US lacks labs to test for 'dirty bomb' »

This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed

Comments: 32

• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  STONERS

  Oct. 25, 2007, 12:46 a.m.

  "I had hoped since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, that our government had smart people lying awake at 3 o'clock in the morning, trying to think through everything that terrorists could be dreaming of, every kind of attack they could be dreaming of, and trying to think of ways to prevent it and to respond to it if it does happen."

  "Learning how poorly prepared we are for a dirty bomb, a radiological attack, makes me think that that's not happened."
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  johnbbbs

  Oct. 25, 2007, 5:51 a.m.

  Fearmongering. "Starts when you're always afraid" So-called "dirty bombs" are a tool to keep you in terror, more by the Government than by terrorists. They are VERY hard to make, do not "disburse" well, are relatively not dangerous. But they DO sound awful. The ONLY thing we have to fear ........ is fear itself.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  jordan11

  Oct. 25, 2007, 8:27 a.m.

  This is a reactive administration, which surrounds itself with reactive advisors. Fighting 'terrorism' requires being proactive, as obviously it makes sense to stop terrorist acts before they happen.

  Imports are not being watched. Our animals have been poisoned, and our childrens toys covered with lead. Imagine what terrorists could do to imported goods. Our food supply has been getting 'dirtier', and people being sickened is now a common occurance. Imagine what terrorists could do if they got ahold of our food supply. (And so on).

  That old adage "out of sight, out of mind" aptly applies to the lack of our anti terrorism policies. The media doesn't talk about it, so Americans don't think about it.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  getreal1

  Oct. 25, 2007, 11:12 a.m.

  Looks like they should volunteer testing to regular doctors and medical clinics, since they do have the test. They should be free to the doctors and the public. After all we most likely wouldn't have this problem in Global trade weren't so cheaply accepted by other countries. Sometimes they should demand their worth and then we may have better goods.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  RedRiverJ

  Oct. 25, 2007, 1:55 p.m.

  The day after 9-11 our government should have started every way possible to fight terrorism to keep it from happening. Our politicians should consider ever way to help people if they are victims of terrorists as well as keep us safe. It is like they are asleep at the wheel........sometimes I think we have an entire senate and house of morons. What do you expect from politicians that will not and have not put up A BORDER FENCE 6 years after the fact.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  kaizersozey83

  Oct. 25, 2007, 3:30 p.m.

  don't worry, dirty bombs are terribly innefective. This type of attack really has no grounds for alarm. The effect it would have on people would be minimal. The people directly related to the attack (meaning around it) would be the only ones with anything to worry about. An small explosion is not a great means to spread radiation throughout any city. Do a little research into "dirty bombs" and you will find that it really has no basis for believing it is a plausible attack method. It was something that was thrown around the news networks as a means for getting people to watch.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  Charlson

  Oct. 25, 2007, 4:25 p.m.

  The Bush administration has had years to work out many of these terrorist issues and have done very little if anything to really make us safer. No secure borders, no adequate checking of imports coming into the US, many of our aiports are still not secure and have failed bomb detecting tests, nuclear facilities are still vulnerable to terrorist attacks as well as our power infrastructures, and this administration touts how well they are doing. And now when we have disasters like Katrina, or mass floodings or drought, or wild fires in California, we are stretched so thin in National Guard troops and supplies that we may be reaching a breaking point. But hey, why worry? Our troops are fighting them in the wrong country so they won't come here.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  mamasan

  Oct. 25, 2007, 5:25 p.m.

  thats because this admin wants to shut all the national labs and privatize everything.

  they dont give a crap about keeping us safe.

  they care about putting cold hard cash in the hands of thier

  CRONIES!!!!!
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  fishifanb

  Oct. 25, 2007, 5:28 p.m.

  The goal has never been to make us safe but to use fear to solidify power and overcome opposition. If you have any doubts just follow the money.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  Grrr

  Oct. 25, 2007, 5:35 p.m.

  I can tell if you're radioactive just by tasting you. Can't everybody do that?
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  Alexia

  Oct. 25, 2007, 5:58 p.m.

  Makes me very curious to see what Chertoff comes up with in his "report" on the recent counterterrorism "experiments" he oversaw in Portland, OR, Phoenix and the Territory of Guam. Wasn't the issue in this story supposed to be something he's reviewing...??? Scary, indeed...
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  bumbaklotartattack

  Oct. 25, 2007, 6:04 p.m.

  We're winning the war on terror!
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  nostalgia

  Oct. 25, 2007, 6:34 p.m.

  And who will be the first to scream and point fingers if one of these go off in a US city and there are no labs?
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  Mutainia

  Oct. 25, 2007, 8:37 p.m.

  Chernobyl, anyone? That could be a lab for a dirty bomb.
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  aceofspades1

  Oct. 25, 2007, 11:55 p.m.

  Philadelphia would make a good lab
• 
  Avg rating: (+0/-0 0)

  jumanji

  Nov. 5, 2007, 3:26 p.m.

  http://forwardpayday.com/

The first 29 comments are shown. Show all 32 comments »