Skip to comments.New PreWarDoc fits with Gwynne Roberts article about Iraqi nuclear test
Posted on 04/19/2006 9:18:35 PM PDT by RayRobisonblog
Fitting the pieces together
In February 2001, the Sunday Times ran the article Was this Saddams Bomb by Gwynne Roberts. I couldn't find the original but it is also on Globalsecurity.org .
I only recently read this article and found it interesting but very hard to believe. One of the newly released documents CMPC-2003-015757 contains the Roberts' article in English. This is the first time I have seen it. I did some research and found no serious academic or professional rebuttals other than people who also found it hard to believe. However, it seems that supporting evidence has been right in front of us for a few weeks now.
The article describes a conversation with a man called Leone who claimed to be a nuclear scientist working in Iraq. He approached Gwynne with tales of hidden nuclear programs, hidden nuclear weapons and most surprisingly a claim of a successful nuclear test performed in the Rezzaza Lake area of southern Iraq in 1989.
Leone claimed that the test was conducted underground in a massive tunnel. He said the tunnel required workers who were sacrificed for the secrecy of the project.
The tunnel and the entrance were huge and the manpower needed to block it up massive. Leone had told me that thousands of political prisoners worked on the tunnel after a presidential amnesty. "They were well fed and lived in comfortable caravans. In return, they worked hard. But none of them came out of it alive," he said. "Many were contaminated with radioactive waste. Friends working for Iraqi security who were guarding them said they were buried in caves nearby. The Iraqi regime hoped the secret of the Rezzaza lake test would die with them. "Hussein Kamel gave the order to kill these people . . . I was disgusted by it and it's one of the major reasons I fled." This grotesque story was corroborated by Imad. He said he was aware that political prisoners who worked on the Rezzaza tunnel were massacred by Iraqi security guards to conceal an unspecified secret military project. He did not know this was the nuclear test site.
I am not sure how these workers would have been contaminated if this test occurred as stated by Leone. But I dont think it is beyond the bounds of reason that even though the tunnel was plugged deep inside, radiation could have penetrated the 50 meter concrete plug Leone described. Then when the workers went down into the tunnel to completely fill it in they were exposed to radiation. It also seems like the deaths of hundreds of prisoners caused by radiation would certainly be hard to conceal, even in Iraq. But putting this story together with a newly released document does present an intriguing clue.
A few weeks ago a man named Joseph or screen name Jveritas started putting original translations on the Free Republic website. One of them was interesting but did not receive a lot of attention: ISGQ-2004-00224003
In this Iraqi document ISGQ 2004-00224003 dated February 7 2001, there was a discussion in upper echelon of the Iraqi intelligence about mass graves in Southern Iraq and how to shift the blame to the Coalition forces and make it look like these mass graves as the results massacres committed by the Coalition forces back in 1991 during Desert Storm Operation. Beginning of the Partial Translation The Republic of Iraq The Intelligence Apparatus Date: 7/2/2001 No 1687 In the Name of God the Merciful the Most Compassionate Secret To the respectful Mr. Director of the Fourth Directory Your letter secret and immediate numbered B 264 on 2/4/2001 1. No information is available to us about the Mass Graves in the Southern Region. 2.We see to achieve the observation the following matters: A. Inspect the graves to confirm the existence of Nuclear Radiations. B. Were they buried alive or their death was by suffocation. C. Are they military personnel or civilians. D. Are there tombstones that carry the names of the martyrs E. Identify accurate marks and proofs of the graves and the possibility to reach it quickly and identify it. 3. We do not agree that the declaration about it through a direct Iraqi media in the first stage at least and not to cause public and party reaction so that the subject will take as a priority an international interest, and we should work on the following direction during this stage: A. Leak the news through reliable sources.. News agencies or Satellite stations.. and that there is confusion, and indications from the members of the Coalition forces about the existence of mass graves civilians and military personnel in the South of Iraq. B. The attempt to search for soldiers from the Coalition forces in a serious way to mention these truth through the agencies.
This document is describing a mass grave filled with people who are suspected of suffering radiation exposure. The IIS intends to argue the bodies have been there since 1991.
So lets put this in context. Leone tells a story in 1998 about a nuclear test in 1989. In February of 2001, the IIS is talking about a mass grave site that must have been there for many years. Why are they talking about it now (2001)? The U.N. was not in Iraq at that time. And it happens to be the same month that Gwynne Roberts takes this story public. Did the IIS find out about the article and begin planning the media manipulation to cover up a nuclear test? Or, this article may not have been the first time Roberts wrote about the graves. Perhaps there was an earlier work I couldnt find and thats why the IIS was concerned. Either way, the IIS seems to be reacting to his story. But it seems like the IIS is exploring ways to leak the news of the radioactive graves so it can be managed before the claim is made by another source, in other words, spin control.
In my research I could find no other triggering event for this discussion by the IIS like an actual discovery of mass graves by an external source.
The IIS seems to expect radiation to be present when they wrote in this memo confirm the presence of radiation.
The location matches, both describe the graves in Southern Iraq.
So the IIS document matches the story of Leone in location, radiation exposure, mass graves, and close enough for the timing as far as we can infer from the document.
And one more thing. Leone described a Group Four responsible for nuclear testing: see rest at http://rayrobison.typepad.com/ray_robison/2006/04/fitting_the_pie.html
More amazing stuff from Iraq bump
Everyone be sure to read through the whole thread, lots of info and research throughout!
New PreWarDoc fits with Gwynne Roberts article about Iraqi nuclear test
Release/Translation of Classified PreWar Docs ping. If you want to be added or removed to the ping list, please Freepmail me.
Please add the keyword prewardocs to any articles pertaining to this subject.
no, thank you sir!
Based on my knowledge of seismic detection and verification of underground nuclear tests, they could not have detonated a device without it being discovered. You cannot decouple it successfully, and the signature is very differnet than a chemical explosion.
"Based on my knowledge of seismic detection and verification of underground nuclear tests, they could not have detonated a device without it being discovered. You cannot decouple it successfully, and the signature is very differnet than a chemical explosion."
What if they had a nuclear accident before the bomb was tested during the assembly process or an earlier process? Could a nuclear accident caused these problems? Then, they would have had to go to their cover story.
I am cetainly not an expert on the subject, which is why I researched it and found this:
have had readers point out some counter arguments.
"Such an explosion he said, in an article for the London-based think tank, the Verification, Training and Information Center, would have been easily detectable by international or by regional monitoring in Iran, Israel or Jordan, which keep records of earthquakes.
None of them reported any seismic events of the magnitude necessary for a nuclear test in the region around Lake Rezazza, Wallace said."
Sounds case closed doesn't it? Until I found this:
"Wallace and his colleagues examined the global earthquake catalogues produced by the International Seismic Center and the US Geological Survey and say they reveal no seismic disturbances at all in Iraq that day. Moreover, they say there has been no seismicity within 50 km of the reported test site for the years 1980 to 1999. One problem with the assertion that no weapons testing took place, they point out, is that the detection threshold for these global catalogues was just magnitude 4.0 in 1989 so a smaller magnitude event may have not been picked up by the sensors."
Leone said it was 2.7 on the surface.
So people who are experts say that a less than 4.0 would not have been detected, and this is after Leone made the claim of a 2.7. What do you think about that, honestly, no sarc meant.
If it produced yield, even a few hundred tons, not even 1kt, it would have been detected. There could have been a criticality accident that sprayed material around, that would have caused ugly problems like Chelyabinsk 40.
Even a big underground test like the 5MT Cannikin does not produce a huge earthquake (I believe that was a very localized reading of 6.5), it is the signature of the device that is very recognizable. An earthquake is sort of like shaking something, whereas a detonation shows up on seismographs more like a very sharp blow from a hammer. No lead up, a sharp peak that "rings" down to normal very fast.
I know some seismic guys that pinpointed the Russian sub Kursk's explosion underwater, which was non-nuclear, shortly after it happened.
For an extremely small device, it would almost be easier to hide a test above ground than under it.
Thanks for the info, my friend. There is lot of scary reading re Chelyabinsk 40 if anyone wants to go there.
What do you think happened there if anything?
I don't know, but my take on the Iraqi nuke program is that it was long on desire, but short on achievements.
Iran, they can pull it off. Not sure of the timeline, but they can.
Thanks as usual for your excellent insight.
Iran is a very scary nation at this time re the nuclear potential and their hatred of Israel and us.
Independant of the type of "shaking", if the equipment was not in place to detect a 2.7, then can it be discounted based on seismic evidence?
The signature of an underground test, or even an above ground that couples into the ground would be picked up by more sensitive equipment elsewhere. Some of the tests in the pacific in the 50's that were fired on barges in shallow water were recorded thousands of miles away on the equipment available at that time. The earth is a marvelous trasnmitter of this type of "sound." Part of the technique of seismic detection is multiple readings that allow triangulation to determine location and magnitude.
ping to me to come back to.
I just wanted to thank you for the work you are doing regarding these documents. Your work is valued by me.
Excuse the interruption, Ray, but aren't there civilian seismic labs which would have data covering the time period of the supposed test? I don't think the Gov't would make available on Freedom Of Info Act the monitoring done during that period. You could check with U. of Colorado, I think, and the U.S. Geological Services.
Oops! I should have know fellow freepers would hone in on the seismic activity angle immediately. Never mind ...
that very nice, thank you, hopefully it will ultimately provide a more accurate picture.
This is from the OKLAHOMA GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OBSERVATORY.