8 thoughts on “TIDBIT: MORE ON THE TANKERS FROM THE SAKER”

  1. Putting aside any pretexts for Middle East conflict between the usual players, the availability and rocketing price of gasolene/petrol/diesel will possibly have the effect of driving motorists towards electric vehicles. The Rockefellers sold out their iconic Standard Oil a few years ago, and since then there has been an onslaught on the internal combustion engine! In disgusting rags like the Daily Mail there are endless anti car propaganda pieces – stories of royals driving badly, and videos of car smashes, and dubious WHO reports of air pollution. The agenda is on to deprive the public of independent transport and into hackable/controllable technology as desired by Agenda 21/30. James Corbett’s film ‘Big Oil’ is good on the history of the promotion of the oil industry and petrol driven transport. As an interesting side note, there was a fleet of electric taxis in London in the 1880’s! And is not as if the internal combustion engine was always the best available option from the get-go, but was the desired one. Now it is very much not the desired one, and the public have to be made aware of that by fuel prices which will water the eyes and the pocket book!

  2. While one can’t rule anything out, it still seems that none of the parties involved (not necessarily “state actors”) are not really interested in a “hot” war. First of all the inhabitants of the Middle East as a whole: even Nuttiyahu would probably baulk at the risk of even a “small” radioactive cloud over his head. On the other hand, keeping the pot simmering gives tactical political advantages to all (or at least for those who are convinced that bellicose rhetoric is beneficial to their maintaining power). And of course so, so many profits on arms and oil deals.
    As an aside, not only tankers are sitting ducks – how many “pirate” attacks on them go unreported? – but so are military ships, which can apparently be hacked with little or no difficulty.

  3. Well the Russians did it, I mean they did everything else that’s deemed nasty.
    Can’t the neocons think of something else but blaming countries of wrong doings ?
    Same old playbook same old songs about war with the bad guys, they are totally NUTS.

  4. Well Joseph Patrick Farrell the USA has motive, means and intent as possibly do USA’s “allies” of convenience Israel and Saudi Arabia .
    There are only two possible outcomes with Iran they either submit or face escalating tensions possibly war.
    Speculation among various journalistic discussion groups is the hard core advocate for military actions but Trump is dragging his feet on military actions because he is looking to be re-elected in 2020. If re-elected we bet trump might be more willing to pursue military action.
    Trump has recently posted 1,000 American troops to Poland war is coming it is just a question of when.
    .
    .

    1. When you say, “the USA has motive…. and intent,” what do you mean, please?
      Is there not a third possibility: that the USA will relent in the face of firm opposition from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization countries and, at best, luke-warm support from its European/Japanese vassals?
      With the national debt starting to spiral upwards out of control and global de-dollarization well under way, there is a very real risk that a major war could push The United States Corporation over the edge – assuming that Deutsche Bank does not do it first.

      1. I’m not sure why no one has mentioned the elephant in the room, FASAB 56 and those like Erik Prince and his Blackwater. Cui Bono?… the contractors (read: Mercenary armies), bankers and big oil. POTUS and Congress have “control” of our nations military, who controls the private sector?

Comments are closed.