The Iran Sanctions That Aren't - State Department Give Waivers to 11 Countries

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced today that the State Department is exempting 10 European countries and Japan from penalties for doing business with Iran's central bank:

"I am pleased to announce that an initial group of eleven countries has significantly reduced their volume of crude oil purchases from Iran -- Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and the United Kingdom. As a result, I will report to the Congress that sanctions pursuant to Section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2012 (NDAA) will not apply to the financial institutions based in these countries, for a renewable period of 180 days," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a Tuesday statement. "The actions taken by these countries were not easy. They had to rethink their energy needs at a critical time for the world economy and quickly begin to find alternatives to Iranian oil, which many had been reliant on for their energy needs."

Of course, Mrs. Clinton didn't mention that Iran has already announced it would no longer sell crude to France and the United Kingdom, so they're getting a waiver based on Iran's actions,not theirs. And the other EU countries have already announced they will phase out all purchases of Iranian oil by July 1st. However, at this point it really doesn't matter. Without barring countries from dealing with Iran's Central Bank the oil sanctions are almost meaningless.

Let me explain to you why. Oil is fungible, and as we saw with the UN's Oil for Food scandal involving Saddam Hussein and Iraq, it's easily transferable, can easily be moved through other hands to disguise its origin and can be swapped via third parties for other items. The US could even end up buying Iranian oil if it was shipped to say, Venezuela and reflagged. But take away the ability of buyers to pay Iran for it directly by isolating Iran's central bank and it becomes a much more difficult and costly matter.

One of the few effective things President George W. Bush did in the period after 9/11 to fight Islamist terrorism was to identify the banks used to bankroll it and a number of questionable individuals and organizations who held accounts in otherwise legitimate institutions. Aside from freezing all suspect assets here in America and blocking US financial institutions from having any dealings with the suspect accounts and organizations, President Bush successfully got foreign financial institutions to cooperate by ordering US financial institutions not to deal with banks overseas handling accounts for places like the Islamic Cultural Center in Milan, Italy, Al Taqwa Construction in Dubai and the Revival of Islamic Heritage Society(RIHS) in Kuwait, all al-Qaeda and Hamas fronts. Since the world's banking system is wired through New York, most countries complied, which led to something like $79.9 million in terrorist assets being seized.

If President Obama was actually serious about stopping Iran's nuclear weapons program and ending Iran's financing of terrorism, he'd do something similar and make all of Iran's banks including Iran's central bank persona non grata in the world's financial systems using the same tools. Even countries like China and India might decide that forgoing Iranian oil was better than having their ability to perform financial transactions here in America compromised or curtailed.

But then, that was never going to happen with this president. I've become fairly convinced that President Obama isn't particularly exercised about whether Iran goes nuclear or not. He might just take a wag the dog option to pull off a strike on Iran if he's lagging in the polls come October, but failing that, he appears to be fine with it.

Either he's simply clueless and doesn't see the danger, is too preoccupied with his domestic agenda and his re-election bid,or feels that America needs to be taken down a peg. Or perhaps a combination of all three.

The Iran Sanctions That Aren't - State Department Give Waivers to 11 Countries

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced today that the State Department is exempting 10 European countries and Japan from penalties for doing business with Iran's central bank:

"I am pleased to announce that an initial group of eleven countries has significantly reduced their volume of crude oil purchases from Iran -- Belgium, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, and the United Kingdom. As a result, I will report to the Congress that sanctions pursuant to Section 1245 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 2012 (NDAA) will not apply to the financial institutions based in these countries, for a renewable period of 180 days," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a Tuesday statement. "The actions taken by these countries were not easy. They had to rethink their energy needs at a critical time for the world economy and quickly begin to find alternatives to Iranian oil, which many had been reliant on for their energy needs."

Of course, Mrs. Clinton didn't mention that Iran has already announced it would no longer sell crude to France and the United Kingdom, so they're getting a waiver based on Iran's actions,not theirs. And the other EU countries have already announced they will phase out all purchases of Iranian oil by July 1st. However, at this point it really doesn't matter. Without barring countries from dealing with Iran's Central Bank the oil sanctions are almost meaningless.

Let me explain to you why. Oil is fungible, and as we saw with the UN's Oil for Food scandal involving Saddam Hussein and Iraq, it's easily transferable, can easily be moved through other hands to disguise its origin and can be swapped via third parties for other items. The US could even end up buying Iranian oil if it was shipped to say, Venezuela and reflagged. But take away the ability of buyers to pay Iran for it directly by isolating Iran's central bank and it becomes a much more difficult and costly matter.

One of the few effective things President George W. Bush did in the period after 9/11 to fight Islamist terrorism was to identify the banks used to bankroll it and a number of questionable individuals and organizations who held accounts in otherwise legitimate institutions. Aside from freezing all suspect assets here in America and blocking US financial institutions from having any dealings with the suspect accounts and organizations, President Bush successfully got foreign financial institutions to cooperate by ordering US financial institutions not to deal with banks overseas handling accounts for places like the Islamic Cultural Center in Milan, Italy, Al Taqwa Construction in Dubai and the Revival of Islamic Heritage Society(RIHS) in Kuwait, all al-Qaeda and Hamas fronts. Since the world's banking system is wired through New York, most countries complied, which led to something like $79.9 million in terrorist assets being seized.

If President Obama was actually serious about stopping Iran's nuclear weapons program and ending Iran's financing of terrorism, he'd do something similar and make all of Iran's banks including Iran's central bank persona non grata in the world's financial systems using the same tools. Even countries like China and India might decide that forgoing Iranian oil was better than having their ability to perform financial transactions here in America compromised or curtailed.

But then, that was never going to happen with this president. I've become fairly convinced that President Obama isn't particularly exercised about whether Iran goes nuclear or not. He might just take a wag the dog option to pull off a strike on Iran if he's lagging in the polls come October, but failing that, he appears to be fine with it.

Either he's simply clueless and doesn't see the danger, is too preoccupied with his domestic agenda and his re-election bid,or feels that America needs to be taken down a peg. Or perhaps a combination of all three.

Just One More Question, Mr. President..

Cheerfully swiped from the one and only Hugh Hewitt.

And placed on a number of gas pumps in my little corner of the world...where prices are climbing towards $4.50 per gallon including Big Government's 17-22% profit for just being there (AKA Federal, State and local taxes).

Just One More Question, Mr. President..

Cheerfully swiped from the one and only Hugh Hewitt.

And placed on a number of gas pumps in my little corner of the world...where prices are climbing towards $4.50 per gallon including Big Government's 17-22% profit for just being there (AKA Federal, State and local taxes).

Obama's Energy Speech - Lie After Lie After Lie

Someone obviously whispered in our Dear Leader's ear that gas prices have skyrocketed, and it wasn't polling well. So he decided to address the peons in front of a friendly crowd at th eUniversity of Miami, Florida, telling them in effect 'hey, it's not my fault, it's the greedy oil companies so stop whining and go buy a Volt or something.'

The speech was so ruthlessly cynical and lacking in truth that it would take more space than it's worth to fully debunk it, but there are several points worth underlining:


Now, some politicians they see this as a political opportunity. I know you’re shocked by that. (Laughter.) Last week, the lead story in one newspaper said, “Gasoline prices are on the rise and Republicans are licking their chops.” That’s a quote. That was the lead. "Licking their chops." Only in politics do people root for bad news, do they greet bad news so enthusiastically. You pay more; they’re licking their chops. You can bet that since it’s an election year, they’re already dusting off their 3-point plan for $2 gas. And I’ll save you the suspense. Step one is to drill and step two is to drill. And then step three is to keep drilling.

You know there are no quick fixes to this problem. You know we can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices.

That seems to be a key phrase for this president 'we can't drill our way to lower gas prices.'

An honest response would be, 'how the hell would you know, sir'?

One of the first things President Obama did when he became president was to cancel leases for oil and gas drilling in Utah, and he followed up with cancellation in in Virginia, in the Gulf and suspended them in Colorado and Montana. In 2010, he doubled down with new, stringent regulations to make future leasing on federal land for energy exploration and drilling far more difficult.

He issued not one but two executive orders halting drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, one of which defied a court order. And his administration has been refusing to issue any new permits ever since. The Department of Energy's own figures says that Gulf oil output will be down 17% by the end of 2013, compared with the start of 2011.

This president is also blocking access to an estimated 19 billion barrels of oil on the Pacific and Atlantic coasts and the eastern Gulf of Mexico, another 10 billion barrels estimated in the Chukchi Sea off the Alaskan coast, and another 10 billion barrels of oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve. This is th esame president who later on inhis speech said 'we're focused on production'!

The amount of oil that we drill at home doesn’t set the price of gas by itself. The oil market is global; oil is bought and sold in a world market. And just like last year, the single biggest thing that’s causing the price of oil to spike right now is instability in the Middle East -– this time around Iran. When uncertainty increases, speculative trading on Wall Street increases, and that drives prices up even more.

If we’re going to take control of our energy future and can start avoiding these annual gas price spikes that happen every year — when the economy starts getting better, world demand starts increasing, turmoil in the Middle East or some other parts of the world — if we’re going to avoid being at the mercy of these world events, we’ve got to have a sustained, all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy.

The president blamed high prices several times on turmoil in the Middle East rather than his own mismanagement and incompetence. And mentioned global demand as a factor,particularly in China.


Just a little while ago, there was a bill in Congress to approve the Keystone Pipeline, a project that would have not only provided thousands of badly needed construction jobs but lowered the cost of transporting oil to American refineries - and not from some hot spot in the Middle East, but from Canada. That project was killed by the president with the assistance of his fellow Democrats in the Senate....and the fed up Canadians are routing that oil to Vancouver via an already existing Canadian pipeline and have sold those oil contracts to China.

President Obama blamed this fiasco on - wait for it - Republicans, simply because they wanted to end the dithering and give the Canadians some indication we were serious about buying their oil. hey, not only did President Obama see to it that we lost out on 900,000 barrels a day of badly needed oil to China, he insulted one of our closest allies in the bargain at the same time. Focused on production!

Another interesting factoid - remember the President gifting over a billion of your tax dollars to Brazil to finance their oil exploration because, as he told them 'we want to be your best customers' ? Instead oil financing oil exploration here?

The United States consumes more than a fifth of the world’s oil. But we only have 2% of the world’s oil reserves. That means we can’t just rely on fossil fuels from the last century. We can’t just allow ourselves to be held hostage by the ups and downs of the world oil market. We have to keep developing new sources of energy. We have to keep developing new technology that helps us use less energy. We have to keep relying on the American know-how and ingenuity that comes from places like the University of Miami. That’s our future. And that’s exactly the path we’ve been taking these last three years.

That 2% figure is demonstrably false on the face of it, since believe it or not, America is one of top five oil exporters. But even without going there, this president,who claims we're running out of oil and that he's focused on an all-of-the above strategy curiously leaves out two major oil sources here at home.

The first is shale oil, which the administration has fought tooth and nail but is providing quite a few jobs in the Dakotas and other Rocky Mountain states. The process of fracking, which the president has also tried to restrict as much as possible on faux environmental grounds is making headlines in a great many places, but getting hardly any support...certainly nothing like the bogus 'green energy' companies like Solyndra run by well-connected insiders and Obama campaign donors that have sucked up billions of taxpayer dollars and been an abysmal failure.

Another energy resource that has been totally ignored because of the Obama Administration's focus on cap n' tax, subsidizing the UAW friendly bailout of GM and similar pursuits is the gasification of coal, which I've mentioned a few times of these pages.

Gasification is a proven, clean technology that takes coal and reprocesses it into refinable oil and petroleum products. It's how Hitler kept the Panzers running after the British fleet cut off much of Germany's access to Middle East and Asian oil.

The United States is justifiably called the Saudi Arabia of goal, and we have ample supplies of it. Back in the 1970's, when our Arab friends put an embargo on oil shipments to America and oil was flirting with $100 per barrel, President Carter performed one of the few intelligent acts of his administration and authorized the development of American synthetic fuel made by this process, which could be done then for about half of what the Arabs were asking for their crude.

The project worked quite well for a few tears, but was scrapped when crude prices from the Middle East crashed in response and made it less economical.

Gasification is still a cheap source of oil, the technology has improved considerably since the 1970's, we have massive coal deposits and it could still produce oil for about half what Brent crude is going for on the spot markets. So why isn't Mr. 'all-of-the above strategy' jumping on this?

Here's why. First of all, President Obama, quite frankly, knows very little about energy but he does know that a lot of his base hates the coal and oil industry, because that's what Democrats have told them for years without letting them in on how ample energy affects things like food prices, the cost of goods and services and yes,what they pay at the pump. They've even got these well-trained lemmings buying electric and hybrid cars because they're not thinking about what the electric power plants run on that generate that 'non-fossil fuels' energy for that spiffy new Prius or not so spiffy GM Volt.

The oil companies make a convenient target, as the president demonstrates here:

Right now, four billion of your tax dollars subsidize the oil industry every year. Four billion dollars. These are the same oil companies that have been making record profits off the money you spend at the pump. And now they deserve another four billion dollars from us?

It’s outrageous. It’s inexcusable. And every politician who’s been fighting to keep these subsidies in place should explain to the American people why the oil industry needs more of their money. Especially at a time like this.

What the president is talking about is what the oil companies write off as R&D for exploration and for depreciation and depleting of existing equipment and resources, just like every other corporation. Make special rules that apply just to those 'greedy oil companies' and watch how research and development and the exploration for new resources dries up.

Which, by the way, is exactly what the president and other Big Government apparatchniks want.

They absolutely loves the high taxes generated by super-sized prices at the pump, which gives them huge sums to spend on pet projects and rewarding loyal constituencies. Those greedy, profiteering oil companies make, on average, about a 9% profit on a gallon of gas in exchange for finding, pumping, shipping, refining and retailing it. In California, the government's cut on a gallon of gasoline at today's prices simply for being there ranges from a 17% 'profit' per gallon in outlying areas to 22% in cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco, depending on sales taxes and the actual retail price involved.

President Obama is hoping that retailing the Big Lie on energy is going to spin the issue to make high gas prices the fault of the Republicans in Congress, who won't OK fresh giveaways of taxpayer dollars to his green energy cronies.

It shows exactly how much this president really cares about the 'little people', doesn't it?

Obama's Energy Speech - Lie After Lie After Lie

Someone obviously whispered in our Dear Leader's ear that gas prices have skyrocketed, and it wasn't polling well. So he decided to address the peons in front of a friendly crowd at th eUniversity of Miami, Florida, telling them in effect 'hey, it's not my fault, it's the greedy oil companies so stop whining and go buy a Volt or something.'

The speech was so ruthlessly cynical and lacking in truth that it would take more space than it's worth to fully debunk it, but there are several points worth underlining:


Now, some politicians they see this as a political opportunity. I know you’re shocked by that. (Laughter.) Last week, the lead story in one newspaper said, “Gasoline prices are on the rise and Republicans are licking their chops.” That’s a quote. That was the lead. "Licking their chops." Only in politics do people root for bad news, do they greet bad news so enthusiastically. You pay more; they’re licking their chops. You can bet that since it’s an election year, they’re already dusting off their 3-point plan for $2 gas. And I’ll save you the suspense. Step one is to drill and step two is to drill. And then step three is to keep drilling.

You know there are no quick fixes to this problem. You know we can’t just drill our way to lower gas prices.

That seems to be a key phrase for this president 'we can't drill our way to lower gas prices.'

An honest response would be, 'how the hell would you know, sir'?

One of the first things President Obama did when he became president was to cancel leases for oil and gas drilling in Utah, and he followed up with cancellation in in Virginia, in the Gulf and suspended them in Colorado and Montana. In 2010, he doubled down with new, stringent regulations to make future leasing on federal land for energy exploration and drilling far more difficult.

He issued not one but two executive orders halting drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, one of which defied a court order. And his administration has been refusing to issue any new permits ever since. The Department of Energy's own figures says that Gulf oil output will be down 17% by the end of 2013, compared with the start of 2011.

This president is also blocking access to an estimated 19 billion barrels of oil on the Pacific and Atlantic coasts and the eastern Gulf of Mexico, another 10 billion barrels estimated in the Chukchi Sea off the Alaskan coast, and another 10 billion barrels of oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve. This is th esame president who later on inhis speech said 'we're focused on production'!

The amount of oil that we drill at home doesn’t set the price of gas by itself. The oil market is global; oil is bought and sold in a world market. And just like last year, the single biggest thing that’s causing the price of oil to spike right now is instability in the Middle East -– this time around Iran. When uncertainty increases, speculative trading on Wall Street increases, and that drives prices up even more.

If we’re going to take control of our energy future and can start avoiding these annual gas price spikes that happen every year — when the economy starts getting better, world demand starts increasing, turmoil in the Middle East or some other parts of the world — if we’re going to avoid being at the mercy of these world events, we’ve got to have a sustained, all-of-the-above strategy that develops every available source of American energy.

The president blamed high prices several times on turmoil in the Middle East rather than his own mismanagement and incompetence. And mentioned global demand as a factor,particularly in China.


Just a little while ago, there was a bill in Congress to approve the Keystone Pipeline, a project that would have not only provided thousands of badly needed construction jobs but lowered the cost of transporting oil to American refineries - and not from some hot spot in the Middle East, but from Canada. That project was killed by the president with the assistance of his fellow Democrats in the Senate....and the fed up Canadians are routing that oil to Vancouver via an already existing Canadian pipeline and have sold those oil contracts to China.

President Obama blamed this fiasco on - wait for it - Republicans, simply because they wanted to end the dithering and give the Canadians some indication we were serious about buying their oil. hey, not only did President Obama see to it that we lost out on 900,000 barrels a day of badly needed oil to China, he insulted one of our closest allies in the bargain at the same time. Focused on production!

Another interesting factoid - remember the President gifting over a billion of your tax dollars to Brazil to finance their oil exploration because, as he told them 'we want to be your best customers' ? Instead oil financing oil exploration here?

The United States consumes more than a fifth of the world’s oil. But we only have 2% of the world’s oil reserves. That means we can’t just rely on fossil fuels from the last century. We can’t just allow ourselves to be held hostage by the ups and downs of the world oil market. We have to keep developing new sources of energy. We have to keep developing new technology that helps us use less energy. We have to keep relying on the American know-how and ingenuity that comes from places like the University of Miami. That’s our future. And that’s exactly the path we’ve been taking these last three years.

That 2% figure is demonstrably false on the face of it, since believe it or not, America is one of top five oil exporters. But even without going there, this president,who claims we're running out of oil and that he's focused on an all-of-the above strategy curiously leaves out two major oil sources here at home.

The first is shale oil, which the administration has fought tooth and nail but is providing quite a few jobs in the Dakotas and other Rocky Mountain states. The process of fracking, which the president has also tried to restrict as much as possible on faux environmental grounds is making headlines in a great many places, but getting hardly any support...certainly nothing like the bogus 'green energy' companies like Solyndra run by well-connected insiders and Obama campaign donors that have sucked up billions of taxpayer dollars and been an abysmal failure.

Another energy resource that has been totally ignored because of the Obama Administration's focus on cap n' tax, subsidizing the UAW friendly bailout of GM and similar pursuits is the gasification of coal, which I've mentioned a few times of these pages.

Gasification is a proven, clean technology that takes coal and reprocesses it into refinable oil and petroleum products. It's how Hitler kept the Panzers running after the British fleet cut off much of Germany's access to Middle East and Asian oil.

The United States is justifiably called the Saudi Arabia of goal, and we have ample supplies of it. Back in the 1970's, when our Arab friends put an embargo on oil shipments to America and oil was flirting with $100 per barrel, President Carter performed one of the few intelligent acts of his administration and authorized the development of American synthetic fuel made by this process, which could be done then for about half of what the Arabs were asking for their crude.

The project worked quite well for a few tears, but was scrapped when crude prices from the Middle East crashed in response and made it less economical.

Gasification is still a cheap source of oil, the technology has improved considerably since the 1970's, we have massive coal deposits and it could still produce oil for about half what Brent crude is going for on the spot markets. So why isn't Mr. 'all-of-the above strategy' jumping on this?

Here's why. First of all, President Obama, quite frankly, knows very little about energy but he does know that a lot of his base hates the coal and oil industry, because that's what Democrats have told them for years without letting them in on how ample energy affects things like food prices, the cost of goods and services and yes,what they pay at the pump. They've even got these well-trained lemmings buying electric and hybrid cars because they're not thinking about what the electric power plants run on that generate that 'non-fossil fuels' energy for that spiffy new Prius or not so spiffy GM Volt.

The oil companies make a convenient target, as the president demonstrates here:

Right now, four billion of your tax dollars subsidize the oil industry every year. Four billion dollars. These are the same oil companies that have been making record profits off the money you spend at the pump. And now they deserve another four billion dollars from us?

It’s outrageous. It’s inexcusable. And every politician who’s been fighting to keep these subsidies in place should explain to the American people why the oil industry needs more of their money. Especially at a time like this.

What the president is talking about is what the oil companies write off as R&D for exploration and for depreciation and depleting of existing equipment and resources, just like every other corporation. Make special rules that apply just to those 'greedy oil companies' and watch how research and development and the exploration for new resources dries up.

Which, by the way, is exactly what the president and other Big Government apparatchniks want.

They absolutely loves the high taxes generated by super-sized prices at the pump, which gives them huge sums to spend on pet projects and rewarding loyal constituencies. Those greedy, profiteering oil companies make, on average, about a 9% profit on a gallon of gas in exchange for finding, pumping, shipping, refining and retailing it. In California, the government's cut on a gallon of gasoline at today's prices simply for being there ranges from a 17% 'profit' per gallon in outlying areas to 22% in cities like Los Angeles and San Francisco, depending on sales taxes and the actual retail price involved.

President Obama is hoping that retailing the Big Lie on energy is going to spin the issue to make high gas prices the fault of the Republicans in Congress, who won't OK fresh giveaways of taxpayer dollars to his green energy cronies.

It shows exactly how much this president really cares about the 'little people', doesn't it?

Iran Ends Crude Oil Sales To UK And French Companies

The Iranian regime has formally announced that it is cutting off all oil sales to French and British companies.

The ban is in retaliation for EU sanctions on buying Iranian oil, set to go into effect on July 1st of this year.

"Exporting crude to British and French companies has been stopped ... we will sell our oil to new customers," spokesman Alireza Nikzad was quoted as saying by the Ministry of Petroleum website. For 'new customers', read India and China.

The European countries had already cut back their purchases of Iran oil in anticipation of the sanctions, with major players like French company Total, Royal Dutch Shell and Spain's Cepsa and Repsol either cutting back sharply on Iranian crude or ceasing to buy it altogether.The EU accounted for close to 18% of Iran's imports.

The Europeans say they have reserves for about 120 days, and there are additional sources available like Russia, South America,Libya, the U.S.and European North Sea Oil. In addition, the Saudis and Gulf States have already pledged to make up any shortfall. That could lead to fireworks if the Iranians decide to try close off the Strait of Hormuz to stop the Persian Gulf Oil from reaching Europe.

The idea behind the sanctions is to force Tehran into giving up its illegal nuclear weapons program. I see the Iranian regime as trying something much more dramatic rather than giving up their nukes.

Iran Ends Crude Oil Sales To UK And French Companies

The Iranian regime has formally announced that it is cutting off all oil sales to French and British companies.

The ban is in retaliation for EU sanctions on buying Iranian oil, set to go into effect on July 1st of this year.

"Exporting crude to British and French companies has been stopped ... we will sell our oil to new customers," spokesman Alireza Nikzad was quoted as saying by the Ministry of Petroleum website. For 'new customers', read India and China.

The European countries had already cut back their purchases of Iran oil in anticipation of the sanctions, with major players like French company Total, Royal Dutch Shell and Spain's Cepsa and Repsol either cutting back sharply on Iranian crude or ceasing to buy it altogether.The EU accounted for close to 18% of Iran's imports.

The Europeans say they have reserves for about 120 days, and there are additional sources available like Russia, South America,Libya, the U.S.and European North Sea Oil. In addition, the Saudis and Gulf States have already pledged to make up any shortfall. That could lead to fireworks if the Iranians decide to try close off the Strait of Hormuz to stop the Persian Gulf Oil from reaching Europe.

The idea behind the sanctions is to force Tehran into giving up its illegal nuclear weapons program. I see the Iranian regime as trying something much more dramatic rather than giving up their nukes.

India Opts Out Of Participating In Iran Oil Embargo

India, the world's fourth largest oil consumer has informed the US and Europe that it will not participate in the embargo on Iranian oil scheduled to start - if it starts - this summer.

"It is not possible for India to take any decision to reduce the imports from Iran drastically, because among the countries which can provide the requirement of the emerging economies, Iran is an important country amongst them," Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee told reporters on a visit to the Unites States.

Yeah, sanctions'll work. Sure they will.

In a related item, India and Iran have agreed to drop the use of the dollar as a reserve currency for oil trading between the two countries. They're using gold.

India Opts Out Of Participating In Iran Oil Embargo

India, the world's fourth largest oil consumer has informed the US and Europe that it will not participate in the embargo on Iranian oil scheduled to start - if it starts - this summer.

"It is not possible for India to take any decision to reduce the imports from Iran drastically, because among the countries which can provide the requirement of the emerging economies, Iran is an important country amongst them," Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee told reporters on a visit to the Unites States.

Yeah, sanctions'll work. Sure they will.

In a related item, India and Iran have agreed to drop the use of the dollar as a reserve currency for oil trading between the two countries. They're using gold.

Khaddaffi Dead : The Fall Of The Brother Leader

Libyan leader Moamad Khaddaffi was killed this morning, fighting to the last as his final stronghold in Sirte was taken by the rebels.He'd been in power for 44 years.

National Transitional Council (NTC) Prime Minister Mahmoud Jibril announced the death at a news conference this morning in Tripoli.

Jibril said NTC forces were now pursuing Saif al-Islam, Col Khaddaffi's most prominent son, who fled Sirte in a convoy before Sirte fell. He's probably the last major Khaddaffi loyalist still at large.

Jibril also called for neighboring Algeria to turn over the members of KHaddaffi's family who fled there in August to revolutionary justice. Two of KHaddaffi's younger sons, his daughter and his wife are in the country.

"A new Libya is born today," Mahmoud Shammam, the chief spokesman of the Transitional National Council, said today in a statement. "This is the day of real liberation. We were serious about giving him a fair trial. It seems Allah has some other wish."

Apparently so.

British and French leaders hailed the of Khaddaffi's death and the preservation of those lucrative oil contracts they signed with the rebel forces.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy called the death a major step forward for the people of Libya and urged the pursuit of democratic reforms.

"The disappearance of Moamer Kadhaffi is a major step forward in the battle fought for more than eight months by the Libyan people to liberate themselves from the dictatorial and violent regime imposed on them for more than 40 years."

William Hague, Britain's Foreign Secretary said: "When the uprising began, we didn't know how long this would take. I think we feel vindicated all along as the country is now free to become a free and fair democracy. We are very pleased that with Khaddaffi has been removed. There is work to be now to stabilise Libya and bring together separate militias under the control of one governemnt. Once the liberation is declared then there's 30 days to form a transitional government. We should be on the optimistic side, but should not rule out further problems.

It could be a long job for the UK and our allies, but not so much a military job now. Tripoli is not Baghdad."

In other words, count on a lot more of your tax dollars going for nation building before the nature of Libya's new government is actually known.Actually, the odds on an Arab state being established in Libya that's actually free and democratic are incredibly long ones, but the oil will start flowing,which is all the British and French ever were concerned about in the first place.

After all, they didn't care a fig about 'democracy' when they were actively dealing with the Khaddaffi for the oil during his reign, and they were even able to happily ignore the Brother Leader's involvement in the Lockerbie Bombing. What they cared about was that black gold underneath Libya's sands.



The British and French only dumped Khaddaffi during the initial surge of the rebellion, when it looked like he was finished, and their response was to abandon Khaddaffi and rush to sign new oil deals with the rebels. When Khaddaffi rallied and pushed the rebels back to their final stronghold in Benghazi, the Brits and the French realized that they were going to be left out in the cold. And that's when NATO suddenly became involved and western military action against Khaddaffi's forces was launched to turn the tide.

I remind you of this not to defend Khaddaffi, but to give you a little realistic perspective on the matter, so no one's disappointed when the West pours billions into a Libyan rathole only to have it turn out as something different than 'free and democratic'. If the West's leaders were really all that fired up about freedom of democracy, they would have put Khaddaffi in the jar a long time ago.

All the pious nonsense about 'establishing freedom and democracy' or 'protecting the rights of the Libyan people' needs to be seen as exactly that. This was nineteenth century imperialism writ large, and it was always about the oil.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

Khaddaffi Dead : The Fall Of The Brother Leader

Libyan leader Moamad Khaddaffi was killed this morning, fighting to the last as his final stronghold in Sirte was taken by the rebels.He'd been in power for 44 years.

National Transitional Council (NTC) Prime Minister Mahmoud Jibril announced the death at a news conference this morning in Tripoli.

Jibril said NTC forces were now pursuing Saif al-Islam, Col Khaddaffi's most prominent son, who fled Sirte in a convoy before Sirte fell. He's probably the last major Khaddaffi loyalist still at large.

Jibril also called for neighboring Algeria to turn over the members of KHaddaffi's family who fled there in August to revolutionary justice. Two of KHaddaffi's younger sons, his daughter and his wife are in the country.

"A new Libya is born today," Mahmoud Shammam, the chief spokesman of the Transitional National Council, said today in a statement. "This is the day of real liberation. We were serious about giving him a fair trial. It seems Allah has some other wish."

Apparently so.

British and French leaders hailed the of Khaddaffi's death and the preservation of those lucrative oil contracts they signed with the rebel forces.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy called the death a major step forward for the people of Libya and urged the pursuit of democratic reforms.

"The disappearance of Moamer Kadhaffi is a major step forward in the battle fought for more than eight months by the Libyan people to liberate themselves from the dictatorial and violent regime imposed on them for more than 40 years."

William Hague, Britain's Foreign Secretary said: "When the uprising began, we didn't know how long this would take. I think we feel vindicated all along as the country is now free to become a free and fair democracy. We are very pleased that with Khaddaffi has been removed. There is work to be now to stabilise Libya and bring together separate militias under the control of one governemnt. Once the liberation is declared then there's 30 days to form a transitional government. We should be on the optimistic side, but should not rule out further problems.

It could be a long job for the UK and our allies, but not so much a military job now. Tripoli is not Baghdad."

In other words, count on a lot more of your tax dollars going for nation building before the nature of Libya's new government is actually known.Actually, the odds on an Arab state being established in Libya that's actually free and democratic are incredibly long ones, but the oil will start flowing,which is all the British and French ever were concerned about in the first place.

After all, they didn't care a fig about 'democracy' when they were actively dealing with the Khaddaffi for the oil during his reign, and they were even able to happily ignore the Brother Leader's involvement in the Lockerbie Bombing. What they cared about was that black gold underneath Libya's sands.



The British and French only dumped Khaddaffi during the initial surge of the rebellion, when it looked like he was finished, and their response was to abandon Khaddaffi and rush to sign new oil deals with the rebels. When Khaddaffi rallied and pushed the rebels back to their final stronghold in Benghazi, the Brits and the French realized that they were going to be left out in the cold. And that's when NATO suddenly became involved and western military action against Khaddaffi's forces was launched to turn the tide.

I remind you of this not to defend Khaddaffi, but to give you a little realistic perspective on the matter, so no one's disappointed when the West pours billions into a Libyan rathole only to have it turn out as something different than 'free and democratic'. If the West's leaders were really all that fired up about freedom of democracy, they would have put Khaddaffi in the jar a long time ago.

All the pious nonsense about 'establishing freedom and democracy' or 'protecting the rights of the Libyan people' needs to be seen as exactly that. This was nineteenth century imperialism writ large, and it was always about the oil.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

The 'Arab Spring' Reaches Saudi Arabia - Courtesy Of Iran

Saudi Arabia announced that an unnamed foreign country - normally code for Iran - was responsible for unrest in its Eastern Province, after armed men opened fire on police during a protest near the city of al-Qatif on Monday.Eleven Saudi security personnel and three protesters were wounded when security forces clashed with protesters and a group of armed men opened up onthe Saudi forces with automatic weapons and Molotov cocktails.

“A group of instigators inspired by a foreign country gathered in al-Awwamiya village near Qatif at 9pm on Monday and tried to undermine security,” an interior ministry official was quoted as saying in a statement to the Saudi press agency.

While the majority of Saudis are Sunni and live in the western part of the country near the Red Sea where Riyadh and Mecca are located, the Eastern part of the country near the Persian Gulf is home to Saudi Arabia's largely Shi'ite underclass. Just coincidentally, the East is also where the oil is.

The Saudis, aided by the British( who wanted that oil and saw Ibn-Saud as a reliable ally) conquered the Eastern Province in 1925, and its Shi'ites, about 10% of the Saudi population have been subjugated ever since.

Iran sees this as an opportunity to joust with the Saudis, just as it attempted to do using the Shi'ites in Bahrain. The tactic of using an armed militia enveloped in sectarian protests is a time-honored tactic the mullahs used in Lebanon and in Iraq.

This is not the first protest by Shi'ites in the Qatif area. One demand has been the withdrawal of Saudi forces from Bahrain, a goal that means little to Saudi Shi'ites compared with other issues but one that means a lot to Iran. Who's pulling the strings is fairly obvious.

Nor is Qatif a random location. It's close to some major installations in the Saudi oil infrastructure like the Abqaiq processing center, which handles about 70 per cent of the Kingdom’s production.

Expect further protests and unrest in this area...courtesy of Iran.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!

The 'Arab Spring' Reaches Saudi Arabia - Courtesy Of Iran

Saudi Arabia announced that an unnamed foreign country - normally code for Iran - was responsible for unrest in its Eastern Province, after armed men opened fire on police during a protest near the city of al-Qatif on Monday.Eleven Saudi security personnel and three protesters were wounded when security forces clashed with protesters and a group of armed men opened up onthe Saudi forces with automatic weapons and Molotov cocktails.

“A group of instigators inspired by a foreign country gathered in al-Awwamiya village near Qatif at 9pm on Monday and tried to undermine security,” an interior ministry official was quoted as saying in a statement to the Saudi press agency.

While the majority of Saudis are Sunni and live in the western part of the country near the Red Sea where Riyadh and Mecca are located, the Eastern part of the country near the Persian Gulf is home to Saudi Arabia's largely Shi'ite underclass. Just coincidentally, the East is also where the oil is.

The Saudis, aided by the British( who wanted that oil and saw Ibn-Saud as a reliable ally) conquered the Eastern Province in 1925, and its Shi'ites, about 10% of the Saudi population have been subjugated ever since.

Iran sees this as an opportunity to joust with the Saudis, just as it attempted to do using the Shi'ites in Bahrain. The tactic of using an armed militia enveloped in sectarian protests is a time-honored tactic the mullahs used in Lebanon and in Iraq.

This is not the first protest by Shi'ites in the Qatif area. One demand has been the withdrawal of Saudi forces from Bahrain, a goal that means little to Saudi Shi'ites compared with other issues but one that means a lot to Iran. Who's pulling the strings is fairly obvious.

Nor is Qatif a random location. It's close to some major installations in the Saudi oil infrastructure like the Abqaiq processing center, which handles about 70 per cent of the Kingdom’s production.

Expect further protests and unrest in this area...courtesy of Iran.

please donate...it helps me write more gooder!