Trump’s Propaganda Mill: State Department’s Recycled Lies About Iran

By Stephen Lendman

Like the White House, war department, other US agencies and establishment media, the State Department is a lying machine — especially under neocon extremists Pompeo and Hillary when she was in charge.

Both figures vie for which one operated more ruthlessly and recklessly as chief US diplomat in name only.

Pompeo’s State Department puts out “this week in Iran policy” disinformation and bald-faced Big Lies.

On Friday, he lied claiming Trump  is “prepared to negotiate with no preconditions and sit down and talk about the terror activity, the missile program, the nuclear program as well,” adding:

“I hope that the Islamic Republic of Iran leadership, the Ayatollah in particular, will take this opportunity to solve this in a way that is diplomatic.”

Fact: Diplomacy is a lost art in the Washington, long ago abandoned, unacceptable demands and brute force replacing it.

Fact: Since Iran’s 1979 revolution, ending a generation of US-installed fascist tyranny, Republicans and undemocratic Dems have been and continue to be hellbent for returning the country to US vassal state status — along with gaining control over its vast oil and gas reserves.

Pompeo lied claiming an Iranian drone “closed within a threatening range” of the USS Boxer in the Persian Gulf — over 7,000 miles from the US, operating in waters where no US warships belong.

He lied saying the (unthreatened) “ship took defensive action against the UAS to ensure the safety of the ship and its crew” — falsely claiming the drone was downed.

On Friday, Iran’s IRGC released video footage taken by the drone in question while monitoring the USS Boxer in the Hormuz Strait, returning to base unharmed, its images preserved, exposing Trump’s Big Lie claim about downing the UAV, repeated by Pompeo’s State Department.

On Friday, officials of the Trump regime’s state and war departments met with their imperial counterparts from dozens of other nations, seeking to build an anti-Iran coalition on the phony pretext of “safeguarding freedom of navigation and maritime security in the Middle East.”

They got few if any takers for the hostile initiative to stoke regional conflict against nonbelligerent Iran. The Trump regime may be left with a coalition of one in pursuing possible war on the country.

Hostile US actions against non-threatening nations make more enemies than friends. Belligerent US policy with no end of it flies in the face of the UN Charter and aims of most nations to engage cooperatively with others on the world stage.

The US, especially under Trump, is a sanctioning machine, militarizing this action illegally against nations, entities, and individuals it doesn’t control.

Pompeo said a senior Hezbollah External Security Organization official was sanctioned — falsely and ludicrously claiming it was “for perpetrating and plotting terrorist attacks in the Western hemisphere.”

Hezbollah is a democratically elected part of Lebanon’s government, its military wing exclusively for defense, its forces aiding neighboring Syria combat US-supported ISIS and other terrorists, a noble undertaking, wanting the scourge eliminated and kept from spreading cross-border to Lebanon.

The State Department falsely accused Iran and Hezbollah of involvement in the 1994 attack on the Argentine-Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) — killing scores, injuring many others.

A White House statement lied claiming “Hizballah—an Iranian proxy designated by the United States as a Foreign Terrorist Organization—bombed the” AMIA.

So-called Middle East terrorist groups infiltrating Latin America don’t exist. A pre-Trump State Department report contradicted the Pompeo one.

Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and other imperial adversaries are falsely accused of all sorts of things they had nothing to do with. On July 18, Pompeo said the following: “As part of our maximum pressure campaign, the US sanctioned a global network of companies and agents that procured materials for Iran’s nuclear program. The world’s leading sponsor of terrorism should not be enriching uranium.”

Indeed! “The world’s leading (US, UK, French, Israeli state) sponsor(s) of terrorism should not be enriching uranium.” Nor should their menacing nuclear arsenals go unchallenged.

US unilaterally imposed sanctions on Iran, other nations, entities, and individuals flagrantly breach international law — what Trump, Pompeo, Bolton, other regime hardliners, and imperial press agent media never explain.

They’re virtually always imposed on nonbelligerent targets — while the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism USA and its imperial partners remain unacceptable for the highest of high crimes against peace.

The US and its killing machine partners represent an unparalleled threat to humanity — nation state equivalents of mad dog monsters.

A Final Comment

Netanyahu regime official Tzachi Hanegbi boasted that “Israel is the only country in the world that has been killing Iranians for two years now.”

Along with assassinating Iranian nuclear scientists, the IDF has been terror-bombing Syrian sites for years, waging preemptive war on the country without declaring it, goading Damascus to respond defensively to escalate aggression more than already.

One day the Jewish state may pay a major price for its decades of Nuremberg-level high crimes.

The same goes for the US.

SEE HIS NEW WEB SITE: (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at Also, see his newest book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”

READ MORE IRAN NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Iran Files

As Trump Backs Down, The Pips Squeak

  • Trump finally had to stand up and be the grown-up in the room, such as he is, and put an end to this madness.

Last week it was all fire and brimstone. The US was threatening more sanctions on Iran, the Brits were seizing oil tankers and Iran was violating the JCPOA.

This week things look different all of a sudden. An oil tanker goes dark while passing through the Strait of Hormuz, the story fails to get any real traction and the US allows Iranian Foreign Minister, recently sanctioned, to do his job at the United Nations.

Trump then holds a cabinet meeting where he reiterates that “We’re not looking for regime change. We want them out of Yemen.”

I thought National Security Advisor John Bolton said the US would apply pressure until “the pips squeak.”

Where the pips are squeaking is on the Arabian Peninsula, not across the Persian Gulf in Bandar Abbas. Specifically, I’m talking about the United Arab Emirates. The UAE sent a delegation to Tehran recently that coincided with its partial withdrawal of troops from Yemen.

That meeting, according to Elijah Magnier, focused on Emirates realizing they are in the middle of this conflict, up to their skyscrapers.

“The UAE would like to avoid seeing their country transformed into a battlefield between the US and Iran in case of war, particularly if Trump is re-elected. The Emirates officials noted that the US did not respond to Iran’s retaliation in the Gulf and in particularly when the US drone was downed. This indicates that Iran is prepared for confrontation and will implement its explicit menace, to hit any country from which the US carries out their attacks on Iran. We want to be out of all this”, an Emirates official told his Iranian counterpart in Tehran.

Iran promised to talk to the Yemeni officials to avoid hitting targets in Dubai and Abu Dhabi as long as the UAE pulls out its forces from the Yemen and stops this useless war. Saudi Crown Prime Mohammad Bin Salman is finding himself without his main Emirates ally, caught in a war that is unwinnable for the Saudi regime. The Yemeni Houthis have taken the initiative, hitting several Saudi strategic targets. Saudi Arabia has no realistic objectives and seems to have lost the appetite to continue the war in Yemen.

So, with the Houthis successfully striking major targets inside Saudi Arabia and the UAE abruptly pulling forces out, the war in Yemen has reached a critical juncture. Remember, the Republican-controlled Senate approved a bill withdrawing support for the war back in March, which the White House had to veto in support of its fading hopes for its Israeli/Palestinian deal pushed by Jared Kushner.

But things have changed significantly since then as that deal has been indefinitely postponed with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu facing a second election this fall after he failed to secure a stable coalition.

After that there was the failed economic conference in Bahrain in June where Kushner revealed the economic part of the plan to a half-empty room where only the backers of the plan showed any real support.

And that’s the important part of this story, because it was Kushner’s plan which was the impetus for all of this insane anti-Iran belligerence in the first place. Uniting the Gulf states around a security pact leveraging the U.S/Israeli/Saudi alliance was part of what was supposed to pressure the Palestinians to the bargaining table.

By placing maximum economic sanctions on both Hezbollah in Lebanon and Iran while continuing to foment chaos in Syria was supposed to force Israel’s enemies to fold under the pressure which would, in turn, see the Palestinians surrender to the will of Kushner and Bibi.

The problem is, it didn’t work. And now Trump is left holding the bag on this idiotic policy which culminated in an obvious provocation when Iran shot down a $220 million Global Hawk surveillance drone, nearly sparking a wider war.

But what it did was expose the US and not Iran as the cause of the current problems.

Since then Trump finally had to stand up and be the grown-up in the room, such as he is, and put an end to this madness.

The UAE understood the potential for Iran’s asymmetric response to US belligerence. The Saudis cannot win the war in Yemen that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman began. The fallout from this war has been to push Qatar out of the orbit of the rest of the Gulf Cooperation Council, cutting deals with Iran over developing the massive North Pars gas field and pipelines to Europe.

And now the UAE has realized it is facing an existential threat to its future in any confrontation between Iran and the US

What’s telling is that Trump is making Yemen the issue to negotiate down rather than Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Because it was never about the nuclear program. It was always about Iran’s ballistic missile program.

And Secretary of State Mike Pompeo would have us believe that for the first time Iran’s missile program is on the negotiating table. I have no idea if that’s actually true, but it’s a dead giveaway that it’s what the US is after.

The main reason why Trump and Netanyahu are so angry about the JCPOA is the mutual outsourcing of the nuclear ballistic missile program by Iran and North Korea. North Korea was working on the warhead while Iran worked on the ballistic missile.

Trump tweeted about this nearly two years ago, confirming this link. I wrote about it when he did this.  Nearly everything I said about North Korea in the blog post is now applicable to Iran. This was why he hated the JCPOA, it didn’t actually stop the development of Iran and North Korea into nuclear states.

But tearing up the deal was the wrong approach to solving the problem. Stop pouring hundreds of billions of dollars in weapons to the region, as Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif pointed out recently, is the problem. By doing this he took both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese Premier Xi Jinping off his side of the table.

Now he stands isolated with only the provocateurs – Israel, the U.K., Saudi Arabia – trying to goad him forward into doing something he doesn’t want to do. And all of those provocations that have occurred in the past month have failed to move either Trump or the Iranians. They’ve learned patience, possibly from Putin. Call it geopolitical rope-a-dope, if you will.

I said last month that the key to solving Iran’s nuclear ambitions was solving the relationship with North Korea. Trump, smartly, went there, doing what only he could do, talk with DPRK Chairman Kim Jong-Un and reiterate his sincere desire to end proliferation of nuclear weapons.

He can get Iran to the table but he’s going to have to give up something. So, now framing the negotiations with Iran around their demands we stop arming the Saudis is politically feasible.

Trump can’t, at this point, back down directly with Iran. Yemen is deeply unpopular here and ending our support of it would be a boon to Trump politically. Trading that for some sanctions relief would be a good first step to solving the mess he’s in and build some trust.

Firing John Bolton, which looks more likely every day, would be another.

He’s already turning a blind eye to Iranian exports to China, and presumably, other places. I think the Brits are acting independently trying to create havoc and burnish Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt’s resume as Prime Minister against Boris Johnson. That’s why they hijacked the oil tanker.

But all the little distractions are nothing but poison pills to keep from discussing the real issues. Trump just cut through all that. So did Iran. Let’s hope they stay focused.

Mon Jul 22, 2019 12:35PM [Updated: Mon Jul 22, 2019 01:08PM ]
An October 2005 handout photo released in London on July 11, 2019, shows the British Royal Navy's HMS Montrose, a Type 23 Frigate, performing turns during exercise "Marstrike 05," off the coast of Oman. (Photo by AFP)
An October 2005 handout photo released in London on July 11, 2019, shows the British Royal Navy’s HMS Montrose, a Type 23 Frigate, performing turns during exercise “Marstrike 05,” off the coast of Oman. (Photo by AFP)

Gideon Rachman


(Gideon Rachman became chief foreign affairs columnist for the Financial Times in July 2006. He joined the FT after a 15-year career at The Economist, which included spells as a foreign correspondent in Brussels, Washington and Bangkok. He also edited The Economist’s business and Asia sections. His particular interests include American foreign policy, the European Union and globalization.)


Unexpected events have a way of crowding a world leader. Boris Johnson hasn’t even been elected leader of the UK Conservative Party, let alone moved in to 10 Downing Street.

Now the man who is expected to win that election on Tuesday and be appointed British prime minister on Wednesday faces the prospect of having to deal with a major diplomatic crisis with Iran that could spiral into military conflict.

On Friday, Iran seized a British-flagged oil tanker that was sailing through the Strait of Hormuz. The Iranian action was seen as retaliation for the British seizure earlier this month of an Iranian tanker, near Gibraltar, that had been suspected of violating sanctions on Syria.

The British government has already threatened “serious consequences” for Iran, a phrase often regarded as a euphemism for a military response. Mr Johnson comes to power with a carefully-cultivated image as a robust no-nonsense patriot, and will want to appear strong in what could be his first major test as a national leader.

But military and diplomatic realities will constrain a British response. The UK has consistently tried to pursue the path of negotiations with Tehran. As recently as last week (before the tanker seizure), Mr. Johnson said he would oppose military action against Iran. And with the Royal Navy stretched very thin, it would be risky for the UK to take on Iran in its own backyard.

In any military clash with Iran, the UK would certainly look to the US for support. On Friday, Donald Trump intimated vaguely that such support would be forthcoming. But the US president has already demonstrated his reluctance to take military action against Iran. Last month, he abruptly cancelled bombing raids on Iran that had been planned as retaliation, after Iran had shot down an unmanned American drone.

Britain’s current dilemma can only be understood as part of a broader escalation of tensions between Iran and the west, in which the governments in Tehran and Washington are the central players.

The US has been pursuing a strategy of “maximum pressure,” which is designed to force Tehran into direct negotiations. In pursuit of this goal, the US has withdrawn from the Iran nuclear accord and reimposed swinging economic sanctions.

So far, the American strategy has not worked. Iran has refused to engage in direct talks and instead has resorted to a series of small-scale military provocations, including the tanker seizures and the attack on the American drone. The Iranian leadership may be relying on Mr. Trump’s clear reluctance to get involved in another shooting war in the Middle East.

But Tehran is at risk of miscalculating. There are influential people in Washington — such as John Bolton, Mr. Trump’s national-security adviser — who have long been advocates of a strike on Iran, Repeated Iranian provocations may tip the argument in their direction.

The seizure of the British-flagged oil tanker could also push the UK towards a more hawkish position on Iran, something that has been resisted by the EU. The Trump administration’s 2018 decision to pull out of the nuclear accord was rejected by Germany, France and the UK, who are cosignatories to the deal. They have collectively struggled to keep alive the prospect that Iran will reap economic benefits from continuing to respect the negotiated restraints on its nuclear program.

But if the UK is looking to deliver “serious consequences” for Iran that stop short of a military response, it could abandon its efforts to preserve the Iran nuclear accord and instead join in the Trump administration’s efforts to strangle the Iranian economy.

A British decision to align its Iran policy with that of Washington, would probably finally kill off the EU’s efforts to keep the Iran nuclear accord alive. It would also represent the abandonment of a long-standing British foreign-policy position and might increase the chances of a military confrontation further down the road. It is a momentous choice for a new prime minister to face, in his first few days in office.


Gideon Rarchman is just another brainwashed so called journalist. Boring.
Faridvor 4 Stunden
If Iran just sinks one of the British ships, they will go back to their shell.
Abdullah Yusoffvor 5 Stunden
years of cuts in defense spending…leaving the RoyalNavy with probably only 9 or 10 seaworthy gunboats (and 34 admirals)…is going to show up quite sorely, if Great Britain takes the military path in this instance…
TruthSeekervor 6 Stunden
if you dont have nukes, then you are do-able, meaning they will definitely do to you what they did to madman saddam, but this time a million times worse than their war on Iraq. Ask yourself, why trouble trump will not attack North Korea. There in lies the answer.
Anti Terror> TruthSeekervor 1 Stunde
True being Nuclear Helps Deter Enemies
Dr Rightvor 7 Stunden
Iran still has many cards to play. The biggest of them all would be to kick IAEA out of the country. If Iran plays that card, they could not possibly be blamed for the unraveling of the JCPOA, and it would give them much more leverage as well when negotiations become the only option, as before, to resolve their differences.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: