[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Al Qaida Nukes in the USA



Look at how much compensation victims of the World

Trade Center are getting?



Seriously, this nuclear weapon stuff is B.S., and I

don't mean budget surplus.  Again, there are no plans

for recovery of a site after a terrorist incident.



--- Jerry Cohen <jjcohen@prodigy.net> wrote:

> 

> John,

>     Thanks for sharing that insight. I was not aware

> that cleanup costs would be a more important issue

> than life and death.         Jerry

> 

> 

> John Jacobus <crispy_bird@YAHOO.COM> wrote: 

> The real issue is who will pay for the cleanup.

> 

> --- jjcohen wrote:

> > Jim,

> > Regardless of the height of the detonation, the

> > effects of the residual radioactivity would be

> > relatively minor compared to the early effects due

> > to blast, shock wave, heat, etc. Unless, of

> course,

> > you buy into the crap put out by NCRP, EPA, etc.

> > regarding LNT, and low-dose effects in general. 

> > Jerry

> > ----- Original Message ----- 

> > From: James Barnes 

> > To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu 

> > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 7:18 AM

> > Subject: Re: Al Qaida Nukes in the USA

> > 

> > 

> > >>> I wonder if the residents of Hiroshima and

> > Nagasaki realize that their cities will still be

> > "unlivable" for another ~950 years?

> > 

> > Regarding the "unlivability" issue, we should

> > recall that the Hiroshima/Nagasaki detonations

> > occurred about 1500 feet off the ground. It was

> not

> > a surface burst, and therefore fallout was not a

> > major issue.

> > 

> > A terrorist detonation would very likely be a

> > surface burst from a concealed weapon. The fallout

> > issue would be much different in that scenario.

> > 

> > The "1,000 year" statement is the kind of

> > marketing tripe that sells books. But there would

> > be an unpleasant cleanup that would have to be

> > performed, and it is likely that there would be

> > sections (blocks) of the attacked city that would

> > become unusuable for many years.

> > 

> > Jim Barnes

> > 

> > ----- Original Message ----- 

> > From: Garner, William 

> > To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu 

> > Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 4:22 AM

> > Subject: RE: Al Qaida Nukes in the USA

> > 

> > 

> > In my view, if Osama does have a nuke, please

> > use it on the author...he deserves it. 

> > 

> > William Garner

> > 

> > University Of Kentucky

> > 

> > Radiation Safety Department

> > 

> > Lexington KY. 40506-0076

> > 

> > Phone: 323-5795

> > 

> > Fax: 323-4752

> > 

> > http://ehs.uky.edu/radiation/

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > -----Original Message-----

> > From: owner-radsafe@list.Vanderbilt.Edu

> > [mailto:owner-radsafe@list.Vanderbilt.Edu] On

> Behalf

> > Of jjcohen

> > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 7:51 PM

> > To: radsafe@list.Vanderbilt.Edu

> > Subject: Al Qaida Nukes in the USA

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > From the NewsMax Website: http://www.newsmax.com

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > Breaking from NewsMax.com

> > 

> > A new book written by a former FBI consultant

> > claims that al-Qaeda not only has obtained nuclear

> > devices, but also likely has them in the U.S. and

> > will detonate them in the near future. These

> > chilling allegations appear in "Osama's Revenge:

> The

> > Next 9/11: What the Media and the Government

> Haven't

> > Told You," by Paul L. Williams (Prometheus Books).

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > Williams says his "intelligence" concludes the

> > most likely means of attack would come in the form

> > of a so-called "suitcase (size) tactical nuclear

> > bomb."

> > 

> > "The chatter that everyone is referring to is

> > coming from the nest in Pakistan, a virulent nest

> in

> > Iran, the chatter is all about nukes being

> > here....the best bang for the buck is nuclear,

> they

> > (al-Qaeda) know that."

> > 

> > Such bombs are estimated to have an explosive

> > strength of approximately "10 kilotons" and could

> > weigh less than 35 pounds.

> > 

> > "With today's technology and the Internet, an

> > experienced person could easily assemble such a

> bomb

> > in his home garage," Williams explained.

> > 

> > A bomb of that strength could easily level

> > Manhattan and spread lethal radiation throughout

> the

> > NYC-Metro area says the author. "It (the nuke)

> could

> > render Manhattan unlivable for 1,000 years," he

> > estimated.

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > 

> > I wonder if the residents of Hiroshima and

> > Nagasaki realize that their cities will still be

> > "unlivable" for another ~950 years? Given the

> > quality of insight exhibited in his "unlivability"

> > assertion, the credibility of rest of the

> > information in William's book might also be

> > considered somewhat questionable.

> > 

> > 

> 

> 

> =====

> +++++++++++++++++++

> "To be persuasive, we must be believable,

> To be believable, we must be credible,

> To be credible, we must be truthful."

> Edward R. Murrow

> 

> -- John

> John Jacobus, MS

> Certified Health Physicist

> e-mail: crispy_bird@yahoo.com

> 

> 

> 

> __________________________________

> Do you Yahoo!?

> Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile

> phone.

> http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo 

>

************************************************************************

> You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing

> list. To

> unsubscribe, send an e-mail to

> Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the

> text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the

> body of the e-mail,

> with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe

> archives at

> http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/

> 

> 





=====

+++++++++++++++++++

"To be persuasive, we must be believable,

To be believable, we must be credible,

To be credible, we must be truthful."

Edward R. Murrow



-- John

John Jacobus, MS

Certified Health Physicist

e-mail:  crispy_bird@yahoo.com





		

__________________________________

Do you Yahoo!?

New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!

http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 

************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To

unsubscribe, send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the

text "unsubscribe radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail,

with no subject line. You can view the Radsafe archives at

http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/