HMX explosives left unsecured by troops

[J. J.]

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!

[J. J.]

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.

[J. J.]

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.

[J. J.]

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.

[J. J.]

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.

[J. J.]

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.

[J. J.]

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?

[J. J.]

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.

[J. J.]

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?

Jfool according to the tape, the bunker that was videotaped was within the security perimeter of the US incampment.  Maybe you need to pay attention when you watch the video tape.

[J. J.]

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.

Let me try to dumb this down for you.  If each truck can carry 9 tons, and they make one trip per day, it takes 40 days to move the explosives.  There was a 20 day period between the video tape and when the army did the inspection.

They still have the problem of doing it, within the perimeter of a Brigade of Airborne.  After 10 or 15 trips, somebody will notice something.

[J. J.]

GPS put it at right by the facility. And there's those IAEA seals, and explosives that appear to be HMX.

Keep spinning.

As you pointed out the facility was large; neither the newscrew nor the soldiers identifuied it as such.  Of course, you can, jfool, from a grainy internet video, right?  Because of all your experience with UN, right jfool?

You Dudge bust is a bust and we are all laughing at you.  Soon we all be laughing at Kerry.

[J. J.]

The area was NOT SECURED.  So 2 of your smaller trucks per day. Whatever.

Why should I have to explain how they might have been taken after we confirmed they were still there?

Well, the area is within the defensive perimeter of a brigade of the 101st Airborne, according to the video.  So, it really is in a relatively secure place.  

So now you have two trucks, "whatever," going into the perimeter, daily for 20 days, of an encampment of elements of the 101st Airborne.  Then after taking time to load up the trucks, they drive down the road loaded with American convoys.  That really makes sense, jfool.

[J. J.]

GPS put it at right by the facility. And there's those IAEA seals, and explosives that appear to be HMX.

Keep spinning.

As you pointed out the facility was large; neither the newscrew nor the soldiers identifuied it as such.  Of course, you can, jfool, from a grainy internet video, right?  Because of all your experience with UN, right jfool?

You Dudge bust is a bust and we are all laughing at you.  Soon we all be laughing at Kerry.

WEAPONS INSPECTERS IDENTIFIED IT

You just won't admit defeat. Yawn.

No they didn't; that's the problem.  They did identify a seal, not what was for.  We also have all of this happening within the parimeter of an encampment of US forces.

[J. J.]

You guys are just spinning

The HMX was there.
Than Sadam moved it before we got there.
No Russia moved it to Syria
The HMX wasn't there when the troops get there
But the HMX was there.
US troops opened some of the seals.
intelligence knew about it they didn't tell their military counterparts or conversly the military counterparts didn't do anything.
There were 500 other sites like this.
Bush was told to go in with overwhelming force.  Why to secure the weapons and the bases.
Bush's team decided to go in with less forces than needed.

The terrorists are more terrorists today then there were 4 years ago.

The terrorists are better armed today than they were 4 years ago.

And I blame the president.  And had this happend during a democratic presidency I would have blamed the president too.  can't you detach yourself from your party for a second and see how <<khirhibs's tasteless expletive deleted>> up this is.

Former weapons inspector says he can't say that it was HMX on the tape, on CNN right now.

Pentagon released a satellite photo of trucks around the bunkers from before the war but after the last inspection. 

You run into the logistical problems of taking these out of the area after the Americans arrive.

There is circumstancial evidence that the explosives were not there.  I've noticed that you cannot show how the explosives could have been removed, all 360 tons of it.

I'll be perfectly free to admit that some explosives could have been taken, if they were there.  You need proof that they were there at the time the US Army showed up.

[J. J.]

Likely HMX
Definitely stuff the IAEA was guarding
And we left it unsecured

Maybe it won't convince you, but it will convince enough reasonable people that Bush is doomed.

They could not identify it as HMX, and they still have not been clear about the seal.

No, please explain how 360 tons of explosive were removed when the roads were filled with American vehicles?  The story goes bust if you can't.  Kerry will still probably lose if you can.

[J. J.]

We didn't have the area guarded at all for 20 days. Why should I have to explain exactly how they went into an unguarded area, and went into unlocked buildings and removed the explosives shown in that video?

First, determine if there was something there to guard.  You have to explain it because you have claimed it.  You are claiming that it was looted in a 20 day period.  Okay, how?

I frankly, from reading you posts, would bet that you coundn't.

[J. J.]

Wow if Bush only had the integriaty and the intelectual honesty that you do JJ when he told America that Sadam had weapons of mass distruction.  We would have never gone to war.

No, I thought there were WMD's there, and I was wrong. 

I would however like you to answer the question, even using circumstancial evidence.  So far, you have not been to.  I challenge you to do so.

[J. J.]

Wow if Bush only had the integriaty and the intelectual honesty that you do JJ when he told America that Sadam had weapons of mass distruction.  We would have never gone to war.

No, I thought there were WMD's there, and I was wrong. 

I would however like you to answer the question, even using circumstancial evidence.  So far, you have not been to.  I challenge you to do so.

One day:
20 reasonably size trucks
100 people

I think it's 380 regular tons, or 350 metric tons.
17.5 tons or 35,000 pounds per truck
Each person moves 90 pounds at a time, 400 loads, or 80 loads per person. The trucks are put right next to the storage area.

Maybe all done at night?

Nobody's going to notice a convoy of twenty trucks rolling down the roads occupied and being used by the US Army?  They are doing the loading next to an encampment of the 101 Airborne?

And to khirknib, I want you to honestly back up you claims.  Jfern is at least trying here.

[J. J.]

Why don't you explain to me what happened to the explosives in that video?

For all either of us know they have been collected and destoyed.

Now, why don't you answer my question.  If the HMX was there, how was it looted?  Answer the question, if you can.  I'm challenging you.

[J. J.]

have the interviews with the 101st troops been completely discounted?  I haven't heard any more about them.  Has the expectation od an OCTOBEr surprise already been factored into voters minds?  How many undecided voters could there be?  No DEmos or Repubs will be swayed.

If there was really a plausible story, e.g. 4-5 tons were missing, it would be damaging, and their wouldn't be any circumstancial evidence.  Whoever planted the story blew it with the 360 metric tons[/b] part.

If you're goning to lie, make it a believable lie.

[J. J.]

Are these Ministry of Science Iraqis former Bathist Party members?  360 tons vs. 3 tons.  Even the IEA UN papers say there was possibly only 3 tons.  Who to believe.

Three tons is possible.  It could be removed in a few days. 

The details have not yet come out.  That creates a problem for Kerry obviously.  He has to stick to the 360 tons unless he wants to look stupid and having incredibly bad judgment, dishonest, or a flipflopper.

[J. J.]

j.j....I have probably missed it in the news but who has actually been at the site in the last 18 months?  Iraqis?  US?  Who has inventoried the site lately?

Nobody.  :-)

What we know is that inspectors saw and sealed it in Jan. 2003, that the inspectors saw the seal in early March, and that it wasn't there on May 8, 2004.  The US Army got there in early April, I think.

There is a video recorded on April 18, 2003, that jfool makes much that shows, well something.  The news crew that made the tape, and the inspectors, have not been able to confirm that this showed the explosives in question, HMX.

If it is the explosives in question, they would have to have been stolen over the 20 days between the taping and the Army inspection.  It's exceptionally hard to move 360 metric tones, roughly 794,000 pounds, in 20 days.  Because of that, and because there is circumstancial evidence, i.e. there were truck there just before the war, it's unikely to be true.

3 metric tons could have been moved, fairly easily, within those 20 days.

[J. J.]

Are these Ministry of Science Iraqis former Bathist Party members?  360 tons vs. 3 tons.  Even the IEA UN papers say there was possibly only 3 tons.  Who to believe.

Three tons is possible.  It could be removed in a few days. 

The details have not yet come out.  That creates a problem for Kerry obviously.  He has to stick to the 360 tons unless he wants to look stupid and having incredibly bad judgment, dishonest, or a flipflopper.

Damn those flip-floppers who are against a 9/11 commission and then for it, against a Dept. of Homeland security and then for it, against civil unions, and then for it......

Hey, of always said the problem here is trying to explain how 360 metric tons were moved.  It's a lot easier with 3 metric tons; you don't run into the same problem.  Ah, that, BTW, is called intellectual honesty.

Kerry overplayed it by latching on to the 360 metric tons figure.  If he would have said some or part, he wouldn't be having this problem.

[J. J.]

There have been a lot of U.S troops in that area since it fell.  It is extremely difficult to believe that a bunch of people in big trucks could just pull up to this site and load up 360 tons of ANYTHING without U.S. forces falling in on them.

Bingo!  I could very easily believe that several tons could be taken out over 20 days.  That would be plausible, though there isn't any proof.  It's the weight that runs into into the problem.  Too much, 360 tons, in too little time, 20 days. 

You also have to factor in:

1.  That the area where the video tape was shot was within the defensive perimeter of a brigade of the 101 Airborne. 

2.  The roads in and out of the area were being used continiously by the US Army.

It would next to impossible to get large trucks into or out of the site in those conditions.

You also have evidence, satellite imaging does show trucks by those bunkers, after the last inspection but before the US troops arrived.  It's not proof, but it is circumstantial evidence that the explosives were moved prior to the US showing up.

Those people suggesting that the explosives were still there can only spin and can't explain away this evidence.

[J. J.]

Good observations, Engineer. 

The problem is the plausibility of the moving of the explosives.