Conclusion to Economic Consequences of the Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:15)

Scenario Earthquakes for Urban Areas Along the Atlantic Seaboard of the United States: Conclusions

NYCEM.org

---

The current efforts in the eastern U.S., including New York City, to start the enforcement of seismic building codes for new constructions are important first steps in the right direction. Similarly, the emerging efforts to include seismic rehabilitation strategies in the generally needed overhaul of the cities’ aged infrastructures such as bridges, water, sewer, power and transportation is commendable and needs to be pursued with diligence and persistence. But at the current pace of new construction replacing older buildings and lifelines, it will take many decades or a century before a major fraction of the stock of built assets will become seismically more resilient than the current inventory is. For some time, this leaves society exposed to very high seismic risks. The only consolation is that seismicity on average is low, and, hence with some luck, the earthquakes will not outpace any ongoing efforts to make eastern cities more earthquake resilient gradually. Nevertheless, M = 5 to M = 6 earthquakes at distances of tens of km must be considered a credible risk at almost any time for cities like Boston, New York or Philadelphia. M = 7 events, while possible, are much less likely; and in many respects, even if building codes will have affected the resilience of a future improved building stock, M = 7 events would cause virtually unmanageable situations. Given these bleak prospects, it will be necessary to focus on crucial elements such as maintaining access to cities by strengthening critical bridges, improving the structural and nonstructural performance of hospitals, and having a nationally supported plan how to assist a devastated region in case of a truly severe earthquake. No realistic and coordinated planning of this sort exists at this time for most eastern cities.

The current efforts by the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) via the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) to provide a standard methodology (RMS, 1994) and planning tools for making systematic, computerized loss estimates for annualized probabilistic calculations as well as for individual scenario events, is commendable. But these new tools provide only a shell with little regional data content. What is needed are the detailed data bases on inventory of buildings and lifelines with their locally specific seismic fragility properties. Similar data are needed for hospitals, shelters, firehouses, police stations and other emergency service providers. Moreover, the soil and rock conditions which control the shaking and soil liquefaction properties for any given event, need to be systematically compiled into Geographical Information System (GIS) data bases so they can be combined with the inventory of built assets for quantitative loss and impact estimates. Even under the best of conceivable funding conditions, it will take years before such data bases can be established so they will be sufficiently reliable and detailed to perform realistic and credible loss scenarios. Without such planning tools, society will remain in the dark as to what it may encounter from a future major eastern earthquake. Given these uncertainties, and despite them, both the public and private sector must develop at least some basic concepts for contingency plans. For instance, the New York City financial service industry, from banks to the stock and bond markets and beyond, ought to consider operational contingency planning, first in terms of strengthening their operational facilities, but also for temporary backup operations until operations in the designated facilities can return to some measure of normalcy. The Federal Reserve in its oversight function for this industry needs to take a hard look at this situation.

A society, whose economy depends increasingly so crucially on rapid exchange of vast quantities of information must become concerned with strengthening its communication facilities together with the facilities into which the information is channeled. In principle, the availability of satellite communication (especially if self-powered) with direct up and down links, provides here an opportunity that is potentially a great advantage over distributed buried networks. Distributed networks for transportation, power, gas, water, sewer and cabled communication will be expensive to harden (or restore after an event).

In all future instances of major capital spending on buildings and urban infrastructures, the incorporation of seismically resilient design principles at all stages of realization will be the most effective way to reduce society’s exposure to high seismic risks. To achieve this, all levels of government need to utilize legislative and regulatory options; insurance industries need to build economic incentives for seismic safety features into their insurance policy offerings; and the private sector, through trade and professional organizations’ planning efforts, needs to develop a healthy self-protective stand. Also, the insurance industry needs to invest more aggressively into broadly based research activities with the objective to quantify the seismic hazards, the exposed assets and their seismic fragilities much more accurately than currently possible. Only together these combined measures may first help to quantify and then reduce our currently untenably large seismic risk exposures in the virtually unprepared eastern cities. Given the low-probability/high-impact situation in this part of the country, seismic safety planning needs to be woven into both the regular capital spending and daily operational procedures. Without it we must be prepared to see little progress. Unless we succeed to build seismic safety considerations into everyday decision making as a normal procedure of doing business, society will lose the race against the unstoppable forces of nature. While we never can entirely win this race, we can succeed in converting unmitigated catastrophes into manageable disasters, or better, tolerable natural events.

The Rising Japanese Nuclear Horn?

Land of the Rising Nukes?

Commentary

The U.S.-based security alliance in the Asia-Pacific region as we know it is all but dead.

For the first time since the end of World War II, Japan has announced that it will double its defense spending. Over the next five years, its defense budget will increase from about 1 percent to 2 percent of GDP per year, or from about $50 billion to $100 billion per year. This will make Japan the third largest defense budget in the world, after the United States and China.

There are several reasons behind this drastic departure from Japan’s defense posture and several implications that attach to it.

A Shift in Defense Sharing

First, Tokyo has determined that the world has reached a turning point in history. Communist China is now its biggest threat. Beijing has a blue water navy that’s now numerically larger than the U.S. Navy, continually threatens Taiwan and Australia, and has made new alliances with traditional Western allies, such as the Solomon Islands.

On a related front, China’s deepened alliance with Russia and its support of nuclear-armed North Korea both pose elevated security risks. Japan now faces threats from all three aggressive nations and the worst security environment since World War II.

Second, Japan has explicitly linked its security to that of Taiwan. To support that recently announced strategic object requires deploying military assets that go beyond defending Japan’s home islands. More on that in a bit.

Third, Japan’s leaders have rightly determined that the U.S. security umbrella is becoming less reliable as China’s military power grows, the United States gets more deeply involved in Ukraine, and war clouds gather over the Asia-Pacific region. Plus, in the wake of the disastrous Afghanistan withdrawal, U.S. political will and strategic reliability are less certain than before in the minds of U.S. allies.

Fourth, both the war in Ukraine and Beijing’s vow to take control of Taiwan underscore that war is possible in the Asia-Pacific region, perhaps and even probable. Ukraine’s lack of military readiness and strategic weapons prior to Russia’s invasion is certainly not lost on Japanese military planners.

Japan’s New Defense Plans

Japan’s new security plans include enhancing its coastguard and maritime forces, as well as developing greater cyber and space capabilities, unmanned systems, and integrated missile defenses. They will also be increasing munition supplies and hardening infrastructure to increase resilience.

The 5th and 8th Air Wing of Japan Air Self-Defense Force’s F-15 and F-2 fighters hold a joint military drill with U.S. Marine Aircraft Group 12’s F-35B fighters off Japan’s southernmost main island of Kyushu in this handout picture released Oct. 4, 2022. (Joint Staff Office of the Defense Ministry of Japan/Reuters)

But that’s not all. In addition to purely defensive actions, Japan will also develop counterstrike capabilities. Those capabilities could include long-range precision-guided cruise missiles capable of hitting enemy bases in North Korea and China. This is a huge upgrade in defensive capabilities, indicative of new perspectives of Japan’s military planners.

Whether spoken aloud or not, if Japan is to truly take responsibility for its own security, then its military capabilities will have to go even further.

In light of the rising tensions, there will also be a shift toward closer Japanese defense and intelligence cooperation with regional allies, such as South Korea and Australia, with the participation and blessing of the United States. Again, as Ukraine demonstrates, close coordination is critical in providing effective responses in a fast-moving conflict.

But as the war in Ukraine aptly shows, counterstrike capability doesn’t prevent war; it only escalates it. Deterrence is the key to protecting against invasion by another nation.

Deterring War With Nukes

Therefore, the ultimate deterrence would have to be the possession of precision-guided nuclear ballistic missiles, preferably hypersonic, to avoid anti-missile defense systems.

The idea of a nuclear-armed Japan goes back to the 1960s. As recent as 2009, planners feared that a nuclear-armed Japan would cause an arms race among other Asian nations, such as India and North Korea, but the region is well past that point.

However, this potential nuclear option has yet to be widely discussed. The ongoing dialogue between the United States and Japan has mainly been around evolving the joint security posture from one of dependence to mutual engagement. Tokyo’s enhanced engagement would likely include Japan building up its own defense industry to make them more competitive internationally, including a modern fighter aircraft industry in possible collaboration with the United Kingdom and Italy.

Japan Is Quite Capable of Going Nuclear

Japanese military planners are not only considering the nuclear option, but it is well-prepared, both technologically and in terms of its supply of fissile material. Japan certainly has the know-how and industrial infrastructure to develop its own delivery systems, but it also owns enough plutonium to produce up to 6,000 nuclear warheads. Only Russia and the United States own more weapons-grade plutonium than Japan.

Of course, there are deep historical, political, environmental, and cultural issues surrounding the question of Japan developing nuclear weapons that are too diverse to go into here. Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Fukushima are huge factors in Japan’s cultural identity.

However, the overriding fact is that Japan sees the world order rapidly changing and, with it, the deterioration of its security. Japan counts at least three nuclear-armed adversaries, with two of them, North Korea and China, repeatedly violating its air and sea spaces with missiles and naval vessels.

As Tokyo’s confidence in U.S. security guarantees diminishes and Russia threatens the use of nukes in its war with Ukraine, Tokyo is forced to reevaluate its security situation going forward and its defense options to meet them. Consequently, nuclear deterrence is now at the center of Japan’s security planning going forward.

Who can blame the Japanese?

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

James R. Gorrie is the author of “The China Crisis” (Wiley, 2013) and writes on his blog, TheBananaRepublican.com. He is based in Southern California.

Iraqis condemn continuation of Babylon the Great’s occupation

Iraqis condemn continuation of US troops occupation

TEHRAN, Dec. 31 (MNA) – On the anniversary of the martyrdom of anti-terror icons Lt. Gen. Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi Abumahdi al-Muhandis, the Iraqis have taken to social media to denounce the continuation of US troops’ presence in their country.

Mehr News Agency

TEHRAN, Dec. 31 (MNA) – On the anniversary of the martyrdom of anti-terror icons Lt. Gen. Qassem Soleimani and Iraqi Abumahdi al-Muhandis, the Iraqis have taken to social media to denounce the continuation of US troops’ presence in their country.

Supporters of the Iraqi Resistance groups and Iraqi social networking websites activists have launched a campaign against the continuation of US troops’ presence in their country describing it as an occupation.

They demanded the withdrawal of the occupying US troops on the anniversary of the assassination of Lieutenant General Qassem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, the second-in-command of Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Units (PMU), and their companions who were martyred in a US drone strike authorized by previous president Trump near Baghdad International Airport on January 3, 2020.

Some of the Iraqi users have posted a picture of “Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah”, the Secretary General of the Lebanese Hezbollah Movement, who had said in a previous speech on the anniversary of the martyrdom of the Resistance commanders, the American occupying forces “came horizontally and will withdraw vertically.”

Other users also reposted videos of the criminal activities of the American troops at the Baghdad airport and wrote, “America killed the leaders of the field and the defenders of our homeland. This is an unforgivable action.”

By trending the hashtag “Invasion of the Devil’s Den,” the pro-Resistance activists last night (Friday, December 30) commemorated the third anniversary of the martyrdom of the anti-terror commanders and voiced their anger against the continued presence of American forces in their country.

After the assassination, the Iraqi parliament approved a piece of legislation calling on the Baghdad government to expel foreign troops, most notably the US troops from their country.

The Iran-Obama Nuclear Deal is Dead: Daniel 8

Photo: Then U.S. President Trump announcing withdrawal from Iran nuclear deal in May 2018. Credit: The White House Flickr.

Is the Iran Nuclear Deal Dead or Alive?

By Thalif Deen

UNITED NATIONS (IDN) — U.S. President Joe Biden’s off-the-cuff remark, describing the nuclear deal with Iran as “dead”, has led to widespread speculation about the future of the landmark agreement—and of the potential emergence of new nuclear powers in the horizon.

“It is dead, but we’re not going to announce it,” Biden said before adding, “long story”.

Biden’s quote was on a video circulating on social media filmed during an election event in November—and disclosed in December.

The White House did not dispute the authenticity of the video but refused to comment—as did the State Department, leaving in doubt the future of Iran’s nuclear agreement known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

The agreement, which was reached in Vienna in July 2015, included Iran, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, namely, the U.S., UK, France, China and Russia, plus Germany, together with the European Union (EU).

The 159-page document, with five annexes, also lifted some of the crippling sanctions on the Iranian economy in exchange for limitations on Tehran’s nuclear programme.

In May 2018, the United States withdrew from JCPOA as President Donald Trump announced he would negotiate a better deal. But that never happened.

If Iran eventually ends up going nuclear, it is most likely that Saudi Arabia, its political rival in the Middle East, would stake its claim to go nuclear as well, perhaps followed by Egypt.

Currently, Israel is the only undeclared nuclear power in the Middle East.

A lingering question remains: Will Iran eventually emerge as the world’s 10th nuclear power, along with the existing nine, namely, the UK, U.S., Russia, China and France—the five permanent members of the UN Security Council—plus India, Pakistan, Israel and North Korea.

Asked about the future of the JCPOA, UN Secretary-General António Guterres told reporters on December 19: “I have always believed that the JCPOA was a remarkable diplomatic achievement”.

“I was very frustrated when the JCPOA was put into question, and we will do everything we can, in the context of our limited sphere of competence, to make sure that the JCPOA is not lost, recognising that we are, at the present moment, in a serious risk of losing the JCPOA, which in my opinion, would be a very negative factor for peace and stability in the region and further afield,” declared Guterres.

Joseph Gerson, President of the Campaign for Peace, Disarmament and Common Security and Co-Convener of the Peace & Planet International Network, told IDN the “death” of the JCPOA brings the world face to face with the possible end of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) regime, vastly increasing the dangers of nuclear weapons proliferation, and nuclear war itself.

“With the Biden Administration’s announcement of the death of the JCPOA process, we are confronted by the dangers and enormity of Donald Trump’s ignorant and reckless withdrawal of the U.S. from the critically important JCPOA and the failures of the nuclear weapons states to fulfil their Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty obligation to engage in good faith diplomacy to eliminate their nuclear arsenals,” he said.

Gerson said that former IAEA head and Nobel Peace Laureate Mohamed ElBaradei decried the dangerous hypocrisy and double standard of the nuclear weapons states.

And Joseph Rotblat, the Nobel Peace laureate who earlier quit the Manhattan Project, warned that the failure to eliminate the world’s nuclear arsenals would lead to global proliferation. No nation, he observed, would long tolerate what it experiences as an unjust imbalance of power/terror.

“This in no way exempts the Iranian government from condemnation for its nuclear program that has brought it to the brink of nuclear weapons production and the threats implicit in the program,” said Gerson.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken told reporters on December 22 that Iran is engaging in destabilizing activities, dangerous activities, support for terrorist groups and destabilizing actions throughout the region.

“We’ve been focused and engaged. That also does not take away from the proposition that it is profoundly in our interest that Iran not acquire a nuclear weapon. And President Biden is committed to ensuring that Iran not acquire a nuclear weapon. We’ve continued to believe that the most effective way, the most durable way to do that was through diplomacy.”

And when the JCPOA, the Iran nuclear deal, was actually enforced, said Blinken, it did exactly what it was designed to do.

“It put Iran’s nuclear program in a box. It was verified not only by international inspectors, it was verified by our own people, Iran’s compliance with that, including by the previous administration.”

“And in our judgment, it was a grievous mistake to pull out of that agreement and to let Iran’s nuclear program out of the box. But that’s the reality that we inherited and that we’ve had to deal with.”

“So, on the diplomacy, again, as I said, we think that’s the best solution. But despite the efforts that we’ve made, even as we’ve been pushing back against Iran’s other egregious actions, despite the efforts that we’ve made and our partners in Europe have made, Iran has not been willing or able to do what’s necessary to come back into compliance with the agreement.”

“So, we will continue to look and act on ways to make sure that, one way or another, Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon.”

Elaborating further, Gerson told IDN that the new crisis, created by the inability of U.S. and Iranian negotiators to find common ground to restore the Agreement, must be understood in its deeper contexts, beginning with the injustices of decades of coercive U.S. hegemony across Southwest Asia, as well as the Iranian government’s ambitions to replace the Western hegemon.

“These include the 1953 Anglo-American overthrow of the Mosaddegh government, backing of the Shah’s brutal dictatorship, support for Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Iran to overthrow an “Islamic” government, and repeated U.S. threats and preparations to initiate nuclear war to reinforce its hegemony.”

He also pointed out that Israel’s nuclear arsenal and the double standard practised by the U.S. and other nations turning a hypocritical blind eye to Israel’s nuclear arsenal are also significant factors.

“It is increasingly expected that if and when Iran becomes a nuclear weapons state that it will follow the Israeli model, not publicly acknowledging its arsenal while wielding its nuclear weapons as a coercive and potentially genocidal force.”

This, in turn, will likely lead Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states to develop nuclear arsenals of their own, he predicted.

“We also face the possibility that, with or without explicit U.S. backing, before or soon after Iran produces its first nuclear weapon, its nuclear infrastructure will be attacked by Israel. This, in turn, will generate a wider regional war with devastating consequences for all involved.”

It is thus imperative that despite their differences, all governments that can exercise diplomatic leverage to save the JCPOA. Gerson declared that it is near the top of our urgent and common interests. [IDN-InDepthNews — 30 December 2022]

Photo: The then U.S. President Trump announced withdrawal from Iran nuclear deal in May 2018. Credit: The White House Flickr.

IDN is the flagship agency of the Non-profit International Press Syndicate.

We believe in the free flow of information. Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International, except for articles that are republished with permission.

Russian Horn plans to deploy nuclear weapons to Belarus

Putin plans to deploy nuclear weapons to Belarus – Belarusian politician

Pavel Latushko, former Minister of Culture of Belarus. Photo by Natalia Fedosenko 

There are signs indicating that Russia is getting ready to deploy tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus in the near future, the Belarusian politician and former Minister of Culture of Belarus Pavel Latushko claimed in his interview with Radio NV.

“We have confirmed information from several sources that the officers of the rocket and artillery forces of Belarus made a trip to the Russian Federation to visit warehouses where tactical nuclear weapons are stored. Belarusian officers studied the logistics and transportation of nuclear weapons to Belarus,” Latushko said.

Drills of the chemical and radiation protection troops of Belarus took place on the territory of Belarus earlier this week, which might be one of the elements of the preparation to transport nukes from Russia to Belarus, according to Latushko.

Ukraine needs independent journalism. And we need you. Join our community on Patreon and help us better connect Ukraine to the world. We’ll use your contribution to attract new authors, upgrade our website, and optimize its SEO. For as little as the cost of one cup of coffee a month, you can help build bridges between Ukraine and the rest of the world, plus become a co-creator and vote for topics we should cover next. Become a patron or see other ways to support.

The Hypocrisy of Babylon the Great: Revelation 18

Violations of International Law: United States Hypocrisy Laid Bare – LA Progressive

David Starr

The Southern U.S. in particular has a problem regarding human rights. Historically, this problem has existed for about two centuries, when looking at overt racism (or slavery) and systemic racism (still evident today despite social reforms). The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has not only documented these rights violations, it has provided documents to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD).

The CERD’s report, according to the SPLC, is a “serious rebuke and a wakeup call for the Biden administration.” The SPLC also stated that the report reveals the U.S. has a “longstanding failure of taking compliance with the treaty on racial discrimination seriously.”

In a press release, the SPLC focused on the criminal legal system in the South, the information of which was submitted by the SPLC to CERD, which stated that “the widespread, disparate harms [results] from the arrests, harsh prison sentences, and incarceration on Black communities.” Additionally, there are “the devastating impacts of solitary confinement, prison labor, the school to prison pipeline, and incarceration of parents on Black families.”

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) called a report put out by the U.N. Human Rights Council in 2015 “a scathing” condemnation with 348 recommendations to stop human rights violations in the U.S. But the latter has not taken its rights problem very seriously, instead putting off compliance of international treaties.

It’s like kicking the can down the road.

What U.S. leaders have done is preach to the rest of the world that their country is exceptional, that it is always the good guy supporting freedom and democracy. In reality, more often than not, the U.S. has been blatantly hypocritical in dealing with other countries, arrogantly lecturing them about what is right and what is wrong. Meanwhile, the U.S., as an empire, has done a lot of wrong.

Xinhuanet has published a list of rights violations committed by the U.S. Xinhuanet is a Chinese source and one may think that it only puts out propaganda and in the process discredits itself. Or, that the information it publicizes comes from a nefarious source. But Xinhuanet is still a source and it cannot be lying about everything.

There are inconvenient truths that are out there about the U.S., and foreign sources have the right to reveal these truths. Thus, a source like Xinhuanet has put out truths about U.S. foreign policy actions and the hypocrisy that accompanies those actions.

The list starts off with U.S. interference in other countries’ affairs and violating the sovereignty of other countries: “The principle of non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs is an important principle of the UN Charter and the basic norm governing international relations.” 

But the U.S. has repeatedly violated the Charter for decades to save “freedom” and “democracy.” Usually, that is not the case since it does this “under the guise of so-called democracy and human rights” while trying to turn other countries into market satellites. And China was an example of this.

Before 1949, China was known as the “Sick Man of Asia,” being carved up by western powers and going through a brutal invasion by the imperial Japanese military during World War II. It was a typical “Third World” country that was exploited for its wealth, labor and resources; just like many “Third World” countries today.

The list states that “the United States has long disregarded the fundamental principle of international law that prohibits the unlawful use of force or threat to use force, and has brazenly launched wars against other sovereign states.” One example that immediately comes to mind is the 2003 Iraq War. 

Under the façade of protecting democracy and to implement regime change to take down Saddam Hussein (who was a loathsome character), U.S. officials from the Bush Jr. regime fervently lied about Iraq’s nuclear capabilities. There was a rush to war, committing “shock and awe.” U.S. officials also lied about Hussein having an alliance with Osama bin Laden, another lie since they didn’t see eye-to-eye.

The result of the Iraq War caused the deaths of about 1 million Iraqis while displacing millions. “Shock and awe” could very well be called a terrorist action.

The list states that,

“The United States has been upgrading its nuclear arsenal, lowering the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons, using the so-called ‘trilateral negotiations’ as a pretext to evade its special responsibility for nuclear disarmament, and even entertain the thought of resuming nuclear tests.” 

There has been preaching from U.S. officials, warning “rogue” countries not to develop a nuclear arsenal, even though the U.S. arsenal is the biggest threat in the world. U.S. military spending dwarfs the military spending of the next 10 nations combined.

Regarding biological weapons, “The United States has stood alone in opposing negotiations on a verification protocol of the Biological Weapons Convention and impeded international efforts to verify the biological activities in member countries and has thus become a ‘stumbling block’ to the process of biological arms control.” Additionally, “The United States has secretly set up biological laboratories around the world and engaged in biological militarization.” 

Again, it gets back to the U.S. pointing the accusing finger at other nations it sees as “enemies” for supposedly endangering the world with biological weapons, yet has blocked a way to check on the presence of biological weapons in the U.S. itself. It makes it look like the U.S. is hiding something, like a stockpile of its own biological weapons.

And the U.S. is obsessed with imposing sanctions on other countries: 

“According to data published by U.S. legal firm Gibson Dunn, under former President Donald Trump’s administration, the United States took more than 3,900 distinct sanctions actions, a record frequency of 3 a day.” 

We are supposed to believe that the imposed sanctions are against “rogue” nations and “evil” leaders. This is, for example, indicated in U.S. media propaganda. While there may be a particular nation storing biological weapons, U.S. finger-pointing brings out U.S. hypocrisy.

The U.S. has threatened to withdraw, or has actually withdrawn, from international treaties and organizations:

“In June 2018, the United States announced its withdrawal from the UN Human Rights Council, citing the council’s ‘bias’ against Israel and its inability to effectively protect human rights.” 

The U.S. also continues to side with a nation violating basic rights – Israel with its apartheid system imposed on Palestinians.

“In April 2017, the Trump administration announced a unilateral ‘cut-off’ of funding to the UN Population Fund on the grounds that that the organization supports or participates in coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.” But the Biden administration did restore funding to the organization. As for Trump and his ilk, accusations of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization are lies used in an attempt to discredit the left.

“In 2020, despite objections from its allies, the United States announced that it initiated the procedure of exiting from the Skies Treaty from May 22.” Whatever the Skies Treaty is specifically, it sounds like the U.S. is shirking its responsibilities.

“In 2019, the United States announced its withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range NuclearForces Treaty for the sake of developing advanced weapons without constraints.” The U.S., as an empire, is unfortunately gearing up for more war. That’s the biggest threat to peace.

The blatant irresponsibility shown by U.S. leaders and officials is inexcusable in light of the danger and chaos in the world. Rather than exhibiting wisdom and empathy, the world’s lone superpower is displaying a superiority complex. Just the fact that the U.S. is prioritizing implements of war shows that it priorities are ass-backwards.

There is no longer a Cold War existing in the world. The only “danger” to the U.S. is the world becoming more multi-polar, and this threatens its hegemony. It thus provokes other countries like Russia and China into a new Cold War.

Where is the exportation of freedom and democracy? These things hardly exist within the U.S.’s imperial foreign policy, let alone within their own borders.

Sometimes freedom and democracy look as though it doesn’t exist within the U.S. (despite its degree of democracy). The SPLC took a major step in showing documents to CERD about racist violence in the United States. While this is very important, documentation is also crucial to show the racist violence and racist-sponsored violence by the U.S., as an empire, internationally. That and the U.S.’s hypocrisy in dealing with international law.

This article was produced by StarrNarrative.

Conflict Outside the Temple Walls: Revelation 11

Spotlight on Terrorism and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict (December 21-27, 2022)

Published: 28/12/2022

Armed, masked Palestinians march wearing headbands reading, “the masked lion” (Rasha Hirzallah’s Twitter account, December 20, 2022).

Na’im Muhammad Bader draws a gun to shoot a policeman.

The gun having failed to fire, he drives in reverse in an attempt to run him over (Israel Police Force Facebook page, December 23, 2022).

Daraghmeh’s body wrapped in a Hamas flag (Jmedia Twitter account, December 22, 2022).

Flooding in the Gaza Strip (Right: Paldf Twitter account, December 24, 2022.

The DFLP’s military exercise: simulating the storming of an IDF post (Telegram channel of the DFLP’s military-terrorist wing, December 24, 2022).

Armed, masked Palestinians march wearing headbands reading, “the masked lion” (Rasha Hirzallah’s Twitter account, December 20, 2022).

Na’im Muhammad Bader draws a gun to shoot a policeman.

The gun having failed to fire, he drives in reverse in an attempt to run him over (Israel Police Force Facebook page, December 23, 2022).

Daraghmeh’s body wrapped in a Hamas flag (Jmedia Twitter account, December 22, 2022).

Flooding in the Gaza Strip (Right: Paldf Twitter account, December 24, 2022.

The DFLP’s military exercise: simulating the storming of an IDF post (Telegram channel of the DFLP’s military-terrorist wing, December 24, 2022).

Armed, masked Palestinians march wearing headbands reading, “the masked lion” (Rasha Hirzallah’s Twitter account, December 20, 2022).

Overview

• This past week Palestinian terrorists carried out four attacks: a combined attack in Kafr Qassem (an Israeli-Arab city) in which three Israeli policemen were wounded; and three shooting attacks in Samaria, in which no Israeli casualties were reported. The security forces recently exposed a terrorist network directed by the organizations in the Gaza Strip, which planned to carry out attacks inside Israel. Palestinians continued throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails at Israeli vehicles driving on the roads in Judea and Samaria. The Israeli security forces continued counterterrorism activities, detaining dozens of wanted terrorists and confiscating weapons.
• A Hamas operative from Tubas was killed during a clash with IDF forces near the Tomb of Joseph in Nablus. He was also a soccer player with a local Tulkarm team. Senior figures in the Palestinian Authority (PA) ignored his Hamas affiliation and called on FIFA to punish Israel.
• The security forces revealed information about the terrorist who carried out the double IED attack in Jerusalem on November 23, 2022, in which two Israelis were killed. He acted alone and was influenced by ISIS ideology but did not belong to the organization.
• The Gaza Strip remained relatively quiet. The recent rains caused flooding in several areas, including roads and houses. The Hamas government accused Israel of responsibility because it opened dams near the Gaza Strip.
• The PA continues preparing itself for the new Israeli government. Mahmoud Abbas held a meeting of the Palestinian leadership where they voted to launch a political and diplomatic campaign which would include appeals to international organizations such as UN agencies, the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ). They also voted to launch a propaganda campaign to revile, libel and slander the new government. Mahmoud Abbas’ spokesman, who is also the PA minister of media information, compared the new government to the Taliban and claimed it was worse than ISIS. He also attacked the American administration for supporting Israel and not keeping its promises to Mahmoud Abbas.
• Following the death of security prisoner Nasser Abu Hamid and the decision made by Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz not to deliver his body to the family, members of the PA leadership remain in contact with international groups regarding the issue, including appealing to the ICC.

Combined terrorist attack in Kafr Qassem (an Israeli-Arab city east of Tel Aviv)

• Before dawn on December 23, 2022, the Israeli police were summoned by a Kafr Qassem resident to deal with an issue of domestic violence. When the police arrived the resident came out holding a gun and tried to shoot the policemen, however, the safety was on and the gun did not fire. The resident attacked them with rocks and Molotov cocktails and then entered his vehicle and reversed in order to run them over. An officer arrived with an auxiliary force and shot and killed the attacker (Israel Police Force Facebook page, December 23, 2022). He was Na’im Muhammad Badir, 23 years old, from Kafr Qassem; he had no previous criminal record. His motivation is assumed to have been nationalist (Israeli media, December 23, 2022).

Right: Na’im Muhammad Badir from Kafr Qassem (al-Quds, December 25, 2022). Left: The funeral held for him in Kafr Qassem (Paldf Twitter account, December 25, 2022).

  
Right: Na’im Muhammad Bader draws a gun to shoot a policeman. Left: The gun having failed to fire, he drives in reverse in an attempt to run him over (Israel Police Force Facebook page, December 23, 2022).

• Hamas issued a mourning notice for him, stressing that the “resistance” [Palestinian terrorist attacks] continued and was escalating (Hamas website, December 23, 2022). The Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) also issued a mourning notice, stressing that the “crimes of Israel” (“the occupation”) against the Palestinian people would not harm their firm stance and commitment to defend their identity, despite attempts at “Judaization” (Paltoday, December 23, 2022).