archived: 4 - 10 Dec, 2005 Back Next
ALLEN L. ROLAND*
“Iraq / The
Grim Big Picture”
A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves -- Edward R Murrow
This illegal war and occupation of Iraq had only one true purpose and that was securing the OIL.
Like a gang of ravenous wolves the Cheney/Bush administration made their intentions clear – the only ministry protected initially was the Oil ministry. The first executive order signed by Bush in March 2003 was Executive Order # 13303 – which gave full control of Oil revenues to the United States and their partners.
Paul Bremer's 100 illegal orders of servitude has economically paralyzed and privatized the country. Here are some of them:
Order #39 allows for the following: (1) privatization of Iraq's 200 state-owned enterprises; (2) 100 percent foreign ownership of Iraqi businesses; (3) "national treatment" of foreign firms; (4) unrestricted, tax-free remittance of all profits and other funds; and (5) 40-year ownership licenses. Thus, it allows the U.S. corporations operating in Iraq to own every business, do all of the work, and send all of their money home. Nothing needs to be reinvested locally to service the Iraqi economy, no Iraqi need be hired, no public services need be guaranteed, and workers' rights can easily be ignored. And corporations can take out their investments at any time
Order #40 turns the banking sector from a state-run to a market-driven system overnight by allowing foreign banks to enter the Iraqi market and to purchase up to 50 percent of Iraqi banks."
As for the oil – Crude Designs: The Rip-Off of Iraq's Oil Wealth* reveals that current Iraqi oil policy will allocate the development of at least 64% of Iraq’s reserves to foreign oil companies. Iraq has the world’s third largest oil reserves. Figures published in the report for the first time show:
the estimated cost to Iraq over the life of the
new oil contracts is $74 to $194 billion, compared with leaving oil development
in public hands. These sums represent between two and seven times the current
Iraqi state budget.
the contracts would guarantee massive profits to foreign companies, with rates of return of 42% to 162%.
The kinds of contracts that will provide these returns are known as production sharing agreements (PSAs). PSAs have been heavily promoted by the U.S. government and oil majors and have the backing of senior figures in the Iraqi Oil Ministry. Britain has also encouraged Iraq to open its oil fields to foreign investment.
However, PSAs last for 25-40 years, are usually secret, and prevent governments from later altering the terms of the contract.
That's why the Cheney/Bush administration has no intention of pulling out. Once they can claim a pseudo legitimate government – the PDA's will be signed and the oil is theirs.
And you wonder why the insurgency (who are really freedom fighters) is growing every day, and you wonder why 80% of the Iraqis want us out – and then you realize that this country has not only been illegally attacked and occupied but they have been economically raped by the Cheney/Bush/Rumsfeld neocon cabal which, in turn, has high jacked our Republic and its intrinsic moral values.
And we are the sheep, lulled by a compliant Press, who have beget this government of wolves.
Here's
the true picture of what its like to be living in Iraq right now – courtesy of
Dahl Jamail and Harb Al-Mukhtar –
Where People Cannot Afford Their Country
_____
*Allen L. Roland served five years as a Navy fighter pilot and ten years as a stockbroker. He has earned a masters degree in psychology and now works as a therapist with an active private counseling practice in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Roland has a wonderful website,
Allen L. Roland's Radio Weblog.
He also publishes a newsletter that is TPJ recommended. You may subscribe
here:
Newsletter
_____
Junkie: Roland’s assessment is compelling. Today’s TPJ features several excellent articles on policy objectives Democrats should advance to the public as an alternative to Republican neoconservative doctrine. First, Dr. Steven Jonas, in his section, offers a compelling platform for Democrats. Second,
ERIC COX
“The Impeachment”
President Bush may face impeachment in 2007.
This is possible and maybe even likely with one crucial condition: that Democrats win at least 15 House seats in November, thereby regaining control of the House. This may occur in spite of the redrawing of congressional districts making more seats safe for each political party and therefore fewer competitive races. So it may take a political earthquake for Democrats to capture the House. Such Teutonic pressure is already present.
A confluence of events reveals this pressure. The most significant is that public support for President Bush has tanked. Polls indicate that now a slim majority deem him not trustworthy. And recent elections in various places provide evidence that some voted for Democrats as a protest against Bush. Previously his popularity buoyed up Republicans. Now this life support system has been withdrawn. Evidence is provided when a Pennsylvania GOP senator did not appear with him when he spoke at a military base in his state and when the Republican candidate for governor in Virginia initially snubbed him when he spoke in that state.
Added to plummeting support for the President are possible ethical problems confronting key Republican officials including DeLay, Frist, Libby and maybe Rove. And now, with the resignation of Republican Congressman Cunningham for blatant corruption and the ongoing Abramoff scandal, maybe snaring other Republicans, Democrats have gained an issue that will resonate with voters. And with public confidence in Congress at a low ebb, and worse for Republicans, the lay of the political landscape is now more favorable for Democrats than at any time in the past five years.
The combined increases in federal debt, budget shortfalls, unemployment, poverty, those lacking health insurance, and income disparity – all under Republican leadership in Congress and the Administration – add to GOP woes. These developments make it easier for Democrats to recruit winning candidates and harder for Republicans. For these reasons it is probable that Democrats will gain seats in both chambers in November and maybe 15 in the House.
With the House reverting to Democratic control, motions for impeachment may be forthcoming. There are two principal reasons why this could occur. One is that most voters seemed to think we were deceived about the reasons for the Iraq war. The Zogby poll showed surprising strong support for impeachment if it is established that Bush lied to get us into this war, including backing by a quarter of Republican voters.
The other reason that impeachment is possible is payback – that is doing to a Republican President what was done to a Democratic President. But in this case there would be a big difference. An oft seen sign tells it all:
Clinton lied but nobody died.
If there is support for impeachment in the House, it may not be strong enough for an actual impeachment, which is only in effect an indictment. Conviction would have to come in the Senate. It is unlikely that there would be strong support in the upper chamber in part because chances of Democrats winning the Senate are less than with the House.
If there will be impeachment efforts, this would be bad for our social hygiene and for public confidence in government, but it might be unstoppable
Last Update: 03/23/2006