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

New Evidence Shows Power of East Coast EarthquakesVirginia Earthquake Triggered Landslides at Great Distances

Released: 

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.

Spotlight on Terrorism outside the Temple Walls: Revelation 11

Spotlight on Terrorism and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (October 4-19, 2022)

Published: 23/10/2022

Riots in east Jerusalem (Kul Yawm, October 12, 2022; Sawa, October 13, 2022).

Detentions in Shuafat and Anata (Israel Police Force spokesman’s unit, October 18, 2022).

PA security force operatives carry the body of Mujahed Ahmed Muhammad Daoud (Facebook page of the PA security forces, October 16, 2022).

Hussein al-Sheikh visits the mourning tent erected by the ministry of health in Ramallah (ministry of health in Ramallah Facebook page, October 18, 2022).

Muhammad Shtayyeh with Fathi Hazem behind his left shoulder; in back are operatives of the PA security forces. They are at the mourning tent erected for Mateen Dabaya and Muhammad Maher Ghwardra, whose pictures appear on the poster.

Ataa Abu Armila, surrounded by armed terrorists (Right:, al-Quds, October 16, 2022; left: Safa, October 16, 2022).

Ataa Abu Armila, surrounded by armed terrorists (Right:, al-Quds, October 16, 2022; left: Safa, October 16, 2022).

The demonstration in Nablus (Shehab, October 6, 2022).

Khalil al-Haya holds a press conference after meeting with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad (al-Ghad TV, October 19, 2022).

Fathi Hammad visits the Burj al-Barajneh refugee camp (Hamas website, October 16, 2022).

Representatives of the Palestinians organizations and the president of Algeria after the signing of the agreement (Facebook page of the office of the president of Algeria, October 13, 2022).

The president of Algeria meets with Isma’il Haniyeh and Azzam al-Ahmed of the Hamas delegation (palsawa, October 12, 2022).

Overview

• During the past two weeks tensions remained high in Judea and Samaria. Palestinians carried out four shooting attacks, killing two IDF soldiers, and continued throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails at Israeli vehicles driving on the roads in Judea and Samaria.
• The Israeli security forces continued intensive counterterrorism activities, primarily in Jenin and Nablus; Palestinians shot at the forces on several occasions. No Israeli casualties were reported. A relatively large number of Palestinians were killed during counterterrorism activities and clashes with the security forces. In recent weeks the activities of the Lion’s Den network increased; most of them were in Nablus.
• The Gaza Strip remained relatively quiet. A Hamas delegation to Damascus met with the Syrian president, part of renewing Hamas-Syria relations, which were cut off 11 years ago. Senior Hamas figures also visited Turkey, Iran and Lebanon. The Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) marked the 35^th anniversary of its founding with rallies and military displays.
• Mahmoud Abbas visited Kazakhstan where he met with Russian President Putin. Abbas told him the Palestinians did not trust the United States as a party to the negotiations with Israel.
• After a conference held in Algeria to promote internal Palestinian unity, representatives of 14 Palestinian organizations signed the “Algeria Declaration of National Reconciliation,” which stressed the importance of national Palestinian unity and promised elections within a year. In ITIC assessment the chances of elections actually being held are slim.

The World Worries About the Pakistani Nuclear Horn: Daniel 8

Security of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons

Masud Ahmad Khan

October 24, 2022

Pakistan was part of the US sponsored (SEATO) Southeast Asian Treaty Organization and (CENTO) Central Treaty Organization. In 1962, it provided a base for US spy plane-U2 in Peshawar which was shot down by a Russian missile after taking off from Badaber, Peshawar. During Russian invasion of Afghanistan, the Mujahideen were supported by the US through Pakistan. At that time Pakistan was the most favorite and front state fighting Russians and communism.

The Afghan Mujahideen were taken to Washington where they met the then President Ronald Reagan. After Russian withdrawal, the US abandoned Afghanistan and dumped Pakistan. This led to the emergence of the Taliban and other groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan. After 9/11, Pakistan again sided with US on the war on terror and provided bases which led to disastrous consequences for Pakistan as it introduced a new phenomenon of suicide attacks. The US exited Afghanistan after the Doha Accords however blamed it Pakistan for their humiliating exit and tried to make it a scapegoat. The relations between the US and Pakistan have remained on a turbulent patch from the day the Biden administration came into power.

Saudi Arabia eyes $10.6bn investments in global supply chains

Recently, the US President called Pakistan “one of the most dangerous nations in the world” which had “Nuclear weapons without any cohesion”. Biden made these comments during a democratic party reception in Los Angeles. There are number of reasons on which the US is not happy with Pakistan. First, mainly our close and strong alignment with China and it is not happy with the CPEC passing through Pakistan. The US and its allies are trying to contain China through alliances like the AUKUS, QUAD and India. Pakistan’s nuclear assets have the best safeguards according to the IAEA criteria and it has proved itself as a responsible state. According to the Anti-Nuclear Security Index “Pakistan was the most improved country in the ranking for countries with usable nuclear materials improving its over all score by 7 points”. The index further mentioned that “the majority of Pakistan’s improvements are in the security and control measures category (+25) because of its passage of new regulation”.

Arshad Sharif shot dead in ‘mistaken identity’ case, confirms Kenyan police

Pakistan is a signatory of the convention on physical protection of nuclear material-1980 and also party to nuclear safety convention of 1997. According to reports, countries like Australia, Canada, Switzerland, Germany, Netherlands and Norway have been ranked with poor security measures and possibility of sabotage cannot be ruled out. The irony is that the US is only country which has used an atomic bomb on the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki which razed both cities to the ground. Even the US’ own history on security and safety of nuclear weapons is deplorable. According to a viral report on social media, the US lost nine nuclear warheads which were never recovered. At least 56 accidents at nuclear reactors have occurred in the US according to a 2010 study. Despite these lapses at its own end, the US and its allies on several occasions have issued rhetoric that terrorists can have access to Pakistan’s nukes.

The US is ignoring the serious incidents happening in India related to missiles and uranium. In India there have been several incidents of smuggling and selling of highly rich uranium in the open market. India is failing to protect its highly rich radioactive material falling into the wrong hands. Unfortunately, IAEA and the West did not raise their concerns and remained silent. On March 9 2022, an Indian missile BrahMos violated Pakistan’s airspace and fell 124 kilometers inside Pakistani Punjab. The missile endangered many lives and commercial flights in the air. The Indian officials did not inform Pakistan about the missile firing and only responded once the issue was raised by the ISPR. Imagine if it was armed with a warhead, the consequences could have been disastrous for India. Pakistan acted with responsibility and did not take a decision in haste. If it was Pakistan, then there would have been hue and cry by questioning Pakistan’s safety mechanism and all hell would have broken loose. No one condemned India rather asked Pakistan to condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Change in Indian Congress

It is the hypocrisy of international community as different options are being used by the West as tools to pressurise Pakistan. Some of the tools are the use of FATF, IMF, and asking Pakistan to settle its issues with India on New Delhi’s terms, leave Chinese camp and recognize Israel. One thing is very clear the actual target of the US is Pakistan’s nuclear programme by making it controversial and terming it as the Islamic Bomb. Surprisingly, in the US National Security Strategy endorsed by Biden recently, there is no mention of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. The ISPR has issued a statement after the conclusion of Corps Commander’s conference that Pakistan is responsible nuclear weapon state and has taken all necessary measures to strengthen its nuclear security at par with IAEA standards. Meanwhile the US has reconciled the statement made by President Biden and issued a statement by the State Department that “The US is confident of Pakistan’s commitment and its ability to secure weapons”. Let there be no doubt that Pakistan is a responsible nuclear state and its assets have safeguards as per IAEA standards.

UN report on human rights outside the Temple Walls only terror supporters: Revelation 11

UN report on human rights in West Bank and Gaza serves only terror supporters

Opinion: UN Commission of Inquiry into Human Rights Violations report accuses Israel of violating international law, while ignoring terror and missile attacks aimed against Israeli civilians

Ben-Dror Yemini | published:Yesterday | 14:20

You can safely assume that the Palestinian terrorist who carried out a stabbing attack in Jerusalem on Saturday, did not read a report by the UN Commission of Inquiry into Human Rights Violations in the West Bank and Gaza, submitted to the General Assembly last week.

This report, however, is part of an international propaganda meant to do nothing more than demonize Israel, serving no one but terror organizations like Hamas and the Islamic Jihad. If Israel is committing “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity,” as the report says, by defending its people, then by default terror acts aimed against Israelis are justified.

Three “human right activists” and their anti-Israeli lackeys presented the report to the UN Secretary-General António Guterres after a year of “hard work” the committee had done, investigating the alleged crimes.

No Western power supported the committee’s establishment, but the majority vote in the General Assembly allowed for it to be formed.

Unlike other committees in the UN, this one is permanent, meaning it will publish reports annually until it is decommissioned. This provides a great platform and income to the three stooges heading it and to Hamas’ propaganda machine, now being funded by an international organization. We thought the UN was established to fight racism, but it turns out it is now funding it.

The committee’s head, Navi Pillay from South Africa, in the past was a signatory of a petition calling for “sanctions against the apartheid state of Israel.”

The second committee member, Miloon Kothari from India, once said during an interview that “the social media is controlled largely by the Jewish lobby or specific NGOs.” Kothari also objects to Israel being a member of the UN.

null

The third member of the committee, Australia’s Christopher Sidoti, is affiliated with an organization supporting the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement.

These three, according to the definition of antisemitism, are antisemites. Hillel Neuer, head of the UN Watch, sent a detailed 30-page report on Pillay’s consistent and extreme anti-Israel stance, but to no avail.

How can Pillay, Kothari and Sidoti be appointed to a committee scrutinizing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Well, everything is possible when it comes to Israel.

Benjamin Netanyahu warns against another Obama deal with Iran

Benjamin Netanyahu warns against a new nuclear deal with Iran

Benjamin Netanyahu decries the Islamic State’s doings against its own people

October 22, 2022 10:52pm EDT

Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed reports of Iran helping Russia launch drone strikes in Ukraine and spoke out against a new Iran nuclear deal on Saturday’s “One Nation with Brian Kilmeade.”

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU: I’ll tell you, the one thing that I would say is, those who advocate a deal with a nuclear Iran, a nuclear deal with Iran, can have a taste of what’s in store. And we’re getting that taste anyway. You can see the brave men and women of Iran, the brave women of Iran that are going into the streets against these goons of this Islamic terrorist state, and they’re facing up to them. You’re going to give the ayatollahs nuclear weapons, you’re going to give them a deal that will give them hundreds of billions of dollars so they can make more of these deadly drones to attack, ultimately Israelis, Americans and others? You don’t want that. 

…

I think it’s time that everyone took a stand against the Iranian regime. When I put out videos reaching out to Iran, to the Iranian people, I got an enormous amount of responses with names, addresses, and I said to our intel guys, I said, “Something’s wrong here. It can’t be. I mean, these people are risking their lives.” And they came back to me, they said, “Prime minister, they are, because they’re really, really bent on having freedom.” So I think you see that now. Will it work in the end? I think we can help it work. I think there are many things that if I come back into office in two weeks, I’ll help them work.

Experts say China Horn may increase its stockpile of nuclear weapons

Edules

“We will establish a strong strategic deterrence,” Jinping said while addressing the opening session of the CPC General Assembly on October 16. Jinping is also the head of the Central Military Commission (CMC).

Experts believe that the communist country can expand its nuclear arsenal after President Xi Jinping’s statement at the Communist Party of China (CPC) general conference to establish a strong strategic deterrence.

Addressing the opening session of the CPC General Conference on October 16, Jinping said, “We will establish a strong strategic deterrence.” Jinping is also the head of the Central Military Commission (CMC). The idea of strategic deterrence was not included in the report presented by him in 2017 or in last year’s landmark resolution.

According to the South China Morning Post news published from Hong Kong, the 14th five-year plan released last year focused on “establishing a high-standard strategic deterrence”.

Experts say that Jinping’s statement indicates that China will improve its nuclear deterrence capability in the face of growing rivalry with America because America is a major nuclear power. Song Zhongping, a former instructor of the People’s Liberation Army (PLL), said in a statement that this means China will “develop its strategic nuclear capability” to maintain national security. 

Song said the need for stronger strategic deterrence stemmed from the US challenge to China and Russia on the issue of the Taiwan and Ukraine wars, respectively. “Our national security can be effectively maintained only when China has a strong nuclear capability,” he said.

Disclaimer:Prabhasakshi has not edited this news. This news has been published from PTI-language feed.

When Russia Uses a Nuclear Weapon: Revelation 16

If Russia Uses a Nuclear Weapon . . .

Mel GurtovOct 22, 2022

President Biden surprised his top advisers along with everyone else when, at a fundraising event, he referred to “Armageddon” in the Ukraine war: Russia’s possible use of a nuclear weapon. Though US officials were quick to stress that they knew of no imminent threat by Russia, Biden’s remark underscored recent reports suggesting deepening US concern about what Putin might do as Russian forces retreat in eastern and southern Ukraine.

The remark also was in response to Putin’s increasingly frequent allusions to nuclear weapons, such as on September 21 when he said: “If the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, we will without doubt use all available means to protect Russia and our people. This is not a bluff.”

Biden said: “We have not faced the prospect of Armageddon since Kennedy and the Cuban missile crisis. I don’t think there’s any such thing as the ability to easily [use] a tactical nuclear weapon and not end up with Armageddon.” 

Nuclear weapons experts point to any number of “limited” nuclear-weapon use available to Putin—for example, a “nuclear display,” such as a strike on a nuclear power plant or a high-altitude detonation; or a targeted attack, such as on a Ukrainian military base or a single city.

CNN reports that in direct communications between Washington and Moscow in the last several weeks, Putin has been told about “the scale of the US response” should he use a nuclear weapon in the war. Other sources indicate that the “scale” would be within the range of conventional weapons, presumably in order to reduce the chance of escalation to the nuclear level. How Putin would react to a NATO counterattack with conventional weapons is anybody’s guess, since conventional weapons these days can be as destructive as some nuclear devices.

The threat to use a tactical nuclear weapon is just one of the ways this crisis differs from the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis—and makes this one even more difficult to negotiate a way out. The earlier crisis occurred because the Russians deployed long-range missiles in Cuba to correct the huge imbalance in US-Soviet strategic nuclear forces—the infamous “missile gap” that actually favored the US. 

Kennedy and Khrushchev were able to craft a deal for the removal of Soviet missiles from Cuba because a face-saving trade was available—US missiles removed from Turkey in exchange. The equivalent trade that might take place today—involving occupied territory—is rejected by Putin and (with US support) Zelensky. 

Moreover, in 1962 Moscow and Washington were equally determined not to escalate to a nuclear showdown. They looked for a diplomatic off-ramp, and found one. Vladimir Putin isn’t looking; he’s convinced that Ukraine must be expunged or at least greatly diminished, and he evidently sees that as a way to weaken the West.

Two questions arise here: First, are there any sanctions and use of force that would persuade Putin to back down; second, what alternative to war is being put before him? Biden’s comments about an inability to identify an off-ramp–“We are trying to figure out, what is Putin’s off-ramp? Where does he find a way out? Where does he find himself where he does not only lose face but significant power?”—particularly as Putin’s military assault flails—suggest no exit.

So we have a real conundrum for policy makers: Putin’s determination to wipe out Ukraine and avoid defeat might lead him to use a nuclear weapon, the West wants to avoid a nuclear response if he does, and no diplomatic off-ramp has yet to be discovered. What, then, can deter Putin?

Carl Bildt, the former Swedish prime minister, has laid out five courses of action that might stop Putin from using a nuclear weapon. They are making regime change in Moscow the war aim, strengthening Western resolve (including bringing Ukraine into NATO), mobilizing public opinion to win the war, gaining India’s and China’s support or cutting their ties to the West if they refuse, and taking “active and visible preparations for credible conventional strikes against important Russian assets.” 

Let’s briefly evaluate these ideas. 

Regime change seems far more likely to provoke Putin than deter him, since it threatens his and his inner circle’s survival. 

Offering Ukraine membership in NATO only strengthens Putin’s resolve to keep fighting. Public opinion is always iffy, and may not be something to count on if all-out war is a possibility. 

Little can be expected of China and India, considering their weak, rather pathetic expressions of “concern” about Putin’s war. 

Finally, and most critically, striking Russian bases, troops, or war industries means accepting the possibility that Putin, far from being deterred, will strike back at targets in the heart of Europe, bringing Russia and NATO into direct conflict.

None of these steps, moreover, offers Putin an off-ramp. Far from containing a diplomatic option, they amount to a game of chicken—the sort of game played several times during the Cold War. We survived those games, more by sheer luck than cleverness. 

If Mr. Bildt’s idea represents the best thinking in Western elite circles, I suggest it is a recipe for World War III.