Scarlet Woman Prepares for General Election (Rev 17:4)

Trump and Clinton: Bring on the general election

By MJ Lee, CNN Politics Reporter

Updated 1:12 PM ET, Wed April 27, 2016

(CNN)For Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, the 2016 general election has all but begun.

The two presidential front-runners celebrated a victorious night Tuesday, each notching major wins in East Coast primaries and taking giant leaps towards their party’s nominations. And in dueling victory speeches that showcased their starkly contrasting tone and style, Trump and Clinton had one thing in common: an eye on November.

Gov. John Kasich joined the Republican field July 21 as he formally announced his White House bid.
“I am here to ask you for your prayers, for your support … because I have decided to run for president of the United States,” Kasich told his kickoff rally at the Ohio State University.

Hillary Clinton launched her presidential bid on April 12 through a video message on social media. The former first lady, senator and secretary of state is considered the front-runner among possible Democratic candidates.

“Everyday Americans need a champion, and I want to be that champion — so you can do more than just get by — you can get ahead. And stay ahead,” she said in her announcement video. “Because when families are strong, America is strong. So I’m hitting the road to earn your vote, because it’s your time. And I hope you’ll join me on this journey.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who caucuses with Democrats, announced his run in an email to supporters on April 30. He has said the United States needs a “political revolution” of working-class Americans to take back control of the government from billionaires.

“This great nation and its government belong to all of the people and not to a handful of billionaires, their super PACs and their lobbyists,” Sanders said at a rally in Vermont on May 26.

Businessman Donald Trump announced June 16 at his Trump Tower in New York City that he is seeking the Republican presidential nomination. This ends more than two decades of flirting with the idea of running for the White House.

“So, ladies and gentlemen, I am officially running for president of the United States, and we are going to make our country great again,” Trump told the crowd at his announcement.

Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas has made a name for himself in the Senate, solidifying his brand as a conservative firebrand willing to take on the GOP’s establishment. He announced he was seeking the Republican presidential nomination in a speech on March 23.

“These are all of our stories,” Cruz told the audience at Liberty University in Virginia. “These are who we are as Americans. And yet for so many Americans, the promise of America seems more and more distant.”Ohio Gov. John Kasich joined the Republican field July 21 as he formally announced his White House bid.

“I am here to ask you for your prayers, for your support … because I have decided to run for president of the United States,” Kasich told his kickoff rally at the Ohio State University.

At a news conference at Trump Tower in midtown Manhattan, Trump declared that the GOP primary was “over.”

 

“I consider myself the presumptive nominee,” Trump said, as he blistered his two remaining rivals for making a deal to work against him. “Gov. (John) Kasich and Sen. (Ted) Cruz have really, really hurt themselves with a faulty deal that was defaulted on before it was even started.”

 

Clinton, who has been looking to shake off Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders for months, signaled at a campaign rally in Philadelphia that she would work to win over the senator’s supporters and unite the Democratic base.

 

“Whether you support Sen. Sanders or you support me, there’s much more that unites us than divides us,” Clinton said.

 

No one secured enough delegates to win the nomination of either party Tuesday. Still, the night marked a major turning point in a primary season that has already had plenty of twists and turns.

Trump had a clean sweep of the five states where voters went to the polls: Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. CNN projected that the New Yorker would win all of the states before 9 p.m. ET — a mere one hour after polls had closed. His dominance quelled — though didn’t snuff out — talk that the nomination might be decided at a contested convention.

 

Clinton, meanwhile, defeated her rival in each state except Rhode Island — the state the Sanders campaign had felt most optimistic about heading into Tuesday. It was also the only state that was an open party that allowed voters who aren’t Democrats to participate in the primary.

The big delegate gains from Super Tuesday #4 04:22

 

The front-runners offered a preview of the personally charged, identity-politics battle that could come if they wind up in a general election clash. Clinton and Trump took aim at each other in their victory speeches Tuesday, and especially clashed on the issue of women.

 

When asked about Clinton by a reporter, Trump declared that the former secretary of state would make a “horrible president.”

 

“If Hillary Clinton were a man, I don’t think she’d get 5% of the vote,” he said. “The only thing she’s got going is the woman’s card and the beautiful thing is, women don’t like her.”

 

Clinton addressed Trump’s accusations head-on.

 

“The other day, Mr. Trump accused me of playing the woman card. Well, if fighting for women’s health care and paid family leave and equal pay is playing the woman card, then deal me in,” she said to a roaring crowd.

 

Clinton also responded over Twitter.

 

Trump’s clean sweep on Tuesday comes just days after Cruz and Kasich announced a joint effort to strategically divide some of the upcoming races to stall Trump’s momentum. It also dealt a serious blow to the so-called “Never Trump” movement — an anti-Trump faction within the GOP that’s launched a campaign to stop the New York businessman from becoming the party’s nominee.

 

“Even if the media yearns to declare this race over, the path to 1,237 delegates remains narrow for Trump, and he just left the most favorable part of the map for him in the northeast,” the movement said in a statement.

 

If Cruz and Kasich are showing no signs of backing down, across the aisle, Sanders sent a more conciliatory message.

 

Although he told supporters in West Virginia that he polled better against Trump than Clinton, in a separate statement, the senator signaled that his primary goal moving forward would be issues and having a say in the Democratic platform.

 

“The people in every state in this country should have the right to determine who they want as President and what the agenda of the Democratic Party should be,” Sanders said. “That’s why we are in this race until the last vote is cast. That is why this campaign is going to the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia with as many delegates as possible to fight for a progressive party platform.”

 

Trump was more blunt in his triumphant speech surrounded by family and supporters and speaking to a throng of gathered reporters.

 

“As far as I am concerned it’s over,” he said.

Antichrist And His Men Affect Change In Iraq (Rev 13:18)

Iraqi Parliament Approves Partial Cabinet Change Amid ‘Million Man March’

• By Elizabeth McLaughlin

Apr 26, 2016, 3:09 PM ET

Karim Kadim/AP Photo

Followers of Iraq’s influential Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr hold national flags as they cross the al-Jumhuriya bridge over Tigris River towards the heavily guarded Green Zone, ahead of a scheduled parliament session for a vote on a new government, April 26, 2016, in Baghdad.more +

Thousands of Iraqis traveled to Baghdad Tuesday to voice their opposition to government leaders, rallying for an end to political corruption.
The “million-man march” was called for by influential Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr ahead of a scheduled parliament session to vote on a new government.
Many of the protesters are aligned with former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and have demanded the resignation of the current Prime Minister, Haider al-Abadi, as well as other high-level leaders.

Karim Kadim/AP Photo

Followers of Iraq’s influential Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr gather ahead of a scheduled parliament session to press for a vote on a new government, at Tahrir Square on April 26, 2016, in Baghdad.

The Parliament approved a partial cabinet “reshuffle,” originally proposed by al-Abadi.
The move would transfer key portfolios to independent technocrats in an effort to rid the government of “patronage and corruption that have hindered the provision of public services since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion,” according to The Associated Press.
In preparation for the massive protests, Iraqi security forces blocked off all roads leading to the downtown Tahrir Square with razor wire and concrete blocks.

Karim Kadim/AP Photo

Iraqi security forces guard the heavily fortified Green Zone as followers of Iraq’s influential Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr wave national flags as they gather in front of the Green Zone, April 26, 2016, in Baghdad.more +

Some protesters arrived several weeks ago and have been holding a “sit-in” outside of the heavily guarded Green Zone, creating huge traffic jams in parts of the city.
Many demonstrators carried photos of Muqtada al-Sadr and praised him with songs.
Protesters said they would not leave Tahrir Square until a new government was in place, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Col. Steve Warren, the U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, said American military personnel and operations were not affected by today’s protests.

In The End, Russia And Iran Will Be Enemies (Daniel 7/8)

Iran and Russia move closer but their alliance has limits

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin (L), who arrived to attend the Gas Exporting Countries Forum (GECF), meets with Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in Tehran, Iran, November 23, 2015.Alexei Druzhinin/Sputnik/Kremlin/File Photo via REUTERS

Bozorgmehr Sharafedin and Lidia Kelly

When Iran took delivery of the first parts of an advanced Russian air defense system this month, it paraded the anti-aircraft missile launchers sent by Moscow to mark Army Day.

Tehran had cause to celebrate: the Kremlin’s decision a year ago to press ahead with the stalled sale of the S-300 system was the first clear evidence of a growing partnership between Russia and Iran that has since turned the tide in Syria’s civil war and is testing U.S. influence in the Middle East.
But the delay in implementation of the deal also points to the limitations of a relationship that is forged from a convergence of interests rather than a shared worldview, with Iran’s leadership divided over ideology and Russia showing signs of reluctance to let the alliance develop much more, according to diplomats, officials and analysts interviewed by Reuters.

Some Iranian officials want a strategic alliance, a much deeper relationship than now. But the Kremlin refers only to ongoing cooperation with a new dimension because of the conflict in Syria, in which both back Damascus.

“We are continuously developing friendly relations with Iran, but we cannot really talk about a new paradigm in our relations,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said last month.

Russia agreed to sell the S-300 system to Iran in 2007 but froze the deal in 2010 after sanctions were imposed on Tehran over its nuclear program.

Moscow lifted the self-imposed ban in April last year as Iran and world powers got closer to the deal that led eventually to the nuclear-related sanctions being lifted in exchange for Tehran curbing its atomic program.

Russia is now weighing the financial and diplomatic benefits of arms sales to Tehran against the risk of upsetting other countries including Saudi Arabia, the United States and Israel, or seeing Iran become too powerful.

“There is a military-economic aspect to this alliance which is beneficial to both sides,” said Maziar Behrooz, associate professor of Mideast and Islamic history at San Francisco State University, who has studied Iran’s relationship with Russia.

“But on a geopolitical level, Iran and Russia can only form a tactical short-term alliance, not a strategic one. I think the ideological differences between the two are just too deep.”

BACKING FOR DAMASCUS

The relationship, long cordial, appeared to reach a new level last September when Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a military intervention in Syria in support of Iran’s ally, President Bashar al-Assad.

Iran had already deployed its Revolutionary Guards (IRGC), who had rallied Assad’s troops to check the opposition’s momentum. But it took Russian air power to break the stalemate and give Assad the upper hand.

Militarily, the two powers proved complementary. Iran brought disciplined ground troops who worked well with their local allies, while Russia provided the first-rate air power that Iran and Assad lack.

Diplomatically, the joint operations have made Tehran and Moscow central to any discussion about the regional security architecture.

That is important for Putin as he has sought to shore up alliances in the region and increase Moscow’s influence since Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, a Russian ally, was killed.

How well Moscow will fare when it comes to winning lucrative business contracts now the nuclear-related sanctions have been lifted is less clear. There is little sign so far of Russian companies making new inroads into Iran.

This is partly for ideological reasons. The Iranian establishment is divided, with President Hassan Rouhani’s faction more interested in trading with the West than struggling against it, even if many U.S. policies are still condemned.

Russia has little incentive to join the mostly Shi’ite “Axis of Resistance” to Western interests in the region which is championed by the more conservative Iranian faction as this could ruin its relationships with other Middle Eastern powers such as Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

SECRET MEETINGS

Russia’s first big intervention in the Middle East since the Cold War followed months of secret meetings in Moscow between Putin and Iranian officials, including IRGC commanders and Ali Akbar Velayati, foreign policy advisor to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

A close and exclusive alliance with Russia would suit Khamenei, Iran’s most powerful figure, who has blamed Western influence for Iran’s troubles and pushed hard to implement his “Look East” policy.

But it runs contrary to the policy of Iran’s government, led by Rouhani and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who have courted Western delegations on an almost weekly basis since the nuclear deal was reached with world powers last July.

The Western-educated Rouhani is less inclined toward Russia and has an uneasy relationship with Putin. Last November, during his first visit to Tehran in eight years, Putin went straight from the airport to meet Khamenei, rather than seeing Rouhani first as most visitors do.

“Rouhani and Putin don’t get along that great,” an Iranian diplomat told Reuters on condition of anonymity.

Some Iranian officials are also wary of getting too close to Russia, which fought Britain for domination of 19th century Iran and occupied the country during both World Wars.

“Russians have always used us as a tool in their foreign policy. They never stayed committed to their alliance with any country,” Abdullah Ramezanzadeh, who served as spokesman for former President Mohammad Khatami, told Reuters from Tehran.

Putin has worked hard to improve relations with Iran. During the November visit, he presented Khamenei with one of the world’s oldest copies of the Koran, which Russia had obtained during its occupation of northern Iran in the 19th century.

The intervention in Syria has served as a distraction from economic problems in Russia, deepened by international sanctions on Moscow over its role in the Ukraine crisis which have forced Moscow to seek new trade partners.

Trade with Iran was only $1.3 billion in 2015, according to Russian data, though there are signs cooperation could pick up.

Russia says it is ready to start disbursing a $5-billion loan to Tehran for financing infrastructure projects. A deal is also being discussed for Russia to send oil and gas to northern Iran, where supply is scarce, and for Iran to send oil and gas from its southern fields to Russia’s customers in the Gulf.
But the prospects for cooperation may be limited, sector analysts say, as, to update its energy sector, Iran mainly needs technology and equipment which Russia is also in need of.

Russia is also in talks to help upgrade Iran’s dilapidated air force by selling it Sukhoi Su-30 fighter jets but the deal would need the approval of the United Nations Security Council and could further strain Moscow’s relations with Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

(Editing by Sam Wilkin, William Maclean and Timothy Heritage)

East Coast Still Unprepared For The Sixth Seal (Rev 6:12)

East Coast Earthquake Preparedness

By BEN NUCKOLS

WASHINGTON — There were cracks in the Washington Monument and broken capstones at the National Cathedral. In the District of Columbia suburbs, some people stayed in shelters because of structural concerns at their apartment buildings.

A day after the East Coast’s strongest earthquake in 67 years, inspectors assessed the damage and found that most problems were minor. But the shaking raised questions about whether this part of the country, with its older architecture and inexperience with seismic activity, is prepared for a truly powerful quake.

The 5.8 magnitude quake felt from Georgia north to Canada prompted swift inspections of many structures Wednesday, including bridges and nuclear plants. An accurate damage estimate could take weeks, if not longer. And many people will not be covered by insurance.

In a small Virginia city near the epicenter, the entire downtown business district was closed. School was canceled for two weeks to give engineers time to check out cracks in several buildings.
At the 555-foot Washington Monument, inspectors found several cracks in the pyramidion – the section at the top of the obelisk where it begins narrowing to a point.

A 4-foot crack was discovered Tuesday during a visual inspection by helicopter. It cannot be seen from the ground. Late Wednesday, the National Park Service announced that structural engineers had found several additional cracks inside the top of the monument.

Carol Johnson, a park service spokeswoman, could not say how many cracks were found but said three or four of them were “significant.” Two structural engineering firms that specialize in assessing earthquake damage were being brought in to conduct a more thorough inspection on Thursday.
The monument, by far the tallest structure in the nation’s capital, was to remain closed indefinitely, and Johnson said the additional cracks mean repairs are likely to take longer. It has never been damaged by a natural disaster, including earthquakes in Virginia in 1897 and New York in 1944.
Tourists arrived at the monument Wednesday morning only to find out they couldn’t get near it. A temporary fence was erected in a wide circle about 120 feet from the flags that surround its base. Walkways were blocked by metal barriers manned by security guards.
 
“Is it really closed?” a man asked the clerk at the site’s bookstore.

“It’s really closed,” said the clerk, Erin Nolan. Advance tickets were available for purchase, but she cautioned against buying them because it’s not clear when the monument will open.

“This is pretty much all I’m going to be doing today,” Nolan said.

Tuesday’s quake was centered about 40 miles northwest of Richmond, 90 miles south of Washington and 3.7 miles underground. In the nearby town of Mineral, Va., Michael Leman knew his Main Street Plumbing & Electrical Supply business would need – at best – serious and expensive repairs.

At worst, it could be condemned. The facade had become detached from the rest of the building, and daylight was visible through a 4- to 6-inch gap that opened between the front wall and ceiling.
“We’re definitely going to open back up,” Leman said. “I’ve got people’s jobs to look out for.”
Leman said he is insured, but some property owners might not be so lucky.

The Insurance Information Institute said earthquakes are not covered under standard U.S. homeowners or business insurance policies, although supplemental coverage is usually available.
The institute says coverage for other damage that may result from earthquakes, such as fire and water damage from burst gas or water pipes, is provided by standard homeowners and business insurance policies in most states. Cars and other vehicles with comprehensive insurance would also be protected.

The U.S. Geological Survey classified the quake as Alert Level Orange, the second-most serious category on its four-level scale. Earthquakes in that range lead to estimated losses between $100 million and $1 billion.

In Culpeper, Va., about 35 miles from the epicenter, walls had buckled at the old sanctuary at St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church, which was constructed in 1821 and drew worshippers including Confederate Gens. Robert E. Lee and J.E.B. Stuart. Heavy stone ornaments atop a pillar at the gate were shaken to the ground. A chimney from the old Culpeper Baptist Church built in 1894 also tumbled down.

At the Washington National Cathedral, spokesman Richard Weinberg said the building’s overall structure remains sound and damage was limited to “decorative elements.”

Massive stones atop three of the four spires on the building’s central tower broke off, crashing onto the roof. At least one of the spires is teetering badly, and cracks have appeared in some flying buttresses.

Repairs were expected to cost millions of dollars – an expense not covered by insurance.
“Every single portion of the exterior is carved by hand, so everything broken off is a piece of art,” Weinberg said. “It’s not just the labor, but the artistry of replicating what was once there.”
The building will remain closed as a precaution. Services to dedicate the memorial honoring Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. were moved.

Other major cities along the East Coast that felt the shaking tried to gauge the risk from another quake.

A few hours after briefly evacuating New York City Hall, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said the city’s newer buildings could withstand a more serious earthquake. But, he added, questions remain about the older buildings that are common in a metropolis founded hundreds of years ago.
“We think that the design standards of today are sufficient against any eventuality,” he said. But “there are questions always about some very old buildings. … Fortunately those tend to be low buildings, so there’s not great danger.”

An earthquake similar to the one in Virginia could do billions of dollars of damage if it were centered in New York, said Barbara Nadel, an architect who specializes in securing buildings against natural disasters and terrorism.

The city’s 49-page seismic code requires builders to prepare for significant shifting of the earth. High-rises must be built with certain kinds of bracing, and they must be able to safely sway at least somewhat to accommodate for wind and even shaking from the ground, Nadel said.

Buildings constructed in Boston in recent decades had to follow stringent codes comparable to anything in California, said Vernon Woodworth, an architect and faculty member at the Boston Architectural College. New construction on older structures also must meet tough standards to withstand severe tremors, he said.

It’s a different story with the city’s older buildings. The 18th- and 19th-century structures in Boston’s Back Bay, for instance, were often built on fill, which can liquefy in a strong quake, Woodworth said. Still, there just aren’t many strong quakes in New England.

The last time the Boston area saw a quake as powerful as the one that hit Virginia on Tuesday was in 1755, off Cape Ann, to the north. A repeat of that quake would likely cause deaths, Woodworth said. Still, the quakes are so infrequent that it’s difficult to weigh the risks versus the costs of enacting tougher building standards regionally, he said.

People in several of the affected states won’t have much time to reflect before confronting another potential emergency. Hurricane Irene is approaching the East Coast and could skirt the Mid-Atlantic region by the weekend and make landfall in New England after that.

In North Carolina, officials were inspecting an aging bridge that is a vital evacuation route for people escaping the coastal barrier islands as the storm approaches.

Speaking at an earthquake briefing Wednesday, Washington Mayor Vincent Gray inadvertently mixed up his disasters.

“Everyone knows, obviously, that we had a hurricane,” he said before realizing his mistake.
“Hurricane,” he repeated sheepishly as reporters and staffers burst into laughter. “I’m getting ahead of myself!”
___
Associated Press writers Sam Hananel in Washington; Alex Dominguez in Baltimore; Bob Lewis in Mineral, Va.; Samantha Gross in New York City; and Jay Lindsay in Boston contributed to this report.

Nuclear Terrorism From Pakistan (Daniel 8:8)

Risk analysis of nuclear terrorism in Pakistan

by Rayhan Chouglay , April 25, 2016 

 

President Obama’s warning of the risk of nuclear terrorism should be considered seriously, especially when placing Pakistan in this context.

At the March 2016 Nuclear Security Summit (NSS) President Obama warned of the possibility of a terrorist group such as the Islamic State (IS) gaining access to a nuclear weapon as a real threat and ‘one of the greatest threats to global security’. While there was focus on this comment shortly after it was made, other news quickly overshadowed it. However, I feel that it should not be dismissed so soon. This is because of the higher likelihood of Obama’s warning coming true. In this specific context of Pakistan, this article explains why.

First of all, Pakistan as a state is not the most stable. The country only recently saw its first transition from one democratically-elected government to another, back in 2013. Prior to that, Pakistan was seemingly stuck in a pattern of interchanging civilian government and military rule. Recent revelations about Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s family in the recently leaked Panama Papers highlights the problem that Pakistan has with corruption of its leaders. As an independent country, Pakistan is still relatively young and is set to mark its 69th independence day in August this year. Therefore, within the context of international development, the country is still finding its feet. In combination with the corruption, Pakistan is therefore a malleable state. As a nuclear-armed nation with the close proximity of war-torn Afghanistan, the potential for nuclear weapons to transit through the chaotic Middle East certainly exists.

Contributing to this instability is the growing threat of radicalisation in Pakistan, with the Pakistani Taliban the biggest source of that threat. Recent attacks by the Taliban, such as in Lahore in March 2016 and in Peshawar in December 2014 are the strongest evidence of the country’s vulnerability to radicalisation and subsequent terrorism. The perpetrators of the Lahore attack were known to have been targeting Christians, particularly children, a characteristic that is shared with IS. This seemingly common motivation of attacking non-Muslims has the potential to be a horrifying foundation for collaboration between IS and the Taliban. If one of them somehow obtains a nuclear weapon, the consequences could be catastrophic.

Furthermore, the relationship between the Pakistan state and groups who have committed terrorist attacks is not exactly clear. When Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden was killed in May 2011, he was found in a compound very close to a Pakistan Military Academy in Abbottabad. While there is no clear evidence that the Pakistan military had anything to do with Bin Laden’s location, the proximity to the academy raises questions, especially due to the fact that the power of the military is and has historically been very prominent. Back in the 1980s, the Pakistani intelligence service, the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI), was involved with arming and training the mujahedeen in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. One of those who was a part of the mujahedeen was Bin Laden himself.  These incidents raise fears that IS or other terrorist groups could exploit some within Pakistan to potentially gain access to nuclear material.


Finally, we must observe IS itself. As a group/unofficial state IS has quickly risen to being one of the foremost threats to world peace in recent years and has amounted huge assets through sales of oil on the black market.  As a result, it is clear that IS has the knowledge and capability of how to access powerful resources and utilize them for their own gain. Its location within the region and proximity to Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel and Turkey-all states with access to or alliances with strong military power-make the possibility of IS gaining access to more destructive material, including nuclear, existent.

Source: http://warincontext.org/2014/11/16/detailed-map-showing-areas-under-control-of-isis-in-syria-and-iraq/

From an economic perspective, this issue is also really important. Pakistan as a country requires investment to address infrastructure and service inefficiencies, with power supplies being unreliable. However, corruption along with a growing risk of radicalisation and terrorism in the country all place a huge barrier to investment and will lead to caution before any relevant decisions are made.
Furthermore, the oil and nuclear industries have risks. Both are now so globally interconnected that there is a danger for money to enter the industry from a legitimate source but unwittingly ends up funding terrorist groups. That has been the case with IS and oil where much of the money they gain on the black market originates from those who are trying to defeat it. This makes it difficult to continue to fund both industries without unwittingly funding threats to international security.

Overall, the combination of a fragile nuclear-armed Pakistan with radicalised elements hiding within it, state-associated institutions with a murky history, and an aggressive but effective IS makes Obama’s warning of a nuclear terrorist attack a lot more likely. While I am not arguing that IS is going to procure a nuclear weapon through Pakistan or through any other state in particular, I am raising concern that it is a potential turn of events. It may seem very far-fetched and require a whole series of other events to occur, but in security and intelligence you have to consider the worst case scenario, principally when it comes to nuclear weapons, and this is one of the worst by far. From an economic perspective, it means that Pakistan will lose out as investors will have to think twice.

Obama Correct, North Korea Not A Threat

Obama Shrugs Off North Korea’s Offer to Stop Nuclear Tests

By Mirren Gidda On 4/25/16 at 5:04 AM 

 

U.S. North Korea Nuclear tests United States

 

 

U.S. President Barack Obama has dismissed a sudden North Korean proposal to suspend its nuclear tests, if the U.S. abandons its military exercises in the region. Speaking to reporters on Sunday, Obama said that he wasn’t taking the offer seriously and that North Korea would “have to do better than that.” The country’s foreign minister, Ri Su-yong, suggested the plan on Saturday.

Ri’s interview, during which he made the proposal, coincided with Pyongyang test launching a ballistic missile from a submarine, NBC News reports. The United Nations condemned the test saying that it was a “serious violation” of its attempts to rein in the North’s nuclear ambitions.
In the interview, Ri said that the continued confrontation between his country and the U.S. would lead to “very catastrophic results…for the whole entire world,” the BBC reports. He suggested that if the U.S. stops its annual military exercises with South Korea, then the North would similarly halt its own nuclear activities.

