Im on it!

Spreading the word and the truth.

Boy, is Rather going to be pissed!

Just subscribed to this comment thread.

OOPs, Just subscribed to this comment thread.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2167933.stm

No inspectors present in Iraq until September of 2002.

I haven't finished reading your entire post yet, Paul, but I believe you're starting from a misconception. Even when I first read the ABC piece, what I got from it was that the 141 tons were in one of the declarations that Iraq provided IAEA periodically.

So the IAEA didn't inspect them in July 2002. In fact, there were no inspectors in Iraq at that time, remember? They didn't return until late that year.

Okay, now I'll go back and finish reading.

I haven't finished reading your entire post yet,

Grrrr Don't make me hurt you

Before I forget, your ABC quote actually says the declaration was from the Iraqis:

At that time, the Iraqis said there were 141 tons of RDX explosives at the facility.

Okay, now that I've finished reading the post, I don't think the source of the July 2002 report matters. The important point is that in January 2003, IAEA inspectors reported only 3 tons of RDX were present.

That alone blows this whole thing out of the water, in my opinion.

-------------------------------

and these facts were never given to the UN Security Council

That might be the most difficult item to prove.

Were IAEA reports ever presented in SC executive session? How do you get the minutes or copies of the reports?
--------------------------------

Hey, I ain't afraid a nobody fum Loseriana.

Regardless of the outcome of this experiment, I give you guys/gals credit for asking the questions and asking for answers. A very good reason I now look to you bloggers for my news and information

wget -m, grep, find, |, are your friends in this search.

Mirror their site locally, (rate limit it if necessary, use googlebot as the agent if necessary) then search through the site locally, much faster than searching the site over the web, and you can customize the searches many ways. And you can search google at the same time. Come up empty? Don't forget the way back when machine, and other site archiving projects in case the material or articles have been removed. And don't forget the BBC has a lot of archives online, for those without lexis nexxus accounts to burn someone else's money on.

I posted the request over at LGF, and at Suite101. Hopefully something will come of it shortly.

IAEA reported in S/2003/95 that it inspected and verified 196 tons of HMX. This inspection took place sometime between the resumption of inspections on Nov 27 2002 and the release of this report on Jan 27 2003.

The report also indicates that the IAEA got the backlogged semi-annual reports from 1998 to 2002 in December of 2002. One of them, probably the starting point document, would have been the July 15 2002 Semi-Annual Declaration.

My guess (only a guess now) is that the IAEA took the Iraqi's word for it that they had 141 tons of RDX and never inspected it because no one was raising hell about RDX, just HMX. The Iraqis could very well have used all that RDX and then reported in their next Semi-Annual Declaration due on Jan 15 2003 that they only had 3 tons left.

First, a big thanks! Bloggers are a terrific check and balance system for the Legacy Media.
Wizbang is one of my favorites.

Second- a question about something that may need correcting. I am reading the IAEA report as saying that at one point there were nearly 195 tons of HMX, which I think most people have agreed are not so worrisome as the other stuff, and 147 tons of RDX.

Then they went back later and found only 3 tons of of the RDX. - and this is where I am seeing something different.

The majority of bloggers seem to be reading this as saying only 3 tons of RDX and nothing else. I am reading this as the other stuff was there in the same amounts, but the RDX had been tampered with and only 3 tons was left of *it*- not only 3 tons of all explosives.

Frankly, this is mainly important for credibility and the tenacious sticking to the facts that bloggers not supported by Soros are noted for. But those assets are valuable enough to protect.

http://www.iraqwatch.org/profiles/nuclear.html

"Iraq also started working on spherical lenses as early as 1988, and experimented with various kinds of explosives, including Baratol, PETN, COM-B, TNT, RDX and HMX. Iraq revealed to IAEA-4 that hundreds of tons of HMX had been imported, and that Iraq had gained "considerable experience in casting such material." The HMX was used to make improved explosive lenses for the Iraqi bomb. The Al Qaqaa team also mastered the design of dedicated exploding bridge wire (EBW) detonators, after experimenting with several types. In fact, the U.S. Departments of Defense and Energy helped train three Iraqi scientists from Al Qaqaa at a quadrennial international detonation conference in Portland, Oregon, where nuclear weapon detonation technology and flyer plate technology were presented. The latter is used to control the force and shape of implosive shock waves."
1988. That far back they were ID'ing it

"If I'm putting the cart before the horse, Spoons is sure to tell me but I don't think my theory is too far out there from reading this report. "

How can I, when you told me several paragraphs above to stop reading?!? :-)

But anyway, I think this is mostly right, with a couple of reservations. One, I'm a little concerned about the issue Wendi Sue raises, which I had tried to figure out last night and this morning, but couldn't. Two (and this is a really minor point), I think you may be making too much of the fact that the SC was not notified of the movement of this stuff way back when. As I understand it, this is not particularly exotic material we're talking about here -- certainly not WMDs. IT doesn't surprise me that ther wouldn't have been much focus on it.

lawhawk thanks

Varuth you rock

Wendi Sue- "Legacy Media" OUCH! -

Spoons, you have a real name? And that was a test, I knew you would ignore it. lol

But lemme wring out your point- Remember all the debate before the war- everyday somebody testified before the SC. IF IF IF 138 tons of explosives used to detonate nuclear weapons turned up missing in that time frame and it was ignored?????? Big story.

Update 1: Boyd reminds be that I wanted to address something. It was my understanding (prior to this story) the IAEA SAID there was 141 tons there. This story, which is not worded as clearly as if could be, said "Iraq declared."

If Iraq could self declare, did they inflate the number or did some truly get moved before Jan???

Can anyone find if the "inspected country" can self declare? Seems almost worthless if they can.

On the issue of self-declaration, if you recall, one of the sticking points during the rigamarole prior to the war was the fact that Iraq was required to present a report detailing what and where all the inspected items were. If I recall correctly, they ultimately turned in a 12,000-page document that was total gibberish.

I point that out because there are apparently provisions in the inspection regime that required Iraq to report on certain things. Recall that when Hans Blix issued his famous report, there was page after page of "Iraq has no documentation on this".

Now, on to the conjecture. It sounds as if Iraq was required to periodically verify that the IAEA seals were in place and that the quantities were correct. On July 15, 2002, they "verified" the 141-ton figure in a report. Come January 2003, when the inspectors arrived, they found only 3 tons. The only thing we know for sure is that between the last inspections previously (1997 or 1998) and January 2003, 138 tons of explosives disappeared. Those are the last two times that any eyes other than Iraqi eyes saw the material.

excellent point steve

http://www.iraqwatch.org/un/IAEA/S-1995-1003.htm

Don't forget Steve that in 1991 supposedly at the Al Qaqaa facility much of the equipment and weapons machination hardware was removed in the begining of 1991.

But I can't seem to find via tracking where the stuff went. Anyone want to take a guess as to wether or not the expolsives where as well?

I E-mailed Kevin on the Self Declaration.

Iraq was told to declare their own munitions in total. Basicaly an attempt to 'Come Clean" in part of UN Ressolution 687/1991.

They had till April 15th to step to the plate and show their cards.

Ok... quick timeline summary of IAEA activity at Al Qa Qaa. Begins here

Nov 30 2002 - An IAEA team completed some work at the Al Qa Qaa Company, specifically the removal of the last of four air samplers previously installed and planned to be refurbished, upgraded and reinstalled in the near future.

Dec 8 2002 - IAEA receives Iraqi declarations at its Vienna HQ. (ref. S/2003/95)

Dec 9 2002 - An IAEA team at Al Qa Qaa began inventorying known explosive materials from the past nuclear programme that were previously under the control of the IAEA. Other tasks involved inspecting a number of key buildings and outdoor sites within the huge Al Qa Qaa complex.

Dec 10 2002 - Another team investigated an outlying site of the Al Qa Qaa explosives plant. The outlying site, called Sumood-4, is near the city of Mussayib and was associated with a past program. Sumood-4 is co-located with the Sadda Cement Factory. The cement plant was also inspected for dual-use capabilities.

Dec 16 2002 - Another IAEA team visited four sites: Al Qa Qaa, Mussayib Army Munitions Depot, Al Motaseem Factory, and the Hatteen Establishment's testing range. The team monitored the production of small rockets. These sites work as a unit in the Iraqi military armaments structure to produce and test munitions.

Dec 25 2002 - In a cooperative venture, the IAEA team joined with Iraqi auditors at the Al Qa Qaa explosives plant. They together made item counts of important dual-use materials and compared results. Hundreds of items were counted. The results will be used as part of a verification of Iraq's use of special metals.

Jan 24 2003 - An UNMOVIC chemical team returned to the Al Qa Qaa complex for the seventh day. The team inspected the Research and Development Centre and a waste treatment facility.

Feb 4 2003 - Two IAEA teams conducted two inspections. One team inspected the Al Mamoun plant of the Al Qa Qaa Establishment south of Baghdad. A second IAEA team, with support from UNMOVIC, inspected the former site of the Al Salam Company, formerly associated with biological weapons development, in the Salman Pak area south of Baghdad.

Perhaps the real question here should be whether John Kerry overheard anything about the Al Qaqaa munitions stash during his super-secret meetings with the UN Security Council ...

Also, may I suggest a new name for this scandal, with a hat-tip to the unbelievably sloppy work done by the NYT:

"Failure-To-Investi-Gate"

The IAEA has come forward saying there is no discrpency. Only 3 tons of RDX was at that location. The rest was at another location 45 km away, that they considered part of Al QaQaa as far as reporting is concerned. Sounds pretty strange to me.

So now, either the IAEA is lying, or there was never more than 3 tons of RDX at the specific location that troops were at. I haven't heard anything about anyone confirming that RDX was or was not at the location 45 km away, but if it was gone it is just more circumstantial evidence that the stuff was moved prior to the war rather than looted after the war. It was tough enough to beleive that looters could sneak into one location with dozens of tractor-trailers to steal explosives without being seen. It is impossible to believe that they could have snuck into 2 locations 45 km apart with dozens of trucks in each location, and not be seen.

OK. Iraq had to make semi-annual reports to the UN. From Hons Blix's report prior to the war (Page 14):

Although there have been some inconsistencies and discrepancies in Iraq’s semi-annual declarations...

I still have a copy of the report and I am reading it again to see if there is any mention of this. There may not be since it was an IAEA thing.

- As an aside FOX is now reporting that serious questions are being raised by industry insiders into the possibility that NY Times "leaked" the upcoming news release to the Kerry campaign ahead of time...

- The spark in the hey pile is the speed that the Kerry people were able to air an Ad citing information contained in Sangers article so quickly and comments Kerry made back some time ago where he mentions several NYT reporters by name, Sanger being one of them, who "[think] it would take a change in presidency to move America back on track"....

- developing.....

- The "Companies of the Islamic armies", yet another group of terrorists are now saying in a video on Al Zazerra, that they have the explosives all 340 tons, and they will use them on Coalition forces, (never mind they would require advaned processing to be usable in conventional weapons)....

- Does that asshole Kerry either know or give a flying f*** that what he's doing is yet another traitorous anti-American act and playing into the hands of the insurgents? Its going beyond wanting to see that elitist scum bag lose...I'm starting to loath the SOB.....

has anyone here looked at the footage from the minneapolis tv station supposedly embedded with the 101st? they're showing video which they claim was shot onsite at qaqaa showing huge amounts of stuff labeled explosives. now my query would be why is all of this iraqi stuff labeled in english, but this might be worth looking into.

http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/S3723.html?cat=1

The IAEA and UN are useless (REDUNDANCY ALERT), but I did find a couple of things:

1. Inspections restarted on 25 November 2002 and continued until 17 March 2003.

2. IAEA inspected Al Qa Qaa three times: 9 December, 28 December (this may have been an UNMOVIC inspection) and 14 January. UNMOVIC inspected there several times, but for rocket motor production issues.

3. On December 10, IAEA inspected Sumood-4 which may be the mythical "outlying" facility which is described as:

A team investigated an outlying site of the Al Qa Qaa explosives plant. (The main Al Qa Qaa complex was inspected on Monday.) The outlying site, called Sumood-4, is near the city of Mussayib and was associated with a past program. Sumood-4 is co-located with the Sadda Cement Factory.

I did find this interesting tidbit from a December 1997 letter from the IAEA to the UN:

In accordance with its notification to IAEA, Iraq removed IAEA seals from five of the six high-explosive bunkers at the Al Qa Qaa facility and dispersed approximately 50 tons out of the total of 228 tons of high explosives (HMX) stored in the bunkers to other locations at Al Qa Qaa. IAEA inspectors have witnessed the return of this material to its original storage location and have taken measures to account for the original inventory. There are no indications that any of this material has been diverted.

Clearly, Iraq had no problem removing IAEA seals in the past.

Clearly, Iraq had no problem removing IAEA seals in the past.

I sure wouldn't. What are these seals, anyway? Are we talking about little stick'ums?

Hunter and all,

Remember, Kerry brought up the idea of un-secured ammo dumps in the second debate.

http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004c.html

This debate happened on October 8th.

Varuth you are going to bust this