Uranium jerky: Angle on Ukraine (Part VII)

Things that make you go, Hmmm.

Back in the fall of 2020, I published a series of six articles* under the subject “Uranium Jerky” (explanation in the first article), taking note of the extraordinary connection of the events recounted in them to the Obama administration and – among other things – the high-profile Clinton-involved developments of the time, including the sale of Uranium One to the Russians.

One of those events was Goldman Sachs’s unique, remarkable decision, announced on 20 January 2009, that it would become a buyer of and dealer in physical uranium.  It proceeded to do so, and to this day has not shed that role, although the company began suggesting it would do so under congressional pressure at least seven years ago.

I’m still not sure most readers fully grasp the significance of a firm like Goldman Sachs, with little visibility or transparent exposure to observers of the uranium industry, owning and moving around thousands of tons of uranium. Continue reading “Uranium jerky: Angle on Ukraine (Part VII)”

Advertisement

The ‘Iran deal’ serves as a distraction – and an Israel-suppressant

Peace in our time.

Peace in our time.  (Reuters)
Peace in our time. (Reuters)

New post up at Liberty Unyielding.  Enjoy!

Bibi, Iran’s nukes, and military force in a changed Middle East

Game change.

Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on the march. (Image: AFP via Der Spiegel)
Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) on the march. (Image: AFP via Der Spiegel)

New post up at Liberty Unyielding.  Enjoy!

In the short run, Biden might well keep his promise that Iran won’t get nukes

Interesting times.

Playing charades. Kerry, Ashton, and Zarif meet for coffee in Muscat, Oman on 10 Nov. (Image: Reuters/Nicholas Kamm via Al-Monitor)
Playing charades. Kerry, Ashton, and Zarif meet for coffee in Muscat, Oman on 10 Nov. (Image: Reuters/Nicholas Kamm via Al-Monitor)

New post up at Liberty Unyielding.  Enjoy!

Taqiyya and Hudaybiyyah: The non-deal Iran “deal,” Week 5

“Treaty,” they lied.

When we left our story last time, Iran hadn’t agreed to anything except further negotiation (if she felt like it), but Western governments were depicting this as a “deal” or “agreement” with Iran, and well-meaning media pundits were proclaiming that “it” would have to be given time to work.

The question remains what “it” is supposed to be, considering that the Iranians persist in emphasizing their intention to continue uranium enrichment: the irreducible point of contention for an actual deal – a “deal” deal, if you will – to render the Iranian nuclear program less easily weaponizable.

But even if we set that question aside, the problem remains Continue reading “Taqiyya and Hudaybiyyah: The non-deal Iran “deal,” Week 5”