Case Study #3: Jose Padilla case involving radiological bomb plot, March 2002 Jose Padilla, also known as Ibrahim, or Abdullah al-Muhajir is an interesting case of an individual who seeks notoriety an Original Papers

Case Study #3: Jose Padilla case involving radiological bomb plot, March 2002

Jose Padilla, also known as Ibrahim, or Abdullah al-Muhajir is an interesting case of

an individual who seeks notoriety and fame while being manipulated at the hands of

others.  This case is probably more remembered as an example of “what may

happen” as much as “what did happen”.  The prospect of a “lone wolf” terror attack in

the United States is plausible and real, with recent incidents involving Jihadists

occurring in Paris, Amsterdam, and Copenhagen as current examples.   

Individuals such as Jose Padilla seemingly fed up and angry about the course their

lives have taken, sought fame and notoriety for committing criminal acts while cloaked

in the intrigue of Jihadist fronts and acts of domestic terrorism.  Regardless, Jose

Padilla wanted to detonate an improvised nuclear device in the United States, but his

contacts in Al Qaeda lacked the means to carry out such as act.  Instead, Al Qaeda’s

chief operations officer, Abu Zubaydah, asked Padilla if he would undertake the

mission of detonating a dirty bomb or radiological dispersal device (RDD) instead.  

Individuals, caught up in the drama and attention associated with high profile terrorist

acts, seek out the support and approval of terror organizations.  These individuals are

more interested in making headline news than necessarily promoting a political or

religious agenda.  This was probably the case for Jose Padilla, and when he was

interrogated over the issue of wanting to detonate an RDD, seemed “vague and

uncertain” about such an act being planned by Al Qaeda masterminds.  How would

emergency management planners anticipate such an act, and what are the potential

consequences associated with the possible detonation of a RDD in an urban setting? 

These questions, and concerns are more important to understand and over-shadow

the case involving Jose Padilla and his eventual conviction. 

What is a dirty bomb? • NATO. (2010, June 15). NATO Review – The dirty bomb: low cost, high risk (with subtitles: English) [Video file]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z89pGkFVrhE

Instructions: 

Conduct a 4-5 page case study analysis of how you would respond, based on appropriate National Planning Scenario background, analysis, and response actions needed using the resources and information provided throughout the course.

1. Select one of the cases on WMD response and carefully read all materials in the case:
   • Case Study #3: Jose Padilla case involving radiological bomb plot, March 2002
2. Provide an overview of the situation:
   • Include information about where the attack occurred, demographics, key critical infrastructure, etc.
   • Discuss the weapon used, the damage it caused, injuries, deaths, etc.
3. Review the response:
   • Analyze what was done well and what could have been improved.
     • If an ICS structure was implemented, include an analysis of how it operated. If one was not implemented, discuss why this may have happened.
   • Identify key agencies involved in the response.
   • Determine if any agencies should have been involved and were not.
4. Prevention:
   • Discuss how the attack could have been prevented.
   • Include any detection methods that you have learned in this course that could be applicable.
5. Lessons Learned:
   • Research any changes that were made to preparedness because of this attack.
6. Current Vulnerability:
   • Based on what you learned about the incident, discuss where the United States may still be vulnerable to a similar attack.
7. Mitigation and Prevention:
   • Suggest mitigation or prevention measures that could be used to prevent a future attack.
   • Provide an overview of the key agencies involved in implementing those measures.

GENERAL GUIDANCE

• You are responsible for researching the body of knowledge available for building an appropriate response to the scenario you selected.
• Please keep in mind there is no “school-house” solution to this assignment and success can be achieved in any number of ways available to you. The key is to critically analyze and think about/through your plan development, using the planning principles provided.

Requirements: 

• Use a minimum of three primary source references.
• Submit a 4–5-page Word document with APA formatting, ensuring that in-text and reference citations are present.