerably less than obvious. [Washington Post]


For a guy to just jump into the cockpit and fly like an ace is impossible - there is not one chance in a thousand," said [ex-commercial pilot Russ] Wittenberg, recalling that when he made the jump from Boeing 727's to the highly sophisticated computerized characteristics of the 737's through 767's it took him considerable time to feel comfortable flying. [LewisNews]


Israel: But wouldn't what they did require sophistication?

Dekkers: Yeah, they went to that school, I have heard the name, they call it a jet center for simulator training, there is no way - this is not my opinion. My opinion is I don't think it is possible. I have spoken to many captains from the airlines and they say there is no way what the planes did they could have done that. They changed altitude. They changed speed. They changed direction. They had to know about the equipment to do what they had to do and there is no way that could have been done.




Nothing supports your point, everything supports mine.

Everybody who knew anything about the guy KNEW he was a worthless know nothing.."wanne be pilot"

[beachnut]

What you an other slurpers seem to forget about that" Hani could fly it into the Pentagon quote" is its context.

That quote never said he could do it from hundreds of miles away, barely able to see the earth.And navigate the plane that far.

If he was directly above the Pentagon, i MIGHT believe that quote,(actually flying it into the roof) but as its referenced, it holds zero cranial worth.

The earth barely visible means what? 30,000 feet is only 5 miles up and that does not make the earth barely visible. What do you mean?

BTW, the Pentagon is a wide target from the side it is BIG! But if you choose to be ignorant of the facts continue posting as you have for years.

The profile view Hani had was giant, much easier to hit than a 40 foot runway on center line and driving down the runway on a vector to keep the plane on the runway.

Hani having to hit the Pentagon only requires hitting it, no one cares if he is lined up sideways, or crooked, or will run off the runway. All he has to do is hit it and he almost hit the ground first! So was Hani a crack pilot like p4t? Yes, but they missed the buildings in simulator attempts!

Hani flew like he was on meth and dope. He was only good enough to hit the largest target on the list. Or was the Capitol bigger.

Do you understand VOR/DME? Do you need help?


Hani flew like crap! But anyone without training could hit the Pentagon with a 757 save the incompetent 911Truth pilots like Wittenburg and Balsamo. Your failed opinions will get you nothing...


Hani showed no skill so the people who said he showed skills are pure dolts and did not research 911 past making failed comments like you.

[roundhead]

[Flight Academy] Staff members characterized Mr. Hanjour as polite, meek and very quiet. But most of all, the former employee said, they considered him a very bad pilot. "I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon," the former employee said. "He could not fly at all." [New York Times]


This guy could not solo a Cessna 150 ... and what I mean by solo is a pilot's first time out without anyone in the cockpit with him. It's the most simple, the most fundamental flying exercise one can engage in..."
WMV video download (588kB)


Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm, possibly one of the hijackers. Someone even knew how to turn off the transponder, a move that is considerably less than obvious. [Washington Post]


For a guy to just jump into the cockpit and fly like an ace is impossible - there is not one chance in a thousand," said [ex-commercial pilot Russ] Wittenberg, recalling that when he made the jump from Boeing 727's to the highly sophisticated computerized characteristics of the 737's through 767's it took him considerable time to feel comfortable flying. [LewisNews]


Israel: But wouldn't what they did require sophistication?

Dekkers: Yeah, they went to that school, I have heard the name, they call it a jet center for simulator training, there is no way - this is not my opinion. My opinion is I don't think it is possible. I have spoken to many captains from the airlines and they say there is no way what the planes did they could have done that. They changed altitude. They changed speed. They changed direction. They had to know about the equipment to do what they had to do and there is no way that could have been done.


You fail miserably, as you always do, when putting your arms around(and defending)one of the most nefarious lies in history.

You prove your lack of intellect every second you continue to cling to the OCT fable

[dtugg]

Pure dumb luck that nobody saw the plane fly over the Pentagon and that the people that figured out the "military deception" are fraudulent idiots and the people that believe them so stupid it is amazing that they can type.

[JamesB]

That quote never said he could do it from hundreds of miles away, barely able to see the earth.And navigate the plane that far.



Barely able to see the earth? What, was he flying from Neptune or something?

[TexasJack]

And yet others have this assessment:

Experienced pilot Giulio Bernacchia agrees:

In my opinion the official version of the fact is absolutely plausible, does not require exceptional circumstances, bending of any law of physics or superhuman capabilities. Like other (real pilots) have said, the manoeuvres required of the hijackers were within their (very limited) capabilities, they were performed without any degree of finesse and resulted in damage to the targets only after desperate overmanoeuvring of the planes. The hijackers took advantage of anything that might make their job easier, and decided not to rely on their low piloting skills. It is misleading to make people believe that the hijackers HAD to possess superior pilot skills to do what they did.

And as Marcel Bernard pointed out, the hijackers wouldn't have required all the skills of a regular pilot:

"Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said"

"They'd done their homework and they had what they needed," says a United Airlines pilot (name withheld on request), who has flown every model of Boeing from the 737 up. "Rudimentary knowledge and fearlessness."

"As everyone saw, their flying was sloppy and aggressive," says Michael (last name withheld), a pilot with several thousand hours in 757s and 767s. "Their skills and experience, or lack thereof, just weren't relevant."

"The hijackers required only the shallow understanding of the aircraft," agrees Ken Hertz, an airline pilot rated on the 757/767. "In much the same way that a person needn't be an experienced physician in order to perform CPR or set a broken bone."
http://911myths.com/html/flight_school_dropouts.html

[johnny karate]

It was just pure dumb luck that US multi-billion defense and intelligence buffoons were so totally incompetent at a time when the US needed to do something very, very violent about its long-term energy "requirements".

...which six years in Iraq have done nothing to change. I guess when whatever all-powerful cabal you imagine controls the world originally put together their unbelievably convoluted plot to steal oil from the Middle East, they forgot about the part where they actually steal the oil.

[roundhead]

Barely able to see the earth? What, was he flying from Neptune or something?


Clouds, definate terrain features(which he wouldnt be even remotely aware of)


You seem to be unaware this guy didnt slide into the seat directly above the Pentagon and dive into it like a Stuka Pilot.

He had to use instruments he could barely if at all read, that he didnt know how to use, and navigate the plane literally hundreds of miles.

Anybody who believes this dolt could do that belongs on this site, that much i DO agree with.

[beachnut]

dumb luck, terrorist were pilots and could use VOR/DME and picked a clear day

[dtugg]

Clouds, definate terrain features(which he wouldnt be even remotely aware of)

9/11 was a remarkably clear day. What the hell was "definate [sic] terrain features" mean? Are you just making up terms?

[roundhead]

And yet others have this assessment:






http://911myths.com/html/flight_school_dropouts.html



Again, that Bernard quote makes no mention of the pilot flying hundreds of miles to a target........

Once i "Got going" ABOVE the Pentagon, I might be able to hit it as well.

[roundhead]

9/11 was a remarkably clear day. What the hell was "definate [sic] terrain features" mean? Are you just making up terms?


Yeah, say he was over a wooded portion of Virginia at 30,000 feet, he would have zero clue where he was, nor how to get to the Pentagon. His English was very poor(reading and understanding instruments)his navagitation skills were non existant, and he had never flow a plane of this sort even 2 feet.

Anybody is hard pressed to say anything more than this guy was an aeronautical amoeba, and thats being kind.

[JamesB]

Clouds, definate terrain features(which he wouldnt be even remotely aware of)


You seem to be unaware this guy didnt slide into the seat directly above the Pentagon and dive into it like a Stuka Pilot.

He had to use instruments he could barely if at all read, that he didnt know how to use, and navigate the plane literally hundreds of miles.

Anybody who believes this dolt could do that belongs on this site, that much i DO agree with.

You have never heard of GPS? The average teenager could figure out how to navigate to the Pentagon over a weekend, I think a licensed pilot with months to prepare could figure it out.

[dtugg]

Yeah, say he was over a wooded portion of Virginia at 30,000 feet, he would have zero clue where he was, nor how to get to the Pentagon. His English was very poor(reading and understanding instruments)his navagitation skills were non existant, and he had never flow a plane of this sort even 2 feet.

Anybody is hard pressed to say anything more than this guy was an aeronautical amoeba, and thats being kind.

Stop lying. Hanjour was trained in the autopilot and navigation systems in a 757/756 simulator. It really wasn't that hard. Especially since the Pentagon was next to a major airport.

[beachnut]

Yeah, say he was over a wooded portion of Virginia at 30,000 feet, he would have zero clue where he was, nor how to get to the Pentagon. His English was very poor(reading and understanding instruments)his navagitation skills were non existant, and he had never flow a plane of this sort even 2 feet.

Anybody is hard pressed to say anything more than this guy was an aeronautical amoeba, and thats being kind.
Hani dialed in DCA in the VOR and flew to DC with VOR/DME.

Simple navigation, all you have to do is aim the plane in the direction of the arrow; a total dolt could do it. You need help to understand basic flying skills; I am an instructor; need help?

Sad you are told the facts and can't understand what they mean. Why are you unable to understand reality?


See above post, plus flying a little single engine plane is harder than a 757.

[apathoid]

Obviously, the OP struck a nerve with roundhead. But these responses strike a nerve with me:


Thanks for letting me know all the pilots had their throats slashed instantly, not even fending off the evil box cutter attack with their hands, and scuffling. And taking the 2 seconds to set the highjack code and possibly save other lives.

Pure dumb luck........


That all 4 hijacked planes captains werent able to flip on the highjack code, even though it only takes an instant.




http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/990246db6e3522d68.jpg

Roundhead, thats a typical 767 transponder in the photo above. Exactly, what has to be done to broadcast the hijack code? How many knobs need to be positioned, what buttons need to be depressed? Is there a hijack button that you "flip"? Walk me through it.

[apathoid]

See: FedEx Flight 705. Attempted takeover of the aircraft. No hijack code was sent. No emergency transmission was sent. The air traffic controllers had no idea what was going for several minutes as the aircraft made a number of violent maneuvers. It was not until after the crew had temporarily subdued the attacker that they were finally able to send an emergency call.

Reality does not conform to your Hollywood notions of how it should work.



But, but, but...roundhead says it only "takes an instant" to "flip the hijack code". Clearly, FE705 was an inside jobby job too.

[JamesB]

:popcorn1

[ozeco41]

...Roundhead, thats a typical 767 transponder in the photo above. Exactly, what has to be done to broadcast the hijack code? How many knobs need to be positioned, what buttons need to be depressed? Is there a hijack button that you "flip"? Walk me through it.
Touché Sir, well done.

[JihadJane]

...which six years in Iraq have done nothing to change. I guess when whatever all-powerful cabal you imagine controls the world originally put together their unbelievably convoluted plot to steal oil from the Middle East, they forgot about the part where they actually steal the oil.

Your imagination is both overactive and feeble.

