[Man50D]

Back on July 18th I started a thread titled Al-Qaida's U.S. Nuclear Targets

Many people were skeptical because of the messenger was Joseph Farah. Now the messenger is Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff. I hope the new messenger will help people understand the threat is legitimate and heed his advice.

[Plymouth Sentinel]

Thoroughly scary.

[Just mythoughts]

I have not heard one liberal senator or congressperson even acknowledge this threat.

What are they doing to stop these terrorists?

[coconutt2000]

It makes a warped kind of sense that the terrorists would single out the U.S. for large, spectacular attacks. Mundane attacks like car bombings, mass transit bombings won't do for them.

We are perhaps their greatest enemy. Attacks directed against our people, on our shores would have to be bigger and grander than anything done anywhere else. To inflict a wound greater than any ever before.

Nobody claims the terrorists are rational. If they understood us, they would never have done what they did on 9/11.

[raybbr]

Chertoff joins the growing list of public officials – including President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Chertoff's predecessor at Homeland Security, Tom Ridge – who have strongly hinted that nuclear terrorism has moved center stage as the No. 1 security threat facing the U.S.

That must be why they are really beefing up security on our borders, right?... Do I really need to put a sarcasm tag on this?

[montag813]

Issuing yet the latest warning of the threat of nuclear terrorism in the U.S., Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said there are far worse security problems facing the country than bombings of mass-transit systems.

There are few worse problems than a President who refuses to defend our border.

[jammer]

Look, it may or may not be overstatement. But what do you expect Chertoff to say? "No, there's no nuclear threat. In fact, we've miscalculated, so let's cut our personnel and funding." Of course not.

It's part of his job to say things like this, especially at that laboratory where he blows smoke up the rear ends of his audience. He does this for several reasons (1) PR to them; (2) keep America vigilant or aware, depending upon your viewpoint; (3) provide cover in case something DOES happen, so they can say "I told you so."; (4) keep those cards and letters (funding) coming in.

It will be much more convincing if they gave a damn about closing the open border. That one fact alone is more telling than all the speeches put together.

[Lazamataz]

Many people were skeptical because of the messenger was Joseph Farah. Now the messenger is Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff. I hope the new messenger will help people understand the threat is legitimate and heed his advice.

Yeah, but Joseph Farah once said it, making it not credible.

[Mad Mammoth]

Back on July 18th I started a thread titled Al-Qaida's U.S. Nuclear Targets. Many people were skeptical because of the messenger was Joseph Farah. Now the messenger is Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff. I hope the new messenger will help people understand the threat is legitimate and heed his advice.

It may mean nothing more than Michael Chertoff subscribing to Joe Farh's "G2 Intel Bulletin".

[AndyJackson]

The problem with this whole point of view is that the posture this leads to is defensive and the history of warfare is frought with the disasters of those whose point of view is entirely defensive.

What hand wringing such as this scenario overlook is that if someone is determined, something can slip through. They also overlook the fact that if it happens, it is not just an act of war, but it is war of the most terrible kind, and if our administration, DoD, CIA, State are doing their jobs not only the perps, but the countries that support them know that the response will be a massive nuclear strike on everything that the islamic world holds dear - its major relgious sites, its major capitals, and the palaces and cathouses of their political leadership. Oh and the principal villages and goat heards of the towns that breed islamic terrorists.

[rwfromkansas]

Chertoff mentions the nuclear threat because he is visiting a facility that's purpose is to STOP one.

Note he hasn't warned of an increased nuc danger any other time.

Politicians and officials always make their comments fit the places they visit.

It doesn't mean jack squat.

[IamConservative]

I believe it was just last week it was reported the WH has dropped the term "war on terror."

The conflict between Islam and the Infidel is over 1400 years old, I don't think they will be dropping the term "jihad" anytime soon.

[1234]

likely an event causing at least 100,0000 U.S. casualties will be needed before the BIGWIGS start talkin up racial/ethnic profilin....

[COEXERJ145]

I see World Nut Daily is still trying to keep Farah's BS alive. I guess they have to keep hyping it after Iran's EMP attack failed to materialize.

[Iris7]

Nukes have to happen sometime. This has been obvious all of my life, nearly 60 years. "Fat and Sassy" America is not forever.

[cynwoody]

Let's see ... the ninth is a weekday, a Tuesday, in fact, and also the 60th anniversary of Nagasaki.

[jpsb]

"Many people were skeptical because" .... our borders are wide open, nobody home, nobody cares, gangs, criminals, terrorist all get a free ticket in, so as long as the borders stay wide open they I am pretty sure the feds are not worried about terrorist in the usa.

[thefactor]

although the threat should be taken seriously, most of the fallout from a nuclear device detonated in the US will be purely psychological. there will most likely not be enough radiation to kill too many people. they would take more people with a large conventional bomb and that is what they are looking to do.

[MagnoliaB]

When I read articles like this, I think of the message from al-Qaeda Oct. 2004:

"Allah willing, the magnitude and ferocity of what is coming your way will make you forget all about Sept. 11."

I think the only reason we haven't been attacked again since 9/11 is because the next attack has to be much greater. If it's not they will lose face among their followers. Suicide bombers blowing themselves up in US shopping malls is not all that impressive after 9/11. A next attack will have to be all or nothing.