Wednesday, 17 May 2017

The Trump - Russian Narrative Fails Basic Logic Test

“It is very easy: If you can put Russia in the equation you win your argument,” - George Epurescu, Romanian Anti Fracking Group

In 2014, many media outlets such as the New York Times, The Guardian, and Financial Times were reporting that Russia may have been financing anti fracking protest groups around Europe. Their source was the then head of NATO, Anders Rasmussen. According to Wikileaks, even Hillary Clinton was privately worried about Russian influence in anti fracking movements in the US. Bloomberg recently reported that since US overtook Russia in gas production, the Russian TV Network, RT has :

"regularly published articles and aired segments that appear to oppose fracking, the fossil-fuel extraction technique that has made the U.S. an energy superpower again. One "exclusive" interview about the extraction technique features the opening question: "There are a lot of studies that say fracking is dangerous, so why do you think some countries and companies think it’s worth the risk?" 

This tends to support the initial claims made in 2014 by the head of NATO. There is of course a clear motive for Russia to get involved in anti fracking movements and to provide a platform for anti fracking propaganda on RT - to keep gas prices high and reduce competition. 

The logical next step then is for Russia to have backed an anti fracking party in America like the Greens or indeed a candidate like Bernie Sanders but certainly not someone like Donald Trump who is a strong advocate for US gas, coal and oil. Russia exports about $8 billion in petroleum products to the US each year. Even if the claims in 2014 about Russian influence in anti fracking movements are false, there is still no clear motive as to why Russia would back Trump. 

As George Epurescu says, "Russia" is now an argument and a counter argument to almost everything. You can dispense with the inconvenient need for basic logic and reason to support your arguments and just claim "Russia" which elicits the necessary emotional response required to make it look like you actually have an argument. 


  1. It was not Russia. It was a DNC staffer and in typical Clinton fashion he was knocked off. Podesta was stupid enough to write an e mail saying he would not mind if they hit a leaker even if it were the wrong one. The Russiia theory knocked on the head. Murder is a pretty serious crime. They say.

  2. Brexit and the American Presidential election demonstrates that the traditional right / left political environment has morphed into a new beast. I have always said that the political spectrum is not a bar, but a circle, like the face of a clock. Many parts of UKIP and Trump's policies would be considered to be communist in 1950. The left appealled to the ordinary worker, but while there has been improvements to public services and a social welfare safety net, ordinary workers feel left behind as the left adopts global green policies which directly impact their well being.

    Having their clothes stolen by Nigel Farage and Donald Trump leaves the left with less wreckage to cling to. Greenism kills jobs, imposes wind farms of rural dwellers (cutting off the prospect of city left voters retiring to the country) and it can only bring green jobs by upping electricity bills. Faced with this, they resort to scare tactics, "we and our children will fry in sweltering heat". Meanwhile opportunities for Irish and British people to go to the beach, take in the sun and take a dip have shrunk to about 4 days in some years and no days in others.

    Its 13 degrees in Cavan 10 am to day after a very cold few days. Grass growth is retarded. The customary buzz of tractors cutting silage is no where to be heard. With American money gone from the Paris fund and Brexit pulling there EU contributions, there may be less farm subsidies. The corncrake could come back