New York Subways at the Sixth Seal (Revelation 6)

           

How vulnerable are NYC’s underwater subway tunnels to flooding?Ashley Fetters
New York City is full of peculiar phenomena—rickety fire escapes; 100-year-old subway tunnels; air conditioners propped perilously into window frames—that can strike fear into the heart of even the toughest city denizen. But should they? Every month, writer Ashley Fetters will be exploring—and debunking—these New York-specific fears, letting you know what you should actually worry about, and what anxieties you can simply let slip away.
The 25-minute subway commute from Crown Heights to the Financial District on the 2/3 line is, in my experience, a surprisingly peaceful start to the workday—save for one 3,100-foot stretch between the Clark Street and Wall Street stations, where for three minutes I sit wondering what the probability is that I will soon die a torturous, claustrophobic drowning death right here in this subway car.
The Clark Street Tunnel, opened in 1916, is one of approximately a dozen tunnels that escort MTA passengers from one borough to the next underwater—and just about all of them, with the exception of the 1989 addition of the 63rd Street F train tunnel, were constructed between 1900 and 1936.
Each day, thousands of New Yorkers venture across the East River and back again through these tubes buried deep in the riverbed, some of which are nearing or even past their 100th birthdays. Are they wrong to ponder their own mortality while picturing one of these watery catacombs suddenly springing a leak?
Mostly yes, they are, says Michael Horodniceanu, the former president of MTA Capital Construction and current principal of Urban Advisory Group. First, it’s important to remember that the subway tunnel is built under the riverbed, not just in the river—so what immediately surrounds the tunnel isn’t water but some 25 feet of soil. “There’s a lot of dirt on top of it,” Horodniceanu says. “It’s well into the bed of the bottom of the channel.”
And second, as Angus Kress Gillespie, author of Crossing Under the Hudson: The Story of the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels, points out, New York’s underwater subway tunnels are designed to withstand some leaking. And withstand it they do: Pumps placed below the floor of the tunnel, he says, are always running, always diverting water seepage into the sewers. (Horodniceanu says the amount of water these pumps divert into the sewer system each day numbers in the thousands of gallons.)
Additionally, MTA crews routinely repair the grouting and caulking, and often inject a substance into the walls that creates a waterproof membrane outside the tunnel—which keeps water out of the tunnel and relieves any water pressure acting on its walls. New tunnels, Horodniceanu points out, are even built with an outside waterproofing membrane that works like an umbrella: Water goes around it, it falls to the sides, and then it gets channeled into a pumping station and pumped out.
Of course, the classic New York nightmare scenario isn’t just a cute little trickle finding its way in. The anxiety daydream usually involves something sinister, or seismic. The good news, however, is that while an earthquake or explosion would indeed be bad for many reasons, it likely wouldn’t result in the frantic flooding horror scene that plays out in some commuters’ imaginations.
The Montague Tube, which sustained severe damage during Hurricane Sandy.
MTA New York City Transit / Marc A. Hermann
Horodniceanu assures me that tunnels built more recently are “built to withstand a seismic event.” The older tunnels, however—like, um, the Clark Street Tunnel—“were not seismically retrofitted, let me put it that way,” Horodniceanu says. “But the way they were built is in such a way that I do not believe an earthquake would affect them.” They aren’t deep enough in the ground, anyway, he says, to be too intensely affected by a seismic event. (The MTA did not respond to a request for comment.)
One of the only real threats to tunnel infrastructure, Horodniceanu adds, is extreme weather. Hurricane Sandy, for example, caused flooding in the tunnels, which “created problems with the infrastructure.” He continues, “The tunnels have to be rebuilt as a result of saltwater corroding the infrastructure.”
Still, he points out, hurricanes don’t exactly happen with no warning. So while Hurricane Sandy did cause major trauma to the tunnels, train traffic could be stopped with ample time to keep passengers out of harm’s way. In 2012, Governor Andrew Cuomo directed all the MTA’s mass transit services to shut down at 7 p.m. the night before Hurricane Sandy was expected to hit New York City.
And Gillespie, for his part, doubts even an explosion would result in sudden, dangerous flooding. A subway tunnel is not a closed system, he points out; it’s like a pipe that’s open at both ends. “The force of a blast would go forwards and backwards out the exit,” he says.
So the subway-train version of that terrifying Holland Tunnel flood scene in Sylvester Stallone’s Daylight is … unrealistic, right?
“Yeah,” Gillespie laughs. “Yeah. It is.”
Got a weird New York anxiety that you want explored? E-mail tips@curbed.com, and we may include it in a future column.

How Babylon the Great Assisted the Chinese Nuclear Horn: Daniel 7

Former Los Alamos nuclear scientists aid China’s advanced weapons, private study says

By Bill Gertz

The Chinese government targeted scientists at the Los Alamos nuclear laboratory for recruitment, with more than 160 researchers returning to China over more than three decades to help nuclear and other advanced weapons programs there, according to a new report by a private security and intelligence firm.

According to the report released Thursday by Strider Technologies, between 1987 and 2021, an estimated 162 scientists who once worked at Los Alamos returned home to China and took part in a variety of domestic research and development programs. 

“Former Los Alamos scientists have made, and continue to make, considerable contributions to the PRC hypersonic, missile and submarine programs that present an array of security risks for the United States and the entire free world,” says the 32-page report, “The Los Alamos Club: How the People’s Republic of China Recruited Leading Scientists from Los Alamos National Laboratory to Advance Its Military Programs.” 

“Our research shows the PRC has seen a significant return on their investment with advances in critical military technologies. Now, more than ever, it is a national security imperative for the U.S. and our allies to identify and protect leading talent in both the public and private sectors,” said Greg Levesque, CEO and co-founder of Strider.

Ken deGraffenreid, a former senior U.S. counterintelligence official, said that Congress has ignored for decades repeated cases of Chinese communist successes in stealing sensitive U.S. secrets.

“Twenty-two years ago, the bipartisan Cox Commission Report shocked the nation in detailing the myriad ways in which the Chinese Communist Party robbed nuclear and other information,” Mr. deGraffenreid said. “The Striderreport reveals yet another dimension of these undiminished activities. Can the administration and the Congress finally summon the courage to act?”

A total of 15 of the scientists were staff members at the Energy Department laboratory in New Mexico that designs nuclear weapons. Thirteen were recruited as part of Chinese government “talent” programs that hired overseas experts. 

China’s program is called the Talent Superpower Strategy Program and is similar to Beijing’s Thousand Talents program. 

The Justice Department since 2018 prosecuted about a dozen U.S. academics recruited under the Thousand Talents program for hiding Chinese funding and other connections to Beijing. 

At least one of the returning scientists in “the Los Alamos Club” held a top-secret Q clearance granted to those with access to nuclear secrets. 

A spokeswoman for Los Alamos referred questions to the National Nuclear Security Administration, which did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A spokesman for National Counterintelligence and Security Center declined to comment. 

Asked about the report, the Energy Departmentsaid in a statement that national security requires “fierce protection of critical technology.” 

Based on growing research security threats, the department stepped up security, including in-depth vetting of officials, counterintelligence reviews and restrictions on foreign talent programs, the statement said. 

“We are committed to protecting and promoting our scientific ecosystem, technological competitiveness and national security,” the statement said. 

According to the Strider study, the program began in the 1980s and involved sending young Chinese to the United States for study. It evolved into a coordinated program to recruit them and others and use their knowledge and expertise for China’s military and civilian development. 

China’s government adopted a program known as “military-civilian fusion” that seeks to build up military capabilities with civilian knowledge.

Key technologies

The Strider report outlines several key technologies the authors say were developed by former Los Alamos scientists. 

One scientist, Chen Shiyi, worked at Los Alamosin the 1990s and later headed the Southern University of Science and Technology where he helped recruit other scientists with experience at Los Alamos. 

Mr. Chen is an expert in fluid dynamics and worked on developing China‘s hypersonic missiles. China recently disclosed it has deployed a hypersonic missile called the DF-17 that can travel greater than five times the speed of sound, enough to evade U.S. missile defenses. 

One of Mr. Chen’s recruits was Zhao Yusheng, a former 18-year employee of Los Alamos who was paid $19.8 million in U.S. government grants for his research, the report said. Mr. Zhao conducted sensitive research on deep-earth penetrating warheads, key weapons needed to attack hardened targets such as underground command bunkers. 

At Los Alamos, Mr. Zhao worked with a researcher who filed a patent on similar penetrating-bomb technology upon returning to China. The researcher currently works at the Chinese Academy of Engineering Physics, a major nuclear weapons research and development and production facility. 

Another former Los Alamos scientist, He Guowei, helped China develop quieter submarines capable of evading detection. 

China has a major program to build large numbers of nuclear and conventional submarines. Navy officials have said China’s submarines have grown quieter and thus harder to track in recent years. 

Mr. He worked closely with Mr. Chen in the late 1990s and, after moving to China, worked at the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Mechanics helping develop computer models that predict turbulence generated by submarines, a key element in developing submarine quieting technology. 

Mr. Chen in 2016 recruited Shan Xiaowen, who worked at Los Alamos from 1991 to 1998. In China, Mr. Shan worked at the Southern University’s Department of Mechanics and Aerospace Engineering. 

“In 2019, Dr. Shan became head of the [the university’s] Intelligent Aviation R&D Center, which focuses on unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) technologies,” the report said. “Under Shan’s leadership, the center produced a prototype Vertical Take-Off and Landing (VTOL) UAV with both civil and military applications.” 

China’s efforts to recruit high-level U.S. scientists was highlighted by the 1999 case against Wen Ho Lee, a Los Alamos nuclear weapons designer who was convicted of illegally removing top-secret computer simulations of nuclear tests from the lab. 

Lee was suspected of collaborating with Chinese nuclear weapons officials, and U.S. counterintelligence officials believe the Chinese eventually recruited him but were unable to prove the case in court. 

During the Clinton administration, the Energy Department launched a program of exchanges between U.S. and Chinese nuclear scientists that critics say Beijing was able to exploit to advance its nuclear arms program. 

The CIA later determined that during the period of the exchanges China obtained nuclear secrets on every deployed U.S. warhead, including the W-88, the advanced small warhead deployed on submarine-launched missiles.

• Bill Gertz can be reached at bgertz@washingtontimes.com.

The Pacific Northwest Isn’t Ready for The Third Quake: Revelation 8:13

   (Getty Images)

The Pacific Northwest Isn’t Ready for This Tsunami

The evacuation options just aren’t there for tens of thousands of people

(NEWSER) – “It’s going to dwarf the scale of any disaster we have ever had. We know it’s coming.” So Chris Goldfinger of Oregon State University tells the New York Times. He’s talking about a massive—think magnitude 9.0—quake along the Cascadia fault off the Pacific Northwest coast. Based on 10,000 years of geologic evidence, we’re due for that kind of quake within roughly the next century. And after the ground shakes, the water will come. The fault sits only about 70 miles offshore, and the tsunami that could result from it could hit within 15 minutes. As Mike Baker writes, “Along many stretches of the Northwest coast, there are no bluffs or high buildings to climb—nowhere to go.” His story opens with a painful illustration of that fact.

At Washington’s Ocean Shores Elementary School, students practice evacuating to the second floor after a quake. Except modeling shows the school could be hit with water 23 feet deep. The second floor is 13 feet above ground level (never mind that the school wasn’t built to withstand a tsunami). In that state, modeling shows that of the 70,000 people who would be in the path of the tsunami triggered by a 9.0-magnitude quake, 32,000 of them wouldn’t be able to reach high enough ground in 15 minutes. The state is considering building a series of vertical evacuation structures along the coast that would be accessible to 22,000 people. Only two exist so far in all of the Pacific Northwest, though the Shoalwater Bay Tribe in Tokeland, Wash., has broken ground on one—with pilings located 51 feet in the ground. (Read the full story for much more.)

Palestinian suspect killed outside the Temple Walls: Revelation 11

Palestinian suspect killed after stabbing in central Israel

JERUSALEM — A Palestinian man was shot and killed Thursday by an off-duty policeman after stabbing a pair of Israeli motorists at an intersection in central Israel, Israeli officials and media said.

The incident came at a time of heightened Israeli-Palestinian violence.

Israel has been conducting nightly military raids in the occupied West Bank following a series of deadly attacks inside Israel last spring.

Thursday’s incident occurred near the Israeli city of Modiin on a major highway that passes through the West Bank just a few kilometers (miles) away.

Israeli police and rescuers said the attacker approached a number of vehicles, spraying tear gas at people and trying to open car doors. The MADA rescue service said two people suffered light wounds to their hands, while five people were hurt by pepper spray and the off-duty policeman suffered mild injuries to his face.

There was no way to independently verify the account.

Lone Palestinians have carried out dozens of stabbing and car ramming attacks in recent years. But Palestinians and human rights groups say Israeli security forces often use excessive force.

Earlier Thursday, the Palestinian militant group Hamas threatened hostile actions against Israel over what it called “violations against Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa Mosque” ahead of the upcoming Jewish High Holidays.

Hamas’s threats came just ahead of Sunday’s Jewish new year, and a day after a group of Jewish religious extremists visited a contested holy site revered by both Jews and Muslims and blew the shofar — a ram’s horn that’s trumpeted in the run-up to and during the Jewish High Holidays.

The Jewish new year, Rosh Hashanah, begins at sundown on Sunday, and in the succeeding weeks thousands of Israelis are expected to visit Jerusalem.

Omer Barlev, Israel’s minister in charge of police, told Kan public radio on Wednesday that Israeli authorities would not limit Jewish visits to the contested Jerusalem holy site known to Jews as the Temple Mount and to Muslims as the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound.

Visitations and prayers by hard-line Jewish radicals at the site have triggered previous rounds of violence between Israel and the Palestinians.

For Jews, the site is the holiest on earth, the location of two ancient Temples. For Muslims, it is the home of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and the third holiest place after Mecca and Medina. The shrine is the emotional epicenter of the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Story continues below advertisement

Officially, under a loose set of rules known as the “status quo,” Jews are allowed to visit, but not pray at the site, which is managed by a Jordanian-run trust. But in recent years, the number of Jewish visitors to the site has steadily grown, and some hold Jewish prayer at the site under police protection.

Addressing reporters in the city of Gaza, Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar decried what he called a “blatant attack on the religious and Islamic status of the city and the mosque,” saying Israel bore full responsibility for “the possibility of dragging the entire region into an open religious war.”

He said the militant group, which rules the Gaza Strip, would “defend the rights and sanctities of our people by all possible means.”

Story continues below advertisement

Israel and Hamas have fought four wars in the Gaza Strip since the Islamist militant group seized power in 2007.

The most recent battle, in May 2021, began when Hamas fired rockets at Jerusalem as Israeli nationalists planned to march through Jerusalem’s historic Old City, which is home to holy sites to Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

Israel captured east Jerusalem, along with the Old City and its holy sites, in the 1967 Mideast war and later annexed it in a move unrecognized by most of the international community. The Palestinians seek it as capital of a future independent state.

US Warnings Against the Russian Horn Will Fail: Revelation 16

US has privately warned Russia against using nuclear weapons in Ukraine for several months

Washington (CNN) — The US has privately communicated to Russia for the past several months that there will be consequences if Moscow chooses to use a nuclear weapon in the Ukraine war, according to US officials.

It was not immediately clear how or when the warnings were sent. The State Department was involved, according to one official. The Biden administration has also leaned heavily on intelligence channels to communicate sensitive messages to Moscow throughout the buildup and prosecution of Russia’s war in Ukraine, including recently in the negotiations over wrongfully detained Americans.

The warnings, first reported by The Washington Post, come as Russian President Vladimir Putin has once again threatened to turn to nuclear weapons amid a series of embarrassing setbacks on the battlefield in Ukraine. In a speech on Wednesday, he warned that, “In the event of a threat to the territorial integrity of our country and to defend Russia and our people, we will certainly make use of all weapon systems available to us. This is not a bluff.”

US officials have emphasized that this is not the first time Putin has threatened to turn to nuclear weapons since the start of his invasion of Ukraine in February, although some analysts have seen this threat as more specific and escalatory than the Russian president’s past rhetoric.

The US has also sought to deter Russia from using a nuclear weapon in public warnings in the past and have made the issue a theme of remarks at the UN General Assembly this week in New York. Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Thursday said Russia’s “reckless nuclear threats must stop immediately.”US President Joe Biden, appearing on CBS’s “60 Minutes” last week, said his message to Putin should he be considering the use of nuclear weapons was: “Don’t. Don’t. Don’t.”The US reaction would be “consequential” but would depend “on the extent of what they do,” Biden said, without providing further details.For now, top CIA officials have said publicly that they have seen no signs that Russia is preparing to use nuclear weapons. But some military analysts have been concerned that Russia may seek to use a so-called tactical, or battlefield, nuclear weapon in response to its poor showing in Ukraine — a tactic sometimes called “escalate to deescalate.” Intelligence officials believe Putin would likely only turn to that option if he felt Russia or his regime were existentially endangered, and it’s not clear if he would feel that losing his war in Ukraine would fit that description.

The Rising Risk of Nuclear War: Revelation 16

Putin’s ‘incredibly dangerous’ nuclear threats raise the risk of an unprecedented disaster

PUBLISHED FRI, SEP 23 20223:49 AM EDTUPDATED FRI, SEP 23 20229:36 AM EDT

Sam Meredith@SMEREDITH19

KEY POINTS

• Speaking in a rare, televised address on Wednesday, Putin warned that if the territorial integrity of Russia is threatened, the Kremlin would “certainly use all the means at our disposal to protect Russia and our people. It is not a bluff.”
• It comes as pro-Moscow regional leaders in Kremlin-controlled areas of southern and eastern Ukraine announced referendums on joining Russia.
• Beatrice Fihn, executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, said Putin’s threats drastically increase the risk of escalation to a nuclear conflict.

Speaking in a rare, televised address on Wednesday, Putin warned that if the territorial integrity of Russia is threatened, the Kremlin would “certainly use all the means at our disposal to protect Russia and our people. It is not a bluff.”

Gavriil Grigorov | Afp | Getty Images

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s ultimatum to the West drastically increases the risk of a nuclear conflict, analysts and campaigners warned, with world leaders denouncing what they describe as “reckless” and “irresponsible” threats.

Speaking in a rare televised addressWednesday, Putin called up extra forces for the war in Ukraine and warned that if the territorial integrity of Russia was threatened, the Kremlin would “certainly use all the means at our disposal to protect Russia and our people. It is not a bluff.”It was widely interpreted as a threat that Putin is prepared to use nuclear weapons to escalate the war following a string of Ukrainian successes.Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Thursday doubled down on the Kremlin’s nuclear posturing, saying that any weapons in Russia’s arsenal could be used to defend its territories — including strategic nuclear weapons.It comes as pro-Moscow regional leaders in areas of southern and eastern Ukraine announced referendums on joining Russia. The votes are expected to take place in the Russia-controlled regions of Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, reportedly amounting to roughly 15% of Ukrainian territory.The outcome of the referendums is widely believed to have been predetermined by the Kremlin, prompting the U.S. and its allies to denounce them as a “sham.”Political analysts say the Kremlin may then view Ukrainian military action against these four areas as an attack against Russia itself.“The citizens of Russia can be sure that the territorial integrity of our Motherland, our independence and freedom will be ensured, I emphasize this again, with all the means at our disposal,” Putin said.Putin’s threats increase the risk of escalation to a nuclear conflict drastically. This is incredibly dangerous and irresponsible.Beatrice FihnICAN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR“Those statements go beyond the Russian nuclear doctrine, which only suggests Russian first use in a conventional war when the very existence of the state is threatened,” said Andrey Baklitskiy, a senior researcher in the weapons of mass destruction and other strategic weapons program at the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research.“Coming from the person who has the sole decision-making power regarding Russian nuclear weapons this will have to be taken seriously,” Baklitskiy said, noting that Putin’s citation of “territorial integrity” was tricky to determine given that the Kremlin is planning to absorb four Ukrainian regions.“None of this means that Russia would resort to nuclear use. This would be a truly world-changing decision,” Baklitskiy said.“And it’s not clear if such a move would even lead to any desired outcomes for [President] Putin. … But extending the conditions for possible use amidst the ongoing war is a huge gamble,” he added. “One we all, including Russia, would be safer without.”‘Eroding the taboo’U.S. President Joe Biden condemnedPutin’s threat to use nuclear weapons and urged allied U.N. leaders to reject Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.Speaking at United Nations headquarters in New York City on Wednesday, Biden accused the Kremlin of making “reckless” and “irresponsible” threats and said, “a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.”His comments echoed remarks by NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, who told Reuters on Wednesday that the 30-nation Western defensive alliance would remain calm and “not engage in that same kind of reckless and dangerous nuclear rhetoric as President Putin.”Beatrice Fihn, Nobel laureate and executive director of the International Campaign Against Nuclear Weapons, urged political leaders to renew efforts to get rid of all nuclear weapons by signing and ratifying the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.Mikhail Svetlov | Getty ImagesPutin has alluded to Russia’s nuclear weaponry at various points during the conflict with Ukraine. Still, there are doubts among Western leaders over whether Moscow would resort to deploying a weapon of mass destruction.Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told German media on Wednesday that he didn’t believe the world would allow Putin to use nuclear weapons.Beatrice Fihn, Nobel laureate and executive director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, told CNBC that Putin’s “incredibly dangerous and irresponsible” threats drastically increase the risk of escalation to a nuclear conflict.“Threats to use nuclear weapons lower the threshold for their use,” Fihn said via email. “Subsequent discussion by politicians and commentators about the possibility of Russia using nuclear weapons and about possible nuclear responses without also discussing the devastating humanitarian impact of using even so-called ‘tactical’ nuclear weapons is eroding the taboo against their use.”Fihn called for the international community to “unequivocally condemn any and all nuclear threats” and urged political leaders to renew efforts to get rid of all nuclear weapons by signing and ratifying the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.‘No going back’Max Hess, a fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute think tank, described Putin’s nuclear threats as a “very significant announcement.”“Now, the real threat from Putin’s speech was that he’s prepared to use nuclear weapons to defend Russian territory, including the territory that they plan to annex,” he told CNBC’s “Street Signs Europe.”“This includes not only the Donetsk and Luhansk region, the traditional Donbas, but also all of Zaporizhzhia and all of Kherson — Ukrainian regions that very much remain contested and where Russians do not control their entirety.”“What this means then for those territories that are still under Ukrainian control with regards to Putin’s threats is still left unsaid,” Hess added.WATCH NOWVIDEO03:33Escalation of economic war against Russia is still possible, analyst saysIf Putin were to use a so-called tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine, there would be “no going back” and “no negotiation,” according to Timothy Ash, an emerging markets strategist at BlueBay Asset Management.In such a scenario, Putin “is finished with the West forever, and likely then even the Chinese, India, South Africa, the BRICS, and the rest of the non-aligned world turns against him,” Ash said. The BRICS acronym refers to Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.A weapon of mass destruction, or WMD, “is a deterrent,” Ash said. “Once it is used, its power is actually denuded.”Russia’s foreign ministry was not immediately available for comment when contacted by CNBC on Friday.

Putin threats: How many nuclear weapons does the Russian Horn have? Daniel 7

Putin threats: How many nuclear weapons does Russia have?

By The Visual Journalism Team  
BBC News

President Putin has announced a “partial mobilisation” of forces to be sent to Ukraine and warned that he will use “all means we have” to defend Russian territory, raising concerns around the world.

But as with previous warnings, analysts suggest his actions should probably be interpreted as a warning to other countries not to escalate their involvement in Ukraine, rather than signalling any desire to use nuclear weapons.

Nuclear weapons have existed for almost 80 years and many countries see them as a deterrent that continues to guarantee their national security.

How many nuclear weapons does Russia have?

All figures for nuclear weapons are estimates but, according to the Federation of American Scientists, Russia has 5,977 nuclear warheads – the devices that trigger a nuclear explosion – though this includes about 1,500 that are retired and set to to be dismantled. 

Of the remaining 4,500 or so, most are considered strategic nuclear weapons – ballistic missiles, or rockets, which can be targeted over long distances. These are the weapons usually associated with nuclear war.

Antichrist Movement continues to reject PM nominees: Wisdom Movement

Moqtada al-Sadr (Photo: Sadr’s office)

Sadr Movement continues to reject PM nominees: Wisdom Movement

“If we appoint a prophet for the post of prime minister, he will be rejected by the Sadr Movement.”

   2022/09/21 20:15

ERBIL (Kurdistan 24) – Fahad Jabbari, a member of Ammar al-Hakim’s National Wisdom Movement, told reporters on Wednesday that Moqtada al-Sadr continues to oppose the nominee for Iraqi premiership. 

“If we appoint a prophet for the post of prime minister, he will be rejected by the Sadr Movement,” Fahad Jabbari, a member of the National Wisdom Movement, told reporters on Wednesday.

“We have not tried to do anything that would upset the Sadr Movement, but we reiterate that if we nominate 100 candidates for the post of prime minister, all of them will be rejected by Moqtada al-Sadr,” he said.

After the end of the Arbaeen pilgrimage in mid-September, the 40-days mourning period that commemorates the death of Prophet Mohammad’s grandson Imam Hussein, Iraqi parties have resumed talks to reach an agreement to form a new cabinet.

Iraqis in October 2021 went to the polls to elect a new government. However, nearly one year later, the feuding political parties continue to disagree on the formation of a new government.

Rumours were circulating that some political parties of the pro-Iran Shiite Coordination Framework would support the current caretaker PM Mustafa al-Kadhimi to run again for one year.

However, the Framework on Monday underlined that Mohammed Shia’ Al-Sudani is still their candidate for Iraq’s premiership, and Sudani held a meeting on Tuesday with Iraqi parties on the upcoming cabinet formation.    

It is expected that there might be new round of unrest in early October if the Framework succeeds in forming a government before holding early elections in Iraq without Sadr’s approval.

The populist cleric Moqtada Al-Sadr earlier organized mass protests that occupied the parliament for days. On late August, the Sadrist protests led to armed clashes between the cleric’s supporters and Iran-backed factions inside Baghdad’s Green Zone.

More than 30 people were killed and hundreds injured before Sadr had ordered his supporters out of the  Zone.

The Sadrist Movement has so far rejected to join meetings between the main parties to find a solution to end the political deadlock.