Re: [CTRL] Chevron on Iraqi Oil
-Caveat Lector- Steve, I agree that this whole operation is potentially a huge boondoggle for the oil industry and a massive rip-off of the American people. But big oil has major doubts about whether the crackpots and incompetents running the Bush administration are going to make the reconstruction work and stick, regardless of whose money is paying for it. Those oil pipelines are highly vulnerable to sabotage by the angry natives. Bush administration policies are more likely to lead to a massive revolt of the Arab and Muslim masses against all American interests than to big new profits for American oil companies. The neocons have gone out of their way to provoke Arab and Muslim hatred of Americans. I'm limited to five messages here per day in CTRL, so I may not be able to continue this discussion without some regular interruptions. political-research, here http://groups.yahoo.com/group/political-research/ is wide open for discussion on this fascinating topic. Let's just make an effort to keep it civil. - Original Message - From: Steve Wingate To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 12:39 AM Subject: Re: [CTRL] Chevron on Iraqi Oil One more question: Who is paying for the reconstruction of the oil infrastructure in post-war Iraq? The oil companies, or the US taxpayers? I think you know the answer.Who benefits? The oil companies and the oil service companies. Sounds like a win-win situation for the oil industry, and a real looser for you and I, and our children, and their children, and so on...Steve--ANOMALOUS IMAGES AND UFO FILEShttp://www.anomalous-images.com www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ctrl To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Chevron on Iraqi Oil
-Caveat Lector- In a 1998 speech at the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco, Chevron CEO Kenneth Derr candidly remarked: "Iraq possesses huge reserves of oil and gas -- reserves I'd love Chevron to have access to." There is a major gap in your logic here. OF COURSE any major oil company in the world would love to have access to Iraqi oil. One cannot conclude from this wish that they have supported Bush's unilateral invasion and occupation of Iraq. There is absolutely no connection between the two propositions. The desire for access to Iraqi oil would more likely motivate big oil to work out friendly business relationships with Saddam's regime than to invade Iraq. Big oil has been especially worried that the invasion of Iraq might upset their currently highly profitably business arrangements with nations like Saudi Arabia. Why do you think it is that Israel and Israeli supporters have exhibited so much hostility towards big oil over the decades? The reason is that big oil has sought FRIENDLY relations with Arab and Muslim oil producers around the world. Big oil requires a stable and friendly environment in which to extract oil efficiently and profitably. It is far too easy for an enraged occupied people to sabotage oil pipelines. It is impossible for any military force, no matter how large, to protect every foot of the pipelines. You have failed to respond to any of the details in the expert articles I've posted on this subject from Anthony Sampson, Roger Burbach, Daniel Yergin and others. Do you think they are all part of a sinister plot to protect big oil? The few articles you've posted don't even support your own argument. You seem to be operating more from an emotional conspiracy theory about big oil's role in the Iraq War than from a rational analysis of the facts. It's true that Dick Cheney has close ties to the oil industry. He also has intimate and emotional ties to the neocons, and is a prominent member of the PNAC, a prominent neocon outfit. I don't deny that the neocons have succeeded in luring a few big oil principals into their messianic campaign to ignite World War IV on behalf of Israel. But the oil industry as a whole, just like the CIA and the American military establishment, has dismissed the arguments of the neocons about the benefits of American attacks on Arab and Muslim nations as pure bunk. What do you think the current war between the CIA and the neocon-controlled Bush administration is all about? Why do you think that so many members of the military establishment, like Anthony Zinni and Wesley Clark, have been lashing out at the neocons who engineered the disastrous war on Iraq? - Original Message - From: Steve Wingate To: Sean McBride ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 12:22 AM Subject: Re: [CTRL] Chevron on Iraqi Oil On 5 Oct 2003 at 7:28, Sean McBride wrote:> Point out where Peter Robertson of Chevron Texaco ever expressed any support for an> American war against Iraq. There is nothing in this article to suggest that.The former CEO of Chevron said:In a 1998 speech at the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco, Chevron CEO Kenneth Derr candidly remarked: "Iraq possesses huge reserves of oil and gas -- reserves I'd love Chevron to have access to." www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ctrl To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
Re: [CTRL] Chevron on Iraqi Oil
Iraq's reconstruction, said that amount was "it for the U.S." He said any other reconstruction money would come from elsewhere, including other countries and future "Iraqi oil revenues," which he predicted at "$20 billion a year." In an interview this week, Mr. Natsios said he had based those comments on "the discussion in the interagency process at the time," adding, "That's what the Office of Management and Budget was telling us." Trent Duffy, a budget office spokesman, said this week that "the administration was very clear that the $1.7 billion in initial reconstruction was for the beginning stages and that it was necessary to get a better understanding of the fuller, comprehensive needs going forward." Last week, appearing again before the Senate committee, Mr. Rumsfeld said, "I don't think I did misjudge" Iraq's oil capacity. According to current projections, he said, the country's oil revenues will grow to $12 billion next year from $2 billion this year; they should reach $19 billion in 2005 and $20 billion in 2006. "So, their oil revenues will be contributing," Mr. Rumsfeld said. Yet Mr. Bremer, in his remarks to legislators two weeks ago, said that for the next two years, whatever revenue was reaped from oil production would not exceed the cost of Iraq's day-to-day operating expenses. In 2005, he said, there would be a surplus of only $4 million to $5 million. As for Mr. Cheney's projection in April that oil would produce as much as $20 billion a year, a Cheney aide said last week that "there was much more extensive damage due to looting and sabotage, so we're not going to get there when the vice president anticipated." Reassessing Revenues The public revenue estimates made in the spring were in line with the very top range of projections made by the Pentagon task force. According to the Pentagon official who served on the task force, its projections for yearly oil revenues were $25 billion to $30 billion "in the very best case, no sabotage and little or no battle damage," and about $16 billion in the "worse than best case." The worst case was no revenue for a few years, if there was "major sabotage and some significant battle damage." Last December the Baker Institute estimated that even if there was no war damage, "Iraq's total oil revenues would still only likely average around $10 billion to $12 billion annually." Yet even after the war, some officials in Washington seemed to cling to an optimistic view of Iraq's oil production. In July, Mr. Wolfowitz told a group of senators that production had reached "over a million barrels per day." Although Iraq was having electrical power problems, Mr. Wolfowitz said the oil was flowing "because we brought in portable generators to provide electricity" and planned to bring in more. But Philip Carroll, a retired petroleum executive and the senior American oil adviser in Baghdad, said in an interview that Iraqi oil production "experienced a terrible month in July because electrical problems cut us back to half of what we should have produced." Those problems, including the need to import considerable fuel, he said, led him to arrange new generator leases in late July. Mr. Carroll said that although gross production for the week of July 25 was a million barrels a day, 350,000 barrels had to be injected back into the ground, because of a lack of storage or distribution infrastructure. An aide to Mr. Wolfowitz said he believed that the oil information came from a briefing and that Mr. Wolfowitz's testimony was "sober and nuanced." Once the war ended, and United States officials gained access to Iraq's oil records, they got a more complete picture. "When we actually got their production figures for 2002, we were able to make a distinction between productive capacity and what they were actually producing," said Gary Loew, an Army Corps of Engineers official, reducing their capacity figures by 20 to 25 percent. That reduction roughly corresponded to the Pentagon task force's cuts before the war began. Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company | Home | Privacy Policy | Search | Corrections | Help | Back to Top - Original Message - From: Steve Wingate To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, October 05, 2003 3:14 AM
[CTRL] Chevron on Iraqi Oil
-Caveat Lector- (No problemo, Sean, Halliburten will be glad to take US taxpayers debt to secure Iraqi oil for Chevron. ;-( Chevron Texaco sees 40 billion dollar bill to rebuild Iraqi oil industry Monday, 08-Sep- 2003 9:57AM Story from AFP Copyright 2003 by Agence France-Presse (via ClariNet) DUBAI, Sept 8 (AFP) - Modernising Iraq's oil sector will cost up to 40 billion dollars, Peter Robertson, vice chairman of Chevron Texaco, said Monday. "It will cost 30 to 40 billion dollars to bring Iraq's oil sector up to modern standards and have a sustainable production rate of two to three million barrels per day (bpd)," Robertson told the Middle East Petroleum and Gas conference in Dubai. Robertson did not, however, give a timeframe for when Chevron Texaco expects Iraq to reach such output levels. The war-torn country's future oil revenues will not be sufficient to cover the cost of rehabilitating the oil industry, Robertson said, "putting (the oil) industry in Iraq on a stable footing and providing for its citizens to not be financed by oil revenues themselves." The US administration is struggling to meet the cost of reconstruction in Iraq. US civil administrator Paul Bremer said last month that "several tens of billions of dollars" are needed to rebuild Iraq's infrastruture. Bremer said meeting Iraq's electrical demand alone would require two billion dollars and 12 months of work, while providing clean water would cost 16 billion dollars over four years. Iraq's new administration will be asking donors at a conference in Madrid at the end of October to help foot the bill. Cost estimates for rebuilding the oil industry have been spiralling upwards on almost a daily basis as saboteurs and looters continue to target pipelines and other oil and power facilities. The attacks have severely limited Iraq's export capabilities particularly from the north where the 1.1 million bpd Kirkuk-Ceyhan pipeline remains out of action following several attacks. In the south, exports in August were at 709,000 bpd, Mohammad al-Jibori, the director general of Iraq's State Oil Marketing Organisation (SOMO), told AFP. This is a far cry from the 1.1-1.2 million bpd of Basra light exported before the US-led war. Iraq is hoping to boost the current output levels by the end of September but much will depend on regular power supplies, Jibori said. Output plummeted to around 200,000 bpd in the south last month following a massive power cut in Basra and the surrounding area. The blackout played havoc with the loading schedule for the recently signed term contracts with international oil companies. Iraq is a member of OPEC but has not been included in its production quotas since sanctions were imposed by the United Nations in the wake of the 1990 invasion of Kuwait. -- ANOMALOUS IMAGES AND UFO FILES http://www.anomalous-images.com www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER == CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. Archives Available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