[beachnut]

Obviously, the OP struck a nerve with roundhead. But these responses strike a nerve with me:


http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/990246db6e3522d68.jpg

Roundhead, thats a typical 767 transponder in the photo above. Exactly, what has to be done to broadcast the hijack code? How many knobs need to be positioned, what buttons need to be depressed? Is there a hijack button that you "flip"? Walk me through it.
IDENT

Why would you be turning knobs while someone is cutting your throat?

Is it inner left set digit, outer left set digit, inner RT set digit, outer RT set digit? (with the original setting being like 3245, then you would have to set all 4 digits)

It would be fast, but impossible as someone cuts my throat if I choose to set vs. fight and try to understand why my chest is warmed by blood.

[twinstead]

Not mentioning anybody in particular, but arrogant fools who tirelessly argue untenable positions against people who know better ROCK.

[Corsair 115]

I see roundhead has yet to address FedEx Flight 705...


Your imagination is both overactive and feeble.


Says the person who has yet to provide any evidence to support their energy acquisition argument, nor to explain the data that is available which contradicts their argument.

[apathoid]

IDENT

Why would you be turning knobs while someone is cutting your throat?




Well of course, in our world, no one would be opting to fumble around with a transponder control head over protecting ourselves from a violent attacker. But in roundheads world, things are a little different.

IDENT would have been a good idea, but I doubt it would have made a difference in the outcome.

[Mancman]

Pure dumb luck........


That all 4 hijacked planes captains werent able to flip on the highjack code, even though it only takes an instant.


that a guy who couldnt even fly a Cessna a very short time before 9/11 could fly an airliner at 30+ thousand feet for hundreds of miles and fly it into a building at ground level.

That a high school physics teacher had to get the NIST to admit that wtc7 came down(at least partially)in free fall. Something all those mighty engineers seem to have missed studying it for 7 years....



that the guy supposedly behind the attacks changed his mind about claiming responsibility(he didnt on video initially)then decided months later to take full blame...what a thoughtful terrorist

I could post scores more, but you get the point.

You are beyond a joke. You are pathetic.

[JihadJane]

Says the person who has yet to provide any evidence to support their energy acquisition argument, nor to explain the data that is available which contradicts their argument.

I wrote a reply to the post I assume you're referring to earlier today but was unable to post it, then I sorta lost interest in the repetitive debate hobby. I'll post it after this one.

[FineWine]

Your imagination is both overactive and feeble.

I like to read the posts, but I don't know enough to get into arguments. I did not understand your post. If the conspiracy did everything to steal oil, why didn't they steal any oil? America's energy problems today are the same as they were before September 11, 2001. What are you saying?

[defaultdotxbe]

Well of course, in our world, no one would be opting to fumble around with a transponder control head over protecting ourselves from a violent attacker. But in roundheads world, things are a little different.

IDENT would have been a good idea, but I doubt it would have made a difference in the outcome.
im not a pilot, but i would also assume that declaring a hijack is not something to be done lightly, and that the pilots would have attempted to determine why someone was coming into the cockpit and to tell them to get out before deciding to enter a hijack code

[JamesB]

I like to read the posts, but I don't know enough to get into arguments. I did not understand your post. If the conspiracy did everything to steal oil, why didn't they steal any oil? America's energy problems today are the same as they were before September 11, 2001. What are you saying?

I blame ADD.

"Well we must insure that Exxon gets all of this oil production for the next... oh look, a squirrel..."

[WildCat]

Obviously, the OP struck a nerve with roundhead. But these responses strike a nerve with me:








http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/990246db6e3522d68.jpg

Roundhead, thats a typical 767 transponder in the photo above. Exactly, what has to be done to broadcast the hijack code? How many knobs need to be positioned, what buttons need to be depressed? Is there a hijack button that you "flip"? Walk me through it.
This is the point where roundhead runs away from this thread, or will ignore this post if he returns..

[JihadJane]

I like to read the posts, but I don't know enough to get into arguments. I did not understand your post. If the conspiracy did everything to steal oil, why didn't they steal any oil? America's energy problems today are the same as they were before September 11, 2001. What are you saying?

As you may have noticed johnny karate specializes in reducing complex reality to simplistic, propagandistic slogans. "Stealing oil" is such a slogan.

Efforts to control energy supplies have been going on for centuries, often accompanied by extreme violence. Global oil production is near, or maybe even at, peak and, therefore, approaching decline. Gas production is not far behind. As I wrote in response to Corsair 115 on another thread:

US attempts at controlling ME and Asian energy deposits and transportation routes are about maintaining global hegemony. This was the stated aim of the architects of the Iraq and Afghanistan slaughters.

Controlling the world's energy supply means controlling the world.

Iraq has probably the world's largest remaining deposits of high quality oil, much of it untapped. The longer as it stays in the ground the more valuable it will become.

Afghanistan is a key gateway for the Caspian Basin's huge hydrocarbon deposits.

It is unclear whether the US expansionist campaign has been successful though it appears to have established a secure, long-term military presence in the region, which it is now attempting to expand into Pakistan.

Its presence in the region is also part of a strategy to encircle Russia (and Iran) with US military bases and client states.

[Pinch]

And taking the 2 seconds to set the highjack code and possibly save other lives.

You are displaying your extreme level of ignorance again. Don't you ever get tired of that?

[A W Smith]

Controlling the world's energy supply means controlling the world.




Really Plain?
Like solar energy?
Nuclear?
Hydrogen?
Hydroelectric?
Coal?
Wind?
Tidal?
ethanol?

Speaking of Ethanol Plain, tell us how we are going to take over Brazil?

[beachnut]

... Efforts to control energy supplies have been going on for centuries, often accompanied by extreme violence. Global oil production is near, or maybe even at, peak and, therefore, approaching decline. Gas production is not far behind. As I wrote in response to Corsair 115 on another thread:
...
We are the Saudi Arabia of COAL!!!!

Go stick your pathetic we want oil crap in the pit of stupid with all the 911Truth crap. Your failed logic is slightly amusing, as is your lack of knowledge on 911.

Pure dumb luck for 911Truth, a vast fringe of those who lack knowledge on 911 and buy dirt dumb DVD filled with implied lies about 911.

[ktesibios]

Pure dumb luck that the only people on the planet who could see through the Nefarious Plot would refuse to do anything about it besides behaving like buttheads in Youtube videos and internet fora.

[ozeco41]

I suppose all hope of getting this thread back into the parody mode that the OP posted is now gone??



....thought so.

[johnny karate]

Iraq has probably the world's largest remaining deposits of high quality oil, much of it untapped. The longer as it stays in the ground the more valuable it will become.

Afghanistan is a key gateway for the Caspian Basin's huge hydrocarbon deposits.

It is unclear whether the US expansionist campaign has been successful though it appears to have established a secure, long-term military presence in the region, which it is now attempting to expand into Pakistan.

Its presence in the region is also part of a strategy to encircle Russia (and Iran) with US military bases and client states.

Same old conspiracy theory song, just slightly different lyrics. As usual, everything is about what could happen and what's going to happen, but there's not a whole lot of focus on what has actually happened.

JihadJane makes a claim the U.S. presence in the Middle East is about "controlling the world" by "controlling the oil" despite the fact they have made absolutely no tangible efforts to do so, and as usual, offers only rhetoric in support of this claim.

JihadJane, please feel free to provide evidence of any kind that what you claim is actually taking place. No here is really all that interested in your paranoid fantasies.

[johnny karate]

I suppose all hope of getting this thread back into the parody mode that the OP posted is now gone??



....thought so.

Have you read JihadJane's posts?

[beachnut]

Gosh, it sure seems like the Evil Bad Guys depended on dumb luck for a lot of things. Help me list them.

Here's what I have so far:


WTC-7: The only reason that the Evil Bad Guys even had an alibi for WTC-7's demolition was that it was severely damaged by debris from one of the nearby Towers. It was by pure dumb luck that this debris caused enough damage and fires to create an alibi convincing enough to most engineers. What would the Evil Bad Guys have done if the debris had caused little or no damage?

The firefighters didn't speak out for fear of losing their pensions or whatever: It was by pure dumb luck that EVERY SINGLE FDNY FIREFIGHTER turned out to be a coward. What would the Evil Bad Guys have done if even one of the FDNY firefighters had turned out to be brave enough to risk his pension?

NOC Flight Path: The Evil Bad Guys needed to plant evidence such as downed light poles, plane parts, etc. It was by pure dumb luck that not one single eyewitness saw this evidence being planted. What would the Evil Bad Guys have done if even one person had gotten a peek at the Evil Bad Guys cutting down light poles and planting truckloads of plane parts on the Pentagon lawn in the middle of the night?



Please contribute by adding your own examples of just how darned lucky the Evil Bad Guys are.

Planes fly faster than speed limit: Bad guys had to modify Boeing Jets to make them fly faster by using BASF; they don't make planes, they make the planes faster.


Aluminum planes can’t penetrate steel buildings or the Pentagon: Bad guys had to use Teflon to coat the Boeing jets so they would slip into the WTC and Pentagon, and deep in the ground in PA.

[FineWine]

As you may have noticed johnny karate specializes in reducing complex reality to simplistic, propagandistic slogans. "Stealing oil" is such a slogan.

Efforts to control energy supplies have been going on for centuries, often accompanied by extreme violence. Global oil production is near, or maybe even at, peak and, therefore, approaching decline. Gas production is not far behind. As I wrote in response to Corsair 115 on another thread:



Controlling the world's energy supply means controlling the world.

Iraq has probably the world's largest remaining deposits of high quality oil, much of it untapped. The longer as it stays in the ground the more valuable it will become.

Afghanistan is a key gateway for the Caspian Basin's huge hydrocarbon deposits.

It is unclear whether the US expansionist campaign has been successful though it appears to have established a secure, long-term military presence in the region, which it is now attempting to expand into Pakistan.

Its presence in the region is also part of a strategy to encircle Russia (and Iran) with US military bases and client states.


So you are saying that becuase they didn't steal the oil you are right that they want to steal the oil? If they leave the oil in the ground that means they want to steal it? I don't understand.

[johnny karate]

So you are saying that becuase they didn't steal the oil you are right that they want to steal the oil? If they leave the oil in the ground that means they want to steal it? I don't understand.

First of all, welcome to the forum, FineWine.

Secondly, as a friendly word of warning, don't expect anything of substance from JihadJane. S/he is quite fond of waxing psychotic without a whole lot beyond fevered imaginings to back up any claims or implications.

In other words, JihadJane is a typical Truther.

[FineWine]

First of all, welcome to the forum, FineWine.

Secondly, as a friendly word of warning, don't expect anything of substance from JihadJane. S/he is quite fond of waxing psychotic without a whole lot beyond fevered imaginings to back up any claims or implications.

In other words, JihadJane is a typical Truther.


Thank you. I'm not here to argue. He isn't making sense.

[ozeco41]

Have you read JihadJane's posts?

Yup.

Real parody is when "We" do "them" better than they do....:D

[JihadJane]

So you are saying that becuase they didn't steal the oil you are right that they want to steal the oil? If they leave the oil in the ground that means they want to steal it? I don't understand.

Firstly, think within the framework of a much longer timescale and consider, also, that US/UK military actions aren't always successful!

Secondly, "they" are quite willing to pay for the oil, as long as it's priced in dollars. Controlling energy supplies is a matter of being able to decide who gets how much energy and at what price.

To find out more try:

'The Party's Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies'

by Richard Heinberg

http://www.amazon.com/Partys-Over-Fate-Industrial-Societies/dp/0865715297/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239450140&sr=1-1

or

'A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order'

by William Engdahl

http://www.amazon.com/Century-War-Anglo-American-Politics-World/dp/3925725199/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239449164&sr=1-1

There's plenty online. Try googling, e.g.: "middle east oil politics". This article, for instance, contains a good introduction:

'Understanding the Complexities and Contradictions of the Middle East
Oil Wealth, Colonial and Neo-Colonial Intervention, and Cheap South Asian Labor'

http://india_resource.tripod.com/mideastoil.html

[MarkyX]

That all 4 hijacked planes captains werent able to flip on the highjack code, even though it only takes an instant.


It's hard to flip that hijack code when you're dead.


that a guy who couldnt even fly a Cessna a very short time before 9/11 could fly an airliner at 30+ thousand feet for hundreds of miles and fly it into a building at ground level.


You mean that they had trouble landing the plane and despite this, the problems weren't exactly unusual? I fail to see how that factors into "let's crash this ****" mentality the hijackers had.


That a high school physics teacher had to get the NIST to admit that wtc7 came down(at least partially)in free fall. Something all those mighty engineers seem to have missed studying it for 7 years....


Why is freefall such a big deal? There were no bombs found in the debris.


that the guy supposedly behind the attacks changed his mind about claiming responsibility(he didnt on video initially)then decided months later to take full blame...what a thoughtful terrorist


Show me the video, oh wait, you can't.

[JamesB]

Secondly, "they" are quite willing to pay for the oil, as long as it's priced in dollars. Controlling energy supplies is a matter of being able to decide who gets how much energy and at what price.



What difference does it make if it is priced in dollars, euros, or cereal box tops? One of the reasons in fact that oil prices skyrocketed in the US last year was because of the weakness of the dollar relative to other currencies. Having it denominated in dollars obviously didn't help much.

[Alt+F4]

The firefighters didn't speak out for fear of losing their pensions or whatever: It was by pure dumb luck that EVERY SINGLE FDNY FIREFIGHTER turned out to be a coward. What would the Evil Bad Guys have done if even one of the FDNY firefighters had turned out to be brave enough to risk his pension?

Pure dumb luck that the NWO happens to control New York State Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli who oversees those FDNY pensions. One call from the NWO and DiNapoli wipes out those pensions with a single keystroke!

[johnny karate]

He isn't making sense.

Welcome to 9/11 Trutherdom.

[johnny karate]

Firstly, think within the framework of a much longer timescale and consider, also, that US/UK military actions aren't always successful!

Secondly, "they" are quite willing to pay for the oil, as long as it's priced in dollars. Controlling energy supplies is a matter of being able to decide who gets how much energy and at what price.

To find out more try:

'The Party's Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies'

by Richard Heinberg

http://www.amazon.com/Partys-Over-Fate-Industrial-Societies/dp/0865715297/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239450140&sr=1-1

or

'A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order'

by William Engdahl

http://www.amazon.com/Century-War-Anglo-American-Politics-World/dp/3925725199/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239449164&sr=1-1

There's plenty online. Try googling, e.g.: "middle east oil politics". This article, for instance, contains a good introduction:

'Understanding the Complexities and Contradictions of the Middle East
Oil Wealth, Colonial and Neo-Colonial Intervention, and Cheap South Asian Labor'

http://india_resource.tripod.com/mideastoil.html


Please quote the passages in any of those documents that provide evidence supporting the implication of this statement:
It was just pure dumb luck that US multi-billion defense and intelligence buffoons were so totally incompetent at a time when the US needed to do something very, very violent about its long-term energy "requirements".

[Corsair 115]

Iraq has probably the world's largest remaining deposits of high quality oil, much of it untapped.


Source?


For discussion purposes, here are the figures for the imports of crude oil by the U.S. from Iraq, as reported by the Energy Information Administration.

U.S. Crude Oil Imports from Iraq

Barrels % of Total
Year (thousands) U.S. Imports Rank
-------------------------------------
1998 122,518 3.86 8
1999 264,471 8.31 5
2000 226,804 6.83 6
2001 289,998 8.52 6
2002 167,368 5.02 6
2003 175,663 4.98 6
2004 239,758 6.49 6
2005 192,524 5.21 6
2006 201,886 5.47 6
2007 176,709 4.83 7
2008 229,300 6.42 6 So, in 2008, imports from Iraq still have not reached the level attained back in 2001; they were 20.9% off that high. Even the best year since then, 2004, was some 17.3% off the peak reached in 2001.

Now, for comparison, here are the U.S. crude oil imports from Canada for that same time period:
U.S. Crude Oil Imports from Canada

Barrels % of Total
Year (thousands) U.S. Imports Rank
-------------------------------------
1998 462,228 14.55 4
1999 429,962 13.49 3
2000 493,256 14.86 2
2001 494,796 14.53 3
2002 527,304 15.81 3
2003 565.533 16.03 3
2004 591.489 16.02 1
2005 596,183 16.13 1
2006 657,834 17.81 1
2007 689,209 18.82 1
2008 706,910 19.80 1 For the last five years, Canada has been the #1 supplier of crude oil to the U.S. For every year 2000, Canada has been increasing both its share and the number of barrels exported to the United States. Indeed, in 2008, Canada supplied nearly one-fifth of all U.S. crude oil imports, some 155.6 million, or over 28%, more barrels than did second place Saudi Arabia, and triple the number supplied by sixth place Iraq.

Given these numbers, which nation would be of more strategic interest to the U.S. in terms of energy supply?


Lastly, just for interest's sake, the total number of U.S. crude oil imports since 1998:
Total U.S Crude Oil Imports

Barrels
Year (thousands)
-----------------
1998 3,177,584
1999 3,186,663
2000 3,319,816
2001 3,404,894
2002 3,336,175
2003 3,527,696
2004 3,692,063
2005 3,695,971
2006 3,693,081
2007 3,661,404
2008 3,570,848

[9/11-investigator]

Well of course, in our world, no one would be opting to fumble around with a transponder control head over protecting ourselves from a violent attacker. But in roundheads world, things are a little different.

IDENT would have been a good idea, but I doubt it would have made a difference in the outcome.

I would expect that the designer of a hijacked-warning facility would anticipate that hijackers could prevent pilots from sending this warning. Therefore I would install a simple switch, rather than having to enter a code in a procedure that lasts several seconds. And no harm done if the pilot hits the switch accidentally; he can simply call traffic control and explain that it was an accident.

[twinstead]

JJ, it's fine to have ideologically-based opinions, everybody has SOME, but it appears you are trying to pass them off as given facts. There are two sides to every world view.

[FineWine]

Firstly, think within the framework of a much longer timescale and consider, also, that US/UK military actions aren't always successful!

Secondly, "they" are quite willing to pay for the oil, as long as it's priced in dollars. Controlling energy supplies is a matter of being able to decide who gets how much energy and at what price.

To find out more try:

'The Party's Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies'

by Richard Heinberg +

or

'A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order'

by William Engdahl



There's plenty online. Try googling, e.g.: "middle east oil politics". This article, for instance, contains a good introduction:

'Understanding the Complexities and Contradictions of the Middle East
Oil Wealth, Colonial and Neo-Colonial Intervention, and Cheap South Asian Labor'




All of that to cover up the obvious fact that what you thought would happen, didn't happen. You were wrong.

[JihadJane]

What difference does it make if it is priced in dollars, euros, or cereal box tops? One of the reasons in fact that oil prices skyrocketed in the US last year was because of the weakness of the dollar relative to other currencies. Having it denominated in dollars obviously didn't help much.

Trading oil exclusively in dollars makes the dollar the world's de facto world reserve currency and gives the US enormous financial and economic power.



Please quote the passages in any of those documents that provide evidence supporting the implication of this statement:

If it wasn't pure dumb luck, what was it?

Source?

My memory.

Here's another:

“According to the oil ministry, only 27 out of 80 discovered fields are producing in Iraq, the result of decades of under-investment. A report by Wood Mackenzie, the consultancy, meanwhile says the scale of Iraq's remaining oil resources surpasses all other countries in the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia, and its high-quality reservoirs ensure that production costs would be very low.”

- The Financial Times

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=14983




For discussion purposes, here are the figures for the imports of crude oil by the U.S. from Iraq, as reported by the Energy Information Administration.

... So, in 2008, imports from Iraq still have not reached the level attained back in 2001; they were 20.9% off that high. Even the best year since then, 2004, was some 17.3% off the peak reached in 2001.

Now, for comparison, here are the U.S. crude oil imports from Canada for that same time period:

... For the last five years, Canada has been the #1 supplier of crude oil to the U.S. For every year 2000, Canada has been increasing both its share and the number of barrels exported to the United States. Indeed, in 2008, Canada supplied nearly one-fifth of all U.S. crude oil imports, some 155.6 million, or over 28%, more barrels than did second place Saudi Arabia, and triple the number supplied by sixth place Iraq.

Given these numbers, which nation would be of more strategic interest to the U.S. in terms of energy supply?

The US economy, as currently structured, cannot survive on a fifth of its oil supply.

Most of Iraq's oil is yet to be developed so it’s hardly surprising that imports from Iraq haven’t increased. There is also a security problem! And a legal problem.

Saying that the US/UK invaded and occcupied Iraq largely because of its oil, isn’t saying that the US/UK wants to buy more of it.

It is about controlling the world's oil supply - most of which is in the Middle East - who gets it and how much it costs. Controlling Iraq's spigots is the only strategic alternative to controlling Saudi Arabia's spigots.

JJ, it's fine to have ideologically-based opinions, everybody has SOME, but it appears you are trying to pass them off as given facts. There are two sides to every world view.

Only two?

What's your non-ideologically based view of the future of the world's oil supply??

[UNLoVedRebel]

For the last five years, Canada has been the #1 supplier of crude oil to the U.S. For every year 2000, Canada has been increasing both its share and the number of barrels exported to the United States. Indeed, in 2008, Canada supplied nearly one-fifth of all U.S. crude oil imports, some 155.6 million, or over 28%, more barrels than did second place Saudi Arabia, and triple the number supplied by sixth place Iraq.

Given these numbers, which nation would be of more strategic interest to the U.S. in terms of energy supply?

So we need to stage a false flag attack and blame the Canadians. You here that TAM, you're a dead man!

[johnny karate]

If it wasn't pure dumb luck, what was it?

You'll first have to demonstrate what you allege actually took place before we can assess it.

So far you haven't.

Do you have anything of substance to offer?

[johnny karate]

The US economy, as currently structured, cannot survive on a fifth of its oil supply.

The U.S. economy is in the process of a major overhaul, including an initiative to explore alternative energy resources. You seem to be overlooking this very important point. Since your entire argument follows from the rather myopic premise that the U.S. economy and its energy requirements will remain indefinitely static, it is wholly irrelevant.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

that a guy who couldnt even fly a Cessna a very short time before 9/11 could fly an airliner at 30+ thousand feet for hundreds of miles and fly it into a building at ground level.

