Explosives Story Blows Up On John Kerry
October 28, 2004 01:50 PM
The Washington Post screams a page one headline in Thursday’s edition, “Missing Munitions Become Focus of Presidential Race.” They are absolutely correct as John Kerry made a strategic blunder in an attempt to use a very incomplete story ran by the New York Times on Monday about 380 tons of explosives that were missing in Iraq as the centerpiece of the final week of his campaign. It’s been the focus of the race now for the entire week. But that’s a mistake by John Kerry as putting the focus on Iraq with a disprovable story only rally the GOP to their president.
And by running it eight days out of the election the New York Times gave too much time to investigate and discredit the story.
The line of media bias is now drawn and crystal clear. ABC’s George Will concluded the front page of the New York Times is now “a principal organ of Democratic Party” in a radio interview on Wednesday. On the same radio program NBC’s Tim Russert didn’t go quite that far but was frustrated with the way the Times ran such an incomplete story saying, “This story needs to be reported in its completeness.”
And Tim Russert is getting his wish, though other news organizations have had to complete the story. The New York Times version of the story has now almost completely fallen apart. ABC News punched a gaping hole into it on Wednesday when they reported that IAEA documents showed that only 3 tons of RDX still remained stored at the facility on January 14, 2003. That means 138 tons of explosives were moved long before the invasion that was launched in March of 2003.
But the IAEA did conclude that there was still 194 tons of HMX in 9 bunkers at the facility in January when the bunkers were placed under IAEA seal. But that seal was useless as the bunkers had ventilation slats on the sides. ABC notes that the inspectors rightly conclude, “These slats could be easily removed to remove the materials inside the bunkers without breaking the seals.” Easy move, take the munitions out of the side of the bunkers, load them into trucks and leave the seal intact.
The timeline is also a key. According to the AP in January, “IAEA inspectors viewed the explosives at Al-Qaqaa for the last time.” The inspectors did return between March 9th through the 15th however they didn’t examine the explosives inside because the seals weren’t broken. That leaves the possibility they were looking at empty, but sealed bunkers. The inspectors then pulled out of the country.
That means that from January 2003 until April 3rd 2003 the Al qaqaa facility was not under US control. On April 3rd the United States 3rd Infantry Division arrived at al Qaqaa and fought its way inside the facility and captured or killed those inside the facility
One scenario gives over two months for a coordinated military style operation to break out the slats of the bunkers, load the 194 tons of HMX out of the 9 bunkers and nab the remaining 3 tons of RDX and ship it out on trucks. The other scenario is that “looters” grabbed the 197 tons (though still claiming it was 380 tons) and somehow moved the explosives out of the facility due to the "incompetence" of the United States military under President George W. Bush.
Logic dictates that this other scenario is a tough conclusion. Even Democratic strategist Elaine Kamarck grudgingly admitted on Fox news Thursday morning, “This story is filled with holes.” John Kerry made a huge miscalculation in taking an incomplete story “filled with holes” and making it the centerpiece of his campaign in the final week of a close presidential campaign. Using the New York Times as a staging ground for campaign issues is very dangerous as that “newspaper” is now considered the crown jewel of old media bias by many news consumers.
This could have been a brilliant “October Surprise” by the New York Times. Many Americans were shocked by the volume of explosives and the charges of “incompetence.” But in placing it in the public eye a full eight days before the election, the incomplete New York Times' version of the story is being debunked hour by hour and report by report.
And this explosive attempt at an October Surprise has blown up in John Kerry’s face.
TrackBack
Comments: (No profanity, or inappropriate remarks.)
ONLY 3 TONS missing. Wow, the NYT has really screwed itself on this one!
The information on which the Iraqi Science Ministry based an Oct. 10 memo in which it reported that 377 tons of RDX explosives were missing — presumably stolen due to a lack of security — was based on "declaration" from July 15, 2002. At that time, the Iraqis said there were 141 tons of RDX explosives at the facility.
But the confidential IAEA documents obtained by ABC News show that on Jan. 14, 2003, the agency's inspectors recorded that just over three tons of RDX were stored at the facility — a considerable discrepancy from what the Iraqis reported.
abcnews.go.com
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:12 PM
Oh, I didn't notice that CK already stated this fact. Oh well, TRUE facts should ALWAYS be repeated!
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:13 PM
Lyn, for you:
THAT IS 6,000 POUNDS PEOPLE!
LOL
ROFLMAO!
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:14 PM
Oh, poor lyn.
It must hurt to find out how ill-informed you are.
Kerry kool-aid is bad for the brain!
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:17 PM
The Washington Times reports that the RUSSIANS were brought in to REMOVE THE WEAPONS AND EXPLOSIVES RIGHT BEFORE WE WENT IN!
"Russian troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, "almost certainly" removed the high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility, south of Baghdad."
washingtontimes.com
"Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein's weapons and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned. "
"The Russians brought in, just before the war got started, a whole series of military units," Mr. Shaw said. "Their main job was to shred all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the Iraqis. The others were transportation units."
Mr. Shaw, who was in charge of cataloging the tons of conventional arms provided to Iraq by foreign suppliers, said he recently obtained reliable information on the arms-dispersal program from two European intelligence services that have detailed knowledge of the Russian-Iraqi weapons collaboration.
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:21 PM
SATELLITE IMAGES TAKEN RIGHT BEFORE U.S. TROOPS WNET IN WILL BE RELEASED TODAY!
These images are reported to show MASSIVE truck movements from the facility!
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:23 PM
READ THE IAEA REPORT YOURSELF!
Should be online in a bit:
"FNC Obtains Weapons Docs
FOX News has obtained a copy of an IAEA weapons inspection group "action team confidential" memorandum dated Jan. 14, 2003, that describes how the HMX, RDX and PETN explosives at the Al Qaqaa plant were handled.
The memo provides a description of the HMX stores on site, the nine bunkers the HMX was locked in, and how those bunkers were sealed by IAEA inspectors. FOX News also has maps showing the location of these bunkers at the complex.
There is a huge discrepancy in the amount of RDX reported in these inspection documents; IAEA head Mohamad ElBaradei notes that 158 U.S. tons of RDX is listed. In the inspection report, however, only 3 tons are cataloged."
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:29 PM
A BIG WARNING AT THE END OF THE IAEA's LAST ACTION REPORT:
"Of note was that the sealing on the bunkers was only partially effective because each bunker had ventilation shafts on the sided of the buildings. These shafts were NOT SEALED, and could provide removal routes for the HMX while leaving the fron door locked."
IAEA Action Team Report
January 14, 2003
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:31 PM
The IAEA also admits that they did NOT inspect the explosives themselves in March 2003. They simply spot checked for the seals. They did not physically see the explosives in March.
This means that the last time the explosives were ACTUALLY seen in the bunkers was January 2003!
The Russians removed them as part of their arms-removal program initiated within weeks before the war started.
Yes, it is true. Just reported today!:
washingtontimes.com
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:36 PM
Followups:
Explosives Story BLOWS UP ON KERRY:
abcnews.go.com
foxnews.com
washingtontimes.com
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:47 PM
okay mikep..you've gone from being poochie to puddles..you've just wet yourself with glee.
however..there are videos of al qaqaa showing the explosives were still on site in april.
kstp.com
Posted by: lyn at October 28, 2004 02:47 PM
Here are the images I promised of what happened very close to where I was as a human shield at the time. These photographs were taken 2 days after the Americans came through Taji (Baghdad main food silos), where we were, blasting everything in their sight, including civilians, civilian busses; I was there, I witnessed the murder.
Keep up the great site,
Leo
rense.com
Posted by: at October 28, 2004 02:50 PM
Okay lyn, I know, the aliens are coming, right?
LOL
Nice try on your fraudulent dream world!
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:53 PM
A BIG WARNING AT THE END OF THE IAEA's LAST ACTION REPORT:
"Of note was that the sealing on the bunkers was only partially effective because each bunker had ventilation shafts on the sided of the buildings. These shafts were NOT SEALED, and could provide removal routes for the HMX while leaving the fron door locked."
IAEA Action Team Report
January 14, 2003
Posted by Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:31 PM The IAEA also admits that they did NOT inspect the explosives themselves in March 2003. They simply spot checked for the seals. They did not physically see the explosives in March.
This means that the last time the explosives were ACTUALLY seen in the bunkers was January 2003!
The Russians removed them as part of their arms-removal program initiated within weeks before the war started.
Yes, it is true. Just reported today!:
washingtontimes.com
.
.
.
.
.
.
Followups:
Explosives Story BLOWS UP ON KERRY:
abcnews.go.com
foxnews.com
washingtontimes.com
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 02:53 PM
The Bush clan is reacting honestly to this:
First, it was a "fabrication."
Then, it was "if Kerry had his way, those (fabricated) weapons would've gotten into the hands of Hussein."
THEN, it was "the explosives disappeared before the war."
THEN, it was "the explosives were not observed on April 10th." Never mind the war began on March 19th, and that they'd been well protected under the old inspection requirement.
So, it's the same hooey as "despite the UN's advice to the contrary we're invading Iraq because they didn't obey the UN."
A bunch of stupid, silly men in the White House. Five more days.
Posted by: Flea at October 28, 2004 02:59 PM
ooh..puddles..you are entertaining..what a flurry of info you are posting.
you missed.
MOSCOW Oct 28, 2004 — Russia angrily denied allegations Thursday that Russian forces had smuggled a cache of high explosives out of Iraq 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," he told The Associated Press.
abcnews.go.com
abcnews is okay..right..i mean you are using their site to back up your position.
keep on digging puddles..there's loads of doo doo on qa qaa.
FIVE more days!!!
buh-buh bushie
Posted by: lyn at October 28, 2004 03:02 PM
Huh, oh, you're waking me up about this 16 month old story again????
The real question is why does the Democrat party resort to such last-minute hijinks to try to win elections???
Could it be that the ultra-left-wing Democrat message does not draw enough voters so they resort to trickery and scheming??
And if the people “breaking” the story really cared about the welfare of the soldiers they would have raised hell about it back in May of 2003.
But noooooo, we’ll endanger (if that is really true) the brave American soldiers for 16 months so that we can get our Democrat candidate into office.
After all if an American soldier does not die for a United Nations cause then his death is a non-issue (according to Kerry).
Posted by: DwayneJ at October 28, 2004 03:03 PM
Oh yea, that's right. I forgot that you trust the Russians, Germans and French wholeheartedly!
I guess Russia wouldn't deny it if it was true.
NOT!
Poor gullable lyn. I feel nothing but pity for you.
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 03:04 PM
Flea.
A very appropriate name.
A pest, infectious, dumb, annoying and NOBODY WANTS THEM AROUND!
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 03:07 PM
Lyn, about that vid you posted.
April 18th, 2003?
Doesn't that put a WRENCH in your theory!
Do your own research! You will figure it out! But, knowing your IQ, probably not.
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 03:10 PM
Flea wrote:
"Never mind the war began on March 19th, and that they'd been well protected under the old inspection requirement."
That is a FLAT OUT FABRICATION there flea!
Did you read the IAEA Team Action report that came out today?
The explosives had NOT BEEN protected AT ALL under the old inspection req!
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 03:12 PM
So someone accused Russia of going to great lengths to cover up illegal and unethical weapons deals and the fact that they deny it is proof of their innocence?
Whoa. Talk about gullible.
See. People accused of illegal and unethical almost always deny that they're guilty. Do you that Bill Clinton did not have sexual relations with that woman? That OJ was framed? That Nixon was not a crook? That Dan Rather really went several extra miles to authenticate the Killian memos?
Please. Russia's denials are hardly a footnote in deciding whether or not they're guilty.
Posted by: at October 28, 2004 03:14 PM
You guys and Kerry are seriously doing the Repubs a GREAT service by clinging to the false reports of the NYT.
KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK!
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 03:14 PM
^^ correction
...false PROPAGANDA of the NYT.
Posted by: Mike P. at October 28, 2004 03:17 PM
Good work, CK!
When a political party has an empty suit for a candidate with a record of never doing anything of note except betraying his country while still a US Military officer, all they can do is attack, lie, attack, and lie.
Lets hope the hate-America and hate-our-President movement dies a quick and quiet death when President Bush is reelected.
Posted by: DeM at October 28, 2004 05:09 PM
Post a comment |
