Earthquake activity in the New York City area

WikipediaAlthough the eastern United States is not as seismically active as regions near plate boundaries, large and damaging earthquakes do occur there. Furthermore, when these rare eastern U.S. earthquakes occur, the areas affected by them are much larger than for western U.S. earthquakes of the same magnitude. Thus, earthquakes represent at least a moderate hazard to East Coast cities, including New York City and adjacent areas of very high population density.Seismicity in the vicinity of New York City. Data are from the U.S. Geological Survey (Top, USGS) and the National Earthquake Information Center (Bottom, NEIC). In the top figure, closed red circles indicate 1924-2006 epicenters and open black circles indicate locations of the larger earthquakes that occurred in 1737, 1783 and 1884. Green lines indicate the trace of the Ramapo fault.As can be seen in the maps of earthquake activity in this region(shown in the figure), seismicity is scattered throughout most of the New York City area, with some hint of a concentration of earthquakes in the area surrounding Manhattan Island.The largest known earthquake in this region occurred in 1884 and had a magnitude of approximately 5.For this earthquake, observations of fallen bricks and cracked plaster were reported from eastern Pennsylvania to central Connecticut, and the maximum intensity reported was at two sites in western Long Island (Jamaica, New York and Amityville, New York). Two other earthquakes of approximately magnitude 5 occurred in this region in 1737 and 1783. The figure on the right shows maps of the distribution of earthquakes of magnitude 3 and greater that occurred in this region from 1924 to 2010, along with locations of the larger earthquakes that occurred in 1737, 1783 and 1884.


The NYC area is part of the geologically complex structure of the Northern Appalachian Mountains. This complex structure was formed during the past half billion years when the Earth’s crust underlying the Northern Appalachians was the site of two major geological episodes, each of which has left its imprint on the NYC area bedrock. Between about 450 million years ago and about 250 million years ago, the Northern Appalachian region was affected by a continental collision, in which the ancient African continent collided with the ancient North American continent to form the supercontinent Pangaea. Beginning about 200 million years ago, the present-day Atlantic ocean began to form as plate tectonic forces began to rift apart the continent of Pangaea. The last major episode of geological activity to affect the bedrock in the New York area occurred about 100 million years ago, during the Mesozoic era, when continental rifting that led to the opening of the present-day Atlantic ocean formed the Hartford and Newark Mesozoic rift basins.Earthquake rates in the northeastern United States are about 50 to 200 times lower than in California, but the earthquakes that do occur in the northeastern U.S. are typically felt over a much broader region than earthquakes of the same magnitude in the western U.S.This means the area of damage from an earthquake in the northeastern U.S. could be larger than the area of damage caused by an earthquake of the same magnitude in the western U.S. The cooler rocks in the northeastern U.S. contribute to the seismic energy propagating as much as ten times further than in the warmer rocks of California. A magnitude 4.0 eastern U.S. earthquake typically can be felt as far as 100 km (60 mi) from its epicenter, but it infrequently causes damage near its source. A magnitude 5.5 eastern U.S. earthquake, although uncommon, can be felt as far as 500 km (300 mi) from its epicenter, and can cause damage as far away as 40 km (25 mi) from its epicenter. Earthquakes stronger than about magnitude 5.0 generate ground motions that are strong enough to be damaging in the epicentral area.At well-studied plate boundaries like the San Andreas fault system in California, scientists can often make observations that allow them to identify the specific fault on which an earthquake took place. In contrast, east of the Rocky Mountains this is rarely the case.  The NYC area is far from the boundaries of the North American plate, which are in the center of the Atlantic Ocean, in the Caribbean Sea, and along the west coast of North America. The seismicity of the northeastern U.S. is generally considered to be due to ancient zones of weakness that are being reactivated in the present-day stress field. In this model, pre-existing faults that were formed during ancient geological episodes persist in the intraplate crust, and the earthquakes occur when the present-day stress is released along these zones of weakness. The stress that causes the earthquakes is generally considered to be derived from present-day rifting at the Mid-Atlantic ridge.

Earthquakes and geologically mapped faults in the Northeastern U.S.

The northeastern U.S. has many known faults, but virtually all of the known faults have not been active for perhaps 90 million years or more. Also, the locations of the known faults are not well determined at earthquake depths. Accordingly, few (if any) earthquakes in the region can be unambiguously linked to known faults. Given the current geological and seismological data, it is difficult to determine if a known fault in this region is still active today and could produce a modern earthquake. As in most other areas east of the Rocky Mountains, the best guide to earthquake hazard in the northeastern U.S. is probably the locations of the past earthquakes themselves.

The Ramapo fault and other New York City area faults

The Ramapo Fault, which marks the western boundary of the Newark rift basin, has been argued to be a major seismically active feature of this region,but it is difficult to discern the extent to which the Ramapo fault (or any other specific mapped fault in the area) might be any more of a source of future earthquakes than any other parts of the region. The Ramapo Fault zone spans more than 185 miles (300 kilometers) in New YorkNew Jersey, and Pennsylvania. It is a system of faults between the northern Appalachian Mountains and Piedmont areas to the east. This fault is perhaps the best known fault zone in the Mid-Atlantic region, and some small earthquakes have been known to occur in its vicinity. Recently, public knowledge about the fault has increased – especially after the 1970s, when the fault’s proximity to the Indian Point nuclear plant in New York was noticed.There is insufficient evidence to unequivocally demonstrate any strong correlation of earthquakes in the New York City area with specific faults or other geologic structures in this region. The damaging earthquake affecting New York City in 1884 was probably not associated with the Ramapo fault because the strongest shaking from that earthquake occurred on Long Island (quite far from the trace of the Ramapo fault). The relationship between faults and earthquakes in the New York City area is currently understood to be more complex than any simple association of a specific earthquake with a specific mapped fault.A 2008 study argued that a magnitude 6 or 7 earthquake might originate from the Ramapo fault zone,which would almost definitely spawn hundreds or even thousands of fatalities and billions of dollars in damage. Studying around 400 earthquakes over the past 300 years, the study also argued that there was an additional fault zone extending from the Ramapo Fault zone into southwestern Connecticut. As can be seen in the above figure of seismicity, earthquakes are scattered throughout this region, with no particular concentration of activity along the Ramapo fault, or along the hypothesized fault zone extending into southwestern Connecticut.Just off the northern terminus of the Ramapo fault is the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant, built between 1956 and 1960 by Consolidated Edison Company. The plant began operating in 1963, and it has been the subject of a controversy over concerns that an earthquake from the Ramapo fault will affect the power plant. Whether or not the Ramapo fault actually does pose a threat to this nuclear power plant remains an open question.

Another Iranian drone attack on Babylon the Great

Second drone strike in two days attempted on U.S.-led coalition in Iraq: report

Jan 4, 06:01 AM

A second attack against U.S.-led coalition troops in Iraq involving two fixed-wing drones rigged with explosives was foiled Tuesday, according to Reuters.

An unnamed coalition official told Reuters that the drones were shot down by air defenses as they approached Ain al-Asad Airbase, located in western Al-Anbar province. Another attempted strike on Monday was made at a coalition base housing U.S. troops near Baghdad International Airport. That was also foiled by air defenses. 

No injuries were reported. No claims of responsibility for either attack on Monday and Tuesday have been made yet.

While the attack was once again stopped using base defense capabilities, concerns are rising over the increasing tension between the U.S., Iran and armed-groups supporting Iran.

The first drone strike marked the second anniversary of the assassination of Iranian general and Quds Forces leader Qassem Soleimani, who was killed in a drone strike ordered by former President Donald Trump near Baghdad International Airport in 2020.

Parts of the wreckage of a drone are laid out on the ground near the Ain al-Asad airbase, in the western Anbar province of Iraq, Tuesday, Jan. 4, 2022. Two explosives-laden drones targeting the base housing U.S. troops were engaged and destroyed by defensive capabilities at the base on Tuesday, a coalition official said. (International Coalition via AP) 

Following yesterday’s attack, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi called for the U.S. to put Trump and former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo up for trial in “a fair court for the criminal act of assassinating General Soleimani, Muslims will take our martyr’s revenge.”

“The aggressor, murderer and main culprit — the then president of the United States — must be tried and judged under the [Islamic] law of retribution, and God’s ruling must be carried out against him,” Raisi said in a speech Monday.

U.S. troops remain in Iraq despite December 2021 marking the official end of their combat mission there.

“While we have ended our combat mission, we maintain the inherent right of self-defense,” the coalition official reportedly told Reuters.

“These are attacks against Iraqi installations and an attack against the Iraqi people and the military that protects them. We maintain a minimal footprint on Iraqi bases — the coalition no longer has its own bases in Iraq.”

Rachel is a Marine Corps veteran, Penn State alumna and Master’s candidate at New York University for Business and Economic Reporting. 

How Europe helped the Pakistani Nuclear horn

Pakistan flag
Pakistan flag (Representational image) Pixabay

German and Swiss Companies Aided Pakistan’s Nuclear Weapons Program: Bombshell Report Reveals

By R. Ghosh On 1/4/22 at 4:55 PM

The Mossad, Israel’s intelligence agency, bombed and threatened German and Swiss companies in the 1980s as they played a major role in helping Pakistan develop nuclear weapon’s program, a bombshell report from the Swiss media claims. Pakistan and Iran worked closely during the 1980s to develop nuclear weapons and German and Swiss companies assisted them, the report mentions.

The bombshell story was first broken by Switzerland-based newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ), on Sunday. And interestingly the United States then under the President Jimmy Carter also played a major role in helping Swiss companies, according to the report.

Mossad Threatened Pak Allies

During the 1980s, Pakistan and the Islamic Republic of Iran worked closely together on the construction of nuclear weapons devices. German and Swiss companies were actively involved in assisting the two countries in developing their nuclear program.

However, the secret mission, soon got exposed to Mossad, and months later, at least three facilities linked to the European companies helping Pakistan were bombed. The three facilities were a Cora Engineering Chur employee’s house on May 18, 1981, a Wälischmiller company factory building on May 18, 1981, and the Heinz Mebus engineering office on November 6th, 1981, the report says.

Also, the Mossad sent threatening messages to other firms by phone.

However, the United States also had a role to play in this. According to the report, the then-US president Jimmy Carter’s administration also sent diplomatic advances to the Swiss and German companies aiding this project to fight the progression of Pakistan’s nuclear program, according to NZZ.

“The suspicion that the Mossad might be behind the attacks and threats soon arose,” the report said.

“For Israel, the prospect that Pakistan, for the first time, could become an Islamic state with an atomic bomb posed an existential threat.”

Mossad Felt Threatened?

Israeli Flag
Israeli Flag Pxfuel

The report comes almost four daces later and two decades after Pakistan tested it first nuclear weapon in 1998. However, ever after that, not too many said anything about the involvement of German and Swiss companies in providing support to Pakistan and Iran.

Following the bombings on these German and Swiss facilities, Organization for the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in South Asia, claimed the responsibility.

However, the entity prior to the explosions was completely unknown to the world but everyone believed in that. However, Organization for the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons never gave an explanation into the bombings and why it would suddenly attack German and Swiss companies.

Moreover, the organization was also never “never heard from” again following the incident, the NZZ report cities. It is possible that Mossad bombed the facilities after it got an intelligence report and felt that Pakistan could become the first Islamic state to possess an atomic bomb which could become an exponential threat.

However, even then there is no proof that Mossad was behind those attacks.

Israel hampers the Pakistani Nuclear horn

Report: Israel's Mossad hampered Pakistan's nuclear program

Report: Israel’s Mossad hampered Pakistan’s nuclear programs

Swiss daily says that in the 1980s, the Mossad intelligence agency allegedly targeted German and Swiss companies involved in developing Pakistan’s nuclear program, deemed “an existential threat” to Israel. Intelligence expert says there is no concrete evidence to prove Israel’s involvement.

Israel’s Mossad intelligence agency allegedly targeted German and Swiss companies that assisted in the development of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program in the 1980s, Neue Zurcher Zeitung (NZZ), a daily based in Switzerland, reported on Sunday.

During the 1980s, Pakistan and Iran worked closely together on the construction of nuclear weapons devices, the report explained.

Then-president Jimmy Carter’s administration sent diplomatic advances to the Swiss and German companies also aiding this project to fight the progression of Pakistan’s nuclear program, according to NZZ.

A few months later, three facilities linked to the European companies were bombed – a Cora Engineering Chur employee’s house on May 18, 1981, a Walischmiller company factory building on May 18, 1981, and the Heinz Mebus engineering office on Nov. 6, 1981.

Threatening messages were also sent to other firms by phone, NZZ claimed.

“The suspicion that the Mossad might be behind the attacks and threats soon arose,” the report said. “For Israel, the prospect that Pakistan, for the first time, could become an Islamic state with an atomic bomb posed an existential threat.”

Additionally, NZZ points to the fact that the Organization for the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in South Asia, a previously unknown entity that claimed responsibility for the explosions, was “never heard from” again following the incident.

Adrian Hanni, a contemporary historian and intelligence service expert, told the daily that the Mossad’s participation in the bombings was probable, but there is no “smoking gun” to prove involvement.

i24NEWS contributed to this report.

Indian nuclear missile proliferation before the first nuclear war: Revelation 8

Indian nuclear missile proliferation | By Amber Afreen Abid

January 2, 2022

Indian nuclear missile proliferation

THE nuclear capability of Pakistan is purely security based and depends upon the changing technological developments in the region.

Pakistan maintains a posture of credible minimum deterrence and ensures strategic stability in the region.

However, India continually pushes Pakistan towards arms race, by the development and induction of new aggressive technology and incorporation of offensive doctrines.

The proliferation of supersonic and hypersonic weapons is echoing in South Asia which could be disastrous for the regional peace and stability.

Ever since the mass nuclear power has been invented, the deterrence stability in the region is maintained by keeping the mutual vulnerability intact, which India tries its best to sabotage.

The introduction of supersonic and hypersonic weapons could be devastating as it travels with immensely high speed and the enemy can’t be certain whether it is carrying conventional or non-conventional weapon, hence the chances and risks of nuclear war are manifolds.

India recently test-fired the air version of Brahmos supersonic missile. The supersonic missile is a joint venture of the Indian DRDO and the Russian NPOM.

It is basically an offensive missile, and India intends to develop a series of supersonic missiles. India is most likely to supplement it with the nuclear missile as well, which would intensify the already volatile scenario in South Asia.

Moreover, India has also tested the Supersonic missile assisted torpedo (SMART), which indicates the continuous modernization of its technology. Recently Indian Defence Minister said that India wants to go for hypersonic missile in line with credible minimum deterrence.

Owing to the volatile situation in South Asia, with the absence of any conflict resolution treaties and agreements, the innovation in technology in South Asia leads to the change in the nuclear doctrines as well.

Pakistan maintains a policy of minimum credible deterrence, but that minimum is directly proportional to the advancements made by the adversary in offensive technology and ultimately in the nuclear doctrine.

The Indian posture of NFU is also questionable, as the statements from the Defence Minister of India comes otherwise. The recent development indicates India’s move towards a counterforce targeting, which is a highly destabilizing factor for South Asia.

The Indian military modernization is far exceeding the ‘minimum’ in minimum credible deterrence and there is no reasonable justification of credible and minimum in the recent developments.

Such doctrines only exist when a country prepares for the offensive first strike targeting and pre-emption strikes, hence leading to a full scale war.

India doesn’t have any security concern for which it is going for the acquisition of hypersonic weapons or change in doctrine.

It doesn’t have any potent threat from the neighbouring countries to go for such ventures; hence, the drive is totally out of the prestige factor, as India wants to come at par with US, Russia and China in leading world technologies, without realizing the effect of such technologies on the regional stability.

India needs to withdraw its hegemonic ambitions if the stability and regional peace is required or if the arms race needs to be withheld.

As a responsible nuclear weapon state, Pakistan always maintains a modest nuclear posture, and any military development is the part of strategic chain in South Asia, and or because of its allies.

—The writer is Research Associate, at Strategic Vision Institute, Islamabad.

Iraq confirms that the Antichrist is ruler

Followers of Muqtada al-Sadr celebrated in Baghdad in October after initial results of Iraq’s parliamentary elections.
Followers of Muqtada al-Sadr celebrated in Baghdad in October after initial results of Iraq’s parliamentary elections.Khalid Mohammed/Associated Press

Iraq Confirms Election Gains for Shiite Leader Seen as Potential U.S. Ally

A court certified October’s parliamentary vote that gave Muqtada al-Sadr’s party a plurality of seats, clearing a path for a government to be formed.

Dec. 27, 2021

Iraq’s Federal Supreme Court on Monday upheld the results of the country’s October parliamentary elections, resolving a dispute that had stalled the formation of a new government as Iran-backed Shiite Muslim militias contested gains by a rival Shiite political bloc.

No one can win a nuclear war but it’s inevitable: Revelation 16

Nuclear weapons: Russia, China, Britain, US and France say no one can win a nuclear war

January 4, 2022 — 2.42am

‘No one can win a nuclear war’: Superpowers release rare joint statement

UpdatedChina, Russia, the UK, the United States and France have agreed that a further spread of nuclear arms and a nuclear war should be avoided.According to a joint statement released on Tuesday morning (AEDT), the five countries – the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council – said they considered it their primary responsibility to avoid war between the nuclear states and to reduce strategic risks, while aiming to work to create an atmosphere of security.Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park. The five countries making up the UN Security Council – all nuclear powers –  say a nuclear war must never be one can win a nuclear warHiroshima Peace Memorial Park. The five countries making up the UN Security Council – all nuclear powers – say a nuclear war must never be fought.AP“We declare there could be no winners in a nuclear war, it should never be started,” the Russian-language version of the statement read.An English-language version was released by the White House.Related Article“We affirm that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought,” the statement reads. “We also affirm that nuclear weapons – for as long as they continue to exist – should serve defensive purposes, deter aggression and prevent war. We believe strongly that the further spread of such weapons must be prevented.”The statement goes on to discuss the importance of addressing nuclear threats and of preserving and complying with non-proliferation, disarmament and arms control agreements.“We each intend to maintain and further strengthen our national measures to prevent unauthorised or unintended use of nuclear weapons,” the statement reads.“We underline our desire to work with all states to create a security environment more conducive to progress on disarmament with the ultimate goal of a world without nuclear weapons with undiminished security for all.”Related ArticleFrance also released the statement, underscoring that the five powers reiterated their determination for nuclear arms control and disarmament. They would continue bilateral and multilateral approaches to nuclear arms control, it said.The declaration comes despite a UN decision last week to postpone a key arms-control meeting in New York – originally scheduled for February – due to rising COVID-19 infections.Diplomats had been scheduled to meet to review the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the 1970 accord designed to limit the spread of atomic arms.Under the accord, China, Russia, the UK, the United States and France were all granted dispensations to maintain stockpiles as long as they continued working toward the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons.The urgency to reduce the risks posed by weapons of mass destruction has come into greater focus amid recent talks designed to lower tensions between the White House and the Kremlin, which administer the world’s biggest nuclear arsenals. The two adversaries are spending billions of dollars to modernise weapons systems, even as they occasionally work together to stem proliferation of weapons technologies.The statement comes amid increased geopolitical tensions between Moscow and NATO countries over concerns about Russia’s military build-up near neighbouring Ukraine. Moscow says it can move its army around its own territory as it deems necessary.Last Thursday US President Joe Biden told his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin that a possible move on Ukraine would draw sanctions and an increased US presence in Europe.Reuters, Bloomberg