Backtracking on that 377, no make that 219, tons of explosives
With real evidence, as opposed to wild-ass wishful thinking, beginning to mount that the 219 tons of explosives in question more likely were removed from the Al Qaqaa munitions depot before the invasion of Iraq, Kerry is subtly backtracking today.
That's right, I said 219 tons. Turns out 158 tons of the high explosives the IAEA says went missing were never at Al QaQaa, and that's according to the IAEA itself. But 377 tons sounds a lot scarier doesn't it? More on that later. No documentation has been provided by IAEA on the 158 tons of explosive allegedly missing from elsewhere in Iraq.
But back to the story. In a campaign appearance today, Kerry said, and I'm paraphrasing slightly, that the missing explosives are more important as a metaphor for Bush's failed policies in Iraq. He's saying, in effect, "Well, even if the story was wrong, it's still the metaphor it provides us that is the most important thing, telling us of the incompetence of this administration."
Does this sound a bit familiar? Something like, "Well, even if the documents are forgeries, the issues raised in the documents are still legitimate."?
This is the height of hypocrisy and demagoguery - taking an unsubstantiated, and most likely false, accusation and lecturing to us about what it tells us about the target of the accusation.
Back to "377 tons." Interesting, isn't it, that the NYT chose to banner that number, when it knew from the information leaked to it by the IAEA that the IAEA had provided no documentation on 158 of those tons, only that it had inventoried and confirmed 219 tons of high explosives at Al Qaqaa in January of 2003. Furthermore, no reliable inventory numbers are available for any time after January 2003.
"Bush supporters" have been accused here at JU of dreaming up all sorts of "conspiracy theories to explain away the fact that 377 tons of high explosives disappeared after the invasion, under Bush's watch." Just hold that thought for a moment.
The NYT publishes an article alleging a dereliction of duty on the part of our President based entirely on speculation, without any factual substantiation; Kerry repeats it on the campaing trail and Kerry supporters repeat it here. And "Bush supporters" have the burden of proof?
If you look objectively at what is public knowledge, there is not one iota of proof, no hard evidence, not even anything that qualifies as circumstantial evidence supporting the allegation that 377 tons of high exposives disappeared after the invasion, on Bush's watch. Zip.
The only evidence we have is the following:
1. The IAEA reports that 377 tons of high explosives are presently unaccounted for from stocks as inventoried in January of 2003, 219 of those tons having been documented as housed at the Al Qaqaa munitions depot as of that date.
2. The IAEA has documented that many of the bunkers housing high explosives had ventilation shafts, which were not sealed, large enough to permit removal of the explosives from the bunkers without disturbing the seals on main bunker doors.
3. The IAEA made a visit to Al Qaqaa in March of 2003 at which time they checked the integrity of some, but not all, of the seals that had been placed in January.
4. There are satellite surveillance photos of large vehicles & transporters being present at Al Qaqaa in the days immediately prior to the start of the invasion.
That's it. Everything else is wild-ass speculation or wishful thinking. There is NO evidence whatsoever presently available as to when after January 2003 the explosives were removed, who removed them, where they were taken or who currently has them in their possession. We don't even know that they still exist.
And onto this thin ice, Kerry has recklessly skated, using the NYT article as "evidence" of Presidential dereliction of duty. And when the only real evidence is revealed as not even remotely supporting the allegation, he compounds the demagoguery by saying, in so many words, "Well, the truth of the matter isn't what's important, it's how this is a metaphor for the failures of Bush's administration - that's what's important, so I'm going to use this false accusation in an effort to dupe you into voting for me, anyway."
Cheers,
Daiwa