 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| Next: The Dirty Bomb? By Antonio C. Abaya Written Nov. 16, 2004 For the Philippines Free Press, November 27 issue In my article �War on Terrorism� (Sept. 21), I had written that �More worrisome, in my opinion, would be the so-called dirty bomb or radiological bomb, which anyone with a background in engineering or chemistry can put together in his garage, provided he has some radioactive material�.. �A dirty bomb is an ordinary explosive device using ordinary dynamite or gunpowder but buried under layers of fluffy material like talcum powder that has been mixed with radioactive material. When the bomb is detonated, the irradiated talcum powder is blown sky high into the air and is spread by prevailing winds over a wide area �The Chernobyl nuclear reactor accident in the Ukraine in 1986 was a chemical, not a nuclear, explosion, said to have been caused by an accumulation of hydrogen gas somewhere which got ignited. The chemical explosion blasted a hole through the reactor wall, allowing radioactivity to escape into the air with the resultant smoke and dust, which reached as far away as France and the Arctic Circle in Finland. Chernobyl was an accidental �dirty bomb.� �A dirty bomb will not kill many people but the panic and hysteria from fears of radiation sickness will stampede people out of, say, Manhattan or London, and cause hundreds of heart attacks, suicides and vehicular accidents, and ruin an entire national economy�.� This article, like other articles of mine critical of his idol George W. Bush and the neocons, drew an angry and super-critical response from a Fil-American in California, and the above paragraphs in particular elicited his badgering critique: �I am not going to accept your word for it, because you have no established reputation for being an expert and authority on the subject of radioactivity. Yet you write about it as if it is a matter of factly common knowledge that you need lead to prevent radioactivity exposure�.You are talking way over my head. I don�t know that REAL experts in the business of bomb-making, nuclear physicists, alike will necessarily accept your theoretical explanations, or not��� Etc, etc., and I mean etc., all archived in www.tapatt.org. I can accept differences of opinion on anything and everything, but partisan badgering can become really obnoxious. So this is as good a time as any for me to �confess� that I hold a degree in Chemistry from Northwestern University (Evanston, Illinois) and though I am not an expert on bomb-making or radioactivity, I do understand the science behind them, at least better than someone who obviously slept or was in a trance during Science 101. But don�t take my word for it, that the dirty bomb or radiological bomb is a major problem. Listen to the real experts. In a recent international conference in Sydney on nuclear proliferation, Mohamed El Baradei, chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said that past assumptions on the spread of nuclear materials must be radically revised. He said that his agency had never assumed, until 9/11, that terrorists would deliberately use nuclear or radiological weapons. Now, after 9/11 and the growth of an illicit market in radioactive materials, he said their previous assumptions about nuclear security have been rendered completely out of date. �We need to take preventive measures before a nuclear or radiological emergency. We should not wait to see the kind of situation like 9/11 or Chernobyl. (Emphasis mine.) The danger exists everywhere. It�s real, it�s current and it�s everywhere. We have to cross our fingers that nothing will happen.� For his part, Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said that preventive measures should get greater attention, considering the international outcry that would result from any radiological attack. �There would be a sense of global pandemonium.� Downer said the most likely kind of attack was some kind of radiological �dirty bomb� (emphasis mine) which would contaminate a large area, rather than terrorists building or stealing a nuclear bomb and detonating it. (AFP, PD Inquirer, Nov. 10, 2004.) Messrs. El Baradei and Downer may or may not have been reacting to a recent news item from the former Soviet republic of Kyrgyzstan. The BBC reported on Sept. 28 that police in Kyrgyzstan had arrested two men who were trying to sell a large quantity of plutonium on the black market. �There has been growing concern that radioactive materials from former Soviet military or research sites could fall into the hands of extremists. Plutonium is very toxic and can be used in atomic weapons or as reactor fuel. The highly radioactive material can also be used to make a dirty bomb (emphasis mine) � a non-nuclear explosive which scatters radioactive material packed inside it.� Police said it arrested two Kyrgyz citizens and confiscated 60 small containers containing plutonium-239. Earlier this year, another man was arrested, also in Kyrgyzstan, trying to sell a quantity of cesium-137, another highly radioactive substance. (Yahoo News, Sept 28). My article �War on Terrorism� (Sept. 21) mentioned that, according to an expert cited recently by CNN, there have been at least 18 known thefts of radioactive materials from former Soviet installations. It should be kept in mind that al-Qaeda terrorists usually do not repeat themselves. So it is very unlikely that they will try again to crash airliners against tall buildings, or sink another US warship, or collapse another US embassy with a truck bomb, or shoot down another airliner with heat-seeking, shoulder-fired missiles. My hunch has been and still is that the next Big Bang may be in the form of a dirty bomb, and Messrs El Baradei and Downer seem to think so, too. And the delivery platform may also be something previously untried, such as a truck bomb in the middle of a tunnel, or a merchant ship unloading cargo in a port. ***** CHERNOBYL UPDATE. According to a recent (Nov. 20) BBC news story, Swedish scientists at Linkoeping University believe that of 22,400 reported cases of cancer in northern Sweden from 1988 to 1996, 849 may have been caused by radioactive fall-out from the Chernobyl (emphasis mine) nuclear reactor accident in 1986. ***** Reactions to [email protected]. Other articles in www.tapatt.org. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to �Next: The Dirty Bomb?� Dear Tony, It is possible that another act of terrorism may not involve the use of planes as projectiles but radioactive materials. The reason is quite obvious: transportability. The invasion of Iraq, the continuous and unwavering support for Israel by the Americans, and the ever presence of Americans on holy Muslim sites have incensed the hatred among Muslim countries. In a fight for survival and extinction, each bolo must be matched by a gun, a gun by a bomb! Dr. Nestor P. Baylan, [email protected] New York, November 22, 2004 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, I agree with you on your "dirty bomb" point. Its possibility scares me a lot because I think radioactive materials are not well controlled in various parts of the world--not only in the Soviet Union. As you know, radioactive materials are used not only in connection with bombs. They are also used in positive ways in hospitals, research facilities, etc. Such applications, which involve small amounts of radioactive materials, lead to radioactive waste that is not always handled well. The amount of radioactive materials or waste in positive applications at any one site may be small but it can also harm people, psychologically if not physically. I agree that, with a significant amount of radioactive materials, one does not have to be a nuclear expert to develop a "dirty bomb" and to use it to harm people and our environment. Even in nuclear power plants, the essential technical experts that operate the plants are mechanical, electrical and chemical engineers because problems that lead to radioactive release come from their areas. The most common nuclear power plant problem is SGTR (steam generator tube rupture), a mechanical, not a nuclear, failure. A dirty bomb is a lot less complex than a nuclear power plant so it can work with even less technical expertise than those types of engineering. When a journalist writes or talks about technical issues like this, some people can, indeed, become insulting with their reactions. But you stand on good-enough ground--you're a chemist. And this occasional lady writer stands on good ground, too--a chemical engineer, with doctoral thesis on the design of warning systems for nuclear power plants. I'm not a nuclear physicist, and didn't have to be one to understand well enough how a nuclear power plant works and fails, and to design a warning system for it. (It was funded by the US Electric Power Research Institute, at Stanford University--just in case your obnoxious reader will wonder whether the system is a toy.) We should keep this issue alive. Development and use of a dirty bomb can happen anywhere--even in our midst. We need to be prepared. That requires a warning system, which I can help design, if some people will listen and support the work. My plate is now full with environmental issues to address, so I don't have much time to convince people that our concern is valid and must be given priority attention, nor do I have the time to argue with obnoxious people like that reader of yours. Cora Claudio, [email protected] November 22, 2004 MY REPLY. That obnoxious reader has been removed from our distribution list and any message from him is now automatically deleted without being read. Your technical background is indeed impressive. Has the Arroyo government tapped you for your expertise? wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I have difficulty believing Bin Ladin and his marauders being able to acquire highly sophisticated weapons that no country on earth today has that the USA doesn't have. The reason is I had the opportunity to see reports of my fellow members of the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan to know how crudely the Al Qaeda's live, and not having any big factory of guns or a Nuclear plant as those found in the USA or North Korea, I cannot help wondering why we should continue to lap up US propaganda. I've been to the refugee camps at the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan, etc. but even now, I believe that the Al Qaeda will not be able to really bomb the WTC, or even the USS Cole without some help from the inside, or from someone wanting to cheat his way to power like Dubya, who sounds stupid to me really. But then, what can you expect from some who had an average grade of C in college. I would like to recommend Robert Fisk. His analysis on Al Qaeda is more believable. I thought Filipinos should be more believable as well. No more lapping up of US propaganda! If ever, Bin Ladin's men are capable of making only molotov bombs unless he is able to get ahold of his money freezed by Uncle Sam and buy those sophisticated guns Bush family sells to whoever can pay. See the articles at the http://www.informationclearinghouse.info Yuko Takei, [email protected] Japan, November 22, 2004 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww At 11:55 PM 11/16/2004, you wrote: Next: The Dirty Bomb? ...a truck bomb in the middle of a tunnel... That would sort of defeat the idea of blowing the dirty material sky high, wouldn't it? But who is really behind all this terrorism? Have you seen the 52 min. documentation film, made entirely from live footage of 9-11, but never re-aired again, because it constitutes evidence that somebody else than 20 Arabs did it? Who needs "terrorist" attacks to justify their illegal and immoral wars against defenseless nations? Who needs "terrorist" attacks to justify repressive, nazi-like, domestic security laws, also known as Patriot Acts I, II.. . What is the purpose of all this? Who's hidden hand is really at work here? Would appreciate it if you could let your considerable knowledge and reasoning power work on these crucial questions.. . Peter Ritter, [email protected] November 22, 2004 MY REPLY. Exploding a dirty bomb in a tunnel will not spread the radioactive material sky high, true. But it will spread the radioactivity in a more concentrated, and therefore more lethal, dose near or around ground zero. If detonated in a crowded urban center, the effect could actually be more catastrophic than spreading it over a larger area in a concentration diluted by the wind. I will download the video you sent later and give you my comments. wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Mr. Abaya, The threat of a dirty bomb is VERY real. The BBC recently produced and aired a drama titled "Dirty War" about what a dirty bomb attack in London would be like. Very moving. Regards, Tonton Mapa, [email protected] November 22, 2004 MY REPLY. But my obnoxious reader will not be moved. He will say that neither you nor the BBC has the technical expertise to discuss these things, just as he wrote me that Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer did not have the technical expertise to warn an international forum about the dangers of a dirty bomb. He is in denial that the hard-line policies of his idol George W can possibly lead the Muslims to strike back with such a thing as a dirty bomb, which he does not understand. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO |