% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

ENERQ.PK Message Board

  • murdoch65 murdoch65 Aug 9, 1999 10:39 AM Flag

    That would explain a lot


    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Of course $65m. is not a "ton of money", but it
      works out to quite a weight if converted to

      >"...On the topic of H2 storage, what is going on imo is
      The makers would love fuel cells, because it
      would just be another new-fangled sort of engine, and
      they could still rely on
      the oil companies for
      fuel. Not as radical as shifting to electric utilities.

      HOWEVER, there is no way to fuel the cells right
      now, and they are casting around desperately to figure
      out how to do it.
      Reformers? Not going to happen
      on mobile applications until they work on
      stationary, and even then, there's the problem of

      Stored H2 in bottles? Don't make me die

      So if and when the makers decide to dump tons of
      money on some company which can perform miracles, the
      solid h2
      storage, although not imo much more
      practical right now, is a good dumping place. I expect
      frantic makers to dump tons of
      resource on ECD some
      time in the future.

      This does NOT mean that
      ECD will make any money at it, necessarily. But who
      knows? Even Stan is not averse to turning
      a ruble
      now and then, just enough to keep the lab lights

    • No matter what position one might have taken in
      '48, (and I think the murder of so many caused an
      understandable commitment to an extreme solution), I think it
      bears pointing out that this is '99. Israel is a
      reality, and it doesn't bother me that much when the US
      shows a commitment to Israel that goes beyond the pale.
      We are either going to support Israel or we aren't,
      and I think we should.

      We do so in the face of
      lunatics, whom we have enriched, whose stated commitment is
      to drive Israel into the sea. I see no dishonor in
      antagonizing those lunatics. In fact, it is an honor to be
      their constant antagonists.

      While it is true (I
      assume) that injustice was committed toward Palestinian
      individuals in the creation of Israel, and that that wrong
      must be righted as much as possible now, this does not
      mean that we should cease supporting Israel with our
      consistent level of effort. In my personal opinion, no
      matter what one's private views on zionism, the current
      situation demands that any current solution includes a free
      and strong Israel.

      Just my opinion.


    • I think the position is absurd but I am afraid
      some are positioning themselves against oil
      independence because of it. I was very discouraged when I was
      told this. While Bin Laden calls the U.S. intervention
      in the middle east a Crusader complex, I think that
      is rather absurd too as there is so little
      Christianity left in the U.S. versus hundred and fifty years
      ago. Our support for Israel, according to General
      George Marshall who advised Truman against it, went
      against the national interest as it antagonized a great
      part of the Islamic world against us and undermined
      our position in the middle east. The British were
      opposed to Jewish immigration into Palestine during the
      war for this reason but were readying themselves to
      grant massive numbers of visas for trapped Jews in
      Europe for other parts of their Empire when Zionists in
      England started to agitate towards an immigration to
      Palestine position only. The son-in-law to the Chief Rabbi
      Hertz, Rabbi Schonfeld, wrote a letter to the London
      Times around l948 as the former head of the Jewish
      Rescue Committee outlining the Zionist obstruction of
      his efforts to save Jews in Europe with their
      Palestine only position to stop attacks on the King that he
      had not done enough to help Jews in Europe, and this
      letter can be found in the Jewish book entitled
      "Holocaust Victims Accuse." I point this out because I have
      found Jewish positons not aways rational in the past,
      as today in relation to the oil, especially when
      they are taken by zionists whose narrow focus often
      trips them up. This is the position of the Central
      Rabbinical Council. Truman was influenced politically by
      Chicago's Colonel Jake Arvey among others and the coming
      election in l948. Certainly, I can see the humanitarian
      aspects of this in the terrible refuge problem in Europe,
      but I can also see the reaction of the indigenous
      population whose Wahabi fundamentalism was culturally
      antagonistic to the westernized immigrants. I don't think we
      can solve these problems here but only recognize
      their effect on our energy problems. It is very unwise
      from any point of view, Jewish or otherwise, to foster
      dependence on external oil sources, and therefore my
      position is founded on my good will towards the Jewish
      community to help them when I see them make a mistake. I
      would not be a friend if I saw them make a strategic
      mistake and failed to point it out, for a collapse of the
      U.S. stock market and economy pinioned on an oil
      debacle would probably raise in the U.S. the very forces
      many on this board fears, that is, the Dr. William
      Pierces and the David Dukes. Therefore, a sound economy
      is the best defense against extremism, and it must
      be founded on sound principles.

    • I can't cast doubt on your thesis as to the
      Middle East, because I find it difficult, if not
      impossible, to understand what in heck you are

      Are you saying that Jews in New York fear that
      without an alterior motive, the US would not stay around
      to protect Israel, so they have helped push the US
      toward maintaining an additional pretext for continuing
      M.E. presence, i.e., the protection of Oil

      If that is what you're saying (I've probably got it
      wrong), then I think it's a bit absurd. While it is not
      unfair to point out the unprecedented loyalty of the US
      to Israel, I rather doubt we've needed the pretext
      of Big Oil to maintain it.

      The Crusades have
      been going on for a thousand years. I may agree that
      their justification is questionable, but no additional
      motive has been needed, I think. From what I can tell,
      protecting "Israel" seems to be a Christian as well as
      Jewish issue, in this country.

      But then again, I
      suppose Christians don't care quite as much as the 2% of
      this country which is Jewish.

      I'm more inclined
      to believe a conspiracy of stupidity, than any other
      theory, when it comes to diagnosing why we haven't kicked
      the M.E. Oil habbit.


    • 1. Most of the people here are interested in ENER
      because they have some broader view and interest in
      society's future, so I don't think that brainstorming about
      far-reaching issues is irrelevant. Eventually we'll have
      filters on yahoo, as on usenet, and those who don't want
      to read your posts won't have to.

      2. As to
      the specifics you raised yesterday, well I've read

      Your post struck me as borderline anti-semitic.
      Perhaps I was mistaken, perhaps not. Shana seems to have
      had some experience following the veiled convoluted
      arguments of anti-semites, and I can see where he's coming
      from. But I did not immediately dismiss its points

      I've had lengthy conversations with friends recently
      as to the fact that one can't make a single comment
      criticizing Jews as a group whereas one generally is not as
      intensely attacked if one criticizes other cultural groups.
      (Generally, I'm the token "Jewish" person in the
      conversation, even though I despise the belief.)

      My own
      policy, however naive, is to not criticize someone for
      giving me the benefit of their honest opinion, however
      twisted I may, or may not, think their opinion is. As for
      consulting with a Rabbi here or there, mazel-tov. Doesn't
      make you good, bad, or indifferent, but I guess they
      feel they're conversing with someone who's interested
      in engaging in productive conversation.

      Anyhow, I agree with you and a couple of others here, in
      my level of frustration with ENER's lack of
      breakthrough, regardless of making money on the stock. There is
      no reason on this Earth that the US should be
      importing any energy, or obliterating so much of its future
      with unecessarily foul environmental policies, and it
      would be nice to see us change course.


    • I don't know what that would prove. First, it was
      told to me in confidence. Second, everyone wants to be
      as anonymous as possible on these boards which make
      them such an open forum and so we really don't expect
      people to divulge names. Third, if you go to UJA
      meetings, just go up to one of the political leaders and
      ask them. Lay it out in a positive light. Would the
      U.S. keep its fleet there if the oil were to become
      unnecessary if we get a fuel cell, or solar energy, or ENER's
      battery? If an oil tariff created the cost environment for
      these developments, would that official support it? If
      not, why not? What would be the consequences for
      Israel? Would they be left unprotected against Russia and
      Syria (Syria, by the way, is arming to the teeth with
      missiles armed with chemical weapons because their pilots
      cannot compete with the Israelis), Iraq, and Iran (Iran,
      by the way, has purchased atomic bombs from the
      Kazakhstan stockpile, and combined with North Korean and
      Russian missile technology can reach Israel), and Egypt
      (Egypt, by the way, cannot be relied upon, and has been
      built up into a regional power by U.S. aid). Will
      Turkey continue to combine with the U.S. and Israel to
      outflank Syria if the U.S. withdraws its power from the
      region? Ask these questions, as I did, and you will
      probably not need names.

    • "I cannot help it when a prominent public official tells
      me they want U.S. dependence on the middle east for the reasons I stated. I am sorry it is so."

    • My comments on this board have always been
      constructive, and there must be more focus on when GM will go
      to mass production, when the U.S. government will
      really push alternative energy, and I tried to give some
      background on why I think we are going so slow. I would be
      interested in opposing views that are based on logical
      analysis instead of inflammatory talk. I cannot help it
      when a prominent public official tells me they want
      U.S. dependence on the middle east for the reasons I
      stated. I am sorry it is so. But we have to face it and
      see what we can do about it. There is no one more
      interested than I in seeing ENER a success even if I don't
      own any stock because it would be good for the
      country, but the reality of this situation is quite

    • You will find the opinions expressed here in the
      book entitled "Transformation" by I. Domb and
      available from the Jewish Guardian, P.O.Box 2143, Brooklyn,
      N.Y. ll202. They reflect traditional Jewish values,
      and represent the unanimous opinion of the Central
      Rabbinical Council of Williamsburg. Although I am not
      Jewish, and I believe my critics here are, you should
      know that my comments on this board are in strict
      agreement with Rabbinic opinion with whom I have consulted
      at length when they visited me at my home on Long

    • Protocols of Fredyism

      Get off the board Fred-this is a stock discussion board not a forum for your crap.

    • View More Messages