Is al Qaeda Preparing a Nuclear Hit?

Top U.S. officials are worried that al Qaeda is preparing a major assault before the November elections. The present level of concern was first voiced by the U.S. Attorney General, then by the Secretary of Homeland Security, and now by the acting Director of Central Intelligence. The warnings qualitatively differ from previous warnings. Two data points serve to explain this qualitative shift. The first data point is the claim that al Qaeda has nuclear weapons that are probably deployed on U.S. soil. The second data point is the fact that steps are being taken to cope with a major disruption of the November elections.

A new book by terrorism expert and former FBI consultant Paul Williams says that al Qaeda acquired 20 nuclear suitcase bombs from the Chechen mafia between 1996 and 2001. This agrees with similar statements made by Yossef Bodansky in his 1999 book, Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War On America. In saying that al Qaeda poses a nuclear threat, Williams takes his analysis a step farther. He says that al Qaeda has almost assuredly smuggled suitcase bombs into the United States. He also says that these bombs are in the10 kiloton range, capable of inflicting millions of casualties. Williams believes that al Qaeda will use several of these devices in simultaneous attacks against urban targets by the end of 2005.

This week the country’s journalists were jolted by reports that security officials are looking into legal mechanisms for postponing the November elections in the event of a terror assault on the homeland. Conspiracy theorists and Bush-haters are already decrying what they call “the obvious power-grab.” But the story is not so simple, since the underlying threat is undeniably real. To be sure, Al Qaeda promised to bring death to America in the wake of 9/11 and death’s tardiness is evident. Many are therefore encouraged to denounce those who offer dire warnings. The July 19 issue of Newsweek offers a startling check to this view. American counter-terror officials have “alarming” intelligence, writes Michael Isikoff, “about a possible al Qaeda strike inside the United States this fall….” Government officials are anticipating an attack that may force the postponement of the November presidential elections.

Now let us think. Would explosions on subways, buses or trains, etc., force a closure of the polls? Spain was hit by train bombings on the eve of its recent elections, and the elections went forward without postponement. To disrupt America’s elections a terrorist would need more than a few conventional bombs. He would have to kill more than a few hundred people to disrupt America’s elections.

According to Isikoff, U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded that al Qaeda wants to “interfere with the [U.S.] elections.” Newsweek’s sources allege that the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel has been asked by the Department of Homeland Security to outline the legal steps required for election postponement

In a July 8 background briefing by the Department of Homeland Security, a senior official said that a major offensive was being planned by bin Laden’s group. “Osama bin Laden and Ayman Zawahiri have issued several public statements last fall,” he explained, “threatening to carry out those attacks. And numerous al Qaeda spokespersons have, in fact, said that these plans are underway and are near completion.”

Al Qaeda’s stated goal is the destruction of the United States. This goal is peculiar in terms of its grandiosity and the frankness with which it has been broadcast. What are we to make of this? A small group cannot realistically hope to achieve such an objective on its own. Yet this is the stated objective. How on earth do they hope to advance their cause when it is so baldly overstated? After all, to propose unrealistic objectives is to court the disappointment of your own followers. If you say that you will soon destroy the United States you had better deliver a devastating attack or brace for a crippling loss of credibility and prestige. Be careful, as well, that your attack is not ineffectual since you will only raise the level of your adversary’s vigilance.

Clearly, it makes no sense that al Qaeda would declare an objective without the means to achieve that objective. Furthermore, Superpowers do not scare easily. A social system predicated on economic optimism isn’t going to surrender its most fundamental assumptions to an Islamic scarecrow hiding in a distant cave. And yet, American officials are worried. Now ask yourselves the next logical question: If the White House suspected that al Qaeda was ready with nuclear weapons on U.S. soil would the president warn the public?

In the first place, the government could not afford to warn the public. The warning itself would trigger an economic disaster and the government would be blamed. The government itself would be called on the carpet. The opposition party would turn the situation to political advantage. Therefore, a warning about nuclear strikes would be political suicide. The ruling power in this country cannot close the border because we depend on foreign trade. The government cannot arrest and deport illegal aliens because we depend on their labor. We cannot deport all Muslim aliens, since political correctness forbids such blatant profiling. The most effective security measures are impossible under the present political system. As it stands the U.S. would have to undergo an internal revolution before Washington could enact the policies most needed to defend against the suitcase nuclear threat. Simply put, the country is not ready to accept such measures. The country is not convinced that such measures are absolutely necessary. Therefore, the government cannot accept the reality of suitcase nuclear bombs sitting on U.S. soil! To admit of such a thing would be tantamount to admitting that our form of government must come to an end.

The basis of our nuclear defense for half a century has been “deterrence.” Unless you can pinpoint your enemy, unless you can locate him on a map, you cannot send a missile against him. You cannot retaliate. In the case of terrorists hiding in remote mountain caves, there may be no deterrence even if you threaten to locate them and nuke their cave. Since they do not care about their own lives, since they are determined to die for their cause, deterrence is ineffective.

Here is the dilemma of the United States in the first decade of the twenty-first century.

When I first heard this a couple of weeks ago, I dismissed it as highly unlikely. Then I saw something on TV over the weekend that has me gravely worried. I was watching one of those MSNBC Investigates show and the implications were frightening. Yes, I know it was MSNBC, but do you think they would air a program showing how much ME terrorists, especially AQ hate us and are trying to acquire nukes unless it was strong? After all, such info only strengthens Bush's argument that we are at war. The demos would love to downplay the threat. "There is no terrorism threat" as Michael Moore rails.

Anyway, here's the story as I recall. Back in 1999 there was a wealthy man in Florida contacted by ME men looking to acquire weapons. He was wealthy, because he was a very good con man, and diamonds were his specialty. He had never dealt in arms or anything like that. The feds finally caught on to him and his jewelry cons, and he was arrested. At some point he got a phone call from someone who said he "liked the way he did things" or "conducted himself" or something along those lines. He asked him if he would be interested in doing some "deal", including arms. He said he would, so this guy on the phone agreed to fly down from NJ to meet him and talk. The guy coming from NJ was an Egyptian immigrant who owned a convenience store there in NJ. By outward appearances he seemed to be a good example of an immigrant living the American dream; however, he appearantly was/is working for our enemies.

The man in Florida had no qualms about ripping people off via scams, but in reality he wanted nothing to do with illegal arms deals, especially with a ME man, knowing they could be used against US, so he contacted the feds and told them what was going down. I'm sure the feds were skeptical, but they rigged his car, house, etc. with mikes and cams to see if this guy from NJ was legit. By all appearances he was. He was sort of a middle man who connected the guy in Florida to another ME guy (Pakistani, I belive). The feds went undercover and got involved as well, acting as associates of the guy in Florida who could provide arms. They claimed they had US weapons taken from military bases. At first the bad guys were most interested in Stinger missiles (shoulder-fired ground-to-air missiles that can take a plane out), but they were also interested in just about anything they could get their hands on. The feds even rigged up a room at a storage facility where they had weapons, including Stingers, to show these ME guys that they could produce.

Eventually, the talks went nuclear. The ME guys said they needed nuclear components, such as triggers and "heavy water". They said that without these, there would be no deal. They openly admitted that these would be for the Taliban/OBL in Afghan. When the feds said they could get these, the ME guys said they wanted to bring a Pakistani nuclear scientist over to check things out, which the feds agreed to. They even mentioned the guy's name. Of course he was checked out, and indeed he was a nuke scientist from Pakistan.

Keep in mind that all of this is on video and audio tape along with many pictures taken. Much of it appeared on MSNBC. They showed pics of these ME guys holding the Stinger missiles and smiling. They allowed their pics to be taken, actually they wanted their pics taken with the weapons because they took them back or sent them abroad to their ME contacts to show that they indeed were dealing with the real things.

My jaw was on the floor as I watched this. The guy in Florida talked about having dinner with these guys in NYC, including a guy that had just flown in from somewhere in the ME. They were cold and quite open about these weapons being used against Americans and one of them commented that they would have absolutely no problem with killing every person in the restaurant they were sitting in at that moment. They happened to be just a few blocks from the Twin Towers at the time. Again, keep in mind, this was all pre-9/11.

The guy in Florida asked them how they could travel so freely in and out of the country, and he was told "fake passports". The guy in Florida expressed skepticism about the ease of getting such a thing. A few days later he received a passport in the mail. It was a passport for him, but was fake. It had a fake name and said he was from Argentina, but it was perfectly done. It was exactly like a real Argentinian passport, official country stamp and all.

They finally agreed on a price of $32 million for these weapons, including the nuclear devices, but they got cold feet and never transferred the money. Did they catch on, or did someone tip them off? Who knows, but once the feds were convinced that they had gone as far as they could, they moved in and made some arrests, including the guy in NJ. Incredibly, he was free to go pending trial and was confronted by MSNBC in his store. Of course, he denied dealing in any arms. I believe he was sentenced to 30 months in jail. 30 months?! You try to acquire a nuclear bomb for terrorist bent on destroying us and you only go to jail for 2 and a half years? Unbelievable!

The larger point is this. That was FIVE years ago. If OBL was that aggressive in pursuing nuke materials that many years ago, what are the chances that he has been successful at some point from somewhere? (former USSR countries, for example)

I'm not a nuke expert, but how close are you to having a working bomb if you are just looking for a trigger and heavy water?

Now, a truly ugly scenario. What if they have even one nuke bomb of some sort and have it in some smaller US city, say Springfield, MO or some such size. They then blow it up prior to the election, killing thousands. They then say, they have 10 more planted in major cities around the US and will explode IF we don't (A) get rid of Bush and (B) pull out of Irag and Afghan and all of ME immediately. Again, all it would take is 1 bomb. God help us.

you arent suggesting real solutions that can be implemented. theres maybe 5% of people who post here in response to any such problem with massive amounts of bluster about throwing nukes around. please. this isnt about solving problems, its about some chip on your shoulder. real problems are solved by intelligence, diplomacy, and sometimes direct action with appropriate force.

you want to just attack third parties at random just because you cant find the actual enemy? when it comes down to it, nukes arent useful against terrorists. yes they make us all-powerful in one respect, but they arent problem solvers. the only problem nukes solve is deterring other nations that have them from firing them at us. you want to just start launching nukes at random third parties because you cannot target the real enemy? you might as well go out on the street and start shooting up random people because someone murdered your wife. yes, something bad happened to you, but that doesnt justify what you are doing.

if these nukes exist in terrorist hands (doubtful) then we need to do everything possible to stop them from being used against us. putting a bullet in each and every one of their heads would be appropriate force in my book. what you suggested does not solve our problem. you seem to take joy in the fact that this will upset some people ('That would be the whole point.'). is this about solving the problem of terrorism, or making you feel like a big man? you are suggesting actions by your country with vast repurcussions to satisfy your own personal agenda?

we cant win this one because we have a bigger weapon than them. its not going to work. we need to be smarter than our enemy. SMARTER. thats the key.

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.