Amano's New Report Repetition of Unfounded CLaims by U.S., Zionists
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC NEWS AGENCY (IRNA)
November 8, 2011
Tehran, Nov 8, IRNA -- Western sources said about one month ago that the new report by the UN nuclear watchdog's chief would include some evidence showing that Iran's nuclear activities were for military purposes.
They said that the report would include some evidence that had been
given to the International Atomic Energy Agency by certain states about
the alleged military nature of Iran’s nuclear program.
Latest news indicated that the IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano’s
report would have a 15-page attachment which would include the text of
some of the so-called evidence.
Diplomats said in Tehran that during his last week’s visit to
Washington, Amano received latest orders about the necessity of
publishing his report in the present juncture and that is why he ignored
demands by Russia and China as well as some European states and members
of the Non-Aligned Movement for practicing neutrality.
According to scholars in Tehran and at the IAEA Secretariat, the
15-page attachment was not technically and legally defensible and would
soon become a credit crisis for the IAEA.
The depth of the attachment’s unreliability would become clear once a
few points including as mentioned below are taken into consideration:
1- No new evidence was provided in the report published in November,
2011. They are all related to the same so-called laptop issue which was
allegedly stolen from an Iranian official in 2004. Therefore, it is
clear that unlike what he had said before, Amano had no new information
to support his claim and was using the same old data. This indicates
that all his claims about continuation of Iran’s nuclear activities
after 2004 was a mere lie.
2- The original text of those so-called evidences were seen neither
by the Agency nor by Iran. Since 2007, Iran has repeatedly requested
that the evidences be sent for an independent team to examine their
reliability but the US has always opposed the idea. The US opposition
was so embarrassing that the then director general of the IAEA, Mohamed
ElBaradei repeatedly accused Washington of preventing the Agency from
acting in accordance with its Safeguards duties.
The significant point here is that what the US claims to have
against Iran is an electronic file and there is no original text
available about that. Actually, no original text has existed about
alleged studies over the issue of Iran’s nuclear activities. Publishing a
117-page study, Iran proved to the IAEA in 2007 that those evidences
were fake but Amano did not mention this issue in his November report.
3- Even if we believe that the evidences were true, neither the IAEA
nor anybody else could ever prove that they were related to Iran. In
other words, it is not acceptable that collecting some Farsi texts and
evidences as well as making some seals, signatures and official headers
in Farsi should be considered as those belonging to the organizations of
the Islamic Republic of Iran.
4- Using nuclear material by Iran has not been confirmed at any
documents or evidences provided by the Agency in its so-called alleged
studies. Therefore, even if we assume that those evidences were true
(while they are not) again they could be related to conventional
military activities and it is not reasonable to believe that they have
nuclear nature.
5- Even if we accept that those evidences were true, they are all
based on some computerized simulations not a “practical activity.” That
is why the Agency has called the whole project as “studies.” There is no
evidence in those documents to prove that the studies have been changed
into practical projects or activities.
We can conclude then from the points mentioned above that what has
been published as the 15-page attachment in Amano’s latest report, was
not really a “document” in the true sense of the word but rather it was a
series of fake information added to Amano’s report under US political
pressure.
Diplomats said that US envoy to the IAEA Glen Davis prepared a
16-page report yesterday (November 7) and was personally trying to
contact media persons and press to ask them to cover his report with
maximum hue and cry.
His report included some old information repeatedly used since 2004
and denied by Iran in May 2008 in Tehran’s 117-page evaluation which
proved to the Agency that those information was all fake. Some news
sources in Vienna provided parts of Davis report for the Iranian
officials.
It seems that Mr. Amano who according to WikiLeaks has promised US
officials to coordinate his measures with American authorities, was
assigned to publish the original text of the fake documents which were
given to US President Barack Obama by the CIA and then handed over to
Amano and Davis by the US president.
This is taking place while most of the scholars believe that the
documents were forged in a completely immature way so that their
publication would lead to a major disgrace for the Agency.
The scholars also believe that the documents are dictated in such a
way that for example their paragraphs 23 and 24 were an exact repetition
of an assessment paper prepared by US intelligence sources in 2008.
In 2007, the US prepared an intelligence assessment claiming that
Iran had stopped its alleged military nuclear activities in 2003. The
assessment led to a major disgrace for the US as many countries asked at
that time why it was necessary to impose sanctions on Iran or ask the
country to suspend its nuclear activities.
To save its face, the US administration published another assessment
in 2008 claiming that Iran was probably continuing some of its alleged
military nuclear activities after 2003.
Those claims are now completely repeated in paragraphs 23 and 24 of
Amano’s latest report and the director general has not even bothered to
change their wordings.
Another ridiculous example in Amano’s report is in paragraphs 47-53
where the author (or better saying Davis) claims that Iran has made some
computer simulations of hydrodynamic tests to develop nuclear weapons.
It has also claimed that the Agency has some satellite images of a large
steel box which was used for nuclear tests in Iran’s Parchin nuclear
facilities.
Iranian scholars completely refuted the report as ridiculous and
something made up by intelligence services of the West which presently
completely control Amano. They say that the report was prepared by an
agent of French intelligence service named Ferederic Claude. He was
previously in charge of satellite images in the IAEA and is currently an
advisor to the Agency’s director general.
It is interesting to know that Claude had brought the same images to
Iran during a visit to the country a few years ago when he was
accompanying Olli Heinonen, deputy director general. During the visit,
they sought permission to inspect Parchin facilities.
Iran permitted IAEA inspectors to visit any part of the facilities they wished and take samples. They later announced that firstly, what Claude had mentioned as steel boxes were indeed metal toilets of Parchin facilities and secondly, samples taken from the facilities have made it clear that there was no nuclear activities underway in Parchin. Therefore, the IAEA announced that the Parchin case was closed.