Guest Harry Hope Posted July 18, 2007 Posted July 18, 2007 Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. From The New Zealand Herald, 7/18/07: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=359&objectid=10452099 Fight for control of Iraq's reserves Long before coalition troops arrived in Iraq in 2003, anti-war campaigners warned that President George W. Bush's real motive was to grab its oil. While the violence continues to rage, workers in the devastated country's energy industry are warning that America and Britain are pressing Baghdad to hand over control of its oil industry to foreign multinationals. Hassan Jumaa Awad al Assadi, the head of the Iraqi oil workers' union, was in London last week campaigning against a new law which, he says, will give the oil giants unprecedented rights to his country's vast reserves. "We will lose control over Iraqi oil. The social progress in Iraq will be curtailed substantially, because the oil companies want huge profits; they are not concerned about the environment, wages, or living conditions," he warned. "We will wait to see the reaction of the Iraqi people." Baghdad has reacted angrily to the union's campaign, issuing arrest warrants for al Assadi and his fellow leaders, and refusing to recognise the 26,000-strong confederation of workers. Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. "One of our criticisms is the way the law was proposed - under a veil of secrecy." In Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Gulf producers, foreign investors are brought in under "service contracts", while the ownership of the reserves remains in state hands. Under the new Iraqi law, however, contracts for up to 30 years would be signed, giving foreign investors a share of the profits in new fields. ____________________________________________ Harry Quote
Guest Joe S. Posted July 18, 2007 Posted July 18, 2007 "Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:sg8s93hlagg6ndteij61b0nnrfehoafnb6@4ax.com... > > Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on > the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. > > "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their > hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. No shit. He finally broke the code. Oil is the reason we went there in the first place. > > > From The New Zealand Herald, 7/18/07: > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=359&objectid=10452099 > > Fight for control of Iraq's reserves > > Long before coalition troops arrived in Iraq in 2003, anti-war > campaigners warned that President George W. Bush's real motive was to > grab its oil. > > While the violence continues to rage, workers in the devastated > country's energy industry are warning that America and Britain are > pressing Baghdad to hand over control of its oil industry to foreign > multinationals. > > Hassan Jumaa Awad al Assadi, the head of the Iraqi oil workers' union, > was in London last week campaigning against a new law which, he says, > will give the oil giants unprecedented rights to his country's vast > reserves. > > "We will lose control over Iraqi oil. The social progress in Iraq will > be curtailed substantially, because the oil companies want huge > profits; they are not concerned about the environment, wages, or > living conditions," he warned. > > "We will wait to see the reaction of the Iraqi people." > > Baghdad has reacted angrily to the union's campaign, issuing arrest > warrants for al Assadi and his fellow leaders, and refusing to > recognise the 26,000-strong confederation of workers. > > Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on > the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. > > "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their > hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. > > "One of our criticisms is the way the law was proposed - under a veil > of secrecy." > > In Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Gulf producers, foreign investors > are brought in under "service contracts", while the ownership of the > reserves remains in state hands. > > Under the new Iraqi law, however, contracts for up to 30 years would > be signed, giving foreign investors a share of the profits in new > fields. > > ____________________________________________ > > Harry Quote
Guest Nicik Name Posted July 19, 2007 Posted July 19, 2007 "Joe S." <noname@nosuch.net> wrote in message news:f7l8d00161i@news3.newsguy.com... > > "Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message > news:sg8s93hlagg6ndteij61b0nnrfehoafnb6@4ax.com... > > > > Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on > > the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. > > > > "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their > > hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. > > No shit. He finally broke the code. > > Oil is the reason we went there in the first place. That is correct........... But the oil will remain underground for the next 100 years +/-. > > > > > > > > > From The New Zealand Herald, 7/18/07: > > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=359&objectid=10452099 > > > > Fight for control of Iraq's reserves > > > > Long before coalition troops arrived in Iraq in 2003, anti-war > > campaigners warned that President George W. Bush's real motive was to > > grab its oil. > > > > While the violence continues to rage, workers in the devastated > > country's energy industry are warning that America and Britain are > > pressing Baghdad to hand over control of its oil industry to foreign > > multinationals. > > > > Hassan Jumaa Awad al Assadi, the head of the Iraqi oil workers' union, > > was in London last week campaigning against a new law which, he says, > > will give the oil giants unprecedented rights to his country's vast > > reserves. > > > > "We will lose control over Iraqi oil. The social progress in Iraq will > > be curtailed substantially, because the oil companies want huge > > profits; they are not concerned about the environment, wages, or > > living conditions," he warned. > > > > "We will wait to see the reaction of the Iraqi people." > > > > Baghdad has reacted angrily to the union's campaign, issuing arrest > > warrants for al Assadi and his fellow leaders, and refusing to > > recognise the 26,000-strong confederation of workers. > > > > Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on > > the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. > > > > "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their > > hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. > > > > "One of our criticisms is the way the law was proposed - under a veil > > of secrecy." > > > > In Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Gulf producers, foreign investors > > are brought in under "service contracts", while the ownership of the > > reserves remains in state hands. > > > > Under the new Iraqi law, however, contracts for up to 30 years would > > be signed, giving foreign investors a share of the profits in new > > fields. > > > > ____________________________________________ > > > > Harry > > Quote
Guest Hatto von Aquitanien Posted July 19, 2007 Posted July 19, 2007 Nicik Name wrote: > > "Joe S." <noname@nosuch.net> wrote in message > news:f7l8d00161i@news3.newsguy.com... >> >> "Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message >> news:sg8s93hlagg6ndteij61b0nnrfehoafnb6@4ax.com... >> > >> > Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on >> > the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. >> > >> > "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their >> > hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. >> >> No shit. He finally broke the code. >> >> Oil is the reason we went there in the first place. > That is correct........... > But the oil will remain underground for the next 100 years +/-. It's about control. These globalists are not in this to secure the oil for "America". They intend to destroy this country. They are doing this to gain control of the planet. America is their enemy. > >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > From The New Zealand Herald, 7/18/07: >> > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=359&objectid=10452099 >> > >> > Fight for control of Iraq's reserves >> > >> > Long before coalition troops arrived in Iraq in 2003, anti-war >> > campaigners warned that President George W. Bush's real motive was to >> > grab its oil. >> > >> > While the violence continues to rage, workers in the devastated >> > country's energy industry are warning that America and Britain are >> > pressing Baghdad to hand over control of its oil industry to foreign >> > multinationals. >> > >> > Hassan Jumaa Awad al Assadi, the head of the Iraqi oil workers' union, >> > was in London last week campaigning against a new law which, he says, >> > will give the oil giants unprecedented rights to his country's vast >> > reserves. >> > >> > "We will lose control over Iraqi oil. The social progress in Iraq will >> > be curtailed substantially, because the oil companies want huge >> > profits; they are not concerned about the environment, wages, or >> > living conditions," he warned. >> > >> > "We will wait to see the reaction of the Iraqi people." >> > >> > Baghdad has reacted angrily to the union's campaign, issuing arrest >> > warrants for al Assadi and his fellow leaders, and refusing to >> > recognise the 26,000-strong confederation of workers. >> > >> > Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on >> > the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. >> > >> > "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their >> > hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. >> > >> > "One of our criticisms is the way the law was proposed - under a veil >> > of secrecy." >> > >> > In Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Gulf producers, foreign investors >> > are brought in under "service contracts", while the ownership of the >> > reserves remains in state hands. >> > >> > Under the new Iraqi law, however, contracts for up to 30 years would >> > be signed, giving foreign investors a share of the profits in new >> > fields. >> > >> > ____________________________________________ >> > >> > Harry >> >> -- http://911research.wtc7.net http://vehme.blogspot.com Virtus Tutissima Cassis Quote
Guest eHDMI Posted July 21, 2007 Posted July 21, 2007 Good thing we got all of that oil...It really helped getting the oil prices down. It's not like Bush has an oil pipeline that runs to his house... Keith http://www.RightDaily.com "Nicik Name" <orbits@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:FUzni.8310$rR.7842@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net... > > "Joe S." <noname@nosuch.net> wrote in message > news:f7l8d00161i@news3.newsguy.com... >> >> "Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message >> news:sg8s93hlagg6ndteij61b0nnrfehoafnb6@4ax.com... >> > >> > Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on >> > the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. >> > >> > "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their >> > hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. >> >> No shit. He finally broke the code. >> >> Oil is the reason we went there in the first place. > That is correct........... > But the oil will remain underground for the next 100 years +/-. > > >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > From The New Zealand Herald, 7/18/07: >> > http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=359&objectid=10452099 >> > >> > Fight for control of Iraq's reserves >> > >> > Long before coalition troops arrived in Iraq in 2003, anti-war >> > campaigners warned that President George W. Bush's real motive was to >> > grab its oil. >> > >> > While the violence continues to rage, workers in the devastated >> > country's energy industry are warning that America and Britain are >> > pressing Baghdad to hand over control of its oil industry to foreign >> > multinationals. >> > >> > Hassan Jumaa Awad al Assadi, the head of the Iraqi oil workers' union, >> > was in London last week campaigning against a new law which, he says, >> > will give the oil giants unprecedented rights to his country's vast >> > reserves. >> > >> > "We will lose control over Iraqi oil. The social progress in Iraq will >> > be curtailed substantially, because the oil companies want huge >> > profits; they are not concerned about the environment, wages, or >> > living conditions," he warned. >> > >> > "We will wait to see the reaction of the Iraqi people." >> > >> > Baghdad has reacted angrily to the union's campaign, issuing arrest >> > warrants for al Assadi and his fellow leaders, and refusing to >> > recognise the 26,000-strong confederation of workers. >> > >> > Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on >> > the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. >> > >> > "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their >> > hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. >> > >> > "One of our criticisms is the way the law was proposed - under a veil >> > of secrecy." >> > >> > In Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and other Gulf producers, foreign investors >> > are brought in under "service contracts", while the ownership of the >> > reserves remains in state hands. >> > >> > Under the new Iraqi law, however, contracts for up to 30 years would >> > be signed, giving foreign investors a share of the profits in new >> > fields. >> > >> > ____________________________________________ >> > >> > Harry >> >> > > Quote
Guest Harold Burton Posted July 21, 2007 Posted July 21, 2007 Pretty much the trade off FDR made, only with him it cost hundreds of thousands of American lives, two orders of magnitude greater than under President Bush. And your point was? Quote
Guest Harold Burton Posted July 21, 2007 Posted July 21, 2007 In article <f7l8d00161i@news3.newsguy.com>, "Joe S." <noname@nosuch.net> wrote: > "Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message > news:sg8s93hlagg6ndteij61b0nnrfehoafnb6@4ax.com... > > > > Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on > > the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. > > > > "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their > > hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. > > No shit. He finally broke the code. > > Oil is the reason we went there in the first place. And a damned good reason too. Would you care to try to live without oil? Quote
