Pentagon Posts Iraq nuclear Documents on Web...giving terrorist information on bomb?

[headscratcher4]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/w...&en=d6e60f288e881789&ei=5094&partner=homepage

NYT...may need to register.

Apparently, they were posting all kinds of documents on the web that are now being questioned as possibly providing something of a how to for building a nuke. Fortunately, we can trust Rummy and this Administration to keep us safe from terrorism.

From the AP:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061103/ts_nm/security_internet_iraq_dc

 

[daredelvis]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/w...&en=d6e60f288e881789&ei=5094&partner=homepage

NYT...may need to register.

Apparently, they were posting all kinds of documents on the web that are now being questioned as possibly providing something of a how to for building a nuke. Fortunately, we can trust Rummy and this Administration to keep us safe from terrorism.

From the AP:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061103/ts_nm/security_internet_iraq_dc

So are you trying to tell me that the Pentagon is just another outlet for the New York Times? Why do they hate freedom?

Another example of the lengths those morons will go to, to justify their folly.

Daredelvis

 

[Darth Rotor]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/w...&en=d6e60f288e881789&ei=5094&partner=homepage

NYT...may need to register.

Apparently, they were posting all kinds of documents on the web that are now being questioned as possibly providing something of a how to for building a nuke. Fortunately, we can trust Rummy and this Administration to keep us safe from terrorism.

From the AP:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061103/ts_nm/security_internet_iraq_dc

I am still laughing at the buffoonery involved. Are you sure this isn't a Mel Brooks script, leaked as a news item?

DR

 

[BPSCG]

I wouldn't worry about it. Everyone knows Saddam wasn't building WMDs. So this must be about something else...

 

[joe1347]

You're Kidding Me, Right?
By William Rivers Pitt

. . . . So, to recap: the administration and its Congressional allies published directions for the development of nuclear weapons, said directions including "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." They did this to try to manufacture some political cover, period. Much of the published material is in Arabic. All that is required to put these directions to practical use is the fissionable material, a great deal of which is sitting unsecured all across Russia ... and the administration has slashed the budgets aimed at nailing this stuff down.


http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/110306R.shtml

Very helpful putting out Nuclear Bomb building documents in Arabic. Much much easier for the terroists to absorb than having to struggle though some confusing math ridden Nuclear Physics textbook written in English that our local librarians are already keeping a close eye on. I guess that the Bush Admin much have forgotten to put in a section in the Patriot Act on preventing Bush Admin officials and Republican Congressmen from publishing Nuclear Bomb making instructions - in ARABIC - on the internet.

 

[Cello Man]

With government like this, who needs enemies?

Are we really that f***ing stupid?!

 

[Darth Rotor]

With government like this, who needs enemies?

Are we really that f***ing stupid?!

We may not be, but apparently some of the brain trust in Congress is. They pushed for it. And just in time for the electorate to send them packing for being morons.

Dr

 

[joe1347]

The NYTimes blabbermouths are accusing the Bush administration of being careless with national security data?

Ouch. Stop. Sides. Splitting.

Reader Mike M. sends the best response:

With all of the classified document leaks purposefully made by the NY Times--through clearly illegal sources--for the NY Times to suggest that the U.S. may have helped users of this web site to build bombs or do things to endanger America is rich.
And ripe.


Ha.

Just another rich and ripe example of how the Times' problem is, you know, that it's too "evenhanded."

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/006265.htm

Nice to see the 'attack the messenger' strategy is full force. Yes Michelle, giving our enemies Nuclear Weapons secrets in ARABIC is just a big joke worthy of a side splitting laugh. Ha Ha.

 

[joe1347]

In the aftermath of the Iraq invasion, facing the embarrassment of no WMDs found, the White House found themselves in possesion of thousands of pages of Iraqi documents pertaining to obsolete WMD programs from before the first Gulf War


To provide fodder for out of context quoting and neocon fear monergering, to save time and money on translating, and to retain a few votes, the Republican Congress with the cooperation of President Bush wanted to post the raw docs on the Internet and invite right-wing bloggers and web surfers to pitch in and read through it all to find any quotable gems.


