Given the fact that ElBaredi of the International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) has never found any evidence of an Iranian nuclear program, and given the fact that the same people making this claim are the ones who fudged WMD in Iraq, namely Dick Cheney and other neocons, and the Israelis, and given the fact that the IAEA also accurately assessed that there were no WMD in Iraq. Why are we taking their claims of WMD seriously when it comes to Iran?
Here is a very good editorial on the matter that appeared in "The Ottawa Sun" by MICHAEL HARRIS
Meanwhile, the Bush Administration is reading from the same script that led to the Iraq War. Despite epic blunders in his assessments of pre and post-war Iraq, U.S. vice-president Dick Cheney is promoting a sense of clear and present danger over Iran's nuclear program, which he says, the U.S., (and the Sharon government), will not "tolerate." The question is, what evidence does the Bush administration have for the vice-president's bellicose musings about Iran? The answer is none.
In fact, the International Atomic Energy Agency, (IAEA) has now inspected Iran's nuclear program and found absolutely no evidence of a nuclear weapons program. After 18 years of not cooperating with the IAEA, Iran is now complying with international inspections. Like Hans Blix before him, Mohamed El-Baredei is now the object of ridicule by hawkish figures in the Bush administration. Ignoring facts learned from hard inspections on the ground in Iran, Washington is once again quoting disgruntled exiles to back up its fears about Tehran.
David Kay sees this as dangerous deja vu. These exiles may or may not have valuable information to share. But after the fiasco of the Iraqi exiles, who grossly misled U.S. intelligence, their stories must be confirmed by better sources than other Iranian exiles who clearly have their own agenda for regime change back home. Having gone once to the UN Security Council to "prove" that Iraq had WMD only to be totally discredited by the work of the Iraq Survey Group, the U.S. won't find much of a coalition of the willing to thunder into Iran without evidence that can stand the test of international scrutiny.
Nevertheless, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's foot is already tapping over what the U.S. sees as protracted diplomatic discussions between the European Union and Iran, openly talking about the need for there to be "an end to this." Colin Powell exhibited the same impatience with the Security Council members, many of them from "Old Europe" and most especially with UN weapons inspector Hans Blix.
Link to the rest of the article
The people making the claim should have zero credibility so why are the news media, and many Democrats taking it seriously?