Brussels Bombers Filmed Nuclear Researchers, Hoped To Build A "Dirty Bomb," Expert Says (nbcnews.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from NBC News: The brothers behind this week's Brussels bombings also spied on a top nuclear researcher and hoped to build a so-called "dirty bomb," an expert involved in a probe into ISIS threats told NBC News on Thursday. Khalid and Ibrahim El Bakraoui were responsible for planting a hidden camera outside the Belgian researcher's house, according to Claude Moniquet, a French former intelligence official who was hired to investigate potential plots targeting Europe's nuclear sector. This camera produced more than 10 hours of film showing the comings and goings of senior researcher at a Belgian nuclear center and his family. "The terrorist cell ... naively believed they could use him to penetrate a lab to obtain nuclear material to make a dirty bomb," Moniquet, CEO of the European Strategic Intelligence and Security Center privacy consultancy said. The researcher worked at a center which stored a "significant portion of the world's supply of radioisotopes," according to the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit, nonpartisan investigative news organization in Washington, D.C. These isotopes are used in hospitals and factories around the world but can also be used to make a so-called "dirty bomb" -- a device that could spread radioactive material across a wide area.

Comments

Naively?

[mveloso]

I'm not sure that's very naive at all. In fact, "help us your we'll kill your family" is a very powerful motivator.

Re:Naively?

[khasim]

The naive part is the interest in a "dirty bomb" in the first place.

Why take on the significant additional risk of discovery for something that won't inflict much more damage?

A "dirty bomb" only spreads radioactive material in the area where it explodes. So it is easier to just rely upon shrapnel and the explosion. Any radioactive material they could get probably wouldn't do more damage than that. Most of it just isn't that damaging. Except in large quantities over many years.

It's the news shows that have played up the "threat" of a "dirty bomb".

Re:Naively?

[matbury]

If you believe that that primary intention of acts of terror is to cause harm, then yes, that sounds reasonable. However, as far as I understand it, the main point of acts of terror is usually to make people irrationally afraid (cars, dogs, and swimming pools are more dangerous). For that purpose, dirty bombs and the way they've been hyped in movies and the media, as you've stated, are perfect for terror attacks.

If their intent is to destroy ...

[Taco Cowboy]

I, as an immigrant to the West, appreciate what I have gotten, and am still getting, and I do my best to contribute back to the society

On the other hand, I do know that there are other immigrants who not only do not appreciate what the West has offered them, they intend to disrupt, even to destroy the very society that gave them a helping hand when they need it

The one thing that I find about the Western people - mainly the Whites - are that they are being very kind, too kind some times

While that might be a good trait, it might also turn into a weakness

You see, those immigrants (or descendants of immigrants) who intend to make trouble - you guys (the White folks) still tolerate them, to the extend that even after those motherfuckers kill your people, you still standing up for them, in the name of, so called 'equality', 'diversity' et cetera

I dunno

I, as an immigrant to the West, is very very angry with those motherfuckers --- if it is up to me, those motherfuckers would be deported yesterday, every single fucking one of them

I mean, if those immigrants don't appreciate what the West has given them, they should move the fuck OUT

Stop using religion or whatever fucking excuse to carry out their despicable act

I don't care who they are, if I invite a guess into my house and that guess start to make trouble, he or she will either be thrown out, or a bullet in the head

But the, I am only an immigrant from China --- and my opinion, of course, can not represent that of the hosts - the White folks who have endless tolerance towards motherfuckers who create troubles

Re:If their intent is to destroy ...

[Bing Tsher E]

It's a serious mistake to label the threat 'Islam.'

The terrorists are an extreme branch of Islam. They embrace an antiquated literal interpretation of the Koran. Most Muslims are not like them.

There are a huge number of Muslims in the world, and if you 'draw the line' by grouping them with the human-garbage terrorists of ISIS and Al Quida, you're pushing a lot of people who can and will be our allies over to the other side. The problems in the Islamic world won't be solved by killing them all or forcing them all to convert to another religion. We need their help to fix things.

Re:If their intent is to destroy ...

[Tom]

If Christians were in the same social and economic situation as the Muslims are right now they would behave exactly the same.

There are Christians living in the Middle East. A minority yes, but a few millions. Never heard of them becoming terrorists, maybe you can enlighten us?

Stop the excuses. Christians might react violently as well, yes. But claiming they would behave exactly the same is the exact reductionism you rail against. No, they would not. Maybe similar, maybe not, but definitely not exactly.

Islam is part of the problem. Maybe a small part, maybe a big part, that's an interesting discussion. But claiming its contribution is zero is delusional.

That's it for SMRs

[mdsolar]

If you need heavy security at each plant, the idea of small plants comes to an end.

Re:It's not forever a pipe dream

[khasim]

That troubling part is that as incompetent as they may be, they're still quite highly effective.

But they aren't. In the USofA, you are more likely to be killed while moving furniture than by a terrorist.

If someone kills you tomorrow, it will probably be someone you know (friend or family) or a traffic accident.

I used to work for an insurance company. You could get a "terrorism" rider on your policy at additional cost. That cost? $1. And it was pure profit for the company.

The problem is that our news agencies and politicians are SELLING the idea of a terrorism threat for their own benefit.

Terrorism

[Etherwalk]

The naive part is the interest in a "dirty bomb" in the first place.

Why take on the significant additional risk of discovery for something that won't inflict much more damage?

You're thinking like an engineer, not a terrorist. The objective of a terrorist is to create fear and mass panic, and in this case overreaction that ultimately leads to an invasion which they can claim is a holy war against Islam.

A bomb the press can call "nuclear" will get more press coverage and a LOT more concern and reaction than an IED. Not necessarily because of a worse effect, but because laypeople are afraid of and do not understand science. That's why MRI's are called MRI's today instead of nMRI's. That's why a movies and television shows can warn against reactors exploding, when nuclear reactors do NOT explode. A dirty bomb can scare people more, and that helps terrorists.

You've also got the possibility of a propaganda radiation murder like when Putin had that guy in the UK murdered with... I think soup? That gets a lot of coverage.

Re:Terrorism

[dbIII]

when nuclear reactors do NOT explode

One did. It may have been a steam explosion but bits did go everywhere at high speed. Going off like an atomic bomb is of course a different story.

Re:Doesn't add up....

[smooth wombat]

And yet extraordinarily they were left free to carry out bombings and kill innocent civilians.

Several of the 9/11 hijackers, including the two lead planners, were on watch lists yet not only entered the U.S. under their own names, moved about the country at will. They were never stopped, including after their visas had expired and, as we know, flew on multiple flights out of Boston to test and gauge security and to plan their attack.

Sounds like Belgium and Turkey were following the lead of George Bush and ignoring the problem.

Here comes the apologist ...

[Taco Cowboy]

Every single time we bring up the issue of the terrorists being of a certain faith there sure come up people apologizing for them ... and as always, they will bring up "Christianity being the most evil of all and/or issue regarding the "Crusades", and so on ...
 
Can't you guys be truthful, for just a second, folks?

TODAY the bombers are not Christians

TODAY those who are killing people in Paris, in Belgium, in Madrid, in Mumbai, in London, in New York City, in San Bernardino, are not Christians !!

Get on with REALITY, folks !

Stop apologizing for those who are carrying out the terrorist acts !!

Re:That shows how naive you are !

[Anonymous Coward]

You say this because you guys do not mix with them, nor understand the tenet of their culture

I grew up in a poorer neighborhood that had several neighboring groups of different immigrants, and the cheap housing I found in university was in a mostly middle eastern neighborhood. You think I didn't mix enough with them, when instead it looks to me like your characterization seems like it is completely disconnected from the reality of immigrants who cared more about making money, getting good jobs and spouses, and raising their kids to do well in school than political and religious tenets. I'm not going to speculate on how much mixing you did, as observations are useless if you just see everything through tinted glasses.

DO NOT FORGET that their community plays the part of the ***support group***, providing them everything from financial aid to networking to even safe houses for them to hide

How many people provided safe houses and financial support? Even if it was 50%, you would still be an asshole for treating the other half like terrorists.

They threw stones at the cops !

So did the blacks in neighborhoods near where I grew up, and so did college students at the school I went to... there are a lot of reasons groups of people get pissed off at cops and end up doing stupid things to police.

Yes, their community actually feel proud of having terrorists amongst them ! The terrorists are their "heroes", someone who 'do things for them'

Again, what fraction? Are you extrapolating from a minority? How are you any different than those that say all Americans are proud of Trump, and that all Russians are proud of the Soviet era, other than you might be extrapolating from an even smaller minority?

But of course, you do not read this type of 'news' in the mainstream media -

And yet I've heard about the issues cops faced in those neighborhoods from mainstream media already... I find it funny how often people try to emphasize some point by claiming it wasn't covered by media, when it was, and that doesn't change how much or how little BS is involved in the original point.

You, Sir, are naive --- no matter how you want to deny it, those of us who are not from the West get to witness your naivete being displayed in the open

And yet when I travel overseas and out of the west, the most ridiculed aspects of westerners is not those that are too generous or open, or naively kind. Instead you hear nonstop complaints, insults, and jokes about how intolerant westerners are, how self-centered they are to the point of trying to force everyone else to act like them or GTFO. Any truth to what you say about problems in the West is not exclusive to the West, and you're just another person trying to make neat, easy piles to point fingers at.

You want people to not be naive and see reality? Start by not pretending that these problems are not neat little categories that are easy to blame instead of the big fucking mess it actually is.

Not an apologist, don't pretend I'm strawman

[dbIII]

To speak plainly Islam is not the problem here but the pig fucking evil pieces of shit that are using it as an excuse. In no way am I an apologist for them and I find it incredibly insulting that you wish to pretend that I am. I also pity you for falling for the excuse from those pig fucking pieces of shit that their God told them to do it. How can you swallow that shit? When Manson said that shit we didn't fall for it - why should we fall for it with this bunch of killers instead?

Re:Not an apologist, don't pretend I'm strawman

[Barsteward]

if you are going to blame Islam then you have to tar all the abrahamic holy books with the same brush. they all have passages/god inspired events in them that can be used to justify demented actions by demented people, none of those books/ideologies are innocent. All those books should be burnt as books of hatred.

Not So Fast...

[IBitOBear]

Nuclear Material in/near Reactors Secure's Itself.

Dry fuel pellets are harmless.

Fuel rods are made by welding dry pellets into steel I-Beams or similar big, heavy, structures.

Used (wet) fuel pellets are _fantastically_ _dangerous_ to handle, so much so that they have to kept wet at all times to keep them from roasting everything while they cool.

Back in the seventies my father (nuclear engineer) said he'd love to stage, and televise, a "raid" on a nuclear power facility... The _months_ necessary to get the stuff off the premises (let alone ground up into nuclear dust) would have probably lost its audience. But the "Fast As Possible" "Smallest Crew" version of the raid that the anti-nuke people were putting in movies and scare politics would be thoroughly disproved.

Even if I installed a pebble-bed reactor in your garage (and one _would_ fit), any attempt to turn it into a "dirty bomb" would fatal to the person attempting it. Someone could blow up the pebble-bed itself, but that would move a few of the "pebbles", if any, a short distance. Someone with a radiation counter and a radiation suit could then just go pick them up with tongs.

So the terrorists "want{ed} to build a dirty bomb" is about as likely to lead to that end as my personal desire to own all of Google _and_ Tesla Motors outright as a pure proprietorship.