Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24
  1. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #1  
    2,500 detonators, 661 pounds of plutonium, and 400 pounds of explosive material. Kinda reminds of that Anthrax thing. The Pu story maybe nothing more than clerical error, but it is disturbing.

    Plutonium Story
    Source: UPI

    Plutonium missing from Los Alamos
    LOS ALAMOS, N.M., Nov. 30 (UPI) -- Some 661 pounds of plutonium is unaccounted for and may be missing from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, an activist group says.

    There is no evidence the plutonium -- enough to make dozens of nuclear bombs -- was stolen or diverted, the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research said.

    The Takoma Park, Md., institute said its report used documents from 1996 to 2004 to reach its conclusions, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

    "The University (of California) obviously has a responsibility in this," said report co-author Arjun Makhijani. "It should be a grave embarrassment for the university to be sitting on numbers like this and discrepancies like this, and not have resolved them."

    A university spokesman said the lab tracks plutonium "to a minute quantity."
    Detonators and Explosives story
    Source: ABC News

    Federal Investigators Probe High-Tech Explosives Theft About 400 Pounds of Explosive Material Missing

    Dec. 19, 2005 Officials are investigating the theft of 400 pounds of high-powered plastic explosives in New Mexico. The material was stolen from a bunker owned by a bomb expert who works at a national research lab outside Albuquerque.

    ABC News has been told it's one of the most significant thefts of high-power explosives ever in the United States.

    Agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives confirmed today they are investigating the large theft from Cherry Engineering, a company owned by Chris Cherry, a scientist at Sandia National Labs.

    The theft was discovered Sunday night by local authorities. The thieves used blowtorches to cut through thick steel walls at the bunker, authorities told ABC News.

    The missing 400 pounds of explosives includes 150 pounds of what is known as C-4 plastic, or "sheet explosive," which can be shaped and molded and is often used by terrorists and military operatives.


    "It is a very dangerous material, we want to keep this off the streets," Cherry told ABC News.

    Also, 2,500 detonators were missing from a storage explosive container, or magazine, in a bunker owned by Cherry Engineering.

    -snip-
  2. #2  
    Too late so I haven't read the whole articles yet....but just read the quotes.....Holy crap does come to mind.

    They have found AQ plans and blueprints to build Nukes. In one of the plans they found in Afg, if memory serves correctly, called for getting all the materials from within the States to build it vs trying to smuggle it in. The same doc (or another found righat around the same time) went on with other scenarios of having AQ become employees at various types of plants, like Natural Gas and Chemical plants, to sabatoge it explode and spread the chems ect....

    Whether this pans out to be all accounted for or not, this is a pretty good wake up call that the threat is still VERY real on our own soil.
  3. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #3  
    Yep, the threat is still real and scary. This should really make people think twice about complaining because some college student was asked about his activities revolving around a book, or about the feds monitoring certain activist groups. Yes, there needs to be oversight, but they need to be able to do the job in a way that protects the freedoms we enjoy.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  4. #4  
    Totally agree, Cardio. I have no problem with the government monitoring communications to which I am a party if it means protecting the security of our country or saving lives. I'm doing nothing wrong, and in most cases, they'd be pretty bored.

    And, seriously, the way those systems works is NOT someone sitting there listening to you. It is all electronic. It is a system that looks for certain keywords and then they are reviewed to determine if it is something of interest or not. It makes sense. It is appropriate given the threat we face.
  5. #5  
    How exactly do you lose 661 pounds of a highly radioactive material???
    I'm back!
  6. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by MikeElmendorf
    Totally agree, Cardio. I have no problem with the government monitoring communications to which I am a party if it means protecting the security of our country or saving lives. I'm doing nothing wrong, and in most cases, they'd be pretty bored.

    And, seriously, the way those systems works is NOT someone sitting there listening to you. It is all electronic. It is a system that looks for certain keywords and then they are reviewed to determine if it is something of interest or not. It makes sense. It is appropriate given the threat we face.
    There should not be random searches without oversight. But that is another thread.
  7. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by jmill72x
    How exactly do you lose 661 pounds of a highly radioactive material???
    That is why I am assuming it is clerical.
  8. #8  
    Even though I find it very funny, to fulfill a personal request from a shy poster, Mods would you be able to please fix the misspelled title of this thread.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    That is why I am assuming it is clerical.
    Let's hope.
    I'm back!
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by HobbesIsReal
    Even though I find it very funny, to fulfill a personal request from a shy poster, Mods would you be able to please fix the misspelled title of this thread.
    I'm back!
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    There should not be random searches without oversight. But that is another thread.
    I don't believe he was not referring to random wiretaps by real people, but the Echolen project.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Yep, the threat is still real and scary. This should really make people think twice about complaining because some college student was asked about his activities revolving around a book, or about the feds monitoring certain activist groups. Yes, there needs to be oversight, but they need to be able to do the job in a way that protects the freedoms we enjoy.
    Yea, he was checking out books on bomb building. Not! Sigh. Besides the fact that one could just obtain the same informtion with a proxy server on the net. But yea, go ahead and flush your liberty down the drain and piddle yourself at the thought of the scary terrorist.
  13. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Yea, he was checking out books on bomb building. Not! Sigh. Besides the fact that one could just obtain the same informtion with a proxy server on the net. But yea, go ahead and flush your liberty down the drain and piddle yourself at the thought of the scary terrorist.
    Oh, quit your bellyaching. This poor student really had his rights trampled did'nt he. My gosh he had to talk to federal agents, the horror of it all. Sigh. (If the story is true)

    Just curios, do you agree with background checks on individuals prior to purchase of a firearm?
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    Oh, quit your bellyaching. This poor student really had his rights trampled did'nt he. My gosh he had to talk to federal agents, the horror of it all. Sigh. (If the story is true)

    Just curios, do you agree with background checks on individuals prior to purchase of a firearm?
    Sure, is a firearm the same as knowledge?
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Sure, is a firearm the same as knowledge?
    In the (in)appropriate hands, each can be deadly.
  16. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
       #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    In the (in)appropriate hands, each can be deadly.
    So can a spork!


  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    In the (in)appropriate hands, each can be deadly.
    As a person wanting to kill, knowing how to use a firearm and not having one is not lethal.

    When we start saying knowledge is dangerous, oh, what a slippery slope we're into then.
  18. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Sure, is a firearm the same as knowledge?
    A firearm in and of itself is no more dangerous than a book. The issue lies in what your intention is with the firearm or the information in the book. So a background check on purchase of a firearm is a reasonable sacrifice to protect the freedom to purchase and own a firearm, and a check on the individual requesting a book that is identified on a watch list is also a reasonable sacrifice to protect the freedom to study other forms of gov't or ideology.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  19. cardio's Avatar
    Posts
    779 Posts
    Global Posts
    787 Global Posts
    #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    As a person wanting to kill, knowing how to use a firearm and not having one is not lethal.

    When we start saying knowledge is dangerous, oh, what a slippery slope we're into then.
    What about the person who just wants to shoot clay pigeons. They still go through the same background check.
    "If It Weren't For The United States Military"
    "There Would Be NO United States of America"
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by cardio
    What about the person who just wants to shoot clay pigeons. They still go through the same background check.
    Seems a bit tangential eh?
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions