Authorities Expecting The Sixth Seal? (Revelation 6:12)

US Raises Threat of Quake but Lowers Risk for Towers

New York Times


JULY 17, 2014

Here is another reason to buy a megAuthorities Expecting The Sixth Seal? (Revelation 6:12)a-million-dollar apartment in a Manhattan high-rise: Earthquake forecast maps for New York City that a federal agency issued on Thursday indicate “a slightly lower hazard for tall buildings than previously thought.”

The agency, the United States Geodetic Survey, tempered its latest quake prediction with a big caveat.“The eastern U.S. has the potential for larger and more damaging earthquakes than considered in previous maps and assessments,” the agency said, citing the magnitude 5.8 quake that struck Virginia in 2011.

Federal seismologists based their projections of a lower hazard for tall buildings — “but still a hazard nonetheless,” they cautioned — on a lower likelihood of slow shaking from an earthquake occurring near the city, the type of shaking that typically causes more damage to taller structures.

“The tall buildings in Manhattan are not where you should be focusing,” said John Armbruster, a seismologist with the Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University. “They resonate with long period waves. They are designed and engineered to ride out an earthquake. Where you should really be worried in New York City is the common brownstone and apartment building and buildings that are poorly maintained.”

Mr. Armbruster was not involved in the federal forecast, but was an author of an earlier study that suggested that “a pattern of subtle but active faults makes the risk of earthquakes to the New York City area substantially greater than formerly believed.”

He noted that barely a day goes by without a New York City building’s being declared unsafe, without an earthquake. “If you had 30, 40, 50 at one time, responders would be overloaded,” he said.

The city does have an earthquake building code that went into effect in 1996, and that applies primarily to new construction.

A well-maintained building would probably survive a magnitude 5 earthquake fairly well, he said. The last magnitude 5 earthquake in the city struck in 1884. Another is not necessarily inevitable; faults are more random and move more slowly than they do in, say, California. But he said the latest federal estimate was probably raised because of the magnitude of the Virginia quake.“Could there be a magnitude 6 in New York?” Mr. Armbruster said. “In Virginia, in a 300 year history, 4.8 was the biggest, and then you have a 5.8. So in New York, I wouldn’t say a 6 is impossible.”

Mr. Armbruster said the Geodetic Survey forecast would not affect his daily lifestyle. “I live in a wood-frame building with a brick chimney and I’m not alarmed sitting up at night worried about it,” he said. “But society’s leaders need to take some responsibility.” 

The Inevitable- Iran Nukes: Daniel 8

Give Iran Nukes, Says Quincy Institute’s New Iran Expert

Iran should be allowed to build a nuclear weapon, according to the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft’s newest hire, Roxane Farmanfarmaian.

Farmanfarmaian, a policy analyst who focuses on Iran, earlier this month became a nonresident fellow at the isolationist think tank bankrolled by billionaires George Soros and Charles Koch. In a 2013 policy debate, Farmanfarmaian argued in favor of Iran building a nuclear bomb, saying the country would never use it to destroy Israel, even though the hardline regime has been threatening to do so for years and sponsors the top jihadist terrorists waging war on the Jewish state.

Farmanfarmaian joins a growing roster of Quincy Institute scholars who have pushed for increased engagement with Iran and promoted anti-Israel conspiracy theories from their perch at the think tank. This includes Trita Parsi, who formerly helmed the National Iranian American Council, a group accused of secretly lobbying on Iran’s behalf, and Stephen Walt, a longtime Israel critic who has pushed conspiracy theories about the Jewish state. Like many of her Quincy Institute colleagues, Farmanfarmaian has downplayed the threat posed by a nuclear-armed Iran and argued that Israel should learn to live with the threat of an Iranian bomb.

“If Iran was to bomb Israel, it would destroy Jerusalem, the third-holiest site in Islam,” Farmanfarmaian was quoted as saying during the debate, according to a press report published at the time. “It’s inconceivable that Iran would bomb Israel because it would isolate it.”

Israeli leaders and a wide array of regional experts disagree with this assertion.

Farmanfarmaian also argued in a 2020 op-ed published in the Nation that then-president Donald Trump’s assassination of Iranian general Qassem Soleimani was “a colossal strategic blunder.” Like other Quincy scholars and pro-Iran analysts, Farmanfarmaian argued the assassination would spark a global terror spree by Iran, a fear that never came to fruition.

She also described the general, who helmed Iran’s regional terror operations, as “charismatic and highly effective.”

Soleimani, “largely immune from the ambivalence with which many Iranians view the ruthless Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, operated for the most part outside the country as the respected head of the IRGC’s foreign arm, the elite Quds Force,” she wrote at the time. “Charismatic and highly effective, he gained admiration even among reformists for expanding Iran’s reach across the Shia Crescent, the land bridge connecting Iran to Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon.”

Farmanfarmaian went on to claim that the Soleimani assassination genuinely upset ordinary Iranians, even though the general was widely seen as the face of Tehran’s massive spending on foreign wars.

“The expressions of grief on the streets of Iran are genuine,” she wrote. “His assassination has brought the population closer to the leadership, despite recent protests, in shared outrage not only at Trump’s actions but also at the administration’s apparent disdain for Iran’s sovereign rights and its insulting rhetoric demanding that Iran ‘change its behavior.'”

Posted in: National Security

The Truth About the Australian Nuclear Horn: Daniel 7

The logo of the International Atomic Energy Agency is seen at IAEA headquarters during a board of governors meeting in Vienna, Austria, June 7, 2021. [Photo/Agencies] 

Hard to conclude AUKUS partnership not engaged in nuclear proliferation: China Daily editorial | Updated: 2022-09-18 19:27

Upon the establishment of their AUKUS alliance one year ago, the United Kingdom and the United States announced that they would transfer nuclear submarine technology to Australia.

The plan has met with fierce condemnation and opposition, not least from China which is generally viewed as being the target of the move, on the basis that it violates the nuclear non-proliferation treaty which the three countries are signatories to.

Under the plan, Australia will acquire at least eight nuclear submarines that IAEA chief Rafael Grossi has said will be fuelled by weapons-grade, or close to it, “very highly enriched uranium”.

As China said in a position paper sent to IAEA member states during this week’s quarterly meeting of the IAEA’s 35-nation Board of Governors in Vienna, “The AUKUS partnership involves the illegal transfer of nuclear weapon materials, making it essentially an act of nuclear proliferation”.

Since the position paper the Chinese side put forward questions both the legal basis for the AUKUS program and such issues as the interpretation of nuclear proliferation, the IAEA rules, and the mandate of the IAEA and its leadership, the issue has become a crucial test for the global nuclear watchdog. It needs to stay true to its mission of preserving peace via non-proliferation if it is to retain its authority.

“The IAEA, as a non-proliferation agency, would directly violate its own statute and the Non-Proliferation Treaty if it endorses the legality of the AUKUS countries’ proliferation activities”, as Wang Qun, Chinese permanent representative to the UN and other international organizations in Vienna, said.

Australia says it will be unable and unwilling to use the fuel in its submarines to make nuclear weapons since the vessels will have “welded power units” containing nuclear material that would need chemical processing for use in nuclear weapons, and it neither has nor wants the facilities to do that.

The AUKUS countries and the IAEA say the NPT allows so-called marine nuclear propulsion provided necessary arrangements are made with the IAEA.

China disagrees and says the AUKUS countries are seeking to take the IAEA “hostage” so they can “whitewash” their nuclear proliferation.

While the focus has been on the nuclear reactors that will power the submarines, it should also be noted that the vessels are to be based on the US navy’s latest Virginia-class submarines, which can launch both cruise and ballistic nuclear missiles.

Looking at the AUKUS deal within the bigger picture, although the Joe Biden administration’s nuclear posture review remains classified, which is in itself unusual, given the revamping of the US’ nuclear posture under the Trump administration — which made nuclear weapon use more matter of fact than let’s hope it never comes to that — along with the Pentagon’s desire for naval bases in North Australia, it seems naive to conclude that it does not constitute nuclear proliferation in one form or another.

A dangerous ‘mistake’ leading to the first nuclear war: Revelation 8

A dangerous ‘mistake’

RECENTLY, the Indian government sacked three Indian air force officials for accidentally firing a nuclear-capable, land-attack cruise missile, BrahMos, into Pakistani territory. It was startling to learn of the flaws in the Indian nuclear command authority. It took only three persons to launch strategic weapons that had the potential to annihilate the whole region. This weak command and control system of strategic weapons is a real and serious concern for neighbouring countries as well as the world at large.

The Philippines, purchasing the BrahMos missile, should also consider this malfunction in the system that led to the ‘accidental’ launch. The Indian government failed to answer some basic questions regarding the launch of the missile into Pakistan. It also does not address the security measures essential for the future safety of strategic weapons. What would happen if, God forbid, some other set of ‘three personnel’ repeat the same mistake? And if it has a warhead, that, too, a nuclear one, the consequences of the ‘mistake’ could be far from imagination. 

A strict and robust control and command system of strategic weapons is indispensable for preventing any mishandling of the weapons and for the security of the region as well as the country of its origin. Accidental launching of a missile is not a mistake that can be ignored and forgotten. India owes further explanation to the world and Pakistan if it is sincere in preventing any future ‘accidental’ launch.

On the other hand, Pakistan should also consider the fact that the missile was not intercepted immediately and flew around for three minutes inside Pakistani territory.

The presence of an aggressive and irresponsible neighbour like India means the armed forces should take effective measures to counter any misadventure in the future.

The restraint shown by Pakistan is really commendable, but India may one day have to pay dearly for testing the patience of a nuclear state that is in its neighbourhood.

Muhammad Ahsan Fareed

Published in Dawn, September 17th, 2022

How the first nuclear war would affect Earth: Revelation 8

Nuclear war: Stubby white mushroom cloud seen between high and low clouds over ocean with red haze.
The United States set off this nuclear explosion – called the Castle Bravo blast – at Bikini Atoll in the Marshall Islands on March 1, 1954. It spread radioactive contamination as far as Australia, Japan, the United States, Europe and India and helped prompt a treaty banning atmospheric testing of thermonuclear devices, signed in 1963. This year, researchers at LSU in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, said that their work showed that, if a nuclear war happened today, it would devastate Earth’s oceans and cause what they’re calling a Nuclear Little Ice Age. Image via the US Department of Defense/ Wikimedia Commons.

How nuclear war would affect Earth today

A nuclear war would devastate our oceans and our world, with some effects lasting thousands of years. That’s the conclusion of a new study led by Cheryl Harrison at Louisiana State University in Baton Rouge. She said in a statement:

It doesn’t matter who is bombing whom. It can be India and Pakistan or NATO and Russia. Once the smoke is released into the upper atmosphere, it spreads globally and affects everyone. 

These scientists’ simulations showed that it doesn’t matter whether the detonation of a nuclear arsenal came through a deliberate act of war, or through accident or hacking Their statement explained: 

In all of the researchers’ simulated scenarios, nuclear firestorms would release soot and smoke into the upper atmosphere that would block out the sun, resulting in crop failure around the world. In the first month following nuclear detonation, average global temperatures would plunge by about 13 degrees Fahrenheit (7 degrees C), a larger temperature change than in the last Ice Age. 

Ocean temperatures would drop quickly and would not return to their pre-war state even after the smoke clears. As the planet gets colder, sea ice expands by more than 6 million square miles and 6 feet deep in some basins blocking major ports including Beijing’s Port of Tianjin, Copenhagen and St. Petersburg. The sea ice would spread into normally ice-free coastal regions blocking shipping across the Northern Hemisphere making it difficult to get food and supplies into some cities such as Shanghai, where ships are not prepared to face sea ice.

The sudden drop in light and ocean temperatures, especially from the Arctic to the North Atlantic and North Pacific oceans, would kill the marine algae, which is the foundation of the marine food web, essentially creating a famine in the ocean. This would halt most fishing and aquaculture.

The scientists published their study in the peer-reviewed journal AGU Advances on July 7, 2022.

Where are the nuclear weapons?

Nine nations control more than 13,000 nuclear weapons on Earth, these scientists said. According to, the top three countries with nuclear weapons include Russia with 6,257, the United States with 5,550 and China with 350. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) aims to control the spread of nuclear weapons and reaches for disarmament.

In their study, the researchers simulated what would happen if the U.S. and Russia used 4,400 100-kiloton nuclear weapons. This would result in fires that would put more than 330 billion pounds of smoke and sunlight-absorbing black carbon into the upper atmosphere. 

In another simulation, they imagined India and Pakistan detonating about 500 100-kiloton nuclear weapons. This would inject 11 to 103 billion pounds of smoke and soot into the upper atmosphere.

In all the simulations, the result was essentially the same.

World map with a few countries in color, the rest are gray.
View larger. | A world map of nuclear weapons. Red is non-NPT nuclear weapon states (India, North Korea, Pakistan). Light blue is NPT nuclear weapon states (China, France, Russia, United States, United Kingdom). Dark blue is NATO nuclear weapons sharing states (Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, Italy, Turkey). Yellow is undeclared nuclear weapon states (Israel). And green shows states formerly possessing nuclear weapons (Belarus, Kazakstan, Ukraine, South Africa). Image via Bourgeois/ Wikimedia Commons.
Snowy harbor with snow-covered ship in port.
A nuclear war would lead to colder oceans and major world seaports blocked by ice. Image via Max Grakov/ Pexels.

The effect on marine life

With a blackened sky from the nuclear firestorm, oceans would receive less light and heat. This is especially true from the Arctic to the North Atlantic and North Pacific. Marine algae (seaweed), the base of the ocean’s food web, would die. Thus, a chain reaction would follow, creating a famine in the ocean. Fishing and aquaculture would mostly come to an end. So marine life suffers from both the initial blast and the resulting new ocean conditions.

Ocean waters would take longer to recover than on land. The changes to Arctic sea ice alone would probably last thousands of years, ushering in what the scientists called a Nuclear Little Ice Age.

Underwater view of floating pennants of seaweed.
The base of the ocean’s food web, marine algae, such as this bull kelp in Glacier Bay National Park, would die off in a nuclear war. Image via National Park Service.

Events other than nuclear war with similar results

Nuclear war isn’t the only event that could lead to these results of devastation in the ocean and on land. Massive wildfires and volcanic eruptions could eject enough soot into the atmosphere for similar results. Massive volcanic eruptions in the past have even caused multiple mass extinction events on Earth. Harrison said:

We can avoid nuclear war, but volcanic eruptions are definitely going to happen again. There’s nothing we can do about it, so it’s important when we’re talking about resilience and how to design our society, that we consider what we need to do to prepare for unavoidable climate shocks. We can and must, however, do everything we can to avoid nuclear war. The effects are too likely to be globally catastrophic.

Bottom line: Researchers found that nuclear war would devastate the oceans, leading to a Nuclear Little Ice Age, with the death of marine algae and shipping ports blocked with ice.

Biden Worries About Nuclear War With Russia: Revelation 16

Ukraine war: Biden warns Putin not to use tactical nuclear weapons

By Alys Davies
BBC News

Watch: Biden warns Putin not to use tactical nuclear weapons

US President Joe Biden has warned Russia not to use chemical or tactical nuclear weapons in the war in Ukraine.

Speaking during an interview with CBS News, Mr Biden said such action would “change the face of war unlike anything since World War Two”.

He would not say what response the US would make to the use of such weapons.

Russian President Vladimir Putin put the country’s nuclear forces on “special” alert following its invasion of Ukraine in February.

He told defence chiefs it was because of “aggressive statements” by the West.

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

Russia is estimated to have around 5,977 nuclear warheads, according to the Federation of American Scientists.

It, however, remains unlikely that it intends to use such weapons.

Tactical nuclear weapons are those which can be used at relatively short distances, as opposed to “strategic” nuclear weapons which can be launched over much longer distances and raise the spectre of all-out nuclear war.

Comparison of the estimated number of warheads held each of the nine nuclear-armed countries.
Russian forces in Kherson this month

Antichrist leaves politics and his supporters attack Baghdad’s Green Zone again

Iraq, Moqtada al-Sadr leaves politics and his supporters attack Baghdad’s Green Zone again: curfew across the country

Banner Leon

New twist in Iraqi politics. The Shiite leader Moqtada al-Sadr has announced that he wants to withdraw from the political life of the country. “I had decided not to interfere in political matters, but now I announce my complete retirement from political life.” The surprise communication comes almost a month after the assault on the Iraqi parliament by its supporters who called for the dissolution of the parliament.

A move that aggravates the country’s political crisis that has been going on since October last year. Immediately after al-Sadr’s words, his supporters returned to raid Baghdad’s Green Zone, where government offices and diplomatic representations are based. Their stated goal is to wantChange the regime”. Images of supporters of the Shiite leader trying to climb the gates of the Palazzo della Repubblica, the main institutional headquarters of the capital, have been circulated on social media. The army declared for today 29 August the curfew to Baghdadmeasure then extended to levelnational: in all the provinces of Iraq it is scheduled from 7 pm local time, 6 pm in Italy. The outgoing premier, Mustafa al-Kadhimiordered the suspension until further notice of each meeting of the Council of Ministers.

“The people want the regime to fall,” the protesters chanted, making them a slogan originally associated with the anti-government protests of the Arab Spring of 2011. A note released by al-Sadr’s office after his resignation reads from now on onwards is “The use of slogans, flags, political songs and other in the name of the Sadrist movement is strictly prohibited”. Iraqi security forces have called on al-Sadr supporters toWithdraw immediately”from the Green Zone and called for restraint to “prevent Iraqi fighting or bloodshed”.

TheUn, who invited the demonstrators to leave the Green Zone, admonishing: “The survival of the Iraqi state itself is at stake.” Commenting on the ongoing violence in Baghdad, the United Nations mission in Iraq (Unami) added: “Today’s developments represent a very dangerous escalation. State institutions must work free of obstacles ”, we read in reference to the fact that Sadr’s followers have occupied the Palace of the Republic, the seat of the government. ThereWhite House describes the situation in Iraq as ‘worrying’ and calls for calm and dialogue. He also denies rumors of an embassy evacuation.

The clashes have resulted for the time being 12 dead. Pan-Arab TV reports al Arabiya citing medical sources. Iraqi security forces began shooting tear gas to disperse Sadr’s followers in front of the Palace of the Republic in Baghdad. They were also heard bursts of automatic riflesand gunshots in the center of the city, according to reports from pan-Arab TV stations al JazeeraAnd al Arabiya. Some sources speak of “pro-Iranian militiamen” infiltrated who, according to the testimonies gathered among the Sadrists, opened fire on police officers. The information cannot be independently verified on the ground. Meanwhile, Tehran has suspended flightstowards Baghdad until further notice. The Iranian embassy in Baghdad also issued a warning to its compatriots in Iraq not to go to religiously and politically sensitive places such as the Shiite mausoleums of Kazimiya and Samarra in Baghdad. The crowd set fire to pictures and blow-ups of the Iranian general Qasem Soleimanideceased leader of the Iranian Pasdaran Qods Brigade, killed in a US attack in the Iraqi capital in January 2020.

“If I die or be killed, I ask you to pray for me”, meanwhile added Al-Sadr, who also announced the closure of all offices that belong to him, except religious ones. The Sanctuary, the Sharif Museum and the al Sadr Heritage Institute therefore remain open. A few minutes after the announcement of the Shiite leader, his adviserSalih Muhammed al-Airaki suspended her Twitter account by changing her profile picture to text “Closed”.

Meanwhile, US military helicopters took off in the skies of the area besieged by demonstrators in the Iraqi capital. The images of the patrol were broadcast on Al Arabiya TV, showing the aircraft flying at low altitudes. According to local media reports, the media are carrying some Iraqi institutional personalities. The information coming from the field, therefore, is confused and currently it is not possible to verify independently on the ground.

In the October 2021 elections, the Sairoon breakfast whose most powerful faction is precisely the Movement of al-Sadr He obtained74 seats out of 329making the party led by the Shiite leader the political formation more numerous in Parliament. Despite this, however, al-Sadr had failed to assemble a majority necessary to form a government, rejecting alliances with the pro-Iranian Shiite parties, in particular with the former premier. Nouri al Maliki. Al Sadr had called for early elections in recent months, while the pro-Iranian opposition forces have opposed it, asking to work on an agreement to form an executive.