~~* Paul's Justice Blog - launched July 4 *~~

Teaching & Understanding Sept 11: 

Photograph of the Moment - It's about the oil...

Web Intro ~ Contents ~ Photo Archive

Share this page: Enter e-mail address

bush, oil and iraq - oil company logos create statement we Shell not Exxon-erate Saddam

A Crude Case for War (Washington Post March 16, 2008: P B01) reviews and evaluates some of the claims:

"There is no single conspiracy theory about why the Bush administration allegedly waged this "war for oil." Here are two.

"Version one: Bush, former Texas oilman, and Vice President Cheney, former chief executive of the contracting and oil-services firm Halliburton, wanted to help their friends in the oil world. They sought to install a pro-Western government that would invite the major oil companies back into Iraq. "Exxon was in the kitchen with Dick Cheney when the Iraq war was being cooked up," says the Web site of a group called Consumers for Peace.

"Version two: As laid out in an April 2003 article in Le Monde Diplomatique, "The war against Saddam is about guaranteeing American hegemony rather than about increasing the profits of Exxon." Yahya Sadowski, an associate professor at the American University of Beirut, argues that "the neo-conservative cabal" had a "grand plan" to ramp up Iraqi production, "flood the world market with Iraqi oil" and drive the price down to $15 a barrel. That would stimulate the U.S. economy, "finally destroy" OPEC, wreck the economies of "rogue states" such as Iran and Venezuela, and "create more opportunities for 'regime change.' "

In "Crude Vision: How Oil Interests Obscured US Government Focus On Chemical Weapons Use by Saddam Hussein" the Institute for Policy Studies reveals that the diplomatic pressure from Rumsfeld and the Reagan administration happened during and despite Hussein's use of chemical weapons. Behind the scenes, these officials worked for two years attempting to secure the billion dollar pipeline scheme for the Bechtel corporation. The Bush/Cheney administration now eyes Bechtel as a primary contractor for the rebuilding of Iraq's infrastructure.

Bechtel's pipeline would have carried a million barrels of Iraqi crude oil a day through Jordan to the Red Sea port of Aqaba.

"The men who courted Saddam while he gassed Iranians are now waging war against him, ostensibly because he holds these same weapons of mass destruction" said Jim Vallette, lead author of the report. "To a man, they now deny that oil has anything to do with the conflict. Yet during the Reagan Administration, and in the years leading up to the present conflict, these men shaped and implemented a strategy that has everything to do with securing Iraqi oil exports. All of this documentation suggests that Reagan Administration officials bent many rules to convince Saddam Hussein to open up a pipeline of central interest to the US, from Iraq to Jordan."

"Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption and abuse, said today that documents turned over by the Commerce Department, under court order as a result of Judicial Watchís Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit concerning the activities of the Cheney Energy Task Force, contain a map of Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as 2 charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and 'Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts'.Ē 

If this is on the level, the implications are extraordinary. I always had it in the back of my mind that Cheney was stonewalling on the energy task force to hide the corruption, the ties to Enron and so on. But what if the sons of bitches were sitting around deciding how to divvy up Iraq? What if that most reductionist of slogans is a simple statement of fact: it's all about the oil?

Is the DC Sniper an Islamic Terrorist?

Cartoonist Tom Tomorrow has another take on Iraq in This Modern World (if you can't find bin Laden, bomb Iraq; if you're up to your ears in corporate scandals, bomb Iraq; if the stock market is taking a dive, bomb Iraq; etc)

Who profits from War? or Iraq Threat? (small flash movie - check out the rest of blah3.com)

Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy, Saudi Arabia and the Failed Search for bin Laden

In Iraqi War Scenario, Oil Is Key Issue: U.S. Drillers Eye Huge Petroleum Pool (Washington Post September 15, 2002; Page A01)

A U.S.-led ouster of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein could open a bonanza for American oil companies long banished from Iraq, scuttling oil deals between Baghdad and Russia, France and other countries, and reshuffling world petroleum markets, according to industry officials and leaders of the Iraqi opposition. 

Although senior Bush administration officials say they have not begun to focus on the issues involving oil and Iraq, American and foreign oil companies have already begun maneuvering for a stake in the country's huge proven reserves of 112 billion barrels of crude oil, the largest in the world outside Saudi Arabia. 

The importance of Iraq's oil has made it potentially one of the administration's biggest bargaining chips in negotiations to win backing from the U.N. Security Council and Western allies for President Bush's call for tough international action against Hussein. All five permanent members of the Security Council -- the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China -- have international oil companies with major stakes in a change of leadership in Baghdad.

The secretary of the army, Thomas White - currently, one supposes, planning a war not a million miles away from a rich source of oil - was actually an executive of the spectacularly corrupt and incompetent Enron Corporation, whose implosion began the unravelling of scoundrel capitalism. 

The dead and the guilty: Simon Schama on the questions Americans should be asking on the anniversary of September 11

Apparently, the [Sept 11] dead are owed another war. But they are not. What they are owed is a good, stand-up, bruising row over the fate of America; just who determines it and for what end? 


What the US president wants us to forget (Arab News.com)

"Remember to use the word "terror". Use it about Saddam Hussein, Osama Bin Laden, Yasser Arafat, and anyone who opposes Israel or America. Bush used it in his speech yesterday, 30 times in half an hour - thatís one "terrorism" a minute. But now letís list exactly what we really must forget if we are to support this madness. Most important of all, we absolutely must forget that President Ronald Reagan dispatched a special envoy to meet Saddam Hussein in December 1983. Itís essential to forget this for three reasons. 

Firstly, because the awful Saddam was already using gas against the Iranians ó which is one of the reasons we are now supposed to go to war with him.  Secondly, the envoy was sent to Iraq to arrange the re-opening of the US Embassy ó in order to secure better trade and economic relations with the Butcher of Baghdad. Thirdly, the envoy was Donald Rumsfeld. Now you might think it strange that Rumsfeld, in the course of one of his folksy press conferences, hasnít chatted to us about this interesting tit-bit. You might think he would have wished to enlighten us about the evil nature of the criminal with whom he so warmly shook hands. But no.

This was the speech of a president in exile.  

Like a deposed leader seeking refuge in a friendly nation, Bill Clinton came to Blackpool to deliver a message that can barely be heard in today's America. 

He had to be careful: an unwritten rule of US public life demands that "politics stops at the water's edge", that partisan hostilities be shelved when it comes to foreign policy. Convention also dictates that a former president give respectful support to his successor, especially when speaking abroad.  

But yesterday Clinton - whose dazzling, dizzying career broke every rule in the US book - broke those rules, too. He did it artfully, sometimes in code, but the 42nd president of the United States used the floor of the Labour party conference to unleash an acid critique of the Bush administration. 

rest of article on Clinton speech  

text of Clinton speech



Any views or opinions expressed in the pictures is not necessarily those of the authors. The photographs are presented as additional commentary on Sept 11th and people's reaction to it. No claim of copyright is being made to the photographs, which are temporarily provided here for their contribution to education. Copyright owners who would like additional credit or the removal of material from this site should contact me



Search WWW Search StopViolence.com


Copyright © 2000 - 2007 Paul Leighton. Permission is freely given to link to these pages or use them for non-commercial purposes, including distribution of printed copies at or below cost. For other uses, please contact the owner


This site is an affiliate of Amazon and Hostway. Ordering WebHosting or shopping at Amazon provides a contribution to this site, or examine other options to help StopViolence. Thanks for your support.