Is a terrorist chemical attack possible ?

Do you think there's a serious risk to see a chemical terrorist attack soon ?

  • Yes, the terrorists are ready to do everything that could harm the Western world and it's impossible

    Votes: 26 63.4%
  • No, I trust in our intelligence to prevent such an attack.

    Votes: 5 12.2%
  • No, that would be too risky and/or counter-productive for fundamentalists.

    Votes: 5 12.2%
  • Don't know.

    Votes: 5 12.2%

  • Total voters
    41

Marla_Singer

United in diversity
Joined
Oct 24, 2001
Messages
13,289
Location
Paris, west side (92).
See the story on Yahoo
Suspected Islamic extremists in French court, links to chemical plot

PARIS (AFP) -Six suspected Islamic extremists including the imam of a Lyon area mosque appeared before anti-terrorist judges here and were placed under formal investigation over suspicions they knew about plans for a chemical attack in France in 2002.



Chellali Benchellali, an imam in the Lyon suburb of Venissieux his son Hafed were placed under judicial investigation -- the first step towards being formally charged in France -- for "belonging to a criminal association in relation to a terrorist enterprise" and ordered held in jail.

Four other people, including Chellali Benchellali's wife Hafsa, were also placed under investigation, mostly for providing logistical support. Three were remanded in custody, while one was given conditional release.

The suspects were taken into custody last week as part of a French probe launched in 2002 into a so-called "Chechen network" of Islamic radicals with links to Al-Qaeda who allegedly underwent armed training at camps in the separatist Russian republic of Chechnya (news - web sites) and in Georgia in 2000 and 2001.

Chellali Benchellali is suspected of screening videotapes at his mosque aimed at recruiting fighters to join the Chechen separatists in their war against Moscow.

Another of his sons, Mourad, is one of six French nationals being held by US authorities at the military base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

French police said they had learned in questioning the detainees that Menad, Benchellali's eldest son, was seeking to produce "highly toxic" substances such as ricin or a botulism toxin.

Ricin is a naturally-occurring toxin found in castor beans and is 6,000 times more powerful than cyanide. A speck no larger than a grain of salt is enough to kill an adult.

Menad Benchellali was detained in December 2002 when police smashed a network of suspected Islamic radicals in the northeast Paris suburbs. At the time, investigators were convinced they had thwarted a chemical attack on French soil, possibly targeting Russian interests.

According to statements made by the suspects taken into custody last week, he learned to handle and make poisons in Afghanistan (news - web sites), and packaged his toxic concoctions in jars of Nivea face cream or 70 cl flasks, police sources said.

The products were then given to a local pharmacist for safe-keeping, the French newspaper Le Monde reported at the weekend, quoting sources close to the investigation.

Police have not yet found any of the toxic substances allegedly made by Menad Benchellali.

Le Monde said that during his interrogation, the imam admitted he knew of his son's plans, while other family members said they had purchased chemicals for him.

Police said other detainees had admitted to providing Menad Benchellali with logistical support, including false identity papers and funding.

French Justice Minister Dominique Perben on Monday hailed the country's counter-intelligence service DST, saying it had "conducted a probe which, I think, allowed us to keep very dangerous people from doing any harm."

French investigators are now looking into a possible link between the Benchellali family and the discovery of a small amount of ricin in a northeast London apartment in January 2003.

Fourteen people had previously been placed under judicial investigation in connection with the "Chechen network" probe.
 
As it happens I know someone who is a charged chemical weapon.. :(
 
I think that history has shown that chemical weapons cause more terror than actual casualties. For one thing, they are notoriously difficult to control and maintain, without causing harm to the intended users( remember Ramzi Yousef). Moreover, the conditions have to be just right for the release of the chemical weapon or else it will be neutralized by the atmospheric conditions. Thirdly, they are usable only in cramped, poorly ventilated areas to great effect and even here it is gone to dust, if it is discovered by any odd person. In fact, Aum Shirinkyo tried a chemical attack nearly 50 times in Tokyo, before succeeding in a closed subway, that too because the station master did not inform the police first before opening the suspicious package.
 
The ones they catch are probably just the tip of the iceberg, no doubt there are others out there. The terrorists would be foolish to do anything in France, it would make Europe as difficult a place to work and raise money as the U.S. is now. Chellali Benchellali? :lol: I have to write that name down somewhere, its a keeper:lol:
 
Yes and it's eventually going to happen. Probly not in France or UK first but you never know what these dweebs are thinking of hitting. They might suprise me and pull of something in Paris or London. Political correctness will prove deadly.
 
Originally posted by Dumb pothead
The ones they catch are probably just the tip of the iceberg, no doubt there are others out there. The terrorists would be foolish to do anything in France, it would make Europe as difficult a place to work and raise money as the U.S. is now. Chellali Benchellali? I have to write down that name somewhere, its a keeper
I don't understand at all your statement. France had actually been hit several times by fundamentalist attacks in the past. From 1995 to 1997, several bombings occured in Paris subway. We've found during that period a dozen of bombs in the network, three have exploded and killed dozens of people. Of course it's not the September, 11th, but it just proves France is a target.
 
I think fanatists have no interests to attempt a chemical attack. I've got no arguments, its what i feel
 
Originally posted by Marla_Singer
I don't understand at all your statement. France had actually been hit several times by fundamentalist attacks in the past. From 1995 to 1997, several bombings occured in Paris subway. We've found during that period a dozen of bombs in the network, three have exploded and killed dozens of people. Of course it's not the September, 11th, but it just proves France is a target.

Especially from Americans pissed off by your lack of support to "OPeration Iraqi Freedom". Their next act of terror..... French toast will be renamed Freedom toast to strike a blow at the very hearts of the French people;)
 
Im talking about an attack on the scale of 9-11 that kills thousands. Security would get much tighter all across Europe and make the terrorists job even more difficult than it was before.
 
Originally posted by Dumb pothead
Im talking about an attack on the scale of 9-11 that kills thousands. Security would get much tighter all across Europe and make the terrorists job even more difficult than it was before.
Well I just hope you're right DP.
 
Originally posted by Dumb pothead
Im talking about an attack on the scale of 9-11 that kills thousands. Security would get much tighter all across Europe and make the terrorists job even more difficult than it was before.

The last decade the French (secret service) have done much, much, much more than the Americans to counter terrorists! This in contrary to popular American believe ;) .

There is no way to tell, but I think the French might have prevented quite a few terrorist attacks!

Realise that fighting terrorists usually happens undercover. Sending expeditionary forces around the world might get a lot of attention, but are not necisarilly more effective ;) .
 
Yes, it is possible, workable, and capable of creating a large amount of casualties. This last factor is not always of great importance. The purpose of terrorism is to terrorise, and create fear, doubt and panic. Casualties are a bonus, and it is often the case that a terrorist act will have an impact and affect far, far greater than its body count. Consider the 1972 Munich Olympics attack, and many subsequent attacks.

It is more likely that a terrorist chemical attack would occur at the lower end of the scale, such as subway or mall attacks, even with relatively crude devices and distribution techniques. This would have a greater ripple than just the casualties. This would be particularly effective if carried out on several targets simulataneously, or in combination with other attacks/threats. Even the threat of terrorism serves its purpose in certain ways.

To take out a city, or cause very significant with chemical weapons, you need air burst/dispersed warhead(s), using nerve agent and favourable weather and geographical conditions. A city in a basin surrounded by hills will cop it worse than one in a different state.

In regards to the poll, "Yes, the terrorists are ready to do everything that could harm the Western world" and it is possible, but I don't believe that it is impossible to prevent. Good intelligence and law enforcement hits one flank; military and special forces another; diplomacy, propaganda and creative thinking yet another.
 
According to the poll (only 14 voters though), it seems a majority of people feels the risk as serious. I hate to say so but I'm part of it :(. It's sure terror is used at least as much by western goverments to make us support them than by terrorists to terrorize us. So the western goverments have all interests to say "we got people who wanted to gas you". However, I'm still sure there's a serious risk such an attack could occur. I guess there are as much chance I'll die in a terrorist bombing than chance I'll win to the lottery, but still, I don't feel comfortable with that idea.
 
Unlike the lottery, you can maximise your chances.
 
Marla,

Does the ''terrorist" attacked france for its implication in algeria ? According to what i know some very nasty stuff have been done into algeria.

They dont attack us for nothing, it is because our dear capitalist leader screwed them in the past.

You harvest what you seeded, seed exploitation and colonisation and harvest teerorist attack, seed respect and friendly behavior and harvest peace.
 
For that reason, my fellow wishy-washy, I'd have to vote "no" for target Canada, not by any other than a freak. There are freaks now and again (like the Aumi cult), so I can't rule it out.
 
Originally posted by Tassadar
Marla,

Does the ''terrorist" attacked france for its implication in algeria ? According to what i know some very nasty stuff have been done into algeria.

They dont attack us for nothing, it is because our dear capitalist leader screwed them in the past.

You harvest what you seeded, seed exploitation and colonisation and harvest teerorist attack, seed respect and friendly behavior and harvest peace.
I don't understand well your message, you seem to not know very well about what you're talking about. Algeria became an independant nation in 1962, afterwards, the main party which had fought for the independance came to power : The FLN, a secular pro-arab (Nasseirian) organization. Actually, you may not know that but the FLN used terror to lead the country to Independance. Just to make you understand better why there had been a war, There were 15 million people in that time in Algeria : 13 million "Arabs" and 2 million "Europeans" (I try to summarize). Those "Europeans" settled in Algeria during the 19th century so they weren't fresh newcomers, they were called "pieds noirs". Well, the war isn't the topic of the discussion but I just need to add it wasn't a regular war since it was an ugly war made of civilian bombings and torture. After the Independance, the "pieds noirs" had to move to France (2 million people) and the FLN took the power. They made of Algeria a dictatorship.

In the 90's, elections had been organized for the first time in Algeria. However, the fundamentalist party won it and as a result, the FLN denied the results of the election. Afterwards, the GIA (a local "Al Qaeda" organization) used terror in Algeria. The FLN was already very good at Terror so they used it too. It's been once again an ugly war of civilian bombings with also mass murders in villages. As the GIA was considering France to be responsible of the victory and support of the FLN, we got bombings in Paris subway. 8 people died in St Michel station (250 people wounded), 10 peopled in Orsay station (200 people wounded), 2 peopled died in Charles de Gaulle-Etoile station (20 people wounded) and 1 peopled died in Port Royal station (50 people wounded).

You may think France is responsible of that, but tell me then what France should have done ? The naughty "pieds noirs" people had already left the country for a long time and it was pointless to start once again a war against the FLN. We would have accused France on purpose to start a second war of colonization. Once we know what happened in the 90's, we can't say the fundamentalists of the GIA were "better" than the FLN. It was about removing a military dictatorship to install an obscurantist fundamentalist dictatorship. I'm not sure Democracy would have won in here. Sometimes, there are things that aren't your business which become your business because people consider that even after the colonization, you're still responsible of what's happening in the country. Tassadar, what would you have done instead ?

Today, the FLN is still in power in Algeria but we must admit the country has never been so close to Democracy. The press can be really rude against the power, some newspapers are dedicated to the fight against the FLN, and they usually don't get too much trouble about it. Elections are organized there but we can't say those elections are truely democratic since the main opposition, the fundamentalist party (FIS) is forbidden. That's actually a central question for any democracy in the Arab world : should we forbid or not a party that wants to destroy Democracy in the name of Democracy ? It's not such an easy question when we know there are still strong chance that the fundamentalist party could have the majority of votes.

Tassadar, I hope you've got better the complexity of the story. As you can see, it's not that black and white. Algeria is independant since 1962 (40 years ago). 75% of Algerians weren't born when the country became independant. How long people will continue to consider what's happening there is the fault of France ?
 
Originally posted by rmsharpe
To those that voted "no," have you ever heard of the Tokyo subway system?

Get over it Rmsharpe. People in here don't know what they're talking about. Fundies have blown up the South of Manhattan and some weirdos in here consider they are too nice to make a chemical attack ! :lol: Fundamentalists are brainless freaks and I wish they will kill thousands of people in Paris subway. This way, frenchies would know what is terrorism and maybe they'll understand why we went after Saddam.
 
Top Bottom