Osama nuke fear for U.S.

New York Daily News ^ | 3/13/03 | JAMES GORDON MEEK

[kattracks]

EXCLUSIVE- WASHINGTON - The manhunt for Osama Bin Laden has become more urgent because of growing fears among intelligence officials that he is obsessed with building a nuclear bomb to explode on U.S. soil.

Federal intelligence and energy officials worry that Bin Laden's terrorists will build an improvised nuclear weapon and smuggle it into the U.S., possibly in a container ship, according to well-placed sources.

His goal, they believe, is a nuclear hellstorm like the 1945 Hiroshima blast that killed 140,000 Japanese.

Unlike smaller-scale attacks, which can be planned and authorized by lower-level leaders, the chain of command in Al Qaeda's nuke project answers directly to Bin Laden, right-hand man Ayman Al-Zawahiri and an unidentified scientist called "Dr. X," the sources said.

Alarming new statements by a top Al Qaeda lieutenant - in U.S. custody for the past year - add to evidence of Bin Laden's doomsday bomb ambition.

On Feb. 2, captured Al Qaeda planner Abu Zubaydah was asked what type of "new" attack would "surprise" America.

"Zubaydah's first response was nuclear, although he has continually stated that he does not believe that Al Qaeda acquired nuclear weapons," said a secret Feb. 19 intelligence bulletin obtained by the Daily News.

Some in government suspect Al Qaeda has a secret A-bomb lab in Sudan, Pakistan or Yemen. Other officials doubt it.

No definite plot

The CIA says no specific nuclear plot has been uncovered, but one U.S. official described Bin Laden's bomb lust as "on our screen for a long time."

"It is clear that Al Qaeda is moving in that direction amidst obstacles," said British terrorism expert Rohan Kumar Gunaratna, author of "Inside Al Qaeda."

The furtherance of Bin Laden's nuclear ambitions has alarmed others outside the intelligence community.

"The greatest danger we face is a nuclear bomb being smuggled into this country," Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said. "The amazing thing is how little we're doing about it."

"The probability of us stopping a bomb from being smuggled into the U.S., unfortunately, is small," said Matthew Bunn, a Harvard University nuclear terrorism expert who co-wrote a report on the threat released yesterday by Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee.

Though difficult for terrorists to build, an A-bomb detonated inside Grand Central Terminal would vaporize a half-million New Yorkers, the report said.

Recruitment drive

Sources say Al Qaeda has tried to recruit disgruntled nuclear scientists overseas, particularly in Pakistan, where nine scientists were reported missing last January.

"One of the great worries is that the Pakistani nuclear core is infiltrated by Taliban and Al Qaeda," Schumer said.

The U.S., through its allies, has bought off some foreign nuclear scientists and jailed others, the sources said.

Pakistan insists it keeps tabs on nuclear experts. "Their whereabouts are observed and their travel is observed," a Pakistani official told The News.

He pointed to Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood, the fired chief of Pakistan's plutonium energy project, who was jailed for a year after U.S. intelligence grew suspicious of him in 2001. Mahmood later admitted he twice met with Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri about A-bomb production.

[anniegetyourgun]

"The greatest danger we face is a nuclear bomb being smuggled into this country," Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said. "The amazing thing is how little we're doing about it."

How would this sorry little twit know what's being done. Besides, he's just a chirping bird who has never himself done anything for his countrymen.

[backhoe]

katt, I have maintained since 9-11 that there was a sort of inexorable, natural progression to the attacks on America--

1- conventional ( aircraft used as flying bombs )
2- biological ( anthrax )
3- nuclear

...and I have fully anticipated the next attack to be nuclear. I hope I'm wrong. This is, in part, the price to be paid for overlooking and tolerating all of the clinton's corruption during "The Decade of Fraud(s)..."

God help us, there is so much good and decent about America, and yet so much rot and wrong, too. I really don't know which one will triumph. Let's just hope our military and intelligence services can stay ahead of the vermin trying to wreck what is good here.

[freeper12]

I have no doubt that a NUKE will be detonated in the a US city sometime in the future...probably in my lifetime (next 50 years or so). I have beentelling my wife this since well before 9/11 happended, and now it seems even more likely.

If not Osama, then someone else..the technology just keeps getting "better" and smaller and its just a matter of time...think about the bomb dropped on Japan..they were built with 60 year-old technology...how hard is it to replicate something that happended almost 60 years ago.

If a powerful nuke was detonated in NYC, anyone have an educated guess on what the minimum safe distance will be? i.e. safe from the immediate blast and then safe from the spread of radiation in the hours days and weeks after the blast?

[backhoe]

If you have a point to make, try again- your meaning is unclear.

[We Happy Few]

If detection is so difficult, we must rely on deterrence. The first difficulty is identifying what these terrorists are afraid to lose. The second difficulty is summoning the resolve to make good on our deterrent threat, should we be attacked.

Alternatively, we can hold a third party strictly liable. We can tell a country that has aided or harbored terrorists: "We will take massive retribution against you in the event of attack, so you better summon the resources to find these guys before they act." The detection problem is easier here, since the evidence of complicity appears to be solid for several countries. However, the second problem of the credibility of threat remains. Does the United States have the resolve to carry out an act of massive retribution (on the order of Dresden or Hiroshima) that is necessary for this third-party strategy of deterrence to work?

The fact that we allow ourselves to be manipulated by the United Nations when we propose to use a far lesser degree of military force to combat the spread of weapons of mass destruction does not inspire confidence that we could credibly signal to our enemies our willingness to execute the counterattack that is necessary for this strategy of nuclear deterrence to succeed.

[KickRightRudder]

I wonder who we would retailiate (nuclear) against? Would have to steal some oil fields to repay/rebuild 1 trillion minimum. Scary to ponder,but the govt. can't protect us if Arab are going to be able to come and go as they please and the borders are open. Our government isn't serious about helping us. The laws past are to control us instead of us controling them.
No comprehende American History gringo.

[DerZornGottes]

Right on the money! Finally someone else that has seen the light. One of the most effective weapon the terrorists have,
is the massive support of many muslims. These goat-humpers provide aid and comfort to their 'mujihadeen', and financial support to the families of their 'martyrs'.

The only way to bring the minions of militant islam out of the al quaida camp, is to make them pay a price. Right now they can dance in the streets and celebrate with impunity.
After one massive retaliation is visited upon them (Medina, Mecca, or one of many other islamic centers), and we'll find very few active supporters of terrorism.

Logic has been abandoned for the sake of political correctness, and as long as we tolerate the intolerable, we'll pay the price. The IRS milks us unmercifully for the "cost of government", but we don't use what our money has paid for. The primary function of government is to protect it's citizens and it's borders. Playing games with UN and "Goofy Inane", only encourages terrorists and undermines our sovereignty.

We paid for our thermonulear devices, let's protect ourselves by any means!

[fivecatsandadog]

Perhaps you're right. Bin Laden/al Qaeda planted the seeds (911 WTC, anthrax). If another attack on our soil never happens, it wouldn't matter because it's already too late. They set the wheels in motion, and the train is rolling down the tracks nearly out of control. So now all the terrorists really need to do is sit back and watch the US alienate itself from the rest of the world, and ultimately, destroy itself. Flame away.

[The Lake City Gar]

If a powerful nuke was detonated in NYC, anyone have an educated guess on what the minimum safe distance will be? i.e. safe from the immediate blast and then safe from the spread of radiation in the hours days and weeks after the blast?

The ironic/sad/realistic thing is, whatever that number is (I'm not "Educated" on the subject but I'm guessing about 5 miles in each direction from ground zero) you can multiply it by about 10 (50 miles). Simply because the "No Nukes" harpies (Both in and out of the press) will paralize the pupulace will propaganda.

So to answer your question, it doesn't matter what the answer is because fear and ignorance will take over.

I saw a program with some nuke specialists. These guys were being honest about fallout problems. They admited that people will grossly over-react. Most of it has to do with the International Nuclear Organization (Or something like that) having a zero tolerance on radiation levels. They said we could more than likely clean the area and make it safe but due to fear we'd probably have to just level it and haul everything off.

Of course I can't claim that I would be brave enough to risk a 1-1000 chance at cancer either. Simply because I live in Indiana and you couldn't pay me to live in New York even if it was the proposterous 1-1,000,000 (Or whatever) chance that International Nuclear Organizaion demands it be.

[George W. Bush]

His goal, they believe, is a nuclear hellstorm like the 1945 Hiroshima blast that killed 140,000 Japanese.

Imagine such an explosion among modern high-rises in the middle of a business day. Say, in close proximity to the Sears Tower or another large group of skyscrapers with tens of thousands of people in each of them.

The death toll of a Hiroshima bomb set off in a skyscraper district would dwarf the numbers from Hiroshima.

[Cincinatus]

tell me where I'm wrong

Just about at every point.

First, the number one priority of any government is to protect the nation. Thus, whining about how military costs are hurting health care, education, pensions, etc. does not move me. Defending America is always number one -- and it always should be.

Next, nobody has "mixed up" any threat. Iraq is a threat because Hussein supports Islamic and/or anti-American terrorism (either one, same difference), he has WMD and is willing to use them, and needs to be removed because he threatens us and our national interests. Iraq is a threat and we will take care of it.

Other terrorist nations are on notice: you're next. After we deal with Iraq, the other nations of the "axis of evil" will be dealt with in turn: North Korea, Iran, Syria, and yes, even Saudi Arabia. Look at a map -- what country is in the middle of these arab nations? Duh....

As far as "alienating our long-time allies", if they choose to be against us in this fight, they are not our allies and will be treated accordingly. Simple as that.

Any questions?

[Constitutional Patriot]

"Zubaydah's first response was nuclear, although he has continually stated that he does not believe that Al Qaeda acquired nuclear weapons,"

...Yet...

And once Sadaam or Kil Jung Il have such weapons, how long before one or more ends up in the hands of terrorists!?!?

I wonder if Ms. Serandon is capable of understanding this.

[jimt]

There is no better way to fight terrorism?

I favor the Phil Gramm approach: "We're gonna find those people and we're gonna kill 'em."

[Cincinatus]

Thanks for the lecture.

You're welcome.

But ....Still not clear...

So I see.

[habaes corpussel]

The press is out of control....Read the report by Lugar...........A dirty bomb yea ok I will agree, a Nuke???No way..........