Marines hold nuclear site

Pittsburgh Tribune Review ^ | Wednesday, April 9, 2003 | Carl Prine

[Robert A Cook PE]

Legot uses (Co 60 for medicine) would require ONE ROOM for storage, dry, with NO WASTE WATER DRUMS. The Co is highly radioactive; very, very little else is.

Only minor waste like survey papers, filters, rags, uniforms, masks ... Simple low-level wastes.

[witnesstothefall]

16 hrs and running, the PPT has an exclusive on this story in America. What are the rest waiting for?

[Robert A Cook PE]

Wrong.

Pull your head up and read up on nuclear programs and source/waste radiation levels from a "real" nuclear program before you say anything else to make yourself look more foolish.

These tanks are equal to the weapons grade, waste storage tanks we've been fighting in Washington since WWII.

You DON'T hide massive underground rooms in wet mud to create tiny Co60 sources.

[Ditto]

I defer to your knowledge, but it seems the way to get rooms full of very high-level stuff it by reprocessing spent fuel to extract plutonium.

[not-an-ostrich]

Do journalists have certain rights on their stories? Can they sue if a news outlet doesn't use their own reporters/sources to find a story? I know you have to have permission to use photos/film...remember the flack FNC got when the used the Challenger film without permission.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Yes!

The Pu239 is produced as a by-product of inserting "regular" fuel into the reactor, then letting it "burn" for a while.

Then you pull several thousand pounds of HIGHLY RADIOACTIVE!!! (emphasis added) rods out, separate the Pu239 and U235 from the waste products (which creates deadly gasses and acidic waste products of dissolved metals and "junk") then take the separated grams of Pu239 to the bomb-making facility.

The rods are re-mixed, put back in the reactor, and you do it again. We are still "playing" with the tanks of liquid waste from WWII at hanford WA; and here, Hussein buried it in unlined drums in an aquifer next to a river!

Stupid. Criminally stupid.

[Erasmus]

hello Hans, you missed this, hanssss, hansssssssss, where are you hans?

In a Malmö nightclub using his favorite line:

Hi schveetie. My name is Hans und I'm hier too inspect yoo."

[openotherend]

This isn't a smoking gun. It's a smoking howitzer.
That's not a smoking gun! This is a smoking gun! /dundee

[Erasmus]

Oh no, this will really ruin their day over at DU. After all, Iraq had a clean nuclear bill of health.

I am confident that one of our VRWC agents provocateurs will do their part in operation "DU Mindfu--" by posting the article.

[walden]

bump again

[Erasmus]

Sorry folks, another "red herring", another false alarm. This is clearly an innocent, civilian, non- weapons related, "Nuclear Insecticide Development Complex"

The sign out front read,

"Atomic Baby Milk Factory"

[Erasmus]

"French engineers spent a fortune pumping water from the foundation area, only to see buildings crumble when the water was removed".

I see French engineers are as good as French soldiers.

These were from the Ferdinand de Lesseps Brigade.

[philetus]

I sent this link to FOXNEWS.
Couple hundred more people send it and they might report it.

[XJarhead]

Pull your head up and read up on nuclear programs and source/waste radiation levels from a "real" nuclear program before you say anything else to make yourself look more foolish.

Oh, so you're personally guaranteeing that this is indeed an illegal weapons site with weapon-grade material? Have you personally seen the exact readings that were taken? Or are you saying that any radiation reading that is dangerous to humans automatically confirms the presence of weapons grade material? Because the article is notably lacking in the type of detail you seem to be taking as fact.

Tell you what, why don't you say exactly what portions of that article confirm the presence of weapons grade material?

I love guys who express such certainty at preliminary reports. Seeing what you want to see rather than what the evidence proves. For example, the article assumes that no underground areas were explored when IAEA inspected the facility. But hey, that isn't quite correct:

http://www.iraqwatch.org/un/IAEA/iaea-inspex-021503.htm

On February 13, 2003, the inspectors did the following:

Two inspection teams inspected two facilities within the Tuwaitha site 20km south of Baghdad. The first team included nuclear experts experienced in rock climbing and inspected previously inaccessible underground chambers within the old Tamuz 1 reactor complex that had been destroyed by bombing in 1981.

I freely admit that the IAEA may have screwed up. It certainly wouldn't be the first time. But to use your phrase, I find it rather "foolish" to jump to the conclusion you seem to have reached based on a very preliminary report.

[XJarhead]

I think a key point here is that the weapons inspectors don't appear to have even known about the vast underground side of this facility.

That's not clear. The IAEA filed a report stating that it inspected "underground chambers" at that facility in February. It's too vague to know exactly what they looked at, and what they may have missed. But the bozos missed the Iraqi nuke program during the 1980's, so I wouldn't be shocked if they missed this one too.

[MHGinTN]

I sent a link to Sean Hannity in prep for his evening Fox gnarl with Colmes.

[bert]

Is ElBardei's nonfeasance a war crime?

[Torie]

So how come this mega story hasn't been picked up by the usual suspects?

[bert]

These sme French engineers failed to create the Panama canal.

Ive worked hand to hand with French engineers and they can't stand up. If it had not been for their Filippino hired hands they would have failed worse than they did.

[NautiNurse]

Why the hell aren't the major networks talking about this or sending in reporters?????

They need something for tomorrow's news.