Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (185611)	3/27/2004 8:29:08 AM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1587184

These guys just can't tell the truth.... Al ================================ Arms-Control Group Says U.S. Inflated Libya's Nuclear Bid By WILLIAM J. BROAD Published: March 25, 2004 ekindling debate on how close Libya actually came to acquiring a nuclear bomb, a private arms-control group says the Bush administration overstated the number of devices the country had for making uranium fuel. The group, the Institute for Science and International Security, based in Washington, said yesterday that the administration had given an inaccurate briefing to reporters last week at the Energy Department's nuclear weapons lab in Oak Ridge, Tenn. At that briefing, officials displayed a dozen uranium centrifuges from what they said was a cache of about 4,000 that Libya had obtained before agreeing in December to dismantle its nuclear weapons program. Advertisement The institute, which has done extensive research on uranium centrifuges, said its own inquiries, including interviews with federal and overseas experts, found that Libya had obtained 4,000 casings for centrifuges, but that few if any had the finely tooled rotors that are the machine's heart. A spokeswoman for the Energy Department replied that Libya had the parts and raw material for making the centrifuges, if not thousands of working machines. "Libya had a nuclear weapons program — that's not in dispute," said the spokeswoman, Jeanne Lopatto. As for the 4,000 centrifuges, she said, the Libyans "either had the parts in hand, or the ability to make them." She added that Libya had many tons of a special high-strength steel "which would make a lot of rotors." Centrifuges are complex devices and their rotors are hard to make. They must spin so fast that a wobble can throw them out of alignment and destroy the machine. Without working rotors, said David Albright, the institute's president, Libya would have been "several years from being able to produce enough highly enriched uranium for a bomb." "The administration has distorted what was found in Libya, with the implication that it was very close to having a nuclear weapon," he said. After Libya publicly renounced its weapons program, the Bush administration and Britain tended to portray the project as large and aggressive, while the International Atomic Energy Agency said Libya was several years away from producing a nuclear weapon. In a report last month, the agency said Libya had obtained two advanced centrifuges of the type known as P-2, for Pakistan-2, had ordered 5,000 more and "had received a considerable number of parts, mainly casings." It added that shipments for the advanced machines contained "no additional rotors." At the briefing in Oak Ridge on March 15, White House and Energy Department officials showed a dozen casings for centrifuges, flanked by guards armed with assault rifles. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham gave the main briefing, and a White House official spoke of the 4,000 centrifuges. Many television and newspaper reports, including one in The New York Times, quoted the administration as saying Libya had surrendered 4,000 centrifuges. Corey Hinderstein, a researcher for the security institute, investigated that claim and learned from an Oak Ridge employee involved in the briefing that the 4,000 figure referred to casings, according to a memorandum she wrote to Mr. Albright, the group's president. Mr. Albright said the administration had papered over a huge gap between centrifuge theory and practice. "It would take the Libyans a long time to learn how to make the sophisticated components," he said. "They might have failed because some of them are extremely difficult to make. The bottom line is that what they had was a far cry from a large number of working machines."

To: Road Walker who wrote (185611)	3/27/2004 8:33:01 AM
From: i-node	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1587184

>> You know he isn't lying. This is something that isn't subject to interpretation. He directly contradicted himself. In August '02, he was totally laudatory about the Bush administration's progress in the war on terror. Then, after not getting the job he wanted, he goes and writes this juicy book that contradicts his August statement. You act as though you are not bound by partisanship. But this is solely a political attack and anyone who is honest about it (INCLUDING the liberal media) simply MUST look at these facts and discount his statements as a political attack. He's a failure on virtually every front You're entitled to your view; we'll have to see what the voters say. I think most people recognize that he has done precisely what was needed to protect the interest of the United States. It is hilariously weak of the Dems to run this Clark out there with these tales. They recognize they can't win on the issues, so they drum up some mud to sling. Weak, weak.

To: Road Walker who wrote (185611)	3/27/2004 1:42:11 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1587184

The WH is very badly managed, they have no clue how to assess risk or assign priorities. Would you hire Bush as a CEO of a company? Well he's a worse CEO of the country. If Bush were a CEO, he would have been fired by now for his excellent adventure in Iraq. He's a failure on virtually every front, no matter if you are liberal or conservative. Only the neo-cons, the brain-addled talk show conservatives and blindly Republican partisans can support this guy. And there are not enough of those to win in November. Have you watched Pat Buchanan struggle to defend him? I know he doesn't like him much and he really fights trashing him. You better hope the Dem's shoot themselves in the foot, it's your only chance. Something tells me the Dems are working very hard to keep this from happening. ted