Weeble Rothschild

6.4K posts

Weeble Rothschild banner
Weeble Rothschild

Weeble Rothschild

@noruserious

This twitter account is only for boosting Anti Nazi news. So, don't even bother.

Over there. Inscrit le Ocak 2025
71 Abonnements117 Abonnés
Tweet épinglé
Weeble Rothschild
Weeble Rothschild@noruserious·
How do you get a Covid! 2.0? Well, the @NSAGov doesn't do the same psyop 2x in a row, they like variety. So, u manuf a shut down of a v imp energy choke point, the smokescrn is a War. It's y thy keep telling @realDonaldTrump to announce these endless 'endings'. #EnergyLockdown
HFI Research@HFI_Research

They really tried huh. They had all this nonsense done on a Saturday. Trump TACO again on his own military strike. Iran knows full well now he will never attack again. They are going to drag this out forever. We have officially gone into deadlock mode for many more weeks/months.

English
1
0
0
94
Weeble Rothschild
Weeble Rothschild@noruserious·
@BoltzmannBooty Were times always this f*ing crazy or does it just seem so now? Is it 'bad becs the US is "losing it's hegemonic power" and that's y the NSA is in beast mode' or has it really always just been this f*ing nutz?
English
0
0
0
10
Energy Aspects
Energy Aspects@EnergyAspects·
"We are looking at the biggest disruption in history when it comes to energy markets, we've got over 11 million barrels per day of production shut-ins in the Middle East". Energy Aspects Founder and Director of Market Intelligence, @ea_amrita, joined @MackenzieInvest Get Sharpe podcast recently to discuss the ongoing disruption of the Strait of Hormuz and its effect on energy markets. Amrita explains why physical cargo markets are trading ten to fifty dollars above published crude benchmarks, what that divergence means for gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, and LNG, and why a reopening of the strait would not restore flows anywhere near pre-conflict levels. Listen to the podcast here. Spotify: ow.ly/j5z850Z6996 Apple: ow.ly/V0EE50Z6997 #EnergyAspects #OOTT #Hormuz #EnergyMarkets
Energy Aspects tweet media
English
1
1
6
1.3K
Weeble Rothschild
Weeble Rothschild@noruserious·
@JoshYoung Ahh, Josh, since Oman has been legitimately working w Iran I'd guess that it was the US/Israel that attacked Oman. Not Iran.
English
0
0
0
33
Weeble Rothschild
Weeble Rothschild@noruserious·
@JoshYoung At this point I'd bet that Mr. Currie would use a diffrent word than "gamble" whn in private, trusted channels.
English
0
0
1
95
Josh Young
Josh Young@JoshYoung·
"The gamble is that governments can bridge the gap until supply returns and prices fall. The problem is that a falling oil price is not evidence of rebalancing. It is evidence that we are consuming the buffer and mistaking it for abundance. There is a difference between a market clearing and a market solving. What we are witnessing is destocking: the drawdown of finite inventories accumulated over decades. You can only do that once."
Jeffrey Currie 🆔++@CommodMkt

Thanks @AlanEyre1. From Washington to Beijing, the response has been the same: reassure markets with words and hundreds of millions of barrels from strategic reserves. The gamble is that governments can bridge the gap until supply returns and prices fall. The problem is that a falling oil price is not evidence of rebalancing. It is evidence that we are consuming the buffer and mistaking it for abundance. There is a difference between a market clearing and a market solving. What we are witnessing is destocking: the drawdown of finite inventories accumulated over decades. You can only do that once. The article notes that “inventories and government reserves run low”, but that understates the issue. Strategic reserves buy time, not supply. When tank bottoms arrive (likely later this summer), there is no price signal that conjures a new barrel into existence. The “stream finds its way around the log” metaphor is seductive but flawed. It assumes the total volume of water is unchanged and that we don’t mind being thirsty. The Strait’s closure has not simply redirected supply; it has removed supply while the world burns through stored reserves to cover the gap. When Jimmy Carter asked Americans to turn down the thermostat, he was punished for acknowledging physical constraints. His successors learned to promise abundance instead. That lesson is being applied again today, and the consequences will be proportionally larger for the delay.   You cannot print molecules. And you cannot destock your way to energy security.

English
8
14
141
14.6K
Weeble Rothschild
Weeble Rothschild@noruserious·
My god they treat @nytimes readers like their idiots. Let's see, 1) Free Article + 2) Obama (NSA asset) Official + yada yada... @csmart #oott #crude
Weeble Rothschild tweet media
Jeffrey Currie 🆔++@CommodMkt

Thanks @AlanEyre1. From Washington to Beijing, the response has been the same: reassure markets with words and hundreds of millions of barrels from strategic reserves. The gamble is that governments can bridge the gap until supply returns and prices fall. The problem is that a falling oil price is not evidence of rebalancing. It is evidence that we are consuming the buffer and mistaking it for abundance. There is a difference between a market clearing and a market solving. What we are witnessing is destocking: the drawdown of finite inventories accumulated over decades. You can only do that once. The article notes that “inventories and government reserves run low”, but that understates the issue. Strategic reserves buy time, not supply. When tank bottoms arrive (likely later this summer), there is no price signal that conjures a new barrel into existence. The “stream finds its way around the log” metaphor is seductive but flawed. It assumes the total volume of water is unchanged and that we don’t mind being thirsty. The Strait’s closure has not simply redirected supply; it has removed supply while the world burns through stored reserves to cover the gap. When Jimmy Carter asked Americans to turn down the thermostat, he was punished for acknowledging physical constraints. His successors learned to promise abundance instead. That lesson is being applied again today, and the consequences will be proportionally larger for the delay.   You cannot print molecules. And you cannot destock your way to energy security.

English
0
0
0
272
Weeble Rothschild
Weeble Rothschild@noruserious·
@CRUDEOIL231 @calvinfroedge y is Calvin sayin TWO YEARS? "If the current state of things continues, yr talking about forced demand destruction from widespread shortages within 2 years." We've got #oott's/JPM/etc saying Global Crude Inventories hit a hard wall ~Sept 2026? JH, what's yr idea of "long dated"?
English
0
0
0
380
JH
JH@CRUDEOIL231·
Calvin, phenomenal piece, appreciate the insights. Just wanted to push back on one item here. I think lumping us, Mercuria, or Vitol into the bucket of pure speculators is missing the mark. Look, on a macro level, do we print money from these massive dislocations? Absolutely, especially when the entire commodity complex is ripping. But our footprint is massive. Raking it in on one desk doesn't mean we aren't eating losses on another side of the book. And we have a franchise to run for the long term. Our structural incentives are exactly the same as CVX or XOM. We all know we’ll have to pivot to next-gen tech eventually, but none of us want that expiry date to hit today. The speculators you're talking about are the macro tourists and the momentum chasers. For the rest of your note, I’m 100% on board. It’s just a matter of timing; the destination is already crossed the finish line. With prompt futures liquidity completely evaporated and the tape left exposed to violent chop, sitting on long dated calls and letting time do the work is the absolute highest-conviction trade on the board.
English
5
0
80
5.3K
🏴‍☠️
🏴‍☠️@calvinfroedge·
Let me break down for you the difference in incentives for the speculators and the people who actually work in the oil industry The people who work for the oil industry have made their careers in it. Oil having a future depends on stability and reliability. They know that a severe crisis could push the world to act and develop viable alternatives. That would effectively jeopardize their careers as well as the enormous Capital expenditure that has been made in developing global oil infrastructure. Literally the fate of entire nations depends on the continued use of oil as our primary source of energy. So it's rare that you're going to see these guys talk up a crisis. Because the smart ones know that any crisis that's really severe could be the last crisis. However, you do get blips of transparency from guys who aren't talking their book. They're just like holy crap. This actually is turning into a crisis. On the other hand, you have the speculators. Now the speculators don't really care too much. If this is the crisis that structurally shifts the future world energy allocation 10 years from now. The speculators want to make their money now from an extreme price dislocation. Mercuria and Trafigura, for example, are speculators. They're thinking about their bonuses over the next few years. Nothing that they're saying is untrue, but the reason that they're telling people that yes this is actually really bad is because they're positioned to profit from it. If you've got 100 years of oil reserves, you want people to be using oil for the next hundred years. If oil futures in 2028 you just want the price to go to $1000 and you don't care how it gets there. Anyway, oil industry career guys and super long term planners have an incentive to talk down oil. Traitors and speculators have an incentive to talk it up. I think that everybody from governments around the world, to consumers of oil, to producers of oil, are watching Iran basically go off script and potentially throw the whole world into chaos and they're basically all wish casting that Iran just decides to stop and let Israel teabag them. What people are missing is that this is existential for Iran, and existential for Israel, and you rarely have somebody back down in an existential fight. I think crisis is certain but the timeline might be slower than people expect because of the incentives. Should the oil price go higher? I think almost certainly so. You've got the largest drawdown of reserves in history. We drew down 15% of everything that we have (oil + fuel) in 3 months. And this was with China largely sidelined. If the current state of things continues, you're talking about forced demand destruction from widespread shortages within 2 years. You're talking about global recession. And yes, higher oil prices. Higher oil prices are necessary to destroy demand. So far, governments have been doing exactly the opposite of what they should be as a policy response. The jaw boning and subsidies are keeping demand high. You've got countries suspending fuel taxes and drawing down on their reserves. This is not allowing the price to destroy demand. Eric Townsend used the analogy of the guy who loses his job and he's living on his credit lines because he thinks he can get a job in 6 weeks. But he doesn't stop spending. So sooner or later he hits the wall. And that's what we're doing as a global economy.
English
25
55
476
27.6K
Mohamed A. El-Erian
Mohamed A. El-Erian@elerianm·
As you may recall from prior posts, developments in Japan can have implications for global markets through sales of its massive holdings of foreign securities. The Bloomberg reporting below on the link between FX intervention and US Treasury sales illustrates one of several possible spillover channels. #economy #markets #japan
Mohamed A. El-Erian tweet mediaMohamed A. El-Erian tweet media
English
7
17
94
15.6K
Mohamed A. El-Erian
Mohamed A. El-Erian@elerianm·
Just heard during a financial television interview on equity investing: “ANY pullback is an opportunity to buy.” This echoes quite a broad market belief -- conditioned by years of policy puts and outcomes-- that has increasingly ensured market corrections are remarkably limited in both magnitude and duration. Yet the deeper this belief is embedded in the system, the greater the risk of unsettling volatility in the event of a serious challenge, whether from fundamentals, technicals, valuations, or all three. #markets #investing #investors
English
32
38
337
31.9K
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command
Overnight, U.S. forces carried out a maritime interdiction and right-of-visit boarding of the sanctioned stateless vessel MT DAVINA located in the Indian Ocean within the INDOPACOM area of responsibility. We will continue global maritime enforcement to disrupt illicit networks and interdict vessels providing material support to Iran, wherever they operate. International waters cannot be used as a shield by sanctioned actors. The Department of War will continue to deny illicit act ors and their vessels freedom of maneuver in the maritime domain.
U.S. Indo-Pacific Command tweet mediaU.S. Indo-Pacific Command tweet mediaU.S. Indo-Pacific Command tweet media
English
145
741
3.8K
257.7K
Weeble Rothschild retweeté
Ramy Abdu| رامي عبده
Breaking: After Dr. Hussam Abu Safiya’s legal team appealed his arbitrary detention, Israeli authorities transferred him on 3 June 2026 from Naqab Prison to solitary confinement in Nafha as a punitive measure. The move comes amid harsh conditions and denial of medical treatment.
Ramy Abdu| رامي عبده tweet media
English
237
4.4K
5.4K
287.1K
Weeble Rothschild retweeté
neyi kaybettiğini hatırla
neyi kaybettiğini hatırla@neyikaybettik·
Hussam Ebu Safieh, "İsrail'in rehineler için ölüm cezası" ile öldürülecek olan Filistinli doktorlardan biridir (diğer 95 doktor arasında). Onu öldürmelerine izin verme. Bunu yeniden yayınlayın.
Türkçe
849
20.5K
26.4K
254K
Max Blumenthal
Max Blumenthal@MaxBlumenthal·
Anna Paulina Luna is a pathological liar with a fake name who has buried elements of her life story. So it's no surprise she would fabricate a violent attack. But there's a more salient issue that has been lost in the drama: Luna (real name: Meyerhofer) has been targeting Medea Benjamin and Code Pink in a McCarthyite witch hunt with no concrete basis, accusing them of being Chinese agents based entirely on innuendo. Luna's bogus investigation and her fake assault claims are of a part. Both are designed to criminalize antiwar dissenters and ensure that warmongers like herself are never challenged to their face by American citizens.
CODEPINK@codepink

Nobody hit her. Instead of answering for the war crimes she supports, this AIPAC-funded congresswoman continues to lie about activists.

English
247
1.8K
6.2K
137.4K