brian carroll on 28 Feb 2001 14:35:00 -0000 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> gone fishing |
since this is open communications, i would like to make it known that every time i have written of Halliburton Oil company and-or Enron Energy Corp, within 24 hours of posting to nettime about any aspect of their relation to larger cultural and social issues, i catch their URLs in my web logs. often the URLs are either intentionally or unintentionally obscured, sometimes they ride in on other URLs, piggy-back like. i can usually tell Halliburton's been around my site because their IP is a non-working domain (at least they sometimes won't let me load their website) and is represented as 122.123, often making it stand out from the rest of the domains logged, often at the top of the alphabetical list. here is the IP: 34.63.122.123 that i noticed in the last 24 hours. if you go to: http://swhois.net/ and search using the IP address you will get the following DNS information: ============================================================== Halliburton Company (NET-HALLIBURTON) 5151 San Felipe Houston, TX 77056 Netname: HALLIBURTON Netblock: 34.0.0.0 - 34.255.255.255 Coordinator: Harrison, Richard (RH766-ARIN) rharrison@HALNET.COM 281-596-6646 (FAX) 281-596-6659 ============================================================== at first this got me a bit concerned, being that i could not imagine why energy companies would be hitting my architectural research and theory site within hours of posting to nettime about their companies as a part of the text. while reassured this was not an abnormal occurrence, i am not convinced in the benign aspects of this voicing of free speech in a democracy, while the larger forces are keeping tabs of who says what. for when times turn darker, this type of critique could have severe consequences for those who are now speaking up, not ideologically, but with ideas. 'the silence' online regarding the global issues that undergird the movements of the supposedly dead nation-state and whatnot is a great part of the problem. in a totally public forum, any speech that is not within the prevailing set of reason can have severely detrimental effects upon one's livelihood, in business, in academics, in communities. if more people spoke up, then it would not feel like such an isolated phenomenon. funnily, the Department of Defense also has a keen interest in architecture, as does Boeing and lots of other aerospace companies and trans-military/industrial companies. if indeed it was true they were listening, to listen, to hear, to think, to think about what is going on, what is being discussed, in the sense that there may be some truth (and of course some hyperbole) in the texts- what i can only call a necessary purging of corrupted intellectual data about the forces that move things around- how can we work together, in a realistic world, to enact changes needed, and agreed upon, by a large sector of humanity..? for example, the pitting of public against private interests, or class warfare, or military versus civilian, or theorists versus everything (!), or culture against culture, or ideas against ideas, seems to me a predictable story of past failures, maybe stated too simply as examples of 'failures to communicate'. wars, deaths, purges, exterminations, genocide, euthanasia, ... whether it is of the mind or the body or both, it just continues the long death-mill of tradition, and its consequences. at any point the issues involved can be discussed, in part, such as in the 'human story of technology', and its dual edge. to say i'm not afraid is to lie. but these companies snooping on a 3x college dropout's internet website at a statistically odd rate gets me beyond paranoia, which i consider a base state for dealing with the Real, and into speculation of the best of worst of this paradoxical reality. best case: some resolution could be established, or a mechanism, a program, an idea, organic and other, meshing together differences by their similarities, beyond a dictionary, but merging lexicons into one larger project, an Internet Translation project, not for separate languages, but for language, not for theories per se, but for ideas, as they are founded on their keywords. thus, i believe, or at least still hold some hope, that ideas like public and private, and capital and its social dimensions, even socialism, will not be mutually exclusive, `till death we unite.' as for corporations and the globalism debate. fascism, american imperialism, etc. if discourse were to be productive in its de(con)struction, it seems clear to me that we need to find a way to speak a common language, though our lexicons may vary. how can we speak a similar language, and come to understandings beyond the paradoxes of 'for and against', verses versus 'other' verses. [never thought of it in this sense, but the same idea could happen if the following project was made public, and automated and autonmous, it indexes words and cross-references their meanings and authors... http://www.architexturez.com/glossslalia a glossalalia could structurally make nettime keywords into structural relationships. or paradoxical or contradictory or all of the above. there are 1,000 words i can estimate that recur frequently enough. what if their structural connections could be brought out of the private languages and specific definitions into meta-words, or words with generic definitions, that can then refer to more specific words. every has created their own internet-langauge, it seems. just an idea though. but a structure/program will be needed to break the looping of similarly themed thought, in order to build ideas... the nettime-glossalalia/encyclopedia.] the conspiracy card can be played, easily, especially if it is insulated from the reality of its effect and a group exists to fetishize it and make it an oc/cult knowledge. nothing wrong with fringes, but when the thinking stays static in a fringe-sort-of-way and the issues sit here, like a big fish in the nettime pool, and the choice is between silence and saying, and in either way, the fool wins on both sides, in the multi- spectral event that plays out in the public forum. i write about these URLs publicly because i need to express my concern in both public forums, with no privacy, and these logs have me wanting to go private in communications such as these, when i think that is the exact wrong thing to do. as ideas need to be aired and thought out and heard out and - i'm not sure what else happens, as nothing happens. and nothing is happening. the second choice is the Bad Choice (here is my moral lessons from gradeschool). that is to continue with something that is wrong, when one knows it is wrong. how can language, or theory, or corporations, or basic citizens all interrelate and get beyond some of these barriers... is it only through totalitarian guidance, and issues of control and surveillance (not that they have ever been far off-stage). the public-private state, encompassing the local community to continents and all nations of the Earth, has become one state, complex and fiercely diverse, and yet with long-standing dreams. the questions seem to be, at least for me, are you a human being, that is a public citizen, or a private individual, a man or woman, firstly? the story of the past so far has been mostly the story of mankind told as his story. with feminism and civil rights we now have his|her-story and many wo|man-kinds, and lots of fe|males with different perspectives on this whole. if corporations are people, and presidents and administrations are people, are they public or primary private people, when making their `public' or 'human' decision making..? as humans we are one group, as wo|men we are many. we are both, yet sometimes one predominates, and its dynamic tendencies can pre-determine future outcomes. what are the chances that Halliburton Oil and Enron Energy, working with President George Bush's new energy secretary (and the 'high cabinet officials' such as VP Dick Cheney), will do with their newly realized power. they will continue to do the same, build the same old centrally controlled, economies of scale, nuclear-even, powerplants, gold-mining the countries resources, while undermining whatever Democracy is surviving the Millennial purge. my computer smokes, Power to Burn, as Apple computer soon will be saying to millions of Californian's during a summertime power crisis that will be resolved by the former executives of oil and gas companies that will push the forward back into the industrial past in order to keep things put, while the world prepares for III. Halliburton, as a company, is acting in its best interests, which are said to be those of the Country it so dearly regards and symbolizes its virtues. Yet, could these same powers use their inheritance to 'taketh away' democracy by acting as primary 'private citizens' when given the trust of the United States energy planning? how objective can Enron be about alternative energy. it is not a 3-5% market. it is a 80+% marketplace. instead it is folly. more centeralized pipelines. more coal mines. more wilderness gone. much more pollution, though compassionate. and lots of power plants, big ones, with "HIT ME" signs plastered all over their centralized facilities, given any strategic missiles that happen to see to take out whole states of the US by lobbing several dozen nuclear warheads onto these plants. big plants go down, so goes the internet. little plants, resilience. resistance. self-sufficiency, somewhat. it can still be public- private. nothing inherently wrong with that, as some seem to have said before. what is wrong is the undemocratic control of these issues by those in power, and weighting whatever science, whatever statistics, to beyond the lowest common denominator. a hugely complex task such as redesigning the energy grid could have a simple result: destroying democracy by making it impossible to survive in the extensions of the same limiting system. if Halliburton and Enron are listening, or someone, whom- ever, is sending them mails, i would like to take this chance to try to convey a personal feeling i've had... when companies, in America, become the enemy, the basic foundations of Americanism are dissolved. the entrepreneur is no longer free to invent, the private is no longer in a world extinct of all but self-interest and pursuit, but carries us all along with it. The companies that bring us far are often unnoticed, as they are of the past. they connect worlds, from the industrial to the technological. these worlds, realities, need to be merged, and optimized. the purge needs to happen on the level of expertise, to open up channels of communications, to truly enact freedoms of speech through debating the issues as they really do exist, not in private clean-room versions of what is. but power corrupts perception, power corrupts reason, so that it is much easier for one to believe their own lies. this happens mainly when people no longer fear, themselves. they have no doubts, they have a firewall around their philosophies. like a medieval moat. drawbridge is up, and king and queen are inside within their castle with their subjects, the corporation, the university, the clergy, the football team, the music scene, whatnot. the world is so much bigger in both ideas and potential than what is being aired today online. it is a power to be able to say, see, and think. and yet to feel some sense of threat by the hypersensitivity of connections makes this one wonder if it is possible to declare that the 2-sided sword has a good and bad side, on both sides. and to work forward from there. not in a traditional moderate-way. but through the facilitation of change. changing ways. changing ways changes paradigms by changing paradoxes, and breaking myths by breaking new ground. the corporations, engines of the centuries, will always be around in some form, but probably with a different name. they are an organization. a belief. a concept. is this concept and its goals and ideals always in opposition with the public interest, when it faces dire challenges with such uncreative and traditional approaches to solutions to all but signal the death knell for America and the state of the world? Enron and Halliburton are isolated in a mono-cult-ure of thinking and doing. they're experts at certain ways of doing things. but we need our new solutions to be based on totally different ways of doing things. will insider connections forge the new America, and leave it to die for its suicidal exploitation of its natural, artificial, and virtual resources in order to profit in the short term, and end the dreams with centuries more burdens, when democracy may all but be gone, because of poor planning, poor design, and poor consulting by the Department of Defense and the 20th century Industrials as to 'what America needs'. at some point it will be decided you are the enemy, of democracy, of people. issues such as war, pollution, energy inefficiency are all tied with energy issues. what if your companies took a stand and moved into a wholly different paradigm of thinking- and maybe this is where discourse really does work best- and converse with the other side about the future of America. i've heard of newpaper polls saying majorities want localized small alternative power plants. (recently in Mpls,MN). it is time for industries to take up the challenge. to state a shared goal. to stop ideological politics. and to retool or reengineer, and also redesign and reconceptual the question, what is at state in its answer, and what would be good for a democracy. there must be some way, between revolution and evolution, between death and life, to make something happen. especially given that there's 5 billion humans on the planet. clean air is not going to hurt anyone. good design will not hurt anyone. cultural investment will not hurt anyone. it is what cultures are made of, not business, but shared beliefs and ideas. not gods, but understandings. there will be a big story some day hence, either a success or failture, and it will showcase your companies are large players at this most unusual time in the human story. the judge will be the people and whether or not your companies worked for the people or against the people. it is not that simple, but War is. and War is what we are heading for. unless we change. by changing, we might be able to have a chance to influence the larger realm to change also. opening dialog. opening control. less secrecy. more transparency. you exploit in nettime, but you hide your own. for example, attached below is an article about a former Halliburton Employee. Now Vice President, breaking the law in the 2000 in the Oil Business in Iran. that's open communications- how is that going to play out- deniability? purging? and of whom? people whom believe in democratic society, or the totalitarian culture inherent in privatized and economically capitalized democracy? as this is an open letter, of sort, i'd appreciate any feedback you could give, or a representive whom might start a discussion on issues of energy and power and representation in society and the need to have public missions that are publicly defined, and not privately crafted, and privately agreed upon in backgrooms. we control the texts now. the word is out, it is free. your surveillance is the friction, and it could be put to use by making it help things rather than hurt. article attached. silence kills. so does dignity and honor. -human ---------- From: today@american-politics.com Subject: American Politics Journal -- Feb. 26, 2001 -- The Latest Golden Lawbreaker: Dick Cheney Date: Mon, Feb 26, 2001, 7:16 AM GWB's Latest Golden Lawbreaker: Dick Cheney! When Will Burton Hold Hearings on THIS? by Tamara Baker Feb. 26, 2001 -- SAINT PAUL, MINNESOTA -- When I first started my "Golden Lawbreaker" series, even I didn't realize where it would lead. As you know, the "Golden Lawbreakers" are those friends and donors of GW Bush who, if President Clinton's regulations had not been undone by Usurper Boy and his Prince Regent Cheney, would be barred from receiving Federal Government contracts because of their habitual lawbreaking. As expected, the pro-Bush US Chamber of Commerce raised a stink (now, what was this about conservatives and businessmen respecting "the rule of law"?), thus giving Shrub's minders the cover they needed to zap the regulations within hours of their gaining control of the Oval Office. It turns out that a company very near and dear to Dick Cheney's heart is one of these Golden Lawbreakers. Yes, folks -- I'm speaking of Halliburton. Here's the scoop: We all know that one of the two counts Rudy Giuliani filed against Marc Rich, way back when, concerned Rich's buying oil from Iran. However, it also seems that Halliburton has been caught violating President Clinton's 1995 executive order forbidding US companies/individuals from doing business with Iran: (http://www.smartmoney.com/news/ON/index.cfm?story=ON-20010201-000010-0036) - - - - - Halliburton Co., the U.S. oil-services giant until recently headed by Vice President Richard Cheney, has opened an office in Tehran and operated in Iran in possible violation of U.S. sanctions, Thursday's Wall Street Journal reported. Since 1995, U.S. laws have banned most American commerce with Iran. Halliburton Products and Services Ltd. works behind an unmarked door on the ninth floor of a new north Tehran tower block. A brochure declares that the company was registered in 1975 in the Cayman Islands, is based in the Persian Gulf sheikdom of Dubai and is "non-American." But, like the sign over the receptionist's head, the brochure bears the Dallas company's name and red emblem, and offers services from Halliburton units around the world. - - - - - Ooops! You know, I think that the 5th Federal Judiciary Circuit's Northern Texas District (http://www.txnd.uscourts.gov/Right.asp) might find this rather interesting, don't you? Perhaps someone should bring this to their attention. Ah, but it gets even better: - - - - - .. a U.S. official said a Halliburton (HAL) office in Tehran would violate at least the spirit of American law. The Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control declined to comment on a specific company, referring inquiries to a Web site summary of Iran sanctions that bans almost all U.S. trade and investment with Iran, specifically in oil services. The Web site adds: "No U.S. person may approve or facilitate the entry into or performance of transactions or contracts with Iran by a foreign subsidiary of a U.S. firm that the U.S. person is precluded from performing directly. Similarly, no U.S. person may facilitate such transactions by unaffiliated foreign persons." - - - - - Got that? The law was written so that certain attempts to foil it, such as the transparent attempts by companies like Halliburton to create fake foreign "shell" (or "Potemkin") companies for that very purpose, would be thwarted. Even out of the Oval Office, our last elected President is still going to give Cheney and Bush fits: - - - - - An executive order signed by President Clinton in March 1995 prohibits "new investments [in Iran] by U.S. persons, including commitment of funds or other assets." It also bars U.S. companies from performing services "that would benefit the Iranian oil industry." Violation of the order can result in fines of as much as $500,000 for companies and up to 10 years in jail for individuals. - - - - - And guess what: - - - - - The Halliburton brochure in Tehran says the company has performed oil-drilling services on two offshore drilling contracts in the Iranian sector of the Persian Gulf. One is the Sirri field, being developed by France's TotalFinaElf SA, and the other is Phase 1 of the South Pars field, being developed by an Iranian company. - - - - - The Halliburton brochure continues: "We are committed to position ourselves in a market that offers huge growth potential." Obviously. So, we know that Halliburton has already given its drilling services to two Iranian projects: the Sirri Field and Phase 1 of the South Pars field. I Googled for Sirri Field and here's part of what I found: http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.totalfinaelf.com/us/html/bi/cp/2000 /0003293. htm+Sirri+field,+TotalFinaElf+SA+.+&hl=en - - - - - In the Middle East, the Sirri E field (TotalFinaElf 60%) in Iran started production in February 1999 and rose to a level of 90 mb/d by year end. - - - - - Hmmm. Now remember, Cheney didn't leave Halliburton until July of 2000. Sounds like he may have been around when both the Sirri and South Pars fields were drilled by the company he led, and he certainly was around when the drilling deals were negotiated. I next did a Google on "South Pars Phase 1 Halliburton". At the very end of the Google cached version of the July 2000 Menas oil newsletter (http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.alberta-canada.com/export/pdf/Iran _Energy_J uly12000.pdf+Phase+1+of+the+South+Pars+field+Halliburton&hl=en), we find this: - - - - - 5.0 Facts and Figures 5.1. Quotes * The former US Defence Secretary Dick Cheney, who is currently Chief Executive of Halliburton, labelled present Iran-US relation as a "tragedy" and said that it is time to set the past crises aside. Speaking at the World Petroleum Congress in Calgary, Cheney said: "I hope we can find ways to improve mutual ties. I think one of those ways is to allow American firms to do the same works as other firms from other parts of the world are able to do now." He further added: "We are kept out of there primarily by our own government," noting that the US policy aims to prevent its companies from making large investments in Iran and that this policy is a "mistake." "While American companies have to sit on the sidelines, oil companies from the rest of the world have invested in Iran's energy sector, sometimes without operating the same high standards." He also remarked that unilateral economic sanctions were not effective in achieving political and even human rights goals. - - - - - Now, again, remember, here's the story as I understand it: Marc Rich is allegedly Satan Incarnate because he bought some oil from Iran over twenty years ago. But Dick Cheney presided over his company's, Halliburton's, setting up a fake shell company so it could drill oil wells in Iranian waters, in direct violation of US law -- and THAT is somehow just peachy-keen? Please, do me and yourselves a favor, and fax this to your Democratic legislators, as well as the 5th Circuit. Forward this by e-mail to your local and national media contacts. We have to do something about this. --=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=----=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=-- American Politics Journal is the longest--running political commentary on the Internet.For over a decade, our commentary has been read by America's mostpowerful decision shapers and opinion makers. We tear the lid off the funny business that passes for politics, press coverage, justice and punditry in America. We pull no punches. We speak truth to power. And we even manage to find a chuckle or two in the process! Tell your friends they can subscribe for FREE by filling out the form at our secure server site http://www.american-politics.com/subNEW.html = = = = = = = = = = = = For permission to reprint American Politics Journal in full or in part, call (212) 501--9150 or contact Carl Cook at press@american-politics.com = = = = = = = = = = = = This email is being sent to you because you have communicated with American Politics Journal, sent American Politics Journal an offer within the last six months, or you and American Politics Journal belong to the same "opt-in" list. We apologize if you find this email offensive or an intrusion on your privacy. If you received this mailing from american-politics.com, continued reception of our materials may be stopped at no cost to you by simply sending a request to be removed to: subscribe@american-politics.com Please type "UNSUBSCRIBE" in the subject line (no quotes) with no message in the body. Your request to be removed will be processed within 48 hours. Please DO NOT reply to this message if you wish to be removed. = = = = = = = = = = = = American Politics Journal Copyright (C) 2000 American Politics Journal Publications, Inc All rights reserved. ISSN No. 1523-1690 All materials contained herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of the authors and American Politics Journal Publications, Inc. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content. This message may not be reproduced in full or in part without the advance express written consent of American Politics Journal Publications, Inc. However, you may print this material (one machine-readable copy and one print copy per page) for personal use. # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net