Posted on 06/05/2007 2:12:24 PM PDT by ovrtaxt
Hey Tom,
Neutron detectors, while portable can be heavy. And their effiency/accuracy is not the best. A better meter would a gamma detector, as these transuranics, while they do emit neutron, also emit gamma.
He republishes the same book every summer, and NewsMax and WorldNet Daily spin several stories each to bump it into the "alternative" news feed.
If you use neutrons, you’d probably use an external neutron source to probe the vehicle and look for neutrons with a different energy coming out.
There are gamma detectors here and there on the road and in airports, but I don’t think anyone’s been brave enough to ping cars with neutrons just yet.
Anything including outrageous lies, hyperbole and wingnutter delusions? Wouldn't that do more harm than good, giving the Dhimmicrats and other 9-10ers reason to dismiss or diminish genuine warnings? IMHO the truth is frightening enough. There's no need, and much harm, in legitimizing lunatics like this guy.
I seriously doubt al-Qaida currently has nuclear explosives, but certainly has the will, money and friends in places like Iran, Pakistan and N. Korea who may eventually help them get nukes. However, al-Qaida can easily assemble so called “dirty bombs” made from radioactive materials dispersed by conventional explosives (rent the British film, “Dirty War” for a realistic account of how this can be done)
Because our response would destroy Mecca?
An nuclear attack would renew our resolve.
Ron Paul Williams?
The "plutonium implosion device" we built was the size of a Volkswagen Beetle, weighed five tons and looked like this:
Even if you leave off all the "bomb" packaging, there's still no way it's gonna fit in the back of a Volkswagen.
Even a "bus".
Someone should clue Mr. Williams in on the boy-who-cried-wolf thing.
For something you can carry around, just Google "portable radiation detector", there are many.
What does "wide open" mean? To me it would mean an illegal could walk right across the border pretty much anywhere, anytime he wanted.
If our borders are "wide open" then why do illegals generally cross at night? Why do they cross in remote areas, miles and miles from cities and towns, often walking for a couple of nights, laying up during the day, having to carry water, etc. If the borders are "wide open" why not just walk across in or near a city and catch a cab on the other side. This, after all, is exactly what illegals used to do 20 or 25 years ago when, by my definition at least, the borders really were pretty close to being effectively "wide open".
If the borders are "wide open" today then why have the fees charged by coyotes (people smugglers) increased by nearly an order of magnitude in recent years (as I'm given to understand from something like one or two hundred dollars often to a thousand or more)? Why are coyotes even needed? They didn't used to be so common.
If the borders are "wide open" then why are the cheap apartment complexes I drive through here in Texas now nearly full all winter long? They used to be nearly deserted that time of year. A large proportion of Mexican illegals used to prefer to work in the United States during the Spring, Summer and Fall and then go back to their villages and families during the Winter. If the borders are "wide open" is should be a simple matter for them to cross back and forth several times a year and continue this time honored practice. Why don't they?
The fact is the borders have been tightened to a considerable relative degree since 9-11, indeed gradually but progressively over the 15 or 20 years preceding 9-11.
I agree completely that the degree to which border security has been improved is dangerously inadequate. I'd like to see the number of border agents tripled post haste. I'd like to see hundreds of miles of new fence. I'd like to thousands of new beds for detentions. I'd like see the 30 new federal prosecutors that have been recently added in the southwest for border control issues backed up with the hundreds of lower level employees and new courthouses and other infrastructure they need to be truly effective.
But you know what, just because much more needs to be done, I'm not going to lie or delude myself and others about what has been done. You can't solve a problem if you're willfully deluded about it's nature and dimensions, which nevertheless seems to be where well over half of freeperdom is these days.
Frankly I'm quite appalled and disgusted with the pervasive and abysmal level of intellectual dishonesty that I'm finding in this forum lately. We're becoming little better than DUers.
If this turns out to be true, history will not be kind to George W. Bush.
W-40 Warhead. Yield is 10 KT and it weighs about 385 pounds, it was used in Bomarc SAM and Lacrosse SSM. first version manufactured 6/59-8/59.
Or for a little higher yield, but having dial a yield if you insist on 10 or 20 KT This one, which weighs about 290 lbs, and is 31.4 inches long and 11.8 inches in diameter, is the W-80 ALCM warhead warhead, also used in Tomahawk nuclear variant. It was manufactured in the 1980s. Yield is 5 to ~ 180 KT.
Of course it all depends on where the terrorists get their nukes. Pakistan's are probably somewhat larger than the '50s US tech W-40 above, but probably not so very much larger.
If the warheads come from the former Soviet Union, but maintained by "who knows", they could easily be as small as the '50s or even '80s US designs.
Of course larger yield are quite possible with fusion devices. Here's the W-62/Mk-12 warhead still in use (AFAIK) on the Minuteman missiles, it's yield is 170 KT, and the warhead, which smaller than the Re-entry vehicle shown, weighs a mere 253 pounds, and is 39.3 inches long and 19.7 inches in diameter.
As you can tell from the haircuts, they were produced from 1970 to 1976.
Those are nice historic pictures. However, all of those warheads would NOT work today unless they were maintained. Specifically; the triggers, timing mechanisms, and nano-timed explosives all tend to deteriorate very quickly.
Newer warheads require very sophisticated arming and detonation triggers. That is not to say that some electronic genius couldnt go to a radio shack and get the necessary parts to accomplish this.
The lifetime of a warhead is depending on model and delivery vehicle requires aver 20 50 (latest estimate I heard) hours of maintenance for every hour available and on line. It is almost guaranteed that a Fizzle is the default for a perfect 100% trigger of a nuclear reaction.
I still think that this whole sensational report is a book sales ploy as opposed to actual knowledge of reality.
As far as implosion detonation goes, it is probably the most difficult type of detonation. If all of this yellow cake and U-238 (I assume that U-235 is also readily available) is around, I would think that the cannon delivery of fission would be simpler for a terrorist organization. Maybe a little bulkier than the warheads shown, but more easily engineered for effect.
great... i’ll be dying either immediately, or of cancer... it’s so reassuring that we’ll be attacking back
*rolling eyes*
Really? You don't think the PC politicians among us would wuss out?
I do.
lol! cute
I’ve read bits and pieces of that book- it gets your attention.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.