Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US investigating whether nukes in country
Washington Times ^ | 12/20/01 | RICHARD SALE

Posted on 12/20/2001 10:32:38 PM PST by JustPiper

Edited on 07/12/2004 3:50:10 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-212 next last
To: Nita Nupress
"You guys can leave me out of your dogfight. I'm not here to take sides; I'm here to gather information. The only reason you even know I'm here is becaus"

Rest assured I'm not trying to include you in "your dogfight". I asked your opinion, since you displayed interest in the thread.

Since I know little, except what I've been reading here about "red mercury", I can't express opinions about that. I asked for proof that former Pres Bush committed treason, and learned it is only opinion; now I find it a cheap, baseless and unfounded shot.

With that, I'll leave the red merc discussion to Poohbah, who seems more than knowledgable and capable to discuss, if he can find someone else with those qualities.

161 posted on 12/27/2001 6:23:38 AM PST by katze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: katze

Rest assured I'm not trying to include you in "your dogfight". I asked your opinion, since you displayed interest in the thread.

See, that's the problem with doing group replies.  People tend to ignore the portion that addresses them.  Here's your very own reply to your "Bush treason" question, katze:

"I'm not informed enough on that topic to have an opinion.  And to be quite blunt, I have no time nor desire to research it in order to form an opinion. 

 

I'll leave the red merc discussion to Poohbah, who seems more than knowledgable and capable to discuss, if he can find someone else with those qualities.

Me-e-e-ow!  That sounds more like a vindictive woman in a catfight!   Act like a man and play fair. 

You are a man, aren't you?  ( <--------- example of typical passive/aggressive "wimmin-in-a-catfight" statement. :)

I really must run now... just passin' through.  Feel free to flame at will.  And Merry Christmas to you.

162 posted on 12/27/2001 7:02:04 AM PST by Nita Nupress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: Squantos
Stay Safe and Merry New Year Nita, hope Santa was good to ya !

The same back to ya, Squantos! May the coming year bring rich blessings upon you and yours.

163 posted on 12/27/2001 7:05:16 AM PST by Nita Nupress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Nita Nupress
"The bottom line is that there is no official confirmation of the existence of red mercury. In Great Britain the standard denial is that "there is no evidence that red mercury exists." The US Department of Energy says that "the alleged samples it has been asked to test were worthless" and that "it doubts if red mercury really exists." Vic Hogsett, an analyst at the Los Alamos nuclear research facility, said "this is the unicorn of modern science. You can put your hand on a Kalashnikov, you can touch plutonium. With red mercury, there just doesn't seem to be anything there. Call it red mercury, call it a Big Mac. I call it a scam.""

Just found this, on my first search of red merc. Quite an interesting article.

164 posted on 12/27/2001 7:13:43 AM PST by katze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Nita Nupress
Me-e-e-ow! That sounds more like a vindictive woman in a catfight! Act like a man and play fair.

You are a man, aren't you? ( <--------- example of typical passive/aggressive "wimmin-in-a-catfight" statement. :)

I really must run now... just passin' through. Feel free to flame at will. And Merry Christmas to you.

162 posted on 12/27/01 8:02 AM Pacific by Nita Nupress

LOL. And you say you're not part of this "fight".

And, yes I meant what I said about "if Poohbah can find someone with those qualities". Perhaps you've missed, but this issue of accusing former Pres Bush of being a traitor is not isolated to this thread, nor this topic. It has been injected into many threads, I suppose to insure everyone sees it. It is offensive and certainly not an established fact, rather from someone who has many gripes about the man.

Me? Man or woman? Don't know that it should matter, since I'm not making claims of *any* sort. Can't imagine why it would make a difference.

165 posted on 12/27/2001 7:22:17 AM PST by katze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: katze
Me? Man or woman? Don't know that it should matter, since I'm not making claims of *any* sort. Can't imagine why it would make a difference.

It only makes a difference when some smarta$$ female wants to throw a passive/aggressive barb your way. ;-)

Later, dude/dude-ette.

166 posted on 12/27/2001 7:27:08 AM PST by Nita Nupress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Nita Nupress
I'll reserve comment until later, since you're just passing by. ;-)

Still waiting for someone to discuss red merc with Poohbah. You know, posting articles is not quite the same as discussing. Of course, my complaint remains the same, and if more than an opinion that elder Pres Bush committed treason, I'd like facts.

167 posted on 12/27/2001 8:48:30 AM PST by katze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Nita Nupress
Nita, I keep bashing my head against a wall on these issues regarding red mercury:

First, the basic description supplied by Sam Cohen is of a substance that violates basic physics. The biggest issue is that this substance apparently can undergo some sort of chemical reaction that releases an intense amount of heat, but that reaction does NOT increase its entropy. Mother Nature doesn't let you DO that--because otherwise, Red Mercury would be the fuel for a perpetual motion machine. If it IS such a fuel, then it's too damn valuable to blow up in neutron bombs.

Next, when you look at the details of "red mercury," it gets interesting. Supposedly, it's mercury antimony oxide. It generates energy levels associated with nuclear reactions from a simple chemical reaction--and nobody ever bothers to explain HOW it does this. This is kind of important, because chemical reactions are FAR less energetic than nuclear reactions. To give you an idea of how much more energy is involved in a nuclear reaction, take a laboratory beaker full of sugar and pour in some hydrochloric acid. You will end up with a black, gunky mess (essentially pure carbon) and enough heat that you can't hold the beaker without using tongs or thermally insulated gloves. Now, if you were to somehow fuse a significant fraction of the hydrogen in the sugar into helium in one instant, the following would happen:

Finally, this stuff is AMAZINGLY cheap--no more than $400,000 a kilo, and it will set off a thermonuclear burn with just a blasting cap. No need for complicated design work, just stick in your tritium and your lithium deuteride, and BINGO! You just became a superpower. What's that, ma'am? You don't have tritium, and you don't have any lithium deuteride? NO PROBLEM! This stuff gets so doggone hot, you don't NEED the usual fusion fuel materials. Set off enough of it and it will ignite oxygen and nitrogen--good ol' air, or at least a significant minority component of the air in the Los Angeles Basin--into a fusion reaction of amazing yield. Nukes would be VERY cheap...and every terrorist in the world would be able to afford this stuff, and keep it on the shelf next to their $400 EMP bomb they built with parts from Radio Schlock and plans downloaded from the Internet.

It would be cheap at $1,000,000 a kilo.

It would still be very competitive with "ordinary" nukes at $10,000,000 a kilo.

If it actually existed.

But, HEY...if I had a line on where to get red mercury, I sure wouldn't use it in a bomb...I'd use it to fuel a powerplant in California, and not have to pay for fuel, EVER.

168 posted on 12/27/2001 8:51:29 AM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: ignatz_q
I saw the hearings at which Boris Yeltsin's National Science Advisor testified as to the details of the unaccounted-for backpack nukes. He was not a presidential candidate, and he has not been 'discredited'. Discredited by who? Yuri Andropov's clone?

The Spetznaz Units which deploy these weapons are the ones trained in their use, which is apparently relatively intricate as indicated herein. Multiply-sourced reports also indicate that Al Queda was able in August to obtain a Spetznaz agent's cooperation in training them in the operation and use of the two weapons they had acquired. These were not alluded to by Richard Sales article, but are fairly reliable reports, as such things go. Before the spooks go running around trying to discredit public info and 'disinform' an aroused public that scares the top brass.

169 posted on 12/27/2001 9:39:23 AM PST by Paul Ross
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

Comment #170 Removed by Moderator

Comment #171 Removed by Moderator

Comment #172 Removed by Moderator

Comment #173 Removed by Moderator

To: ratcat
While you were writing to me, I was writing to you on another thread. I have something cooking that needs attention, I'll be back to see your comments on the other thread. If FR down, meet me on the yahoo thingie.
174 posted on 12/27/2001 12:28:20 PM PST by katze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: ratcat
What if they were? Who are those the terrorists most want to weaken or kill? My best guess is the pres and VP. What would happen to this country if they were both killed? In addition to all of us being completely demoralized (I'm speaking collectively), people would be financially wiped out; the economy would collapse, then the country falls.

There may be other measures taken to protect the elected officials in this country, and for very good reason. I could give a hoot less if every Dem was stricken with the plague, but IMO the pres and VP must be protected, at any cost.

Just an opinion, ratcat, but I think you read too much and don't consider that some of those doing the writing may want you to be riled up against the Govt, and nothing more; their job is finished.

175 posted on 12/27/2001 1:25:58 PM PST by katze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Nita, I keep bashing my head against a wall on these issues regarding red mercury:

Yes, and you've written some wonderful information that will help me do a productive search.  Thank you.  I'm not proficient in physics nor do I care to learn it at this point in my life.  But with the information you gave me, I can continue gathering facts and then let others decide. 

Even with my limited knowledge of physics, everything you said makes perfect sense to me.  Can you tell me why Sam Cohen thinks otherwise?  If what you said is so obvious, as you seem to think, then why doesn't Mr. Cohen -- the creator of the neutron bomb -- understand basic physics?  Why do he and other esteemed physicists believe there are "pure fusion" weapons small enough to fit in a lunch box and lethal enough to kill everyone within 500 or 600 yards?

Fox News is reporting that the NYPD will be using radiation sensors at the New Year's Day celebrations.  Someone must be taking all this seriously, as I doubt NYPD would include this in their budget if they thought it was hogwash.

Anyway, back to Cohen...

176 posted on 12/27/2001 2:20:21 PM PST by Nita Nupress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: ratcat
I'm not sure how much credence I give Col. Gritz, but thank you for all that information. My potassium iodide supply is good for another year. Hope I never have to use it. ;-)
177 posted on 12/27/2001 2:24:00 PM PST by Nita Nupress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: katze

Still waiting for someone to discuss red merc with Poohbah. You know, posting articles is not quite the same as discussing.

Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for me to "discuss" if you mean that in the context of having a "debate."   Don't have time and don't have the knowledge. I'm strictly in the "fact-finding" mode at this point.  And if you're not talking about me, don't bother to answer this.  If it doesn't concern me directly, then it's none of my business and you should be addressing that comment to the person to whom you're actually speaking.

Of course, my complaint remains the same, and if more than an opinion that elder Pres Bush committed treason, I'd like facts.

You must have meant that sentence for someone who's interested in that particular topic.  Again, I'm not interested in being triangulated into that discussion. :)

178 posted on 12/27/2001 2:33:06 PM PST by Nita Nupress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: Nita Nupress
"Don't hold your breath if you're waiting for me to "discuss" if you mean that in the context of having a "debate.""

Indeed, it was meant for someone else; someone who purports to know more about this; I'd be very interested in reading their debate, since I believe Poohbah knows what he's talking about. If he doesn't, he's certainly done his homework to the extent of being able to discuss.

And I'm not trying to drag you into anything.

179 posted on 12/27/2001 2:47:12 PM PST by katze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: Nita Nupress
Even with my limited knowledge of physics, everything you said makes perfect sense to me.

Thank you kindly.

Can you tell me why Sam Cohen thinks otherwise? If what you said is so obvious, as you seem to think, then why doesn't Mr. Cohen -- the creator of the neutron bomb -- understand basic physics?

And there, my dear Nita, is the really big question. Sam Cohen knows enough nuclear fizzies to understand these issues. If red mercury exists and performs as advertised, then it has a wee side effect--you have to completely rewrite most areas of physics to explain this. He doesn't even begin to try and explain these issues--not even a brief thumbnail sketch of how this stuff works so differently from everything else.

Why do he and other esteemed physicists believe there are "pure fusion" weapons small enough to fit in a lunch box and lethal enough to kill everyone within 500 or 600 yards?

Again, I don't know. But when I don't get any explanation of HOW this amazing substance is able to completely upend modern physics, or even a brief acknowledgement that it DOES completely upend modern physics and that further discussion is not possible due to security concerns, and the speaker is a nuclear physicist of some renown, I get VERY suspicious about the whole thing. There is something very amiss here.

Regarding the radiological detectors: my guess is a "dirty bomb." Based on my own study, I'd prefer a REAL nuke (you get a much bigger BANG! for the same amount of detection risk), but Osama may not be bright enough to realize that this is an issue, or may not have access to a nuke.

180 posted on 12/27/2001 3:53:00 PM PST by Poohbah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-212 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson