originally posted by: mSparks43
a reply to: Bedlam
So you didn't watch it then.
because that's exactly what they did.
Meh, not so much. Again, like a lot of people, not picking on you in particular, you look at things and pick up keywords, and don't actually
about what they're telling you on these things. To give you MY take on your video, and to properly summarize this thing, I took one for
the ATS team so no one else has to donate 30 minutes of their lives to your video.
Pictures of generic rubble. Complaints that it smelled bad. Anecdotes about people saying not to touch things or inhale smoke "to avoid damage".
Unidentified older guy responding to anecdotal statement about radiation, asked to find out "what's going on".
An explosion. Dramatic title graphics. People running around screaming. Other people standing at what is apparently the bomb crater, with no
protective clothing or dust masks. The crater is not particularly large or deep. Damage to reinforced concrete structure is major, but not total. More
complaints about smell. (this seems to be relevant to the documentary guys)
Unidentified older guy now identified as Mohammad Ali Kobeissi, identified as "a physicist from Beirut". He makes a lot of appeals to emotion, but
offers no evidence.
(sidenote: Kobeissi has a "report" that doesn't seem to have been published by a reputable journal, titled "A Study by Gamma-, Alpha- and Mass-
Spectroscopy Measurements of
Uranium Isotopes Activity and Mass Ratios in Dust, Soil and Water Samples Obtained from Craters Produced by Israeli Bombardments on Lebanon during the
JulyAugust Conflict 2006.", which seems more anti-Israeli screed than scholarly paper. However, in that paper, he states "Using a very sensitive
Geiger-Muller counter(GM), I went down to the bottom of that crater. The counter registered doses between 750 and 850 nSV/h (850 nSV per hour) at the
deep point. This dose was 14 times more than the measured dose value of 50 nSV/h I have obtained at the surface area in the surroundings of that
crater.". So, a few days after the blast, he's saying that he reads a whopping 14 times background. In the bottom of the crater. The crater that's
supposedly made by a nuclear weapon. In terms of whether the guy's real or not, I see what may be his PhD thesis but other than that he doesn't seem
to publish except about the evil weapons used in Lebanon. However, even he doesn't seem to call them nuclear bombs, but states that they seem to have
had some component made of natural Uranium. I also looked for MA Qobeissi, as that's a common variant)
Another guy identified as Ibrahim Rashidi, "physics professor Lebanon University". (sidenote: Lebanese University has no listing for him. I find no
papers by him in the scholarly journals I searched. Other than references to this video, I do not see him linked to research at all. Also tried
El-Rashidi and Al-Rashidi, as they're common variants.)
He also quotes the same number that Kobeissi gave: "the immediate radiation up to 800 nanoSieverts per hour". (sidenote: a bit of background here on
radiation levels - 800nSv/hr sounds really scary. If they'd said 800,000 pSv/hr it might have sounded even scarier! The problem is, a nSv/hr is really
pretty pissant. The worldwide average radiation dose from natural background radiation is 2.4mSv/year. Or, 2,400uSv/yr. Or, 2,400,000 nSv/yr. On a
per-hour basis, that's about 274nSv/hr. So this guy's getting all nuclear-bomby for a 4x background count. Just to put it in perspective...)
Kobeissi states "for sure, this comes from Uranium". No proof for this is given. In order to know, you'd have to have a gamma ray spectrometer. THEN
you could tell. If they had that, I'd imagine they'd state it.
Back to Rashidi - "I imagine the warhead is deeper now, therefore we are going to carry out diggings". Note again, he's standing at ground zero with
no protective gear at all. Debate over where the crater actually was. The nuclear bomb crater. Repeated statements about thinking something is hidden
beneath the current location.
Back to Kobeissi. "we measured 300 or 400 uh uh radiation in other craters". Again, note that the average background from natural sources is about 240
The Beirut Daily Star quoted as saying that this is a high concentration of radioactive materials. (It's not.) Kobeissi stating that mysterious forces
are trying to keep him quiet. A person identified as "Day Williams" from "Green Audit", which seems to be an environmental group with all the
believability of, say, CSPI, speaks about revisiting the craters again. Invokes Chris Busby as a reference on his findings. Unlike everyone in the
'documentary' up to this point, Busby actually DOES have a PhD that's relevant, but is one of those people with "controversial discoveries", i.e. few
agree with his statements and he doesn't have a lot of publications of the sort you have to have refereed these days. Busby is shown testing samples
from the craters, which he handles with his bare hands. It is stated that two of the samples measured "higher radioactivity", although they avoid
stating "higher than what", or "how high in relation to, say, a banana". Busby claims that upon analysis, it was found to be enriched uranium,
although the documentary doesn't cite by how much, which would have been interesting to know. Busby states that he thinks it was either the penetrator
part of a bunker buster or as the pyrophoric component of a thermobaric weapon. (the first is a lot more likely, in truth, the US doesn't use uranium
as the pyrophoric part of FAEs.) Busby is puzzled by it seeming to be enriched uranium. It should be noted that there isn't much difference between
the radioactivity of enriched vs depleted uranium.
10:05-11:49 A research group in Beirut claims they found no radiation. The Lebanese government took soil and water samples from the craters. The UN
did as well. No radiation. Another group finds that it contains "slightly enriched uranium". Although again, they don't say how much. (It should be
noted that if it's slight enough, it could fall into the normal variation of natural uranium. It might at that point give you an indication of where
it came from.) Day Williams again states it might be the penetrator part of a bunker buster. The documentarist is trying to confuse this with "nuclear
weapon", or perhaps doesn't understand what is being stated. Busby doesn't want to come down hard on this misconception but does state "if this is
some sort of tactical nuclear weapon, it certainly doesn't operate on the basis of fission", a weasely way of saying 'no'. Busby now states he has
measured the gamma spectrum of the material (finally!) and it shows no fission daughter products, "...so that can be ruled out". (thus obviating it
being a nuclear weapon)