New York Quake Overdue (The Sixth Seal) (Rev 6:12)

Won-Young Kim, who runs the seismographic network for the Northeast at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, said the city is well overdue for a big earthquake.

The last big quake to hit New York City was a 5.3-magnitude tremor in 1884 that happened at sea in between Brooklyn and Sandy Hook. While no one was killed, buildings were damaged.

Kim said the city is likely to experience a big earthquake every 100 years or so.

“It can happen anytime soon,” Kim said. “We can expect it any minute, we just don’t know when and where.”

New York has never experienced a magnitude 6 or 7 earthquake, which are the most dangerous. But magnitude 5 quakes could topple brick buildings and chimneys.

Seismologist John Armbruster said a magnitude 5 quake that happened now would be more devastating than the one that happened in 1884.

Gaza: Thousands rally against wave of Israeli violence outside the Temple Walls: Revelation 11

Thousands rally against wave of Israeli violence against Palestinians
Mass rally held in Khan Yunis in Gaza on Friday in support of Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque and in solidarity with fellow Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem. Photo: Shehab News Agency/Twitter

Gaza: Thousands rally against wave of Israeli violence on Palestinians

The mass rally started from all mosques in the city after Friday prayers and the participants raised banners praising the martyrs of the West Bank and the sacrifices of the people of Jerusalem.

Sakina FatimaPublished: 15th October 2022 8:05 pm IST

Jerusalem: Thousands of Palestinians in the besieged Gaza Strip, on Friday, participated in a mass rally organized by the Islamic Resistance Movement— Hamas, denouncing the attacks carried out by the Israeli occupation against the Palestinians.

The mass rally was organized in the centre of Khan Yunis in the southern Gaza Strip in support of Al-Aqsa Mosque and in solidarity with the Palestinians in occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, amid a wave of violence by the Israeli forces.

The mass rally started from all mosques in the city after Friday prayers, and the participants raised banners praising the martyrs of the West Bank and the sacrifices of the people of Jerusalem.

Mosheer Al-Masry, a senior Hamas official, said in his speech during a mass rally, “The masses of Khan Yunis stand in support of Jerusalem and its Arabism, and in support of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and its Islamism, in the face of the occupation and flocks of its settlers.”

Mosheer said, “The enemy should realize that blowing the trumpet, harming Al-Aqsa, storming it, desecrating it, is a provocation to our people and our nation, and that means a revolution for our people.”

He praised the “pullers of the trigger from all the resistance factions in the West Bank” stressing that “the wave of resistance proves that all attempts to domesticate minds, and the attempt to create the new Palestinian, have failed”.

Mosheer warned the occupation against harming Jerusalem, stressing that Al-Aqsa Mosque is a thunderbolt for all revolutions and uprisings, starting with the Al-Buraq revolution and not ending with the Jerusalem uprising today.

He called on the leadership of the authority to remove its hand from the security coordination and stop pursuing the resistance, confiscating its weapons and arresting its members, the latest of which was the arrest of the Qassam leader, Musab Shtayyeh.

The two mosques, Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and the Ibrahimi Mosque in Hebron (south of the West Bank) are subjected to violations by the occupation forces and settlers, who storm them in hundreds daily.

It should be noted that the occupied West Bank and Jerusalem have witnessed, since the beginning of the year, a clear increase in guerrilla operations and acts of resistance, especially in the areas of Jenin and Nablus, in the north of the occupied West Bank.

The escalation comes in response to the occupation’s violations against Palestinians, and its continuous attacks on their holy sites.

Since the beginning of this year, at least 160 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip, including 51 Palestinians during the three-day Israeli offensive on Gaza in August, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry.

Antichrist announces boycott of negotiations for the formation of the new government in Iraq

File - Supporters of the coalition led by Moqtada al Sadr during the occupation of the Iraqi Parliament. - AMEER AL-MOHAMMEDAWI / DPA

Al Sadr announces boycott of negotiations for the formation of the new government in Iraq

Daniel Stewart

The movement led by Iraqi cleric Muqtada al Sadr, considered the country’s strongman, has announced that it will boycott the process of forming a new government entrusted to Mohamed Shia al Sudani by the newly elected Iraqi president, Abdelatif Rashid.

File – Supporters of the coalition led by Moqtada al Sadr during the occupation of the Iraqi Parliament. – AMEER AL-MOHAMMEDAWI / DPA© Provided by News 360

The unofficial spokesman of the movement, Sali Mohamed al Iraqi, announced this past Saturday in a communiqué “the categorical, clear and explicit rejection” of the Saderist movement in this new government which, in principle, will be dominated by the pro-Iranian political forces of the so-called Coordination Framework, declared enemy of Saderism.

“None of us, nor anyone affiliated with the movement will take part in this new government,” Al Iraqi has warned in a statement published on his Twitter account and picked up by the Kurdish news agency Rudaw.

“We recommend,” he added, that “Iraq should not become a puppet of international plans, that its weapons should not fall into idle hands, and that the people’s money should not fall into corrupt banks and pockets.”

Iraq is in political paralysis as a result of the early legislative elections of October 2021, in which the Saderist movement won, only to end up withdrawing from the hemicycle in protest against the lack of political will to form a government.

In fact, the Parliament was scheduled to hold the vote in February, although it was postponed due to the disputes arising from the elections and the blockade by pro-Iranian parties and militias, in a scenario of political chaos and constant protests by the cleric’s supporters, who even took over the Parliament a few weeks ago.

The Iraqi presidency has been held by Kurdish politicians for two decades, within the framework of a power-sharing agreement that includes that the prime minister must be a member of the Shiite community and the speaker of parliament, a Sunni

Pakistani Horn summons US envoy over Joe Biden’s ‘most dangerous nation’ remark

Pakistan summons US envoy over Joe Biden’s ‘most dangerous nation’ remark

US president questioned country’s nuclear weapons safety protocols sparking outrage in Islamabad

Pakistan on Saturday summoned the US ambassador for an explanation after President Joe Biden described the south Asian country as “one of the most dangerous nations in the world” and questioned its nuclear weapons safety protocols.

Biden made the apparently off-the-cuff remark late on Thursday while talking about US foreign policy during a private Democratic party fundraiser in California, but the White House later published a transcript of his comments, which provoked outrage in Pakistan.

Washington’s relations with Pakistan have soured since last year, when the US ended a two-decade war in Afghanistan.

Pakistan provided crucial logistical access, but US officials believe Islamabad’s powerful military and intelligence apparatus also aided the Taliban, which swept back to power as foreign troops pulled out.

Biden was speaking about his frequent interactions with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, when he said: “Did anybody think we’d be in a situation where China is trying to figure out its role relative to Russia and relative to India and relative to Pakistan?

“This is a guy who understands what he wants but has an enormous, enormous array of problems. How do we handle that? How do we handle that relative to what’s going on in Russia?

“And what I think is maybe one of the most dangerous nations in the world: Pakistan. Nuclear weapons without any

Hours after the transcript of his address was posted, Pakistan summoned the US ambassador, Donald Blome, to the foreign office in Islamabad.

“I have discussed it with the prime minister, and we have summoned the ambassador of the United States … for an official demarche,” Pakistan’s foreign minister, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, said during a press conference in Karachi.

“I am surprised by the remarks of President Biden. I believe this is exactly the sort of misunderstanding that is created when there is lack of an engagement.”

Later, Pakistan’s prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, tweeted that Pakistan was a “responsible nuclear state”.

“We are proud that our nuclear assets have the best safeguards … We take these safety measures with the utmost seriousness. Let no one have any doubts,” he said.

The foreign minister also appeared to offer Washington some room to manoeuvre diplomatically away from Biden’s remarks. “It was not an official function, it was not an address to the nation or an address to the parliament,” he said.

“We should allow them an opportunity to explain this position. I don’t believe that this should negatively impact the relations between Pakistan and the United States.”

The US is wary of Pakistan’s close partnership with China, as Beijing pushes ahead with a $54bn (£48bn) “economic corridor” that will build infrastructure and give Beijing an outlet to the Indian Ocean.

Washington has repeatedly said China will reap most of the benefits, leaving Pakistan with unsustainable debt.

The warnings by the US – which considers China its pre-eminent global competitor – have repeatedly been brushed aside by Pakistan.

Pakistan this week abstained from a UN general assembly vote to condemn Russia’s annexation of parts of Ukraine, despite a major US diplomatic push to seek clearer condemnation of Moscow.

Antichrist refuses to join new government

By AFP – Oct 15,2022 – Last updated at Oct 15,2022

Iraq’s Sadrist camp refuses to join new government

In this file photo taken on August 2, supporters of Iraqi cleric Moqtada Sadr (image), protest against a rival bloc’s nomination for prime minister, in the capital Baghdad’s high-security Green Zone (AFP photo)

BAGHDAD — Iraqi firebrand cleric Moqtada Sadr’s movement on Saturday announced its refusal to join a new government being formed by prime minister-designate Mohammad Al Sudani.

The announcement came two days after lawmakers elected Abdul Latif Rashid as Iraq’s new president, and he swiftly named Sudani as prime minister in a bid to end a year of political gridlock since October 2021 elections.

“We stress our firm and clear refusal for any of our affiliates to participate… in this government formation,” Mohammed Saleh Al Iraqi, a close associate of Sadr, said in a statement posted on Twitter.

The 52-year-old Shiite former minister Sudani has the backing of Sadr’s Iran-backed rivals, the Coordination Framework, which controls 138 out of 329 seats in the Iraqi legislature.

In June, Sadr had ordered the 73 lawmakers in his bloc to resign, leaving parliament in the hands of the Framework, which includes representatives of the former paramilitary Hashed Al Shaabi.

In his statement Saturday, Iraqi charged that the upcoming government has a “clear subordination to militias” and would “not meet the people’s aspirations”.

The Sadrist official said the movement refused to take part in any government led by Sudani “or any other candidate from among the old faces or those affiliated with the corrupt”.

“Anyone who joins their ministries does not represent us… rather, we disavow them,” Iraqi said.

Snap elections were held last year following nationwide protests that erupted in October 2019 to decry endemic corruption, decaying infrastructure and the absence of services and jobs for youth.

The stakes are high for the next Cabinet, with a colossal $87 billion in revenues from oil exports locked up in the central bank’s coffers.

The money can help rebuild infrastructure in the war-ravaged country, but it can only be invested after lawmakers approve a state budget presented by the government, once formed.

Sudani vowed on Thursday to push through “economic reforms” that would revitalise Iraq’s industry, agriculture and private sector.

The prime minister-designate also promised to provide young Iraqis “employment opportunities and housing”.

Sadr, who has the ability to mobilise tens of thousands of his supporters with a single tweet, has repeatedly demanded early elections, while the Coordination Framework wants a new government in place before any polls are held.

Tensions between the two rival Shiite camps boiled over on August 29 when more than 30 Sadr supporters were killed in clashes with Iran-backed factions and the army in Baghdad’s Green Zone, which houses government buildings and diplomatic missions.

Russian Horn Prepares For Nuclear War: Revelation 16

The satellite image showing Russian planes capable of carrying nuclear weapons. Picture: Planet Labs
The satellite image showing Russian planes capable of carrying nuclear weapons. Picture: Planet Labs

Vladimir Putin deploys bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons near border of NATO country

Aliki Kraterou and The Sun

Russia has deployed eleven bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons just a few kilometres from its border with a NATO country.

Vladimir Putin has deployed eleven bombers capable of carrying nuclear weapons just a few kilometres from his border with the NATO country Norway.

The American satellite operator Planet Labs detected “an increased presence” of Russian Tu-160s and Tu-95 strategic bombers less than 32km from the Norwegian border.

A satellite image taken on October 7 shows seven Tu-160 bombers and four Tu-95 aircraft at the Russian air base Olenya on the Kolskyi Peninsula, The Sun reports.

Two days later, another image showed one of the Tu-160 bombers ready to take off on the runway.

Tu-160s, the largest and heaviest Mach 2 warplanes ever made, are capable of flying 12,070 kilometres non-stop without refuelling. They can carry up to 12 short-range nuclear missiles.

And meanwhile, the Tu-95 strategic bombers – known as Bears – are some of the biggest aircraft in Putin’s air force, capable of hauling cruise missiles and massive nuclear bombs.

Earlier this month, Israeli intelligence firm ImageSat International spotted Russian bombers at an air base near the border with Finland.

According to the satellite images, obtained by The Jerusalem Post, four Tu-160s were seen at the base on August 21 and three Tu-95s were seen on September 25.

The Engels air base houses Russia’s only strategic bombers stationed near Ukraine and is home to the 121st Heavy Bomber Aviation Regiment, which flies the Tu-160s and Tu-95s.

It comes amid mounting fears the Russian dictator might carry out his threats and unleash nuclear Armageddon.

NATO held a closed-door meeting yesterday as the alliance pressed ahead with plans for a nuclear exercise.

And meanwhile, Russia issued further apocalyptic warnings to both the West and Ukraine.

Putin is facing military disaster on the ground as his forces are pushed back across the frontline. But that has stoked fears he could do something stupid – and potentially even make good on his threats go nuclear.

Russian President Vladimir Putin. Picture: Konstantin Zavrazhin/Sputnik/AFP
Russian President Vladimir Putin. Picture: Konstantin Zavrazhin/Sputnik/AFP

Ukraine has formally applied to join NATO, something which infuriated Russia.

“Kyiv is well aware that such a step would mean a guaranteed escalation to a World War III,” said Alexander Venediktov, deputy secretary of Russia’s Security Council.

“The suicidal nature of such a step is understood by NATO members themselves.”

Meanwhile, US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin said: “We are committed to defending every inch of NATO’s territory – if and when it comes to that.”

Just this week, a bombshell report claimed Putin warned billionaire Elon Musk he would use nukes if Ukraine tried to retake Crimea. Mr Musk has denied speaking to the President.

And earlier this month, Putin promoted violent warlord Ramzan Kadyrov – who demanded Russia nuke Ukraine – to the position of general.

He has also positioned his ruthless “General Armageddon”, Sergey Surovkin, as head of the armed forces.

UK defence sources believe Putin might turn the war nuclear by detonating a bomb on the border in a message to the West.

And an expert has warned an apocalyptic Russian nuclear strike on Ukraine would be the final step on a devastating “ladder of escalation”.

Following the explosion of his prized Crimean bridge, Putin has repeatedly warned he would strike back with more devastating attacks, after branding Kyiv “nuclear terrorists”.

Russian Security Council deputy secretary Alexander Venediktov warned on Thursday that there would be a “guaranteed escalation to World War III” if Ukraine joined NATO.

This story first appeared on The Sun and has been republished with permission.

Indicators the Russian Horn Will Use Nuclear Weapons

Collage of showing cropped pictures of Putin overlapping the radiation symbol
Antonio Masiello / Getty; The Atlantic

Will Putin Use Nuclear Weapons? Watch These Indicators

I asked several experts to share the indicators they’re tracking most closely to determine whether Russian nuclear use in Ukraine is imminent—and to help us all separate the signal from the noise.

By Uri Friedman

October 15, 2022, 6 AM ET

If Vladimir Putin were to decide to use nuclear weapons in Ukraine, would we know ahead of launch? If so, how exactly would we know?

Not since the early days of the war in Ukraine have these questions felt so urgent. As Putin has suffered battlefield setbacks and illegally annexed Russian-occupied territory in eastern Ukraine, he has repeatedly threatened to make use of his country’s nuclear weapons—appearing to implicitly extend the protection of Russia’s nuclear arsenal over lands that Ukrainian forces could soon seek to retake. U.S. officials have underscored the gravity of the situation as well; President Joe Biden recently traced a direct line from what he deemed the serious risk of Putin going nuclear to “Armageddon.”

In these circumstances, feeling on edge is only natural. But in reporting on nuclear threats over the years, I have learned the pitfalls of assigning undue weight to rhetorical shiny objects. In 2017, for example, when Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un were calling each other “Little Rocket Man” and a “mentally deranged U.S. dotard” and warning of all manner of nuclear apocalypse, experts advised me to peer past the bombast and look for clues of impending war, such as the evacuation of American noncombatants from South Korea. Those clues never materialized. Nor did the apocalypse.

In a similar spirit, I asked several experts to share the indicators they’re watching most closely to determine whether Russian nuclear use in Ukraine is imminent—and to help us all separate the signal from the noise.

“I do believe that we are at least several steps away from” Russian nuclear use in Ukraine, Pavel Podvig, an expert on Russian nuclear forces, told me.

Below is a breakdown of what those remaining steps could look like.

Despite Putin hinting recently that threats to Russian “territorial integrity” could spur the Kremlin to use nuclear weapons, Podvig maintained that the Russian president and other top officials have nevertheless largely been consistent in articulating a defensive doctrine, in which the Russian government would consider using nuclear weapons only if it were to sustain an attack that threatened the existence of the Russian state.

Podvig is looking out for a shift away from that doctrine, which could involve Russian leaders more explicitly threatening to use nuclear weapons to halt Ukrainian advances on the battlefield. Matthew Kroenig, a nuclear strategist and my colleague at the Atlantic Council, served up a scenario: Imagine that Putin, seeing the lands he recently annexed about to slip from his grasp, declares, “‘I warned the world that these four regions are Russian territory. I warned Ukraine not to attack Russian territory. They’ve not heeded these warnings. They need to evacuate these areas immediately, or else I’ll consider nuclear weapons. This isn’t a bluff.’” That’s the kind of more specific statement that would put Kroenig on higher alert.

“We will know it when we see that,” Podvig said of a possible rhetorical shift. “My take is that, so far, we haven’t seen it.”

As a dictator who controls the media, Putin could spin any partial Russian win in Ukraine as a victory, Kroenig reasoned. But if Ukrainians are on the verge of taking back all of their territory, Putin could conceivably turn to nuclear weapons to reverse his military misfortunes and avoid a humiliating defeat.

Kroenig, who served in the Department of Defense and the intelligence community in the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations, is relatedly tracking “Putin’s strength at home,” because “if we saw more Russian elites turning against him or publicly criticizing him,” Putin “could seek nuclear use as a way to gamble for resurrection, change the conversation, [and] show that he’s a strong leader.”

This is one of the core conundrums in this confounding war: The United States and its partners are rightly supporting Ukraine’s campaign to regain all the territory it has lost to Russia’s illegal and abhorrent aggression. But investing in Ukraine’s unequivocal success, and thus Putin’s utter defeat, may come with the greater risk of a desperate Putin unleashing nuclear war.

Movements of Russian tactical nuclear weapons from storage to the field

The general consensus among experts is that if Putin were to reach for his nuclear weapons in the course of his war in Ukraine, he wouldn’t select the kind of long-range, city-destroying, “strategic” nuclear weapons that were so prominent during the Cold War. Instead, he’d likely opt for one or several of the country’s roughly 2,000 tactical nuclear weapons—less explosive, shorter-range arms intended for use on a battlefield.

These tactical nuclear weapons are not deployed and ready for immediate use the way that Russia’s ground- and sea-based strategic nuclear weapons are. Experts believe they are held in an estimated 47 national and base-level storage facilities across Russia. The country’s systems for launching these weapons are stashed away in separate locations.

Podvig has sketched out how a move to tap into this arsenal could play out. In the event of order to raise Russia’s state of readiness, the defense ministry’s 12th Main Directorate, the custodian of the country’s nuclear arsenal, would remove the selected weapons from storage and put them on specialized trucks, which would bring them to a designated point where they would be taken out of their storage containers and paired with their delivery systems (loading a nuclear bomb onto an aircraft at an air base, for instance, or installing a nuclear warhead on a missile).

Through its satellites, other surveillance capabilities, and various forms of on-the-ground intelligence, the U.S. government wouldprobably (not certainly) be able to spot signs of Russian efforts to move tactical nuclear weapons out of storage facilities.

Private researchers poring over open-source intelligence would, conversely, be less likely to catch this activity. But the broader public might quickly find out about it anyway. Just as it did in novel ways in the lead-up to the war in Ukraine, the Biden administration might disclose classified intelligence—through either leaks to the media or public statements—to expose Putin’s plans and marshal international pressure, including from more Russia-friendly nuclear-armed states, such as China and India, as a means of deterrence.

In such circumstances, “I think President Biden and other officials would”—publicly and privately—“signal very aggressively to the Russians to dissuade them from escalating the conflict with nuclear weapons,” Jeffrey Lewis, a nuclear-nonproliferation expert at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, told me.

The experts I consulted also agreed that Putin himself would probably want to telegraph to the world in subtle or blatant ways that he’s making these moves—in part because he could never be fully confident of taking these steps without his adversaries detecting them, but also because, as Lewis put it, he would want “to see if he could get what he wants for free.”

If Putin can “frighten” Ukraine’s allies into standing down without actually using nuclear weapons, “that’s the best outcome for him,” Kroenig said. Kroenig could even envision the Kremlin “ostentatiously” recording video of Russian troops removing tactical nuclear weapons from storage facilities and Putin deliberately leaking it, with a message to the world like “‘We’re moving them to the front lines. We’re getting ready to use them. I’m serious. Back off now, or else this is coming.’”

Intercepted communications suggesting forthcoming nuclear use and corresponding movements of Russian forces or military assets

If Russia were preparing to use nuclear weapons, Podvig said, it would likely “raise the level of readiness of a portion of forces,” which “generates a certain footprint,” such as orders and additional communication through both Russia’s nuclear command-and-control systemand other military channels. Russia has practiced these processes during past military exercises, so the U.S. government has a sense of the patterns to watch for. One recent assessment estimated that “tens of thousands” of Russian soldiers would ultimately need to be involved in the complex logistical operation of transferring tactical nuclear weapons from storage to the battlefield.

“I would expect to see alert levels rise throughout Russia’s nuclear forces before any nuclear use, no matter how small,” Lewis said, particularly because the country’s generals will need to gird those forces for escalation that could result from any U.S. or NATO retaliation following Russian nuclear use. Moving Russian nuclear forces to a higher state of readiness could involve not just activity at storage sites for nuclear warheads, but also “submarines going out to sea” or “mobile missiles leaving their bases.”

Although open-source researchers such as Lewis don’t yet have the capabilities to monitor Russian communications, here, too, the U.S. government could choose to publicly release any intelligence it gathers on Russian military orders that signal nuclear use is in the offing.

A particular challenge with reading the Kremlin’s tea leaves is that Russia has nearly two dozen“dual use” delivery systems, some already being used in the war in Ukraine, which can carry conventional or nuclear warheads. U.S. intelligence could “assume they have conventional warheads on them, but actually they don’t,” because Putin has “switched them out somewhere and we didn’t detect that,” Kroenig noted. “So it is possible, I guess, that we just start seeing mushroom clouds in Ukraine, but I think that’s less likely than that we’d get some kind of warning.”

In recent weeks, U.S. and allied officials haverepeatedly stated that they have not detected signs of imminent Russian nuclear use. And the experts I consulted mostly concurred, although Kroenig noted that because Putin is beginning to lose the war and sharpen his threats, “we are already in the danger zone.”

“There is always some background level of activity with [Russia’s] nuclear forces,” as there is in any nuclear-armed country, Lewis noted. But so far, he has “not seen anything in Russia” that he “would characterize as unusual.”

When I asked Podvig whether he’d seen any of his top indicators for looming Russian nuclear use, he hesitated and then replied, “Not yet.” A message of great reassurance this was not. But I’ll take it over the latest runaway speculation on Twitter.