1. Topic #1 Bush Administration Attempt Restart Cold War Christian Evangelist-Nuclear Decapitation of US Government

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

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

4 Topic #3 Age Related Defects In US Arsenal

5. Topic #4 Rebuilding Defective Nuclear Weapons

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

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

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

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

10. Topic #9 Congressional Investigation Into Suitcase Sized Nukes

11. Topic #10 Assorted Other Threats

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.

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:

Exhibit #74The deployment of paramilitary groups from Texas to This linkIdaho and throughout the Pacific Northwest appears to position former veterans with criminal background in close proximity to US missle fields was largely unchallenged or unknown. That the takeover occured during winter in an area controlled by the Catholic Church. This linkAs you are probably aware Pastor John Hagee of Corner Stone Church of San Antonio, Texas has a special mission as he explains it to bring about the death of 2 Billion which will force the 2nd coming of Jesus.

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. The Obama Administation response to seditionist movements by Christian Conservatives was Operation Jaded Helm and purged a large number of military officers wwithout much explanation

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�.

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.

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.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/22/

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. President-elect Donald J. Trump said on Thursday that the United States should greatly expand its nuclear capability, appearing to suggest an end to decades of efforts by presidents of both parties to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in American defenses and strategy.

Mr. Trumps statement, in a midafternoon Twitter post, may have been a response to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, who in a speech to his militarys leadership in Moscow earlier on Thursday vowed to strengthen Russias nuclear missiles. Mr. Putin said nuclear forces needed to be bolstered so they could reliably penetrate any existing and prospective missile defense systems, apparently a reference to the Pentagons efforts to develop systems capable of shooting down nuclear-armed rockets.

Shortly after Mr. Putins comments were reported by the news media, Mr. Trump said on Twitter that the United States must strengthen and expand its nuclear forces until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes. He did not elaborate. Continue reading the main story

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

This Link reviews delays in reworking the US nuclear weapons pits due to extensive delays are US production facilities of us aging stockpiles It might be possible for US allies such as Great Britian or other countries to do the needed work required under contract

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.

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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]

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]

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]

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 governments 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 Ren� 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.�

Currently, the United States fears Israel will attack Iran pre-emptively because Irans 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, Irans 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]

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:

***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."

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 ... .

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. ...

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...

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...

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? ...

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. ...

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

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."

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.