US-Venezuela Oil Pact Expands Offsetting Iran War Supply Shock

 As US-Israeli strikes on Iran since late February 2026 disrupt crude flows through the Strait of Hormuz and damage export hubs like Kharg Island, the Trump administration is rapidly expanding energy agreements with Venezuela to restore global supply balance.

Following the January 3 capture of Nicolás Maduro and the installation of interim leader Delcy Rodríguez, the US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control issued and updated General Licenses 46 through 50 (latest March 13 expansions). These authorize American and international majors—including Chevron, BP, Shell, Eni, and Repsol—to invest in exploration, provide diluents and equipment, generate electricity, and freely export Venezuelan-origin crude and petrochemicals.

Venezuelan production, recently near 1 million barrels per day, is accelerating with targeted US investment and technology. Early exports have surged, with direct shipments to US Gulf Coast refiners like Phillips 66 and Citgo, while trading houses handle broader marketing. Analysts project 30-40% output growth within 2026, adding hundreds of thousands of barrels daily.

This strategic pivot—explicitly framed by Energy Secretary Chris Wright as a counter to Iranian disruptions—delivers immediate relief to price volatility and supports US energy security without relying on the volatile Middle East chokepoint. While full recovery requires billions more in investment, the new pacts are already stabilizing markets.

Mamdani’s Twisted Priorities: Focusing on "Bigotry" While Dodging Islamic Terror at Gracie Mansion

OPINION- In a press conference that will live in infamy, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani addressed the “Gracie Bombing” with the moral clarity of a man reading from two different scripts. An anti-Islam protest organized by Jake Lang outside the mayor’s official residence turned chaotic when two men hurled improvised explosive devices at the crowd. The attackers, Emir Balat and Ibrahim Kayumi, traveled from Pennsylvania, allegedly pledged allegiance to ISIS, and hoped to top the Boston Marathon bombing. NYPD and federal prosecutors are charging them with ISIS-inspired terrorism—yet Mamdani’s first instinct was not to name radical Islam.

Instead, the mayor opened by branding the protest “a vile protest rooted in white supremacy” and “rooted in bigotry and racism.” He called it appalling. Only then, almost as an afterthought, did he condemn the violence that actually put lives at risk. He did pause to affirm that even those he abhors have a “sacred” right to peaceful protest—effectively patting "white supremacists" on the head while the chaos from Islamist IEDs that failed still lingered in his own neighborhood.

Conveniently absent from Mamdani’s remarks: any mention that the bombers were Muslim. No condemnation of the ideology that radicalized them. No acknowledgment that the very protest he smeared as racist was warning against the exact threat that was just about to explode on his doorstep. As the city’s first Muslim mayor, he had a golden opportunity to draw a bright line between peaceful Muslim New Yorkers and the jihadists who tried to maim their critics. He chose selective silence.

This is more than tone-deaf. It’s dangerous. When Islamist terrorists attack Americans exercising their First Amendment rights, the response cannot begin with lectures about “white supremacy.” New York’s communities and especially Latino communities—large, vibrant, and often on the front lines of urban crime and terror threats—deserve better than a mayor who prioritizes identity politics over public safety.

If local leadership refuses to call radical Islam by its name, perhaps it’s time for federal intervention. Donald Trump may indeed need to step in to protect all New Yorkers from the very ideology Mamdani refuses to confront. Free speech is sacred. So is the truth.

The Honest Christian and Jewish Divide: The Shadows of History and Influence

The historical and theological schism between Judaism and Christianity traces its origins to the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, a figure born into the Jewish tradition yet whose teachings and claims precipitated a profound rupture. Jesus, recognized by Christians as the promised Messiah foretold in Hebrew scriptures, preached a message of divine love, repentance, and fulfillment of God's covenant to his fellow Jews. However, his assertions of divinity and critiques of religious authorities, particularly the Pharisees, led to widespread rejection among many in the Jewish community. This rejection culminated in his trial and crucifixion under Roman authority, an event Christians attribute to betrayal by Jewish leaders and elements of the populace who failed to recognize him as the incarnation of Yahweh. The resurrection of Jesus, a cornerstone of Christian faith, marked the inception of Christianity as a distinct path for those who accepted him as the divine Savior.

Before the advent of Christ, Judaism stood as the monotheistic faith centered on the Torah, the Temple, and adherence to Mosaic law. During Jesus' era, he lived and taught within this framework, emphasizing spiritual renewal over ritualistic observance. Yet, the Pharisees' opposition, rooted in perceived threats to their authority and interpretations of the law, contributed to his condemnation. Post-resurrection, early followers—many of whom were Jews—formed communities that evolved into Christianity, viewing Jesus' sacrifice as the ultimate atonement superseding the old covenant. Those Jews who rejected this fulfillment are seen by some Christian perspectives as clinging to an obsolete tradition, one that denies the divine incarnation and thus remains incomplete in its relationship with God. This viewpoint posits that alliance with those who deny Christ equates to a rejection of the Christian God, fostering an irreconcilable divide.

Historical records illuminate this tension. The Talmud, a central text in rabbinic Judaism compiled centuries after Jesus' time, contains passages that reference a figure named Yeshua, interpreted as Jesus, in derogatory terms. These include accounts of his execution by hanging on the eve of Passover for sorcery and leading Israel astray, portraying him as a false prophet and heretic. Such depictions underscore the early rabbinic dismissal of Jesus' messianic claims, with some texts even impugning his origins and miracles as deceptive. This rejection persists in modern Judaism, where Jesus is typically viewed negatively without divinity.

Adding layers to this narrative are symbols and practices that some argue reveal deviations from ancient Jewish fidelity. The Star of David, or hexagram, now emblematic of Judaism and Israel, has origins that extend beyond biblical Judaism. While it became a prominent Jewish symbol in the 17th century in Prague and spread in the 19th century, historical analyses trace its use to ancient pagan contexts, including Babylonian and Egyptian mysticism associated with deities like Baal and Moloch. The hexagram appears in occult traditions, symbolizing elements like sexual union in fertility cults, far removed from the monotheism of Moses or the era of Christ. Critics contend this adoption reflects a corruption, aligning modern Judaism with idolatrous elements absent in its foundational periods.

In contemporary times, this division is exacerbated by propaganda and political influence. While divisions between Christianity and Islam—stemming from theological incompatibilities and historical conflicts—might logically mirror those with Judaism, disparities exist in Western nations like the United States, Britain, and Australia. Organizations such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) wield significant lobbying power, directing substantial U.S. aid to Israel and shaping pro-Israel, and in some ways pro-Jewish/anti-goyim policies through congressional influence and campaign contributions. AIPAC's efforts, including disseminating information and mobilizing members, ensure robust support for Israel, often framing criticism as anti-Semitic.

Media networks amplify this asymmetry. Outlets like MSNBC and CNN are accused of shielding Islamic extremism by downplaying threats or contextualizing them as isolated, while condemning Christian perspectives as intolerant. Coverage of terrorism often frames Muslim-perpetrated acts within broader narratives of grievance, contrasting with scrutiny of Christian fundamentalism. This protective stance extends to Jewish communities, where allegations of anti-Semitism swiftly counter critiques.

Prominent Jewish figures continue to exemplify the ongoing rejection of Christ as the Messiah. In a resurfaced interview, Jeffrey Epstein diminished Jesus to merely “a carpenter,” thereby sidestepping any deeper theological engagement and explicitly mocking His significance. Similarly, comedians Sarah Silverman and Seth Rogen produced the animated series Santa Inc., a vulgar parody of Christmas that incorporates anti-Christian undertones, ultimately reducing the holiday to crass materialism and blasphemy. Whether among respected or absolutely horrific members of the Jewish community, one encounters this pattern: some mask their opposition to Christ with superficial kindness, while others disparage Him openly. These contemporary examples echo the disdain found in certain Talmudic passages, thereby perpetuating a broader cultural rejections of core Christian tenets.

This divide, rooted in history and sustained by influence, calls for reflection on alliances and truths.