House of Bush, House of Saud

[wacki]

http://houseofbush.com/book.jpg

I had someone wave this book in my face today. Is this legit, or is it spin? Just curious.

[jokerswild]

It's legitimate.

[JoeC]

I can't answer. But I'd be willing to bet all the liberals say its legit and all the conservatives say it's BS. It's going to be tough to get a straight answer.

[Bigdaddydvo]

Michael Moore used it as a source for Fahrenheit 9/11...that should answer your question.

[Il_Mostro]

ehh, no.

[BadgerAle]

I watched farenheit 9/11 the other day and I don't really understand why it's a problem that Bush knows saudis, even the Bin Laden family. Could someone educate me?

[Il_Mostro]

Well, first of all you really should get your facts from other sources. Do a search around here, it's been discussed a lot.

I think he raises some valid points/questions, but he does it in ways that are detrimental for his cause.

[BCPVP]

This "problem" is compounded by the fact that every president since at least Eisenhower has known the Sauds.
And MM tries to paint the whole Bin Laden family as terrorist supporters and hence because of the six degrees of Kevin Bacon, Bush must support terrorists.

[sirio11]

So you're OK with the BinLaden family flying out of the country after the 9-11 attacks?

[BCPVP]

Yes. None of those who left knew anything about bin Ladin.
Can you imagine the harrassment they might have received from irrational Americans with a name like Bin Ladin?
I see you've been letting F9-11 rot your brain a little to much. I bet you believe they left before anyone else could fly too, right? WRONG! In fact, Richard Clarke, one of Moore's "sources" during the movie, has said repeatedly that it was his decision and his decision alone to allow the flights. So if you're going to believe Clarke about one thing, you better believe him about the others too.

[Cyrus]

Haven't read the book.

But why should this be a "liberal" vs. "conservative" thing? The Bush family are oil men and have been in necessarily good terms with foreign oil men, such as the Saudis. Texas oil families have a history of good relations with oil families across the globe. It's a sticky liguid!

Now, however, as to whether some "sinister goings on" (!) happened between the Bushes and the Sauds, I do not know.

But, "liberal" and "conservative" oil men alike have been known to routinely oil whatever needs to be oiled, in order to get things moving.

It is not politics. It is pure physics.

http://houseofbush.com/book.jpg

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
But why should this be a "liberal" vs. "conservative" thing?

[/ QUOTE ]

Have I used those words in this thread? I just wanted to know if the facts are straight. I don't want to waste my time. /images/graemlins/grin.gif


[ QUOTE ]
Now, however, as to whether some "sinister goings on" (!) happened between the Bushes and the Sauds, I do not know.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't either, and I have a feeling it will be very difficult to truly tell either way.

[ QUOTE ]
But, "liberal" and "conservative" oil men alike have been known to routinely oil whatever needs to be oiled, in order to get things moving.

It is not politics. It is pure physics.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, the Middle East has America by the balls. I can't wait for alternative fuels to come around.

[nicky g]

I think the problem isn;t about "knowing" the Sauds et al, but about being too close to them. It's also a tad hypocritical given all their rhetoric about freedom.

I've not read it, my wife said it was OK.

[Il_Mostro]

To go off slightly..
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, the Middle East has America by the balls. I can't wait for alternative fuels to come around.

[/ QUOTE ]
I've seen some reasonably positive news on biodiesel made from algae lately. Probably not scalable to produce enough to completely rid you of oil, but there might be some hope there, at least to take up slack for a while when oil starts getting scarce (or, if we are smart, before that). If you are interested I might be able t dig up some links.

[feelixthegreek]

It means something that we're friendly with the regime whose country produced so many of the hijackers. It becomes hard to sell the "liberator" title in Iraq, Iran, or wherever else we go, with this kind of relationship.

Even if you're a fan of cynical Realpolitik, which I can accept, it's hard to see how we're getting the best of it in our dealings with Saudi Arabia, not with the way they have such sway over our economy.

[wacki]

I am always interested. Like I said before, you can't predict technology. Scientists come with all sorts of crazy methods. If they can do it with algae, then maybe they can do it with phytoplankton.

[Il_Mostro]

I'll see what I can find.

Exponential growth will get us in the end anyway, though... did you watch the video with Dr Bartlett? If not, I recomend it, it's worth your while.

[wacki]

No, do you have a link?

[Il_Mostro]

Here's (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Board=politics&Number=148917 0&Forum=f27&Words=%2Bbartlett%20%2Bexponential&Sea rchpage=0&Limit=25&Main=1489170&Search=true&where= bodysub&Name=&daterange=1&newerval=2&newertype=m&o lderval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post1489170) the post.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll see what I can find.

Exponential growth will get us in the end anyway, though... did you watch the video with Dr Bartlett? If not, I recomend it, it's worth your while.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just read somewhere that biodiesel has been successfully created with soybeans as well. That certainly seems to be a viable alternative and would be a great way to help out the farming industry in America instead of using subsidies which artificially increase prices.

[Il_Mostro]

You can create biodiesel out of any oil-crop (soy-beans, palmoil, rape-oil and so on). It's not even hard, you can do it at home at your kitchen table if you want to. This does not, however mean that it's a viable solution, you also have to consider things like how much energy you'll get out of the process. Most crops are energy negative, ie. it'll cost you more energy to grow and process them than you get when you use the biodiesel.

And when it comes to using farm land to grow oil-crops, it's probably not a good idea in the slightly longer run. If we ignore that the midwest will have no topsoil left in 30 years if you/we continue to farm the way that is done today (top soil are depleated/eroded about 30 times as fast as it is regenerated today) you will still need all the food you can grow to feed the projected US population in 20-30 years. Thus, if biodiesel are to take up slack when oil starts to run out we need to find a way to grow it that does not use up farm land otherwise used for food production. Exponential growth is a bitch. It's about time people start thinking about it.

[BCPVP]

[ QUOTE ]
It means something that we're friendly with the regime whose country produced so many of the hijackers. It becomes hard to sell the "liberator" title in Iraq, Iran, or wherever else we go, with this kind of relationship.

Even if you're a fan of cynical Realpolitik, which I can accept, it's hard to see how we're getting the best of it in our dealings with Saudi Arabia, not with the way they have such sway over our economy.

[/ QUOTE ]
You have a point, to an extent. I also hate how little the Royal Saudis do about terrorism in their own country, but when you consider that they do indeed have us by the balls, we don't have too much of a choice. Also consider that the Royals aren't as fanatical as the fundamentalists brewing in the country. At least the Royals you can somewhat depend on to do business with you out of greed. If they were overthrown, I'm not too sure about how willing their replacement would be.
A good illustration of our situation, I think, would be this cartoon:
http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/BloodforOil-X.gif

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
You can create biodiesel out of any oil-crop (soy-beans, palmoil, rape-oil and so on). It's not even hard, you can do it at home at your kitchen table if you want to. This does not, however mean that it's a viable solution, you also have to consider things like how much energy you'll get out of the process. Most crops are energy negative, ie. it'll cost you more energy to grow and process them than you get when you use the biodiesel.


[/ QUOTE ]

Vuturesrow's plan isn't a cure all, but it will help make us more efficient in more than one category. There are ways to do this efficiently on a decent scale. The biggest problems with biodiesel are the NO2, cold weather performance, and limited production capacity. Biodiesel is still a +.

[ QUOTE ]
If we ignore that the midwest will have no topsoil left in 30 years if you/we continue to farm the way that is done today (top soil are depleated/eroded about 30 times as fast as it is regenerated today) you will still need all the food you can grow to feed the projected US population in 20-30 years.

[/ QUOTE ]

Topsoil depletion isn't that hard of a problem to solve. Even if it was hard to solve we could easily force other countries to ship their poop back to us. Problem is solved. There are many plants btw that get 100% of their carbon from fixing CO2.


Il Mostro, don't be so negative.

[Il_Mostro]

[ QUOTE ]
Vuturesrow's plan isn't a cure all, but it will help make us more efficient in more than one category. There are ways to do this efficiently on a decent scale. The biggest problems with biodiesel are the NO2, cold weather performance, and limited production capacity. Biodiesel is still a +.

[/ QUOTE ]
I got the impression that Vulture didn't know much about biodiesel (you can even make it from soy-beans) so I thought I should educate a little /images/graemlins/smile.gif
And I belive that biodiesel can be part of the future, but if it is, that future will have us using a lot less energy than we do today. I also belive it's important to tell people as it is today, and today biodiesel cannot be more than a very very small contributor. There is a possibility that this can change due to algae or what-not, but today we don't really know.
And most crops are an energy negative.

[ QUOTE ]
Topsoil depletion isn't that hard of a problem to solve. Even if it was hard to solve we could easily force other countries to ship their poop back to us. Problem is solved. There are many plants btw that get 100% of their carbon from fixing CO2.

[/ QUOTE ]
Ohh, I know. Trouble is I don't see this being done. And nothing is really simple when government subsidies are involved... Eventually something has to be done, of course. And I belive it's important that people understand that, since otherwise the measures necessary might come as a shock to some (WHAT, you mean the food I'm eating has had COW POOP spread on it???)

[ QUOTE ]
Il Mostro, don't be so negative.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, I thought I was fairly postitive...

And exponential growth will get us in the end.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
I just read somewhere that biodiesel has been successfully created with soybeans as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

I saw the first suggestions to use soya for fuel (or rather part of the fuel), believe it or not, some twenty-five years ago. It made economic sense then, it makes economic sense now.

Don't ask.