The foreign minister vowed that the current sanctions imposed on Pyongyang by the U.S. and other countries would not cause the North to back down. These sanctions have been increased following several weapons tests in the country. In January, North Korea carried out its fourth nuclear test with a hydrogen bomb.

North Korean observers are worried that the country may be preparing for a fifth nuclear test ahead of its Seventh Party Congress in early May.

Antichrist's Men Shape Iraq's Destiny (Rev 13:18)

Spurred by Demonstrators, Iraqi Lawmakers Start Voting for New Cabinet

Followers of Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr march toward parliament, which elected some new ministers before adjourning

Followers of Iraq’s Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr chant slogans during a protest Tuesday in the Iraqi capital Baghdad demanding that parliament approves a new cabinet and end political and sectarian wrangling. Photo: Reuters 

 

By Matt Bradley and Ghassan Adnan

Updated April 26, 2016 4:46 p.m. ET 

BAGHDAD—Iraq’s parliament began voting on a slate of new technocratic cabinet ministers Tuesday after thousands of protesters gathered here demanding new leaders and long-delayed reforms.


The demonstrators convened in central Baghdad’s Tahrir Square in response to a call from Shiite cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, waving Iraqi flags amid festering dissatisfaction over rampant corruption and bitterness over economic stagnation and the country’s military inefficacy against Islamic State, which still holds a quarter of Iraqi territory.

They marched to the gates of the International Zone, the heavily secured area that houses government offices and foreign embassies.

The protesters said they wouldn’t leave the square until parliament voted in a new leadership unaffiliated with Iraqi political parties, most of which are aligned with the country’s many ethnic and sectarian identities. Many Iraqi politicians have expressed concerns, however, that Mr. Sadr’s followers are really pressing sectarian demands. By evening many had dispersed, with those who remained leaving the International Zone and returning to the square to sleep.

The beginning of the cabinet voting appeared to appease Mr. Sadr and his supporters for the time being.

“Today the change has been achieved by your insistence,” said Khadhum al-Essawi, an assistant to Mr. Sadr, in an address to protesters Tuesday evening. “We are demanding to change the whole cabinet with no exceptions, but we accepted the current change just to let things move on.”

Parliament announced lawmakers cast their ballots on seven ministerial posts on Tuesday, correcting earlier state television reports that they had voted on nine. Among the posts they voted on, the parliament retained only the justice and education ministers from the current government. Speaker Salim al-Jubori suspended voting until Thursday for a remaining 21 positions.

Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi last year announced a slate of reforms intended to reduce the size of government, diminish sectarian quotas in the cabinet and improve the delivery of basic services, including electricity.

But ministers and lawmakers, many of whom rely on corruption and a system of patronage based on the sectarian quotas, have repeatedly delayed voting on them.

Parliament’s installation of a technocratic cabinet would mark a major departure from Iraq’s long-standing political tradition in which parties representing ethnic and religious groups—primarily Kurds and Sunni and Shiite Arabs—grapple for power.

The political turmoil threatens Iraq’s already fragile government, which has struggled to turn back Islamic State’s gains. Since oil prices plummeted in 2014, unemployment has soared.

Thousands of Mr. Sadr’s followers protested in Baghdad last month, their sit-in breaching the gates of the International Zone. They were joined by a cross-sectarian group of legislators who demanded the resignation of Mr. Jubori, Mr. Abadi and Iraqi President Fouad Masoum.

Some of those lawmakers have staged a sit-in in the parliament building, sparking fistfights and shouting matches. Parliamentary leaders shut off the chambers’ water and power last week in a bid to oust them.
The insurgent members repeatedly interrupted Tuesday’s parliament session, shouting that the session was illegal and calling for the dismissal of top leaders, including Mr. Jubori, who later moved the session to another room in the assembly hall to avoid further disruption.

It was unclear if the approval of the seven new ministers would end the sit-in.

“Such opposition and chanting inside the parliament is a democratic thing, but we also believe that this delays parliament’s performance,” said Majid Shingali, a parliamentarian who participated in the vote.

State television said 180 members were in attendance, but past head counts have been disputed. A quorum mandates that 165 be present.