Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The IAEA’s game
The American Thinker ^ | 10/27/2004 | Douglas Hanson

Posted on 10/27/2004 10:25:17 AM PDT by Coffee_drinker

The IAEA’s game October 27th, 2004

The latest slam of the Bush Administration by the combined forces of the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the New York Times, CBS, and the Kerry campaign, repeats on old pattern. The leading lights of the legacy media have their own agenda, one that considerably overlaps that of the Kerry forces. But the IAEA is not merely driven by animus towards Bush.

That United Nations agency also needs to cover up its own ineffectiveness and incompetence by shifting attention and blame to the Bush Administration, while waiting for a more congenial President of the United States to take office, one who won’t be tempted to investigate its numerous inadequacies, nor pursue the investigations of the criminality within its parent.

The “disappearing explosives” incident, in other words, is simply the latest firefight between the US and the IAEA over the UN’s complete and utter failure to enforce the provisions of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) with the nations of the Axis of Evil.

Iraq is essentially one big ammo dump. The collection and destruction of all of Saddam’s munitions are proceeding apace under the occupation. So far almost 248,000 tons of ammo have been destroyed or captured, out of an estimated 600,000 tons. This is no small feat. Before the war and during the initial occupation, it was thought Iraq’s munitions were scattered among ammo storage dumps numbering over 130 sites. However, by June of this year, Charles Duelfer and the Iraqi Survey Group (ISG) had determined that there were approximately 8,700 ammo dumps in Iraq!

The first shots were fired by the IAEA at the US and the Coalition last July when approximately two tons of low-enriched uranium were shipped out of the Iraqi nuclear research facility at Al-Tuwaitha for disposition in the US. The IAEA was upset that the US and the Iraqi government had failed to notify the UN about the shipment. Apparently, the UN failed to note that the Iraqi Ministry of Science and Technology had been established by Ambassador Paul Bremer over a year earlier, and, with US assistance, had begun to take stock of the materials at the site.

The Coalition and the Iraqi scientists had to deal with an extraordinary amount of yellowcake uranium and other radioactive source materials that totaled approximately 800 tons. How the stockpile of low-enriched uranium was found is not publicly known. What is known is that the IAEA allowed Saddam and his scientists to retain hundreds of tons of nuclear raw material, supposedly monitored by the UN and under “IAEA seal and control.” Left unexamined was the rationale allowing the Iraqis to keep this massive stockpile, since both of the Iraqi reactors and the Italian-built enrichment facility had been destroyed and never repaired.

The find of the low-enriched uranium presented another series of questions that the IAEA has yet to answer, despite its responsibility for close supervision and control over Iraq’s nuclear programs. For example, what was the source of this material? Some experts say it was from Italy, but since the UN inspected the “seals” on Saddam’s stockpile only once a year, how can we be sure? Or perhaps, it was manufactured by Saddam and stored away in a secret location in preparation for the once-a-year visit by the IAEA.

This weak inspection regimen and lack of accountability by the IAEA is the real story behind this latest trumped-up charge by the media/Kerry forces. But the July yellowcake incident was only the first publicly visible instance of the IAEA muddying the waters of its incompetence in turning a blind eye to dictators trying to develop WMD, by going on the offensive and charging the United States with malfeasance.

The next incident occurred earlier this month, when the UN raised another fuss after they found out from satellite photos (who provided these photos?) that a substantial amount of dual-use equipment was “missing” from the Al-Tuwaitha complex. Dual-use equipment is that which can be used for peaceful purposes and for use in manufacturing weapons. In this case, the UN was clearly concerned about equipment that could be used to enrich raw nuclear material for use in a reactor or a nuclear warhead. This meant that the IAEA had detailed inventories and annotated overhead images to compare the pre-war and post-war layouts and configuration of the research site. The IAEA had supposedly accounted for and “sealed” both the raw material and the facilities required to turn that material into fuel for a nuclear bomb.

Just as with the latest flap concerning the “missing” explosives at Al-Qaqaa, Mohammed El Baradei blamed the Coalition for lax security at Tuwaitha, which ostensibly allowed looters to make off with the equipment. Looting may have been a problem initially at the site, but looters simply can't make off with entire facilities and huge amounts of dual-use equipment. Just as removing the 380 tons of high explosive away from the bunker complex at Al-Qaqaa would have required 38 large trucks for transport, the missing equipment and facilities at Al-Tuwaitha would have necessitated a complex and sophisticated large scale, yet covert and hurried effort. Facilities that can be seen from overhead imagery are not stolen and transported by a few locals looking to realize some dinars on the black market.

Which brings us to the status of the explosives at Al-Qaqaa. As with the previous two incidents at Tuwaitha, the New York Times article tells us that the IAEA had been monitoring the materials in the bunkers and had “even sealed and locked some of it.” But El Baradei admits that during the time the inspectors were not allowed into Iraq – from 1998 to 2002 - about 35 tons of HMX went missing from the complex. And, whether or not being “under IAEA seal” means anything of significance, the US 101st Airborne Division “saw no materials bearing the IAEA seal” when they went through the bunkers during Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The common thread that runs through these cases of missing equipment, nuclear material, and high explosives, is that they were all under the non-existent control of the UN’s so-called nuclear watchdog, the IAEA. Every complaint since July of this year to now has consisted of El Baradei faulting lax security on the part of the US and the Coalition, which supposedly allowed looters to make away with these banned substances. In reality, looters couldn’t move this amount of material and not be noticed by Coalition forces and their reconnaissance assets.

However, thanks to the legacy media we learn that the UN and IAEA have allowed at least three critical components of nuclear weapons to go missing: raw materials, dual-use equipment, and high explosives. They were removed prior to the arrival of Coalition troops. Their current disposition remains a most important mystery.

Not only are the NYT, and apparently CBS News (again!), attempting to influence a US Presidential election, they have become the public relations firm of a corrupt UN and its nuclear inspection agency that allowed a madman to keep materials and equipment in violation of a treaty that the UN was duty-bound to enforce.

And John Kerry wants to entrust our national security to these same people.

Douglas Hanson is our military affairs correspondent. During the Summer of 2003, he was the Chief of Staff of the Ministry of Science and Technology for the Coalition Provisional Authority


TOPICS: Editorial; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: bush; iaea; kerry; mediabias; un; waronterror; weapons
Heard this read on the Rush Limbaugh show
1 posted on 10/27/2004 10:25:19 AM PDT by Coffee_drinker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker; 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub; MeekOneGOP; Grampa Dave; Former Military Chick; ...

BTTT


2 posted on 10/27/2004 10:29:14 AM PDT by EdReform (Have you seen FAHRENHYPE 9/11? - www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1240926/posts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker

El Baradei is a Muslim. Although he talks a good game, I wonder if he is completely serious about controlling Nuclear proliferation in Iran.


3 posted on 10/27/2004 10:30:23 AM PDT by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker

It is now clear that the 3rd Infantry Division was at Al Qaqaa before even the 101st Airborne. The 3rd ID DID do a thorough search and they DID NOT find any explosives.

They did find vials of powder and instructions on chemical/biological attack.

This place was still being used as a WMD site. It had been part of Iraq's nuclear program in the past. The explosive is perfect for use as a nuclear trigger explosive. Since all of the explosive was spirited out of the country, it is reasonable to suggest a very high probability that this was taken away by Saddam for just this reason.

Finally....the IAEA complained AND reported that Iraq had opened the explosives that they had "sealed."

In other words, Iraq was ALREADY on the record BEFORE OUR SOLIDERS ARRIVED accused of relocating this explosive.


4 posted on 10/27/2004 10:31:31 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army and Proudly Supporting BUSH/CHENEY 2004!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker

This only seems to reinforce the notion that the UN and IAEA were in bed with Saddam and that he knew that with their help he could always remain a threat, and what do they think he held all this for. He was a broker for explosives to terrorist. Oil for food may be kid stuff. Some of these parties may have been profiting from the sale and transfer of weapons. And now they are pointing fingers to deflect attention. More evidence to support Bush's claim that Iraq was a sponsor and facilitator of terror.


5 posted on 10/27/2004 10:31:33 AM PDT by revealerls
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

What I get from this weapon's thing is that the UN f*****d up big time (no surprise). What they where trying to do is cover there a** by blaming Bush..


6 posted on 10/27/2004 10:32:38 AM PDT by KevinDavis (Let the meek inherit the Earth, the rest of us will explore the stars!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker

Before the war and during the initial occupation, it was thought Iraq’s munitions were scattered among ammo storage dumps numbering over 130 sites. However, by June of this year, Charles Duelfer and the Iraqi Survey Group (ISG) had determined that there were approximately 8,700 ammo dumps in Iraq.....

So by my calculation based on there now being 8,700 known dumps (and only 130 when the war started), those that say that the weapons inspectors should have been granted more time (to do their work, of course) would have required 67 times more time than they had already used. Sheeeesh - sure, we can wait.


7 posted on 10/27/2004 10:38:16 AM PDT by Asfarastheeastisfromthewest...
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker
IAEA inspected al Qa Qaa site in JULY, 2003.

Scroll down to:
ACTIVITIES RELATED TO EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS

There is definitely a game afoot by IAEA and the UN.

8 posted on 10/27/2004 10:39:39 AM PDT by MamaLucci (Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker

Good post.


9 posted on 10/27/2004 10:44:03 AM PDT by alcuin (getridofthateffinlooselipssinkshipsgesture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pearls Before Swine
I wonder if he is completely serious about controlling Nuclear proliferation in Iran.

The US wants him gone over evidence that he has been telling Iran the fine points of avoiding his agency's
recommending sanctions over Iran's nuclear program.

10 posted on 10/27/2004 10:44:52 AM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: alcuin
Thanks!


We need to help Bush anyway we can, if it takes getting the real truth out there so be it. The Main Stream Press certainly ain't gonna do it!!
11 posted on 10/27/2004 10:57:15 AM PDT by Coffee_drinker (Careful with those grapes TahRaZA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker
Heard this read on the Rush Limbaugh show.<<<

He just started reading it, here, now.

"[from] one of our favourite web sites."

12 posted on 10/27/2004 10:57:23 AM PDT by alcuin (getridofthateffinlooselipssinkshipsgesture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci
"There is definitely a game afoot by IAEA and the UN.

Yes and there lays the real story

13 posted on 10/27/2004 10:59:31 AM PDT by Coffee_drinker (Careful with those grapes TahRaZA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker

self-bump


14 posted on 10/27/2004 11:00:38 AM PDT by King Prout (yo! sKerry: "Live by the flip, die by the flop." - Frank_Discussion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis
Yes this is what is happening,

CYA for themselves and blame Bush to get a pansy Kerry that will bow down to the U.N.

I say remove the U.N. from U.S. Soil we don't like them kind around here no more.
15 posted on 10/27/2004 11:03:09 AM PDT by Coffee_drinker (Careful with those grapes TahRaZA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker; All

That is true.. We no longer need the UN...


16 posted on 10/27/2004 11:05:07 AM PDT by KevinDavis (Let the meek inherit the Earth, the rest of us will explore the stars!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker
From the NY SLIMES

Dear Mr.,

I appreciate your concerns about The Times's reporting on the explosives missing from the Al Qaqaa site in Iraq. However, I think it is much too early to come to a conclusion that there is error here. I note three factors in particular: NBC News's clarification of their early report; The Times's on-the-record citation of the unit commander who arrived at Al Qaqaa on April 10 asserting that his troops did not conduct a search; and, finally, some mixed signals from the White House.

This story will, I am sure, continue to play out over the next several days. If The Times is indeed in error, that is certain to become clear, and I will say so in print. Until then, I can only suggest that you -- and I -- examine each charge and countercharge very carefully, and examine the evidence fully, before reaching conclusions.

Yours Sincerely,
Daniel Okrent
Public Editor
N.B.: Any opinions expressed here, unless otherwise indicated, are solely my own

17 posted on 10/27/2004 11:45:42 AM PDT by GailA ( hanoi john, I'm for the death penalty for terrorist, before I impose a moratorium on it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coffee_drinker

If the IAEA has it in for President Bush, and this is frame up is the best they can do, then El Baradei deserves to be dumped. He's too stupid to head anything.


18 posted on 10/27/2004 2:37:25 PM PDT by etcetera (All men are endowed by their Creator with the inalienable right to shoot back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson