The ABC's Washington correspondent Kim Landers reported last Monday, ‘The United States' top military officer [Admiral Mike Mullen] believes
It may come as a surprise that one
Waxing hysterical in response to the same announcement, the American Jewish Committee’s tireless Executive Director David A. Harris opined,
In AJC-speak, it’s self evident that the Lebanese nationalist Hizballah and the Palestinian nationalist Hamas are ‘Iranian terrorist proxies’, but this is the first I’ve heard about those outfits seeking a dirty bomb. A quick search reveals that some crackpot posting under the name Iqbal Latif alleged in a comment on Sara Roy’s review of a book about Hamas that both organisations were hiding dirty bombs in mosques. Doubtless ample evidence for David Harris.
Anyway, there’s no need for Harris to be so worried. A few weeks ago, Philip Sherwell reported in The Telegraph that Mossad has matters well in hand.
Reva Bhalla, a senior analyst with Stratfor, the
"With co-operation from the
Mossad was rumoured to be behind the death of Ardeshire Hassanpour, a top nuclear scientist at
Other recent deaths of important figures in the procurement and enrichment process in
Israel has also used front companies to infiltrate the Iranian purchasing network…The businesses initially supply Iran with legitimate material, winning Tehran's trust, and then start to deliver faulty or defective items that "poison" the country's atomic activities.
Harris concludes by magically transforming Mullen’s belief, ‘His assessment follows a recent report by the International Atomic Energy Agency that
The source of Mullen’s hyperbole is the most recent IAEA report on their quarterly inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities.
The IAEA report showed a significant increase in
But according to IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming,
The (IAEA) has no reason at all to believe that the estimates of LEU produced in the (Natanz) facility were an intentional error by
In other words, if Iran were planning to build nuclear weapons, and if they had enough centrifuges to enrich the ‘stockpile’ to the required degree, and if they could do this without the IAEA noticing, and if they had the knowledge and technology to weaponise the uranium, they might at some stage be able to produce a nuclear weapon. At least according to ‘some physicists’.
In reality, not only has
The IAEA ‘has been able to continue to verify the non-diversion of declared nuclear material in
Significantly, the NIC also reported,
We judge with moderate confidence
It’s worth remembering that a country with enough Highly Enriched Uranium to build one bomb is not in a position to threaten anyone with it, as they would have to test it before risking nuclear annihilation for shooting off a dud. It doesn’t even have deterrent value. If I’m not mistaken, no country has ever announced that it was developing a nuclear weapon. There are accusations, of course. But, although North Korea provided six days’ warning of its 2006 test, the successful test is the announcement. And you don’t carry out the test until you’ve built more than one bomb, which you can’t do with just enough LEU to process into enough HEU to build one bomb.
Typically evenhanded, the ABC report concludes, ‘
But they can’t fool cluey American ‘Likely Voters’, 77% of whom told Rasmussen in a poll conducted on 29 and 30 January that they believed Iran's nuclear program was ‘for weapons development’.
Taking a leaf out of the push pollsters’ book, what Rasmussen asked was,
Only 6% believed a rogue pariah state like the Islamofascists in
In a demented reprise of the old ‘When did you stop beating your wife?’ trope, Rasmussen went on to ask,
Before a meeting is allowed between the President of Iran and the President of the
While 56% said President Obama should not condescend to meet Ahmedinejad until