BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 06 Jan 11 - 06:00 AM

Of course Bliar and Bush had the moral high ground. They used to pray together if the tittle tattle from aides is to be believed.

Say no more.

if you can't win an argument, get the big man on side. History is littered with such disgusting examples, from Crusades, through Spanish Inquisition all the way to Jihad.

Invoking superstition is a tried and trusted way of disguising your more material aims.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Jan 11 - 12:11 PM

Perhaps CarolC can tell us how much of the 1640 kilometer long 56" Diameter TAPI Pipeline has been constructed during the course of 2010.

My prediction was Not One Single Metre

Her's quoting an article by SteelGuru.com dated some time in May 2008 stated that construction work would commence in 2010.

I believe that my prediction has proved to be correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:07 PM

So construction of TAPI will start this year will it CarolC??

How come no pipe or steel has been ordered for it? Ever heard of long lead items for a project? A 56" Pipeline eh? Over 1600 kilometers long, now that takes time to manufacture, any idea how much construction work requiring steel is going on in the world Carol? Think how many other major overland pipeline projects are underway in the world let alone in the region. How many companies do you think make that diameter of pipe in the world?

Have the gas compressors been ordered yet CarolC, they would have to be if construction was going to start this year.

So far the only work that has been carried out on this project is a feasibility study, that was done on behalf of the Asia Development Bank by a consultancy firm based in London. Now what hasn't been done apart from all that ordering of materials is:

- FEED Study
- Design Basis
- Mine Clearance
- Route surveys

And nobody has signed any sales agreements.

Keep googling away there CarolC

Your links are old news.

Oh if the work is to start this year (2010) who is doing the job? I ask you see because no tenders have gone out for the work, and certainly no construction contracts have been awarded and for a job of this size all that should have started about three years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 03:09 AM

(From one of your links it would appear that India has now definitely bowed out of the deal and has sources its gas from Iran).


No, that article was published in 2005, before India signed on to the TAPI (in 2006).

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 02:28 AM

Here's a link to the article in The Times...

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\02\16\story_16-2-2008_pg5_9

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 02:26 AM

I also note that all have to be built, therefore the simple answer to my question regarding where the underground storage facilities were located for the TAPI pipeline product was - There aren't any.

Teribus, you didn't ask where the storage facilities were located. You asked where the depleted gas reservoirs and salt cavern were located. However, it really doesn't matter if the underground storage facilities are going to be developed in depleted natural gas fields, salt caverns, or if they're going to use large underground tanks. What matters for the purpose of this discussion is that they will have underground storage that will allow them to store large amounts of gas. According to this 2008 article in the Pakistani newspaper, The Times...

Sources added that Pakistan would need gas storages to maintain the gas reserves in the country. Sources further said that these gas reserves would help Pakistan to tackle any situation of gas shortages in the country

The country is said to be facing shortage of gas by 2011 and the imported gas would be stored in the underground storages as reserved stocks. In Pakistan, the energy requirements are increasing after the use of gas in auto sector due to which the demand has hiked by 40 percent in the country...

...Despite importing 2.2 billion cubic feet gas from Iran, Pakistan would import 3.2 billion cubic feet gas from Turkemanistan and it will be shared by India and Pakistan. Turkemanistan claims to have gas reserves of 159 trillion cubic feet at its Dauletabad fields, and Russia is the main importer.

So we can see that they will be importing gas from Turkmenistan, and they will be developing enough underground storage to be able to use the stored gas as reserve stock. And India will be doing the same.


Here's more on the subject from India's perspective (note the very strong encouragement that India has been getting from the US government to sign on to participate in the TAP [now, TAPI])...


"India join US-backed gas pipeline project
New Delhi May 20, 2006

With Iran playing tough on gas pricing, India has decided to join the United States-backed 3.5 billion dollar Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (TAP) gas pipeline project to meet its burgeoning energy demands. 'The cabinet has approved petroleum ministry's proposal for joining the TAP project,' an official said here on Thursday night.
India had in mid-February participated for the first time as an 'observer' in the 9th meeting of the steering committee of the TAP project and has since decided to join the project which will now be renamed TAPI (Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline), he said.

Besides the fact that Iran was bargaining for a very high price for the gas it wants to sell to India through Iran-Pakistan-India pipeline and in its liquid form (LNG), the pipeline from Turkmenistan would be easier to implement than IPI line as it already has the backing of the Asian Development Bank (ADB).

Iran's controversial nuclear programme and Washington's strong reservations have clearly cast a shadow on the future of the proposed eight billion dollar Iran-Pakistan-India (IPI) pipeline. Moreover, unlike IPI, the TAPI project does not run the risk of being blacklisted for participation by US and European financiers and companies.

The US has been encouraging Pakistan to abandon the IPI project and consider TAP for meeting its gas needs.

The proposed natural gas pipeline would stretch from the Turkmenistan/Afghanistan border in south-eastern Turkmenistan to Multan, Pakistan (1,271km), with a 640km extension to India. The estimated cost of the project is 2.9 billion dollars for the segment to Pakistan and an additional 600 million dollars for the extension to India.

'With a view to meeting the burgeoning gas demand, it is estimated that substantial volumes of gas would need to be imported. Joining the TAP project offers the possibility of an alternative source of gas supply to India,' said the petroleum ministry proposal without referring to Iran."

http://www.lngplants.com/TurkistanGasNewsletterMay262006.html


And then there's this...


"Construction work on TAPI pipeline project to start from 2010
Sunday, 04 May 2008

The 10th steering committee of oil ministers from Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India have agreed to start construction work on the much delayed TAPI pipeline project in 2010.

This was stated at a joint press conference by Mr Khwaja Muhammad Asif Pakistan's minister for petroleum & natural resources, Turkmen minister for oil & gas industry Dr Baymurad Hojamuhamedov, Afghan minister of mines Mr Mohammad Ibrahim Adel and Indian minister for petroleum & natural gas Mr Murli Deora here after the conclusion of the steering committee meeting.

The second meeting of the technical working group of the 4 countries was also held the same day.

The gas pipeline project, to be completed at the cost of USD 7.6 billion, will start supplying 3.2 billion cubic feet gas per day through 56 inch diameter pipeline. The pipeline will start from Dauletabad field in Turkmenistan to Fazilka at the Pakistan India border, passing through Herat and Kandahar in Afghanistan and Multan in Pakistan. Key principles for future gas sales and purchase agreement will be agreed bilaterally between the buyer and sellers under the heads of agreement discussions."

http://steelguru.com/news/index/2008/05/04/NDQxOTc=/Construction_work_on_TAPI_pipeline_project_to_start_from_2010.html


Before TAPI can be built there has to be peace and guaranteed security in both Afghanistan and in the Baluchistan Province of Pakistan.

Precisely so. Hence the current ratcheting up of US military efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan. You are making my arguments for me, Teribus.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,OG1
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 02:05 PM

"Provide me with any proof at all that Hamid Karzai ever worked for any Oil Company let alone an American one. If you cannot, then please shut the fuck up about it." -Teribus

Wooow!! I will be sure to send you a copy of Hamid Karzai's pay stub and tax filings.

"It is a lie, a myth, it never happened." -Teribus

I do not think that it is necessary for me to post a link to every site on the internet that points to the opposite, but if you say its a myth it must be; I guess we all better go back to sleep to see what other good stories we could all dream up.

Next you will be telling all of us that the U.S. does not install "Puppet Governments" (i.e. Saddam Husssein and Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi), especially not in areas that have vast natural resources and/or are located in strategical locations.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 08:47 AM

Guest, OG1:

1. Provide me with any proof at all that Hamid Karzai ever worked for any Oil Company let alone an American one. If you cannot, then please shut the fuck up about it. It is a lie, a myth, it never happened. the ball is in your court provide the proof to back up your assertion, somehow I don't think that you will be able to do that. Unocal had an office in Kandahar between 1995/6 and 1998 during that time Hamid Karzai and his family were living in exile in Quetta, Pakistan. After December 1998, Unocal withdrew from the TAPI Project.

2. Look at a map, your "cut-n-pastes" mention much that is totally disconnected, Afghanistan is not "The Caspian" and I doubt very much whether Cheney or Albright were thinking much about Afghanistan. I was in Azebaijan when Albright visited, what was under discussion then was first oil from the Chirag Field and its future expansion, the upgrading of the Sangachal refinery and pipeline export routes.

3. No mention or detail of ACTUAL meetings between the US Government and that so called Taliban delegation

4. Karzai worked for Unocal according a French Nespaper - Ah that's alright then they've NEVER GOT ANYTHING WRONG BEFORE HAVE THEY - Sheeesh. As I asked above go away and find some definitive evidence that Karzai ever worked for Unocal.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 08:30 AM

"There's a reason why T ignored my last post... He can't deal with the truth..." Says Bobert

Well yes there is a reason I ignored your post Bobert, after reading through it three times I still couldn't make any bloody sense out of it.

But on those letters Bobert, that both Alister Campbell and the Chilcott Inquiry Panel Members have seen, but the ones that you have not. Was there any mention of pursuing a diplomatic solution to the problem first, anything reported about that at all Bobert? The answer to that is a simple Yes, according to those who have actually seen and read the correspondence. Your apparent attempt to portray the correspondence as Blair demanding war in Iraq to ensure compliance to outstanding UN Resolutions as of March 2002 is plain downright silly, a total misrepresentation, something that belongs alongside those other famous Bobert Facts you know like:

- Heads on Sticks
- 3000 Patriot Missiles raining down on Baghdad
- Blix quote; "The Iraqi's are co-operating fully"
- etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,OG1
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 02:11 PM

GUEST,OG1 your post of 15 Jan 10 - 02:09 AM has got nothing whatsoever to do with the FACT that the United Nation asked the US and NATO to intervene in Afghanistan as part of what was agreed between UN Officials and Afghan Leaders in Bonn in Germany in December 2001.-Teribus

Is it not interesting how you are referencing that "UN Officials and Afghan Leaders" came to an agreement in Bonn, Germany, but you fail to mention that the Interim Authority of the "Afghan Leaders" -and I use the term "leaders" loosley- was chaired by Hamid Karzai. Yes, the same Hamid Karzai that was a "consultant" to UNOCAL. Hmmm... Now... Let's see... Where have I seen that name "UNOCAL"?

Unfortunately, Teribus, humans have some thing called "memory", and can use the "Google" or just as good ol' "Dubbya" once said "We can have filters on Internets".

It's as basic as looking in:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamid_Karzai

"...Karzai was involved in helping to provide financial and military support for the Mujahideen during the 1980s Soviet war in Afghanistan. The Mujahideen were secretly supplied and funded by the United States, and Karzai was a contact for the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) at the time".

"...While Karzai's brothers emigrated to the United States,Hamid Karzai remained in Pakistan during the Soviet occupation. He accompanied the first Mujahideen leaders into Kabul in 1992 following the Soviet withdrawal."

But, wait... There is more:

http://www.counterpunch.org/tomenron.html

A Creeping Collapse in Credibility at the White House:
From ENRON Entanglements to UNOCAL Bringing the Taliban to Texas and Controlling Afghanistan
By Tom Turnipseed

The Bush Administration's entanglement with ENRON is beginning to unravel as it finally admits that Enron executives entered the White House six times last year to secretly plan the Administration's energy policy with Vice-President Cheney before the collapse of the Texas-based energy giant. Meanwhile, even more trouble for our former-Texas-oil-man-turned-President is brewing with reports that unveil UNOCAL, another big energy company, for being in bed with the Taliban, along with the U.S. government in a major, continuing effort to construct pipelines through Afghanistan from the petroleum-rich Caspian Basin in Central Asia. Beneath their burkas, UNOCAL is being exposed for giving the five star treatment to Taliban Mullahs in the Lone Star State in 1997. The "evil-ones" were also invited to meet with U.S. government officials in Washington, D.C.

According to a December 17, 1997 article in the British paper, The Telegraph, headlined, "Oil barons court Taliban in Texas," the Taliban was about to sign a "£2 billion contract with an American oil company to build a pipeline across the war-torn country. ... The Islamic warriors appear to have been persuaded to close the deal, not through delicate negotiation but by old-fashioned Texan hospitality. ... Dressed in traditional salwar khameez,Afghan waistcoats and loose, black turbans, the high-ranking delegation was given VIP treatment during the four-day stay."

At the same time, U.S. government documents reveal that the Taliban were harboring Osama bin Laden as their "guest" since June 1996. By then, bin Laden had: been expelled by Sudan in early 1996 in response to US insistence and the threat of UN sanctions; publicly declared war against the U.S. on or about August 23, 1996; pronounced the bombings in Riyadh and at Khobar in Saudi Arabia killing 19 US servicemen as 'praiseworthy terrorism', promising that other attacks would follow in November 1996 and further admitted carrying out attacks on U.S. military personnel in Somalia in 1993 and Yemen in 1992, declaring that "we used to hunt them down in Mogadishu"; stated in an interview broadcast in February 1997 that "if someone can kill an American soldier, it is better than wasting time on other matters." Evidence was also developing which linked bin Laden to: the 1995 bombing of a U.S. military barracks in Riyadh which killed five; Ramzi Yuosef, who led the 1993 World Trade Center attacks; and a 1994 assassination plot against President Clinton in the Philippines.

Back in Houston, the Taliban was learning how the "other half lives," and according to The Telegraph, "stayed in a five-star hotel and were chauffeured in a company minibus." The Taliban representatives "...were amazed by the luxurious homes of Texan oil barons. Invited to dinner at the palatial home of Martin Miller, a vice-president of Unocal, they marveled at his swimming pool, views of the golf course and six bathrooms." Mr. Miller, said he hoped that UNOCAL had clinched the deal.

Dick Cheney was then CEO of Haliburton Corporation, a pipeline services vendor based in Texas. Gushed Cheney in 1998, "I can't think of a time when we've had a region emerge as suddenly to become as strategically significant as the Caspian. It's almost as if the opportunities have arisen overnight. The good Lord didn't see fit to put oil and gas only where there are democratically elected regimes friendly to the United States. Occasionally we have to operate in places where, all things considered, one would not normally choose to go. But we go where the business is." Would Cheney bargain with the harborers of U.S. troop killers if that's where the business was?

The Telegraph reported that Unocal had promised to start building the pipeline and paying the Taliban immediately, with the added inducements and a donation of £500,000 to the University of Nebraska for courses in Afghanistan to train 400 teachers, electricians, carpenters and pipefitters.

The Telegraph also reported, "The US government, which in the past has branded the Taliban's policies against women and children "despicable", appears anxious to please the fundamentalists to clinch the lucrative pipeline contract." In a paper prepared by Neamatollah Nojumi, at the Tufts University Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Nojumi wrote in August 1997 that Madeline Albright sat in a "full-dress CIA briefing" on the Caspian region. CIA agents then accompanied "some well-trained petroleum engineers" to the region. Albright concluded that shaping the region's policies was "one of the most exciting things that we can do."

It's also exciting to the Bush Administration. According to the authors of Bin Laden, the Hidden Truth, one of the FBI's leading counter terrorism agents, John O'Neill, resigned last year in protest over the Bush Administration's alleged obstruction of his investigation into bin Laden. (A similar complaint has been filed on behalf of another unidentified FBI Agent by the conservative Judicial Watch public interest group.) Supposedly the Bush Administration had been meeting since January 2001 with the Taliban, and was also reluctant to offend Saudi Arabians who O'Neill had linked to bin Laden. Mr. O'Neill, after leaving the FBI, assumed the position of security director at the World Trade Center, where he was killed in the 911 attacks.

As America's New War now begins focusing on other "rogue nations," UNOCAL's stars have magically aligned. About two months after the Houston parties, UNOCAL executive John Maresca addressed the House Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific and urged support for establishment of an investor-friendly climate in Afghanistan, "... we have made it clear that construction of our proposed pipeline cannot begin until a recognized government is in place that has the confidence of governments, lenders and our company." Meaning that UNOCAL's ability to construct the Afghan pipeline was a cause worthy of U.S. taxpayer dollars.

Maresca's prayers have been answered with the Taliban's replacement. As reported in Le Monde, the new Afghan government's head, Hamid Karzai, formerly served as a UNOCAL consultant. Only nine days after Karzai's ascension, President Bush nominated another UNOCAL consultant and former Taliban defender, Zalmay Khalilzad, as his special envoy to Afghanistan.

When UNOCAL makes big bucks from the pipeline they should donate 50% of all pretax profits to the 911 Fund. And they should also cut a very special check to the widow of FBI Agent O'Neill.


Please... Teribus, the next thing you will be doing is telling me that "Corporations do not rule the world, its citizens do."

Now come on Guest, OG1 tell us how the US is going to control the "Silk Road" region and all its resources. I am dying to hear it.-Teribus.

Perhaps you should ask how the British and Russian Empires, and Soviet Union, intended to "control" the "Silk Road" region and all of its resources.

But, the better question is not the "how" but the "why" they wanted to control the "Silk Road" region.

Let history be your guide.

Next you will be asking me to explain to you the procedures on how to build the U.S.'s next secret spy satellite.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Bobert
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 08:56 AM

There's a reason why T ignored my last post... He can't deal with the truth...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 06:56 AM

GUEST,OG1 your post of 15 Jan 10 - 02:09 AM has got nothing whatsoever to do with the FACT that the United Nation asked the US and NATO to intervene in Afghanistan as part of what was agreed between UN Officials and Afghan Leaders in Bonn in Germany in December 2001.

Now come on Guest, OG1 tell us how the US is going to control the "Silk Road" region and all its resources. I am dying to hear it.

CarolC, the link re Pakistan's planned storage is from SteelGuru.com (they map world steel prices on a day to day basis) the tanks they seem to be building are steel storage tanks set into the ground to protect them from direct attack.

I also note that all have to be built, therefore the simple answer to my question regarding where the underground storage facilities were located for the TAPI pipeline product was - There aren't any.

The storage facilities being sought for India are for product that will be delivered from Iran, not from Turkmenistan.

"Some people think they can prove that there won't be a pipeline by saying that there will be no way to store the gas." CarolC.

No CarolC that was not what was said at all, to recap:

1. Before TAPI can be built there has to be peace and guaranteed security in both Afghanistan and in the Baluchistan Province of Pakistan. At the moment no-one can state or accurately predict when that will be.

2. Before TAPI can be built sales agreements and delivery contracts must be signed by both Turkmenistan and Pakistan and India (From one of your links it would appear that India has now definitely bowed out of the deal and has sources its gas from Iran).

3. What was stated was that gas cannot be stored like oil therefore the TAPI pipeline cannot be built on spec in the hope that somebody is going to buy the product once the project has been completed. As your links state, if you elect to put gas into the ground you effectively lose half of it to make your storage system work. You could then at enormous expense and effort inject water to lift the remainder but it is hostage to the law of diminishing returns.

4. Turkmenistan has a finite number of gas fields for which it has both a ready market of customers and transport networks and it has potential future customers with transportation pipelines already under construction who do not have to end wars before gas acan be purchased and who are prepared to sign contracts now.

5. As part of their delivery price the Chinese are paying for field development costs and transport pipeline network installation costs for gas from Turkmenistan. The Chinese having done that and the Government of Turkmenistan having accepted that, I would doubt very much if any gas produced would go anywhere else other than to China.

5. All of the above conspire to make it highly unlikely that TAPI will ever come to anything. One thing it most certainly is not - the TAPI pipeline is not the reason that US and NATO forces are fighting in Afghanistan which was the original contention of Guest, OG1 - He is wrong.

Application of commonsense, reasoning and logic CarolC - all of which gives the indications that TAPI will most likely not be built. And to date within the oil & gas industry there are no US Companies who have declared any interest in being part of the TAPI Pipeline Project.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Jan 10 - 10:35 AM

Hell's bells, T...

What arms are you talkin' about, mah man??? Let's do a little review here... First of all the letters that have come forward from Blair to Bush were one year before the invasion... Yes, an entire year!!! That dates them well before Bush cranked up the war drums...

I mean, we are talkin' well before the world wide demonstartions... Before the aluminum tubes... Before, before...

So what we had were two dilussional leaders (?) who had no evidence of Saddam possessing WMD deciding, for whatever reasons (insert oil here), that it would be nice if Saddam was gone and the US/UK could just move right in and steal the oil...

Then when George Tenant warned Bush not to use the "nuclear" threat wording in his October 11th speech in Cincinitti then Blair came riding to Bush's rescue with an old term paper that some college kid had gotten a C+ on back in the early 90s...

That's the way it went down, T, and you know it as well as everyone else now knows it...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jan 10 - 09:35 AM

I think some found it easier to discuss gas storage than to explain how a non existant pipeline was the real cause of the war.

Some people think they can prove that there won't be a pipeline by saying that there will be no way to store the gas. As I have already shown repeatedly, that is a non-argument.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jan 10 - 09:33 AM

Unfortunately none of those putting this theory forward can explain how this can be of any benefit to the USA or any US Company as none have been interested in the project since December 1998.

A deal on the pipeline was signed on December 27 2002 by the leaders of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. In 2005, the Asian Development Bank submitted the final version of a feasibility study. Forbes reported in 2005, "Since the US-led offensive that ousted the Taliban from power, the project has been revived and drawn strong US support."    At that time, Ann Jacobsen, who was at that time the US Ambassador to Turkmenistan, said, "We are seriously looking at the project, and it is quite possible that American companies will join it." The project has not been started as of yet, because the Taliban are currently in control of part of the area then pipeline is supposed to go through. And we have stepped up our fighting there to bring them under control. How convenient.

On April 24, 2008, Pakistan, India, and Afghanistan signed a framework agreement to buy natural gas from Turkmenistan.

On the subject of storage CarolC, the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline, where along it's route are all these depleted gas reservoirs and abandoned salt mines that will serve as the storage you speak of.

Underground gas storage tanks to be built in Pakistan.

"Daily Times reported that Pakistan will make underground storages to store gas imported from Iran and Turkmenistan. A study in collaboration with Asian Development Bank is being conducted to identify the places to store the gas."

This article reports that the gas in question is going to come from Turkmenistan through Iran. The US government is pretty adamant about not wanting the gas to come through Iran. That is why they are working so hard to make Afghanistan safe for the pipeline.


India to build natural gas storage facilities to counter sabotage of Iran-Pak pipeline by Al-Queda and other Jihadists

"India went ahead with Iran-Pak natural gas pipeline. But the big danger of sabotage by Al-Queda, Pakistani and other Islamic Jahadists threatens the pipeline continuously. India plans to build huge underground reservoir to hold a buffer supply to ensure reliability of gas supply from Iran.

India will develop underground natural gas storage facilities, which will act as reserves in the event of sabotage of the proposed US$4.16 billion Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline."

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,OG1
Date: 15 Jan 10 - 03:33 AM

Oh my giddy aunt the US is only there to steal ........(fill in whatever country you like)'s resources. How bloody pathetic, that is what was yelled and yelled about Iraq and it never happened. -Teribus

Of course, Teribus, the U.S. and the U.K. were filled with joy when it was discovered that Iraq had awarded contracts to France, Russia and China; the U.S. and U.K. could not wait to be left out in the cold.

All of the "Freedom Fries" and pathetic France bashing by the U.S. corporate propaganda machine was only meant to bring us closer to the French people, and was not meant to embarass and put pressure on Jacques René Chirac. Thank GOD that new "tough guy", Nicolas Sarkozy, showed up to save the day; we can't have people going around saying that the French are weak, spineless and have never won a war.

Oh yeah, that's right, let's not forget about Germany. They were shunned and made fun of as punishment for disobeying the orders of their overseer -the U.S.-, for going against them when the "drum beats" of war were pounding. Thank goodness that Angela Merkel -wanna be Margaret Thatcher- came into the picture, to make sure that her country was guided towards the right just in time to make "nice-nice" with the U.S., before Bush left office.

But, of course, you are right Teribus, the U.S. had not interest in Iraq.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Iraq/wm217.cfm

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,OG1
Date: 15 Jan 10 - 02:09 AM

Sure Teribus. We all know that the U.S.'s intentions are pure. We know that when the United Nation calls on the U.S. to do its bidding, the U.S. always obliges. I almost forgot, the U.S. did not give a damn about the United Nations when it came to WMD inspections in Iraq.

I never realized that the United Nations was around in 1800's, nor that they asked the U.S. to introduce The Monroe Doctrine on December 2, 1823.

I am sure that the United Nations "asked" the U.S. to reactivate the Fourth Fleet -which was deactivated at the end of the WW2- to patrol Latin American waters effective July 1, 2009.

Of course the United Nations "asked" the U.S. to establish (7) seven military bases in Colombia.

Of course the U.S,'s presence in Latin America would not have anything to do with the fact that Venezuela, one of the top ten oil producing countries in the world, and 3rd or 4th top importer to the U.S., resides in said region.

Nor would it have anything to do with the fact that Brazil --up and coming rival to the U.S.-- just discovered five to eight billion barrels of recoverable light oil off its coast.

And I am sure that it has nothing to do with the fact that there is a new crop of left leaning goverments in South America, which are in the process of coming up with their own common currency.

I am sure that when the U.S. stole Panama from Colombia, in the begining of the 20th century, it was thinking of Colombia's best interest.

I am sure that "Operation Just Cause" in Panama was only put in place for the benefit of the Panamanians, and did not benefit the U.S.

I am sure that when "The United Fruit Company" took possesion of almost all the land in Guatemala, and then asked the CIA to perform a covert operation, which lead to the 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état to overthrow Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán, the U.S. was acting in the best interest of the Guatemalan people. Just like I am sure that the land reform acts that Arbenz was instigating made the U.S. ecstatic with joy, especially considering that Mexico's Lázaro Cárdenas del Río had already expropriated and redistributed millions of acres of hacienda land to peasants and had also nationalized Mexico's petroleum reserves and expropriated the equipment of companies such as Royal Dutch/Shell and Standard Oil.

Too bad fifty years of embargos on Cuba could not hold back the inevitable.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Jan 10 - 01:29 AM

None of this is done in Europe or as far as I know in Russia or in Central Asia.


Obviously you are wrong about that, as my 14 Jan 10 - 02:01 AM post shows. Ignoring the evidence in the hope that it will go away doesn't work, and just looks ridiculous. And then there's this...

Chemieanlagenbau Chemnitz GmbH (CAC; Germany; www.cac-chem.de) draws on its longstanding collaboration with Rohol-Aufsuchungs AG (RAG; Vienna, Austria) and lands two new contracts for erecting underground storage facilities for natural gas.


And this...

The technology of underground storage which permits matching a constant supply with a variable demand for economic advantage has been developed since 1917 in US and Canada.

It is of particular interest to NATO partners such as US, UK, France, Italy, Germany and Canada where it is practiced.



Gazprom, the Russian gas monopolist, is going to build the Europe's largest underground natural gas storage.

It says Europe's largest underground natural gas storage. It doesn't say Europe's first underground natural gas storage.


You're not fooling anyone, Teribus. You never even worked in the UK natural gas industry.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 15 Jan 10 - 12:33 AM

"...a witness reported that Tony B Liar had repeatedly assured the Shrub that, if diplomatic means failed, and military action were necessary, the UK would join the invasion."

I take it that that witness was Alister Campbell - Yes?

If so this is what he actually told the Inquiry:

"We share the analysis, we share the concern, we are going to be with you in making sure that Saddam Hussein is faced up to his obligations and that Iraq is disarmed." Campbell added: "If that cannot be done diplomatically and it has to be done militarily, Britain will be there. That would be the tenor of the communication to the president."

The letters Blair wrote to Bush have been passed to the Chilcot inquiry. It has not given any indication about whether it will publish them.

This is how Bobert put it:

"Somewhat related, seems that some private letters have surfaced where Baloney Blair told is buddy, Bomber Bush, one year before the Iraq invasion that Bomber could count on the UK if it came down to an invasion..." - Bobert

Inaccuracies in the latter are:

1. The Inquiry has been told that Tony Blair had written a number (unspecified) of letters in private to George W. Bush. Nobody outwith the Inquiry Panel knows the content of those letters because they are not in the public domain, so what Bobert is repeating is hearsay.

2. Bobert in writing the above misses out the very important bit about - "we are going to be with you in making sure that Saddam Hussein is faced up to his obligations and that Iraq is disarmed." Campbell added: "If that cannot be done diplomatically". The "If it cannot be done diplomatically" is I am sure you would agree an important part of the whole.

"At the end of the day, the main reason the U.S. and U.K. are in Afghanistan, to "secure the peace", is so that they have strategic control of the "Silk Road" region, including all of its resources." - Guest, OG1

Oh my giddy aunt the US is only there to steal ........(fill in whatever country you like)'s resources. How bloody pathetic, that is what was yelled and yelled about Iraq and it never happened.

It was Guest,OG1 who was prattling on about a pipeline that:

1. Hasn't even been built yet;
2. Is highly unlikely to ever be built;
3. In which no US company has any interest;
4. From which the USA can accrue no benefit whatsoever.

Somehow is the reason for the current fighting in Afghanistan. Utter rubbish.

Pray tell us OG1 how the hell are is the US going to control "The Silk Road" Judging by the number of deaths on their own roads (round about 43,000 per year IIRC) they cannot even control Sunset Boulavard.

At the end of the day, the main reason the U.S. and U.K. are in Afghanistan, to "secure the peace", is because the United Nations asked them to - FACT, live with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,OG1
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 10:47 PM

At the end of the day, the main reason the U.S. and U.K. are in Afghanistan, to "secure the peace", is so that they have strategic control of the "Silk Road" region, including all of its resources.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 07:50 PM

""Somewhat related, seems that some private letters have surfaced where Baloney Blair told is buddy, Bomber Bush, one year before the Iraq invasion that Bomber could count on the UK if it came down to an invasion..." - Bobert

Not what has surfaced at all Bobert, at least not as specifically as you state above.""

Not so mate. Bobert has stated exactly what surfaced, and not just in letters, but at the inquiry where a witness reported that Tony B Liar had repeatedly assured the Shrub that, if diplomatic means failed, and military action were necessary, the UK would join the invasion.

I listened to it on the BBC News several times during the day.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 01:27 PM

Nigel - It was a bloody stupid question and you were well aware of it at the time of asking.

On the subject of underground storage, what I actually did say was this:

"If it is underground storage of transported gas, and I know that this has been tried it is again expensive and extremely wasteful"

Underground storage of transported gas is what is being talked about. Go through the steps and the investment that were required to get the gas to the surface and cleaned up, now during its transportation go through the steps that will be required to store it back underground in such a way as to be able to control the pressure in the reservoir you intend to store it in. The costs are enormous.

None of which detracts from the fact that no gas export pipeline is built until there is a guaranteed customer for the gas that the field will produce. Gas projects are not undertaken on spec.

At the moment no purchase agreements have been signed by either Pakistan or India for any gas from Turkmenistan via TAPI, a pipeline that has not yet been built. Therefore as far as Afghanistan goes the proposed pipeline has got absolutely nothing to do with the conflict and it never had.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 12:14 PM

Nigel Parsons asks re natural gas:

"Pray tell us where this gas has been for the last several millennia?"
Simple enough question to answer - "In the rock formations that trapped it all those millions of years ago"
Or are you one of the simpletons, Nigel, who think that oil and gas exists in vast underground caverns?

Calling those who disagree with you, or question your answers 'simpletons' suggests you arguments are failing & you need to rely on insult.
I never stated that this gas was lying around in massive underground chambers, merely that you stated underground storage was impossible.
Are those "Rock formations that trapped it all those millions of years ago" above ground? If not you are arguing from a false premise.
I, however will not stoop to the level of insult, as you may be highly intelligent.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 08:20 AM

I think some found it easier to discuss gas storage than to explain how a non existant pipeline was the real cause of the war.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 08:12 AM

(Very interesting discussion, Boberdz....)

What??? A thread about the Iraq invasion where folks end up talkin' exclusively about energy reserves???

(Yeah, you got it...)

What about UN resolutions and mushroom clouds and Saddam and al qeada being buddies???

(Guess you were tright from the very beginning, Boberdz... Don'tcha just hate that??? You know, being right an' T-Bird being wrong...)

No... What I hate is that Bush and Blair went to war over oil...

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 03:44 AM

Apologies CarolC, I forgot this point when it comes to who Turkmenistan will sell it's gas to. You said this:

"....if they (Turkmenistan) can get better prices from that market than they can get from China, for instance,"

China is paying for field development and all infrastructure required all of which must come with a price no doubt tied to where the product from those fields go.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 03:36 AM

So CarolC everything you have mentioned so far is applicable to the US where in some cases depleted gas field reservoirs have been used.

None of this is done in Europe or as far as I know in Russia or in Central Asia. Take the UK for example with quite an extensive gas network, all our gas fields are offshore where operators are committed to decommissioning when the field is depleted. The costs of keeping those fields in operation as storage and the cost of pumping that gas back underground makes no sense.

Of course the UK is renown world-wide for its extensive salt mines (Off the top of my head, IIRC the only one in the UK is in Cheshire, and as it is still producing it can harldy serve as a candidate for storing gas)

Now to get back to TAPI, remember that, the sole reason US and UK troops are fighting in Afghanistan (Sorry correction the only reason US and UK troops in minute numbers "invaded" and "occupied" Afghanistan) to build a pipeline to do what exactly? Oh yes to transport gas from Turkmenistan to India. Unfortunately none of those putting this theory forward can explain how this can be of any benefit to the USA or any US Company as none have been interested in the project since December 1998.

Now for TAPI to ever be constructed Afghanistan must be returned to stable governance, at that is the aim of UNAMA. One thing is for certain, without the aid previously given by Pakistan's ISI and Army, the Taleban will never be capable of returning the country to stable government. You then have to consider the Pakistani Province of Baluchistan and get its problems solved, before one field joint of pipe is laid.

For Turkmenistan to continue to develop and prosper it relies on selling its natural gas and oil now, today, not at what might be an improved price at some undetermined point in the future.

Another thing on pricing with gas, that is fixed before delivery, and the contract is signed on that premise, again it is not like the oil market where prices change continually. Within the terms and conditions of a gas supply contract there will be agreed price review points for the benefit of both those supplying the gas and those purchasing it - prices can go down as well as up.

"There is no need for it to wait for TAPI to be built. But, having not waited, there is also no reason to expect that if it is built, and if they can get better prices from that market than they can get from China, for instance, that they won't decide at some point in the future to sell to the market that is served by the TAPI." - CarolC

I can remember Don Firth going on about this pipeline (TAPI) as the reason behind "western" involvement in Afghanistan years ago on this forum. I told him then that TAPI would not be built and I still say it will not be built, at any rate it will not be built in any way that you could be beneficial to the USA, so can hardly be a stated reason behind the current conflict. You talk of TAPI as if it is a certainty when in reality it is not, so far I think in real terms the only work that has been done on it has been a feasibility study. nothing else. TAPI is and remains a proposal, nothing more, the Asia Development Bank is not going to pay for the pipeline it is going to finance those who will take the risk and build it. If it were an oil pipeline no problem, but as I have said all along gas is different, it has to be sold before it is transported because it cannot be stored in the same manner that oil can.

On the subject of storage CarolC, the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India pipeline, where along it's route are all these depleted gas reservoirs and abandoned salt mines that will serve as the storage you speak of.

Previously Turkmenistan only sold gas to Russia. Now it sells to Iran (in increasing quantities), to China (in quantities that no doubt will increase as Chinese demand expands), potentially to Europe (Once the infrastructure is in place in 2014) and finally potentially to Russia at a very improved price. Now that means that by the time TAPI is constructed (if and whenever that may be) those attempting to fill it will be facing what I can only describe as exceptional competition, some might even say prohibitive competition.

Have a look at the end user, India. If India buys from Iran through the IPI, it could still potentially buy Turkemistan gas through that pipeline (Turkmenistan already exports gas to Iran through two pipelines). India continues to develop its own gas fields offshore in the Bay of Bengal. Then there is the nuclear energy programme in partnership with the USA. The combination of the above could all conspire to make TAPI completely unnecessary and excess to requirement.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 02:14 AM

Therefore without any rsolution in any conflict in Afghanistan or in Baluchistan in Pakistan the Turkmenistan Government is laughing all the way to the bank its options over the next decade are:

1. Sell as much to China as they want through existing pipeline
2. Sell as much to Iran as they want through existing pipelines
3. From 2014 sell as much to Europe through the Trans Caspian/Nabucco pipeline system.
4. Sell as much to Gazprom through repaired existing pipelines

Can you tell me why with all that immediately available Turkmenistan would wait for TAPI to be built - Once of course there is peace in Afghanistan.

Red herring. There is no need for it to wait for TAPI to be built. But, having not waited, there is also no reason to expect that if it is built, and if they can get better prices from that market than they can get from China, for instance, that they won't decide at some point in the future to sell to the market that is served by the TAPI.

In the absence of documented proof that the governments included in the TAPI agreement have decided to abandon it, all you are doing is blowing smoke.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 02:01 AM

Now in turn CarolC IF what you contend is correct within the UNECE region that underground natural gas is standard, common or in use at all. Could you tell me why they would be doing a study on it covering the entire region, I mean they would be fully aware of the complexities and requirements of selecting and creating such sites wouldn't they??

What they are referring to when they mention "the natural gas industry" is that industry world-wide.


Wrong again, Teribus. Take the following sentence, for instance...

Considerable recent and ongoing changes in the functioning of the natural gas market in the UNECE region have also affected the underground natural gas storage sector.

They are talking here specifically about the UNECE region and its underground natural gas storage sector.

And this...

New legislationhas been introduced, including at the European Union level, which opened the sector to competition together with third-party access provisions.

This sentence follows directly the one I quoted previously, so 'sector' in this sentence refers to the same sector, which, again is the underground natural gas storage sector of the UNECE region.

With the deregulation and liberalization of the natural gas industry in the UNECE region, the natural gas industry has come to rely more on the expanded role of underground natural gas storage facilities. In addition, new services have been developed and new roles designed, such as transforming the storage facilities into the heart of hub operations. In turn, they have contributed considerably to the integration of the gas markets in the UNECE region with the development of facilities which serve regional needs and convert a set of national markets into a truly regional or even, as in the case of the European Union, into a European industry.

Here, again, they are talking specifically about the natural gas industry in Europe and how the deregulation and liberalization of the natural gas industry in the UNECE region has effected how much the gas industry in that region relies on regional underground natural gas storage facilities.

This next part talks about the purpose of the study...

The purpose of the UNECE study on underground gas storage is to review the main trends in the sector with a view to increasing the visibility of future capacity and investment needs as well as the regulatory, cost and operational challenges. It should also identify potential problem areas which might inhibit the sector's ability to continue providing the desired services in a timely and affordable manner.

This doesn't say anything at all about studying whether or not underground storage will at some point in the future, be considered as a possible means of storing gas. It only discusses reviewing the main trends in an already existing sector with a view to increasing the visibility of future capacity and investment needs, and potential regulatory, cost, and operational challenges. And to identify any potential problem areas that might inhibit the (already existing) sector's ability to continue providing the desired (underground storage) services in a timely and affordable manner.

That's it. It's not a feasibility study to decide whether or not to use this technology. It only discusses an existing underground natural gas storage sector and how the new regulatory environment might effect the ability of the sector to do what it is already now doing, effectively in the future.


Like I said, the only person you're humiliating is yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 01:20 AM

Perhaps Teribus can find a way to prove that these people don't store gas underground...


"Currently these three storage methods – depleted reservoir, salt caverns and liquefied natural gas - combine to provide more than 285 billion cubic feet of certificated working gas storage capacity.

Depleted Reservoir

Depleted reservoirs (or pools) in our eastern North America market area are used as storage facilities by injecting natural gas back into the porous underground rock that once held the fuel before it was produced.

Spectra Energy owns the storage field near the town of Accident, Maryland, and partially owns the Pennsylvania fields near Oakford (50 percent) and Leidy (25 percent). The proximity of these storage fields to our shippers provides a great deal of flexibility. The depleted reservoirs in use at Accident, Oakford and Leidy allow for "one turn" per year (an injection and withdrawal cycle that takes 12 months).

Our Union Gas storage facility at Dawn, Ontario, is North America's largest. It, too, is a depleted reservoir but the porosity of its geologic formation allows for more than one turn per year. In total, Spectra Energy's depleted reservoir working gas storage capacity is about 235 Bcf.


Salt Caverns

Salt is impermeable and self-sealing, so it creates exceptionally strong and environmentally sound storage. Our salt caverns can extend more than 1,000 feet underground. In fact, their vertical height can be greater than a major skyscraper is tall.

Spectra Energy owns two salt storage facilities, one in Liberty, Texas (Moss Bluff), and the other in Evangeline, Louisiana (Egan), with others in development. Moss Bluff and Egan are equipped with two-way directional interconnects to major pipelines serving mid-western and eastern U.S. markets.

We also use a bedded salt formation in southwest Virginia for natural gas storage. The bedded salt beneath the Saltville facility allows for caverns not as deep as those at Egan or Moss Bluff, but wider.

In total, Spectra Energy has more than 40 Bcf of salt cavern working gas storage capacity."

Spectra Energy

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 06:25 PM

Well, that was the story on NPR today, T-zer... More at 11...

Oh, I get it... You aren't questioning the letter but my little nick names... Right???

Or are you questioning the letter itself??? if so, like I said, this is what NPR is reporting so stayed tuned...

B~!

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 05:21 PM

"Somewhat related, seems that some private letters have surfaced where Baloney Blair told is buddy, Bomber Bush, one year before the Iraq invasion that Bomber could count on the UK if it came down to an invasion..." - Bobert

Not what has surfaced at all Bobert, at least not as specifically as you state above.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 05:06 PM

Somewhat related, seems that some private letters have surfaced where Baloney Blair told is buddy, Bomber Bush, one year before the Iraq invasion that Bomber could count on the UK if it came down to an invasion...

I'm beginning to wonder if this entire screw up wasn't all Baloney Blair's idea in the 1st place...

I mean, who was it when Bomber Bush was lookin' for the last piece of evidence that Saddam had WMD's who came forward with a 20 some year old college kids C+ term paper as the final exhibit on why Baloney and Bomber had to order up the slaughter of upwards of a million innocent Iraqi women, old people and children???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 01:15 PM

Nigel Parsons asks re natural gas:

"Pray tell us where this gas has been for the last several millennia?"

Simple enough question to answer - "In the rock formations that trapped it all those millions of years ago"

Or are you one of the simpletons, Nigel, who think that oil and gas exists in vast underground caverns?

CarolC's latest "Ace" attempt:

"With the deregulation and liberalization of the natural gas industry in the UNECE region, the natural gas industry has come to rely more on the expanded role of underground natural gas storage facilities."

Now in turn CarolC IF what you contend is correct within the UNECE region that underground natural gas is standard, common or in use at all. Could you tell me why they would be doing a study on it covering the entire region, I mean they would be fully aware of the complexities and requirements of selecting and creating such sites wouldn't they??

What they are referring to when they mention "the natural gas industry" is that industry world-wide.

There can be as many agreements in principle as you like but the more pipelines that are built now and in the near future will be used to capacity long before any Trans Afghan Pipeline ever comes into existence.

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/view/128764

Basically the Tukmenistan Government is in a "No-lose" situation, whether Gazprom repairs the pipeline or not.

Other pipelines that will be available for use long before any lays a single joint of the TAPI:

The Nabucco gas pipeline, construction of which will start this year will come into operation in 2014 and will carry gas from Azerbaijan to Europe by-passing Russian pipeline networks. gas from Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan will be fed into this pipeline by either the two proposed Trans-Caspian Pipelines or from Turkmenistan through a short extension of existing pipeline networks in Iran

So let's see CarolC

If Turkmenistan gets between $175 and $200 per thousand cubic metres of gas it can quite comfortably survive and pay for future expansion just by selling to Iran and China. If those prices are agreed it puts the squeeze on Russia's Gazprom because as the link says Gazprom needs Turkmenistan more than Turkmenistan needs Gazprom. Pipelines such as Nabucco tighten the nut even harder on the Russians.

Therefore without any rsolution in any conflict in Afghanistan or in Baluchistan in Pakistan the Turkmenistan Government is laughing all the way to the bank its options over the next decade are:

1. Sell as much to China as they want through existing pipeline
2. Sell as much to Iran as they want through existing pipelines
3. From 2014 sell as much to Europe through the Trans Caspian/Nabucco pipeline system.
4. Sell as much to Gazprom through repaired existing pipelines

Can you tell me why with all that immediately available Turkmenistan would wait for TAPI to be built - Once of course there is peace in Afghanistan.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 11:56 AM

I haven't read the thread but the title can only elicit the Victor Meldrew response....


I don't beleive it!


DeG

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 10:13 AM

""Teribus reliably informs us that natural gas cannot be stored underground.
Pray tell us where this gas has been for the last several millennia?""

And not one storage tank in sight.

Game, set, and match!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 09:26 AM

Teribus reliably informs us that natural gas cannot be stored underground.
Pray tell us where this gas has been for the last several millennia?

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Lizzie Cornish 1
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 04:38 AM

Tony Blair is unable to tell the truth, that's the whole problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 02:05 AM

With the deregulation and liberalization of the natural gas industry in the UNECE region, the natural gas industry has come to rely more on the expanded role of underground natural gas storage facilities.

Obviously you are wrong, Teribus. Note the tense of this sentence fragment in particular, "the natural gas industry has come to rely more on the expanded role of underground natural gas storage facilities".

If they were talking about the future, they would have said, "the natural gas industry may some day come to rely more on the expanded role of underground natural gas storage facilities".

But that's not what they said. They said, "has come to rely more". That is past tense. They are talking about what has already taken place. I'm not even going to say "nice try" this time, because that attempt at weaseling was very lame.


But one thing I am certain of CarolC and that is every standard cubic metre of gas currently produced by Turkmenistan is sold and none of it is currently being sold to India.

This is meaningless. It does not address any increases in the amount of gas that is expected to come on line in the future and who will get them.

I am not aware of a pipeline having already been built in Afghanistan. I am, however, aware of agreements between the governments of Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India, and the Asia Development Bank, to build such a pipeline.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 05:47 PM

LOL Indeed - Read your link - it refers to a study - that study if finished on time should be completed mid 2010.

Describes what they are thinking of doing NOT what is currently being done.

As for:

"...no Turkmenistan gas will be going to or through India. So far you have not provided any."

OK CarolC

1. Show me the pipeline that will transport it.

2. State who built it and when was it built, or when will it be built?

3. Tell me why Turkmenistan will hold off development of their natural gas fields in order to wait for the curently non-existent TAPI pipeline to be built.

4. Tell me why Turkmenistan will refuse to sell their natural gas to their existing customers in the hope that India MIGHT buy their gas at sometime in the future.

But one thing I am certain of CarolC and that is every standard cubic metre of gas currently produced by Turkmenistan is sold and none of it is currently being sold to India.

Now go off and Google some more until you think that you have found your next "ace" - pity I keep trumping them.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 01:36 PM

LOL!

OOPS! I was right. You did pull that one right out of your arse. Europe does rely on underground storage of natural gas...


STUDY ON UNDERGROUND GAS STORAGE IN EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA

With the deregulation and liberalization of the natural gas industry in the UNECE region, the natural gas industry has come to rely more on the expanded role of underground natural gas storage facilities. In addition, new services have been developed and new roles designed, such as transforming the storage facilities into the heart of hub operations. In turn, they have contributed considerably to the integration of the gas markets in the UNECE region with the development of facilities which serve regional needs and convert a set of national markets into a truly regional or even, as in the case of the European Union, into a European industry

http://www.unece.org/energy/se/pdfs/wpgas/wpg_ugs/2_mt_03sep08/Terms_of_Reference_Draft_UGS_Asia_Aug08.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 01:16 PM

"If it is underground storage of transported gas, and I know that this has been tried it is again expensive and extremely wasteful."

And yet it's standard practice, Teribus. So I'm betting that you're also pulling your claim that it is expensive and wasteful right out of your arse, like pretty much everything else you say. And since it's standard practice, there's no reason your claim that it is expensive and wasteful will cause anyone in the industry (which you clearly know nothing about) to decide to stop doing it. And whether or not Europe needs to use this method is irrelevant. You maintain that the "fact" that gas can't be stored is proof that this method won't be used for Caspian Basin gas. You are making that up out of thin air. If it is needed for Caspian Basin gas, it will be used for that purpose.

Oh the deal for the Turkmenistan Gas for China was all signed off on and the pipeline opened on 14th December, 2009 and was well covered in the media - so much for making it up as I go along.

Show me some documentation that proves that China is going to get all of the gas. Or that no Turkmenistan gas will be going to or through India. So far you have not provided any.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 11:14 AM

As stated previously:

"If it is underground storage of transported gas, and I know that this has been tried it is again expensive and extremely wasteful."

Simple elementary general gas laws will tell you that. Of course over here in Europe we have more customers for the gas that you do in the USA with a steadier demand so do not have to go in for such wasteful schemes.

The US Government IS trying to disuade India from getting gas via the IPI Pipeline but is doing so, or was doing so by trying to convince the Indias to use nuclear power stations to provide electricity rather than carbon fuels.

Oh the deal for the Turkmenistan Gas for China was all signed off on and the pipeline opened on 14th December, 2009 and was well covered in the media - so much for making it up as I go along.

TAPI ain't going to get built CarolC so it can hardly be introduced as the reason the US is fighting in Afghanistan - It is as valid as the old chestnut about the US going into Iraq to "steal the oil" - absolutley ridiculous.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: GUEST,OG1
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 03:26 AM

I guess when Ross Perot famously predicted a "giant sucking sound" of U.S. jobs would be going to Mexico, he miscalculated a bit.

It seems that he should of been more worried about the giant sound China is making by sucking-up most U.S. manufacturing jobs and more and more of the earth's natural resources.

The last article posted by "Little Hawk" clearly shows how complicated things have become, and how China stands to benefit when the dust finally settles.

As they say, staying on top is sometimes harder than getting there. The history of the decline of both the Spanish and British Empires are excellent examples of things to come.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 02:16 AM

And my last post was 100.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 02:02 AM

If you were working in the gas industry, Teribus, it must have been as a server in the cafeteria, since you clearly know nothing about the transport and storage of natural gas over land.

It is an established practice to store natural gas along the pipeline route in a number of different ways. The way it was being done where I used to live was to inject the gas into depleted reservoirs. The gas being stored near me, in Accident, Maryland, came from Texas and was on its way to points north. The company who was responsible for this also stores gas in salt caverns, and in the form of liquified natural gas. This one company alone has 285 billion cubic feet of certificated working gas storage capacity. That's just one company.

I lived in the Accident, Maryland area from about 1980 to 1992, and it was not a new storage facility when I moved there, so it is hardly an experimental technology.

Face it, Teribus, you're clearly making this shit up as you go along, and the only person you're humiliating with this kind of behavior is yourself, even if you don't have the ability to see it yourself.


On the subject of the Iran/Pakistan/India pipeline and the instability in Afghanistan - the US government is vehemently opposed to a the pipeline going through Iran. So that explains very nicely why Obama is ratcheting up US military efforts in Afghanistan. I suggest you give up on your current line of argument. It's not winning you any points.

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 01:46 AM

You'll no doubt enjoy this even more...

OSAMA 10. THE US: 0.

January 11, 2010

To better understand why Osama bin Laden is so far winning his struggle to oust the western powers from the Muslim world, let us go back to 1986, when I was covering the anti-Soviet war in then almost unknown Afghanistan.

I called on the grandly titled "Afghan Information Center" in Peshawar, Pakistan. Peshawar was a wild and dangerous place. I called it, "Dodge City meets the Arabian Nights" in my book on Afghanistan, `War at the Top of the World."

The information center turned out to be a drab little office filled with mimeographed pamphlets and piles of dusty books.

The director was a short, thin man in a torn sweater named Abdullah Azzam. We spoke at length of the anti-Soviet jihad (struggle) in Afghanistan being waged by Afghan and Arab mujahidin.

Then, Azzam told me, `when we have driven the Communist imperialists from Afghanistan, we will go on and drive the American imperialists from Arabia and the rest of the Muslim world.'

I was absolutely floored. Except for Communists, a notorious bunch of liars, I had never heard anyone call my beloved America an imperialist power. In those days, the US appeared the acme of good – in large part because its rival, the Soviet Union, looked so wicked.

But after the USSR collapsed, absolute power absolutely corrupted Washington's ruling circles and drove them to seek "full spectrum domination" of the globe and its energy resources rather than a cooperative new world order.   

Sheik Abdullah Azzam was the teacher and spiritual mentor of a young Saudi named Osama bin Laden. Azzam gave bin Laden the blueprint for his later war against the west.

Azzam was murdered in 1989, likely by a western intelligence service. His pupil, Osama, launched a seemingly Quixotic mission to overthrow the western-backed dictatorships and monarchies that misruled the Muslim world, and drive western power from the region.

Bin Laden proclaimed his grand strategy in the 1990's. He would oust the modern `Crusaders' by luring the US and its allies into a series of small, debilitating, hugely expensive wars to bleed and slowly bankrupt the US economy, which he called America's Achilles' heel.

Bloody attacks would enrage the US and lure it into one quagmire after another.

Bin Laden was dismissed by western intelligence as a crackpot and "enragé."

But both the dim-witted President Gorge W. Bush and the intelligent President Barack Obama fell right into Osama's carefully-laid trap.

Today, Osama's words haunt us as we witness hysteria and chaos engulf America's air travel system, the war party in Washington demands the US invade Yemen, and the drums beat for war against Iran.

US airport security officials will be even more panicked when they learn a jihadist recently tried to assassinate Saudi Arabia's interior minister, Prince Nayef, by detonating a bomb secreted in his rectum. Will we soon bend and spread for security– just like in prisons?      

The American colossus continues to stumble ever deeper into the Muslim world's violent, tangled affairs at a time when Washington is bankrupt and only runs on Chinese loans. In 2009, the US deficit was US $1.4 trillion. But Washington managed to spend $200 billion on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by loading the costs onto the national credit card.

American soldiers are fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. US   Special Forces, air units and CIA mercenaries are involved in combat operations in Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, West Africa, North Africa and the Philippines. A new US base at Djibouti is launching raids into Yemen, Somalia and northern Kenya.   US forces aided the failed Ethiopian invasion of Somalia in 2006.   New US bases are planned in oil-producing West Africa and also in Colombia.

The Red Sea littoral is America's next major headache. Somalia's anti-western Shebab movement controls much of that nation's south and center. Yemen is a hotbed of jihadist activity that increasingly threatens neighboring Saudi Arabia, a vital American ally. Somali pirates could turn from plunder to striking at other western interests.

As soon as the US or its satraps crush one anti-western jihadist group, another springs up somewhere else.

Washington is quietly engineering the breakup of troubled Sudan, Africa's largest nation, in order to dominate South Sudan's important oil resources and undermine the regime in Khartoum which Washington has marked for termination.

Even Egypt is growing shaky. The US-backed Mubarak military dictatorship that has ruled the Arab world's most populous nation with an iron hand since 1981 faces a succession struggle once the 82-year old pharaoh is gone.

Al-Qaida is no longer the tiny organization founded by Osama bin Laden that never numbered more than 300 hard core members. It has morphed into a worldwide movement of like-minded but independent, revolutionary, anti-American groups that share Osama's militant philosophy. This is precisely the kind of `asymmetrical warfare' the Pentagon has so long feared.   

Ominously, a 2006 World Public Opinion poll showed large majorities in four leading Muslim nations that are key US allies, Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan and Indonesia (a third of the Muslim world's population), believe the US is determined to destroy or undermine Islam. They support attacks on American targets. This was an ominous warning for the United States.

Remember all the claims by the Bush administration that Osama bin Laden was on the run, or out of business? He is still very much in business, and so far making his western enemies look foolish and bumbling.   

Copyright Eric S. Margolis 2010

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 01:41 AM

Apologies CarolC assumption on my part from this:

"I used to live right next to a large natural gas storage location. They pump the gas to the storage location, and they store it there."

Now to avoid further assumptions on my part you tell us all about it.

If it is underground storage of transported gas, and I know that this has been tried it is again expensive and extremely wasteful. One by product of the experimentation into this on the eastern side of the pond is that some "gas bearing" reservoirs can be used for storing carbon dioxide gas.

Where natural gas cannot be transported ashore it can be transferred to nearby oil fields and injected into the reservoir to increase field pressure and boost output. Same thing can be done cheaper with water.

None of which of course alters the fact that, as no-one can predict with any certainty when peace will descend on Afghanistan or Pakistan, the TAPI pipeline will not be built.

Why did you say that Turkmenistan should hold off field development and forego the revenue from its natural resources in order to suit your hypothesis about the Afghan war being all about a pipeline that even if built would not benefit the USA one iota?

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 01:02 AM

Which tanks was I talking about, Teribus?

Subject: RE: BS: Tony Blair Finally Tells the Truth
From: Teribus
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 12:37 AM

"You most certainly can store natural gas. I used to live right next to a large natural gas storage location. They pump the gas to the storage location, and they store it there." - CarolC

OK then CarolC where was the source of the natural gas that was stored in those tanks (think they were called "gasometers" in the old days). But from experience there will be one gas export line from the field (location where the natural gas is extracted from the earth) to a terminal where the gas is further cleaned and treated so that it can be distributed to a network of pipelines and compressor stations for delivery to industry and centres of population. All the way down this chain the pressure of the gas is falling. Where you have only one or possibly two export lines from the field (The "upstream" end) there will be hundreds if not thousands of those tanks you were talking about at the domestic ("Downstream") end, which relies on that gas being used. If the gas is not used CarolC then production at the "Upstream" end has to shut down, believe it or not that is not as simple as turning off a tap, it can have far reaching and extremely expensive consequences.

What I have said in context is that you cannot store natural gas like you can store oil. Of course it is possible to store natural gas for transport, that is done by freezing it to -190 degrees C, but this tremendously expensive and wasteful, which is why it is not done on any great scale compared to conventional pipeline transportation of natural gas.

As for: "Clearly you're the one who doesn't know anything about the gas industry."   LOL CarolC if only you knew. "the Gas Industry"?? Depends which part of it you mean. If it is the offshore getting of it and the work associated with transporting it to shore, then would 30 odd years in the industry have taught me anything about it??

Your Trans Afghan Pipeline (TAPI) has to wait for the arrival of peace in Afghanistan and Pakistan before anyone will even consider building it - give me a date for that.

The Iran-Pakistan-India Pipeline is under construction. This was the alternative, as far as India was concerned to TAPI. It only has to be decided if the tranist through Pakistan is a land or a submarine pipeline, as India has doubts about the political security of Pakistan's Baluchistan Province. But this pipeline is more likely to be completed than TAPI is.

Central Asian Pipeline is built and in commission this is the trunk line that will carry Turkmenistan natural gas to western China, no what-ifs or buts. It is a done deal.

The pipeline to Europe will be capable of taking gas from the Caspian region, Iraq, Iran, Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan. This pipeline is currently being constructed.

The existing pipelines from Turkmenistan to Russia.

All in all CarolC we are talking about ten pipelines that are not affected by war or political instability through which Turkmenistan can actually and potentially export its natural gas. Can you give me any good reason why they should hold off field development and deny themselves hard currency revenue in order to wait for peace in Afghanistan? Which will come about when CarolC? Just not logical is it?

Particularly liked this piece of nonsense from Little Hawk:

"Pakistan's ISI greatly aided the Taliban in gaining power so as to help keep the Russians out of Afghanistan."

Now then LH correct me here wherever I go wrong:

- The Taleban were formed by Mullah Mohammed Omar from the students of his madrassa in a district of Kandahar Province in March 1994 to punish an ex-Mujahideen local warlord.

- The movement grew and with the help of Pakistan's ISI and Army they took on the various warring factions within Afghanistan so that by 1996 they declared themselves de facto rulers of Afghanistan, although they were not recognised as such by the United Nations.

Some things to consider logically about this period:

- 1989 to 2001 was a period of global expansion for Russian interests was it Little Hawk? I seem to recall it was exactly the reverse, Russia did not have two pennies to rub together over that period which saw the collapse departure of its former satellite nations in droves.

- 1989 to 1994 saw nothing but uncertainty and turmoil inside Afghanistan, Pakistan's immediate neighbour to the North-West.

- The leaders of the Northern Alliance, who had formerly fought the Russians, leaned more towards India rather than Pakistan, Iran or Russia. This again rationally makes sense as India is in the process of emerging as a world economic super-power. It was to counter and destroy this potential Indian influence on its North-West border that prompted Pakistan to back the Taleban in their fight with the Northern Alliance, nothing else.