Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

The JCPOA Deal: What should Iran, Russia and America do?

Here are the possible consequences and strategies following Trump’s latest dangerous chess move.

Published

on

1,140 Views

On Friday the 13th of October, a day notoriously celebrated for its tragic news and bad luck, President Donald Trump gave the world both.  In a scathing speech from the White House accusing Iran of a litany  of offenses, conspiracies, and terrorist attacks, Donald Trump read from a teleprompter words which mirrored ones spat at the world by President George W. Bush about Iraq a decade earlier.   After a fifteen-year global war costing trillions of dollars, irreversibly wounding civilization, and destroying millions of people’s lives, these words uttered by Bush were irrefutably proven to be not only absolute lies, but responsible for what quite possibly could be proven to be the greatest crime against humanity in history—plain and simple.  For this reason, the world cannot afford another; and an American President must never again be allowed to lecture and manipulate the nations into war using another speech of lies, fabricated evidence, misunderstood agendas, and misguided expectations—which was exactly what President Trump, or perhaps the Zionist neocons controlling him, tried to do on Friday the 13th.

Although re-shaped to fit an Iranian mold and Trump’s vocabulary, once again the same old words, dripping with the stench of death, poisoned the airwaves with sequential images of Colin Powell’s non-existent chemical weapons claims, ludicrously impossible religious alliances between Iran’s Shia believers and their sworn Sunni-Salafi Wahhabi ISIS/Al Qaeda enemies, and the nightmare of an inevitable societal collapse if America didn’t act.  The question on everyone’s mind after the speech was, what action would be taken?

Despite the passionate protestations of Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China—the other signatories to the JCPOA—President Trump ultimately chose to not renew the U.S. commitment to the JCPOA, and consequently triggered an avalanche of global diplomatic, military, economic, and informational maneuvers which very easily could worsen, and inevitably  trigger a global conflict through a scenario that repeats the world war one domino effect.  For that reason, and many others, let Saturday October 14th, begin the day of deconstructing this agenda, correcting the lies with truth, and mark a new commitment to peace.

PROBLEM, ANALYSIS, SOLUTION

Overall, the key to improving U.S.-Iranian relations and maintaining the U.S. commitment to the JCPOA is through using Russia as the key intermediary; and persuading the public through using “Soft power” and “psychological operations” and “information operations” on all levels—Diplomatic, Informational, Military, Economic, and Religious.   Political careers are directed by public votes, and emotional messages inspire the public’s values and direct their choices—specifically their choice of what box to check in the voting booth, and thereby which politician lives or dies.  Therefore, not withstanding a surprise Presidential Impeachment, everything involved with the success of JCPOA starts and ends with understanding and influencing President Trump.  The Zionist Neocons know this, and have been isolating Trump and sterilizing his intelligence briefings for just this reason.

What is Trump’s mind?  President Donald Trump seems committed, almost obsessed, with trying to “achieve some image or sense of himself as President who has rescued America from Obama’s treason and improved upon the JCPOA”. Now, this is understandable given Obama’s insanity and criminal activity in the White House, but Trump needs to know Iran is not the enemy he thinks they are–or rather the Zionist neocons have been trying to brainwash him into believing–and he needs to fire those advisors and gain a whole new perspective.

Sadly, this notion of “re-designing the JCPOA” has become a source of personal “pride” or “ego” and “vanity” for Trump, which is both dangerous and an opportunity. For a man whose fundamental human identity is dependent on this pride, ego, and vanity, these elements of character become the very thing that most influence him; and words that stimulate the emotions of pride, ego, and vanity are heard by him more than words of “economic, military, or political sense  or success”. Although they can be interpreted as mutually inclusive, they are also intimate and emotional and personal words with a personally titillating effect on a man who secretly enjoys titillation.

Therefore, the intelligence policy for Iran to take is to “appease”—or rather give the impression of appeasement—in order to assuage and nullify the hyperbolic rhetoric and aggressive Congressional sanctions actions.  In the game of political chess, sometimes pawns must be sacrificed to achieve the deception, gain the advantage, and win the game—which in this case is simply the avoidance of war.

Iran’s long-term goal is full restoration of its global participation, but in order to achieve this, its short term goal should be to enable President Donald Trump not to cancel, nullify, or pull out of the nuclear deal (JCPOA).  To do this, Iran—with the help of Russia—must give the American President an opportunity to keep the deal moving forward, improve upon it, and use it for opening the door for improving Iranian-US relations.

The way for Iran to do this is the following: 1) agreeing to meet with President Trump in Russia with Russian President Putin, in a formal summit environment of neutrality, similar to when President Reagan met Russian Premier Gorbechev in Iceland in the 1980’s.  This will enable President Putin of Russia to draw from history (and thereby develop the diplomatic reference language and symbolism to appease American-Iranian-European populations) to help negotiate “improvements” that all sides will agree with; and 2) communicate that all sides are walking away with improved trust, confidence, political stability, economic prosperity, and military security. The key is to use this “new deal” which President Trump has been cornered into trying to achieve, to open new doors to discussion, respect, negotiation, while at the same time recognizing it may need to be phrased in deceptive language in order to pass through the Zionist-neocon filters in Washington.

President Putin would most likely welcome the opportunity to expand his influence as a stabilizer and peacemaker in the region, which would also help his election in 2018.  It would also cultivate a better relationship between the U.S. and Russia, and Russia and Europe.  The nation essentially that would benefit greatly from brokering a peaceful enhancement of the JCPOA between the U.S. and Iran, would be Russia, and it would be a way for the “big boys” to re-establish that fact that Russia and the United States are the two most significant powers in global politics, and nothing happens without both of them allowing it.

If Trump fails to do this, he runs the risk of irreparably isolating himself—as well as America; and forcing Russia to throw down the gauntlet by establishing that Russia and China and Iran are committed to defending each other from any kind of attack—conventional, nuclear, informational, political, or economic.  This foreign policy isolation of the United States would increase European hostility towards America also, which is already upset by the massive refugee-migrant tsunamis which are triggered by U.S. military adventures and are eroding Europe’s geographic, social, and political integrity.  Europe unwaveringly disagrees with The White House request to meddle, interfere with, or try to restructure the JCPOA.  So, it’s a gamble, but Trump will once again go bankrupt if he things he can follow the Zionist-neocon playbook, win the Republican nomination for a second term as President, and enhance America’s standing in the world.  Instead, he will achieve the opposite, and quite possibly destroy the United States in a civil war that is already simmering over broken confederate Civil War statues, George Soros financed “color revolutions”, and false-flag shooting attacks.  Ezra Pound wrote something in Canto 42, similar to the political tightrope Trump is walking America along:

“There died a myriad,
And of the best, among them,
For an old bitch gone in the teeth,
For a botched civilization,

Charm, smiling at the good mouth,
Quick eyes gone under earth’s lid,

For two gross of broken statues,
For a few thousand battered books.”

Let’s hope the American Constitution is not one of those burnt, tattered papers.

CONCLUSION:

Dick Morris made an astute observation that America’s banking system has been weaponized into a sanctions mechanism against America’s “enemies/ rebellious colonies”. This means that if any other nation does business with Iran, North Korea, Russia, Venezuela or nation the U.S. arbitrarily chooses to put on the “sanctions blacklist”, then they too are denied access to the American banking system–which means economic death.

Essentially America is using its banking system as an extortion racket and threatening not to pick up its “bat and ball” and leave the game if it doesn’t get its way, but to take also the bases, the bleachers, and the stadium itself. So unless countries are prepared to either 1) submit to the U.S. imperialism; or 2) design intelligent “soft power”, “influence operations”, and “information operations” to distract and redirect the U.S. decision; or 3) change not only teams but create an entirely new league and set of rules, such as the BRICS group and others, then nothing will change and most likely get worse.

Hopefully Trump will use his JCPOA objections and ridiculously presumptuous rhetoric as more of a bluff and justification for personal summit with President Putin and President Rouhani to start a new dialogue, throw off the Zionist neocon agenda, and achieve a victory where all three nations can claim victory; and the world can rest easier that peace and stability has been achieved.  Time will tell.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

FBI recommended Michael Flynn not have lawyer present during interview, did not warn of false statement consequences

Flynn is scheduled to be sentenced on Dec. 18.

Washington Examiner

Published

on

Via The Washington Examiner…


Former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who arranged the bureau’s interview with then-national security adviser Michael Flynn at the White House on Jan. 24, 2017 — the interview that ultimately led to Flynn’s guilty plea on one count of making false statements — suggested Flynn not have a lawyer present at the session, according to newly-filed court documents. In addition, FBI officials, along with the two agents who interviewed Flynn, decided specifically not to warn him that there would be penalties for making false statements because the agents wanted to ensure that Flynn was “relaxed” during the session.

The new information, drawn from McCabe’s account of events plus the FBI agents’ writeup of the interview — the so-called 302 report — is contained in a sentencing memo filed Tuesday by Flynn’s defense team.

Citing McCabe’s account, the sentencing memo says that shortly after noon on Jan. 24 — the fourth day of the new Trump administration — McCabe called Flynn on a secure phone in Flynn’s West Wing office. The two men discussed business briefly and then McCabe said that he “felt that we needed to have two of our agents sit down” with Flynn to discuss Flynn’s talks with Russian officials during the presidential transition.

McCabe, by his own account, urged Flynn to talk to the agents alone, without a lawyer present. “I explained that I thought the quickest way to get this done was to have a conversation between [Flynn] and the agents only,” McCabe wrote. “I further stated that if LTG Flynn wished to include anyone else in the meeting, like the White House counsel for instance, that I would need to involve the Department of Justice. [Flynn] stated that this would not be necessary and agreed to meet with the agents without any additional participants.”

Within two hours, the agents were in Flynn’s office. According to the 302 report quoted in the Flynn sentencing document, the agents said Flynn was “relaxed and jocular” and offered the agents “a little tour” of his part of the White House.

“The agents did not provide Gen. Flynn with a warning of the penalties for making a false statement under 18 U.S.C. 1001 before, during, or after the interview,” the Flynn memo says. According to the 302, before the interview, McCabe and other FBI officials “decided the agents would not warn Flynn that it was a crime to lie during an FBI interview because they wanted Flynn to be relaxed, and they were concerned that giving the warnings might adversely affect the rapport.”

The agents had, of course, seen transcripts of Flynn’s wiretapped conversations with Russian then-ambassador Sergey Kislyak. “Before the interview, FBI officials had also decided that if ‘Flynn said he did not remember something they knew he said, they would use the exact words Flynn used … to try to refresh his recollection. If Flynn still would not confirm what he said … they would not confront him or talk him through it,'” the Flynn memo says, citing the FBI 302.

“One of the agents reported that Gen. Flynn was ‘unguarded’ during the interview and ‘clearly saw the FBI agents as allies,'” the Flynn memo says, again citing the 302.

Later in the memo, Flynn’s lawyers argue that the FBI treated Flynn differently from two other Trump-Russia figures who have pleaded guilty to and been sentenced for making false statements. One of them, Alexander Van der Zwaan, “was represented by counsel during the interview; he was interviewed at a time when there was a publicly disclosed, full-bore investigation regarding Russian interference in the 2016 election; and he was given a warning that it is a federal crime to lie during the interview,” according to the memo. The other, George Papadopoulos, “was specifically notified of the seriousness of the investigation…was warned that lying to investigators was a ‘federal offense’…had time to reflect on his answers…and met with the FBI the following month for a further set of interviews, accompanied by his counsel, and did not correct his false statements.”

The message of the sentencing memo is clear: Flynn, his lawyers suggest, was surprised, rushed, not warned of the context or seriousness of the questioning, and discouraged from having a lawyer present.

That is all the sentencing document contains about the interview itself. In a footnote, Flynn’s lawyers noted that the government did not object to the quotations from the FBI 302 report.

In one striking detail, footnotes in the Flynn memo say the 302 report cited was dated Aug. 22, 2017 — nearly seven months after the Flynn interview. It is not clear why the report would be written so long after the interview itself.

The brief excerpts from the 302 used in the Flynn defense memo will likely spur more requests from Congress to see the original FBI documents. Both House and Senate investigating committees have demanded that the Justice Department allow them to see the Flynn 302, but have so far been refused.

In the memo, Flynn’s lawyers say that he made a “serious error in judgment” in the interview. Citing Flynn’s distinguished 30-plus year record of service in the U.S. Army, they ask the judge to go along with special counsel Robert Mueller’s recommendation that Flynn be spared any time in prison.

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

Latest

Macron offers crumbs to protestors in bid to save his globalist agenda (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 36.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris take a quick look at French President Macron’s pathetic display of leadership as he offers protestors little in the way of concessions while at the same time promising to crack down hard on any and all citizens who resort to violence.

Meanwhile France’s economy is set for a deep recession as French output and production grinds to a halt.

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Via Zerohedge


As if Brussels didn’t have its hands full already with Italy and the UK, the European Union will soon be forced to rationalize why one of its favorite core members is allowed to pursue populist measures to blow out its budget deficit to ease domestic unrest while another is threatened with fines potentially amounting to billions of euros.

When blaming Russia failed to quell the widespread anger elicited by his policies, French President Emmanuel Macron tried to appease the increasingly violent “yellow vests” protesters who have sacked his capital city by offering massive tax cuts that could blow the French budget out beyond the 3% budget threshold outlined in the bloc’s fiscal rules.

Given the concessions recently offered by Italy’s populists, Macron’s couldn’t have picked a worse time to challenge the bloc’s fiscal conventions. As Bloomberg pointed out, these rules will almost certainly set the Continent’s second largest economy on a collision course with Brussels. To be clear, Macron’s offered cuts come with a price tag of about €11 billion according to Les Echos, and will leave the country with a budget gap of 3.5% of GDP in 2019, with one government official said the deficit may be higher than 3.6%.

By comparison, Italy’s initial projections put its deficit target at 2.4%, a number which Europe has repeatedly refused to consider.

Macron’s promises of fiscal stimulus – which come on top of his government’s decision to delay the planned gas-tax hikes that helped inspire the protests – were part of a broader ‘mea culpa’ offered by Macron in a speech Monday night, where he also planned to hike France’s minimum wage.

Of course, when Brussels inevitably objects, perhaps Macron could just show them this video of French police tossing a wheelchair-bound protester to the ground.

Already, the Italians are complaining.  Speaking on Tuesday, Italian cabinet undersecretary Giancarlo Giorgetti said Italy hasn’t breached the EU deficit limit. “I repeat that from the Italian government there is a reasonable approach, if there is one also from the EU a solution will be found.”

“France has several times breached the 3% deficit. Italy hasn’t done it. They are different situations. There are many indicators to assess.”

Still, as one Guardian columnist pointed out in an op-ed published Tuesday morning, the fact that the gilets jaunes (yellow vest) organizers managed to pressure Macron to cave and grant concessions after just 4 weeks of protests will only embolden them to push for even more radical demands: The collapse of the government of the supremely unpopular Macron.

Then again, with Brussels now facing certain accusations of hypocrisy, the fact that Macron was pressured into the exact same populist measures for which Italy has been slammed, the French fiasco raises the odds that Rome can pass any deficit measure it wants with the EU now forced to quietly look away even as it jawbones all the way from the bank (i.e., the German taxpayers).

“Macron’s spending will encourage Salvini and Di Maio,” said Giovanni Orsina, head of the School of Government at Rome’s Luiss-Guido Carli University. “Macron was supposed to be the spearhead of pro-European forces, if he himself is forced to challenge EU rules, Salvini and Di Maio will jump on that to push their contention that those rules are wrong.”

While we look forward to how Brussels will square this circle, markets are less excited.

Exhausted from lurching from one extreme to another following conflicting headlines, traders are already asking if “France is the new Italy.” The reason: the French OAT curve has bear steepened this morning with 10Y yields rising as much as ~6bp, with the Bund/OAT spread reaching the widest since May 2017 and the French presidential election. Though well below the peaks of last year, further widening would push the gap into levels reserved for heightened political risk.

As Bloomberg macro analyst Michael Read notes this morning, it’s hard to see a specific near-term trigger blowing out the Bund/OAT spread but the trend looks likely to slowly drift higher.

While Macron has to fight on both domestic and European fronts, he’ll need to keep peace at home to stay on top. Remember that we saw the 10Y spread widen to ~80bps around the May ’17 elections as concerns of a move toward the political fringe played out in the markets, and the French President’s popularity ratings already look far from rosy.

And just like that France may have solved the Italian crisis.

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

Latest

Watch: Democrat Chuck Schumer shows his East Coast elitism on live TV

Amazing moment in which the President exhibits “transparency in government” and shows the world who the Democrat leaders really are.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

One of the reasons Donald Trump was elected to the Presidency was because of his pugnacious, “in your face” character he presented – and promised TO present – against Democrat policy decisions and “stupid government” in general.

One of the reasons President Donald Trump is reviled is because of his pugnacious, “in your face” character he presented – and promised TO present – in the American political scene.

In other words, there are two reactions to the same characteristic. On Tuesday, the President did something that probably cheered and delighted a great many Americans who witnessed this.

The Democrats have been unanimous in taking any chance to roast the President, or to call for his impeachment, or to incite violence against him. But Tuesday was President Trump’s turn. He invited the two Democrat leaders, presumptive incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, and then, he turned the cameras on:

As Tucker Carlson notes, the body language from Schumer was fury. The old (something)-eating grin covered up humiliation, embarrassment and probably no small amount of fear, as this whole incident was filmed and broadcast openly and transparently to the American public. Nancy Pelosi was similarly agitated, and she expressed it later after this humiliation on camera, saying, “It’s like a manhood thing for him… As if manhood could ever be associated with him.”

She didn’t stop there. According to a report from the New York Daily News, the Queen Bee took the rhetoric a step below even her sense of dignity:

Pelosi stressed she made clear to Trump there isn’t enough support in Congress for a wall and speculated the President is refusing to back down because he’s scared to run away with his tail between his legs.

“I was trying to be the mom. I can’t explain it to you. It was so wild,” Pelosi said of the Oval Office meet, which was also attended by Vice President Pence and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.). “It goes to show you: you get into a tinkle contest with a skunk, you get tinkle all over you.”

This represented the first salvo in a major spin-job for the ultra-liberal San Francisco Democrat. The rhetoric spun by Mrs. Pelosi and Chuck Schumer was desperate as they tried to deflect their humiliation and place it back on the President:

With reporters still present, Trump boasted during the Oval meeting he would be “proud” to shutdown the government if Congress doesn’t earmark cash for his wall before a Dec. 21 spending deadline.

Pelosi told Democrats that Trump’s boisterousness will be beneficial for them.

“The fact is we did get him to say, to fully own that the shutdown was his,” Pelosi said. “That was an accomplishment.”

The press tried to characterize this as a “Trump Tantrum”, saying things like this lede:

While “discussing” a budgetary agreement for the government, President Donald Trump crossed his arms and declared: “we will shut down the government if there is no wall.”

While the Democrats and the mainstream media in the US are sure to largely buy these interpretations of the event, the fact that this matter was televised live shows that the matter was entirely different, and this will be discomfiting to all but those Democrats and Trump-dislikers that will not look at reality.

There appears to be a twofold accomplishment for the President in this confrontation:

  1. The President revealed to his support base the real nature of the conversation with the Democrat leadership, because anyone watching this broadcast (and later, video clip) saw it unedited with their own eyes. They witnessed the pettiness of both Democrats and they witnessed a President completely comfortable and confident about the situation.
  2. President Trump probably made many of his supporters cheer with the commitment to shut down the government if he doesn’t get his border wall funding. This cheering is for both the strength shown about getting the wall finished and the promise to shut the government down, and further, Mr. Trump’s assertion that he would be “proud” to shut the government down, taking complete ownership willingly, reflects a sentiment that many of his supporters share.

The usual pattern is for the media, Democrats and even some Republicans to create a “scare” narrative about government shutdowns, about how doing this is a sure-fire path to chaos and suffering for the United States.

But the educated understanding of how shutdowns work reveals something completely different. Vital services never close. However, National Parks can close partly or completely, and some non-essential government agencies are shuttered. While this is an inconvenience for the employees furloughed during the shutdown, they eventually are re-compensated for the time lost, and are likely to receive help during the shutdown period if they need it. The impact on the nation is minimal, aside from the fact that the government stops spending money at the same frenetic pace as usual.

President Trump’s expression of willingness to do this action and his singling out of the Dem leadership gives the Democrats a real problem. Now the entire country sees their nature. As President Trump is a populist, this visceral display of Democrat opposition and pettiness will make at least some impact on the population, even that group of people who are not Trump fans.

The media reaction and that of the Democrats here show, amazingly, that after three years-plus of Donald Trump being a thorn in their side, they still do not understand how he works, and they also cannot match it against their expected “norms” of establishment behavior.

This may be a brilliant masterstroke, and it also may be followed up by more. The President relishes head-to-head conflict. The reactions of these congress members showed who they really are.

Let the games begin.

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

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

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...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending