FurPaw wrote:
> http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/07/14/iraq.military.ap/index.html
>
> But he forgets, if the US troops leave, they leave all that oil
unguarded!
>
> I don't understand it... why don't the folks in the media point this out
> in every single story? Why don't our Congressfolk mention OIL when they
> are arguing the merits of staying, leaving and by when? Nothing about
> the occupation makes sense - especially building the US bases and the US
> embassy - until you factor in OIL, and the B.AD.'s patent desire to gain
> control of the Iraqi supply.
>
> OIL is the dead skunk in the middle of the table that few seem willing
> to mention. And that makes the B.AD. very happy!
>
> [Who first used B.AD.? I just saw it here a few days ago, and I LOVE
it!]
>
> FurPaw
>
Thank you, thank you... I started using B.AD a few years back but
it's hard to believe that such an obvious acronym hasn't occurred
spontaneously all over the place! To appear unprejudiced i started
using C.AD. for the Clinton administration too.
As for the failure to mention the oil angle, i tend toward
paranoid conspiracy stuff, but i can't help but think it's a sign
that big oil controls everything, including the media, at least
indirectly.
What media entity isn't owned by a huge conglomerate, and
what industry isn't dependent on what oil does?
--
pax,
ruth
Save trees AND money! Buy used books!
http://stores.ebay.com/Noir-and-More-Books-and-Trains
|
