My SO says that the map could have been bought anywhere for $60!

[Timefortruth]

He is no * supporter but works with oil data and maps every day. He says there is absolutely nothing at all proprietary about the the map on 60 minutes tonight or the one that came from Judicial Watch.

When the Judicial Watch map was originally released I showed it to him and at that time he said that it revealed nothing that is not well within the public domain, no clearance necessary.

I'm sure he is right, he knows his stuff. He points out that the map simply shows the foreign companies and countries that had interests in Iraq at that time, and did not represent some future plan.

[KissMyAsscroft]

1. Yeah, right....

Bullshit.

[Catfish]

2. Not sure what relevance that has

Even if it's not proprietary, why was it being used as part of a NSC briefing? That's the issue, why early in the admin. were they discussing oil interests in Iraq as well as post regime change issues?

[Timefortruth]

11. Maybe I misunderstood the issue with the map.

I was under the impression that the map showed the Task Forces intention to divide the oil fields in a post-invasion Iraq.

It looks like I was the last to know. It's not the first time.

[SheilaT]

3. What map?

A little context might be useful.

[Timefortruth]

5. Sorry, I should have included it.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/IraqOilMap.pdf

http://www.judicialwatch.org/IraqOilGasProj.pdf

http://www.judicialwatch.org/IraqOilFrgnSuitors.pdf

[DrBB]

4. This is true

The point is not that they had the map drawn up especially, it's that they were obviously considering the country's oil resources and the markets for same when they were drawing up their plans. You can even argue that they were right to do so. Assuming there was a good reason to invade Iraq in the first place. But there wasn't. And it sure makes for an ugly picture, don't it.

[Timefortruth]

7. OK, that makes sense. I thought its relevance had to do with

the Cheney teams specific plans to divide Iraq between the major US oil companies, and the map represented those plans. I

If I understand you, the maps inclusion in those debates represents the plans to change the existing division of the fields in Iraq. In other words, how much of the existing division would have to live with after the invasion.

Is that true?

[Catfish]

9. I don't know

someone else will have to answer that. The relevance to me is that there was no reason in February of 2001 to be discussing post regime change in Iraq at an NSC meeting whether it had to do with oil or any other matter.

[LunaC]

6. So why did it take a FOIA Demand

before Cheney released them?

[Timefortruth]

10. Not because of their content, but because their interest in those

maps betrays their intent toward Iraq.

That and the fact that everything no matter how trivial is kept secret by these people.

Unless you had specific knowledge of this kind of information you would have no idea that there is nothing secret about the maps, so they look incriminating. Their release isn't incriminating so that's why they came out, it is another Red Herring, no doubt about it.

[LunaC]

8. So why did it take a FOIA demand

before Cheney released the info? Those were more than just maps.....they were part of a Plan.

For a refreher course on the Cheney Energy Task Force/PNAC agenda see:
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1005193