Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

"The plain unvarnished facts totally ignored. I guess the New York Times is "always right" and all us "sane" people who can add two plus two equals four are always wrong.

The Republican National Committee released a compilation of recent news reports on the missing explosives Tuesday, which it said proved that the Times and Kerry campaign were ignoring the facts to attack Bush."

1 posted on 10/26/2004 5:07:24 PM PDT by focusandclarity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last
To: focusandclarity

As though dozens and dozens of trucks were able to back up to this facility and load up weapons and then drive away to Syria or wherever.

To believe the NYT, this is what you'd have to believe.

Or perhaps I should say, to believe the NYT, you'd have to be nuts. Or a Democrat.


2 posted on 10/26/2004 5:09:17 PM PDT by Peach (The Clintons pardoned more terrorists than they ever captured or killed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity

Ahhh...the letter they reference was full of false claims...perhaps they did not get that memo. Someone get to a Kinkos right away.


3 posted on 10/26/2004 5:10:25 PM PDT by JediForce (Do not underestimate the power of the Dark Side of the Force...keep your blasters ready.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity

Dirtbags


4 posted on 10/26/2004 5:10:33 PM PDT by SoDak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity
The story of Al Qaqaa is more complicated than anti-Bush partisans are portraying it. According to the Times, U.N. weapons inspectors discovered Al Qaqaa after the first Gulf War. The powerful explosives, which can be used as the trigger in a nuclear device, weren't destroyed then because Saddam pleaded to keep them for use in mining and construction (uh-huh). After the inspectors were booted in 1998 and returned in late 2002, they realized that 35 tons of HMX had been taken in the meantime. So it is clear that the inspections process Kerry and others wanted to rely on to deal with Saddam was inadequate. NRO THE VANISHING STORY
5 posted on 10/26/2004 5:11:23 PM PDT by GailA ( hanoi john, I'm for the death penalty for terrorist, before I impose a moratorium on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity
We are stoopid sheeple, we should not question the great and powerful New York Slimes. /sarcasm
6 posted on 10/26/2004 5:11:27 PM PDT by MKM1960
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity

yeah, right. what are they going to do, come and say it was a plant to try and propagandize a bunch of moron viewers who can't remember last year?


7 posted on 10/26/2004 5:12:58 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand (do not remove this tag under penalty of law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity
Hey, I admire their spunk. Way to go, New York Times, don't let the truth stand in the way of a good story!

/sarcasm
8 posted on 10/26/2004 5:13:07 PM PDT by PrtzlLogic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity

"New York Times, Fake But INACCURATE"


9 posted on 10/26/2004 5:13:18 PM PDT by elizabetty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity

The UN should have destroyed this weapons cache when they found it. Yet they once again allowed saddam to con them into letting him keep it.


10 posted on 10/26/2004 5:13:49 PM PDT by GailA ( hanoi john, I'm for the death penalty for terrorist, before I impose a moratorium on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity

The media are starting to eat there own. We may get fair reporting yet. I won't hold my breath of course.


12 posted on 10/26/2004 5:14:50 PM PDT by farmfriend ( In Essentials, Unity...In Non-Essentials, Liberty...In All Things, Charity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity

NY TIMES IS DNC MOUTHPIECE!!!



14 posted on 10/26/2004 5:15:28 PM PDT by Lux-In-Domino
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity
I guess the New York Times is "always right" and all us "sane" people who can add two plus two equals four are always wrong.

Their 'defense' is very carefully worded:

Our front page story of October 25 reported accurately that a senior official at Iraq's Ministry of Science & Technology informed the International Atomic Energy Agency in a letter on October 10 that the materials were lost from the Al-qaqaa site after April 9, 2003, through the theft and looting of the governmental installations due to lack of security.

They are careful to say that they only reported the existence of this letter. They are not saying they ever tried to confirm its accuracy in any way, which they didn't. They are basically admitting that they chose to run a story on their front page, critical of an administration they are openly antagonistic towards, a week before the election, from a single source (that is also openly at odds with this administration) without any confirmation or investigation as to its veracity.

The agenda of ousting this "regime" was far more important to them than any sort of journalistic integrity, and they are openly admitting it.

19 posted on 10/26/2004 5:20:34 PM PDT by dead (I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity

The one tenth of one percent that may or may not have got away!

Demos seem very confused. For months now they've been telling us that Iraq was no threat. Now they want to ignore the 400,000 tons of explosives we've captured and/or destroyed and talk about the 380 tons, we may or may not have missed.

Ah, you can do better Mr. Kerry!

Of the 216 years of this country's history, only 5 have been led by a president elected from a sitting legislature. I don't think Mr. Kerry is going to change that trend.


20 posted on 10/26/2004 5:20:49 PM PDT by John Jamieson (Hybrids are a highway around CAFE, that's all they're good for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity
George Bush needs to personally address this issue NOW. I hate to say it, but the Clinton team was 1000% better than the Bush team at responding to politically damaging information. President Bush can't rely on the MSM to put the record straight. The presstitutes will be glad to quote Kerry's lies verbatim about this story for the next 7 days.
26 posted on 10/26/2004 5:23:58 PM PDT by Semi Civil Servant (November 2, 2004: I'm suspicious of the timing of this election.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity
kerry already put out a new campaign ad using this story....see

Bush Failure to Secure Explosives /Misjudgments that Have Made America Less Secure

or watch it here:

QuickTime: Right-Click Here

Windows Media: Right-Click Here

RealVideo: Right-Click Here

29 posted on 10/26/2004 5:24:53 PM PDT by Zacs Mom ("The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons" ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity

Never let the facts get in the way of a good smear. The NYT's is a POS. AND the Grey Lady is dead, replaced by a toothless street walking prostitute.


31 posted on 10/26/2004 5:26:11 PM PDT by marty60
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity
From CQ:

Insurgents Hauling 380 Tons Of Explosives Not Exactly A Covert Act

"Unfortunately for the New York Times, no one gave a thought about the logistics of the notion that small bands of insurgents made off with 380 tons of explosives under the noses of the Coalition with no one noticing. CQ reader and retired Army Reserve Captain Ian Dodgson got paid to think about logistics, and he did some "cocktail-napkin" math that escaped the geniuses at the Paper of Record:

We're familiar with the NY Times story and the IAEA accusations that the "missing" explosives were looted from the Al-Qaqaa military base due to US negligence in securing the facility.

If I were a guerilla "looter" and I was planning such an operation from a military standpoint, here's what the task would require:

Assumptions:

-Each "looter" could haul comfortably about 25 pounds per trip to a truck. (of course after 12 hours that would require superhuman endurance)

-I'd allow 5 minutes per round trip to the truck

-Work day 12 hours

-assume security breaks down 1 week after war starts (that allows 2 weeks before the US troops arrive)

-each pickup truck can carry about 1/4 ton of explosives (I did a quick calculation based upon the dimensions and weight of a block of C-4 and the dimensions of an average small pickup) and it takes 15 minutes to either load or unload the truck.

-the secure hiding place for 380 tons of explosives is 30 minutes away.

Calculations:

-380 tons / [((12hrs/dayX60min/hr) / (5 min per load)) X (25 lbs per load) X 14 days] = 15 loaders X 2 = 30 loaders/unloaders

-30 loaders/unloaders times 200% for breaks, rest, inefficiency, etc. = 60 loaders and unloaders.

-380 tons / [(12hrs/day / 1 hr/round trip,load,unload) X (.25 tons per trip) X 14 days] = 10 trucks and drivers X 1.5 (contingency) = 15 trucks and drivers.

-4 trucks + 10-15 men to supply water, food and other logistical requirements

Total = 19-20 trucks, 90 men working continuously for two weeks to "loot" facility.

Bottom line this operation would take the resources of AN ENTIRE COMPANY (approx. 100 men) OVER TWO WEEKS, good Intel to know exactly where the "right" explosives were hidden and a means of breaching huge steel doors and concrete of an ASP.

And all of this would have to be done in an area with numerous intel overflights that would be looking for exactly this kind of activity in the combat zone, and not get noticed at all. Like so much of what the New York Times, CBS, and the Kerry campaign feeds us ... it just doesn't add up.

36 posted on 10/26/2004 5:32:11 PM PDT by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity
above from Captain's Quarters
37 posted on 10/26/2004 5:33:28 PM PDT by 45Auto (Big holes are (almost) always better.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity

"Pentagon and White House officials told the Times, as the story says, that the materials vanished sometime after the U.S.-led invasion."

It was before we got to the site, though, by all reports I have seen. It would have been impossible to hide that many trucks carting it out after we reached the site on the way to Baghdad....The roads were filled with our trucks and tanks.


38 posted on 10/26/2004 5:34:05 PM PDT by MEG33 (John Kerry has been AWOL on issues of national security for two decades)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: focusandclarity

http://www.scrappleface.com/MT/archives/001890.html
scrappleface.com weighs in:

Saddam Worried Explosive Cache Now in 'Wrong Hands'
(2004-10-25) -- When Iraqi military interrogators informed the imprisoned Saddam Hussein that 377 tons of explosives had disappeared from a huge weapons storage facility, the former Iraqi president expressed concern that the extremely powerful chemical agents might "fall into the wrong hands."

His remarks bolstered claims by Democrat presidential candidate John Forbes Kerry that President George Bush had made a "great blunder" by failing to secure the weapons cache at Al Qaqaa.

"When Al Qaqaa was under Saddam Hussein's control, inventory management was efficient and reliable, and Americans could sleep at night," said Mr. Kerry, who is also a U.S. Senator. "But once these weapons of nearly mass destruction (WNMD) came under the care of George W. Bush, they vanished. And who knows what kind of crazed, America-hating killers have them now?"

The missing materials include HMX (high melting point explosive) and RDX (rapid detonation explosive). Less than a pound of such substances brought down Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988.

However, chemical experts agree that HMX and RDX posed no threat to anyone as long as they were controlled by the legitimately-elected former president of the Republic of Iraq.

The Pentagon is reportedly negotiating a deal with Mr. Hussein to allow him to oversee Iraq's remaining weapons depots as a kind of prison work-release program while he awaits trial.


39 posted on 10/26/2004 5:36:57 PM PDT by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson