- Joined
- Sep 30, 2005
- Messages
- 18,264
- Reaction score
- 6,649
- Location
- Utah
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
The ABC network did a test at most, if not all, of the security at research nuclear facilities at colleges across the nation. Their people were able to walk in to the buildings unchallenged nearly all the time. Female journalists got in easier since most of the students at the nukes are young horny males.
Many times, they were able to get right up to the open tops of "pool" reactors while carrying bags or backpacks. They could have dropped a bomb in the reactors easily enough, creating a "dirty bomb" situation.
That IS bad, but the narrator kept repeating the same thing over and over again that is misleading. He kept telling us how much in kilograms each facility has, and then telling us how much it takes to make a nuclear bomb.
He was trying to make the public think that terrorists can go in, steal the "highly enriched weapons grade uranium" and go make a nuclear bomb.
Fact is, once fuel has been "lit off" the first time, it becomes so radioactive that removing it from the water is fatal to the persons doing it, and fatal to anyone coming near it until it somehow gets into a special shipping cask that is so big and heavy that it takes a tractor-trailer rig to haul the cask. The only fuel that can be safely handled is new fuel. So the facilities making fuel grade Uranium are a bigger security risk.
Granted, their point about security was valid, and the dirty bomb scenario is valid, altho it would only possible at the colleges only, but to suggest that a nuclear bomb can be made is media bias at its worst.
Many times, they were able to get right up to the open tops of "pool" reactors while carrying bags or backpacks. They could have dropped a bomb in the reactors easily enough, creating a "dirty bomb" situation.
That IS bad, but the narrator kept repeating the same thing over and over again that is misleading. He kept telling us how much in kilograms each facility has, and then telling us how much it takes to make a nuclear bomb.
He was trying to make the public think that terrorists can go in, steal the "highly enriched weapons grade uranium" and go make a nuclear bomb.
Fact is, once fuel has been "lit off" the first time, it becomes so radioactive that removing it from the water is fatal to the persons doing it, and fatal to anyone coming near it until it somehow gets into a special shipping cask that is so big and heavy that it takes a tractor-trailer rig to haul the cask. The only fuel that can be safely handled is new fuel. So the facilities making fuel grade Uranium are a bigger security risk.
Granted, their point about security was valid, and the dirty bomb scenario is valid, altho it would only possible at the colleges only, but to suggest that a nuclear bomb can be made is media bias at its worst.