Posted on 11/30/2004 1:01:46 AM PST by JohnHuang2
The United States is losing the war on terrorism and faces an "inevitable" al-Qaida attack with weapons of mass destruction that will be worse than 9-11, according to a counter-terror expert.
"All of the warnings we have today indicate that a major strike – something more horrible than anything we've seen before – is all but inevitable," said Yossef Bodansky, former director of the U.S. Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, in an interview yesterday with the Jerusalem Post.
Bodansky said "the primary option" for the next al-Qaida attack on American soil would be to employ weapons of mass destruction.
"I do not have a crystal ball, but this is what all the available evidence tells us; e will have a bang," Bodansky told the Post, adding al-Qaida is "tying up the knots" for an attack.
Bodansky, author of "Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America," and "The Secret History of the Iraq War," said the jihadist movement is gaining strength as Osama bin Laden's call to arms draws an increasing number of recruits throughout the Muslim world.
Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Bodansky said, the number of people trained and willing to die has more than doubled to an estimated 500,000 to 750,000. Intelligences estimates say another 10 million are willing toactively support them while another 50 million would provide financial support.
Bodansky was in Israel for the second annual Jerusalem Summit, an international gathering of conservative thinkers, the Post said.
Al-Qaida has not carried out a second major attack, Bodansky explained, because the first one sufficiently sent the message to the Islamic world that the U.S. could be penetrated, and a second attack necessarily would have to be more grandiose.
Now, however, the re-election of President Bush has set the stage for a massive attack with non-conventional weapons, Bodansky believes.
There has been a debate between bin Laden allies and some Islamic leaders over the propriety of such a large-scale attack on U.S. citizens, he told the Jerusalem paper. But, according to bin Laden's mindset, that has been resolved by the American electorate backing Bush and thus "choosing" to be enemies of Islam.
Though some debate and doubt may linger, the planning for an attack is finished, Bodansky believes.
"They got the kosher stamp from the Islamic world to use nuclear weapons," he said.
Bin Laden's theme has shifted since 9-11, Bodanksy said. Previously, perpetual confrontation and jihad against the U.S. was seen as the only way to protect Islam. Now, the emphasis is on punishing American society.
"Just as the West was challenging the quintessence of Islam by means of the globalization era, there was a parallel need by Islamic extremists to strike at – and hurt – the core of American society, this time with weapons of mass destruction," Bodansky said.
40% of American mooselimbs are blacks who are natural born US Citizens.
Where are you going to send them?
I do too. If, we are fighting a premptive war, this should be done , before WMD's are used.
Therapy for the native born muslims.....the arabs don't
think they are real muslims anyway. Someone told me
that black and slave are the same word in arab.
Round them up, if they're with the enemy.
Not into conspiracies, just winning the war.
If it worked for FDR, then why not now.
Well...we all thought Osama bin Laden was dead too. The author is partially correct...a WND attack on U.S. soil is inevitable.
The release of reports such as this is itself is a form of terrorism, whose side are these people on, anyway?
The 9/11 attacks did not depend, hinge, or leverage off any other fact, incident, preparation, threat, history, relationship, etc. aside from target location. It, in and of itself, was a defining moment. A nuke detonating would likewise be such, a hundredfold - and would not need to involve a particular landmark as WTC was.
The only conceivable relevant planning point is getting it to a major city - any part thereof.
If AQ had a nuke and could move it to a world-recognized city, we would be discussing the past-tense event right now, not the possibility.
Islam is itself a WMD.........?
I would agree with the therapy for the newborns, but I am sure they will be going with their parents when they leave our Great Country.
As I see it, if these psychos had and could deploy WMD they'd have used them already.
That's not to say they won't get them.
Incidentally,
"They got the KOSHA stamp from the ISLAMIC world to use nuclear weapons,"
LOL, good un that!
That's why they release tapes every month or so. Even if it were true, what more could we possibly do? Statistically, I wonder the possibility of dying in a dirty bomb attack, compares to one dying in a car accident, being a murder victim, or just dropping dead tomorrow. If nothing else, the reports serve to psychologically prepare people for the worst. IMHO, if this were from a reliable source, even France would be on our side.
It would be Pearl Harbor times 50. Back then we carpet bombed Tokyo with incendiary bombs that literally killed millions of ordinary Japanese citizens. We would kill billions of Muslims.
The can't be that stupid.
Target Package: Pyongyang, N. Korea; Damacus, Syria; Tehran, Iran; Mecca; Medina; Yemen; Sudan.
One nuclear sub and its payload would take care of this from the Red Sea.
The reason we went into Iraq is to prevent such WMD attacks in the US in the future.
We have put a big dent in al-qaeda's ability to carry out such attacks, now and in the future, but it is still the biggest risk faced for the American people.
9/11 demonstrated that these people (nut-jobs) don't care how many innocent people they kill so the risk will always be there as long as these people are walking around on the face on the earth.
The risk only gets larger as science and technology grows and access to it expands (which is it doing an ever increasing pace.)
That's why the solutions must be two-fold,
- limit or eliminate their access to WMD; and,
- kill and/or jail as many of these nut-jobs as we can before they can do something.
Bush already said a couple of years ago that we would respond with nuclear weapons, if necessary.
Great point! I dare say that if there truly were 500-750,000 of them, then a "handful" more would be in Iraq taking it up with our troops, not subjecting their entire "home base" to freedom and rule of the people.
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.