Cattraknoff
02-14-2008, 01:15 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080213/ap_on_re_mi_ea/nuclear_iran
Apparently it's needed for nuclear weaponry... I'd like to bring attention to a specific quote, as I did in my last post about Iran:
"He and other diplomats who discussed the latest details of Iran's program agreed to do so only if granted anonymity because they were not supposed to be releasing the confidential information."
One would thing that people entrusted to jobs of this importance would actually be able to keep their mouths shut. I hardly think anyone leaking confidential information would be allowed to keep their jobs, I doubt their superiors couldn't find out if they wanted to. And so I would say that the information was leaked intentionally, likely as an attempt to create yet more unease about Iran. But this of course is all speculation on my part. It could very well be that these people are incompetent enough to allow gossips to be given jobs of importance. Which prospect would you find more frightening?
Apparently it's needed for nuclear weaponry... I'd like to bring attention to a specific quote, as I did in my last post about Iran:
"He and other diplomats who discussed the latest details of Iran's program agreed to do so only if granted anonymity because they were not supposed to be releasing the confidential information."
One would thing that people entrusted to jobs of this importance would actually be able to keep their mouths shut. I hardly think anyone leaking confidential information would be allowed to keep their jobs, I doubt their superiors couldn't find out if they wanted to. And so I would say that the information was leaked intentionally, likely as an attempt to create yet more unease about Iran. But this of course is all speculation on my part. It could very well be that these people are incompetent enough to allow gossips to be given jobs of importance. Which prospect would you find more frightening?