U.S. Web Archive Is Said to Reveal a Nuclear Guide (Saddam Hussein had a nuclear weapons program)

NYT ^ | November 3, 2006 | William J. Broad

[RDTF]

Last March, the federal government set up a Web site to make public a vast archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war. The Bush administration did so under pressure from Congressional Republicans who said they hoped to “leverage the Internet” to find new evidence of the prewar dangers posed by Saddam Hussein.

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 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.

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 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.

-snip-

[proud_yank]

No problem Cindy! Its odd how little things like this never seem to get much coverage when they are discovered before an election.

Personally, I think it would be wise for President Bush to come forward and make it known. Lord knows the media won't.

[Cindy]

I do understand.

[proud_yank]

Dolly, the link I posted (#98) is a good one for your e-mail list.

[airborne]

The documents, the experts say, constitute a basic guide to building an atom bomb.

I can recall stories of college kids in the 70's drawing up functional plans for the A-bomb.

This genie has been out of the bottle for decades!

[endthematrix]

You can't build a nuclear device with out some specialized equipment. You can have checklist, but without key ingredients, no bomb.

[endthematrix]

Good Heavens! NY Times is against the First Amendment?

[Notwithstanding]

The real headline should be:

"Bush Was Right: Saddam Hussein's Iraq had a dangerous and effective weapons of mass destruction program in place"

Apparently "Bush Lied, People Died" is a lie, and even the NYT's experts now agree:

"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."

[Notwithstanding]

Imagine if Pelosi had bitched about these same documents being kept secret?

The NYT would set up the website itself to leak them!

[syriacus]

By 2002, the UK government already had made detailed instructions for building a bomb available to the public.
Sturm Ruger has pointed out this CNN article from 2002.

UK reveals nuclear bomb plan April 15, 2002

LONDON, England -- Britain's Ministry of Defence has confirmed it has made public information describing in detail the make-up of a nuclear bomb.

The plans give complete cross-sections, precise measurements and full details of materials used for all the components, including the plutonium core and the initiator that sets off the chain reaction causing the blast.

[edpc]

The antiwar crowd is going to have to argue that the information somehow wasn't dangerous in the hands of Saddam Hussein, but was dangerous posted on the Internet. It doesn't work. It can't be both no threat to America and yet also somehow a threat to America once it's in the hands of Iran. Game, set, and match.

I agree completely. However, you know how the Left loves to live in denial. Rush always plays the MSM montage when they take a word or phrase and beat it into the ground. Today's Lefty watchwords for Iraq will be "containment" and Hussein was "in a box."

[pleikumud]

BJ Klinton was too busy getting serviced in the Oval Office to pay attention to Saddam Hussein, the first bombing of the WTC, the bombing of the USS Cole, the bombing of our embassy in Nairobi, Kenya...........

[eyespysomething]

Incoming Pings!

U.S. Web Archive Is Said to Reveal a Nuclear Guide (Saddam Hussein had a nuclear weapons program)

Release/Translation of Classified PreWar Docs ping. If you want to be added or removed to the ping list, please Freepmail me.

Please add the keyword prewardocs to any articles pertaining to this subject.

Operation Get The Truth Out

Operation Iraqi Freedom Documents

Documents from the Harmony Database

jveritas’s blog

An Interview With a Citizen Translator and American Hero

[dinoparty]

I am of the conviction that, in my honest opinion, this proves that

SADDAM HUSSEIN HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM
SADDAM HUSSEIN HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM
SADDAM HUSSEIN HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM
SADDAM HUSSEIN HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM
SADDAM HUSSEIN HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM

[girlangler]

I have said all along, and still say, there is more about Saddam's WMD than we know at this point. We did NOT go into Iraq just because we could (and there is a reason the democrats voted to go to Iraq, they were scared). I am still convinced (and have read documentation right here on FR) Saddam was intent on making WMD and providing these to terrorists to eventually be used against us.

And I am still convinced the anthrax used during 9/11 was from Iraq. Does anyone remember the story about Mohammed Atta and his co-terrorist in Florida going to a pharmacist with rashes on their hands (the kind anthrax would make)? There is a reason that case has not been solved.

I am no political expert, but I believe this to be the case, and proof of Saddam's intent will be revealed right before the next presidential election, and after all the DIMS have had plenty of time to play the "Bush lied" game.

[Spunky]

"You can't build a nuclear device with out some specialized equipment. You can have checklist, but without key ingredients, no bomb."

Like "Yellowcake" That Joe Wilson says Saddam never tried to get from Nigeria.

[streetpreacher]

NYT: "We won't open government!'
NYT: "Not that open!"

Damned if you do; damned if you don't...

[FreedomNeocon]

Wait-a-minute..... but I thought Saddam had no WMD and it was all a Bush lie in order to steal the oil for Halliburton and the J0000Z.

How in the hell would we find a 'how to build a nuke' primer from the files of a guy who was contained, who had impenetrable iron-clad sanctions on him, and had no interest in WMD?

[BJClinton]

Bears repeating

[sawoody]

There are so many contradictions and so much hypocrisy in this article. Here's my email response to the author...

The NYT now thinks Iraqi Nuclear Research was a Threat??? Hmmm…

If publishing these documents is a real threat, then you have to conclude that the Iraqi nuclear research was a real threat. Somehow I don’t think that fits the NYT template.

The NYT now has a problem with publishing sensitive materials??? O…K…

I seem to recall the NYT had no problem publishing information that would expose US efforts at surveillance and tracking of terrorist phone and financial transactions.

The NYT had no interest in translating captured Iraqi documents because they were concerned about revealing weapons secrets??? Right…

Is this why none of the major print, cable, and television news agencies cared to translate the captured Iraqi documents?

The NYT really believes that Democrats are strong on national security and the real threat to security is…Republicans exposing the content of captured Iraqi documents???

Might your concern have anything to do with the fact that the Democrats are in desperate need of a boost on the national security issue, and the Republicans need to be taken down a notch 3 days before an election???

This article is wrong on so many levels

[Danae]

WHAT? You mean...? Saddam had WMD's????????? You mean.... you... you mean, BUSH TOLD THE TRUTH??????????????????????????????????

OMG! The Press gets it right! I wonder if they get what it MEANS yet?

Bawahahahahahah