Video shows explosives being investigated by military…

[sliver108]

It looks like shit, smells like shit so it must be shit right? Well not if you are a Bush supporter. Remember the beginning of Vanilla Sky… “open your eyes”.



Video is time stamped and showing our military looking through boxes and containers in the bunker.

Weapon inspectors state that the seal on the video is the same seal that is “only” put on places that house such chemicals/ingredients.

Weapons inspectors also state that the physical appearance of the chemicals/ingredients match that of the explosives.

What more proof do you need? Do you expect me to believe that this is just a spoof brought to us by Saddam as an April fools day joke? Your lack of the acceptance of this grave proof is earth shattering and detrimental to the US civilians knowledge that you associate with. For once please get off the “my candidate can do no wrong bandwagon” and face the facts that are so alarmingly present.

[jrock5730]

People don't care man, and its sad as hell.

[sliver108]

People don't care man, and its sad as hell.I think it is more of a problem with them admitting they are wrong.

[jrock5730]

I think it is more of a problem with them admitting they are wrong.

Either way, its sad nontheless. It makes my stomach turn to even think about this stuff anymore, I cannot wait until this is over.

[SBetsinger]

Either way, its sad nontheless. It makes my stomach turn to even think about this stuff anymore, I cannot wait until this is over.

I couldn't agree more. :thumbsup

[pedelen99]

I couldn't agree more. :thumbsup

People do care. Kerry is going keep hitting this through Tuesday, and that's going to force the news media to keep looking at it... they're already starting to fall in line with the truth, after all those unbelievable excuses that the administration has floated out. Like "Russian secret agents did it". Please.

- Phil

[ss10mets]

People do care. Kerry is going keep hitting this through Tuesday, and that's going to force the news media to keep looking at it... they're already starting to fall in line with the truth, after all those unbelievable excuses that the administration has floated out. Like "Russian secret agents did it". Please.

- Phil

Russian Secret Agents??? I could have swore it was UFO's that were to blame

[chellek23]

There is a press conference on right now with an officer (Major Austin Pierson) claiming that he and his unit moved the explosives to a Baghdad holding area and then destroyed them. He has sworn under oath. He said he realized that when he saw the video you all are claiming proves they were removed after the invasion that those were the same ones. He also says there were less explosives there than what were, approximately 280 tons of ammunitions, most of which was plastic explosives. This also gives creedence that some was removed by Saddam as there is survelliance video of truck activity before the invasion.

[bdb23]

There is a press conference on right now with an officer (Major Austin Pierson) claiming that he and his unit moved the explosives to a Baghdad holding area and then destroyed them. He has sworn under oath. He said he realized that when he saw the video you all are claiming proves they were removed after the invasion that those were the same ones. He also says there were less explosives there than what were, approximately 280 tons of ammunitions, most of which was plastic explosives. This also gives creedence that some was removed by Saddam as there is survelliance video of truck activity before the invasion.
Yep. Let's see if Kerry calls this soldier a liar or a war criminal.

[pedelen99]

There is a press conference on right now with an officer (Major Austin Pierson) claiming that he and his unit moved the explosives to a Baghdad holding area and then destroyed them. He has sworn under oath. He said he realized that when he saw the video you all are claiming proves they were removed after the invasion that those were the same ones. He also says there were less explosives there than what were, approximately 280 tons of ammunitions, most of which was plastic explosives. This also gives creedence that some was removed by Saddam as there is survelliance video of truck activity before the invasion.

Can you link that?

- Phil

[bdb23]

Front page of Drudge and foxnews and was on most news radio.

[chellek23]

It's on the radio right now...
Not sure where if it's made the internet etc yet.

[bdb23]

I see that Kerry doesn't mention much of this story anymore on his website. Interesting....

[sliver108]

Russian Secret Agents??? I could have swore it was UFO's that were to blame
Wait a second…. I heard that Hitler came back to life and carried them out himself.

[nubby]

LOL a truck carrying 100+ tons of explosives.... someone smoking crack?

[sliver108]

I am not trying to trivialize explosives missing but there is another problem here now. How many fucking stories has the Bush administration told about this situation in the past few days? That’s right, more then there should be. They have countered every report made with “new evidence”. Doesn’t this seem fishy at all?

[bdb23]

I am not trying to trivialize explosives missing but there is another problem here now. How many fucking stories has the Bush administration told about this situation in the past few days? That’s right, more then there should be. They have countered every report made with “new evidence”. Doesn’t this seem fishy at all?
No stories from the administration. They have just come forward with facts and have consistently said that they don't know for sure when the materials were moved.

[jrock5730]

I am not trying to trivialize explosives missing but there is another problem here now. How many fucking stories has the Bush administration told about this situation in the past few days? That’s right, more then there should be. They have countered every report made with “new evidence”. Doesn’t this seem fishy at all?

You had to know it was coming though, naturally.

[sliver108]

No stories from the administration. They have just come forward with facts and have consistently said that they don't know for sure when the materials were moved.Well you better ask Rumsfeld about that because he had an opposing belief yesterday. So hence, they are not consistent views. I really am not trying to have an anti-Bush view or pro-Kerry view on this. Maybe you should worry more about this country then protecting the incompetence of the Bush administration.

[bdb23]

Well you better ask Rumsfeld about that because he had an opposing belief yesterday. So hence, they are not consistent views. I really am not trying to have an anti-Bush view or pro-Kerry view on this. Maybe you should worry more about this country then protecting the incompetence of the Bush administration.
Maybe you should learn to read. I'm not protecting anything. Rumsfeld said "We would have seen anything like that. The idea it was suddenly looted and moved out, all of these tons of equipment, I think is at least debatable."

[sliver108]

Maybe you should learn to read. I'm not protecting anything. Rumsfeld said "We would have seen anything like that. The idea it was suddenly looted and moved out, all of these tons of equipment, I think is at least debatable."
He also said a lot of other things. Why and how can you deny every report made about bad things in general about this administration? Do you think that everybody is out to get Bush with no unwarranted reason?

[pedelen99]

There is a press conference on right now with an officer (Major Austin Pierson) claiming that he and his unit moved the explosives to a Baghdad holding area and then destroyed them. He has sworn under oath. He said he realized that when he saw the video you all are claiming proves they were removed after the invasion that those were the same ones. He also says there were less explosives there than what were, approximately 280 tons of ammunitions, most of which was plastic explosives. This also gives creedence that some was removed by Saddam as there is survelliance video of truck activity before the invasion.

First take, as I haven't seen a script yet. First of all, Major Pierson seems to be talking about about an ammunition removal mission near al-Qaqaa, not explosives at al-Qaqaa. CNN also mentioned that he did whatever he did on April 13th, which would then be immaterial to the explosives that were on site April 18th?

- Phil

[pedelen99]

By the way, this isn't just some isolated instance. Here's an article pulished today"

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.

The aid workers say they informed Lt. Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, the highest ranking Army officer in Iraq in October 2003 but were told that the United States did not have enough troops to seal off the facility, which included more than 60 bunkers packed with munitions.

"We were outraged," said Wes Hare, city manager of La Grande, who was working in Iraq as part of a rebuilding program. A colleague who also visited the depot, Jerry Kuhaida, said it appeared that the explosives at the Ukhaider Ammunition Storage Area had found their way to insurgents targeting U.S. forces.

"There's no question in my mind that the stuff in Ukhaider was used by terrorists," said Kuhaida.

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/front_page/1099052619177610.xml

- Phil

[bdb23]

He also said a lot of other things. Why and how can you deny every report made about bad things in general about this administration? Do you think that everybody is out to get Bush with no unwarranted reason?
I deny judgment on these "reports" (specifically NYT and 60 Minutes) because they have no investigation behind them. What has come to light from this "report" is that the story was over a year old and built up on the eve of the election with no one having investigated whether it would stick. The insinuations made by the NYT and the Kerry camp are fraudulent. Why do you think CBS chose to not go with the story on Sunday??? Because it wouldn't stick. Simply put after all of the recent developments, no one can say for certain that the materials were looted after the military arrived (as the NYT and Kerry have argued).

[sliver108]

First take, as I haven't seen a script yet. First of all, Major Pierson seems to be talking about about an ammunition removal mission near al-Qaqaa, not explosives at al-Qaqaa. CNN also mentioned that he did whatever he did on April 13th, which would then be immaterial to the explosives that were on site April 18th?

- Phil
Thank you........I was just going to say that.

[bdb23]

Remember, all of the experts said that this country (Iraq) was loaded with weapons, munitions, and explosives. So far we've destroyed 400,000 tons of it but there is certainly more out there.

[sliver108]

I deny judgment on these "reports" (specifically NYT and 60 Minutes) because they have no investigation behind them. What has come to light from this "report" is that the story was over a year old and built up on the eve of the election with no one having investigated whether it would stick. The insinuations made by the NYT and the Kerry camp are fraudulent. Why do you think CBS chose to not go with the story on Sunday??? Because it wouldn't stick. Simply put after all of the recent developments, no one can say for certain that the materials were looted after the military arrived (as the NYT and Kerry have argued).
Ok but what about everything else? You don't have to explain your reasons but come on man.

[bdb23]

First take, as I haven't seen a script yet. First of all, Major Pierson seems to be talking about about an ammunition removal mission near al-Qaqaa, not explosives at al-Qaqaa. CNN also mentioned that he did whatever he did on April 13th, which would then be immaterial to the explosives that were on site April 18th?

- Phil
It included ammunition and explosives.

[bdb23]

Ok but what about everything else? You don't have to explain your reasons but come on man.
I won't explain b/c I don't have to. Same reason Kerry supports don't (and can't) explain Kerry's back and forth and how he can't fund his "ideas."

[pedelen99]

I deny judgment on these "reports" (specifically NYT and 60 Minutes) because they have no investigation behind them. What has come to light from this "report" is that the story was over a year old and built up on the eve of the election with no one having investigated whether it would stick. The insinuations made by the NYT and the Kerry camp are fraudulent. Why do you think CBS chose to not go with the story on Sunday??? Because it wouldn't stick. Simply put after all of the recent developments, no one can say for certain that the materials were looted after the military arrived (as the NYT and Kerry have argued).

These reports hit because the Iraqi government (those are the people that we put in place) reported to the IAEA that the explosives were missing, and they had gone missing 'after Aptil 9th due to widespread looting'. It turns out that Iraq had good reason to make this statement - they had talked to the Iraqis who staffed the facility until April 9, 2003, and they said nothing had been removed up to that point in time.

An official report from an official government to a branch of the United Nations is newsworthy, and significant.

- Phil

[bdb23]

as I haven't seen a script yet
I assume you meant "transcript" or are you suggesting this was a scripted news conference???

[jrock5730]

I assume you meant "transcript" or are you suggesting this was a scripted news conference???

I will be the first to suggest it was a scripted news conference, cause I believe this administration does not want to have to say " WE FUCKED UP".

[bseitz]

These reports hit because the Iraqi government (those are the people that we put in place) reported to the IAEA that the explosives were missing, and they had gone missing 'after Aptil 9th due to widespread looting'. It turns out that Iraq had good reason to make this statement - they had talked to the Iraqis who staffed the facility until April 9, 2003, and they said nothing had been removed up to that point in time.

An official report from an official government to a branch of the United Nations is newsworthy, and significant.

- Phil
And the folks staffing those facilities certainly had no reason say it had been removed after they were no longer were responsible. Looks like those stealth trucks had "US. Army" on the sides. :lol

[pedelen99]

I assume you meant "transcript" or are you suggesting this was a scripted news conference???

No, I meant transcript. Didn't mean to suggest anything.

- Phil

[Evans]

I love how Democrats have been accusing Republicans for months that "they'd catch Osama right before the election" or "they'll find WMD's right before the election" and here we see the Democrats pulling all this out of their ass on the eve of the election. Sweet sweet hypocrisy : )

[jrock5730]

I love how Democrats have been accusing Republicans for months that "they'd catch Osama right before the election" or "they'll find WMD's right before the election" and here we see the Democrats pulling all this out of their ass on the eve of the election. Sweet sweet hypocrisy : )

I think its funny that you think the Democrats pulled this out, just shows what you know.

[jrock5730]

And the folks staffing those facilities certainly had no reason say it had been removed after they were no longer were responsible. Looks like those stealth trucks had "US. Army" on the sides. :lol

Actually, it doesn't look like that.

http://kstp.com/article/stories/S3751.html?cat=1

[crosscg]

Actually, it doesn't look like that.

http://kstp.com/article/stories/S3751.html?cat=1
Convincing stuff... where are the spin guys now?

[bseitz]

Why is so much time being wasted on a story that is a year and a half old and really means nothing in the context of the Presidential election?

[crosscg]

Why is so much time being wasted on a story that is a year and a half old and really means nothing in the context of the Presidential election?
Why does the president bring up 9/11 so much? Because it is an issue. Just like the fact that there was not proper planning when this started and now those explosives stolen a year and a half ago are being used to kill our troops now.

[pedelen99]

Why is so much time being wasted on a story that is a year and a half old and really means nothing in the context of the Presidential election?

A) because it captures this president's administration perfectly in one tiny capsule. Failure to plan, failure to execute, and an enormous desire to avoid admitting mistakes at any cost... even when faced with as absolute a proof as anyone could have. And all those failures adding up to our soldiers getting killed.

B) Because 18 months ago, the administration chose to to release this information. They had a legal responsibility to report to IAEA the fact that these explosives were missing and they didn't. When you chose to cover something up, you lose the ability to control the time frame under which it is discussed. We could have been talking about this 18 months ago - and perhaps had the ability to make some changes in policy that would have benefited the troops - but the administration decided not to. I have no sympathy for them.

- Phil

[pedelen99]

New story from Knight Ridder:

Vast amounts of weapons-related material missing, official says

In a new disclosure, the senior U.S. military officer and another U.S. official, who also spoke on condition he not be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter, said that an Iraqi working for U.S. intelligence alerted U.S. troops stationed near the al Qaqaa weapons facility that the installation was being looted shortly after the fall of Baghdad on April 9, 2003.
But, they said, the troops took no apparent action to halt the pillaging.

"That was one of numerous times when Iraqis warned us that ammo dumps and other places were being looted and we weren't able to respond because we didn't have anyone to send," said a senior U.S. military officer who served in Iraq.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/10042037.htm

- Phil

[jrock5730]

New story from Knight Ridder:

Vast amounts of weapons-related material missing, official says

In a new disclosure, the senior U.S. military officer and another U.S. official, who also spoke on condition he not be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter, said that an Iraqi working for U.S. intelligence alerted U.S. troops stationed near the al Qaqaa weapons facility that the installation was being looted shortly after the fall of Baghdad on April 9, 2003.
But, they said, the troops took no apparent action to halt the pillaging.

"That was one of numerous times when Iraqis warned us that ammo dumps and other places were being looted and we weren't able to respond because we didn't have anyone to send," said a senior U.S. military officer who served in Iraq.

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/10042037.htm

- Phil


Nice!

[Evans]

I think its funny that you think the Democrats pulled this out, just shows what you know.

What then do you say to the democrats who claim that Bush has bin laden already and is going to whip him out on monday just for political reasons?

[nonewdirections]

What then do you say to the democrats who claim that Bush has bin laden already and is going to whip him out on monday just for political reasons?
this post is a good example of a red herring.

[bseitz]

A) because it captures this president's administration perfectly in one tiny capsule. Failure to plan, failure to execute, and an enormous desire to avoid admitting mistakes at any cost... even when faced with as absolute a proof as anyone could have. And all those failures adding up to our soldiers getting killed.

B) Because 18 months ago, the administration chose to to release this information. They had a legal responsibility to report to IAEA the fact that these explosives were missing and they didn't. When you chose to cover something up, you lose the ability to control the time frame under which it is discussed. We could have been talking about this 18 months ago - and perhaps had the ability to make some changes in policy that would have benefited the troops - but the administration decided not to. I have no sympathy for them.

- Phil
The troops have secured or destroyed over 400,000 tons of ordinance. Hardly a failure of planning or execution.

[marco j]

The troops have secured or destroyed over 400,000 tons of ordinance. Hardly a failure of planning or execution.


but giving 380 tons of it away is OK?!? :rolleyes:

:BANG

[pedelen99]

The troops have secured or destroyed over 400,000 tons of ordinance. Hardly a failure of planning or execution.

Floating out a large number with no context doesn't constitute proof of much. Nor does the fact that saying 'hey, we got some of it!' constitute good planning or execution.

From Brett Wagner, professor at the Naval War College, a year ago in USA Today"

In the weeks before the invasion, the U.S. military repeatedly warned the White House that its war plans did not include sufficient ground forces, air and naval operations and logistical support to guarantee a successful mission. Those warnings were discounted — even mocked — by administration officials who professed to know more about war fighting than the war fighters themselves.

But the war fighters were right. Military commanders weren't given enough manpower and logistical support to secure all of the known nuclear sites, let alone all of the suspected ones.

It wasn't until seven of Iraq's main nuclear facilities were extensively looted that the true magnitude of the administration's strategic blunder came into focus.

And remember, the fatality and casualty rates are higher in 2004 than 2003; higher since Hussein's capture than before; higher since "sovereignty" was turned over on June 28 than before.

The picture that encompasses this most clearly is al-Qaqaa. The UN identified the most powerful explosives that Iraq had, tagged their exact location, told us where they were, and we drove right past them. Multiple times, without ever even checking up on them, much less securing and destroying them. And now they've been looted and are being used against us.

Failure.

- Phil

[bseitz]

Floating out a large number with no context doesn't constitute proof of much. Nor does the fact that saying 'hey, we got some of it!' constitute good planning or execution.

From Brett Wagner, professor at the Naval War College, a year ago in USA Today"

In the weeks before the invasion, the U.S. military repeatedly warned the White House that its war plans did not include sufficient ground forces, air and naval operations and logistical support to guarantee a successful mission. Those warnings were discounted — even mocked — by administration officials who professed to know more about war fighting than the war fighters themselves.

But the war fighters were right. Military commanders weren't given enough manpower and logistical support to secure all of the known nuclear sites, let alone all of the suspected ones.

It wasn't until seven of Iraq's main nuclear facilities were extensively looted that the true magnitude of the administration's strategic blunder came into focus.
There were thousands of weapons dumps all over the country and they all couldn't have been secured in a timely manner no matter how many troops were deployed.

And remember, the fatality and casualty rates are higher in 2004 than 2003; higher since Hussein's capture than before; higher since "sovereignty" was turned over on June 28 than before.
Why would you expect anything different? The Saddam loyalists see it all slipping away and they see the handwriting on the wall: they'll be made to pay for the 30+ years of support for a mass murderer. They've got nothing to lose.

The picture that encompasses this most clearly is al-Qaqaa. The UN identified the most powerful explosives that Iraq had, tagged their exact location, told us where they were, and we drove right past them. Multiple times, without ever even checking up on them, much less securing and destroying them. And now they've been looted and are being used against us.
I notice that the pictures you're so fond of appear to show maybe a couple of hundred barrels at most. Unless they weigh a couple of tons apiece, it doesn't appear that much of the stash was left when your boys got to the scene. Say each barrel weighed 300 pounds (probably a little high, but we'll use it for illustration). It would take over 2,500 barrels to get to 377 tons. Where do you suppose they were hiding that no one saw them and how long do you think it would take to sneak away with 2,500 barrels of anything?


Failure.
Possibly. But the failure will be that of the Iraqi people.

[bseitz]

Floating out a large number with no context doesn't constitute proof of much. Nor does the fact that saying 'hey, we got some of it!' constitute good planning or execution.
What context do you need for the fact that over 1,000 times as much explosives have been secured or destroyed than what you're so concerned about? And that number represents nearly 2/3 of the 650,000 tons estimated to be in the entire country. Not bad considering the lengths to which Saddam went to distributed weapons throughout the countryside. But I guess anything short of the 100% that I'm sure Clinton or any other Socialist would attain is a complete failure.

[pedelen99]

There were thousands of weapons dumps all over the country and they all couldn't have been secured in a timely manner no matter how many troops were deployed.

The first commander to reach al-Qaqaa said he would have needed 4 times the number of troops to secure all the ammo dumps he came across. That's not a "no matter how many" number, it's very specific. That's what he needed, that's what he should have gotten.

But more importantly, we didn't even try. No one went to al-Qaqaa to secure the explosives there, even though we knew exactly what was there and what it could be used for. And just to remind you - the explosives there were critical to making a nuclear weapon.

We went to war to prevent materials that could be used to make WMDs from falling into terrorist hands, and then failed to even attempt to secure these components when we went in.

You've become very good at offering excuses. But we're tired of excuses, we'd much prefer some degree of competence.

- Phil

[pedelen99]

What context do you need for the fact that over 1,000 times as much explosives have been secured or destroyed than what you're so concerned about? And that number represents nearly 2/3 of the 650,000 tons estimated to be in the entire country. Not bad considering the lengths to which Saddam went to distributed weapons throughout the countryside. But I guess anything short of the 100% that I'm sure Clinton or any other Socialist would attain is a complete failure.

The "2/3 of the 650,000 tons " adds context. Can you provide a source for that?

- Phil

[bseitz]

The "2/3 of the 650,000 tons " adds context. Can you provide a source for that?

- Phil
Gladly.

http://cns.miis.edu/cr/03_10_06.htm

[granny_dmb41]

im just glad that they decided to "tape" this event happening so they have proof, but no one seemed to know ne thing before this video surfaced out of nowhere

[pedelen99]

im just glad that they decided to "tape" this event happening so they have proof, but no one seemed to know ne thing before this video surfaced out of nowhere

The video was an accident, filmed by one of the imbedded crews (from a station in Minneapolis). Neither they not the soldiers knew what they were looking at at the time, and it wasn't until after the story broke that they went back to the tape. Interestly (to me at least), they checked their GPS data first to see if they really were at that site, and then went back and reviewed the tape.

As far as no one knowing anything, it's fairly well documented that the administration knew for almost 18 months. David Kay was at the site looking for WMDs several weeks after the film crew was there and the explosives were gone. There is also evidence that Paul Bremer (head of the CPA) was informed as well. When Iraq made a formal statement to the IAEA was when it became public knowledge.

At that point it became an issue that the administration denied on progressively different reason, including it was gone when we got there, Russian secret agents took it, and then our troops destroyed it when they got there. The video tapes are what finally proved that the explosives were there and thus subsequently lost to looters.

- Phil