The US media continues the scaremongering about Iran's nuclear program using more "anonymous sources". The latest example is George Jahn who claims in an article entitled "Suspected Nuclear Site Reportedly Increasingly Active", that according to "officials", there is an "increase in activity at an Iranian site suspected of links to alleged secret work on nuclear weapons."
Note the hedging language: the site is "suspected" of having links to an alleged nuclear weapons program. What the hell does that even mean?
Anyway, the site in question is known as Parchin.
But, not mentioned by George Jahn, Parchin was already inspected by the IAEA - twice. David Albright started a campaign of innuendo about Parchin, based on nothing more than his own pure speculation that the site would be a "logical candidate" for a secret weapons program (just count the number of "may be" statements in Albright's explanation about why Parchin was deemed suspicious.)
George Jahn then goes on to lie yet again:
Iran razed the Lavizan Shian complex in northern Iran, before allowing IAEA inspectors to visit the suspected repository of military procured equipment that could be used in a nuclear weapons program five years ago. Tehran said the site had been demolished to make way for a park, but inspectors subsequently found traces of uranium enriched to or near the level used in making the core of nuclear warheads.
Well, no, sorry - that's not true at all. No "traces of nuclear weapons grade uranium" were found at Lavizan. In fact, not only was the entire issue if "traces of enriched uranium" ultimately resolved by the IAEA in favor of Iran (the traces came from contamination on parts obtained from Pakisan) the US claimed that Iran had not only razed the site but also removed the topsoil at Lavizan, specifically because such traces had NOT been found there.
"Former U.S. ambassador to the IAEA, Kenneth Brill, accused Iran in June of using "the wrecking ball and bulldozer" to sanitize Lavizan prior to the arrival of U.N. inspectors. ... But another diplomat close to the IAEA told Reuters that on-site inspections of Lavizan produced no proof that any soil had been removed at all."
SOURCE: No Sign of Nuke Work at Suspect Iran Site - Diplomats - Reuters
September 30, 2004
And the IAEA agreed with Iran that the 'razing' (aka grading) of the site was part of normal pre-planned construction activity, and the issue was deemed to be resolved - in favor of Iran:
"39. However, with regard to the razing of the Lavisan-Shian site, in August 2005, Iran provided further clarification and additional documentation in support of its statement that the site had been razed following the return of the site to the Municipality of Tehran in connection with a dispute between the Municipality and the Ministry of Defence. Iran explained further that the razing of the site had been carried out by the Municipality, and that it had begun in December 2003 and was completed within two or three months. The information provided by Iran appeared to be coherent and consistent with its explanation of the razing of the Lavisan-Shian area."
SOURCE: IAEA Repor Nov 2005
Which is probably why the IAEA then publicly complained about the inadequacy of US intelligence on Iran's supposed "secret" nuclear sites.