01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Knowing the truth about the Kennedy Assassination is understanding America today.

Moderators: kenmurray, dankbaar, Bob, Dealey Joe

01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby Bruce Patrick Brychek » Wed Dec 16, 2009 3:22 am

12.16.2009

Dear JFK Murder Solved Forum Members and Readers:

01.01.2010, HOW MUCH OIL IS LEFT ? I can use some major help here.

The Earth is just so big. It isn't getting any bigger.

The Earth can only hold so much oil.

"Making oil" by the Earth takes a really long time.

Globally "we" are taking billions of barrels of oil from the Earth daily.

Globally "we" have been taking a really lot of oil, in ever increasing amounts from the
Earth, for a really longtime.

Understand my point ?

In my opinion, there is more or less a finite amount of oil. And this should be calculable,
in some finite terms ?

How soon will the oil run out at current rates of consumption ?

Also along these Lines Of Thinking I suggest the same Level Of Analysis to the Global
Fresh Water Supply. Think about that also. There will be Major Problems with Fresh
Water in 25 years or less. My Opinion.

Any additional analyses, interviews, investigations, readings, research, studies, thoughts,
or writings on any aspect of this Subject Matter ?

Bear in mind that we are trying to attract and educate a Whole New Generation of JFK
Researchers who may not be as well versed as you.

Comments ?

Respectfully,
BB.
Last edited by Bruce Patrick Brychek on Sun Apr 12, 2015 2:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Bruce Patrick Brychek
 
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

Re: 01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby Bob » Wed Dec 16, 2009 5:19 am

Bruce, please see this...

The plunder of Iraq’s oil

November 11th, 2009

James Cogan

Having drowned the Iraqi people in blood, the American financial and corporate oligarchy now believes that day has finally arrived. While US corporations are not the sole beneficiaries of the contracts, there is no question who has the final say over Iraq’s oil.

The awarding of development rights over the huge West Qurna oilfield in southern Iraq to Exxon-Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell last Thursday once again underscores the criminal character of the continuing US-led occupation. As the direct result of the Iraq war, major American and other transnational energy conglomerates are now gaining control over some the largest oilfields in the world.

West Qurna has proven reserves of 8.7 billion barrels of oil. Iraq’s total reserves are currently put at 115 billion barrels, though dozens of potential fields have not been explored adequately. Before the US invasion in 2003, rights over West Qurna had been awarded by the Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein to the Russian oil firm, Lukoil. The pro-US puppet regime in Baghdad has torn up all pre-war contracts.

Exxon-Mobil is the first US-based oil giant to benefit. Under the terms of a 20-year contract, Exxon-Mobil and Shell plan to boost daily production at West Qurna from less than 300,000 barrels to 2.3 million barrels per day over the next six years. As well as the Iraqi government compensating the companies for the cost of upgrading the field—which may run as high as $50 billion—they will be paid $1.90 for each barrel extracted, or some $1.5 billion per year. Exxon-Mobil holds an 80 percent stake and Shell the remaining 20 percent.

The contract is only the second signed by the Baghdad regime with foreign energy companies. Last Tuesday, the Iraqi government concluded a deal with British Petroleum (BP) and China National Petroleum Corp (CNPC), giving them development rights to the massive Rumaila field and its reserves of 17 billion barrels. BP holds a 38 percent stake and CNPC, a 37 percent share. The plan is to boost production from around 1 million barrels per day to 2.85 million barrels, generating profits of over $2 billion per year.

The only disappointment for the transnationals is that the contracts are not based on the Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) model, which gives access to as much as 40 percent of an oilfield’s total revenue. Even the venal elements that make up the Iraqi government rejected handing over the country’s largest oil fields on such terms. Instead, the deals are classified as “service” agreements. This has enabled Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his oil minister, Hussain al-Shahristani, to ignore parliament and the lack of a hydrocarbons law to govern the energy industry.

Further deals are in the process of being finalised. A consortium made up of the Italian company Eni, US-based Occidental and South Korea’s Kogas has signed a tentative agreement for the Zubair oilfield with reserves of 4 billion barrels. Eni, Japanese giant Nippon Oil and Spanish firm Repsol are bidding for a field in Nasiriyah which has similar-sized reserves. In northern Iraq, Royal Dutch Shell is negotiating a contract to develop untapped areas of the major Kirkuk oilfield, which is thought to have as much as 10 billion barrels in reserves despite being in production since 1934.

After initially demanding better terms, the energy companies are agreeing to deals to upgrade existing fields in the hope that they will better positioned when more lucrative contracts, on the PSA model, over 67 untapped fields are auctioned later this year or next year. While it has taken far longer than anticipated, the major energy conglomerates now calculate that Iraq is now sufficiently stable to begin pouring in money to vastly expand the country’s oil production. The first step has been taken in opening up the Iraqi oil industry, which was nationalised in 1975, to foreign investors.

Highlighting the neo-colonial nature of this operation, two former top American officials under the Bush administration are now facilitating corporate deals in Iraq. Jay Garner, the first head of the US occupation administration in Iraq following the invasion, is an advisor to the Canadian energy company Vast Exploration, which has a 37 percent stake in an oilfield in the Kurdish north. Zalmay Khalilzad, former ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq and the UN, has established his own corporate consultancy firm in the Kurdish city of Irbil.

The US invasion and occupation of Iraq was always a war over energy resources. Over one million Iraqis have been slaughtered, millions more people maimed and traumatised, cities and infrastructure destroyed and tens of thousands of American soldiers killed or wounded to achieve American domination of Iraq’s vast oil reserves as part of its broader ambitions in the Middle East and Central Asia.

The US failed to achieve its wider regional objectives after the first Gulf War in 1990-91. The Hussein regime remained in place and despite continued UN sanctions was signing contracts with companies such as French oil giant Total and Lukoil. From the late 1990s on, Russia and the European powers were pressing for the lifting of sanctions to allow these companies to reap the benefits. War became the only means of preventing US corporate interests from being cut out.

American energy conglomerates were not passive bystanders. High-level representatives of Exxon-Mobil, Chevron, Conoco-Phillips, BP America and Shell took part in talks in early 2001 with the Bush administration’s “Energy Task Force” headed by Vice President Dick Cheney. One document prepared for the discussions included a detailed map of Iraq’s oil fields, terminals and pipelines and a list of the non-US foreign companies that were preparing to move in. A May 2001 report by the task force bluntly stated the US aim: “The Gulf will be the primary focus of US international energy policy.”

The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks were seized upon to provide a pretext for war. The lies over Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were entwined with further lies about an Iraqi link to Al Qaeda. In the lead-up to the invasion, oil industry executives repeatedly met with Bush administration officials. As the Wall Street Journal commented on January 16, 2003: “US oil companies are starting to prepare for the day when they may get a chance to work in one of the world’s most oil-rich countries.”

Having drowned the Iraqi people in blood, the American financial and corporate oligarchy now believes that day has finally arrived. While US corporations are not the sole beneficiaries of the contracts, there is no question who has the final say over Iraq’s oil. With huge military bases in the country and a Baghdad regime tied to Washington, the US is positioned to dictate terms to its European and Asian rivals and, amid rising great powers tensions, to wield the threat of cutting off oil supplies—a longstanding tenet of American strategic policy.
User avatar
Bob
 
Posts: 5659
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:39 pm
Location: Florida/Wisconsin

Re: 01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby dankbaar » Wed Dec 16, 2009 11:17 am

I think any prediction or forecast cannot be trusted. In my youth (1970's) I heard all the time that the world oil reserves would be finished in the year 2000.

Wim
The allies of evil are ignorance, apathy and the wish to not believe.
User avatar
dankbaar
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1394
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 8:27 pm

Re: 01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby ChristophMessner » Wed Dec 16, 2009 12:41 pm

Some scientists recently said, the oil would not be of organic origin but of anorganic and the depleted oil wells will fill up by themselves by time. I can't verify, but it seems logical to me, that on earth no substance runs out concerning the consumption behavior of humans, cause the fewer and nevertheless requested a substance gets, the higher it's price will be and this will make more expensive exploitation methods affordable. They will just dig deeper then. If consumers will pay these prices for transportation still, other transportation or heating technology will become a business, too, and compete. On top of that, other materials like some metals will run short (= expensive) sooner and determine the price of transportation or artificial taxation on any oil burner might influence the oil consumption and therefor it's price as well. The number of those who stay at home and read philosophy instead will grow ...
unjust peace is better than unjust war; just war is better than unjust peace; just peace is better than just war
User avatar
ChristophMessner
 
Posts: 1481
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 8:11 am
Location: Germany

Re: 01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby Bob » Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:05 pm

See this story as well...

US builds up its bases in oil-rich South America

From the Caribbean to Brazil, political opposition to US plans for 'full-spectrum operations' is escalating rapidly

By Hugh O'Shaughnessy

Sunday, 22 November 2009

The United States is massively building up its potential for nuclear and non-nuclear strikes in Latin America and the Caribbean by acquiring unprecedented freedom of action in seven new military, naval and air bases in Colombia. The development – and the reaction of Latin American leaders to it – is further exacerbating America's already fractured relationship with much of the continent.

The new US push is part of an effort to counter the loss of influence it has suffered recently at the hands of a new generation of Latin American leaders no longer willing to accept Washington's political and economic tutelage. President Rafael Correa, for instance, has refused to prolong the US armed presence in Ecuador, and US forces have to quit their base at the port of Manta by the end of next month.

So Washington turned to Colombia, which has not gone down well in the region. The country has received military aid worth $4.6bn (£2.8bn) from the US since 2000, despite its poor human rights record. Colombian forces regularly kill the country's indigenous people and other civilians, and last year raided the territory of its southern neighbour, Ecuador, causing at least 17 deaths.

President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, who has not forgotten that US officers were present in government offices in Caracas in 2002 when he was briefly overthrown in a military putsch, warned this month that the bases agreement could mean the possibility of war with Colombia.

In August, President Evo Morales of Bolivia called for the outlawing of foreign military bases in the region. President Manuel Zelaya of Honduras, overthrown in a military coup d'état in June and initially exiled, has complained that US forces stationed at the Honduran base of Palmerola collaborated with Roberto Micheletti, the leader of the plotters and the man who claims to be president.

And, this being US foreign policy, a tell-tale trail of oil is evident. Brazil had already expressed its unhappiness at the presence of US naval vessels in its massive new offshore oilfields off Rio de Janeiro, destined soon to make Brazil a giant oil producer eligible for membership in Opec.

The fact that the US gets half its oil from Latin America was one of the reasons the US Fourth Fleet was re-established in the region's waters in 2008. The fleet's vessels can include Polaris nuclear-armed submarines – a deployment seen by some experts as a violation of the 1967 Tlatelolco Treaty, which bans nuclear weapons from the continent.

Indications of US willingness to envisage the stationing of nuclear weapons in Colombia are seen as an additional threat to the spirit of nuclear disarmament. After the establishment of the Tlatelolco Treaty in 1967, four more nuclear-weapon-free zones were set up in Africa, the South Pacific, South-east Asia and Central Asia. Between them, the five treaties cover nearly two-thirds of the countries of the world and almost all the southern hemisphere.

The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), the world's leading think-tank about disarmament issues, has now expressed its worries about the US-Colombian arrangements.

With or without nuclear weapons, the bilateral agreement on the seven Colombian bases, signed on 30 October in Bogota, risks a costly new arms race in a region. SIPRI, which is funded by the Swedish government, said it was concerned about rising arms expenditure in Latin America draining resources from social programmes that the poor of the region need.

Much of the new US strategy was clearly set out in May in an enthusiastic US Air Force (USAF) proposal for its military construction programme for the fiscal year 2010. One Colombian air base, Palanquero, was, the proposal said, unique "in a critical sub-region of our hemisphere where security and stability is under constant threat from... anti-US governments".

The proposal sets out a scheme to develop Palanquero which, the USAF says, offers an opportunity for conducting "full-spectrum operations throughout South America.... It also supports mobility missions by providing access to the entire continent, except the Cape Horn region, if fuel is available, and over half the continent if un-refuelled". ("Full-spectrum operations" is the Pentagon's jargon for its long-established goal of securing crushing military superiority with atomic and conventional weapons across the globe and in space.)

Palanquero could also be useful in ferrying arms and personnel to Africa via the British mid-Atlantic island of Ascension, French Guiana and Aruba, the Dutch island off Venezuela. The US has access to them all.

The USAF proposal contradicted the assurances constantly issued by US diplomats that the bases would not be used against third countries. These were repeated by the Colombian military to the Colombian congress on 29 July. That USAF proposal was hastily reissued this month after the signature of the agreement – but without the reference to "anti-US governments". This has led to suggestions of either US government incompetence, or of a battle between a gung-ho USAF and a State Department conscious of the damage done to US relations with Latin America by its leaders' strong objections to the proposal.

The Colombian forces, for many years notorious for atrocities inflicted on civilians, have cheekily suggested that with US help they could get into the lucrative business of "instructing" other armies about human rights. Civil strife in Colombia meant some 380,000 Colombians were forced from their homes last year, bringing the number of displaced since 1985 to 4.6 million, one in ten of the population. This little-known statistic indicates a much worse situation than the much-publicised one in Islamist-ruled Sudan where 2.7 million have fled from their homes.

Amnesty International said: "The Colombian government must urgently bring human rights violators to justice, to break the links between the armed forces and illegal paramilitary groups, and dismantle paramilitary organisations in line with repeated UN recommendations."

Palanquero, which adjoins the town of Puerto Salgar on the broad Magdalena river north-west of the capital, Bogota, is one of the seven bases that the government of President Alvaro Uribe gave to Washington last month despite howls from many Colombians. Its hangars can take 100 aircraft and there is accommodation for 2,000 personnel. Its main runway was constructed in the 1980s after Colombia bought a force of Israeli Kfir warplanes. At 3,500 metres, it is 500 metres longer than the longest in Britain, the former US base outside Campbeltown, Scotland. The USAF is awaiting Barack Obama's signature on a bill, already passed by the US Congress, to devote $46m to works at the base.

Many Colombians are upset at the agreement between the US and Colombia that governs – or, perhaps more accurately, fails to govern – US use of Palanquero and the other six bases. The Colombian Council of State, a non-partisan constitutional body with the duty to comment on legislation, has said that the agreements are unfair to Colombia since they put the US and not the host country in the driving seat, and that they should be redrafted in accordance with the Colombian constitution.

The immunities being granted to US soldiers are, the council adds, against the 1961 Vienna Convention; the agreement can be changed by future regulations which can totally transform it; and the permission given to the US to install satellite receivers for radio and television without the usual licences and fees is "without any valid reason".

President Uribe, whose studies at St Antony's College, Oxford, were subsidised by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, has chosen to disregard the Council of State.
User avatar
Bob
 
Posts: 5659
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:39 pm
Location: Florida/Wisconsin

Re: 01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby tom jeffers » Wed Dec 16, 2009 6:25 pm

HERE'S MY 2 CENTS WORTH.

oil is a natuarlly renewing natural resource created between the friction of the techtonic plates beneath the surface. this is why they can retap an old dried up oil well and it srarts producing again. we will never run out of oil. right now we have oil reserves in wyoming/montana and alaska to give the us enough oil for the next 500 years without importing a drop.

we just use oil as apart of the natural resource whoring we do when a third world country cannot pay back the extravagant loans offered by the imf. they want people to believe that it is a dying resourse so it has monetary value and we can get those countries indebted to us so they will vote with us in a un resolution, or send troops to a desert storm or import us really cheap coffee and bananas.
tom jeffers
 

Re: 01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby Bob » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:26 pm

Look at this article that proceeded the war in Iraq which was based on lies which the author predicted in this article, and the war has made a ton of blood money for the war profiteers and the oil boys.

The Bush family business: oil, blood and lies

By John Bell

Last issue we went barking up the Bush family tree. We discovered that, going back four generations, the Bush's have profited from slaughter and war.

Great-grandpa Sam Bush earned the family's place in the highest echelons of the US ruling class by serving on the War Industries Board, that made sure US industry profited by arming all sides in World War One.

His son Prescott, Dubya's grandpappy, furthered the family fortune in the 30's and 40's by directing, on behalf of a tight circle of super-rich families like the Rockefellers and Harrimans, the US financial and industrial interests of the Nazis. Found guilty of trading with the enemy in 1942, Prescott's investments were temporarily impounded but his name and activities were only publicly revealed decades later when certain State Department documents became declassified.

It is no exaggeration to say that the financial stake used by George Herbert Walker Bush — the first President Bush — to enter the oil business can be traced to the slave labour of Nazi concentration camps.

To do justice — if that is the right word — to the lies, scandals and crimes that make up George Sr.'s career, would take a lot of space. This, after all, is a man who was part of Richard Nixon's inner circle, lucky to escape the quagmire of Watergate with his career intact.

In 1976, as head of the CIA, King George the First conspired with the Pinochet dictatorship to assassinate Chilean opposition figure Orlando Letelier (and an American co-worker who was with him) in the streets of Washington, by means of a car bomb.

As Ronald Reagan's Vice President, Bush was instrumental cooking up the Iran-Contra deal. This tale of unconstitutional and illegal drug smuggling and arms dealing, all designed to funnel money to right-wing thugs and death squads in Nicaragua — the same sort of "freedom fighters" who are now carving Afghanistan into warlord fiefdoms and opium plantations.

But now, with a new war against Iraq in the offing, fueled by lies from George II and his friends, it seems sensible to focus on the lies that George I and his supporters told back at the start of the 1990's to justify the first Gulf War.

The most blatant, memorable lie was the dead baby hysteria.

In 1990, when George I was trying to convince Congress to back war against Iraq, a young Kuwaiti woman known only as Nayirah was trotted out before the Senate and the news media.

The 15-year-old Nayirah said she was a volunteer in a Kuwait hospital maternity ward.

Weeping, she told a spellbound audience about how Iraqi troops invaded the hospital, stealing the incubators, leaving 312 babies "on the cold floor to die."

A few days later Congress voted to support the war by just five votes.

George I and his Secretary of Defense, a fellow named Dick Cheney, insisted these "ghastly atrocities" proved Saddam Hussein was "Hitler revisited".

Not until after the bombing had begun did the truth start to leak out.

Nayirah was no maternity ward volunteer, she was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to Washington. She had no connection with any hospital.

The whole thing was a lie cooked up by a PR firm working the Kuwait government.

Bush and his inner circle denied they knew it was a lie. But Bush's national security advisor, Brent Scowcroft had to admit "it was useful in mobilizing public opinion."

Another useful lie of the time came directly from Bush, Cheney and the White House.

In September of 1990, Bush announced he had top-secret satellite pictures of the Kuwait-Saudi Arabia border area that clearly showed about 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks ready for invade Saudi Arabia.

The media bought the story without question, except for one reporter with the St. Petersburg Times in Florida, Jean Heller.

Heller managed to purchase photographs of the Kuwait-Saudi Arabian border taken by a Russian commercial satellite.

Guess what — no troops, no tanks.

"It was a pretty serious fib," says Heller, in a pretty serious understatement.

Even when her story ran, the White House denied it and the rest of the press ignored it.

Even now the US satellite pictures are classified top-secret.

John MacArthur is publisher of Harper's Magazine and author of "Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda I the Gulf War". He has a warning about Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of George Bush Jr.'s inner circle gearing up today's war drive:

"These are all the same people who were running it more than 10 years ago. They'll make up just about anything … to get their way."

For this "dynasty", lying is as much a part of the family business as oil and warfare.

It seems the nut didn't fall too far from the Bush.
User avatar
Bob
 
Posts: 5659
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:39 pm
Location: Florida/Wisconsin

Re: 01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby ChristophMessner » Wed Dec 16, 2009 7:51 pm

Bob, Tom, Bruce and all,
while we sit here in front of our screens we don't drive and therefore don't waste gas, don't we? So deeper communication, more praying, better meditation, doing arts, writing, reading, practicing an instrument, gourmet cooking, just practicing reflection, ... all those sitting things different from driving, are a solution, aren't they?
Chris
unjust peace is better than unjust war; just war is better than unjust peace; just peace is better than just war
User avatar
ChristophMessner
 
Posts: 1481
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 8:11 am
Location: Germany


Re: 01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby Bruce Patrick Brychek » Sat Dec 19, 2009 2:28 am

12.19.2009

Dear JFK Murder Solved Forum Members and Readers:

Bob - This is potentially extreme.

We "can't, won't, and don't have any intention of winning in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq,
Pakistan, etc."

We will eventually pull out in utter failure and lack of accomplishment just like Viet
Nam, Laos, and Cambodia.

BUT THE SHADOW GOVERNMENT AND RULING ELITE WILL HAVE WON. FUN, GAMES,
WARS, AND PROFITS. AND ALL THE WHILE CONTROL OF THE POPULATION, AND
POPULATION CONTROL.

THINK ABOUT IT.

Iran won't pussy foot around with us.

Jimmy has been telling me to watch Iran since 09.11.2001.

Iran would be our Waterloo. "WE" KNOW THAT.

Excellent Post, Bob.

Any additional analyses, interviews, investigations, readings, research, studies, thoughts
or writings on any aspect of this Subject Matter ?

Bear in mind that we are trying to attract and educate a Whole New Generation of JFK
Researchers who may not be as well versed as you.

Comments ?

Respectfully,
BB.
Last edited by Bruce Patrick Brychek on Sun Apr 12, 2015 2:35 am, edited 2 times in total.
Bruce Patrick Brychek
 
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

Re: 01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby ChristophMessner » Sat Dec 19, 2009 4:49 pm

Would Russia ever give up it's backing of Iran?
As far as I know aircraft carriers are pretty vulnerable by supersonic submarine torpedoes.
unjust peace is better than unjust war; just war is better than unjust peace; just peace is better than just war
User avatar
ChristophMessner
 
Posts: 1481
Joined: Mon Dec 08, 2008 8:11 am
Location: Germany

Re: 01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby Bruce Patrick Brychek » Tue Jan 01, 2013 9:33 pm

01.01.2013

Dear JFK Murder Solved Forum Members and Readers:

12.16.2009 - I Posted this analytical and perceptive Headline. Some great discussion followed,
with excellent input by Mr. Bob Fox as always.

01.01.2013 - Laws in the U.S. Have been changed, disregarded, and modified blatantly to allow
for "Fracking."

Many authorities claim that this will be the Final Death Knell to Clean Underground Water in America.

Additionally, many have argued that now is the Final Hour for Renewable Energy in automobiles and
other diesel, gas, kerosene, and propane consuming machines.

Are there any realistic attempts to develop Competitive Renewable Energy ?

Will we wait till all the Clean Water in America runs out ?

Not to worry. The Bush Family Cartel purchased and owns the Largest Fresh, Underground Water Aquifir
in the World, in South America.

THE BUSH FAMILY CARTEL NOW OWNS THE FRESHEST, LARGEST, PUREST UNDERGROUND WATER AQUIFIR
IN THE WORLD.

Soon water will be more expensive than fuel.

There will be Major Global Fresh Water Shortages increasing regularly for the next 25 years. My Opinion.

IF THERE IS A WAY TO CORNER THE MARKET ON FRESH AIR IN THE NEXT 25 YEARS, THAT WILL BE NEXT.
My Opinion.

FEDERAL RESERVE - ENERGY SUPPLY - FRESH WATER SUPPLY - FRESH AIR SUPPLY ? Who controls this
now, and on an increasing basis in The New World Order ? The Ruling Elite and The Shadow Government.
My Opinion.

Any additional analyses, interviews, investigations, readings, research, studies, thoughts,
or writings on any aspect of this Subject Matter ?

Bear in mind that we are trying to attract and educated a Whole New Generation of JFK Researchers
who may not be as well versed as you.

Comments ?

Respectfully,
BB.
Bruce Patrick Brychek
 
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby Bruce Patrick Brychek » Sun Apr 12, 2015 3:25 am

04.12.2015

Dear JFK Murder Solved Forum Members and Readers:

12.16.2009 - I Posted this inquisitive, important Headline. My Opinion.

Since we now have FRACKING I am more convinced than ever that Oil Supplies are FINITE.
Underground Oil Wells do not KEEP FILLING UP as suggested by some.

And what goes on underground also affects our Underground Clean Fresh Water Supply.
Some strong arguments Against FRACKING have arisen. Others in the Main Stream Media
Deny Negative Effects. Well O.K., I trust anything that I read in Main Stream Media. How
about you ?

01.01.2013 - I Posted additional input about The Bush Cartel Purchasing the Cleanest,
Freshest, Largest Underground Water Aquifir in the World.

This drew little attention both here and elsewhere in the World. The Main Stream
Media virtually ignored it, the Newest Way they cover-up things. My Opinion.

An interesting discussion followed from some of our Best JFKMS Forum Members that I
think is even more relevant today.

Recently I have been watching the Growing Fresh Water Shortages in California, other
parts of the U.S., and other parts of the World.

Clean Fresh Water will soon be more expensive than Gasoline. Probably 10 years or less.

Federal Reserve - Energy Supply - Fresh Water Supply - Fresh Air Supply ?

CONTROL OF THE POPULATION AND POPULATION CONTROL, all bases will be covered.

The Ruling Elite and The Shadow Government are already in Complete Control of The
New World Order. Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How will they allow "We the
people…" to develop in the next 25 years ?

Where will the U.S. be in the next 25 years ? Where will the World be in the next 25
years ? The Plans have been drawn. The Plays have been called. The Future is on
its way all in a Very Controlled Fashion. My Opinion.

Any additional analyses, interviews, investigations, readings, research, studies, thoughts,
or writings on any aspect of this Subject Matter ?

Bear in mind that we are trying to attract and educate a Whole New Generation of JFK
Researchers who may not be as well versed as you.

Comments ?

Respectfully,
BB.
Bruce Patrick Brychek
 
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

Re: 01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby kenmurray » Sun Apr 12, 2015 1:56 pm

Rockefeller's Agenda Population Control:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owaCmHWwCd8
kenmurray
 
Posts: 4779
Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 8:55 pm

01.01.2010: How Much Oil Is Left ?

Postby Bruce Patrick Brychek » Mon Sep 25, 2017 6:28 am

09.25.2017:

Dear JFK Murder Solved Forum Members and Readers:

12.16.2009 - I Originally Posted this Analytical, Inquisitive, Perceptive, Thought Provoking Headline seeking a Divergence of Intelligent Discussions.

Some of the Best and Brightest JFKMS Forum Members made some excellent contributions.

Nearly 8 years has passed since I began this Discussion, and my interests in re-raising it today have only increased.

Since then we are no closer to "Solving" JFK, MX, MLK, RFK, the Oklahoma Bombing, 09.11.2001, The War on Drugs, Overall Issues with Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq, North Korea, Russia, Air Pollution, Water Pollution, Crime, Drugs, Gangs, etc.

WHAT ARE THE SECRET STATE, THE SECRET GOVERNMENT, THE HIGH CABAL, AND THE MILITARY INDUSTRIAL CORPORATIONS REALLY FOCUSING ON, PLANNING, AND THINKING ABOUT LONG RANGE ? (09.25.2017, BB).

As always, I strongly recommend that you first read, research, and study material completely
yourself about a Subject Matter, and then formulate your own Opinions and Theories.

Any additional analyses, interviews, investigations, readings, research, studies, thoughts,
or writings on any aspect of this Subject Matter ?

Bear in mind that we are trying to attract and educate a Whole New Generation of JFK
Researchers who may not be as well versed as you.

Comments ?

Respectfully,
BB.
Bruce Patrick Brychek
 
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

Next

Return to Who shot JFK, and why?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

cron