• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

U.S. shuts Web site said to reveal nuclear guide

J

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member


link

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. government has shut down a Web site it set up in March containing documents captured during the Iraq war after arms experts and officials raised concerns it offered a guide to building a nuclear bomb, The New York Times reported on Thursday.
Click to expand...

The newspaper said the Bush administration started the site under pressure from congressional Republicans who had hoped to use the Internet to find new evidence of the dangers posed by former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.
Click to expand...

What a brilliant idea from the ones that claim only they can save us from the bad guys.

It seems that not only is the government inclined to disregard intel they don't like, when they come into it in large batches, they let John Q. Public sift through it for them.

This would be funny if it were not so sad.
 
I dont think the information is going to help them.

They would have to get the material for it first which is going to be very very very hard.
 
I dont think the information is going to help them.

They would have to get the material for it first which is going to be very very very hard.
 
It's not hard to find how to do it, it's getting the stuff, and safely putting it together that makes it such a biatch.
 
I agree with the above posters---its now common knowledge---but the problem is and remains----getting the crucial ingredient----(1) One critical mass of either Uranium 235 or of plutonium.---with the latter only obtainable when you have a substantial quantity of U235 in a nuclear breeder reactor.

But once you have that---the other trick is figuring out how to put together a critical mass quick enough---and keep it together long enough to get much yield. And how to jump the broom and add hydrogen fusion to get an even bigger kaboom.

Since its not clear which is being censored---it may be fruitless to comment further. Other than to say I never had a burning desire to be the first kid on my block with a nuke.

And I sure don't rest any easier knowing GWB does.---or any other world leader---some none too stable either---its only a matter of time before someone will pop one off in anger,
 
Same as this one?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world...1d6b3da302d4f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Interesting little tidbit buried in the article . . .

"Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990?s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Hussein?s scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away."

Iraq had a nuclear weapons program . . . and was on the verge of building a bomb? But . . . but . . . but . . . Bush lied! :Q I am shocked, shocked I tell you!
 
Originally posted by: XMan
Same as this one?

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world...1d6b3da302d4f&ei=5094&partner=homepage

Interesting little tidbit buried in the article . . .

"Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990?s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Hussein?s scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away."

Iraq had a nuclear weapons program . . . and was on the verge of building a bomb? But . . . but . . . but . . . Bush lied! :Q I am shocked, shocked I tell you!
Click to expand...
Yes dear, in the 1990's, which is why Clinton bombed the hell out of them in 1998, effectively ending their nuclear potential as well as virtually all their remaining WMD capabilities, according to the experts. From the OP, "the site posted documents that weapons experts said contained detailed accounts of Iraq's secret nuclear research before the 1991 Gulf War."




By the way, this leak was the lead story on the Today Show this morning. Apparently the intelligence community objected to publishing this information. The "We're strong on security" Republican Congressional leadership insisted it be published anyway to score political points with the easily duped sheeple (nothing personal XMan). Bush took the self-serving partisan road and signed the order overriding our intelligence professionals. As someone else mentioned, some of this information was highly technical and much more detailed than anything else available publically.

Looks to me like they're more interested in making elections safer for Republicans than in making America safer from terrorism. Let's hope it blows up in their face Tuesday.

 
Originally posted by: jackschmittusa


link

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. government has shut down a Web site it set up in March containing documents captured during the Iraq war after arms experts and officials raised concerns it offered a guide to building a nuclear bomb, The New York Times reported on Thursday.
Click to expand...

The newspaper said the Bush administration started the site under pressure from congressional Republicans who had hoped to use the Internet to find new evidence of the dangers posed by former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.
Click to expand...

What a brilliant idea from the ones that claim only they can save us from the bad guys.

It seems that not only is the government inclined to disregard intel they don't like, when they come into it in large batches, they let John Q. Public sift through it for them.

This would be funny if it were not so sad.
Click to expand...
Your link didn't work for me. Here is their new link.
 
Originally posted by: jackschmittusa


link

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. government has shut down a Web site it set up in March containing documents captured during the Iraq war after arms experts and officials raised concerns it offered a guide to building a nuclear bomb, The New York Times reported on Thursday.
Click to expand...

The newspaper said the Bush administration started the site under pressure from congressional Republicans who had hoped to use the Internet to find new evidence of the dangers posed by former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein before the U.S.-led invasion in 2003.
Click to expand...

What a brilliant idea from the ones that claim only they can save us from the bad guys.

It seems that not only is the government inclined to disregard intel they don't like, when they come into it in large batches, they let John Q. Public sift through it for them.

This would be funny if it were not so sad.
Click to expand...

Another mission accomplished, publishing nuke plans on the internet. With friends like these, who needs enemies?
 
This is a classic media driven story. The US puts up thousands of captured documents from Saddams regime and a few have nuclear information. Suddenly we are giving out information on how to build the bomb. As if people who actually have the technical know how dont already.

There is probably 200 websites that give you the basic information you need to do it. Getting the parts is a different story.
 
Originally posted by: Genx87
This is a classic media driven story. The US puts up thousands of captured documents from Saddams regime and a few have nuclear information. Suddenly we are giving out information on how to build the bomb. As if people who actually have the technical know how dont already.

There is probably 200 websites that give you the basic information you need to do it. Getting the parts is a different story.
Click to expand...

Why should the US gov't be part of the problem?

Oh, because Congressional Republicans felt the need to justify their silly war.
 
Originally posted by: Genx87
This is a classic media driven story. The US puts up thousands of captured documents from Saddams regime and a few have nuclear information. Suddenly we are giving out information on how to build the bomb. As if people who actually have the technical know how dont already.

There is probably 200 websites that give you the basic information you need to do it. Getting the parts is a different story.
Click to expand...

Would you be so dismissive if the New York Times published this dangerous information? Not hardly.


-------------------------
Bush Apologists of America (BAA): Pulling the wool over America's eyes since 1980
 
Originally posted by: Ldir
Originally posted by: Genx87
This is a classic media driven story. The US puts up thousands of captured documents from Saddams regime and a few have nuclear information. Suddenly we are giving out information on how to build the bomb. As if people who actually have the technical know how dont already.

There is probably 200 websites that give you the basic information you need to do it. Getting the parts is a different story.
Click to expand...

Would you be so dismissive if the New York Times published this dangerous information? Not hardly.
Click to expand...
The reports were written in Arabic. They posted the documents and asked for people who spoke the language on the net to help translate them. There are literally TONS of Iraq documents that they can not translate fast enough to make use of them.

I posted a couple of these translations in threads, and got attacked because I sourced "FreeRepublic.com"

One thing this does prove is that Saddam still have a nuke WMD plan in as last as 2002. Add this to the parts buried in the back yard of his head nuke scientist and it shows that there was an effort to hide his WMD programs from inspectors. A program you all claim did not exist.

He may have not had chemical weapons laying around as we thought, we this shows a pattern to hide things from the inspectors. How long after the inspectors had left would it have taken them to start making WMD again?

BTW: These documents come from the same source as the documents that state Iraq wanted to attack American ?interests? around the world and spoke of gathering suicide bombers. Saddam really was a threat to us and the world, maybe one day you will accept that fact.
 
Originally posted by: ProfJohnThe reports were written in Arabic. They posted the documents and asked for people who spoke the language on the net to help translate them. There are literally TONS of Iraq documents that they can not translate fast enough to make use of them.
Click to expand...

I said it at the time of the Valerie Plame outing.

YOU DON'T DO THAT.

How moronic is it to post untranslated documents from a fallen government on the web. YOU DON'T DO THAT!
 
Originally posted by: Termagant
Originally posted by: Genx87
This is a classic media driven story. The US puts up thousands of captured documents from Saddams regime and a few have nuclear information. Suddenly we are giving out information on how to build the bomb. As if people who actually have the technical know how dont already.

There is probably 200 websites that give you the basic information you need to do it. Getting the parts is a different story.
Click to expand...

Why should the US gov't be part of the problem?

Oh, because Congressional Republicans felt the need to justify their silly war.
Click to expand...

People were on here a couple of days ago telling us we need transperency in our govt. Are you suggesting de-classified information be with held from the public?

Would you be so dismissive if the New York Times published this dangerous information? Not hardly.
Click to expand...

What dangerous information?

Sky is falling

I only have a poroblem when the NYTimes publishes classified information or information on classified programs that our enemies can simply read abotu and learn how to cirvumvent.

 
The point is, these docs should have beeen classified until their content was examined and cleared.

There are many people with the skills to build bomb components that do not have all of the necessary details on the component design, such as the firing circuits mentioned in the article. Publishing such detailed info has the potential to increase the pool of people that could build a working bomb. The more people in that pool, the more likely that there will be someone willing to work for the bad guys. Plutonium is more likely to eventially fall into the hands of terrorists or a rogue nation than U239 is, and plutonium bombs are much more difficult to detonate. If this info is about plutonium weapons, it may be of great value.

It was incredably stupid to put all of this info on the net without knowing what was in there. It could have contained innumerable things about target vulnerabilities in the U.S., the location of hidden weapons caches in Iraq that the bad guys could have raided, etc..

The real irony is that the same people who claim that they are the only ones that can keep America safe are now shown to be the ones that will sell out for political gain. I think anyone that can't see that is blind.
 
David Kay was just on hardball and he said that putting this information up on the web is a big deal. He said that putting the information up was illegal in terms of our treaty commitments and went on to say that the biggest difficulty with building a nuclear bomb is the engineering, not the physics.
 
So...according to the New York Times own article, Saddam was only a year away from making a nuke in 2002.

 
Originally posted by: BrownTown
This is just another example of politics way way over blowing reality.
Click to expand...

Exactly. In the fact that congressional Republicans wanted this information rushed up on the web to justify the invasion. When in fact some of the documents in question had been heavily redacted when originally presented as evidence before the invasion, because they contained technically important information. And other documents found after the invasion had not been cleared for declassification before they were uploaded in their entirety.
 
Originally posted by: GoPackGo
So...according to the New York Times own article, Saddam was only a year away from making a nuke in 2002.
Click to expand...

No, just according to people who have the reading comprehension skills of very small children. Read the article again, it is VERY clear that the documents reference Saddam's capabilities PRIOR TO THE FIRST GULF WAR.
 
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: Termagant
Originally posted by: Genx87
This is a classic media driven story. The US puts up thousands of captured documents from Saddams regime and a few have nuclear information. Suddenly we are giving out information on how to build the bomb. As if people who actually have the technical know how dont already.

There is probably 200 websites that give you the basic information you need to do it. Getting the parts is a different story.
Click to expand...

Why should the US gov't be part of the problem?

Oh, because Congressional Republicans felt the need to justify their silly war.
Click to expand...

People were on here a couple of days ago telling us we need transperency in our govt. Are you suggesting de-classified information be with held from the public?

Would you be so dismissive if the New York Times published this dangerous information? Not hardly.
Click to expand...

What dangerous information?

Sky is falling

I only have a poroblem when the NYTimes publishes classified information or information on classified programs that our enemies can simply read abotu and learn how to cirvumvent.
Click to expand...

Really? So explain to me how knowing that the NSA "wiretaps" without warrants allows you to "learn how to circumvent" that capability? Did they NOT know that intelligence folks could intercept their phone conversations? Or were they in some way able to manipulate the FISA courts so that they couldn't get warrants, thus making the terrorist communications safe? Help me out here, you people rant and rave that the NYT damaged national security somehow by broadly describing a program where the only new piece of information was the legality of the actions being taken. Or maybe you're talking about the idea of following the funding. Again, the extremely broad strokes that were revealed don't seem to allow anyone to learn how to circumvent anything, and I don't see that it's telling them anything they probably didn't know already.

But obviously YOU are the intelligence expert here, so enlighten us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top