Amano's New Report, Repetition Of Unfounded Claims By US, Zionists

Tehran, Nov 9, 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./end