AP’s Iran Hoax, Glenn Greenwald and I

Posted on November 29, 2012 by admin

AP’s dangerous Iran hoax demands an accounting and explanation

Evidence proves that the graph trumpeted by AP as evidence of Iran’s nuclear weapons program is an obvious sham

Iran ap

An article published by Associated Press about Iran’s nuclear program has sparked controversy (screen shot of AP story)

(updated below w/AP’s response)

It’s important to return to the story about AP’s nuclear Iran “exclusive” which I wrote about yesterday. Although it was intuitively obvious that the graph trumpeted by AP as scary and incriminating of Iran’s nuclear program was actually a farce, there is now new, overwhelming, very compelling scientific evidence that is the case. Whether as victim or recklessly culpable participant, AP helped perpetrate a dangerous hoax, and owes an explanation and accounting for what took place, including identifying the “officials from a country critical of Iran’s atomic program” who made false claims about what this is.

To begin with, the graph AP touted as reflecting some sort of nefarious, highly threatening and complex nuclear calculation is, in fact, widely available all over the Internet in the most innocuous places. Just consider this side-by-side comparison of the AP graph on the left, with the graph on the right on this harmless site designed to teach beginner users how to use Microsoft Excel:

iran apAt the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists (BAS), Yousaf Butt and Ferenc Dalnoki-Veress on Wednesday night wrote: “Graphs such as the one published by the Associated Press can be found in nuclear science textbooks and on the Internet.” Similarly, Prof. Muhammad Sahimi, a professor of chemical engineering at USC and expert in Iran’s nuclear program, told Richard Silverstein of Tikun Olum that “too many graphs like this can be generated by a competent undergraduate student.” So what AP presented to the world as some sort of highly complex, specialized document was, in fact, nothing more than a completely common graph easily found in all sorts of public venues.

Even worse, the calculations reflected on this graph are patently ridiculous. Butt and Dalnoki-Veress document that the graph “does nothing more than indicate either slipshod analysis or an amateurish hoax” [emphasis added]. That’s because, they explain, “the diagram features quite a massive error, which is unlikely to have been made by research scientists working at a national level”; namely:

“The image released to the Associated Press shows two curves: one that plots the energy versus time, and another that plots the power output versus time, presumably from a fission device. But these two curves do not correspond: If the energy curve is correct, then the peak power should be much lower – around 300 million ( 3×108) kt per second, instead of the currently stated 17 trillion (1.7 x1013) kt per second. As is, the diagram features a nearly million-fold error.”

This error is patently obvious to anyone versed in nuclear physics. Nima Shirazi yesterday spoke with Dr. M. Hossein Partovi, who teaches courses in thermodynamics and quantum mechanics at Sacramento State, and he echoed the BAS scientists:

“[Dr. Partovi], noting that the graph is plotted in microseconds, explains that ‘the graph depicted in the report is a nonspecific power/energy plot that is primarily evidence of the incompetence of those who forged it: a quick look at the energy graph shows that the total energy is more than four orders of magnitude (forty thousand times) smaller than the total integrated power that it must equal!’”

Notably, the nuclear expert quoted by AP in its article, David Albright, also seemed to be trying to tell AP that the graph contained this same obvious, glaring error, yet AP – eager to believe, or at least lead others to believe, that it had some incriminating evidence – either failed or refused to understand its significance. Buried in the AP article was this passage:

“‘The yield is too big,’ Albright said, noting that North Korea’s first tests of a nuclear weapon were only a few kilotons.”

But AP never indicated that this error strongly suggested that no real nuclear scientist would have prepared it, and immediately went back in the very next paragraph to touting the document as some sort of scary evidence of Iran’s threatening nuclear weapons machinations.

Then there’s the obvious crudeness of the graph itself, which I noted yesterday. Professor Sahimi told Silverstein: “The graph itself looks low quality, as if it has been drawn by hand.” And the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists authors noted the same thing: “the level of scientific sophistication needed to produce such a graph corresponds to that typically found in graduate- or advanced undergraduate-level nuclear physics courses.” Indeed, they added: “no secrets are needed to produce the plot of the explosive force of a nuclear weapon – just straightforward nuclear physics” [emphasis in original]. They continued:

“Though the image does not imply that computer simulations were actually run, even if they were, this is the type of project a student could present in a nuclear-science course. The diagram simply shows that the bulk of the nuclear fission yield is produced in a short, 0.1 microsecond, pulse. Since the 1950s, it has been standard knowledge that, in a fission device, the last few generations of neutron multiplication yield the bulk of the energy output. It is neither a secret, nor indicative of a nuclear weapons program.”

It is, to put it as generously as possibly, completely reckless for AP to present this primitive, error-strewn, thoroughly common graph as secret, powerful evidence of Iran’s work toward building a nuclear weapon. Yet from its inflammatory red headline (“AP EXCLUSIVE: GRAPH SUGGESTS IRAN WORKING ON BOMB”) to the end of the article, this is exactly what AP did. And it did so by mindlessly repeating the script handed to it by a country which AP acknowledged is seeking to warn the world about the dangers of Iran. This is worse than stenography journalism. It is AP allowing itself, eagerly and gratefully, to be used to put its stamp of credibility on a ridiculous though destructive hoax.

The obligation of journalists to protect the identity of their sources to whom they have pledged anonymity ends when the “sources” use them purposely to disseminate falsehoods. Indeed, the obligation to protect these sources not only ends, but a different obligation arises: to tell the public who fed them the hoax. This was exactly the issue that arose when it became clear that multiple sources had falsely told ABC News’ Brian Ross in late 2001 that government tests had linked the anthrax attacks in the US to Saddam’s chemical weapons program, a story that Ross spread far and wide – thus, as intended, heightening fears of Iraq, but which turned out to be completely false from start to finish. As numerous journalists argued then, Ross had the obligation to tell the public who was behind the hoax he so damagingly spread.

AP has that same obligation here. At the very least, they have the duty to respond to this scientific and documentary proof that the graph they trumpeted, and certainly the claims they made about it, are misleading in the extreme. On Wednesday afternoon, I asked AP to comment on these issues and have thus far received no response.

As both Shirazi and John Glaser document, the AP writer responsible for this absurdity, George Jahn, has a history of similar behavior. That includes producing an equally hyped and equally absurd report back in May featuring a cartoon-like drawing that, as Jahn put it, “was provided to The Associated Press by an official of a country tracking Iran’s nuclear program who said it proves the structure exists, despite Tehran’s refusal to acknowledge it.”

As the Iraq War proved, there are few things more irresponsible and dangerous than having a large media outlet trumpet extremely dubious claims from anonymous sources designed to hype the threats posed by some targeted foreign regime. That is exactly what AP is doing here, and given how obvious the sham is, it is inexcusable. AP owes a clear explanation of what happened here.

The real story here is not this inane graph, but the behavior of AP and its “sources”. That someone is purposely feeding this influential media outlet obvious hoaxes shows two facts: (1) the evidence of Iran’s nuclear weapons program must be very thin if fabrications of this type are needed; and (2) someone from an unnamed country or countries is very eager to scare the public into believing this weapons program exists and is vigorously proceeding, and is willing to use fraud to advance those fear-mongering ends.

UPDATE

Here, in its entirety, is the response sent by AP to all of the objections raised to its story:

“We continue to report this story.”

It’s hard to decide which is worse: the original story or their “response” to the very serious flaws in their reporting.

Comments

486 comments, displaying

first

Post a comment

  • This symbol indicates that that person is The Guardian's staffStaff
  • This symbol indicates that that person is a contributorContributor

…

  • MuleyaJumba29 November 2012 3:10PM

    Looks like the days of claiming countries have weapons of mass destruction and subsequently invading them with very little resistance are over.

    If i was this AP “source” i would be quite annoyed, what ever happened to the good old days of lying and everyone believing you, now you have to deal with pesky people who seek the truth.

  • 02460129 November 2012 3:13PM

    Typical Greenwald making excuses for the Iranians. No one should be in possession of graphs like these. Iran scheme like Mordor, yet he acts like they are Dennis the Menace. What’s worse, our sanctions probably don’t cover textbooks yet, so these kind of graphs are still making it into their country. We must act now to prevent anymore physics textbooks from falling into the wrong hands. Lord knows how many Texas Instrument calculators are already sitting in the heart of Tehran. Very scary stuff.

    But seriously, whose brainchild was that graph? And what the fuck was the AP thinking when they ran with it? Couldn’t find any forged documents about yellow cake this time? Aluminium tubes no longer frightening enough?

    Let’s just invade already. The anticipation is killing me.

  • Terry513529 November 2012 3:16PM

    Good investigative work.

    I’ll second that! It’s not a surprise to me that this item has circled back to us again. GG will want to have a vigilant eagle eye to catch the many shams that will inevitably appear. The problem is that it’s always harder to prove the lie, to forestall the debates that give the lies more life, and the liars will just shrug and produce their next one.

    I highly recommend this video clip that was posted here in the last day or two – but then, I couldn’t find the comment again to remind me who it was, so I can’t attribute the find yet again and I apologize. (024601, was this your offering?):

    IRAN LIE same as IRAQ LIE, put up by someone appropriately named TheParadigmShift.

    It nails it.

  • jokaz29 November 2012 3:16PM

    This is the age of information, but it also the age of deception. The western media is bias and strongly influenced. You can only balance your views if you read the other side. Imagine yourself as a judge, you would always need to hear all sides before making an opinion.

  • CreatureAdam29 November 2012 3:18PM

    “[Dr. Partovi], noting that the graph is plotted in microseconds, explains that ‘the graph depicted in the report is a nonspecific power/energy plot

    You don’t need to be a Stephen Hawking to be able to read that lines representing ‘power’ and ‘energy’ aren’t quite right in this context.

    This is hilarious, and for all the wrong reasons.

    It looks like the kind of graph that would have ACME written above it in an episode of Road Runner.

  • tokaido29 November 2012 3:20PM

    “AP …have the duty to respond to this scientific and documentary proof that the graph they trumpted, and certainly the claims they made about it, are misleading in the extreme.”

    Given the title AP ran, I’d say Glenn’s spot on here. That is some sh*tty journalism, AP.

  • BillSchee29 November 2012 3:20PM

    Well, well, well….

    http://www.timesofisrael.com/writers/george-jahn/

    This clown has been a busy little beaver. I wonder if someone has a photo of him and a goat or if he really believes this crap.

  • rransier29 November 2012 3:20PM

    AP = the new grocery store tabloid

    soon they will have articles about actresses impregnated by aliens and bigfoots protesting alongside the occupy wall street people

  • Terry513529 November 2012 3:21PM

    Let’s just invade already. The anticipation is killing me.

    Quite a choice of words.

    The anticipation is probably killing the Iraqis also. Oh wait… they already were. Killed that is. And that starts with a K and it rhymes with J and that stands for Jihad, right here in River City Folks.

  • Phace Palm29 November 2012 3:21PM

    I have to admit that as soon as I saw that graph – being a PhD engineer – I had to congratulate myself on the brilliant choice I made in choosing my username. Hardly a day goes by that I do not use it…

  • toIronMountain29 November 2012 3:21PM

    Evidence proves that the graph trumpeted by AP as evidence of Iran’s nuclear weapons program is an obvious sham

    It’s the “dodgy dossier” boomeranged back as a graph proving WMDs yet again! It looks like the Zionists want a war with Iran so badly they clearly don’t mind shouting wolf at any and every piece of paper blowing in the wind.

    Here is Netanyahu in 2002 convincing the world of Iraq’s nuclear/WMD program, watch the first minute, no wonder Sarkozy called him a liar.

    The Zionists want the US to change the regimes of any and all countries in the ME paving the way for future expansion. That is the plan, the colonisation of the ME by predominantly white skinned Europeans.

  • insertfunnyusername29 November 2012 3:24PM

    “”too many graphs like this can be generated by a competent undergraduate student.” ”

    A competent undergrad student? A graph like this can be generated by pretty much ANY undergrad student, even one who has skipped every single class, and is just recovering from a massive headache. Google + Excel, and any student could generate that graph in a very short amount of time.

    “Even worse, the calculations reflected on this graph are patently ridiculous. ”

    “This error is patently obvious to anyone versed in nuclear physics.”

    That’s why you don’t need to a competent undergrad (in physics) to generate that graph. Whoever generated the graph didn’t even think to link the 2. To derive one from the other.

    “This is worse than stenography journalism. It is AP allowing itself, eagerly and gratefully, to be used to put its stamp of credibility on a ridiculous though destructive hoax”

    AP is disseminating propaganda, plain and simple.

    “(1) the evidence of Iran’s nuclear weapons program must be very thin if fabrications of this type are needed; and (2) someone from an unnamed country or countries is very eager to scare the public into believing this weapons program exists and is vigorously proceeding, and is willing to use fraud to advance those fear-mongering ends.”

    3) Despite all the claims about “free and independent media” by neoliberals, media such as AP, etc, is NOT “free and independent”.

  • bloopie229 November 2012 3:24PM

    Next thing you know, AP will be putting out a graphical representation of the distances between Iranian nuke sites and selected targets elsewhere in the Middle East (sometimes these are called ‘maps’). Has anyone checked the AP map database to see if they have fudged those distances as well? After all, nuclear disaster may be closer than you think.

  • darwinANTIFASC29 November 2012 3:26PM

    Yeah so what

    They are still building a bomb and those who think right wing clerics who want to kill the jews should have a bomb is a good idea would be good mates with that guy who thought Movember was cool back in the 40′s.

  • rook11929 November 2012 3:26PM

    I’m pretty sure the authors know the graph is stenography without a shred of truth to it. I’m also pretty sure the authors and/or editors at the AP don’t care either.

  • Montecarlo229 November 2012 3:27PM

    A single graph is insufficient evidence to reach any conclusions; so it is premature to declare it a hoax. It is simplistic and an error was made on the units for the Power axis – so to me it appears likely to be a study by an undergraduate physics student.

    But this graph and presumably other documents were provided last year to the IAEA by “two Member States ” (presumably the US and Israel). If anyone is interested in a description of the information, see Section “C.8. Modelling and calculations” in the November 18, 2011 report given on the IAEA web page for Iran.

    So presumably the AP has access to the other documents provided to IAEA and can also publish them so that people can draw their own conclusions.

    But as was stated in yesterday’s thread, an undergrad student doing a theoretical study does not constitute a nuclear weapons development program.

  • chinatownjake29 November 2012 3:29PM

    Kim Jong-un featured in the People´s Daily as a sex symbol vs. Iranian nuclear bomb graph featured by AP. Source of one story is The Onion. Source of the other story?

  • killthefascistwithin29 November 2012 3:30PM

    Good investigative work

    Just what I was thinking the moment I saw Glenn’s headline, Drewv.

    And, dare I say it, dare I think it, with responsible and courageous citizens like GG we stand a good chance of taking back our country. And to start, yes, let’s hold AP accountable for its propaganda!

  • Abtalyon29 November 2012 3:31PM

    Who cares if the AP story is a hoax ? I’m sure the IAEA couldn’t. After all, it is that body which is responsible for monitoring the evidence that Iran has a nuclear weapons development programme, not AP, and certainly not Glenn Greenwald.

    But keep on writing irrelevant guff. CiFers lap it up.

  • EnglishroG29 November 2012 3:32PM

    It’s very clever propaganda.

    Because if it works it works, and if it’s exposed it’s so amateurish that it’s farcical rather than sinister.

    Very clever. Very evil.

  • TallyHoGazehound29 November 2012 3:32PM

    re: You don’t need to be a Stephen Hawking to be able to read that lines representing ‘power’ and ‘energy’ aren’t quite right in this context.

    Maybe you don’t, but others will. Just watch. I’ve no doubt that there will be some who try to offer an alternative explanation, and for whom, only the most credible of credentialed sources will quasi-convince.

  • HerrEMott29 November 2012 3:33PM

    Until they come clean about this it would appear to be wise not to trust AP, certainly as regards Iran and the region in general.

    I wonder which country provided this deliberately misleading titbit and why George Jahn, his editors and AP put their names to it.

  • yandat29 November 2012 3:34PM

    Can we go back in time to yesterday’s comment thread to humiliate and lampoon all the idiots? Is time travel possible? Someone draw a graph.

  • BobJanova29 November 2012 3:34PM

    It’s disturbing that AP – generally thought of as a respectable and accurate news source, along with Reuters, and used as a trusted secondary source by most consumer media – should publish something which is not only propaganda and lies, but so obviously and provably so.

    I suppose the only upside is that it is so obviously laughable that no-one will take it seriously, unlike the Nigeri yellow cake and Iraq thing which required some foreknowledge to discredit.

  • ZenExpat29 November 2012 3:35PM

    The AP has always been a propaganda machine for the US. It was founded in order to consolidate information on the Mexican/US war, and regurgitate with the aim to show the US in an entirely favourable light, while showing the Mexicans to be “savages” who were attempting to threaten “every American” and indeed “democracy”. Thus, it is interesting that nothing has changed about the US and it’s modus operandi of controlling the press. The biggest problem is now the spread of influence.

    The only potential saving grace regarding the AP, is that it is all about survival at the moment. Despite massive income and continuing non-profit status (very convenient tax benefits), they posted losses of around $15 Million for the year 2010, and their annual revenues continue to plummet. Conversely, and assuming the AP had even a modicum of integrity to begin with, the dire financial affairs means that they depend somewhat upon hand-outs, which will be most forthcoming from those wanting to control the press by bandwidths. Perhaps if they continue to go under, Obama will simply bail them out…..

  • Micklemoose29 November 2012 3:37PM

    Plus, if it is true, the author would have been wrong, wrong, wrong about Iran for some time now if you will pardon my dark humor.

    I am not a mind-reader and have no idea whether Iran is pursuing a bomb or not. They are pretty clearly trying to make their people think they are building a bomb, probably for several different political reasons. The question should be, since we can’t read intent, does Iran have the capability to make a bomb? The answer to this is a resounding yes. So, we have a group of people who say they want to build a bomb, and who can build a bomb, and the author seems obsessed with convincing us that anyone saying they are building a bomb is a liar and a crook.

    He may be right, or he may be wrong. I don’t even particularly care since I find it very unlikely that the west will be able to contain nuclear proliferation for many more years, but this author is a crank and someone needs to take him to see a therapist.

  • insertfunnyusername29 November 2012 3:37PM

    “single graph is insufficient evidence to reach any conclusions; so it is premature to declare it a hoax. It is simplistic and an error was made on the units for the Power axis – so to me it appears likely to be a study by an undergraduate physics student.”

    Bullshit. It is evidence that this is a hoax. This is a graph that an undergraduate BUSINESS, or management, student would generate, ie someone who knows how to use excel to draw graphs, but doesn’t know anything about physics. An undergraduate physics student would at least know enough of the basics of physics not to make that kind of basic error. That is a very basic error, the kind of basic error you would expect from someone who doesn’t know anything about physics, and who is too lazy / has too little time to do a bit of googling.

    “But this graph and presumably other documents were provided last year to the IAEA by “two Member States ” (presumably the US and Israel). If anyone is interested in a description of the information, see Section “C.8. Modelling and calculations” in the November 18, 2011 report given on the IAEA web page for Iran.

    So presumably the AP has access to the other documents provided to IAEA and can also publish them so that people can draw their own conclusions.
    ”

    1. If AP presumably has access to those other documents, then why hasn’t it presented them? Why has it instead presented a graph that indicates that it didn’t to do any editorial checking as to whether the graph was realistic? Or more nefariously, it knew the graph wasn’t realistic, but chose to publish it anyway.

    2. If this graph is part of the “evidence” from the “two member states”, it seriously calls into question the validity of the rest of the evidence. If your doctor told you that you can prevent diabetes by eating 10 kgs of sugar a day, would you believe anything else he said about medicine and health?

  • jaapdenhaan29 November 2012 3:39PM

    Naturally a lot of politicians don’t have any knowledge of nuclear physics, Israel has been helped by conspiracy theories to such an extent, that anything absurd to save us from the wretched end-of-time scenario of the Bible, which comes close to the scenery of a nuclear holocaust which Is not in their scriptures, must be coming from the Mossad.

  • killthefascistwithin29 November 2012 3:45PM

    If Iran did manufacture a deliverable nuclear device, would it have any deterrent value?

    I think Likud thinks an Iranian nuclear weapon would be a deterrent. That is why they want to eliminate the possibility of Iran’s nuclear weapons development. A first strike from Israel would elicit an unthinkable response from Iran. Israel prefers to assault the weak among us, not the strong.

  • Phace Palm29 November 2012 3:47PM

    Glenn,

    allow me as an engineer to make it a bit more clear why the “scary graph” from AP is identical to the harmless one found via the google search. The solid line curve, as others have noted, is a distribution, and in this particular case a bell-curve distribution. If one mathematically integrates this distribution, then one obtains its cumulative distribution function i.e. the other, dotted curve in the figure. There are so many observations in science and engineering that can be represented by this relationship, that to proclaim this figure is some sort of proof of nuclear weapons work by the Iranians is beyond laughable.

    I mean, when students get their SAT scores and see that they scored in the 95th percentile, that is exactly what was used to generate this score.

    As always, wikipedia is a great resource on this – the two graphs on thie right-hand side of the relevant wikipedia page are the ones combined in the “scary iranian plot”:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cumulative_distribution_function

  • fondlemyBush29 November 2012 3:47PM

    I am afraid that the simpletons in the intended audience has already been convinced by this kindergarten graph and will probably think it justified to bomb Iran.

…

  • SiDevilIam
  • Your comments are being premoderated.

About this series

  • A critical, campaigning column on vital issues of civil rights, freedom of information and justice – and their enemies, from the award-winning journalist, former constitutional litigator and author of three New York Times bestsellers.Follow @ggreenwald on Twitter or email him at glenn.greenwald@guardiannews.com

Latest posts

More from Glenn Greenwald on security and liberty

A critical, campaigning column on vital issues of civil rights, freedom of information and justice – and their enemies, from the award-winning journalist, former constitutional litigator and author of three New York Times bestsellers.

Follow @ggreenwald on Twitter or email him at glenn.greenwald@
guardiannews.com

Related information

Alleged Iranian nuclear weapon diagram ‘amateurish and wrong’

29 Nov 2012

US scientists debunk latest leaked ‘evidence’ of Iran’s weapons work

CNN claims Iran shot at a US drone, revealing the news network’s mindset

8 Nov 2012

Glenn Greenwald: Its Pentagon reporter parrots significant, inflammatory government claims without an iota of skepticism or balance

About admin

...and I am Sid Harth
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.