Question...need help debunking....

[opiate69]

I just found a post from a *-groupie on another board claiming "the IAEA didn't tell the US about the material at Al Qaqaa until April 10th"....with all the play this stiry is getting, I'm having a hard time wading through all the back and forth, whenever I try to google it.. can anybody help me? I know this jackass is wrong, and I'd love to be able to jump into the fray and destroy his weak-assed excuse for an argument... thanks, in advance.

[pk_du]

1. How about something from that Bastion of rampant liberalism

...FAUX NEWS

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/alqaqaa_documents.pdf


...or those well known commie sympathisers at GlobaSecurity.org

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/al_qa_qaa.htm

...lots more if you need it!!

[Carolab]

2. That was the Tuwaitha looting

They told them about Al-Qaqaa subsequent to that. So what? There is news footage on April 18 from KSTP TV that shows that the dangerous high explosives were still there and the bunkers were unsecured. There were IAEA seals on some doors but no one was guarding anything.

"Fleming did not say which officials were notified or when, but she said the IAEA — which had put storage bunkers at the site under seal two months before the war — alerted the United States about Al-Qaqaa after the Tuwaitha nuclear complex was looted. The IAEA said it informed U.S. officials separately of the Tuwaitha looting on April 10."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041...

[alcuno]

3. So we didn't ask ahead of time?

I'd just like to point out that it was OUR responsibility to ask for information before we went in. The stuff was under IAEA seal. Is the administration now saying that the IAEA didn't tell them about enough high explosives to fill up one and a half Statues of Liberty? Really. Who has more credibility here, the IAEA or the * administration? It's not even close.

BTW. Ask why the Pentagon only NOW is looking for satellite pictures - eighteen months AFTER May 2003, when they KNEW it was gone. And NOW the Pentagon is scrambling.

[opiate69]

5. Well, his angle is...

"It would have been great to guard this place... if we got there sooner.. or knew about it.." Of course, that doesn't explain why our troops would open some bunkers, see a bunch of explosives and explosive-related materials, and then just fucking leave it unsecured!But, I'm gonna hit him with the info you guys have helped with, then probably just let him alone to wallow in his cognitive disconnect...

Thanks, everyone!

[Carolab]

4. From the globalsecurity.org link above...

While the facility was supposed to be under American guard following the 2003 invasion, it remains unclear whether the stockpile had already been removed from Al Qaqaa by that point. Following the return of inspectors to Iraq in 2002, At that time, the IAEA reportedly discovered that 35 tons of HMX were initially unaccounted for. Iraqi authorities later explained that the explosives had been used mostly as part of civilian programs. The IAEA placed seals on a number of bunkers at the site in January 2003. The IAEA last verified the presence of the explosives in March 2003.

The Pentagon has identified a two and a half month period during which the explosives were most likely removed, but it includes time from before and after the fall of Baghdad, leaving open the question of whether U.S. failure to properly secure the site enabled looting of sensitive materials. One senior official was quoted in the New York Times article as saying that Al Qaqaa had been designated by the Central Intelligence Agency as a “medium priority” site but had never been secured.

In response to the controversy, the White House initially asserted that the materials were already gone by the time the troops from 2nd Brigade, 101st Airborne Division arrived on 10 April 2003. However, that unit's commander at the time was quoted in a 27 October 2004 New York Times article in response to the the White House claims, saying, "I didn't know what the place was supposed to be. We did not get involved in any of the bunkers. It was not our mission. It was not our focus. We were just stopping there on our way to Baghdad." He added that he was not aware the site was considered sensitive until the news story broke. A current spokesman for the unit said that when troops arrived on the 10th, there were already looters present. And the Associated Press reported on Oct. 27 that the unit secured the area upon arrival and looked into a limited number of bunkers.

Troops from the Army's 3rd Infantry Division arrived at the site on 3 April 2003, a week earlier than the 101st, but they did not execute a thorough search of the site either, and departed two days later. By the time the 75th Exploitation Task Force inspected the site on 27 May 2003, the site had been looted.