Comments on: Nuke Facility Raid An Inside Job?

Eyewitness Talks To 60 Minutes About Brazen Assault On South African Nuclear Facility

Add a Comment See all 45 Comments
by cbswhiteout November 23, 2008 11:18 PM EST
I grew up watching Walter Cronkite and 60 minuets with my dad. I believed it all.

Now I watch and wonder "what was the reason for that piece of propaganda?
Reply to this comment
by robaldrich November 23, 2008 11:11 PM EST
clathrate wrote: ''Right....nuke facility housing HEU is raided by gang of armed men who defeat multiple layers of security and they get away with God knows what. Right, nothing to be concerned about at all...''
-------

I''m not concerned, I live in America -- not Africa. Even if I live next door to Pelindaba, I still wouldn''t worry.

You can''t just take enriched uranium, throw it at someone, and have any real damage other than from the weight of Uranium-235. Uranium-235 alpha decays.

No need to discuss the virtual impossibility that a ''gang,'' that had to steal it''s enriched uranium from someone else, could build a device (bomb) to make Uranium-235 go prompt supercritical.
Reply to this comment
by royrun99 November 23, 2008 11:01 PM EST
I have seen used car lots with better security than these incompetents have put together. Based on their evasive answers, i am convinced they, the management of the facility, are part of the plot.

How''bout the girl bringing her boyfriend in to the facility to keep her company.
Roy Hall
Reply to this comment
by doxtdm November 23, 2008 10:56 PM EST
Nuke Facility Attack:
Is it really necessary that the news media report every aspect of what they consider news? Don''t you care that anti-Americans watch your reports? To think that you actually showed where they could get in the fencing, how they got in and told them that the alarm had to be shut off and then even proceeded to tell them how much uranium is needed and how it can be used to blow most of us off the face of the earth. I think there are times that the public does not need to know every detail and have it explained to them. This is not the first time or for that matter the only station that I have seen present things of unfavorable taste.
Reply to this comment
by clathrate November 23, 2008 10:37 PM EST
Sound more like desperate Muslims hoping to see those 72 virgin boys they''''re promised when they kill.


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

Posted by jbrown88881

Actually it sounds more like a Russian mob plot to steal the stuff and sell to the highest bidder, whoever that may be. They''ve tried for years inside their own country, what''s to prevent them from going international?
Reply to this comment
by clathrate November 23, 2008 10:30 PM EST
Sounds like more wild conspiracy theory blather from Scott Pelley.

He seems willing to claim just about anything for his Israeli and corporate masters.



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

Posted by MikeTotten1

Right....nuke facility housing HEU is raided by gang of armed men who defeat multiple layers of security and they get away with God knows what. Right, nothing to be concerned about at all...
Reply to this comment
by cbswhiteout November 23, 2008 10:24 PM EST
Who really produced this story? Black country Nuclear Technology? 60 min looks like the tool of the "economic hitman"

Reply to this comment
by tianl05 November 23, 2008 10:11 PM EST
The report completed glosses over the fact that the dismantling of South Africa''s nuclear arsenal was a key negotiating point for the transition to democratic ''Native African'' rule.

It would not be allowed that a ''Black'' African nation have access and control over nuclear weapons. It is also no suprise that 98% of the employees at the facility are still white Afrikaaners.
Reply to this comment
by tianl05 November 23, 2008 10:11 PM EST
The report completed glosses over the fact that the dismantling of South Africa''s nuclear arsenal was a key negotiating point for the transition to democratic ''Native African'' rule.

It would not be allowed that a ''Black'' African nation have access and control over nuclear weapons. It is also no suprise that 98% of the employees at the facility are still white Afrikaaners.
Reply to this comment
by tianl05 November 23, 2008 10:11 PM EST
The report completed glosses over the fact that the dismantling of South Africa''s nuclear arsenal was a key negotiating point for the transition to democratic ''Native African'' rule.

It would not be allowed that a ''Black'' African nation have access and control over nuclear weapons. It is also no suprise that 98% of the employees at the facility are still white Afrikaaners.
Reply to this comment
by redbds November 21, 2008 5:39 PM EST
Sounds like an intelligence service wanted an untraceable source of nuclear material for a false flag terror attack and the plant operator was involved.

I would look at those that specialize in false flag attacks - Israel and the US.

Posted by AntiZion at 01:10 PM : Nov 21, 2008

And away we go with the conspiracy theories! Idiot!
Reply to this comment
by antizion November 21, 2008 4:10 PM EST
Sounds like an intelligence service wanted an untraceable source of nuclear material for a false flag terror attack and the plant operator was involved.

I would look at those that specialize in false flag attacks - Israel and the US.
Reply to this comment
by evian_ycnan November 21, 2008 3:34 PM EST
Posted by Amysdad76 at 12:27 PM : Nov 21, 2008

You`re assuming that the were there to steal radioactive materials.

Maybe they came there just to shoot this Gerber fellow.
Reply to this comment
by amysdad76 November 21, 2008 3:27 PM EST
Adam thinks it''s a case of "random criminality".

Is it somehow safer if random criminals have radioactive materials?
Reply to this comment
by markavelli2 November 21, 2008 2:31 PM EST
buttonjockey,

Wind is cheaper than nuke power? That''s a no brainer. But how much land must be peppered with windmills to create the output of one nuke plant.
You are also forgetting the environmentalists refusal to compromise on ANYTHING. They will not tolerate windmills all over our mountains, and open plains. They won''t allow anything that isn''t perfect in their eyes.

Who wants to see windmills all over the place anyways.
Nuke power is still the best way to go. But the enviros put a stop to that back in the 70''s.....
Reply to this comment
by buttonjockey November 21, 2008 12:49 PM EST
This is one of the fundamental problems with nuclear power that will drive up its cost even further while the cost of solar and wind falls. According to a 2006 government study, wind is already cheaper than nuclear power when you analyze the costs of construction, fuel, operation, SECURITY, maintenance and decommission. Solar is still a lot more expensive than nuclear but its cost is expected to fall below nuclear when large scale production and implementation happens (as it will in the southwest US). Wind will come down a little in cost due to efficiency improvements. Nuclear, on the other hand, is facing skyrocketing construction costs and increasing security considerations so it will only increase in price. Power generation by coal, oil and natural gas (all cheaper than nuclear) will become more expensive due to fuel cost increases and environmental concerns.

In about 10 to 20 years, we will see that solar is the way to go because it will be cheaper than nuclear, it will employ heat retention systems to produce power overnight, it will be far too decentralized to suffer much from terrorist activity, and it will produce no dangerous waste of any kind. Wind will be viable as a cheaper supplement.

What''s ironic is that all the fuss of the environmentalists will not be the key to widespread use of solar and wind for power. It will be simple economics.
Reply to this comment
by joule18 November 21, 2008 10:09 AM EST
I sure do hate bush and his greedy, rich friends. A nice civil war in which all Republican rich are imprisoned would be fun. We could send them to Palestine and let the Arabs there move here. Then stop sending money to Israel. Well... Let''''s go! Really... I''''m waiting.

Posted by timothyone at 06:50 AM : Nov 21, 2008

It would be nothing less than you deserve to have the Arabs in the Palestenian territory be your neighbors. If we could do a swap where all the people that live there vacate and I could go live there I would. Israel is a wonderful, vibrant country and they could then annex the Gaza and West Bank and make it wonderful too.

As far as your situation, your property values would immediately plummet and you could live in intimidation and fear as they lob rockets into your backyard on a daily basis.
Reply to this comment
by connapa November 21, 2008 9:52 AM EST
If it was an inside job, it had to have been planned by someone with low level clearance. Otherwise, they would have been able to get further into the facility. The Uranium would be in relatively unformed, basic pieces stored in such a way to make sure that radioactive decay would be slow to preserve the purity until it could be made into any type of weapon. It would take weeks to months- even with the right equipment- to form the material into any useable shape. They would also have needed the technology and equipment to turn a subcritical mass into a critical (or supercritical) mass. Given the economy of the continent, it was likely just an attempt to steal material and try to sell to the highest bidder.
Reply to this comment
by wardoglrs November 21, 2008 1:36 AM EST


Little physics here, folks.

ALL reactor fuel, with "added purification", can be used in a nuclear weapon.

It is the "added purification" which is the issue.

Is Iran actually doing "Added purification"? The IAEA says no. And it is not as trivial as the article implies. Nuclear fuel (what Iran is making) is enriched to 3%. Weapons-grade uranium needs to be enriched to 95% or higher. The required equipment, energy, and time needed to go from 3% to 95% is enormous, orders of magnitude larger than that needed for reactor fuel. And impossible to conceal (except under the Dimona reactor, which is, unlike Iran, safe from IAEA inspections.
Reply to this comment
by karela33 November 21, 2008 12:39 AM EST
If they couldn''t carry it off, what would happen if they had a way to deonate it on site? And/or what would happen if they held the site hostage with the threat of detonation? No one would find much advantage in trying to steal the makings of nice, safe, clean wind and solar energy. Why do we mess with things like this if we don''t have to? Solar experts now say that a solar system ninety two miles on a side set in the Nevada desert would supply all the electricity the U.S. needs. Now, we need a new smart power grid that can handle the job of moving it where it''s needed. And that''s good too because it will create a lot of jobs and save of some of the $700 billion a year we spend on foreign oil.
Reply to this comment
See all 45 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR
60 Minutes RSS Feed