[ RadSafe ] False Claim that Neutron Bomb used on Fallujah

Tue Nov 29 10:50:01 CST 2011

Suggest that this subject be changed - because a number of people may not
read much further than the subject line and presume that RADSAFE has
verified the "fact" instead of is hotly disputing it and satirizing it.

Busby makes unfounded claims - he has always made unfounded claims.
Academia should disavow him.  He is still refusing to admit error or what
he really did which is make it all up.  He has no proof of finding enriched
uranium and he most certainly is not about to submit what he claims to have
to any member of this list for validation.  He just had to come up with a
theory because it is real clear that there was no depleted uranium so he
had to back peddle and propose something else before spreading it to his
vast networks, YouTube videos, press agents, etc.   The networks are full
of believers; it is not science, it is a religion to them and how dare we
declare Saint Christopher Busby to be anything but what they believe him to
be.  I am really glad the Guardian and maybe the Sunday Times have found
some serious flaws in the Busby facade and are beginning to exploit them.

Roger Helbig

PS - not only is the science wrong - but if a neutron bomb was used, why
didn't the Marines just walk in and collect all the dead since the neutron
bomb kills people but leaves property intact.   There are a lot of dead
Marines who would be alive if the horrible neutron bomb had been used
instead of their having to fight house-to-house to clear the city.  Yes,
they had tank support, but the tanks fired the High Explosive Anti-Tank
(HEAT) round since the DU kinetic energy penetrator was useless and even
had the potential of seriously wounding or killing the infantry that the
tanks were supporting.

*http://tinyurl.com/cz6cha5*

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:46 AM, Cowie, Michael I
<michael.cowie at aramco.com>wrote:

> Chris, seriously "if you do not know", why provide that "detail??!!!
>
> Mike
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:
> radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Busby, Chris
> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 12:53 PM
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List;
> The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Neutron Bomb used on Fallujah
>
> The neutron bomb is not a conventional one. It uses cold fusion through
> deuterium dissolved in uranium which when supersaturated by compression
> causes fusion. The method was developed following the Fleischmann discovery
> using Palladium electrodes, but uranium is better. It is a small device, as
> small as a baseball. The Russians called it Red Mercury and described its
> characteristics.
> But this was only a suggestion. I do not know. All I know is that there is
> slightly enriched uranium in Fallujah and also in the Lebanon bomb crater
> from Khiam.
> Thank you
> Chris
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Brennan, Mike (DOH)
> Sent: Mon 28/11/2011 22:19
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Neutron Bomb used on Fallujah
>
>
>
> Thank you for your kind words.
>
> Another argument against the claim that a neutron weapon was used in
> Fallujah is that I suspect all versions of enhanced radiation weapons
> (neutron bombs) use plutonium, rather than highly enriched uranium.  At
> very least the one description that I found in a quick look mentioned using
> plutonium, and it fits with other things I know about such weapons.  If
> that is the case, a neutron bomb as the source of U235 is even more
> difficult to accept.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of
> alstonchris at netscape.net
> Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 4:12 PM
> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Neutron Bomb used on Fallujah
>
>
> Mike
>
>
> Thanks for your usual calm, well informed, and carefully considered
> discussion of the matter.  I might only add that the article is really
> baffling in that it refers to the U in question as being simultaneously
> "weapons-grade" and "slightly enriched".  These are mutually exclusive
> characterizations.
>
>
>
> Cheers
> cja
>
>  > It is sad that people who promote this kind of thing don't bother to>
> google what they are talking about.  A "neutron bomb" isn't some magic>
> people-killing-building-leaving device; it is a low yield nuclear> weapon,
> optimized for neutron production.  If one had been set off in> Fallujah,
> everyone who was interested would have known about it, and
> the> evidence would be incontrovertible.>> The first clues would have
> been pretty distinctive: the mushroom cloud,> really, REALLY loud
> explosion and flash (even compared to the other> explosions and flashes)
> and an electro-magnetic pulse that would have> fried most electronics for
> miles around.  Given that almost every> American in the area was carrying
> some personal electronics such as cell> phones, computers, GPS units, etc.,
> if there had been an EMP, it would> have been noticed.
> Someone would have talked.  In addition to the US, I> would guess there
> are at least four countries with satellites that could> detect and identify
> t  he EMP from a nuke, and probably as many> corporations (and it may be as
> high as 10 countries).  There would also> be a fairly distinctive blast
> damage pattern at ground zero.>> Second, given the fairly short range of a
> neutron dose high enough to be> fatal in the short term (and if you are in
> the middle of a battle you> don't use thing with latency periods in years
> or decades, as you want to> kill your targets now, to make them stop
> shooting at you), the weapon> would have to be detonated fairly close to
> the ground.  This means LOTS> of fallout.  Easily detectable levels of
> short lived isotopes would have> been seen probably a couple thousand miles
> downwind.  No matter which> way the wind was blowing, there are countries
> that would be willing to> blow the whistle on the event.>> Third, one of
> the things about neutron bombs is high neutron flux in the> target area
> (that is the whole point, after all).
> High neutron flux> means lots of activation of material in that area, wit
>  h characteristic> isotopes.  A lot of them are short lived, but there
> would be enough to> increase the gamma background, and detectable with a
> hand held gamma> spec device for quite some time after.>> No, the best
> explanation for finding U235 in samples is that it is> naturally occurring.>
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu <http://health.phys.iit.edu/>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu <http://health.phys.iit.edu/>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>
> ________________________________
>
> The contents of this email, including all related responses, files and
> attachments transmitted with it (collectively referred to as “this Email”),
> are intended solely for the use of the individual/entity to whom/which they
> are addressed, and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged
> information. This Email may not be disclosed or forwarded to anyone else
> without authorization from the originator of this Email. If you have
> received this Email in error, please notify the sender immediately and
> delete all copies from your system. Please note that the views or opinions
> presented in this Email are those of the author and may not necessarily
> represent those of Saudi Aramco. The recipient should check this Email and
> any attachments for the presence of any viruses. Saudi Aramco accepts no
> liability for any damage caused by any virus/error transmitted by this
> Email.
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>