ARC's 1st Law: As a "progressive" online discussion grows longer, the probability of a nefarious reference to Karl Rove approaches one

Friday, November 03, 2006

The New York Times' November Suprise

H/T Drudge

Message that the New York Times wishes to convey with this article - days before the mid-term Congressional elections:

Those idiotic GOP Congressmen and right-wingers in the Bush Administration and the blogosphere helped Iran by getting the CIA to publicly disclose Iraq's information regarding its WMD programs.

Here's how I responded to the story as I read it:
I thought Saddam's WMD programs consisted only of rubber-bands, chewing gum, and duct tape. I mean, Saddam wasn't a threat to us and just wasn't interested in WMDs, right?

It's nice to know that the New York Times has decided to simply become an official organ of the Democratic Party. It'll be hilarious when the GOP keeps both chambers of Congress on Tuesday. In addition to laughing at the card-carrying Dems and Leftists who will lose on Tuesday, we can also laugh at the NYTimes.

Jim Geraghty of NRO had the same reaction as me:

I'm sorry, did the New York Times just put on the front page that IRAQ HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM AND WAS PLOTTING TO BUILD AN ATOMIC BOMB?

What? Wait a minute. The entire mantra of the war critics has been "no WMDs, no WMDs, no threat, no threat", for the past three years solid. Now we're being told that the Bush administration erred by making public information that could help any nation build an atomic bomb.

Let's go back and clarify: IRAQ HAD NUCLEAR WEAPONS PLANS SO ADVANCED AND DETAILED THAT ANY COUNTRY COULD HAVE USED THEM.

Michelle Malkin is noting that this is the Pot calling the Kettle black, given the amount of classified information that appears in the NYTimes' pages day after day.

Here is Captain's Quarters' take
.... is the NYTimes operating in an environment in which it doesn't understand? I mean, surely they know that there are thousands of bloggers and experts that have actually read the disclosures.
This is apparently the Times' November surprise, but it's a surprising one indeed. The Times has just authenticated the entire collection of memos, some of which give very detailed accounts of Iraqi ties to terrorist organizations. Just this past Monday, I posted a memo which showed that the Saddam regime actively coordinated with Palestinian terrorists in the PFLP as well as Hamas and Islamic Jihad. On September 20th, I reposted a translation of an IIS memo written four days after 9/11 that worried the US would discover Iraq's ties to Osama bin Laden.

It doesn't end there with the Times, either. In a revelation buried far beneath the jump, the Times acknowledges that the UN also believed Saddam to be nearing development of nuclear weapons:
Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990’s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. 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.

European diplomats said this week that some of those nuclear documents on the Web site were identical to the ones presented to the United Nations Security Council in late 2002, as America got ready to invade Iraq. But unlike those on the Web site, the papers given to the Security Council had been extensively edited, to remove sensitive information on unconventional arms.

That appears to indicate that by invading in 2003, we followed the best intelligence of the UN inspectors to head off the development of an Iraqi nuke. This intelligence put Saddam far ahead of Iran in the nuclear pursuit, and made it much more urgent to take some definitive action against Saddam before he could build and deploy it. And bear in mind that this intelligence came from the UN, and not from the United States. The inspectors themselves developed it, and they meant to keep it secret. The FMSO site blew their cover, and they're very unhappy about it.

Here is the take from JVeritas, who is one of the bloggers that has been tirelessly translating the documents and posting them online in English:
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????

heh...

And finally, here is StopTheACLU's take:
Saddam Closer To Bomb Than Anyone Thought
by Oak Leaf on 11-02-06 @ 10:34 pm Filed under War On Terror, News

The New Yorks times confirms that in 2002 Saddam Hussein’s “scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away:”
Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990’s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. 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.
Had the United States not eliminated this threat, today we would be facing a nuclear armed Iraq and possibly a nuclear armed Iran. Well, there is your talking point Tony Snow.

Classic.

As I mention above, it just seems that the NYTimes doesn't understand that they're outclassed on this one. They think they can get away with this crap.

Your Co-Conspirator,
ARC: St Wendeler

Comments (4)
Anonymous said...

No, the Times did not just publish a story about Iraq having a nuclear weapons program, at least in this decade. Or the decade before that. Those documents were from the period before Gulf War 1, which we won. And which ended the possibility of Saddam acquiring the imaginary WMD.

St Wendeler said...

Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990’s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. 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.

So, experts in the 90s and in 2002 say that Hussein's scientists could make a nuke within a year.

If you have the capacity to have a nuke within a year in 1990, you have the capacity to have a nuke within a year in 2002 (since you have the same knowledge).

But, you'll retort, Saddam was being held in check by the sanctions and the inspections.

That is a naive statement on two counts:
1 - Saddam had plenty of dough rolling in from the French and Kofi's boys to fund whatever he wanted and the inspections were a farce (which was one of the reasons why everyone thought Saddam had WMDs - because he was trying to stifle inspectors around the clock.
2 - the sanctions and the inspections regimes (along with the US-enforced no-fly zones) would not be maintained indefinitely. The French, the Leftists in the US, and the world community at large was starting to waiver on whether the sanctions were not causing more harm than good...

But, hey... at least we know Saddam won't have a nuke now. No thanks to you.

Anonymous said...

you are a fucking moron.

St Wendeler said...

you are a fucking moron.

Thanks for keeping the debate civil. I know that when it's difficult to reply with facts, slander has to suffice. And cursing doesn't exactly elevate your intelligence in the minds of your readers.