News

Kashani

Back to the main subject, read this article you might learn something.

//original.antiwar.com/porter/2009/06/03/repo...

let me help you with your click:

excerpts:

A report on Iran’s nuclear program issued by the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee last month generated news stories publicizing an
incendiary charge that U.S. intelligence is underestimating Iran’s
progress in designing a "nuclear warhead" before the halt in nuclear
weapons-related research in 2003.

That false and misleading charge from an intelligence official of a
foreign country, who was not identified but was clearly Israeli,
reinforces two of Israel’s key propaganda themes on Iran – that the
2007 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate on Iran is wrong, and that
Tehran is poised to build nuclear weapons as soon as possible.

But it also provides new evidence that Israeli intelligence was the
source of the collection of intelligence documents which have been used
to accuse Iran of hiding nuclear weapons research.

The Committee report, dated May 4, cited unnamed "foreign analysts" as
claiming intelligence that Iran ended its nuclear weapons-related work
in 2003 because it had mastered the design and tested components of a
nuclear weapon and thus didn’t need to work on it further until it had
produced enough sufficient material.

That conclusion, which implies that Iran has already decided to build
nuclear weapons, contradicts both the 2007 National Intelligence
Estimate on Iran, and current intelligence analysis. The NIE concluded
that Iran had ended nuclear weapons-related work in 2003 because of
increased international scrutiny, and that it was "less determined to
develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005."

The report included what appears to be a spectacular revelation from "a
senior allied intelligence official" that a collection of intelligence
documents supposedly obtained by U.S. intelligence in 2004 from an
Iranian laptop computer includes "blueprints for a nuclear warhead."

It quotes the unnamed official as saying that the blueprints "precisely
matched" similar blueprints the official’s own agency "had obtained
from other sources inside Iran."

No U.S. or IAEA official has ever claimed that the so-called laptop
documents included designs for a "nuclear warhead." The detailed list
in a May 26, 2008 IAEA report of the contents of what have been called
the "alleged studies" – intelligence documents on alleged Iranian
nuclear weapons work — made no mention of any such blueprints.

In using the phrase "blueprints for a nuclear warhead," the unnamed
official was evidently seeking to conflate blueprints for the reentry
vehicle of the Iranian Shehab missile, which were among the alleged
Iranian documents, with blueprints for nuclear weapons.

When New York Times reporters William J. Broad and David
E. Sanger used the term "nuclear warhead" to refer to a reentry vehicle
in a Nov. 13, 2005 story on the intelligence documents on the Iranian
nuclear program, it brought sharp criticism from David Albright, the
president of the Institute for Science and International Security.

"This distinction is not minor," Albright observed, "and Broad should
understand the differences between the two objects, particularly when
the information does not contain any words such as nuclear or nuclear
warhead."

The Senate report does not identify the country for which the analyst
in question works, and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee staff
refused to respond to questions about the report from IPS, including
the reason why the report concealed the identity of the country for
which the unidentified "senior allied intelligence official" works.

Reached later in May, the author of the report, Douglas Frantz, told
IPS he is under strict instructions not to speak with the news media.

After a briefing on the report for selected news media immediately
after its release, however, the Associated Press reported May 6 that
interviews were conducted in Israel. Frantz was apparently forbidden by
Israeli officials from revealing their national affiliation as a
condition for the interviews.

Frantz, a former journalist for the Los Angeles Times, had
extensive contacts with high-ranking Israeli military, intelligence and
foreign ministry officials before joining the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee staff. He and co-author Catherine Collins conducted
interviews with those Israeli officials for The Nuclear Jihadist,
published in 2007. The interviews were all conducted under rules
prohibiting disclosure of their identities, according to the book.

The unnamed Israeli intelligence officer’s statement that the
"blueprints for a nuclear warhead" — meaning specifications for a
missile reentry vehicle - were identical to "designs his agency had
obtained from other sources in Iran" suggests that the documents
collection which the IAEA has called "alleged studies" actually
originated in Israel.

A U.S.-based nuclear weapons analyst who has followed the "alleged
studies" intelligence documents closely says he understands that the
documents obtained by U.S. intelligence in 2004 were not originally
stored on the laptop on which they were located when they were brought
in by an unidentified Iranian source, as U.S. officials have claimed to
U.S. journalists.

The analyst, who insists on not being identified, says the documents
were collected by an intelligence network and then assembled on a
single laptop.

The anonymous Israeli intelligence official’s claim, cited in the
Committee report, that the "blueprints" in the "alleged studies"
collection matched documents his agency had gotten from its own source
seems to confirm the analyst’s finding that Israeli intelligence
assembled the documents.

German officials have said that the Mujahedin-e-Khalq or MEK, the
Iranian resistance organization, brought the laptop documents
collection to the attention of U.S. intelligence, as reported by IPS in
February 2008. Israeli ties with the political arm of the MEK, the
National Committee of Resistance in Iran (NCRI), go back to the early
1990s and include assistance to the organization in broadcasting into
Iran from Paris.

The NCRI publicly revealed the existence of the Natanz uranium
enrichment facility in August 2002. However, that and other
intelligence apparently came from Israeli intelligence. The Israeli
co-authors of The Nuclear Sphinx of Tehran,
Yossi Melman and Meir Javeanfar, revealed that "Western" intelligence
was "laundered" to hide its actual provenance by providing it to
Iranian opposition groups, especially NCRI, in order to get it to the
IAEA.

They cite U.S., British and Israeli officials as sources for the revelation.

New Yorker writer Connie Bruck wrote in a March 2006 article
that an Israeli diplomat confirmed to her that Israel had found the MEK
"useful" but declined to elaborate.

Israeli intelligence is also known to have been actively seeking to use
alleged Iranian documents to prove that Iran had an active nuclear
weapons program just at the time the intelligence documents which
eventually surfaced in 2004 would have been put together.

The most revealing glimpse of Israeli use of such documents to
influence international opinion on Iran’s nuclear program comes from
the book by Frantz and Collins. They report that Israel’s international
intelligence agency Mossad created a special unit in the summer of 2003
to carry out a campaign to provide secret briefings on the Iranian
nuclear program, which sometimes included "documents from inside Iran
and elsewhere."

The "alleged studies" collection of documents has never been verified
as genuine by either the IAEA or by intelligence analysts. The Senate
report said senior United Nations officials and foreign intelligence
officials who had seen "many of the documents" in the collection of
alleged Iranian military documents had told committee staff "it is
impossible to rule out an elaborate intelligence ruse."

end excerpts

-YT

Kashani

So are you telling me you beleive in those?

ay kalak..... 

I thought you were not speaking to me?

BTW How is weather down there, because I might be coming to Tel Aviv for couple of weeks to visit my university pal who is a MD there. I have not set the exact schedule yet, may be late August or early Sept.

-YT

capt ayhab, Let me tell

capt ayhab,

Let me tell you what else is reality: Unicorns and UFOs.

If IRIs nuke program is so "peaceful", why did they hide it for 30 years, and why IAEA itself is saying IRI is not cooperating with us fully? What do they have to hide?

Anonymous and don't believe it

Tell me, who do you think is telling the truth?Do you even know what [DOCUMENTS] are the refering to in that UN report?

-YT

say what?

You think this proves anything? You might try reading the whole thing. lol