We really are due for the sixth seal: Revelation 6:12

Opinion/Al Southwick: Could an earthquake really rock New England? We are 265 years overdue

On Nov. 8, a 3.6 magnitude earthquake struck Buzzard’s Bay off the coast of New Bedford. Reverberations were felt up to 100 miles away, across Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and parts of Connecticut and New York. News outlets scrambled to interview local residents who felt the ground shake their homes. Seismologists explained that New England earthquakes, while uncommon and usually minor, are by no means unheard of.

The last bad one we had took place on Nov. 18, 1755, a date long remembered.

It’s sometimes called the Boston Earthquake and sometimes the Cape Ann Earthquake. Its epicenter is thought to have been in the Atlantic Ocean about 25 miles east of Gloucester. Estimates say that it would have registered between 6.0 and 6.3 on the modern Richter scale. It was an occasion to remember as chronicled by John E. Ebel, director of the Weston observatory of Boston College:

“At about 4:30 in the morning on 18 November, 1755, a strong earthquake rocked the New England area. Observers reported damage to chimneys, brick buildings and stone walls in coastal communities from Portland, Maine to south of Boston … Chimneys were also damaged as far away as Springfield, Massachusetts, and New Haven, Connecticut. The earthquake was felt at Halifax, Nova Scotia to the northeast, Lake Champlain to the northwest, and Winyah, South Carolina to the southwest. The crew of a ship in deep water about 70 leagues east of Boston thought it had run aground and only realized it had felt an earthquake after it arrived at Boston later that same day.

“The 1755 earthquake rocked Boston, with the shaking lasting more than a minute. According to contemporary reports, as many as 1,500 chimneys were shattered or thrown down in part, the gable ends of about 15 brick buildings were broken out, and some church steeples ended up tilted due to the shaking. Falling chimney bricks created holes in the roofs of some houses. Some streets, particularly those on manmade ground along the water, were so covered with bricks and debris that passage by horse-drawn carriage was impossible. Many homes lost china and glassware that was thrown from shelves and shattered. A distiller’s cistern filled with liquor broke apart and lost its contents.”

We don’t have many details of the earthquake’s impact here, there being no newspaper in Worcester County at that time. We do know that one man, Christian Angel, working in a “silver” mine in Sterling, was buried alive when the ground shook. He is the only known fatality in these parts. We can assume that, if the quake shook down chimneys in Springfield and New Haven, it did even more damage hereabouts. We can imagine the cries of alarm and the feeling of panic as trees swayed violently, fields and meadows trembled underfoot and pottery fell off shelves and crashed below.

The Boston Earthquake was an aftershock from the gigantic Lisbon Earthquake that had leveled Lisbon, Portugal, a few days before. That cataclysm, estimated as an 8 or 9 on the modern Richter scale, was the most devastating natural catastrophe to hit western Europe since Roman times. The first shock struck on Nov. 1, at about 9 in the morning.

According to one account: ”Suddenly the city began to shudder violently, its tall medieval spires waving like a cornfield in the breeze … In the ancient cathedral, the Basilica de Santa Maria, the nave rocked and the massive chandeliers began swinging crazily. . . . Then came a second, even more powerful shock. And with it, the ornate façade of every great building in the square … broke away and cascaded forward.”

Until that moment, Lisbon had been one of the leading cities in western Europe, right up there with London and Paris. With 250,000 people, it was a center of culture, financial activity and exploration. Within minutes it was reduced to smoky, dusty rubble punctuated by human groans and screams. An estimated 60,000 to 100,000 lost their lives.

Since then, New England has been mildly shaken by quakes from time to time. One series of tremors on March 1, 1925, was felt throughout Worcester County, from Fitchburg to Worcester, and caused a lot of speculation.

What if another quake like that in 1755 hit New England today? What would happen? That question was studied 15 years ago by the Massachusetts Civil Defense Agency. Its report is sobering:

“The occurrence of a Richter magnitude 6.25 earthquake off Cape Ann, Massachusetts … would cause damage in the range of 2 to 10 billion dollars … in the Boston metropolitan area (within Route 128) due to ground shaking, with significant additional losses due to secondary effects such as soil liquefaction failures, fires and economic interruptions. Hundreds of deaths and thousands of major and minor injuries would be expected … Thousands of people could be displaced from their homes … Additional damage may also be experienced outside the 128 area, especially closer to the earthquake epicenter.”

So even if we don’t worry much about volcanoes, we know that hurricanes and tornadoes are always possible. As for earthquakes, they may not happen in this century or even in this millennium, but it is sobering to think that if the tectonic plates under Boston and Gloucester shift again, we could see a repeat of 1755.

Terrorism in the Pakistani Nuclear Horn: Daniel 7

Terrorism Poses Threats to Pakistan and the West, Says Bilawal

February 19, 2023

Amid growing terrorism and militancy in Pakistan, Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari in a panel discussion at Munich Security Conference on Saturday called on the international community to engage with the Afghan Taliban regime and take on threats of terrorism.  

Mr. Bilawal said that Afghanistan’s neighbors and the international community wanted the Afghan caretaker government to live up to its commitment promised in the Doha Agreement in the areas of women’s education, forming an inclusive government and talking on potential threats from terrorism emanating from terrorists groups of Daesh, TTP and Al Qaeda.

He said that the terrorist groups could conduct terrorist activities from Afghanistan as had been witnessed recently from the incidents in Pakistan.

Apparently, the foreign minister scapegoated the Taliban-run administration for not having the capacity to fight terror groups and live up to its obligations. He further called on the international community to convince the Taliban regime to fight terror groups and show it will.

Mr. Bilawal further added that Pakistan has helped Afghanistan by hosting millions of Afghan refugees on its soil for decades, and the international community should continue its humanitarian support, unfreeze Afghan assets, and engage with the Taliban, society, and women.

He reiterated that a peaceful Afghanistan is extremely vital for the economic development and trade connectivity of the region.

His remarks come as both Afghanistan and Pakistan are suffering from growing threats of terrorism and militancy. The outlawed Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has intensified its operation across the country after the militant group ended its unilateral ceasefire with the Pakistani government in November.

Meanwhile, in Afghanistan, the security situation is even worse. Since the return of the Taliban to power in August 2021, Daesh (ISIS) has carried out brutal attacks targeting foreign embassies, hotels, educational institutions, and more.

Support for nukes is on the rise in the South Korean Horn: Daniel 7

Why support for nukes is on the rise in South Korea


Over three-quarters of South Koreans believe a nuclear deterrent offers the best defense for their country amid growing security threats from North Korea and China. 

A new study indicates that more than 76% of South Koreans believe the nation should develop and deploy its own nuclear weapons to serve as a deterrent, with China seen as the biggest threat to peace in the region but North Korea also a constant cause for concern.

Perhaps surprisingly, analysts point out, backing for an independent nuclear capability has support from across the political spectrum in South Korea.

Conservatives insist an arsenal of nuclear weapons is necessary to fend off the threat posed by Beijing. China has in recent years been aggressively expanding its control of the South China Sea, is demanding control over Taiwan and has made increasingly bold territorial claims against many of its neighbors, including South Korea.

The unpredictable Kim Jong Un-led regime in Pyongyang has also been investing heavily in its nuclear and long-range missile capabilities in recent years, with analysts predicting an eighth underground nuclear test at the North’s Punggye-ri proving grounds in the coming months.

Others in South Korea have been alarmed at the perceived fragility of the security alliance that has tied the United States to Seoul since the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950.

While in office, President Donald Trump strong-armed Seoul into sharply increasing the amount it paid to keep US troops in the South by threatening to withdraw US forces from the peninsula.

More recently, questions have been asked about Washington’s commitment to the alliance as trade frictions have grown.

Conflict in Ukraine could escalate into nuclear war: Revelation 16

Conflict in Ukraine could escalate into nuclear clash between Russia and US – DOS

February 18, 2023

February 18, 2023, 08:36 – BLiTZ – News 

American politicians lie about what is happening in Ukraine. In the same way, they lied before about the victories in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is reported by the publication Salon, reports “Lenta.ru”.

According to the observer, earlier the US military reported to Congress about the victories of the American army in Iraq, but later it turned out that “all this was a lie and a lie.” At the moment, the United States continues to fight, now Ukraine has come under attack. “The unwinding of the same spiral continues. It is common knowledge that the first casualty of any hostilities is the truth.

The journalist noted that the West deliberately creates the illusion of Kyiv’s success, allegedly because of the colossal supplies of European and American weapons. The observer added that in this situation, Ukraine has little choice but to continue this farce, without looking at the “monstrous human and material costs.”

In conclusion, the publication emphasized that the extension of the Ukrainian conflict could end in a full-scale war between Moscow and Washington, which in turn is unlikely to avoid the use of nuclear weapons.

As previously reported, American political scientist Daniel Depetris predicted a nuclear war after Biden’s words. He is convinced that the support of the United States and NATO in the Ukrainian offensive in Crimea can lead to this.

Recently, the BLiTZ raised the topic of what the aggravation of relations between the Russian Federation and the United States will lead to. For more information, see the News TV program “Press Conference”.

We must prepare for the Iranian nuclear horn: Revelation 16

We must prepare for a nuclear Iran

What many proponents of an agreement have repeatedly failed to recognize is that the regime has been dead set on having a nuclear arsenal, no matter the cost.

Joseph Epstein

(February 17, 2023 / JNS)

For all intents and purposes, the Iranian nuclear deal, or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), is dead.

Iran can now enrich its uranium stockpile to 90%, which is weapons-grade, within a few weeks. After that, the regime only needs to place the enriched uranium in a warhead and run a nuclear test to join the league of nuclear rogue states like Russia and North Korea. Barring a full-scale invasion of the country, or an extremely unlikely coup or revolution, this will happen. Constructing a nuclear warhead is no simple task; it is exponentially more complicated than construction conventional bombs. However, given Iran’s determination, it is only a matter of time.

In December, Iranian officials said they had doubled their capacity to enrich uranium. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) monitoring cameras were shut down by the regime last May, and IAEA inspectors have been banned from checking on the program. IAEA officials say Iran has enriched 154 pounds of uranium to 60% purity. According to the head of the IAEA, Rafael Grossi, that is enough to sproduce several weapons.

What many proponents of the JCPOA have repeatedly failed to recognize is that Iran has been dead set on having a nuclear arsenal, no matter the cost. After watching what happened in Libya and Iraq, Iran’s leaders understand this is the only way for them to guarantee their safety. In 2008, then-Libyan President Moammar Gaddafi warned Iranians to abort their nuclear program, saying that they would, “suffer the same fate as Iraq.” Three years later, Gaddafi was overthrown and brutally murdered after NATO intervened to support a popular revolution against him. North Korea’s official news service promptly claimed that by giving up his nuclear-arms program, Gaddafi had opened himself up to an invasion. While they wisely remained silent on the issue, the Iranian regime drew the same conclusions.

Alex Grinberg, an expert on Iran at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security, says Iran has seen the cause of Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine on the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, in which Ukraine gave up its nuclear weapons in return for a worthless U.S. guarantee of security.

Optimists suggest that if Iran were to get its nuclear warheads, its leaders might relax their policy of entrenchment through the arming, training and funding of proxy groups like Hezbollah, Yemeni Houthis and Shia militias. Yet while, of course, desirable, this is unlikely. What is more apt to happen is Iran will join nuclear regimes like Russia and North Korea in becoming more aggressive globally precisely due to their new confidence.

Moreover, this tendency would only worsen once Iranians can guarantee a second-strike option, with either a nuclear submarine or hiding their stockpiles deep in the mountains as they have previously done with their nuclear facilities. Iran’s massive size and numerous mountain ranges make that a likely option.

Iran is unlikely to use nuclear weapons, given the potentially fatal consequences as a result. Nonetheless, its nuclear threats must be taken seriously, as should be the potential for accidents. During the Cold War, on several occasions, the United States and Soviet Union were almost accidentally plunged into nuclear war, such as with the case of Vasili Arkhipov and many other close calls. It is noteworthy that Moscow and Washington have mutually consented to set a communication line following the Cuban Missile Crisis as the leadership of both countries realized the risks of an undesired nuclear conflict. Tehran has refused to establish any kind of communication with Jerusalem, even in the case of emergency alone. This only further aggravates the risk.

Given the likelihood of a nuclear Iran, U.S. policy should be aggressive containment and deterrence. Iran must understand that if it uses a nuclear weapon—even a tactical one—it will pay a large price, whether through crippling cyber-attacks, conventional strikes on critical infrastructure or other means. There must be a credible deterrent in place to Iran and any other rogue nuclear power that breaking the nuclear taboo will never be worth it.

But the threat of nuclear weapons goes beyond their actual use. Nuclear weapons have always been a force-multiplier, and if Iran feels that its force is multiplied, it will ramp up its subversive activities. Iran must also be made to understand that the security it has from invasion does not apply to its proxies, and that it will be struck hard in reprisal for Iranian provocations. Overall, the regime must be made to understand that its nuclear weapons will not give it any advantages outside of Iranian territory.

Additionally, the United States should ramp up support for allies that would come under increased threat from a nuclear Iran—i.e., Israel, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Azerbaijan. If the United States does not do so, these allies will likely turn to Russia and China for protection, giving those nations even larger foothold in the Middle East and diminishing U.S. influence to almost zero.

Regardless of U.S. policy, Washington will have to prepare for Saudi Arabia to seek to acquire nuclear weapons, as it said it would once Iran does. The United States may be able to prevent Riyadh from proliferating by storing U.S. nuclear warheads on Saudi soil; however, given the Biden administration’s teetering relationship with the kingdom, it remains unclear if there is enough trust on either side for this to work. Saudi proliferation may then lead to Turkish and Egyptian proliferation.

Unlike in Vladimir Putin’s Russia, where only he is in charge of major decisions such as the deployment of nuclear weapons, in Iran, they are more likely to be taken by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps command together. Considering that this decision would have to be taken by such a large group whose consistent goal has been invulnerability and survival, this is unlikely. All the same, the force-multiplying ability of nuclear weapons in Iranian foreign policy is extremely dangerous. If the United States is not ready to respond with a robust policy to counter and protect its allies in the region, it risks losing them.

Joseph Epstein is a Legislative Fellow at the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET)

Israel Continues to Trample Outside the Temple Walls: Revelation 11

The scene of an alleged Israeli airstrike in the Kafar Sousah neighborhood of Syria's capital, Damascus, early February 19, 2023. (Social media)

Syria says 5 killed, 15 wounded in Israeli strike on Damascus residential area

Heavy damage inflicted to buildings in Kafar Sousah neighborhood, an area said to house Iranian sites; state-run news agency says victims mostly civilians

By EMANUEL FABIAN Today, 1:09 amUpdated at 3:15 pm  

The scene of an alleged Israeli airstrike in the Kafar Sousah neighborhood of Syria’s capital, Damascus, early February 19, 2023. (Social media)

The Israeli Air Force allegedly carried out a strike late Saturday night targeting a residential neighborhood in Damascus, killing five people and leaving 15 others hurt, Syria’s state news agency SANA reported.

There was no comment from the Israel Defense Forces, in line with its policy of not generally commenting on air raids in the country. Israeli officials have previously said the IDF does not target civilians and seeks to avoid damage to residential areas as much as possible.

According to the Reuters news agency, the strike targeted an area in the Kafar Sousah neighborhood in the Syrian capital, near a large and heavily guarded security complex and close to Iranian installations.

Orient News, a Syrian opposition media outlet, claimed the strikes targeted Iranian militia officials at the so-called Iranian school in Kafar Sousah.

SANA, citing a military source, said four civilians and one soldier were killed, and another 15 civilians were wounded in the strike. It said several of those wounded were listed in critical condition.

Some unconfirmed Syrian media reports put the death toll higher.

The airstrike also inflicted heavy damage to a number of residential buildings in Kafar Sousah, SANA said.

#كفرسوسة ب #دمشق بعيد تعرضها لعدوان اسرائيلي وأنباء عن استشهاد مدنيين اثنين.#سوريةpic.twitter.com/P51CqLbcFa


— خالد اسكيف (@khalediskef) February 18, 2023

Images and video from the Damascus neighborhood showed heavy damage to several buildings.

Reuters said there are several multi-story security buildings located within Kafar Sousah.

Imad Mughniyeh, a notorious Hezbollah terror chief, was allegedly assassinated by Israel in a 2008 bombing in Kafar Sousah, close to where Saturday’s strike took place.

If this geolocation is accurate, the #Damascus strike was almost exactly where Imad Mughniyeh was killed in 2008. Barely 100 metres to the west #Syria https://t.co/YKXA0oivJ9pic.twitter.com/QZNbSIfk6L

— Alex Rowell (@alexjrowell) February 19, 2023

Separately, the Israeli jets targeted Iranian and Syrian regime military sites near the Damascus International Airport, as well as in Sitt Zaynab and al-Kiswah, a town and a city just south of the capital, Orient News said.

The outlet also claimed the damage to the residential buildings in Kafar Sousah was caused by a misfired Syrian anti-aircraft missile.

SANA claimed Syrian air defenses managed to intercept “most” of the missiles launched by IAF jets from over the Golan Heights in the strike. Syria regularly claims to intercept Israeli missiles, though military analysts doubt such assertions.

Footage from northern Israel appeared to show a Syrian air defense missile exploding over the Golan Heights.

???????? صور | شهداء وإصابات بقصف صهيوني استهدف أحد المنازل في حي كفرسوسة في محيط دمشق.#أشبال_الثأر#تكامل_الأدوار#الباب_الدوار#التطبيع_جريمةpic.twitter.com/LIL0JLcZ59

— قناة الأقصى الفضائية (@SerajSat) February 18, 2023

The strike was later condemned by Russia, a key backer of the Syrian regime in the over decade-long civil war, which called the attack a “flagrant violation” of international law. Israel’s need to coordinate with Russia — which controls Syrian airspace — to carry out strikes has been cited as a chief reason for Jerusalem’s reluctance to supply Kyiv with weaponry amid the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

“We strongly urge the Israeli side to stop armed provocations against the Syrian Arab Republic and refrain from steps that are fraught with dangerous consequences for the entire region,” Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said, according to Reuters.

As a rule, Israel’s military does not comment on specific strikes in Syria, but has acknowledged conducting hundreds of sorties against Iran-backed groups attempting to gain a foothold in the country over the last decade.

The IDF says it also attacks arms shipments believed to be bound for those groups, chief among them Lebanon’s Hezbollah terror organization. Additionally, airstrikes attributed to Israel have repeatedly targeted Syrian air defense systems.

Last week, the Saudi-owned Elaph news site cited an Israeli military official as saying if Iran ships weapons to its regional proxies under the guise of humanitarian aid to Syria following the major earthquake there, the IDF would not hesitate to strike.

The unnamed official said “there is information indicating that Iran will take advantage of the tragic situation in Syria” and ship weapons to Hezbollah and other Iran-backed groups in Syria.

Several Iranian cargo planes carrying aid have landed in Syria since a major earthquake struck the country and areas in southeast Turkey on February 6.

In recent years, several airstrikes against alleged Iranian weapon shipments disguised as seemingly harmless products have been attributed to Israel, including one incident last month.

Generally, relatively large weapons are thought to be smuggled via Syria on Iranian cargo airlines, which frequently land at Damascus International and the Tiyas, or T-4, airbase, outside of the central Syrian city of Palmyra.

The weaponry is then believed to be stored in warehouses in the area before being transported to Lebanon.

Who is the Antichrist Iraq’s most influential religious-political figure?

Who is Muqtada al-Sadr, Iraq’s most influential religious-political figure?

Sulaiman LkaderiPublished date: 21 October 2021 17:38 UTC| Last update: 10 hours 40 mins ago 111Shares

Muqtada al-Sadr emerged as the frontrunner in Iraq’s 2021 elections. The Shia cleric, militia leader and political kingmaker has played a crucial role in shaping Iraq since the US invasion in 2003. Here’s what you need to know about him.