Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Joseph Wilson commented about the looting of Iraqi yellow cake! (Tuwaitha)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-05 10:21 PM
Original message
Joseph Wilson commented about the looting of Iraqi yellow cake! (Tuwaitha)


That's always been the smoking gun for me. They didn't care about WMD. They didn't even inspect or guard the Iraqi nuclear sites. Instead, they guarded the Oil Ministry.

Wilson's comments today were that he knows the site was left unguarded, he doesn't know where the yellowcake went, and that there were reports of Iraqi children touching the barrels and getting radiation poisoning.

Remember Tuwaitha?




____________________________________________

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,955413,00.html

Nuclear watchdog fears terrorist dirty bomb after looting at al-Tuwaitha
Wednesday May 14, 2003

United Nations nuclear inspectors, barred from Iraq by Washington, are increasingly worried that the widespread looting and ransacking of Iraq's nuclear facilities may result in terrorists building a radioactive "dirty bomb". The inspectors' concerns are shared internationally and the British government has reportedly offered to raise the matter with Washington to try to get agreement on a return of the UN nuclear inspectors to Iraq.

The main worry revolves around the fate of at least 200 radioactive isotopes which were stored at the sprawling al-Tuwaitha nuclear complex, 15 miles south of Baghdad. It has seen widespread looting, and reports from Baghdad speak of locals making off with barrels of raw uranium and the isotopes which are meant for medical or industrial use.

<snip> "The radioactive sources, some very potent ones, could get on to the black market and into the hands of terrorists planning dirty-bomb attacks," said Melissa Fleming, an IAEA spokeswoman.

<snip> Experts are muttering that the US, as the occupying power in Iraq, is now technically in breach of the non-proliferation treaty. There is a fear that the occupation, ostensibly to eliminate weapons of mass destruction, could result in more such weapons being created. <more>

____________________________________________

http://power.about.com/library/weekly/aa050503a.htm

Andre Titarenko
Iraq Nuclear Sites Looting
Updated May 11, 2003

<snip> Chronologically the first reason to attack Iraq that was provided by the USA Administration was intelligence related to development of the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) by Saddam Hussein. Another reason was terrorism. There were changes of mind, but none of these reasons was ever dismissed completely. Being formerly involved with nuclear disarmament in another part of the world I had in my mind very clear picture of the USA Marines taking the control of whatever is left out there in the nuclear field after the bombing first hand, maybe even airlifted to do so. They certainly will be armed with detailed roadmaps, satellite pictures, floormaps and guidance, and will keep everyone away from known locations of fusion materials no matter what. Well…

First reports about possible looting of nuclear materials in Iraq dates back to April 11, when an anonymous source told ABC that IAEA seals on the drums with Uranium at Al-Tuwaitha facility near Baghdad, were broken. Drums there contained about 1.8 tons of Uranium (not weapon-grade, but probably fine to build “dirty bomb”). There was a lot of highly active materials other than Uranium there too. The initial looters could be local ( looking to get at least something for their families and homes), but they sure knew what is hidden behind the fence of Al-Tuwaitha. It was bombed not once (for the first time in 1981), and they must have had a lot of “word from mouth” about deadly radiation out there, etc. Only a very brave or a very stupid local guy will go looting there. Even if this happens, a sealed drum with Uranium is not as attractive a looting object as armchair, TV or freezer for an "average guy". If someone targets it, and breaks the seal, most likely he knows perfectly well what he is looking for, and who is the likely buyer for it. If by chance someone has broken the seals on the drums out of stupid curiosity, by now he has probably put pieces together and is looking for a buyer for stolen Uranium.

____________________________________________

http://www.msnbc.com/news/912073.asp?0cv=KB10

WMDs for the Taking?
While U.S. troops pushed on to Baghdad, Iraqis were looting radioactive materials from once protected sites

May 19 issue — From the very start, one of the top U.S. priorities in Iraq has been the search for weapons of mass destruction. Weren’t WMDs supposed to be what the war was about? Even so, no one has yet produced conclusive evidence that Iraq was maintaining a nuclear, biological or chemical (NBC) arsenal.

<snip> Some of the lapses are frightening. The well-known Al Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center, about 12 miles south of Baghdad, had nearly two tons of partially enriched uranium, along with significant quantities of highly radioactive medical and industrial isotopes, when International Atomic Energy Agency officials made their last visit in January. By the time U.S. troops arrived in early April, armed guards were holding off looters—but the Americans only disarmed the guards, Al Tuwaitha department heads told NEWSWEEK. “We told them, ‘This site is out of control. You have to take care of it’,” says Munther Ibrahim, Al Tuwaitha’s head of plasma physics. “The soldiers said, ‘We are a small group. We cannot take control of this site’.” As soon as the Americans left, looters broke in. The staff fled; when they returned, the containment vaults’ seals had been broken, and radioactive material was everywhere.

U.S. officers say the center had already been ransacked before their troops arrived. They didn’t try to stop the looting, says Colonel Madere, because “there was no directive that said do not allow anyone in and out of this place.” Last week American troops finally went back to secure the site. Al Tuwaitha’s scientists still can’t fully assess the damage; some areas are too badly contaminated to inspect. “I saw empty uranium-oxide barrels lying around, and children playing with them,” says Fadil Mohsen Abed, head of the medical-isotopes department. Stainless-steel uranium canisters had been stolen. Some were later found in local markets and in villagers’ homes. “We saw people using them for milking cows and carrying drinking water,” says Ibrahim. The looted materials could not make a nuclear bomb, but IAEA officials worry that terrorists could build plenty of dirty bombs with some of the isotopes that may have gone missing. Last week NEWSWEEK visited a total of eight sites on U.N. weapons-inspection lists. Two were guarded by U.S. troops. Armed looters were swarming through two others. Another was evidently destroyed many years ago. American forces had not yet searched the remaining three.<more>

____________________________________________

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=564&u=/nm/20030521/ts_nm/iraq_un_nuclear_usa_dc_3&printer=1

U.S.: IAEA Team Could Inspect Iraqi Nuke Site
Wed May 21, 3:02 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States proposed a joint investigation with the International Atomic Energy Agency of Iraq (news - web sites)'s Tuwaitha nuclear research center after reports of looting and a mission could go in a week or so, a U.S. official said Wednesday.

The Vienna-based IAEA earlier said Washington had offered a limited return of its inspectors to Iraq two months after they left on the eve of the U.S.-led war, but gave few details on the nature of the offer or the timing of a return.

___________________________________________

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/w-me/2003/may/21/052108859.html

May 21, 2003 at 6:47:39 PDT
U.S.: Barrels Missing From Iraq Nuke Site

Some 20 percent of the known radioactive materials stored at Iraq's largest nuclear facility are unaccounted for, and U.S. nuclear experts have found radioactive patches on the ground where looters dumped out barrels believed to contain hazardous materials.

<snip> The dormant Tuwaitha plant, once considered the heart of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program, has been repeatedly trashed by scavengers. It hasn't been operational for years. The Iraqis had been using it to store declared nuclear materials that were prohibited and sealed by the U.N. nuclear agency.

While the sprawling complex was considered one of the top sites where evidence of weapons of mass destruction might be found, it was left unguarded for days during the war. By the time weapons teams showed up to inspect the facility, so much had been destroyed that it was impossible to know what was missing.

____________________________________________


http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html

Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud. - G. Bush, 10/7/02

____________________________________________

http://www.sierrasun.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20030718/OPINION/307180301

July 18, 2003
Bush's actions don't match the rhetoric
Guest Column by Kirk Caraway

<snip> Turn back the clock to the before the war. You "know" your enemy has 100-500 tons of chemical weapons, and you know where he is likely hiding them. Wouldn't you try to secure those sites as quickly as possible? After all, these chemical weapons posed a major threat to our advancing troops, and the big danger, they said, was if these fall into the hands of terrorists.

So why wasn't this done? Special Forces teams were flown into Iraq to secure the oil fields, but not the weapons. That speaks volumes about what the real reason for the war is.

<snip> And what about the nukes? If Bush and his people really thought that Iraq had an active nuclear weapons program, why did the military wait for more than a week after taking over the region to even visit the country's main nuclear research facilities at Tuwaitha?

Why did they wait even longer to visit the neighboring Baghdad Nuclear Research Facility? Both sites were heavily looted, so if there were plans for a nuclear bomb or even some weapons-grade material, it would be long gone by now.

____________________________________________

http://www.counterpunch.org/schwarz07172003.html

July 17, 2003
Bush's Pre-emptive Strike Doctrine
The Bane of Non-Proliferation Watchdogs
By MARTIN SCHWARZ

<snip> Bush's use of the specter of nuclear threat to legitimate his intimidation policy can also been seen as just another excuse if reports from occupied post-war Iraq are taken into account. When the reports about massive looting in Iraq's biggest nuclear facility Al-Tuwaitha emerged after the war, the U.S. administration rejected the IAEA's request to send inspectors to that facility for more than a month. El-Baradei didn't even get an answer to his letters to U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell. Meanwhile, strange things must have happened in Al-Tuwaitha: The IAEA in Vienna received several phone calls from U.S. soldiers based at the facility to secure it, who didn't know what to do with nuclear material they had found.<more>

____________________________________________

http://www.abcnews.go.com/wire/World/reuters20030716_192.html

U.N. in Dark About Looted Iraq Dirty Bomb Material
July 16
By Louis Charbonneau

VIENNA (Reuters) - The U.N. nuclear watchdog said Wednesday it had accounted for most of the low-grade uranium lost during looting at Iraq's main nuclear facility, but had no information about more dangerous radioactive material.

<snip> But an IAEA spokeswoman said the agency had not been permitted by U.S. occupation authorities to check the status of Tuwaitha's stocks of highly-radioactive cesium-137, cobalt-160 and other materials which could be used in dirty bombs.

"There were around 400 of these radioactive sources stored at Tuwaitha," IAEA's Melissa Fleming said.

Witnesses have said that villagers near Tuwaitha, especially children, have shown symptoms of radiation sickness.

"Any case of radiation sickness would probably be from these highly-radioactive sources, not from the low-grade natural uranium at Location C," Fleming said.<more>

____________________________________________

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/6068775.htm

Looting of Iraqi nuclear facility indicts U.S. goals
If we feared the loss of radioactive materials, why not guard them?
TRUDY RUBIN
Knight Ridder Newspapers
Posted on Thu, Jun. 12, 2003

TUWAITHA, Iraq - On a dusty road, just outside of Baghdad, lies one of the great mysteries of the Iraq war.

<snip> The administration knew full well what was stored at Tuwaitha. So how is it possible that the U.S. military failed to secure the nuclear facility until weeks after the war started? This left looters free to ransack the barrels, dump their contents, and sell them to villagers for storage.

How is it possible that, according to Iraqi nuclear scientists, looters are still stealing radioactive isotopes?

The Tuwaitha story makes a mockery of the administration's vaunted concern with weapons of mass destruction. The U.S. military hastened to secure the Ministry of Oil in Baghdad from looters. But Iraq's main nuclear facility was apparently not important enough to get similar protection.

<snip> And why, in facilities other than Location C, is the looting apparently continuing?

Hisham Abdel Malik, a Iraqi nuclear scientist who lives near Tuwaitha and has been inside the complex, told me that in buildings "where there are radioactive isotopes, there is looting every day." He says the isotopes, which are in bright silver containers, "are sold in the black market or kept in homes." According to IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming, such radioactive sources can kill on contact or pollute whole neighborhoods.

How could an administration that had hyped the danger of Saddam handing off nuclear materials to terrorists let Tuwaitha be looted? Maybe the hype was just hype ... or maybe the Pentagon didn't send enough troops to Iraq to do the job right.

Either answer is damning.<more>

_____________________________________________



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-05 10:35 PM
Response to Original message
1. Colin Powell fooled me completely.
I actually believed that no one would go before the UN and lie like he did, so I believed that we had evidence that Iraq had WMDs and supported the war thanks to his testimony.

You pointed to the evidence that made me change my mind. I watched our troops as they went into Iraq. I expected them to make a bee line for the WMD sites since Powell was so certain he knew where they were. They didn't even pretend to be headed for those sites, and they did not really seem concerned about WMDs. That is when I realized that Powell and the rest of them had lied. It was obvious. I felt and feel just horrible for having been duped by the Bush administration. That is what has made me so angry at them --- that they lied to me, and that I believed them.

The press has to have figured it out during or shortly after the invasion too. How could they not? But they said nothing, and they still refuse to apologize or admit how wrong they were to trust the Bush crew. Shame on them. Shame on us all. If there is a God, they/we deserve to be punished. If there is a hell, they/we deserve to go there. No question in my mind. We Americans have the blood of innocent Iraqi children on our hands.

No matter what religion you believe in, our conduct is a horrible thing. The Bible says the sins of the father are visited on the children unto the 7th generation. Other religions teach that our Karma dooms us. Virtually every religious tradition teaches that acts such as what we have done in Iraq are punished. Even if you are not religious, this consensus reflects wisdom as old as the human race. We cannot give up on trying to right the terrible wrongs that we have done as a nation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-05 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. It's the true smoking gun. Why didn't they head straight to the WMD sites?
You're exactly right.

They didn't even pretend to be headed for those sites, and they did not really seem concerned about WMDs.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 07:44 AM
Response to Reply #2
8. The UN had those sites secured for YEARS...until bush invaded Iraq and
totally ignored those sites.

Yeah sure he gave a shit about "WMD".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-05 11:05 PM
Response to Original message
3. Smirko warned Iraqis not to hurt the oil wells.
Just before he ordered his illegal invasion.



Yours is a great post, there Stephanie! Much truth in a handy to remember form.

BTW: Here's something lower down the weapons scale, but still has caused the most casualties, in my estimation: The plastic and other high-explosives looted from Al Qaqaa.



Bozell, Malkin used Newsweek controversy to falsely attack "biased" reporting on Al Qaqaa explosives looting

Media Research Center president L. Brent Bozell III and right-wing pundit Michelle Malkin have trumpeted the recent controversy over a retracted Newsweek article as evidence of "liberal" or "anti-military" bias in the media. To further this allegation, they also used the Newsweek story to attack another example of supposedly "biased" reporting: coverage of the alleged looting of explosives from the Al Qaqaa weapons facility in Iraq after the U.S.-led invasion. Bozell derided the Al Qaqaa story as "ridiculous," while Malkin cited the media's "hyping" of the story as an example of "bias." The evidence, however, strongly suggests that Al Qaqaa was in fact looted of its high explosives after U.S. troops had passed through the site, and though conservatives tried aggressively to dismiss or debunk the story, their objections to it have been discredited.

The New York Times first reported on October 25, 2004, that Iraqis looted the weapons facility after the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003.

On the May 16 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes, Bozell alleged that the Newsweek story fit into a pattern of "personal attacks" on the Bush administration by the "hard left" in the media -- a pattern that includes the Al Qaqaa story:

BOZELL: Look, Sean (Hannity, co-host), you and I have talked about this on the air on countless occasions. This is what the hard left has been reduced to. They can't debate conservatives. They can't debate George Bush on the issue. It's just attack, attack, attack, attack. Personal attacks. Personal attacks. We saw it with the National Guard story. We saw it with the Al Qaqaa ridiculous story. Now you're seeing it with this (Newsweek) story.

CONTINUED...

http://mediamatters.org/items/200505180007





Bozell is a real turd of the BFEE,
almost to the sub-stooge level.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gabi Hayes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-16-05 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. on top of that, today, I heard a military expert on the radio say....
that the IEDs they have now can blow up the BIGGEST frickin TANKS they have there; not just the Hummers and Bradleys

how nice is that

and they got how man HUNDRED THOUSANDS of TONS of explosives just from that one place?

and how many BILLIONS of Saddam's money do they have at their disposal?

that doesn't make for a very good mix for our occupying troops, now, does it?

I'm watching the CSPAN military mouthwash conference, and they're asking the lamest softball questions

wonder why no mention of any of THIS stuff

silly question, hey?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. They went to Iraq for WMD, then didn't even bother to look for them
Didn't even pretend they were looking for them. Didn't secure anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coexist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. yes they did - they secured the Ministry of Oil
the sons-of-you-know-whats
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 07:32 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. They hurried the invasion
before the UN inspections was able to document conclusively that there were no WMD in Iraq. If they actually believed Saddam had WMDs, which implies a willingness to use them, the administration certainly would have allowed the inspections to continue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. They didn't need to look; there were known UN-secured sites. The UN
told bush to immediately secure those sites in his invasion, as the UN had kept those sites locked up & secured for years.

bush totally ignored those known & previously-secured sites and allowed them to be ransacked.

Iraq had no "WMD" since 1991; they had UN-secured dual-use sites and BUSH KNEW ABOUT THOSE SITES. BUSH IGNORED THOSE SITES. BUSH DIDN'T SECURE THOSE SITES.

And that IS the "smoking gun", I agree. It was NEVER about any "WMD".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. How do you spell that again?
T-U-W-A-I-T-H-A???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. you are correct! T-U-W-A-I-T-H-A
Funny how all the old topics are relevant again. Bush Lied and Our Troops Died.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Indeed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
im10ashus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #5
13. Don't you remember?
Bush was looking for them. In the oval-freaking office. That shows you how serious they were about WMD's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. What? They weren't
under his desk? HA.HA.HA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
im10ashus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. A real card, that shrub!
I am sure he found lots of empty bottles in there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Toots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
16. Is it possible that they have allowed this to draw attention from DU?
DU is pretty much throughout the countryside and so is the radiation levels found in Iraqi citizens. Is it possible that they are so devious that they allowed the pillage of those nuclear material sites for a purpose? Sure takes the pressure off DU anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rateyes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-17-05 03:33 PM
Response to Original message
17. "We have met the enemy...
and he is us" --POGO

We have met the enemy, and he is "b US h." --RATEYES
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 05:00 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC