You are viewing the NationofChange archives. For the latest news and actions, visit the new www.NationofChange.org.
Friday, October 31, 2014 / PROGRESSIVE JOURNALISM FOR POSITIVE ACTION
Get Email Updates | Log In | Register

V. Noah Gimbel
Published: Sunday 13 November 2011
“Painting the Islamic Republic as an irrational actor, as was done to Saddam Hussein in 2003, serves to reinforce the case for war as a last resort.”

Do Iran’s Objections to the IAEA Report Deserve Consideration?

Article image

Much of the U.S. media, with instigation from hawkish voices in IsraelFrance, the U.K. and the U.S., has been whipped into an anti-Iran frenzy over the last week surrounding the release of a much-ballyhooed report from the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The report, which expresses the Director General’s “serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear program,” has been dismissed by Iranian leaders as politically biased in favor of the U.S. administration, and lacking in any direct evidence of a weapons program.

In a sentence now removed from the web version of the article in which it appeared (it can still be found in external links to the article, like the one here), the New York Times’ Robert Worth described the Iranian response thus:

Professing outrage over the release of a United Nations report on Iranian nuclear ambitions, Iran’s leaders escalated their anti-American vitriol on Wednesday, calling the report a fabrication, denouncing its chief author as a Washington stooge and vowing that their country would not be bullied into abandoning its nuclear program.

The same article refers to “voluminous evidence not previously disclosed,” and the Washington Post editorial board goes one step further, stating that the report “ought to end serious debate about whether Tehran’s program is for peaceful purposes.” But rarely do the scions of the informed public give their readers insight into what sort of evidence is used to support the report’s claims, where it comes from or how the Iranian regime has refuted those claims.

A deeper look into just that, however, may cast serious doubts on the report’s objectivity and veracity, raising the question: just how far-fetched are Iran’s claims that the IAEA Directorate General is politically compromised?

Prior to the release of the report on Tuesday, November 8, White House press secretary Jay Carney augured that the report’s findings would “echo and reinforce” the long-held U.S. stance that the Iranian government seeks to build nuclear weapons, contrary to its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty. And indeed, Carney’s foresight was by no means preternatural: as evidenced inthis 2009 diplomatic cable released by Wikileaks, the U.S. had secured the support of IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano in its campaign against the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program as a quid-pro-quo for American support of his candidacy in the wake of Egyptian Nobel Laureate Mohammad El-Baradei’s resignation.

But could one man’s personal bias really manipulate the IAEA’s evidence – what the Washington Post referred to as “over 1,000 pages of documents, interviews with renegade scientists who helped Iran and material from 10 governments”? Well, that depends.

devastating piece of reporting from Gareth Porter of Inter Press Service follows one of the main pieces of evidence cited in the report to its source. The report, Porter says,

repeated the sensational claim previously reported by news media all over the world that a former Soviet nuclear weapons scientist had helped Iran construct a detonation system that could be used for a nuclear weapon.

But it turns out that the foreign expert, who is not named in the IAEA report but was identified in news reports as Vyacheslav Danilenko, is not a nuclear weapons scientist but one of the top specialists in the world in the production of nanodiamonds by explosives.

In other words, his legitimate reason for being in Iran from 1996-2002 was not a cover, it really was legitimate. As Porter points out, the Washington Think-Tanker who helped spread the word of this “renegade scientist” theory, David Albright, admitted the intelligence claims from an unidentified “member state” that spawned the theory almost certainly came from Israel. Later, that intelligence was incorporated into Amano’s findings without any independent verification.

And Israel’s authority on nuclear non-proliferation should be completely null by now, considering that the Jewish State possesses a sizeable secret arsenal of its own and shared nuclear technology with the murderous apartheid regime of South Africa for years. But what about the other intelligence sources?

Another fount of evidence supporting Amano’s report is likely the so-called “laptop of death” allegedly nabbed from an Iranian scientist by U.S. intelligence services in 2005. The smoking gun evidence on the laptop was all written in English, had no reference to official classification, and included graphs made on Microsoft PowerPoint. When this piece of evidence first surfaced in 2007 in connection to the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate on the Iranian nuclear program, it was largely dismissed by IAEA officials and international diplomats as a likely forgery. But that was before Yukiya Amano headed the agency. Indeed, Amano’s predecessor El Baradei publicly confirmed that Western Intelligence agencies had sought to exaggerate the threat of the Iranian nuclear program.

At The Race for Iran, Flynt and Hillary Mann Levrett have put out a characteristically thoughtful piece on the report’s implications, putting the current belligerence of the U.S. and Israel in context.

Whether or not it can be definitively stated that Iran seeks nuclear weapons capabilities, it should be understood that Iranian objections to the IAEA report are neither baseless nor hysterical. See for yourself the response of the Iranian Ambassador to the IAEA on Russia Today.

Painting the Islamic Republic as an irrational actor, as was done to Saddam Hussein in 2003, serves to reinforce the case for war as a last resort. In reality, there are numerous steps short of invasion or even targeted air strikes that can and should be taken, if indeed Iran’s critics are mainly interested in avoiding nuclear conflict.



Really? Please provide the

Really? Please provide the documentation to prove that assertion.

If the US and Israel attack

If the US and Israel attack Iran, it will start a regional war that could explode into a global conflagration. Netanyahu is obviously suicidal and Yukiya Amano and the IAEA is a stooge of the US/Israeli power structure.The real maniacs are in Washington and Tel Aviv...

Boris Badenov's picture

Is this the same way, that

Is this the same way, that baby incubators taken from Kuwaiti Hospitals in the Gulf War, could be used to purify Uranium 235?Because all of this sort of talk scares this Christ out of me!

I have absolutely no respect

I have absolutely no respect for any regime that seeks to dehumanize those who aren't of the" correct" ethnicity or religion. Thus, I am no lover of the Iranian mullahs, their "student guards," or other standard bearers of Shiite ignorance.
Nevertheless, I am troubled by parallels between the current publicity about Iran's alleged nuclear-weapons program and the allegations about Iraq just prior to the disastrous U.S. invasion of that country. Where are the "weapons of mass destruction?" Where is the "yellow cake uranium?" Where are the massive stockpiles of nerve gas that British and American papers claimed Iraq had?
Sorry, Washington and London, you lied to me before. I am no more likely to believe your stories than I am willing to believe that my becoming a "holy martyr for Islam" will put me in bed with seven virgins in the afterlife.

Dan H is half right. We did

Dan H is half right. We did some evil stuff. But let's not forget that Iran is hardly innocent. Just because we did bad, does that justify the 12'th century attitudes of the Iranian leadership? Does that mean we should ignore the desperate longings of the people to overthrow their own repressive government? Does that mean that everything we do is wrong, everything their also awful leaders do is right? Get a grip on logic here.

You miss the point of the

You miss the point of the Russian scientist helping the Iranians: the same mechanism used to make diamonds can fire uranium pellets to make a critical mass.

The article above makes no

The article above makes no claim that there is any connection between the two technologies. If you have any documentation to prove there is, please provide it. I'm sure the propaganda ministers in the MSM would just love to get their hands on that information (whether real or fictitious) so they can continue to beat the war drums until we do the same thing to Iran that we did to Iraq.

Boris Badenov's picture

Is this the same way, that

Is this the same way, that baby incubators taken from Kuwaiti Hospitals in the Gulf War, could be used to purify Uranium 235?

Does the VALERY PLAME

Does the VALERY PLAME incident tell anything to those with ears? Scott Ritter? What is the nature of amphictyonies that have arrived, in this day of endless crime in politics, past the Third Reich, where SWAT only SWATs the people and the earth? Where is Indira Singh? She provides the golden thread needing a silver needle of a biological political awareness, that of the natural Darwinian succession of mechanical crime in electronic form since WWII to overtake a flower-age (of 3Gs and the like) through a sophisticated second grade approach of laundering money and financing all crime via a surveillance state with way too much traction. SWAT is supposed to take cells out, not grow them to cover the planet. Evidence is more important than propaganda, so developed over time it boggles the imagination. Google her 2005 interview on Guns and Butter. She is, or was, a genius. She is missing. Justice must start somewhere. This is not just being cheeky, I promise. If you don't believe the 'cells' analogy, look up Lynn Margulis.

Its really very simple - the

Its really very simple - the lovely Shariah Lawley's power in the US does not go beyond extending the late night opening hours of her kebab shop!! And the devils who own and manage the five MSM networks (amongst many many many other power positions within the US) are telling us here otherwise ?! Its sick - they have certainly chosen to have a very low opinion of our intelligence (at the very least !). BTW - this computer laptop and other "evidence" dates back to 2003 and before, by now NINE YEARS later; the Iranians should already have the bomb then - and are deviously lulling the devil into making a first strike. only to get the chance to retaliate from a two man sub in the Mediterranean off Tel Aviv?!! Last man standing wins, and it certainly won't be Israel as we know it.

Its not rocket science, a conventional strike would be just an ineffective pin prick, someone somewhere is probably furiously planning (like 911) the next false flag (a sunk aircraft carrier perhaps?) that warrants a nuclear retort. Just in time for the 2012 US Presidential transition (like pre Xmas Gaza 2008 - to hell with JC!) window of opportunity, after all the next President may not be such an amenable Chicago puppet.

Or mebbe we are headed for a destined yin yang spell of emaciation (yet again) to exorcise the devil from the pound of flesh with the inevitable blood loss being the collateral damage to the rest. But wiser over chosen heads may yet intercede.

The credibility of the US and

The credibility of the US and Israel makes non-believers of most of the world. The US lost most of its credibility with the Viet Nam war. It lost all its credibility when it invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. Israel lost its credibility when it bombed the USS Liberty and its apartheid policy in Palestine. The more they talk the less they are believed. Actions speak much louder than words. So far all the actions have been for profit for the Military Industrial Complex and the right wing businessmen.

Um - I don't know which side

Um - I don't know which side to believe here. I do note that if the Russian scientist is "one of the top specialists in the world in the production of nanodiamonds by explosives" that specialty would lend itself excellently well to designing a detonation system for a nuclear weapon.

Basically the fissile material (U-235 or Pu-239,) is compressed by inward-pointing explosions to create the necessary critical mass. Sounds awful like the way they create diamonds by compressing carbon with explosives.

Maybe the guy does the nuke stuff in Russia and the diamond work, while also real, is a useful cover.

The same observation occurred

The same observation occurred to me. An attack on Iran would be a foolish move I believe as it would drive the suppressed minority which hates the current regime to rally to its defense. A surreptitious undermining of its efforts (such as the centrifuge wrecking worm) might eventually lead to an Iranian Spring.

You are a fool. You speak and

You are a fool. You speak and act as though the repressive mullahs don't exist, as if Ahmedinijad doesn't exist. As if, since this country and the west have been involved in bad acts and has the free press to bring those bad acts to light so we can punish the guilty and correct our course on a regular basis, that Iran is the good guys...YOU ARE OUT OF YOUR MIND. That is a genuinely evil, psychotic , repressive, backward, anti-women, anti-gay, antisemitic, anti-human rights, dictatorial government that takes glee in the thought of destroying the world around it. You are a fool!

Ahmedinijad, a denier of

Ahmedinijad, a denier of Holocaust and wanting to "wipe out Israel from the map" cannot be trusted with ANYTHING. Iranian people who did not elect this dictator are weary of things this delusional guy does. Other Muslims countries surrounding Iran are also weary to have such crazy guys having nuclear capability.

Considering that this guy has a delusional Jew-hatred, also practiced by the majority of Muslim countries, and the fact that his rockets may be able to reach Israel, no nuclear activity should be allowed in Iran or ANY other Muslim countries. We re now suffering the consequences of Pakistani delusional and dysfunctional state, ruled by medieval evil Sharia has nuclear weapons and India is endangered by those guys.

Mahmoud Abbas is also a denier of Holocaust and in his Ph,D, thesis he blamed Zionists of cooperating with Hitler. Considering that most of the Arab leaders were great admirers of Hitler and that Amin al Husseyni, the role model for many Arab leaders, was the only Nazi war criminal allowed to go unpunished and spread his delusional Jew-hatred in Arab countries, there cannot be a viable state run by those guys.

Islam unfortunately is NOT a peaceful religion and Koranic writings are the source of terrorism and other hateful behaviors of Muslim masses. Human life on earth does not have much value, unlike among Jews who let over 1000 terrorists be exchanged for ONE Israeli soldier. This ratio and the fact that among those thousand were many murderers is an indication about the value of human life in most Muslim societies.

The report could be reviewed

The report could be reviewed by a truly independent committee of the UN, if such exists, since, like UNESCO with half its budget gone for recognizing Palestine as a state, no group is truly independent of the power and money of the USA and Israel, no matter how courageous they may be in fairly evaluating the evidence.

Will people in the US even remember the mood of joy, hate, revenge, and patriotism surging through their country prior to the unilateral attack of Iraq for supporting terrorism and hiding weapons of mass destruction? And will politicians even care what junior members of the House, or citizens, think this time, now that so much more power belongs (nominally) to the office of the President, and in this cause alone, all the right-wingers are in favour of him!! Have the 99% really found their voice, and will they be heard, when they say a quick bombing and war in Iraq (oops, I meant Iran) really will not fool anyone this time, whether it's the 99% in America, Israel, the UK, Australia, Canada, or any other sorry country that gets dragged in by their 1%.

We (meaning we, the US) have

We (meaning we, the US) have a pretty bad history with respect to Iran, because we installed the Shah there in the 1950s via a CIA operation.

It's no wonder that there was a "hostage" crisis in 1979.

And our sin in the 1950s will continue to bear bitter fruit (after all, we're still sinning).

Anyhow, the Iranians would be nuts not to protest loudly at each new lie the west comes up with.

Yes - "Operation Ajax" was a

Yes - "Operation Ajax" was a covert CIA/MI6 operation designed to depose Mohammed Mossadeq, the democratically elected leader of Iran. Mossadeq's crime was his desire to nationalize the Iranian oil fields and deny BP a monopoly in the Middle East. The US installed the Shah and the CIA created SAVAK - the Iranian Secret Police. A reign of terror followed and lasted until the Iranian Revolution in 1979.

Comment with your Facebook account



Comment with your Disqus account

Top Stories

comments powered by Disqus

NationofChange works to educate, inform, and fight power with people, corruption with community.

If you would like to stay up to date with the best in independent, filter-free journalism, updates on upcoming events to attend, and more, enter your email below:

7 Compelling Reasons Why You Should Support NationofChange

Our readers often tell us why they’ve decided to step up and become supporters. Here are some of the top reasons people are giving.

1. You’re keeping independent journalism alive
The corporate owned media has proven that it can’t be trusted. In a media landscape wrought with spin and corruption, NationofChange stands in very scarce company.

2. You’re sticking it to the rich, powerful, and corrupt
When you have money in this country you can get away with damn near anything, and they do. NationofChange isn’t afraid to expose these criminals no matter how powerful they are.

3. Your donation is 100% tax-deductible
NationofChange is a 501(c)3 charity. People tend to assume that many other organizations are (most nonprofits are NOT) but it’s that 501(c)3 status is a bit more rare than you think.

Read the rest...