Dirty Bombs...

Its easier to get a dirty bomb in the US than from Iran…

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/12/us/12nuke.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1184213183-kZB8enPyyP6OxUHBRGLy2g&oref=slogin

[quote]Ren wrote:
Its easier to get a dirty bomb in the US than from Iran…

A Nuclear Ruse Uncovers Holes in U.S. Security

By ERIC LIPTON
Published: July 12, 2007

WASHINGTON, July 11 �?? Undercover Congressional investigators set up a bogus company and obtained a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in March that would have allowed them to buy the radioactive materials needed for a so-called dirty bomb.

The investigators, from the Government Accountability Office, demonstrated once again that the security measures put in place since the 2001 terrorist attacks to prevent radioactive materials from getting into the wrong hands are insufficient, according to a G.A.O. report, which is scheduled to be released at a Senate hearing Thursday.

�??Given that terrorists have expressed an interest in obtaining nuclear material, the Congress and the American people expect licensing programs for these materials to be secure,�?? said Gregory D. Kutz, an investigator at the accountability office, in testimony prepared for the hearing.

The bomb the investigators could have built would not have caused widespread damage or even high- level contamination. But it still could have had serious consequences, particularly economic ones, in any city where it was set off.

The undercover operation involved an application from a fake construction company, supposedly based in West Virginia, that the investigators had incorporated even though it had no offices, Internet site or employees. Its only asset was a postal box.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials did not visit the company or try to interview its executives in person. Instead, within 28 days, they mailed the license to the West Virginia postal box, the report says.

That license, on a standard-size piece of paper, also had so few security measures incorporated into it that the investigators, using commercially available equipment, were able to modify it easily, removing a limit on the amount of radioactive material they could buy, the report says.

With that forged document, the auditors approached two industrial equipment companies to arrange to buy dozens of portable moisture density gauges, which cost about $5,000 each and are used to read the density of soil and pavement when building highways. The machines include americium-241 and cesium-137, radioactive substances commonly used in industrial equipment. Auditors, convinced they had enough evidence to prove their point, called off the ruse before the devices were delivered.

But if they had gone ahead with the plot �?? which would have required extracting the radioactive materials from the machines and combining them, a job that could harm anyone in close contact �?? they could have built a bomb that would have contaminated an area about the length of a city block, according to the regulatory commission.

As with any dirty bomb, the resulting low-level contamination would not have presented an immediate health hazard. Still, the area would have to have been evacuated and decontaminated.

Edward McGaffigan Jr., a member of the regulatory commission�??s governing board, said the agency had taken steps to improve safeguards immediately after learning about the security lapses from auditors. The commission now requires members of its staff to visit any company it is not familiar with before approving a license application. It is also looking for ways to change the license to make it harder to modify or counterfeit, Mr. McGaffigan said.

But he said the danger associated with the amount of radioactive material the auditors were trying to buy should not be overstated. And the operation would have been much more expensive and complicated than pulling off a more conventional attack involving a truck bomb or a chemical tanker truck.

�??Why would I not blow up a chemical tanker on a train with chlorine in it or other toxic materials, at a tiny fraction of the cost before doing this very elaborate exercise?�?? Mr. McGaffigan said.

A nuclear commission spokesman, David McIntyre, said the agency had not inspected the offices of the bogus company before issuing a license because the portable devices the Congressional auditors were trying to buy are considered a lower-level threat than that posed by more dangerous radioactive materials, which it regulates more strictly.

But Senator Norm Coleman, Republican of Minnesota, who has pushed Congressional auditors to investigate nuclear threats since 2003, said the commission was guilty of playing down the threat.

�??The economic and psychological effects of a dirty bomb detonating on American soil would be devastating,�?? Mr. Coleman said in a statement Wednesday. �??The N.R.C. has a pre 9-11 mindset in a post 9-11 world focusing just on preventing another Chernobyl.�??

The findings by the Congressional auditors are the latest in a series of reports about management and procedural weaknesses at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that investigators have argued make the nation more vulnerable to a dirty bomb attack. In 2003, auditors first recommended that licenses for radioactive materials not be granted without inspections or other means of verifying that the applicant was legitimate.

In 2006, it recommended that the agency take steps to make sure its documents cannot be forged.

The use of undercover tactics is not a new one for the auditors. They used a similar approach last year when trying to smuggle radioactive materials across the border and investigating how effective the government�??s protections were against fraudulent efforts to get cash assistance after Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

The most recent investigation did turn up some reassuring news: a second ploy by the auditors to acquire radioactive material was thwarted.

In 34 states, local regulatory authorities handle license applications. In Maryland, the Congressional investigators sent a similar application for a license to buy construction equipment that relied on a radioactive source. But Maryland officials said they wanted to inspect the bogus company�??s offices and storage yard, so the auditors withdrew their application.
[/quote]

ren,

We shouldn’t worry. We’ll just take some iodine pills.

Nothing to worry about.

Signed,

pookie.

[quote]JeffR wrote:

ren,

We shouldn’t worry. We’ll just take some iodine pills.

Nothing to worry about.

Signed,

pookie.

[/quote]

Hah, dirty bombs don’t have much nuclear radioactive fallout, so no, we don’t. But it is always nice to point out the idiots and fearmongers who constantly cite other countries as sources of radioactive materials when we apparently hand the stuff out like candy.

I aggree this is fear mongering.
Our biggest threat is our wide-the-fuck-ass open southern border where an entire terror cell, with bombs in hand, can just strut accross the border uninhibated. Besides, while nuclear materials are harder to steal from Iran, I am sure they’ll be happy to hand some over to anybody willing to bomb the U.S., Israel or anybody with western interests.

[quote]ren wrote:
JeffR wrote:

ren,

We shouldn’t worry. We’ll just take some iodine pills.

Nothing to worry about.

Signed,

pookie.

Hah, dirty bombs don’t have much nuclear radioactive fallout, so no, we don’t. But it is always nice to point out the idiots and fearmongers who constantly cite other countries as sources of radioactive materials when we apparently hand the stuff out like candy.
[/quote]

renny,

I’m surprised at you.

You are in America. You are at risk. The bomb goes off next to you, you die. It goes off near you, God only knows what you can get in the short and long term.

Put yourself in that position and try to imagine.

You wouldn’t be so cavalier if this happened near you.

I expected more from you.

pookie is canadian so he has the excuse that he isn’t being targeted.

You may be.

Let’s remember that.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
ren wrote:
JeffR wrote:

ren,

We shouldn’t worry. We’ll just take some iodine pills.

Nothing to worry about.

Signed,

pookie.

Hah, dirty bombs don’t have much nuclear radioactive fallout, so no, we don’t. But it is always nice to point out the idiots and fearmongers who constantly cite other countries as sources of radioactive materials when we apparently hand the stuff out like candy.

renny,

I’m surprised at you.

You are in America. You are at risk. The bomb goes off next to you, you die. It goes off near you, God only knows what you can get in the short and long term.

Put yourself in that position and try to imagine.

You wouldn’t be so cavalier if this happened near you.

I expected more from you.

pookie is canadian so he has the excuse that he isn’t being targeted.

You may be.

Let’s remember that.

JeffR

[/quote]

Jeffy,

You are in America, I am surprised at you. Here are a list of things that have a MUCH MORE REALISTIC chance of killing me as opposed to a dirty bomb:

Cancer
Heart Disease
A depressed postal worker
A car accident
the 6’5" 270lb bouncer boyfriend of the girl my roommate is chasing
A bad batch if spinach
Imported food stuffs from China

To name but a few. So I will be cavalier, if it happens it happens, but those of us not in fairytale land that have a basic understanding of statistics and probability will go on with our lives and worry about REAL threats.

[quote]JeffR wrote:
You may be.

[/quote]
“For his freedoms”, right?

You forgot to add in imported food stuffs from India and Mexico too.

Right up there on the list with Chinese cooking.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/12/business/12imports.php

"At a time when Chinese imports are under fire for being contaminated or defective, U.S. records suggest that China is not the only country that has problems with its exports.

In fact, U.S. inspectors have stopped more food shipments from India and Mexico in the last year than they have from China, an analysis of data maintained by the Food and Drug Administration shows."

Hmmmmm… salmonella and caustic chemicals in food.

Bon Appetit.

[quote]Ren wrote:
JeffR wrote:
ren wrote:
JeffR wrote:

ren,

We shouldn’t worry. We’ll just take some iodine pills.

Nothing to worry about.

Signed,

pookie.

Hah, dirty bombs don’t have much nuclear radioactive fallout, so no, we don’t. But it is always nice to point out the idiots and fearmongers who constantly cite other countries as sources of radioactive materials when we apparently hand the stuff out like candy.

renny,

I’m surprised at you.

You are in America. You are at risk. The bomb goes off next to you, you die. It goes off near you, God only knows what you can get in the short and long term.

Put yourself in that position and try to imagine.

You wouldn’t be so cavalier if this happened near you.

I expected more from you.

pookie is canadian so he has the excuse that he isn’t being targeted.

You may be.

Let’s remember that.

JeffR

Jeffy,

You are in America, I am surprised at you. Here are a list of things that have a MUCH MORE REALISTIC chance of killing me as opposed to a dirty bomb:

Cancer
Heart Disease
A depressed postal worker
A car accident
the 6’5" 270lb bouncer boyfriend of the girl my roommate is chasing
A bad batch if spinach
Imported food stuffs from China

To name but a few. So I will be cavalier, if it happens it happens, but those of us not in fairytale land that have a basic understanding of statistics and probability will go on with our lives and worry about REAL threats.[/quote]

renny,

I hope you are right.

I really do.

I don’t have that luxury and have a healthy respect for how easy it would be to produce said weapon.

All it takes is one car/briefcase.

I’m sorry you’ve chosen this stance.

However, there are a lot of people willing to protect you who I believe deserve more respect than you are giving them.

In fact, they are out there right now struggling to make sure you aren’t proven wrong.

Again, saddened by your attitude.

JeffR

Most of the danger from a dirty bomb is panic…

“Meserve … said the health consequences from the use of a “dirty bomb” would be minimal and said the greater concern was a ‘psycho-social one,’” reported ABC News. "He added, “The terrorist’s greatest weapon is fear.'”

Because the radioactive materials in a “dirty bomb” are relatively weak, the damage would likely be isolated to a small blast area.
http://enews.tufts.edu/stories/061102DirtyBombs.htm

[quote]JeffR wrote:
renny,

I hope you are right.

I really do.

I don’t have that luxury and have a healthy respect for how easy it would be to produce said weapon.

All it takes is one car/briefcase.

I’m sorry you’ve chosen this stance.

However, there are a lot of people willing to protect you who I believe deserve more respect than you are giving them.

In fact, they are out there right now struggling to make sure you aren’t proven wrong.

Again, saddened by your attitude.

JeffR

[/quote]

WHAT THE FUCK?!? Saddened by my attitude? That I choose not to live my life COWERING like some frail-minded weakling? No fucking offense, but people die every damn day.

How about I ask you some questions:

Do you know what it is like to have to drive to work and worry that if your car windows are down you might get mugged?

Do you know what it is like to BE REQUIRED to have an alarm system, trained guard dog, and 10 foot high fences?

Do you know what it is like to live in a country with the highest murder rate?

Do you know what its like to be from a place where a rape occurs once every 10 minutes?

I’ll tell you what, you are fucking spoiled. And when the bad times come you are happy to cower and be afraid because some worthless politicians told you that you need to be. Because some “terrorists” want to blow your ass up.

BULL-FUCKING-SHIT

And I tell you what genius, its easier for someone to be a bloody unabomber than it is for a terrorist to hit. Why aren’t you shitting your pants every time you open the mail?!? Or maybe that crazy guy down the street is making TNT in his basement, its not that hard and it will more than likely do more damage than some dirty bomb.

The fact is, people like you have no idea what the reality of the situation is. You hang onto the “threat of terrorism” as if it is supposed to happen any day now.

The more I read about “terrorist plots” that the administration has foiled, the less worried I get. These “terrorists” seem more like borderline retards or action movie junkies than anything else, a bunch of hair-brained schemes that didn’t stand a snowflake’s chance in hell of succeeding.

And how the fuck am I not giving respect to American soldiers? Where the hell did I even mention American soldiers? Seriously, stay on topic here, quit bringing random bullshit into the argument that you don’t stand a chance of winning.

Take it from someone who actually knows what it is like to live in a place where violence against you is a very real possibility:

LIVE YOUR LIFE

or cower under a table like a moron if you choose, its a free country after all.

[quote]ren wrote:
JeffR wrote:
renny,

I hope you are right.

I really do.

I don’t have that luxury and have a healthy respect for how easy it would be to produce said weapon.

All it takes is one car/briefcase.

I’m sorry you’ve chosen this stance.

However, there are a lot of people willing to protect you who I believe deserve more respect than you are giving them.

In fact, they are out there right now struggling to make sure you aren’t proven wrong.

Again, saddened by your attitude.

JeffR

WHAT THE FUCK?!? Saddened by my attitude? That I choose not to live my life COWERING like some frail-minded weakling? No fucking offense, but people die every damn day.

How about I ask you some questions:

Do you know what it is like to have to drive to work and worry that if your car windows are down you might get mugged?

Do you know what it is like to BE REQUIRED to have an alarm system, trained guard dog, and 10 foot high fences?

Do you know what it is like to live in a country with the highest murder rate?

Do you know what its like to be from a place where a rape occurs once every 10 minutes?

I’ll tell you what, you are fucking spoiled. And when the bad times come you are happy to cower and be afraid because some worthless politicians told you that you need to be. Because some “terrorists” want to blow your ass up.

BULL-FUCKING-SHIT

And I tell you what genius, its easier for someone to be a bloody unabomber than it is for a terrorist to hit. Why aren’t you shitting your pants every time you open the mail?!? Or maybe that crazy guy down the street is making TNT in his basement, its not that hard and it will more than likely do more damage than some dirty bomb.

The fact is, people like you have no idea what the reality of the situation is. You hang onto the “threat of terrorism” as if it is supposed to happen any day now.

The more I read about “terrorist plots” that the administration has foiled, the less worried I get. These “terrorists” seem more like borderline retards or action movie junkies than anything else, a bunch of hair-brained schemes that didn’t stand a snowflake’s chance in hell of succeeding.

And how the fuck am I not giving respect to American soldiers? Where the hell did I even mention American soldiers? Seriously, stay on topic here, quit bringing random bullshit into the argument that you don’t stand a chance of winning.

Take it from someone who actually knows what it is like to live in a place where violence against you is a very real possibility:

LIVE YOUR LIFE

or cower under a table like a moron if you choose, its a free country after all.[/quote]

ren,

You don’t understand what I face on a daily basis.

You apparently don’t understand that I have plenty of life and death situations in my face.

Your disdain for other viewpoints angers me.

Finally, I think it better that you and I stop communicating.

JeffR

Just remember to vote for Guliani, Ren. He’s tough on crime and will stop terrorism like Chuck Norris, mmmkay…

[quote]storey420 wrote:
Just remember to vote for Guliani, Ren. He’s tough on crime and will stop terrorism like Chuck Norris, mmmkay…[/quote]

Vote for rodham.

She’s tough.

JeffR

Rodham? Uggghh…That would be the absolute last person I would vote for. I would even vote for Guiliani before that. Hillary is part of the group of elitists that want to pass bills that would make vaccination mandatory and if you didn’t succumb to their will, they could imprison you. No thanks, her and her husband suck as leaders.

[quote]JeffR wrote:
renny,

I hope you are right.

I really do.

I don’t have that luxury and have a healthy respect for how easy it would be to produce said weapon.

All it takes is one car/briefcase.

I’m sorry you’ve chosen this stance.

However, there are a lot of people willing to protect you who I believe deserve more respect than you are giving them.

In fact, they are out there right now struggling to make sure you aren’t proven wrong.

Again, saddened by your attitude.

JeffR

[/quote]
What is it with you and your ilk concocting all these ridiculous hypothetical situations?

“Well, shit, what if somehow, possibly, hypothetically, in the near future sometime maybe, some terrorists planted 32 tons of Bobcat fireworks around the Sears Tower???”

You people have no grasp on reality and instead are living in a badly written episode of 24

There has never been a dirty bomb detonated anywhere in the world, EVER.

Please, come back to reality, it’s much more rational and level headed here.

[quote]JeffR wrote:
Finally, I think it better that you and I stop communicating.
JeffR
[/quote]

LOL!

Can’t stand the heat so you run away from the kitchen!

See ya JeffR.

[quote]unbending wrote:
JeffR wrote:
Finally, I think it better that you and I stop communicating.
JeffR

LOL!

Can’t stand the heat so you run away from the kitchen!

See ya JeffR.[/quote]

Yea, knob.

I can’t take controversy.

However, there are times when ending discussions is better for everyone.

This is one of those times.

JeffR

[quote]Inner Hulk wrote:
JeffR wrote:
renny,

I hope you are right.

I really do.

I don’t have that luxury and have a healthy respect for how easy it would be to produce said weapon.

All it takes is one car/briefcase.

I’m sorry you’ve chosen this stance.

However, there are a lot of people willing to protect you who I believe deserve more respect than you are giving them.

In fact, they are out there right now struggling to make sure you aren’t proven wrong.

Again, saddened by your attitude.

JeffR

What is it with you and your ilk concocting all these ridiculous hypothetical situations?

“Well, shit, what if somehow, possibly, hypothetically, in the near future sometime maybe, some terrorists planted 32 tons of Bobcat fireworks around the Sears Tower???”

You people have no grasp on reality and instead are living in a badly written episode of 24

There has never been a dirty bomb detonated anywhere in the world, EVER.

Please, come back to reality, it’s much more rational and level headed here.[/quote]

There hadn’t been a mass sarin attack before Tokyo.

Or suicide on a large scale with airliners until 9/11/01.

There hadn’t been anthrax sent through the mail until 2001.

Unfortunately, micronuts, it isn’t that hard to make nor disperse these weapons.

Let’s hope you and every dink blowing off the danger is correct.

JeffR

[quote]JeffR wrote:
There hadn’t been a mass sarin attack before Tokyo.

Or suicide on a large scale with airliners until 9/11/01.

There hadn’t been anthrax sent through the mail until 2001.

Unfortunately, micronuts, it isn’t that hard to make nor disperse these weapons.

Let’s hope you and every dink blowing off the danger is correct.

JeffR
[/quote]

And what happened in these attacks beside the oh so important symbolics?

Your chances of dying in a terrorist attack went up 0,0000001%.

Scary.