11.09.2014 Author: Gordon Duff

Nuclear Terror Alert in US: Hoax or Blackmail?

567567A mysterious article was published in the New York Daily News today. On the surface, it made no sense, a short article about a claimed nuclear threat against the World Trade Center, term a “heartless prank” by the paper, owed by “quad citizen,” Israel, US, UK and Australia, Rupert Murdock.

Intelligence professionals have long looked on the NYDN as a Mossad front, doing much more than simply propagandizing and spreading smut and cheap pornography. In light of recent developments, the nuclear terrorism warnings from former Vice President Dick Cheney and the leak by Edward Snowden of the 2003 Department of Energy 9/11 Nuclear Investigation Report, citing multiple hybrid neutron and Thermobaric nuclear weapons in the destruction of the World Trade center, this current “hoax” has an even darker side.

This is the unedited text of the article:

A callous prank caller threatened to destroy 1 World Trade Center with a nuclear bomb Friday night — six days before the 13th anniversary of 9/11. The caller phoned in the threat to the city’s 911 system at about 7 p.m., claiming the device was placed next to the building near Vesey St. in lower Manhattan. Port Authority police and members of the Joint Terrorism Task Force raced over, but found nothing, law enforcement sources said. The call was traced to Brooklyn, but no arrests had been made Friday evening, sources said. Thousands will be flocking to 1 World Trade Center, as well as the 9/11 Museum and Memorial, on Thursday as the city marks the 13th anniversary of the terror attack on the World Trade Center and remembers the nearly 3,000 people who died there.”

When major portions of the DOE nuclear report were serialized in Veterans Today and other publications and confirmed by both the International Atomic Energy Agency and Los Alamos National Laboratories as legitimate, the New York Daily News boycotted the story. However, today the NYDN headlines with a story of a “prank” call.

In fact, the NYDN story contains no references to confirmations, no one was interviewed, in fact there is no known source to any of the information given. If no announcement was made, no press release, no press conference, how did the NYDN know of the supposed call?


442342342There is good reason police would have rushed to the scene as the DOE report clearly cited moving vans parked under the World Trade Center as containing some of the destructive nuclear devices used.

The 2003 report included specifics on parking lot security, weapons placement in relationship to lot access protocols and their relationship with blast effects. The report cited white moving vans which were seen on video referred to but to this day classified and not released to the public.

The threat reported by the NYDN could only have been referring to a vehicle which, of course, would never have remained abandoned on a New York street with a nuclear weapons inside, especially in Lower Manhattan, a city under virtual military siege for 13 years.

In fact, until Snowden released the report to Russian Naval Intelligence, distribution had been limited to White House officials, key members of congress and the Pentagon and select federal judges. When interviewed, scientists at Sandia Labs who participated in the investigation said they had been under gag order regarding the report and, as of 2005, were ordered to stop any further investigations. This group, which worked in coordination with IAEA investigators who were at “ground zero” almost immediately as they were attending a conference at the UN on 9/11/2001, has released their working papers and notes, some of which have been published on Veterans Today.


What alarms law enforcement and intelligence professionals is the nature of the story itself. Were a threat of nuclear blackmail to be made, this is the exact venue to be used and a threat of this kind would be particularly insidious if a minor “hoax” were given this kind of coverage.

Another alarming aspect of the story is that there is no mention that former Vice President Cheney had issued an almost identical warning, not so far as to exact placement or time, but as to the use of nuclear weapons. Without this “detail,” the wording of the NYDN story may well represent, in itself, a nuclear threat and the article, not the alleged phone call, is the real warning.


The 2003 DOE report references stolen weapons, arms trader Victor Bout and extensive involvement of Israeli groups in 9/11. That the Snowden leak would be suppressed is no surprise. That it would coincide with a noted cooling of relations with Israel including weapons boycotts and America’s schizophrenic “defense of Israel” during the recent Gaza War indicates that it is likely the Obama White House finds the Snowden leak credible.

It also means they may well have never been given access to this vital material suppressed by the Bush administration.

During the Gaza War, stories of Iron Dome interceptions of Hamas rockets became less and less credible. There was no video of interceptions or wreckage, no video of Israeli launches on social media where there should have been literally thousands of such videos.

Moreover, though congress voted more money for the Iron Dome, a clear indication it had failed as configured, the real story behind this US reaction has been withheld. Israel has powerful influence over congress because of the Citizens United court decision that allows controversial figures like Adelson and Koch openly bribe or blackmail government officials to do Israel’ bidding.

However, the Iron Dome is and has been dependent on American AEGIS ships, as is the missile defense system of the United States. 38 such advanced ships defend the US and her allies including American military operations and fleet activities. Two had always been “on station” defending Israel.

President Obama removed them and placed them in the Black Sea which allowed Hamas rockets to land as will with impunity. Congress voted over $200 million to fund AEGIS capability for Israel that an American president would not be able to withdraw as leverage against Israeli atrocities.

Today’s “hoax” quite probably, taken in context, is, in itself, a threat against the United States by the State of Israel, a threat of nuclear retaliation by a nation that has, as the Snowden leak made clear, has used nuclear weapons against the US before.

Gordon Duff is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War that has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades and consulted with governments challenged by security issues. He’s a senior editor and chairman of the board of Veterans Today, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.