Detailed Design of Nuclear Weapons is Available on the Internet ( NYT and IAEA Are Liars)

nuclearweaponarchive.org ^ | November 3rd 2006 | jveritas

[eyespysomething]

Can we get this moved to Front Page News? Thanks in advance.

[Williams]

What you just said is the 100% truth. They will spend months calling the president a racist murderer, and most republicans won't answer forcefully out of a misguided sense of "politeness."

[eyespysomething]

Stephen hayes is usually very good about following this. I believe either FR or Joseph has been mentioned in one of his articles in Weekly Standard.

[syriacus]

I did not see the documents that NYT is talking about. I wished I have downloaded these particular documents.

I'm wondering if the Times could be exaggerating the importance of the documents.

[Brian Mosely]

First, great work you've been doing. Thanks for posting this link. I seem to remember back in the 1990's that Hazel O'Lerry declassified a whole bunch of energy department documents. So why is it wrong for the Bush administration to post this stuff, but AOK for the Clinton administration?

Yeah, I know. Dumb question.

[syriacus]

I'm wondering if the Times could be exaggerating the importance of the documents.

I'm wondering if the Times could be exaggerating the importance of the documents as a cookbook.

[syriacus]

Thanks for the explanation.

[Brian Mosely]

http://www.security-policy.org/papers/1996/96-T120.html

O'Leary's Glasnost Campaign

Mrs. O'Leary has pursued policies that effectively equate the protection of the Nation's vital secrets with "repression." Her insistence on indiscriminately declassifying vast quantities of heretofore classified nuclear weapons-related information has virtually assured that nations and subnational groups are garnering an undesirably enhanced understanding of U.S. designs, developmental experiences, capabilities and vulnerabilities. At one point, deadlines arbitrarily imposed by the Secretary obliged security personnel to declassify documents by the box-full rather than evaluate each one page by page.

Of particular concern is the fact that Mrs. O'Leary's glasnost campaign has made public precise information concerning the quantities and whereabouts of U.S. plutonium and highly enriched uranium stocks. At the same time, her Department has significantly reduced the budget available for securing and protecting those sites. The Center for Security Policy has been informed that one reason for these cuts has been the Clinton Administration's diversion of scarce resources from U.S. programs to fund the Cooperative Threat Reduction initiative (frequently called the Nunn-Lugar program).⁽⁴⁾ In this manner, she has effectively invited attacks on these facilities and left them significantly able to thwart such attacks -- with potentially ominous implications for the local communities and/or for the effort to staunch the proliferation of radiological, atomic or thermonuclear weapons.

[Cindy]

Let's make your link clickable:

http://www.security-policy.org/papers/1996/96-T120.html

[cynwoody]

The problem is that website is shut, and I search my downloaded files the website, I did not see the documents that NYT is talking about. I wished I have downloaded these particular documents.

There is a nonresponsive server at 70.168.46.200, linked from the Foreign Military Studies Office using the text "Operation Iraqi Freedom Documents". Would that be the place?

Google cache
Yahoo cache
MSN cache
Gigablast cache

The stuff available on those caches is pretty incoherent and a lot more basic than that on the NW Archive.

[Jet Jaguar]

Good work! Helping the NYTimes and the IAEA look like idiots is fantastic. (not that they needed any help)

[Sender]

Even someone with limited knowledge and a crude, flawed design could create one hell of a mess given enough fissile material.

If it fizzled it would still go critical, irradiate a lot of people, contaminate a large area and cause economic chaos.

[Marine_Uncle]

"The president needs to hold a news conference and clear this up right now!"
Yes. He should arrange for a carefully orchestrated release on this issue. Done right, it could shut down the old grey lady and her fellow conspirators.
This administration has been to quiet in it's defense. Surely with all the stuff now available in the Harmony database and elsewhere, enough points could be hammered at the press corps. to make it clear once and for all Saddam had every intention of building the bomb as well as going forth in new and old wmd programs once the sanctions where lifted.
Their silence continues to bother the hell out of me.

[Chickenhawk Warmonger]

Why does this line from JVeritas' earlier translation about the furnaces keep sticking in my head when talking about the IAEA's involvement?

"The furnaces do not have the seal of the Agency but it was among the equipments of the previous program that were included in the list prepared by the agency."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1725141/posts

[BobS]

"Even someone with limited knowledge and a crude, flawed design could create one hell of a mess given enough fissile material."

Heck, where has everybody been? It was public knowledge 35 years ago that all you need is 13 lbs. of U-238 seperated in half, and that is not exactly a room temperature metal. The ionizing radiaton will destroy your body's cell structures and kill you very fast if you are near it.

[penelopesire]

wow...good find! OK...here is a link that I posted to jveritas yesterday(it is an old site of the INVO that still works and seems to have more info than their new site)

http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/Programmes/ActionTeam/nwp2.html

If you hit on the link below from the page, and scroll down, it gives a detailed list of what the IAEA claims they removed from Iraq between 1991-1997

http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/Programmes/ActionTeam/reports/s_1997_779.pdf

I believe that furnace is mentioned in the PDF file. Not sure how to copy and paste from a PDF file or I would post it. Ping me when you have read it.

[penelopesire]

"Why does this line from JVeritas' earlier translation about the furnaces keep sticking in my head when talking about the IAEA's involvement?"

"The furnaces do not have the seal of the Agency but it was among the equipments of the previous program that were included in the list prepared by the agency."

I may be more than a little confused here, so be patient with me...lol

In the link I provided in my earlier post, the IAEA claimed that they destroyed or rendered 'harmless' all furnaces. Is it possible that this furnace was never found or just not really destroyed?

If you do a search within the PDF document....the furnaces are mentioned 4 times!

http://www.iaea.org/OurWork/SV/Invo/reports/s_1997_779.pdf

[Chickenhawk Warmonger]

Great Links! It's gonna take me a while to get my brain around the report. What was interesting was the yellowcake from Niger that was removed by the IAEA in the 90's. I'm gonna get a cup of coffee and get to reading!

[penelopesire]

Let me know what you find! I believe some of the yellowcake was just put under IAEA 'seal' and left in Iraq.

When the Iraqi's threw out the inspections teams in 1998...there were four years of basically no onsight inspections, although the IAEA had some remote viewing capabilities.

What is so ridiculous, it that the IAEA left the yellowcake in Iraq under their flimsy 'seal' instead of removing it back in 1991!!

[windchime]

"What is so ridiculous, it that the IAEA left the yellowcake in Iraq under their flimsy 'seal' instead of removing it back in 1991!!"

Bump!