Eco Nwo David McGowan Peak Oil is a Scam to Promote World Depopulation

8/3/2019 Eco Nwo David McGowan Peak Oil is a Scam to Promote World Depopulation

1/14

Peak Oil Is a Scam to Promote World Depopulation

By David McGowan, October 12, 2004

It has become apparent that many people have misinterpreted my 'Peak Oil' rants. I know this

because I get e-mail with messages like, "thanks for giving me hope," and "thanks for changingmy view of the future." I am sorry to have to report here that the newfound optimism of some ofmy readers is entirely unwarranted. After reviewing my past writings, I realize that the fault forthis misunderstanding lies with me, since I haven't done a very good job of articulating exactlywhat my position is.

This, my friends, is the harsh reality, so pay very close attention: the fact that 'Peak Oil' is anentirely manufactured construct does not mean that the doomsday scenarios painted by the 'Peak'crowd will therefore not become our new reality. This is not just another scam to further pad thepockets of the oil industry and other financial elites. The stakes are much higher than that. Muchhigher.

In order to clarify my position on 'Peak Oil,' it would be instructive to briefly review the areas ofagreement, and the areas of disagreement, that I have with those who are selling the scam.

The Peakers claim that 'Peak Oil' is the single most important issue that we are facing today. Iagree with that assessment (but not because 'Peak Oil' is a valid concept).

The Peakers claim that much of America's military might has been directed in recent years atconquering the key oil and gas producing regions of the world. And that is obviously quite true.Central Asia and Iraq have been seized, Venezuela has suffered through constant meddling bythe CIA, the Sudan has been targeted for a future assault, and Saudi Arabia and Iran have been

subjected to saber rattling.

But the Peakers also claim that these military ventures have been motivated by America's desireto seize what will soon be the last drops of the world's precious reserves of oil -- and that isentirely untrue.

The Peakers claim that we will very soon be facing a world where chaos reigns supreme-- a world of war, famine and death on a scale unknown in recorded human history. And thatdoes, in fact, appear to be the case. And we're not talking about the distant future here, folks;we're talking about the very near future.

But the Peakers also claim that this global "die off" will be a regrettable, but quite natural, andentirely unavoidable, consequence of the world's oil taps running dry. And that is the really biglie. That is the lie that will very soon be used to rationalize the killing off of hundreds ofmillions, possibly billions, of the world's people. There are, you see, simply too many people inthe world who, by merely being alive, are standing in the way of the aspirations of the globalelite.


2/14

The people that the 'Peak Oil' pitchmen are fronting for are deadly serious about selling 'PeakOil' to the masses -- and not just in theoretical terms, as a cynical ploy to raise prices andincrease profits. No, it has become clear that the real goal is to actually cut off most of theworld's oil supplies under the ruse that the oil simply no longer exists. The desired result ismassive social unrest, widespread famine, and endless war. The majority of the world's people

will not survive. Those that do will find themselves living under the overtly authoritarian form ofrule that will quickly be deemed necessary to restore order. And if you think that we here inAmerica are exempt, you are sadly mistaken.

In order to pull off this stunt, all the world's major oil producing regions must be solidly underthe control of the U.S. and it's co-conspirators, otherwise known as 'allies.' In other words, thepuppet-masters have to control all the major oil taps, so that they have complete control over theflow of oil -- or lack of it. And that, in a nutshell, is the real reason for America's recent militaryventures. The goal, you see, is not to steal Iraq's oil, or the oil in the 'Stans, or in the Sudan, or inVenezuela, or anywhere else. We don't want to take their oil, because the truth is that we don'treally need it. What we want to do is sit on the taps so no one else can get to the oil.

http://www.oilandgasreporter.com/stories/090101/cov_opinions.shtml

The Peakers have claimed that the Central Asian adventure -- launched with the invasion ofAfghanistan, but certainly not limited to Afghanistan -- has largely been a bust. We have allheard the spin: the hope for reserves aren't there, what has been found can't be extractedeconomically, the grand plan simply didn't pan out, yadda, yadda, yadda.

Frankly, I find all of that a little hard to believe. After all, hasn't Central Asia been the subject ofintense interest and study by geologists and the petroleum industry for the last century or so?You would think that the lords of oil were operating on more than just a hunch when they draftedthis gameplan. And I couldn't help noticing that the United States has established a massivemilitary presence in the area, and it looks very much like it was designed to be a permanentmilitary presence. If the oil and gas aren't there, then what exactly is it that our troops arestanding guard over?

At least one researcher has doggedly claimed that the Central Asian and Middle Eastern militaryventures are but a prelude to military confrontations with Russia and China. But that hardlyseems to be the case. It does not appear as though there is any urgent need for 'regime change' inRussia or China, since the West seems to already have 'friendly' regimes in place in bothcountries. And I have to add here that if the ruling regimes of Russia and China really areenemies of the United States, they will undoubtedly go down in history as the stupidest enemiesof all time for watching approvingly as the United States entrenched its military machine in theirbackyards on the most transparent of pretexts.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, I believe that the Central Asian adventure has been wildlysuccessful. True, the West hasn't reaped the bounty of the region's oil and gas reserves -- but Idon't think that was ever the goal. To the contrary, I think the U.S. has done exactly what it setout to do: deny anyone else the opportunity -- by force if necessary, and it will become necessary-- to exploit the area's resources.
http://www.oilandgasreporter.com/stories/090101/cov_opinions.shtmlhttp://www.oilandgasreporter.com/stories/090101/cov_opinions.shtml


3/14

Also contrary to conventional wisdom, I believe that the Iraq adventure has also been successful.Again, the goal was not to steal Iraqi oil; the goal was to shut down or severely limit the flow ofIraqi oil, and that goal has obviously been accomplished. Indeed, some reports have held thatAmerican troops (and American mercenaries) are responsible for at least some of the pipelinebombings and other attacks on the Iraqi oil infrastructure.

Interestingly, Michael Ruppert began one of his recent "Peak is the Word" rants with an ominousquote attributed to an "Anonymous Middle Eastern Participant at the Third Conference of theAssociation for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas -- Berlin, May 2004." The quote, which Ruppertpresents without comment, reads as follows: The one thing that every Middle Eastern leader,manager, and planner who dreams of holding his country together fears now, is that there will bea widespread uprising, inspired by the perceived victory against Spain after Madrid, and Spain'swithdrawal from Iraq, that it might prompt much of the Muslim world to start attacking oilfacilities everywhere. This is the way they see that has worked to defeat the West and to avengetheir grievances. May God help us all if that happens.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/062104_berlin_peak.html

This statement, if taken literally, is patently absurd -- beginning with the Bill O'Reillyesqueclaim that the 'terr'ists' somehow scored a victory in Spain, and continuing through theastounding leap of faith required to equate manufactured attacks on commuter trains towidespread attacks on oil facilities. The only way that the uncredited statement makes any senseat all is as a tip-off that the CIA's future playbook is packed with false-flag terr'ist operationsdirected at critical oil facilities -- especially in countries that haven't yet been convinced that theirvast oil reserves don't really exist.

In order to carry out the 'Peak Oil' agenda, the powers-that-be need to have all the major oilproducers on board. Some of them have been on board all along. Some have to be recruitedthrough military force (Iraq, for example). Some will be compelled to join the team throughcovert operations (e.g., Venezuela). And some are being brought on board through threats,intimidation, and saber rattling.

The two most sought after recruits, of course, are Russia and Saudi Arabia, since they are theworld's two top oil producing nations. As of this past April, Saudi Arabia apparently hadn't yetreceived the latest memos on 'Peak.' Much to the consternation of Ruppert and his handlers,Saudi officials announced on April 28 that the Kingdom's estimate of recoverable reserves hadnearly quintupled! (The article below says "tripled," but the math isn't that hard to do.)

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=6&section=0&article=44011&d=29&m=4&y=2004

WASHINGTON, 29 April 2004 -- Officials from Saudi Arabia's oil industry and theinternational petroleum organizations shocked a gathering of foreign policy experts inWashington yesterday with an announcement that the Kingdom's previous estimate of 261billion barrels of recoverable petroleum has now more than tripled, to 1.2 trillion barrels.
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/062104_berlin_peak.htmlhttp://www.arabnews.com/?page=6&section=0&article=44011&d=29&m=4&y=2004http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/062104_berlin_peak.htmlhttp://www.arabnews.com/?page=6&section=0&article=44011&d=29&m=4&y=2004


4/14

Additionally, Saudi Arabia's key oil and finance ministers assured the audience -- whichincluded US Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan -- that the Kingdom has the capabilityto quickly double its oil output and sustain such a production surge for as long as 50 years.

"Saudi Arabia now has 1.2 trillion barrels of estimated reserve. This estimate is very

conservative. Our analysis gives us reason to be very optimistic. We are continuing to discovernew resources, and we are using new technologies to extract even more oil from existingreserves," the minister said.

Naimi said Saudi Arabia is committed to sustaining the average price of $25 per barrel set by theOrganization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. He said prices should never increase to morethan $28 or drop under $22.

"Saudi Arabia's vast oil reserves are certainly there," Naimi added. "None of these reservesrequires advanced recovery techniques. We have more than sufficient reserves to increase output.If required, we can increase output from 10.5 million barrels a day to 12 -- 15 million barrels a

day. And we can sustain this increased output for 50 years or more. There will be no shortage ofoil for the next 50 years. Perhaps much longer."

Note that the oil reserves claimed by Saudi Arabia alone (1.2 trillion barrels) exceed what thePeakers claim are the total recoverable oil reserves for the entire planet. Let's pause here for aminute and think about the significance of that: one tiny patch of land, accounting for less than1/2 of 1% of the earth's total surface area, potentially contains more oil that the 'Peak' pitchmenclaim the entire planet has to offer! Is there not something clearly wrong with this picture?

Needless to say, that sort of candor by the Saudis could put a serious crimp in Washington'splans to sell the 'Peak Oil' scam. Perhaps that is why, just three days after that announcement, theSaudi oil industry was attacked by some of those terr'ists. Not to be deterred, however, Saudiofficials announced three weeks later, on May 21, that the Kingdom still intended to dramaticallyincrease its petroleum output. And a week after that, on May 29, those crafty terr'ists launchedyet another brazen attack on the Saudi oil industry. Shit happens, I guess.

At that very same time, and in the months that followed, the U.S. was sending clear signals that itwould not hesitate to set its military dogs loose on the Kingdom if necessary. Michael Moore's"the Saudis are the real enemy" movie, for example, splashed across America's screens. Variousvoices involved in both the official and unofficial 9-11 investigations were pointing the fingertoward the Saudis as well. The message couldn't have been clearer: "we can easily drum uppublic support for 'regime change' if you won't play ball." The Saudis, it would appear, have nowfallen in line.

Meanwhile, in Russia, the regime of Western puppet Vladimir Putin has been working diligentlyto transfer control of Russian oil production to what the L.A. Times referred to as "morecomplaint owners." From a July 23, 2004 report by Kim Murphy: Since the arrest in October offormer CEO Mikhail Khodorkovsky, now on trial on charges of fraud and tax evasion [editor'snote: probably trumped-up charges], the financial community has debated the Russiangovernment's decision to assess at least $8 billion in back taxes against Yukos: Was it to punish


5/14

Khodorkovsky for his political activism and alleged financial misdeeds, but leave his companyintact? To hand control of the company to more complaint hands? Or destroy a company thatproduces 2% of the world's oil supply?

"Yukos," according to the Times, "produces about 1.7 million barrels of oil a day, equal to some

OPEC countries." The turning point in the case against Yukos, the Times noted, came "whencourt bailiffs moving to execute an initial $3.4-billion tax judgment announced that they werepreparing to seize and sell not one of the dozens of small Yukos assets that might easily settle thetax bill, but the company's production unit, Yuganskneftegaz... the two-month deadline forselling the company means there would be little time to raise financing, and a potential buyerwould acquire it at a fire-sale price, analysts said. The government listed the unit's official valueat about $1.8 billion."

The actual value of Yuganskneftegaz, as the Times admitted, is probably closer to $30 billion, ornearly 17 times the Russian government's ludicrous assessment. And who do you suppose willacquire the assets of Yukos, and the control of Yukos, at these fire-sale prices? I'm guessing it

could very well be one or more of the Western oil giants. The Russian people, of course, will beless than thrilled with such a scenario, which is probably one of the key reasons that Putin hasrecently opted to reveal the iron fist within the velvet glove.

Michael Ruppert, being the top-notch journalist that he is, has either completely ignored orgrotesquely misrepresented these recent developments in Russia and Saudi Arabia. The 'PeakOil' crowd has claimed, with nothing to offer in the way of supporting evidence, that the Saudisare lying about their oil reserves and their ability to increase production. The Peakers have alsostrongly implied that the Saudis actually attacked their own facilities, so that they would not haveto deliver on their promises. No logical explanation has been offered though for why the Saudiswould lie and then immediately attack themselves to cover up the fact that they were lying. Itseems to me like it would have taken less effort to just not tell the lie to begin with. The Saudis,meanwhile, have insisted that it is the Peakers who are lying.

http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story_s.asp?StoryId=42933http://www.aramcoexpats.com/ArticleDetail.asp?article=701

Lynch concludes: "There literally seems to be no evidence that the Saudi oil fields are facing anyunusual challenges or that Saudi production will be constrained in the future by anything otherthan policy... The use of vague language ("tired" fields, "challenges") rather than specifics aboutefforts and costs indicate that this is one more instance of Malthusian bias."]

Even if the Saudis could boost production, say the Peakers, no one would want their extra crudeanyway, because, as it turns out, Saudi crude oil just isn't very good. Who knew? What will welearn from the Ruppertians next? That you can't get decent Champaign in France? That Russiancaviar isn't all it's cracked up to be?

On the FTW website is a re-post of an article that begins: "The world's oil refiners areunimpressed by Saudi Arabia's boost to production capacity that would only swell supplies ofsour, high sulphur crude while they hanker for sweet oil... 'Most refiners couldn't take more sour
http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story_s.asp?StoryId=42933http://www.aramcoexpats.com/ArticleDetail.asp?article=701http://www.aramcoexpats.com/ArticleDetail.asp?article=701http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story_s.asp?StoryId=42933http://www.aramcoexpats.com/ArticleDetail.asp?article=701


6/14

if they tried,' said one refiner, who asked not to be named. 'We have a glut of sour crude and ashort supply squeeze on low sulphur crude oil and products, so extra Saudi makes no differencewhatsoever,' a physical oil trader said."

http://www.copvcia.com/free/ww3/100604_refiners_unimpressed.shtml

Now, I hesitate to point this out, because I know that Ruppert prides himself on his journalisticprofessionalism, as well as his police training, and I certainly wouldn't want to needlesslyembarrass him, but the truth of the matter is that the article that The Great One re-posted appearsto be a fake -- a fake that was planted, no doubt, for the 'Peak' team to 'find.'

Here are a few clues that Detective Ruppert missed: the article ran in the tabloidesque Gulf DailyNews, which claims to be the "Voice of Bahrain," although one wouldn't expect Bahrain to speakin an English voice; the article has no byline, indicating that no real reporter wanted his nameattached to it; and the two alleged insiders quoted to establish the premise of the article declinedto be identified, even though they were supposedly voicing an uncontroversial opinion shared

throughout the industry.

http://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=92871&Sn=BUSI&IssueID=27194

What we have here then is an unsigned, unsourced article from the Middle Eastern version of theNational Enquirer being presented as real journalism. And this from the man who constantlyquestions the journalistic ethics and integrity of his detractors! Simply put, if this was a real newsstory that Ruppert was promoting, he would have been able to round up at least one crediblereport from a legitimate media outlet.

Bizarrely enough, Ruppert has headlined the fake article, "Peak Oil On The Table -- Hard ToMiss." Really, Mike? It can't be that hard to miss, because I'm having trouble seeing it myself. Irealize that it might be partly my fault, since I haven't been attending the 'Peak' indoctrinationsessions, but here is what I'm having difficulty with: I get the part about how we're quicklyrunning out of oil, and I understand that it is foolish to consider the viability of alternative energysources, because only oil will do; but are you now saying that we also have to be very pickyabout what kind of oil we use?

That reminds me of a story about a guy who was lost in the desert and spent days wanderingaimlessly in search of water. This guy -- we'll call him Peak Oil Man -- was followed by acircling vulture, who occasionally spoke to him. At one point, the vulture asked Peak Oil Manwhy he kept ignoring all the succulent plants along his route, from which he could extract life-saving fluids. "A waste of time," said Peak Oil Man, "must have water." Later in the journey,Peak Oil Man stopped to relieve himself in the sand. "Why do you not capture and drink yoururine, Peak Oil Man," asked the vulture. "It could save your life." Ignoring the vulture, Peak OilMan pushed on, still muttering his mantra: "must have water." Eventually, Peak Oil Man --emaciated, severely dehydrated, and barely clinging to life -- stumbled upon a stranger, and thestranger extended his hand and offered Peak Oil Man a container of water. Peak Oil Man raisedthe vessel to his lips and began to drink, but quickly spat out the offending liquid. "Is thatfucking tap water!?" asked Peak Oil Man. "Where can I get some bottled water around here?"
http://www.copvcia.com/free/ww3/100604_refiners_unimpressed.shtmlhttp://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=92871&Sn=BUSI&IssueID=27194http://www.copvcia.com/free/ww3/100604_refiners_unimpressed.shtmlhttp://www.gulf-daily-news.com/Story.asp?Article=92871&Sn=BUSI&IssueID=27194


7/14

And the vulture said: "But Peak Oil Man, how can you afford to be so picky at a time of suchgreat need? How can you turn away not only viable alternatives to water, but even water itself ifthe water offered to you doesn't meet your high standards? It is almost as if you don't really needwater at all." Peak Oil Man just smiled and continued on his way.

Meanwhile, Mexico, which also hasn't been reading the 'Peak' memos, recently announced thediscovery of massive quantities of new petroleum reserves. The Peakers, as we all know,repeatedly claim that no new reserves of any consequence have been found for years. In fact,they go so far as to say that there are no new reserves to be found. In one recent collection of liesposted on the FTW website, Julian Darley writes: "Major oil discoveries have declined everyyear so that 2003 saw no new field over 500 million barrels... It is well over twenty years sincemore oil was found than consumed in a year."

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/031704_two_planets.html

Really, Mr. Darley? Are you sure about that? Let's check with the Mexican press to see if you are

correct: Three years of exploration has enabled Pemex to map oilfields that the state-owned oilmonopoly believes will more than double the nation's known crude oil reserves. Luis RamrezCorzo, Pemex's director for exploration, told EL UNIVERSAL that on a "conservative" estimate,almost 54 billion barrels lie underneath the oilfields. That would take Mexico's reserves to 102billion barrels, more than the United Arab Emirates (which has reserves of 97.8 billion barrels),Kuwait (94 billion) and Iran (89.7 billion), and almost as much as Iraq (112.5 billion). Theofficial also said the discovery could enable Pemex to increase Mexico's oil production from thecurrent level of 4 million barrels per day (bpd) to 7 million bpd. Saudi Arabia currently produces7.5 million bpd, while Russia's oil output is 7.4 million bpd. Ramrez Corzo said the exploration,at an investment of US 4.6 billion, led to the identification of seven separate blocks rich in oiland natural gas. The most promising blocks are under water in the Gulf of Mexico, thought tocontain around 45 billion barrels.

http://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=6110&tabla=miami

No new fields over 500 million barrels? How about the 45 billion new barrels sitting in the Gulfof Mexico, right in our own backyard? Isn't that just a tiny bit more than is "consumed in ayear"?

Of course, the oil will not be easy to extract. Mexico will need some help, since it "lacks thetechnology for deep water pumping." And there is another problem as well: "there areterritoriality issues with the United States and Cuba over the fields." In order to bring the oil tomarket, Mexico will need the cooperation of both the United States government and the majorplayers in the oil industry. In other words, the newly discovered oil isn't going to be extractedany time soon, which is why the American media, and the 'Peak' crowd, haven't bothered toacknowledge its existence.

http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=15958
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/031704_two_planets.htmlhttp://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=6110&tabla=miamihttp://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=15958http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/031704_two_planets.htmlhttp://www.el-universal.com.mx/pls/impreso/noticia.html?id_nota=6110&tabla=miamihttp://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=15958


8/14

It will no doubt be determined that it is not economically feasible to extract the oil in the Gulf ofMexico. After all, Reuters has reported that, "Oil from deep-water reserves could cost $4 a barrelto extract, nearly double the cost of oil from shallow water." And we certainly can't expect anyresponsible corporation to shell out $4 a barrel to extract something that they can then trade for$50 a barrel, can we?

Or maybe the Peakers will claim that the oil doesn't even exist -- that Mexico, like Saudi Arabia,is lying about increased levels of reserves. There seems to be a lot of that sort of lying goingaround these days. [For more on oil in the Gulf of Mexico, and various other issues directlyrelated to the 'Peak Oil' debate, see:

http://www.oralchelation.com/faq/wsj4.htmhttp://www.science-frontiers.com/sf124/sf124p10.htmhttp://www.newaus.com.au/040908-oil-sources.htmlhttp://www.pnl.gov/er_news/08_95/ER_News/oil1.kb.html

The real problem with the Saudi crude, as near as I can determine, is that the Saudis and the'Peakers' have entirely different ideas about what the price of crude oil should be. At the time ofthe attacks in Saudi Arabia, it was hovering at about $40.00/barrel, and is now at about$50.00/barrel. The Saudis would like to bring it down to $25.00/barrel. And the 'Peakers' wouldlike to see it raised to -- are you ready for this? -- a whopping $182.00/barrel -- which would,quite obviously, place oil out of reach for the vast majority of the world's people.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3777413.stm

The $182.00/barrel figure was provided by Matthew Simmons to a BBC reporter at the 'Peak Oil'conference held earlier this year in Berlin. According to Simmons, "Oil is far too cheap at themoment... we need to price oil realistically to control its demand." Simmons is described in theBBC article as "an energy investment banker and adviser to the controversial Bush-Cheneyenergy plan." He is, in other words, a perfectly credible source -- if we choose to overlook thefact that everyone connected to the Bush-Cheney team reeks of corruption and outrageous lies.

Nevertheless, the Peakers just adore Mr. Simmons, who was described by Michael Ruppert as"the de facto star of the [Peak Oil conference]." 'Peak Oil' pitchmen just love to quote Simmons,says Ruppert, "because his voice is refreshing."

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/062104_berlin_peak.html

Simmons is a member of ASPO (Association for the Study of Peak Oil), founded and led by'Peak Oil' guru Colin Campbell and promoted relentlessly by Michael Ruppert, who boasts ofhaving "a great many friends in ASPO." According to the BBC, ASPO includes in its ranks "adiverse range of oil industry insiders," including a good number of "oil executives" and"investment bankers." Just the sort of salesmen we should trust, in other words, when shoppingfor a suitably apocalyptic future.
http://www.oralchelation.com/faq/wsj4.htmhttp://www.science-frontiers.com/sf124/sf124p10.htmhttp://www.newaus.com.au/040908-oil-sources.htmlhttp://www.pnl.gov/er_news/08_95/ER_News/oil1.kb.htmlhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3777413.stmhttp://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/062104_berlin_peak.htmlhttp://www.oralchelation.com/faq/wsj4.htmhttp://www.science-frontiers.com/sf124/sf124p10.htmhttp://www.newaus.com.au/040908-oil-sources.htmlhttp://www.pnl.gov/er_news/08_95/ER_News/oil1.kb.htmlhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3777413.stmhttp://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/062104_berlin_peak.html


9/14

And make no mistake about it: the future that has been scripted by the architects of 'Peak Oil' isnot going to be pretty. Massive population reduction has always been a key component of the'Peak Oil' agenda. Ruppert first acknowledged that fact in an e-mail to this website in March ofthis year. This is what he wrote at that time: I advocate an immediate convening of political,economic, spiritual and scientific leaders from all nations to address the issue of Peak Oil (and

Gas) and its immediate implications for economic collapse, massive famine and climatedestruction (partially as a result of reversion to coal plants which accelerate global warming).This would, scientifically speaking, include immediate steps to arrive at a crash program --agreed to by all nations and in accordance with the highest spiritual and ethical principles -- tostop global population growth and to arrive at the best possible and most ethical program ofpopulation reduction as a painful choice made by all of humanity.

At that time, I accused Ruppert of advocating a eugenics program, and I was, not surprisingly,harshly criticized by the Ruppertians for doing so. Numerous members of the cult of 'Peak Oil'sent e-mail accusing me of "putting word's in Ruppert's mouth." But more recently, whileaddressing the Commonwealth Club (which apparently just began extending invitations to

dissident journalists; who knew?), Ruppert put the words in his own mouth when he quotedapprovingly from a eugenics tome penned in 1952 by Charles Galton Darwin. Darwin was, forthe record, a rather notorious figure in the American eugenics movement, as were other Darwinsand Galtons before him. Are we supposed to believe that there was no significance to the factthat Ruppert referenced a noted eugenicist while addressing such a distinguished audience?

www.fromthewilderness.com/PDF/Commonwealth.pdf

In a previous newsletter, I reported that Ruppert had briefly addressed the issue of populationreduction during the speech that he delivered at this year's 9-11 conference in San Francisco.Since then, I have had the opportunity to review an audiotape of Ruppert's entire 'Peak Oil'presentation at the event. Here is a complete (enough) transcript of that presentation: Look, let'stalk about Peak Oil quick, and [sounding clearly irritated] I'm really tired of the debate. I'm reallytired of "there's no proof; there's no evidence." I'm not gonna take time to go through this, but ifwe talk about Peak Oil real quickly, who's been talking about it?

[Ruppert then ran through a lengthy list of mainstream media and trade journal articles. Thepresentation went something like this: "Foreign Affairs Magazine, yadda, yadda, yadda, JamesKenneth Galbraith, yadda, yadda, yadda, Sunday Herald, yadda, yadda, yadda, Los AngelesTimes, yadda, yadda, yadda." Several derisive comments were added about these sources notbeing "conspiracy rags." Ruppert then read lengthy and unsubstantiated excerpts from thewritings of both Galbraith and Dale Pfeiffer, before closing with the following.]

Now the question is: do we want to do it nice or do we want to do it nasty? The world has chosento embark on a path that is the worst Nazi nightmare ever seen. It will be bloody, it will beviolent, it will involve population reduction by the most brutal, venal, underhanded methods. Soultimately what I have to say to you is that, as I look at this, and as I've studied this, and as I'veworked for 26 years to unravel this -- this covert mechanism that governs our lives, I'm firmlyconvinced that what we are now faced with is a choice offered to us by our creator: either evolve
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/PDF/Commonwealth.pdfhttp://www.fromthewilderness.com/PDF/Commonwealth.pdf


10/14

or perish. Thank you. Thank you. So what is Ruppert telling us here... other than that "ourcreator" is now apparently now demanding that we evolve?

What exactly is this "world" of which he speaks -- this "world [that] has chosen to embark on apath that is the worst Nazi nightmare ever seen"? I don't think that it is the people of planet Earth

that have collectively chosen to take this path. And I doubt that it is the planet itself that haschosen this path. Isn't it really the case that this path was forced upon the world by the globalelite and their paid stooges?

Is Ruppert telling us that we are all facing a violent, bloody death, so we might as well starttaking care of the job ourselves -- in a less "nasty" and more, uhmm, "nice" manner? Are thosethe only two options available? Why is a "bloody," "brutal," "violent" and "venal" future taken asa given? To be sure, we are certainly heading in that direction, but we needn't necessarilycontinue to do so, unless we blindly accept the manufactured reality as an objective, andinevitable, reality. Of course, Ruppert and his fellow 'Peakers' seem to be working very hard toguarantee the arrival of that "Nazi nightmare" future.

The truth is that such a future awaits us only if the claims of the 'Peakers' are true, or, moreimportantly, if we allow ourselves to be convinced that the claims are true when they mostcertainly are not. It is vitally important, therefore, that the people of the world be given theopportunity to thoroughly review all sides of this issue. After all, if the Peakers are right, then allof our lives are very much on the line. And yet, strangely enough, the majority of theRuppertians who have chosen to spew their bile into my mailbox have made it quite clear thatthey have no desire to read any opposing points of view.

Could it be any more obvious that these people have no interest in ascertaining the truth?Just this week, Ruppert discretely added a new article to his website, which he posted "on anunpublished URL at the FTW web site" -- guaranteeing that none of his readers will ever know itis there, unless they learn of it elsewhere. Asked to explain his previous comments on populationreduction, Ruppert does not deny that he advocates some type of forced depopulation program;he only denies having a specific program in mind: I have no list of people who should be incharge of this. Everyone should have a say. I have suggested that such an endeavor might bestinclude people of more humane vocations than those of the economists, politicians, andfinanciers who are currently in charge of most domestic and international institutions. I havenever said anywhere that there was a specific group of organizations or people who should runthis. I have listed philosophies and disciplines that ought to be included in an effort to avoid thesort of draconian disaster that now seems likely.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/10questions.shtml

I wonder why it is that Ruppert continues to shelter his readers from this aspect of the 'Peak Oil'gameplan? If this is such an important issue, and if we should all have a voice in the 'debate,' asRuppert has claimed, then why has he not brought the issue to the forefront? Why has he choseninstead to leak it in a limited way? Ruppert claims that, in order to be "ethical in the face of aninevitable disaster, the entire human community will have to share useful information as equablyas is humanly possible." Why then is Ruppert not sharing this most important of information?
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/10questions.shtmlhttp://www.fromthewilderness.com/10questions.shtml


11/14

We turn now to a disturbing new post on the FTW website, which Ruppert has modestly titled"WE DID IT!" Before even getting to the actual text of the piece, we already know, just from thearticle's lengthy subtitle, that Ruppert is taking another stroll into Bizarro World. With equalparts bombast, ignorance, and unintentional irony, he actually refers to his critics as "Flat-Earth,Abiotic Oil Advocates." This is a guy, it will be recalled, whose mission in life is to relentlessly

promote a scam predicated on a unproven, 250-year-old theory, while blithely ignoring anunchallenged body of modern scientific research -- and yet he dismisses the other side as FlatEarthers!

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/100404_we_did_it.shtml

The full subtitle of the post is "World's Seven Largest Economies Admit They Have No IdeaHow Much Oil Is Left -- Issue Emergency Call for Transparency at DC Summit: A Challenge tothe Flat-Earth, Abiotic Oil Advocates and Cornucopian Economists -- It's Now or Never."

Ruppert begins by re-posting a Reuters report: Group of Seven finance ministers and central

bankers met at the tightly guarded U.S. Treasury building over lunch and were to work throughthe afternoon before a dinner with Chinese counterparts that has currency reform on the menu.

The officials will set out their world-view at about 5:45 p.m. EDT (2145 GMT) in a communiqusources said would include a call to bolster oil-market monitoring to make it easier to discern ifscarce supply, hefty demand or market speculation lay behind crude's drive to record levels...

The G7 gathering comes ahead of weekend meetings of the International Monetary Fund andWorld Bank.

Ministers are seeking energy market transparency to discover if world oil supplies may bescantier than they thought in May when they urged producers to open the spigots.

Another G7 official suggested the rise in oil costs was rooted in such fundamental factors asover-estimated supplies and was not solely due to speculation.

There is "a recognition that oil resources are scarcer than was thought a few years ago," theofficial said. "We agree there is a need for more transparency on the potential supply of variousareas."

Ruppert next segues into a rant of his own -- a rant that may some day be regarded as thequintessential Ruppert diatribe. In just a few short pages, he manages to squeeze in virtually allof his most acclaimed rhetorical flourishes, including:

o Arrogant self-importance -- "We were right and this can no longer be ignored. We did it."

o The appearance of Mike the Martyr -- "a group of dedicated men and women, recognized

as being in the forefront of the movement to place Peak Oil front-and-center on theworld's agenda, have endured intense resistance... I hope I speak for all of us when I saythat whatever we have endured, it was worth it."

o The bombastic challenges -- "Show us the oil! People are dying now... Put up or shut up."
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/100404_we_did_it.shtmlhttp://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/100404_we_did_it.shtml


12/14

o The bizarre delusions of grandeur -- "I do know that the world is paying very close

attention to what I have written."o The deliberate misrepresentation of critic's arguments -- "That's what these 'critics' argued

would happen when the time came: there would be some magic switcheroo, and a newenergy source would be unveiled."

o And, the newest addition to his arsenal, the shameless hyping of his book -- "This bookmay change the outcome of the election."

While Ruppert celebrates his 'victory,' perhaps the rest of us should pause here and considerexactly what it is that he is celebrating. Just months ago, Ruppert called for the leaders of theworld to meet and discuss the implications of 'Peak Oil,' including the necessity of taking"immediate steps to arrive at a crash program" for depopulating the world. And now we have theglobal elite meeting behind closed doors to discuss the implications of a phantom oil shortage,and those elite are, Ruppert believes, "well into discussing 'options' which they don't want therest of us to know about." At stake, Ruppert notes, is "everyone's chances for survival and, mostimportantly, the future of all the world's children."

And we are supposed to believe that this is somehow a positive development? I don't think so.To the contrary, it would appear that the call for 'transparency' is a signal that the puppeteershave control of enough of the global chessboard to begin implementing the 'Peak Oil' scam. Theyare not meeting behind closed doors to discuss how to contend with a global oil shortage; theyare meeting behind closed doors to discuss how to manufacture a global oil shortage.

As I said earlier in this post, these people are deadly serious about staging this apocalypticscenario. And the stakes, for all of us, are very high. Consider that, for many years now,concerted efforts have been made to program our children to passively accept death as amundane, routine occurrence. Do not make the mistake of assuming that that is a phenomenon

unrelated to the 'Peak Oil' agenda.

Television, movies, and video games dwell relentlessly on death, frequently violent death. Eachand every year, the volume and intensity of such propaganda is cranked up higher and higher. Bythe time our kids reach adulthood, they have processed through their malleable minds thousandsof graphic images of death. Many of those deaths they may even have caused themselves, asoperators of graphically violent "first person" computer and video games.

The next in the series of "Harry Potter" books -- promoted endlessly as the best thing to happento children's books since Dr. Seuss -- will reportedly feature the death of one of the belovedcharacters. One of the new features of the latest version of the wildly popular "Simms" computer

game is that the virtual characters that our children create to populate their virtual worlds willnow die virtual deaths.

Our high schools for some time now have offered students "death education." The CitizensCommission on Human Rights has noted that, "For decades, schools around the world have used'death education,' a psychological experiment in which the children are made to discuss suicide,what they would like placed in their coffins, and write their own epitaphs in an effort to 'get kidsmore comfortable with death.'"


13/14

http://www.cchr.org/topics/educators/violence/

Dr. Samuel Blumenfeld writes that "Death education has been a part of the progressivecurriculum in virtually every public school in America for at least the last 15 years. Yet no one inthe establishment, let alone the U.S. Department of Education, has sought to find out what death

education is doing to the minds and souls of the millions of children who are subjected to it. Butwe do have plenty of anecdotal information on hand."

http://www.ritalindeath.com/blumenfeld31.htm

Why are our children being conditioned to accept death? How thorough will this depopulationprogram be? How long will it take to shatter all remaining social bonds -- to instill in the massesan "every man for himself" mind set? How quickly will we collectively descend into barbarism?If the masters of our collective illusion can convince us that we live in a "kill or be killed" world,how much of the dirty work of depopulation can they get us to do ourselves? What would we alldo to stay alive in a high stakes game of global Survivor? The architects of 'Peak Oil' hope to

find out soon.

Originally published at: http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr70.html

More research that punches a big hole in the Peak Oil hysteria Paper Sold To Pools Of LiquidityLindsey Williams, who has been an ordained Baptist minister for 28 years, went to Alaska in1971 as a missionary. The Transalaska oil pipeline began its construction phase in 1974, andbecause of his concern for the spiritual welfare of the "pipeliners," Mr. Williams volunteered toserve as Chaplain on the pipeline, with the subsequent full support of the Alyeska PipelineCompany. Because of the executive status accorded to him as Chaplain, he was given access tothe information that is documented in his book, "The Energy Non-Crisis," which shows that peakoil is a scam because our domestic reserves in the North Slope of Alaska alone are at least aslarge as those in Saudi Arabia and are potentially large enough to power the US with domesticoil for two centuries.

Recently this year, due to the sensitive nature of his book, Mr. Willians' life was threatened andhe was forced to shut down his web-site and stop selling his books and CDs. At the urging of Dr.Stanley Monteith of Radio Liberty, he called back the same oil executive who had warned himabout the danger he would be in if he continued to disseminate certain information to ask if infact there was any information that he could in fact convey to the public without upsetting thepowers that be. The oil executive, who Mr. Williams had known for years, gave Mr. Williamssome startling revelations which he could safely reveal to the general public.

This is a crazy world. What can be done? Amazingly, we have been mislead. We have beentaught that we can control government by voting. The founder of the Rothschild dynasty, MayerAmschel Bauer, told the secret of controlling the government of a nation over 200 years ago. Hesaid, "Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes its laws."Get the picture? Your freedom hinges first on the nation's banks and money system. Freedom isconnected with Debt Elimination for each individual. Not only does this end personal debt, itplaces the people first in line as creditors to the National Debt ahead of the banks. They don't
http://www.cchr.org/topics/educators/violence/http://www.ritalindeath.com/blumenfeld31.htmhttp://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr70.htmlhttp://www.cchr.org/topics/educators/violence/http://www.ritalindeath.com/blumenfeld31.htmhttp://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr70.html


14/14

wish for you to know this. It has to do with recognizing WHO you really are in A NewBeginning: A Practical Course in Miracles, an informational study.

Disclaimer -- The posting of stories, commentaries, reports, documents and links (embedded orotherwise) on this site does not in any way, shape or form, implied or otherwise, necessarily

express or suggest endorsement or support of any of such posted material or parts therein.

The myriad of facts, conjecture, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information inthe articles, stories and commentaries posted on this site range from cutting edge hard news andcomment to extreme and unusual perspectives. We choose not to sweep uncomfortable materialunder the rug -- where it can grow and fester. We choose not to censor skewed logic anduncomfortable rhetoric. These things reflect the world as it now is -- for better and worse. Wepresent multiple facts, perspectives, viewpoints, opinions, analyses, and information.

Journalism is (or used to be) the profession of gathering and presenting a broad panorama ofnews about the events of our times and presenting it to readers for their own consideration. We

believe in the intelligence, judgment and wisdom of our readers to discern for themselves amongthe data which appears on this site that which is valid and worthy... or otherwise. See full legaldisclaimer

This material is copyrighted by its original publishers. It is reprinted by The Seventh Fire News without permission,solely for purposes of criticism, comment, and news reporting, in accordance with the Fair Use Guidelines ofcopyright material under 107 of U.S.C. Title 17.

Eco Nwo David McGowan Peak Oil is a Scam to Promote World Depopulation

Documents

Transcript of Eco Nwo David McGowan Peak Oil is a Scam to Promote World Depopulation