PDA

View Full Version : Al-Qaida Has Nuclear Weapons Inside U.S.



SequSpur
07-15-2004, 11:57 AM
Author: Al-Qaida Has Nuclear Weapons Inside U.S.
A new book written by a former FBI consultant claims that al-Qaida not only has obtained nuclear devices, but also likely has them in the U.S. and will detonate them in the near future. These chilling allegations appear in "Osama's Revenge: The Next 9/11: What the Media and the Government Haven't Told You," by Paul L. Williams. Williams claims that al-Qaida has been planning a spectacular nuclear attack using six or seven suitcase nuclear bombs that would be detonated simulantaneously in U.S. cities. "They want the most bang for the buck, and that is nuclear," Williams told NewsMax. "I expect such an attack would come between now and the end of 2005," the author said. In addition to writing several books on terrorism, Williams, an investigative journalist, has worked as an FBI consultant. Williams' contention is not far from what U.S. intelligence believes, a source close to Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge has told NewsMax. The source said Ridge claimed that U.S. intelligence believes terrorists already have smuggled into the U.S. actual atomic devices, as opposed to so-called "dirty nukes" that simply are conventional bombs that help spread radiation. Williams traces the rampant spread of nuclear bomb development to a leading Pakistani scientist, Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan. Khan, described as an "Islamic extremist," also has been depicted by former CIA chief George Tenet as "the father of Pakistan's nuclear program." Williams reports that Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl was investigating Khan at the time he was kidnapped and later killed in 2003. According to Williams, another beneficiary of Khan's "contacts" was al-Qaida. The author reports that the U.S. got its first "hard" evidence of a connection when it invaded the Afghan capital of Kabul in 2001. A former al-Qaida safe house was found to be loaded with documents detailing dealings with the Pakistani scientist. The finding was so serious, says Williams, that Tenet traveled to Afghanistan and Pakistan to follow up on the discovery. The author points out that the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 made matters worse: "The Chechen Mafia reportedly sold twenty nuclear suitcases in Grozny to representatives of Osama bin Laden and the Mujahadeen [in 1996]. For their weapons, bin Laden paid $30 million in cash and two tons of heroin. "Al-Qaida's leader, says Williams, is a major drug producer and runner in Afghanistan. "It is the drug money, not the bin Laden family fortune, that is the financial engine for al-Qaida," he points out. Today, Williams says, more than 40 Russian "nuclear suitcases" cannot be accounted for. The suitcases are miniaturized tactical nuclear bombs (in some cases weighing less than 40 pounds) that originally were planned by the Cold War-era Kremlin to be detonated inside the U.S. in the event of war. Most could cause damage equal to or greater than the crude device Washington dropped on Hiroshima during World War II. The author says some of these weapons still remain stateside in a "sleeper" status controlled by Russian military officials who believe a war with the U.S. "is still possible." Others, as many as 10, might be under al-Qaida's control, says Williams. What kind of damage could such a weapon do? The CIA estimates the Russian nuclear suitcases to have an explosive yield approaching 10 kilotons. Williams, referring to estimates by Theodore Taylor, a prominent American physicist who miniaturized the atomic bomb and visited the site of the World Trade Center in 1993, says a suitcase bomb could "emit intense thermal radiation, creating a fireball with a diameter that would expand to 460 feet. The core of the fireball would reach a maximum temperature of 10 million degrees Celsius ... ." The author says the heat that collapsed the Twin Towers never exceeded 5,000 degrees Celsius. Had such a bomb been used in 9/11, Williams claims, "The World Trade Center towers, all of Wall Street and the financial district, along with the lower tip of Manhattan up to Gramercy Park and much of midtown, including the theater district, would lie in ruins." Of those who might survive the blast, 50 percent of the survivors could expect to die at the rate of "250,000 people on any given day," Williams reports. And how could al-Qaida manage to transport such weapons into theU.S.? Williams points out that the borders with Mexico and Canada are still dangerously porous and not equipped to detect the smuggling of nuclear materials. U.S. seaports are even more vulnerable, he argues. Though New York City would seem to be the No. 1 target of another attack by al-Qaida, Williams points out other U.S. cities have been mentioned in intercepted intelligence chatter. Among those discussed: Boston, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas, Philadelphia, Miam and Washington. He hastens to add that time "may not be on our side." "It was eight years between the World Trade Center attacks. Islam preaches patience. They will attack when they want," Williams concluded.

spurster
07-15-2004, 12:29 PM
That is chilling.

exstatic
07-15-2004, 12:37 PM
There is one pretty easy way to stop this. There has always been behind the scenes clandestine communication with our adversaries, and I have no reason to think that there isn't now. Let it be known that if there is ever any kind of nuclear weapon used by terrorists, be it a dirty bomb or a suitcase, that we will immediately drop one nuke on a city in Saudi Arabia, Mecca, destroying the two mosques, the pillar of Islamic faith. End of story.

Aggie Hoopsfan
07-15-2004, 01:59 PM
I agree with you ex.

I'm just waiting for Dan to show up and tell us these AQ guys aren't evil, just misunderstood, and that it's all Bush's fault.

Spurminator
07-15-2004, 02:45 PM
Let it be known that if there is ever any kind of nuclear weapon used by terrorists, be it a dirty bomb or a suitcase, that we will immediately drop one nuke on a city in Saudi Arabia, Mecca, destroying the two mosques, the pillar of Islamic faith. End of story.

That would end nothing.

MannyIsGod
07-15-2004, 03:34 PM
good to see people of fsp advocating terrorism.

fucking barbarians.

Aggie Hoopsfan
07-15-2004, 03:58 PM
Yeah, we should just sit back and take it up the ass right? You probably think victims of rape had it coming too.

It's not terrorism, it's self-defense. I'm surprised you beat Dan to the punch though.

So what should we do in that case? Group hugs with Osama? Send him a thank you card for whiping out 5-40 million? Ask France for help?

Truthsayer
07-15-2004, 04:18 PM
Osama doesn't give a damn about Mecca. He would like nothing better than a war between Islam and the West. Destroying Mecca would be playing right into his hands.

Aggie Hoopsfan
07-15-2004, 04:26 PM
You could be right to an extent on playing into his hands, but the thing you've got to think about is how many Muslim leaders/people out there that don't like OBL but have no motivation to do anything to help us would suddenly have reason to do so.

Particularly the Saudi royal family. This isn't something that should be broadcast on CNN, rather intimated through back channels.

Don't make it a threat to just Mecca - let it be known everywhere where we know there are AQ clusters (Afghanistan, Sudan, Syria, Checnya) all cease to exist.

Spurminator
07-15-2004, 04:32 PM
So you want to fight terrorism by pissing off the world's entire Islamic population, along with pretty much every other country in the world? Seems counter-productive to me.

The only people who consider this a "Jihad" are the extremists. Threaten to take out Mecca, and you make it a legitimate holy war. The US is not fighting Islam. We're fighting radical extremist lunatics. I don't want them gaining a bigger following as a result of us making ourselves the bad guy (or any more so than we are already perceived).

E20
07-15-2004, 04:38 PM
IF the US doesn't want to be bombed, Bush should use his that chimpanzee brain of his and go for Al-Qaeda/Bin Laden who are threatning to use nukes not Iraq/Sadaam and if authenticy of this writers work is valid then Bush should read the book and find the so called bombs in the US and neutrilize them instead of looking for WMD's in Iraq.

Aggie Hoopsfan
07-15-2004, 04:38 PM
Like he said, it's something you wouldn't advertise, just let it be known to Osama. And that we know where he is (roughly), and that will be nuked too.

What do you guys propose we should do if it were to happen? So far I'm seeing the typical liberal response: we don't have a plan, but yours sucks.

I'm not even saying this would be the perfect solution (far from it), just curious what you guys would do.

Yonivore
07-15-2004, 04:45 PM
Well, if it happens, we'd better fucking nuke someone.

Spurminator
07-15-2004, 04:48 PM
I'm sure Osama would keep his mouth shut...

Any tactics we use to try to prevent such an attack will have to be focused on the interior. Unfortunately, once they're in due to poor border security, there may not be a lot we CAN do.

Desperately threatening the Holy Land of a religion which holds a billion followers only expedites the inevitable at that point.

Hook Dem
07-15-2004, 06:02 PM
Sad situation ! :rolleyes

Nbadan
07-16-2004, 02:11 AM
Consider the source people. Worldnetdaily, hello, can anyone say right-wing scare tactic? Nevermind that the Soviet Union hasn't produced a suitcase bomb since 1991 and they only have a life span of one to three years due to rapid battery deteriortion.


Maxim Shingarkin, a former major in the Russian military's secretive 12th Department, which is in charge of strategic weapons, said suitcase nuclear bombs, if they are still in Russia's arsenal, were too difficult to maintain and had too short a lifespan to make them feasible as terrorist weapons. He said Russia only had built about 100 suitcase bombs and had not produced any new ones since the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union.

Shingarkin said Russian suitcase nukes consisted of a bag measuring about 24 by 16 by 8 inches fitted with three coffee can-size aluminum canisters filled with plutonium or uranium. A 6-inch-long detonator is connected to the canisters, and a battery line keeps it powered during storage.

