Iran Needs To be Stopped

The USA and Israel have launched a war against Iran. 

The USA seems to have thought that the regime would topple if pushed, especially after recent anti-government demonstrations and the slaughter of up to 30,000 Iranian citizens in the streets.  

Israel took the opportunity to try to exterminate every single Iranian leader and member of the Revolutionary Guards that it could possibly reach. 

Both the US and Israel also tried to destroy what was left of Iran's nuclear program, as well as its miliary forces, especially its missile armaments.

What do we know to an absolute certainty now?

We know that Iran's nuclear program is focused on the acquisition of nuclear weapons, and nothing else. To produce nuclear power, Uranium only needs to be enriched to between 5 - 10%. Iran has enriched Uranium to 60%. If they wanted a nuclear reactor, the fact is that they have had the Uranium to power such a reactor for quite some time. Instead, but for the interference of American and Israeli bombs, they are hell-bent on the continued enrichment of Uranium. When they get to 90%, they will have enough weapons-grade Uranium to build multiple bombs.

That would be a bad thing.

Here is what Iranian leaders have threatened and/or said over the last decades regarding their hatred of certain people, and related to what they would like to see happen to them.

1979–1989 (Ayatollah Khomeini): Following the revolution, Khomeini branded Israel an "enemy of Islam" and the "Little Satan," adopting a policy of non-recognition and calling for the dismantling of Israel.

1990s–2000s: Iranian leadership supported terrorism in the form of Hezbollah and Hamas, therefore translating their rhetoric into action through relentless terror attacks against U.S. and Israeli targets.

2000 (Ali Khamenei): Supreme Leader Khamenei referred to Israel as a "cancerous tumor of a state" that "should be removed from the region".

2005–2013 (Mahmoud Ahmadinejad): President Ahmadinejad frequently called for Israel to be "wiped off the map" and described it as a "disgraceful stain". He also stated that "the U.S. and its allies" supporting Israel would face destruction.

2010s–Present (Ali Khamenei/Rouhani/Raisi): Leaders continued calling for the "elimination of the Zionist regime". Khamenei has described Israel as a "savage, wolf-like creature" (Thank you, Wiki!)

Hmmm, there seems to be a pattern to these many statements and proclamations! 

To put it simply, "Israel is Satan and needs to be destroyed." Note that many of the above-mentioned leaders have also denied that the Holocaust happened. World leaders and antisemites usually deny the Holocaust because they want to repeat it.

Question - What other countries in the world have threatened to destroy another country that is not even one of its neighbors for the last forty years?

Answer - There aren't any.

Given its consistent, demented and ideologically-driven hatred of Israel, and its constant threats to destroy that country, should Iran gets The Bomb there is a very real risk they will actually use it. In fact, Israel is so small that one would think that two or three bombs would just about do it.

It will never happen.

The moment Israel suspects that Iran actually has a functional bomb, it will do whatever it has to do to destroy it before it is launched. Israel has between 80 and 250 nuclear weapons. It will use them if it thinks it has to. If Israel were to use nukes to stop Iran, millions of people could perish from a combination of blasts and radiation, with most of these people living in Iran itself.

The world has an obligation to make sure this turn of events never happens. Unfortunately, the person leading the charge against Iran these days is not only bereft of the moral clarity it needs to deal with this issue, but he can't negotiate his way out of a wet paper bag. "The Art of The Deal" should have been named "The Art Of The Con" or "Confessions Of A Serial Loser" (Truly, how do you go bankrupt when you own casinos, no less than four times?)

Can we envision something a tad different? 

The people of Iran, formerly Persia, have ranked near the top of human civilization through their achievements and leading human progress in the areas of mathematics, science, literature, architecture, medicine, the fine arts, and even games like chess, for millennia. This ingenious people has languished under the yoke of a demented, Fascist, Suicide Cult and Ideological Tyranny for decades now. 

Dare we hope for a better time when the people of Iran live in peace with their neighbors, forswearing support for terrorism, building a successful economy and society, settling disputes peacefully, and taking their place in a world that would welcome them with open arms?

We here at mewetree.blogspot.com do.

Note - nothing in this should be taken as excusing Israel for its actions in Gaza and/or the West Bank and/or Lebanon, which were and continue to be deeply troubling.

 

   

Alberta Oil

Alberta is Canada's energy powerhouse.  

In 2025, Alberta exported about 3.56 million barrels per day (bpd). There are numerous export expansions in the works including an expansion by Enbridge which will optimize its mainline oil pipe operations in Canada adding up to 150,000 bpd by 2026-2027 and potentially another 250,000 bpd by late 2028, and the TMX pipeline will see additional growth via an expansion beyond the existing 890,000 bpd to a "Phase 2" pump station expansion could add another 360,000 bpd by 2028. 

Together, these changes will expand Alberta's exports to about 4.35 million bpd by 2028.

President Trump has approved an expansion to the Bridger Pipeline from Albert to Wyoming that could add another 550,000 bpd to exports. The governments of Alberta and Canada are working on another pipeline to move Alberta oil to the West Coast of Canada that could see up to 1 million bpd more oil exported from Alberta by 2035.

If these planned pipeline expansions come to fruition, Alberta could be exporting about 5.9 million bpd day by 2035. That would make Alberta the third largest exporter of oil on the planet after Saudi Arabia and Russia, and ahead of the USA and Iraq, assuming the war in Ukraine ceases and Russia can again export oil as it did prior to the war.

For context, it is worth noting that in 2015 Alberta only exported 2.5 million bpd. If planned pipeline expansions and construction goes ahead, by 2035 it would be exporting 235% more oil than it exported two decades prior.

There is an independence movement in Alberta that has complained loudly that Alberta's economic potential has been purposely quashed by federal government policies that have seen the cancellation of pipelines and the implementation of climate change policies. This sentiment is widely shared by the majority of Albertans who want Alberta to remain in Canada. One would hope that the planned expansions of Alberta's oil exporting capacity noted above will go a very long way to address these concerns.

The British Monarchy On The Tropes

The Epstein thing has rocked the very foundations of the British Monarchy. A summary, so far...

Former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, having been stripped of all titles by Charles III. He had sexual relations with a girl who was underage - Virginia Giuffre. He is a paedophile and a criminal. 

Andrew has been arrested and questioned by the police relating to allegedly sharing British trade secrets. This is the first time this has happened to a member of the royal family in almost 400 years. 

His ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, has been disgraced owing to her regular contacts with Epstein, including bringing her daughters to visit with him a week after his release from prison after being convicted for soliciting a minor for prostitution and procuring a child for prostitution. 

The King has banished Andrew from Royal Lodge, where he lived for over 20 years. 

Andrew remains eighth in line for the throne.

We here at mewetree.blogspot.com think this is about to get way worse. 

Read on.

It is inconceivable that Charles III did not know "something". He must have had some knowledge of various allegations against his brother going back decades. 

Charles III would also have known about some of his reprehensible behaviour while he was trade envoy for the British Government, and no doubt many other scandalous goings-on, many of which we do not know about yet. In fact, Charles recommended that Andrew not receive this trade post when it was first proposed, likely owing to what he thought could happen once Andrew was let loose on the world. He certainly knew of the allegations related to Epstein for years, as did we all. He has been the King for three and a half years. He did basically nothing about these things until the release of the Epstein files. He may have even contributed to the pay-off that Giuffre got to settle her lawsuit against Andrew. 

This is a very bad look.

And so, it will likely come out that Andrew has behaved abominably for decades. Now that he is not a royal prince, he is "fair game". The stories are just starting. 

We here at mewetree.blogspot.com strongly suspect that it will soon become obvious that the Monarchy protected Andrew, not for a few years, but for decades. This protection would include silencing journalists, politicians, and any witnesses of his behaviour, especially security personnel. His armour is gone; his crimes and misdemeanors will soon become known to everyone. The fact that he was protected will leave the Monarchy under siege unlike anything since Charles I lost his head in 1649.

But it could get worse...

  

Andrew will soon be removed from the line of succession, which requires legislation in 14 different countries. Once he can no longer become king, we may be witnesses to a revelation that would rock the Monarchy to its very core.

It could be this...

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor may not the son of Prince Phillip, the late husband of the late Queen Elisabeth II. He may be the son of a man named Lord Porchester, who was the Queen's horse manager, with whom she had a close friendship. The clear implication would be that Andrew, "The Bastard", should never have been in line for the Throne at all 

The lies that may have been told by the Monarchy and their protectors to keep this hidden for over half a century could put the bona fides of the Monarchy into question regarding each and every issue they have touched on going back 75 years. Literally everything they stand for and have ever said could be questioned. No one would trust these people.

But it may get even worse...

Reality - Harry looks nothing like Charles, but is the spitting image of Diana's alleged illicit lover, James Hewitt. This affair is said to be impossible as Diana is claimed to have only met Hewitt two years after Harry was born. This has been verified by a member of the security detail that guarded Diana - Ken Warfe - who confirmed the dates.

Regardless, Harry himself has claimed that he thought he was Hewitt's son until 2014! There has never been a DNA test done to confirm paternity. 

Note that red hair is often given as an indicator that Hewitt is Harry's father. In fact, there are redheads on both sides of the Charles and Diana union, meaning there was about a 25% chance that Harry would have red hair. 

What is more striking is the fact that Harry looks nothing like Charles! He is the spitting image of Hewitt! Look for yourself...

This is Charles and William...

Harry looks nothing like either of these men. How is this scandal not obvious? 

But what about the defence that Diana and Hewitt did not meet until after Harry was born? Hmmm - a man who was professionally loyal to the Crown was the witness to the fact that the Diana-Hewitt affair could not have happened. Given his sworn obligation to protect the Crown, do you think he might lie about something like that to do just that, namely protect the Crown? How many security people turned a blind eye to Andrew's goings-on?

If Harry's questionable paternity is revealed, the Monarchy will have to go on bended knee to the British People begging forgiveness. This scandal will rekindle and strengthen the veneration of Diana, who will be said to have tried to tell all of us what a bunch of lying creeps these people really are - before she was allegedly killed, that is.

But it may get even worse...

To be in the line of succession, a person must be delivered through a natural birth to a woman who is either in the line of succession, or who is married to someone in the line of succession. Children who have been delivered by a surrogate cannot be in the line of succession for the British Crown.

How were Lilibet and Archie born? 

Did Meghan Markle actually carry them to term? 

There are questions circulating on-line about all of this. The board here at mewetree.blogspot.com thinks much of this is Internet Slop, but you never know.

If Markle did not carry her children to term, it would not matter should Harry prove to have been Hewitt's son as he would not be in the line of succession, so neither would his children. 

If this is the case, coming on the heels of other lies and distortions this could be the end of the Monarchy as we know it. One would think that the only thing that could save it might be the abdication of Charles III to signal a break with the Old Guard, and the ascension of William and Kate to try to pick up the pieces. In fact, even if the Andrew-related things noted above happen, it is hard to see the Crown continuing on as it is.

The Epstein debacle has exposed that the elite of Western society believe they are untouchable. Some of these people carry on in abominable ways, secure in their belief that they are safe from justice. 

No one is more elite in the West than members of the British Monarchy. Andrew has been found out, and there seems little doubt that more findings are to follow. 

Dare we expect an abdication by the end of the year? 

If yes, could the Crown survive?

Of course, all of this is speculation. 

But if it reads like it's right, might it be just that?

Understanding Venezuela and Iran

There is a new war on!  

It's the USA and Israel, and likely others versus Iran! 

What is this all about?

The previous American attack on Venezuela resulted in opening up the country to private investment in the oil sector, reversing decades of national control. 

The negotiations with the Iranians likely involve removing the nuclear threat, but also some private ownership and control of Iran's oil reserves. Iran was about to allow what would have amounted to limited joint ventures between private firms and the national oil company, but it would still have banned outright private ownership of Iran's oil. I suspect that this will be lifted once there is a deal in place after the war is over.  

The key here is that the odious Venezuelan regime was left in charge, with some sops to democracy via release of political prisoners etc. The Mullahs will likely be left in charge as well. There is no plan for regime change because they aren't serious about regime change if they can get at the oil. 

This is about colonialism, not freedom.

The wild-card here is Israel which wants to see Iran's regime utterly destroyed. They want the Mullahs gone, so behind the scenes there is likely a debate between those who favour colonization of Iran with the Mullahs in charge - a.k.a. the Americans - and the Israelis who don't care about oil, but who want this existential threat eliminated. The debate will likely end in an all-around agreement on killing as many Iranian leaders as possible, within a defined time frame.  

These wars were and are clearly illegal. Illegal in international law, and illegal in American law. This isn't even debatable. 

Canada's PM Carney has read the room correctly - stick to Canada's previous position against the Iranians getting the Bomb, and say nothing about the illegality, which is consistent with his "end of the world order as we know it" speech in Davos. 

Query - if the Americans and Israelis can do this, why pre tell, could Russia not invade Ukraine, or China not invade Taiwan? 

"Might is Right" and "The Law of the Jungle" and Hobbes' view of "The State of Nature" all rule again. 

Is every small country on the menu?