New York Times Says Financial Transfers Confirm That Russia Paid For Bounties In Afghanistan



New York Times: Suspicions of Russian Bounties Were Bolstered by Data on Financial Transfers

Analysts have used other evidence to conclude that the transfers were most likely part of an effort to offer payments to Taliban-linked militants to kill American and coalition troops in Afghanistan.

American officials intercepted electronic data showing large financial transfers from a bank account controlled by Russia’s military intelligence agency to a Taliban-linked account, evidence that supported their conclusion that Russia covertly offered bounties for killing U.S. and coalition troops in Afghanistan, according to three officials familiar with the intelligence.

Though the United States has accused Russia of providing general support to the Taliban before, analysts concluded from other intelligence that the transfers were most likely part of a bounty program that detainees described during interrogations.

Investigators also identified by name numerous Afghans in a network linked to the suspected Russian operation, the officials said — including, two of them added, a man believed to have served as an intermediary for distributing some of the funds and who is now thought to be in Russia.

Read more ....

Update: Report: Financial transfers back intelligence of Russian bounty scheme (UPI).

WNU Editor: The general purpose of this blog is to post the breaking news stories of the day, and to give my opinion on it. But I feel like I am repeating history when it comes to the New York Times. When the New York Times led the story on the Russia-Trump collusion narrative for almost three years, using anonymous sources to back their reporting, regular readers of this blog know that I was always skeptical and critical of their conclusions. That is why I was not surprised when we learned earlier this year that the entire Russian-Trump collusion story was false. Or to put it bluntly .... a lie. Flash forward to today. The New York Times is now using anonymous sources to claim that money was transferred from Russia to the Taliban via through the informal “hawala” system that operates in countries like Afghanistan. Right there that does not make sense. The "hawala" system is the most informal banking system in the world that stays away from normal banking paperwork and documentation. It is based on trust, and its very nature makes it impossible to track and monitor. Even the NSA, which monitors this type of activity,  is now saying that there is no truth to this story .... NSA Differed From CIA, Others on Russia Bounty Intelligence (WSJ). In the past I would always side with a news organization and its reporting .... no more now when it comes to the New York Times and their use of anonymous sources. They have lied in the past with their use of anonymous sources, and my gut tells me that they are lying now. Never forget that this is a Presidential election year in the U.S.. Everything that is now being reported, and what is not being reported, is based on that.

Update: Three years ago I would have sneered and laughed at President Trump for saying this (see tweet below). I am not laughing anymore. He is (I am sad to say) probably right.

Subscribe to receive free email updates: