February 4, 2006
HarryTho 2/04 Natalee Holloway CommentaryTopics: Natalee Holloway
In this editorial, I would like to visit the silence that has surrounded the case of Natalee Holloway's disappearance. Many of our posters have mentioned sensing this silence. Normally, active, media sources are now asleep. It appears that no one is talking.
We have to ask why? Why would the media suddenly go silent?
In past editorials, we raised questions about other events that were happening within the same time frame as the Natalee Holloway case. One event focused on a financial acquisition by Hushang Ansary of the Parman Capital Group of Houston, TX. Ansary purchased the Banco de Carib on Curacao. At the time, I felt that Ansary was focusing on the oil refinery on Curacao. Whether he was or not is uncertain; however, he possesses the wherewithal in order to exploit the oil industry in the Netherlands Antilles.
The second event involved a nationalization issue between President Chavez of Venezuela and Chevron oil. Clearly, Chevron was upset with the prospect of having to divest its oil asset. How upset is yet to be determined? During the period of the dispute between Chavez and Chevron, accusations of an American invasion of Venezuela were commonplace. A one point, Chavez accused the United States of funding an armed group of mercenaries that crossed their borders and engaged in all forms of calamities. Additionally, the rumor of invasion become so heated that an airliner mysteriously was shot down as it crossed into Venezuelan airspace near their heavy-concentrated oil fields of Maracaibo.
Let us be clear here: both events involved governments reluctant to provide concessions to the American interests. Ansary faced resistance from the Central Bank of the Kingdom of the Netherlands; whereas, Venezuela gave Chevron an ultimatum ... divest their oil assets or lose their rights to the oil fields forever.
Given both Ansary's and Chevron's political connections, it is conceivable that senior Republican politicians attempted to exert their influence into the matters. With the Central Bank of the Netherlands, the results indicate success. However, all attempts to persuade Venezuela to abandoned their interests in nationalizing Chevron's oil assets failed. Chavez was not hearing any of it. Furthermore, any rumor of invasion was proclaimed as factual. Chavez was so convinced of an invasion that he relieved the commandant of the garrison protecting the oil fields at Maracaibo with one of his closest friends. Chavez wanted to insure that the oil fields did not fall into American hands intact.
Interestingly, once Hushang Ansary culminated his acquisition of Banco de Carib and Chevron acquiesced and concluded their divesture, the media frenzy around the Natalee Holloway case simultaneously went silent. Coincidence? I hope so.
Let us explore why these events were so important.
In less than 30 days, after Hushang Ansary's take over of Banco de Carib, Aruba suddenly tabled the establishment of an oil and gas exploration agency in Parliament. The ruling party in Aruba had the numbers to rush the agency's enactment through parliament. The agency, designed to award oil and gas exploration rights to seven secret oil companies, commenced assembling bureaucrats immediately from other Aruban agencies. What was the hurry? Obviously, the fact that seven oil companies had expressed an interest in exploration off Aruba's shores did not materialize overnight. Aruban newspapers and those of the oil industry were silent about the prospects of exploration around Aruba. Why?
In addition, there exists mention of an additional oil refinery in Aruba that seems as quiet as the other oil industry developments. No data exists, other than the mention, in any of the prime funding institutions for large-scale projects. Whoever is planning this oil refinery has the financial capacity in order to materialize it. Interestingly, the identity of the planner can be reduced to just a few entities. Chevron is one of them with the backing of the US $34 Billion Carlyle Group.
Next, we tackle the question as to whether or not Chevron entertained an invasion of Venezuela in order to protect her oil fields. Is this something Americans would endorse? Clearly, the answer for most Americans is "no." Is that a wise choice for America? Do Americans desire a hot-head, anti-American dictator financed at their expense? We certainly had a problem with Saddam Hussein being so supported. Of course, Saddam had other flaws that Hugo Chavez does not share. It seems clear that if Chavez is allowed to vent unconfronted that he eventually may sway many Latin American countries with his rhetoric and his bequests of low-cost oil. Can America allow that happen?
What is at stake?
From data provided in past editorials, we learned that the world has some 45 years worth of oil at our current consumption rate of 22 million barrels per year. In reality terms that materializes the fact that children born, today, in the northern climates of the world (and far southern climates) will most likely freeze to death, before they reach retirement age. Of course, there are those who would claim that other sources of energy may replace oil. Truly, those possibilities exists; however, they are unthinkable in today's environmentally-conscious societies. Nuclear power plant construction has been shutdown in the United States since 1979. We have exploited our hydro-electric power possibilities. Solar and wind power might provide some water heating and non-industrial needs; however, it falls short of household heating. Then, we have our transportation industry ... cars. If our transportation industry does not convert to another source of energy, then how will we transport our good and services without oil? How will we get food to markets?
When faced with an energy shortage with which to sustain the expanse of the empire, Imperial Japan marched out some 3,000 miles, conquering and seizing all the resources of the area. I believe that you will find that most military expansions occur as a result of overwhelming a society's resources. At least in the past that was a ready solution.
What course of action awaits us when expansion is not an option? When conglomerates reach their bursting point, they downsize and divest. When faced with a similar situation, Germany developed some unusual methods at relieving the strains on their society. They chose to thin the herd.
We have 45 years. Within those 45 years, scientific innovation will race to alleviate the strains on our society. Can innovation save us? Nuclear power is here, yet so is a preference for environmentalism. Our very ideals often blur our perception. When the food becomes scant and the winter cold is upon us ... and both are coming ... will we continue to adhere to our ideals and staunch beliefs?
I fear that if we wait too long to adjust our perceptions, we will slide into our default modes established by the Germans and the Japanese. We will expand in order to acquire whatever resources are left and/or we will thin our herd. And, let us not forget that, if we wait too long, our food supply will have exhausted, as well.
What will we eat? When the Japanese army was surrounded and cutoff from their supplies by the allies in New Guinea, they became innovative. They ate the Australian soldiers. What will we eat?
For those of you unmoved by the foregoing, the last few decades have seen a rush by all nations to acquire resources of all kinds: energy, minerals, etc. In unstable areas of the world, multinational enterprises (MNE) have been hiring mercenaries to quell any resistance to their exploitations and extractions.
Execute Outcomes is real. They produce real effects without regard to any standards of conduct. They are British in organization. They negotiate a portion of the take rather than purely mercenary-like payment. You might call them large-scale mercenaries. They perform what civilized nations and their armed forces would frown upon. What is not known is that most MNEs employ them.
What I wanted to expose with the introduction of Executive Outcomes is that the rush for resources has commenced and that tactics are being employed that would never pass muster before a civilized tribunal.
The workings of units, such as Executive Outcomes, became so outrageous that the then Secretary of State ordered the extraction MNEs (including Chevron) to clean up their act.
Freeport, Chevron Try To Clean Up Images With Voluntary Human Rights Principles. Drillbits & Tailings -1/31/2001 - vol. 6, no.
Clearly, and for personal experience, the stresses, emanating from 45 years from now, have been exerting themselves for some time. We will not have to wait much longer, before the coming atrocities fill the pages of our newspapers. The atrocities are here now. Currently, they hide in the shadows of the world and civilization. Societies are being exterminated for the resources contained in their territories.
When faced with the question as to whether or not Chevron, with its economic and political allies, would sanction an invasion of Venezuela or an assassination of Hugo Chavez, the answer is not "no." In my opinion, the response would be a degree of "yes." Would the tripartite-coalition (Chevron-Halliburton-Carlyle) be cable of swaying public perception so as such an act would go unnoticed? In response, I can only point to the manner in which America was fixated on the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. Hushang Ansary's activities went unnoticed. and, for the most part, Chevron's concerns with Venezuela went unnoticed. At seemingly random intervals, some newspapers screamed assassination attempts against Hugo Chavez. Most Americans, though, just shrugged them off as nonsense. It was not until Minister Robinson spoke out that Americans took notice ... but only in ridicule of Robinson. Yes, the tripartite-coalition is capable of deluding the American public with other affairs.
What I have written is not so much speculation as a perception of the future ... actually, it is the present that most Americans believe to be the future. One thing is certain: however this oil business works out, America had better have a strong military in the 21st Century. If we prize our beliefs and way of life, it is the military that will ensure it. If we abandon our military, the pitfalls, mentioned in the foregoing, will fall upon we Americans. Other nations with stronger militaries will dictate our perception and beliefs. And, I suspect when the food runs out, they will eat us.
With Aloha, Posted for HarryTho
Posted by Richard at February 4, 2006 11:38 PM
Articles Related to Natalee Holloway:
- HarryTho 2/04 Natalee Holloway Commentary - Feb 04, 2006