No. It isn't that simple. Nukes that worked yesterday might not work today and *won't* work at some point in the future. Fissionable materials, electronics being radiated, and conventional explosives being irradiated...all deteriorate.
Posted on 07/13/2005 4:37:32 PM PDT by Las Vegas Dave
A new book written by a former FBI consultant claims that al-Qaida not only has obtained nuclear devices, but also likely has them in the U.S. and will detonate them in the near future.
These chilling allegations appear in "Osama's Revenge: The Next 9/11: What the Media and the Government Haven't Told You," by Paul L. Williams (Prometheus Books).
Williams claims that al-Qaida has been planning a spectacular nuclear attack using six or seven suitcase nuclear bombs that would be detonated simulantaneously in U.S. cities.
"They want the most bang for the buck, and that is nuclear," Williams told NewsMax.
"I expect such an attack would come between now and the end of 2005," the author said.
In addition to writing several books on terrorism, Williams, an investigative journalist, has worked as an FBI consultant.
Williams' contention is not far from what U.S. intelligence believes, a source close to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has told NewsMax. The source said Ridge claimed that U.S. intelligence believes terrorists already have smuggled into the U.S. actual atomic devices, as opposed to so-called "dirty nukes" that simply are conventional bombs that help spread radiation.
The Bush administration has warned for years that terrorists pose a nuclear threat to America.
Williams' book presents a review of the increasing spread of nuclear weapons technology, which the author says can be traced to India's nuclear tests in the early 1970s. It accelerated when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991.
Shortly after the Indian nuclear tests, Pakistan made an all-out effort to join the nuclear club, the author says. Islamabad received help from sympathetic nations, namely China and North Korea.
Williams traces the rampant spread of nuclear bomb development to a leading Pakistani scientist, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan.
Khan, described as an "Islamic extremist," also has been depicted by former CIA chief George Tenet as "the father of Pakistan's nuclear program."
It is believed the Pakistani gained his expertise while working in the Netherlands, where he allegedly stole technology used in uranium reprocessing, a key procedure for building an atomic bomb.
Pakistan successfully detonated two nuclear weapons inside a northern mountain range in the late 1990s.
Khan, arrested by Pakistani police in February under White House pressure, admitted selling nuclear technology to numerous foreign countries, including North Korea and Libya.
Williams reports that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was investigating Khan at the time he was kidnapped and later killed in 2003.
Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, fearing a backlash from radical Muslims, granted Khan a pardon but restricted his travels.
According to Williams, another beneficiary of Khan's "contacts" was al-Qaida. The author reports that the U.S. got its first "hard" evidence of a connection when it invaded the Afghan capital of Kabul in 2001.
A former al-Qaida safe house was found to be loaded with documents detailing dealings with the Pakistani scientist.
The finding was so serious, says Williams, that Tenet traveled to Afghanistan and Pakistan to follow up on the discovery.
Tenet: 'They Are Coming'
Perhaps it was such intelligence that led Tenet to say in October 2002: "The threat environment we face is as bad as it was before September 11. It is serious. They have reconstituted. They are coming after us."
Almost from the moment 9/11 happened, the U.S. has been on a heightened state of alert and worry over the possible use of nuclear weapons. On the day of the attack, President Bush left Florida and began criss-crossing the country in Air Force One in maneuvers consistent with a president preparing for a nuclear attack.
Shortly after Sept. 11, Taliban leader Mullah Omar claimed to the BBC that the main intent of al-Qaida was the "bigger cause," which he described as the "destruction of America."
Asked pointedly if this meant the use of nuclear weapons againt the U.S., he responded: "This is not a matter of weapons. We are hopeful for God's help. The real matter is the extinction of America. And, God willing, it will fall to the ground."
Omar cryptically suggested that a nuclear plan was already under way at the time of Sept. 11.
He said: "The plan is going ahead and, God willing, it is being implemented. But it is a huge task, which is beyond the will and comprehension of human beings. If God's help is with us, this will happen within a short period of time; keep in mind this prediction."
The Russian Connection
The author points out that the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 made matters worse:
"The Chechen Mafia reportedly sold twenty nuclear suitcases in Grozny to representatives of Osama bin Laden and the Mujahadeen [in 1996]. For their weapons, bin Laden paid $30 million in cash and two tons of heroin."
Al-Qaida's leader, says Williams, is a major drug producer and runner in Afghanistan.
"It is the drug money, not the bin Laden family fortune, that is the financial engine for al-Qaida," he points out.
Today, Williams says, more than 40 Russian "nuclear suitcases" cannot be accounted for.
The suitcases are miniaturized tactical nuclear bombs (in some cases weighing less than 40 pounds) that originally were planned by the Cold War-era Kremlin to be detonated inside the U.S. in the event of war.
Most could cause damage equal to or greater than the crude device Washington dropped on Hiroshima during World War II.
The author says some of these weapons still remain stateside in a "sleeper" status controlled by Russian military officials who believe a war with the U.S. "is still possible."
Others, as many as 10, might be under al-Qaida's control, says Williams.
What kind of damage could such a weapon do? The CIA estimates the Russian nuclear suitcases to have an explosive yield approaching 10 kilotons.
Williams, referring to estimates by Theodore Taylor, a prominent American physicist who miniaturized the atomic bomb and visited the site of the World Trade Center in 1993, says a suitcase bomb could "emit intense thermal radiation, creating a fireball with a diameter that would expand to 460 feet. The core of the fireball would reach a maximum temperature of 10 million degrees Celsius ... ." The author says the heat that collapsed the Twin Towers never exceeded 5,000 degrees Celsius.
Had such a bomb been used in 9/11, Williams claims, "The World Trade Center towers, all of Wall Street and the financial district, along with the lower tip of Manhattan up to Gramercy Park and much of midtown, including the theater district, would lie in ruins."
Of those who might survive the blast, 50 percent of the survivors could expect to die at the rate of "250,000 people on any given day," Williams reports.
And how could al-Qaida manage to transport such weapons into the U.S.?
Williams points out that the borders with Mexico and Canada are still dangerously porous and not equipped to detect the smuggling of nuclear materials.
U.S. seaports are even more vulnerable, he argues.
Though New York City would seem to be the No. 1 target of another attack by al-Qaida, Williams points out other U.S. cities have been mentioned in intercepted intelligence chatter.
Among those discussed: Boston, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas, Philadelphia, Miami, Washington and Rappahannock County, Va.
Why a small rural county in Virginia? Williams says it houses the underground command center the White House would use in time of war.
He hastens to add that time "may not be on our side."
"It was eight years between the World Trade Center attacks. Islam preaches patience. They will attack when they want," Williams concluded.
More chilling was the response from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog.
One official, speaking on background, told NewsMax: "We have no comment. It is not within our responsibility to track atomic bombs."
< snip >
No. It isn't that simple. Nukes that worked yesterday might not work today and *won't* work at some point in the future. Fissionable materials, electronics being radiated, and conventional explosives being irradiated...all deteriorate.
The main damage will be that nukes were used on cities in America. People will go crazy, and the gov't will be out of order for a long time. We'll get martial law and possibly a lot more that we wouldn't want under ordinary circumstances. Could even ratchet up to general thermonuclear war.
Why do you ask allah to curse those who are killing you in the name of allah? Don't you find that somewhat incongruous? A slight failure in using a gram of logic to resolve your cognitive dissonance? Did it ever enter your mind that allah is having you killed by your own brothers because you do not believe in Islam strongly enough?
Consider that it may be more righteous to believe in no god than to believe in one who wants you dead unless you join in the murder and maiming of the rest of the world.
If and when the 'nukes' come, you will remember this.
Aye, definitely a crank...that whole "suitcase nuke from 1991" bit doesn't even pass the smell test.
These authors and talk show pundits need a course or two in introductory Physics so that *maybe* they would begin to grasp the concept of half-life of atomic elements as well as the effects of nuclear decay on *other* weapons components.
Southhack, you're repeating the same argument I'm making. And that is, Al Qaeda either has functioning nukes or they don't.
You're going around in circles by repeating the same irrelevant points over and over.
Al Qaeda is not stupid enough to use nukes that have deteriorated over time. I stated this point before.
The ultimate issue is whether they have functioning nukes or not. If they do, they may be tempted to use against us.
Oh, btw, time to close the borders to illegal, undesirable elements.
Yeh. I'm attempting to listen to it. Streaming on hughhewitt.com.
Many deserts turned to glass.
No, Israel is their Palestine. They would not necessarily target their Palestine. They would target the Great Satan, though.
Thank you for posting this, Las Vegas Dave, and thanks for referring to it on the TM thread.
Most of us take all these threats seriously (as we should).
No, it isn't the ultimate issue. Al Qaeda, even if it had nukes (which it probably doesn't), couldn't wait around. They have no way of knowing if their nukes that are good today would still be functional tomorrow. They aren't holding atomic tests! The longer that they wait, the less chance that a nuke goes boom.
Nukes deteriorate *every* day. Use them or lose them. Even if they *knew* that they had a nuke that could work today, they don't know if it would still work tomorrow, and it is clear that at some point in the future, it won't work.
Exactly.
And it is foolish to think that the Russian, Pakistan and North Korea nuke experts cannot be bought with al qaeda drug money... They are the ones needed to maintain the suitcase and other portable nukes.
It's far, far more than mere talent that is required. Nazi Germany had talent; they couldn't do nukes, for instance.
Your highly trained talent is *constantly* maintaining nukes at enormous expense in at least 8 nations...in very, very sophisticated clean labs.
That sort of endeavor is vastly beyond the resources of Al Qaeda, an organization so weak that it can't even kidnap a single American general in Iraq.
Fissionable material also gives off a signature (radiation, among *other* things). That's the sort of thing that the highly advanced sensors of the U.S. would be rather likely to pick up...leading us directly to an area where Al Qaeda had sunk an enormous amount of their resources and best personnel.
Call me when Iran gets the Bomb. Iran, I assure you, will beat Al Qaeda to the Bomb.
Probably, but not necessarily. I have to assume the Israelis control their border much more tightly than we do ours.
Not a valid arguement. Yes the planes were in the United States, but they were not in the control of the terrorists for years.
The logistics of the September 11 attack is completely different from the logistics of a smuggled nuclear attack (even one cargo container sized). For something like September 11, you need to coordinate among several terrorists, examine airport security at various airports and routes, find weak points, test them, and finally exploit them. For a smuggled nuclear attack, the main difficulty is in getting the weapon, and then sneaking it into the United States. Once you have accomplished those goals, the rest is simply driving it to the intended target, and pushing the button.
If AlQueda already has nukes in the United States, then they've already accomplished the hard parts of a smuggled nuclear attack. There'd be nothing stopping them from pushing the button, and they'd have done so already.
From what I've read, the Paki nuke physicist Khan (or possibly his reps) met with Osama or his reps in Afghanistan. So the possibility of nukes being more recently obtained or planned is obvious; not just old Russian nukes.
I appreciate your comments, kingu.
I just do not think any islamic terrorist grouo would nuke Israel. I do think they will nuke America when / if they can.
They will only get one bang for their buck, in other words. With a severely weakened U.S. unable to immediately respond -- or to continue to help Israel in at least the short-term -- the islamic terror thugs will feel freer to move in on Israel.
The entire world is one they see as their islamic empire.
I can only hope you are right.
But I recall jihadi messages (clumsily machine translated from arabic) a few years ago that mentioned North Korea. That was way before GWB's axis of evil speech. This still gives me pause... And, yes, Iran is certainly a worry.
Do you believe it impossible/unlikely that al qaeda has already teamed up with either nation? I think it is possible.
Of course it is possible. They aren't teaming up with Iraqi or Afghanistani governments any longer, though!
Iran doesn't yet have the Bomb.
North Korea is still possible, of course, but that's probably why the U.S. is intercepting North Korean ships on the High Seas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.