USA’s Fukushima At The Sixth Seal (Revelation 6)

Ernie Garcia,

A review of unplanned shutdowns from January 2012 to the present showed this year’s events happened within a short time frame, between May 7 and July 8, in contrast with events from other years that were more spread out, according to data released by Indian Point.

If a nuclear plant has more than three unplanned shutdowns in a nine-month period, its performance indicator could be changed by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which results in additional oversight. That’s what happened with Entergy’s Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in Plymouth, Mass., after four unplanned shutdowns in 2013.

So far, Entergy said there doesn’t appear to be a pattern to the Indian Point shutdowns.

“You do want to look at these events holistically to see if there is something in common, but you also look individually to see what the causes were,” Nappi said. “A plant shutdown in and of itself is not a safety issue.”

One of the four recent Buchanan shutdowns triggered a special inspection by the NRC and calls to close the nuclear plant by environmental groups and elected officials. Gov. Andrew Cuomo has said in the past Indian Point should close, but his office did not respond to a request for comment about whether the recent shutdowns have prompted any state scrutiny.

The NRC is expected to release a quarterly report on Indian Point this month that will address the transformer failure and, by year’s end, is planning an inspection of the transformer and an analysis of transformer issues since 2007.

Besides its transformer-related inquiries, the other three shutdowns have not raised “any immediate safety concerns or crossed any thresholds that would result in additional NRC oversight,” agency spokesman Neil Sheehan wrote in an email.

The unplanned shutdowns at Indian Point and Pilgrim in Massachusetts were mostly preventable, said Paul Blanch, a former Indian Point employee with 45 years of nuclear power experience.

“For this to happen this frequently indicates a deeper problem,” he said. “I believe it’s management oversight in the maintenance of these plants.”

Nappi said the transformer that failed May 9 and caused a fire and oil spill into the Hudson was regularly monitored. Investigators determined the failure was due to faulty insulation.

“The transformer inspection and reviews were in accordance with our standards and industry expectations, yet there was no indication the transformer was going to fail,” Nappi said.

The NRC conducted a separate, but related special inspection into the May 9 incident that focused on a half-inch of water that collected in an electrical switchgear room floor. Inspectors determined a fire suppression system’s valve failed to close properly.

Inspectors noted in their report that Entergy knew about that problem since April 2011 and replaced the valve but didn’t discover the actual cause — a dysfunctional switch — until after the fire.

Indian Point’s Unit 3 was down 19 days May through July, with the transformer failure accounting for 16 days. The shutdowns didn’t cause the public any supply problems because New York’s grid can import electricity from other states and New York has an energy plan to maintain reliability, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The nuclear energy industry judges a power plant on how continuously it produces energy, which is called a capacity factor.

There were 100 nuclear plants in the United States in 2014, a record year in terms of efficiency. In January, the Nuclear Energy Institute announced the U.S. average capacity factor was 91.9 percent.

Indian Point has an above-average efficiency rate. The plant’s Unit 2 and 3 reactors were each online more than 99 percent of the time during their most recent two-year operating cycles. They are currently in the middle of other cycles.

China Displays Her Nuclear Horn (Daniel 7)

China set to unveil Dongfeng-41 nuclear weapon at military parade commemorating 70 years of Communist rule

OCTOBER 1, 2019 8:45AM

A look into the building military force China has been building, featuring a second aircraft carrier turned warship.


Chinese Military Might

Benedict Brook and AP

China is set to unveil the “ultimate doomsday weapon” during one of the nation’s biggest military parades on Tuesday in a clear sign of the country’s growing arsenal.

A clutch of new military hardware is expected to take centre stage at a huge parade in China’s capital Beijing on October 1 to mark 70 years of Communist rule. It will take place in Tiananmen Square in front of officials, selected members of the public and 188 military attaches from 97 countries.

The most hotly-anticipated piece of equipment is the Dongfeng-41, an intercontinental ballistic missile that is said to have the furthest range of any nuclear missile and could reach the United States in 30 minutes.

Speculation has been rife as to what weapons will be unveiled, with parade rehearsals showing missiles and aircraft under camouflage wraps.

The parade comes against the backdrop of worsening economic relations with the US and continued angry protests in Hong Kong. The Chinese government is keen to assert its dominance in Asia and particularly in the South China Sea where it has been busy building militarised islands in international waters.

It also wants to enforce its claim to Taiwan which has been effectively an independent nation since the Communists took over the Chinese mainland in 1949 and which Beijing regards as a renegade province.

China’s message to the US is that it is closer to matching it in terms of military might. A defence ministry spokesman recently said China had no intention to “flex its muscles” but was instead keen to show a “peace-loving and responsible China”.

A Chinese paramilitary policeman is silhouetted by a display showing the upcoming 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China in Beijing. Picture: AP Photo/Ng Han Guan). Source: AP

Shoppers spend their time near a "I love China" sign at a popular shopping mall in Beijing. Picture: AP Photo/Andy Wong. Source: AP

Tuesday’s parade will include 15,000 troops, more than 160 aircraft and 580 pieces of military equipment, according to Ministry of Defence spokesman Major General Cai Zhijun.

A supersonic drone, hypersonic missile and a robot submarine could all be shown off. But all eyes will be primed for whether the huge Dongfeng 41 (DF-41) missile rolls through Tiananmen Square in what would be its debut public appearance.

Many new weapons “will be shown for the first time,” Cai told reporters last week. Asked whether that would include the DF-41, Cai said, “Please wait and see.”

No details of the DF-41 have been released, but the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington said it may have the world’s longest range at 15,000 kilometres.

US nuclear tipped missiles fall a few thousand kilometres short of that.

Analysts say the DF-41, flying at 25 times the speed of sound, might be able to reach the US in 30 minutes with up to 10 warheads for separate targets — a technology known as MIRV, or multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles.

New weapons, wrapped up, have been seen on the streets of Beijing ready for Tuesday’s parade. Picture: AP Photo/Andy Wong. Source: AP

China’s current mainstay missile the Dongfeng-31 — Dongfeng means “east wind” — has a range of more than 11,200 kilometres that puts most of the continental US within reach.

Australia is well within reach of this weapon, with Brisbane, for instance, around 7000 kilometres from the Chinese mainland.

Chinese academics have previously said the DF-41 “can hit every corner of the earth”.

Speaking to in 2017, Dr Malcolm Davis, a senior analyst in defence strategy and capability at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, said the DF-41 was China’s most advanced ICBM.

“It’s a road-mobile, solid fuelled ICBM with the range to cover all targets in the continental US,” he said.

The missile can carry multiple nuclear warheads — up to 10 warheads each with yields of around 150 kilotons (150,000 tons TNT equivalent) — or a single warhead with a yield up to 3 megatons (millions of tons of TNT).”

“It would also carry penetration aids designed to confuse US missiles defences.”

Could this be the Dongfeng-41 nuke? (AP Photo/Andy Wong) Source: AP

A Chinese military vehicle possibly carrying a drone passes along the Jianguomenwai Ave in Beijing on Saturday. Picture: Andy Wong/APSource:AP Source: AP

Nuclear disarmament campaigner John Hallam said the DF-41 was the most powerful nuclear missile in the world and was the “ultimate doomsday weapon”.

“It’s a whopper, comparable to the biggest Russian missiles, which it resembles,” Mr Hallam said.

“Just one of these missiles, with 10 warheads each, could essentially destroy either the major cities or the significant military capacity of the US, especially if command and control nodes are prioritised.”

The People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the world’s biggest military with two million men and women in uniform and the second-highest annual spending after the US, is also working on fighter planes, the first Chinese-built aircraft carrier and nuclear-powered submarines.

Photos circulated on Chinese social media of parade preparations show blurry images of a possible attack drone dubbed “sharp sword” and another drone, the DR-8 or Wuzhen 8.

Last year’s spending on the PLA rose 5 per cent to $US250 billion, or about 10 times its 1994 level, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). the US, with a force of 1.3 million, was far ahead at $US650 billion.

“This parade will highlight Chinese military power, at a time when Sino-American relations are deteriorating and international arms control treaties are being called into question,” Antoine Bondaz and Stéphane Delory of the Foundation for Strategic Research in France told the Washington Post.

“Our research indicates that unprecedented conventional and nuclear ballistic capabilities will be paraded, some for the first time, demonstrating the quantitative and qualitative modernisation of China’s ballistic arsenal,” the foundation wrote in a research note.

“Highly rapid, even hypersonic weapon systems could also be shown, illustrating that China is, in some respects, at the forefront of global innovation.”

China has about 280 nuclear warheads, compared with 6450 for the United States and 6850 for Russia, according to SIPRI.

Beijing says it wants a “minimum credible nuclear deterrent” but won’t be the first to use atomic weapons in a conflict.

The New “Conventional” Nuclear War

Why Russia’s New Cruise Missile Would Be a Terror on the Battlefield

Key Point: As Moscow forges ahead with tests of additional experimental weapons for a looming nuclear arms race tied to the axing of key arms-control treaties, the potential for more such accidents is real.

At nine in the morning on August 8, 2019, an explosion resonated across the cold waters of the arctic White Sea. A missile had exploded lifting off from an offshore research platform near Nyonoksa, Russia.

Long-range missiles had been tested at a site adjacent to the rural town since 1965, and accidents were hardly unprecedented. In 2015, debris from an errant cruise missile rained onto a residential complex with a kindergarten on its ground floor, setting the building on fire but fortunately leaving residents unscathed.

Tragically, the August 8 incident proved more lethal. Initially, media reported two testers died in the blast. But subsequent reports increased the number to three, then five, then seven.

Indeed, as many as fifteen may have been harmed in the accident. Locals tweeted ominous imagery of a Russian military helicopter landing and depositing Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear (CRBN) specialists in hazardous-material suits who evacuated injured personnel in stretchers.

At least three testers were evacuated to the Moscow Federal Medical Biophysical Center, where two subsequently died from their injuries. Later, ten workers from a regional hospital involved in treating the injured were themselves reportedly flown to the Moscow center.

A notice was issued to ships that they could not enter a 250-square kilometer area close to the accident. The Serebryanka—a nuclear fuel carrier likely modified to recover radioactive fragments from the ocean—remained in the area, having been present near the platform prior to the test.

Not unrelatedly, twenty miles to the west, the major Russian shipyard city of Severodvinsk reported a spike in gamma radiation twenty times the norm around noon. Technically, this remained within safe limits, and by 4 p.m., radiation levels began to normalize.

However, the radiation levels at Nyonoksa itself would surely have been of much higher—possibly releasing radionuclides into the atmosphere and drinking water that could increase cancer risk and cause other adverse health effects to those exposed.

As reports of the accident circulated, Moscow claimed that it had been testing a “liquid fuel rocket.” Rosatom then stated it was working on an “isotope power source in a liquid propulsion system.”

By then a consensus had emerged among Western experts that Russia had been testing a prototype Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile, which is codenamed the SSC-X-9 “Skyfall” by NATO. The weapon was one of several developed to circumvent the United States’ GMD anti-ballistic missile system, which Russia worries may undermine its nuclear deterrence despite GMD’s limited capabilities.

Putin had publicly unveiled the Burevestnik (which means “Petrel,” a type of seabird)—in a video showing a successful launch in April 1, 2018, alongside several other exotic new strategic nuclear delivery systems.

Theoretically, a cruise missile propelled by a nuclear-powered ramjet could travel at supersonic speeds out to practically unlimited range, skimming close to the earth and maneuvering around obstacles to evade long-range radars and air defense missiles.

However, Putin’s video didn’t show numerous failed tests, or that even the successful launch in November 2017 had gone to crash in the sea after flying only twenty miles. That means Burevestnik’s development is far from complete.

A companion article on the Burevestnik details more on the missile’s underlying strategic rationale, technical concept, and testing history, as well as a likely explanation for the accident on August 8.

Fallout from a Failed Test

Ultimately the dead included five elite scientists of the Russian Rosatom nuclear energy agency and two military personnel. A special memorial service was held at Sarov, a closed city that’s central to Russian nuclear research.

Supposedly, the radiological event tied to the accident had been minor, and notices posted by regional officials were scrubbed from the internet. But locals were not convinced. In Severodvinsk and Arkhangelsk, demand for potassium iodide tablets, which reduce the thyroid gland’s intake of radioactive substances, skyrocketed and several pharmacies were sold out.

Then, as if the Russian state were keen to reenact historical events dramatized in the HBO series Chernobyl, four days after radiation levels were declared to have returned to normal, officials told Nyonoksa’s approximately 450 residents they would be temporarily evacuated by train for a few hours as a “routine measure.”

Given that locals insisted radiation levels really were normal, this may actually have been intended to conceal the personnel, equipment and debris involved in the clean-up. But as the alarming news resounded on the internet, the government backtracked and canceled the evacuation. Despite Moscow’s habitual obfuscation of the accident, internet social media made a coverup difficult to maintain.

The deadly incident near Nyonoksa is merely the latest in a string of major military accidents in Russia including a titanic explosion at an ammunition dump on August 5 that injured six, a fire onboard the Losharik nuclear-powered spy submarine that killed fourteen, and the sinking of a huge floating drydock in Severodvinsk which nearly resulted in the loss of Russia’s only aircraft carrier.

As Moscow forges ahead with tests of additional experimental weapons for a looming nuclear arms race tied to the axing of key arms-control treaties, the potential for more such accidents is real.

Sébastien Roblin holds a master’s degree in conflict resolution from Georgetown University and served as a university instructor for the Peace Corps in China. He has also worked in education, editing, and refugee resettlement in France and the United States. He currently writes on security and military history for War Is Boring.

Image: Wikimedia

The War With Iran Begins in Iraq

Iraq Is Once Again The Battleground For An American Proxy War

Patrick Cockburn

People in Baghdad are fearful that the next war between the US and Iran will take place in Iraq, which is only just returning to peace after the defeat of Isis. Alarm that Iraq will be sucked into such a conflict has increased here because of recent Israeli drone attacks on the bases of the Iraqi paramilitary group known as the Hashd al-Shaabi, which is accused by the US and Israel of acting as a proxy of Iran.

The new development is that Israel has entered the conflict in Iraq,” says Abu Alaa al-Walai, the leader of Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada, a militant Shia paramilitary movement with ties to Iran, speaking in an exclusive interview with The Independent in Baghdad. He says that three Israeli drones attacked one of his bases in the Iraqi capital, called al-Saqr, on 12 August, leading to the explosion of 50 tons of weaponry. The Israelis confirm that they carried out the raid, which was preceded by several others, claiming that they hit Iranian missiles on their way to Syria and Lebanon.

It is the likelihood of US complicity in the Israeli action which could provoke a political crisis in Iraq. Abu Alaa says that an unpublished Iraqi government report on the attack reveals that the Israeli drones were launched from a US base called Kassad in Kurdish-controlled northeast Syria. “Iraqi radar tracked one out of three of the drones travelling at 140km before, during and after the attack,” he says.

US policy in the Middle East is notoriously incoherent and contradictory under President Trump, but allowing Israel to make pin-prick attacks from a US base against the Hashd looks peculiarly like self-destruction from an American point of view. It has already led to a bill passing through the Iraqi parliament demanding the withdrawal of US forces from the country.

Asked if Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada would attack US forces, if there is a war between the US and Iran, Abu Alaa replies: “Absolutely, yes”. He expresses enthusiasm for drone warfare, saying that the successful drone assault on the Saudi oil facilities on 14 September makes battlefields more equal for groups like his own. “We are working day and night to develop drones that can be put together in a living room,” he says.

Drone attacks on US bases in Iraq would not enjoy the same element of surprise as those on the Abqaiq and Khurais oil facilities in Saudi Arabia, but the bases are certainly vulnerable. In many respects, they do not add to US strength in Iraq but they could become American “hostages” in Iraq in the event of an Iran-US conflict.

The future of the Hashd al-Shaabi as an Iranian-influenced state-within-a-state is the crucial issue in the struggle for influence between Iran and the US. Washington is pushing for the role of the Hashd to be reduced or even eliminated, but these efforts are likely to prove ineffective and even counterproductive.

The Hashd is a political as well as a military organisation and is so well established in Iraq that there is not much the US can do to reduce its influence. Its parliamentary representatives did well in the last general election in 2018 and its support is essential for any stable Iraqi government.

A similar pattern has held true in Iraq since the US invasion of 2003. The US wanted to get rid of Saddam Hussein, though without benefiting Iran. But the downfall of Saddam’s Sunni Arab regime was inevitably followed by a political revolution in which it was replaced by the Shia majority and, to a lesser degree, by the Kurds. Try as they might, US diplomats and generals in Baghdad could not avoid cooperating, often covertly, with Iran.

Not much has really changed in the years that followed. The ruling Shia majority has an Iraqi national identity, but this is matched, and usually overmatched, by a strong religious Shia identity. Given that Iraq and Iran are among the few Shia-led states in the world it is scarcely surprising that they feel that they have much in common. Post-Saddam Iraq saw the first Shia Arab government take power in the region since Saladin overthrew the Fatimids in 12th century Egypt. “Religiously speaking, Iran gives Iraq strategic depth,” says Dhiaa al-Asadi, a leading figure in the populist religious movement of the Shia leader, Muqtada al-Sadr.

President Trump and previous US administrations have repeatedly made the mistake of denouncing Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen and the Hashd in Iraq as Iranian proxies pure and simple. This is a mistake because these powerful paramilitary movements are rooted, above all else, in the local Shia communities. Iran may have fostered these groups but it does not have command and control over them.

Another reason why Mr Trump’s bid to roll back Iranian influence is unlikely to get anywhere, is that Iran’s paramilitary allies have been victorious, or at least held their own, in the wars in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen over the last two decades. Many Iraqis resent this fragmentation of power, complaining that “the Hashd is strong and our government is weak” – but there is not a lot they can do about it. Iran is adept at playing Iraqi political chess games and acting as the broker between different factions and centres of power.

The US is not strong enough to oust the Hashd in Iraq, but that does not mean it will not try. The US must have known that Israel was firing drones into Iraq since it controls Iraqi airspace, but using Israel as its proxy in Iraq is a risky game.

There are good reasons for them to be worried: US and Saudi authority in the Middle East has been damaged by Iranian-inspired attacks – the Iranian modus operandi is normally to act through others – on oil tankers in the Gulf, a high-flying US drone, and the Saudi oil industry. So far, Mr Trump has not thought it is in the US’s interest to hit back, but he cannot indefinitely absorb this kind of punishment without looking weak.Iraq has enjoyed a couple of years of relative peace since the defeat of Isis with the recapture of Mosul in 2017. The hundreds of security checkpoints and concrete anti-bomb blast walls in Baghdad have largely disappeared. The city is full of new restaurants and shops and the streets are thronged with people until late at night. But many Iraqis wonder how long this will last, if the US-Iran confrontation escalates into a shooting war. “Many of my friends are so nervous about a US-Iran war that they are using their severance pay on leaving government service to buy houses in Turkey,” said one civil servant.

Iraq is one place where the US and its allies could try to retaliate and their main target is likely to be the Hashd. This could in turn provoke attacks on US bases which look vulnerable in the age of the drone. Iraqis dread the idea of another military conflict, but they fear it may in any case be heading in their direction.

The European Horns Align Against Iran (Daniel)

Time for Europe to Close Ranks Against Iran’s Threats

The scales are finally falling from European eyes on Iran. In a joint statement on Monday, Germany, France and Britain held the Islamic Republic responsible for the recent attacks on Saudi Aramco facilities, adding that “no other explanation is plausible.”,

At the United Nations General Assembly in New York, European leaders used their meetings with President Hassan Rouhani to pile on pressure. France’s President Emmanuel Macron urged him to meet with US President Donald Trump; Rouhani, under strict instructions from his boss, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, demurred. He trotted out the usual preconditions for talks with the US — a return to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action and an end to sanctions — even though these were already a dead letter.

To make matters worse for Tehran, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson endorsed Trump’s view that Iran should make a new deal with world powers, covering not only its nuclear ambitions — the remit of the JCPOA — but also other threats that it poses.

In response, Iran professed to be upset with the Europeans, accusing them of lacking the “strength or willpower to counter US bullying.”

This reaction is, to say the least, uncharitable. Since Trump pulled the U.S. out of the JCPOA last year, the European signatories have given every appearance of wanting to honor their end of the bargain with Iran. First, they urged Europe-based companies to keep investing in Iran, even invoking a European Union statute forbidding them “from complying with the extraterritorial effects of US sanctions.” When that failed, they created a workaround, a “special purpose vehicle” to protect trade with Iran from the sanctions.

The Europeans also haven’t stopped pressing Trump to ease his “maximum pressure” campaign against the Islamic Republic. In recent weeks, Macron has taken the lead, proposing a package that includes a $15 billion line of credit.

Meanwhile, the Europeans have adopted an indulgent attitude toward Iran’s atrocious behavior — its attacks on oil tankers in the Persian Gulf, its defiance of EU sanctions against giving material assistance to the genocidal regime in Syria, even its brazen capture of European nationals for use as hostages. They expressed only mild reproach at the regime’s breach of uranium-enrichment limits imposed by the JCPOA.

But given the regime’s penchant for escalating provocation, it was bound to test the limits of European sympathy, and then to go a step too far. That happened with the attacks on Saudi Arabia’s most important oil installations — which were in effect an assault on the world economy.

Trump may have helped the European change of heart by his repeated offers of talks with Rouhani — without preconditions. His firing of Iran hawk John Bolton as national security adviser also eased any lingering suspicions that the president was looking for an excuse to go to war with the Islamic Republic.

What next for the Europeans? France’s president remains keen to play intermediary, but Khamenei’s treatment of the last world leader to try — Japan’s Shinzo Abe — should temper Macron’s optimism. Even as Abe was visiting Tehran with hopes of opening discussions, the Iranians engineered an attack on a Japanese-flagged oil tanker. To rub it in, Khamenei embarrassed his guest by claiming, in a tweet, that Abe agreed with the Iranian view of the US.

The supreme leader is not man for subtlety, and he will need a more forceful demonstration that the Europeans will no longer tolerate his hostile behavior. The quickest way to do this is to join the US effort to protect the sea lanes and oil infrastructure in and around the Persian Gulf. Britain is already signed up for some of the naval duties, and Johnson has said he’s open to helping Saudi Arabia guard its infrastructure from Iranian attack.

The other Europeans should follow suit and close the Western ranks against the Iranian threat to commerce and trade.

They should also signal an end to their tolerance for the regime’s nuclear brinkmanship. Iran’s breach of enrichment limits gives the JCPOA’s signatories cause enough to impose their own economic sanctions. These may not add much bite to the American sanctions, but the symbolism would be useful.

For Iran, the loss of European indulgence leaves only the two other JCPOA signatories, China and Russia. But the regime in Tehran has long known not to expect too much material support from those quarters: That is why Iran has never pressured them to try to save the nuclear deal with the urgency it has brought to bear on the Europeans. It cannot have escaped Iranian attention that neither Beijing nor Moscow has bent over to create a special purpose vehicle to circumvent American sanctions.

If the loss of Western sympathy now compels a desperate regime to demand more of its eastern and northern friends, it will almost certainly meet with more disappointment. Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin may criticize Trump’s abrogation of the nuclear deal, but Chinese and Russian companies have little enthusiasm to run the gamut of American — and hopefully, European — economic sanctions on Iran.


Khan Warns of Coming Nuclear War (Revelation 8 )

Insisting he wasn’t making a threat, Pakistan’s leader denounced his Indian counterpart on Friday and warned that any war between the nuclear rivals could “have consequences for the world.” India’s prime minister took the opposite approach, skipping any mention at the United Nations of his government’s crackdown in the disputed region of Kashmir.

“When a nuclear-armed country fights to the end, it will have consequences far beyond the borders. It will have consequences for the world,” Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan said in a wide-ranging, at times apparently extemporaneous U.N. General Assembly speech in which he called Modi’s actions in Kashmir “stupid” and “cruel.”

“That’s not a threat,” he said of his war comments. “It’s a fair worry. Where are we headed?”

An hour earlier, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi addressed the U.N. meeting with a speech that focused primarily on his country’s development, though he warned of the spreading specter of terrorism. He never mentioned Kashmir directly.

India and Pakistan have fought two of their three wars over the Himalayan region. They’ve been locked in a worsening standoff since Aug. 5, when Modi stripped limited autonomy from the portion of Kashmir that India controls.

Modi’s Hindu nationalist government imposed a sweeping military curfew and cut off residents in the Muslim-majority region from virtually all communications. Khan said there were 900,000 Indian forces in the region policing 8 million Kashmiris.

“What’s he going to do when he lifts the curfew? Does he think the people of Kashmir are quietly going to accept the status quo?” Khan said. “What is going to happen when the curfew is lifted will be a bloodbath.”

He added: “They will be out in the streets. And what will the soldiers do? They will shoot them. … Kashmiris will be further radicalized.”

While not mentioning Kashmir by name, Modi touched on terrorism: “We belong to a country that has given the world not war, but Buddha’s message of peace. And that is the reason why our voice against terrorism, to alert the world about this evil, rings with seriousness and outrage.”

Modi has defended the Kashmir changes as freeing the territory from separatism. His supporters have welcomed the move.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said during his U.N. speech later Friday that “as a neighbor of both nations, China hopes to see the dispute effectively managed and stability restored to the relationship between the two sides.”

The difference in speech styles between the Indian and Pakistani leaders was striking, with Modi sticking closely to a prepared text and Khan appearing to speak off the cuff and riff. While the U.N. distributed a transcript of Modi’s speech moments after he finished talking, Khan’s had not been released hours later.

Ahead of Modi’s and Khan’s appearances at the U.N., residents of Indian-controlled Kashmir expressed hope that their speeches would turn world attention to an unprecedented lockdown in the region.

“We really hope these leaders will do something to rid us of conflict and suppression,” said Nazir Ahmed, a schoolteacher on the outskirts of Srinagar, the main city in Indian-held Kashmir. “Conflict is like a cancer hitting every aspect of life. And Kashmiris have been living inside this cancer for decades now.”

As the two leaders spoke Friday, large dueling protests supporting and opposing India’s action in Kashmir were taking place across the street from U.N. headquarters.

U.S. President Donald Trump, who met with both Modi and Khan earlier in the week, has urged the sides to resolve their differences.

India and Pakistan’s conflict over Kashmir dates to the late 1940s, when they won independence from Britain. The region is one of the most heavily militarized in the world, patrolled by soldiers and paramilitary police. Most Kashmiris resent the Indian troop presence.

Modi, a pro-business Hindu nationalist, and his party won a decisive re-election in May. The election was seen as a referendum on Modi, the son of a poor tea seller whose economic reforms have had mixed results. But he has enjoyed enduring popularity as a social underdog in India’s highly stratified society.

Critics, however, say his Hindu-first platform risks exacerbating social tensions in the country of 1.3 billion people.

86 Shot 1 Dead Outside the Temple Walls (Revelation 11)


On 76th Friday Great March of Return: Palestinian civilian killed and 86 civilians injured
PCHR 28 Sept — On 76th Friday of Great March of Return, a Palestinian civilian was killed and 86 civilians were injured as a result of the Israeli military’s continued use of excessive force against the peaceful protests along the Gaza Strip’s eastern border; 22 children, 4 female paramedics, 5 male paramedics and 2 persons with disabilities were among those injured this Friday, 27 September 2019. This week witnessed an escalation in the use of excessive force against the protesters as injury of 5 of them was deemed serious; one died after hours of his injury while 4, including a child and a female paramedic, are still in a very serious condition.  Further, 40 protesters were shot with live bullets while the Israeli forces escalated their attacks against the medical personnel, which enjoys protection under the international humanitarian law, wounding 9 paramedics, including a female paramedic deemed in very critical condition. The Supreme National Authority of Great March of Return and Breaking the Siege called for today’s protests under the slogan “al-Aqsa Intifada and Palestinian Prisoners”, coinciding with the 19th anniversary of al-Aqsa Intifada. The protests lasted from 15:00 to 19:00 and involved activities such as speeches by political leaders and theatrical performances …
The following is a summary of today’s events along the Gaza Strip border: …
Hundreds participated in the eastern Shokah protests, where folklore songs and speeches were held. Dozens approached the border fence and threw stones and Molotov Cocktails at the shielded Israeli soldiers, who responded with live and rubber bullets and teargas canisters. As a result, Saher ‘Awadallah Jaber ‘Othman (20) was declared dead in al-Shifa hospital at approximately 21:30 after sustaining serious wounds due to being shot with a bullet in the chest at approximately 17:45.

Woman injured by Gaza rocket fire nearly one year ago dies
JERUSALEM (JTA) 24 Sept — An [Israeli] woman has died nearly a year after suffering injuries in a rocket attack into southern Israel from Gaza. Nina Gisdenanova, 74, died last week at the Sheba Medical Center in Tel Hashomer, The Times of Israel reported Sunday. She was in an apartment building in Ashkelon on Nov. 13 when it was hit with a rocket. A Palestinian man [Mahmoud Abu Asabeh, 48, from the West Bank city of Halhul] visiting the building died in the strike; his wife was seriously injured. Nearly 500 rockets were fired at southern Israel from Gaza between Nov. 11 and 13. The barrage began after a botched Israeli covert operation carried out in the Khan Yunis area of the southern Gaza Strip left seven Gaza Palestinians and one Israeli soldier dead.