Two Centuries Before The Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

The worst earthquake in Massachusetts history 260 years ago
It happened before, and it could happen again.
By Hilary Sargent @lilsarg Staff | 11.19.15 | 5:53 AM
On November 18, 1755, Massachusetts experienced its largest recorded earthquake.
The earthquake occurred in the waters off Cape Ann, and was felt within seconds in Boston, and as far away as Nova Scotia, the Chesapeake Bay, and upstate New York, according to the U.S. Geological Survey.
Seismologists have since estimated the quake to have been between 6.0 and 6.3 on the Richter scale, according to the Massachusetts Historical Society.
While there were no fatalities, the damage was extensive.
According to the USGS, approximately 100 chimneys and roofs collapsed, and over a thousand were damaged.
The worst damage occurred north of Boston, but the city was not unscathed.
A 1755 report in The Philadelphia Gazette described the quake’s impact on Boston:
“There was at first a rumbling noise like low thunder, which was immediately followed with such a violent shaking of the earth and buildings, as threw every into the greatest amazement, expecting every moment to be buried in the ruins of their houses. In a word, the instances of damage done to our houses and chimnies are so many, that it would be endless to recount them.”
The quake sent the grasshopper weathervane atop Faneuil Hall tumbling to the ground, according to the Massachusetts Historical Society.
An account of the earthquake, published in The Pennsylvania Gazette on December 4, 1755.
The earthquake struck at 4:30 in the morning, and the shaking lasted “near four minutes,” according to an entry John Adams, then 20, wrote in his diary that day.
The brief diary entry described the damage he witnessed.
“I was then at my Fathers in Braintree, and awoke out of my sleep in the midst of it,” he wrote. “The house seemed to rock and reel and crack as if it would fall in ruins about us. 7 Chimnies were shatter’d by it within one mile of my Fathers house.”
The shaking was so intense that the crew of one ship off the Boston coast became convinced the vessel had run aground, and did not learn about the earthquake until they reached land, according to the Massachusetts Historical Society.
In 1832, a writer for the Hampshire (Northampton) Gazette wrote about one woman’s memories from the quake upon her death.
“It was between 4 and 5 in the morning, and the moon shone brightly. She and the rest of the family were suddenly awaked from sleep by a noise like that of the trampling of many horses; the house trembled and the pewter rattled on the shelves. They all sprang out of bed, and the affrightted children clung to their parents. “I cannot help you dear children,” said the good mother, “we must look to God for help.”
The Cape Ann earthquake came just 17 days after an earthquake estimated to have been 8.5-9.0 on the Richter scale struck in Lisbon, Portugal, killing at least 60,000 and causing untold damage.
There was no shortage of people sure they knew the impretus for the Cape Ann earthquake.
According to many ministers in and around Boston, “God’s wrath had brought this earthquake upon Boston,” according to the Massachusetts Historical Society.
In “Verses Occasioned by the Earthquakes in the Month of November, 1755,” Jeremiah Newland, a Taunton resident who was active in religious activities in the Colony, wrote that the earthquake was a reminder of the importance of obedience to God.
“It is becaufe we broke thy Laws,
that thou didst shake the Earth.

O what a Day the Scriptures say,
the EARTHQUAKE doth foretell;
O turn to God; lest by his Rod,
he cast thee down to Hell.”
Boston Pastor Jonathan Mayhew warned in a sermon that the 1755 earthquakes in Massachusetts and Portugal were “judgments of heaven, at least as intimations of God’s righteous displeasure, and warnings from him.”
There were some, though, who attempted to put forth a scientific explanation for the earthquake.
Well, sort of.
In a lecture delivered just a week after the earthquake, Harvard mathematics professor John Winthrop said the quake was the result of a reaction between “vapors” and “the heat within the bowels of the earth.” But even Winthrop made sure to state that his scientific theory “does not in the least detract from the majesty … of God.”
It has been 260 years since the Cape Ann earthquake. Some experts, including Boston College seismologist John Ebel, think New England could be due for another significant quake.
In a recent Boston Globe report, Ebel said the New England region “can expect a 4 to 5 magnitude quake every decade, a 5 to 6 every century, and a magnitude 6 or above every thousand years.”
If the Cape Ann earthquake occurred today, “the City of Boston could sustain billions of dollars of earthquake damage, with many thousands injured or killed,” according to a 1997 study by the US Army Corps of Engineers.

Israeli forces kill Palestinian outside the Temple Walls: Revelation 11

Palestinian men mourn a man shot dead, at the morgue of a hospital in Jenin in the occupied West Bank, on April 27, 2022 (AFP/JAAFAR ASHTIYEH)

Israeli forces kill Palestinian in new West Bank raid

A poster of the 28-year-old Palestinian assailant from Jenin, Raad Hazem, who killed three Israeli civilians and wounded 12 at a Tel Aviv bar before he was shot dead, is displayed in Jenin in the occupied West Bank, on April 12, 2022 (AFP/JAAFAR ASHTIYEH)

Palestinian men mourn a man shot dead, at the morgue of a hospital in Jenin in the occupied West Bank, on April 27, 2022 (AFP/JAAFAR ASHTIYEH)


Wed, April 27, 2022, 12:17 AM·3 min read

Israeli forces killed a Palestinian man in the West Bank flashpoint city of Jenin Wednesday, in what the army called its latest “counterterrorism” raid following a series of attacks in Israel since late March.

The army said that during the operation at Jenin’s refugee camp, troops used “live ammunition” after being targeted with gunfire and explosives by Palestinian “rioters”.

The Palestinian health ministry identified the man killed as Ahmad Massad, 18, from Burqin village in the north of the occupied West Bank. He was shot in the head, a hospital official told the official Palestinian news agency WAFA.

The army said 12 people were arrested in the overnight raids at several West Bank locations. The Palestinian Prisoner’s Club group put the number of arrests at 17.

More than a thousand people gathered for Massad’s funeral in Burqin, and masked gunmen fired volleys into the air as his body was taken from his family home.

A band with the logo of the Palestinian armed movement Islamic Jihad was wrapped around his forehead.

Israeli security forces have stepped up operations in recent weeks in the West Bank — particularly around Jenin, where there are active fighters from several Palestinian armed groups.

Raad Hazem — who killed three Israelis in a shooting spree in a Tel Aviv nightlife district last month, before being shot dead after a massive man-hunt — hailed from Jenin’s refugee camp.

During the overnight operation, the army said it also delivered a demolition notice to Hazem’s family home.

Gunman’s home targeted –

The destruction of assailants’ homes is a common Israeli practice, and condemned by critics as an illegal form of collective punishment.

The Tel Aviv shooter’s father Fathi Hazem and brother Hamam are both wanted by Israel.

Hours after the demolition notice was handed over, the father appeared in a video that then circulated widely in Palestinian media.

He accused Israel of labelling all Palestinian youths as “terrorists” and told a small crowd, speaking at an unknown location, that “we will defeat them, God willing, and soon”.

Hamam Hazem told AFP earlier this month that the family had no prior knowledge of Raad’s plans for the Tel Aviv attack.

– ‘Escalate the resistance’ –

Clashes between Israeli forces and Palestinians are common in the West Bank, a territory occupied by Israel since 1967.

Violence has intensified in the territory and in Israel, at a time the Muslim holy month of Ramadan and the Jewish holiday of Passover overlapped this month.

The mounting violence since March 22 has killed 12 Israelis, including an Arab-Israeli police officer, and two Ukrainians in four separate attacks inside Israel.

A total of 26 Palestinians and three Israeli Arabs have died during the same period, among them the perpetrators of the attacks and those killed by Israeli security forces in West Bank operations.

Massad’s death follows that of another Palestinian killed Tuesday, when Israeli forces stormed a West Bank refugee camp near Jericho.

Violent clashes have also rocked the Al-Aqsa mosque compound in Israeli-annexed east Jerusalem, sparking fears of another conflict after last year’s 11-day war between Israel and armed groups in the Gaza Strip.

Following the Al-Aqsa clashes, isolated rocket fire towards Israel from the Gaza Strip resumed, prompting Israeli reprisals on targets linked to Hamas, the Islamist group which controls the coastal enclave.

Palestinians have been angered by an uptick in Jewish visits to the Al-Aqsa compound, Islam’s third-holiest site. It is also Judaism’s holiest place and known to Jews as the Temple Mount.

In an apparent attempt to ease tensions, Foreign Minister Yair Lapid said Sunday that Israel was committed to the “status quo” at Al-Aqsa, meaning an adherence to long-standing convention allowing Jews to visit the compound but not pray there.

Concerns of fresh Al-Aqsa clashes are building, though, ahead of Friday prayers at the compound, with the end of Ramadan approaching in early May.

The Palestinian armed movement Islamic Jihad in a statement Wednesday called on followers “to escalate the resistance in all its forms”.


Threat of the First Nuclear War: Revelation 8

Threat of Nuclear War

Daily Times

APRIL 27, 2022

For once, the threat of nuclear war is not coming from the Pak-India theatre, but it doesn’t mean that warnings out of the Russia-Ukraine war are any less real and dangerous.

Moscow has finally drawn a line around the US and its allies providing any more lethal weapons for Kyiv, but since Washington hasn’t listened so far, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov was more or less forced to dig deep and use the N-word once again. “The danger is serious, real,” he said during a TV interview on Monday.

Even though the use of nuclear weapons is simply unacceptable and it ought to really worry the international community that it is being talked about so often and so openly, other aspects of the war are also cause for very serious concern.

Not that any party should just watch from the side and let their allies be wiped out in front of their eyes, yet the way America and some of its allies have been arming not just the Ukrainian army but also freelancing rebels is a long-term security risk in its own right. Clearly, nobody learned any lessons from the fallout of the first Afghan war, when militias-armed to the teeth-took to the war business once the superpowers were done playing in their front yard.

US interference might have slowed the Russian advance, and even cost their army very dearly, but is there really a long term plan at play here? Not very likely because in that case, the so-called sponsors of the resistance would have been a little more careful about who gets to play with the toys that they are sending to the warzone.

Some right wing militias that find themselves nicely armed and promoted to the frontlines just because it suits everybody right now are bad news not just for Russia, but also for Ukraine and its neighbours since they’ve been trying to keep them quiet for a while now. Yet after this war, regardless of how it ends, they will be more powerful and dangerous than ever and even carry a badge of political legitimacy.

It makes far more sense for the Americans to listen to the Russians, for once, and make sure everybody’s security concerns are addressed. It’s definitely a far better alternative than continuing with the war and arming any and everybody who raises their hands. *

Time running out to save Obama Iran nuclear deal

An Iranian flag flies at the Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran.
An Iranian flag flies at the Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran. Photograph: Atta Kenare/AFP/Getty Images

Time running out to reach Iran nuclear deal, warn experts

Letter signed by former diplomats says Iran close to developing nuclear weapons capability

Patrick Wintour, Diplomatic editorTue 26 Apr 2022 11.53 EDT

Leading former diplomats including seven ex-UK foreign and defence ministers have warned the Iran nuclear talks are heading to “corrosive stalemate devolving into a cycle of increased nuclear tension” and urged Tehran and Washington to show more flexibility.

Year-long talks in Vienna on reviving the deal and for the US, which was pulled out of the agreement by Donald Trump, to lift sanctions on Iran have in effect ground to a halt in a dispute over whether the west will lift the foreign terrorist organisation designation, and sanctions, against the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC).

The former diplomats said in an open letter that a final draft text of a renewed agreement was ready to be signed and warned that “for US and European leaders to let slip the opportunity to defuse a nuclear crisis in the Middle East would be a grave mistake”.

Washington says the sanctions on the IRGC do not relate to the nuclear deal, but to its long-term terrorist behaviour in the region, including in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon.

The signatories to the open letter, coordinated the European Leadership Network, include former senior diplomats in 14 countries including the former foreign secretary Jack Straw, former defence secretaries Lord King and Des Browne, as well as the former Conservative Middle East minister Alistair Burt.

They say the legacy of Trump’s strategic error in leaving the agreement “can today be measured in the tons of enriched uranium Iran has since accumulated, including uranium enriched to near-weapons grade; in the thousands of advanced centrifuges it is spinning; and, in the rapidly dwindling timeframe for Iran to reach a breakout capability”.

The US left the nuclear deal in 2018. Joe Biden on his election as president said he wanted to rejoin so long as Iran came back into compliance with the agreement on nuclear non-proliferation.

One proposal that Israel fears the US administration will adopt is to retain sanctions on the elite foreign arm of the IRGC, the al-Quds force, but lift the designation on the IRGC domestically.

The letter’s authors acknowledge the politics of the foreign terrorist organisation designation are difficult but insist “there are ways to provide the counter-terrorism benefits of the current designation while still accommodating Iran’s specific request, and consider it imperative that these be fully explored”.

“For its part, Iran should not expect a nuclear deal to address broader areas of disagreement between Tehran and Washington. Both sides must approach this final phase of negotiation with an understanding that the strategic implications of failure would be grave and profound.”

Hamas terrorists accused of causing terrorism outside the Temple Walls: Revelation 11

Israel accused Hamas terrorists of causing “an outbreak of violence” in Jerusalem

ByEdit Porkson

 Apr 25, 2022

Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid claimed that extremists used the Al Aqsa mosque “as a base” to attack with stones and explosives

Palestinian protesters clash with Israeli security forces at the compound that houses the Al-Aqsa mosque, known to Muslims as the Noble Sanctuary and to Jews as the Temple Mount, in Jerusalem’s Old City (REUTERS/Ammar Awad)< p class=”paragraph”>Israel on Sunday accused the Palestinian terrorist groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad of “kidnapping the Al Aqsa Mosque” to provoke “an outbreak of violence in Jerusalem and a violent conflict throughout the country”.

“Hamas and Islamic Jihad extremists entered al-Aqsa early every morning, armed themselves with weapons inside the mosque, threw stones and explosives from inside. They used it as a base to incite violent protests”, affirmed the foreign minister, Yair Lapid, about the disturbances in the Esplanade of the Mosques, which have been repeated for two consecutive Fridays of Ramadan raising tension in the area.

Last Friday’s riots left 57 Palestinians injured and those of the previous Friday more than 150 after clashes with Israeli security forces.

Lapid insisted that the police response was “measured and proportional” to the dispatch of between 200 and 300 rioters by “Palestinian terrorist organizations”.

“They do this to provoke, to force the Israeli police to enter the mosque and get them out of there,” said the Israeli Foreign Minister about the situation in the Esplanade of the Mosques, controlled by a Jordanian foundation and where the Israeli police only enter when the security of the area is at risk.

“If we hadn’t removed these troublemakers, there would have been a disaster. If you don’t remove the rioters immediately from the start, that leads to more violence later,” said the minister, who underscored the Israeli government’s commitment to maintaining the status quo in the compound.

According to the status quo, in force since 1967, Jordan guards the Esplanade of the Mosques, where worship is reserved only for Muslims, while Jews can only enter as visitors and pray in the nearby Wailing Wall.

However, more and more Jewish settlers sneak to pray in the area where the Second Temple is believed to have been located, something seen as a provocation by the Arab world and the Palestinians, for whom Al Aqsa is part of their national identity, and especially in Ramadan, which this year coincided with Pesach or Jewish Passover.

Lapid also condemned these visits by “Jewish extremists”, although he clarified that they are a minority and that Israel cannot control what each individual Jew does, in addition to categorically denying that Israel is planning to divide the compound by religion.

For his part, the president of the United States, Joe Biden, accepted this Sunday an invitation from the prime minister Israeli, Naftali Bennet, to visit Israel in the coming months, during a telephone conversation in which they also discussed the violence in Jerusalem and the possible new nuclear agreement with Iran.

With information from AFP

Nuclear Weapons Market Expected To Grow Before the Bowls of Wrath

Nuclear Weapons Market Expected To Grow By 73% In 10 Years

In 2020, the nuclear bomb and missiles market was valued at $72.6 billion, but current projections estimate that it will reach a value of $126.3 billion within the next 10 years. This conjecture is formed given increased tensions between a large part of the world and Russia following their invasion of Ukraine. as well as China’s relations with their neighbors Hong Kong and Taiwan. China has been looming over and threatening their independence for years. Many nations feel threatened by the precarious positions other countries find themselves in and are bolstering their defenses after observing an increase in global conflict. Another reason is that investment in the weapons sector was put on pause during the rise of COVID-19, as many nations chose to allocate resources toward health and social welfare programs. Now that the effects of COVID-19 are not being felt quite as heavily, many governments are looking to allocate those funds to the original plans they had to grow their military capabilities.

In 2020, North America was the dominating region in terms of nuclear weapon market share, holding a majority of the shares in the market. However, the global nuclear missiles and bombs market across Asia-Pacific is expected to register the highest compound annual growth rate of 6.5% during this upcoming period, due to an increase in initiatives taken by the governments of India, Pakistan, and China. While the latter countries are expected to see a tremendous amount of growth in terms of missile and nuclear defense, United States President Joe Biden has also put out a spending proposal that is the highest the country has seen in peace times.

According to the Congressional Budget Office, this would cost about $634 billion in total over the 10-year period. President Biden has also grown increasingly worried about Pakistan’s acquisition of nuclear weapons. While he was president, Barack Obama once said that “the single biggest threat to U.S. security, both short term, medium-term and long term, would be the possibility of a terrorist organization obtaining a nuclear weapon.” This worry could become a reality, given that the Taliban terrorist organization gained control of Pakistan in 2021. 

The bombs and missile market is not a free one, however, and many international treaties and agreements will prevent the market from reaching its full potential. Additionally, Britain, China, France, Russia, and the U.S. at the start of the year issued a joint statement saying there could be no winners in a nuclear war and it must be avoided, as it would be disastrous and fruitless for every party involved. While decreasing information problems and alerting other nations of your nuclear capabilities does prevent war, it escalates global anxiety. The growth of this market may be good news for these defense technology corporations, but it is bad news for the world overall as it increases the threat of nuclear conflict.

Second Strike Capability: Revelation 8

Indian navy submarine INS Arihant. Photo by Chanakyathegreat, Wikimedia Commons.

Indian navy submarine INS Arihant. Photo by Chanakyathegreat, Wikimedia Commons.

Second Strike Capability: Pakistan’s Babur 3 Versus India’s INS Arihant – Analysis

   Rauf Khalid*  

By Rauf Khalid*

Second strike capability refers to the attempt by nuclear-weapon states to secure their nuclear installations from the first strike by an adversary and make them applicable for retaliation against that specific hostile act. The prime focus of second strike capability is to deter the enemy from attempting a first strike. In the contemporary world, a nuclear submarine is considered the most reliable source of assuring second strike capability.

The Nuclear Dynamics of India & Pakistan

Pakistan shares a contentious history with India since its independence; all the capabilities of Pakistan are intended for India. Since the advent of nuclear weapons in South Asia in 1998, both India and Pakistan have been involved in a nuclear arms race, which has led to the need for the attainment of second strike capability on both sides. India showed interest in the nuclear triad since the very early ages of its nuclearization mainly because it believes in full-spectrum deterrence.

On the other hand, Pakistan believes in credible minimum deterrence, which stopped Pakistan from attempting to establish a nuclear triad in the early stages. However, India managed to attain second strike capability by the development of a nuclear-powered submarine equipped with ballistic missiles (SSBN) – the INS Arihant.

After the development of the INS Arihant, it was inevitable for Pakistan to absorb the asymmetry in the naval domain against India. The consequence of this is the instability in the region. In response, Pakistan went for the development of the Babur 3 cruise missile, which is a submarine-launched missile and declared itself to be qualified for the second strike capability.

How Viable is Pakistan’s Second Strike Capability?

Pakistan’s Conventional Submarines

The proportionality of the credibility of second strikes of Pakistan and India is in question because there is an asymmetry between an SSBN and a submarine-launched cruise missile (SLCM). Hence, Pakistan’s second strike capability lacks credibility, and needs more furtherance, since just modifying a conventional submarine and equipping it with cruise missiles cannot effectively respond to the second strike capability of India’s INS Arihant.

Secondly, conventional submarines work on diesel engine motors and therefore, are unable to hide and deceive the enemy sonars due to the sound vibrations. Moreover, Pakistan has modified only a single type of submarine, which alone is not able to counter the Indian aggression; it needs a crew of more submarines. So, the modified submarine of Pakistan is not able to pose a credible threat to India. Resultantly, making the deterrence compromised.

Babur 3 Cruise Missile & the Significance of NC3

The Babur 3 missile is claimed as the main component of Pakistan’s second strike capability. The operational range of Babur 3 is 450km, which means it can reach the coastal cities of India but not its pivotal territories. In case India deploys its nukes outside the 450km range of Babur 3, Pakistan wouldn’t be able to perform a second strike against India. This job can be done effectively by a medium-range ballistic missile (submarine-based), in order to pose a credible posture of second strike deterrence.

Another very important factor of the second strike capability of a country is NC3, meaning command and control along with communication. The real-time information gathering in war scenarios and its transformation to the deployed submarine is very significant in maintaining deterrence. The triggering of a second strike is automated by the NC3, along with the given hierarchy of command and control given to the commanding officer and the executive officer of the submarine.

The operational command is dependent on the decision of the commanding officer and the executive officer of the submarine. According to experts, Pakistan comparatively lacks in this domain as well. The launching of Babur 3 missiles for the purpose of second strike capability requires a strategic NC3, but Pakistan still relies on conventional command and control systems that are not fit for nuclear operations.

Any miscalculation can lead to the accidental triggering of the nuclear arsenal, resulting in a global catastrophe. Hence, when it comes to maintaining deterrence against India, Pakistan has to face another challenge due to the lack of advanced strategic command and control systems.

Opting for Full-scale Deterrence

In support of the above-mentioned arguments, it can be deduced that Pakistan’s second strike capability is not compelling and unable to pose a reasonable threat to the massive Indian naval expansion. Pakistan needs to invest in building an SSBN in order to effectively deter the enemy and counter India’s INS Arihant. Without that, the challenges and limiting factors of the present second strike capability cannot be covered.

Instead of relying on short-range SLCMs, Pakistan needs a long-range submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) that covers the major territories of India. Considering the small economy of Pakistan, the other policy option for Pakistan is to propose the agenda of declaring the Indian Ocean Region as a “nuclear-weapons-free zone” on international platforms, in order to haunt the aggressive Indian naval posture.

Pakistan’s involvement in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and the investments in the Gwadar Port demand that Pakistan maintain a hold in some portions of the Indian Ocean. This can be considered as one of the reasons for opting for full-scale deterrence against India in the naval domain. The protection and security of these economic hubs along with Pakistan’s Sea Lines of Communication (SLOC) is also very important for preventing the enemy from using these unsecured spots as weak points in case of any misadventure.

Moreover, the development of SSBN by Pakistan also has implications for regional stability. The conventional asymmetry between the two rival states of South Asia demands credible deterrence stability on both sides. The development of credible and assured second strike capability on both sides will enhance deterrence, lowering the chances of failure of deterrence.

*About the author: Rauf Khalid is a student at National Defense University, Islamabad. He is currently pursuing a bachelor’s degree in strategic studies. He has been a research intern at SASSI University. His areas of interest include traditional and non-traditional security issues, national security, the threat perception of Pakistan, and international politics, specifically of East Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East. He can be contacted at

Source: This article was published at