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]
Let me get this straight. The substance undergoes a massive temperature increase from CHEMICAL reactions only? And yet it doesn't change its density or volume, despite this temperature increase? And it produces no blast? Yeah, Sam, pull my other leg, willya?
Cohen identifies the mysterious "red mercury" (of TV documentary fame) as a ballotechnic material. He offers this "recipe:" take mercury-antimony oxide, compress it, and bombard with neutrons. He says it is slightly radioactive, with a half-life of a couple of days.
Huh? Would somebody mind explaining what the decay products of mercury and antimony are? Also, if its half-life is only a couple days, and you need (for example) 100 grams of the substance, and you stick 400 grams into a bomb casing, you have (assuming you pulled straight out of the neutron bombardment) four days to use the device. After that, there isn't enough of the stuff for it to work. Also, the (unidentified) decay products might "poison" any reaction (assuming that you can get any nuclear reaction from a chemical reaction). For example, 3He is a decay product of tritium, and helium-3 has an absolutely voracious appetite for neutrons--several US nuclear tests were "fizzles" due to helium contamination.
Cohen says the Russians have built and tested mini-nukes, and that Americans and Russians are cooperating on pure fusion. He says that a Russian bomb was brought to Los Alamos ("by Federal Express" from a Russian plane in Washington) and successfully tested. .....
Uh-huh. If they REALLY thought they were moving a nuke, it wouldn't have been sent via FedEx.
The terrorist potential of mini neutron bombs is horrifying. One possibility mentioned by Cohen involved a US State Of The Union address.'
Even worse: the moose that bit my sister could use it on cheese. Just as likely a threat.
Most frightening for Cohen is the relative ease by which neutron bombs can be created with a substance called red mercury. Red mercury is a compound containing mercury that has undergone massive irradiation. When exploded, it creates tremendous heat and pressure - the same type needed to trigger a fusion device such as a mini-neutron bomb. Before, an obstacle to creating a nuclear bomb was the need for plutonium, which when exploded could create a fusion reaction in hydrogen atoms. But red mercury has changed that. The cheap substance has been produced in Russia, Cohen said, and shipped on the black market throughout the world.
If it's THAT cheap, then why hasn't anybody set off a mini-neutron bomb in downtown Manhattan? Why did Osama bin Rotten have to have some dopey followers hijack some airplanes?
According to Jonathan Eyal, director of the royal United Services Institute for Defence Studies (which is connected to the British Department of Defence) in London, England, "Red mercury is definitely used in the production of nuclear weapons with Soviet technology.
Well, yes. That's because "Red Mercury" was the codename given to lithium deuteride, a critical component of thermonuclear weapons, by the Soviet government. It's critical in ANY thermonuclear weapon, unless you want to use liquid deuterium, and have a device roughly the size of a railroad tank car.
Red mercury is of great interest to third world countries that want to make nuclear bombs, because the technology is different and cheaper than that used in the west.
Actually, it's of interest because XUSSR stockpile security is downright pathetic. Much easier to get 6LiD from Ivan than from Uncle Sam...
And in Italy, Judge Romano Dolce in Milano presided over a case where two kilograms red mercury are reported to have been sold for US$800,000. He said, "Red mercury is not a bluff, but a business for weapons purposes. Red mercury is viewed as an important ingredient in production of nuclear weapons and buyers are prepared to pay millions of dollars for it."
May I please see the judge's credentials in nuclear physics? Perhaps he can explain those discrepancies I pointed out earlier.
I'm really not trying to downplay the potential dangers of nuclear terrorism. However, Sale is a known liar, and Weldon seems more interested in fear-mongering than in dealing with any actual threats.
Journalists and politicians... can you think of two groups with less credibility?
No, the result would be quite the opposite. He'd rise to hero status even more than he already has. The Arabs like to "back the winner", especially if he's one of their own. They hold "weakness" in contempt, and further, they perceive what we see as "reasonableness" (and all that goes with it) as weakness. A surprise attack, a stunning strike below the belt -- these are things they'd view as "courageous" and "strong".
Look at the whole "you can't continue bombing during ramadan!" drama. There was a rising crescendo of opposition, lots of bravado, and the underlying (emphasis on the last two syllables of that word) assumption that we simply couldn't dare bomb the enemy during his "holy month".
Yet, as soon as ramadan began, and the bombing continued, the mouths were stopped. They shut up when they saw us act with what they perceived as strength. "Strength" in that culture means doing what you want in the face of opposition. The stronger the opposition, and the more outrageous the "what you want", the greater the display of "strength" -- and, the greater the degree of "earned" respect (especially from those who opposed the action the most vociferously!)
Very few Americans seem able to grasp this, and it will be our ultimate downfall, as the "movers and shakers" seem to be for the most part among that number.
*That* is exactly what we are facing with the Al-Qaeda organization, and their possible (I say probable) owners, the Chinese - a completely different mindset, with views alien to our own.
Now is the time for vigillance (sp?), not arrogance.
And they had better know it!
Dennis, do you still have your "before and after" image of Mecca?
Master terrorist Ossama Bin Laden has acquired portable nuclear devices, a U.S.-based expert on non-conventional terror believes. The only real question now is whether BinLaden has "a few," as Russian intelligence seems to think, or "over 20," a figure cited by intelligence services of moderate Arab regimes. "There is no longer much doubt that Bin Laden has finally succeeded in his quest for nuclear ‘suitcase bombs," says Yossef Bodansky, head of the Congressional Task Force on Non-Conventional Terrorism in Washington. In a recent book, Bodansky reports that Bin Laden’s associates acquired the devices through Chechnya, paying the Chechens $30 million in cash and two tons of Afghan heroin, worth about $70 million in Afghanistan and about 10 times that on the street in Western cities.
Bodansky’s statements corroborate 1998 testimony by former Russian security chief Alexander Lebed to the U.S. House of Representatives. Lebed said that 43 nuclear suitcases from the former Soviet arsenal, developed for the KGB in the 1970s, have vanished since the collapse of the former Soviet Union a decade ago. Lebed said one person could detonate such a bomb by himself, and kill 100,000 people.
Among the others who recognize the threat is Ben Venzke, director of Tempest Publishing. The U.S. firm plans to release a detailed technical handbook on dealing with nuclear terror next year. The danger, says Venzke, is quite real and is not confined to stolen Russian weapons. "It is really quite simple," he says, "to acquire radioactive material and combine it with an explosive or so-called dirty device." Yael Haran
More at link----- http://christianactionforisrael.org/isreport/septoct99/binladen.html
Thank you!
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.