China on Collision course with the West for Oil

With 1.3 billion people, the People's Republic of China is the world's most populous country and the second largest oil consumer, behind the U.S. In recent years, China has been undergoing a process of industrialization and is one of the fastest growing economies in the world. With real gross domestic product growing at a rate of 8-10% a year, China's need for energy is projected to increase by 150 percent by 2020. to sustain its growth China requires increasing amounts of oil. Its oil consumption grows by 7.5% per year, seven times faster than the U.S.'
Growth in Chinese oil consumption has accelerated mainly because of a large-scale transition away from bicycles and mass transit toward private automobiles, more affordable since China's admission to the World Trade Organization. Consequently, by year 2010 China is expected to have 90 times more cars than in 1990. With automobile numbers growing at 19% a year, projections show that China could surpass the total number of cars in the U.S. by 2030. Another contributor to the sharp increase in automobile sales is the very low price of gasoline in China. Chinese gasoline prices now rank among the lowest in the world for oil-importing countries, and are a third of retail prices in Europe and Japan, where steep taxes are imposed to discourage gasoline use.

Where will China get its oil?
China's ability to provide for its own needs is limited by the fact that its proven oil reserves are small in relation to its consumption. At current production rates they are likely to last for less than two decades. Though during the 1970s and 1980s China was a net oil exporter, it became a net oil importer in 1993 and is growingly dependent on foreign oil. China currently imports 32% of its oil and is expected to double its need for imported oil between now and 2010. A report by the International Energy Agency predicted that by 2030, Chinese oil imports will equal imports by the U.S. today.

China's expectation of growing future dependence on oil imports has brought it to acquire interests in exploration and production in places like Kazakhstan, Russia, Venezuela, Sudan, West Africa, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Canada. But despite its efforts to diversify its sources, China has become increasingly dependent on Middle East oil. Today, 58% of China's oil imports come from the region. By 2015, the share of Middle East oil will stand on 70%. Though historically China has had no long-standing strategic interests in the Middle East, its relationship with the region from where most of its oil comes is becoming increasingly important.

Implications for U.S.-China relations
U.S.-China relations are influenced by a wide array of issues from Taiwan to trade relations and human rights. But undoubtedly access to Middle East oil will become a key issue in the relations between the two powers. Clearly, in the short term, China recognizes that its energy security is increasingly dependent on cooperation with the U.S., rather than competition with it. China would like to maintain good relations with the U.S. and enjoy the economic benefits derived from such cooperation. But this inclination is balanced by the feeling among many Chinese leaders that the U.S. seeks to dominate the Persian Gulf in order to exercise control over its energy resources and that it tries to contain China's aspirations in the region. The U.S. is therefore considered a major threat to China's long-term energy security.
Although China is banking on oil development projects outside the Middle East, Beijing most likely will insist on nurturing its relations with the main oil-producing states in that region as an insurance policy. But its attempts to gain a foothold in the Middle East and build up a long-term strategic links with countries hostile to the U.S. could also bear heavily on U.S.-China relations. Especially troubling are China's arms sales to the region, its support of state sponsors of terrorism and its proliferation of dual use technology.
A report by the U.S.-China Security Review Commission, a group created by Congress, warned that China's increasing need for imported energy has given it an incentive to become closer to countries supporting terrorism like Iran, Iraq and Sudan:
"A key driver in China's relations with terrorist-sponsoring governments is its dependence on foreign oil to fuel its economic development. This dependency is expected to increase over the coming decade."
China's relations with state sponsors of terrorism have provided these countries a great deal of money, allowing them to continue to harbor terrorist organizations and to maintain a policy of oppression and exploitation of their people. China is the number one oil and gas importer from Iran. The two countries are bound by energy deals reaching a total value of $120 billion and growing. While the U.S. and EU were forging a diplomatic strategy to halt Iran's nuclear program, China signed in October 2004 its largest energy deal with Iran ever and promised to block any American attempt to refer Iran's nuclear program to the UN Security Council. This may indicate not only that China is interested in a militarily strong, even nuclear Iran that dominates the Gulf but also that for China, energy security considerations trump international cooperation on critical global security issues. In addition to its special relations with Iran, China is also known to be a provider of WMD technologies to rouge states including North Korea, Syria, Libya and Sudan.

China also provides conventional weapons that could threaten U.S. military forces securing the Persian Gulf. Of particular concern are China's sales to Iran of anti-ship cruise missiles, which pose a threat to oil tanker traffic and American naval vessels operating there. This arms trafficking presents an increasing threat to U.S. global security interests, particularly in the Middle East and Asia.

A key component of China's strategy to guarantee access to Persian Gulf oil is the special relations it has cultivated with Saudi Arabia. The ties with Riyadh go back to the mid-1980s when China sold Saudi Arabia intermediate range ballistic missiles. Since then, the relations have grown closer. High-level visits of Chinese leaders to Saudi Arabia culminated in 1999 with President Jiang Zemin's state visit in which he pronounced a "strategic oil partnership" between the two countries. China has offered to sell the Saudis intercontinental ballistic missiles. The Saudis have so far preferred to turn down many of the proposals and limit their procurement from China in order to maintain their special relations with the U.S. But continuous deterioration in Saudi-American relations or, in the longer run, a regime change in the oil kingdom, could drive the Saudis to end their reliance on the U.S. as the sole guarantor of their regime's security and offer China an expanded role.

Outside of the Middle East, China's pursuit of oil could undercut U.S. security interests on multiple fronts: In the South China Sea, China is involved in territorial disputes with Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam and Brunei over access to energy in the Spratly and Paracel Islands. In the East China Sea, where rich oil and gas reserves are believed to exist, rivalry is developing between China and Japan over access to energy resources. China has already begun the exploring process for gas reserves on its side of the East China Sea. The Japanese government claims that some of the reserves are actually on its side of the demarcation line and has accused China of attempting to extract hydrocarbons from its water. It also allowed its own oil firms to drill in the disputed territories—a move considered a provocation by China. Another source of tension is access to Russian oil. For many months, China and Japan have been involved in a bidding war over a major pipeline deal to deliver Russian oil from Eastern Siberia. China’s plan calls for a pipeline running to the Manchurian city of Daqing, while Japan is insisting on a pipeline that would run to Nakhodka, the Russian coastal area opposite to Japan. This tense atmosphere is feeding popular and political animosity, which have already resulted in a wave of violent anti-Japanese demonstrations in April 2005, and are likely to deepen over time. In Africa Chinese oil companies turn a blind eye to the way petrodollars are used by the local governments. One place where such indifference impacts America's effort to fight against corruption and human rights abuse is Sudan. The Chinese have invested more than $8 billion in joint exploration contracts in this country, including the building of a 900-mile pipeline to the Red Sea, deployed thousands of military personnel disguised as oil workers and provided arms to the Sudanese government to support it in the country's 20-year civil war. In September 2004, the United Nations Security Council passed resolution 1564, threatening Sudan with oil sanctions unless it curbed its support for belligerent militia groups in Darfur. To protect its oil interests in Sudan, which supplies seven percent of China’s oil imports, Beijing stated very clearly that it would veto any bid to impose such sanctions. In the Western Hemisphere China concluded oil and gas deals with Argentina, Brazil, Peru, and Ecuador. But its main country of interest is Venezuela, U.S.' fourth largest oil supplier. A series of oil agreements signed in early 2005 allow Chinese companies to explore for oil and gas and set up refineries in Venezuela. Chinese state-owned oil companies have also begun seeking ambitious oil deals in Canada, the top petroleum supplier to the U.S. China's continued penetration into the Western Hemisphere could have profound economic and political implications for the U.S. Considering the fact that both U.S.’ and Mexico's domestic crude production are falling, the U.S. cannot afford to lose chunks of the crude produced by the two countries that together supply a third of its oil imports. With less oil available to the American market the U.S. will be forced to seek this oil elsewhere, primarily in the Middle East, hence becoming more dependent on this tumultuous region.

China’s two decades of rapid economic growth have fueled a demand for energy that has outstripped domestic sources of supply. China became a net oil importer in 1993, and the country's dependence on energy imports is expected to continue to grow over the next 20 years, when it is likely to import some 60 percent of its oil and at least 30 percent of its natural gas. China thus is having to abandon its traditional goal of energy self-sufficiency brought about by a fear of strategic vulnerability and look abroad for resources. This study looks at the measures that China is taking to achieve energy security and the motivations behind those measures. It considers China's investment in overseas oil exploration and development projects, interest in transnational oil pipelines, plans for a strategic petroleum reserve, expansion of refineries to process crude supplies from the Middle East, development of the natural gas industry, and gradual opening of onshore drilling areas to foreign oil companies. The author concludes that these activities are designed, in part, to reduce the vulnerability of China's energy supply to U.S. power. China's international oil and gas investments, however, are unlikely to bring China the energy security it desires. China is likely to remain reliant on U.S. protection of the sea-lanes that bring the country most of its energy imports.


U.S., China Are on Collision Course Over Oil

Sixty-seven years ago, oil-starved Japan embarked on an aggressive expansionary policy designed to secure its growing energy needs, which eventually led the nation into a world war. Today, another Asian power thirsts for oil: China.

While the U.S. is absorbed in fighting the war on terror, the seeds of what could be the next world war are quietly germinating. With 1.3 billion people and an economy growing at a phenomenal 8% to 10% a year, China, already a net oil importer, is growing increasingly dependent on imported oil. Last year, its auto sales grew 70% and its oil imports were up 30% from the previous year, making it the world's No. 2 petroleum user after the U.S. By 2030, China is expected to have more cars than the U.S. and import as much oil as the U.S. does today.

Dependence on oil means dependence on the Middle East, home to 70% of the world's proven reserves. With 60% of its oil imports coming from the Middle East, China can no longer afford to sit on the sidelines of the tumultuous region. Its way of forming a footprint in the Middle East has been through providing technology and components for weapons of mass destruction and their delivery systems to unsavory regimes in places such as Iran, Iraq and Syria. A report by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, a group created by Congress to monitor U.S.-China relations, warned in 2002 that "this arms trafficking to these regimes presents an increasing threat to U.S. security interests in the Middle East." The report concludes: "A key driver in China's relations with terrorist-sponsoring governments is its dependence on foreign oil to fuel its economic development. This dependency is expected to increase over the coming decade."

Optimists claim that the world oil market will be able to accommodate China and that, instead of conflict, China's thirst could create mutual desire for stability in the Middle East and thus actually bring Beijing closer to the U.S.

History shows the opposite: Superpowers find it difficult to coexist while competing over scarce resources. The main bone of contention probably will revolve around China's relations with Saudi Arabia, home to a quarter of the world's oil. The Chinese have already supplied the Saudis with intermediate-range ballistic missiles, and they played a major role 20 years ago in a Saudi-financed Pakistani nuclear effort that may one day leave a nuclear weapon in the hands of a Taliban-type regime in Riyadh or Islamabad.

Since 9/11, a deep tension in U.S.-Saudi relations has provided the Chinese with an opportunity to win the heart of the House of Saud. The Saudis hear the voices in the U.S. denouncing Saudi Arabia as a "kernel of evil" and proposing that the U.S. seize and occupy the kingdom's oil fields. The Saudis especially fear that if their citizens again perpetrate a terror attack in the U.S., there would be no alternative for the U.S. but to terminate its long-standing commitment to the monarchy — and perhaps even use military force against it.

The Saudis realize that to forestall such a scenario they can no longer rely solely on the U.S. to defend the regime and must diversify their security portfolio. In their search for a new patron, they might find China the most fitting and willing candidate.

The risk of Beijing's emerging as a competitor for influence in the Middle East and a Saudi shift of allegiance are things Washington should consider as it defines its objectives and priorities in the 21st century. Without a comprehensive strategy designed to prevent China from becoming an oil consumer on a par with the U.S., a superpower collision is in the cards. The good news is that we are still in a position to halt China's slide into total dependency.

Unlike the U.S., China's energy infrastructure is largely underdeveloped and primarily coal-based. It has not yet invested in a multibillion-dollar oil infrastructure. China is therefore in a better position than the U.S. to bypass oil in favor of next-generation fuels.

The U.S. should embark on a frank dialogue with China, conveying to the Chinese the mutual benefits of circumventing oil and offering any assistance required to curb China's growing appetite for it. A shift from oil into other sources of transportation energy — such as bio-fuels or coal-based fuels, hydrogen and natural gas — could prevent future conflict and foster unprecedented Sino-American cooperation with significant economic benefits for both countries.

The Chinese would probably leapfrog oil if they could. Dependency of any kind is foreign to their culture. But without substantial American technological support, China is likely to follow the path of least resistance and become a full-fledged oil economy. Failure to address the issue with the utmost care would undercut all of today's costly efforts by the U.S. to reform and stabilize the Middle East.

This explosive, complex region cannot accommodate two major powers competing not only over a barrel but also over the hearts, minds and allegiance of its people.
Oil was first discovered in the U.S. in 1859. At the beginning of the 20th century it supplied only 4% of the world's energy; decades later it became the most important energy source.
Today oil supplies about 40% of the world's energy and 96% of its transportation energy. Since the shift from coal to oil, the world has consumed over 875 billion barrels. Another 1,000 billion barrels of proved and probable reserves remain to be recovered.

From now to 2020, world oil consumption will rise by about 60%. Transportation will be the fastest growing oil-consuming sector. By 2025, the number of cars will increase to well over 1.25 billion from approximately 700 million today. Global consumption of gasoline could double.

The two countries with the highest rate of growth in oil use are China and India, whose combined populations account for a third of humanity. In the next two decades, China's oil consumption is expected to grow at a rate of 7.5% per year and India's 5.5%. (Compare to a 1% growth for the industrialized countries). It will be strategically imperative for these countries to secure their access to oil.

Where are the reserves?
Proved oil reserves are those quantities of oil that geological information indicates can be with reasonable certainty recovered in the future from known reservoirs. Of the trillion barrels currently estimated, 6% are in North America, 9% in Central and Latin America, 2% in Europe, 4% in Asia Pacific, 7% in Africa, 6% in the Former Soviet Union. Today, 66% of global oil reserves are in the hands of Middle Eastern regimes: Saudi Arabia (25%), Iraq (11%), Iran (8%), UAE (9%), Kuwait (9%), and Libya (2%).
Following 9/11 and in light of the rise of radical Islam many have called for reduction of the dependency on Middle East oil. To offset the growing influence of Middle East producers, non-OPEC countries in Africa and Former Soviet Union have increased their production considerably. Many have even suggested that Russia could take on OPEC and help shift global oil supply away from the Middle East. The Washington Post even claimed that Moscow is "on its way to becoming the next Houston—the global capital of energy." And indeed, Russia's oil production increased to the point that it became the second largest exporter behind Saudi Arabia. But Russia's prospects of being a key player in the oil market in the long run are dim. Russia ranks seventh in proven oil reserves, holding only 5%. Its oil production peaked around 1999 and its reserves have been steadily declining since. That means that at current production rates, Russia will be out of the running by 2020.
Washington's search for reliable oil suppliers outside the Middle East has brought about an oil boom in many African countries like Angola, Nigeria, Guinea and Chad. But like Russia, Africa is hardly a bonanza. Its total reserves amount to 7% and its largest producer, Nigeria, will peak by the end of the decade. Africa will be out of the running by 2025.

Because reserves in non-Middle East countries are being depleted more rapidly than those of Middle East producers, their overall reserves-to-production ratio -- an indicator of how long proven reserves would last at current production rates -- is much lower (about 15 years for non-Middle East and 80 years for Middle East producers). If production continues at today's rate, many of the largest producers in 2002, such as Russia, Mexico, U.S., Norway, China and Brazil will cease to be relevant players in the oil market in less than two decades. At that point, the Middle East will be the only major reservoir of abundant crude oil. In fact, Middle Eastern producers will have a much bigger piece of the pie than ever before.

Wrestling the Russian Bear
Russia's curtailing deliveries of natural gas to Ukraine goes far beyond the bounds of a common commercial dispute between an energy supplying and an energy consuming nation. It is indicative of Russia's foreign policy vis-à-vis the Soviet Union's former allies spread across Central and Eastern Europe not to mention a warning shot across the bow of Central Asian energy exporters.

While Gazpom has a legitimate right to demand a market price for its product regardless of destination, the present dispute is lodged principally at the level of bilateral relations between Ukraine and the Russian Federation personified by the leaders of both states. Ukraine's Orange Revolution which catapulted Viktor Yuschenko to power was highly unwelcome in Moscow adding further evidence of Russia's declining influence in fully independent states it once dominated. This is contrasted by President Putin's moves to recentralize control over Russia's energy and power sectors reminiscent more so of a growing authoritarian regime rather than the expanded liberalization of a purportedly emerging democratic state.

Russia unwisely chose the eve of its assuming the leadership of the G8 to exercise energy brinksmanship while concurrently insisting on fair and competitive market practices in the energy trade which if pursued would in and of themselves promote Russia's competitive advantage as Europe's most significant provider of energy resources. With Russian influence smoldering in Georgia in the wake of President Shakashvili's assumption of power, and in view of the growing independence of Azerbaijan as a small but not insignificant competitor not only for Russian oil to the West but also as a viable and vital transit state for Central Asian energy resources, Gazprom decided to draw the line in Kiev. Russia insisted that as of January 1, 2006 Ukraine begin paying market prices for its gas effectively quadrupling the $60 per 1000 c/m price it had been paying under the terms agreed to by former Ukraine President Kuchma whose political persuasions were far more acceptable in Moscow than those of the present Ukraine administration. This price increase must be seen against the backdrop of Gazprom's prices to states across the neighboring Caucasus region: $64 per 1000 c/m to Georgia and reportedly $56 to Armenia. The rouge regime in Belarus, under the tutelage of Lukashenko, finds its price for Russian gas even more advantageous at $50 per 1000 c/m despite the fact that the Belarussian president has long refused to relinquish state control over that state's branch of the former Soviet northern Druzhba pipeline, a key asset for the transit of Russian gas to its downstream European customers. And while the price charged to Georgia appears inconsistent with its democratization movement, a closer look at that situation reveals considerable downstream investment by Russian RAO UES in Georgia's electricity network which depends on imported Russian gas to power their turbines coupled with Russian interest in gaining control over Georgia's main gas pipeline which, if it occurred, would tie Russia directly to its strongest Caucasus ally Armenia.

In the interim, the international community appears dumbstruck by this flurry of activity as if the issue of energy security remains a back-burner issue traditionally relegated to individual states and entirely disconnected from national security concerns. The fact is that energy security is not only a pressing issue for each and every sovereign nation, but because of the interdependencies that transporter energy transit generates energy security is a regional if not global defense-security concern. The United States knows this only too well, but NATO has yet to respond to this challenge. It should. And on this note, Russia should be held accountable for its destabilizing actions not only in Ukraine but also in its present leadership role of the elite G8 where it has already placed energy at the top of its agenda.

Having said this, productive negotiations in the run-up to the St. Petersburg Summit can occur based on known modalities that work. The OECD's process of peer-to-peer dialogue to promote open markets, financial transparency, and respectable competition policy should be the basis for discussion. Hence, a first step in avoiding the unnecessary destabilization of one state by another purportedly over a disagreement in the price charged for energy would be a frank discussion on leveling the playing field in the energy sector itself. Insistence on the principle of developing alternative energy transit routes and corridors unencumbered by the overt foreign policy interests of one state over the national security interests of another would be one step forward. This discussion could easily accommodate and recognize national interests in retaining control over vital critical energy infrastructure as a national security priority and concurrently insist on transparency in the privatization of energy infrastructure so often opaque and shrouded in mystery throughout Central and Eastern Europe. This plays to the interests of both energy producers and consumers.

Second, aligning to world energy prices - as abhorrent as one or another state might find them - is a reasonable rule to which all states need to be persuaded to aspire. Accepting this unpalatable medicine is the most efficient catalyst for diversifying primary energy supply by both country of origin and energy source. Finally, doing so would energize the development of alternative fuels and efficiency alternatives which have been long standing back burner issues not only for the countries of the G8 but for China, India, and the developing world as well.

Third, in particular the EU, the United States and Japan need to stop cowering under the fear of Russia as an energy giant. Russian oil reserves represent %6 of proven world resources at best. While Russian gas is much more pronounced hovering around %30 of proven reserves, gas is becoming a fungible commodity with the development of transportable LNG making alternative suppliers like Oman a major competitor for Russian gas in European, Japanese, and American markets discounting in the longer term the present strategic importance of land-based pipeline systems. While the price differential between Russian and Middle Eastern gas is pronounced introduction of some competition may be the only solution for taming the Russian bear and in doing so bring some stability to the European gas market. In short, Russia needs to begin treating their clients including the Ukraine like customers not as subservient to their pronounced national resource endowments. For their part, the G7 should begin to speak to Russia as it often speaks to them: bluntly and to the point.

Finally, NATO needs to continue to transform and to address present and future risks to state stability in the Euro-Atlantic region. The NATO-Russia Dialogue is partly designed for this purpose. Without undue exaggeration NATO's credibility rests on its ability to address in real terms those risks and challenges to its members' and partners' national security. Energy is the lifeline that binds all of these states together as an essential life support system for the civilian populations that have placed their trust in an Alliance that has successfully secured the peace in Europe for more than 40 years. It is obvious that peace and stability cannot be achieved in the Euro-Atlantic region without the cooperation of the Russian Federation. This is particularly true in the energy sphere. And while Gazprom may have drawn the line in Kiev, it is appropriate that the Alliance now draws its own line unless similar instabilities are allowed to be perpetrated elsewhere.

Crashed Saucers, Salvaged Equipment, Paranormal Experiences, Brainwashing, Mind Control, Telepathy, Teleportation, Time Travel, Incarnation, Extra-Terrestrials, Psychic, Metaphysics, The Rainbow Project, Project Invisibility, Phoenix Project, Teleportation Projects, Nicola Tesla-Visionary. John Von Neumann-mathematician of physicist, John Hutchinson-Dean U of C, Dr. David Hilbert - Multi Space Time/Realities, Dr. Gust off - Physicist, Dr. Levinson-Levinson Time/ Space Equations, Space-Time Tunneling, Teleportation, USS Eldrige, The Montauk Chair, Alternate Reality, Warping Space Time, Past and Future Travels to the Year 6048, Unrecognizable Ruins, Weather Control, Z-Argon Gases, Alternate Time Lines, Altered States of Reality, No Perception of Time, Mind Control, Altered Auras, Extra-Terrestrial Bases, Stealth Technology. Tesla Towers, Teleportation to the Planets, Atlantis, Falling Frogs, Teleportation Machines, Extraterrestrial bases, Tesla Arranges ET's meeting, Pleiadians, Grays and Reptilians show up, Alchemy, other domains, Crashed Ships, Bavarian Alps, Ruins: Ancient Civilizations, Bodies Found Embedded in the walls at Montauk, time tunneling, alien projects, Atlantis, Secret Society's, German Mars Projects, Albert Einstein, Nicola Tesla, Micro chip Implants, Rainbow, Invisibility and Hyper Space, Space - Time Continuum, Worm Holes, Space Time, Time Travel, Invisibility Machines, Hypo-Meditation, Weather Control, "Psychic" Signals, Psychic Frequency. Time Vortex, Face of Mars, Ancient Civilizations, Mars Ruins, Telepathic Thought, and Powers of the Mind, Alternate Realities, Artificial Intelligence, and Monster Manifested, Walking into the Time tunnel. Anomalies in time, Reptilians, Balance of time, Intelligence's off our planet, Project "God Edge" Manifesting of Objects, Subconscious Mind, Alien Intervention, Secret Societies, Celestial Management, Self Conscious computers, Magnetic Field, Et message of Islam, CIA, ISLAM, ALIENS, DRUGS IN USA, Montauk Base, Mind Control, Finite Space, first electronic computer, zero time frame Reference, Stealth Bombers, underground mars caverns, dead civilizations, psychic nature vortexes, Akashic location system, religious artifacts, alien walk in's, teleportation, Philadelphia experiment. The subconscious mind, Hilga Marro, aliens, Bob Lazar, John Lear, Mars Face, Mars Pyramid what Nasa Knows about Mars Einstein, Eldridge Survivors, Element 115, String Theory, University of Yale, Princeton university, UCLA, USC, CAL TECH, MIT, Harvard university, investing in Stock market for Alien Technology, education, movie, church, Christian, death, abortion, evolution, web hosting, job search, search engines, coca cola, Pepsi, TV, radio, MTV, male, mortgage rates, Olympics, stock quotes, weather, AVI, virus, diet, family, baseball, beach, fun, female, male, free games, friends, hotels, las vegas, mac, Iraq, Iran, China, Russia, USA, Bush, CIA, FBI, NSA, ONI, OSI, millions of agents on tax payer pay roll playing computer games all day long reading Alienshift, Humanoid Alien in Las Vegas walking freely, S4 Giant Gray Master Aliens in under ground united nation the real one coping with humans. UFO video, UFO Pictures, Alien video, CNN, garden, medicine, NASCAR, nostradamus, home, career in Alientology, Steven Greer try to finish the Oil project for Exxon and Mobile sending all of them home jobless with his Alien free energy project, just like what Tesla did!, Art Bell, Ice age. FX, Euro, Dollar, Baseball, alien, Yahoo, MSN, CNN, Internet chat , Dating, Matrix, Microsoft, Las Vegas, hotels, stocks, bonds, ET eyes, movies, games. church, ET message of Islam, ALLAH, Mohammad, Quran, DVD, PC, fishing, Real Estate, IRS, Napster, Bible, Diet, Game boy, Star Trek, Baseball, computers, maze generator, game downloads, Angelina Jolie, Tattoos, Jennifer Lopez, NFL, Kazaa, Atkins Diet, final fantasy, AOL, Jokes, Google, Maps, search engines, ask jeeves, YOUTUBE, music, eBAY, Jobs, used cars, online degrees, zip codes, furniture, Kelly blue book, weather, lyrics, dictionary, Read my Lips stop Profiling People of the Land of the Free, health, Wal-Mart, horoscopes, weight loss, home depot, WinZip, BOB LAZAR ALIENS RETICULI ELEMENT 115 PHYSICS FLYING SAUCERS ANTIMATTER GRAVITY WAVES DISCS S4 GROOM LAKE PAPOOSE LAKE AREA 51 NEVADA "DR. EDWARD TELLER" "JON FARHAT" "ART BELL", free games free downloads MP3 airline cheats tires auto parts insurance, Do not travel in the Year 2012.