READER COMMENTS ON
"Explosives at Al Qa-qaa"
(9 Responses so far...)
COMMENT #1 [Permalink]
said on 10/28/2004 @ 7:35 pm PT...
On CNN, David Kay just confirmed that the images contained HMX and that the seals were IAEA seals. And that the only bunkers at that site that were sealed with those IAEA seals were the ones that contained those explosives. This is a smoking gun, period.
COMMENT #2 [Permalink]
said on 10/29/2004 @ 4:11 am PT...
For some reason, i am hearing the Doors song "When the Music's over". Smoking gun? Combined with the article in which the military spokesman said that these were the weapons being used against our forces? You betcha.
COMMENT #3 [Permalink]
said on 10/29/2004 @ 8:02 am PT...
You know what would be interesting? Replaying mr Rumsfeld's remarks about freedom being "untidy" in response to a question about looting:
"Free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things. They're also free to live their lives and do wonderful things."
So free people were apparently free to loot al Tuwaitha and al Qaqaa. They are free to use these explosives, as we've documented here, to attack Americans. Apparently the republicans are free to read these satellite photos of two, not forty but two, trucks parked at al Qaqaa like the tinfoil hat club watches the Zapruder film.
And now the FBI is investigating Halliburton.
When it rains it pours.
COMMENT #4 [Permalink]
said on 10/29/2004 @ 11:17 am PT...
The Army says they moved it. Its all over the news. I notice you conviently leave that out of your blog. Ignoring the trth doesnt change it. you just keep believe forgieners over your own country, then call yourself a patriot.
Oh yeah, BTW. I thought Osama was supposed to suddenly appear when we were close to the election. But no Osama. Wrong as usual.
Keep up the good work, I think your even starting to believe yourself.
COMMENT #5 [Permalink]
said on 10/29/2004 @ 11:48 am PT...
Hey No-Name, how about a link to where it's all over the news.
Seems to me everything I've heard is that the GOP's line is, "Oh, gone before we got there...", which of course throws egg in their faces as it appears to be utterly false.
So what are you talking about?
Beyond that, the real issue is: where is this stuff, and whose hands has it passed through? Answers to which this administration seems much happier to push off until after the election.
COMMENT #6 [Permalink]
said on 10/29/2004 @ 12:03 pm PT...
LOLOL(etc) - As you'll note, I finished blogging last night at 3am. I'm getting to work now, and will be reporting on the story of Major Pierson (who I presume you're talking about) when I actually get to read the details of the report.
Unless, you'd like to me to just throw out unsubstantiated stuff as you seem to prefer.
From what I understand of the report on Pierson, the numbers aren't adding up. Furthermore, it seems to undermine the Administration's own claim that the explosives were gone before the war started. But I'll report when I have something more conclusive to report. Despite what you'd like to *believe* is true.
As well, you said this:
"I thought Osama was supposed to suddenly appear when we were close to the election. But no Osama. Wrong as usual."
Well, don't worry. Everybody gets it wrong sometimes. We don't think any less of you because of it. Though if you're usually wrong, you may want to be more careful in the future.
COMMENT #7 [Permalink]
said on 10/29/2004 @ 12:27 pm PT...
Here's the problem. The most recent story is one of many that the Administration has put forth to explain away its culpability. The good major's explanation (though a hundred and eighty tons shy of all the missing explosives) has to compete with the false allegation that Russian special ops took it, that it was moved before the war and that it was destroyed in bombing. Dont you find it the least bit interesting that issues were raised with one ofthe largest weapons depots in Iraq and there was absolutely no paperwork, no info in the system at all concerning the alleged destruction of 200 tons of material?
By the way, if you had read the Pearson story you would have learned that the stuff his team destroyed was NOT under UN seal and was composed of the following items:
"TNT, plastic explosives, detonation cords, and white phosphorous rounds."
Conspicuously absent are the explosives that were actually being discussed. Its a nice try and i am sure the good people over at faux will try to give Mr. Bush a pass but this is just another pile. Not unlike the satellite photos of trucks parked near bunkers other than the ones under discussion.
"I did not see any IAEA seals at any of the locations we went into. I was not looking for that," Pearson said.
The seals of course, were on the doors and the containers of munitions in question. Kind of hard to miss a broken seal at the door.
"I can't say RDX that was on the list of IAEA is what the major pulled out. ... We believe that some of the things they were pulling out of there were RDX." This was a quote from the spokeman DeRite (hopefully no relation to Curly Joe).
Now before you get on the porch with the big dogs, make sure you have your facts lined up. You didn't now slink away like you always do.
COMMENT #8 [Permalink]
said on 10/29/2004 @ 12:36 pm PT...
Couple of other items you seem to have missed, John. The story that there was only 3 tons (not 377 tons) of explosives was also being floated - and repeated by Rush as late as this morning.
As well, according to GlobalSecurity.org (and as reported by their rep on FAUX NEWS of all places just now!) the Pentagon sattelite shot show a truck, but at the *wrong* bunker! Not the one where the HMX/RDX was!
As I said though, more as I'm able to gather up all the facts.
COMMENT #9 [Permalink]
said on 10/29/2004 @ 5:51 pm PT...
Osama showed up, says he wants to talk to you...