Truespeak

Today the New York Times prints what is possibly the starkest example of the Bush administration's incompetence in their handling of the war in Iraq and it gets only a passing mention in the evening news. According to the Times, almost 380 tons (yes tons) of explosives are now missing from an Iraqi weapons cache.

The Iraqi interim government has warned the United States and international nuclear inspectors that nearly 380 tons of powerful conventional explosives - used to demolish buildings, make missile warheads and detonate nuclear weapons - are missing from one of Iraq's most sensitive former military installations.

The huge facility, called Al Qaqaa, was supposed to be under American military control but is now a no man's land, still picked over by looters as recently as Sunday. United Nations weapons inspectors had monitored the explosives for many years, but White House and Pentagon officials acknowledge that the explosives vanished sometime after the American-led invasion last year.

The NBC Nightly News spent a whole two minutes on this subject at the begining of their broadcast. Instead of focusing on the fact that our President, who claims he can keep us safe from terrorists, and his staff were unable or unwilling to guard 380 tons of explosives, they spent a good five minutes discussing how good President Clinton looked when he appeared with John Kerry in Philadelphia today. I admit that I was glad to see Clinton back up and around, but the shallowness of their coverage while ignoring the severity of the missing explosives was all too typical of today's misguided media.

In plain and simple terms, the Bush administration fucked up. In May of this year, the International Atomic Energy Agency sent a memo to the White House warning that terrorists might be helping themselves to "the greatest explosives bonanza in history," yet the Bush team did nothing. They continued to ignore the problem allowing these explosives to be looted and spread throughout the country and possibly the entire Middle East. These are not mere grenades or landmines, this is HMX, which stands for "high melting point explosive," and RDX, which stands for "rapid detonation explosive." These explosives are some of the most devestating available. It took less than a pound of of this type of material to bring down Pan Am Flight 103. According to Atrios, the amount of missing explosives is about 4,000 (yes 4,000) times as dangerous as the explosion that destroyed the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.

So I'll ask it again: Where's the outrage?

Why isn't this all over the news? Why isn't someone demanding that the Bush administration explain this? When the subject was broached today with Scott McLellan, he responded this way:

Q: The Kerry campaign is hitting you on this story in the New York Times today that a large cache of explosives have gone missing. Is there anything you could have done about that?

MR. McCLELLAN: Maybe the best way to do this is kind of walk you through how we came to be informed about this. The Iraqi Interim Government informed -- told the IAEA -- the International Atomic Energy Agency on October 10th that there were approximately 350 tons of high explosives missing from Al Qaqaa in Iraq. And they informed the IAEA because these munitions were subject to IAEA monitoring, because they were considered dual-use materials. And the International Atomic Energy Agency informed the United States mission in Vienna on October 15th about these -- this cache of explosives that was missing because of some looting that went on in Iraq toward the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom, or during and toward the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

[Did I miss it, or did he not answer the question?]

Q: When did the President find out?

MR. McCLELLAN: That's why I said, we were informed on October 15th. Condi Rice was informed days after that. This is all in the last, what, 10 days now.

Q: She was informed days after October 15th?

MR. McCLELLAN: Yes, and she informed the President. And the first priority, from our standpoint, was to make sure that this wasn't a nuclear proliferation risk, which it is not. These are conventional high explosives that we are talking about. And the President wants to make sure that we get to the bottom of this. Now, the Pentagon, upon learning of this, directed the multinational forces and the Iraqi survey group to look into this matter, and that's what they are currently doing.

Now, if you go back and look at the Duelfer report that recently has come out, according to the Duelfer report, as of mid-September, more than 243,000 tons of munitions have been destroyed since Operation Iraqi Freedom. Coalition forces have cleared and reviewed a total of 10,033 caches of munitions; another nearly 163,000 tons of munitions have been secured and are on line to be destroyed. That puts this all -- that puts this all in context.

[Actually Scott, that puts nothing in context. They're still missing and you still haven't explained why or how that happened.]

Q: Prior to the 10th, and the notification by the interim government, whose responsibility was it to keep track of these munitions, the IAEA or the multinational force in Iraq?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, I think you need to look at the time. I think the Department of Defense can probably answer a lot of these questions for you. But that's why I pointed out what we did to -- literally, there were munitions caches spread throughout Iraq at the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom. That's why I pointed out the large volume of munitions that have already been destroyed and the large volume that are on-line to be destroyed. The sites now are the responsibility of the Iraqi government to secure.

[Once again Scott, you're not answering the question. You're being asked who's fault it is and instead of saying that we fucked up you're giving us bullshit rhetoric.]

Q: But after Iraqi Freedom, there were those caches all around, wasn't the multinational force -- who was responsible for keeping track --

MR. McCLELLAN: At the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom there were a number of priorities. It was a priority to make sure that the oil fields were secure, so that there wasn't massive destruction of the oil fields, which we thought would occur. It was a priority to get the reconstruction office up and running. It was a priority to secure the various ministries, so that we could get those ministries working on their priorities, whether it was --

[So in other words, we were more worried about securing the oil fields than keeping our soldiers and the rest of the Middle East safe. That's about right.]

Q: So it was the multinational force's responsibility --

MR. McCLELLAN: There were a number of -- well, the coalition forces, there were a number of priorities at the end of Operation Iraqi Freedom. And munitions, as I said, were literally spread throughout the country. And we have gone in and destroyed, as I pointed out, more than 243,000 tons --

Q: Was it the coalition's responsibility to take care of that --

Q: This morning, in Senator Kerry's remarks, he calls this one of the greatest blunders in the Iraq mission and this presidency. How do you respond to that?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, Senator Kerry has a strategy of protest and retreat for Iraq. It is essential that we succeed in Iraq, because Iraq is critical to winning the war on terrorism. The President will talk in his remarks today about how the terrorists understand how high the stakes are in Iraq. They are doing everything they can to try to disrupt the progress we are making toward free elections in Iraq. And this is a critical difference in how the two candidates view the war on terrorism. Senator Kerry has a strategy for retreat and defeat in Iraq. The President has a strategy for success in Iraq. We are making important progress. And as I pointed out, the first priority, when it came to these munitions, was to make sure that there was not a nuclear proliferation risk. There is not a nuclear proliferation risk. We're talking about conventional explosives, when we talk about these -- and that's why I pointed out the more than 243,000 munitions that have already been destroyed, and nearly 163,000 munitions that are in the process or are awaiting to be destroyed now. So this, as I said, this was pointed out by the Iraqi Interim Government to the IAEA, and then we were informed about it just in recent days.

Q: Scott, did we just have enough troops in Iraq to guard and protect these kind of caches?

MR. McCLELLAN: See, that's -- now you just hit on what I just said a second ago, that the sites now are really -- my understanding, they're the responsibility of the Iraqi forces. And I disagree with the way you stated your question, because one of the lessons we've learned of history is that it's important to listen to the commanders on the ground and our military leaders when it comes to troop levels. And that's what this President has always done. And they've said that we have the troop levels we need to complete the mission and succeed in Iraq.

[In other words, it's not our fault. It's the fault of the Iraqis because we don't make mistakes.]

Q: But you're saying this is the responsibility of the Iraqi forces. But this was our responsibility until just recently, isn't that right? Weren't these -- there is some U.S. culpability, as far as --

MR. McCLELLAN You're trying -- I think you're taking this out of context of what was going on. This was reported missing after -- when the interim government informed that these munitions went missing some time after April 9th of 2003, remember, that was when we were still involved in major military action at that point. And there were a number of important priorities at that point. There were munitions, munition caches spread throughout Iraq. There were -- there was a concern that there would be massive refugees fleeing the country. There is concern about the devastation that could occur to the oil fields. There was concern about starvation that could happen for the Iraqi people.

So -- and obviously there is an effort to go and secure these sites. The Department of Defense can talk to you about -- because they did go in and look at this site and look to see whether or not there were weapons of mass destruction there. So you need to talk to Department of Defense, because I think that would clarify that for you and set that record straight.

Thanks Scott, that sure cleared things up. My understanding of what he just said is "It's not our fault." But in fact, these weapons were being guarded by the IAEA themselves before we invaded. So yes Scott, it most certainly is our fault.

According to the administration's spin, it's not that big of a deal, because these are just explosives not nuclear weapons. Maybe President Bush could explain how insignificant these explosives are to the families of those servicemen and women who have lost their lives in explosions while serving in Iraq. Since June, one month after the IAEA sent the memo warning the White House of the possibility of these explosives falling into the wrong hands, at least 90 American soldiers have lost their lives due to an IED or a car bombing. Many of which may have contained the exact material our government failed to secure. Those 90 deaths account for almost one-third of all American casualties during that time.

So I'll ask it one more time: Where's the outrage?

This is irrefutable evidence that our government's inneptitude has actually left us less safe than we were before we invaded Iraq. In their own words, we were more interested in Iraq's oil than we were in safeguarding the weapons and keeping our soldiers safe.

I, for one, am pissed! I can hardly wait the eight days to cast my vote to remove this incapable prick from office.