Food for thought (a history of oil and the world)...

1970

Arab oil embargo, temporary cessation of oil shipments from the Middle East to the United States, the Netherlands, Portugal, Rhodesia, and South Africa, imposed by oil-producing Arab countries in October 1973 in retaliation for support of Israel during the Yom Kippur War; the embargo on the United States was lifted in March 1974, though the embargo on the other countries remained in place for some time afterward. The Arab oil embargo was the first oil crisis, an oil-supply disruption leading to major price increases and a worldwide energy crisis. The embargo caused the United States and western European countries to reassess their dependence upon Middle Eastern oil. It also led to far-reaching changes in domestic energy policy, including increased domestic oil production in the United States and a greater emphasis on improving energy efficiency.

Effect: More domestic oil exploration in US and Europe, followed by strategies of consumption reduction such as reducing car engines, more efficient machines and power plants, change from diesel to coal as a primary fuel for energy generation.

Banks who suffered more with this crisis: Rothschild and its partners.

Since they are the banks who control half of the economy of the US and almost totality of European Union economy, they felt how vulnerable they were against the Arab controlled oil.

Therefore economic incentives were made to invest in oil exploration outside the Arab lands. This started an increase of exploration of the North sea, Gulf of Mexico, South America, Africa etc...

Also investments in technology to make their economy less dependent on oil, like coal power plants, more efficient engines etc.

1980

Another major oil crisis occurred in 1979, a result of the Iranian Revolution (1978–79). High levels of social unrest severely damaged the Iranian oil industry, leading to a large loss of output and a corresponding rise in prices. The situation worsened following the outbreak of the Iran-Iraq War (1980–88), which further added to the level of instability throughout the region. In 1981 the price of oil was stabilized at $32 per barrel. By 1983, however, major capitalist economies had adopted more-efficient methods of production, and the problems of the 1970s had been transformed into a relative oversupply of oil rather than a shortage.

Effect 1: As mentioned before, realization that West economy is deeply depended on Middle East oil, led western nations to engage in various wars in the middle east. Those wars had the ultimate goal of controlling the countries governments and economies, therefore controlling its natural resources that in those cases was the oil.

Those wars become very difficult due to the fact that the battle was against a group that controlled the other half of US economy and the capital of the Arab oil producing countries: the Rockefeller and its partners.

Effect 2: Creation of the IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change).

IPCC is the body responsible for research and the conclusion that the earth is getting warmer exponentially and man made CO2 emissions (primarily by burning oil and gas), are the causes of this global warming.

IPCC was created and is funded by the United Nations.

United nations are funded by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, witch are institutions owned by the Rothschild and partners.

Any one who can connect dots, can see that is quite a coincidence that concerns about man made global warming comes at times that is interesting to a group of banks to preach the reduction of fossil fuels.

Looking at the facts, the reduction of fossil fuel consumption would essentially benefit the Rothschild and partners banks, due to the fact that would decrease the dependency of their controlled economies on Middle East oil.

1990

Wars to control the oil in the Middle-East led by the Rothschild and partners against the Rockefeller and partners started to be more common and dispute for the Middle-Eastern oil was evident.

In 1990, an oil price shock occurred in response to the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait on August 2, 1990, Saddam Hussein's second invasion of a fellow OPEC member. Lasting only nine months, the price spike was less extreme and of shorter duration than the previous oil crises of 1973–1974 and 1979–1980, but the spike still contributed to the recession of the early 1990s. Average monthly price of oil rose from $17 per barrel in July to $36 per barrel in October. As the U.S.-led coalition experienced military success against Iraqi forces, concerns about long-term supply shortages eased and prices began to fall.

Effect: Creation of the Kyoto protocol.

Kyoto protocol, was an agreement between G20 Countries to reduce the CO2 emissions therefore reducing the consumption of oil and gas to try to fight global warming.

Again, is it a coincidence that talks about man made global warming come one more time when an oil crisis jeopardize the economical aspirations of a certain group of banks (the Rothschild and partners).

July 11, 2008

Supply concerns and the weakening U.S. dollar cause the price of oil per barrel to hit a record high of $147.27.

Effect: Exploration of oil outside Middle-East countries becomes more profitable then ever.

Rothschild and partners banks, EU and other nations start profiting very much on oil exploration outside the Middle-East. With that, a low dependency on Middle-Eastern nations was achieved.

No more talks about global warming could be observed in the mainstream media or governments political agendas.

Coincidence?

November 20, 2008

The price of oil drops below $50 per barrel.

Effect 1: Another mini oil crisis starts, affecting the same way the economies and the banks affected in the 1970's. Again the Rothschild and partners were jeopardized by the crash of oil prices.

This happens because, with a low oil price, the only ones who can continue profiting from oil exploration are the nations that have it cheap, such as the Middle Eastern nations. Those nations are, in their majority, economically controlled by the Rockefeller's and partners group.

January 19, 2009

The price of oil continues to fall, hitting a low of $34 per barrel.

The 2009 Russia–Ukraine gas dispute was a pricing dispute between Russia and Ukraine that occurred when Russian natural gas company Gazprom refused to conclude a supply contract for 2009 unless Ukrainian gas company Naftogaz paid its accumulating debts for previous gas supplies. The dispute began in 2008 with a series of failed negotiations, and on January 1 Russia cut off gas supplies to Ukraine. On January 7 the dispute turned to crisis when all Russian gas flows through Ukraine were halted for 13 days, completely cutting off supplies to Southeastern Europe, most of which depends on Russian gas, and partially to other European countries.

On January 18 the dispute was resolved when Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and his Ukrainian counterpart Yulia Tymoshenko negotiated a new contract that covered the next ten years (on October 11, 2011, a Ukrainian court sentenced Tymoshenko to seven years in prison for abuse of office because she signed this deal). Analysts point out that the crisis had a negative and possibly irreversible impact on the reputations of both Russia as an energy supplier, and Ukraine as a transit country.

According to the Czech foreign minister, "The main lesson learned from this crisis is that Russia and Ukraine aren’t reliable suppliers. Europe must think about alternative sources and pipelines." The President of the European Commission José Manuel Barroso similarly expressed during the crisis that by failing to honor supply agreements Russia and Ukraine could no longer be considered reliable energy partners.

Despite calls for European energy diversity being amplified as a result of the crisis, Russia's European customers have long term legal contracts for gas deliveries. Most of these contracts stretch beyond 2025–2030 and obligations to these contracts remain despite the crisis. Thus European countries can do little in the short-medium term in the ways of diversification away from Russian gas, but diversification of delivery routes away from Ukraine could potentially be achieved within a few years via projects such as the South Stream and Nord Stream pipeline systems.

Effect: New routes for gas supply started to be generated.

South Stream pipeline was build.

Nord stream pipeline started to be deployed, but later on received sanctions from US, stopping the deliver of the pipelines.

A route thru Syria started to be negotiated but again disparities between Russian allies and EU allies started a new war.

Again, is important to note the dependency that the economies of the west have in relation to Russian gas and Middle-East oil.gas and oil.

2011

Syria war starts. This war started mainly because an alliance between Syria's government and European Union + (US and allies) was broken due to the fact that Syria's government changed plans and created an alliance with Russia and allies instead. Those alliances had the purpose of building and controlling the gas pipe that will supply Europe for its energy needs.

The pipeline passing by Syria was supposed to come from EU and US allies supply countries and be managed by at the moment Syria's government that was also EU and US ally.

With the change of mind of Syria's government, the pipe line now would be controlled by Syria's government, but now a Russia ally and be produced by Russian ally countries in the middle east.

Note: Mainstream Media likes to focus on terrorism as the main cause of those wars, but is clearly economical reasons rather then religious fanaticism that sparkles those wars.

2014

After 2010, the oil price started rising again and reaching around $100 a barrel. It was a very good period for all nations exploring oil out of the Middle-East. With the oil price that high, it was easier to obtain profit of oil exploration of expensive fields such as in the North Sea, Gulf of Mexico, Africa, etc. But the over supply of oil was jeopardizing the Middle-Eastern economies that used to have the monopoly of oil sales and therefore jeopardizing the group of banks that profit from its exploration (the Rockefeller and partners).

Disagreement about oil prices lead to a fight between Saudi-Arabia and Russia. This fight soon becomes a price war. As strategy, Saudi-Arabia drops the price very low, in an attempt to bankrupt Russian producers.

This results in a huge drop of oil prices from $100 to $50 per barrel. Consequently a big economic depression all over the world followed, specially in the developed countries of Europe and US.

However China, that is a big oil importer, profits from a low oil price and continues to grow economically.

Effect: Signage of the Paris Agreement.

The Paris Agreement requests that all countries involved reduce the CO2 emissions with the purpose to reduce man made global warming.

One more time, as seen before, talks and treaties regarding man made global warming come to the surface only when the Rothschild + partners banks and group of funded countries start loosing money with oil.

Coincidence?

2019

Attempt to an agreement between Russian producers and Saudi-Arabian producers on a settled oil price fails. Talks are halted.

Effect: Extensive investment from EU countries and countries that have the economy controlled by Rothschild banks and allies in electric cars, alternative energy sources and different suppliers. Those banks are trying for the third time an offensive retaliation on the oil controlling nations and banks (Rockefeller and partners). This time, trying to reduce the demand in oil by replacing car engines and local power generation by batteries and electric supply. This could be a real game changer in oil prices and dependency of those economies to Middle-Eastern oil.

Although, the main power supply would still come from gas, but this could be circled around by different suppliers (another fight is progress).

2020

Corona Crisis - A sudden virus infection in China spreading quickly to the rest of the world. As a response to this event, governments all over the World start imposing quarantines and lock-downs as well as evening clock measures as an attempt to curb the virus.

This measures however, affect deeply the economy, specially on the developed world, leading to one of the hardest economic recessions in modern days.

Effect: EU, US, China and most of the worlds economy shut down due to a virus.

The winners of this event? The Rockefeller group of banks.

With the economy damaged in the countries financed by the Rothschild group, such as EU, half of the US and many others like Russia and China, the investments in alternative energy sources is jeopardized in a way that could be irreversible. Curiously, the countries that have the least lock downs are the ones controlled by the Rockefeller group of banks (Saudi Arabia for example).

The point of this article is to place the events related to oil and gas and what followed them affecting the hole world.

It can be seen without much effort that measures with humanitarian excuses such as fighting global warming and trying to contain a virus are connected directly to oil crisis.

Meaning that government expenditures and propaganda about alternative power sources, such as electric cars and wind power, followed by imposed hard laws to the population with the excuse of fighting global warming and mankind damnation comes always after an oil crisis. We, the people, are always in the end of the line, suffering from those wars and disputes.

It come to us to ask the question: Are those measures really for our own good or is there another reason for it? Isn't maybe because that banks that finance the governments of certain countries want to be economically free from the other banks that own the oil and gas market?

Is the so called evidence that global warming exists and is man made reliable?

This evidence comes from studies made by the IPCC, a body that is financed by the United Nations. United Nations is financed by the Rothschild and partners group of banks.

Rothschild and partners is the group of banks that is constantly loosing on the oil war. Is that a coincidence?

Mainstream media is also funded in the majority by Rothschild and partners banks.

Where is the so called evidence? Most of the study was proved flawed and biased.

Corona virus crisis. Are the lock downs actually god for the people?

Where are the statements of the doctors and scientists that agree with lock-down measures?

Most of doctors are actually against lock-down to fight a virus.

The measures are coming mostly from politicians without any medical backup.

 

We should ask our selfs: Is this also for my own good? Or is it a strategy of the oil profiting banks (Rockefeller) to jeopardize the other group of banks (Rothschild) in a fight for energy dominance and independence.

Don't forget that those banks have powers in all countries all over the world. Most countries have both banks immersed in its economies. That's why is a battle so difficult to fight.

We should ask ourselves: When in the history of mankind there was a time that the government introduced mandatory dictatorial measures for the good of the people?

I cant remember any single time.

But the opposite happens may times... When was that governments adopted dictatorial measures to control the population for the benefits and interests of a royal minority? Just every dictatorship ever.

All those arguments above are not supposed to convince anyone or make peoples mind. But is a request for people to question more what we see every day and question specifically when someone comes imposing measures with the argument that is for your own good.

We don't need others to tell us what to do. We can gather the facts ourselves, make our own conclusions and take action.

Our action don't need to be something extreme like revolution or wars, but simply denying to follow what is imposed to us.

The banks may have lots of money, but together, the people are much stronger. The problem is that people don't come together that often for the common good.