Reepers deserve to have Nuke Secrets Scandal stuffed down their throats

[BurtWorm]

After all the grief they gave Clinton for supposedly transferring weapons technology to China in the 1990s, they really, really need to get their slimy asses kicked on this. They can't tell us who met with Cheney over national energy policy, but these pieces of shit, because their political zealotry blinded them to common sense despite repeated warnings from the IAEA and even Negroponte, handed nuclear secrets to anyone who wanted them on the Internet!

This scandal needs a name. And it needs to get pushed onto the front pages of other papers and kept buzzing till Tuesday and afterwards, no matter who wins the Congress. These assholes must pay.

[Hepburn]

1. What Bush did....

...kind of makes what Sandy Berger pale in comparison. All the BS posted about Berger....and I bet the Freeps have NO prob with all the nuke secrets on the web.

Sheesh!

[BurtWorm]

5. Their Sandy Berger schtick is an excellent example

of why these Reepers need to have this mirror of their own treachery stuck in front of their noses. I hope this will be asked about during whatever press gaggle they have planned for today.

[Hepburn]

8. Over and over...

...I got soooooooooo sick of hearing from the RW Freep assholes how Sandy Berger was a traitor. Yes, what Berger did was wrong ~~ but they beat it into the ground and sounded far too much like a prosecution of the Rosenbergs. The Freeps blew what Berger did so far out of proportion, it was sickening. But...here they are...spinning the posting of this info by BushCo to try and support that there really were WMD in Iraq.

Where in the hell is WRONG with these assholes? I used to think it was just plain stupidity...but now I am thinking there has to be some form of mental illness combined with their basic stupidity. That or they really, really do drink a very special brand of Kool Aid.

[BootinUp]

2. Have any Dem Senators made a statement yet?

I say give Bush and the repuke congress both barrels. Do it now!

[BurtWorm]

4. Not that I know of.

[Ravy]

3. How about "OpenGate" as a name. nt

Changed from OpenTheGate. I like OpenGate better.

[ellacott]

7. The freepers are trying to spin it

They are insisting that this proves that Iraq had a nuclear program.

[Hepburn]

9. I cannot even begin to grasp the stupidity of those people.

Can't they even read and comprehend the simplest of factual settings?

Hello...hellooooooo, Freep-ville:

Read it again and when you have a clue what the true facts are, THEN and ONLY THEN open your stupid pie-holes, OK?

Hint: THE ARTICLE DOES NOTPROVE IN ANY MANNER THAT IRAQ HAD WMD. PUT DOWN THE KOOL-AID AND ACCEPT REALITY, OK? BUSH LIED ~~ SOLDIERS DIED. AND...YOU STUPID ASSHOLES...THE MORE YOU SUPPORT BUSH'S LIES WITH TOTAL BULLSHIT LIKE THIS, THE MORE SOLDIERS AND INNOCENT IRAQIS YOU SEND TO THEIR DEATHS.

:mad:

[BurtWorm]

10. This really kills me, too, that they will not let such reality through their screens

I mean, if you want this story to prove Bush was right, you really want it to show that the documents in question came into US hands AFTER March 20, 2003 AND show that the program was alive and well AFTER the Gulf War. Those are the ONLY conditions (braindead Freepers, I'm shouting at YOU!) that would satisfy their craving for a document that damns Clinton and the anti-war left and exonerates Bush AND justifies letting slip precious nuclear secrets for anyone in the world--including Iran and North Korea--to see.

These documents meet absolutely ZERO of those criteria:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/03/world/middleeast/03cnd-documents.html?ei=5088&en=a9532d192572f9f8&ex=1320210000&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

<<Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990s and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq had 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. >>

...

<<In September, the Web site began posting the nuclear documents, and some soon raised concerns. On Sept. 12, it posted a document it called “Progress of Iraqi nuclear program circa 1995.” That description is potentially misleading since the research occurred years earlier.>>

[LSK]

6. this has to be the November surprise that sinks the GOP