Connect with us
// (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});


CBS’s & NPR’s Rabidly False ‘News’ About the Khashoggi Case

What’s not normal in the Khashoggi case is that it was being done to a Saudi who has so many admirers and friends at high places in The West.

Eric Zuesse



Authored by Eric Zuesse:


It’s a lie to say, as CBS ‘News’ did on October 24th, that Saudi Crown Prince Salman couldn’t have done what Turkey says he did in the Khashoggi case — couldn’t do it,  because it’s not in the Saud family’s “DNA” to do such things. To the exact contrary: it is the norm for the Saud family, and has been for decades if not longer. What’s not normal in the Khashoggi case is that it was being done to a Saudi who has so many admirers and friends at high places in The West. That’s what makes the Khashoggi case different from all the others. And the evidence for this — and for the pervasive propagandistic fakery in U.S. mainstream ‘news’ reporting about foreign affairs (such as CBS did there) — will be presented here. This routine and unchallenged lying by the ‘news’-media is a super-scandal that the U.S. and UK press don’t report, but instead they all hide that they had lied and routinely do lie. So, since it’s totally unaddressed, it continues, on and on, for at least decades. Probably none of the major American or British ‘news’-media will publish this American samizdat, exposing the press, but this is being submitted to them all, in the hope that maybe at last, some or at least one of them will finally relent, and break open this mega-scandal — about the press itself. It needs to be made public

The constant lying, at any rate, must stop, regardless how it’s done. Though the problem itself, of repeatedly deceiving-the-public-into-wars, is not being reported, some U.S. and UK ‘news’-media are starting to come clean on aspects of the resulting disaster. The New York Times had participated like all the others in helping George W. Bush lie America into invading and destroying Iraq, but that newspaper, fifteen years later, bannered in its Sunday magazine on August 12th, “War Without End”, and sub-headed “The Pentagon’s failed campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan left a generation of soldiers with little to fight for but one another.” C.J. Chivers wrote, with rare honesty:

The governments of Afghanistan and Iraq, each of which the United States spent hundreds of billions of dollars to build and support, are fragile, brutal and uncertain. The nations they struggle to rule harbor large contingents of irregular fighters and terrorists who have been hardened and made savvy, trained by the experience of fighting the American military machine. Much of the infrastructure the United States built with its citizens’ treasure and its troops’ labor [and bodies!] lies abandoned. Briefly [these infrastructures were] schools or outposts, many [now] are husks, looted and desolate monuments to forgotten plans. Hundreds of thousands of weapons provided to would-be allies have vanished; an innumerable quantity are on markets or in the hands of Washington’s enemies. Billions of dollars spent creating security partners also deputized pedophiles, torturers and thieves. National police or army units that the Pentagon proclaimed essential to their countries’ futures have disbanded. The Islamic State has sponsored or encouraged terrorist attacks across much of the world — exactly the species of crime the global “war on terror” was supposed to prevent.

Even articles like that, however, fail to note that these invasions are enormously profitable for insider-connected American corporations, such as Blackwater and Halliburton and Raytheon. No lessons have been learned from these disasters, because the people in power in 2002, are still being honored, instead of despised today; they even are talking heads on news shows, and speech-makers at the think tanks. It’s all propaganda for the same group of billionaires’ products and services as before — no one is boycotting any of their companies. The problem is just the same now as it was in 2002. Nothing, at all, has yet been learned from these catastrophes. After George W. Bush’s unchallenged lying which fooled Americans into invading Iraq in 2003 and destroying that country, we had Barack Obama’s unchallenged lying which fooled Americans in 2011 into invading Libya and then Syria, and destroying those countries. And because those lies are still believed, both George W. Bush and Barack Obama are respected even now in the United States. There is no accountability, none. Unless things change, America is doomed, and will destroy the entire world, without stop.

Rabid lying results when a propagandistic purpose is being served by a false ‘news’ report and it encourages America’s evil such as America’s providing logistics and weapons for the Saudis to slaughter Yemen’s Houthis now by the millions. Such lying is what was done by not only CBS News and NPR during the lead-up to the criminal 2003 invasion of Iraq, but which propaganda-for-invasion all of America’s and UK’s mainstream news-media were doing (and they continue to do, regarding today’s news-events — they misrepresent, for a propagandistic purpose). Just as in the past, the purpose is for international invasions, such as the U.S. and UK billionaires want, because it’s good for the industrial part of the military-industrial complex, and because the same billionaires who control the ‘news’-media own those industries. The most blatant example of that lying-for-the-billionaires was displayed in 2002 here. George W. Bush knew that he was lying about the evidence, but he did it anyway, because he was determined to conquer Iraq. Anyone who trusts mainstream ‘news’ media in U.S. and UK after that is just a willing fool — a sucker — for the billionaires’ propaganda-machine, and consequently is a partner with their deceiving ‘news’-media, and their firms, such as Lockheed Martin, in the entire system of profit from the war-crimes that these billionaire owners support, and constantly engender, just like they did before. Essentially, nothing has changed, since 2002.

On October 23rd, CBS News bannered “Khashoggi case: Former top U.S. intel official says past Saudi activity suggests attempted rendition, not assassination” and reported that “intelligence veteran Norman Roule said an attempted rendition or interrogation sanctioned by the Kingdom’s leadership – rather than a state-directed assassination – appears for now to fit better with a known pattern of previous Saudi operations.” This lying by ‘experts’ is basically no different than what had happened with the rigged ‘news’-reporting in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq. Back then it was fake and heavily biased (if not outright prostituted) ‘experts’ who were engaged to inform the American and British publics about how dangerous to us the “WMD” or weapons of mass destruction — which Saddam was, they said, building — were, and why we must therefore promptly kick the U.N. weapons-inspectors out and immediately invade Iraq in order to eliminate these fictitious WMD (which those inspectors had searched for but not found). But this time, we’re being deceived to continue supporting the most barbaric tyranny on the face of the Earth — the Saud regime, which is the top ally of the U.S. regime, which is the world’s most aggressive, internationally law-breaking, war-making government, and it’s joined-at-the-hip with the Saud family.

CBS presents Mr. Roule as “A career intelligence official who, before retiring last year, spent decades at the Central Intelligence Agency and Office of the Director of National Intelligence managing significant programs related to Iran and the Middle East.” In America’s invasion and destruction of Iraq, the CIA and DNI were tasked by the President to provide him evidence that Saddam Hussein still possessed or was producing WMD, but they couldn’t find any so put together whatever bogus ‘evidence’ they could locate to support George W. Bush’s determination to invade Iraq, and they did it, and suckers believed it. Does any intelligent person believe them now — after the CIA Director had privately assured Bush that the case about Saddam’s WMD would be “a slam-dunk,” meaning that it would fool the mass of suckers — which it was? What intelligent person would trust them after that — and after Obama and Hillary Clinton’s subsequent Libyan adventure, “We Came, We Saw, He Died. Ha ha!”, and after so many other psychopathic, catastrophic, conquests by America and its allies, which are based on official lies, all of which were backed-up by the CIA? The CIA ‘authenticates’ what the President wants it to ‘authenticate’.

No intelligent persons would trust them now, though many suckers still do. “Bad intelligence” isn’t unintelligent spies; it is the euphemism that’s used to apply to professional ‘intelligence’ that serves its actual purpose of deceiving the public to support a catastrophic invasion, an evil attack by the aristocracy’s operatives, and for the aristocracy’s other purposes.

Roule said: “the idea [that] a murder was approved by the crown prince of Saudi Arabia – I’ve seen no evidence for this. It’s not in the DNA of their past operational activity.” He went on: “Almost to a man and woman, they [the Saudi people] are hurting because of this event. There is a bit of pain that the entire country of Saudi Arabia is being painted with this action.” In other words: he presumed that the family who own Saudi Arabia, the Sauds, are beloved by (instead of terrify) the subjects over whom they rule. It’s “the entire country” and not bin Salman al-Saud himself that’s now being “painted with this action” (the murder of Khashoggi). Roule clearly lies. He does it yet again: “The Saudis have no recent history of engaging in assassination activity abroad,’ Roule said. ‘Even the alleged activities of the past are many, many years ago and may not have occurred.’” What, then, about “NAWAF AL RASHEED, SON OF PRINCE TALAL BIN ABDULAZIZ AL RASHEED, DISAPPEARED SINCE MAY 12 [2018] DEPORTATION TO SAUDI ARABIA”? Rasheed still hasn’t been heard from or about, since his abduction at the order of bin Salman, half a year ago. And, going back to even before this Crown Prince, to the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing ‘suspects’, all of them simply disappeared, never to be heard from (or about) again — no public trial, nothing at all. There are many such cases, of many different kinds. This is normal Saudi practice — not abnormal at all. The Saud clan are like the Mafia, but vastly richer. For other recent examples, all attributable to the reign of Crown Prince Salman: on 15 August 2017, the BBC headlined “Saudi Arabia’s missing princes”, and reported that, “Between 2015 and 2017, three Saudi princes living in Europe [Prince Sultan bin Turki bin Abdulaziz, Prince Turki bin Bandar, and Prince Saud bin Saif al-Nasr] disappeared. All were critical of the Saudi government — and there is evidence that all were abducted and flown back to Saudi Arabia, where nothing further has been heard from them.” And, yet, after all this, the ‘expert’Norman T. Roule, says: “It’s not in the DNA of their past operational activity.”

Then, in the CBS transcript, Roule said that America’s support for and assistance to the Sauds’ bombing of the Houthis in Yemen is on the good side of that invasion: the Houthis are bad people — “Where you have famine is primarily in areas under Houthi control. And the reasons for the famine, it’s less the absence of food, and it’s more that the Houthis charge so much for food.” He blames the victims. As I had headlined on Monday, 11 June 2018,“America’s Genocide in Yemen Starts Tuesday”. I reported there:

The Houthis in Yemen are expected to start being slaughtered en-masse on June 12th. The U.S.-Saudi-UAE plan is to destroy the Yemenese port city of Al Hudaydah, which is the only entry-way by which food reaches approximately seven million Shiites, members of the Houthi tribe, who occupy the western third of Yemen, and who had recently ruled all of Yemen. The U.S. provides the weapons and the training, and the United Arab Emirates supplies the pilots for this operation, which is financed mainly by the Saudis. The objective is to establish a joint UAE-Saudi-run government of Yemen.

Roule provides his ‘expertise’ not only at CBS, but at NPR, and at Bloomberg, and at Belfer Center at Harvard’s Kennedy Schoool, and at many other prestigious forums.

And, of course, Roule isn’t the only reporter (or ‘expert’) who lies about Yemen and other matters. On August 10th, I bannered “Yemen: Fake ‘News’ That’s Mixed Into America’s Mainstream News — And Why” and reported that,

On Friday, August 10th, CNN headlined “Saudi-led strike kills dozens of children on school field trip in Yemen” and reported as if the United States doesn’t have any important role to play in targeting and supplying the bombs and missiles for what the news-report refers to as “the Saudi-led coalition.” It even says at 0:15 in the video, “Saudi Arabia, through air strikes, leads the coalition, including the UAE, Bahrain, Egypt, and Sudan” and doesn’t even mention there the main party, other than the royal Saud family — the U.S. Government itself — which provides not only detailed authorization of each target but also the weapons and the training on how they’re used.

The lying is systematic, and across the major media, and academia.

Furthermore, Roule’s saying that “the Houthis charge so much for food” is irrelevant because the Sauds’ cutting off the food-supplies has caused food-prices to soar, but Roule uses this price-rise to blame the Houthis, and not the Saud-U.S.-UAE coalition. Of course, the food-prices soared. But what’s relevant is who did it — and he lies about that. He uses this irrelevant allegation as an excuse for what the Sauds, UAE and U.S. are doing to the Houthis — exterminating them.


Roule is hired because he’s a pro-Saud anti-Iran hack. On 20 October 2017, NPR’s Mary Louise Kelly interviewed Roule in “Former Intelligence Official On Iran Nuclear Deal”. He told her: “Any time you can push back a rogue nation’s capacity to develop a nuclear weapon you’ve done something good. … you don’t want to be in a position where you say to someone, if you stop robbing banks we won’t put you in jail, but because they’ve stopped robbing banks they can commit any other nefarious activity and say, well, if you put me in jail, I guess I get to go back to robbing banks.”

One of his many employers is the neoconservative (pro-imperialistic, pro-invasion), which provides this background of him:

Norman Roule is an advisory board member of the Arabia Foundation. Mr. Roule served for 34-years in the Central Intelligence Agency, managing numerous programs relating to Iran and the Middle East. His service in the CIA’s Directorate of Operations included roles as Division Chief and Chief of Station, and he also served as the National Intelligence Manager for Iran at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. In addition to his role with the Arabia Foundation, Mr. Roule also serves as Senior Adviser to the Counter Extremism Project, United Against Nuclear Iran, and the Nuclear Threat Initiative.

If he didn’t hate Iran and Shia Muslims as much as the Saud family do, he wouldn’t be hired there, nor here, nor here, nor here, nor here, just to mention a few of his benefactors. To make money in this field, one must lie in the ‘right’ way. People wonder: How can atrocities such as the invasions of Iraq and of Libya happen? This is how it happens.

Fawaz Gerges

On October 24th, NPR headlined “Erdogan’s End Game”, and opened with “NPR’s David Greene speaks with international relations professor Fawaz Gerges about Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s handling of the killing of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.” Gerges said:

2:20- “Almost everything we know that you and I and all of us [know], it really comes from leaks from Turkish security forces.”
3:10- “On the one hand, you have Turkey … provides support for religious activists or Islamists, support and refuge from all over the Arab world, while Saudi Arabia and Egypt and other Arab states view Islamists as subversive.”
4:10- “There are more correspondents jailed in Turkey than any other country in the world.”

He presented Erdogan as the “Islamist” and Salman as the non-Islamist. The interviewer didn’t challenge him, at all, on that absurd upside-down portrayal. The Sauds’ regime is much more religious-extremist than is the Turkish regime. But both interviewer and interviewee had doubtless been fully vetted by CIA, NATO, and other agencies of the billionaires that control such official bodies. This systematic consistently pro-NATO propaganda doesn’t “just happen.” It’s not by chance. And, now, NATO stands with Salman, and against NATO-member Turkey, on the Khashoggi affair; so, Gerges does too.

Here are Gerges’s sponsors:

Fawaz Gerges holds the Emirates Chair of the Contemporary Middle East at the  LSE and was the inaugural Director of the LSE Middle East Centre. Other than the London School of Economics, he also teaches at: Sarah Lawrence College, Oxford University, Harvard University, Columbia University, and Princeton University. But his main posting is at LSE, shown here:
Centre Funding
Emirates Foundation
Aman Trust
Kuwait Foundation for the Advancement of Science
UK Department for International Development
The Leverhulme Trust
Gerald Gray
LSE Knowledge Exchange and Impact Fund
British Institute for Persian Studies
British Institute for the Study of Iraq
Oxfam GB
LSE IGA–Rockefeller Fund
American Political Science Association
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Research Councils UK

Both the Saudi and the UAE rulers are pro-Taliban, and fund Al Qaeda.

America’s aristocracy and also Britain’s are allied mainly with the fundamentalist-Sunni Saud family who own Saudi Arabia, and also with the fundamentalist-Sunni President of “the Emirates” or UAE, Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan, and both are fundamentalist Sunni Arabs. They are now jointly destroying Yemen to kill off the Shiites there, Houthis, and are using U.S. weapons, logistics, and guidance, to do it. They and Israel are also strongly against Iran and against the Government of Syria. The U.S. and UK ‘news’-media pump that same propaganda, and are now becoming also hostile toward the Sunni Governments of Turkey and Qatar, which are less extreme Sunni regimes than the ones that the U.S. regime is allied with. At the present time, the flash-point is the murder of Khashoggi. That could even break up the Western alliance. The U.S. and UK ‘news’-media want to prevent this break-up from happening.

And this explains how the ‘experts’ and the ‘news’-media get the public to vote for politicians who, on the basis of lies, authorize the destruction of nations, such as Iraq, Libya, Ukraine, Syria, and Yemen. Will the corruption and viciousness of America’s aristocracy ever stop? The mainstream ‘news’-media are part of it. The prospects are grim.


Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement // (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Leave a Reply

4 Comment threads
2 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
5 Comment authors
Eric ZuesseSteveMShaun RameweKentVince Dhimos Recent comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Vince Dhimos

So true. And one of the biggest, and most dangerous lies is “it was a mistake.” Whenever the US military says this in Syria, they’re aiding terrorists:–analysis/intentional-mistakes-of-the-united-states-in-syria


Such a nice guy. PUKE!comment image

Or not



The real deal.comment image

Shaun Ramewe
Shaun Ramewe

Saudis are perverse cowards. Lying ZioYank/Western political-meddling pro-terrorist war-criminal governments and their fake mainstream politicorporate media can never be trusted – not ever.


Re: “Even articles like that, however, fail to note that these invasions are enormously profitable for insider-connected American corporations, such as Blackwater and Halliburton and Raytheon.”

To be fair to the current Halliburton, they got out of the “defense” business in 2007. All of their business is now energy services related.


VIPS Fault Mueller Probe, Criticize Refusal to Interview Assange

The bug in Mueller’s report released on Thursday is that he accepts that the Russian government interfered in the election. Trump should challenge that, says VIPS.

Consortium News





FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT: The Fly in the Mueller Ointment

April 16, 2019

Mr. President:

The song has ended but the melody lingers on. The release Thursday of the redacted text of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s “Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election” nudged the American people a tad closer to the truth on so-called “Russiagate.”

But the Mueller report left unscathed the central-but-unproven allegation that the Russian government hacked into the DNC and Podesta emails, gave them to WikiLeaks to publish, and helped you win the election. The thrust will be the same; namely, even if there is a lack of evidence that you colluded with Russian President Vladimir Putin, you have him to thank for becoming president. And that melody will linger on for the rest of your presidency, unless you seize the moment.

Mueller has accepted that central-but-unproven allegation as gospel truth, apparently in the lack of any disinterested, independent forensic work. Following the odd example of his erstwhile colleague, former FBI Director James Comey, Mueller apparently has relied for forensics on a discredited, DNC-hired firm named CrowdStrike, whose credibility is on a par with “pee-tape dossier” compiler Christopher Steele. Like Steele, CrowdStrike was hired and paid by the DNC (through a cutout).

We brought the lack of independent forensics to the attention of Attorney General William Barr on March 13 in a Memorandum entitled “Mueller’s Forensic-Free Findings”, but received no reply or acknowledgement. In that Memorandum we described the results of our own independent, agenda-free forensic investigation led by two former Technical Directors of the NSA, who avoid squishy “assessments,” preferring to base their findings on fundamental principles of science and the scientific method. Our findings remain unchallenged; they reveal gaping holes in CrowdStrike’s conclusions.

We do not know if Barr shared our March 13 Memorandum with you. As for taking a public position on the forensics issue, we suspect he is being circumspect in choosing his battles carefully, perhaps deferring until later a rigorous examination of the dubious technical work upon which Mueller seems to have relied.

Barr’s Notification to Congress

As you know, the big attention-getter came on March 24 when Attorney General William Barr included in his four-page summary a quote from Mueller’s report: “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” Understandably, that grabbed headlines — the more so, since most Americans had been convinced earlier by the media that the opposite was true.

There remains, however, a huge fly in the ointment. The Mueller report makes it clear that Mueller accepts as a given — an evidence-impoverished given — that the Russian government interfered in the election on two tracks:

Track 1 involves what Barr, echoing Mueller, claims “a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA)” did in using social media “to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election.” A careful look at this allegation shows it to be without merit, despite Herculean efforts by The New York Times, for example, to put lipstick on this particular pig.  After some rudimentary research, award winning investigative reporter Gareth Porter promptly put that pig out of its misery and brought home the bacon. We do not believe “Track 1” merits further commentary.

Track 2 does need informed commentary, since it is more technical and — to most Americans — arcane. In Barr’s words: “The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election.”

We are eager to see if Mueller’s report contains more persuasive forensic evidence than that which VIPS has already debunked. In Barr’s summary, the only mention of forensics refers to “forensic accountants” — a far cry from the kind of forensic investigators needed to provide convincing proof of “hacking” by the Russian government.

But They Were Indicted!

Circular reasoning is not likely to work for very long, even with a U.S. populace used to being brainwashed by the media. Many Americans had mistakenly assumed that Mueller’s indictment of Russians — whether they be posting on FaceBook or acting like intelligence officers — was proof of guilt. But, as lawyers regularly point out, “one can easily indict a ham sandwich” — easier still these days, if it comes with Russian dressing.

Chances have now increased that the gullible folks who had been assured that Mueller would find collusion between you and Putin may now be a bit more circumspect — skeptical even — regarding the rest of the story-line of the “Russian hack,” and that will be even more likely among those with some technical background. Such specialists will have a field day, IF — and it is a capital “IF” — by some miracle, word of VIPS’ forensic findings gets into the media this time around.

The evidence-impoverished, misleadingly labeled “Intelligence Community Assessment” of January 6, 2017 had one saving grace. The authors noted: “The nature of cyberspace makes attribution of cyber operations difficult but not impossible. Every kind of cyber operation — malicious or not — leaves a trail.” Forensic investigators can follow a trail of metadata and other technical properties. VIPS has done that.

A “High-Class Entity?”

If, as we strongly suspect, Mueller is relying for forensics solely on CrowdStrike, the discredited firm hired by the DNC in the spring of 2016, he is acting more in the mold of Inspector Clouseau than the crackerjack investigator he is reputed to be. It simply does not suffice for Mueller’s former colleague James Comey to tell Congress that CrowdStrike is a “high-class entity.” It is nothing of the sort and, in addition to its documented incompetence, it is riddled with conflicts of interest. Comey needs to explain why he kept the FBI away from the DNC computers after they were said to have been “hacked.”

And former National Intelligence Director James Clapper needs to explain his claim last November that “the forensic evidence was overwhelming about what the Russians had done.” What forensic evidence? From CrowdStrike? We at VIPS, in contrast, are finding more and more forensic evidence that the DNC emails were leaked, not hacked by the Russians or anyone else — and that “Guccifer 2.0” is an out-and-out fraud. Yes, we can prove that from forensics too.

But the Talking Heads Say …

Again, if Mueller’s incomplete investigation is allowed to assume the status of Holy Writ, most Americans will continue to believe that — whether you colluded the Russians or not — Putin came through for you big time. In short, absent President Putin’s help, you would not be president.

Far too many Americans will still believe this because of the mainstream-media fodder — half-cooked by intelligence leaks — that they have been fed for two and a half years. The media have been playingthe central role in the effort of the MICIMATT (the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Intelligence-Media-Academia-Think-Tank) complex to stymie any improvement in relations with Russia. We in VIPS have repeatedly demonstrated that the core charges of Russian interference in the 2016 election are built on a house of cards. But, despite our record of accuracy on this issue — not to mention our pre-Iraq-war warnings about the fraudulent intelligence served up by our former colleagues — we have gotten no play in mainstream media.

Most of us have chalked up decades in the intelligence business and many have extensive academic and government experience focusing on Russia. We consider the issue of “Russian interference” of overriding significance not only because the allegation is mischievously bogus and easily disproven. More important, it has brought tension with nuclear-armed Russia to the kind of dangerous fever pitch not seen since the Cuban missile crisis in 1962, when the Russian provocation was real — authentic, not synthetic.

Sober minds resolved that crisis more than a half-century ago, and we all got to live another day. These days sober minds seem few and far between and a great deal is at stake. On the intelligence/forensics side, we have proved that the evidence adduced to “prove” that the Russians hacked into the DNC and Podesta emails and gave them to WikiLeaks is spurious. For example, we have examined metadata from one key document attributed to Russian hacking and shown that it was synthetically tainted with “Russian fingerprints.”

Who Left the Bread Crumbs?

So, if it wasn’t the Russians, who left the “Russian” bread-crumb “fingerprints?” We do not know for sure; on this question we cannot draw a conclusion based on the principles of science — at least not yet. We suspect, however, that cyber warriors closer to home were responsible for inserting the “tell-tale signs” necessary to attribute “hacks” to Russia. We tacked on our more speculative views regarding this intriguing issue onto the end of our July 24, 2017 Memorandum to you entitled “Intelligence Veterans Challenge Russia Hack Evidence.”

We recall that you were apprised of that Memorandum’s key findings because you ordered then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo to talk to William Binney, one of our two former NSA Technical Directors and one of the principal authors of that Memorandum. On October 24, 2017, Pompeo began an hour-long meeting with Binney by explaining the genesis of the odd invitation to CIA Headquarters: “You are here because the president told me that if I really wanted to know about Russian hacking I needed to talk to you.”

On the chance Pompeo has given you no report on his meeting with Binney, we can tell you that Binney, a plain-spoken, widely respected scientist, began by telling Pompeo that his (CIA) people were lying to him about Russian hacking and that he (Binney) could prove it. Pompeo reacted with disbelief, but then talked of following up with the FBI and NSA. We have no sign, though, that he followed through. And there is good reason to believe that Pompeo himself may have been reluctant to follow up with his subordinates in the Directorate of Digital Innovation created by CIA Director John Brennan in 2015. CIA malware and hacking tools are built by the Engineering Development Group, part of that relatively new Directorate.


A leak from within the CIA, published on March 31, 2017 by WikiLeaks as part of the so-called “Vault 7” disclosures, exposed a cyber tool called “Marble,” which was used during 2016 for “obfuscation” (CIA’s word). This tool can be used to conduct a forensic attribution double game (aka a false-flag operation); it included test samples in Arabic, Chinese, Farsi, Korean, and Russian. Washington Post reporter Ellen Nakashima, to her credit, immediately penned an informative article on the Marble cyber-tool, under the catching (and accurate) headline “WikiLeaks’ latest release of CIA cyber-tools could blow the cover on agency hacking operations.” That was apparently before Nakashima “got the memo.” Mainstream media have otherwise avoided like the plague any mention of Marble.

Mr. President, we do not know if CIA’s Marble, or tools like it, played some kind of role in the campaign to blame Russia for hacking the DNC. Nor do we know how candid the denizens of CIA’s Directorate of Digital Innovation have been with the White House — or with former Director Pompeo — on this touchy issue. Since it is still quite relevant, we will repeat below a paragraph included in our July 2017 Memorandum to you under the sub-heading “Putin and the Technology:”

“We also do not know if you have discussed cyber issues in any detail with President Putin. In his interview with NBC’s Megyn Kelly, he seemed quite willing – perhaps even eager – to address issues related to the kind of cyber tools revealed in the Vault 7 disclosures, if only to indicate he has been briefed on them. Putin pointed out that today’s technology enables hacking to be “masked and camouflaged to an extent that no one can understand the origin” [of the hack] … And, vice versa, it is possible to set up any entity or any individual that everyone will think that they are the exact source of that attack. Hackers may be anywhere,” he said. “There may be hackers, by the way, in the United States who very craftily and professionally passed the buck to Russia. Can’t you imagine such a scenario? … I can.”

As we told Attorney General Barr five weeks ago, we consider Mueller’s findings fundamentally flawed on the forensics side and ipso facto incomplete. We also criticized Mueller for failing to interview willing witnesses with direct knowledge, like WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange.

Political Enemies & Mainstream Media (Forgive the Redundancy)

You may be unaware that in March 2017 lawyers for Assange and the Justice Department (acting on behalf of the CIA) reportedly were very close to an agreement under which Assange would agree to discuss “technical evidence ruling out certain parties” in the leak of the DNC emails and agree to redact some classified CIA information, in exchange for limited immunity. According to the investigative reporter John Solomon of The Hill, Sen. Mark Warner, (D-VA) vice chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, learned of the incipient deal and told then-FBI Director Comey, who ordered an abrupt“stand down” and an end to the discussions with Assange.

Why did Comey and Warner put the kibosh on receiving “technical evidence ruling out certain parties” [read Russia]? We won’t insult you with the obvious answer. Assange is now in prison, to the delight of so many — including Mrs. Clinton who has said Assange must now “answer for what he has done.”

But is it too late to follow up somehow on Assange’s offer? Might he or his associates be still willing to provide “technical evidence” showing, at least, who was not the culprit?

You, Mr. President, could cause that to happen. You would have to buck strong resistance at every turn, and there all manner of ways that those with vested interests and a lot of practice in sabotage can try to thwart you — with the full cooperation of most media pundits. By now, you know all too well how that works.

But you are the president. And there may be no better time than now to face them down, show the spurious nature of the concocted “evidence” attempting to put you in “Putin’s pocket,” and — not least — lift the cloud that has prevented you from pursuing a more decent relationship with Russia.

For the Steering Group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

William Binney, former Technical Director, World Geopolitical & Military Analysis, NSA; co-founder, SIGINT Automation Research Center (ret.)

Bogdan Dzakovic, former Team Leader of Federal Air Marshals and Red Team, FAA Security (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Philip Giraldi, CIA, Operations Officer (ret.)

Mike Gravel, former Adjutant, top secret control officer, Communications Intelligence Service; special agent of the Counter Intelligence Corps and former United States Senator

James George Jatras, former U.S. diplomat and former foreign policy adviser to Senate leadership (Associate VIPS)

Larry Johnson, former CIA Intelligence Officer & former State Department Counter-Terrorism Official, (ret.)

Michael S. Kearns, Captain, USAF (ret.); ex-Master SERE Instructor for Strategic Reconnaissance Operations (NSA/DIA) and Special Mission Units (JSOC)

John Kiriakou, former CIA Counterterrorism Officer and former Senior Investigator, Senate Foreign Relations Committee

Karen Kwiatkowski, former Lt. Col., US Air Force (ret.), at Office of Secretary of Defense watching the manufacture of lies on Iraq, 2001-2003

Clement J. Laniewski, LTC, U.S. Army (ret.)

Linda Lewis, WMD preparedness policy analyst, USDA (ret.)

Edward Loomis, NSA Cryptologic Computer Scientist (ret.)

David MacMichael, former Senior Estimates Officer, National Intelligence Council (ret.)

Ray McGovern, former US Army infantry/intelligence officer & CIA presidential briefer (ret.)

Elizabeth Murray, former Deputy National Intelligence Officer for the Near East & CIA political analyst (ret.)

Todd E. Pierce, MAJ, US Army Judge Advocate (ret.)

Peter Van Buren,U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (ret.) (associate VIPS)

Robert Wing, U.S. Department of State, Foreign Service Officer (former) (associate VIPS)

Ann Wright, U.S. Army Reserve Colonel (ret) and former U.S. Diplomat who resigned in 2003 in opposition to the Iraq War

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Ukraine’s president-in-waiting Zelensky vows to end conflict in Donbass with ‘POWERFUL INFOWAR’

Zelensky vowed to “act within the Normandy format,” referring to the French-German-Russian-Ukrainian talks on war in Donbass, saying that “we will continue the Minsk process, we will restart it.”





Via RT…

Comedian-turned-politician Volodymyr Zelensky, set for a landslide win in Ukraine’s presidential vote, stayed true to character at his first press conference, dropping some flashy promises but refusing to go into boring detail.

Shortly after claiming electoral victory, Zelensky held a Q&A session with reporters at his campaign HQ in a Kiev business center. While the official results of the elections have yet to be announced, multiple exit polls suggest he secured more than 72 percent of votes.

Zelensky addressed the media in an easy-going manner. He spoke in a mix of Ukrainian and Russian, switching between the two languages, sometimes in one sentence. He also talked English a bit. But if the press hoped to shed light on the policies of the incoming president and his team, the conference actually generated more questions than answers.

Bringing the civil war in eastern Ukraine to an end appears to be one of the top priorities for Zelensky.

Promising to announce some kind of a plan shortly, he asked the reporters for help in the upcoming “infowar” that he says would help end the conflict, which, since 2014, has been raging between Kiev’s troops and the rebel self-proclaimed republics.

We will launch a very powerful information war to end the war in Donbass.

He then vowed to “act within the Normandy format,” referring to the French-German-Russian-Ukrainian talks on war in Donbass, saying that “we will continue the Minsk process, we will restart it.”

Next up, Zelensky did not rule out – even if half-jokingly – that the outvoted president Petro Poroshenko could gain a government post if the public “asks so.”

Do you want me to appoint him? Then I will ask society… If they tell me that they want to see Petro Poroshenko in one post or another – maybe, I don’t know.

Zelensky added, though, that he would like to try “new people” first. But the very team of the soon-to-be president still remains a mystery, as he’s refusing to provide any names, be it the new administration, the judiciary, or the country’s military.

“We have very serious acting generals who have authority in the army, you will definitely see them. I have no right to give the names of these people now, as there is an agreement with the generals,” Zelensky said cryptically, likewise not revealing his candidate for prosecutor general.

For now, Zelensky and his Servant of the People party – notably named after his own comedy show where he played a schoolteacher-turned-president – are promising to introduce the team “in the near future.”

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


The Triumph of Evil

What is going on is that American oil companies want to recover their control over the revenue streams from Venezuela’s vast oil reserves.

Paul Craig Roberts



Authored by Paul Craig Roberts:

Today (April 17) I heard a NPR “news” report that described the democratically elected president of Venezuela as “the Venezuelan dictator Maduro.” By repeating over and over that a democratically elected president is a dictator, the presstitutes create that image of Maduro in the minds of vast numbers of peoples who know nothing about Venezuela and had never heard of Maduro until he is dropped on them as “dictator.”

Nicolas Maduro Moros was elected president of Venezuela in 2013 and again in 2018. Previously he served as vice president and foreign minister, and he was elected to the National Assembly in 2000. Despite Washington’s propaganda campaign against him and Washington’s attempt to instigate violent street protests and Maduro’s overthrow by the Venezuelan military, whose leaders have been offered large sums of money, Maduro has the overwhelming support of the people, and the military has not moved against him.

What is going on is that American oil companies want to recover their control over the revenue streams from Venezuela’s vast oil reserves. Under the Bolivarian Revolution of Chavez, continued by Maduro, the oil revenues instead of departing the country have been used to reduce poverty and raise literacy inside Venezuela.

The opposition to Maduro inside Venezuela comes from the elites who have been traditionally allied with Washington in the looting of the country. These corrupt elites, with the CIA’s help, temporarily overthrew Chavez, but the people and the Venezuelan military secured his release and return to the presidency.

Washington has a long record of refusing to accept any reformist governments in Latin America. Reformers get in the way of North America’s exploitation of Latin American countries and are overthrown.

With the exceptions of Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba, and Nicaragua, Latin America consists of Washington’s vassal states. In recent years Washington destroyed reform governments in Honduras, Argentina and Brazil and put gangsters in charge.

According to US national security adviser John Bolton, a neoconservative war monger, the governments in Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua will soon be overthrown. New sanctions have now been placed on the three countries. Washington in the typical display of its pettiness targeted sanctions against the son of the Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega.

Ortega has been the leader of Nicaragua since for 40 years. He was president 1985-1990 and has been elected and reelected as president since 2006.

Ortega was the opponent of Somoza, Washington’s dictator in Nicaragua. Consequently he and his movement were attacked by the neoconservative operation known as Iran-Contra during the Reagan years. Ortega was a reformer. His government focused on literacy, land reform, and nationalization, which was at the expense of the wealthy ruling class. He was labeled a “Marxist-Leninist,” and Washington attempted to discredit his reforms as controversial leftist policies.

Somehow Castro and Ortega survived Washington’s plots against them. By the skin of his teeth so did Chavez unless you believe it was the CIA that gave him cancer. Castro and Chavez are dead. Ortega is 74. Maduro is in trouble, because Washington has stolen Venezuela’s bank deposits and cut Venezuela off the international financial system, and the British have stolen Venezuela’s gold. This makes it hard for Venezuela to pay its debts.

The Trump regime has branded the democratically twice-elected Maduro an “illegitimate” president. Washington has found a willing puppet, Juan Guaido, to take Maduro’s place and has announced that the puppet is now the president of Venezuela. No one among the Western presstitutes or among the vassals of Washington’s empire finds it strange that an elected president is illegitimate but one picked by Washington is not.

Russia and China have given Maduro diplomatic support. Both have substantial investments in Venezuela that would be lost if Washington seizes the country. Russia’s support for Maduro was declared by Bolton today to be a provocation that is a threat to international peace and security. Bolton said his sanctions should be seen by Russia as a warning against providing any help for the Venezuelan government.

Secretary of state Mike Pompeo and vice president Pence have added their big mouths to the propaganda against the few independent governments in Latin America. Where is the shame when the highest American government officials stand up in front of the world and openly proclaim that it is official US government policy to overthrow democratically elected governments simply because those governments don’t let Americans plunder their countries?

How is it possible that Pompeo can announce that the “days are numbered” of the elected president of Nicaragua, who has been elected president 3 or 4 times, and the world not see the US as a rogue state that must be isolated and shunned? How can Pompeo describe Washington’s overthrow of an elected government as “setting the Nicaraguan people free?”

The top officials of the US government have announced that they intend to overthrow the governments of 3 countries and this is not seen as “a threat to international peace and security?”

How much peace and security did Washington’s overthrow of governments in Iraq, Libya, Ukraine, and the attempted overthrow of Syria bring?

Washington is once again openly violating international law and the rest of the world has nothing to say?

There is only one way to describe this: The Triumph of Evil.

“The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere the ceremony of innocence is drowned; the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.” — William Butler Yeats

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading


Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...


Quick Donate

The Duran
Donate a quick 10 spot!


The Duran Newsletter