John Negroponte, bless his black little heart, had enough brains to oppose this incredibly asinine idea knowing full well that the data had not been read and vetted.


Apparently, Bush the Decider, a guy who wouldn't know a neutron from a noble gas, reportedly decided to over ride expert advice and do it anyway.


Buried in the stacks of dull inventories and mundane trivial minutia were the plans for how to fabricate and assemble the critical components of a working fission bomb.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/11/4/45348/4151

Dailykos provided the above summary of what's been reported to date on this story as well as remind us of the previous criminal penalties applied to Americans revealing nuclear weapons secrets to our enemies.

No matter how much contempt anyone has for the Bush Admin, this is one story that for our Countries sake - I sincerely hope that the NY Times is dead wrong on.

 

[WildCat]

I wouldn't worry about it. Everyone knows Saddam wasn't building WMDs. So this must be about something else...

Of course, the documents must be completely fake. Saddam had no WMD programs, right?

 

[WildCat]

At any rate, it's not really a huge mystery how to make a fission (atomic) bomb. The hard part is gathering enough fissionable material.

 

[This Guy]

"We appreciate the Monday-morning quarterbacking, but the president has a plan to succeed in Iraq, and we are going forward with it."

From this thread - http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=67831


Could there be a connection?

 

[joe1347]

At any rate, it's not really a huge mystery how to make a fission (atomic) bomb. The hard part is gathering enough fissionable material.

Sorry Wildcat, but the 'everyone already knows how to make one' argument (talking point) doesn't fly - especially when applied to terrorists. Possibly the argument is somewhat valid when applied to a large country - such as Iran - as opposed to a terrorist 'garage' bomb building operation. But after the reported low yield of North Koreas recent nuclear bomb test - a country with lots of fissionable material. Providing additional instructions (help) on building working Nukes doesn't seem like a good idea to my simple state school educated mind.

Also, if everyone already knows how to build a nuke. How to you explain some of the provisions in the Patriot Act that are meant to monitor middle-eastern students checking out Nuclear Physics textbooks?

But under Section 215, which overrides 48 state laws protecting library users' confidentiality, the FBI need not suspect any one person to request electronic and circulation records - it may request general information about thousands of library users. And at Cornell, as at other university libraries, federal law would prevent the subpoenaed librarian from informing the students whose records are being scoured.

Those with foreign-sounding names who borrow materials about the Middle East or complex scientific subjects - say, nuclear physics - are said to be especially vulnerable to the law.

"When someone is suspected of a crime, it's entirely appropriate for law enforcement to go to a library … we respect that right of law enforcement when they present a legal document asking for those records," said Murphy. "But we think Section 215 orders are too easy for them to get."

http://www.cornellsun.com/node/17053

 

[WildCat]

Sorry Wildcat, but the 'everyone already knows how to make one' argument (talking point) doesn't fly - especially when applied to terrorists. Possibly the argument is somewhat valid when applied to a large country - such as Iran - as opposed to a terrorist 'garage' bomb building operation. But after the reported low yield of North Koreas recent nuclear bomb test - a country with lots of fissionable material. Providing additional instructions (help) on building working Nukes doesn't seem like a good idea to my simple state school educated mind.

Also, if everyone already knows how to build a nuke. How to you explain some of the provisions in the Patriot Act that are meant to monitor middle-eastern students checking out Nuclear Physics textbooks?

So you're now claiming that Iraq's nuclear program was further along than N. Korea's?

 

[Mephisto]

At any rate, it's not really a huge mystery how to make a fission (atomic) bomb. The hard part is gathering enough fissionable material.

Oh, they've got enough and we know where it is . . . it's north, south, east and west of Valerie Plame.