East Coast Quakes and the Sixth Seal: Revelation 6

Items lie on the floor of a grocery store after an earthquake on Sunday, August 9, 2020 in North Carolina.

East Coast Quakes: What to Know About the Tremors Below

By Meteorologist Dominic Ramunni Nationwide PUBLISHED 7:13 PM ET Aug. 11, 2020 PUBLISHED 7:13 PM EDT Aug. 11, 2020

People across the Carolinas and Mid-Atlantic were shaken, literally, on a Sunday morning as a magnitude 5.1 earthquake struck in North Carolina on August 9, 2020.

Centered in Sparta, NC, the tremor knocked groceries off shelves and left many wondering just when the next big one could strike.

Fault Lines

Compared to the West Coast, there are far fewer fault lines in the East. This is why earthquakes in the East are relatively uncommon and weaker in magnitude.

That said, earthquakes still occur in the East.

According to Spectrum News Meteorologist Matthew East, “Earthquakes have occurred in every eastern U.S. state, and a majority of states have recorded damaging earthquakes. However, they are pretty rare. For instance, the Sparta earthquake Sunday was the strongest in North Carolina in over 100 years.”

While nowhere near to the extent of the West Coast, damaging earthquakes can and do affect much of the eastern half of the country.

For example, across the Tennesse River Valley lies the New Madrid Fault Line. While much smaller in size than those found farther west, the fault has managed to produce several earthquakes over magnitude 7.0 in the last couple hundred years.

In 1886, an estimated magnitude 7.0 struck Charleston, South Carolina along a previously unknown seismic zone. Nearly the entire town had to be rebuilt.

Vulnerabilities

The eastern half of the U.S. has its own set of vulnerabilities from earthquakes.

Seismic waves actually travel farther in the East as opposed to the West Coast. This is because the rocks that make up the East are tens, if not hundreds, of millions of years older than in the West.

These older rocks have had much more time to bond together with other rocks under the tremendous pressure of Earth’s crust. This allows seismic energy to transfer between rocks more efficiently during an earthquake, causing the shaking to be felt much further.

This is why, during the latest quake in North Carolina, impacts were felt not just across the state, but reports of shaking came as far as Atlanta, Georgia, nearly 300 miles away.

Reports of shaking from different earthquakes of similar magnitude.

Quakes in the East can also be more damaging to infrastructure than in the West. This is generally due to the older buildings found east. Architects in the early-to-mid 1900s simply were not accounting for earthquakes in their designs for cities along the East Coast.

When a magnitude 5.8 earthquake struck Virginia in 2011, not only were numerous historical monuments in Washington, D.C. damaged, shaking was reported up and down the East Coast with tremors even reported in Canada.

Unpredictable

There is no way to accurately predict when or where an earthquake may strike.

Some quakes will have a smaller earthquake precede the primary one. This is called a foreshock.

The problem is though, it’s difficult to say whether the foreshock is in fact a foreshock and not the primary earthquake. Only time will tell the difference.

The United State Geological Survey (USGS) is experimenting with early warning detection systems in the West Coast.

While this system cannot predict earthquakes before they occur, they can provide warning up to tens of seconds in advance that shaking is imminent. This could provide just enough time to find a secure location before the tremors begin.

Much like hurricanes, tornadoes, or snowstorms, earthquakes are a natural occuring phenomenon that we can prepare for.

The USGS provides an abundance of resources on how to best stay safe when the earth starts to quake.

Small Quake Before the Sixth Seal: Revelation 6:12

This USGS map shows where a minor earthquake struck outside of Warsaw, N.Y., on Tuesday, March 15, 2022.

Small earthquake rumbles in Upstate New York

Updated: Mar. 16, 2022, 5:52 p.m. | Published: Mar. 16, 2022, 8:57 a.m.

By Geoff Herbert | gherbert@syracuse.com

A minor earthquake has been recorded in Upstate New York.

The U.S. Geological Survey said a 2.6-magnitude quake struck about 3 miles outside of Warsaw, N.Y., at 11:11 a.m. Tuesday. At least 58 people reported feeling the rumble.

According to WHEC, such a small earthquake can be felt by people, but is unlikely to cause any damage.

Warsaw is located in Wyoming County, about 39 miles southwest of Rochester and 120 miles west of Syracuse.

The earthquake, which occurred about 3 miles below the surface, was one of six recorded Tuesday by USGS in the United States.

The Democrat & Chronicle notes that earthquakes are not uncommon in New York state, but most are minor. A 2.0-magnitude quake under Lake Ontario rattled the Rochester area in 2019.

The Empire State’s largest earthquake, with a magnitude of 5.8, was recorded Sept. 5, 1944 in St. Lawrence County; it caused $2 million worth of damage and was felt from Canada to Maryland and Indiana to Maine.

Some strong quakes outside of the state have been felt throughout the region, including a 5.1-magnitude earthquake in 2013 and a 5.9-magnitude Virginia quake in 2011 that shook Central New York, more than 370 miles away from its epicenter.

The Risk of Nuclear War is Real: Revelation 16

A Russian army RS-24 Yars ballistic missile system moving through Red Square during a military parade, in Moscow, in 2020.Pool photo by Pavel Golovkin

As Russia Digs In, What’s the Risk of Nuclear War? ‘It’s Not Zero.’

A series of shifts in Russian statements about using nuclear weapons has led some analysts to believe that the Kremlin sees a nuclear exchange as a viable strategy.

March 16, 2022Updated 11:11 a.m. ET

A major war raging on Russia’s and NATO’s borders. Increasingly bold Western military support. Russian threats of direct retaliation. A mood of siege and desperation in the Kremlin. Growing uncertainty around each side’s red lines.

As Russia and NATO escalate their standoff over Ukraine, nuclear strategists and former U.S. officials warn that there is a remote but growing risk of an unintended slide into direct conflict — even, in some scenarios, a nuclear exchange.

“The prospect of nuclear war,” António Guterres, the United Nations secretary general, warned this week, “is now back within the realm of possibility.”

Antichrist to investigate alleged Israeli base in Erbil

Barzani, Sadr to investigate alleged Israeli base in Erbil

13-03-2022

ERBIL, Kurdistan Region – Kurdistan Democratic Party (KDP) leader Masoud Barzani and influential Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr agreed on Sunday afternoon to form a committee to investigate the existence of an Israeli base in Erbil, after allegations of its presence were made by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as justification for Sunday morning’s attack on the city.

Under the pretext of hitting an Israeli base, a dozen ballistic missiles targeted the US consulate building in Erbil early Sunday morning, landing in nearby residential neighborhoods, and injuring two civilians.

The IRGC on Sunday afternoon claimedresponsibility for targeting “the strategic center of the Zionist conspiracy and evil by point-to-point missile,” Iranian state media reported, without mentioning Erbil or the Kurdistan Region by name.

Barzani and Sadr exchanged words regarding the recent missile attack in Erbil, Barzani headquarters said in a statement.

The two leaders agreed to form an investigative committee to “uncover the truth regarding the pretext of the existence of Israeli headquarters in Erbil, which has been used as an excuse for the attack,” the statement added.

Following the IRGC’s statement, Sadr released a response calling for a note of protest to be given to Iran for violating Iraq’s sovereignty, while also mentioning that the so-called Israeli locations should be investigated as soon as possible “so that it cannot be used as an excuse to disturb the security of Iraq and its people.”

The KDP politburo also released a statement on Sunday evening, condemning the incident and calling it “a failed, inimical attack” on the capital of the Kurdistan Region. The statement urged all parties in Iraq and the Kurdistan Region to put serious efforts into preventing such attacks, and expressed expectations for clear and strict response from the international community.

“Allegedly under the pretext of hitting an Israeli base near the US Consulate in Erbil, [the attack] targeted civilian locations and its justification is only to hide the disgracefulness of such offense. We reiterate that the propaganda of the perpetrators of this attack is far from true,” read a statement by the KRG on Sunday, calling on the international community to urgently investigate the “baseless attack.”

Widely blamed on Iran-backed militia groups, the Kurdistan Region and Iraq have previously come under several rocket and drone attacks, with the airports and US bases being the main target.

There have been at least 30 reported rocket and drone attacks on bases and facilities housing US forces and personnel in Iraq and the Kurdistan Region last year, according to data compiled by Rudaw English.

However, ballistic missiles were last used on January 8, 2020, when Iran attacked an Iraqi air base in retaliation for the killing of top Iranian Commander Qasem Soleimani, injuring dozens of US troops suffered brain injuries. 

Updated at 7:03 pm

By Chenar Chalak

Iran’s strike on Iraq puts US in awkward position amid nuclear talks

Abu Dhabi, UAE (CNN) — The United States appears to be keen to tell the world that it wasn’t the target of Iranian missile strikes in Iraq on Sunday.

Iran said it was targeting Israeli “strategic centers” in the northern city of Erbil, but Iraqi-Kurdish authorities said the missiles fell close to a US consulate under construction. Baghdad summoned the Iranian ambassador. The Israeli Prime Minister’s Office refused to comment on the Iranian claim.

It was the first Iranian attack to strike so close to US interests since Tehran struck the Ain Al Asad air base in western Iraq in January 2020 in retaliation for the US killing of Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani.

“The US was not the intended target,” State Department spokesperson Ned Price said. “Press speculation otherwise is simply wrong.” The White House said the attack targeted a “civilian residence.” 

The attack came as world powers are engaged in talks with Tehran to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement. A conclusion of the talks could see over a million barrels a day of currently sanctioned Iranian oil coming to the world market, giving reprieve to an oil price rally as Western states scramble to find alternatives to Russian energy exports.

Crude prices last week hit an eight-year high on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and subsequent Western sanctions on Moscow. The US has so far failed to convince its oil-producing allies in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to raise supply and help tame the rise in prices. 

“The message is clear,” said Saman Vakil, senior research fellow at London’s Chatham House think tank. “That regional stability is not something we should take for granted and that Iran, as a regional state that projects power beyond its border, has the potential to be destabilizing.” 

Some Republican politicians weren’t convinced by the Biden administration’s narrative of the events. Lisa McClain, a representative for Michigan, called for an “immediate halt in negotiations with Iran,” while Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton said sanctions relief should be “off the table.” 

An acknowledgement by the Biden administration that the US was the target of the attack would oblige it to retaliate at a time when it wants to settle disputes with Tehran diplomatically, said Trita Parsi, vice-president of the Quincy Institute in Washington, DC. The Iranians were likely sending a message to Israel as “they’ve been taking a lot of hits in Syria, where the Israelis have been targeting them.”

“There is probably a signaling at the US as well, since the US is essentially allowing the Israelis to do what they are doing in Syria,” he said. “The Iranians [are saying] they will not tolerate it. They are striking close to the consulate and not at the consulate.” 

Paris said it was “reckless” of Iran to conduct the strike amid the nuclear talks but added that it may not have an impact on the negotiations. 

“The US is trying to compartmentalize regional issues from the nuclear ones,” said Vakil. “Iran’s accelerating nuclear program remains a problem if not a crisis for the international community.” 

The fate of the nuclear talks was uncertain last week after a surprise last-minute demand by Russia for guarantees that its trade with Iran wouldn’t be affected by Western sanctions on Moscow. The US rejected the demand and the talks were paused.

Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amirabdollahian will visit Russia on Tuesday for “frank and forward-looking talks,” Iran’s Nour News reported. Despite Moscow’s stalling, Tehran on Monday placed the blame for delays on the US, saying the decision to conclude the talks lies with Washington. 

The Iranian strike in Iraq could also be aimed at putting pressure on the US to come to an agreement, giving it a preview of what’s to come if nuclear talks fall through, Parsi said. “But the question is why is the pressure on the US and not on the Russians?” 

It’s time for Babylon to reconsider our nuclear forces: Daniel 7

It’s time to reconsider our nuclear forces

By Patty-Jane Geller, Opinion ContributorMarch 14, 2022 – 03:30 PM EDT

The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill 

We’ve known about China’s massive nuclear expansion for some time now. Last year, Admiral Charles Richard, commander of U.S. Strategic Command, testified that we are on a trajectory to face two nuclear peers – Russia and China – for the first time in its history.

But things have changed. This week, Richard testified that this three-party nuclear-peer reality has already arrived.

This constitutes a significant shift in threat environment. Richard said the nuclear forces we have today are “the absolute minimum” and that the Pentagon will need to make “immediate and significant” changes to our nuclear posture.

Disarmament advocates greeted his statement with skepticism, but Richard is right. There is no time to waste when it comes to deterring nuclear attack.

The basic design of our current nuclear force posture dates to around 2010, when the overall threat of nuclear attack was expected to lessen over time. Russia was our only peer competitor, and President Obama’s 2010 Nuclear Posture Review considered Russia to no longer be an adversary. China maintained its historic “minimum deterrence” posture of fewer than 100 nuclear missiles and was expected to stay the course. 

These faulty assumptions drove many decisions about our nuclear posture. For example, the Columbia-class nuclear submarine is designed to hold fewer nuclear missiles than its predecessor, the Ohio-class. That decision “was based in part on the assumption that the multi-decade reduction in U.S. nuclear delivery systems is unlikely to be suddenly and dramatically reversed,” according to a recent RAND report.

The Obama administration generally failed to anticipate the scope and size of China’s subsequent nuclear buildup. Nor did it anticipate Russian President Vladimir Putin’s nuclear saber-rattling in Ukraine.

Considering that our nuclear arsenal of around 1,550 deployed nuclear weapons was designed for the 2010 environment (with the expectation that threats would decrease) it is surely insufficient to meet the deterrence demands of today’s far more dangerous world.

There is a direct relationship between our adversaries’ capabilities and what the U.S. needs for deterrence. Deterrence hinges on the ability to hold at risk those assets our adversaries value most, including their nuclear forces and accompanying infrastructure. For deterrence to be credible, the United States must maintain the amount and types of nuclear weapons required to convince our adversaries that we can strike these targets if necessary.

Now facing double the number of peer threats that existed in 2010, the U.S. will need to adjust its nuclear forces in kind. That’s not to say that we must match China’s new capabilities one for one, but it does mean that our current nuclear force is insufficient to counter two major nuclear threats.

The U.S. cannot risk a deterrence posture that enables it to defeat only one nuclear adversary and not the other. When it comes to the most dangerous weapons in the world, the U.S. should want to deter all threats at all times.

If the United States fails to adjust its nuclear force posture, risks go up. If Russia and China do not perceive the U.S. nuclear threat to be credible, they will become further emboldened in their aggressive pursuits in Europe and Asia. Worse, they may calculate that the benefits of using nuclear weapons would outweigh the costs.

The Biden administration is expected to release its Nuclear Posture Review soon. If it has not already considered future adjustments to U.S. nuclear forces, it must do so immediately. In particular, it should review options to add more nuclear warheads to our current forces as well as to develop additional kinds of tactical weapons.

With something as dangerous as nuclear war – the only existential threat to the United States – the United States cannot afford to skimp on deterrence.

Patty-Jane Geller is a policy analyst specializing in nuclear deterrence and missile defense in The Heritage Foundation’s Center for National Defense.

Antichrist considers a shrewd choice for prime minister

Sadr considers a shrewd choice for prime minister

Farhad Alaaldin

Mohammad Jaafar al-Sadr. Photo: Jaafar al-Sadr/Twitter

As political stalemate continues in Baghdad, rumours are swirling around the leader of the Sadrist movement’s nomination for prime minister. In recent days, Muqtada al-Sadr has made rounds of phone calls to Iraqi leaders, including his arch-rival Nouri al-Maliki, to discuss his choice of potential candidate. Sources suggest he is keen to nominate his cousin for the post: Iraq’s ambassador to the United Kingdom, Mohammad Jaafar al-Sadr (MJS).

Little is known about him, but MJS is the son of the revered Shiite leader Sayeed Mohammad Baqir al-Sadr, the founder of the Islamic Dawa Party, and movements such as the Sadrists and Asaib Ahl al-Haq, who follow his ideals.

MJS worked at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for some time, and was elected as a member of parliament in 2010 with the State of Law, led by Maliki, whereupon he resigned a few months later.

In a rare interview published in Elaph in 2010, MJS discussed his ideals and shared his hopes for Iraq and its future.

Despite his religious upbringing – being the son of Mohammad Baqir al-Sadr, and mentored by Mohammad Mohammad Sadiq al-Sadr – MJS said he doesn’t believe in a religious state, but in a “civil state, which is the formula closest to the British and German model of dealing between state and beliefs,” he said.

He has lived and studied in Iran, yet doesn’t believe in “Wilayat al-faqih” as a form of ruling. “The experience of living in Iran was a catalyst for liberation from a number of perceptions and ideas that were closer to ideology than the objective perception of the movement of society and its contradictions,” he explained.

On Iraq’s relation with its neighbours, MJS expressed a direct view. “Iraq, with its Arab depth and history, requires keenness to establish distinguished relations with its Arab neighbours, such as Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt, because I believe that the depth of Iraq is its Arab world and its integration can only take place with its own countries to build a regional system that begins with the Arabs and integrates with other countries such as Iran and Turkey.”

His views on the American invasion and occupation are vividly clear. He rejected the occupation, yet called for a balanced relationship with the United States, saying he would “be keen to establish distinguished relations with the United States, whether in the economic, scientific or cultural fields.” Furthermore, “It is possible to envision other forms of assistance to the Iraqis that are more beneficial, not only to them but also to America and its reputation in the region and the world.”

MJS expressed a clear picture of Iraq’s state of affairs in 2010, talking about lack of services, the decline in education, rampant corruption, muhasasa, extreme poverty, unemployment that devours the youth, the politicisation of state institutions, etc…

About his relationship with the Sadrist leader, he commented, “I have a lot of respect for him for his brave, patriotic stances, especially with regard to foreign presence as well as his stances calling for openness to other components.”

It may be a shrewd move for the influential Shiite cleric to nominate MJS. He is one of the family, and it would be almost impossible for the Coordination Framework to object to his nomination.

It remains to be seen if the political process will get out of the stalemate, however.

Sadr still refuses consensus and believes that he must form a national majority government. The Coordination Framework might not reject MJS. However, they might still boycott the session to elect the president, which requires 220 members, and it is clear that without their support, the session might not occur. As a result, the nomination will be on hold until a president is elected.

Farhad Alaaldin is the chairman of the Iraqi Advisory Council. He was the political adviser to former Iraqi President Fuad Masum, the former chief of staff to the KRG prime minister from 2009 to 2011, and the former senior adviser to the KRG prime minister from 2011 to 2012.