ProPublica

Journalism in the Public Interest

Cancel

How a Government Report Spread a Questionable Claim About Iran

.

Iran's Ayatollah Ali Khamenei delivers a speech. Experts are questioning a new U.S. government study on Iran's intelligence ministry. (Behrouz Mehri/AFP/Getty Images)

Several media outlets reported this month on an alarming finding from a new U.S. government study: Iran’s intelligence ministry, as CNN put it, constitutes “a terror and assassination force 30,000 strong.”

The claim that the intelligence ministry has a whopping 30,000 employees, first reported by a conservative website, spread to other outlets including Wired and the public radio show the Takeaway and landed elsewhere online, even on the intelligence ministry’s Wikipedia page. All cited the new government study, put out by an arm of the Library of Congress called the Federal Research Division.

So how did the government researchers come up with the number? They searched the Internet — and ended up citing an obscure, anonymous website that was simply citing another source.

The trail on the 30,000 figure eventually ends with a Swedish terrorism researcher quoted in a 2008 Christian Science Monitor article. But the researcher, Magnus Ranstorp, said he isn’t sure where the number came from. “I think obviously that it would be an inflated number” of formal employees, said Ranstorp.

We inquired with six Iran experts, and none knew of any evidence for the figure. Some said it might be in the ballpark while others questioned its plausibility.

“Whether the figures emanate from Iran or from western reporting, they are generally exaggerated and either meant as self-aggrandizing propaganda, if self-reported by Iran, or just approximations based on usually scant data or evidence,” said Afshon Ostovar, a senior Middle East analyst at the Center for Naval Analyses who writes frequently on Iran. The number “could be more or less accurate, but there's no way to know.”

Gary Sick, a longtime Iran specialist in and out of government, said the entire Federal Research Division study “has all the appearance of a very cheap piece of propaganda and should not be trusted."

Sick pointed to the study’s use of questionable Internet sources as well as flat-out errors. In one section, for example, the study lays out in detail how “Iran’s constitution defines” the intelligence ministry’s official functions. The problem, as Sick notes: Iran’s constitution doesn’t mention an intelligence ministry, let alone define its functions.

Federal Research Division Chief David Osborne said in an email the report “was leaked to the media without authorization” and declined to comment further “because it is proprietary to the agency for which it was written.”

This is that we know about the 30,000 figure and its provenance:

On the morning of Jan. 3, the conservative Washington Free Beacon ran a story headlined, “Iran Spy Network 30,000 Strong.” The outlet said it had obtained a “64-page unclassified report” on the Ministry of Intelligence and Security, and published it with the story.

The Federal Research Service of the Library of Congress, which produced the study, provides “fee for service” research to other government agencies using the resources of the library. The study’s title page names no author but says it was produced under an agreement with an arm of the Pentagon called the Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office. (That office did not respond to requests for comment.)

The study flatly states that Iran’s intelligence ministry has “more than 30,000 officers and support personnel.”

But it also hedges. It notes Iranian intelligence is “a difficult subject to study because so little information about it is publicly available.” The study does not claim to feature any original intelligence or reporting. It says its main sources are news websites and Iranian blogs.

“The reliability of blog-based information may be questionable at times,” says the report. “But it seems prudent to evaluate and present it in the absence of alternatives.”

The evening after the report was first published, CNN ran a segment on what it called “troubling new details on a new report of Iran's intelligence service.” The story compared the 30,000 figure to the roughly 100,000 employees in the 17 U.S. intelligence agencies and offices, and went through various attacks over the years attributed to Iranian intelligence.

A CNN spokeswoman said the network “checked the number with sources that led us to feel comfortable that the report was in line with the national security community's understanding."

As support for the 30,000 claim, the study cites a post on a website, iranchannel.org, which aggregates news critical of Iran’s government.

That post, from 2010, turns out to merely excerpt another study from yet another source.

That study, titled “Shariah: The Threat to America,” was put out by the hawkish Center for Security Policy. As the title suggests, it doesn’t focus on Iran but rather the purported threat of Islamic law.

The study briefly mentions that Iran’s intelligence ministry has “up to some 30,000 officers and support staff.” Its source: the 2008 article in the Christian Science Monitor.

That piece refers to Iran’s intelligence ministry having “some 30,000 on the payroll by one count,” which came from Ranstorp, the Swedish terrorism researcher.

Ranstorp told us that while he did not recall citing the figure to the Monitor, it might have originated with Kenneth Katzman, a Mideast specialist with the Congressional Research Service who often writes on Iran.

Katzman told us that the figure did not come from him. He added that 30,000 did not seem “inordinately unreasonable” but that he does not know of evidence supporting it.

Bill Gertz, the Washington Free Beacon reporter who obtained and published the Federal Research Service study, told ProPublica he stands by his story.

"In my 30-plus years in reporting on national security issues, I have found that such unclassified reports often use press reporting of such numbers to avoid having to use classified information,” Gertz said. “I also know that most of the people who write such reports have access to classified information about the subjects they write about and I doubt they would publish a figure that would be contradicted by classified assessments of the number of personnel in the [intelligence ministry]."

Gertz also pointed to another report on Iran, this one produced in 2010 by private intelligence firm Stratfor. But that report says that, as of 2006, Iran’s intelligence ministry had just 15,000 employees. It does not cite a source for the figure.

Clark Baker

Yesterday, 3:50 p.m.

Is anyone shocked that ProPublica is SHOCKED-SHOCKED that a government report spread dubious claims about Iran.

CEOs, politicians and political parties routinely form committees to conduct “research”  that is designed to produce desired results and conclusions.  Those results are then reported to a wire service, where they are parroted by other wire services as news.  Minority committee members who reach the “wrong conclusion” rarely return to such committees.  So whether you’re talking about Iran, vaccines, gun control, global warming or HIV, the funding source dictates the conclusions of the reports, which are then parroted by corrupt universities and a dying media that survives on its own complicity.

Indeed, if ProPublica began to report corruption related to, say, George Soros or Berkeley, they wouldn’t exist.  A story about dubious sources of an Iran intelligence report is a “safe subject” for ProPublica - and the entities that manage and fund them.

Not surprising at all. If you track much of the “conventional wisdom” on Iran back to the original source, you’d see that it has no real basis. Ahmadinejad secretly Jewish? Iranian Jews to be forced to wear yellow badges? Secret documents showing a neutron initiator, or graphs showing nuclear experiments? etc etc..—all just baloney that became “truth” because the claims were simply repeated often enough.

Isn’t Gary Sick the same “longtime Iran specialist” who claimed Bush Sr flew in a specially modified SR-71 blackbird (the only aircraft capable of making Sick’s timeline work) to Paris in 1980 to meet with Iranian negotiators in order to convince them to not release the hostages before the November election between Carter and Reagan? That’s some “expert” you managed to find.

David Kauber

Yesterday, 5:58 p.m.

I don’t know how Bush Sr. got to Paris, but I have little doubt that the Reagan campaign people, and Bush Sr. did indeed meet with Iranian officials to arrange a deal.

Did you ever consider it rather strange, and a bit alarming, that the U.S. hostages were released within minutes of Reagan being sworn into office, in January 1981??!!

But of course, it would be treason to do such negotiations, and the main stream media would never investigate such activities.  So too with the eliminating tens of thousands of voters from the voter registration lists, nearly all black, in Florida in the summer of year 2000, under the order of Jeb Bush, doing this little favor for his brother. 

Check out Greg Palast if you want some facts that the media refuse to disclose, as in the intro to his book: THE BEST DEMOCRACY MONEY CAN BUY.

Reality is much more interesting than all the fiction you can come up with.

Mr. Sick claims to be an expert on Iran and he says “Iran’s constitution doesn’t mention an intelligence ministry, let alone define its functions.” He probably needs to ask a translator to read the Iranian constitution in regards to the Ministry of Intelligence and Security. He can update his information by looking at the following link. http://hvm.ir/lawdetailnews.asp?id=741
By the way, If the ministry had 15,000 officers by 2006, 30000 officers sounds reseanable since iran has developed its activities around the world. In addition, it has to deal with people inside Iran as well.

David Kauber,

Such things do happen. A similar game was even played by France with Iran over their election. Another by France with Pakistan. Politicians do all kinds of stuff to get their election wins. In fact there are indications that the hostage crisis had been done on instigation of other powers and through MKO and others.

Reza,

Well, if the translation is right then it means you are wrong. The link you have provided is not for constitution but rather the law passed by Iranian parliament. Please learn the difference between constitution and law. The article is talking about constitution and the Iranian constitution does not mention any intelligence agency.

blowback

Today, 6:26 a.m.

@Reza - The Islamic Republic of Iran Ministry of Information has been around for over six hundred years. How can this be?

Pugnacious

0 minutes ago

Bill Gertz was a frequent guest of Brian Lamb’s Washington Journal during C-SPAN’s 1991 televisingof the HRC hearings—Lamb being fully aware that the Hill & Knowlton story was a lie—the Iraqi Baby Incubator Hoax engineered by California congressmanTom Lantos and his Human Rights Caucus. Then, before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Gertz was on WJ peddling his lies that Saddam Hussein had mined his oil fields with “chemical,biological, nuclear cocktail” bombs. Check out Gertz’s Counter Jihdad Report online.

Add a comment

Email me when someone responds to this article.