Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Al Qaeda nukes are reality, intelligence says
Washington Times ^ | 10/28/02 | Neil Doyle

Posted on 10/27/2002 11:26:43 PM PST by kattracks

Edited on 07/12/2004 3:58:23 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

LONDON ó Soon after September 11 last year, the notion that al Qaeda might have nuclear weapons was largely dismissed by intelligence professionals.

It is, however, a working assumption in security circles now that the terror group does have nuclear capabilities. Al Qaeda's secret nuclear stash is assumed to be somewhere in Afghanistan, although finding it is proving to be as hard as locating Osama bin Laden.


(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 10/27/2002 11:26:43 PM PST by kattracks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Mo1
FYI and indexing
2 posted on 10/27/2002 11:32:05 PM PST by Bradís Gramma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brad's Gramma
There is no consensus among experts on whether al Qaeda possesses working nuclear warheads, as Osama bin Laden contended in an interview after September 11.

Think Saddam might help him out ???

3 posted on 10/27/2002 11:38:24 PM PST by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
I can't answer. I'm not here anymore. I've logged off.

Shhhhhhhh
4 posted on 10/27/2002 11:43:08 PM PST by Bradís Gramma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Bookmarked.

Chilling.

5 posted on 10/27/2002 11:43:21 PM PST by sourcery
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
"It has been estimated that one ADM could immediately kill 100,000 people if it exploded in a major city center, with hundreds of thousands dying from cancer in the fallout.

However, one senior Western intelligence contact is adamant that the terrorists do have a number of these weapons — nine, to be precise. The price on the deal is put at $30 million, plus 2 tons of opium per nuke."
-----
This should be required reading for everyone before they go to the polls on November 5. Voters should ask themselves who is more capable to defend us -- the Democrats who constantly put their partisan interests over the interests of the American People, or the Republicans who support Bush in his superhuman efforts to protect us.
6 posted on 10/27/2002 11:47:50 PM PST by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
Disturbing if true.
7 posted on 10/27/2002 11:51:04 PM PST by seeker41
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
 Rose Gottemoeller, senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and assistant energy secretary for nonproliferation in the Clinton administration, said: "I believe that the chance that al Qaeda controls actual warheads is virtually nil.

Well, here is proof positive that AQ has a nuke. Thanks Bubba.

8 posted on 10/27/2002 11:55:38 PM PST by Norman Arbuthnot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
It has been estimated that one ADM could immediately kill 100,000 people if it exploded in a major city center, with hundreds of thousands dying from cancer in the fallout.

Really? Hundreds of thousands didn't die from fallout after Hiroshima or Nagasaki. Why should they now?

This is total fantasy. If Al-Qaeda currently possesed WMD, we would have seen something a bit more impressive in followup to 9/11 than the shoe bomber or the DC sniper, after toppling the Taliban, killing Bin Laden, and imprisoning hundreds of their fighters at Camp X-Ray. We do need to worry about WMD -- specifically anthrax (nukes are a non-issue for the foreseeable future) -- but the issue there is Hussein, not some stumblebums living in a cave in Afghanistan.

9 posted on 10/28/2002 12:20:19 AM PST by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
bttt...
10 posted on 10/28/2002 2:23:17 AM PST by Las Vegas Dave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
I don't believe that they have it.

How and ever, if they do, they probably understand that our response would be biblical in proportion, and have probaby been told as much throught channels.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

11 posted on 10/28/2002 4:03:50 AM PST by section9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: kattracks; monkeyshine; ipaq2000; Lent; veronica; Sabramerican; beowolf; Nachum; BenF; angelo; ...
interesting
12 posted on 10/28/2002 4:10:27 AM PST by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
is proving to be as hard as locating Osama bin Laden.

Here's one for Neil Doyle.


13 posted on 10/28/2002 4:18:45 AM PST by ASA Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw
I have to roust the wife in a moment, but if you'll follow my previous posts on NBC warfare, Nuke News, etc., you'll find info on SADM, among other stuff. Since 9-11 I have fully expected another attack ( not to forget the anthrax... ) and somewhat anticipate it being nuclear... altho I doubt those old small nukes could be kept "hot" enough to go critical... but they make a dirty bomb easily enough... gotta run-
14 posted on 10/28/2002 4:20:29 AM PST by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: backhoe
A dirty bomb would put people into a panic. Contaminating Wall Street with one would strike a severe blow.....And then who would we attack to stop such actions? Would we nuke Mecca? We should but even after a dirty bomb we wouldn't.

Just what would our course of action be if we got hit by 4 dirty bombs in one day in the downtowns of 4 major cities? Our insurers would be thrown for a real loop and the American people would be in a panic.

15 posted on 10/28/2002 4:40:03 AM PST by dennisw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
Saddam's help?

Considering the major premise of this article is based on the fact of

wouldn't it be fair to say not only has Saddam already helped OBL out with this extreme tactic but has so lowered the bar on conflict that taking him out has been deserved even without Saddam's possession of WMD's?
16 posted on 10/28/2002 6:24:10 AM PST by flamefront
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
THE ELECTION IS IN 8 DAYS
AND I CAN'T VOTE.

PLEASE, HELP TAKE BACK THE SENATE.
IT'S FOR THE PUPPIES!

TakeBackCongress.org

A resource for conservatives who want a Republican majority in the Senate

17 posted on 10/28/2002 7:45:38 AM PST by ffrancone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: section9
How and ever, if they do, they probably understand that our response would be biblical in proportion, and have probaby been told as much throught channels.

The response should be biblical in proportion, but what would we target? Baghdad and Riyahd? Level off the Tora Bora Mountains?

18 posted on 10/28/2002 10:56:33 AM PST by xJones
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: xJones
The response should be biblical in proportion, but what would we target? Baghdad and Riyahd? Level off the Tora Bora Mountains?

The bin Ladenists presently are strongest in the Northwestern Frontier just over the border from Afghanistan. Basically, you make that region uninhabitable to humans for the next several decades.

You need to set an example for others.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

19 posted on 10/28/2002 3:39:55 PM PST by section9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson