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

Skip to comments.

Discrepancy Found in Explosives Amounts: (On DRUDGE story unravels further)
ABC News ^ | 10/27

Posted on 10/27/2004 9:49:52 PM PDT by ambrose

Discrepancy Found in Explosives Amounts

Documents Show Iraqis May Be Overstating Amount of Missing Material

- Iraqi officials may be overstating the amount of explosives reported to have disappeared from a weapons depot, documents obtained by ABC News show.

The Iraqi interim government has told the United States and international weapons inspectors that 377 tons of conventional explosives are missing from the Al-Qaqaa installation, which was supposed to be under U.S. military control.

But International Atomic Energy Agency documents obtained by ABC News and first reported on "World News Tonight with Peter Jennings" indicate the amount of missing explosives may be substantially less than the Iraqis reported.

The information on which the Iraqi Science Ministry based an Oct. 10 memo in which it reported that 377 tons of RDX explosives were missing -- presumably stolen due to a lack of security -- was based on "declaration" from July 15, 2002. At that time, the Iraqis said there were 141 tons of RDX explosives at the facility.

But the confidential IAEA documents obtained by ABC News show that on Jan. 14, 2003, the agency's inspectors recorded that just over 3 tons of RDX was stored at the facility -- a considerable discrepancy from what the Iraqis reported.

The IAEA documents could mean that 138 tons of explosives were removed from the facility long before the start of the United States launched "Operation Iraqi Freedom" in March 2003.

The missing explosives have become an issue in the presidential campaign. Sen. John Kerry has pointed to the disappearance as evidence of the Bush administration's poor handling of the war. The Bush camp has responded that more than a thousand times that amount of explosives or munitions have been recovered or destroyed in Iraq.

Another Concern

The IAEA documents from January 2003 found no discrepancy in the amount of the more dangerous HMX explosives thought to be stored at Al-Qaqaa, but they do raise another disturbing possibility.

The documents show IAEA inspectors looked at nine bunkers containing more than 194 tons of HMX at the facility. Although these bunkers were still under IAEA seal, the inspectors said the seals may be potentially ineffective because they had ventilation slats on the sides. These slats could be easily removed to remove the materials inside the bunkers without breaking the seals, the inspectors noted.

ABC News' Martha Raddatz filed this report for "World News Tonight." Luis Martinez contributed to this report.



TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: alqaqaa; ammogate; bush; cbs; explosives; iraq; kerry; nyt; nytrogate

1 posted on 10/27/2004 9:49:52 PM PDT by ambrose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ambrose

Tomorrow's Washington Times features an article by Bill Gertz in which John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, says that Russian troops "almost certainly" helped Saddam's men clean the Al Qaqaa site out before the Iraq War started.

We'll have more on this tomorrow. One way or another, it appears clear that the 380 tons of explosives that are now "missing" were moved by Saddam prior to the start of the war. I suppose the point is too obvious to be worth making, but 380 tons is a lot of material--approximately 38 semi-truck loads. Yet it has, apparently, completely disappeared, probably because it was shipped to Syria before the war started. Do you suppose that, whereever the 380 tons are now, there might be a little extra room for some vials of anthrax, sarin, nerve gas, etc.?

DEACON adds: If Shaw's version, as reported by the Washington Times, holds up and (as importantly) gets heard, the consequences for Kerry could be serious. The Senator will have (a) jumped to a conclusion that wasn't supported by the facts, (b) assumed the incompetence of our troops, (c) confirmed President Bush's position that Iraq had weapons worth worrying about, and (d) unleashed evidence that, as Rocket Man notes, suggests that chemical and biological weapons could easily have been moved out of Iraq just before we invaded. In light of the final point, though, what puzzles me is this: if the Defense Department has evidence that the Russians helped clean out Alqaqaa, why haven't we heard about this before now (or did I just miss it). Evidence that Iraqi weapons, any weapons, were moved out of the country by the Russians would have been helpful to the administration long before now. Maybe we learned about it recently, as relations with Russia have improved.

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/008341.php


2 posted on 10/27/2004 10:01:03 PM PDT by soccer_linux_mozilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

btt!


3 posted on 10/27/2004 10:53:48 PM PDT by LastDayz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

Looks worse for the NYTimes and Kerry every day.


4 posted on 10/27/2004 11:02:04 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
"But the confidential IAEA documents obtained by ABC News show that on Jan. 14, 2003, the agency's inspectors recorded that just over 3 tons of RDX was stored at the facility"

Why was this confidential. It should have been (thought it was) submitted to the SC?

5 posted on 10/28/2004 2:42:35 AM PDT by endthematrix (10 out of 10 terrorists agree-Anybody but Bush!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ambrose

You have to give the devil his due with these report. ABC is making a real effort to get to the truth on this issue. I'm glad to see it.


6 posted on 10/28/2004 2:46:52 AM PDT by Artemis Webb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

ABC is being fed the info. by the govt. They have no choice but to report it. The New York Times either had this info. or could have obtained it if it had wanted to do so.


7 posted on 10/28/2004 2:55:35 AM PDT by Loyal Buckeye ((Kerry is a flake))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Loyal Buckeye

I doubt that the government is feeding the info to exclusively to ABC. Why would they do that? Where are the other networks on this (including FOX)? The fact is that ABC does have a choice...they seem to be making the right one.


8 posted on 10/28/2004 3:04:36 AM PDT by Artemis Webb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

Re: The fact is that ABC does have a choice...they seem to be making the right one.



Sink or swim.


9 posted on 10/28/2004 3:09:29 AM PDT by endthematrix (10 out of 10 terrorists agree-Anybody but Bush!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
Although these bunkers were still under IAEA seal, the inspectors said the seals may be potentially ineffective because they had ventilation slats on the sides. These slats could be easily removed to remove the materials inside the bunkers without breaking the seals, the inspectors noted.

another Useless Nations failure.

10 posted on 10/28/2004 4:17:42 AM 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: Artemis Webb; Loyal Buckeye

ABC must have gotten orders to help Hillary.


11 posted on 10/28/2004 4:22:55 AM PDT by Sloth ("Rather is TV's real-life Ted Baxter, without Baxter's quiet dignity." -- Ann Coulter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ambrose
380 tons are missing...oops.... 3 tons. Those pesky decimal points...

NYT and CBS are a disgrace to America! They deserve to be put out of business just like all companies that sells recklessly defective products!

12 posted on 10/28/2004 6:09:38 AM PDT by PajamaTruthMafia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mhking

Interesting. Not only were 138 tons of the "380 missing tons" gone before the IAEA did the last full check in January, but the IAEA placed innefective seals on the rest of the cache.


13 posted on 10/28/2004 6:41:36 AM PDT by steveegg (C-BS and the NYT have really stepped in the ca-ca.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

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