Israeli media with Mossad connections are detailing what they say are the inner secrets of the U.S.-Iran deal on the Iranian nuclear program. They warn us that Iran has not signed off on it yet, so the final deal may be somewhat different. But if Iran does accept it as is, the deal will ‘endanger’ Israel.

They also say that the way the deal is structured, it would be very difficult for Israel to make a unilateral strike on Iran after it is finalized… if it is actually finalized… on May 23.

So. Reading between the lines, they seem to be saying that the window for an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities is only between now… and May 22. Which is this Tuesday.

I can’t say if any of this is true or not, especially the conclusion that is between the lines. No one outside of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s closest inner circle knows if he is actually thinking this way.

It is just barely enough of a possibility that I must bring it up; because of the potential gravity of the situation, it requires High Alert status… although most likely it is yet another false alarm.

But you know… the Stock Market has been sliding downward in a very scary way lately, which I’ve always thought would be a prerequisite for war. Stock futures, as of this moment, are down yet another 78 points.

A word to the wise is sufficient.

Just in a few minutes ago: U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon says the UN Observer mission needs both fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft and troops on the ground to ensure the Syrian ceasefire, according to U.S. mainstream media.

He said the proposed force of 250 observers are “not enough considering the current situation and the vastness of the country”.

Tomorrow, Ki-moon will formally propose at the United Nations that the EU provide the aircraft. It is not clear where he wants the troops to come from, nor the number of boots on the ground.

Also today, the Arab League (AL)… which has booted both Syria and Iran out of the group… met with the UN-AL Special Envoy to Syria, Kofi Annan. It is important to keep in mind that Annan is tied tightly to the AL, which makes Syria and Iran and Russia nervous about the real intent of his ‘peace plan’…

… with some reason. In the meeting, the AL representatives from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, and other nations which also belong to the Gulf Cooperation Council, discussed with Annan ‘how to enhance the mission’. Shortly after this meeting, Ki-moon announced his proposal.

U.S. official media paints a bleak and dire picture of the Syrian ceasefire, using words such as ‘teetering’ and ‘unravels’. (more…)

“At a time when there is not a lot of sympathy for Iran and its only real ally is on the ropes, do we want a distraction in which suddenly Iran can portray itself as a victim?”
– President Obama, in remarks made earlier this week, published today, Friday, March 2

Sometimes in the heat of action… which for a politician is always words… a president, or a president’s ghost writer, says just a bit more than they intend to reveal. This may be the case here.

One might wonder under what circumstances an action, one that may result in beginning World War III, could be considered merely ‘a distraction’. The only sane answer is that the speaker must not think that a strike on Iran could lead to such a cataclysm. And frankly, how sane is that?

But we must include in our considerations that there is a faction in the Obama administration which has been reported by world media as whispering in the president’s ear… softly saying that Iran would surely make only a ‘limited response’ if their nuclear facilities were razed by either a U.S. or Israeli strike. Has Obama believed those whispering voices? If so, why does he not just green light the Israelis? Boom. Mission accomplished, with minimal risk to U.S. assets in the Middle East. Russia and China are sure to look the other way. Why wait for sanction after sanction to fail?

Unless he truly believes sanctions are working their slow poison on the Iranian body politic.

Then he would believe that a strike against Iran, no matter how small a price would have to be paid for it, would be premature. Which is how all media is summarizing today’s statements by Obama. Which bodes ill for the March 5 meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, who continues to pressure our president toward a ‘red line’ statement for a clarity as to exactly when a military strike on Iran would become necessary.

(more…)

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.

The March 5th meeting between President Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is being ballyhooed and promoted like a summer blockbuster movie.

The key hook is today’s White House proposal to the Israeli PM’s office that Mr. Obama and Mr. Netanyahu release a joint statement following their meeting ‘to present a single U.S.-Israeli front in order to leverage pressure on Iran’, according to Israeli mainstream media.

After that caviler move by the Obama administration, if a statement is not released after the meeting it will underline that the two countries are completely at odds with each other on the Iranian question. Especially if the Israelis accept this proposal. Great expectations are being created, and the most likely outcome is that those expectations will be cruelly dashed.

Which is perhaps the whole intent of the meeting. Deep distancing between the two countries. Obama showing Iran that it will not be America’s fault if Israel bombs them. For the umpteenth time, that will never be accepted by Iran, so why try? Good question. Either the politicos choreographing the two nations’ dance with war are not very bright, or there is something that is not obvious to us unwashed masses. Maybe I’m the one who is not very bright, because I can’t imagine what that would be, except to try and convince not very bright legislators that if there is enough distancing, Iran will not retaliate against U.S. assets in the Middle East. But who would be that gullible?

Of course, it is vaguely possible that there will be a joint statement. If so, it should be a doozy.

(more…)

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.

I still read printed newspapers as well as online U.S. mainstream media. How else could one know what the bulk of Americans are seeing and feeling? Okay, network TV news… but I have to draw the line somewhere, and that’s where.

Today, the big page 3 article in our local newspaper… owned as most are by a conglomerate, fed stories as most are by the central news agency, so it is eminently typical… was headlined “More supply than demand” with the large subhead “Yet oil and gasoline prices are surging”.

The article blames Iran, flat out. There is also grumbling about oil speculation by the robber barons of Wall Street, but that is secondary. The top culprit, in no uncertain terms, is evil Iran, and the ‘growing fear of a military confrontation with Iran in the Persian Gulf’s Strait of Hormuz’. Even the speculation is all Iran’s fault: ‘… today’s high oil and gasoline prices is because of excessive speculation, driven by Iran fears…’.

Left out of the article (more…)

I’m writing this at 1:35PM GMT, Wednesday.

At 11:56AM GMT, Iran official English language media announced that Iran had cut oil exports to France, Italy, Greece, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands.

The iranian Foreign Ministry had summoned the ambassadors of those six countries earlier Wednesday and protested the EU sanctions on Iranian oil that is to be implemented in or about June. The Iranians called for negotiations. Apparently final negotiations. They were not forthcoming from the EU. Iran cut them off.

It is not yet clear if ‘cut’ means totally cut… but that is the take at this moment.

The U.S. stock market is not open at this time, so no reaction to this news as yet. Futures are still up at this moment. It may take a little while for the news to be disseminated to the mavens of Wall Street.

European markets are open, and are trending downward now, but no big crash.

Benchmark oil jerked up to $102.54, then settled back to just under $101. Don’t know if the Iranian news caused that, or if the effect will be later in the day.

This could be an interesting day.

Or will the traders ignore the writing on the wall?