Connect with us

News

Early intelligence suggests Iran’s uranium largely intact, European officials say

Published

on

Early intelligence suggests Iran’s uranium largely intact, European officials say

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Preliminary intelligence assessments provided to European governments indicate that Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile remains largely intact following US strikes on its main nuclear sites, two officials have said.

The people said the intelligence suggested that Iran’s stockpile of 408kg of uranium enriched close to weapons-grade levels was not concentrated in Fordow, one of its two main enrichment sites, at the time of last weekend’s attack.

It had been distributed to various other locations, the assessments found.

Advertisement

The findings call into question US President Donald Trump’s assertion that the bombing had “obliterated” Iran’s nuclear programme.

In an apparent reference to Fordow, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform on Thursday: “Nothing was taken out of [the] facility. Would take too long, too dangerous, and very heavy and hard to move!”

The people said EU governments were still awaiting a full intelligence report on the extent of the damage to Fordow, which was built deep beneath a mountain near the holy city of Qom, and that one initial report suggested “extensive damages, but not full structural destruction”.

Iranian officials have suggested the enriched uranium stockpile was moved before the US bombing of the plant, which came after days of Israeli strikes on the country.

At a Pentagon press briefing on Thursday, US defence secretary Pete Hegseth sidestepped questions about whether Iran had taken the uranium out of Fordow before the strikes.

Advertisement

When pressed by reporters, Hegseth said: “I’m not aware of any intelligence that I’ve reviewed that says things were not where they were supposed to be, moved or otherwise.”

The US used bunker-buster bombs to attack Fordow and Natanz, Iran’s other main uranium enrichment facility, on Sunday. It fired cruise missiles at a third site, Isfahan, which was used in the fuel conversion cycle and for storage.

Trump has dismissed a provisional American intelligence assessment, leaked to US media, that said Iran’s nuclear programme had been set back by only a matter of months.

Hegseth lambasted the media on Thursday for focusing on the report, which the US Defense Intelligence Agency had later stressed was a “preliminary, low-confidence assessment”.

The Israel Atomic Energy Commission said this week that it had assessed that US and Israeli strikes had “set back Iran’s ability to develop nuclear weapons by many years”.

Advertisement

But experts have warned that if Tehran has retained its stockpile of enriched uranium and set up advance centrifuges at hidden sites, it could still have the capacity to produce the fissile material required for a weapon.

Rafael Grossi, director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, told French Radio on Thursday that Iran’s nuclear programme had “suffered enormous damage”, though he said claims of its complete destruction were overblown.

Iran insists its programme is for peaceful civilian purposes.

Fordow was the main site for enriching uranium up to 60 per cent purity, a small step away from weapons grade. Experts said the 408kg stockpile of uranium enriched to 60 per cent had been stored at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan before Israel launched its war against Iran on June 13.

Iran’s total stockpile of enriched uranium was more than 8,400kg, but most of that was enriched to low levels.

Advertisement

Satellite images of Fordow after Sunday’s bombing show tunnel entrances apparently sealed with earth and holes that may be the entry points of the US’s 30,000lb precision-guided bunker busters. Access roads also appear damaged.

Grossi said this week that Iranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi had sent a letter to the IAEA on June 13 warning that Iran would “adopt special measures to protect our nuclear equipment and materials”.

Grossi said the UN nuclear watchdog’s inspectors, who have been unable to visit the plants since Israel launched its assault on Iran, should be allowed to return to the sites to “account for the stockpiles of uranium, including, most importantly, the 408kg enriched to 60 per cent”.

The US had not provided definitive intelligence to EU allies on Iran’s remaining nuclear capabilities following the strikes, and was withholding clear guidance on how it plans future relations with Tehran, said three officials briefed on the discussions.

EU policy towards Tehran was “on hold” pending a new initiative from Washington on seeking a diplomatic solution to the nuclear crisis, the people said, adding that conversations between Trump and EU leaders this week had failed to provide a clear message.

Advertisement

The Trump administration had been holding indirect negotiations with Tehran before the war in the hopes of a deal to curb its nuclear activities.

Trump said on Wednesday that Washington would talk to Tehran next week, but he also suggested a deal might not be needed following the strikes on Iran’s nuclear plants.

“It is completely erratic,” said one of the people. “For now, we are doing nothing.”

News

Video: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

Published

on

Video: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

new video loaded: Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

transcript

transcript

Man on Roof Faces Off with ICE Agents for Hours in Minnesota

A man clung to a partially built roof for hours in frigid temperatures during a standoff with immigration agents in Chanhassen, Minn., a suburb of Minneapolis. The confrontation was part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in the state to remove what it calls “vicious criminals.”

“What a [expletive] embarrassment.” “Look at this guy.” “What’s with all the fascists?” “The Lord is with you.” “Where’s the bad hombre? What did this guy do?” “He’s out here working to support his [expletive] family.” “Gestapo agents.” “Oh yeah, shake your head, tough guy.” “This is where you get the worst of the worst right here, hard-working builders.” “Crossing the border is not a crime. Coming illegally to the United States is not a crime, according to you.” “C’mon, get out of here.” “Take him to a different hospital.”

Advertisement
A man clung to a partially built roof for hours in frigid temperatures during a standoff with immigration agents in Chanhassen, Minn., a suburb of Minneapolis. The confrontation was part of the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown in the state to remove what it calls “vicious criminals.”

By Ernesto Londoño, Jackeline Luna and Daniel Fetherston

December 17, 2025

Continue Reading

News

Trump’s BBC lawsuit: A botched report, BritBox, and porn

Published

on

Trump’s BBC lawsuit: A botched report, BritBox, and porn

Journalists report outside BBC Broadcasting House in London. In a new lawsuit, President Trump is seeking $10 billion from the BBC for defamation.

Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Kirsty Wigglesworth/AP/AP

Not content with an apology and the resignation of two top BBC executives, President Trump filed a $10 billion defamation lawsuit Monday against the BBC in his continued strategy to take the press to court.

Beyond the legal attack on yet another media outlet, the litigation represents an audacious move against a national institution of a trusted ally. It hinges on an edit presented in a documentary of the president’s words on a fateful day. Oddly enough, it also hinges on the appeal of a niche streaming service to people in Florida, and the use of a technological innovation embraced by porn devotees.

A sloppy edit

At the heart of Trump’s case stands an episode of the BBC television documentary program Panorama that compresses comments Trump made to his supporters on Jan. 6, 2021, before they laid siege to the U.S. Capitol.

Advertisement

The episode seamlessly links Trump’s call for people to walk up to the Capitol with his exhortation nearly 55 minutes later: “And we fight, we fight like hell, and if you don’t fight like hell you don’t have a country anymore.”

Trump’s attorneys argue that the presentation gives viewers the impression that the president incited the violence that followed. They said his remarks had been doctored, not edited, and noted the omission of his statement that protesters would be “marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.”

As NPR and other news organizations have documented, many defendants in the Jan. 6 attack on Congress said they believed they had been explicitly urged by Trump to block the certification of President-elect Joe Biden’s victory.

Trump’s lawsuit calls the documentary “a false, defamatory, deceptive, disparaging, inflammatory, and malicious depiction of President Trump.”

The lawsuit alleges that the depiction was “fabricated” and aired “in a brazen attempt to interfere in and influence the Election to President Trump’s detriment.”

Advertisement

While the BBC has not filed a formal response to the lawsuit, the public broadcaster has reiterated that it will defend itself in court.

A Nov. 13 letter to Trump’s legal team on behalf of the BBC from Charles Tobin, a leading U.S. First Amendment attorney, argued that the broadcaster has demonstrated contrition by apologizing, withdrawing the broadcast, and accepting the executives’ resignations.

Tobin also noted, on behalf of the BBC, that Trump had already been indicted by a grand jury on four criminal counts stemming from his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including his conduct on Jan. 6, 2021, on the Capitol grounds.

The appeal of BritBox

For all the current consternation about the documentary, it didn’t get much attention at the time. The BBC aired the documentary twice on the eve of the 2024 elections — but never broadcast it directly in Florida.

That matters because the lawsuit was filed in Florida, where Trump alleges that the program was intended to discourage voters from voting for him.

Advertisement

Yet Tobin notes, Trump won Florida in 2024 by a “commanding 13-point margin, improving over his 2020 and 2016 performances in the state.”

Trump failed to make the case that Floridians were influenced by the documentary, Tobin wrote. He said the BBC did not broadcast the program in Florida through U.S. channels. (The BBC has distribution deals with PBS and NPR and their member stations for television and radio programs, respectively, but not to air Panorama.)

It was “geographically restricted” to U.K. viewers, Tobin wrote.

Hence the argument in Trump’s lawsuit that American viewers have other ways to watch it. The first is BritBox, a BBC streaming service that draws more on British mysteries set at seaside locales than BBC coverage of American politics.

Back in March, then-BBC Director General Tim Davie testified before the House of Commons that BritBox had more than 4 million subscribers in the U.S. (The BBC did not break down how many subscribers it has in Florida or how often Panorama documentaries are viewed by subscribers in the U.S. or the state, in response to questions posed by NPR for this story.)

Advertisement

“The Panorama Documentary was available to BritBox subscribers in Florida and was in fact viewed by these subscribers through BritBox and other means provided by the BBC,” Trump’s lawsuit states.

NPR searched for Panorama documentaries on the BritBox streaming service through the Amazon Prime platform, one of its primary distributors. The sole available episode dates from 2000. Trump does not mention podcasts. Panorama is streamed on BBC Sounds. Its episodes do not appear to be available in the U.S. on such mainstream podcast distributors in the U.S. such as Apple Podcasts, Spotify or Pocket Casts, according to a review by NPR.

Software that enables anonymous browsing – of porn

Another way Trump’s lawsuit suggests people in the U.S. could watch that particular episode of Panorama, if they were so inclined, is through a Virtual Private Network, or VPN.

Trump’s suit says millions of Florida citizens use VPNs to view content from foreign streamers that would otherwise be restricted. And the BBC iPlayer is among the most popular streaming services accessed by viewers using a VPN, Trump’s lawsuit asserts.

In response to questions from NPR, the BBC declined to break down figures for how many people in the U.S. access the BBC iPlayer through VPNs.

Advertisement

Demand for such software did shoot up in 2024 and early 2025. Yet, according to analysts — and even to materials cited by the president’s team in his own case — the reason appears to have less to do with foreign television shows and more to do with online pornography.

Under a new law, Florida began requiring age verification checks for visitors to pornographic websites, notes Paul Bischoff, editor of Comparitech, a site that reviews personal cybersecurity software.

“People use VPNs to get around those age verification and site blocks,” Bischoff says. “The reason is obvious.”

An article in the Tampa Free Press cited by Trump’s lawsuit to help propel the idea of a sharp growth of interest in the BBC actually undercuts the idea in its very first sentence – by focusing on that law.

“Demand for Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) has skyrocketed in Florida following the implementation of a new law requiring age verification for access to adult websites,” the first paragraph states. “This dramatic increase reflects a widespread effort by Floridians to bypass the restrictions and access adult content.”

Advertisement

Several legal observers anticipate possible settlement

Several First Amendment attorneys tell NPR they believe Trump’s lawsuit will result in a settlement of some kind, in part because there’s new precedent. In the past year, the parent companies of ABC News and CBS News have each paid $16 million to settle cases filed by Trump that many legal observers considered specious.

“The facts benefit Trump and defendants may be concerned about reputational harm,” says Carl Tobias, a professor of law at the University of Richmond who specializes in free speech issues. “The BBC also has admitted it could have done better and essentially apologized.”

Some of Trump’s previous lawsuits against the media have failed. He is currently also suing the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Des Moines Register and its former pollster, and the board of the Pulitzer Prize.

Continue Reading

News

Video: Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

Published

on

Video: Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

new video loaded: Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

transcript

transcript

Prosecutors Charge Nick Reiner With Murdering His Parents

Los Angeles prosecutors charged Nick Reiner with two counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of his parents, the director Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner.

Our office will be filing charges against Nick Reiner, who is accused of killing his parents, actor-director Rob Reiner and photographer-producer Michele Singer Reiner. These charges will be two counts of first-degree murder, with a special circumstance of multiple murders. He also faces a special allegation that he personally used a dangerous and deadly weapon, that being a knife. These charges carry a maximum sentence of life in prison without the possibility parole or the death penalty. No decision at this point has been made with respect to the death penalty.

Advertisement
Los Angeles prosecutors charged Nick Reiner with two counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of his parents, the director Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner.

By Shawn Paik

December 16, 2025

Continue Reading

Trending