Can U.S. Intelligence Be Trusted???

I'm not being snide or tacky here, I'm asking a serious question.  If Iran "froze" their nuclear weapons program in 2003, what the heck have our intelligence agencies been doing these last four years?  It took them this long to find out Iran's program had been frozen?  So what has Iran been doing during the last four years that we DON'T KNOW ABOUT???  Will it take us until 2011 to know what they are doing in 2007??? 

We depend mostly on human intelligence, but this presents many problems.  Geroge Freidman at Strategic Forecast says:

Intelligence is not an easy task. Knowing what is going on inside of a building is harder than it might seem. Regardless of all the technical capabilities -- from imagery in all spectra to sensing radiation leakage at a distance -- huge uncertainties always remain. Failing to get a positive reading does not mean the facility is not up and running. It might just have been obscured, or the technical means to discover it are insufficient. The default setting in technical intelligence is that, while things can be ruled in, they cannot simply be ruled out by lack of evidence.

You need to go into the building. Indeed, you need to go into many buildings, look around, see what is happening and report back. Getting into highly secure buildings may be easy in the movies. It is not easy in real life. Getting someone into the building who knows what he is seeing is even harder. Getting him out alive to report back, and then repeating the process in other buildings, is even harder. It can be done -- though not easily or repeatedly.

Recruiting someone who works in the building is an option, but at the end of the day you have to rely on his word as to what he saw. That too, is a risk. He might well be a double agent who is inventing information to make money, or he could just be wrong. There is an endless number of ways that recruiting on-site sources can lead you to the wrong conclusion.

 

Can U.S. Intelligence Be Trusted On Iran, from Insights Into Today's Middle East:

The United States National Intelligence Estimate concludes that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003. If this is the case why is Iran continuing to defy the international community’s call to immediately end its pursuit of enriching weapons grade uranium by setting up 3,000 centrifuges, which is the clearest path to acquiring the fissile material needed to produce a nuclear weapon? Why would Iran not fully open up all of its nuclear sites to IAEA inspectors? And why would Iranian leaders say the following:

President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced: “We must get ready to rule the world. … the Islamic government in Iran is the pre-requisite for a world wide Islamic state.” [1]

On 5 October 2007, Ahmadinejad vowed that Iran will not negotiate over its "nuclear rights". The comments came as French diplomatic officials said Iran is set to run almost 3,000 centrifuges by the end of the month, nearing the threshold for industrial-scale uranium enrichment. [2]

Ahmadinejad considers the dispute over his country's nuclear program "closed" and says Iran will disregard the resolutions of the Security Council, which he said is dominated by "arrogant powers." [3]

"We are rapidly becoming a superpower," Ahmadinejad told reporters 1 February 2007. [4]

Iran will not negotiate with anyone about its right to nuclear technology Ahmadinejad said on 23 October 2007, hours before talks aimed at defusing an atomic row with the West were to start in Rome. [5]

"The Iranian nation has entered the phase of industrial scale of nuclear fuel (production) and the train of the Iranian nation's progress is irreversible," Ahmadinejad told a rally in South Khorasan province, broadcast live on state television. "Today, we've reached 3,000 centrifuges," he said in beginning of November 2007. [6]

Iran does not intend to discuss the suspension of its nuclear enrichment activities, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mohammad Ali Hosseini said on 29 April 2007. [7]

Iranians will slap in the face of those who threaten them and address them in the language of anger and threat," Ahmadinejad warned. [8]

Iranian nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili after meeting with EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana in November 2007 said: „ (...) If some countries want to use the UN Security Council and its resolutions to stop Iran's atomic work, surely they will not be successful". [9]

"Those who don't worry are either unaware of what is happening" or showing that they lack wisdom, said Ismail Gerami Moghadam, a member of Parliament in January of 2007, the independent daily Etemad Melli reported. [10]

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said late on 29 November 2007, that nothing would deflect the Islamic Republic from its pursuit of nuclear technology and that it was not committed to allowing inspection of nuclear sites. [11]

On 26 November 2007, Khamenei said: “The slogans and stances and perseverance of the Iranian nation have an influence on regional and international issues, and this reality indicates the Iranian nation’s steady advancement on the path to the accomplishment of the ideals and objectives of the Islamic Revolution.” [12]

“The wave of the Islamist revolution will soon reach the entire world.” [13]

 

---

[1] "Ahmadinejad: We Must Get Ready To Rule World," Rooz, 5 September 2006. 

[2] "Ahmadinejad says Iran won't negotiate over its 'nuclear rights'," Associated Press, 6 October 2007.

[3] Hoge, Warren: "Ahmadinejad declares nuclear dispute 'closed'," International Herald Tribune, 26 September 2007.

[4] Fathi, Nazila: "Iran boasts of becoming a superpower," International Herald Tribune, 2 February 2007.

[5] "Iran won't negotiate over atomic rights: president," Reuters, 23 October 2007.

[6] Derakhshi, Reza: "Iran's nuclear program 'irreversible': president," Reuters, 7 November 2007.

[7] "Iran has no intention to suspend nuclear enrichment," RIA Novosti, 29 April 2007.

[8] "President: Iranians will not back down from legitimate right," IRNA, 13 June 2007.

[9] "Iran talks 'disappoint' EU envoy, BBC News, 30 November 2007.

[10] Ibid.

[11] "Iran vows never to stop pursuing atomic plans," Reuters, 30 November 2007.

[12] http://www.khamenei.ir/EN/Speech/detail.jsp?id=20070217A.

[13] Pryce-Jones, David: "A Particular Madness-Understanding Iran's Ahmadinejad," National Review, 8 May 2006.

As some pundits have said, I might trust Israel's intelligence this time before I would the U.S. intelligence.  From The Israel Project:

 

Click the link below to write a letter to the editors of the newspapers in your area to raise awareness on the real and continued threat of a nuclear Iran.  

http://www.theisraelproject.org/site/lookup.asp?c=hsJPK0PIJpH&b=3639297

It will only take a few minutes to help do your part to make the world a safer place for our children.

Terence Jeffrey makes an excellent observation: 

Whether American politicians accept or reject the assumption that Iran acts rationally will have tremendous consequences for the fate of the Middle East and for our security.

From a reader at Right Truth via email:

First, if they are just now saying that Iran stopped its program in 2003 then that only means we're four years behind in our assessments.

Second, if they stopped in 2003 it was probably only because they weren't sure what 'Cowboy Bush' would do next. Third, our intelligence agenies are notorious for being daffy. They won't trust any information unless it is in paper form...

The only thing that I observed is that we didn't waste any time taking out that Syrian facility. This lends some credence to Iran not having anything.

 

Having said that, however, there's things that just can't be explained. Why does Iran need all of those centrifuges? Would our intelligence people even know something was referenced as a bomb program if they called it something else? After all, Iran is not an open society.

 

I just think that our bureaucratic imbeciles decided that they would do the "academic thing"

From Stormwarning's Counterterrorism:

  [snip]  There is also no question that careful watching is critical now. And, as discussed in my earlier post, watching on Syria, is essential. Iran works through proxies. Ahmadinejad is not to be trusted. But a pre-emptive attack now??? Won’t happen folks.

Sources:
Symposium: Hitting Iran? - FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, November 30, 2007
U.S.: Iran Halted Nuclear Weapons Program in 2003 - Officials Say Iran Continues With Uranium Enrichment
Friedman Writes Back - The NIE Report: Solving a Geopolitical Problem with Iran

Also check out Laer’s Iran’s Nuke Program On Hold, But Caution Shouldn’t Be at Cheat Seeking Missiles for his take on this.  Please also read’s Spree’s (Wake Up America) take on the NIE, The Jury Is Still Out, for her views.  Also see Right Truth’s post on the NIE,  Something stinks about the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran (along with alot of other peoples’ views).

Rastaman at Islamanazi says:  Wow, What An Amazing Coincidence

Just yesterday I wrote about the latest session of the Gulf Cooperation Council and mentioned Saudi Arabias leading role, with Iran’s president on the left arm of the Saudi king. Then in the evening, suddenly and inexplicably, this report comes out of virtually nowhere that Iran halted its A-bomb program in 2003!

Isn’t that the most amazing coincidence?

Great Satan's Girlfriend:  BEST GUESS:

The Islamic Republic's box seats got an eyefull as legitimate, democratic, veto powered Hoes were pimped, tricked and bribed into ultimately shielding nothing for the largest Arab army in history along with a hideously au currant absolute despot.  (continue reading)

See my previous article on the NIE and Iran "Something stinks about the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran"

Other reading:

Iran's no problem, they've only be at war with us for 28 years, Rosemary's Thoughts

Historians For Obama, 123 Beta

Utah Festival Organizers Reject Christmas Tree Honoring Troops , Stop the ACLU

 

Comments

[Incognito]

Like you, I believe something is terribly amiss.

There are those who believe it's a ploy to hang the Israelis out to dry. What a terrible thing that would be.

[Paul Champagne]

If Iran did freeze it's nuclear weapons program, it may have been because they had gone as far as they could. Ancillary programs such as the enrichment of uranium to "weapons-grade" purity and the production and testing of ballistic missiles has continued. Could it be possible that once he has enough uranium and rockets, the weaqpons program will become un-frozen and suddenly Iran will be a nuclear power?