It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Paper on Iran's Nuclear Aims Called Dishonest

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 14 2006 @ 07:10 AM
The Officials of the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency are protesting a congressional report about Iran's nuclear program claiming that it has significent flaws and outright lies in it calling it "outrageous and dishonest."
One of the misstatements has to do with the nuclear enrichment program noting that weapons-grade uranium is enriched to a level of 90 percent or more. Iran has enriched uranium to 3.5 percent under IAEA monitoring. The report was written by a single Republican operative with a known hard-line position on Iran by the name of Fredrick Fleitz, is a onetime CIA officer and special assistant to John R. Bolton.
U.N. Inspectors Dispute Iran Report By House Panel
Paper on Nuclear Aims Called Dishonest

By Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, September 14, 2006; Page A17

U.N. inspectors investigating Iran's nuclear program angrily complained to the Bush administration and to a Republican congressman yesterday about a recent House committee report on Iran's capabilities, calling parts of the document "outrageous and dishonest" and offering evidence to refute its central claims.

Officials of the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency said in a letter that the report contained some "erroneous, misleading and unsubstantiated statements." The letter, signed by a senior director at the agency, was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the House intelligence committee, which issued the report. A copy was hand-delivered to Gregory L. Schulte, the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA in Vienna.

The IAEA openly clashed with the Bush administration on pre-war assessments of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Relations all but collapsed when the agency revealed that the White House had based some allegations about an Iraqi nuclear program on forged documents.

Yesterday's letter, a copy of which was provided to The Washington Post, was the first time the IAEA has publicly disputed U.S. allegations about its Iran investigation. The agency noted five major errors in the committee's 29-page report, which said Iran's nuclear capabilities are more advanced than either the IAEA or U.S. intelligence has shown.

Among the committee's assertions is that Iran is producing weapons-grade uranium at its facility in the town of Natanz. The IAEA called that "incorrect," noting that weapons-grade uranium is enriched to a level of 90 percent or more. Iran has enriched uranium to 3.5 percent under IAEA monitoring.

The report was never voted on or discussed by the full committee. Rep. Jane Harman (Calif.), the vice chairman, told Democratic colleagues in a private e-mail that the report "took a number of analytical shortcuts that present the Iran threat as more dire -- and the Intelligence Community's assessments as more certain -- than they are."

Privately, several intelligence officials said the committee report included at least a dozen claims that were either demonstrably wrong or impossible to substantiate. Hoekstra's office said the report was reviewed by the office of John D. Negroponte, the director of national intelligence.

"This is like prewar Iraq all over again," said David Albright, a former nuclear inspector who is president of the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security. "You have an Iranian nuclear threat that is spun up, using bad information that's cherry-picked and a report that trashes the inspectors."

The committee report, written by a single Republican staffer with a hard-line position on Iran, chastised the CIA and other agencies for not providing evidence to back assertions that Iran is building nuclear weapons.The report's author, Fredrick Fleitz, is a onetime CIA officer and special assistant to John R. Bolton, the administration's former point man on Iran at the State Department. Bolton, who is now ambassador to the United Nations, had been highly influential during President Bush's first term in drawing up a tough policy that rejected talks with Tehran.

Among the allegations in Fleitz's Iran report is that ElBaradei removed a senior inspector from the Iran investigation because he raised "concerns about Iranian deception regarding its nuclear program." The agency said the inspector has not been removed.

A suggestion that ElBaradei had an "unstated" policy that prevented inspectors from telling the truth about Iran's program was particularly "outrageous and dishonest," according to the IAEA letter, which was signed by Vilmos Cserveny, the IAEA's director for external affairs and a former Hungarian ambassador.

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

This sends chills up my spine. It shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that this administration hasn't learned a thing. It cooked the books on Iraq and are doing the same about Iran. Iran's government maybe hard line (and I am no fan of it or its loud-mouth president) but this is outrageous. It is obscene to be so eager to go to war that you are willing to lie your country into it... no matter what administration does it. I think though after the mess in Iraq, the American public will not be so easily fooled this time. Iraq was a cake walk of an invasion...if we tried to invade Iran, a long standing (try several thousand years) political unity and stable nation, it would be a bloodbath.

here is a link to the original article which includes a PDF of the IAEA letter.

[edit on 14-9-2006 by grover]

[edit on 14-9-2006 by grover]

[edit on 14-9-2006 by grover]

posted on Oct, 30 2006 @ 03:53 AM
Very interesting article. Thanks for finding it.

Whether the information was misrepresented intentionally or not would have probably caused another "Iraq has WMD" scenario, which is another mistake American citizens are not willing to put up with again, for sake of the troop's lives.

posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 12:47 AM
Here is a little bit of info on this subject that I thought might stir some discussion.Kind of makes you wonder where some peoples loyalties are?

posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 07:19 PM
I dont think that lots of american citiziens are buying into the iran situation... >_>. We arent going to be easily fooled by the iranians, and I am presuming that our situation with the iranians are hostile right now. The current administration feels that they are a threat to the americans and as of yet I have to see any concern that the current administration may have.

Bad decision making, false claims that arent true, and stories about a false nuclear enrichment program to entice intensity among the citizens of this nation are enough to start a war here. I hope that the country as a whole realizes the mistakes that we made with Iraq.

If we went to war with Iran we could crush them, but we'd have to find their known military outlets first, and destroy them after that. False claims will get you nowhere... and there's problematic situation which compromises the ends after that... why would the general publiic talk of war when we arent even in a waring situation?

First of all, this is iran, this isnt iraq, (they need to get the facts straight).

posted on Nov, 7 2006 @ 07:53 PM
I don't know what to say. This is sad, very sad

Hopefully the World has learnt not to trust these war mongers. Otherwise, more innocent lives will be lost to this crazy, hawkish Administration.

top topics

log in