Reuters, public relations wing for Iran

Reuters continues with its ludicrous and journalistically indefensible efforts to downplay the Iranian nuclear weapons program and conceal explicit Iranian threats to commit genocide.

The agency runs three stories, two by self-censoring Iranian correspondent, Parisa Hafezi, the third by hardcore propagandist, Alistair Lyon, employing a combination of euphemisms, egregious factual omissions, and sanitized reporting to portray a fantasy world where Iran is merely pursuing electrical power and where the regime's military threats are solely a defensive response to Western aggression.  Here's Hafezi running interference:

Still, a top U.S. intelligence official said last week that while U.S. spy services believed Iran would respond if attacked, they thought it was unlikely to start a conflict.
Israel and the United States do not rule out military action against Iran if sanctions and diplomacy fail to rein in its nuclear energy campaign.
Senior U.N. inspectors have begun their second round of talks in Tehran in three weeks, seeking Iranian explanations with respect to intelligence about "possible military dimensions" to the Iranian nuclear program.
Iran denies Western accusations that it is covertly seeking the means to build nuclear weapons and in recent weeks has again vowed no nuclear retreat, but also voiced willingness to resume negotiations with world powers without preconditions.
Iran says it is enriching uranium solely as fuel for a future network of nuclear power stations, not for bombs.

And again here after Iran refused yesterday to allow U.N. inspector access to its nuclear sites:

As sanctions mount, ordinary Iranians are suffering from the effects of soaring prices and a collapsing currency. Several Iranian nuclear scientists have been killed over the past two years in bomb attacks that Tehran has blamed on its arch-adversary Israel.

In response, Iran has issued a series of statements asserting its right to self-defense and threatening to block the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil tanker route.

The collapse of the nuclear talks came as Iran seems increasingly isolated, with some experts seeing the Islamic republic's mounting defiance in response to sanctions against its oil industry and financial institutions as evidence that it is in no mood to compromise with the West.

Elections on March 2 are expected to be won by supporters of Khamenei, an implacable enemy of the West.

The failure of the two-day visit by the International Atomic Energy Agency could now hamper any resumption of wider nuclear negotiations between Iran and six world powers as the sense grows that Tehran feels it is being backed into a corner.

And here's Reuters correspondent Lyon, writing of Iran's Supreme Leader (we love the Orwellian ring of that sobriquet):

This month Khamenei said sanctions would not alter Iran's nuclear course, military threats would "harm America" and any nation or group fighting Israel, thought to be the Middle East's only nuclear-armed power, would have Tehran's backing.
"In response to threats of oil embargo and war, we have our own threats to impose at the right time," he declared.
Khamenei has in the past denied that Iran seeks atomic bombs, saying: "It is against our Islamic thoughts."
But he has shown little interest in genuinely assuaging Western worries about Iran's activities, authorizing what the U.N. nuclear watchdog regards as only incomplete cooperation, as well as intermittent talks with six world powers that Western officials suspect Tehran pursues primarily to gain more time to attain nuclear "breakout" capability.
The bespectacled cleric, who ultimately decides all matters of state, including nuclear and foreign policy, simply does not trust the United States, once described by his late mentor Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini as a wolf to Iran's lamb.

Ah yes, poor Iran is being unfairly persecuted for a perfectly innocent "nuclear energy campaign" (to which it refuses to allow independent inspection under its NPT obligations) and only "in response", has the country "issued a series of statements asserting its right to self-defense".  You know, like threatening to commit genocide against the Jews.

The Iranian lamb.  And its Reuters udder.

Parisa Hafezi continues to self-censor; the truth continues to suffer

In a piece about inspectors from the United Nations IAEA arriving in Iran to try, yet again, to obtain cooperation for their investigation into the country's nuclear weapons program -- er, sorry -- disputed medical isotopes program, Reuters correspondent Parisa Hafezi ties herself into knots to avoid stating the obvious:

Iran says its nuclear program is entirely peaceful but its refusal to curb uranium enrichment, which can have both civilian and military ends, while shifting a key part of it to a remote mountain bunker protected from air strikes and continuing to restrict IAEA access, has raised concerns.

As everyone knows, medical isotope programs are routinely moved to mountain bunkers to protect them from air strikes.

Nothing to see here; move along.

Reuters and self-censorship

Reuters correspondent Parisa Hafezi has written literally hundreds of stories about Iran's nuclear program.  In next to none of them, does she acknowledge that scientists at the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have concluded that Iran has engaged in all aspects of developing a nuclear bomb.  Rather, the Reuters' reporter is bent on obfuscating the matter, characterizing the conflict as merely a he said, she said dispute between two equally credible partisans:

The West accuses Iran of covertly trying to develop the means to produce nuclear bombs with its uranium enrichment program. Iran, the world's No. 5 crude oil exporter, says its nuclear facilities are part of a peaceful energy program and it would retaliate for any attack on them.

Hafezi is based in Tehran with 16 Reuters employees and according to this story, "the Reuters offices are under constant surveillance and have experienced several break-ins; staffers are convinced that e-mails and telephone lines are bugged".

Hafezi is also reported to have "endured beatings, interrogations and raids on her office and home for critical reporting [of the Iranian regime]".

If these accounts are true, Hafezi and Reuters clearly fear reprisals for any perceived failure to toe the Iranian government line in the agency's coverage of the country's nuclear weapons program.

While we sympathize with Hafezi's plight, Reuters should be informing readers that its reporting in Iran is subject to self-censorship due to concerns for the safety of their staffers there.

Self-censoring, in this case, appears to be a reflection of Reuters correspondents' instincts for self-preservation.

Failure to disclose that self-censorship is unethical and a reflection of Reuters instincts for corporate preservation.

The West, yada, suspects, yada, Iran, yada

In a nearly 1,700-word magnum opus about Iran and the impact international sanctions are having on its economy, Reuters correspondents Niluksi Koswanage and Parisa Hafezi tell us:

The sanctions have been imposed to halt Iran's nuclear programme, which the West believes is being used to develop a nuclear bomb. Iran's leadership says the nuclear programme is peaceful, and it is willing to endure sanctions to maintain it as a national right.
Last month, Iran took the important step of beginning production of highly enriched uranium at a new facility hidden deep under a mountain, where it would be difficult for U.S. or Israeli warplanes to destroy it.
Israel and Western countries have accused Iran of working to develop a nuclear bomb, a charge dismissed by Tehran.

For the 700th+ time, Reuters attempts to obfuscate reality by stating that Israel and the amorphous "West" merely suspect Iran is developing a nuclear bomb and that of course, Iran denies this.  To Reuters, a perfectly symmetrical claim and rebuttal between two partisans.

Nearly 1,700 words of blather and nary a mention of the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency and its many independent reports concluding that Iran has engaged in all aspects of developing nuclear weapons:

The information indicates that Iran has carried out the following activities that are relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device:
• Efforts, some successful, to procure nuclear related and dual use equipment and materials by military related individuals and entities (Annex, Sections C.1 and C.2);
• Efforts to develop undeclared pathways for the production of nuclear material (Annex, Section C.3);
• The acquisition of nuclear weapons development information and documentation from a clandestine nuclear supply network (Annex, Section C.4); and
• Work on the development of an indigenous design of a nuclear weapon including the testing of components (Annex, Sections C.5–C.12).

These are the facts Reuters correspondents are desperate to conceal from public view, even as they drum into the minds of their readers, a stale and meaningless propaganda mantra intended to misinform and confuse.

This is one sick media company.

Reuters' broken record -- broken record -- broken record

For years, and across hundreds of stories, Reuters Middle East-based correspondents have been covering for Iran's drive to obtain the bomb, characterizing it innocuously as a "nuclear program" (no reference to weapons) and framing it merely as a he said/she said dispute between Iran and the amorphous "West".

That may have been a prudent and journalistically defensible approach to covering the story several years ago when much of the forensic evidence of Iran's covert nuclear enrichment, fission experiments, and weaponization efforts had yet to come to light.

With the November 2011 release of the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency report documenting, in meticulous detail, Iran's advanced activities in these areas, Reuters obdurate editorial position on this issue is simply an embarrassment for the agency.  Yet, it persists:

TEHRAN, Jan 9 (Reuters) - Iran announced on Monday it had sentenced a dual U.S.-Iranian citizen to death for spying for the CIA, creating fresh grounds for hostility with Washington at a time when Tehran has responded to new U.S. sanctions with military threats.

The sentence comes at a time when tension between Iran and the West over Tehran's nuclear programme has reached a new high, rattling global oil markets. The West fears the work is a secret atomic weapons programme, while Iran says it is purely peaceful.

No mention of the UN report, no mention of the mountains of forensic evidence of Iran's covert nuclear weapons program, and no mention that it is not just the "West" that fears Iran's directive, but dozens of other countries in the Middle East and around the world that share the same concern.

All part and parcel of Reuters obfuscation efforts to conceal and cover for the Iranian regime.

Reuters still covering for Iran

Reuters has a long history of censoring the various findings of the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) with respect to Iran's nuclear program.  The IAEA concluded in October 2009 that Iran had acquired “sufficient information to be able to design and produce a workable” atom bomb and the following month asked Iran to respond to evidence suggesting that Iranian scientists had experimented with an advanced nuclear warhead design.  Iran refused to do so.

Yet in story after story, Reuters correspondents choose to withhold this critical information from readers and instead revert to their standard propaganda mantra suggesting that only the United States, Israel, and the amorphous "West" believe Iran is developing nuclear weapons:

The United States and its Western allies suspect Iran is using its nuclear energy program as a cover to build bombs. Iran denies the allegation, insisting it needs nuclear technology to generate more electricity.

This key omission is of course, intentional, and reflects Reuters' efforts to conceal from readers the widespread and independently-held conclusion that Iran is indeed, aggressively pursuing the bomb.  Rather, the dispute is framed merely as a "he said/she said".

Nor does Reuters note, as we did in October of 2009, that based on the widening positive gap between electricity production and electricity consumption in Iran, it is absurd to suggest (or parrot) that Iran "needs nuclear technology to generate more electricity".

Why does Reuters, which clings to claims of being an unbiased and transparent news agency, continue to cover for the Iranian regime?

Reuters still running interference for Iran

Over the seventeen months we have been commenting on Reuters Middle East coverage, the agency has published hundreds of articles on Iran and its nuclear program.  In all but a handful of these stories, Reuters correspondents refuse to come clean with respect to the overwhelming global consensus, led by the IAEA at the United Nations, that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons.  Rather, the agency hypnotically repeats one of its favorite propaganda mantras that merely the US and Israel, or alternatively, the amorphous "West" are making this claim:

Iran is at odds with major powers over its nuclear activities, which the United States and its allies suspect are aimed at producing a nuclear weapon. Tehran has denied the allegations and said it wants only to generate electricity.

Framed this way, the scope of Iran's nuclear program (as well as its serial violations of the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty) is always in murky waters, one of subjective debate, unsupported claim and denial, between Iran and her adversaries.

Reuters apparently hasn't a clue as to whether any independent evidence has emerged -- like this, this, or this -- to confirm American "suspicions".

Alternatively, why does Reuters, an agency that trumpets itself as the foremost source of "unbiased and reliable news", continue to deliberately conceal the facts about Iran's nuclear program?

"The United States and its allies"

Reuters consistently frames the altercation over Iran's nuclear program as one of undemonstrated claims by the United States (or the amorphous "West") and denials by Iran.  Per Reuters, the US accuses Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons and Iran says it is simply pursuing nuclear power for electricity generation:

The U.N. Security Council has imposed four rounds of sanctions against Tehran for refusing to suspend sensitive parts of its nuclear work that the United States and its allies suspect is aimed at developing weapons.  

Iran denies this and refuses to halt its uranium enrichment program.

Whereas Reuters is normally quick to cite the United Nations in any global dispute as the arbiter of record, in this dispute (according to Reuters), the UN has no view on whether Iran is developing nuclear weapons and is acting only as handmaiden for the US and its allies to punish Iran. 

Of course, this is a serious distortion of the facts as the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has itself uncovered and reported on extensive evidence that Iran is working feverishly to obtain the bomb.

Reuters still confused about Iranian support for Hamas

In a story on Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad calling on the Palestinians to continue warring against Israel until, "Jerusalem [is liberated] from the dirt of the Zionist occupation", Reuters correspondent Parisa Hafezi continues to get it wrong on the extent to which Iran has supported the terror group Hamas:

Washington accuses Iran of sponsoring terrorism by arming and financing those organizations. Iran says it provides moral support to the Islamist militant groups.

Note how the wily Hafezi follows an accusation by the US that Iran is arming and financing Hamas with the non sequitur, "Iran says it provides moral support to the Islamist militant groups".  Of course, that moral support does not preclude arming and financing but as written, it suggests a denial.

As we noted back in June, both Iran and Hamas have publicly admitted to the former bankrolling the latter.  And we know that Iranian missiles have ended up in the Hamas arsenal because they have also ended up exploded in Israeli communities.

Reuters only cites the UN when it goose steps to Reuters drumbeat

Reuters loves to cite the United Nations and its myriad of departments, committees, agencies, and commissions.  That is, the news agency loves to cite the UN when the august body is passing resolutions or issuing findings that adhere to Reuters' peculiar political ideology and agenda.  When the UN is out of step with this agenda however, Reuters promptly punishes it with a cold shoulder, omitting any mention of the body in its stories.

Take for example, the hundreds of stories Reuters has published on Iran's nuclear program.  Last February, the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) declared that it had extensive evidence of Iran’s efforts to develop a nuclear warhead.  Yet whereas Reuters reported on this bombshell at the time (no pun intended), the news agency has since completely vanished the UNs finding:

The West suspects Iran is trying to build bombs under cover of a civilian nuclear program. Tehran denies this, saying it needs nuclear technology to generate power.

No mention at all of the UN and its authoritative position on the matter.  The objective evidence that Iran is seeking the bomb is thus suppressed and the question of Iran's nuclear activities reduced to one of he said/she said between Iran and "the West".

If it's Sharia, it can't be abuse

Reuters picks up a report from the official Iranian news agency indicating that the government there has decided to temporarily suspend the stoning of a woman convicted of adultery.  Reuters correspondent Parisa Hafezi reminds readers:

Murder, adultery, rape, armed robbery, apostasy and drug trafficking are all punishable by death under Iran's sharia law, enforced since the 1979 Islamic revolution.

Hafezi's story ends with this mind-boggling non sequitur:

The Iranian authorities routinely dismiss charges of rights abuses, saying they are following Sharia.

Well yes, we suppose that if Sharia law calls for adultery to be punished by stoning, by that standard a stoning fulfilled wouldn't reflect an abuse of rights. Leave it to Reuters to straighten us out on that.

Hypocrisy, thy name is Reuters

Once again, Reuters demonstrates its rank hypocrisy and mendacity.  In a story on the arrests of 13 Iranians suspected in the killings of Sunni religious leaders, Reuters parrots the Iranian regime -- not once, not twice, but three times -- referring to the suspects as terrorists.  Let's review again, Reuters published and oft-repeated policy for its journalists on use of the word "terrorist" and its derivatives.  First, from its Handbook of Journalism:

We may refer without attribution to terrorism and counter-terrorism in general but do not refer to specific events as terrorism.

Then there's Reuters global news editor Stephen Jukes who, in a memo to correspondents, famously declared: 

We all know that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter and that Reuters upholds the principle that we do not use the word terrorist.

Apparently, that "principle" only applies when Israel describes attacks against its civilians with the "T"-word.

Iran speaks; Reuters parrots

Peruse almost any Reuters story on the Iranian nuclear program and you will spot something along the lines of what Parisa Hafezi writes here:

"The West suspects the Islamic state is seeking to develop nuclear weapons. Iran insists it needs the nuclear technology to generate power to meet booming domestic demand."

Now, we know that Reuters correspondents are not investigative reporters -- aye, we know that too well. But given its position as the world's largest international news agency and a staff of over 100 Middle East correspondents, writers, and editors, one would think that Reuters could take a more informed and critical view of Iran's repeated and hollow defense that it is only pursuing a nuclear program to generate electricity.

For example, it required only about five minutes for us to do an internet search and locate the following informative graphic comparing Iran's electricity generation with consumption between 1984 and 2006.

One can see that while electricity consumption has been rising over this period, electricity generation has been increasing at an even faster pace such that the gap between production and demand has actually been widening in favor of production. This, absent any nuclear power generating stations in the country.

So while on the surface it may be true that Iranian demand for electrical power is growing, it is an incomplete truth and patently misleading to suggest (or uncritically parrot) that this is the reason Iran is intent on pursuing a nuclear program.