Scott Horton Interviews Jason Ditz

Scott Horton, February 09, 2010

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Jason Ditz, managing news editor at Antiwar.com, discusses the quickly removed AP article from George Jahn that blatantly exaggerates Iran’s nuclear program, Iran’s tentative agreement to third-party uranium enrichment for medical applications and the big difference between highly enriched and weapons grade uranium.

MP3 here. (11:49)

Jason Ditz is the managing news editor at Antiwar.com.

12 Responses to “Jason Ditz”

  1. Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by RonPaulNews: Antiwar Radio: Jason Ditz http://bit.ly/cByYnz @AntiwarScott…

  2. Today at the London independent, we read (comments for that story are conveniently turned off):

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-ea

    This internal political drama helps to explain Iran's latest nuclear challenge to the world, analysts believe. Yesterday, Tehran said that scientists at its Natanz nuclear enrichment plant had begun, in the presence of inspectors from the IAEA, upgrading stocks of uranium from a current level of purity of 3.5 per cent to 20 per cent. …. The government insists the higher grade uranium that yesterday's step purportedly brings closer is for use by oncologists in the treatment of cancer, which is not illegal under UN rules. But the US, Israel and other Western governments say the move is an alarming provocation because Iran does not have the technology to turn enriched uranium into fuel rods for medical uses. Once it reaches 20 per cent purity however, it could easily continue to enriching to the 90 per cent required for a nuclear bomb.

  3. If iran enriches to 20% they can exchange that 20% for the actual fuel rods and not have to wait for some 3rd country to enrich a batch of 3.5% uranium to 20%. Currently the west is saying that iran has to transfer its 3.5% and then WAIT until that is enriched to 20%.

  4. Wow. Did you guys see the New York Times today? TWO articles, and of course, one by Willian Broad pushing the war party line.

    These people just don't give damn about the truth.

  5. It does not matter that AP has pulled back the story. It has already been implanted in people's minds. Just like "Israel should be wiped off the map," which Achmadinijad never said. This is similar to when a trial lawyer says something totally out of order, then has it withdrawn before the other lawyer can object. The jury still heard it, and what do they know.

  6. The missiles to be deployed in Romania and Poland by 2015 are part of a first strike force – - to shoot down surviving Russian missiles which are launched in retaliation.

  7. Continue enriching for A YEAR to make ONE bomb. Please. Iran knows the rest of the world has their fingers on their triggers. Iran releases their one bomb and they are toast a minute later. Literally. They are crazy but not completely stupid.

  8. Is there anything that can be done to hold news organizations accountable for the truth? What once was a reputable source for news is now ruined. Like Fox 'news'.

  9. What do you expect? They are bought and paid for.

  10. I agree that Iran – as every country – has the right to procure/produce enriched uranium for peaceful purposes, but what I do not understand is: Where did Iran get the fuel rods from that they haven been using to produce isotopes for medical use until now?

  11. Mark Twain said it best way back when there were only newspapers. His comment is appropriate for all of the media / press today: "If one does not read the newspapers they will not be informed. If one does read the newspapers they will be misinformed."

  12. I've been inspecting nuclear plants since 1991. For 3 years I was an IAEA inspector. Much of my work has been in the area of uranium enrichment plant inspections. Based on my experience, the IAEA's inspection regime for Iran's LEU enrichment plant is much more stringent than what the U.S. imposes even on our sites that possess and/or use highly enriched uranium or plutonium.

    What has me concerned, is that Iran's non-issues have so distracted the world that we pretty much ignored the blatant proliferation in North Korea. Sure the world press and a few nations paid some token 'lip service' back in October 2006, when North Korea detonated a test nuclear device. BUT, there was hardly a mention last May 25, 2009, when North Korea conducted another nuclear test. How many readers even knew of that test? In the meantime, the IAEA has literally no idea how much uranium and plutonium North Korea has produced over the years when it kicked the IAEA out.

Leave a Reply