Over the past week, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria that the Iranians have “not decided that they will embark on the [...] effort to weaponize their nuclear capability.” Both Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and Director of National Intelligence (DNI) James Clapper testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that Iran had not yet decided to develop a nuclear weapon.

But the analysis of America’s top military officer, the Secretary of Defense and the Director of National Intelligence just isn’t good enough for Christian Whiton, the Deputy Director of National Security Staff at the Newt Gingrich presidential campaign. Appearing on Fox News yesterday, Whiton falsely claimed that an International Atomic Energy Agency report from last November “says Iran is working on a nuclear weapons program,” adding that the administration “need[s] to start telling the truth about the threat [from Iran]“:

WHITON: The most important thing we need to do is start telling the truth about the threat. For Leon Panetta, the defense secretary, to go up to Congress last week and say that we know they’re working on an energy program and a uranium program but not necessarily a nuclear weapons program, that’s just wrong. The IAEA has said that is wrong. The 2007 National Intelligence Estimate that said Iran had halted its program was wrong, has been disproved. It is now viewed as misleading and politicized. So step one is telling the truth.”

Watch it:

But Whiton never got to “step one” himself. In fact, while the November IAEA report did express concerns about possible military dimensions to Iran’s program, it did not assert that Iran “is working on a nuclear weapons program.” Indeed, no further reports from U.S. intelligence services or the IAEA have asserted that Iran has restarted its nuclear weapons program.

The development of dual-military-civilian use technologies raises serious questions about Iran’s nuclear program, but no verifiable evidence has yet been produced to show that the Islamic Republic is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon. While Clapper said Iranians are “keeping themselves in a position to make that decision,” he also said that Iran is susceptible to sanctions and diplomacy. “We judge Iran’s nuclear decisionmaking is guided by a cost-benefit approach, which offers the international community opportunities to influence Tehran,” he said last week

Whiton, who last made headlines after the July, 2011 terrorist attack in Norway by claiming that European countries are susceptible to terrorism because they’re “neutral on the war on terror,” might want to check his facts before accusing the Secretary of Defense of lying to Congress.

Right-wing pundits and politicians are loudly declaring that diplomatic efforts to stop Iran’s alleged nuclear weapons program have failed and the time has come for Obama to either participate in a military attack against Iran or stand back while Israel launches airstrikes. The argument increasingly hinges on a “closing window of opportunity” which, according to various reports, limit the Israelis to striking this spring or living with a nuclear weapons armed Iran.

While neither the IAEA nor U.S. intelligence officials have concluded that Iran has decided to pursue a nuclear weapon, the IAEA has expressed concern about military dimensions of the Iranian nuclear program. But right-wing hawks — from GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney to Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens — are repeating talking points that the Israelis are on the verge of unilaterally attacking in the face of an “existential threat” from Tehran.

Today, former Israeli intelligence chief Meir Dagan slammed Netanyahu’s government for representing fringe political positions, adding that Israel does not face an existential threat. The AP reports:

Meir Dagan, the former head of the Mossad spy agency said he does not believe Israel faces an existential threat from Iran, a view that contrasts with Israel’s prime minister and other leaders. [...]

At the launch of an electoral reform movement he chairs, he observed, “I don’t think there is an existential threat.” He did not specifically mention Iran, but the use of the phrase “existential threat” in Israel generally refers to Iran.

Dagan is joined by the current Israeli intelligence chief Tamir Pardo who reportedly told a gathering of Israeli ambassadors in December that Iran doesn’t pose an “existential threat” and “the term existential threat is used too freely.”

Last week, retired Israeli Lt. Gen. Amnon Lipkin-Shahak told The Independent that the Israeli military’s leadership does not support a strike on Iran and the Associated Press reported that Israel’s new air force chief, Maj. Gen. Amir Eshel, is “less enthusiastic about a possible attack on Iran” than his predecessor.

There is no doubt that Iran’s nuclear program, if weaponized, is incredibly worrying and constitutes a threat to nuclear non-proliferation efforts as well as Israel’s security. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said recently that Iran can be dissuaded from nuclear weapons through diplomacy and economic sanctions.