[ RadSafe ] Findings of enriched U in Fallujah and elsewhere

[Roger Helbig]

The numbers are shown in what report by what competent laboratory
organization?

There is considerable question about the scientific nature of your papers.
For example, your Brussels Tribunal collaborator is no scientist - for the
list's edification, a prior paper submitted through the Brussels Tribunal by
collaborator Malik Hamdan with the title of "Women and Birth defects,
Assassination of Iraqi Academics, Torture and Detainees (Prisoners of War)"
is at
http://www.brussellstribunal.org/pdf/Abdulmunaem_Almula200310.pdf

Roger Helbig

On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Busby, Chris <C.Busby at ulster.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> I agree. No easy explanation. But the numbers are there. No arguing with
those. The Lebanon crater was 115 by ICPMS and also separately, different
lab by alpha spec. The Fallujah soil was U extracted using ion exchange then
ICPMS. It was 129 but the 95%CI cutoff was 132. This was 5 years after the
attacks. Russian disarmament warheads? Neutron bomb with deuterium? Cover up
of DU? Read the paper.
> C
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Douglas Minnema [mailto:douglasm at DNFSB.GOV]
> Sent: Wed 19/10/2011 20:18
> To: radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu; C.Busby at ulster.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Findings of enriched U in Fallujah and elsewhere
>
> Sorry, I don't have access to the origianl papers right now.  Just how
"enriched" is this material?  And what methods and isotopic ratios were used
to determine the "enrichment?"  Similar to EU, not all DU is the same mix of
isotopes.
>
> I would suspect that uranium of any enrichment is much more valuable than
DU, and I see absolutely no logical value in using enriched uranium in any
of the cases described here.  In other words, there is no financial or
weapon-based advantage to using EU over DU.  Furthermore, it is illogical to
use EU in order to "disguise" the use of uranium-based penetrators; why not
use natural uranium??
>
> Occams razor could also be used to suggest that somebody is
mis-interpreting the lab results.
>
> Doug Minnema
>
> >>> "Busby, Chris" <C.Busby at ulster.ac.uk> 10/19/11 1:00 PM >>>
> Yes, that is a reasonable suggestion and you may be sure that I thought of
it.
> It does not explain the enriched uranium in the Lebanon in the bomb crater
and air filter nor the enriched uranium in Gaza samples.
> So Occams razor applies.
> Sincerely
> C
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Glenn R. Marshall
> Sent: Tue 18/10/2011 20:24
> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
List
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Findings of enriched U in Fallujah and elsewhere
>
> Maybe Saddam spilled a little enriched U while hastily getting out of the
country.....  That's at least as plausible as the notion that enriched U
penetrators were used on the battlefield.
>
> Glenn Marshall
>
>
> -----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, October 18, 2011 3:16 PM
> To: Joe Toole; The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
Mailing List; List Radsafe
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Findings of enriched U in Fallujah and elsewhere
>
> No, that isnt the case. I can see why you might believe that. These were
two separate labs, one in UK and one in Germany. In addition the Lebanon
samples were tested by ICPMS in UK and by alpha spectrometry in UK at a
separate lab run by David Assinder (qv). The soil samples Fallujah were
extracted  and the uranium concentrated by ion exchange to the point that
there was no mistake. The 95% confidence limits were determined: look at the
paper.
> Chris
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Joe Toole
> Sent: Tue 18/10/2011 16:25
> To: List Radsafe
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Findings of enriched U in Fallujah and elsewhere
>
> <<[as well as Fallujah]...Enriched Uranium signatures have also turned up
in other recent battlefields, notably in the Lebanon, where soil from a
missile crater in Khiam and also dust from an ambulance air filter both
showed the presence of Enriched Uranium in 2006, a finding reported in The
Independent by Robert Fisk. The authors are unable to explain why these
weapons contain or produce slightly enriched Uranium and call for the
military to now reveal the truth about the weapons systems being employed in
modern battlefields. >>
>
> It is not clear from Prof Busby's post where these mass spectrometric
measurements were done. What I do think is that that the laboratory has an
uncorrected measurement bias. Try running a soil or grass sample from Green
Audit's back garden in the same lab, you may scare yourself. To extrapolate
an uncorrected measurement bias to conclude the existence and widespread use
of enriched uranium weaponry is rather silly.
. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>