380 tons stolen *BEFORE* troops arrived

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

AMDFanatic

Member
Oct 28, 2004
32
0
0
Libbies, please tell me how a group of insurgents could steal 350 tons of explosives under the watch of U.S. troops on the ground and planes in the air? It would take over a hundred men with pickup trucks TWO WEEKS STRAIGHT, working day and night with no breaks in between, to move those weapons.

The logistics of such a thing would make it impossible. Or maybe the DNC wants us to believe that the troops just sat there and let them take the weapons. That's the only plausible explanation since it's IMPOSSIBLE to steal that much explosives in secret. Libbies pwn3d again.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
52,614
46,279
136
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: EXman
In conclusion the Anchor said "this MAY OR MAY NOT be the explosives in question."
Yeah...there were just so many explosives at that facility. But, Bush couldn't be bothered with protecting any of it. The mission was to get to Baghdad and secure the Oil Ministry and to keep looking for phantom WMDs.


BTW, notice that 1.1D designation on the containers? That means secondary explosives such as HMX and RDX.

It could be many things:

DOD AMMUNITION AND EXPLOSIVES SAFETY STANDARDS

. Classification system

1. To ease identification of hazard characteristics and thus promote safe storage and transport of ammunition and explosives, the Department of Defense shall use the international system of classification devised by the United Nations Organization (UNO) for transport of dangerous goods. Ammunition and explosives also will be assigned the appropriate Department of Transportation (DOT) class and marking in accordance with 49 CFR 173 (reference (c)).

2. The UNO classification system consists of nine hazard classes, two of which are applicable to ammunition and explosives as defined in this Standard, Classes 1 and 6, (See ST/SG/AC.10/1/Rev. 9 (reference (d))). Thirteen compatibility groups are included for segregating ammunition and explosives on the basis of similarity of characteristics, properties, and accident effects potential.

3. Class 1 is divided into divisions that indicate the character and predominance of associated hazards:

a. Mass-detonating (Division 1).

b. Non-mass detonating fragment producing (Division 2).

c. Mass fire (Division 3).

d. Moderate fire-no blast (Division 4).

e. Very insensitive explosives (Division 5).

f. Extremely insensitive ammunition (Division 6).

This Standard uses the term "Hazard Division" instead of "Division", both to emphasize the correspondence with the previous term "Hazard Class" and to avoid the cumbersome alternatives "Division 1 of Class 1," and so forth. For further refinement of this hazard identification system, a numerical figure (in parenthesis) is used to indicate the minimum separation distance (in hundreds of feet) for protection from debris, fragments, and firebrands when distance alone is relied on for such protection. This number is placed to the left of the Hazard Division designators 1.1 through 1.3, such as (18)1.1, (08)1.2, and (02)1.3.
Group D. Black powder, HE, and ammunition containing HE without its own means of initiation and without propelling charge, or a device containing an initiating explosive and containing two or more independent safety features. Ammunition and explosives that can be expected to explode or detonate when any given item or component thereof is initiated except for devices containing initiating explosives with independent safety features. Examples are bulk trinitrotoluene (TNT), Composition B, black powder, wet RDX or PETN, bombs, projectiles, cluster bomb units (CBUs), depth charges, and torpedo warheads.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: AMDFanatic
Libbies, please tell me how a group of insurgents could steal 350 tons of explosives under the watch of U.S. troops on the ground and planes in the air? It would take over a hundred men with pickup trucks TWO WEEKS STRAIGHT, working day and night with no breaks in between, to move those weapons.

The logistics of such a thing would make it impossible. Or maybe the DNC wants us to believe that the troops just sat there and let them take the weapons. That's the only plausible explanation since it's IMPOSSIBLE to steal that much explosives in secret. Libbies pwn3d again.
Did you not read the articles?

The ones mentioning that Iraqis were seen coming and going in and out of the complex?


Pull the wool from your eyes, Mr. 2nd-account-because-I-was-recently-banned.
 

BarneyFife

Diamond Member
Aug 12, 2001
3,875
0
76
Originally posted by: AMDFanatic
Libbies, please tell me how a group of insurgents could steal 350 tons of explosives under the watch of U.S. troops on the ground and planes in the air? It would take over a hundred men with pickup trucks TWO WEEKS STRAIGHT, working day and night with no breaks in between, to move those weapons.

The logistics of such a thing would make it impossible. Or maybe the DNC wants us to believe that the troops just sat there and let them take the weapons. That's the only plausible explanation since it's IMPOSSIBLE to steal that much explosives in secret. Libbies pwn3d again.

Where did this nutbag come from?
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c..._2004_10_24.php#003835

(October 28, 2004 -- 11:26 PM EDT // link // print)
Game. Set. Match.

They got caught with a screw-up, their response was to lie, smear, obfuscate and bamboozle. And now the unimpeachable evidence is out.

It captures the administration's whole record on Iraq, only fast-forwarded and telescoped into four days as opposed to four years.

Here's former weapons inspector David Kay on Aaron Brown this evening delivering the news ...

Aaron Brown: 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 UN weapons inspector, US weapons inspector, David Kay. David, it?s nice to see you.
David Kay: Good to be with you, Aaron.

AB: 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. Okay? First what I?ll just call the seal. And tell me if this is an IAEA seal on that bunker at that munitions dump?

DK: Aaron, 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 is 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.

AB: Was there anything else at the facility that would have been under IAEA seal?

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

AB: OK now, I?ll take a look at barrels here for a second. 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.

DK: 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 barrels a bag. HMX is in powder 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 Qaqaa that was in that form.

AB: 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?

DK: 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 was the seal broken, lock broken, but the soldiers left after opening it up. I mean, to rephrase the so-called pottery barn rule. If you open an arms bunker, you own it. You have to provide security.

AB: I'm -- that raises a number of questions. Let me throw out one. It suggests that maybe they just didn't know what they had?

DK: I think you're quite likely they didn't know they had HMX, which speaks to 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.

AB: Could you -- I?m trying to stay out of the realm of politics. I'm not sure you can.

DK: So am I.

AB: I know. It's a little tricky here. But, is there any -- 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?

DK: Absolutely not. For example, al Qaqaa was a site of Gerald Bull's 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 US has in its entire inventory. The country was an armed camp.

AB: 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?

DK: Oh absolutely not.

AB: Thank you.

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

AB: Okay. It's just dangerous and its out there and by your thinking it should have been secured.

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

AB: David, thank you for walking me through this. I appreciate it, David Kay the former head US weapons inspector in Iraq.



Game. Set. Match
 

zephyrprime

Diamond Member
Feb 18, 2001
7,512
2
81
Originally posted by: AMDFanatic
Libbies, please tell me how a group of insurgents could steal 350 tons of explosives under the watch of U.S. troops on the ground and planes in the air? It would take over a hundred men with pickup trucks TWO WEEKS STRAIGHT, working day and night with no breaks in between, to move those weapons.

The logistics of such a thing would make it impossible. Or maybe the DNC wants us to believe that the troops just sat there and let them take the weapons. That's the only plausible explanation since it's IMPOSSIBLE to steal that much explosives in secret. Libbies pwn3d again.
It's easily possible to move those explosives. Firstly, they had a heck of a lot more than 2 weeks to move that stuff. Secondly, by your numbers, a 14 man team would only have to move 500lbs per person per day to move all that inventory. I handled a couple of hundred pounds of mundane merchandise myself at my job today and doing so is nothing remarkable at all. Lastly, as was shown in the video, local iraqis could easily go to the site because it simply was not secured!
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c..._2004_10_24.php#003835

(October 28, 2004 -- 11:26 PM EDT // link // print)
Game. Set. Match.

They got caught with a screw-up, their response was to lie, smear, obfuscate and bamboozle. And now the unimpeachable evidence is out.

It captures the administration's whole record on Iraq, only fast-forwarded and telescoped into four days as opposed to four years.

Here's former weapons inspector David Kay on Aaron Brown this evening delivering the news ...

Aaron Brown: 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 UN weapons inspector, US weapons inspector, David Kay. David, it?s nice to see you.
David Kay: Good to be with you, Aaron.

AB: 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. Okay? First what I?ll just call the seal. And tell me if this is an IAEA seal on that bunker at that munitions dump?

DK: Aaron, 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 is 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.

AB: Was there anything else at the facility that would have been under IAEA seal?

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

AB: OK now, I?ll take a look at barrels here for a second. 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.

DK: 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 barrels a bag. HMX is in powder 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 Qaqaa that was in that form.

AB: 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?

DK: 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 was the seal broken, lock broken, but the soldiers left after opening it up. I mean, to rephrase the so-called pottery barn rule. If you open an arms bunker, you own it. You have to provide security.

AB: I'm -- that raises a number of questions. Let me throw out one. It suggests that maybe they just didn't know what they had?

DK: I think you're quite likely they didn't know they had HMX, which speaks to 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.

AB: Could you -- I?m trying to stay out of the realm of politics. I'm not sure you can.

DK: So am I.

AB: I know. It's a little tricky here. But, is there any -- 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?

DK: Absolutely not. For example, al Qaqaa was a site of Gerald Bull's 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 US has in its entire inventory. The country was an armed camp.

AB: 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?

DK: Oh absolutely not.

AB: Thank you.

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

AB: Okay. It's just dangerous and its out there and by your thinking it should have been secured.

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

AB: David, thank you for walking me through this. I appreciate it, David Kay the former head US weapons inspector in Iraq.



Game. Set. Match

linkage

Locks/seals not broken. Looks like the IAEA was right about vents allowing access to the inside of the bunker.
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c..._2004_10_24.php#003835

(October 28, 2004 -- 11:26 PM EDT // link // print)
Game. Set. Match.

They got caught with a screw-up, their response was to lie, smear, obfuscate and bamboozle. And now the unimpeachable evidence is out.

It captures the administration's whole record on Iraq, only fast-forwarded and telescoped into four days as opposed to four years.

Here's former weapons inspector David Kay on Aaron Brown this evening delivering the news ...

Aaron Brown: 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 UN weapons inspector, US weapons inspector, David Kay. David, it?s nice to see you.
David Kay: Good to be with you, Aaron.

AB: 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. Okay? First what I?ll just call the seal. And tell me if this is an IAEA seal on that bunker at that munitions dump?

DK: Aaron, 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 is 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.

AB: Was there anything else at the facility that would have been under IAEA seal?

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

AB: OK now, I?ll take a look at barrels here for a second. 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.

DK: 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 barrels a bag. HMX is in powder 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 Qaqaa that was in that form.

AB: 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?

DK: 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 was the seal broken, lock broken, but the soldiers left after opening it up. I mean, to rephrase the so-called pottery barn rule. If you open an arms bunker, you own it. You have to provide security.

AB: I'm -- that raises a number of questions. Let me throw out one. It suggests that maybe they just didn't know what they had?

DK: I think you're quite likely they didn't know they had HMX, which speaks to 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.

AB: Could you -- I?m trying to stay out of the realm of politics. I'm not sure you can.

DK: So am I.

AB: I know. It's a little tricky here. But, is there any -- 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?

DK: Absolutely not. For example, al Qaqaa was a site of Gerald Bull's 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 US has in its entire inventory. The country was an armed camp.

AB: 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?

DK: Oh absolutely not.

AB: Thank you.

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

AB: Okay. It's just dangerous and its out there and by your thinking it should have been secured.

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

AB: David, thank you for walking me through this. I appreciate it, David Kay the former head US weapons inspector in Iraq.



Game. Set. Match
linkage

Locks/seals not broken. Looks like the IAEA was right about vents allowing access to the inside of the bunker.
Yeah, it's so easy to unload 380 tons of explosives through vents 10' off the ground.
 

Crimson

Banned
Oct 11, 1999
3,809
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c..._2004_10_24.php#003835

(October 28, 2004 -- 11:26 PM EDT // link // print)
Game. Set. Match.

They got caught with a screw-up, their response was to lie, smear, obfuscate and bamboozle. And now the unimpeachable evidence is out.

It captures the administration's whole record on Iraq, only fast-forwarded and telescoped into four days as opposed to four years.

Here's former weapons inspector David Kay on Aaron Brown this evening delivering the news ...

Aaron Brown: 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 UN weapons inspector, US weapons inspector, David Kay. David, it?s nice to see you.
David Kay: Good to be with you, Aaron.

AB: 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. Okay? First what I?ll just call the seal. And tell me if this is an IAEA seal on that bunker at that munitions dump?

DK: Aaron, 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 is 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.

AB: Was there anything else at the facility that would have been under IAEA seal?

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

AB: OK now, I?ll take a look at barrels here for a second. 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.

DK: 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 barrels a bag. HMX is in powder 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 Qaqaa that was in that form.

AB: 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?

DK: 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 was the seal broken, lock broken, but the soldiers left after opening it up. I mean, to rephrase the so-called pottery barn rule. If you open an arms bunker, you own it. You have to provide security.

AB: I'm -- that raises a number of questions. Let me throw out one. It suggests that maybe they just didn't know what they had?

DK: I think you're quite likely they didn't know they had HMX, which speaks to 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.

AB: Could you -- I?m trying to stay out of the realm of politics. I'm not sure you can.

DK: So am I.

AB: I know. It's a little tricky here. But, is there any -- 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?

DK: Absolutely not. For example, al Qaqaa was a site of Gerald Bull's 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 US has in its entire inventory. The country was an armed camp.

AB: 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?

DK: Oh absolutely not.

AB: Thank you.

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

AB: Okay. It's just dangerous and its out there and by your thinking it should have been secured.

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

AB: David, thank you for walking me through this. I appreciate it, David Kay the former head US weapons inspector in Iraq.



Game. Set. Match
linkage

Locks/seals not broken. Looks like the IAEA was right about vents allowing access to the inside of the bunker.
Yeah, it's so easy to unload 380 tons of explosives through vents 10' off the ground.

But dozens and dozens of tractor trailers coming and stealing the explosives after the U.S. arrived and NOBODY noticing is COMPLETELY plausible.
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,816
1,126
126
Originally posted by: AMDFanatic
Libbies, please tell me how a group of insurgents could steal 350 tons of explosives under the watch of U.S. troops on the ground and planes in the air? It would take over a hundred men with pickup trucks TWO WEEKS STRAIGHT, working day and night with no breaks in between, to move those weapons.

The logistics of such a thing would make it impossible. Or maybe the DNC wants us to believe that the troops just sat there and let them take the weapons. That's the only plausible explanation since it's IMPOSSIBLE to steal that much explosives in secret. Libbies pwn3d again.

Who were you before banned troll?
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Originally posted by: Crimson
Originally posted by: conjur
Yeah, it's so easy to unload 380 tons of explosives through vents 10' off the ground.
But dozens and dozens of tractor trailers coming and stealing the explosives after the U.S. arrived and NOBODY noticing is COMPLETELY plausible.
You should really work on that reading comprehension problem of yours.



"We weren't quite sure what were looking at, but we saw so much of it and it didn't appear that this was being secured in any way," said photojournalist Joe Caffrey. "It was several miles away from where military people were staying in their tents".

Officers with the 101st Airborne told 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS that the bunkers were within the U.S. military perimeter and protected. But Caffrey and former 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS Reporter Dean Staley, who spent three months together in Iraq, said Iraqis were coming and going freely.

"At one point there was a group of Iraqis driving around in a pick-up truck,"Staley said. "Three or four guys we kept an eye on, worried they might come near us."
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: conjur
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.c..._2004_10_24.php#003835

(October 28, 2004 -- 11:26 PM EDT // link // print)
Game. Set. Match.

They got caught with a screw-up, their response was to lie, smear, obfuscate and bamboozle. And now the unimpeachable evidence is out.

It captures the administration's whole record on Iraq, only fast-forwarded and telescoped into four days as opposed to four years.

Here's former weapons inspector David Kay on Aaron Brown this evening delivering the news ...

Aaron Brown: 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 UN weapons inspector, US weapons inspector, David Kay. David, it?s nice to see you.
David Kay: Good to be with you, Aaron.

AB: 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. Okay? First what I?ll just call the seal. And tell me if this is an IAEA seal on that bunker at that munitions dump?

DK: Aaron, 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 is 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.

AB: Was there anything else at the facility that would have been under IAEA seal?

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

AB: OK now, I?ll take a look at barrels here for a second. 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.

DK: 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 barrels a bag. HMX is in powder 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 Qaqaa that was in that form.

AB: 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?

DK: 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 was the seal broken, lock broken, but the soldiers left after opening it up. I mean, to rephrase the so-called pottery barn rule. If you open an arms bunker, you own it. You have to provide security.

AB: I'm -- that raises a number of questions. Let me throw out one. It suggests that maybe they just didn't know what they had?

DK: I think you're quite likely they didn't know they had HMX, which speaks to 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.

AB: Could you -- I?m trying to stay out of the realm of politics. I'm not sure you can.

DK: So am I.

AB: I know. It's a little tricky here. But, is there any -- 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?

DK: Absolutely not. For example, al Qaqaa was a site of Gerald Bull's 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 US has in its entire inventory. The country was an armed camp.

AB: 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?

DK: Oh absolutely not.

AB: Thank you.

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

AB: Okay. It's just dangerous and its out there and by your thinking it should have been secured.

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

AB: David, thank you for walking me through this. I appreciate it, David Kay the former head US weapons inspector in Iraq.



Game. Set. Match
linkage

Locks/seals not broken. Looks like the IAEA was right about vents allowing access to the inside of the bunker.
Yeah, it's so easy to unload 380 tons of explosives through vents 10' off the ground.

what was shown in the picture was not 380 tons.
 

Crimson

Banned
Oct 11, 1999
3,809
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Originally posted by: Crimson
Originally posted by: conjur
Yeah, it's so easy to unload 380 tons of explosives through vents 10' off the ground.
But dozens and dozens of tractor trailers coming and stealing the explosives after the U.S. arrived and NOBODY noticing is COMPLETELY plausible.
You should really work on that reading comprehension problem of yours.



"We weren't quite sure what were looking at, but we saw so much of it and it didn't appear that this was being secured in any way," said photojournalist Joe Caffrey. "It was several miles away from where military people were staying in their tents".

Officers with the 101st Airborne told 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS that the bunkers were within the U.S. military perimeter and protected. But Caffrey and former 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS Reporter Dean Staley, who spent three months together in Iraq, said Iraqis were coming and going freely.

"At one point there was a group of Iraqis driving around in a pick-up truck,"Staley said. "Three or four guys we kept an eye on, worried they might come near us."

Uh huh.. and where in your 'reading comprehension' does it say that they were moving explosives out of the buildings? Maybe they put it in their socks? And did 10 million trips of .25 pounds of explosives.. How incompetent are these reporters that they wouldn't notice explosives leaving the facility in 3 MONTHS OF BEING THERE?

Having people coming and going does not equate to moving 400 tons of explosives.

You'd think one of the 'Eyewitness' guys might tap a U.S. soldier on the helmet and say Muhammed over there just loaded up his pickup full of high explosives?
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
"We weren't quite sure what were looking at, but we saw so much of it and it didn't appear that this was being secured in any way," said photojournalist Joe Caffrey. "It was several miles away from where military people were staying in their tents".
 

Crimson

Banned
Oct 11, 1999
3,809
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
"We weren't quite sure what were looking at, but we saw so much of it and it didn't appear that this was being secured in any way," said photojournalist Joe Caffrey. "It was several miles away from where military people were staying in their tents".

So let me get this right.. they didn't know what they were looking at.. they were concerned about it not being secured.. they were there for 3 months.. And they made absolutely no mention of it to American troops in the area?

Way to go 'Eyewitness' News 5! Great job guys! Right on top of things!
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
I wasn't aware that a news crew was responsible for ordering our military and assigning them with objectives.
 

her209

No Lifer
Oct 11, 2000
56,336
11
0
Originally posted by: Crimson
So let me get this right.. they didn't know what they were looking at.. they were concerned about it not being secured.. they were there for 3 months.. And they made absolutely no mention of it to American troops in the area?

Way to go 'Eyewitness' News 5! Great job guys! Right on top of things!
Bwhahahah... so now the news people are to blame for the missing explosives. Bwhahahahah...
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
The looting of Iraq's arsenal
The same month Al Qaqaa was being stripped of high explosives, I warned my military intelligence unit of another weapons facility that was being cleaned out. But nothing was done.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
http://www.salon.com/news/feat...29/anaconda/index.html
Oct. 29, 2004 | When I read last Sunday's New York Times story of the missing explosives from the Iraqi weapons storage facility south of Baghdad at Al Qaqaa, it brought back memories from my time with the Army National Guard's 223rd Military Intelligence Battalion in Iraq last year. Bad memories. In the Times story, Iraqi scientists who worked at Al Qaqaa described how the facility was looted of almost 400 tons of high explosives right after the American troops swept through the area in April 2003 and failed to secure the site.

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. It is now home to over 22,000 U.S. troops, mostly Army but some Air Force personnel as well, and serves as the main supply point for American forces throughout Iraq. Hundreds of heavy trucks in long convoys enter and leave the two main gates every day, 24 hours a day, hauling every conceivable item that an army at war might need.

When I first arrived at Anaconda in late April of 2003 however, the base was a barren, desolate outpost. There were only about 200 soldiers on the base when we first arrived with our wartime convoy of California and Massachusetts National Guard troops up from Kuwait. The base had been vacated by Iraqi forces just days before our arrival. The signs of battle were everywhere, starting with the charred remains of the guard shack at the main gate and continuing all over the base in the form of bomb craters, bullet holes and wrecked vehicles. With a total area of about 15 square miles within the base to defend, and with just a couple hundred soldiers to do it, security was our main concern. The war was still going on and the base was located right in the middle of the hot zone known as the Sunni Triangle. We all took turns standing watch on one of the many guard towers that ringed the base.

As a counterintelligence agent, one of my main jobs was to talk to local Iraqis and gather information on any possible threats to the security of the Army. This is called "force protection." In order to do that, we recruit and train local people to act as informants to provide us with needed information on the location and intention of the bad guys and their weapons. This is also known as "human intelligence" and is the area most lacking in our war on terrorism thus far.

During the period just after we arrived at Anaconda, the Iraqi people were actually very supportive of our presence and would line up at the entrances to the base in order to bring us information on all manner of things and also to ask for assistance with their medical or other needs. Those bringing us information were referred to as "walk-ins." Some of the best intelligence I obtained during my tour in Iraq came from walk-ins.

