298265209086071 1064242781072358
 

OPEC Sued for Promoting Economic Terrorism

Freedom Watch Inc., filed a lawsuit accusing OPEC of committing illegal anti-competitive actions, to apply a form of economic terrorism whose practices are aimed at seriously damaging the economy and interests of the United States and Western Europe.


It is pointed out that, in the case of Venezuela, it promotes communism and supports Muslim members of the cartel in order to attack Western culture.


by Maibort Petit

Maibort Petit is a Venezuelan writer, researcher and political scientist specialized in Transnational Organized Crime. Based in New York, she works for various Hispanic media outlets and as a consultant for various firms in New York and Washington DC.


She is also founder of Freedom Voice Reports which is an Investigative Reporting team, started over 25 years ago, with an emphasis on protecting our freedoms. Reporting on authoritative government, dark money used by business to persuade our political institutions, our court system, drug trafficking stealing so many lives, parental rights being lost in our educational system and so much more.



Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries

The strategy

The strategy of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries of establishing quotas for the production of oil and its derivatives to its members with a view to increasing and stabilizing the price of crude oil above competitive levels would be nothing more than a conspiracy to violate united States antitrust laws and destabilize the West, according to Freedom Watch Inc., OPEC plaintiff in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.


To date, the plaintiff's attempts to notify OPEC of the legal action against him have been futile. If this does not happen, the judge in the case, Donald M. Middlebrooks, could dismiss the case.


The demand

On November 30, 2021, Larry Klayman of the Klayman Law Firm, representing Freedom Watch Inc., filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), accusing it of committing illegal anti-competitive actions, to apply a form of economic terrorism whose practices are aimed at seriously damaging the economy and interests of the United States and Western Europe.



Freedom Watch Inc. — registered in Washington, D.C. and with offices in Boca Raton, Florida — which presents itself as an organization seeking to promote and protect freedom in the United States and around the world, refers in the lawsuit that it purchased gasoline from OPEC and its co-conspirators in the federal judicial district in which the lawsuit was established.


OPEC, the lawsuit indicates, is made up of several members who are determined to promote the war of radical Islam against Western Judeo-Christian civilization, especially the United States and Israel, while in the case of Venezuela, it promotes communism. It refers to the demand that Venezuela collaborates with the Muslim countries that make up OPEC to promote terrorism against the West.


Maduro from Venezuela
Maduro from Venezuela

In short, according to the plaintiff, the recent, huge and calculated increase in the price of gasoline and petroleum products, which is expected to exceed $120 per barrel in 2022, is the result of violations per se of antitrust law, and is part of a calculated strategy to advance constituent members of OPEC's latent war against Western democratic interests. Such political actions, he explains, are due to the fact that manifest terrorist acts and other means so far have not produced the "desired" results, so they have "intelligently" added economic terrorism to their panoply of weapons.


 

oil and soldier
“Our national security is at risk when we rely on foreign oil to keep our economy moving forward.” — Bill Shuster


Let's get the word out when Freedoms and your country is threatened.



 

It notes the demand that some of the OPEC members, such as the Islamic Republic of Iran, are, not coincidentally, on the U.S. State Department's list of designated terrorist nations, while Venezuela has been in the process of being added to this list of state sponsors of terrorism for its use of oil and other revenues to support and finance terrorist groups such as the Colombia's FARC, Afghanistan's Taliban, Cuba's communist state, as well as other nations and groups bent on destroying U.S. and Western interests.


It is claimed that the increased revenue generated by OPEC's antitrust violations is largely used to finance terrorist organizations and nation states, supported and promoted in particular by the Islamic Republic of Iran, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.


How it works

As the United States is the largest consumer of gasoline and petroleum derivatives in the world, OPEC's actions are aimed at directly and substantially affecting the prices of these products in U.S. territory.


The actions of OPEC — which controls most of the world's oil reserves — would violate Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C§ 1 and Sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. §15.26.




They point out that OPEC – made up of Algeria, Angola, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Libya, Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Venezuela – is organized and exists under the laws of Austria, so that this and the entire European Union should adhere to the demand.


The oil cartel that sells gasoline and other crude derivatives across the United States has violated — according to the terms of the lawsuit — federal antitrust laws in at least three ways:


First, through the practice of entering into agreements among its members to facilitate, enable and provide direct assistance to its pricing scheme. It is claimed that OPEC has analysed the US oil market and on this basis has prepared a long-term strategy.


Second, through the participation of OPEC members in an anti-competitive agreement and a conspiracy to aid and facilitate the sale of gasoline and other petroleum products to customers in the United States at equally anti-competitive prices.


Third, extending its anti-competitive acts and practices directly to U.S. soil through various suppliers as instruments of its illegal scheme. OPEC, according to Freedom Watch, is responsible for the anti-competitive effects in the United States of its illegal pricing plan and the cartel.





The lawsuit states that, by the time of its filing in court, OPEC's illegal plan had succeeded in raising oil prices to more than $72 per barrel, "bringing the economy of the United States and the entire Western world to its knees." They add that the price of gasoline in the U.S. was then around $6 per gallon and would continue to rise due to the illegal scheme and the reduction of OPEC oil supply.


It is noted that the acts denounced in the lawsuit cannot be classified as unilateral and independent of sovereign nations taken and carried out entirely within the limits of their own territorial limits, but that as a multinational cartel, OPEC depends on the concerted and agreed commercial acts of all its members, and those acting in concert with it, to achieve the conspiracy pricing scheme.


The charge and the request to the court

The charge for which Freedom Watch Inc. sues, states that OPEC is a conspirator with its members and non-member co-conspirators in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and Section 4 of the Clayton Act.


Plaintiff Freedom Watch Inc. petitioned the court to rule on its behalf and against OPEC, finding that OPEC's actions are per se and/or an unreasonable restriction of trade in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 and Section 4 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 15 and that pursuant to Section 16 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 26, a preliminary and permanent Order must be issued prohibiting defendant OPEC and the unidentified co-conspirators from continuing violations of antitrust laws as described in the lawsuit and ordering any additional legal or equitable relief that may be deemed fair and adequate.





157 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All