He said the suitcase nukes have a lifespan of only one to three years because some of the materials, such as the battery and the conventional explosives that produce the charge that sets off the nuclear reaction, deteriorate over time and must be replaced. Otherwise, he said, they become radioactive scrap metal.

Shingarkin said the Soviet Union kept some of the bombs near Moscow, where it trained about 30 to 50 military spies to transport and detonate them abroad. More deadly portable devices were kept in the Baltic republics and, possibly, Ukraine, he said -- close to the Soviet borders with its NATO neighbors. There were never any suitcase nukes in Uzbekistan or in any other Central Asian republic, Shingarkin said, because the Soviet Union did not perceive any acute threat from its southern flank.

San Francisco Gate (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/03/23/MNG8D5PM7L1.DTL)

Gotta keep the people scared though. :rolleyes

SubFallen
07-16-2004, 03:24 AM
Hope you're right Dan...but, again, AHF has a valid point.

What should we do if a nuke is detonated?

My opinion:

It's obvious that conventional, rules-of-warfare tactics are completely useless against Islamist extremists. They don't care if they are die for their cause, and certainly don't don't mind spilling the blood of our civilians. So they leave us with no choice: we must fight fire with fire.

The Islamist extremist's position: it's unimportant to target military installations and personnel. The key thing is to kill as many non-Muslims as possible in the most demonstrative manner available.

Our current position: don't hurt civilians and use precise and limited force.

The "fire with fire position": for every US life claimed in an atomic attack, kill (presumably using thermonuclear weapons) 10 citizens of a Muslim majority country likely to have harbored AQ.

If these fcvkers want to test us with their 10 Kton suitcase bombs, they had better be ready to deal with 40 Mton warheads hitting major population centers in Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THESE BASTARDS ANYWAYS??

Mohammed led the least productive existence in the history of mankind.

MannyIsGod
07-16-2004, 09:01 AM
ahf, if you want to use a rape analogy this one might be more appropriate.

if we are raped, we should threaten the rapist that we will cut off the penis of 100 men who have nothing to do with the rape.

what you are advocating is terrorism, the killing of innocent civilians in order gain what you want. the citizens of mecca aren't waging war on the us.

but you know what, if we simply nuke the rest of the world maybe americans can live in peace with themselves. i doubt it however.

exstatic
07-16-2004, 09:43 AM
Actually, it wasn't AHF, Manny, it was me. It's not terrorism, it's a measured response. Remember, this was to be carried out ONLY in the event that they used nukes in a terrorist attack. Go back and re-read the descriptions of the NYC attack. 250 thousand people dying every day in the aftermath. Those people would be civilians, too.

Yonivore
07-16-2004, 11:41 AM
I don't want a "measured" response to a nuclear attack. I want to obliterate a whole fucking region of the world.

If they detonate a nuke, we've got to go on the rabid junkyard dog offensive and break our chain.

Why? Because if they've got one...chances are they've got two and the sooner and more ferocious our response, the quicker it will give them pause about detonating that second one.

Just my opinion.

exstatic
07-16-2004, 12:56 PM
OK, now what region of the world are we talking about, Yoni? The most populous Islamic nation and a hotbed of al Qaeda is Indonesia. That's no where near the Middle East.

Yonivore
07-16-2004, 01:05 PM
I say you throw a dart at the globe (with a bubble over North America).

tskolar
07-18-2004, 01:10 AM
U people better stick wth sports.
It makes me mad watching PROPAGANDA turn such promising and basically good people like yourself into babbling morons. America was once a decent country.
Wht the **** happened over there? U sound like something tht came out of a horror movie. Rallying for an apocalypse, whats wrong with u? I sure hope im dealing with small children. If so, its bedtime and u kiddies should go up and brush ur teeth. Off u go.

Yonivore
07-18-2004, 01:14 AM
People like Hitlary Clinton and her dog, Bill, along with John Kerry and the rest of the Demoncrats came along and started attacking the individual, bashing capitalism, redistributing private wealth, and socializing our government. That's what.

HiGGinsFr
07-18-2004, 08:35 AM
I say you throw a dart at the globe (with a bubble over North America).

Your sense of humour is really frightening.http://img19.exs.cx/img19/8533/hum1.gif

Yonivore
07-18-2004, 05:46 PM
I hope so.

Nbadan
08-31-2004, 03:47 AM
bump

NeoConIV
08-31-2004, 03:49 AM
No more than 4 bumps tonight Dan. Is that fair?

Nbadan
08-31-2004, 03:55 AM
fair enough