PDA

View Full Version : Al-Qaida nukes already in U.S. ?!?



Mandelon
10-17-2006, 09:07 PM
I know some of you guys have trouble reading more than four sentences, but this might be worth paying attention to.
Al-Qaida nukes already in U.S.
WASHINGTON – As London recovers from the latest deadly al-Qaida attack that killed at least 50, top U.S. government officials are contemplating what they consider to be an inevitable and much bigger assault on America – one likely to kill millions, destroy the economy and fundamentally alter the course of history, reports Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.
According to captured al-Qaida leaders and documents, the plan is called the "American Hiroshima" and involves the multiple detonation of nuclear weapons already smuggled into the U.S. over the Mexican border with the help of the MS-13 street gang and other organized crime groups.
Al-Qaida has obtained at least 40 nuclear weapons from the former Soviet Union – including suitcase nukes, nuclear mines, artillery shells and even some missile warheads. In addition, documents captured in Afghanistan show al-Qaida had plans to assemble its own nuclear weapons with fissile material it purchased on the black market.
The plans for the devastating nuclear attack on the U.S. have been under development for more than a decade. It is designed as a final deadly blow of defeat to the U.S., which is seen by al-Qaida and its allies as "the Great Satan."
According to Williams, former CIA Director George Tenet informed President Bush one month after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that at least two suitcase nukes had reached al-Qaida operatives in the U.S. According to the author, the news sent Bush "through the roof," prompting him to order his national security team to give nuclear terrorism priority over every other threat to America.
Bin Laden's goal, according to the book, is to kill at least 4 million Americans, 2 million of whom must be children. Only then, bin Laden has said, would the crimes committed by America on the Arab and Muslim world be avenged.
There is virtually no doubt among intelligence analysts al-Qaida has obtained fully assembled nuclear weapons, according to Williams. The only question is how many. Estimates range between a dozen and 70. The breathtaking news is that an undetermined number of these weapons, including suitcase bombs, mines and crude tactical nuclear weapons, have already been smuggled into the U.S. – at least some across the U.S.-Mexico border.
The future plan, according to captured al-Qaida agents and documents, suggests the attacks will take place simultaneously in major cities throughout the country – including New York, Boston, Washington, Las Vegas, Miami, Chicago and Los Angeles.
Maybe ya can't believe everything you read, but you'd be foolish not to pay attention to some of it. Don't think they wouldn't do it if they have the opportunity More info: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46127

Phat Matt
10-17-2006, 09:11 PM
I believe it only because your hips don't lie.

dmontzsta
10-17-2006, 09:12 PM
Definitely scary stuff.

Kilrtoy
10-17-2006, 09:17 PM
very scary especially being in L.A. and possible

BajaMike
10-17-2006, 09:24 PM
This is total bullshit!
First of all, "WorldNetDaily.com" is hardly a credible new source.
Secondly, the idea of 70 "suitcase" bombs floating around the world is extremely far fetched....It is not ever been substanciated that even one "suitcase" bomb exists. If it did, the U.S. is probably the only country sophisticated enough to produce one, and we aren't selling them to terrorists.
It takes a small atom bomb to set off a hydrogen bomb. It takes a lot of really sophisticated explosives to set off a atom bomb....very difficult to fit in a "suitcase".
I say this article is bullshit (and over a year old, and no real media has picked up on it) and the guy is trying to sell books. :idea: :idea:
Wait a minute...could an Internet story not be true??? Well, that's never happened on ***boat!:D
:rollside:

Mandelon
10-17-2006, 09:33 PM
So the Al Qaeda plan is just made up by the author to sell books?
There is no uranium or plutonium missing from Russia or Pakistan?
Stuff can't be smuggled over the borders?
There aren't thousands of wacky muslims all over the world trying to figure out how to kill as many Americans as possible?
North Korea wouldn't be irresponsible with its newfound nuclear abilities?
Whew. I thought for a moment that it could be plausible.

OGShocker
10-17-2006, 09:36 PM
very scary especially being in L.A. and possible
Why do you think I am hangin' out in Australia..:D

Flyinbowtie
10-17-2006, 09:46 PM
While the deatils of the story might not be exactly correct, and the info may be a little dated, the goal of the enemy is clear, and hasn't changed.
Couple that fact with;
A dirty bomb could devastate a large American City, or worse depending on the target.
The former Soviet Union has not exactly won any awards for record keeping on the location, configuration or amount of fissionable materials currently or previously in its possession, nor have they done a good job screening potential buyers, or controlling potential thievery amongst former military types.
It appears that there are places along our southern border where you could drive an 18-wheeler full of just about anything, unimpeded by a fence, a boundry line, or even so much as a loss of a radio station signal right into this country without any sort of contact with anybody, let alone a Border Patrol/Homeland Security Detail.
Far less than 10% of all shipping containers arriving in this country via our ports are searched.
I don't really think that the enemy is looking to create a hydrogen bomb. It is possible, they certainly have the $ resources to do so, and they would love to get their hands on one, but they can devastate this country with radioactive fallout without doing so, and I think they are hell-bent upon achieving that goal.
I think they work on it every single minute of every single day, with a tireless devotion to a cause, without concern about how longs it takes or how many people die in the effort to reach the goal.
Meanwhile, many of our esteemed elected officials are so busy trying to line their own pockets, ensure their own re-election, pad their percieved historical legacy, block the efforts of their oppostion, point fingers at each other and try to make hay out of the most meaningless, absurd, and media-driven tripe that not a damn thing gets done in D.C. to care for, protect, and further the interests of this nation.
What the hell has happened to the diginty, integrity, and character of the people serving in Congress, where is their sense of purpose?

BajaMike
10-17-2006, 09:51 PM
So the Al Qaeda plan is just made up by the author to sell books?
There is no uranium or plutonium missing from Russia or Pakistan?
Stuff can't be smuggled over the borders?
There aren't thousands of wacky muslims all over the world trying to figure out how to kill as many Americans as possible?
North Korea wouldn't be irresponsible with its newfound nuclear abilities?
Whew. I thought for a moment that it could be plausible.
Maybe it's wishfull thinking, but saying there are 70 small nukes floating around is far fetched (I hope).
1. Going from "uranium or plutonium missing in Russia or Pakistan" is a far cry from a compact nuclear bomb.
2. "Stuff can be smuggled over the borders", but there is still some debate if Pakistan and India really have "deliverable" nukes.
3. "North Korea's recent nuke tests" are still debateable.....that may have been a failed nuke test. And going from underground nuke test to deliverable weapons (as Froggy pointed out in another tread) is very questionable.
And, it is indisputeable that there are "thousands of wacky muslims all over the world trying to figure out how to kill as many Americans as possible?", but I think if there were 70 "suitcase bombs" already smuggled in America, they would have mushroomed one by now.
But maybe I'm wrong (I hope not!).
:cool:

BajaMike
10-17-2006, 09:55 PM
While the deatils of the story might not be exactly correct, and the info may be a little dated, the goal of the enemy is clear, and hasn't changed.
Couple that fact with;
A dirty bomb could devastate a large American City, or worse depending on the target.
The former Soviet Union has not exactly won any awards for record keeping on the location, configuration or amount of fissionable materials currently or previously in its possession, nor have they done a good job screening potential buyers, or controlling potential thievery amongst former military types.
It appears that there are places along our southern border where you could drive an 18-wheeler full of just about anything, unimpeded by a fence, a boundry line, or even so much as a loss of a radio station signal right into this country without any sort of contact with anybody, let alone a Border Patrol/Homeland Security Detail.
Far less than 10% of all shipping containers arriving in this country via our ports are searched.
I don't really think that the enemy is looking to create a hydrogen bomb. It is possible, they certainly have the $ resources to do so, and they would love to get their hands on one, but they can devastate this country with radioactive fallout without doing so, and I think they are hell-bent upon achieving that goal.
Good point....a "dirty bomb" is far more likely, but it still involves driving around the country with tons of radiactive waiste, hopefully not an easy thing to do.
:idea:

deltaAce
10-17-2006, 10:36 PM
The bombs don't need to be in suitcases. It's posible that terrorists have rented
houses & apartments in the targeted areas. They go to jobs everyday & perfect
the explosive devices at night. We havent had any attacks since 9-11 because
they want the heat to die down while they impliment the next big attack. I do
believe we have to be ever vigilant in preventing terrorists from attacking
within our country but I don't think they will be using airplanes again. That seems to be where our focus is.

moneypit
10-17-2006, 10:42 PM
Isnt there a forum for this stuff? I saw a smuggling plums today. :D

78Eliminator
10-17-2006, 10:48 PM
Well, shit, we all have to go some time................

CARLSON-JET
10-17-2006, 11:26 PM
I wonder how this would effect the realestate market? :rollside:

SHOTKALLIN
10-18-2006, 12:04 AM
if this were to happen the entire middle east would be turned into one big piece of glass. No victory for Al Queda. Not that they care?

SmokinLowriderSS
10-18-2006, 12:11 AM
It doesn't take a LOT of HE (high explosive) to detonate a nucleaar bomb. All you do is drive 2 below-critical mass parts together, HARD. A couple pounds of C-4 would be plenty shaped properly. To make a thermo-nuke (H-bomb) is harder, but that is only because of the need to inject (with very perfect timing) Tritium (H3) into the middle of the mess. A "suitcase" is currently VERY possible. :skull:
Whether 70 or so is possible, is a far different debatable point. :argue:
A "dirty" bomb does not require "tons" of radioactive material. A few POUNDS of things like Strontium 90, salvaged/scavenged from x-ray equip and other sources (or enriched uranium powder) would be enough to poison Manhattan, for a few centuries. You just strap it to some Semtex (or other HE) and set it off. Terrorists from the middle east have PLENTY of Semtex laying arround. :skull:
Well back in the 90's, Al Queda was trying to get (and got) information on how to build a nuke from the same source the Pakistanis did, the Iranians did, the Iraqis did, the Lybians did, and god knows how many others. A scientist, A. Q. Kahn, head of the largest nuke-proliferation ring in the world. Just caught a Discovery Chanell story on him this afternoon. :cry:

RitcheyRch
10-18-2006, 04:21 AM
Scary stuff. Only a matter of time before they try to attack us again.

SmokinLowriderSS
10-18-2006, 04:36 AM
Scary stuff. Only a matter of time before they try to attack us again.
Yea, and idiots like the ACLU want us to only ask known, proven, hard-core, terrorists NICELY if they will tell us anything, if they'd be soooo kind as to spill the beans on the next bomb plot. :mad: :mad: :mad:
I hope every day we catch the next one before it goes off, and we have, a couple of times (which of course are actually "govt plans, fakes, to make us THINK they are here" (gawd the stupidity!!!)) Sooner or later, we won't. The terrorists have time, and timing on their side, vigilance is a LOT harder to maintain.

jimslade
10-18-2006, 04:53 AM
if this were to happen the entire middle east would be turned into one big piece of glass. No victory for Al Queda. Not that they care? I agree. Any nuclear capability would first be used in the middle east. For a bunch of uneducated turbin heads to detonate a nuclear weapon.They would need a pool of scientists for help. Look at Korea, they still have not succesfully detonated a nuclear weapon!

axkiker
10-18-2006, 05:27 AM
remember the ole saying. " be very wary of a man who has alot of free time" These dopes have lots of free time and a cause which they dont mind dying for. Eventually something bad will happen. Wether its on the scale that this article predicted only time will tell.

Sportin' Wood
10-18-2006, 05:40 AM
New York, Boston, Washington, Las Vegas, Miami, Chicago and Los Angeles.
The herd needs to be thinned in those cities anyway.

mmered8299
10-18-2006, 06:05 AM
It doesn't take a LOT of HE (high explosive) to detonate a nucleaar bomb. All you do is drive 2 below-critical mass parts together, HARD. A couple pounds of C-4 would be plenty shaped properly. To make a thermo-nuke (H-bomb) is harder, but that is only because of the need to inject (with very perfect timing) Tritium (H3) into the middle of the mess. A "suitcase" is currently VERY possible. :skull:
Whether 70 or so is possible, is a far different debatable point. :argue:
A "dirty" bomb does not require "tons" of radioactive material. A few POUNDS of things like Strontium 90, salvaged/scavenged from x-ray equip and other sources (or enriched uranium powder) would be enough to poison Manhattan, for a few centuries. You just strap it to some Semtex (or other HE) and set it off. Terrorists from the middle east have PLENTY of Semtex laying arround. :skull:
Well back in the 90's, Al Queda was trying to get (and got) information on how to build a nuke from the same source the Pakistanis did, the Iranians did, the Iraqis did, the Lybians did, and god knows how many others. A scientist, A. Q. Kahn, head of the largest nuke-proliferation ring in the world. Just caught a Discovery Chanell story on him this afternoon. :cry:
Is somebody watching this guy? He know too much :boxed:

Mandelon
10-18-2006, 07:41 AM
if this were to happen the entire middle east would be turned into one big piece of glass. No victory for Al Queda. Not that they care?
Who would we retaliate against? We can't exactly nuke Iraq, we have a few tens of thousands of our guys there....Iran? About half that country still want's to be our friends. Ya think we'd simply nuke the whole region? There's that oil thing we have to think about. We are sadly dependent upon them.....Plus I don't think the entire region is anti American, just a few thousand fanatics. The mullahs like having a common enemy to unite the sheep against, to keep themselves important and in power.
So would we kill millions of innocents? I doubt it. But I do think there would be muslim hunting in the streets of America. The US would have its own time of ethnic cleansing and those of middle eastern descent would be targeted, at least until the police regained control of the situation. Maybe even the kissy face peacenik liberals would understand it then.
70 nukes, probably not. 7.....I wouldn't be all that surprised. My point was to be aware, and be prepared. think of the chaos.....its not like you could use a charge card at the supermarket. If the financial districts are hit, banking will be toast for while, no one will be able to pay for anything, cash will be king. And prices will skyrocket overnight. Trucking must go through to keep the supermarkets full, who's gonna be doing that when all hell is breaking loose. Food will be hard to get.....roads jammed. Riots in the streets, looting, mosques burning.....it will be very "Katrinaesque".
I am certainly not some doomsday lunatic......just thinking it might be worthwhile to have a couple weeks worth of canned food and a couple extra boxes of shells around to protect you and your family. Propane, a generator...hell at least have a plan. If its all bullsh*t, stay complacent and happy. I am putting a couple extra jugs of water in the pantry. :220v:

UltraClean
10-18-2006, 08:05 AM
That is the p*ssy way of doing shit!!! damn gutless pieces of sh*t!!!!
If it does go down that way(which i think is a little far fetched)no doubt in my mind that we will turn that place into Hiroshima & Nagasaki!!!! :crossx: :crossx: :crossx: ...and maybe an extra one in N.Korea for good measure

BajaMike
10-18-2006, 08:11 AM
Who would we retaliate against? We can't exactly nuke Iraq, we have a few tens of thousands of our guys there....Iran? About half that country still want's to be our friends. Ya think we'd simply nuke the whole region? There's that oil thing we have to think about. We are sadly dependent upon them.....Plus I don't think the entire region is anti American, just a few thousand fanatics. The mullahs like having a common enemy to unite the sheep against, to keep themselves important and in power.
So would we kill millions of innocents? I doubt it. But I do think there would be muslim hunting in the streets of America. The US would have its own time of ethnic cleansing and those of middle eastern descent would be targeted, at least until the police regained control of the situation. Maybe even the kissy face peacenik liberals would understand it then.
70 nukes, probably not. 7.....I wouldn't be all that surprised. My point was to be aware, and be prepared. think of the chaos.....its not like you could use a charge card at the supermarket. If the financial districts are hit, banking will be toast for while, no one will be able to pay for anything, cash will be king. And prices will skyrocket overnight. Trucking must go through to keep the supermarkets full, who's gonna be doing that when all hell is breaking loose. Food will be hard to get.....roads jammed. Riots in the streets, looting, mosques burning.....it will be very "Katrinaesque".
I am certainly not some doomsday lunatic......just thinking it might be worthwhile to have a couple weeks worth of canned food and a couple extra boxes of shells around to protect you and your family. Propane, a generator...hell at least have a plan. If its all bullsh*t, stay complacent and happy. I am putting a couple extra jugs of water in the pantry. :220v:
All very good points....especially, the idea of being prepared. Depending on the government when the shit hits the fan is a bad idea....as shown in the aftermath of Katrina.
Water, food, bullets, cash, gold/silver, and a full tank of gas....I noticed Phoenix and Havasu aren't on the list of cities......let's meet at the Naked Turtle? :idea:
:cry:

RUSHIN ROULETTE
10-18-2006, 08:19 AM
This is a little long but interesting reading...
Robert G. Williscroft
The Atom Bomb and the Fatwa
In 1986, Osama bin Laden established al Masadah – the Lion’s Den – a training camp in Afghanistan for Persian Gulf Arabs, where he began inculcating his faithful with the dream of global jihad. After three years he founded al Qaeda – the Base, to carry out his nefarious dream, and fifteen years later this week, on a website named after the al Masadah training camp, al Qaeda announced a Fatwa that authorized Muslims to use a nuclear device against Americans.
Some essential background information: Islam is based on two writings, the Qur’an, believed by Muslims to have been revealed by Allah to Mohammad during the 7th century, and the Sunnah, which records the Prophet’s life. Taken together, the Qur’an and Sunnah form the basis for Islam as a religion and for Islamic jurisprudence, very much like our Constitution forms the basis for our secular laws; except that Islam does not distinguish between “religious” and “secular” as we do in the West.
The Shari’ah, which is analogous to codified law in Western society, consists of the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and a constantly evolving collection of Fatwas, or rulings, that deal with every aspect of Islamic life from ideology to practical daily matters. Throughout Islamic history, Imams and Mullahs have issued Fatwas, which have the force of law among Muslims, similar to a ruling by a Western court. As in the West, these rulings can be confirmed or overturned by a higher authority, by issuing a Fiqh.
This new Fatwa announced by The Lion’s Den is especially significant because of the length to which it goes to establish its legitimacy. The Fatwa commences with the 60th verse from the Qur’an section called the Al-Anfal, or The Spoils of War. It reads in part:
And prepare for them you Muslims all you can recruit of strength: armed forces and mounted troops to strike terror into the hearts and minds of Allah's enemy who is your enemy, and into the hearts and minds of others whom you do not know but Allah knows them. And remember that whatever you spend in divine service you shall be reimbursed and never shall you be wronged.
The Fatwa is signed: The al Qaeda Network, The Sheikhs’ Major General.
The al Qaeda threat has received a confirmation of sorts from a disaffected former CIA official.
Michael Scheuer was a senior official in the CIA’s counterterrorism unit and a special advisor to the head of the agency’s bin Laden unit until he resigned on Nov. 12. He is the “anonymous” author of Imperial Hubris: Why the West is Losing the War on Terror. He appeared on CBS’s “60 Minutes” on Sunday night, Nov. 14, speaking with Steve Kroft. He said: “[Bin Laden] secured from a Saudi sheik ... a rather long treatise on the possibility of using nuclear weapons against the Americans. [The treatise] found that he was perfectly within his rights to use them. Muslims argue that the United States is responsible for millions of dead Muslims around the world, so reciprocity would mean you could kill millions of Americans.”
To me, Scheuer’s approach in his book and on “60 Minutes” smacked of fear-mongering, and reminded me of Chicken Little’s reaction to the falling acorn. I do not minimize the danger posed to the United States and the rest of the non-Muslim world by al Qaeda, but it is important to understand their threats within the proper context.
For example, The Lion’s Den reports: “Our attempts to make small nuclear bombs with great potential for destruction have succeeded.” And it emphasizes the threats made by OBL just before the election: “Al Qaeda will respond harshly to your refusal to heed sheikh Osama bin Laden’s warning not to re-elect the foolish Bush in the presidential elections. We tell you that this refusal will bring Allah’s divine wrath upon you. He will make you the prime target of an attack that will strike at the heart of America.”
Scheuer, however, is pushing his own agenda as well. On “60 Minutes” he said: “One of the questions that should have been asked of [former CIA Director George] Tenet was why were there always enough people for the public relations office, for the academic outreach office, for the diversity and multi-cultural office? All those things are admirable and necessary but none of them are protecting the American people from a foreign threat.” And he also said to Kroft, “I think our leaders over the last decade have done the American people a disservice ... continuing to characterize Osama bin Laden as a thug, as a gangster. Until we respect him, sir, we are going to die in numbers that are probably unnecessary. Yes – he’s a very, very talented man and a very worthy opponent.”
With these dire words, Scheuer should not want for money-earning bookings in the coming months.
So, what is the real threat of al Qaeda actually unleashing nuclear holocaust on the United States?
In past articles, I have discussed the unlikelihood of any terrorist group successfully assembling a functioning “suitcase” type nuke. (See “New Nuclear Threat Is Based On Junk Science” and “Reckless Science - 'Nuclear Nightmares' Exposed.”) The bottom line is that no terrorist group in the foreseeable future will be able to assemble, let alone manufacture, a tritium-based thermonuclear device. The ingredients are too pure and too scarce, the design is too complex, and the engineering is too precise – it simply isn’t going to happen.
What about al Qaeda assembling a device similar to the 13-kiloton uranium gun-type device exploded over Hiroshima? Bottom line: It’s possible. If al Qaeda actually can assemble sufficient Uranium-235, which is the fissile form of Uranium, in sufficient purity, and if it can actually manufacture a design that will work, at least theoretically, then it has – theoretically – the possibility of exploding one of these devices.
In its simplest form, a gun-type device consists of four elements: (1) the “uranium target,” which sits at one end of the (2) “rail.” At the other end is (3) the “Gun” that shoots (4) the “Uranium bullet,” which is fired into the target. By themselves, neither the target nor the bullet contain sufficient Uranium-235 to generate a chain reaction. When slammed together, “critical mass” is obtained, and a nuclear detonation results – maybe.
Uranium-235 is radioactive, emitting neutrons spontaneously. If sufficient Uranium-235 is held together, each of these released neutrons strikes a Uranium atom, releasing another pair of neutrons, which each create another pair, etc, causing a run-away chain reaction that ultimately (in a few micro-seconds) results in a massive detonation. So the trick is to have sufficient Uranium-235 for critical mass, keep it sufficiently separated so it won’t detonate, and when you want it to detonate, jam the two sections together.
What isn’t obvious from this description is that as soon as the chain reaction begins, the critical mass of Uranium-235 tends to blow itself back into a non-critical mass of Uranium-235, and what you end up with is a poof and a fizzle, with a limited, but locally lethal release of neutrons, and a bit of initial beta (high energy electrons), and some residual alpha (helium nuclei). That’s it. Period.
The difficulty in designing one of these devices and then building it, is that it is not trivial how to integrate the bullet and the target. If the bullet is too fast, it passes through the target. If the alloy mix is incorrect, one or the other, or even both shatter, and you don’t get critical mass. If the bullet is too slow, the critical mass is obtained too fast, and before the actual explosion happens, the unit blows itself apart in a mini-explosion – a poof and a fizzle. In the real world, there are a thousand ways the device can fail, and only one way it can work.
These are not very good odds for the would-be terrorist atom bomb maker.
And that’s all al Qaeda will ever likely be able to produce: A poof and a fizzle.
And they know it, because by their rhetoric they have already tried, and that’s all they apparently accomplished: A poof and a fizzle. Otherwise we would have known, because the U.S. intelligence community and our allies have the ability to detect a nuclear explosion anywhere on Earth.
Incidentally, these devices are big, well over a thousand pounds. They’re not going to sneak one through our southern border. In fact, the only viable way for al Qaeda to have a chance at exploding one of these devices – assuming that they can actually create a working model – is to construct it inside the United States, or bring it into one of our ports inside a cargo vessel.
And you can be certain that our best people are making sure this doesn’t happen!
So, whatever al Qaeda has in mind, it most certainly is not a nuclear explosion. A “dirty bomb”? Maybe (see my article, “The Dirty Nuke - What It Is and Isn't ,” for an in-depth discussion of this possibility). A biological attack? Much more likely (see my article, “We Can Handle the Most Likely Threats,” for a detailed discussion of the biological threat). But even in this case, as the article title suggests, we can handle it.
It goes without saying that the United States and its western allies must wage an unrelenting campaign to track and hunt down al Qaeda and its leaders.
What we don’t need is Scheuer and the other Chicken Littles criss-crossing the country, spreading alarm for the sole benefit of their wallets.

Froggystyle
10-18-2006, 08:51 AM
RD Sux

lewiville
10-18-2006, 09:02 AM
heres what i found on www.snopes.com
nukes (http://www.snopes.com/rumors/nukes.htm)
I like this source. they do a great job getting to the bottom of rumors

eliminatedsprinter
10-18-2006, 09:03 AM
I'm no expert, but I think if Islamic nuts had nukes, they would have used them on Israel.

dmontzsta
10-18-2006, 09:06 AM
So the terrorists have nukes...we have Chuck Norris, there has to be some kind of balance. :)

RUSHIN ROULETTE
10-18-2006, 09:09 AM
So the terrorists have nukes...we have Chuck Norris, there has to be some kind of balance. :)
Good guys wear black....

OutCole'd
10-18-2006, 09:11 AM
I am certainly not some doomsday lunatic......just thinking it might be worthwhile to have a couple weeks worth of canned food and a couple extra boxes of shells around to protect you and your family. Propane, a generator...hell at least have a plan. If its all bullsh*t, stay complacent and happy. I am putting a couple extra jugs of water in the pantry. :220v:
I know where I'm heading when the shit hits the fan. :cool:

RiverDave
10-18-2006, 09:17 AM
RD Sux
While that may be true, I'd also like to point out that the U.S. is equipped with radio active sensors all over the place. If you've even been remotely around anything radio active and are in a major city their going to know about it. Some fire departments even have small censors that go off. Point in fact some guy just had chemo awhile back, and ended up getting surrounded by the authorities, becuase it triggered a sensor in his local fire department when he walked by it. (That's how unbelievably sensitive and accurate these things are)
They are currently working on un manned blimps that will fly over incoming ports with a variety of sensors, as well as blimps to patrol over major cities that detect a variety of different things involving terrorism.
I have no doubt that more attacks are on the way, and I also think that no matter what we are going to be put into a "reactive" situation almost everytime.. (As in it's going to happen whether we like it or not and then we'll respond) but I find it pretty hard to believe that somebody is going to sneak anything nuclear into the states without someone finding out about it within minutes. As well if it's in a major city and being put together, they'll find it before any terrorist ever gets a chance to put his finger on the trigger.
RD

UltraClean
10-18-2006, 09:19 AM
all of this because they are promised 72 virgins.....dont know about you guys but id like 72 "experienced" women instead

PlyaPlya22
10-18-2006, 09:19 AM
Very intresting!

CARLSON-JET
10-18-2006, 10:00 AM
While that may be true, I'd also like to point out that the U.S. is equipped with radio active sensors all over the place. If you've even been remotely around anything radio active and are in a major city their going to know about it. Some fire departments even have small censors that go off. Point in fact some guy just had chemo awhile back, and ended up getting surrounded by the authorities, becuase it triggered a sensor in his local fire department when he walked by it. (That's how unbelievably sensitive and accurate these things are)
They are currently working on un manned blimps that will fly over incoming ports with a variety of sensors, as well as blimps to patrol over major cities that detect a variety of different things involving terrorism.
I have no doubt that more attacks are on the way, and I also think that no matter what we are going to be put into a "reactive" situation almost everytime.. (As in it's going to happen whether we like it or not and then we'll respond) but I find it pretty hard to believe that somebody is going to sneak anything nuclear into the states without someone finding out about it within minutes. As well if it's in a major city and being put together, they'll find it before any terrorist ever gets a chance to put his finger on the trigger.
RD
I find the red statements to be laughable . The donothings we have in Washington were not prepared on 9/11 and to this day are not prepared.
The statement in orange I find very sad but true. Durring the last attack the only poeple to launch any type of offensive were very brave citizens. God bless them, True American.

***boat
10-18-2006, 10:20 AM
In my opinion there is a slim chance of nuclear weapons being detonated on U.S. soil by a terrorist organization. Simply put nuclear material is very difficult if not impossible to hide from detection. Airplanes can see the thermal radiation from a human body at altitude. Nuclear radiation is significantly stronger and detectable at greater ranges. This might just be speculation on my part, but to my knowledge there is very little you can do to stop the escape of radiation. Lead, DU and other materials reduce the escape of radiation, but they do not completely stop it.
Additionally as far as weight and portability goes, you don't need a ton of explosives to detonate a nuke. But if you only have a little bit of explosive, you can only detonate a little bit of radioactive material. Even the U.S.'s smallest confirmed nuclear weapon the W-54 had a yield of 6 kT, and it would also be unlikely that someone would get their hands on such an advanced weapon as W54. The W54 is believed to be the smallest nuclear weapon ever built and possibly the smallest nuke possible.
Given the expense, complexity and likelihood that the weapon will not even detonate a terrorist would still probably be better off with a conventional based explosive. I don't have a reference for this, but I did see some speculation that the nuke detonated by North Korea might have been something they had sitting on the shelf made by Russia. If that's the case then concerns that older nuclear weapons may have degraded past the point where they are able to fully detonate could be true.
Side note:
In my opinion, the real threat is still chemical, biological, or a conventional attack on a U.S. based reactor. I am still amazed every year when this doesn't happen. There is only one explanation for this, and that is that the CIA and FBI is doing a better job than anyone including themselves can give credit for.
Intelligence is an un-rewarding field, and often times you have to go in front of the cameras and say you ****ed up when it was a success just to protect the methods that will allow that method to succeed in the future. Give some credit to the government, politics is a screwed up world, but with the bad there is a lot of good.
References (some good reading)
Nuclear Detection Equipment
http://www.thermo.com/com/cda/market/landing_page/0,,16,00.html?ca=rmp
http://www.novascientific.com/snm.html
W54 and the Davy Crockett rocket
http://www.brook.edu/FP/projects/nucwcost/davyc.HTM
Nuke Construction
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive_lens
Janes take on nuke test
http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jdw/jdw061009_2_n.shtml

reDECKulous
10-18-2006, 10:24 AM
909 isn't looking so bad after all...

Sportin' Wood
10-18-2006, 10:29 AM
Will my tin foil covered armadillo helmet offer me any relief from the fallout?
We have other forms of radiation out in the 909. :crossx:

Sleek-Jet
10-18-2006, 10:32 AM
All very good points....especially, the idea of being prepared. Depending on the government when the shit hits the fan is a bad idea....as shown in the aftermath of Katrina.
Water, food, bullets, cash, gold/silver, and a full tank of gas....I noticed Phoenix and Havasu aren't on the list of cities......let's meet at the Naked Turtle? :idea:
:cry:
Yeah, but they are down wind unfortunately.
I don't generally buy into the whole doomsday hype either, but these people have proven to exploit our weaknesses (spelling not among them. :D ) The southern border of this country has been weak for a long time.

Cheap Thrills
10-18-2006, 11:04 AM
Side note:
In my opinion, the real threat is still chemical, biological, or a conventional attack on a U.S. based reactor. I am still amazed every year when this doesn't happen. There is only one explanation for this, and that is that the CIA and FBI is doing a better job than anyone including themselves can give credit for.
DING !
I believe the reason they didn't find the WMDs is that they didnt look far enough or deep enough offshore ! Or that they were already here long before the search begain.
Good reads too HB. thx
C.T. :wink:

SmokinLowriderSS
10-18-2006, 11:31 AM
Is somebody watching this guy? He know too much :boxed:
The CIA was trying, but they lost track of him, missed some of his contacts, couldn't keep up.
Hard to imagine with the wide open budget the CIA enjoyed back in the '90's. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

AZKC
10-18-2006, 12:17 PM
Incidentally, these devices are big, well over a thousand pounds. They’re not going to sneak one through our southern border.
Sorry but it is very easy to get stuff across our Southern Border. :) But if they were doing a bunch you would think we could have found a few all ready or maybe we have and they are not telling us. No way, they tell us everything :)

Schiada76
10-18-2006, 12:26 PM
"Incidentally, these devices are big, well over a thousand pounds. They’re not going to sneak one through our southern border "
Ummm yeah ok, they bring TONS of blow and weed across the border every year. Big, bulky tons of drugs.
You're right, no way could they get a 1000# nuke across. :rolleyes:
Odds are they haven't yet but I sure as hell don't believe we'd know about it if they caught someone with fissionable material or a functioning device at the border or in country.

AZKC
10-18-2006, 01:04 PM
News radio just blurped something about 7 dirty bombs at NFL games this weekend. Some sort of Internet chatter thats going around.

AZKC
10-18-2006, 01:07 PM
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Department of Homeland Security has warned officials in seven U.S. cities about a dirty bomb threat to NFL football stadiums but does not believe the threat is credible, officials said on Wednesday.
The threat, found posted on an Internet web site, said bombs containing radioactive material known as "dirty" bombs had been smuggled into the United States and would be used to attack professional football stadiums this coming Sunday, department spokesman Jarrod Agen said.
"We judge that this is not a credible threat," Agen said. He declined to identify the cities. But a department official said they were Miami, New York, Atlanta, Seattle, Houston, Oakland, California, and Cleveland, Ohio.

4DAY4PLAY
10-18-2006, 01:16 PM
Just heard breaking news on channel 9 saying there has been a threat posted on a website(unk which one) of dirty bombs hitting several Football stadiums this sunday. anyone else hear the same?

Riverless
10-18-2006, 01:22 PM
Just heard breaking news on channel 9 saying there has been a threat posted on a website(unk which one) of dirty bombs hitting several Football stadiums this sunday. anyone else hear the same?
look, up :rolleyes:

Mardonzi
10-18-2006, 01:44 PM
News radio just blurped something about 7 dirty bombs at NFL games this weekend. Some sort of Internet chatter thats going around.
Disgruntled Raider fans maybe????

OutCole'd
10-18-2006, 01:47 PM
Disgruntled Raider fans maybe????
More like Raider Players....

BajaMike
10-18-2006, 02:06 PM
http://www.brook.edu/FP/PROJECTS/NUCWCOST/davy6.jpg
"The Davy Crockett consisted of an XM-388 projectile launched from either a 120-millimeter (XM-28) or 155-millimeter (XM-29) recoilless rifle (the 120 millimeter version is shown above). This weapon had a maximum range of 1.24 miles (120 millimeter) to 2.49 miles (155 millimeter). The XM-388 casing (including the warhead and fin assembly) weighed 76 pounds, was 30 inches long and measured 11 inches in diameter (at its widest point). "
Interesting....

BajaMike
10-18-2006, 02:10 PM
Just heard breaking news on channel 9 saying there has been a threat posted on a website(unk which one) of dirty bombs hitting several Football stadiums this sunday. anyone else hear the same?
"
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Department of Homeland Security warned officials on Wednesday in seven U.S. cities about a dirty-bomb threat to National Football League stadiums but does not believe the threat is credible, officials said.
The threat, posted on Monday on an Internet site, said bombs containing radioactive material known as "dirty" bombs had been smuggled into the United States and would be used to attack professional football stadiums this Sunday, the department said.
"We are looking at this with strong skepticism. We have judged that there is not a credible threat here. There is no evidence or intelligence that there is a credible threat of such attacks," said Homeland Security spokesman Jarrod Agen.
"But out of an abundance of caution, we thought it necessary to notify federal, state, local and private sector partners," he added.
The seven cities were identified as Miami, New York, Atlanta, Seattle, Houston, Oakland, California, and Cleveland in a Homeland Security notice sent to federal, state, local and private security officials in those areas.
"They have not been asked to take any security measures," Agen said. "This is to inform them that the information is out there but we don't see it as a credible threat."
The Homeland Security notice said the threat was posted to an English-language Web site at www.thefriendsociety.com and said dirty bombs in trucks would be detonated outside the stadiums during Sunday's NFL games.
"The content of the Web site, which requires registration to post, is sometimes crude and contains none of the hallmarks of jihadist Web sites," Homeland Security advised in the notice. An attempt to connect to the site was unsuccessful. Continued...
© Reuters 2006. All Rights Reserved.

yer daddy
10-18-2006, 10:15 PM
This is total bullshit!
First of all, "WorldNetDaily.com" is hardly a credible new source.
Secondly, the idea of 70 "suitcase" bombs floating around the world is extremely far fetched....It is not ever been substanciated that even one "suitcase" bomb exists. If it did, the U.S. is probably the only country sophisticated enough to produce one, and we aren't selling them to terrorists.
It takes a small atom bomb to set off a hydrogen bomb. It takes a lot of really sophisticated explosives to set off a atom bomb....very difficult to fit in a "suitcase".
I say this article is bullshit (and over a year old, and no real media has picked up on it) and the guy is trying to sell books. :idea: :idea:
Wait a minute...could an Internet story not be true??? Well, that's never happened on ***boat!:D
W
:rollside: When the soviet union fell apart there where tons of weapons missing including 110+ nuclear suitcase bombs in which the soviets said to have had well over 1000 of them so this to me sounds possible. And as for getting them into the US, seems to me that's the easiest part, no border security, hidden tunnels, illegal immigrants come and going as they please. It would be very naive of us not to take a threat like this seriously.

MudPumper
10-18-2006, 11:48 PM
This is total bullshit!
First of all, "WorldNetDaily.com" is hardly a credible new source.
Secondly, the idea of 70 "suitcase" bombs floating around the world is extremely far fetched....It is not ever been substanciated that even one "suitcase" bomb exists. If it did, the U.S. is probably the only country sophisticated enough to produce one, and we aren't selling them to terrorists.
It takes a small atom bomb to set off a hydrogen bomb. It takes a lot of really sophisticated explosives to set off a atom bomb....very difficult to fit in a "suitcase".
I say this article is bullshit (and over a year old, and no real media has picked up on it) and the guy is trying to sell books. :idea: :idea:
Wait a minute...could an Internet story not be true??? Well, that's never happened on ***boat!:D
:rollside:
Keep living in denial if you wish. The fact of the matter is this. The Soviet Union HAS produced nuclear devices commonly referred to as "suitcase bombs." They are approximately the size of a medium sized office wastebasket. The Soviet Union has confirmed they CANNOT account for approximately 70 of these devices.
Is it possible for a terrorist organization such as Al Queda, Al Fatah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad or Hizbollah to obtain these devices? Extremely.

SmokinLowriderSS
10-19-2006, 08:02 AM
Is it possible for a terrorist organization such as Al Queda, Al Fatah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad or Hizbollah to obtain these devices? Extremely.
It only takes money, of which they seem to have little shortage, at least in the past.