NY Times Iraq Explosives Document

[MattNC]

Thought this warranted its own thread - kind of a simple way to refute Sludge's latest story.

[qanda]

1. Thanks

:kick:

On edit: kick

[juliagoolia]

3. european dating style.

Day month year.. note the date on the form
15/7/2002

date in letter is
4/9/2003

written 9 4 2003

[Bad Thoughts]

6. Is that the basis of the Drudge error? n/t

[Garbo 2004]

16. Drudge cites an NBC Nightly News report as his source of info

But I saw the report and perhaps I simply wasn't paying close enough attention, but my viewing of the NBC report didn't leave me with the impression that the explosives were already missing when they arrived.

Did anyone else see the NBC report? I've looked at the NBC news site online but all I could find on the subject was the AP article I linked to in my previous post. If NBC had a "scoop" on the NYT one would think they would feature it on their site.

[MidwestTransplant]

21. Exctly

Olberman recounted what NBC News said. They didn't say anthing about the weapons being gone. The troops arrived at the weapons site shortly after the invasion but they didn't look for weapons there. That's what NBC said.

[sharman]

24. Full quotation of NBC report

can be found in a comment to a post on Atrios (4000MFBs is the title of the story)

Sorry I'm not more adept at linking. The language is a bit stronger, the troops did not find the "powerful explosives" in question, but did find more conventional weapons. The date was April 10.

Here's my bottom line on it:

If the Pentagon had taken the threat seriously, we wouldn't have all this speculation about when the looting occurred. The troops would have been tasked to look for them, look to see that the seals were intact, and we would have real documentation of the condition we found the facility in.

So, whether or not we could have prevented the looting, whether it happened on our watch or just before--obviously, this Admin didn't set out to secure the site, despite the warnings from the IAEA.

[Garbo 2004]

25. But US troops were at the site at least on April 3 a week before NBC.

See this AP story dated April 4, 2003. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,83252,00.html

This would put US troops at the site at least by April 3. It likely was then that the site was first inspected and the explosives cache was confirmed as "intact" as the Pentagon source said. And the site was left unsecured.

NBC didn't arrive on the scene until April 10.

[blitzen]

8. good point....still well after the invasion though n/t

[juliagoolia]

13. timeline baghdad had fallen.... this area was under our control

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/war.tracker/

WE took baghdad 4-9/2003

They say these things vanished after that.. not before that.

[LizW]

15. Wait

Making sure I understand this -- The date as written in the letter is "9-4-2003".

That means, in European dating style, April 9, 2003, right?

I'm wondering where that date comes from. Does anyone recall when the inspectors were ordered out of Iraq before the invasion? It seems it was just a few days before, but I'm not sure. At any rate, they weren't there on April 9, 2003, so how do they know the stuff disappeared after that date? One theory: that might have been the date that our soldiers reached Al Qaqaa and reported that the stuff was there. (Although there are conflicting stories on whether that happened. The NYT story said that our guys went through the site and did NOT see anything with IAEA seals on it, but later versions of the story say that they saw the stuff but didn't guard it, and it was taken later.)

Anyway, the inclusion of this specific date in this document makes me think that SOMEONE had some proof the stuff was there on April 9, 2003.

[juliagoolia]

19. Right on dates

The date in the letter is April 9, 2003... Written Month Day Year..as in the form letter. That was the key. Since this memo came out 10-10-2004 you can't tell if they are using that type of date style, but in the content of the form you see a date of 15/7/2002 which can not mean the 15th month so there for the month is used after the day in this letter.


The US styled dates are
10-10-2004
4-9-2003
7-15-2002

[mzmolly]

2. Check out what Kerry said that same month!

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/200...

Remarks by Senator John Kerry: Winning the Peace in Iraq

This Administration’s brazen, go-it-alone policy has placed our soldiers at needless risk and our hopes for success in jeopardy. It has given al Qaeda an opening in Iraq – and made Iraq a recruiting poster for terrorists of the future. It has undermined America’s legitimacy with our own people, our allies abroad, and the Iraqis. And it has left them wondering when they will get their country back.

For months, there have been warnings about Iraq’s stockpiles of munitions. Three weeks ago, the Pentagon assured Americans those weapons were secure. Today we learn they are not – 650,000 tons of ammunition – unguarded and uncontrolled.

This Administration’s arrogance was so deep they even ignored the warnings of their own CIA experts in Iraq and carelessly disbanded the Iraqi army – resulting in 350,000 angry Iraqis roaming the country – without a paycheck and with guns.

To ignore the CIA is one thing. To undermine our intelligence efforts and to risk the lives of our agents is beyond the pale and unacceptable. We learned in the last days the extent to which someone in a powerful position in his Administration, bent on revenge, endangered Ambassador Joe Wilson’s wife because her husband had committed the great crime of telling the truth. Outing a CIA agent endangers lives, threatens national security and breaks faith with those who put their lives on the line to protect this country. It is outrageous that the President who campaigned with a promise to restore integrity to the White House refuses to get to the bottom of this. President Bush’s father called those who expose the names of national security sources “traitors.” And this President Bush needs to start going after any traitors in his midst – and that means more than an inside once-over from his friend – and Karl Rove’s client – John Ashcroft.

Blast this shit to the media folks!

Perhaps we need a thread gathering info/statements from Kerry on this - then we can blast it? What say you all?

[Bush was AWOL]

4. Thanks. What are the chances the NYT's backs off?

[blitzen]

5. case closed.....blast to media! n/t

[Doosh]

7. Are we ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN these documents are authentic?

[havocmom]

9. "Lost after 9-4-2003" well that puts the 'happened before we got there'

excuse in the trash heap, doesn't it! OK, junta, bring on the NEXT implausible excuse so we can blow that one outta the water too.

edited to fix an ommission

[qanda]

12. Someone above pointed out that date is probably

4-9-2003, because they were using European dating styles.

[havocmom]

17. We were there in April too

either way, we lost the boom boom powder and that aint good

[Garbo 2004]

10. I say, well done! Pentagon sources had confirmed the cache was intact

when US troops arrived but was left unguarded. For example, in an AP report:

"At the Pentagon, an official who monitors developments in Iraq said U.S.-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. The site was not secured by U.S. forces, the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity." http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6323933/

[Hailtothechimp]

11. But look at the font! It's obviously forged! So the whole thing's bogus!

Am I good buckhead or what?????????

[sonicx]

14. sorry, but those fonts couldn't have been made until 2004

;)

[Joefess]

20. LOL

:)

[LynnTheDem]

18. Sept 4, 2003 or April 9th 2003 doesn't matter

bush is responsible from March 2003 when he launched his invasion and onwards.

bush was WARNED PUBLICLY MANY TIMES SPECIFICALLY about Al Qaqaa and to SECURE the site.

He didn't.

[shraby]

22. I think that same document was one the

New York Times page with the story. I know I saw it last night.

[juliagoolia]

23. Why didnt we know..Don "YOU BET" Rumsfeld?

This is the time when Rummy was saying this is FREEDOM< and people loot when they are free....
Doesn't anyone remember him talking about the same chair..

Well during that time is when they were absconded with. Now if they didnt know it until now then what the hell have they been up to looking for these WMDs? Wouldn't you think they'd look where the conventional weapons they already knew about were?

If thats the case then why are we just now hearing about it? COVERUP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!