Now instead of calling me names go check it out then ansewer my question, who's better at Security?
2006-11-03 14:47:45 · 10 answers · asked by older_fat_male 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
What an astonishing turn of events. Sure illustrates that this administration has little regard for national security -- only grabbing and holding onto power. As Bush did not listen to military about troop levels, he didn't listed to his own security czar Negreponte, who didn't want this posted. Can you believe Andrew Card actually proposed that the real damage was done by the NY Times in reporting the story.
The brouhaha over John Kerry's unfortunate joke delivery about Bush getting (US) stuck in Iraq got ten thousand percent more coverage than this serious security breach and W is holding the smoking gun. Go figure.
2006-11-03 15:03:06 · answer #1 · answered by murphy 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I love how people instantly try to discredit the sources. Hardball went after Clinton for years.
Anyway, this sounds like a joke, but it really happened. I googled nuke secrets and hit news. There are multiple sources and it is a fact.
Unreal.
2006-11-03 15:21:54 · answer #2 · answered by Truth Erector 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Poor guy, he didn't know whether to "prove" that there were WMD's or at least WMD programs started, so that he could justify the Iraq invasion, or to keep secrets that could potentially create programs in other hostile countries. ANYONE could have had access to these "nuke plans". Scary to think that this is our administrations way of handling "damage control"....Not too bright.
*** I also heard that these plans for nuclear armaments were found in the Bush Sr. era...they were just misrepresented as evidence for this invasion.
2006-11-03 15:39:37 · answer #3 · answered by Katie 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
And now everybody will be using up thier old soup cans in a nuclear arms race. The international atomec energy commission was so worried that they could not even be bothered to issue a notice about it, in spite of what Bush's delegate to them says about how alarmed they were. It takes a bit more than a few sketchy generalities to have the tech to make something go boom. For one thing you need the tech to be able to use the info.
2006-11-03 15:00:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes I watched those shows and more,also on them was the we peons inspector that was appointed by pred. bush,he said that most of those papers were found by him and his team in 1991 which is before bush. when he was sent in just after the war he found nothing,and also found no evidence that anything had been moved.I do not have a dog in this fight but i listen to all sides before i make any decisions.
2006-11-03 14:59:10 · answer #5 · answered by oklablakjak 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Its funny to see Karl Rove is still working hard on his October Suprise in November. That guy is such a goofball.
2006-11-03 15:01:12 · answer #6 · answered by Laughing Man Copycat 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I like a variety of news sources and do not want to rely on all LIBERAL news sources. So actually, the question is mute.
2006-11-03 15:08:01 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Well, it proves the nuke program the liberals are so sure of doesn't it? Just because we haven't found them doesn't mean they are not there.
2006-11-03 14:54:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
If they were truly nuclear secrets then we have proof positve that Iraq had WMDs.
So finally we can put the issue to rest, they were capable of constructing WMDs. Bush saved the world.
2006-11-03 14:51:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
When you rely on all LIBERAL news sources then your question is not worthy of an answer.
2006-11-03 14:52:03 · answer #10 · answered by daydoom 5 · 2⤊ 4⤋