You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Terror Networks & Islam
Reports reveal Zarqawi nuclear threat
2005-04-20
By Bill Gertz
Recurrent intelligence reports say al Qaeda terrorist Abu Musab Zarqawi has obtained a nuclear device or is preparing a radiological explosive -- or dirty bomb -- for an attack, according to U.S. officials, who also say analysts are unable to gauge the reliability of the information's sources.
The classified reports have been distributed to U.S. intelligence agencies for several consecutive months and say Zarqawi, al Qaeda's leader in Iraq, has stored the nuclear device or dirty bomb in Afghanistan, said officials familiar with the intelligence. One official said the intelligence is being questioned because analysts think al Qaeda would not hesitate to use a nuclear device if it had one.
As we have discussed here.
However, the fact that the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) has reported the nuclear threat in several classified reports distributed since December indicates concern about it. A DIA spokesman had no comment.
The Jordanian-born Zarqawi, who last year formally linked up with Osama bin Laden's terror network, is thought to be operating inside Iraq and has specialized in suicide bombings and large-scale vehicle bombings. He had several close encounters in recent weeks with Iraqi and U.S. forces.
Senior U.S. intelligence and security officials said in congressional testimony in February that a terrorist attack with weapons of mass destruction -- nuclear, chemical or biological arms -- is likely. CIA Director Porter J. Goss said such a terrorist strike "may be only a matter of time." Dirty bombs are made by mixing radioactive material with conventional explosives.
A report by the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction faulted U.S. intelligence agencies for not understanding al Qaeda's unconventional weapons programs in Afghanistan prior to 2001, when U.S. forces helped oust the Islamist Taliban government.
"There are critical intelligence gaps with regard to each al Qaeda unconventional weapons capability -- chemical, biological and nuclear," said the report, made public March 30.
The commission said bin Laden told a Pakistani newspaper reporter in November 2001 that al Qaeda has both nuclear and chemical weapons. The CIA then "speculated" in a report that the terrorist group "probably had access to nuclear expertise and facilities and that there was a real possibility of the group developing a crude nuclear device," the commission report said. The commission also said U.S. intelligence agencies think development of a radiological bomb is "well within al Qaeda's capabilities."
Dirty bomb - yes, nuclear weapon - not likely.
The reported threat of nuclear terrorism comes amid other intelligence indicating that Zarqawi is planning an attack on the United States. Still other intelligence says Zarqawi was planning a chemical weapons attack in Europe, officials said. In February, U.S. intelligence and security officials said information showed bin Laden had asked Zarqawi to focus future attacks on targets inside the United States. The threat was contained in a classified bulletin to state and local security officials.
Posted by:Steve

#24  We know were Abu Musab Zarqawi's family and friends are. Perhaps a couple of them should loose their heads to some dull sword on al that jizz tv by some unknown guys wearing burkhas.... Threats to the the rest of his nabbed relations unless he turns himself in. Same for binny boy. Its something the Arabs seem to relate to.
Posted by: 3dc   2005-04-20 9:39:40 PM  

#23  "A burgeoning East Boston-based street gang made up of alleged rapists and machete-wielding robbers has been linked to the al-Qaeda terrorist network..."

If it's sexual and pathological, AQ is at the front of the line to join up.
Posted by: jules 2   2005-04-20 7:31:28 PM  

#22  If it must come to pass (Lord we hope it doesn't) make it a blue state. We can start anew.
Posted by: Dennis Kucinich   2005-04-20 4:38:09 PM  

#21  AQ + narco-terrorists, AQ + latin american gangs, AQ + Chavez.... isn't it obvious?
Posted by: thibaud (aka lex)   2005-04-20 3:15:48 PM  

#20  They're already working with at least one gang. From Command Post (see January 6 2005 article) http://www.command-post.org/gwot/2_archives/cat_al_qaeda.html

Boston Street Gang Linked to Al Qaeda
The Boston Herald reported yesterday that federal law enforcement agencies have warned the Boston police that an East Boston street gang with roots in El Salvador is cooperating with Al Qaeda:

A burgeoning East Boston-based street gang made up of alleged rapists and machete-wielding robbers has been linked to the al-Qaeda terrorist network, prompting Boston police to “turn up the heat” on its members, the Herald has learned.
MS-13, which stands for La Mara Salvatrucha, is an extremely violent organization with roots in El Salvador, and boasts more than 100 “hardcore members” in East Boston who are suspected of brutal machete attacks, rapes and home invasions. There are hundreds more MS-13 gangsters in towns along the North Shore, said Boston police Sgt. Detective Joseph Fiandaca, who has investigated the gang since it began tagging buildings in Maverick Square in 1995.

In recent months, intelligence officials in Washington have warned national law enforcement agencies that al-Qaeda terrorists have been spotted with members of MS-13 in El Salvador, prompting concerns the gang may be smuggling Islamic fundamentalist terrorists into the country. Law enforcement officials have long believed that MS-13 controls alien smuggling routes along Mexico.

The warning is being taken seriously in East Boston, where Raed Hijazi, an al-Qaeda operative charged with training the suicide bombers in the attack on the USS Cole, lived and worked, prosecutors have charged.

Posted by: thibaud (aka lex)   2005-04-20 3:14:39 PM  

#19  If they're shrewd operatives, they'd pick cities where it's not likely that the population is going to shoot back, like Chicago or San Francisco.

As long as they stay away from the gangs..
Posted by: BrerRabbit   2005-04-20 3:03:03 PM  

#18  Thats whats really scary. They could pull a "DC Sniper" stunt in a bunch of cities all at the same time.

If they're shrewd operatives, they'd pick cities where it's not likely that the population is going to shoot back, like Chicago or San Francisco.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-04-20 2:41:42 PM  

#17  Though I maintain that the party that dominates the White House and Congress needs to step up first, I'll agree with .com that blame on this goes to both parties.

There's something deeply troubling about the notion of a political class that cannot even grasp what a huge and present danger this porous border poses to our people.

The word "decadence" comes to mind. The system isn't working. We can't wait until 2008 to get serious about this.
Posted by: thibaud (aka lex)   2005-04-20 2:36:33 PM  

#16  Not sure why we bother to win elections when we loose every policy argument or fail to turn it into policy. Borders, judges, Bolton at the UN...

It's called "the absence of a spine".
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-04-20 2:30:47 PM  

#15  We also know that a very effective way to terrorize a population is to use 10-20 jihadists with small arms
Thats whats really scary. They could pull a "DC Sniper" stunt in a bunch of cities all at the same time.
Posted by: Yosemite Sam   2005-04-20 2:11:13 PM  

#14  ... by humans
Posted by: thibaud (aka lex)   2005-04-20 1:46:07 PM  

#13  #6 Los Angeles and San Francisco are already uninhabitable
Posted by: blackhorse   2005-04-20 1:31:31 PM  

#12  Maybe this is naive, but why wouldn't AQ/Z-man and Co use forged identity papers to get their operatives into the country legally by posing as legal aliens or their relatives?

I'm sure there's no shortage of willing narco-politicians and cops in Mexico, Honduras, etc who'd be willing to supply the docs for the right price. Or in Chavez's case, no price at all.
Posted by: thibaud (aka lex)   2005-04-20 1:24:02 PM  

#11  So we know for certain that "bin Laden has asked Zarqawi to focus future attacks on targets inside the United States", and fairly sure that these planned attacks will include at some point a dirty bomb. We also know that a very effective way to terrorize a population is to use 10-20 jihadists with small arms to hit a school or other soft target where children are concentrated-- a mall, for ex.

I can't join the minutemen, and in any case the MSM will do their best to spin it as Son of Militia. We won't have another presidential election for 3 years. How the hell do you get the attention of our political class?
Posted by: thibaud (aka lex)   2005-04-20 1:04:32 PM  

#10  I live in Austin, and I was just teasing with my brother about joining the Minutemen in AZ. Maybe we should start our own militia/border patrol her. But damn, what a huge boder we have.
Posted by: Bill   2005-04-20 12:43:02 PM  

#9  Three months after Dallas becomes uninhabitable. Why couldn't it be Los Angeles, or San Francisco?
Becasue W is from Texas and it would be more symbolic to them to hit his home state.

When the f*** will this country's political class get serious about controlling the border?
After a part of a major US city is rendered un-inhabitalbe, after the left crucifies W and his team, after the MSM wrings their hands saying we deserved this for invading Iraq, after the lawyers file class action lawsuits against the govt for not doing their job, after Congress sings 'God Bless America' again on the capitol steps so they can be attention whores, and finally after citizens start popping off rounds on the illegals on their own (because its bad PR for the govt)
Posted by: Yosemite Sam   2005-04-20 12:12:57 PM  

#8  Nothing new here. Not sure why we bother to win elections when we loose every policy argument or fail to turn it into policy. Borders, judges, Bolton at the UN...
Posted by: SR-71   2005-04-20 12:12:44 PM  

#7  Lets say three months after Dallas, and nine months after Houston. I think it might take a couple of times to drive the idea into the heads of some of the idiots in DC.

After the first there will be a big showing of 'controlling the border' (perhaps along with a general amnesty...) but nonthing practical wil be done.
Posted by: CrazyFool   2005-04-20 11:50:50 AM  

#6  Three months after Dallas becomes uninhabitable.

Why couldn't it be Los Angeles, or San Francisco?
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-04-20 11:13:43 AM  

#5  More than a few people in DC are going to have alot to answer for unless the effort is made now to try and control things on the borders.
Posted by: Tkat   2005-04-20 11:10:06 AM  

#4  Three months after Dallas becomes uninhabitable.

Or, 3 months after Houston and all her refineries are un-inhabitable.
Posted by: BA   2005-04-20 11:10:03 AM  

#3  
When the f*** will this country's political class get serious about controlling the border?


Three months after Dallas becomes uninhabitable.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2005-04-20 11:00:42 AM  

#2  So Zarqawi has motive and means. Where's the area of greatest opportunity to strike at domestic US targets? Perhaps our southern border?

When the f*** will this country's political class get serious about controlling the border?
Posted by: thibaud (aka lex)   2005-04-20 10:30:55 AM  

#1  Maybe this was why Bin Laden claimed something about dying in the belly of the enemy. Everyone at the time thought he was going to do a spectacular attack on the US. Except, I believe he is past due on his threat. Or is He? Does anyone know?
Posted by: plainslow   2005-04-20 10:22:45 AM  

00:00