Monday, May 5, 2008

Syria's Reactor and North Korea - Again

You've read about it in the news: Both are in CNN's Politics*com section.

That ambassador mentioned in the headline is the Syrian ambassador.

"He noted that the photos showed just one building -- which didn't have enough power or other complex facilities nearby, such as reprocessing plant for extracting plutonium from spent nuclear fuel -- in order to operate a nuclear program.

" 'I had to ask myself, is this Hollywood or Foggy Bottom?' he said, calling it 'Iraq déjà vu.' "

I'm sure that the ambassador will find many people agreeing with him, in principle, in America: 'Everybody knows' that the Bush administration lied to justify an attack on Iraq. I think the motive is supposed to have something to do with an oil company.

Returning to reality, I recommend reading: There's more information there, including a video and links to a rather interesting transcript.

My last post on this topic, "Unilateral Attack Sparks International Condemnation! Syria Had No Reactor! Pay No Attention to the North Koreans!" (April 26, 2008) was cited by another blog, American Interests.

In the interests of full disclosure: I'm biased. In a situation like this, I am more inclined to believe Israel, and American intelligence agencies, than a nations whose leadership has at best a policy of active cooperation with organizations dedicated to eradicating Israel from the face of the Earth. (More at my previous blog post, cited above.)

Posts from "Another War-on-Terror Blog," on the Israeli raid and its aftermath:
1("Country Reports on Terrorism 2005" Chapter 6 -- State Sponsors of Terror Overview

No comments:

Unique, innovative candles

Visit us online:
Spiral Light CandleFind a Retailer
Spiral Light Candle Store


Note! Although I believe that these websites and blogs are useful resources for understanding the War on Terror, I do not necessarily agree with their opinions. 1 1 Given a recent misunderstanding of the phrase "useful resources," a clarification: I do not limit my reading to resources which support my views, or even to those which appear to be accurate. Reading opinions contrary to what I believed has been very useful at times: sometimes verifying my previous assumptions, sometimes encouraging me to change them.

Even resources which, in my opinion, are simply inaccurate are sometimes useful: these can give valuable insights into why some people or groups believe what they do.

In short, It is my opinion that some of the resources in this blogroll are neither accurate, nor unbiased. I do, however, believe that they are useful in understanding the War on Terror, the many versions of Islam, terrorism, and related topics.