Reactor may have been built in 2001 North Korea's alleged involvement in the project could have started shortly before the new millennium, the Times report said. The fact that the infrastructure had been built at least four years ago did not mean the facility had always been used for the same purposes as it was being used for immediately before the Israeli strike, former OC Air Force Maj.-Gen. (res.) Eitan Ben Eliyahu told Channel 10 on Saturday evening.
Numerous foreign media reports have suggested the IAF bombed a partially-constructed nuclear reactor on the bank of the Euphrates River in northeast Syria, some 90 kilometers from the Iraq border. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/917474.html
You know what is so funny?? You have outed numerous Israeli newspapers quoting foreign media. None of these Israeli newspapers made the claim themselves!! I wonder why dddooo?! I'll tell you why! Because when the shit hit the fan and the lie is exposed, all the Israeli media has to do is to blame them miss informed foreign media.
How credible are these two scenarios? The nuclear claims against Damascus were discounted so quickly by experts of the region that Washington was soon downgrading the accusation to claims that Syria was only hiding the material on North Koreaâs behalf. But why would Syria, already hounded by Israel and the US, provide such a readymade pretext for still harsher treatment? Why, equally, would North Korea undermine its hard-won disarmament deal with the US? And why, if Syria were covertly engaging in nuclear mischief, did it alert the world to the fact by revealing the Israeli air strike? The other justification for the attack was at least based in a more credible reality: Damascus, Hizbullah and Iran undoubtedly do share some military resources. But their alliance should be seen as the kind of defensive pact needed by vulnerable actors in a Sunni-dominated region where the US wants unlimited control of Gulf oil and supports only those repressive regimes that cooperate on its terms. All three are keenly aware that it is Israelâs job to threaten and punish any regimes that fail to toe the line. Contrary to the impression being created in the West, genocidal hatred of Israel and Jews, however often Ahmadinejadâs speeches are mistranslated, is not the engine of these countriesâ alliance. Nonetheless, the political significance of the justifications for the the Israeli air strike is that both neatly tie together various strands of an argument needed by the neocons and Israel in making their case for an attack on Iran before Bush leaves office in early 2009. Each scenario suggests a Shia "axis of evil", coordinated by Iran, that is actively plotting Israelâs destruction. And each story offers the pretext for an attack on Syria as a prelude to a pre-emptive strike against Tehran -- launched either by Washington or Tel Aviv -- to save Israel. That these stories appear to have been planted in the American media by neocon masters of spin like John Bolton is warning enough -- as is the admission that the only evidence for Syrian malfeasance is Israeli "intelligence", the basis of which cannot be questioned as Israel is not officially admitting the attack. It should hardly need pointing out that we are again in a hall of mirrors, as we were during the period leading up to Americaâs invasion of Iraq and have been during its subsequent occupation. Bush's "war on terror" was originally justified with the convenient and manufactured links between Iraq and al-Qaeda, as well as, of course, those WMDs that, it later turned out, had been destroyed more than a decade earlier. But ever since Tehran has invariably been the ultimate target of these improbable confections. There were the forged documents proving both that Iraq had imported enriched uranium from Niger to manufacture nuclear warheads and that it was sharing its nuclear know-how with Iran. And as Iraq fell apart, neocon ideologues like Michael Ledeen lost no time in spreading rumours that the missing nuclear arsenal could still be accounted for: Iranian agents had simply smuggled it out of Iraq during the chaos of the US invasion. Since then our media have proved that they have no less of an appetite for such preposterous tales. If Iran's involvement in stirring up its fellow Shia in Iraq against the US occupation is at least possible, the same cannot be said of the regular White House claims that Tehran is behind the Sunni-led insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. A few months ago the news media served up "revelations" that Iran was secretly conspiring with al-Qaeda and Iraq's Sunni militias to oust the US occupiers. But they are also the evidence needed by Israel and the neocons to convict Syria and Iran in the court of Washington opinion. The attack on Syria is part of a clever hustle, one designed to vanquish or bypass the doubters in the Bush Administration, both by proving Syriaâs culpability and by provoking it to respond. http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=13900
Israel Struck Syrian Nuclear Project, Analysts Say WASHINGTON, Oct. 13 â Israelâs air attack on Syria last month was directed against a site that Israeli and American intelligence analysts judged was a partly constructed nuclear reactor, apparently modeled on one North Korea has used to create its stockpile of nuclear weapons fuel, according to American and foreign officials with access to the intelligence reports. The description of the target addresses one of the central mysteries surrounding the Sept. 6 attack, and suggests that Israel carried out the raid to demonstrate its determination to snuff out even a nascent nuclear project in a neighboring state. The Bush administration was divided at the time about the wisdom of Israelâs strike, American officials said, and some senior policy makers still regard the attack as premature. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/w...?bl&ex=1192766400&en=1d33be45314ab7c0&ei=5087
You know what is so funny?? You have outed numerous Israeli newspapers quoting foreign media. None of these Israeli newspapers made the claim themselves!! I wonder why dddooo?! I'll tell you why! Because when the shit hit the fan and the lie is exposed, all the Israeli media has to do is to blame them miss informed foreign media. <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nQKI-EH4kzQ&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nQKI-EH4kzQ&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>
Syria admits that Israeli air strike targeted nuclear facilities Syria's ambassador to the United Nations confirmed on Tuesday that Israel's air strike on September 6 in northern Syria did indeed target a nuclear site, marking the first time the country has acknowledged its nuclear efforts.
Finally!! I was waiting for you to do so to expose you for the liar you are!!! I made this thread and waited and waited for you to make this fraudulent claim to exposer your zionist lies. Interpreter error causes furor E-mail News Brief Tell the Editors Published: 10/18/2007 An interpreter's error has raised hackles in the United Nations and throughout the Middle East. The United Nations said Wednesday that an interpreter misquoted a Syrian diplomat as saying that Israel had bombed a nuclear facility in his country. Reuters reported that according to the transcript of a meeting of the U.N. General Assemblyâs Disarmament Committee, Syrian U.N. Ambassador Bashar al-Jaafari -- speaking in Arabic with simultaneous English translation --said that Israel "violates the airspace of sovereign states and carries out military aggression against them, like what happened on the 6th of September 2007 against my country." The translator quoted the diplomat as saying that Israel had "taken action against nuclear facilities, including the 6 July attack in Syria." The error made headlines throughout the Middle East. http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/104740.html UN taking action for Syria error By EDITH M. LEDERER, Associated Press Writer Thu Oct 18, 9:42 PM ET The United Nations said Thursday action would be taken against the interpreter responsible for an erroneous report that Syria has a nuclear facility and expressed regret at the incident. Syria denied that one of its representatives told the U.N. General Assembly's disarmament committee on Tuesday that Israel had attacked a Syrian nuclear facility. It said the representative was misquoted, demanded a correction, and insisted that "such facilities do not exist in Syria." After more than seven hours of investigation Wednesday, U.N. officials agreed the Syrian delegate was misquoted. "There was no use of the word nuclear," U.N. associate spokesman Farhan Haq said. The mistake made headlines in the Middle East and heightened concerns over Damascus' nuclear ambitions. Those ambitions were under scrutiny following a Sept. 6 Israeli airstrike on an unknown target in northeastern Syria near the border with Turkey. Widespread reports say it may have been a nascent nuclear facility, a claim Syria has denied. According to the corrected text, the Syrian representative said: "...the (entity) that is ranking number four among the exporters of lethal weapons in the world; that which violates the airspace of sovereign states and carries out military aggression against them, like what happened on Sept. 6 against my country, such entity with all those characteristics and even more, has no right for its representative to go on lying without shame..." The Syrian representative spoke in Arabic, but Haq said Thursday the problem wasn't the result of the interpretation from Arabic. An interpreter who worked from Arabic into French was fairly accurate, he said. The problem occurred because of another interpreter, who was listening to the French and then interpreting into English, Haq said. "Action will be taken against that freelance interpreter to the fullest extent of the U.N. rules and regulations," Haq said, refusing to comment further on what that action might be. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071019...1&printer=1;_ylt=AokXus8mKsBkd_pgsqdRO8QUewgF Your attempt to hide that and engage in framing Syria has one interpretation. You want a war, similar to the one your zionists gangs promoted against Iraq, to be carried against Syria