Author: Al-Qaida Has Nuclear Weapons, Likely Inside U.S.

NewsMax ^ | 7/14/04 | Stewart Stogel

[Mister Baredog]

Come on, I want to sleep tonight.

This is pretty scary stuff.

It makes me deeply saddened.

[LibWhacker]

A wet dream from the religion of nuke lust.

[Nachum]

The entire Islamic world is all over the world. Are you shooting for a nuclear winter?

No, just a hot time in Mecca and Medina.

[feedback doctor]

Had he used a Bic lighter, or had he been smart enough to do this in the lavatory, the plane would have gone down.

I guess he didn't try it in the restroom as he wanted to not violate the rule about tampering with lavatory smoke detectors. (grin)

I saw a program about the lady that stopped him. It kinda messed up her life, emotionally. I don't remember her name, but keep her in your prayers.

[mlbford2]

I was just joking.

[mlbford2]

I think Kerry's reaction will make the Spanish reation seem like bold defiance.

[KiaKaha]

Richard Reid can best described as an imbecile, his attempt to destroy the plane was not a “dry run”.

If he had been successful it would have taken months perhaps a year (if ever) for the cause of the blast to have been discovered. If other aircraft had been destroyed thousand would have died and international air travel would have been crippled with financial losses running into the 10’s of billions of dollars.

As to the prison convert idea, I would say that is happening as we speak without the need for elaborate plots to place the converters in prison.

[BJungNan]

I saw this on GoGov.com about three months ago. Very scary read. Too bad our government is not serious about protecting us. There would not be a flood of people coming across this border every day if it was, people here illegally would be rounded up and sent packing.

Some will reply in defense of the current government that it is just not politically practical to start rounding up people or to militarize our borders. They are of course correct. Look what happened when a border patrol office made a raid recently in Southern California.

Thinking optimistically, you have to hope the current political landscape that prevents proper protection of our country does not change. It seems the only thing that will change it will be a day like 9/11 or one far worse like the article talks about that none of us ever want to see.

And who will be to blame? The current administration or the people that complain about even mild initiatives like the Patriot Act.

[BJungNan]

There's only one problem with this assertion. If al Qaeda has the nukes here, why haven't they already used them?

It seems they operate according to dates that are significant to them.

[TigersEye]

They know that if they nuke us not one of their mothers, fathers, daughters or sons will escape a Made in the USA mideast holocaust.

I don't think they do know that. I don't know that. It is a "religion of peace" after all. I don't see the will to "go nuclear", if you'll pardon the expression, on any Arab/Muslim country or city.

[GOPJ]

Until Mullah Omar and his idiot buds realize their countries are poor in spite of sitting on oceans of oil because of their 14th century ways, not because of us or Israel, they'll remain a threat. Mutually assured distruction belongs on the table. Time to tell them about reality: we will fight back.

Shortly after Sept. 11, Taliban leader Mullah Omar claimed to BBC that the main intent of al-Qaida was the “bigger cause,” which he described as the “destruction of America.”

[Doe Eyes]

As long as the blame can be placed on the Clinton Administration, the result, politically, may be to advantage of the Republican party.

[GOPJ]

If we're wiped out, maybe Putin will nuke them for us. It would be a great act of kindness.

[datura]

The premise of Chechens selling nukes to OBL is pure drivel. After Grozny? Yeah, the Chechens would sell them rather than use them on the Russians after Grozny. Sure.

[Southack]

""The Chechen Mafia reportedly sold twenty nuclear suitcases in Grozny to representatives of Osama bin Laden and the Mujahadeen [in 1996]."

The smaller the nuke, the shorter the shelf life.

The less shielding that you have, the sooner that your electronics and conventional explosives deteriorate from the radiation.

The less fissionable material that you have, the faster you generally need your atomic trigger isotopes to emit neutrons. The faster you emit neutrons, the shorter your half-life. The shorter your half-life, the less time that you have before the nuke simply fizzles instead of booms.

This is simple physics. Moreover, heavy metals like uranium and plutonium are among the most brittle materials known to man, and the slightest bit of humidity turns them into uranium oxide or plutonium oxide (i.e. worthless rust).

So a "suitcase nuke" from 1996 is likely little more than a rusted, shattered, fragmented collection of wiring and explosives today.

But I guess that sort of thing doesn't sell books...

[ChildofReagan]

We should let CHINA know that as well...

[technomage]

And if they really have nukes, why haven't they tested one?

Maybe they have and the test was a failure.

[mlbford2]

~~ slightest bit of humidity turns them into uranium oxide or plutonium oxide (i.e. worthless rust).~~

Wwwwwwwwweeeeeeeewwwwwwww!! I guess I'm safe here in Houston. Humidity capitol of the South.

[prisoner6]

They gain nothing by delay, and nukes don't have an indefinite shelf life.

Bingo!

prisoner6

[GLH3IL]

I've got to believe the US has considerable ability to seek out any unauthorized nuclear materials in the US. Certainly we have satalite technology that never stops scanning the US looking for radiological hot spots. Would I be wrong in guessing that weapon grade uranium in a bomb would have a rather unique radiation signature?