Posted on 06/28/2002 4:57:08 PM PDT by Charlesj
"The Coming Attack" by J. R. Nyquist
On May 18 the New York Times reported that U.S. intelligence had intercepted a “troubling series of communications among Al Qaeda operatives” about an intensive effort “to carry out an operation as big as or bigger than the Sept. 11 attacks….” According to the Times, the details of al Qaeda’s plans are yet unknown. “There’s just a lot of chatter in the system again,” one official told the Times. This “chatter” is alarming because it contains references to attacks that would cause “vast numbers of American casualties.” What kinds of attacks are indicated? In the last few weeks al Qaeda spokesmen have begun to publicly discuss what the Americans can expect.
In a recent message broadcast on al Jazeera television in the Middle East, al Qaeda spokesman and Kuwaiti-born Muslim cleric Sulaiman Abu Ghaith said that Osama bin Laden is preparing further attacks on the United States. “The al Qaeda leadership is 98 percent intact,” said Abu Ghaith, and bin Laden is still running the show. Earlier this month Abu Ghaith reportedly said, “America should get ready and fasten its safety belt. We will come at them from a direction they do not expect. Yes, we will make attacks but at the right time, at the place we choose after the fashion we please.”
The place of attack will almost certainly be inside the United States and the time may be soon. The Arabic Sahab website (ÇáÕÝÍÉ ÇáÚÑÈíÉ ÇáÅÓáÇãíÉ ÓÍÇÈ ) has reported that Osama bin Laden will be releasing a video on July 4. The timing is suggestive, adding subtle confirmation to earlier reports that an attack against America has been planned for July. More than two weeks ago the website www.alneda.com (also now defunct) briefly carried a message in Arabic from Abu Ghaith that said, “We are still at the beginning of the road. The Americans have not yet suffered from us what we have suffered from them.” He then added that Islam has “the right to kill four million Americans, including one million children, displace double that figure and injure and cripple hundreds of thousands.”
The key comment in Abu Ghaith’s statement is his reference to “displacing double” the figure killed. Chemical and biological weapons cannot do this in the stated proportions. Furthermore, an attacker cannot come up with large approximate casualty projections for biological and chemical weapons, where the results of attacks depend on weather and variable weapon potency (often incalculable). Only nuclear weapons aimed at cities promise such casualty figures.
What kind of bombs would be needed for such results?
A handful of small tactical nuclear devices with yields between one and 10 kilotons could not produce such a large result. The Hiroshima bomb, which was 15 kilotons, only managed to kill 100,000 people. Today’s American cities would probably sustain fewer casualties than a 1945 Japanese city because of modern earthquake and fire standards. Even if the Hiroshima result could be replicated under American conditions, forty Hiroshima bombs would be required to kill 4 million Americans. Quite naturally, it is improbable that al Qaeda would be able to acquire, let alone manage, forty nuclear devices. If Abu Ghaith’s statements reflect an actual plan of attack, it would mean that al Qaeda has several large-yield nuclear devices in the 100 to 500 kiloton range. Such devices could effectively gut a major city, killing millions and leaving millions homeless. Furthermore, the successful use of such weapons against seven U.S. cities might collapse the U.S. economy, discredit the U.S. government and demoralize the American people. Such an attack would also make good on the terrorist promise that the U.S. dollar will become absolutely worthless in short order.
But are Abu Ghaith’s pronouncements reliable? Are they, perhaps, intended to frighten or impress weak-minded people?
It is significant that Ghaith’s statements mirror similar statements made privately among al Qaeda operatives. As a rule of thumb: when secret communications reflect public pronouncements, it is time to pay close attention. Under such circumstances, U.S. officials should be exhaustively investigating all reports suggestive of a possible nuclear attack.
When would such an attack take place?
The story of Lebanese-born American Michael Hamdan may be relevant. Hamdan says he overheard a mobile phone conversation in Arabic about a projected attack on Las Vegas: “We are here in the city of corruption,” the Arab speakers allegedly stated, “the city of gambling and prostitution, the city of unbelievers.” They spoke of hitting the city on America’s “day of freedom,” the Fourth of July. While Hamdan’s testimony did not impress the FBI lie detectors, Independence Day has shown up elsewhere in reports related to terror. In fact, the Fourth of July has shown up in the internal al Qaeda “chatter” before. Also remember, as stated earlier, the Arabic Sahab website claims that bin Laden will deliver a special “televised address to the world” via videotape on July 4.
Statements from bin Laden since Sept. 11 have been few and far between. Normally talkative and in love with publicity, bin Laden’s great silence in recent months has been taken by some as evidence that he is dead. Now we are told to expect to hear from him on American Independence Day. Are all these references to one special day merely coincidental?
With limited information, nobody outside of al Qaeda can say with any certainty. What is certain, however, is that the United States remains vulnerable. The basic security problem that brought us 9/11 has not been solved. America has wasted the last nine months, failing to deal adequately with the domestic terror threat. This is obvious when it comes to the issue of foreign infiltrators determined to import nuclear, biological or chemical terror. Despite 9/11, American’s continue to put civil liberties first and security last. The prevailing mindset in the country emphasizes civil liberties at the expense of security, so that law enforcement, counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism are yet hamstrung.
The terrifying significance of countless enemy aliens operating in the United States has not registered. The fact that mass destruction weapons could be smuggled into the country has not altered the country’s adherence to political ideals that have always given way during times of war. But not today.
According to sources in law enforcement, forty terrorist infiltrators are believed to have entered the Los Angeles area by boat in early June. There are clues suggestive of a maritime terrorist attack against San Francisco. It seems that a “Middle Eastern” man recently took the ferry to Alcatraz. When the boat arrived on the island he didn’t get off. Instead, he videotaped naval traffic in the Bay while using a stopwatch. In another incident, dating back to October, three Middle Eastern men boarded a ferry at Pier 41 for Alameda. One of them alarmed the crew by climbing to the upper deck to watch the captain. Meanwhile his associates videotaped Anchorage Terminal 9, also using a stopwatch. In yet another San Francisco incident, dated Oct. 20, six Golden Gate Transit uniforms were taken from a ferry employee’s car, along with ferry schedules and maritime maps. The thieves neglected to steal money and CDs that were left in the car.
What does all this suspicious activity indicate?
Whatever the terrorists are planning, San Francisco is a chief target. There is growing concern that a sea-borne attack against U.S. cities is coming. And why would terrorists be interested in the ferry schedule to Alcatraz? Perhaps it makes sense because Alcatraz offers reliable sheltering and is a good observation point for terrorist operatives immediately after a nuclear weapon is set to detonate in a shipping container sitting at an anchorage terminal.
This column is intended to frighten Americans because Americans ought to be frightened. At present the country acts as if 9/11 did not happen. We are not taking sufficient steps, we are not acting with the warlike emphasis of times past, because America is not sufficiently alarmed. Apparently we cannot rouse ourselves to overhaul inadequate security measures, to pay the price of greater protection, on a basis of simple prudence. It seems that our hair must be made to stand on end. Unfortunately, if something dreadful happens next week (i.e., something nuclear) the attending panic might produce an even worse result – paralysis.
I pray that nothing happens. I pray that the terrorists lack the weapons since they do not lack the will to use them. For it is certain that we lack the will to eject all resident and illegal aliens from the offending region. And lacking that will, infiltration by enemy operatives is relatively easy.
© 2002 Jeffrey R. Nyquist
I'll admit that they're being extra careful. I know a Dr at Portsmouth Naval Hospital in Portsmouth, VA. All leave is cancelled on the Fourth and anyone who hasn't got the duty has been told to be available for an emergency all day and night.
That's what he's told me, for what it's worth.
Going across any bridge is out. Down the Peninsula is the only option.
As far as any attacks are concerned, the leftists in the USA had better get used to the fact that there may just not be any good targets to retaliate against, so we may just have to target equivalent population groups in multiple Arab states.
You mean, the radioactive hole formerly known as Mecca. :-)
What he meant was that the Gulf War would be a catalyst, or give birth to, much costlier future battles for the United States. It's generally misinterpreted to suggest that the 1991 conflict would be some sort of grand defeat of the American forces (though he did use such rhetoric at the time, as well). That's not what this statement means.
Considering Saddam's involvement in the September 11th attacks, the inevitable invasion of Iraq (clearly a response to the attacks), his arsenal of chemical weapons and his desire to use them against our forces and the Israeli civilian population, it's safe to assume some nasty future battles do lie ahead. I'm no military expert, but I'm guessing those scenarios (and others unkown to us) are precisely what we're spending these months planning and preparing for. I'm also guessing that Saddam's involvement in the 9/11 atrocities has been downplayed and called into question for the sole purpose of buying the administration time to prepare such contingencies.
Should a World War break out as a result of renewed fighting in the Iraq, history will accurately show its origins lie in the 1991 Gulf War. And Saddam's "mother of all battles" declaration will prove to be correct.
You got that right. The sheeple will finally wake up.
Do you think that any Mosques would be left standing in the US?
Not especially the way since we rounded up the Japs in the WW2. (No offense intended to the Japanese, they are hardworking and decent people)
However, remember many of the Arabs are christians. I know, because I have a good friend who is a christian Arab.
I know the heroic actions of the men on Flight 93 give many hope that any attempt will be thwarted, but there was something exceptional about those people. The more likely scenario would be passengers paralyized by fear, life flashing before their eyes, unable to move. If the terrorists could simply prevent the passengers from talking amongst themselves (a larger crew would accomplish that), who would be willing to make the first move on their own? Most men wouldn't. I'd think the odds of finding a man who would on a half-empty plane would be remote.
These barbarians like to go with what works. Using hijacked planes as missiles worked. I imagine they'll try it again.
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.