Nuclear Disaster Brews Before the Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)​

February 27, 2020

WASHINGTON – Congresswoman Nita Lowey (D, NY-17), Thursday, said that a report by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Inspector General reveals that NRC failed to properly analyze the safety impact of the placement of a natural gas pipeline near the Indian Point Energy Center as part of the process for the pipeline’s approval by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

“The IG findings show outrageous failings by an agency charged with the important responsibility of protecting the health and safety of our communities,” Lowey said.  “This report indicates repeated failings to use proper analysis by the same commission that oversees the decommissioning of Indian Point.  NRC must immediately explain to our communities the risks they face as a result of the agency’s faulty processes and take steps to protect the public from any dangers that have resulted from the pipeline’s approval and installation.”

The IG report indicated that FERC relied upon NRC to assess the impacts of the pipeline that now traverses Indian Point property as part of the Algonquin Incremental Market Project.

Lowey has written to NRC Chairman Kristine Svinicki calling for an immediate briefing in the wake of the IG report’s release.  She said the report is all the more alarming at a time when the NRC must ensure the safety of local residents as Indian Point’s nuclear plants are decommissioned.

“The NRC must do its job to protect the public first and foremost,” Lowey said. “As we work to mitigate the impact of the decommission of Indian Point on our communities, we simply must have reliable partners to ensure that we don’t face increased environmental and public safety concerns.”

Westchester County Executive George Latimer, meanwhile, called the NRC’s action “a gross failing on the part of the agency that is charged with keeping this community and the families that live here safe.” He said it is “particularly appalling when coupled with the fact that this is the same agency charged with overseeing the decommissioning of Indian Point – a process that is occurring right now.”

Lattimer said he wants the NRC to come to Westchester to tell its residents

“that they have failed them, and to explain what steps they are taking to protect the public from the pipeline that now crosses the Indian Point property as part of the Algonquin Incremental Market Project.”

After Gaza incendiary balloon attacks, Israel strikes Hamas outside the Temple Walls (Revelation 11)

Illustrative: A ball of fire is seen following an Israeli airstrike on Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip early on August 3, 2020. (SAID KHATIB / AFP)

Illustrative: A ball of fire is seen following an Israeli airstrike on Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip early on August 3, 2020. (SAID KHATIB / AFP)

Israeli Air Force planes struck a Hamas observation post in the northern Gaza Strip late Sunday, the IDF said.

“The strike was carried out in response to the launching of incendiary balloons from Gazan territory into Israel over the course of the day,” the army said.

The incident came amid rising tensions along the Gaza border over the past week, reportedly due to delays in the implementation of an ongoing ceasefire agreement between the Gaza-ruling Hamas terror group and the Israeli government.

On Sunday morning, gunshots were fired from the southern Gaza Strip toward civilian workers building the security barrier along the Israel-Gaza border, and then at Israeli troops who arrived at the scene, the military said.

There were no injuries reported.

The initial gunshots at the workers were heard just before 11 a.m. A short time later the IDF fired a number of smoke shells in the area of Kissufim to create a smokescreen in order to evacuate the workers.

“Afterward, shots were fired at IDF troops who had been sent to the location,” the military said in a statement.

Work was halted on the security barrier in light of the attacks, the military said.

Palestinian media reported that the IDF then fired toward Hamas sites in the vicinity of Deir al-Balah. The Israeli military did not immediately confirm the reports.

In light of the concerns of continued shooting attacks, the military also closed off access roads around the border, the Eshkol Regional Council wrote in a message to residents.

“For now and until further notice, there will be no entrance to the border zone throughout the region, including for agricultural work near the security fence,” the council said.

Recent days have seen a return of the launching of balloon-borne incendiary and explosive devices from Gaza into Israel.

On Saturday, a bunch of balloons bearing a suspected explosive device launched from the Gaza Strip into Israel was found by residents of Kibbutz Nir Oz in a nearby agricultural field, the Eshkol council said. No injuries were reported.

The council said police sappers arrived on the scene to neutralize the device, which appeared to be some sort of grenade. “Following the incident, we would like to once again emphasize: In an incident where a suspicious object has been identified, one should move away from the scene, not touch anything, and report it to security personnel immediately,” the regional council said in a statement.

On Thursday, after a number of balloons carrying suspected explosives and incendiary devices were launched into Israel earlier in the day, Israeli aircraft bombed a Hamas site in the northern Gaza Strip, the military said.

Another balloon that carried a suspected explosive device was found near the city of Arad, some 80 kilometers (50 miles) from the coastal enclave. It was located by police and detonated in a controlled explosion, police said. The origin of the balloon was not known.

The Israel Defense Forces said that Thursday’s retaliatory strike targeted “underground infrastructure belonging to the Hamas terror group in the northern Gaza Strip.”

Following the strikes, Defense Minister Benny Gantz warned Gaza-based terror groups against attacking Israel. “The State of Israel will not accept any violation of its sovereignty or harm to residents of the south,” Gantz wrote on Twitter. “If the terror organizations still don’t understand, whoever tests Israel will be hit hard.”

Last Sunday evening, a Gazan terror group fired a rocket toward southern Israel, which was intercepted by the Iron Dome missile defense system, the IDF said.

In response, the IDF targeted several Hamas sites in central and southern Gaza, including a cement factory used in the construction of underground infrastructure and “underground facilities used by the Hamas terror group,” the military said.

How the Merchant is Changing the Rules

President Donald Trump speaks in the White House Rose Garden in Washington, D.C., on March 13, 2020.Delay the election? Take Trump seriously. Laws and the Constitution haven’t stopped him yet.

Look at Trump’s track record and don’t take his threats lightly, no matter how far-fetched or outrageous they seem. They reveal him for who he is.

David Rothkopf
Opinion contributor

Moments after President Donald Trump tweeted that perhaps this year’s election should be delayed, a wave of responses suggested that his public musing should be dismissed. The Constitution gives Congress the power to set election dates, political Twitter noted, and the Democratic-controlled House would never go along with the idea. It was impossible. It was a non-starter.

It was also suggested that the president floated the idea as a distraction from the other news of the morning: that the economy during the second quarter had suffered the worst economic collapse in U.S. history, that another 1.4 million people had filed for unemployment, and that former Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain, who  attended Trump’s Tulsa rally without wearing a mask, had just died of COVID-19.

These Twitterverse pundits relied on the strangely enduring theory that the president is once again playing 3-D political chess, even though he is currently in free-fall, often cannot read prepared remarks and has regularly shown he doesn’t comprehend the challenges facing him. Don’t be distracted, they advised. Don’t be shocked. Don’t take the bait.

Despite the soundness of the legal arguments being made, however, shock was precisely the right reaction — and complacency about the seriousness of the threat posed by the president’s tweet was exactly the wrong one. Because beneath Trump’s far-fetched words, his anti-democratic intent was blood-chillingly real.

Breaking laws is what Trump does

Those who see the Constitution as a barrier to actions attempted by Trump have not been paying attention. The Constitution explicitly designates oversight powers to the Congress that Trump has rejected and ignored. The Constitution explicitly designates the right to allocate spending to the Congress that Trump has rejected and ignored. The Constitution explicitly forbids a president benefiting from foreign or domestic emoluments and Trump has nonetheless done so. I The Constitution says no one should provide aid or comfort to a foreign enemy, yet Trump has done so.

The Constitution was written based on the principle that we are a nation of laws and yet, Trump has worked ceaselessly to undermine the rule of law in the United States. It is was drafted to ensure that no American is above the law — and yet Trump and his abettors, like Attorney General William Barr and the GOP leadership in the Senate, have worked to ensure that Trump is.

Even the casual observer must conclude that Trump has, with impunity, broken campaign finance laws, tax laws, laws against the abuse of women. It is not an aberration for him. It is what he does. It is who he is.

But concern should not be limited to the fact that Trump acts daily with contempt for laws and the Constitution. Trump’s tweet about postponing the election followed by minutes one that once again argued without any basis in fact that mail-in balloting created a risk of voting fraud. It is a regularly repeated lie, one that was offered up by the attorney general in his recent testimony to Congress, even though he was forced to admit he had no evidence on which he based his conclusions.

C as part of their effort to restrict access to the polls. Given the state of the economy, the catastrophic mishandling of the pandemic and Trump’s systematic undermining of America’s standing on the world stage, he has nothing of substance to run on and his plummeting poll results support that conclusion. The only option he seems to have at this point is to suppress voter turnout and cast doubt about the fairness and later the results of the election.

ISO guts:Trump is on the prowl for enemies of the state in American cities. And who will stop him?

Sending federal forces into the cities to combat questionable or non-existent threats is related to this effort. It creates a premise for martial law-like decisions later that will make it harder for people to vote. Cities with large Democratic populations have been targeted. In Georgia and Tennessee and Wisconsin, to choose just three states, we have recently seen egregious efforts at other forms of voter suppression. It is a tactic that is being institutionalized — weaponized against our democracy — by the modern GOP.

Trump fears this election not simply because the general public seems to want him to lose but because a loss of the powers and asserted immunities associated with the presidency may ultimately cost him his freedom in the long run.  A post-Trump era might indeed be rife with serious legal threats not just to Trump but to Barr and many close to them. Therefore, they will do whatever it takes to win.

Look at intent, not the letter of the law

We already know, from Russia in 2016, Ukraine in 2019 and the GOP unwillingness to vote funds to protect our elections this year, that Team Trump is perfectly willing to not play fair. We know that they see laws as impediments only to those without the power to sidestep them.  We know Trump’s past history suggests that creating confusion about election results, whether through delays or foreign intervention or voter suppression or bad counts, will give him an opening he would happily seize to contest results in the courts.

Hence, the threat posed by Trump’s musing about illegally delaying the election must be seen not in terms of the letter of the law but of Trump’s intent, of his situation and of his history.  He is contemptuous of our democracy and cares only about himself. He is aided by others with similarly very narrow self-interest as their guiding imperative.

Brought to our knees: Resolve after appalling Roger Stone commutation: Don’t let Donald Trump break us, America.

Do you doubt that if Trump could be a dictator, he would be? Do you doubt it is his intention to cheat America’s voters again? Do you dare dismiss his disregard of the Constitution given his track record? Are you willing once again to trust the voices that say “Trump would never do that, the GOP would never do that, they could never get away with that,” after all we have been through?

If the answer to any of those questions is no, then do not take lightly this president’s threats no matter how far-fetched or outrageous they may seem. They reveal this man for who he is and what he represents: The greatest threat our democracy has faced from within since the Civil War.

David Rothkopf is host of “Deep State Radio” and CEO of the Rothkopf Group, a media company that produces podcasts on political, scientific and international issues. His latest book, “Traitor: A History of Betraying America from Benedict Arnold to Donald Trump,” will be published in October. Follow him on Twitter: @djrothkopf

Fighting over Kashmir WILL blow up the planet (Revelation 8 )

Kashmir region. — Counter Punch

JAMMU and Kashmir, widely referred to as Kashmir, has had many designations since India and Pakistan were partitioned by Britain and gained their respective independence from the empire: a princely state, a state, a union territory. The 86,000 mile, Muslim-majority region sits in the Himalayas on the border with China. It is of strategic significance to both India and Pakistan, primarily because of the Siachen Glacier which brings freshwater the drought-ridden nations. India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons: armaments of such destruction that even a ‘minor’ regional war would cause more than a decade of global nuclear winter.

Both countries have already fought several times over Kashmir. With India going down the route of Hindu fanaticism and Pakistan gripped by Islamism, both nations compound their irrationalities with a different form of religious extremism exported from the west, namely neoliberal economics. The chances of global survival diminish. The question is what we in the West can do to pressure our governments to de-escalate the conflict and cease exacerbating it.

Jammu and Kashmir

THE princely state of Kashmir was ruled by a Hindu Maharaja, Hari Singh. Following independence from Britain in 1947, Pakistani fighters invaded Kashmir. Singh signed the Instrument of Accession to India, igniting war between India and Pakistan, which lasted for two years. Two-thirds of Kashmir fell under Indian control. Both states violated UN Security Council Resolution 47: India refused to hold an election, which would have allowed the Muslim-majority population to decide their future, and Pakistan never withdrew its troops. India subsequently opposed UN involvement in the dispute.

In 1965, Pakistan infiltrated troops into the Indian zones in an apparent effort to incite a counter-India insurgency. Around 6,000 people were killed during the 17-day Indian counter-offensive. The war ended with the so-called Line of Control, created by the Simla Agreement of 1972, which followed another conflict in Kashmir and basically existed until India’s annexation of Kashmir in 2019. Following a growing independence movement among Kashmiris, India passed the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act 1978, which led to the disappearances of around 8,000 Kashmiris and the indefinite detention of hundreds more.

In a repeat of 1965, India tried to seize the high ground of Kargil in 1999. A few years later, two Kashmiri groups based in Pakistan, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad, attacked the Indian Parliament, nearly triggering war. A so-called Composite Dialogue was established, seeking to bring the more moderate independence groups into negotiations. This led to a ceasefire.

In 2007, a bilateral peace plan was nearly finalised, but collapsed due to Pakistan’s internal problems. Pro-independence demonstrations ended in violence in 2010. Tensions rose again in 2016, with India’s murder of Burhan Wani, the leader of the group Hizbul Mujahedin. Hundreds were detained and dozens killed, following more protests. In 2017, the Indian government declared its lack of interest in peace talks as curfews were imposed. However, India employed the ex-intelligence officer, intelligence official, Dineshwar Sharma, to seek a consensus for peace. This was scuppered by Pakistan’s decision to release from house arrest, Hafiz Saaed of Lashkar-e-Taiba.

In 2019, India bombed Pakistan in retaliation for an SUV attack in Kashmir, attributed to the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammad. In August, India’s ultra-Hindu nationalist BJP party revoked Article 370 of the Constitution, effectively ending Jammu and Kashmir’s formal autonomy and leading to its de facto annexation.


HOW are Britain and the US responding? In 2017, the UK exported £370m-worth of military equipment to India, including components for aerial targeting equipment, RADAR, technology for military space craft, viruses (yes, viruses), and nuclear detection equipment and graphite; an element used in nuclear weapons production. In the same year, the UK exported £14m-worth of military equipment to Pakistan, including aerial targeting equipment and deuterium compounds, which can also be used in nuclear reactors. After the declaration of ceasefire in 2018, the UK continued to feed the war machine. In that year, it exported £164m-worth of similar military equipment to India and £19m-worth to Pakistan.

India has had the atomic bomb since 1974, when it conducted an underground test (‘Smiling Buddha’). In1998, India began testing again, allegedly prompting Pakistan to test and formally declare possession. Like Israel, neither country is party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. During the 1980s, the US Reagan administration allowed Pakistan’s dictator Zia ul-Haq to develop nuclear weapons, partly in exchange for using Pakistan as a base to recruit and transport anti-Soviet Mujahiddeen, later rebranded ‘al-Qaeda’ by the CIA. In 2006, the US lifted sanctions on India, enabling it to import nuclear materials.

In July, shortly before India’s unilateral annexation, Trump told India’s prime minister Modi that the US would be willing to act as a moderator between the two states over Kashmir. This gave Modi leverage to annex: the logic being that India seizes the main prize and ‘negotiates’ smaller ones. This tactic is modelled on Israel’s theft of Palestine and its sham ‘peace process.’ Indeed, these events occurred around the time that Israeli prime minister Netanyahu was green-lighted by Trump to formally annex parts of Palestine. India is mimicking Israel in other ways. Just as Israel holds 1.8m Gazans hostage behind a wall, India is keeping Bangladeshis locked into their poverty by constructing a ‘security fence’ on the border. Just as Israel cries ‘anti-Semitism’ whenever pressure is put upon it to treat Palestinians with minimal decency, BJP apologists accuse Modi opponents of ‘Hinduphobia.’

As Britain’s Lord Desai signed a letter denouncing alleged anti-Semitism within the UK Labour Party under the lefty leader and anti-occupation activist, Jeremy Corbyn, Desai appeared on television in praise of India’s lockdown Kashmir. Labour’s new leader, Keir Starmer, seems to be to the left of the party on social issues (at the moment), thanks to pressure from the grassroots. But Starmer is a Blarite in his approach to foreign policy. A lawyer and former head of the Crown Prosecution Service, Sir Keir said: ‘Any constitutional issues in India are a matter for the Indian Parliament, and Kashmir is a bilateral issue for India and Pakistan to resolve peacefully.’


EVERY few years, scientists model nuclear winter. Recently, climatologists modelled ‘the potential effects’ of nuclear powers detonating ‘50 Hiroshima-size bombs — less than 1 per cent of the estimated world arsenal.’ They found that at least five million tonnes of soot would block out the Sun for fifteen years and reduce global crop production by 11 per cent. In 2015, Pakistan declared that it had developed tactical nukes, which are usually of a small yield and therefore more dangerous because they increase the likelihood of being used. India’s nukes are more advanced and capable of being delivered from sea, on land, and dropped from the air.

Nearly three decades ago, Hindus razed a mosque in Ayodhya, India, said to have been built on the site of the Hindu god, Ram. Today, Modi is back at the site to inaugurate the construction of a Hindu temple. Zafaryab Jilani, General Secretary of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, says: ‘It is against the letter and spirit of India’s secular constitution for the prime minister in his official capacity to attend such a religious event.’

With these underlying cultural tensions creating a psychology of illogicality, a war sparked in Kashmir over, for instance, access to water from the Siachen Glacier, could prove fatal for us all. We will have ourselves to blame, in part, for not pressuring our leaders to forge peace: if there’s anyone left to blame after the atoms are split., August 7. TJ Coles is director of the Plymouth Institute for Peace Research and the author of several books, including Voices for Peace (with Noam Chomsky and others) and Fire and Fury: How the US Isolates North Korea, Encircles China and Risks Nuclear War in Asia (both Clairview Books).

Why nuclear weapons will always be with us until the END (Revelation 16)

Nuclear explosion over Nagasaki, 1945 (picture-alliance/dpa/Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Museum)

Opinion: Why nuclear weapons will always be with us

With the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki 75 years ago, a new form of horror came into the world. There is only one sure way to ever get rid of these weapons, says Felix Steiner.

The people of every era have fought each other with the most modern weapons at their disposal. Prohibitions are of no use at all, because someone will always use whatever science is available to gain an advantage.

My social studies teacher provoked me with this wisdom almost 40 years ago — at the height of the NATO rearmament debate. To this day, the teacher — he passed away some time ago — has been right.

Only about a third of the number of nuclear warheads that existed then are still around today. But their destructive potential has changed only slightly. For any rational person this is quite insignificant: What difference does it make whether humanity can extinguish itself 10 or a 100 times over? Once is enough.

Nuclear weapons as a guarantee

Much more crucial is to consider who has nuclear weapons now. With North Korea and Pakistan, two new states have joined the list of nuclear nations in the past 40 years, which clearly demonstrates the basic problems of arms control and non-proliferation treaties.

Take North Korea: Dictator Kim Jong Un has already met US President Donald Trump twice, laughing and shaking hands, then doing whatever it wants. Then there is Iran, which does not yet have a bomb, but which (with good reason) is said to have ambitions. And would Ukraine — knowing that Russia had annexed the Crimea — return the nuclear weapons on its territory to Moscow today? We learn: Whoever has the most deadly of all weapons feels safer.

Japan: Tribute to atomic bomb victims in Nagasaki

Take Pakistan: The most dangerous aspect of Pakistan’s nuclear program to date is not the country’s chronic instability, the unpredictability of its regime or the traditional enmity with neighboring nuclear power India, but the business conduct of Abdul Kadir Khan, the much revered “father of Pakistan’s nuclear program.” He has sold his technical knowledge — as has been proven, to Tehran, Pyongyang and Tripoli. And where else? We do not know.

My teacher was right: There is always someone who wants to gain an advantage. We can confidently doubt that these people are always honorable and guided by reason. The existence of nuclear weapons remains a perpetual danger, as does the knowledge of their construction.

Pressure must come from below

To this day, the United States remains the only power that has ever used this most brutal and deadly of all weapons. And — because victors write history — it has never been condemned for it, even though the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, with more than 100,000 dead each, do, indeed, meet all the criteria for war crimes.

Felix SteinerDW editor Felix SteinerMoreover, historians have long since proven that the justification for those bombings — to make an invasion of Japan, with possibly thousands of dead US soldiers, superfluous — was a grandiose lie. Japan had already offered to surrender before.

Nevertheless, the vast majority of Americans still believe that the use of nuclear bombs was the right thing to do. The only sign of hope is that less than half of 18- to 29-year-old US citizens are now of this opinion.

In the future, it may be conceivable that a US president will visit Hiroshima and not only call for the memory of August 1945 to never fade (as Barack Obama did in 2016), but will also apologize for this atrocity. The pressure for this will not be exerted at international conferences. It can only come from below, from society.

Such a step will certainly not eliminate a single nuclear weapon. But it could be the beginning of a ban. And a sign of hope that the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki remain isolated events.

There is probably no guarantee that nuclear weapons will disappear until one thing happens: When mankind has invented an even more deadly and efficient killing tool. Anything other than that will probably remain wishful thinking. Just as my teacher always knew.

Pivotal Vote on the Iranian Horn (Daniel 8 )

img_1259Trump, US face pivotal UN vote on Iran

The Russian Horn Prepares for Nuclear War (Revelation 16)

Russia prepared to use nuclear weapons in response to conventional attack, says military newspaper

Russia will perceive any ballistic missile launched at its territory as a nuclear attack that warrants a nuclear retaliation, the military warned in an article published in the official military newspaper Krasnaya Zvezda (Red Star).

The warning clearly directed at the United States, which has been working to develop longer-range non-nuclear weapons.

This follows the publication in June of Russia’s nuclear deterrent policy that envisages the use of nuclear weapons in response to a conventional strike that “threatens the very existence of the state”.

In the Krasnaya Zvezda article, senior officers of the Russian military’s General Staff, Major General Andrei Sterlin and Colonel Alexander Khryapin, noted that there will be no way to determine if an incoming ballistic missile is fitted with a nuclear or a conventional warhead, and so the military will see it as a nuclear attack.

Any attacking missile will be perceived as carrying a nuclear warhead,” the article said. “The information about the missile launch will be automatically relayed to the Russian military-political leadership, which will determine the scope of retaliatory action by nuclear forces depending on the evolving situation.”

The argument reflects Russia’s longtime concerns about the development of weapons that could give Washington the capability to knock out key military assets and government facilities without resorting to atomic weapons, and also betrays Moscow’s uncertainty over the efficacy of its own conventional weapons systems.

The new policy document also states for the first time that Russia could use its nuclear arsenal if it receives “reliable information” about the launch of ballistic missiles targeting its territory or its allies and also in the case of ”enemy impact on critically important government or military facilities of the Russian Federation, the incapacitation of which could result in the failure of retaliatory action of nuclear forces.”

This is particularly chilling as many recall the events of September 26th 1983 when Soviet detection systems warned of an incoming missile attack.


The cool thinking of Lieutenant Colonel Stanislav Yevgrafovich Petrov of the Soviet Air Defence Forces, the man responsible that moment for “pressing the button”, led to him disobeying orders, thus preventing a devastating retaliatory missile launch against what was a false alarm. The subsequent inquiry revealed so many flaws in the system that Petrov was quietly sidelined and the incident was not publicly acknowledged for a decade.

The Krasnaya Zvezda article states that “the specifics of retaliatory action, such as where, when and how much will be determined by Russia’s military-political leadership depending on the situation.”

Petrov passed away on19th May 2017 aged 77. His actions are now widely acknowledged, and he has been honoured across the globe.

Very modest about his actions, in an interview for the film The Man Who Saved the World, he said, “All that happened didn’t matter to me—it was my job. I was simply doing my job, and I was the right person at the right time, that’s all. My late wife for 10 years knew nothing about it. ‘So what did you do?’ she asked me. ‘Nothing. I did nothing'”.

Gary Cartwright

Gary Cartwright

Gary Cartwright is publishing editor of EU Today.

An experienced journalist and published author, he specialises in environment, energy, and defence.

He also has more than 10 years experience of working as a staff member in the EU institutions, working with political groups and MEPs in various policy areas.

Gary’s latest book WANTED MAN: THE STORY OF MUKHTAR ABLYAZOV: A Manual for Criminals on How to Avoid Punishment in the EU is currently available from Amazon…