The Gulf of Credibility 718

I really cannot begin to fathom how stupid you would have to be to believe that Iran would attack a Japanese oil tanker at the very moment that the Japanese Prime Minister was sitting down to friendly, US-disapproved talks in Tehran on economic cooperation that can help Iran survive the effects of US economic sanctions.

The Japanese-owned Kokuka Courageous was holed above the water line. That rules out a torpedo attack, which is the explanation being touted by the neo-cons.

The second vessel, the Front Altair, is Norwegian owned and 50% Russian crewed (the others being Filipinos). It is owned by Frontline, a massive tanker leasing company that also has a specific record of being helpful to Iran in continuing to ship oil despite sanctions.

It was Iran that rescued the crews and helped bring the damaged vessels under control.

That Iran would target a Japanese ship and a friendly Russian crewed ship is a ludicrous allegation. They are however very much the targets that the USA allies in the region – the Saudis, their Gulf Cooperation Council colleagues, and Israel – would target for a false flag. It is worth noting that John Bolton was meeting with United Arab Emirates ministers two weeks ago – both ships had just left the UAE.

The USA and their UK stooges have both immediately leapt in to blame Iran. The media is amplifying this with almost none of the scepticism which is required. I cannot think of a single reason why anybody would believe this particular false flag. It is notable that neither Norway nor Japan has joined in with this ridiculous assertion.


Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations


Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

718 thoughts on “The Gulf of Credibility

1 2 3 4 5 6
  • jrkrideau

    I cannot think of a single reason why anybody would believe this particular false flag.

    Well, some people believe the Syrian gas attack stories too. One can never discount the level of ignorance in the population.

    It sounds silly but an old friend in New York used to have to check that his university students could find Europe on a map, and then find France.

    I remember a number of years ago that my sister and her son were rather confused over a coin from Nepal. Five cents I think but is looked almost exactly like a Canadian 10 cent piece (maybe we mint them for Nepal?) Both of them could find India or Tibet on a map but a small country such as Nepal? No idea.

  • Dave

    My question about how the MSM tap is turned on (knowing enables it to be turned off) wasn’t answered beyond there is concentrated ownership and the ‘journalists’ know what to think and say to be on message. My question is who makes up the editorial board and where do they meet, because if the all act on script there must be a script writer, a central HQ.

    • Goose

      As ordinary citizens we clearly made a huge mistake believing our collective media stays ‘free’ left to its own devices, as if that’s its natural state.

      Weird media choir-like, almost cult-like activity in which ‘the metaphorical tap has been turn on’ recently : the intense ‘selling’ of the ‘orrible Jess Phillips as a replacement for Corbyn (this despite her having little to no membership support). The almost saturation coverage/promotion of Rory Stewart – this despite him finishing seventh and being a remainer backed by Dominic Grieve and Ken Clarke. All the btl evidence in the Telegraph (ostensibly a pro-Brexit newspaper) suggesting he’s deeply unpopular with party activists and associations compared to Boris. Literally, they’ve had about six or seven articles promoting him.

      • Goose

        Assuming Craig and others are right and the hidden crimes of our countries are appalling they need people in power who’ll toe the line As an analogy think of the state as a family in which we are the children (citizens), unaware of how our parents(elite) earn the money and our parents just happen to be Bonnie and Clyde.

    • michael norton

      “My question is who makes up the editorial board and where do they meet, because if they all act on script
      there must be a script writer, a central HQ.”

      I have thought his for years, are we to assume it is a Cabal of SIS / GCHQ and the Press Barons?

      • Dave

        Its a substantial undertaking and therefore must have a CEO to coordinate everyone, a Sir Humphrey of the Deep State and therefore there must be meetings and agenda, all top secret I’m sure, but not all secret in practice.

        People often comment, with a sigh, its the usual line from the MSM, a coordinated attack on for example Jeremy Corbyn, but the follow through is missing, Who is involved. The fact questions are often answered by that’s “anti-Semitism” gives a clue, but who are these Semitics who protest, and where do they meet?

      • Johny Conspiranoid

        To some extent they will be repeating the cultural norms of the particular subculture they belong to. That culture will generate policy positions on Assange, Corbyn, Syria etc. as an expression of its class interests. Any specific guidance provided by GCHQ, MI6 or Chatham House representatives will have to be kept secret to preserve necessary illusions i.e. there will be conspiracies.

      • Shatnersrug

        Two interesting things here

        Israeli lobby group the institute for Near East politics give a suggestion on how to get into war with Iran

        And the the news that Guardian’s deputy editor @paul__johnson joined state censorship D-Notice committee

        Excuse for posting again I’m surprised none of you have picked up on the guardian “reestablishing” links with the secret services post Snowden considering we’d all guessed it

      • Jo Dominich

        Rupert Murdoch? After all, he owns most of the MSM in this country and has a 30% stake inITV.

  • Jake Pelmet

    Presumably the publication of Iranian forces planting the devices would convince you, Corbyn et Al?
    Standby, expect that in a day or two. I find it unbelievable that you would believe the US would publish this footage without holding back incriminating evidence of the act? At the moment the USA is endorsing the Iranians case that they came to the assistance of a foreign tanker. The asset used to provide this footage will no doubt have incriminating footage too.

    • nevermind

      At the moment the US is erratic and hegemon8cally challenged. By supporting ruthles regimes that pay terrorists to destabilise the ME they have no trust or credibility left.
      As for sanctioning half of the worlds trade with Iran. It will not work and just causes utter chaos in the WTO we are about to meddle with…well we are trying to meddle.

  • Courtenay Barnett

    If the images shown by the US are to be believed and also the ones that seek to contradict the US allegations against Iran – then:-

    1. If a projectile is fired into the vessels – then one would expect to see an entry that penetrates into the vessel.

    2. If a bomb is planted – then one would expect to see a huge hole blown out where the bombs explode.

    The forensic evidence of one type of attack ( since indeed something exploded into – or – on the vessels) should then serve well to lead to a credible analysis and determination.

    But who wants – credibility – reasoned determination – or – war?

    • Jake Pelmet

      Holing something above the waterline is what was required. Don’t forget these are not US tankers so any action to hit fuelled tanks or below the waterline would prevent the Iranians reopening their own routes.

  • SA

    Caution has to be exercised here. Most commenters are quite sure, as is Craig, that this is a false flag. No one at either side has any proof one way or another and so we have to rely on hunches, past behaviour of the two sides and on some insider commenters. I feel that there may be compelling arguments of both sides as who gains more by these incidents.
    Two commenters whose views seem well informed are b of The Moon of Alabama, and Elijah Magnier, who is well connected with leaderships in Iran, Iraq and Syria. Both appear to suggest that Iran may have a good reason to initiate these actions.
    It is now a fact that Iran is isolated apart from its allies in Iraq, Syria and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Very slowly the West has been isolating these allies. US has declared the IRGC as a terrorist group and UK declared Hezbollah a terrorist organisation, by way of further tightening the noose. As to Russia or China standing behind Iran if attacked, this is highly unlikely and any support will only be verbal. Putin recently made this clear and said that Russia cannot act as the fire brigade in the region. Moreover what we have seen in Syria, Putin is very careful not to intervene when Israel, Turkey or let alone the US bombs Syrian troops, and it is very clear that these powers can intervene in Syria, as long as no Russians are harmed.

    So the picture is indeed very bleak for Iran, with little to lose. The economic strangulation is hurting and causing some unrest, although there is still internal unity of sorts. As EM comments, Iran may be trying to demonstrate how powerless the US is in threatening war because the first casualty would be closure of the straights of Hormuz and rocketing of oil prices with a possibility of a major economic collapse. Even if this does not happen, insurance costs for shipping and companies’ reluctance to operate in potential conflict zones will also have a major effect on oil prices. In other words Iran can call US bluff easily and without necessarily risking a major conflagration. This can be done using rogue proxies. Part of this strategy is already being seen by the Houthis bombing airports and other facilities in KSA and the Gulf. In other words the war against Iran would not be limited to Iran but will affect many US allies as well.
    So yes, there is a possibility that these actions may be carried out by Iranian proxies, either with or without the knowledge of their rulers.

    • Carl


      That is also the approved explanation that has been forwarded by the BBC/ Chatham House/ RUSI since the story broke. What it doesn’t factor in is that Pompeo and Bolton have always known any assault on Iran would involve major disruption to oil supplies. That knowledge has never cooled their obsession with taking Iran’s scalp, which has become more intense than ever in the past two years. The Iranians know the special level of crazy they are dealing with in the Trump gang. They also remember how the oil-hungry US-UK perpetual war machine overthrew Iranian democracy in 1953, installing a dictator who subjected the people to ‘an all-pervasive terror’, accotding to Amnesty International. With madmen like Pompeo and Bolton panting at the door, it makes little obvious sense for Iran to give them an excuse to replay history.

      • SA

        The closure of the gulf would have catastrophic effects on world economy and would not just have consequences on Iran. So it is calling off their bluff in a way. In the past it would have been possible to eliminate Iran’s defences to such a degree as to have control over shipping in the Gulf, but this is no longer the case with Iran’s much more modern weaponry.

    • Tony

      It’s an interesting theory by B. I support his site financially, as I do Craig’s, and as I do Kit’s Off Guardian. But there is no real evidence to support B’s opinion, whereas there is plenty of evidence to support the false flag scenario. Not least of which is the crews and captains of the targeted ships complete contradiction of the US version of events.

    • JImmeh

      Craig didn’t mention false flags.

      I think there is some confusion here about what that expression means: for clarity, it means an attack in which the attacking force pretends to be some other force. In this case, the attack was against neutral commercial shipping, and occurred near to the shore of a considerable number of countries that are involved in conflict; as well as to western naval forces that also are interested in those conflicts. The USA has accused Iran of responsibility; but no way is that the same as concluding that the USA launched a false-flag attack on these neutral tankers.

      Perhaps this is just a matter of linguistic drift, and ‘false flag’ now refers to an attack that A accuses B of launching, but B denies. Lazy journalists love to use hip phrases, even if they don’t know what they mean.

      • Tony

        If A carries out a covert attack on it’s own people or a neutral target and then blames B for it, it’s a false flag.

        • JImmeh

          There is no evidence, in this case, that A carried out the attack. They simply accused B of the attack, and B denied it. Absent evidence that the USA was responsible for the attack, it can’t be called a ‘false flag’. In fact, nobody knows who did carry it out, except the perpetrators themselves.

          Personally, I suspect the Israel/Saudi/UAE axis. Idon’t thiink it was done by the USA; so no false flag.

  • Redshift

    I haven’t read through all the comments so don’t know if anyone has pointed out the obvious problem with the video. A limpet mine is attached in order to breach the hull and allow water in to sink the ship. I can’t see any reason then why they would have attached it so high up the hull – in the video you can see someone at full upwards stretch to remove it. At such a height the hole diamater would not be large enough to reach down to the waterline. Also mines are attached below the waterline because water is one thousand times more dense than air so that more of the explosive energy is contained near the mine and driven into the hull if attached underwater. However if I were making a false flag video it would not be very dramatic if the package were below the waterline; all you would see is a small boat sitting alongside the tanker and maybe at some point a diver would get back onto the boat as it wouldn’t be reachable from the boat. So my false flag video would instead feature someone reaching theatrically upwards and handling a package even if the strategy makes no sense. Sadly given the main media’s lack of challenge to state narratives and most people’s lethargy about analytic thinking whoever made this video knows it doesn’t have to stand up to any real scrutiny.

    Another thought is that tankers have onboard short range radar so they can see what’s around them. These radar systems are perfectly capable of highlighting boats of the size seen in the video. Hence presumably the tanker crew would have been sending out messages (to the boat and to shore based agencies) at the time the boat approached and they would also have mentioned it since being rescued. Hence I suspect if they did film it with the same tanker then it was done before it set sale from UAE.

  • AndrewB

    Frankly speaking, the fact that even one person could be taken in by the official narrative is . . . depressing. And, when the UK government spokesperson robotically parrots the ludicrous US propaganda, it is difficult not to despair. Really – who believes this nonsense? It appears that few people ask, ‘Who benefits?’, surely a fundamental question when investigating any crime. In this case, who benefits is certainly NOT Iran. Could it be the US who recently sent a carrier task force to the Persian Gulf (does the name suggest this waterway once belonged to Persia / Iran?) now seek validation for their hostile action?

    Much like the nonsense about Assad (needlessly) using chemical weapons when the consequences of so doing were abundantly clear. Or Putin ordering the assassination of Skripal using a nerve agent originally created within the (defunct) Soviet Union. Doh! Does anyone buy that Putin is stupid? These matters are easily dealt with by ‘hit and run’ incidents – not weapons grade neurotoxins smuggled in via a ‘perfume sprayer’!

    Let’s collectively give the world a break and tell the perpetrators and conveyors of these false flag narratives to, “Go to Hell! We’re not buying your BS.”

  • .Peter

    Another option that sounds plausible enough and might hint to a new strategy by Iran:

    “To say that the attacks were provocations by the U.S. or its Middle East allies is made easier by their evident ruthlessness. Any accusations by the Trump administration of Iranian culpability will be easily dismissed because everyone knows that Trump and his crew are notorious liars.

    This cat and mouse game will now continue and steadily gain pace. More tankers will get damaged or even sunk. Saudi refineries will start to explode. UAE harbors will experience difficulties. Iran will plausibly deny that it is involved in any of this. The U.S. will continue to blame Iran but will have no evidence to prove it.

    Insurance for Middle East cargo will become very expensive. Consumer prices for oil products will increase and increase again. The collateral damage will be immense.”

  • Nigel Hartnup

    Certainly, Trump is stupid. It is obviously USA trying to stir up trouble in the region do it can sell weapons and ammunition. Troublemakers!

    • JImmeh

      I do not think Trump is “stupid”. He’s very rich; rich people attract con-men and scammers like shit attracts flies, and yet he’s managed to stay rich. And he seems to know what matters to his supporters, in terms of PR, and which supporters are important. I think he is a skillful operator. Part of his skill is in convincing his adversaries to underrate him.

      He does for sure appear to be a complete moron. Confusing the Prince Of Wales with something to do with cetaceans, when he’s hosting the party you’ve been waiting for since forever, looks incredibly moronic. Telling the UK that the NHS is on the table for trade negotiations also looks amazingly stupid and arrogant (of course, the NHS is only “on the table” if we put it there!). His attacks on Sadiq Khan (Mayor of the city that was hosting his visit a week ago), also look like unnecessary creation of enemies. He pushed the Queen through a doorway by placing his hand in the small of her back; it’s certain that he has protocol advisers who told him that one does not ever lay hands on a monarch.

      But I think all this rudeness and uncouthness is put on; it is simply designed to appeal to the ill-educated and uncouth US citizens that he wants voting for him. The people of the UK are not his constituency; so they’re fired. Same goes for the over-educated citizens of the East and West Coast; too clever by half. They’re fired too. He’s appealing instead to racists and religious fanatics in the Deep South and Texas, and to unemployed car-makers and steelworkers in the rust belt.

      • Jo Dominich

        JLmennh – I don’t agree it is put on at all. The orange one is ignorant, uneducated, a megalomaniac and his little or no regard for protocol, diplomacy, human life, politics or common human decency. He believes as POTUS he can do what he likes and he does. It’s not a show, it’s who he is and the world is the worse for it. He has been bankrupted at least four times, so, he might be rich but not through good business ability. Here’s a thing, in the first three months of his becoming POTUS his expenses were more than three times Obama had claimed in three years! I think that ought to tell you something.

        • JImmeh

          In the USA, being bankrupted a few times is not a sign of failure, it is a sign of prospective success,

  • Tony M

    The IRG claims are more than vaguely reminiscent of those heard of Saddam’s ‘elite’ Republican Guard and their giant mincing machine into which bodies were thrown; even saying the name makes me quake. As for the US Super-Puppet being seen as dangerous and unpredictable, that is a trait modelled on the tail that wags the US dog, willing dupe of its partner and agent-provocateur in this and most crimes: Stolen-Land. Who knows how and who is running England’s truncated and sickly little Super-Poodle crime empire: Britain. The tightly-controlled Britnat media hum along as if everything were perfectly normal as the political mafias engage in bloodletting and prostrating themselves before the puppet-masters over who is to be big fish in this lifeless staganant pond. Nothing is ever going to change till we ourselves start putting these shameless thieves and murderers behind bars and before public justice, the onus is on us to hold to account Major, Blair, Brown, Cameron, May, for their egregious crimes, and see that that list of Infamous Criminal Prime-Ministers and Cabinets, does not grow -that the next budding scumbag ‘leader’ sees that his or her neck is on the line if they dare trangress human decency, that the deserved fates of their reviled predecessors will be their ignominious end too.

    • Goose

      Wow , yes I’d forgotten about that : The Nayirah testimony

      The Nayirah testimony was a false testimony given before the Congressional Human Rights Caucus on October 10, 1990 by a 15-year-old girl who provided only her first name, Nayirah . She was presented as just some ordinary Kuwaiti, but was in fact the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the U.S.

      • Tony M

        No, I’m sure preposterous stories of the mincing machine into which Saddam’s ememies were supposedly thrown alive, were quite distinct claims from the babies thrown from incubators ones. That and the ‘legendary’ Iraqi Republican Guard amongst the nonsense that gave these monsters and murderers in Washington, London or Tel Aviv the scantest bogus moral justification for attacking one broken, starving, defenceless nation after another. They were voiced by one or more of the institutionalised members of the Commons or Lords, in the chambers or some committee or other, by someone instantly forgettable but no doubt for their brazen hustling for war probably remain powerful cogs in the perpetual war machine squat athwart our political affairs.

      • Andyoldlabour


        Nayirah al-Sabah, daughter of Saud al-Sabah, Kuwaiti ambassador to the US, was working for a public relations campaign organised by US firm Hill and Knowlton for the Kuwaiti government.
        Amnesty International after initially going along with the macabre fantasy, then backtracked, with CEO John Healey accusing the Bush administration of “opportunistic manipulation of the international human rights movement”.
        Everyone in the US governement, irrespective of the party they belong to, lies all the time in order to propmote US hegemony across the globe.

    • Wikikettle

      Tony M. Indeed. ‘We the People’ elect these scum bags. Its we that look on. Another country and its people about to be destroyed. Then our people will complain about ‘migrants flooding our little island paradise……

      • Tom Welsh

        “‘We the People’ elect these scum bags. Its we that look on”.

        Not quite. The idea that “the people” elect their leaders is charmingly seductive, but in fact it’s quite untrue.

        On a given day – once every few years – the voters are allowed to choose between a set of candidates who are chosen by others. It should be obvious that this mechanism allows the voters’ power to be reduced to almost nothing.

        Aristotle, along with other ancient Greeks, took it for granted that elections were a sign, not of democracy, but of oligarchy or plutocracy. To them, nothing could be more glaringly obvious than that rich people can buy the election results they want – whether by paying for huge campaigns of propaganda, or by gaining control of selection committees, or by simple downright bribery.

        The Greeks believed that the only way to implement democracy was through choosing officials by lot – an idea that has been dead and buried – to the intense satisfaction of political elites – for 2,000 years and more. (Although Philip K Dick revived it in SF novel “World of Chance”).

        • Andyoldlabour

          Tom Welsh

          You are entirely correct Tom, if there is a candidate/leader of a main party who are deemed “wrong”, then they will be “got rid of” by the corrupt forces in the background.

  • goose

    US seeks to ‘build international consensus’ blaming Iran for tanker attacks.

    Maybe if the white helmets had turned in three rowing boats to film the crew being rescued they’d be a tad less suspicious?

  • Lee Melnychuk

    Appears the US’s 3 Stooges (DJT, Pomp & Bolt) are still at it. Read their ‘official’ statements on the Gulf & see (easily) how one lie morphs into their own confusion. It gets worse when you actually listen to their respective sound bites. Can’t even get their own ‘official” stories straight. I find it hard to believe that US Taxpayers (some gleefully) are paying for this ‘crap’ (i.e. Child-In-Chief & his sycophantic diaper brigade running amok). Somebody lock up the ‘button’.

    • Goose

      He’s desperate to make the final two in the Tory leadership ballot. As are Javid and Gove.

      I’d expect the final two to be Gove & Johnson. More so if Gove has scored some of that Bolivian marching powder he’s so fond of, before the TV debate on Tuesday.

    • Tony

      The guy’s one of the biggest twits in public life. At least Boris is streetwise, which seems to blind many to his personality disorders, such as his pathological lying.

    • michael norton

      if Hunt relatively quickly, proved wrong, his mindless jumping to conclusion that “It was the Iranians wot did it”
      he could not possibly become Prime minister of the United Kingdom,
      also I don’t see how he could remain as F.M.

  • Edward

    What is the stupidest part of this latest Screeching at Iran? What I can’t fathom is how the video is supposed to be evidence that Iran perpetrated these attacks; the video shows an Iranian ship REMOVING a mine from a ship, several hours after the attack. I ask you, what is the opposite of PLACING a mine on a ship? Is there something I am missing?

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Edward June 15, 2019 at 19:39
      Perhaps they planned to run the video backwards for presentations, but forgot.

    • Goose

      Iran does need to issue a statement explaining that video, even if it’s only a denial that it’s their forces. If innocent, honesty is the best policy, even if foes like the US and others rubbish any explanation.

      It could be the mines weren’t placed there by Iranian forces, but instead by those intending to frame Iran. They were then spotted, identified and ultimately removed when the Iranians turned up and realised what was going on.

      • Goose

        All supposition of course: but from the perspective of a country trying to frame another, a drone strike; the damage of which is indistinguishable from a mine blast…. Iranians then arrive on the scene and notice the mines, handle the mines – while filmed.. gotcha!

        Those who dismiss such conspiracies forget the recent case of Russian journalist Arkady Babchenko, lying in a pool of his own blood, a critic of the Kremlin felled by ruthless Putin assassins as our MSM reported. Only for him to emerge Lazarus like, after someone screwed up, or the Russians had infiltrated Ukraine’s spy agencies?

        • JImmeh

          “a drone strike; the damage of which is indistinguishable from a mine blast…”

          Mine blasts happen below the water-line. Drones that fly underwater are usually called torpedoes. The particular drones are said to have been observed flying through the air.

  • Anthony

    Interesting again to see so many of the self described “moderates” who were shrieking about Trump being a threat to humanity now urging him to take it to Iran (as previously with Syria and Venezuela.) The past two years have exposed these people like never before. The Guardian is now an even more extreme cheerleader for endless war than the NYT which at least headlined the shipowners’ revelation that the tanker was hit by a flying object.

    • Jack

      Hear hear^
      This is what I have seen too early on, war is appealing to the same anti-Trump media, when Trump threats – the same crowd come to support him and spread his desinformation uncritically! Demented people.

    • Goose

      The guardian have used it to have a go at Corbyn. Their report is titled: Corbyn – No credible evidence of Iran role in tanker attacks.

      And above this heading there’s a still from the grainy video the US released. The clear implication being Corbyn is simply wrong.

      However, the plausible scenario I laid out above means the video might not be a slam dunk at all.

  • Jack

    If there is ever war with Iran, not only US but UK will be the front runners, no doubt after this posture:
    Tehran Summons British Ambassador Over UK’s Stance on Incident in Oman Gulf – Report

    They must laugh in Israel on how easy it is to push western states to go to war for israeli interests.

    • Hatuey

      Israeli interests? It’s hard to see how it is in Israel’s interests to have a highly destructive war on its doorstep, or how Israel directly benefits from the regions oil money being pumped into US and European banks.

      To argue that is in Israel’s interest is as mistaken as saying it’s in Britain or America’s interest. We are really talking about sociopaths and factions within countries who have vested personal interests in war and plunder. The rest of us are dragged along for the ride.

      The biggest problem, as ever, is Mr Ordinary man who says nothing and cares for nothing but his own material well-being, football, his “image”, beer, and the size of his TV.

      The west has fallen and we have all fallen with it. We are collectively the scum of the earth. If you’re going to generalise, say that.

      • Goose

        Israel wants to destroy the Iranian regime once and for all. Despite have nuclear weapons itself, Israel sees Iran as a potential future existential threat. They’ve wanted to bomb Iran a few times and been talked down. They’re terrified of Iran having the leverage nuclear weapons would bring them to press their regional claims. US hawks also fear this as do KSA and other Gulf monarchies. Defensive systems are improving all the time, and it may become impossible to attack under a future more dovish US administration.

        Although… it’s probably not going to go as they imagine. I can’t see what they possibly hope to achieve besides uniting Iran and infuriating world opinion. Especially if they bomb essential public infrastructure like wastewater facilities and powerstations.

        UK /US leaders are fighting populist type leaders and leftists like Corbyn, AOC and Sanders, their supporters WILL press for arrests and if necessary trials for decision makers if they come to power.

        • Hatuey

          It’s hard to see how pulling out of the deal that was in place with Iran helps Israeli security. The deal would have stopped Iran going down the path towards developing nuclear weapons and now Iran is back on that path.

          The only people that benefit from this are those with dual passports in Israel who have shares in oil companies, such as Genie Oil, and arms manufacturers. History will not be kind to these people and will judge them some day as we judge the Nazis and others who committed unspeakable atrocities. And history will not need to watch its mouth or worry about its phone being tapped.

          But this isn’t Israel any more than it’s the US, Britain, or Saudi Arabia. The people responsible for the carnage are a very small minority in those countries. It’s time to start calling them out personally for what they are — butchering, robbers, war criminals — and stop giving them the cloak of respectability that pretends they represent whole nations.

          • Tony

            It was a Bibi Netenyahu presentation of a fake dossier on an Iran nukes programme that convinced Trump to pull out of the deal with Iran. John Bolton is Sheldon Adelson’s bitch. Sheldon Adelson sponsors Bibi Netenyahu. It’s not difficult to join the dots. Arguing that Israel is against taking down Iran is highly disingenuous.

          • Hatuey

            Tony, you can’t hold the whole of Israel responsible. You can’t hold the whole ofnthe US or the UK responsible. These countries have been hacked by sociopaths. Democracy left the building long ago.

            It angers me that so many sit back and say nothing and/or swallow the state propaganda in these countries when it would be quite easy to take back control and get rid of the sociopaths, but the grip they have on the media and information is such that you can’t really blame the victims.

            You look back at the darkest chapters of history and must assume it was even easier for them back then to fool people into supporting their wars. More people are aware of what they get up to today, and that’s probably progress, but those who profit in the disaster capitalist system we call “the West” seem to be more unscrupulous and desperate today than they ever were.

          • Tony

            Hatuey, I agree with almost everything in your above post, apart from your pedantry. It’s patently obvious that when we refer to behaviour by countries that we’re not referring to their populations, we’re referring the the cabals that hold most of the power in said countries. Long-windedness does not aid discussion.

        • Jack

          israel have elections and repeatedly vote in these people that engage in genocide, ethnic cleansing. Why shouldnt we blame them as any other nation commiting to the same warloving attitude?

      • Jack


        It is israel that push for war and have for aslong as they – Israel – pushed for the iraqi war of 03. Have you really missed this?
        Have you missed that israel have attacked syria past years, lebanon? Do not want war you say?
        Generalize? Sure the regime in israel wants war and that is what I mean, not to say that alot of israelis are on board condering their REPEATED voting in power – warlovers as Netanyahu. Its very easy when you think about it. Do not make fuss about it.

  • Dr TvMcMaster

    I’d like to subscribe, but as I am in contention with PayPal I would therefore prefer an alternative payment method.

  • Yaw Opoku

    From day one, i suspected USA and Israel plot to create an excuse to recklessly attack Iran. That has been a long time desire of Israel.What they forget is the possible effect of the moribund rule of the kings and emirati.
    America under racist Trump and his blood thirsty gang are putting the whole world into risk of a world war

  • Peter

    “The Gulf of Credibility”


    With Trump, Pompeo and Bolton leading on this, what could possibly go wrong?

    Mel Brooks should dust off his film-making skills.

  • Harry Law

    Trump, Bolton, Pompeo, Pence, and Senator Lindsey Graham are certifiable, Pompeo and Pence are “end timers” waiting for the rapture, in this article Graham uses the Granada invasion [population 90,000] as a means to intimidate other nations opposing the US, starting with Venezuela.
    “Republican senator Lindsey Graham has suggested that the United States should take military action against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro so countries opposing the US are intimidated and surrender to Washington’s demands.
    The warmonger from South Carolina told Fox News that the US needed to resolve its issues with other countries using military actions.
    The Chair of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary suggested using US military force to resolve America’s conflicts with countries opposed to US foreign policy.
    “Do what Reagan did in Grenada. Put military force on the table … start with your own backyard,” he suggested”.

    • Goose

      Like the UK, which uses a similar electoral system based on a simple plurality (most votes), winner-take-all, it’s really hard to get rid of the embedded political establishment and change directiion. I’m struck by how many octogenarians – or soon to be octogenarians – there are dominating American politics and many vying for the Presidency. John McCain was 82 and still heavily influencing US Middle East foreign policy right up to his death, despite having brain cancer.

      Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi; Dianne Feinstein (85), Joe Biden it appears the oldies don’t know how bow out gracefully.

  • Peter

    From the BBC:

    “The foreign secretary has branded Jeremy Corbyn “pathetic”, after he questioned whether the UK had “credible evidence” Iran was behind attacks on two oil tankers in the Gulf of Oman.”

    If the UK government has “credible evidence” (and who believes that?) that Iran carried out the attack then why has it not shown it to the leader of Her Majesty’s official opposition?

    And then again, why hasn’t Jeremy asked to see it?


    • Jo Dominich

      Peter, it is highly possible that Jeremy has asked to see it but has probably been denied it.

      • Peter

        Thanks. But if he has, and they’ve denied it to him, then he should make that public and call their hand.

  • Jack Worthington

    When I heard about these tankers being attacked in such a strategic area as the Strait of Hormuz, I was suspicious. The red flags and the fake news and lying political stuff started knocking. The thing didn’t pass the smell test. My suspicions were on high alert. Maybe I’ll never know the truth but until I do, I’m not on board with anyone, especially the politicians and their toadies the MSM, blaming the Muslims in Iran for these attacks on petro-tankers, yet, even though they are very wicked people. Islam is not a peaceful belief system; it is a “false religion.” Political government is the bane of humanity; politics is violence and thus, voting is an act of violence. The Bible teaches us that the troika of evil, that wicked consort of politics, commerce and “false religion,” will be destroyed in the end and we would be wise to take heed and adjust our lives accordingly. We would be wise to abandon political government and go for organizational government based on voluntary contracts, thereby removing the tyrannical power of politicians, commie/socialists. I recommend Ted R. Weiland’s messages. Pick the audio up at the 33:22 mark and listen to Weiland explain the problem of voting and political government. This Biblical information was never mentioned in the government schools and one private school that I attended, but of course all these schools had government contracts/grants/kids on government scholarships so they all had conflicts of interest, i.e. they were all prejudiced in favor of political government. Political government has trapped us all with the welfare state’s and “Statist’s” loot A to satisfy B schemes. Political government has been the bane of humanity.

    Bible Law vs. The United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective
    Law & Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant
    Where have all the freedoms (flowers) gone, long time passing?
    Where have all the freedoms (flowers) gone, long time ago?
    Where have all the freedoms (flowers) gone?
    Voters trashed (Young girls have picked) them everyone.
    Oh, when will they ever learn?
    Oh, when will they ever learn?
    The time has come,’ the Walrus said,
    To talk of many things:
    Of shoes — and ships — and sealing-wax —
    Of cabbages — and kings —
    And why the sea is boiling hot —
    And whether pigs have wings.’

    And I am two and twenty and Oh ‘tis true, ‘tis true.

    The Gods of the Copybook Headings

    As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man —
    There are only four things certain since Social Progress began —
    That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
    And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wobbling back to the Fire —
    And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
    When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins
    As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn
    The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!

  • Deb O'Nair

    The main reason the US is planning a military strike is to stop Iran selling oil in non-dollar trading, with the added benefit of hitting China who are buying the oil non-dollar. Last year Venezuela started selling oil in Euros and they are now targeted for ‘regime change’. This is a pattern that is repeated when any oil producing nation sells oil outside the petrodollar mechanism, including with Iraq and Libya.

    People should not be to concerned if the US launches a military attack as the Iranians are very capable and fanatical, plus any US action will inevitably bring the Chinese military into the region, just as Syria brought the Russians in, and the net effect will be the continued degrading of US military might in the region. If one didn’t know better one could be forgiven for thinking that the US administration is deliberately degrading its military ‘influence’ in the region.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Deb O’Nair June 16, 2019 at 00:22
      Let’s hope you’re right. I certainly do.

      • Hatuey

        If the US attacks Iran we could all go up in a flash. Hoping that happens is insanity. Suggesting we “should not be concerned” is proof of that insanity. You’re crackers.

    • Doodlebug

      Good on you for pointing out the fundamental financial issue. Rob Newman did so very effectively in his ‘History of Oil’ over a decade ago. Kicking the petrodollar into touch would bankrupt the USA.

    • Adam Ash

      While the genesis of the US Navy was the fight against Barbary Coast pirates, I’m sure the USA would happily leave the confinement of Islam as a problem for China and Russia!

  • mark golding

    Why (and how) was an encrypted signal from an Israeli nuclear armed submarine in the Gulf of Oman received by a British Type 23 frigate? If this is true I personally will be all ears.

    • Doodlebug

      Do please elaborate. I’ve missed this gem. Last night’s TV news was devoid of any update of the situation, except for Jeremy Hunt’s calling Corbyn’s cautionary remarks into question, because ‘he said similar things about the Novichok attack on the Skripals’. The mere presence of an Israeli submarine in the those waters might represent a ‘starter for ten’.

  • Hatuey

    I didn’t bother reading all of the Moon of Alabama article; I got about half way and realised it was utter junk.

    The situation Iran finds itself in is very straightforward. No adaptation of strategy or tactics towards the US and its running dogs is likely because Iran’s strategy is, as it always has been, based on survival. It is surrounded by maniacs who are dying for an excuse to annihilate Iran.

    The idea that Iran is about to take the gloves off and confront Saudi Arabia, Israel, the US, Britain, and God knows who else, is so far-fetched that it has the making of a Mission Card from the board-game Risk.

    I’m again surprised and disappointed that seemingly intelligent people fall for this sort of propaganda. Iran has just watched the civilised world destroy about 5 countries in the region and is under no illusions when it comes to the balance of forces in the region. They know they’d be vaporised if they so much as farted in the wrong direction.

    • Paul Barbara

      @ Hatuey June 16, 2019 at 00:47
      They also know that they will annihilate a lot of ‘Enemies of God’, and so do the ‘Enemies of God’.
      Not all of the likely targets for annihilation believe in God, so they may just, possibly, say, along with Charlie Drake, ‘What am I doing here?’
      In other words, they may, just may, wake up to reality, and tell their officers to kiss their ass.

      • Paul Barbara

        @ Paul Barbara June 16, 2019 at 00:57
        Like they did in Vietnam, with the ‘Fragging’ de-officering.

      • Hatuey

        If you are suggesting that Iran is going to evolve into some sort of suicide bomber and go out in a blaze of glory, you have never been so wrong. Iran is the only state in the region that has consistently acted rationally over the last 40 years. Having a bunch of guns pointed at your head on hair triggers tends to make you act carefully and rationally.

        • Goose

          They could have easily acquired nuclear weapons if they’d ever really desired them too. Back when Pakistan and India were developing their nuclear capability. From a purely strategic perspective, it looks like a big error on Iran’s part that they didn’t go all out to acquire them. It’d be a totally different situation in terms of the US’s ability to ratchet up tensions and pose a realistic threat. North Korea will probably never face direct military assault for that very reason. The brutal truth is, a well-stocked nuclear armed Iran wouldn’t be facing the current threats.

          Trump and Bolton could end up incentivizing countries to go down the route of nuclear proliferation, along a wider arms race as non-nuclear countries race to avoid being next on the hit list.

          • Hatuey

            Yes, correct, and if you look at the non proliferation treaty, Iran and others are fully entitled to expect help in developing nuclear power in return for giving up the quest for nuclear weapons. That, like the UN charter and the Declaration on Human Rights, has been rendered a worthless piece of paper in the last 20 years.

            The people responsible for all this could be squeezed into a medium sized room. It’s the same names that come up time and time again. Blair will be out any day now telling us to destroy Iran, for example.

            They’ve hijacked whole countries. It’s been like watching a disease spread through western democracies.

          • JImmeh

            I believe Bolton and his ilk don’t see anything special about nuclear weapons; they see them as simply better versions of conventional weapons. They don’t believe in any ‘nuclear threshold’ (except when it is applied to their enemies). For many decades, the USA has planned and deployed for the use of tactical nukes to stop a USSR army in its tracks in Europe. The cruises at Greenham Common, and the deployment of Pershing II bunker-busters in Germany are clear examples.Even Carter was on-board with such policies; he approved the development of enhanced-radiation bombs – low blast, so minimal destruction of buildings, power-stations etc., with high radiation, so maximum human deaths.

    • Goose

      The Telegraph has an article up titled : Why Iran would sabotage itself by attacking tankers in the Gulf of Oman.

      It’s behind the paywall, but you can guess the content.

      It’s infuriating that we in the west are powerless to stop our marauding war criminal elites as they set their sights on destroying another perfectly functional country that hasn’t attacked us. An estimated 460,000 plus died in the invasion of Iraq 2003 , 60% of those directly attributed to violence, in 1995 the NYT was reporting as many as 576,000 Iraqi children had died since the end of the first Gulf war because of economic sanctions.

      When will this madness stop? These people pushing for war care not a jot for the sanctity of life and they think they’re untouchable.

      • Tom Welsh

        “It’s behind the paywall…”

        Best place for it. And there it can stay, as far as I am concerned.

    • SA

      If you look at the situation carefully it bears another interpretation. It is not that Iran is “taking gloves off” but just a reminder of the economic shock that would follow a conflict and even preceding one.

  • Jo1

    “I really cannot begin to fathom how stupid you would have to be to…..”

    Given the state we’re in generally right now in the UK, I think it’s safe to say stupidity is definitely in the driving seat.

    • Tom Welsh


      “Perhaps it is time to recognize the stupid as an ethnic group. They are the country’s [USA] largest voting bloc. They are hugely influential, having agendas, lobbies, and demands. They work tirelessly to put the cognitively undetectable into positions of power. Usually they succeed. They are the enemies of reason, the sciences, mathematics, schooling, high culture, thought, and recognizable grammar”.

    • Goose

      Starting a war is always the easy part.

      Goals, objectives … tackling a country like Iran with unclear aims is total madness. Is there even public support?

      • David

        Frank Gardener , BBC’s security correspondent and victim of previous Saudi hospitality , just gave a realistic assessment of the tanker video on the BBC World Service.

        He was exploring the UKUSA automatic UK gov assumptions that everything the yanks say is correct, said it could be very dangerous for UK to proceed, and that a putative inquiry in two years time might find there was no basis in the US & Saudi allegations against Iran. Frank went into detail , highlighting how the Japanese crew saw incoming flying ordinance and that the “irg mine” story does not add up! (tho’ Iran has very historically used mines, but not in this way)

        Frank, you did accurate journalism! thanks,

        (W.S. was also interviewing a lot of colorful HK revolutionaries, and even mentioned that the colorful venezuelan revolutionary Guaidó’s helpers have nicked a lot of someone’s color revolution dollars, before they were able to be used as planned)

        I must listen more if they smuggle three accuracies through in one program…

      • Andrew Ingram

        Oil, oil and more oil. Control of oil. Venezuela, Iraq, Syria.
        There are a trillion barrels known to be in the ground and that represents a shit load of money even at half today’s prices. Plenty of incentive to manufacture consent if there is no public support for war at the moment. Watch Rubicon if you can find it.

      • Andrew Ingram

        One motive/goal would be to drive up the price of oil which has taken a bit of a tumble in the last three weeks – watch Rubicon.

  • John Calvert

    I’ve just had a look at the BBC’s rebroadcast of the black and white footage of alleged Iranian soldiers allegedly tampering with the Norwegian tanker.
    The scale looks wrong.
    Either that tanker is remarkably small, or the Iranian Republican Guard employ Goliaths.

  • Greg Burton

    Similarly, I really cannot begin to fathom how stupid Trump, British and Israeli intelligence think we are that we would believe this obvious false flag; and further how anybody could still believe Trump’s protestation about the ‘Mueller witch-hunt’, the ‘Russia collusion & hacking’ concoction when his own administration has the men who could exonerate Trump arrested, detained and drugged in Belmarsh (Julian Assange), and another to be extradited (Kim Dotcom) back to the US to face charges of ‘copyright infringement’. It is becoming harder and harder for me to believe that Trump was not part of this scam from the beginning. Frankly, Craig I am surprised you’re still upright and walking around a free man.

1 2 3 4 5 6

Comments are closed.