A Must Read for those regular honest folks seeking the Truth In this War Against Al-Qaeda

books:


	• Disinformation : 22 Media Myths That Undermine the War on Terror Richard Miniter Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2005 - 256 pages average customer review:based on 82 reviews view larger image
	for more information click here

I feel better for having read it.

In this, his third pro-Bush book (following "Losing Bin Laden" and "Shadow War") I have the sense that author Richard Miniter is making an effort to not so obviously be a President Bush advocate, but the results confirm his position. Having read this book, I feel better about the United States' foreign policy regarding the Middle East and less threatened by the terrorists of the world. All of the myths that Miniter debunks are important, but some more than others. For example, he proves that the War in Iraq is not another Vietnam. In Vietnam we lost an average of 19 men a day, in Iraq just over one on average. Any casualty is to be mourned, but to compare our losses to what we suffered in Vietnam is ridiculous. More importantly, in Vietnam the enemy could deploy as many as 80,000 men in a single campaign. The sum total of al Qaeda fighters number less than 2,000. Another myth: suitcase nukes are a real threat. First, Miniter points out that "suitcase nukes" are a term invented by the press, and in fact no such weapon exists. The smallest nuclear weapon is the size of three footlockers and takes three men to explode. I could discuss all 22 myths, but will end with this: The post-September 11 world is more dangerous for Americans than ever before. The bottom line: The era of the Cold War with its thousands of nuclear missiles pointed at the U.S. lasted for more than fifty years and was far more dangerous. The end of the Soviet Union brought an end to a reign of terror far greater than that posed by al Qaeda. There have been no terror attacks inside the United States since 2001, although several have been thwarted. There would have to be a 9/11 attack every month before terrorism killed as many Americans as car crashes do. Even Bush detractor Michael Moore pointed out on CBS's "60 Minutes" TV program that "the chances of any of us dying in a terrorist incident is very, very, very small." As in his other two books, Miniter backs his claims with detailed documentation. I believe it would help us all sleep sounder at nights if each of us took the time to read these three books.

for more information click here

How much to believe?

Miniter sets out to debunk 22 Medial Myths, and presents compelling facts for each myth. Is he correct?

I only have the expertise to evaluate his treatment of the 17th Myth: Suitcase nukes are a real threat. Miniter, like most authors, is not a nuclear physicists or engineer. He must take the representations of others as factual. Herein lies the problem. He has been trapped by using incorrect (not necessarily disinformation) to support his position. I will constrain my comments to Myth 17.

LG Alexander Lebed is referenced and ridiculed. On page 138 Miniter says, "He [Lebed] said the bombs would fit `in a 60-by-40-by-20 centimeter case' [23.6 in x 15.75 in x 7.9 in] and would be `an ideal weapon for nuclear terror. The warhead is activated by one person and easy to transport.' It would later emerge that none of these statements were true." Miniter shot himself in the foot with this statement. A small gun-type nuclear device, weighing less than 100 pounds is possible. A mock up of such a device was presented to a Congressional committee. Such devices are Special Atomic Demolition Munitions (SADMs), something Miniter acknowledges on pages 141 and 143. The U.S. SADM used an implosion warhead, not a gun-type one, which accounts for the larger size reported on page 141.

Miniter, and most other authors, suffer from a lack of understanding definitions and terms. Highly enriched uranium (HEU) is a good place to start. Weapons graded HEU is 90% or more of the isotope U-235. Reactor grade HEU is between 5% - 20% U-235. The dual definition creates problems because most authors do not specify which HEU they are writing about.

Suitcase nuke is also a vague and improper term. It is used to describe items varying is size from a briefcase to multiple trunks. Unless the KGB produced a small SADM disguised as a small suitcase, there is no such thing. There are SADMs weighing less than 100 pounds that can be carried in a knapsack. The U.S. had them, and I have no reason to doubt that the Soviet's developed them too.

Proper terminology. SADM is a man portable nuclear device with a yield of less than 1 KT (probably less than .5 KT). ADM, atomic demolition munition, is a nuclear warhead, weighing hundreds of pounds, with yields as high as several hundred KTs. ADMs could be used as mines. Their main purpose was a welcoming device for Soviet troops who had captured U.S. or NATO positions--sort of a surprise party favor.

Mr. Miniter makes my point on page 140 when he presents Rose Gottemoeller as seeing a "suitcase-sized nuclear device" that "actually required three footlockers and a team of several people to detonate." What Ms. Gottemoller saw was an ADM. She did not see a SADM, which one person can cause to detonate. Miniter continues with the assumption that because Ms. Gottemoller did not see a SADM, there were none. He concludes his argument by saying (page 148), "For now, suitcase-sized nuclear bombs remain in the realm of James Bond movies." Really? The last above ground nuclear detonation at the Nevada Test Site was a Davie Crocket nuclear warhead, the same warhead used in our SADMs.

I have no specific knowledge of Soviet SADMs, but it is reasonable to assume the early ones did not have safeties. I helped fit a prototype PAL (prescribed action link) safety device on the Davie Crocket warhead.

Miniter's worst error (page 140) is his perpetuation of another myth which begs debunking: nuclear material has to be replaced every six to nine months. Miniter refers to LG Igor Valynkin who denied [Soviet] nuclear suitcase nukes were ever produced (note he did not say SADMs), then mentions that they are technically feasible, and acknowledges that such weapons would have "a life span of only several months." At this point Miniter jumps to faulty conclusions. "Radioactive weapons require a lot of shielding," [not so] and "The half-life of the most likely materials in the infinitesimal weighs necessary to fit in a suitcase is a few months. So as a mater of physics and engineering, the nuclear suitcase is an impractical weapon. It would have to be rebuilt every few months." The half-life of pulotonium-239 is over 24,000 years. Uranium-235 is 700 million years. What LG Valynkin was referring to was the polonium-210 half of the neutron source (nuclear trigger)--a tiny gold foil packet much smaller than the blue or red sweetener found on a restaurant table. Makes one wonder what Litvinenko and his pals were doing with Po-210.

My novel, The Rings of Allah, presents a technically accurate description of how simple nuclear weapons work, and how a terrorist can plant one in a U.S. city. The Po-210 nuclear trigger is discussed on pages 58-59.

I found the rest of Miniter's book interesting. Except for Myth 17, I would have given the book four stars.

for more information click here

WOW

Show this to your University Prof's and it'll make their heads spin! It's brilliant!

A Must Read for those regular honest folks seeking the Truth In this War Against Al-Qaeda

This book is a must for all those regular, hard working, honest people out there who need the truth (raw facts) on the war on terrorism (Al-Qaeda).

What we have here is a fine straight forward documentary on what is real, and what is a mythology or straight lies fed to us through the mass "drive by" media on the war, Osama Bin Laden, and many others things including the Iraq conflict.

I really like this author's work and have found his other books just as insightful.

for more information click here

reviews: page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10

In Disinformation, a veteran investigative reporter and bestselling author Richard Miniter debunks the myths of the left (and the right) with hard evidence, high-level interviews and on-the-ground reporting in more than a dozen countries.