Mr. Trump, Your Beef is with Britain, Not the People of Iran

Britain Owns Iran’s Mullahs. And they have served Britain well.

Most Iranians already know this, but in case you (in the west) feel like reacting in a knee-jerk fashion, accusing me of making up another ‘conspiracy theory’; we have added one more data point (piece of evidence) this past week to the accusation.

A major news site in Iran a Ministry of Intelligence source, confirmed that Zahra Larijani was caught transmitting information to her British handlers on behalf of her father (Head of Iran’s Judiciary) and uncles for many years. There are confirmed reports that the Larijani Brothers – who control key components of Iran’s government (and therefore Iran’s policies) are British agents.

In case you did not know, the Larijanis are five brothers that occupy five key posts within Iran’s complex political system. Between them they dominate two of the top three institutions in the country; the parliament and the judiciary. The others hold positions within the human rights council, the ministry of health, and the diplomatic corps.

This comes after years of allegations of Iran’s President Rouhani (who changed his name from Hassan Fereydoun – to appear more religious and therefore favored by the regime) and his brother having deep links with the Brits. Rouhani, in case you did not know, studied for a PhD in the UK while at the same time working as a senior staffer in Iran’s National Security apparatus.

My point, dear friends, is that the senior leadership of the ‘Islamic Republic’ is infested with British agents. Iran, it seems, has been doing Britain’s bidding all along … and Americans have been demonizing Iranians when their beef, surely, is with Britain.

And you don’t have to look at Iran’s senior leadership to figure out the truth, you must look at concrete outcomes of Iranian policies that have favored Britain over America.

Take energy dynamics:

  1. The Iranian Revolution (1979): When the West “Shat on the Shah” on Iran and engineered his fall and the rise of the Mullahs, and precipitated the Iran-Iraq war; they succeeded in shutting down both Iran and Iraq’s oil output – over 6 million barrels of oil was taken off the market. Ayatollah Khomeini’s revolution resulted in severe oil shortages that sent downstream processes scrambling for sources of oil anywhere to feed their refineries.Many turned to Rotterdam for oil, to fill their empty tanks. The deep-water port at Rotterdam was the principle harbor where huge tankers could be found to deliver oil on the spot, and hence the spot market for oil was often referred to as the Rotterdam market–but in truth, the spot market was available worldwide. This spot market was never meant to determine the price for oil, but was only supposed to supply day-to-day purchases.Due to the stresses of low supply, the Rotterdam price sailed above the $13.34 posted OPEC price on Tuesday, May 15,1979 to $28, and two days later it reached $34. Iran immediately took what little production remained and sold on the Rotterdam market. The “spot” price reached $40 per barrel as uncertainty about the future brought forth every empty tank or dilapidated tanker out of retirement to be filled.

Prices had finally hit the (pre-set desired levels) needed to justify oil exploration and extraction from the most distant places (Alaska and Britain’s North Sea). Iran’s demise led to a boom in Britain, Norway and Alaska. Iranians (and Iraqis) suffered for British, Norwegians and Alaskans (American) prosperity. BP (and Shell) had vast interests in those fields; and by the way, have won ‘the’ most significant contracts for Iraq’s largest oil fields (in Iraq’s tranquil southern tip).

The rise of Iran’s mullahs it seems, was a good thing for Britain. And in politics, tis outcomes that count, not rhetoric. Its outcomes that speak volumes. These are not unintended consequences of other events or actions. This outcome was a direct result of British actions

2. The Iraq Invasion: There is clear evidence that the Brits manipulated the run up to the Iraq invasion, and even the strategy after the invasion to ensure that Iraqi oil fell firmly in their hands. U.S. did all the work, spent the money, but Britain took all the gains. The British Government saw Iraqi oil as “vital” to the UK’s long-term energy security, and the effective privatization of its oil industry was central to the post-invasion plan for the country, according to previously unseen Whitehall documents.The UK was already working behind the scenes to ensure British companies did not lose out to competitors in the region, reveal strategy papers that were discussed at the highest level across Whitehall just days after President George W Bush declared “mission accomplished” in May 2003.Despite Tony Blair and his ministers’ public insistence that Iraq’s vast oil reserves – then estimated at 112 billion barrels – were a matter for the Iraqis alone, officials warned a meeting of the “inter-departmental Oil Sector Liaison Group (OSLG)” that appearing “gratuitously exploitative” in its policy goals – which included the aim to “maximize benefit to British industry and thus British employment/economy” – could “backfire politically”.Minutes of a meeting held on 12 May 2003 starkly spell out the importance of the issue, stating: “The future shape of the Iraqi industry will affect oil markets, and the functioning of Opec, in both of which we have a vital interest.”Officials cite the oil industry as the “first main target” when asked to establish “where specific prospects for British industry exist and ensure we are properly placed to take them”. The group was also urged to consider when a “senior British oil industry person should go out to Iraq to survey the ground and, if appropriate, participate in [for example] the emerging Oil Advisory Board”.Two weeks later, London officials outlined a “desirable” outcome for Iraqi’s crippled oil industry as “an oil sector open and attractive to foreign investment, with appropriate arrangements for the exploitation of new fields”.The paper concluded “foreign companies’ involvement seems to be the only possible solution” to make Iraq a reliable oil exporter. But the document recognized that would be “politically sensitive”, and would “require careful handling to avoid the impression that we are trying to push the Iraqis down one particular path”.These documents demonstrated the central importance of oil to Britain’s thinking on Iraq. While a Foreign Office spokesman denied that oil interests had driven policy. “It is normal to consider the commercial risks and opportunities presented by geopolitical events,” he said. “But this is not to say that those risks and opportunities directed our policy on Iraq.”One leading Tory MP, who asked not to be identified, said that the revelations “come as no surprise to me”. He added: “In May 2002… a serving officer in the Ministry of Defense said to me: ‘We’re planning for ground operations to start on 19 March next year.’ He [said]… they couldn’t give a damn about the politics. There is no question that the armed services knew it as a racing certainty when the war would start.”Suddenly we have new producers, and there is an oil glut. Oil from Azerbaijan, oil from Iraq … all under British control. When the fields in the North Sea and Alaska dried up, suddenly there was new supply.It’s all brilliantly planned and conspiratorial. As one government insider in Britain has publicly stated: “I have been in meetings where these wars were planed and discussed, and it was all about resources. Our elite are ruthless and immoral!”

3. Take actions taken by major British Allies, like Qatar or Azerbaijan vis-a-vis Iran:

a. British Puppets and Allies in Bed with Iran: It’s no secret that Aliev (President for life in Azerbaijan) or Qatar’s emir are British puppets. As we are often reminded, neither Aliev or the Emir, go to the bathroom without permission from London. Their balls are in British hands.The emir after all shares a box with the queen and major horse races and has considerable investments in Britain. His whole family are educated there. Aliev, too has homes in London. But more importantly, both countries have essentially handed British (and British based companies) their oil and gas assets. The Brits have served these puppets well. Aliev has remained in power for decades. And Iran has conveniently stepped aside to allow Azerbaijan to extract Iranian oil from Iranian sovereign waters in the Caspian Sea. Iran that once controlled 50% of the Caspian sea now barely lays claim to 11%! Even the fields have Persian names … and are now in Azerbaijani waters extracted by BP and Shell!And similarly, Qatar’s regime is similarly protected by the Brits, and somehow, Iran has stepped aside to allow Iranian oil and gas extracted from Iranian sovereign fields. The Pars Gas field (the largest in the world) is named after Iran’s Pars province and is now split with Qatar! Mined by British oil companies.

b. Qatar’s Embargo: When Saudi Arabia embargoed Qatar and shut off its borders, it was Iran that immediately stepped in to support Qatar! Iran has been supplying food and air space in a heartbeat to a British puppet state! Let’s not forget, Qatar is a Wahabi dominated state – that until recently was backing ISIS!! Need I say more!

Mr. Trump, the Brits are behind the Mullahs! Everything else is bullshit! Your beef is with Britain.

Leave a Reply