The Syrian Fiasco

Attempting to dispel the alleged Bushmyths that surround The Syrian Fiasco, I applaud the efforts of Syria and the IAEA to resolve unfinished business by the Bush administration that should have transpired before a bombing.

The Syrian Fiasco

ANAGRAM EVIDENCE: The Syrian Fiasco - 'Is hoariest fancy.'

While this incident is old news to some people, these events have recently resurfaced as a bone of contention between the East and the West.  About a year ago, Israel bombed upon a target in Syria, claiming it to be a nuclear production facility.  At that time, Syria denied the truth of these allegations, and I believe them on these matters.  Instead, I believe that American intelligence simply conjured a fantasy to increase tension between the East and West to drive up oil prices as well as to make Syria look bad in the eyes of the international community.

The United States claims, which it says are based on intelligence and photographic evidence, that the Al-Kibar site attacked by Israel in September was a nuclear facility built with North Korean help and close to becoming operational.

But Syria has denied the allegations and said Al-Kibar was a disused military building, although Damascus has fed suspicion by wiping clean the site in a move certain to make the IAEA inspection more difficult.

Assad also charged that the US evidence was "fabricated 100 percent" as part of a campaign to ratchet pressure on Damascus, which Washington accuses of supporting terrorism along with its key regional ally Tehran.

Al-Kibar "is a military facility... it is not nuclear," Assad said.

Washington levelled its accusations against Syria in April, seven months after the Israeli attack.

The timing and the cloak of secrecy Israel kept for days after the attack have added to the lingering mystery about Al-Kibar, while Syria has refused to define the facility's military use.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080622/wl_afp/syrianuclearpoliticsiaea

There are and were considerable questions as to the nature of the Al-Kibar site at the time of the bombing, and only recently has a UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) team been dispatched to the site in the hopes of finally putting to rest the allegations of malfeasance on the part of Syria and to reduce the overall level of tension in the Middle East.

Senior UN atomic experts are set to begin a three-day visit to Syria on Sunday to inspect a mysterious site bombed by Israel last year amid US allegations that it was a nuclear facility.

The team led by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) deputy chief Olli Heinonen left Vienna in the morning but there was no immediate indication in Damascus about their arrival as Syria kept the visit under tight wraps.

"We are now travelling to Damascus, we will meet tonight our counterparts and then we start to gather facts," Heinonen told journalists at Vienna airport before boarding a place to Syria.

"What will be waiting there, we will see when we get there," he added.

The team is due to visit Al-Kibar site in a remote desert area of northeastern Syria on the Euphrates River during its three-day trip. Damascus has welcomed the inspection but insists that it will be limited to Al-Kibar site. US news reports and diplomats close to the IAEA have said that the nuclear watchdog was also interested in two or three other facilities. "Syria invited the IAEA and will cooperate with it," President Bashar al-Assad has said, but he insisted that "talking about other sites is not within the purview of the agreement" with the nuclear watchdog.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080622/wl_afp/syrianuclearpoliticsiaea

I am of the opinion that there are good reasons for the difference between the American and the Syrian accounts for this particular incident.  While Syria has an interest in rightfully clearing their name from false accusations, the Bush leadership in America has often backed the political agenda of the powerful oil industry lobbying groups.   Falsifying such an international incident would be very likely to increase the amount of tension in the Middle East, further fueling the oil speculation in America that has led to astronomical prices at the gasoline pump.  While Bush is blaming the Democratic Congress for the increase in the cost of gasoline, I believe that he is also partially or fully responsible for this increase.  The wars in the Middle East that Bush initiated started the constant upward spiral of the cost of oil roughly seven years ago.  Plus, Bush has made a long history of pushing his Republican Party upon the American public as being superior with regards to fighting terrorism and rogue nuclear nations.  He has yet to show us a nuclear program in Iran, Syria, or Iraq, and the Iraqi intelligence was later disputed.  I believe that none of these nations actually has a nuclear program at this time.

I like to call The Syrian Fiasco just one example of "The Mirror Effect," and intelligence tactic.  If America tells the world that it was Israel bombing a nuclear facility, the East becomes nervous and does not trust the West.  At the same time, the price of oil is expected to move upwards even on a free market. This also defames Syria, further allowing such shenanigans to build mistrust between the East and the West generally.  If this were the first alleged incident of Syrian malfeasance, it would be relatively easy to dismiss.  But, people have been claiming that Syria has been misbehaving on a number of fronts for many years; I don’t believe this.  At this time, both Syria and Israel mistrust each other making it difficult to negotiate a peace treaty between these nations while Bush claims to be the champion of the Palestinian peace process and its “sponsor.”  What did Bush ever sponsor besides the oil industry that is making record profits?  On the American domestic front, Bush can and has argued all the more fervently due to the American inflicted chaos in the Middle East, "You need to vote for the Republican Party as these are very troubled times."  I argue that these times would not have been so troubled but for the false intelligence and propaganda spread by George W. Bush and Tony Blair in particular.

According to the United Nations, there are good reasons to believe that Syria has never had a nuclear program in any form despite the US allegations.

IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei stressed in an interview with an Arab news channel ahead of the visit that there was no evidence of Syrian nuclear foul-play.

"We have no evidence that Syria has the human resources that would allow it to carry out a large nuclear programme. We do not see Syria having nuclear fuel," he told Dubai-based Al-Arabiya television.

The United States maintains its allegations and along with some European allies has urged Syria to give the inspectors unfettered cooperation.

Syria, a party to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which Israel refuses to sign, has "limited nuclear resources and capabilities" focusing primarily on civilian research, according to the authoritative Nuclear Threat Initiative website.

Analysts attribute concern about Syria's nuclear intentions to its close ties with Iran and North Korea -- both of which are under IAEA scrutiny over their nuclear programmes.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080622/wl_afp/syrianuclearpoliticsiaea

It has been said that speculation is the American pastime, but some forms of speculation can be extremely damaging.  At this time, Iran has had three levels of sanctions placed upon them, and Bush has yet to make a showing as to the legitimacy of his claims with regards to Iran.  I believe them to be erroneous, and I believe that it is fair to say that Iran has been unjustly sanctioned and slandered.  Who wants to engage in international trade these days with a rogue American empire simply setting up nations with allegations of terrorism and also weapons of mass destruction to be overrun and auctioned off to the lowest bidding American companies?  Whose countries are those?  Despite claiming to invade Afghanistan to look for Usama Bin Ladin and Iraq to depose a vicious despot, we have left neither nation.  What would have happened if we had invaded Iran to try to prevent their alleged nuclear ambitions from reaching fruition?  I believe that America would have found nothing other than a peaceful nuclear program that has been confirmed by Iran, and that America would not have left there, either.

What was the primary selling point of the most recent American Presidential election?  Bush claimed that he was going to do a better job fighting terrorism, and I still have not seen it!  It has been roughly seven years since the 9/11 bombing, and I have yet to see Usama Bin Ladin surface other than the possible near capturing of Usama at the Afghanistan and Pakistan border that appeared to be called off to allow Usama to escape being captured.  Why end the War on Terror when America has finally made the leap from a nation to a world empire based upon our alleged fighting of terror around the globe?  How much money has been made on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan for Bush’s political supporters?  At this time, I have yet to read a report of any FEMA aid reaching our ravaged Midwest, and I recently heard a report that the products that FEMA purchased “for New Orleans” were actually given away to the states, presumably to boost support for the Republican Party before the upcoming election, while the victims from the flood in New Orleans got the shaft.

Enough is enough!  It is time for America to finally get some change in which we can actually believe instead of having to wade through the alleged Bush information and disinformation to try to speculate as to the truth of the matters asserted.  I applaud the Syrian President Assad for allowing the IAEA to finally investigate the scene to end this particular round of Bush allegations, and I applaud his support of a mediation to finally end the war for Palesrael.  On the other hand, I am counting the months, days, hours, minutes, and seconds until America is finally freed from the alleged usurping of power by a President who lost two elections but chose to mislead America straight into the Abyss regardless of the Will of the People!

 

 

Reviews

[Ron B]

An excellent article. I'm afraid Bush will still bomb Iran. Leaving a militarily healthy Iran in a position to influence Iraq or even overthrow a government would negate the oil rights currently being sold to U.S. and one U.K. oil company. Thus the need for bases and the world's largest embassy wasn't built to advise but govern.

[Berserker[Diktator Von ..]

Gabe,
What you have written is very eye-opening. A lot of americans share the same views, especially since america seems to keep crying wolf when it comes to nuclear and biological weapons. I am glad that you have written this piece, maybe it will open the eyes of others...=)

Love you,
Berserk