[Jack]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Gazzatrone', 'W')hat drugs is that guy taking and does he have a well stocked cupboard of the stuff to really plough into when TSHTF.

[phaeryen]

Too bad they are this vague with their optimistic statements - it would have been more fun had they stated whos production is going to soar so much that, it would supposedly fill in for all the major producers already in serious decline AND account for the huge rise in rate of production.

...

[Newsseeker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jack', '
')What drug? Hope.

It is, perhaps, the most powerful hallucinogenic available. People buy lottery tickets with sixteen million to one odds against them, and think of winning! Ahh, hope!

[Cynus]

Does anyone know off the top of their heads what the megaprojects database predicts for the next 3 years? Could the 10 additional mbpd be a stupid mistake of counting new production but not factoring in declines?

[DantesPeak]

Some interesting conclusions in this report, although no bug surprises for regular PO.com readers.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')on-OPEC Oil Production
Author: Toni Johnson, Staff Writer

October 19, 2007

Oil producers operating outside the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) are responsible for producing 60 percent of the world’s oil and face increasing production hurdles. Experts say many of the non-OPEC producers have older, less productive wells, rising costs for new projects, and in some cases rising demand at home that may cut into exports.

Many non-OPEC producers are faced with wells that are quickly depleting. Some major producers, such as the United States, Mexico, and Norway, have experienced a decline in production in recent years. However, overall numbers for non-OPEC producers are bolstered by the significant increases in production from Brazil, Canada, Russia, and a few other former Soviet states. A June 2007 BP report on world energy shows that production among the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development nations, which include four top independent producers—Canada, Norway, the United States, and Mexico—dropped by about two million bpd in the last decade. Meanwhile, the former Soviet states increased production by more than 40 percent over that same time period.

Declines in Production
Once one of the fifteen-largest oil producers, Britain experienced a production decline of 10 percent in 2005, the largest (Independent) of any oil producer for the year. Although production will be bolstered by new wells in the North Sea’s Buzzard Field, Britain’s overall production is expected to continue to decline, experts say. Overall production in the North Sea, which includes that of Norway, also is expected to decline in coming years. Norwegian production fell by about 570,000 bpd from 2000 to 2006. Mexico, a major exporter to the United States, experienced about a 300,000 bpd decrease in production during the same time period. The percentage of exports out of Mexico's oil production rose slightly from 41 percent in 2000 to 45 percent in 2006, but there are doubts Mexico can sustain the current level of exports much longer.

D. Barry McKennitt, executive director of the U.S. National Association of Petroleum Investment Analysts, questions Mexico’s ability to continue to export, noting that with domestic consumption going up and production going down, “They may not be able to export to anyone in five years.” For the period of 2000 through 2006, the EIA puts U.S. production declines at about 700,000 bpd; the BP report (PDF) estimates those declines to be closer to 900,000 bpd. The EIA includes gains in refining volume while the BP report does not.

[virgincrude]

And what do we know about the CFR?

How about this: "Psycho-political operations are propaganda campaigns used by the CFR and the Bilderberg Club designed to create perpetual tensions and manipulate various groups of people to accept the particular opinion these institutions wish to imprint upon the world. " (The Human Dimension; Experiences in Policy Research by Hadley Cantril published by the Rutgers University press in 1967

Therefore what the majority feel to be 'public opinion' is in effect carefully orchestrated propaganda, designed to provoke a certain reaction. I am not saying therefore, that we should doubt Peak Oil as a geological certainty. But we should at the least research our information as much as possible, as it is highly likely we are being duped with the intention of reaching a certain outcome: collapse of society, economic collapse and collapse of civilisation as we know it.

This outcome would help speed along the ultimate aims of the CFR and it's sister groups, all founded and lead by the same 'elite' responsible for the Stock Exchange, Banking, arms and weapon technology, and pretty much life as we know it so far. This ultimate goal is to secure control of world markets for their private benefit, at the expense of the common man who is being carefully prepared for a life of utter serfdom. Obviously population reduction will ease the process.

The CFR are an extremely secretive organisation, beholden to no government body, as they clearly state that not a single member of the Council can be held responsible for their declarations. The CFR practically controlls every organisation and institution of American government. All of the so-called checks and balances designed to ensure government function, are under their control. All of the past presidents of the US have either been members of the CFR or it's associated secret club; the Bilderberg, or the Trilateral Commission, regardless of their party affiliations. Significant members of past administrations have aloso, all been members of these elite organisations.

Most of the members of the CFR share the ideology of One World Government, more recently changed to the cozy term 'globalisation'. The extent and depth of their influence is staggering, and involves crafty psy-ops we can hardly suspect. I suggest you read up on it, since they are about to relieve you of your ability to think for yourself (the official web site is only too pleased to present the presentable side, one we all swallow happily oblivious to the ulterior motives, try elsewhere for the sinister reality.)

[mattduke]

A new CFR book is out on "regional monetary integration."

Amazon

[virgincrude]

There you go: one world government, one world currency (hence the current Dollar problems) one world army, one world police, one world religion.

Aaah the comfort and joy spread wide and thick. Whether you like it or not.

Grab your copy of "1984" before it's banned (or burned.)

[TreebeardsUncle]

Think it is rather a leap to that partiular paranoid conspiracy theory of a one-world govenment sponsored by the CFR. Think what the article actually indicates is that the balance of power will be shifting from Europe and the US, to Canada and the former USSR republics within the OECD.

Geoff

[funzone36]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('virgincrude', 'T')here you go: one world government, one world currency (hence the current Dollar problems) one world army, one world police, one world religion.

Aaah the comfort and joy spread wide and thick. Whether you like it or not.

Grab your copy of "1984" before it's banned (or burned.)

[mmasters]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('virgincrude', 'T')here you go: one world government, one world currency (hence the current Dollar problems) one world army, one world police, one world religion.

Aaah the comfort and joy spread wide and thick. Whether you like it or not.

[funzone36]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('virgincrude', 'T')here you go: one world government, one world currency (hence the current Dollar problems) one world army, one world police, one world religion.

Aaah the comfort and joy spread wide and thick. Whether you like it or not.

Grab your copy of "1984" before it's banned (or burned.)

[roccman]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('funzone36', '
')And I bet $1000 that it won't happen.

[virgincrude]

funzone, I'm not in to personally attacking anyone who doesn't think (not the same as believe, by the way) this whole crisis is NOT pre-programmed. In fact, it's always those with alternative views to the mainstream who are personally attacked for their thinking.

It's always easy to find back up for whatever views you find more likely. So, recently, I've been finding a frightening amount from unusual sources, which back up the 'conspiracy' theory. Sources I turn to, to AVOID strengthening the likelihood that my 'conspiracy theory' is unfounded, and lacks evidence.

"One thing experience has taught is that every notable market crash, panic, bear market or financial crisis is the result of careful planning and forethought by the monetary authorities. With trillions of dollars at stake, nothing happens without their tacit or explicit approval and there is simply no such thing as a crisis that happens by “coincidence.” For happenstance to be allowed to run its course in with trillions in derivates out there would be certain death for the financial system. As the economist Dr. Stuart Crane was fond of saying, “Things [in the monetary world] don’t just happen to happen. They happen because they were planned to happen.”

Now We Know the Real reasons for The Credit 'crisis'

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd I bet $1000 that it won't happen. They could've done it right after WW2 when America was at its peak of power but they didn't. Now, we hardly have enough energy to power those SUVs, let alone having enough energy to invade every single country, rule the world, and enforce their policies effectively around the giant globe.

[funzone36]

roccman. Basically, if a world government is established then I'll you $1000 but if it doesn't, then you give me $1000. A Real ID card does not mean that a world government will take place. The new card is not totally new except the biometric system. It is just a new card that makes it easier for the national government to identify its citizens so that it is more convenient for the user and it makes false identification harder to occur. The US government always had your personal information from your passport to your social security card to your credit cards. Although I agree that it won't stop terrorism, at least it can decrease the chances of terrorism. You can't argue that it takes away freedom of privacy since we (all countries) never ever had full freedom of privacy anyway.



virgincrude, I perfectly agree that a lot of market crashes are indeed planned but we can't do anything about it. Economic crashes is part of the economic cycle and under normal circumstances, an economy will recover from economic crashes. Economic crashes is not something new. It's a concept as old as economics. It happened in numerous other countries in history including the Roman Empire. Assuming no nuclear warfare, civilization will exist after peak oil but in a less industrialized manner. Just because market crashes are planned is no proof for one world government. If the world economy crashes then political institutions like UN and NATO will have a hard time conducting their operations because of insufficient funding. Allied armies is not a new concept. Many countries in history were allied together and combined their armies and fought together. I do not take away the possibility that Afghanistan was for narcotics trade but it was also for destroying the Taliban as well. And no, don't bring up 9/11 conspiracy theories or else I'll have to bring up Popular Mechanics. It's interesting to note that France and Germany largely did not support the invasion of Iraq. If you ask me, I'd say the UN's armed forces is hardly advanced enough and peak oil will further deteriorate military technology.

[roccman]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('funzone36', 'r')occman. Basically, if a world government is established then I'll you $1000 but if it doesn't, then you give me $1000. .

[funzone36]

Exactly. Such a concept of world government will fail. Though, I'd like you to describe who these Royal Elites are. It is no surprise to me that powerful people wants more power but I find a lack of full cooperation between powerful people. Oh and government control of the populace is not a new concept at all. It already happened.

[virgincrude]

funzone, I wish I could agree with you, it all makes perfect sense. If it were just as you say. However, nothing is as clear cut. As you say, there is also a lot of disagreement between TPTB and there is no evident hierarchical structure. Those that hold the power (bankers), set the agenda. The idea of a One World Government is of course, on the face of it, pretty unlikely seeing how chaotically most existing gocernments work today. But take a look at the current European Union and its new pseudo-Constitution. The Euro zone is a blueprint for the rest of the world: zone-wide laws which SUPERCEDE local, state laws. Citizens haven't noticed yet, because those laws are governing stuff like money exchange, agriculture and trade, not the daily stuff such as where and how much it'll cost you to park your car in town.

Your concept of the One World Government, your view of economics and politics is too narrow and governed by the mainstream, acknowledged and 'official' order of things for you to entertain the possibility that all is not as it seems. Just because we have seen empires crumble before, and watched economies collapse, does not mean it is all going to turn out like before. To see it all from the perspective of our existing economic set up, is to not see it at all. The UN is slowly gaining more strength, and usefull muscle, it is the prototype world government. Running out of funds? There are too many easy ways to get around this problem: ennable an international, mandatory tax system, a world tax which has been discussed and planned at very high levels, as they say, (aka the carbon emissions tax) and implement money-less financing. Call it slave labour.

Under a UN-like World Government, each individual state leader (elected in such free and fair elections as practiced by G.W. Bush i.e controlled circumstances) shall be subservient to the U.N's impenetrable burocracy of secretaries and 'government' bodies in a seemingly unwealdy leaden-footed series of treaties and agreements, alliances and joint-ventures (Cf European Union today.)

The UN as an army, is of course, a joke, but the UN forces currently deployed around the world, are a hotch-potch drawn from the standing armies of individual countries. Most of which are well trained and very well armed, and shooting under the orders of United States commanders, in the name of the UN- or incipient One World Government.

Of course, I don't have the answer to all your questions about the viability of this conspiracy notion or the next. It is a far more complex subject than simply reducing it to the 'One World Government Conspiracy'. But I find that dismissing such theories out of hand, with standard arguments and media-influenced explanations, is only going to reinforce your standard perception rather than open you to an alternative possibility.

[roccman]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('funzone36', 'E')xactly. Such a concept of world government will fail. Though, I'd like you to describe who these Royal Elites are. It is no surprise to me that powerful people wants more power but I find a lack of full cooperation between powerful people. Oh and government control of the populace is not a new concept at all. It already happened.

[funzone36]

Well, I am not trying to prove that they are not trying. All I said was that it's impossible to implement such a concept. It won't happen. They may have a plan (and I do not brush aside this possibility) but whether they can successfully implement it is a totally different question. I could even name people I know who wants to control the world. Obviously, they know it won't happen. One world government is too ideal (too perfect). It's like trying to set up a Utopian world.

On the other hand, conspiracy theories seeks to simplify politics and economics. If you haven't noticed, theorists make their theories simple enough so that it can reach as much of the dumb masses (those who doesn't know anything about politics/economics) as possible. But I agree, politics and economics is more complex than what you and I are discussing. What I already posted is not even the tip of the iceberg of what I know about politics and economics so you cannot judge my knowledge with these few posts.

I do have a question for you. Do you desire a one world government? If not, why not? If yes, explain.



roccman: First, at least millions people belong to all those families. Second, powerful does not mean they want to control the world. Just because they are powerful is not proof of trying to implement a new world order. The possibility is there but it's not fact.