Group: Iran Resumed Nuclear Weapons Program in 04
The Wall Street Journal reports that “[t]he he Iranian opposition group that first exposed Iran’s nuclear-fuel program said a U.S. intelligence analysis is correct that Tehran shut down its weaponization program in 2003, but claims that the program was relocated and restarted in 2004.”
The National Council for Resistance in Iran will make this claim public today, as part of “a broader pushback by conservative hawks who say the U.S. analysis has wrongly given the impression that Iran’s nuclear-fuel program doesn’t present an urgent threat.”
Fox News adds that the NCRI “has had a mixed record of accuracy with its claims about Iran’s nuclear ambitions in the past” and that it’s considered to be a terrorist organization by both the United States and the European Union.
In other words, they’re not exactly the most reliable of sources.
Mohammad Mohaddessin, NCRI’s foreign affairs chief, told the Wall Street Journal: “They scattered the weaponization program to other locations and restarted in 2004. Their strategy was that if the IAEA found any one piece of this research program, it would be possible to justify it as civilian. But so long as it was all together, they wouldn’t be able to.”
Of course that’s possible, and I believe that experts should take a second look at the NIE, at what Iran is doing and that Israel and the United States should intelligence, but we have to keep in mind that the NCRI isn’t as trustworthy as, say, the CIA.
Jules Crittenden reacts: “Well, it’s not like the United States intelligence community is the most reliable of sources, either.”
True enough.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
How will be Curveball and Chalabi in Farsi ?
Wil they be wearing patches TOO?
But we all know which "intellilgence" the White House will cherry pick to believe.