Why do twoofers continue to insist that destroying ones vehicle, killing ones self, killing all on board and causing massive property damage and loss of life on the ground are all indicators of great skill?

[Corsair 115]

It is about controlling the world's oil supply - most of which is in the Middle East - who gets it and how much it costs. Controlling Iraq's spigots is the only strategic alternative to controlling Saudi Arabia's spigots.


That might make sense if Iraq was a significant supplier to the United States. It isn't, as the official figures show.

Canada is far more important to the U.S. in terms of energy than Iraq is. Saudi Arabia's importance as a source of U.S. imports has also fallen. Its supplies to the U.S. peaked in 2003 at 629.8 million barrels; in 2008, it supplied 551.3 million barrels, a decline of 12.5%. Imports from Persian Gulf nations as a whole also peaked in 2001 at 972.5 million barrels; in 2008, the figure was 857.4 million barrels, a decline of 11.8%. This in spite of overall U.S. imports being 4.9% higher in 2008 than in 2001.

In 2008, the U.S. imported 31.9% of its crude oil from its two neighbouring nations, Canada and Mexico. It seems to me the more crude oil the U.S. can get closer to home from allied, friendly, and reasonably stable nations, the better, easier, and more secure it is than engaging in uncertain and very expensive ventures halfway around the globe.

So you're proposing that, in the name of energy security, rather than investing its money to increase the oil production capabilties of its two neighbouring nations, the U.S. instead spent billions on a military campaign half a world away to control oil supplies? (And then it doesn't even actually exercise that control.)

Does that make any sense to anyone else?


Here's an interesting tidbit: in 2008, the U.S. imported more crude oil from the nations of Argentina, Australia, Boliva, Brazil, Colombia, Norway, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom, and Vietnam combined (235.9 million barrels) than it imported from Iraq (229.3 million barrels)

[twinstead]

What's your non-ideologically based view of the future of the world's oil supply??

Exactly what does THAT have to do with your incessant diatribes about how evil the USA is?

[Sword_Of_Truth]

What's your non-ideologically based view of the future of the world's oil supply??

Aw geeze... are we back to oil again already?

Tell me JJ... why couldn't this secret cabal with thier superpowers conspire to open up ANWAR for drilling? Why couldn't they conspire to open up the continental shelf for oil drilling? Why couldn't they scheme to exploit the Utah oil shale deposits? Why couldn't they plot to release the restrictions on Alberta tar sands?

And hey... for all the billions that have been spent subduing one country for the pourpose of NOT building a gas pipeline and hundreds of billions more subduing another country that failed to have any effect on last years oil crisis, why couldn't they just build a crap-ton of nuclear power plants?

[JihadJane]

You'll first have to demonstrate what you allege actually took place before we can assess it.

So far you haven't.

Do you have anything of substance to offer?

What did I allege took place? Some pure dumb luck? How does one substantiate that?

The U.S. economy is in the process of a major overhaul, including an initiative to explore alternative energy resources. You seem to be overlooking this very important point. Since your entire argument follows from the rather myopic premise that the U.S. economy and its energy requirements will remain indefinitely static, it is wholly irrelevant.

The US imperial economy has become wholly dependent on an ever-increasing, cheap energy supply. There is no alternative energy source on the horizon that can be scaled up to offset the projected decline in world oil production. Demand destruction and economic contraction are a solution but that would mean giving up the global empire, which US seems unwilling to contemplate. I don't know why.

My view is that the US economy will carry on contracting anyway but the longer that that necessity is denied the more painful the eventuality will become. The party's over!


That might make sense if Iraq was a significant supplier to the United States. It isn't, as the official figures show.

Canada is far more important to the U.S. in terms of energy than Iraq is. Saudi Arabia's importance as a source of U.S. imports has also fallen. Its supplies to the U.S. peaked in 2003 at 629.8 million barrels; in 2008, it supplied 551.3 million barrels, a decline of 12.5%. Imports from Persian Gulf nations as a whole also peaked in 2001 at 972.5 million barrels; in 2008, the figure was 857.4 million barrels, a decline of 11.8%. This in spite of overall U.S. imports being 4.9% higher in 2008 than in 2001.

In 2008, the U.S. imported 31.9% of its crude oil from its two neighbouring nations, Canada and Mexico. It seems to me the more crude oil the U.S. can get closer to home from allied, friendly, and reasonably stable nations, the better, easier, and more secure it is than engaging in uncertain and very expensive ventures halfway around the globe.

So you're proposing that, in the name of energy security, rather than investing its money to increase the oil production capabilties of its two neighbouring nations, the U.S. instead spent billions on a military campaign half a world away to control oil supplies? (And then it doesn't even actually exercise that control.)

Does that make any sense to anyone else?.

Yes, it seems pretty mad but the US appears unable to accept that its dominance is evaporating. All it has left is military might and the petro-dollar.

Mexico's oil production, btw, is in very steep decline.


Here's an interesting tidbit: in 2008, the U.S. imported more crude oil from the nations of Argentina, Australia, Boliva, Brazil, Colombia, Norway, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, United Kingdom, and Vietnam combined (235.9 million barrels) than it imported from Iraq (229.3 million barrels)

So what? There's a war on in Iraq. Iraq's oil is very high quality and cheap to extract. In a world of oil depletion every drop counts! The US is up against the ropes, energy-wise. To maintain power now and in the future it needs to control who has access to energy globally.

Aw geeze... are we back to oil again already?

Tell me JJ... why couldn't this secret cabal with thier superpowers conspire to open up ANWAR for drilling? Why couldn't they conspire to open up the continental shelf for oil drilling? Why couldn't they scheme to exploit the Utah oil shale deposits? Why couldn't they plot to release the restrictions on Alberta tar sands?

And hey... for all the billions that have been spent subduing one country for the pourpose of NOT building a gas pipeline and hundreds of billions more subduing another country that failed to have any effect on last years oil crisis, why couldn't they just build a crap-ton of nuclear power plants?

What's with the secret cabal stuff?

There are many sensible things the US could do to prepare for an energy scarce future such as revamping its railway network. Instead, it's investing in roads.

It's probably down to end-of-empire insanity. In the short term war is always the most profitable enterprise. The US economy is addicted to it.


Exactly what does THAT have to do with your incessant diatribes about how evil the USA is?

I'm sure readers would be interested to read these "incessant diatribes about how evil the USA is". Perhaps you could provide some links.

Is politics really all about who's good and who's evil ?

[johnny karate]

My view is that...

If it has already not been made abundantly clear to you, no one is interested in what "your view" is. Please present evidence to support your claims. You can start with the one that says the U.S. invaded Afghanistan and Iraq for the purposes of controlling global oil supplies. Please present the evidence that supports this assertion.

[JihadJane]

If it has already not been made abundantly clear to you, no one is interested in what "your view" is. Please present evidence to support your claims. You can start with the one that says the U.S. invaded Afghanistan and Iraq for the purposes of controlling global oil supplies. Please present the evidence that supports this assertion.

If, after eight years, you haven't worked that out for yourself, then I'm afraid I can't help you.

[dtugg]

If, after eight years, you haven't worked that out for yourself, then I'm afraid I can't help you.

In other words, you have no evidence, just your opinion. And nobody cares what your opinion is, especially since you consider yourself stupid.

[johnny karate]

If, after eight years, you haven't worked that out for yourself, then I'm afraid I can't help you.


Your dodge, and subsequent colossal failure, are noted.

[Pardalis]

Jihad Jane says he/she is not a truther, but by pure dumb luck he/she ends up defending the conspiracy side every thread he/she finds him/herself in.

[JihadJane]

Your dodge, and subsequent colossal failure, are noted.

Go away and read some books.

[T.A.M.]

boy this is a thread full of intelligent conversation.

ah well, off to read more of Shenon's "The Commission".

TAM:)

[Sabrina]

Heck, from what I can see, the entire freakin' conspiracy would've had to have succeed based on pure dumb luck.

But if you want specifics, it was pure dumb luck that the tens of thousands of people who would have had to have been aware of at least PART of the impossibly vast conspiracy™ have somehow or other kept silent about their part in upholding said conspiracy for going on eight years now, despite the fame and fortune there would certainly be in exposing it.

[FineWine]

Go away and read some books.


Have you ever read anything not written by a Marxist?

[JihadJane]

Have you ever read anything not written by a Marxist?


No, I've only ever read books by Marxists.

[FineWine]

No, I've only ever read books by Marxists.



I thought so. You should try looking at other points of view.

[JihadJane]

Actually, I have read Shenon's "The Commission". He's not a Marxist.

[FineWine]

Actually, I have read Shenon's "The Commission". He's not a Marxist.



Have you read "The Looming Tower"?

[JihadJane]

No.

[dtugg]

Have you read "The Looming Tower"?

No, instead of reading extremely well researched, Pulitzer Prize winning books, Jane reads crap like Crossing the Rubicon which includes a paedo con artist as a source.

[stateofgrace]

No.

No, as in no chance I don't want to read this?

Or no, as in I am very interesting in reading this but I haven't got around to it yet?

[johnny karate]

Go away and read some books.

I'd rather just read the post where you actually produce your evidence.

[UNLoVedRebel]

Your dodge, and subsequent colossal failure, are noted.

You still have room on your notepad?

[Corsair 115]

The US imperial economy has become wholly dependent on an ever-increasing, cheap energy supply.


And what, exactly, was cheap about $147 per barrel oil in the summer of 2008?


There's a war on in Iraq. Iraq's oil is very high quality and cheap to extract.


And yet, curiously, that nation's oil does not end up in the U.S. as frequently as it did eight years ago.


The US is up against the ropes, energy-wise. To maintain power now and in the future it needs to control who has access to energy globally.


Yes, and the country to control is Canada. If the oil sands in Alberta are included, Canada has the second largest proven petroleum reserves in the world behind Saudi Arabia (the oil sands are estimated to contain 173 billion barrels). Plus we have plenty of uranium, hydroelectric power, natural gas, and billions of dollars' worth of oil and natural gas deposits under the Arctic currently going unexploited. According to a recent study by the USGS, the Arctic holds up to 13% of the world's untapped oil reserves and 30% of the untapped natural gas reserves. This is one of the reasons why Russia and Canada are currently both claiming the relevant areas belong to them.

So, put all this together, and you still maintain spending hundreds of billions of dollars to allegedly control oil in Iraq makes sense? The U.S. would get far more for far less by investing in Canada's energy industry and backing Canada's claims to the Arctic.

But hey, don't let facts and logic stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory...

[JihadJane]

No, as in no chance I don't want to read this?

Or no, as in I am very interesting in reading this but I haven't got around to it yet?


The second one, along with a lot of other books. Being less of a JREF junkie would help achieve this ambition!

I have browsed through the "The Looming Tower" in a bookshop was but was a bit put off by the thriller format. I also understand that the author rather arbitrarily plumps for the Incompetence Theory without exploring the possibility of more deliberate obstruction. Why the lack of curiosity?

I've also been told it doesn't explore many of the connections between Muslim radicals and the US leadership. Is this true?


I'd rather just read the post where you actually produce your evidence.

I'm flattered


Jihad Jane says he/she is not a truther, but by pure dumb luck he/she ends up defending the conspiracy side every thread he/she finds him/herself in.

I don't remember saying this. I do remember, though, denying calling myself a truther. Perhaps you are confused. "Truther" means different things to different people. What does it mean to you?

And what, exactly, was cheap about $147 per barrel oil in the summer of 2008?

The era of cheap, easily available energy is coming to a sticky end. Price volatility is a symptom of this. On the other hand, $147 probably will be seen as cheap in the not too far distant future.


And yet, curiously, that nation's oil does not end up in the U.S. as frequently as it did eight years ago.

As I have attempted to explain to you on several occasions this is irrelevant. Energy is power and controlling energy bestows political power and leverage. It's not just about eating the cake.


Yes, and the country to control is Canada. If the oil sands in Alberta are included, Canada has the second largest proven petroleum reserves in the world behind Saudi Arabia (the oil sands are estimated to contain 173 billion barrels). Plus we have plenty of uranium, hydroelectric power, natural gas, and billions of dollars' worth of oil and natural gas deposits under the Arctic currently going unexploited. According to a recent study by the USGS, the Arctic holds up to 13% of the world's untapped oil reserves and 30% of the untapped natural gas reserves. This is one of the reasons why Russia and Canada are currently both claiming the relevant areas belong to them.

So, put all this together, and you still maintain spending hundreds of billions of dollars to allegedly control oil in Iraq makes sense? The U.S. would get far more for far less by investing in Canada's energy industry and backing Canada's claims to the Arctic.

But hey, don't let facts and logic stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory...

Canada cannot meet the US current oil needs. Arctic oil will not halt the global decline in oil production. How is the US going to pay for rebuilding it's energy infrastructure in the middle of a Depression?

Iraq is one part of the chess game.

Even a small shortfall is supply has devastating effects on an economy that depends on growth to survive.

Why does Canada have troops in Afghanistan?

In other words, you have no evidence, just your opinion. And nobody cares what your opinion is, especially since you consider yourself stupid.


Don't diss Johnny Karate. He/she cares.

[stateofgrace]

The second one, along with a lot of other books. Being less of a JREF junkie would help achieve this ambition!

I have browsed through the "The Looming Tower" in a bookshop was but was a bit put off by the thriller format. I also understand that the author rather arbitrarily plumps for the Incompetence Theory without exploring the possibility of more deliberate obstruction. Why the lack of curiosity?

I've also been told it doesn't explore many of the connections between Muslim radicals and the US leadership. Is this true?


Thank you for your honest and reasonable answer.To be honest JJ, I read the book a while ago but hey I took it off my bookshelf and now have it sat in front of me and the general feel to book as how you describe it. It does explore US involvement in the Afghan war but beyond that no, it doesn't really explore connections between Muslim radicals and the US leadership.But the book does not set out to explore these connections it sets out to detail the raise of Al Qaeda, through the eyes of those that were there and to dire consequences of ignoring the rise of such extremism.

[dtugg]

Why does Canada have troops in Afghanistan.

Because the Canadians along with a few dozen other countries are a part of the evil, US led plot to dominate the poor, peace loving Muslims in order to control the world's energy supply. And of course, Afghanistan, with its vast amount of nothing is somehow a key part of this.

[JihadJane]

Because the Canadians along with a few dozen other countries are a part of the evil, US led plot to dominate the poor, peace loving Muslims in order to control the world's energy supply. And of course, Afghanistan, with its vast amount of nothing is somehow a key part of this.

Thanks for your ravings.

[T.A.M.]

Actually, I have read Shenon's "The Commission". He's not a Marxist.

So far it is quite a good book.

So far, my reading of it makes Zelikow much less the SOB the truthers make him out to be. Seems he tried to get things, and it was Gonzalez who stonewalled him (as you can tell I am within the 1st 100 pages).

A good read for sure.

TAM:)

[T.A.M.]

"The Looming Tower" is an excellent read. It is very detailed/thorough in its examination of the start and rise of Al-Qaeda. It is very detailed at looking at OBL and his rise. It does not go into, from what I remember, the Bush-Saudi connection, or any other.

Canada has troops in Afghanistan because of its committment to the mission. It will soon be in the process of withdrawing them, unless something new turns up to change that.

TAM:)

[Corsair 115]

As I have attempted to explain to you on several occasions this is irrelevant. Energy is power and controlling energy bestows political power and leverage. It's not just about eating the cake.


And yet you continue to fail in explaining why the U.S. went through all this to gain control and then does not actually exercise that control. Imports from Iraq should be in an upward trend. They're not. You fail to explain why investing in Canada's energy production was not as good a solution for the U.S. as spending hundreds of billion of dollars on its Iraq military venture.

The longer a supply line is, the more at risk it is. A seven thousand mile long supply line from Iraq to the U.S. is highly susceptible to all manner of disruption. To secure that long a supply line is problematic at best in a time of turmoil. In comparison, securing a supply line which stretches only from Canada to the U.S. is vastly easier to achieve. And yet you continue to claim, without any evidence no less, that the U.S. opted for the far more difficult logistical solution rather than the much easier one.


Canada cannot meet the US current oil needs.


And Iraq can?

According to a report in the Oil and Gas Journal, the top five countries in terms of proven oil reserves are: 1) Saudi Arabia, 267 billion barrels; 2) Canada, 176 billion barrels; 3) Iran, 138 billion barrels; 4) Iraq, 115 billion barrels; 5) Kuwait, 105 billion barrels.

So, Iraq doesn't even has as much oil reserves as Iran, and less than two-thirds of what Canada has. And that doesn't take into account as yet untapped resources in the Arctic, up to 90 billion barrels.

Can you explain the math of how 115 billion barrrels is better than 176 billion barrels? Can you explain how a seven thousand mile long supply line is better than a one thousand mile long supply line? Might you offer a clue as to how deposing an unfriendly regime overseas at great expense is a better option than investing in a friendly, allied nation right next door?


How is the US going to pay for rebuilding it's energy infrastructure in the middle of a Depression?


Depression? Really? So there's 25% unemployment right now? Or are you just fond of hyperbole?

What's happening now is a recession on a scale of the 1980-82 recession, only without the high inflation and high interest rates of that period.


Why does Canada have troops in Afghanistan?


Twenty-five Canadians were killed on 9/11 by Al-Qaeda. As Afghanistan was the safe haven of Al-Qaeda, and in connection with other allies, Canada sent troops to assist in the stabilization of the country after the Taliban had been defeated and fled from power. Canadian troops were first in Afghanistan in February of 2002. Currently there are approximately 2,500 Canadian soliders in Afganistan. The mission will end in December of 2011, unless Parliament agrees to extend the mission. The current Conservative (minority) government has said it will not extend the 2011 withdrawal deadline.

Canada did not, however, participate in the U.S. mission in Iraq. Which, it seems to me, would have been the mission Canada engaged in if the (conspiracy) point you are trying to make was valid.

[Disbelief]

Pure dumb lack that one of the most inept administrations was able to pull off such a complex, convoluted plan to destroy these buildings in a mere 9 months of planning. That includes setting all the explosives/thermite/thermate in three skyscrapers, outfitting remote control planes, getting voice prints for voice morphing technology, faking a crash in rural Pennsylvania, setting explosives in the Pentagon, etc.

[twinstead]

Pure dumb luck that only crazy people and rabid ideologues are able to see through the 911 deception (like dogs who can hear things humans can't), thus ensuring no real experts, or sane people in general, will pay attention.

[Mince]

WTC 1 & 2 - it was pure luck that had two planes hit two buildings spot on the only floors where demolition charges were installed.

And those demolition charges survived the aircraft impact and subsequent fires!

[Mince]

WTC-7: The only reason that the Evil Bad Guys even had an alibi for WTC-7's demolition was that it was severely damaged by debris from one of the nearby Towers. It was by pure dumb luck that this debris caused enough damage and fires to create an alibi convincing enough to most engineers. What would the Evil Bad Guys have done if the debris had caused little or no damage?

Presumably, Flight 93 was supposed to crash into WTC7. When Flight 93 crashed but not into WTC7, they needed an alternate plan (presumably somehow directing WTC 2's debris into WTC 7), which they probably planned in advance. However, WTC 2 collapsed before Flight 93 crashed, so the conspirators had no reason to use their "back-up" plan: they still would think that Flight 93 was going to do its job at the time of WTC 2's collapse, and, if needed, use WTC 1 as "the backup."

[Seymour Butz]

The population at large is lucky that more girls in wheelchairs haven't got beaten up yet.

And we're lucky that the insane types that are attracted to the CT ******** haven't killed anyone purely over 9/11. Despite the veiled death threats handed out by the true psychos at Pfffft. (I think that the guy that killed his dad also had other delusions?)

[Mince]

im not a pilot, but i would also assume that declaring a hijack is not something to be done lightly,...

Exactly why there is no insta-press hijack button.

[KreeL]

You have never heard of GPS? The average teenager could figure out how to navigate to the Pentagon over a weekend, I think a licensed pilot with months to prepare could figure it out.

Wow! Now THAT'S retarded!:D

[Slayhamlet]

Wow! Now THAT'S retarded!:D

Yes, we understand that you're slower than the average teenager.

[bill smith]

I remember Alberto Gonazales's testimony to the Senate. That was an eaxpmple of the conspirators depending on pure dumb... Jeez...I thought he was going to say 'no hablo Ingles' at any minute.

[johnny karate]

I remember Alberto Gonazales's testimony to the Senate. That was an eaxpmple of the conspirators depending on pure dumb... Jeez...I thought he was boing to say 'no hablo Ingles' at any minute.

Or how about those firefighters you claimed "exaggerated" the size of the fires in WTC7? It certainly was pure, dumb luck that none of those professional firefighters were able to properly assess the scope of the fires in the building burning right in front of them.

[bill smith]

Or how about those firefighters you claimed "exaggerated" the size of the fires in WTC7? It certainly was pure, dumb luck that none of those professional firefighters were able to properly assess the scope of the fires in the building burning right in front of them.

Did you ever notice Johnny that one type of poster will try to draw a person into insulting the Jews, or the firefighters or the 9/11 families and so on ?

[Slayhamlet]

Did you ever notice Johnny that one type of poster will try to draw a person into insulting the Jews, or the firefighters or the 9/11 families and so on ?

You already insulted the firefighters.

[johnny karate]

Did you ever notice Johnny that one type of poster will try to draw a person into insulting the Jews, or the firefighters or the 9/11 families and so on ?

I only ever asked Truthers to explain why no members of the FDNY express a belief that 9/11 was an inside job. It's not my fault you can't manage that without insulting them.

[beachnut]

Did you ever notice Johnny that one type of poster will try to draw a person into insulting the Jews, or the firefighters or the 9/11 families and so on ?
You insult all by your statements of lies, hearsay, and delusions on 911. You insult other by supporting the lies of 911 truth, something 911Truth has been doing for 7 years.

Every post that you spew delusions without supporting evidence is an insult to all Americans. Please post more stupid ideas about 911 so you can insult me again. Go ahead prove you lack knowledge on 911 and fail to any meaningful research.

Alberto Gonazales's testimony Are you trying to be a bigot?

[JihadJane]

And yet you continue to fail in explaining why the U.S. went through all this to gain control and then does not actually exercise that control.

They have established huge military bases in Iraq which they are unlikely to abandon voluntarily for a long time.

Imports from Iraq should be in an upward trend.

Why should they be?

They're not. You fail to explain why investing in Canada's energy production was not as good a solution for the U.S. as spending hundreds of billion of dollars on its Iraq military venture.

There is no need to spend money making Canada safe for the oil industry.

The longer a supply line is, the more at risk it is. A seven thousand mile long supply line from Iraq to the U.S. is highly susceptible to all manner of disruption. To secure that long a supply line is problematic at best in a time of turmoil. In comparison, securing a supply line which stretches only from Canada to the U.S. is vastly easier to achieve. And yet you continue to claim, without any evidence no less, that the U.S. opted for the far more difficult logistical solution rather than the much easier one.

Neither Iraq nor Canada is the solution. The world's oil supply is due to go into decline about now. Currently, the US uses nearly of a quarter of it. The US is operating an energy-hungry global empire. Controlling oil bestows political power.

The Pentagon may have its eyes on most of Iraq's easily extractable, high quality oil in the long term. The imperial war machine uses lots of fuel. policing its "interests".

And Iraq can?

Neither can.

According to a report in the Oil and Gas Journal, the top five countries in terms of proven oil reserves are: 1) Saudi Arabia, 267 billion barrels; 2) Canada, 176 billion barrels; 3) Iran, 138 billion barrels; 4) Iraq, 115 billion barrels; 5) Kuwait, 105 billion barrels.

So, Iraq doesn't even has as much oil reserves as Iran, and less than two-thirds of what Canada has. And that doesn't take into account as yet untapped resources in the Arctic, up to 90 billion barrels.

Can you explain the math of how 115 billion barrrels is better than 176 billion barrels? Can you explain how a seven thousand mile long supply line is better than a one thousand mile long supply line? Might you offer a clue as to how deposing an unfriendly regime overseas at great expense is a better option than investing in a friendly, allied nation right next door?

It isn't either or.

The US has to do both and more if it is have enough oil to fuel it's "nonnegotiable way of life" (Cheney). 115 billion barrels is a lot of oil and Iraq's is the highest quality oil in the world.

The US also has an interest in preventing competitors from seizing control of Iraq's oil in the future. The military occupation of Iraq by another power is now far less likely than before it became a US garrison.

"If you control the oil you control the country, if you control food, you control the population" - Henry Kissinger

The subjugation and occupation of Iraq is also part of a US policy of encircling Iran with military bases.

Depression? Really? So there's 25% unemployment right now? Or are you just fond of hyperbole?

I don't see how a major Depression can be avoided. Maybe there's something I'm not seeing.

What's happening now is a recession on a scale of the 1980-82 recession, only without the high inflation and high interest rates of that period.

Well, no-one could accuse you of being a pessimist!

Twenty-five Canadians were killed on 9/11 by Al-Qaeda. As Afghanistan was the safe haven of Al-Qaeda, and in connection with other allies, Canada sent troops to assist in the stabilization of the country after the Taliban had been defeated and fled from power. Canadian troops were first in Afghanistan in February of 2002. Currently there are approximately 2,500 Canadian soliders in Afganistan. The mission will end in December of 2011, unless Parliament agrees to extend the mission. The current Conservative (minority) government has said it will not extend the 2011 withdrawal deadline.

Canada did not, however, participate in the U.S. mission in Iraq. Which, it seems to me, would have been the mission Canada engaged in if the (conspiracy) point you are trying to make was valid.

Maybe the Canadian military has some good lawyers.

Asserting that wars, including the aggressive, unprovoked invasion of Iraq, are fought over energy resources is hardly "conspiracy" talk. Oil is energy. Energy is power and oil is going to start getting progressively scarcer and, therefore, much more valuable, soon.

[twinstead]

I don't see how a major Depression can be avoided. Maybe there's something I'm not seeing.



But I checked the post he responded to; you said we're IN a depression, and you used it to make a point. Now you qualify it by saying in your opinion, you don't see how a major depression can be avoided. I'd bow to your financial prognostication prowess, but of course I don't think you have any. Pardon me if I get a second opinion. I MY opinion, you're just a member of the doom and gloom crowd that crops up during every down cycle in the economy.

It will take until the next upturn, probably in the first quarter of 2010, to shut you up. That's quite a few months of merry FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) spreading for you. Have fun. Maybe there will be some other disaster that befalls the US in the mean time, like a hurricane or earthquake, that will entertain you for the short term

[johnny karate]

Asserting that wars, including the aggressive, unprovoked invasion of Iraq, are fought over energy resources is hardly "conspiracy" talk. Oil is energy. Energy is power and oil is going to start getting progressively scarcer and, therefore, much more valuable, soon.

The key ingredient missing is the part where U.S. presence in the Middle East, which is now in its seventh year, has been established as a pretext for gaining control of energy resources.

So far all you've established is that the U.S. is in the Middle East, and the Middle East has oil. You've yet to cite one specific piece of evidence that confirms your claim that the U.S. is in the Middle East to gain control of that oil.

Please list the evidence that establishes this is, in fact, what is taking place.

[JihadJane]

But I checked the post he responded to; you said we're IN a depression, and you used it to make a point. Now you qualify it by saying in your opinion, you don't see how a major depression can be avoided. I'd bow to your financial prognostication prowess, but of course I don't think you have any. Pardon me if I get a second opinion. I MY opinion, you're just a member of the doom and gloom crowd that crops up during every down cycle in the economy.

It will take until the next upturn, probably in the first quarter of 2010, to shut you up. That's quite a few months of merry FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) spreading for you. Have fun. Maybe there will be some other disaster that befalls the US in the mean time, like a hurricane or earthquake, that will entertain you for the short term

If I remember rightly I was talking about building infrastructure, something that takes a long time to do, nearly all of it in the future.

Have merry fun looking forward to the next batch of fraudulent financial instruments.

[TK0001]

Presumably, Flight 93 was supposed to crash into WTC7. When Flight 93 crashed but not into WTC7, they needed an alternate plan (presumably somehow directing WTC 2's debris into WTC 7), which they probably planned in advance. However, WTC 2 collapsed before Flight 93 crashed, so the conspirators had no reason to use their "back-up" plan: they still would think that Flight 93 was going to do its job at the time of WTC 2's collapse, and, if needed, use WTC 1 as "the backup."

For some reason I want to pull my eyeballs out of my face.

[twinstead]

Have merry fun looking forward to the next batch of fraudulent financial instruments.

The delightful thing about this debate is that there will either be a depression and financial collapse or there won't. Either you are right, or we are right. We shall certainly see, won't we? Are you as capable of saying you were wrong as many of us are depending on the output, or is your ideological mojo too strong?

[JihadJane]

The delightful thing about this debate is that there will either be a depression and financial collapse or there won't. Either you are right, or we are right. We shall certainly see, won't we? Are you as capable of saying you were wrong as many of us are depending on the output, or is your ideological mojo too strong?

Yes, it's delightful to have the promise of real evidence. (Did you mean to say outcome rather than output?)

I don't perceive my "ideological mojo" to be any stronger than yours. It's simply that your ideology accords more with the status quo consensus and so is less visible, like water to fish.

I have no problem saying I'm wrong. I think I have couple of decades leeway, though! Part of what motivates me to post my thoughts here is that it would be really funny if I, as one of forum's perceived mentalists, were right and all the supposedly sane ones were wrong! Either way I shall, hopefully, have developed a more dependable food supply for my loved ones and the local community (not to mention local wildlife) and gained a lot of pleasure and satisfaction from doing so, even if, in the end, it all gets destroyed by climate change. Death happens.

[JihadJane]

"The crash has laid bare many unpleasant truths about the United States. One of the most alarming, says a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, is that the finance industry has effectively captured our government—a state of affairs that more typically describes emerging markets, and is at the center of many emerging-market crises. If the IMF’s staff could speak freely about the U.S., it would tell us what it tells all countries in this situation: recovery will fail unless we break the financial oligarchy that is blocking essential reform. And if we are to prevent a true depression, we’re running out of time."

'The Quiet Coup'

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200905/imf-advice

'Is America the new Russia?'

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/09f8c996-2930-11de-bc5e-00144feabdc0,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=htt p%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F09f8c996-2930-11de-bc5e-00144feabdc0.html&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fhome%2Feurope

[KreeL]

Or how about those firefighters you claimed "exaggerated" the size of the fires in WTC7? It certainly was pure, dumb luck that none of those professional firefighters were able to properly assess the scope of the fires in the building burning right in front of them.

Again - totally ignorant of reality. Are you going to stand there and look at a few office fires in a vacant building, or are you going to try finding surviving friends in what's left of WTC 1 & 2?:boggled:

Non-toofers are always totally void of logic.

[johnny karate]

Again - totally ignorant of reality. Are you going to stand there and look at a few office fires in a vacant building, or are you going to try finding surviving friends in what's left of WTC 1 & 2?:boggled:

Non-toofers are always totally void of logic.

Actually, several firefighters gave testimony indicating the fires in WTC7 were very large. (Despite what your backwards thinking tells you, when skyscrapers are on fire, it tends to attract the attention of at least some of the several hundred firefighters in the immediate area.) Your little conspiracy buddy you've rushed here to defend basically called them liars by saying they were "exaggerating".

This discussion took place in an earlier thread that didn't involve you. My recommendation to you is to actually know what is going on in a conversation before you decide to butt in. This way, you'll avoid looking so foolish.

[roundhead]

Actually, several firefighters gave testimony indicating the fires in WTC7 were very large. (Despite what your backwards thinking tells you, when skyscrapers are on fire, it tends to attract the attention of at least some of the several hundred firefighters in the immediate area.) You're little conspiracy buddy you've rushed here to defend basically called them liars by saying they were "exaggerating".

This discussion took place in an earlier thread that didn't involve you. My recommendation to you is to actually know what is going on in a conversation before you decide to butt in. This way, you'll avoid looking so foolish.

If avoiding looking foolish was something you subscribed to, we wouldn be haveing to put up with your excrement on here daily, hourly, and for that matter, most every minute.


your every keystroke is a vast stundie nomination

[T.A.M.]

If avoiding looking foolish was something you subscribed to, we wouldn be haveing to put up with your excrement on here daily, hourly, and for that matter, most every minute.


your every keystroke is a vast stundie nomination

while we are talking about excrement and vast stundies, are you still a member of that particularly fecal of movements known as the truth movement?

TAM:)

[Unsecured Coins]

hey roundhead, care to address the hijack code thing-a-ma-bobby thinger yet?

[twinstead]

Yes, it's delightful to have the promise of real evidence. (Did you mean to say outcome rather than output?)

Yea. I meant outcome. Screwed that one up. :blush:


I don't perceive my "ideological mojo" to be any stronger than yours. It's simply that your ideology accords more with the status quo consensus and so is less visible, like water to fish.That is a coincidence. The ONLY reason why my ideology "accords more with the status quo consensus" is while of course not all of it but much of the status quo consensus makes sense to me. I'm not blindly following anything.


I have no problem saying I'm wrong. I think I have couple of decades leeway, though! Part of what motivates me to post my thoughts here is that it would be really funny if I, as one of forum's perceived mentalists, were right and all the supposedly sane ones were wrong! Quite true, but obviously it wouldn't be funny in a ha ha way; if I were in your ideological shoes I would pray that I was wrong, because the scenario you predict wouldn't be fun for anybody.


Either way I shall, hopefully, have developed a more dependable food supply for my loved ones and the local community (not to mention local wildlife) and gained a lot of pleasure and satisfaction from doing so, even if, in the end, it all gets destroyed by climate change. Death happens.Who knows? Given enough time, anything can happen. Climate change has done worse things since the "snowball Earth" of 650 million years ago. We shall see.

[Alt+F4]

Are you going to stand there and look at a few office fires in a vacant building, or are you going to try finding surviving friends in what's left of WTC 1 & 2?:boggled:

Non-toofers are always totally void of logic.

You are void in logic of how the FDNY operates.

[johnny karate]

If avoiding looking foolish was something you subscribed to, we wouldn be haveing to put up with your excrement on here daily, hourly, and for that matter, most every minute.

Boy, you really got me there! Remember that time I actually had the audacity to characterize the FDNY as cowards in order to wedge my ridiulous theories into reality? Talk about excrement-spewing foolishness!

Oh wait a minute...

That was you (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164).

your every keystroke is a vast stundie nomination

Says the guy who thinks the FDNY took part in a cover-up to murder 3,000 people (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164). The fact that someone so virulently irrational disapproves of me is quite comforting.

[JihadJane]

That is a coincidence. The ONLY reason why my ideology "accords more with the status quo consensus" is while of course not all of it but much of the status quo consensus makes sense to me. I'm not blindly following anything.

Me neither.

Quite true, but obviously it wouldn't be funny in a ha ha way; if I were in your ideological shoes I would pray that I was wrong, because the scenario you predict wouldn't be fun for anybody.

Agreed but even Iraqis still laugh. Perhaps it would help if you joined me in prayer!

[KreeL]

Actually, several firefighters gave testimony indicating the fires in WTC7 were very large. (Despite what your backwards thinking tells you, when skyscrapers are on fire, it tends to attract the attention of at least some of the several hundred firefighters in the immediate area.) Your little conspiracy buddy you've rushed here to defend basically called them liars by saying they were "exaggerating".

This discussion took place in an earlier thread that didn't involve you. My recommendation to you is to actually know what is going on in a conversation before you decide to butt in. This way, you'll avoid looking so foolish.

Oh my, YES! As large a fire as the Madrid inferno I'm sure!!

LOL *sarcasm off*

[KreeL]

You are void in logic of how the FDNY operates.

Yes indeed, since the firefighting 'contingent' was 'pulled' - they all just stood around with weinie-sticks rather than help rescue survivors.

Makes total logical sense to YOU maybe.:confused:

[Corsair 115]

They have established huge military bases in Iraq which they are unlikely to abandon voluntarily for a long time.


And unless those bases are used to determine how much oil will be pumped out of Iraqi wells and to which country that oil will be shipped, the presence of military bases means absolutely nothing because they are not exercising control over the oil.


Why should they be?


It's a consequence of your own argument. You claim the point of the Iraqi campaign was to control the Iraqi oil supply. As I keep pointing out, control only means control if you actually exercise it. Thus, the U.S. should be getting more oil from Iraq as it exercises its control over Iraqi oil. It's not doing that. This works against your argument.


There is no need to spend money making Canada safe for the oil industry.


There is need for much expenditure in establishing the necessary infrastructure to take full advantage of what the oil sands has to offer. The U.S. could speed this process by helping fund the construction of this infrastructure.


Neither Iraq nor Canada is the solution.


This works against your argument since hundreds of billions was spent on Iraqi oil control according to you but no similar expenditure was made on oil sands infrastructure by the U.S.


The world's oil supply is due to go into decline about now.


Experts are divided on this. Some agree, others do not. Thus, it is not irrefutable fact.


The US is operating an energy-hungry global empire.


Yes, so oil hungry that the amount it imports has declined each of the last three years. Imports dropped by 2.5% in 2008 compared to the year before, and are 3.4% off the high of 2005.


The Pentagon may have its eyes on most of Iraq's easily extractable, high quality oil in the long term.


I guess your use of the word "may" absolves you of having to provide any evidence to support your claim. There may be unicorns too.


115 billion barrels is a lot of oil and Iraq's is the highest quality oil in the world.


You keep saying this. Might you actually provide an official source for this claim so that we might judge its veracity?


The US also has an interest in preventing competitors from seizing control of Iraq's oil in the future.

Care to name these supposed competitors? Might you offer why the U.S. stopped at Iraq and didn't proceed to take Iran and add another 138 billion barrels to its basket of controlled oil reserves?


The military occupation of Iraq by another power is now far less likely than before it became a US garrison.


And what, exactly, was the likelihood of that before the U.S. invasion? I don't recall the forces of any other nation massing its troops on the Iraqi border for an imminent invasion.


"If you control the oil you control the country, if you control food, you control the population" - Henry Kissinger

Only as I keep pointing out the U.S. is not actually controlling the oil. Unless it decides how much is produced and where it is sent, it is not controlling the oil. It's pretty simple.


The subjugation and occupation of Iraq is also part of a US policy of encircling Iran with military bases.


Do you have a source for this claim? Or is this another "may" on your part?



I don't see how a major Depression can be avoided.


So we're not in a Depression yet after all? That's not what your original comment stated.


Well, no-one could accuse you of being a pessimist!


The data is freely available. Compare unemployment, interest, and inflation rates of the 1980-82 recession to the current situation. While unemployment echoes the earlier recession, the inflation and interest rates most certainly do not. That means two of the three elements of the so-called 'misery index' are much better today than twenty-eight years ago. (If I had to guess, I'd say you're too young to remember those days. Indeed, I'd wager you weren't even born then. Some of us here actually lived through those times.)


Asserting that wars, including the aggressive, unprovoked invasion of Iraq, are fought over energy resources is hardly "conspiracy" talk.


It certainly is when you connect it to the idea that the U.S. government itself perpetrated 9/11. And your assertion is of little meaning unless you provide some concrete evidence to support it. Thus far you have failed to do so. And the data that is available actually works against it, both substantively and logically.


Have merry fun looking forward to the next batch of fraudulent financial instruments.


Not every nation allowed its financial system to engage in the kind of foolishness that the United States unfortunately allowed its financial system to engage in. Some nations actually have stable and secure banking systems at the moment. They'd be in even better shape were it not for the drag placed on the overall system by the problems largely initiated by the U.S. financial misadventures.

[beachnut]

Yes indeed, since the firefighting 'contingent' was 'pulled' - they all just stood around with weinie-sticks rather than help rescue survivors.

Makes total logical sense to YOU maybe.:confused:All the people were out of WTC7. It was expected to fall due to fire and damage. The FD does pull men out of the fires when structural failure is possible, they do it all the time. Sad you make fun of the FD on 911 and don't have a clue what happen save your delusions made up by idiots for you to repeat.

So you make fun of the FDNY. Good job being all you can for 911Truth delusion experts selling implied lies in books and DVD. Do you get a cut of the junk as you apologize for terrorists?

[KreeL]

WTC7 was expected to fall? You mean around the time BBC reported it?

Oh, look, it fell! No wait....it's GOING to FALL...any minute now....here it comes...THERE, HOW ABOUT THAT FRIENDS!

Never before in history...and all those firemen knew it was going to fall...probably around 5:30pm...yeah right. They didn't think WTC3 was going to fall....or 1...or 2, but 7 they knew absolutely for sure. How do we know that? Because a dude in a black suit told them to move people back.

Do not insult other posters. If you continue to ignore moderator warnings further action, up to and including suspension or banning, is likely to follow.

[Redtail]

WTC7 was expected to fall? You mean around the time BBC reported it?

Oh, look, it fell! No wait....it's GOING to FALL...any minute now....here it comes...THERE, HOW ABOUT THAT FRIENDS!

Never before in history...and all those firemen knew it was going to fall...probably around 5:30pm...yeah right. They didn't think WTC3 was going to fall....or 1...or 2, but 7 they knew absolutely for sure. How do we know that? Because a dude in a black suit told them to move people back.

Edited for civility.

So the firemen lied? Wow...

[beachnut]

...
Edited for civility.
The fireman expected WTC7 would fall due to the fire raging in WTC7.

Why do you call the firemen liars? You have failed to make your point by not researching 911 save spewing failed ideas and lies.

Your weak apologies for terrorist is due to your complete lack of knowledge and research on 911 and all you can do is lie about your guvtard name calling. Pathetic post as you spew delusions at an increased rate thinking Jones has discovered thermite.

The dumb luck is 911Truth has zero capabilities to understand fire and structures so any mindless story about 911 is supported; must be a required trait for joining the delusion club of 911Truth.

[Bananaman]

Kreel:
WTC7 was expected to fall? You mean around the time BBC reported it?

Oh, look, it fell! No wait....it's GOING to FALL...any minute now....here it comes...THERE, HOW ABOUT THAT FRIENDS!

Never before in history...and all those firemen knew it was going to fall...probably around 5:30pm...yeah right. They didn't think WTC3 was going to fall....or 1...or 2, but 7 they knew absolutely for sure. How do we know that? Because a dude in a black suit told them to move people back.

Edited for civility.

Brainwashing is an amazing thing. It dispenses with any need for rational thought or analysis JUST LIKE THAT, (as Tommy Cooper would say).


Bananaman (The Despairing at the Weeblish nature of troofers.

[johnny karate]

Oh my, YES! As large a fire as the Madrid inferno I'm sure!!

Yes indeed, since the firefighting 'contingent' was 'pulled' - they all just stood around with weinie-sticks rather than help rescue survivors.

Never before in history...and all those firemen knew it was going to fall...probably around 5:30pm...yeah right. They didn't think WTC3 was going to fall....or 1...or 2, but 7 they knew absolutely for sure. How do we know that? Because a dude in a black suit told them to move people back.

That the WTC7 fires were large and raged unfought for several hours is matter of record as established by the FDNY. That WTC7 was in danger of collapse, and expected to do so for several hours before it actually did, is a matter of record as established by the FDNY.

If you take issue with either of these statements, perhaps you should check out this thread (http://forums.firehouse.com/showthread.php?t=107457) in the Firehouse.com forums. Several firefighters, including some members of the FDNY who were actually there on 9/11, are discussing these very topics.

Maybe you could join and tell them how you think they are all liars.

[lapman]

Oh my, YES! As large a fire as the Madrid inferno I'm sure!!You mean that fire to an undamaged building that caused the collapse of the steel portions of the building solely due to fire while the reinforced concrete core remained standing? That fire?

[Mince]

WTC7 was expected to fall? You mean around the time BBC reported it?

Oh, look, it fell! No wait....it's GOING to FALL...any minute now....here it comes...THERE, HOW ABOUT THAT FRIENDS!

Never before in history...and all those firemen knew it was going to fall....

I'm going to go with "precaution." I mean, it's not like they didn't have immediate precedent:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sczTcrRp1bY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sczTcrRp1bY)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ESaIEVxLnK4


Never before in history? Uh, it happened mere hours earlier. From the firefighters perspective, you don't think it was a good move to presume the building might collapse (given the immediate precedent) and take cautions to move everyone away from the building?

[defaultdotxbe]

WTC7 was expected to fall? You mean around the time BBC reported it?

Oh, look, it fell! No wait....it's GOING to FALL...any minute now....here it comes...THERE, HOW ABOUT THAT FRIENDS!

Never before in history...and all those firemen knew it was going to fall...probably around 5:30pm...yeah right. They didn't think WTC3 was going to fall....or 1...or 2, but 7 they knew absolutely for sure. How do we know that? Because a dude in a black suit told them to move people back.

Do not insult other posters. If you continue to ignore moderator warnings further action, up to and including suspension or banning, is likely to follow.
of all the CTers mental gymnastics this is easily my favorite

you assume WTC7 was intentionally demolished, and therefore wouldnt have collapsed on its own

you then assume no one on site should have expected it to collapse

you then further assume anyone who DID expect it to collapse must have been informed of the planned demolition

you finally claim this as proof of a demolition


i love it

[johnny karate]

of all the CTers mental gymnastics this is easily my favorite

you assume WTC7 was intentionally demolished, and therefore wouldnt have collapsed on its own

you then assume no one on site should have expected it to collapse

you then further assume anyone who DID expect it to collapse must have been informed of the planned demolition

you finally claim this as proof of a demolition


i love it

Classic Truther gambit. Evidence of a conspiracy is evidence of a conspiracy. Absence of evidence of a conspiracy is evidence of a conspiracy.

[Mince]

Absence of evidence of a conspiracy is evidence of a conspiracy.

More precisely, evidence of the cover-up of a conspiracy.

[roundhead]

All the people were out of WTC7. It was expected to fall due to fire and damage. The FD does pull men out of the fires when structural failure is possible, they do it all the time. Sad you make fun of the FD on 911 and don't have a clue what happen save your delusions made up by idiots for you to repeat.

So you make fun of the FDNY. Good job being all you can for 911Truth delusion experts selling implied lies in books and DVD. Do you get a cut of the junk as you apologize for terrorists?


No steel framed building is "expected" to fall because of fire damage, if they were "expected to" it would have some time in history already happened(possibly often, to qualify as "expected")

Prior to 9/11 it had NEVER happened, so to say it was"expected" is an out and out lie.

Damage unrelated to fire had nothing to do with building 7's demise, per Nist. So among your many lies, just thought i would point out that specific one.

The FD didnt pull people out of the towers who were fighting fires, must mean those buildings werent "expected" to fall??

You lie and twist the truth "extremely" poorly.


The only thing i "expect" is to listen to constant lies from you and others of your ilk who continue to slurp out of the same rancid 9/11 OCT punchbowl.

[johnny karate]

No steel framed building is "expected" to fall because of fire damage, if they were "expected to" it would have some time in history already happened(possibly often, to qualify as "expected")

Prior to 9/11 it had NEVER happened, so to say it was"expected" is an out and out lie.

Damage unrelated to fire had nothing to do with building 7's demise, per Nist. So among your many lies, just thought i would point out that specific one.

The FD didnt pull people out of the towers who were fighting fires, must mean those buildings werent "expected" to fall??

You lie and twist the truth "extremely" poorly.


The only thing i "expect" is to listen to constant lies from you and others of your ilk who continue to slurp out of the same rancid 9/11 OCT punchbowl.

The members of the FDNY who witnessed the collapse of WTC7 firsthand posting in this thread (http://forums.firehouse.com/showthread.php?t=107457) are in disagreement with your stellar analysis, and think people who subscribe to your brand of idiocy are scum.

But of course, we all know what you think of the FDNY (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4413684&postcount=164)...

[TSR]

Absence of evidence of a conspiracy is evidence of a conspiracy.

More precisely, evidence of the cover-up of a conspiracy.

.
"the fact that there has been no sabotage is, itself, ominous..."
.

[stilicho]

I don't see how a major Depression can be avoided. Maybe there's something I'm not seeing.

Understatement of the millenium right there.

[JihadJane]

And unless those bases are used to determine how much oil will be pumped out of Iraqi wells and to which country that oil will be shipped, the presence of military bases means absolutely nothing because they are not exercising control over the oil.

Do you think that military planners never make provisions for future developments?

It's a consequence of your own argument. You claim the point of the Iraqi campaign was to control the Iraqi oil supply. As I keep pointing out, control only means control if you actually exercise it. Thus, the U.S. should be getting more oil from Iraq as it exercises its control over Iraqi oil. It's not doing that. This works against your argument.

The great thing about Iraq's high-quality oil is that lots of it isn't even tapped. It's money in the bank.

There is need for much expenditure in establishing the necessary infrastructure to take full advantage of what the oil sands has to offer. The U.S. could speed this process by helping fund the construction of this infrastructure.

The military occupation of the Middle East is about securing future supplies. I guess that the US feels supplies from Canada are secure.


This works against your argument since hundreds of billions was spent on Iraqi oil control according to you but no similar expenditure was made on oil sands infrastructure by the U.S.

Whose money is being spent? Oil companies stand to make multi-billions in profit from Iraq's oil.

Experts are divided on this. Some agree, others do not. Thus, it is not irrefutable fact.

True, Peak Oil can only be identified in retrospect but the indicators are compelling that it is not some far-off event that can be ignored by military planners.


Yes, so oil hungry that the amount it imports has declined each of the last three years. Imports dropped by 2.5% in 2008 compared to the year before, and are 3.4% off the high of 2005.

I'll rephrase my original statement:

The US is operating an energy-hungry global empire with a collapsing economy. Iraq is in ruins.


I guess your use of the word "may" absolves you of having to provide any evidence to support your claim. There may be unicorns too.

My "may" has logic on its side. Unicorns don't eat oil.


You keep saying this. Might you actually provide an official source for this claim so that we might judge its veracity?

It's your figure. I have already verified that Iraq's oil is very high quality. You could do so yourself very easily, too:



Why Iraq’s Oil is so coveted by the big companies

Oil in Iraq is especially attractive to the big international oil companies because of three factors:

(1)high quality/high value product

Iraq’s oil is generally of high quality because it has attractive chemical properties, notably high carbon content, lightness and low sulfur content, that make it especially suitable for refining into the high-value products. For these reasons, Iraqi oil commands a premium on the world market.

...

(2)huge supplies

...

(3)exceptionally low production costs, yielding a high per barrel profit

The US Department of Energy states that “Iraq’s oil production costs are amongst the lowest in the world, making it a highly attractive oil prospect.” This is because Iraq’s oil comes in enormous fields that can be tapped by relatively shallow wells, producing a high “flow rate.” Iraq’s oil rises rapidly to the surface, because of high pressure on the oil reservoir from water and from associated natural gas deposits.

[compare this with Canadian Oil Sands -JJ]

'Oil in Iraq: the heart of the Crisis'

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2002/12heart.htm


"Why is Iraq such a prize? Not only does it have the potential to become the world's largest producer, but no other country can do it as cheaply. That's because, for geological reasons, Iraq boasts the world's most prolific wells.”

'Iraq's Crude Awakening'

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030519-450939,00.html

'Oil in Iraq'

“Iraq is the only country capable of flooding the world with cheap oil on the scale of Saudi Arabia. And that poses a major test for Washington."


http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/irqindx.htm


Care to name these supposed competitors? Might you offer why the U.S. stopped at Iraq and didn't proceed to take Iran and add another 138 billion barrels to its basket of controlled oil reserves?

Iraq has shown that are limits to what the US can achieve with violence.

The whole world is competing for the disproportionately vast amount of oil the US consumes but China, India, Russia, France and the Middle Eastern oil-producing countries themselves should be particularly noted in relation to Iraq.

The US normally only attacks defenseless countries. Iran is not Iraq. Iraq has not set a good precedent for the efficiency of US military operations!


And what, exactly, was the likelihood of that before the U.S. invasion? I don't recall the forces of any other nation massing its troops on the Iraqi border for an imminent invasion.

Doesn't the future exist in your world?

A world in which the energy supply is shrinking is completely different to the one we are used to, which has had a ever-increasing supply of cheap energy.



Only as I keep pointing out the U.S. is not actually controlling the oil. Unless it decides how much is produced and where it is sent, it is not controlling the oil. It's pretty simple.

Or one can simply keep it in the ground.

A military presence ensures that, if it needs to, the US can impose control on Iraq's oil industry. It is still currently working to ensure that Iraq's oil is in friendly hands.


Do you have a source for this claim? Or is this another "may" on your part?


This map's a bit dated but gives you the general idea:

http://www.mimico-by-the-lake.com/us%20military%20bases%20surround%20iran.jpg


So we're not in a Depression yet after all? That's not what your original comment stated.

It talked about building infrastructure during a Depression.


The data is freely available. Compare unemployment, interest, and inflation rates of the 1980-82 recession to the current situation. While unemployment echoes the earlier recession, the inflation and interest rates most certainly do not. That means two of the three elements of the so-called 'misery index' are much better today than twenty-eight years ago. (If I had to guess, I'd say you're too young to remember those days. Indeed, I'd wager you weren't even born then. Some of us here actually lived through those times.)

I recommend that you do not engage in gambling.

Some depression indicators:

http://thecomingdepression.blogspot.com/2009/04/illusions-of-celebrated-recovery.html


It certainly is when you connect it to the idea that the U.S. government itself perpetrated 9/11. And your assertion is of little meaning unless you provide some concrete evidence to support it. Thus far you have failed to do so. And the data that is available actually works against it, both substantively and logically.

What has 911 got to do with the invasion of Iraq?

[dtugg]

Still no proof that the Iraq war was about securing oil supplies, I see.

What has 911 got to do with the invasion of Iraq?

Exactly.

[defaultdotxbe]

The FD didnt pull people out of the towers who were fighting fires, must mean those buildings werent "expected" to fall??

this of course ignores a fundamental difference in how the FDNY would approach tower7 and towers 1 and 2

tower 7 was already evacuated, towers 1 and 2 were still full of people

do you think that might have had some bearing on their decision to not pull out of 1 and 2?

[johnny karate]

Still no proof that the Iraq war was about securing oil supplies, I see.

Big surprise. If there are more tedious posters here than JihadJane, I haven't seen them. A cat walking across the keyboard would produce a post with more substance than anything I've seen from JihadJane.