Guest Harold Burton Posted July 21, 2007 Posted July 21, 2007 In article <wHdoi.10411$Od7.6768@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, "eHDMI" <Support@eHDMI.com> wrote: > Good thing we got all of that oil...It really helped getting the oil prices > down. It's not like Bush has an oil pipeline that runs to his house... John "it's not mine, it's the family's SUV" Kerry, actually. Quote
Guest A Veteran Posted July 21, 2007 Posted July 21, 2007 In article <hal.i.burton-DDDD79.22054420072007@comcast.dca.giganews.com>, Harold Burton <hal.i.burton@hotmail.com> wrote: > In article <f7l8d00161i@news3.newsguy.com>, > "Joe S." <noname@nosuch.net> wrote: > > > "Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message > > news:sg8s93hlagg6ndteij61b0nnrfehoafnb6@4ax.com... > > > > > > Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on > > > the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. > > > > > > "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their > > > hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. > > > > No shit. He finally broke the code. > > > > Oil is the reason we went there in the first place. > > > And a damned good reason too. Would you care to try to live without oil? as usual, you missed the point. It's about controlling the oil and killing to get control. Karmic implications escape you. Right? Fortunately, there is a cure for ignorance. Benchmark Boogie: A Guide to the Struggle Over Iraq's Oil By Antonia Juhasz, AlterNet. Posted July 14, 2007. Your guide to the ongoing dance between Bush, the Congress, and the Iraqi government; an update on the current status of the proposed oil laws; and some steps you can take to stop the hijacking of Iraq's oil. Also in War on Iraq http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/56672/ After Reporting in Iraq, America Feels Like a Bizarre Disneyland Dahr Jamail GAO Testimony: State Department Overstating Iraq's Oil Output Ben Lando Meet the Next Generation of GOP Hypocrites at the College Republican Convention Max Blumenthal Why Is the White House Pretending That Saudi Insurgents in Iraq Are Iranian? Amy Goodman "Secret Prison" Uncovered in Baghdad From the Grave, a Senator Exposes Bloody Hands on Capitol Hill Norman Solomon More stories by Antonia Juhasz What does a war for oil look like? American troops going into battle with tanks waving "Exxon Mobil" and "Chevron" flags right behind? Are the flags then planted squarely in the ground and the oil beneath officially declared war bounty? Well, some members of the Bush administration and U.S. oil companies may have favored such an approach. But the device ultimately chosen to win this war for oil is only slightly more subtle: a law, to be passed by the Iraqis themselves, which would turn Iraq's oil over to foreign oil companies. -- when you believe the only tool you have is a hammer. All problems look like nails. Quote
Guest A Veteran Posted July 21, 2007 Posted July 21, 2007 In article <georgek-82F4BC.05112921072007@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, A Veteran <georgek@humboldt1.com> wrote: > Fortunately, there is a cure for ignorance. and this just in;' There's much more to it than just oil: The Rising Corporate Military Monster By RUSSELL MOKHIBER and ROBERT WEISSMAN A corporate military monster is being created in Iraq. The U.S. government is relying on private military contractors like never before. Approximately 15,000 military contractors, maybe more, are now working in Iraq. The four Americans brutally killed and mutilated in Fallujah March 31 were part of this informal army of occupation. Contractors are complicating traditional norms of military command and control, and challenging the basic norms of accountability that are supposed to govern the government's use of violence. Human rights abuses go unpunished. Reliance on poorly monitored contractors is bleeding the public treasury. The contractors are simultaneously creating opportunities for the government to evade public accountability, and, in Iraq at least, are on the verge of evolving into an independent force at least somewhat beyond the control of the U.S. military. And, as the contractors grow in numbers and political influence, their power to entrench themselves and block reform is growing. Whatever the limitations of the military code of justice and its in-practice application, the code does not apply to the modern-day mercenaries. Indeed, the mechanisms by which the contractors are held responsible for their behavior, and disciplined for mistreating civilians or committing human rights abuses -- all too easy for men with guns in a hostile environment -- are fuzzy. It is unclear exactly what law applies to the contractors, explains Peter W. Singer, author of Corporate Warriors (Cornell University Press, 2003) and a leading authority on private military contracting. They do not fall under international law on mercenaries, which is defined narrowly. Nor does the national law of the United States clearly apply to the contractors in Iraq -- especially because many of the contractors are not Americans. Relatedly, many firms do not properly screen those they hire to patrol the streets in foreign nations. "Lives, soldiers' and civilians' welfare, human rights, are all at stake," says Singer. "But we have left it up to very raw market forces to figure out who can work for these firms, and who they can work for." There are already more than a few examples of what can happen, notable among them accusations that Dyncorp employees were involved in sex trafficking of young girls in Bosnia. In general, the performance of the private military firms is horribly under-monitored. Sometimes the lack of monitoring is a boon to the government agencies that hire the contractors. Although there are firm limits on the kinds of operations that U.S. troops can conduct in Colombia, Singer notes, "it has been pretty loosey-goosey on the private contractor side." The contractors are working with the Colombian military to defeat the guerilla insurgency in Colombia -- unconstrained by Congressionally imposed limits on what U.S. soldiers in Colombia may do. Meanwhile, in Iraq, a problem of a whole different sort is starting to emerge. The security contractors are already involved in full-fledged battlefield operations, increasingly so as the insurgency in Iraq escalates. A few days after the Americans were killed in Fallujah, Blackwater Security Consulting engaged in full-scale battle in Najaf, with the company flying its own helicopters amidst an intense firefight to resupply its own commandos. Now, reports the Washington Post, the security firms are networking formally, "organizing what may effectively be the largest private army in the world, with its own rescue teams and pooled, sensitive intelligence." Because many of the security contractors work for the Coalition Provisional Authority, as opposed to the U.S. military, they are not integrated into the military's operations. "Under assault by insurgents and unable to rely on U.S. and coalition troops for intelligence or help under duress," according to the Post, the contractors are banding together. Private occupying commandos? Corporate military helicopters in a battlefield situation? An integrated occupation private intelligence network? Isn't this just obviously a horrible idea? Given the problems that have already occurred in places like Colombia and Bosnia, the scale and now independent integrated nature of the private military operations in Iraq is asking for disaster, beyond that already inflicted on the Iraqis. Making the problem still worse is that the monster feeds on itself. The larger become the military contractors, the more influence they have in Congress and the Pentagon, the more they are able to shape policy, immunize themselves from proper oversight, and expand their reach. The private military firms are led by ex-generals, the most effective possible lobbyists of their former colleagues -- and frequently former subordinates -- at the Pentagon. As they grow in size, and become integrated into the military-industrial complex (Northrop Grumman has swallowed a number of the military contractors, for example), their political leverage in Congress and among civilians in the executive branch grows. Over the last decade or so, the phenomenon of private military contracting has grown unchecked. We're now at a precipice, with action to constrain the contractors about to become far, far more difficult than if the madness of employing mercenaries had been averted in the first place. http://www.counterpunch.org/mokhiber04232004.html http://www.iraqwar.org/micomplex.htm -- when you believe the only tool you have is a hammer. All problems look like nails. Quote
Guest Harold Burton Posted July 21, 2007 Posted July 21, 2007 In article <georgek-82F4BC.05112921072007@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>, A Veteran <georgek@humboldt1.com> wrote: > In article > <hal.i.burton-DDDD79.22054420072007@comcast.dca.giganews.com>, > Harold Burton <hal.i.burton@hotmail.com> wrote: > > > In article <f7l8d00161i@news3.newsguy.com>, > > "Joe S." <noname@nosuch.net> wrote: > > > > > "Harry Hope" <rivrvu@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message > > > news:sg8s93hlagg6ndteij61b0nnrfehoafnb6@4ax.com... > > > > > > > > Al Assadi said that Washington and London had put heavy pressure on > > > > the Iraqi Government to persuade it to pass the new law. > > > > > > > > "It's not logical for the US to come out empty-handed: they want their > > > > hands to be full of Iraqi oil," he said. > > > > > > No shit. He finally broke the code. > > > > > > Oil is the reason we went there in the first place. > > > > > > And a damned good reason too. Would you care to try to live without oil? > > as usual, you missed the point. It's about controlling the oil and > killing to get control. Yeah, and? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.