russia-insider--2020-04-03--Denying Medicines to Iran and Venezuela Is a Crime Against Humanity

Much remains to be learned about the coronavirus , though it is quite possible that it will not be possible to determine how it developed if the various governments that might be involved prove to be uncooperative .
The Chinese carefully controlled the information on the virus in its early stages , though they eventually adopted a complete lockdown to prevent its spread that seems to have been successful and might serve as a model for other nations to follow if they can overcome concerns about threats to civil liberties that evolve from placing too much power in the hands @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Over two weeks ago , I suggested that the current form of corona might have possibly escaped from someone ’ s lab where a weaponized virus was being developed , most likely in China itself , though nations like the United States and Israel which are believed to have significant capabilities in biowarfare as well as a geopolitical motive to unleash the disease on certain countries should not be excluded .
I still believe that assessment should be considered as viable particularly as the politicization process involving the virus is now fully in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. soldiers involved in the World Military Games held in Wuhan back in October might have deliberately planted the virus , while President Donald Trump and other Republicans in the U.S. are calling the disease the Wuhan or China virus , implying willful or careless behavior by the Chinese and a clear effort to demonize the Beijing government by exploiting the appearance of the virus as a wedge issue .
And one might take note of the fact that the virus has particularly hit both China and Iran , countries that are on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ generates additional conspiracy theories .
Donald Trump is not exactly a person overflowing with compassion .
When corona virus began to emerge in the U.S. he called it a “ hoax ” and urged everyone to keep going to work even if ill , precisely the opposite of what was being recommended by most responsible medical authorities .
He is now planning to throw $ 1200 dollars at each American resident whether they need it or not to undo the political damage , a proposal that will cost as much as $ 500 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ does not have and which it will have to either print or borrow .
The money should be going to those who are now unemployed as a result of the virus , a point that surprisingly enough is being made by several Republican Senators .
Hundreds of billions more will go to the usual “ victims , ” banks and large corporations that will use the cash to pay off long terms loans and also to buyback their own stock and raise the value of their shares for investors .
That is precisely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to show for the average American .
One of the most truly despicable aspects of the coronavirus is how it is being exploited by Washington to punish countries like Iran and Venezuela , currently the enemy-designates of the inside the Beltway crowd .
It would be possible to describe the Trump Administration policy towards both nations as sadistic apart from the fact that the behavior of the president and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo might actually shock the Marquis de Sade .
Venezuela has been denied a $ 5 billion International Monetary Fund @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the seemingly irrelevant and politically motivated argument that it is not clear who represents the legitimate government in the country , whether it is Nicola Maduro , the president , or Juan Guaido , the aspirant to the position of head of state being promoted by Washington .
The White House has also declared a “ maximum pressure March ” directed against the Venezuelan economy , with the health care sector particularly targeted .
So , Venezuelans will die and Maduro will undoubtedly continue to run the government , making the position of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ toxic and pointless .
Iran is also seeking a $ 5 billion IMF emergency loan to cope with the crisis , a request that will almost certainly also be torpedoed by the Trump Administration .
Last Thursday Pompeo doubled down on Iran , initiating new sanctions based on the evidence-free allegation that Tehran is behind the recent attacks on U.S. military bases in Iraq .
He also confirmed that , as part of the “ maximum pressure ” policy , all existing sanctions will remain in place , saying “ Our sanctions will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its petrochemical industry and further Iran ’ s economic and diplomatic isolation .
The United States will continue to fully enforce our sanctions.
” The fact that the Iraqi government and parliament have asked the Americans to close their bases in the country while the U.S. is highly unpopular due to its killing of Iraqi militiamen and soldiers seems to have escaped Pompeo as possible causes of the series of missile strikes .
Pompeo also seems oblivious to the fact that remnants of ISIS are active in the areas where the bases are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firing missiles from improvised pick-up truck launchers .
Last week Iran confirmed that it had experienced 988 deaths from the coronavirus and the infected number in the tens of thousands , but many believe that testing has been inadequate and the government may be understating the number of cases for political reasons .
Pompeo has repeatedly insisted that Iran will be allowed to buy necessary medicines from abroad , but the U.S-imposed currency exchange restrictions on the activity of the national bank as well as of the country ’ s remaining commercial banks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pay for the drugs and medical supplies so the country is combating the epidemic without many badly needed pharmaceuticals .
Even some congressmen have noticed that there is something fundamentally evil about the U.S. policy .
Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren sent a letter to Pompeo and Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin that included “ I am concerned about the vulnerability of the Iranian people to the coronavirus and the potential for Iran ’ s coronavirus cases to worsen the spread of the disease to neighboring countries , including regional allies , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Therefore , I seek an assurance that every reasonable effort is being made by the United States to ensure the availability of medicine and other non-sanctionable humanitarian items to the Iranian people to help prevent the further spread of the coronavirus.
” Senator Bernie Sanders tweeted “ Iran is facing a catastrophic toll from the coronavirus pandemic .
U.S. sanctions should not be contributing to this humanitarian disaster .
As a caring nation , we must lift any sanctions hurting Iran ’ s ability to address this crisis , including financial sanctions.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ due to the mishandling of the shoot-down of the Ukrainian airliner and the inability to cope with a deepening economic crisis caused largely by the U.S. imposed sanctions .
Given the current signs of weakness and instability in Tehran , there was recently a meeting in the White House discussing whether the U.S. should take the opportunity to attack Iran .
It was , fortunately , rejected by a narrow margin when the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff strongly opposed the proposal .
Meanwhile the usual Iranophobes in Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Democracies ( FDD ) have seen an opportunity to tighten the screws a bit more and hopefully bring down the Iranian leadership through economic warfare .
Their support for increasing sanctions on Iran is a policy designed to inflict the maximum pain on the Iranian people so they will rise up seeking to destroy their government .
If that were to occur it would mean a civil war , but the folks at FDD would be hard pressed to even acknowledge the blood on their hands .
Ironically , if the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to actually help the Iranian people by suspending sanctions and helping to expedite medical assistance it might actually produce a genuine thaw in a relationship that has been unnecessarily locked into 1979 and the embassy hostage crisis .
Waging war on innocent people should not in any event be what the United States of America is all about .
A shift in policies that actually demonstrates that Washington might be interested in saving lives rather than destroying them would be welcomed by most of the world and also by many Americans .
Philip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Director of the Council for the National Interest , a 501 ( c ) 3 tax deductible educational foundation ( Federal ID Number # 52-1739023 ) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East .
Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org , address is P.O .
Box 2157 , Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is [ email protected ] .

Much remains to be learned about the coronavirus, though it is quite possible that it will not be possible to determine how it developed if the various governments that might be involved prove to be uncooperative. The Chinese carefully controlled the information on the virus in its early stages, though they eventually adopted a complete lockdown to prevent its spread that seems to have been successful and might serve as a model for other nations to follow if they can overcome concerns about threats to civil liberties that evolve from placing too much power in the hands of corrupt and ignorant government officials.
Over two weeks ago, I suggested that the current form of corona might have possibly escaped from someone’s lab where a weaponized virus was being developed, most likely in China itself, though nations like the United States and Israel which are believed to have significant capabilities in biowarfare as well as a geopolitical motive to unleash the disease on certain countries should not be excluded. I still believe that assessment should be considered as viable particularly as the politicization process involving the virus is now fully in play.
China is now claiming that U.S. soldiers involved in the World Military Games held in Wuhan back in October might have deliberately planted the virus, while President Donald Trump and other Republicans in the U.S. are calling the disease the Wuhan or China virus, implying willful or careless behavior by the Chinese and a clear effort to demonize the Beijing government by exploiting the appearance of the virus as a wedge issue. And one might take note of the fact that the virus has particularly hit both China and Iran, countries that are on Washington’s enemy list, which generates additional conspiracy theories.
Donald Trump is not exactly a person overflowing with compassion. When corona virus began to emerge in the U.S. he called it a “hoax” and urged everyone to keep going to work even if ill, precisely the opposite of what was being recommended by most responsible medical authorities. He is now planning to throw $1200 dollars at each American resident whether they need it or not to undo the political damage, a proposal that will cost as much as $500 billion of money that the United States does not have and which it will have to either print or borrow. The money should be going to those who are now unemployed as a result of the virus, a point that surprisingly enough is being made by several Republican Senators.
Hundreds of billions more will go to the usual “victims,” banks and large corporations that will use the cash to pay off long terms loans and also to buyback their own stock and raise the value of their shares for investors. That is precisely what happened in 2008, with little to show for the average American.
One of the most truly despicable aspects of the coronavirus is how it is being exploited by Washington to punish countries like Iran and Venezuela, currently the enemy-designates of the inside the Beltway crowd. It would be possible to describe the Trump Administration policy towards both nations as sadistic apart from the fact that the behavior of the president and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo might actually shock the Marquis de Sade.
Venezuela has been denied a $5 billion International Monetary Fund loan to combat the virus based on the seemingly irrelevant and politically motivated argument that it is not clear who represents the legitimate government in the country, whether it is Nicola Maduro, the president, or Juan Guaido, the aspirant to the position of head of state being promoted by Washington. The White House has also declared a “maximum pressure March” directed against the Venezuelan economy, with the health care sector particularly targeted. So, Venezuelans will die and Maduro will undoubtedly continue to run the government, making the position of the Trump Administration demanding regime change both toxic and pointless.
Iran is also seeking a $5 billion IMF emergency loan to cope with the crisis, a request that will almost certainly also be torpedoed by the Trump Administration. Last Thursday Pompeo doubled down on Iran, initiating new sanctions based on the evidence-free allegation that Tehran is behind the recent attacks on U.S. military bases in Iraq. He also confirmed that, as part of the “maximum pressure” policy, all existing sanctions will remain in place, saying “Our sanctions will deprive the regime of critical income from its petrochemical industry and further Iran’s economic and diplomatic isolation. The United States will continue to fully enforce our sanctions.”
The fact that the Iraqi government and parliament have asked the Americans to close their bases in the country while the U.S. is highly unpopular due to its killing of Iraqi militiamen and soldiers seems to have escaped Pompeo as possible causes of the series of missile strikes. Pompeo also seems oblivious to the fact that remnants of ISIS are active in the areas where the bases are located and have proven quite capable of firing missiles from improvised pick-up truck launchers.
Last week Iran confirmed that it had experienced 988 deaths from the coronavirus and the infected number in the tens of thousands, but many believe that testing has been inadequate and the government may be understating the number of cases for political reasons. Pompeo has repeatedly insisted that Iran will be allowed to buy necessary medicines from abroad, but the U.S-imposed currency exchange restrictions on the activity of the national bank as well as of the country’s remaining commercial banks means that there is no mechanism to pay for the drugs and medical supplies so the country is combating the epidemic without many badly needed pharmaceuticals.
Even some congressmen have noticed that there is something fundamentally evil about the U.S. policy. Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren sent a letter to Pompeo and Secretary of the Treasury Steve Mnuchin that included “I am concerned about the vulnerability of the Iranian people to the coronavirus and the potential for Iran’s coronavirus cases to worsen the spread of the disease to neighboring countries, including regional allies, and to the rest of the world. Therefore, I seek an assurance that every reasonable effort is being made by the United States to ensure the availability of medicine and other non-sanctionable humanitarian items to the Iranian people to help prevent the further spread of the coronavirus.”
Senator Bernie Sanders tweeted “Iran is facing a catastrophic toll from the coronavirus pandemic. U.S. sanctions should not be contributing to this humanitarian disaster. As a caring nation, we must lift any sanctions hurting Iran’s ability to address this crisis, including financial sanctions.”
Iran’s government is admittedly unpopular due to the mishandling of the shoot-down of the Ukrainian airliner and the inability to cope with a deepening economic crisis caused largely by the U.S. imposed sanctions. Given the current signs of weakness and instability in Tehran, there was recently a meeting in the White House discussing whether the U.S. should take the opportunity to attack Iran. It was, fortunately, rejected by a narrow margin when the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff strongly opposed the proposal.
Meanwhile the usual Iranophobes in Washington at the Israeli-linked Foundation for the Defense of Democracies (FDD) have seen an opportunity to tighten the screws a bit more and hopefully bring down the Iranian leadership through economic warfare. Their support for increasing sanctions on Iran is a policy designed to inflict the maximum pain on the Iranian people so they will rise up seeking to destroy their government. If that were to occur it would mean a civil war, but the folks at FDD would be hard pressed to even acknowledge the blood on their hands.
Ironically, if the United States were to make a serious effort to actually help the Iranian people by suspending sanctions and helping to expedite medical assistance it might actually produce a genuine thaw in a relationship that has been unnecessarily locked into 1979 and the embassy hostage crisis. Waging war on innocent people should not in any event be what the United States of America is all about. A shift in policies that actually demonstrates that Washington might be interested in saving lives rather than destroying them would be welcomed by most of the world and also by many Americans.
Philip M. Giraldi, Ph.D., is Executive Director of the Council for the National Interest, a 501(c)3 tax deductible educational foundation (Federal ID Number #52-1739023) that seeks a more interests-based U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East. Website is councilforthenationalinterest.org, address is P.O. Box 2157, Purcellville VA 20134 and its email is inform@cnionline.org.


russia-insider--2020-04-03--Russians Help Disinfect Italian Hospital (Video)

The following video from RT shows the arrival of a team of Russian technicians to disinfect a hospital in Bergamo @ @ @ @ @ ChiCom virus outbreak in Northern Italy .
The Russians are using a 70 % ethanol @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ s 140 proof .
I figure they just diverted a couple of @ @ @ @ @ Moscow distillery , and watered it down a little for medical use .
The clip @ @ @ @ @ , but MissPiggy has kindly translated it from the German subtitles .
Many thanks to @ @ @ @ @ :

× Disabling adblock
Disabling adblock for a specific site just takes a couple of clicks.
Usually it is as simple as clicking on the adblock icon in your browser, and choosing the ‘disable on this page or domain’ option.
If that doesn’t work this wikihow article gives more detail: https://www.wikihow.com/Disable-AdBlock
Thank you for your support!


russia-insider--2020-04-03--Trump Should Use This Crisis to End America's Disgraceful Wars Around the World

To fight the coronavirus at home , France is removing all military forces from Iraq .
When NATO scaled back its war games in Europe because of the pandemic , Russia reciprocated .
Moscow announced it would cancel its war games along NATO ’ s border .
Nations seem to be recognizing and responding to the grim new geostrategic reality of March 2020 : The pandemic is the real enemy of us all , and while we fight it , each in his own national corner , we are in this together .
Never allow a serious crisis to go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel during the financial crisis .
Emanuel was echoed this month by House Majority Whip Rep. James Clyburn , who called the coronavirus crisis “ a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision.
” What Clyburn had in mind is what Democrats advanced as their alternative to the $ 2.2 trillion emergency bill .
It was designed to force President Trump either to swallow it whole or to take responsibility for vetoing a critical transfusion of federal funds to keep the economy alive .
Among the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : • None A $ 15-an-hour minimum wage imposed on companies receiving funds .
Blanket loan forgiveness of $ 10,000 for students .
New tax credits for solar and wind energy .
Full funding of Planned Parenthood .
Federal dollars for fetal tissue research .
• None $ 300 million for PBS , which has been promoting the LBGT agenda to school kids .
Mandating “ diversity ” on corporate boards as a condition of companies receiving funds .
Election “ reforms ” to increase Democratic turnout .
Insistence that airlines , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from jet engines .
$ 35 million for the Kennedy Center .
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and congressional Republicans ash-canned almost the leftist wish list .
But Trump should go further , turn the tables , and seize this crisis to do what he was elected to do — impose a new foreign policy .
Isolate America , not from the world , but from the world ’ s wars .
The New York Times and Washington Post editorialized Thursday for an easing of the economic sanctions we have imposed on Iran .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Iran is suffering more than any country in the Middle East from the virus .
More than that , it would be a statement that America is not at war with the Iranian people .
This unilateral gesture by Trump , asking nothing in return except negotiations , would put the onus for Iran ’ s isolation squarely with the ayatollah and his regime .
As for Vladimir Putin ’ s cancellation of war games in response to NATO ’ s cancellation , Trump could seize upon this as an opening to engage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Does anyone believe Putin wants a war with NATO ?
Should he do so , does anyone think Italy and Spain , two of the largest NATO allies , but both suffering greatly in the coronavirus crisis , would invoke Article V and declare war on Russia ?
When Hitler was our foe , America created a wartime alliance with Stalin in the common cause of crushing the Axis powers .
Liberals and leftists yet defend the Popular Front between the democracies and Stalin .
If we could unite with Bolsheviks to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Iran ’ s rulers to cope with and crush the coronavirus .
When , if ever , will there be a better time to make good on Trump ’ s campaign pledge to extricate America from the wars in Syria , Iraq and Afghanistan ?
Consider also the Korean Peninsula .
Kim Jong Un has been testing rockets again over the Sea of Japan .
Transfixed by the coronavirus crisis , however , the world is paying him no attention .
We should make a final offer to Kim Jong Un to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and lift sanctions for verifiable reductions and restraints on his nuclear arsenal .
We are ready for a deal .
But If Pyongyang refuses to talk , we should tell him we are going home and are allowing South Korea and Japan to develop their own nuclear weapons .
And let Kim deal with them .
The coronavirus pandemic is the greatest crisis since the Cuban missile confrontation of 1962 .
After that crisis , John F. Kennedy sought to use the world ’ s brush with Armageddon to establish a detente with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who had put the missiles in Cuba .
Following our Cold War victory , we have not done that .
Instead , we plunged into wars that were none of our business to deal with imagined threats and advance utopian causes like establishing Jeffersonian democracy in lands where tribalism and dogmatism are rooted in the very soil .
The coronavirus is the enemy Saddam Hussein never was .
And the ayatollahs never had tens of millions of Americans “ sheltering in place.
” What the coronavirus crisis tells us is not that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but that , in engaging with the world , we should put our own interests first , as every nation in the world is doing now .

To fight the coronavirus at home, France is removing all military forces from Iraq.
When NATO scaled back its war games in Europe because of the pandemic, Russia reciprocated. Moscow announced it would cancel its war games along NATO’s border.
Nations seem to be recognizing and responding to the grim new geostrategic reality of March 2020: The pandemic is the real enemy of us all, and while we fight it, each in his own national corner, we are in this together.
Never allow a serious crisis to go to waste, said Barack Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel during the financial crisis.
Emanuel was echoed this month by House Majority Whip Rep. James Clyburn, who called the coronavirus crisis “a tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision.”
What Clyburn had in mind is what Democrats advanced as their alternative to the $2.2 trillion emergency bill. It was designed to force President Trump either to swallow it whole or to take responsibility for vetoing a critical transfusion of federal funds to keep the economy alive.
Among the items stuffed in the Democrats’ proposal:
A $15-an-hour minimum wage imposed on companies receiving funds. Blanket loan forgiveness of $10,000 for students. New tax credits for solar and wind energy. Full funding of Planned Parenthood. Federal dollars for fetal tissue research.
$300 million for PBS, which has been promoting the LBGT agenda to school kids. Mandating “diversity” on corporate boards as a condition of companies receiving funds. Election “reforms” to increase Democratic turnout. Insistence that airlines, to get a bailout, offset carbon emissions from jet engines. $35 million for the Kennedy Center.
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and congressional Republicans ash-canned almost the leftist wish list.
But Trump should go further, turn the tables, and seize this crisis to do what he was elected to do — impose a new foreign policy.
Isolate America, not from the world, but from the world’s wars.
The New York Times and Washington Post editorialized Thursday for an easing of the economic sanctions we have imposed on Iran.
This would be a humanitarian gesture when Iran is suffering more than any country in the Middle East from the virus. More than that, it would be a statement that America is not at war with the Iranian people.
This unilateral gesture by Trump, asking nothing in return except negotiations, would put the onus for Iran’s isolation squarely with the ayatollah and his regime.
As for Vladimir Putin’s cancellation of war games in response to NATO’s cancellation, Trump could seize upon this as an opening to engage Russia as candidate Trump promised to do.
Does anyone believe Putin wants a war with NATO?
Should he do so, does anyone think Italy and Spain, two of the largest NATO allies, but both suffering greatly in the coronavirus crisis, would invoke Article V and declare war on Russia?
When Hitler was our foe, America created a wartime alliance with Stalin in the common cause of crushing the Axis powers. Liberals and leftists yet defend the Popular Front between the democracies and Stalin. If we could unite with Bolsheviks to defeat Nazis, surely we can join with Iran’s rulers to cope with and crush the coronavirus.
