Tuesday, April 19, 2016

The Origin of Economic Failures and Depressions

The Origin of Economic Failures and Depressions

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

Forbidden Planet is a class Sci-Fi tour de force staring Leslie Nielson, Walter Pidgeon and Anne Francis. Released in 1956, it holds up surprisingly well against Star Wars, the Star Trek series and even the most recent digital entries into the genre.

The story of Dr. Morbius, re-discovering the technological marvels of a lost race of Krell on the distant distant planet Altair, is updated Shakespeare: The Tempest! Forbidden Planet excels in special effects, but it's enduring fascinations is to be found in its story –a parable of technology vs its inventor 

The story of Dr. Morbius, re-discovering the technological marvels of a lost race of Krell on the distant planet Altair, is updated Shakespeare: The Tempest. Forbidden Planet excels in special effects, but it's enduring fascination is to be found in it story --a parable of technology vs its inventor, the monster vs Dr. Frankenstein, the enemy of our own making.

Forbidden Planet shows us the dark side of human kind, a forbidding gestalt of uncontrollable urges that lies within all of us --a monster from the ID! 

Even intelligence —seemingly papered over the more powerful id —cannot negate our darkest, deepest reservoirs. Just as Lord of the Rings depicts the absolute corruption of absolute power, Forbidden Planet confronts us with a question we would rather not answer: what are we to do with the physical manifestations of our inmost monsters? Far fetched? Consider this: what are nuclear weapons if not the "physical manifestations" of our darkest, unconscious impulses?

Is "Terrorism" a Monster From the ID?

Forbidden Planet shows us the dark side of human kind, a forbidding gestalt of uncontrollable urges that lies within all of us –a monster from the ID! Even intelligence –seemingly papered over the more more powerful ID –cannot negate our darkest, deepest reservoirs. Just as the Lord of the Rings depicts the absolute power, Forbidden Planet confronts us with a question we would rather not answer: what are we to do with the physical manifestations of our most inmost monsters?
Far fetched? Consider this: what are nuclear weapons if not the "physical manifestations" of our darkest, unconscious impulses?

Not so long ago, it was said by many writers that the U.S. Was hated by 100% of terrorists. Aside from being an amusing tautology, it misses the point. FBI statistics, for example, published by the Brookings Institution, utterly repudiate the political exploitation of terror. The FBI'S's own number are conclusive: while Ronald Reagan waged his famous “War on Terrorism”, terrorist attacks against the United States actually increased. Terrorist attacks were much greater under R. Reagan than under Clinton. Yet Clinton was criticized for not having waged such a war, if war it was! It raises the questions: is it preferable to wage a war and fail than to not wage a war and succeed?

Shakespeare's “The Tempest” deals with the same question: what does it mean to be human? The traditions of the enlightenment and more recently of existentialism come down heavily on the side of the fully realized individual –free to be human in the context of a free society. How oddly quaint and surrealistically naive that seems after a few years of debacle and the unleashed madness of the monster of the Id!.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Tuesday, December 15, 2015

Oil Junkies for Jesus

by Len Hart, the Existentialist Cowboy

Face it – the United States and foreign affairs always seem to be awkward at best. At the very worst, the United States comes away having lost a friend! Involvement in Iraq was complicated by what I would call “weird” theology.

Fundamentalist Christians insist upon an unconditional pro-Israeli policy no matter what! Israel is God's chosen nation. To oppose Israel, they say, is to damn the opposing nation to hell.

Another complication is our nation's symbiotic relationship with oil producing “infidels”. GOP faithful believe that middle east oil is ours to plunder. Oil Junkies for Jesus openly boast of stealing Iraqi oil. For them, waging war for oil is not a war crime, it's a crusade; it's not an atrocity its, a commandment.

SUV's are not abominable energy hogs, they are God's own chariot. While we fear the mother of all energy crunches, Hubbert's Peak, oil junkies for Jesus look forward to just flying away from it all. In 1956, geophysicist, M. King Hubbert, working at the Shell research lab in Houston, TX predicted that U.S. oil production would peak in the early 1970s.

For his efforts, Hubbert was pilloried by oil experts and economists. Nevertheless, the 70's are remembered less for Disco Duck than for the long lines at service stations. The Arab Oil Embargo had driven home a point that the US had become an oil junkie nation. The US partnership with Arab oil producers was always a strange marriage of fundamentalist Christians from Texas and equally fundamentalist Muslims from the far flung deserts of the Middle East, primarily Saudi Arabia. Amid long lines, hot tempers and high prices, the era of cheap energy was over by the end of the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, the so-called Yom Kippur War.

The situation is complicated by what is conveniently and politically called "world terrorism" and the suspicion that the Bush administration turned a blind eye to the flow of "petro-dollars" finding their way into Saudi coffers and eventually into the hands of terrorists and, perhaps, bin Laden. In the early days of the Iraq war, the moral implications were easily assuaged: just stick a flaq on your SUV, wave a yellow ribbon from your truck!

Americans are just barely aware that they pay about one-third the price Europeans pay for gasoline! But you have to credit the GOP with resourcefulness. The Bush administration delivered a message to the faithful: war in Iraq will result in lower prices at the pump even as the official line denied that the US attack and invasion of Iraq had anything at all to do with oil. That is revisionist history.

The record of US Ambassador April Glaspie's interview with Saddam Hussein on the eve of his attack of Kuwait proves conclusively that Hussein's "problems" with the Bush family began when he tried to lower the price of oil. Apparently the nation bought the GOP line. Alternative fuels, green energy and efficient cars were no longer "in".

It was not always so. The famous Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston during the oil embargo was dominated by talk of Solar Energy, Offshore Thermal Energy Conversion, and Wind Energy. The brightest minds from MIT, Harvard, and Cambridge were there –modeling the economics of it all. It's easy to find in the 1970's the growing antipathy between big oil and the Democratic party. President Carter got caught in the cross hairs as perhaps JFK had done about ten years earlier when he promised to put an end to a Texas oil industry sacred cow –the Oil Depletion Allowance. But only a conspiracy theorist would connect that fact with his murder in Dallas, TX.

Carter's advisors, however, favored lifting price caps but his political advisors nixed the idea. Clearly, American consumers were fed up with higher prices but absurdly long lines were the only alternative. Even now consumers may not have it both ways. Energy Secretary James R. Schlesinger favored lifting Federal price caps and doing away with what he called the “government's” Byzantine allocation system". His proposal, he said, would go a long way toward spurring conservation while allocating scarce fuel more efficiently. Schlesinger said it would eliminate the long lines at the gas pump. It would mean the end of dirt cheap gasoline.

When Carter over ruled Schlesinger the press reported that the President had refused to eliminate Federal Price Caps against the advice of his own energy secretary. [See: Merrill Sheils, "The Energy Plan," Newsweek, July 23, 1979] In Houston, MIT energy economist Morris Adelman would tell us reporters:

'All in all, it was a very weak, pallid performance,' said MIT energy economist Morris Adelman. "The failure to decontrol will cost us a good deal." The future may be seen in our own past. It is simplistic to say merely that all the world's oil supplies will simply run dry, though oil supplies are finite to be sure. It is, rather, a matter of economics. Pennsylvania, for example, was America's first oil producing state –but Pennsylvania hasn't figured prominently in the oil industry in over a century.

Oil seemed limitless; after all, it took some 60 years to consume the first 10% --a curve that has continually gotten steeper. Later --the Spindletop gushers in Texas startled the world only to be exploited and abandoned in a period of some twenty years or less. Then the pattern repeated itself in West Texas. On the ranches just outside of Odessa/Midland, there is evidence that the robber barons of big oil simply walked away, abandoning wells to despoil the environment when it became no longer economically viable to operate them.

It ceased to be easy. That may explain why George W. Bush had to settle for stealing an election. In its first stages, petroleum exploration is a straight-forward technical procedure and, indeed, it was so easy wildcatters used to call it “land speculation with cash flow”. Just shoot a modern seismic "net" across a basin and let the soundings delineate the significant prospects. The largest oil and gas fields are also the biggest and easiest targets; it was so easy in its early days that even an idiot could have made money. George W. Bush's ventures went belly-up twice; that is significant. Every other idiot made money. Shrub failed to find oil amid plenty but he did find “the Lord" in a hell hole” –Odessa/Midland.

By that time, however, getting rich in oil had become more complicated. The cost of producing oil outstripped oil's value. What happened in Pennsylvania, Beaumont (Spindletop), Odessa/Midland will one day happen to Saudi Arabia, The Persian Gulf, and Russia. The Arabs –inventors of Algebra –know this even if the blythe SUV-driving American idiot does not. The demand for oil will increase from about eighty million barrels per day to about 125 million barrels per day by 2030; in the meantime, OPEC oil production will level off in 2014, if not sooner. A steep decline will begin in 2016 from which oil production will never recover.

A big crunch is very nearly here if the shortfall isn't made up. In the meantime, Halliburton, Unocal, Chevron rush to enrich themselves with Republican assistance, even complicity. The War in Iraq is just a part of the grand chessboard albeit a key one. Should Bush abandon Iraq, the American oil industry faces a crisis. It is a last desperate, ruthless grasp that has plunged the world into a "war on terror" and too many Americans have been asked to die for Halliburton --not America! Who is the genius behind the prediction that bears his name?

In 1969, Hubbert skipped Woodstock to do math. Hubbert suspected that a graph of world oil production would follow a standard statistical norm and his findings are not unlike those of Malthus who said essentially the same thing of arithmetic food production in populations which increase geometrically. Students of elementary statistics will know it as a “bell curve”. Hubbert was not appreciated in 1969 –the dawning of the Age of Aquarius. Nonetheless, he plotted a graph which predicted a peak of oil production followed by a precipitous decline.

The future is now: Hubbert is now said by experts to have made the “...only truly valid scientific projection of future oil production.” A report by the Novum Corporation bluntly states that Hubbert was correct when he forecast oil production peaking in 1969. Since that time, domestic oil production has declined to within 5% of Hubbert's 1956 predictions. The world oil map is not what it was in the 70's.

Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf producers still make up a quarter of the world's oil supply to be sure but new supplies are now found in Russia where production fell by one-half after the break-up of the Soviet Union. But foreign supplies are likewise finite and cannot be depended upon to bail out the US –especially given the increasingly murky role of Saudi Arabia and volatile political situations throughout the middle east. The war on terrorism cannot be counted on to bring stability to the region or to oil prices.

Dick Cheney's Halliburton, Enron, Unocal, and Chevron, for example, have long proposed a "consortium" to build a pipeline across Afghanistan to the Arabian Sea –a pipeline supported by Pakistan but opposed by the Taliban. Only the insentient would not wonder if Dick Cheney's "pipeline" figured prominently in BBC reports that the United States had promised Pakistan a "little war" with Afghanistan --a promise made months before the events of 9/11.

Some conclusions: America's addiction to oil is not just a matter of taste, lifestyle, or provincialism. It is a matter of national security. Alarms bells should have gone off when Bush promised to end world terrorism at a time when his own family is in business with the people who finance them –Saudi Arabia. Afghanistan, for example, got carpet bombed; Saudi Arabia had merely to endure some bad press. Is that because the Saudis are well-connected with Bush et al? Until fuel cell cars are made, scooters, economy vehicles, and public transportation –already popular everywhere, it seems, but in America --will become necessary in the US. The alternative is walking.

There are glimpses of the future to be seen in various out-of-the-way places across the U.S: little communities where residents live “harmoniously” with the earth in super-insulated, comfortable houses coated with hardened clay. They do organic farming and telecommute. Just a bunch of hippies, tree-huggers, and liberals no doubt –but tell me that when your heating bill outstrips the value of your latter day manor house. In the meantime, Hubbert's Peak is not a Soap Opera. It does, rather, explain why Bush and Dick Cheney (Halliburton) may have –as has been published and reported now in an increasing number of sources –threatened Afghanistan with “carpet bombs” before 9-11.

It also explains Bush's one time love of Putin. Bush didn't see Putin's soul; he saw his oil! It also explains why they have since fallen out. The US was “negotiating” pipeline rights with the Taliban; dying for God and country is one thing –but for Halliburton?

Another complication is our nation's symbiotic relationship with oil producing “infidels”. GOP faithful believe that middle east oil is ours to plunder. Oil Junkies for Jesus openly boast of stealing Iraqi oil. For them, waging war for oil is not a war crime, it's a crusade; it's not an atrocity its a commandment.

SUV's are not abominable energy hogs, they are God's own chariot. While we fear the mother of all energy crunches, Hubbert's Peak, oil junkies for Jesus look forward to just flying away from it all. In 1956, geophysicist, M. King Hubbert, working at the Shell research lab in Houston, TX predicted that US oil production would peak in the early 1970s.

Others predicted a peak occurring right about now. For his efforts, Hubbert was pilloried by oil experts and economists. Nevertheless, the 70's are remembered less for Disco Duck than for the long lines at service stations. The Arab Oil Embargo had driven home a point: the US had become an oil junkie nation. The US partnership with Arab oil producers was always a strange marriage of fundamentalist Christians from Texas and equally fundamentalist Muslims from the far flung deserts of the Middle East, primarily Saudi Arabia. Amid long lines, hot tempers and high prices, the era of cheap energy was over by the end of the 1973 Arab-Israeli War, the so-called Yom Kippur War.

The situation was complicated by what is conveniently and politically called "world terrorism" and the suspicion that the Bush administration turned a blind eye to the flow of "petro-dollars" finding their way into Saudi coffers and eventually into the hands of terrorists perhaps, bin Laden. In the early days of the Iraq war, the moral implications of this were easily assuaged: just stick a flag on your SUV, wave a yellow ribbon from your truck!

Americans are just barely aware that they pay about one-third the price Europeans pay for gasoline! But you have to credit the GOP with resourcefulness. The Bush administration delivered a message to the faithful: war in Iraq will result in lower prices at the pump even as the official line denied that the U.S. attack and invasion of Iraq had anything at all to do with oil.

That is revisionist history. The record of US Ambassador April Glaspie's interview with Saddam Hussein on the eve of his attack of Kuwait proves conclusively that Husein's "problems" with the Bush family began when he tried to lower the price of oil. Apparently the nation bought the GOP line. Alternative fuels, green energy and efficient cars were no longer "in". It was not always so. The famous Offshore Technology Conference held in Houston during the oil embargo was dominated by talk of Solar Energy, Offshore Thermal Energy Conversion, and Wind Energy.

The brightest minds from MIT, Harvard, and Cambridge were there –modeling the economics of it all. It's easy to find in the 1970's the growing antipathy between big oil and the Democratic party. President Carter got caught in the cross hairs as perhaps JFK had about ten years earlier when he promised to put an end to a Texas oil industry sacred cow –the Oil Depletion Allowance. But only a conspiracy theorist would connect that fact with his murder in Dallas, TX.

Carter's advisors, however, favored lifting price caps but his political gurus nixed the idea. Clearly, American consumers were fed up with higher prices but absurdly long lines were the only alternative. Even now consumers may not have it both ways. Energy Secretary James R. Schlesinger favored lifting Federal price caps and doing away with what he called the “government's” Byzantine allocation system".

His proposal, he said, would go a long way toward spurring conservation while allocating scarce fuel more efficiently. Schlesinger said it would eliminate the long lines at the gas pump. It would mean the end of dirt cheap gasoline. When Carter over ruled Schlesinger the press reported that the President had refused to eliminate Federal Price Caps against the advice of his own energy secretary. [See: Merrill Sheils, "The Energy Plan," Newsweek, July 23, 1979] In Houston, MIT energy economist Morris Adelman would tell me and other reporters: "All in all, it was a very weak, pallid performance," said MIT energy economist Morris Adelman. "The failure to decontrol will cost us a good deal."

The future may be seen in our past. It is simplistic to say merely that all the world's oil supplies will simply run dry, though oil supplies are finite to be sure. It is, rather, a matter of economics. Pennsylvania, for example, was America's first oil producing state –but Pennsylvania hasn't figured prominently in the oil industry in over a century.

Oil seemed limitless; after all, it took some 60 years to consume the first 10% --a curve that has continually gotten steeper. Later --the Spindletop gushers in Texas startled the world only to be exploited and abandoned in a period of some twenty years or less. Then the pattern repeated itself in West Texas. On the ranches just outside of Odessa/Midland, there is evidence that the robber barons of big oil simply walked away, abandoning wells to despoil the environment when it became no longer economically viable to operate them.

It ceased to be easy. That may explain why George W. Bush had to settle for stealing an election. In its first stages, petroleum exploration is a straight-forward technical procedure and, indeed, it was so easy wildcatters used to call it “land speculation with cash flow”. Just shoot a modern seismic "net" across a basin and let the soundings delineate the significant prospects. The largest oil and gas fields are also the biggest and easiest targets; it was so easy in its early days that even an idiot could have made money. The fact that George W. Bush's ventures went belly-up twice is significant. Every other idiot was making money. Shrub failed to find oil amid plenty but he did manage to find “the Lord" in a hell hole” – the oil fields just outside Odessa/Midland.

By that time, however, getting rich in oil had become more complicated. The cost of producing oil outstripped it's value. What happened in Pennsylvania, Beaumont (Spindletop), Odessa/Midland will one day happen to Saudi Arabia, The Persian Gulf, and Russia. The Arabs –inventors of Algebra –know this even if the blythe SUV-driving American idiot does not. The demand for oil will increase from about eighty million barrels per day to about 125 million barrels per day by 2030; in the meantime, OPEC oil production will level off in 2014, if not sooner. A steep decline will begin in 2016 from which oil production will never recover.

A big crunch is very nearly here if the shortfall isn't made up. In the meantime, Halliburton, Unocal, Chevron rush to enrich themselves with Republican assistance, even complicity. The War in Iraq is just a part of the grand chessboard albeit a key one. Should Bush abandon Iraq, the American oil industry faces a crisis. It is a last desperate, ruthless grasp that has plunged the world into a "war on terror" and too many Americans have been asked to die for Halliburton --not America! Who is the genius behind the prediction that bears his name?

In 1969, Hubbert skipped Woodstock to do math. Hubbert suspected that a graph of world oil production would follow a standard statistical norm and his findings are not unlike those of Malthus who said essentially the same thing of arithmetic food production in populations which increase geometrically. Students of elementary statistics will know it as a “bell curve”. Hubbert was not appreciated in 1969 –the dawning of the Age of Aquarius. Nonetheless, he plotted a graph which predicted a peak of oil production followed by a precipitous decline.

The future is now: Hubbert is now said by experts to have made the “...only truly valid scientific projection of future oil production.” A report by the Novum Corporation bluntly states that Hubbert was correct when he forecast oil production peaking in 1969. Since that time, domestic oil production has declined to within 5% of Hubbert's 1956 predictions. The world oil map is not what it was in the 70's.
Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf producers still make up a quarter of the world's oil supply to be sure but new supplies are now found in Russia where production fell by one-half after the break-up of the Soviet Union. But foreign supplies are likewise finite and cannot be depended upon to bail out the US –especially given the increasingly murky role of Saudi Arabia and volatile political situations throughout the middle east. The war on terrorism cannot be counted on to bring stability to the region or to oil prices.

Dick Cheney's Halliburton, Enron, Unocal, and Chevron, for example, have long proposed a "consortium" to build a pipeline across Afghanistan to the Arabian Sea –a pipeline supported by Pakistan but opposed by the Taliban. Only the insentient would not wonder if Dick Cheney's "pipeline" figured prominently in BBC reports that the United States had promised Pakistan a "little war" with Afghanistan --a promise made months before the events of 9/11.

Some conclusions: America's addiction to oil is not just a matter of taste, lifestyle, or provincialism. It is a matter of national security. Alarms bells should have gone off when Bush promised to end world terrorism at a time when his own family is in business with the people who finance them –Saudi Arabia. Afghanistan, for example, got carpet bombed; Saudi Arabia had merely to endure some bad press. Is that because the Saudis are well-connected with Bush et al? Until fuel cell cars are made, scooters, economy vehicles, and public transportation –already popular everywhere, it seems, but in America --will become necessary in the US. The alternative is walking.

More generally, there are glimpses of the future to be seen in various out-of-the-way places across the U.S: little communities where residents live “harmoniously” with the earth in super-insulated, comfortable houses coated with hardened clay. They do organic farming and telecommute. Just a bunch of hippies, tree-huggers, and liberals no doubt –but tell me that when your heating bill outstrips the value of your latter day manor house. In the meantime, Hubbert's Peak is not a Soap Opera. It does, rather, explain why Bush and Dick Cheney (Halliburton) may have --as has been published and reported now in an increasing number of sources –threatened Afghanistan with “carpet bombs” before 9-11.

It also explains Bush's one time love of Putin. Bush didn't see Putin's soul; he saw his oil! It also explains why the have since fallen out. The US was “negotiating” pipeline rights with the Taliban; dying for God and country is one thing –but for Halliburton?


Tuesday, November 03, 2015

911: A Final Summation

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

American Airlines itself is the source for information that AA Flights 11 (North Tower) and 77 (Pentagon) did not fly on 911. These flights are critical to the the government's crumbling cover up! Without those flights, Bush and his murderous co-conspirators will have to revise the big lie. They will have to concoct yet another cover story from the ground up! 

A cover up is on the brink of collapse when those guilty of capital crimes and high treason either turn on one another or are forced to revise the lie!If neither flight was in the air as American Airlines itself has so stated, then numerous 'official versions' of the 'official conspiracy theory' are all a pack of malicious lies. That includes almost every statement made by Bush. It is, in my opinion, probable cause to indict Bush and his co-conspirators for the crimes of mass murder and high treason.

WikiScanner discovered that American Airlines changed their Wikipedia entry to state that Flights 11 and 77 never flew on 9/11. Original entry was:
Two American Airlines aircraft were hijacked and crashed during the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack: American Airlines Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and American Airlines Flight 11 (a Boeing 767).
          New entry is as follows and it includes the bolded text below:
Two American Airlines aircraft were hijacked and crashed during the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack: Flight 77 (a Boeing 757) and Flight 11 (a Boeing 767). 
Although these flights were daily departure before and a month after September 11, 2001, neither flight 11 nor 77 were scheduled on September 11, 2001. The records kept by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (www.bts.gov/gis/) do not list either flight that  day.  
--Wikipedia
To make the point: the source for these change is American Airlines by making corrections to Wikipedia. The 'story' is not about Wiki. The story is about how AA 'corrected' a wiki entry to coincide with their own. The story is about the fact that the evidence that Flights 11 and 77 were not flying on 911 comes from American Airlines itself.
According to a Freedom of Information Act reply from the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS), the last known pre-9/11 flights for three of the four aircraft involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 took place in December, 2000, nine months before the attacks, while no pre-9/11 final flight information was provided for American Airlines flight 77 (N644AA).

However, a discovered searchable online BTS database produces the following search results for three of the four 9/11 aircraft on September 10, 2001:

AA 11 departs San Francisco (SFO): AA 09/10/2001 0198 (flight number) N334AA (tail number) BOS (destination) 22:04 (wheels-off time)

UA 175 departs San Francisco (SFO): UA 09/10/2001 0170 (flight number) N612UA (tail number) BOS (destination) 13:44 (wheels-off time)

UA 93 departs San Francisco (SFO): UA 09/10/2001 0078 (flight number) N591UA (tail number) EWR (destination) 23:15 (wheels-off time)--911 Blogger, UPDATE: U.S. BTS FOIA Records For 9/11 Planes Differ From BTS Online Database [The records were obtained by Adrian Monaghan]
Anyone trying to prove that Flights 77 and 11 were not flying on 911 would have to verify that proposition through authoritative sources that could confirm it. The question is raised: how do we know who made the changes to Wiki? Everyone logged on to the internet does so from an IP address. In this case, the IP is that of American Airlines. It's traceable.

My own WHOIS lookup as well as a Google search of the IP address proves conclusively that it was --indeed --American Airlines itself that made the change. It is American Airlines --by way of Wiki --that has said that neither Flight 11 nor Flight 77 were in the air that day.

Therefore, the Bush theory of 911 is a deliberate lie.

My look up returned the following:
WHOIS - 144.9.8.21

Location: United States [City: Ft. Worth, Texas]

OrgName: American Airlines Incorporated
OrgID: AMERIC-112
Address: P.O.Box 619616
Address: MD 5308
City: DFW Airport
StateProv: TX
PostalCode: 75261
Country: US
NetRange: 144.9.0.0 - 144.9.255.255
CIDR: 144.9.0.0/16
NetName: AANET
NetHandle: NET-144-9-0-0-1
Parent: NET-144-0-0-0-0
NetType: Direct Assignment
NameServer: DNS-P1.SABRE.COM
NameServer: DNS-P2.SABRE.COM
NameServer: DNS-P3.SABRE.COM
NameServer: DNS-P4.SABRE.COM
Comment:
RegDate: 1990-10-31
Updated: 2002-06-27

RTechHandle: OG60-ARIN
RTechName: Gelbrich, Orf
RTechPhone: +1-817-931-3145
RTechEmail: ************@aa.com
OrgTechHandle: ZW72-ARIN
OrgTechName: WARIS, ZISHAN
OrgTechPhone: +1-817-967-1242
OrgTechEmail: ************@aa.com

# ARIN WHOIS database, last updated 2008-06-29 19:10
# Enter ? for additional hints on searching ARIN's WHOIS database.
This is not the first major hole to be discovered. The many lies (many referenced in previous EC articles; see links below) are probable cause to begin a Federal Grand Jury investigation of George W. Bush's role in 911. Bush should be compelled by subpoena and Federal Marshals to testify under oath before an independent Federal Grand Jury. The AA revelations demand it!

Bush lies have the effect of covering up the truth, protecting the guilty and obstructing justice. The lies are an insult to the families of 911 victims, victims who are dishonored by the continuing cover-up! Bush's lies aggravate the crimes of mass murder, terrorism and high treason for which the penalty must surely be death. 911 did not happen as we have been told. 

We were lied to 

Bushco's 'official conspiracy theory' of 911 is full of holes. Flights 11 and 77 are essential ingredients in the 'official conspiracy theory' of 911. 

That AA claims that neither 11 or 77 were in the air that day sinks Bush's theory. 

More importantly, however, it should get him an 'invitation' to appear before a Federal Grand Jury to answers charges that he betrayed his nation and waged war upon the people. Clearly --the official theory is a lie, an intentional cover-up. Cover-ups imply guilt! Otherwise --what is there to cover up? The official 'lie' goes like this:
At 8:20, Flight 11 stopped transmitting its transponder signal, and veered northward and departed dramatically from the westward heading of its planned route. The controllers concluded that the plane had probably been hijacked. 4 5 At 8:24, the following transmission was reportedly received from Flight 11: We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you'll be okay .. we are returning to the airport...Nobody move. Everything will be okay. If you try to make any moves, you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet. Nobody move please we are going back to the airport .. don't try to make any stupid moves. 6 Neither of the pilots pressed the distress call button. At 8:28 controllers reportedly watched the plane make a 100-degree turn toward the south. 7 Presumably, Flight 11 continued south along the Hudson River until it reached the World Trade Center, though documentation of this is sparse given the lack of public information.According to NORAD's September 18 timeline, the FAA did not notify NORAD of the signs that Flight 11 was hijacked until 8:40, 25 minutes after the first signs of trouble.
--Flight 11, The First Jet Commandeered on September 11th, 911 Research

Elsewhre, 911 Research stats: "...there is no evidence for the assertions by some people... that the North Tower was hit by something other than Flight 11." I can do better: those who assert must prove. Ergo: those who believe the Bush version of events must prove the Bush version or, at the very least introduce some evidence in support of the official conspiracy theory. 

Rather, the Bush admin and its supporters have not proved or supported! They have, in fact, threatened and intimidated. It is, rather, the assertions that Flight 11 struck the North Tower that are utterly baseless. 

The burden of proof is on those who assert. Those who assert that Flight 11 did not fly that day must prove their assertion. If the case had even been taken to court, a judge would have required evidence meeting legal requirements of the bench, the court, and eventually a jury. 

If neither Flight 11 or 77 was in the air that day, then nothing in the 'official statements' with regard to the Twin Towers is true. The house of cards collapses.

While it is not good news for Bush, it is consistent with the fact that no wreckage traceable to a 757 was ever found at the Pentagon. The rotor seen photographed beside one of the workers in the wake of the "attack" is what some have called a turbine jet. Had a Flt 77 crashed into the Pentagon, two of these would have been found. Alas --only one was photographed (above). 

There are several problems with that: 1) there are two of these in a 757; only one was recovered. Had a complete investigation been made, more inconsistencies may have made the Bush version of events so outrageous that a full and competent investigation could not have been dodged or covered-up. 


.
Where is the Airliner? 

Moreover, photos of an engine rotor appear to depict an engine used in the Global Hawk, a payload carrying missile that was, according to Britain's International Television News, flown from the US to Australia completely by remote control. "A robot plane has made aviation history by becoming the first unmanned aircraft to fly across the Pacific Ocean." 


Britain's ITN continued: "The Global Hawk, a jet-powered aircraft with a wingspan equivalent to a Boeing 737, flew from Edwards Air Force Base in California and landed late on Monday at the Royal Australian Air Force base at Edinburgh, in South Australia state... It flies along a pre-programmed flight path, but a pilot monitors the aircraft during its flight via a sensor suite which provides infra-red and visual images."

ITN quoted Australian Global Hawk manager Rod Smith: '"The aircraft essentially flies itself, right from takeoff, right through to landing, and even taxiing off the runway."'

The Global Hawk is a much better candidate for what Rumsfeld called "...the missile that struck this building" than a 757. Here's what you need to know about the Pentagon.
  • Only minutes after the strike, [see pic above] there is no sign of an airliner at all!
  • No wreckage traceable to a 757 was ever recovered.
  • Only ONE engine rotor (seen in photos) was recovered! This rotor is about one third the diameter of a 757 rotor.
  • A 757 has two rotors, each of which are nearly three times the size of the SINGLE rotor located at the Pentagon
  • Engine rotors are made of a Steel/Titanium alloy to withstand high temps inside jet engines.
  • Flight 77 could not have crashed into the Pentagon
The time has come to consign Bush's official conspiracy theory to the dust bin of history. The theory is not even a good cover story, surviving for as long as it did only because millions of good Americans wanted to believe it. Millions of otherwise good Americans did not wish to believe the very, very worst about an administration that had claimed to represent and defend our interests. Millions of Americans chose to believe that the government was still responsible to us, that the government was still the defender of Democracy as we are always taught in school. 

Below: a US Global Hawk painted to look like an AA airliner.


America, it is time to grow up! Recognizing lies for what they are is a part of the process of growing up! It is time to confront this heinous pack of lies and to insist that the Obama administration begin a REAL investigation. 

It is time to insist that a Federal Grand Jury investigate every count of high treason, mass murder and domestic terrorism that was perpetrated upon the people of the US by the Bush administration, collaborators in the Pentagon, K-Street, the Congress and the leadership of the Republican party, Marvin Bush's 'Securacom', Larry Silverstein, General Myers, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and, of course, George W. Bush who was, at the time, the 'Commander-in-Chief' and ultimately responsible for the orders given the US military to 'stand down'.
By Donald Rumsfeld's own admission, he was unaware of any threats to the Pentagon -- the building where he was located during the September 11th attacks -- until an aircraft crashed into the side of it, and he ran out "into the smoke" to see if it might be a "A bomb? I had no idea." (ABC News This Week, Interview 9/16/01).Well, that's a pretty tall tale by any standard.
The New York Times reported that by 8:13am, the FAA was aware of the first hijacking out of Boston. The Pentagon explosion, which Donald Rumsfeld claimed he had "no idea," did not occur until approximately 9:37am, nearly an hour and a half later, this after two of the tallest buildings in the world were devastated. Note that a plane hijacked out of Boston can reach Washington D.C. as easily as it can reach New York City. It was widely reported that Pentagon personnel were indeed aware of the threats to their security, and they took security measures on that morning. But not the "Secretary of Defense."
Why should the man charged with defending the United States of America concern himself with hijacked aircraft?There is a set of procedures for responding to hijackings. In particular, these procedures were changed on June 1, 2001 while Rumsfeld was in power as our Secretary of Defense, in a document called:
"CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF INSTRUCTION, J-3 CJCSI 3610.01A"
The Global Hawk

The video asks: "Was 911 a Conspiracy?" That is NOT the question. Even Bushco claims that it was a conspiracy, a conspiracy of 19 Arab Hijackers who could not possibly have pulled it off. It is, frankly, a stupid scenario! Without the shock and awe campaign, no one would have believed it. The questions, rather, are which conspiracy and who were the conspirators? It was Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's character Sherlock Holmes who said that when you have eliminated the impossible what remains however improbable MUST be the truth! Following is a reader's playlist. I recommend it.

Additional resources:
Labels: 911911 liesBushBush's Reichstag Firecover-upflight 11high treasonmass murderPentagonterrorism 

Monday, June 22, 2015

If Only A. Scalia were Half as Smart as He Thinks He Is!

by Len Hart, the Existentialist Cowboy

Antonine Scalia somehow managed to get a lifetime 'gig' on the U.S. Supreme Court. Before SCALIA came on board, SCOTUS might have been competent if not 'supreme'. All bets are off now. 

SCALIA has thrown in with a fringe group called "young earthers". They are called "young earthers" because they believe that the Universe and the Earth were created con-currently about 6,000 years ago. SCALIA has that in common with Sarah Palin who believes that human beings walked with the Dinosaurs

There is NO EVIDENCE but religious dogma for this 'young universe' theory. The opposite is true of the scientific evidence that proves conclusively that the universe is much, much older. Most recently scientists discovered an "object" whose distance from Earth can be measured. That distance is about 13.7 billion light years from Earth. Put another way --it has taken light (the light we see) some 13.7 billion years to reach earth. That, of course, is inconsistent with Palin and who clams that the universe and everything in it is but 6,000 years old.

SCALIA joins S. Palin by subscribing to it. Both Palin and Scalia are WRONG and embarassingly so! Recently --the most distant object in the universe was discovered and verified by REAL SCIENTISTS in the real world. The AGE of the universe is determined by the distance --in light years --to that recently discovered object. This figure, we are told, is derived by adding up the "begats" in the Old Testament.  

The distance to this object is stated in light years as is the distance to almost every object beyond our moon. The distance to the most distant jobject yet discovered is 13.7 BILLION LIGHT YEARS. That means that merely observing this object is PROOF that the universe is AT LEAST 13.7 BILLION years old as it has taken light from the object 13.7 BILLION years to reach the Earth where we have observed it. 

SCALIA should stick to law (or, at least, his defective grasp of it) and leave science to intelligent people! Put another way --SCALIA should just SHUT UP about things of which he is ignorant. Uh....come to think of it, SCALIA is no better at law than he is at science. 
                     _________________________________________________________________

Wednesday, May 27, 2015

U.S. Elections May be in Violation of the 14th Amendment

by Len Hart, The Existentialist Cowboy

The ideal of one man, one vote has NEVER been achieved. If your VOTE does not carry the same weight as does the vote of someone else, then your rights under the 14th Amendment have been violated! For example, it is possible that a Presidential candidate could get a greater number of popular votes but, by losing a few large states, gets fewer electoral college votes and, thus, lose the White House.

On any given election, votes are not equal. Someone else's vote may be worth more than yours or your vote may be worth more than the vote cast by another person. Votes are not equal; elections may not be fair. In some cases, fairness is ignored. In others, it is controversial. In yet other cases, your vote may not even count.

In a democratic election between two candidates, the winner is the person with the majority of the votes. But when three or more candidates run, things are seldom so simple. The winner often amasses only a plurality of the votes. (Bill Clinton, for example, won the presidency with 43 percent of the vote; Jesse Ventura won the Minnesota governorship with 37 percent.) The plurality winner could be everyone's least favorite candidate and still lose in a head-to-head battle. As Saari puts it:
"The plurality vote is the only procedure that will elect someone who's despised by almost two thirds of the voters." --Discover Magazine, May the Best Man Lose, November 1, 2000
The 14th says that ...
"no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
--U.S. Constitution, 14th Amendment The Equal Protection Clause may be seen as an attempt to secure the promise that "all men are created equal".
Not only minorities but every person has a stake in his/her vote being counted; but --even more importantly --counting for as much as every other vote cast by every other person in the nation. The most promising proposals include the 1) System of Single Transferable Vote (STV) proposed by Thomas Hare in England and Carl George Andrae in Denmark in the 1850s. Adopted throughout the world, STV has been adopted throughout the world to elect public officials, prominently in Australia, Malta, the Republic of Ireland, and Northern Ireland as well as in local school board elections in New York City.
Other systems have their own advocates as well. They include preference voting, the Borda Count, range voting et al. All have in common that they are far superior to any method now in use in the United States in terms of how accurately any given election reflects the will of the people. My own "preference", however, is the Borda count in which... ...each voter ranks all of the candidates from top to bottom. If there are, say, five candidates, then a voter's top-ranked candidate gets 5 points, his second-ranked candidate gets 4, and so on. Finally, the points from all the voters are added up to determine the winner.  
--Discover Magazine, May the Best Man Lose, November 1, 2000
It is hard to see how anything could be simpler and just as hard to see how a nation which tolerates the unequal nature of elections can make a straight-faced claim to being democratic or fair. It is hard to see how any government formed as a result of unfair or inaccurate voting systems can claim to be legitimate.
________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

How to Resist Illegal Police Searches and Violations of the Fourth Amendment!

Commit this to memory:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

--Fourth Amendment, U.S. Constitution
Bottom line --unless the officer wanting to harass you, search your car, pester you or argue with you can PRODUCE a WARRANT issued by a judge that describes 'particularly' the article that you are suspected of possessing, you need not submit to any search whatsoever. You know that! The judge knows that! But 'hot dogs' cops either don't know it or don't care or both!

Most of the time, police must present their probable cause to a judge or magistrate, whom they ask for a search or arrest warrant. Information is reliable if it shows that it's more likely than not that a crime has occurred and the evidence sought exists at the place named in the search warrant, or that the suspect named in the arrest warrant has committed a crime.

The prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures effectively restricts actions that cops may wish to take but cannot unless they get a warrant. Producing the probable cause is the responsibility of the police and it follows from the 'presumption of innocence'. That's not your problem! The fact is "unreasonable searches and seizures" are illegal if not authorized by a warrant and NO warrant shall be issued but upon 'probable cause'! Therefore, you are not required or expected to do the cop's job for them.

An example of what cops are capable of occurred in Houston some 20 years ago. Cops, responding to a disturbance, arrested an Hispanic Viet Nam war hero who was accused of creating a row in a bar.
He was beaten so badly by the cops that the jailer refused to admit him; he ordered the cops to take him to a hospital. Instead, they took him to a dimly lit area on Buffalo Bayou between downtown and the city's River Oaks/Memorial area. There they beat the holy hell out of him while shackled. Then they leveraged him out over the bridge and DUMPED him into the inky dark waters of Buffalo Bayou some 20 ft (or more) below.

He drowned and the cops --to Houston's credit --were made to stand trial for murder! They were convicted! I covered the trial.

If you should get stopped by a cop who persists and despite not having a warrant FORCES a search upon you, get his badge number!

SUE him! Some attorney's may be willing to take the case for a small fee. ACLU Attorney's are often have a good record of holding 'law enforcement' accountable.

Demand that he be dismissed without pension!

FILE charges against him!

Sue either the city, the state, the district!

Sue the bastards!

Thursday, December 18, 2014

Of Space-Time and Clock Towers

by Len Hart, the Existentialist Cowboy

Brian Greene is an American theoretical physicist and string theorist who has worked on mirror symmetry since 1996 while a professor at Columbia University. As a result, he believes that in “infinite” universes, matter can arrange itself in an infinite number of ways. Eventually, a “universe” is repeated. Such a parallel universe would look very much like the one we live in.

Therefore, Greene says, if the universe is infinitely large, it is also home to infinite parallel universes.
As a string theorist, he believes that apparent conflicts between current cosmology (Relativity theory) and quantum mechanics is resolved with string theory –his 'specialty' for the past 25 years. Greene believes that the entire universe is explained with small strings vibrating in as many as 11 dimensions. Moreover, within our single universe time is relative to where you are and how fast you are going at any given instant.

Therefore, time is always local even within the single universe we live in. For example, time is slower for anyone who is moving. As Einstein demonstrated, time stops for anyone traveling at light speed.

Einstein imagined a street car leaving the clock tower in Bern. As long as his speed was less than that of light, the clock viewed from the street car would appear to be moving forward, marking the 'forward' progress of time. But –should the street car exceed the speed of light, the hands of the clock would appear to go backward as the street car catches up with and passes light beams.

This effect can be simulated with an oscillator or an old 33 and a third RPM album turntable with a disc of concentric hash marks calibrated to appear stationary under florescent (pulsing) light. If the turntable is too slow, the hash marks will appear to rotate in one direction. If the rotation is too fast, the marks will appear to move in the opposite direction. At the desired turntable speed, the hashmarks will appear absolutely motionless. By the same token, time STOPS for one traveling at the speed of light.

The downside is that many other unfortunate things will happen to you at that speed. So –don't try this at home or without the supervision of experts. You are safe if you confine your experiments to an old 33 1/3 RPM turntable and some old Rolling Stone LPs.

A few years ago, Julian Barbour “shook up” readers of “Discover” magazine when he denied the existence of “time”. He may have been correct. In fact, he is consistent with Einstein. Einstein posits that time is merely one's local' movement relative to the speed of light. Young Einstein lived in Bern (Switzerland) where he worked at the patent office. He often took the tram home in a direction away from the famous Bern clock tower. He imagined how the clock might appear should his tram exceed light speed.

He immediately concluded that the hands on the clock tower would appear to move backward relative to the forward movement perceived by pedestrians on either side of the street. The explanation is simple: at faster than light travel, the tram overtakes light that had already left the tower. One looking back at the tower would see the hands run backward.

That, of course, is a dramatic example that drives home the point for anyone daring to imagine faster-than-light trams. The conclusion is simpler: time is different for every person occupying a different space from every other person. For that matter, time differs from every point to every other point in the universe.Barbour believes the past, present and future all exist in what may be called a timeless 'super-verse'. Barbour posits a series of “NOWS” like individual frames on a motion picture film strip. 'Nows' exist for actual events but, interestingly, many 'nows' are alternate possibilities, i.e, virtual universes.

This view is consistent with Einstein's analogy re: the Bern clock tower. To use Barbour's film strip analogy, NOW is a single frame. The universe is the entire film strip. Parallel universes may be compared to alternate "film strips", thus Barbour's views are consistent with Greene's "parallel" universes. If Barbour's timeless universe is akin to a film-strip, then Greene's parallel universes are a shelf full of film-strip canisters –each containing a feature-length film. In this case the feature-length movie is the universe as it unfolds. But as long as we travel at sub-light speeds, we move forward in time as "light" over-takes us. But if we should exceed light speed we will eventually see the big bang! In fact, we can see remnants of the big bang now. This "object", astronomers tell us, is some 13.7 billion years old and as many light-years distant.