The article is from Debka File which has not always been the most accurate, but anyway if it's not, blame my buddy:
(Vancouver, BC) -- "How close were we to seeing an armed nuclear conflict?" That is the question being asked as Syrian nationals temporarily vacated Beirut, Lebanon and the Jordan Valley during mid July according to sources close to ACG-CIS. Many security and intelligence officials believe that this behavior may have been related to the US sinking of a North Korean ship approximately 100 nautical miles from the coast of Iran. It was not immediately clear why, around July 10, 2007, the Syrian nationals, primarily engaged in construction, trades and agricultural occupations, should have vacated Lebanon without notice. The nationals were noticed to have returned to Beirut and the Jordan Valley by July 21, 2007.
ACG-CIS is of the opinion that the approximate 10-day absence may have been in part due to a warning system alerting the nationals to the possibility of an impending military or terror strike against Israel and other western interests in the region.
According a number of news sources, officials and clerics from Syria and Iran met during this time period reportedly to draw plans and scenarios for proposed attacks and increased activity against western interests in both the Mid East region and elsewhere. Those talks ended last week with no official announcements from any of the participants.
ACG-CIS, based upon further analysis, believe that the nationals were warned of an apparent military style strike or strikes as Hezbollah was reported to be moving missiles in civilian populated areas throughout southern Lebanon. This movement along with the involvement of the Iranian president, an adamant believer in nuclear technology and development, lead to concerns about the possibility of a military style "dirty bomb" nuclear attack or a ballistic missile attack involving nuclear weapons purchased from North Korea.
It was reported earlier this month that while the North Korean 2006 test demonstrated the viability and reliability of North Korea's Scud- and Nodong-class systems, it left open the status of the three ballistic missile systems that the Korean People's Army (KPA) recently placed, or is placing, into service as testing on North Korea short-range missile systems has been quietly ongoing.
In reports first published by DEBKAfile, American naval and air forces intercepted two North Korean vessels clandestinely en route for Iran with cargoes of enriched uranium and nuclear equipment in the past month. The shutdown of Pongyong's nuclear facilities has made these items surplus to North Korea's requirements and the Islamic Republic was more than willing to pay a hefty price for the goods.
On July 12, the second intercepted North Korean freighter was sunk in the Arabian Sea.
We sunk ships with enriched uranium aboard?
ReplyDelete++
ReplyDeletecan't find anything else related, but did find this..
9 Filipinos missing as ship sinks in Oman
btw: not sure, but i read that Debka may have pulled (?) the link.. iow: no longer available..
ps: if true.. it will eventually make the headlines elsewhere.. and as bad a rep as Debka may have.. via my experience, have found most of their info (minus the spin) to be more accurate than not..
==
Here's the Debka file: US Sinks a North Korean Ship Carrying Enriched Uranium Cargo for Iran
ReplyDeleteIn the past month, American naval and air forces have intercepted two North Korean vessels clandestinely en route for Iran with cargoes of enriched uranium and nuclear equipment. The shutdown of Pongyong’s nuclear facilities has made these items surplus to North Korea’s requirements and worth a good price to the Islamic Republic.
Revealing this, DEBKA-Net-Weekly’s intelligence and military sources describe the second incident in detail.
On July 12, the second intercepted North Korean freighter was sunk in the Arabian Sea by torpedoes fired from a US submarine 100 miles southeast of the Iranian naval base-port of Chah Bahar. Delivery of its freight of enriched weapons-grade uranium and equipment and engines for manufacturing more fissile material including plutonium in its hold could have jumped-forwarded Iran’s nuclear bomb and warhead project, lopping off at least a year of work. For this Iran’s rulers were ready to fork out $500 million. there is more
++
ReplyDeletethanks juandos.. :)
here's the one link i found..
US Sinks North Korean Ship Bound for Iran
which i believe is the same story GP posted..
==
This sounds very difficult to believe.
ReplyDeleteThere would be many opportunities to stop such a shipment short of torpedoing it.
Anon, it just makes the job easier if the ship goes down. Water cleans all. Best solvent in the universe.
ReplyDelete++
ReplyDeleteanonymous @ 1:44 PM
i find it incredibly hypocritical what human beings choose to believe or not.. i mean, AQ (and others) not only declared war on the US, but the entire world.. AQ et al has delivered many a declaration not only warning of it's intentions, but living up to them.. yet a large portion of Americans, as well as many others around the globe are unfortunately still in denial in spite of the reality that's been smacking them upside their heads..
==
"There would be many opportunities to stop such a shipment short of torpedoing it"
ReplyDeleteOh yes sir! There is this option also...LOL!
The submarine hot shot is so much more subtle though which means it has a seriously extra cool aura all about it...
Hey big A, do you think those Koreans could've been talked into surrending up the ship and its cargo?
This has to be someone's idea of a joke, or the equivalent of an 'urban myth.' 1) two ships sunk in a heavily traveled and closely watched area of merchant shipping and no major news media - ours or anyone else's - pick up on it? 2) ships torpedoed rather than stopped and boarded by serface vesels? 3) North Korea voountarily giving away - or seling - enriched uranium ? The whole thing is just silly.
ReplyDeleteI think what makes this story so questionable is the idea that we sunk the ship because we didn't want to board it so close to Iranian waters. But immediately after we somehow went into full bore recovery operations to get the cargo. Isn't that a bit of a stretch to be wary one minute of being in the area and the next minute we have recovery operations in effect?
ReplyDeleteI dunno - sounds like a bogus report since debka is the only one reporting it.