When, if ever, will there be a better time to make good on Trump’s campaign pledge to extricate America from the wars in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan?
Consider also the Korean Peninsula.
Kim Jong Un has been testing rockets again over the Sea of Japan.
Transfixed by the coronavirus crisis, however, the world is paying him no attention. We should make a final offer to Kim Jong Un to pull our U.S. forces from South Korea and lift sanctions for verifiable reductions and restraints on his nuclear arsenal.
We are ready for a deal. But If Pyongyang refuses to talk, we should tell him we are going home and are allowing South Korea and Japan to develop their own nuclear weapons. And let Kim deal with them.
The coronavirus pandemic is the greatest crisis since the Cuban missile confrontation of 1962. After that crisis, John F. Kennedy sought to use the world’s brush with Armageddon to establish a detente with the Soviet Union of the Communist dictator who had put the missiles in Cuba.
Following our Cold War victory, we have not done that. Instead, we plunged into wars that were none of our business to deal with imagined threats and advance utopian causes like establishing Jeffersonian democracy in lands where tribalism and dogmatism are rooted in the very soil.
The coronavirus is the enemy Saddam Hussein never was. And the ayatollahs never had tens of millions of Americans “sheltering in place.”
What the coronavirus crisis tells us is not that we should turn our backs on the world but that, in engaging with the world, we should put our own interests first, as every nation in the world is doing now.


russia-insider--2020-04-03--The NYTimes' Insidious Ongoing Disinfo Campaign on Russia and Elections

For the past three years the new narrative of Russian interference in U.S. elections has bound corporate news media more tightly than ever to the interests of the national security state .
And no outlet has pushed that narrative more aggressively – and with more violence to the relevant facts – than The New York Times .
Times reporters have produced a series of stories that loudly proclaim the Russian election meddling narrative but offer no real facts in the body of the story supporting its most sensational claims .
The Times service to the narrative was introduced by its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts with Russian Intelligence.
” We now know from Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz ’ s report on the FBI investigation of the Trump campaign that the only campaign aide who had contacts with Russian intelligence officials was Carter Page , and those had taken place years before in the context of Page ’ s reporting them to the CIA .
The Horowitz report revealed that FBI officials had hidden that fact from the FISA Court to justify its request for surveillance of Page .
But the Times @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 failed to the acknowledge that the calumny about Page ’ s Russian intelligence contacts it had published without question in 2017 had been an FBI deception .
Two more Times Russiagate stories in 2018 and 2019 featured spectacular claims that proved on closer examination to be grotesque distortions of fact .
In September 2018 a 10,000-word story by Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti sought to convince readers that the Russian Internet Research Agency ( IRA ) had successfully swayed US opinion during the 2016 election with 80,000 Facebook posts that they said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that turned to be an outrageously deceptive claim , because Shane and Mazzetti failed to mention the fact that those 80,000 IRA posts ( from early 2015 through 2017 ) , had been engulfed in a vast ocean of more than 33 trillion Facebook posts in people ’ s news feeds – 413 million times more than the IRA posts .
In December 2019 , senior national security correspondent David Sanger wrote a story headlined , “ Russia Targeted Election Systems in All 50 States , Report Finds , ” and Sanger ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had “ concluded ” that all 50 states had been targeted .
But the Committee report actually reaches no such conclusion .
It quoted President Barack Obama ’ s cyber-security adviser Michael Daniel as recalling that he had “ personally ” reached that conclusion , but shows the only basis for his conclusion was remarkably lame : the “ randomness of the attempts ” and his conviction that Russian intelligence was “ thorough.
” The Committee reported that some intelligence “ developed ” in 2018 had “ bolstered ” the subjective judgment by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the eight paragraphs in the report describing that intelligence were redacted , and the one unredacted paragraph suggests that the redacted paragraphs provided no conclusive evidence that Russian intelligence had scanned any state election websites , much less those of all 50 states .
The paragraph said , “ However , IP addresses associated with the August 16 , 2016 FLASH provided some indicators the activity might be attributableto the Russian government… .
[ emphasis added ] .
” The Committee report also contained summary statements from six states that the Department of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 21 states it insists were hacked by the Russians in 2016 , denying any cyber threat to their systems .
Another 13 states reported only that there was “ scanning and probing ” by inconclusive IP addresses the FBI and DHS had sent them .
Sanger did not report any of those troublesome details .
In January 2020 the Times began its coverage of the theme of Russian interference in the 2020 election with a story headlined , “ Chaos is the Point : Russian Hackers and Trolls Grow Stealthier in 2020.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Matthew Rosenberg and Nicole Perlroth , sought to heighten the existing US climate of paranoia about a Russian attack in regard to the 2020 elections .
Once again , however , nothing in the story supports the sinister tone of the headline .
It reported Department of Homeland Security officials ’ anxiety about the ransom-ware attacks on 100 American towns , cities and federal offices during 2019 , which are clearly criminal operations aimed at large-scale payoffs by cities .
The story informed readers that DHS was investigating “ whether Russian intelligence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” on the apparent theory that the criminals were being used by the Russians .
