Hey Shrub!!! This is an example of how not to stabilize the region and limit terrorist access to WMDs!!!!



U.N.: Explosives Missing from Former Iraq Atomic Site
By Louis Charbonneau
Reuters

Monday 25 October 2004

VIENNA - Nearly 380 tons of explosives are missing from a site near Baghdad that was part of Saddam Hussein's dismantled atom bomb program but was never secured by the U.S. military, the United Nations said Monday.

The head of the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog, Mohamed ElBaradei, will immediately report the matter to the U.N. Security Council, a spokeswoman for the agency said.

The missing explosives could potentially be used to detonate a nuclear weapon or in conventional weapons, the agency said.

"El Baradei has decided to inform the Security Council today," spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said.

The New York Times, which broke the story Monday, said U.S. weapons experts feared the explosives could be used in bombing attacks against U.S. or Iraqi forces, which have come under increasing fire ahead of Iraq's elections due in January.

The U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has been barred from most of Iraq since the war and has watched from afar as its former nuclear sites have been systematically stripped by looters.

Fleming said ElBaradei informed Washington of the seriousness of the matter on Oct. 15 after learning about the disappearance of the explosives on Oct. 10.

One substance found in large quantities at the Al Qaqaa facility was the explosive HMX, which Fleming said had "a potential use in a nuclear explosive device as a detonator."

Prior to the March 2003 invasion of Iraq, the HMX had been sealed and tagged with the IAEA emblem while being stored at Al Qaqaa.

Iraq was permitted to keep some of its explosives for mining purposes after the IAEA completed its dismantling of Saddam's covert nuclear weapons program after the 1991 Gulf war.

Fleming said HMX also had civilian and conventional military applications. In the months prior to the second Gulf war, the IAEA was certain that none of the dual-use materials were being used in a nuclear weapons program.

Diplomats at the IAEA have warned that materials useable in nuclear weapons could easily be shipped out of Iraq and sold to countries like Iran or terrorist groups believed to be interested in acquiring nuclear weapons.

U.S. Failed to Secure Known Nuclear Site

The New York Times report cited White House and Pentagon officials - as well as at least one Iraqi minister - as acknowledging that the explosives vanished from the site shortly after the U.S.-led invasion amid widespread looting.

The minister of science and technology, Rashad M. Omar, confirmed the explosives were missing in an interview with The Times and CBS Television in Baghdad.

A Western diplomat close to the IAEA, who declined to be named, said it was difficult to understand why the U.S. military had failed to secure the facility despite knowing how sensitive the site was.

"This was a very well known site. If you could have picked a few sites that you would have to secure then ... Al Qaqaa would certainly be one of the main ones," the diplomat said.

U.S. national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was informed about the missing explosives only within the last month, the Times said, adding that it was unclear whether President Bush was aware.

U.S. administration officials said Sunday the Iraq Survey Group, the Central Intelligence Agency task force that searched for unconventional weapons, had been ordered to investigate the disappearance, the newspaper said.

Vienna diplomats said the IAEA had cautioned the United States about the danger of the explosives before the war, and after the invasion it specifically told U.S. officials about the need to keep the them secured.

Go to Original

A Look at Explosives Missing in Iraq
The Associated Press

Monday 25 October 2004

A glance at the destructive power of the nearly 380 tons of conventional explosives the International Atomic Energy Agency says have gone missing from a former military installation in Iraq:



HMX: High melting explosives, as they are scientifically known, are among the most powerful in use by the world's militaries today. HMX, also known as octogen, is made from hexamine, ammonium nitrate, nitric acid and acetic acid. Because it detonates at high temperatures, it is used in various kinds of explosives, rocket fuels and burster chargers.



RDX: Also referred to as cyclonite or hexogen, RDX is a white crystalline solid usually used in mixtures with other explosives, oils or waxes. Rarely used alone, it has a high degree of stability in storage and is considered the most powerful of the high explosives used by militaries.



Plastic Explosives: Experts say both HMX and RDX are key ingredients in plastic explosives such as Semtex and C-4, puttylike military substances that easily can be shaped. Libyan terrorists used just 1 pound of Semtex in 1988 to down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 270 people.

C-4 or its main ingredients were used in the October 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen that killed 17 U.S. sailors. Traces of RDX were found in an investigation of explosions that crippled two heavily fortified Israeli tanks, indicating Palestinian militants have obtained at least small quantities of the extremely potent material.

Just 5 pounds of either plastic explosive would be enough to blow up a dozen jetliners, experts say.

Old news dug up by the New York Times to provide cover for the story released this morning by the Washington Times proving Kerry is beyond a doubt the biggest exaggerator (read: liar) to ever run for office.

Old news or not, 380 tons of that stuff can make a lot of roadside bombs and suit up a lot of suicide bombers!!! More mismanagement by our "texas cowboy" that will cost troop lives!!!! What an idiot!!!!

More mismanagement by our "texas cowboy" that will cost troop lives!!!! What an idiot!!!!Yeah, why wasn't Bush guarding that himself? I can't believe he didn't personally see to it that there was a brigade of soldiers guarding that site (sarcasm)!!! How do you expect to be taken seriously when everything wrong that happens you automatically blame Bush personally for it? This is the kind of attitude that makes people like me rally to Bush's side.

Obviously forgot to read the article, again. They were warned about this depot before the war started and had ample time to deal with this. Instead they chose to ignore it.[/B]SHRUB has failed miserably at his mission goal of keeping weapons of mass distruction out of the hands of terrorists!!! After all, wasn't this one of the "justifications" given by Shrub and Cheney for invading Iraq?[B]

This a major blunder on the part of Shrub's administration and jeopardizes the lives of all of our troops!!!!

But you and Bryan can poo-pooh this and try and sweep it under the rug. It never ceases to amaze me how you and the rest of the right wingers will look away when your boy has really screwed the pooch!!!!

Phil, you have finally convinced me. It is Shrub's fault. He should have been more careful to watch all those stockpiles of French, Russian and Chinese WMD. How stupid could he be? I mean, they were shipping those weapons in before/during/after the war. Bush knew they were using the corrupt oil-for-food program that those we not pallets of rice they were bringing in. It was plain for everyone to see the giant skull and crossbones on the tips of those nukes. I mean right under our noses. How brazen!

Obviously forgot to read the article, again.I read it just fine, thank you. But your claim that I didn't gives further proof of how inept you are at arriving to an accurate conclusion.

I think the conclusion I reach is valid, and I'm sure a lot of others will agree.
1. The IAEA warned us about the stockpile of explosives, some of which could be used for nuclear weapon detonation, before the war. Once the war started, the IAEA personnel were no longer able to guard this material. At that point, it should have been a concern for the Shrub administration.
2. During Shrubs lame attempts to justify the war, one of the reasons given was to prevent saddam from giving weapons of mass distruction to terrorists.
3. By not securing the stockpile, we have "given " this material to the terrorists, who no doubt are using these explosives against our troops, causing the death and mutilation of same, as well as innocent Iraqi citizens.
4. Bryan and Kbob will see this as a non issue because it makes Shrub look bad. No guys, I don't expect that he will personally guard this material. He is the commander in chief, at least in title, and I would expect that someone within his administration might possess enough intelligence to suggest that the stockpile be guarded, or moved to a more secure area, or destroyed rather than let the locals go on a shopping spree!

Guys,
You gotta see the sense in what Phil is saying. Obviously Bush wouldn't guard them himself, to make that statement was just plain stupid. Anyone with even a small amount of common sense can see that this was a pretty big OOPS by the Bush administration. As was pointed out previously, Bush DID manage to have troops guarding the oil ministry. Why would that be more important to guard than a commonly known stockpile of WMD grade explosives. To not be able to see fault in this or to place blame on the Bush administration seriously undermines your credibility.
Face it, 380 tons wasn't smuggled out in a few pick-up trucks overnight.

He is the commander in chief, at least in title, and I would expect that someone within his administration might possess enough intelligence to suggest that the stockpile be guarded, or moved to a more secure area, or destroyed rather than let the locals go on a shopping spree!
Please prove that the locals went on a shopping spree or that the weapons were either not destroyed, or moved, or buried. Then we can place blame on the military plan created by the Pentagon and signed off by Bush.

Kerry Says Missing Explosives in Iraq Illustrate Bush's Failures
By TERENCE NEILAN

Published: October 25, 2004
Senator John Kerry seized on a report today that 380 tons of explosives had vanished from a site in Iraq that the United States admits it was supposed to have guarded, calling the disappearance "one of the great blunders of Iraq, one of the great blunders of this administration."

He added that "the incredible incompetence of this president and this administration has put our troops at risk and put this country at greater risk than we all need."

The chief White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, sought to downplay the threat posed by the missing explosives, saying they represented no threat of nuclear proliferation and that the administration preferred to concentrate on weapons destroyed, not those lost.

"We have destroyed more than 243,000 [tons of] munitions," he said, adding that Mr. Bush was told the material was missing on Oct. 15. "We've secured another nearly 163,000 that will be destroyed."

But with leadership in time of war a major issue as the Nov. 2 election approaches, Mr. Kerry pressed home his point during a campaign stop in Dover, N.H.: "Let me say this as directly as I can: that the unbelievable blindness, stubbornness, arrogance of this administration to do the basics, has now allowed this president to once again fail the test of being commander in chief."

Mr. Kerry went on: "If President Bush can't recognize his failures in Iraq, which he doesn't admit, won't acknowledge, you can't fix them, and then he's doomed to repeat the same mistakes elsewhere, whether its North Korea, or Iran, or in any other of the risks that we face ahead of us.

"My fellow Americans, we can't afford to risk four more years of George Bush's miscalculations."

A spokesman for the Bush-Cheney campaign, Steve Schmidt, describing "the entire country of Iraq" as "a weapons stockpile,'' responded that "all the Monday morning-quarterbacking and armchair-generaling in the world by John Kerry won't make up for the fact that he does not have a vision, a strategy or a plan to fight and win the war on terror."

Mr. Bush did not directly reply to Mr. Kerry's remarks or address the issue of the missing explosives during a campaign speech today in Colorado, whose nine electoral votes are still considered up for grabs by most opinion polls. Rather, he sought again to link the war in Iraq with the campaign against terrorism.

"We are fighting these terrorists with our military in Afghanistan and Iraq and beyond so we do not have to face them in the streets of our own cities," Mr. Bush told supporters in Greeley. "Victory in Iraq is essential to victory in the war on terror."

Mr. Bush also used the occasion to again portray Mr. Kerry as having a "flip-flop" record on the war and other issues.

"Just last year, American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan needed $87 billion for body armor, hazard pay, vehicles, weapons and bullets," Mr. Bush said. "First, Senator Kerry said it would be irresponsible to vote against the troops, then he voted against the troops. "

In his own address, in New Hampshire, whose four electoral votes are considered still in play, Mr. Kerry said that although American troops had been doing their job, "the problem is the commander in chief has not been doing his. "

The report, which appeared today in The New York Times, said the explosives were used to demolish buildings, make missile warheads and detonate nuclear weapons. The facility, called Al Qaqaa, was supposed to have been under American military control, but it is still being looted, the report said. White House and Pentagon officials acknowledge that the explosives vanished after the American-led invasion.

American weapons experts say their immediate concern is that the explosives could be used in major bombing attacks against American or Iraqi forces.

Mr. Kerry's criticism was echoed by his vice presidential running mate, Senator John Edwards.

Mr. Edwards, in a campaign stop in Toledo, Ohio, called Mr. Bush "reckless" and "clueless" for not safeguarding the explosives missing in Iraq and criticized the administration for sending Condoleezza Rice out on the campaign trail instead of the situation room.

"They failed to do what was necessary and what was needed to keep us safe," Mr. Edwards told a rally. "During the invasion, these explosives were taken by who knows who, who knows where. After they learned about the missing explosives, they still failed to properly guard this site."

He suggested that Ms. Rice should be in Washington directing the hunt for the explosives instead of giving a speech in hotly contested Florida.



Enough proof for you? "White House and Pentagon officials acknowledge that the explosives vanished after the American-led invasion."

OK Bryan,

The stockpile went somewhere, and we didn't move it. Who did?

The biggest problem that I have with our current President is that he lacks the ability to admit to his and his minions mistakes. Admission of failings and changing course would go a long way to restoring GWB's credibility. I'm not saying that we should cut and run. I'm saying that we should stop and analyze our approach and try to build a new consensus.

I would agree that the intelligence the GWB relied on was faulty and I would also agree that the machine that produced this intelligence was started under other adminstrations so there is plenty of blame to go around. But, he can't keep blaming bad intelligence when he's in charge of intelligence. He can't keep blaming Kerry for voting for the war. The intelligence that Kerry used to make his decision was supplied directly and indirectly by the White House. Can't you see that?

Think of us (US) as a big family. If the dad makes an "assumption" and yells at the mom in front of the kids and later finds out that he's wrong, wouldn't the right thing to do be to aplologize to mom in front of the kids? I didn't think any less of my father for handling our family that way.

You and I just finished a round of pretty nasty exchanges. We made contact and came to an understanding. We both acknowledged that our extremes didn't do either of our positions any good. You acknowledged that you went too far sometimes and I admitted that I took pleasure in rubbing your nose in your statements. If we can agree to change course, why can't our Commander in Chief?

380 tons of explosives had vanished

"We have destroyed more than 243,000 [tons of] munitions,"

"We've secured another nearly 163,000 that will be destroyed."

Ah, thank you. So we have destroyed or are going to have destroyed a total of 406,000 tons on munitions and you are whining about 380 tons. An amount equivalent to less than 1 small warehouse or bunker.

That works out to less than .1% (one-tenth of 1 percent) of the amount of munitions so far being discussed.

Man, you guys are precious. Talk amount making a mountain out of a molehill. Why don't you report that the US has seized 99.9% of the known munitions so far?

I see, the glass is always half empty and the Democrats cannot attain power unless good things happen like Americans being killed, hostages being taken, oil costing $5.00 gallon, tax money being returned to the people that pay it, etc, etc. What miserable existence must be led by many on the left to have acquired such a pessimistic and dour outlook on life.

I am just asking you guys to put things in perspective. There are millions of tons of munitions in Iraq. I guarantee I could hide 380 tons of weapons in Milwaukee and nobody could find them, much less in a country the size of California. I guess I am so upset about these things because Kerry is always Monday-Morning quarterbacking things.

I'm John kerry and I would have done this and I would have done that, and I would have done it smarter and I would have done it faster. And I have a plan.

Please, Mr. Kerry, spare me!

You and I just finished a round of pretty nasty exchanges. We made contact and came to an understanding. We both acknowledged that our extremes didn't do either of our positions any good. You acknowledged that you went too far sometimes and I admitted that I took pleasure in rubbing your nose in your statements. If we can agree to change course, why can't our Commander in Chief?Hopefully we can continue to smoke the peace pipe. It is much preferred to putting on the war paint.

As far as President Bush goes, please stop asking him to apologize. I don't think he has done anything wrong myself in prosecuting this war on terror. Saddam had to go! The whole world was in agreement. The world community was in agreement that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and was an emminent threat to our safety and that of the free world. Should I post again the statements made by the whole Democratic party that agreed that Saddam was a threat? But because it is not politically expedient anymore, now they have conveniently changed their minds.

I don't care anymore. Let Kerry win. Let him muck things up and then we'll take over in 4 years and control everything in the country for another 12 years after that. I'm willing to make that trade just to set things straight once and for all on which doctrine is the best for this country.

A “lack of security” resulted in the loss of 377 tons of high explosives from the sprawling Al-Qaqaa military installation about 30 miles south of Baghdad, said Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA.


and another quote


The letter informed the IAEA that since Sept. 4, 2003, looting at the Al-Qaqaa installation south of Baghdad had resulted in the loss of 214.67 tons of HMX, 155.68 tons of RDX and 6.39 tons of PETN explosives.


You call this old news - yet bring up stuff from 35 years ago that is merely heresay from bush supporters at best? This stuff is a fact-300 tons missing. SO the question for you Bryan, is how do you shift blame from The Commander in Chief - to John Kerry? After all - GW isnt responsible is he?


Here are a few other notes:





Chemical weapons
Before: Iraq was believed to have stocked up to 500 metric tons of chemical warfare agents. It was also said to have concealed equipment and other items needed for continuing chemical weapons production.

After: No chemical weapons have been found. Some sources say Iraq was conducting experiments to develop chemical weapons, but no physical evidence has been found. More time is needed to investigate.




Biological weapons
Before: Intelligence agencies believed Iraq had biological weapons and facilities to develop more of them. Among the weapons believed to be in Iraq was anthrax, a deadly germ which could be quickly produced and delivered by bombs, missiles, aerial sprayers or covert operatives. Mobile laboratories were believed to be used for developing biological weapons.

After: No weapons have been found and Secretary of State Colin Powell said in a May 16, 2004 interview with 'Meet the Press" that the prewar intelligence on the existence of mobile biological weapons labs was based on sourcing that was "inaccurate and wrong and, in some cases, deliberately misleading." Powell originally introduced the threat of mobile labs during a February 2003 speech in front of the United Nations. Former chief weapons inspector David Kay and other U.S. officials have said that one of the main sources of the mobile labs evidence was an Iraqi defector code-named "Curveball." The defector was later identified as a brother of one of the top aides of Ahmad Chalabi, the Iraqi exile who was an important advocate for the U.S. invasion of Iraq.



Yup - we got a competent Commander in Chief

Obviously Bush wouldn't guard them himself, to make that statement was just plain stupid. Anyone with even a small amount of common sense can see that this was a pretty big OOPS by the Bush administration. What I typed was sarcastic, I even said so. It was made to point out how ridiculous it is to think that nothing will ever go wrong in a war. Taking my words literally, even with my (sarcastic) disclaimer is what is stupid. And Bryan has pointed out how little it really means anyway. Everyone has been waiting for something to drop right before the election. Anyone that takes the time to study this story can see that this is just an over-blown story dropped on Bush to make him look bad right before the election.

Next questions: when did those explosives disappear? When was the last time the IAEA knew where they were? How do they know how much there really was? Does anyone know if they were even there in the first place? Have they been gone since before the war in Iraq even started? I suspect so unless proven otherwise. I suspect this "news" is probably at least 1 1/2 years old.

Gee Joey, that was timely. You answered a couple of my questions and backed up some of my suspicions, thanks. I still would like to know how they knew what was there before 9-4-03.

IAEA Insepections - the explosives were under IAEA seal -- and - as I recall - we had already invaded and occupied iraq as of 9-4-03 -


here is the whole article

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/

I wouldn't be surprised if Kofi Annan had them stolen so he could give them to the next country that wanted to rattle its tail against the US or he may have just 'given' them to the terrorists to teach us a lesson.

What basis do you have for this delusion?

He was the last to see them and he is corrupt. Should I post the info on Annan and his son? And the scandal that is the Oil-For-Food program that caused the French, Germans and Soviets to not support that action against Saddam because they were knee deep in it?

I wouldn't doubt for a second that he would be capable of such a thing. He hates the US and wants to see us go down. Its called MOTIVE.

All I want to know is how ANYONE could claim 380 TONS is no big deal. What are you totally nuts?! No wonder you like Bush. He'd have to be like HITLER before you'd finally admit he's a liar and a useless leader.

What is "SUPPOSEDLY" missing, and may well have been "missing" before we entered Iraq amounts to 40 truckloads of material. We have already destroyed or will be destroying shortly a total of 40,000 truckloads.

Keep drinking the kerry kool-aid. In fact, spike it with something. You're already in lala land, you might as well enjoy it.http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon12.gif

Go ahead and prove the weapons are missing becuase of the US occupation and disprove that they weren't moved before the war even started. Have you seen the pictures of the sand pile that is supposed to be the weapons dump? Not a real high profile place when there are millions of pounds of weaponry elsewhere in Iraq.

I can't believe how many people believe what the press writes. The New York Times runs with this story fed to them a week ago by the IAEA and it is national news. We find out that Kerry lied during the 2nd debate when he said he met with all the heads of the UN Security Council and not a peep is heard in the media and not a peep from you guys.

Bryan, how come anyone who seems to provide a story that isnt favorable to GW is a liar or a crook or whatever, but anyone who speaks out against Kerry is rightous? Surely they cant ALL be liars and crooks and left wing hacks.

I cant remember once where you have agreed that GW is weak on anything Bryan - is the man now perfect? Should God make room for the almighty GW Bush now?

Come on Joey, smell the ribs.http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon10.gif

The UN via the IAEA comes out with this bogus 'news event' 8 days before the election to influence the election in the hope of getting their patsy elected.

I have been following the money trail for a month now and I could make your head spin around like the exorcist. Kerry is in way deeper than anybody wants to report. Especially with the North Korean and the bridges and deep water port they want to build.

Anyway, I digress, this falsified or bogus UN report comes out that says the weapons were once there, but now they are not. They don't know and they can't say if they were missing before the US invasion, only that at some point they were there. But it is Bush's fault anyways. And that is big news. 40 truckloads missing vs the 40,000 we have secured and destroyed. That is what I am talking about. Why aren't we celebrating the fact that we got 40,000 truckloads so far? That is 40,000 more truckloads that can't be used against us but would have been available if Kerry or Gore would have been in office. That is the facts of life. And that is what the media should be reporting. If Gore or Kerry were in office, the Iraqis will still be in possession of 400,000 tons (that's 8,000,000,000 billion pounds) of weapons that they could have been used against our troops or handed over to the terrorists. THAT IS THE REAL STORY HERE, not the 40+ trucks. But that is how the media spins it and then they shove it down, not my throat, but yours. Enjoy and please pass the butter.http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon6.gif

I need to look into the psychology of what it takes to be from the left. Did you need to be dropped on your head as child or something.http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon7.gif Sincerely, this whole half-empty view of the world is really troubling to me. Your not happy unless there is bad news.

On a positive note, there is a new movie coming out this week (can't remember the name) that is a documentary type movie where they handed out 150 cameras to Iraqis and let them film their lives. Why it was not produced 1 month ago I don't know. From what I have heard of it, it would secure the election for President Bush if the American people could see how grateful the Iraqi people truly are about our rescue of them from Saddam. Instead all we get shown on TV screens is the occasional car bomb footage or the fabrications of a pompous fool in the movie theaters.

We perform 4000 murders, (I'm sorry) abortions a day in this country. We kill hundreds of our fellow citizens over drugs, sex, and money each hour. Bush is out trying to save mankind and freedom as we know it. Give him a break, wiil ya.

IAEA Insepections - the explosives were under IAEA seal -- and - as I recall - we had already invaded and occupied iraq as of 9-4-03 -


here is the whole articleThe explosives were under seal since 1991. That article says the IAEA verified the explosives were there in January '03 before the invasion. I'm not refuting that. But I need more than an "anonymous source at the Pentagon" to verify that they were there after we invaded. Yes I'm skeptical, and I'm not about to apologize for that.

I haven't studied the characteristics of those 2 explosives, but I understand that they are key ingredients in plastic explosives. However, they are not as lethal by themselves. The OK City bombing showed us that powerful bombs can be made with the proper know-how. Of course we should try and keep any weapons out of enemy hands, but that in and of itself is not the key to victory.

Side note: I noticed an error in that article you posted, Joey. It said that there were 170 deaths due to the crash of Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie. The actual number of deaths was 270. A simple typo I know, but I thought it was interesting how things can so easily be misstated and that errors abound everywhere.

But see, the damage is done. It was all Bush's fault. Kerry was out making a fool of himself today because he again doesn't know what he is talking about. This is the danger with Kerry. He will govern from the editorial page. This is also why he will lose the election in 8 days.

Don't expect to see huge retractions in the media on this one. They never retract a story when they are found out and proven to be liars. One by one the old dinosaurs of the elite media are going down, down, down.


XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX MON OCT 25 2004 22:45:05 ET XXXXX

NBCNEWS: HUGE CACHE OF EXPLOSIVES VANISHED FROM SITE IN IRAQ -- AT LEAST 18 MONTHS AGO -- BEFORE TROOPS ARRIVED

The NYTIMES urgently reported on Monda (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/25/international/middleeast/25bomb.html?ex=1099368000&en=9ce7b708a2986170&ei=5065&partner=MYWAY)y how the Iraqi interim government has warned the United States and international nuclear inspectors that nearly 380 tons of powerful conventional explosives are now missing from one of Iraq's most sensitive former military installations.

Jumping on the TIMES exclusive, Dem presidential candidate John Kerry blasted the Bush administration for its failure to "guard those stockpiles."

"This is one of the great blunders of Iraq, one of the great blunders of this administration," Kerry said.

In an election week rush:

**ABCNEWS Mentioned The Iraq Explosives Depot At Least 4 Times
**CBSNEWS Mentioned The Iraq Explosives Depot At Least 7 Times
**MSNBC Mentioned The Iraq Explosives Depot At Least 37 Times
**CNN Mentioned The Iraq Explosives Depot At Least 50 Times

But tonight, NBCNEWS reported, once: The 380 tons of powerful conventional explosives were already missing back in April 10, 2003 -- when U.S. troops arrived at the installation south of Baghdad!

An NBCNEWS crew embedded with troops moved in to secure the Al-Qaqaa weapons facility on April 10, 2003, one day after the liberation of Iraq.

According to NBCNEWS, the HMX and RDX explosives were already missing when the American troops arrived.

It is not clear why the NYTIMES failed to report the cache had been missing for 18 months -- and was reportedly missing before troops even arrived.

The TIMES left the impression the weapons site had been looted since Iraq has been under US control.

"The U.S. Army was at the sight one day after the liberation and the weapons were already gone," a top Republican blasted from Washington late Monday.

The International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors last saw the explosives in January 2003 when they took an inventory and placed fresh seals on the bunkers.

Dem vp hopeful John Edwards blasted Bush for not securing the explosives: "It is reckless and irresponsible to fail to protect and safeguard one of the largest weapons sites in the country. And by either ignoring these mistakes or being clueless about them, George Bush has failed. He has failed as our commander in chief; he has failed as president."

A senior Bush official e-mailed DRUDGE late Monday: "Let me get this straight, are Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards now saying we did not go into Iraq soon enough? We should have invaded and liberated Iraq sooner?"


Me speaking: And then listen to this last doozy from Lockhart. What a mouth. Direct from the Democratic playbook... You guys have seen me post this all the time...Deny, deflect, attack! There it is fellas. Read it. Almost as good as demanding Bush answer questions that forged documents raised.http://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon10.gif

Top Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart fired back: "In a shameless attempt to cover up its failure to secure 380 tons of highly explosive material in Iraq, the White House is desperately flailing in an effort to escape blame. Instead of distorting John Kerry’s words, the Bush campaign is now falsely and deliberately twisting the reports of journalists. It is the latest pathetic excuse from an administration that never admits a mistake, no matter how disastrous."

Developing...

Would you like ketchup and mustard to go with that crow???

Bryan,
Guys like you are dangerous. I can only imagine how useful to society you might if only you'd remove your blinders. You, like Bush obviously lack the ability to see when you're wrong. It's that or you certainly lack the ability to ADMIT it. Any manager, coach, or commander worth his salt knows that when you are faced with a situation where your current plans are not working, or yielding the results you're looking for, you change your plan. Come at it from a different angle so to speak. Bush, and people like you, just continue forward no matter what because doing anything else would mean conceeding that you were wrong at some point. Your plan is great for YOU. It means never having to admit you're wrong.
And BTW, to call the left and bunch of negative thinkers is ridiculous. Bush is the one that's always playing on our fears. Kerry appeals to our hopes and dreams for a better society. How could you NOT admit THAT? Sorry, forgot myself for a second there. Your brain isn't programmed for that function, I forgot.
Bush theory 101:
1. Play on the fears of your constituents.
2. Always be able to provide a plausable denial.
3. When caught, deny everything, and blame the liberal press.

JPost.com » News » World » Article

Oct. 25, 2004 17:45 | Updated Oct. 25, 2004 17:49
380 tons of explosives missing in Iraq
By ASSOCIATED PRESS
Vienna, Austria

Nearly 400 tons of conventional explosives that can be used in the kind of car bomb attacks that have targeted US-led coalition forces in Iraq for months have vanished from a former Iraqi military installation, the UN nuclear agency said Monday.

The International Atomic Energy Agency said it fears the explosives may have fallen into insurgents' hands. Diplomats questioned why the United States didn't do more to secure the facility, which they say posed a well-known threat of being looted.

IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei was to report the explosives' disappearance to the UN Security Council later Monday, spokeswoman Melissa Fleming told The Associated Press.

Iraq's Ministry of Science and Technology told the nuclear agency on Oct. 10 that about 380 tons (350 metric tons) of explosives had gone missing from the former Al-Qaqaa facility south of Baghdad, Fleming said.

"The most immediate concern here is that these explosives could have fallen into the wrong hands," she told the AP.

Saddam Hussein's regime used Al-Qaqaa as a key part of its effort to build a nuclear bomb. Although the missing materials are conventional explosives known as HMX and RDX, the Vienna-based IAEA got involved because HMX is a "dual use" substance powerful enough to ignite the fissile material in an atomic bomb and set off a nuclear chain reaction.

Both are key components in plastic explosives such as C-4 and Semtex, which are so powerful that Libyan terrorists needed just a pound (0.45 kilos) to blow up Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988, killing 170 people.

Insurgents targeting coalition forces in Iraq have made widespread use of plastic explosives in a bloody spate of car bomb attacks. Officials were unable to link the missing explosives directly to the recent car bombings, but the revelations that they could have fallen into enemy hands caused a stir.

"This stuff was well-known. Everyone knew it was there, and it should have been among the first sites to be secured," said a European diplomat familiar with the disappearance of the explosives, which was first reported Monday by The New York Times.

At the Pentagon, an official who monitors developments in Iraq said US-led coalition troops had searched Al-Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives, which had been under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact. Thereafter the site was not secured by U.S. forces, the official said, also speaking on condition of anonymity.

The IAEA had periodically inspected the site between 1991 and 2003, including numerous times between November 2002 and March 2003, the official said. As of January 2003 the IAEA had "fully inventoried" the site, the official said. It was not clear what additional inspections were done between January and March.

This past weekend, the Pentagon ordered the U.S. military command in Baghdad and the Iraq Survey Group to investigate the IAEA report, the official said, adding it was not yet clear how or by whom the explosives were taken or whether any of the material had been used in attacks by the insurgency.

In Washington, Democratic presidential hopeful John Kerry's campaign said the Bush administration "must answer for what may be the most grave and catastrophic mistake in a tragic series of blunders in Iraq."

"How did they fail to secure nearly 380 tons of known, deadly explosives despite clear warnings from the International Atomic Energy Agency to do so?" senior Kerry adviser Joe Lockhart said in a statement.

"These explosives can be used to blow up airplanes, level buildings, attack our troops and detonate nuclear weapons," Lockhart said. "The Bush administration knew where this stockpile was, but took no action to secure the site."

Al-Qaqaa is located near Youssifiyah, an area rife with ambush attacks. An Associated Press Television News crew which drove past the compound Monday saw no visible security at the gates of the site, a jumble of low-slung, yellow-colored storage buildings that appeared deserted.

Saddam was known to have used the site to make conventional warheads, and IAEA inspectors dismantled parts of his nuclear program there before the 1991 Gulf War. The experts also oversaw the destruction of Iraq's chemical and biological weapons.

The Iraqis told the nuclear agency the materials had been stolen and looted because of a lack of security, Fleming said.

"We do not know what happened to the explosives or when they were looted," she said. After authenticating the Iraqi report, the IAEA informed the multinational force in Iraq through the US government on Oct. 15, Fleming said.

IAEA inspectors pulled out of Iraq just before the 2003 invasion and have not yet been able to return despite ElBaradei's repeated urging that the experts be allowed back in to finish their work.

ElBaradei told the UN Security Council before the war that Iraq's nuclear program was in disarray and that there was no evidence to suggest it had revived efforts to build atomic weaponry.

In February 2003, a month before the invasion, ElBaradei told the United Nations that Iraq had declared that "HMX previously under IAEA seal had been transferred for use in the production of industrial explosives."

Only a resumption of inspections can determine what happened to the explosives since then, agency officials said.


Bryan,
There is the answer to one of your questions:"At the Pentagon, an official who monitors developments in Iraq said US-led coalition troops had searched Al-Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives, which had been under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact. Thereafter the site was not secured by U.S. forces, the official said, also speaking on condition of anonymity."


I like that new pic you have, is that the mask you have to wear when attending a Shrub/Cheney campaign stop? How many cartridges does it take to filter the stench of the BS they sling?

Typical Bush loyalist tactic.
First deny, then ask for proof, then finally claim that it's a BS story, "old news", or throw up a smoke screen by changing the subject.
Do you all realize how stupid you look?

Bush is the one that's always playing on our fears. Kerry appeals to our hopes and dreams for a better society.I almost spewed my coffee all over my computer monitor when I read those lines, which are straight out of all the Demo's stump speeches. Talk about not being open-minded and being brain-washed by their side, you're a prime example Katshot. If you fail to see the negativity in the Demo campaign, then it's obvious you have blinders on as well.

And 97silverlsc, if YOU would read other peoples posts you would realize that article you just posted is almost identical to the article Joey linked to. It even has the same error of 170 deaths in the Lockerbie crash, instead of 270 like I pointed out. You are a hypocrite plain and simple. Not to mention that Bryan has pointed out that the whole thing was bogus anyway. But the truth really is not your concern is it.

Typical Bush loyalist tactic.
First deny, then ask for proof, then finally claim that it's a BS story, "old news", or throw up a smoke screen by changing the subject.
Do you all realize how stupid you look?Hahahahahahahahahahahahaahhahahahaha, how stupid who looks? Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha haha

Kbob,
You and Bryan both claim to read the articles, yet post questions that are answered by the article(if you were to read it). I post another article that shows that the explosives were still in place shortly after the invasion (a question posted by Bryan) and you resort to name calling. A typical republican response. If you can't dispute the evidence, go after the messenger. Seems as childish from you as it does from Shrub and company. And by the way, Bryan saying something is bogus doesn't make it so!!!!
You and Bryan are living in the same state as Shrub--- the state of Denial!!

Kbob,
You and Bryan both claim to read the articles, yet post questions that are answered by the article(if you were to read it). I post another article that shows that the explosives were still in place shortly after the invasion (a question posted by Bryan) and you resort to name calling. A typical republican response. If you can't dispute the evidence, go after the messenger. Seems as childish from you as it does from Shrub and company. And by the way, Bryan saying something is bogus doesn't make it so!!!!
You and Bryan are living in the same state as Shrub--- the state of Denial!!I thought you were going to be a challege, but you disappoint me again. The article didn't answer any of my questions, they only made claims and I wanted details. Joey answered some of them. I'm not resorting to anything since you have made it a point to ridicule me by name with baseless accusations in the past and I'm not going to let you get away with it when the proof is right in front of you. I'm calling it exactly like I see it and I'll say it again, you're a hypocrite and I won't stop in pointing that out with proof every chance I get until you acknowledge that you were wrong with an apology. I tried to be friendly and cordial with you in the beginning and you spat in my face. I'm not giving you any quarter now until you in turn are friendly and cordial to me. The part about "Bryan saying so" was only in reference to the article he posted and there are others out on the internet right now which I'm truly surprised that you are unaware of them. I read somewhere recently of someone being disgusted here with somebody else, and now I am too.

I thought you were going to be a challege, but you disappoint me again. The article didn't answer any of my questions, they only made claims and I wanted details. Joey answered some of them. I'm not resorting to anything since you have made it a point to ridicule me by name with baseless accusations in the past and I'm not going to let you get away with it when the proof is right in front of you. I'm calling it exactly like I see it and I'll say it again, you're a hypocrite and I won't stop in pointing that out with proof every chance I get until you acknowledge that you were wrong with an apology. I tried to be friendly and cordial with you in the beginning and you spat in my face. I'm not giving you any quarter now until you in turn are friendly and cordial to me. The part about "Bryan saying so" was only in reference to the article he posted and there are others out on the internet right now which I'm truly surprised that you are unaware of them. I read somewhere recently of someone being disgusted here with somebody else, and now I am too.

As I've stated before, my intent behind posting the articles and editorials that I do is to enlighten people about issues that should be of concern before making a decision about who to vote for in the upcoming elections. If you don't like what I post, well that is just too bad. This forum has rules, and as long as I abide by them I can post whatever I want. Call me whatever you want, it just agrees with my belief that republicans in general and you and Bryan specifically resort to name calling or character assasination whenever you can't dispute the information or charges presented by someone else. I'm just glad that I can't be there with you and Bryan, cause the foot stomping and breath holding would be equally embarassing a display as your name calling is!!

I almost spewed my coffee all over my computer monitor when I read those lines, which are straight out of all the Demo's stump speeches. Talk about not being open-minded and being brain-washed by their side, you're a prime example Katshot. If you fail to see the negativity in the Demo campaign, then it's obvious you have blinders on as well.

Yep, you're right. What I said IS virtually identical to the "Demo's stump speeches" as you call them, and I've been saying it at least as long as they have. It would take a moron to not see the truth in it. The ONLY negativity in the Demo campaign is concerning the poor job Bush has done. The Rep campaign on the other hand not only suggests but comes right out and claims that if Kerry wins, we'll be over-run with terrorist attacks etc. Come on, listen to what Bush is saying and what his campaign ads are saying. The ONLY thing he ever says is about terrorism and how only HE can properly deal with it. The whole Bush campaign is one of thinly vailed threats.
Hate to say it but Clinton was right yesterday, "if your choice is between someone who wants to scare you and someone that wants you to think, you better vote for the one that wants you to think."

"if your choice is between someone who wants to scare you and someone that wants you to think, you better vote for the one that wants you to think."

heh... kind of like the democrats proposing re-instating the draft and blaming the republicans for it :F

"better vote for kerry or everyone is going to war" please... :bash:

You'll find out SOON that a certain Republican from PA has a bill waiting that will reinstate the draft.

I like that new pic you have, is that the mask you have to wear when attending a Shrub/Cheney campaign stop? How many cartridges does it take to filter the stench of the BS they sling?No, that is a picture of the muzzle placed on a top liberal political analyst who when confronted with the truth last Friday night on MSNBC, started foaming at the mouth. He was consequently shot with a tranqualizer (bosses) and then put out of our misery so he couldn't bite anyone and infect them liberal rabies. A very serious type of disease that destroys the brain and leaves the body intact. Kind of the opposite of paralysis. Body works, brain doesn't. Hopefully a breakthrough in fetal stem cell research can reverse the effect of those who have contracted the disease.

BTW, at this point I will believe the NBC crew that was on the ground the day we invaded Baghdad and that has been quoted sayiing there was nothing there over the (so typical of liberals) unnamed source. Talk to the hand!!!

Guys, as long as we can play nice together, have at it. Tempers are flairing. Let's ALL (myself included) do our level best to not rip each other personally, just our ideologies.

We are in the home stretch. Kerry is behind (no I didn't say he IS a behindhttp://www.lincolnvscadillac.com//images/icons/icon7.gif) and the left is getting a little desperate. Time for the right to hold on. We are experiencing a little turbulence right now but pretty soon we'll be entering clear skies and will have a smooth ride after November 2nd.

The bowl is full, time to flush the Johns!

I feel like Bush during the 2nd debate when he wanted to answer Kerry's accusation and Charlie Gibson was trying to control what he was saying. I just read your post after I posted, Bryan, and in respect for you and this site I'm dropping my reply to Phil.

Back on track: those explosives have been gone since probably before the war started or before we got to that weapons depot. Negativity is prevalant in both campaigns. 'Nuff said.

No, that is a picture of the muzzle placed on a top liberal political analyst who when confronted with the truth last Friday night on MSNBC, started foaming at the mouth. He was consequently shot with a tranqualizer (bosses) and then put out of our misery so he couldn't bite anyone and infect them liberal rabies. A very serious type of disease that destroys the brain and leaves the body intact. Kind of the opposite of paralysis. Body works, brain doesn't. Hopefully a breakthrough in fetal stem cell research can reverse the effect of those who have contracted the disease.

BTW, at this point I will believe the NBC crew that was on the ground the day we invaded Baghdad and that has been quoted sayiing there was nothing there over the (so typical of liberals) unnamed source. Talk to the hand!!!

There's a surprise! :rolleyes: Usually, you and all your other Republican pals are whining about the liberal press but since they happen to appear to support your point of view, you chose to believe them. And you call Kerry a flip-flopper!

What is really funny if you time the events of yesterday is that when the correction broke, the Democrats came out swinging blaming the Bush administration for distorting the facts. When it was pointed out that a friendly fellow liberal media outlet was responsible for the correction, they said (in their best Rosanne Rosanadana voice): Oh! Nevermind.


Even better, C-BS wanted to "BREAK" this story on election eve night and were scooped by the NYT (New York Tabloid).

The liberal lefty media bias is so exposed, they have no credibility left. The pajamadeen are killing them in cyberworld.

*owned*

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX TUE OCT 26 2004 11:02:38 ET XXXXX

60 MINS PLANNED BUSH MISSING EXPLOSIVES STORY FOR ELECTION EVE

News of missing explosives in Iraq -- first reported in April 2003 -- was being resurrected for a 60 MINUTES election eve broadcast designed to knock the Bush administration into a crises mode.

Jeff :q:q:qer, executive producer of the Sunday edition of 60 MINUTES, said in a statement that "our plan was to run the story on October 31, but it became clear that it wouldn't hold..."

Elizabeth Jensen at the LOS ANGELES TIMES details on Tuesday how CBS NEWS and 60 MINUTES lost the story [which repackaged previously reported information on a large cache of explosives missing in Iraq, first published and broadcast in 2003].

The story instead debuted in the NYT. The paper slugged the story about missing explosives from April 2003 as "exclusive."

An NBCNEWS crew embedded with troops moved in to secure the Al-Qaqaa weapons facility on April 10, 2003 (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/26/iraq.explosives/index.html), one day after the liberation of Iraq.

According to NBCNEWS, the explosives were already missing when the American troops arrived.

Give up, resistance is futile.

New Headline: not mine..

No CaCa at QaQaa!

Simple question guys.

If these explosives we so dangerous, why didn't the UN and the IAEA take them? 2 theories.

1) Because Saddam said he would use them for construction projects and they believed him!

2) They are the incompetent boobs everybody but the left knows them to be and are a corrupt organization that someday we will have to face down.