Over 100 missiles have been fired from Gaza into Israel. 15 people have been ‘treated for rocket-related injuries. One, a worker from Thailand, remains in serious condition.

Israeli airstrikes on Gaza have killed at least 15. Number of airstrikes so far not known, but are known to have killed at least 15 ‘combatants’. Israeli sources with Mossad connections say the Israeli airstrikes are ‘tapering off’, presumably as a silent offer to deescalate the situation.

However, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu said on Saturday, Israel time, “We will continue to attack anyone who intends to attack the citizens of the state of Israel.”

(more…)

Israel has admitted assassinating Zuheir al-Qaisi, head of the Popular Resistance Committees in Gaza, and Muhamad Ahmad al-Hanani, who was among the jailed Palestinians Israel swapped for Gilead Shalit. The Israeli official announcement said the two were planning another major terrorist attack along the Eliat Highway - also called Highway 12 - which runs along the Egypt-Israel border. Eight Israelis died in an August, 2011, attack.

Iranian media says that the Friday afternoon strike was carried out by an Israeli UAV firing missiles into a car carrying both men.

In response, over 60… some sources are saying over 80… Grad and Qassam missiles have been fired into Israel so far, starting Friday evening and continuing through now, Saturday morning Israeli time. Israel has sent in a number of airstrikes - at least three - into Gaza, saying they have hit missile launchers and their firing personnel.

(more…)

Wednesday night in the Middle East, a Chinese assembly line started up in Syria. But it had nothing to do with making things. The purpose was to process ALL the Chinese nationals in Syria out of the country on hastily chartered aircraft as quickly as possible… save 100 brave and hearty souls who will be left behind to guard primarily oil equipment, possibly Chinese special forces. The Chinese had US$17 billion in oil and gas projects damaged when they left Libya too late and their equipment too unguarded, as the war/civil war there got suddenly too hot.

The question: is this exodus for fear of an escalated civil war in Syria? Or the real thing: full blown war between Syria and… whom? If so, which side will start it?

Smart money is betting on the war option, not just a civil war. Unless there has been a substantial influx of foreign arms or foreign troops, Syrian President Assad’s opposition is probably in no position to escalate their conflict with the government to such an extent as to make the Chinese flee for their lives.

So… is the U.S. et. al. about to invade Syria for ‘humanitarian’ reasons? Or is Israel et. al. about to make their preemptive strike on Iran, which would surely involve Syria?

Or has Syria and Iran been following the Obama-Netanyahu exchanges and decided to preempt the preemption?

(more…)

What happened to the report of North Korea testing a nuke for Iran? There are at least 2,300 news articles about it in the internet right now. It was never mentioned in the ’summit’ talks between President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, so far as we know, nor in any of the AIPAC speeches. Why not? If there is a shred of truth in it, that would mean time has indeed run out for Israel to make a decision whether or not to strike Iranian nuclear sites. And if it does have a shred of truth in it, that would be far more than was needed to start the Iraq no-WMD war.

There may be some people saying it is not true, but I don’t see that happening. The bulk of the commentary community says it is a reasonable claim. So why are the leaders of both the U.S. and Israel ignoring it? Is that because talking about it would be a dead giveaway that a military strike is about to happen? Can you think of another reason?

Why did Netanyahu ask Obama to pardon convicted and admitted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard, sentenced to life in 1987 for giving U.S. military secrets to Israel?

While it is true that Netanyahu promised the Israeli electorate he would get Pollard pardoned during his time in office, doesn’t the Prime Minister of Israel have bigger fish to fry right now? Wasn’t asking for the pardon inappropriate while the PM was trying to get the U.S. to back Israel for a military strike against Iran?

Ah… but Pollard is a high-ranking poster boy for the concept that Israel must survive at any cost. He never showed any remorse for helping Israel obtain military secrets from the U.S. He justified it as necessary in order for the state of Israel to exist. Many people in Israel see him as a hero, and see Netanyahu a sort of hero for pushing the U.S. to release him. So asking Obama to give Pollard a pardon was a message… Israel stands behind people who will act for Israel regardless of the costs, who are not afraid to act ‘by themselves’. He meant that message for Obama. He has already taken that message to heart for himself.

Now into even more disturbing things, on an even more serious level.

(more…)

The previous post highlighted this phrase in Obama’s speech at AIPAC: “… Israel must always have the ability to defend itself, by itself, against any threat.”

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu also found it to be the most significant moment of the president’s speech. He is being reported in mainstream U.S. media as saying that was the part that he ‘perhaps most appreciated’.

However, Israeli mainstream media headlines tend to quote it a little differently, saying ‘Prime Minister Welcomes Obama’s Recognition of Israel’s Right ‘To Defend Itself By Itself”.

What’s different? Just one word… Right… instead of Ability. Obama did say something like that in another part of his speech. He said Iran “… should not doubt Israel’s sovereign right to make its own decisions about what is required to meet its security needs.” But it was not part of the other phrase. The editors put the two together because the Israelis are hearing it together. Right to defend itself, by itself.

The rest of Obama’s speech is being analyzed and picked over. His defense of a sane peace between Israel and the Palestinians, and his put downs of war and ‘loose talk’ about it are being duly noted. Perhaps I should say dully noted. The dusty U.S. military strike option is just still sitting there on the table.

Ears perk up slightly at his promise the U.S. will certainly not allow Iran to get the bomb. But then he lapses back into sanctions and the world audience lapses back into coma. Nothing at all concrete about how long the sanctions must drag on first. No red line, of course.

All the excitement was about Obama seeming to signal a green light for an Israeli preemptive strike on Iran, if they should choose to do so. Netanyahu’s glee at apparently receiving a green light may suggest that decision is about to be made.

In current world headlines… oddly… the most quoted piece of Obama’s speech is a phrase that seems to amplify the green light AND promise the U.S. will reinforce the Israelis once the shooting starts: “So there should not be a shred of doubt by now. When the chips are down, I have Israel ’s back.”

Hard not to apply that as an absolute promise that America will throw its military weight behind Israel after a preemptive attack on Iran.

(more…)

Definition of chartreuse: a clear, light green with a yellowish tinge.

“… Israel must always have the ability to defend itself, by itself, against any threat.”
– President Obama in his speech today at AIPAC meeting

I’ll keep this short for now because it’s Sunday. But that one phrase in Obama’s speech, two pair of words in particular, is of great significance, and it may not be spotlighted by mainstream media.

One must conclude that the president is saying Israel has the ability defend itself against Iran. By itself.

Does that give Israel the green light to go make a preemptive strike to ‘defend’ themselves?

More like a chartreuse light.

They’ll have to decide if they want to ignore the yellow tinge.

Iran media reported oil pipelines in Saudi Arabia had ‘exploded’. U.S. benchmark oil prices immediately spiked to $110.55.

The price fell back almost as quickly to $108.87 on reports in Western media that the Iranian report was false, about the same as it was before the report. Prices continue to inch down, at $108.60 as of this writing.

The truth? Here is a link to on-the-scene reporting of the apparently ongoing incident on The Arab Digest, a small independent news source opposing the Saudi government, which may or may not be the truth.

If you prefer not to click the link, the basic information is that one of their correspondents is present currently in the area and says ‘… the area under fire is indeed where major pipelines are located…’ and that the Saudi disclaimer that there was no explosion is false. I think that ‘under fire’ means there is a fire going on there, because the article includes a pic of something on fire. Of course no telling if it is actually a picture of the current event.

Same unconfirmed source says Saudi security forces have killed two in Awamiya, a town near the pipelines, and are in the process of searching ‘houses, schools and mosques’ and arresting people. Protesters are said to be now blocking the ‘Police road’ after the arrests. Seems like something happened.

The truth? Impossible to confirm. Not much gets out of Saudi Arabia in terms of negative news. They would have to retract their official statement and say they were wrong. Not likely.

Or perhaps nothing happened. No explosion. No crackdown occurring around Awamiya. Perhaps the Iranians just made it up.

The entire situation resonates with the mutually exclusive statements of the Iranian cutoff of oil to Greece.

At the end of the business day Tuesday in Iran, official Iranian news media for both Iranians and English speaking people confirmed that Iran had, indeed, stopped supplying crude oil to Greece.

“Not supplying crude to Greece was in fact an executive planning and arrangement made by the National Iranian Oil Company and was in line with fortifying the national interests and pride,” according to a statement to Iranian press by Majlis (parliament) member Elyas Nadderan. He is also a member of the Majlis Economic Commission.

Today’s article retained and expanded the information contained in the initial Sunday articles: ‘… a Greek tanker returned home unloaded after Iran refrained… from supplying the 500,000-barrel cargo to the Greek tanker which was due to deliver it to Hellenic Petroleum refinery’.

The Iranians acknowledge that hitting Greece could make things particularly difficult for that economically challenged nation. They also say Russia, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan have stopped sending oil to Greece over fears Greece cannot pay the bill. They iterate that Iran had been extending credit to Greece for oil purchases.

The current article also iterates that Iran has warned the EU that Iran ‘… would soon stop oil exports to these countries if they do not reverse their decision’ about sanctions against Iran.

The reason the Greek-Iranian oil issue is being heavily covered in this blog are several.

(more…)

Western and Israel mainstream media is carrying a report supposedly from the Iranian Student’s News Agency (ISNA) that Iran had not blocked an oil shipment to Greece.

The official and only English language ISNA website is not currently carrying any story relating to the Greek oil shipment.

There is an article saying funds from EU purchases of Iranian oil are going through, and are not being blocked.

Official English language Iranian media and official media intended for domestic Iranian consumption are still saying the shipment was blocked. The later source is now also saying that the tanker has ‘returned home unloaded’. Pretty definitive.

There is a pic of the tanker Stone Eagle associated with the story, but it is not clear if that is just a file photo having nothing to do with Sunday’s action, or if that is the ship that was refused filling. Information on an oil tanker called Stone Eagle, if there is one, does not seem to be on the net currently.

The Iranian Students’ News Agency may not be the most accurate source for this story. But, perhaps the Western and Israel media got a prerelease copy of their post, and it is still to come onto the website? That may be a little generous, though.

So at the moment, without some solid confirming source for the ISNA information, it does appear that Iran refused to fill the tanker bound for Greece.

In any event, whatever happened, even if it was an unfulfilled threat, one might expect the oil markets and stock markets to react strongly when they open for Monday trade.

In what may be Iran’s final warning shot across the bow on the issue of cutting oil to the EU, Iran “refrained from supplying the 500,000-barrel cargo to the Greek tanker which was due to deliver it to Hellenic Petroleum refinery”, according to official Iranian media.

Iranian Oil Minister Qassemi has been telling EU countries they would soon have to make a final decision on oil imports from Iran, warning them they would be sanctioned by Tehran otherwise.

Apparently… stress apparently… Greece will not be able to pick up any more oil from Iran unless they agree to the ironclad 2 to 5 year contract demanded by Iran. This could have disastrous effects on the Greek economy, since they have been getting oil from Iran on credit. That could have a tidal effect on the EU and world economy. The Greek bailout may have been torpedoed by this Iranian move.

Apparently… stress apparently… the cutoff to the rest of the EU may well follow in short order if Greece does not accede to Iranian demands.

Will anyone take this as an act of war? Or will it spur some action that will be taken as such? Things could happen quickly now.

ON another issue:

Aid corridors through Syria do not seem to be happening, and even if they do, Saudi Arabia and Israel are both very unhappy about President Obama stalling on the Syria issue, according to Israeli sources. Fireworks of one kind or another may ensue.