Since those ransom-ware attacks had been going on for years , the obvious question would have been why DHS would have waited until 2020 to reveal that it was investigating Russian involvement .
Thus , the only fact underlying the story was the DHS desire to find evidence to support its accusations of Russian election hacking .
Still at it in 2020 The Times continued its advocacy journalism in a Feb. 26 report that US intelligence officials @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the House Intelligence Committee on Feb. 13 that “ Russia was interfering in the 2020 campaign to get President Trump elected , ” citing five people “ familiar with the matter.
” The Times ’ team of four writers proceeded to declare , “ The Russians have been preparing – and experimenting – for the 2020 election…aware that they needed a new playbook of as-yet undetectable methods , United States officials said.
” But instead of reporting actual evidence of any Russian action or decision for action , the Times writers again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ done .
“ Some officials , ” they wrote , “ believe that foreign powers , possibly including Russia , could use ransom-ware attacks…to damage or interfere with voting systems or registration databases.
” The Times ’ sources thus had no actual intelligence on the question and were merely speculating on what any foreign government might do to disrupt the election .
Three days after that report , moreover , the Times backed away from its previous lede after intelligence sources disputed its claim that Russia was intervening to reelect Trump , suggesting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , had overstated the assessment .
Sanger sought to limit the damage with a story labeling the problem one of “ dueling narratives ” in the intelligence community .
Then Sanger admitted , “ It is probably too early for the Russians to begin any significant moves to bolster a specific candidate , ” which obviously invalidated the Times ’ previous speculation on the subject .
But after The Washington Post published a story that the FBI had informed Senator Bernie Sanders that Russia had sought to help his campaign , Sanger quickly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interference to advance its favorite candidates .
On the Times ’ podcast “ The Daily , ” Sanger opined that the Russians were now supporting both Trump and Sanders – because Sanders , “ like Donald Trump , ” has “ got a real aversion to interventions around the world.
” The most recent entry in the Times ’ campaign to create anxiety about Russian interference in the election focused on race relations .
On March 10 , the Times headlined its story , “ Russia Trying to Stoke US Racial Tension before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lede Julian Barnes and Adam Goldman announced , “ The Russian government has stepped up efforts to influence racial tensions in the United States as part of its bid to influence November ’ s presidential election , including trying to incite violence by white supremacist groups and stoke anger among Afro-Americans , according to seven American officials briefed on recent intelligence.
” But true to the modus operandi used routinely to push the Russian election threat narrative , the writers did not offer a single fact supporting such a story line .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ making the claims provided “ few details ” about white supremacists and “ did not detail how ” blacks were being encouraged to use violence .
It turns out , in fact , that US officials have found nothing indicating Russian support for violent white supremacists in America .
The only fact that they could cite – based on a single source – was that the FBI is “ scrutinizing any ties ” between Russian intelligence and Rinaldo Nazzaro , the American founder of a “ neo-Nazi group , ” who lives with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Russia , but owns property in the United States .
So , the Times ’ single source had nothing but a suspicion for which the FBI was trying to find evidence .
The final touch in the piece was the accusation that RT had “ fanned divisions ” on race by running a story about a video of New York policemen attacking and detaining a young black man that Barnes and Goldman write “ sparked outrage ” and had also “ posted tweets aimed at stirring white animosity.
” But the RT article @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the video depicted unprovoked police brutality and that it had already gone viral .
The Times itself had published a much more detailed Associated Press story on the same incident that went into a discussion of the history of police brutality in New York City .
By the Times ’ own criterion , the AP was doing far more to stoke racial animosity than RT .
The opinion pieces that RT published attacking The New York Times for its coverage of a video at the University of Wisconsin that offended non-whites and for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Apu character on “ The Simpsons ” echoed views on race and culture that most Americans find offensive .
The idea that they were part of a Russian plot to generate racial animosity , however , is a very long stretch .
The descent of The New York Times into this unprecedented level of propagandizing for the narrative of Russia ’ s threat to US democracy is dramatic evidence of a broader problem of abuses by corporate media of their socio-political power .
Greater awareness of the dishonesty at the heart of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a key to leveraging media reform and political change .
Gareth Porter , an investigative historian and journalist specializing in US national security policy , received the UK-based Gellhorn Prize for journalism for 2011 for articles on the U.S. war in Afghanistan .
His new book is Manufactured Crisis : the Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare .
He can be contacted at [ email protected ] .
Reprinted from Consortium News with the author ’ s permission .

For the past three years the new narrative of Russian interference in U.S. elections has bound corporate news media more tightly than ever to the interests of the national security state. And no outlet has pushed that narrative more aggressively – and with more violence to the relevant facts – than The New York Times.
Times reporters have produced a series of stories that loudly proclaim the Russian election meddling narrative but offer no real facts in the body of the story supporting its most sensational claims.
The Times service to the narrative was introduced by its February 2017 story headlined, “Trump Campaign Aides Had Repeated Contacts with Russian Intelligence.” We now know from Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz’s report on the FBI investigation of the Trump campaign that the only campaign aide who had contacts with Russian intelligence officials was Carter Page, and those had taken place years before in the context of Page’s reporting them to the CIA. The Horowitz report revealed that FBI officials had hidden that fact from the FISA Court to justify its request for surveillance of Page.
But the Times coverage of the Horowitz report in December 2019 failed to the acknowledge that the calumny about Page’s Russian intelligence contacts it had published without question in 2017 had been an FBI deception.
Two more Times Russiagate stories in 2018 and 2019 featured spectacular claims that proved on closer examination to be grotesque distortions of fact. In September 2018 a 10,000-word story by Scott Shane and Mark Mazzetti sought to convince readers that the Russian Internet Research Agency (IRA) had successfully swayed US opinion during the 2016 election with 80,000 Facebook posts that they said had reached 126 million Americans.
But that turned to be an outrageously deceptive claim, because Shane and Mazzetti failed to mention the fact that those 80,000 IRA posts (from early 2015 through 2017), had been engulfed in a vast ocean of more than 33 trillion Facebook posts in people’s news feeds – 413 million times more than the IRA posts.
In December 2019, senior national security correspondent David Sanger wrote a story headlined, “Russia Targeted Election Systems in All 50 States, Report Finds,”and Sanger’s lede said the Senate Intelligence Committee had “concluded” that all 50 states had been targeted. But the Committee report actually reaches no such conclusion. It quoted President Barack Obama’s cyber-security adviser Michael Daniel as recalling that he had “personally” reached that conclusion, but shows the only basis for his conclusion was remarkably lame: the “randomness of the attempts” and his conviction that Russian intelligence was “thorough.”
The Committee reported that some intelligence “developed” in 2018 had “bolstered” the subjective judgment by Daniel. But all but one of the eight paragraphs in the report describing that intelligence were redacted, and the one unredacted paragraph suggests that the redacted paragraphs provided no conclusive evidence that Russian intelligence had scanned any state election websites, much less those of all 50 states. The paragraph said, “However, IP addresses associated with the August 16, 2016 FLASH provided some indicators the activity might be attributableto the Russian government….[emphasis added].”
The Committee report also contained summary statements from six states that the Department of Homeland Security has continued to include among the 21 states it insists were hacked by the Russians in 2016, denying any cyber threat to their systems. Another 13 states reported only that there was “scanning and probing” by inconclusive IP addresses the FBI and DHS had sent them. Sanger did not report any of those troublesome details.
In January 2020 the Times began its coverage of the theme of Russian interference in the 2020 election with a story headlined, “Chaos is the Point: Russian Hackers and Trolls Grow Stealthier in 2020.” The story, written by Sanger, Matthew Rosenberg and Nicole Perlroth, sought to heighten the existing US climate of paranoia about a Russian attack in regard to the 2020 elections. Once again, however, nothing in the story supports the sinister tone of the headline.
It reported Department of Homeland Security officials’ anxiety about the ransom-ware attacks on 100 American towns, cities and federal offices during 2019, which are clearly criminal operations aimed at large-scale payoffs by cities. The story informed readers that DHS was investigating “whether Russian intelligence was involved in any of the attacks,” on the apparent theory that the criminals were being used by the Russians.
Since those ransom-ware attacks had been going on for years, the obvious question would have been why DHS would have waited until 2020 to reveal that it was investigating Russian involvement. Thus, the only fact underlying the story was the DHS desire to find evidence to support its accusations of Russian election hacking.
Still at it in 2020
The Times continued its advocacy journalism in a Feb. 26 report that US intelligence officials had “warned” in a briefing for the House Intelligence Committee on Feb. 13 that “Russia was interfering in the 2020 campaign to get President Trump elected,” citing five people “familiar with the matter.”
The Times’ team of four writers proceeded to declare, “The Russians have been preparing – and experimenting – for the 2020 election…aware that they needed a new playbook of as-yet undetectable methods, United States officials said.” But instead of reporting actual evidence of any Russian action or decision for action, the Times writers again cited what their sources suspected could be done.
“Some officials,” they wrote, “believe that foreign powers, possibly including Russia, could use ransom-ware attacks…to damage or interfere with voting systems or registration databases.” The Times’ sources thus had no actual intelligence on the question and were merely speculating on what any foreign government might do to disrupt the election.
Three days after that report, moreover, the Times backed away from its previous lede after intelligence sources disputed its claim that Russia was intervening to reelect Trump, suggesting that the briefing officer, Shelby Pierson, had overstated the assessment. Sanger sought to limit the damage with a story labeling the problem one of “dueling narratives” in the intelligence community.
Then Sanger admitted, “It is probably too early for the Russians to begin any significant moves to bolster a specific candidate,” which obviously invalidated the Times’ previous speculation on the subject. But after The Washington Post published a story that the FBI had informed Senator Bernie Sanders that Russia had sought to help his campaign, Sanger quickly returned to the same narrative of Russian interference to advance its favorite candidates.
On the Times’ podcast “The Daily,” Sanger opined that the Russians were now supporting both Trump and Sanders – because Sanders, “like Donald Trump,” has “got a real aversion to interventions around the world.”
The most recent entry in the Times’ campaign to create anxiety about Russian interference in the election focused on race relations. On March 10, the Times headlined its story, “Russia Trying to Stoke US Racial Tension before Elections, Officials Say.” In their lede Julian Barnes and Adam Goldman announced, “The Russian government has stepped up efforts to influence racial tensions in the United States as part of its bid to influence November’s presidential election, including trying to incite violence by white supremacist groups and stoke anger among Afro-Americans, according to seven American officials briefed on recent intelligence.”
But true to the modus operandi used routinely to push the Russian election threat narrative, the writers did not offer a single fact supporting such a story line. They even admitted that the officials who were making the claims provided “few details” about white supremacists and “did not detail how” blacks were being encouraged to use violence.
It turns out, in fact, that US officials have found nothing indicating Russian support for violent white supremacists in America. The only fact that they could cite – based on a single source – was that the FBI is “scrutinizing any ties” between Russian intelligence and Rinaldo Nazzaro, the American founder of a “neo-Nazi group,” who lives with his Russian wife in St. Petersburg, Russia, but owns property in the United States. So, the Times’ single source had nothing but a suspicion for which the FBI was trying to find evidence.
The final touch in the piece was the accusation that RT had “fanned divisions” on race by running a story about a video of New York policemen attacking and detaining a young black man that Barnes and Goldman write “sparked outrage” and had also “posted tweets aimed at stirring white animosity.” But the RT article on the video merely reported accurately that the video depicted unprovoked police brutality and that it had already gone viral. The Times itself had published a much more detailed Associated Press story on the same incident that went into a discussion of the history of police brutality in New York City. By the Times’ own criterion, the AP was doing far more to stoke racial animosity than RT.
The opinion pieces that RT published attacking The New York Times for its coverage of a video at the University of Wisconsin that offended non-whites and for a Times opinion piece critical of the Apu character on “The Simpsons” echoed views on race and culture that most Americans find offensive. The idea that they were part of a Russian plot to generate racial animosity, however, is a very long stretch.
The descent of The New York Times into this unprecedented level of propagandizing for the narrative of Russia’s threat to US democracy is dramatic evidence of a broader problem of abuses by corporate media of their socio-political power. Greater awareness of the dishonesty at the heart of the Times‘ coverage of that issue is a key to leveraging media reform and political change.
Gareth Porter, an investigative historian and journalist specializing in US national security policy, received the UK-based Gellhorn Prize for journalism for 2011 for articles on the U.S. war in Afghanistan. His new book is Manufactured Crisis: the Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare. He can be contacted at porter.gareth50@gmail.com. Reprinted from Consortium News with the author’s permission.


russia-insider--2020-04-03--German Nationalist Party (AfD) Demands End to Russia Sanctions Amidst COVID Economic Pain

Germany ’ s populist Alternative for Germany ( AfD ) party has urged the country ’ s lawmakers yet again to end sanctions against Russia amid the difficult economic situation caused by the Chinese COVID-19 virus .
The Right-wing populist party has called on Germany to oppose extending sanctions levied against Russia at the next meeting between EU heads of state , adding that Russia should be restored as a member of the G7 and other transnational organizations , Junge Freiheit reports .
Failing to lift the current sanctions that are in place against Russia would result in the German @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , AfD ’ s parliamentary group argues .
To add insult to injury , the Chinese COVID-19 virus is expected to hit the German economy hard .
The economic output of the country expected to drop by at least 5 percent due to the crisis .
With these figures in mind , AfD lawmakers have argued : “ The quickest possible lifting of the Russia sanctions would be a cost-neutral and effective economic stimulus package in times of the corona crisis.
” Furthermore , AfD ’ s parliamentary group in the Bundestag has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ development between the two countries .
This isn ’ t the first time that lawmakers in the AfD have urged fellow German politicians to lift the sanctions against Russia .
In 2018 , the party ’ s parliamentary group also urged lawmakers in the Bundestag to end Russian sanctions .
Sanctions against Russia were first introduced in March 2014 following the annexation of the Crimean peninsula .
Shortly thereafter , sanctions were further tightened .
Since then , harsh sanctions have been imposed on several Russian banks , industrial groups , and citizens @

Germany’s populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) party has urged the country’s lawmakers yet again to end sanctions against Russia amid the difficult economic situation caused by the Chinese COVID-19 virus.
The Right-wing populist party has called on Germany to oppose extending sanctions levied against Russia at the next meeting between EU heads of state, adding that Russia should be restored as a member of the G7 and other transnational organizations, Junge Freiheit reports.
Failing to lift the current sanctions that are in place against Russia would result in the German economy losing eight billion euros each year, AfD’s parliamentary group argues. To add insult to injury, the Chinese COVID-19 virus is expected to hit the German economy hard. The economic output of the country expected to drop by at least 5 percent due to the crisis.
With these figures in mind, AfD lawmakers have argued: “The quickest possible lifting of the Russia sanctions would be a cost-neutral and effective economic stimulus package in times of the corona crisis.”
Furthermore, AfD’s parliamentary group in the Bundestag has called for increased cooperation in research and development between the two countries.
This isn’t the first time that lawmakers in the AfD have urged fellow German politicians to lift the sanctions against Russia. In 2018, the party’s parliamentary group also urged lawmakers in the Bundestag to end Russian sanctions.
https://twitter.com/V_of_Europe/status/1188158493049720832
Sanctions against Russia were first introduced in March 2014 following the annexation of the Crimean peninsula. Shortly thereafter, sanctions were further tightened.
Since then, harsh sanctions have been imposed on several Russian banks, industrial groups, and citizens.
Follow Arthur Lyons on Twitter