Yes, the explosives would be much safer if we had left them where they belong: in the hands of Saddam. /Democrap Logic.
Posted on 10/25/2004 6:36:16 AM PDT by areafiftyone
To: National Desk, Political Reporter
Contact: Chad Clanton or Phil Singer, 202-464-2800, both of Kerry-Edwards 2004; http://www.johnkerry.com
WASHINGTON, Oct. 25 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Kerry-Edwards Senior Advisor Joe Lockhart issued the following statement on reports of missing explosives in Iraq:
"Today, the Bush administration must answer for what may be the most grave and catastrophic mistake in a tragic series of blunders in Iraq. How did they fail to secure nearly 380 tons of known, deadly explosives despite clear warnings from the International Atomic Energy Agency to do so? And why was this information unearthed by reporters -- and was it covered up by our national security officials?
"These explosives can be used to blow up airplanes, level buildings, attack our troops and detonate nuclear weapons. The Bush administration knew where this stockpile was, but took no action to secure the site. They were urgently and specifically informed that terrorists could be helping themselves to the most dangerous explosives bonanza in history, but nothing was done to prevent it from happening.
"This material was monitored and controlled by UN inspectors before the invasion of Iraq. Thanks to the stunning incompetence of the Bush administration, we now have no idea where it is.
"We need to know what the administration knew about this and when. We need to know why they failed to safeguard these explosives and keep them out of the hands of our enemies. The National Security Advisor should be at her desk in Washington tomorrow to work this problem and answer these questions, instead of giving speeches in battleground states."
Paid for by Kerry-Edwards 2004, Inc.
-0-
/© 2004 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
FROM JOHN KERRY:
BUSH'S FAILURE TO SECURE IRAQI EXPLOSIVES HAS MADE THE WORLD LESS SAFE
Today, the New York Times revealed that the Bush Administration failed to secure nearly 380 tons of high-grade explosives in Iraq shortly after the United States took control over the country, despite being informed of their exact location. The failure to secure the explosives has led to three major concerns:
1) The weapons could end up or have already ended up in the hands of a terrorist group;
2) The explosives might be used against our troops on the ground; and
3) The explosives could be used to carry out a deadly attack against America or our allies.
NEW REVELATION: Failure To Secure Iraqi Explosives May Mean that Powerful Explosives are in Hands of Terrorists
Bush Administration Remained Silent About the Disappearance of Explosives. "The White House said President Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, was informed within the past month that the explosives were missing. It is unclear whether President Bush was informed. American officials have never publicly announced the disappearance, but beginning last week they answered questions about it posed by The New York Times and the CBS News program '60 Minutes.'" 10/25/04]
Explosives May Help Terrorists Create Chaos. "In May, an internal I.A.E.A. memorandum warned that terrorists might be helping 'themselves to the greatest explosives bonanza in history.'"
Explosives Could Be Used For Nuclear Weapon. "The explosives could also be used to trigger a nuclear weapon, which was why international nuclear inspectors had kept a watch on the material."
NEW REVELATION: Bush Administration Was Warned About Possible Looting of Explosives But Failed To Act
Bush Administration Ignored Warnings of Leaving Explosives Unsupervised. "A European diplomat reported that Jacques Baute, head of the I.A.E.A.'s Iraq nuclear inspection team, warned officials at the United States mission in Vienna about the danger of the nuclear sites and materials once under I.A.E.A. supervision, including Al Qaqaa. But apparently, little was done. A senior Bush administration official said that during the initial race to Baghdad, American forces 'went through the bunkers, but saw no materials bearing the I.A.E.A. seal.' It is unclear whether they ever returned."
Kerry called on Bush to secure Iraq from looting "Yesterday, Kerry took issue with the Bush administration's post-war policies in Iraq. 'I think they wasted a month,' Kerry said. 'They lost a serious amount of time because they didn't have a plan. They have allowed looting to take place that has done more damage to the infrastructure than any bomb.'" Journal-Bulletin, 5/23/03]
Bush / Administration Played Down Looting at the Time:
Bush Was Unconcerned About Looting. When asked in April 2003 about concerns of looting, Bush said: "The statue comes down on Wednesday, and the headlines start to read, 'Oh, there's disorder.' Well, no kidding... But just like the military campaign was second-guessed, I'm sure the plan is being -- but we will be successful."
Rumsfeld on Looting: "Stuff Happens". "'Freedom's untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things,' Rumsfeld said. ... Looting, he added, was not uncommon for countries that experience significant social upheaval. 'Stuff happens,' Rumsfeld said."
White House Said Looting Was Part of Liberation Process. In April 2003, asked about looting in Iraq, White House Spokesman Ari Fleischer said: "Clearly, anything that involves looting is not desirable. It is worth noting that what you are seeing is a reaction to oppression. ... It's also a situation the world has seen before when oppressed people find freedom. For a short period of time, these actions have occurred in history. You saw it in Sierra Leone, you saw it in the Soviet Union with the collapse of the Soviet Union. And nobody likes to see it, but I think it has to be understood in the context of people who have been oppressed, who are reacting to the oppression..."
White House Said Stories About Looting Were Overblown. Asked about the widespread looting in Iraq, Fleischer said: "This is almost starting to remind me of the stories that said our forces were bogged down, as people watched 24, 36 hours' worth of people reacting to the oppression from which they suffered. ...but there's no question, in the President's judgment, that what's happening is people are finding liberation, are finding freedom."
NEW REVELATION: Explosives May Be Used Against Our Troops
Immediate Concern Is Weapons Could Be Used Against Troops. "American weapons experts say their immediate concern is that the explosives could be used in major bombing attacks against American or Iraqi forces: the explosives, mainly HMX and RDX, could be used to produce bombs strong enough to shatter airplanes or tear apart buildings."
Same Type of Explosives Have Been Used By Terrorists Before. "The bomb that brought down Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988 used less than a pound of the material of the type stolen from Al Qaqaa, and somewhat larger amounts were apparently used in the bombing of a housing complex in November 2003 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and the blasts in a Moscow apartment complex in September 1999 that killed nearly 300 people."
Bush Said He Would Do Everything To Keep U.S. Soldiers Safe.
Bush: "Look, we just need strong support for our troops. And I have a solemn duty to say to you as squarely as I can, we will do the very best we possibly can to make your loved one safe. That's what we owe the family members, and that's what we owe the troops."
Just a thought - has anyone looked to see if this stuff is on EBay?
No, they won't.
Everybody can see it's a nothing story being twisted such as it is (so far no traction whatsoever, of course) to try and send a message that the American public knows is false (that Bush is a bumbling fool who doesn't care about security or the safety of our troops is the underlying message which only the mouth breathers over at DU will believe).
post marker bump
Yes, we "folks" realize it.
Why would you think we didn't?
!
But...but...I thought Iraq wasn't dangerous. Doesn't Kerry always go on about that?
No, it won't. Just watch.
Exactly.
The UN is not to be trusted and we have proof to back that up.
Surely you must be wrong. Michael Moore showed pictures of pre-invasion Iraq and it was a peaceful place filled with love and harmony and kids flying kites. In addition, the 'Rats have told us that Saddam wasn't a threat to anyone.
Here's what must have happened. Iraq was a peaceful, loving place with no stockpiles of weapons. But when the out-of-control cowboy president George Bush began talking about an unprovoked attack on that innocent pacifist nation, some neighboring countries sent Saddam some weapons. They did this because it was the right thing to do, and I'm sure the French would agree. However, Saddam didn't believe in violence, even if attacked. He quoted Gandhi, and then dumped the weapons out in the desert, having no plans to ever use them. The poor, peaceful man then hid in a hole, not wanting to be a part of the evil violence that had been unleashed around him.
However, there were other pacifists in Iraq who were changed by the evil and unprovoked American invasion. When American troops came roaring into Iraq, raping and pillaging, and ravaging the countryside in a manner reminiscent of the armies of "Jen-jis" Khan, these pacifists were converted into men of violence. Their backs were against the wall, and they had no choice but to abandon their lifelong pacifism. Thus, they seized the weapons Saddam had dumped, right under the noses of the evil, but stupid, U.S. Marines. They drove 25 sixteen-wheelers up, spent a couple of days loading them, and drove away with the bombs, while our guys were busy raping teen girls and looting mosques.
That must be what happened, because otherwise there's something wrong with the 'Rat storyline.
Let me put this in perspective -- the bomb that took down Pan Am Flight 103 over Scotland used less than one pound of this same explosive. There were 760,000 pounds at Al Qaqaa.
Now who's doing to FEARmongering???
IT SMELLS ... they are all in on it
Yes, the explosives would be much safer if we had left them where they belong: in the hands of Saddam. /Democrap Logic.
I recall reading an article in the American Enterprise from last year about the bomb dumps in Iraq (if memory serves) Iraq is pretty much one giant bombdump.
I'm watching - they're moving.
You are aware this story turned out to be bogus, right?
And before you claim the truth won't get out, you're wrong.
The polls are moving to Bush.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.