The Most Important FTW Story
in Two Years...
IN YOUR FACE
- Connections between
Dick Cheney's Energy Task Force, 9/11 and Peak Oil “On
- July '04 Supreme Court
Ruling on Secrecy, Task Force Documents Obtained through
FOIA Suit on Collision Course as Cheney “Duck Hunts” with
- The Reason Why Activists
of All Stripes are Ineffective
Michael C. Ruppert
“The Cheney report is very guarded
about the amount of foreign oil that will be required.
The only clue provided by the [public] report
is a chart of net US oil consumption
and production over time. According
to this illustration, domestic oil field production
will decline from about 8.5 million barrels per day
(mbd) in 2002 to 7.0 mbd in 2020, while consumption
will jump from 19.5 mbd to 25.5 mbd. That suggests
imports or other sources of petroleum… will have to
rise from 11 mbd to 18.5 mbd. Most of the recommendations
of the NEP [National Energy Policy, May 2001] are aimed
at procuring this 7.5 mbd increment, equivalent to
the total oil consumed by China and India .
-- Professor Michael Klare
“Bush-Cheney Energy Strategy: Procuring
the Rest of the World's Oil”
Foreign Policy in Focus, January
The White House Stonewall goes on, as the Bush
administration continues to deny the non-partisan
Office's request for information on who the White
House Energy Task Force met with while formulating
national energy policy. For the first time in history,
has sued the executive branch for access to the
records. It has been 42 days since the GAO
filed their suit against the Bush administration
and 333 days since the White House first received
request. Why is the White House going to such lengths?
What are they trying to hide?
“White House Stonewall”
April 5, 2002
“The Supreme Court said Monday it
will settle a fight over whether Vice President Dick
Cheney must disclose details about secret contacts
with energy industry officials as the Bush administration
drafted its energy policy…
“The Supreme Court will hear the
case sometime in the spring, with a ruling expected
-- The Associated Press, Dec. 15, 2003
“Bush and Blair
have been making plans for the day when oil production
peaks, by seeking to secure the reserves of other nations.”
-- George Monbiot
“Bottom of the Barrel”
The Guardian, December 2, 2003
“ China and India are
building superhighways and automobile factories. Energy
demand is expected to rise by about 50 per cent over
the next 20 years, with about 40 per cent of that demand
to be supplied by petroleum…
“Oil supplies are finite and will soon be controlled
by a handful of nations; the invasion of Iraq and
control of its supplies will do little to change that.
One can only hope that an informed electorate and its
principled representatives will realize that the facts
do matter, and that nature – not military might – will
soon dictate the ultimate availability of petroleum.”
-- Alfred Cavallo
Oil: The illusion of plenty
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Jan-Feb
The 9/11 attacks gave the US an
ideal pretext to use force to secure its global domination…
The plan [“Rebuilding
Project for a New American Century – 2000] shows
Bush's cabinet intended to take military control of
the Gulf region whether or not Saddam Hussein was in
The overriding motivation
for this political smokescreen is that the US and
the UK are
beginning to run out of secure hydrocarbon energy
demand is increasing, so supply is decreasing,
continually since the 1960s.
-- Michael Meacher MP, UK Environment
“The War on Terrorism is Bogus”
The Guardian, September 6, 2003
"Moreover, as America becomes
an increasingly multi-cultural society, it may find
it more difficult to fashion a consensus on foreign
policy issues, except in the circumstance of a truly
massive and widely perceived direct external threat."
-- Zbigniew Brzezinski
The Grand Chessboard, p211 (1997)
(Brought to world attention after 9/11
by FTW on Nov. 7, 2001 )
January 29, 2004 1700 PST ( FTW ) – Nothing
can change the facts.
When, in May 2001, the conservative legal watchdog group
Judicial Watch filed suit to see the records of Dick
Cheney's National Energy Policy Development Group (NEPDG),
it was the first to protest the unheard of secrecy at
the energy task force. As the White House stonewalled,
the Government Accounting Office (GAO) filed suit
the following February. Congress had, after all, funded
the project. Non-governmental officials had played major
roles in its deliberations and, under the Constitution,
the GAO had an obligation to see how the money was
spent and what was produced. White House refusals prompted
media speculation about deals with Enron and big oil
companies; a divvying of spoils, a rape of the environment.
Judicial Watch was later joined in its suit by the Sierra
Club. A scandal for everyone!
It's a sure bet that of all the plaintiffs; from Congressman
Henry Waxman (D – CA) and Comptroller General David
Walker who fought for the GAO; to Judicial Watch's
Larry Klayman, who had previously fought Bill Clinton;
to the environmentalists, none had a clue as to what
they were really asking for or why Dick Cheney fought
them so ruthlessly.
The fight was just beginning.
As reported in the congressional newspaper The
Hill on February 19, 2003, the GAO dropped
its suit after the administration made threats of heavy
cuts to its budget. The offer GAO couldn't refuse
was delivered by Alaska 's Republican Senator Ted
Stevens where a lot of new drilling was expected to
take place. Judicial Watch and the Sierra Club stood
firm. Both had the money to see their suits through.
The controversy boiled throughout 2001-2002. It was
a crisis which – absent the war on terror – might have
been one of the biggest constitutional crises of all
time. It might still be.
Enron seems like a pleasant diversion now. All these
battles started before the first plane hit
the Twin Towers . That's one reason why everyone was
so shocked at the blatantly illegal secrecy and the manner
in which the administration fought. This was long before
The Patriot Act, Homeland Security, Patriot Act II,
and all the scandalous lies that have since been revealed.
One of the administration's bets was that, in the wake
of 9/11, the NEPDG records would be forgotten.
They lost that one.
Hints as to what was discussed in the secret task force – empanelled
immediately after Bush took office in January 2001 – are
now on the table. They strongly suggest that inside the
NEPDG records lay the deepest, darkest secrets of 9-11.
The motive; the apocalyptic truth that would compel such
carnage and hairpin the course of human history; the
thing that no one ever wanted to know; the thing that
makes it utterly believable that the US government could
have deliberately facilitated the attacks of September
11th, stands on the brink of full disclosure.
The likelihood that those truths might soon be revealed
is serious enough that two weeks ago Dick Cheney found
it convenient to go duck hunting with Justice Antonin
Scalia who will hear arguments in the case this spring.
Nature laughs as pundits spin and concerned peoples
around the world frantically and frenetically expend
futile, disorganized energies against the juggernaut
of tyranny and madness: elect a Democrat (any Democrat);
impeach Bush; write a check to support an activist group;
place an ad; stage a protest march; vote; don't vote;
file a suit; file another suit; demand that the major
media tell the truth, as long as it's the truth you want
to hear; blame political ideology; blame a religion;
blame a race; blame Capitalism; blame Communism; fight
each other to release your frustrations and fears. That
will make it better. Do anything but accept the obvious
reality that for the US government to have facilitated
and orchestrated the attacks of 9/11, something really,
really bad must be going on.
There are so many inconsistencies, proven lies, conflicts
of interest, and contradictions in the Bush administration's
accounts of 9/11 that the sheer multitude of them – in
a rational world – would have brought the government
to a halt long ago. But this is not a rational world.
It is full of people – on both sides – who are not behaving
GLIMPSE UNDER THE DOOR
Last July, after appealing a Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) request for NEPDG documents, Judicial Watch
won a small victory with the release of seven pages of
A detailed map of all Iraqi oil fields
(11% of world supply);
A two-page specific list of all nations
with development contracts for Iraqi oil and gas projects
and the companies involved;
A detailed map of all Saudi Arabian oil
fields (25% of world supply);
A list of all major oil and gas development
projects in Saudi Arabia ;
A detailed map of all the oil fields in
the United Arab Emirates (8% of world supply);
A list of all oil and gas development projects
in the UAE;
The documents may be viewed online at: http://www.judicialwatch.org/071703.c_.shtml .
In their austerity, the documents scream of what NEPDG
was debating. If 7.5 mbd of new oil production was to
be secured from any place there was only one place to
get it – the Persian Gulf . All told, including Qatar
(firmly under US control and the home of headquarters
for US Central Command) and Iran, the Gulf is home to
60% of all the recoverable oil on the planet. Not only
would these oil fields have to be controlled, billions
of dollars in new investment would be required to boost
production to meet US needs, simultaneously denying that
same production to the rest of the world where demand
is also soaring.
According to the Department of Energy, Saudi Arabia 's
net petroleum output must grow by 133% over the
next 25 years, from 10.2 mbd in 2001 to 23.8 mbd
in 2025, in order to meet anticipated world requirements
at the end of that period. Expanding Saudi capacity
by 13.6 mbd, which is the equivalent of total current
production by the United States and Mexico,
will cost hundreds of billions of dollars… The
Cheney report calls for exactly that. However,
any effort by Washington to
apply pressure on Riyadh is
likely to meet significant resistance from the
Not to mention from Muslim fundamentalists and ordinary
Saudi citizens who oppose the corrupt and teetering regime.
Sixty per cent of all the recoverable
oil on the planet is in an area no larger than the
state of Indiana
Herein lays the motive behind the US 's eagerness to
quietly and wrongly implicate the Saudi government in
9/11. A closer look at the maps obtained by Judicial
Watch explains why. When placed side by side the maps
reveal that 60% of the world's recoverable oil is in
a “golden” triangle running from Mosul in northern Iraq,
to the Straits of Hormuz, to an oil field in Saudi Arabia
75 miles in from the coast, just west of Qatar, then
back up to Mosul. Sixty per cent of all the recoverable
oil on the planet is an in area no larger than the state
of Indiana .
Is it surprising then that the overwhelming majority
of US military deployment since 9/11 is in this region?
How easy would it be for the US military, already surrounding
it, to occupy this area in the event that the Saudi monarchy
The list of countries and companies already invested
in new development projects in the region reads like
the perfect answer to the question: “OK, who do we have
to deal with to get this done? Who will come with us
if we offer them a piece and who will refuse, no matter
what, because they can't afford to have their share reduced?” Look
at the documents and answer that question and you have
perfectly separated the investor nations into two camps;
those who supported the Iraqi invasion and those who
The simple fact, as described in the opening quote from
Michael Klare, is that to secure imports equivalent to
the amounts consumed by China and India means taking
that oil away from China and India, or some other mix
of countries. The question is, from whom?
Other global battles for the oil that remains have already
begun, albeit quietly for the time being. This year China
will pass Japan as the world's second largest oil importer.
A January 3 article by James Brooke in the New York
Times titled Japan and China Battle for Russia's
Oil and Gas, described the fierce high-stakes contest
underway. Russia is going to build only one pipeline
east from its Siberian fields. It is either going to
terminate in the middle of China, or on Russia 's Pacific
coast where it can supply Japan, Korea and the Philippines.
Brooke wrote, “With the choice Russia faces, the political
and economic dynamics of Northeast Asia stand to be
profoundly shaped for years to come.”
Russia has 60 billion barrels (Gb) of proven reserves,
a 690-day supply for planet earth and there are no more
significant quantities of oil to be discovered anywhere
inside or outside of Russia . World oil discovery peaked
in the 1960s and has been declining ever since. The human
race now uses four barrels of oil for every barrel found
and the gap is widening each year. What remains to be
discovered is gong to be of a lesser quality, much more
expensive to obtain, and more expensive to refine.
WEST AFRICA, LATIN AMERICA, SOUTHEAST ASIA
The public NEPDG report also addresses (in oblique fashion)
areas of the world which have increasingly become inflamed
since 9/11: West Africa, South America, and Southeast
Asia . For more than two years FTW has paid
close attention to a shift in US and NATO military
presence in West Africa, Venezuela, Colombia, the Philippines
and Indonesia . (Please see: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/index.html#oil )
Of particular interest here are the facts that on May
1 2003, through the CIA 's Voice of America, NATO
commander James Jones announced that NATO was shifting
its focus to West Africa; new US naval bases are being
negotiated in the tiny West African island nations of
Sao Tome and Principe (Klare); and that the US gave six
naval warships to Nigeria last summer (Reuters, CNN).
Isn't it convenient that a US-friendly coup toppled the
Sao Tome government last July? (source: CNN)
As detailed by Klare, the importance of these regions
is that while they contain far smaller reserves than
the Gulf, they can be brought online (and drained) quickly
to meet current demand without destabilizing the US (world)
economy. The tens and perhaps hundreds of billions of
dollars needed to invest in infrastructure to increase
production in the Gulf will come only when oil prices
have soared enough to provide that capital. Don't expect
Wall Street to drain their reserves. They aren't going
to pay for it. You are.
Make no mistake, the oil companies and Wall Street are
banking on severe oil price spikes to fund this short-lived
development and, almost as importantly, to reduce consumption
on an ad hoc basis as people find they can't afford five
or six-dollar gasoline and businesses shut down. The
world uses a billion barrels of oil every eleven and
one half days and the rate of consumption is growing.
There are, at best, 500-600 billion barrels in the Gulf,
which can only be pumped if the investment is made over
the next ten years and begun immediately.
Do the math.
The vaunted “proven reserve” numbers touted by economists
have been shown to be as questionable as Enron's bookkeeping. FTW documented
in April of 2002 that the US Geological Survey admits
that it estimates reserves as a function of demand .
On January 9th 2004 Royal Dutch Shell announced that
it had overstated its proven reserves by 20 per cent.
The markets reacted accordingly.
When will the price spikes come? Within six months to
a year of the 2004 election. Not – if George W. Bush
can prevent it – before then.
FTW has spent 27 months exploring
and educating people about all the nuances involved in
a world that is running out of hydrocarbon energy. We
have looked at its effects on transportation, electricity,
economic growth and contraction, political power, civilization
and – perhaps most importantly – food production. The
coming showdown over the NEPDG records is probably the
single most important battle that can be fought to learn
the truth of 9/11 and the one overriding mandate that
is now driving human history.
I am not optimistic about the outcome.
There are two reasons why activist efforts to halt the
inertia of the Empire have failed and will continue to
fail: human nature, and human nature.
Activists all over the political spectrum are flailing
about in the post-9/11 world, spinning wheels, and throwing
out idea after idea without a unifying principle or a
clearly stated goal. As has happened so many times before
with the victims of a dozen other instances of government
criminality, the new victims – like the New Jersey widows
of 9/11 who are known for their persistence in challenging
government lies – make mistakes that have been made before,
put their faith in strategies that have been tried before,
and discount the wisdom and experience of those who have
suffered before. Human nature says that it is wrong to
criticize victims. Yet the new ones make a habit of ignoring
the old ones, only to be replaced and forgotten when
the next, inevitably greater, crime takes place.
Each time a new tragedy strikes, whether it be 9/11,
TWA 800 (a Navy shootdown), CIA involvement in drug
trafficking, Iran-Contra, Waco, The Savings and Loan
Scandal, the Enron shareholders, the Gander crash, or
any of a dozen other events in recent history, a new
crop of people is instantly and brutally transformed
from people who once trusted the system into people who
have been betrayed by it. Psychologically and emotionally
raped, they rage. They vow to fight. The need to make
the system that failed them work as they were “taught” becomes
a new imperative for their sanity and emotional stability.
They must believe that they can make people listen to
them, that they can “fix” it.
When, therefore, others who have been brutalized before
them present themselves with valuable experience and
try to explain the lay of the land, the new victims are
faced with the awful responsibility of acknowledging
that they themselves had not listened or responded when
their predecessors cried out for help. They had been
just as quick to say “I'm too busy” or “That's a bunch
of b.s. It couldn't be that way.” Yet it is. The new
victims had once been as deaf as the rest of the world
now appears to them. Still they clutch at straws and
cling to the illusion that “this time it will be different”.
For their own sanity they must ignore the reality of
the people who came before them, when to listen and learn
might provide a unifying, if terrifying, focus that might
ensure success. All it takes is courage and a good map
THREE DAYS OF THE CONDOR
But there is a deeper part of human nature which covers
the planet in a sickly, light-sweet-crude blanket of
denial. It is best exemplified from the closing lines
of Sidney Pollack's 1975 Three Days of the Condor,
perhaps the best spy movie ever made. As FTW has
shown in recent stories – using declassified CIA documents – the
CIA was well aware of Peak Oil in the mid 1970s. Three
Days of the Condor took that awful truth
and said then, what few in the post-9/11 world have had
the courage to say. I can guarantee you that it is the
overriding rationale in Dick Cheney's mind, in the mind
of every senior member of the Bush administration, and
in the mind of whomever it is that will be chosen as
the 2004 Democratic Party nominee. Getting rid of Bush
will not address the underlying causative factors of
energy and money and any solution that does not address
those issues will prove futile.
Turner (Robert Redford): "Do we
have plans to invade the Middle East ?"
Higgins (Cliff Robertson): " Are you crazy?"
Turner: " Am I?"
Higgins: "Look, Turner…"
Turner: "Do we have plans?"
Higgins: "No. Absolutely not. We have games.
That's all. We play games. What if? How many men? What
would it take? Is there a cheaper way to destabilize
a régime? That's what we're paid to do."
Turner: "Go on. So Atwood just took the game
too seriously. He was really going to do it, wasn't he?”
Higgins: "It was a renegade operation. Atwood
knew 54-12 would never authorize it. There was no way,
not with the heat on the Company.”
Turner: "What if there hadn't been any heat? Supposing
I hadn't stumbled on a plan? Say nobody had?"
Higgins: "Different ball game. The fact is there
was nothing wrong with the plan. Oh, the plan was alright.
The plan would have worked."
Turner: "Boy, what is it with you people? You
think not getting caught in a lie is the same thing as
telling the truth?"
Higgins: "No. It's simple economics. Today it's
oil, right? In 10 or 15 years - food, Plutonium. And
maybe even sooner. Now what do you think the people are
gonna want us to do then?
Turner : " Ask them."
Higgins: "Not now - then. Ask them when they're
running out. Ask them when there's no heat in their
homes and they're cold. Ask them when their engines
stop. Ask them when people who've never known hunger
start going hungry. Do you want to know something? They
won't want us to ask them. They'll just want us to get
it for them."
What do you want?