Never mind those unexplained "military dimensions." According to the article below, El-Baradei argues that Iran won't have a nuclear weapon "any time soon." But any time in the future that Iran does have nuclear weapons will be too soon.
And at the point at which Iran finally does test its first nuclear weapon, we are all too likely to find that the putative "watchdogs" have frittered away the time they could have spent trying to prevent it on insisting there's no real reason for concern, sending the occasional stern warning, or setting deadline after meaningless deadline for Iran to come clean about its activities.
"Iran nuclear "threat" hyped: IAEA's ElBaradei," by Sylvia Westall for Reuters, September 2:
VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran is not going to produce a nuclear weapon any time soon and the threat posed by its atomic program has been exaggerated, the U.N. nuclear watchdog chief said in a published interview.
The West suspects Iran wants to develop a nuclear weapons capability under the guise of a declared civilian atomic energy program. Tehran rejects the charge, saying its uranium enrichment program is a peaceful way to generate electricity.
Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said there was no concrete evidence that Tehran has an ongoing nuclear weapons program.
"But somehow, many people are talking about how Iran's nuclear program is the greatest threat to the world. In many ways, I think the threat has been hyped," he told the specialist Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
ElBaradei said there was concern about Iran's future nuclear intentions and that the Islamic Republic needs to be more transparent with the Vienna-based U.N. nuclear watchdog.
"But the idea that we'll wake up tomorrow and Iran will have a nuclear weapon is an idea that isn't supported by the facts as we have seen them so far," said ElBaradei, 67, who will step down in November after 12 years in office.
The interview was conducted in July but released late on Tuesday.
Last week, an IAEA report lent some weight to Western intelligence reports that Iran had studied ways to make atom bombs although the agency has repeatedly said it does not have concrete proof of a weapons agenda.
Iran has refused to provide documentation, access to sites or to nuclear officials for interviews which the IAEA has requested to reach conclusions about the intelligence materials.
And rest assured, it will remain "exaggerated" until they light one off.
Again, the head of IAEA is named Mohammad. Mohammad. It IS significant and telling, and no DOUBT was one of the Main reasons he was picked.
Let's face it, to a lot of brain dead people the threat of Iran's nukes is exagerated. Until a mushroom cloud rises over Tel Aviv.
Given the completely clueless nature of what passes for "leadership" in the US and the West these days, it's hard not to feel pesimistic about the future.
"Iran has refused to provide documentation, access to sites or to nuclear officials for interviews which the IAEA has requested to reach conclusions about the intelligence materials."
Yet, Mohmammed concludes that "But the idea that we'll wake up tomorrow and Iran will have a nuclear weapon is an idea that isn't supported by the facts as we have seen them so far,".
What facts is he referring too if Iran refuses to provide any access. Sounds like islamic double-speak/logic at its finest. I wonder why people are concerned when all there is a whole lotta guessing going on. It's not like Iran wants to wipe any countries off the map or anything. Nothing to see here; just move along.
Uh huh. Gee, I wonder if ElBaradei would care to give a probability estimate that he is correct? Somehow I doubt he would have the kahunas. Can anyone imagine him saying 99% chance he is correct? Can anyone imagine him saying even 90% chance he is correct? No, he would surely weasel out of any accountability by refusing to put a number on something about which we lack knowledge of so many variables. But if he were forced to put a number, and he had the hubris to put a 90% probability rating on his prediction, that ridiculously confident probability rating would still be way too low to warrant doing nothing. If the chances are 90% that ElBaradei is correct, that's still one chance in ten that Iran will have nukes tomorrow, and will be handing them off to terrorists the next day or sending them to Israel or Allah knows where. ElBaradei seems to be a slave to popular opinion, i.e., a craven little conformist.
"Hype" - yeah, that's it. Nothing to worry about. Go back to sleep.
And when Iran eventually develops not just nuclear missile technology but a mini-nuke, they will provide such to some terrorist group. After one or more of our cities are nuked, the liberals will show up in haz-mat suits, hold hands, and with John McCartney leading them, they will sing "let it be." Then our leftist global news media will do documentaries about America "healing" itself, about understanding the "anger" that "caused" this attack, and maybe thereafter we will attempt again to "nation building" within Iran.
"AEA chief: Iran nuclear threat "hyped" ". Really? How about:
World: "Confidence in IAEA 'hyped' "
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wxrWz9XVvls
But, contrary to the egregious El Baradei, the Iranian bomb is no joke.
First it was 30 Years, then 20 Years, then it was 10 Years, then it was 10 years then it was 5 Years. Now it is only a multiple choice answer that can be anywhere from one Year all the way back to 10 years.
Anything except the notion that it could be here already.
If there is no spine to do anything while Iran has no Bomb, than what are the chances of doing something when they do???
I guess we will all see how supine our Commander in Chains really is before his Kenyon Masters.
I would have thought the whole Iraq cock up would have taught people not be hasty in concluding that someone is building weapons of mass destruction. I dont think we should be attacking anymore countries on the basis that we *think* they may want a nuke, i want to see proof either way before we do anything more than sanctions.
Somehow I doubt if the Israelis give a rat's @$$ about what Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, might or might not have to say about this. Their intelligence is likely to be much better than the IAEA's, not least because they have a greater stake in this than anyone else. They will do what is necessary to protect themselves, with or without U.S. assistance.
Although it would be preferable for the U.S. to take the lead in defanging Iran, events don't seem to be moving in that direction so it will be up to Israel to look after its own defense. I hope that when the day comes that Israel makes its move the rest of us are prepared, loudly and from the streets if necessary, to provide our support, since Obama has shown/is showing signs that he may not provide official U.S. support.
U.S. citizens are beginning to wake up from the election stupor that resulted in the Left taking over our government, and slowly starting to find their voices, principally now by means of Town Hall meetings related to health care program. But it is bracing to see conservatives standing up and insisting on being heard for a change, and not just letting themselves be run over by the Left. Hopefully we will see this movement gain steam, and when Israel needs our support, we'll be there for them.
Mohammed El-Baradei is a Muslim.
Given the principle that Islam inculcates - that a Muslim must *always* side with, cover for, his fellow Muslims, against the kafir - I am completely prepared to believe that he has been running interference for the Iranians all along.
dumbledoresarmy,
Exactly my thoughts.
To expect Mohammed Baradei to be truthful to his office is like expecting CAIR to be loyal to America.
"any time soon" means a date beyond Labor Day.
So distant it is almost inconceivable.
At least for puling peabrains we have in power.
Our President is hosting iftaar parties and saying islam is a religion of peace. we all know its a religion of eternal peace.Once iran gets it ready then mohammad the IAEA chief will still deny it as its all in the Ummah.
Daniel:
You may want to look at Iranian reactions to past United Nations Security Council resolutions and also the development of their ballistic missile production. Someone is not just thinking this up.
"Last week, an IAEA report lent some weight to Western intelligence reports that Iran had studied ways to make atom bombs although the agency has repeatedly said it does not have concrete proof of a weapons agenda."
Big surprise. ElBaradei couldn't find his own butt with three grabs.