American Hiroshima
This piece from Breitbart illustrates the grave danger this country faces, and how our unwillingness to deal with the issue of terrorism is going to bring disaster down upon our cringing heads. We were lucky in this case, but may not be so lucky next time. You will note this guy was heading for Arizona-and our almost non-existent Mexican border.
This fits with the chatter the intelligence community has been picking up about an
American Hiroshima; Al-Quada has supposedly been smuggling nuclear weapons across the Mexican border for an attack on the United States. Considering the proliferation of nukes, and the lack of border enforcement, and the unwillingness to deal with our enemies in any fashion but the kindest and most gentle, and America`s war weariness, this possibility does not seem all that unrealistic.
By the by, this piece by J.R. Nyquist brings an interesting perspective on American Hiroshima, and asks a question I`ve not heard before; which came first, the chicken or the egg? Who is assisting, and who is organizing? Did Al-Quada find willing allies or did willing Allies recruit Al-Quada? Nyquist points a damning finger at the Russians, and suggests they may have been behind Al-Quada all along!
According to Joseph Farrah:
The cities chosen as optimal targets are New York, Miami, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Boston and Washington, D.C. New York and Washington top the preferred target list for al-Qaida leadership.
We had better come to our senses in this country quickly, or we will be joining the Japanese Empire in the nuclear dustbin of History.
This fits with the chatter the intelligence community has been picking up about an
American Hiroshima; Al-Quada has supposedly been smuggling nuclear weapons across the Mexican border for an attack on the United States. Considering the proliferation of nukes, and the lack of border enforcement, and the unwillingness to deal with our enemies in any fashion but the kindest and most gentle, and America`s war weariness, this possibility does not seem all that unrealistic.
By the by, this piece by J.R. Nyquist brings an interesting perspective on American Hiroshima, and asks a question I`ve not heard before; which came first, the chicken or the egg? Who is assisting, and who is organizing? Did Al-Quada find willing allies or did willing Allies recruit Al-Quada? Nyquist points a damning finger at the Russians, and suggests they may have been behind Al-Quada all along!
According to Joseph Farrah:
The cities chosen as optimal targets are New York, Miami, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Chicago, San Francisco, Las Vegas, Boston and Washington, D.C. New York and Washington top the preferred target list for al-Qaida leadership.
We had better come to our senses in this country quickly, or we will be joining the Japanese Empire in the nuclear dustbin of History.
posted by Timothy Birdnow | 5:53 AM
5 Comments:
I read WorldNetDaily for some time after it came on-line. I stopped two or three years ago because so many of its predictions about this catastrophe or that catastrophe never materialized. The writing there was wild-eyed and at times ludicrous. But I still stop in every month or so.
How many times and for how many years have we heard about any number of terror cells here, there and everywhere in the US? And each one ready at some secret code sent by some Dr. No to bust forth in violent fury to ravage and maim?
This of course does not mean that this particular story is not true. But WND has written the same story for so many years that eventually it will be right---as an astrologist predicting a divorce of Elizabeth Taylor will eventually be proven right.
The Nyquist article mentions a bunch of ex-KGB types as sources. Are these guys reliable? Have they ever been reliable? Who knows? Not even James Jesus Angleton could figure out who was a mole and who was not.
The Litvinenko fellow claims that Russia is controlled by the KGB. Is this news? Now, how long has ex-KGB master Putin been in power? And Russia has had other KGB types in power too---recall Andropov.
To attribute astounding levels of perception and skullduggery to secret organizations is to remove oneself from reason. If the KGB is so awesome, then why did the USSR fall? Why did the Soviets fail in Afghanistan, a fifth world nation on Russia's very border?
The schemes mentioned by Nyquist are so labyrinthine that even the Minotaur would be confused. When in all of human history has such a plan come to be?
Occam should rule here. So let us simplify: There are bad guys out there. They want to hurt us. They will try anything and deal with anyone to do so.
This is not news.
Could a Hiroshima happen here? Possibly. No laws of physics would be violated by this. But would the laws of reason be violated? Would our enemies really wish to call down upon their heads the response of an America full of hatred and fury?
One might say, "Yes, because our enemies are crazy!" But are they? Would a group of nut-bags be able to defeat up as they are doing in Iraq? Would they have been able to already conquer half of Western Europe? Would crazies have been able to engineer the defeat of a party in the US dedicated to their defeat and to help put in place a party dedicated to their victory?
In light of this, it seems more likely that America is crazy and our enemies political and military geniuses.
Good points all, Mike, and I don`t disagree, but I do have a couple of points on this:
1.WND does often make wild predictions, but I`ve seen this information about AH elsewhere and made by some pretty reputable people-former defense secretary William Perry, for example. New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote about this last year, too. Here is a forum at the Hoover Institute discussing the possibility of terrorists obtaining nuclear materials.
Under Bill Clinton the United States financed the ``Nuclear Cities Initiative`` in which we, the U.S. taxpayers, paid to keep the old Soviet nuclear materials plants running. As a result, Russia continued to crank out enriched Uranium and Plutonium-and the Russian government, not the U.S., ended up with the final product. Furthermore, the U.S. recently paid for Russian decomissioning of their nuclear arsenal-allowing the Russians to build a brand new one with their nuclear material! We paid to decomission, but again, the Russians had final control. This was a massive project; can we account for all those weapons? Doubtful.
2.I`ve never bought into the theory of an all-powerful conspiracy, but it must be pointed out that paranoids sometimes have enemies, too, and it would not surprise me to find former KGB assisting enemies of America. There is still a great deal of anti-Americanism in Russia; just read Pravda. I doubt it would be Russian policy to destroy us, but I doubt that Putin and company would shed any real tears if we were, and there most certainly are former Communists who would be delighted.
3.Mike, I have to disagree with you on the idea that they would be afraid of our response; what would we do? Will we nuke the Russians, when they can plausibly claim that these weapons were stolen from them as a result of the confusion following the Soviet breakup-which we caused? Back in the `80`s I translated a speech (in class) by Mr. Big, Mikey Gorbachev, to the Politbureau in which he addressed America and in which he warned of this eventuality; he pointed out that the U.S.S.R. was full of dangerous weapons which would be blown to the four winds if the Soviet Empire collapsed. His points are still salient.
We could go after the terrorists, but we are already doing that, and I doubt we`ll be able to do more to go after Bin-Laden. Will we bomb Tehran? Sadr City? Damascus? I suspect we won`t know who to hit, and with a large chunk of our government dead we won`t have proper command and control. Will President Pelosi order the military to launch the birds?
The point is, this would be a phantom attack, and retaliation would be difficult if not impossible.
3.Which brings us back to the original article which sparked this whole thing; what was that guy doing with a laptop full of information on nukes? Why was he heading for a border state? I`ve argued all along that if someone wanted to smuggle something large into the U.S. the way to operate would be to land it by ship in Baja, transfer it to a truck, and hire a top immigrant smuggler to take it in for you. The Mexican government has been actively assisting their people to evade U.S. border security, so you have a good chance. Once inside, it should be possible to take it where you wish with proper planning.
Police look at three things when investigating a crime: means, motive, and opportunity. Motive is obvious, opportunity seems likely, means is the only question. Can our enemies obtain nuclear materials? The stuff is out there to be had, consider this, this, and this (it was eventually found that the first story overestimated the amount of enriched Uranium, but the point is that these guys had some.)
My point is, it`s going to happen to us, probably sooner rather than later since we insist on pretending there is no real problem. I often ask why haven`t we been hit at all since the 2001 attacks. That is very odd; we know there are numerous cells here, yet no actions have been taken against us. Why? I would argue that it hasn`t happened not because of our superior defenses, but because something much larger than a shopping center bomb is being planned, and the enemy does not want to strike before they are ready. We are being lulled into a false sense of security-and it has worked! America would NEVER have elected a Democratic cut-and-run Congress if they felt threatened.
Thanks for a great comment, Mike!
Excellent points. All boil down to these:
1. Are rogue nations or groups capable of sending---and willing to send---some sort of nuclear explosion our way?
2. Could such nations or groups mask the return address of such a package?
3. Would such nations or groups take a risk of doing the unthinkable?
4. Who on this earth can predict the reaction of America were this to happen?
If such a thing is our fate, then the outcome is millions and millions dead.
Granted Russia is and always has been our enemy. To pretend otherwise is to be a fool. But what sort of chances is she willing to take to antagonize us? A complete destruction of her allies and the world economic system? Does it matter that she could mask her blame?
Russia is a parasite. She needs the West, she needs America if only as a source of technology. She cannot even extract her Siberian oil without American expertise.
Gorbachev was angling for more US cash in that speech you quote. He was hoping for more dough to shore up his system. Thus, spooky stories about loose nukes all about. How reliable is that stain-headed creep anyway?
It is hip and cool to say that all is different now, that this group or that nation can wreak havoc with nukes. I wonder. Politics change, human nature does not.
I have been reading your writing---been your student---for some time. You are no fool. You understand human nature just fine. So I ask: Do you think that a nuclear strike is going to happen on our soil?
Forget all those experts and such. Do you really think so? If you do, then have you made any preparations? (Which of course assumes, how does one prepare for such an event?)
If we awaken one fine morning without Boston, without Oklahoma City, without St. Louis, what then?
Tim, should we feel as Carthage in 149 BC? Or should we as those Medieval folk who lived during the reign of the great god Pasturella Pestis?
Is this nuclear thing really beyond the control of America and her resources? Will the existence of our Republic really be determined by ignorant and ghoulish thugs? If so then what is to be done? Do we kill more terrorists? Do we eliminate a nation or two?
What I will do is live my life. What happens, happens. We live, we love, we vote, we pray---and Christians are taught to pray much. We know that the final outcome will not be decided by some politico in Washington or some practiced killer in Tehran.
The outcome was decided 2000 years ago on a Cross.
Great response, Mike, and points all well taken.
I think that a nuclear attack in America is possible but not unpreventable. We just aren`t doing what needs to be done to prevent it. Too many Americans are overly concerned with the breakup of Brittany and what`s-his-name, or with who wins Dancing With Celebrities, and do not want to be bothered with these details. How is it that we can be arguing over securing the borders? No rational nation-especially one at war-would fail to do this, yet we continue to scrap about a no-brainer. Ditto this business about Gitmo, about interrogation of prisoners, etc. In short, the national conversation is NUTS! We have practically invited our enemies in to attack us, and they must be laughing themselves silly at the angst and hand-wringing going on in this country.
That said, I agree with your point; we need to live our lives and not allow fear to rule over us. I`ve made some emergency preparations, but have not exactly moved into a bomb shelter. We should not let the enemy dominate us in such a fashion. Still, it makes sense to take a few basic steps; keep extra food and water around, have a first-aid kit, etc. I`m fortunate, since I find all sorts of useful items abandoned by people while doing my job, and have been able to supply myself with some emergency goods.
You are absolutely right, Mike; this was all resolved two thousand and six years ago. In the end, we aren`t the ones in control. But I fear we may take the consequences for abandoning our faith. God sends people to lead, or he allows a Nation to sink of it`s own weighty sins. I hope to help in a small way to lead us through the Valley of the Shadow of Death. That`s why I started writing in the first place; I wanted to make a contribution (however small) to restoring some sanity, to help wake people up to what they are doing-and failing to do.
I don`t think we really disagree; you favor a more optimistic view of things, and want to keep America at peace. Is there any benefit to worry? Your point is well taken. I fear sloth, and I fear that too many Americans have become very complacent-which is why the Democrats won the last election. Half of the country doesn`t even believe we are at war. THAT has got to change, or we will pay a great price.
Mike, I always greatly profit from reading your thoughts! Thanks!
Oh, and here`s a harebrained idea; perhaps we should warn the terrorists that we will nuke Mecca if anything similar happens to one of our cities? Obviously, we should pass this along quietly via the Saudis...
Would this suggestion trigger all-out war with Islam? (Obviously our actually doing it would.) Maybe it would be for the best; get everyone out in the open.
Post a Comment
<< Home