Lest we forget amid partisan jockeying, domestic demonization, and heated foreign policy debates, here’s a report that serves as a reminder of a lingering threat — and the ease with which they could be carried out — in the early 21st century:

Canada’s spy agency says it is “quite surprisingâ€? that terrorists have not detonated a crude radioactive bomb, given the availability of materials and ease with which they could be made into a weapon.A newly released Canadian Security Intelligence Service study concludes a so-called dirty bomb is the most likely means of deliberately spreading deadly radiation.

But the CSIS study cautions that “a determined and resourceful terrorist group� could execute more elaborate forms of nuclear or radiological attack.

It says extremists could conceivably acquire an existing nuclear explosive device, fashion an improvised weapon from black-market material or sabotage a nuclear facility with the aim of triggering a radioactive release.

A copy of the October study was obtained by The Canadian Press under the Access to Information Act.

CSIS relies mainly on previously published research and analysis in assessing the threats, though brief passages were deemed too sensitive to disclose.

A dirty bomb is a real threat. At present it’s perceived by the general public in nearly the same manner as the pre-911 warnings that terrorists might one day hijack airplanes and fly them into planes as guided missiles: as a scary warning out there, but it hasn’t happened so there’s a good chance it never will. It did.

And, with info on the Internet, general information, and shadowy geopolitical alliances lurking in the corners of the world, it’s likely one day this will happen, too. The questions are: (a) where, (b) when and (c) how will the government respond and how will the public respond this time?

RELATED READING ON THIS SUBJECT:

What If A Dirty Bomb Hit London (BBC)

NOVA: Preparing For Terrorism (Key quote:“The first-ever dirty bomb attack would be a dramatic event, I suspect, because people wouldn’t know quite what to make of it.â€?)

Terrorism Project

JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
Sort by:   newest | oldest
superdestroyer
Guest
superdestroyer
9 years 8 months ago
Radioactive (dirty bombs) have to be one of the most overreated threats to the United States. The U.S. Defense Threat Reduction Agency ran numerous computer models on spreadng iridium, Cesium, or Cobalt around the Washington, DC area that could not come up with more than a few deaths. The most interesting aspect of a dirty bomb is how the United Stated environmental rules will make cleanup very expensive, difficult, and slow. The biggest impact of a dirty bomb is not loss of life or health of anyone but the economic loss of whatever area is contaminated due to the expensive… Read more »
Soev
Guest
Soev
9 years 8 months ago

More money is needed for the resources to make sure this doesn’t happen.

grognard
Guest
grognard
9 years 8 months ago
Considering the technical problems in making [or buying] a nuclear weapon and getting it to a target city a dirty bomb makes far more tactical/practical sense. Superdestroyer is right, the casualties would be low but large sections of the target city will be barricaded for months for cleanup and there would be concerns about cancer rates etc. for the people that returned to work or lived in the contaminated sections of the city. The hospitals would also be swamped by people thinking they have developed the symptoms of exposure, and demanding treatment. I don’t consider that type of threat “overratedâ€?… Read more »
GreenDreams
Guest
9 years 8 months ago
Actually, it is only immediate casualties that are low. As we learned from Chernobyl, inhalation of small amounts of radioactive materials kill by inducing cancer. A single airborne particle of cesium could cause a lung cancer. While GOP Hawks funneled millions into harebrained schemes like “Star Wars”, the real threat is radioactive materials, poorly guarded, that already exist in the United States. In fact, no bomb is necessary. A terrorist could simply steal waste cesium from a hospital, and drop it into the wind in Manhattan. The financial devastation it would cause is incalculable. Similarly, as pointed out by the… Read more »
superdestroyer
Guest
superdestroyer
9 years 8 months ago
Greendreams: If you want to talk about the risks from radiation you are going to have to read up on toxicology because the dose is the toxin. In the models used for a dirty bomb very few people would get over 10 rem ( o.1 Gy) for a 1000 curie Cesium-137 dirty bomb set off with several pounds of explosives. 10 rem is only twice the allowable occupational dose in the United States. It would increase the risk of develop a cancer but only on the scale of 1 in a thousand. I doubt if dropping a sealed in 36… Read more »
Kevin H
Guest
Kevin H
9 years 8 months ago
Maybe a bomb hasn’t been set off because it really does the terrorists no good. They know of the worldwide reaction of disgust after the only two nuclear bombs were ever dropped by the US. A dirty bomb carries a certain stigma that a suicide bombing does not. It might very well turn many ‘on the fence’ regions against terrorist organizations, and produce a worldwide sudden interest in clamping down on nuclear proliferation, which Iran would not be happy with. So I bet Iran is using their influence to suppress any nuclear tainted plans. If I were a terrorist, I… Read more »
Rudi
Guest
Rudi
9 years 8 months ago

The ‘dirty bomb’ has scared the sheep. The wolf will not attack with a Polonium bomb. More people die from bad Tacobell and spinach. More people will become sick from poor handling of raw meats and fish. The lead shielding of a trully effective dirty bomb makes the DB impractical. It’s a good story like ‘liquid explosives’, good copy very little factual trurths.

GreenDreams
Guest
9 years 8 months ago
Not true superdestroyer. Cesium-137 in the form of powdered cesium chloride is the most likely substance for a dirty bomb, and it is commonly found in hospitals and industrial facilities. Other radioactive isotopes are commonly found. Hospitals and research universities have cesium, strontium, cobalt, and americium, and traces of americium are also in smoke detectors. Food processing plants, oil monitoring facilities, and other industries also have devices that use cobalt. In addition, the U.S. is one of the world’s worst offenders regarding nuclear waste. There are currently about 45,000 tons of nuclear waste stored in 131 sites across the country,… Read more »
superdestroyer
Guest
superdestroyer
9 years 8 months ago
Greendeams, Any Cesium-137 or Cobalt-60 source that a hospital source that a hospital or an industrial facilty would own would be a sealed source, double encapsulated, special form in accordance with Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations. A terrorist would need an explosive to spread it around that the bomb decrease the risk. A blood irradiator that a hospital would own would be installed in a 3,000 pound machine. A Cobalt-source would be installed in a gamma knife and would make a lousy source. I find it odd that an activist would think it a good thing that the terrorist… Read more »
Sam
Guest
Sam
9 years 8 months ago

I’m assuming the raioactive elements they are talking about would be a bit more lethal, but obtainable in smaller doses. Say the kind of uranium enriched to nuclear plant quality material. This is obtainable to dedicated and rich people. That bomb would be pretty bad.

Also, you can’t stop everyone who wants to blow things up. Its simply too easy to do. We just have to try out best to prevent it, and deal with the damage when it comes.

Doobs
Guest
Doobs
9 years 8 months ago

Umm CSIS is on this. I wonder which CSIS Director General wants more funding. We’re spending close to 4 billion a year on CSIS and “security”, yet we haven’t yet been attacked by the Taliban, Al-Queda or even ETA in the last 100 years.

Lets be honest. It would be very easy to blow up a greyhound bus or a VIA rail train. Think about that paranoia thought the next you vote!

When you live in fear, you forget to live.

wpDiscuz