Is this bad reporting or propaganda? Updateat-LargelyJan. 23, 2007 |
Israel Lobby Ousts Thomas Massie From Congress in Most Expensive Primary Race in History
Ben Shapiro: The Israel Lobby Didn't Target Massie Because Of His Opposition to Israel
Thomas Massie vs. The Israel Lobby
DOJ Indicts Jewish Group for 'Large-Scale, Decade-Long Insider Trading Scheme'
Netanyahu Working to Cement U.S. Aid to Israel Through 'Partnership'
![]() Earlier this morning, Reuters (and AP too) news service ran a piece citing one UK government official and an anonymous Iranian source alleging that the IAEA inspectors were thrown barred out of Iran. Now just to make clear why this is important, Saddam Hussein had allegedly done the same thing according to reports, which was not true. The IAEA cannot and does not generally issue specific responses when dealing with a country, because the matters are confidential. So I called them to see how solid this story was that Reuters put out. My report is at Raw Story, but here is in part the statement I was given, which is up in full at RS: "It should be noted however, that there are a sufficient number of inspectors designated for Iran and the IAEA is able to perform its inspection activities in accordance with Iran's Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement." For them to issue this statement shows how concerned they are about these reports, so concerned, they are willing to go on the record and issue something more than just their standard confidentiality statement. It also shows that the Reuters reporter did not contact the IAEA, inexplicably. Is this bad reporting or propaganda? AP responds (link is in the original RS article): "Update: After an inquiry by RAW STORY, the Associated Press' Director of Corporate Communications Jack Stokes said they could not reach the spokeswoman for the International Atomic Energy Agency after running a story asserting that Iran had barred 38 IAEA inspectors. |