It IS about Middle-East oil

Iraq spends oil revenues on its own reconstruction:

Last fall, as Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top American commander in Iraq, and Ryan C. Crocker, the American ambassador to Iraq, reported to Congress on the state of the war, the Bush administration provided figures that contrasted sharply with those of the accountability office. The administration reported that by July 2007, Iraq had spent 24 percent of the $10 billion in oil revenue set aside for reconstruction that year.

The accountability office disputed those figures, saying they were based in part on projections that proved inaccurate. But in a recent phone interview, a senior Iraqi official gave even more bullish estimates of the expenditures. Citing official Iraqi Finance Ministry figures, the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity in order to provide information that had not yet been publicly released, said by the end of last year, Iraq had spent 63 percent of its capital budget, a leap over the previous year that would indicate rapid progress in governmental efficiency.

Finally, Senators Levin and Warner ask the question looming over the entire rebuilding effort: "Why has the Iraqi government not spent more of its oil revenue on reconstruction, economic development and providing essential services for the Iraqi people?" (Glanz NYT) Link

American tax payers are paying for reconstruction in Iraq:

The Bush administration's Iraq policy has already imposed significant costs for Americans. In fact, U.S. taxpayers have spent over $600 billion in Iraq, including about $48 billion for stabilization and reconstruction activities. According to the GAO report, the Iraqi government has generated over $90 billion in sales of crude oil from 2005 to 2007 and will generate close to that amount in 2008 alone.

The Government of Iraq's failure to adequately invest in its own population and infrastructure is a direct byproduct of President Bush's failed strategy in Iraq. An American military occupation has not created meaningful political progress, and the Government of Iraq has allowed U.S. taxpayers to foot the bill for rebuilding Iraq. (Waters) Link

Halliburton HAS been exploiting its ties to the US Government:

The three-way division of the largest Pentagon contract in Iraq ends the monopoly held by KBR, which has been accused of mismanagement and exploiting its political ties to Vice President Dick Cheney. (Risen NYT) Link

It IS about Middle-East oil:

HOUSTON (AP) — Halliburton, the oil field services company, said Monday that its emphasis on Middle Eastern markets had contributed to a nearly 5 percent increase in fourth-quarter profit.

The company has been adding people and equipment to the Middle East and elsewhere — even moving its top executive overseas — which it says helped Eastern Hemisphere sales grow 27 percent in the fourth quarter versus a year ago.

Halliburton said results were squeezed by higher costs and lower pricing in North America, a trend that also hindered a rival, Schlumberger, and could persist.

Net income in the fourth quarter rose to $690 million, or 75 cents a share, compared with $658 million, or 64 cents a share, in the period a year ago. (NYT) Link

Is $690 million just pocket change?

To Congressman John Shadegg in District 3

My name is Joshua Kimball and I am an avid blogger and a registered voter (I) who just moved into your district. I am sending you this to let you know about the issues that I will be voting for and what I will be blogging about leading into the next election. I have nothing against any party or elected official, this is more of a FWI than anything else. I have been a Full-Time student for the last three years and due to the recent budget cuts I lost government aid that would have normally allowed me money for living expenses while attending school. Government aid for schooling will be a very big hot button for me. Also, while in school I briefly enjoyed AHCCCS Health Insurance for about eight months. Now DES has cut me loose and when I apply for an extension it takes them six months to even respond. What they tell me is that I missed a deadline that should have been met, of course because they can't tell me until months after the deadline. That means having a budget to properly staff the DES office is very big on my agenda. I honestly don't care about the war that costs us $60+ billion dollars in the Middle East if we can't take care of American citizens at home. Let the Special Forces take out key targets and make it easier for the locals to police themselves. If my funding for financial aid gets cut some more and we are still spending billions of dollars outside the US, it will affect my blogging and voting considerations drastically. I certainly wish you the best, I honestly haven't read anything about your history as a politician and I am looking forward to reading about your accomplishments as my representative in this district.

Joshua Kimball

Bystander Vs. Values

The Bystander Effect Size: 338 members

VS

Six Degrees Of Separation - The Experiment Size:    5,497,076 members

I thought it was interesting and almost comical at the play on words "The Bystander Effect?" One group has less than a thousand members, were as the other has over five million members. So here is a quick comparison contrast to see what makes one more desirable over the other:

Bystander Effect – topics list

VS

Six Degrees – topics list

In a quick conclusion, although it is interesting that "The Bystander Effect" lives up to its name and definition. What I have taken from the " Six Degrees Of Separation" is a list of five million members representing Modern Western Civilization's values. That is because the group comprises American, Europeans, and anyone else who speaks English of course. What do we commit the majority of our free time to? "Who would have sex with whom?" "If gays should be allowed to adopt?" I am personally concerned for our intellectual community. If we allow ourselves to die intellectually we risk becoming ignoramus. We therefore risk giving up our freedom because we do not learn to argue our positions and problems to our government representatives. I'm certainly not saying that creating discussion topics on social websites are bad. I'm just saying we should see discussion groups of our politicians complaining about how many letters they receive from their districts that dictate the will of the people. I'm saying, before you write a response to a facebook thread. Take five or ten minutes to make one paragraph letter to your local representative once a week stating your opinions of political subjects that will affect their career on the next election. Most of them have a website that you can post that paragraph to.

For Example: The State of Arizona

It is just as easy as posting a facebook thread. Enjoy getting your representatives attention.

The Highest Bidder

My girlfriend sent me this link <click here> to an article entitled "Bush Cabinet official target of corruption inquiry." It is about former Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton and her connection to Royal Dutch Shell PLC and the fact that George W. Bush appointed her.

I acknowledge that I am not a political analyst, just an average Joe. Please, feel free to agree or disagree with sources and links. One-liner responses just don't do it for me. I find that I personally rant and rave (not actually shouting) to my girlfriend all the time over this very concept: Oil companies and weapons companies who use government connections to profit. Government workers who help oil companies and weapons companies for financial gain. Didn't Martha Steward go to prison for insider trading? Is there no justice for those who profit from "Insider Warring?"

It goes deeper than that, and I know it has nothing to do with party lines. Here is another company that profits from war. Transguard and they are connected to Halliburton/KBR and many others. Cheney IS connected to Halliburton. Bush IS connected to oil in the Middle East. Don't get me wrong. I am not attacking the Repulican party, or for that matter is my attack on Transguard, Halliburton/KBR. I am attacking the idea of politicians using tax payer money to favor corporations. All corporations will use whatever connection that they have to gain an advantage. But any politician who has a financial interest in a subject that involves making a controlling decision over tax payer's money has a conflict of interest. Any politician (republican, democrat, and libertarian, independent) who encourages our nation to go to war for their financial interest is a warmonger and should be tried for war crimes. So I understand that whoever is in charge is going to get control of the kickbacks for the war profiting.

When the democrats were in charge Bill Clinton bombed Iraq. It just happened that the republicans were in charge for the most recent war fiasco. The important thing to understand is there is money to be made and war is good money. Who cares if the American people have the highest unemployment rate in decades? The war companies who are now global companies don't have to. They have no real connection to our country; accept with the politicians who decide where our tax dollars go. Americans starve while war companies profit: "Transguard Group profits double to $20 million despite global economic climate."

Please don't misunderstand my view points of war, if the United Nations could spare some troops to go down to Sudan to stop the genocide. Then by all means, go to war. Oh, but the oil there belongs to China, more specifically China National Petroleum Corporation and a few other companies. As long as there is money to be made, then the killing just gets ignored. Yes, there IS oil in Sudan.

Like I said before it is not the fault of the corporations in the long run, it is in their nature to gain any advantage. The politicians who take American tax money and give it to a company that will not reinvest back into American soil due to a "conflict of interest" do not represent us as Americans. Vote them out, and then chose another who will represent us. The politicians who have financial interests in places where they have to make decisions on where to take our country to war are committing war crimes. Plain and simple, the fact that we don't have trials right now for those war crimes simply prove how we as American citizens are not free. Our dictators are the highest bidders who pay those who are supposed to represent us.