10 November 2011

De Iraanse dreiging (2)

Vervolg op De Iraanse dreiging (1)

Inmiddels gonst het weer van de desinformatie uit het gelekte (sic) IAEA-rapport over de Iraanse nucleaire activiteiten, dat hoofdzakelijk gebruik maakt van veronderstellingen met de woorden "zou", "kan" en "mogelijk" e.d. Hoewel er in het rapport geen enkele 'smoking gun' te vinden is, wordt het rapport zélf als 'smoking gun' naar voren geschoven.

De propaganda die verspreid wordt kunt u onverbloemd lezen in de christen-zionistische koerier het Friesch Dagblad, dat niet alleen heilig gelooft in God, de Heere Jezus en de Bijbel, maar ook in Israël's regerings- en legerpropaganda. Net als de meeste journalisten van de commerciële massamedia, heb ik de indruk.
Ik noem het Friesch Dagblad omdat het in wezen dezelfde boodschap verspreidt als onze "kwaliteitspers", alleen de laatste manipuleert haar berichten door vaak anonieme "deskundigen" of anonieme "officials" op te voeren die spreken over geheime rapporten, documenten en andere bronloze geruchten. De "kwaliteitspers" spant zich namelijk meer in om het nieuws geloofwaardig te laten lijken dan dat het boude en zelf gevaarlijke beweringen op waarheid onderzoekt. Zoals de aanjager deze keer de Washington Post:

Intelligence provided to U.N. nuclear officials shows that Iran’s government has mastered the critical steps needed to build a nuclear weapon, receiving assistance from foreign scientists to overcome key technical hurdles, according to Western diplomats and nuclear experts briefed on the findings. (Washington Post, 07.11.2011)

Overschrijven

U hoeft echter de Washington Post niet te lezen, omdat onze Nederlandse kranten en persbureau's de teksten uit de VS (en in deze uit Israël/USraël) meestal alleen maar vertalen en daarna opdienen. Onze nieuwsmedia lijken de vuistregel te hanteren: hoe machtiger het land, hoe betrouwbaarder de informatie. De werkelijkheid zit natuurlijk andersom in elkaar, maar het kritiekloos overnemen van die informatie overnemen is nu eenmaal 'veilig': het betreft immers de officiële werkelijkheid, en het scheelt enorm in de personeelskosten. Afgezien daarvan zijn onze journalisten aartslui, want in de regel trekken zij de informatie die ze, soms overnemen en soms aangereikt krijgen, niet na op waarheid.


Illustratie van het Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS). Denk u eens in hoe de wereld zou reageren wanneer Iran zo'n kaart zou publiceren met raketten richting Israël...

Terug naar de Iraanse dreiging. Het persbureau IPS (Inter Press Service) is zo'n beetje nog het enige persbureau dat wél bronnen onderzoekt, en komt vandaag met de onthullende mededeling dat de "atoomgeleerde uit de voormalige Sovjet-Unie", aldus het ANP , die volgens het IAEA-rapport Iran aan een ontstekingsmechanisme voor een atoombom geholpen zou hebben, helemaal geen atoomgeleerde is, maar een onderzoeker van nanodiamanten, die ontstaan na een explosie van een mix van TNT en RDX in een afgesloten ruimte. En ontdekte het meer tegenstrijdigheden. Het IPS-artikel staat onderaan dit log.

Anti-Iran propaganda in Nederland

Welke Nederlandse nieuwsmedia verspreiden de nu al gedeeltelijk aangetoond leugenachtige propaganda, zeer waarschijnlijk afkomstig uit Israël? Voor u misschien een eye-opener:

Trouw (redactie)
Iran is bijna in staat een atoombom te bouwen. Met buitenlandse hulp heeft de islamitische republiek de belangrijkste en moeilijkste stappen daarvoor onder de knie gekregen.
(...)
Iran zou onder meer hebben geleerd een nucleaire kettingreactie in een atoombom op gang te brengen. Die reactie maakt een kernexplosie allesverwoestend. De techniek zou ze zijn bijgebracht door een atoomgeleerde uit de voormalige Sovjet-Unie.

NRC (Jules Segers)
Volgens het Internationaal Atoomenergieagentschap (IAEA) heeft Iran de laatste stappen gezet om een nucleair wapen te kunnen bouwen. Wetenschappers van over de grens zouden het land geholpen hebben bij het nemen van “cruciale technische horden”. (...) “Ze zijn er nooit mee opgehouden”, zegt David Albright, ex-IEAE, die de geheime informatie bestudeerde.

Volkskrant (redactie)
Het IAEA stelde vandaag aanwijzingen te hebben dat Iran minstens tot vorig jaar aan een atoomwapen heeft gewerkt. Een deel van het werk zou mogelijk momenteel worden voortgezet.

Het rapport bevat de duidelijkste aanwijzingen tot dusver dat Iran aan een atoomwapen werkt. De onderzoekers spreken over 'algemeen betrouwbare' informatie uit rapporten van buitenlandse geheime diensten en uit eigen onderzoek.

ANP (diverse nieuwsmedia)
Gegevens in handen van functionarissen van het Internationaal Atoomagentschap (IAEA) tonen aan dat Iran cruciale technieken beheerst die nodig zijn om een nucleair wapen te bouwen.
(...)
Zo zouden buitenlandse experts Iraanse wetenschappers hebben geïnstrueerd bij de bouw van ontstekers die een nucleaire kettingreactie in gang kunnen zetten.

NOS
Bij uitzondering blijft de NOS deze keer vrij beschaafd door steeds weer duidelijk aan te geven dat het om de (vermeende) mening van het IAEA gaat, en heeft naar het lijkt zowaar het rapport gelezen. Maar ook dit staatsapparaat heeft geen moeite gedaan om wat er beweerd wordt op waarheid te toetsen. Haar laatste zin spreekt ook weer boekdelen: "Iran zelf heeft altijd beweerd dat het atoomprogramma alleen is bedoeld voor het opwekken van energie." Manipulatief taalgebruik dat suggereert dat Iran kernwapens aan het maken is en dat het daarover liegt.

Natuurlijk doen de derderangs hysterie- en pulpnieuwsmedia als Elsevier, Sp!ts en PowNed het nog veel slechter dan onze zelfgekroonde "kwaliteitspers".

Leestip: De volgende oorlog - De aanval op Iran: een voorbeschouwing, van onafhankelijk publicist Daan de Wit.


This cake was served at a Washington party November 5, 1946 to celebrate the success of the atomic testing program and the disbanding of the Joint Army-Navy Task Force Number One which organized and oversaw the first postwar atomic test in the Pacific.



IAEA's "Soviet Nuclear Scientist" Never Worked on Weapons

IPS | By Gareth Porter | 09.11.2011 | NEDERLANDS

WASHINGTON, Nov 9, 2011 (IPS) - The report of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) published by a Washington think tank Tuesday repeated the sensational claim previously reported by news media all over the world that a former Soviet nuclear weapons scientist had helped Iran construct a detonation system that could be used for a nuclear weapon.

But it turns out that the foreign expert, who is not named in the IAEA report but was identified in news reports as Vyacheslav Danilenko, is not a nuclear weapons scientist but one of the top specialists in the world in the production of nanodiamonds by explosives.

In fact, Danilenko, a Ukrainian, has worked solely on nanodiamonds from the beginning of his research career and is considered one of the pioneers in the development of nanodiamond technology, as published scientific papers confirm.

It now appears that the IAEA and David Albright, the director of the International Institute for Science and Security in Washington, who was the source of the news reports about Danilenko, never bothered to check the accuracy of the original claim by an unnamed "Member State" on which the IAEA based its assertion about his nuclear weapons background.

Albright gave a "private briefing" for "intelligence professionals" last week, in which he named Danilenko as the foreign expert who had been contracted by Iran's Physics Research Centre in the mid-1990s and identified him as a "former Soviet nuclear scientist", according to a story by Joby Warrick of the Washington Post on Nov. 5.

The Danilenko story then went worldwide.

The IAEA report says the agency has "strong indications" that Iran's development of a "high explosions initiation system", which it has described as an "implosion system" for a nuclear weapon, was "assisted by the work of a foreign expert who was not only knowledgeable on these technologies, but who, a Member State has informed the Agency, worked for much of his career in the nuclear weapon program of the country of his origin."

The report offers no other evidence of Danilenko's involvement in the development of an initiation system.

The member state obviously learned that Danilenko had worked during the Soviet period at the All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Technical Physics in Snezhinsk, Russia, which was well known for its work on development of nuclear warheads and simply assumed that he had been involved in that work.

However, further research would have revealed that Danilenko worked from the beginning of his career in a part of the Institute that specialised in the synthesis of diamonds. Danilenko wrote in an account of the early work in the field published in 2006 that he was among the scientists in the "gas dynamics group" at the Institute who were "the first to start studies on diamond synthesis in 1960".

Danilenko's recollections of the early period of his career are in a chapter of the book, "Ultrananocrystalline Diamond: Synthesis, Properties and Applications" edited by Olga A. Shenderova and Dieter M. Gruen, published in 2006.

Another chapter in the book covering the history of Russian patents related to nanodiamonds documents the fact that Danilenko's centre at the Institute developed key processes as early as 1963-66 that were later used at major "detonaton nanodiamond" production centres.

Danilenko left the Institute in 1989 and joined the Institute of Materials Science Problems in Ukraine, according to the authors of that chapter.

Danilenko's major accomplishment, according to the authors, has been the development of a large-scale technology for producing ultradispersed diamonds, a particular application of nanodiamonds. The technology, which was later implemented by the "ALIT" company in Zhitomir, Ukraine, is based on an explosion chamber 100 sq metres in volume, which Danilenko designed.

Beginning in 1993, Danilenko was a principal in a company called "Nanogroup" which was established initially in the Ukraine but is now based in Prague. The company's website boasts that it has "the strongest team of scientists" which had been involved in the "introduction of nanodiamonds in 1960 and the first commercial applications of nanodiamonds in 2000".

The declared aim of the company is to supply worldwide demand for nanodiamonds.

Iran has an aggressive programme to develop its nanotechnology sector, and it includes as one major focus nanodiamonds, as blogger Moon of Alabama has pointed out. That blog was the first source to call attention to Danilenko's nanodiamond background.

Danilenko clearly explained that the purpose of his work in Iran was to help the development of a nanodiamond industry in the country.

The report states that the "foreign expert" was in Iran from 1996 to about 2002, "ostensibly to assist in the development of a facility and techniques for making ultra dispersed diamonds (UDDs) or nanodiamonds…" That wording suggests that nanodiamonds were merely a cover for his real purpose in Iran.

The report says the expert "also lectured on explosive physics and its applications", without providing any further detail about what applications were involved.

The fact that the IAEA and Albright were made aware of Danilenko's nanodiamond work in Iran before embracing the "former Soviet nuclear weapons specialist" story makes their failure to make any independent inquiry into his background even more revealing.

The tale of a Russian nuclear weapons scientist helping construct an "implosion system" for a nuclear weapon is the most recent iteration of a theme that the IAEA introduced in its May 2008 report, which mentioned a five-page document describing experimentation with a "complex multipoint initiation system to detonate a substantial amount of high explosives in hemispherical geometry" and to monitor the detonation.

Iran acknowledged using "exploding bridge wire" detonators such as those mentioned in that document for conventional military and civilian applications. But it denounced the document, along with the others in the "alleged studies" collection purporting to be from an Iranian nuclear weapons research programme, as fakes.

Careful examination of the "alleged studies" documents has revealed inconsistencies and other anomalies that give evidence of fraud. But the IAEA, the United States and its allies in the IAEA continue to treat the documents as though there were no question about their authenticity.

The unnamed member state that informed the agency about Danilenko's alleged experience as a Soviet nuclear weapons scientist is almost certainly Israel, which has been the source of virtually all the purported intelligence on Iranian work on nuclear weapons over the past decade.

Israel has made no secret of its determination to influence world opinion on the Iranian nuclear programme by disseminating information to governments and news media, including purported Iran government documents. Israeli foreign ministry and intelligence officials told journalists Douglas Frantz and Catherine Collins about the special unit of Mossad dedicated to that task at the very time the fraudulent documents were being produced.

In an interview in September 2008, Albright said Olli Heinonen, then deputy director for safeguards at the IAEA, had told him that a document from a member state had convinced him that the "alleged studies" documents were genuine. Albright said the state was "probably Israel".

The Jerusalem Post's Yaakov Katz reported Wednesday that Israeli intelligence agencies had "provided critical information used in the report", the purpose of which was to "push through a new regime of sanctions against Tehran…."

*Gareth Porter is an investigative historian and journalist specialising in U.S. national security policy. The paperback edition of his latest book, "Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam", was published in 2006.

2 comments:

  1. Mostly I don't react on articles on the internet, but in this case I just have to. I read nothing about the threats mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad expresses against Israel. A bit silly to show us a map how Israel can strike against Iran with nuclear weapons, when just yesterday they were hit by rockets coming out of Lebanon and fired by Lebanese Hezbollah, supported by Iran. Ofcourse it would be stupid if Israel would launch a nuclear attack against Iran, they would suffer the fall out too.
    Saying all this doesn't mean I agree with everything Israel does. In case of the Palestinian wish to have a state of their own they should understand that better than any other country. The way the Palestinian people are treated by the Israeli government is beneath all levels of humanity. Holding a nation hostage by controlling their food-supplies, their money, water-supplies, is disgusting. But to deny Iran is threatening Israel's existence is in my opinion very narrow minded and just as dangerous as you say Israel's nuclear power to destroy Iran is.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear Anonymus,

    "I read nothing about the threats mr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad expresses against Israel."
    For your information, see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2006/jun/14/post155
    Besides that, with this remark you dismiss the issue of the threats against Iran. Which is a cheap manipulative trick. That doesn't convince me of anything but you are not commenting here to start a serious discussion.

    If you are serious, please tell me when Iran threatened to bomb Israel. And, please, don't insult my intelligence with conjuring up a MEMRI 'report' and such.

    "A bit silly to show us a map how Israel can strike against Iran with nuclear weapons, when just yesterday they were hit by rockets coming out of Lebanon and fired by Lebanese Hezbollah, supported by Iran."

    How can you object to countries arming other countries to kill civillians? If you are promoting this as a bad thing, you are putting Israël in danger!
    http://eindpunt.blogspot.com/2010/08/drones-and-death-de-israel-connectie.html

    "Saying all this doesn't mean I agree with everything Israel does."
    You're doing great, this is textbook hasbara.

    "In case of the Palestinian wish to have a state of their own they should understand that better than any other country."
    Palestinian bantustans and ethnic cleansing is indeed the best deal Israel can get.
    http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/04/2011413152522296883.html

    "But to deny Iran is threatening Israel's existence is in my opinion very narrow minded..."
    If you don't tell me what exactly I deny, and where, I can't comment on that. But I suppose that is your intention.

    "...and just as dangerous as you say Israel's nuclear power to destroy Iran is."
    Can you please point out where I say that?

    ReplyDelete