Sunday, May 31, 2020

History Expects the Sixth Seal in NYC (Revelation 6:12)


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.
“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.”
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)

The French Nuclear Horn (Daniel 7)

France was among the pioneers of nuclear weapons technology. Currently, France refuses to acknowledge the number of nuclear weapons she has but the international community believes France has the third-largest nuclear weapons stockpile globally, approximately 300 of which are in deployment. This number begs the question, “why does France have such a high number of nuclear weapons?” International relations are volatile. Today’s allies may be tomorrow’s enemies and France knows this fact too well from as early as World War I. Apart from the French nuclear weapon programme, the country also has a massive peaceful nuclear programme and generates among the world’s largest quantities of nuclear power.
Force de Frappe
In the late 1950s and 1960s, France initiated Force de frappe (Strike Force). This force was to enable the country to operate independently without the help of NATO using nuclear deterrence on future superior enemies. Force de frappe used sea, air, and land-based nuclear weapons for deterrence. To date, France Nuclear Force, a section of the French Military, remains the third-largest nuclear force in the world after the US and Russia.
Testing In Algerian Sahara
France did 210 nuclear tests between 1960 and 1995 within its territory and overseas territories. Between 1960 and 1966, the country conducted seventeen tests in the then French Algeria within the Sahara Desert. Thirteen of these tests were underground. Apart from geographic location, they choose Algeria because of the Algerian War that was ongoing. The Centre Saharien d’Expérimentations Militaires ((C.S.E.M) Saharan Military Experiments Centre), Centre Interarmées d’Essais d’Engins Spéciaux ((CIEES) Joint Special Vehicle Testing Center), and Centre d’Expérimentations Militaires des Oasis (C.E.M.O) conducted the tests under different code names like Gerboise Bleue (“Blue jerboa”) and Gerboise Rouge.
Testing In French Polynesia
France also conducted 193 tests in French Polynesia in the South Pacific Ocean from 1966 to 1996. Initially, the military did not favor French Polynesia because of its distance from France and its lack of a large airport. However, after Algeria gained independence, the rest of the tests took place in French Polynesia. France conducted her last nuclear test in the South Pacific Ocean in 1996 just before signing the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) the same year. In 2008, the country announced that she had reduced the nuclear arsenal in the French Airforce by 30%, leaving Force de Frappe with only 290 nuclear warheads. Today, France has deactivated all her land-based nuclear missiles. Between 1996 and 2012, France used powerful supercomputers to simulate nuclear tests and also for study purposes. Currently, French law dictates that out of four submarines on patrol at any given time, one must carry a nuclear weapon.
Protests Against French Nuclear Tests
The Algerian Sahara tests elicited protests from Egypt, Nigeria, Ghana, and Japan. Of the seventeen, an accident happened during one test leading to radiation exposure to soldiers and a section of civilians. Moroccan and Liberian government denounced the tests. Over 26 Afro-Asian countries also condemned the tests at the United Nations General Assembly. Between 1960 and 1996, governments, lobby groups, think tanks, and Civil Society groups in New Zealand and Australia staged several protests against testing in the South Pacific. In 1972, Australia and New Zealand took France to the International Court of Justice.
About the Author
• Mark Owuor Otieno
• Writer
Mark is a student at Maseno University and community commentator in Kenya. Mark also has interests in geography, African history, and international development.

The First Nuclear War: 22 years of Nuclear India and Pakistan (Revelation 8 )



May 30, 2020
The author reviews the conceptual evolution of nuclear deterrence in both countries over the past two decades, and the role nuclear weapons play in their national security strategies
This month saw the 22nd anniversary of the Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests. In May 1998, India chose to announce its nuclear weapons capability by conducting five tests on 11 and 13 May. Pakistan followed about two weeks later with six nuclear tests. As summer temperatures peaked, so did nuclear rhetoric on both sides.
Both countries have been operationalising their individual concepts of nuclear deterrence over the past two decades. India follows the dictum of credible minimum deterrence as enunciated in its nuclear doctrine—which was announced as a draft in 1999, and then as an official document in 2003. Pakistan began with the same concept but transitioned a few years ago to the idea of full spectrum deterrence. This new concept is meant to project deterrence at all levels of conflict—sub-conventional, conventional, and nuclear—with an arsenal that includes varied yields of warheads and a range of delivery systems.
Advances in the technological sophistication of Indian and Pakistani nuclear capabilities were only to be expected. Indeed, the types of delivery vehicles have grown, as has their range, accuracy, and reliability across launch platforms. Both countries have come a long way from the first-generation short-range ballistic missiles; Prithvi 1 in the case of India and Hatf 1 and 2 in the case of Pakistan. The numbers of nuclear warheads are estimated at 130-140 for India and 150-160 for Pakistan. Of course, neither officially corroborates or denies these figures. Some of the newer capabilities that are currently under development and testing include the ability of missiles to carry multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) in Pakistan, and rudimentary developments in hypersonic technologies in India.
Capability, however, is only one leg of the three-legged stool on which nuclear deterrence rests. The other two legs include the resolve to use this capability and the communication of both capability and resolve.
Resolve to use capability has a military and political dimension. Military resolve is to be found in the existence of requisite command and control structures, operational logistics, etc. These underpin the ability to handle deterrence breakdown by maintaining sufficient robustness for retaliation. Political resolve is more amorphous and may be gauged, among others, from the personality of the leadership and his/her ability to take hard, even unpopular decisions, across a diverse spectrum of issues.
India’s demonstration of resolve, traditionally seen as weak, is perceived to have become more evident over the last half a decade. Military responses to terrorist attacks supported by Pakistan since 2016, as well as a strong prime minister who has not shied away from decisions such as demonetisation or a nationwide lockdown to fight COVID-19, illustrate a strong political will.
Meanwhile, with a first use doctrine and a military-predominant system, Pakistani resolve is perceived in its projection of the use of ‘tactical nuclear weapons’ mounted on shoot and scoot systems to target the battlefield. The army is the prime driver of Pakistani nuclear decision-making, and the command chain signals integration of nuclear and conventional operations. This contrasts with the Indian system where the political leader is at the helm of nuclear command, and nuclear weapons are not integrated with conventional warfare. So, for India, demonstration of political resolve is perceived to be of greater consequence for deterrence, while for Pakistan, the military dimension is of greater significance.
The third leg of deterrence rests on communication or signalling. The experience in this domain is that Pakistan has chosen to maintain a far higher pitch regarding its nuclear dimension than India. This is not surprising since Pakistan uses its nuclear capability for purposes other than just deterring the adversary’s nuclear weapons. The objectives of its nuclear weapons also include deterring the possibility of an Indian conventional response to acts of terrorism that Rawalpindi sponsors; drawing international attention towards a possible regional nuclear conflagration and thus seeking constraints on an Indian response; and bargaining with the West for military and financial assistance.
Frequently drawing attention to nuclear weapons is, therefore, a significant hallmark of Pakistan’s nuclear strategy. Prime Minister Imran Khan demonstrated this well in the wake of the Pulwama terrorist attack on Indian paramilitary forces in February 2019. Before and after the Indian military response targeting terrorist infrastructure in Balakot, he consistently emphasised the presence of nuclear weapons in both countries, and the consequences of their use for the region and beyond.
In contrast to Pakistan maintaining the spotlight on nuclear weapons, statements from Indian officialdom drawing attention to India’s nuclear capability have traditionally been few. In fact, from 2003 to 2013, New Delhi hardly made any notable nuclear references. In April 2013, two years after the Pakistani announcement of tactical nuclear weapons, a speech was made by the then head of India’s National Security Advisory Board (NSAB) to reiterate India’s strategy of massive retaliation. There was another lull thereafter, punctuated only by a statement in November 2016 by then Defence Minister late Manohar Parrikar regarding no first use (NFU). The debate that followed is well-known. But, it was soon put to rest at the official level by clarifying that there was no change in India’s nuclear doctrine.
Some references to India’s nuclear weapons have been made more recently, one of them being by the prime minister himself during his election campaign. Another statement came along in August 2019 when the present Defence Minister Rajnath Singh made a reference to India’s nuclear doctrine. It is unclear whether such remarks are part of a considered government communication strategy or inadvertent statements made in a political context. In fact, one clear case of deliberate nuclear signalling that can be gleaned is the PM’s statement in October 2018 announcing INS Arihant’s first deterrent patrol.
Signalling is an important dimension of nuclear deterrence, and states must pick these  out from the hubris of rhetoric and political chatter. India and Pakistan do appear to have settled into some sort of a pattern of signalling, which creates a sense of predictability and allows a semblance of understanding. However, neither side should ever forget that nuclear weapons are not ordinary weapons, and must be treated with respect, restraint, and responsibility.
At the age of 22, and with the natural swagger of early adulthood, these two nuclear states—with the fate of over one and a half billion of humanity upon their shoulders—can ill-afford rash misadventures.
Dr Manpreet Sethi
Distinguished Fellow with the Centre for Air Power Studies (CAPS), New Delhi.

Donald Trump is ‘Catastrophically Stupid’



May 29, 2020,The teapot nuclear test in Nevada in 1955.
National Nuclear Security Administration
It’s worse than a bad idea, multiple nuclear experts said.
“A bad idea is waiting a week too long to begin testing for the coronavirus,” said Joe Cirincione, a nuclear expert with the San Francisco-based Ploughshares Fund. “A bad idea is doing daily press briefings where you attack the press.”
“This,” Cirincione said of nuke-testing, “is a catastrophically stupid idea.”
The United States last conducted a live, explosive test of a nuclear warhead in September 1992. Four years later the United States signed, but did not ratify, the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
The treaty all but ended major nuclear-weapons tests by the world’s established atomic powers. These same powers continued testing their nuclear warheads using sophisticated computer simulations.
“There is no national-security reason to test,” Cirincione said. “With the modern computer and technical diagnostic tools, our national laboratories know more about the performance of our nuclear weapons than ever before. The labs have repeatedly certified for decades that the stockpile is safe, reliable and effective.”
But live explosive tests are necessary for the development of new warhead designs. “Testing thus opens the floodgates to developing all kinds of new and different nuclear weapons,” said Bruce Blair, a Princeton University nuclear expert.
If the United States resumed testing, so too could countries whose own nuclear arsenals aren’t as sophisticated as America’s is. “India, Pakistan, perhaps China and most certainly North Korea would promptly test,” Cirincione said. “Who in their right minds would want to give these nations better nuclear weapons? But that is what new U.S. tests would do. They would breed nuclear tests around the world.”
“Russia and China have a lot more to gain from explosive testing than we do,” said Jeffrey Lewis, director of the East Asia Nonproliferation Program at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey.
“China has limited stores of weapons-grade plutonium and heavy warhead designs,” said Gregory Kulacki, a nuclear expert with the Union of Concerned Scientists in Massachusetts. “A resumption of explosive testing allow them to test lighter, more efficient designs that would stretch their limited stores of fissile material and make it easier for them to put multiple warheads on their missiles.”
The result most likely would be a runaway nuclear-arms race, of the kind that diplomats spent decades trying to contain during the Cold War. An arms race, Lewis said, “is a bad thing.”
“Arms racing increases unpredictability and the risk of conflict escalating into nuclear war,” Blair explained. “It also would motivate non-nuclear countries to go nuclear and thus encourage proliferation.”
“In short,” Blair said, “testing runs contrary to the U.S. national security interest by making the outbreak of nuclear war more likely.”

Iran Continues to Raise Her Nuclear Horn (Daniel 8:4)



Photo: Majid Asgaripour, AP
FILE – In this Oct. 26, 2010, file photo, a worker rides a bicycle in front of the reactor building of the Bushehr nuclear power plant, just outside the southern city of Bushehr. Iran said Friday, May 29, 2020, its experts would continue nuclear development activities, despite sanctions imposed earlier this week on their fellow scientists by the United States.
State TV cited a statement from the country’s nuclear department saying the U.S. decision to impose sanctions on two Iranian nuclear scientists indicate continuation of a “hostile” attitude. It said the sanctions would make them “determined to continue their nonstop efforts more than before.”
The statement said the sanctions violate international law.
On Wednesday, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo imposed sanctions on two officials with Iran’s atomic energy organization, Majid Agha’i and Amjad Sazgar, who are involved in the development and production of centrifuges used to enrich uranium.
Pompeo also said he would revoke all but one of the sanctions waivers covering civil nuclear cooperation. The waivers had allowed Russian, European and Chinese companies to continue to work on Iran’s civilian nuclear facilities without drawing American penalties.
Waivers that permitted work at the Arak heavy water plant and the Tehran Research Reactor had been in place until now. A waiver for work at the Bushehr nuclear power station will be the only one extended.
Since the U.S. withdrawal from Iran’s nuclear deal with world powers in 2018, Iran has gradually taken steps away from the accord and started injecting uranium gas into more than a thousand centrifuges. Iran says the steps could be reversed if Europe offers a way for it to avoid U.S. sanctions choking off its crude oil sales abroad.
Iran is also enriching uranium up to 4.5% in violation of the accord’s limit of 3.67%. Enriched uranium at the 3.67% level is enough for peaceful pursuits but is far below weapons-grade levels of 90%.
At the 4.5% level, it is enough to help power Iran’s Bushehr reactor, the country’s only nuclear power plant. Prior to the nuclear deal, Iran had reached up to 20%.

Israel Continues to Trample Outside the Temple Walls (Revelation 11)

It said in a report that Israeli forces shot and wounded five Palestinian civilians, including a child, during Israeli military raids into Ramallah and Tubas that included the use of live ammunition.
In Gaza, six shootings by Israeli forces against agricultural lands east of the Gaza Strip were reported.
The report added Israeli forces carried out 47 incursions into the West Bank, including occupied East Jerusalem. Those incursions included raids of civilian houses and shootings, enticing fear among civilians, and attacking many of them. During this week’s incursions, 48 Palestinians were arrested, including 2 children.
On settlement expansion activities and settlers’ attacks, the PCHR documented 8 violations, including the dismantling of a caravan and demolition of an under-construction house in the central Jordan Valley, demolition of a barn, and demotion of two resorts in an archeological site in Nablus. It said three Palestinians were forced to self-demolish their homes.
The PCHR also documented nine settler attacks: Palestinian lands set on fire, farmers assaulted and trees cut off in Tulkarm; two houses and vehicles assaulted in Nablus; two Palestinians shot and wounded, and two others assaulted in Ramallah; agriculture lands set on fire in Hebron; and trees uprooted in Salfit.
On the Israeli closure policy and restrictions on freedom of movement, the PCHR said Israeli forces continued to use the Erez Crossing, on Gaza-Israel border that is designated for movement of individuals, as an ambush to arrest Palestinians who obtain permits to exit via Israel.

Saturday, May 30, 2020

A Closer Look At The Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

Monday, March 14, 2011

The Ramapo Fault is the longest fault in the Northeast that occasionally makes local headlines when minor tremors cause rock the Tri-State region. It begins in Pennsylvania, crosses the Delaware River and continues through Hunterdon, Somerset, Morris, Passaic and Bergen counties before crossing the Hudson River near Indian Point nuclear facility.
In the past, it has generated occasional activity that generated a 2.6 magnitude quake in New Jersey’s Peakpack/Gladstone area and 3.0 magnitude quake in Mendham.
„There is occasional seismic activity in New Jersey,“ said Robinson. „There have been a few quakes locally that have been felt and done a little bit of damage over the time since colonial settlement — some chimneys knocked down in Manhattan with a quake back in the 18th century, but nothing of a significant magnitude.“
Robinson said the Ramapo has on occasion registered a measurable quake but has not caused damage: „The Ramapo fault is associated with geological activities back 200 million years ago, but it’s still a little creaky now and again,“ he said.
„More recently, in the 1970s and early 1980s, earthquake risk along the Ramapo Fault received attention because of its proximity to Indian Point,“ according to the New Jersey Geological Survey website.
Historically, critics of the Indian Point Nuclear facility in Westchester County, New York, did cite its proximity to the Ramapo fault line as a significant risk.
„Subsequent investigations have shown the 1884 Earthquake epicenter was actually located in Brooklyn, New York, at least 25 miles from the Ramapo Fault,“ according to the New Jersey Geological Survey website.

Celebrating the Pakistani Nuclear Horn (Daniel 8:8)

By Preeti RainaMay 29, 2020
Pakistan celebrated Youm-e-Takbeer – a day when Pakistan became a nuclear power and matched arch-rival India with a  ‘bomb for a bomb’. The nuclear tests that Pakistan conducted in May 1998 made it the only Islamic nations to possess nuclear weapons.
Timely Action By Kashmir Police Averts A Possible India-Pakistan War?
In a tweet, Pakistan DG-ISPR wrote – On 28 May 1998 Pak successfully established credible min nuclear deterrence & restored the balance of power in the region. AFs salute all those involved from conceptualisation to actualisation especially scientists & engineers who made this possible. Long Live Pakistan. #YoumeTakbeer
On May 28, 1998, responding to Indian nuclear tests, Pakistan successfully carried out five nuclear tests in Chaghi, an area of Balochistan. The nuclear detonations, which Islamabad claimed were carried out in self-defence were a direct response to India’s nuclear aggression, Pakistani experts write.
“Every year, May 28 serves as an earnest reminder of Pakistan’s wish for peace as well as a resolute determination to preserve its national integrity, sovereignty and independence,” Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi said at a seminar.
UAE, Maldives Thwart Pakistan’s Plan Of Targeting India Over Islamophobia At OIC
Pakistan insisted that it was forced to conduct nuclear tests due to “hostile posturing” by India. Islamabad has maintained that despite the nuclear testing, Pakistan is committed to non-proliferation and global peace and strategic stability and exhibited utmost caution and accountability in the stewardship of its nuclear capability since 1998.
Pakistan has also assured the world that it recognizes its obligations and the country had developed a sturdy command and control system led by the National Command Authority, and powerful nuclear safety and security management and export controls.

Trump’s Delusional Nuclear Deal

Trump thinks he can get Russia and China to agree on nuclear weapons? Not even close

Opinion: A three-way nuclear deal with Russia and China is non-starter. And isn’t a true America-first approach. There’s a better way.
ROBERT ROBB | ARIZONA REPUBLIC | 3 hours ago
President Donald Trump conducts foreign policy the same way he conducts domestic policy: by instinct and impulse.
For the most part, this has meant ad hoc responses to events. With rare exceptions, such as moving the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, the Trump administration’s foreign policy has been reactive rather than proactive.
There is another curious exception, but one that still seems motivated by instinct and impulse, rather than reflecting some overarching strategic approach to managing the relationship between the United States and the rest of the world.
The New START accord with Russia, which limits the number of long-range nuclear warheads each possesses, expires in February. The accord, negotiated by the Obama administration, has a provision to extend it for five years by mutual consent.
Rather than do that, Trump wants a three-way deal with Russia and China. And to have the agreement cover all nuclear weapons – long-range and shorter-range tactical weapons, where Russia and China have a geopolitical advantage at the moment.
Trump has appointed a negotiator, Marshall Billingslea, to try to wangle such a deal. And Billingslea recently announced plans to meet with a Russian counterpart to begin the discussions.
This is sure to be a non-starter for various reasons. But what is the strategic purpose?
Russia and China are going to cheat
Yes, it would be valuable to limit Russian and Chinese tactical nuclear weapons. And it would be valuable to limit the expected increase in China’s nuclear arsenal.
But, if anything has been proven in a half century of arms control agreements, it is that Russia will cheat. No verification regimen will be rigorous enough to detect precisely when the Russians cheat or the extent to which they have cheated. And no enforcement regimen will be tough enough to deter or correct the cheating.
Russia under Vladimir Putin is certain to continue cheating. And there is no question that China under Xi Jinping will also cheat. Under current leadership, these are not trustworthy regimes.
Now, there are those who believe that arms control agreements are worthwhile even though cheating is likely. Perhaps, even after the cheat, there are fewer nukes than there otherwise would be. And, these advocates believe, there is intrinsic value in engaging potential adversaries in an arms control process, even if the results aren’t optimal.
The Trump administration, heretofore, hasn’t shared that view. In fact, it has withdrawn from two arms control deals explicitly because Russia was cheating on them. One of them limited intermediate land-based missiles. The other was a protocol permitting aerial surveillance for verification purposes.
If existing arms control deals with Russia aren’t worth keeping because Russia cheats, why negotiate a new one? And add another party, China, also sure to cheat?
There is no chance for a deal
Particularly when the likelihood of success is nil.
Russia is willing to enter into the talks. But, if negotiations are expanded to include China’s nukes, Russia wants them further expanded to include those of Britain and France.   
This is not an unreasonable position. China is thought to have around 320 nuclear warheads. Britain and France combined are thought, with greater certainty, to have nearly 500. China is expected to increase its arsenal markedly, while Britain and France are not.
Still, there is not much of a rationale to including China but excluding Britain and France, except that the United States doesn’t perceive a nuclear threat from Britain and France. That will be unpersuasive to Russia, for whom Britain and France’s arsenal is geopolitically significant.
China has refused to even consider a three-way deal or enter into three-way negotiations. And it’s hard to imagine any deal to which it might even possibly agree.
China has a fraction of the nuclear weapons that the United States and Russia possess. It sees itself as a rising world power. It won’t enter into an agreement that locks in its inferior position.
Nor will the United States agree to allow China to increase nukes to our position, or reduce our nukes to China’s level. Nor would Russia for that matter.
What Trump should do instead
A true America-first approach to nuclear weapons wouldn’t involve a quixotic quest for a three-way deal. It would involve a clear-eyed assessment of what nuclear deterrent the United States needs to protect our country and our security interests.
The answer would probably be a much smaller arsenal, but one with more modern and flexible warheads and delivery systems.  
But that wasn’t the direction that caught Trump’s fancy.
Reach Robb at robert.robb@arizonarepublic.com.

Testing Nuclear Weapons Again WILL Be a Terrible Idea

Testing Nuclear Weapons Again Would Be a Terrible Idea

The Washington Post has reported that the Trump administration discussed conducting the first U.S. nuclear test explosion since 1992. Experts say this is a bad way to make a political point. By Matthew Gault May 29 2020, 6:00am
So you’re worried about dying in a nuclear war. Given recent world events, it’s a perfectly reasonable concern. Iran said on Sunday it would no longer abide by most of the restrictions on uranium enrichment and production as detailed in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. Iran isn’t rushing towards developing a nuclear weapon, but it’s laying the groundwork to make it easier if wanted to.
In June, the Pentagon accidentally published its plan for fighting a nuclear war. In early August, the US officially pulled out of one of the most important anti-nuclear treaties in world history. In December, it tested a missile that could soar beyond the bounds laid out in that now defunct treaty. Days after Christmas, Russia deployed its hypersonic glide missiles—a new kind of reentry vehicle meant to deliver nuclear warheads past missile defense systems. Add to this the failing treaties and fire and fury rhetoric, and nuclear war now seems like a real possibility—but so does surviving it.
Today’s nuclear weapons are devastating nightmares, but people can and do survive even when they are close to the bomb’s blast radius. Japanese man Tsutomu Yamaguchi lived through the bombings of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki and died at the age of 93. Yamaguchi wasn’t the only person to survive both blasts, either, just the most famous. The horrific American bombings killed more than 200,000 people, but around 70 percent of each city’s population survived. Many lived with severe complications related to the bombing, but they lived.
To find out exactly how one might survive a nuclear explosion today, we called up Alex Wellerstein, Brooke Buddemeier, and Eliot Calhoun. Wellerstin is a professor at Stevens Institute of Technology and the creator of the Nukemap, a website that lets people see the effects of nuclear bombs in their area; Buddemeier is a radiation safety specialist in the Global Security directorate of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory; Calhoun is the Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and Explosions Planner at New York City’s Office of Emergency Management.
How people survive a nuclear blast
A nuclear blast comes in six stages. There’s a flash of light, a wave of heat, a release of nuclear radiation, a fireball, a blast of air, and finally the radioactive fallout.
This all happens very quickly—within just a few seconds—but modern early warning systems will likely give you some time to react. In January 2018, for example, the state of Hawaii warned residents that a ballistic missile was inbound. It was a false alarm, but state officials estimated that, had it been a real missile, the amount of time from warning to impact would have likely been 12 minutes.
According to Buddemeier, the blast zone of a nuclear explosion breaks down into three areas: the severe damage zone, the moderate damage zone, and the light damage zone. If you’re in the severe damage zone (the area consumed by the fireball) your chances of surviving are low, but you may live through it if you have the right shelter.
“People did survive in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in that zone,” Buddemeier said. “And they weren’t in any kind of bunker, they just happened to be in a strong concrete building. One woman survived in a bank just 300 meters from the epicenter. Not in the vault, just the bank.”
But around the edges of the blast, in the moderate and light damage zones, there is even more room for survival. Your first instinct might be to hit the road, but according to Wellerstein, that could be a deadly mistake.
Atomic Bomb Dome in Hiroshima city in Japan. Image: Getty Images
“Whatever you do, don’t flee,” Wellerstein said. “You likely don’t know where it is ‘safe’ to go anyway, you’ll just clog up the roads, and your car gives you nearly no protection against anything.”
According to Wellerstein, no matter which damage zone you’re in, the safest place to be during a nuclear blast is in a large, secure building.
“If you do have some warning, find the nearest large, commercial, well-built building. If it’s got a basement, go in there. If it doesn’t, move to the center of the building,” he said. “Sit tight. Nothing is guaranteed, and you don’t know where the weapon will likely go off, but these kinds of structures do much better against blast, heat, and radiation than anything else.”
Calhoun said the most important thing to do was to “Get inside and stay inside.” That’s the core message NYC’s Office of Emergency Management wanted to stress. Calhoun said it didn’t matter if the explosion came from a small suitcase detonated by a terrorist or an ICBM launched by a rival country, the message to the public was the same: “Get inside and stay inside.”
It’s also important to not to look at the bright flash of light emitted as the bomb detonates; it will blind anyone looking at it. This blindness is temporary, only lasting for a few seconds or few minutes, but for that brief time it could make people more vulnerable to hazards such as rubble. During the day, the blinding effects of a nuclear flash can reach 10 miles from the blast zone. At night, those effects extend even farther.
Sheltering in a building is extremely important for surviving the next stage of a blast: the heat wave. The thermal blast of a five-megaton warhead (the high end of modern intercontinental ballistic missiles) will be around 15 miles. That blast is so powerful that it can sear away pain nerves while causing third degree burns. Simply sheltering in a building, preferably underground, can mitigate the worst effects of this heat wave.
A building could become dicey during the air blast that follows the fireball, however. “It’s like a wall of air coming through,” Buddemeier said. “Buildings will be blown apart.”
The air blast in the moderate damage zone will likely cause another wave of injuries even for those who sought shelter, but it will be worse for anyone who stayed outside or attempted to flee by car. Like a tornado or an earthquake, getting to a secure location in the middle of a building is safer than the alternative. After the air blast comes the radiation, and a building is also likely to provide the most protection.
The light damage zone is on the very fringes of the explosion. The airblast dissipates as it moves outwards, but it’s still dangerous on the fringes. “It’s more like a sonic boom or a thunderclap,” Buddemeier said. “There’s just enough force that it’s actually breaking windows and throwing glass across the room. It might pop the roof of a building.” This zone extends for miles outside the immediate blast radius, and should cause the least significant injuries.
“If you survive the initial blast, and the building isn’t too damaged to be an immediate threat—it’s not on fire, say—stay inside it,” Wellerstein said. “You won’t know where the contamination is outside, and for the first few days it could be dangerously high levels of radioactivity.”
How to survive after the bomb drops
Surviving the initial blast requires some luck even inside a building, but staying safe after the initial detonation requires patience.
“[The nuclear blast will] suck up thousands of pounds of dirt and debris, coat that dirt and debris with the fission products produced during the explosion, and after it stabilizes miles up in the air the heavier particles will come down. They will be radioactive,” Buddemeir said. “Protecting yourself from exposure to that is something you can do after the blast occurs.”
Around 15 minutes after the initial blast, this fallout will begin to move through the atmosphere and pepper the ground. “Being as far away from that material as possible is what’s going to change your outcomes,” Buddemeir said. “Get inside, stay inside, and stay tuned. If you can get into a basement, that’s even better.”
Being indoors during the blast will help, but if you are outside for any part of the detonation, it’s important to minimize the amount of fallout you absorb once you’re safe inside. The longer you’re in contact with radioactive material, the more it’ll eat away at your body. An early warning sign is nausea and vomiting. Under stronger doses of radiation, the body melts from the inside out. Lower doses will break down your DNA, eventually leading to cancers such as Leukemia and, eventually, death.
According to the US Department of Energy, your clothing will absorb a lot of fallout and simply getting rid of that clothing can go a long way towards keeping you safe. Strip, and, if you can, get those clothes into a plastic bag and get the bag as far away from you as possible. Then, take a shower with soap and water to remove the fallout from your body’s surface.
If you can’t shower, use the water from a sink or bottled water and a damp cloth to wipe down your skin with a focus on areas that were exposed outside. Do not use conditioner in your hair, however. The unique chemical properties in conditioner will bind radioactive material to your hair.
As for food, because you’ll need to eat even during Armageddon, packaged food and drink that was inside a building during the blast will likely be safe (or safe-ish) to eat. The US Government did extensive testing of the effects of nuclear blasts and fallout on packaged food, even nuking bottles of beer to see what would happen. Needless to say, avoid consuming anything that was outside during the attack.
The good thing about the gamma radiation from a nuclear blast is that it decays quickly. An hour after the blast, about 50 percent of the fallout will have already dissipated. According to both Wellerstein and Buddemeier, the fallout will have decayed by 80 percent after 24 hours. The longer you wait, the safer the outside will be.
Eventually, it will be time to leave your shelter and brave the irradiated world.
“After three days or so, [depending] on the size and number of the blasts, but three days is a good rule of thumb for single detonations of modern warhead sizes—the outside radiation will have likely subsided to a degree that you can flee the area without putting yourself too much at risk,” Wellerstein said. “Ideally you would wait for external information from emergency personnel before leaving, but depending on the scenario that might not be possible.”
The blast radius of a 5 megaton nuclear bomb hitting New York City. Nukemap
Calhoun agreed. “We recommend people wait 72 hours and have three to four days worth of food and water on hand at any given time,” he said.
If the blast hasn’t knocked out communications infrastructure, information will be key to survival from here on out, but it’s also likely to be difficult to parse truth from fiction.
In the aftermath of the false alarm in Hawaii, bad information spread across social media. In the event of an actual nuclear attack, Twitter, Facebook, and whichever other services or websites that remain online will be full of bad info, misinformation, and rumors shared in a panic. There’s also a good chance the blast will knock devices such as smartphones out of commission, and make the internet less accessible. A battery or crank-operated AM/FM radio will be your best bet for staying connected to the outside world.
When you’re huddled inside a building, cleaning radioactive fallout off your body, and trying to survive, it may be hard to take a deep breath and scrutinize the information that comes your way. But no matter how the info gets to you—either by radio, word of mouth, or the internet—the important thing will be to scrutinize it.
If you need some guidance, Sweden recently published a civil defense pamphlet that lists excellent questions to ask about information during a time of crisis: what’s the point of the information? What’s the source? Is the source known to be trustworthy? Can you verify the information with another source? Don’t believe unverified or unverified rumors and don’t spread them.
Nuclear war is one of the most terrifying threats the world has ever faced. It’s an existential threat to both civilization and life itself. Nuclear weapons are a big-picture political problem that—like climate change and the rise of fascism—require political solutions. Until then, you can prepare for the worst and hope it doesn’t happen.

IRGC commander Soleimani: Iran Will Always Be Outside the Temple Walls (Revelation 11)

Prior to his death in a U.S. strike in Iraq, Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani sent a letter to Izz ad-Din al-Qassam head Muhammad Deif emphasizing Iran’s support for the Palestinian cause.
In the letter, published on the the website of the Al-Mayadeen television channel, the Iranian commander conveyed his greetings to Hamas’s fighters and to the Palestinian people as a whole, and promised them that Iran would not abandon them under any circumstances. He added that “the death knell of the invading Zionists will soon be heard,” and expressed hope to die as a martyr for the sake of Palestine.
It should be noted that Hamas officials have recently made many statements in praise of the Iranian regime and its ties with their movement. On May 20, for instance, in a speech on the occasion of Quds Day—a day of solidarity with Jerusalem and the Palestinians marked by Iran on the last Friday of Ramadan—Ismail Haniyeh, the head of Hamas’s political bureau, said that “Iran has never hesitated to support the resistance and assist it financially, militarily and technologically.”
Haniyeh’s deputy, Saleh al-Arouri, said in an interview with the Al-Mayadeen channel that “the relations between Hamas and Iran are strong,” and that “Iran has given Hamas and the resistance movements all the support and weapons they need.”
He revealed that during the 2008-09 Israel-Gaza war, Soleimani had been present in Hamas’s military operations room in Damascus, and noted that Soleimani’s successor, Esmail Ghaani, was “maintaining the coordination and assistance to the Palestinian resistance. Hamas’s representative in Iran, Khaled al-Qadoumi, said in an interview with a Hamas-affiliated website that “via its ties with Iran, Hamas strives to establish that the Zionist enemy is the common enemy of the entire Arab and Islamic nation.”
The following is a translation of Soleimani’s letter to Deif, as posted on the Al-Mayadeen website:
“My dear brother, the great jihad fighter, living martyr and brave resistance fighter, general commander of the Martyr Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, [Muhammad] Abu Khaled Deif, may God protect and strengthen you …
“[I convey my] heartfelt greetings to, and deep longing for, the battle-ready jihad fighters of the purest [battle]front, for which millions of hearts weep with yearning. May God’s mercy and will be with the courageous Palestinian people, who carry deep sorrow and suppressed pain in their hearts due to their many wounds, in the face of the oppressive siege and the enemies’ barbaric attack [carried out] in plain sight of the hundreds of millions of Muslims [around the world].
“Rest assured that, no matter how much the pressures and the siege upon it increase, Islamic Iran will not leave Palestine—the pearl of the Islamic world, the Muslims’ first direction of prayer and the place of the Prophet Muhammad’s ascent to heaven—alone [in the fray].
“Defending Palestine [is] our honor and glory, and we will not relinquish this religious duty for any of the pleasures and frivolities of this world.
“The friends and supporters of Palestine are our friends and supporters, and its enemies are our enemies. This has been our policy in the past, and so it shall remain.
“The defense of Palestine is the real proof that one is defending Islam and the Koran; one who hears your call and does not come to your aid is not a Muslim.
“With God’s permission and help, the dawn of victory will soon come, and its refreshing breezes will stir the soul, as the death knell of the invading Zionists will be heard.”
“We hope for the day on which God will permit us to stand by your side and lead us to [realize] our perpetual hope to die as martyrs for the sake of Palestine.
“Your brother, Qods Force Commander Qassem Soleimani.”

Friday, May 29, 2020

The Sixth Seal Is Past Due (Revelation 6:12)

https://www.cheatsheet.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/aftershock-640x484.png?044193 


by , 03/22/11
filed under: News
New York City may appear to be an unlikely place for a major earthquake, but according to history, we’re past due for a serious shake. Seismologists at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory say that about once every 100 years, an earthquake of at least a magnitude of 5.0 rocks the Big Apple. The last one was a 5.3 tremor that hit in 1884 — no one was killed, but buildings were damaged.
Any tremor above a 6.0 magnitude can be catastrophic, but it is extremely unlikely that New York would ever experience a quake like the recent 8.9 earthquake in Japan. A study by the Earth Observatory found that a 6.0 quake hits the area about every 670 years, and a 7.0 magnitude hits about every 3,400 years.
There are several fault lines in New York’s metro area, including one along 125th Street, which may have caused two small tremors in 1981 and a 5.2 magnitude quake in 1737. There is also a fault line on Dyckman Street in Inwood, and another in Dobbs Ferry in Westchester County. The New York City Area Consortium for Earthquake Loss Mitigationrates the chance of an earthquake hitting the city as moderate.
John Armbruster, a seismologist at the Earth Observatory, said that if a 5.0 magnitude quake struck New York today, it would result in hundreds of millions, possibly billions of dollars in damages. The city’s skyscrapers would not collapse, but older brick buildings and chimneys would topple, likely resulting in casualities.
The Earth Observatory is expanding its studies of potential earthquake damage to the city. They currently have six seismometers at different landmarks throughout the five boroughs, and this summer, they plan to place one at the arch in Washington Square Park and another in Bryant Park.
Won-Young Kim, who works alongside Armbuster, says his biggest concern is that we can’t predict when an earthquake might hit. “It can happen anytime soon,” Kim told the Metro. If it happened tomorrow, he added, “I would not be surprised. We can expect it any minute, we just don’t know when and where.”
Armbuster voiced similar concerns to the Daily News. “Will there be one in my lifetime or your lifetime? I don’t know,” he said. “But this is the longest period we’ve gone without one.”
Via Metro and NY Daily News
Images © Ed Yourdon