Home arrow Commentary arrow OPINIONS arrow Bulletin arrow The New York Times thinks so
Feb 21 2008
The New York Times thinks so | Print |  E-mail
Bulletin
By Ace Hoffman   

Translation
Image

But does anybody else believe it's a hydrazine worry?

Bob Nichols, a Project-Censored award-winning writer, called today to say he doesn't buy the Pentagon's story that they are shooting down the errant satellite because of hydrazine.  Ed Siegel called to say the same thing:  "No way!  No way!  That's ridiculous!"

Bob's follow-up email included a letter published in Nature in 1973 which was written by some folks from the Atomic Energy Commission, and which presented the results of their tracking the Pu-238 from the 1964 SNAP-9A accident.

Most of the Pu had stayed in the southern hemisphere, where the Plutonium levels had increased sometimes by more than double -- across ALL forms of Pu.  Therefore, for many places in the southern hemisphere, such as Brisbane, Australia or Pretoria, South Africa, the single SNAP-9A accident, which released just 2.1 pounds of plutonium at an altitude of about 30 miles, causes more cancers than all the plutonium released from all the atmospheric weapons testing and weapons use in history.

In the northern hemisphere, which is much more polluted from weapons testing, the Pu from the SNAP-9A accident contributed, at that time, about 1% to 2% of the total Pu burden, which was, in total, about five to ten time greater than in the southern hemisphere. After about five years, approximately 5% of the Pu from the SNAP-9A was estimated to still be in the atmosphere.  It drops out very slowly.

Today is my younger brother Dan'l's 50th birthday.  Like many Americans, Daniel, a former aircraft mechanic and now a high school instructor, is an amateur astronomer / sky watcher.  That means he has a telescope, often with a camera attached to it, and knows how to point it at things in the sky.

Today, he can point his telescope at the full lunar eclipse, and at about the same time, he can look for 20,000 pounds of junk crashing to earth at 18,000 miles per hour.  The first attempt to shoot it down will be concurrent with the eclipse.

But the junk MIGHT include 25 pounds or more of plutonium.  if so, like Caesar's last breath, today's tragedy will invade us all.

I could not stop its launch in 2006, since the CIA / NASA always just say it's all "secret" and won't admit to what might be aboard.  And I sure can't stop its falling.

But shooting down this satellite is NOT about the hydrazine, that's for sure.  Could it be because of any plutonium on board?

ABSOLUTELY.

No one mentions a word about the possibility of it being plutonium in the mainstream media's articles.  But it's unlikely they are shooting this satellite down because of fears the Chinese will get hold of some "eeproms," as commentator "Deek Chainy" puts it in the comments underneath the WIRED article shown below.  (It makes a nice cover story, though, I suppose.)  Nukes are mentioned a few times in the comments (which I've edited slightly for taste; forgive me if I missed anything ugly), but mostly by woefully ignorant people who apparently think incineration during reentry will destroy the plutonium.  It doesn't -- plutonium is an element, and incineration only spreads it around for humans and other living things to breath.

If you try to call the Pentagon to ask them about the possibility of ANY spy satellite, and in particular this one, having plutonium on board, they'll tell you to call NASA about it.  Pamela Blockey-O'Brien tried really, really hard to find out -- to get a definitive "NO" from them.  First, she called the White House switchboard.  "Huh?" they said, and suggested she call the Pentagon.  They, of course, denied all ability to answer any questions about it because it was "secret" and suggested she call NASA instead, who, they told her, are actually in charge of space objects like that hunk of junk.  A call to NASA produced, of course, the immediate response that she needs to call the Pentagon about that particular birdie, because it's their birdie, and NASA doesn't have anything to say about Pentagon Birdies.

Pamela responded, somewhat annoyed: "THEY TOLD ME TO CALL YOU!!!!"

After much haggling, she was given the Press Office number at the Pentagon, and assured that they would have an answer.

But of course, they didn't, because when she called them, they said: "Are you the press?"

"No" she replied.  "Wait, please" they responded.  So she waited five or ten minutes, but they finally came back on the line and said, "You're not the press, so we can't talk to you about that satellite."  "But I'm going to talk to the press as soon as I hang up with YOU!" she responded.

They chuckled a little, she told me, but wouldn't release any information.  This whole thing, which took maybe 20 seconds for you to read and two minutes for me to write, took nearly two hours to accomplish for poor exhausted Pamela, on oxygen to begin with.  And only to be told citizens don't have the rights that the "free" press has in America.  We do NOT have official "press" credentials in America, though, so the whole excuse for not talking to her is unconstitutional and immoral!

Last year, I sent a Freedom Of Information Act request to various government agencies trying to determine how much of the information about nuclear issues that I've sent them is being stored.  The answer is NOTHING,  NOTHING, NOTHING -- except the NRC had a couple of documents I sent to my then-Congressman Randall "Duke" Cunningham shortly before he attempted to commit murder / suicide on November 25th, 2005, just prior to his resignation / imprisonment.

NASA officially knows NOTHING of anything I've ever said or written, even after all these long years of opposing their use of nuclear materials in space, both for spy satellites AND for "deep" space probes which are, I contend, merely a cover for the spy program's use of "RTG's."

This_Category
Category:: Bulletin

Recommend this article...




Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:
Digg!Reddit!Del.icio.us!Newsvine!Blogmarks!Yahoo!

Quote this article on your site | Views: 1018

Comments (4)
RSS comments
1. 21-02-2008 17:27
Pu!
Thanks for getting this info out... Because of my own limited research, I suspected immediatley that the power plant on this flying school bus was indeed plutonium... Hence, all the obfuscation on the part of the Powers-That-Be!  
 
Thanks Ace for your constant vigilance...
Guest
2. 23-02-2008 02:01
Bob Nichols - No Journalist
I see that Bob Nichols and his "Project Censored" award are in the blogs yet again. Do you know what that award is; it is a totally political gift from a professor at Sonoma State University. If your view of the world agrees with the professor's warped view, you win the award. Nichols's award winning article was a piece of bad science fiction about depleted uranium; he is not a journalist; he does not do any kind of indepth research; he ignores anything that disagrees with his preformed opinions and he is somewhat of an egocentric individual who has to always be in the limelight. Who else would claim to be a war correspondent, as Nichols did on the DeadlyDUST home page, when they were supposedly reporting on the war (in Lebanon) from the comfort of their apartment in San Francisco, California. He certainly is no expert on satellites or missiles; he claims to be some sort of weapons expert but he does not know, as Rosalie Berthell also did not know, that the 30mm GAU-8 DU penetrator round is encased in aluminum and that the UNEP team found hundreds of intact rounds on the ground in Boznia-Herzegovina. There are even pictures of these intact rounds in the link to the UNEP report that is linked to my name. If you want to learn about DU, go there or to www.depletedcranium.com. Don't go to Bob Nichols.
Guest
rhelbig@california.comNOSPAM! ">Roger Helbig
3. 23-02-2008 02:13
Ace Hoffman
So, Ace, just exactly who are you and what makes you think that Bob Nichols is some kind of expert on anything? Just wondering, besides, maybe you actually do have an inquiring mind, though it sounds like you have done very little if any research in the NRC because their files are pretty available to the public. Hydrazine is used for attitude control jets on satellites that move around and change orbits - spy satellites do just that. Plutonium generators are really only useful if a satellite is going so far out into space that the sunlight will not generate enough electricity from the solar arrays. Nichols is always drawing at straws. He is tied at the hip to Leuren Moret and she is a total fake - all the science she really knows is what's left from a nearly 40 year old baccalaureate degree in geology and maybe a bit from 20 year old graduate study that she never completed. None of that had anything to do with radiation or uranium or anything like that. You can read more about Moret from the files that are indexed in the link at the end of this message. The files are not "links" - you have to log in to the Yahoo group with the username and password that are given in the message - then you can go to the Files section and read any of the files that are there. At least three are about Moret - there is not much about Nichols - he is a such a zero in the real world that I was not even able to verify that he had served in Vietnam - I did verify that he worked at McAlester Army Ammunition Plant in Oklahoma for less than a month about 10-20 years ago. I was also able to verify that he never worked for any news organization and has no journalistic training. The Project Censored Award is not the Pulitizer Prize - he just gets to keep it because no one wants to interfere with Academic Freedom - which I always thought was the freedom to present unpopular viewpoints, not to disseminate outright false information to the campus community.
Guest
rhelbig@california.comNOSPAM! ">Roger Helbig
4. 24-02-2008 11:18
Boss
Ace: 
Are you an ace on satellites, that you know what kinds of power plants they use? Does the sun provide enough power for a weather control satellite? I doubt it. Does NASA ever tell us the truth? I doubt that, too! 
What's more, the chances that anyone get hit by hydrazene is at least 1 in 20 since most of the Earth's surface has no people, and even if it did, no one would be permanently injured. In other words, all the talk about Hydrazene is bullsh_t!
Guest

Write Comment
  • Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article.
  • Personal verbal attacks will be deleted.
  • Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed.
  • Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button.
  • Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:Web AddressEmail AddressBold TextItalic TextUnderlined TextQuoteCodeOpen ListList ItemClose List
Comment:



Code:* Code
I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4


Tags:  Ace Hoffman Bob Nichols Project-Censored hydrazine New York Times
 
< Prev Content   Next Content >
 

Translate

Enter Amount: