• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Terrorists have 350 tons of high explosives thanks to the Bush Admin. poor planning

Status
Not open for further replies.
also, kerry DESPISES the mainstream media. if you watched diary of a political tourist on HBO, it's pretty evident that he's quite aware of the media and their willigness to spin anything and everything to the advantage of their bottom line.

anyway, what was the bill reagan pushed through in his term that affected media(tv, newspapers, radio)? i've heard kerry is strongly against it, and is strongly considering repealing it.
 

Alcibiades

Member
Hitokage said:
Wrong. The New York Times cannot be claimed to be reliably liberal, while the Washington Times can be claimed to reliably right-wing. Ever heard of David Brock, by any chance?
a tiny drop in a sea of liberal editors?

reliably liberal IMO, not that I don't think it's a good newspaper, and I used to read Safire, Herbert, and Krugman columns, but you can tell by what's pg. 1 and what they bury they have either an active or passive bias whether they realize it or not...
 

Hitokage

Setec Astronomer
KE04: No, the NYT has actually been a main conduit of dissembling and talking points.... and NOT for either Kerry or Gore's benefit.
efralope said:
a tiny drop in a sea of liberal editors?
As I thought, you don't.
 

Alcibiades

Member
woops, I responded so quick I thought I read David Brook...

sincerely, I imagined that dude when I read that, didn't notice the last name...
 
http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/S3723.html?cat=1

A 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS crew in Iraq shortly after the fall of Saddam Hussein was in the area where tons of explosives disappeared, and may have videotaped some of those weapons.

Rest of the story at the link:

Key thing is "The footage is now in the hands of security experts to see if it is indeed the explosives in question."

If these were the explosions in question...well that throws out the russian theory...and solidifies the position that the Bush Administration FAILED to protect ammunitions(in this case explosives) of Saddam's regime and now any joe blow can have them.
 
Al-Qaqaa-pix_09a.jpg


Well, THAT could certainly seal the deal. Amazing if true. But why the hell did it take them this long to release the footage?



*Noel Coward Parody
 

Azih

Member
They might have been confused when people started blaming the Russians.

I mean I'm witholding judgement on this until it's more settled but really... the Russians?
 
ErasureAcer said:
Interesting how no national news is picking up this story. This country's media is pathetic.

i say by tomorrow it'll be on the news. the major blogs are just not beginning to pick up this, and they seem to be slightly ahead of what's shown on TV...
 
Hitokage said:
Wrong. The New York Times cannot be claimed to be reliably liberal, while the Washington Times can be claimed to reliably right-wing. Ever heard of David Brock, by any chance?



The paper’s own, self-appointed critic addressed the question earlier this past summer. New York Times Public Editor Daniel Okrent asked, rhetorically: “Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper? Of course it is. The fattest file on my hard drive is jammed with letters from the disappointed, the dismayed and the irate who find in this newspaper a liberal bias that infects not just political coverage, but a range of issues from abortion to zoology to the appointment of an admitted Democrat to be its watchdog. (That would be me.)”



Not Liberaly biased?

Seriously now, that has got to be the funniest thing i've heard today!
 

Phoenix

Member
There are whole swaths of video from embeds that were there that show volumes of canisters from a previously sealed bunker. Since the only bunkers that were sealed were those with the RDX/HDX, it seems pretty clear that when US forces first arrived and broke the seal (on tape) and then left having not secured the facility because they had neither orders nor manpower to secure the facility that the weapons were definitely there when US forces arrived.
 
David Kay, Iraq weapons inspector for the Bush Administration, just appeared on CNN and was asked by Aaron Brown to review the new video filmed on April 18, 2003, one month after the invasion and 8 days after US Troops first arrived at Al Qaqaa.

He was asked about the video which shows the seal. He said that they are indeed IAEA seals and he's seen nothing else like them in IRAQ. He then went on to say that only the explosives in question would have been sealed because of their potency. He then said that other parts of the video show clearly that these were the types of explosives in question.

He was asked if it was "Game, Set, Match". He replied yes, "Game, Set, Match".

In a final blow to recent conservative spin he was asked if they were classified as WMD. He replied point blank, "absolutely not."

BROWN: OK, back to the explosives the who and when and the how of it all but on the question of when, as we saw at the top of the program, there is new information to factor in, pretty conclusive to our eye.

So, we'll sort through this now, take the politics out of it and try and deal with facts with former head U.N. weapons inspector -- U.S. weapons inspector David Kay. David, it's nice to see you.

DAVID KAY, FMR. U.S. WEAPONS INSPECTOR: Good to be with you, Aaron.

BROWN: I don't know how better to do this than to show you some pictures, have you explain to me what they are or are not, OK? First, I'll just call it the seal and tell me if this is an IAEA seal on that bunker at that munitions dump.

KAY: Aaron, as about as certain as I can be looking at a picture, not physically holding it, which obviously I would have preferred to have been there, that's an IAEA seal. I've never seen anything else in Iraq in about 15 years of being in Iraq and around Iraq that was other than an IAEA seal of that shape.

BROWN: And was there anything else at the facility that would have been under IAEA seal?

KAY: Absolutely nothing. It was he HMX, RDX, the two high explosives.

BROWN: OK. Now, I want to take a look at the barrels here for a second and you can tell me what they tell you. They obviously to us just show us a bunch of barrels. You'll see it somewhat differently.

KAY: Well, it's interesting. There were three foreign suppliers to Iraq of this explosive in the 1980s. One of them used barrels like this and inside the barrel is a bag. HMX is in powdered form because you actually use it to shape a spherical lens that is used to create the triggering device for nuclear weapons.

And, particularly on the videotape, which is actually better than the still photos, as the soldier dips into it that's either HMX or RDX. I don't know of anything else in al Qa Qaa that was in that form.

BROWN: Let me ask you then, David, the question I asked Jamie. In regard to the dispute about whether that stuff was there when the Americans arrived, is it game, set, match? Is that part of the argument now over?

KAY: Well, at least with regard to this one bunker and the film shows one seal, one bunker, one group of soldiers going through and there were others there that were sealed, with this one, I think it is game, set and match.

There was HMX, RDX in there. The seal was broken and quite frankly to me the most frightening thing is not only is the seal broken and the lock broken but the soldiers left after opening it up. I mean to rephrase the so-called (UNINTELLIGIBLE) rule if you open an arms bunker, you own it. You have to provide security.

BROWN: That raises a number of questions. Let me throw out one. It suggests that maybe they just didn't know what they had.

KAY: I think quite likely they didn't know they had HMX, which speaks to the lack of intelligence given troops moving through that area but they certainly knew they had explosives.

And to put this in context, I think it's important this loss of 360 tons but Iraq is awash with tens of thousands of tons of explosives right now in the hands of insurgents because we did not provide the security when we took over the country.

BROWN: Could you -- I'm trying to stay out of the realm of politics.

KAY: So am I. BROWN: I'm not sure you can necessarily. I know. It's a little tricky here but is there any reason not to have anticipated the fact that there would be bunkers like this, explosives like this and a need to secure them?

KAY: Absolutely not. For example, al Qa Qaa was a site of (UNINTELLIGIBLE) super gun project. It was a team of mine that discovered the HMX originally in 1991. That was one of the most well documented explosive sites in all of Iraq. The other 80 or so major ammunition storage points were also well documented.

Iraq had, and it's a frightening number, two-thirds of the total conventional explosives that the U.S. has in its entire inventory. The country was an armed camp.

BROWN: David, as quickly as you can because this just came up in the last hour, as dangerous as this stuff is, this would not be described as a WMD, correct?

KAY: Oh, absolutely not.

BROWN: Thank you.

KAY: And, in fact, the loss of it is not a proliferation issue.

BROWN: OK. It's just dangerous and it's out there and by your thinking it should have been secured.

KAY: Well, look, it was used to bring the Pan Am flight down. It's a very dangerous explosive, particularly in the hands of terrorists.

BROWN: David, thank you for walking me through this. I appreciate it, David Kay the former head U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq.
 
Also:

MOSCOW - Russia angrily denied allegations Thursday that Russian forces had smuggled a cache of high explosives out of Iraq (news - web sites) prior to the U.S. invasion in March 2003.

Defense Ministry spokesman Vyacheslav Sedov dismissed the allegations as "absurd" and "ridiculous."


"I can state officially that the Russian Defense Ministry and its structures couldn't have been involved in the disappearance of the explosives, because all Russian military experts left Iraq when the international sanctions were introduced during the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites)," he told The Associated Press.


The denial followed a story in The Washington Times on Thursday that quoted a high-ranking U.S. defense official alleging that Russian special forces had "almost certainly" helped spirit out the hundreds of tons of high explosives that went missing from the al-Qaqaa base. The newspaper based its report on an interview with John Shaw, the deputy U.S. undersecretary of defense for international technology security.


Two weeks ago, Iraqi officials told the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency that 377 tons of explosives had vanished as a result of "theft and looting ... due to lack of security." The compounds, HMX and RDX, are key components in plastic explosives, which insurgents in Iraq have used in bomb attacks.


Russia' charge d'affaires in Iraq, Ilya Morgunov, also denied the report.


"I didn't hear about any weapons to be taken out," Interfax quoted him as saying. "Moreover, there was nobody to take them out, because we actually evacuated all of our personnel."


He said there had been no Russian special forces in Iraq, only civilian specialists working for foreign firms.
 
Yes...now let's see if this gets to the front page before election time.

This doesn't even seemed to be being well covered in Minnesota. I watched KSTP's 10 o clock news tonight...they were covering it hardcore...15 minutes to this story alone...no commercials. I was flippin to other news stations at 10 to see what they had to say about the story...I didn't see anything! Which means they probably just mentioned in in brief, if at all.

This should be the headline story everywhere!!! The truth is no good if people don't see it/read it.

BUSH FAILED
 
ErasureAcer said:
Yes...now let's see if this gets to the front page before election time.

This doesn't even seemed to be being well covered in Minnesota. I watched KSTP's 10 o clock news tonight...they were covering it hardcore...15 minutes to this story alone...no commercials. I was flippin to other news stations at 10 to see what they had to say about the story...I didn't see anything! Which means they probably just mentioned in in brief, if at all.

This should be the headline story everywhere!!! The truth is no good if people don't see it/read it.

BUSH FAILED

Well, KSTP was the one who taped it. For a local station, it's big news.
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Did anyone else see Rudy Guiliani's comments about this? In the course of defending President Bush he said the following: "No matter how you try to blame it on the president, the actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search carefully enough -- didn't they search carefully enough?"

Under certain circumstances that might be a decent point, but it's obvious there are far larger problems here than how individual units handled themselves. Clearly there was mismanagement in the upper echelons of command from before the war to after. Besides which, the comment is pretty contrary to the Bush campaign's stance on supporting the troops.
 
Spin prediction - after a Kerry victory, Limbaugh and company will spend the next four years bitching about how the IAEA, partnered with the liberal media, lied about and politicized events to destroy Bush's chances of winning. Favorite references will include "Rathergate", Michael Moore, Zogby, The Guardian, and convicted felons voting in Florida.

Edit - Yeah, I saw Rudy on the Daily Show. He must've been speaking off the cuff, I can't imagine the campaign going with a "our troops should've looked harder" talking point.
 

jiggle

Member
Dan said:
Did anyone else see Rudy Guiliani's comments about this? In the course of defending President Bush he said the following: "No matter how you try to blame it on the president, the actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search carefully enough -- didn't they search carefully enough?"


Just saw part of that on the Daily Show 5 mins ago. Way to support the troops.
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Banjo Tango said:
Edit - Yeah, I saw Rudy on the Daily Show. He must've been speaking off the cuff, I can't imagine the campaign going with a "our troops should've looked harder" talking point.
He was on the Today show.
 

Triumph

Banned
Dan said:
He was on the Today show.
Yeah, Stewart's clip on the Daily Show had that footage though. His resonse was great: "Finally, a politician with the balls to say that he's for the war but against the troops." :D
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Sorry, I was responding to the "off the cuff" part of that quote, as in, he wasn't at a rally or anything. So it surely wasn't a planned talking point, no.
 

Shinobi

Member
Dan said:
Did anyone else see Rudy Guiliani's comments about this? In the course of defending President Bush he said the following: "No matter how you try to blame it on the president, the actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search carefully enough -- didn't they search carefully enough?"

Under certain circumstances that might be a decent point, but it's obvious there are far larger problems here than how individual units handled themselves. Clearly there was mismanagement in the upper echelons of command from before the war to after. Besides which, the comment is pretty contrary to the Bush campaign's stance on supporting the troops.

FUCK Rudy Guiliani's wrinkled ass with tire iron...he simply makes me sick.

BTW, when is the Washington Times due to counter these pics with shots of their own?
 
Dan said:
Sorry, I was responding to the "off the cuff" part of that quote, as in, he wasn't at a rally or anything. So it surely wasn't a planned talking point, no.
I'm more surprised in political interviews when politicians and officials don't just slip into talking-point rhetoric, especially so close to the election.
 

Keio

For a Finer World
BBC said:
The Pentagon has also released an aerial photograph of the al-Qaqaa site showing two trucks outside a bunker there in mid-March, two days before the Iraq war started.
Would this already qualify this thread for some quality "DAMAGE CONTROL" pics?

Maybe if they really tried they could also squeeze us some photos which would have the "mobile WMD labs" visible at the site too?

Well, the story is already snowballing, so no amount of damage control can help the administration wriggle out of yet another exposure of totally misconducted warfare and occupation. Just read the new Salon.com story where a soldier who served in Iraq tells about his experiences with another ammo dump.

Salon.com said:
But Al Qaqaa is not the whole story. The same month it was being looted, I learned of another major weapons and ammunition storage facility, near my battalion's base at Camp Anaconda, that was unguarded and targeted by looters. But despite my repeated warnings -- and those of other U.S. intelligence agents -- nothing was done to secure this facility, as it was systematically stripped of enough weapons and explosives to equip anti-U.S. insurgents with enough roadside improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, for years to come.

Camp Anaconda, where I was stationed with the 223rd from April through October, 2003, is a sprawling logistical supply base located 50 miles north of Baghdad which once served as one of Saddam's largest air force bases.
 

hiryu

Member
My brother in law is in the 101st and was there when they found that bunker. He remembers there being explosives and as far as he knew they were leaving them under the control of polish troops before moving on to Baghdad.
 

NWO

Member
hiryu said:
My brother in law is in the 101st and was there when they found that bunker. He remembers there being explosives and as far as he knew they were leaving them under the control of polish troops before moving on to Baghdad.

Thank you Poland....
 

Azih

Member
Alright, so it wasn't the Russians fault. It was the damn POLES!

God dammit, what's next, they'll invade North Korea and leave the nuclear weapons under the guard of a buncha Newfies? WHAT?
 

HAOHMARU

Member
Special report on Fox News...Army Major from 3rd ID going to say he removed 200 tons for Al-Qaqa weapons depot.

I'm sure there is more information about the rest of the stuff.

Funny thing about the IAEA (which is run by the U.N.)...they knew about this 3 weeks ago and released the report this week. They are trying to embarrass the Bush administration and influence the election. The U.N. has political motivation behind this...they want Kerry elected.

Good thing we are finding out the truth now.
 
HAOHMARU said:
Funny thing about the IAEA (which is run by the U.N.)...they knew about this 3 weeks ago and released the report this week. They are trying to embarrass the Bush administration and influence the election. The U.N. has political motivation behind this...they want Kerry elected.

We havent' even gotten a report on such a conspiracy yet. Talk about jumping to conclusions. A report released at any time would have possibly hurt Bush anyways.
 

HAOHMARU

Member
What report do you want? The U.N. had this report 3 weeks ago and held it until this week to try and influence the election. Obviously they are going to deny that they are trying to do that but it is pretty clear that was their intention. The news was probably broke to the Kerry camp first.

Good thing they are explaining the aftermath of the report right now...we don't want to "mislead" anyone do we? :rolleyes:
 
HAOHMARU said:
What report do you want? The U.N. had this report 3 weeks ago and held it until this week to try and influence the election. Obviously they are going to deny that they are trying to do that but it is pretty clear that was their intention. The news was probably broke to the Kerry camp first.

Come back when you find a whistle-blower at the UN who will verify your claims. You are jumping to conclusions.
 
HAOHMARU said:
Jumping to conclusions? This whole fucking story is one big jump to conclusion.

? The story is about missing explosives. Then, other people speculate about why the explosives are missing.
 
Hahaha. I don't trust the Pentagon one bit. Where the fuck was this information 5 days ago when this story first broke.

We've heard from members of the administration it was the russians and the explosives had been looted before they made it the Al Aaqaa site.

Now they're saying in this pentagon briefing that they moved 200 tons of explosives. Why didn't they say that from day one? This is bs. You can't trust anything this government says.

I give it 24 hours before some newssource puts a dent into this recent make believe story about moving 200 tons of explosives.

I love the official during the briefing..."we may release photos, we're looking at them now." Yeah right. He's had at least 5 days to look at photos...he should have them now and be ready to release them.
 
Trotting out a solider to shore up Bush's utter incompetence. How wonderful of BushCo; absolve themselves of ANY responsibility pertaining to the post war plan.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom