It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Did Israel Use A Radioactive Bunker Blaster in Lebanon?

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 04:23 PM

Israel Detonated a Radioactive Bunker Buster Bomb in Lebanon
What kind of weapon leaves traces of radiation & produces such lethal & circumscribed consequences?

Global Research, November 11, 2006
RAI News (translated from the ItaIian) - 2006-11-09


By Flaviano Masella, Angelo Saso, Maurizio Torrealta

The special report was triggered by the radioactivity measurements reported on a crater probably created by an Israeli Bunker Buster bomb in the village of Khiam, in southern Lebanon. The measurements were carried out by two Lebanese professors of physics - Mohammad Ali Kubaissi and Ibrahim Rachidi. The data - 700 nanosieverts per hour – showed remarkably higher radiocativity then the average in the area (Beirut = 35 nSv/hr ). Successivamente, on September 17th, Ali Kubaissi took British researcher Dai Williams, from the environmentalist organization Green Audit, to the same site, to take samples that were then submitted to Chris Busby, technical adisor of the Supervisory Committee on Depleted Uranium, which reports to the British Ministry of Defense. The samples were tested by Harwell’s nuclear laboratory, one of the most authoritative research centers in the world. On October 17th, Harwell disclosed the testing results - two samples in 10 did contain radioactivity." target="_blank" class="postlink">Did they?

If Israel indeed did this, then there should be some examination of Israel's true motives.

[edit on 15-11-2006 by SpeakerofTruth]

posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 04:34 PM
The UN claims that Israel did not in their investigation. A Euro based analysis said otherwise, that traces of enriched uranium was found at one crater. Perhaps a test of effectiveness to prepare for Iran. They will need to dig deep if they want to hit the bunkers


posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 04:49 PM
Before someone else mentions it, there is a slim possibility that there was a WMD or components for making a WMD at the target location...

I don't really buy that, but it is a possibility.

I'd be more inclined to believe that Irael did, in fact, use the conflict to test out some of their new "toys".

posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 06:08 PM
Well, we already know that Israel's military has been funded by the U.S for quite sometime. I am not making the accusation that Israel is another arm of America's empire, but I do think they probably have some of the same weaponry as we do. Back in the 90s it was rumored that America had given Israel a "secret" weapon. What that weapon was I have not a clue.

posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 06:13 PM
Questions: what does Israel do with waste generated from its nuclear program? Is this waste finding its way into munitions etc around the world? why is Israel's nuclear program still hidden from international?

posted on Nov, 15 2006 @ 06:20 PM

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
Questions: what does Israel do with waste generated from its nuclear program? Is this waste finding its way into munitions etc around the world? why is Israel's nuclear program still hidden from international?

Well,that's the thing..... "officially" Israel is not a nuclear power... So, as fara s we all know, Israel has no nuclear waste to get rid of.

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 08:32 AM
Two samples out of 10 is not clear evidence of a nuclear device...or weapon being used.

If you had a weapon it would be 8 to 10 out of ten. No mistaking it.

This article is bottom feeding...sensationalism of the textbook type.

A nuclear weapon would leave a definite discernable fingerprint...not 2 out of 10 samples.
Skilled peoples in the nuclear field could even break down the elements into the type of material used...the very nuclear elements and their percentage of composition. YOu do not see this information posted in these articles.

There are more items in daily use which give off radiation than most people are even aware.....from smoke detectors to other devices.

You people need to be more savy than this.


posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 11:43 AM
wouldn't this level of radiation be similar to the amount used by depleted uranium munitions. if so so what lots of countries use depleted uranium munitions.
on the subject of them getting secret weapons from us. i under stand they funded the thel laser system.

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 12:19 PM
Good point in your post. However ..once again you do not see any clear evidence ..just reports of samples being taken. There should be some indication of what the material is..a breakdown ..percentages...the composition of the material in its various elements. None of this is given...we are to trust in experts.

What you begin to realize by the absence of information is that this is a political article..for emotional put people on the emotional string. To use a emotionally jerk people off....public masterbation. This is a common technique of politicians. How to put people easily frightened on the emotional string for thier political purposes.

This is what I meant by people should be more savy than this. Sooner or later you tire of this technique when you have seen enough of it. However some people never tire of is their bailywick. They cannot think further than this provincial emotional box.

Depleated uranium too can be broken down into its component parts, percentages etc etc.

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 12:28 PM
I forgot to add in my last post...Look at the title of this thead ..Nuclear Bunker Blaster.

This is substantially more than depleted uranium.

I have been around these CWIS machine guns on Navy Ships which fire the depleted uranium ammunition. I have also been around the lockers where they store this ammunition. I know what the levels are around this ammo.

I have also been in reactors..I know what the levels are under operation and when shut down.

Something else you need to know about radiation in a particular area. Natural background radiation levels of any given area..are not constant. This is not a knowlege the average person would ever be wont to know. People in the buisness keep records and daily take new levels in the same area. They know this varys from day to day. This fact is not explained in the article.

They give you a figure which I understand to be the average in this area of Beruit.

35 nSv/hr. I did not see what the actual reading was of the material measured. Only that it was "remarkably higher." What exactly constitutes remarkably higher. Professionals know this and would ask for a figure. Politicians are wont to use the scare technique for their purposes and leave this information vague.

Just some additional information for your consideration.


top topics


log in