Bill Gertz of the Washington Times reported today that "Russian troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, "almost certainly" removed the high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility." The NYT refuses to acknowledge the possibility that the weapons may have been removed from Al-Qaqaa before the US went into Iraq.
I heard someone today compare the reporting of these developments by the NYT and others to Rathergate. To me, it is interesting to see how this has all shaken out.
Who stands to profit from this story if it were to pan out that these weapons were stolen right out from under the US's nose? First, and most obviously, the Kerry campaign. Kerry has been hitting the president hard on this issue for the past couple of days. He and his staff know that IF this story is true it could cloud many voters minds about Bush vis-a-vis Iraq. For some of those that have supported the president thus far this may be the nail in the coffin that keeps them from voting for Bush on Tuesday.
Second, the two news organizations pushing the story the hardest would benefit greatly: the NYT and CBS News (let's be honest, their veracity is questionable at best) would love to be the groups that potentially alter the debate running up to the election with such an explosive (no pun intended) story.
However, the group that may have the most to gain, which may in turn necessitate their dupliciousness, is the IAEA. It is safe to assume that the IAEA and its head, Mohamed ElBaradei, hold a grudge towards the US, and Pres. Bush in particular, in regards to the run up to the war in Iraq. ElBaradei and Blix were very powerful men as long as the US and the UN Security Council continued to rely on weapons inspections and endless UNSC resolutions. Not to sound like a kooky conspiracy theorist, but by attempting to damage US military credibility and possibly throwing a wrench into Pres Bush's re-election machine ElBaradei can exact a sort of revenge for being tossed aside in 2002 and 2003.
For one thing, the timing of the report is certainly suspicious. A couple of days before the election? I mean come on. For another, I'm sure ElBaradei realizes that a Kerry Administration wants nothing more than to have men like ElBaradei and Blix running around the world in place of the US. It would certainly be in his best interest professionally to deter Americans from re-electing Bush.
We've all read about the how, Kerry, the NYT, and the world want "regime change" in the US. Why should we think ElBaradei and his cohorts should be any different?
Comments