Believe anything Kerry says?

Well, stupid is as stupid does!

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041028-122637-6257r.htm

Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein's weapons and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned.

John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, said in an interview that he believes the Russian troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, "almost certainly" removed the high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility, south of Baghdad.

The Russians brought in, just before the war got started, a whole series of military units," Mr. Shaw said. "Their main job was to shred all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the Iraqis. The others were transportation units.

[Burnin' oil]

Do you believe everything you read? This is just another neo-con, last ditch effort to prop up Bush. It's a bunch of garbage and even if it's true, so what? You neo-cons are sooo predictable . . .

Just another in a series of Kerry lies. More and more will be revealed. Anybody that believes this guy needs help.

http://support.earthlink.net/newsarticle?cat=7&aid=D8602RG00_story

The infantry commander whose troops first captured the Iraqi weapons depot where 377 tons of explosives disappeared said Wednesday it is "very highly improbable" that someone could have trucked out so much material once U.S. forces arrived in the area.

Two major roads that pass near the Al-Qaqaa installation were filled with U.S. military traffic in the weeks after April 3, 2003, when U.S. troops first reached the area, said Col. David Perkins. He commanded the 2nd Brigade of the 3rd Infantry Division, the division that led the charge into Baghdad.

Perkins and others in the military acknowledged that some looting at the site had taken place. But he said a large-scale operation to remove the explosives using trucks almost certainly would have been detected.

[dd74]

So what? They still disappeared, didn't they? Excuses, excuses.

[sammyg2]

Nope, don't believe anything he says. IMO opinion he will say and do anything and everything to get what he wants.

[red ufo]

Your stupid to believe anything, any president says.

[concentric]

Shaw's accounts have been discredited by Rumsfeld and the Pentagon and he's been reprimanded for saying this.

JCM

[Superman]

You guys are hilarious. On the one hand, we've got pictures and eyewitness testimony that the stuff was there several days after we invaded Baghdad. On the other hand we've got stuff like:

"Russian troops...."almost certainly" removed the high-explosive..."

"...it is "very highly improbable" that someone could have..."

So, we've got an "almost certainly" from someone who was not there. And a "very highly improbable" and "almost certainly would have been detected" opinion about what could have or might have happened.

And that's better information than pictures backed up by eyewitness testimony? Apparently, you guys are not lawyers or judges. Or analysts.

[jyl]

I gather there is film, that has been shown on TV, of US troops entering the compound several days after the US occupied it, inspecting the UN seals, breaking open crates, and showing the explosive. Is that not pretty good evidence that the explosive was not, in fact, removed by the Russians or whoever "before" the war? I don't really understand what the argument is about.

[jyl]

I mean, 30 seconds on Google found this:

The claims made in the Washington Times article have been further discredited. As CNN noted on October 29, "Asked about Shaw's comments during an interview on WABC radio in New York, [Secretary of Defense Donald] Rumsfeld said, 'No, I have no information on that at all and cannot validate that even slightly.'" CNN also reported, "Di Rita said Shaw was not speaking for the Pentagon and that his views were not those of senior defense officials." Di Rita also noted that "Shaw's superiors were talking to him about his comments." [Di Rita is a Pentagon spokesman]

http://mediamatters.org/items/200410290006

Q: There was a report Thursday that Russian special operations troops helped Saddam Hussein's intelligence forces move the explosives out of Al-Qaqaa and into Syria before the U.S. invasion. Is that true?

A: State Department and Pentagon officials on Thursday dismissed the theory outlined in The Washington Times by John Shaw, deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security. Shaw told the newspaper he believed that Russian commandos removed the explosives before the war to hide evidence of Russian contractual arrangements with Iraq. Richard Armitage, deputy secretary of state, said Thursday that he "has never seen any such information." And Pentagon spokesman DiRita said he "didn't have any information" on Shaw's theory. The Russian government also said Thursday that it was not involved in the removal of the materials.

http://www.indystar.com/articles/9/190300-3909-010.html

We don't have all the answers, but I don't understand the haste to call Kerry a liar and a fabricator. If anyone's credibility is dubious, it sounds like it might be this Shaw guy.

[pwd72s]

Has Michael Moore given his opinion yet? I mean, as long as we're looking for an unbiased source....

[fintstone]

Originally posted by jyl
....We don't have all the answers, but I don't understand the haste to call Kerry a liar and a fabricator. If anyone's credibility is dubious, it sounds like it might be this Shaw guy.

We already know that Kerry is a liar.

Shaw is probably quite honest, but just not too bright. Clearly in this era of good relations with Russia...senior leadership had no intent of dropping the dime on them.

[350HP930]

How many lies has the bush administration made up about these explosives so far, about five?

So far it appears that kerry is the only presidential candidate speaking the truth about this little fiasco.

[hoff944]

I never knew Bush was in Iraq personally guarding these explosives. I'm sure I'm sure Kerry would have defended those explosives personally and gotten about 11 purple hearts in the process.

[350HP930]

I guess you have forgotten that the president is commander and chief of the military, though I know the bush lovers prefer that the buck stop anywhere but his desk.

The bad planning and rush to war can be pinned directly on bush and those he put in charge of this train wreck so all bad results belong to him.

[hoff944]

So you are saying Bush was personally commanding the soldiers guarding those explosives? "President! We found some 380tons of explosives. What do we do?". Bush: "Just leave them there. They will be alright". Direct to the field eh'?

[350HP930]

Someone decided that the oil ministry needed to be secured ASAP but the explosives depot that the weapons inspectors told them was critical was not.

Its likely that bush just put his inept cronies in charge of these details but that decision was his and the fact that he does not believe any mistakes were made in iraq would make this 'accomplishment' all his.

[island911]

Originally posted by 350HP930
I guess you have forgotten that the president is commander and chief of the military, . . .

The bad planning and rush to war can be pinned directly on bush . . .

[feign]Yeah. . .not only that, but people got hurt, in Iraq. . .some even killed!
Impeach Bush, the hitler-criminal who stole the election.
Oh my burden of being so smarter than stupid rebuplicans it hurts my head. ..
[/feign]



"rush to war" !?

If Bush should be faulted, it should be for taking too long!

The Frogs were stalling, Saddam was hiding his toys.

We were WAAAAYYYY too nice.

[911pcars]

As President, he's not expected to know every little detail. He's got people to take care of those things.

As Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, he's ultimately responsible for what the military does or doesn't do.

Unfortunately he's both, and he either doesn't have the right people acting on his behalf as Prez or he doesn't have the correct strategy or chain of command in place as CIC.

Either way, the buck stops with him - not just this latest episode, but a cumulative, 4-year history of examples such as this.

How many things can someone screw up in just a short time? How do the American people have this much patience with a guy who ignored the events leading up to 9/11, puts the nation at increased risk, increases record deficit spending and national debt, national unemployment and corporate giveaways, creating a quagmire in Iraq and instability in the middle east? All this in the name of supposedly making us "safe" (or whatever his real agenda is). Compare this with the outrage against the previous guy who got a bjob in his office.

Ask 10 guys on the street which would they rather have accomplished?

I rest my case,
Sherwood