SwiftVets.com

drjohn · Last edited by drjohn on Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:22 am; edited 1 time in total

I did a little research of my own, and I found the following timeline of IAEA inspections in Iraq. To the best of my knowledge there was NO inventory of high explosive ordinance done between 25 Dec 2002 and the war. So from what date are the numbers generated? Dec 25. Maybe.

This is a big question. The explosives could have been taken from the site ANY TIME betwen 25Dec 2002 and Mar 2003 and the IAEA would have had no idea.

Al QA QAA INSPECTIONS

9 MAR 2003 MISSILE
8 MAR 2003 MISSILE
5 MAR 2003 CHEMICAL INSPECT TWO PLANTS
3 MAR 2003 MISSILE
25 JAN 2003 CHEMICAL BASELINING
24 JAN 2003 CHEMICAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTRE and WASTE TREATMENT
21 JAN 2003 CHEMICAL METAL ANALYSIS/ SOME INSPECTIONS OF CHEMICAL UNITS
20 JAN 2003 CHEMICAL production units
19 JAN 2003 CHEMICAL storage facilities
11 JAN 2003 QA QAA SUMOOD Explosives plant
28 DEC 2002 MISSILE
25 DEC 2002 EXPLOSIVES PLANT ITEM COUNTS OF DUAL USE MATERIALS
21 Dec 2002 MISSILE DOUBLE BASE PROPELLANT PLANT
16 DEC 2002 EXPLOSIVES PLANT Small rocket production
15 DEC 2002 CHEMICAL Ongoing inspection. Updated information about sulfuric acid plant and explosives production plant. Focused on new production unit built between 1998 and 2002.
9 DEC 2002 EXPLOSIVES NUCLEAR INVENTORY
30 NOV 2002 EXPLOSIVES PLANT- Air Samplers

drjohn · Posted: Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:12 am Post subject:

"The materials mentioned in Mr. El-Baradei's letter were 214.67 tons of HMX, 155.68 tons of RDX, and 6.39 tons of PETN - all explosives used in plastic bombs or in bombings of whole buildings and airplanes. They could also be used as nuclear detonation devices."

I have to find out the date that these numbers were generated. It was BEFORE Nov 2002.

ord33 · Rear Admiral Joined: 11 Aug 2004 Posts: 670 Location: Ohio

drjohn,

I think you are on to something here. It makes the NY Times article even more ridiculous. They just tagged those certain materials, then each time they went back to the facility they were looking for something else, not checking to see if the "tagged" materials were still at the facility, let alone the same amount (weight, number, etc.) of materials. I think you are right on with your research, and they could have been moved well prior to even March 2003.

I B Squidly · Posted: Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:35 am Post subject:

I'm sure we're all familiar with the Spanish homonym for Qa Qaa. It's a child's expression for merde. Merde is well understood in all the romance languages (including French) and that's all this story is.

drjohn · Posted: Wed Oct 27, 2004 4:43 am Post subject:

The WaPo story

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A816-2004Oct26.html

says inspectors checked seals on bunkers that day. They did not. According the IAEA doc's, they did this that day

"Al-Qa Qaa storage site

Inspectors verified the tagging of al-Samoud 2 warheads and inspected the facility’s solid propellant production plant (see GSN, March 10). "

Nothing about bunkers and seals.

They were pretty clear about what they did, no one did any inventory after 25 Dec 2002.