RSS
Using PayPal
AMERICAN INTELLIGENCE? COULD WE HAVE BEEN INVOLVED AT AL-QAQAA?
Share / Recommend - Comment - Print - Thursday, Oct 28 2004, 11:09AM
AP REPORTS THAT AN ARMED INSURGENT GROUP, THE AL-KARAR BRIGADE, says that it worked with various U.S. military and intelligence officers in moving the massive amount of explosives that has become a major pre-election controversy.
Clearly, there are problems believing the assertions of an armed and hostile group, but on the other hand, this is the first reasonable scenario for how such a huge cache of weapons-making material could be moved without our intelligence operations seeing it.
After all, Colin Powell provided extensive photo evidence and other intelligence in his UN testimoney of truck movements of weapons and related materials. One would think that we would have been even more successful in monitoring movements around real rather than imagined weapons.
Could our intelligence services have somehow been involved in moving and hiding the materials that somehow fell back into hostile hands? There must be more to this story.
AP reports:
A group calling itself Al-Islam's Army Brigades, Al-Karar Brigade, said it had coordinated with officers and soldiers of ``the American intelligence'' to obtain a "huge amount of the explosives that were in the al-Qaqaa facility."
Josh Marshall has been following this affair closely, and another little birdie tells me that it was none other than Bill Clinton who pulled Kerry aside and told him to go after this issue hard and tenaciously -- and to stay on it.
Good call.
-- Steve Clemons
« Previous Article - THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS: THE SINS OF THE FATHERS» Next Article - A SOLDIER'S STORY: "VOTING FOR BUSH WON'T HELP US"
I'm curious as to the lack of reaction to the Moonie Times article today. A DoD undersecretary, John Shaw, alleges Russian Special Forces involvement in moving the missing explosives to Syria and elsewhere. Why is there no diplomatic outcry from Russia? Or Syria? Where are there denials voiced or motives questioned? This seems like a pretty inflammatory assertion to go so unnoticed or not commented on further. Steve?
Putin is a Bush-Cheney pioneer.
Steve -- Good point. I'm going to call the Russian Embassy and put in an inquiry to some friends at the Carnegie Endowment Moscow Center on this. Thanks, Steve Clemons
According to FT the Russian embassy called this "nonsense," and Larry Di Rita said he doesn't know anything about this.
Steve,
The Bush adminstration need to SPIN EVERYTHING to present Mr Bush as Mr. Infallable boggles the mind.
Plastic explosive is available enough that the 400 tons in Iraq does not contribute greatly to the world threat.
The administration made no plans, contingency or otherwise for an insurgency so the explosives were not a high priority objective.
However, given the existence of the insurgency, the 400 tons gives the insurgence a capability they would not have had otherwise.
Those explosives put the "bomb" in "car bomb" and IEDs.
Yes you could invoke a CIA conspiracy theory for the missing explosive but that is hardly necessary.
It is estimated that over 5 thousand tons of drugs are smuggled across the SW border of the US every year. Compare that to the 400 tons of Iraq explosives. Or compare that 400 tons to the amount of goods looted in one day during the Rodney King riot and one can quickly calculate that a diabolical conspiracy was not necessary to cause the explosives to disappear. A small army of looters is perfectly capable of cleaning out such a facility in a very short time especially if NO EFFORT WAS MADE TO STOP THEM.
Please, sit back, relax, and read again:
Some insurgent brigade worked WITH U.S. military AND intelligence (!) officers to move the 380 tons of explosives somewhere unknown.
These allegations against U.S. (how shall I name them?) citizens are supported by a CNN report on Oct.12,2004
(CNN.com - Missing Iraqi nuke equipment worries IAEA - Oct 12, 2004.html):
Iraqi Interior Ministry adviser Sabah Kadhim acknowledged that much of the country's dual-use equipment was missing, charging that the looting was organized and carried out by "neighboring countries."
He also alleged that "lower-level U.S. military officers" facilitated the sale of some of the equipment. CNN is seeking comment on the allegation.
Jonathan Landay writing for Knight Ridder has a good investigative piece on missing munitions in Iraq. Why does KR out perform NYT, WaPo and some of the other "elite" news agencies? Because they don't rely on official administration sources. This administration cannot be trusted to tell the truth. Even good news gets embellished beyond recogniztion.
From the KR report:
We find inside sources that indicate US troops were alerted to looting but not enough troops to respond.
The 400 tons at al QaQaa are put in perspective:
"Al Qaqaa was one of some 900 known weapons sites in Iraq that U.S. experts estimated held more than 650,000 tons of munitions. The Defense Department contends that the U.S.-led military coalition has destroyed or secured 402,000 tons of munitions. That leaves at least 148,000 tons still unaccounted."
We learn that "Iraqi exiles had a very heavy hand in determining which places got looked at first."
We learn that: "smaller-scale looting after the fall of Baghdad might have evaded detection."
An Aug. 27 UNMOVIC report to the U.N. Security Council said an assessment using commercial satellite imagery confirmed the "systematic removal of items subject to monitoring ... the fate of which remains unknown."
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/10040910.htm
So the facts are out there if reporters are willing to do their job.
Questions-
Does the Bush administration know what happened to these weapons and are purposefully trying to confuse the press and the public?
Does the Bush administration not know what happened and are therefore less competent than good journalists?
Do the Bush administration not care and see the story only in terms of political damage control?
My observation is that Mr Bush likes campaigning, but does not seem to enjoy governing.
Covering the Bush administration by reporting on what they say seems to be a sure way to mislead readers. The book on convering the Bush administration is to only report the results they achieve or don't achieve. Everything we see and hear from them is completely enveloped in spin.
Steve:
You need to go on some of the other blogs before you assert stuff like the following:
"... this is the first reasonable scenario for how such a huge cache of weapons-making material could be moved without our intelligence operations seeing it."
I won't reiterate, but your assertion is ridiculous. And the fact that AP reports means less and less to me with their often quite obvious political agenda. I am certainly feeling your agenda. I thought you wanted a non-partisan site?
bertignac
I CANNOT ABSOLVE SINS
I CANNOT ABSOLVE SINS
I CANNOT ABSOLVE SINS
I CANNOT ABSOLVE SINS
Bart Simpson on chalkboard in episode AABF14
buy levitra cheap levitraWithout going outside, you may know the whole world.
Without looking through the window, you may see the ways of heaven.
The farther you go, the less you know.
Thus the sage knows without traveling;
He sees without looking;
He works without doing.
levitra levitra onlineI CANNOT ABSOLVE SINS
I CANNOT ABSOLVE SINS
I CANNOT ABSOLVE SINS
I CANNOT ABSOLVE SINS
Bart Simpson on chalkboard in episode AABF14
Reader Comments (10) - post a comment