Looks like the press/Dems are wrong AGAIN

[Hotrod]

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041028-122637-6257r.htm

Those sneaky commies.

[Mile High Shack]

wow

I'm thinking Kerry should've waited before he tied his horse to that post. This could come back to bite him.

[Hotrod]

Of course now the question is where did they go and do we go get them ???

[Crushaholic]

I predict this will be the "Mock was right" thread. He's about the only person that has consistently mentioned Syria as the place where the WMDs were moved.

[Sideburn]

I predict this will be the "Mock was right" thread. He's about the only person that has consistently mentioned Syria as the place where the WMDs were moved.
No, Sideburn was right aswell. It's one of the few things Mock and I agreed on. They're in two places. Syria and the Bakkah Valley in Lebanon. But I gotta give it up to Mock...he was the most vocal of us. I gave up on the politics forum after Spider and I went round and round for 10 pages on what constitutes a WMD. That day I learned that Spider is the most stubborn person I know and he gets big props from me on that. He doesn't waiver at all. Now I treat this forum as a place to get entertainment. Funny stuff can be read here. But yeah, Syria and Bakkah valley Lebanon...Bible code said so.

[Crushaholic]

No, Sideburn was right aswell. It's one of the few things Mock and I agreed on. They're in two places. Syria and the Bakkah Valley in Lebanon. But I gotta give it up to Mock...he was the most vocal of us. I gave up on the politics forum after Spider and I went round and round for 10 pages on what constitutes a WMD. That day I learned that Spider is the most stubborn person I know and he gets big props from me on that. He doesn't waiver at all. Now I treat this forum as a place to get entertainment. Funny stuff can be read here. But yeah, Syria and Bakkah valley Lebanon...Bible code said so.

Duly noted. I just know Mock was the most vocal, but props to you for calling it, as well... :thumbs:

[Hotrod]

Nothing from my Kerry friends ???

I think this is huge. Its the second time the press has jumped into a pile of sh*t and the dems have blindly jumped with.

2. I guess there were WMD afterall

Then away from the political side of this news what do we do with this information. Does it mean that chem/bio stuff was moved to syria also ??? I would think it a very very real possiblity. If so we have to act on this now.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

John Shaw? Right. This has been disccussed in the other thread. Even when the Bush administration admits there were no WMD and hasn't been since 1991 people still try and say facts mean nothing?

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=19364

Inspector: Iraq had no WMD before invasion
WASHINGTON - Contradicting the main argument for a war that has cost more than 1,000 U.S. lives, the top U.S. arms inspector reported Wednesday that he had found no evidence that Iraq produced weapons of mass destruction after 1991. He also concluded that Saddam Hussein’s weapons capability weakened, not grew, during a dozen years of U.N. sanctions before the U.S. invasion last year.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6190720/

[Traveler]

EXCLUSIVE:
5 EYEWITNESS NEWS video may be linked to missing explosives in Iraq
Updated: 10/28/2004 11:50:09 AM - VIDEO







A 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS crew in Iraq shortly after the fall of Saddam Hussein was in the area where tons of explosives disappeared, and may have videotaped some of those weapons.

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 Division, 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS has determined the crew embedded with the troops may have been on the southern edge of the Al Qaqaa installation, where the ammunition disappeared. The news crew was based just south of Al Qaqaa, and drove two or three miles north of there with soldiers on April 18, 2003.

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

"We can stick it in those and make some good bombs." a soldier told our crew.






Soldiers who took a 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS crew into bunkers on April 18 said some of the boxes uncovered contained proximity fuses.

There were what appeared to be fuses for bombs. They also found bags of material men from the 101st couldn't identify, but box after box was clearly marked "explosive."

In one bunker, there were boxes marked with the name "Al Qaqaa", the munitions plant where tons of explosives allegedly went missing.

Once the doors to the bunkers were opened, they weren't secured. They were left open when the 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS crew and the military went back to their base.

"We weren't quite sure what were looking at, but we saw so much of it and it didn't appear that this was being secured in any way," said photojournalist Joe Caffrey. "It was several miles away from where military people were staying in their tents".

Officers with the 101st Airborne told 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS that the bunkers were within the U.S. military perimeter and protected. But Caffrey and former 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS Reporter Dean Staley, who spent three months together in Iraq, said Iraqis were coming and going freely.

"At one point there was a group of Iraqis driving around in a pick-up truck,"Staley said. "Three or four guys we kept an eye on, worried they might come near us."


On Wednesday, 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS e-mailed still images of the footage taken at the site to experts in Washington to see if the items captured on tape are the same kind of high explosives that went missing in Al Qaqaa. Those experts could not make that determination.

The footage is now in the hands of security experts to see if it is indeed the explosives in question.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

All the evidence, however, suggests the opposite. In an Oct. 25 AP story, a Pentagon official said, "US-led coalition troops had searched Al Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives, which had been under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact." According to Today's New York Times, after U.S. troops came through, Iraqis on the scene in Al Qaqaa "described an orgy of theft" as the sensitive military site was picked clean by looters. Iraq's top science official, Mohammed al-Sharaa, confirmed these reports, saying, "It is impossible that these materials could have been taken from this site before the regime's fall. The officials that were inside this facility (Al Qaqaa) beforehand confirm that not even a shred of paper left it before the fall."

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/28/international/middleeast/28bomb.html?oref=login&oref=login&oref=login

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200410/s1229343.htm

[TailgateNut]

Good grief, you people are so f-ing gullible/ brainwashed. The "October surprise"-----"there were WMD's" -----who would have thunk it?
All of our satellites and spy planes did not see any of this occuring, but yet, we have the capabilities to launch rockets right through the front door of houses hundreds of miles from ships in the middle of the night (and convieniently capture it on camera). Give me a f-ing break, Bush has you guys wrapped around his finger while you sit there sucking on your thumbs like a toddler in pre-school!
The MI BN's assigned to keep an eye on your buddy Saddam must have taken a few days off to allow him to make an extra buck prior to the attack taking place!

[Hotrod]

Good grief, you people are so f-ing gullible/ brainwashed. The "October surprise"-----"there were WMD's" -----who would have thunk it?
All of our satellites and spy planes did not see any of this occuring, but yet, we have the capabilities to launch rockets right through the front door of houses hundreds of miles from ships in the middle of the night (and convieniently capture it on camera). Give me a f-ing break, Bush has you guys wrapped around his finger while you sit there sucking on your thumbs like a toddler in pre-school!
The MI BN's assigned to keep an eye on your buddy Saddam must have taken a few days off to allow him to make an extra buck prior to the attack taking place!

LOL little touchy arent ya. rofl

[Traveler]

"A political candidate who jumps to conclusions without knowing the facts is not a person you want as your commander in chief."

Me thinks one should practice what he preaches.

[patteeu]

Nothing from my Kerry friends ???

I think this is huge. Its the second time the press has jumped into a pile of sh*t and the dems have blindly jumped with.

2. I guess there were WMD afterall

Then away from the political side of this news what do we do with this information. Does it mean that chem/bio stuff was moved to syria also ??? I would think it a very very real possiblity. If so we have to act on this now.

One point of clarification. These high explosives were technically not WMD. The term "weapons of mass destruction," when used correctly (e.g. the way our military uses it) means nuclear, chemical, or biological weaponry. High explosives are not WMD even if a truckload of them could very easily be more devastating than some chemical or biological agents.

[Mile High Shack]

LOL little touchy arent ya. rofl

he's a very angry young man
lol

[Hotrod]

One point of clarification. These high explosives were technically not WMD. The term "weapons of mass destruction," when used correctly (e.g. the way our military uses it) means nuclear, chemical, or biological weaponry. High explosives are not WMD even if a truckload of them could very easily be more devastating than some chemical or biological agents.

Oh I agree my point is (which I admit was a scrambled mess) IF and I mean IF it is proven that those explosives were moved to syria before or even during the war is it not probable that the same would have been done with WMD ??? With the spinning by both partys and unfortunatly the press who knows whats what anymore.

[TailgateNut]

Do you actually believe this garbage. If you do then I assume I should believe the thread about Bush masterminding 9-11!
Our spy planes can read the hands on a watch from 50000ft, but we didn't see these shipments departing under our "watchful eye".
If Bush would'nt have been in such a hurry to protect the "oil ministry" he could have kept a security force in place to prevent this from happening.

Codoleeza Rice was informed that these explosives "vanished sometime after the American invasion last year" but yet the white house has chosen to keep the information from the American public! WHY!!!!!

Just another of many blunders attributable to the current administrations "lack of intelligence" or lack of response to intelligence!

[Hotrod]

Do you actually believe this garbage. If you do then I assume I should believe the thread about Bush masterminding 9-11!
Our spy planes can read the hands on a watch from 50000ft, but we didn't see these shipments departing under our "watchful eye".
If Bush would'nt have been in such a hurry to protect the "oil ministry" he could have kept a security force in place to prevent this from happening.

Codoleeza Rice was informed that these explosives "vanished sometime after the American invasion last year" but yet the white house has chosen to keep the information from the American public! WHY!!!!!

Just another of many blunders attributable to the current administrations "lack of intelligence" or lack of response to intelligence!

Yep Im with ya the government should always make public all they know LOL

[Hotrod]

The heck with stupid overated security and intel inquiring minds want to know. ROFL!

[TailgateNut]

Yep Im with ya the government should always make public all they know LOL


Sure, while spreading their re-election message----"Be afraid, Be very afraid!"-- they convieniently neglect to mention having LOST three quarters of a million pounds of explosives!

Who should we be afraid of?????

Oh, that's right, they are removing arms from the streets of Baghdad, by offering $$$$ for each grenade, rifle and machine gun. I wonder how much a pound of this mtl will cost the American taxpayer. And the Bush supporters are worried about Kerry raising taxes. How big is BUSH's BILL?

[Hotrod]

Sure, while spreading their re-election message----"Be afraid, Be very afraid!"-- they convieniently neglect to mention having LOST three quarters of a million pounds of explosives!

Who should we be afraid of?????

Oh, that's right, they are removing arms from the streets of Baghdad, by offering $$$$ for each grenade, rifle and machine gun. I wonder how much a pound of this mtl will cost the American taxpayer. And the Bush supporters are worried about Kerry raising taxes. How big is BUSH's BILL?

OH thats right I forgot if Kerry was in charge not only would he have secured the explosives......oh wait we would not have gone at all since its the wrong war and could not have passed the global test. I mean if the first colation did not pass Kerrys global test I really doubt any every will. I guess then we would not have to worry about the losing the explosives well except for the fact they would still be under saddam's control.

[TailgateNut]

And Saddam could have placed them in the basket of a Hot air Balloon, and hope the winds aloft are blowing in the right direction. The add an egg timer with a few wires, and we would have been under attack!

[Hotrod]

And Saddam could have placed them in the basket of a Hot air Balloon, and hope the winds aloft are blowing in the right direction. The add an egg timer with a few wires, and we would have been under attack!

Or slip them to 19 men who slip into the USA.

[patteeu]

John Shaw? Right. This has been disccussed in the other thread. Even when the Bush administration admits there were no WMD and hasn't been since 1991 people still try and say facts mean nothing?

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=19364

Inspector: Iraq had no WMD before invasion
WASHINGTON - Contradicting the main argument for a war that has cost more than 1,000 U.S. lives, the top U.S. arms inspector reported Wednesday that he had found no evidence that Iraq produced weapons of mass destruction after 1991. He also concluded that Saddam Hussein’s weapons capability weakened, not grew, during a dozen years of U.N. sanctions before the U.S. invasion last year.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6190720/

Finding no evidence of WMD and proving that there were no WMD are two different things. But leaving aside that argument, there isn't any proof for Kerry's position that our military had an opportunity to secure these high explosives.

Here are some of the things we know:

1) The information on which the Iraqi Science Ministry based it's recent report that 377 tons of RDX explosives were missing was based on an IAEA "declaration" from July 15, 2002. But 6 months later, Jan. 14, 2003, the agency's inspectors recorded that just over 3 tons of RDX were stored at the facility. Thats a tiny fraction of what Kerry is saying we didn't secure. Note that both of these reports are from dates prior to our invasion. (<a href="http://www.abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=204304&page=1">link</a>)

2) When IAEA's checked the site in March 2003, they only checked the locks on the doors rather than the entire contents of the bunkers. (FOX News @ ~1:15pm central today)

3) The IAEA seals didn't really insure that the sealed material was not removed because ventilation grills could be removed and the material could be accessed without disturbing the seals. (<a href="http://www.abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=204304&page=1">link</a>)

4) The troops and reporters there on the 4th and 10th said they didn't see any HMX or RDX - although vials of white powder marked as explosives were seen. Note that we don't know what kind of explosives these were and there no reason whatsoever to believe that the hundreds of tons of explosives that Kerry has been talking about were present.

5) We've seen no reports of HMX or RDX being used by terrorists/insurgents in Iraq

6) It is highly unlikely that the terrorists/insurgents could have managed to haul away the tons of explosives that were said to exist without being detected by US military who controlled that part of Iraq's road system at that time. It would have taken a huge hauling capacity (multiple 18 wheelers), plenty of manpower, and lots of time to accomplish this. It's just too improbable to believe, especially on top of all the factual discrepancies noted above.

[Rohirrim]

Yeah, whenever I need to know what's going on in the world, I turn to the Syung Mung Moon Times. rofl

[patteeu]

EXCLUSIVE:
5 EYEWITNESS NEWS video may be linked to missing explosives in Iraq
Updated: 10/28/2004 11:50:09 AM - VIDEO

...
The footage is now in the hands of security experts to see if it is indeed the explosives in question.

Well I guess that's the key point in this article. This footage is absolutely worthless unless "explosives" becomes "RDX and HMX." No one argues that there weren't free explosives located all over Iraq after Bagdhad fell.

[patteeu]

Good grief, you people are so f-ing gullible/ brainwashed. The "October surprise"-----"there were WMD's" -----who would have thunk it?
All of our satellites and spy planes did not see any of this occuring, but yet, we have the capabilities to launch rockets right through the front door of houses hundreds of miles from ships in the middle of the night (and convieniently capture it on camera). Give me a f-ing break, Bush has you guys wrapped around his finger while you sit there sucking on your thumbs like a toddler in pre-school!
The MI BN's assigned to keep an eye on your buddy Saddam must have taken a few days off to allow him to make an extra buck prior to the attack taking place!


The fact is that we've had intelligence that materials were moved from Iraq to Syria for a long time. The question that was unanswered was whether or not these shipments contained WMD. We still don't know on that count, but it's certainly possible that they contained these high explosives. Here is just the first of many articles that my google of "trucks intelligence syria wmd" found:

Duelfer, an adviser to the CIA, said at the Oct. 6 hearing that a large amount of material had been transferred by Iraq to Syria before the March 2003 war.

"A lot of materials left Iraq and went to Syria," Duelfer said. "There was certainly a lot of traffic across the border points. We've got a lot of data to support that, including people discussing it. But whether in fact in any of these trucks there was WMD-related materials, I cannot say."

http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/breaking_8.html


Here is another to show that this theory existed before Oct 6 of this year:

On Dec. 24, 2002, nearly three months before fighting in Iraq began, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon accused Saddam Hussein's regime of transferring key materials for his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs to Syria in convoys of 18-wheel trucks to hide them from U.N. weapons inspectors. "There is information we are verifying, but we are certain that Iraq has recently moved chemical or biological weapons into Syria," Sharon told Channel Two television in Israel.

http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=670123



Good grief! Gullible/brainwashed, indeed.

[patteeu]

Oh I agree my point is (which I admit was a scrambled mess) IF and I mean IF it is proven that those explosives were moved to syria before or even during the war is it not probable that the same would have been done with WMD ??? With the spinning by both partys and unfortunatly the press who knows whats what anymore.

I'm with you on that.
:thumbs:

[patteeu]

...
If Bush would'nt have been in such a hurry to protect the "oil ministry" he could have kept a security force in place to prevent this from happening.
...

Which is more important, protecting the global economy from an oil crunch or guarding some high explosives that your side thought were so unimportant that you were willing to let Saddam retain them?

[patteeu]

And Saddam could have placed them in the basket of a Hot air Balloon, and hope the winds aloft are blowing in the right direction. The add an egg timer with a few wires, and we would have been under attack!

This post shows why you are off on such a wrong track. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of why Saddam was a threat to us. It wasn't because he might use his weapons to attack us, it was because he might join forces with terrorist elements and give them access to his weapons, his weapons development capability and his intelligence services. Reasonable people can disagree about how real this threat was or how far it had "gathered," but informed people don't make comments like the one you just did. I hope you aren't old enough to vote next Tuesday.

[TailgateNut]

On the other hand, we completely ingore those countries which are or already have developed nuclear arms.
"Yes, he might have joined forces, or could have supplied explosives to terrorists",or he might have not.
In an inadvertant way, have'nt we done the same?

According to your view, at least we save the OIL!!!!!!! Have you seen the prices lately?

[Hotrod]

On the other hand, we completely ingore those countries which are or already have developed nuclear arms.
"Yes, he might have joined forces, or could have supplied explosives to terrorists",or he might have not.
In an inadvertant way, have'nt we done the same?

According to your view, at least we save the OIL!!!!!!! Have you seen the prices lately?

And you think kerry will what ??? Do you really think kerry will not make decisions based on such things as oil. :giggle: Maybe he can build a collition with france and invade N Korea. The problem is talking to N Korea is about as productive as trying to convince LABF to vote for Bush. :giggle:

[patteeu]

On the other hand, we completely ingore those countries which are or already have developed nuclear arms.

Are you proposing that we invade a country that can strike back with nukes? I have no doubt that we could defeat/eliminate North Korea, but do you want our 30,000+ ground troops on the penninsula to get a closeup view of a mushroom cloud? Or millions of innocent people in Seoul? Or our bases in Japan?. You aren't a brilliant military strategist are you?


"Yes, he might have joined forces, or could have supplied explosives to terrorists",or he might have not. In an inadvertant way, have'nt we done the same?

No, we haven't. If Al Qaeda has hundreds of thousands of tons of HMX and RDX explosives that's a bad thing. If we let them get it through negligence that's worse. But neither is as bad as having Al Qaeda working hand in hand with an oil-rich state that has the technical capabilities to develop chemical and biological (and eventually nuclear) weapons or that has a sophisticated intelligence infrastructure.

According to your view, at least we save the OIL!!!!!!! Have you seen the prices lately?

Oil is important. If you don't think so, stop driving your car, start farming your own food, start heating your home with wood you chop by hand, and have your electricity disconnected.