HMX explosives left unsecured by troops

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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

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:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[/b]

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

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

lmao. Why does this matter?

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

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

lmao. Why does this matter?

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.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

lmao. Why does this matter?

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.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

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

Keep spinning.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

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?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

They say HMX

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

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.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

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?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

One can easily come up with a reasonable scenario of how it was done, but why bother with this speculation. It was there and now it's gone. I don't have to prove anything.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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.

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

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

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......

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You forgot one (at least):

April 13, 2003 - Army demolition team destroys the bulk of explosives at the site.  This was just release from the Pentagon.

The destruction may or may not have included the HMX.

The Pentagon has already been busted lying on the explosives issue. They're trying desperately to save Bush's ass..... and failing.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Pentagon has already been busted lying on the explosives issue. They're trying desperately to save Bush's ass..... and failing.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Where were they lying, in their tents?

You are not funny.

The Pentagon released a photo of a truck next to a bunker that they said had HMX. That bunker did not have HMX.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/al_qa_qaa-imagery4.htm

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Pentagon has already been busted lying on the explosives issue. They're trying desperately to save Bush's ass..... and failing.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Where were they lying, in their tents?

You are not funny.

The Pentagon released a photo of a truck next to a bunker that they said had HMX. That bunker did not have HMX.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/al_qa_qaa-imagery4.htm

I am seeing them within about 500 yards of one.

The Pentagon said they were right in front of one.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Borrowed from here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/29/13056/484

he Republicans are doing their level best to muddy the waters on the explosives issue. That means that part of our job has to be to get out a clear, well documented and referenced narrative to counter their noise machine. I hesitated to create yet another diary on this subject but what I want to do here is to consolidate all the great info that's being ferreted by the whole team here and organize it neatly so we have all the facts right at hand.

The second job then is to get it out to everyone. The latest Republican spin is: "this helps us" - not sure how they justify that but we need to counter it by drawing the next conclusion: lost explosives show how incompetent the Bush team is.

Another new dimension to this story which is emerging is the "this is just the tip of the iceberg" storyline.

To sumarize:

1. Al-Qaqaa explosives looted on Bush's watch
2. Bush ordered the oil ministry guarded, NOT the arms depots - shows both incompetence and true motivations.
3. This is just the tip of the iceberg for missing arms
4. MOST important: Bush needs to take responsibility for the fiasco



Diaries :: storme's diary ::

List of Media Outlets
Help the media get the story right - take a few minutes to push this. Especially helpful is to point out how they are lying: the misleading Pentagon photos and the Shaw lies. Shows that they are desperate and trying to weasel out of taking responsibility.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2004/10/1/183955/602

The explosives were at Al-Qaqaa when the 101st Airborne Division arrived

1. KSTP footage show explosives in Al-Qaqaa bunkers during invasion.
http://kstp.com/article/stories/S3723.html?cat=1

2. KSTP footage shows SEALED bunkers with IAEA tag
http://kstp.com/article/stories/S3741.html?cat=1

3. ABC Video shows explosives at Al Qaqaa on April 18th as reported by the NY Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/politics/29bomb.html?...

4. ABC News reports that the seals indicate HMX was in bunker
"The seal's critical," Albright said. "The fact that there's a photo of what looks like an IAEA seal means that what's behind those doors is HMX. They only sealed bunkers that had HMX in them."
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=206847

5. NY Times reports Al-Qaqaa looted after Americans left: 4 eyewitnesses
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/28/international/middlee... 50b42da5ffd60de&ei=5094&partner=homepage

6. UK Independent News eyewitness reports explosives looted after US left.
"Al-Qaqa'a, the Iraqi military complex from which 350 tons of explosives disappeared, was looted after US troops left the area refusing requests to protect the site, Iraqi witnesses say." http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.j...

7. David Kay on ABC tells Aaron Brown: "That is an IAEA seal" and "Those are barrels of HMX"
Transcript: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0410/28/asb.01.h...

The explosives were NOT removed by US troops
1. ABC Video shows explosives at Al Qaqaa on April 18th as reported by the NY Times: NY Times story

2. The Pentagon press conference Friday AM failed to show that the equipment the soldier spoke of removing was in any way connected to the missing HMX and later photos show the explosives still present on April 18th. The Pentagon is providing political damage control for Bush - why is the Pentagon misleading the American public?

Other Ammo depots abandoned and looted

1. U.S. left ammo site unguarded reports the Oregonian
"Six months after the fall of Baghdad, a vast Iraqi weapons depot with tens of thousands of artillery rounds and other explosives remained unguarded, according to two U.S. aid workers who say they reported looting of the site to U.S. military officials."
http://oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/fr...

2. The looting of Iraq's arsenal - Salon reports looting of another arms depot
"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."
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2004/10/29/anaconda/i...


Pentagon photos of trucks at Al-Qaqaa are deliberately misleading

1. ** The trucks pictured in the Pentagon satellite photos are NOT at any of the nine bunkers identified by the IAEA as containing the missing explosive stockpiles. Is the pentagon trying to mislead the press? **

"a comparison of features in the DoD-released imagery with available commercial satellite imagery, combined with the use of an IAEA map showing the location of bunkers used to store the HMX explosives, reveals that the trucks pictured on the DoD image are not at any of the nine bunkers indentified by the IAEA as containing the missing explosive stockpiles. "

Source: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/al_qa_qaa-...


"The Russians took explosives" story is a lie - Did the Bush campaign ask Shaw to lie?

1. The Russian foreign ministry refutes the story: "Vyacheslav Sedov, the head of the Russian Defence Ministry's press service, quoted by Interfax news agency, said "one cannot regard such reports as other than far-fetched and ridiculous."
http://www.mosnews.com/news/2004/10/28/iraqrefute.shtml

2 continued. John Shaw, the source of the Russia story is a liar and a fraud:
"A senior Defense Department official conducted unauthorized investigations of Iraq reconstruction efforts and used their results to push for lucrative contracts for friends and their business clients, according to current and former Pentagon officials and documents.

John A. "Jack" Shaw, deputy undersecretary for international technology security, represented himself as an agent of the Pentagon's inspector general in conducting the investigations, sources said.

In one case, Shaw disguised himself as an employee of Halliburton Co. and gained access to a port in southern Iraq after he was denied entry by the U.S. military, the sources said. "
Source: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article6441.ht...