andyh wrote:EB - I think I'll leave you to your own little universe on this one. It is clearly inconceviable to you that someone could review the 'evidence' and come to an opposite view to your own. I must try your line of arguement on others; something along the lines of ' you have an open mind if you agree with me, but a closed mind if you dont'. Having spent half my life as a scientist I can honestly say that particular line of thought wouldnt have got me very far. Vive la difference.
On the contrary, if you actually read what I've posted in this thread you'll see that I have myself wrestled with what seemed to me an utterly implausible scenario on the surface. And certainly, if you only deal with the superficial details of the events as commonly received it's difficult to accept the possibility of a conspiracy.
Now in light of Peak Oil, such a conspiracy suddenly became thinkable to me. In the sense that there was, I believe, an urgent need to address this problem. From the perspective of someone like Cheney - a businessman, I think it's difficult to appreciate just how threatening Peak Oil must be to them. There's an interesting document in which Cheney made a speech to the London Institute of Petroleum, in his capacity as CEO of Haliburton, about the challenge to find enough oil to meet demand in the coming years, especially in light of oil depletion.
Cheney in 1999 wrote:
Every year you've got to find and develop reserves equal to your output just to stand still, just to stay even...A newly merged company like Exxon-Mobil will have to secure over a billion and a half barrels of new oil equivalent reserves every year just to replace existing production...
For the world as a whole, oil companies are expected to keep finding and developing enough oil to offset our 71 million-plus barrel a day of oil depletion, but also to meet new demand. By some estimates there will be an average of two percent annual growth in global oil demand over ther years ahead along with conseratively a three percent natural decline in production from existing reserves. That means by 2010 we will need on the order of an additional 50 million barrels a day...So where is that oil going to come from?
***
Oil is unique in that it is strategic in nature. We are not talking about soapflakes or leisurewear here. Energy is truly fundamental to the world's economy. The Gulf War was a reflection of that reality.
Now however hard you might find it to accept that 9/11 may have involved government complicity on some level, I think you'll be hard pressed to argue that the strategic imperative to expand US influenence in South West Asia could not have influenced foreign policy in the Bush-Cheney goverment in light of the above statement.
I think it would have been next to impossible to generate public acceptance for an overtly imperialistic foreign policy without some external threat, real or imagined. It's obvious (to me at least) that 9/11 provided the catalyst for current policy, and that such a policy would have been impossible to implement in its absence. That alone (in my mind) provides sufficient reason to be suspicious of the official version of events on 9/11.
But if you're still incredulous I can't say I blame you.
.. 
