Nuclear Fallout Protection : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

WWIII is just starting to peep over the horizon. You may need to protect yourself from radioactive fallout. In the event of an explosion more than about twenty miles away, you'll have about half an hour to an hour to find or create suitable shelter before the radiation becomes intense enough to kill you if unshielded. Plan on staying inside for two full weeks if you have no means of detecting radiation.

1. Basement - Put a heavily-built table in the corner of your basement that is most underground. Pile as much material on top as you can, preferably earth, if not then books, furniture, filled drawers, etc. Pile as much material up around the table from the floor up as you can, leaving a small passageway to under the table. Put some water and food, a radio and a flashlight inside, then close the passageway behind you with, again, as much material as you can build up.

2. On the road - Always carry a shovel or two in your trunk. Dig a narrow trench to lay in, then drive vehicle over (straddling) the trench. Bank earth up on sides of vehicle, and fill passenger compartment/bed of truck with as much earth as possible. Get in trench and pull earth in after you, leaving only a small hole for ventilation. Water, etc. as before. Forget culverts and tunnels, radiation will come in the ends and cook you unless you can pile up dirt... even so, first good rain may wash it (and you) away.

3. Boat - If you have a boat, and can get at least 3000 feet away from shore in all directions in a body of water at least 6 feet deep, you can survive. Keep tarp over boat, wash it off often in early stages of fallout.

I sincerely hope this advice will never have to be used by anyone reading it.

-- ,., (.@...), May 10, 1999



S.E International PO. Box 39 156 Drakes Lane Summertown, TN 38483

Makes a nice Rad meter "RAD Monitor 4" which is a hand held device which is good for both alpha and beta/gamma monitoring I bought mine for $240 from Edwards Scientific about 3 years ago( I use them at work).....

Radiation is serious business, but if you can monitor it it is less scarry than BIO or Nerve toxins....

What will be will be....

-- helium (, May 10, 1999.

I knew that there was a reason why we bought this WW II bunker...

-- Mad Monk (, May 10, 1999.


Thanks for the information. Do you also have any information,source or link for obtaining the type of iodine that one should have on hand for children; and the proper dosages, ages for use, etc.

This sort of topic is very foreign to me. I am thinking some more knowledge in these areas wouldn't hurt, all things considered.

*Sigh* though can I actually handle much more to worry about than we all do already...preparing for economic/social and supply chain disruption is workable. How could one, at this late of a date and limited resources, prepare for nuclear war?

-- Lilly (, May 10, 1999.

Thanks for the good advice. However, I live in New Orleans, which is below sea level, so we cannot build basements. I was wondering about the possibility of some type of above-ground shelter - I don't know if we could afford a concrete bunker, but what about building a framework of some sort, and covering it with another substance - any ideas? How thick would the building have to be to withstand radiation? I recently bought a good supply of potassium iodide tablets - do you know how effective these are?

-- Scarlett (, May 10, 1999.

Lilly: I just purchased some potassium iodide tablets from Nitro-Pak Preparedness Center , , phone (435)654-0099. The instructions say that the proper dosage for adults and children over the age of one year is one tablet per day; babies under one year, 1/2 tablet per day, crushed.

-- Scarlett (, May 10, 1999.

Potassium iodide tablets called ThyroBlock are available from Emergency Essentials, 1-800-999-1863. They cost $5.50 for a bottle of 14 tablets. Hope we never need 'em.

-- (, May 10, 1999.

See Fallout Shelter Design Collection (2nd Edition)
"206 pages, with many illustrations, in a 8= x 11 inch format. ISBN: 1-886848-32-7 {Item No.32} Price 20.00

This site offers photocopies of out-of-print, nonclassified, public domain military manuals and books

This manual looks like it might be useful: H-12-3 Home Blast Shelter (November 1983); 8 pages, illus. Price 1.00 {Item No.1932}

(AltaVista is useful too.)

-- Tom Carey (, May 11, 1999.

In order to do it above ground, you're gonna pour a HUGE amount of concrete, with a MINIMUM thickness of THREE FEET ALL THE WAY AROUND (top and all 4 sides). In New Orleans, you should consider the blast effects, too.


-- chuck, a Night Driver (, May 11, 1999.

Interesting that the fears about nuclear war are coming back, after a big lull that began during the Reagan administration.

But anyway:

See what Chuck said. You need a LOT more protection than you've described. It takes several feet of dirt or concrete (or at least a few inches of lead) before you can really consider yourself safe. The car-over-the-ditch idea sounds good, but it won't work. You'll extend your life by a few hours at most.

(As an alternative, if you're in a large, AIRTIGHT -- see next -- building, find a spot that is no less than 50' from any exterior wall, and the more distance, the better. I'd recommend 100'.)

Dean Ing (an old survivalist whom I used to read a lot[g]) has pointed out any number of flaws in the old bomb shelter designs from government publications; the biggest one was ventilation.

Fallout particles can be as tiny as dust mites, and will seep into cracks and crevices. If you breathe even a tiny amount of that dust, you're dead.

Therefore, your shelter needs to be airtight. Caulk around all cracks (use layers of duct tape in an emergency). You should also not underestimate the amount of air that 2 adults in close quarters will need; it's quite a bit. Natural convection won't do it, not if you've built a bunker as described. You'll need a way to force air.

You'll need a good filter at the air entry point. A home heating/cooling-type filter from the hardware store is worse than useless; you need something that screens stuff out down into the sub-micron range.

(You'll also need a way to change that filter when it gets clogged -- and remember, it'll be VERY radioactive, so handle it carefully!)

Dean has also illustrated a way to make a simple radiation scope using the old Leyden jar concept: a couple of thin strips of foil placed parallel to each other in a very dry environment, if charged with static electricity, will drift apart. Eventually, the charges will dissipate, and the foil leaves will drift back "flat," parallel to each other.

Note how long it takes for the foil strips to fall back together in normal atmosphere. In the presence of ionizing radiation, the strips will fall MUCH faster. Dean even published a way to calibrate for somewhat-accurate readings, but the basic idea is simple: if you charge the foil leaves and they fall back together in less than a minute, you're in a "hot" area and need to move.

(If they fall together very quickly, you're in serious danger, and need to move RIGHT THEN.)

One reason why you might consider getting a commercial meter is because exposure is cumulative. For example, in an emergency, you can actually spend a couple of minutes outside, even in heavy fallout -- but then you won't be able to go NEAR anything radioactive for some time!

Using the meter, you'll probably find that one area of the basement is better than others; try to stay there as much as possible, moving only when needed.

Finally, if you really think we're looking at a nuclear exchange (just for the record, I don't, but anyway), then 2 weeks supplies won't be enough, either. You'd better plan on AT LEAST two years, because there won't be anything left around you when you emerge from that shelter. It could be a long time before you'll get anything to grow properly, too, because the radiation will have killed just about all living things around you. It'll be like emerging into Ghost Land.

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (, May 11, 1999.

Egad where to start..... If you would like some FACTS read the various texts at is a good place to start.

Let's go in order.

.@.. - What he says is correct, but you need to read NWSS to understand precisely what he is saying. In some basements you can have a protection factor of 1,000 by just lying at the floor wall intersection.

Some radiation meters have a nasty habit of giving false low readings when exposed to high radiation. If you don't have an Alnor, you should have a mechanical radiation meter (KFM = Kearney Fallout meter) for confirmation. The KFM is self calibrating. Calibration is the main problem with these old surplus Civil Defense meters. The capacitors are so old that they should be replaced and the unit recalibrated, that will cost you easily several hundred dollars. A better alternative is the KFM or some surplus dosimeters.

Lilly - You'll find what you need at my website and in the NWSS book.

Scarlett & - - See my text IODINE.TXT for more info. Please note that KI is ONLY to prevent the uptake of radioactive iodine into the thyroid gland to prevent cancer many years down the road and proper throid function. Purchasing crystals of KI and using them as per NWSS is vastly less expensive than the pills.

Tom - I woulnd't want anybody to waste money on that book until they have first read Cresson Kearney's Nuclear War Survival Skills, available via telephone order from some of those shelters are okay, but the older ones are very very poor. The book would useful for its different concepts, not their execution (ie., adding a little more dirt to make them vastly more effective).

Chuck - You only need the concrete for structural strength. You use nice cheap dirt or sand for a radiation barrier.

Stephen M. Poole, CET - What does CET stand for? Certifiable Entertaining Troll? You offer several possibilities. You are either an insincere individual that enjoys putting out misinformation for distraction and misdirection, example or you simply don't know better and don't care or you get your info from highly suspect sources like PSR, GZ, PRIG, etc. or you've forgotten what you once knew or read. A PF of 1,600 is available from 5" of lead, 24" of concrete, 36" of dirt. The lead is a bad idea unless it is inside of something else since the lead will convert alpha radiation (which can be stopped by a single newspaper sheet) into xray radiation which is harder to stop. The car-over-the-ditch will work just fine IF done properly as most of its protection comes from geometry. 200' of air provides a PF of 40, therefore 100' would be less than PF of 7 and 50' about PF 2.5, totally inadequate for an significant radiation, you'ld be vastly safer in the car/trench. This statement, "If you breathe even a tiny amount of that dust, you're dead." is so absurd I won't bother, I'll just suggest that people read NWSS or TACDA's magazine. You mean electroscope, not Leyden jar, otherwise you have it right. The ionizing radiation changes the conductivity of the air which increases the discharge rate of the static charges on the two metal foils allowing them to move closer together. Ing is desribing a KFM in his book Pulling Through. This would seem to contradict your previous statement, "For example, in an emergency, you can actually spend a couple of minutes outside, even in heavy fallout -- but then you won't be able to go NEAR anything radioactive for some time!" but you've got it right. You can find an exposure table at its the third table that addresses what your refer to. I agree with you that a nuclear war is highly unlikely, embassy bombing included - just another photo op for sabre rattling, look for the begging bowl to be polished up. I disagree on your Ghost Land picture, melodramatic but only applicable near ground zero. H-bombs are exceedingly powerful, but they are finite.

-- Ken Seger (, May 11, 1999.

NWSS was dean's source for Pulling Through, and while he IS a FICTION writer (currently, when not slaying trout) he is SO DISGUSTINGLY CAREFUL about his facts, and particularly the appendices.......

I also have a problem with the Dead Land description. This is NOT what they found in Japan. Paticularly outside the range of the flash burn damage. Inside the range of the flash burn damage, the soil still grew plants the next year.

I have another problem on Mr. Poole's take on the particulate filter. Kearney, IF I remember correctly, is the source of the vent pump Ing uses. the dust filter is designed to reduce the quantity to a reasonable level, not zero.

Ken, New Orleans, concrete is easier to get poured inthe proper configuration than piling sand or earth in a big enough pile with supporting structures.


Who is going to have to go back and reread P.T.

-- chuck, a Night Driver (, May 11, 1999.


Run towards the blast ripping your clothes off... It's a lot quicker and less painful....

Pray you are ground zero...

Surviving a nuclear exchange isn't...

Gettin' a drink,

The Dog

-- Dog (desert dog, May 11, 1999.

Thank you all for the excellent information. Chuck, the Night Driver: You said in New Orleans, I should consider the blast effects too. I have always wondered where our city stood as "most likely to be nuked" - we have a large port and many oil refineries - do you have some information on exactly where New Orleans is rated as far as likelihood of being targeted for a nuclear attack?

-- Scarlett (, May 11, 1999.

Chuck - Let me see if I can do a better job on what I should have said on above ground shelters. If they are for fallout only, like the one at you could make something like that with concrete in place of the temporary wood (having an engineer add rebar for horizontal spans since concrete has great compressional strength but diddly for spanning strength) but still fill the cavity with dirt, strictly for the purpose of economy. Since concrete is denser than dirt you could make the radiation mass barrier less thick using concrete, but it would probably be more expensive. My main thought was cost here.

Now for above ground blast shelters you have to mound dirt on all sides anyway (35 degrees max. angle for best results if memory serves me) to minimize wind effects.

When one considers the multi-use aspects of these shelters they start to look better and better all the time. Even the above ground with a good insulating door works passably as a root cellar. It's also nice to have a tornado shelter when a funnel is sighted in your county.

-- Ken Seger (, May 11, 1999.

To all the people who have read this far, are a little bit nervous (or a lot) about this topic:

Just DO IT. Learn and prepare. It may give you an "unfashionable" feeling, but it will do wonders for you peace of mind, and sense of self-reliance. And it could save your life.


-- Dano (bookem@blacksand.srf), May 11, 1999.

Slow down a little bit:

One. There are several immediate (several potentially catastrophic) immediate effects from a nuclear blast, and several slower acting (and not-so-dangerous) secondary effects, and several theorectical (and unavoidable by the casual observer) effects. The writer, and the responses, have mixed these up into one ball. They are very different problems - each can be solved in different ways, assuming they affect you at all.

Immediate effects are thermal blast, wind blast (going away, then returning), ground shock, immediate radiation (gamma/neutron), and the subsequent damage from these effects (buildings falling on you, fires, collapse of bridges or tunnels, etc.) If you are not in the immediate blast area - 1 to 5 miles radius from the "boom" depending on height of blast and strength of bomb - the immediate effects are of little concern, some would say of no concern at all..

Two. There are three kinds of radiation: Alpha, Beta, and gamma. They penetrate different material differently. You can protect yourself from their effects using different methods.

Alpha can't get through a sheet of paper, or the layer of dead cells on your skin. Alpha particles are actually high speed He nuclei. They are typically emitted from sources like the transuranium atoms, and are dangerous ONLY if you breathe them in. (If you eat the source particle of dust containing an alpha emitter, it will pass through your body while doing very little harm. While not "good" for you, people have swallowed large amounts of Plutonium in the 1940's and 1950's and had no measureable effects.)

To protect yourself, stay indoors if downwind from the explosion. If upwind, you will not get the source particle at all - unless somebody else "walks/drives" through the contaminated area, then drives/walks though your house and neighborhood. The particles MUST be carried to you, then breathed in to be dangerous. Any closed door and window will keep the particles away from you, even a sheet of plastic over an open window (In winter, you'd want to open a window anyway?). If you must go outside downwind of the explosion or source, use a simple paper filter over your mouth and nose.

Beta particles are single positive or negative electrons emitted at higher speeds - since they ar esmalle and have higher speeds, they tend to go through more material. You need more shielding, depending on the actual energy, a 1/2" layer of plywood will do just fine. obviously, the combined exterior wall of any typical US house will shield you.

Same thing goes for beta as for alpha - the threat only exists if you get the particle (1) into your house if downwind, (2) tracked into your neighborhood if upwind. (Or blown backwards later if the wind changes.) However, a beta particle deposits its energy in a larger area of the body than an alpha - hence, breathing in a beta-emitting particle is NOT as dengerous as breathing in an alpha emitter. reason is: the alpha emittor will deposit all of its subsequent damage in one little area in your lungs - an area less than 1/4 cm around the original source. The beta emittor will spread the damage out over a wider area of your body - up to 10-20 cm from the particle, and so the body has a better chance of recovery; that is, it has a smaller chance of developing unnatural cancers.

Gamma are a little more nasty - since they are actually high-energy X-rays, they can obviously penetrate further through things and still hit you. You cannot tell how much shielding is needed unless you know for sure what energy gamma rays are being emitted - so people tend to take worse case conditons. This 'worse case" is where the 3 feet of concrete comes from referenced above, and even that is not enough in certain cases. Mass (weight) is what counts - lead shielding is best, steel works okay, concrete is cheapest and easiest to pour into a structure. Not all gamma is this penetrating (36 inches), not all sources are that strong, not all bombs will deposit dangerous short term gamma sources close to you.

Any shielding will help though. Increasing your distance from the source helps too, since the amount of radiation received falls off as a factor of the distance from the source squared. (Going from 1 yard to 2 yards reduces the radiation dose by a factor of 4.)

Gamma is whole body penetrating, using a mask will not significantly help reduce exposure, but it will keep you from carrying the particles "with" you internally. As with any exposure, removing contaminated clothing, washing/spraying off the source particles from your environment will help.

More later.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (, May 11, 1999.

Thanks to all for asking the right questions and then filling in the blanks (Mr. Poole excepted). There is a lot to this subject, the bottom line being to get as much mass of any kind between you and the radiation. Some will need three feet of earth, for some folks staying inside for a day would be sufficient.

-- . (.@...), May 11, 1999.

I think some of you guys just get a blue gonad rush off of attacking me. What I said wasn't that far from the mark. I left out some details because I was trying to keep the post short, and yes, I blew the air-separation PF thing (I admit that; I was going from memory).

Chuck, in the event of any of the scenarios for nuclear war that I've seen, the fallout WOULD cause a virtual killoff in areas of heavy concentration. The amount of fallout over Nagasaki and Hiroshima was nothing compared to what some of the multi-megaton Soviet whoppers would cause.

One of the few good things to come out of Chernobyl was that it convinced some top Soviet people that maybe a nuclear war WASN'T such a good idea. (Prior to that time, Soviet Military doctrine toyed with the idea that a quick preemptive strike was actually do-able.)

Compared to a full-blown nuke, Chernobyl was a cream puff -- but there's still quite some area around that plant where it's not safe to walk. :)

Of course, we've gone full circle; there are some new guys coming up who think the nukes might be useable after all . .. .. but I'll leave that topic to the EOTW types on this board. :)

-- Stephen M. Poole, cET (, May 12, 1999.

Thanks again for all of the excellent input on shelters!

-- Scarlett (, May 12, 1999.

SMP,CET - Don't give youself more credit than you are worth. It's not just you. I get distressed whenever anybody puts forth total or partial falsehoods about the effects and defenses against nuclear or atomic weapons. I grew up in Omaha, NE just north of SAC. For 30+ years I believed that Omaha was going to be toast about 2 seconds after SAC gets hit if a nuclear war broke out, radiation will kill anything left, mutations, etc. the whole 1950's B-movie routine. When I discovered the truth thanks to Bruce Clayton's article in Reason magazine I was rather ticked off that so many people lied about so much. Now when I say lie I mean they knew the truth but withheld it and instead told what they knew was a falsehood as if it were true, examples would be various government officials, Carl Sagen, etc.. That portion is a small portion. The vast majority were people that didn't know right from wrong, assumed the "experts" were telling the truth, and repeated those lies, example local politicans, reporters, teachers, etc.. Their only sin was that they did not have the integrity to research readily available primary sources of information, got lazy and instead relied on second and third hand information before they repeated those lies as if they were true.

I was angry then, I'm still angry when somebody (any topic) puts forth false information that has the potential to cause a person to do significant self-injury or death.

On your using air as a mass shield, perhaps you were thinking of the equation where if you are in the middle of a flat plain and all the fallout for X' in diameter to you is removed the radiation exposure will be reduced Y PF, example 25'= D. PF=2. Not much but if it cuts down your exposure by a PF of 4 that could mean the difference between being dead and being sick for a few weeks, or between being sick and no illness. If you talk of just being in a building with the fallout still on the roof, you haven't gained much at all, digging a foxhole with no roof would get you vastly more PF.

On the, "Fallout particles can be as tiny as dust mites, and will seep into cracks and crevices. If you breathe even a tiny amount of that dust, you're dead. Therefore, your shelter needs to be airtight." that is pure bullshit, and I'm not talking inhaled gamma sources in which much of the radiation would harmlessly pass through ones body. Alpha or beta are the worse to inhale and lodge in the lung since all of their radioactivity ionizes the local tissue. All those cilla in the lung are there for a purpose. Any that is not expelled is a hazard which can be mitigated by a diet high in antioxidents and free radical scavengers. Read Durk Pearson and Sandy Shaw's books for the data on radiation mitigation via nutrition, it's astounding. With proper nutrition your susceptability to radiation can be reduced by a factor of three.

Lambasting the car over the trench shelters as useless is so widely wrong I don't know where to start. If your source of information is organizations such as Physicians for Social Responsibility, Programers for Social Responsibility, Educators for Social Responsibility, Ground Zero, Public Interest Research Group, Science in the Public Interest, etc. please note that all of those organizations are strictly political organizations that have no interest whatsoever in what is true or false and any nuclear information from them is highly suspect since the vast majority of their nuclear related pronouncements are blatantly false.

On fallout. Fallout only occurs in a ground burst, when the fireball touches the earth and sucks up material and the gaseous bomb remnants condensate on the dirt particles. There is no fallout in an airburst, when the fireball is far enough above the earth that nothing is sucked up. Larger bombs have larger fireballs so an airburst altitude for a small warhead could be considered a ground burst for a large warhead. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were airbursts, technically there was no fallout, but there was some rainout. Given very particular weather conditions, the condensing bomb remnants can "seed" water droplets and be washed down in a "rain". This usually covers a much smaller area than fallout would but can be more concentrated. Please note that for building knockdown effect, airbursts give a vastly wider ring of destruction. Ground bursts are only used for hardened targets. Also, note that for the last several decades bombs have been getting vastly smaller due to better guidance systems. The old 1,5,10, and 25 megaton bombs have been replaced by .05 and .1 megaton bombs that are more precise or MIRVed.

Back to SMP. A single nuke's fallout, unless it is a cobalt clad bomb which thank goodness nobody has ever built (so far), puts out a whole bunch less radiation than Chernobyl did. Now 1,000 nukes? I'ld have to do some math, but the nukes radiation would be spread over a larger area and be the type of radiation that goes away faster (the T 1.2 rule). Actually the soviet union did suffer in the mid 1950's an unplanned radiation release that was actually worse than Chernobyl. The history of that is almost as bizzare as Chernobyl's cause. I can't remember the title or author of the book that covers that, I'll look that up. It is a fascinating read!

Your point about coming full circle. In both Russia and China, and the USA for that matter, the leaders that remember the siege of Stalingard or the Long March are just about all gone from the scene. This IS bad news. This might be a very very good explanation to explain the difference in uses of military power by Clinton versus Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, etc. An economic parallel might be money managers that were still in grade school in the stagnant 70's and weren't born when the DJA hit 1,000 and then went bigtime bull in the sixties. And forget about relating to the 1929-1933 bull market completely. "Those that don't learn from history........ My heavens! We are in agreement! Put a black circle on the calendar!

-- Ken Seger (, May 12, 1999.

I think the dangers of nuclear radiation exposure will exist without the issue of nuclear bombs added to it. The possibility of nucelar accident(s) somewhere due to y2k mishaps is probably real enough to get concerned.

As an aside, we were getting our longed for root cellar dug out the other day by a local backhoe owner and he joked about our getting worried enough about NATO to dig a bomb shelter-tee hee...

-- anita (, May 12, 1999.

Well Anita the difference between a good root cellar and a good fallout shelter is 1. one or two right angles in front of the entrance 2. a ventilation system 3. a port-a-potty 4. a light source 5. bedding 6. books, games, a guitar or harmonica, or other entertainment source 7. a homemade self-calibrating radiation meter (if you can from scratch bake bread you can make a KFM). The NWSS book will tell you what you need to know. Plus there is always my website and OISM's.

I personally don't think Yugoslavia will cause WW3. I have been known to make some really bad more-than-half-a-bubble-off guesses before though.

I will say this, unless Gary North is right, 10 or 20 years from now there are going to be a lot more nations with A-bombs, H-bombs, and ICBMs than there are today.

The amount of radiation released at 3 Mile Island was so small, if you were downwind of it at the fenceline for fays before and days after, you'ld get a smaller radiation dose than you would flying from N.Y.C. to LA. Still to be on the absolute safe side, KI is always a good idea. It lasts forever and is cheap insurance, particularily for children.

-- Ken Seger (, May 12, 1999.

Two doors Ken - one outer one, then an inner one that is kept shut until the outer one closes.

Best - if possible, and if water pressure is still avialable, is a simple hose and drain to the outside in between the two doors - then a user steps into the space between the two doors, parys off any dust (letting it flow out under the door away form the inside, shuts off the hose, dries off, and removes outer garments if needed, and then steps though inside door to root cellar.

Kind of like the "mud rooms" up north. Its a place to kee "outside" clothes outside the inside room(s).

If the root cellar has an inside access (to the regular house), and an outside access, even better. If tornadoes approach - after hours or at night - then the users can get to shelter quickly without getting into the storm itself.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (, May 13, 1999.

Excellent suggestions Robert. If one wants the ultimate in convenience, if you live in an area with a high enough water table, install a hand pump. Then you don't have to bother with storing as much water. You should always store some just in case of pump failure, or if you live in earthquake counrty you might find that after a rattle rattle boom the local hydrology is all screwed up and there's no longer any water to pump at 15' down.

-- Ken Seger (, May 14, 1999.

Such excellant advice and things to consider for one who is new to this topic. Mr Seger offers a great site, will work through it as time allows :-).

I went to the Nitro-pak site, and couldn't find listing for the tablets online? Unless I navigated wrong, which is very possible, a phone call must be required to obtain prices, S&H, etc. Shall follow up on that.

Now I have another question, which I hope isn't too naieve (sp.). Just as with y2k, local variables affect how we prepare; to put it simply, the difference between city/country preparations, etc.

My question then is with nuclear weapons/fallout, how does one prepare, determining distance from a likely target, such as a military base or large city? I scanned quickly through most of the articles on Mr. Seger's page, and this question is answered very adequetely there in relation to distance from ground zero; and difference between air and ground blast. But being a novice, and with limited time/resources as a consideration, how does one come to understand what types of shelter and preps would be adequate in relation to individual geography?

Not sure I am being clear enough with the question. A long time ago, during the cold war days, we where acquinted with an ex-navy seal. We discussed some of these things with him. He mentioned a map one could use to determine how close you lived to a "target". These targets, apparently where numbered in order of likelyhood of strike order. Now, if one lived in very close proximity to obvious targets, such as a nuclear power plant or large refinery, one would need full shelter plans. But how does one in rural Indiana, or large city in North Dakota, or small city in Texas, etc, determine needs without at least some educated guess of risk? Does such a map exist? Would the source of this map be the government? ...or is it another issue the general public must garner information for and speculate on our own?

I must give myself my own advice, as I give to those seeking answers with y2k, read and learn and draw your own conclusions. I believe I now have a bit of understanding/insight of how someone new to the y2k situation must feel...scary stuff.

I wish I could afford books, but I must depend on the public library, the Internet and the kindness of strangers for information. :-)

-- Lilly (, May 14, 1999.

Lilly - If you can't afford books, you can't afford tablets, buy the crystals. Look at item POT590 125 g $53.oo, 500g $108.oo + shipping. But you say one bottle of tablets is cheaper? Yes, but look what one person did with those white LEDs? Find others that will go in with you and buy brown glass bottles with bakelite tops can can hold the KI without damaging the cap. Ie., while KI is pretty stable stuff, just a little bit of gassing of iodine will make most plastics brittle over a long time.

Anyway the fallout maps you see at gun shows and in books are totally useless because they are very outdated. They show missile fields that haven't been there for over a decade, etc. There is a book you can purchase from the Government Printing Office, it is a little more up to date, very detailed, about 2" thick, can't remember the name, I own it, I've read it, I wouldn't bother with it. Just figure it out for your self. The Russians have NEVER targeted cities per se. Their targeting priorities have been as follows, 1. Command and control centers. 2.What can hurt them within a few minutes (missile silos and other platforms{subs}) 3. What can hurt them within a few hours (bombers) 4. What can hurt them in a few days (land based stuff in Europe, etc. and support for 2&3) 5. What can hurt them in a few weeks (land based stuff in the US) 6. What can hurt them in a few months (the US infrastucture,oil, electric and communications) 7. What can hurt them in several years (US people) Now please do understand that flight #432 from Boston to Albany is considered a troop carrier with a flashy plant job.

That said, remember that ground bursts are only useful for hardened targets like #1 and #2. Otherwise they are a waste of kilotonnage since the #2, 3, & 4 of the 4 damage rings are smaller the lower the height of burst.

Also please remember that the difference between a fallout shelter of PF 40 (97.5% radiation reduction) and PF 80 is 3.6 inches of dirt. Besides more dirt equals a better root cellar for temeperature uniformity.

A fan of Tennessee Williams? You might want to at least look at those maps to get an idea. First you need to think like a Russian and not a Hollywood script writer or liberal politician on "obvious targets".

I'll make a bibliography that would be helpful, the first is NWSS by Kearney.

-- Ken Seger (, May 14, 1999.

Ken, have you read anything about 'rolling your own' iodide from tincture of iodine, which is readily available in every pharmacy? You can reduce the iodine to iodide with Vitamin C:

I2 + ascorbic acid -> 2HI + dehydroascorbic acid

Add some sodium bicarbonate to neutralize the acid and you've got sodium iodide. 30 ml of 2% tincture would contain 600 mg of iodine, or six adult doses, approximately equivalent to six 130 mg tablets of potassium iodide.

You can see the reaction works - crush 1000 mg of vitamin C, add to 30 ml of tincture, shake, and the solution becomes loses its reddish brown color, indicating that the iodine has been reduced to iodide.

THIS IS NOT A RECOMMENDATION TO ANYONE!!! This is a request for a reality check from someone who knows more than I do. It seems to me that it ought to work, but I don't know that it is safe. If I have it wrong, or if you do it wrong, you could ingest elemental iodine, which is highly toxic in these doses.

-- Ned (, May 14, 1999.

Ned, I have not heard of that technique. I have heard of painting "X" sq. inches of your body with tincture of iodine, or "Y" sq. inches with a betadine type iodine prep.

However, since you can purchase 500g of KI for about $120.oo and that's about 4,000 adult-day doses, that's what, about $0.03 per dose? Why fiddle with the unknown when the proven and known is so readily available from 1-800-533-4605?

I just like simple solutions that work. It's like that big brohaha on this forum about diluting Gatorade for an electrolyte replacement. The Jane Orient formula was designed by an M.D. whose specialty is emergency and disaster medicine and is cheaper and more available than Gatorade. When the best is cheaper than the alternatives, why fiddle?

Please don't take this as a flame, I hope it doesn't sound like one, because I applaud anybody that can come up with a workaround for a problem.

Surviving Y2K or a nuclear war isn't all that complicated if you stick to the basics first. I love luxury as next as the next person, but small, light, and potent are going to be important in a crisis.

-- Ken Seger (, May 14, 1999.

>Please don't take this as a flame

Of course not. The only reason I bring it up is that in a pinch, tincture of iodine is easy to find, and potassium iodide isn't.

-- Ned (, May 14, 1999.

Ken, Robert (OK CET, if you behave): What about neutron weapons? I assume most of the effects would be localized to the blast area, but there is not really any effective shielding is there? And not much fallout?

-- a (a@a.a), May 14, 1999.

Dear --a,

I just noticed that only includes blast effects and not prompt radition effects. If you are really interested I can get out the map overlays that I made for my dog & pony shows I used to give and give you effect radii for prompt radiation.

Anyway, if you increase the size (power) of a nuclear or atomic weapon the blast radius increases proportionately. It is just figuring the energy density at the surface of a sphere since the blast is a spherical phenomenon. Ie., double the bomb size and blast effects go up a bunch - reduce the bomb size by 1/2 and the blast effects go down a bunch. To be more specific. Example, the formula for volume of a sphere is V = 3/4 pi r(cubed), now that formula can not be used for blast or any other effects but remember the idea of cubing a radius. Roughly if you want to double the ditance of a blast effect you have to make the bomb 8 times as large.

Now this is not true for the prompt radiation effects. At the time of blast a whole bunch of neutron radiation is generated (as well as gamma, beta, alpha). The amount of prompt radiation doesn't change much. Double the bomb size and you'll get only a small increase in prompt radiation effects to distance, half the bomb size and the prompt radiation effects to distance don't go down much. To be more specific. A 20kt (a little bit smaller than Hiroshima) will deliver 100 REM out to about 1 mile. Increase that to a 200 kt (0.2 Mt) and that is 100 REM at 1.4 miles. A 2 Mt (2,000 kt) is 100 REM at just over 2 miles, and a 20 Mt is 100 REM are 3.2 miles.

So increasing the bomb size (or decreasing the bomb size) by a factor of 100 gives you about a doubling (or halving) of prompt radiation effect distances. Whereas in blast effects changes by a factor give a 5:1 (or 1:5) change.

That's nice Ken, what does this have to do with --a's question? A given bomb size will have a radius X for a 100% kill rate (unprotected) from blast effects and a radius Y from prompt radiation effects. Now in a Hiroshima sized bomb those radii are about the same. Increase the size of the bomb and the blast kill zone extends farther than the radiation kill zone. Decrease the the size of the bomb and the smaller radiation kill zone extends farther than the vastly smaller blast zone.

The tricky part of the nuetron bomb is that while it is fairly easy to increase the size of the bomb, it is very difficult to make a small bomb work at all, not enough critical mass.

As for fallout from a neutron bomb, that just relates back to whether the fireball "touches" the ground enough to suck up dirt and contaminate it with the condensing radioactive bomb debris.

As far as sheilding against neutrons go, if memory serves me, a shelter that provides a 40 PF against gamma would provide a 20 PF against neutron. 80 vs. 40, 200 vs. 100, always about 1/2. But remember the neutron bomb has a very short reach, less than one mile because the radiation is being attenuated by the air and the radiation is falling off as inverse cube of the distance. Example the prompt radiation of a 200 kt is as follows; 100,000 REM @ 0.5 miles, 10,000 REM @ 0.8 mi., 1,000 REM @ 1.1 mi., 100 R @ 1.4 mi., 10 R @ 1.8 miles, and 1 REM @ 2.1 miles.

Did all of the above make it clearer? I'm just typing this up as I go.

-- Ken Seger (, May 14, 1999.

Ken: Yeah, I guess. As INVAR says, we'll find out soon enough. :)

BTW - My late father was a county CD director. When I was a kid I got a huge dose of Geiger counter lessons, A-bomb films, and duck&cover exercises. After around 1970 though, Civil Defense was phased out (renamed Emergency Preparedness) and his "mission" shifted to natural disasters. As a result, he became really into hurricanes.

I was looking at my closet full of food and water the other day and it reminded me of the small stockpiles that CD used to stash in government buildings under the staircases. I wondered if old Dad would be proud of his son, or whether he just Wouldn't Get It.

-- a (a@a.a), May 14, 1999.


Thank you for sharing this information.

A question about grades of KI. When I purchased KI I assumed that "reagent grade" is the same as "lab grade." I received 125g potassium iodide, granular, lab grade, ordered from The Science Alliance in TX, then noticed the label says, "for lab use only, not for drug, food or household use." I take this to mean there are some kind of impurities. Would it be usable in an emergency or should I try to get the reagent grade?

(I do have the instructions for preparation, which are in Ch. 13 of the Kearney book, so I know not to use it straight!)

-- Debbie (, May 14, 1999.

Debbie, You'ld have to ask a chemist the specifics but if memory serves me, reagent grade is purer than pharmacutical grade which is pure than lab grade. My KI is from Advance Scientific and Chemical, it is reagent grade 99% purity.

I would *guess* that the "not fit for..." label is there because of the lawyers, but I don't know!!! I would think that the people that sold you the stuff could tell you the purity %. Whether they know what the other X% is, I doubt it. hmmm.... The reagent grade doesn't cost that much, I'd buy the reagent grade, but then I am a risk adverse type fellow and kind of like to know what I'm putting in my body.

--a - Short answers this time, I promise! Neutron weapons have a very small area of prompt radiation hazard, less than a mile and the blast area is even smaller. You have to be behind the shielding when the bomb goes off, the sheilding is half as effective against prompt radiation as it would be against fallout, but remember even a PF of 2 might be enough to save your life. To get the largest kill zone the nuetron bomb has to be an air burst, plus the fireball is very small so it doesn't take a great height to be an air burst, therefore no fallout.

sheesh, I'm long winded even when I try to be brief. Let's try that again!

Nuetron bombs; only very local effects, shielding is effective, no fallout.

Wow! I did it. Put a gold star on the calendar.

-- Ken Seger (, May 14, 1999.

Consider neutron boms as still experimetnal at this stage - the Chinese have exploded a couple of our designs, but that's a long ways from testing to warheads ready to deploy. Not very long, but long enough.

If a warhead 9or several warheads) were to fly, they'd be the old style.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (, May 17, 1999.

I had read somewhere that kelp tablets would help for iodine in a pinch. Any feedback on this?

-- anon (, May 17, 1999.

We all may need protection at this rate....

Here is todays worldnetdaily article by Nyquist who now writes for them. He earlier reported that N. Korea had its special forces slip into Japan recently ready to destabilize its infrastructure.

Is a military offensive being contemplated?

) 1999

"Only the offensive leads to the attainment of victory over the enemy," wrote Col. Sidorenko, a Soviet military strategist in the 1970s. "As a type of combat, the offensive has incontestable advantages over the defense." Why is the offensive so incontestably superior?

Sidorenko explained, "The attacker has broad capabilities for launching surprise strikes, for the rapid exploitation of the results of nuclear attacks. ..."

On Dec. 15, in a Washington Times op-ed piece, J. Michael Waller broke a mainstream media taboo. He noted that Russia's new hard-line leaders had been "spending their time and money preparing for ... nuclear war against the United States and its allies."

Waller's statement, of course, is correct. As crazy as it sounds, the Russians have been preparing for a Third World War, even as Russia's leaders have warned that such a war may be imminent. In recent years, the Russians have built huge underground shelters, bunkers, and nuclear-proof cities. Under Yamantau Mountain in the Urals, the Russians have built an underground city the size of metropolitan Washington. But that is not all the Russians have done.

According to Bill Lee, a former official with the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Russians have 10,000 to 12,000 ABMs defending their country. These ABMs have been deceptively described to the outside world as Surface to Air Missiles (SAMs), but as Lee told me in Washington last February, many of these so-called SAMs can carry one-megaton warheads far above the earth's atmosphere. Lee also explained how a special type of nuclear warhead, which puts out x-ray radiation, could be used in these "SAMs" to kill American nuclear warheads as they travel towards Russia, along flight-paths outside the earth's atmosphere. Inside the earth's atmosphere, explained Lee, "the Russians would use interceptor missiles with neutron bombs. The peculiar characteristics of this warhead give it a better kill radius against warhead electronics."

Another peculiar move in recent months, the Russians have been upgrading 180 MiG-29s to what they call the MiG-29 SMT. The upgrade involves the addition of a fuel tank and in-flight refueling capabilities that would give the MiG-29 intercontinental range. Why the Russian Federation would need a jet fighter that could fly to Chicago is something curious. If you put this together with the stockpiling of strategic metals, food, and fuel, a more ominous picture begins to unfold.

Since the NATO bombing began against Yugoslavia, Russian war preparations have accelerated. Over 80,000 Russians have volunteered to fight the West. Last month, the Russian Defense Ministry called up a draft of 170,000 recruits. Russia also called up a large number of naval and marine reserves, which have been used to man Russia's Black Sea Fleet.

In terms of naval deployments, the Russians have mobilized their Northern, Pacific, Baltic and Black Sea fleets for unprecedented training exercises, which have been held almost continuously since 27 March. These exercises have involved marine amphibious landings, missile launches, and mock air-strikes.

But Russia is not alone in preparing for war. China, too, has been engaged in a serious buildup of forces opposite Taiwan. There is also China's invasion of the Spratly Islands, which are located more than 800 miles from China yet 140 miles from the Philippines. In January, Manila was alarmed to discover that the People's Liberation Army was erecting gun and anti-aircraft emplacements on Mischief Reef. The Chinese ambassador to the Philippines, Guan Dengming, insisted that China was merely constructing "shelters for fishermen." But a leading Philippine official countered this, saying, "We strongly believe a fortress is being built. ..." Philippine Defense Secretary Orlando Mercado stated that concrete buildings in the Spratlys "are beginning to look more like military structures rather than the so-called fisherman's refuge the Chinese claimed it to be." Mercado further accused China of bullying the Philippines, referring to recent Chinese moves as a "a creeping invasion."

As it happens, Taiwan's lifeline runs near to the Spratlys. On Jan.12 of this year, Taiwan President Lee, taking note of Beijing's obvious attempts to encircle his small island country, called on his fellow citizens "to raise their vigilance against the military threat from China." Four days earlier, on Jan. 8, Chinese President Jiang Zemin laid out the mission of the People's Liberation Army in a speech: "We must resolutely safeguard the unity of the motherland and the nation's territorial integrity."

Unity, of course, is the war cry of the Communist Chinese against the Nationalist Chinese on Taiwan. President Jiang also warned that the Chinese People's Liberation Army should prepare itself for two things: nuclear war and internal uprisings. Soon thereafter, in mid January, China conducted bomber and missile exercises in which Chinese forces practiced targeting American troops in the Far East. The Chinese have also announced radical changes in military doctrine. The Chinese Air Force was placed in "offensive mode" in January, and China's army doctrine was altered to one of global war-fighting.

Chinese war preparations have also been unmasked, more recently, by the United States Congress. The House select committee's long-awaited report, slated for release this week, describes the emergence of China as a serious military threat, claiming that: 1) China has stolen five of America's most modern nuclear warheads through "pervasive" spying at U.S. nuclear laboratories; 2) China has stolen satellite and missile technology; 3) China has illegally acquired supercomputers, telecommunications equipment, jet engines and sophisticated machine tools.

Meanwhile, in a Senate Appropriations subcommittee on defense, America's top general said last Tuesday that North Korea was continuing to strengthen its military, which is mobilized and poised to attack South Korea. According to General Henry Shelton, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, North Korea has deployed most of its one million troops near the South Korean border to prepare for war. "Despite its collapsed economy and struggle to feed its own population," explained Shelton, "the North Korean government continues to pour resources into its military and to pursue a policy of confrontation with South Korea and its neighbors in the region." Shelton further said that the threat from North Korea is serious.

In recent months the North Koreans, who are close allies of Moscow and Beijing, have declared, "The United States will [soon] be reduced to ashes and will no longer exist. ..." North Korean headlines from the first week of 1999 proclaimed that: "U.S. Imperialist Aggressors Will Be Unable to Avoid Annihilating Strikes." Another North Korean newspaper stated that the Americans would be wiped "from this planet for good." In the New Year's message of the North Korean government, the Communists called on their citizens to "love rifles, earnestly learn military affairs and turn the whole country into an impregnable fortress."

South Korean President Kim Dae-Jung, fearing the Communist threat, warned his people to be ready for a surprise attack from the North.

While the Far East appears on the brink of war, the Middle East is equally bad. Intelligence International has reported that Saddam Hussein recently sent a memorandum to "senior staff in the party, state, and the army." The memorandum says that war is imminent. It says that "the showdown with the United States is not far away." Further along, Hussein promises a "crucial confrontation that will end in Iraq's favor." Saddam's memo also stated: "Iraq will confront -- with determination, vigor, and a devastating response that will be remembered throughout history -- the latest U.S. attempt to inflict harm on it."

Small countries like Iraq and North Korea could not, by themselves, defeat the United States in any kind of war. However, if Iraq and North Korea are supported by the Russian-Chinese alliance, then we are talking about World War III. In that event, all bets are off. Presently the United States is not prepared for a global war, and is certainly unprepared to fight a nuclear war.

From the statements of Iraqi and North Korean officials, one might get the idea that these small countries know that something is about to happen. The Iraqi and North Korean statements, as quoted above, seem to indicate that weapons of mass destruction will be used against the United States and its allies.

"A massed nuclear strike is a strike inflicted by a large number of nuclear weapons simultaneously," wrote Col. Sidorenko in his book, The Offensive. "Its goal is the destruction of enemy means of nuclear attack, the inflicting of destruction on the main formations of his troops, and disorganization of the rear, economy, and troop control."

Is a military offensive against the U.S. being contemplated by Russia, Iraq, North Korea and China?

To this question there is only one right answer. Let's not get it wrong.

-- BB (, May 17, 1999.

-- Andy (, May 17, 1999.

Afghanistan News

-- 123 (1232@!23.123), March 17, 2002.

I dont know, I think I would rather die quickly then die slowly, probably painfully, living the low quality of life that is sounds like there would be. God I hope people come to have enough sense not to use weapons like this.

-- Juanita (, May 30, 2002.


Nuclear, Biological, & Chemical Warfare- Survival Skills, Pt. II

-- John Rollinson (, May 31, 2002.

I can not find a map that will show the most likely targets and direction of radiation distribution. What can anyone tell me about the India and Pakistan situation as it relates to us in the U.S. beyond the military implications or where I can find the information. I have tossed around the idea of finding a cave in the mountains to take my kids to. Any thoughts there??

-- Katie (, June 02, 2002.

@ Why not pull the bedsheet,up over your head? I, for one will not place my soul in close proximity of latest terror. I do not even own a John Boat, much less a bigger boat, So you don't have to be concerned about Me and Mine. We are still trying out how to get out of the driest, sand pile road. It is only my story and you thought your story was the same? How dramtic, your final line sounded. Too Bad, you didn't listen to others.

-- My Story (, June 08, 2002.

andIam... sorry that I am not a super brain like most of the people on this board seem to be. Most of the things posted here go over my poor, ignorant, head with only 4 degrees behind my name but none grad level. I was asking a simple question based on today's news events and my concerns for my family. If this offends you, well I will not appologize because I was hoping some COMPASSIONATE and KNOWLEDGEABLE person could give me some practicle advice to someone who does not have an advanced degree in nuclear physics. Excuse me for trying to ask what I feel were knowledgeable people. I will try to find my info elsewhere.

-- Katie (, June 08, 2002.

Katie, sorry to offend you in the heated words of Battle by a truck load of "scare mongers". Even though this seems new and scary to you, there are some of us Old Timers, who went before you, and it wasn't as bad as presented. There are some immediate things you can do, like buying a wind-up radio, you don't have to worry about batteries. A few years ago, we had to "Flee Floyd", a hurricane that hit Florida. For some reason, even the car radio buzzed out, so I whipped out my handy dandy, wind up solar radio, and immediately hooked into the weather radio station. The broadcast news made out like we were meant for Hell. Whilst, I rode upon a Golf Cart on the Gulf Coast. This life style is meant for you too. A few extra cans of meats and veggies won't hurt, as well, but extra supplies of Toilet Paper, is a Must! Once, on this particular money making forum, they allowed us to free style on the toilet paper issue. That was a Hoot! In the meanwhile, Can I sell you an original wood burning stove? And six 50 pounds of unground wheat? I didn't do so well on grinding down that stuff, like to broke my right arm off, until it got to powder. I knew I should have bought an electric version. For whatever it means, I was There, before You, You don't have to worry.

-- My Story (, June 09, 2002.

i was wondering if there are any materials that radiation is attracted to, that would absord radiatin at an entrance or air intake.

-- michael arter (, June 22, 2002.


I was wondfering if anyone knows of any good detailed engineering books about building decent blast and fallout shelter design as part of a building and the standards there of. There is allot of 1960's "dig a bunker" stuff out there, but little really good stuff for the professional architect or engineer. Thanks ahead of time!

-- Tim Lenon (, August 16, 2002.

How does this situation with the boat play out? Why is the 3,000 feet from shore and six foot depth a considration? Are not all the different airborne and radiant contaminants the sames whether you are in a boat or not? Why is this different from being on shore?

-- John Mitchell (, August 21, 2002.

20 miles away? Are you on crack???!! If a hydrogen bomb detonated 20 miles away and had a yield of over 400 kilotons, do you really think that you should be worried about the fallout??!! In the event of a nuclear blast, make sure you cover yourself in something silvery or white, it may just save your life from the intense heat from the blast. Everything in a 15 mile radius would be "flattened and blackened" due to JUST the blast. Then everything in a 10 mile radius past that would be flattened from the shock wave. After that anything then would be saturated with gamma, beta, and alpha waves. Only if you are more than fifty miles away should you even worry about surviving longer than 20 minutes! Gotta go now and do some homework! Bye now!

-- Not I (, October 07, 2002.

India and Pakistan, phaw!! Neither have the ability to make ICBMs so why worry about??!! Even if they get in a nuclear war, everybody else would quicly pounce on the user!!! Would the government really let a country exist if it was willing to use nuclear weapons in a war??!! In all seriousness, don't worry about China either. They might have ICBMs but everybody else hates their guts. So I am very sure they would not use them unless they were "cornered like a mouse" and had no other option, simply because everybody else is jumping for a reason to attack China! So in fact IF there is a WWIII anybody that uses a nuclear weapon would immediatly be pounced upon by it's neighboring nations. After all who wants a neighbor who constantly aims a gun at your house??!! Trust me don't even try to throw this logic off. Hee hee. My homework is done now.

-- its not me (, October 07, 2002.

You are all a bunch of idiots....just face it, you're going to die. There.

-- Jim Cheegar (, February 14, 2003.

I've got my potasium iodide for my family, copies of all relevant fallout/nuclear war info books, survival info for homesteading, canning, seed collections, raising small livestock,etc. My 900 lbs.of wheat is stored in basement in plastic food liners that fit my galvanized trash cans and are air-sealed with dessicant (wheat frozen for a week first). We buy all the supplies like soap, deod. oil (crisco in cans, olive oil, etc. We have a piece of land outside of town we plan to move to and instead of a basement, we're planning to put in a fallout shelter; dual purpose as we live in central Kansas and tornadoes do visit. We are serious about this and angry 28% of the people in this world have governments that provide shelter or at least educated THEIR taxpayers as to how to survive or get by in case of the unthinkable (Sweden, Switzerland, China and Russia). We have contacted our governor here in Kansas, our Senator and others about the feasibilty of our using out IRA's without being penalized to build our own shelters. I mean, its isn't as though those funds are doing anything rights now but loosing. No response or one of "you're government is doing everything possible to see such an emergency will never take place". EMERGENCY?!?!? What jackasses. Enjoy this site I happened on as our neighbors and friends have been doing wheat WE"VE been doing, or wondering HOW to do what we are doing. We should all not be so shy and bombard our LEADERS to take us seriously. There is a lot of fatality out there (what's the use, we've nothing to live for) and I would LOVE to see a copy of NUCLEAR WAR SURVIVAL SKILLS in every library in this country. Homeland Security site is a laugh riot.......

-- Dulcie Anders (, May 02, 2003.

Emergency Food and Water Supplies

-- (theB@sic.s), May 04, 2003.

Do you honestly think any of these measures are gonna stop you from getting your ass blown to hell and back?

-- Spider Wire (, April 22, 2004.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