Article

2003-12-23 Terror Networks

Al-Qaeda may have trained and licensed pilots in their ranks

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Dan Darling 2003-12-23 12:09:16 AM|| || Front Page|| [11139 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Dirty bombs are not meant to be a casualty-producing weapons system, they are an area-denial weapons system.

The detonation of a dirty bomb would require massive cleanup, but our own US plaintiff's attorneys, acting as a fifth-column (either intentionally or unintentionally, the result is the same), would sue to see to it that the contaminated area was never used again, even if scientifically safe.

Posted by Rivrdog 2003-12-23 1:41:57 AM|| 2003-12-23 1:41:57 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 They might try that, but it won't work. Qaida would detonate the firty bomb in a big city like NY or LA. You aren't just going to declare mile-wide circle in the middle of LA "off limits".

Posted by Charles 2003-12-23 2:48:39 AM|| 2003-12-23 2:48:39 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Iâd still say that Adnan al-Shukrijumah and Jdey are the most likely folks to perpetrate an attack on US soil, given that indications are that theyâre already here. It might well be a good idea to get us seeing their faces on the Terriblevision as often as we now see Jackoâs, just for safe measure ...

Yeah, right. Like reporters are ever going to rank potential terrorism as a bigger story than Whacko Jacko. Besides, showing their pictures would be prejudicial and would be a violation of press neutrality.

Posted by Robert Crawford 2003-12-23 8:24:12 AM|| [http://www.kloognome.com] 2003-12-23 8:24:12 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Charles, why wouldn't you, if that city were contaminated by too high levels of radiation?
The Russkis had to do it at Chernobyl.
And it would remain that way for hundreds of years, if not thousands.
A "dirty bomb" wouldn't outright kill many, but many more would die later from their exposure to radiation and there's, of course, the panic or terror factor.
The fact that Padilla just about got his walking papers from a US court this week would make this type of terrorism now that much more likely to be used.
As long as they're not caught doing it and a US citizen, dirty bombs away, right?

Posted by Jennie Taliaferro 2003-12-23 10:32:42 AM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2003-12-23 10:32:42 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 The results of a "dirty" bomb would be (relatively) easily cleaned up. An area would not likely be contaminated by high levels of radiation. It certainly would not be radioactive for hundreds of years. There would be no deaths immediately (except from the blast itself), and except for a few very unlucky people, most of the radiation-induced deaths would be due to cancer, years later.

Padilla hasn't been released into the wild, he's just been ordered released from military jurisdiction. And that had nothing to do with what type of attack he was planning, and therefore no bearing on the attractiveness of dirty bombs as a tactic.

Posted by Angie Schultz 2003-12-23 11:05:38 AM|| [http://darkblogules.blogspot.com] 2003-12-23 11:05:38 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 I agree that 'dirty' bombs are more of a psychological weapon than a militarily effective weapon, but would the US public see a weapon like this, with the dreaded 'N' word involved, as some kind of Rubicon?

In other words, would a 'dirty' bomb attack on the US, lead to a nuclear response?

Posted by Tony (UK) 2003-12-23 11:39:02 AM|| 2003-12-23 11:39:02 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 Dirty bombs are nothing compared to a large release of anthrax in, say, the NYC subway system. It would likely never be used again.

Posted by Rawsnacks 2003-12-23 11:56:55 AM|| 2003-12-23 11:56:55 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 Authorities raised the terrorist threat assessment over the weekend after new intelligence indicated that operatives of Osama bin Ladenâs al-Qaida terror network, possibly trained and licensed to fly passenger jets, may now be pilots for some foreign airlines, ideally positioning them to carry out suicide attacks, U.S. officials told NBC News on Monday.

Reinforced cockpit doors intended to thwart hijackers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks would now protect any terrorist pilot at the controls, the officials said on condition of anonymity.

The solution is simple: profiling, the way the Israelis do it. The question is, is the U.S. government willing to do it over the objections of idiot organizations like the ACLU and CAIR?

Posted by Bomb-a-rama 2003-12-23 12:40:27 PM|| 2003-12-23 12:40:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 Maybe so, Angie, but dirty bombs are far easier to sneak into the country and into the cities to use.
And perhaps YOU think a radioactive dirty bomb's bad stuff can be cleaned up "pretty easily" but 1) Has that ever been done? Don't think so.
2) Tell that to John and Jane Q. Public and your friends and neighbors.
The Padilla case tells Islamofascist terrorists that they can "work" our legal system to either escape punishment or to actually get free because they haven't actually killed large numbers of Americans.
In my mind, someone who joins Al Queda or any other Islamist terror group, regardless of whether they're an American citizen or not, is indeed an "enemy combatant" and I look forward to Padilla's case being moved.
He's not going free. Not in my country!

Posted by Jennie Taliaferro 2003-12-23 12:50:42 PM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2003-12-23 12:50:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#10 Re: Dirty Bomb Clean Up. Good discussion. You really need to break the problem in two, though. The first problem is the radioactive debris that lands in the streets and roof tops. Rain and wind will take care of most of that in a relatively short amount of time (as compared to halflife). Within a year or two, outdoor radiation will drop to background levels, especially in a city like NY where there is very little exposed soil. The second problem is all of the radioactive debris that gets sucked into building HVAC (heating, ventilation and air conditioning) systems. Some gets stuck in the filters, but some gets dispersed throughout the building. Even if the resulting radiation is within safe limits, I doubt if any such building would ever be occupied again, given liability laws and the general cancer fear in this country.

Posted by 11A5S 2003-12-23 1:09:47 PM|| 2003-12-23 1:09:47 PM|| Front Page Top

#11 Re: Egyptair Flight 990. The Atlantic Monthly had a good article about that, detailing the non-cooperation of the Egytian authorities, etc.

FWIW, Debka reported the July 4, 2002 LAX shooter was a one-time room mate of the pilot of that Egypt air flight.

Posted by Pete Stanley 2003-12-23 2:48:51 PM|| 2003-12-23 2:48:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 Re: Dirty Bomb Clean Up- I have other long term concerns- The second tier of the problems would involve the deflation of that areas housing bubble. Home and building values for that area would plummet, no one moving in, no loans to be had, regional exodus (Think OK Dust Bowl in the 30's) Billions in lost home equity savings boomer are counting on for retirement. Financial effects could extend well beyond the unlucky ground zero zip code. Remove your closest regional economy from the GNP, and it will ripple across the national picture. It will be everytones problem IMHO. (Sorry for the downer prognosis. It really HAS to be prevented even if a few civil liberties get footprints on them.

Posted by Capsu78 2003-12-23 5:15:35 PM|| 2003-12-23 5:15:35 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Jennie, a dirty bomb is no easier to sneak into a city than a nuke. Their advantage is that they're a lot easier to build, using any old radioactive material you might have lying around the lab. A real nuke takes some skill to create.

Yes, explosions like that have been cleaned up before, mostly as a result of lab accidents. Admittedly, this is on a very tiny scale.

You (and others) are correct that perception is nearly everything in this case. Many people would never believe that an area hit by a dirty bomb could ever be "clean" again. Then again, I would wager that you could set off a bomb filled with some easily-aerosolized but completely harmless substance, and simply call it a dirty bomb, and get much the same psychological effect. It's one thing to recognize the danger these bombs pose, and another thing entirely to give into hysteria about them.

Again, Padilla's chosen tactic has nothing to do with his legal status.

Posted by Angie Schultz 2003-12-23 5:23:17 PM|| [http://darkblogules.blogspot.com] 2003-12-23 5:23:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Angie, Sorry, but I'm not buying it.
First of all, I think the terrorists have explored and learned the technology for both "real" nukes and dirty bombs.
How awful a dirty bomb will be is dependent upon the amount of radiation used--maybe it would just be a little heap of cesium from a medical lab, maybe it would be enough uranium or plutonium to cause some real damage, but not enough for a warhead.
IIRC, no one has ever cleaned up a CITY or a whole area of a city that was contaminated before (unless you think cleaning up Ground Zero after 9/11 was no big deal).
If someone merely called something a "dirty bomb," Geiger counters would reveal whether or not they were bluffing, if not the actual injuries sustained.
And Padilla's legal status is being played with because although he's clearly a jihadi member of Al Queda, he's also an American citizen (of sorts.)
Sadly, he got put into the civil domestic justice system before our goverment had worked out how they legally want to handle any killers who were American citizens.
The key thing is that they got him locked up, which is where I hope he will stay.

Posted by Jennie Taliaferro 2003-12-24 7:51:55 AM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2003-12-24 7:51:55 AM|| Front Page Top

08:03 Jennie Taliaferro
08:01 Jennie Taliaferro
07:51 Jennie Taliaferro
01:52 Anonymous
01:16 ruprecht
23:45 4thInfVet
23:42 Les Nessman
23:32 OldSpook
23:30 CrazyFool
23:03 4thInfVet
22:57 Zhang Fei
22:47 tu3031
22:47 Ptah
22:38 Frank G
22:33 Ptah
22:29 john
22:21 john
22:19 tu3031
22:15 4thInfVet
22:11 .com
22:09 doc8404
21:58 4thInfVet
21:56 Ptah
21:41 Zhang Fei