That is not what has been reported today. The report is that the UN reported that the IAEA seals were still in place on March 8, 2003.
You cannot take the IAEA report as true on its face. Below is an example of when Iraq diverted HMX, under IAEA seal, for other uses. This is just what they declared. The excerpt below ends in a way that admits they can't be sure.
February 17, 2003 IAEA statement on Iraq
"..Use of HMX
The IAEA has continued to investigate the relocation and consumption of the high explosive HMX. As I reported earlier, Iraq has declared that 32 tonnes of the HMX previously under IAEA seal had been transferred for use in the production of industrial explosives, primarily to cement plants as a booster for explosives used in quarrying.
Iraq has provided us with additional information, including documentation on the movement and use of this material, and inspections have been conducted at locations where the material is said to have been used. However, given the nature of the use of high explosives, it may well be that the IAEA will be unable to reach a final conclusion on the end use of this material..."
The MSM prints this material as if it were the gospel. It isn't. There is a lot of room for error and outright lies.
February 2003 U.N. Report: Saddam Moving Explosives From Al-Qaqaa
"..# On March 8, 2003, IEAE inspectors made their last check of the facility before the war. The IAEA said that included a spot check on some - but not all - of the sealed explosives.
# "The war started March 19. After the Army's 3rd Division moved through here on their way to Baghdad, the first U.S. troops stopped in to Al-Qaqaa on April 9.
# "A Reuters camera crew embedded with the scouts from the 101st Airborne Division arrived at the storage facility, did a quick search noting a number of bunkers filled with explosives - but nothing marked by the IAEA.
# "On April 10, the Second Brigade of the 101st arrived there and spent the night. An NBC crew was with them. A cursory search was conducted. Again, nothing marked or tagged by the IAEA was spotted. The Second Brigade left the next day, pushing forward to Baghdad..."
So even if soldiers or other observers did not see looting and the bunkers were locked, the absence of IAEA seals is a good indication that the material could have been moved and the bunkers locked back up as a matter of course. If I was an Iraqi soldier, I damn well would lock the bunkers back up. Who would want to PO the high command in that Army.
Our soldier were looking for IAEA seals, or anything that might indicate WMDs. Apparently, no IAEA seals were found.
A possible scenario, and not improbable, is that after the IAEA spot check and before the war, the seals were broken and the material was moved and the bunkers locked back up as part of a routine military precaution to protect expensive material that absolutely would be a military target.
That is not what has been reported today. The report is that the UN reported that the IAEA seals were still in place on March 8, 2003.
Maybe the UN put the seals on the empty storage units thus setting up the "explosive were stolen" line of conversation we're having.