The afterthought

It is Reuters that gave us ‘Exclusive: Stop Israel from bombing Iran’s oil sites, Gulf states urge US’ (at https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/stop-israel-bombing-irans-oil-sites-gulf-states-urge-us-2024-10-11/) Now normally this doesn’t bother or alert me, but after the 6th when I wrote ‘Is it merely political?’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/10/06/is-it-merely-political/) where we got to see “A loophole allows middlemen in countries like Turkey, China and India to refine Russian oil in petrol and diesel before selling it elsewhere — exempt from sanctions. According to a report first seen by POLITICO, Western countries spent $2 billion on this rebranded fuel in the first half of 2024” Now we see Gulf states all ‘worried’ about Iran, or are they perhaps worried about the cheap deal they have from Iran counting in the billions? A setting that most of us ignored as we were unaware of the loophole. But now, even after Iran threatens Israel, we are given “Gulf states are lobbying Washington to stop Israel from attacking Iran’s oil sites because they are concerned their own oil facilities could come under fire from Tehran’s proxies if the conflict escalates, three Gulf sources told Reuters” and in the article we aren’t given any names are we? Which Gulf sources? I think that we are entitled those answers, are we not? Isn’t it interesting that Reuters missed that beat, but then the media is becoming less and less reliable. And it makes sense that the first thing Israel goes after is the money, hence the oil. And in all of this Gulf states are urging the US to stop Israel from bombing oil sites? Who are the stake holders, what Gulf nations are involved and how is that money flowing? More important how can we track that money. How can we expose these exploiters? 

These are all questions that are derived from the article on the 6th of October that Politico gave us. If they rebranded 2 billion of Russian oil, there is nothing to stop us thinking that Iran gave others a lot more and from the gulf states there is plenty of players around to do whatever it takes to get a share of a mere 50 million and this has been going on for a while (a speculative thought). The Russia story came out relatively fast, but the Iran dilemma has been going on for decades and now with the Hezbollah eradication as well as the pounding of Hamas, these stake holders are worried that their well dries up and now they are speculatively crying like little bitches that their free ride is drying up. OK, that might have been a little over the top but the sentiment comes across, does it not? Now, I could be wrong, one sides does not prove the other. To put it simplistically every cube is a orthotope, not every orthotope is a cube. As such what is happening in Russia might not happen in Iran. On the other hand, what was set in motion to be applied to Iran was pretty much a setting for Russia as well. And the media isn’t asking questions, why not?

Until recently when Politico showed us the loophole no one asked questions and now they should have asked a few questions, yet they still are not. How weird is that?

Apply that to the fact that we are merely give “three Gulf sources told Reuters” and no one wakes up? Why is that?Journalists are not that dim, as such, I suspect that at least one stakeholders has a larger finger in the journalism pie of Reuters. Just a thought to consider.

Have a great weekend.