Posted on 08/01/2003 12:57:34 PM PDT by Jean S
I posted my tin-foil opinion that France had some knowledge, if not active participation, in the WTC attack prior to 9/11, which explained Chirac's hysteria to keep us out of Iraq.
And now we see this! Very interesting,Shermy! Thanks!
You make enriched uranium from plain old uranium. Remember the scientist who had a gas centrifuge buried under his rosebush in Iraq? You take uranium ore and make Uranium Floride with it. You then use the slight weight difference between U235 (bomb material) and U238 (not bomb material) and run the gas thousands of times through the centrifuge, until you're left with gas that is mostly U235.
I laugh every time someone posts something like that. :-D
***Sigh***...remember the centrifuge we dug up in the rose garden? Take into consideration this article from 1990...
By the time the world ceased commerce with Iraq in retaliation for the Aug. 2 invasion of Kuwait, Saddam Hussein's scientists had apparently already imported enough technical know-how, exotic material and specialized equipment for an independent nuclear-weapon effort. Still more disturbing are reports reaching US agencies that Iraqi scientists can now make the complex gas centrifuges that are crucial for raising natural uranium to nuclear-weapon grade, substantially freeing Iraqi nuclear-material production from outside sources.Intelligence reports indicate that Saddam's scientists have the technology and expertise to chemically convert the uranium to a gas and will soon begin building the centrifuges needed to enrich the gas to nuclear-weapon grade. By spinning uranium gas at high speed, the centrifuge separates the heavier isotope of uranium, which is inert, from the lighter isotope, which is unstable and produces the chain reaction needed for a bomb. If those steps are achieved, it is within Iraq's grasp to turn the enriched gas back into the metal needed for the core of a bomb. Sources familiar with the reports say that Iraq already has a handful of centrifuges operating and the blueprints for producing more.
Then add this:
Several Iraqi nuclear weapons facilities and much equipment were indeed dismantled or destroyed by U.N. inspectors between 1991 and 1998. However, substantial and significant issues about Iraq’s ability to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program remained unresolved when the inspectors left the country.So...yes the statement IS important and enriched uranium within a month was a possibility.Dolley, citing IAEA’s own inspection reports as documentation, said: “Iraq has never surrendered to inspectors its two completed designs for a nuclear bomb, nuclear-bomb components such as explosive lenses and neutron initiators that it is known to have possessed, or almost any documentation of its efforts to enrich uranium to bomb-grade using gas centrifuges, devices which are small and readily concealed from reconnaissance.”[5]
Moreover, IAEA has previously conceded that Iraq’s weaponization R&D---small-scale technical research devoted to the design of a nuclear bomb’s components---is not readily detected by means of inspections. IAEA Director-General Mohamed ElBaradei stated in 1998 that “no matter how comprehensive the inspection, any country-wide verification process, in Iraq or anywhere else, has a degree of uncertainty that aims to verify the absence of readily concealable objects such as small amounts of nuclear material or weapons components.”[6]
The IAEA’s own guidelines for the safeguarding of highly enriched uranium and separated plutonium gives the conversion time for transforming these materials into weapons components as on the order of seven to ten days or one to three weeks, depending on the form the materials are in (metal, oxide or nitrate) when the materials are acquired by means of diversion or theft.[7] Thus, Iraq could be capable of producing a nuclear weapon in less than a month with sufficient diverted or stolen fissile material if it has managed to fabricate and conceal all of the non-nuclear components of a weapon.
Indeed he was, as time will slowly, and for the RATs, torturously reveal.
Not once did Pissy Mathews or Joe Wilson speak about the other sources of Intel on Niger or Africa. They kept talking about the forged document even though the White had never seen or known about the forged document until after the SOTU Speach.
For the life of me I can't figure out why President Bush hasn't dispatched Colin Powell and a few others to refute this Niger issue. There has to be something else going on behind the scenes that is preventing them from puting these lies to rest. My only guess is that we have somebody in custody that is working with us as David Kay puts the whole hidden WMD programs together for the world to see just how dangerous Saddam actually was.
The fact that the 9/11 report has 28 pages of blank pages tells me that they were put there for a reason. Why not just leave those pages out?, my guess is they were put in there to shake people up and get them talking. The Saudi's sure got shaken up over them.
If there is a link between Al-Qaeda and Saddam, and a connection between the Saudi's and Al-Qaeda, there could be a Saudi Saddam connection that we are investigating
If I wanted to catch some spies and leakers in Congress, I believe I would put out different inconsequential or fake names to different suspected parties and see whih names surfaced in the press, and in which outlet.
I also would hold my fire while the busy little spies were thinking they got away with something.
I do believe Powell addressed this issue in an interview, but of course the media would ignore anything that doesn't support their "Bush lied" mantra.
Well, I am calling it a night. I will check on these threads tomorrow.
I thought this week they are saying Condi Rice lied
Hmmm .. or was that last week ?
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.