21 thoughts on “IAEA Iran Report Unravels: Tainted Mossad Evidence Alleges Russian Scientist Aided Nuclear Weapons Research – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
task-attention.png
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.
 

  1. I can’t understand where are the facts showing the Mossad is behind all of this? Or maybe this article based on your hearts’ wish? Really, I can’t get it.

    How can you tell me not attach any link that contradict your POV, but in the same time you write an article that based on IPS report that only guess that “The unnamed member state that informed the agency about Danilenko’s alleged experience as a Soviet nuclear weapons scientist is ALMOSTcertainly Israel, which has been the source of virtually all the purported intelligence on Iranian work on nuclear weapons over the past decade” and “Albright said the state was ‘PROBABLY Israel’ Again, where are the facts showing the Mossad is behind this report?

    So, it’s nice that you’re “going to put my money on this information being offered by the Mossad”. How can we know if it’s true or false? At the end, it’s all about specualtuions, so don’t worry, your money will be safe.

    Furthermore, The story about Danilenko is a minor issue in this report. I think that it’s very convenient for you (and other progressives) to fucos on Danilenko’s issue and to ignore the rest of the report which indicates that Iran does anything that it can to achieve some nuke bombs (which is not based only on the findingsand documents that the member states called Israel and the US provided to the IAEA).

    1. You’re making the same hollow arguments hasbarists made about Stuxnet, the Al Mabouh assassination, etc. YOu argue it wasn’t Mossad because I can’t give you a photo of the forged document. Well, sorry Porter’s article is convincing & offers evidence though you may not like it. And btw, if it wasn’t Israel can you point to which intelligence agency it was? Just so we can blame the right one. Till then, I feel comfortable laying the finger on Mossad.

      Danilenko is NOT a minor issue. Every media rpt throughout the world trumpeted the false “fact” that foreign scientists were engaged in making an Iranian bomb.

      “Iran does anything it can to achieve nuke bombs.” Did you see that in the rpt.? Cause I sure didn’t. Is that an example of how free & easy you are w facts & evidence??

      1. My money is on “Jonds” as the source of the misinformation. He seems to have trouble understanding that your story is speculative but compelling given history etc. I don’t expect Jonds to own up.

    2. A minor issue? not according to the unrelenting barrage of unfounded “news” reports from a veritable smorgasbord of news outlets, blogs and comments there on since David Albright started pushing the story nearly a week before the report was due. Having read the new IAEA report three times now, it was the only new “claim” offered, the rest of the appendix is a rehash of the “Laptop of Death” and any real alleged “journalist” or “expert” covering this worth their “green salt” should have been able to identify that from simply reading it. The IAEA in this have simply become a “publishing house” for “unnamed member states” to disseminate uncorroborated/unfounded/unproven (old and rejected) claims under what was a respectable label with the help of its new “Editor in Chief”. Dodgy Dossier 2: The return of …

      1. IAEA has indeed become a impartial organ since the lackey amano took over the office – it has made a mockery of itself – relaying of israeli intelligence that may be fabricated.
        At the same time IAEA’s highest ‘organ’ is the UN security council and who runs that is no news which proves once again its non-objectivity.

        People like to think that IAEA and UN have nothing with each other to do but its basically runned by the same nation running UNSC. At the same time its also runned by westerners, which obviously then have a pro-western agenda, or should I say a pro-US(Israel) agenda.

        Former IAEA leader – Mohammed El’Baradei got more or less kicked out due US and israeli interests. For example was El’Baradei threatened with impeachment by the israelis.
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7085213.stm

        It also be worth noting what Mohammed El’Baradei wrote in his memoirs about the Iran case and israel’s refusal to present the evidence they claimed about Iran.
        Here is a link to some excerpt from his book:

        http://www.iranaffairs.com/iran_affairs/2011/11/those-alleged-studies-or-possible-military-dimensions-in-iran.html

        IAEA is like UNSC just a mere front for the national interest of United States and its allies, evidently especially Israel. If not, where are the sanctions, isolation on israeli secret nuclear weapons program?

  2. Richard, this is excellent trail blazing summary. It seems completely plausible to me that one – somewhat hapless – Mossad department would supply similar more or less erroneous bits of information about the Ukranian connection. Which can be rather easily debunked.

    I have also liked your theory about Abusisi and the possibility he was offered by Hamas for their own political reasons. You are thinking like a proper counterintelligence (or is it counter-propagaqnda) operative….(it’s a compliment, BTW).

    As an aside, here’s another thought to brighten your day(s): if you – and your sources – are even partly right, then the Mossad is falling on hard times. It has been relying for way too long on the apathy and ignorance of the masses, which may have been justified in the pre-internet days. But its complacency is ill-suited for the new times. I bring as another exhibit the botched operation in Dubai. They may have gotten the “hit” (ie, dead man, probably also sacrificed by Hamas – for their own reasons) but at the expense of a huge black eye and an enduring whiff of organizational incompetence. The entire MO laid bare. What can be worse for an intelligence organization?

    That’s what will get israel in the end – the complacency that comes with too much hubris. They don’t even bother to cover their tell-tale- tracks any more.

  3. I think your assumptions based on what evidence is available seem perfectly believable. Thanks for saying what is all to clear, that Israel & US are the main suppliers of the ‘so-called’ evidence for the IAEA report, which I have read.

  4. Too funny. For years IAEA reports have been held up as reliable counter for Israel’s claims of weapon ambitions in the Iran nuclear program.

    Suddenly IAEA info is unreliable and tainted by possible Mossad connections.

    I don’t recall any analysis pulling apart past IAEA reports, or even any major doubts expressed about their content (except by the hasbarists of course)

    1. Not “suddenly.” Mohammed el Baradei was director till 2 yrs ago. He resisted including much of the nonsense included in this report. That’s why IAEA reports were considered careful & cautious. The new director is a U.S. poodle. Hence much skepticism.

  5. “YOu argue it wasn’t Mossad because I can’t give you a photo of the forged document.” I don’t argue it wasn’t the mossad as I don’t argue that maybe it was the CIA or maybe MI6. I’m just showing you the other side. When you say my links aren’t convincing but yours are, I find it dubious. Especially when those were based on convincing articles and academic reviews.

    “And btw, if it wasn’t Israel can you point to which intelligence agency it was” – I have to say that after I read the report carefully, Iv’e concluded that the alleged studies documents were provided by 10 member states and by the IAEA itself. In contrary to you, I can’t point which intelligence agency it was on the basis of published articles without any facts.

    “Porter’s article is convincing & offers evidence” – There isn’t any evidence in his article. Instead, it offers lots of speculations.

    ““Iran does anything it can to achieve nuke bombs.” Did you see that in the rpt.? Cause I sure didn’t. Is that an example of how free & easy you are w facts & evidence??” – You should read article C6-C10 to this report. Read also section 53. I urge you to read section 65 and its attachment 2. Richard, It seems that you’re putting your head in the sand like an ostrich. But hey, I’m sure that as long as it serves your POV it’s ok. nope?

    “Iran does anything it can to achieve nuke bombs.” Did you see that in the rpt.? Cause I sure didn’t. Is that an example of how free & easy you are w facts & evidence??

    “Danilenko is NOT a minor issue” – If you read the report you should have known that the issue of Danilenko is minor issue when compared with the other parts of the report. You really should read it from the beginning to the end.

    “Every media rpt throughout the world trumpeted the FALSE “fact” that foreign scientists were engaged in making an Iranian bomb” – Do you have any evidence that this report about foreign scientists is false? Can you provide them to all of us? Otherwise, we will learn your articles in the apporpriate context.

    Oh, and one more thing about FALSE facts – It is well-known fact that Abdul Qadeer Khan (who is known for being the creator of the Pakistani nuclear bomb) and his stuff sold centrifuges to the Iranian regime. I understand that you would say it was for uranium enrichment for civilian purposes. I would say that it wasn’t as they were sold while breaching the UN sanctions. Everyone of us will conclude the conclusions that he should, but afterwards please don’t tell “we didn’t know”.

