[ RadSafe ] Man Pleads Guilty to “Dirty Bomb ” Hoax

[Steven Dapra]

March 3

Clayton:

         How do you figure "The US government have been the real 
perpetrators of this hoax."?   At present I am not disupting your 
suggestion, I merely would like to know what has caused you to draw that 
conclusion.

Steven Dapra


At 09:32 AM 3/3/08 -0500, Clayton J Bradt wrote:

>Friday, February 29, 2008
>
>Man Pleads Guilty to "Dirty Bomb" Hoax
>
>A Wisconsin man could be sentenced to five years in prison after pleading
>guilty yesterday to claiming online that terrorists planned to use
>radiological "dirty bombs" against seven National Football League stadiums,
>the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Oct. 23, 2006).
>
>On about 40 occasions from September to October 2006, Jake Brahm posted a
>message on a Web site claiming that attacks were planned on Oct. 22 of that
>year in Atlanta, Cleveland, Houston, Miami, New York, Oakland and Seattle.
>
>"The death toll will approach 100,000 from the initial blasts and countless
>other fatalities will later occur as [a] result from radioactive fallout,"
>the message stated.
>
>A federal grand jury one year ago indicted the 22-year-old Wauwatosa man
>under the Patriot Act for willfully conveying false information regarding
>attacks on the stadiums involving weapons of mass destruction and
>"radiological dispersal devices."
>
>He is scheduled for sentencing in federal court in New Jersey on June 5.
>Along with up to five years in prison, Brahm could be fined $250,000.
>
>"This was the Internet version of yelling fire in a crowded theater, but to
>a much wider audience," U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie said in a
>statement. "I don't think anyone needs to be reminded in this day how
>serious and dangerous such conduct is."  (Jeffrey Gold, Associated Press/USA
>Today, Feb. 28).
>*****************************************************************************
>
>The US government have been the real perpetrators of this hoax.  This guy
>was dumb enough to believe it.  So was the jury, apparently.
>
>Clayton J. Bradt