Let's see...how can we make America less safe today?

[DanXIII 8]

Attempts to justify Operation Iraqi Clusterfock go horribly awry. Friggin' IDIOTS:

 

NY Times story

 

But in recent weeks, the site has posted some documents that weapons experts say are a danger themselves: detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war. The documents, the experts say, constitute a basic guide to building an atom bomb.

 

Last night, the government shut down the Web site after The New York Times asked about complaints from weapons experts and arms-control officials. A spokesman for John Negroponte, the director of national intelligence, said access to the site had been suspended “pending a review to ensure its content is appropriate for public viewing.”

 

Officials of the International Atomic Energy Agency, fearing that the information could help states like Iran develop nuclear arms, had privately protested last week to the American ambassador to the agency, according to European diplomats who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the issue’s sensitivity. One diplomat said the agency’s technical experts “were shocked” at the public disclosures.

 

Early this morning, a spokesman for Gregory L. Schulte, the American ambassador, denied that anyone from the agency had approached Mr. Schulte about the Web site.

 

But former White House chief of staff Andrew H. Card Jr. said today that senior officials had been cautioned against posting the information.

 

“John Negroponte warned us that we don’t know what’s in these documents, so these are being put out at some risk, and that was a warning that he put out right when they first released the documents,” Mr. Card said on NBC’s “Today” show, according to The Associated Press.

 

The documents, roughly a dozen in number, contain charts, diagrams, equations and lengthy narratives about bomb building that nuclear experts who have viewed them say go beyond what is available elsewhere on the Internet and in other public forums. For instance, the papers give detailed information on how to build nuclear firing circuits and triggering explosives, as well as the radioactive cores of atom bombs.

 

“For the U.S. to toss a match into this flammable area is very irresponsible,” said A. Bryan Siebert, a former director of classification at the federal Department of Energy, which runs the nation’s nuclear arms program. “There’s a lot of things about nuclear weapons that are secret and should remain so.”

[tony hardware 0]

"detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war"

 

So these demonstrate that Iraq was actively engaged in building nuclear weapons as early as 1991? Doesn't this debunk the whole, no WMD's democrats argument? I wouldn't be suprised if this is a calculated effort by reps to raise this point one week before elections. It supports why we went into Iraq after 9/11.

[Isotopes 1]

"detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war"

 

So these demonstrate that Iraq was actively engaged in building nuclear weapons as early as 1991? Doesn't this debunk the whole, no WMD's democrats argument? I wouldn't be suprised if this is a calculated effort by reps to raise this point one week before elections. It supports why we went into Iraq after 9/11.

 

are you serious?

[hoytdwow 202]

STAY THE COURSE

[tony hardware 0]

are you serious?

 

I'm not suggesting that I believe its true, I'm suggesting that it may be a motive. When sh!t like this happens one week before an election, it's usually not a mistake.

[DanXIII 8]

"detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war"

 

So these demonstrate that Iraq was actively engaged in building nuclear weapons as early as 1991? Doesn't this debunk the whole, no WMD's democrats argument? I wouldn't be suprised if this is a calculated effort by reps to raise this point one week before elections. It supports why we went into Iraq after 9/11.

 

If there was some new information here I might agree with you. The existence of these documents has been common knowledge for some time now. Like you, I think the timing of the story is a bit curious...but the only "new" news here is the fact that they (and by "they" I mean "Republicans") are endangering the world in their efforts to make the other side look bad.

 

If this was an attempt at October Surprise then, like everything else they've tried, I'm guessing it won't work.

[Isotopes 1]

I'm not suggesting that I believe its true, I'm suggesting that it may be a motive. When sh!t like this happens one week before an election, it's usually not a mistake.

 

We knew that he he had WMD and that he was looking to nuclear weapons pre 1991. That is what all the UN sanctions were supposed to take care of. Documents pre 1991 prove nothing that everyone already doesn't know.

[tony hardware 0]

We knew that he he had WMD and that he was looking to nuclear weapons pre 1991. That is what all the UN sanctions were supposed to take care of. Documents pre 1991 prove nothing that everyone already doesn't know.

 

So if the UN is so ineffective, why were so many dems for the US to rely on UN action prior to the start of the Iraq War in lieu of military strikes?

[DanXIII 8]

So if the UN is so ineffective, why were so many dems for the US to rely on UN action prior to the start of the Iraq War in lieu of military strikes?

 

...for the same reason that so many Reps and fell back on Iraq's failure to comply with "UN Resolution so-and-so" whenever no WMDs were found: The UN is a convenient excuse for politicians to get what they want when they want it; otherwise, it is "ineffective and should be disbanded."

[pingpong 0]

"detailed accounts of Iraq’s secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war"

 

So these demonstrate that Iraq was actively engaged in building nuclear weapons as early as 1991? Doesn't this debunk the whole, no WMD's democrats argument? I wouldn't be suprised if this is a calculated effort by reps to raise this point one week before elections. It supports why we went into Iraq after 9/11.

If you only read the headlines, and don't read the entire article, you would conclude that the NY Times November surprise is bad for the president.

 

If you actually read the docuement, it damn well proves that the Hussein regime was actively seeking to build a Nuke, and would have the capability within a year to build a bomb.

 

Those that post this as proof of how dumb the administration is show that they are not capable of A) reading the ENTIRE document, and B drawing their own conclusions without help from the left wing.

 

There are fewer things that I hate more than election season news.

[DanXIII 8]

If you only read the headlines, and don't read the entire article, you would conclude that the NY Times November surprise is bad for the president.

 

If you actually read the docuement, it damn well proves that the Hussein regime was actively seeking to build a Nuke, and would have the capability within a year to build a bomb.

 

Those that post this as proof of how dumb the administration is show that they are not capable of A) reading the ENTIRE document, and B drawing their own conclusions without help from the left wing.

 

There are fewer things that I hate more than election season news.

 

Funny...you must have missed this paragraph while "reading the ENTIRE document":

 

On March 16, after the documents’ release was approved, Mr. Negroponte’s office issued a terse public announcement including a disclaimer that remained on the Web site: “The U.S. government has made no determination regarding the authenticity of the documents, validity or factual accuracy of the information contained therein, or the quality of any translations, when available.”

 

In other words, according to Negroponte (who is anything but a "left winger") these documents don't "prove" a gd thing. Yet that didn't stop the "non left wing" from posting them anyway and, per other "non left wingers," potentially give bomb-making hints to terrorists or rogue nations.