Daily News


January 15, 2012 By Joseph P. Farrell

While we're all being spoon fed the swill that passes for news on the American (and one would have to say, by extension, the Western)media, we might ponder again the case of abiotic oil:

recent applications of the modern theory of abiogenic hydrocarbon origins: drilling & Development of oil & gas fields in the Dnieper-Donetsk basin (My thanks to my friendMr. D.A.J., who works in the petroleum industry in fact, for sending me this intriguing paper).

I'm one of those who has, since boyhood, questioned the fanciful notion that fossil fuels are indeed the remains of decomposing dinosaurs and plants. A little digging into this notion will reveal that the whole notion was proposed and advanced by the Rockefeller interests as a means of inducing the idea that this resource is "scarce" and most importantly, non-renewable. Indeed, even the late Colonel Fletcher Prouty pointed out the connection of this financial-petroleum interest in promoting the fossil fuel idea. To my youthful mind and imagination, it seemed simply impossible that there were enough dead dinosaurs and plants to account for all the oil the world seemed to be swimming in.

Along come the Russians and, as the article attached above indicates, pursuing their abiotic oil theory, they begin to drill in areas predicted by their theory and lo and behold there's oil and gas. But this isn't what we should notice here; what we should notice is that the theory changes the geopolitical game considerably...if allowed to. What need of Middle Eastern oil if new deep drilling techniques, new separation techniques male new fields, including the vast oil-shale fields of western North and South Dakota and eastern Montana practical?

The refusal of the Western mainstream to treat this theory as a credible theory to my mind indicates that the deepest reality of the current situation isn't about energy supplies at all, it's a deeper geopolitical reality, one that has been operating in the West since the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries within British and later American geopolitics, to prevent Russia from dominating those energy reserves.  This increases, to my mind, the probability that another agenda is really behind current Middle East maneuverings by the West, including, as I have suggested in a blog earlier this week, the idea of "prophecy" as a "plan of action."

But that model, "prophecy" as "action plan," provides is own predictive model, namely, that if this is indeed part of the "game plan of the power elite," one can expect a gradual increase within the mainstream media of little articles spotlighting this or that aspect of the religions of the Middle East and the political tensions arising from them. One may expect, that initially, such spotlights will only serve to spotlight those tensions, then gradually, over time, to propose "solutions" that may include some sort of vast "ecumenical" enterprise stressing the similarities and de-emphasizing the differences of those religions, the Three Great Yahwisms. Time will tell, in the meantime, see you on the flip side.