'Al-Qaida on brink of using nuclear bomb'

[Erod]

'Al-Qaida on brink of using nuclear bomb'

Al-Qaida is on the verge of producing radioactive weapons after sourcing nuclear material and recruiting rogue scientists to build "dirty" bombs, according to leaked diplomatic documents.

A leading atomic regulator has privately warned that the world stands on the brink of a "nuclear 9/11".

Security briefings suggest that jihadi groups are also close to producing "workable and efficient" biological and chemical weapons that could kill thousands if unleashed in attacks on the West.

Read more: 'Al-Qaida on brink of using nuclear bomb'

The cockroaches are coming out of the cracks again.

 

[zimmer]

'Al-Qaida on brink of using nuclear bomb'



The cockroaches are coming out of the cracks again.

Whatever we do, we better make darn sure we don't waterboard anyone we might catch that proves uncooperative and might have valuable information.

.

 

[rathi]

Let me translate the article: FEAR FEAR FEAR BE AFRAID NUCLEAR ANTHRAX TERRORISTS OUT TO GET YOU. I can't believe this kind of crap is considered journalism.

 

[Goshin]

Let me translate the article: FEAR FEAR FEAR BE AFRAID NUCLEAR ANTHRAX TERRORISTS OUT TO GET YOU. I can't believe this kind of crap is considered journalism.

But they ARE out to get you, and they WOULD like to do so with more effective weapons. Odds are good that one day they'll pull this off too, if they keep at it and we don't stay on top of them.

 

[Laila]

Lol @ people who actually believe this.
:lol:

Don't worry, I have a bunker at the end of my garden in preparation :2wave:

 

[Grant]

Let me translate the article: FEAR FEAR FEAR BE AFRAID NUCLEAR ANTHRAX TERRORISTS OUT TO GET YOU. I can't believe this kind of crap is considered journalism.

You might be surprised how few people predicted 9/11.

You don't have to fear these people, just keep and eye on them and/or kill them when you find them.

You should either debate the points though or just ignore the thead. Many world leaders don't believe these threats this are "crap".

 

[Dirty Harry]

I thought the war in Iraq and the trillion dollars we spent there was supposed to eliminate the threat. Wouldn't it have been better to go after Al Qaeda with all that money?

 

[Resist the gov.]

I'm not worried at all, think last i checked more people die from peanut allergies than from terrorists in the U.S., this is no different than in the 1950's when it was "commies" who were supposedly coming to eat our children and cause mayhem. Aw media never changes.....

 

[Zyroh]

i love how when it's wikileaks reporting something, and the media echoing it, that no one has to use the word 'allegedly' anymore. there is no doubt any more people, there words are as good as facts. just believe it, quit questioning what your masters tell you.

 

[scourge99]

I thought the war in Iraq and the trillion dollars we spent there was supposed to eliminate the threat.

Apparently you didn't read the Iraq War Resolution very carefully. It says nothing about how stopping Saddam would put an end to world wide terrorism. It talks, in one of 10+ points, about how removing saddam will put an end to his dabbling with terrorists.

Wouldn't it have been better to go after Al Qaeda with all that money?

Would it? If Saddam was still in power, dodging inspections, building an army, funding terrorists, would the world be a better and safer place?

 

[ksu_aviator]

You know, we shouldn't dismiss reports like this. I'm not saying you should buy a survival garden kit or build a buinker...but we should be concerned that a terrorist organization would be successful in using a nuclear device, some where in the world. I doubt they can smuggle one into the US...but it isn't impossible.

 

[Dirty Harry]

Apparently you didn't read the Iraq War Resolution very carefully. It says nothing about how stopping Saddam would put an end to world wide terrorism. It talks, in one of 10+ points, about how removing saddam will put an end to his dabbling with terrorists.
?

No I didn't. Did you? I just went by what my president told us. He told us we had to invade Iraq to make us safe.
"Dabbling with terrorists" was worth a trillion dollars and thousand of American lives. I can't believe there are still people out there that don'y think invading Iraq was a huge mistake.

 

[zimmer]

Let me translate the article: FEAR FEAR FEAR BE AFRAID NUCLEAR ANTHRAX TERRORISTS OUT TO GET YOU. I can't believe this kind of crap is considered journalism.

Ugh... Dr. Strangelove, I mean rathi... Nukes are nothing to worry about, nor are other WMD. I seeeee yuuu haf learnt to love zee bumb. Sehr gut, now on vis da shoooow.

C O N N E C T - T H E - D O T S... remember that phrase post 911?

Of course these morons would never have worked with someone in the Iraqi Regime to acquire WMD. Never. These people have ethics dontcha know. On both sides.

Good thing Bush went in and cleaned up the hell hole, and in the process closed a nuke black market after 12-years of Jack-in-ov.

CORNYN: You said something during your opening statement that intrigues me, and something that I'm afraid may be overlooked in all of this back and forth; and that has to do with proliferation.

You said that there was a risk of a willing seller meeting a willing buyer of such weapons or weapon stockpiles, whether they be large, small or programs, whether it's information that Iraqi scientists might be willing to sell or work in cooperation with rogue organizations or even nations.

KAY: Actually, I consider it a bigger risk. And that's why I paused on the preceding questions. I consider that a bigger risk than the restart of his programs being successful.

KAY: I think the way the society was going, and the number of willing buyers in the market, that that probably was a risk that if we did avoid, we barely avoided.

CRG: Dr David Kay's Testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee

.

 

[scourge99]

No I didn't. Did you?

I did ad it. I recommend you do the same. Its ok wikipedia.

I just went by what my president told us. He told us we had to invade Iraq to make us safe.

He said a lot more the that. He said everything in the resolution. It wasn't a secret. It was open. The public.

"Dabbling with terrorists" was worth a trillion dollars and thousand of American lives.

There was more to it that "dabbling with terrorists". Once again, READ THE RESOLUTION or continue in ignorance.

I can't believe there are still people out there that don'y think invading Iraq was a huge mistake.

I don't think it was a HUGE mistake. Its debatable whether it was worth the cost or the best decision, but not a HUGE mistake.
There are valid reasons why we should NOT have invaded and valid reasons why we should have. Most people who aren't hyperpartisan hacks understand the reasons for invasion (because they've read such things as the resolution) and agree or disagree based on the reasons. This is in contrast to the hyper partisans and conspiracy theorists who spout such tinfoil hat ideas as "finishing daddys war", "getting iraq oil", 9/11 truth, crusading, etc. Debating such people is a waste of time.

 

[Ockham]

Let me translate the article: FEAR FEAR FEAR BE AFRAID NUCLEAR ANTHRAX TERRORISTS OUT TO GET YOU. I can't believe this kind of crap is considered journalism.

A little incident on September 11th 2001 invalidates your opinion.

 

[Ockham]

Lol @ people who actually believe this.
:lol:

Don't worry, I have a bunker at the end of my garden in preparation :2wave:

I'll laugh harder when and if it happens and you have to use your faux bunker, but I won't laugh for long.

 

[Dirty Harry]

* Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 cease fire, including interference with weapons inspectors. Was not enough reason for invasion
* Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region." Didn't have WMDs and nuclear programs had been halted
* Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population." Other countries are just as bad or worse. Our invasion killed a lot of Iraqis. That's pretty brutal.
* Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people". We provided him with some of those WMDs he used. We used WMDs against other nations too.
* Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the alleged 1993 assassination attempt of former President George H. W. Bush, and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War. Revenge by Bush Jr is not a reason for war. How many US planes were shot down in the no fly zone?
* Members of al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq. The Al qaeda bases in Iraq were located in the north US protected no fly zone. Al Qaeda hated Saddam as much as GWB did.
* Iraq's "continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations. The US supports dictators all over the world and have supported terrorist groups in South America.
* The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, and those who aided or harbored them. Saddam did not aid Al Qaeda
* The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism. Saddam had nothing to do with terror attacks on the US Iran did.
* Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement. Creating a act does not give us the right to invade other countries.

 

[Objective Voice]

Let's put this "warning" into perspective, shall we?

First off, we've known Al-Qaida has been trying to get their hands on fissle materials since before 9/11. Per the article in the OP, NATO has been keenly aware of a "ramping up" of al-Qaida's attempts to make roadside "dirty-bombs" to use against (British) troops in Afghanistan. This is why (per the article) the Obama Administration last year declared nuclear terrorism "the single biggest threat" to international security with the potential to cause "extraordinary loss of life".

Read more: 'Al-Qaida on brink of using nuclear bomb'

Now, what the article doesn't state clearly is has their been any credible evidence since 2008 to suggest that Al-Qaida has come any closer to acquiring the fissle materials needed to create a nuclear device even on a small scale. By all accounts, the OP article is just another "warning", but doesn't lend any new or credible evidence suggesting Al-Qaida has been successful at getting their hands on what they need. I'm not saying don't take the threat seriously. What I am saying is let's not go screaming "Run for the hills! The terrorist are coming to get us!", when there's nothing to suggest an imminent threat is even remotely possible on U.S. soil at present.

Stay vigilent, but let's not go into a panic over old news that's not very credible for present-day conditions.

 

[zimmer]

Let's put this "warning" into perspective, shall we?

First off, we've known Al-Qaida has been trying to get their hands on fissle materials since before 9/11. Per the article in the OP, NATO has been keenly aware of a "ramping up" of al-Qaida's attempts to make roadside "dirty-bombs" to use against (British) troops in Afghanistan. This is why (per the article) the Obama Administration last year declared nuclear terrorism "the single biggest threat" to international security with the potential to cause "extraordinary loss of life".

Read more: 'Al-Qaida on brink of using nuclear bomb'

Now, what the article doesn't state clearly is has their been any credible evidence since 2008 to suggest that Al-Qaida has come any closer to acquiring the fissle materials needed to create a nuclear device even on a small scale. By all accounts, the OP article is just another "warning", but doesn't lend any new or credible evidence suggesting Al-Qaida has been successful at getting their hands on what they need. I'm not saying don't take the threat seriously. What I am saying is let's not go screaming "Run for the hills! The terrorist are coming to get us!", when there's nothing to suggest an imminent threat is even remotely possible on U.S. soil at present.

Stay vigilent, but let's not go into a panic over old news that's not very credible for present-day conditions.

If they could have used a nuke on 911 they would have, and laughed their asses off, as they had after the Tower fell... so I would say "The terrorists are out to get us." There is ample evidence going back more than a decade of their intent.

.

 

[d0gbreath]

We must stand together in our vigilance. We wouldn't want to find out that the smoking gun is a mushroom cloud.

 

[MSgt]

Lol @ people who actually believe this.
:lol:

Don't worry, I have a bunker at the end of my garden in preparation :2wave:

Underestimating this enemy is exactly what shocked the world on 9/11. Before 9/11, nobody was willing to believe that an apocalyptic religious movement was maneuvering about. Even Washington refused to read intel reports throughout the 90s without words like "religion" being scrubbed out. Given half a chance (and a Middle Eastern nuclear Cold War between tribes), our enemies would have no problem burying you under a mushroom cloud as they offer your human sacrifice to their God.

 

[American]

I thought the war in Iraq and the trillion dollars we spent there was supposed to eliminate the threat. Wouldn't it have been better to go after Al Qaeda with all that money?

Are you actually dredging this old **** up? Even Bush admitted he was wrong about WMDs. Damn!!

 

[Dirty Harry]

Even Bush admitted he was wrong about WMDs. Damn!!

I feel so much better that he admitted he was wrong.

 

[American]

I feel so much better that he admitted he was wrong.

Read his speeches and his book.

 

[Erod]

Lol @ people who actually believe this.
:lol:

Don't worry, I have a bunker at the end of my garden in preparation :2wave:

You're right. This could never happen.

Good lord.