HMX explosives left unsecured by troops
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 11:41:45 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Campaign
  HMX explosives left unsecured by troops
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5
Author Topic: HMX explosives left unsecured by troops  (Read 27613 times)
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 28, 2004, 04:55:38 PM »
« edited: October 28, 2004, 05:57:13 PM by jfern »

Latest breaking is at the bottom


Article here with pictures:

http://kstp.com/article/stories/S3723.html?cat=1

Here's a video link:

http://kstp.dayport.com/viewer/content/special.php?Art_ID=159660&Format_ID=2&BitRate_ID=8&Contract_ID=712&Obj_ID=3

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.



Updated:
New article
http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/S3741.html?cat=1

Seal:


It being removed:



Updated again thanks to ABC:

IAEA warned US about site:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=206262

and the jackpot from former weapons inspectors:

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
[/b]

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=206847

Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 28, 2004, 04:59:12 PM »

You really need to learn to read the entire story.

Here is the final paragraph:

"On Wednesday, 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS e-mailed still images of the footage taken at the site to experts in Washington to see if the items captured on tape are the same kind of high explosives that went missing in Al Qaqaa. Those experts could not make that determination. .

Your bust just went bust!
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 28, 2004, 05:00:26 PM »

You really need to learn to read the entire story.

Here is the final paragraph:

"On Wednesday, 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS e-mailed still images of the footage taken at the site to experts in Washington to see if the items captured on tape are the same kind of high explosives that went missing in Al Qaqaa. Those experts could not make that determination. .



Your bust just went bust!


There's proof that we left explosives unsecured in that area. WTF more do you want?
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 28, 2004, 05:09:00 PM »




There's proof that we left explosives unsecured in that area. WTF more do you want?

Obviously for you give intelligent and honest answers, but that's asking too much.  You did ask.

There were a huge amounts of explosives and other weapons in the country.  The 360 tons was less that 0.1% of all that has been recovered.  All of it cannot be secured, which is an accurate statement about the aftermath of any.

The more you post on this the more it show your lack of comprehesion of how much material the US is dealing with.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 28, 2004, 05:13:41 PM »




There's proof that we left explosives unsecured in that area. WTF more do you want?

Obviously for you give intelligent and honest answers, but that's asking too much.  You did ask.

There were a huge amounts of explosives and other weapons in the country.  The 360 tons was less that 0.1% of all that has been recovered.  All of it cannot be secured, which is an accurate statement about the aftermath of any.

The more you post on this the more it show your lack of comprehesion of how much material the US is dealing with.

These are explosives that the IAEA has been monitoring.

The 360 tons were high power explosives, less than 1 pound of the same stuff took down Pan Am Flight 103.

We left the explosives that this story is reporting on unsecured, and now they are gone. Do you seem a problem with that?
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 28, 2004, 05:24:58 PM »



These are explosives that the IAEA has been monitoring.

The 360 tons were high power explosives, less than 1 pound of the same stuff took down Pan Am Flight 103.

We left the explosives that this story is reporting on unsecured, and now they are gone. Do you seem a problem with that?

Well, first of all, I'd like to it these were the same seals that were on the buildings housing, at one point, the explosives.  Second, I'd like to know if later, after the invasion, these are not pictures of the troops breaking the seals to destoy the explosives.  Third, I'd like to know if this was the only way into or out of the building.

A photo of seal really doesn't say very much.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 28, 2004, 05:28:54 PM »



These are explosives that the IAEA has been monitoring.

The 360 tons were high power explosives, less than 1 pound of the same stuff took down Pan Am Flight 103.

We left the explosives that this story is reporting on unsecured, and now they are gone. Do you seem a problem with that?

Well, first of all, I'd like to it these were the same seals that were on the buildings housing, at one point, the explosives.  Second, I'd like to know if later, after the invasion, these are not pictures of the troops breaking the seals to destoy the explosives.  Third, I'd like to know if this was the only way into or out of the building.

A photo of seal really doesn't say very much.

Yes, The seals were on the buildings.
The troops broke the seals, and then left the explosives unsecured.
I'd assume that was the only entrance.
You might consider watching the video.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 28, 2004, 05:33:10 PM »

Here is what the story really says:

A 5 Eyewitness News crew in Iraq may have been just a door away from materials that could be used to detonate nuclear weapons. The evidence is in videotape shot by Reporter Dean Staley and Photographer Joe Caffrey at or near the Al Qaqaa munitions facility.

The video shows a cable locking a door shut. That cable is connected by a copper colored seal.

A spokesperson for the International Atomic Energy Agency told 5 Eyewitness News that seal appears to be one used by their inspectors. "In Iraq they were used when there was a concern that this could have a, what we call, dual use purpose, that there could be a nuclear weapons application."

5 Eyewitness News continues to develop new leads and uncover new developments in this story.


We have no idea what was in there and if this was being removed.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 28, 2004, 05:34:37 PM »

Here is what the story really says:

A 5 Eyewitness News crew in Iraq may have been just a door away from materials that could be used to detonate nuclear weapons. The evidence is in videotape shot by Reporter Dean Staley and Photographer Joe Caffrey at or near the Al Qaqaa munitions facility.

The video shows a cable locking a door shut. That cable is connected by a copper colored seal.

A spokesperson for the International Atomic Energy Agency told 5 Eyewitness News that seal appears to be one used by their inspectors. "In Iraq they were used when there was a concern that this could have a, what we call, dual use purpose, that there could be a nuclear weapons application."

5 Eyewitness News continues to develop new leads and uncover new developments in this story.


We have no idea what was in there and if this was being removed.


Did you see the 2nd article?
The first acticle verifies that explosives were left unsecured by US troops at the site.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 28, 2004, 05:35:42 PM »

lmao. Why does this matter?
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 28, 2004, 05:36:47 PM »


Anti-American forces with lots of IAEA monitored explosives. Who cares? LOL!!!!!!!!
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 28, 2004, 05:40:43 PM »


Anti-American forces with lots of IAEA monitored explosives. Who cares? LOL!!!!!!!!

Oh, I get it. You're saying Saddam Hussein was a threat to our national security.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 28, 2004, 05:41:37 PM »


Anti-American forces with lots of IAEA monitored explosives. Who cares? LOL!!!!!!!!

Oh, I get it. You're saying Saddam Hussein was a threat to our national security.

Saddam wasn't a threat to us as long as we didn't have troops in Iraq.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 28, 2004, 05:42:49 PM »


Anti-American forces with lots of IAEA monitored explosives. Who cares? LOL!!!!!!!!

Oh, I get it. You're saying Saddam Hussein was a threat to our national security.

Saddam wasn't a threat to us as long as we didn't have troops in Iraq.


Saddam could have passed these weapons on to terrorists anytime he wanted.

What the hell does this have to do with Bush? You're basically b*tching at the troops.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 28, 2004, 05:46:04 PM »

Huh, interesting tape.  It said that the bunker was within the US Army parameter and the explosives "may or may not" be the ones in question.  That reall definitive Jfool

I don't want accuse you being a troll, but clearly your ability to understand English is in question.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 28, 2004, 05:50:33 PM »


Anti-American forces with lots of IAEA monitored explosives. Who cares? LOL!!!!!!!!

Oh, I get it. You're saying Saddam Hussein was a threat to our national security.

Saddam wasn't a threat to us as long as we didn't have troops in Iraq.


Saddam could have passed these weapons on to terrorists anytime he wanted.

What the hell does this have to do with Bush? You're basically b*tching at the troops.

They weren't given orders to secure the site. I blame the higher ups, not the rank and file.
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 28, 2004, 05:56:36 PM »

Presidents don't micromanage military operations. The idea that Bush is responsible for this is absolute idiocy.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 28, 2004, 05:57:20 PM »

Interestingly, the tape was made on April 18.  The site was ininspected, and found looted, on May 8, 20 days.

Now, forgetting for a moment that the bunkers were within US bases, that give the looters 20 days to loot 360 tons of explosives and drive it past or through a brigade of Airborne and down a road filled with US Army vehicles!   That is absolutely brilliant jfool.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: October 28, 2004, 05:58:58 PM »

Interestingly, the tape was made on April 18.  The site was ininspected, and found looted, on May 8, 20 days.

Now, forgetting for a moment that the bunkers were within US bases, that give the looters 20 days to loot 360 tons of explosives and drive it past or through a brigade of Airborne and down a road filled with US Army vehicles!   That is absolutely brilliant jfool.

HMX was seen there April 18th.
A typcal frieght canister could have held most of it.
380 tons is only 10 meters by 10 meters by 20 meters.
They only had to move 20 tons a day, or regular truckload.
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: October 28, 2004, 06:04:19 PM »


They weren't given orders to secure the site. I blame the higher ups, not the rank and file.

Perhaps, in the case shown on the videotape, because it was in the perimeter of the US Forces?
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: October 28, 2004, 06:05:40 PM »

If jfern tripped and fell, he would blame it on George Bush.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: October 28, 2004, 06:07:59 PM »


They weren't given orders to secure the site. I blame the higher ups, not the rank and file.

Perhaps, in the case shown on the videotape, because it was in the perimeter of the US Forces?

What?
Logged
A18
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 23,794
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: October 28, 2004, 06:09:16 PM »

If you didn't understand, it's probably because of George Bush
Logged
J. J.
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 32,892
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: October 28, 2004, 06:14:18 PM »



HMX was seen there April 18th.
A typcal frieght canister could have held most of it.
380 tons is only 10 meters by 10 meters by 20 meters.
They only had to move 20 tons a day, or regular truckload.

First the estimate is that it would be 40 truckloads to move 360 tons or 9 tons per truckload; this once again proves that jfool cannot do math.  Second, the news story is quite clear that they didn't know what it is.  Third, you still have the problem of trying drive past or though a brigade of Airborne onto a road crowded with Army vechicles.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,611


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: October 28, 2004, 06:16:03 PM »



HMX was seen there April 18th.
A typcal frieght canister could have held most of it.
380 tons is only 10 meters by 10 meters by 20 meters.
They only had to move 20 tons a day, or regular truckload.

First the estimate is that it would be 40 truckloads to move 360 tons or 9 tons per truckload; this once again proves that jfool cannot do math.  Second, the news story is quite clear that they didn't know what it is.  Third, you still have the problem of trying drive past or though a brigade of Airborne onto a road crowded with Army vechicles.

It just proves you're using smaller trucks. Yawn.
The weapons inspectors say that it was HMX. You might want to read the updated part. It's over for Bush.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.06 seconds with 15 queries.