TERRORISM: Al-Qaida Reported to have Nuclear Weapons

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 8 2004 @ 10:38 PM
link   
The Haaretz Service is reporting that Al-Qaida has obtained tactical nuclear weapons as has been rumored for several years. The Arabic daily is reporting sources close to Al-Quaida that nuclear weapons have been obtained from Urainian scientists while they visited Kandahar in 1998.
 
www.haaretz.com However, the sources said Al-Qaida doesn't intend to use the weapons against American forces in Muslim countries, "due to the serious damage" it could cause. But that decision is subject to change, the sources said, if Al-Qaida "is dealt a serious blow that won't leave it any room to maneuver." Related news coverage... english.aljazeera.net Related AboveTopSecret.com discussion... NYC nuke attack in February? Gadhafi armed al-Qaida with WMD's U.S. Military 'Sure' to Catch Bin Laden [Edited on 8-2-2004 by SkepticOverlord] [Edited on 11-2-2004 by SkepticOverlord]




posted on Feb, 8 2004 @ 11:00 PM
link   
Here is another ATS Thread-Nukes In U.S. Allready

I still believe the possibility of Nukes being in the country are very favorable. Considering Military and Defense budgets were cut by Clinton(As Republicans have used this as an excuse), I would think that if the government was NOT involved in 9-11, it would have been easy to bring them into the country beforehand.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 12:04 AM
link   
It creeps me out to think of how simple it might be to smuggle nuclear material into the USA. I've read about some of the radiation detection technology and other safeguards that are in place, but it isn't much comfort, especially when we can't keep a ba-zillion dollars worth of illegal drugs out.
There are a tons of ways terrorists, foreign or domestic, could kill a lot of people, but there is something chilling about the awesome destructive power of an atomic explosion coupled with the lingering effects of radiation. Even the lasting effects of a "dirty bomb" seems more menacing. Don't know why it affects me so, maybe I am just experiencing a kind of atomic paranoia like that from the Cold War.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 12:43 AM
link   
Well, no city has been yet nuked. And I think that if Al-Q wanted revenge for killing their collegues in Afg, they would have at least tried.

Therefore I believe story of Al-Q having nukes is same of Iraq having WMD.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by surfup
Well, no city has been yet nuked. And I think that if Al-Q wanted revenge for killing their collegues in Afg, they would have at least tried.

Therefore I believe story of Al-Q having nukes is same of Iraq having WMD.


I don't agree. Al-Q and sleeper's would probably have enough material
already. In the chaos of the break-up of the soviet union, it was a
'free for all', for anyone who wanted to make a fast rouble, but
payment on delivery in $U.S. ...of course. lol
P.S. I hope this is NOT true



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 09:35 AM
link   
Debka has an interesting take on the re-run of this story;

DEBKAfiles sources reveal: Al Hayats rerun of report that Made-in-Russia nuclear suitcases were sold to al Qaeda was published to counter Musharrafs attempts to close the books on the nuclear black market run by top Pakistani scientist A. Q. Khan. Western intelligence believes al Qaeda had Pakistani help to obtain its operational nuclear devices and is keen for full exposure.

The pakastani's are going to have a lot to account for as this develops.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 10:27 AM
link   
Ukraine says it never controlled suitcase bombs;
www.alertnet.org...
"During all those years of independence not one Ukrainian scientist even stood close to nuclear warheads which were in Ukraine," said Volodymyr Gorbulin, a presidential adviser.

"Everything was done by specialists from the 12th general command of the Soviet Union's Defence Ministry, and then by Russia's Defence Ministry."

"It is just laughable to talk about Ukrainian scientists (selling nuclear arms)," he said.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Spectre
.. especially when we can't keep a ba-zillion dollars worth of illegal drugs out.


Ask the CIA about the drugs, they swamped the country in drugs when they wanted some money for arms. Funny really that all this 5h!t the USA could be in has been caused in no small part BY the USA!


[Edited on 9-2-2004 by eRnie]



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 02:44 PM
link   
ah so...thats why the US troops are moving out of the city of Baghdad...to 8 encampments/bases round the perimeter of the city (local accessible target site)

Google up Reuters for the story, dtd today



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by sanctum
I don't agree. Al-Q and sleeper's would probably have enough materialalready. In the chaos of the break-up of the soviet union, it was a free for all', for anyone who wanted to make a fast rouble, but ayment on delivery in $U.S. ...of course. lol
P.S. I hope this is NOT true


Then why haven't any U.S. or any city has been nuked by Al-Q?



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 03:54 PM
link   
A powerful weapon should be used to maximum effect at the right time. I assume that if portable nukes are controlled by these extremist freaks then they have a plan in place to use them.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
A powerful weapon should be used to maximum effect at the right time. I assume that if portable nukes are controlled by these extremist freaks then they have a plan in place to use them.


I am sorry, but I don't agree with you. Bush waged a war against terrorism and the first victim was Afghanistan, which also includes top Al-Q members.

If I were a member of that group, naturally I would want revenge; therefore I would nuke or at least try to nuke a U.S. city then and there. I wouldn't want to wait for 10 years to show my revenge for killing my friends.

If you think from Al-Q perspective, most of their group has been killed, meaning U.S. is going to come after the rest, therefore the time when they are not in the hands on U.S. army, is the right time, if not the only time to show their revenge.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Sorry Surfdude, but Afghanistan is better off then before the Americans moved in so your supposed need for revenge is more a reflection of idealism than reality. Thus, anyone engaging in such delusions has no validity in my opinion.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
Sorry Surfdude, but Afghanistan is better off then before the Americans moved in so your supposed need for revenge is more a reflection of idealism than reality. Thus, anyone engaging in such delusions has no validity in my opinion.


I am talking about Al-Q not Afghanistan.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Okay, but why should I care about Al-Q? Does anybody know what it is they want? seriously?



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
A powerful weapon should be used to maximum effect at the right time. I assume that if portable nukes are controlled by these extremist freaks then they have a plan in place to use them.


and with the upcoming elections in which the US people should wake up and rid us all of GWBush, do you think that is the right time to use such weapons? the extremist freaks in washington might just think so!



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
Okay, but why should I care about Al-Q? Does anybody know what it is they want? seriously?


1. Withdraw American troops from their holy-land.
2. Can't remember.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Their holy land? That is laughable. They treat women and children like slaves, mistreat anyone that doesn't agree with them and they slaughter anyone that even hints at a modernization of their world.

These people are not holy, their land may have been but that is over now. They are criminals in my mind.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
Their holy land? That is laughable. They treat women and children like slaves, mistreat anyone that doesn't agree with them and they slaughter anyone that even hints at a modernization of their world.
These people are not holy, their land may have been but that is over now. They are criminals in my mind.


They may not be holy in our standards, but in their custom and tradition they are more than just holy. It is not for us to decide for them.

By holy land I meant Saudi Arabia, of course you know why.

Al-Q thinks that by having U.S. troops where their prophet once was, the land becomes unholy.



posted on Feb, 9 2004 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Why is that because Mohammad was only an arab? He only spoke to the Arab or the Black man? I think these people need to grow up. Why don't they try to learn to run their own country which they are barely capable of doing btw.



new topics
top topics
 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join


ATS Live Reality Remix IS ON-AIR! (there are 10 minutes remaining).
ATS Live Radio Presents - Reality Remix Live - SE4 EP5

atslive.com

hi-def

low-def