US Congressman Bob Goodlatte

Chairman of Agriculture
2240 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
(202) 225-5431
(202) 225-9681 fax

US Senator Patrick Leahy

Chairman Senate Committee On Juriciary
433 Russell SOB
US Senate
Wahsington, D.C. 20510

US Congressman James Sensebrenner

House Committee On Judiciary
120 Bishops Way, Room 154
Brookfield, WI 53005-6294
(262) 784-1111
Fax: (262) 784-9437

Chairman Devin Nunes

U.S. House of Representatives
US House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence
US Capitol Building
Washington, DC 20515-6415

Chairman Michael McCaul

House Committee On Homeland Security
U.S. House of Representatives
H2-176 Ford House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515


Chairman Darrell Issa

Subcommittee Courts, ....
House Judiciary Committee
2269 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: 202-225-3906

Congressman Jim Jordan

Subcommittee On HealthCare
1524 Longworth House Office Bldg
Washington, DC 20515
T (202) 225-2676

Chairman Jason Chaffetz

House Oversight Committee
2157 Rayburn HOB
Washington,DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-5074
Fax: (202) 225-3974
Exhibit C Submitted As Evidence And
Testimony To Congress-Exclusive Jurisdiction
You are looking at part of Exhibit C a United States source document submitted as Evidence and Testimony to the several committees of the United States Congress since 1986. The survey data is occassionally used for creation of federal statutes; considering possible improvements in operation of federal programs; and study of operational field impediments. Because of the Separation of Powers found in US Constitution and various Rules of Congress it not possible to serve summons, subponeas; or other court process on Capitol Hill and persons attempting to can be detained and arrested by Capitol Police or otherwise sanctioned. Obviously the only legal reviews which can occur would require permission of the Chairman of a Congressional Committee reviewing the matters at public hearings
Standing US Court ORDERS
And Black Letter Law
Beginning in 1997 the Social Security Administration issued an Executive ORDER or Fia before a USDC, WDT link restricting legal discussions to places and times authorized by statute and have successfully defended their statutory rights from a over 500 challenges A small host of poor bastards who appear to have challenged the Sovereign rights of the Social Security Administration or Congress appear to have been thrown down the political 5 ton wood chipper and the confirmed kill list appears to include at least 1 or 2 federal judges; maybe a couple of cabinet level officers; a bunch of US Attorneys and a many more lesser persons. Whispered in the background are the strange, sacred, and holy legal incantations muttered by federal officials including Title 18 USC 402 Contempt; Title 18 USC 1509 Obstruction Court Order; tampering with federal agency, Contempt of Congress...

US Senator Chuck Grassley

Chairman Senate Committee On Juriciary
433 Russell SOB
Wahsington, D.C. 20510
Phone: 202-224-7703

US Senator Ron Johnson

Chairman Senate Oversight
Whistleblower
340 Dirksen SOB
Washington, DC, 20510
(202) 224-4751

Congressman Mike Thompson

House Ways and Means Committee
2300 County Center Dr. Suite A100
Santa Rosa, CA 95403

President Bill Clinton

The Whitehouse
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500

President George Bush Jr

The Whitehouse
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500

President Barrack Obama

The Whitehouse
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500
Table Of Contents
Questions on Strategic Weapons
1. Topic #1 Bush Administration Attempt Restart Cold War-"Russian Monroe Doctrine

2. Topic #2 Russia to build missile defence shield and renew nuclear deterrence

3. Topic #3 Age Related Defects In US Arsenal

4. Topic #4 Rebuilding Defective Nuclear Weapons

5. Topic #5 US Calls Chinese Nuclear Threat 'Irresponsible

6. Exhibits #6 Did Splinter Factions In Both Political Parties Attempt to Decapitate The Government?

7. Topic #7 Military Coup Defused-Nuclear Dry Run Discovered 2008

8. Topic #8 Sampson Option & Israeli Abuse of KH-11

9. Topic #9 Congressional Investigation Into Suitcase Sized Nukes

10. Topic #10 Assorted Other Threats

Senate Select Subcommittee Intelligence

211 Hart Senate Office Building,
Washington, D.C. 20510
Nuclear & Strategic Threats Concerning The US
If you live in an age where megaton nuclear ordinance travels at 17,000 mph or your adversary can emplace suitcase size nukes and you believe your government is a long term military target for eventual nuclear attacks you would naturally take preventive measures? The United States did create the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to run the government if needed during national crisis.
Long Term Policy Recommendations
One of the easiest deterrrant means would be to have Washington DC be the historic capitol and most of the rest of the government reside elsewhere for instance;

1. The Senate and US House of Representatives could easily reside in different cities in a different state legislature building each year

2. The Office of the President would be in the central US in another city.

3. The several US Departments could be moved to other cities.

Although any person or reasonable or common intelligence could easily surmise that Washington D.C. would eventually be a victim of a nuclear attack at some point in time those in government found their ease and convience to be more important than compelling national interest as some of these articles cited below suggest:


New Bush Administration Policy

Topic #1 Bush Administration
Attempt Restart Cold War-"Russian Monroe Doctrine"

The Bush Administration is reportedly placing a stratetic weapons system on the border of the Russian Republic-who reportedly are flying nuclear bomber operations off Alaska; threatening to nuke US Patriot Missle Sites in Poland; and have Russian Bomber overflying US Carriers. Russian interest are best described as similar to US Monroe Doctrine to prevent foreign powers to colonize or build strategic weapons systems in areas directly adjacent to their borders. The United States has previously asserted this doctrine in Grenada Nicaragua; and during the Cuban Crisis

With the Bush Administration leaving office in several months it appears that the next Administration will be saddled with a major arms race and according to Article #15 a defective nuclear arsenal.

Topic #2 Russia to build missile defence
shield and renew nuclear deterrence


The Times September 27, 2008

Russian President Medvedev

Topic #2 Russia to build missile defence
shield and renew nuclear deterrence
Russia to build missile defence shield and renew nuclear deterrence (RIA/Reuters)
From The TimesSeptember 27, 2008
Tony Halpin in Moscow

Russia is to build new space and missile defence shields and put its armed forces on permanent combat alert, President Medvedev announced yesterday. In a sharp escalation of military rhetoric, Mr Medvedev ordered a wholesale renovation of Russia’s nuclear deterrence and told military chiefs to draw up plans to reorganise the armed forces by December.

He said that Russia must modernise its nuclear defences within eight years, including the creation of a "system of air and space defence". The announcement puts Russia in a new arms race with the United States, which has infuriated the Kremlin by seeking to establish an anti-missile shield in eastern Europe. The US argues that the shield is aimed at rogue states such as Iran, but Russia is convinced that its own security is threatened.

Mr Medvedev told military commanders that "all combat formations must be upgraded to the permanent readiness category" by 2020. He added that Russia would begin "mass production of warships, primarily nuclear cruisers carrying cruise missiles and multi-purpose submarines". "A guaranteed nuclear deterrent system for various military and political circumstances must be provided by 2020," he said after attending military exercises in the southern Urals region of Orenburg.
Tensions with the West have soared to new levels since Russia’s war with Georgia last month. Mr Medvedev told army chiefs that the conflict showed that "a war can flare up suddenly and can be absolutely real". The military build-up was announced as Russia wages a struggle to prevent Georgia and Ukraine entering Nato. The military alliance is due to consider fresh applications from the two former Soviet satellites in December. Russia also openly declared its ambition to rival the US in Latin America yesterday as Prime Minister Vladimir Putin promised to sell nuclear technology to Venezuela.

Mr Medvedev met Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez in Orenburg. Tthe Kremlin issued a statement calling their relations a "counterweight to US influence" and added that Venezuela sought "a widening of our presence in the region". "We are ready to consider opportunities for cooperating on the use of atomic energy," Mr Putin told Mr Chavez during earlier talks in Moscow. "Latin America is becoming a noticeable link in the whole chain of the emerging multipolar world. We will pay more and more attention to this area of our economic and foreign policy."

The announcement of atomic assistance is certain to alarm Washington. Moscow has already angered the West by delivering enriched uranium to Iran for its Russian-built power station, amid fears that Tehran is secretly building a nuclear bomb. Venezuela’s fiercely anti-American leader has long coveted his own nuclear energy programme, but insists that he has no desire to build an atomic bomb. He lavished praise on Mr Putin during his second visit to Russia in as many months. "Today, like never before, all that you said on the multi-polar world becomes reality. Let us not lose time...The world is developing fast geopolitically,” Mr Chavez said.

The Kremlin despatched its nuclear-powered warship Peter the Great and a submarine destroyer, Admiral Chabanenko, to Venezuela on Monday for military exercises in the Caribbean, which is traditionally America’s backyard. It is Russia’s first naval mission to Latin America since the end of the Cold War. The move was seen as a retort to the passage of American warships through the Black Sea to deliver aid to Georgia after the war. It came just days after Russian strategic nuclear bombers visited Venezuela for the first time, in what Mr Chavez described as a warning to the US.

Mr Medvedev said that the joint naval exercises between Russia and Venezuela would demonstrate "the strategic nature of our relations". The Kremlin earlier announced that it was giving Venezuela a $1 billion loan to buy Russian weaponry. Mr Chavez has already struck deals worth $4.4 billion since 2005 to buy jet fighters, tanks and 100,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles. The two countries also edged closer in energy relations after Russia’s Gazprom and Venezuela’s state-run oil company struck a deal to create an "oil and gas consortium". Venezuela is the ninth largest oil producer in the world and a major supplier to the US, while Russia is the second largest oil exporter and has a quarter of global gas reserves. Mr Chavez said that the joint venture would be "the biggest oil consortium on the planet”.


President Obama

Meets With Russians

F-22 Stealth Fighter
Topic #3 Obama Administration
Ends Production of F-22
During the Reagan Administration "Star Wars" helped bankrupt the Soviet Union. Faced with a technology which created 5th generation fighter aircraft with extensive stealh capability the Russians opted for an easy nuclear win or more probably a fail safe capability. No matter how much damage their country absorbed their nuclear ordinance was and is still well protected on American soil.

After meeting with the Russian Premier in 2009 the Obama Administration canceled further production of F-22 as a relic of the cold war. F-22 reportedly has Oxygen system problems and has never been flown in combat

Topic #3 Age Related Defects In US Arsenal


Discover Magazine

November 11, 2005
Topic #5 How Defective Is the US
Nuclear Arsenal?
This Article from Discovery magazine review the detoriation of the US nuclear arsenal as it gets very old and warheads become filled with impurities. Although most of us are not experts on nuclear ordinance we might question the wisdom of threatening another country whose nuclear arsenal is believed to be state of the art? The Soviet SS-18 Code named Satan carried a 25 megaton device and the SS-19 was supposed to be capable to carrying a 100 megaton device which could for instance kill everything in the State of Ohio. So we might suggest before someone starts a nuclear war-first make sure you are still a nuclear power:

"The American Century was built on a toxic metal, one we still know very little about"

By David Samuels
DISCOVER Vol. 26 No. 11 | November 2005

The American Century was built on a toxic metal, one we still know very little about

Between 1951 and 1992, the United States set off nearly a thousand nuclear bombs at the Nevada Test Site, an empty and awesome stretch of desert whose cratered surface resembles the face of the moon. Throughout the site's 1,350 square miles are the remains of houses, fortified bunkers, and parking garages, structures built to see how much damage bombs of various sizes could do. Visible amid the detritus of bomb blasts are simple examples of plutonium's power
As I toured the desert recently with some of the men who specialize in the arcane art of detonating nuclear weapons, it occurred to me that the Americans who mastered plutonium had plenty in common with the smiths and chemists who first mastered iron, bronze, copper, and steel. Every great empire in history, from the Greeks to the British, has been founded on an ability to manipulate metal into new and ever more lethal forms.

Plutonium, the metal that made the American Century possible, was manufactured by thousands of people, organized by a rich, centralized democratic state devoted to the advancement of military science. The deadliest products of this effort are thousands of hollow grapefruit- size plutonium "pits" that power America's nuclear weapons. Our arsenals house roughly 24,000 plutonium pits, of which some 10,600 are inside nuclear weapons. Each pit, slightly warm to the touch, has about 30 parts, which are often coated with nickel or beryllium. Engineered to extraordinary tolerances, the parts fit together like a three-dimensional puzzle.

Yet this metal largely remains a mystery even to the scientists who know it best. In "An Update," one of several dozen recently published papers on plutonium by scientists at Los Alamos National Laboratory, George Chapline and James L. Smith write: "After more than 50 years of plutonium research at Los Alamos, we might be expected to understand the strange properties of this metal. Instead, we are still stumped."

Plutonium, element 94 on the periodic table, is as old as the universe itself, formed in the blowoff from ancient supernovas, massive stars that explode after exhausting their fuel. The thermonuclear reactions in the stars created extraordinary heat and pressures that ripped small atoms like hydrogen and lithium apart and recombined their parts to produce larger atoms like plutonium. Because plutonium has a half-life of 81 million years, nearly all traces of it had vanished by the time Earth cooled 4 billion years ago. Plutonium reappeared on Earth for a brief moment 2 billion years ago in Africa, in what is now Gabon, where plant life oxidized and reduced a deposit of 10 tons of uranium oxide to uranium ore. Fission in the uranium created a smaller deposit of plutonium, which decayed back into uranium.

The first meeting between plutonium and mankind occurred on February 23, 1941, when a young chemist named Glenn Seaborg used a chemical process to isolate a minute quantity of element 94 in a laboratory in Berkeley, California. Seaborg named it after Pluto, the most recently discovered and least-known planet in the solar system. Pluto is what the Romans called the Greek god Hades, lord of the underworld. Seaborg chose the letters Pu as a joke, which passed without notice into the periodic table.

Toxic, mysterious, and possessing the ability to combine with nearly every other element in the periodic table, plutonium would be at home in the underworld of the Greeks or in Dante's Inferno. It can be as brittle as glass or as malleable as aluminum. Plutonium-239, a variant of the element Seaborg discovered, is 1.7 times as likely as uranium to fission, making it the perfect fuel for a nuclear bomb. Two pounds of the metal contain the potential energy of 20,000 tons of high explosive, a millionfold increase over the power of chemical explosives like TNT.

The first usable quantities of plutonium were produced in February 1944. The metal delivered to Los Alamos was unlike any other on Earth. The plutonium corroded nearly every container it was put in. At only 300 degrees Fahrenheit, it could spontaneously ignite, making it all but impossible to shape or roll. Gallium was added to help it retain a cubic crystalline state. While pure plutonium at room temperature fractured like cast iron, the alloy resembled steel. It could be cast, pressed, machined, and assembled into shapes designed by the engineers of the Manhattan Project.

The basic idea that guided the working of the first bomb was so simple that any smart high school student could understand it. A sphere of plutonium was surrounded by a mantle of high explosives. Detonated, the explosive crushed in on the plutonium. As the density increased, the distance between the nuclei decreased, setting off a chain reaction. On July 16, 1945, the Trinity test at Alamogordo, New Mexico, proved the power of plutonium-based weapons. As the blast unfolded, physicist J. Robert Oppenheimer, leader of the Manhattan Project, quoted from the Bhagavad Gita: "Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.
"
Religious references in the plutonium age were hard to avoid, even for die-hard materialists like Oppenheimer. Plutonium-based weapons offered ultimate power and operated on a plane of existence not visible to the naked eye. Early prophets promised safe, cheap plutonium energy for all mankind. That vision never materialized. Instead, a vast weapons complex grew in the United States in great secrecy, a world of laboratories, testing sites, and production facilities that produced more than 100 tons of plutonium. The plutonium and tritium that fueled America's nuclear arsenal were cooled by the Savannah River at Aiken, South Carolina, and the Columbia River at Hanford, Washington. Pits for bombs and warheads were designed at Los Alamos and at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California. The Sandia National Laboratories in New Mexico and California designed the weapons systems that could carry the bombs to their targets.

Today the majority of America's plutonium arsenal is kept in sealed bunkers near Amarillo, Texas the last stop on the assembly line that produced finished nuclear weapons. Plutonium pits were formerly made at the Rocky Flats Plant in Colorado, which was shut down in 1989 for gross violations of environmental law. Since then, the United States has lost the ability to mass-produce pits for weapons, and the reliability of some of our existing weapons has become questionable. As plutonium decays, it produces helium, which spreads through the l attice, causing the metal to swell. Over time, the explosive power of the plutonium decreases, and bombs stop working in the way they were designed.

In place of testing live warheads in the desert, our national laboratories now employ complex computer simulations to try to predict how aging plutonium-based weapons might behave. With the end of the test program, a degree of certainty has been lost. Would our nuclear warheads actually detonate if the president chose to use them? Probably but it is impossible for us to know for sure. What is clear is that, in less than a decade, all the weapons in the American nuclear arsenal will have outlived their expected lifetimes, and the last American nuclear weapons designer with test experience will have retired from the laboratory. The end of the plutonium age may lie on the not-so-distant horizon.

The end of the plutonium age means the end of the stabilizing logic that followed World War II. In a world that has been remade by a band of fanatic hijackers, the notion of nuclear deterrence seems increasingly quaint. As the plutonium pits decay and the old security structures collapse, the apocalyptic potential inherent in the metal becomes more immediate and terrifying, and the illusion that we are its master becomes ever harder to sustain.
Plutonium Is Forever
There are 260 tons of weapons-grade plutonium-239 in the world enough to build 85,000 warheads. The United States has roughly 90 tons, most of which is stored at Department of Energy sites. Most information about plutonium storage remains classified.

US Senator John McCain
Discussion of Technical Errors
Of A New Arms Race...
If the United States and Russians have reached technological parity through the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty and 50 year arms race where is the profit in restarting the problem? As a result of being harassed by the United States the Russians announced they are building a whole new class of nuclear rockets; soviet submarines; and other offense weapons.

As US Senator John McCain explained during his recent run for the White House the United States will shortly lose the technical ability to build nuclear reactors because the folks with the technical knowledge have retired. Hope the United States can ask the British or Israeli's to build new bombs because the technical skills needed here in the US have probably long since retired.

New Bush Administration Policy
Topic #6 Bush Administration
Upgrades US Arsenal 2007
1. Various groups within the Chinese Government have threatened to hydrogen bomb 100 American cities twice in the last 11 years if the US opposes an invasion of Taiwan.

2. While American experts voice concerns over the US aging nuclear stockpile and deteroriating "plutonium pits" the Chinese appear to be expanding their extensive nuclear arsenal and have no moral problems offering to use the weapons on American soil at least "unofficially".

3. In March 2, 2007 the Bush Administration called for upgraded nuclear weapons and a repair of the US nuclear arsenal which is a good idea if you don't want to learn to speak Chinese

Article From USA Today
U.S. dismantles ‘monster’ B53 Nuclear Warhead
by Dan Vergano on Oct. 25, 2011,
USA Today News
Closing a Cold War chapter, technicians Tuesday dismantled the last of the most powerful U.S. nuclear bombs ever built. The B53 nuclear bomb was made to deliver a 9-megaton blast about 600 times more powerful than the one that destroyed Hiroshima in 1945.

Starting in 1962, about 300 of the 10,000-pound, minivan-size bombs were made, meant to be carried on bombers kept on 24-hour alert at the height of U.S.-Soviet tensions. “Obviously, this was one of the largest weapons we had. It was a big one,” says Greg Cunningham of the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration’s Pantex Plant near Amarillo, Texas. At the plant, a ceremony marked the removal of high explosives from the last of the final 50 B53 bombs held in a reserve after the weapon’s 1997 retirement.

“Monster really is the word. It would have created a fireball several miles wide,” says noted nuclear history author Richard Rhodes. “The world is a safer place with this dismantlement,” said NNSA chief Thomas D’Agostino, in a statement. “The B53 was a weapon developed in another time for a different world.”

The B53 was a thermonuclear device: An atomic bomb set off a larger hydrogen one, creating a tremendously powerful blast intended to annihilate Russian command bunkers deep underground. It was replaced by smaller, more accurate “bunker buster” weapons. Uranium from the dismantled bombs will be sent to the Energy Department’s Oak Ridge, Tenn., facility. “The good news is we are taking some of our old nuclear weapons apart,” says Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), a national security think tank based in Washington, D.C. “On the other hand, it’s not like we still don’t have plenty.” Bomb dismantlement work at the Pantex plant, scheduled until 2022, he notes, has been slowed by weapon modernization work underway there.

Under 2010 treaty obligations, U.S. active strategic nuclear warheads will drop to 1,550 by 2018. About 5,000 nuclear weapons now remain deployed by the U.S. military, Kristensen notes. Although President Obama has called for lowering nuclear weapons numbers, the administration urged a Senate committee this month to support efforts to modernize U.S. nuclear weapons, an estimated decade-long $85 billion commitment. “We’re not losing any military capability with this (B53) weapon’s disappearance,” says nuclear security expert Micheal Levi of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Copyright © 2010 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.

Topic #4 Rebuilding Defective Nuclear Weapons


Y-12 National Security Complex

Estimate for uranium facility goes
from $600 million to $11.6 billion

It would be one of the largest nuclear weapons investments since World War II. A watchdog group says the work – which may not be needed – can be done for less elsewhere.

By Ralph Vartabedian
September 24, 2013, 10:48 p.m.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-bomb-factory-20130925,0,6160248.story

The cost of a proposed uranium processing facility for nuclear weapons in Oakridge, Tenn., has soared as high as $11.6 billion — 19 times the original estimate — even as critics accuse the Energy Department of overstating the need for spare bomb parts. Under a proposal unveiled in 2005, the manufacturing plant at the Y-12 National Security Complex would produce new uranium cores for the nation's stockpile of aging hydrogen bombs. But not long after the plan was disclosed, with an estimated cost of $600 million, the price tag began to climb. Now, the processing facility would be among the largest investments in the U.S. nuclear weapons infrastructure since the Manhattan Project, which developed the atomic bomb during World War II.
The facility has drawn sharp criticism by the Project on Government Oversight, a Washington watchdog group, which advocates that the plan be scrapped. In a report issued Wednesday, the group cites a little-noticed report by the Army Corps of Engineers that made the $11.6-billion cost estimate and argued that the work could be done more cheaply at e xisting facilities. The Energy Department has not disputed the corps' estimate, although its own official price tag is $4.2 billion to $6.5 billion. A spokeswoman at Y-12 said the corps' estimate was the highest of three outside agency reviews of the project.

The escalating cost reflects questions that have troubled the Energy Department's nuclear weapons complex since the end of the Cold War: How long will the Pentagon need a stockpile of nuclear weapons, and how can the massive industrial network needed to maintain the bombs be kept going at an affordable level? The Y-12 plant is the only U.S. facility that melts, c asts and machines bomb-grade uranium. About 7,000 people work there. The facilities, massive brick structures the size of football fields, were built 70 years ago during World War II. The Energy Department says they are "genuinely dilapidated." Similar problems with aged facilities exist at the Pantex nuclear weapons facility in Texas, Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, among other places.

But Peter Stockton, lead author of the new report and a former Energy Department special investigator, disputes the need to replace so many uranium cores, known as secondaries. The Energy Department delayed its plans for a new plutonium facility in New Mexico after acknowledging that it had overestimated the number of plutonium triggers it would need for weapons, he noted. The Energy Department has failed to account for reductions in the size of the U.S. weapons stockpile and has underestimated the resiliency of the weapons parts, Stockton said. "They can't say how many secondaries we will need," he said.
President Obama signed an agreement with Russia to cut each side's weapons stockpile to 1,550 by 2018, down from about 6,000 weapons about a decade ago. Stockton said the uranium work could be done more cheaply at existing facilities at Y-12 or at Pantex, where nuclear weapons are disassembled and repaired.
The nation's three types of nuclear bombs are slowly undergoing life-extension programs, in which some parts are replaced and updated. Many of the weapons are more than 30 years old; they can no longer be tested under international treaties to determine conclusively that they will work. Some of the parts are virtual museum pieces, such as the B61 gravity bomb's fusing system, which still uses vacuum tubes. It is generally accepted that the bombs need to be refurbished. But all of the three design types already would be refurbished by the time the new uranium facility is fully operational in 2038, the date cited by the Army Corps of Engineers.

The corps did not release its cost estimates, but the Government Accountability Office cited them this summer in a briefing addendum. The GAO, an arm of Congress, found that the Energy Department had made a number of errors in its cost estimates, including pricing a building design with a roof 13 feet too low to accommodate manufacturing equipment. That resulted in a $540-million increase in the project. After that, the GAO said it was reducing its confidence in the Energy Department's cost estimates. The GAO also found that the department had anticipated that Congress would provide much higher annual funding than was realistic. In addition, the GAO said, a longer construction schedule would drive up the price. In another report released Tuesday, the libertarian Cato Institute said the cost of the nation's nuclear force could be reduced by eliminating the historic reliance on delivering bombs by three different systems: submarines, bombers and land-based missiles. Cato defense analysts Benjamin Friedman and Christopher Preble say that submarine-launched missiles are more accurate than land-based missiles and can provide deterrence by themselves at a much lower cost. Friedman and Preble suggest that the Air Force not modernize its fleet of intercontinental ballistic missiles — part of a plan that, they say, could save $20 billion without jeopardizing the nation's deterrence against an attack.

ralph.vartabedian@latimes.com


Chinese Army Major General Zhu Chenghu

Topic #5 US Calls Chinese
Nuclear Threat 'Irresponsible

The Bush administration Friday labeled as "highly irresponsible" a Chinese general's reported threat to use nuclear weapons if the United States became involved in a conflict over Taiwan. The State Department said it hoped the remark did not reflect official Chinese policy. Officials here are responding in measured tones to an assertion by a Chinese general that Beijing would resort to the use of nuclear weapons if the United States became involved in a cross-strait conflict over Taiwan.

Two newspapers quoted Chinese Army Major General Zhu Chenghu as making the remarks Thursday in Beijing to a group of Hong Kong-based correspondents. The general, on the faculty of China's National Defense University, said he believed China would have to respond with nuclear weapons if the United States used precision conventional arms against Chinese forces near Taiwan. He said he was expressing his personal views and not the official policy of Beijing, which has long said it would not initiate the use of nuclear weapons in any conflict.

Topic #5 State Department Response


Spokesman Sean McCormack

State Department

State Department Response

At a news briefing here, State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack called the remarks "highly irresponsible" and said he hoped they did not reflect the views of the Chinese government: "The United States is not a threat to China," said Sean McCormack. "We have a broad and deep relationship in which we try to work closely with the Chinese government on a variety of issues. The secretary has talked about the fact that this relationship is probably the best U.S.-China relationship we've seen in quite some time. There are mixed elements to it. But again she was just there and had good discussions with the Chinese leadership." Mr. McCormack called overall relations with China good and constructive and said the remarks of General Zhu were unfortunate. A senior official who spoke to reporters here said he was unaware of any U.S. diplomatic complaint about the general's remarks beyond the spokesman's comments. Taiwan has long been a point of friction between Washington and Beijing. The United States has no formal defense commitment to Taiwan, which China considers a renegade province. But it is committed to providing Taiwan with defensive weapons under an act of Congress approved in 1979 at the time U.S. diplomatic recognition was switched from Taiwan to the mainland. U.S. officials have long stressed the need for a peaceful resolution of the China-Taiwan dispute, while being vague about what the United States might do in the event of hostilities between them. Secretary of State Rice visited Beijing as part of the Asian trip she completed earlier this week. Spokesman McCormack said Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick will be traveling there later this month to begin a strategic dialogue with the Chinese leadership.

Spokesman Sean McCormack

State Department
Discussion of Technical Errors
On Troop Deployment Under
Chinese Nuclear Umbrella
Hello Is this the White House? Yes this is the Premiere of China-as you probably already know we had a renagade Chinese General nuke US military forces throughout the Middle East just a short time ago. The good news is we were able to execute the traitor and we have a 10 million man peasant army standing buy to be sacrificed if in the interest of World Peace. So why don't you take an aspirin and call us back in a few days.

Leaving most of your combat troops under the nuclear umbrella of a country where some question as to who controls the button could become a costly mistake.

Spokesman Sean McCormack

State Department
Iran Has A Very Large
Existing Nuclear Arsenal
Contrary to the belief of the Bush Administration the country of Iran has a very large nuclear capability with theatre wide strategic missle capability as this link suggest. Most of us simply call this arrangement Communist China several of whom's leaders such as Chinese Army Major General Zhu Chenghu have publically suggested they will "hydrogen bomb 100 American cities". Why would China defend Iran?

This tour de force was followed by China and Iran signing an international agreement to purchase large stockpiles of Iranian oil and probally expanding their influzence throughout the region. The Bush Administration and associates then went on to alienate the country of Venezuela which also happily sent it's oil over to China. Like the Russians before them the Chinese business offers would be much more attractive than western offers since China being an athestic society has no religious or cultural attachment to peddle as does the Western culture.


911 Attack & Questions

www.9-11commission.gov

Exhibits #6 Did Splinter Factions In Both Political
Parties Attempt to Decapitate The Government?

This section asks if information exist to support the possibility that splinter factions in both the Democratic and Republican parties plot and execute plans to eliminate the opposition. The government had been in gridlock for years and some data suggest splinter groups in 1 party decided to get rid of the other side and a real nice clearly defined retaliatory strike appears to have occured-maybe. Evangelist Pat Robertson and others who are often sounding boards for Republic interest began hawking certain destruction in 2007 before the accidental over flight of nuclear weapons by the Air Force which caused the retirement of top staff. A person might be forced to wonder if the "accidental over flight" and a dry run for something planned in the future or simply an accident?

Topics 6 Democratic Party Ties to Islamic Fundamentalist


911 Attack

www.9-11commission.gov

Former US Senator Bob Graham

Chairman US Senate Select Committee On Intelligence
Was 911 Attack
Created by Splinter Factions In Democratic Party?
The story line goes that a former CIA operative in Afghanistan decides to mastermind and attack the United States without any inside assistance. Very obvious facts are that most of the hijackers lived in or flew out of areas of the United States controlled by the Democratic Party such as Boston and Philadelphia. All of the targets which were hit or planned were tangible assets of importance to the Republican Party. The targets included the World Trade Towers; Pentagon; and most likely the White House was the target of the plane which went down in Pennsylvania.

The simple facts would suggest Bin Laden was acting in direct conjunction with the Democratic Party to effect a coup of sorts against the Republican Party. If you look across the page you can see that the terrorist and their operatives planned the combat operations not in bum fuck Arabia but right in the triad region of North Carolina where they been in residence for what 30 some odd years in an area dominated by the Democratic party

Rambo Reno

Former US Attorney General
Splinter Factions
Involved In Terrorist Activities?
1. A person of common intelligence might ask if Florida Democrats being unhappy over the theft of the Presidential election in 2000 in Florida found it expident to use work with some of US Senator Bob Graham's Intelligence contacts to arrange the 2001 attacks.

2. Many of the terrorist were located in Florida prior to the attack. Former US Attorney General Janet Reno was heavily involved in terrorist activities in this era as this link shows.

Holy Wars On Home Front

By Harvey Kushner

US Congressman Howard Coble

Chairman of Subcommittee
Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security
2102 North Elm Street, Suite B
Greensboro, NC 27408-5100
Topic Islamic Terrorist
Ties Too North Carolina Buddies & Pals for Almost 30 Years
A person reading Harvey Kushner's book Holy Wars on Home Front would soon realize that the terrorist with extensive ties to North Carolina and nonprofit agencies and has better credentials and bonifides than most of the folks reading this report which included planning the 911 Attack on New York; launching combat operations on Israel; and trying to construct a unified national terrorist front in the United States. A large part of this book is devoted to development of a private Islamic Army drawing it's base of support from various prisons.

Exactly why these folks have spent the last 30 years very much at home in Central North Carolina in the heart of the Bible Belt is quite a mystery as their office was about 2 miles from the Office of the Chairman of The House Committee on Crime, Terrorist, and Homeland Security. Who profited from the terrorist attack in New York City? As Andy of Mayberry would say Goooolly the banks in North Carolina in Charlotte to be exact superceded New York as the nations banking capitol.

Biological Weapons

Evidence In Oregon & Idaho

Former US Senator Larry Craig

Convicted Sexual Predator
Retaliatory Strike With Anthrax
On US Senate Originates in Idaho/Oregon/Utah?
We might ask if the Republican Party was aware they were the victim of a partisan political attack and what if anything they did about it. This link reviews the probable source of Military quality Anthrax which was subsequently used on Democratic Congressional Leaders.

Evidence of Biological Weapons and associated groups have been identified in Oregon, Texas and Idaho. Idahois the community which is believed to have been involved in Anthrax attack on the US Senate in 2001.

In 2008 US Senator Larry Craig (R) from Idaho was convicted of sexual related offenses and reportedly is quitting Congress. If his actions were accurately reported he is simply engaged in what many folks at Boise State Universitydo on a regular basis-serial stalking. Stalking and sticking their noses into other folks business is simply a cultural activity which afflicts the entire State of Idaho.

San Antonio Fire Department

Retired Fire Chief Joe Candelario
(210 433-7927FX: 210 436-0337
Emergency Operations Center
PO Box 839966
San Antonio, Texas 78283

Minister John Hagee

P.O. Box 1400,
San Antonio, Texas 78295
Phone: 1-800-854-9899
Email: support@jhm.org
Private Nuclear Device Spotted 1996
Pastor John Hagee Advocates Nuclear War
Link The year in 1996 and the government official is in a rage as he storms into the emergency management center and slams an odd looking metal box with a long handle on the counter. He explains that if anyone has messed with his highly specialized software he will detonate what he claims is an "atomic bomb" he has brought into the Emergency Operations Center. None of the government persons nor myself challenge his assertion and he calms down and the event is quickly forgotten.... The object he displayed is metallic, shiny, professionally welded shut; has a black dial on the back of the handle and looks like it might be designed to fit into another object.

It is possible the object the person has is a nuclear trigger for a thermonuclear weapon. San Antonio is a hive of retired military personnel many with long term access to critical military equipment and it is quite probable that more than 1 private nuclear weapon exists here abouts more likely several some having thermonuclear capabilities.

Evangelist Pat Robertson

Said What On TV?
Evangelist Pat Robertson Predicts
Mass Killings In Terror Attack 2007?
1. It is very interesting to note that Televangelist Pat Robertson claims to have recieved a Divine Message From God" about a mass terror attack which is going to occur in the United States this year and kill many persons.

2. As with many other statements by Evangelist Pat Robertson such as a call to Assassinate the Leader of Venezuela don't we generally associate his comments as a political sounding board for ideas and policies from the extreme right wing.

3. A similar statement was made later by the Secretary of US Department of Homeland Security before a B52 bomber carrying unauthorized nuclear weapons over flew the US.

Topic #7 Military Coup Defused-Nuclear Dry Run Discovered 2008


updated 4:54 p.m. ET, Thurs., June. 5, 2008
Topic #19 Top two Air Force officials
resigning The two are asked to step down
after a mistaken warhead shipment
Two top U.S. Air Force officials resigning June 5: Defense Secretary Robert Gates asks the top two Air Force officials to step down. MSNBC's Contessa Brewer has the details. updated 4:54 p.m. ET, Thurs., June. 5, 2008
WASHINGTON - Defense Secretary Robert Gates ousted the Air Force's top officials Thursday, holding them to account in a historic military shake-up for failing to ensure the security of sensitive materials, including nuclear missile warhead fuses that were mistakenly shipped to Taiwan. Gates announced at a Pentagon news conference that he had accepted the resignations of Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Moseley and Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne — a highly unusual double firing.

Gates cited two embarrassing incidents in the past year. In one, a B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles and flown across the country without anyone realizing nuclear weapons were aboard In the other, four electrical fuses for ballistic missile warheads were mistakenly sent to Taiwan in the place of helicopter batteries. Gates said an internal investigation found a common theme in the B-52 and Taiwan incidents: "a decline in the Air Force's nuclear mission focus and performance."

Trouble at the top More than the other military branches, the Air Force in recent years has endured trouble at the top. Still, it is extremely rare for a service to lose its most senior uniformed and civilian leaders at the same time. There was no immediate word on who would be nominated to succeed Moseley and Wynne. Gates last week told Wynne to fire Moseley but Wynne refused, sources told NBC News. As a result, Gates took the unprecedented step of asking both men to resign. Word of the resignations was first reported by InsideDefense.com and the Air Force Times earlier Thursday.

In another embarrassing setback, this one last August, a B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles and flown across the country. The pilot and crew were unaware they had nuclear arms aboard. That error was considered so grave that President Bush was quickly informed. Gates' Air Force decision is the latest example of his impatience with Pentagon leaders he deems to be out of line. In March 2007, three months into his tenure, he forced the Army secretary, Francis Harvey, to quit. Gates was unhappy with Harvey's handling of revelations of inadequate housing conditions and bureaucratic delays for troops recovering from war wounds at Walter Reed Army Medical Center.

Bush was aware of the new changes, but the White House "has not played any role" in the shake-up, said press secretary Dana Perino. Moseley, who commanded coalition air forces during the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003, became Air Force chief in September 2005. Wynne took office in November 2005; before that he was the Pentagon's top acquisition and technology official under Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. In response to flaws exposed by the nuclear weapons error last year, Moseley said the Air Force would change the way bomber crews organize for their nuclear training mission. It was disclosed in recent days that the bomber unit, based at Minot Air Force Base, N.D., had failed portions of a nuclear security and safety inspection in May, although it did not lose its certification.

Gates seemed to be especially disturbed by the mistaken fuse sale to Taiwan. He was briefed last week on the conclusions of an internal investigation of the matter but the written results have not been released. Four cone-shaped electrical fuses used in intercontinental ballistic missile warheads were shipped to the Taiwanese — instead of the helicopter batteries Taiwan had ordered. The fuses originated at F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Cheyenne, Wyo., but the mix-up apparently occurred after the parts were shipped to Hill Air Force Base in Utah.

Authority 'compromised,' senator said After the March disclosure of that mistake, Gates ordered a full inventory of all nuclear weapons and related materials. At the time the erroneous sale was disclosed by the Pentagon, Ryan Henry, a senior aide to Gates, said mistakes involving elements of the nation's strategic nuclear arsenal "cannot be tolerated." In another incident, the Pentagon inspector general found in April that a $50 million contract to promote the Thunderbirds aerial stunt team was tainted by improper influence and preferential treatment. No criminal conduct was found. Moseley was not singled out for blame, but the investigation laid out a trail of communications from him and other Air Force leaders that eventually influenced the 2005 contract award. Included in that were friendly e-mails between Moseley and an executive in the company that won the bid. "It is my sense that General Moseley's command authority has been compromised," Sen. Claire McCaskill, a Missouri Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said at the time.
Discussion of Technical Errors
& Of Political Decapitation...
The world wakes up 1 day and learns that 1 political faction in the United States has used a strategic weapon on the other side could best be summarized as really bad for everyone involved.

President Barrack Obama

The WhiteHouse
Washington, D.C. 20510
President Obama Policy On Elimination
Of Nuclear Weapons


Author Seymour M. Hersh

Topic #8 The Samson Option
Israeli Nuclear Deterrance

The Samson Option is a term used to describe Israel’s alleged deterrence strategy of massive retaliation with nuclear weapons as a "last resort” against nations whose military attacks threaten its existence, and possibly against other targets as well.[1] Israel refuses to admit it has nuclear weapons or describe how it would use them, an official policy of nuclear ambiguity, also known as "nuclear opacity." This has made it difficult for anyone outside the Israeli government to definitively describe its true nuclear policy, while still allowing Israel to influence the perceptions, strategies and actions of other governments.[2]

It is estimated Israel has as many as 400 atomic and hydrogen nuclear weapons.[3] These can be launched from land, sea and air.[4] This gives Israel a second strike option even if much of the country is destroyed.[5] Some mis-identify Israel’s whole nuclear weapons program as the "Samson Option".[6] The phrase also has been mis-applied to situations where non-nuclear actors, such as Saddam Hussein[7], Yassir Arafat[8] and Hezbollah [9] threatened conventional weapons retaliation, and even to United States President George W. Bush's foreign policy.[10]

Topic #8 Sampson Option & Israeli Abuse of KH-11

Israel's Original Deterrence Doctrine
The original conception of the Samson Option was only as deterrence. According to American journalist Seymour Hersh and Israeli historian Avner Cohen Israeli leaders like David Ben-Gurion, Shimon Peres, Levi Eshkol and Moshe Dayan created the term in the mid-1960s. They named it after the Biblical figure Samson, who is said to have pushed apart the pillars of a Philistine temple, bringing down the roof and killing himself and thousands of Philistines who had gathered to see him humiliated. They contrasted it with ancient siege of Masada where Jewish radicals greatly outnumbered by Roman legions committed mass suicide rather than be defeated and enslaved by the Romans.[11]

Although nuclear weapons were viewed as the ultimate guarantor of Israeli security, as early as the 1960s the country avoided building its military around them, instead pursuing absolute conventional superiority so as to forestall a last resort nuclear engagement.[12] Nevertheless, during the Cold War one major use of the nuclear threat was to convince the United States to support Israel with conventional weapons sales to prevent it from using its nuclear weapons and possibly sparking a world nuclear war.[13]

Another use of the weapons was to discourage the former Soviet Union, which Israel regarded as its greatest enemy, from arming and aiding Arab nations. Israel went on nuclear alert during the 1973 Yom Kippur War, threatening to use nuclear weapons against Egypt, to encourage the United States to supply weapons to it and discourage the Soviet Union from interfering.[14] No nation has attacked Israel since 1973, though some have supported terrorist attacks on it.[15]

Israeli Doctrine Link
Jonathan Pollard Gives Israeli
Access KH11 Satellite-Targets Soviet Union
Seymour Hersh writes that once a coalition of right-wing political parties made Menachen Begin Prime Minister in 1977, the goal of Israel’s Samson Option began to change from deterrence only to also using "Israeli might to redraw the political map of the Middle East.”[16] Israel Shahak, an Israeli critic of its policies, claims: "Israel clearly prepares itself to seek overtly a hegemony over the entire Middle East...without hesitating to use for the purpose all means available, including nuclear ones."[17]
Jonathan Pollard Gives Israeli
Access KH11 Satellite-Targets Soviet Union
Seymour Hersh writes that once a coalition of right-wing political parties made Menachen Begin Prime Minister in 1977, the goal of Israel’s Samson Option began to change from deterrence only to also using "Israeli might to redraw the political map of the Middle East.”[16] Israel Shahak, an Israeli critic of its policies, claims: "Israel clearly prepares itself to seek overtly a hegemony over the entire Middle East...without hesitating to use for the purpose all means available, including nuclear ones."[17]

The political parties, which united in 1988 as the Likud Party, shared the goal of expanding the state of Israel to the Israeli-occupied territories.[18] Ariel Sharon, who was named Minister of Defense in 1981, publicly proclaimed that "his major goals included the overthrow of King Hussein of Jordan and the transformation of that country into a Palestinian state, to which Palestinian refugees would be ‘transferred’ or driven.” Sharon put his allies in charge of Israeli intelligence and Israel’s nuclear weapons.[19]

Because of the Soviet Union’s support for Arab nations, Begin immediately "gave orders to target more Soviet cities” for nuclear attack, which necessitated better targeting information. [20] Israel increased its espionage efforts, including by convicted spy Jonathan Pollard, in order to obtain nuclear targeting information on Soviet cities.[21] In 1998 Israeli defense analyst Zeev Schiff opined in Haaretz: "Off-the-cuff Israeli nuclear threats have become a problem, even before the onset of the Iraqi crisis."[22] David Hirst notes that "The threatening of wild, irrational violence, in response to political pressure, has been an Israeli impulse from the very earliest days.” and "Israel will remain at least as likely a candidate as Iran, and a far more enduring one, for the role of 'nuclear-crazy' state.”[23] Some "Samson Option” threats seem to be directed against nations which have not attacked Israel. Ariel Sharon has said: "We are much more important than (Americans) think. We can take the middle east with us whenever we go."[24] and "No longer 'Masada Option' - now 'Samson Option.’”[25] A "former Israeli govt official” with "first hand knowledge of his government’s nuclear weapons program” told Seymour Hersh: "You Americans screwed us” for not supporting Israel in its 1956 war with Egypt. "We can still remember the smell of Auschwitz and Treblinka. Next time we’ll take all of you with us.”[26]
High profile Israeli supporters also brandish such threats. Martin Van Creveld, a professor of military history at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem stated: "We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force. Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: ‘Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.’...We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under."[27] In 2002 the Los Angeles Times, published an opinion piece by Louisiana State University professor David Perlmutter in which he wrote: "What would serve the Jew-hating world better in repayment for thousands of years of massacres but a Nuclear Winter. Or invite all those tut-tutting European statesmen and peace activists to join us in the ovens? For the first time in history, a people facing extermination while the world either cackles or looks away--unlike the Armenians, Tibetans, World War II European Jews or Rwandans--have the power to destroy the world. The ultimate justice?"[28]

During the build up to the United States 2003 invasion of Iraq, then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon stated: "If our citizens are attacked seriously - by a weapon of mass destruction, chemical, biological or by some mega-terror attack act - and suffer casualties, then Israel will respond." Israeli military commentator Zeev Schiff explained: "Israel could respond with a nuclear retaliation that would eradicate Iraq as a country.” It is believed President Bush gave Sharon the green-light to attack Baghdad in retaliation, including with nuclear weapons, but only if attacks came before the American military invasion.[29]

Louis René Beres, a professor of Political Science at Purdue University, chaired Project Daniel, a group advising Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and issued a year 2004 final report. Beres’ 2004 article Israel and Samson. Biblical Insights on Israeli Strategy in the Nuclear Age recommends Israel use the Samson Option threat to "support conventional preemptions” against enemy nuclear and non-nuclear assets because "without such weapons, Israel, having to rely entirely upon nonnuclear forces, might not be able to deter enemy retaliations for the Israeli preemptive strike.”
Current Concerns
Currently, the United States fears Israel will attack Iran pre-emptively because Iran’s nuclear power program could be used eventually to produce nuclear weapons.[30] Iranian threats to retaliate against Israel with 600 missiles if either Iran or Syria are attacked[31] raise concerns about Samson Option retaliation. Dr. Jerome Corsi, author of "Atomic Iran,” states that "Israel's Samson Option” could be "a preemptive strike against Iran, even if the international military and diplomatic reprisals that follow might bring disastrous consequences upon Israel itself.”[32] Russia is still considered an Israeli target.[33] Russia provides technical assistance to, and diplomatic support for, Iran’s nuclear program.[34] It also has sold advanced missiles to Syria.[35] In January 2007 Israeli officials voiced "extreme concern" over Russia's sale of advanced anti-aircraft missiles to Iran. They warned: "We hope they understand that this is a threat that could come back to them as well."[36] On November 8, 2007 President George Bush said: "If you want to see World War Three, you know, a way to do that is to attack Israel with a nuclear weapon."[37]

Topic #9 Congressional Investigation Into Suitcase Sized Nukes


First Generation

Atom Bomb-Implosion Device

First Generation H Bomb

From Atomic Archive

2nd Generation Hydrogen Bomb

"With U235 Jacked & Holograms"

Suit Case Nuke

From Technical Article
Nuclear & Strategic Threats Concerning The US
Brief Nukes Discussion
Author PD Smith in "Doomsday Men" (ISBN13-9780-312-37397-9) describes on page 350 the EPB Emergency Plan Book of 1958 developed by FEMA:"The EPB also anticipates that weapons employed by claudstein methods, such as smuggled atom bombs would be detonated...." The Emergency Plan Book was a formerly classified book which was declassified in 1998 and considered the real possibility an adversary would preposition portable nuclear weapons on American soil. The documents on down the page review the matter in more detail:
Russian Roulette From PBS By Alexi
***The comments of Alexei Yablokov, former science adviser to Boris Yeltsin; Russian General Vladimir Dvorkin; policy expert Matthew Bunn; U.S. General Eugene Habiger; and U.S. Congressman Curt Weldon.
"In 1997, the public became aware of a Russian nuclear device they had not known even existed-- the so-called suitcase bomb. These devices were made for the Soviet KGB. One of these bombs had an explosive charge of one kiloton, equivalent to one thousand tons of TNT.

If a device like this made its way to the U.S. it could destroy everything within a half-mile radius of the Capitol in Washington, D.C. Within hours, prevailing winds would carry the nuclear fallout throughout Washington.

The comments of Alexei Yablokov, former science adviser to Boris Yeltsin; Russian General Vladimir Dvorkin; policy expert Matthew Bunn; U.S. General Eugene Habiger; and U.S. Congressman Curt Weldon. In the 1960s the U.S. built its own version of a mini nuclear device-- the Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM). It weighed 80-100 pounds, was small enough to fit in a duffel bag or large case and was designed for sabotage missions-- airfields, bridges, dams. Like the Russian device, it had an explosive charge of roughly one thousand tons of TNT ( one kiloton).

Film of the SADM was declassified in 1997 and shows how it would be deployed by a parachutist for a jump mission into water to reach a target. Although the parachute jumps and retrieval operations were rehearsed many times, the project was never put to use and these nuclear devices do not exist in current stockpiles."
Do "backpack" nuclear weapons exist?
Alexei Yablokov
Yes, small atomic charges exist. They are very small. Several dozen kilos, thirty kilos, forty kilos. I spoke with people that made them, I saw them. The American specimens can be seen on the Internet, they can be seen on photographs, they can even be seen in the movies. I have never seen Russian analogies, I have only seen American ones, but Russian ones do exist, because I spoke with people who made them, and I believe these people, these people knew what they were talking about. And there was data published about it. ... Some was published in the newspaper of a town in the south of the Urals in a little paper, and it said there that the prominent achievement is that they have manufactured a miniature atomic charge. ... No one knows how many exist ... . Lebed mentioned that there's forty-eight, or a hundred and fifty, but no one knows for certain.
How Powerful Are They?
Their power is about one kiloton, possibly less, but a powerful charge. You cannot destroy Moscow or London, but the Kremlin, you can destroy ... Capitol Hill can be wiped out by such a bomb. ...
Why Are You Raising The Issue?
I talk about tactical nuclear arms, and including mini-nukes, nuclear cases, because I believe that, after the end of the cold war, the situation with nuclear arms has become much more dangerous. During the cold war, everything was under strict control, now it's not the case anymore. Now, it's becoming clear to us that tactical nuclear arms pose a great threat in people's minds. People think that, "Well, the American President and the Russian President have nuclear cases and only after the President presses a button in it, then something happens." But that's not the case regarding tactical nuclear arms. If we've got tactical nuclear arms and small briefcase bombs, a terrorist version of it, it's not going to be up to the President to decide where and at what time to set the bomb off. So, tactical nuclear arms exist under less control than the strategic nuclear arms. The power is much smaller of tactical ones, but the control is also much weaker. Therefore, it now poses a greater threat to society, that's why I keep talking about it.

We know that Chechnyan leaders announced that they've got two nuclear bombs. But we checked it out, and it seems that it's not the case. Palestinian terrorists also made statements to that effect, they said they've got several atomic bombs which they've purchased in the Soviet Union, but hopefully, they are also bluffing. But, in reality, the danger comes from within the country, from within Russia. We've got about one hundred organizations of a fascist nature. These fascist organizations have got many military who know where these bombs are located, who know how to use them. And if, inside the country, there's a struggle for power, and these fascists and nationalists get hold of these bombs--there's a small chance, but there is that chance, much smaller than Chechnya or Palestine--but, if that happens, that will be terrible. That's why I'm talking about this, that's why tactical nuclear arms, these small nuclear bombs, ought to be destroyed as soon as possible. ...

When this scandal with the nuclear mini-bombs erupted, and when it became clear to me that tactical nuclear arms poses a greater threat than strategic ones, I sent a letter to President Yeltsin saying that I would hate to publish all the data but I'd like to draw your attention to this and take measures. I had a call from the Kremlin, from the Defense Council ... a decision was taken ... it was deemed necessary to make a ruling which would impose more strict control over tactical nuclear arms. I was told that such a decree would be worked out, and I offered my own draft of such a decree and I sent such a draft to the President [and the Defense Council]. I don't know what the state of affairs is now, it's been three months since I submitted my draft decree. ...
Did you ever talk to General Lebed about this?
I never spoke with General Lebed about this question. I don't know what General Lebed thinks. I've only heard his statement, and I saw it printed in newspapers. When General Lebed was the Secretary of the Security Council, someone mentioned this weapon to him, and he appointed a special commission to look into the matter, and this commission was headed by one of his aides, with whom I'm acquainted. And he gave an interview and he said that the commission's been investigating, ... and they have found [these weapons], they've established that they exist, there is no doubt about the fact that they exist, they know where they are, the only question is, have they been able to locate all? They said they'd found several dozen, but it's not clear whether they've managed to locate all existing. Did you ever talk to General Lebed about this?
Why did you testify before the US Congress?
.. On the request of [Representative] Weldon, whom I know for a long time, I made a statement in the Committee on National Defense, in the [House]. And we spoke on the dangers of the tactical nuclear arms. Sometimes you have to go to America and make a statement there, or, like when Lebed spoke about these problems here, no one listened to him. But when he gave an interview to Reuters, the entire world heard about it, and our people back at home began to worry, too. So I agreed, at the request of Congressman Weldon, to appear before the ... committee... Because, the problem, as I said, is a very worrying one and concerns us all.
What was the reaction in Russia
to your statements in America?
When I returned, an independent newspaper ... published a dirty article, accusing me of being an American spy. They insisted that Yablokov is an American spy and that he is using ecological organizations in order to collect classified data. It's all lies. I was so indignant that I filed a court case against [the paper]. And the press secretary of the Atomic Ministry, I sued him as well. And this court case will take place a few days from now.
Can you tell me about your work?
All my life I was a biologist, but, towards the end of Gorbachev's perestroika, I began to be interested in ecology. Towards the end of Gorbachev's perestroika, I believed that it's time to take part in political life. I was elected to the Soviet Parliament, I was Deputy Chairman of the Ecological Commission of Russia. But before the collapse of the Soviet Union, Boris Yeltsin offered me to become his aide in charge of ecological affairs, and for three years, I was his aide in charge of ecology. Recently, I was chairman on a commission on ecological security. Now I've finished my work in administration, and I've returned to the Science Academy. And also to the ecological politics in Russia. It's a small ecological organization, and our goal is to help the government to resolve urgent ecological problems ... .
Do you think Russian officials are
misleading the public opinion?
The fact that they mislead the public is absolutely clear. When Lebed first talked about it ... he said that he tried to locate all the small atomic charges, but he was unable to do that because he was sacked. The first official reaction was that Lebed is mad, he is talking rubbish. And then I said, no, it's possible, because I spoke to people who manufactured the briefcase bomb. And then this flow was centered on me, all these lies. The federal intelligence ... , the former KGB, [announced] that this is impossible. The press secretary for the Defense Ministry said, "We know what atomic bombs are, we have never heard of briefcase bombs." The Ministry for Atomic Energy said the very same thing, that we've never heard of anything like that. But, if I'm looking at a photograph of these devices, I know they've been made, simply on the Internet. My American friends say, why don't you have a look on the Internet, there are photographs there of small, portable, American made bombs. And then, bit by bit, people began to say, of course, yes, they exist, but Yablokov is disclosing state secrets. What state secrets are we talking about? ... We insisted that we have full parity in terms of nuclear arms, that we have everything that the Americans have got; this was our official position. So, if I'm looking at a [picture] of an American weapon, I must be sure that we have an analogy. ...
more about yablokov...
President Yeltsin's former Science Advisor, Alexei Yablokov, testified to the American Congress regarding the so-called suitcase bombs; the small, atomic demolition devices. Can you confirm the existence of these weapons?

I don't really know anything about these devices. I know that some small devices of this type existed both in the United States and in Russia, but why they should be needed in a suitcase format, that's something really for terrorists; I don't think they can really fulfill any kind of deterrence function. ... But even if they did exist, this kind of mobile nuclear bombs or devices, this is something that would have to be reproduced on a regular basis. Made again. Any kind of nuclear device or bomb has a shelf life. And once the service life has run out, then the charges on these devices become more dangerous. They become more dangerous for the people that are actually in possession of them.

You're referring to the tritium; the half-life of some of the materials?Not only, there are a lot of other factors that lead to the decreased efficiency of devices like that ... . But I don't know anything about the system and I don't really see why it would make sense. But the most important answer would be that I don't know this field. ...

General Lebed, when he came and testified before the Congress, evidently said that at one point he had known about them, evidently. And he had tried to account for all of them and couldn't find some of them. Then when a team tried to inquire about it later, he said that he was under investigation for revealing state secrets for even having talked about it. Do you know anything about that end of the story at all?

Well, I've heard about this incident. I can tell you that Lebed is probably the least informed person as far as this topic is concerned. I considered him a big specialist, really, an expert in the military folklore. That's really where it stops. He says that he was charged with actually making an accounting of these things. Was he not a general, highly-placed enough to know? Well, theoretically, he could have dealt with these issues only when he was the Secretary of the Security Council. That was a very short period of time, and he had quite a few other problems to deal with. But he could not be qualified to even deal with this issue, in principle, because that's outside of his expertise. more about dvorkin...
Were we ever able to confirm
that suitcase bombs existed?
Not that I'm aware of. Both United States and Russia of course built tactical nuclear weapons that were quite small in size ... . We had, for example, what we called atomic demolition munitions, that were designed to be carried in a backpack. ... I doubt that there was ever anything that was specifically designed to be carried in something that looked like a suitcase, though I couldn't rule it out. My personal judgment is that there probably aren't 100 or 20 or however many suitcase bombs that are missing in the former Soviet Union, although I would guess that Lebed, when he made his initial statements, probably in good faith believed there were. The way the Russian accounting system works, everything is accounted for on paper. And there's reams of gigantic paper log books. You could easily imagine a situation where Lebed sent somebody to check at a particular facility, and there's a 19-year-old guard there, and he looks in the book and says, "Gee, there's supposed to be 100 here and it turns out there are only 30." And the reason is, there's another log book over here that the 19-year-old forgot about, that describes how many had been shipped off to such-and-such a place to be dismantled, or something like that. ...

Could [Lebed] have been talking about the backpack-size devices rather than suitcase bombs? Sure. He could have been. I wouldn't want to speculate as to exactly what it was Lebed was trying to communicate. In some of the subsequent interviews he gave, he back-pedaled significantly and just said, "Well, it's a possibility that these things might be missing," rather than, "They are definitely missing, and here's how many are missing." So it's a bit hard for me to parse exactly what he really thinks is the situation. Congressman Weldon said that we thought that the KGB might have commissioned a suitcase-size specimen of the small atomic demolition device, as a thing to sell to terrorists specifically. Does that wash with anything you know? I don't think it was as something to sell to terrorists. It was something, I believe, for the KGB's use, was the claim. Alexei Yablokov made that claim in print, in the Russian press. I haven't looked at the intelligence in enough detail to follow that. But it was denied by essentially everyone in a position of authority in the Russian military and nuclear system....more about bunn...

Yeltsin's former Science Advisor, Alexei Yablokov, came to the US last year and testified about suitcase bombs that KGB or somebody was making for terrorist use. Do we know whether these things existed? If so, do the Russians now know where they all are? Yes, we knew they existed. Suitcase nuclear bomb is, I think, a little optimistic. It's certainly something that ... I would be hard pressed to carry. It's fairly big and it's fairly heavy. The Russians, again from what I saw, go to great lengths in the accountability of their nuclear devices. We are spending a lot of money under Nunn-Lugar to automate that system. Our system is very automated, and we test it on a regular basis. The Russian system is more manpower-intensive. It's pretty much a stubby pencil and a spreadsheet kind of thing. But I was shown how they account for their nuclear weapons. And I was told that these smaller devices are included in that same accountability system. I mean, General Yakoulev took me in his office--General Yakoulev is the commander-in-chief of the Rocket Forces--and showed me an IBM computer screen, and ... Yakoulev can track where every nuclear weapon is in his system by serial number. I couldn't do that from my headquarters. ... If the Russians were as deadly serious about the accountability of the nuclear weapons that I saw and have been involved with, I can only surmise that they have the same concerns with the smaller weapons. There have been a number of Russians that have come over here and thrown a grenade on the table of some of our Congressional committees, saying that there lot of loose suitcase bombs out there. I don't think so. ...more about habiger...
Could you tell me how you first
found out about the existence of suitcase bombs?
Over the past several years in my work with Russia and its leaders, I have reached out to have conversations with all the senior leaders of the various factions in Russia, one of whom is General Alexander Lebed, a very prominent official credited with ending both the Chechnyan war and the war in Moldova. On my second meeting with him in Moscow last May [1998] with a delegation of five or six other members, I was discussing with him the security of Russia's nuclear arsenal, and the status of conditions in the Russian military. This was not a meeting that any press attended, there was no press conference before the event or after the event, it was a quiet, off the record meeting to discuss in an intelligent way ... what were his perceptions relative to Russian control of their nuclear arsenal and their conventional forces. And he gave us ... examples of his concerns, examples of senior Soviet military leaders being forced out, being embarrassed and having to resort to illegal operations to make a living, and how we should be worried in the West because these very successful and capable soldiers and leaders were now having to resort to selling off technology that presents a real danger for the world. He went into the status of Russian nuclear submarines being decommissioned, with no place to store them, no means to take apart these nuclear submarines, and the terrible problem that Russia has today with ... nuclear submarines being stored in ports potentially subject to an earthquake or another incident that could cause terrible degradation of the environment.

And then he went into ... what he reported to Boris Yeltsin as Secretary of the National Security Council. He said one of his assignments was to account for 132 suitcase size nuclear weapons that the Soviet Union had manufactured during the sixties, the seventies and the eighties, much like we manufactured in our country, even though today we no longer have small atomic demolition munitions, we've destroyed them all. ... He said he could only find 48. We were startled. We said, "General, what do you mean, you can only find 48?" He said, "That's all we could locate. We don't know what the status of the other devices were, we just could not locate them." ...

The Russian media tried to portray Lebed as trying to gain notoriety for his campaign. There was nothing of that at all occurring. There were no media present. Two months later, after I returned to the US and I debriefed our intelligence community to give me their assessment of what Lebed had said, I filed my trip report, as is required by Members of Congress. In the trip report, I mentioned General Lebed's comments. A producer for 60 Minutes ... contacted me, and she said, "Congressman, did General Lebed really say this?" And I said, "Absolutely." She then asked to interview me and went over to Moscow and interviewed General Lebed. That was the first contact by a member of the media, and that was at the end of July, early August. That story then ran nationally in America on 60 Minutes, and following that there was a tremendous outcry. The Russian government denounced Lebed, the Russian media called him a traitor, they denied that he would know anything about these demolition devices. In some cases, senior Russian leaders denied they ever built these devices and said, "This is a fabrication, that Lebed is totally wrong." I then invited my good friend Dr. Alexei Yablokov to come to Washington in October, because he also knew something about these devices. And in a public hearing, Dr. Yablokov ... said that he knew scientists who had worked on these devices. And in fact he said that he thought part of the problem in accounting for them may have been because some of his colleagues who worked on these devices told him they were building them for the KGB, and therefore if they were being built for the KGB, they may not have been included under the counting of the Ministry of Defense, an entirely separate operation. So therefore, he encouraged us to work jointly with his country to work together to see if in fact we could locate and then destroy these devices. It was not an attempt by him to embarrass his country, it was an attempt by him to get to the facts and the heart of the issue. Again, Yablokov was treated terribly by the Russian media. They called him a traitor, they said he was coming over to America and giving false information.
Finally, I went to Russia on my 13th trip out of 14 or 15 that I've taken, last December, and I requested, besides my other meetings, a meeting with the Defense Minister, Minister Sergeyev, as you know, General of the Chief Command Staff for some 20 years. And I said to General Sergeyev, after a wide range of topics that we discussed in a session that lasted well over an hour, I asked him specifically, "One, did you build small atomic demolition munitions, as we suspect you did? Two, do you know where they are? And three, have you destroyed them all?" And to me he said, "Yes, we did build them, we are in the process of destroying them, and by the year 2000 we will have destroyed all of our small atomic demolition devices, the so-called nuclear suitcases." Now, I have no reason to doubt General Sergeyev. In fact, I have a lot of respect for him. He impressed me very much in the meeting that I had with him. But again, I don't know whether or not we in fact know that they have the whereabouts known of each of these devices. I have confidence that what he told me is true. They will destroy all the devices that they currently know the whereabouts of. That's not the question. The question is what about devices that Russia may not have an accounting of? Do they exist? Do we have an accurate way of counting them? ...
How big are these things?
Well, it depends upon what you describe as a suitcase. Our understanding is that Russia manufactured three different types of these devices, most of them able to be carried by two people. Some able to be carried by one strong person. The typical size would be maybe like a large trunk, or in perhaps like a large suitcase, probably weighing someplace in the neighborhood of 50 to 100 pounds. These devices would be self activated, which means you would not have to have some central command, as you do the long range missiles, but rather that [the] individual controlling that device could in fact set that device for activation and actually activate it ... independently from some central command. But these are devices that, yes, could be carried portably. There's no reason why they couldn't be put on a barge or a ship and floated into a harbor. And the devastation that they would present to that area would be beyond anyone's imagination.

What is the scale of damage that a terrorist could do with one of these things? First of all, it would change the whole face of the earth in terms of our outlook on terrorism. Because you're not talking about a bomb that would blow up perhaps one part of one building, as we saw in Oklahoma, or you see repeatedly in London. You're talking about a bomb, a device with a capability of one kiloton of destruction, which is a massive capability that would cause severe destruction of a major inner city area, perhaps causing a multitude of buildings to collapse with the people inside of them. So you'd have a massive loss of life, you'd have massive radioactive contamination and you'd have massive havoc, unlike any that we've prepared for in the past. Just the threat of that kind of incident alone can change the face of the world in terms of the way we deal with terrorists. That's why a full accounting of these kinds of weapons has got to be the number one priority of both the US and Russia.

And following on this issue of small nuclear devices is the whole issue of tactical nuclear weapons. I mean, one of the things that is not included in arms control negotiations between the US and Russia are tactical nukes. Tactical nukes are smaller devices that can wreak havoc. They too, in the wrong hands, could cause massive destruction and loss of life. And that's why in our discussions with Russia we must include the beginning of a formal counting process and the beginning of a limitation process on tactical nuclear weapons, not just those long range ICBMs. Because I would argue that the potential for a small atomic demolition device or a tactical nuclear device is even greater than the possibility of an accidental launch of a long range ICBM. ...

Lebed has said that he's been prevented really from talking about the suitcase bombs. What's going on there? Why isn't he allowed to talk freely about what is potentially a problem for the world? I think it's partly because the Russian government and the media have tried to portray him as creating sensational stories in the West, when that was not his original intent. The sensationalization of the story came about by the Russian government and the Russian media itself, in response to Lebed's interview on 60 Minutes. What Lebed asked for and what Yablokov asked for were deliberate, very detailed efforts by our country to assist Russia, not to create any embarrassment for Russia, but for us to assist ... them in helping them deal with the problem. ... I think Russia took a very defensive posture that these two individuals were out to embarrass the motherland. When I totally read the opposite. I read their attempts to interact with us [as] a pleading for us to come in and assist Russia in identifying these devices, locating them, using whatever detection means we have, and then destroying them. Something that we should be doing together. Again, as a country, America has not always handled nuclear materials in the most correct manner possible, and so this is not an attempt to try to embarrass Russia, but rather to focus on the potential problem that could come about from one of these devices, be they small atomic demolition nuclear suitcase or a tactical nuke, from getting into the wrong hands.

General Lebed is now in a position where the State Prosecutor is investigating him for disclosure of state secrets. Do you think that in retaliation for speaking to you? I asked General Lebed about this when he appeared before my committee just earlier this year, and he said it's interesting that they could charge him if in fact he didn't know what he was talking about. If, as they said, he didn't know what he was talking about, how could they charge him with a crime? If they're in fact charging him with a crime, then that must indicate he did know what he was talking about, in which case it means the Russian government was lying all this period of time when they said he did not know what he was talking about. But either way, it's not a state secret. General Sergeyev has told me, a Member of Congress, that they made these devices, that they are in fact are in the process of destroying them. So that's in the public realm. And to somehow try to create some false accusation against General Lebed or Alexei Yablokov is just demeaning, I think, to a country that I have a great deal of respect for. I respect the Russian people, and I desperately want to assist them in this time of difficulty, but taking the steps to overreact and to pass tighter restrictive laws, as they've done, only hurts the democracy that's just beginning to take hold there. ...

Russian Roulette

PBS Report 2-1999
Discussion of Technical Errors and Mistakes
On Portable Nuclear Munitions
1. The focus of the articles appears to concern the idea that a suitcase size nuke would be detonated in time of war under a decapitation scenerio

2. If the weapons exist they are not offensive in nature of they would have been used decades ago as a statement of the obvious.

3. The suitcase nuke theory closely resembles the Soviet Dead Hand Doctrine explained in Author PD Smith in "Doomsday Men" (ISBN13-9780-312-37397-9)

4. Several suitcase size nukes could be configured into a 2nd generation themonuclear weapon of at least 25 megaton range.


FEMA
Discussion of Technical Errors Regarding FEMA
The idea that after the entire primary government structures has been eliminated that FEMA could simply turn a switch and replace vital services to millions of Americans is nonsensical in the extreme.

Topic #10 Assorted Other Threats


US Congressman Curt Weldon

from Pennsylvania's 7th district

Terrorist Zacarias Massoui

Convicted Wrong Crime?
Topic #1 Was Massoui Seeking
Old Soviet Nuclear Ordinance?

Doc. Code: 19990900
Headline: Congressman Weldon
Fears Soviets Hid A-Bombs Across U.S.
Date: 26 October 1999
Bibliography: Lexis-Nexis Academic Universe,
http://web.lexis-nexis.com/universe
Author: US Representative Curt Weldon (R-PA)
Holds Hearing on Russia and the KGB,
Washington, DC
Orig. Src.: Case: Material
What the Terrorist Was Probally Doing In Minnesota
Abstract-http://www.nti.org/db/nistraff/1999/19990900.htm
While the United States convicted Zacarias Massoui of being the 20th hijacker we might in light of the following report ask if he was actually in the area of Minnesota or North Dakota searching for reported stockpiles of nuclear ordinance left in this era by the Soviet Union:

The Military Research Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee heard testimony about the possibility that the former Soviet Union prepositioned man-portable nuclear weapons on the territory of the United States at a 26 October 1999 hearing. The committee, chaired by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA), listened to testimony by Professor Christopher Andrew of Cambridge University (United Kingdom), co-author of The Sword and the Shield, a 1999 book based on KGB archival materials, and Col. Oleg Gordievsky, a former KGB officer who defected to Great Britain. Andrew testified about Cold War-era KGB documents that detailed the locations of hidden weapons and equipment caches which had been placed in Western Europe and the United States to supply KGB sabotage teams that would take action against Western countries in the event of war.

The documents used to write The Sword and the Shield, which were smuggled out of Russia by former KGB archivist Vasiliy Mitrokhin, allowed authorities in Switzerland and Belgium to uncover bobby-trapped caches of sabotage equipment. Austrian authorities tried but failed to locate a similar cache outside Vienna, where road construction had altered the terrain and removed the landmarks needed to uncover it. The documents noted that similar caches had been placed in the United States, in New York, Texas, California, Montana, and Minnesota, but did not include details of their locations or contents. Gordievsky confirmed the prepositioning of such caches in Western Europe and the United States. Weldon expressed concern that these caches could contain 'suitcase nukes,' man-portable atomic demolition munitions (ADMs).

Although the Mitrokhin documents do not include any evidence that these sabotage caches include 'suitcase nukes,' Weldon argued that the 1998 claims of former GRU Col. Stanislav Lunev (see abstract 19980480 for details), who said that 'suitcase nukes' had been smuggled into the United States by Soviet military intelligence agents, as well as the claims of former Russian Security Council Secretary Aleksandr Lebed, who in 1997 claimed that a number of 'suitcase nukes' were unaccounted for (for details see the overview 'Are Suitcase Nukes on the Loose?' in the NIS Nuclear Profiles Database), suggested that 'suitcase nukes' had been included in these caches. Andrew, when asked if he believed 'suitcase nukes' had been included in the caches prepositioned in the United States, said, 'I find it highly improbable that any actually exist on the soil of the United States.' Gordievsky also argued that while KGB plans for the prepositioning of small ADMs in the United States probably existed, 'whether [inaudible] it has come to actually bringing them here, is a big, big step.' Weldon lambasted the Clinton administration for not aggressively questioning the Russian government about the existence and location of hidden KGB weapons caches in the United States.

At the outset of the hearing, Weldon presented what he termed a 'notional model' of what a 'suitcase nuke' might look like, although he emphasized that 'no one in the West actually knows what a Russian 'nuclear suitcase' bomb looks like.' [Russian officials have repeatedly denied that such small ADMs were ever produced by the Soviet Union.] He said that using unclassified data on nuclear artillery shells, the model demonstrated that the 'essentials' of a small nuclear weapon could fit into 'an attache case. Displaying this model to the committee, Weldon described it as a 'plutonium-fueled gun-type atomic weapon having a yield of one to 10 kilotons.' [Open sources on the history of nuclear weapons design note that owing to its high rate of spontaneous fission, plutonium is not suitable for use in a gun-type nuclear weapon. A gun-type weapon using plutonium would be unreliable, since stray neutrons might initiate a premature chain reaction, either greatly reducing the explosive yield of the device, or causing a 'fizzle' with greatly reduced yield.][1]

[1] Paul P. Craig and John A Jungerman, Nuclear Arms Race: Technology and Society (New York: McGraw Hill), p. 212.

Article Associated Press

Sunday March 21, 2002
Topic #3 "We Have Briefcase Nukes"
SYDNEY, Australia - Osama bin Laden (news - web sites)'s terror network claims to have bought ready-made nuclear weapons on the black market in central Asia, the biographer of al-Qaida's No. 2 leader was quoted as telling an Australian television station. In an interview scheduled to be televised on Monday, Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir said Ayman al-Zawahri claimed that "smart briefcase bombs" were available on the black market.

It was not clear when the interview between Mir and al-Zawahri took place. U.S. intelligence agencies have long believed that al-Qaida attempted to acquire a nuclear device on the black market, but say there is no evidence it was successful. In the interview with Australian Broadcasting Corp. television, parts of which were released Sunday, Mir recalled telling al-Zawahri it was difficult to believe that al-Qaida had nuclear weapons when the terror network didn't have the equipment to maintain or use them.

"Dr Ayman al-Zawahri laughed and he said `Mr. Mir, if you have $30 million, go to the black market in central Asia, contact any disgruntled Soviet scientist, and a lot of ... smart briefcase bombs are available,'" Mir said in the interview. "They have contacted us, we sent our people to Moscow, to Tashkent, to other central Asian states and they negotiated, and we purchased some suitcase bombs," Mir quoted al-Zawahri as saying.

Al-Qaida has never hidden its interest in acquiring nuclear weapons. The U.S. federal indictment of bin Laden charges that as far back as 1992 he "and others known and unknown, made efforts to obtain the components of nuclear weapons." Bin Laden, in a November 2001 interview with a Pakistani journalist, boasted having hidden such components "as a deterrent." And in 1998, a Russian nuclear weapons design expert was investigated for allegedly working with bin Laden's Taliban allies. It was revealed last month that Pakistan's top nuclear scientist had sold sensitive equipment and nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea (news - web sites), fueling fears the information could have also fallen into the hands of terrorists.

Earlier, Mir told Australian media that al-Zawahri also claimed to have visited Australia to recruit militants and collect funds. "In those days, in early 1996, he was on a mission to organize his network all over the world," Mir was quoted as saying. "He told me he stopped for a while in Darwin (in northern Australia), he was ... looking for help and collecting funds." Australia's Attorney-General Philip Ruddock said the government could not rule out the possibility that al-Zawahri visited Australia in the 1990s under a different name.

"Under his own name or any known alias he hasn't traveled to Australia," Ruddock told reporters Saturday. "That doesn't mean to say that he may not have come under some other false documentation, or some other alias that's not known to us." Mir describe al-Zawahri as "the real brain behind Osama bin Laden." "He is the real strategist, Osama bin Laden is only a front man," Mir was quoted as saying during the interview. "I think he is more dangerous than bin Laden."

Dr. Ayman al-Zawahri

Sunday March 21, 2002

Al-Zawahri — an Egyptian surgeon — is believed to be hiding in the rugged region around the Pakistan-Afghan border where U.S. and Pakistani troops are conducting a major operation against Taliban and al-Qaida forces. He is said to have played a leading role in orchestrating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States.

President John F. Kennedy

Cited Time Magazine 2005
Topic #2 President Kennedy Cites
Atomic Bomb In Soviet Consulate 1960's
The Time Magazine article in 2005 is believed to have cited President John F. Kennedy's notes that the Soviet Government has brought an atomic bomb into Washington D.C in the diplomatic bag in the 1960's with the intent of detonating it in the event of war and taking out the central US Government. This led the United States to develop systems such as NORAD and Looking Glass..