Return to Transcripts main page

News from CNN

New Developments Regarding Missing Explosives; Campaign 2004 Reaches Final Round

Aired October 29, 2004 - 12:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Wolf Blitzer in New York. We're standing by. The Pentagon has just announced it's going to be holding a briefing right here. You're looking live at the briefing room at the Pentagon. Larry Di Rita, the Pentagon spokesman, will be emerging with a representative from the 3rd Infantry Division.
On the agenda, more than 350 tons of missing explosives in Iraq. Apparently some new information. The Pentagon under enormous pressure to explain what happened to those explosives.

We'll get to the Pentagon as soon as that briefing starts. We've got much more coming up on this story. First, though, some other news now -- some other headlines "Now in the News."

Yasser Arafat arrived today in Paris for treatment of his blood disorder. Arafat was wheeled from a helicopter after an aide revealed he would undergo tests for leukemia. Israel has pledged to let Arafat return to his base in the West Bank. More on this story coming up later this hour.

The FBI plans to interview a Pentagon informant about the no-bid contracts awarded to an arm of Halliburton. The contracting officer for the Corps of Engineers is alleging wrongdoing involving the company formerly headed by the vice president, Dick Cheney.

The chairman of the nation's oldest civil rights group says the IRS is squeezing his organization because he criticized the Bush administration. Julian Bond says the government is reviewing the tax exempt status of the NAACP. He says the group was warned not to air partisan comments at official functions.

But up first, new developments in a case of those missing explosives in Iraq. As CNN senior correspondent Jamie McIntyre reports, pictures taken before and after the U.S.-led invasion are adding to the mystery.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Pentagon's argument that the stockpile of powerful HMX explosive was likely long gone from the al Qa Qaa facility when U.S. troops arrived in April of 2003 was seriously undercut by this video shot by Minneapolis television station KSTP. Reporter Dean Staley was embedded with soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division when they entered a locked bunker at the al Qa Qaa facility on April 18, 2003, nearly a month into the war. But to get in, they cut what now appears to be an International Atomic Energy Agency seal.

DEAN STALEY, FMR. KSTF-TV REPORTER: We thought it might have been some sort of booby trap because it was such a thin wire. But we broke the lock and broke that wire to get in.

MCINTYRE: That IAEA sale, arms experts tell CNN, is the strongest evidence yet that at least some of the missing explosives were inside. Because HMX was the only material placed under seal at al Qa Qaa.

And the reporter says the troops he was with were on an unofficial mission, just looking around. They were not searching for, or securing any material. There was, he said, nothing to stop anyone from looting.

STALEY: And some of the bunkers weren't even locked. I mean, we had to break a couple padlocks to get into some of them. Others we did not. They were wide open.

We also saw Iraqis at the time driving around in a pickup truck, an old beat-up pickup truck, clearly scavenging. I mean, clearly sort of looking around. We kept an eye on them because this was sort of no-man's-land.

MCINTYRE: The revelation came on a day when the Pentagon released this satellite photograph taken on March 17, 2003, a few days before the war began. It shows a truck and heavy equipment transporter outside one bunker that is not believed to have contained HMX.

But the Pentagon admits the photograph is inconclusive, showing only there was activity at the site and not that any explosives were moved. Still, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in a series of radio interviews, repeated the Pentagon's contention that it's unlikely the stockpile could have been looted after the U.S. got there.

DONALD RUMSFELD, DEFENSE SECRETARY: We total control of the air. We would have seen anything like that. And so the idea that it was suddenly looted and moved out all of these tons of equipment is, I think, at least debatable. And it's very likely that, just as the United States would do, that Saddam Hussein moved munitions when he knew the war was coming.

MCINTYRE (on camera): The Pentagon says the video is just another piece in the puzzle, as it tries to reconstruct to what happened to what the IAEA now says is more than 360 tons, not 380 tons of missing high explosives. Still unclear is whether any was stolen or successfully destroyed by U.S. troops.

Jamie McIntyre, CNN, the Pentagon.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: And we are standing by right now for a briefing over at the Pentagon. We are standing by to hear from the Pentagon spokesman, Larry Di Rita, as well as Major Austin Pearson. He's with the 3rd Infantry Division. We're told there is additional information on those more than 350 tons of missing explosives in Iraq.

We will go to the briefing as soon as it starts. We are standing by for that Pentagon briefing.

Earlier this morning on "AMERICAN MORNING" here on CNN, David Kay, the former chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq, spoke out on this subject, suggesting that if U.S. troops went in there and broke those seals from the International Atomic Energy Agency, it was their property as a result of breaking those seals. Listen precisely to what David Kay said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID KAY, FMR. U.S. WEAPONS INSPECTOR: In this film you see -- what I think is most disturbing about this film is military tourism within a war zone. If you open up a bunker -- and I don't know what the pottery barn says about that rule -- but I can tell you, in a war zone, if you open up a bunker you are responsible for guarding it. You don't go out and casually open them up, look at what's there and then leave them, particularly when you don't have control of the site.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: And last night on "NEWSNIGHT WITH AARON BROWN," David Kay went further, suggesting that if this videotape is authentic from this Minneapolis local television station, and U.S. troops went in there, broke those seals, it's all over. The U.S. was responsible as result for those missing explosives.

Listen precisely once again to David Kay.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAY: Well, at least with regard to this one bunker. And the film shows one seal, one bunker, one group of soldiers going through. And there were others there that were sealed. With this one, I think it is game, set, match. There was HMX, RDX in there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: And we're going to have much more on this. The Pentagon briefing is expected to begin shortly. It was called for the top of this hour. We will go to the Pentagon and the briefing as soon as it begins.

In the meantime, let's check some other developments now.

With only days left before the presidential election, four days specifically, the 2004 campaign has reached the final round. The president and the senator back in the ring today.

The Kerry campaign swinging its way through Florida, a state whose importance is beyond dispute, a state currently leaning towards President Bush, according to the latest public opinion polls down there. Kerry's first stop was Orlando. He travels next to West Palm Beach, then on to Miami. CNN's Kelly Wallace is following John Kerry today. She is joining us now live from Orlando with more -- Kelly.

KELLY WALLACE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Wolf.

What is very interesting, for the first time this week Senator Kerry not mentioning specifically those missing explosives in Iraq. As you know, he did it every day this week.

The reason, his advisers say he wanted to talk more broadly today, make a broader case against President Bush. And so here, at his speech in Orlando, he was talking about the problems he sees with the president's administration when it comes to domestic issues and also international issues.

The strategy behind this, Mike McCurry, Senator Kerry's top adviser, saying ultimately this race is likely to come down to those voters who voted for President Bush four years ago who are not happy with how things are going, but are having a hard time making the switch to Senator Kerry. And so they are hoping, this campaign, that those voters listen to this speech. Here's what Senator Kerry said on the issue of Iraq a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: His mistakes and misjudgments have hurt our troops, have put our troops at greater risk, have overextended the armed forces of the United States, have driven away our allies, have diverted our focus from Osama bin Laden and the real war on terror.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Another focus of this day, continuing to try and energize and excite Democrats. And that's where The Boss, Bruce Springsteen, comes in.

He will be appearing with Senator Kerry later today in Miami. McCurry telling us that Springsteen and Senator Kerry were talking yesterday and that Springsteen said he didn't want to wake up Wednesday and think, "Wow, I could have done more."

So they looked at his schedule. He decided to come out later on this day. They think he can energize Democrats, get the party excited, build the momentum because right now, of course, getting out the vote is key.

And in that regard, former President Bill Clinton out trying to get out the vote. He's in Nevada today. He will be in New Mexico and Arkansas this weekend.

And then, Wolf, we keep talking about Hawaii, the new surprise battleground of this race. Senator Kerry's daughter Alexandra there today. And we are told Al Gore making his way to the state to try and do some rallying for Senator Kerry this weekend -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Kelly Wallace reporting for us from Florida.

As we await the start of this Pentagon briefing, new information presumably on those missing explosives. Some more than 350 tons of missing explosives from Iraq. We will go to that Pentagon briefing -- you are looking at a live picture -- as soon as it begins.

In the meantime, let's move on to the Bush campaign and two battleground states. The president spoke this morning in Manchester, New Hampshire, before a scheduled stop in Portsmouth. Up next, another trip to Ohio with events later today in Toledo and Columbus, two cities Senator Kerry visited only yesterday.

CNN's Elaine Quijano is covering all of this. She's joining us now live from the White House with more -- Elaine.

ELAINE QUIJANO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good afternoon to you, Wolf.

President Bush today using more personal stories to try to make his case to voters in New Hampshire that he will better protect the country in a fight against terrorism. Now, the president at that appearance just a short time ago, in Manchester, Manchester, was joined by several September 11 family members. Also, New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg, who you will recall was the president's debate preparations partner.

Well, the president today talking about his strategy to win the terrorism fight, about his commitment to fighting terrorism. And he restated the Bush doctrine, acting preemptively against terror threats abroad in order not to face them domestically. The president also stressing, however, the need for the commander in chief to be consistent.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The president must base decisions on principle, core convictions from which you will never waiver. The issues vary. The challenges are different every day. The polls go up, the polls go down. But a president's convictions must be consistent and true.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUIJANO: Now, as we mentioned, some September 11 family members joining the president, including Arlene Howard, whose son's badge the president carries with him. George Howard was a port authority officer killed on September 11.

And, Wolf, a bit of an unscripted moment. As the president was talking to Arlene Howard, during his speech confetti was prematurely released. A bit of a startled look on the president's face, but then he realized -- he appeared to realize what happened, moved on from his speech and wrapped up from there. But the president, as you said, moving on to Portsmouth, New Hampshire, and then two appearances later today in Ohio -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Elaine Quijano at the White House. Thank you, Elaine, very much.

Let's get some analysis of what's going on. Jeff Greenfield joining us.

On this explosives issue, is it explosive politically?

JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SR. ANALYST: I don't know that it's explosive. I think for me it's a template of what's going on in the whole campaign, in which the partisans on either side immediately rushed to the conclusions that they are comfortable with.

The right was saying from the beginning this is a left wing or liberal media bias, that it's a U.N. plot to embarrass the president. Kerry was on the air with an ad before anybody knew what the facts were.

It does seem to me that that Minneapolis tape suggests that and the David Kay comment suggests that, yes, those things were there after the Americans took over. You know, if you -- if you clear away the partisanship and you talk about the fog of war and what happens in a situation like this, it's perfectly understandable that the troops went into the compound, had no idea what was going on, and that's what the Kerry campaign is pointing to, is saying that's the problem with your rush to judgment.

BLITZER: All right. Jeff, the briefing is going to begin. Larry Di Rita, the Pentagon spokesman, speaking right now.

(INTERRUPTED BY LIVE EVENT)

LAWRENCE DI RITA, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS: ... stories about some information involving a particular type of weapons in Iraq that early reports suggest have been difficult to account for.

The early reports, earlier this week, based on information that came to light earlier this month -- obviously, I don't have to describe the reaction that people had to the early reports. But what is often the case that we deal with every day in this department is that early reports often need more information to better understand.

It has not been our attempt or desire to tell a particular story other than to tell the facts that we understand about this early report, about which I think people may have drawn conclusions absent those facts.

What we've tried to do is, since this became such an important issue to some, learn more about this. And we've done that through the course of the last six or seven days -- five or six days, whenever these initial reports surfaced.

The initial reports left the impression that there was a particular facility in Iraq that was heavily secured, that there were bunkers at this facility that were themselves inaccessible, and that sometime after the fall of the Saddam Hussein regime some question of accountability arose about these facilities. That's the initial impression that was left by the reports.

What we have, obviously, learned since then, among other things, is that, for example, the quantity of explosives of a particular type -- this so-called RDX material -- was actually much different than what was initially reported at that particular facility; on the order of more than a 100 tons difference.

We've learned that since these initial reports.

We've learned since the initial reports that there was some apparent movement of heavy equipment in this facility at a time when only Saddam Hussein was in control of that facility; meaning after inspectors left the country and before U.S. forces arrived to begin the liberation of the country.

So, we've tried to accumulate our understanding about this situation.

What we've also acknowledged since then is that -- and what people I think have become to understand better -- is that since the fall of this regime, coalition forces have uncovered, destroyed or marked for destruction 10,000 weapons caches spread throughout the country, consisting of 400,000 tons, plus or minus, of ammunition of all types.

The ammunition in question consists of 1/1,000 of that. We've destroyed or marked for destruction 1,000 times more ammunition than the amount of ammunition that has been called into question.

But nonetheless, we've spent an enormous amount of time in the last week trying to better understand what happened to this 1/1,000 of material that we are aware of and know about.

And I caution that there is a lot that we probably don't know about, because this was a country, as the inspectors acknowledged, that was awash in weapons.

So we've learned more over time and we've tried, as we've learned more, to produce this information without trying to say that what we have to produce, what we have to discuss is definitive, because I don't know that anybody can get to the definitive conclusions about this, but we are doing our best for people to better understand it.

As we've learned more, we've tried to provide that information to the public through, of course, the press corps here.

What we have learned within the last day or so is that units arrived at that facility. And we did provide this information. Again, a facility that the impression of which early was left that it was a facility that was heavily secured and inaccessible.

Units arrived there in early April, units of the United States Army, to find -- and were met by Iraqi forces inside the complex, which was opened. The Fedayeen Saddam, Special Republican Guard, Republican Guard and others for whatever purpose were inside the facility before U.S. forces arrived.

Those U.S. forces that did arrive there described for you how weapons that they had seen throughout the country had been heavily dispersed throughout that country as they moved forward.

Again, more facts that have come to light since we've applied ourselves to better understanding this initial report, which appears to have been significantly short of complete.

Subsequent to understanding that U.S. forces arrived there with Iraqi forces already in place, we've learned that there were, at the request of the U.S. forces that arrived there, some units that were assigned the task of removing some of the weapons that were found at that facility. And we've tried to better understand that.

What I don't intend to -- what I don't expect anybody will draw from what we're presenting today is that the weapons that we think we identified and destroyed from that facility constitute the universe of weapons that people are concerned about. We believe it constitutes some portion of those weapons. We believe that other units later on had responsibility to police weapons of this nature throughout the country and went about doing that. And we're learning more about that, and as we learn more about that, we'll provide that information.

But with that, kind of, summary, what I'd like to do is let Major Austin Pearson of the 24th Ordinance Company, 24th Corps Support Group -- who was in the country during the period in question, who was in the facility during the period in question, and who had responsibility for collecting some of these weapons of interest -- talk a little bit about how he arrived at that facility, what his responsibilities were, what his actions were.

And again, we'll do our best to provide additional information. There will be more that comes out about this. We know that. We're learning more.

We have taken this wonderful institution and applied no small percentage of it to understanding 1/1000 of the weapons we've already identified for destruction or destroyed. But it's important we do that and we've gone about to do that.

So with that, I'll ask Major Pearson to discuss a little bit about what he knows, and we'll be happy to take a few questions after that.

MAJOR AUSTIN PEARSON, 3RD INFANTRY DIVISION: Currently I'm an instructor at the U.S. Army Ordnance Center and School at APG, Maryland. I teach...

DI RITA: APG is the Aberdeen Proving Ground.

PEARSON: Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland.

I teach advanced ammunition management to military officers going through the captain's career course. On Tuesday I had taken my students to United Defense on an industrial tour. I was sequestered within the plant going on the tour. As I took a bus ride back, got back, arrived back at around 1800 to APG.

At that time, I'm in an MBA program, went to class, and I arrived home at about 2100 hours, where I was watching the news. And from the news I seen an NBC report talking about the missing 380 tons of ammunition.

To this point, I had thought that 380 tons was a recent type ammunition that was missing. And then I seen the video from NBC highlighting what I knew was Objective Elms, Logistics Support Area Elms, at the time, a place that I operated in and did some collection operations in Elms in the time frame I was there in April '03.

The next morning I contacted my chain of command, where I was directed to the chief of staff of the Army Ordnance Center and School, who put me in contact with the Defense Intelligence Agency. From there, I received multiple call-backs, getting the facts. I provided the facts to them.

And last night I received a call from the staff up here at the Pentagon. General Helmic (ph) called me and asked me to come down, verify what I knew, and look at some visuals and some maps corresponding where Objective Elms and the other locations that are at the top of this conversation.

From there, in April of 2003, I was the commander of the 24th Ordnance Company. Our mission was to provide convention ammunition support to 3rd Infantry Division. I was part of the 24th CSG at this time in April, based out of Logistics Support Area Dogwood, southwest of Baghdad.

My primary role was to provide U.S. forces with ammunition to support combat operations.

In addition to that, I had an additional mission of managing a captured ammunition holding area at LSA Dogwood. I also received the mission during the first weeks of April to assist the brigade combat teams of the 3rd I.D. in Baghdad clearing, in sectors that they were operating in, of captured enemy ammunition that was throughout their area of operations.

We conducted multiple of these missions in locations like elementary schools, residential communities. A particular one we worked with in northwest Baghdad in the Hammer Brigade's area of operation was a housing development that was under construction. We took out of one house alone over 7 million rounds of AK-47 rounds out of one house built into the walls of the house. A very large area. Took about three days. There was all sorts of ammunition, to include the types that we are talking about here, scattered throughout that. That was just the one location. We also found them in multiple sites within and around Baghdad.

Upon returning from that mission back to Logistics Support Area Dogwood, I was ordered by the rear area operations center that I reported to, from the 24th CSG, to assist the corps support group working with the 101st Infantry Division at Objective Elms.

I will point out what I know as Objective Elms right now, because before this I had never heard of Al Qa Qaa. On the planning graphics that we worked with, Objective Elms is this blue square right here around the map, as you can see. And Al Qa Qaa is in the red- highlighted area.

This is Logistic Support Area Dogwood, where I had my U.S. ammunition facility, in addition to my captured ammunition holding area was located at LSA Dogwood.

Once I received my mission from the RAOC, I moved across the Euphrates into LSA Elms, and we made an assessment that the area that we came into -- the area to the north of LSA Elms, as you see here, if you are coming down from the northwest as you cross, there's a major road network and you can travel around. This is the main route you will take, the main supply route. There is a wall -- an earthen concrete wall that encompasses the military complex -- the ammunition complex around in Elms. It had multiple breaks in the walls. We were able to drive right through the breaks. DI RITA: On that point, let me just clarify one piece that Major Pearson wouldn't know about. But the commander of the 101st -- or maybe it was the 3rd Infantry Division -- talked about their need to access that facility. And when they did, they did so by breaking through the walls.

DI RITA: It's possible, although not certain, that the breaks in the walls that the major refers to were put there by U.S. forces trying to access the facility when they engaged the Iraqi force there.

And I only say that's possible. But, in fact, U.S. forces acknowledged having knocked some walls down to get into that facility.

PEARSON: We entered in through this area and address, and our mission was to find any exposed ammunition, clear ammunition that was -- had the potential to be pose a threat to U.S. forces or as easy access.

We specifically went in. I had nine palletized loading system vehicles, which encompasses both a truck and a trailer that has the capability of -- each truck and each trailer has 16.5 tons per vehicle, per truck, per trailer, for a total of 33 tons per system. We went in there with nine.

I collected ammunition from the earthen covered magazines. We drew that ammunition, loaded up onto our trucks, and moved it back to the captured ammunition holding area, LSA Dogwood.

Once we were at Dogwood, as part of our operations at the captured ammunition holding area, one of those was to destroy the captured enemy ammunition that we had on our site that was designated as high priority or as a risk to the soldiers managing the site.

We used some of this type of ammunition that we recovered from LSA Elms in order to facilitate those operations. It is a typical -- what we have done. We would do about a 10,000- pound demolition explosion, a demolition shot. In order to facilitate that, you set up the shot and you wrap the rounds with plastic explosives.

And the doctrinal method to do that is, if you're going to destroy captured enemy ammunition, you will use captured enemy ammunition to run the shot. And we consumed some of this ammunition in order to destroy the other ammunition we had.

And at the time, when this was all going on, my high water mark of ammunition -- because it went up and down as I destroyed ammunition -- was over 7,000 tons of ammunition at the captured ammunition holding area at Dogwood.

The captured ammunition holding area at Dogwood was destroyed in a fire in June of 2003. We had transitioned accountability and authority to another ordinance company.

I moved back during the entire time of the summer months because the nature and the quality of the captured enemy ammunition. We had multiple cook-offs throughout the day. And then, finally, the captured ammunition holding area was fully destroyed and engulfed in a fire. That's all I have, sir.

DI RITA: Before we take a couple questions, let me clarify a couple points that give a little bit more context to what the major just said.

He thinks his unit removed a couple hundred, 250 tons of ammunition. It encompasses a variety of ammunition. It encompasses -- he has photos that were not -- we may provide later; we're reviewing those photos -- that reflect the types of -- in some cases the types of ammunition that have been seen on other video that's been made available to the public within the last day or two: large boxes of plastic explosives, those sorts of things, I think commonly referred to by some as RDX by the ordnance handlers themselves.

One of the things that I think we are learning as, again, we continue to learn more about this, is that the original declaration of some 140 tons of RDX at this particular facility is probably not accurate. And we are trying to understand this better.

And as I said, we are learning more about what we -- our -- what we knew at the time and what was in the reports. It was probably, at this particular facility, a much smaller number of RDX; perhaps as low as three tons.

The major's unit pulled 100 -- 250 tons of total equipment out of this facility, including a lot of plastic explosives. How much? I don't think we know. It was a portion of the kinds of things, including detonation cord.

We have some talking points that will provide you that -- some data, some fact sheets. So, I want to make sure that we are very clear on a point. There was some question about ammunition at a particular facility. The questions of those ammunition -- the facts that we've learned since then have caused some doubt about the initial reports, but that's always the case. And that's nobody's fault; that's what happens in life. You hear a report and then you go out and try and enrich that report with knowledge and facts. And we've tried to do that.

As we've gathered these facts, we've tried to put them out. And people can make their own evaluations.

We have captured and destroyed 400,000 tons of ammunition of a variety of types, including the types in question. The types in question constitute quite a small percentage of the total.

Some percentage of that total in question was almost certainly removed from bunkers and destroyed by Major Pearson's unit. There were other units that followed -- and we're learning more about that, and as we have more information, we'll provide it -- other units that followed that had the responsibility, task forces that had the responsibility for policing up conventional ordnance, other units that followed that had the responsibility of identifying sites of weapons of mass destruction.

There's a perception that I think is unfortunate that's been left by the initial reports of this weapons that leave the impression that the military forces there did not have a systematic approach to three priorities: taking down the regime of Saddam Hussein; minimizing casualties to U.S. and coalition forces, and indeed to Iraqis; and identifying and securing weapons throughout that country.

And what we have learned since the unfortunate response to the initial report is that, as we've delved into this deeper, we've been able to demonstrate, I think, that that planning was well conceived and extraordinary well executed by the forces that are over there. And with that, I'll leave it to the major.

QUESTION: Major, could you please better describe the explosives that were removed? Were they primarily assembled weapons? Were they raw material like the granular HMX or RDX? And could you, sort of, give us a ratio out of that 250 tons how much were assembled weapons and how much were raw material?

PEARSON: As a conventional ammunition ordnance officer, I deal with ammunition logistics management. I am not a technical specialist. I am not explosive ordnance disposal or technical intelligence. My role and what I've been trained on is to manage ammunition facilities and mitigate the risk and exposure to U.S. forces and civilians.

The specifics of what we talked about that we pulled out of there, from my recollection, is some TNT, plastic explosives; I can't further define other than that, plastic explosives. Detonation cords, initiators, and white phosphorous rounds, which were a higher priority for us to go in there.

QUESTION: So you don't know... QUESTION: But do you believe there was HMX?

QUESTION: Yes. You don't know if there was HMX?

DI RITA: Let me handle that.

QUESTION: Did it look like those barrels -- you know this video that ABC had.

DI RITA: We've described what we know. And as we learn more, we'll describe that. The major has...

QUESTION: Why doesn't the major talk about that?

(CROSSTALK)

DI RITA: Excuse me for one moment.

The major had -- we had units that had responsibility for identifying and understanding what IAEA seals were. The major's unit had the responsibility to go in and clear conventional ordnance.

QUESTION: But, Larry, you've told us that you believe part of the 250 tons represents the material under question. You have said that.

DI RITA: Represents some portion of the material.

QUESTION: The major has not said that. So we would like to hear from him...

QUESTION: Do you believe you had RDX in there?

PEARSON: I had plastic explosives in there.

QUESTION: It's the HMX that we're concerned about. And you've seen that video that the affiliate...

PEARSON: I have not.

QUESTION: You've not shown him the video of the barrels? Didn't you just say you've shown him...

(CROSSTALK)

DI RITA: He saw some photos from yesterday, and had understood that, as I said, the palletized boxes -- I think you said those were the kinds of things you removed. The barrels that some people have said is HMX that I don't know is accurate and I'm not prepared to stipulate whether it is or is not was not.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) a symbol on it though that...

DI RITA: The one we have seen on some of the photos is a symbol that identifies a class of ordinance.

PEARSON: Hazardous division class. This is one of the techniques we teach to ordnance and how you use -- it's an international symbol for shipping hazardous materials. The Haz Class Division 1.1D (ph) -- there's multiple types of ordinance in that class. Off the top of my head, I'm sure there is at least 80 or 90 different types. And whether it's HMX, I couldn't verify it.

QUESTION: You talk about this procedure though. You say there's a procedure in place and they know what to do. And yet apparently the major didn't know he was even looking for HMX or what was there or what to do if you found it sealed.

Do you remember seeing the IAEA seals?

PEARSON: There was -- I do not -- I did not see any IAEA seals at the locations that we went into. I was not looking for that.

My mission specifically was to go in there and to prevent the exposure of U.S. forces and to minimize that by taking out what was easily accessible and putting it back and bringing it into our captured ammunition holding area.

DI RITA: And some of these are good questions that we are still trying to better understand and as we do that we will try and provide it.

QUESTION: I'm not understanding your conclusion, Larry.

Based on what the major has said, how do you come to the conclusion that some of the 250 tons this unit removed is the materiel under question?

QUESTION: How do you make...

DI RITA: As we're developing our better understanding of this, we have a -- the term that was being used throughout the theater for RDX is plastic explosives. It was, sort of, an interchangeable term.

So we don't -- I can't say that RDX that was on the list of the IAEA is in what the major pulled out. The major has said, and I think in terms of the way we have tried to understand this, is that we believe that some of the things that they were pulling out of there was RDX.

Was it RDX that is associated with what the IAEA declared? My only point on that is I'm not sure what we know what the IAEA declared, because they first said there were some 141 tons of it there. We are now trying to better understand some of the reports that indicate there may have been only three tons of it at that particular building.

QUESTION: Isn't that tonnage discrepancy already accounted for by the IAEA by the fact it is stored at a nearby facility that is called the...

DI RITA: We are trying to understand that better. I'm not in any position to comment on that. The initial report was 141 tons at this facility. We are hearing some more refined explanation by the IAEA, that, well, maybe this facility really meant another facility 30 kilometers away. So it's a fair question. And we don't have an answer. And we are not prepared to talk to that today.

QUESTION: Could you describe the palletized boxes? Mr. Di Rita just mentioned palletized boxes. Could you describe what kind of boxes they were?

Did you actually go into bunkers or just go to those materiels that were easily accessible, because we've seen much of it lying around on the ground?

PEARSON: We went into the bunkers that were easily accessible. We used a palletized loading system, was our vehicle transport. Most of the ammunition had to be loaded on to that, either manual or using a forklift. There are small boxes, 24 square, but it's a vary, depending on what you had. The det cord comes in large rolls; from my recollection, about a three foot diameter of a roll of detonation cord.

QUESTION: So the palletized boxes, were they wooden boxes? Cardboard?

PEARSON: Wooden boxes, sir.

QUESTION: Can I ask one question -- actually two questions. One is, you said you had nine vehicles, 33 tons each, roughly. That's 297 tons. Was that more like it, or is it 250? Do we know?

PEARSON: Sir, the way -- I'm calculating, and it's an estimation on my part of what we did, I went in there with nine vehicles, so it's a truck and a trailer, which equates to 18.

PEARSON: On one of those trailers I had a 6K forklift on one of those trailers. So that gives me 17.

And just if you look at the configuration and the packing and the characteristics by weight and cube of how you're going to pack that ammunition, it brings you down to the ballpark of around 250 as an estimation, just by how much I could fit if I compare it with what I know about U.S. ammunition, which is just very similar. It's about 3,600 pounds to a four-by-four pallet, which is a standard international pallet and how many can fit on a flat rack.

QUESTION: OK. Just to follow up, just two things.

One is you don't have the percentage of what we are calling HMX and RDX, the plastic explosives. You don't have a percentage of that total lift -- like an estimate that you think how much it might be of that -- what you took out of those bunkers. Is there an estimate?

PEARSON: No, sir.

Before, when my company left out of there we, one, because this was all classified. Everything -- all our documentation was classified. And the procedures that we followed -- was I turned it into my rear area operations center, which when they left the country, they turned it into their rear operation center. All I...

DI RITA: And they're pursuing that to determine that (inaudible).

QUESTION: Last question: Judging by what it took for you to remove that 200 tons, with the forklifts, the tractor trailers, et cetera, do you believe it's possible to move that much materiel in a short period of time while U.S. military convoys are moving up and down those roads?

It would be from -- the last time would be April 18th -- let's say the new video -- to May 8th, when the inspection team comes in and doesn't find the IAEA-marked material. So it would be about -- I don't know? -- 20 days.

Is it possible to get all of that done? The forklifts, the trucks -- without anybody in the U.S. military knowing?

DI RITA: You mean if somebody else were doing it?

QUESTION: Right. Yes. Yes. I'm saying, insurgents or looters, or whatever.

PEARSON: Sir, I know what -- we went in there, we did it in about a day. It's not -- it seems like an exorbitant amount, but when you take it in the scope of we were managing 7,000 tons of ammunition, we just completed a major mission in Baghdad, this wasn't that significant of an operation.

At the time when I was in Objective Elms, that area was very pacified where there wasn't a lot of civilians in the area at that time.

PEARSON: If they were, they were very respectful to U.S. forces. They were very respectful to us. I didn't see any hostilities at that location at that time.

DI RITA: But if I can just provide a little more -- Colonel Perkins, when he was here speaking about that -- and Colonel Perkins was the brigade commander of the 2nd Brigade of the 3rd Infantry Division who was there just a few days prior to Major Pearson -- he talked a little bit about that.

And it was his perception that that size of an operation, while small in terms of the total number of weapons we were finding, would have been something his forces, which were the combat forces, would certainly have noticed; that a large number of trucks that Iraqis were trying to move up and down those roads were something his unit would certainly have -- he believes they would have noticed that.

QUESTION: Major Pearson, just to remove any confusion about what you're telling us, can you tell us definitively that any of the materiel that you or your unit destroyed was among the 300-plus tons of the high explosives under IAEA seal? Can you tell us that definitively?

PEARSON: I can tell you that I recovered captured enemy ammunition from Objective Elms and I moved that approximately 200 to 250 tons of ammunition to the captured ammunition holding area at Dogwood, which I managed.

QUESTION: Wait a second, can he tell us whether that was the materiel -- the 300 plus tons that were under IAEA seal? Can you tell us that that was the same materiel? Are we talking about the same materiel?

DI RITA: You don't know, sir?

PEARSON: I don't know. I don't have that information.

DI RITA: And let me help you with that.

I get that you guys really want the definitive answer, and so do we. The difference is that that takes understanding facts, and we have tried to uncover facts over the last week, at a point after which many people thought they had the definitive answer, and we simply do not.

So it is perfectly understandable that people would like to have somebody at this podium say definitively, "This happened."

Even the number you used is not definitive: 300 tons of this or that. It's in a report provided by Saddam Hussein in June of '02 -- I think June or July. It's in a report repeated in October of '04 by the Iraqi government.

In between there are other reports by the IAEA that we are trying to better understand because they don't, at least at first glance and deeper analysis, seem to track the same numbers.

So we're trying our best to understand it.

You want a definitive answer. Others have said that they think they know the definitive answer.

DI RITA: We're simply saying we don't.

QUESTION: HMX was under seal. HMX is the only thing under seal. Did you see seals? Did you go into locked bunkers? You said you only went into bunkers that were easily accessible.

PEARSON: My mission was to go into bunkers and to prevent the exposure...

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

PEARSON: I went to in bunkers that we would easily get into and remove that.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

QUESTION: What does that mean? Sorry. Can you clarify? PEARSON: That it was open, and I was able to take my troops in there, and that was exposed.

QUESTION: There were no seals. So that would...

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

PEARSON: No seals. I did not see any seals.

QUESTION: ... it was not HMX.

DI RITA: Unless somebody had come by and already opened the seals.

QUESTION: But you saw the video of April 18th.

DI RITA: Right.

QUESTION: The video of April 18th shows U.S. forces going into bunkers that are locked, and there are seals on some of those...

DI RITA: And that's correct. And it's not -- we don't know. Certainly Major Pearson had no responsibility. And we just don't know to this point. And as we learn, I think we've tried to demonstrate, as we learn things we'll be sure to tell you.

QUESTION: Major, do you have the longitude and latitude and/or GPS coordinates of Objective Elm?

DI RITA: That's what on the chart.

PEARSON: That's specified on the chart.

DI RITA: By grid coordinates.

PEARSON: By grid coordinates.

DI RITA: And it overlaps with the facility.

QUESTION: What date were we talking about?

PEARSON: To my best recollection, based on information I have, it was April 13th, 2003.

QUESTION: You were there prior...

DI RITA: That is correct.

QUESTION: ... to the video the ABC affiliate showed of the bunkers being opened.

DI RITA: Of some bunkers being opened, by the 101st Airborne Division personnel who were the ones who asked for this assistance from Major Pearson's unit sometime...

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) tell us what these pictures show that we haven't seen yet? Because perhaps that would additionally clarify the matter, if you can. What do they show?

PEARSON: Ma'am, the pictures I have were digital photos as a commander on the ground that I took. All right, this is a soldier inside the bunker, just like a few -- this wasn't an investigative photos. And that's how I, sort of...

DI RITA: One picture I saw, just to describe it -- and if we can we'll try to make it available -- is a picture of boxes that look very similar to the kinds of boxes that we see the 101st Airborne Division personnel looking at the following week.

QUESTION: Major, if you mission was to clear the ammo, were there troops waiting for your arrival guarding this area or was it wide open?

PEARSON: There was no troops waiting for my arrival. My mission was to go in there and to assist the corps support group that was supporting the 101st in their area to minimize the exposure of their troops to capture enemy munition.

DI RITA: But 101st was -- had, as General Petraeus has said -- they were on the facility. I mean, that was their facility at that point.

QUESTION: When you left the facility, how much explosives were still there?

PEARSON: I don't know. I can't speak about what was left. I can speak about what I took out of the facility.

QUESTION: But did you -- I mean, you took out as much as you could, but there was more there. Is that right?

PEARSON: My intent was to go in there and the stuff that was easily exposed. I completed my mission, I got what I needed to get. And we went back to captured munition holding area to continue the operations to support 3rd I.D.

DI RITA: It's almost certain there was more, because we have seen the 101st -- if the dates are correct from the reporters that were embedded with the 101st.

QUESTION: The other bunkers that you left, you didn't check, the ones that you didn't go into -- what was the status of them? Was there dirt pushed up against them? Were they locked? What happened?

PEARSON: I did see some bunkers, some earth-covered magazines that had berms of earth and gravel pushed up in front of them. This is a technique I've seen repeatedly, it's a common military technique to limit access to earth-covered magazines, especially at abandoned sites.

I have seen that at multiple different locations throughout Iraq and...

QUESTION: A common U.S. military technique or... PEARSON: Common U.S. military -- and -- I can't say who did it, but it's a common military technique to prevent access.

DI RITA: I think we have time for one more.

QUESTION: Let me just ask you how you square all of this with the fact that less than 24 hours ago, in two radio interviews, Secretary Rumsfeld said that he didn't feel the facts were known. He wanted to know more, but yet he said that it was his view it was most likely that the stuff was removed prior to the war by the Saddam Hussein regime because he didn't see how anything else was possible.

How do you square...

DI RITA: I haven't seen the transcript of what the secretary said, although I was there when he made his comments. I just don't remember how precisely he worded it.

What I think he would emphasize, and what I'm certainly emphasizing, is that there's a lot we don't know.

We also -- I think the point he was trying to make is that there was certainly activity, and I would describe it only because that's the way the people describe these things as unusual activity at this facility prior to the arrival of U.S. forces and after the departure of inspectors from Baghdad.

DI RITA: Unusual activity meaning large trucks in front of bunkers. Doing what? We don't know. But it was at a period of time when only Saddam Hussein was in control of that facility.

We have seen other photos, photos we didn't release, because we don't know them well enough, that show a significant number of large trucks on that site, near those bunkers.

QUESTION: What should we take away from this very capable, well- informed major here as to what he's telling us? Is this just another potential scenario you're outlining for us?

DI RITA: No. We have no scenario.

What I would think you would take away is what I have tried to describe, which is there's probably more we don't know about that 377 tons than what we know, other than we've destroyed 400,000 tons of ammunition in that country. We had people moving about freely on that facility prior to the arrival of U.S. forces, armed people, Fedayeen Saddam, Special Republican Guard. They attacked our forces from inside that facility.

And as we try to better understand what happened to 1/1,000 of the ammunition that we have already identified or destroyed, we will provide those facts.

That's about all we got time for. Thanks very much, thank you, thank you. BLITZER: Larry Di Rita, the Pentagon spokesman, and Major Austin Pearson who -- accompanying him. Major Austin Pearson was there right after the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime in mid-April.

He is reporting now that, based on what he remembers his unit doing, removing, he says, between 200 and 250 tons of what he calls equipment and a lot of plastic explosives. But under questioning, some serious questioning from Pentagon reporters, he could not say whether any of those plastic explosives were part of the International Atomic Energy Agency inspected explosives documented over the past few days by the IAEA, the Iraqi government, as well as news media organizations.

He says his area was within this al Qa Qaa region. He removed, he said, a significant quantity of explosives and equipment, but it's unclear. He says he can't confirm that any of that explosives was from the al Qa Qaa facility that's under question right now. It's possible, but he can't say that. Larry Di Rita making a strong case, as we just heard at the very end, once again, that 400,000 tons of ammunition or was about to be destroyed by the U.S. and coalition forces. And they are talking about 1/1000th of that right now.

We're going to take a quick break and continue our analysis of what we've just learned, what we haven't learned. Still unanswered questions. Our Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr, you saw her asking good questions there. When we come back, we'll ask Barbara Starr to help us better understand what we heard and what we didn't hear. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: We are going to continue our analysis now of what we just saw. The live coverage here on CNN. That Pentagon briefing on those missing explosives in Iraq. Our Pentagon correspondent, Barbara Starr, you saw her asking good questions there. She is joining us now live.

Barbara, help us better understand what we learned and what we didn't learn during the course of this past half hour.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Boy, Wolf, this is -- continues to be a top story here at the Pentagon and increasingly confusing thing day by day. Let's be very clear what we did see.

We saw the chief Pentagon spokesman, Larry Di Rita, who is one of the top political operatives for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, he was at the podium with an Army major. A relatively junior officer, Major Austin Pearson of the 3rd Infantry. He was affiliated with the 3rd Infantry Division at the time of the war in the region. A man who is a professional Army officer and an expert in ammunition. They brought him out to talk about what he saw at this region around April 13th, 2003, when he was there.

Now, this Army major, again, a professional Army officer, says, indeed, his unit removed 250 tons of munitions, explosives, weapons, all kinds of material from the facility. But what he isn't able to tell us is was any of that material -- the material that the IAEA is talking about, was any of it under seal? Did he see IAEA seals? Did he see sealed bunkers? He is indicating, no.

He is saying, when pressed by reporters, he can only testify, if you will, to the fact that his unit removed 250 tons. He does believe that some plastic explosives were included in that. Some of the material that would be the type of material. But he cannot tell us that it was specifically the material of concern by the IAEA's agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency. And he specifically says he cannot verify that he ever saw any seals.

So let's turn to the political side of the podium and the briefing we just saw. Larry Di Rita saying they know that, that there is no definitive answer, but they are bringing this man out to try offer more information. Clearly the Pentagon feels, you know, throughout this entire week that this is a story they do want to address, they do want to come up with a definitive answer to address the public firestorm and the political firestorm that has burst open about this story.

They say that the Pentagon is not political in these final days of the presidential campaign. But many officials we have talked to over the last several days readily acknowledge behind the scenes that this is a major political story for the Bush administration and for the Pentagon here.

So to wrap it up, they have brought out a professional Army officer to talk about what he knew, what he saw what he did on April 13th. That's a very important date, Wolf. That is several days before the estimated April 18th date when other Army units were at that facility and may have opened some bunkers.

So once again, it's actually not very clear what this briefing has told us with any precision -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All right. Barbara Starr, I know you are going to be back at the top of the hour with much more. Thanks very much. We will continue to watch this important story for our viewers. Much more of course coming up throughout the day here on CNN.

And this note in the coming hour on "LIVE FROM." Dean Staley, the reporter from Minneapolis who was there on April 18th when they went in. We saw that videotape from that ABC affiliate station last night, he is going to be joining us coming up in the next hour. He is now out in the Pacific Northwest. We'll talk to him as well, our colleagues from "LIVE FROM." Much more coming up on this story.

There's another important story we are following today, Yasser Arafat, he has now been moved to a hospital in Paris. He arrived there just a few hours ago. The question now though, is this -- who is in charge of the Palestinian Authority? And what about the future of peace talks with Israel? Is there a future? For years Aaron Miller helped formulate U.S. policy in the Middle East. He is now president of Seeds of Peace, an organization here in the United States that promotes peace among young people in the Middle East and throughout the world. He met with Yasser Arafat, what, just 10 days ago, Aaron?

AARON DAVID MILLER, PRES., SEEDS OF PEACE: About 10 days ago.

BLITZER: You may have been the last American to have met with him before he took a turn clearly for the worst. First of all, what was he like?

MILLER: Well, in contrast to the hundreds of hours that we had spent with him during the course of the '90s, during the negotiations, I found him fundamentally changed. I had seen him in August, he appeared reasonably healthy. But about 10 days ago it was clear that something seriously was wrong with him. He was unfocused, tired, lost a lot of weight and uncharacteristically quiet. Usually we would get the cassette, that is, the interpretation of Arafat's problems, according to Arafat. But not this time.

BLITZER: So did he look like he was critically ill, almost on his deathbed?

MILLER: I'm not a physician, but it is clear to me that something was seriously wrong with him, yes.

BLITZER: I would be surprised that he would be willing to receive you if he's in that bad shape.

MILLER: Well, in this case, we do have this longstanding relationship, and he's a supporter of the organization that I lead.

BLITZER: Seeds of Peace.

MILLER: Yes.

BLITZER: Let's talk a little bit about what happens now. He's in the hospital, whatever he is going through. Whatever kind of treatment they are trying to determine what the cause of his illness is right now, but what happens with the Palestinian leadership?

MILLER: Well, whether it's incapacitation or he ultimately dies, a fundamental historic change is under way. Here is a guy who dominated the Palestinian national movement for 50 years. He founded Fatah in 1957. He took over the PLO in 1964, 1968. He is the symbol of Palestinian national identity. More power, more guns, more money, more political authority than any other Palestinian leader.

Now he's gone or at least incapacitated. So you have a vacuum, that vacuum is going to be filled by a formal succession process, Abu Alaa, maybe Abu Mazen, some of the security chiefs. But there is then going to be a struggle for control and power behind the scenes. I suspect that for the moment will you're not going to get a lot of turmoil and violence. To borrow a phrase from one of our revolutionary fathers, Sam Adams, we are either going to hang together or we're going to hang separately. And I suspect that that advice will be taken among the Palestinians in the territory.

BLITZER: Aaron Miller, formerly with the State Department, now with Seeds of Peace. Unfortunately, we can't continue. We had a lot of breaking news this hour. But we will continue this conversation down the road.

MILLER: I appreciate it, Wolf, thank you.

BLITZER: Thank you very much, Aaron.

I'll be back later today and every weekday at 5:00 p.m. Eastern for "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS." How safe are the nation's polling places, yes, polling places with Election Day just days away? We will take a closer look at how local authorities plan to keep all of us voters safe.

BLITZER: Plus my special interview with the White House chief of staff, Andrew Card. He will join us live. Until then, thanks very much for joining us. I'm Wolf Blitzer in New York, "LIVE FROM" from with Kyra Phillips is coming up next.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com


Aired October 29, 2004 - 12:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: I'm Wolf Blitzer in New York. We're standing by. The Pentagon has just announced it's going to be holding a briefing right here. You're looking live at the briefing room at the Pentagon. Larry Di Rita, the Pentagon spokesman, will be emerging with a representative from the 3rd Infantry Division.
On the agenda, more than 350 tons of missing explosives in Iraq. Apparently some new information. The Pentagon under enormous pressure to explain what happened to those explosives.

We'll get to the Pentagon as soon as that briefing starts. We've got much more coming up on this story. First, though, some other news now -- some other headlines "Now in the News."

Yasser Arafat arrived today in Paris for treatment of his blood disorder. Arafat was wheeled from a helicopter after an aide revealed he would undergo tests for leukemia. Israel has pledged to let Arafat return to his base in the West Bank. More on this story coming up later this hour.

The FBI plans to interview a Pentagon informant about the no-bid contracts awarded to an arm of Halliburton. The contracting officer for the Corps of Engineers is alleging wrongdoing involving the company formerly headed by the vice president, Dick Cheney.

The chairman of the nation's oldest civil rights group says the IRS is squeezing his organization because he criticized the Bush administration. Julian Bond says the government is reviewing the tax exempt status of the NAACP. He says the group was warned not to air partisan comments at official functions.

But up first, new developments in a case of those missing explosives in Iraq. As CNN senior correspondent Jamie McIntyre reports, pictures taken before and after the U.S.-led invasion are adding to the mystery.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JAMIE MCINTYRE, CNN SR. PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The Pentagon's argument that the stockpile of powerful HMX explosive was likely long gone from the al Qa Qaa facility when U.S. troops arrived in April of 2003 was seriously undercut by this video shot by Minneapolis television station KSTP. Reporter Dean Staley was embedded with soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division when they entered a locked bunker at the al Qa Qaa facility on April 18, 2003, nearly a month into the war. But to get in, they cut what now appears to be an International Atomic Energy Agency seal.

DEAN STALEY, FMR. KSTF-TV REPORTER: We thought it might have been some sort of booby trap because it was such a thin wire. But we broke the lock and broke that wire to get in.

MCINTYRE: That IAEA sale, arms experts tell CNN, is the strongest evidence yet that at least some of the missing explosives were inside. Because HMX was the only material placed under seal at al Qa Qaa.

And the reporter says the troops he was with were on an unofficial mission, just looking around. They were not searching for, or securing any material. There was, he said, nothing to stop anyone from looting.

STALEY: And some of the bunkers weren't even locked. I mean, we had to break a couple padlocks to get into some of them. Others we did not. They were wide open.

We also saw Iraqis at the time driving around in a pickup truck, an old beat-up pickup truck, clearly scavenging. I mean, clearly sort of looking around. We kept an eye on them because this was sort of no-man's-land.

MCINTYRE: The revelation came on a day when the Pentagon released this satellite photograph taken on March 17, 2003, a few days before the war began. It shows a truck and heavy equipment transporter outside one bunker that is not believed to have contained HMX.

But the Pentagon admits the photograph is inconclusive, showing only there was activity at the site and not that any explosives were moved. Still, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in a series of radio interviews, repeated the Pentagon's contention that it's unlikely the stockpile could have been looted after the U.S. got there.

DONALD RUMSFELD, DEFENSE SECRETARY: We total control of the air. We would have seen anything like that. And so the idea that it was suddenly looted and moved out all of these tons of equipment is, I think, at least debatable. And it's very likely that, just as the United States would do, that Saddam Hussein moved munitions when he knew the war was coming.

MCINTYRE (on camera): The Pentagon says the video is just another piece in the puzzle, as it tries to reconstruct to what happened to what the IAEA now says is more than 360 tons, not 380 tons of missing high explosives. Still unclear is whether any was stolen or successfully destroyed by U.S. troops.

Jamie McIntyre, CNN, the Pentagon.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: And we are standing by right now for a briefing over at the Pentagon. We are standing by to hear from the Pentagon spokesman, Larry Di Rita, as well as Major Austin Pearson. He's with the 3rd Infantry Division. We're told there is additional information on those more than 350 tons of missing explosives in Iraq.

We will go to the briefing as soon as it starts. We are standing by for that Pentagon briefing.

Earlier this morning on "AMERICAN MORNING" here on CNN, David Kay, the former chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq, spoke out on this subject, suggesting that if U.S. troops went in there and broke those seals from the International Atomic Energy Agency, it was their property as a result of breaking those seals. Listen precisely to what David Kay said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID KAY, FMR. U.S. WEAPONS INSPECTOR: In this film you see -- what I think is most disturbing about this film is military tourism within a war zone. If you open up a bunker -- and I don't know what the pottery barn says about that rule -- but I can tell you, in a war zone, if you open up a bunker you are responsible for guarding it. You don't go out and casually open them up, look at what's there and then leave them, particularly when you don't have control of the site.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: And last night on "NEWSNIGHT WITH AARON BROWN," David Kay went further, suggesting that if this videotape is authentic from this Minneapolis local television station, and U.S. troops went in there, broke those seals, it's all over. The U.S. was responsible as result for those missing explosives.

Listen precisely once again to David Kay.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAY: Well, at least with regard to this one bunker. And the film shows one seal, one bunker, one group of soldiers going through. And there were others there that were sealed. With this one, I think it is game, set, match. There was HMX, RDX in there.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: And we're going to have much more on this. The Pentagon briefing is expected to begin shortly. It was called for the top of this hour. We will go to the Pentagon and the briefing as soon as it begins.

In the meantime, let's check some other developments now.

With only days left before the presidential election, four days specifically, the 2004 campaign has reached the final round. The president and the senator back in the ring today.

The Kerry campaign swinging its way through Florida, a state whose importance is beyond dispute, a state currently leaning towards President Bush, according to the latest public opinion polls down there. Kerry's first stop was Orlando. He travels next to West Palm Beach, then on to Miami. CNN's Kelly Wallace is following John Kerry today. She is joining us now live from Orlando with more -- Kelly.

KELLY WALLACE, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Hello, Wolf.

What is very interesting, for the first time this week Senator Kerry not mentioning specifically those missing explosives in Iraq. As you know, he did it every day this week.

The reason, his advisers say he wanted to talk more broadly today, make a broader case against President Bush. And so here, at his speech in Orlando, he was talking about the problems he sees with the president's administration when it comes to domestic issues and also international issues.

The strategy behind this, Mike McCurry, Senator Kerry's top adviser, saying ultimately this race is likely to come down to those voters who voted for President Bush four years ago who are not happy with how things are going, but are having a hard time making the switch to Senator Kerry. And so they are hoping, this campaign, that those voters listen to this speech. Here's what Senator Kerry said on the issue of Iraq a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: His mistakes and misjudgments have hurt our troops, have put our troops at greater risk, have overextended the armed forces of the United States, have driven away our allies, have diverted our focus from Osama bin Laden and the real war on terror.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WALLACE: Another focus of this day, continuing to try and energize and excite Democrats. And that's where The Boss, Bruce Springsteen, comes in.

He will be appearing with Senator Kerry later today in Miami. McCurry telling us that Springsteen and Senator Kerry were talking yesterday and that Springsteen said he didn't want to wake up Wednesday and think, "Wow, I could have done more."

So they looked at his schedule. He decided to come out later on this day. They think he can energize Democrats, get the party excited, build the momentum because right now, of course, getting out the vote is key.

And in that regard, former President Bill Clinton out trying to get out the vote. He's in Nevada today. He will be in New Mexico and Arkansas this weekend.

And then, Wolf, we keep talking about Hawaii, the new surprise battleground of this race. Senator Kerry's daughter Alexandra there today. And we are told Al Gore making his way to the state to try and do some rallying for Senator Kerry this weekend -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Kelly Wallace reporting for us from Florida.

As we await the start of this Pentagon briefing, new information presumably on those missing explosives. Some more than 350 tons of missing explosives from Iraq. We will go to that Pentagon briefing -- you are looking at a live picture -- as soon as it begins.

In the meantime, let's move on to the Bush campaign and two battleground states. The president spoke this morning in Manchester, New Hampshire, before a scheduled stop in Portsmouth. Up next, another trip to Ohio with events later today in Toledo and Columbus, two cities Senator Kerry visited only yesterday.

CNN's Elaine Quijano is covering all of this. She's joining us now live from the White House with more -- Elaine.

ELAINE QUIJANO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good afternoon to you, Wolf.

President Bush today using more personal stories to try to make his case to voters in New Hampshire that he will better protect the country in a fight against terrorism. Now, the president at that appearance just a short time ago, in Manchester, Manchester, was joined by several September 11 family members. Also, New Hampshire Senator Judd Gregg, who you will recall was the president's debate preparations partner.

Well, the president today talking about his strategy to win the terrorism fight, about his commitment to fighting terrorism. And he restated the Bush doctrine, acting preemptively against terror threats abroad in order not to face them domestically. The president also stressing, however, the need for the commander in chief to be consistent.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The president must base decisions on principle, core convictions from which you will never waiver. The issues vary. The challenges are different every day. The polls go up, the polls go down. But a president's convictions must be consistent and true.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

QUIJANO: Now, as we mentioned, some September 11 family members joining the president, including Arlene Howard, whose son's badge the president carries with him. George Howard was a port authority officer killed on September 11.

And, Wolf, a bit of an unscripted moment. As the president was talking to Arlene Howard, during his speech confetti was prematurely released. A bit of a startled look on the president's face, but then he realized -- he appeared to realize what happened, moved on from his speech and wrapped up from there. But the president, as you said, moving on to Portsmouth, New Hampshire, and then two appearances later today in Ohio -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Elaine Quijano at the White House. Thank you, Elaine, very much.

Let's get some analysis of what's going on. Jeff Greenfield joining us.

On this explosives issue, is it explosive politically?

JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SR. ANALYST: I don't know that it's explosive. I think for me it's a template of what's going on in the whole campaign, in which the partisans on either side immediately rushed to the conclusions that they are comfortable with.

The right was saying from the beginning this is a left wing or liberal media bias, that it's a U.N. plot to embarrass the president. Kerry was on the air with an ad before anybody knew what the facts were.

It does seem to me that that Minneapolis tape suggests that and the David Kay comment suggests that, yes, those things were there after the Americans took over. You know, if you -- if you clear away the partisanship and you talk about the fog of war and what happens in a situation like this, it's perfectly understandable that the troops went into the compound, had no idea what was going on, and that's what the Kerry campaign is pointing to, is saying that's the problem with your rush to judgment.

BLITZER: All right. Jeff, the briefing is going to begin. Larry Di Rita, the Pentagon spokesman, speaking right now.

(INTERRUPTED BY LIVE EVENT)

LAWRENCE DI RITA, PRINCIPAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS: ... stories about some information involving a particular type of weapons in Iraq that early reports suggest have been difficult to account for.

The early reports, earlier this week, based on information that came to light earlier this month -- obviously, I don't have to describe the reaction that people had to the early reports. But what is often the case that we deal with every day in this department is that early reports often need more information to better understand.

It has not been our attempt or desire to tell a particular story other than to tell the facts that we understand about this early report, about which I think people may have drawn conclusions absent those facts.

What we've tried to do is, since this became such an important issue to some, learn more about this. And we've done that through the course of the last six or seven days -- five or six days, whenever these initial reports surfaced.

The initial reports left the impression that there was a particular facility in Iraq that was heavily secured, that there were bunkers at this facility that were themselves inaccessible, and that sometime after the fall of the Saddam Hussein regime some question of accountability arose about these facilities. That's the initial impression that was left by the reports.

What we have, obviously, learned since then, among other things, is that, for example, the quantity of explosives of a particular type -- this so-called RDX material -- was actually much different than what was initially reported at that particular facility; on the order of more than a 100 tons difference.

We've learned that since these initial reports.

We've learned since the initial reports that there was some apparent movement of heavy equipment in this facility at a time when only Saddam Hussein was in control of that facility; meaning after inspectors left the country and before U.S. forces arrived to begin the liberation of the country.

So, we've tried to accumulate our understanding about this situation.

What we've also acknowledged since then is that -- and what people I think have become to understand better -- is that since the fall of this regime, coalition forces have uncovered, destroyed or marked for destruction 10,000 weapons caches spread throughout the country, consisting of 400,000 tons, plus or minus, of ammunition of all types.

The ammunition in question consists of 1/1,000 of that. We've destroyed or marked for destruction 1,000 times more ammunition than the amount of ammunition that has been called into question.

But nonetheless, we've spent an enormous amount of time in the last week trying to better understand what happened to this 1/1,000 of material that we are aware of and know about.

And I caution that there is a lot that we probably don't know about, because this was a country, as the inspectors acknowledged, that was awash in weapons.

So we've learned more over time and we've tried, as we've learned more, to produce this information without trying to say that what we have to produce, what we have to discuss is definitive, because I don't know that anybody can get to the definitive conclusions about this, but we are doing our best for people to better understand it.

As we've learned more, we've tried to provide that information to the public through, of course, the press corps here.

What we have learned within the last day or so is that units arrived at that facility. And we did provide this information. Again, a facility that the impression of which early was left that it was a facility that was heavily secured and inaccessible.

Units arrived there in early April, units of the United States Army, to find -- and were met by Iraqi forces inside the complex, which was opened. The Fedayeen Saddam, Special Republican Guard, Republican Guard and others for whatever purpose were inside the facility before U.S. forces arrived.

Those U.S. forces that did arrive there described for you how weapons that they had seen throughout the country had been heavily dispersed throughout that country as they moved forward.

Again, more facts that have come to light since we've applied ourselves to better understanding this initial report, which appears to have been significantly short of complete.

Subsequent to understanding that U.S. forces arrived there with Iraqi forces already in place, we've learned that there were, at the request of the U.S. forces that arrived there, some units that were assigned the task of removing some of the weapons that were found at that facility. And we've tried to better understand that.

What I don't intend to -- what I don't expect anybody will draw from what we're presenting today is that the weapons that we think we identified and destroyed from that facility constitute the universe of weapons that people are concerned about. We believe it constitutes some portion of those weapons. We believe that other units later on had responsibility to police weapons of this nature throughout the country and went about doing that. And we're learning more about that, and as we learn more about that, we'll provide that information.

But with that, kind of, summary, what I'd like to do is let Major Austin Pearson of the 24th Ordinance Company, 24th Corps Support Group -- who was in the country during the period in question, who was in the facility during the period in question, and who had responsibility for collecting some of these weapons of interest -- talk a little bit about how he arrived at that facility, what his responsibilities were, what his actions were.

And again, we'll do our best to provide additional information. There will be more that comes out about this. We know that. We're learning more.

We have taken this wonderful institution and applied no small percentage of it to understanding 1/1000 of the weapons we've already identified for destruction or destroyed. But it's important we do that and we've gone about to do that.

So with that, I'll ask Major Pearson to discuss a little bit about what he knows, and we'll be happy to take a few questions after that.

MAJOR AUSTIN PEARSON, 3RD INFANTRY DIVISION: Currently I'm an instructor at the U.S. Army Ordnance Center and School at APG, Maryland. I teach...

DI RITA: APG is the Aberdeen Proving Ground.

PEARSON: Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland.

I teach advanced ammunition management to military officers going through the captain's career course. On Tuesday I had taken my students to United Defense on an industrial tour. I was sequestered within the plant going on the tour. As I took a bus ride back, got back, arrived back at around 1800 to APG.

At that time, I'm in an MBA program, went to class, and I arrived home at about 2100 hours, where I was watching the news. And from the news I seen an NBC report talking about the missing 380 tons of ammunition.

To this point, I had thought that 380 tons was a recent type ammunition that was missing. And then I seen the video from NBC highlighting what I knew was Objective Elms, Logistics Support Area Elms, at the time, a place that I operated in and did some collection operations in Elms in the time frame I was there in April '03.

The next morning I contacted my chain of command, where I was directed to the chief of staff of the Army Ordnance Center and School, who put me in contact with the Defense Intelligence Agency. From there, I received multiple call-backs, getting the facts. I provided the facts to them.

And last night I received a call from the staff up here at the Pentagon. General Helmic (ph) called me and asked me to come down, verify what I knew, and look at some visuals and some maps corresponding where Objective Elms and the other locations that are at the top of this conversation.

From there, in April of 2003, I was the commander of the 24th Ordnance Company. Our mission was to provide convention ammunition support to 3rd Infantry Division. I was part of the 24th CSG at this time in April, based out of Logistics Support Area Dogwood, southwest of Baghdad.

My primary role was to provide U.S. forces with ammunition to support combat operations.

In addition to that, I had an additional mission of managing a captured ammunition holding area at LSA Dogwood. I also received the mission during the first weeks of April to assist the brigade combat teams of the 3rd I.D. in Baghdad clearing, in sectors that they were operating in, of captured enemy ammunition that was throughout their area of operations.

We conducted multiple of these missions in locations like elementary schools, residential communities. A particular one we worked with in northwest Baghdad in the Hammer Brigade's area of operation was a housing development that was under construction. We took out of one house alone over 7 million rounds of AK-47 rounds out of one house built into the walls of the house. A very large area. Took about three days. There was all sorts of ammunition, to include the types that we are talking about here, scattered throughout that. That was just the one location. We also found them in multiple sites within and around Baghdad.

Upon returning from that mission back to Logistics Support Area Dogwood, I was ordered by the rear area operations center that I reported to, from the 24th CSG, to assist the corps support group working with the 101st Infantry Division at Objective Elms.

I will point out what I know as Objective Elms right now, because before this I had never heard of Al Qa Qaa. On the planning graphics that we worked with, Objective Elms is this blue square right here around the map, as you can see. And Al Qa Qaa is in the red- highlighted area.

This is Logistic Support Area Dogwood, where I had my U.S. ammunition facility, in addition to my captured ammunition holding area was located at LSA Dogwood.

Once I received my mission from the RAOC, I moved across the Euphrates into LSA Elms, and we made an assessment that the area that we came into -- the area to the north of LSA Elms, as you see here, if you are coming down from the northwest as you cross, there's a major road network and you can travel around. This is the main route you will take, the main supply route. There is a wall -- an earthen concrete wall that encompasses the military complex -- the ammunition complex around in Elms. It had multiple breaks in the walls. We were able to drive right through the breaks. DI RITA: On that point, let me just clarify one piece that Major Pearson wouldn't know about. But the commander of the 101st -- or maybe it was the 3rd Infantry Division -- talked about their need to access that facility. And when they did, they did so by breaking through the walls.

DI RITA: It's possible, although not certain, that the breaks in the walls that the major refers to were put there by U.S. forces trying to access the facility when they engaged the Iraqi force there.

And I only say that's possible. But, in fact, U.S. forces acknowledged having knocked some walls down to get into that facility.

PEARSON: We entered in through this area and address, and our mission was to find any exposed ammunition, clear ammunition that was -- had the potential to be pose a threat to U.S. forces or as easy access.

We specifically went in. I had nine palletized loading system vehicles, which encompasses both a truck and a trailer that has the capability of -- each truck and each trailer has 16.5 tons per vehicle, per truck, per trailer, for a total of 33 tons per system. We went in there with nine.

I collected ammunition from the earthen covered magazines. We drew that ammunition, loaded up onto our trucks, and moved it back to the captured ammunition holding area, LSA Dogwood.

Once we were at Dogwood, as part of our operations at the captured ammunition holding area, one of those was to destroy the captured enemy ammunition that we had on our site that was designated as high priority or as a risk to the soldiers managing the site.

We used some of this type of ammunition that we recovered from LSA Elms in order to facilitate those operations. It is a typical -- what we have done. We would do about a 10,000- pound demolition explosion, a demolition shot. In order to facilitate that, you set up the shot and you wrap the rounds with plastic explosives.

And the doctrinal method to do that is, if you're going to destroy captured enemy ammunition, you will use captured enemy ammunition to run the shot. And we consumed some of this ammunition in order to destroy the other ammunition we had.

And at the time, when this was all going on, my high water mark of ammunition -- because it went up and down as I destroyed ammunition -- was over 7,000 tons of ammunition at the captured ammunition holding area at Dogwood.

The captured ammunition holding area at Dogwood was destroyed in a fire in June of 2003. We had transitioned accountability and authority to another ordinance company.

I moved back during the entire time of the summer months because the nature and the quality of the captured enemy ammunition. We had multiple cook-offs throughout the day. And then, finally, the captured ammunition holding area was fully destroyed and engulfed in a fire. That's all I have, sir.

DI RITA: Before we take a couple questions, let me clarify a couple points that give a little bit more context to what the major just said.

He thinks his unit removed a couple hundred, 250 tons of ammunition. It encompasses a variety of ammunition. It encompasses -- he has photos that were not -- we may provide later; we're reviewing those photos -- that reflect the types of -- in some cases the types of ammunition that have been seen on other video that's been made available to the public within the last day or two: large boxes of plastic explosives, those sorts of things, I think commonly referred to by some as RDX by the ordnance handlers themselves.

One of the things that I think we are learning as, again, we continue to learn more about this, is that the original declaration of some 140 tons of RDX at this particular facility is probably not accurate. And we are trying to understand this better.

And as I said, we are learning more about what we -- our -- what we knew at the time and what was in the reports. It was probably, at this particular facility, a much smaller number of RDX; perhaps as low as three tons.

The major's unit pulled 100 -- 250 tons of total equipment out of this facility, including a lot of plastic explosives. How much? I don't think we know. It was a portion of the kinds of things, including detonation cord.

We have some talking points that will provide you that -- some data, some fact sheets. So, I want to make sure that we are very clear on a point. There was some question about ammunition at a particular facility. The questions of those ammunition -- the facts that we've learned since then have caused some doubt about the initial reports, but that's always the case. And that's nobody's fault; that's what happens in life. You hear a report and then you go out and try and enrich that report with knowledge and facts. And we've tried to do that.

As we've gathered these facts, we've tried to put them out. And people can make their own evaluations.

We have captured and destroyed 400,000 tons of ammunition of a variety of types, including the types in question. The types in question constitute quite a small percentage of the total.

Some percentage of that total in question was almost certainly removed from bunkers and destroyed by Major Pearson's unit. There were other units that followed -- and we're learning more about that, and as we have more information, we'll provide it -- other units that followed that had the responsibility, task forces that had the responsibility for policing up conventional ordnance, other units that followed that had the responsibility of identifying sites of weapons of mass destruction.

There's a perception that I think is unfortunate that's been left by the initial reports of this weapons that leave the impression that the military forces there did not have a systematic approach to three priorities: taking down the regime of Saddam Hussein; minimizing casualties to U.S. and coalition forces, and indeed to Iraqis; and identifying and securing weapons throughout that country.

And what we have learned since the unfortunate response to the initial report is that, as we've delved into this deeper, we've been able to demonstrate, I think, that that planning was well conceived and extraordinary well executed by the forces that are over there. And with that, I'll leave it to the major.

QUESTION: Major, could you please better describe the explosives that were removed? Were they primarily assembled weapons? Were they raw material like the granular HMX or RDX? And could you, sort of, give us a ratio out of that 250 tons how much were assembled weapons and how much were raw material?

PEARSON: As a conventional ammunition ordnance officer, I deal with ammunition logistics management. I am not a technical specialist. I am not explosive ordnance disposal or technical intelligence. My role and what I've been trained on is to manage ammunition facilities and mitigate the risk and exposure to U.S. forces and civilians.

The specifics of what we talked about that we pulled out of there, from my recollection, is some TNT, plastic explosives; I can't further define other than that, plastic explosives. Detonation cords, initiators, and white phosphorous rounds, which were a higher priority for us to go in there.

QUESTION: So you don't know... QUESTION: But do you believe there was HMX?

QUESTION: Yes. You don't know if there was HMX?

DI RITA: Let me handle that.

QUESTION: Did it look like those barrels -- you know this video that ABC had.

DI RITA: We've described what we know. And as we learn more, we'll describe that. The major has...

QUESTION: Why doesn't the major talk about that?

(CROSSTALK)

DI RITA: Excuse me for one moment.

The major had -- we had units that had responsibility for identifying and understanding what IAEA seals were. The major's unit had the responsibility to go in and clear conventional ordnance.

QUESTION: But, Larry, you've told us that you believe part of the 250 tons represents the material under question. You have said that.

DI RITA: Represents some portion of the material.

QUESTION: The major has not said that. So we would like to hear from him...

QUESTION: Do you believe you had RDX in there?

PEARSON: I had plastic explosives in there.

QUESTION: It's the HMX that we're concerned about. And you've seen that video that the affiliate...

PEARSON: I have not.

QUESTION: You've not shown him the video of the barrels? Didn't you just say you've shown him...

(CROSSTALK)

DI RITA: He saw some photos from yesterday, and had understood that, as I said, the palletized boxes -- I think you said those were the kinds of things you removed. The barrels that some people have said is HMX that I don't know is accurate and I'm not prepared to stipulate whether it is or is not was not.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) a symbol on it though that...

DI RITA: The one we have seen on some of the photos is a symbol that identifies a class of ordinance.

PEARSON: Hazardous division class. This is one of the techniques we teach to ordnance and how you use -- it's an international symbol for shipping hazardous materials. The Haz Class Division 1.1D (ph) -- there's multiple types of ordinance in that class. Off the top of my head, I'm sure there is at least 80 or 90 different types. And whether it's HMX, I couldn't verify it.

QUESTION: You talk about this procedure though. You say there's a procedure in place and they know what to do. And yet apparently the major didn't know he was even looking for HMX or what was there or what to do if you found it sealed.

Do you remember seeing the IAEA seals?

PEARSON: There was -- I do not -- I did not see any IAEA seals at the locations that we went into. I was not looking for that.

My mission specifically was to go in there and to prevent the exposure of U.S. forces and to minimize that by taking out what was easily accessible and putting it back and bringing it into our captured ammunition holding area.

DI RITA: And some of these are good questions that we are still trying to better understand and as we do that we will try and provide it.

QUESTION: I'm not understanding your conclusion, Larry.

Based on what the major has said, how do you come to the conclusion that some of the 250 tons this unit removed is the materiel under question?

QUESTION: How do you make...

DI RITA: As we're developing our better understanding of this, we have a -- the term that was being used throughout the theater for RDX is plastic explosives. It was, sort of, an interchangeable term.

So we don't -- I can't say that RDX that was on the list of the IAEA is in what the major pulled out. The major has said, and I think in terms of the way we have tried to understand this, is that we believe that some of the things that they were pulling out of there was RDX.

Was it RDX that is associated with what the IAEA declared? My only point on that is I'm not sure what we know what the IAEA declared, because they first said there were some 141 tons of it there. We are now trying to better understand some of the reports that indicate there may have been only three tons of it at that particular building.

QUESTION: Isn't that tonnage discrepancy already accounted for by the IAEA by the fact it is stored at a nearby facility that is called the...

DI RITA: We are trying to understand that better. I'm not in any position to comment on that. The initial report was 141 tons at this facility. We are hearing some more refined explanation by the IAEA, that, well, maybe this facility really meant another facility 30 kilometers away. So it's a fair question. And we don't have an answer. And we are not prepared to talk to that today.

QUESTION: Could you describe the palletized boxes? Mr. Di Rita just mentioned palletized boxes. Could you describe what kind of boxes they were?

Did you actually go into bunkers or just go to those materiels that were easily accessible, because we've seen much of it lying around on the ground?

PEARSON: We went into the bunkers that were easily accessible. We used a palletized loading system, was our vehicle transport. Most of the ammunition had to be loaded on to that, either manual or using a forklift. There are small boxes, 24 square, but it's a vary, depending on what you had. The det cord comes in large rolls; from my recollection, about a three foot diameter of a roll of detonation cord.

QUESTION: So the palletized boxes, were they wooden boxes? Cardboard?

PEARSON: Wooden boxes, sir.

QUESTION: Can I ask one question -- actually two questions. One is, you said you had nine vehicles, 33 tons each, roughly. That's 297 tons. Was that more like it, or is it 250? Do we know?

PEARSON: Sir, the way -- I'm calculating, and it's an estimation on my part of what we did, I went in there with nine vehicles, so it's a truck and a trailer, which equates to 18.

PEARSON: On one of those trailers I had a 6K forklift on one of those trailers. So that gives me 17.

And just if you look at the configuration and the packing and the characteristics by weight and cube of how you're going to pack that ammunition, it brings you down to the ballpark of around 250 as an estimation, just by how much I could fit if I compare it with what I know about U.S. ammunition, which is just very similar. It's about 3,600 pounds to a four-by-four pallet, which is a standard international pallet and how many can fit on a flat rack.

QUESTION: OK. Just to follow up, just two things.

One is you don't have the percentage of what we are calling HMX and RDX, the plastic explosives. You don't have a percentage of that total lift -- like an estimate that you think how much it might be of that -- what you took out of those bunkers. Is there an estimate?

PEARSON: No, sir.

Before, when my company left out of there we, one, because this was all classified. Everything -- all our documentation was classified. And the procedures that we followed -- was I turned it into my rear area operations center, which when they left the country, they turned it into their rear operation center. All I...

DI RITA: And they're pursuing that to determine that (inaudible).

QUESTION: Last question: Judging by what it took for you to remove that 200 tons, with the forklifts, the tractor trailers, et cetera, do you believe it's possible to move that much materiel in a short period of time while U.S. military convoys are moving up and down those roads?

It would be from -- the last time would be April 18th -- let's say the new video -- to May 8th, when the inspection team comes in and doesn't find the IAEA-marked material. So it would be about -- I don't know? -- 20 days.

Is it possible to get all of that done? The forklifts, the trucks -- without anybody in the U.S. military knowing?

DI RITA: You mean if somebody else were doing it?

QUESTION: Right. Yes. Yes. I'm saying, insurgents or looters, or whatever.

PEARSON: Sir, I know what -- we went in there, we did it in about a day. It's not -- it seems like an exorbitant amount, but when you take it in the scope of we were managing 7,000 tons of ammunition, we just completed a major mission in Baghdad, this wasn't that significant of an operation.

At the time when I was in Objective Elms, that area was very pacified where there wasn't a lot of civilians in the area at that time.

PEARSON: If they were, they were very respectful to U.S. forces. They were very respectful to us. I didn't see any hostilities at that location at that time.

DI RITA: But if I can just provide a little more -- Colonel Perkins, when he was here speaking about that -- and Colonel Perkins was the brigade commander of the 2nd Brigade of the 3rd Infantry Division who was there just a few days prior to Major Pearson -- he talked a little bit about that.

And it was his perception that that size of an operation, while small in terms of the total number of weapons we were finding, would have been something his forces, which were the combat forces, would certainly have noticed; that a large number of trucks that Iraqis were trying to move up and down those roads were something his unit would certainly have -- he believes they would have noticed that.

QUESTION: Major Pearson, just to remove any confusion about what you're telling us, can you tell us definitively that any of the materiel that you or your unit destroyed was among the 300-plus tons of the high explosives under IAEA seal? Can you tell us that definitively?

PEARSON: I can tell you that I recovered captured enemy ammunition from Objective Elms and I moved that approximately 200 to 250 tons of ammunition to the captured ammunition holding area at Dogwood, which I managed.

QUESTION: Wait a second, can he tell us whether that was the materiel -- the 300 plus tons that were under IAEA seal? Can you tell us that that was the same materiel? Are we talking about the same materiel?

DI RITA: You don't know, sir?

PEARSON: I don't know. I don't have that information.

DI RITA: And let me help you with that.

I get that you guys really want the definitive answer, and so do we. The difference is that that takes understanding facts, and we have tried to uncover facts over the last week, at a point after which many people thought they had the definitive answer, and we simply do not.

So it is perfectly understandable that people would like to have somebody at this podium say definitively, "This happened."

Even the number you used is not definitive: 300 tons of this or that. It's in a report provided by Saddam Hussein in June of '02 -- I think June or July. It's in a report repeated in October of '04 by the Iraqi government.

In between there are other reports by the IAEA that we are trying to better understand because they don't, at least at first glance and deeper analysis, seem to track the same numbers.

So we're trying our best to understand it.

You want a definitive answer. Others have said that they think they know the definitive answer.

DI RITA: We're simply saying we don't.

QUESTION: HMX was under seal. HMX is the only thing under seal. Did you see seals? Did you go into locked bunkers? You said you only went into bunkers that were easily accessible.

PEARSON: My mission was to go into bunkers and to prevent the exposure...

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

PEARSON: I went to in bunkers that we would easily get into and remove that.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

QUESTION: What does that mean? Sorry. Can you clarify? PEARSON: That it was open, and I was able to take my troops in there, and that was exposed.

QUESTION: There were no seals. So that would...

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

PEARSON: No seals. I did not see any seals.

QUESTION: ... it was not HMX.

DI RITA: Unless somebody had come by and already opened the seals.

QUESTION: But you saw the video of April 18th.

DI RITA: Right.

QUESTION: The video of April 18th shows U.S. forces going into bunkers that are locked, and there are seals on some of those...

DI RITA: And that's correct. And it's not -- we don't know. Certainly Major Pearson had no responsibility. And we just don't know to this point. And as we learn, I think we've tried to demonstrate, as we learn things we'll be sure to tell you.

QUESTION: Major, do you have the longitude and latitude and/or GPS coordinates of Objective Elm?

DI RITA: That's what on the chart.

PEARSON: That's specified on the chart.

DI RITA: By grid coordinates.

PEARSON: By grid coordinates.

DI RITA: And it overlaps with the facility.

QUESTION: What date were we talking about?

PEARSON: To my best recollection, based on information I have, it was April 13th, 2003.

QUESTION: You were there prior...

DI RITA: That is correct.

QUESTION: ... to the video the ABC affiliate showed of the bunkers being opened.

DI RITA: Of some bunkers being opened, by the 101st Airborne Division personnel who were the ones who asked for this assistance from Major Pearson's unit sometime...

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) tell us what these pictures show that we haven't seen yet? Because perhaps that would additionally clarify the matter, if you can. What do they show?

PEARSON: Ma'am, the pictures I have were digital photos as a commander on the ground that I took. All right, this is a soldier inside the bunker, just like a few -- this wasn't an investigative photos. And that's how I, sort of...

DI RITA: One picture I saw, just to describe it -- and if we can we'll try to make it available -- is a picture of boxes that look very similar to the kinds of boxes that we see the 101st Airborne Division personnel looking at the following week.

QUESTION: Major, if you mission was to clear the ammo, were there troops waiting for your arrival guarding this area or was it wide open?

PEARSON: There was no troops waiting for my arrival. My mission was to go in there and to assist the corps support group that was supporting the 101st in their area to minimize the exposure of their troops to capture enemy munition.

DI RITA: But 101st was -- had, as General Petraeus has said -- they were on the facility. I mean, that was their facility at that point.

QUESTION: When you left the facility, how much explosives were still there?

PEARSON: I don't know. I can't speak about what was left. I can speak about what I took out of the facility.

QUESTION: But did you -- I mean, you took out as much as you could, but there was more there. Is that right?

PEARSON: My intent was to go in there and the stuff that was easily exposed. I completed my mission, I got what I needed to get. And we went back to captured munition holding area to continue the operations to support 3rd I.D.

DI RITA: It's almost certain there was more, because we have seen the 101st -- if the dates are correct from the reporters that were embedded with the 101st.

QUESTION: The other bunkers that you left, you didn't check, the ones that you didn't go into -- what was the status of them? Was there dirt pushed up against them? Were they locked? What happened?

PEARSON: I did see some bunkers, some earth-covered magazines that had berms of earth and gravel pushed up in front of them. This is a technique I've seen repeatedly, it's a common military technique to limit access to earth-covered magazines, especially at abandoned sites.

I have seen that at multiple different locations throughout Iraq and...

QUESTION: A common U.S. military technique or... PEARSON: Common U.S. military -- and -- I can't say who did it, but it's a common military technique to prevent access.

DI RITA: I think we have time for one more.

QUESTION: Let me just ask you how you square all of this with the fact that less than 24 hours ago, in two radio interviews, Secretary Rumsfeld said that he didn't feel the facts were known. He wanted to know more, but yet he said that it was his view it was most likely that the stuff was removed prior to the war by the Saddam Hussein regime because he didn't see how anything else was possible.

How do you square...

DI RITA: I haven't seen the transcript of what the secretary said, although I was there when he made his comments. I just don't remember how precisely he worded it.

What I think he would emphasize, and what I'm certainly emphasizing, is that there's a lot we don't know.

We also -- I think the point he was trying to make is that there was certainly activity, and I would describe it only because that's the way the people describe these things as unusual activity at this facility prior to the arrival of U.S. forces and after the departure of inspectors from Baghdad.

DI RITA: Unusual activity meaning large trucks in front of bunkers. Doing what? We don't know. But it was at a period of time when only Saddam Hussein was in control of that facility.

We have seen other photos, photos we didn't release, because we don't know them well enough, that show a significant number of large trucks on that site, near those bunkers.

QUESTION: What should we take away from this very capable, well- informed major here as to what he's telling us? Is this just another potential scenario you're outlining for us?

DI RITA: No. We have no scenario.

What I would think you would take away is what I have tried to describe, which is there's probably more we don't know about that 377 tons than what we know, other than we've destroyed 400,000 tons of ammunition in that country. We had people moving about freely on that facility prior to the arrival of U.S. forces, armed people, Fedayeen Saddam, Special Republican Guard. They attacked our forces from inside that facility.

And as we try to better understand what happened to 1/1,000 of the ammunition that we have already identified or destroyed, we will provide those facts.

That's about all we got time for. Thanks very much, thank you, thank you. BLITZER: Larry Di Rita, the Pentagon spokesman, and Major Austin Pearson who -- accompanying him. Major Austin Pearson was there right after the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime in mid-April.

He is reporting now that, based on what he remembers his unit doing, removing, he says, between 200 and 250 tons of what he calls equipment and a lot of plastic explosives. But under questioning, some serious questioning from Pentagon reporters, he could not say whether any of those plastic explosives were part of the International Atomic Energy Agency inspected explosives documented over the past few days by the IAEA, the Iraqi government, as well as news media organizations.

He says his area was within this al Qa Qaa region. He removed, he said, a significant quantity of explosives and equipment, but it's unclear. He says he can't confirm that any of that explosives was from the al Qa Qaa facility that's under question right now. It's possible, but he can't say that. Larry Di Rita making a strong case, as we just heard at the very end, once again, that 400,000 tons of ammunition or was about to be destroyed by the U.S. and coalition forces. And they are talking about 1/1000th of that right now.

We're going to take a quick break and continue our analysis of what we've just learned, what we haven't learned. Still unanswered questions. Our Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr, you saw her asking good questions there. When we come back, we'll ask Barbara Starr to help us better understand what we heard and what we didn't hear. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: We are going to continue our analysis now of what we just saw. The live coverage here on CNN. That Pentagon briefing on those missing explosives in Iraq. Our Pentagon correspondent, Barbara Starr, you saw her asking good questions there. She is joining us now live.

Barbara, help us better understand what we learned and what we didn't learn during the course of this past half hour.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Boy, Wolf, this is -- continues to be a top story here at the Pentagon and increasingly confusing thing day by day. Let's be very clear what we did see.

We saw the chief Pentagon spokesman, Larry Di Rita, who is one of the top political operatives for Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, he was at the podium with an Army major. A relatively junior officer, Major Austin Pearson of the 3rd Infantry. He was affiliated with the 3rd Infantry Division at the time of the war in the region. A man who is a professional Army officer and an expert in ammunition. They brought him out to talk about what he saw at this region around April 13th, 2003, when he was there.

Now, this Army major, again, a professional Army officer, says, indeed, his unit removed 250 tons of munitions, explosives, weapons, all kinds of material from the facility. But what he isn't able to tell us is was any of that material -- the material that the IAEA is talking about, was any of it under seal? Did he see IAEA seals? Did he see sealed bunkers? He is indicating, no.

He is saying, when pressed by reporters, he can only testify, if you will, to the fact that his unit removed 250 tons. He does believe that some plastic explosives were included in that. Some of the material that would be the type of material. But he cannot tell us that it was specifically the material of concern by the IAEA's agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency. And he specifically says he cannot verify that he ever saw any seals.

So let's turn to the political side of the podium and the briefing we just saw. Larry Di Rita saying they know that, that there is no definitive answer, but they are bringing this man out to try offer more information. Clearly the Pentagon feels, you know, throughout this entire week that this is a story they do want to address, they do want to come up with a definitive answer to address the public firestorm and the political firestorm that has burst open about this story.

They say that the Pentagon is not political in these final days of the presidential campaign. But many officials we have talked to over the last several days readily acknowledge behind the scenes that this is a major political story for the Bush administration and for the Pentagon here.

So to wrap it up, they have brought out a professional Army officer to talk about what he knew, what he saw what he did on April 13th. That's a very important date, Wolf. That is several days before the estimated April 18th date when other Army units were at that facility and may have opened some bunkers.

So once again, it's actually not very clear what this briefing has told us with any precision -- Wolf.

BLITZER: All right. Barbara Starr, I know you are going to be back at the top of the hour with much more. Thanks very much. We will continue to watch this important story for our viewers. Much more of course coming up throughout the day here on CNN.

And this note in the coming hour on "LIVE FROM." Dean Staley, the reporter from Minneapolis who was there on April 18th when they went in. We saw that videotape from that ABC affiliate station last night, he is going to be joining us coming up in the next hour. He is now out in the Pacific Northwest. We'll talk to him as well, our colleagues from "LIVE FROM." Much more coming up on this story.

There's another important story we are following today, Yasser Arafat, he has now been moved to a hospital in Paris. He arrived there just a few hours ago. The question now though, is this -- who is in charge of the Palestinian Authority? And what about the future of peace talks with Israel? Is there a future? For years Aaron Miller helped formulate U.S. policy in the Middle East. He is now president of Seeds of Peace, an organization here in the United States that promotes peace among young people in the Middle East and throughout the world. He met with Yasser Arafat, what, just 10 days ago, Aaron?

AARON DAVID MILLER, PRES., SEEDS OF PEACE: About 10 days ago.

BLITZER: You may have been the last American to have met with him before he took a turn clearly for the worst. First of all, what was he like?

MILLER: Well, in contrast to the hundreds of hours that we had spent with him during the course of the '90s, during the negotiations, I found him fundamentally changed. I had seen him in August, he appeared reasonably healthy. But about 10 days ago it was clear that something seriously was wrong with him. He was unfocused, tired, lost a lot of weight and uncharacteristically quiet. Usually we would get the cassette, that is, the interpretation of Arafat's problems, according to Arafat. But not this time.

BLITZER: So did he look like he was critically ill, almost on his deathbed?

MILLER: I'm not a physician, but it is clear to me that something was seriously wrong with him, yes.

BLITZER: I would be surprised that he would be willing to receive you if he's in that bad shape.

MILLER: Well, in this case, we do have this longstanding relationship, and he's a supporter of the organization that I lead.

BLITZER: Seeds of Peace.

MILLER: Yes.

BLITZER: Let's talk a little bit about what happens now. He's in the hospital, whatever he is going through. Whatever kind of treatment they are trying to determine what the cause of his illness is right now, but what happens with the Palestinian leadership?

MILLER: Well, whether it's incapacitation or he ultimately dies, a fundamental historic change is under way. Here is a guy who dominated the Palestinian national movement for 50 years. He founded Fatah in 1957. He took over the PLO in 1964, 1968. He is the symbol of Palestinian national identity. More power, more guns, more money, more political authority than any other Palestinian leader.

Now he's gone or at least incapacitated. So you have a vacuum, that vacuum is going to be filled by a formal succession process, Abu Alaa, maybe Abu Mazen, some of the security chiefs. But there is then going to be a struggle for control and power behind the scenes. I suspect that for the moment will you're not going to get a lot of turmoil and violence. To borrow a phrase from one of our revolutionary fathers, Sam Adams, we are either going to hang together or we're going to hang separately. And I suspect that that advice will be taken among the Palestinians in the territory.

BLITZER: Aaron Miller, formerly with the State Department, now with Seeds of Peace. Unfortunately, we can't continue. We had a lot of breaking news this hour. But we will continue this conversation down the road.

MILLER: I appreciate it, Wolf, thank you.

BLITZER: Thank you very much, Aaron.

I'll be back later today and every weekday at 5:00 p.m. Eastern for "WOLF BLITZER REPORTS." How safe are the nation's polling places, yes, polling places with Election Day just days away? We will take a closer look at how local authorities plan to keep all of us voters safe.

BLITZER: Plus my special interview with the White House chief of staff, Andrew Card. He will join us live. Until then, thanks very much for joining us. I'm Wolf Blitzer in New York, "LIVE FROM" from with Kyra Phillips is coming up next.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com