Greenspan: War about Oil.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2170237,00.html

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Hmmm.... What a surprise.

[opebo]

Well, the 'geopolitical' purpose of the war was to remain the power in control of, or the gaurantor of the supply of, oil, not really about stealing that particular bit of oil. 

Also even this bit of semi-honesty from  the horrible Greenspan is mixed with propaganda - we are expected to ignore the domestic purpose of the war - the feeding from the public treasury of Bush's political supporters, in the hundred of billions (tens of billions not even accounted for).

[ragnar]

Well, the 'geopolitical' purpose of the war was to remain the power in control of, or the gaurantor of the supply of, oil, not really about stealing that particular bit of oil. 

I am rather surprised that you get that.
And in truth I do not see that goal as a bad one.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

He who controls the spice controls the universe.

[Governor PiT]

BACK BREAKING NEWS

September 15, 2007

As We Continue to Identify the Enemies
of the American Revolution in the 21st Century
and Annihilate Them


GREENSPAN FINGERS BUSH-CLINTON CRIME FAMILY IN SECRET GRAND JURY

By Tom Heneghan

http://msnbcmedia4.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/051024/051024_bernanke_hmed_11a.hmedium.jpg
Alan Greenspan, left, steps down Jan. 31 after more than 18 years in office, making way for Bernanke, center, a former Fed governor and current White House economic adviser. Bernanke was nominated by President Bush and is expected to win easy Senate confirmation next month.
Mark Wilson / Getty Images

It can now be reported that former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has testified in a secret National Security Court in Virginia that both the Bush and Clinton Crime Syndicate misused the Federal Reserve system for their own personal financial and political gain.

Further, Greenspan now believes that the current Federal Reserve under Chairman Ben Bernanke is being threatened and blackmailed to lower interest rates, which would place the world banking system in chaos as monetary and currency inflation could reach chaotic levels.

Reference: Informed sources familiar with Bank of America and Bear Stearns allege that the Federal Reserve is on orders from Bushfraud to bail out Bank of America and the Bear Stearns Hedge Fund.

Note: The Northern Rock Bank of the United Kingdom has already collapsed because of the criminal money laundering of both Bank of America and Bear Stearns Hedge Fund.

Bush is actually using the Patriot Act to give the Federal Reserve command and control decisions on monetary policies.

http://media.gatewaync.com/wsj/photos/specialreports/attack/remember/bush1.jpg
Bush-Clinton Crime Family Dynasty
(WSJ photo)

Greenspan has testified in a Virginia National Security Court that both current occupant Bushfraud and his father, former President Bush, along with Bill and Hillary Clinton used the Federal Reserve to set up private offshore alleged national security proprietary accounts for the purpose of laundering narcotics profits from their noted America Global China-Iran/Contra-Mena, Arkansas piggy bank.

http://gfx.dagbladet.no/pub/artikkel/4/49/497/497614/Albright_858_1176434729.jpg
Madeleine Albright (Foto: CHIP EAST/REUTERS)

http://www.tnr.com/graphics2004.1/20070402/kiss.jpg

Representing the Bushes and Clintons in this Federal Reserve bucket shop operation were none other than Madeleine Albright i.e. Halfbright, on behalf of the Clintons and former CIA Director, member of the Iraq Study Group and current United States Secretary of Defense Robert Gates on behalf of the Bushes.

http://www.juventudrebelde.cu/UserFiles/Image/2006/noviembre/15/robert-y-bush.jpg
Robert Gates and Bushfraud

Item One: Greenspan has also presented evidence showing the misuse of Civitas Stonebridge LLC as a Bush-Clinton Crime Family money laundry for stolen U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve financial instruments.

Item Two: Civitas Stonebridge LLC was the corporate entity that approved Bushfraud’s attempted sale of U.S. portal authority to Dubai Ports World in the United Arab Emirates.

It should also be reported that Mossad agent Sandy Berger, former Clinton National Security Adviser, who now works as an advisor to unelectable Hillary closet lesbian Rodenhurst Clinton not only stole 9/11 evidence out of the United States National Archives, but also took financial records and secret account numbers tied to the Bush-Clinton Crime Family.

9/11 AND HILLARY, BUSH, BERGER AND KARL ROVE
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=147509065&blogID=309796156

Stay tuned folks. We will soon post the Queen Melusina aka Hillary Rodenhurst Clinton’s secret offshore account in the Bahamas and the Bush Crime Family-Saddam Hussein-Queen of England’s secret Coots Bank account.

http://illuminati-news.com/graphics/BushSr-Clinton.jpg
former Presidents H.W. Bush and business partner Bill Clinton

http://www.markdroberts.com/images/bush-clinton-hillary-4.jpg
Bushfraud and business partner unelectable Hillary Clinton

How dare you, you conspiratorial tyrants and kings and notable queens!

P.S. Bushfraud has already used the Patriot Act to illegally fire U.S. Attorneys and hold back and stonewall the implementation of the Reagan-Mitterrand-Wanta Protocols.

P.P.S. The major U.S. network benefiting from this Federal Reserve crime spree on behalf of the Bushes and Clintons is none other than General Electric’s NBC, 202-885-4200.

http://www.kgam.com/images/Tim%20Russert.jpg
Tim Russert (NBC)
http://newsbusters.org/media/2006-11-07-MSNBCScarborough.jpg
http://www.exposetheleft.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/05/matthews-deedee-liberals.jpg

Tim Russert and current Republican MSNBC talk show hosts Joe Scarborough and Chris Matthews have benefited from financial insider trading tips from Greenspan’s Federal Reserve wife, NBC foreign policy correspondent Andrea Mitchell.
http://images.forbes.com/images/2002/05/09/greenspan_415x331.jpg
Andrea Mitchell and Alan Greenspan

One last note: The Federal Reserve crime spree also involves the Bush-Clinton Crime Family use of the offshore accounts to finance the Bush-Clinton True Colors assassination teams on American soil and worldwide, that targeted both John F. Kennedy Jr. and former Vice President, now duly elected, non-inaugurated President Albert Gore Jr.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

He who controls the spice controls the universe.

Awesome Book.

P.S: ^^^^^ What tehhh... Fuuuuuuukkk was that about?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Wow, Bush is uniting even the rabidly partisan Republican hacks against him. Bush is mad that the Iraqi parliament wouldn't pass the oil bill he wanted. Of course OIL (Operation Iraqi Liberation) was always about the oil.

[angus]

"war about oil?"  oh, no!!!!!!!!!!!

tell us something we don't know, greenspan.

well, anyway, I read in the weekend edition WSJ that greenspan is unapologetic about the fed's rates that led up to the housing bubble that led to its current crash.

and some of these candidates are making noises about what the government "should do" about it.  OMFG.  If some dumbass borrows a second mortgage for 1.125 what his house is worth, and then spends the loan on a caribbean vacation, I'm supposed to pay for his mistakes with my tax dollars?!?!  No, thank you, Senator Edwards.  And he's not the only one.  The government has no business bailing out these poor saps, or any corporate entity that had the audacity to make loans to people with no income, no down payment, and no business trying to buy a house in the first place!  at least greenspan agrees with that.  good for him.

[MODU]

Glad to see Greenspan clarify his comment.

"Greenspan: Ouster Of Hussein Crucial For Oil Security"

He said that in his discussions with President Bush and Vice President Cheney, "I have never heard them basically say, 'We've got to protect the oil supplies of the world,' but that would have been my motive." Greenspan said that he made his economic argument to White House officials and that one lower-level official, whom he declined to identify, told him, "Well, unfortunately, we can't talk about oil." Asked if he had made his point to Cheney specifically, Greenspan said yes, then added, "I talked to everybody about that."

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

yeah, I am sure Bush would discuss with Greenspan his reasons for going to war? 

All anyone who wants to know the reason for invading Iraq has to do is read the Project for the New American Century.  They basically thought they could use American military strength to "liberate" the Muslim world.  Iraq, being strategically located, was the test case.

The grand vision and naive motives of the American Enterprise Institute are a little over the head of Greenspan.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

yeah, I am sure Bush would discuss with Greenspan his reasons for going to war? 

All anyone who wants to know the reason for invading Iraq has to do is read the Project for the New American Century.  They basically thought they could use American military strength to "liberate" the Muslim world.  Iraq, being strategically located, was the test case.

The grand vision and naive motives of the American Enterprise Institute are a little over the head of Greenspan.

But you in all your wisdom see everything.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

yeah, I am sure Bush would discuss with Greenspan his reasons for going to war? 

All anyone who wants to know the reason for invading Iraq has to do is read the Project for the New American Century.  They basically thought they could use American military strength to "liberate" the Muslim world.  Iraq, being strategically located, was the test case.

The grand vision and naive motives of the American Enterprise Institute are a little over the head of Greenspan.

But you in all your wisdom see everything.

well, when a group publishes a plan in 1998 and follows it to the letter after assuming power, I tend to connect the dots.

[opebo]

Well, the 'geopolitical' purpose of the war was to remain the power in control of, or the gaurantor of the supply of, oil, not really about stealing that particular bit of oil. 

I am rather surprised that you get that.
And in truth I do not see that goal as a bad one.

My dear chap, you do me a great injustice.  I do have a master's degree in the subject, and teach it on a university level. 

[The Man From G.O.P.]

yeah, I am sure Bush would discuss with Greenspan his reasons for going to war? 

All anyone who wants to know the reason for invading Iraq has to do is read the Project for the New American Century.  They basically thought they could use American military strength to "liberate" the Muslim world.  Iraq, being strategically located, was the test case.

The grand vision and naive motives of the American Enterprise Institute are a little over the head of Greenspan.

But you in all your wisdom see everything.

well, when a group publishes a plan in 1998 and follows it to the letter after assuming power, I tend to connect the dots.

I ran into bunch of you nuts on campus on the 11th, any chance you were there?

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I ran into bunch of you nuts on campus on the 11th, any chance you were there?

Dude, don't ever confuse me with those who believe Muslims can be reformed through democracy - one of the reason why they're naive.

You should read up on the following names:

Elliott Abrams - During Bush's first term in office, he was appointed the post of Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director on the National Security Council for Near East and North African Affairs. At the start of Bush's second term, Abrams was promoted to be his Deputy National Security Advisor for Global Democracy Strategy, responsible for advancing Bush's strategy of advancing democracy abroad

Richard L. Armitage - United States Deputy Secretary of State, the second-in-command at the State Department, serving from 2001 to 2005.

John Bolton - served as the Permanent US Representative to the UN from August 2005 until December 2006, on a recess appointment.

Dick Cheney - US Vice President under Bush43

Paula Dobriansky - is the Under Secretary of State for Democracy & Global Affairs, a position in which she was appointed 1 May 2001 by US President George W. Bush

Zalmay Khalilzad - is the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. He is a member of the President's cabinet and the highest-ranking Muslim in the Administration of U.S. President George W. Bush. Khalilzad's previous assignments in the Administration include U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq.

Peter Rodman - United States Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs

Donald Rumsfeld - Secretary of Defense under President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2006

William Schneider, Jr. - selected by Donald Rumsfeld to chair the Defense Science Board. In this position, Schneider continues to advocate using nuclear weapons in certain limited first-strike situations.

Paul Wolfowitz - U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense

Robert Zoellick - United States Deputy Secretary of State

…and once you read up on them, you should study their history and involvement with the following characters:

William J. Bennett
Jeffrey Bergner
Robert Kagan
William Kristol
Richard Perle
Vin Weber
James Woolsey

...for these are the neocons who controll(ed) US foreign policy under Bush43.  Their policy objectives and plans for obtaining those objectives were clearly stated years before Bush43 became president, and they have been executing their plan since 2001.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

I ran into bunch of you nuts on campus on the 11th, any chance you were there?

Dude, don't ever confuse me with those who believe Muslims can be reformed through democracy - one of the reason why they're naive.

You should read up on the following names:

Elliott Abrams - During Bush's first term in office, he was appointed the post of Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director on the National Security Council for Near East and North African Affairs. At the start of Bush's second term, Abrams was promoted to be his Deputy National Security Advisor for Global Democracy Strategy, responsible for advancing Bush's strategy of advancing democracy abroad

Richard L. Armitage - United States Deputy Secretary of State, the second-in-command at the State Department, serving from 2001 to 2005.

John Bolton - served as the Permanent US Representative to the UN from August 2005 until December 2006, on a recess appointment.

Dick Cheney - US Vice President under Bush43

Paula Dobriansky - is the Under Secretary of State for Democracy & Global Affairs, a position in which she was appointed 1 May 2001 by US President George W. Bush

Zalmay Khalilzad - is the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. He is a member of the President's cabinet and the highest-ranking Muslim in the Administration of U.S. President George W. Bush. Khalilzad's previous assignments in the Administration include U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq.

Peter Rodman - United States Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs

Donald Rumsfeld - Secretary of Defense under President George W. Bush from 2001 to 2006

William Schneider, Jr. - selected by Donald Rumsfeld to chair the Defense Science Board. In this position, Schneider continues to advocate using nuclear weapons in certain limited first-strike situations.

Paul Wolfowitz - U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense

Robert Zoellick - United States Deputy Secretary of State

…and once you read up on them, you should study their history and involvement with the following characters:

William J. Bennett
Jeffrey Bergner
Robert Kagan
William Kristol
Richard Perle
Vin Weber
James Woolsey

...for these are the neocons who controll(ed) US foreign policy under Bush43.  Their policy objectives and plans for obtaining those objectives were clearly stated years before Bush43 became president, and they have been executing their plan since 2001.

I ran into YOUR group, they had inflatible twin towers, it was pretty nifty, if not an appaling insult to the 3,000 who died.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I ran into YOUR group, they had inflatible twin towers, it was pretty nifty, if not an appaling insult to the 3,000 who died.

please stop, the intellectual power of your empty innuendos is bringing me to tears.

[MODU]

I ran into YOUR group, ...

That's a fairly stupid comment.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

I ran into YOUR group, ...

That's a fairly stupid comment.

well, for the record, i did support the invasion of Iraq, but only because I thought they were going to use Iraq as a stepping stone to quickly launch an attack on Iran.

I agreed with the neocons that something must be tried, but I understand from a religious perspective that Islam can not be reformed through democracy.

so, in some aspects I could be confused with the neocons, and I might, from time to time, agree and hitch a ride with them.   But true neocons, not jmfcst, but the ones I listed a couple of posts ago, are NOT religious fundamentalists.  True neocons express hope that freedom and democracy will lead to a brighter, safer, and stable future. 

Whereas I'm 100% certain that Islam wants to wipe Israel off the face of the map and 99% certain that Islam and Israel are headed toward nuclear war.  The only thing "freedom and democracy" will do in the Muslim war is hand power to the radical elements of Islam.

[The Man From G.O.P.]

I ran into YOUR group, ...

That's a fairly stupid comment.

No, it was the group he mentioned and supports. The People for a New American Century or whatever...

[The Duke]

Greenspan did not, you will note, claim we went in to steal Iraq's oil (You don't hand ownership of the oil to Iraq's new government if you plan to steal it.  You just auction drilling rights off to western companies which we didn't do.) or even to access Iraq's oil (This biggest obstacle to access were sanctions we could have had lifted at any time.).

What Greenspan said was that Saddam posed a threat to the oil supplies of the broader Middle East (ie: He could at any point launch some kind of attack on oil fields in Kuwait or Saudi Arabia that would disrupt the global economy.).

Now, a question: Does anyone actually believe the Iraqis had the capabilities that Greenspan attributes to them?  I certanly don't.   The threat I percieved from Iraq was their support for various terrorist groups, not their ability to re-conquer Kuwait.  They were of no threat whatsoever to the region's oil supplies unless the threat came by terrorist attack from one of their proxy agents.  And if the threat is a terror attack on Ras Tanura or some other strategic asset, is threat threat Iraq undermining the stability of oil supplies or is it the Iraqi support of a terrorist group?  I think pretty clearly Iraqi support of the terrorist group is the threat.  Saying otherwise is like saying 9/11 warned us of the danger that building might fall down.

[angus]

Paul Wolfowitz - U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense

actually, we have discussed him before.  DPG of 1992.  In fact, he worked closely with Cheney and Khalizad and Libby--I note you conveniently omitted Libby from your suggested reading list--on that document.  Yes, you're on to something important.  Iraq was the test case, but what was the test?  As you say, military liberation of the muslim world.  But ask yourself, what is the importance of importing democratic capitalism into Muslim world?  Surely those countries' vast petroleum resources can't be overlooked as a major reason.  In fact, the DPG comes out and says as much.  Here's an excerpt:

"Our first objective is to prevent the reemergence of a new rival. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power..."

Really, jmfcst, by the evidence you have submitted (albeit circuitously, since you only hinted at the DPG) you have given further testimony that the war was about the region's oil reserves.

[The Duke]

Here's an excerpt:

"Our first objective is to prevent the reemergence of a new rival. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power..."

Was Iraq anywhere near capable of "dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate a global power..."

Am I really suposed to believe that Iraq was only a few steps away from being a military and economic superpower?  The evidence seems pretty clear that they were not.

I still think some people are failing to realize the single most obvious objection to Greenspan's position: He wildly overestimates Iraq's military capabilities far more than even the most hawkish PNAC signatory ever did.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Paul Wolfowitz - U.S. Deputy Secretary of Defense

actually, we have discussed him before.  DPG of 1992.  In fact, he worked closely with Cheney and Khalizad and Libby--I note you conveniently omitted Libby from your suggested reading list--on that document.

It wasn’t intentional.  The list of names I presented were the signatories of a Jan 98 letter to President Clinton, the letter simply provided me with a quick and ready list of prominent neocons.  I took the liberty to add Cheney’s name to the list because of his involvement with the AEI.  Not that I doubt Libby’s involvement, but Libby never came to mind.

---

  Yes, you're on to something important.  Iraq was the test case, but what was the test?  As you say, military liberation of the muslim world.  But ask yourself, what is the importance of importing democratic capitalism into Muslim world?  Surely those countries' vast petroleum resources can't be overlooked as a major reason.  In fact, the DPG comes out and says as much.  Here's an excerpt:

"Our first objective is to prevent the reemergence of a new rival. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power..."

Really, jmfcst, by the evidence you have submitted (albeit circuitously, since you only hinted at the DPG) you have given further testimony that the war was about the region's oil reserves.

Cheaper oil was simply an expected benefit of the group’s intentions, not the goal.  Nor was the group focused merely on the Middle East.  They had a global agenda which was based on their belief they could use American military might and political influence to transform the entire world into democracies based upon free market and capitalism.  They wanted to seize the moment of the US being the sole superpower with the goal being to transform the world into the American way of doing business.  Basically to transform the world into the American way of life.   

To claim that the neocon objective was cheaper oil is tantamount to not being able to see the forest because of the trees.

[angus]

Am I really suposed to believe that Iraq was only a few steps away from being a military and economic superpower?  The evidence seems pretty clear that they were not.

oh, man.  I probably deserve this.  Getting in over my head.  John Ford and jmfcst I gotta argue with, all at once.  Okay, then, I'll answer John first:  There are two obvious interpretations.  One is that it mustn't be about the oil since Iraq was obviously ruled by a third-world thug who couldn't even control his own populace without resorting to oppression, therefore Greenspan's wrong.  Fair enough.  (and no, neither Cheney nor Wolfowitz nor I used the language "Iraq...would be military and economic superpower"  That particular bit of hyperbole was yours and yours alone.)  But an equally valid interpretation might be that Wolfowitz and Cheney might have believed that Iraq's might (and they did have the fourth largest army in the world at the time) though not really sufficient to dominate the region was sufficient to cause turmoil in the region, and given Saddam's general insanity, it's not out of the realm of possibility that he might.  He certainly had no problems destroying his own oil in order to keep US and UK troops away from it in the past, so it's not beyond the realm of possiblity that Wolfowitz would at least consider the possiblity. 

Now, let's see what jmfcst wrote.  Ah, yeah I was just bustin' yer balls about Libby.  Couldn't resist. 

Sole superpower?  The fact is that both Bush41 and Bill Clinton blew it.  They got lazy and distracted.  But I don't disagree with your conclusion.  In fact, I think it's pretty obvious that they wanted to transform the world in that way.  But you avoid any discussion of why they wanted to do that.  All I'm saying is that they wanted to because our way of life depends on making others live our way of life.  That means the cheap oil and all the things we can make with the cheap oil and all those products we can move across our interstate system with the cheap oil.  You cannot discuss the myth of the reluctant superpower without looking at globalization and its conceits.  As early as 1901 William McKinley said, "The world's products are being exchanged as never before...  Isolation is no longer possible or desirable."  And in 1998 Madelaine Albright made it clear when she said, "If we have to use force, it is because we are America, the indispensable nation" that the intervening 97 years had only encouraged the idea of remolding the world to fit our corporate needs.  It's pretty clear to me that Democrats and Republicans are keen on maintaining dominance of the world in order to feed the economic engines of the US in order to maintain our way of life.  And I don't disagree much with you, except to say that it isn't the "neoconservative" ilk within the GOP that should shoulder all the blame for the current state of affairs.  It's all of us, everyone from Jimmy Carter to you to me to Bill Clinton to George W. Bush.  Well, that, and you still haven't suggested any reason why we'd want them to adopt our economic way.  The simplest answer is sometimes the truest answer.  Ockham's razor would suggest that we realize that it is, in fact, that our own way of life is dependent on their vast supply of natural resources.  Did anyone in the USA get upset when the IRA was bombing Belfast?  A few people.  But how many americans got upset when islamic terrorists were bombing the London subway system?  Many.  The difference:  the IRA doesn't stock the shelves of Wal-Mart or help Haliburton stock values increase.  Stability in the middle east does.  Giving the Iraqis democracy would be a boon to us because we believe we can convince a free and literate people that it is in their best interest to do business peacefully with us.  So, yeah, it is about the oil.  Well, that and maybe a little payback for trying to off daddy.  How rude.