History Says Expect The Sixth Seal In New York (Revelation 6:12)

History Says New York Is Earthquake Prone

Fault Lines In New York City

Fault Lines In New York City

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. (ANI)

Antichrist Prepares To Take Over Iraq Government (Revelation 13)


Abadi agonizes: Two new governments in a month

The Economist
Apr 16th 2016

PM for how long?

WHILE their soldiers gain ground battling Islamic State (IS), Iraq’s political leaders in Baghdad are losing their footing. On April 12th the parliamentary Speaker suspended proceedings as MPs furious at Iraq’s second new cabinet in a month resorted to fisticuffs in front of him. Over a hundred of them demanded that the prime minister, Haider Abadi, should resign, and began a sit-in. And across southern Iraq protest leaders threatened to return to the gates of the Green Zone, the government’s sheltered enclave in the heart of Baghdad.

The reason for all the politicking is a struggle over the sectarian system that has dominated Iraq since America’s invasion in 2003. For over a decade the leading factions and their militias have divvied up ministries, treating them as their fiefs. They have stuffed them with their cadres, inflating the government payroll from 1m under Saddam Hussein to 7m today. Ghost projects and ghost workers have emptied state coffers and, together with plummeting oil prices, have saddled the government with a whopping budget deficit of 25% of GDP. Though oil is being pumped in record amounts, hospitals are suspending services for lack of funds. Transparency International lists Iraq’s as the eighth-most-corrupt government in the world.

Mr Abadi’s promise to end the quota system had powerful support. America and Iran, long-term rivals for influence over Iraq, rallied behind him. Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, Shia Islam’s chief religious authority, urged him on. Each Friday, tens of thousands of demonstrators braved blistering temperatures to echo his call for an end to corruption and Iraq’s transformation into a militia-free civil state. Last month the leader of one of the strongest Shia factions, Muqtada al-Sadr, sent out his followers from Baghdad’s shantytowns to join the protests. Still Mr Abadi dithered, unable to break free of Dawa, his own faction, which has ruled Iraq for a decade.

Only after Mr Sadr erected a protest tent in the Green Zone, and insisted he would stay there until Mr Abadi acted, did Mr Abadi finally pluck up the courage to name his own cabinet. On March 31st the prime minister went to parliament and sought its approval for his new ministers. It never came. His nominee for oil minister, a Kurdish academic, withdrew after Kurdish leaders vowed that men in Baghdad would never choose their ministers again. His finance minister also backed out, fearful of Shia gunmen. To the fury of Mr Sadr and the protesters, Mr Abadi’s second list was designed to appease the factions.

Instead of his first choice for foreign minister, Sherif Ali Hussein, a Sunni scion of the Hashemite monarchy that once ruled Iraq and has close ties to Arab Gulf states, he named Faleh al-Fayyad, an inept Dawa hand with a habit of dozing off in meetings.

What happens next is unclear. Mr Abadi’s former backers have turned their backs on him. The protesters are returning to the streets, this time to demand his resignation. Plans are afoot for a vote of no confidence in Mr Abadi, when parliament next convenes, possibly within the next few days. Fresh elections could soon follow. Mr Sadr’s men are mulling a march on the Green Zone, while other armed factions vow to prevent them. “A war is brewing to defend the sectarian system,” says Faleh Jaber, a veteran Iraqi analyst trying to mediate between some of the factions. “When Muqtada Sadr enters the Green Zone, generals open the gates and kiss his hands. If he’s shot there’ll be civil war.”
Perplexed Americans, including John Kerry, the secretary of state, have hastened to Baghdad to urge restraint and a renewed focus on what they see as the most important task, battling IS. But the situation is alarmingly volatile.

The Antichrist and the Shia Horn (Daniel 8)


Prominent Iraqi Shia cleric visits Hezbollah

Thursday, 14 April 2016 14:26

Prominent Iraqi Shia Cleric Muqtada Al-Sadr arrived in Lebanon on Tuesday evening to visit Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, Arabi21 reported yesterday. Al-Mayadeen TV channel reported sources saying that Al-Sadr left Iraq and arrived in Lebanon in a sudden visit.

Iraqi websites said that Al-Sadr arrived in the Lebanese capital Beirut as part of an official visit.
Al-Sadr, the leader of the Sadrist Movement, ended his party’s protest around the Green Zone in Baghdad on 31 March after parliament agreed to vote for a new government.

Speaking to his supporters, Al-Sadr said: “Every thief and corrupt person will be sent to court.”

Who Will Be At The Trigger When Clinton Calls The Nuclear Strike


Who’s at the trigger when the president calls a nuclear strike
 
April 13, 2016 at 6:30 PM EDT

What would happen today if the president ever gave the order to unleash nuclear weapons? Granted rare access to America’s nuclear war fighters, veteran correspondent Jamie McIntyre on special assignment for the NewsHour profiles the people and the fleet that would carry out such a mission, then joins John Yang to discuss what he’s learned about America’s aging arsena

JUDY WOODRUFF: Over the past eight months, we have aired three stories about America’s aging nuclear arsenal.

Tonight, we thought we’d share with you some of the more interesting things we learned along the way.

John Yang has that.

JOHN YANG: Our past stories looked at the debate over rebuilding America’s nuclear submarines, missiles and bombs, now that much of the current arsenal is reaching the end of its service life.
And, tonight, to continue our unprecedented look behind the scenes, we meet some of the men and women charged with this great responsibility.

Veteran defense correspondent Jamie McIntyre reported these stories for us, in partnership with the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting.

MAN: All stations, all stations, this is absentee, absentee.

JAMIE MCINTYRE: If the president ever gives the order to unleash nuclear weapons, the men and women whose fingers are on the triggers would hear something like this.

MAN: Yankee, mike. Stand by, uniform.

JAMIE MCINTYRE: It’s the sound of an emergency action message. It’s only a drill, but in a real-life situation, the highly encrypted message sent to bombers, submarines and missile crews would tell them which war plan to execute and which targets to destroy.

The coded message echoes, because it’s sent by many different radios around the world, to ensure that even if the nation were under nuclear attack, at least one of the messages would get through.
The “NewsHour” was granted rare access to America’s nuclear war fighters over the past six months. At Minot Air Force base in North Dakota, we spent the day with the airmen who load the B-52 bombers and the crews that fly them.

Chief Master Sergeant Lee Robins is the wing weapons manager.

How can you tell how old it is?

CHIEF MASTER SGT. LEE ROBINS, Wing Weapons Manager, U.S. Air Force: It’s pretty easy. So, there is — on the tail number, if we look underneath the letters A.F., this is a 61, so that is when it rolled off the assembly line.

JAMIE MCINTYRE: That makes this aircraft 19 years older than Major Luke Dellenbach, a B-52 commander and instructor pilot.

I asked him about the differences between flying a conventional vs. nuclear mission.

MAJ. LUKE DELLENBACH, Aircraft Commander, U.S. Air Force: For a nuclear mission for us, it’s very controlled. It’s very scripted. The president doesn’t want us doing things that we want to do. There is not inventiveness. It’s very much you follow the rules and you follow the procedures and guidelines that we have.

For conventional, it’s almost the opposite. We have a lot more flexibility. We can be more innovative. We can hit targets different ways.

JAMIE MCINTYRE: It’s a sobering mission, and the venerable B-52 has been updated with modern avionics to carry it out, even though, as the crew is quick to show us, some non-mission-critical systems are an antiquated reminder of its Cold War history.

What do we have?

MAJ. C. RYAN COX, Mission Commander, U.S. Air Force: So, over here, we have the oven. It has two different settings, off and 400 degrees.

JAMIE MCINTYRE: 1960s technology?

MAJ. C. RYAN COX: It still works today. And up here, we have a sextant port (INAUDIBLE) navigation if everything else fails.

JAMIE MCINTYRE: You know how to use a sextant?

MAJ. C. RYAN COX: No. We usually put a GPS antenna out of it if we need it.

(LAUGHTER)
JAMIE MCINTYRE: While bombers crews typically fly at 50,000 feet above the ground, the submariners we visited last summer lurk hundreds of feet below the surface, in this case plying the depths of the Pacific Ocean.

MAN: Dive, dive.

JAMIE MCINTYRE: By far, the stealthiest leg of the nuclear triad, the submarine’s unofficial motto is hide with pride.

The USS Pennsylvania’s crew spends three months at a time in the cramped confines of the windowless ballistic missile submarine, breathing recycled air and never seeing the sun, that is, unless they are among the chosen few who get to go topside while the sub takes on provisions, an elaborate and highly choreographed ritual on the high seas in which canvas bags of food an supplies are transferred from boat to boat.

While the subs patrol undersea, missileers serve underground. They have to take an elevator 50 to 60 feet down each time they arrive at their jobs. There are 45 launch facilities spread across the America’s heartland controlling the intercontinental ballistic missiles, ICBM, buried in silos in fixed, known locations.

MAN: Incoming emergency action message.

JAMIE MCINTYRE: We got to watch two junior officers practicing running through the lengthy checklist to launch nuclear missiles.

To get the launch keys, they must each unlock a padlock. In this training scenario, using unfamiliar locks, a forgotten combination delays a mock launch. In case you’re wondering, missileers can’t just go rogue. It takes four officers, in two separate launch facilities, to launch a missile after an authentication code is received.

You can’t help noticing how young America’s nuclear warriors are. First Lieutenant Kathleen Fosterling who commands a two-person missile combat crew, is 27. She works a 24-hour shift eight times a month, waiting for an order she hopes to never receive.

1ST LT. KATHLEEN FOSTERLING, Commander Missile Combat Crew, U.S. Air Force: I wouldn’t say it’s lonely. Yes, we only work with technically one other person, but we have all the other guys topside. We have — we talk to the other crews at the other capsules constantly.

But our free time, if we have any, not always — sometimes, there is a lot — sometimes, there is not — a lot of people do homework. There is a lot of people in school. We read. We watch TV. We watch movies, hang out with each other. It’s not so bad.

(LAUGHTER)

JAMIE MCINTYRE: Do you ever wonder, we ask, what it would be like if she had to turn the launch key for real?

1ST LT. KATHLEEN FOSTERLING: It’s hard to think about it, because you don’t know what is going to happen in that situation. You just have to do your job. And whatever the outcome is, it is.
JAMIE MCINTYRE: First Lieutenant Fosterling is not alone. A number of nuclear warriors told us it’s very hard to think about what it would be like after the unthinkable happens.

JOHN YANG: Now Jamie McIntyre joins us.

Jamie, this was really a remarkable series. You showed us things that we rarely see on television.
I have to ask you, what do you take away from this personally? What was most memorable for you?
JAMIE MCINTYRE: Well, you know, John, one of the things we asked almost all the people we interviewed was, have you ever thought about what would happen if you actually had to employ these weapons? It is the classic unthinkable scenario.

And what we found was that, yes, most of them had thought about it, but they don’t dwell on it. These are military people trained to a mission and they think about their part of the mission, and there’s not a whole lot of angst of what would happen if they actually were involved in an all-out nuclear exchange.

 

 JOHN YANG: A little guidance from the Pentagon on it.

And talk about that, because this really is — they are handling the awesome power of nuclear weapons. But it’s a job for them. It’s their assignment. It’s their day-to-day assignment.
JAMIE MCINTYRE: Well, I mentioned this in the piece, that one of the things that really struck me was how young everybody was, and how they’re focused on their mission.

The young 1st lieutenant that we met in the missile silo, 1st Lieutenant Kathleen Fosterling, so she’s very young and she’s commanding this two-person crew, but yet — and she’s in this tiny room underground in a windowless room every day. And one of the things that struck you is that you had the — you see how they personalize their life.

So, for instance, those locks — and you saw the sequence in the story where the training scenario, they can’t get the lock open because they’re using a training lock. In real life, they all use their own personal padlocks. And she had plastered hers with Hello Kitty stickers, which seemed to be sort of this juxtaposition of the fact that they’re — they’re conducting this awesome mission, but, at the same time, it is a job, and they just need to have some sort of human interaction and think of it as something that they just do every day.

JOHN YANG: Just personalizing their workspace.

Jamie McIntyre, remarkable reporting. Thank you very much.

JAMIE MCINTYRE: Thank you.

The Scarlet Woman: A Lobbyist’s Jackpot (Revelation 17)

Hillary Clinton rakes in Verizon cash while Bernie Sanders supports company’s striking workers

hillary-clinton-winking-AP
Verizon paid Hillary $225,000 for speech and poured money into Clinton Foundation. Executives give to her campaign

Ben Norton

In some ways, it would hard for Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton to be more different.
Hillary Clinton, a Wall Street-backed multimillionaire, served for six years on the board of directors of Walmart, the world’s largest company based on sales. She remained silent at a time when the mega-corporation was viciously cracking down on workers’ attempts to unionize.

Bernie Sanders, on the other hand, has been unflinching in his support of the labor movement. Sanders has spoken passionately in support of striking Verizon workers on multiple occasions.
The Hillary Clinton campaign, meanwhile, has received tens of thousands of dollars from Verizon executives and lobbyists.

That’s not all. For a May 2013 speech, the corporation paid Clinton a whopping $225,000 honorarium, according to her tax records.

Verizon has also given between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Clinton Foundation, which investigative journalist Ken Silverstein has referred to as a “so-called charitable enterprise [that] has served as a vehicle to launder money and to enrich family friends.”

Moreover, the Clinton Foundation has partnered directly with Verizon, which is notorious for its vehement opposition to unions. The corporation is a partner in the Clinton Health Matters Initiative, and said it is “proud to partner with the Clinton Foundation.”

Journalist Zaid Jilani reported in AlterNet in October, when Sanders spoke in support of a Verizon strike, that the corporation’s executives and lobbyists had poured money into Clinton’s campaign or PACs.

Three Verizon vice presidents each donated $2,700 to Hillary for America. They were joined by a senior vice president and another vice president, who gave an additional $1,000.

A former Hillary Clinton operative who now lobbies for Verizon donated $2,700 as well, along with another Verizon lobbyist who pitched in $1,000.

While Clinton’s campaign is receiving Verizon cash, Sanders is delivering powerful impromptu speeches physically on Verizon workers’ picket lines.

“Today, you are standing up not just for justice for Verizon workers; you’re standing up for millions of Americans who don’t have a union,” he proclaimed at a New York City strike on April 13.
Sanders continued: “On behalf of every worker in America, those facing the same kind of pressure, thank you for what you are doing. We’re gonna win this thing!”

Clinton’s campaign released a statement of tepid support for the employees, stating “Verizon should come back to the bargaining table with a fair offer for their workers.” But her paltry remarks were overshadowed by Sanders’ heartfelt speech.

This was not the first time Sanders stood with striking Verizon workers. In October, the Vermont senator and self-declared democratic socialist marched alongside them.

“I am hopeful you will reach a fair contract,” Sanders said at the time. “But if you run into roadblocks, as in years past, know that I will be there with you until a fair contract is negotiated.”
Roughly half a year later, Verizon workers were back on the picket line, and Sanders was there to back them.

“Verizon is one of the largest, most profitable corporations in this country, but they refuse to sit down and negotiate a fair contract,” Sanders declared in his April 13 speech.

Sanders called Verizon “just another major American corporation trying to destroy the lives of working Americans.”

What was left out of many media reports on the story, however, is that this very corporation has been overwhelmingly supportive of Clinton, to whom it has close ties.

Aside from the tens of thousands Verizon executives and lobbyists have given to the Clinton campaign and pro-Clinton PACs, the Clinton Foundation has worked directly with Verizon.
In 2012, the Clinton Foundation announced the launch of the Clinton Health Matters Initiative, in partnership with Verizon — along with GE and the Tenet Healthcare Corporation.

“We are proud to partner with the Clinton Foundation on this innovative and potentially life-changing initiative,” declared Peter Tippett, chief medical officer and vice president of Verizon’s health IT practice.

“As the Foundation’s technology provider, we believe we can empower individuals to take better care of their health. We have barely scratched the surface on using technology to improve health and well-being and reduce medical costs,” the Verizon executive wrote.

The corporation’s rhetoric reflects the individualistic, neoliberal economic ideology that the Clintons have endorsed for decades.

“Our work with the Clinton Foundation is just one more example of how we are bringing our vision to life,” the Verizon vice president said in 2012.

Verizon is one of many corporations and organizations on the 2013 Clinton Health Matters Initiative list of commitments, which totaled more than $100 million in investments.

The corporation noted that it was partnering with the Clinton Health Matters Initiative, or CHMI, “to drive a co-branded public awareness and engagement strategy.”

In a Verizon news report after the Clinton Foundation’s 2013 Health Matters conference, the corporation additionally indicated that it provided “the technology infrastructure to support the CHMI web portal, including application development, cloud storage and high-speed connectivity.”
This is by no means the only tie to Verizon.

In 2013, the Clinton Foundation held a forum on employee “effectiveness” and wellbeing. The organization noted that forum attendees included “executives from large and innovative employers including Verizon, Humana and Microsoft, among others.”

Verizon was also one of the corporations participating in the Clinton Global Initiative America program, which the organization says brings together business and civil society leaders together “to develop and highlight ideas for spurring economic growth and creating jobs.”

In 2014, the Clinton Foundation published an article insisting that such corporate “partnerships are key to tackling global global rise in non-communicable diseases.”

“By working with partners at the national level, such as Verizon and Nike, and partners and stakeholders at the community level, such as GE in Houston and the PGA TOUR in Northeast Florida, we have made great strides in advancing our vision,” the organization wrote.

While Sanders works with grassroots organizations like unions and stands with the workers themselves, the “New Democrat,” of which the Clintons are the progenitors and the embodiment, rubs shoulders with big business.

This critical distinction is reflected in the respective longtime contributors to past campaigns of the two presidential candidates.

According to data collected by the watchdog NGO Open Secrets, 18 (90 percent) of the top 20 contributors to Hillary Clinton from 1999 to 2015 were corporations or firms that provide services to corporations.

On the other hand, 19 (95 percent) of the top 20 contributors to Bernie Sanders from 1989 to 2015 were unions.

Perhaps this is not surprising given the Clintons’ history. On their first date, in fact, Bill and Hillary crossed a picket line.

Ben Norton is a politics staff writer at Salon.