Why New York City Will Be Shut Down At The Sixth Seal

Indian Point tritium leak 80% worse than originally reported

Published time: 10 Feb, 2016 22:12Edited time: 11 Feb, 2016 01:51

New measurements at the Indian Point nuclear power plant in upstate New York show levels of radioactive tritium 80 percent higher than reported last week. Plant operator insists the spill is not dangerous, as state officials call for a safety probe.

Entergy, which operates the facility 25 miles (40 km) north of New York City, says the increased levels of tritium represent “fluctuations that can be expected as the material migrates.”

“Even with the new readings, there is no impact to public health or safety, and although these values remain less than one-tenth of one percent of federal reporting guidelines,” Entergy said in a statement.

New York governor Andrew Cuomo raised an alarm last Saturday over the reports of groundwater contamination at Indian Point, noting that the company reported “alarming levels of radioactivity” at three monitoring wells, with “radioactivity increasing nearly 65,000 percent” at one of them.

The groundwater wells have no contact with any drinking water supplies, and the spill will dissipate before it reaches the Hudson River, a senior Entergy executive argued Tuesday, suggesting the increased state scrutiny was driven by the company’s decision to shut down another nuclear power plant.

“There are a number of stakeholders, including the governor, who do not like the fact that we are having to close Fitzpatrick,” Michael Twomey, Entergy’s vice president of external affairs, said during an appearance on ‘The Capitol Pressroom,’ a show on WCNY public radio.

The James A. Fitzpatrick plant is located on the southern shore of Lake Ontario, near Oswego, New York. Entergy said it intended to close the plant once it runs out of fuel sometime this year, citing its continued operations as unprofitable.

Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant on the Hudson river © wikipedia.org

‘65,000% radioactivity spike’: New York Gov. orders probe into water leak at Indian Point

“We’re not satisfied with this event. This was not up to our expectations,” Twomey said, adding that the Indian Point spill should be seen in context.

Though it has never reported a reactor problem, the Indian Point facility has been plagued by issues with transformers, cooling systems, and other electrical components over the years. It currently operates two reactors, both brought on-line in the 1970s.

In December, the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission allowed Entergy to continue operating the reactors, pending license renewal. The facility’s initial 40-year license was set to expire on December 12, but the regulators are reportedly leaning towards recommending a 20-year extension.

By contrast, Reactor 4 at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Pripyat, Ukraine was only three years old when it exploded in April 1986. To this day, an area of 1000 square miles around the power plant remains the “exclusion zone,” where human habitation is prohibited.

The tritium leak at Indian Point most likely took place in January, during the preparations to shut down Reactor 2 for refueling, according to Entergy. Water containing high levels of the hydrogen isotope reportedly overfilled the drains and spilled into the ground.

According to Entergy, tritium is a “low hazard radionuclide” because it emits low-energy beta particles, which do not penetrate the skin. “People could be harmed by tritium only through internal exposure caused by drinking water with high levels of tritium over many years,” an Entergy fact sheet says.

Environmentalist critics are not convinced, however.

“This plant isn’t safe anymore,” Paul Gallay, president of environmental watchdog group

Riverkeeper, told the New York Daily News. “Everybody knows it and only Entergy and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission refuse to admit it.”

Even Warren Buffett is Predicting the Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

Warren Buffett warns of natural or human-made ‘megacatastrophe,’ and says our losses will be huge

Record-breaking investor and Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett released his yearly letter on Saturday, and in it he warned about the prospect of “The Big One” – a major hurricane, earthquake, or cyber attack that he said “will dwarf hurricanes Katrina and Michael.”

“When such a megacatastrophe strikes, we will get our share of the losses and they will be big – very big,” Buffett wrote.

Although such a disaster could happen tomorrow or decades from now, one thing is sure, he said: the catastrophe is inevitable. Yet Buffett said he had a plan for such an outcome.

“Unlike many other insurers,” he wrote, “we will be looking to add business the next day.” That funding, he said, will come from deferred income taxes, liabilities that Berkshire Hathaway will eventually pay but are currently interest-free.

‘The Big One:’ a matter of when, not if

© AP Although Buffett says the catastrophe may take the form of a natural disaster or could be something more surprising, like a cyber attack, experts have warned about the impending nature of the former for decades.

In recent years, concerns about ‘The Big One” from geologists, seismologists, and other scientists have mounted as two things have: First, evidence of our role in a steady shift in climate has mushroomed as we observe more frequent and extreme fires, droughts, hurricanes, and tsunamis. Second, our ability to predict and model the risk of oncoming natural disasters is improving at a steady clip.

Science writer Kathryn Shultz galvanized public attention to the threat in 2015 with the New Yorker essay “The Really Big One,” in which she describes how an earthquake could destroy a large chunk of North America’s coastal Northwest.

“The hand of a geological clock is somewhere in its slow sweep,” she wrote. “All across the region, seismologists are looking at their watches, wondering how long we have, and what we will do, before geological time catches up to our own.”

While some natural disasters are no fault of our own, they are in general being actively exacerbated by issues like hasty building, poor planning, a failure to invest in healthcare infrastructure and environmental protection, and an over-reliance on dirty fossil fuels, according to experts. And the outcomes – which include roof-toppling hurricanes, ground-rumbling earthquakes, and flooding and sea-level rise – will eventually affect everyone.

The bottom line is it’s going to be bad everywhere,” Bruce Riordan, the director of the Climate Readiness Institute at the University of California, Berkeley, told Business Insider two years ago.

“It’s a matter of who gets organized around this,” Riordan said.

Nations Continue to Trample Outside the Temple Walls (Revelation 11)

Hamas terrorists attack Fatah terrorists in Gaza

Fatah terrorists in the Gaza Strip, which is controlled by Hamas, held a demonstration in support of Palestinian Authority (PA) chairman Mahmoud Abbas and the legitimacy of his regime.

Atef Abu Saif, spokesman for the Fatah movement, said that the demonstrations were also intended to express opposition to Israel’s policies and to the “plots” aimed at eliminating the Palestinian issue, a reference to the US peace initiative which has come to be known as the “Deal of the Century”.

Abu Saif condemned the Hamas movement for the forcible suppression of the demonstrators in the Jabalya refugee camp in Gaza and for the arrest of Fatah activists.

The official PA news agency Wafa reported that Hamas activists attacked the participants in the demonstration organized by Fatah with batons and arrested several of them.

Hamas and Fatah have been embroiled in a bitter rivalry since 2007, when Hamas violently took over Gaza from Fatah in a bloody coup.

The two organizations signed a reconciliation deal in October of 2017, under which the PA was to have resumed full control of Gaza by December of that year.

That deadline, however, was initially put back by 10 days and had later reportedly hit “obstacles”. It has never been implemented and is one of many attempts that have failed over the years to ease the tensions between the two groups.

The rivalry between the groups has intensified in the past year because of the punitive measures taken by the Palestinian Authority against Gaza.

In December of 2018, Hamas arrested dozens of Fatah members. After PA security forces broke up a Hamas protest in Hevron and used batons against both male and female demonstrators.

Israel Prepares for War Outside the Temple Walls (Revelation 11)

IDF launches surprise military-wide drill simulating war in Gaza

Amid increasing violence in the Strip and concerns over army preparedness, 3-day exercise to include live-fire tests, troop deployments and aerial maneuvers

By Judah Ari Gross 24 Feb 2019, 9:16 am

The Israeli military launched a surprise large-scale exercise on Sunday simulating a number of war scenarios, including in the increasingly restive Gaza Strip, the army said.

The three-day drill will include forces from throughout the military, “including ground troops, armor, artillery and aircraft,” the Israel Defense Forces said in a statement.

The military said the exercise would “test the operational preparedness for a number of combat scenarios, especially in the Gaza Strip.”

The drill, which is due to end on Tuesday, will include transporting large numbers of troops to different regions, gathering forces in designated locations, life-fire exercise and aerial maneuvers, the army said.

Though a surprise announcement, the military said the exercise had been planned in advance as part of its training schedule.

Palestinian protesters burn tires during a demonstration near the fence along the border with Israel, east of Gaza City, on February 22, 2019.(Photo by MAHMUD HAMS / AFP)

Recent weeks have seen a dramatic increase in the level of violence along the Gaza border, with near nightly riots and a return of airborne arson attacks, which had waned in light of a de facto ceasefire agreement between Israel and the Gaza-ruling Hamas terror group.

The exercise also came amid growing concerns in the military concerning its readiness for war in light of allegations by former military ombudsman Maj. Gen. (res.) Yitzhak Brick that the army, especially its ground troops, were not prepared for a large-scale war.

Last week, the army also tested its automated system for calling up reservists in what it said was a planned exercise aimed at improving preparedness.

Russia Prepares for Another Cold War

INF Treaty exit? Putin says he’s ready to escalate to Cuban Missile Crisis levels – Ars Technica

02/22/2019 5:08 pm

Go ahead. Make my day.

Russian President Vladimir Putin told members of the Russian media on Wednesday that if the US exits the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty and deploys nuclear weapons to Europe, Russia will follow suit—by placing nuclear weapons off the coast of the US. The comments came on the heels of an announcement by Putin that a nuclear powered, nuclear-armed unmanned submersible vehicle (essentially a giant nuclear torpedo) was nearly ready for deployment. The Russian president said the first submarine equipped to carry it would be ready as soon as this spring.

“If they create threats to us, they should be aware of the potential consequences, so that they will not accuse us of unnecessary aggressiveness or whatever later,” Putin said in comments following his February 20 address to Russia’s Federal Assembly. “They have announced their decision,” he said, referencing President Donald Trump’s decision to withdraw from the INF treaty. “We know what can follow it. We tell them, ‘Do the maths. Can you count? So, do it before making any decisions that would create additional threats to you.'”

To make that point clearer, Putin gave some of the numbers for “the maths.” First, he would put nuclear-armed missiles on submarines or surface ships. “At a speed of Mach 9, these missiles can strike a target more than 1,000 km away,” he explained. “Under the Law of the Sea, the exclusive economic zone is defined at some 400 km or 200 miles. Do the maths. The distance of 1,000 kilometers at Mach 9. How soon, in how many minutes, can these weapons reach their targets? Just compare, the flight time to Moscow is between 10 and 12 minutes. How long would it take to reach the decision-making centers that are creating threats to us? The calculation is not in their favor, at least, not today.”

Putin acknowledged “problems” between the US and Russia, but he blamed the US government for creating even more problems:

Is there any harsh confrontation between two world systems, as it happened during the Cold War? Absolutely not. Yes, we do have mutual complaints and different approaches to problems, and the complaints are mutual. But this is no reason for aggravating this to the level of the Cuban Missile Crisis of the 1960s. Anyway, I think we do not want this. If somebody else wants this, they can do it. I have said today what will follow. Let them make their calculations.


During his speech to the Federal Assembly, Putin stressed that the United States’ “unilateral withdrawal from the INF Treaty is the most urgent and most discussed issue in Russian-American relations.” He accused the US of making “far-fetched accusations” about Russia violating the INF treaty with land-based cruise missiles “to justify their unilateral withdrawal from the treaty.”

The US government has made several claims of Russian violations of the INF, particularly focusing on ground-launched cruise missiles. That’s what the US military refers to as the SSC-8—thought to be a modification of a sea-launched or air-launched cruise missile already in the Russian inventory. Under the INF, missiles carried by mobile ground launchers must have a maximum range either of less than 1000 kilometers (roughly 600 miles) or more than 5500 kilometers (3,400 miles).  The SSC-8, now deployed, is reported to have a range of as great as 2,500 kilometers (1,550 miles)—within the banned range window. That has prompted the White House to declare that Russia is in violation of the INF treaty, triggering President Donald Trump’s declaration that the US would withdraw from the treaty as a result.

For its part, Russia has argued that the US’ Aegis Ashore systems—the antiballistic missile installations that the US has positioned in Romania and Poland—are a violation of the INF Treaty. While the Aegis facilities are not currently equipped or configured to launch, the Russian foreign ministry has argued that the facilities could be used to launch Tomahawk cruise missiles. The US Navy retired the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile-Nuclear (TLAM-N) from service during the Obama administration, but there has been discussion of introducing a new, improved nuclear Tomahawk.

Putin also called out the US’ development of targets for ballistic missile defense testing as an INF violation. “First, the Americans began developing and using medium-range missiles, calling them discretionary ‘target missiles”’ for missile defense,” he said in his speech to the Federal Assembly. “Then they began deploying Mk-41 universal launch systems [the launchers used by Aegis Ashore] that can make offensive combat use of Tomahawk medium-range cruise missiles possible… having done everything I have just described, the Americans openly and blatantly ignored the provisions envisaged by articles 4 and 6 of the INF Treaty.”

The Mk-41 containerized launchers have been in Romania for some time, he said.

Treat(y) yourself

Russia’s return to nuclear weapons development has in large part been a response to the US exit from the Anti-ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM Treaty) executed by the George W. Bush administration and the continued development of a ballistic missile defense by the US. Long-range cruise missiles are just part of the collection of apocalyptic firepower Putin’s government has in development.

During his Federal Assembly speech, Putin said, “The Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile of unlimited range and the Poseidon nuclear-powered unmanned underwater vehicle of unlimited range are successfully undergoing tests… today we can say that as soon as this spring the first nuclear-powered submarine carrying this unmanned vehicle will be launched.”

The Poseidon is a fire-and-forget torpedo—inasmuch as you can call an 80-foot long nuclear-powered unmanned submarine with a 2-megaton nuclear warhead a “torpedo.” According to a specification sheet shown on Russian television, the Poseidon has a top speed of 107 knots (123 miles per hour, 198 kilometers per hour). According to Russian state media, the Poseidon will enter service before 2027.

The Burevestnik cruise missile is (as Ars has previously reported) a whole other nightmare: a long-flying cruise missile powered by a nuclear jet engine, harking back to the US’ SLAM program. The SLAM, which would have been powered by a nuclear ramjet, was shelved by the Kennedy administration because it was believed to be “too provocative” a weapon—a hypersonic, nuke-dropping cruise missile with a nuclear ramjet engine that could orbit over the ocean spewing radioactive waste until ordered to strike.

And then there’s the Avangard hypersonic missile system, designed to skip and glide through the atmosphere at speeds in excess of Mach 20. “Our American friends invented the anti-ballistic missile defence system to safeguard against ballistic missiles,” Putin said. “Therefore, we had to provide an adequate, asymmetrical but serious response.”

Putin compared the achievement behind Avangard to the launch of Sputnik, the first man-made satellite. “This is an absolute breakthrough in terms of modern technologies and materials. This winged glider vehicle’s nose section heats up to almost 3,000 degrees Celsius… I have already mentioned the chocolate-coated ice cream effect, when the vehicle flies along and melts away as it goes.”

Let’s talk, Donald

Putin emphasized that “Russia does not intend to deploy such missiles in Europe first.” But if US-deployed Tomahawks or other intermediate range nuclear weapons get to Europe, he said, “it will dramatically exacerbate the international security situation and create a serious threat to Russia because some of these missiles can reach Moscow in just 10–12 minutes.” That would force Russia to “create and deploy weapons that can be used not only in the areas we are directly threatened from, but also in areas that contain decision-making centers for the missile systems threatening us…these weapons will fully correspond to the threats directed against Russia in their technical specifications, including flight times to these decision-making centers.”

Putin said that no action would be taken yet to implement those plans. “I do not think we need any further, irresponsible exacerbation of the current international situation,” he said. But the Russian president also warned the US against trying to develop additional countermeasures as a response. “Our American colleagues have already tried to gain absolute military superiority with their global missile defense project,” he said. “They need to stop deluding themselves. Our response will always be efficient and effective.”

The countering of US military posturing, which Putin described as a complete dismantling of “the international security architecture that took shape over the past decade… all while referring to Russia as almost the main threat to the USA” is but one component of Putin’s plans to re-assert Russia’s power in the world. Putin identified his goals as “a unified society, people being involved in the affairs of their country, and a common confidence in our power—that plays the main role in reaching success. And we will achieve this success by any means necessary.”