Why is Israel hiding news of killing of senior Mossad commander, Fahmi Hinavi?

According to Veterans Today, a senior Mossad commander, known with his Arab name, Fahmi Hinavi is reported to have been shot dead in Tel Aviv on December 5, 2020, apparently in retaliation to the killing of Iranian scientist Mohsen Fakhrzadeh assassination. Israel has not yet officially confirmed it.

No western or Israeli media dared to speak about it for fear that the Zionist settlers, panicked that they are already at the idea of ​​having to pay the price of the blood of the Iranian, begin to make links between this liquidation and two other similar liquidation cases produced in recent days at X and Y and to think that the “Resistance” is much closer to them than the blows suggest.

Things started to get out of hand and social networks started disseminating images of a shooting that would have everything to look like “a response”. The attackers approached the vehicle of Officer Hinavi while he had stopped at a red light before unloading their machine gun and then leaving. The media tried to pass the “guy” by a quidam, victim of a family quarrel but the presence of Mossad forces and security services even before the police arrived at the scene left no doubt

The big question, does the liquidation of Hinavi have any connection with the assassination of Fakhrizadeh, seven days rather while the latter was traveling in his car not far from the Iranian capital Tehran? 

Possible and the blow would be much cleaner, if the Mossad took 20 years to have Fakhrizadeh and this, not with the help of a commando composed of 12 assassins as suggested by the press in their excess of enthusiasm, but by a “remote-controlled machine gun”, Hinavi was himself liquidated in the middle of the street, by “several attackers” who “did it most easily”.

Since the assassination of the senior Iranian scientist, there were reports of a real earthquake within the intelligence apparatus and the Israeli armed forces which accused the Netanyahu-Cohen couple of having acted against Iran without them.

It is even said that the Minister of War Gantz, whose Chief of Staff repeats to whoever wants to hear that Israel is ready for all Iranian war scenarios, refuses to assume “militarily” the consequences of “Netanyhau’s act” since Israel would be “ruined” at the “first Iranian missile fire” or its “proxies”

A sign of existing tensions, even though so far he boasted of having designated Fakhrizadeh’s name as a target to be shot in 2018 and finally managed to get it, Netanyahu appeared on the screen of the American Hudson Institute to accuse Iran of accusing Israel of any event that occurs there. Visibly embarrassed to have been questioned about the murder of November 27, he launched: “the Iranians are accusing us of everything true or false.”

In short, for the past week Israel has been in a mess and the temptation is great in any way, including self-mutilation, to “ease the pressure”. Self-mutilation would be welcome. Moreover, an Iranian response would go well beyond the Hinavi cases. On Thursday, a general alert was raised at the Dimona nuclear reactor in the Negev, the Tel Aviv regime having warned its “old and new employees” against “the danger” which now awaits them at the turn of every street, every alley or even when they were at home.

The response promised by Iran paradoxically comes to be grafted to that of Hezbollah for the murder of “Kamel Mohsen” to thus widen the “circle of anguish” of the Zionist soldiers to “researchers”, “academics “, to the” Think Tankists “, … of Israel, Nasrallah having already promised the bullet from his snipers to the Israeli military, Iran having sworn that his” response “will be” painful and precise “.

And Iran will strike Israel …
Cowardly Murdered Fakhri Zadeh: The Misstep of Too Much
Sign of the hell that the Zionist entity saw, Israel Hayom attacked Thursday against the cyberwar units of the army, target Saturday, a few hours after the assassination of Fakhrizadeh, of the super hackers of BlackShadow: “these are people who demand bitcoin from us by threatening to publish the data of thousands of clients of insurance companies, including officers, officials, military, academics … Israelis. A first ransom amount reaches a million dollars. .but one has the impression that it is only a decoy and that this intermittent reappearance of BlackSadow has something with Iran … “

In August 2020, the Zionist army, on high alert on the Northern Front and waiting for Hezbollah to fire, engaged in a ridiculous maneuver by sending its units to hunt ghosts and claiming to have neutralized an Israeli commando operation. At the time, all intelligence sources laughed at an Israel which, well aware of its military and intelligence flaws, was carrying out shoddy “False Flags” since a “false flag” operation was intended in principle to be given to the strongest the pretext of attacking the weakest … But here again the Zionist regime intends to reverse the principles … clumsily. Fakhrizadeh is worth more than a thousand thousand Hinavi … he is worth all of Israel and more …

Saudi Prince Turki bin Faisal slams Israel

Saudi Prince Turki bin Faisal accused Israel of colonialism and apartheid. “All Israeli governments are the last of the colonizing powers in the Middle East,” bin Faisal said at the International Institute for Strategic Studies’ Manama Dialogue in Bahrain’s capital.

The Saudi prince accused Israel of establishing an “apartheid wall” in the West Bank, of “demolishing homes as they wish, and assassinating whoever they want,” of having 20 nuclear weapons and of “denying non-Jewish residents equality under law. What kind of democracy is that?” he said.

He reiterated statements from Saudi King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman (MBS) that Riyadh would only establish diplomatic relations with Jerusalem if the latter accepted the 2002 Arab Peace Plan, which involves a full withdrawal to the 1949 Armistice Lines, a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem and a “fair settlement for Palestinians refugees,” which is generally understood to be a euphemism for allowing some to live in Israel.

Prince Turki said that only after making peace with the Palestinians “can we together meet the other colonizing pretender that boasts of its control of Arab capitals, Beirut, Damascus and Sanaa.”

Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi was taken aback by the Saudi prince’s tone, as were his Bahraini interlocutors, who had invited them to a panel on cooperation and partnerships.  Ashkenazi chose not to escalate and merely expressed “regret for the comments” Prince Turki made. “I don’t think they reflect the spirit and the changes taking place in the Middle East,” Ashkenazi added.

He also thanked Saudi Arabia, saying that without the kingdom’s approval, the Abraham Accords, in which Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates normalized ties with Israel, could not have happened. Most of Ashkenazi’s remarks focused on the hope that the Abraham Accords would bring a better future to the Middle East, and called for more countries to join.

 “The months to come will be significant in the future of the region,” Ashkenazi added, a possible reference to Biden’s policies when he enters office next month.

Ashkenazi also called on the Palestinians to enter direct negotiations with Israel without preconditions.

“We believe that Israel moving from annexation to normalization is a window to resolve this conflict,” he stated.

In response to a question soon after, Prince Turki called settlements “a precondition” and suggested that they should all be removed before Israel enters negotiations with the Palestinians.

World moving away from fossil oil and gas

The fight against climate change and the need to curb were already prominent features of government plans. The pandemic has accelerated the momentum as governments pledged all kinds of “Green Deals” and green stimulus packages for economic recovery. All the major oil companies in Europe also announced net-zero emissions targets by 2050 or sooner, committing more investments in renewable energy and other low-carbon energy solutions. 

Yet, all the pledges from government and corporations are just tiny fractions of the true cost of the energy transition. If the world is to come anywhere close to limiting global warming to 2 degrees Celsius or below, it will need, collectively, a bare minimum of US$30 trillion to US$40 trillion of investment in energy systems and de-carbonization of industries where emissions are notoriously hard to abate such as steel and cement making.

Oil giants

Big oil companies have been frequently lambasted for trying to burnish their green credentials through half-hearted investments in renewables. That might have been true for much of the past decade, but it appears to be changing as the oil and gas majors have started putting down big money into clean energy. For instance, European oil majors including BP, Royal Dutch Shell, Eni SpA, Total SA and Norwegian Equinor ASA have already invested billions of dollars in renewable energy and made big clean energy commitments. Yet, Big Oil just can’t seem to catch a break, with stocks of oil and gas companies that are investing heavily in renewables being punished by the markets.

A good case in point is BP, one of the oil majors with some of the largest clean energy commitments. BP has announced plans to achieve net-zero status by 2030 by dramatically increasing its renewables spending. BP stock has, however, cratered 48% in the year-to-date, considerably worse than Europe’s oil and gas benchmark STOXX Europe 600 Oil & Gas Index (SXEP) which is down 32% in the year-to-date or even the Energy Select Sector Fund (XLE) which has lost 41%. 

BP’s European peer Shell has probably done more than any other supermajor as far as investing in renewable energy goes. Recently, Shell CEO Ben van Beurden told investors that the company no longer considers itself an oil and gas company but an energy transition company. Shell has been vocal about the shift to renewables, frequently issuing the clarion call for the industry to switch to cleaner energy sources. In 2016, Shell had announced an ambitious goal to invest up to US$6 billion in clean energy projects by 2020.

US Automakers

A group representing major automakers vowed to work with President-elect Joe Biden on efforts to reduce vehicle emissions. John Bozzella, who heads the Alliance for Automotive Innovation representing General Motors Co, Volkswagen AG, Toyota Motor Corp, Ford Motor Co and most major automakers, said the group “looks forward to engaging with the incoming Biden administration ... to advance the shared goals of reducing emissions and realizing the benefits of an electric future.”

Biden has made boosting electric vehicles (EV) a top priority and pledged to spend billions to add 550,000 EV charging stations. He also supports new tax credits for EV purchases and retrofitting factories for EV production.

 “The long-term future of the auto industry is electric,” Bozzella said in a statement after automakers held a virtual meeting. “We are investing hundreds of billions to develop the products that will drive this electric future, and we are committed to working collaboratively.”

Ford urged automakers to consider backing a framework deal with California on vehicle emissions in a bid to reach industry consensus before Biden takes office, but automakers did not immediately take that step.

Last week, GM abruptly announced it would no longer back the Trump administration’s ongoing effort to bar California from setting its own vehicle emissions rules. In October 2019, GM joined Toyota, Fiat Chrysler and other automakers in backing President Donald Trump in the California fight.

Environmental Working Group President Ken Cook said, “by continuing to support this futile fight, Toyota and Fiat Chrysler are signaling their disregard for cleaning our air, curbing the climate crisis and saving motorists millions at the gas pump.”

Ford, Honda Motor Co, Volkswagen and BMW in July 2019 struck a voluntary agreement with California on reducing vehicle emissions that is less stringent than Obama-era rules but higher than the Trump administration’s rollback .

Denmark to phase out oil and gas production

Denmark's parliament has voted to phase out North Sea oil and gas production by 2050. The plan includes cancelling the country's eighth licensing round, which has attracted lackluster interest since its launch in 2018, and all future rounds.

"It is incredibly important that we now have a broad majority behind the agreement. There is no longer any doubt about the possibilities and conditions in the North Sea," Danish climate and energy minister Dan Jorgensen said.

Denmark will continue to review two outstanding applications in the eighth round from UK-based Ardent Oil to ensure "stability", Jorgensen said. But any licences awarded will be subject to the 2050 cut-off date for oil and gas extraction. Total, the largest operator in Denmark's upstream sector, has already withdrawn from the round.

Denmark's decision to end North Sea production comes six months after parliament set a legally binding target to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 70% by 2030.

Denmark began producing oil and gas in its sector of the North Sea in 1972. It has 19 oil and gas fields, 15 of them operated by Total on behalf of the Danish Underground Consortium (Duc), three operated by the UK's Ineos and one by US firm Hess.

The latest figures from the Danish Energy Agency put Danish crude production at 71,500 b/d in October and gas output at 130.9mn ft³/d. Production has been constrained since the Tyra field and its satellites were shut down for a redevelopment project in September last year. The project is not expected to be completed until the second quarter of 2023, having been delayed by a year by the Covid-19 pandemic.

Is OPEC getting control over supply and price of crude oil, once gain?

The contraction of oil industry in the United States this year means the OPEC members probably won’t need to worry too much about losing market share for some time. But the group has a few challenges to consider at the upcoming crucial summit, for the first time in years the shale boom won’t be at the top of the list.

A devastating global pandemic and a reckoning with Wall Street appear to have broken the resolve of the shale wildcatters who made the US the world’s biggest oil producer. Years of breakneck growth, at the expense of crude kingpins in the Middle East and Russia, seems to be coming to the end. If there was ever any doubt, it’s now abundantly clear who has the upper hand in the global oil market.

It is believed that OPEC has got control over oil prices to a large extent. The US oil output will be around 11 million barrels a day in 2021, about the same as it is now. Experts don’t see growth until 2022, 2023, and prospects are lean that the US shale industry will post significant growth.

At the start of 2020, OPEC plus efforts to control prices were facing increasing difficulties. The breakthroughs in horizontal drilling and fracking that ushered in the shale revolution made it look as though US production growth might never end. Output surpassed 13 million barrels a day for the first time in February 2020.

After COVID-19 hit, people around the world stopped driving and flying and the oil market crashed. President Donald Trump brokered a historic deal with OPEC in April to remove almost a 10th of global production from the market. He said the US contribution would come in the form of market-driven cuts.

That pledge was delivered faster than most predicted, and it made a huge difference. Investors who were already tiring of the shale industry’s cash-burning spree retreated from the sector, and several producers went bankrupt. Before the summer was over, the US output had collapsed by 3.4 million barrels a day.

Output from shale wells typically declines in a matter of months, therefore, new ones need to be drilled and fracked just to maintain production at existing levels.  A recent uptick in drilling and fracking doesn’t seem to be enough to ensure production growth.

Since hitting bottom in the summer, the number of rigs searching for crude in shale fields has increased by 69 to 241 lately, still down from 683 in March. 

Similarly, the number of fracking crews in the once vibrant Permian Basin straddling Texas and New Mexico has increased to 63, an improvement from a meager 20 in June. But that’s less than half the 146 teams that were pumping mixtures of water, chemicals and sand into wells in January to release oil from shale rock in the area. 

It seems that the US has gone from being a thorn for OPEC to being an unofficial member of the cartel’s alliance with Russia and other producing nations. Since June, benchmark US oil prices have been remarkably stable, hovering around US$40 a barrel.

While shale’s retreat has made OPEC’s life easier, for the US oil industry it’s been brutal. There have been 43 bankruptcies of exploration and production companies this year through October, according to a report. Shale may be down but it’s certainly not out, though. The US is still an oil superpower, and will remain so for years to come. And there’s always the possibility that higher prices will get explorers drilling and fracking relentlessly like before.