Posted on 11/02/2006 8:48:45 PM PST by jveritas
Edited on 11/02/2006 11:06:31 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
The New York Times article to be published on November 3rd 2006 is about the US putting some captured Iraqi documents on the Foreign Military Intelligence Office (FMSO) website that talks about what the NYT and the IAEA call sensitive information from Iraq 1996 "Full, Final, and Complete Declaration FFCD presented to the UN and IAEA in 1996 and that talks about Iraq nuclear clandestine program. The IAEA and the New York Times claim that Iran may be using some of the technology in this FFCD which is a laughable idea as shown below.
That is from the IAEA website regardinf their report on Iraq FFCD presented to them by the Iraqis in 1996: “ 3. On 7 September 1996 in Baghdad Iraq delivered what it considered to be the definitive version of the "Full, Final, and Complete Declaration" (FFCD-F) of the Iraqi clandestine nuclear programme. The IAEA with the assistance of technical experts from Member States undertook a comprehensive review of the document.” Link: http://www.iaea.org/About/Policy/GC/GC41/Documents/gc41-20.html
So the FFCD was discussed with member states experts of the IAEA. There are 142 members in the IAEA including Iran. I am not saying that the IAEA discussed the Iraqi FFCD with Iranians but the FFCD was not such a secret document and the Iranians would have been able to access it in one way or another if it really provide them with any useful information.
What is important in this whole issue is that the New York Times has ridiculed these documents all along and never payed attention to them including the very important documents that show Saddam regime never stopped its programs related to WMD including nuclear programs. These documents were translated and posted here on FR.
On the subject of nuclear program, I translated and posted a document last month dated January 2001 that shows with a shadow of doubt that Saddam was personally involved with his nuclear scientist to re-build the nuclear program. In this document it states that Saddam personally approved his Iraqi Atomic Energy Agency to re-use nuclear equipments that include something called “Degussa Furnaces” that were used in the previous and prohibited Iraq nuclear program. These furnaces can be used to melt uranium and other nuclear related activities. The Degussa Vacuum furnaces were supplied to Iraq in the 1980’s by a German firm (Degussa AG based in Frankfurt Germany) and these furnaces later on became the subject of investigations of the German firm in the early 1990’s where the company claimed that they did not know that Iraq would have used them in its nuclear program.
The New York Times had an article in 1998 titled “An Iraqi Defector Warns of Iraq's Nuclear Weapons Research” where the Degussa furnaces were mentioned as part of “previous” Iraq nuclear program and the controversy surrounding the sale of these furnaces and the investigations later on(link: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~sanders/214/other/news/iraqi_defector.html ). The irony is that this is not only a New York Times article but also it was written by JUDITH MILLER and JAMES RISEN once of the worst accusers (liars) that the Bush administration lied about Iraq WMD. Where are you Scott Shane????
Link to the translated document on FR: 2001 Iraqi Document: Saddam Approved the Re-Use of Nuclear Equipment http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1725141/posts
Moreover, there are documents dated 1999-2001 that talk about Saddam regime projects to re-build some of the nuclear program facilities like RWTS (Radioactive Waste Treatment Station) and Radio-Chemistry laboratories which were part of Iraq previous clandestine nuclear program. Link to the translated document on FR: Iraqi Documents: Projects to Rebuild Saddam Nuclear Facilities http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1718125/posts .
Also this one
Iraqi Documents Show Plans for Prohibited Nuclear Projects http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1709390/posts
At the end Hate will destroy the hater.
Let's fix this one spelling error:
"What is important in this whole issue is that the New York Times has ridiculed these documents all along and never payed attention"
corrected to: never paid attention
I believe it's quite possible your contact prompted them to get off their rear ends and I don't find it at all odd that they didn't reply.
They couldn't possibly be wrong about anything (in their opinion) and replying to anyone who points out the opposite is not going to happen.
DITTO that.
I just e-mailed our local (Hartford, CT) conservative talk radio host Jim Vicevich about this...
Good quote...because Zinni is NOT a Bush fan...
Thank you Jim.
I just e-mailed Jim Vicevich (WTIC) with this info. Hopefully he'll run with it tomorrow...
EXCELLENT! Thank you very much, jveritas. The MSM will tremble.
Does this mean that the mighty UNMOVIC inspectors MISSED the 2001 documents? The only way to verify Iraq's WMD status was an invasion.
The Duelfer report's true bottom line (ignored by MSM) appears to be vindicated. All Saddam had to do was wait for for UNMOVIC to leave with a false sense of accomplishment, and for the sanctions to be lifted (with the help of Russia, France, and a possible Kerry Administration).
An Iran-Iraq arms race would have ensued. The Palestinian terrorists would have two WMD-seeking axis-of-evil sponsors instead of one. That could not have been better than the current situation.
Thank you, I appreciate that.
Typed too fast on post #89
rush@eibnet.com
He has gotten the article.
Thank you for your service!!!!
EXCELLENT!!!!
I stand in Awe yet again J, God bless you!
Can you get this to Wilkow for Levin's show tomorrow night?
http://michellemalkin.com/
Suddenly, the New York Times
is worried about dangerous disclosures
By Michelle Malkin · November 02, 2006 11:32 PM
So, this is the big NYTimes story that was being hyped tonight: "U.S. Web Archive Is Said to Reveal a Nuclear Guide:"
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 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."
***
Allah "questions the timing."
Chester remembers when the NYTimes stepped in late October 2004 al-QaQaa.
Jim Geraghty:
"I think the Times editors are counting on this being spun as a "Boy, did Bush screw up" meme; the problem is, to do it, they have to knock down the "there was no threat in Iraq" meme, once and for all. Because obviously, Saddam could have sold this information to anybody, any other state, or any well-funded terrorist group that had publicly pledged to kill millions of Americans and had expressed interest in nuclear arms. You know, like, oh... al-Qaeda."
You are incredible.
Thanks.
I like to find quotes of the Zinni types that they made before Bush was elected.
8-)
yw, If I can't get him tonight, I will get him in the morning.
Thank you!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.