ISIS Calls Trump a Maniac

Alex Sims
Mr Trump was widely condemned for his call, shortly after the terrorist attacks in Paris in November 2015, to temporarily ban all Muslims from entering the United States until he figured out “what the hell was going on”.
The Republican and his allies have consistently defended the ban, insisting the measure was about Americans’ “safety” and not about discriminating against religion.
Trump: We’re going to deport millions
But Taliban commanders and Islamic State supporters have said the rhetoric Mr Trump used during his campaign will help their recruitment efforts, especially among disaffected young people in the West.
“Our leaders were closely following the US election but it was unexpected that the Americans will dig their own graves and they did so,” Khorasani continued, describing President Barack Obama as a moderate infidel with a little more intelligence than Mr Trump.
A senior Taliban commander in Afghanistan said the group had kept track of Mr Trump’s speeches and anti-Muslim comments: “If he does what he warned in his election campaign, I am sure it will provoke Muslim Ummah [community] across the world and jihadi organisations can exploit it.”
Al-Qaeda, which launched the 11 September attacks on New York and the Pentagon, has not yet commented on Mr Trump’s win.
However, Hisham al Hashimi an adviser to the Iraqi government on Sunni jihadist movements, told Reuters that “Al-Qaeda is known for its recruitment strategy that heavily quotes speeches of the White House and other Western officials.”
President Trump protests
The President-elect vocalised his tough stance on Islamic militants during his campaign, vowing to defeat “radical Islam just as we won the Cold War”. However, he has failed to give extensive details on his plans to combat jihadist groups.
The US saw a number of attacks inspired by Islamic militants during Mr Trump’s presidential campaign, including the killing of 14 people in December 2015 in San Bernardino, California by Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik, who allegedly pledged allegiance to Isis leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and the June massacre of 49 people in an Orlando nightclub by a gunman who made a phone call before the attack saying, “I pledge my allegiance to [Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi] of the Islamic State.”
Officials have warned the US is likely to face similar attacks as Isis calls on its supporters to launch attacks at home rather than making the journey to the Middle East.
Mr Trump’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the statements from the militants.
Even if the President-elect tones down his anti-Muslim comments when he takes office in January, analysts say his statements during the campaign were enough to fuel the militants’ propaganda machine.
“Militants will still use those quotes,” said Matthew Henman, head of IHS Jane’s Terrorism and Insurgency Centre. “The key thing militant groups, particularly Islamic State and al-Qaeda, depend on for recruitment purposes is convincing Muslims in the Western world that the West hates them and won’t ever accept them as part of their society.”

History Says Expect The Sixth Seal In New York (Revelation 6:12)

History Says New York Is Earthquake Prone

Fault Lines In New York City
Fault Lines In New York City

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)

Trump And His Neocons

John Bolton could be close to being named the next secretary of state in Donald Trump’s administration, multiple reports suggested Monday. The former U.S. representative to the United Nations is somewhat of an establishment Republican figure but has also developed a reputation for promoting aggressive military action, including bombing Iran to keep the nation from developing nuclear weapons.
The Wall Street Journal reported that the decision was down to Bolton or former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani. The Huffington Post reported that Bolton was close to getting named to the position, while Tennessee Sen. Bob Corker was a “remote possibility” and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich was no longer being considered.
Others have called such a strike a terrible idea. Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who served in presidential administrations of both George W. Bush and Obama, has said, “If you think the war in Iraq was hard, an attack on Iran would, in my opinion, be a catastrophe.”
Gates said the retaliation to such a strike would be devastating. “[Iranian] capacity to wage a series of terror attacks across the Middle East aimed at us and our friends, and dramatically worsen the situation in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and elsewhere is hard to overestimate,” he said in remarks given in 2012 at the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia.
Conservative outlet National Review wrote an editorial urging Trump to choose Bolton, who the magazine called a “friend,” and a board member of the National Review Institute.
In an editorial published over the weekend, Bolton listed the so-called Islamic State group, Iran/North Korea nuclear proliferation, Russian aggression, territorial claims from China and the U.S.’s “global governance” as the “five gravest challenges confronting America” in the next four years.
Ryan Grim of the Huffington Post wrote on Twitter that choosing Bolton would be seen negatively by Russia and later posted that Bolton was not a “done deal.” Bolton has disagreed with one of Trump’s foreign policy statements, the possible secretary of state strongly critiquing the president-elect’s noncommittal to backing its NATO allies.

Trump And The Nuclear Trigger (Revelation 15)

Bruce Blair
Donald Trump has inchoate, inconsistent and sometimes ill-informed views on a raft of nuclear weapons issues: their role in national and international security; the nuclear threats posed by North Korea, Iran and others; the consequences of their use; the inevitability and desirability of nuclear proliferation; the necessity of spending $1tr over 30 years to modernise the US arsenal; and the importance of cutting deals with Russia and others to regulate their stockpiles.
He is as yet largely unformed in this critical arena, but some of his stated positions and views have the potential to wreak havoc on the international security order and put the country and the world in nuclear jeopardy.
Yet there is a promising side to Trump’s fluid views. They could offer ways to reduce nuclear risks and arsenals.
Relevant indications point to his cold war interest in arms negotiations, his interest in achieving rapprochement with Vladimir Putin, and his anti-interventionist leanings. To be sure, some of these leanings are double-edged. His hard-nosed attachment to reducing the cost of America’s defence commitments to Nato and Asian allies while also extricating the US from risky entanglements abroad may well reduce the country’s exposure to nuclear conflict. But it may equally destabilise regional security and encourage allies to build their own nuclear arsenals. Instability and proliferation would only increase the odds of regional nuclear war, which could easily spread across the entire globe.
Trump could lower the nuclear temperature, especially in US-Russian relations. He clearly wishes to establish a positive relationship with Putin and he should be encouraged to do thisvia nuclear arms control, just as Ronald Reagan did with his Soviet counterpart. Specifically, Trump should seek a grand bargain: bilateral cuts to 1,000 total weapons (Barack Obama’s 2013 Berlin proposal that remains on the table for Putin to pick up), along with scrapping the missile defence programmes in Romania and Poland that stand in the way of these bilateral cuts, pledging to refrain from using nuclear weapons first against each other, standing down their hair-trigger nuclear missiles, and establishing a joint early warning centre in order to reduce the risk of accidental nuclear war.
Some of these elements, especially missile defences, are ingrained in Republican ideologyand a litmust test of party purity. But Trump is no purist or ideologue. He appears to have no fixed programme and seems willing to question long-held premises. Hopefully he will resist old-school hardliners populating his administration who may attempt to block him from extending an olive branch to the Russian bear. Achieving a rapprochement with Russia would go far toward defusing the Nato-Russian tensions in Europe that otherwise could too easily escalate to the level of real nuclear danger.
Trump also needs to defuse the growing tensions with North Korea over its expanding nuclear weapons programme, which is on the verge of enabling its mercurial leader to lob nuclear missiles at South Korea, Japan and portions of the United States. Sanctions have not curtailed this threat. Withdrawing the US nuclear umbrella from our allies will not help. On the contrary, Trump will need to reassure our anxious Asian allies and engage North Korea and China more deeply than ever to stop it. If Trump can overcome his anti-interventionist leanings with an out-of-the box approach that goes to the heart of the matter – the deep insecurity of the North Korean regime – then his penchant for defying long-held premises may yield real progress toward halting and reversing this imminent threat.
He will have the power to single-handedly launch a nuclear strike at any time of his choosing with a single phone call
To reduce nuclear danger in the Middle East, Trump will have to accept that his campaign pledge to tear up the Iranian nuclear deal and renegotiate a better deal would in fact not serve the US national interest, or that of Israel. He should listen to the professional Israeli nuclear establishment, the senior generals and career officials who testify that the deal enhances Israeli security and averts the proliferation nightmare of Iran’s enemies getting nukes in droves.
Trump also needs to allay nuclear concerns at home. As commander in chief, he will have the power to single-handedly launch a nuclear strike on his own at any time of his choosing with a single phone call. If he gives the order, within minutes hundreds of US nuclear missiles would blast out of their underground silos. Ten minutes later hundreds more would leave their submarine tubes. There would be no take-backs. They would reach their target cities on the other side of the Earth in 30 minutes or less.
A large chunk of the American electorate, not to mention a large global audience, is deeply concerned that Trump will command the nation’s nuclear arsenal, giving him the authority to launch a civilisation-ending nuclear strike. This responsibility requires extraordinary composure, competence and diplomatic skill. It requires the qualities of presidential leadership. With the campaign behind him, the hope is that Trump can prove himself a leader with a steady hand whom we can rely on to act with diligence, reason and restraint in times of crisis.

US Prepares For Next Korean Launch

Kirk Spitzer | USA TODAY6 hours ago
TOKYO — Among the pressing issues facing President-elect Donald Trump when he takes office on Inauguration Day will be North Korea’s rogue nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs — and a crisis might not wait that long.
North Korea has carried out two nuclear weapons tests and dozens of missile tests and launches this year in defiance of U.N. sanctions. Although not all the missile tests have been successful, the North has made significant advances in developing nuclear weapons and the technology needed to mount them to long-range missiles.
South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said last week it was closely monitoring moves by the North Korean military at its Punggye-ri nuclear test site and other possible missile-launching sites and is prepared to respond to any provocative acts, South Korea’s Yonhap News Agency reported.
North Korea is preparing more launches, and it has also been continuously showing eagerness about nuclear tests and miniaturization of nuclear warheads,” Japanese Defense Minister Tomomi Inada said recently in Tokyo.
North Korea’s leaders have often timed weapons tests or other provocative actions to key dates and events at home or overseas as a way of drawing attention to its demands.
About 36,000 U.S. and Japanese troops and hundreds of aircraft and warships took part in a major exercise held every two years that ended Friday in and around Japan and the western Pacific that was pegged, at least in part, to ballistic missile defense.
In a statement released last month, U.S. Forces-Japan said training scenarios for the exercise will include “integrated air and missile defense and ballistic missile defense in order to keep pace with the growing ballistic missile threat in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region.”
North Korea’s advances in nuclear weapons and missile technology make defense planners “nervous and alarmed,” said Narushige Michishita, director of the security and international studies program at the National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies in Tokyo.
He said the most recent nuclear test, in September, showed North Korea is capable of building a weapon equivalent in power to the atomic bomb used at Hiroshima in World War II.
North Korea has at least 12, and perhaps as many as 20, functional nuclear weapons and is likely to have an arsenal of 50 to 100 nuclear weapons within the next five years, Michishita said.
North Korea has 200 to 320 medium-range Nodong ballistic missiles that can reach major cities in Japan, along with key U.S. military bases there. The longer-range Musudan missile could threaten U.S. bases in Guam and Alaska. North Korea is developing two other missile variants with range to strike parts of the continental USA.
National Intelligence Director James Clapper said last month that persuading North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons program is a “lost cause.”
North Korea has been under international sanctions since its first nuclear weapons test in 2006. The reclusive country has conducted five tests altogether, including what it described as a powerful “hydrogen bomb” in January. U.S. experts were skeptical of that claim.
South Korea and Japan held a second round of talks in Seoul on Nov. 9 — and more are needed — to discuss a long-delayed intelligence-sharing pact that would allow the two U.S. allies to share information on North Korea’s nuclear weapons and missile programs and other potential threats.