Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
July 11, 2019

Iran Keeps Calm While U.S. And Britain Continue Their Provocations

Great Britain has joined the U.S. pressure and provocation campaign against Iran. It is creating incidents to put Iran into a defensive position and to provoke into a violent reaction.

Early today 'two U.S. officials' spread a scare story about Iran which lead to this CNN headline: Iranian boats attempted to seize a British tanker in the Strait of Hormuz

Armed Iranian boats unsuccessfully tried to seize a British oil tanker in the Persian Gulf Wednesday, according to two US officials with direct knowledge of the incident.

The British Heritage tanker was sailing out of the Persian Gulf and was crossing into the Strait of Hormuz area when it was approached by boats from the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The Iranians ordered the tanker to change course and stop in nearby Iranian territorial waters, according to the officials.

The same 'two U.S. officials' briefed ABCNews:

A British warship prevented an apparent attempt by five Iranian small boats to direct a British oil tanker towards Iranian waters on Wednesday, according to two U.S. officials.

Remarkably the official British report came later than the U.S. officials briefing. It showed significant differences:

The UK defence ministry said that "three Iranian vessels attempted to impede the passage of a commercial vessel, British Heritage, through the Strait of Hormuz."

"HMS Montrose was forced to position herself between the Iranian vessels and British Heritage and issue verbal warnings to the Iranian vessels, which then turned away," the ministry statement said.
"There has been no confrontation in the last 24 hours with any foreign vessels, including British ones," the Revolutionary Guards said in a statement.

The U.S. officials claimed 5, not 3 boats. They claimed the boats tried to seize the ship, while the Brits just say they probably were getting in the way of the ship. The U.S. officials 'direct knowledge of the incident' seems to be lacking. Iran says that nothing happened at all.

There are reasons to believe that the Iranian statement is the most truthful one.

The BRITISH HERITAGE is a crude oil carrier with an overall length of 274 m, a beam of 49 m and a maximum draft of 17.8 m. How three of the typical 20 feet long fiberglass speedboats of the IRGC could try to 'seize' or even 'impede' such a huge ships is not conceivable.

According to CNN the ship came from Basra, Iraq, had stopped at the Saudi coast and then left the Persian Gulf. It was not carrying any cargo at the time of the incident. That is quite curious as a crude oil carrier is typical loading and not delivering crude to Persian Gulf countries.

Here is a Marine Traffic chart of the last course of the British Heritage.


Of interest is also that the ship turned off its AIS signal, see the dotted line, during its passage through the Hormuz Strait.

CNN also noted that:

On July 10, the ship turned off its transponders for almost 24 hours, making it undetectable by radars. When it switched on its transponders at around 1pm Eastern Time, it appeared to have sailed through the Persian Gulf escorted by the HMS Montrose.

Turning of the AIS in a high traffic area and especially at night is quite dangerous. The AIS signals a ships type, speed and course and other ships use that data to plan their own course. But even without AIS the ship will still be visible on the Iranian surveillance radars that control the Hormuz Strait. A ship on the radar screen without AIS information would be suspicious.

So why would the British ship do that? Was that an attempt to draw special attention to it from the Iranian coast guard or military?

To me it seems that the empty British crude carrier, which was shadowed by a British frigate, was used as bait. There were probably Royal Marines on board waiting for an Iranian attempt to seize the ship. Iran did not fall for it.

On July 4 the British military in Gibraltar hijacked the tanker GRACE 1 which was carrying Iranian crude oil allegedly to Syria. The ship had planned to receive provisions in Gibraltar. The British controlled enclave changed its local regulations only a day before the ship arrived:

The new regulation, introduced on July 3, allows Gibraltar to designate and detain ‘specified ships’ for up to 72 hours if the chief minister has reasonable grounds to suspect a breach of EU regulations.

Crucially, Grace 1 can be held until any other legal proceedings in other jurisdictions against the owners of the cargo or tanker are settled. The seizure has triggered a diplomatic row between the UK and Iran, amid claims the detention was done at the behest of the US.

Tomasz Wlostowski, a lawyer specialized in EU regulatory affairs, found that there is no legal base in EU sanctions law and regulations to nab the tanker.

Today the police of Gibraltar arrested the captain of the ship:

Gibraltar Chronicle @GibChronicle - 14:45 UTC - 11 Jul 2019

Police in #Gibraltar have arrested the captain and chief officer of the supertanker Grace 1 on suspicion of breaching EU sanctions on Syria, a spokesman for the Royal Gibraltar Police has confirmed.

The spokesman confirmed too that documents and electronic devices have been seized from the ship.

Both men were arrested on Thursday afternoon interviewed under caution. Neither has been charged at this stage and investigations continue.

On July 3 a U.S. military spy plane crossed into Iranian airspace, twice, likely to provoke an reaction. The pirating of the GRACE 1 on July 4 was a U.S. planned provocation of Iran but carried out by the Brits. The passage of the empty BRITISH HERITAGE without AIS but with a military shadow seems to have been an attempt to lure Iran into a revenge action. When that did not work John Bolton strew the scare story about a failed attempt to 'seize' the ship. The Brits say the incident was less serious, and Iran says it never happened. The arrest of the captain of the GRACE 1 is another step on the provocation ladder.

The people who planned these provocation do not understand how Iran acts and reacts. Its military forces are obviously under orders not to react to provocations as such could allow the John Bolton's of this world to escalate towards a war.

Iran will react to these provocations and especially the British seizure of its tanker. But, as we noted in an earlier piece, its responses to such incidents are nearly always asymmetrical and come at an unexpected place and time.

Posted by b on July 11, 2019 at 17:39 UTC | Permalink

next page »

If the incident did happen as reported, then it was recon. The recon, apart from what it yields in and of itself as a military operation, also serves to indicate that Iran is setting about doing what they said they would do. The empire is stretched thin and wars of attrition can be two-way streets.

Moreover, the alleged verbal order to the EMPTY tanker to set anchor in Iranian water was likely intended as nothing more than an addition of insult to injury, on the heels of the tanker having reportedly pussied-out two days prior, and canceled it's crude order 40km before it reached Basra... as if a tanker with a military escort by air and sea would possibly pull over for a few dinghies, LOL.

Good stuff.

This war of attrition is a two-way street, and the EROEI of middle East crude has just ratcheted down a notch.

I imagine that the IRGC probably sent its blue-chip recruits out there in those swift boats. It's another badge of honor to have the empire's 30mm guns trained on you.

Posted by: reante | Jul 11 2019 17:44 utc | 1

Here is an article that explains how key representatives of the Republican Party are doing their best to convince the party's evangelical base that an attack on Iran is justified:

These three gentlemen who are being used to solidify the electoral support of America's Christian right seem to have forgotten that one of the key tenets of Christianity is the concept of peace. Their "turning of plowshares into swords", particularly when it comes to Iran, stands in complete opposition to what they claim to believe in their religious lives.

Posted by: Sally Snyder | Jul 11 2019 17:55 utc | 2

I am Muslim
Americans mercilessly kill my people in Afghanistan
Israeli Zionists mercilessly kill my people in Palestine
Indians mercilessly kill my people in Kashmir
Buddhists are mercilessly killing my people in Burma
But still, they call me the terrorist :(
And now they are coming for Iran :'(

Posted by: Azul | Jul 11 2019 17:56 utc | 3

"Iran has long been secretly “enriching,” in total violation of the terrible 150 Billion Dollar deal made by John Kerry and the Obama Administration. Remember, that deal was to expire in a short number of years. Sanctions will soon be increased, substantially!" 10 July D.Trump

Masal tanker seems blocked at entrance to Suez.
Happiness 1 is detained still at Jeddah
A Ukrainian tanker reported detained in Suez re. Iran sanctions.

Seems Suez is closed to Iran oil after sanctions waivers ended.

Give what is known of the legal background to Grace1 detention.

It suggests US asset forfeiture might also be applied.
It does not directly answer if the naming of Grace1 as specific ship under EU reg., or if non registration, overrule innocent passage clause in UNCLOS (which is what Tomasz Wlostowski pins his view on).

As #1 says above, seems British Heritage was a missed shipment, or feasibly is a manoeuvre to boost support for international patrol. AIS switchoff is unusual, a precaution or possibly to avoid dispute over position.

Note Forbes is suggesting retaking disputed islands.

Just comparing notes.

Posted by: gzon | Jul 11 2019 18:12 utc | 4

3 (or 5) small boats get in the way of a tanker, and the British response is to send in an even bigger target. This is going to be one nasty war if it ever breaks out. I truly feel sorry for the poor saps who are being put into harms way everyday because Washington is overrun with foreign agents masquerading as lobbyists.

Posted by: eblacksmith | Jul 11 2019 18:16 utc | 5

Also worth noting that the British Conservative party is in the midst of an internal Conservative Party election to decide who will be its next leader and Britain's next Prime Minister.

One of the two surviving candidates, Jeremy Hunt, is the Foreign Secretary and not doing very well against his opponent, Boris Johnson. This incident has allowed Hunt to go on television exhibiting his private school stiff upper lip and saying how we must stay firm in the face of these foreign provocations, etc. He is portraying a "good" image to a conservative electorate.

Also worth noting is that the news was first reported on the Trump-unfriendly CNN and Boris Johnson is bessie mates with Trump.

The whole brouhaha over the British Ambassador has likewise enabled Hunt to pose as the British patriot standing up to the foreign loud mouth while Boris has been forced into a position of refusing to criticize his "chum" Trump.

Both the British Ambassador and Hunt are rock hard neo-cons and could be doing Bolton a favour.

Posted by: johnf | Jul 11 2019 18:19 utc | 6

If this is any truth to this, any, it may be very bad for Iran

IAEA finds nuclear material in Iran warehouse

Iran should have got nukes like 20 years ago. Now its too late being under this pressure.

Posted by: Zanon | Jul 11 2019 18:21 utc | 7

It is more than possible that these are actions co-ordinated between Bolton/Pompeo and the Royal Navy which increasingly sees itself as part of the US forces.
No doubt in the wardrooms of Her Majesty's few remaining ships the officers think of themselves as America's Gurkhas or Jocks, ready to carry out tasks others refuse on grounds that they have not been properly authorised.
It is ion the nature of false flag and other provocations, such as this one, that if they succeed no questions are ever asked and there is a rush, at the top to claim to have been behind them.

Posted by: bevin | Jul 11 2019 18:23 utc | 8

The timeline of the supposed approach is not stated. I wonder whether turning off the AIS led the Iranian Coast Guard to send a patrol to investigate, creating the opportunity for the UK setup?

Posted by: fx | Jul 11 2019 18:26 utc | 9

thanks b... ""...another step on the provocation ladder"" and we're just in the early innings.. usa-uk - tied at the hip sickos, will continue on.. @9 fx... yes - makes sense.. part of the game of making war on iran..

Posted by: james | Jul 11 2019 18:32 utc | 10

> The UK defence ministry said that "three Iranian vessels attempted to impede the passage

1. UK did not say IRGC vessels tried to, but some vaguely Iranian did

2. IRGC did not say no Iranian vessels were involved, but specifically no IRGC vessels

IOW as of yet there is no reason to put UK DM and IRGC claims against each other.
Chances are, they both were truthful.

Posted by: Arioch | Jul 11 2019 18:32 utc | 11

"These three gentlemen who are being used to solidify the electoral support of America's Christian right seem to have forgotten that one of the key tenets of Christianity is the concept of peace. Their "turning of plowshares into swords", particularly when it comes to Iran, stands in complete opposition to what they claim to believe in their religious lives.

Posted by: Sally Snyder | Jul 11 2019 17:55 utc | 2"

Not to an evangelical Christian. Evangelicals believe that they can influence the second coming, leading to rapture. For this, they need a big conflagration involving Jerusalem (Israel). Netanayahu and AIPAC are leveraging this pipedream to foster their land grab and soft-genocide agenda, and at this point the largest obstacle to that is Iran.

So yes, the most influential Christians in the US, starting with Pompeo, want that war *because* of their twisted version of that religion.

Posted by: fx | Jul 11 2019 18:33 utc | 12

I am sure that the PR firm Hill & Knowlton is busy again working on a replay of babies being thrown out of incubators for Iran - coming soon..

Seems that Britain is really ratcheting up the tensions with Iran lately. Is there maybe a connection between Epstein being an intelligence asset and the blackmail of people such as Prince Andrews?

Posted by: Stever | Jul 11 2019 18:44 utc | 13

@fx 12

Widens the topic a little though slightly outdated, I don't say it is not biased .

Posted by: gzon | Jul 11 2019 18:53 utc | 14

#3 don't worry Iran is well prepared for the glass cannon UK and US. Their days are over, and they know it. Their people will also know it soon once a war sparks.

Posted by: A | Jul 11 2019 19:05 utc | 15

None of the news reports seem to clearly indicate whether or not the Brit ship entered Iranian waters -- seems like an important consideration.

Posted by: chet380 | Jul 11 2019 19:08 utc | 16

Zarif's B-Team just gained a new member: BOJO for the navy, while BiBi provides ( coverUps) the air force and BZ/BS the infantry ? POTUS can then postulate for Nobel peace prize.

Posted by: Go Figure | Jul 11 2019 19:11 utc | 17

For crying out loud people, CNN is part of the CIA. What kind of credence could it possibly have?

Posted by: Tony B. | Jul 11 2019 19:19 utc | 18

@Zanon #7

FWIW, the claim comes from the same individual who for the past two decades has been saying that Iran is "six months away from having a nuclear weapon".

Posted by: farm ecologist | Jul 11 2019 19:22 utc | 19

It is my impression that the primary focus of US and UK posturing WRT Iran is on two things:

1.) Not looking "weak".
2.) Keeping the "maximum pressure" on Iran.

Along with regular pleas for "talks without preconditions", i.e. with the sanctions still in place. An awkward combination to have to argue for, that, but our spokespersons have a lot of practice.

While it may have been considered that the Iranians might try to take the boat, I suspect that it was really to see what they would do, "recon" as the other fellow said, hence the warship and the empty boat.

And the Iranians, I expect, just wanted to harass it, that is all it takes really, the threat.

Posted by: Bemildred | Jul 11 2019 19:26 utc | 20

farm ecologist

Yes of course, Israel cannot be trusted, but I was implying if IAEA will release any information on this, then it is really bad for Iran.

Posted by: Zanon | Jul 11 2019 19:27 utc | 21

I see from your Marine Traffic chart that the ship is supposed to have remained on the Omani side of the strait. As far as I understand it, this is only possible for an empty tanker, as the Omani side is too shallow for a full vessel. So why was an empty tanker leaving the Gulf? It was supposed to have taken on a load in Basra, but didn't, and then to have stopped in Saudi. As it's not very commercial to leave without a cargo, there must have been an unexplained technical fault, which needed to be repaired in a major shipyard, not available in the Gulf, or someone was paying the owners off to do an empty voyage.

By the way, the 09:00 utc BBC World Service news bulletin, well after the event, no doubt already informed of the official position, but perhaps before US intervention in the story, described the event as having taken place in "disputed waters". That means the Tumbs, I think, well inside the Gulf.

Well, I think we have to wait until the evidently available video is released. It'll take them until tomorrow, I would say, to edit and photoshop the raw footage to get what they want. If it was the US doing it. The Brits, however, are notoriously reluctant to release anything security-wise, so I'm not sure we'll see anything, even if something really happened.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jul 11 2019 19:33 utc | 22

As some may have already noted, how do we even know this really happened?

IRGC rejects US claim of Iran attempt to seize UK tanker in Persian Gulf
“In the past 24 hours, there has been no encounter with foreign ships, including British ones,” it added.

Posted by: O | Jul 11 2019 19:36 utc | 23

Please let's not forget what's behind all this: Lebensraum -- Iran's affiliates successfully blocking Israeli expansion into Syria.

Posted by: bjd | Jul 11 2019 19:42 utc | 24

"The U.S. officials claimed 5, not 3 boats."

The US officials are unnamed
"Early on Thursday, two American officials, who were speaking to Reuters on the condition of anonymity,"

This is usually the sign of a completely fabricated story. Because if the narrative falls apart there is no one to blame for the BS story

Posted by: O | Jul 11 2019 19:45 utc | 25

Posted by: Zanon | Jul 11 2019 18:21 utc | 7

IAEA finds nuclear material in Iran warehouse

Please note, the article is dated July 10 of this year. We read:

International Atomic Energy Agency finds radioative material at site PM Netanyahu revealed during speech to the UN in September.

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors found evidence of radioactive activity in a warehouse in Tehran that Prime Minister Netanyahu revealed in his UN speech in September, Channel 13 News reported Thursday evening.

It seems the event had to be in September last year. September 2019 is soon. Is there any proof of the Netanyahu's words from IAEA and more up-to-date information on this case? From the agency itself, and not from Netanyahu. Because, to believe Bibi, as is well known, is not to respect yourself.

Posted by: John Doe | Jul 11 2019 19:58 utc | 26

It is not impossible that Iranian militants did something without authorisation from Tehran, who are now disavowing them. I am not saying they did; we have to wait for the video, if it is ever released.

This was standard practice in Israel after the 1948 war. Militants, like Dayan, led unauthorised raids on Syrian villages, slaughtering left and right, without government authorisation. The difference is that the militants' approach later became government policy, and has remained so (unlikely in Iran). We in Britain are having the same experience today. The wilder the claims of the insane Brexiters, the more government policy moves towards them, and will include their views in government policy.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jul 11 2019 20:02 utc | 27

@John Doe (27)

You can find 'radioactive material' (lovely degree of fuzziness in that term, misused by criminals such as Netanyahoo) at your local friendly hospital.

Posted by: bjd | Jul 11 2019 20:05 utc | 28

CNN is the megaphone of the CIA, i.e. not crediable

Posted by: Hannibal | Jul 11 2019 20:06 utc | 29

Posted by: O | Jul 11 2019 19:45 utc | 26

Sharmine Narwani:

"U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity..." The ubiquitous phrase that precedes every lie on the Mideast.

Posted by: John Doe | Jul 11 2019 20:22 utc | 30

When Boris is PM I want to see him pose on the foredeck of a UK Navy frigate wearing a funny hat, a patch over one eye, one foot on an inverted bucket, and declare "We are NOT scared of payback from Iran!!!"

Posted by: Hoarsewhisperer | Jul 11 2019 20:23 utc | 31

John Doe

In the article, there is mentioning that this information might be in the next IAEA report on Iran. If not I guess IAEA will debunk what Netanyahu said asap.

Posted by: Zanon | Jul 11 2019 20:29 utc | 32

The hullaballoo was contrived to keep the very negative results of the IAEA meeting called by the Outlaw US Empire from finding publication space. Stephen Lendman provided the following which keeps with Zarif & Rouhani's theme of Irony I posted the other day:

"In response to the Trump regime’s request for an IAEA meeting on Iran, its envoy to the organization Kazem Gharibabadi said the following:

"'It is indeed a sad irony that the same regime which materially violated the JCPOA by withdrawing illegally and unilaterally form the deal, and has been pushing others to follow suit, thereby hampering its implementation by the International Community through exerting every means of coercion, is expressing concern over the mere implementation of the same deal,' adding:

"'Iran’s recent decisions, which are exercised in response to the situation caused by the US by imposing sanctions on all who want to implement their commitments to the JCPOA, tend to bring about the lost balance of the deal and are fully in line with its provisions.'

"'The fact that the US as the prime violator of the JCPOA, has tabled this request, indicates its isolation in contradicting multilateralism and rule of law in international affairs.'

"'Furthermore, the recent developments have no connection to safeguards related issues and the mandate of the Board of Governors. Issues related to the implementation of the JCPOA will be deliberated in its prescribed mechanisms.'"

As anticipated, the toothless Outlaw US Empire had nothing much to say and little came from yesterday's meeting. The following was published on IAEA's website:

"The IAEA’s Board of Governors met today to discuss verification and monitoring in Iran. The meeting of the 35-nation Board was held at the request of a Member State. Governors discussed two recent reports by IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano on Verification and monitoring in the Islamic Republic of Iran in light of United Nations Security Council resolution 2231 (2015), issued to Member States on 1 July and 8 July, respectively. The Board decided to make the reports public."

The mentioned reports are available to download at the above link.

With its resent actions, the UK ought to be considered in breech of JCPOA along with its cousin leaving France, EU, Russia, and China as signatories.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jul 11 2019 20:30 utc | 33

The Independent is now saying:

The ship, British Heritage, was near the island of Abu Musa, which is in disputed waters, but HMS Montrose, the British frigate which moved in to head off the gunboats of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) stayed in international seas.

Wiki says:

Due to the depth of sea, oil tankers and big ships have to pass between Abu Musa and Greater and Lesser Tunbs; this makes these islands some of the most strategic points in the Persian Gulf.[4] The island is administered by Iran as part of its province of Hormozgan, but is also claimed by the United Arab Emirates as a territory of the emirate of Sharjah.[5][6]
It seems to me that Iran had a perfect right to stop a ship passing through its waters, if that in fact is what happened.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jul 11 2019 20:32 utc | 34

34 Cont'd--

There's Zero, Zip, Nada about any nuclear material found in an Iranian warehouse in anything said or published by IAEA. Just another instance of Zionist lies to keep the Iranian Nuclear Weapons Program Narrative alive. Doubt me? Then go to the link I provided above and read the docs yourself. The only criticism I have about the IAEA's director is his refusal to berate the Outlaw US Empire for its illegalities in keeping Iran from complying with its JCPOA commitments, which he continues to--unrealistically--urge upon Iran.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jul 11 2019 20:46 utc | 35

Press TV:

@JZarif : U.S. suffers political defeat, fails in its anti-#Iran attempt in IAEA meeting
Press TV:
Zarif: U.S. isolated politically, fails to draw condemnation against #Iran at @iaeaorg meeting
Javad Zarif:
Irony of IAEA Board meeting on US request:

a. US abhors JCPOA, axed & violates it, and punishes all who observe it;
b. US has no standing to raise JCPOA issues;
c. Iran fully complied with JCPOA per 15 IAEA reports;
d. Iran's actions are lawful under para 36 of accord:

Javad Zarif:
Bolton & Netanyahu killed Paris agreement between E3 & Iran in '05 by insisting on zero enrichment.

Result? Iran increased its enrichment 100 fold by 2012.

Now they've lured @realDonaldTrump into killing #JCPOA w/the same delusion.

#B_Team hasn't learned. BUT THE WORLD SHOULD.

Javad Zarif:
#B_Team sold @realDonaldTrump on the folly that killing #JCPOA thru #EconomicTerrorism can get him a better deal.

As it becomes increasingly clear that there won’t be a better deal, they're bizarrely urging Iran's full compliance.

There's a way out, but not with #B_Team in charge

Posted by: John Doe | Jul 11 2019 20:46 utc | 36

Its good 2 c the anglo-zionist have not changed their MO. WW1 anyone come 2 mind.
How they so desperately need a war cing that we re entering the largest financial implosion known to man kind in our post modern dying paradigm. Extremely reminiscent of the dying Roman Empire in crica 400 AD If history is 2 repeat itself well my fellow bloggers and readers the next phase can only be post modern fuedalism/Mid evilism.
Post SCriptum: Who needs Netflix or Stan when we have our very own Anglo-Zionst.

Posted by: falcemartello | Jul 11 2019 20:56 utc | 37

Ministry of Defence:

Defence Secretary @PennyMordaunt comments on HMS Montrose in the Strait of Hormuz:

Jonathan Beale:
UK MOD say they will NOT be releasing any imagery from incident in Gulf when @HMS_MONTROSE confronted #Iran IRGC boats . Shame as far as I’m concerned .

Jonathan Beale is a BBC Defence Correspondent.

Posted by: John Doe | Jul 11 2019 21:00 utc | 38

So, if, and I repeat if, any video comes out that proves the event ever happened, it will have been a local militant action in their own waters. If Tehran disavowes them, it will be with the objective of calming the waters. Iran doesn't want war.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jul 11 2019 21:07 utc | 39

36 Cont'd--

Seeing how next to nothing's available in BigLie Media about yesterday's IAEA meeting, we need to consult the Global Times article to read what the Outlaw US Empire representative said:

"'There is no credible reason for Iran to expand its nuclear program, and there is no way to read this as anything other than a crude and transparent attempt to extort payments from the international community,' [said] Jackie Wolcott"

Iran's rep responded thusly:

"'The sadistic tendency of the United States to use illegal, unilateral sanctions as an instrument to coerce sovereign states and private entities should come to an end."

China's action was reported as follows:

"The international community should not overreact to Iran's recent nuclear moves because they do not incur any proliferation risks, said Fu Cong, head of the Chinese delegation, at the meeting on Wednesday. 'We do not, we should not, overreact to the actions taken by Iran, because in our view, these actions do not incur any proliferation risks, and they do not contravene Iran's obligation under the safeguard agreement,' said Fu, who is director general of the Department of Arms Control of the Chinese Foreign Ministry."

Russia "issued a statement after the meeting, pointing to the 'oddity' that the United States, a country that declared the JCPOA to be a 'terrible deal' and 'took the path of its destruction' suddenly became aware of its importance and demanded its full implementation.

"'In fact, the United States who are refusing to fulfil its own obligations under the nuclear deal lost any right to demand this from others.'" [My Emphasis]

Indeed, that's the real crux isn't it. The entire Outlaw US Empire has zero grounds to bitch about the JCPOA. The timeline shows Obama reneged before the ink was even dry followed by Congress, so the Empire has never even attempted to fulfill its obligations, with Trump merely escalating the situation while also tying its hands to do anything legal about it all.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jul 11 2019 21:15 utc | 40

Where are the grainy pictures of the incident?

Posted by: kurious | Jul 11 2019 21:27 utc | 41

@kurious (43)

Give it some time. It's hard to find the equivalent of a dead duck when you're dealing with the Strait of Hormuz.

Posted by: bjd | Jul 11 2019 21:35 utc | 42

@Azul 3

You are painting with a very broad brush with that “my people” talk. Some could make a case for ISIS, Al-Queda, etc as part of “your people” as well. Be careful. Don’t turn this into a religious conflict. It is not. It is just used as a convenient ploy to get the 99% of every western nation to support their countries’, and Israel’s, dirty deeds and hegemonic agenda.

Posted by: Uncle Jon | Jul 11 2019 21:38 utc | 43

@falcemartello 38

It is sad that you think of all of this as a spectator sport to sit and watch on Saturdays with popcorn and beer.

If a war breaks out, you will not be a spectator. You will be a voiceless victim that HAS to survive on popcorns and polluted water.

So my suggestion is for you to get off the couch, stop the microwave and make a phone call to your representative. Or perhaps be in a rally or two to let the Empire know that you will not be a spectator anymore. That is the only thing that scares them.

Posted by: Uncle Jon | Jul 11 2019 21:48 utc | 44

Anyone who believes that turning off the AIS signal on a ship or the transponder on a plane will make either one disappear from radar has been watching too much Star Trek. Nothing disappears from the radar screen except the identification of the plane or ship. The Klingons are not involved.

Posted by: Vonu | Jul 11 2019 21:57 utc | 45

Uncle Jon @46--

falcemartello doesn't live within the Empire; Brazil or Italy if I recall from reading him at Syria Perspective. Yes, he's quite the cynic.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jul 11 2019 21:59 utc | 46

Empire Speak:

'no pre-conditions' => unconditional surrender
'sanctions' => global trade embargo
'freedom of navigation' => aircraft carriers on your coast, your ships seized at any time
'nuclear blackmail' => IAEA monitored nuclear power

Posted by: Christian J Chuba | Jul 11 2019 22:07 utc | 47

Excellent analysis b, thanks. So good there's not much more I can think of saying. I heard snippets of pure Brit propaganda on the subject on the radio as I prepared meals, interspersed with feral attacks on Corbyn for alleged anti-semitism - the BBC did a big "expose" last night. The irony is that Corbyn has possibly one of the best records of anyone in the country for work on anti-racism.

Around this time I take annual leave from the internet. So be warned as I drift somewhat off topic. But as they used to say all roads lead to Rome. What harm could there be in studying the trees in a local park I thought. But as it turns out it's not a typical local park which I sort of guessed. It's the ex-estate of an owner of the Cunard Shipping Line who was a tree buff so there are trees brought from all over the world through his ships that docked in Liverpool through the late 19th century.

I walk around the legacy of the British Empire and therefore cannot escape. It gets worse. I find a tree called the "Monkey Puzzle" tree and the name sort of annoys me. With its massively spiky threatening branches and impressive grandeur and almost scariness it seemed to deserve a better name. I discover the name was invented by some rich Victorians who joked that a monkey could not possibly climb it due to the spikes. Hence the puzzle. Ha fucking ha. The trees is indigenous to the Southern Andes, chiefly Chile where there have never been monkeys.The Latin name is Aurocaria. Much better. The Spanish name is "Paraguas" - umbrella, because with age (1,000 years plus) the lower branches drop off and leave just a crown. Crap, as well. So I went a little further and looked for the name the indigenous people had given it. Pehuan! And they called themselves after the tree - the Pehuanche people. Notice the Che there! The tree provided very nutritious nuts that were toasted and made into flour for bread or were added to stews or simply eaten. So sacred was (and is) it considered that the tree was treated with huge respect and veneration. No-one was allowed to talk near it, presents were left around its trunk. And then the savages came.

Posted by: Lochearn | Jul 11 2019 22:30 utc | 48

Its like an endless soap opera. Every day a different crisis, nothing too big (usually) , just enough to keep you watching day after day until you realize its all a tease.

Where’s the clicker?

No, seriously, obviously a conspiracy where officials are lying to make Iran look to be aggressors.

You know, we have these clashes , mostly self-made (Trump) with North Korea, Iran, China, Russia, Venezuela, etc. Meanwhile Trumps boosted military spending 25%. Thats what these manufactured crisis are all about. To keep support for increased spending.

Obviously at some point the hawks are going to get impatient with the soap opera and go for a Hollywood blockbuster thriller. Perhaps the Epstein thing is to push that along. Clinton needed the Monica scandal to escalate against the Serbs after he whitewashed the TWA 800 false flag and blamed it on Boeing fuel tanks. So maybe Trump needs a push as well.

Posted by: Pft | Jul 11 2019 22:35 utc | 49

Correction: It's Pehuen not Pehuan. Apologies, especially to this fine people.

Posted by: Lochearn | Jul 11 2019 22:38 utc | 50

@karlof1 48

Oh, Brazil or Italy! Two countries on the brink.There is a case of total surrender. I guess it’s too late for him/her.

Posted by: Uncle Jon | Jul 11 2019 22:41 utc | 51

Pft @51--

Yes, "an endless soap opera" indeed!

Magnier has a new item that's mostly a review, although he does say Iran has more than enough monetary resources to outlast Outlaw US Empire sanctions. He reiterates the #1 question: "Will Europe stand with US hooliganism, or stand by its treaty obligations to Iran?"

Further confusion in TrumpCo policy is speculated upon here. The gist:

"The heart of the matter is that President Trump’s invitation to Imran Khan goes way beyond a show of token gratitude for Pakistan’s cooperation in making the peace agreement with Taliban. Actually, Pakistan has not made any major concessions on its Afghan agenda. It simply facilitated the peace talks by leveraging its influence on the Taliban. The Pakistani objective of restoring the Taliban to mainstream Afghan politics — highly likely with a lead role — and creating ‘strategic depth’ vis-a-vis India is very much intact."

Afghanistan as a topic disappeared but has always remained in the background. How Khan fares with Trump will be interesting to learn.

Posted by: karlof1 | Jul 11 2019 22:51 utc | 52

Zanon @ 7, Uncle Jon @ 27, BJD @ 29:

Someone should have told the inspectors from the IAEA to put out their cigarettes before they entered the Iranian warehouse.


And not for the first time or the last, Binyamin Netanyahu exaggerates, talks up a non-event into its polar opposite or tells outright lies if he believes he can influence other people to act or not act, all to his advantage. No-one should trust anything he says, least of all the Israeli mainstream news media who breathlessly report his idiotic utterances.

Posted by: Jen | Jul 11 2019 22:57 utc | 53

@Azul 3

This is true. There is conflict all over the globe between all kinds of different peoples. Terrorism is just a propaganda word in Western society. It doesn't mean anything. Muslim people should stand ready to defend their homes and lands with their lives like any good people should. It can be done. Hezbollah is an excellent example of this. If the Shia community in Southern Lebanon hadn't banded together to kick the IDF out in 2000 and win a war in 2006, they would be in the same situation the Palestinians are in today. They are a great and honorable people and should serve as an excellent example to other Muslim peoples. They are lucky to have leaders that represent their people instead of paid off dictators.

Posted by: goldhoarder | Jul 11 2019 23:07 utc | 54


@50 lochearn.. have a good holiday... we call them monkey trees here on vancouver island..

Posted by: james | Jul 11 2019 23:18 utc | 55

usa press propaganda briefing from today.. more at link..

QUESTION: What’s the administration’s position on the Convention on the Law of the Sea? Do you think that the Senate should ratify it?

MS ORTAGUS: So I know what you’re getting at because we’re not signed to it, but we have —


MS ORTAGUS: I’m sorry?

QUESTION: Yeah, I know.

MS ORTAGUS: Yeah. So we think that all parties that are a part of this have an obligation to comply with this decision. They should, of course, exercise restraint.

QUESTION: So it’s similar to the Iran nuclear deal. Even though you’re not a part of it, the other parties to it —


QUESTION: — including Iran should still abide by it. Is that right? Yup? Okay.

MS ORTAGUS: Okay. What’s your next question?

QUESTION: The Iran question is: Yesterday, your colleague Lea Gabrielle was on the Hill and testified —

MS ORTAGUS: Ah, yeah.

QUESTION: — about the – she was asked about the IranDisinfo Twitter feed, the project that —

MS ORTAGUS: From May, right.

QUESTION: She said that it had been terminated.

Posted by: james | Jul 11 2019 23:24 utc | 56

@ 57 james

You should now call them Pehuen!

Posted by: Lochearn | Jul 11 2019 23:26 utc | 57

Pft has it about right, this is endless "war theater" to keep the peons restless and distracted, while the grifters funnel the treasure of The U$A to it's ruling classes.

Posted by: ben | Jul 12 2019 0:06 utc | 58

Very important news (also related to Iran):

From Pepe Escobar's Facebook page:

Well, the Pentagon DID respond to my latest column on Turkey-Iran-Russia-China, via one of their experts, as sent to one of my Beltway sources.

Here is the response in full:

"Russia and China were never allies. There is no loss there. Turkey is part of the Islamic revival and it is inevitable that it would have to choose the West or Islamic East. This so-called loss of Eurasia is not a debacle but the beginning of sanity where we start recognizing what was always the reality. While Russia with the right leadership could join the West, China was never going to do that. Russian disaffection with the West is due solely to Russia’s unrealistic attempt to restore its empire. Turkey is a microcosm of a major movement in the world with very many challenges. Turkey must make that decision for itself and that decision is well beyond our ability to control."

If this "expert" is really a legitimate Pentagon source, then this may be the first direct evidence that there is a "Clash of Civilizations" ideology that is very popular at least with a significant portion of the American elite.

That's why, ultimately, Trump tries to be an ally with Russia, against China.

But the real enemy here is not China: it's socialism. As Bannon (Trump's master) once said: "I'm against the Chinese Communist Party, not the Chinese people".

Posted by: vk | Jul 12 2019 0:17 utc | 59

Does this have legs? Will it pass the Senate? What about a veto from Trump?

"WASHINGTON – The House approved a measure Thursday that would force President Donald Trump to end U.S. military support of Saudi Arabia's military operations in Yemen.
Next up is a proposal that would bar Trump from launching a military strike against Iran, which supporters predict will pass in a vote set for Friday."

Posted by: dh | Jul 12 2019 0:18 utc | 60

Araucaria araucana trees

here too

Araucaria heterophylla trees

Posted by: the pessimist | Jul 12 2019 0:19 utc | 61

WTF is a British warship doing in the gulf Iran? A long way from the British chanell Ehh.....
F@@ck and go back home, you failed state piece of sh*t.
You rule nothing and not the waves, thats sure!
Puddle-dog go kiss your masters ass!

Posted by: Den Lille Abe | Jul 12 2019 0:41 utc | 62

Expect much more of this Anglo-Amerikkkan joint connivance as Brexit forces the British poodle to do more and better tricks for Master Trump's command in order to get fed their post-Brexit dog chow.

Now we begin to see what Brexit is really all about on both sides of the Atlantic.

It's all about British sovereignty? Lol. Sure it is.

Fools get fooled again. What a surprise.

Posted by: donkeytale | Jul 12 2019 0:49 utc | 63

@ Lochearn about the Pehuen tree

Thanks for that. I have had the "honor" of being so intrigued/smitten by this tree that over the past 40+ years I have planted and nurtured 2 of them at houses I lived at....and I expect to plant and nurture one more before I go

Blessings for your sharing

Posted by: psychohistorian | Jul 12 2019 1:36 utc | 64

I suppose by now the British have squeezed all they can out of the ongoing Skripal poisoning circus without adding more clowns (of perhaps supposed Iranian extraction and IRGC loyalties) to an already overloaded motor vehicle.

They still have to explain how the paramedics who attended to Charlie Rowley in June 2018 managed to get sick while the senior British army nurse and her award-winning teenage daughter who gave first aid to the Skripals three months earlier barely got a sneeze and a sore throat between them. They also have to explain how the paramedics rushing to Rowley's aid remembered to take atropine or some other fast-acting nostrum against nerve agent with them in the ambulance.

Posted by: Jen | Jul 12 2019 1:52 utc | 65

Escobar's "expert" is so full of is literally painful to read! lol! It is the US that cant give up it's empire, as it's criminal machinations in Ukraine and Syria show clearly. The only "leader" Russia could ever have that would please the insane west is a corrupt traitor who would sell his country for scrap....they already did that in the 90' push off silly bugger!! The truth is, the West was never Russia's friend, and they know it...with all the dripping sarcasm they use about "partners". Maybe this is the delusion the collective elites of the Western empire operate under. No wonder it is doomed.

Posted by: Indrid Cold | Jul 12 2019 1:54 utc | 66

I assume the small Iranian boats would carry machine guns which would be capable of making a mess of the tanker's bridge area. Therefore I would not assume that the tanker could just brush them aside. There is surely some video of the alleged incident which is being suppressed for no good reason. Therefore I would not believe anybody until such video was released.

Posted by: ramblingidiot | Jul 12 2019 2:06 utc | 67

@50 Lochearn

Thanks for the story. I loved your concluding sentence.

Posted by: Grieved | Jul 12 2019 2:21 utc | 68

donkeytale @65: Now we begin to see what Brexit is really all about ...


Yet another disingenuous attack on sovereignty and democracy.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Jul 12 2019 2:38 utc | 69

According to this (via ZH) the report the IAEA is due to issue at some point is different from any mentioned in comments above. It would be on inspections of a contaminated warehouse (so far only pushed via media) and whether that offerred proof/"proof" that Iran did not keep to JCPOA before the US withdrew. Sort of looks like Iraq wmd at the moment.

Posted by: gzon | Jul 12 2019 2:56 utc | 70

This is a political crisis that's going to end badly... =(

I think the average Iranian doesn't care too much about politics and just wants a better quality of life for themselves and their loved ones.

I hope they don't get pulled into a war.

Posted by: Newsography | Jul 12 2019 3:26 utc | 71

Well, since Zanon was the first person to draw attantion to it, I'm going to conclude that the IAEA "revelation" is a Mossad pych-op.

At best the Israelis found an empty, unguarded warehouse and got their very-good-buddies from the MEK to salt the soil outside.

At worse it's all made-up bulls**t.

I now await Zanon's breathless links explaing how Putin is ultimately to blame.

Posted by: Yeah, Right | Jul 12 2019 4:04 utc | 72

Or its just another day in the Persian Gulf. This shit goes on all the time. They are making something out of nothing to keep priming the public.

Posted by: dltravers | Jul 12 2019 4:40 utc | 73

Posted by: gzon | Jul 12 2019 2:56 utc | 72

According to this (via ZH) the report the IAEA is due to issue at some point is different from any mentioned in comments above.

1. Via ZH? Zerohedge? Would you please give us all a link to this ZH repost?

2. Different? What different? Would you please give us all a somewhat detailed explanation of his conclusion?

3. Can you read? Can you understand what is read?

Posted by: John Doe | Jul 12 2019 4:42 utc | 74

Posted by: Jen | Jul 12 2019 1:52 utc | 67

In Memory of Dawn Sturgess

Posted by: John Doe | Jul 12 2019 4:57 utc | 75

Pompeo Unveils New US Strategy of Attributing Blame for Attacks Before They Have Happened, June 14, 2019

Allergy Warning: May contain traces of Nuts & Boltons

The US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, has blamed Iran for the deaths of 23 Swedish sailors in an attack on an oil tanker in the Strait of Hormuz. However, in what is said to be an unusual move, the incident referred to by Mr Pompeo hasn’t yet happened and no-one has died. Nonetheless, Mr Pompeo was adamant that Iran must bear responsibility for the future incident, and has vowed a strong response:

“It is the assessment of the US Government that Iran will be responsible for this terrible incident, which could well happen in the next few days or weeks. This possible future attack is a threat to international peace and security, a blatant assault on the freedom of navigation, and an unacceptable escalation of tension by Iran. We cannot let this possible attack go unanswered.”

Posted by: John Doe | Jul 12 2019 5:02 utc | 76

Saudi Arabia exports almost all of its 10 million barrels of crude oil per day from its port at Ra's Tanura which is its only deep sea port (which can accommodate supertankers). Does anyone doubt Iran's ability to hit the piers of this port with their hypersonic Noor cruise missiles? Does anyone doubt that they can do so with their multiple warhead ballistic missiles? How about their submarine launched torpedoes? Does anyone doubt that this single asymmetric act against Saudi Arabia's greatest Achilles' Heel will put the economy of the whole world into a tailspin, making everyone feel the pain that the Iranians have been made to endure since the beginning of the Revolution, starting with the Imposed War? All of the weapons I just mentioned are equally as effective against any number of US aircraft-carrier naval formations, let alone a single English warship, which is a sitting duck in our pond.

Does anyone doubt that if and when this war breaks out, one of the first things that will happen after all of the "over the horizon" US threats are eliminated (yes, we can reach Diego Garcia), Qatif, the Shi'a region of no-longer "Saudi" Arabia where all the oil is produced, will be armed to the teeth, and that this region will join the Axis of Resistance alongside the rest of our allies? Of course, by that time, there will in all likelihood no longer be an Evil Empire to resist, per se, as the knat wagging the dog, namely, the Zionist entity will have passed into the pages of history. The Hezbollah missile strikes there will concentrate on the control tower at Ben Gurion Airport, the Dimona nuclear reactor, and the entity's two petrochemical plants. Sionara to all the Jewish dual passport holders, who will quickly make their way back to the Jew York and the European capitals where they came from, and where they belong.

Posted by: Nuff Sed | Jul 12 2019 5:33 utc | 77

John Doe @ 76:

This is the actual Zerohedge report that Gzon @ 72 must have been referring to.

Mossad Led Inspectors To Iran-made "Radioactive Material" At Disputed Site

Who is prepared to suggest that Mossad might have actually entered Iran secretly and planted something radioactive at that site (or got someone to do that on their behalf?? Why would they otherwise have drawn IAEA inspectors' attention to that warehouse?

We must bear in mind also that Satanyahu is in deep political shit as he was unable to form a government after the April 2019 elections and Israel now is heading to new elections in October 2019, at about the same time he and his wife Sara must answer charges of fraud, embezzlement and breach of trust in a corruption hearing before a magistrate. An incident in Iran might be just the thing to help spring Satanyahu off those corruption charges if the US can be persuaded by such news to push the Israeli authorities to treat that poisonous couple leniently.

Posted by: Jen | Jul 12 2019 5:50 utc | 78

And coming soon to the democratic, sovereign cuts for the rich!

Posted by: donkeytale | Jul 12 2019 5:55 utc | 79

John Doe @ 77:

Thanks, I saw the original Blogmire post some time ago and commented there but I see the comments forum there has now taken up the discussion about the paramedics coming to Charlie Rowley's aid and the new improbable "facts" about them we are supposed to believe.

Posted by: Jen | Jul 12 2019 6:01 utc | 80

Jeremy Hunt, British Foreign Secretary and the lagging contendant in the Conservative Party contest in Britain, continues to use the Iranian tanker incidents to boost his image:

"Jeremy Hunt pledges to reverse cuts to Navy amid Iran row"

Posted by: johnf | Jul 12 2019 6:46 utc | 81

Posted by: Jen | Jul 12 2019 5:50 utc | 80

This is the actual Zerohedge report that Gzon @ 72 must have been referring to.

Mossad Led Inspectors To Iran-made "Radioactive Material" At Disputed Site

Jan, thanks for the ZH link.

1. ZH refers to Aхios. The latter, in turn, is on Barak Ravid of private Israel's TV Channel 13. In the past the author has already been caught for his lies.

2. There is no ANY official information that the IAEA inspectors ever visited the "disputed" site. Mossad Agents - maybe, but not the inspectors.

The author of the stuffing refers to Netanyahu's speech at the UN in September LAST year. It was about the event of August 2018. From then until today the IAEA has prepared and released several reports on the state of affairs in Iran. During the CURRENT July, two such reports have already been released. But nothing like what Barak Ravid says is not there.

3. The names of those "officials" who whisper in Barak Ravid’s ear are unknown.

So, the below Axis' heading is at least inaccuracy, if not to tell a lie:

"UN finds evidence of radioactive material in Iranian warehouse, Israeli officials say"

Posted by: John Doe | Jul 12 2019 8:02 utc | 82

johnf @83,

"Don't coup me, lads"

Posted by: Jonathan | Jul 12 2019 8:04 utc | 83

British Tanker Seizure Try Fake News, Totally Fabricated -- Veterans Today

Editor’s note: The entire thing was fake, made up by the BBC, a network owned by a government long taken over by Epstein style sex trafficking of young boys and a few girls, you see in the UK, it is always young boys…part of their “public school” tradition of buggery.

If only I were making this up. The UK is a nation entirely run by perverts, twits and morons, all fed into office by multi-generational organized crime.

What makes it worse, I just returned from Britain and spoke to many (not countless close).

“Boris Johnson is dangerous, he is being paid off by the Israeli’s, this is going to be a disaster.” He just torpedoed the UK ambassador to the US for Trump and now engineered this false flag piece of crap. He is “on the pad” full time. Nothing from Britain can be trusted except stilton cheese.


Posted by: John Doe | Jul 12 2019 8:36 utc | 84

Iran, Russia say US ‘was isolated’ at IAEA’s special meeting -- Veterans Today

Editor’s Note: We are entering the Alice in Wonderland aspect of the JCPOA deal. The US has had the gall under Trump, no surprise there, to claim that Iran is the deal breaker.

Israel is going further, accusing Iran of “nuclear blackmail” with its plan to start backing off its agreed enrichment limitations, but with the option to reverse that process if all parties to the JCPOA come into compliance.

Israel is never challenged by governments or media over its vast, illegal WMD stockpiles, which it continues to refuse having inspected or even discussed, while Iran is framed as the nuclear threat it has not been proven to be.

All of Israel’s long history of claims that Iran was one or two years away from having “the bomb” have all been shot down in flames, via VT’s archive of reporting on the issue. Neither Israel nor any other country challenged the accuracy of our reports, as we used the Israeli archives to prove their own for two decades.

Was it crazy for the US to call for this IAEA meeting, merely to set the stage for framing itself with Israel as the two main rogue nuclear operators at the state level?

Does anyone at the White House care that it just suffered a huge diplomatic defeat, or will the US attitude remain as, “Wha-da-ya gonna do about it?… Jim W. Dean


Posted by: John Doe | Jul 12 2019 8:42 utc | 85

Jonathan Beale:
UK MOD say they will NOT be releasing any imagery from incident in Gulf when @HMS_MONTROSE confronted #Iran IRGC boats . Shame as far as I’m concerned .

Jonathan Beale is a BBC Defence Correspondent.
Posted by: John Doe | Jul 11 2019 21:00 utc | 39

Posted by: Laguerre | Jul 12 2019 8:46 utc | 86

Sorry, posted too soon by mistake. I was planning to say Beale's tweet doesn't surprise me. It's the British way. But it means the incident is going to remain in doubt as to whether it ever happened.

Posted by: Laguerre | Jul 12 2019 8:48 utc | 87

@ John Doe #78

"The US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, has blamed Iran..."

That article appears to be satire.

Posted by: teri | Jul 12 2019 9:15 utc | 88

Posted by: teri | Jul 12 2019 9:15 utc | 90

That article appears to be satire.

Yes, of course. No one argues. And everything would be funny if it were not so sad ... or so bloody...

Posted by: John Doe | Jul 12 2019 9:37 utc | 89

@johnf 6

Jeremy Hunt? Is that THE Jeremy "rhymes with" Hunt?

Posted by: el sid | Jul 12 2019 10:37 utc | 90
Is it possible to set off a nuclear explosion, in someone else's country and pass it off as an earth quake.. to later blame the other? The idea that one could plant nuclear material in the country of another as alluded to here raised that question .. for me.. going back and looking at just before the iran nuclear deal..

Posted by: snake | Jul 12 2019 11:02 utc | 91

el sid 92

Yup. Rhymes with twunt.

Posted by: johnf | Jul 12 2019 11:49 utc | 92

Laguerre 89..
Did you consider the possible role that former MI6 head Sir John Sawers might have played in this UK provocation? In his role on the board of BP since 2015, it seems he might have some influence in arranging for a BP tanker to be used as a decoy, not for the Iranians but for the dumb as media. How else did they coordinate it with well planned RN operations, supported by the US, along with the Hunt, who was the first to jump in and support the ludicrous Pompeo claims about the limpet mine tanker attacks.
Sawers role in spinning the lie about the Skripals in BBC's Panorama special was primary, and chilling - from someone who knows everything we know.
check him out on Wiki:
includes involvement in Iran nuclear negs in 2006, Baghdad, Damascus, Kosovo, Bilderberg, UN. Demonic anti-Russian psychopath

Posted by: David Macilwain | Jul 12 2019 11:56 utc | 93

@ Jen 80

Thanks, I figured linking the original source was simpler/clearer is all. D.Trumps comments maybe suggest an IAEA report of some kind is in the works. Same thought crossed my mind, that evidence could be planted - the sum is maybe that enough doubt is created to press for wider inspections etc (I think mil sites are off limit?) , or build tension. It would take a lot of evidence to persuade UN resolution, but then maybe there are enough on board already who want Iran tensions finished etc. , unlikely to pass sec. council.

Posted by: gzon | Jul 12 2019 12:03 utc | 94

One statement by Russia and China will suffice to
get the Western and wannabe Western warmongers off
the back of Iran:

An attack on Iran is an attack on Russia and China.

End of that - notwithstanding the covert actions
of rabid and war horny Israel.

Everything else is lowest ham theater the USUK way.

I am pretty sure that enough here are aware of the
fuse to WW3 being lit with an attack on Iran. That
might of course not be the case with e.g. the pseudo
Christian torture and devastation faction of Evangelicals,
who are not only the dumbest people on earth, but also
the most unhinged and dangerous.

They WANT to light that fuse so badly. Sickening. And
I am already sick.

Posted by: nottheonly1 | Jul 12 2019 12:37 utc | 95

I won't be shocked if there's another accident somewhere in the refinery complexes around Houston, or if a North Sea oil platform has a major blowout.

Posted by: Peter VE | Jul 12 2019 13:03 utc | 96

A further look at the zionisms as part of the evolution of the near east.

Posted by: gzon | Jul 12 2019 13:27 utc | 97

The Russian Empire

(BTW thanks for the citation of Pepe Escobar quoting his Pentagon source)
"Russian disaffection with the West is due solely to Russia’s unrealistic attempt to restore its empire."

I've always wanted to ask the U.S. supremecists, in their view what IS the Russian empire?

It is not the former Warsaw pact. It is all of the territory that comprised the internationally recognized boundaries of the Soviet Union. They are entitled exactly to the Russian Federation, anything beyond that is an empire. Russian ex-pats stranded in Crimea and immediate surroundings can go to hell. These people totally lack empathy.

Talk about painful to watch


Don't Senators get to the point where these Pentagon briefings are beyond tedious? How often can you hear, 'disinformation, malicious activity, international norms, cyber warfare, and bad hygeine, ...' before you scream out, 'BOILER PLATE INTRO' now move onto specific details.

Posted by: Christian J Chuba | Jul 12 2019 13:28 utc | 98

That the tanker was unladen would have been obvious to anyone who sees vessels on a regular basis from over 10 miles away. John Bolton must've planned this personally. Thanks for the laughs, guys.

Posted by: Ralph Conner | Jul 12 2019 13:30 utc | 99

it's really a piece of new information to me, I learn more from this blog, I want to learn more from this blog, keep on it doing, I eagerly waiting for your updates, Thank you!!!

Posted by: firstfly | Jul 12 2019 13:31 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.