That's funny Ed,
I thought I saw President Bush holding hands with a Saudi person some
time ago, and I heard that his dad was fundamentally owned by a bunch of
these Saudi people all controlling the world's oil flows. I must have
been either mistaken or blind... These must have been Mossad agents in
disguise... Silly me for not immediately seeing that...
P.
----- Original Message ----
From: Edmund Storms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sunday, June 8, 2008 11:40:17 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Oil Gang responds
Hi Jack,
You are right. The oil gang has benefited from Iraq. However, this
benefit is temporary, as I'm sure they must realize. Meanwhile,
decisions have set in motion that will eventually lead to their demise
as well as a situation that no one wants. For example, all kinds of oil
saving technologies are in the pipeline. In addition, people are so
pissed off they will put severe restrictions on the industry in the US.
To make matters worse, if Israel has its way, the economic and political
situation will get completely out of control. Meanwhile, China is
developing its own oil sources independent of the jokers we deal with.
Either the oil gang is totally incompetent or so totally corrupted by
greed they are blind to the long term consequences of their actions. The
third possibility, which I favor, is that the Bush gang is so
incompetent and so under the domination of Israel that they created a
situation that even the oil gang is pissed off about.
Ed
Taylor J. Smith wrote:
> Ed Storms wrote on Sat, 24 May 2008:
>
> "This approach has been applied repeatedly with the
> same outcome. For example, during the cold war, Russia
> made simple and cheap reactors that powered their
> satellites. We, on the other hand, tried to make a
> "perfect" reactor that totally failed. As a result, we
> were forced to use solar panels that even today make the
> satellites easy targets.
>
> These are the kinds of decisions that eventually lead to
> failure even though our arrogance make them look good at
> the time. You can see the same attitude being applied to
> the Iraq situation. We never learn."
>
> Hi Ed,
>
> The objective evidence is that our policy in Iraq has
> been an outstanding success from the view point of those
> in control of the U.S. government, namely the Oil Gang.
> In fact, the destruction of the Golden Mosque which started
> the Sunni - Shiite civil was classic imperial strategy:
> Divide et Impera.
>
> Previously I wrote "The gangsters have taken another hit,
> and Admiral Fallon deserves the credit. Meanwhile, the
> oil glut is intensifying as the U. S. miltary has been able
> to nullify Bush's laughable sabre rattling, increasing the
> probability of $40 per barrel oil before the end of 2008.
> The terror premium could soon evaporate, and the price of
> oil could drop to $70 per barrel ovenight.
>
> What will the Oil Gang do about this? ..."
>
> Well, now we know.
>
> Jack Smith
>
> ------------------
>
> http://www.pbs.org/nbr/site/onair/transcripts/080606b/
>
> TRANSCRIPT fom The Nightly Business Report, 6-6-08
>
> ``John Kilduff, Energy Analyst at MF Global Offers An
> Outlook on Oil
>
> SUZANNE PRATT: Joining me now to talk about that huge move
> in oil prices today is John Kilduff, energy analyst at MF
> Global. John, welcome back to the program.
>
> JOHN KILDUFF, SR. VP, ENERGY, MF GLOBAL: Thank you Suzanne.
>
> PRATT: So it was a crazy day in the energy market. Tell
> us what happened.
>
> KILDUFF: Well, it was really one for the record books. We
> had never been lock ... limit up. Futures rose as much as
> they possibly could today, and the commodity markets are
> still a little old-fashioned with our circuit breakers and
> we reacted strongly to several of the things that you've
> been speaking about in this broadcast so far.
>
> I think chief among them though was the shudder that
> was sent through the market from Israel and the comments
> from their transportation minister, who isn't just some
> transportation minister. This gentleman was a former
> defense minister, is seeking to succeed Ehud Olmert
> because of the scandal that's going on embroiling
> his administration, and he also made a comment that
> U.S. military had approved of this plan. [' Israel's
> Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz told a newspaper that
> Iran faced airstrikes if it did not abandon its nuclear
> program.']
>
>
> So the oil traders didn't really want to stick around too
> long to get the details on that. They just bought with
> both hands because of the potentialities that exist and
> the repercussions that would come from such an attack.
>
> PRATT: So is geopolitical risk now back on the table? It
> was sort of missing from the marketplace for a little
> while.
>
> KILDUFF: We were, for a while, really just dealing with
> the economics of everything. From the -- from watching
> the value of the dollar closely, watching interest rate
> moves very closely, even hanging each day on the various
> data points to see if the economy was slowing or not,
> which would dictate future energy demand and whether or
> not prices were justified at the ever-higher levels. But,
> yes, this brought the geopolitical worries front and center
> once again.
>
> PRATT: About a month ago I think I believe you were saying
> that you thought the top for oil prices would be somewhere
> in the $130s range. Now we're almost approaching $140. Are
> all bets off for you? What do you think? Where are we
> going in terms of prices?
>
> KILDUFF: We're at a crossroads. I have to say the bias
> is towards the upside still now. We had called for $138
> to be the top and when we hit $135 at the end of May, we
> thought that it might have been over. A lot of things are
> certainly coming together to argue for that. The dollar
> had stabilized and was rebounding. Some of the economic
> data points were sufficiently down ... not the least of
> which was U.S. motorists driving about 6 percent less and
> diesel fuel consumption down about 8 percent.
>
> But now that is all out the window. I think you have to
> say it's going to go higher still before it can crack and
> go back lower.
>
> PRATT: So today we had Morgan Stanley analysts saying
> $150. Weight in on this. Where do you think we're going?
>
> KILDUFF: At this point obviously setting a new high. We
> are looking now at the next target is $142. You're going
> to need some help, some events of some import to get to
> that $150. The Israeli worry here today was one of those
> that needed to emerge. And, to be honest, to the extent
> that we see climb down from this by Israel and talking
> it down by the U.S. military, some of this worry could
> quickly come out of this market. So I think we will get a
> $140 print next week, but I would look for these prices
> to come down. I just cannot see how they're sustainable
> given the demand response that we are in fact seeing at
> least here in the U.S. and more and more globally.
>
> PRATT: What about speculators, everybody has been talking
> about speculators in the market. Do you think they were
> a huge factor in the market today?
>
> KILDUFF: There was a lot of buying that went through and
> there was certainly capitulation of all sorts. My point
> about the speculation is that it will stop - speculation
> will stop once it stops making sense to speculate on these
> various issues.
>
> The consequences of an attack in Iran are that we could
> see 25 percent of the world's oil knocked off line because
> of the blocking of the Strait of Hormuz just off Iran's
> shores. And that would argue for $300 oil, if I can even
> put a price on it.
>
> So I think, again, the demand deterioration continues. Some
> of these geopolitical worries get pushed back again. Some
> of the speculation will come out of the market, but there
> is no room for error. We cannot make up any lost supply at
> this point. So that's what is driving these things. There
> is a rationale behind the speculation.
>
> PRATT: Some very interesting comments. Thank you for
> joining us.
>
> KILDUFF: Thank you.
>
> PRATT: My guest this evening, John Kilduff of MF Global.''
>
>
>
