From World War 3 To The Age of Peace (2006-2012)

[Mr.Conley]

First, Saudi Arabia does not produce half of the worlds oil. Saudi Arabia produces a bit less than 10 million barrels per day. That sounds like a lot until you realize that the world uses over 84 million barrels per day. The Saudis produce barely 10% of the planets oil. Most US oil is produced in either the United States or Canada- our largest supplier. We get an additional 1-1.5 million bpd from Mexico. Some from Central and South America. Most of the rest is then imported from the Gulf Region; however, this accounts for a small but significant proportion of our oil.

Second. I'm confused. I thought you said the point of these "Black Budget" projects was that since they couldn't get the funding through the Congress or support from the Executive, they had to secretly use drug money. But if its a secret, when the opium supply was threatened, how could the CIA announce to the Federal government that, "Hey our supply of money for projects so terrible we can't even tell you about them has been threatened, so we need you to go over and kick Afganistan's butt." Isn't the point that the black budget projects are secret? Plus why would the government agree to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on wars instead of just shifting production? That way they don't have to redistribute all that money, raising eyebrows and losing a good portion to non-Controller related projects. Plus, besides opium, Afganistan has no real value. You said 60% of the economy was opium anyway, and minerals like zinc are not on the verge of running out even in the US. The country is worse than worthless to us.

Third, there is no way there is an oil field so big as to supply all our oil needs for the next five hundred years in Russia. There is a lot of oil and natural gas, but not that much. Besides, why spend hundreds of billions of dollars taking over a country when they could simply go through the other, loyal stans, through India, and to the ocean. Or how about straight through Pakistan? Or how about across Russia, through Europe, to France, have the oil loaded there and sent onto America. That pipeline would hit everysingle major oil market on the planet and cost 1/10,000th as much money as invading a country. Natural Gas pipelines from Russia through Europe already exist, why not build another? What you propose is inefficent, wildly expensive, and not nearly as effective.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

First, Saudi Arabia does not produce half of the worlds oil. Saudi Arabia produces a bit less than 10 million barrels per day. That sounds like a lot until you realize that the world uses over 84 million barrels per day. The Saudis produce barely 10% of the planets oil. Most US oil is produced in either the United States or Canada- our largest supplier. We get an additional 1-1.5 million bpd from Mexico. Some from Central and South America. Most of the rest is then imported from the Gulf Region; however, this accounts for a small but significant proportion of our oil.

Second. I'm confused. I thought you said the point of these "Black Budget" projects was that since they couldn't get the funding through the Congress or support from the Executive, they had to secretly use drug money. But if its a secret, when the opium supply was threatened, how could the CIA announce to the Federal government that, "Hey our supply of money for projects so terrible we can't even tell you about them has been threatened, so we need you to go over and kick Afganistan's butt." Isn't the point that the black budget projects are secret? Plus why would the government agree to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on wars instead of just shifting production? That way they don't have to redistribute all that money, raising eyebrows and losing a good portion to non-Controller related projects. Plus, besides opium, Afganistan has no real value. You said 60% of the economy was opium anyway, and minerals like zinc are not on the verge of running out even in the US. The country is worse than worthless to us.

Third, there is no way there is an oil field so big as to supply all our oil needs for the next five hundred years in Russia. There is a lot of oil and natural gas, but not that much. Besides, why spend hundreds of billions of dollars taking over a country when they could simply go through the other, loyal stans, through India, and to the ocean. Or how about straight through Pakistan? Or how about across Russia, through Europe, to France, have the oil loaded there and sent onto America. That pipeline would hit everysingle major oil market on the planet and cost 1/10,000th as much money as invading a country. Natural Gas pipelines from Russia through Europe already exist, why not build another? What you propose is inefficent, wildly expensive, and not nearly as effective.

It seems you misunderstand the nature of black ops.

 

[NuclearWinter]

Hey Whatever,

Where are you copying this crap from? There is no way you are writing this garbage on your own, are you a plant from the controllers? You come up with this far out bunch of fairy tales and secure their identity by proving to all of us that this couldn't possibly happen.Who are the controllers, who are you really working for? Hasn't it occured to you that you are a pawn, that the source of all of this junk is nonother than your controller...........pretty scary isn't it. Or maybe there isn't a middle man at all, maybe you are one of the controllers purposely exposing everything to us and trying to sound insane so that even if someone credible would discover the same things you have already discredited it by saying the same thing earlier......and you are obviously insane.


I'm scared! Run away!!!!!!!!!!!!The controllers are after me!!!! They are trying to si le nc e me.......ugh.......goodbye board, run for your lives . . . . .. argh. . . . .

For your information Sitarro, I hand type every bit of information that I post. Rarely if ever will you see me on this board copy and paste something for everyone to see. And yes, it took years for me to study this stuff, and years for me to learn about it, so keep on spitting out your insults and what nots but in the end I guarantee you that the Truth of this information will end up biting you in the ass.

And that goes for anyone else who has closed off their minds to reality.

 

[NuclearWinter]

First, Saudi Arabia does not produce half of the worlds oil. Saudi Arabia produces a bit less than 10 million barrels per day. That sounds like a lot until you realize that the world uses over 84 million barrels per day. The Saudis produce barely 10% of the planets oil. Most US oil is produced in either the United States or Canada- our largest supplier. We get an additional 1-1.5 million bpd from Mexico. Some from Central and South America. Most of the rest is then imported from the Gulf Region; however, this accounts for a small but significant proportion of our oil.

Second. I'm confused. I thought you said the point of these "Black Budget" projects was that since they couldn't get the funding through the Congress or support from the Executive, they had to secretly use drug money. But if its a secret, when the opium supply was threatened, how could the CIA announce to the Federal government that, "Hey our supply of money for projects so terrible we can't even tell you about them has been threatened, so we need you to go over and kick Afganistan's butt." Isn't the point that the black budget projects are secret? Plus why would the government agree to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on wars instead of just shifting production? That way they don't have to redistribute all that money, raising eyebrows and losing a good portion to non-Controller related projects. Plus, besides opium, Afganistan has no real value. You said 60% of the economy was opium anyway, and minerals like zinc are not on the verge of running out even in the US. The country is worse than worthless to us.

Third, there is no way there is an oil field so big as to supply all our oil needs for the next five hundred years in Russia. There is a lot of oil and natural gas, but not that much. Besides, why spend hundreds of billions of dollars taking over a country when they could simply go through the other, loyal stans, through India, and to the ocean. Or how about straight through Pakistan? Or how about across Russia, through Europe, to France, have the oil loaded there and sent onto America. That pipeline would hit everysingle major oil market on the planet and cost 1/10,000th as much money as invading a country. Natural Gas pipelines from Russia through Europe already exist, why not build another? What you propose is inefficent, wildly expensive, and not nearly as effective.

First of all, Mr. Conley, your information is just false. No offense to you, but without statistics to back up what you are saying I cannot just take your word for it. Because I promise you if Saudi Arabia decided to stop shipping us oil today, our country would literally come to a hault.

And the longer they decided to keep us from their oil, the more and more falling apart we would experience.

I suggest strongly Mr. Conley that you do some research on the Capsian landscape before you come in here and tell me without even researching that "it can't produce enough oil to fuel the United States for an extremely long time." It could! And if you research information on it, you will discover that fact. As far as the rest of the World is concerned, there would be a ton of it leftover for them as well.

So please, without posting only your opinion, why not throw some facts in along with it as well? Just a suggestion.

PS - I would also like everyone on this board to understand that I am no oil tycoon. I dispise the fact that our Government knows that it has the technology to come up with other means of energy besides oil but continues to go for oil only because it knows that whoever controls the oil has an enormous amount of power. And that is just sickening.

No. I am one for alternative energy sources. Whatever they may be. Cleaner ones. More efficient ones. And just plain better ones.

 

[NuclearWinter]

The Carlyle Group has an inordinate amount of access to the current administration which is used for their own personal gain, and some people may not have realized the general importance of this situation.

In the early 1990's, the Carlyle Group put George W. Bush on the board of one of their subsidiaries -- CaterAir. To keep him occupied until he could be "selected" to his future job as Governor of Texas, the Carlyle Group lent a helping hand.

But lo and behold, one hand quickly washed the other, for after George W. Bush became Governor, he appointed several people to a Board that controlled the money invested by a Texas Teacher's Pension Fund -- a total of $100 million! So, this board decides to invest this PUBLIC MONEY with a certain group. Guess who it was. Yup, the Carlyle Group! In addition, another entity - the University of Texas Board of Regents -- invested millions of dollars, too. And guess which way it went. To the Carlyle Group. So lets see -- Texas, Bush, money, and the Carlyle Group. A mere coincidence? Yeah right. Follow the money.

A case in point is Wayne Berman, a Washington consultant and George W. Bush fundraiser who got kickbacks of $900,000+ after Connecticut State Treasurer Paul Silvester pushed tens of millions of dollars of state pension funds to the investment portfolio of a certain group. And which group would that be? Yup, the Carlyle Group!

 

[NuclearWinter]

Are things starting to smell a little fishy? Maybe it doesn't matter that oil companies gave thirteen times more money to the Bush campaign in 2000 than they did to Gore, and that electric companies gave seven-times more. Not that I would have ever voted for either one of them, because they were both controlled by the Controllers, but come on now, thats a little one sided. There are tons of dirty dealings and shenanigans going on behind the scenes that aren't getting reported in the mainstream media.

In December, 2001, Frank Carlucci and James Baker (both Carlyle representatives) met at the Ritz-Carlton in Washington, D.C. for their annual investor conference. Also in attendance were the representatives of another important family that had invested huge amounts of money in the Carlyle Group. And what family were these individuals from? Hold your breath, but it was the BIN LADEN family. Worse, another famous politician was rumored to be at this same meeting after he SPENT THE NIGHT AT THE WHITE HOUSE with George W. Bush. And who was it that supposedly met with the bin Laden family after spending the night at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? Answer: George Bush Sr.!

Things are getting even stickier, huh? Well, Larry Klayman, spokesman for Judicial Watch, comments on this subject. "The idea of the President's father, an ex-President himself, doing business with a company under investigation by the FBI in the terror attacks of September 11 is horrible. President Bush should not ask, but demand that his father pull out of the Carlyle Group."

Tom Fitton, President of Judicial Watch, echoes this sentiment. "For the father of our current President to be doing business with foreign governments, there is a clear conflict of interest."

 

[NuclearWinter]

Now some of you might be wondering, "Hey, did I read that correctly? That the Bush family was doing business with the bin Laden family?" Regrettably, yes, you did.

Here's the story. Back in the early 1970s when George Bush started his first company, Arbusto Energy, Inc, his first business partner was Salem bin Laden. Yes, Osama bin Laden's brother! This fact is confirmed by the United Kingdom's "Daily Mail" which wrote that Salem bin Laden, "Invested heavily in Bush's first business venture." Salem is also a close friend of Saudi Arabia's King Fahd.

Now some may say, hey, that was a long time ago. Let bygones be bygones. But how does that account, then, for George Bush Sr.'s meeting TWICE with the bin Laden family prior to the 9-11 attacks, the second time being in January, 2000? Or how the bin Laden's have been frequented by Bush, James Baker, and Frank Carlucci over the past few years in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia?

Charles Freeman, President of the Middle East Policy Council, has said of the clandestine relationship, "If there were ever any company closely connected to the U.S. and it's presence in Saudi Arabia, it's the bin Laden Group. They're the establishment Osama's trying to overthrow."

 

[Mr.Conley]

First of all, Mr. Conley, your information is just false. No offense to you, but without statistics to back up what you are saying I cannot just take your word for it. Because I promise you if Saudi Arabia decided to stop shipping us oil today, our country would literally come to a hault.

And the longer they decided to keep us from their oil, the more and more falling apart we would experience.

Saudi Arabia maintains crude oil production capacity of around 10.5-11.0 million bbl/d, and claims that it is "easily capable" of producing up to 15 million bbl/d in the future and maintaining that production level for 50 years. In June 2005, Saudi Aramco's senior vice president of gas operations, Khalid al-Falih, stated that Saudi Arabia would raise production capacity to more than 12 million bbl/d by 2009, and then possibly to 15 million bbl/d "if the market situation justifies it." Falih added that by 2006, Saudi Arabia would have 90 drilling rigs in the Kingdom, more than double the number of rigs operating in 2004.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/saudi.html
http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0872964.html
That's from the Department of Energy, Saudi Aramco, and even Matt Simmons agrees with current production levels.

I suggest you read the entire article in covers the basics of the Saudi oil situation very well.

As for a Saudi shutdown (which they would never do). We import only 1.5 million bpd from the Saudis (We use over 20 million bpd-again see the page I posted). A lot yes. Enough to send the price up a lot yes. Not enough to destroy the US economy.

I suggest strongly Mr. Conley that you do some research on the Capsian landscape before you come in here and tell me without even researching that "it can't produce enough oil to fuel the United States for 500 years." It could! And if you research information on it, you will discover that fact. As far as the rest of the World is concerned, there would be a ton of it leftover for them as well.

So please, without posting only your opinion, why not throw some facts in along with it as well? Just a suggestion.

Besides the fact that, assuming to growth in demand, you are proposing the there exists an oil field in the Caspian that contains over 15,330,000,000,000 barrels of oil, and that not a single oil company engineer, not a single disaffected executive, not a single Soviet report, not even a retired Russian engineer looking for a quick buck has bothered to mention it to anyone. My search shows that while there is some oil in the Caspian, it does not amount to the equivilent of over 4 times the know amount of oil to have EVER existed on the planet. Unless you have anything to show that such a field could even theoritically exist, the physical evidence does not support your case. Unless you want to, "throw some facts in along as well," I suggest you include either a. expert testimony b. links c. studies d. some other proof of your claim.

You have still failed to address my question about the "Blackbudget projects."

You have also failed to address my concerns for alternative pipelines for said

 

[NuclearWinter]

Tell you what Mr. Conley, I respect you for calmness and maturity when addressming the information I am posting with your questions.

You are obviously a patient man, who is willing to discuss these issues in a civilized manner. And I would be lying if I told you I didn't admire that. I admire that in anyone.

So.....

As far as the pipeline question was concerned, I would have to answer by saying as of now, anything related to how they would operate their oil production facilities and what nots if the United States did find some way to tap into the Capsian landscape and start pumping oil out of that area, that as of right now, since it hasn't happened yet, any of our ideas are purely theoretical. And for us to debate how they would go about doing it, is pointless at the moment for the simple fact that it hasn't even happened yet.

As far as the "Black Budgets" of the CIA are concerned, you have to remember that these people are masters of secrecy, and they admit it out loud. Every United States citizen knows today that there are things that the CIA is doing that may take decades for anyone to even discover if they were ever to discover it at all. The CIA has been operating in secrecy since it's beginnings. There have been "leaks" yes, but the very fact that information has to be "leaked" from the CIA in order to become known shows that for a person to even begin to discover some of the CIA's true operations they have to get lucky and hope that someone spills the beans for them.

If a person thinks they are just going to pick up a local newspaper or turn on the news or even log onto the internet and get down into the nitty gritty of CIA operations than they mine as well give up now because it's just not going to happen. The only way you are ever going to figure out what the CIA is actually doing is to keep your eyes and ears open to what people say who have either had ties to them, or have seen them operate in front of their eyes, or have known some other person who told them something thats credible, or if it is "leaked" into the media through what amounts to usually be an unknown source. Of course there may be a few other ways of obtaining CIA secrets, but the list is not very big at all.

The CIA is not going to come over and have dinner at your house and discuss all of it's dirty dealings with you and your family. Thats the point I am trying to make here. But when you come across crucial information that relates to the CIA from people who fall into any one of the 4 categories I mentioned above along with the others, then you should listen to them. Or at least entertain the possibility that they may be onto something.

