HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Potentially Deal-Shatteri...

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 03:04 PM

Potentially Deal-Shattering Report About Iran Inspections Has Some Issues

Source: Huffington Post

WASHINGTON -- The Associated Press reported Wednesday that future oversight of Parchin, an Iranian military site suspected of hosting past nuclear weapons development over a decade ago, would be conducted by Iranian scientists rather than the International Atomic Energy Agency’s nuclear inspectors.

Critics of the Iranian nuclear deal declared vindication, citing the report as evidence that the broader nuclear agreement negotiated between Iran, the U.S. and five world powers was flawed. "How does this not set a precedent for future inspections at suspicious military sites in Iran?" asked House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), suggesting that the Iranians would be entrusted to oversee their own nuclear inspections going forward.

But no sooner had the report surfaced than questions began to circulate about its underlying assertions and the accuracy of its claims. Hours after publication, nonproliferation expert Jeffrey Lewis noted on Twitter that the AP deleted several paragraphs that contained the most damning allegations about the way in which inspections would occur.



The above screenshot shows the original version of the AP report on the left, and the updated version on the right. Click to view larger.
The revised version of the exposé also scrubbed a paragraph that suggested IAEA inspectors would oversee Iranian scientists as they collected samples and photographs at Parchin, despite other parts of the report claiming that officials from the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency would be barred from entering the facility.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ap-story-iran-inspections_55d50eeee4b0ab468d9fce0c?kvcommref=mostpopular

15 replies, 1943 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 03:05 PM

1. Much to do about nothing.This deal is baked in for approval as far.

 

As the veto proof

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigdarryl (Reply #1)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 03:15 PM

6. I think the integrity and trustworthiness of a word wide news aggregator is worthy of some notice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigdarryl (Reply #1)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 04:22 PM

11. 'Much to do' on whose part? The professional propaganda media don't need apologists

these days, do they?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 03:06 PM

2. Parchin is a dormant site that's ancillary to the main point of the deal.

 

this is all smoke, no fire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #2)

Wed Aug 26, 2015, 08:56 PM

15. Parchin proves there's a military purpose to Iran's nuke program.

 

If their nuke program were for peaceful purposes, there'd be nothing to cover up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 03:10 PM

3. Associated Press purposely deleted several relevant paragraphs because......AP, comments?

Why did you whoever "you" a news aggregator are, push a story that you knew was false??


"But no sooner had the report surfaced than questions began to circulate about its underlying assertions and the accuracy of its claims. Hours after publication, nonproliferation expert Jeffrey Lewis noted on Twitter that the AP deleted several paragraphs that contained the most damning allegations about the way in which inspections would occur."

Who will report on the errors and omissions and false agenda driven-reporting of the reporters?

That is the real story here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 03:13 PM

4. Another crack in the teeth for Journalistic Integrity,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to benld74 (Reply #4)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 03:14 PM

5. It is not an error, it was done on purpose to push for wavering votes in Congress to vote NO.

No fucking way you miss entire paragraphs when you impute full coverage....AP has always been suspect in my Book of Trust and this is like the smoking gun....no wonder folks do not want to address the main issue of this revelation.....the purposeful deceit of a major news gatherer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #5)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 03:18 PM

7. ^^That

100% that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fred Sanders (Reply #5)

Fri Aug 21, 2015, 02:19 AM

14. Classic propaganda technique. Eliminate sentences and clauses to create the reverse of the meaning

of the original text. But for whole paragraphs going into the wastebasket, so to speak, this one is almost clever enough to pass.

For instance in the original Al Hoseini Tash is described as an Deputy Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council for Strategic Affairs INSTEAD OF AN OFFICIAL OF IRAN"S NUCLEAR AGENCY
(my emphasis)

This qualifier is missing from the AP version giving the impression this agreement is of urgent importance to the Iranian government when in fact the Iranians view this site as irrelevant to the master agreement and purely a political matter of no scientific importance.

That is a major distortion and no accident.

Looks like AP at least is happy to carry water for AIPAC

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 03:22 PM

8. Question is....

Did Boehners office issue a retraction of the Speakers statement which was based on poor reporting. Secondly doesn't the speaker have a staff researcherlook into both the AP article and the agreement which clearly spells out the inspection terms.
This is where i get mad with the GOP, they have a blatant disregard for the truth when the lie fits thier agenda. No wonder Obama plays Boehner like a fiddle. He is far and away th most ineffective speaker I have ever seen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 03:28 PM

9. "The AP, deliberately or not, has distorted that into something that sounds much worse,

but actually isn't."

http://www.vox.com/2015/8/20/9182185/ap-iran-inspections-parchin

There is some very disturbing stuff going on, and it smells from the same stuff and WMDs in Iraq.

The timing is amazingly coincidently I would say.

"A key point here: The Parchin inspection is not part of the Iran nuclear deal that was negotiated by the US and other world powers with Iran. Rather, this is something the IAEA negotiates directly with the country it's inspecting, in this case Iran."





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 04:19 PM

10. Pay close attention to those who posted that propaganda here, too.

Their 'concern' smelled like rotted fish guts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Original post)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 06:13 PM

12. More sensationally false clickbait from the "reporeters" at Huffington Post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PSPS (Reply #12)

Thu Aug 20, 2015, 06:40 PM

13. What's false about it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread