Al-Qaeda 'planning for nuclear attack'

The Scotsman ^ | November 14, 2006 | Staff

[MadIvan]

Al-QAEDA is determined to acquire the technology to carry out a nuclear attack on the West, a senior Foreign Office official warned yesterday.

She said that Osama bin Laden's terrorist network was trawling the world for the materials and know-how to mount an attack using nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.

The latest warning echoes the remarks last week of the MI5 director-general, Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller, that future terror attacks in Britain could involve weapons of mass destruction.

Asked if she had any doubt that al-Qaeda wanted to obtain the materials to carry out a nuclear attack on the West, the Foreign Office official told reporters at Westminster: "No doubt at all".

She said that terrorists were seeking the means to mount a range of attacks using chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear devices.

"We know that the aspiration is there, we know attempts to gather materials are there, we know that attempts to gather technologies are there," she said.

The latest warning comes as the government is preparing to make security a key theme of its legislative programme for the next parliamentary session, to be set out in the Queen's Speech tomorrow.

[backtothestreets]

"Amazing that now the election is over, the MSM is reporting the truth about what Freeper's have known all along. The Muslims want to kill us."

That could actually be excellent! The conservatives and Republicans have shouldered there share. Such MSM attention while the Democrats hold both houses of Congress will force them to shoulder their share, or fall from grace.

I'm a firm believer that any chance of defeating our enemy will require our nation be united as one. If MSM can help that along, more power to them.

[Screamname]

"Plan? What plan? You mean we need a plan?"

[Screamname]

Oh wait, she does have a plan....

[backtothestreets]

Some have put 9-11 behind them. I hope it isn't most. Sadly, an opportunity escaped. I had never thought our nation could be so mobilized, but it was, and not by the call of any leader, but our deep sense of grief and outrage. Because our leaders lacked the wisdom to utilize a self-mobilized people, we returned to our old ways. We will most certainly have to suffer another tragic loss before we can be galvanized as one.

I personally feel such a time is rapidly approaching. It has been too quiet here in the states. If the UK is aware of approximately 30 planned attacks in various stages of implementation within their own nation, I have a dire sense attacks of similar proportion and preparedness are already underway here also, and were initiated well before the elections.

[Caipirabob]

There's nothing to worry about. Reports like this are just the neocons using their "scare tactics"!

Of course, and when the nuclear fallout starts to drop over the outskirts of Washington, look for AlGore^TM to blame it on "Global Warming". The surprising thing will be that he'll be close to the truth...

[G Larry]

Why wouldn't they?

We invited them last week!

[odds]

I read somewhere quite some time ago that some members of AQ were against 9/11 attacks. They thought it'd wake up the Americans and the world too soon to AQ and Islamist malicious intentions. But, 9/11 happened...we still, seem half asleep. Hey, this ain't USSR and Cold War, Reagan passed away and Thatcher was forced away by her OWN party. I have tremendous respect for both.

Now, there is nothing that could stop any AQ or Islamist attacks anywhere if they were truly determined to do so, imo. Many have written about it, including this person - read it please, if you haven't already:

http://www.freeman.org/m_online/jul04/harari.htm


Airport security, etc.. are ad hoc, reactive, and tactical at best.

This war needs to be understood at multiple and strategic levels; it still isn't or, at least, doesn't seem to be. If it is understood by enemy and strategic terms, then, the West needs to act accordingly and in a United fashion. So far, it isn't and hasn't acted in any meaningful sense AT ALL.

I'm saddened by the fact that the Democrats won the midterm elections. But, as for Islamic Iran or AQ, was there any other actionable or feasible strategy or policy before the Dems won? I'm afraid the clear answer is: NO.

[prisoner6]

...call her madame speaker..

ma-DAMN speaker works for me.

Sorry, I couldn't resist...

prisoner6

[backtothestreets]

You pose a valid question about which nation to hold responsible if an Al Qaeda terror cell based in London launched an attack here in the states. I'm inclined for holding the responsible nation accountable, the Nation of Islam ... all of it!

[jonrick46]

My question is where will they get the necessary nuclear materials? Of course, they need a host country to do all the assembly and testing. That country will be risking much if it were discovered that such activities were occuring. Something like the Cuban Missle Crisis would take place.

[backtothestreets]

Excellent post and link. I haven't read all the report yet, but from what I have read it is on the mark.

[gakrak]

"There's nothing to worry about. Reports like this are just the neocons using their "scare tactics"!"

Oh, and don't worry we will not let it come to actual attacks.
Gosh we'll just sit down and have some nice talks with them. Nancy assure us that they really don't mean us any harm. They really just want our help in advancing their religion. You know the religion of peace. BARD. Amen.

[gakrak]

Your right but I guess if I were to pick I'd go to the source, IRAN. Just blow the country to hell. Amen.

[sure_fine]

whats really amazing is that nothing has really come out after the NYT admits Saddam had WMD's

[Brilliant]

Don't worry... Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will protect us.

[1234]

this 'news' is at least 5 yrs. old!!

[Former Proud Canadian]

Re post 17 you asked "who would we attack?" I think a better question is "what would we attack?" A nuclear attack on the CONUS would consititute an all out war with (radical) islam. Don't be surprised to see internment camps in the US, just like WW II. The Persian Gulf supply route and the oil fields of Saudi Arabia and Iran should be secured, occupied and pumped out. The NWP of Pakistan should be attacked from the air with nuclear weapons if neccessary.

Before the US is attacked, a nuclear target list should be drawn up and shown to moslem leaders. It should be made very clear that these targets will be vaporized within 24 hours of a nuclear attack against the US. This target list would include all the major urban areas and all the religious sites of the islamic world, including Mecca, Medina et al.

War is war, sides must be chosen and if you choose the wrong side, you might lose your life.

[TexKat]

Thank you odds!

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]

----------------------------

[Mr. Silverback]

I endorse Charles Krauthammer's suggestion that we make a statement that any nucelar attack by terrorists anywhere will be considered an attack by North Korea on the United States, which will receive an appropriate nuclear response.

Unfortunately, that approach only works if Iran doesn't get the bomb.