[ RadSafe ] Nuclear Terrorism: Weapons for Sale or Theft?

[Flanigan, Floyd]

Just for the sake of argument ... It's called the art of misdirection. If I am going to hit you with a right cross, I want you looking at my left hook. It's that whole element of surprise concept. If I am in a fist fight, the last thing I am going to tell my opponent is "Ya know what I'm gonna do right now? I'm gonna take this foot and strike you right across the left side of your face ... and there's not a thing you can do about it ..." unless of course my name was Billy Jack. 

Floyd W.Flanigan B.S.Nuc.H.P.

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl]On
Behalf Of A Karam
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 3:32 PM
To: radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] Nuclear Terrorism: Weapons for Sale or Theft?


All of these arguments against the risk of radiological or nuclear terrorism are compelling.  Unfortunately, the final word is that of the terrorists.  Osama bin Laden made it clear in a public statement in the mid-90s that he considers it an obligation to procure and use nuclear weapons against the US and/or its allies.  RDD designs and (apparently) guidelines for their use were found in Afghanistan following the overthrow of the Taliban.  
 
Our government overstated the case for Iraqi WMD, but bin Laden's statement was public and has not yet been withdrawn (to the best of my knowledge).  So it seems prudent to assume that, regardless of how likely we consider such an attack to be, there are those who are intent on carrying one out and who will do so if the opportunity presents itself.
 
Andy
 
P. Andrew Karam, Ph.D., CHP
Research Assistant Professor
Rochester Institute of Technology
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the radsafe mailing list
radsafe at radlab.nl

For information on how to subscribe/unsubscribe and other settings visit: 
http://radlab.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe