1st we have the circumstances all set to go for the false flag bioterror patsy angle:
Hunting Dangerous Genes, Inbox by Inbox
February 2009
The building blocks for deadly bio-weapons are available by email or online to almost anyone who cares to place an order—and the world has begun to pay attention. "Current government oversight of the DNA-synthesis industry falls short of addressing this unfortunate reality," wrote a group of academics, industry executives, and security experts in a 2007 article, "DNA Synthesis and Biological Security," which appeared in the journal Nature Biotechnology.
Addressing that scary scenario head-on is a group of MITRE experimental and computational biologists developing a method for weeding out dangerous synthetic DNA orders from harmless ones. They call their fledgling process DOTS, short for DNA Order Tracking System. And with the success of an early prototype, they now have set their sights on making DOTS available outside of the laboratory.
Some background: Genetic materials made to order from the basic chemical components of DNA are now routinely manufactured by dozens of companies in the United States and abroad. Anyone can place an email order with these DNA synthesis companies for any combination of genetic base pairs A, T, G, and C and have the order delivered. (Please see "The ABCs of ATGC," on this page.) It's also cheap: costs for DNA synthesis have fallen from $30 per base pair in 1990 to roughly 55 cents per base pair today.
So far, one factor limiting easy abuse of factory-made genetic materials is that no manufacturer has yet been able to make a DNA sequence longer than 35,000 base pairs. Because a virus like Variola major, which causes smallpox, contains 190,000 base pairs of DNA, some feel comfortable that would-be bioterrorists can't readily order such dangerous pathogens.
"Don't be so comfortable," warns John Dileo, experimental biologist and MITRE's lead in the DOTS project. "Small lengths of DNA can be ordered from multiple manufacturers and then stitched together" to make a potentially deadly virus.
MIT's Drew Endy, a leading authority on synthetically engineered pathogens, offered a simpler "genetic hack" to the audience at the 24th Chaos Congress in Berlin in 2007: "You can add key genes to an otherwise harmless but close relative to the virus" and thereby convert it to a virulent pathogen. Dileo, citing a sobering example, reckons that the ultra-deadly genome of the Ebola virus, which is fewer than 19,000 base pairs, would cost a mere $8,500 to manufacture.
Siloed Checks Provide No Safeguard
In 2005, researchers at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in Atlanta, Ga., showed just how easy this process can be. They placed email orders to purchase many different DNA sequences from several manufacturers and then stitched those sequences together, thereby recreating the virus that caused the 1918 flu pandemic that killed 40 million people worldwide. Thankfully, these were the good guys—but what if they weren't?
James Diggans, Dileo's colleague and DOTS co-developer, cites published reports showing that virtually all DNA synthesizers have some kind of screening system in place to "systematically check their orders and ensure that they are not constructing and delivering dangerous DNA sequences." These screening systems, however, are designed to detect orders for large segments (more than 300 base pairs) of DNA from a single vendor. A bad actor ordering smaller segments from multiple vendors for later assembly into an infectious agent would go unnoticed, and it is this shortcoming that the DOTS system addresses.
Though a new industry, DNA synthesis is a burgeoning one. In the U.S. alone, manufacturing requests are on track to top more than 15 million orders a month by 2012, up from 9 million a month just two years ago. Overwhelmingly, the orders are from trusted government, private, and university laboratories that use the synthetic DNA for legitimate research. However, it's an order stream that is not monitored across companies in an industry that's essentially unregulated. As such, the potential for danger by those committed to the covert production of biological weapons remains unaddressed.
A recent survey conducted by the publication New Scientist found wide divergence in industry reaction to overseeing questionable DNA orders. "It's not our job," reported the director of Genemed Synthesis in California. The general manager at Bio Basic in Canada admitted only to spot-checking orders. Conversely, the president of Blue Heron in Bothell, Wash., claims that his company checks every order. And Picoscript of Houston, TX, turned down an email order from a reputable U.S. laboratory when it learned that the order was to be shipped to an unknown third party in a foreign country. For Dileo and Diggans, the lack of uniformity and siloed nature of these companies' policies is insufficient to address the threat posed by the technology.
Developing a Hard-to-Evade System
For three years now, DNA synthesizers' only defense against such orders—other than scrutinizing their own in-boxes—has been freely available software from a West Coast software development company. According to the developer, the software is "designed to identify DNA and protein sequences derived from hazardous biological agents," tracking potential problems by uploading the ordered sequence and matching them against select agents in the National Institutes of Health's GenBank genetic sequence database.
However, "the software can be evaded by breaking select agent sequences into short segments and ordering from a number of synthesis companies allowing intent to fly under the radar," contends MITRE's David Walburger, another of the DOTS researchers. That's where DOTS comes into play, say Dileo and Diggans. They recently co-presented their new order-checking software at a MITRE Lecture Series event on bio-security. They reported that DOTS scrutinizes DNA sequences from both the black list as well as a "grey list," made up of DNA sequences that could be either virulent or harmless depending on how they are used. The system also checks the additional details found in every order, such as buyer information, shipping, and other relevant data. This information becomes the input for specially designed algorithms to calculate a threat score for any one order or collection of orders. DOTS processes and re-processes the orders in the database looking for collections of DNA strings that, if stitched together, could be hazardous.
To date, the DOTS prototype can efficiently process 10,000 orders at a time on a single processor, with each screened order ranging from 20 to 300 base pairs in length. Of course, checking 10,000 orders is a far cry from the 15 million orders a month worldwide expected by 2012. The goal now is to scale up DOTS and move to a computing cluster to meet that demand.
"Based on past experience," notes Dileo, "within the next two or three years some federal agency will be given a national security mandate to be responsible for monitoring and regulating recombinant and synthetic DNA activities." Well in advance of that looming directive, the MITRE DOTS team feels confident that their DNA Order Tracking System will be ready for use by government and industry partners.
Others see danger of a more calculated variety, particularly since the 1918 viral genome was published and can now be recreated by other laboratorians using entirely synthetic materials. Among those questioning the wisdom of the research is Kenneth Alibek, MD, PhD, DSc, former chief scientist and deputy director of bioweapons research in the former Soviet Union.
Born Kanatjan Alibekov in the Soviet Republic of Kazakhstan, Alibek oversaw bioweapons research and development involving such pathogens as smallpox, anthrax, and viral hemorrhagic fevers. Now a U.S. citizen, he changed his name when he defected to the United States in 1992. Weaponizing influenza — particularly the 1918 strain — was discussed by Soviet researchers, says Alibek, now a distinguished professor in the department of molecular and microbiology at the National Center for Biodefense at George Mason University in Washington, DC.
Prior to publication, the 1918 virus research was reviewed by the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, an advisory committee to the U.S. government. Julie Gerberding, MD, MPH, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, issued a joint statement that read in part: “The rationale for publishing the results and making them widely available to the scientific community is to encourage additional research at a time when we desperately need to engage the scientific community and accelerate our ability to prevent pandemic influenza. . . . Moving forward with research conducted by the world’s top scientists and openly disseminating their research results remain our best defense against H5N1 avian influenza virus and other dangerous pathogens that may emerge or re-emerge, naturally or deliberately.”
=======================================================
2nd we have the circumstances all set to go for the false flag nuclear (includes cyber motive as well) patsy angle:
=======================================================
Obama Releases List of Nuclear Sites - These screw-ups happen - Deutch
Fear! We need more Fear!
http://www.groupintel.com/2009/06/03/us-releases-secret-list-of-nuclear-sites-accidentally/
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/03/us/03nuke.html?_r=1&ref=global-home
U.S. Releases Secret List of Nuclear Sites Accidentally
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: June 2, 2009
The federal government mistakenly made public a 266-page report, its pages marked “highly confidential,” that gives detailed information about hundreds of the nation’s civilian nuclear sites and programs, including maps showing the precise locations of stockpiles of fuel for nuclear weapons.
The publication of the document was revealed Monday in an online newsletter devoted to issues of federal secrecy. That set off a debate among nuclear experts about what dangers, if any, the disclosures posed. It also prompted a flurry of investigations in Washington into why the document had been made public.
On Tuesday evening, after inquiries from The New York Times, the document was withdrawn from a Government Printing Office Web site.
Several nuclear experts argued that any dangers from the disclosure were minimal, given that the general outlines of the most sensitive information were already known publicly.
“These screw-ups happen,” said John M. Deutch, a former director of central intelligence and deputy secretary of defense who is now a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “It’s going further than I would have gone but doesn’t look like a serious breach.”
But David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington that tracks nuclear proliferation, said information that shows where nuclear fuels are stored “can provide thieves or terrorists inside information that can help them seize the material, which is why that kind of data is not given out.”
The information, considered confidential but not classified, was assembled for transmission later this year to the International Atomic Energy Agency as part of a process by which the United States is opening itself up to stricter inspections in hopes that foreign countries, especially Iran and others believed to be clandestinely developing nuclear arms, will do likewise.
President Obama sent the document to Congress on May 5 for Congressional review and possible revision, and the Government Printing Office subsequently posted the draft declaration on its Web site.
As of Tuesday evening, the reasons for that action remained a mystery. On its cover, the document referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed. But Lynne Weil, the committee spokeswoman, said the committee had “neither published it nor had control over its publication.”
Gary Somerset, a spokesman for the printing office, said it had “produced” the document “under normal operating procedures” but had now removed it from its Web site pending further review.
The document contains no military information about the nation’s stockpile of nuclear arms, or about the facilities and programs that guard such weapons. Rather, it presents what appears to be an exhaustive listing of the sites that make up the nation’s civilian nuclear complex, which stretches coast to coast and includes nuclear reactors and highly confidential sites at weapon laboratories.
Steven Aftergood, a security expert at the Federation of American Scientists in Washington, revealed the existence of the document on Monday in Secrecy News, an electronic newsletter he publishes on the Web.
Mr. Aftergood expressed bafflement at its disclosure, calling it “a one-stop shop for information on U.S. nuclear programs.”
In his letter of transmittal to Congress, Mr. Obama characterized the information as “sensitive but unclassified” and said all the information that the United States gathered to comply with the advanced protocol “shall be exempt from disclosure” under the Freedom of Information Act.
The report details the locations of hundreds of nuclear sites and activities. Each page is marked across the top “Highly Confidential Safeguards Sensitive” in capital letters, with the exception of pages that detailed additional information like site maps. In his transmittal letter, Mr. Obama said the cautionary language was a classification category of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspectors.
The agency, in Vienna, is a unit of the United Nations whose mandate is to enforce a global treaty that tries to keep civilian nuclear programs from engaging in secret military work.
In recent years, it has sought to gain wide adherence to a set of strict inspection rules, known formally as the additional protocol. The rules give the agency powerful new rights to poke its nose beyond known nuclear sites into factories, storage areas, laboratories and anywhere else that a nation might be preparing to flex its nuclear muscle. The United States signed the agreement in 1998 but only recently moved forward with carrying it out.
The report lists many particulars about nuclear programs and facilities at the nation’s three nuclear weapons laboratories — Los Alamos, Livermore and Sandia — as well as dozens of other federal and private nuclear sites.
One of the most serious disclosures appears to center on the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, which houses the Y-12 National Security Complex, a sprawling site ringed by barbed wire and armed guards. It calls itself the nation’s Fort Knox for highly enriched uranium, a main fuel of nuclear arms.
The report lists “Tube Vault 16, East Storage Array,” as a prospective site for nuclear inspection. It said the site, in Building 9720-5, contains highly enriched uranium for “long-term storage.”
An attached map shows the exact location of Tube Vault 16 along a hallway and its orientation in relation to geographic north, although not its location in the Y-12 complex.
Tube vaults are typically cylinders embedded in concrete that prevent the accidental formation of critical masses of highly enriched uranium that could undergo bursts of nuclear fission, known as a criticality incident. According to federal reports, a typical tube vault can hold up to 44 tons of highly enriched uranium in 200 tubes. Motion detectors and television cameras typically monitor each vault.
Thomas B. Cochran, a senior scientist in the nuclear program of the Natural Resources Defense Council, a private group in Washington that tracks atomic arsenals, called the document harmless. “It’s a better listing than anything I’ve seen” of the nation’s civilian nuclear complex, Mr. Cochran said. “But it’s no national-security breach. It confirms what’s already out there and adds a bit more information.”
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: June 4, 2009
An article on Wednesday about the mistaken release of a report detailing America’s civilian nuclear complex described incorrectly a statement on the document’s cover about its publication. The statement said the document had been “referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed.” It did not directly attribute the report’s publication to the committee.
Others see danger of a more calculated variety, particularly since the 1918 viral genome was published and can now be recreated by other laboratorians using entirely synthetic materials. Among those questioning the wisdom of the research is Kenneth Alibek, MD, PhD, DSc, former chief scientist and deputy director of bioweapons research in the former Soviet Union.
Born Kanatjan Alibekov in the Soviet Republic of Kazakhstan, Alibek oversaw bioweapons research and development involving such pathogens as smallpox, anthrax, and viral hemorrhagic fevers. Now a U.S. citizen, he changed his name when he defected to the United States in 1992. Weaponizing influenza — particularly the 1918 strain — was discussed by Soviet researchers, says Alibek, now a distinguished professor in the department of molecular and microbiology at the National Center for Biodefense at George Mason University in Washington, DC.
Prior to publication, the 1918 virus research was reviewed by the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, an advisory committee to the U.S. government. Julie Gerberding, MD, MPH, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Anthony Fauci, MD, director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, issued a joint statement that read in part: “The rationale for publishing the results and making them widely available to the scientific community is to encourage additional research at a time when we desperately need to engage the scientific community and accelerate our ability to prevent pandemic influenza. . . . Moving forward with research conducted by the world’s top scientists and openly disseminating their research results remain our best defense against H5N1 avian influenza virus and other dangerous pathogens that may emerge or re-emerge, naturally or deliberately.”
2nd we have the circumstances all set to go for the false flag nuclear (includes cyber motive as well) patsy angle:
Obama Releases List of Nuclear Sites - These screw-ups happen - Deutch
Fear! We need more Fear!
http://www.groupintel.com/2009/06/03/us-releases-secret-list-of-nuclear-sites-accidentally/
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/03/us/03nuke.html?_r=1&ref=global-home
U.S. Releases Secret List of Nuclear Sites Accidentally
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: June 2, 2009
The federal government mistakenly made public a 266-page report, its pages marked “highly confidential,” that gives detailed information about hundreds of the nation’s civilian nuclear sites and programs, including maps showing the precise locations of stockpiles of fuel for nuclear weapons.
The publication of the document was revealed Monday in an online newsletter devoted to issues of federal secrecy. That set off a debate among nuclear experts about what dangers, if any, the disclosures posed. It also prompted a flurry of investigations in Washington into why the document had been made public.
On Tuesday evening, after inquiries from The New York Times, the document was withdrawn from a Government Printing Office Web site.
Several nuclear experts argued that any dangers from the disclosure were minimal, given that the general outlines of the most sensitive information were already known publicly.
“These screw-ups happen,” said John M. Deutch, a former director of central intelligence and deputy secretary of defense who is now a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “It’s going further than I would have gone but doesn’t look like a serious breach.”
But David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington that tracks nuclear proliferation, said information that shows where nuclear fuels are stored “can provide thieves or terrorists inside information that can help them seize the material, which is why that kind of data is not given out.”
The information, considered confidential but not classified, was assembled for transmission later this year to the International Atomic Energy Agency as part of a process by which the United States is opening itself up to stricter inspections in hopes that foreign countries, especially Iran and others believed to be clandestinely developing nuclear arms, will do likewise.
President Obama sent the document to Congress on May 5 for Congressional review and possible revision, and the Government Printing Office subsequently posted the draft declaration on its Web site.
As of Tuesday evening, the reasons for that action remained a mystery. On its cover, the document referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed. But Lynne Weil, the committee spokeswoman, said the committee had “neither published it nor had control over its publication.”
Gary Somerset, a spokesman for the printing office, said it had “produced” the document “under normal operating procedures” but had now removed it from its Web site pending further review.
The document contains no military information about the nation’s stockpile of nuclear arms, or about the facilities and programs that guard such weapons. Rather, it presents what appears to be an exhaustive listing of the sites that make up the nation’s civilian nuclear complex, which stretches coast to coast and includes nuclear reactors and highly confidential sites at weapon laboratories.
Steven Aftergood, a security expert at the Federation of American Scientists in Washington, revealed the existence of the document on Monday in Secrecy News, an electronic newsletter he publishes on the Web.
Mr. Aftergood expressed bafflement at its disclosure, calling it “a one-stop shop for information on U.S. nuclear programs.”
In his letter of transmittal to Congress, Mr. Obama characterized the information as “sensitive but unclassified” and said all the information that the United States gathered to comply with the advanced protocol “shall be exempt from disclosure” under the Freedom of Information Act.
The report details the locations of hundreds of nuclear sites and activities. Each page is marked across the top “Highly Confidential Safeguards Sensitive” in capital letters, with the exception of pages that detailed additional information like site maps. In his transmittal letter, Mr. Obama said the cautionary language was a classification category of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspectors.
The agency, in Vienna, is a unit of the United Nations whose mandate is to enforce a global treaty that tries to keep civilian nuclear programs from engaging in secret military work.
In recent years, it has sought to gain wide adherence to a set of strict inspection rules, known formally as the additional protocol. The rules give the agency powerful new rights to poke its nose beyond known nuclear sites into factories, storage areas, laboratories and anywhere else that a nation might be preparing to flex its nuclear muscle. The United States signed the agreement in 1998 but only recently moved forward with carrying it out.
The report lists many particulars about nuclear programs and facilities at the nation’s three nuclear weapons laboratories — Los Alamos, Livermore and Sandia — as well as dozens of other federal and private nuclear sites.
One of the most serious disclosures appears to center on the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, which houses the Y-12 National Security Complex, a sprawling site ringed by barbed wire and armed guards. It calls itself the nation’s Fort Knox for highly enriched uranium, a main fuel of nuclear arms.
The report lists “Tube Vault 16, East Storage Array,” as a prospective site for nuclear inspection. It said the site, in Building 9720-5, contains highly enriched uranium for “long-term storage.”
An attached map shows the exact location of Tube Vault 16 along a hallway and its orientation in relation to geographic north, although not its location in the Y-12 complex.
Tube vaults are typically cylinders embedded in concrete that prevent the accidental formation of critical masses of highly enriched uranium that could undergo bursts of nuclear fission, known as a criticality incident. According to federal reports, a typical tube vault can hold up to 44 tons of highly enriched uranium in 200 tubes. Motion detectors and television cameras typically monitor each vault.
Thomas B. Cochran, a senior scientist in the nuclear program of the Natural Resources Defense Council, a private group in Washington that tracks atomic arsenals, called the document harmless. “It’s a better listing than anything I’ve seen” of the nation’s civilian nuclear complex, Mr. Cochran said. “But it’s no national-security breach. It confirms what’s already out there and adds a bit more information.”
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: June 4, 2009
An article on Wednesday about the mistaken release of a report detailing America’s civilian nuclear complex described incorrectly a statement on the document’s cover about its publication. The statement said the document had been “referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed.” It did not directly attribute the report’s publication to the committee.
http://www.groupintel.com/2009/06/03/us-releases-secret-list-of-nuclear-sites-accidentally/
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/03/us/03nuke.html?_r=1&ref=global-home
U.S. Releases Secret List of Nuclear Sites Accidentally
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: June 2, 2009
The federal government mistakenly made public a 266-page report, its pages marked “highly confidential,” that gives detailed information about hundreds of the nation’s civilian nuclear sites and programs, including maps showing the precise locations of stockpiles of fuel for nuclear weapons.
The publication of the document was revealed Monday in an online newsletter devoted to issues of federal secrecy. That set off a debate among nuclear experts about what dangers, if any, the disclosures posed. It also prompted a flurry of investigations in Washington into why the document had been made public.
On Tuesday evening, after inquiries from The New York Times, the document was withdrawn from a Government Printing Office Web site.
Several nuclear experts argued that any dangers from the disclosure were minimal, given that the general outlines of the most sensitive information were already known publicly.
“These screw-ups happen,” said John M. Deutch, a former director of central intelligence and deputy secretary of defense who is now a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “It’s going further than I would have gone but doesn’t look like a serious breach.”
But David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington that tracks nuclear proliferation, said information that shows where nuclear fuels are stored “can provide thieves or terrorists inside information that can help them seize the material, which is why that kind of data is not given out.”
The information, considered confidential but not classified, was assembled for transmission later this year to the International Atomic Energy Agency as part of a process by which the United States is opening itself up to stricter inspections in hopes that foreign countries, especially Iran and others believed to be clandestinely developing nuclear arms, will do likewise.
President Obama sent the document to Congress on May 5 for Congressional review and possible revision, and the Government Printing Office subsequently posted the draft declaration on its Web site.
As of Tuesday evening, the reasons for that action remained a mystery. On its cover, the document referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed. But Lynne Weil, the committee spokeswoman, said the committee had “neither published it nor had control over its publication.”
Gary Somerset, a spokesman for the printing office, said it had “produced” the document “under normal operating procedures” but had now removed it from its Web site pending further review.
The document contains no military information about the nation’s stockpile of nuclear arms, or about the facilities and programs that guard such weapons. Rather, it presents what appears to be an exhaustive listing of the sites that make up the nation’s civilian nuclear complex, which stretches coast to coast and includes nuclear reactors and highly confidential sites at weapon laboratories.
Steven Aftergood, a security expert at the Federation of American Scientists in Washington, revealed the existence of the document on Monday in Secrecy News, an electronic newsletter he publishes on the Web.
Mr. Aftergood expressed bafflement at its disclosure, calling it “a one-stop shop for information on U.S. nuclear programs.”
In his letter of transmittal to Congress, Mr. Obama characterized the information as “sensitive but unclassified” and said all the information that the United States gathered to comply with the advanced protocol “shall be exempt from disclosure” under the Freedom of Information Act.
The report details the locations of hundreds of nuclear sites and activities. Each page is marked across the top “Highly Confidential Safeguards Sensitive” in capital letters, with the exception of pages that detailed additional information like site maps. In his transmittal letter, Mr. Obama said the cautionary language was a classification category of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspectors.
The agency, in Vienna, is a unit of the United Nations whose mandate is to enforce a global treaty that tries to keep civilian nuclear programs from engaging in secret military work.
In recent years, it has sought to gain wide adherence to a set of strict inspection rules, known formally as the additional protocol. The rules give the agency powerful new rights to poke its nose beyond known nuclear sites into factories, storage areas, laboratories and anywhere else that a nation might be preparing to flex its nuclear muscle. The United States signed the agreement in 1998 but only recently moved forward with carrying it out.
The report lists many particulars about nuclear programs and facilities at the nation’s three nuclear weapons laboratories — Los Alamos, Livermore and Sandia — as well as dozens of other federal and private nuclear sites.
One of the most serious disclosures appears to center on the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, which houses the Y-12 National Security Complex, a sprawling site ringed by barbed wire and armed guards. It calls itself the nation’s Fort Knox for highly enriched uranium, a main fuel of nuclear arms.
The report lists “Tube Vault 16, East Storage Array,” as a prospective site for nuclear inspection. It said the site, in Building 9720-5, contains highly enriched uranium for “long-term storage.”
An attached map shows the exact location of Tube Vault 16 along a hallway and its orientation in relation to geographic north, although not its location in the Y-12 complex.
Tube vaults are typically cylinders embedded in concrete that prevent the accidental formation of critical masses of highly enriched uranium that could undergo bursts of nuclear fission, known as a criticality incident. According to federal reports, a typical tube vault can hold up to 44 tons of highly enriched uranium in 200 tubes. Motion detectors and television cameras typically monitor each vault.
Thomas B. Cochran, a senior scientist in the nuclear program of the Natural Resources Defense Council, a private group in Washington that tracks atomic arsenals, called the document harmless. “It’s a better listing than anything I’ve seen” of the nation’s civilian nuclear complex, Mr. Cochran said. “But it’s no national-security breach. It confirms what’s already out there and adds a bit more information.”
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: June 4, 2009
An article on Wednesday about the mistaken release of a report detailing America’s civilian nuclear complex described incorrectly a statement on the document’s cover about its publication. The statement said the document had been “referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed.” It did not directly attribute the report’s publication to the committee.
3rd we have the circumstances all set to go for the false flag cyberterror/cyberattack patsy angle:
http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=555&pst=1354165
Cyberspies Penetrate U.S. Power Grid, Leave Software That Could Disrupt System April 08, 2009 9:30 AM
The intrusions were not just limited to the electrical power grid, but affected systems like water and sewage.
Cyberspies Penetrate U.S. Power Grid, Leave Software That Could Disrupt System April 08, 2009 9:30 AM
The intrusions were not just limited to the electrical power grid, but affected systems like water and sewage.
INSERT: WATER AND SEWAGE? REALLY? LIKE SHOWN IN THIS RED TEAM DOCUMENT, WHERE SUCH ATTACKS COULD, AND WOULD ONLY BE CARRIED OUT BY ENEMY TRAITORS THAT WORK FOR THE NEW WORLD ORDER. WHAT THE F*CK PART OF ***WE KNOW THAT YOU AHVE BULEPRINTED OUT EVERY ASPECT OF CRITICAL F*CKING INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE UNITED STATES WITH PTECH/PROMIS BASED AGILE SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURES THAT ALLOW YOU TO FALSE FLAG ATTACK THEM ACCORDING TO YOUR CRIMINAL AFCEA ORGANIZATION WHO SPONSORS SYMPOSIUMS FOR JOHN ZACHMAN, THE PROGENITOR/FATHER OF EA. SHUT THE F*CK UP WITH YOUR BULLSHIT INCESSANT LIES! NO ONE IS GOING TO BELIEVE YOU PIECES OF SHIT, YOU ARE THE TERRORISTS!
NWO is going to decapitate IT infrastructure with 2 phase RNA recomb Flu
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=137788.msg835599#msg835599
NWO is going to decapitate IT infrastructure with 2 phase RNA recomb Flu
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=137788.msg835599#msg835599
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
The U.S. has uncovered evidence that cyberspies, most likely from China and Russia, have penetrated the U.S. power grid and left behind software that could be activated to disrupt American infrastructure, FOX News confirmed Wednesday.
The "intrusions," first reported by The Wall Street Journal, have occurred over a period of time, one U.S. official said -- not all at once.
The breaches are "something we're concerned about," a U.S. official told FOX News.
The concern is that any software could be activated at a later date to disrupt critical systems.
2nd we have the circumstances all set to go for the false flag nuclear (includes cyber motive as well) patsy angle:
Obama Releases List of Nuclear Sites - These screw-ups happen - Deutch
Fear! We need more Fear!
http://www.groupintel.com/2009/06/03/us-releases-secret-list-of-nuclear-sites-accidentally/
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/03/us/03nuke.html?_r=1&ref=global-home
U.S. Releases Secret List of Nuclear Sites Accidentally
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: June 2, 2009
The federal government mistakenly made public a 266-page report, its pages marked “highly confidential,” that gives detailed information about hundreds of the nation’s civilian nuclear sites and programs, including maps showing the precise locations of stockpiles of fuel for nuclear weapons.
The publication of the document was revealed Monday in an online newsletter devoted to issues of federal secrecy. That set off a debate among nuclear experts about what dangers, if any, the disclosures posed. It also prompted a flurry of investigations in Washington into why the document had been made public.
On Tuesday evening, after inquiries from The New York Times, the document was withdrawn from a Government Printing Office Web site.
Several nuclear experts argued that any dangers from the disclosure were minimal, given that the general outlines of the most sensitive information were already known publicly.
“These screw-ups happen,” said John M. Deutch, a former director of central intelligence and deputy secretary of defense who is now a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “It’s going further than I would have gone but doesn’t look like a serious breach.”
But David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington that tracks nuclear proliferation, said information that shows where nuclear fuels are stored “can provide thieves or terrorists inside information that can help them seize the material, which is why that kind of data is not given out.”
The information, considered confidential but not classified, was assembled for transmission later this year to the International Atomic Energy Agency as part of a process by which the United States is opening itself up to stricter inspections in hopes that foreign countries, especially Iran and others believed to be clandestinely developing nuclear arms, will do likewise.
President Obama sent the document to Congress on May 5 for Congressional review and possible revision, and the Government Printing Office subsequently posted the draft declaration on its Web site.
As of Tuesday evening, the reasons for that action remained a mystery. On its cover, the document referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed. But Lynne Weil, the committee spokeswoman, said the committee had “neither published it nor had control over its publication.”
Gary Somerset, a spokesman for the printing office, said it had “produced” the document “under normal operating procedures” but had now removed it from its Web site pending further review.
The document contains no military information about the nation’s stockpile of nuclear arms, or about the facilities and programs that guard such weapons. Rather, it presents what appears to be an exhaustive listing of the sites that make up the nation’s civilian nuclear complex, which stretches coast to coast and includes nuclear reactors and highly confidential sites at weapon laboratories.
Steven Aftergood, a security expert at the Federation of American Scientists in Washington, revealed the existence of the document on Monday in Secrecy News, an electronic newsletter he publishes on the Web.
Mr. Aftergood expressed bafflement at its disclosure, calling it “a one-stop shop for information on U.S. nuclear programs.”
In his letter of transmittal to Congress, Mr. Obama characterized the information as “sensitive but unclassified” and said all the information that the United States gathered to comply with the advanced protocol “shall be exempt from disclosure” under the Freedom of Information Act.
The report details the locations of hundreds of nuclear sites and activities. Each page is marked across the top “Highly Confidential Safeguards Sensitive” in capital letters, with the exception of pages that detailed additional information like site maps. In his transmittal letter, Mr. Obama said the cautionary language was a classification category of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspectors.
The agency, in Vienna, is a unit of the United Nations whose mandate is to enforce a global treaty that tries to keep civilian nuclear programs from engaging in secret military work.
In recent years, it has sought to gain wide adherence to a set of strict inspection rules, known formally as the additional protocol. The rules give the agency powerful new rights to poke its nose beyond known nuclear sites into factories, storage areas, laboratories and anywhere else that a nation might be preparing to flex its nuclear muscle. The United States signed the agreement in 1998 but only recently moved forward with carrying it out.
The report lists many particulars about nuclear programs and facilities at the nation’s three nuclear weapons laboratories — Los Alamos, Livermore and Sandia — as well as dozens of other federal and private nuclear sites.
One of the most serious disclosures appears to center on the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, which houses the Y-12 National Security Complex, a sprawling site ringed by barbed wire and armed guards. It calls itself the nation’s Fort Knox for highly enriched uranium, a main fuel of nuclear arms.
The report lists “Tube Vault 16, East Storage Array,” as a prospective site for nuclear inspection. It said the site, in Building 9720-5, contains highly enriched uranium for “long-term storage.”
An attached map shows the exact location of Tube Vault 16 along a hallway and its orientation in relation to geographic north, although not its location in the Y-12 complex.
Tube vaults are typically cylinders embedded in concrete that prevent the accidental formation of critical masses of highly enriched uranium that could undergo bursts of nuclear fission, known as a criticality incident. According to federal reports, a typical tube vault can hold up to 44 tons of highly enriched uranium in 200 tubes. Motion detectors and television cameras typically monitor each vault.
Thomas B. Cochran, a senior scientist in the nuclear program of the Natural Resources Defense Council, a private group in Washington that tracks atomic arsenals, called the document harmless. “It’s a better listing than anything I’ve seen” of the nation’s civilian nuclear complex, Mr. Cochran said. “But it’s no national-security breach. It confirms what’s already out there and adds a bit more information.”
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: June 4, 2009
An article on Wednesday about the mistaken release of a report detailing America’s civilian nuclear complex described incorrectly a statement on the document’s cover about its publication. The statement said the document had been “referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed.” It did not directly attribute the report’s publication to the committee.
http://www.groupintel.com/2009/06/03/us-releases-secret-list-of-nuclear-sites-accidentally/
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/03/us/03nuke.html?_r=1&ref=global-home
U.S. Releases Secret List of Nuclear Sites Accidentally
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: June 2, 2009
The federal government mistakenly made public a 266-page report, its pages marked “highly confidential,” that gives detailed information about hundreds of the nation’s civilian nuclear sites and programs, including maps showing the precise locations of stockpiles of fuel for nuclear weapons.
The publication of the document was revealed Monday in an online newsletter devoted to issues of federal secrecy. That set off a debate among nuclear experts about what dangers, if any, the disclosures posed. It also prompted a flurry of investigations in Washington into why the document had been made public.
On Tuesday evening, after inquiries from The New York Times, the document was withdrawn from a Government Printing Office Web site.
Several nuclear experts argued that any dangers from the disclosure were minimal, given that the general outlines of the most sensitive information were already known publicly.
“These screw-ups happen,” said John M. Deutch, a former director of central intelligence and deputy secretary of defense who is now a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. “It’s going further than I would have gone but doesn’t look like a serious breach.”
But David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security, a private group in Washington that tracks nuclear proliferation, said information that shows where nuclear fuels are stored “can provide thieves or terrorists inside information that can help them seize the material, which is why that kind of data is not given out.”
The information, considered confidential but not classified, was assembled for transmission later this year to the International Atomic Energy Agency as part of a process by which the United States is opening itself up to stricter inspections in hopes that foreign countries, especially Iran and others believed to be clandestinely developing nuclear arms, will do likewise.
President Obama sent the document to Congress on May 5 for Congressional review and possible revision, and the Government Printing Office subsequently posted the draft declaration on its Web site.
As of Tuesday evening, the reasons for that action remained a mystery. On its cover, the document referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed. But Lynne Weil, the committee spokeswoman, said the committee had “neither published it nor had control over its publication.”
Gary Somerset, a spokesman for the printing office, said it had “produced” the document “under normal operating procedures” but had now removed it from its Web site pending further review.
The document contains no military information about the nation’s stockpile of nuclear arms, or about the facilities and programs that guard such weapons. Rather, it presents what appears to be an exhaustive listing of the sites that make up the nation’s civilian nuclear complex, which stretches coast to coast and includes nuclear reactors and highly confidential sites at weapon laboratories.
Steven Aftergood, a security expert at the Federation of American Scientists in Washington, revealed the existence of the document on Monday in Secrecy News, an electronic newsletter he publishes on the Web.
Mr. Aftergood expressed bafflement at its disclosure, calling it “a one-stop shop for information on U.S. nuclear programs.”
In his letter of transmittal to Congress, Mr. Obama characterized the information as “sensitive but unclassified” and said all the information that the United States gathered to comply with the advanced protocol “shall be exempt from disclosure” under the Freedom of Information Act.
The report details the locations of hundreds of nuclear sites and activities. Each page is marked across the top “Highly Confidential Safeguards Sensitive” in capital letters, with the exception of pages that detailed additional information like site maps. In his transmittal letter, Mr. Obama said the cautionary language was a classification category of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspectors.
The agency, in Vienna, is a unit of the United Nations whose mandate is to enforce a global treaty that tries to keep civilian nuclear programs from engaging in secret military work.
In recent years, it has sought to gain wide adherence to a set of strict inspection rules, known formally as the additional protocol. The rules give the agency powerful new rights to poke its nose beyond known nuclear sites into factories, storage areas, laboratories and anywhere else that a nation might be preparing to flex its nuclear muscle. The United States signed the agreement in 1998 but only recently moved forward with carrying it out.
The report lists many particulars about nuclear programs and facilities at the nation’s three nuclear weapons laboratories — Los Alamos, Livermore and Sandia — as well as dozens of other federal and private nuclear sites.
One of the most serious disclosures appears to center on the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee, which houses the Y-12 National Security Complex, a sprawling site ringed by barbed wire and armed guards. It calls itself the nation’s Fort Knox for highly enriched uranium, a main fuel of nuclear arms.
The report lists “Tube Vault 16, East Storage Array,” as a prospective site for nuclear inspection. It said the site, in Building 9720-5, contains highly enriched uranium for “long-term storage.”
An attached map shows the exact location of Tube Vault 16 along a hallway and its orientation in relation to geographic north, although not its location in the Y-12 complex.
Tube vaults are typically cylinders embedded in concrete that prevent the accidental formation of critical masses of highly enriched uranium that could undergo bursts of nuclear fission, known as a criticality incident. According to federal reports, a typical tube vault can hold up to 44 tons of highly enriched uranium in 200 tubes. Motion detectors and television cameras typically monitor each vault.
Thomas B. Cochran, a senior scientist in the nuclear program of the Natural Resources Defense Council, a private group in Washington that tracks atomic arsenals, called the document harmless. “It’s a better listing than anything I’ve seen” of the nation’s civilian nuclear complex, Mr. Cochran said. “But it’s no national-security breach. It confirms what’s already out there and adds a bit more information.”
This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:
Correction: June 4, 2009
An article on Wednesday about the mistaken release of a report detailing America’s civilian nuclear complex described incorrectly a statement on the document’s cover about its publication. The statement said the document had been “referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs and ordered to be printed.” It did not directly attribute the report’s publication to the committee.
3rd we have the circumstances all set to go for the false flag cyberterror/cyberattack patsy angle:
Quote
http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=555&pst=1354165
Cyberspies Penetrate U.S. Power Grid, Leave Software That Could Disrupt System April 08, 2009 9:30 AM
The intrusions were not just limited to the electrical power grid, but affected systems like water and sewage.
Cyberspies Penetrate U.S. Power Grid, Leave Software That Could Disrupt System April 08, 2009 9:30 AM
The intrusions were not just limited to the electrical power grid, but affected systems like water and sewage.
INSERT: WATER AND SEWAGE? REALLY? LIKE SHOWN IN THIS RED TEAM DOCUMENT, WHERE SUCH ATTACKS COULD, AND WOULD ONLY BE CARRIED OUT BY ENEMY TRAITORS THAT WORK FOR THE NEW WORLD ORDER. WHAT THE F*CK PART OF ***WE KNOW THAT YOU AHVE BULEPRINTED OUT EVERY ASPECT OF CRITICAL F*CKING INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE UNITED STATES WITH PTECH/PROMIS BASED AGILE SOFTWARE ARCHITECTURES THAT ALLOW YOU TO FALSE FLAG ATTACK THEM ACCORDING TO YOUR CRIMINAL AFCEA ORGANIZATION WHO SPONSORS SYMPOSIUMS FOR JOHN ZACHMAN, THE PROGENITOR/FATHER OF EA. SHUT THE F*CK UP WITH YOUR BULLSHIT INCESSANT LIES! NO ONE IS GOING TO BELIEVE YOU PIECES OF SHIT, YOU ARE THE TERRORISTS!
NWO is going to decapitate IT infrastructure with 2 phase RNA recomb Flu
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=137788.msg835599#msg835599
Quote
FOXNews.com
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
The U.S. has uncovered evidence that cyberspies, most likely from China and Russia, have penetrated the U.S. power grid and left behind software that could be activated to disrupt American infrastructure, FOX News confirmed Wednesday.
The "intrusions," first reported by The Wall Street Journal, have occurred over a period of time, one U.S. official said -- not all at once.
The breaches are "something we're concerned about," a U.S. official told FOX News.
The concern is that any software could be activated at a later date to disrupt critical systems.
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
The U.S. has uncovered evidence that cyberspies, most likely from China and Russia, have penetrated the U.S. power grid and left behind software that could be activated to disrupt American infrastructure, FOX News confirmed Wednesday.
The "intrusions," first reported by The Wall Street Journal, have occurred over a period of time, one U.S. official said -- not all at once.
The breaches are "something we're concerned about," a U.S. official told FOX News.
The concern is that any software could be activated at a later date to disrupt critical systems.
INSERT: JUST LIKE HOW CRIMINAL ENEMY TERRORIST TRAITOR AMIT YORAN OVERSAW THE CYBER FALSE FLAG BETA TEST AT DHS WITH PTECH USING UNOBTRUSIVE MICROWAVE HACKING TO FORCE THE SCADA COMPONENTS TO MODULATE THE AC SINEWAVE FREQUENCY FAR ENOUGH AWAY FROM 60 HZ SO THAT IT WOULD EXPLODE--THE VIDEO THAT YOU HAD THAT WAS FUOU, BUT YOU SLAPPED WITH THE CLASSIFIED DESIGNATION FOR "NATIONAL SECURITY" BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T WANT ANYONE TO FIGURE OUT THAT THAT WAS A TEST RUN FOR HOW YOU PLAN TO ATTACK U.S. CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE DURING A FALSE FLAG ATTACK THAT YOU WOULD PLAN YEARS LATER TO USE DURING A MANUFACTURED BIOWEAPON FLU.
The intrusions were not just limited to the electrical power grid, but affected systems like water and sewage. The motivation for the breaches is not well understood, and while the electronic trail appears to lead to China and Russia, it is not clear whether these actions were state-sponsored.
The Washington embassies of China and Russia deny involvement.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the espionage appeared pervasive across the country and did not target any particular region or company.
The intrusions were in many cases detected by U.S. intelligence agencies, not the companies, officials told the Journal.
"If we go to war with them, they will try to turn them on," one official told the Journal.
Click here to read the story in The Wall Street Journal.
FOX News' Catherine Herridge and Mike Levine contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/08/cyberspies-penetrate-power-grid-leave-software-disrupt/
The Washington embassies of China and Russia deny involvement.
According to The Wall Street Journal, the espionage appeared pervasive across the country and did not target any particular region or company.
The intrusions were in many cases detected by U.S. intelligence agencies, not the companies, officials told the Journal.
"If we go to war with them, they will try to turn them on," one official told the Journal.
Click here to read the story in The Wall Street Journal.
FOX News' Catherine Herridge and Mike Levine contributed to this report.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/08/cyberspies-penetrate-power-grid-leave-software-disrupt/
I almost forgot: the radiological angle that their Agile software methodology calculated for them, BUT FAILED--because someone who was not being observed within their OODA loop of this planned FALSE FLAG, DISRUPTED IT AND DESTROYED IT ENTIRELY BY DESTROYING THE PATSY BEFORE HE COULD ACT.
American Nazi slain by wife/FBI finds nuke dirty bomb parts and depleted uranium
American Nazi slain by wife/FBI finds nuke dirty bomb parts and depleted uranium
Cummings had violent history
http://www.bangornews.com/detail/99358.html
By Abigail Curtis 2/12/09
BELFAST, Maine - James G. Cummings II was known as "kind of a violent dude" back home in Fort Bragg, Calif., according to Lt. Rusty Noe of the Mendocino County Sheriff's Office.
"He was involved in several assault cases," Noe said in a telephone interview Wednesday evening. "He was a victim in some, a suspect in others, most of them involving family."
But despite the 16 contacts the sheriff's office had with him in the late 1990s, Noe sounded surprised to learn of recent allegations that Cummings was a white supremacist with a cache of radioactive materials and directions for building a dirty bomb in his Belfast home. [Profile of a patsy, look into connections with this guy and government agencies. He could be one of the "Homegrown" patsies that they have available. Look how everyone is completely quiet about this one.]
"The guys say they never knew him to be a Neo-Nazi type," Noe said. "He seemed like he was a kind of angry dude that argued with the family."
Police say that Cummings was shot to death by his wife, Amber B. Cummings, two months ago, in what they have described as a domestic violence homicide. He had no criminal history in Maine.
There was even less information readily available about Amber Cummings, whose maiden name may have been Brown. Cummings didn't answer the phone at her Belfast home Wednesday afternoon.
It wasn't clear Wednesday why the Cummingses moved to their home at 346 High Street in Belfast.
There are three vehicles registered to the couple with the office of the Maine Secretary of State: a 2000 Jeep Wrangler, a 1999 Dodge Durango and a 1998 motor home.
All in all, a modest lifestyle for a man who came from a California family as wealthy as it was troubled. His father, James G. Cummings Sr., made a fortune in real estate and was a well-known local philanthropist before being shot to death at his home in 1997, according to newspaper accounts.
Just months before his father's death, when James G. Cummings II was 17, he made the national news - including Oprah - when he and his father allegedly conspired to secretly videotape his mother in the act of using hard drugs, according to the archives of the Anderson Valley Advertiser.
"The national media swooped down on Fort Bragg, and there was a 24-hour cacophony about kids spying on parents," wrote Bruce Anderson in a 2002 story. "[They] were long gone by the time it was found that Mom had been brewing up popcorn balls for the kids, not black tar heroin."
Mark Scaramella, the managing editor of the paper, said Wednesday that Cummings and his sister, Kathryn, sued to get more of their father's estate in the early 2000s.
It isn't clear how much they inherited, but the father's trust fund reportedly earns an estimated annual income of $10 million.
When asked about a neo-Nazi presence in Fort Bragg, Scaramella chuckled.
"There are some red-necky sorts of skinheady people," he said. "I don't think they read enough to be neo-Nazis."
http://www.bangornews.com/detail/99358.html
By Abigail Curtis 2/12/09
BELFAST, Maine - James G. Cummings II was known as "kind of a violent dude" back home in Fort Bragg, Calif., according to Lt. Rusty Noe of the Mendocino County Sheriff's Office.
"He was involved in several assault cases," Noe said in a telephone interview Wednesday evening. "He was a victim in some, a suspect in others, most of them involving family."
But despite the 16 contacts the sheriff's office had with him in the late 1990s, Noe sounded surprised to learn of recent allegations that Cummings was a white supremacist with a cache of radioactive materials and directions for building a dirty bomb in his Belfast home. [Profile of a patsy, look into connections with this guy and government agencies. He could be one of the "Homegrown" patsies that they have available. Look how everyone is completely quiet about this one.]
"The guys say they never knew him to be a Neo-Nazi type," Noe said. "He seemed like he was a kind of angry dude that argued with the family."
Police say that Cummings was shot to death by his wife, Amber B. Cummings, two months ago, in what they have described as a domestic violence homicide. He had no criminal history in Maine.
There was even less information readily available about Amber Cummings, whose maiden name may have been Brown. Cummings didn't answer the phone at her Belfast home Wednesday afternoon.
It wasn't clear Wednesday why the Cummingses moved to their home at 346 High Street in Belfast.
There are three vehicles registered to the couple with the office of the Maine Secretary of State: a 2000 Jeep Wrangler, a 1999 Dodge Durango and a 1998 motor home.
All in all, a modest lifestyle for a man who came from a California family as wealthy as it was troubled. His father, James G. Cummings Sr., made a fortune in real estate and was a well-known local philanthropist before being shot to death at his home in 1997, according to newspaper accounts.
Just months before his father's death, when James G. Cummings II was 17, he made the national news - including Oprah - when he and his father allegedly conspired to secretly videotape his mother in the act of using hard drugs, according to the archives of the Anderson Valley Advertiser.
"The national media swooped down on Fort Bragg, and there was a 24-hour cacophony about kids spying on parents," wrote Bruce Anderson in a 2002 story. "[They] were long gone by the time it was found that Mom had been brewing up popcorn balls for the kids, not black tar heroin."
Mark Scaramella, the managing editor of the paper, said Wednesday that Cummings and his sister, Kathryn, sued to get more of their father's estate in the early 2000s.
It isn't clear how much they inherited, but the father's trust fund reportedly earns an estimated annual income of $10 million.
When asked about a neo-Nazi presence in Fort Bragg, Scaramella chuckled.
"There are some red-necky sorts of skinheady people," he said. "I don't think they read enough to be neo-Nazis."
http://www.bangordailynews.com/external/cummings/dc-sec-08-0116.pdf
Maine Man Tries to Build Dirty Bomb, No One Cares
http://jonathanstray.com/maine-man-tries-to-build-dirty-bomb
Published by admin at 3:19 pm. Tags: media, politics, terrorism
A leaked FBI report states that a man named James G. Cummings was trying to build a dirty bomb when he was shot and and killed by his wife last December 9th in Belfast, Maine. He had plans, parts, explosive ingredients, and small quantities of radioactive material, though nothing that could not be purchased legally within the US. Cummings was a white supremacist who was reportedly very upset about Obama’s election.
The leaked document has been posted on Wikileaks since January 16th. While the material concerning Cummins was first noticed by the rumor site Unattributable.com on January 19th, only yesterday was there any sort of story about it in the mainstream media, in this case the local Bangor Daily News.
Although this dastardly plot was probably not much more dangerous to the public than a garden-variety bomb, this man would certainly qualify as a bona fide “terrorist” under Bush-regime logic. Or at least he would if he was Arab. In point of fact, he actually is a threat to the public, or was. So why haven’t we heard about it? Are crazy white supremacists somehow less of a threat than crazy fundamentalist muslims?
The FBI report notes:
State authorities detected radiation emissions in four small jars in the residence labeled ‘uranium metal’, as well as one jar labeled ‘thorium.’ The four jars of uranium carried the label of an identified US company. Further preliminary analysis on 30 December 2008 indicated an unlabeled jar to be a second jar of thorium. Each bottle of uranium contained depleted uranium 238. Analysis also indicated the two jars of thorium held thorium 232.
Depleted uranium (DU), the by-product of uranium enrichment for use in nuclear power plants or weapons, is not terribly radioactive and is reportedly not very suitable for use in a dirty bomb. Thorium is similarly weakly radioactive, and can be purchased legally through chemical supply companies (such as Fisher Scientific). Dispersal of these isotopes wouldn’t exactly be healthy — they’re both considered carcinogens, and DU has been well documented to cause birth defects, which is why the US and Israeli armies really shouldn’t be spraying foreign countries with DU bullets. However, a depleted uranium/thorium bomb couldn’t really be considered a weapon of mass destruction.
Still, the man was on his way to building some sort of upsetting bomb. Aside from the nastyness of bombings of any sort, I am quite sure the headlines screaming “radioactivity” wouldn’t bother with the scientific subtleties I just covered. I for one am glad that the FBI finally clued in — though only because these materials were found after Cummins was shot and killed by his wife, who claimed she was defending herself after years of physical and sexual abuse.
This is all very strange, and I am left with questions.
1. Given this foiled plot, the sadly succesful Oklahoma City bombing of 1995, and other deranged loners such as the Unabomber, what is the actual risk to the public from foreign jihadists versus homegrown wackjobs, of which there are apparently plenty? [UPDATE: See also the Texas militia with a sodium cyanide bomb in 2003]
2. Do the DHS and the FBI know the true answer to this question? Are they allocating their resources appropriately? How come we only found out about this plot accidentally?
3. Again, the mainstream media still haven’t touched the story. Would this have been an instant headline if the guy was muslim?
4. If domestic terrorists don’t count, why not? Is it because they’re useless in justifying foreign wars? Or is mostly ignoring them the right response, implying that we are far too jumpy about terrorism in general?
5. This is completely ridiculous in so many ways. When do we, as a culture, decide to think rationally about terrorism?
And what would a rational approach be to terrorism be? I suggest public health as a model, which would doubtless show that if saving lives and property is the aim, we are wasting our time and money with “terrorism” as compared to, oh, I don’t know, obesity, car accidents, and global climate change.
OH WOW, LOOK WE ALSO HAVE A SMALL EXAMPLE OF THE EXPLOSIVE PATSY ANGLE COVERED.
I haven't checked on updates to that stuff, I pointed you to it because of this link in there: SEPTEMBER 11th SPECIAL - URANIUM GETS THROUGH THE HOMELAND SECURITY, IN L.A. HARBOR!
Meanwhile, get a load of this, in contrast to your OP main story:
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YpsPxAoyYs
Meanwhile, get a load of this, in contrast to your OP main story:
Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YpsPxAoyYs
4 Tons of Fertilizer Stolen In Frederick Maryland
http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2009/03/02/4-tons-of-fertilizer-stolen-in-frederick-maryland/
Submitted by national on Monday, 2 March 2009
UPDATE: The Frederick Police Department says they have surveillance tape of the theft and believe a white man between the ages of 45 and 50 may be the suspect.
Investigators believe the theft occurred on Sunday afternoon.
The contents of the fertilizer have the police concerned that it could be used for making a bomb.
The thief stole two types of fertilizer: Triple 19 and Urea. Police say the Urea is more dangerous of the two because it contains hydrogen.
“We want to make sure that we covered all bases. We want to make sure that the Frederick community understands that we are following through as far as we can possible go with FBI and other agencies,” said Lt. Clark Pennington with the Frederick Police Department.
Frederick police say four tons of fertilizer have been stolen from a farm supply store.
A store representative told police that 2,000 pounds of urea and 6,000 pounds of other fertilizer are missing. The fertilizer was in white 50-pound bags with a company logo.
Lt. Clark Pennington says they don’t know what the motive behind the theft is, but they have notified the Maryland Coordination Analysis Center, which alerts all federal agencies of the theft.
_____________________________________________________________
LMFAO? They can ignore Radioactive materials for a real dirty b0mb, but go balls out insane over fertilizer? HAHAHAHAHAHA WTF!? Hey, FBI, if you're reading this, why not give me a job? LOL I can do a better job investigating than you guys! I actually catch REAL terrorists! And you wouldn't get away trying to carry out false flags on my watch!
http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2009/03/02/4-tons-of-fertilizer-stolen-in-frederick-maryland/
Submitted by national on Monday, 2 March 2009
UPDATE: The Frederick Police Department says they have surveillance tape of the theft and believe a white man between the ages of 45 and 50 may be the suspect.
Investigators believe the theft occurred on Sunday afternoon.
The contents of the fertilizer have the police concerned that it could be used for making a bomb.
The thief stole two types of fertilizer: Triple 19 and Urea. Police say the Urea is more dangerous of the two because it contains hydrogen.
“We want to make sure that we covered all bases. We want to make sure that the Frederick community understands that we are following through as far as we can possible go with FBI and other agencies,” said Lt. Clark Pennington with the Frederick Police Department.
Frederick police say four tons of fertilizer have been stolen from a farm supply store.
A store representative told police that 2,000 pounds of urea and 6,000 pounds of other fertilizer are missing. The fertilizer was in white 50-pound bags with a company logo.
Lt. Clark Pennington says they don’t know what the motive behind the theft is, but they have notified the Maryland Coordination Analysis Center, which alerts all federal agencies of the theft.
_____________________________________________________________
LMFAO? They can ignore Radioactive materials for a real dirty b0mb, but go balls out insane over fertilizer? HAHAHAHAHAHA WTF!? Hey, FBI, if you're reading this, why not give me a job? LOL I can do a better job investigating than you guys! I actually catch REAL terrorists! And you wouldn't get away trying to carry out false flags on my watch!
No comments:
Post a Comment