Kinda scary if you ask me

[lummy 4]

Checked for other posts

clicky

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[PhillyKev 0]

You think that's bad? Who knows what this guy had.

http://kyw.com/news/local_story_222220435.html

Quote

investigators say a man arriving on an overseas flight set off a metal detector alarm. Security screeners on duty asked him to step aside for a further search but it was ten minutes before anyone realized the man was gone.

[skymama 35]

Quote

Checked for other posts

You're such a good boy.

She is Da Man, and you better not mess with Da Man,
because she will lay some keepdown on you faster than, well, really fast. ~Billvon

[Deuce 1]

Could somebody please tell me how big a cube of depleted uranium is?

What the heck is it good for other than being heavy? I'm sure hundreds of pounds of it can be found in and around tank carcasses all up and down the road from Kuwait to Baghdad. It doesn't have a smell, and it's not overly radioactive, so what's the big deal?

[PhillyKev 0]

The point isn't that the depleted uranium itself is dangerous. The point it, they didn't detect it.

"If they can't detect that, then they can't detect the real thing," explained Tom Cochran, a nuclear physicist at the Natural Resources Defense Council

[turtlespeed 212]

But, hey, there's no reason to try and stop the terrorists from doing this....I mean, live and let live right?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Deuce 1]

Well, I disagree.

They used depleted uranium cause it sounds scary. If they had put horse shit in the suitcase, it would have made a lousy headline.

"Homeland Security fails to find an amount of Horse Shit, that had it been enriched uranium, would have been enough to form a dirty bomb to kill everyone in Los Angeles"

Why these folks are so bent on keeping people scared is beyond me. I do not think this was an act of patriotism to assist Mr. Ridge in improving his operation.

It's purely sensationalism, and it's annoying.

When I was learning how to be a cop, my training officer would occasionally plant something and when I'd find it or fail to find it he'd ask me "What if that had been a gun" And the answer would be "I would have gotten into a gunfight and won"

(Wow. That sounds pretty macho, eh Diablopilot? )

I'd like to see Comedy Central import some horseshit in a fancy suitcase, and then call Homeland Security and tell them "If this had been a fuel-rod, we could have killed everybody!"

[PhillyKev 0]

Quote

But, hey, there's no reason to try and stop the terrorists from doing this....I mean, live and let live right?

Yes, that's exactly what I said. All of us who think that the wrong things are being done to protect us from terrorism want nothing to be done. In fact, we'd prefer if we found the terrorists and import them into the country.

It amazes me at the logic that exists and the conclusions that are jumped to. I think UN inspectors should have been given more time, therefore I'm a Saddam Hussein supporter. I think TSA should be effective in screening for nuclear materials. Therefore I think we shouldn't screen for them.

Actually, I'm not suprised. It explains how so many people are duped by the administrations lies. When you lead a horse to water, apparently it jumps in for a swim.

[PhillyKev 0]

Never said I agree with the tactics of the "reporters". But the fact that TSA didn't detect radioactive material in a suitcase (I'm pretty sure that is supposed to be one of their goals) is still alarming. It indicates that there is still a problem with the screening system, even though the gov't keeps telling us how much they've accomplished.

I'll reiterate again. Those of us who are opposed to the current tactics aren't opposed to stopping terrorism. We're opposed to the ineffective tactics that have been used thus far.

Yes, some good things have been done. Some useless, wasteful things have been done. And, IMO, some unconstitutional, intentionally misleading and immoral things have been done.

[lummy 4]

Quote

Could somebody please tell me how big a cube of depleted uranium is?

In this case, it was 15 lbs.

According to the Duf6 Guide , one pound of Uranium would make a ball approximated 1.3 inches round. To put in perspective, make an OK sign with your thumb and forefinger. Now think of a pipe that tick but 15 inches long.
I'm trying to find out what the destructive capability of say 1 lb of Uranium is. If and when I find it, I'll post it


And according to the Nuclear Physicist interviewed:

"Cochran said the highly enriched uranium used for nuclear weapons would, with slightly thicker shielding, give off a signature similar to depleted uranium in the screening devices currently being used by homeland security officials at American ports. " [/]

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[jumper03 0]

Quote

Well, I disagree.

They used depleted uranium cause it sounds scary. If they had put horse shit in the suitcase, it would have made a lousy headline.

"Homeland Security fails to find an amount of Horse Shit, that had it been enriched uranium, would have been enough to form a dirty bomb to kill everyone in Los Angeles"

Why these folks are so bent on keeping people scared is beyond me. I do not think this was an act of patriotism to assist Mr. Ridge in improving his operation.

It's purely sensationalism, and it's annoying.

When I was learning how to be a cop, my training officer would occasionally plant something and when I'd find it or fail to find it he'd ask me "What if that had been a gun" And the answer would be "I would have gotten into a gunfight and won"

(Wow. That sounds pretty macho, eh Diablopilot? )

I'd like to see Comedy Central import some horseshit in a fancy suitcase, and then call Homeland Security and tell them "If this had been a fuel-rod, we could have killed everybody!"

I think you mis-read. The depleted uranium was in a shielded canister so that it's radiation signature would be similar to a shipment of enriched uranium in a heavily shielded container. The depleted uranium in the heavily shielded container wouldn't make a blip. The enriched uranium in the heavily shielded container should light up the board. Depleted uranium in the container they used should light up the board....

Surprise.

Jump

Scars remind us that the past is real

[skyesspot 0]

Quote

You're such a good boy.

Sometimes...

Life is too short. Don't sweat the small stuff.

[lawrocket 3]

Anybody out there, I'd like to make an example of how they could have missed this.

Go to a port. Let's use an example as the port of Los Angeles in San Pedro. Then look at all the 20 foot containers stacked everywhere. Then, go ask one of the stevedors how hard it would be to smuggle something into one of those things, for example, a 10 pound ball of enriched uranium.

It's one of those, "What the hell can you do?" I mean logistically, how can you do it? It's finding the needle in 10,000 haystacks. All of them locked.

All you can do it spot check and hope. Reality sucks...

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[turtlespeed 212]

I don't think you guite understood my sarcasm.

I would really rather not wait for another incident of the magnitude of the Trade Center for people to realise that the threat is real, and that (as Duece put it) sensationalising things doesn't help. Not a bit, It IS annoying, and does nothing but promote what I have come to see as "Media Terrorism".

First thing the media did when the "Anthrax" epidemic was running rampid was to present the numbers in a light that skewed the appearance. Now everyone is done worrying about that, so by all means, lets make some news we can scare every one with.

I do agree with one thing whole heartedly though, it was wrong to have been used in ammunition.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Deuce 1]

Quote

The depleted uranium was in a shielded canister so that it's radiation signature would be similar to a shipment of enriched uranium in a heavily shielded container. The depleted uranium in the heavily shielded container wouldn't make a blip.

This is sensationalistic journalism. That "scientific opinion" is from their paid expert. He isn't getting paid, and won't be on "Good Morning America" if he states that even common granite gives off a radioactive signature and a 300 pound block of granite will give off the same radiation as an ounce of heavily sheilded plutonium.

For the purposes of this argument I don't even care about the terror issues. It's just absolute crap tabloid journalism, and most folks aren't seeing it cause they don't equate ABC with this kind of nonsense.

If they want to be badass, be badass. Buy some of the real shit and bring it on in. Apples to apples. Do any of you think we could prevent a well-funded nation-sponsored effort to bring radioactive materials here? I don't.

But the stupid ones, well we stand a chance of catching most of them. And most of them will snitch each other off one at a time.

[lummy 4]

Quote

They used depleted uranium cause it sounds scary. If they had put horse shit in the suitcase, it would have made a lousy headline.

I believe the intent was that Depleted Uranium would give off a similar signature as sheilded weapons grade uranium.

I found on WWW.nuclearfiles.org a 1941 British document known as the[ url http://www.nuclearfiles.org/redocuments/1941/41-maud.html] MAUD report [/url] that stated "

We have now reached the conclusion that it will be possible to make an effective uranium bomb which, containing some 25 lb of active material, would be equivalent as regards destructive effect to 1,800 tons of T.N.T. and would also release large quantities of radioactive substance, which would make places near to where the bomb exploded dangerous to human life for a long period

So, now take your left hand and make an OK sign. Put it next to your right hand (from my previous post) and imagine a pipe 12.5 inches long.

They also listed the probable effects of an explosion of 1800 tons of TNT


4. Probable Effect
The best estimate of the kind of damage likely to be produced by the explosion of 1,800 tons of T.N.T. is afforded by the great explosion at Halifax N.S. in 1917. The following account is from the History of Explosives. "The ship contained 450,000 lb. of T.N.T., 122,960 lb. of guncotton, and 4,661,794 lb. of picric acid wet and dry, making a total of 5,234,754 lb. The zone of the explosion extended for about 3/4 mile in every direction and in this zone the destruction was almost complete. Severe structural damage extended generally for a radius of 1-1/8 to 1-1/4 miles, and in one direction up to 1-3/4 miles from the origin. Missiles were projected to 3-4 miles, window glass broken up to 10 miles generally, and in one instance tip to 61 miles."


1 ton = 2000 lbs
1800 x 2000= 360000 lbs

Or if I use a METRIC TON which is probable since it is a british report
1 metric ton = 2204 lbs
1800x 2204= 396000 lbs

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[lummy 4]

Quote

If they want to be badass, be badass. Buy some of the real shit and bring it on in. Apples to apples. Do any of you think we could prevent a well-funded nation-sponsored effort to bring radioactive materials here? I don't.

SO what's your point here JP? That this is nothing but sensationlistic journalism trying to get a rise out of everyone and hope the jump in the night when you yell BOO?

Or that we are in fact screwed if some organization really intends to vaporize a US City and we're powerless to stop them?

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[Deuce 1]

Lummy, there's a physicist right now, somewhere in Russia, who can't feed his family and is in charge of a nuclear power plant.

There's a general in charge of a missile farm in the same quandary.

Both those fellows will sell you what you want so their children won't starve. So they can have a better life.

There's nothing we can do about it. So far as I know we only missed the depleted uranium. If the news crew had been Al-jazeera, maybe they'd have gotten a closer look. These guys work for Disney!

If you see a guy get on the BART train with a little teeny suitcase that weighs 100 pounds, maybe call the cops.

[Deuce 1]

Quote

SO what's your point here JP? That this is nothing but sensationlistic journalism trying to get a rise out of everyone and hope the jump in the night when you yell BOO?

Or that we are in fact screwed if some organization really intends to vaporize a US City and we're powerless to stop them

Correct on both points.

Lets say I'm looking for a gun. You cruise up in the lummy wagon with the lil-lummies and skye and I just kind of wave you through. You jump out of the wagon on the other side and say "HA! I had a pistol hidden under the seat!"

I yawn and say " So put it back and move along, citizen"

"But I could have shot you!" "Yeah. Have a nice evening sir".

But I profile. The folks who dress and act like gangsters get the gangster treatment.

Why would we take time and resources to tear down and "American Broadcasting Company" news crew?

You can't tear down everybody, so you stick to the likelies.

Do you think and ABC news crew could bring a loaded AK47 into Disneyland with thousands of rounds of ammo? You bet! Why don't they? Cause that's who they work for.

[PhillyKev 0]

I agree with you regarding sensationalistic journalism, and no matter what, we can't catch everything. But did you read the article? They shipped it from Jakarta through an independant shipping company. They weren't transporting it in a news van. They sent it from one of the largest terrorist havens we know of.

I agree that we can't stop everything, and it's not suprising that this shipment got through undetected, or that legitimate threats could also get through. But the gov't doesn't seem to be saying that. They're saying that they're fixing the problems, and that we're going to be safe, and that we can win a war on terror. These things are all untrue and designed to make people feel good and safe, so that they feel good about the administration, so that they get re-elected.

People are always asking, what would you do differently. Possibly not too much. I'm sure the administration is doing what they truly believe is the best thing to do. But lying to us about the results of their efforts is despicable and serves no one but themselves.