Tags, 상세검색
응답: PJ#072, CANDLELIGHT
PJ 72CHAPTER 3REC #1 HATONN
SAT., JULY 3, 1993 9:19 A.M. YEAR 6, DAY 321
SAT., JULY 3, 1993How many of you watched the "short subject" on cloning on CNN yesterday?? Did you get indigestion? Did you also note that the process is perfected and you had a row of full-grown bovine with identical appearance, not only cloned but genetically altered to produce ONLY prime beef for your tables? You have to stop overlooking such news items lest you stay uninformed!
PRIME BEEF ON THE HOOF--CLONED
MORATORIUM ON NUCLEAR TESTINGThis morning a big thing was made, by Clinton, on extending the moratorium on nuclear testing. What in the name of common sense could he mean? There has never been even a slow-up in testing--just in Nevada. Who does he think he is fooling? THE PEOPLE PERHAPS? It can't be the Russians for the Russians are everywhere in the U.S. that the testing is done--WITH JOINT INPUT. I just wonder if IT COULD BE that the launching of that manned rocket from Kazakhstan could have anything to do with such a "sudden" decision in the matter of nuclear blasts? It could be worth a thought, perhaps?
WATCH THE G-7Boy, THIS IS THE ONE TO WATCH. The G-7 conference IS the International Banker's big league gang. This is also the BOSS and paymaster to ones like Reno, Bentsen and thus and so. They control the Federal Reserve, the Postal Service, the Internal Revenue Service, etc., OF THE U.S. of A. In Japan? Good grief! You are dead and don't know it, citizens. You are existing in that lower Astral Plane of not yet realizing you are dead and yet can't find a way to participate in the game going on around you.
HOW DOES IT ADD UP?The numbers, in simple arithmetic, are interesting as presented by "counters". They go a bit like the following. These ARE the numbers given but as with any "poll" they are off by "1-3% in either direction" (I believe is the cover-inclusion).
How are you going to escape what is coming according to the "prophets"? If there is no "rapture until after the tribulation"--what is going to happen to you? If you are among the "antiGod/Christ" it doesn't look good, does it? If you are among the Christians and other religions who DO trust in and believe in God, you are already hostage.
Quoting: Almost 1 billion Moslems on earth are looking for their twelfth Imam (Paradise on Earth leaders).
About 18 million Jews are looking to the fulfillment of Zechariah 12-14 and Zionism worldwide.
More than 1 billion, 700 million Christians (most of whom are asleep) await the second coming of Jesus Christ and the millennium. END Quoting.
The best and highest way to count this does not account for even HALF of the population of Earth Planet. By the way, almost all of the above counted--are looking forward to the WRONG thing and in the WRONG way. Makes you think, doesn't it? And, further, who is going to blow up whom and when? So be it, friends. We would like to help you but it surely looks quite gloomy to me from time to time--like second to second.
***I ask that the "nuclear related" maps be placed in this paper as close to these prophecies and "attack" articles as possible [See next 2 pages.] so you can look at a picture and see the possibilities OF JUST THIS ONE PROBABLE EVENT. We won't even go into secondary targets of cities and installations utilizing neutron bombs to preserve structures or other warfare OR "unnatural" and natural changes.
(For pict.: look Pdf )
Since Dharma is accused of being so good at plagiarism and I am noted for pushing her into such evil behavior--I am going to give you some more of "other's" worthy work!
ATOMIC SUICIDE*** GET THIS BOOK!! IF YOU BUY NO OTHER BOOK THE REST OF YOUR LIFE--BUY ATOMIC SUICIDE. Please, however, I ASK YOU HUMBLY--GET IT FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY! Please do not just go get it "somewhere" as it is hard to find, costly and I WANT return to authors and institutions who produce the volumes. There is NO ROOM IN YOUR LIVES, CHELAS, FOR VENDETTAS AND HARANGUES--YOU ARE ABOUT TO BE NUCLEAR "SUICIDED".
BY WALTER RUSSELL
I would appreciate your mentioning CONTACT and "Ekkers" when you order the book and again, please get it from THEM--not from America West. I also ask Ed if he will please run an ad in this next CONTACT edition. I apologize to you staff, however, and to you readers. We are accused of plagiarizing the book--BUT WE DO NOT EVEN HAVE A COPY TO REPRINT THE COVER. Since America West was, however, so nice as to send CONTACT copies of their most recent catalogue perhaps you can plagiarize their picture of the book in point. May "justice" someday again be your foundation.
It appears to me, however, that Mr. Green has just overstepped his good luck--he has finally pushed the WRONG people TOO FAR. No, that is NOT "US". It appears he has presented LIES to the WRONG JUDGE, PERHAPS. We won't waste time on the matter.
For ordering The University of Science and Philosophy, P.O. Box 520, Waynesboro, VA 22980. Book orders only: 1-800882-5683 other calls:1-703-942-5161. Atomic Suicide: $20.00, postage : $3.00 first book, $2.00 each additional book.
From the ECONOMIST (London), June 5, 1993:
HOW TO STEAL AN ATOM BOMBDid you stop worrying about nuclear obliteration when the cold war ended? Start again. To make an atomic bomb, a terrorist or a would-be proliferator would need to get hold of only 5 kg of weapon-grade plutonium or 15 kg of weapon-grade uranium, less than you would need to fill a fruitbowl. At present the world probably contains about 250 tonnes of this sort of plutonium and 1,500 tonnes of the uranium. To lose a bomb's-worth from the stock is the equivalent of losing a single word from one of three copies of The Economist. But the loss would be harder to detect. The world's stock of nuclear-explosive material is dispersed and hoarded. Almost none of this material is covered by international nuclear-accounting rules. And more than half of it is inside the chaotic relic of the former Soviet Union.
For four decades, countries with nuclear weapons have tried to keep weapon-grade material safe from terrorists and foreign powers. They know that there is no room for error. Despite occasional lapses (like the 100 kg of highly enriched uranium that went missing in the early 1960s from a factory in Pennsylvania) the system has not failed catastrophically. Bomb-grade plutonium and uranium have been kept securely enough to persuade most potential proliferators that, if they want a bomb, they will have to make their own nuclear material, not just steal or buy it. Because making the material itself is a lot harder than turning it into a rudimentary bomb, it is the tight control of plutonium and uranium that has until now restricted the spread of nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, for two reasons, the job of the nuclear thief or illicit buyer may be getting significantly easier.
[H: URGENT ALERT! Wake up!! You are only one small country using atomic powered power plants. FRANCE DERIVES ALL OF HER POWER FROM NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS FROM WHENCE COMES MATERIAL FOR BOMBS! MOREOVER, FRANCE AND RUSSIA JUST LAUNCHED A JOINT-VENTURE ROCKET INTO SPACE--REALLY INTO SPACE TO HOOK UP WITH THEIR ALREADY TOTALLY EFFICIENT STATIONS AND COSMOSPHERES. THEY CALLED IT A COSMOSDROME, MANNED AND FULLY CAPABLE AND ARMED. IT WAS LAUNCHED FROM KAZAKHSTAN (read on). YOU ARE GETTING SET FOR SOME VERY INTERESTING THINGS, READERS. THE LAUNCH WAS IMMEDIATELY ON SET-DOWN OF YOUR SHUTTLE!]
It is becoming easier, first, because the world's stock of plutonium is growing. [See charts next page.] According to one authoritative study, stocks of civil plutonium separated from spent reactor fuel in Britain, France, Russia and Japan could grow from 72 tonnes in 1990 to more than 250 tonnes by 2010. Because it has been in reactors for so long, this sort of plutonium is not best-suited to nuclear weapons. But it would still make a bomb that could flatten much of a city and drench the place with fall-out.
The second thing making life easier for the would-be proliferator is the break-up, and breakdown, of the Soviet Union. The break-up has given new regimes in Ukraine, Belorussia and KAZAKHSTAN a say in what will become of the nuclear weapons on their soil. The breakdown threatens to create a shambles where a reasonably well-ordered nuclear establishment used to be. The different parts of Russia's nuclear-weapons complex are in conflict with one another. The inspectorate that Boris Yeltsin has put in national charge of nuclear materials has less muscle than the mighty nuclear ministry and the military establishment. Its rivals have excluded its inspectors from their installations. In a way, nuclear disarmament makes matters worse. As weapons are reduced, six tonnes of plutonium and 30 tonnes of uranium from dismantled warheads must pass through Russia's rickety bureaucracy every year for the next 15 or so. Given the unpredictable changes sweeping through Russia, and the penury of its bureaucrats, the danger of nuclear theft or bribery is clearly growing. Some Western experts believe that Russia has never properly counted the exact amount of nuclear material it possesses.
The only sure way to reduce the danger is to reduce the world's store of uranium and plutonium. But there is no easy way to undo the nuclear binge of the cold war. Although uranium can be put to use, and used up, as fuel in existing reactors, plutonium is much harder to get rid of. Its value as a fuel is limited, since uranium is cheaper and plentiful. By most estimates it would cost at least $1 billion to level Russia's and America's plutonium mountains, either by mixing it with waste in glass, or by burning it away in special reactors. And this money would have to be spent in the knowledge that it would never produce a profit, only the hope of a safer world.
PLUTONIUM PIPEDREAMSSadly, the Russian nuclear industry does not yet see things that way. Even if rapid disposal of precious plutonium were possible, Russia's nuclear experts would shun it. They have grandiose ideas about creating a plutonium economy, built upon advanced reactors, reprocessing plants and thermal reactors burning plutonium fuel. This is a dangerous dream. Not even the West has mastered the necessary reactor designs. And Russian demand for energy is collapsing along with the country's industries. Right now, Russia has neither the money to build new nuclear facilities, nor experience of burning plutonium in its already unreliable civil reactors. In other words, the bulk of its plutonium is likely to remain stashed in potentially vulnerable stockpiles for at least a decade.
Here, the West could lead by example. Its own drive to create a plutonium economy has stalled, yet Western nuclear contractors are encouraging Russians in their dream. The contracts which Western utilities signed in the 1970s and 1980s to reprocess their nuclear waste have taken on a life of their own. But the environmental and economic cases for reprocessing have faded. Reprocessing does nothing to help manage waste from modern reactors; plutonium fuel is dearer than uranium, and is likely to stay that way. It would be a far sounder policy to run down Western reprocessing. This would not only save money and help to curb the growth of the world's stocks of separated plutonium; it might also help to persuade Russia to dispose of its plutonium, rather than weaving an economic pipedream around it.
Will Russia listen? It has a solemn responsibility to make sure that its own house is put in order. Fortunately, pure self-interest demands as much. Russia cannot afford to be flanked by newly nuclear states on its southern borders; or to allow the ethnic strife in and between ex-Soviet republics to turn nuclear; or to see extremists among its own fissiparous peoples demand independence on pain of nuclear terrorism. [H: Good grief, it makes you wonder who in the world the nut is who wrote this paper--IT IS DONE ALREADY! IT IS OVER--THE "HORSE" IS OUTSIDE THE BARN--DONE, OVER--JUST THE RESULTS OF THE "RUNAWAY" IS ALL THAT IS PENDING!] Because plutonium cannot be made safe rapidly, Russia must at the very least compile and police a thorough inventory of its nuclear materials. If some material is lost already, that is all the more reason to stop a lapse becoming a loophole.
The United States has earmarked $800m to help Russia count and monitor its nuclear materials. In the end, international supervision would provide the best reassurance. But Russia still has its pride as well as its plutonium. It would not accept such inspections unless America accepted them too. That might not please American generals used to secrecy, but America should agree anyway. Mutual inspection, careful inventories and a steady reduction in the world's stockpile of nuclear fuel; these three measures will not guarantee security. But they are the least the world must do to make itself safer from nuclear blackmail.
End of Article
* * *If you don't wake up and know what is THE LIE in the above, you can't survive this madness. You no longer have a free United States of America under some "Under God" Constitution. You have a nation run by, ordered by and functioning under the United Nations ONE WORLD ORDER--GLOBAL GOVERNMENT OF BANKERS AND ZIONIST "BUSINESS" PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO MORALS, NO QUALMS ABOUT MURDER OR DESTRUCTION AND, AT THIS TIME, YOU HAVE NO RECOURSE AS YOU ARE UNDER THE FORCE OF THE WORLD ENFORCERS AND U.N. INTERNATIONAL POLICE.
So, let us read on with the news of the month in the ECONOMIST, same issue.
SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
URANIUM, PLUTONIUM, PANDEMONIUM
Disarmament has a dark side. It sets free nuclear explosives that used to be tucked away in superpower arsenals, and must now be disposed of. [H: Now don't for one moment let the chemical and biologicals leave your mental notebook of destructive toys to use and test on you-the-people! AND of course the most effective destruction comes in those PULSE BEAMS AND PARTICLE BEAMS. Also, I ask that the illustration be inserted within this article we are now going to reprint. (See next page.)]
There are various recipes for making nuclear weaponry. Some can be carried out only by experienced master bomb makers. Others are easy enough for beginners to have a go at. All of them, though, contain ingredients--plutonium or highly enriched uranium (HEU)--that have always been very hard to come by.
It is the possession of these nuclear materials, more than know-how about their use, that separates the Israelis from the Iraqis, or the Indians from the Iranians. Making them is hard, and requires the sort of efforts only rich countries or desperate ones will undertake. Even with money and will, a uranium-enrichment program takes time to build, and might easily be detected by others. The cost of making materials for nuclear weapons, and the risk of being caught in the act, are the biggest obstacles facing countries tempted to gate-crash the nuclear club.
Mindful of this, countries with nuclear weapons have developed elaborate systems to guard plutonium and HEU. But the authoritarian mechanisms that guarded Soviet nuclear material can no longer be guaranteed. Nuclear smuggling is already on the increase. The number of reported cases rose to over 100 last year, compared with 35 in 1991. So far the contraband is low-grade stuff from industrial sources, not weapon-grade materials. All the same, smuggling routes are being established that could serve more dangerous trades, and customs authorities are beginning to be stretched.
The mere possibility of a black market in weapon-grade material is terrifying. Instability would spread like a chain reaction. Countries newly unsure about their neighbours' capabilities would find themselves ever more tempted to try to get a bomb themselves. Terrorist groups kept from the nuclear game by their lack of industrial infrastructure, could become players. Exploiting these fears, nuclear blackmailers could make a mint. There have already been more than 50 attempts to extort money from America with nuclear threats, some frighteningly credible. The people who decide whether to believe them or not have been able to check their own stocks quickly, to make sure no bombs or material are missing. Such checks will be less reassuring if the world's supplies become more accessible--and, alarmingly, less well documented.
THE SOVIET SYNDROMEThe break-up of the Soviet Union has fractured the brutal certainties of the cold-war nuclear regime. Roughly 3,000 weapons in Ukraine, Belorussia and Kazakhstan are now less firmly in the grip of the top brass in Moscow. Ukraine has been reluctant to honour its pledge to relinquish its arsenal. Whether or not these countries have nuclear ambitions, there are worries about security on their soil. One Russian officer is reported to have advised his western counterparts to "take seriously" rumours that three or four weapons have disappeared in Kazakhstan.
In Russia itself, the nuclear industry that once supported whole cities, such as Chelyabinsk east of the Urals, and Tomsk and Krasnoyarsk in Siberia, is facing a crisis. Grandiose Soviet schemes for nuclear power have been replaced by Russian realities. Thousands have lost their jobs. The chances of a foreign country finding a Russian engineer ready to sell nuclear advice or materials are growing.
Disarmament treaties between America and the former Soviet Union could further strain the regime for guarding weapons materials. Roughly six tonnes of plutonium and 30 tonnes of HEU are due to be released annually over the next 15 years as Soviet warheads are scrapped. Many Western sources believe that there is no reliable overall inventory system to keep track of this material.
All this is happening against the background of a worldwide accumulation of civilian plutonium. Plutonium is not found naturally on Earth, but it is produced whenever uranium is used in a nuclear reactor. Military production reactors are designed to burn fuel in short bursts and thus maximize the production of a particular isotope of plutonium, 239Pu. Civilian reactors, designed to produce power, use their fuel for longer and so produce heavier isotopes, 240Pu and 241Pu. To get the plutonium into a usable form, the fuel has to be "reprocessed".
The bombs in today's stockpiles contain almost pure 239Pu. The other isotopes mess up the workings of the nuclear reaction. But isotopically impure plutonium produced in civil reactors can be made into bombs; American scientists at Los Alamos National Laboratory have tried it, and it worked. According to Frank Barnaby, once director of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, it takes about 35kg (771b) of civil plutonium in its oxide form to make a bomb, whereas a mere 5kg of good military metal will suffice. Despite being larger, bombs made from civil plutonium will have low, unpredictable yields, especially if inexpertly designed and assembled. But terrorists do not need the power, precision and elegance of a high-yield weapon that fits on a missile. Low-yield bombs in lorries could serve their purposes, demolishing a fair fraction of a city and spreading fall-out far and wide.
GEIGER COUNTERThe first convincingly reasoned inventory of the world's nuclear material was published earlier this year. ("World inventory of Plutonium and Highly Enriched Uranium, 1992" by David Albright, Frans Berkhout and William Walker, Oxford University Press 1993) Working from a variety of sources, public and private, the authors conclude that there are roughly 1,000 tonnes of plutonium and 1,500 tonnes of HEU. Because of the doubt attached to their estimates, they want all governments to publish their inventories and submit them to international supervision.
At the moment, international supervision is woefully limited. Only 1% of the world's HEU comes under the safeguards administered by the International Atomic Energy Agency; that is mostly used to power small research reactors in countries that have no nuclear weapons. Almost all the rest, 95% of the total, is held by the American and Russian armed forces. It is not all in weapons; as much as 100 tonnes of Russian HEU is used simply to power ships and submarines. A tiny fraction of this amount could be the basis for a successful third-world weapons program. A mere
130-220kg of HEU, accumulated in its own enrichment program, has made Pakistan
a nuclear power. This is 0.01 % of the world's total stock.
By contrast, most of the world's 1,000 tonnes of plutonium are in civilian hands--though only 30%, that in Britain, France and the non-nuclear states, is under international safeguards. More than half of this plutonium is sitting in used fuel-rods from commercial reactors, unusable for anything until it is reprocessed. But stocks of civil plutonium are flowing forth from reprocessing plants ordered during the 1970s. These plants were supposed to provide fuel for a new generation of "fast" reactors which would burn plutonium, but neither the demand for nuclear power nor the performance of fast reactors has met the planners expectations, and the cost of uranium fuel has dropped. Most of the reprocessed civil plutonium--72 tonnes--is sitting in storage.
And yet reprocessing will continue. Billion-dollar reprocessing plants have been built in Britain and France. It is hard to resist the pressure to use them, especially as some nuclear-power generators have tied themselves into long-term reprocessing contracts. When they did so, they hoped that reprocessing could cut the cost of disposing of nuclear waste. That claim has not been borne out for today's designs, but such contracts cannot easily be broken. So on current plans the reprocessing plants will separate an average of 21 tonnes of plutonium a year over the next 20 years. By 2010 a total of 545 tonnes of plutonium is due to have been separated. Most of this plutonium will be produced in Britain and France, though some could also be separated in Russia and possibly JAPAN.
When it comes to military plutonium, America and the former Soviet Union have the lion's share: some 250 tonnes between them. Again, small amounts can have striking political consequences--witness Israel and India with about 300 kg of plutonium each. Russia and America both say they need no longer make military plutonium. And yet, even as military production stops adding to the total amount of nuclear material in the world, plutonium and HEU from dismantled weapons will add to the stocks.
THE DANGER OF DISARMINGThe former Soviet Union has more bombs to dismantle--at least 33,000 weapons in all. The reason the Russians have so many is that fresh plutonium slowly undergoes radioactive decay, making it unpredictable in warheads. America solves this by recycling old material, chemically extracting impurities, occasionally going so far as to make "ivory" plutonium, almost pure 239Pu. As a rule, the Soviet Union did not refresh its plutonium. Aging weapons simply got put into reserve, replaced by warheads full of plutonium fresh from the reactor.
The differences in design account for some of the differences in safeguards. With most of the Russian plutonium in weapons, either ready for service or held in reserve, control of materials could be maintained by locking up bombs. In America, partly because of more recycling, safeguards depended more on full accounting for the nuclear materials themselves as they passed through the long and complex procedures. A greater distinction between the two systems of safeguards, though, lies in their psychology. The Soviet system, confident in its control over its own people, saw threats coming from outside. In America treacherous and corruptible insiders have always been seen as a potential danger.
The snag with disarmament, for all its other merits, is that it disrupts the established Soviet routine. The chart shows how much plutonium and HEU might be released from warheads if the INF and START disarmament treaties are implemented. Weapons will be broken open and the plutonium and uranium stockpiled or processed. This material will be passed to civilian inventories controlled by Minatom, the ministry of atomic energy; counting bombs will give way to accounting for material. There is no systematic connection between the two inventories. Gosatomnadzor, the regulator which was given responsibility for civil and military materials last June, has been refused access to some military inventories.
THE GREAT BONFIREThe HEU that gets to Minatom can, eventually, be burnt in commercial reactors. Uranium comes in two isotopes, 235U and 238U. It is 235U that releases energy; but 99.28% of natural uranium is 238U. For this natural uranium to be made more potent it must be enriched in 235U, which means sorting through the uranium and discarding some of the 238U. A little enrichment--to a 235U content of 2-6%--is good enough for most reactors, though some can work with unenriched uranium and some research reactors use highly enriched uranium. The HEU in weapons is usually enriched to 94% 238U.
Enrichment is hard, which is why bomb programs are rare. Reversing it--diluting HEU by adding less enriched uranium--is easy, and America is making it profitable as well. America has agreed to buy Russian HEU diluted for commercial use. It is set to pay $780 a kilogram for material blended to a concentration of 4.4% 235U, a price competitive with that of enriched fuel. A total of 500 tonnes of HEU will be blended into 15,000 tonnes of fuel, which makes the deal worth $12 billion.
The Uranium Institute, based in London, has calculated that the 816 tonnes of HEU that might be released from American and Soviet disarmament could take the place of 166,000 tonnes of natural uranium, roughly three years' worth of world demand. This is a headache for the world's uranium producers, which are already suffering from depressed uranium prices. For everyone else, though, it is a blessing: once blended, the uranium presents no more threat than any other nuclear fuel. It would be no easier to enrich than any other reactor-grade uranium.
If only it were as simple for military plutonium. But the world has a surplus of plutonium, even without extra supplies coming from disarmament. And there is no commercial plutonium-fuel industry equivalent to the uranium-fuel industry into which diluted HEU so neatly feeds.
Many bright ideas--and failed ideas looking for a second lease on life--are being put forward as ways of converting weapons-grade plutonium into a form too awkward for the weapon-minded to bother with. One such scheme would mix the plutonium with nasty but useless nuclear waste and seal it in blocks of glass. Most of the rest would help pay for disposing of the plutonium by generating electricity from it while turning it into waste. France has thought about reviving Superphenix, its experimental fast reactor, which was shut down after technical mishaps. General Atomics, based in San Diego, has floated a plan for a $1.5 billion helium-cooled reactor--a novel design it has long wanted to build.
There are other, more radical designs. One is a molten-salt reactor. Liquid plutonium is squirted in, waste is siphoned off. Scientists at Los Alamos have suggested using particle beams to help burn up the plutonium, rather than relying entirely on particles given off by a chain reaction going on within the material; they think it would be like holding a flame underneath the plutonium, rather than starting a dangerous plutonium blaze.
A study of different ways to burn up plutonium by America's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory came out against such clevernesses, at least as far as using up America's surplus plutonium is concerned (though it did recommend more research into a few). Not only would these novel reactors take too long to develop, but the electricity that comes from them will, in most cases, be needlessly expensive. Instead the study prefers a proven technology known as mixed-oxide fuel, or MOX.
The idea is to take plutonium and mix it with unenriched uranium. Since 239Pu acts like 235U, the end result is quite like the low-enriched uranium used as reactor fuel. The idea dates from the 1950s, when it looked as if there would be plutonium left over from the fast-breeder reactors that were being planned--reactors which could produce more plutonium than they consumed. Under such conditions MOX made sense. If you have to pay to reprocess the plutonium from spent fuel, though, it does not. An OECD study in 1989 found it unlikely that MOX could compete with uranium under realistic circumstances. According to the fuel-cycle manager of a large German power company, it is twice as expensive as uranium. Even with free plutonium, MOX is unlikely to be cheaper than making uranium fuel from scratch unless uranium prices soar. Some MOX fuel has been made--the lack of an economic rationale has never stopped the nuclear industry trying things--but as yet it has used up only 12.5 tonnes of plutonium.
Now disarmament and reprocessing are bringing about what fast reactors never did: surplus plutonium. MOX would be a relatively safe (???) way of disposing of the stuff. Moreover the Livermore study concluded that it would be easy to adapt designs for tomorrow's reactors so they could burn MOX exclusively--rather than a mixture, one-third MOX and two-thirds uranium, as is the practice today. Given free plutonium, the report says that such a plant could generate electricity at 3.1 cents a kilowatt hour (kwh), compared with 3.0 cents a kwh using uranium fuel in a standard reactor.
Unfortunately there is not enough capacity in MOX factories to turn the weapons surplus from both superpowers into fuel. And governments have not licensed enough MOX-burning reactors to absorb the plutonium coming from reprocessing plants, let alone tonnes of weapon-grade plutonium as well. According to the authors of the inventory, even the most optimistic projection--which, incidentally, takes no account of military plutonium--sees plutonium stocks growing from 72 tonnes in 1990 to 113 tonnes in 2000, before decreasing to 36 tonnes in 2010, as MOX fabrication and fast reactors take off.
As a matter of course, many will protest about shipping and flying civilian plutonium around the world in large volumes. Terrorists will not be among them. Some of the planned MOX factories will probably fail to get approval; reactors will be refused licences to load MOX into their cores. In Germany and Japan, where reprocessing nuclear waste has been a requirement, using the plutonium produced seems less popular; several utilities are having difficulty securing licences to burn MOX. A projection that tries to take account of some of these factors sees civil plutonium stocks growing to 265 tonnes by 2010.
THE COMMODITY FROM HELLThe problem is not just that MOX reactors provide only a narrow channel for disposing of military plutonium, or that the channel will be clogged by the plutonium from uneconomic civil reprocessing programs. It is that these programs, and the plutonium economy they seek to bring into being, encourage the Russian nuclear industry to think of plutonium as valuable. Far from talking of the plutonium problem, desperate Russian nuclear engineers, encouraged by the plutonium industry in France and Britain, want to begin a new program to build fast reactors running on plutonium, undaunted by difficulties the West has had with such technology.
Even if it were technically possible, Russia does not have the money to do it. The alternative, when plutonium is seen as a fuel, is to load it into existing Russian reactors, unused to the stuff and already regarded as unsafe by outsiders. Either way, as long as reprocessing plants make plutonium look like a commodity, the risk that the wrong people will buy it remains.
END OF ARTICLE
* * *Since the WRONG PEOPLE already have the "stuff", it looks pretty sobering, does it not?
Well, who knows--maybe some Fairy-godmother dust will settle on your precious little beings and you can just "rapture" up to somewhere. I wouldn't choose clouds though--because guess where the most radiation will be!
Happy Independence Day--America. May you and the Queen of England live happily ever-after.
IF YOU EVER GET AROUND TO REMEMBERING GOD--GIVE US A CALL GOOD DAY.
PJ 72CHAPTER 4REC #1 HATONNSUN., JULY 4, 1993 9:58 A.M. YEAR 6, DAY 322
SUN., JULY 4, 1993INDEPENDENCE DAY??Well, let's see if you are free and independent.
OMAR ABDEL-RAHMANFirst of all, perhaps the "followers" of Rahman may well be involved in operations "against" this or that, including the American Government--BUT SO IS YOUR CIA, ATF, AND YOUR OWN GOVERNMENT (AGAINST YOU-THE-PEOPLE).
The arrest seizure of Rahman on Independence Day weekend was a sign--and not a good one. Now the truth comes out, readers: Warren Christopher AND Bill Clinton have now made major public statements that "THE ARREST IS TO CARRY A MESSAGE TO ALL FUNDAMENTALISTS LIKE RAH-MAN'S FOLLOWERS AND ONES OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH SUCH AS THE WACO SITUATION, THAT CULT ACTIVITIES WILL NOT BE TOLERATED". Now, the plan is to extradite him back to Egypt--but actually it will come to be that it is a plot to keep him in prison without bail and without chance of release--FOR YEARS! I cannot warn you unsuspecting citizens, strongly enough, of how serious this type of unlawful manipulation and force actually IS. How much damage can an old blind man do?
In addition, since when is it the duty of THE NATIONAL ATTORNEY GENERAL TO PERSONALLY DEMAND THESE ACTIONS AND ORDER THEM DONE? DO YOU REALIZE YET WHAT A POLICE STATE YOU HAVE BECOME--AND, A LESBIAN LAWBREAKER WHO IS AVOWED TO BE ANTI-GOD (SHE CALLS IT SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE)--TO BE IN CHARGE OF CLOSING DOWN BY FORCE AND MURDER RELIGIOUS GROUPS AND SPEAKERS? Am I "sure" it was Reno? Come now, chelas-- don't you read your own propaganda sheets and listen to your open news programs at all?
The last paragraph of one such article about the matter read: "Friday, administration officials said that Reno acted strictly on law-enforcement grounds, ordering that Abdel-Rahman be taken into custody as a flight risk". [Flight? Flight to where? Now, today, it goes further in that there will be consideration of release pending extradition and then the news states: "and it can be years before such extradition can be worked out"!]
I begin this writing with this subject because we are going to write some very disturbing things about Waco. You just aren't first hand witnesses to what is happening to some Pakistanis in Somalia because of retaliation against Rahman. MURDER is the agenda of the day for getting rid of all you "fundamentalists"--and before the purge is finished it will hit local Baptist and Catholic churches WHO DO NOT MODERATE TO THE NEW WORLD ORDER MORALS--VOTED IN HOMOSEXUALITY AS EQUAL AND ORDAINED BY THE RELIGION, ETC. The International Intelligence Cults are the ones, in conjunction with your CIA, Mossad and KGB-U.N. Forces--who bombed the Trade Center, et al. Indeed, Pakistani or known terrorist groups are targeted--so did they TRY to set up Waco as a bunch of terrorist gun dealers? Actually Koresh and his group were NOTHING BUT LAW ABIDING, CLAIMED-TO-BE-CHRISTIANS MINDING THEIR OWN BUSINESS, AND MAKING NO WAVES ANYWHERE--ANYHOW! If you Americans aren't scared spitless then you are DEAD, OR CERTAINLY IN A FULL BLOWN COMA.
MORE INDEPENDENCE AND FREEWhat of this "free trade wonder"? How do you think Canada feels about this wonderful free trade trend? TODAY it is announced that the US/Canadian border will be closed to sugar import (to the US) along with any products using sugar. The sugar-beet industry is the major product for Canada in almost all instances. First you wiped out the fishing industry, canning industry and now you hit the sugar industry. This will wipe out income and jobs for multi-hundreds of thousands of citizens. Why? Because, "There is a glut of sugar in the U.S. and, to keep prices up, the import restriction from Canada will be indefinitely imposed".
TRADE WONDERS?
Want to hear even more? The U.S. ships more sugar and sugar products INTO CANADA than Canada sends into the U.S.!
Oh, by the way--don't miss the over 50,000 lay-offs from IBM. Have a good day of hotdogs and apple pie. Just remember, the hotdogs are bits and pieces of "waste" meat by-products often from cloned, genetically altered and antibiotic riddled animals and the apples are treated with pesticides, genetic alteration for ripening and holding capability and additives to polish their lovely skins to entice you.
People, you are on your own--I can only suggest that if you get nothing else--you had best keep up your Gaiandriana for it will be through your own immune and working body system that you are going to keep the alterations from totally taking over your mechanical bodies.
IRAQ AND SUDDEN CHANGESThis is one of the most important things that almost all of you WILL MISS TODAY. The "Inspection teams" from the United STATES are leaving Iraq--TODAY! There is blathering and corrections and intended confusion as to U.N. vs. U.S., so they say as an after-announcement: "It is the U.S. teams (who make up the entirety of the teams) of the U.N. resolution for inspection of possible weapons sites " Now, RIGHT AFTER BOMBING IRAQ, is this not interesting as there have been no signs of "retaliation" AND Hussein has stated, "THERE WILL BE NO RETALIATION". Ah, what have we here?? No--surely not, it couldn't possibly have anything to do with the launch of that Cosmosdrome from Kazakhstan--COULD IT?
CLINTON AND JAPANWell, good luck, Mr. President. The G-7 troops are about to erupt like a volcano--and I would have suggested you check with Mr. Bush before dancing in the streets of Japan or, at the least, avoid all banquets!
NASTY MOSQUITOS AND OTHER BLOODSUCKERSOK, America, the Asian Tiger Mosquito has been brought into your America and is on the prowl. They have been in your midst since 1985 and are now OUT OF CONTROL. This little insect transmits so many "blood" diseases that I won't bother to lay them out for you. They are the best "bloodsuckers of the bloodsuckers" and moreover, they regurgitate the blood already within in a mixture of digestive saliva to facilitate feasting on the "next" banquet provider. This mixes everything in the blood it carries with every other host it bites.
What do I suggest, since most of the diseases it will transmit (intentionally) are at present non-treatable? Well, of course, repellents--but this won't deter too many from their intended feast--but it is better than NOTHING. Next, get screened "tents" and USE them for all picnics and outings--even in your back-yard. You can even get small ones and rig them on apartment balconies.
I suggest you get whatever size(s) you like; I suggest a family have more than one--especially if you have small children.
What I am telling my people here is to get the tents and use them even on patios in the backyard for dining. The Bar-B-Q cook will usually have smoke (which is a good deterrent) so he is pretty safe if you put repellent on the legs (trousers), etc. EAT under that screen canopy and do your sitting and visiting WITHIN the canopy. The screens will not interfere with visiting and closeness and will provide such a more pleasant atmosphere at any rate than fighting bugs. With all the rains in most of the U.S. and flooding--mosquitoes will breed out of control this year--everywhere! They will even breed in over-watered flower beds! These are very versatile little insects.
I actually suggest that, in addition, if the tent does not already have a floor (which is more flexible in use) get plastic tarps a size larger than the tent--this gives you a "fold up flap" to use for camping and sleeping. Spray repellent UNDER the tarp. I further suggest covering by an old bedspread or bedspread/comforter on top of the tarp to protect, especially, crawling babies or young children. Imitation grass carpets are ok but not necessary--whatever makes you more comfortable and aesthetically pleasing.
I suggest that young children have their outside sand-boxes covered by the screened facility. It will also offer shade and a bit of protection from the direct sun and block out some of the higher ultraviolet rays.
By the end of summer it IS INTENDED by the Elite that most of the citizens are infected with that dastardly Asian flu we have been speaking of.
If you watch sales you can get these little tents (adequate) for about $50. Four lesser ones will be more useful than one high quality. If you have several you will USE them. If you have to continually move ONE, you won't.
Another reason for the tents is for use if displaced to have to sleep OUTSIDE in case of earthquake, etc. A set of tents for temporary living are excellent in your survival packs AND SCREENED ROOMS ARE EXCELLENT FOR SAME--IN SUMMER MONTHS--FOR YOU ARE JUST STARTING SUMMER AND THIS IS A VERY REAL DANGER FROM NOW ON! The time to get ready is right now while commercial sales make buying easier.
I would guess that if you are on a "hard" surface you will need a style of tent that can be moved and stand without "stakes", THE TYPE IS UP TO YOU--BUT WISDOM WILL KEEP YOU ALIVE AND WELL.
