Uh-huh 0 Posted February 28, 2007 Under the new law, agreed on Monday by Iraq's cabinet, foreign oil companies will be allowed to cut long-term exploration and development deals with the government for 20 years, renewable for a further five years. Companies willing to operate in a country with high physical risks — insurgents regularly blow up pipelines and kill contractors — will be allowed to export their oil after paying the government a minimum 12.5% royalty, although there are usually also cash signing bonuses to the government, and most "profit oil," extracted after operating costs are met, would likely go to Baghdad. Regional governments — only Kurdistan has one right now — can sign their own contracts under the law, a dizzying change from decades when Saddam dictated the terms and stifled oil production in Kurdistan. A Baghdad-based Federal Council on Oil & Gas will be formed; it will have 60 days to appoint a team to arbitrate a contract, if it has strong concerns. http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8...1594388,00.html Oh my. Here's the "cool" part: The current law remains silent on the type of contracts that the Iraqi government can use. The law establishes a new Iraqi Federal Oil and Gas Council with ultimate decision-making authority over the types of contracts that will be employed. This Council will include, among others, “executive managers from important related petroleum companies.” Thus, it is possible that foreign oil company executives could sit on the Council. It would be unprecedented for a sovereign country to have, for instance, an executive of ExxonMobil on the board of its key oil and gas decision-making body. The law also does not appear to restrict foreign corporate executives from making decisions on their own contracts. Nor does there appear to be a “quorum” requirement. Thus, if only five members of the Federal Oil and Gas Council met—one from ExxonMobil, Shell, ChevronTexaco, and two Iraqis—the foreign company representatives would apparently be permitted to approve contacts for themselves. Under the proposed law, the Council has the ultimate power and authority to approve and re-write any contract using whichever model it prefers if a "2/3 majority of the members in attendance" agree. Early drafts of the bill, and the proposed model by the U.S. advocate very unfair, and unconventional for Iraq, models such as Production Sharing Agreements (PSAs) which would set long term contracts with unfair conditions that may lead to the loss of hundreds of billions of dollars of the Iraqi oil money as profits to foreign companies. http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/02/2...l_iraqs_oil.php So, in conclusion: foreign companies will start bidding on Iraqui oil contracts; Kurds, Sunnis and Shi'ites can potentially negotiate their own contracts and receive payment directly; contract dispute resolution will fall under a Federal Oil and Gas Council which will include foreign oil execs. Nice deal, if you're Exxon or BP. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,797 Posted February 28, 2007 "It would be unprecedented for a sovereign country to have, for instance, an executive of ExxonMobil on the board of its key oil and gas decision-making body." Not in America Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 Oh my. Here's the "cool" part: So, in conclusion: foreign companies will start bidding on Iraqui oil contracts; Kurds, Sunnis and Shi'ites can potentially negotiate their own contracts and receive payment directly; contract dispute resolution will fall under a Federal Oil and Gas Council which will include foreign oil execs. Nice deal, if you're Exxon or BP. So what? Who would be better suited to serve on the council? Britney Spears? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Uh-huh 0 Posted February 28, 2007 So what? Who would be better suited to serve on the council? Britney Spears? In case you need a reminder, here they are again. Toro's response is a perfect illustration. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Isotopes 1 Posted February 28, 2007 So what? Who would be better suited to serve on the council? Britney Spears? How about someone with the country's interest in mind and not the oil company's Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 How about someone with the country's interest in mind and not the oil company's This Council will include, among others, “executive managers from important related petroleum companies.” It is a tip that reading comprehension. Again, wouldn't you want the guys with the most imminent knowledge on the subject of oil and gas exploration to be a part of your countries oil and gas exploration efforts? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,797 Posted February 28, 2007 "will be allowed to export their oil after paying the government a minimum 12.5% royalty, although there are usually also cash signing bonuses to the government, and most "profit oil," extracted after operating costs are met, would likely go to Baghdad." I'm really not getting the economics of this. 1) You pay cash up front 2) You pay a minimum 12% royalty. 3) You meet your operating costs by (presumably) exporting oil. 4) Then the rest of the oil you sell to Baghdad? - At market or discount? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Uh-huh 0 Posted February 28, 2007 This Council will include, among others, “executive managers from important related petroleum companies.” It is a tip that reading comprehension. Again, wouldn't you want the guys with the most imminent knowledge on the subject of oil and gas exploration to be a part of your countries oil and gas exploration efforts? How about you take your own advice? The law also does not appear to restrict foreign corporate executives from making decisions on their own contracts. Nor does there appear to be a “quorum” requirement. Thus, if only five members of the Federal Oil and Gas Council met—one from ExxonMobil, Shell, ChevronTexaco, and two Iraqis—the foreign company representatives would apparently be permitted to approve contacts for themselves. If the law allows it, then you can be sure it's going to happen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 How about you take your own advice? If the law allows it, then you can be sure it's going to happen. Again, for the third focking time you focking idiot.... Wouldn't you want the guys with the most imminent knowledge on the subject of oil and gas exploration to be a part of your countries oil and gas exploration efforts? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Uh-huh 0 Posted February 28, 2007 Again, for the third focking time you focking idiot.... Wouldn't you want the guys with the most imminent knowledge on the subject of oil and gas exploration to be a part of your countries oil and gas exploration efforts? I see you're applying right-wing debate tactics very well. Would you want the real estate agent decide who's going to buy your house? After all, they know much more about real estate than you do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 7,954 Posted February 28, 2007 How about you take your own advice? If the law allows it, then you can be sure it's going to happen. Who better to award oil contracts to Exxon Mobill than those who know Exxon Mobill the best - Exxon Mobill executives? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Uh-huh 0 Posted February 28, 2007 Who better to award oil contracts to Exxon Mobill than those who know Exxon Mobill the best - Exxon Mobill executives? Exactly. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 I see you're applying right-wing debate tactics very well. Would you want the real estate agent decide who's going to buy your house? After all, they know much more about real estate than you do. Answer my focking question or shut the fock up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Uh-huh 0 Posted February 28, 2007 Answer my focking question or shut the fock up. What question? Do you mean your attempt to obfuscate the question at hand? Please. I'll help you. This is the question at hand: is it in the best interests of Iraq to let the same people who are bidding on their oil also decide the terms of the contract? To everyone in the world except for the right-wing loonies, the answer to the question is obvious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 What question? Do you mean your attempt to obfuscate the question at hand? Please. I'll help you. This is the question at hand: is it in the best interests of Iraq to let the same people who are bidding on their oil also decide the terms of the contract? To everyone in the world except for the right-wing loonies, the answer to the question is obvious. Again, instead of discussing my question to you, you automatically dismiss it as an "attempt to obfuscate" remark and continue on? You have the conversational skill of Helen Keller. I'm through with you. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
surferskin 31 Posted February 28, 2007 Again, instead of discussing my question to you, you automatically dismiss it as an "attempt to obfuscate" remark and continue on? You have the conversational skill of Helen Keller. I'm through with you. LEMMING!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 LEMMING!!! Lemmings are small rodents, usually found in or near the Arctic. Together with the voles and muskrats, they make up the subfamily Arvicolinae (also known as Microtinae), which forms part of the largest mammal radiation by far, the superfamily Muroidea, which also includes the rats, mice, hamsters, and gerbils. Lemmings mostly weigh 30 to 112 grams (1–4 oz) and are about 7 to 15 centimetres (2.75 – 6 in) long. They usually have long, soft fur and very short tails. They are herbivorous, feeding mostly on leaves and shoots, grasses, and sedges in particular, but also roots and bulbs in some cases. Like many rodents' teeth, their incisors grow continuously, allowing them to exist on much tougher forage than would otherwise be possible. Lemmings do not hibernate through the harsh northern winter. They remain active, finding food by burrowing through the snow and utilising grasses clipped and stored in advance. They are solitary animals by nature, meeting only to mate and then going their separate ways, but like all rodents they have a high reproductive rate and can breed rapidly in good seasons. There is little to distinguish a lemming from a vole. Most lemmings are members of the tribe Lemmini (one of the three tribes that make up the subfamily). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted February 28, 2007 "will be allowed to export their oil after paying the government a minimum 12.5% royalty, although there are usually also cash signing bonuses to the government, and most "profit oil," extracted after operating costs are met, would likely go to Baghdad." I'm really not getting the economics of this. 1) You pay cash up front 2) You pay a minimum 12% royalty. 3) You meet your operating costs by (presumably) exporting oil. 4) Then the rest of the oil you sell to Baghdad? - At market or discount? 12% royalty? The going rate in western nations is at least double that. Why am I not surprised that: 1. Multinational oil companies are going to rip off Iraq and 2. The corrupt "government" we put in place is going to gladly help them do it? Can't you see? It all makes perfect cents. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 7,954 Posted February 28, 2007 Again, instead of discussing my question to you, you automatically dismiss it as an "attempt to obfuscate" remark and continue on? You really don't see how putting foreign oil/gas company executives on a gov't body responsible for awarding oil/gas contracts is a conflict of interests? You're either obfuscating or you're a lot stupider than I thought. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Uh-huh 0 Posted February 28, 2007 You really don't see how putting foreign oil/gas company executives on a gov't body responsible for awarding oil/gas contracts is a conflict of interests? You're either obfuscating or you're a lot stupider than I thought. C'mon man, it's Toro. Are you really surprised? Toro must be having a slow day in the drive-thru at the office. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted February 28, 2007 You really don't see how putting foreign oil/gas company executives on a gov't body responsible for awarding oil/gas contracts is a conflict of interests? You're either obfuscating or you're a lot stupider than I thought. No one can possibly be that stupid. Toro and his ilk seem to have backed themselves in to a corner here. They've spent the past 6 years vigorously defending the Bush Administration and the Republicans in Congress, and now that it has become blatantly obvious that the whole lot are nothing a bunch of crooks that could not care less about anything but their own bottom line, the right-wing parrots are left with two choices: admit they were wrong, or continue to defend the Bush Administration's actions with ever decreasing rationality. Unfortunately, Toro has clearly chosen the latter. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 C'mon man, it's Toro. Are you really surprised? Toro must be having a slow day in the drive-thru at the office. This coming from a dooshbag who puts a picture of his wife's tiits in his signature. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 7,954 Posted February 28, 2007 Toro is demonstrating all the typical traits of Bush apologists: First he demonstrates the knee-jerk belief that corporate interests should benevolently run everything. Bush supporters have no problem with Halliburton and its subsidiaries being awarded no-bid contracts (which drive up reconstruction costs) and doing business in Iraq despite repeatedly overcharging taxpayers. Why would they care about the oil industry serving on a gov't board that awards oil contracts? It fits their vision of government. Then when it's pointed out this is a conflict of interests, he throws up this stupid red herring about how it makes sense because they know the most about the oil and gas industry. By Toro's logic, since healthcare providers know the most about medicine we should start putting hospital executives in charge of issuing Medicare contracts to themselves. Then when all else fails, just start calling names. The circle is now complete. Being a Bush supporter these days really is a pathology. A little less than one out of every three people in this country is a total fockwit and an extremist loony, and threads like this really expose those special people. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 Toro is demonstrating all the typical traits of Bush apologists: First he demonstrates the knee-jerk belief that corporate interests should benevolently run everything. Bush supporters have no problem with Halliburton and its subsidiaries being awarded no-bid contracts (which drive up reconstruction costs) and doing business in Iraq despite repeatedly overcharging taxpayers. Why would they care about the oil industry serving on a gov't board that awards oil contracts? It fits their vision of government. Then when it's pointed out this is a conflict of interests, he throws up this stupid red herring about how it makes sense because they know the most about the oil and gas industry. By Toro's logic, since healthcare providers know the most about medicine we should start putting hospital executives in charge of issuing Medicare contracts to themselves. Then when all else fails, just start calling names. The circle is now complete. Being a Bush supporter these days really is a pathology. A little less than one out of every three people in this country is a total fockwit and an extremist loony, and threads like this really expose those special people. Wow, that was even better than your movie review for Hellraiser. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snoopy1 0 Posted February 28, 2007 Spinx vs Tyson Grenada vs USA Toro vs FFT Board. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,797 Posted February 28, 2007 Again, wouldn't you want the guys with the most imminent knowledge on the subject of oil and gas exploration to be a part of your countries oil and gas exploration efforts? Seriously, like for example, if you're a Defense Contractor lagging in contracts, who's better to hire as CEO to bring in contracts than say, the Secy of Defense? (Proof it works: Govt. contracts increased 700% @ Halliburton under Cheney's rule) Or like, when you're a VP of a country and you're going to occupy a country, what better company to use than one you trust - one you recently stopped being the CEO of? People just don't get it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 Spinx vs Tyson Grenada vs USA Toro vs FFT Board. Shouldn't you be busy collecting donations for your imaginary internet girlfriend's recovery efforts? Seriously, like for example, if you're a Defense Contractor lagging in contracts, who's better to hire as CEO to bring in contracts than say, the Secy of Defense? (Proof it works: Govt. contracts increased 700% @ Halliburton under Cheney's rule) Or like, when you're a VP of a country and you're going to occupy a country, what better company to use than one you trust - one you recently stopped being the CEO of? People just don't get it. Seriously, there is absolutely no way to justify giving oil companies the right to approve decisions unilaterally. I can see merit in having input from them though. i'mbored Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 7,954 Posted February 28, 2007 Wow, that was even better than your movie review for Hellraiser. So now in addition to Googling me online, talking about me with Hooters waitresses, and visiting my MySpace page, you admit to reading reviews I wrote at Amazon.com. And you guys wonder why I say FFT is full of latent h0mos and social lepers... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Uh-huh 0 Posted February 28, 2007 This coming from a dooshbag who puts a picture of his wife's tiits in his signature. Gotta do my part for the FFT board!!! P.S. Come to think of it, I should update that picture. It's going to be 2 years old in May. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 So now in addition to Googling me online, talking about me with Hooters waitresses, and visiting my MySpace page, you admit to reading reviews I wrote at Amazon.com. And you guys wonder why I say FFT is full of latent h0mos and social lepers... Like you haven't googled me. Don't be angry cause you gotz owned. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phillybear 366 Posted February 28, 2007 Given a choice, I would drink blood rather than oil. And I have. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 Gotta do my part for the FFT board!!! They are nice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Snoopy1 0 Posted February 28, 2007 So now in addition to Googling me online, talking about me with Hooters waitresses, and visiting my MySpace page, you admit to reading reviews I wrote at Amazon.com. And you guys wonder why I say FFT is full of latent h0mos and social lepers... Damn and people accuse me of being a staulker!!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 Damn and people accuse me of being a staulker!!!!! He makes it sound like people are spending 20 hours at the library researching. It's not hard to type "MonkeyDeathCar" in a text box. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MDC 7,954 Posted February 28, 2007 Like you haven't googled me. Actually, I haven't. Sorry to bruise your ego. I also didn't post comments on your blog and I don't live in New Jersey, two things you've accused me of. Other things I don't do include talking about you to anyone offline, asking Hooters waitresses to hold up signs about you, reading reviews of movies/music you may have posted on Amazon (I haven't looked) or looking for you on MySpace (although I did accept your MySpace friend invitation and I was baffled when you posted a half-dozen comments on my profile within the hour and then disappeared). Oh, and I also don't offer your full name to everyone on the Danzone. Does this sound like normal behavior to you? Because it sounds to me like something a creepy stalking phaggot might do in his spare time. HTH! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Toro 3 Posted February 28, 2007 Actually, I haven't. Sorry to bruise your ego. I also didn't post comments on your blog and I don't live in New Jersey, two things you've accused me of. Other things I don't do include talking about you to anyone offline, asking Hooters waitresses to hold up signs about you, reading reviews of movies/music you may have posted on Amazon (I haven't looked) or looking for you on MySpace (although I did accept your MySpace friend invitation and I was baffled when you posted a half-dozen comments on my profile within the hour and then disappeared). Oh, and I also don't offer your full name to everyone on the Danzone. Does this sound like normal behavior to you? Because it sounds to me like something a creepy stalking phaggot might do in his spare time. HTH! Call it a hobby. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kpbuckeye 3 Posted February 28, 2007 Toro is demonstrating all the typical traits of Bush apologists: First he demonstrates the knee-jerk belief that corporate interests should benevolently run everything. Bush supporters have no problem with Halliburton and its subsidiaries being awarded no-bid contracts (which drive up reconstruction costs) and doing business in Iraq despite repeatedly overcharging taxpayers. Why would they care about the oil industry serving on a gov't board that awards oil contracts? It fits their vision of government. Then when it's pointed out this is a conflict of interests, he throws up this stupid red herring about how it makes sense because they know the most about the oil and gas industry. By Toro's logic, since healthcare providers know the most about medicine we should start putting hospital executives in charge of issuing Medicare contracts to themselves. Then when all else fails, just start calling names. The circle is now complete. Being a Bush supporter these days really is a pathology. A little less than one out of every three people in this country is a total fockwit and an extremist loony, and threads like this really expose those special people. hey douchey the coffee room is completly out of the hazlenut cream creamers. Get off the internet and do your focking job. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Uh-huh 0 Posted February 28, 2007 Golly MDC, how many members does your fan club have these days? kbbuckeye even has you in his sig. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IGotWorms 4,063 Posted February 28, 2007 Seriously, there is absolutely no way to justify giving oil companies the right to approve decisions unilaterally. Toro concedes, argument OVER! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites