Sunday, July 06, 2008

Iraqi Yellowcake Delivered to Canada in Secret

There is really big news out today that the Saddam era yellowcake has finally been removed in a three month secret removal operation. The US government wanted to move the yellowcake by ocean ship from Iraq, but decided that would be extremely risky since the ships would have to pass through the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz.

They decided to haul the stuff out by cargo jet to the Indian Ocean British base at Diego Garcia, then put the 550 metric tons (1.2 million pounds plus) of concentrated uranium on ships. The ships would then deliver the yellowcake to Canada. The Canadians assure us the yellowcake will be used only for good and not for evil.

There is much being made of this story vis-à-vis the main stream media, the much maligned MSM. It's being printed the MSM will not pick-up the story, the MSM ignored the story for years, the MSM has for years claimed the nuke program didn't exist, the MSM is shocked, shocked, to find that Iraq did indeed have a nuclear program. And much of it is true. Most of the criticism is hype, though.

The MSM - who the hell is the MSM anyway? - has been reporting the yellowcake for years. In fact, the story that broke today is from the Associated Press, the AP, the evil AP, the traitorous AP, the AP that wouldn't know the truth if it tripped over it. Along with the AP story is a photograph with this caption: In a Monday June 9, 2003 file photo, UN inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) work at the nuclear facility in Tuwaitha, Iraq, 50 kms east of Baghdad. The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program - a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium - reached a Canadian port Saturday, July 5, 2008, to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans. (AP Photo/Saurabh Das, file)

The AP points out that an official interviewed said, "There was no evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991." That comports with the story the Left has been telling that Saddam was not buying yellowcake from Niger. But it also conforms to the Bush Administrations assertion that Saddam had nuclear material all along.

Yet, this supposed to be some kind of vindication for ... whom? For what? The right is still going to say Saddam had a nuclear program with yellowcake and the Left is still going to say Saddam had no working nuclear WMD and besides, he didn't get the yellowcake from Niger, like Joe Wilson said. What changes?

The whole argument got sidetracked by both sides playing politics with a subject that seemed imminently dangerous, but in reality, was of marginal import at best. There was a sexy blonde CIA spy involved and that certainly kept people's attention.

The yellowcake stockpiles themselves were of little or no danger. Yellowcake is non-explosive and one must breath in the dust to get sick. The stockpiles were under US military guard since the the start of the war because everyone in the biz knew the exact location. The bad guys haven't the equipment to process the material. A dirty bomb would be the best they could do, and that would have limited efficacy.

My question is this: who or what is the MSM? The MSM is being accused of ignoring news stories, yet they are the same guys that everyone else gets the stories from. So, if the MSM isn't reporting, where do the stories come from?

Or is it that the MSM, hated by both sides of the aisle by the way, reports stories in a manner and with a bias with which we do not agree? Much of the so called 'new media' has been around long enough to be thought of as 'media of record' as the New York Times and the Washington Post are called 'papers of record'. These would, of course, be media organs to whom officials go to spill the beans and common folk go for reliable information. So, would Pajamas Media, Drudge Report, Townhall, InstaPundit, and Michelle Malkin be eligible for MSM status, because we go to them for reliable information. Or is that reserved only for news organs we don't like?

The life of Indigo Red is full of adventure. Tune in next time for the Further Adventures of Indigo Red.


bernie said...

If you look at the way the New York Times reports stories they don't like, they bury it on page 82. The story still gets told but not on the front page.

Everything that happens in the world gets a blurb on AP. But newspapers are free to pick and choose what they print.

So it's possible to read a story on my blog that I picked up in a small Tennessee online news report but was ignored by the MSM until enough guys like you and me report on it. And sooner of course if Michelle Malkin blogs it.

If you see something in the MSM that you are surprised to read, it's probably because blogs exist. Before blogs, the MSM could distort, lie and say whatever they wanted. Dan Rather learned to his peril that blogs are king.

Louise said...

The Canadians assure us the yellowcake will be used only for good and not for evil.
Yeah, but nuclear power plants are evil, don't you know. Just like "big oil". /sarc

Indigo Red said...

Where the story appears is irrelevant to my point that the story is, in fact, being reported. That sooooo many people only read pages 1-3, sports, and entertainment is not the fault of th newspaper. The fault lies with the news consuming public.

Newspapers are businesses and they print what the readers want. It's especially easy on line to track what people read and extrapolate what kinds of stories to run an dtheir placement.

Blogs are exceptionally important now at holding feet to fire. That's why they are so hot to limit how much and what we can reprint.

Louise, you don't really believe the Canadians can be trusted with radioactive material, do you? Big Dentistry always says their work won't hurt. Liars!