This research led us to conclude that American soil is under a real threat with Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). The historical momentum, the facts, and the evidence supporting them, which are described in a chronological context, are sufficient to persuading us about this premise, although some skeptical consider this is just another conspiracy theory.

1. Munoz 1
Nancy Y. Munoz
Professor Jarvis Slacks
EN-102
May 15, 2014
The Post 9/11 New Terrorists
Threat with Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)
According to National Security’s scholars, the events of 9/11, 2001, marked a turning point
in the recent history of the United States. That day millions of people not only in this country,
but also around the world watched on TV a plane exploding into the South tower of the World
Trade Center in New York City; a second plane passed across the North Tower, and a few hours
later due to the impact, collapsing these two skyscrapers, the greatest symbol of America.
Dantesque scenes that seemed more out of fiction than real life left around 3,000 dead, hundreds
injured and untold losses. Amid the panic and confusion arose two fundamental questions: What
was this? How likely is a terrorist attack involving weapons of mass destruction (WMD) to
happen?
“Before September 11, 2001, the words “terrorism” and “war” had not been conflated. This
9/11, a day that “changed everything”, demanded crucial responses aimed at protecting the
nation. Thus, President George W. Bush declared: “The deliberate and deadly attacks which
were carried out yesterday against our country were more than acts of terror…They were acts of
war”. This was “a new kind of war”, which implies “a new kind of terrorist, able to make war
on the most powerful nation on earth” (Dudziak 100).

2. Munoz 2
In this context, the concept of New Terrorism has reached a specified connotation. Due to
the event of 9/11 security experts have distinguished this manifestation of terrorism from
terrorist groups operated in the past. They mentioned eight fundamental characteristics. 1) The
U.S. territory was increased risk of a terrorist attack like 9/11. 2.) The new terrorism is more
violent. This not only wants attention but also mass casualties; 3.) Unlike old terrorist style, the
new ones are transnational, non-state actors who operate globally against the West, the far enemy
and secular Muslim, the near enemy; 4) Today’s terrorist are better funded so that they have
large sums of money from the mafia, all kinds of traffic and black market. 5) It is known based
on the material seized in some of their training camps, that nowadays terrorists are better trained
than their Cold War counterparts; 6) This religiously and ethnically motived new terrorism
cannot be infiltrated through old methods -sex, money, lure-. Besides, its networked cellular
structure used by Al Q’da and allies makes particularly difficult such infiltration; 7) The
determination to obtain and use weapons of mass destruction (WMS), in contrast to conventional
weapons used by their predecessors. Today’s terrorists are interesting in nuclear, radiological,
chemical, and biological weapons, with massive potential destruction; 8) Finally, a tangible
victory is not in sight (Howard 7).
The most worrisome of these characteristics is the New Terrorism’s determination to obtain
and use weapons of mass destruction (WMD) because terrorist can assassinate thousands,
millions, through a single act. Acquiring (WMD) has become easier thanks to information’s
technology advances and the availability of providers. By using (WMD) any terrorist group,
even without a state sponsor, would be able to put at risk of annihilation an extensive population.
In Afghanistan, for instance, it was discovered that Al Q’da and other homologous groups are
pursuing biological agents for utilizing against the U.S. and its allies. Besides, Abu Musad al

3. Munoz 3
Suri, Al Q’da’s operational leader and ideologue, expressed in a letter to the U.S. State
Department in regards to 9/11 events: “If I were consulted in the case of that operation I would
advise the use of planes in flights from outside the U.S. that would carry (WMD)…is still very
complicated. Yet, it is possible after all, with Allah’s help, and more important than being
possible-it is vital…” According to Al Suri operating (WMD) is the only mean to achieve the
balance of power in their favor, which explains the unused interest of Al Q’da for (WDM).
(Howard 17).
In Europe, Middle East, and Caucasus have been detected attempts to obtain, build, and
employ (WDM) by Al Q’da’s associated during past decade: In Pankisi George, (Georgia), has
been verified biological and chemical weapons activity; in the Caucasus, (the French Judge Jean-
Louis Bruguiere), has collected evidence of special training camps where chemical-biological
terrorist have been trained to fabricate chemical and biological systems and bombs; many of the
mujahideen who end training return to Europe to apply their knowledge. In Pakistan, a strategic
location for Al Qad’s (WDM) programs, some scientist has supported Al Qad’s efforts to acquire
nuclear weapons. In Southeast Asia, Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) has been involved with many plots to
accomplish local (WDM) attacks and provide international assistant to develop WMD.
According to the 9/11 Commission Report, when Al Qad’s leader “needed a scientist to take over
its biological weapons program” called Jemaah. One of his pupils “spent several months
attempting to cultivate anthrax for Al Q’da in a laboratory, he helped set up near the Kandahar
airport”. (9-11 Commission Report, 2004, web) Moreover, Gunaratna informed about a “JI
manual” that explains how to perform chemical attacks with chemical hydrogen cyanide. It said,
for example, “30ml of the agent can kill 60 million people, Good willing”. According to

4. Munoz 4
Gunaratna, JI planned to use chemical weapons against western targets in May 2006. (Howard
18)
Currently, the U.S. Secretary of State has designated fifty-seven (57) organizations that
operate worldwide as "Foreign Terrorist Organizations. The inclusion in the list is determined
by being involved in terrorist activities as effective attacks, planning and preparation of future
attacks, or keeping the capability and intent to perform such acts. Furthermore, according to legal
criteria contained in section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 (INA) “…The
organization’s terrorist activity or terrorism must threaten the security of U.S. nationals or the
national security (national defense, foreign relations, or the economic interests) of the United
States…or retain the capability and intent to engage in terrorist activity or terrorism…” (USCIS).
The reasons why experts in National Security are concern mainly about the new terrorism
focuses on possibility of using (WDM). To understand these fear is necessary to make a brief
review of what these weapons are, clarifying that this essay only deal with chemical and
biological weapons.
A chemical attack “is the spreading of toxic chemicals with the intent to do harm”. Different
kind of toxic chemicals can be used as chemical weapons such as those developed for military
use, materials employed commonly in industry or trade as oil production, textiles, plastics,
fertilizers, paper, food, pesticides, etc., or toxic substances, chemical or biological, such as ricin.
Their toxicity depends on many factors as its presentation-solid, liquid or vapor-, concentration
degree, substance components, or the way they are used, for example, in closed spaces (Howard
539). One of the main problems with these toxic materials is the double use of some of them, as
long as they are being intended for legal purposes, industry, or trade; nevertheless, its use is
diverted to illicit purposes which makes it difficult to control and detection as lethal weapons.

5. Munoz 5
In the modern era (1914-2013) have been recorded about 39 attacks using multiple
biological or multiple chemical agents; that is, since World War I until the last year in Damascus,
Syrian, by military against civilian in urban areas. The last one, resulted in 1,429 killed people
(including 426 children) and 2,200 injured; the one in the World War I, 1914-1918 has left the
greatest number of victims: 90,000 killed and 1,300,000 injured; the actors have been military,
terrorist groups, or religious sects among others. Since 9/11 ten events are recorded, one of
which occurred in the U.S. between September 8 and October 9, related to “anthrax-laced
letters” mailed to federal officials and new media office in Washington D.C., New York City,
and others, which resulted in 5 killed and 17 injured. The best-known events are those occurred
in 1994 in Matsumoto, Japan, when Aum Shinrikyo, a religious cult leader, released “sarin nerve
gas” killing 7 civilians and 270 injured. Shinrikyo repeated the attack in 1995, in Tokyo, where
he delivered the same gas toxic in a subway that led to12 killed, and 5,511 injured, many of them
with permanent injuries (Johnston).
“Chemical weapons are highly toxic liquid and gaseous substances that can be dispersed in
bombs, rockets, missiles, artillery, mines, and grenades or spray tanks. If it is absorbed through
the skin…can incapacitate or kill with just a few microscopic drops.” Most dissipate quickly into
the atmosphere, while few -notably VX and mustard gas- are far more persistent and raise long-
term health and environmental concerns. Assessing the chemical terrorism threat from the point
of view of availability of these kinds of weapons, the most common are sarin, tabun, hydrogen
cyanide, and XV, as they are easy to make or to get. (Coleman143, 146)
According to RAND Corporation database, over 9000 terrorist incidents with chemical
agents have taken place between 1968-2003. Terrorist have been involved with them on about
100 events that include attempts to acquire or make it, threats to used it or cases of effective use.

6. Munoz 6
In turn, the Monterrey Institute of International Affairs, in the period 1975-2000 register 139 in
the U.S. connected to chemical substances for political or ideological reasons. Internationally it
shows 203 cases involving religious groups or nationalist groups in activities such as acquisition,
possession, use, and more serious, purpose of terrorist association. Likewise, note that most of
these events involve extremely lethal substances to facilitate a massive escalation of attacks with
toxic gases. (Coleman 147)
On the other hand, Biological attack can be defined as “…the intentional release of a
pathogen (disease-causing agent) or biotoxin (poisonous substance produced by a living
organism) against humans, plants or animals. An attack against people could be used to cause
illness, death, fear, societal disruption, and economic damage…” (Howard 560). The most
known lethal agents are: Anthrax, Plague, Smallpox, Ebola virus, Botulism, Ricin, Cholera,
which incubation period oscillate between1-6, 7-17, or 1-3 days. These have high environmental
stability.
Biological agents could be disseminated by aerosols, food or water, human carriers, infected
animals, insects, physically distribute, for example, through the US mail, among others means.
Unlike chemical or nuclear attack, a biological may remain undetected for hours, days, or even
weeks until symptoms are manifested. Some transmissible (contagious) agents can spread
through respiratory droplets from coughing and sneezing, or by direct contact with fluids or feces
(Howard 562, 563).
Biological agents are endemic in Eastern Africa. “This means that the disease-causing
microorganism occur naturally in the region and are therefore accessible to those with sufficient
knowledge to use to deliberately case disease” (Coleman 108). Thus, this region represents a
potential threat from Biological weapons. Outbreaks of Ebola fever (in Uganda and Sudan), Rift

7. Munoz 7
Valley fever (in Kenya and Somalia), and yellow fever (in Kenya) are just a few examples of
pandemics with catastrophic effects: “Potential manifestations include terror in the affected
population and medical care personnel; an overwhelming number of casualties, placing demands
on special medications; a need for personal protection in medical care settings and clinical
laboratories; and problems with general handling”(Coleman 109). Recent Ebola virus outbreaks
in the Congo suggest that the most effective method to limit casualties is to quickly quarantine
anyone who shows signs and symptoms of hemorrhagic fever.
Accordingly, “the main functions of bioterrorism are to cause panic, disruption and chaos, so
biological agents don't have to cause a fatal disease to be effective. In fact, many biological
warfare agents are categorized as 'incapacitating agents' that are not intended to produce a fatal
disease” (Nicolson).
The recent outbreak of inhalation anthrax in Florida and cutaneous anthrax in New York in
the first week of October 2001, might illustrated those effects of panic. In this case a very small
amount of anthrax spores caused only a few casualties and one death but caused tremendous
panic in the local populous. The acquisition, storage and transport of biological material can be
easier, when compared with those required for nuclear or chemical weapons.
This makes the threat of bioterrorism substantial increase and explains, to some extent, why
the government has created research programs in the study and prevention of bioterrorism:
By 2007, USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had
registered 13, 505 public and private Biosafety Level (BSL)-3 laboratories (to handle
agents such as anthrax and tularemia for which a vaccine or treatment exists), and fifteen
BSL-4 laboratories instead of the five registered with CDC and operational pre-9/11 II

8. Munoz 8
(able to investigate agents with no vaccine or cure, such as Ebola virus and Lassa fever)
(Spiers 147).
Likewise, the administration has launched a national strategy for drugs and vaccines reserves
that include about 300 million doses for Small Pox, compared with 90,000 before 9/11.
Similarly, the government has invested large sums of money on those purposes: “By the end
of 2008, the United States had spent some $48 billon on biodefense measures since
9/11…growing from $690 million in FY 2001 to 5.4 billion in FY 2008 (quite apart from the 5.6
billion earmarked for Project BioShield (July 2004) over ten years…” (Spiers 147)
On the other hand, the Final Report of the 9/11 Commission stated clearly that: “…al Qaeda
has tried to acquire or make weapons of mass destruction for at least ten years. There is no doubt
that the United States would be a primer target (Commission).
On November 14, 2005, members of the 9/11 Public Discourse Project that replaced the 9/11
Commission and reported its recommendations’ status, affirmed: “Preventing terrorist from
gaining access to weapons of mass destruction must be elevated above all other problems of
national security because it represents the gravest threat to the American people”. (Stantey16)
John Negroponte, Director of National Intelligence for the Annual Treat Assessment Senate
Committee on Intelligence, January 11, 2007, testified: “….we receive reports indicating that al-
Qa.ida and other groups are attempting to acquire chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear
weapons or materials.
National Intelligence Council reaffirmed that Terrorist groups, especially Al Q’da will
remain “to try to acquire and employ chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear material in
attacks and would not hesitate to use them if it develops what it deems is sufficient capability”
(Negroponte)

9. Munoz 9
Similarly, Dennis C Blair, Director of National Intelligence, in the Annual Threat Assessment
of the Intelligence Community, on 12, February 2009, informed that exists a substantial threat
from terrorist attempting to acquire biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons and “use them to
conduct large-scale attacks.” (Blair)
Spite the fact that some scholars consider the possibility of a terrorist attack using weapons
of mass destruction (WMD), specifically Chemical or Biological weapons, as pure fiction or at
least far away from occur, I think there is enough evidence that prove otherwise. The
demonstrated facts occurred inside and outside the country, the proliferation of contraband
materials that can be used for making chemical weapons, the outbreaks of deadly diseases known
as Ebola, Margbug, Zaire, Aids, etc., leave no doubt about the latent threat of terrorist attack
using WDM against the American society. On the other side and according to the findings
mentioned above, the reasons given by skeptical have no place. For instance, the difficulty of
access to raw materials, their high costs, or any other limitations that incredulous proclaim, have
not stopped the terrorist attempts registered. Likewise, would not be neither logical nor
reasonable that the U.S. government allocated much of its budget and an official attention to
prevent a possible terrorist attack using WMD if it would not exist a real and serious threat.

10. Munoz 10
Works Cited
Coleman, Kim. A History of Chemical Warfare. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan, 2005.
Print.
Dudziak, Mary L. War Time. New York, NY: Oxford University Press Inc., 2012. Print.
Howard, Russel D, and James J. F. Forest. Weapons of Mass Destruction and Terrorism. Unite
States of America: Mac Graw Hill, 2008. Print.
Johnston, Robert. Summary of historical attacks using chemical or biological chemical or
biological weapons. Johnstonsarchive. Robert Johnston, 27 January 2014. Web. 10 May
2014.
Nicolson, Garth L. Bioterrorism and Biological Warfare Agents. Immed. The Institute for
Molecular Medicine. Web. 10 May 2014.
Renshon, Stanley A. National Security in the Obama Administration. New York, NY: Routledge,
2010. Print.
Spiers, Edward M. A History of Chemical and Biological Weapons. London, UK: Reaktion
Books Ltd, 2010. Print.
United States. Department of Homeland and Security. U.S. INA: ACT 219 – Designation of
Foreign Terrorist Organization. Washington D.C.: Citizenship and Immigration
Services. USCIS. Web. 10 May 2014.
United States. National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States. What to Do?
A Global Strategy. Washington D.C.: National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon
the United States. Govinfo. Web. 10 May 2014.
United States. Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Annual Threat Assessment of the

11. Munoz 11
Director National Intelligence. Washington D.C.: John D. Negroponte. 2007. Fas. Web.
10 May 2014.
United States. Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Annual Threat Assessment of the
Director National Intelligence. Washington D.C.: Dennis C. Blair. 2009. Books. Web. 10
May 2014.
21. (UG 447, M. Spiers, 147)
1. (U.21.2, Dudziak 100-1) (Munoz1)
2. (U.793, Howard, Forest 7) (Munoz 2)
3. (U.21.2, Dudziak 100-1, 1001-1, 104-1) (Munoz 1)
4. (U.21.2, Dudziak 104-2) (Munoz 2)
5. (U.21.2 Dudziak 108-1) (Munoz 2)
6. (UA23, Stanley A. 4-5) (Munoz 2)
7. (9-11 Commission Report, 2004, web) (Munoz 3)
(http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report_Ch12.htm).
8. (Stantey A. 16) (Munoz 3)
8. (9/11 Public Discourse Project, 2007, web) (Munoz 3)
(https://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2007_hr/011107negroponte.pdf)
9. (Testimony by Dennis C. Blair, Director of National Intelligence, 12 Feb. 2009. Web)
(http://books.google.com/books?id=5gMwKmkz6ioC&lpg=PP1&dq=Dennis%20Blair%20Annu
al%20Threat%20Assessment%20of%20the%20intelligence&pg=PA21#v=onepage&q=Dennis%
20Blair%20Annual%20Threat%20Assessment%20of%20the%20intelligence&f=false)(Munoz4)

12. Munoz 12
10. (National Intelligence Estimate, “The Terrorist Threat to the U.S. Homeland,” July 2007)
(Munoz 4) (UA 23 pgs., 16, 228 #93 look for web source)
11. The New York Times, Wednesday, May 23, 2012, Election 2008, The First Presidential
Debate, September 26, 2008 (http://www.nytimes.com/) (Munoz4)
12. (Official Website of the Department of Homeland and Security, INA: ACT 219, Designation
of Foreign Terrorist Organization)
http://www.uscis.gov/iframe/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/act.html (Munoz4)
13. (U.793, Howard, Forest, 539) (Munoz4)
14. Summary of historical attacks using chemical or biological chemical or biological weapons,
compiled by Wm. Robert Johnston, last updated 27 January 2014, web. (Munoz5)
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/terrorism/chembioattacks.html
15. (UG 447-, Coleman146, 147) (Munoz 6)
16. (U.793, Howard, Forest 560) (Munoz 6)
17. (U.793, Howard,) (Munoz 6)
18. (UG.447-108) (Munoz 6)
19. (UG.447-109) (Munoz 6)
20. Bioterrorism and Biological Warfare Agents Prof. Garth L. Nicolson The Institute
for Molecular Medicine Huntington Beach, California 92649. (web) (Munoz 7)
http://www.immed.org/illness/bioterrorism.html

13. Munoz 13