72 Comments

1. jerry:

Roger:

Whether the tape is shown or not to the public has little to do with paying attention to it. The CT authorities saw the tape and will react accordingly. There is no purpose in showing the tape to the public and lots of potential downside in giving Al Qaeda publicity. Not media action gets focused through a political lense.

Oct 28, 2004 - 4:16 pm 2. Terrye:

I am not sure about this. On one hand I hate to give the bastards the satisfaction of showing up in homes all over America. On the other it is not the place of ABC to decide what is good for us in terms of national security.

Maybe it is time a standard was set. I know I think the world would be a better place if Al-Jazeera was not in it.

Oct 28, 2004 - 4:26 pm 3. exguru:

ABC has made a news judgment: To play the tape would frighten untold numbers of soccer moms and drive them into the arms of George W. Bush. Ergo, it would not serve the public interest to air the tape–before next Wednesday.

Oct 28, 2004 - 4:46 pm 4. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

Or, they may decide that since Al Qaeda says it will attack if Bush is re-elected, they may want to play it not. What a quandary they must be in.

How many people will believe that not re-electing Bush is going to protect them? I don’t believe Al Qaeda said that they would not attack if we elect Kerry, they only said they would attack if we elect Bush.

The scary thing is that their prestige hangs on this one. If they don’t follow through with an attack far worse than 9-11, people will stop taking them seriously in the mideast.

ABC’s not showing the last 15 minutes to the CT people is absolutely wrong. There is no excuse for it. ABC used those people to verify the tape so ABC can make a big splash with it, and they didn’t even give our government the whole thing!

There is another, ugly October Surprise working it’s way into the election. Check out my blog for the information. Oddly, the organization intentionally putting this information out at this time is composed of British doctors.

Sigh.

Oct 28, 2004 - 4:54 pm 5. mcg:

I’m inlined to not have the tape aired, at least not in its entirety. There has always been suspicion that these tapes might serve as coded communication to sleeper cells. I am, however, all for an executive summary and showing a few brief excerpts, as long as the material is effectively and completely summarized, and not edited as ABC seemed willing to do with the CIA’s copy.

Oct 28, 2004 - 4:55 pm 6. Terrye:

John:

I checked out your site and I don’t think anyone will take that serioulsy except for people that assume we have killed even more.

Sooner or later people need to come up with proof for their claims or they are part of the background noice and the brutal Afghan winter and the hundreds of thousands dead becasue of sanctions every year and the millions of refuges meanwhile we hear Genocide in Darfur? What genocide?

BTW I heard that 270 mass graves have been found in Iraq so far, just where the hell were these doctors then?

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:05 pm 7. ex-democrat:

would the fears of releasing a coded message be the same if a full transcript was released instead?

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:05 pm 8. richard mcenroe:

Terrye — I remember after the Liberty Park bombing at the Atlanta Olympics, the teevee newsdrones were trying desperately to find someone to admit they’d been terrorized. They were trolling the lines of people going back into the Games the next day and EVERY SINGLE PERSON they picked (at least on that newscast (NBC?) said they were going back because they weren’t going to let the bombers intimidate them.

If ABC ran that tape John Kerry would have footprints up his chest from people running over him to vote for Bush.

Where do you think we are, Spain?

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:10 pm 9. penwil:

ABC announced they were going to air it–or at least report on it–tonight. Did they change their minds?

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:23 pm 10. ex-democrat:

terrye – aren’t these the same doctors that won’t work on mass graves in case they hasten saddam’s appointment with the executioner?

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:28 pm 11. asher:

Roger,

Your appalling ignorance is easily explained by the fact that you do not spend enough time listening to responsible, professional news sources like CNN and Reuters. If you did, you would know about the 100,000 INNOCENT IRAQIS KILLED BY US WAR

LONDON (Reuters) – Tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed in violence since the U.S.-led invasion last year, American public health experts have calculated in a report that estimates there were 100,000 “excess deaths” in 18 months.

The rise in the death rate was mainly due to violence and much of it was caused by U.S. air strikes on towns and cities.

“Making conservative assumptions, we think that about 100,000 excess deaths, or more have happened since the 2003 invasion of Iraq,” said Les Roberts of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in a report published online by The Lancet medical journal.

“The use of air power in areas with lots of civilians appears to be killing a lot of women and children,” Roberts told Reuters.

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:35 pm 12. jerry:

asher:

Are these the same experts who predicts millions of deaths in Afghanistan?

Or are they blaming the deaths caused by Al Qaeda and Baath terrorists on the United States? You know, kind of like Winston Churchill’s obstinance causing the deaths of 6 million Jews.

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:41 pm 13. asher:

Jerry,

But don’t you see? It’s all a plot so Haliburton can make more money. I’m still waiting for CNN to produce “proof” that the mass graves and torture chambers were a hoax, too.

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:49 pm 14. Katherine:

I thought that only American military casualties were of any consequenceÖ now we are supposed to care about Iraqi deaths?

I am deeply confused here. Could somebody provide me with a clear cutoff point when I am suppose to stop/start caring about Iraqi lives.

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:55 pm 15. Terrye:

asher:

An excess death? What exactly is an excess death? What about the people who were dying from a lack of food and medicine when Saddam was there, was that an excess? Or the political murders? Were they excess? What a word.

100,000 people in 18 months is about 185 people a day.

If there is a car bomb and 12 people die the whole world knows about it but we kill 185 people day after day and there are no funeral marches through the streets with wailing women?

The first time the US went into Fallujah we pulled out because 700 people were killed and it was reportedly pissing off the Iraqi people. But they let us bomb 185 people day in and day out without any mass demonstrations?

We have lost about 780 men to hostile enemy fire, and about 250 to accidents, doesn’t that seem kinda lopsided? Where are the bodies? Where are we bombing and where is the world press to see these dozens of dead day in and day out?

Is this about money or politics or both?

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:56 pm 16. Terrye:

richard:

I know we aren’t Spain [thank the Lord] but I am not sure I am comfortable with giving some asshole free air time to threaten my life.

Oct 28, 2004 - 5:57 pm 17. asher:

For those unfamiliar with Reuters’ accounting system, these people are not considered “excess deaths”. In fact, they really don’t count at all.

Oct 28, 2004 - 6:14 pm 18. Charlie (Colorado):

…responsible, professional news sources like CNN and Reuters.

What’s really amazing is that he can say that without being struck by lightning or something.

Oct 28, 2004 - 6:15 pm 19. asher:

Did I mention I sometimes forget to close my /sarc tags?

Oct 28, 2004 - 6:17 pm 20. Charlie (Colorado):

Before you take these numbers too seriously, you should read David Adesnik’s analysis of some similar numbers.

Oct 28, 2004 - 6:17 pm 21. mwalls:

Based on Reuters article on the 100,000 deaths (total WAG – wild assed guess), they’re including combatants. And I really don’t care how many combatants we kill.

Oct 28, 2004 - 6:22 pm 22. Terrye:

mwalls:

They must be including everyone that died from old age too. The population is 25 million.

I saw a site called thetruthaboutiraq.org which stated that over 80,000 children have been saved since the US went into Iraq. I guess they aren’t excess.

Oct 28, 2004 - 6:33 pm 23. Lem:

OT

Nasa unveiled its newest supercomputer today.

The new supercomputer achieved sustained performance of 42.7 trillion calculations per second (flip-flops), finally eclipsing world record holder John Kerry.

Kerry’s campaign rapid response team reminded reporters that Kerry’s plan calls for a smarter, more sensitive supercomputer, with manners to boot.

“I’m sorry Dave, I’m afraid I can’t do that.”

Oct 28, 2004 - 7:44 pm 24. Katherine:

You know what, if iour lives and livelihoods were not at stake I could relish the thought of Kerry presidency.

Can you imagine the entertainment value of JohnJohn running against the barriers of checks and balances? And observing the MSM contortions between the faithful worshipfulness of the New God in the White House and temptation to report the blunders that the Kerry administration would be bound to commit? And, beyond everything else, there is this gift to all comedians, Teresa Heinz. I wish the politics were spectatorsí sportÖOh, how I miss the stupidity of the 90ís.

Oct 28, 2004 - 7:45 pm 25. Swopa:

The irony of these post titles is really getting to be hilarious.

Could anyone be more insufferably self-important and flagrantly biased than Roger Simon these days?

The infamous NYTimes article that has fueled a half-dozen or more sanctimonious posts about MSM bias — by supposedly not giving enough weight to the possibility that the al Qaqaa explosives were not removed before U.S. troops got there — has now been proven correct.

Videotape shot on April 18, 2003 shows American troops cutting through the IAEA seals, entering the bunker and opening barrels of HMX (as confirmed by numerous experts, including David Kay)… and then leaving the site unsecured,

Will Roger have the integrity to acknowledge this? The courage to admit that he was (gasp!) wrong? The blogosphere waits and wonders.

Oct 28, 2004 - 7:49 pm 26. Tara:

From Kerry Spot..(cut and pasted)

I watched the big ABC News report: ?Video Suggests Explosives Disappeared After U.S. Took Control.?

And at first glance, it appears to make the case that when the 101st Airborne Division arrived on April 18, 2003, there was still a large supply of explosive materials in the facility.

But there are still a few problems with this story.

Problem one: Take a look at the orange label on the container, in this photo.

It says, ?EXPLOSIV EXPLOSIVE 1.1 D 1?. (The same label can be purchased here.)

There are three explosives we are looking for here:

HMX, cyclotetramethylene-tetranitramine, also called Tetrahexamine Tetranitramine

RDX, Cyclotrimethylene trinitramine, and

PETN, Pentaerythritol Tetranitrate

According to this chart from GlobalSecurity.org, the 1.1D classification can be used for the storage and transport of quite a few high powered explosives. Among them are:

Cyclotetramethylene-tetranitramine, wetted or HMX, wetted or Octogen, wetted with not less than 15 percent water, by mass

Cyclotrimethylene-trinitramine, wetted or Cyclonite, wetted or Hexogen, wetted or RDX, wetted with not less than 15 percent water by mass

Pentaerythrite tetranitrate, wetted or Pentaerythritol tetranitrate, wetted, or PETN, wetted with not less than 25 percent water, by mass, or Pentaerythrite tetranitrate, or Pentaerythritol tetranitrate, or PETN, desensitized with not less than 15 percent phlegmatizer by mass.

So – this orange 1.1 D is the label we would look for on HMX, RDX, or PETN. But did those explosives in these containers have 15 or 25 percent water or other dilution liquid in them? Or did they look pretty dry in that desert?

And as we look at the rest of that chart, we see that a lot of other explosives that fall in the 1.1 D category.

Specifically there are 79 other substances and types of explosive material and supporting equipment that would get the 1.1 D label, including gunpowder, flexible detonating cord, photo-flash bombs, mines, nitroglycerin, rocket warheads, grenades, fuzes, torpedoes and charges. And few of them require any liquid dilution.

Is what?s on this news report video HMX, RDX, or PETN? Possibly, if the material inside is some sort of diluting liquid that we didn?t see on the tape, or if the Iraqis were storing these high-grade explosives in an unsafe manner. Or it could be one of the 79 other substances. Or some containers could have the big three, and some could have others.

As usual, it is foolish for folks to jump in and conclude that they know what was in the containers without gathering all of the facts. How many Kerry-backing writers who will cite this video as a smoking gun are familiar with what materials are classified 1.1D?

Problem two: This doesn?t quite explain the internal IAEA documents ABC reported that suggested that significant amounts were gone before the invasion began. ?Confidential IAEA documents obtained by ABC News show that on Jan. 14, 2003, the agency’s inspectors recorded that just over three tons of RDX were stored at the facility ? a considerable discrepancy from what the Iraqis reported.? It all suddenly came back before the war? Or is what we?re seeing in the video three tons?

Problem three: This doesn?t quite explain the Pentagon?s satellite photos of large numbers of trucks leaving the facilities before the war.

Problem four: This doesn?t quite explain how all this could be taken down a road full of heavily armed U.S. forces, under skies full of coalition warplanes. The Pentagon called the removal of that much material from the facility during or after the war ?very highly improbable?:

Col. David Perkins commanded the 2nd Brigade of the 3rd Infantry Division, the division that led the charge into Baghdad. Those troops first captured the Iraqi weapons depot from which 377 tons of explosives disappeared.

Two major roads that pass near the Al-Qaqaa installation were filled with U.S. military traffic in the weeks after April 3, 2003, when U.S. troops first reached the area, the colonel said.

Perkins and others in the military acknowledged that some looting at the site had taken place. But he said a large-scale operation to remove the explosives using trucks almost certainly would have been detected.

Problem five: This doesn?t quite explain why none of this explosive has to date shown up in any Iraqi insurgent attack.

Oct 28, 2004 - 7:58 pm 27. Terrye:

Swopa:

From what I have read that does not prove anything of the kind.

The point is that proof if it exists should be presented at the time the story is done. Or you sit on the story.

There are still questions and it is not known what is in the containers. I am sure there are people out there who know what the numbers on the containers mean, etc.

There is still the question concerning the memo from ABC concerning the dicrepencies in terms of tons. There is still no indication as to how or when all or any of the explosives could be removed and there are lots of different kinds of explosives.

And guess what if it is true it means that Kerry has trashed the 101st Airborne on the eve of an election with the help of the UN in the hopes he could somehow use it to benefit himself.

There is an investigation ongoing and I don’t know what happened, but that is the difference between you and me. I admit, I don’t know.

Interesting note. ABC had a headline that said video suggests explosives were there, reuters changed that to video shows. That right there is your problem swopa. You don’t know the difference between suggesting and proving.

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:01 pm 28. Swopa:

From the article linked in my previous post:

The reporter and cameraman said that although they were not told specifically that they were being taken to Al Qaqaa by the military, their videotape matches pictures of the site taken by United Nations weapons inspectors, according to weapons experts.

“The photographs are consistent with what I know of Al Qaqaa,” said David A. Kay, a former American official who led the recent hunt in Iraq for unconventional weapons and visited the vast site. “The damning thing is the seals. The Iraqis didn’t use seals on anything. So I’m absolutely sure that’s an I.A.E.A. seal.”

One weapons expert said the videotape and some of the agency’s photographs of the HMX stockpiles “were such good matches it looked like they were taken by the same camera on the same day.”

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:17 pm 29. Katherine:

Well, Swopa, this blog is Rogerís private property and if he chooses to write about the top secret intel that he receives daily from Romulans, that is his right and his choice.

Regarding Rogerís integrity, some time ago he acknowledged that he was wrong in thinking that political system based on Marxism would bring bright future instead of misery and tyrannical oppression to the people living under it. To reexamine oneís belief, to confront the facts, to publicly acknowledge that one was wrong, to go against the beliefs of his friends and community takes real courage.

I say yes, Roger has character and integrity. Nothing that I have seen from you indicates that you are even a hundredth of a man that he is.

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:17 pm 30. Charlie (Colorado):

Videotape shot on April 18, 2003 shows American troops cutting through the IAEA seals, entering the bunker and opening barrels of HMX (as confirmed by numerous experts, including David Kay)… and then leaving the site unsecured,[sic]

Wow, are you ever a day late and a dollar short. Again.

One of the points Jim doesn’t mention, I suspect because it didn’t occur to him, is that those are standard fiberboard dry-storage drums. They aren’t used for wet stuff — but RDX and HDX are only type 1.1D when they’re wet.

What’s more, the original pictures only showed at most a few dozen barrels. Now, those look a little smaller than a 55 gal drum, and I’ll admit I don’t recall what the standard metric sizes are — but a 55 gal drum is about 209 liters, so let’s say, for argument’s sake, that those are 200 liter drums. Specific gravity of RDX is about 1.82; I can’t find anything for HDX offhand, so we’ll assume it’s 2. (Given that it’s a power, this is almost certainly about double reality, if not more.)

Then each barrel would be around 400 kilos — 880 pounds. Five barrels to 2 tonnes. A thousand barrels for the approximately 200 tonnes of HDX that’s supposed to be missing.

Each barrel of which too heavy to be handled by even two men — so it probably requires a forklift, as well as a flatbed truck to move.

25 barrels to a truck load; 40 truck loads to clean it out.

When Jerry Bremer has already pointed out that at the time there was nothing but US vehicles on the roads, so they would have been noticed.

Not to mention that the 3ID didn’t find it around 4 APR, even though they searched closely enough to find and inventory thousands of test tubes with white power in them. So you’re claiming they found a bunch of test tubes, 3/4 in x 5 inches, but missed a thousand (or thousands, more likely) 200 liter drums? And then the Army and the Marines managed to not notice forty truckloads of barrels clearly marked “EXPLOSIVE”.

It’s a tough question: is ABC the bigger bunch of fools for that story — or are you the bigger fool for not thinking even that deeply into it?

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:21 pm 31. Mark Poling:

Tara, nice analysis. This is why the MSM is quaking in its collective boots; lots of smart people can get their thoughts in wide circulation without having to jump through the Coastal Establishment. The news is no longer nurtured and grown in a hothouse environment; the Word is no longer strictly in Latin; the horses are out of the barn; the people with the keys are finding the doors are off their hinges.

Of course, there are still plenty of people more-than-willing to just regurgitate the words of the discredited gatekeepers, and hurl insults at their genial hosts while they do it.

(As an aside, why would the Times be worried that these explosives could be used in the manufacture of nuclear bombs? Everyone knows the WMD threat was a lie concocted by Bush and the Rovers…)

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:25 pm 32. Mark Poling:

Charlie, that’s not fair; you used math!

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:31 pm 33. alcibiades:

Completely OT:

But is anyone paying attention to the new headline at Drudge, which mentions that the IRS is pursuing a case against the NAACP based on the NAACP’s bashing of Bush, its tax exempt status and the fact that everyone in the organization represents himself as a partisan Democrat. And that the Washington Post is going to write all this up in a big story this weekend.

While normally I’d think go for it, IRS, they’re getting what they deserve, just now all I can think is what genius at the IRS decided to pursue this case right before the effin’ election. And I’m wondering if they were a Democrat or just really, really stupid.

We’ve all been hearing for a few weeks about greater support for Bush in the African American community and now, to stop it in its tracks, we hear about this IRS case against the NAACP, which is in the interest of the NAACP to break before the election.

Even though the NAACP more than deserves it, it ain’t a good time for this particular fight. Timing is all, here.

Gnashes teeth.

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:32 pm 34. Charlie (Colorado):

Mark: that wasn’t math, that was arithmetic.

Not that I expect they can do arithmetic either.

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:35 pm 35. Rick Ballard:

Charlie (C),

You can call it math, arithmetic or Ionic Greek, it’s all the same to Swopa. Remember, they took out the logic chip and put a Joshie regurgitator chip in its place.

Ignorance is curable but stupid is forever.

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:43 pm 36. Terrye:

swopa:

A couple of things. For one thing David Kay is a Democrat who lost his job. For another he apparently was not there to inspect that seal or what was inside so his off the cuff remarks are not helpful.

This is the point: WE do not know. We do not know how much if any of the explosives were there. We do not know how they were moved. We do not know what was in the barrels. We do know that 377 tons would require a lot of people and trucks and time to move. We do know that the UN did not do as the US asked and destroy the stuff long before. We do know that a UN official leaked this information at this time to effect this election.

So swopa you wanna kiss ass for some incompetent UN bureacrat who is using Kerry’s historic dislike for the military to screw with our electoral process, go ahead. But I am not interested.

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:45 pm 37. flenser:

Since the so-called news media won’t mention this, I’ll just be a “citizn journalist”.

So, is it possible to buy a US presidential election? I guess we’re going to find out.

Latest numbers from opensecrets show that Soros and Lewis have upped the ante; they are now each in for $23 million. The mysterious “Shangri La Entertainment”, which sounds like a front for the porn industry, has slipped to third place, with only $13.5 million. They’d better pony up if they want any attention from Kedwards.

I understand that in battlegound states, Soros and Lewis have hired thousands of high school and college kids to work the GOTV effort, at $10/hr.

That’s todays Democratic party for you; devoid of brains or morals, but absolutely stinking rich.

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:46 pm 38. Katherine:

Charlie,

Now you keep being factual again. Stop it now!

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:48 pm 39. Terrye:

alci:

Maybe they are doing this because somebody from the NAACP got caught using crack to get people to register to vote.

But I agree, the timing sucks.

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:48 pm 40. flenser:

alcibiades

Judging from the link, this has been in the pipeline for a while. Sounds like a normal IRS investigation. It’s the NAACP that decided to make a big issue of this a few days before an electon.

I suspect we will see many more “October surprises” over the next four days.

I assume eveyone will be working the GOTV effort over the weekend. Our side relies on volunteers.

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:56 pm 41. Rick Ballard:

We need to remember that the missing explosives is not the story.

The story is the terror attack that Kerry and Swopa fall asleep praying for. It’s the only thing that makes squandering the reputation of the All Caca Times/SeeBS consortium worhwhile. It is absolutely the only reason that Kerry keeps this stupid, inconsequential story in his stump speech. He (and Swopa) calculate that the “river of blood” promised by the American al Queada Kerry supporter will float Kerry’s boat across the finish line.

Such loving people.

Oct 28, 2004 - 8:56 pm 42. Rick Ballard:

flenser,

Shangri La is Stephen Bing. Soros to Bing to Lewis is the Dem power play. All men of the people acting only out of the most unselfish motives.

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:00 pm 43. Terrye:

Rick:

Ain’t that the truth.

It is a stupid story. The very fact that the shit is missing means we don’t know where it is. Maybe the Russians helped the Iraqis move it, maybe they left some behind and the looters got it, maybe it was sold to the highest bidder, maybe like the wmd Saddam kinda lied about what he had in the first effing place.

But before you go with a story like this you really should be able to answer at least some of these questions. And if you can not then you should not be surprised [as swopa seems to be] that there are people out there questioning your methods and motives.

I think we should give the 101st the benefit of the doubt, after all securing weapons was a matter of life and death to them.

Swopa thinks we should give Kerry the benefit of the doubt because he says mean things about Bush.

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:08 pm 44. DennisThePeasant:

Swopie-Poo

Let’s do talk about integrity.

Yours.

Not that you’re a regular around here (Praise be to Allah on that score), but you have been around long enough to make your opinions regarding what we call the liberation of Iraq very clear.

You’ve been against it from the beginning. Your position has always been that the United States has never had any valid national security reason for destroying Saddam Hussein’s regime, nor have you ever granted any validity to the moral argument for removing an aggressive, brutal and oppressive totalitarian regime simply because it exists.

Given that as a backdrop, your “concern” for the supposed loss of 380(?) tons of high explosives seems somewhat, um, odd considering you felt no particular need for confronting Saddam Hussein at a time when every nation in the world assumed he possessed genuine weapons of mass destruction. What are we to make of this?

Well, given that I am often less than completely attuned to the Christian concepts of forebearance and tolerance, perhaps I could be the wrong person to answer this, but off-hand I’d say it’s odds on that you’re a lying sack of shit. Do you really think anyone here buys into the idea that you give a rat’s ass about 380 tons of high explosive being either missing, in the hands of al-Qaeda or in a munitions bunker in Syria?

Call me biased, but I’m guessing that what you really do give a rat’s ass about is John Kerry defeating George W. Bush on November 2. To the extent this story of missing ordinance hurts G.W. Bush, you are interested, to the extent it does not, you are not interested. I mean, it’s not like you’re really being slick about this. Those of us who have endured you fully understand the depth of your intellectual limitations. We also fully understand that one of the consequences of those limitations is that you really don’t understand just how badly your ‘arguments’ come across to those who are even modestly informed about the issues of the day.

In any event, were you a little bit brighter or a little less bitter, I would point out to you that the idea that committed Anti-Liberationistas such as yourself can now claim grand concerns over the dangers of a relatively small stockpile of conventional weaponry not being under the control of the U.S. military tends to strike those of us with working short-term memories to be as absurd as it is dishonest.

18 months ago those explosives (and WMD, for that matter) meant nothing to you. Nor did they have meaning 12 or 6 months ago. Nor were you at this site, or any other site, last week bemoaning the ever-present danger of unaccounted for ordinance in Iraq. No…what you were ‘worried’ about was Bush lying, Bush being AWOL, Bush being a fundamentalist fanatic and Bush introducing the draft. In other words, you were ‘worried’ to the extent and in the direction pointed to by your masters. Being without the tools needed for informed and independent thought, what else could you do?

There’s an integrity issue here, alright, but it centers around you and absolutely nobody else.

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:12 pm 45. Lem:

Hold the keys

ABCíS Ted Koppel just poured cold water on the explosive story.

“I was there with the 101st, and did not know it until today when I spoke to the 101st Commander”

“….. they (explosives) were probably moved. Saddam knew we were probably going to bomb the place”.

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:15 pm 46. Jamie Irons:

Rick

What do you think of this statement by Ramesh Ponnuru in NRO’s “The Corner”? (The comment title is “The End is Near”)

Jamie Irons

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:24 pm 47. Terrye:

Dennis:

I love it when you yell at people.

If you do not deliver Ohio I will hunt you down.

I mean that in the nicest way.

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:25 pm 48. Katherine:

DtP,

That is another foot added to your ìlucky foot troll necklaceî (BTW, how many feet did Swopa start with? Is he a centipede?).

I guess I should have left responding to a troll to a professional.

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:27 pm 49. Katherine:

Jamie,

Ramesh is a resident conservative pessimist. He was predicting that Arnold would lose. Personally, I have no idea, but I hope.

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:30 pm 50. alcibiades:

The new Mark Steyn in the Spectator is a good antidote for Ramesh.

He’s bettin’ his job on Bush.

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:40 pm 51. Jamie Irons:

Katherine (OT)

Thanks.

My lovely wife, who has an excellent sense of humor, thought I should have a T-shirt made emblazoned with the logo:

You had me at “crawl space!”

Have you got the crawl space lined with lead yet, just in case?

Jamie Irons

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:40 pm 52. Rick Ballard:

Jamie,

Rammesh should sit town and calculate what it takes in Yankee dollars to move Tradesports. Then he should look at Soros’ net worth and consider that he made it in market manipulation. Then he should go to RCP Market Indicators and scroll down to the British bookies and take a look at the odds. Then he should ask himself what it all might mean.

I can’t tell you what it takes in dollars to move the Tradesports contracts (I’ll bet Charlie (C) can) but I can tell you tht Soros has enough dough to do it and he (and Bing and Lewis) are spending like drunken sailors to beat W.

This election has focused on women with children since day 1. The swing to W identified in the ‘02 elections has held to date. Kerry has never had any chance of winning without moving those women back to Gore levels on his side. Current pol internals continue to show W maintaining his standing with the group that counts, so I’m not particularly concerned except in the case of the terror strike that Kerry is praying for. I just can’t make a call on what women with children will do in that event. If we get through tomorrow without a strike that kills a lot of kids then I believe that W is certain to win. Absent a strike it’ll be W at 54-57% and a five seat Senate pick up.

After Tuesday I’ll bet you’ll be happy to take the Lilly detail man’s number off your speed dialer. Or was it Merck?

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:50 pm 53. Katherine:

Jamie,

Not yet. I will place my order on Nov 3rd, should the worst come to worst. Grrrr!

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:52 pm 54. Terrye:

And remember that tradesports is just that, sports. The real deal takes place on November 2.

Oct 28, 2004 - 9:55 pm 55. Jamie Irons:

Thanks, Rick, yet again…

Katherine

I’m more optimistic now. I have a hunch we’re going to be able to enjoy the wine “unshielded!”

Jamie Irons

Oct 28, 2004 - 10:00 pm 56. Jamie Irons:

Rick

After Tuesday I’ll bet you’ll be happy to take the Lilly detail man’s number off your speed dialer. Or was it Merck?

Are you kidding? Speed dialer? I don’t need no steenking speed dialer. I have a much more direct “line.”

Jamie Irons

Oct 28, 2004 - 10:07 pm 57. Syl:

From ‘finnman’ at polipundit, I pulled this info from a comment:

———-

The video shows explosives labels with ì1.1D UN 0042″.

link to UN numbers identifying Hazard classes:

http://www.ribbands.co.uk/genpages/unnumber.htm

0042 Boosters without detonator 1.1D can be several different types of explosives but is not necessarily RDX or HMX

0072 is specifically RDX

0072 Cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine (Cyclonite; Hexogen; RDX), wetted with not less than15% water, by mass 1.1D

0226 is specifically HMX

0226 Cyclotetramethylenetetranitramine (HMX, Octogen), wetted with not less than 15% water, by mass

These are not the missing explosives.

—————-

Kerry’s problem is that he assumed before having the facts. At least when Bush made a decision to go to Iraq he relied on the CIA and other intelligence agencies.

Kerry relied on the New York Times.

He ain’t Presidential material.

Oct 28, 2004 - 11:09 pm 58. Syl:

Hey, typepad turned the URL into a link automatically! That’s new isn’t it?

I don’t use preview.

I like to live dangerously.

Oct 28, 2004 - 11:11 pm 59. jerry:

People:

The light bulb has gone on. We need to step away from this trial lawyer driven gotcha trick. Al QA QAA is about a tiny fraction of the explosives and ordinance secured in Iraq. This comes down to wastage. Here are two points I want to make which should drive a spike through the heart of the issue.

(1) At best, this shows how ignorant and dangerous Kerry would be as President. If Kerry and Edwards are sincere then it shows that they have little understanding of the conduct of large-scale military operations. They believe that you can conduct major ground combat operations without casualties, with a perfect plan that achieves 100% of the mission goals. A President Kerry would most certainly veto any plan that cannot meet these requirements. Since no commander could devise a plan to satisfy this requirement we would become paralyzed. This sounds a lot like the Clinton administrationís approach to security problems, doesn’t it?

(2) More likely Kerry and Edward views this as courtroom gamesmanship designed to work on the emotions of a “jury.” Certainly the nuanced ones believe that everything should be perfect but failing at that the blame must be fixed on someone with “deep pockets.” Kerry is playing with national security in the same way the Edwards played with OB/GYNs in North Carolina. If the baby is not perfect sue. Someone has to be responsible, right? Just as the women of North Carolina now get less pre-natal and delivery care, we will get less security from the paralysis of perfection.

You know, we lost more men on D-Day then in the entire Iraq campaign. Most of these men died on Omaha Beach because it was manned not by a static fortress division but by the German 352ID, a veteran of the East Front. This was a clear intelligence failure. By Kerry’s reasoning on Al Qa Qaa, Eisenhower should have been relieved because he got it wrong and men died..

Oct 29, 2004 - 6:16 am 60. Knucklehead:

Jerry,

You make, as usual, very good points. Unfortunately, at this stage of the People’s Informational Revolution, the Greater Blogosphere needs to continue doing the heavy lifting and homework necessary to expose the falsities and half-truths propogated by the Reactionary Wordsmiths Local 666. (Way to go, Syl!)

If stories like this are left to RWL-666 nobody hears anything other than, “Nearly 400 Tons of some of the worlds nastiest explosives (used to make nuclear weapons!), RDX and HMX, had been carefully inventoried and kept sealed in Saddam’s bunkers by the Caring Angels of the United Nation’s IAEA until they were forced from the scene by Karl Rove’s Evil Jackbooted Thugs who then went on a drinking binge and let freedom-fighters steal everything the starving children weren’t making toys out of. Look, here is the photographic proof!”

At no point will the RWL-666 tell us what the heck RDX and HMX are or how they are packaged, stored, or used. Would any of the regulars here know that these things are sorta like the “lean ground beef” that can be mixed with any number of versions of “hamburger helper” to make any number of “meat dishes” prior to these heady days of the People’s Informational Revolution? Did anyone know that there is an international labeling system for hazmat and that there were labels on the stuff in the photos and the labels don’t seem to match the claims being tossed about by RWL-666? Did anyone know that the Sacred Seals used by the Exalted Saints of the IAEA are basically fancy versions of the things your local Capitalist Expoiter Scum Utility Company puts on your electric meter?

When all is said and done with NYTrogate, I hope it turns out that some enterprising SpecOps supplyguy who looks a whole lot like the Telly Savalas character in The Battle of the Bulge took what he needed and burned the rest and what he took is being mixed into stuff that is killing Islamomurderers far and wide.

Oct 29, 2004 - 7:17 am 61. Swopa:

Nor were you at this site, or any other site, last week bemoaning the ever-present danger of unaccounted for ordinance in Iraq.

Try more than a year ago, chump.

(sound of Dennis the Peasant’s bluster being flushed down the toilet)

Oct 29, 2004 - 7:44 am 62. jerry:

Swopa:

You are getting testy… Must mean that we have caught your attention.

I guess you now admit that your friend Saddam had a lot military type stuff all over the country. You simply cannot secure all this material no matter what plan you have in mind because you cannot simultaneously descent at all points known and unknown in Iraq. So, like John Edwards going after a North Carolina Obstetrician, you point the finger and yell incompetence and failure. By your standards there hasn’t been a single military success by the United States in its entire History because we haven’t fought a war without some major screw-up happening. All this shows is you have absolutely no subject matter knowledge. What is worse is that you have no desire to develop that knowledge so that you have an intelligent comment to make.

Oct 29, 2004 - 8:04 am 63. Knucklehead:

Someone in this or another recent thread linked to Rick Levanthal’s piece. Here’s an excerpt from that piece:

…but I do know this: a trip across that country revealed one huge weapons depot after another. There were more missiles, mortars, guns, grenades, and ammo in Iraq than you could ever possibly imagine. The stuff was everywhere: in schools, hospitals, mosques, bunkers, abandoned buildings, holes in the ground, and homes under construction.

Something painfully, and very dangerously, similar to this is true of Pakistan, Afghanistan, numerous other -stans, Sudan, Yemen, Somalia, and no shortage of other places. This stuff wasn’t put there by Karl Rove or George Bush or Halliburton or the CIA or the Evil American Weapons industry or any of the other favorite scapegoats of the Barking Moonbats. It was sold or handed out like candy to Islamomurderers and other thugs by the Progressive Egalitarian Societies of the FSU, PRC, NK and the like in their never-ending effort to create Social Justice.

Mr. Levanthal describes the world Barking Moonbats like you, Swopa, have so fervently wished for. Now you’ve got it and you’d like to blame it, and the pain and difficulty of cleaning it up, on everyone else. ESAD, you loathesome bigots!

Oct 29, 2004 - 8:21 am 64. DennisThePeasant:

Swopa

First of all, I should have been more specific. I should have explicitly stated that the venue you ‘talked’ about this issue was one with some traffic. Like Roger’s site. Not like your site (with its’ grand total of 2 comments, you might as well posted it on the wall of your closet). I should have also explained in detail that linking to the New York Times does not constitute ‘talking’ or ‘discussing’ an issue in a meaningful way. I realize it’s all you can do, but linking is linking, not talking, not thinking.

Second of all, it doesn’t change the main thrust of my original post…which is that for all your huff and puff about other people’s integrity, you’re the one doing the unabashed whoring around here. I couldn’t help but notice you simply avoided any attempt to justify the apparent contradiction of bemoaning this issue when you have steadfastly refused to get credence to the concept that WMD in Saddam’s hands ever constituted a danger to the USA. It is no surprise that you remain oblivious to your own lack of credibility, but you really ought to try to think these things through once in a while.

Oct 29, 2004 - 8:43 am 65. Jamie Irons:

Swopa

Glad you Swoped in, sort of like a bat out of heaven to enlighten us.

Your premise seems to be that we either should have guarded all the widely dispersed and infinitely various ordinance in Iraq after we got there, and to do that should have had “enough soldiers on the ground.” (Whatever that number would have been — I’m not sure their is sufficient infantry in the entire world to carry out that task).

But guarding this stuff is not like guarding the gold in Fort Knox, which is in a central, well-defined location in a friendly surrounding environment.

Please consider the arguments of Ralph Peters and others on some of these questions.

Jamie Irons

Oct 29, 2004 - 9:07 am 66. Jamie Irons:

Swopa

I mean this in the kindest posssible way: you might want pause in your flight to orbit around this passage for a few moments (from Hugh Hewitt). (Scroll down a bit.)

Here is one of those small signs of Beltway conviction that Kerry is a loser.ÔøΩ Anthony Cordesman is no friend of the Administration, but the senior analyst at the Center for International Security is one of the “go-to” experts admired by the press.ÔøΩ The Washington Post puts him on the front page this morning:

“There is something truly absurd about focusing on 377 tons of rather ordinary explosives, regardless of what actually happened at al Qaqaa,” Anthony H. Cordesman, a senior analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, wrote in an assessment yesterday. “The munitions at al Qaqaa were at most around 0.06 percent of the total.”

Jamie Irons

Oct 29, 2004 - 9:32 am 67. Knucklehead:

Some additional heavy lifting and homework the MSM is unwilling (and the likes of Swopa unable) to do can be found at Powerline.

Oct 29, 2004 - 9:37 am 68. Charlie (Colorado):

Folks, someone asked what it would take to move TradeSports artificially. I can’t find who for some reason (possibly having to do with a headache and sinus infection reducing my IQ to the mid single digits.)

But here’s the basic skinny: a Tradesports contract is $10. As of a few seconds ago, more than 14000 contracts — $140,000 — have traded since midnight UK time (about 6PM yesterday Mountain Time), 8000 of those since about 10AM MDT today. (It’s 1336MDT as I type this.)

As Don Luskin points out, there is massive selling against the contract, but the contract won’t stay down. So someone is dropping $50K or so to try and drive the price down.

Oct 29, 2004 - 12:38 pm 69. Terrye:

Swopa:

Saddam had 150 ammo dumps in Baghdad alone. Not even a million men can be everywhere at once.

Besides if you had your way nobody would have any control over any of it. Except Saddam and his wacko sons and their friends.

And who sold most of it to him? The Peace Camp. Gotta love that.

Oct 29, 2004 - 12:49 pm 70. Kevin P:

Roger:

This subject is the exact reason why so many people are turning to the blogs to get their information on serious subjects instead of the MSM.When Swopa and his crowd see the picture of the labels and cry smoking gun, it’s proves it is the missing expolsives. Then we find out from people on this site that this label could be one of 79 different types of materials and not all of them are similar to the explosives that the NYT claims were there after the Army has arrived. “oh but the films shows seals being broken”, the smoking gun that proves the original story is correct.” Then we find out from this site that many of the bunkers could be entered without breaking the seals and the last time the UN force was at the bunkers they only checked the seals, not the contents of the bunkers.

My quick recap of the many numerous posts above is superficial and I will not spend time going over the many specific and seemingly irrefutable points made above. Unfortunetly the MSM won’t examine the detailed points either. They operate from the assumption that the original Times story is basically spot on and then cover the story from a process angle instead of examinng the details of the story. They are to lazy to even use the detals listed above, check with experts to debunk or verify the specifics, and then use this knowledge to enlighten their readers.they blather on about how this helps or hurts Bush and thus help cement a superficial and sloppy piece of journalism and help the writers of the Times achieve their goals of influencing the election.

To see Swopa’s paper thin logic get torn apart is enjoyable but it is sad to think that his original post could get printed above the fold of the NYT and passed off as credible journalism and a valid story. The fact that Times can print such a obvious last second propaganda attack from a spurned UN official who is pissed at the Bush administration for not supporting his third term and have it dominate the final days of a US election is a stunning indictment of the state of the traditional journalism and a sign that if they don’t clean up their act they will soon pass into the dustbin of history.

Oct 29, 2004 - 1:53 pm 71. Richardphx:

“There is something truly absurd about focusing on 377 tons of rather ordinary explosives, regardless of what actually happened at al Qaqaa,” Anthony H. Cordesman, a senior analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, wrote in an assessment yesterday. “The munitions at al Qaqaa were at most around 0.06 percent of the total.”

It’s still enough to give the insurgents a motherlode for years to come. Now we have the video footage from ABC proving beyond doubt (according to David Kay, who is no lover of the liberals) that the explosives indeed disappeared after the invasion. So I suggest you give it a rest and go a bit easier on the mainstream media. They do a good job overall (I used to be a member) and there is no conspiracy to fool or delude their readers. Most of the things you read in the papers that you don’t want to believe, like the fact that we outsourced Tora Borta or that we intentionally decided not to get Zarqawi when we could have, are confirmed in both the conservative and liberal media (specifically, in the two cases I just cited, the Wall Street Journal did the confirming recently). In other words, it’s simply the truth, it’s simply what happened. The media did the same thing to JImmy Carter back in 1980, suffocating him in bad news, and for damn good reason — because the bad news was true. When we were winning in Iraq, that was reported too, and we were all delirious with joy and the scent of victory. The media follows the smell of blood, be it Clinton’s or Bush’s or whoever’s. A few bad apples aside (on both the left and the right) they do a good job and are to be commended.

Oct 29, 2004 - 2:06 pm 72. Kevin P:

Richardphx:

The original story was about a specific amount of explosives and a specific type. Even if the original story had been 100% accurrate if put in perspective with the vast amount of weaponery and the vast number of dumps,conventional and unique, the story would still be overblown. But the original story was wrong.It is amazing how the MSM comes out with very specific amounts and then when the story begins to fall apart they begin to lower the bar of proof. If the original story had been some weapons and explosives, the amounts and types is uncertain, have gone missing, then the story would be accurate. Then of course it would not be a campaign issue and Kerry, with the help of certain portions of the MSM, would not have anything to pontificate about. What you say is prooving beyond a shadow of a doubt is not what the original story stated. If I write a story thats says you raped a women and later I proove that you did have a date with her this does not proove the rape. Yet you seem to have such a low threshold of accountability that you try to use these tapes to justify the original story when they in no way do this.Re-read the specific points that are laid out in this thread, all of them. I think they make the original story look ridiculous.How do the tapes you refer to show that the specific amounts and types of explosives that the original story claims went missing. They don’t.This thread ,none of the better posts are written by me, show that the Times story that the Kerry campaign is using to hype this story out of proportion is widely innaccurate and full of assumptions that are not accurate and that these smoking gun tapes that you refer to do not support the wild claims that the Times made. Since you are a former journalist go through this thread and answer the specific charges that are made in this thread and debunk them.

Oct 29, 2004 - 4:14 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: