<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Syriana</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/03/20/syriana/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/03/20/syriana/</link>
	<description>Everyone has a right to my opinions</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 01:08:49 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tim Newman</title>
		<link>http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/03/20/syriana/comment-page-1/#comment-376</link>
		<dc:creator>Tim Newman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Mar 2006 04:43:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/?p=155#comment-376</guid>
		<description>These are fair comments Robert, and I admit that some of my criticisms are only really of interest to somebody like me who knows the system pretty well.

But the point about the logos was IMO an important one, although not regarding the logos per se.  The fact that no foreign company owns and operates a facility in the Middle East, and that the national oil companies are in total control of their western partners, means a lot of the message in this film is based on a completely false basis.  By this, I mean the "everything is connected" is not true (at least in the way that it was so well protrayed in &lt;i&gt;Traffic&lt;/i&gt;).  The director has established a link between Western oil executives, the lives of immigrant workers in the Gulf, and the interests of Gulf governments where none exists (or at least, not in the manner which is presented).

For this reason alone I cannot forgive the film; it is misleading in the extreme, at a time when I can really do without people in the Middle East feeling increased hostility towards Western oil workers.

All that said, your comments are interesting coming from somebody who obviously displays a healthy degree of skepticism, but is more neutral on the issue than I am.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>These are fair comments Robert, and I admit that some of my criticisms are only really of interest to somebody like me who knows the system pretty well.</p>
<p>But the point about the logos was IMO an important one, although not regarding the logos per se.  The fact that no foreign company owns and operates a facility in the Middle East, and that the national oil companies are in total control of their western partners, means a lot of the message in this film is based on a completely false basis.  By this, I mean the &#8220;everything is connected&#8221; is not true (at least in the way that it was so well protrayed in <i>Traffic</i>).  The director has established a link between Western oil executives, the lives of immigrant workers in the Gulf, and the interests of Gulf governments where none exists (or at least, not in the manner which is presented).</p>
<p>For this reason alone I cannot forgive the film; it is misleading in the extreme, at a time when I can really do without people in the Middle East feeling increased hostility towards Western oil workers.</p>
<p>All that said, your comments are interesting coming from somebody who obviously displays a healthy degree of skepticism, but is more neutral on the issue than I am.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
