Plutonium Found in Iran Waste Facility
Nov 14

International Atomic Energy experts have found unexplained plutonium and enriched uranium traces in a nuclear waste facility in Iran.


http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/11/14/D8LCVEU01.html

New traces of plutonium and enriched uranium, potential material for atomic warheads, have been found at a nuclear waste facility in Iran.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/14/AR2006111400230_pf.html

International Atomic Energy experts have found unexplained plutonium and highly enriched uranium traces in a nuclear waste facility in Iran

Testers in Iran find plutonium traces

New Traces of Enriched Uranium, Plutonium Found in Iran

inspectors recently have found traces of yet another unexplained particle -- plutonium -- on samples from containers at Karaj

New traces of plutonium and enriched uranium, both possible weapons materials, have been found in Iran, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said


It's no secret Iran is gonna have nukes ...

We ARE discussing the fact that plutonium has been found in Iran.

TRACES OF PLUTONIUM AND ENRICHED URANIUM FOUND IN IRAN

Plutonium is virtually nonexistent in nature.

The only way there can be plutonium in Iran is if it's been *brought* into Iran because a heavy water breeder reactor is specifically designed to produce plutonium but Iran does not have any heavy water reactors..

plutonium is also the easiest of all radionuclides to make an atomic bomb with too - less is needed to reach critical mass and it gives a larger quantity of neutrons and gamma rays for it's mass than uranium does -

1 kilogram of plutonium produces an explosion equal to about 20,000 tons of chemical explosive.

it's the prefered radionuclide to use for atomic bombs

particles of P238? At a waste site? OMG We know it would never happen unless there was an ISLAMIC BOMB!. It must be a reason for another war for Israel. Good work hex. A memorial will be erected for you.

So, they found plutonium in Iran? And why is Iran not allowed to have plutonium while we are? After all, we're the only country in the world with a record of nuking another country.

First we got the bomb and that was good,
'Cause we love peace and motherhood.
Then Russia got the bomb, but that's O.K.,
'Cause the balance of power's maintained that way!
Who's next?

France got the bomb, but don't you grieve,
'Cause they're on our side (I believe).
China got the bomb, but have no fears;
They can't wipe us out for at least five years!*
Who's next?

Then Indonesia claimed that they
Were gonna get one any day.
South Africa wants two, that's right:
One for the black and one for the white!**
Who's next?

Egypt's gonna get one, too,
Just to use on you know who.
So Israel's getting tense,
Wants one in self defense.
"The Lord's our shepherd," says the psalm,
But just in case, we better get a bomb!
Who's next?

Luxembourg is next to go
And, who knows, maybe Monaco.
We'll try to stay serene and calm
When Alabama gets the bomb!
Who's next, who's next, who's next?
Who's next?

Dr. Tom Leher

I've seen some heavy emotion laced denial here regarding Iran and nukes

first there was only Joe talking about it - well he's easy to dismiss

then Pravda and another news outlet mentioned Iran & nukes - well that doesn't mean...

then the sunday times and a few other others (like MSNBC) say "America is going to have to live with a nuclear Iran" - well that doesn't mean bombs maybe just power (reactors)

now this - Plutonium found in Iran, the *prefered bomb material* and they can't make it themselves...

- well that still doesn't mean theres bombs

_and we're not attacking Iran_

we never attack anyone who has nukes - we only attack countries without nukes..

the discovery of plutonium and highly enriched uranium means at the very least Iran is much further along than they've said in producing nuclear fuel, while plutonium itself is a *very strong indication* that nuclear warheads are being processed and/or produced. Even if they had the breeder to be making it, this itself means they aim to get nuclear bombs because they could just buy it already made elsewhere and *not go to the trouble* otherwise..

They are swimming in oil - they don't even need nuclear power..

unless

"Pravda and another news outlet mentioned Iran & nukes"
what?
Again with this crap? It was scrap missiles, which at one time could have carried nuclear packages. This has been shown several times and you still don't seem to understand. Or are being disingenuous.

" Plutonium found in Iran" yes. enough to set off a detector. Particles were mentioned.

"and we're not attacking Iran_"
Who do you mean by 'we'. Israel? Because they sure as hell have threatened to attack Iran maybe even with 'low yield' nuclear 'bunker busters' to quell a challenge to their singular ( that means the only asshole on the block with them ) nuclear arsenal.

Why are we 'salted' with this 'information' from this poster?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2383147,00.html



Senior operatives and outside experts from the intelligence community were almost unanimous in their view that little could be done to stop Iran acquiring the components for a nuclear bomb, The Sunday Times has learnt.


----------------------
nuclear BOMB
----------------------


Bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities was rejected on the grounds that the intelligence needed for successful air strikes was lacking. “We only have an imperfect understanding of the extent and location of the Iranian programme,” said one source with knowledge of the meeting. “Even if we got the order to blow it up, we wouldn’t know how to.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------
BOMBING IRAN'S NUCLEAR FACILITIES WAS REJECTED
-------------------------------------------------------------------



The sobering view is that even if there is a deal, the Iranians would cheat,” another source said.

“The conclusion is that America is going to have to live with the bomb


--------------------------------------------
Iran having plutonium is CHEATING
--------------------------------------------


"Iran is Going Nuclear, the UN Can't Stop It"

"the fact that the world has to learn to live with a nuclear Iran even if enrichment was stopped tomorrow"



"You’re going to have to learn to live with a nuclear North Korea"



"And now, with the coming of a nuclear Iran... I'm going to have to admit that we've lost this War on Terror"




"Some experts in the United States have been thinking the undiscussable: If all other options are worse, could the world learn to live with a nuclear Iran?"



"Some experts tell us that we must learn to live with a nuclear Iran"


"It may be that learning to live with a nuclear Iran is the wisest thing under any circumstances"



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,1061-2326132,00.html

The Iranian paradox: to gain victory the West must first concede defeat


The “international community” is now totally powerless in its nuclear confrontation with Iran, even more so than with North Korea. Pyongyang needs food and fuel to survive and is therefore susceptible to pressure from China. Iran, at the moment flush with oil wealth, needs nothing and is not dependent on anyone.



Oil prices have more than doubled in the past three years because steadily rising demand, especially from China, has run up against the limits of global production capacity. If Iran, which is the world’s third-largest oil producer after Russia and Saudi Arabia, had even a small part of its exports removed by sanctions from world markets, the oil price would shoot up to $100 or more. As long as the percentage increase in oil prices was higher than Iran’s percentage loss of export volumes, sanctions would result in the Government’s total revenues going up, instead of down.

Iran also controls the Straits of Hormuz, the narrow strip that separates the country from the Arabian peninsula and which provides a passage for roughly 40 per cent of the world’s internationally traded oil. If Iran were to close the Strait of Hormuz or otherwise threaten foreign shipping in response to an attempt to impose economic sanctions, the oil price would jump not just to $100 a barrel but probably to $150 or beyond. As a result, the Iranian Government could quite conceivably double its present revenues after the imposition of sanctions.




But if sanctions are doomed to failure, what about military options? As a last resort, couldn’t America or Israel stop the nuclear programme by threatening to bomb Iran? Sadly or happily (depending on your worldview), the answer is a very clear “no”. Militarily, America and Israel have now shot their bolts in Iraq and Lebanon respectively. They have neither the firepower nor the willpower to do anything to stop Iran’s nuclear programme — and even if they did have the capacity to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities, they could not afford the risk of destabilising their other Middle Eastern interests even further by taking military action. Moreover, both America and Israel now understand that a bombing campaign that could not be backed by an infantry invasion would only reinforce the existing regime’s grip on power.

The last argument against a military strike, but by no means the least one, brings us back to the oil issue. If the US or Israel were to bomb Iran’s nuclear installations, Iran would have the strongest possible pretext to ramp up the oil price to $150 a barrel or higher by closing or restricting traffic in the Strait of Hormuz.



It would also cause potentially catastrophic disruption to the world economy when the American public is already turning against the Iraq adventure and Republicans face a potentially disastrous electoral defeat.

What then should America and its allies do in the face of Iran’s nuclear defiance? The answer is clear: concede defeat. Iran has won this tussle and there is no point in pretending otherwise. Instead of trying to stop Iran’s nuclear programme, the international community must bring Iran back into the civilised world. The only way to do that is to stop issuing empty threats and to start offering Iran real incentives for co-operative behaviour — non-aggression guarantees from America and Israel, removal of the residual US economic sanctions dating back to the 1980s and the prospect of steadily improving treatment in investment and trade. Of course, such a U-turn seems inconceivable while President Bush remains in office. But remember President Nixon’s historic opening to China as he was losing the war in Vietnam. To paraphrase Johnson, a politician’s mind can be concentrated wonderfully by the knowledge that he is faces defeat.

What the hell are you wasting so fucking much typing space for?
You have nothing.
But an agenda.
Certainly no links or quotes or anything much but a spasm of innuendo, inference, personal extrapolations and conjecture. You may quote this phrase, in the future if you wish. It's yours.

you'll be so kind to explain what that agenda is ?

This link from
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2383147,00.html
is pretty funny considering the sources you are referring to. All your pro-israel friends and business parters.
The Bush cabinet.
Come on, hex.

The intelligence communities are in agreement [ and yes, NRO we know you are aware of the location of every 'dimple on the EM spectrum' and don't kid the kidder, okay?] that Iran's nuclear program [ another frantic flurry of flaccid crap from the very sources that no one in their right mind would use to support any kind of thread like this one. 0 ] is anything but a challenge to local israel supremacy.

hex is here to support this position.

> yes, NRO we know you are aware of the location of every 'dimple on the EM spectrum' and don't kid the kidder, okay?

does that include private infrared LASER links running strong encryption VPN ?



> your pro-israel friends and business parters. / israel supremacy. hex is here to support this position.


"What then should America and its allies do in the face of Iran’s nuclear defiance? The answer is clear: concede defeat. Iran has won this tussle and there is no point in pretending otherwise."

and quotes from???

whole thread here is going well.

"does that include private infrared LASER links running strong encryption VPN ? "
it includes the taste tester for the bull shit you come up with to push this -someone else besides ISRAEL probably has nukes, so BEWARE- fondue.

what - your browser is broken ?

Israel doesn't have any nukes

poor defenseless Israel

I guess the only thing to do is nuke Iran with the nukes they don't have so that oil prices will fall

it's like when you play country music backwards

your wife comes back
you get your old truck back
the dog rises from the grave
cans of beer jump out of the trash and fill themselves

play it backward - play it forward, either way the situation remains the same

well except axes don't grind themselves - someone always has to do that :)

And it has a fine edge and perfect balance. Quite a nice one, actually and it's not an ax.

On November 2, Iran tested three new types of land-to-sea and sea-to-sea missiles in the context of its "Great Prophet II" military exercises carried out on land in the desert (See images below), in the Persian Gulf waters, the Sea of Oman and 14 of Iran's provinces.

Western and Israeli military analysts were taken by surprise. According to Debka, the Israeli intelligence publication (5 November), several features of Iran's military capabilities were unknown to the Pentagon:

"The spectacular swarm of sophisticated missiles fired in Iran’s surprise military exercise stuns military planners in the US, Israel and Europe"

Iran's tests of surface missiles on November 2 were marked by precise planning in a carefully staged operation. According to a senior American missile expert (quoted by Debka), "the Iranians demonstrated up-to-date missile-launching technology which the West had not known them to possess."

"They also displayed unfamiliar warheads. But their most startling feat was the successful first test-fire of the long-range Shehab-3 with its cluster of tens of small bomblets, ...

The entire range bore the imprint of new purchases from China. This Shehab-3, whose 2,000-km range brings Israel, the Middle East and Europe within reach - may be more than a match for any anti-missile missile system in American, Israeli or European arsenals – depending critically on the point of its fragmentation. Some of its features are still an enigma in the West. If the Shehab-3’s cluster separates close to target, the Israel-US Arrow has a chance to intercept it, but the Americans and Israelis have no defense against the multiple warhead if it separates at a distance." (Debka, November 5, 2006)

Iranian state television showed dozens of missiles being launched both from warships in the Persian Gulf as well as from land based locations in the desert.




According to Uzi Rubin, former head of Israel's anti-ballistic missile program, "the intensity of the military exercise was unprecedented... It was meant to make an impression -- and it made an impression." (www.cnsnews.com 3 November 2006)

"It was a 'technical and operational achievement' said Rubin, pointing to the fact that the Iranians were able to launch so many missiles." (Ibid)

The display has reached its objective. The Head of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, General Yahya Rahim Safavi, confirmed that the missile test was conducted "to show our deterrent and defensive power to trans-regional enemies, and we hope they will understand the message."

"It was a clear reference to the U.S., Britain and France, who were among six nations that participated in U.S.-led maneuvers in the Gulf earlier this week. Those exercises focused on surveillance, however.



The situation in the Persian Gulf is extremely tense. The massive deployment of US and coalition naval power within a short distance from the Iranian coastline constitutes an act of provocation. This deployment marked by ongoing US war games could trigger an incident which could potentially lead to war.

Michel Chossudovsky




Chinese Companies Sell WMD to Iran


Several government-owned Chinese companies are "proliferators of weapons of mass destruction" (WMD) according to the Bush administration, and the administration has taken legal actions against these companies. They are accused of selling advanced missile and WMD technology to Iran.

The Department of the Treasury has frozen the assets of the three top Chinese military firms.

"The companies targeted today have supplied Iran's military and Iranian proliferators with missile-related and dual-use components," said Stuart Levey, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence (TFI).

The Chinese companies are Beijing Alite Technologies Company, Ltd. (ALCO), LIMMT Economic and Trade Company, Ltd., China Great Wall Industry Corporation (CGWIC), and China National Precision Machinery Import/Export Corporation (CPMIEC).

The U.S. representative office of CGWIC is G.W. Aerospace, Inc., which is located in Torrance, Calif. "The Chinese firms have provided, or attempted to provide, financial, material, technological, or other support for, or goods or services in support of, the Aerospace Industries Organization (AIO), the Shahid Bakeri Industrial Group (SBIG) and/or the Shahid Hemmat Industrial Group (SHIG)," states the official press release from the Treasury Department.

AIO, a subsidiary of the Iranian Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics, runs Iran's missile program. SBIG, an affiliate of AIO, is also involved in Iran's missile programs.

SBIG produces the Fateh-110 missile and the Fajr rocket systems. The Fajr missiles are a series of North Korean-designed weapons produced under license by SBIG. Both systems are capable of being armed with chemical warheads.


SHIG is responsible for Iran's liquid-fuelled ballistic missile programs, including the Shahab-3 medium range ballistic missile, which is based on the North-Korean-designed No Dong missile. The Shahab-3 has a range of at least 900 miles. It is also capable of carrying conventional, chemical, and nuclear warheads - thanks in part to a newly designed third-stage provided by the Chinese.

The U.S. Government has taken action against the four Chinese companies in the past. In 2004, all four of the companies landed in hot water with the State Department for transferring equipment and technology to Iran. Since 2003, CPMIEC has also been subject to an import ban for exporting missile technology to Iran.

Over the past year, LIMMT has continued to supply or attempt to supply Iran's military and missile organizations with controlled items, and ALCO has continued efforts to provide Iranian missile organizations with missile-related and dual-use components.

China Great Wall has also continued to provide goods to Iran's missile program. In addition, CPMIEC has sold the Shahid Bakeri Industrial Group goods, which are controlled under the Missile Technology Control Regime.

Two of the firms, China Great Wall and CPMIEC, are directly owned and operated by the Chinese government. Both firms have repeatedly been the subjects of reprimands since the early 1990s. Exports to China Great Wall were suspended in 1992 because of its transfer of nuclear tipped M-11 ballistic missiles to Pakistan.



However, the Clinton administration allowed the company to purchase advanced U.S. technology such as computer, satellite launch systems, and space electronics. Great Wall was implicated in illegal exports during the 1990s and included in charges filed against Hughes for the illegal export of advanced missile technology such as nose cone designs.

The Clinton administration was very aware that Great Wall was part of the Chinese military. According to a Commerce Department document on Chinese military defense industries, the People's Liberation Army strategy is to wage and win a war against America.

"[Chinese] Civilian resources should be transferable to military industries for weapons production," states the document, titled "Swords Into Market Shares," which was forced from the Clinton administration by a Freedom of Information lawsuit.

"This is not only to prepare for war, but also to use trading firms such as NORINCO (China North Industries Corporation) and China Great Wall Industry Corporation to acquire foreign technologies, such as electronics, for military as well as economic modernization."

The Bush administration is also cracking down on U.S. companies involved in illegal exports. For example, State Metal Industries, based in South Camden New Jersey, sold 192 parts of a radar-guided missile system to a Chinese company partly owned by the Chinese government.

According to the Camden Inquirer, company executive Michael S. Dorfman, pleaded guilty Tuesday in a Newark, N.J. federal court for making false statements to the Defense Department. The company, represented by co-owner Yale Dorfman, admitted violating U.S. export laws. State Metal Industries faces three years of corporate probation. However, Michael Dorfman could serve five years in prison.

State Metal Industries had a contract to smelt military surplus items, including AIM-7 Sparrow missile parts. The AIM-7 Sparrow is an air-to-air missile manufactured for fighter aircraft and warships. The missile also is sold to U.S. allies, including Taiwan.

According to the Inquirer, the missile parts were concealed under scrap metal and packed in a shipping container destine for to China. Customs inspectors opened the container and found the missile parts.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Judy Germano said the name of the Chinese company and the amount paid for the parts had not been made public in court. However, she did state that the missile parts had "intelligence value."

Yet, State Metal is not the only recent case of involving Chinese theft of U.S. military secrets. A New Jersey Federal Court ordered Universal Technologies Inc. to cease operations and sentenced its president, Terry Teng Fang Li, to one year of probation for exporting technology used in weapons systems to China.

According to the Camden Inquirer, Dean Boyd, press secretary for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, said the two cases showed that of all the countries seeking to acquire U.S. military technology illegally, "China is far and away the most active."

It is not difficult to draw the conclusion that the Chinese government is orchestrating a global effort to sell WMDs. The Chinese government is also working to steal as much U.S. weapons technology as it can. Simple actions against individual Chinese companies are and will always be ineffective. It is time that we direct sanctions against those who issue the orders and approve the plans at the highest levels in the PRC.

Here's some http://melbourne.indymedia.org/uploads/getimage.png";>more pertinent details on Iran's nuclear ambitions.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&&q=rumsfeld,+%22we+know%22,+tikrit">We know where they are.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

If this isn't scare-mongering propaganda straight from the israeli ministry of Innuendo.
And the photo of missiles is scary too!

hexaflourine gas mask

flour ?

well what is one to expect from a primary school science dropout :)


the pictures are from *Iran's own media* -

FARS news, and the Iran B satellite news channel..

this thread, as the previous comment from hex, will attest
is going well.

thats irIb -1

Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting

a zionist shill front because

well because

luc/x/sheep says so

the posting seems to be freezing and updating failing *depending on IP* - this is via proxy

My science grades and my reasoning capabilities would put you to shame, hext.

For example, when you claimed that flourine was present in seawater at twice the level of the average domestic water supply, I knew that you were wrong.
Flourine is a gas.

Not content to assert that you were wrong, however, I provided multiple scientific references to demonstrate that as fact.
In contrast, you seem incapable of distinguishing between fact and belicose rumour.

- - - - - - - - - -
"We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat. "
- Donald blitzkrieg Rumsfeld -----------------------------------------------------

the shame

still flour I see

fluorine is extremely reactive, it reacts with *everything* except teflon, copper/nickel and wax (which form protective coatings)

in water it's hydrofluoric acid at best.. A liquid


> flourine was present in seawater at twice the level of the average domestic water supply, I knew that you were wrong. Flourine is a gas.

> Not content to assert that you were wrong, however, I provided multiple scientific references to demonstrate that as fact.


your "scientific references" are flakes like you who can't even spell and don't know even basic grade school science


here let me school you flunkie :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluorine

Pure fluorine (F2) is a corrosive pale yellow or brown gas that is a powerful oxidizing agent.

It is the most reactive and electronegative of all the elements, and readily forms compounds with most other elements. Fluorine even combines with the noble gases, krypton, xenon, and radon. Even in dark, cool conditions, fluorine reacts explosively with hydrogen. It is so reactive that glass, metals, and even water, as well as other substances, burn with a bright flame in a jet of fluorine gas.

***It is far too reactive to be found in elemental form and has such an affinity for most elements, including silicon, that it can neither be prepared nor be kept in ordinary glass vessels. Instead, it must be kept in specialized quartz tubes lined with a very thin layer of fluorocarbons. In moist air it reacts with water to form also-dangerous hydrofluoric acid.***

In aqueous solution, fluorine commonly occurs as the fluoride ion F-, although HF is such a weak acid that substantial amounts of it are present in any water solution of fluoride at near neutral pH. Other forms are fluoro-complexes, such as [FeF4]-, or H2F+.

Fluorides are compounds that combine fluorine with some positively charged counterpart. They often consist of crystalline ionic salts. Fluorine compounds with metals are among the most stable of salts.


Fluorine in the form of fluorspar (also called fluorite) (calcium fluoride) was described in 1530 by Georgius Agricola for its use as a flux, which is a substance that is used to promote the fusion of metals or minerals. In 1670 Schwanhard found that glass was etched when it was exposed to fluorspar that was treated with acid. Karl Scheele and many later researchers, including Humphry Davy, Gay-Lussac, Antoine Lavoisier, and Louis Thenard all would experiment with hydrofluoric acid, easily obtained by treating calcium fluoride (fluorspar) with concentrated sulfuric acid.

It was eventually realized that hydrofluoric acid contained a previously unknown element. This element was not isolated for many years after this, due to its extreme reactivity; fluorine can only be prepared from its compounds electrolytically, and then it immediately attacks any susceptible materials in the area. Finally, in 1886, elemental fluorine was isolated by Henri Moissan after almost 74 years of continuous effort by other chemists. It was an effort which cost several researchers their health or even their lives. The derivation of elemental fluorine from hydrofluoric acid is exceptionally dangerous, killing or blinding several scientists who attempted early experiments on this halogen. These men came to be referred to as "fluorine martyrs." For Moissan, it earned him the 1906 Nobel Prize in chemistry (Moissan himself lived to be 54, and it is not clear whether his fluorine work shortened his life).

The first large-scale production of fluorine was needed for the atomic bomb Manhattan project in World War II where the compound uranium hexafluoride (UF6) was needed as a gaseous carrier of uranium to separate the 235U and 238U isotopes of uranium. Today both the gaseous diffusion process and the gas centrifuge process use gaseous UF6 to produce enriched uranium for nuclear power applications. In the Manhattan Project, it was found that elemental fluorine was present whenever UF6 was, due to the spontaneous decomposition of this compound into UF4 and F2. The corrosion problem due to the F2 was eventually solved by electrolytically coating all UF6 carrying piping with nickel metal, which resists fluorine's attack. Joints and flexible parts were made from Teflon, then a very recently-discovered fluorine-containing plastic which was not attacked by F2.

Both elemental fluorine and fluoride ions are highly toxic and must be handled with great care and any contact with skin and eyes should be strictly avoided. When it is a free element, fluorine has a characteristic pungent odor that is detectable in concentrations as low as 20 nL/L.


Contact of exposed skin with HF solutions posses one of the most extreme and insidious industrial threats-- one which is exacerbated by the fact that HF damages nerves in such a way as to make such burns initially painless. The HF molecule is capable of rapidly migrating through lipid layers of cells which would ordinarily stop an ionized acid, and the burns are typically deep. HF may react with calcium, permanently damaging the bone. More seriously, reaction with the body's calcium can cause cardiac arrhythmias, followed by cardiac arrest brought on by sudden chemical changes within the body. These cannot always be prevented with local or intravenous injection of calcium salts. HF spills over just 2.5% of the body's surface area, despite copious immediate washing, have been fatal (this corresponds with an area of about 9 in2 or 23 cm 2). If the patient survives, HF burns typically produce open wounds of an especially slow-healing nature.

Elemental fluorine is a powerful oxidizer which can cause organic material, combustibles, or other flammable materials to ignite.


Compounds of fluorine, including sodium fluoride (NaF), stannous fluoride (SnF2) and sodium MFP, are used in toothpaste to prevent dental cavities. These compounds are also added to municipal water supplies, a process called water fluoridation, though a combination of health concerns and urban legends has sometimes led to controversy.

In much higher concentrations, sodium fluoride has been used as an insecticide, especially against cockroaches.

Naturally, fluorides are released into the environment through the weathering of rocks and through atmospheric emissions from volcanoes and seawater.



To protect teeth from decay, the best level of fluoride in drinking water is between 0.7 mg/L to 1.2 mg/L

How much fluoride is there in drinking water?

"Fluoride is ubiquitous in the environment; therefore, sources of drinking-water are likely to contain at least some small amount of fluoride. The amount of fluoride present naturally in non-fluoridated drinking-water (i.e., drinking-water to which fluoride has not been intentionally added for the prevention of dental caries) is highly variable, being dependent upon the individual geological environment from which the water is obtained."

Levels may range up to approximately 2.0 mg/litre; however, in areas of the world in which endemic fluorosis of the skeleton and/or teeth has been well documented, levels of fluoride in drinking-water supplies range from 3 to more than 20 mg/litre.

In areas in which drinking-water is fluoridated (i.e., fluoride is intentionally added for the prevention of dental caries), the concentration of fluoride in drinking-water generally ranges from 0.7 to 1.2 mg/litre."

In seawater fluoride concentrations are higher, i.e. 1.2 to 1.5 mg/litre. In areas where the natural rock is rich in fluoride or where there is geothermal or volcanic activity, very high fluoride levels, up to 50 mg/litre, may be found in groundwater or hot springs.

plenty of fluoride but damn little P238. Could have been salted there anyway.

the plutonium could have been planted, although it's unlikely - depends on how many containers it was detected on, just one would be rather suspect...

the whole point is that we are not going to attack Iran, it would disrupt oil supplies and cause a global depression - whether Iran has nukes or how many is still an open question, that the price of oil would shoot through the roof (as if it's not already high enough) isn't..

this whole line of reasoning that since Israel want's to nuke Iran, that anyone who in any way can be perceived as supporting it _must be an Israeli agent_ even in the face of the larger picture of oil prices and info posted showing how bush's own advisors are telling him NO, plus it would only take one nuke to eliminate Israel, then the admission that we don't have the tactical knowledge anyway - we don't know where all the targets are - if we miss even one Israel is toast..

the risk to reward ratio is far too skewed to even think about attacking Iran

I've been consistantly saying exactly this the whole time, and now the picture is becoming clearer every day that this is the reality of the situation..

what started as a single voice has grown - first a few others joined, then more now a chorus of voices are all saying the same thing -

do NOT attack Iran

that's the whole point - not "well let's attack Iran anyway because of a twisted way of looking at the evidence of why we shouldn't attack Iran" and those who present such evidence (shoot the messenger) are secretly doing Israel's bidding

at this point that mud would have to be slung at bush's people also telling him NOT to attack Iran...

the "everyone who disagrees with me is an agent" theme starts looking mightly silly after awhile when it's applied to one subject after another

PS - since I don't think fluorine "gas" in the water is killing-us-all that means I secretly work for DuPont and I'm just here to discredit your public service of educating us about "flourine" with your giant scientific mind that puts me to shame

what's with the glowing, sinister, dark and rather - informative - lead graphic?
We could hold a poll at what the concerned, for lack of a better word, readership and authoritic types think it might be. in a
I'll go for that pimple on hex's butt in high definition IR, w/helium II cooled toilet clamp. Notice the contrast in emissivity.
Notice the lack of reference metrics or origin.

here's the original ^

don't you know plutonium when you see it ?

is this what you've been reduced to - critiquing the selection of plutonium pictures ?

what should I have posted - *a speck of dust* ?

"A speck of plutonium dust found in Iran"

the other pictures (google it) showed balls of plutonium being held in gloved hands, or sitting there, containers with the radiation symbol, plutonium liquid in a test tube..

this one is of the *casting of plutonium into pellets* - actually the background was greenish (a poor quality picture) so I cleaned it up to make it look more like it would actually look to the naked eye..

I like mine better, however.
You're referring to 'copper'
stay away from this material.
It's an obscenity... it's condensed
from the essence of evil of the darkest
secrets in our universe into a
power and poison, unseen and yet
cataclysmic and unimaginable

toxic load in in the nanogram/kilogram range.


.

I mean on his own thread about particles of plutonium? And a big red pimple glowing there, pulsing perhaps...

> his own thread

it's anyone's thread - or no one's thread


"zionist wikipedia"

hmmmm

I'd pull up those paranoia britches - your plutonium pellet is showing :)

From particles to pellets and soon we'll have enough for a butt plug. But even if these particles we're -salted- these by interested parties for obvious PR reasons, it would take some years of accumulation to make enough for a bomb. Better to buy some from israel.

> enough for a butt plug / Better to buy some from israel.

I saw a picture of missiles made in Israel that were phallic shaped in designer colors which I thought was odd

Wikipedia is where every brutal fact about Israel is rendered into a "dispute.
Kinda like "disputed territories" is kosher, whereas "stolen land" is POV.
Wikipedia is also where you can't mention the
***fact***
that five jubilant exploisves-tainted Israelis were arrested on 911, or that birhtly glowing visouis molten metal poured from the 81st floor of the Soth tower for at least seven minutes prior to it's explosive collapse.

I am gald you are a fan of wikipedia, hex, and I am glad you now recognize that flUOrine - gosh I apologize for the typo, mate!!! (maybe it was a "Freudian slip"???) is a GAS that does not exist in tapwater, contrary to you earlier statment.
Perhaps you meant flouriDe rather than flouriNe, hex.
Perhaps it was a typo?

meanwhile,

http://portland.indymedia.org/media/media/2005/09/324255.mp3";>Did you find the WMD in Tikrit?

>>birhtly glowing visouis molten metal
should read,
>>> "brightly glowing viscous molten metal"

as I said - everyone who knows anything about fluorine already knows it doesn't exist as the free element and any reference therefore always means ION ;

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Determination of Fluorine in Drinking Water

the minimum concentration of fluorine in water. which would produce mottled enamel ... fluorine in water which would definitely mottle the teeth



EXPERIMENTAL STUDY OF FLUORINE LEACHING BY WATER FROM ROCKS

in a range (-3.51)÷(-3.16), i.e. concentration of fluorine in water was from 5.9. up to 13.1 mg/L.



[FLUORINE IN WATER IN THE WROCLAW REGION.]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=14116376&dopt=Abstract



[High-speed volumetric method of determining fluorine in water]



The content of fluorine in water before cleaning made up 2.2-2.5 mg/l and after cleaning water in plant "Chashma" the content of fluorine was less than




amount of fluorine in water produces a regular and linear increase in the. severity of mottling, and below 1 mg/L F there was no indication that




The quantity of dissolved fluorine in water that could be measured easily was found to correlate closely with tensile strength and ion exchange capacity



The presence of fluorine in water is apparently not necessarily proof of industrial contamination since it occurs in small amounts in so many water supplies



cc: Subject: Re: Fluorine in Water (Document link not converted) We use capillary electrophoresis for F analysis and have obtained 100

http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?A2=ind9911&L=plasmachem-l&D=0&T=0&P=20622



containing hydrogen and either nitrogen, oxygen or fluorine. In water this hydrogen bonding is responsible for its high melting and boiling points

http://www.colorado.edu/physics/2000/microwaves/collisions.html




Nat' Academies Press, Radiochemistry in Nuclear Power Reactors (1996)

http://fermat.nap.edu/books/NI000156/html/113.html

only in the fluoride (F-) form in either the reactor coolant or the BWR steam condensate, which is the most stable and only form of fluorine in water



presence naturally of fluorine in water supplies led. to the prevalence of mottling of the permanent. teeth. This mottling varies according to the

http://occmed.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/10/3-4/61.pdf



Epoxidation of Olefins with Elemental Fluorine in Water


synthesis of epoxides from olefins using fluorine in water/. acetonitrile mixtures. There are several methods for the synthesis of epoxides



Dr. Gerald Cox of the Mellon Institute in the United States, found in 1938 that 1.0 parts per million of fluorine in water prevented dental caries




DETERMINATION OF FLUORINE IN WATER SAMPLES. BY SPIKING ISOTOPE DILUTION AND
ADSORPTION. ON GLASS BEADS. W, VAN DER MARK, H. A.


fluorine in water and in biological materials such as blood and urine.




The GSP has acquired the capability of detecting 1 p.p.m. fluorine in water samples, through its own efforts. An analytical precision of this kind does not



fact that the naturally occurring levels of fluorine in water is quite variable, albeit typically much.

http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/Other/jfca16_621-628.pdf




form in either the reactor coolant or the BWR steam condensate, which is the most stable and only form of fluorine in water. The typical concentrations


http://fermat.nap.edu/nap-cgi/skimit.cgi?recid=9263&chap=113-124




The advent of the use of fluorine in water supplies, toothpastes, etc.,



An Ecotechnological Removal System for Fluorine in Water by Using Activated Alumina. CHOHJI Tetsuji†*, TANG Ning**, TAFU Masamoto*. and TABATA Masahiro*

http://www.toyama-nct.ac.jp/event/aset13/file/file_e.doc




specifications:, Adopting special fluorine removing agent,the device can remove fluorine in water.




Nobel Prize Winning Chemists

http://www.sanbenito.k12.tx.us/district/webpages2002/judymedrano/Nobel%20Winners/jerome_karle.htm

He developed a procedure for determining the amount of fluorine in water supplies that became a standard method. This was his first contribution to science

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

notice all the EDU and K12 domains (schools), GOV (government)

it's *very common practice* to simply refer to fluorine AS fluorine because it's common knowledge that it does'nt occur as the free element..

which is taught even in grade school (K12)

which one is -not- me?

he haw he haw....
So where's all the P238?
In Israel?

Except for a few particles in Iran.
:>)

as far as I can tell

none

all the sock puppets are in complete agreement :)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to a new UN report, Iran has reportedly admitted that it carried out experiments on plutonium, which can be used to make nuclear arms, up until 1998 -- that is, for five years longer that it had previously acknowledged.



Prague, 16 June 2005 (RFE/RL) -- The UN document says Iran had previously stated that it experimented with plutonium in 1993 and "no plutonium had been separated since then."

But in a letter to the UN last month, Tehran admitted to processing a small amount of plutonium in 1995 and also in 1998. The admission came following an analysis by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of samples indicating the experiments took place recently.

It's not the first time Iran has acknowledged not being fully transparent about its atomic program. Among other admissions, Iran in early 2003 acknowledged secretly importing uranium compounds, following IAEA inspections of its nuclear facility at Natanz.

Independent experts say the latest admission is again raising the question as to whether Iran is coming clean about its nuclear activities.

IAEA inspectors detected bits of plutonium in samples of particles of highly enriched uranium (HEU) taken earlier from containers at the Karaj atomic waste facility near Tehran. In larger amounts, plutonium and HEU can detonate atom bombs.


In response to IAEA queries, Iran said the HEU could have come from spent fuel from a Tehran light-water research reactor, the report said. Iran on Monday provided an explanation of the "slight plutonium contamination" now being assessed by the IAEA.

The report also confirmed Iran last month launched a second experimental chain of 164 centrifuges and began injecting them with uranium "UF6" gas for enrichment as nuclear fuel.


"The IAEA continues therefore to be unable to confirm the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear programme, which is a matter of serious concern," ElBaradei, the IAEA director-general, said in his annual report to the 192-nation UN body.


The reports said Iran still had not clarified questions about black-market acquisitions of material for centrifuge enrichment machines, and research linking uranium-ore processing, high-explosive tests and missile warhead design.

Other unresolved issues include the extent of research on a new generation of centrifuges that could enrich 2-3 times faster than the model now being used.

Iran continues to dodge an IAEA request to install remote monitoring devices at nuclear sites so that camera images could be transmitted straight to IAEA experts abroad, the report said.

A senior IAEA diplomat said the lack of remote monitoring in Iran would become a serious handicap for inspectors once Tehran installed several thousand centrifuges for "industrial-scale" enrichment, as it plans to do by the spring of 2007.

"At this time it is very difficult for our inspectors to move around in Iran. Once they expand to 3,000 centrifuges or more, remote monitoring will become more urgent, as long as Iran refuses to allow unannounced inspections," he told Reuters.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday Iran aimed to install 60,000 centrifuges, up from 54,000 mentioned earlier.

it's still an open question

> Enough for the photo you supplied?

how big is that pellet in the picture Mr. smarty pants ?

next time I'll post a picture of a speck of dust to make you happy

only you're never happy

they ran stories in thier own official news agencies and broadcast them on TV to show the world they mean business

I'm sorry that reality doesn't bend to your will but no amount of hand wringing and pouting changes any of these facts ;

1.) plutonium has been detected AGAIN in Iran
2.) Iran showed off their missiles themselves
3.) the types and capabilities of said missles have surprised military experts in the pentagon
4.) they are strongly recommending we NOT attack Iran because the risk-to-reward ratio is too high
a.) Oil prices will shoot through the roof
b.) one slip up, one missed target and Israel is toast
c.) Iraq will go completely out of control and the bases we have there will be over-run, we will lose what small bit of presence we do have there - our war against Iraq will have been completely wasted
d.) the backlash on bush and the republicans would be extreme as if they aren't already sliding into the abyss as it is

insted of whining/pouting/bitching about non-specific exercises in applied paranoia, try addressing the points above in a reasonable and coherent manner

After your article and comments on same you type this?
"insted of whining/pouting/bitching about non-specific exercises in applied paranoia, -"
Amazing unbelievable and incredible.
So how much P238 did they find, anyway? A good salting's worth?
Enough for your pellet?
Or plug?

A glorious day. Moses got his stick.
Now they can brandish their sizable nuclear arsenal while they push propaganda about plutonium and missiles of -other- nations.

google it and find out

a better question might be how much plutonium *should* they find :)

> while they push propaganda about plutonium and missiles of other nations.

got any evidence to back that up ?

please tell us the IAEA are secret agents too now, and that agents snuck into the Iranian presses and printed the missile stories *and the Iranians let them*

then tell us how they jammed the Iranian TV channels with a clone of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad fooling us into believing the massive unprecedented tests of never before seen missiles no one even knew they had

and again the Iranians let them without so much as a whimper

I'm really looking forward to seeing the proof of these things - before it's lost in a huge explosion too like all the other proof was :)

I see that you did NOT find WMD in Tikrit, hext.
Thanks for answering the question!
'preciate it, pal!


Can anyone within range of Hex's bellicose radiactive faith-based rhetoric feel safe?

"Hex's"

Hi - I'm the devil



[ ]shoot the messenger

[ ]bearer of bad news

[ ]town cryer

[ ]village idiot

(check all that apply)

One reason [striking Iran] won’t be debated publicly because it’s based on a fallacy promoted by a calculated campaign of hysteria by Israel’s leadership. Iran, right now, has

no nuclear weapons program that anyone knows of

— the Israelis however have opted to paint the very idea of uranium enrichment in Iran, quite legal under the NPT, into the first stanza of a new Holocaust. Israel’s demand that Iran be stopped, by force if necessary, from establishing the nuclear fuel cycle allowed under the NPT is untenable, I’ve argued elsewhere — the idea that any nation in the Middle East that creates the infrastructural capability to challenge Israel’s nuclear monopoly in the region (creates the infrastructure that would allow this choice rather than actually pursue weapons) must face military sanctions is absurd and unsustainable. The only way to resolve this problem is to normalize relations in the region to create a basis for stability. But that’s not the way the Israeli or U.S. leadership sees it, which is why we’re heading for confrontation despite the U.S. election results.

Seymour Hersh, in a new New Yorker piece, explores the chances of a weakened Bush administration attacking Iran, and finds them to be pretty good. And one of the most revealing aspects of his piece is the fact that the Administration has been told by U.S. intelligence that there is,

in fact,
no evidence of a covert Iranian nuclear weapons program.

Hersh’s writes:

The Administration’s planning for a military attack on Iran was made far more complicated earlier this fall by a highly classified draft assessment by the C.I.A. challenging the White House’s assumptions about how close Iran might be to building a nuclear bomb. The C.I.A. found no conclusive evidence, as yet, of a secret Iranian nuclear-weapons program running parallel to the civilian operations that Iran has declared to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

And in replay of the pre-Iraq war game, the White House hawks — led by Dick Cheney, who was always far more dangerous than Rumsfeld [EM] are rejecting the evidence and probably rallying bureaucratic power in a battle to override the intel community. Hersh again:

A current senior intelligence official confirmed the existence of the C.I.A. analysis, and told me that the White House had been hostile to it. The White House’s dismissal of the C.I.A. findings on Iran is widely known in the intelligence community. Cheney and his aides discounted the assessment, the former senior intelligence official said. “They’re not looking for a smoking gun,” the official added, referring to specific intelligence about Iranian nuclear planning. “They’re looking for the degree of comfort level they think they need to accomplish the mission.” The Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency also challenged the C.I.A.’s analysis. “The D.I.A. is fighting the agency’s conclusions, and disputing its approach,” the former senior intelligence official said. Bush and Cheney, he added, can try to prevent the C.I.A. assessment from being incorporated into a forthcoming National Intelligence Estimate on Iranian nuclear capabilities, “but they can’t stop the agency from putting it out for comment inside the intelligence community.” The C.I.A. assessment warned the White House that it would be a mistake to conclude that the failure to find a secret nuclear-weapons program in Iran merely meant that the Iranians had done a good job of hiding it. The former senior intelligence official noted that at the height of the Cold War the Soviets were equally skilled at deception and misdirection, yet the American intelligence community was readily able to unravel the details of their long-range-missile and nuclear-weapons programs. But some in the White House, including in Cheney’s office, had made just such an assumption—that “the lack of evidence means they must have it,” the former official said.

Iraq all over again, in other words.

Some believe that the Administration is less likely to go to war after its chastening in the election, and because Iraq is such a disaster. This is what Richard Armitage argues to Hersh. Others see the appointment of Robert Gates to replace Rumsfeld as a sign of the reassertion of adult supervision. Then again, others among Hersh’s sources fear that Gates could be being set up to be the new Colin Powell, brought in to add credibility to a policy train he can’t stop.

The neocons are still hard at work, insisting that the only way Iraq can be salvaged would be to punish Iran. And their notion that Iran is somehow responsible for the turmoil in Iraq remains part of administration conventional wisdom. They’re also pushing the idea that Iran is something Bush will have to do before he leaves office, trying to push the buttons of his Churchillian fantasies to goad him into this disastrous course of action.

But the most dangerous element of the equation, I believe, is the hysteria being cultivated by the Israelis. Hersh mentions that Israel is telling the U.S. they have human intelligence on Iran developing trigger devices for a nuclear bomb, but U.S. intelligence is unable to verify these claims. More worrying, however, is the public campaign being waged by Israeli leaders. Olmert warns American Jewish leader that Israel has come to a “pivotal moment” at which its survival depends on confronting Iran. Bibi Netanyahu (the Newt Gingrich of Israeli politics; a discredited crank who manages to grab headlines only by uttering alarmist rubbish) warns darkly that its 1938 all over again. (Memo to Mark Foley: You ought to try this, it could be a surefire route to political rehabilitation…)

This fevered scaremongering is all about Israeli domestic politics....
http://tonykaron.com/2006/11/20/israels-domestic-political-game-raises-the-danger-of-a-us-iran-war/";>tonykaron.com/...
==================================

"We know where they are"

To produce plutonium, that is. The Hanford reactors that made the Pu for the Fat Man bomb were carbon-moderated and used natural uranium as fuel.

As CP-1 demonstrated, if you achieve sufficient purity of materials (particularly the graphite for the moderator) and get the geometry of the lattice right, a self-sustaining controlled chain reaction can be achieved with natural uranium (that is, U contining the isotope mix found in nature).

Once you get that controlled chain reaction going, all you need to do is let it run for a while, then remove the fuel and chemically extract the Pu.

The failed German atomic energy program was trying to use heavy water as a moderator; they had been put off carbon by incorrect measurements of its neutron absorbtion cross-section. That approach would eventually have worked; they had come around to the idea of a lattice configuration just before the end of the war, but the American program, which was successful, eschewed heavy water in favor of pure carbon as a moderator.

BTW, I see multiple references to Pu238 in this thread. That's odd, because that's not the favored isotope for bombs. Pu238 is used in RTG power sources because its relatively high rate of decay (it has a half-life of 87.74 years as opposed to 24,110 years for Pu239, and consequently a specific activity 274 times greater than Pu239) produces lots of heat to convert to electricity. OTOH, like most isotopes with an even number of neutrons, Pu238 isn't fissile and consequently is unsuitable for bomb fuel.

You wanna build a bomb, you want Pu239.

re: heavy water


I know that but that's the favored way of producing it

besides Iran *does* have a heavy water reactor I found out since I posted this thread :)




> BTW, I see multiple references to Pu238

yeah that's sheepdog for you - you'll notice I strictly referred to plutonium period even when he kept saying 238..

Plutonium-239 is one of the two fissile materials used for the production of nuclear weapons and in some nuclear reactors as a source of energy. The other fissile material is uranium-235. Plutonium-239 is virtually nonexistent in nature. It is made by bombarding uranium-238 with neutrons in a nuclear reactor. Uranium-238 is present in quantity in most reactor fuel; hence plutonium-239 is continuously made in these reactors. Since plutonium-239 can itself be split by neutrons to release energy, plutonium-239 provides a portion of the energy generation in a nuclear reactor.