In the sea of abundant information, please be careful with misleading information coming from half truths. Half truths are worse than no truths, because at least with no truths we can easily detect and debunk them.
But with half truths? Iran’s retaliation can be seen as the instigator in this war if we never read about the first attack by Israel. Without context, Iran’s attack on Saudi, Kuwait, UAE, Bahrain, Qatar will show Iran as the agressor while in the whole truth Iran already warned weeks before if US and Israel attack them they will retaliate by attacking 1. US military bases in the Gulf countries 2. US assets in the region (like sites in Dubai) 3. And overall US military presence, which is why Iran bombed civilian sites such as a hotel in Bahrain (filled with US military personnel). It may look chaotic, but it is not random.
At this point, inserting Sunni vs Shia element in the Iran vs Gulf narrative will make perfect sense, but it’s a half truth. Because yes there is still a tension between Sunni and Shia even after more than 1400 years, but the rift between Shia and Sunni has nothing to do with US-backed Gulf siding with Israel vs Iran that stands in the way of the Greater Israel plan. So the religious infighting element is so very tiny in this war context.
It is also so easy to jump into conclusion that the drone attack on Saudi Aramco’s Ras Tanura refinery is conducted by Iran due to their constant bombing onto the Gulf, but apparently it wasn’t (as claimed by Iran’s deputy foreign minister to CNN). Why should we believe the denial? Because Iran has so far take claims on everything they bomb without hiding it, and they would not have any issue admitting it if they did it. After all they do close down Hormuz strait (20% of global oil traffic) with a bigger impact on oil market than the attack on Aramco’s refinery. It is by not easily believing on the half truth narrative that Iran did the strike on Aramco (the first time) that we would be 1 step closer to the whole truth: if it’s not Iran, then who actually did it? And why?
Half truths can also mislead us in the progress of the geopolitic mapping. Like the posts by many X and IG accounts about a report by the FT that “Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar are discussing withdrawing from contracts with the U.S. and canceling future investment commitments in the U.S.” First, I checked to FT directly and they don’t have any reporting of this (it’s such a massive, empire-shifting, news that if true they would have to report it). The only credible media or journalists (at X) that report it is [the often dodgy] Binance news, without any second source that can solidify the truthfulness. Secondly even if it’s true, notice that it’s still being discussed and not finalized. And so many social media accounts are misleadingly portraying it as if it’s a done deal that would practically end the Petrodollar Recycling engine that powers the American Empire.
And then we have Reza fucking Pahlavi. Half truths will describe him as the “exiled crown prince”, showing that his monarchy father was deposed in 1979 by Muslim extremists. That is correct. But those who said only this part of the story usually want to create a narrative that the current regime is a vicious and illegal regime. And the whole truth? In an action dubbed as the Operation Ajax the US and UK staged a coup in 1953 to topple a democratically-elected Iranian president Mohammad Mosaddegh after he decided to nationalise their oil. Afterwards they installed Shah Reza Pahlevi as their puppet dictator, they stole Iranian oil, bring in Rockefeller to handle the finance of the entire regime from top to bottom, and control the country with Pahlavi’s gruesome rule filled with violence. For Iranians who really understand their history, the last thing they need is the return of the son of a brutal dictator.
Now, this is an oversimplification (hey people write many books about this) but the only group that was brave enough to challenge the US-backed puppet was the extremists, who then staged a counter-revolution in 1979 to grab back their country. That’s why the US so resent this Iranian regime, because they dare to fight back the empire, with the West constantly trying to portray the Ayatollah’s regime as violators of human rights, especially on opression of women while in whole truth women are liberated (now they don’t even have to wear the hijab) with them making up around 70% of science and engineering graduates.
On a ligher side of half truths, Prof Jiang is probably the hottest commentator in this war, after he successfully predicted the rise of Donald Trump and the attack on Iran. I like him. But just because he was right few times, doesn’t mean that going forward he will be correct 100% everytime. Because, despite of his brilliant posts that make a lot of sense, he also a human that once said the strait of Hormuz (width of 33-97 KM) is swimmable, in order to make a point about how narrow the strait is. Hence, a bit of healthy skepticism is still needed in reading any information from any source.
The truth is never easy to learn, but the whole truth is easier to understand rather than a series of inter-connected half truths. The whole truth is always clear and logically make sense. If a reporting doesn’t make sense or feel too good to be true, then it might hide some crucial information that is designed to prevent you to know the whole truth.
And by contrast, don’t quickly dismiss any bizarre or unusual claims that don’t make sense, as long as they can give you the “receipt” or the evidence of the claims. Because, as they say, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” The key to all of this is in the receipts.
THE CHAOS THEORY 