The Observer: weapons grade uranium plot hype ?
Is it any wonder that we are sceptical of the mainstream media, especially the so called "serious" Sunday newspapers, when they publish "Climate of Fear" stories like this one in The Observer today ?
Note the lack of any direct sources or any detail even as to which countries are involved.
MI6 probes UK link to nuclear trade with IranMark Townsend, crime correspondent
Sunday June 10, 2007
The ObserverA British company has been closed down after being caught in an apparent attempt to sell black-market weapons-grade uranium to Iran and Sudan, The Observer can reveal.
Note that this story claims to involve weapons grade uranium
Anti-terrorist officers and MI6 are now investigating a wider British-based plot allegedly to supply Iran with material for use in a nuclear weapons programme.
A wider plot ?
One person has already been charged with attempting to proliferate 'weapons of mass destruction'.
Note how this article does not even mention for certain that this person has been charged in the United Kingdom !
During the 20-month investigation, which also involved MI5 and Customs and Excise, a group of Britons was tracked as they obtained weapons-grade uranium from the black market in Russia. Investigators believe it was intended for export to Sudan and on to Iran.
This article implies that an actual physical quantity of "weapons grade " uranium was obtained, rather than the usual black market criminal scams, and undercover law enforcement sting operations.
Approximately how much fissile Uranium ? Grammes or Kilogrammes ?
How much money is involved ? Surely millions of pounds would be involved ?
How much of this "terrorist finance" cash has been frozen or confiscated ?
A number of Britons, who are understood to have links with Islamic terrorists abroad, remain under surveillance.
So why is there no evidence to arrest and charge them ?
Investigators believe they have uncovered the first proof that al-Qaeda supporters have been actively engaged in developing an atomic capability.
How likely is it that "al-Qaeda supporters" (Sunni / Wahabi) would be in league with their arch enemies the Shi'ite Iranian government ?
The British company, whose identity is known to The Observer but cannot be disclosed for legal reasons, has been wound up.
Under what legal powers was this company wound up ? Was it just a small office based import/export company or did it actually have substantial premises and a large number of employees ?
A Customs and Excise spokesman said: 'We continue to investigate allegations related to the supply of components for nuclear programmes including related activities of British nationals.'
"components for nuclear programmes" could mean pumps and centrifuges or electronics etc. , but does not mean the actual finished product i.e. weapons grade uranium
It is not clear whether all of those involved in the alleged nuclear conspiracy were aware of the uranium's ultimate destination or of any intended use.British agents believe Russian black-market uranium was destined for Sudan, described as a 'trans-shipment' point.
Was this British company planning to ship the alleged uranium via the United Kingdom ?
Was there any cooperation with the Russian authorities or not ?
The alleged plot, however, was disrupted in early 2006, before the nuclear material reached its final destination.
On past evidence, "disrupted" is often a code for "there was no real plot until the law enforcement sting operation entrapped someone gullible or greedy".
Hopefully this is not the same "sting operation" which netted the Georgian sausage trader and his 100 grammes of uranium, which he tried to sell to undecover security agents.
[...]Investigators are understood to have evidence that Iran was to receive the uranium to help develop a nuclear weapons capability. 'They may argue that the material is for civilian use but it does seem an extremely odd way to procure uranium,' said Berry.
Why would the Iranian government bother to do this, when they have tonnes of uranium at various stages of enrichment already ?
Can you see why we are sceptical about this story ?
Comments
Was there not a near identical story shortly before the invasion of Iraq about components or uranium being smuggled/shipped from an African state ?
That one proved to be a lie, and I suspect that this one is also, like all the unattributed stories about IED's by un-named American military sources in balaclava's.
Posted by: IanP | June 10, 2007 8:22 PM
This story raised my suspicions when I read it, being incredibly detailed in everything except the important details of what was obtained (how much, what level of enrichment etc.) and the later talk of 'components' - which *COULD* refer to the fissile material, but could equally be anything else involved in either uranium enrichment or bomb making.
To answer IanP's comment above. Yes, British intelligence believed that Iraq was trying to source yellowcake (processed uranium ore) from Niger. The original report was a fake and there was no way Iraq could have got uranium out of the French-owned plant in Niger which was under IAEA control, nor could they have processed it into bomb material as Iraq had no enrichment programme. Despite these obvious holes in the 'plot', Blair passed it on to Bush who mentioned it in the State of the Union address. When challenged over the veracity of the claims, Blair said that he had seen more intelligence separate from the fakes that had come to Britain via Italy. he has never said what that intelligence was, or withdrawn the claims that Niger was involved. Cogema, who own the plant, the Niger government, the French, the IAEA, AND even the Americans have all rubbished the claims, but poor old Tony can't admit he was wrong.
Posted by: iCowboy | June 11, 2007 12:40 AM
Good stuff, keep up the good work.
Posted by: Michael | June 14, 2007 6:49 PM
I read this and was very impressed.
I then went to the Observer article and read that. Again I was very impressed.
It then occurred to me that if the article was a fraud, it was a very good fraud.
However, then I thought. If it isn't a fraud, what is it?
The answer was: Nothing.
There's nothing there.
The observer has made sure that my whole understanding of the article is based on my pre-conceived ideas and I, like most people, get my ideas of a terrorist organisation from Hollywood!!!!!
It told me nothing and is certainly misleading.
But the Observer? It used to be that the Observer was a dependable paper which could be trusted. But now...
I look from the Sun to the Daily Star, to the Daily Mirror, the Independent, the News of the World and the Times and I can no longer tell the difference.
Posted by: Michael | June 15, 2007 4:21 PM
"The British company, whose identity is known to The Observer but cannot be disclosed for legal reasons, has been wound up."
Not BAE Systems then.
Posted by: Fellow Traveller | June 17, 2007 12:25 PM