Hi all, I know this point of veiw is disturbing but I am going to hear all sides and NOT just believe because everyone else does..yes something awfull is killing these people but once again there are a lot of assumptions being made about a great many things, Depleted Uranium being one of them..
MIND CONTROL IN THE U.S. SPACE PROGRAM
Chapter Seven: How and by Whom the Ozone Hole Fraud was Perpetrated
~~~~ The Mystery of Depleted Uranium or DU ~~~~
Proving DU is NOT radioactive and DU does NOT cause Cancer
Earlier in Chapter Six, I explained that DU is not radioactive and that
DU never caused any cancers. But this is such a common “belief”
found today in many newspapers, magazines and books, and in hundreds of
thousands of Internet websites, that it is now accepted by the public
as “gospel truth.” But is it true?
A number of irate BroJon Digest readers just wrote to me, and said I
was a liar -- I don't know what I'm talking about. Look at all the
“evidence” that proves DU is made from radioactive wastes and causes
all those millions of cancer cases around the world. Well, I just
ignored those emails.
One skeptical BroJon reader, Daniel, wrote and quoted an article from
the Christian Science Monitor. Daniel wondered if that article was
true. That article, from the May 15, 2003 CSM, was written by staff
writer, Scott Peterson. I found the article was typical of the false
information found in the newsmedia and the Internet. So I will use that
article as a typical example. The article is titled: “Remains of Toxic
Bullets Litter Iraq -- The Monitor finds high levels of radiation left
by US armor-piercing shells.” That article can be found here:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0515/p01s02a-woiq.htm
Writer, Scott Peterson, explains in the article, “They gather around
as a Geiger counter carried by a visiting reporter starts singing when
it nears a DU bullet fragment no bigger than a pencil eraser. It
registers nearly 1,000 times normal background radiation levels on the
digital readout.” Peterson was doing a survey of the war zones in Iraq.
He adds that a “120 mm tank shell, was found producing radiation at
more than 1,300 times background levels.”
Just based on what Peterson wrote, you might conclude that DU was
thousands of times more radioactive than the “normal background” and
when he tells about the many cancer cases in Iraq, that the “75 tons of
DU in Iraq” left by the U.S. Army is the cause of the cancers. Is
that true? Where is the mistake that Scott Peterson made? Actually this
is a very common mistake made by almost all people who use modern-day
Geiger Counters or radiation detectors without proper training. Thus,
Peterson's conclusion about DU in Iraq is completely false.
Let me prove that with my own experience in 1968. In 1968, I was a
popular radio disk jockey in the San Francisco Bay Area. I was the
number-three-rated radio personality, just behind two of the big top 40
stations. What's that got to do with DU? I will explain in a moment. In
1967 we ran an ad on the radio for a developer who would teach you how
to build your own big house for only $500 down and 25 dollars a month.
I was a “hands on” kind of guy, so I went for it. Wow, I could
build my own house for real cheap.
It took me a year, using my “sweat equity” to build my large
4-bedroom house in the small city of Milpitas just north of San Jose, California. To dig and pour the foundation, I needed a wheelbarrow. But
living in a 2-bedroom apartment with two infant kids, meant
I had no place to store the wheelbarrow. I strapped it on top of my
'67 Volkswagon. Among the 10,000 residents of that little city, I was
“that radio celebrity” who was building his house in Milpitas, who
drove around with a wheelbarrow on his car. They could spot me a mile
away. I passed around a joke that the purpose of the fifth wheel on top
was just for safety. If I ever rolled my car over, I had an extra
wheel on the bottom so I could safely drive off. Well, it was funny at the
time, and just about everybody in that small city had heard the joke.
Also at that time, I was a member of the Milpitas Toastmasters,
president of the Milpitas Junior Chamber of Commerce, and the Milpitas
Community Improvement Committee. For several years I was chairman of the
Improvement Committee, and from that office I was also a member of the
Santa Clara County Water District. Thus I was both a city and county
commissioner. What's that got to do with Depleted Uranium? Hold on.
The chairman of the Improvement Committee also reported to the City
Council each month on the status of the community, as reported to me by
homeowners associations and other civic groups which attended my
meetings. At that time the Milpitas police and firemen were trying to get a
raise, and the firemen had a beef that they had been subsumed under the
police department, as all being “community service officers.” The
firemen wanted their own department, with their old fire chief back, and
also a raise.
Well, this was small town politics, so the police and firemen thought
by going to my Community Improvement meetings, that they would have an
“in” with the “powers that be.” It was generally known around
town, that me and my wife did baby sitting for the City Manager and the
City Mayor, who were their ultimate bosses. Maybe, I could get those
policeman and fireman a raise and maybe their own fire chief. They had
tried going to the City Council meetings but were mostly ignored as
disgruntled employees. To all the Milpitas firemen and policemen, I was
their “best bud” who was going to make them all rich and get their
own fire department. Yeah right.
At that same time in 1968, the Department of Defense, meaning the
Pentagon, and their Office of Civil Defense started a new program. The
Civil Defense department was going to train community leaders, and “first
providers” meaning police and firemen what to do in case of a nuclear
attack. They were going to provide classes in radiological monitoring,
and what the public should do to protect themselves against radiation.
The group of “community leaders” also included media people, who
could help publicize the Civil Defense program. For that reason I was
selected as one of the students along with about 25 Milpitas police and
fire men to take the class. Without knowing a bit about the small city
politics and my relationship with the police and fire departments, you
would never understand what was about to happen next. That's why I
told you.
In the fall of 1968, my classmates and I attended two Thursday
afternoon classes in Radiological Monitoring at the Milpitas South City Fire
Station. The first week's class was mostly from the text book called
“Handbook for Radiological Monitors,” published by the Department of
Defense, FG-E-5.9, dated April 1963. I still have my copy of that
manual on my shelves, and I will quote from it as needed. It covered such
topics as Radiological Instruments, Protective Measures, Monitoring
Techniques, Monitoring Operations, and a Guide for Independent Operations.
It was mostly for explaining to the public how to find shelter from
radiation, and how to live in a shelter, and then monitor outside
radiation until it is safe to leave the shelter.
The second week of the class was a quick review of the first week, and
then demonstrating the ability to calibrate and use a Geiger Counter.
To do that, the final exam was to adjust your Geiger Counter and then
locate a test radiological source hidden under one of many Styrofoam
cups scattered about the floor. The students had to find that radioactive
source, about the size of a quarter, under one of about 20 cups
randomly placed on the concrete floor of the fire station's large training
room. To complete the course and earn the Radiological Monitor
certificate, you had to find that radiation source in less than ten minutes.
The first several students did admirably, as they went to each cup and
measured the radiation, and found the radiation source correctly in
about 7 or 8 minutes. Then it was my turn. I waited outside as they hid
the test source under one of the cups. Then I stood in the center of
the room, and held the Geiger Tube in front of me and started to turn
around in a circle. Then I walked over to one of the cups and pointed my
Geiger Counter at the cup and said, “It's here. How long did it take
to find it?”
The course instructor, Fire Capt. Wilson, the man in charge of the
South Milpitas fire station, picked up the cup and said, “It was nine
seconds, but wha... how did you...” The other students started
grumbling. Patrolman George blurted out, “That's a trick, you cheated.”
Fire Lieutenant Roberts said, “You saw where they put the source,
that's a magic trick. That's not fair.”
Well, I have been accused many times of “doing magic tricks” or
“cheating” all my life, whenever I do “strange things” that other
people just don't understand. So I said, “OK OK, so you think it's
a trick, or I cheated. Alright, uhm..., how about Lieutenant
Robertson, you and couple of your cops arrest me out in the hallway, and watch
over me, while Capt. Wilson and his firedogs hide the source under one
of the cups and make sure I can't see it. OK?” They all agreed.
They wanted to see if hey could catch me doing that “trick.”
Well, after a couple of minutes under “hallway arrest” they let me
back in the training room. I stood in the middle of the room and said,
“tell me when you are ready with the clock.” Capt. Wilson said,
“Go!” Again, I held up the Geiger Counter in front of me and started
to turn in a circle, then stopped, took a few steps and kicked over one
of the cups exposing the source underneath. I said, “There it is,
what's the time?” Capt. Wilson said, “Five seconds????”
Now everybody was amazed. It had to be a trick. It's impossible.
They had trouble finding the source when they were only a few feet away
from any of the cups, how did I do it from the center of the room? It
had to be a trick. Well, I told then that I had built my own first
Geiger-Mueller Tube 10 years before in 1958. I was just a kid in high
school, I read about it in the Scientific American magazine in the Amateur
Scientist section. I built most of the simple instruments and
experiments in those articles.
One of the articles in 1958 was how to make you own Geiger Counter. I
told the firemen and the policemen in my class what I did. It was just
a pair of wires inside a glass tube. I used an old test tube from my
chemistry set, and connected the wires to the 500 volt power supply from
my home-made ham short wave radio. I had been a licensed radio ham
since I was 13 years old. I had built the radio when I was eleven years
old. I put a 470K Ohm resister in series with the wires and a
capacitor to my headphones. Sure enough, my headphones started clicking. For
my source I used my own “glow in the dark” radium watch. Yes,
that was back in the 1950's and '60s when radium watches and shoe store
fluoroscopes still were used to see the fit of your new shoes using
x-rays. But then somebody claimed that radiation might cause cancer, so
they all disappeared.
In my experiments with my home-made “bedroom” Geiger Counter I
found that if I held my watch off the end of the test tube, I heard almost
nothing in my headphones. If I held my watch above my test tube with
one wire above the other, again I heard almost nothing. But if I held
the watch perpendicular to the wires, the headphones screamed with about
10 to 20 clicks per second. From about six inches from the “end”
of the tube, all I heard was slow background clicks. But with the wires
perpendicular to my watch, I could hear clicks out to about 10 feet
away, about the length of my bedroom. That's what I learned by my
experiments back in 1958.
Then, in 1968, in my radiological monitoring class, I simply turned the
Geiger Counter tube perpendicular to my body with one wire above the
other, and turned around the room. I could “sense” the source on my
meter from about 20 feet away. It was stronger than my old radium
watch. I just turned around the room, standing in one place, and the
click count peaked on the meter when I was facing the cup with the source.
I said to Capt. Wilson, “Let me show you. Hold the source in your
hand. I am about 15 feet from you. When I point the end of the Geiger
Tube at you, you can't hear anything. But when I turn the tube so the
wires are perpendicular to you, now you hear about 20 clicks per second.
It's that simple. That's how I found the source in several seconds by
aiming the side of the tube at the cups, instead of the end of the
tube, the way that everybody is taught. That's not found in the manual or
in any textbooks. I learned that myself.”
So after that, the rest of the students, also quickly found the
radioactive source in a matter of a few seconds, and even the guys who had
gone before me wanted to “retake the test.” They wanted to increase
their final exam score from 9 minutes down to 9 seconds. That part, at
the end of class was supposed to take several hours, that afternoon,
for all the students to complete the test. Instead, we all finished the
class in less than 15 minutes, and now had hours of time to kill. So
they all decided to treat me to coffee and donuts at Coffaro's Coffee
House, about a mile up the road. Coffaro's was the usual stopping point
for cops on the beat, but on a ten minute break. The cops always got
free coffee and donuts at Coffaro's. My sister-in-law, Suzi was a
waitress at Coffaro's, so I got to say “Hi” to Suzi, as I gratefully
accepted my “treat” of “free coffee and donuts” for having taught
the police and fireman something they didn't know. So everybody happy.
But that's small town politics for you.
Several lessons were learned that day. The Milpitas policeman and
firemen learned that there are things about radiation detection instruments
which are not in the books nor manuals. And I learned that even book
“certified” radiation monitors using a hand monitor have no idea
what they are doing. That gets us back to Scott Peterson, the writer for
the Christian Science Monitor, and his article about all that
“killer” DU in Iraq.
Most modern-day “digital” radiation detectors are even more
“black magic” than the old glass tube devices, like I built, from 40 years
ago. I have gone through the instruction manuals for most of the
companies today selling digital monitors. Almost all of them warn the user
that unless they are fully trained on the device, and also experienced
in knowing how different materials behave with the detectors, do not
rely on what the device meter reads. It will only indicate the
“presence” of radiation, but not how much.
Most modern devices use a thick but clear mica window to shield the
detector to eliminate most of the background noise. Thus an old glass
monitor without a shield will show background radiation with a level about
1 milli-Roentgen or 1 mR. That's the background level. But with the
new mica shield the “new” background level seems to be reduced to
about one thousandth of that or 0.001 mR. If you put the new shielded
detector near ANY bulky object it will then show a level of about 1 mR.
But almost any object will do that. And that's the “old”
definition of “background” radiation.
The problem with Scott Peterson's article is that he used the unknown
number called “background” and then claimed the DU sample was 1,000
times or even 1,300 times that background. He didn't know enough to
report the actual numbers in milli-Roentgens. Those numbers are easily
read on a digital detector. But he didn't read them. If he had, he
would have found the background level, away from bricks, rocks, or
concrete, out in the Iraqi desert on his meter reads 0.001 mR, or
one-thousandth of the usual “old” background level. And his reading of the DU
sample was one thousand times that or 1 mR, which is the same as the
usual background level on an old glass tube Geiger Counter. In other
words the DU, detected by Scott Peterson, is as radioactive as a brick, a
piece of concrete or even a glass of water. Yes, pure distilled water.
Which means that DU is NOT radioactive, any more than a glass of water.
But Scott Peterson and the Christian Science Monitor didn't report
that.
Is it that Scott and the CSM purposely lied to you, or is it simply
that Scott along with thousands of similar writers of books and articles,
“believing” that DU is radioactive, simply used the modern day
shielded radiation monitors and “found” what they were “looking”
for? The fact is that all stories about the radioactivity of DU are
based on false facts and inexperienced radiation monitors. All examples
of DU only produce background level radiation of about 1mR or less, and
only do untrained users with modern digital radiation detectors falsely
report “dangerous” levels of radiation for DU. I just explained
how and why that is.
Inexperienced radiation monitors are “breaking the law” every day.
The new super sensitive shielded monitors are used by the
Transportation Safety Administration to monitor for radiation being loaded into
airplanes and shipping containers many thousands of times per day. A
rent-a-cop with a radiation detector will examine a shipping container and
claim it is radioactive. The “cop” runs to a local judge with a
report of probable cause of radiation and get a court order to violate
shipping laws and open the sealed and locked container. With massive
bolt cutters the rent-a-cops break off the padlock and the seal and enter
the container. And what do they find?
Is is Osama bin Laden sending tons of dirty bomb material to the U.S.?
Is it Red China or Russia sending suitcase nukes into the U.S.? No.
What they always find is a wooden palate holding a ton of bricks.
Usually decorative paving or building bricks with pretty glazing on top.
But put enough bricks together and the will show enough background
radiation to set off most of today's super sensitive detectors. And the
rent-a-cops are left with egg on their face, for having violating
international law by unsealing a container “without” probable cause. You
would think they would learn, but no. And that's the same “false
cause,” as when untrained people with modern digital detectors find DU
with levels 1,000 times the “background level,” which is the
radioactivity of a brick or a glass of water.
But what about all those cases of cancer caused by radioactivity? The
fact is, they never happened. They were all caused by something else.
I will explain that to you next. Did you know that prior to 1975, the
idea that radiation causes cancer did not exist. I have the collection
of old medical texts to prove that. Then suddenly about 1975, theories
that radiation leaking through a damaged Ozone Layer, or from the
nuclear reactors, or even from depleted uranium started to appear in the
news and in books and journal articles. Where did all those theories come
from? Did anybody ever prove any of those theories? And why did they
all suddenly appear at the same time, in 1975. That story is coming
next.
In the meantime, all those “believers,” including scientists with
PhD's, who think that DU is radioactive and causes cancer, need to
change your diapers. Your story is beginning to smell....
Marshall Smith
Editor, Brother Jonathan Gazette
newseditor@brojon.com