Sometime in early May 2003, several local walk-ins came to the base and told me that there was a large weapons storage facility located about two or three kilometers to the south that was abandoned after the Iraqi forces fled the area following the collapse of the Saddam regime on April 9, 2003. The facility, they said, was still unguarded. The Iraqi guards had simply deserted their posts and disappeared. The storage facility, I was told, was an annex to the main base at Anaconda and was used by the Iraqi Air Force to store bombs, missiles and other ordnance. These same people said that they were concerned that their children might pick up some of the explosives or landmines that were stored there and blow themselves up. I was also told that local "Ali Babbas" or thieves were looting the site daily and word in the local communities was that they were selling the weapons and explosives to ex-Baath party members for use in attacking U.S forces.

My team and I immediately went out to the location, finding a huge facility perhaps 5 square miles or more in size. It was composed of dozens of both underground bunkers and above-ground storage buildings. I was stunned to see vast amounts of weapons simply lying around on the ground littering the base. Some of these weapons included surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles, land mines, rocket-propelled grenades, small arms ammunition, hand grenades, detonator caps, plastic explosives and other assorted ammunition and weaponry. It was quite a frightening sight.

My team took pictures of the site and all of the weapons and ammunition and filed a report immediately after returning to Anaconda. I also verbally briefed my battalion commander, Lt. Col. Timothy Ryan, as was the policy with any significant event such as this. Upon hearing my report, Lt. Col. Ryan requested that I take him back out to the site the next day, which I did. Ryan toured the facility just as I had done and saw all of the unsecured weaponry and ammunition. Ryan told me that he would talk to EOD (explosive ordinance disposal) and "have the stuff removed."

It should be noted that after U.S forces moved into Iraq and the Saddam regime fell, the responsibility for securing and disposing weapons and explosives at the many storage sites scattered across Iraq became the instant responsibility of the U.S military. The Iraqi police, or any other local public authority that could have taken responsibility, simply no longer existed.

I do not know whether Ryan relayed my reports about the storage site to the appropriate military officials. I placed calls to his office on Thursday for comment, but received no replies. In all fairness to him, Ryan did not have the authority to either remove the material or to post guards. He would have had to request such action through his chain of command, in this case, Col. Thomas M. Pappas, commander of the 205th M.I. Battalion of Abu Ghraib fame. But in any event, no action was taken.

For the next several weeks I continued to receive reports from my sources in the community that the weapons were still at the storage facility, there were still no guards, and the looting was continuing. I made three or four more trips to the site between May and August and confirmed that the facility was in fact unsecured and that weapons and ammunition were still exposed. On one such visit I actually saw some Iraqis in the distance driving a pickup truck and stopping at bunkers inside the storage facility, no doubt helping themselves. During one visit that summer, I took note of some land mines that were stored in an above-ground building at the site. The next time I visited the site, the land mines were gone.

After each visit, I filed reports to the 223rd OMT (Operations Management Team) on the exposed weaponry and the risk to coalition forces. The Iraqi villagers kept coming and telling me of the dangerous situation and asking me why the Americans could not place guards at the facility or haul the stuff away. I had no answer for them.

It is interesting to me to note now, as I recall these incidents, that my brigade commander from July 1 onward at Anaconda was Col. Pappas, who I remember making trips to Abu Ghraib several times a week. Although I did not report on the unguarded site directly to Pappas, he undoubtedly received all of my reports.

While working on this story, I called another member of the unit who served in Iraq with me at Anaconda, Sgt. Greg Ford. Ford was also a counterintelligence agent and is now retired from the National Guard and lives in California. Ford also remembers the vast weapons stockpiles lying open to looters just outside Anaconda. He advised me that he had also filed at least one written report about the problem and verbally advised Lt. Col. Ryan as well. Ford told me, "No one seemed too interested in what I said about that stuff. I went out there several times after I told them and the place was still unguarded. The more times I went out there, the more stuff was missing. It really sucked." Ford went on to say that his sources had also told him that local insurgents, ex-Baath party members as they were known then, were going to use the weapons as roadside improvised explosive devices (IEDs). In fact, Ford told me, one of his sources in Samarra, a tribal sheik, told him that an Iraqi expatriate living in Syria had been sending drivers across the porous border between the two countries and systematically looting weapons storage facilities, including Al Qaqaa, for material to be used in making IEDs. Until that time, late spring of 2003, IEDs were virtually unknown in Iraq. But beginning around June, they became a common threat to U.S. forces around Anaconda and elsewhere.

Ford also told me of a warehouse outside the city of al Khalis, located about 15 kilometers south of Anaconda. During a visit there in May or June 2003, his intelligence team discovered a huge cache of weapons, including heavy machine guns, ammunition, missiles and large chemical drums with Russian insignia. The local people he spoke with told him it had been abandoned right after the regime fell and had been looted ever since. Ford said he filed a written report and verbally briefed his unit upon his return to base. He requested an EOD team to remove the weapons and chemicals. When he returned two days later, almost all of the weapons and chemical drums were gone. When he asked his local sources if the American soldiers had removed them, he was told "No, Ali Babba took them!" The warehouse had been looted and the weapons were now on the street.

Michael Marciello, another ex-counterintelligence agent from the 223rd, told me a similar story on Thursday. He said that he too informed his unit chain of command about the unguarded storage facility outside of Anaconda, but got no response. Marciello told me that he saw many such unsecured storage sites all over Iraq that were full of weapons and ammunition. "They were commonplace," he told me. "Nobody really cared about them."

An Army civilian interpreter who worked with the 223rd last year had a blunter assessment of the U.S. military command's vigilance. "They just didn't give a sh*t," said Abdullah Khalil, a Kurdish-American who served in Iraq last year with several Army units, including the 223rd. "I told Ryan many times about those weapons and that they were being stolen. People in the villages asked me all the time when are we (the Americans) going to move them? I asked Ryan what is he going to do? He never even answered me. Because I am Iraqi, he treated me like an animal. What happened in Al Qaqaa is no surprise."

On Thursday I spoke with Department of Defense spokesperson, Lt. Col. Barry Venable, who told me that he is not aware of any reports about unsecured weapons storage facilities near Camp Anaconda. He also said that "the priority of the troops at that time was taking down the Saddam regime." Since the regime's fall, said Venable, "Coalition forces have destroyed 240,000 tons of munitions and have secured another 160,000 tons that are awaiting destruction." When asked if there were enough troops to secure the weapons sites after the war, he insisted, "There were enough troops to complete the mission." Are there still unsecured weapons storage sites in Iraq that are being looted even as we speak, I asked? Lt. Col. Venable admitted he had no idea.
Looks like Venable was repeating Scott McClellan's pitiful response. McClellan later dropped the "tons" from his response.

And, again, we see the rampant incompetence in the complete and utter lack of planning by this administration to secure Iraq during and after the invasion. Rumsfeld's push to get Franks to provide a bare-bones attack plan is coming back to bite us (and kill our men and women.)
 

conjur

No Lifer
Jun 7, 2001
58,686
3
0
Eastern...yeah.

Not sure of stations. Check like CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc. for streaming audio/video.


Apparently, a soldier to say he removed 200 tons of AlQaqaa explosives

Yeah...right.


They find this guy in mere days, someone responsible for moving 200 tons of explosives when no one has known where the explosives have been for 18 months??
 

polm

Diamond Member
May 24, 2001
3,183
0
0
Originally posted by: conjur
Eastern...yeah.

Not sure of stations. Check like CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc. for streaming audio/video.


Apparently, a soldier to say he removed 200 tons of AlQaqaa explosives

Yeah...right.


They find this guy in mere days, someone responsible for moving 200 tons of explosives when no one has known where the explosives have been for 18 months??


even IF he moved 200, the April 18th Video practically seals the case that weapons were there, discovered, exposed, and left unguarded. Even if it was only 1 ton, this is still a failure for the Administration to inform the soldiers on the ground in how to respond when they discover such things.