[FlyVet]

For more than a half decade, the Clinton administration was shoveling atomic secrets out the door as fast as it could, literally by the ton. Millions of previously classified ideas and documents relating to nuclear arms were released to all comers, including China's bomb makers....

I can't decide what part of the Leftist Idiot mentality allows this.

Is it the "If we'll be nice to them, they'll be nice to us" delusion?

Or, is it the "We are the cause of all the evil in the world, so we deserve to be taken down" delusion?

Or, is it the "If we (Clintonites) feed them this $**+, they'll dump truckloads of cash into our offshore accounts" greedtality?

Your opinion?

[Mia T]

All of the above, of course.

From William J. Broad's 1999 piece (Spying Isn't the Only Way to Learn About Nukes, The New York Times, May 30, 1999):

The release of the secrets started as a high-stakes bet that openness would lessen, not increase, the world's vulnerability to nuclear arms and war. John Holum, who heads arms control at the State Department, told Congress last year that the test ban "essentially eliminates" the possibility of a renewed international race to develop new kinds of nuclear arms...

"The United States must stand as leader," O'Leary told a packed news conference in December 1993 upon starting the process. "We are declassifying the largest amount of information in the history of the department."

Critics, however, say the former secrets are extremely valuable to foreign powers intent on making nuclear headway. Gaffney, the former Reagan official, disparaged the giveaway as "dangling goodies in front of people to get them to sign up into our arms-control agenda."

Thomas B. Cochran,:..."In terms of the phenomenology of nuclear weapons...the cat is out of the bag."

...[F]ormer Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the "extensive declassification" of secrets had inadvertently [?!] aided the global spread of deadly weapons.

 

To summarize, the reasons for the clintons' proactive nuclear proliferation:

1. The ostensible reason: To stop the nuclear arms race.
   
   The clintons sought to disseminate our atomic secrets proactively in order to implement their postmodern, quite inane epistemological theory, namely, that, contrary to currently held dogma, knowledge is not power after all -- that, indeed, quite the contrary is the case, that instructing China and a motley assortment of terrorist nations on how to beef up their atom bombs and how not to omit the "key steps" when building hydrogen bombs would somehow blunt and not stimulate their appetites for bigger and better bombs and a higher position in the power food chain.
   
   (One has only to look to Iran, North Korea or Pakistan to see the absurdity of the clintons' premise.)
   
   
2. Quid pro quo for campaign cash (and who knows what other payoffs--have you noticed the astronomical increase in missus clinton's disclosed assets in recent years?)
   
   
3. To bribe countries with nuclear goodies so that they would sign up into our arms-control agenda so as to give the illusion of 'peace,' thereby increasing the probability of clinton getting the Nobel Peace Prize, his obsession. (clinton did the same thing in the Mideast.)
   

 

I M P E A C H M E N T
h e a r --c l i n t o n --l o s e --i t


by Mia T, 11.11.05

This legacy confab is in and of itself proof certain of clinton's deeply flawed character, and a demonstration in real time of the way in which the clinton years were about a legacy that was incidentally a presidency.

Madeleine Albright captured the essence of this dysfunctional presidency best when she explained why clinton couldn't go after bin Laden.

According to Richard Miniter, the Albright revelation occurred at the cabinet meeting that would decide the disposition of the USS Cole bombing by al Qaeda [that is to say, that would decide to do what it had always done when a "bimbo" was not spilling the beans on the clintons: Nothing]. Only Clarke wanted to retaliate militarily for this unambiguous act of war.

Albright explained that a [sham] Mideast accord would yield [if not peace for the principals, surely] a Nobel Peace Prize for clinton. Kill or capture bin Laden and clinton could kiss the 'accord' and the Peace Prize good-bye.

If clinton liberalism, smallness, cowardice, corruption, perfidy--and, to borrow a phrase from Andrew Cuomo, clinton cluelessness--played a part, it was, in the end, the Nobel Peace Prize that produced the puerile pertinacity that enabled the clintons to shrug off terrorism's global danger.

READ MORE