The Sixth Seal: The Big Apple Shake (Revelation 6:12)

Image result for new york earthquake

Big Apple shake? Potential for earthquake in New York City exists

NEW YORK CITY (PIX11) – For the last 43 years John Armbruster has been a seismologist with Columbia University’s Lamont Doherty Earth Observatory.  A veteran of what he describes as “a couple of dozen” quakes, he is interested in the seismic activity throughout the Pacific region in recent weeks.

However, does the amount of plate movements around the world in recent weeks as well as years to translate to New York City being more vulnerable, “These earthquakes are not communicating with each other, they are too far apart,” said Armbruster in an interview with PIX 11 News on Wednesday.

What would a magnitude 6.0 earthquake inflict upon the city?

“We know that its unlikely because it hasn’t happened in the last 300 years but the earthquake that struck Fukushima Japan was the 1000 year earthquake and they weren’t ready for the that.

US Troops are Moving to the Redline (Revelation 6:6)

US troops in Syria going to Iraq, not home as Trump claims

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) —

While President Donald Trump insists he’s bringing home Americans from “endless wars” in the Mideast, his Pentagon chief says all U.S. troops leaving Syria will go to western Iraq and the American military will continue operations against the Islamic State group.

They aren’t coming home and the United States isn’t leaving the turbulent Middle East, according to current plans outlined by U.S. Defense Secretary Mark Esper before he arrived in Afghanistan on Sunday. The fight in Syria against IS, once spearheaded by American allied Syrian Kurds who have been cast aside by Trump, will be undertaken by U.S. forces, possibly from neighboring Iraq.

Esper did not rule out the idea that U.S. forces would conduct counterterrorism missions from Iraq into Syria. But he told reporters traveling with him that those details will be worked out over time.

Trump nonetheless tweeted: “USA soldiers are not in combat or ceasefire zones. We have secured the Oil. Bringing soldiers home!”

The president declared this past week that Washington had no stake in defending the Kurdish fighters who died by the thousands as America’s partners fighting in Syria against IS extremists. Turkey conducted a weeklong offensive into northeastern Syria against the Kurdish fighters before a military pause.

“It’s time for us to come home,” Trump said, defending his removal of U.S. troops from that part of Syria and praising his decision to send more troops and military equipment to Saudi Arabia to help the kingdom defend against Iran.

Esper’s comments to reporters traveling with him were the first to specifically lay out where American troops will go as they shift from Syria and what the counter-IS fight could look like. Esper said he has spoken to his Iraqi counterpart about the plan to shift about 1,000 troops from Syria into western Iraq.

Trump’s top aide, asked about the fact that the troops were not coming home as the president claimed they would, said, “Well, they will eventually.”

Acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney told “Fox News Sunday” that “the quickest way to get them out of danger was to get them into Iraq.”

As Esper left Washington on Saturday, U.S. troops were continuing to pull out of northern Syria after Turkey’s invasion into the border region. Reports of sporadic clashes continued between Turkish-backed fighters and the Syria Kurdish forces despite a five-day cease-fire agreement hammered out Thursday between U.S. and Turkish leaders.

The Turkish military’s death toll has risen to seven soldiers since it launched its offensive on Oct. 9.

Trump ordered the bulk of the approximately 1,000 U.S. troops in Syria to withdraw after Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan made it clear in a phone call that his forces were about to invade Syria to push back Kurdish forces that Turkey considers terrorists.

The pullout largely abandons America’s Kurdish allies who have fought IS alongside U.S. troops for several years. Between 200 and 300 U.S. troops will remain at the southern Syrian outpost of Al-Tanf.

Esper said the troops going into Iraq will have two missions.

“One is to help defend Iraq and two is to perform a counter-ISIS mission as we sort through the next steps,” he said. “Things could change between now and whenever we complete the withdrawal, but that’s the game plan right now.”

The U.S. currently has more than 5,000 American forces in Iraq, under an agreement between the two countries. The U.S. pulled its troops out of Iraq in 2011 when combat operations there ended, but they went back in after IS began to take over large swaths of the country in 2014. The number of American forces in Iraq has remained small due to political sensitivities in the country, after years of what some Iraqis consider U.S. occupation during the war that began in 2003.

Esper said he will talk with other allies at a NATO meeting in the coming week to discuss the way ahead for the counter-IS mission.

Asked if U.S. special operations forces will conduct unilateral military operations into Syria to go after IS, Esper said that is an option that will be discussed with allies over time.

He said one of his top concerns is what the next phase of the counter-IS missions looks like, “but we have to work through those details.” He said that if U.S. forces do go in, they would be protected by American aircraft.

While he acknowledged reports of intermittent fighting despite the cease-fire agreement, he said that overall it “generally seems to be holding. We see a stability of the lines, if you will, on the ground.”

He also said that, so far, the Syrian Democratic Forces that partnered with the U.S. to fight IS have maintained control of the prisons in Syria where they are still present. The Turks, he said, have indicated they have control of the IS prisons in their areas.

“I can’t assess whether that’s true or not without having people on the ground,” said Esper.

He added that the U.S. withdrawal will be deliberate and safe, and it will take “weeks not days.”

According to a U.S. official, about a couple hundred troops have left Syria so far. The U.S. forces have been largely consolidated in one location in the west and a few locations in the east.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss ongoing operations, said the U.S. military is not closely monitoring the effectiveness of the cease-fire, but is aware of sporadic fighting and violations of the agreement. The official said it will still take a couple of weeks to get forces out of Syria.

Also Sunday, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi led a group of American lawmakers on a visit to Jordan to discuss “the deepening crisis” in Syria.

Jordan’s state news agency Petra said that King Abdullah II, in a meeting with the Americans, stressed the importance of safeguarding Syria’s territorial integrity and guarantees for the “safe and voluntary” return of refugees.

___

This story has been corrected to reflect that the U.S.-Turkey agreement was reached on Thursday, not Friday.

The Antichrist green-lights fresh protests in Iraq

Firebrandw cleric Moqtada al-Sadr green-lights fresh protests in Iraq

AFP | Updated: Oct 20, 2019, 7:24 IST

BAGHDAD: Influential Iraqi Shiite leader Moqtada al-Sadr has given his supporters the green light to resume anti-government protests, after the movement was interrupted following a deadly crackdown.

Protests shook Iraq for six days from October 1, with young Iraqis denouncing corruption and demanding jobs and services before calling for the downfall of the government.

The protests — notable for their spontaneity — were violently suppressed, with official counts reporting 110 people killed and 6,000 wounded, most of them demonstrators.

Calls have been made on social media for fresh rallies on Friday, the anniversary of Prime Minister Adel Abdel Mahdi’s government taking office.

“It’s your right to participate in protests on October 25,” Sadr told his followers in a Facebook post on Saturday evening.

Protesters have opposed any appropriation of their leaderless movement and the firebrand cleric was restrained on Sunday in comparison to his previous exhortations for “million-man marches”.

He qualified his support by adding: “Those who don’t want to take part in this revolution can choose another via the ballot box in internationally supervised elections and without the current politicians,” he said.

His statement echoed another he made during protests at the start of the month, in which he called on the government — of which his bloc is a part — to resign and hold early elections “under UN supervision”.

In his latest message, Sadr called on his supporters to protest peacefully.

“They expect you to be armed,” he said, alluding to authorities blaming “saboteurs” for infiltrating protests. “But I don’t think you will be.”

Sadr’s influence was on display Saturday during the Shiite Arbaeen pilgrimage to the holy city of Karbala, 100 kilometres (60 miles) south of Baghdad.

Thousands of his supporters heeded his call to dress in white shrouds and chanted, “Baghdad free, out with the corrupt!”

October 25 will also mark the deadline issued by Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, spiritual leader for Iraq’s Shiite majority, for the government to respond to protester demands.

Pakistan, Indian Exchange Before Nuclear War

Pakistan, Indian Exchange of Fire Kills at Least 9 at Border

At least six civilians and three soldiers are said to have died during cross-border skirmishes between Pakistani and Indian troops late on October 19, reportedly making it one of the deadliest days since New Delhi revoked the special status of Indian-administered Kashmir in August.

The conflicting reports from each side suggested the death toll could still rise from the late-night incident.

Pakistani Army spokesman Major General Asif Ghafoor, in a tweet on Sunday, blamed “unprovoked” shelling from the Indian side of the de facto Line of Control that he claimed was “deliberately targeting civilians.”

