Note that Aaron shows David Kay a video of an IAEA seal on a bunker and gets him to agree that it is an IAEA seal. Then he asks what else would be behined an IAEA seal. Kay of course says it could only be RDX and HMX. Then he shows pictures of some barrels of explosives, and gets David Kay to make the leap that that is HMX or RDX.
However, the video that these pictures were taken from (http://kstp.dayport.com/viewer/content/special.php?Art_ID=159670&Format_ID=2&BitRate_ID=8&Contract_ID=712&Obj_ID=3) tell you that they searched one bunker that was not under IAEA seal and then looked at another bunker with an IAEA seal that they were not able to get into (due to the IAEA seal and lock). The soldier does climb halfway into a vent on the IAEA bunker, but never says what he sees, if anything.
So, CNN had to know that the barrels they were showing were from a different bunker than the one with the IAEA seal.
David Kay also had to know that the barrels were from a different bunker, because he admitted to watching the video (saying how it was clearer in the video than the snaphosts).
David Kay, as a weapons inspector, has to know that the explosives label 1.1D covers about 70 different explosives, including gun powder. Thus he has to know that he cannot make an absolute statement that it was either HMX or RDX.
The key to this story would be for some reporter who is actually interested in reporting to ask:
I'm having a little trouble following you, but I hope you're right that Kaye has been misled in some way. I'd like to see this boiled down to a simple sound bite or talking point that we can deploy over the weekend. Tuesday can't come fast enough. Luckily I don't think many average voters are paying close attention to this one -- just more campaign noise.
What??? I thought for a fleeting moment that Marshall -- the anti-Taranto -- had an ethics attack that caused him to set aside his 'rat status in the interest of truthful journalism.
Not good form, lobster.
Also "this would not be described as a WMD, correct? "
As an American to be on the receiving end of what the stuff was to become: SADDAM'S ARAB NUCLEAR BOMB I find disagreement to that statement. Same with all the computers, CNC machines and switches used fro nuclear device construction. It is ALL WMD! And Americans were the target! Be glad Saddam doesn't have this stuff - he started in the 70's
An IAEA tag was used for sealing only the HMX/RDX I thought.
All explosives will be listed as Class 1. In addition, they will have a division number, a compatibility number, a UN number and a proper shipping name. Typical explosives for demining can be as follows:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Table 4: Classification of typical explosives for demining. |
That is what I saw and that is NOT what we are looking for.
The stuff we want is raw bulk containers full of powder. It would not be in individually wrapped packaging.
My guess would be more processed explosives like the mining boosters and charges.
The IAEA can verify this, but I doubt they will. (since they started this BS)
If Saddam left the RDX/HDX in the bunkers, then what did the Heavy Trucks in the satellite photos take away? If I were Saddam, I would have taken away the WMDs first.
That's odd that nobody's asked what % of the total stuff at Al=QaQaa has been blown up. 240,000 tons destryed in Iraq, but somehow we know that the 377 tons (or) 240 or 180 or 3 or whatever were NOT destroyed. How can McKay be so sure? Why doesn't he say?
self ping