USGS Evidence Shows Power of the Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

New Evidence Shows Power of East Coast Earthquakes
Virginia Earthquake Triggered Landslides at Great DistancesReleased: 

11/6/2012 8:30:00 AM USGS.gov

Earthquake shaking in the eastern United States can travel much farther and cause damage over larger areas than previously thought.

U.S. Geological Survey scientists found that last year’s magnitude 5.8 earthquake in Virginia triggered landslides at distances four times farther—and over an area 20 times larger—than previous research has shown.

“We used landslides as an example and direct physical evidence to see how far-reaching shaking from east coast earthquakes could be,”

said Randall Jibson, USGS scientist and lead author of this study. “Not every earthquake will trigger landslides, but we can use landslide distributions to estimate characteristics of earthquake energy and how far regional ground shaking could occur.”

“Scientists are confirming with empirical data what more than 50 million people in the eastern U.S. experienced firsthand: this was one powerful earthquake,” said USGS Director Marcia McNutt. “Calibrating the distance over which landslides occur may also help us reach back into the geologic record to look for evidence of past history of major earthquakes from the Virginia seismic zone.”

This study will help inform earthquake hazard and risk assessments as well as emergency preparedness, whether for landslides or other earthquake effects.

This study also supports existing research showing that although earthquakes  are less frequent in the East, their damaging effects can extend over a much larger area as compared to the western United States.

The research is being presented today at the Geological Society of America conference, and will be published in the December 2012 issue of the

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

The USGS found that the farthest landslide from the 2011 Virginia earthquake was 245 km (150 miles) from the epicenter. This is by far the greatest landslide distance recorded from any other earthquake of similar magnitude. Previous studies of worldwide earthquakes indicated that landslides occurred no farther than 60 km (36 miles) from the epicenter of a magnitude 5.8 earthquake.

“What makes this new study so unique is that it provides direct observational evidence from the largest earthquake to occur in more than 100 years in the eastern U.S,” said Jibson. “Now that we know more about the power of East Coast earthquakes, equations that predict ground shaking might need to be revised.”

It is estimated that approximately one-third of the U.S. population could have felt last year’s earthquake in Virginia, more than any earthquake in U.S. history.

About 148,000 people reported their ground-shaking experiences caused by the earthquake on the USGS “Did You Feel It?” website. Shaking reports came from southeastern Canada to Florida and as far west as Texas.

In addition to the great landslide distances recorded, the landslides from the 2011 Virginia earthquake occurred in an area 20 times larger than expected from studies of worldwide earthquakes. Scientists plotted the landslide locations that were farthest out and then calculated the area enclosed by those landslides. The observed landslides from last year’s Virginia earthquake enclose an area of about 33,400 km2

, while previous studies indicated an expected area of about 1,500 km2

from an earthquake of similar magnitude.

“The landslide distances from last year’s Virginia earthquake are remarkable compared to historical landslides across the world and represent the largest distance limit ever recorded,” said Edwin Harp, USGS scientist and co-author of this study. “There are limitations to our research, but the bottom line is that we now have a better understanding of the power of East Coast earthquakes and potential damage scenarios.”

The difference between seismic shaking in the East versus the West is due in part to the geologic structure and rock properties that allow seismic waves to travel farther without weakening.

Learn more

about the 2011 central Virginia earthquake.

UN nuclear agency ‘concerned’ over Iran’s lack of cooperation: Daniel 8

The head of the United Nations Atomic Energy Agency said Tuesday that he is “extremely concerned” about Iran’s lack of cooperation as the EU seeks to restart talks to resurrect the 2015 nuclear deal.

Negotiations between world powers and Iran have been stalled since mid-March, with negotiators seeking to return to the landmark agreement that limited the Islamic republic’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.

Iran announced Monday that EU diplomat Enrique Mora, who chairs the negotiations, will visit Tehran this week, as the US, which is seeking to return to the deal it unilaterally left in 2018, expressed optimism for progress.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is “trying to clarify a number of still open matters with Iran”, agency head Rafael Grossi told a European Parliament committee.

“I am referring to the fact that we, in the last few months, were able to identify traces of enriched uranium in places that had never been declared by Iran as places where any activity was taking place,” he said.

“The situation does not look very good. Iran, for the time being, has not been forthcoming in the kind of information we need from them… We are extremely concerned about this,” he said.

The IAEA and Iran announced in March that they had agreed an approach for resolving issues crucial to reviving the 2015 nuclear accord.

At the time, Grossi said the UN agency and Iran had “decided to try a practical, pragmatic approach” to overcome “a number of important matters”.

Some documents are to be exchanged between the two sides by May 22.

The aim is to settle outstanding questions that the IAEA has about the past presence of nuclear material at undeclared sites in Iran.

Iran “should be at the top of our preoccupations in spite of the drama that is unfolding in Ukraine,” Grossi said on Tuesday, referring to Russia’s invasion of its neighbor.

He stated that talks to resurrect the nuclear deal were “on hold,” but the Vienna-based IAEA was “of course still hopeful that some agreement will be reached within a reasonable timeframe.”

“Although we have to recognize that the window of opportunity could be closed anytime,” he added.

Tactical nuke may be used on Ukraine TODAY: Revelation 16

Putin warning: Tactical nuke may be used on Ukraine TODAY: ‘Only way to change war’

VLADIMIR PUTIN could drop a tactical nuclear weapon on Ukraine today amid Victory Day celebrations to “change the shape of the war”, an expert has warned Express.co.uk.

By JACOB PAUL

07:01, Mon, May 9, 2022 | UPDATED: 08:36, Mon, May 9, 2022

Putin could ‘broaden enemy’ to NATO and US on May victory day

On May 9, Russia celebrates Victory Day to commemorate the country’s victory over Nazi Germany in 1945. James Nixey, director of the Russia-Eurasia Programme at Chatham House told CNN that the celebration is “designed to show off to the home crowd, to intimidate the opposition and to please the dictator of the time”. And according to weapons expert Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, Russia could use this special day to send its most terrifying warning yet.

He told Express.co.uk: “The biggest concern is perhaps the use or direct threat of use of a tactical/battlefield nuclear weapon.

“If things are still going so badly on May 9, which is likely, Putin could decide that a nuke is the only way to change the shape of the war.

“Western leaders have been slightly ambiguous about what would happen if Putin used a tactical nuke.”

A tactical nuclear weapon differs from “strategic” nuclear weapons in that they can be used over relatively short distances.

“Tactical” refers to a wide range of weaponry, including smaller bombs and missiles that are considered “battlefield” weapons.

Putin could drop a nuke on Ukraine “tomorrow” (Image: Getty )

Victory day is a military celebration on May 9 commemorating Russia’s defeat of the Nazis (Image: Getty )

Strategic nukes on the other hand refer to the bombs that the US and the USSR threatened to use during the Cold War.

Mr de Bretton-Gordon urged the West to stand up to Russia to stop it from deploying any nuclear weapons.

He told Express.co.uk: “I think we need them to state very clearly that even a small nuclear weapon would lead to NATO directly targeting strategic Russian targets with sophisticated conventional weapons.

“These targets would be any nuclear launchers in or around Ukraine, command and control sites, basically making further Russian advances in Ukraine untenable.”

The Precipice of the First Nuclear War: Revelation 8

Pakistan at the precipice

The challenges facing Pakistan are such that a single party may not be able to find a way out

---

Kamran YousafMay 09, 2022

This writer is a senior foreign affairs correspondent at The Express Tribune

---

During the week ending on 30 April, the country’s central bank had mere $10.5 billion reserves, not enough even to cover an import bill for two months. The trade and current account deficits are widening as the number of steps taken by the previous government to arrest the slide has made little or no impact. The country is in desperate need of foreign reserves to bring some semblance of certainty to the fragile economy.

The government of Shehbaz Sharif, which has been in the office for just about a month, has its work cut out already. As has been the case in the past the first stopover of any new Prime Minister of Pakistan has always been Saudi Arabia. Shehbaz undertook the visit to Saudi Arabia in the hope to get another financial bailout package. Riyadh has extended several bailout packages in the past. The last one in October when then PM Imran Khan visited Riyadh and was able to secure a $4.2 billion financial package. As part of the package, Saudi Arabia deposited $3 billion with the SBP while the $1.2 was earmarked for purchase of oil on deferred payment. But conditions attached to that bailout package underlined the level of distrust shown even by Pakistan’s “closest friends” Under the terms of the agreement, Saudi Arabia can withdraw the $3 billion deposits on a short notice of 72 hours.

Such conditionalities were unheard of in the past. Saudi Arabia previously extended similar financial assistance to Pakistan but on most occasions converted it into grants when Pakistan was unable to repay. After the May 1998 nuclear tests, Pakistan faced crippling economic sanctions. Saudi Arabia came to Pakistan’s rescue by supplying oil on deferred payment for several years, but later converted the loan into grant, thus giving a huge relief to dollar-strapped Pakistan. Similarly, when the PML-N government took charge in 2013, Saudi Arabia gifted $1.5 billion to Pakistan.

But that all is part of history now. The reason why even our best friends are now reluctant to extend financial support to us is because they realise we are always seeking bailout packages while hardly trying to put our house in order. There is a limit even to test your friends. We have reached a point where our friends are fed up with this “begging” policy. This means we are fast running out of options to run this country on bailouts. The situation requires a plan of action that must address structural problems in our economy so that Pakistan does not need injections of dollars from outside.

However, that is not possible with the prevailing political instability where rivals are competing for their own interests. For former PM Imran Khan, immediate election is the way forward. But the fact of the matter is that mere elections will not address Pakistan’s economic woes. For example, what are the guarantees that Imran will accept the results and will not come on the streets if his party fails to win the polls? It is certain Imran wants nothing short of victory in the elections. Also, even if he wins and wins with a two-thirds majority, can he deliver? His nearly-four year rule suggests that he may be a good orator but he lacks a plan to pull the country out of the current quagmire.

In fact, the challenges facing Pakistan are such that a single party may not be able to find a way out. Therefore, before elections, there has to be a grand dialogue among all stakeholders to assess the situation and suggest a way forward. At least on certain economic and foreign policy issues, Pakistan needs a bipartisan consensus, without which no government will be able to initiate the process of necessary reforms. The choice is clear: either let this country slip further into chaos or preempt a looming disaster!

The Russian Military Doctrine: Revelation 16

Asked if Russia would rule out a preemptive tactical nuclear strike on Ukraine, Russia’s deputy foreign minister said on Tuesday that a decision on the possible use of nuclear weapons was clearly set out in Russia’s military doctrine, RIA reported.

“We have a military doctrine – everything is written there,” Alexander Grushko was quoted by state news agency RIA as saying.

Russia’s official military deployment principles allow for the use of nuclear weapons if they – or other types of weapons of mass destruction – are used against it, or if the Russian state faces an existential threat from conventional weapons.

The decision to use Russia’s vast nuclear arsenal, the biggest in the world, rests with the Russian president, currently Vladimir Putin.

Russia’s invasion has killed thousands of people, displaced nearly 10 million, and raised fears of a wider confrontation between Russia and the United States – by far the world’s biggest nuclear powers.

U.S. Central Intelligence Agency Director William Burns said on Saturday that Putin believes he cannot afford to lose in Ukraine and cautioned that the West could not ignore the risk of the use of tactical nuclear weapons by Moscow.

“We don’t see, as an intelligence community, practical evidence at this point of Russian planning for a deployment or even use of tactical nuclear weapons,” Burns said.

He cautioned, though, that “the stakes are very high for Putin’s Russia.”

NUCLEAR STRIKE?

A decree signed by Putin on June 2, 2020, said Russia views its nuclear weapons as “exclusively a means of deterrence”.

It repeats the phraseology of the military doctrine but adds details about four circumstances under which a nuclear strike would be ordered. These include reliable information of a ballistic missile attack on Russia and an enemy’s attack “on critical state or military installations of the Russian Federation, the incapacitation of which would lead to the disruption of a response by nuclear forces.”

Putin, who has repeatedly expressed resentment over the way the West treated Russia after the 1991 fall of the Soviet Union, says Ukraine has been used by the United States to threaten Russia.

He justified his Feb. 24 order for a special military operation by saying Ukraine had persecuted Russian speakers and the United States was keen to enlarge the NATO military alliance in a way that would endanger Russia.

U.S. President Joe Biden casts Putin’s invasion of Ukraine as a fight in a much broader global battle between democracy and autocracy. He has also called Putin a war criminal and has said the former KGB spy cannot remain in power.

Ukraine dismisses Russian claims that it persecuted Russian speakers and says it is fighting for its survival. Russia denies Ukrainian and Western accusations that its forces committed war crimes.

Will independents join Antichrist’s coalition?

Analysis: Will independents join Sadr-led coalition?

May 10, 2022 – 8:43 AM News Code : 1256179 Source : Al Waght NewsLink:

A key principle in pragmatic politics suggests that “the validity of any political doctrine depends, to a large extent, on the success of that doctrine when it is actually implemented. In this view, to achieve the desired result, the decision makers should look realistically at the political situation; that is, reality as it is and not as it should be.

AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA): A key principle in pragmatic politics suggests that “the validity of any political doctrine depends, to a large extent, on the success of that doctrine when it is actually implemented. In this view, to achieve the desired result, the decision makers should look realistically at the political situation; that is, reality as it is and not as it should be. 

This vision is considerably showing itself in the performance of the major actors these days in the politics of Iraq, a country where six months after the parliamentary elections, the political groups are yet to reach an agreement to form a new government, giving rise to a limbo that can push the country to a new political crisis if allowed to continue.

A look at the post-election developments over the past few months and after the alliances’ approximate weight became known, it is clear to the Iraqi observers that neither of these alliances, namely the Sadrist-led Salvation Coalition and the Shiite Coordination Framework (SCF), are independently capable of forming a new government. In the middle of this uncertainty, the Iraqi society expects a creative move for an exit. 

 This expectation was created for the last time following the end of Muqtada al-Sadr’s 40-day deadline to other political groups to form a cabinet. Albeit, the new al-Sadr initiative for post-deadline period hardly injects new hope into public about the change of the current political situation. 

In al-Sadr’s new initiative, he invited independent members of parliament to join the Salvation Coalition, which he believes is the majority coalition. 

“We urge them to form an independent group with at least 40 members away from the Coordination Framework, which has lost its opportunity,” Sadr tweeted on Wednesday, calling the independents the third largest faction in parliament. 

He added that independent MPs should join a larger coalition to form an independent government. This coalition will vote in favor of a government formed by Sadrist Movement, Kurdistan Democratic Party, and the Sunni Sovereignty bloc. The Sadrist Movement, according to the statement, will not interfere in their ministers choosing.

“We also emphasize that they will have a maximum of 15 days to do so in order to expedite the end of the nation’s suffering,” the statement read. 

The independent MPs saw a sharp rise in their significance after the Federal Court ruling suggesting necessity of presence of two-third of the lawmakers for a formal parliament session. This motivated al-Sadr to resort to them as the only choice possibly contributing to the government formation. Now it remains to see if the independents would join a Sadr-led coalition. 

Al-Sadr’s initiative will certainly not easily lead to the expected result, and the challenges ahead are far from small. After all, he has already made every effort to win the votes of the independents, and some 0f the independents are already part of the tripartite Salvation Coalition. So, it is not that the independents have not joined al-Sadr yet. 

The fact is that many of the MPs who entered the parliament as independents were introduced with the support of traditional political forces, so a number of them from the very beginning aligned themselves with these political forces. Therefore, an expectation of dramatic change in the orientation of the independent lawmakers is unrealistic. 

In the other side, the SCF more than once has proven that it strongly holds the third guarantor to block formation of the parliament sessions. On March 30, once again, with the absence of more than 140 members of parliament in the president election session, the session fell from officiality, proving the power of the SCF to all. 

In the past few weeks, the continuation of the political deadlock not only challenged al-Sadr’s power to attract the independents but also caused fallings in his own coalition. On April 27, Ali al-Zubaidi, of Fatah bloc, said that over 10 members of al-Sadr coalition defected and joined the SCF. 

But while chances of al-Sadr’s new initiative making a change are slim, the initiatives by the rival SCF have proven more proportionate to the Iraqi political realities and also more implementable.