But I'll tell you one thing, I am not going to discredit anyone who I have spoken with who was in Vietnam who claimed to have seen some pritty f-ed up stuff going on with the CIA, ect. And yes, I have stumbled across people in my life who have all but admitted to me that the CIA was doing some pritty horrendous things during the Vietnam War. And it doesn't begin there, nor does it end there. I have read articles, books, statements, ect. from people claiming the exact same thing and who have been from what I have observed to be completely honest in their forthcoming and who I refuse to believe would try and take on the CIA and our Government just to pass the time.

So....with that said...I'll try to dig something up on the Caspian Landscape real quick to see if we can actually come up with some numbers here.

 

[NuclearWinter]

Well after some pritty thorough researching, I have concluded that there just isn't enough information out there for anyone to come up with a substantial answer to exactly how much oil is located in the Caspian Sea region. The simple fact is that no one has done enough research in the entire area to come up with a Factual answer. Everything is currently based on estimates.

Anyways, here is a pritty good site with some good information and ESTIMATES on how much oil could possibly come out of the Caspian Sea region and Central Asia.


The Politics of Oil in the Caucasus and Central Asia

by Rosemarie Forsythe
Adelphi, Paper 300


With billions of dollars and crucial strategic influence at stake, the struggle for control over the vast oil resources in the Caucasus and Central Asia is a tale of political intrigue, fierce commercial competition, geo-strategic rivalries, ethnic feuding and elusive independence. Energy resources in this region are concentrated mainly in the Caspian Sea Basin, in Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan, but some of the area's other states, such as Georgia and Armenia, also play a role in energy export issues. Straddling Europe, the Near East and Asia, the Caspian region is one of the largest unexploited sources of oil in the world. Proven and possible reserves are estimated to be as high as 200 billion barrels, putting the region on a par with Iraq.(1) In addition, the area is rich in natural gas with estimated proven and possible reserves of up to 7.89 trillion cubic metres - as much as those of the US and Mexico combined.(2)

The demise of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the subsequent rise of the more vulnerable and less experienced newly independent states of the Caucasus and Central Asia led to an intense political and commercial competition for control over oil resources and export. Some analysts have compared this situation to the 'Great Game' - a nineteenth-century rivalry between Victorian England and Tsarist Russia. The matrix of national identities, mentalities, goals and instruments, however, has changed significantly. In addition, the new players differ in their perception of the game, with some maintaining that the competition is no longer a zero-sum game, while others still believe that it is and see the world through a traditional balance-of-power framework. The stakes involved, however, remain unchanged -- power, influence, security, wealth.

The new playing field is inherently complex and is further complicated by a vast array of problems. Within the region, these include intra-regional conflict, internal political instability, unscrupulous entrepreneurial operators, and a shortfall in commercial expertise and legal infrastructures. Beyond the region lie the threats of proprietorial and competing neighbours. Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan and Turkmenistan, which share the majority of the region's energy deposits, are landlocked and, therefore, dependent on their immediate neighbours for export. This makes them vulnerable to their neighbours' problems and, sometimes, to becoming a pawn in the rivalry of the larger powers adjacent to the Caucasus and Central Asia.

The mercurial nature of the structural and political evolution of these states and of the surrounding regions makes formulation of long-term regional objectives by third-party policy-makers and Western businesses extremely difficult. Both stand to gain or lose significantly depending on whether they correctly predict the outcome of the region's many developing issues.

The benefits of developing and exploiting the Caspian region's oil resources are clear. First, the margin between world oil production capacity and world demand is projected to narrow in the next decade, leading to greater dependence on the Persian Gulf.(3) Central Asian oil could offer an important alternative, diversifying supply. In consequence, as a powerful geo-strategic key, oil offers the region's states the wherewithal to exploit their best opportunity for true independence in 70 years. Finally, with a possible 90-200bn barrels, the potential for national and commercial profit is substantial.(4)

In a wider context, Caspian oil is tied to, and will affect, issues central to current and developing international relations. These include:

*the political and economic future of Russia, and its behaviour towards neighbours and former Soviet republics;

*the political and economic future of Turkey;

*Iran's position in the region, and its relations with the West, with Russia, and with its other neighbours in the former Soviet Union;

*the strategic consequences of greater dependence on Persian Gulf oil;

*tension between Pakistan and India;

*China's future policy towards its neighbours;

*the potential spread of Islam to the region.

This paper focuses on the Caucasus and Central Asian region as an oil producer of considerable geo-strategic importance. Looking first at the region's history and the strategic role that oil has played since the nineteenth century, the paper goes on to identify the major locations of the region's oil and the factors affecting oil development, exploitation and export. These factors include: the political interests and policies of external parties (Russia, Turkey, Iran, China, Pakistan and the US, along with other developed countries); the Caspian Sea dispute - which, in a sense, encapsulates the nature of the intra-regional competition; the internal political problems of the region's states; and the technical and commercial impediments to implementing oil projects. After covering the largest oil development projects as specific cases, the paper discusses principal short- and long-term export options, including the complex issue of pipelines, and concludes by suggesting how the regional states, the US, Russia and other key actors could develop their policies to encourage stable exploitation of Caspian oil.

Major Oil Deposits

The largest oil deposits in the Caucasus and Central Asia are located in Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan. Other deposits and smaller projects exist throughout the region, in Georgia, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Armenia. Estimates of proven and possible reserves across the entire area run to 200bn barrels of oil product. This includes about 30bn barrels of discovered reserves, approximately equal to those of the North Sea. Post-Soviet regional accessibility has led to substantially increased involvement on the part of Western businesses. The more sophisticated technology and geophysical expertise they brought with them have produced reserve estimates much higher than official Soviet figures, which were based on explorations conducted 40 years ago, before the development of advanced methods for finding and exploiting deeper deposits. The region's strategic importance increases with the growth in its discovered oil.

The Caspian Sea area is particularly rich in oil deposits. Recent geophysical estimates indicate that the area holds far more than the Soviet estimate of 10bn barrels.(12) The sea's southern end has attracted most exploration because, until recently, the countries governing the region did not have access to the technology necessary to analyse the north, which suffers from poor infrastructure and bad weather. Additionally, the hydrocarbon reservoirs are very deep, and strong currents make geophysical work difficult.

Kazakhstan has much larger reserves than were estimated during the Soviet period. The 12 sedimentary basins in eastern and central Kazakhstan 'possess the characteristics of world-class basins and some have the potential to contain giant oil- and gas fields', in addition to those already discovered.(13) After Russia, Kazakhstan is considered the richest of the former Soviet republics in oil and gas resources, with more than 60bn barrels, according to industry analysts. Azerbaijan, a significant source of oil for more than a century, has the geophysical potential for much greater production than Soviet geologists thought. Turkmenistan, whose major resource wealth is natural gas, ranks third among the regional states in estimated oil reserves, although a recent domestic report, based on up-to-date geological studies, claims that the country's reserves may be as high as 46bn barrels.(14) Uzbekistan, with its 230 known oil- and gas fields, and Georgia also possess energy reserves, though not on the scale of their neighbors.(15) Armenia, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are thought to have minimal deposits.

It is therefore ironic that, newly independent, and possessing higher-than-expected oil reserves, all the relevant oil-producing countries of the region, except Uzbekistan, have experienced declining production levels against a background of poorly performing economies. This can be attributed to the difficulty in short-term capitalisation on discovered reserves. Further obstructions of regional oil-based economic growth are 'the fragmentation of the All-Union industry, the subsequent breakdown of business links between technologically-interdependent national enterprises, inadequate equipment and material supplies and lack of capital investments ... and huge payment arrears built up by insolvent downstream enterprises'.(16) While the Caucasian and Central Asian states are strong from the point of view of oil potential, they are afflicted by infrastructural weakness leading to slow economic growth, and a degree of international vulnerability.


http://www.treemedia.com/cfrlibrary/library/background/forsythe.html


----------------

So again, these are merely estimates, but you can easily see why the United States would want to tap into the Caspian Sea and why the Controllers would do whatever it took to make sure that happens.

And while right now Mr. Conley it may be impossible to determine whether your 15,330,000,000,000 barrels of oil could be found there (And you never explained how you came up with that number), it has already been ESTIMATED that there are more than 200,000,000,000 barrels of oil in the area to be discovered. And the key word is Estimated. Which means that no one currently knows exactly much is actually out there.

 

[Mr.Conley]

Ahh. 200 billion barrels. Thats a sizable amount, but not enough for 500 years.
1. The world uses 84 million barrels of oil per day. http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/contents.html

2. Take 84 million and multiply by 365 for annual consumption.
84,000,000x365=30,660,000,000 or about 30.7 billion barrels per year.

So this shows us that there is an estimated 6 years of oil in the Caspian at current levels.
What you also have to remember is that with current technology, only about 30% of the oil in a field can be extracted, so in reality, the figure is even less (Although your article did not state whether the estimate was total reserves or total recoverable reserves.) However, new technologies being introduced into extraction have raised extraction rates to as high as 70%, so we will see.
In other words, the oil available from the Caspian is significant, but not Earthshattering. The Russians should still extract and it will play a major role in Asian politics, but the US will probably see very little of that oil simply because of its remote location.

 

[Mr.Conley]

As far as the pipeline question was concerned, I would have to answer by saying as of now, anything related to how they would operate their oil production facilities and what nots if the United States did find some way to tap into the Capsian landscape and start pumping oil out of that area. Right now, since it hasn't happened yet, any of our ideas are purely theoretical. And for us to debate how they would go about doing it, is pointless at the moment for the simple fact that it hasn't even happened yet.

Understandable. I'm just saying that I doubt the US would wage a multibillion dollar waf when they could just as easiliy build the pipeline around Afganistan either through the other "stans" and India or across Russia and Europe that would cost about 500 million. The fields are potentially lucrative, but will require years to develop. By that time, the owners will be able to extract a higher profit by selling their oil directly to China or India then by shipping from pipeline to ship to the United States. I don't think this is the reason; it's just to impractable and expensive to justify an invasion.

 

[Mr.Conley]

As far as the "Black Budgets" of the CIA are concerned, you have to remember that these people are masters of secrecy, and they admit it out loud. Every United States citizen knows today that there are things that the CIA is doing that may take decades for anyone to even discover if they were ever to discover it at all. The CIA has been operating in secrecy since it's beginnings. There have been "leaks" yes, but the very fact that information has to be "leaked" from the CIA in order to become known shows that for a person to even begin to discover some of the CIA's true operations they have to get lucky and hope that someone spills the beans for them.

If a person thinks they are just going to pick up a local newspaper or turn on the news or even log onto the internet and get down into the nitty gritty of CIA operations than they mine as well give up now because it's just not going to happen. The only way you are ever going to figure out what the CIA is actually doing is to keep your eyes and ears open to what people say who have either had ties to them, or have seen them operate in front of their eyes, or have known some other person who told them something thats credible, or if it is "leaked" into the media through what amounts to usually be an unknown source. Of course there may be a few other ways of obtaining CIA secrets, but the list is not very big at all.

The CIA is not going to come over and have dinner at your house and discuss all of it's dirty dealings with you and your family. Thats the point I am trying to make here. But when you come across crucial information that relates to the CIA from people who fall into any one of the 4 categories I mentioned above along with the others, then you should listen to them. Or at least entertain the possibility that they may be onto something.

But I'll tell you one thing, I am not going to discredit anyone who I have spoken with who was in Vietnam who claimed to have seen some pritty f-ed up stuff going on with the CIA, ect. And yes, I have stumbled across people in my life who have all but admitted to me that the CIA was doing some pritty horrendous things during the Vietnam War. And it doesn't begin there, nor does it end there. I have read articles, books, statements, ect. from people claiming the exact same thing and who have been from what I have observed to be completely honest in their forthcoming and who I refuse to believe would try and take on the CIA and our Government just to pass the time.

I get what your saying. If the CIA is as dark as you claim, then there is no way anyone could ever really find out without already being in so deep that they can't come out.

Here is my question though. There supposed projects that are so secret and terrible that they can't tell Congress because they wouldn't receive the funding. If, as you claim, they made money from drugs to pay for it and the closure of Afganistan hurt their profits, how could the CIA convince Congress to invade a country for a reason (drug money) that they can't tell them to do something (horrible experiments) that they can't say. Congress isn't going to invade a country because the CIA says, "Hey, go invade Afganistan, we can't tell you why though."

 

[Said1]

NucWint:

I think you need to join this team:Security Culture

Rah, rah.

 

[NuclearWinter]

Very good give and take session there Mr. Conley. I appreciate your input. Perhaps the original figure I used would be better for just the United States alone. However, I still stand by my statement that no one actually knows how much oil reserves exist out there in the Caspian region in terms of it's entirety. And perhaps, if the entire area was scanned for oil, from top to bottom, it might be found that if we had the technology to dig it all up, that we could fuel the World's needs for about that amount of years.

Unfortunately though, as much as I love sticking on one subject to milk out all of the facts that we can about it, I need to press forward with my posting. However, please continue putting your input into the equation Mr. Conley because I am sure that I'm not the only one who likes to see what you have to offer here.

 

[NuclearWinter]

NucWint:

I think you need to join this team:Security Culture

Rah, rah.

lol. Thanks Said1. I'll keep that in mind.

Kinda like the 1 man team I got going at the moment though. I don't really need much more than that. Eventually, when the truth of this information is finally revealed to the people, I have a feeling that we'll all be rising up together anyways. Call me crazy.

 

[NuclearWinter]

But to get back to what I was mentioning before, about the Bush-Bin Laden family connection.

This information changes the entire complexion of the "War on Terrorism" doesn't it? I mean, the bin Laden family invested $2 million into the Carlyle Group, but that's only what's been "seen". A foreign investor with ties to the bin Laden's told the European Wall Street Journal on September 28, 2001 that, "The family's overall interest with Carlyle is considerably larger." And according to the Wall Street Journal on September 27, 2001, guess who brokered these deals between the bin Laden's and Carlyle? Good 'ol George Bush, Sr!!

So, due to the touchy nature of this relationship, the bin Laden's pulled their investment money out of Carlyle in October 2001. But let's stop for a moment and examine this situation. George Bush had invested money into the Carlyle Group, and was also employed by them. Likewise, the bin Laden's were substantial investors in the Carlyle Group, and have had business ties with George Bush for 30 years since the early 1970's. Now you have to ask yourself, how does the Carlyle Group derive a large percentage of their revenue? Answer: From foreign military contracts and America's War Machine!

 

[NuclearWinter]

Zeroing in on this sinister configuration of forces, the Wall Street Journal, on September 27, 2001 in their "Special Report": Aftermath of Terror" section stated: "If the United States boosts defense spending in the quest to stop Osama bin Laden's alleged terrorist activities, there may be one unexpected beneficiary: Mr. bin Laden's family."

Is it starting to sink in yet? George Bush, Sr. is tied to the Carlyle Group and America's War Machine like the spots on a leopard. And guess what his son - the current President of the United States -- wants to do very soon -- wage another war in the Middle East. And the bin Laden family, former investors in the Carlyle Group, also have a direct family member acting as key player in this scenario -- their brother, Osama bin Laden.

Sons, brothers, business ties, investments, the Carlyle Group, huge amounts of profits to be made, oil pipelines running across Afghanistan, and America's War Machine. Do these connections and inter-related "coincidences" stink to high Heaven? You better believe they do.

 

[Mr.Conley]

About 27 years if the oil just went to the US...not that it would.

While you are correct that it is theoritically possible for there to be a significantly higher amount of oil in the region. Most estimate are ususally in the range of 10-20%. A few are off by larger amounts, but I've never heard of any estimate being off by factor of 20.

 

[Mr.Conley]

I have heard about the bin Laden/Carliyle connection somewhere. However, I believe the family pulled out right before or soon after Bush Sr. joined.

The bin Laden's are supposedly the second richest family in Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden's father I believe had several dozen children. Osama was disowned by the family after he became a terrorist, so they don't have a connection anymore. The family made its money in construction. I don't think anyone should declare the entire Bin Laden family guilty of terrorism merely because their forced association with a disowned son.