It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
www.thisislondon.com...
One of the most senior figures in the al Qa'eda terror group has pledged that 2004 will be a year of attacks on America.
We have several people tracking down details. Some of the possibilities are, at least alarming. There are two indications that we've discovered that deserve deeper digging. Yeah, rheocrete is not someone's top choice for bomb-making. But using for a giant pipe-bomb in the missing tanker truck is a real possibility given the advice of two chemists we've contacted (preliminary info, more coming later). The big factor is in what form was the stolen rheocrete? Second, one PhD chemist we've contacted has suggested that an explosion with rheocrete may produce a "sticky cloud" which would be perfect for a dirty bomb. Again, this is preliminary, we need to confirm with other experts, and we're continuing to dig deeper. Now, you're right. Even if all this is combined, the resulting ka-bomb and radiation is nothing to hoard Potassium Iodide over. But, the right explosion in the right place could cause havoc, even with few casualties. Port Elizabeth (in New Jersey) is a massively active seaport on which most of the north east U.S. relies. Disabling this seaport would be catastrophic, and a cloud of radioactive dust just might be enough to do it. Most of the country never saw the local news reports here about the horrible security in the numerous chemical plants and storage facilities throughout New Jersey. The features were on local news just about a year ago, and it seems as nothing much as been done.
Originally posted by HowardRoark Finally, as it has been pointed out, even if you were to make a �dirty� bomb, It would still be difficult to significantly impact a large area. Granted the economic and psychological blow would be big, but the environmental damage could be easily managed.
Originally posted by Valhall
Note that the report on this stuff stated 3000 POUNDS.
. . . So we are left with deducing that this was "drymix" (which is basically calcium nitrite).
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Originally posted by Valhall
Note that the report on this stuff stated 3000 POUNDS.
. . . So we are left with deducing that this was "drymix" (which is basically calcium nitrite).
- Where did you get the data for 3000 lbs? When I checked the source of the news, it clearly states 3300 gallons.
- When I checked the source for the MSDS, it clearly states that the product is sold in liquid form, either in containers or bulk delivery. If the product is sold as a "drymix" as you claim, then it will need a MSDS sheet for that particular product.
Well, I would say that it has been changed. For PETE SAKE! That makes a lot of difference, because the liquid is pretty much about as hazardous as water unless you can "nitrate" it.
(and I'm not going to argue the dry versus liquid - if it couldn't be in dry form the MSDS wouldn't talk about it) BUT my comments were based on the POUNDS - now the pounds are gone!!! piffle.
Well, if that's the case, then the New York news channel is full of horse-hockey.
Originally posted by Valhall
Well, if that's the case, then the New York news channel is full of horse-hockey.