Why, six years ago, did the CIA give the Iranians blueprints to build a bomb?
 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...html?gusrc=rss

Guardian Unlimited

George Bush insists that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. So why, six years ago, did the CIA give the Iranians blueprints to build a bomb?

In an extract from his explosive new book, New York Times reporter James Risen reveals the bungles and miscalculations that led to a spectacular intelligence fiasco

moe.ron and tke start erasing this shit.

-Rudey

I say leave it up.

Rudey =\= bush censor

It's difficult to pull off being a social reject on campus as well as being a complete baboon on Greekchat, but you did it. Congrats.

-Rudey

1 - Violates TOS rules re: copywrites (should be linked, not reposted entirely)

2 - Poster does not add own comments

3 - Source is somewhat hilarious in its own right

I don't care if it stays up, but these kinds of threads add to the GC clutter as it is - we should encourage posting of all kinds of articles, but with some . . . content . . . as well?

Here's a BBC article discussing a similar situation (giving Iran the capabilty to create WMD's) in the U.K.:


BBC News
UK Sells Bomb Material to Iran

http://www.officialconfusion.com/Archive/iran/iran.html

Perhaps in the future if you are going to post a link to a BBC story - you might want to actually link to a BBC site...

BBC Article:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2275249.stm

Bush was sworn in about Jan. 20, 2001.

Any idiot would know that he did not control what the CIA did six years ago, and before he was President.

I think it was Hillary's former husband who was in charge.

...you can dowload the blueprints to build modern nuclear weapons off the internet. I remember looking at that stuff like 9 years ago in high school. There are plenty of indepth explations detailing exactly how to build it.

The problem comes in with getting the plutonium. That is a very difficult process that most nations cannot afford or have the brain power to produce.

I really don't think any president has control over what the CIA does.

Bush or Clinton or maybe just some overpaid CIA intelligence "expert" - I really don't care who it is from an ideological standpoint (I'm not a big fan of Clinton or Bush). But, I would like to know why we continually arm the states and organizations that we eventually deem to be our enemies. I mean... are we so powerful that the only way we can start a fight is to give a country the arms they need to be dangerous to us.

US: Here, take these weapons.

Iran: OK, but we hate you.

US: You all see them - they have WMD's

World Community: where?

US: Over there!

World Community: Oh yeah... I see them

US: Now we have to blow the fuc*ers away.

What militia do you belong to?

-Rudey

Bill Hicks was a stand-up performer and commentator who challenged this type of foreign policy by quoting the movie "Shane".

Jack Palance forces a small farmer to pick up a gun. "Pickitup, pickitup!" The man won't. "Pickitup!" He still won't, he's scared... and he's only in town to buy candy for the kids and a roll of gingham for his wife. Palance commands him: he picks it up. Kapow! Palance blasts him away. "You saw him," says Palance. "He had a gun."


Continuing in jest he would follow with somthing like...
Of course... All the US had to do was look at the receipt, Hicks said. As soon as the check cleared, they'd be goin' in to fight that little country in the name of God, democracy and whoever they currently liked.

His comedy was a little sensationalistic, but the overall message points to some very real problems with this type of foreign policy.


We gave Iran the capability they needed to create WMD's:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2275249.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...html?gusrc=rss

You keep posting this rubbish. Why???

1) The first link is England. Not the US.

2) The second link is to a book review.

3) This book evidently has all sorts of great CIA top secret stories. Either someone in the CIA is leaking all known details from every angle, or it's not accurate.

4) The author, James Risen, put out this book at the same time he wrote an article about the NSA spying on Americans. It's great that he was able to write an article to garner publicity for his book. It's great that James wrote the NSA piece in a negative light, but also admitted he knew about it for over a year and thus controlled the timing of its publication.

5) If you read the "story", the CIA gave them a faulty design that would get them off the weapons tracks. This had been done many times before. It was a Russian Scientist who told the Iranians that there was a problem with his design.

"Merlin was supposed to stunt the development of Tehran's nuclear programme by sending Iran's weapons experts down the wrong technical path. The CIA believed that once the Iranians had the blueprints and studied them, they would believe the designs were usable and so would start to build an atom bomb based on the flawed designs. But Tehran would get a big surprise when its scientists tried to explode their new bomb. Instead of a mushroom cloud, the Iranian scientists would witness a disappointing fizzle. The Iranian nuclear programme would suffer a humiliating setback, and Tehran's goal of becoming a nuclear power would have been delayed by several years. In the meantime, the CIA, by watching Iran's reaction to the blueprints, would have gained a wealth of information about the status of Iran's weapons programme, which has been shrouded in secrecy."


STOP POSTING THIS RUBBISH!

-Rudey

Do a little research... this information is everywhere.


How Iraq built its weapons programs
With a little help from ?:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,73292,00.html

http://www.sfbg.com/News/32/21/Features/iraq.html

http://foi.missouri.edu/terrorbkgd/following.html

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/night..._1_020917.html

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/index.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story...678220,00.html

http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/51/220.html

http://www.sptimes.com/2003/03/16/Pe...t_its_we.shtml

I don't really care if its the UK or the U.S. arming these states - its a big problem either way.