Michael A. Levi

Allison cited other authorities, including former Sen. Sam Nunn, who is on record as saying the likelihood of a single nuclear bomb exploding in a single city is greater today than at the height of the Cold War.

Perhaps no one, however, has studied the issue more thoroughly than Allison. In his book, based on the current trend line, he concludes the chances of a nuclear terrorist attack in the next decade are greater than 50 percent. He said former Secretary of Defense William Perry believes that assessment underestimates the risk.

"From the technical side, Richard Garwin, a designer of the hydrogen bomb who Enrico Fermi once called, 'the only true genius I had ever met,' told Congress in March he estimated a '20 percent per year probability with American cities and European cities included' of 'a nuclear explosion -- not just a contamination, dirty bomb -- a nuclear explosion.'"

Discounting arguments that terrorists don't want to take chances with potential failure, Allison explains why the stakes are so high for terrorists to conduct a nuclear attack.

"[T]he effect of a nuclear terrorist attack would reverberate beyond U.S. shores," he says. "After a nuclear detonation, the immediate reaction would be to block all entry points to prevent another bomb from reaching its target. Vital markets for international products would disappear, and closely linked financial markets would crash. Researchers at RAND, a U.S. government-funded think tank, estimated that a nuclear explosion at the Port of Los Angeles would cause immediate costs worldwide of more than $1 trillion and that shutting down U.S. ports would cut world trade by 7.5 percent."

Even a so-called "dud" in nuclear terms would cause more destruction than the most dramatic conventional attack.

"If a terrorist's 10-kiloton nuclear warhead were to misfire (known to nuclear scientists as a 'fizzle') and produce a one-kiloton blast, bystanders near ground zero would not know the difference," explains Allison. "Such an explosion would torch anyone one-tenth of a mile from the epicenter, and topple buildings up to one-third of a mile out."

Allison concludes: "The most important takeaway from this debate is that we must do everything technically feasible on the fastest possible time line to prevent terrorists from getting their hands on nuclear materials. Whether nuclear explosion, fizzle, or total dud, the repercussions of such materials in jihadist clutches are unacceptable."

The largest and most recent study of the effects of nuclear detonations in major U.S. cities showed that, while millions will die, millions of others can be saved with some practical preparations and education.

The three-year study by researchers at the Center for Mass Destruction Defense at the University of Georgia found a concerted effort to teach civilians what to do in the event of a nuclear attack is the best – perhaps only – thing that could save an untold number of lives that will otherwise be needlessly lost.

"If a nuclear detonation were to occur in a downtown area, the picture would be bleak there," said Cham Dallas, director of the program and professor in the college of pharmacy. "But in urban areas farther from the detonation, there actually is quite a bit that we can do. In certain areas, it may be possible to turn the death rate from 90 percent in some burn populations to probably 20 or 30 percent – and those are very big differences – simply by being prepared well in advance."

The government's own National Planning Scenario projects even a small, improvised 10-kiloton nuclear bomb would likely kill hundreds of thousands in a medium-sized city. The carnage was estimated at 204,600 dead in Washington, D.C. – with another 90,800 injured or sickened. Another 24,580 would likely die of thyroid cancer later because the simple compound potassium iodide, which can prevent it, was not made available to civilians in advance of the disaster.

President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and the 9/11 commission have all concluded a nuclear terrorist attack is not only the nation's No. 1 nightmare but also something of an inevitability at some time in the future.

Originally found at http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=55292

Click HERE to subscribe to our newsletter. (Opens a new window.)
We do not share your email address with anyone. Period.

FBI's Mueller: Bin Laden Wants to Strike U.S. Cities
with Nuclear Weapons
Ronald Kessler
Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Osama bin Laden and his terrorist group desperately want to obtain nuclear devices and explode them in American cities, especially New York and Washington, D.C., FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III tells NewsMax.

In a wide-ranging and exclusive interview, Mueller also acknowledged that bin Laden is still active, though isolated. The Director revealed the Bureau believes the terrorist leader continues to communicate with al-Qaida cells, some of which remain in the U.S.

Mueller declined to say how often bin Laden communicates or to elaborate on the substance of his communications.

Other intelligence sources tell NewsMax that U.S. security efforts have forced bin Laden to return to "horse-and-buggy days" -- avoiding electronic communications in favor of using trusted couriers.

But Mueller says though hemmed in, Al-Qaida's paramount goal is clear: to detonate a nuclear device that would kill hundreds of thousands of Americans.

In contrast to homegrown terrorists, al-Qaida is far more likely to be able to pull off such an attack.

Mueller admits the nuclear threat is so real he sometimes wakes up in the middle of the night worrying about that possibility.

"I think it would be very difficult to wipe out the United States, but you'd have hundreds of thousands of casualties from a nuclear device, depending on the size of that nuclear device," Mueller tells NewsMax.

A Lust for Destruction

Al-Qaida could obtain such a device in one of two ways.

"One is to obtain a nuclear device that's already been constructed from one of the former Iron Curtain countries, and the other way is to put together the fissile material and the expertise and do an improvised nuclear device," Mueller says. "And there's no doubt that al-Qaida, if it had the capability, would go down either route to get a nuclear device."

Mueller also has little doubt as to Al-Qaida's likely targets.

"It would be someplace in the United States, in most likely Washington and or New York, depending on how many devices they have. Or both cities," Mueller says.

Because the U.S. has not been attacked in almost six years, Mueller worries that "we are in danger of becoming complacent."

"Al-Qaida is tremendously patient and thinks nothing about taking years to infiltrate persons in and finding the right personnel and opportunity to undertake an attack.

"And we cannot become complacent, because you look around the world, and whether it's London or Madrid or Bali or recently Casablanca or Algiers, attacks are taking place."

Mueller adds the U.S. must remain vigilant. He says our security efforts must "adapt to the new threat landscape."

He then adds: "We are going to be hit at some point. It's just a question of when and to what extent."

From http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/5/14/162425.shtml?s=al&promo_code=3403-1

With over 1.5 million tons of uranium ore in over 1,400 uranium mines, Iran started a global yellowcake race that only the US is ignoring.

hile the world is singularly focused on Iran's production of yellowcake, the former Soviet Union is ramping up production to double its output of uranium ore by 2010—from 2,500 tons per year to 4,500 tons. It plans to increase uranium production sixfold by 2020 by investing over $10 billion in the project. Russia claims if it does not act now, all of its reserves will dry up completely within a decade. In 2005 Russia's three uranium producers mined only 3,325 tons of uranium ore—one-fifth of its annual consumption for its nuclear power facilities and, the Russian Natural Resources Ministry and Federal Atomic Energy Agency noted, its military requirements.

As the reemerging Soviet Union builds its own yellowcake stockpiles, Iran admitted it now has over 1,400 uranium mines within its territory. Iran no longer needs to shop the global blackmarket for uranium for its enrichment program. During a December 18 nuclear technology conference in Mashhad—Iran's holiest city—the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization Deputy Director Hossein Faqihian revealed the extent of Iran's uranium wealth, adding that Iran has only been developing a handful of the available mines. The Middle East Newsline reported that Iran would produce yellowcake to fuel its nuclear reactors, fanning one fable as it crushed the second.

The first fable is that Iran has no military aspirations beyond its national defense when it is obviously determined to build a nuclear arsenal large and deadly enough to [a] enable Wahabbi terrorists all over the world to achieve global Jihad, and [b] it wants to be strong enough to destroy Israel without fear of retaliation from the United States.

The second fable, fanned by the former Soviet Union and America's "former" enemies, was that Iran had no means to secure yellowcake without going to the international community. Thus, they argued, there was a failsafe mechanism in place to monitor what Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was up to—and prevent him from getting enough yellowcake to start a global nuclear war.

As he artfully manipulated the walnut shells to conceal the radioactive pea under each, Faqihian played the 21st century version of Adolph Hitler's 1933 political shell game on the media that wanted to believe Iran also wants "peace in our time." Iran has no nuclear energy industry. Faqihian told the media the first stage in developing nuclear energy isn't the building of nuclear energy plants, it is producing nuclear fuel. "The initial step," he said, "is to have a sufficient supply of uranium to produce yellowcake. The initial process," he added, "is being carried out in Bandar Abbas, in Ardekan and in Isfahan." Faqihian noted that Iran is one of only ten countries in the world that can enrich uranium. Soon it will be one of two or three countries selling yellowcake to terrorist organizations. To date, Iran is enriching uranium not only in Bushehr—the enrichment plant that gained international attention—but also in Arak, Bonab, Chalus, Darkhovin, Esfahan, Fasa, Karaj, Mo'allem Kalaych, Natanz, Neka, Saghand, Tabas, Tabriz, and Tehran. In 2003, Iran began mining uranium in Saghand, which is in the province of Yazd. Geologists have estimated that there are over 1.5 million tons of uranium ore in Yazd.

Iran is determined to make tons of yellowcake from uranium oxide—the first step in enriching uranium. Energy grade—or weapon's grade—yellowcake is uranium hexafluoride. Just as Pakistan is selling nuclear bomb-making technology to its Islamic neighbors, Iran intends to be the supplier of yellowcake to the Muslim world. Their determination to become a nuclear power has launched a yellowcake race in Asia.

Today, 21 countries have the ability to build nuclear devices. Four of them are breakaway Soviet provinces . The nuclear club nations are: China, England, France, India, Iran, Iraq. Israel, Japan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, Mongolia, Netherlands, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Turkey, United States, Uzbekistan and Vietnam. Japan, an overcrowded nation with virtually no natural resources, needs to generate nuclear power. Nine of them—Iran, Iraq, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Tajikistan, Turkey, and Uzbekistan—are oil rich Muslim states whose desire to join the nuclear club is based solely on their desire to convert the world to Islam by force. Mahmoud Ahmadinejah, a politically ambitious man, sees himself as the leader of a nuclear Muslim world. He recently warned Bush-43 that if the United States attacks any more Muslim states in its efforts to annihilate al Qaeda, Iran will attack the United States.

When the Johnson Administration and the Soviet Union promulgated what became known as the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968 they created, in Article IV of that treaty, a loophole large enough to launch third world nuclear missiles through it. Article IV was the magic eraser that technically wiped nonproliferation from the treaty by allowing member States to develop nuclear technology if they intended to use their nuclear know-how to produce nuclear energy and not weapons. Once you possess the knowledge for one, you have the know-how to do the other.

At that point, a nuclear-ambitious nation is one step from possessing the ability to assemble a workable bomb. And since nuclear technician Abdul Qadeer Khan, the "father" of Pakistan's nuclear program, stole the plans to build a nuclear bomb from the Netherlands and used them to develop Pakistan's nuclear arsenal, it's been easy for any terrorist State to get them. Using a Dubai mercantile bank as his agent to collect his fees, Khan has sold his stolen nuclear technology to North Korea, Libya, and Iran.

The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty of 1968 provides rogue nations the cover they need to develop nuclear weapons while pretending to develop nuclear energy as the world watches. That, of course, was the purpose of the loophole. Only, when the treaty was written, both the Soviet Union and the United States believed the loophole would benefit them. Article IV made it clear that"...[n]othing in this Treaty shall be interpreted as affecting the inalienable right of all the Parties to the Treaty to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes without discrimination and in conformity with Articles I and II of the Treaty. All Parties of the Treaty...have the right to participate in the fullest possible exchange of equipment, materials and technological information for the peaceful use of nuclear energy."

North Korea—which was a signatory nation of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty of 1968—insisted, when the Clinton Administration caught them attempting to enrich uranium, that they were simply exercising their right under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to develop nuclear energy. Using dollar diplomacy instead of multi-national statesmanship to force Kim Jong IL to get out of the nuclear missile business, Bill Clinton bribed Kim Jong IL, believing the totalitarian midget actually stopped trying to produce a nuclear weapon. In reality, the Korean dictator never even slowed down. He simply called bomb-making nuclear energy. And that worked for Clinton. He wouldn't have to address the problem militarily because he would be out of office before Kim Jong IL developed a usable nuclear weapon. Jong would be someone else's problem.

Today Kim Jong IL, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejah, has become the world's problem. Both Iran and North Korea—two of the three countries in George W. Bush's Axis of Evil—have become nuclear thorns in the side of the world because one man—Abdul Qadeer Khan. Khan sold stolen nuclear technology to Pakistan, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. Once Saudi Arabia believes it no longer needs the protection of the United States, it will sever its political ties with Washington. Once Iran develops a functional backpack size nuclear weapon—or even an actual suitcase-size nuclear device,it will become the supplier of weapons of mass destruction to every terrorist organization in the world. (Note: the prototype suitcase bombs you've read so much about are actually about the size of two large footlockers, side-by-side. While the US Defense Department experimented with, and successfully developed, smaller size devices, they claim no "practical" designs were ever developed.)

The MAD-concept (Mutually-Assured-Destruction) that protected us from the dictators of the world's belligerent nations throughout the Cold War no longer has a deterrent effect for two reasons. First, while we have dangerous, threatening nations like Iran and North Korea to contend with, our biggest threats today aren't coming from national entities but rogue terrorist groups who "hide" as welcomed guests in the outbacks of the Islamic countries of the Mideast. Second, the Wahabbi extremists who want to kill the infidels are not deterred by the thought of getting killed in the exchange. MAD will not deter them from using nuclear weapons since, in their mind, the martyr's death is more desirable than a long life in abject third world poverty.

NATO long threatened the Soviet Union to go nuclear if conventional defenses in Europe failed. And, the Soviets threatened to go nuclear if America continued building up its forces in Europe. But everyone knew the threats were empty because everyone knew that if the Soviets launched a nuclear strike at Europe or the United States, America and its allies would reciprocate and the northern hemisphere would become a nuclear wasteland that would trigger a year-long nuclear winter.

According to astronomer Carl Sagan (who died of myelodysplasia on Dec. 20, 1996), one of the nation's leading authorities on the aftermath of nuclear war, 25% of the world's population will be annihilated outright in a nuclear exchange between America and its allies in the European Union against the communist bloc nations (which include the former Soviet Union that continues to arm itself for that still-anticipated battle). Another 7% to 8%, Sagan predicted, would die from radiation poisoning and burns within a matter of weeks. And one-third of the survivors, Sagan hypothesized, would perish from long term radiation sickness, famine, pestilence and disease during the nuclear winter that would blanket the Earth like a death shroud for anywhere from one to three years.

What is most interesting about Sagan's analysis of what will happen when MAD fails and the nations of the world engage in their final act of genocide, his predictions of the aftermath of the long-awaited nuclear holocaust is uncannily Biblical. Sagan, the creator of the popular PBS astronomy program, Cosmos, was also an adviser to NASA, a leading member of SETI, a Professor of Astronomy at Cornell University and the Editor-in-Chief of Incanus magazine. He was also an atheist, so thumping the Bible was something Sagan was not likely to do.

Nevertheless, in 1986, Sagan's Cosmos made network TV with a three hour special dealing with nuclear war and the aftermath. The script for the special could just as easily have been written from the Bible as the volumes of scientific data Sagan used to compile his predictions. Sagan's first estimate in the program was that 25% of the population of world would die from the nuclear explosions. His calculation is in complete accord with Rev. 6:8, where the Apostle John wrote that, in his vision, he saw: "...a pale horse, and his name that sat on him was Death, and Hades followed after him. And power was given unto them over the fourth part of the earth to kill with sword, and with hunger, and with pestilence and disease, and with the beasts of the earth..." Sagan further surmised that another 7% to 8% of the world's population would die from radiation sickness within two to three weeks, bringing the total dead to approximately one-third of the population. "The first angel sounded, and there followed hail and fire mixed with blood, and they were cast upon the earth, and a third part of the trees were burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up..." [Rev. 8:7]. (While this verse may appear to suggest that only vegetation is being destroyed, we must remember that prophetically, God has used both trees and grass symbolically for man (Ps. 52:8; Isa. 40:6, 51:12, 56:3; Jer. 11:6; Dan. 4:1-22; 1 Pe. 1:24; Rev. 8:7). In his popular commentary of the book of Revelation, (Loizeaux, 1976; Lecture IXl pg. 149) Dr. H.A. Ironside draws the analogy that "...grass is man in his weakness; man in his littleness: the tree is man in his dignity, in his independence—man lifting himself up against God." It's hard not to agree with Ironside since the judgment found in Rev. 8:7 is directed against mankind, not vegetation. Note: the preceding excerpt as well as the following excerpts are from my book, The Baffled Christian's Handbook.

The logical aftermath of a nuclear exchange, in Sagan's view, is nuclear winter. Nuclear winter occurs when massive amounts of nuclear debris and particles of radiation block the rays of the sun from reaching the surface of the planet, denying both warmth and light—the two elements needed for plant life to grow.

Without sunlight, vegetation—the first link in the biological chain of life—dies, and the ecological balance of the planet is abruptly interrupted. "Immediately after the distress of those days, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give of its light..." [Matthew 24:29 NIV]. (In the KJV, the word "distress" is rendered "tribulation." The Greek word used in that verse is thlipsis, which means "distress" not "tribulation.")

Anyone who has ever watched a docudrama on the effects of nuclear winter should appreciate what the Apostle Matthew said in 24:29.) Sagan theorized that nuclear winter would affect every country on every continent in the world whether they were involved in the actual exchange of nuclear missiles or not. The full extent of the damage is outlined in Rev. 8:12: "And the fourth angel sounded, and a third part of the sun was smitten, and a third part of the moon, and a third part of the stars, so that a third part of them was darkened, and the day shone not for a third part of it, and the night likewise..." It appears from this text that fully one-third of the light of the sun will be lost at least in some parts of the planet. Day would be a virtual twilight. Night would be an opaque shroud. The number of people who will perish during this phase is scripturally recorded only as "many." (Rev. 8:11.) Sagan hypothesized that conditions on Earth at that point would be so bad that the living will envy the dead.

Since Sagan's program aired in 1986, the Soviet Union supposedly collapsed. Credit for the demise of the Soviet Union was attributed to the brinkmanship of President Ronald Reagan since it was Reagan's military spending, together with his unworkable SciFi Strategic Defense Initiative that completely bankrupted the Soviets. In reality, the collapse of the Soviet empire was a ruse. The former Soviet Union is no less an enemy, and no less a nuclear threat today than it was during the Cold War—only today, the American people have been duped by their own government that the Russians are friends when, in fact, the Russian government of Vladimir Putin wants us just as dead in 2007 as the Soviet government of Mikhail Gorbachev did in 1987.

The Bush-43 doctrine of global democracy is not sitting any better in Moscow than it is in Tehran. When Bush, who apparently does not understand that the Soviet breakup in 1991 was a sham, decided to export American democracy to the Ukraine in the hope that it would create a domino effect throughout Eastern Europe. In Moscow, Bush's meddling is viewed with trepidation for the same reason. Bush's détente has brought the geopolitical struggle for global power to the forefront.

Secretary of State Condolessa Rice admits that the United States and Russia are going through "a difficult period," but rising tensions between the two fall far short of a rekindling of the Cold War. "It's time for intensive diplomacy," she admitted, adding that Washington was committed to solving the misunderstandings between Moscow and Washington. "I don't throw around terms like 'the new Cold War,'" Rice said. "It's a big, complicated relationship, but is not one that is anything like the implacable hostility that clouded ties between the United States and the Soviet Union. It's not an easy time in the relationship, but is not also not, I think, a time in which cataclysmic things are affecting the relationship, or catastrophic things are happening in the relationship...Russia," she concluded, "is not the Soviet Union, and this is not a US-Soviet relationship. This is a US-Russian relationship. A great deal has changed." Rice may have had her hands too full in other parts of the world or she would have noticed that more has changed than she apparently realizes. The US-Russian relationship can best be compared to an illicit love affair between two partners who are not ideologically matched and who are cheating on one other with every chance they get.

For the past four years since Bush-43 launched his campaign to militarily democratize the Mideast, Putin has been consolidating power in the Kremlin and pressuring the breakaway provinces to toe the Kremlin line—something viewed by Washington as "democratic backsliding," which led the Bush State Dept. to play a more active role with the Russian Federation States and in European long term defense plans. The former Soviet Union is an ardent practitioner of the philosophy that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Whatever weakens the United States strengthens the former Soviet Union.

Poll your friends and neighbors today and probably 90% of them will tell you that Russia has been reduced to a second-rate nuclear power and that the United States is the only remaining super power. The breakup of the former Soviet satellites is a reality despite the fact that the satellites are on a short leash. They are part of the Russian Federation, which means they haven't really escaped. They gained autonomy and a sense of of independence. Several of the former Soviet satellites which previously had no authority over the nuclear weapons stockpiled within their borders now have sizable nuclear arsenals which they control. They have the power to launch a nuclear strike not only at their former overlords, but at any nation on Earth. And, while these stockpiles are their guarantee that Moscow will not be able to subdue them in the future without Moscow becoming a crater between the Volga and Moskva (Moscow) Rivers, for a cash-strapped former satellite, they are also an asset any oil-rich Muslim nation would pay handsomely to get.

The threat of a thermonuclear war is more real today than it was a decade ago. Only, it is more likely that the aggressor will be a rogue terrorist group supplied with nuclear weapons by Tehran—or by our friends and trading partners in Moscow or Beijing.

From http://www.jonchristianryter.com/2007/070121.html