Slashdot Mirror


Lost Nazi Uranium Found In a Dutch Scrapyard

colin_faber writes "Lewis Page of the Register is reporting that forensic nuclear scientists at the European Commission's Joint Research Centre traced the two pieces of metal found in a Dutch scrapyard — described as a cube and a plate — back to their exact origins and dates. Apparently both came from ores extracted at the 'Joachimsthal' mine in what is now the Czech Republic from the former Nazi nuclear-weapons programme of the 1940s." The article runs through the roadblocks that, unknown to the Allies, the Nazi regime erected against their possible success in any nuclear bomb development during the war.

205 comments

  1. Many boffins died ... by DrJimbo · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ... to bring us this information. Context:

    Furthermore the Germans were hampered by having driven many top physicists out of the country with their anti-Semitic policies, and also by drafting other boffins into the army to fight as ordinary soldiers.

    --
    We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
    -- Anais Nin
    1. Re:Many boffins died ... by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Why can't we talk about 1940s Germany without bringing up the Jews?

      but you fuck one goat...

    2. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      How many times can they use the word boffin in one article? It was distracting...

    3. Re:Many boffins died ... by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 2, Informative

      Stupid British slang. Of course, its hardly a real news source, hence the slang in the first place.

    4. Re:Many boffins died ... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 5, Informative

      The article is about Germany trying to build an atomic bomb during WWII. Jewish scientists who fled Germany around that time include Einstein (E=mc^2, the basis for atomic bombs), Teller (father of the hydrogen bomb), Bloch (worked with neutrons, worked on the Manhattan project), Wigner (told Roosevelt about Nazi bomb plans, worked on the Manhattan project), Szilard (same as Bloch, one of the people who first conceived the a-bomb) and Frisch (same as Szilard).

      Do you suppose some of those guys might have been kind of useful to a German atomic weapons program?

    5. Re:Many boffins died ... by norpy · · Score: 1

      It's kindof a signature of el reg to use the word boffin all the time. Personally I gave up reading it ages ago because it's writers are terrible.

    6. Re:Many boffins died ... by Vahokif · · Score: 3, Informative

      Teller, Wigner and Szilárd were actually from Hungary, not Germany.

    7. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you know. Germany as a state rather than a set of borders. That's a dumb thing to nitpick about, buddy.

    8. Re:Many boffins died ... by drfreak · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but Einstein fucks one goat... and all credibility goes out the door!

    9. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why can't we talk about 1940s Germany without bringing up the Jews?

      but you fuck one goat...

      Now I understand why you call yourself BadAnalogyGuy.

    10. Re:Many boffins died ... by VValdo · · Score: 1

      Why can't we talk about 1940s Germany without bringing up the Jews?

      I knew sooner or later someone would invoke Niwdog.

      W

      --
      -------------------
      This is my SIG. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    11. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Personally I gave up reading it ages ago because it's writers are terrible.

      LOL@U

    12. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but Hitler blanks a donkey, and...

    13. Re:Many boffins died ... by Carewolf · · Score: 1

      Hungary was not part of or occupied by Germany in WW2. They were sort of allied at times.

    14. Re:Many boffins died ... by Xest · · Score: 1

      Yep, even those who weren't Jews such as Godel ended up in the US because he was shunned for having been associated with them. As you say, it's kind of hard not to bring the Jews into it.

    15. Re:Many boffins died ... by mosb1000 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Einstein had nothing to do with the atomic bomb, other than supporting it politically. Not to say that he wasn't a brilliant physicist, but he really had nothing to do with it.

    16. Re:Many boffins died ... by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 5, Informative

      Einstein did many things, and yes his formula was instrumental in predicting the power that a nuclear explosion would have (and yes - he miscalculated the first time, everyone did). However his contribution to the atomic bomb was limited to the suggestion that "matter should be convertible into energy". Not much more than that sentence. Of course, that sentence was the reason a lot of scientists re-examined the properties of known radioactive materials, leading to :

      The direct basis for atomic bombs, for a quick neutron-cascade reaction in enriched uranium, laid by these scientists :
      Otto Hahn (German, Nazi)
      Fritz Strassman (German, most likely also a Nazi)
      Lise Meitner, Jewish, who initially received a "special exception" from the Nazi regime for her work, and protection from a thoroughly Nazi university in Austria, but then was forced to flee anyway

      But this was only fission itself, and the suggestions that if somehow large amounts of U-235 were used with cadmium-enriched water between them that a "large amount" of energy would be released. This release of energy was not yet a bomb, it is what we call today a "meltdown". Dangerous, very hot, and poisonous, but nowhere near an atomic explosion. Niels Bohr calculated exactly how much energy a meltdown would produce : 200 million electron-volts PER split atom. The principle that guides bomb development was still missing 2 concepts : enrichment and the discovery of "critical mass".

      Incidentally, Otto Hahn was part of the nazi nuclear weapon development program (in fact he was the one that suggested the Nazi's start one). Enrichment was eventually mostly perfected by Otto Hahn, in parallel with the enrichment accomplishments in the Manhattan program.

      Critical mass, the actual direct cause for an explosion (nazi weaponization of nuclear power at that point was mostly focused on e.g. launching bombs with it, or producing oil with it, that sort of stuff), was discovered by Francis Perrin.

      Then, in 1939, all elements to produce a working atomic bomb were in place. Eventually, while Otto Hahn has in fact drawn up plans that would have worked before the Americans had a working plan, the Americans were the first to get a working atomic bomb in July 1945, a month after the fall of the third reich.

    17. Re:Many boffins died ... by martyros · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the quote from Heisenberg in the article is particularly interesting:

      "We definitely did not want to get into this bomb business," said Heisenberg. "I wouldn't like to idealize this; we did this also for our personal safety. We thought that the probability that this would lead to atomic bombs during the War was nearly zero. If we had done otherwise, and if many thousand people had been put to work on it and then if nothing had been developed, this could have had extremely disagreeable consequences for us."

      In other words, simple-minded tyrants think that the best way to motivate people is to say, "Make this happen or die." (And less powerful but just as simple-minded people in the workplace use "Make this happen or lose your job.") But one result is that no one is willing to suggest the idea of anything moderately risky, for fear that they'll be put to work on making that happen, and punished when it can't be done.

      --

      TCP: Why the Internet is full of SYN.

    18. Re:Many boffins died ... by BodhiCat · · Score: 1

      wha?

    19. Re:Many boffins died ... by selven · · Score: 1

      Don't nuclear bombs just rely on nuclear potential energy, with every particle that comes in coming out so no matter actually gets physically converted into energy at all? If so, how does e=mc^2 figure into it?

    20. Re:Many boffins died ... by StarfishOne · · Score: 1

      You might be interested in reading the work of Oxford-trained researcher Jospeh P. Farrell, especially if you're not yet familiar with him.

      There's also plenty on YouTube and various radio stations, interview wise..

      He goes into the strangeness of the U.S. never testing the uranium bomb before actually dropping it on Japan, how a German submarine was capture (or given away as decoy while some head honchos escaped) wit on-board two Japanese people .. and infrared

      I cannot copy/paste from it unfortunately, but check e.g. this book:

      http://www.scribd.com/doc/4092510/Joseph-Farell-Reich-of-the-Black-Sun

      If even a FRACTION of Farrell's work is correct, quite a few history books in school are missing some very, VERY big issues and a lot of high strangeness.

    21. Re:Many boffins died ... by houghi · · Score: 1

      Probably, but then part of the rise in power came through the hatred. So if Hitled would not have disliked the Jews so much, he might not have been elected and there would have been no war and thus no need for an atomic bomb.
      OTOH it could have well been that I would now be speaking German if they would not have fled. (Hey, wait. I DO speak German as well as English, French, Dutch and some Spanish.)

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    22. Re:Many boffins died ... by Avtuunaaja · · Score: 1

      The potential energy is stored as the mass of the nucleus. If you measure all the relevant masses before and after the explosion, E=mc^2 does predict the outcome perfectly. In other words, the mass of a nucleus is the mass of all the particles in it plus the energy-equivalent mass of the energy of it's bindings. In the same way as the mass of an atom is the mass of the nucleus, the electrons, and the mass of the potential energy stored in the electrons.

    23. Re:Many boffins died ... by Lord+Pillage · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you take 2 H and make an He, the mass of the products does not equal that of the reactants. Some mass is lost through the process and is converted into energy which is what gives the bomb is power. It's also what makes the Sun hot as well.

      --
      try { Signature mysig = new CleverAttempt(); } catch(NonCleverSignatureException e) { postanyway(); }
    24. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Probably, but then part of the rise in power came through the hatred. So if Hitled would not have disliked the Jews so much, he might not have been elected...

      I guess a good part of the reason why Hitler was elected was the failure of the political system of the Weimar Republic to cope with the circumstances (political instability, economic crisis, the harsh conditions of the Versailles treaty). This all lead to the wish for a "strong man" who would bring stability and reconstitute independence. This national side was IMHO more vital for the fact that the Nazis achieved 34% in the last free elections than the anti-semitic side. It also was the main reason why Hitler managed to gain popularity throughout the 30s - because he was quite successful in lifting a lot of restrictions imposed by the Versailles treaty - and got away with it.

    25. Re:Many boffins died ... by realityimpaired · · Score: 1

      Have you never read the letter he wrote to Roosevelt that most credit as the document which convinced the president to start the Manhattan Project? There's copies of it all over the world; the one I read was at the WWII memorial museum at Juno Beach in northern France.

      You're right that Einstein didn't do any of the actual work of designing, testing, and building a nuclear bomb, but he did have significant political clout, and was instrumental to getting the Manhattan Project actually started.

    26. Re:Many boffins died ... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Informative

      I didn't say ANY of them were FROM Germany.

      Teller left Hungary when he was 18 and completed his undergraduate and graduate training in Germany. Wigner was also educated in Germany and worked there until he moved to the US, around the same time the Nazis were gaining power. Szilard also did much of his training in Germany and worked there for some time before fleeing the Nazis.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Teller
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugene_Wigner
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leó_Szilárd

    27. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might also simply respond by saying: m = c^2 / E with variable E. :) (for an object at rest in the reference frame, blah blah).

    28. Re:Many boffins died ... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Einstein didn't directly do any work on the atomic bomb, but he did urge that it be developed and a lot of his work lays the foundation for both the quantum mechanics necessary to make the thing work and the mass-energy equivalency that suggests an atomic bomb should be particularly powerful.

    29. Re:Many boffins died ... by JerkBoB · · Score: 1

      He goes into the strangeness of the U.S. never testing the uranium bomb before actually dropping it on Japan

      Eh?

      What was the Trinity Test then?

      --
      A host is a host from coast to coast...
      Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
    30. Re:Many boffins died ... by JerkBoB · · Score: 1

      Hmm. The plutonium-based design was tested, but not the U-235 design. Should have read the entire entry. Fascinating, scary stuff.

      --
      A host is a host from coast to coast...
      Unless it's down, or slow, or fails to POST!
    31. Re:Many boffins died ... by QuoteMstr · · Score: 1

      Even more grating:

      Furthermore, they had taken good care not to big that aspect of the research up to their Nazi masters, for reasons of self-interest.

      "Big" is not a verb. Instead of that useless neologism, the author could have chosen from a set of words with more precise meanings, which ranges from "overstate" to "emphasize". Even "play up" would have worked. Instead, the writer chose the word that conveys the least precise meaning imaginable while forcing readers used to ordinary prose to backtrack two or three times to make sure they read that junk sentence properly.

      Yuck.

    32. Re:Many boffins died ... by idontgno · · Score: 2, Informative

      Technically, Einstein didn't draft the letter. Leó Szilárd wrote the letter and convinced Einstein to sign it, mostly for credibility purposes.

      Wikipedia linky.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    33. Re:Many boffins died ... by zerocool6900 · · Score: 1

      How about you read above posts, it has been pointed out that this article has been translated twice using a standard translation program and everyone who has ever used on knows that they suck when it comes to translating some languages and words.

      --
      Some people never learn...no matter how many times something happens to them.
    34. Re:Many boffins died ... by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      If they were not occupied by Germany in WWII, they were totally surrounded by German controlled areas. Look at a map.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II

      Scroll down and look on the left. The blue areas are controlled by German/Axis forces. Hungary was in that area.

    35. Re:Many boffins died ... by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      Trinity was a plutonium device. How about next time actually reading your link yourself instead of trying to pass yourself of as smart?

      Mart

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    36. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To clear up the poor phrasing, ceoyoyo said they FLED Germany, he didn't say they WERE Germans.

      by ceoyoyo (59147) writes: on Monday February 22, @11:48PM (#31240810)
      Jewish scientists who fled Germany around that time include .... Einstein, Teller, Bloch

      by ceoyoyo (59147) writes: on Tuesday February 23, @08:55AM (#31243772)
      I didn't say ANY of them were FROM Germany.

    37. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that's not the kind of bomb we are discussing here, what you describe is fussion - which came later, if you split nukleons of bigger size they lose mass and that is the energie you get. (that is happening in nuclar power plants but not in the sun.

      S

    38. Re:Many boffins died ... by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      Except that one can see many risky programs being engaged in during the Nazi era, not producing any useful or timely results, completely without dire consequences for those engaged in the program. In fact much of the technology, and the brainpower that created it, that was so eagerly exploited by the Allies post war came from scientists and technicians engaged in such risky programs.
       
      It is suspected that Heisenberg didn't get into the bomb business for two key reasons: First, in being increasingly out of the main stream of research he lacked critical information on nuclear science and thus could make little progress, and second he never gained any significant political backing for his research. (Politics was very important in Nazi Germany as various leaders vied for power, status, and influence within the hierarchy.) It also didn't help that German nuclear research was fragmented among multiple organizations and (again, because of politics) poorly coordinated. (This was a problem that plagued research in all fields throughout the Nazi era, research priorities were sensitive to the political fortunes of their patrons and a lack of central coordination and prioritization meant there was a great deal of duplication.)
       
      It is also suspected that Heisenberg, like Von Braun, indulged in a little post war retcon to cover up his intellectual failures and to cast himself in a more positive light. In particular, the Farm Hall transcripts show Heisenberg as believing a uranium bomb was not possible.

    39. Re:Many boffins died ... by PerfectionLost · · Score: 2, Informative

      The sun is a mass of incandescent gas
      A gigantic nuclear furnace
      where hydrogen is built into helium
      at a temperature of millions of degrees

      http://www.mudslide.net/TMBG/Albums/tmbg-ws.html

    40. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same reason you can't pop up without sounding stupid- it's inherently an integral part to the discussion. It would be like saying "anything interesting happen in Hiroshima in 1945?" and some knucklehead saying "Why can't we talk about this without bringing up the bomb?", or "What happened in Haiti this year?" and some idiot going "Why can't we talk about this without bringing up the Earthquake?". I realize you're trying to be funny, but what you're actually doing is sounding like a moron trying too hard to be funny.

    41. Re:Many boffins died ... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      However his contribution to the atomic bomb was limited to the suggestion that "matter should be convertible into energy". Not much more than that sentence

      He also wrote a letter to FDR saying that we should convert matter into energy. Not a scientific contribution, but an important one still. He later called that the one great mistake in his life.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    42. Re:Many boffins died ... by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing he means "fled Europe" , rather than fled Germany. Like "fled from the Germans" .

    43. Re:Many boffins died ... by pugugly · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A notation appended to my Evil Overlord list now -

      "I will never say 'Make this happen or die.' I will say 'Whatcha Got?' "

      Pug

      --
      An Invisible Entity of Vast Power whose existence must be taken on faith alone: Liberal Media
    44. Re:Many boffins died ... by swb311 · · Score: 1

      In the 1980's capitalism defeated communism ... on September 11, 2001 capitalism defeated democracy..

      There, fixed that sig for you!

    45. Re:Many boffins died ... by martyros · · Score: 1

      But this makes you just a little bit less evil. :-)

      --

      TCP: Why the Internet is full of SYN.

    46. Re:Many boffins died ... by quickOnTheUptake · · Score: 1

      I thought the author misspelled 'bring'.

      --
      Mod points: Guaranteed to remove your sense of humor.
      Side effects may include gullibility and temporary retardation
    47. Re:Many boffins died ... by Doctor+Morbius · · Score: 1

      They had to test the plutonium bomb because you have to use the implosion method with plutonium because of the fast reaction time of the plutonium chain reaction. With uranium-235 you can use the "gun type" design because the uranium chain reaction is slower. The implosion method is more difficult to achieve than the much simpler "gun type" so they had to test it to fine tune the timing of the events that take place during the triggering process.

      --
      If I disagree with you it's because you are wrong.
    48. Re:Many boffins died ... by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      This article is about atomic weapons production. People of Jewish heritage made up a significant portion of the scientific community in Germany in the 30's. In fact many of the founders of the US nuclear program were German trained scientists. This is also true of the Soviet program where many of the best German scientists were exported to Russia after the war with the intent to develop Stalin a bomb. Germany before Hitler took power was the scientific powerhouse of the world and a significant portion of that community was Jewish. Not brining up Jew's while talking about WWII era Germany while discussing nuclear weapons would essentially gut the entire topic. For gods sake, Einstein was a Jew and the only reason he came to america was because of the death camps.

    49. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Einstein had nothing to do with the atomic bomb, other than supporting it politically. Not to say that he wasn't a brilliant physicist, but he really had nothing to do with it.

      He didn't do any direct work with the project, but that's probably because he was a theoretical physicist, not an engineer.

      So other than providing the fundamental formula & theories needed to develop the bomb, and helping to provide the political clout and, by extension, the money & resources to fund the project, you are correct that he had "nothing" to do with it. But I would hazard a guess that your definition of "nothing" differs quite a bit from the common use of the term.

    50. Re:Many boffins died ... by LandGator · · Score: 1

      Yes, and Hungary was a member state of the Axis powers.

      --
      There is nothing wrong with yr Internet. Do not attempt to adjust the picture. We are controlling the transmission - NSA
    51. Re:Many boffins died ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You need 4 H, not 2

    52. Re:Many boffins died ... by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      Bloch (worked with neutrons, worked on the Manhattan project)

      That did strike me as odd... Haven’t we all, by definition, worked with neutrons? ;)
      E.g. my food contains delicious neutrons (and protons, and electrons, and even some neutrinos. Oh, and definitely too many photons! *ouch*).

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    53. Re:Many boffins died ... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Free neutrons. Better?

  2. Elsewhere in the scrapeyard... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Funny

    An irradiated lead refrigerator with the body of the legendary tomb raider Indiana Jones was also discovered.

    1. Re:Elsewhere in the scrapeyard... by ibsteve2u · · Score: 4, Funny

      Is it true that Schrodinger's cat was feeding upon the remains?

      --
      Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
    2. Re:Elsewhere in the scrapeyard... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes and no.

    3. Re:Elsewhere in the scrapeyard... by quercus.aeternam · · Score: 1

      What, they didn't open it?

    4. Re:Elsewhere in the scrapeyard... by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Curiosity killed the cat.

      Or it didn't.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    5. Re:Elsewhere in the scrapeyard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cat was framed.

      The radioactive particle was schizophrenic and didn't know whether he waved at the cat or just hit him.

  3. Wow. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    damn. thats hardcore.

  4. Doesn't address the most interesting issue by JoshuaZ · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There's been a lot of controversy over whether Heisenberg deliberately sabotaged the Nazi bomb-making or whether he tried to help but was incompetent or whether the failure was due to factors beyond Heisenberg. Although I have not read the book, I've been told that Paul Rose's book "Heisenberg and the Nazi Atomic Bomb Project" presents a strong case that Heisenberg tried his hardest to assist the Nazi regime in the building of the atom bomb.

    1. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 5, Funny

      There's been a lot of controversy over whether Heisenberg deliberately sabotaged the Nazi bomb-making or whether he tried to help but was incompetent

      I guess we'll never really know. Maybe it was both.

    2. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 1

      Heisenberg himself claimed that he had worked against the project's success, but any such claims are suspect given his obvious motive to avoid ending up at Nuremberg.

    3. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by iluvcapra · · Score: 2, Informative

      Everybody should read "Copenhagen" at some point, it's really the first and last word on this issue. There's very little in the historical record to guide us to the 'right' answer to the question of what Bohr or Heisenberg were trying to accomplsh, the best we can do is consider the different possibilities.

      Whatever happened, thank G-d Bohr didn't ask Heisenberg if he'd double checked his reaction cross-section radius...

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    4. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by _Sprocket_ · · Score: 1, Funny

      There's been a lot of controversy over whether Heisenberg deliberately sabotaged the Nazi bomb-making or whether he tried to help but was incompetent

      I guess we'll never really know. Maybe it was both.

      Ohh! I've got a Hollywood retro-movie pitch! The Mouse that Roared meets The Pink Panther with a bit of Dr. Strangelove.... and some Schindler's List to "modern" it up a bit. Now if we can just find someone who can play Sellers playing Heisenberg...

    5. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The longer it takes for the joke to sink in, the funnier it is.

      --
      If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    6. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      I think the "persuasion" used during Hitler's Government would make even the most stubborn goat be passive.

    7. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by JoshuaZ · · Score: 1

      I think the "persuasion" used during Hitler's Government would make even the most stubborn goat be passive.

      Dietrich Bonhoeffer would have disagreed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietrich_Bonhoeffer.

    8. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by radtea · · Score: 1

      Everybody should read "Copenhagen" at some point, it's really the first and last word on this issue.

      It certainly isn't the first word: the Farm Hall debriefings would probably qualify as that. But as someone who knows a little bit about neutron diffusion calculations I do believe it is the last: Frayne has put together a very difficult argument to answer regarding Heisenberg's role in any NAZI A-bomb project. His portrayal of Heisenberg as a experimentally naive theorist also rings true.

      Read it if you must, but play is definitely worth seeing, although the first part of the second act limps a bit.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    9. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by radtea · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I guess we'll never really know. Maybe it was both.

      We do really know. There is no plausible answer to Michael Frayn's argument in his play "Cophenhagen". Ergo, the matter is incontrovertibly settled: there is simply no way that Heisenberg could have got his initial estimate of the mass of a uranium bomb so badly wrong (several tonnes) at Farm Hall if he had been working on such a project for the NAZIs.

      This is one of those controversies that has been going on for so long that there's a little industry built up around it, but like buggy-whip makers the product they are pushing is no longer much needed.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    10. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by sleeponthemic · · Score: 1

      You would be right at home in the sarlac

      --
      I record my sleeptalking
    11. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      There was an excellent PBS production of the play with Daniel Craig as Heisenberg and Stephen Fry as Bohr. Though I felt like I understood it much better in the reading.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    12. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

      Sorry, Stephen Rea, I get them confused. :D

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    13. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by Dishwasha · · Score: 1

      I'd also recommend Heisenberg's War: The Secret History of the German Bomb by Thomas Powers which makes a strong historical case that Heisenberg tar pitted nuclear weapon development in Nazi Germany and instead pushed for nuclear generators instead. It is apparently clear that he was a strong nationalist, believed that the Nazi regime was doomed to fail from the beginning of their reign, and saw efforts on developing nuclear power as a saving grace for Germany to the rest of the world once the war ended.

    14. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      If you are interested in Copenhagen, I STRONGLY suggest purchasing this book:

      http://ohst.berkeley.edu/publications/copenhagen/

      I presents several different arguments that do a very good job of exploring many things which Frayn couldn't include in the play for theatrical reasons or was otherwise unaware of. Also, make sure to look at both Frayn's postscript and his post-postscript, which you should be able to find online with a bit of searching.

      The play is good, but it definitely falls short in some areas. For example, Heisenberg definitely did the calculation, he just used what was essentially a shortcut based on a false assumption. But it wasn't that he assumed something or the other was right, he just messed it up. Nevertheless, after reading the essays in the book I linked to, I've decided that essentially the Nazis just decided the bomb program wasn't worth pursuing. But hopefully some people will pick up the book and be able to draw their own conclusion.

      Also, to the person suggesting Paul Rose's account: Rose is a giant asshat. He hates Heisenberg unconditionally, going as far as to accuse him of spitting at Max Born, his close friend and mentor, because he was a Jew, despite the fact that no other historian has agreed with this account, there is no evidence of it, and their correspondence has the same tone before and after the supposed event occurred. Don't listen to Rose.

    15. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by Sobrique · · Score: 1

      Who is this G-d, and why do you find it necessary to thank him?

    16. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by thesandtiger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      G-d is a way of saying "God" without actually writing the name in a medium in which it will eventually be destroyed. Presumably, the poster was thanking their god for not allowing the Nazi's to get the bomb.

      Unless you were just being intentionally obtuse, as so many strident atheists are, and trying to draw attention to it - in which case, I ask you, please stop doing that. It makes it really easy for everyone to get pissed off at the rest of us who are atheist but don't feel the need to be jerks about it.

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    17. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As opposed to all the other things that have been discussed in volatile media where the reference was later destroyed. None of those things have ceased to exist as a result. Of course, they existed to begin with...

    18. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Where did he say he was an atheist? And even if he was, why is that any more relevant than say his hair colour, or being a Slashdot member, in terms of giving a group of people a bad name?

      (Not to mention, your second paragraph is just as bad; as an atheist, I ask you to please stop giving us a bad name ;)

    19. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by thesandtiger · · Score: 1

      Because, in my experience on slashdot, there are essentially two people who would respond to seeing "G-d" in a post and ask who that is and why they were being thanked:

      Someone who genuinely didn't know what "G-d" meant - so I provided an explanation.

      or

      Someone who was being disingenuous and taking issue with someone thanking god for something in a post.

      As to why the atheist aspect was relevant - It's pretty illogical to think someone who believes in god or gods would feel the need to question thanking god for something like the Nazis not getting the bomb, so I went with the assumption that, if the second case were true, it was an atheist making that comment. I doubted it was someone genuinely asking, as after all it would be quicker to type "what is 'g-d'" into google and get the first result rather than post the question here and wait for a response that may never come. It made more sense to assume that the person in question was being disingenuous rather than genuinely asking the question, thus my second paragraph.

      So, for the first paragraph, I explained it, and for the second paragraph I asked them to play nicely rather than be a strident atheist. Is that sufficiently clear?

      --
      Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
    20. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 2, Informative

      I guess we'll never really know. Maybe it was both.

      We do really know..

      That sound you just heard? Yep, you got it. Whoosh

    21. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by DerekLyons · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is no plausible answer to Michael Frayn's argument in his play "Cophenhagen". Ergo, the matter is incontrovertibly settled: there is simply no way that Heisenberg could have got his initial estimate of the mass of a uranium bomb so badly wrong (several tonnes) at Farm Hall if he had been working on such a project for the NAZIs.

      You assume that research invariably produces an incontrovertible and utterly final answer - when nothing could be further from the truth.
       
      Take for example, from the Manhattan Project, the discovery of Plutonium's sensitivity to predetonation. When the fission properties of Plutonium were first explored, it was discovered and 'proven' that Plutonium would work in a gun type bomb. Later, when the properties were being studied more intensely (to refine the bombs design), and completely unexpectedly, Plutonium showed an apparent change in it's fission properties - tending to explode early, well before the [gun type] bomb could reach anything approaching it's theoretical performance. (In other words it would fizzle.) Worse yet, different samples showed different performances, and when the same samples were shipped to Berkley they showed performance not only different from their original research there, but also different from Los Alamos.
       
      In the end it turned out that the difference in location of testing was one of the two keys - Los Alamos, being at higher altitude than Berkley, was subjected to a higher flux of cosmic rays. Those cosmic rays were fissioning P-240 that was present in the samples. The effect had not been previously discovered because the original (accelerator bred) had a far lower level of P-240 contamination than the (reactor bred) samples later used at Los Alamos. (And that the P-240 contamination level depended on the irradiation schedule and level during production.) The scientists had known about the P-240 contamination, but had originally dismissed it.
       
      The entire Plutonium bomb project had to be redirected to discover a method of assembling a supercritical mass of Plutonium orders of magnitude faster than was possible in a gun - resulting ultimately in the implosion bomb. The production schedule at Hanford had to be modified to control the breeding of P-240.
       
      Hell, speaking of Hanford, the reactors there (built according the best research of the time), failed to work initially because of a previously unsuspected decay chain and daughter product poisoning the reactions within the reactor.
       
       

      This is one of those controversies that has been going on for so long that there's a little industry built up around it, but like buggy-whip makers the product they are pushing is no longer much needed.

      This belief only exists among those who aren't actually conversant with the history of the development of nuclear arms. (And those who wish to find a 'hero' who stood up not only against the Nazi's but against nuclear arms.)

    22. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please do not enable the insane skywizard believers, kthxbye

    23. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by radtea · · Score: 1

      That sound you just heard? Yep, you got it. Whoosh

      Ok, now I get it! Oops.

      I'm afraid my perspective on quantum ontology makes references to complementarity and uncertainty more than a little obscure.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    24. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How's that being an asshole to people who believe differently than you working out?

      Oh, it's making them band together because they feel oppressed by people like you constantly mocking them. Guess you didn't think your cunning plan all the way through.

    25. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by fotoguzzi · · Score: 1

      ...play is definitely worth seeing, although the first part of the second act limps a bit.

      At least it wasn't a bomb.

      --
      Their they're doing there hair.
    26. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fucking jews should all have died 70 years ago so they wouldn't be able to spread their "don't even write out the generic word 'god'" nonsense.

      jehovah. JHVH, YHWH, etc. I just put that in a medium that will be destroyed. Now go choke on a lungful of Zyklon-B.

    27. Re:Doesn't address the most interesting issue by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      Its amazingly thin here on slashdot, but he could tell because of his reading comprehension skills that allow you to pick up on various aspects of the author without any more knowledge.

      I'd say it was abundantly clear to anyone who read it that the post was from someone who calls themselves an atheist, mostly because the only people who make that kind of post are angsty 15 year olds who call themselves atheist without actually understanding what they are saying.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
  5. Fun trivia by iluvcapra · · Score: 4, Informative

    Fun trivia: Joachimsthal mine is where we get the modern word "dollar." Silver extracted from this mine was minted to attest its purity and the coin thus produced was called a "thaler." TH is a relatively unusual consonant sound in many languages, and corrupts to D in romance languages like French, and here we are.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    1. Re:Fun trivia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      It's true, but you're omitting how the word got into the American language. It's not through "romance languages like French" (don't you mean roman?), but through the german (as in language group) language Dutch. The German (as in, spoken in Germany) word 'thaler' became our word 'daalder', and was used by Dutch merchants as currency.

    2. Re:Fun trivia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mines of Joachimsthal also supplied the pitchblende from which the Curies isolated radium and polonium.

    3. Re:Fun trivia by _merlin · · Score: 4, Informative

      You'll find that Romance languages is the accepted English term for the language group including French, Italian and Spanish. The name for the group including English, Dutch and German is Germanic languages. (Not the capitalisation, too.)

    4. Re:Fun trivia by asaz989 · · Score: 1

      It didn't corrupt to T/D in Romance languages; it was (and is) already pronounced as T in German.

    5. Re:Fun trivia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Not the capitalisation, too.)

      that's what I always say. my teachers never seem to agree, though.

    6. Re:Fun trivia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, dollar comes from the Dutch word "daalder"

    7. Re:Fun trivia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also note the terminal "e".

    8. Re:Fun trivia by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      No, dollar comes from the Dutch word "daalder"

      Which in turn comes from the German word "Thaler", which originally was an abbreviation of "Joachimsthaler", which is (the nominalization of) an adjective meaning "from Jochachimsthal".

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    9. Re:Fun trivia by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      TH is a relatively unusual consonant sound in many languages, and corrupts to D in romance languages like French

      I can't think of a French word where TH is pronounced as anything other than a T. Same for German.

      When speakers of those languages try the [should be a theta symbol here] sound it usually comes out like Z or S.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    10. Re:Fun trivia by moonbender · · Score: 1

      Duly note.

      Or: Dully noted.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    11. Re:Fun trivia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fun trivia: Joachimsthal mine is where we get the modern word "dollar." Silver extracted from this mine was minted to attest its purity and the coin thus produced was called a "thaler." TH is a relatively unusual consonant sound in many languages, and corrupts to D in romance languages like French, and here we are.

      False. French pronounces "th" sounds as a "t".

    12. Re:Fun trivia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, I think SmallFurryCreature was making a joke about Slashdot users knowing nothing about romance or sex. Apparently, they don't understand sarcasm or wit, either.

    13. Re:Fun trivia by idontgno · · Score: 1

      This is, according to Wikipedia, a latter phase of the High German Consonant Shift, sometime in the 9th-to-10th Century CE.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    14. Re:Fun trivia by jachim69 · · Score: 1

      I'll do you one better. My last name is very close to Joachimsthal. Just remove 2 letters. If you look at my user id and you can figure out one of them.

    15. Re:Fun trivia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not through "romance languages like French" (don't you mean roman?) but through the german (as in language group) language Dutch

      No, he means Romance. As in, the Romance languages, which are the languages of the Romantic period, which take their roots from Latin, as opposed to the Germanic languages like German.

    16. Re:Fun trivia by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

      In German Donald Duck comics, their currency is “Taler”. And in Luxemburg we even still say “Daler” (Both times with the “a” spoken like in “master”) (We also have no “th”.)

      I didn’t know that Dollar was just Daler/Taler spoken differently. But it fits. A bavarian would very likely say “Taler” like that.

      Now if only I could make sense of the “Euro”. Is it a currency? Is it a continent? Is it the dumbest name for a currency ever? ;)) (Imagine your currency being called “Americas”. Or even worse “States”. Or “USes”. ;)

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    17. Re:Fun trivia by fishexe · · Score: 1

      It's true, but you're omitting how the word got into the American language. It's not through "romance languages like French" (don't you mean roman?), but through the german (as in language group) language Dutch. The German (as in, spoken in Germany) word 'thaler' became our word 'daalder', and was used by Dutch merchants as currency.

      Or was it through the Spanish dollar?? Given that this was the closest thing to international currency that existed at the time the word entered English, AND that the US dollar was explicity based on the Spanish dollar (to the extent that US continental currencies had "One Spanish Dollar" printed on them), and that the English word doesn't have a 'd' after the 'l' like daalder does, I'd say it's more likely it came through the Romance languages.

      I will give y'all credit for inspiring us to declare ourselves an independent Republic, though.

      --
      "I don't care about the Constitution!" --Bill O'Reilly, November 17, 2009
  6. Coming soon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't wait to see the Youtube Hitler video on this one!

  7. Politics by iluvcapra · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The issue of Heisenberg, and any theoretical physicist being treated like a pariah (and thus dooming Nazi Germany's atom bomb program) is very instructive. The Nazi's made a political and ideological decision, to wit:

    Quantum mechanics and general relativity is all about 'relativism' and 'ambiguity,' and is unworthy of Aryan science. It's emphasis on relative physical laws and indeterminacy are endemic of its moral turpitude and obvious Jewish origins.

    They would then cast about trying to find every white atheist physicist who had doubts about 20th century physics, and then give them huge grants, fat think tank jobs, and would promote their work to the moon and back. On the other hand they would work to suppress the contributions of people like Lise Meitner, who used the 'Jewish physics' to provide them with proof of the first lab fission reaction.

    I suppose there's some sort of argument pro or con of climate change in this... exercise for the reader.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    1. Re:Politics by grouchomarxist · · Score: 4, Informative

      Atheist? Perhaps non-Jewish, but I've never heard of the Nazi's having an inclination to promote a person *because* they were atheist, as opposed to Protestant or Catholic.

      The Nazi's were at least superficially Christian and opposed atheism:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler's_religious_views#Hitler.27s_reaction_to_atheism
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany

      Or perhaps you mistyped and mean Aryan.

    2. Re:Politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Atheists? I thought Nazis were officially believing in God, you know "Gott mit uns" and all that crap....

    3. Re:Politics by iluvcapra · · Score: 1, Informative

      "Gott mit uns" was stamped on the belt buckles of the German Army in World War One. This schlagworte (that's the word, isn't it?) isn't often mentioned or attested in the history of the WW2 German Wehrmacht.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    4. Re:Politics by iluvcapra · · Score: 0

      If Hitler was strongly against atheists, somebody must have been hiding Himmler and Rosenberg from him... When the Nazi's found a Christian who actually believed in the Ten Commandments and followed their conscience, they generally saw an enemy. Their interest in the traditional religions of Germany existed insofar as it provided them with handy symbols for propaganda. They had no use for people who actually believed in things beyond what they were ordered to do.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    5. Re:Politics by iluvcapra · · Score: 0

      I am willing to stipulate s/atheist/gentile/ if that will suffice?

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    6. Re:Politics by grouchomarxist · · Score: 2, Informative

      Judging by the wiki articles, perhaps not the best sources but they're readily available, both Himmler and Rosenberg believed in some kind of Aryan religion which was an aspect of the Nazi movement. Neither appear to have publicly declared themselves to be atheists.

    7. Re:Politics by hachete · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ah hem: a WW2 Wehrmacht belt.

      http://snyderstreasures.com/pages/buckles.htm

      Please go peddle your propaganda somewhere else.

      --
      Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious
    8. Re:Politics by Tsunamio · · Score: 1

      I suppose there's some sort of argument pro or con of climate change in this... exercise for the reader.

      I'm pretty sure there is absolutely no argument for or against climate change in the Nazi suppression of Jewish scientists.

    9. Re:Politics by buzzn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wehrmacht != Nazi. The Nazis were the political party in charge, and the Wermacht was the regular professional army. This is in no way to excuse the Wermacht, and many soldiers were Nazis, but we remind that the belt buckle of an ordinary soldier does not reflect the much more extreme values of the dictatorship, which imprisoned or executed many christian clergy for opposing the regime. The Nazis swept away anyone that opposed their power, and their religion was power.

      --
      Join the window installer's union, where prosperity is a brick throw away!
    10. Re:Politics by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In fact, Einstein and his theories were outcast in the "German Physics" the nazi were building. Einstein was jewish and traitor in their eyes. The nazis really lacked science buffs in their government. They had some success in rewriting history, in creating a non-jewish litterature, they did not understand why it could not be possible to make a non-jewish physics. They did not understand that Einstein was not an author of his laws, but a mere discoverer.

      It is very interesting to look into the "Uranium Verein", the nazi nuclear program. Considering all the very good scientists they had, and the good infrastructure that existed at this time, they should have succeed way before US. But they had Bohr leave, they had Pauli leave, they had Einstein leave. More than Einstein, they put Heisenberg as a leading person, despite him being a poor experimenter (but a very good theorician) the good experimenter at the time was too suspicious because he kept having jewish assistant and protesting about their disappearance. It also didn't help that many of the scientific team had to serve some time on the front (and one or two died). The whole program is an example of bright people hindered by poor management, it is fascinationg to read.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    11. Re:Politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's emphasis on relative physical laws and indeterminacy are endemic of its moral turpitude

      Finally, an explanation of what the USA landing card is all about. They are asking if any visitors know about quantum mechanics! Oops...

      I would have thought they would be banning evolutionists not physicists from visiting but there you go.

    12. Re:Politics by hitmark · · Score: 1

      ah, politics and ideology, making the world "interesting" throughout recorded history...

      --
      comment first, facts later. http://chem.tufts.edu/AnswersInScience/RelativityofWrong.htm
    13. Re:Politics by HungryHobo · · Score: 1

      "We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out."

    14. Re:Politics by blind+biker · · Score: 4, Informative

      Your post misses the mark: Nazis were not opposed to Christian scientists. They were against Jewish scientists. Against as in, first they marginalized them, made it difficult for them to work, then to find a job and finally (if the scientists and their family were stil residing in Germany or a Nazi-occupied country) deported to a concentration camp and gassed.

      Germany COULD have had a nuclear weapon before the allies, if only they didn't engage in their futile/counterproductive policy of extermination, genocde and racial discrimination against Jews. Scientists like Szilard (father of nuclear fission) would have stayed in Germany instead of moving to the USA where they then worked on the Manhattan project.

      And a note at the end: had the Nazis had a nuclear weapon, it would have changed the course of history. They didn't necessarily need more than one, either: just blow up one major USSR city (say, Moscow) and watch the Eastern front fold up and a truce being signed.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    15. Re:Politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ..and their religion was power.

      Don't forget mindless hate.

    16. Re:Politics by triffid_98 · · Score: 1
      I'm not sure it was counterproductive. Their initial basis of power was picking an unpopular minority and demonizing it. Backing away from that stance would have required some pretty savvy political maneuvering.

      Assuming that they had created a functional nuclear weapon, said peace might have been signed if they'd managed to nuke Stalin, but remember that there were plenty more casualties due to conventional carpet bombing than there ever were from nukes and that did not cause a surrender from anyone.

      Many people complain about predator drones in Iraq and Afganistan and mention that the 'al-queda'/insurgents survived longer than the Germans, but a little carpet bombing/nuclear holocaust might clear that problem right up...terribly bad PR though.

      Is that you Godwin?

      Germany COULD have had a nuclear weapon before the allies, if only they didn't engage in their futile/counterproductive policy of extermination, genocde and racial discrimination against Jews. Scientists like Szilard (father of nuclear fission) would have stayed in Germany instead of moving to the USA where they then worked on the Manhattan project.

      And a note at the end: had the Nazis had a nuclear weapon, it would have changed the course of history. They didn't necessarily need more than one, either: just blow up one major USSR city (say, Moscow) and watch the Eastern front fold up and a truce being signed.

    17. Re:Politics by Obyron · · Score: 1

      Exactly correct. There is a line in Albert Speer's memoir "Inside the Third Reich" regarding Hitler's religion where Hitler is quoted to have said: "You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion.Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?" They-- the Nazi leadership-- paid lip service to Christianity to placate the population, but only had a use for it insofar as they could use it as a tool to get people to do things.

      For those who are interested in what these people were actually like, "Inside the Third Reich" is fantastic. Albert Speer is certainly a biased source, and I'm sure he downplays some of his own involvement, but in historical scholarship it doesn't get any better than a primary source. I'll take Speer's biased account over the speculation of someone 70 years later who wasn't there.

      --
      --Obyron
    18. Re:Politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose there's some sort of argument pro or con of climate change in this... exercise for the reader.

      Yes, but I'm not sure whether it is pro or con... Once you politicize science, it is no longer science. Scientists on both sides tweak their models until they get the result they want or expect in hopes of continued funding or big headlines. Only time will tell which side was right, I fear.

    19. Re:Politics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is no way, no how that Germany could have developed the bomb before the Allies. It's not just a question of physics, but also the application of vast industrial resources towards the construction of the facilities required to enrich Uranium or breed Plutonium. Hanford, Oak Ridge were massive industrial installations requiring large amounts of rare resources. The piles at Hanford needed large amounts of graphite (produced from Oil), supplies of water (for cooling and processing), electricity for Uranium refining. Oak Ridge needed even larger supplies of electricity (to run the calutrons), silver (for coils), and stainless steel (for diffusion tubes). Germany simply didn't have the spare industrial capacity to build installations of this magnitude without serious reprecussions on their war effort. As well the design of these facilities are pretty obvious (and large) making them perfect targets for the 8th Airforce

    20. Re:Politics by hey! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, I'd put it this way. The Nazis, intellectually speaking, weren't anything.

      Tyrannies of that type use ideology, but aren't about ideology. Trying to take their "ideologies" seriously as ideologies only leads to confusion, because they weren't interested in consistency, much less truth. They used language purely for its utility.

      Take their idea of "Jewish science". You can't take that notion seriously, because it's all a fantasy they cooked up to target people they were afraid of. So they just lump them in together. It's telling that Himmler wanted to label Heisenberg as a "White Jew". "Jew" doesn't mean "person of historically Jewish descent" or "person who adheres to the Jewish law". It's just the verbal equivalent of a punch in the face.

      The same goes for Hitler's views about atheists. Atheists tend to be free thinkers, and therefore likely to oppose the regime. So you take two despised groups and you manufacture a bigger "threat" by glomming them together.

      Scapegoating is so critical to tyranny that where there aren't ready made hatreds, the tyrant invents groups to be hated. Stalin invented the "kulik", or rich peasant, as the scapegoat for his failed agricultural policies. They kuliks weren't rich by any means, but if your family were starving and your neighbor's had food, that gave you a satisfying, concrete target for your rage right within reach.

      As far as the "Christianity" is concerned, it's about as meaningful as their notion of "Jew". If they'd been living in a predominantly Buddhist society, they'd be filling their propaganda with Buddhist trappings. If they'd been living in a Jewish society, then they'd avail themselves of Jewish symbols and scapegoat Christians and Muslims.

      You can connect what the tyrant wants to what he says in this way: The tyrant wants power. To obtain and hold onto it, he needs a compliant people. To make the people compliant, he arouses fear, anger and hatred in them. To arouse those emotions he uses words, not to tell people anything, but to goad them.

      Hatred and fear are for the politician like the nose ring a farmer puts on a bull. It allows him to safely lead a big, dumb dangerous animal where he wants it to go. This works for both right wing tyrants and left wing tyrants like Stalin. Remember that next time you are tempted to latch on to some popular political hatred.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    21. Re:Politics by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      The Nazis'] initial basis of power was picking an unpopular minority and demonizing it. Backing away from that stance would have required some pretty savvy political maneuvering.

      Their initial basis of power was the German people's disgust at the ineffective Weimar Republic, coupled with despair due to the Great Depression. Their pamphlets and recordings of their speeches are quite clear on the strategy of their electoral campaigns. In their anti-semitism, the Nazis were not exceptional in Germany. They were only exceptional in how far they were willing to go acting on it.

      Mart

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    22. Re:Politics by MiniMike · · Score: 1

      For WW2 they should have changed it to "Got mittens?" (at least while trying to invade Russia).

    23. Re:Politics by careysub · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Germany simply didn't have the spare industrial capacity to build installations of this magnitude without serious reprecussions on their war effort. As well the design of these facilities are pretty obvious (and large) making them perfect targets for the 8th Airforce

      These exact same arguments can be made about the V-2 project, that consumed 2 billion Reichsmarks (1.2 billion US $ at the time, about 70% of the budget of the Manhattan Project during the war) late in the war for negligible real contribution to the war effort.

      The Mittlewerk V-2 plant was bombed many times, but being built underground of reinformed concrete, it was never put out of operation.

      These same resources could have provided a robust nuclear weapons program (but no bomb by the end of the war).

      Most surprising is Germany's failure to have a vigorous R&D effort early in the war on uranium. The cost of such a project would have been small (compared to the huge costs of industrial production) a few tens of million of RM over 2-3 years. They had two strong motivations to do this, even if they thought no atomic bomb was possible during the war.

      1. If Germany had "won the war" (defeat of the USSR, undisputed control over continental Europe, and the Anglo-American world suing for peace) they still would face a hostile Britain and U.S. even after an armistice. Given the precedent of WWI and WWII another round 10-20 years down the road seemed likely. Staying ahead of the Anglo-Americans in atomic technology would have been essential even in a victorious scenario.

      2. Using uranium as a source of power seemed much easier, and the French were actively pursuing this in 1940 before defeat. The US Navy started its own independent uranium program to build reactors to power submarines around this time. To Germany - outclassed in Naval power and needing to sever the sea supply line of the UK and USSR - the possibility of a uranium powered U-boat should have given the German Navy and Hitler thrills of a well-nigh sexual nature. Yet no serious effort was devoted to exploring this.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    24. Re:Politics by hachete · · Score: 1

      But that is the point: the Nazis were not the full-on atheistic regime that the religious right would have us believe. They destroyed those who threatened their power, not those who held a faith.

      --
      Patriotism is a virtue of the vicious
  8. First Godwin Article? by tomhudson · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Is this the first slashdot article that mentions nazis right in the title?

    1. Re:First Godwin Article? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, and (oh yes) no.

    2. Re:First Godwin Article? by Daetrin · · Score: 1

      You probably meant it as a joke (i hope) but not only are you wrong about it being the first "Godwin Article," as the other responder pointed out, but the question doesn't even make sense. Godwin's Law was never meant to prevent discussion about actual Nazis or subjects directly relating to them.

      Godwin's Law was "invented" for two reasons. First that it's bad logic to try to denigrate something just by comparing it to something unpopular when no actual link exists, even though it can often be an "effective" tactic in an argument. Second of all, such vapid comparisons, such as saying "the Nazis had pieces of flare they made the Jews wear" in reference to a restaurant chain just trivializes the true horror of the Nazis. If everyone says "well the Nazis did that too" in response to everything they disagree with then the comparison will begin to seem meaningless even when it is entirely accurate and valid.

      Since this article is about the actual Nazis, and directly relates to genocide and "racial cleansing," at least in theory, trying to invoke Godwin's Law in this case is just as wrong as trying to compare completely unrelated subjects to Hitler or the Nazis.

      --
      This Space Intentionally Left Blank
  9. Time for bed by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 2, Funny

    I misread that as "Lost Nazi Uniforms Found in a Dutch Scrapyard" and failed to see why that would make news.

    --
    If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    1. Re:Time for bed by roju · · Score: 1

      Because of the zombies that were wearing them, obviously.

    2. Re:Time for bed by Wuhao · · Score: 1

      I misread that as "Lost Nazi Uniforms Found in a Dutch Scrapyard" and failed to see why that would make news.

      Because careful analysis shows them to be genuine Nazi issue, and the bodies wearing them were killed by WW2-issue bullets, yet their state of decomposition shows that they died in the past 12 months.

      (quick jump to black, creepy sound effect)
      LOST

  10. 2080 by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Funny

    2080: "Toldja Iraq had WMD's"

  11. quick, someone call Clive Cussler! by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

    I've got an idea for a new Dirk Pitt novel...

    1. Re:quick, someone call Clive Cussler! by Dexter+Herbivore · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's no such thing as a *new* Dirk Pitt novel, they all have roughly the same plot.

    2. Re:quick, someone call Clive Cussler! by HalifaxRage · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What, you mean the one about smugglers? I thought he stole that from ~275 Hardy Boys books.

      --
      bomb the us up set someone
    3. Re:quick, someone call Clive Cussler! by u38cg · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dirk Pitt here, stuck in a cave/submarine/aircraft/other contrived and dangerous situation at the start of my latest novel, and I'd just like to take a few moments (checks Doxa dive watch) to disagree with you, I never repeat plot elements. Once I get out of my current contrived situation, I'm going to hook up with Loren and do something that'll really surprise you. So there. Now where that little Italian guy?

      --
      [FUCK BETA]
  12. Re:Die judischen by pookemon · · Score: 0

    Hey stumm Hintern - Sie haben den Krieg verloren - noch eine weitere Sache, die Sie saugen an

    --
    dnuof eruc rof aixelsid
  13. Big Up? by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

    FTA: Furthermore, they had taken good care not to big that aspect of the research up to their Nazi masters, for reasons of self-interest

    I doubt Heisenberg ever said that, even translated from the German. To big [...] up. Jesus wept, is that OK in journalism now? Not only 21st century lazy slang but a split infinitive as well.

    1. Re:Big Up? by Garble+Snarky · · Score: 1

      "bring up", maybe? not sure

    2. Re:Big Up? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      They was stressed bout the bad word going to their peeps, know what I'm sayin?

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:Big Up? by grouchomarxist · · Score: 1

      Read up on the split infinitive. For many style guides it is perfectly acceptable.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Split_infinitive

    4. Re:Big Up? by sincewhen · · Score: 1

      I can't wait to read the articles written by the generation currently in school:
      The Nazis, they were like "Go away Jews."
      And the scientists were all like, like, "Nah. We aint done nuffink!"

      --
      -- Braden's law of data: All data spends some of its lifetime in an excel spreadsheet.
  14. Boffin by burningcpu · · Score: 5, Informative

    In case any of you Americans were wondering what a Boffin is, it is a scientist. Here is a quote from wikipedia,

    "In the slang of the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, India and South Africa, boffins are scientists, medical doctors, engineers, and other people engaged in technical or scientific research.
    The word 'boffin' (or 'boff'—often as an insult[1]) can also be used to refer to any particularly clever person. The closest American equivalent is "egghead"."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boffin

    1. Re:Boffin by ducomputergeek · · Score: 2, Funny

      I thought they were the ones who told the rebel alliance about the second Death star at endor....IT'S A TRAP.

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    2. Re:Boffin by fusiongyro · · Score: 1

      Thanks! I was also wondering if the author could afford a thesaurus.

    3. Re:Boffin by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      No, those are Bothans.

      Boffins are one of the major families of hobbits, of course, who are included as part of Bilbo Baggins' ancestry.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    4. Re:Boffin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just curious - how many /. Americans were wondering? Given the net, and Stephenson's wildly popular Cryptonomicon, I'd have guessed 'boffin' is no more unknown to this crowd than 'bloke'.

    5. Re:Boffin by Rexdude · · Score: 1

      "In the slang of the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand, India and South Africa, boffins are scientists, medical doctors, engineers, and other people engaged in technical or scientific research.

      India?? No one uses that term here!

      --
      "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."
  15. They all went to the moon anyway by Snaller · · Score: 2, Informative

    I thought we were all clear on that.

    http://www.ironsky.net/site/index.php#teaser

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  16. slashdot ist wirklich ein Wunder by mjwx · · Score: 1, Troll

    Even in German, the trolls still get modded down.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  17. Re: How? by colinnwn · · Score: 1

    With one nut?

  18. No by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Funny

    French is the language of romance, but I understand that as a slashdotter, you might not know this. I read it in a book. Very intresting apparently it all is designed to lead to sex, whatever that might be. Further reading might be in order.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  19. Pfft! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I couldn't even find a dashboard for a 2001 Ford Mondeo when I was searching Dutch scrapyards.

  20. Okay, I'll give it a go..... by rts008 · · Score: 1

    Well, I for one, welcome our radioactive Zombie Nazi Overlord uniforms...to the scrapyard?!!?!??

    That just does not roll off the tongue well.....never mind.
    *hangs head and slinks off, mumbling something about looking cooler in Dutch*

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    1. Re:Okay, I'll give it a go..... by djdavetrouble · · Score: 1

      Lost slashdot memes found in german scrapyard thread, left there to rot for eternity.

      --
      music lover since 1969
  21. Story left out some key points by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 0, Troll

    Some bits were unfortunately left out of the Reg story. Most notably the way Hogan tricked Col. Klink into drinking some of the heavy water from the shipment, thus cutting into vital Nazi supplies.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  22. Where is that "Nazi" land? by piotru · · Score: 1

    Oh, that must be the politically correct name of the German state, specifically under Hitler's occupation?
    Oh wait, wasn't that a free, democratic election by the German people that brought Hitler to power?

    1. Re:Where is that "Nazi" land? by mano.m · · Score: 1

      wasn't that a free, democratic election by the German people that brought Hitler to power?

      Proves a point about democracy not being merely about turning up to elections, I guess. And checks and balances.

      --
      Karma fed to this user will be promptly burnt. Be warned; be wary.
    2. Re:Where is that "Nazi" land? by Alistair+Hutton · · Score: 1

      No? It was the political manoeuvrings of Germany's centre-right/right-wing parties that gifted Hitler power.

      --
      Puzzle Daze is now my job
    3. Re:Where is that "Nazi" land? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh wait, wasn't that a free, democratic election by the German people that brought Hitler to power?

      Yes. In the last free elections in November 1932, the Nazis gained 34% of the votes, which made him Chancellor of a coalition government in January 1933 (the two months in between were spent by the democratic parties to try and form a minority coalition government without the Nazis and the Communists).

      By Summer 1933, all other political parties were outlawed and freedom of speech, freedom of press etc were abolished by the "Gleichschaltung".

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleichschaltung

      Nevertheless, Hitler remained quite popular (not to say gained popularity) for various reasons throughout the 1930s. But still, one should consider that - despite the fact that at the beginning of the 3. Reich stands a free election - Nazi Germany was a totalitarian police state between Summer 1933 and the end in May 1945.

    4. Re:Where is that "Nazi" land? by dlgeek · · Score: 1

      Yes, Hitler was elected to power by democratic elections in all the territory he controlled. The citizens of places like Poland, France, Belgium, Denmark, Albania, Serbia, Italy, etc., etc., all just loved that guy.

    5. Re:Where is that "Nazi" land? by piotru · · Score: 1

      Actually provoked by Stalin who compelled the german communists to switch aliances.

    6. Re:Where is that "Nazi" land? by piotru · · Score: 1

      They have never been given the chance to show their true love by vote. Some until 50 years later.

      But I was making a point that it was the German state under the democratically elected government that started the WW2, not some "Nazi", probably occupying Germany against the will of its people, as the newspeak doublepluswelly suggests.

  23. They could at least have used a cromulent word. by argent · · Score: 1

    Obviously they meant "to embiggen".

  24. Re:Die judischen by dunkelfalke · · Score: 2, Informative

    GP is not a German. His text was clearly machine-translated, so is yours, leading to very funny statements.

    Yours basically means: Hey, a mute bottom, you have lost the war - another thing that you siphon.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  25. i was going to comment by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    but this story godwinned itself, so what's the point?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  26. Waiting for a Downfall Parody Video by mano.m · · Score: 1

    "We've hidden the Uranium here, here, and here."

    --
    Karma fed to this user will be promptly burnt. Be warned; be wary.
  27. Re:Die judischen by M8e · · Score: 0

    Mijn luchtkussenboot zit vol paling.

  28. Re:Die judischen by Lord+Pillage · · Score: 1

    It was probably meant to say, "Hey dumb ass, you lost the war - another thing, you suck!".

    --
    try { Signature mysig = new CleverAttempt(); } catch(NonCleverSignatureException e) { postanyway(); }
  29. Re:Die judischen by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    That looks like Dutch, but I do get the "Dirty Hungarian Phrasebook" reference

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  30. I think you meant ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think you meant to say:

    That depends on how you look at it.

  31. Excellent book about Nazi uranium project by Mendenhall · · Score: 3, Informative

    There is a truly excellent book, "Hitler's Uranium Club" which documents what the Germans themselves said about their efforts. It is edited by Jeremy Bernstein. It is a collection of transcriptions of conversations among the leading German scientists (Heisenberg, Laue, etc., not all of whom were actually doing nuclear physics), who were captured lat in the war and transferred to Farm Hall in England. They were recorded secretly, so what is said is very candid.

    Anyone interested in this history should definitely read the book. The conversations run the gamut from very technical, to various fights over social issues.

     

  32. The Nazi Holocaust was a Christian pogrom by FreeUser · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Nazi's were at least superficially Christian and opposed atheism:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler's_religious_views#Hitler.27s_reaction_to_atheism
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nazi_Germany

    The Nazis were more than just superficially Christian, most of them were very Christian, and had the overt support of the leadership of both the two main Christinan churches in Germany at the time (Catholic and Lutheren), for both the party in general and the policy of exterminating the Jews in particular.

    The reason so many people believe the Nazis were athiests is because of a couple of quotes taken out of context, and because the Catholic church has spared no expense (or Jesuit historian) rewriting history and glossing over their own involvement in both the policies and the atrocities. Indeed, they've even managed to gloss over the fact that Hitler was quite devoutly Catholic (and not particularly out of character in his behaviour--just look at how Columbus treated the natives of the West Indies, or Cortez the Mayans and Aztecs, or...the list goes on, ad nauseum, all with the blessing, both tacit and overt, of the Catholic Christian authorities).

    This actually becomes more obviuos when you look at the longer history of Catholic pogroms and inquisitions against the Jews that litter the history of Europe. The Nazi holocaust is merely the latest and most notorious. What a coup, to help organise and support such a massive Christian pogrom against a people, then send out your cadres of revisionist "historians" to recharacterise those responsible not as fellow Christians, but as Athiests...about the only group who wouldn't be inclined to support, much less lead, a pogrom against a population simply because their ancesters are rumourted to have cricified one of their deities two thousand years earlier.

    Indeed, as you note, the Nazis came after Athiests with much the same ferver as todays Teabaggers, Truthers, and other right-wing zealots. Some things never change.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    1. Re:The Nazi Holocaust was a Christian pogrom by Kismet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Carrol Quigley disagrees with you. But then, you probably accuse him of being the Jesuit historian who "re-wrote" history.

      This is the usual way with "debunkers" who seek to tear down a mass movement in order to supplant it with another. Hitler desperately needed a Jewish devil, so he accused the Jews of rewriting their history. Actually, it was Hitler who invented a new history in which the Jew became a sub-human perpetrator of evil. In the same way, as you have demonstrated, the anti-Christian demands a Christian devil and will commonly accuse Christians of rewriting their own history (the same accusation is frequently leveled against any of the numerous denominations: Catholic, Protestant, Mormon, etc). Typically this is accompanied by a certain "guilt by association" argument. In your case, not only is Christianity associated with Nazism according to your own flavor of revisionist history, but it becomes the driving force behind it. Christian zealots are now to be blamed for every major ill the world has ever seen, including the holocaust. Christians are sub-human genocidal maniacs. Where do we go from there?

      Make no mistake: the Nazi movement was not a Christian movement, nor were it's principal roots found in Christianity. While plenty of Christians were sucked into the movement itself (mass movements are interchangeable, as Eric Hoffer pointed out; it is the quality of the belief rather than the thing believed in that is important to the True Believer), Hitler viewed all religion as competition to his own power. Hitler had no god but power. Nazism was merely one possible reification of Nietzsche's philosophy combined with any other power doctrines that could be extracted from social Darwinism, paganism, Christianity, and so forth.

    2. Re:The Nazi Holocaust was a Christian pogrom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the Christians from the rest of the world rose up against them.

      They had managed to corrupt the church within Germany. That is all.

    3. Re:The Nazi Holocaust was a Christian pogrom by LandruBek · · Score: 1

      The Nazis were more than just superficially Christian, most of them were very Christian

      The corpse of Dietrich Bonhoeffer rolls over as you say this.

      --
      $META_SIG_JOKE
  33. For those that wonder "Why Romanian?" by NotSoHeavyD3 · · Score: 1

    Romania was a colony the Romans set up in eastern europe (hence the name) after wiping out the Dacians.

    --
    Did you know 80 to 90% of the moderators on slashdot wouldn't recognize a troll even if one dragged them under a bridge.
    1. Re:For those that wonder "Why Romanian?" by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Romania the modern nation draws it's name from the Roma. I can't comment on whether the Romans also created such a placed and called it such but the modern day Romania is based on the large number of Roma that occupied the area and their cultural influence on the people of Romania when the nation was born. The Roma are also referred to as Gypsies.

  34. i can't be sure by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    as i let the joke sink in, i attempt to measure an increase in humor. however, in the act of making that measurement, i find that i cannot isolate the amount of humor exactly. what is going on here?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  35. Interesting That This Was Not Congo Uranium by careysub · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The fact this can be traced to production batches at Joachimstal during the war is interesting for the following reason: it was a mine incapable of supporting a nuclear weapon program.

    Joachimstal (Jachymov today) is an ancient and famous mining district (others have noted here that Thaler == Dollar originated from its name) and due to radon gas in its mine is also the earliest recorded incidences of death from occupational radiation exposure - - - lung cancer was a common cause of death of underground miners from the 16th century onward. It was also a prominent source of material for the discovery of radiation and radioactive elements.

    But it could only produce a few tens of tons of uranium annually! Something like a 1000 tons of uranium was needed to support an effective nuclear weapons program.

    Germany had however a couple of thousand tons of already mined and processed ore from the Belgian Congo, captured at the outset of the war. This material was perfect for a nuclear weapons program - if it had one. This material was captured by the U.S. at the end of the war unused. A couple of thousand tons of ore from this same mine and shipped to the U.S. before the war in fact powered the Manhattan Project through most of its wartime operations.

    That Germany was still relying on old pre-war supply arrangements through Joamchimstal to obtain research uranium is very interesting. It is another manifestation of the failure to create a real weapons program.

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  36. Re:Die judischen by Coren22 · · Score: 1

    That is what Google translate gives me, so I would guess that is what he meant to say.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
  37. beating a undead horse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons even death may die.

  38. Hur hur by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is nazi uranium you are looking for!

    oh wait...

  39. Didja ever notice... by Deadstick · · Score: 1

    That there's no such person as Edward Teller? It's always Edward Tellerfatherofthehydrogenbomb...

    rj

  40. Embiggen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's like they've never even heard of the Simpsons.

  41. Re: How? by el3mentary · · Score: 1

    Urban legend actually, it's generally accepted that the sources for that rumour are unreliable

    Mao However...

    --
    I reject your reality and substitute my own.
  42. Hitler's Uranium Club by BancBoy · · Score: 1

    Great Band Name!!!

    --
    [UID-HeinzIntel]
  43. About the sig by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

    What happened January 21st?

  44. this is part of the PR campaign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    b4 the bombing of Iran that will likely come in March. How convenient that they just found this? This will help cement the "nazi/iranian/nukes/must prevent them" meme in the public mind. Why? 1. Israeli guilt/security concerns and 2. oil geopolitics in the face of collapsing world supplies (the EROEI on shale and tar sands will never be positive no matter the price of crude and US strategic planners know this). Throw in some military industrial profits and the urge to distract the public from their economic misery and you've got a war unless the Russians or Chinese stop it. The industrialized powers need oil to be as cheap as possible, to do that they must make the Iranians unable to use it domestically. This means destroying their consumption. Witness the decline in domestic Iraqi oil consumption after we invaded. They had a modern economy (with a despot to be sure). Now they have untreated water, no more public health care and next to no electric power, and, probably, the same Potemkin democracy we in the USA have. All the talk of an arms race is bull; it is an open secret that the Israelis have a large nuclear arsenal already while their neighbors have none. http://www.warsocialism.com/

  45. Way to leave out the main character, dude. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was your post intended to be a slight against Leo Szilard?