Who in Europe (and elsewhere) is buying Iranian Crude oil?

[Bob]

It appears these countries are VERY interested in buying Iranian Oil and don't care about market prices "falling" with speculation about oil prices from Iran coming back on line "without sanctions".. http://cc.amazingcounters.com/counter.php?i=3190880&c=9572953

A tanker for France’s Total SA was being loaded at Kharg Port while vessels chartered for Chinese and Spanish companies were due to arrive later Sunday, an Iranian oil ministry official said. A tanker hired by a Russian company hadn’t arrived, and was still expected, the official said.

The official didn’t identify the companies that had hired the other three tankers and didn’t name the vessels. Total declined to comment.

Iran is trying to rebuild its oil production after sanctions were lifted in January, with plans to boost output and exports by 1 million barrels a day this year.

Supply deals were signed with Total and Hellenic Petroleum SA of Greece.

Iran is planning three initial shipments to Europe carrying 4 million barrels of oil with 2 million barrels going to Total and the rest to companies from Spain and Russia, Roknoddin Javadi, managing director of National Iranian Oil Co., said on Saturday, according to the Iranian oil ministry’s news service Shana.

Total, Spanish refiner Compania Espanola de Petroleos and Russia’s Lukoil PJSC all booked cargoes of Iranian crude to sail from Kharg Island to European ports, according to shipping reports compiled by Bloomberg earlier this month.

Total chartered the VLCC Atlantas, Spain’s Cepsa booked the Suezmax Monte Toledo and Lukoil’s trading unit Litasco booked the Distya Akula (vessel movements can be tracked via the internet).

The Atlantas is scheduled to head for European ports, the Monte Toledo for Spain and the Distya Akula for Constantza, Romania, the data show.

(Source (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-14/iran-sends-oil-in-first-shipment-to-europe-since-sanctions-end))


http://theiranproject.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Iran-oil.jpg

Who IS ?

Compañía Española de Petróleos, S.A.U. is a Spanish multinational oil and gas company. It operates in several European countries as well as in Algeria, Canada, Colombia, Morocco, Brazil, and Panama.

LukOil - Лукойл - is Russia's second largest oil company and its second largest producer of oil. Headquartered in Moscow, Lukoil is the second largest public company (next to ExxonMobil) in terms of proven oil and gas reserves. It is a wonder WHY would LukOil need to buy oil from Iran.

Hellenic Petroleum SA - Hellenic Petroleum S.A. is one of the largest oil companies in the Balkans and with its roots dating to 1958 with the establishment of the first oil refinery in Greece. Hellenic Petroleum operates three refineries in Greece, in Thessaloniki, Elefsina and Aspropyrgos, which account for 57% of the refining capacity of the country (the remaining 43% belongs to Motor Oil Hellas), and one in Skopje, Macedonia, the OKTA refinery, which is supplied by crude oil through pipelines from Thessaloniki and covers approximately 85% of the country's needs. Crude oil for the refineries is supplied from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Libya and Russia. The company also operates over 1400 gas stations in Greece and about 350 gas stations in Albania, Georgia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Montenegro and the Republic of Macedonia. It also has a network which sells LPG, jet fuel, naval fuels and lubricants.

France’s Total SA - is a French multinational integrated oil and gas company and one of the six "Supermajor" oil companies in the world. Its businesses cover the entire oil and gas chain, from crude oil and natural gas exploration and production to power generation, transportation, refining, petroleum product marketing, and international crude oil and product trading. Total is also a large-scale chemicals manufacturer. The company has its head office in the Tour Total in La Défense district in Courbevoie, west of Paris. Products: Oil and gas exploration and production, natural gas and LNG trading and transportation, oil refining and chemicals.

National Iranian Oil Company - The National Iranian Oil Company, a government-owned corporation under the direction of the Ministry of Petroleum of Iran, is an oil and natural gas producer and distributor headquartered in Tehran. It was established in 1948.

[lucidity]

So there are countries willing to buy Iranian oil. So what ?
What is your point ?

[Bob]

What else does Iran have in the way of Energy Products?

Natural Gas - (good quality)

UK especially needs Natural Gas and has been buying from Russia (GazProm) who has had a stranglehold on natural gas prices.. (think economic leverage and posturing)

The Kish GasField on the Iranian side is large. Qatar also has claims to that field (their side of the Gulf).


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/Iran_Gas_Fields_Location-PesareAmol.png

The field also holds at least 1 billion barrels (160,000,000 m3) of condensate (oil equivalent) of which at least 331 million barrels (52,600,000 m3) are recoverable.

In February 2010, an Iranian consortium headed by Bank Mellat signed a $10-billion agreement with the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC) to develop the Kish gas field. The gas field will produce 85 million cubic meters of natural gas per day.

However - South Pars / North Dome Gas-Condensate field. It is the world's largest gas field, shared between Iran and Qatar.

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), the field holds an estimated 1,800 trillion cubic feet (51 trillion cubic metres) of in-situ natural gas and some 50 billion barrels (7.9 billion cubic metres) of natural gas condensates.


https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/South_Pars.gif/330px-South_Pars.gif

It seems that Russia no doubt would love to get its hands on that field, and stranglehold the rest of the world's natural gas consumers (http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-europe-energy-russia-insight-idUKBREA2K13120140321). Possibly that is why they are buying small amounts of oil from Iran from the sanctions relief action, to get a toe hold, then possibly by the throat if they can put Iran into a compromising political situation.

From Reuters - "Russia's seizure of the Crimea and its threat to cut off gas to Ukraine, a transit route to the rest of Europe, have revived calls to reduce the EU's reliance on Moscow for energy, but the blocs options are limited and costly."

Russia today is Europe's biggest supplier of oil, coal and natural gas, meeting around a third of demand for all those fuels, according to Eurostat data, and receiving in return a thumping $250 billion (151 billion pounds) a year.

"European leaders said on Friday that the stand-off with Moscow over Crimea made them more determined than ever to end decades of dependence on Russian gas."

Possibly a motivating factor to let Iran off from sanctions, Europe needs the ENERGY, and Russia is not cooperating..

(Source - multiple - 1 (http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-europe-energy-russia-insight-idUKBREA2K13120140321))

Putin's Energy Stranglehold on Europe - http://euanmearns.com/putins-energy-stranglehold-on-europe/

"Zbigniew Brzezinski the former US National Security adviser to Jimmy Carter: His theory basically claims that firstly the USSR, then the Russian Federation is using its energy resources to bring Europe to heel through energy dependence.

"Russia needs Ukraine for its energy dominance, as a “pipeline corridor country” so the West and Russia have totally opposing goals in Ukraine and Crimea. This could mean war."

From Zero Hedge - http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/2012-08-31/russia%E2%80%99s-gazprom-tightens-its-stranglehold-europe-france-falls-natural-gas-wa -
"Why would France suddenly prohibit shale gas exploration? Sure, there are environmental issues with horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, the methods used to extract gas from porous shale deep underground: flammable drinking water, earth quakes, cows that die, radioactive sludge in sewage treatment plants.... But French governments have had, let’s say, an uneasy relationship with environmentalists. Its spy service DGSE, for example, sank Greenpeace’s flagship, the Rainbow Warrior, in the port of Auckland, New Zealand, killing one person."

Price Fixing through threats of Economic Terrorism

"Gazprom’s “underhanded tactics” and “scaremongering about a new technology” have Moscow’s nod of approval and are designed to dissuade governments from developing their own shale-gas reserves, according to a report by Platts, a global provider of information on energy, petrochemicals, and metals. Efforts include all manner of operations, online and through encouraging demonstrations, but also paying public relation firms to spread “myths and misconceptions,” said Aviezer Tucker, assistant director of the Energy Institute at the University of Texas. A “European Union-wide ban” on shale-gas production, he said, would be the “holy grail.”

"With France already knocked off, Sergei Komlev of Gazprom Export has been bouncing around the world in his fight against European shale gas."

[Bob]

The west seeks to destroy Russian stranglehold on energy (i.e. sales to Europe at inflated prices)..

Iran coming on line with not just oil but natural gas puts a crimp in Russian economy. Oil being artificially lowered in sales prices puts a major crimp in the discretionary income Russia has to pay for waging war.


So there are countries willing to buy Iranian oil. So what ?

Who is buying is interesting, who is wanting to establish economic contract relationships is important. It seems that what their interests are in doing that when they themselves have good energy reserves is especially interesting.

Times - UK " Britain is to lead an international effort to stop Russia from using its vast natural energy supplies to hold the world to ransom.

"As President Putin continues to stoke fears of civil war in Ukraine, energy ministers are preparing to weaken his power by reducing reliance on Russian gas.

"Speaking before a summit for G7 countries next month, Ed Davey, the energy secretary, warned that Putin had the west in a stranglehold.."

Iran's energy sales offer solutions to Europe besides buying from Russia.

(Sources - multiple 1 (http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4069308.ece))

[Bob]

Why is Putin trying to get Natural Gas from other sellers?

Supposedly Shale Gas is so bad, that it has to be stopped worldwide. Shale Gas recovery requires very deep (formation protected hydraulic fracturing operations - 'fracking') drilling, it is expensive, but it yields high values from productive fields.

To sabotage those economically attempting to recover shale gas, a campaign would have to be created to discredit, and put fear into the minds of lay people, eventually to get local governments to "ban fracking", using all sorts of excuses (bypassing and hiding the damage that disposal injection wells, the real culprit)... Russia then maintains its economic stranglehold in Europe's gas buyers who rely on it for instance for industry and heating homes.


The people must FEAR fracking, the way to create vast amounts of gas and oil production, and we must STOP them at all costs..

GET THE GAS, cut deals with those to keep Russia the Supplier for Europe -

The tension between Israel and Iran ratchets up.. an interesting sub-text has developed over the role of Iran’s traditional backer, Russia. While many Western observers continue to raise the spectre of a ‘wider Middle East conflagration’ (an argument we have consistently refuted), and one that could drag in Russia, a whole new, higher value, game chip is now in play: Moscow’s interest in Israeli energy.

Israel and its neighbouring potential partner, Cyprus, of course must be quite aware that Gazprom, Russia’s battering ram, can easily prove to be a Trojan Horse in any major future natural gas development. Certainly, they will try to affect a project that could lessen their energy stranglehold over Europe. 20 million metric tons of liquid natural gas (LNG) exported each year from the eastern Mediterranean into Europe would amount to about one third of current Russian exports.

Whatever we may think of Vladimir Putin’s politics, one thing is clear, he is a shrewd, often ruthless, operator on the global stage. But Putin’s Kremlin is clearly rattled by the threat of decline for that which underpins Russia’s entire economy: its energy hegemony.

Putin is only too aware of the triple whammy of falling domestic energy productivity, surging global shale development in the wake of the transforming US shale revolution, and a new threat posed to a European market still dependent on Russian gas imports – the significant potential of Israeli and Cypriot gas exports.

Getting involved with Israel's attempts for energy independence, Gazprom is potentially that snake in the garden.


According to reports, while publicly playing down the impact that shale gas and oil is likely to have, Putin is privately urging Russia’s energy majors to learn all they can about hydraulic fracturing techniques. Meanwhile, in a bid to retain a key stake in its European export market – Russia supplies a quarter of all Europe’s (rising) natural gas demand – Moscow is set on doing all in its power to protect its ‘captive’ market.

To date, Europe’s anti-shale gas policies have played into Russian hands.

Why is Iran Energy production coming on line important ? Pretty obvious.

[Bob]

I want to thank Nick at Oil and Gas News, the Washington Editor for picking up on the Forum postings :) VWD my friend.

Here is what Nick is saying about this:


Russia’s general economy is withstanding depressed global crude oil prices now despite its heavy reliance on crude exports because the government adopted different financial policies in 2008, a Yale University International Security Studies official told a Washington, DC, audience.

“The economy has held up surprisingly well when you consider the stresses on it” that include Western sanctions preventing banks and oil companies from issuing debt and imposing bans on high-tech oil equipment purchases, said Christopher Miller, Associate Director of the Brady-Johnson Grand Strategy Program at Yale ISS.

“The reason is that government policies since 2008 have been relatively effective,” he said in a Feb. 18 presentation at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.

Miller said that Russia’s heavy economic dependence on oil and gas was a rational response to the country’s resources of those fuels being so substantial. The government’s decision to raise oil and gas taxes gradually to 15% by 2014 allowed it to reduce levies on other industries, he indicated.

More significantly, however, the government also decided to let the ruble move to a floating exchange rate, making its value relative to other currencies fall but not making it necessary to spend financial reserves, Miller said. Doing so helped save the national budget in 2015, he maintained.

This was not easy because Russia is paid in US dollars for its oil and gas, but the government pays for services in rubles. “The object was to get more rubles per barrel and thousand cubic feet,” Miller said. “It worked.”

But hard policy choices lie ahead for Russia’s government, he continued, with three possible options:
• Not change much, and hope global crude prices increase soon. Miller said that Russia’s reserve fund should last to 2017, and the government can issue debt to fill a deficit. “It’s not looking at an immediate fiscal crunch,” he said.

• Increase efficiency and institute reforms in state-owned businesses, including Rosneft and Gazprom. “Trying to cut down on corruption and waste would be politically challenging,” said Miller, noting that several significant national businesses are corrupt and controlled by oligarchs who don’t want to relinquish their power.

• Adopt austerity measure, probably by letting the ruble fall further against other international currencies. Miller said the government probably will choose this option, but could face problems because the resulting inflation would erode the real value of government pensions.

“One question government policymakers probably are asking is whether Russians will remember the gross domestic product’s growth since 2008 or the reduction in pension values when they show up at ballot boxes,” Miller suggested.

Unless global crude prices increases and new sources of investment are found, the regime led by Vladimir I. Putin, who is popular personally, could face problems with the voters, he warned.

“Oil prices will increase eventually, but that looks unlikely before the 2018 elections,” he said.

Miller largely discounted the idea that Russia could work with Saudi Arabia and other Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries to limit crude exports and push global prices upward. “This isn’t the first time we’ve heard of such a possible deal,” he said.

“Russia has signed earlier agreements, but then refused to cut production, which could make OPEC members wary,” Miller observed. “OPEC is a diverse group of countries already and has trouble reaching export limit agreements on its own.”

Miller said that from the Russian government’s perspective, managing the ruble’s exchange rate for more favorable long-term results matters more than helping increase global crude prices. “If they return to $50/bbl, it would be happy,” he said. “But if they started to drift toward $25/bbl, there would be problems. That hasn’t happened yet.”

The points Nick is Hydrocarbon markets will go for the lower prices, such as what IRAN can offer, and Russia cannot offer gas (or oil) at lower prices than Iran can. Do you think that oil sales will be paid at TOP dollar or go for the lower rates? Iran can sell at lower rates, Russia cannot..

[Bob]

Partial continuation of last post - Nick if the oil and gas industry would call out Russia for what it is, and move off it, the world would be a better place. - You are perfectly welcome to ask for membership here from Bill. I am sure you would be welcomed as an informed Industry Leader. We have quite an informed 'enlightened' following from business to global stewardship awareness.

Let's move to this though - (link (http://www.euractiv.com/section/europe-s-east/opinion/russia-s-silent-shale-gas-victory-in-ukraine/)) OPEC is a pawn, setup to be stewards of an energy economy, which when they get out of line, end up being gracefully 'corrected' - on the other hand, Putin and Russia have a problem... attitude..

Dealing with energy manipulation and world economies (based on trade-able commodities, necessary for survival, not "luxury" items)

The vast shale gas reserves in the separatist-held Ukrainian regions of Donetsk and Lugansk regions are an important element not to be overlooked when analysing the Ukraine crisis, writes Szilvia Batkov.

While the Russian energy giant keeps complaining about its deteriorating supply security through Ukraine and fights a debt repayment battle with its neighbour’s new government, in reality the armed turmoil in the breakaway regions is helping Moscow in a way that hardly anyone would expect: shale gas.

At first this statement does not make much sense, since shale gas is mainly America’s focus. However, by taking a deeper look it turns out that Ukraine – one of the few European countries that has not banned fracking – is presumed to have Europe’s third-largest shale gas reserves at 1.2 trillion cubic metres.

In addition, if we put the map of the conflict on the one of Ukraine’s shale gas fields, the Donetsk region is an obvious overlap. Besides sitting on an allegedly huge deposit of shale gas known as Yuzivska, perhaps not surprisingly, it is also the hotbed of the fiercest fighting between the government’s armed forces and pro-Russian separatists.

Yuzivska is believed to contain up to four trillion cubic meters of shale gas, according to the Ukrainian government. To tap this, energy giant Shell signed a production sharing agreement in January 2013, opening way for a potential $10 billion investment in the field. In an optimistic scenario before the armed conflict, Yuzivska alone was supposed to produce up to 20 billion cubic meters of gas annually (bcm/y) by 2030, which equals Ukraine’s 2011 overall gas output.

It is not hard to see why this would be a quite a scary scenario for Moscow. An energy independent Ukraine, let alone if it decides to export its gas to Europe, would mean enormous losses for Gazprom.

So what better way is there to scare away a profit-oriented energy company from a project, than putting its potential investment into danger by an armed conflict? Could it be that Russia’s desire to stifle in the bud the shale gas production in Ukraine as an alternative to Russian gas is one of the main causes of Moscow’s help of the separatists?

Foreign Policy reported in June 2014 that the Russian president and his inner circle have been covertly backing European movements that demonise fracking, in order to maintain the Russian stranglehold on European gas imports. FP notes that strong environmental opposition to fracking is present in countries like Bulgaria and Ukraine, which are heavily dependent on Russia for energy supplies.

According to Russia’s TASS, the residents of Slavyansk, which is the centre of the Yuzivska deposit, organised several protests against development of the deposit. They even planned to have a referendum on the issue.

Another TASS report even allegedly cited Pavel Gubarev, the self-proclaimed leader of pro-Russian separatists in Donetsk, admitting in an interview with Russian television Rossiya 24 on 19 May that one of the key reasons for the fighting is Kyiv’s push to “continue development of shale gas on the territory of Ukraine”.

If this is indeed the case, Russia managed to accomplish its mission – at least for now. Both Shell and Chevron decided to freeze and pull out from their shale projects in the region.

Before the civil war, Ukraine had agreements with the energy giants to explore and tap its shale gas fields in hope to reduce the country’s heavy dependency on Russian gas imports. In the Donetsk Region Shell had a 50-year profit sharing deal with the government of Ukraine to explore and drill for natural gas in shale rock formations.

US energy giant Chevron also signed a similar deal for $10 billion, but it was focusing on developing shale gas reserves in the West of Ukraine. However, one year into the Russia-backed conflict, both decided to freeze or postpone their shale-exploring activities in Ukraine. Probably also driven by the low gas prices, the profit-oriented energy giants simply shied away from their shale projects in the conflict-ridden country, citing the lack of security for their investments and worsening extraction prospects as their main reasons.

According to Unconventional Gas Information Project expert Mykola Shlapak, it was indeed the fighting that scared Shell away from the Yuzivska project. “In the geographical sense there are two major regions with unconventional gas production potential. One of them is located in the east of Ukraine and is partially on the territories currently not controlled by the Ukrainian government, where the armed conflict is taking place.

“The second oil and gas region is located in the west of the country, close to the Ukrainian western border. In terms of unconventional gas potential – according to some national estimates – I would say that about 60-70% of the reserves are located in the east of the country – in the Donetsk-Dnipro basin, as it is called. In other words, the major areas of unconventional oil and gas potential are located close to the war zone in the east and, specifically, the Yuzivska licence area, which Shell had planned to develop, is located in that region. That was to reason Shell decided to postpone the work on the project, and to declare force majeure”, he said in an interview.

At first, the withdrawal of Shell and Exxon seemed to be strictly Ukraine’s problem. However, if we zoom out and look at Europe’s energy map, the case is quite different. Besides Russia, the future of Ukraine’s shale gas -if confirmed- could be of enormous importance for both the European Union and the US. In addition to its own independence, Ukraine also had ambitious plans to become an exporter of shale gas to Europe – with the active contribution of the America and its business interests.

Eduard Stavytskiy, then Ukrainian energy and coal industry minister, said in April 2013 that with the help of shale gas and Crimean offshore gas projects, Ukraine could start exports of gas to Europe in four to five years and to become a net energy exporter by 2020. As we know, by now, both of these areas are not under Kyiv’s control anymore.

“The question of Ukraine is a question of EU’s future, EU’s safety, and a correction of EU’s energy policy. We will not be able to efficiently fend off potential aggressive steps by Russia in the future, if so many European countries are dependent on Russian gas deliveries or wade into such dependence,” the then Prime Minister of Poland Donald Tusk said back in 2012.

Indeed, Gazprom accounted for 39% of the European Union’s natural gas imports in 2013 and the union’s dependency is still a big problem for Brussels, especially in the light of its cooling relations with Moscow. As such the union is busy seeking diversification. It even asked US President Obama for increased shale gas imports.

It is hard to miss the massive American interest in Europe’s desire to cut dependency of Russia and simultaneously Ukraine’s promising shale gas prospects. Besides the obvious profit-oriented business interests of American companies in tapping the shale gas of Ukraine, as usually, politics and strategic foreign political interests are also at play in the war for Ukraine’s new gas potential.

The EU and the US are currently negotiating the Transatlantic Trade and Investment partnership (TTIP), which, if agreed, could be very advantageous for the multinational fracking lobby. When President Obama attended an EU-US summit in Brussels in 2014 to discuss the Ukraine crisis, he said the new trans-Atlantic trade agreement would make it easier for his administration to approve American LNG exports to the EU.

However, as long as TTIP is not signed and with significant problems in Poland, Ukraine seems to be the only way for the US shale gas lobby to set its feet in CEE. Vice President Joe Biden announced that the United States would bring in technical experts to speed up Ukraine’s shale gas development.

In fact, the Biden family was so interested in Ukraine, that his son Hunter was appointed to the board of directors of Ukraine’s largest private gas producer, Burisma Holdings. This has put Ukraine’s shale gas question into a new perspective – at least from the American viewpoint.

Burisma holds licenses covering the Dnieper-Donets basin in the eastern Ukraine and Biden Jr. is not the only American with political ties to have recently joined the company’s board. Devon Archer, a former senior advisor to current Secretary of State John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign and a college roommate of Kerry’s stepson, signed up with Burisma in April 2014.

“Kyiv is fighting in Ukraine’s east for the gas reserves. Germany says the reserves make 5,578 bcm. [the US reserves are 8,976 bcm]. Control will be from the US,” Russian State Duma’s international affairs committee head Aleksey Pushkov tweeted in August 2014.

If the explorations indeed confirm Ukraine’s estimated shale reserves, these would become a significant danger to Russia’s monopoly over the multi-billion euros gas supplies to Europe. By continuing its officially denied support of the separatists in keeping Ukraine’s shale gas untapped, Moscow has also averted another crisis; American shale gas interests setting foot right at its doorsteps at the Ukrainian border and the European gas markets.

In Russia’s silent shale gas victory in Ukraine, the Russian-backed rebels fighting in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions ensured that at least for the near future, Ukraine’s shale gas potential will not be able to challenge Gazprom’s gas monopoly in the region.

The price manipulation Nick is clear. Putin's days are numbered.

[ghostrider]

Let us think about this from another angle , a nation full of Muslims that sponsor terror, are now making big profits selling tankers full of oil that have been under sanctions for 40 years ... the ptb take down Syria , and the survivors retreat to Iran who now has no chains, no sanctions , plenty of oil, plenty of cash , plenty of customers, and could easily be a platform for launching massive terrorist attacks worldwide, especially against those who imposed sanctions on them ... flip side, flood the market, the price of gas drops , big players have weak quarterly statements , mid level players get laid off ... what does one do when laid off, pissed off , and global terror is unleashed ... onee cries for uncle NWO to come save them ...

[Snoweagle]

So what if the world is buying Iranian oil. It's their oil to sell. They aren't stealing it as Turkey/Israel/Saudi/Anglo/Dutch were from Syriia and Northern Iraq.

Maybe you might use some of your immense intellect and produce an article that exposes Israels illegal Oil Bourse tactics to the world. Somehow I don't think so, nor do many others, that exposure will never happen.

As for the falling oil prices, great news. Great news for the world. It will magnify the corruption of the entire economic system that enslaved the globe.

Maybe soon we will see the bankers topping themselves as they did in the nineteen thirties. Economics is Genocide. The two words are interchangeable in any article. Try it, most revealing.