The U.S. is absolutely on the road to war with Iran

Is the U.S. on the road to war with Iran?

Dr. Arshad M. Khan

Is the U.S. on the road to war with Iran?
There are two kinds of people: those with, and without, grace. President Trump can decide on which side he falls, although Mrs. Abe the Japanese Prime Minister’s wife has clearly made up her mind. Anyone who can read a whole speech in English knows enough to say, ‘Excuse me, I do not speak English well’. So, to not respond at all to the U.S. president sitting beside her, who turns to converse, conveys a distinct meaning.

There was a time when countries prided themselves on their civility and their citizenry for their courtesy. Now the byword is the put down; rudeness, crudeness and vulgarity rule the day — not to forget the jingoism, demagoguery and xenophobia that can win elections. If such was the state of a democracy, its founders, were they alive, would weep.

In the past week, U.S. presidential ire has been directed at Iran. Shortly after the administration’s annual declaration to Congress certifying Iran’s compliance with the nuclear deal, it slapped additional economic sanctions the following Tuesday (July 18). Three days later, Trump added threats of ‘new and serious consequences’ unless detained U.S. citizens are returned. Robert Levinson, a former law enforcement officer disappeared ten years ago in Iran. In addition, Xiyue Wang, a Chinese-born U.S. citizen, as well as a father and son Iranian-Americans, Baquer and Siamak Namazi — the elder a former provincial governor in Iran — have been sentenced to 10 years jail for spying. For perspective, it is worth noting that 5 million tourists visit Iran annually contributing $2 billion in revenue, and the country is trying to expand its tourism industry.

The nuclear agreement itself is difficult for the U.S. to abrogate unilaterally as it involves the five permanent veto-wielding members of the UN Security Council plus Germany. Yet Trump appears to have swallowed the Netanyahu line on the deal. Add that to Trump’s new found chumminess with the Saudis and their deep Wahhabi antagonism towards Shia Iran and we could be on the edge of another cataclysm in the Middle East, this time enveloping the whole region.

If we recall the history of the deal, the Obama regime first had to give up their zero-enrichment requirement before the Iranians would even agree to talk. They got low enrichment.

While sanctions had hurt Iran, it refused to buckle under the pressure; in fact it added centrifuges and speeded up enrichment. Had the Obama administration continued on this course, they would have had a nuclear Iran or war.

There are those in Washington who still believe sanctions and pressure would bring Iran to its knees. They have forgotten the Iranian response to Iraq and the Iran-Iraq war when Iran stood up to a better-armed Iraq despite enormous casualties.

If Trump keeps up the pressure imposing further sanctions, how soon before the extremists in Iran secure an upper hand and the deal falls apart? Could an unwinnable war (Iraq and Afghanistan are living examples) and/or a nuclear Iran be the consequence?

Dr. Arshad M. Khan is a former Professor based in the US. Educated at King’s College London, OSU and The University of Chicago, he has a multidisciplinary background that has frequently informed his research. Thus he headed the analysis of an innovation survey of Norway, and his work on SMEs published in major journals has been widely cited. He has for several decades also written for the press: These articles and occasional comments have appeared in print media such as The Dallas Morning News, Dawn (Pakistan), The Fort Worth Star Telegram, The Monitor, The Wall Street Journal and others. On the internet, he has written for Antiwar.com, Asia Times, Common Dreams, Counterpunch, Countercurrents, Dissident Voice, Eurasia Review and Modern Diplomacy among many. His work has been quoted in the U.S. Congress and published in its Congressional Record.

Don’t Forget About the Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

Don’t forget about earthquakes, feds tell city

Although New York’s modern skyscrapers are less likely to be damaged in an earthquake than shorter structures, a new study suggests the East Coast is more vulnerable than previously thought. The new findings will help alter building codes.

By Mark Fahey
July 18, 2014 10:03 a.m.

New York Earthquake Hazard

New York Earthquake Hazard

The U.S. Geological Survey had good and bad news for New Yorkers on Thursday. In releasing its latest set of seismic maps the agency said earthquakes are a slightly lower hazard for New York City’s skyscrapers than previously thought, but on the other hand noted that the East Coast may be able to produce larger, more dangerous earthquakes than previous assessments have indicated.

The 2014 maps were created with input from hundreds of experts from across the country and are based on much stronger data than the 2008 maps, said Mark Petersen, chief of the USGS National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project. The bottom line for the nation’s largest city is that the area is at a slightly lower risk for the types of slow-shaking earthquakes that are especially damaging to tall spires of which New York has more than most places, but the city is still at high risk due to its population density and aging structures, said Mr. Petersen.

“Many of the overall patterns are the same in this map as in previous maps,” said Mr. Petersen. “There are large uncertainties in seismic hazards in the eastern United States. [New York City] has a lot of exposure and some vulnerability, but people forget about earthquakes because you don’t see damage from ground shaking happening very often.”

Just because they’re infrequent doesn’t mean that large and potentially disastrous earthquakes can’t occur in the area. The new maps put the largest expected magnitude at 8, significantly higher than the 2008 peak of 7.7 on a logarithmic scale. The scientific understanding of East Coast earthquakes has expanded in recent years thanks to a magnitude 5.8 earthquake in Virginia in 2011 that was felt by tens of millions of people across the eastern U.S. New data compiled by the nuclear power industry has also helped experts understand quakes.

“The update shows New York at an intermediate level,” said Arthur Lerner-Lam, deputy director of Columbia’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. “You have to combine that with the exposure of buildings and people and the fragility of buildings and people. In terms of safety and economics, New York has a substantial risk.”

Oddly enough, it’s not the modern tall towers that are most at risk. Those buildings become like inverted pendulums in the high frequency shakes that are more common on the East Coast than in the West. But the city’s old eight- and 10-story masonry structures could suffer in a large quake, said Mr. Lerner-Lam. Engineers use maps like those released on Thursday to evaluate the minimum structural requirements at building sites, he said. The risk of an earthquake has to be determined over the building’s life span, not year-to-year.

“If a structure is going to exist for 100 years, frankly, it’s more than likely it’s going to see an earthquake over that time,” said Mr. Lerner-Lam. “You have to design for that event.”

The new USGS maps will feed into the city’s building-code review process, said a spokesman for the New York City Department of Buildings. Design provisions based on the maps are incorporated into a standard by the American Society of Civil Engineers, which is then adopted by the International Building Code and local jurisdictions like New York City. New York’s current provisions are based on the 2010 standards, but a new edition based on the just-released 2014 maps is due around 2016, he said.

“The standards for seismic safety in building codes are directly based upon USGS assessments of potential ground shaking from earthquakes, and have been for years,” said Jim Harris, a member and former chair of the Provisions Update Committee of the Building Seismic Safety Council, in a statement.

The seismic hazard model also feeds into risk assessment and insurance policies, according to Nilesh Shome, senior director of Risk Management Solutions, the largest insurance modeler in the industry. The new maps will help the insurance industry as a whole price earthquake insurance and manage catastrophic risk, said Mr. Shome. The industry collects more than $2.5 billion in premiums for earthquake insurance each year and underwrites more than $10 trillion in building risk, he said.

“People forget about history, that earthquakes have occurred in these regions in the past, and that they will occur in the future,” said Mr. Petersen. “They don’t occur very often, but the consequences and the costs can be high.”

Nuclear-Free is a Biblical Fallacy

https://metrouk2.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/aw-bible-nuclear-explosion-ww3.jpg?w=748&h=392&crop=1EDITORIAL: The nuclear-free fantasy game

The Washington Times http://www.washingtontimes.com
ANALYSIS/OPINION:

Faith is the assurance of things hoped for. The Bible tells us so. One of the things on anybody’s wish list is a nuclear-free world. But without assurance that the hope will be redeemed such wishes are the stuff of idle delusion. That goes double for the expectation that the Trump administration’s recertification of the deal proscribing Iran’s nuclear program, and the United Nations’ nuclear weapons ban, will give wing to the dove of peace.

The White House announced this week that it would declare the Islamic Republic of Iran in technical compliance with the terms of the flawed nuclear agreement signed two years ago by President Obama. Mindful of Donald Trump’s vow as a presidential candidate to tear up the deal, the official statement says Iran is “in default of the spirit” of the pact, recognizing that Iran bends the rules to its aims without quite breaking them. President Trump’s recertification gives the mullahs a pass to continue the nuclear research into weapons that would threaten everybody, and particularly the hated West, with its Judeo-Christian democratic traditions.

Like a police officer who charges the thrower of a Molotov cocktail with littering rather than arson, the State Department followed the compliance certification with new sanctions on Iran for its ballistic missile program and its other “malign activities” in the Middle East. The mullahs can laugh in their turbans at the toothless reprimand and at 18 sanctioned men, women and organizations. They tout their penalties as badges of honor.

Earlier this month the United Nations adopted an equally hollow Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. The measure was backed by 122 nations, nearly all unable to build anything more dangerous than a popgun. Brave Netherlands voted against the ban, and Singapore, afflicted with a large restive Muslim population, abstained. The ban applies to the development and stockpiling of nuclear weapons, and the prohibition on threatening to use them.

The global body might as well have gone a step further and outlawed war. Missing from the balloting — and the preceding three weeks of negotiation — were the nine nations that actually have nuclear arsenals of various size: the United States, Great Britain, France, Russia, China, Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea. None are inclined to give up the protection of their nuclear weapons on instruction from the United Nations. More likely, those non-nuclear nations would beat their plowshares into swords out of sight of the U.N.

An injunction against nuclear bombs comes at a curious time — just when the communist regime in North Korea is working feverishly to build an arsenal of nuclear missiles with which to threaten the world. Kim Jong-un greets every entreaty for peaceful accommodation with a chortle and the launch of another test rocket. Steady progress has brought the hermit regime to the verge of capability to strike the U.S. mainland with a weapon that could kill millions. President Trump has indulged lots of talk about the threat from North Korea, but like his harsh rhetoric about Iran, it may resound in the ears of the mullahs as nothing more than hot air.

It’s easy to forswear something unattainable. When that something is nuclear weapons, the nuclear have-nots can count themselves among the angels. Wishing for a nuclear-free world is a game any number can play.

The Sixth Seal Is Long Overdue (Rev 6)

ON THE MAP; Exploring the Fault Where the Next Big One May Be Waiting

ramapo_factsheet_img_0

The Big One Awaits

By MARGO NASH
Published: March 25, 2001

Alexander Gates, a geology professor at Rutgers-Newark, is co-author of ”The Encyclopedia of Earthquakes and Volcanoes,” which will be published by Facts on File in July. He has been leading a four-year effort to remap an area known as the Sloatsburg Quadrangle, a 5-by-7-mile tract near Mahwah that crosses into New York State. The Ramapo Fault, which runs through it, was responsible for a big earthquake in 1884, and Dr. Gates warns that a recurrence is overdue. He recently talked about his findings.

Q. What have you found?

A. We’re basically looking at a lot more rock, and we’re looking at the fracturing and jointing in the bedrock and putting it on the maps. Any break in the rock is a fracture. If it has movement, then it’s a fault. There are a lot of faults that are offshoots of the Ramapo. Basically when there are faults, it means you had an earthquake that made it. So there was a lot of earthquake activity to produce these features. We are basically not in a period of earthquake activity along the Ramapo Fault now, but we can see that about six or seven times in history, about 250 million years ago, it had major earthquake activity. And because it’s such a fundamental zone of weakness, anytime anything happens, the Ramapo Fault goes.

Q. Where is the Ramapo Fault?

 A. The fault line is in western New Jersey and goes through a good chunk of the state, all the way down to Flemington. It goes right along where they put in the new 287. It continues northeast across the Hudson River right under the Indian Point power plant up into Westchester County. There are a lot of earthquakes rumbling around it every year, but not a big one for a while.

Q. Did you find anything that surprised you?

A. I found a lot of faults, splays that offshoot from the Ramapo that go 5 to 10 miles away from the fault. I have looked at the Ramapo Fault in other places too. I have seen splays 5 to 10 miles up into the Hudson Highlands. And you can see them right along the roadsides on 287. There’s been a lot of damage to those rocks, and obviously it was produced by fault activities. All of these faults have earthquake potential.

Q. Describe the 1884 earthquake.

A. It was in the northern part of the state near the Sloatsburg area. They didn’t have precise ways of describing the location then. There was lots of damage. Chimneys toppled over. But in 1884, it was a farming community, and there were not many people to be injured. Nobody appears to have written an account of the numbers who were injured.

Q. What lessons we can learn from previous earthquakes?

A. In 1960, the city of Agadir in Morocco had a 6.2 earthquake that killed 12,000 people, a third of the population, and injured a third more. I think it was because the city was unprepared.There had been an earthquake in the area 200 years before. But people discounted the possibility of a recurrence. Here in New Jersey, we should not make the same mistake. We should not forget that we had a 5.4 earthquake 117 years ago. The recurrence interval for an earthquake of that magnitude is every 50 years, and we are overdue. The Agadir was a 6.2, and a 5.4 to a 6.2 isn’t that big a jump.

Q. What are the dangers of a quake that size?

A. When you’re in a flat area in a wooden house it’s obviously not as dangerous, although it could cut off a gas line that could explode. There’s a real problem with infrastructure that is crumbling, like the bridges with crumbling cement. There’s a real danger we could wind up with our water supplies and electricity cut off if a sizable earthquake goes off. The best thing is to have regular upkeep and keep up new building codes. The new buildings will be O.K. But there is a sense of complacency.

MARGO NASH

America Overdue For The Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

New Study: America Overdue For Major Earthquake … In States You Didn’t Suspect

New York Destroyed

Written by: Daniel Jennings Current Events

Most Americans have a reasonable chance of experiencing a destructive earthquake within the next 50 years, the US Geological Survey (USGS) has concluded.

The survey’s new National Seismic Hazard Map show that the risk of earthquakes in parts of the country — such as the Midwest, Oregon and the Rocky Mountains — is far higher than previously thought. All total, Americans in one-third of the country saw their risk for an earthquake increase.

“I worry that we will wake up one morning and see earthquake damage in our country that is as bad as that has occurred in some developing nations that have experienced large earthquakes,” Carl Hedde, a risk management expert at insurer Munich Reinsurance America, said of the map in The Wall Street Journal. “Beyond building collapse, a large amount of our infrastructure could be immediately damaged. Our roads, bridges and energy transmission systems can be severely impacted.”

Among the findings:

  • The earthquake danger in parts of Missouri, Arkansas, Tennessee, Illinois and South Carolina is as high as that in Los Angeles.
  • 42 of the 50 states have a reasonable chance of experiencing a damaging earthquake in the next 50 years.
  • Parts of 16 states have the highest risk of a quake: Alaska, Hawaii, California, Oregon, Washington, Nevada, Utah, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Missouri, Arkansas, Tennessee, Illinois, Kentucky and South Carolina

“We know the hazard has increased for small and moderate size earthquakes,” USGS scientist William Ellsworth told The Journal. “We don’t know as well how much the hazard has increased for large earthquakes. Our suspicion is it has but we are working on understanding this.”

Frightening Results From New Study

The USGS used new computer modeling technology and data collected from recent quakes such as the one that struck Washington, D.C. in 2011 to produce the new maps. The maps show that many Americans who thought they were safe from earthquakes are not.

New Relocation Manual Helps Average Americans Get Out Of Harms Way Before The Coming Crisis

Some of the survey’s other disturbing findings include:

    • The earthquake danger in Oklahoma, Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Michigan, Virginia, New York and parts of New England is higher than previously thought.
    • Some major metropolitan areas, including Memphis, Salt Lake City, Seattle, St. Louis and Charleston, have a higher risk of earthquakes than previously thought. One of the nation’s most dangerous faults, the New Madrid fault, runs right through St. Louis and Missouri. It is the nation’s second most active fault. On Dec. 16, 1811, the New Madrid Fault was the site of the most powerful series of earthquakes in American history.

“Obviously the building codes throughout the central U.S. do not generally take earthquake risk or the risk of a large earthquake into account,” USGS Seismologist Elizabeth Cochran told The Journal. Her take: Earthquake damage in the central US could be far greater than in places like California, because structures in some locations are not built to withstand quakes.

Others agree.

“Earthquakes are quite rare in many places but when they happen they cause very intense damage because people have not prepared,” Mark Petersen, the project chief for the USGS’s National Seismic Hazard Map, told The Journal.

This new map should be a wakeup call for Americans.

Iranian Horn Not Complying with Nuclear Deal

Our friend Fred Fleitz, former CIA and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence staffer and author of the book Obamabomb: A Dangerous and Growing National Security Fraud, has just posted a must-read article on Iran’s failure to comply with the terms of the nuclear deal Obama made with the rogue Islamist state.

Press reports from late last week indicated that President Trump will grudgingly agree to certify Iranian compliance again, but could change his mind.

Fleitz points out that per the Iran Nuclear Review Act of 2015, the Trump administration is required to certify to Congress every 90 days that Iran is in compliance with the July 2015 nuclear deal (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA) and that this agreement is in the national-security interests of the United States. The next certification is due on July 17, 2017.

It is crucial, says Fleitz, that the Trump administration, in the next JCPOA certification statement, correct the gross error it made in April, when it certified that Iran was complying with this agreement and that the JCPOA is in the national-security interests of our country.

The April certification, concluded Fleitz, went against Mr. Trump’s accurate statements during the presidential campaign that the JCPOA was one of the worst agreements ever negotiated and that there was clear evidence of Iran’s failing to meet its obligations under the agreement as well as cheating. Although many Trump officials opposed the April certification — and this decision to certify appeared to irritate President Trump — State Department careerists succeeded in convincing Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to agree to certify anyway.

Senators Tom Cotton (R., Ark.), Ted Cruz (R., Texas), David Perdue (R., Ga.), and Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) made it clear in a July 11 letter to Secretary Tillerson that they do not want this to happen again and cited four ways Iran is not complying with the nuclear agreement:

One. Operating more advanced uranium-enrichment centrifuges than is permitted and announcing the capability to initiate mass production of centrifuges. (Although some agree with this concern, the U.S. should not have agreed to let Iran enrich any uranium while the JCPOA is in effect, never mind enrich it with advanced centrifuges. This is one of the JCPOA’s most serious flaws.)

Two. Exceeding limits on production and storage of heavy water, a substance needed to operate plutonium-producing heavy-water nuclear reactors. (Again, some agree, but the U.S. should not have agreed to a pact that allows Iran to produce heavy water or operate a heavy-water reactor.)

Three. Covertly procuring nuclear and missile technology outside of JCPOA-approved channels. There’s direct evidence of this, from German intelligence reports.

Four. Refusing to allow IAEA inspectors access to nuclear-research and military facilities.

Incredibly, says Fleitz, a State Department official said at a recent Washington lunch that the Department is trying to determine whether Iran is in “material breach” of the JCPOA, not whether it is in full compliance.

This means that the State Department is well aware that Iran is not complying with the nuclear deal, but is trying to find ways to discount these violations.

This kind of diplomatic hairsplitting seems to violate the Iran Nuclear Review Act, which mandated that the administration certify whether Iran is or is not in compliance with the JCPOA.

What’s more, Fred Fleitz, and Senators Cotton, Cruz, Perdue, and Rubio are not the only high-level observers of the Iran nuclear deal to see it this way.

John R. Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and a former undersecretary of state for arms control and international security affairs has posted an op-ed in The Hill arguing that certifying that Iran is complying with its 2015 nuclear deal “will be the administration’s second unforced error regarding the JCPOA.”

Over the past two years, argues Ambassador Bolton, considerable information detailing Tehran’s violations of the deal have become public, including: exceeding limits on uranium enrichment and production of heavy water; illicit efforts at international procurement of dual-use nuclear and missile technology; and obstructing international inspection efforts (which were insufficient to begin with).

Certification is an unforced error says Bolton because the applicable statute (the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015, or “INARA”) requires neither certifying Iranian compliance nor certifying Iranian noncompliance.

As Ambassador Bolton and our friend Paula DeSutter previously explained, the INARA requires merely that the Secretary of State (to whom President Obama delegated the task) “determine…whether [he] is able to certify” compliance (emphasis added).

The secretary can satisfy the statute simply by “determining” that he is not prepared for now to certify compliance and that U.S. policy is under review.

The problem, says Ambassador Bolton, is within the Trump administration, JCPOA supporters contend that rejecting the deal would harm the United States by calling into question our commitment to international agreements generally. There is ominous talk of America “not living up to its word.”

This is nonsense argues Bolton. The president’s primary obligation is to keep American citizens safe from foreign threats.

To that end, Bolton says we must also urgently reassess the available intelligence on issues like joint Iranian-North Korea nuclear and ballistic-missile programs, free from the Obama administration’s political biases. Cooperation between Tehran and Pyongyang is deep and long-standing. North Korea’s July 4 ICBM launch should cause greater interest in the implications for Iran.

Much of the current JCPOA debate would be strategically irrelevant if, as seems virtually certain, the ayatollahs can send a wire transfer to Kim Jung-un to purchase whatever capability North Korea develops.

It is time for the Trump administration to stop “reviewing’ and stop issuing phony certifications it knows are lies. The Trump administration itself has already shown the courage of its convictions by withdrawing from the Paris climate accords. Compared to that, abrogating the JCPOA is a one-inch putt says Ambassador Bolton – and we agree.

As Fred Fleitz and Ambassador Bolton have pointed out many times, the Obama Iran nuclear deal is fatally flawed. We urge CHQ readers to use this link to contact the White House. Tell President Trump it is folly to falsely certify that Iran is in compliance with its obligations under the JCPOA and that it is time to fulfill his campaign promise to take America out of Obama’s dangerous Iran nuclear deal.

The Iran Deal May Be Broken (Daniel 8:4)

Trump Is Endangering Nuclear Deal, Says Iranian Foreign Minister

by Julia Conley, staff writer

As the United States and Iran mark two years since reaching their landmark deal on nuclear weapons, analysts say Iran has met its obligations stipulated by the agreement—while the U.S. has failed to do so.

The deal, forged in July 2015 by Iran and the Obama administration along with Germany and the four other members of the U.N. National Security Council, stipulated that sanctions on Iran would be lifted in exchange for its halting of nuclear development for the next decade and its compliance with continuous surveillance of its nuclear enrichment and storage sites, among other requirements.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was tasked with making sure Iran complied with the deal, and has reported that the country has done so. But with the introduction of a Senate bill that would impose new sanctions on Iran aimed at its ballistic missile program, the language of which the nonpartisan Arms Control Association calls “overly broad and imprecise,” critics say the U.S. has not met the deal’s terms, endangering the agreement.

In an interview on Sunday on “Fareed Zakaria GPS,” Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said that President Donald Trump has failed to hold up the United States’ end of the bargain by urging its allies to cut business ties with Iran, effectively enacting more sanctions.

“When…President Trump used his presence in the G20 meeting in Hamburg in order to dissuade leaders from other counties to engage in business with Iran, that is a violation of not the spirit but the letter of the JCPOA [Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action], of the nuclear deal,” Zarif said.

The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) also expressed dismay at the state of the deal, noting in a press release, “The JCPOA represented an opportunity for the U.S. and Iran to change course, broaden engagement, and end the policy of sanctions and antagonism. Unfortunately that opportunity has largely been squandered.”

“Continued sanctions, calls from the White House for nations to refrain from investing in Iran, and an increase in military encounters between the US and Iran all threaten the deal,” the NIAC added.

Meanwhile, the grassroots disarmament organization Peace Action wrote on Thursday that the Iran deal should be held up as a model for diplomacy, as the U.S. weighs its options in handling growing concerns over North Korea’s nuclear capabilities—thus far, imposing sanctions and refusing to participate in talks with North Korea.

“One of the crucial features of negotiations with Iran was our willingness to negotiate without preconditions,” the group wrote. “Yet when it comes to growing concerns over North Korea’s nuclear weapons program, the administration has instead opted for more ineffective sanctions and dangerous threats of military force. It’s time we apply the same diplomatic approach to North Korea that has proved successful with Iran.”

The Reality Of Nuclear War Under Trump (Revelation 15)

http://www.motherjones.com/files/trumpbomb.jpgNoam Chomsky on the prospects for nuclear war under Trump

At The Stone, the philosophy blog of the New York Times, George Yancy interviews Noam Chomsky about the role of philosophy is social transformation, and the state of the US under Trump. In a surprisingly optimistic note, Chomsky says that the popularity of Bernie Sanders, and the activist that his supporters have spearheaded since the end of the election, has the potential to drastically transform the political landscape in the US over the long term. In the short term, however, Chomsky express the dire concern that the reckless Trump Administration has made nuclear war more likely now than even during the Cold War. Read an excerpt from the interview below, or the full text here:

G.Y.: Returning to Trump, I take it that you view him as fundamentally unpredictable. I certainly do. Should we fear a nuclear exchange of any sort in our contemporary moment?

N.C.: I do, and I’m hardly the only person to have such fears. Perhaps the most prominent figure to express such concerns is William Perry, one of the leading contemporary nuclear strategists, with many years of experience at the highest level of war planning. He is reserved and cautious, not given to overstatement. He has come out of semiretirement to declare forcefully and repeatedly that he is terrified both at the extreme and mounting threats and by the failure to be concerned about them. In his words, “Today, the danger of some sort of a nuclear catastrophe is greater than it was during the Cold War, and most people are blissfully unaware of this danger.”

In 1947, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists established its famous Doomsday Clock, estimating how far we are from midnight: termination. In 1947, the analysts set the clock at seven minutes to midnight. In 1953, they moved the hand to two minutes to midnight after the U.S. and U.S.S.R. exploded hydrogen bombs. Since then it has oscillated, never again reaching this danger point. In January, shortly after Trump’s inauguration, the hand was moved to two and a half minutes to midnight, the closest to terminal disaster since 1953. By this time analysts were considering not only the rising threat of nuclear war but also the firm dedication of the Republican organization to accelerate the race to environmental catastrophe.

Perry is right to be terrified. And so should we all be, not least because of the person with his finger on the button and his surreal associates.

Giuliani Correct: US fears new ‘biggest enemy’ Iran

‘This country is WORSE than North Korea’ Rudy Giuliani says US fears new ‘biggest enemy’

By Rachel O’Donoghue / Published 16th July 2017

U.S. against ‘evil’ regime in Iran says ex-New York mayor

Rudy Giuliani, the ex-Mayor of New York, warned Iran is the country’s biggest fear right now.

Speaking after a conference in Paris earlier this month, he said the nation poses a greater threat than both Kim Jong-un and Vladimir Putin.

Mr Giuliani was attending a rally in Paris organised by the People’s Mojahedin Organisation of Iran (PMOI), which is the largest and most active opposition movement to the regime.

The Paris-based group supports a totally secular political system in the hardline Islamic country.

Mr Giuliani said: “Iran is our biggest enemy, Iran is our fiercest enemy. It is the greatest danger to freedom in the world.

“Our long term danger is Iran.

Iran [is] a bigger threat than North Korea, it is expanding into an empire. North Korea is contained.

They have more technological capability and they have what is truly an insane regime.

“In North Korea, we’re not sure about Kim Jong-un and we do have the hope that China can contain him.”

Iran is our biggest enemy, Iran is our fiercest enemy. It is the greatest danger to freedom in the world” Rudy Giuliani

Tensions between the US and North Korea are at an all time high.

The secretive state has repeatedly threatened to blast the US with nuclear weapons, with supreme leader Kim even saying it would be a “piece of cake” to drop a nuke on the country.

But Mr Giuliani, who was Mayor of New York at the time of the September 11 terror attacks, warned the Iranian regime’s downfall can’t be brought about via military action.

He said it would happen through a civilian revolution within the Middle Eastern superpower, which the United States can only help bring about through economic sanctions.

“The [regime change] needs to happen from within. How did the regime change in the Soviet Union or Poland or in the Czech Republic? No army came in.

“The people finally rose up and they were just too much for the military to contain,” he explained.

His comments come as the PMOI again accused the international community of ignoring the global threat posed by Iran.

Last year, Europe and the United States, under President Barack Obama, lifted sanctions – including oil and financial penalties – placed on the country over its expanding nuclear programme.

They also unfroze approximately $100billion of its assets after inspectors said crucial parts of its nuclear capabilities had been dismantled – something the PMOI claims is a lie.

Urging the reintroduction of sanctions, Mr Giuliani said the US has the power to tighten the noose around the regime.

He said that because three-quarters of substantial global trade is done via American banks, Iran could be squeezed financially to such an extent it would spark major unrest in the country.

Iran Continues to Defy the World (Daniel 8:4)

640x392_81016_195499NEWS : NUCLEAR

Published: 11 July 2017
By INU Staff

INU – The Iranian Regime is still attempting to obtain illicit nuclear technology, in direct defiance of the 2015 deal between six world powers and Iran, according to German intelligence agencies.

The Hamburg intelligence agency’s report read: “There is no evidence of a complete about-face in Iran’s atomic policies in 2016… Iran sought missile carrier technology necessary for its rocket program.”

The nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was supposed to stop Iran from continuing development of its nuclear weapons programme for at least a decade in exchange for sanctions relief.

It was signed by the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, France, and China), Germany, and the European Union.

The report also revealed that three German citizens have been charged with violating export bans by sending 51 special valves to Iran. These parts could be used in Iran’s Arak heavy water reactor, to develop plutonium for nuclear weapons.

This reactor was supposed to have been shut down as a condition of the nuclear deal but has not been.

Their report documented 49 instances of the Iranian regime engaging in illegal procurement of weapons of mass destruction and terrorist activities, like cyber warfare, spying, and providing financial and military support for the terrorist group, Hezbollah.

A report from the Baden-Württemberg intelligence agency, read: “Regardless of the number of national and international sanctions and embargoes, countries like Iran, Pakistan and North Korea are making efforts to optimise corresponding technology.”

It continued: “[Iran sought] products and scientific know-how for the field of developing weapons of mass destruction as well missile technology.

The Iranian Regime had even been used a Chinese front company in order to buy technology that would aid Iran’s development of ballistic missiles, but thankfully they were caught.A report from the Rhineland-Palatinate intelligence agency, said: “[In 2016,] German companies located in Rhineland-Palatinate were contacted for illegal procurement attempts by [Pakistan, North Korea and Iran]. The procurement attempts involved goods that were subject to authorization and approval on account of legal export restrictions and UN embargoes. These goods, for example, could be used for a state’s nuclear and missile programs.”

These reports are consistent with those issued by German intelligence agencies in previous years.In 2015, during the nuclear deal talks, German intelligence agencies found that Iran was evading existing sanctions on obtaining both nuclear and ballistic missile technology. While in 2016, they reported that Iran was actively seeking chemical and biological weapons capabilities in Germany.