| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Iraq-Jordan | |
| Planned attack in Jordan involved chemical weapons | |
| 2004-04-17 | |
Al-Qaida planned to attack Jordan's intelligence headquarters in Amman with chemical weapons and the U.S. embassy with poisonous gas, reports said. The Saudi daily al-Hayat, monitored in Beirut, Friday quoted official Jordanian sources as saying al-Qaida operative Abu Musaab al-Zarqawi, a Jordanian, sought to destroy the intelligence building with "a highly-destructive" chemical bomb that would have killed as many as 20,000 people.
| |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #5 A couple of months back the Kurds took prisoners infiltrating from IRAN. With encouragement the prisoners told tales of comrades having smuggled three or more chemical bombs from IRAN into IRAQ for the purpose of creating one or more mass casualty events. The infiltrators were members or associates of Ansar al-Islam. |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2004-04-17 1:09:38 PM |
| #4 And if they'd managed to carry out their attack against Jordan, after obviously coming from Syria, who would the Jordanians blame for all that death and destruction? A. Syria B. Al-Qaeda C. Isreal and America If you answered "C" go to the head of the class. (Too bad - a retaliatory strike by Jordan against Syria might have been fun to watch.) |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2004-04-17 11:14:17 AM |
| #3 From Haaretz A terror cell seized over a week ago in Jordan planned to carry out a large-scale chemical attack in a military intelligence base in the kingdom, ... The cell entered Jordan through Syria at the end of March, with three cars laden with explosives and weapons. It is believed that had the cars exploded at the military base, thousands of people would have been killed and all buildings in a radius of one kilometer of the explosion would have been completely destroyed. Jordanian King Abdullah said ... Obviously something serious was stopped in Jordan, but the coverage of this incident is very confusing. It may just be dopy reporters, but the highlighted sections in the story would seem to contradict each other. The second description actually sounds nearer to a low-yield nuke. |
| Posted by: Lux 2004-04-17 7:45:17 AM |
| #2 3 ways of looking at this - none of them good for Assad. 1) The weapons came from Iraq's stockpile and were stashed in Syria and have been there for some time. 2) AlQ is making Chemical Weapons in Syria (and Syria is going along with it - I would think there is no way you can hide that kind of industrial activity) 3) Syria is making chemical weapons. All 3 of these look grim for Assad. On number 1 and 2, Assad has some serious 'splainin to do but can weasel out by destroying the stockpile/AlQ-Factory. But number 3 is the most serious - it puts Syria at risk for "decapitation" along with "decpacitization". Assad had better get his stuff wired together before he forces us to blow it apart. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2004-04-17 1:45:18 AM |
| #1 These are the weapons that Hans Blix says doesn't exist, right? And they didn't have their true beginnings in Iraq, and were moved to Syria at the beginning of the war in April 2003, right? So, let me see. Chemical weapons used by al-Qaeda against our embassy and the King of Jordan. Oh, I got it : Osama prayed for them and they desceneded on a cloud from heaven. Well, Kerry campaign, as long as Osama delivered the prayer at least 300' away from school, like not lighting up a cigarette close, you guys are cool with that scenario. The poison gas didn't originally come from Iraq? Well if Hans Blix buys that, I'm cool with it! Works for me. |
| Posted by: Anon_of_E-LB-Ca 2004-04-17 12:45:26 AM |