Line of Control, Kashmir

Four civilians and one soldier in Pakistan-administered Kashmir died as a result, he said, and two Pakistani soldiers and five civilians were injured.

He added that Pakistani troops had retaliated, killing nine Indian soldiers and injuring “several” more. He said two Indian bunkers had been “destroyed.”

But Indian sources disputed that account of events and casualty figures.

Senior Indian police and military officials told Reuters and AP that Pakistani soldiers had targeted an Indian border post and civilian areas, leaving two soldiers and two civilians dead.

Colonel Rajesh Kalia, an Indian Army spokesman, said three more Indian civilians were injured in the exchange of fire.

Muslim-majority Pakistan and Hindu-led India have fought three wars since gaining independence from Britain in 1947, two of which were over control of Kashmir, the divided region claimed by both countries.

A decision by New Delhi in August to revoke the special constitutional status of India-controlled Kashmir and impose a security lockdown sparked new tensions between the South Asian rivals.

Two people were killed in renewed gunfire exchanges between Indian and Pakistani border forces in the same region in late September.

Iran Increases Uranium Enrichment Capacity

Report: IR-9 Centrifuges to Increase Enrichment Capacity

T he new centrifuges that Iran plans to use will significantly increase its enrichment capacity, an informed official said, adding that the new centrifuges will be unveiled in the coming weeks.

The advanced IR-9 centrifuges have a capacity of 40-50 SWU, which is “practically twice the capacity of IR-8 centrifuges“, the official from the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, told the local newspaper Khorasan on condition of anonymity.

An SWU is a unit of measurement of the effort needed to enrich natural uranium so nuclear power plants can use it as fuel.

President Hassan Rouhani recently announced that Iran will begin work on centrifuges IR-7 and IR-9 to speed up uranium enrichment.

Iran is scaling back its commitments under its 2015 nuclear deal with major powers step by step in response to tough sanctions imposed by the United States, which pulled out of the agreement last year. Tehran has said its next move will be taken in early November.

The nuclear deal only lets Iran accumulate enriched uranium with just over 5,000 of its first-generation IR-1 centrifuges at its Natanz facility. It lets Iran use small numbers of more advanced models for research, without producing enriched uranium.

Tehran has already hit back with three countermeasures, exceeding the deal’s limits on nuclear enrichment purity and stockpiles of enriched uranium as well as research and development, including on the advancement of centrifuges used to enrich uranium.

The official said the capacity of IR-9 centrifuges is “50 times more than the IR-1 centrifuges currently being used at Natanz”.

The newspaper report also quoted the informed source as saying that developing new centrifuges is not a “difficult or complicated” task for Iranian experts.

The official noted that the IR-7 centrifuges have a capacity of 18-20 SWU.

“These centrifuges [IR-7 and IR-9] will be unveiled in the next four weeks. However, it will take several years to mass produce them,” the official added.

Domestic Potential

The AEOI official clarified that Iranians scientists are not using reverse engineering to manufacture centrifuges, as they have the capability to carry out the basic and conceptual design and build a centrifuge prototype.

Britain, France and Germany, all parties to the pact, have urged Iran to refrain from taking further steps for reducing its commitments.

France urged Iran on Wednesday not to scale back further on its nuclear commitments, saying Tehran’s new announcement about speeding up uranium enrichment next month was “especially worrying”.

“Iran must abstain from crossing an especially worrying new phase of new measures that could contribute to an escalation of tensions,” French Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Agnes von der Muhll told reporters in a daily briefing, Reuters reported.

Iran says its measures are “reversible” if the European signatories to the accord fulfill their obligations and manage to restore its access to foreign trade promised under the nuclear deal but blocked by the reimposition of US sanctions.

The Oxymoron of the Australian Nuclear Horn (Daniel 7)

Nuclear Peace: Australia’s Oxymoron

9 Oct, 2019  in Australia / Current Events by Abbey Dorian

The first legally binding international agreement of its kind, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) was passed by the UN General Assembly on 7 July, 2017. The Nuclear Weapon Ban Treaty comprehensively prohibits the use and threat of use of nuclear weapons alongside the development, testing, production, stockpiling, and transfer of such weapons. Nuclear armed states party to the treaty will receive time-bound commitments to irreversibly eliminate their nuclear weapons programmes. The Treaty intends to completely eliminate nuclear weapons in the future.

Building upon the commitments of the Non-Nuclear Proliferation Treaty (NPT), the TPNW intends to reaffirm commitments to a nuclear weapons free world and accelerate efforts to deconstruct nuclear weapons as a legitimate contingency plan for State security. Despite being a signatory to the NPT and a non-nuclear nation ourselves, Australia is an adversary to the TPNW and remains steadfastly committed to the U.S.’ nuclear prominence. Defence analyst Hugh White reignited the nuclear debate with claims that Australia’s reliance on the United States was dubious and that with concerns for China’s increasing power, Australia should reimagine its defence strategy and seriously consider obtaining nuclear weapons.

Although the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) has not fully committed to White’s vision of a nuclearized Australia, the Department’s position towards the TPNW and nuclear weapons in general is notably ambivalent. While firmly stating “Australia does not support the “ban treaty” which we believe would not eliminate a single nuclear weapon” on the grounds it creates parallel obligations to the NPT, fails to engage nuclear states and ignores the reality of the global security environment, Australia still identifies itself as committed to a ‘progressive denuclearization strategy.’  In its paradoxical stance, Australia sides itself with many of the non-nuclear-armed members belonging to NATO under the belief that U.S.’ nuclear weapons enhance their own security.

This level of resistance cripples the Treaty, which in order to come into effect requires the signatures and ratification of 50 countries. It is currently ratified by 32 states. Unsurprisingly, the U.S. and Russia are staunchly opposed to the agreement. Rather ironically, North Korea is the only nuclear state to vote to initiate ban negotiations.  This pacifist move by an infamously deviant state is reflective of a bigger issue with nuclear deterrence.

Australia’s sitting on the fence on the issue of Nuclear Prohibition rests largely on confidence that the U.S. nuclear umbrella is our best trump card in the case of state conflict and by signing the TPNW we would be breaking down this relationship. In fact, the TPNW would not directly contravene the legal obligation of our ANZUS Treaty with the U.S. ANZUS does not refer or require parties to prescribe to any particular defence strategy, including an umbrella arrangement, to maintain defence guarantees.

A key security reason for Australia to change its position towards the TPNW is that nuclear weapons may become the greatest source of destruction, human fatality and environmental degradation for the countries that produce and hold them. Cases such as the 1966 Palmores Crash demonstrate the reality of the greater risk Australia could be exposing itself to with its hesitation to prohibit nuclear weapons and potential intent to produce them. Not only do nuclear weapons come bound up with a series of accidental and unauthorized safeguard problems but are firmly at odds with our democratic decision-making procedures. As a highly monarchic weapon, the use of nuclear weapons is isolated from public decision-making processes and may be used by irrational decision makers. Australia’s stance towards nuclear production and use is highly negative, with over 75% of Australians supportive of the TPNW.

The most crucial argument to contest advocates of nuclear weaponry is the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction, or MAD. Deterrence theory under the potentially lethal MAD ideology has become grounds for governments to possess and produce nuclear weapons, claiming that their severity deters initiative attack. Based on the premise that to arm to the threshold of apocalypse is to assure safety is not only counterintuitive but purely theoretical. MAD has no historical precedent and its closest example during the Cold War failed in the Petrov Incident of 1983.

If Australia were to subscribe to the theory of MAD and produce nuclear weapons, we would risk the outbreak of large-scale nuclear war resulting from a global Prisoner’s Dilemma. In a situation where the greatest incentive is to act first, Australia is contributing to a more hostile global environment, not a more secure one. In this situation, as we have seen in the early Cold War Years, a nuclear arms race would likely transpire, and the world would find itself on the uneasy see-saw between peace and nuclear war.

Australia should seriously consider following the actions of its regional partners such as New Zealand as they work to de-nuclearize the Asia-Pacific Region. As seen in the case of South Africa’s denuclearization, prohibiting nuclear weapons can in many ways build trust and encourage great cooperation rather than maintaining weapons of mass destruction to force the point.

A key oversight for policy strategists, analysts and advocates for nuclear weapons is the irreversible and irrecoverable human impact of nuclear attack. Not only is the use of nuclear weapons unimaginably destructive for human life but has atrocious inter-generational impacts, as seen for decades after Chernobyl. While the suffering of victims after the bomb drops in Nagasaki and Hiroshima were and continue to be overwhelming, the impact of a nuclear attack today would be even more deleterious. The B-83, one of the nuclear warheads in the U.S.’ arsenal, is 80 times more powerful than the bombs dropped on Japan in 1945. Since 1983, the U.S. has built 650 B-83 bombs.

Australia communicates itself as committed to an advanced disarmament architecture. However, despite being signatory to the Conference on Disarmament (CD) and the UN Disarmament Commission (UNDC) we hesitate to fully commit to a global order not guaranteed by weapons of mass destruction. Australia must re-asses its commitment to the U.S. and the ideology of deterrence. To put simply, it does not deter, and it is not as remotely compelling of a security principle as it initially appears. The only way to ensure nuclear weapons are not used, is to ensure there are no nuclear weapons at all.

Antichrist urges supporters to continue anti-government protests

Iraq cleric Sadr urges supporters to continue anti-government protests

ERBIL, Kurdistan Region – Firebrand Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has called on Iraqis to resume the nationwide protests against corruption, unemployment, and the lack of public services.

Several of Iraq’s central and southern cities, including the capital Baghdad, were rocked by violent protests in early October, which left at least 108 dead and more than 6,000 injured.

In a long statement published on his Facebook page late on Saturday, Sadr called on his supporters and the public to return to the streets on Friday, October 25 to resume the protests.

Sadr is head of the Sayirun alliance, the largest bloc in the Iraqi parliament. He is also head of the Saraya al-Salam militia, which is part of Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) umbrella, also known as Hashd al-Shaabi in Arabic.

“The government leaders and politicians are in a state of fear because of you, they are completely unable to fix anything within this country,” Sadr’s statement read. “Therefore, I ask everyone to start the revolution which will clean Iraq from corrupters and fools.”

Sadr has withdrawn his backing for the government of Adil Abdul-Mahdi in the wake of the protests and called for fresh elections. He accused Iraq’s top politicians of being under the influence of foreign powers – particularly arch rivals Iran and the United States.

“Those politicians and government leaders are taking orders from people who are outside of Iraq’s borders, and they cannot take any step without their permission,” Sadr said.

He urged the protesters not to be cowed into silence by threats.

“They will accuse you of being a Baathist or a rioter, but keep moving forward and we will all chat together: ‘No, no Baath, No, no America’,” Sadr added.

The firebrand cleric has long championed reform and anti-corruption, leading the so-called “million-man” protests in 2016-17. He is a prominent nationalist who wants both Iran and the US to stop meddling in Iraq’s internal affairs.

In May 2018, Sadr’s Sayirun alliance of Shiites and communists became the biggest bloc in parliament. Although he didn’t run for office himself, Sadr emerged as kingmaker, playing a major role in the formation of the federal government.

It was at Sadr’s insistence that Abdul-Mahdi, an independent technocrat, became prime minister. He also sought to set the agenda as Iraq emerged from years of ruinous war.

Iraqi security forces and armed militias responded to October’s protests with tear gas, water cannons, rubber bullets, and live ammunition. The protesters burned down several governorate and militia buildings.

Sadr appealed to the protesters to remain peaceful and to “avoid use of weapons and violence while protesting”.

Likewise, he called on Iraq’s security forces “to avoid arresting protesters as they are neither Islamic State (ISIS) terrorists nor invaders”. Militias should play no part in policing demonstrations, he added.

The protests, which began on October 1, died down after about a week. Abdul-Mahdi urged the demonstrators to give his government time to implement reforms and bring corrupt officials to justice. Critics say he has moved too slowly.

The start of the religious observance of Arbaeen, when millions of Shiite Muslims from around the world march to the holy city of Karbala, also led to the protests being put on hold. The protests are widely expected to resume after the pilgrimage ends on October 20.

The procession into Karbala reflected the political mood, however. Pilgrims were heard to chant “No to America, no to Israel, no to corruption” and “Baghdad is free, corruption must go!” AP reports.