It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Al Qaqaa Explosives Shown Videotaped April 18

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 10:48 AM
link   


KSTP EXCLUSIVE


A 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS crew in Iraq shortly after the fall of Saddam Hussein was in the area where tons of explosives disappeared.

The missing explosives are now an issue in the presidential debate. Democratic candidate John Kerry is accusing President Bush of not securing the site they allegedly disappeared from. President Bush says no one knows if the ammunition was taken before or after the fall of Baghdad on April 9, 2003 when coalition troops moved in to the area.

Using GPS technology and talking with members of the 101st Airborne 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS determined our crew embedded with them may have been on the southern edge of the Al Qaqaa installation, where that ammunition disappeared. Our crew was based just south of Al Qaqaa. On April 18, 2003 they drove two or three miles north into what is believed to be that area.

During that trip, members of the 101st Airborne Division showed the 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS crew bunker after bunker of material labelled explosives. Usually it took just the snap of a bolt cutter to get in and see the material identified by the 101st as detonation cords.


Video

Need I say more?




posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 10:53 AM
link   
are those the explosives in question?

nope

nice try, though.

Kerry is unfit for command.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 10:59 AM
link   
I can't get the video to work. Must be overloaded.

Looks damning if it's verified...



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:00 AM
link   
I just don't get why the timing (whether the muntions were removed just before Saddam fell or after) is supposed to be that critical anyway - given what we know. None of it looks 'good' for Bush & Co. IMO with any of the possibilities.

It seems crystal clear to me that this was one very sizable muntions centre.....hell, what did they want? It was all tagged and catalogued by the IAEA people months before!

Hoshyar Zabari, the current Iraqi Foreign Minister told the UK's Channel 4 news on a live interview last night that he personally had seen documents giving the orders by Saddam's regime - in it's dying moments - to remove explosives from the al-Qaqaa site and that they should be used to resist the allied forces in Iraq by 'insurgents'.

The allied forces did not destroy them by attacking the complex sufficiently, if at all, during the war (as several reporters are now showing many intact but empty bunkers).

The allied forces subsequently allowed their removal (exact date, apparantly, unknown). How come the area was not under the greatest surveilance possible given the several hundred tonnes! of very potent muntions known to be held there?!

The muntions are now discovered to have been removed.

Allied forces now are suffering lethal attack by such munitions.

Bush and Co attempt to claim they were never there, er, probably.

This is outrageous.

This is criminal negligence and it is costing allied lives. There should be charges.....going all the way to the top of the 'planning staff'.

Safer with Bush?


(Jayzuss can you imagine the several million $ & months - years! - of 'fuss' if this kind of thing had happened under Clinton?)











[edit on 28-10-2004 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by moxyone
are those the explosives in question?

nope

nice try, though.


And you know this how? The installation is supposed to be the size of Manhattan? Here's videotape of explosives from there at least a good week after the invasion. Where are they now?

How do you know they aren't the one's your boy claims were already gone, despite not being able to produce a single satellite image or spy plane shot of the "convoy of 40 trucks" required to steal them as they claim would be required.

Bush is saying anything he can to cover his ass. It still isn't covered. It's as exposed as his lies.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Likewise....
And do you, RANT, know that these are indeed the very explosives in question yourself? Does the video tape conclusively prove, with out doubt, that these are again the explosives under scrutiny right now?

If not, or not 100% certain, your doing as the one that you support is doing....politicizing it.



seekerof

[edit on 28-10-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:14 AM
link   
Another consequence to this is that this could backfire on all those critics who claimed that Saddam didn't move his weapons out of Iraq.....think about it.

There were and have been a number of topics suggesting and stating such.

Just where did those "trucks" go? Who was drinving them? Nationality?
There will be many questions to be raised on this, some new, but some undoubtedly old and brought back to bear in this controversy concerning Saddam and those still UN reported "unaccounted" for WMDs...



seekerof

[edit on 28-10-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Likewise....
And do you, RANT, know that these are indeed the very explosives in question yourself? Does the video tape conclusively prove, with out doubt, that these are again the explosives under scrutiny right now?

If not, or not 100% certain, your doing as the one that you support is doing....politicizing it.


I know it's either the same buttload of explosives or another buttload of explosives we found and didn't secure at Al Qaqaa. Does it matter which? It's explosives at a site known to been holding explosives once secured by inspectors, that nobody ordered to secure after the invasion or even take an inventory whatsoever other than a cursory looksey and photo ops.

The same dump that has since been reported to have been looted for months, even recently.

I know Bush also claimed he just heard about all this in the past month and knew nothing about it prior to that.

Remind me what you know again?



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:24 AM
link   

as mentioned by RANT
Remind me what you know again?


Excuse me?
Ok...to play your game, I know very little RANT, BUT I know enough to know that you, as with the Kerry campaign, are politicizing this.
Do you understand and know that?
Let's hope for all your sakes, it doesn't backfire...

Please praytell?



seekerof

[edit on 28-10-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:35 AM
link   
Sorry RANT, these are Cast Bossters, and not the missing explosives, nice try though, Keep on buy Kerry's lies.

I found this in the pdf spec for Cast Boosters:

•Hazardous Shipping Description
•Boosters, 1.1D UN 0042





[edit on 28/10/04 by jrsdls]



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:36 AM
link   
This is all a media stunt. Bush already knew that Russian Special Forces removed the HMX RDX explosives prior to the land invasion. I am sure Putin told him at some point. Bush knows the truth but is letting the Kerry Campaign hang themselves in the media



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

as mentioned by RANT
Remind me what you know again?


Excuse me?
Ok...to play your game, I know very little RANT, BUT I know enough to know that you, as with the Kerry campaign, are politicizing this.
Do you understand and know that?

Please praytell?


Is Bush not politicizing and capitalizing on his own stated lack of intelligence to deflect his faliure on Senator Kerry?

Is Bush's number one shill not politicizing when he deflects the blame for civilian misleadership on our brave troops just doing what they were told to do?

Today

‘The actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search carefully enough? Didn't they search carefully enough?’ ~Giuliani Defending Bush


Washington, DC – Kerry-Edwards advisor Joe Lockhart issued the following statement today:

“Early this morning, we learned the Bush campaign’s latest strategy for dealing with the missing explosives in Iraq. Today, the Bush campaign booked its number one surrogate and convention keynoter, Rudy Guiliani, on America’s top rated morning show and his message was clear, simple and incredible. He said:

“‘The actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search carefully enough? Didn't they search carefully enough?’


“This is just the latest example of the excuse presidency where the buck stops any place but the Oval Office.”


Please do "play my game" Seekerof, because though Bush may try, he can run, but he can't hide from this issue. He can't play dumb. He can't play mute. And he can't blame the troops. How dare he! And now it's Kerry's fault?

It's the saddest thing I've seen in a long ugly campaign from Bush of blaming his opponent and "TV screens" for all his failures to now try to spin this on the troops and Kerry?!?

But keep trying by all means. This discussion should be the dominant narrative. We're in a crisis of leadership in this country! The buck stops nowhere.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by robertfenix
This is all a media stunt. Bush already knew that Russian Special Forces removed the HMX RDX explosives prior to the land invasion. I am sure Putin told him at some point. Bush knows the truth but is letting the Kerry Campaign hang themselves in the media


So Bush is manipulating intelligence about the war for political gain (again)? That would make all the statements of him having no knowledge exposable lies wouldn't it?



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:51 AM
link   
Keep talking, k?
Backfire a'coming have any type distinct ring to it?
Iraq Site: Mystery Trucks Eyed
The Kerry al-Qaqaa Ca-ca


Again RANT, there is a difference see, truth is definitely stranger than fiction. As such, Kerry is claiming something a failure based on bullcrap information that is circumstantial at best. It is not certain as to when those explosives were there. Reports are conflicting, etc. Again, YOU, as with Mr. Kerry, are politicizing something that quite possibly have to Bush responsibility sown into it! Have you comprehended that factoid yet?
Thus the mere politicizing of something that is not entirely proven is pure bunk...I know it, others know it, and you know it, but hey, after all, it is election year and I certainly know how desperate the Democratic base can be when need arises.........as per this case!

Sorry for the pun, but it amounts to pure ca-ca...

Btw, read the information presented by jrsdls?

Prove those explosives were there and when, and that YOUR video specifically addresses them. Till then, please do keep up the mighty fine work of politicizing this issue.




seekerof



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 11:58 AM
link   
another thing that sorts sticks out to me is that all of the crates are in English. Having been in Iraq, I can tell you that the documents that I saw were all in Arabic.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Again RANT, there is a difference see, truth is definitely stranger than fiction. As such, Kerry is claiming something a failure based on bullcrap information that is circumstantial at best.


Kerry is claiming Bush doesn't know where those explosives are. BUSH is even claiming he doesn't know where those explosives are AND it's not his fault!

What's circumstantial about the lost explosives? Is Bush lying like some claim and knows where they are? Is it circumstantial to hold the Commander in Chief accountable for war et al?

Is this "Orgy of Theft" following American troops moving on to Baghdad as ordered not anyone's fault? Or just the troops like Giuliani now claims?


BAGHDAD, Iraq, Oct. 27 - Looters stormed the weapons site at Al Qaqaa in the days after American troops swept through the area in early April 2003 on their way to Baghdad, gutting office buildings, carrying off munitions and even dismantling heavy machinery, three Iraqi witnesses and a regional security chief said Wednesday.

The Iraqis described an orgy of theft so extensive that enterprising residents rented their trucks to looters. But some looting was clearly indiscriminate, with people grabbing anything they could find and later heaving unwanted items off the trucks.

Two witnesses were employees of Al Qaqaa - one a chemical engineer and the other a mechanic - and the third was a former employee, a chemist, who had come back to retrieve his records, determined to keep them out of American hands. The mechanic, Ahmed Saleh Mezher, said employees asked the Americans to protect the site but were told this was not the soldiers' responsibility.


You defend Shrub saying nobody knows what was there. NAY, you ATTACK Kerry saying nobody knows where the explosivs went. But the very indefensible aspect of this as Kerry states is NOBODY KNOWS what was there after the invasion? Don't look. Don't secure it. Don't even tell the troops what to expect.

Just on to Baghdad and let 'em loot, right? Bremer called it a mistake to not have enough troops. The interim government has called it a mistake. But oh no, Rummy called it "a normal part of the liberation process."

LOOTING MUNITIONS IS NORMAL FOR A LIBERATION CELEBRATION?



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 12:21 PM
link   
It's not good for the Bush administration either way. If they let close to 400 tons of explosives be stolen under their watch, they're at fault.

If we went into Iraq to disarm Saddam, and keep him from handing over deadly weapons to the terrorists ... yet, this administration has no clue what happened? They don't know if they were taken after the invasion? They don't know whether they were taken before the invasion? If our $(&(@!* purpose was to keep Saddam from arming the terrorists, don't you think it might be a good idea to check on one of the larger munition sites in Iraq, as noted by the IAEA so you would KNOW the answer to this question?

It's just more proof of why this administration really went to war with Iraq. If they cared that much about Iraqi weapons, they would have looked into this and they would already KNOW the facts of what happened; they would have known whether the weapons were still there or not, our president wouldn't have to ask us to wait for all the facts to come out.

Stunning really, that we go in to disarm Iraq, but somehow fail to inspect one of the larger munitions site in the country. This administration couldn't be any more inept, vote their asses out next week.



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by jrsdls
Sorry RANT, these are Cast Bossters, and not the missing explosives, nice try though, Keep on buy Kerry's lies.

I found this in the pdf spec for Cast Boosters:

•Hazardous Shipping Description
•Boosters, 1.1D UN 0042




Here's documentation on 1.1D classification.

UN Numbers for all Explosives Class 1

What makes you assume 0042? The 1.1D class is extensive and all classified explosives.

RDX and HMX are 1.1D too. #0391


0391 Cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine (Cyclonite; hexogen; RDX) and Cyclotetramethylenetetranitramine (HMX; Octogen) mixtures, wetted with not less than15% water, by mass or Cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine (Cyclonite; Hexogen; RDX) and Cyclotetramethylenetetranitramine (HMX; Octogen) mixtures desensitised with not less than 10% phlegmatiser, by mass 1.1D


I fail to see why you dismiss this as all 0042? Or the fact there were explosives there on April 18th at all?



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by moxyone
are those the explosives in question?

nope

nice try, though.

Kerry is unfit for command.


Sweat! And Left's agenda crumbles.....hehe



posted on Oct, 28 2004 @ 01:30 PM
link   
The argument is moot, as it will change noones mind when they cast thier vote.

However, 3 tons vs. 377 tons is quite a difference. And 377 tons vs. a minimum of a half million tons is quite a difference.

And why is it those who claim wrong war, wrong time, wrong place, wrong reason, wrong commander in chief, are the very ones to make such an issue of a few tons of explosives anyway??? Heck, Saddam was not a risk prior to invasion, so what logic is it that states a "supposed" couple hundred of tons of explosives is suddenly a big deal? Makes no sense, the argument just makes no sense.

Besides, obtaining explosives by the ton, say, from Iran, Syria, Russia, China, or North Korea would be not so difficult a thing for an insurgency to do, now would it?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join