russia-insider--2020-06-30--The Latest Lies About Russia Paying Afghan Bounties Is Russiagate's Last Gasp

One can read this most recent flurry of Russia , Russia , Russia paid the Taliban to kill GIs as an attempt to pre-empt the findings into Russiagate ’ s origins .
On Friday The New York Times featured a report based on anonymous intelligence officials that the Russians were paying bounties to have U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan with President Donald Trump refusing to do anything about it .
The flurry of Establishment media reporting that ensued provides further proof , if such were needed , that the erstwhile “ paper of record ” has earned a new moniker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Over the weekend , the Times ’ dubious allegations grabbed headlines across all media that are likely to remain indelible in the minds of credulous Americans — which seems to have been the main objective .
To keep the pot boiling this morning , The New York Times ’ David Leonhardt ’ s daily web piece , “ The Morning ” calls prominent attention to a banal article by a Heather Cox Richardson , described as a historian at Boston College , adding specific charges to the general indictment of Trump by showing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to treat Russia favorably.
” The following is from Richardson ’ s newsletter on Friday : — “ On April 1 a Russian plane brought ventilators and other medical supplies to the United States … a propaganda coup for Russia ; — “ On April 25 Trump raised eyebrows by issuing a joint statement with Russian President Vladimir Putin commemorating the 75th anniversary of the historic meeting between American and Soviet troops on the bridge of the Elbe River in Germany that signaled the final defeat of the Nazis ; — “ On @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talked for an hour and a half , a discussion Trump called ‘ very positive ’ ; — “ On May 21 , the U.S. sent a humanitarian aid package worth $ 5.6 million to Moscow to help fight coronavirus there .
The shipment included 50 ventilators , with another 150 promised for the next week ; … — “ On June 15 , news broke that Trump has ordered the removal of 9,500 troops from Germany , where they support NATO against Russian aggression .
… ” Hear the siren ?
Children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tall Tale About Russia Paying for Dead U.S .
Troops Times print edition readers had to wait until this morning to learn of Trump ’ s statement last night that he was not briefed on the cockamamie tale about bounties for killing , since it was , well , cockamamie .
Late last night the president tweeted : “ Intel just reported to me that they did not find this info credible , and therefore did not report it to me or the VP .
… ” For those of us distrustful of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on such neuralgic issues , the bounty story had already fallen of its own weight .
As Scott Ritter pointed out yesterday : And who can forget how “ successful ” interrogators can be in getting desired answers .
The Kremlin called the Times reporting “ nonsense … an unsophisticated plant , ” and from Russia ’ s perspective the allegations make little sense ; Moscow will see them for what they are — attempts to show that Trump is too “ accommodating ” to Russia .
A Taliban spokesman called the story @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pride that “ we ” have done “ target killings ” for years “ on our own resources.
” Russia is no friend of the Taliban .
At the same time , it has been clear for several years that the U.S. would have to pull its troops out of Afghanistan .
Think back five decades and recall how circumspect the Soviets were in Vietnam .
Giving rhetorical support to a fraternal Communist nation was de rigueur and some surface-to-air missiles gave some substance to that support .
But Moscow recognized from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fool ’ s errand in Vietnam .
There would be no percentage in getting directly involved .
And so , the Soviets sat back and watched smugly as the Vietnamese Communists drove U.S. forces out on their “ own resources.
” As was the case with the Viet Cong , the Taliban needs no bounty inducements from abroad .
Besides , the Russians knew painfully well — from their own bitter experience in Afghanistan , what the outcome of the most recent fool ’ s errand would be for the U.S. What point @ @ @ @ @ @ @ New York Times and other Establishment media are breathlessly accusing them of ?
Former CIA Director William Casey said : “ We ’ ll know when our disinformation program is complete , when everything the American public believes is false.
” Casey made that remark at the first cabinet meeting in the White House under President Ronald Reagan in early 1981 , according to Barbara Honegger , who was assistant to the chief domestic policy adviser .
Honegger was there , took notes , and told then Senior White House correspondent Sarah McClendon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
If Casey ’ s spirit is somehow observing the success of the disinformation program called Russiagate , one can imagine how proud he must be .
But sustained propaganda success can be a serious challenge .
The Russiagate canard has lasted three and a half years .
This last gasp effort , spearheaded by the Times , to breathe more life into it is likely to last little more than a weekend — the redoubled efforts of Casey-dictum followers notwithstanding .
Russiagate itself has been unraveling , although one would hardly know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia .
Even the sacrosanct tenet that the Russians hacked the DNC emails published by WikiLeaks has been disproven , with the head of the DNC-hired cyber security firm CrowdStrike admitting that there is no evidence that the DNC emails were hacked — by Russia or anyone else .
How long will it take the Times to catch up with the CrowdStrike story , available since May 7 ?
The media is left with one sacred cow : the misnomered “ Intelligence Community ” Assessment of Jan. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Putin himself ordered the hacking of the DNC .
That “ assessment ” done by “ hand-picked analysts ” from only CIA , FBI and NSA ( not all 17 intelligence agencies of the “ intelligence community ” ) reportedly is being given close scrutiny by U. S. Attorney John Durham , appointed by the attorney general to investigate Russiagate ’ s origins .
If Durham finds it fraudulent ( not a difficult task ) , the heads of senior intelligence and law enforcement officials may roll .
That would also mean a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Establishment media that are only too eager to drink the Kool Aid and to leave plenty to drink for the rest of us .
Do not expect the media to cease and desist , simply because Trump had a good squelch for them last night — namely , the “ intelligence ” on the “ bounties ” was not deemed good enough to present to the president .
Nevertheless , the corporate media is likely to play up the Trump administration ’ s rejection of what the media is calling the “ intelligence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rachel Maddow indecorously put it on Friday — “ bounty for the scalps of American soldiers in Afghanistan.
” I am not a regular Maddow-watcher , but to me she seemed unhinged — actually , well over the top .
The media asks , “ Why does Trump continue to disrespect the assessments of the intelligence community ?
” There he goes again — not believing our “ intelligence community ; siding , rather , with Putin.
” In other words , we can expect no let up from the media and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as their life ’ s blood .
As for the anchors and pundits , their level of sophistication was reflected yesterday in the sage surmise of Face the Nation ’ s Chuck Todd , who Aaron Mate reminds us , is a “ grown adult and professional media person.
” Todd asked guest John Bolton : “ Do you think that the president is afraid to make Putin mad because maybe Putin did help him win the election , and he doesn ’ t want to make him mad for 2020 ?
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gets , ” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi yesterday , adding the aphorism she memorized several months ago : “ All roads lead to Putin.
” The unconscionably deceitful performance of Establishment media is as bad as it gets , though that , of course , was not what Pelosi meant .
She apparently lifted a line right out of the Times about how Trump is too “ accommodating ” toward Russia .
One can read this most recent flurry of Russia , Russia , Russia as a reflection of the need to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Durham and Attorney General William Barr in the coming months — on the theory that the best defense is a pre-emptive offense .
Meanwhile , we can expect the corporate media to continue to disgrace itself .
Caitlin Johnstone , typically , pulls no punches regarding the Russian bounty travesty : “ All parties involved in spreading this malignant psyop are absolutely vile , but a special disdain should be reserved for the media class who have been entrusted by the public with the essential task of creating an informed populace and holding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an unprincipled whore do you have to be to call yourself a journalist and uncritically parrot the completely unsubstantiated assertions of spooks while protecting their anonymity ?
How much work did these empire fluffers put into killing off every last shred of their dignity ?
It boggles the mind .
It really is funny how the most influential news outlets in the Western world will uncritically parrot whatever they ’ re told to say by the most powerful and depraved intelligence agencies on the planet , and then turn around and tell you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and China are bad because they have state media .
Sometimes all you can do is laugh.
” Ray McGovern works for Tell the Word , a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington .
During his 27-years as a CIA analyst he led the Soviet Foreign Policy Branch and prepared The President ’ s Daily Brief for Presidents Nixon , Ford , and Reagan .
In retirement , he co-created Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity ( VIPS ) .

One can read this most recent flurry of Russia, Russia, Russia paid the Taliban to kill GIs as an attempt to pre-empt the findings into Russiagate’s origins.
U.S. Army helicopter pilots fly near Jalalabad, Afghanistan, April 5, 2017. (U.S. Army, Brian Harris, Wikimedia Commons)
On Friday The New York Times featured a report based on anonymous intelligence officials that the Russians were paying bounties to have U.S. troops killed in Afghanistan with President Donald Trump refusing to do anything about it. The flurry of Establishment media reporting that ensued provides further proof, if such were needed, that the erstwhile “paper of record” has earned a new moniker — Gray Lady of easy virtue.
Over the weekend, the Times’ dubious allegations grabbed headlines across all media that are likely to remain indelible in the minds of credulous Americans — which seems to have been the main objective. To keep the pot boiling this morning, The New York Times’ David Leonhardt’s daily web piece, “The Morning” calls prominent attention to a banal article by a Heather Cox Richardson, described as a historian at Boston College, adding specific charges to the general indictment of Trump by showing “how the Trump administration has continued to treat Russia favorably.” The following is from Richardson’s newsletter on Friday:
— “On April 1 a Russian plane brought ventilators and other medical supplies to the United States … a propaganda coup for Russia; — “On April 25 Trump raised eyebrows by issuing a joint statement with Russian President Vladimir Putin commemorating the 75th anniversary of the historic meeting between American and Soviet troops on the bridge of the Elbe River in Germany that signaled the final defeat of the Nazis; — “On May 3, Trump called Putin and talked for an hour and a half, a discussion Trump called ‘very positive’; — “On May 21, the U.S. sent a humanitarian aid package worth $5.6 million to Moscow to help fight coronavirus there. The shipment included 50 ventilators, with another 150 promised for the next week; … — “On June 15, news broke that Trump has ordered the removal of 9,500 troops from Germany, where they support NATO against Russian aggression. …”
Historian Richardson added:
“All of these friendly overtures to Russia were alarming enough when all we knew was that Russia attacked the 2016 U.S. election and is doing so again in 2020. But it is far worse that those overtures took place when the administration knew that Russia had actively targeted American soldiers. … this bad news apparently prompted worried intelligence officials to give up their hope that the administration would respond to the crisis, and instead to leak the story to two major newspapers.”
Hear the siren? Children, get under your desks!
The Tall Tale About Russia Paying for Dead U.S. Troops
Times print edition readers had to wait until this morning to learn of Trump’s statement last night that he was not briefed on the cockamamie tale about bounties for killing, since it was, well, cockamamie.
Late last night the president tweeted: “Intel just reported to me that they did not find this info credible, and therefore did not report it to me or the VP. …”
Intel just reported to me that they did not find this info credible, and therefore did not report it to me or @VP. Possibly another fabricated Russia Hoax, maybe by the Fake News @nytimesbooks, wanting to make Republicans look bad!!! https://t.co/cowOmP7T1S — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 29, 2020
For those of us distrustful of the Times — with good reason — on such neuralgic issues, the bounty story had already fallen of its own weight. As Scott Ritter pointed out yesterday:
“Perhaps the biggest clue concerning the fragility of the New York Times’ report is contained in the one sentence it provides about sourcing — “The intelligence assessment is said to be based at least in part on interrogations of captured Afghan militants and criminals.” That sentence contains almost everything one needs to know about the intelligence in question, including the fact that the source of the information is most likely the Afghan government as reported through CIA channels. …”
And who can forget how “successful” interrogators can be in getting desired answers.
Russia & Taliban React
Attendees at the Taliban-U.S. peace signing ceremony in Doha, Qatar, on Feb. 29, 2020. (State Department/Ron Przysucha)
The Kremlin called the Times reporting “nonsense … an unsophisticated plant,” and from Russia’s perspective the allegations make little sense; Moscow will see them for what they are — attempts to show that Trump is too “accommodating” to Russia.
A Taliban spokesman called the story “baseless,” adding with apparent pride that “we” have done “target killings” for years “on our own resources.”
Russia is no friend of the Taliban. At the same time, it has been clear for several years that the U.S. would have to pull its troops out of Afghanistan. Think back five decades and recall how circumspect the Soviets were in Vietnam. Giving rhetorical support to a fraternal Communist nation was de rigueur and some surface-to-air missiles gave some substance to that support.
But Moscow recognized from the start that Washington was embarked on a fool’s errand in Vietnam. There would be no percentage in getting directly involved. And so, the Soviets sat back and watched smugly as the Vietnamese Communists drove U.S. forces out on their “own resources.” As was the case with the Viet Cong, the Taliban needs no bounty inducements from abroad.
President Lyndon Johnson announces “retaliatory” strike against North Vietnam in response to the supposed attacks on U.S. warships in the Gulf of Tonkin on Aug. 4, 1964. (LBJ Library)
Besides, the Russians knew painfully well — from their own bitter experience in Afghanistan, what the outcome of the most recent fool’s errand would be for the U.S. What point would they see in doing what The New York Times and other Establishment media are breathlessly accusing them of?
CIA Disinformation; Casey at Bat
Former CIA Director William Casey said: “We’ll know when our disinformation program is complete, when everything the American public believes is false.”
Casey made that remark at the first cabinet meeting in the White House under President Ronald Reagan in early 1981, according to Barbara Honegger, who was assistant to the chief domestic policy adviser. Honegger was there, took notes, and told then Senior White House correspondent Sarah McClendon, who in turn made it public.
If Casey’s spirit is somehow observing the success of the disinformation program called Russiagate, one can imagine how proud he must be. But sustained propaganda success can be a serious challenge. The Russiagate canard has lasted three and a half years. This last gasp effort, spearheaded by the Times, to breathe more life into it is likely to last little more than a weekend — the redoubled efforts of Casey-dictum followers notwithstanding.
Russiagate itself has been unraveling, although one would hardly know it from the Establishment media. No collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. Even the sacrosanct tenet that the Russians hacked the DNC emails published by WikiLeaks has been disproven, with the head of the DNC-hired cyber security firm CrowdStrike admitting that there is no evidence that the DNC emails were hacked — by Russia or anyone else.
U.S. Attorney John Durham. (Wikipedia)
How long will it take the Times to catch up with the CrowdStrike story, available since May 7?
The media is left with one sacred cow: the misnomered “Intelligence Community” Assessment of Jan. 6, 2017, claiming that President Putin himself ordered the hacking of the DNC. That “assessment” done by “hand-picked analysts” from only CIA, FBI and NSA (not all 17 intelligence agencies of the “intelligence community”) reportedly is being given close scrutiny by U. S. Attorney John Durham, appointed by the attorney general to investigate Russiagate’s origins.
If Durham finds it fraudulent (not a difficult task), the heads of senior intelligence and law enforcement officials may roll. That would also mean a still deeper dent in the credibility of Establishment media that are only too eager to drink the Kool Aid and to leave plenty to drink for the rest of us.
Do not expect the media to cease and desist, simply because Trump had a good squelch for them last night — namely, the “intelligence” on the “bounties” was not deemed good enough to present to the president.
(As a preparer and briefer of The President’s Daily Brief to Presidents Reagan and HW Bush, I can attest to the fact that — based on what has been revealed so far — the Russian bounty story falls far short of the PDB threshold.)
Rejecting Intelligence Assessments
Nevertheless, the corporate media is likely to play up the Trump administration’s rejection of what the media is calling the “intelligence assessment” about Russia offering — as Rachel Maddow indecorously put it on Friday — “bounty for the scalps of American soldiers in Afghanistan.”
I am not a regular Maddow-watcher, but to me she seemed unhinged — actually, well over the top.
The media asks, “Why does Trump continue to disrespect the assessments of the intelligence community?” There he goes again — not believing our “intelligence community; siding, rather, with Putin.”
In other words, we can expect no let up from the media and the national security miscreant leakers who have served as their life’s blood. As for the anchors and pundits, their level of sophistication was reflected yesterday in the sage surmise of Face the Nation’s Chuck Todd, who Aaron Mate reminds us, is a “grown adult and professional media person.” Todd asked guest John Bolton: “Do you think that the president is afraid to make Putin mad because maybe Putin did help him win the election, and he doesn’t want to make him mad for 2020?”
“This is as bad as it gets,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi yesterday, adding the aphorism she memorized several months ago: “All roads lead to Putin.” The unconscionably deceitful performance of Establishment media is as bad as it gets, though that, of course, was not what Pelosi meant. She apparently lifted a line right out of the Times about how Trump is too “accommodating” toward Russia.
One can read this most recent flurry of Russia, Russia, Russia as a reflection of the need to pre-empt the findings likely to issue from Durham and Attorney General William Barr in the coming months — on the theory that the best defense is a pre-emptive offense. Meanwhile, we can expect the corporate media to continue to disgrace itself.
Vile
Caitlin Johnstone, typically, pulls no punches regarding the Russian bounty travesty:
“All parties involved in spreading this malignant psyop are absolutely vile, but a special disdain should be reserved for the media class who have been entrusted by the public with the essential task of creating an informed populace and holding power to account. How much of an unprincipled whore do you have to be to call yourself a journalist and uncritically parrot the completely unsubstantiated assertions of spooks while protecting their anonymity? How much work did these empire fluffers put into killing off every last shred of their dignity? It boggles the mind. It really is funny how the most influential news outlets in the Western world will uncritically parrot whatever they’re told to say by the most powerful and depraved intelligence agencies on the planet, and then turn around and tell you without a hint of self-awareness that Russia and China are bad because they have state media. Sometimes all you can do is laugh.”
Ray McGovern works for Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. During his 27-years as a CIA analyst he led the Soviet Foreign Policy Branch and prepared The President’s Daily Brief for Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Reagan. In retirement, he co-created Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).


russia-insider--2020-06-30--This Russia-Afghanistan Story Is CIA Propaganda At Its Most Vile

All western mass media outlets are now shrieking about the story The New York Times first reported , citing zero evidence and naming zero sources , claiming intelligence says Russia paid out bounties to Taliban-linked fighters in Afghanistan for attacking the occupying forces of the US and its allies in Afghanistan .
As of this writing , and probably forevermore , there have still been zero intelligence sources named and zero evidence provided for this claim .
As we discussed yesterday , the only correct response to unsubstantiated claims by anonymous spooks in a post-Iraq invasion world is to assume @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve been provided with a mountain of hard , independently verifiable evidence to the contrary .
The fact that The New York Times instead chose to uncritically parrot these evidence-free claims made by operatives within intelligence agencies with a known track record of lying about exactly these things is nothing short of journalistic malpractice .
The fact that western media outlets are now unanimously regurgitating these still 100 percent baseless assertions is nothing short of state propaganda .
The consensus-manufacturing , Overton window-shrinking western propaganda apparatus has been in full swing with mass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whatsoever that they have confirmed one another ’ s “ great reporting ” on this completely unsubstantiated story .
“ The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post have confirmed our reporting , ” the NYT story ’ s co-author Charlie Savage tweeted hours ago .
“ We have confirmed the New York Times ’ scoop : A Russian military spy unit offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants to attack coalition forces in Afghanistan , ” tweeted The Washington Post ‘ s John Hudson .
“ We matched The New York Times ’ great @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Russians paid Taliban to target US , coalition forces in Afg which is a pretty stunning development , ” tweeted Wall Street Journal ’ s Gordon Lubold .
All three of these men are lying .
John Hudson ’ s claim that the Washington Post article he co-authored “ confirmed the New York Times ’ scoop ” twice uses the words “ if confirmed ” with regard to his central claim , saying “ Russian involvement in operations targeting Americans , if confirmed , ” and “ The attempt to stoke violence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is of course an acknowledgement that these things have not , in fact , been confirmed .
The Wall Street Journal article co-authored by Gordon Lubold cites only anonymous “ people ” , who we have no reason to believe are different people than NYT ’ s sources , repeating the same unsubstantiated assertions about an intelligence report .
The article cites no evidence that Lubold ’ s “ stunning development ” actually occurred beyond “ people familiar with the report said ” and “ a person familiar with it said “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lubold were lying about having confirmed the New York Times ‘ reporting means that Savage was also lying when he said they did .
When they say the report has been “ confirmed ” , what they really mean is that it has been agreed upon .
All the three of them actually did was use their profoundly influential outlets to uncritically parrot something nameless spooks want the public to believe , which is the same as just publishing a CIA press release free of charge .
It is unprincipled stenography for opaque @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is disgusting .
None of this should be happening .
The New York Times has admitted itself that it was wrong for uncritically parroting the unsubstantiated spook claims which led to the Iraq invasion , as has The Washington Post .
There is no reason to believe Taliban fighters would require any bounty to attack an illegitimate occupying force .
The Russian government has denied these allegations .
The Taliban has denied these allegations .
The Trump administration has denied that the president or the vice president had any knowledge of the spook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ allegation that liberals who are promoting this story have been fixated on .
Yet this story is being magically transmuted into an established fact , despite its being based on literally zero factual evidence .
Outlets like CNN are running the story with the headline “ Russia offered bounties to Afghan militants to kill US troops “ , deceitfully presenting this as a verified fact .
Such dishonest headlines are joined by UK outlets like The Guardian who informs headline-skimmers that “ Russia offered bounty to kill UK soldiers “ , and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russia paid Taliban fighters to attack British troops in Afghanistan ” after “ confirming ” the story with anonymous British spooks .
Western propagandists are turning this completely empty story into the mainstream consensus , not with facts , not with evidence , and certainly not with journalism , but with sheer brute force of narrative control .
And now you ’ ve got Joe Biden once again attacking Trump for being insufficiently warlike , this time because “ he failed to sanction or impose any kind of consequences on Russia for this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You ’ ve also got former George W Bush lackey Richard Haas promoting “ a proportionate response ” to these baseless allegations .
“ Russia is carrying out covert wars vs US troops in Afghanistan and our democracy here at home , ” Haas tweeted with a link to the New York Times story .
“ A proportionate response would increase the costs to Russia of its military presence in Ukraine and Syria and , using sanctions and cyber , to challenge Putin at home.
” Haas is the president of the Council @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think tank with its fingers in most major US news outlets .
And indeed , the unified campaign to shove this story down people ’ s throats in stark defiance of everything one learns in journalism school does appear to be geared toward advancing pre-existing foreign policy agendas which have nothing to do with any concern for the safety of US troops .
Analysts have pointed out that this new development arises just in time to sabotage the last of the nuclear treaties between the US and Russia , the scaling down of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as Haas already openly admitted , any possibility of peace in Syria .
“ This story is published just in time to sabotage US-Russia arms control talks , ” Antiwar ‘ s Dave DeCamp noted on Twitter .
“ As the US is preparing for a new arms race — and possibly even live nuclear tests — the New York Times provides a great excuse to let the New START lapse , making the world a much more dangerous place .
Russiagate has provided the cover for Trump to pull out of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , then the Open Skies , and now possibly the New START .
Any talks or negotiations with Russia are discouraged in this atmosphere , and this Times story will make things even worse.
” “ US ‘ intelligence ’ agencies ( ie , organized crime networks run by the state ) want to sabotage the ( admittedly very inadequate ) peace talks in Afghanistan , ” tweeted journalist Ben Norton .
“ So they get best of both worlds : blame the Russian bogeyman , fueling the new cold war , while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not a coincidence these dubious Western intelligence agency claims about Russia came just days after a breakthrough in peace talks .
Afghanistan ’ s geostrategic location ( and trillions worth of minerals ) is too important to them.
” All parties involved in spreading this malignant psyop are absolutely vile , but a special disdain should be reserved for the media class who have been entrusted by the public with the essential task of creating an informed populace and holding power to account .
How much of an unprincipled whore do you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ journalist and uncritically parrot the completely unsubstantiated assertions of spooks while protecting their anonymity ?
How much work did these empire fluffers put into killing off every last shred of their dignity ?
It boggles the mind .
It really is funny how the most influential news outlets in the western world will uncritically parrot whatever they ’ re told to say by the most powerful and depraved intelligence agencies on the planet , and then turn around and tell you without a hint of self-awareness that Russia and China are bad because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you can do is laugh .
Thanks for reading !
The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website , which will get you an email notification for everything I publish .
My work is entirely reader-supported , so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around , liking me on Facebook , following my antics onTwitter , checking out my podcast on either Youtube , soundcloud , Apple podcasts or Spotify @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some money into my tip jar on Patreon or Paypal , purchasing some of my sweet merchandise , buying my books Rogue Nation : Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone and Woke : A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers .
For more info on who I am , where I stand , and what I ’ m trying to do with this platform , click here .
Everyone , racist platforms excluded , has my permission to republish , use or translate any part of this work ( or anything else I ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ free of charge .

All western mass media outlets are now shrieking about the story The New York Times first reported, citing zero evidence and naming zero sources, claiming intelligence says Russia paid out bounties to Taliban-linked fighters in Afghanistan for attacking the occupying forces of the US and its allies in Afghanistan. As of this writing, and probably forevermore, there have still been zero intelligence sources named and zero evidence provided for this claim.
As we discussed yesterday, the only correct response to unsubstantiated claims by anonymous spooks in a post-Iraq invasion world is to assume that they are lying until you’ve been provided with a mountain of hard, independently verifiable evidence to the contrary. The fact that The New York Times instead chose to uncritically parrot these evidence-free claims made by operatives within intelligence agencies with a known track record of lying about exactly these things is nothing short of journalistic malpractice. The fact that western media outlets are now unanimously regurgitating these still 100 percent baseless assertions is nothing short of state propaganda.
The consensus-manufacturing, Overton window-shrinking western propaganda apparatus has been in full swing with mass media outlets claiming on literally no basis whatsoever that they have confirmed one another’s “great reporting” on this completely unsubstantiated story.
We have confirmed the @nytimes scoop: A Russian military spy unit offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants to attack coalition forces in Afghanistan. From @nakashimae @missy_ryan me and @shaneharris https://t.co/R9tQf89L7G — John Hudson (@John_Hudson) June 27, 2020
“The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post have confirmed our reporting,” the NYT story’s co-author Charlie Savage tweeted hours ago.
“We have confirmed the New York Times’ scoop: A Russian military spy unit offered bounties to Taliban-linked militants to attack coalition forces in Afghanistan,” tweeted The Washington Post‘s John Hudson.
“We matched The New York Times’ great reporting on how US intel has assessed that Russians paid Taliban to target US, coalition forces in Afg which is a pretty stunning development,” tweeted Wall Street Journal’s Gordon Lubold.
All three of these men are lying.
John Hudson’s claim that the Washington Post article he co-authored “confirmed the New York Times’ scoop” twice uses the words “if confirmed” with regard to his central claim, saying “Russian involvement in operations targeting Americans, if confirmed,” and “The attempt to stoke violence against Americans, if confirmed“. This is of course an acknowledgement that these things have not, in fact, been confirmed.
The Wall Street Journal article co-authored by Gordon Lubold cites only anonymous “people”, who we have no reason to believe are different people than NYT’s sources, repeating the same unsubstantiated assertions about an intelligence report. The article cites no evidence that Lubold’s “stunning development” actually occurred beyond “people familiar with the report said” and “a person familiar with it said“.
The fact that both Hudson and Lubold were lying about having confirmed the New York Times‘ reporting means that Savage was also lying when he said they did. When they say the report has been “confirmed”, what they really mean is that it has been agreed upon. All the three of them actually did was use their profoundly influential outlets to uncritically parrot something nameless spooks want the public to believe, which is the same as just publishing a CIA press release free of charge. It is unprincipled stenography for opaque and unaccountable intelligence agencies, and it is disgusting.
"The Washington Post and the WSJ were called up by the same unnamed 'officials' as we were.
They were told the same evidence free fairytale.
Their stenographers, like ours, wrote it dutifully down.
All of us proudly published it!"#confirmation https://t.co/bEZ2OYgsxb — Moon of Alabama (@MoonofA) June 27, 2020
None of this should be happening. The New York Times has admitted itself that it was wrong for uncritically parroting the unsubstantiated spook claims which led to the Iraq invasion, as has The Washington Post. There is no reason to believe Taliban fighters would require any bounty to attack an illegitimate occupying force. The Russian government has denied these allegations. The Taliban has denied these allegations. The Trump administration has denied that the president or the vice president had any knowledge of the spook report in question, denouncing the central allegation that liberals who are promoting this story have been fixated on.
Yet this story is being magically transmuted into an established fact, despite its being based on literally zero factual evidence.
Outlets like CNN are running the story with the headline “Russia offered bounties to Afghan militants to kill US troops“, deceitfully presenting this as a verified fact. Such dishonest headlines are joined by UK outlets like The Guardian who informs headline-skimmers that “Russia offered bounty to kill UK soldiers“, and the Murdoch-owned Sky News which went with “Russia paid Taliban fighters to attack British troops in Afghanistan” after “confirming” the story with anonymous British spooks.
Western propagandists are turning this completely empty story into the mainstream consensus, not with facts, not with evidence, and certainly not with journalism, but with sheer brute force of narrative control. And now you’ve got Joe Biden once again attacking Trump for being insufficiently warlike, this time because “he failed to sanction or impose any kind of consequences on Russia for this egregious violation of international law”.
You’ve also got former George W Bush lackey Richard Haas promoting “a proportionate response” to these baseless allegations.
Russia is carrying out covert wars vs US troops in Afghanistan and our democracy here at home. A proportionate response would increase the costs to Russia of its military presence in Ukraine & Syria and, using sanctions & cyber, to challenge Putin at home. https://t.co/c0Mc7sLriO — Richard N. Haass (@RichardHaass) June 27, 2020
“Russia is carrying out covert wars vs US troops in Afghanistan and our democracy here at home,” Haas tweeted with a link to the New York Times story. “A proportionate response would increase the costs to Russia of its military presence in Ukraine and Syria and, using sanctions and cyber, to challenge Putin at home.”
Haas is the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, a wildly influential think tank with its fingers in most major US news outlets.
And indeed, the unified campaign to shove this story down people’s throats in stark defiance of everything one learns in journalism school does appear to be geared toward advancing pre-existing foreign policy agendas which have nothing to do with any concern for the safety of US troops. Analysts have pointed out that this new development arises just in time to sabotage the last of the nuclear treaties between the US and Russia, the scaling down of US military presence in Afghanistan, and, as Haas already openly admitted, any possibility of peace in Syria.
“This story is published just in time to sabotage US-Russia arms control talks,” Antiwar‘s Dave DeCamp noted on Twitter. “As the US is preparing for a new arms race — and possibly even live nuclear tests — the New York Times provides a great excuse to let the New START lapse, making the world a much more dangerous place. Russiagate has provided the cover for Trump to pull out of arms control agreements. First the INF, then the Open Skies, and now possibly the New START. Any talks or negotiations with Russia are discouraged in this atmosphere, and this Times story will make things even worse.”
“US ‘intelligence’ agencies (ie, organized crime networks run by the state) want to sabotage the (admittedly very inadequate) peace talks in Afghanistan,” tweeted journalist Ben Norton. “So they get best of both worlds: blame the Russian bogeyman, fueling the new cold war, while prolonging the military occupation. It’s not a coincidence these dubious Western intelligence agency claims about Russia came just days after a breakthrough in peace talks. Afghanistan’s geostrategic location (and trillions worth of minerals) is too important to them.”
We're seeing in real time how Western intelligence agencies are derailing peace talks aimed at ending the nearly 20-year war in Afghanistan.
First anonymous US spies spread this rumor. Now anonymous European spies are doing the same. And the corporate media eats it up like candy https://t.co/l6Rze37MZx — Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) June 27, 2020
All parties involved in spreading this malignant psyop are absolutely vile, but a special disdain should be reserved for the media class who have been entrusted by the public with the essential task of creating an informed populace and holding power to account. How much of an unprincipled whore do you have to be to call yourself a journalist and uncritically parrot the completely unsubstantiated assertions of spooks while protecting their anonymity? How much work did these empire fluffers put into killing off every last shred of their dignity? It boggles the mind.
It really is funny how the most influential news outlets in the western world will uncritically parrot whatever they’re told to say by the most powerful and depraved intelligence agencies on the planet, and then turn around and tell you without a hint of self-awareness that Russia and China are bad because they have state media.
Sometimes all you can do is laugh.
_________________
Thanks for reading! The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for my website, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me on Facebook, following my antics onTwitter, checking out my podcast on either Youtube, soundcloud, Apple podcasts or Spotify, following me on Steemit, throwing some money into my tip jar on Patreon or Paypal, purchasing some of my sweet merchandise, buying my books Rogue Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone and Woke: A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge.
Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2


russia-insider--2020-06-29--Why Iran Won’t Be Broken

Why Iran Won’t Be Broken

So what ’ s goin ’ on in Iran ?
How did the Islamic Republic really respond to Covid-19 ?
How is it coping with Washington ’ s relentless “ maximum pressure ” ?
These questions were the subject of a long phone call I placed to Prof. Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran – one of Iran ’ s premier , globally recognized analysts .
As Marandi explains , “ Iran after the revolution was all about social justice .
It set up a very elaborate health care network , similar to Cuba ’ s , but with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When the coronavirus hit , the US was even preventing Iran to get test kits .
Yet the system – not the private sector – managed .
There was no full shutdown .
Everything was under control .
The numbers – even contested by the West – they do hold .
Iran is now producing everything it needs , tests , face masks .
None of the hospitals are full.
” Expanding Marandi ’ s observations , Tehran-based journalist Alireza Hashemi notes , “ Iran ’ s wide primary healthcare system , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health centers is available in thousands of cities and villages ” , and that enabled the government to “ easily offer basic services ” .
As Hashemi details , “ the Health Ministry established a Covid-19 call center and also distributed protective equipment supplied by relief providers .
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei ordered the armed forces to help – with the government deploying 300,000 soldiers and volunteers to disinfect streets and public places , distribute sanitizers and masks and conduct tests.
” It was the Iranian military that established production lines for producing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Hashemi , “ some NGOs partnered with Tehran ’ s chamber of commerce to create a campaign called Nafas ( “ breath ” ) to supply medical goods and provide clinical services .
Iran ’ s Farabourse , an over-the-counter stock market in Tehran , established a crowd funding campaign to purchase medical devices and products to help health workers .
Hundreds of volunteer groups – called “ jihadi ” – started producing personal protective equipment that had been in short supply in seminaries , mosques and hussainiyas and even natural fruit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of social solidarity is extremely powerful in Shi ’ ite culture .
Hashemi notes that “ the government loosened health-related restrictions over a month ago and we have been experiencing a small slice of normality in recent weeks.
” Yet the fight is not over .
As in the West , there are fears of a covid-19 second wave .
Marandi stresses the economy , predictably , was hurt : “ But because of the sanctions , most of the hurt had already happened .
The economy is now running without oil revenue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t even notice it .
It ’ s nothing compared to Saudi Arabia , Iraq , Turkey or the UAE .
Workers from Pakistan and India are leaving the Persian Gulf in droves .
Dubai is dead .
So , in comparison , Iran did better in dealing with the virus .
Moreover , harvests last year and this year have been positive .
We are more self-reliant.
” Hashemi adds a very important factor : “ The Covid-19 crisis was so massive that people themselves have pitched in with effort , revealing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ civil society groups and others have set up a range of initiatives seeking to help the government and health workers on the front line of countering the pandemic.
” What a relentless Western disinformation campaign always ignores is how Iran after the revolution is used to extremely critical situations , starting with the eight-year-long Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s .
Marandi and Hashemi are adamant : for older Iranians , the current economic crisis pales in comparison with what they had to put up with throughout the 1980s .
Marandi ’ s analysis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ early June , Mohammad Bagher Nobakht – responsible for planning Iran ’ s state budgets – told the Majlis ( Parliament ) that the new normal was “ to sideline oil in the economy and run the country ’ s programs without oil.
” Nobakht stuck to the numbers .
Iran had earned just $ 8.9 billion from the sale of oil and related products in 2019-20 , down from a peak of $ 119 billion less than a decade ago .
The whole Iranian economy is in transition .
What ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – with companies focusing way beyond Iran ’ s large domestic market towards exports .
They are turning the massive devaluation of the rial to their advantage .
In 2019-20 , Iran ’ s non-oil exports reached $ 41.3 billion .
That exceeded oil exports for the first time in Iran ’ s post-revolutionary history .
And roughly half of these non-oil exports were manufactured goods .
Team Trump ’ s “ maximum pressure ” via sanctions may have led to total non-oil exports going down – but only by 7 % .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ According to Purchasing Managers ’ Index ( PMI ) data published by the Iran Chamber of Commerce , private sector manufacturers were seriously back in business already in the first month following the relaxation of the partial lockdown .
The fact is Iranian consumer goods and industrial products – everything from cookies to stainless steel – are exported by small and medium enterprises to the wider Middle East and also to Central Asia , China and Russia .
The myth of Iranian “ isolation ” is , well , a myth .
Some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ future .
Take titanium – essential for myriad applications in military , aerospace , marine industries and industrial processes .
The Qara-Aghaj mine in Urmia , the provincial capital of West Azarbaijan , which is part of Iran ’ s mineral belt , including the country ’ s largest gold reserves , has tremendous potential .
Iran features in the Top 15 of mineral-rich countries .
In January , after getting the technology for deep-level mining , Tehran launched a pilot project for extraction of rare earth minerals .
Still , Washington pressure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ In January , the White House issued yet another executive order targeting the “ construction , mining , manufacturing , or textiles sectors of the Iranian economy.
” So Team Trump is targeting exactly the booming private sector – which means , in practice , countless Iranian blue-collar workers and their families .
This has nothing to do with forcing the Rouhani administration to say , “ I can ’ t breathe ” .
Apart from a few scuffles between the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps ( IRGC ) and the Health Ministry about @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Iran-China “ comprehensive strategic partnership ” ( CSP ) remains on track .
The next big test is actually in September .
That ’ s when Team Trump wants to extendthe UN arms embargo on Iran .
Add to it the threat to trigger the snapback mechanism inbuilt in UNSC resolution 2231 – if other Security Council members refuse to support Washington and let the embargo expire for good in October .
China ’ s mission at the UN has stressed the obvious .
The Trump administration unilaterally abandoned the JCPOA .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ it has no right to extend the arms embargo or go for the snapback mechanism against Iran .
China , Russia and Iran are the three key nodes of Eurasia integration .
Politically and diplomatically , their key decisions tend to be taken in concert .
So it ’ s no wonder that was reiterated last week in Moscow at the meeting of Foreign Ministers Sergey Lavrov and Javad Zarif – who get along famously .
Lavrov said , “ We will be doing everything so that no one can destroy these agreements @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iran.
” Zarif for his part described the whole juncture as “ very dangerous ” .
Additional conversations with Iranian analysts reveal how they interpret the regional geopolitical chessboard , calibrating the importance of the axis of resistance ( Tehran , Baghdad , Damascus , Hezbollah ) in comparison with two other fronts : the US and its “ stooges ” ( the House of Saud , UAE , Egypt ) , the master – Israel – and also Turkey and Qatar , which , like Iran , but unlike the “ stooges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Sunni variety , that is , the Moslem Brotherhood ) .
One of these analysts , pen name Blake Archer Williams , significantly remarks , “ the main reason Russia holds back from helping Iran ( mutual trade is almost at zero ) is that it fears Iran .
If Trump does not have a Reagan moment and does not prevail on Iran , and the US is in any event driven out of the Middle East by the continuing process of Iran ’ s weapons parity and its ability to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then all of the oil of the Middle East , from the UAE , Qatar , Kuwait and Bahrain , to Iraq , of course , and not least to the oilfields in Saudi Arabia ’ s Qatif region ( where all the oil is and is 100 % Shi ’ ite ) , will come under the umbrella of the axis of resistance.
” Still , Russia-China continue to back Iran on all fronts , for instance rebuking the International Atomic Energy Agency ( IAEA ) for giving in to US “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s board last week passed a resolution submitted by France , Britain and Germany criticizing Iran for the first time since 2012 .
Another key foreign policy front is Venezuela .
Tehran ’ s soft power , in quite a spectacular manner keenly observed all across the Global South , de facto ridiculed Washington ’ s sanctions/blockade in its own Monroe Doctrine “ backyard ” , when five Iranian tankers loaded with gasoline successfully crossed the Atlantic and were received by a Venezuelan military escort of jets , helicopters , and naval patrols @ @ @ @ @ @ @ run .
The Oil Ministry in Tehran is already planning a round two of deliveries to Caracas , sending two or three cargos full of gasoline a month .
That will also help Iran to offload its huge domestically produced fuel .
The historic initial shipment was characterized by both sides as part of a scientific and industrial cooperation , side by side with a “ solidarity action ” .
And then , this past week , I finally confirmed it .
The order came directly from Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must be broken ” .
The rest is – Global South – history in the making .

So what’s goin’ on in Iran? How did the Islamic Republic really respond to Covid-19? How is it coping with Washington’s relentless “maximum pressure”?
These questions were the subject of a long phone call I placed to Prof. Mohammad Marandi of the University of Tehran – one of Iran’s premier, globally recognized analysts.
As Marandi explains, “Iran after the revolution was all about social justice. It set up a very elaborate health care network, similar to Cuba’s, but with more funding. A large hospital network. When the coronavirus hit, the US was even preventing Iran to get test kits. Yet the system – not the private sector – managed. There was no full shutdown. Everything was under control. The numbers – even contested by the West – they do hold. Iran is now producing everything it needs, tests, face masks. None of the hospitals are full.”
Expanding Marandi’s observations, Tehran-based journalist Alireza Hashemi notes, “Iran’s wide primary healthcare system, comprising public clinics, health houses and health centers is available in thousands of cities and villages”, and that enabled the government to “easily offer basic services”.
As Hashemi details, “the Health Ministry established a Covid-19 call center and also distributed protective equipment supplied by relief providers. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei ordered the armed forces to help – with the government deploying 300,000 soldiers and volunteers to disinfect streets and public places, distribute sanitizers and masks and conduct tests.”
It was the Iranian military that established production lines for producing face masks and other equipment. According to Hashemi, “some NGOs partnered with Tehran’s chamber of commerce to create a campaign called Nafas (“breath”) to supply medical goods and provide clinical services. Iran’s Farabourse, an over-the-counter stock market in Tehran, established a crowd funding campaign to purchase medical devices and products to help health workers. Hundreds of volunteer groups – called “jihadi” – started producing personal protective equipment that had been in short supply in seminaries, mosques and hussainiyas and even natural fruit juices for health workers.”
This sense of social solidarity is extremely powerful in Shi’ite culture. Hashemi notes that “the government loosened health-related restrictions over a month ago and we have been experiencing a small slice of normality in recent weeks.” Yet the fight is not over. As in the West, there are fears of a covid-19 second wave.
Marandi stresses the economy, predictably, was hurt: “But because of the sanctions, most of the hurt had already happened. The economy is now running without oil revenue. In Tehran, you don’t even notice it. It’s nothing compared to Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Turkey or the UAE. Workers from Pakistan and India are leaving the Persian Gulf in droves. Dubai is dead. So, in comparison, Iran did better in dealing with the virus. Moreover, harvests last year and this year have been positive. We are more self-reliant.”
Hashemi adds a very important factor: “The Covid-19 crisis was so massive that people themselves have pitched in with effort, revealing new levels of solidarity. Individuals, civil society groups and others have set up a range of initiatives seeking to help the government and health workers on the front line of countering the pandemic.”
What a relentless Western disinformation campaign always ignores is how Iran after the revolution is used to extremely critical situations, starting with the eight-year-long Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. Marandi and Hashemi are adamant: for older Iranians, the current economic crisis pales in comparison with what they had to put up with throughout the 1980s.
Made in Iran soars
Marandi’s analysis ties up the economic data. In early June, Mohammad Bagher Nobakht – responsible for planning Iran’s state budgets – told the Majlis (Parliament) that the new normal was “to sideline oil in the economy and run the country’s programs without oil.”
Nobakht stuck to the numbers. Iran had earned just $8.9 billion from the sale of oil and related products in 2019-20, down from a peak of $119 billion less than a decade ago.
The whole Iranian economy is in transition. What’s particularly interesting is the boom in manufacturing – with companies focusing way beyond Iran’s large domestic market towards exports. They are turning the massive devaluation of the rial to their advantage.
In 2019-20, Iran’s non-oil exports reached $41.3 billion. That exceeded oil exports for the first time in Iran’s post-revolutionary history. And roughly half of these non-oil exports were manufactured goods. Team Trump’s “maximum pressure” via sanctions may have led to total non-oil exports going down – but only by 7%. The total remains near historic highs.
According to Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) data published by the Iran Chamber of Commerce, private sector manufacturers were seriously back in business already in the first month following the relaxation of the partial lockdown.
The fact is Iranian consumer goods and industrial products – everything from cookies to stainless steel – are exported by small and medium enterprises to the wider Middle East and also to Central Asia, China and Russia. The myth of Iranian “isolation” is, well, a myth.
Some new manufacturing clusters bode well for the future. Take titanium – essential for myriad applications in military, aerospace, marine industries and industrial processes. The Qara-Aghaj mine in Urmia, the provincial capital of West Azarbaijan, which is part of Iran’s mineral belt, including the country’s largest gold reserves, has tremendous potential.
Iran features in the Top 15 of mineral-rich countries. In January, after getting the technology for deep-level mining, Tehran launched a pilot project for extraction of rare earth minerals.
Still, Washington pressure remains as relentless as the Terminator.
In January, the White House issued yet another executive order targeting the “construction, mining, manufacturing, or textiles sectors of the Iranian economy.” So Team Trump is targeting exactly the booming private sector – which means, in practice, countless Iranian blue-collar workers and their families. This has nothing to do with forcing the Rouhani administration to say, “I can’t breathe”.
The Venezuelan front
Apart from a few scuffles between the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and the Health Ministry about China’s response to Covid-19, the Iran-China “comprehensive strategic partnership” (CSP) remains on track.
The next big test is actually in September. That’s when Team Trump wants to extendthe UN arms embargo on Iran. Add to it the threat to trigger the snapback mechanism inbuilt in UNSC resolution 2231 – if other Security Council members refuse to support Washington and let the embargo expire for good in October.
China’s mission at the UN has stressed the obvious. The Trump administration unilaterally abandoned the JCPOA. Then it reimposed unilateral sanctions. Thus it has no right to extend the arms embargo or go for the snapback mechanism against Iran.
China, Russia and Iran are the three key nodes of Eurasia integration. Politically and diplomatically, their key decisions tend to be taken in concert. So it’s no wonder that was reiterated last week in Moscow at the meeting of Foreign Ministers Sergey Lavrov and Javad Zarif – who get along famously.
Lavrov said, “We will be doing everything so that no one can destroy these agreements. Washington has no right to punish Iran.”
Zarif for his part described the whole juncture as “very dangerous”.
Additional conversations with Iranian analysts reveal how they interpret the regional geopolitical chessboard, calibrating the importance of the axis of resistance (Tehran, Baghdad, Damascus, Hezbollah) in comparison with two other fronts: the US and its “stooges” (the House of Saud, UAE, Egypt), the master – Israel – and also Turkey and Qatar, which, like Iran, but unlike the “stooges”, favor political Islam (but of the Sunni variety, that is, the Moslem Brotherhood).
One of these analysts, pen name Blake Archer Williams, significantly remarks, “the main reason Russia holds back from helping Iran (mutual trade is almost at zero) is that it fears Iran. If Trump does not have a Reagan moment and does not prevail on Iran, and the US is in any event driven out of the Middle East by the continuing process of Iran’s weapons parity and its ability to project power in its own pond, then all of the oil of the Middle East, from the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait and Bahrain, to Iraq, of course, and not least to the oilfields in Saudi Arabia’s Qatif region (where all the oil is and is 100% Shi’ite), will come under the umbrella of the axis of resistance.”
Still, Russia-China continue to back Iran on all fronts, for instance rebuking the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for giving in to US “bullying” – as the IAEA’s board last week passed a resolution submitted by France, Britain and Germany criticizing Iran for the first time since 2012.
Another key foreign policy front is Venezuela. Tehran’s soft power, in quite a spectacular manner keenly observed all across the Global South, de facto ridiculed Washington’s sanctions/blockade in its own Monroe Doctrine “backyard”, when five Iranian tankers loaded with gasoline successfully crossed the Atlantic and were received by a Venezuelan military escort of jets, helicopters, and naval patrols.
That was in fact a test run. The Oil Ministry in Tehran is already planning a round two of deliveries to Caracas, sending two or three cargos full of gasoline a month. That will also help Iran to offload its huge domestically produced fuel.
The historic initial shipment was characterized by both sides as part of a scientific and industrial cooperation, side by side with a “solidarity action”.
And then, this past week, I finally confirmed it. The order came directly from Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. In his own words: “The blockade must be broken”. The rest is – Global South – history in the making.


russia-insider--2020-06-29--Russia Benefiting from Oil Market Turmoil

An interesting couple of posts from Southfront.org this week gives us some insight as to what ’ s happening in international oil markets .
Demand for Russian Urals grade oil is so strong that is has been trading at a pretty steep premium to Brent Crude this month .
Southfront references this report from Argus research .
This means that the Russian Urals crude is trading at a premium to the European benchmark Brent .
The premium is $ 1.55 per barrel in North-Western Europe and $ 2.55 – in the Mediterranean .
Argus names competition as the reason of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ After the United States imposed sanctions against Venezuelan oil , American refineries began to willingly buy Russian heavy oil , very similar to the one exported by the Venezuelan PDVSA .
In addition , demand for Russian oil in Asia is growing .
Traditionally , Urals trades at a discount to Brent because of a lack of a unified benchmark price for it .
The July Shanghai Crude Oil futures contract closed at ¥299 ( or $ 42.30 ) per barrel this week , putting it at a ~ $ 1.70 premium to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ closer to the Medium Sour oil the Shanghai contract represents than the Light Sweet Brent .
At the same time the Saudi Arabian plan to flood the market with oil to gain market share has failed entirely .
Despite record oil exports in April as Saudi Arabia flooded the market with oil , the value of the Kingdom ’ s crude exports plunged by US $ 12 billion from April 2019 levels as the lowest oil prices in years hit revenues .
In April , the value of Saudi Arabia ’ s oil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ US $ 12 billion ( 45.3 billion Saudi riyals ) , severely affecting the value of the total exports of the world ’ s top oil exporter , data from Saudi Arabia ’ s General Authority of Statistics showed on Thursday .
China was Saudi Arabia ’ s main trading partner for merchandise trade in April 2020 , with Saudi exports to China valued at US $ 1.9 billion ( 7.16 billion riyals ) .
The Saudis flooded the market with oil after the collapse of the previous OPEC+ deal in early March @ @ @ @ @ @ @ per day ( bpd ) in April 2020 , up from 7.391 million bpd in March , according to data from the Joint Organisations Data Initiative ( JODI ) .
They shipped out 50 % more oil and revenues plunged by 65 % .
They practically gave the stuff away in April .
They had to .
With the Riyal tied to the dollar they had to undercut Russian oil which trades in freely-floated rubles .
In March and April the ruble spiked to a high of RUB81.66 per dollar and has steadily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still trading around 5 % weaker against the U.S. dollar than it was pre-crisis .
That then becomes an even bigger source of profit given that now Urals grade is trading at a premium to Brent Crude while U.S. exports continue to lag behind .
And the Saudis are now still price takers rather than price makers since they immediately had to go back and adhere to production cuts in like with the rest of OPEC+ ’ s agreement .
• None Russia has emerged as a more trusted partner overall than Saudi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Europe is willing to pay a premium for Urals because of both reliability and pricing advantages when currency fluctuations are considered .
• None China is willing to be a big buyer of Saudi oil while it eschews U.S. imports in order to gain leverage over Saudi policy .
As their biggest customer China will at some point dictate terms rather than be dictated to .
• None Subtle shifts in the supply chain by major importers could also be a leading indicator of political unrest in the Arabian peninsula .
The Saudi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report notes significant layoffs at Saudi Aramco .
I ’ ve been steadfast in my assessment that Russia holds all the cards in the global oil market at this point .
This position will only strengthen as long as oil prices stay in this price range .
And don ’ t think Iran isn ’ t okay with this pricing regime since it thoroughly undermines the Saudis , which , in turn , exposes Israel ’ s soft underbelly .
Iran is using the turmoil in the U.S. to , effectively , smuggle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China .
Join My Patreon if you want help navigating the untold stories in the markets .
Install the Brave Browser to loosen Google ’ s grip on the flow of information .

An interesting couple of posts from Southfront.org this week gives us some insight as to what’s happening in international oil markets.
Demand for Russian Urals grade oil is so strong that is has been trading at a pretty steep premium to Brent Crude this month. Southfront references this report from Argus research.
This means that the Russian Urals crude is trading at a premium to the European benchmark Brent. The premium is $1.55 per barrel in North-Western Europe and $2.55 – in the Mediterranean. Argus names competition as the reason of Urals reaching such a high price. After the United States imposed sanctions against Venezuelan oil, American refineries began to willingly buy Russian heavy oil, very similar to the one exported by the Venezuelan PDVSA. In addition, demand for Russian oil in Asia is growing.
Traditionally, Urals trades at a discount to Brent because of a lack of a unified benchmark price for it. The July Shanghai Crude Oil futures contract closed at ¥299 (or $42.30) per barrel this week, putting it at a ~$1.70 premium to Brent Crude.
Russian Urals is far closer to the Medium Sour oil the Shanghai contract represents than the Light Sweet Brent.
At the same time the Saudi Arabian plan to flood the market with oil to gain market share has failed entirely.
Despite record oil exports in April as Saudi Arabia flooded the market with oil, the value of the Kingdom’s crude exports plunged by US$12 billion from April 2019 levels as the lowest oil prices in years hit revenues. In April, the value of Saudi Arabia’s oil exports plummeted by 65.4%, or US$12 billion (45.3 billion Saudi riyals), severely affecting the value of the total exports of the world’s top oil exporter, data from Saudi Arabia’s General Authority of Statistics showed on Thursday. China was Saudi Arabia’s main trading partner for merchandise trade in April 2020, with Saudi exports to China valued at US$1.9 billion (7.16 billion riyals). The Saudis flooded the market with oil after the collapse of the previous OPEC+ deal in early March, exporting a record 10.237 million barrels per day (bpd) in April 2020, up from 7.391 million bpd in March, according to data from the Joint Organisations Data Initiative (JODI).
They shipped out 50% more oil and revenues plunged by 65%. They practically gave the stuff away in April. They had to. With the Riyal tied to the dollar they had to undercut Russian oil which trades in freely-floated rubles.
In March and April the ruble spiked to a high of RUB81.66 per dollar and has steadily fallen since then. Today it is still trading around 5% weaker against the U.S. dollar than it was pre-crisis.
That then becomes an even bigger source of profit given that now Urals grade is trading at a premium to Brent Crude while U.S. exports continue to lag behind.
And the Saudis are now still price takers rather than price makers since they immediately had to go back and adhere to production cuts in like with the rest of OPEC+’s agreement.
This dynamic highlights a couple of interesting points:
Russia has emerged as a more trusted partner overall than Saudi Arabia in the Eurasian oil market. Europe is willing to pay a premium for Urals because of both reliability and pricing advantages when currency fluctuations are considered. China is willing to be a big buyer of Saudi oil while it eschews U.S. imports in order to gain leverage over Saudi policy. As their biggest customer China will at some point dictate terms rather than be dictated to. Subtle shifts in the supply chain by major importers could also be a leading indicator of political unrest in the Arabian peninsula. The Saudi economy is in shambles and the Southfront report notes significant layoffs at Saudi Aramco.
I’ve been steadfast in my assessment that Russia holds all the cards in the global oil market at this point. This position will only strengthen as long as oil prices stay in this price range.
And don’t think Iran isn’t okay with this pricing regime since it thoroughly undermines the Saudis, which, in turn, exposes Israel’s soft underbelly. Iran is using the turmoil in the U.S. to, effectively, smuggle oil around the world, including to China.
* * *
Join My Patreon if you want help navigating the untold stories in the markets. Install the Brave Browser to loosen Google’s grip on the flow of information.