A Fruitless Endeavor Against Pakistan’s Nukes (Dan 7)

Khan: Father of the Islamic Nuclear Bomb

Khan: Father of the Islamic Nuclear Bomb

International campaign against Pakistan’s nuclear weapons

In 1946 United Nations passed its first major resolutions against these weapons. It called for complete elimination of these weapons. Weapons of mass destructions has left their mark forever. The world has never been the same ever since these explosions. With utter disregard to catastrophic impacts of such weapon on humans, environment and other species, many states have invested billions of dollars in development of such weapons.  Russia (10,000-12,600 warheads), the U.S.A (9,613 warheads), France (300 warheads), China (240 warheads) and United Kingdom with 180 warheads are the declared states with nuclear weapons. The race for acquiring such weapon has drawn other states to this quagmire of destruction. India and Israel with 100 and up to 200 nuclear warheads respectively have also joined the nuclear club.

From inception and invention of nuclear bomb, it has been one of the top priorities of most colonial, totalitarian and theocratic states. Even though the cost of acquiring such weapons is huge and the likelihood of using it is almost none but these states have diverted a large proportion of their GDPs in the search for these lethal weapons and their maintenance.  Two rouge states have caused much fear throughout the world. These are the Persian colonial theocratic state of Iran and the Punjabi Muslim colonial theocratic state of Pakistan. As if possession of weapons of mass destruction defines their entire existence.

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons was signed in 1968. The main objectives of this treaty were to pursue a policy of nuclear disarmament and stop spread of nuclear weapons. This treaty has not prevented the proliferation of nuclear weapons. To fanatic rulers of Pakistan and Iran it has meant nothing at all. They kept exploiting the people under their domination and used their wealth in developing these weapons. The Punjabi rulers misled the world, by means of constant begging and plundering the natural resources of nations under their occupations such as the Baloch nation, and acquired their weapons of mass destruction.  The Shia clergy rulers of Iran have been trying to do the same. These states are colonial theocratic states. The two defining characteristics of these states are religious fundamentalism and militarism. These states cannot last long without being violent and destructive.

Modern nuclear weapons are thousands of times more destructive and powerful than those which destroyed the two Japanese cities. The people who suffer from the adverse effects of such weapons are the marginalised and dispossessed people. One nation that has suffered immeasurably from these unwanted weapons of mass destruction is the Baloch nation.

Balochistan is situated in central Asia.  Its total area is about 560,000 square kilometres with population of over Seventeen million people. British imperial army invaded Balochistan in 1839. Subsequently, it divided Balochistan in three parts. Currently, the western Balochistan is under illegal occupation of Persian theocratic rulers of Iran. The eastern part of Balochistan regained its independence from Britain on 11 August 1947, the news of which was reported in the New York Times on 12 August 1947. The newly forged British colonial construction, the state of Pakistan (the land of cleans!), ordered its army to invade eastern Balochistan on 27 March 1948 and annexed Balochistan by force to its territory. Punjabi army, clergy and commercial rulers of Pakistan since illegal occupation of eastern Balochistan have carried out five major military operations, which were in 1948, 1958, 1962, 1973-77 and 2002 that is still in its full swing. Thousands of Baloch political and human rights and civilian have been abducted and disappeared, killed and displaced in the course of these military offences.

In addition, Panjabi army of Pakistan conducted six nuclear tests in Balochistan on 28 May 1998. These nuclear explosions were conducted in Chaghai Mountains in Balochistan and tests were carried out in total secrecy. Baloch were kept in complete darkness during the whole process of construction and testing of these weapons. A very large territory of Balochistan has been affected by these explosions.  There have been many reports of deaths of both human and animals from strange infections and illnesses in this region since these nuclear tests. The Panjabi rulers of Pakistan have permitted no Baloch or independent scientists to study and examine the actual impact of these tests on Baloch people and their environment.

Baloch pro-freedom leader, Hyrbyair Marri (a provincial minister at the time of blasts), issued a strong worded statement as soon as the Pakistani rulers announced the explosion of their “Islamic Bomb” on Baloch soil in 1998. He strongly condemned this criminal act and described “the tests in the name of country’s defence as a death warrant for Baluchistan.” Hyrbyair Marri and his likeminded friends also drafted the Balochistan Liberation Charter and put a separate article in the Charter about these nuclear tests on Baloch soil.

Article 73 of Balochistan Liberation Charter:“Soon after regaining independence immediate action will be taken for the complete removal and eradication of all nuclear activities in Balochistan. Nuclear tests were conducted, against the wishes and without the consent of Baloch people, in Balochistan. They were carried out by Pakistan in the Raaskoh Mountian in Chaagi district of Balochistan on 28th May 1998. An independent investigation, by the United Nations, on the impact of these tests on the people and environment in these regions in Balochistan will be requested. The areas that have been contaminated by radio toxicity will be cleaned and there will be independent scientific research carried out to establish the damage caused on the environment and the effects of radiation on the people living in these regions. The State responsible for this crime against the Baloch people will be held accountable and justice will be sought through the international system of justice. Any state held to account should also be made to pay compensation to those people affected from the disaster.”

Since then the Panjabi Jihadist army has not just stopped their nuclear industry in Balochistan but they have extended their nuclear activities in Balochistan and spread the sale of their destructive booms to other rouge states. Since the blasts Mr Marri has been a leading campaigner against Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and on several occasions he expressed his fear that these weapons sooner or later will fall into the hands of anti-Western religious extremists such at Taliban and ISIS.
Like previous years the Baloch pro-freedom activists and Baloch pro-freedom leader Hyrbyair Marri have announced an international anti-nuclear campaign starting from 19 April till 28 May, 2015. The first protest of this series was held in Dusseldorf city of Germany on 19 April where pro-freedom Baloch activists have gathered carrying banners and placards inscribed with slogans against Pakistan’s nuclear blast in Balochistan. They demanded from the UN and other international bodies to send experts to Balochistan’s Chaighi region to examine the effects of Pakistani nuclear weapons on local population.

The second protest demonstration was held in Borås city of Sweden on 1st May where Baloch activists distributed leaflets as part of the awareness campaign against Pakistan’s crimes against humanity in Balochistan.  There will be a protest and awareness campaign event on 12 May in Canada, and on 17 May in London. These are warm up protest to spread awareness about the main protest on 28 May, 2015. On this day 28 May, 1998 Pakistan tested its nuclear bombs in Balochistan without the consent of Baloch people.

Regional observers believe that Pakistan’s breeding ground for the religious extremist organisation and these organisations like Al-Qaeeda and ISIS have are trying to get their hands on Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. Recently the extremists groups have increased their activities in Pakistan and many small terrorist organisations have already pledged allegiance to ISIS which make it even easier for the ISIS to find new recruits in Pakistan. There are also reports that many senior officials within the Pakistan army are sympathetic to the anti-western extremist organisations.

The Baloch International campaign and simultaneous protests on 28 of May in different districts of Balochistan and abroad in Germany, Norway, Sweden, Canada and London and Glasgow are aimed at informing the world about the dangers of Pakistani’s nuclear weapons and bringing the plight of Baloch nation to the attention of world community. During the series of protests and on 28 May Baloch activists will also run an online campaign using hashtag: #NoToPakistaniNukes and #28MayBlackDay to highlight the effects of Pakistani nuclear explosions and other human rights violations in Balochistan.

This year the protesters demands will be as follows:

(A) – an immediate halt to all Pakistani nuclear activities in Balochistan
(B) – To allow independent scientists, international organisations and media to study and assess the harmful impacts of Pakistan nuclear tests in Balochistan
(C) To stop military operations and to remove completely all nuclear weapons, facilities and wastes under supervision of the UN authority from Balochistan, and
(D) – They will demand from democratic world including all human rights organisations and the United Nations to send an independent fact finding team to Balochistan to find out about the faith of state enforced disappeared persons, the kill and dump victims and the victims of mass graves which were discovered during the last two years in Balochistan.

Russian nuclear horn supplies Iran (Dan 7)

Russian-Iranian Arms Sale: Repercussions of the Nuclear Talks

1 day ago | Updated 1 day ago

Majid Rafizadeh President of the International American Council

For the Islamic Republic of Iran, one of the most significant and beneficial byproducts of the ongoing nuclear talks with the P5+1 nations — the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Russia, and China — is not solely linked to the prospects of Iran’s nuclear program. In fact, the international legitimacy that Iranian leaders are gaining from the negotiations bears much-more-positive consequences for Tehran’s strategic geopolitical and military designs in the Middle East.
At the beginning of this year, Sergei Shoigu became the first Russian Minister of Defense to visit Tehran in 15 years. Then, in April, Russian President Vladimir Putin paved the way for delivering a missile system to Iran by lifting a ban on the sale of sophisticated Russian air-defense missiles to Tehran. The ban had been imposed in 2010 as a result of UN Security Council resolutions, as well as pressure and lobbying from the United States and Israel. Nevertheless, Iran’s military power and the Russian-Iranian partnership have shifted since the P5+1 and Iran reached a framework for a final nuclear deal.

Rise in the Russian-Iranian Partnership

For Iranian leaders the progress in the nuclear talks can significantly increase their geopolitical and economic influence in the region through global trade that could bolster Tehran’s military power. For example, the S-300 surface-to-air missile system can provide the Islamic Republic with a powerful deterrence against any air strikes (including from ballistic missiles or cruise missiles) against their nuclear sites. In addition, the arms sale could embolden Iran to scuttle the foreign-policy objectives of its rivals — including regional state actors and the United States — in the region.

For Russian leaders it is crucial to be ahead of the game when a final nuclear deal is reached between the P5+1 nations and Iran. Taking action will ensure that Moscow can reap a significant amount of trade profits (whether militarily or non-militarily) from Iran. For instance, Russia has long been negotiating to intensify its oil-for-goods barter deal with Tehran. Moscow can place its military deals with Tehran based on the oil-for-goods exchange program. This will provide Russian leaders with a leg up in Iran’s energy and financial markets before the final nuclear deal is signed.

Since a framework for a final nuclear has been reached, several powers will feel the urge to immediately intensify trade (including arms, goods, and oil) with Iran. Before European countries can tap into Iran’s market, Russia is attempting to secure its profits from its arms client (Iran), maintain its strategic alliance with Iran, reassert its military cooperation with Tehran, and enjoy a significant share in Iran’s market. Russia’s Ministry of Defense has stated that Moscow is ready to strike the arms deal, which is worth approximately $800 million.

In other words, the prospect of a final nuclear deal has prompted a race among several countries to benefit from the easing of UN Security Council sanctions against Iran. A competition to secure trade with Iran has already been initiated. And Russia, a long-term strategic ally of the Islamic Republic, would not desire to fall behind. As Andrei A. Klimov, the deputy chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee in the Federation Council (Russia’s Senate), told The New York Times, “We need to think about the future of our trade partnership [with Iran]. We don’t want to wait for anybody else. It is a kind of competition, if you like.”

Iran would welcome any military deal that could further advance its regional hegemonic ambitions. As Iran’s deputy defense minister, Reza Talaienik, told the semiofficial Tasnim News Agency in response to Russia’s decision to lift the ban on missile sales, “If Russia fulfills its commitment to deliver the S-300 missile system to Iran, it will be a step towards boosting the relations and collaborations between the two countries. It will be a step forward.”

In addition, as Tehran is considered a strategic ally of Moscow, bolstering Iran’s military power will further advance Russia’s strategic geopolitical objectives in the region. The heightened tensions between the Obama administration and President Putin pushed Moscow much closer to the Islamic Republic as well.

No Opposition From the West; Moderation in Iran’s Regional Policies?

Although some experts, policy analysts, and politicians might argue that Russia’s move would complicate the nuclear talks, it is unlikely that the Obama administration or Western allies would scuttle the final nuclear deal because of an Iran-Russia arms deal.

The recent developments clearly indicate that Iranian leaders will not moderate their objective of regional preeminence or scale down their military influence over other countries in the region. It appears that the easing of sanctions will be utilized by Iranian leaders to further invest in their country’s military and ratchet up Iran’s strategic geopolitical and economic influence in the Middle East.

Russia and the Iran have leveraged the international legitimacy that the Islamic Republic has gained from the nuclear talks to strengthen their strategic defense ties. This international legitimacy will not only bolster Iran’s military power, which would further destabilize the region and pose security concerns for other regional state actors, but will set off a global race to increase trade with Iran, including trade in arms.

Majid Rafizadeh, an American scholar and political scientist, is the president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He is originally from Iran and Syria.

Obama promoting China nukes (Ezekiel 17)

Obama administration urges approval of US-China nuclear pact

By MATTHEW PENNINGTON, Associated Press | May 12, 2015

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration on Tuesday urged senators to support a new 30-year agreement with China on civilian nuclear cooperation but faced a barrage of concern from both parties that Chinese companies are exporting sensitive technology to Iran and North Korea.
Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Countryman told the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations that China’s nonproliferation record has “improved markedly” since the last agreement was signed in 1985, “though it can still do better.” He said he could not confirm that Chinese firms have stopped selling such technology.

The current agreement expires at the end of the year. President Barack Obama submitted the new agreement to lawmakers April 21 for a period of review lasting 90 days when Congress is in session. If unopposed by legislation, the agreement goes into force.

Frank Klotz, under secretary for nuclear security at the Department of Energy, said the agreement will “enhance our ability to manage and mitigate the risk of China diverting sensitive nuclear technology to its military programs or re-exporting it without U.S. permission.”

Republicans and Democrats acknowledged economic benefits for the U.S. nuclear industry from cooperation with China, but voiced wide-ranging concerns over Beijing’s sticking to its international obligations.

Republican committee chairman Sen. Bob Corker said China has committed not to assist any country in the development of ballistic missiles that can be used to deliver nuclear weapons. But he added, “concerns persist about Chinese willingness and ability to detect and prevent illicit transfers.”

Top-ranking Democrat Sen. Ben Cardin said multiple State Department reports document that Chinese companies and individuals continue to export dual-use goods relevant to nuclear and chemical weapons and ballistic missile programs in Iran and North Korea.

“To me, this agreement presents us with a golden opportunity to place pressure on China to halt these dangerous activities,” Cardin said.

The original agreement signed in 1985 was delayed for 13 years because of questions over China’s proliferation to countries including Pakistan.

Since then, China has entered various international accords, including the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and has joined the Nuclear Suppliers Group. But it has decided to build more power reactors in Pakistan, although its facilities are not under international safeguards.

Countryman, who heads the State Department’s bureau of international security and nonproliferation, acknowledged that was inconsistent with China’s commitment as a Nuclear Suppliers Group member.
Democratic Sen. Edward Markey voiced the strongest opposition to the new agreement.

He said China has failed to take enforcement action against Li Fangwei, also known as Karl Lee, a Chinese man who has been indicted in the U.S. for allegedly contributing to Iran’s ballistic missile program and making millions of dollars in illegal financial transactions to avoid economic sanctions.

“It’s quite clear that there are entities within China who continue to sell materials that could have dual use application into this international nuclear weapon and ballistic missile marketplace in the same way A.Q. Khan was doing it out of Pakistan,” Markey said.

“I think it’s preposterous to conclude that the Chinese government is incapable of shutting this down,” he said.

Khan is a Pakistani scientist who operated an illicit network that sold nuclear weapons technology to countries such as Iran, North Korea and Libya.

Corker said the committee faces a “difficult task” in reviewing the China agreement. He said if the economic benefits of the agreement outweigh the concerns, it should be approved without delay. If not, and the concerns can’t be mitigated, he said the agreement should not be approved.

Countryman said it would be “devastating” to the U.S. nuclear industry to lose access to China’s fast-growing nuclear energy program, where a third of the world’s atomic power plants currently under construction are located.

U.S.-headquartered company Westinghouse is constructing four reactors in China, under a deal reached in 2005, and six more are planned, which it values at $25 billion.

Countryman said that ending cooperation would allow suppliers from Russia and France to gain a greater foothold in the Chinese market. It would also “create new difficulties” in the administration’s efforts to manage the complex U.S.-China relationship, he said.

History Of Trouble At Indian Point Nuclear Plant (Rev 6:12)

WATCH: ‘The beginning of the end of NY’s nuclear power?’


Has the endgame begun for Indian Point? Sure looks that way.

Riverkeeper is fighting on every legal front to stop this dangerous, aging plant from operating, and there’s no doubt we are closing in.

Riverkeeper has raised awareness about the hazards posed by this plant – including the 2,000 tons of toxic nuclear waste that are stored onsite, on the banks of the Hudson River, with no solution in sight. Our commissioning of reports by Synapse Energy Economics helped document the availability of replacement power once the facility is decommissioned. And our attorneys wrapped up arguments that will deny Entergy, the plant’s owner, a means to renew the licenses it needs to continue operating.

Even Entergy seems to have gotten the memo. The plant’s owners are saying openly that it’s time to reach a deal with New York State about the the plant’s closure: An industry publication quotes CEO Leo Denault that Entergy “would be willing to strike a ‘constructive’ agreement with New York officials on early closure of the controversial Indian Point nuclear plant, provided that Entergy received ‘certainty’ and proper compensation for near-term operation … to meet grid reliability and environmental needs while the state pursues a major revamp of its electricity system.”

The state has already signaled its confidence that New York can do without Indian Point’s power. The state Public Service Commission ruled in November 2013 that New York can count on other sources of safe, reliable, affordable energy.

The transformation is already happening, with energy supplies and transmission lines that are in some cases built, in other cases breaking ground. The future is arriving sooner, perhaps, than Entergy thought it would.

– See more at: http://www.riverkeeper.org/blog/watchdog/watch-the-beginning-of-the-end-of-nys-nuclear-power/#sthash.fJtko3g0.dpuf

History Warns New York Is The Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

History says New York is earthquake prone

New York Earthquake 1884

New York Earthquake 1884
Friday, 18 March 2011 – 9:23pm IST | Place: NEW YORK | Agency: ANI
If the past is any indication, New York can be hit by an earthquake, claims John Armbruster, a seismologist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

If the past is any indication, New York can be hit by an earthquake, claims John Armbruster, a seismologist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

Based on historical precedent, Armbruster says the New York City metro area is susceptible to an earthquake of at least a magnitude of 5.0 once a century.

According to the New York Daily News, Lynn Skyes, lead author of a recent study by seismologists at the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory adds that a magnitude-6 quake hits the area about every 670 years, and magnitude-7 every 3,400 years.

A 5.2-magnitude quake shook New York City in 1737 and another of the same severity hit in 1884.
Tremors were felt from Maine to Virginia.

There are several fault lines in the metro area, including one along Manhattan’s 125th St. – which may have generated two small tremors in 1981 and may have been the source of the major 1737 earthquake, says Armbruster.

There’s another fault line on Dyckman St and one in Dobbs Ferry in nearby Westchester County.
“The problem here comes from many subtle faults,” explained Skyes after the study was published.
He adds: “We now see there is earthquake activity on them. Each one is small, but when you add them up, they are probably more dangerous than we thought.”

“Considering population density and the condition of the region’s infrastructure and building stock, it is clear that even a moderate earthquake would have considerable consequences in terms of public safety and economic impact,” says the New York City Area Consortium for Earthquake Loss Mitigation on its website.

Armbruster says a 5.0-magnitude earthquake today likely would result in casualties and hundreds of millions of dollars in damage.

“I would expect some people to be killed,” he notes.

The scope and scale of damage would multiply exponentially with each additional tick on the Richter scale.