    SEE ATTACHMENT 2

    1. When you offer an AEI analyst publishing in the Weekly Standard as evidence no one will take you seriously. Period. You can bellow all you want but that’s just the way it is. Neither is credible in any sense of the word.

      the alleged studies documents were provided by 10 member state

      Nonsense. Sorry fella, but even Yaakov Katz a stout Israeli hawk admits that Mossad evidence is the lion’s share of what is offered in the rpt & he proudly says it was offered to manipulate the international debate in Israel’s favor. That’s a smoking gun & hard to argue with though you might try.

      I repeat there is NOTHING in this report that indicates “Iran does anything it can to achieve nuke bombs,” as you speciously claimed. There are claims that there is evidence that Iran is pursuing research that would have intent to create a weapon. That’s a far cry fr. yr claim. You’d be a lot more credible if you were more cautious & careful in yr language & claims.

      Do you have any evidence that this report about foreign scientists is false?

      Do you have any evidence of specific foreign scientists other than Khan (& his help happened long ago) & Danilenko (whose assistance ended in 2002 if he provided any, which he didn’t) helping the Iranians? I don’t see any. So what foreign scientists are helping? Who are they? When & how did they help? I’m waiting for some real evidence.

      1. “the alleged studies documents were provided by 10 member state. Nonsense.” Ye, you right. I mislead you. It says that “in addition to the alleged studies documentdion, the Agency has received information from more
        than ten Member States. This has included procurement information, information on international travel
        by individuals said to have been involved in the alleged activities, financial records, documents reflecting
        health and safety arrangements, and other documents demonstrating manufacturing techniques for certain
        high explosive components. This information reinforces and tends to corroborate the information reflected
        in the alleged studies documentation, and relates to activities substantially beyond those identified in that
        documentation”. All in paragraph 13 of the report.

        “Yaakov Katz a stout Israeli hawk admits that Mossad evidence is the lion’s share of what is offered in the rpt & he proudly says it was offered to manipulate the international debate in Israel’s favor.” – I guess that Katz, a Journalist, is the credible source. Are you kidding me?

        “When you offer an AEI analyst publishing in the Weekly Standard as evidence” – This analize was based on few sources that were quoted in the article. Again, it seems that you didn’t read it. Maybe because it was inconvinent to do so.

        “Danilenko” – I have just read about Danilenko denial of the allegations against him. Maybe it was other scientist? Maybe the report of Porter who said Danilenko is the scientist doesn’t have any basis? I don’t know. Do you?

        “Do you have any evidence of specific foreign scientists other than Khan & Danilenko helping the Iranians” – So I guess that your sentence “Every media rpt throughout the world trumpeted the false “fact” that foreign SCIENTISTS…” isn’t quite true. All I have to do after I read it again and again is to quote you “You’d be a lot more credible if you were more cautious & careful in yr language & claims”

        1. The name of the allegded “Soviet nuclear scientist” was provided Joby Warrick of the Washington Post, who obtained it from a deliberate leak of David Albright’s powerpoint presention regarding the IAEA report, pre-release. Gareth Porter did not make it up.

          1. Oh and sadly for Joby, he passed it on in his article, apparently without taking the least bit of trouble to actually check out the claims, like a good little trained parrot aka “journalist”. Apparently he either didn’t bother even Googling the fellow’s name, or did so and didn’t think it worthwhile to mention that this guy was not in fact a nuclear scientist etc.

          2. I didn’t asy he did make it up. I say that the Soviet nuclear scientist deny that he is the man who we all talk about here – Danilenko. So maybe it’s someone else?

  6. http://www.truthdig.com/report/page3/20080626_the_nuclear_expert_who_never_was/

    Ah yes, David Albright.

    “…The nuclear expert who never was…”

    The infamous media darling on all things nuclear and agent provocateur of the Iraqi blunder, who has played:

    “…the role of a patsy, the middleman peddling misinformation to a media too lazy to conduct their own due diligence before running with a story.”

    Israelis have to be totally scared out of their wits to be traveling the same worn out & used up paths of disinformation a blogger can so easily trace down.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share via
Copy link