Preparing for the Sixth Seal (Revelation 6:12)

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

The Sixth Seal: NY City DestroyedIf today a magnitude 6 earthquake were to occur centered on New York City, what would its effects be? Will the loss be 10 or 100 billion dollars? Will there be 10 or 10,000 fatalities? Will there be 1,000 or 100,000 homeless needing shelter? Can government function, provide assistance, and maintain order?

At this time, no satisfactory answers to these questions are available. A few years ago, rudimentary scenario studies were made for Boston and New York with limited scope and uncertain results. For most eastern cities, including Washington D.C., we know even less about the economic, societal and political impacts from significant earthquakes, whatever their rate of occurrence.

Why do we know so little about such vital public issues? Because the public has been lulled into believing that seriously damaging quakes are so unlikely in the east that in essence we do not need to consider them. We shall examine the validity of this widely held opinion.

Is the public’s earthquake awareness (or lack thereof) controlled by perceived low SeismicitySeismicHazard, or SeismicRisk? How do these three seismic features differ from, and relate to each other? In many portions of California, earthquake awareness is refreshed in a major way about once every decade (and in some places even more often) by virtually every person experiencing a damaging event. The occurrence of earthquakes of given magnitudes in time and space, not withstanding their effects, are the manifestations of seismicity. Ground shaking, faulting, landslides or soil liquefaction are the manifestations of seismic hazard. Damage to structures, and loss of life, limb, material assets, business and services are the manifestations of seismic risk. By sheer experience, California’s public understands fairly well these three interconnected manifestations of the earthquake phenomenon. This awareness is reflected in public policy, enforcement of seismic regulations, and preparedness in both the public and private sector. In the eastern U.S., the public and its decision makers generally do not understand them because of inexperience. Judging seismic risk by rates of seismicity alone (which are low in the east but high in the west) has undoubtedly contributed to the public’s tendency to belittle the seismic loss potential for eastern urban regions.

Let us compare two hypothetical locations, one in California and one in New York City. Assume the location in California does experience, on average, one M = 6 every 10 years, compared to New York once every 1,000 years. This implies a ratio of rates of seismicity of 100:1. Does that mean the ratio of expected losses (when annualized per year) is also 100:1? Most likely not. That ratio may be closer to 10:1, which seems to imply that taking our clues from seismicity alone may lead to an underestimation of the potential seismic risks in the east. Why should this be so?

To check the assertion, let us make a back-of-the-envelope estimate. The expected seismic risk for a given area is defined as the area-integrated product of: seismic hazard (expected shaking level), assets ($ and people), and the assets’ vulnerabilities (that is, their expected fractional loss given a certain hazard – say, shaking level). Thus, if we have a 100 times lower seismicity rate in New York compared to California, which at any given point from a given quake may yield a 2 times higher shaking level in New York compared to California because ground motions in the east are known to differ from those in the west; and if we have a 2 times higher asset density (a modest assumption for Manhattan!), and a 2 times higher vulnerability (again a modest assumption when considering the large stock of unreinforced masonry buildings and aged infrastructure in New York), then our California/New York ratio for annualized loss potential may be on the order of (100/(2x2x2)):1. That implies about a 12:1 risk ratio between the California and New York location, compared to a 100:1 ratio in seismicity rates.

From this example it appears that seismic awareness in the east may be more controlled by the rate of seismicity than by the less well understood risk potential. This misunderstanding is one of the reasons why earthquake awareness and preparedness in the densely populated east is so disproportionally low relative to its seismic loss potential. Rare but potentially catastrophic losses in the east compete in attention with more frequent moderate losses in the west. New York City is the paramount example of a low-probability, high-impact seismic risk, the sort of risk that is hard to insure against, or mobilize public action to reduce the risks.

There are basically two ways to respond. One is to do little and wait until one or more disastrous events occur. Then react to these – albeit disastrous – “windows of opportunity.” That is, pay after the unmitigated facts, rather than attempt to control their outcome. This is a high-stakes approach, considering the evolved state of the economy. The other approach is to invest in mitigation ahead of time, and use scientific knowledge and inference, education, technology transfer, and combine it with a mixture of regulatory and/or economic incentives to implement earthquake preparedness. The National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) has attempted the latter while much of the public tends to cling to the former of the two options. Realistic and reliable quantitative loss estimation techniques are essential to evaluate the relative merits of the two approaches.

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.

Iranian Horn Closer than Ever to Nukes: Daniel 8

Centrifuges at the Natanz Uranium Enrichment Facility in Iran. Source: Twitter.

Iran’s highest-ever uranium enrichment level is ‘no mistake,’ warns Israeli researcher

The IAEA found uranium at 84% purity, a short step from nuclear weapons, Bloomberg reported.


Centrifuges at the Natanz Uranium Enrichment Facility in Iran. Source: Twitter.

(February 21, 2023 / JNS) Observers in Israel are closely watching developments regarding Iran’s nuclear program following Sunday’s report that U.N. monitors discovered uranium enriched to just below weapons grade.

According to the Bloomberg report, the IAEA is seeking to determine how Iran obtained uranium enriched to 84% purity—the highest level discovered by inspectors in the country to date. The concentration is only 6 percentage points below military-grade uranium, a prerequisite for building nuclear bombs.

Maj. Gen. (res.) Tamir Hayman, former head of IDF Military Intelligence and director of the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, tweeted on Monday that the unusual enrichment level is “a wakeup call,” adding that there are two possible explanations.

The first could be “a mistake that stems from the games the Iranians have recently been playing in connecting the cascades. The whole attempt to deal with valves and gas could lead to an error,” said Hayman.

“The second possibility is that a decision was taken to enrich to the threshold of military enrichment in order to test the response of the West,” he continued. “Another step in the Iranian goal of getting us used to a severe situation, as we got used to the 60% situation.”

Roy Cahanovitz, an Iran researcher at Ariel University’s Middle East and Central Asia Research Center and a research associate at the Alma Center, told JNS, “The regime in Iran does not make ‘mistakes’ in all that is tied to its nuclear program. This is a state led by a regime that knows very well the history and the attack capability of Israel.”

“There is a reason why Iran’s nuclear facilities have been spread out and planted deep underground,” said Cahanovitz. “The State of Israel and the Western world are struggling to find an effective strategy since Iran is a highly sophisticated state, which says X but does Y, in line with the tradition of the Grand Bazaar in Tehran.”

According to Hayman, ignoring the new discovery will raise the confidence of the Iranians and push them to enrich to 90% purity. 

“If we decide not to ignore it, the question arises, how will we respond?… We lack an effective strategy against the Iranian nuclear program. The situation is growing more severe, and we are like, in the allegory, the frog that is getting used to the growing heat until it is too late,” the former intelligence chief warned. “This report is an opportunity for a wakeup call—a continuation of the current trend will lead us to a reality of a nuclear agreement.”

Last week, Brig. Gen. (res.) Yossi Kuperwasser, an ex-Military Intelligence Research Division head and former director-general of the Israeli Ministry of Strategic Affairs, told JNS that the “trip wire” for action appears to have been moved by both Israel and the United States, each in its own way, and they appear to have settled on the idea of needing to act “one minute before Iran starts enriching uranium to the military-grade, 90%.”

Responding to the Bloomberg report, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Monday that he is in close contact with the IAEA and European governments over the development, adding that he’d say more on the matter after receiving further information.

On Jan. 26, a historic five-day joint Israeli-American military exercise called Juniper Oak came to an end. The exercise saw unprecedented levels of cooperation between the U.S. military’s Central Command (CENTCOM), which is responsible for the Middle East, and the IDF.

Juniper Oak tested Israeli and American readiness and boosted the operational connection between the two militaries so as to enable them to deal with “regional threats,” according to the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit, but the intended target audience for this message seems to have been Iran.

Some 6,500 U.S. commanders and soldiers took part, as did missile ships and fighter jets from both militaries, which fired on simulated naval threats. The two air forces also practiced a range of scenarios, including the use of transport and mid-air refueling aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, search and rescue helicopters and B-52 bombers, which dropped munitions on targets in southern Israel. Fighter jets and bombers were refueled by Israeli and American refuelers, including the American Boeing KC-46 Pegasus, which will be in the IAF’s inventory in the coming years.

Out at sea, meanwhile, the Israel Navy’s Sa’ar 5 missile ships were refueled by an American tanker.

An initial review of the exercise was held by IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Herzi Halevi and CENTCOM commander Gen. Michael E. Kurilla aboard the George H. W. Bush aircraft carrier in the Mediterranean Sea. Members of the IDF General Staff and the U.S. Sixth Fleet also participated.

Juniper Oak was, according to Kuperwasser, “designed to send a message to Iran: You are the target. The entire concept is about discouraging them from reaching 90% enrichment. The Iranians need to take it seriously. They could tell themselves that those who want to deter don’t do it as loudly. On the other hand, they cannot ignore this message.”


Jewish News Syndicate

With geographic, political and social divides growing wider, high-quality reporting and informed analysis are more important than ever to keep people connected.

Our ability to cover the most important issues in Israel and throughout the Jewish world—without the standard media bias—depends on the support of committed readers.

If you appreciate the value of our news service and recognize how JNS stands out among the competition, please click on the link and make a one-time or monthly contribution.

We appreciate your support.

Make a secure contribution to JNS



Israel’s shadowy constitution

Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East, is undergoing a constitutional crisis.

The Report, Nov. 11, 2019

Photo by Bruce Gilbert

Republish this article

Spread the word.
Help JNS grow!
Share now:

(February 21, 2023 / Jewish Journal) It’s President’s Day in America, which, for reasons having perhaps something to do with slumbering patriotism, has long been associated with mattress sales. This year, however, there’s a real fear that America’s friend Israel is in danger of putting its democracy to bed.

That’s right: Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East—or anywhere near that region, for that matter—is undergoing a constitutional crisis. The country has been democratic since its inception, commencing with a Declaration of Independence the day before five Arab armies declared war against the fledgling Jewish state. America has a similar origin story—with 13 colonies taking on the British Empire soon after July 4. When these allies of the Enlightenment—America and Israel—speak of shared values, that’s what they mean.

This week, Americans may be reclining, but Israelis will be standing upright in mass protest. The new coalition government, the most conservative in Israel’s history on a range of issues, is moving against its own Supreme Court with a panoply of reforms that opponents believe would undermine the separation of powers and the principle of judicial review.

But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Israel is still a very young country, nearly 75 years old, and very much a free society in an increasingly less democratic world. In 2012, there were 42 liberal democracies. Today, there are but 34. Poland, Turkey, Hungary and Russia are clearly now off the board, precisely because, among other features of authoritarian rule, none possess the checks and balances of independent judiciaries.

Many Israelis see the overhaul of their Supreme Court as an ominous sign that they are next. It is an especially sensitive subject. Maintaining Israel’s democratic character is a numeric challenge in a nation that intends to remain a Jewish state. Israeli Arabs already comprise 20% of the population. There are other minorities in Israel. With declining Jewish birthrates, and loud whispers within the new government of annexing the West Bank and absorbing its Palestinian population, the Jewish majority will dissipate further. A majority-rule voting public could one day take the Star of David out of the Israeli flag.

Subscribe to The JNS Daily Syndicate by email and never miss our top stories

Suddenly, the conflict with the Palestinians is being subordinated to an internal conflict among Israelis about the contours of their democratic governance.

In principle, the Knesset really should address serious problems with its judiciary that are long overdue. There is no appellate court other than the Supreme Court in Israel. That means that its 15 Justices hear everything—the appellate review of trial court decisions, the interpretation of its Basic Laws and the legality of military operations, security fence and building of settlements. There is probably no more overburdened high court, or one with a broader portfolio, on the planet.

Moreover, unlike the American judicial system, Israel largely places the responsibility of selecting judges in the hands of lawyers—not voters, legislators, the cabinet, prime minister or president. Perhaps that’s too much independence, which is why the government is seeking more control over judicial appointments. And the Israeli Supreme Court, unlike most liberal democracies, exercises almost unchecked authority in invalidating legislation. That’s why the new government’s overhaul proposal includes an override that would enable lawmakers to preserve legislation that the Court may have just ruled to be unconstitutional.

Speaking of the constitution: Israel does not actually have one. It may be a constitutional democracy, but it’s one of three countries (England and New Zealand are the others) that functions without a written constitution.

Israelis just never got around to drafting one. They have Basic Laws (think of them as an evolving Bill of Rights), which they have enlarged and amended repeatedly. The expectation was that eventually they would all become incorporated into an actual Israeli constitution. Days and years passed, along with wars against its Arab neighbors, the terrorism of Palestinians, startups in high- and bio-tech, the blooming of barren land and desalinating of the Mediterranean Sea.

Honestly, who had the time for a constitutional convention?

America had its constitutional drafters in James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and The Federalist Papers. Israel became better known for its Mossad and Nobel Prizes. Being surrounded by two major oceans gave America room to operate—to develop a body of law with oversight from three distinct branches of government.

Israel has never had that geographic luxury, is not set up for such governmental interplay and has never known a single day of peace. It has always been a magnificent work in progress, blessed with the agility of a people who know how to improvise and mobilize in a hurry. Like the ancient Hebrews baking bread without yeast in the desert, Israel inherited that same resourcefulness, making do with all deficits with deftness and calm.

All that enterprise came with consequences, however. Some things simply got left undone. Israel developed a shadow constitution on the fly and without a name. It borrowed elements from other democracies—England, Norway, France and Canada—and even some features from the Ottoman Empire and Bahrain. Yet, it even forgot to include freedom of speech as a Basic Law.

Perhaps it’s now time for Israel to finally anoint its Basic Laws with constitutional status. And that same constitution should clarify the powers and limitations of the Supreme Court. Judicial review and independence must be respected, but the Court can’t hold absolute veto power over the actions of the government and legislation of the Knesset.

Americans who were displeased with the Supreme Court’s decision overturning Roe v. Wade knew that individual states were free to enact a woman’s right to choose, the House and Senate could codify a federal right to an abortion and the president could issue an Executive Order doing the same. That’s what Separation of Powers means in practice, and precisely what Israel lacks.

Democracies are messy. But Israel has never shied away from conflict. It might just emerge stronger from this constitutional crisis. Actually, it must. As a beacon of freedom, the light must stay on. Israel knows that its neighbors are despots and theocrats, and that minorities, women and homosexuals around the region all wish they lived in Tel Aviv. That has everything to do with the freedoms that are enjoyed in and the moral authority bestowed on a liberal democracy.

Thane Rosenbaum is a novelist, essayist, law professor and distinguished university professor at Touro University, where he directs the Forum on Life, Culture & Society. He is the legal analyst for CBS News Radio. His most recent book is titled Saving Free Speech… From Itself.

China Enables the Pakistani Nuclear Horn: Daniel 8

Pakistan China Nuclear Bomb: China had given ‘top secret’ of nuclear bombs to Pakistan, used to make and send weapons designs, scientist’s big claim

Pakistan China Nuclear Bomb: China had given ‘top secret’ of nuclear bombs to Pakistan, used to make and send weapons designs, scientist’s big claim



Parvez Hoodbhoy said, ‘China had tested this design in 1962. I can say this with confidence because in 2003 the US seized a ship containing centrifuge parts. The father of Pakistan’s nuclear program Dr. Abdul Qadir Khan tried to send it from Malaysia to Libya. But the ship was captured on the way and the design of the atomic bomb was revealed. he/she said that this is completely true as the design recovered from the ship was written in Chinese language.

Pakistan was scared of India’s nuclear program

‘Will make atomic bomb even after being hungry’

In the year 1965, Ayub Khan had said, ‘If India makes a bomb, we will eat grass and straw, we will also sleep hungry, but we will definitely make our own bomb. Apart from this, we have no other way. Pakistan was successful in making the first nuclear bomb in the year 1998, which was led by Dr. Abdul Qadir Khan. Statistics show that Pakistan has a total of 165 nuclear bombs today. Many experts have also been questioning the safety of such a large stockpile of nuclear bombs in an unstable and impoverished Pakistan.

Obama’s Iranian Nuclear Disaster

Iranians Understand Trump Sanctions, Obama Nuclear Deal Was ‘Disastrous,’ Shah’s Son Says

David BrennanOn 12/12/19 at 7:34 AM EST

Courtesy of Reza Pahlavi

Iran is being convulsed by its worst unrest for 40 years, with cities across the country paralyzed by thousands of anti-government protesters.

Though sparked by a spike in fuel prices, the explosion of anger has been a long time coming. Iranians are living under an authoritarian regime while battling falling living standards and a faltering economy, exacerbated by crippling American sanctions levied to stifle Tehran’s nuclear program and regional influence.

Hundreds—perhaps more than 1,000 according to U.S. authorities—of dissenters have been cut down in the streets by regime gunmen. Human rights groups accuse the authorities of hiding away the bodies of the dead to conceal the true death toll while throttling internet to prevent survivors communicating with each other and the world.

According to Reza Pahlavi—the last surviving son and heir of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, deposed in the Iranian Revolution—the reported “massacre” shows the desperation and ruthlessness of the regime.

Pahlavi spoke to Newsweek from Washington, D.C., where he still lives in exile after his family fled the country in 1979. He has consistently called for a secular democracy to replace the current system.

Pahlavi said the current turmoil is indicative of widespread anger at the government in Tehran, and that the only solution is a rehabilitated secular democracy—whether or not he is directly involved.

How should we characterize the current unrest in Iran?
The protests in our country are driven by a broad-based, grassroots desire to replace this regime. The 200 percent rise in fuel prices may have been the trigger of this latest round of widespread national street protests, but this does not come close to capturing the essence or aspirations of what they have become.

These protests represent a rejection of the regime as a whole and communicate a desire to end forty years of clerical oppression. All one has to do to understand this is to listen to my compatriots in the streets.

They do not chant for reforms, or about fuel prices, they chant, “We don’t want the Islamic Republic!” and, “Khamenei, get out of the country!” and by the hundreds they are giving their lives for the cause of freedom.

Reza Pahlevi, son of the deposed Shah of Iran and his third wife Farah Diba, as a young boy with his parents in 1967.Universal History Archive/Getty

What does the response of the security forces tell us about the priorities and mindset of those in power?
We have known for forty years that the regime’s only priorities are safeguarding and expanding its own power and control, including enriching itself. This massacre is not surprising. It is rather what one expects when such a regime feels threatened.

Simultaneously, we are witnessing the beginning of a peeling away of the security forces from the regime. As a result, the Islamic Republic is forced to import foreign nationals to attempt to control the protests.

This simply shows that the regime will stop at nothing to protect itself, even at the cost of an effective genocide. Yet despite all this, the people are still fighting. The message they give me to tell the world is, “We deserve better than this. Why are you abandoning us?”

What should replace the current regime in Iran?
For four decades I have consistently advocated for a secular, democratic system in Iran. Not only have I advocated this for Iran because it is the best way to ensure the human rights, well-being, and happiness of Iranians but also because it is my sense that the Iranian people overwhelmingly want and demand such a system.

Today’s generation of young Iranians, more than ever, are aware of other countries where sovereignty is routine in their liberal and free societies. They would like to have the very same opportunities and self-determination.

This undated photo shows Reza Pahlavi—the exiled heir to Iran’s defunct monarchy—giving a speech. Pahlavi told Newsweek that the current unrest in Iran is a direct reaction to the authoritarian regime in Tehran.The Secretariat of Reza Pahlavi Media Relations

Is there any legitimate opposition in Iran that can be trusted in this regard? U.S. officials have previously pushed for the involvement of controversial groups such as the People’s Mujahedin of Iran—how do you feel about this?
It is less a matter of how I feel and more about fundamental truths. Our national aspiration is to have a secular democracy and therefore the people of Iran will decide what groups, parties, or individuals are relevant and constructive to our nation’s future. The future of Iran is to be decided by Iranians, not by any foreign leader’s advisors.

Would you like to return to Iran and be involved in a political process to establish a new system of governance?
I view my role as the advocate of the Iranian people. My aspirations are to support the movement for liberty and dignity and are not driven by any ambition for political power in Iran’s future.

That said, I am eager to return to Iran and I will always be there for our people to defend their fundamental and inalienable rights against any and all forces foreign or domestic. I intend to be of assistance in any way that I can to provide proper guidance in our nation’s critical transition to a secular democracy.

Do you think the Iranian people would welcome the return of royal influence?
The future system of government will be subject to intense debate in the constitutional process. It is this process, these democratic mores, on which I am focused and not on the future system of government.

Our country has of course, apart from this forty year interlude, a history of monarchic service and tradition. So naturally many Iranians, in line with this history and culture, have an affinity for the monarchy.

But the present moment is not about monarchy or republic, it is about the fight to reclaim our nation from an anti-Iranian occupying force and to develop this democratic order along with all of its principles, tenets, and values.

What do you think of the current U.S. “maximum pressure” strategy on Iran
It is unfortunate for the Iranian people that the regime, through its nefarious, destabilizing and antagonizing behavior in the region and across the world has brought the ire of so many of its neighbors and of the free world on our country.

To the extent that the sanctions limit or reduce the regime’s resources from being used for such actions, this is something the people of Iran understand and appreciate. Iranians realize that they are first and foremost under maximum pressure socially, politically and economically from the Islamic regime itself.

Therefore, my concern and that of the Iranian people is getting rid of this regime. The people don’t chant in the streets against sanctions, they chant against this regime in hundreds of cities across the country.

Was President Donald Trump right to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal?
I do not tell Americans how to run their country, my focus is Iran. I know that any deal or negotiation with this regime and which ignores the Iranian people and their desires and demands are illegitimate.

All those who still aspire to finding a solution by negotiating with this regime only prove how out of touch they are with the real aspirations and sentiments of the Iranian people. My focus, rather, is on removing the maximum pressure of this regime on our people.

Trump’s hardline approach is directly pushing down living standards of normal Iranians—is this a price worth paying to try and contain the Iranian regime?
Containment and appeasement have proven to be the policy of sustaining the status quo. It is the policy of continuously taking the same steps and expecting different results.

To the extent that the regime is cut off from the resources used to oppress at home and abroad, the Iranian people understand and appreciate that.

But the determining factor in Iran’s future will be the Iranian people not foreign policies, as I have always told our people. To that end, if any nation wants to deal with Iran it must deal with those who hold the answers to its future: the people, not the regime.

I have said for decades that the West has a role to play in supporting the Iranian people in their movement because this support and solidarity will lower the cost of our ultimate victory. The burden of conscience lays heavily on all those who claim liberty and freedom as values and are astonishingly silent now, when their voices are most needed.

Should the White House change its strategy on Iran?
After forty years of failed attempts to appease this irreformable regime, isn’t it time for a different strategy?

Do not try to engage this regime. The previous administration made this mistake to disastrous effect for the Iranian people and for the region. Instead, engage the Iranian people and the secular democratic opposition.

For example, use the frozen assets of this regime and return them to their rightful owners, the people. Use it to support a strike fund to give my compatriots the ability to go on mass strikes and bring this regime to its knees through widespread, peaceful civil disobedience.

As an additional example, the administration should take measures to promote and safeguard uninterrupted access to the internet, and limit the regime’s ability to promote its own propaganda while it asphyxiates our people’s access to information.

Are you in touch with Trump administration officials and do you give advice on their approach?
For all of these years, I have communicated the same, consistent message to international leaders, including those in the United States.

That message has been simple: you cannot properly develop a policy for the future when you are focused on dealing with this illegitimate regime, you must recognize the people’s demand for fundamental change, and you must engage the people. I will continue to advocate this message.

The problem is not that the regime has not changed it’s behavior, because it never will, but rather that the world has not changed its behavior looking to appease this regime.

China Horn Prepares for Nuclear War: Revelation 16

China has tested a new “phantom space strike” weapon

China has tested a new “phantom space strike” weapon 

By Tim HanlonNews Reporter

China has successfully tested new “phantom space strike” technology that can trick missile defence systems by emitting fake target signals from space in a nuclear attack, it is reported.

Military engineers said computer simulations of the weapon system have achieved positive results earlier this month.

It has been designed so that three spacecraft blast out radio interference that tricks enemy forces into launching interception equipment in the wrong direction.

Researchers worked on the idea of saturating the enemy’s response by sending out decoy signals.

The spacecrafts’ direction, speed and formation are decided before the launch and are based on the information obtained about the enemy’s radar station.

North Korea warns of making ‘Pacific our firing range’ as it launches missiles

The technology sends decoy signals to trick defence systems

The technology sends decoy signals to trick defence systems ( 

Image: Getty Images/Science Photo Library RF)

All of this allows the real weapon to fly uninterrupted to its target, significantly increasing the chance of a successful weapons deployment.

While this is relatively common closer to the ground, it has been considered extremely difficult to achieve out in space.

The team was led by Zhao Yanli, a senior engineer in the People’s Liberation Army Unit 63891, a military agency based in the central Chinese province of Henan that develops new technology, reported the South China Morning Post.

While engineers ran the simulation to release just three decoy spacecraft, the researchers themselves said that more could be added fairly easily, further increasing the chances of a successful missile delivery.

The phantom force study has sparked fears however that such technology could lead to nuclear escalation from rival powers as the technology is a potent threat and could be combined with current intercontinental ballistic missiles.

While China has significantly fewer nuclear weapons than the US and Russia, its government has significantly invested in developing alternative technologies such as methods of attacking missile defence systems.

China’s latest development comes as tensions around the use of nuclear weapons is on the rise, with Russia threatening to use them if the West’s response to its invasion of Ukraine escalates.

Just a few weeks ago, scientists at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, an eminent group of researchers, said that its Doomsday Clock, an infamous device used to track how close the world is to total destruction, read 90 seconds to midnight.

Israeli Strike Kills 15 outside the Temple Walls: Revelation 11

Syrian Air defences respond to Israeli missiles targeting south of the capital Damascus, on July 20, 2020
 File photo: Syrian Air defences respond to Israeli missiles targeting south of the capital Damascus, on July 20, 2020. Photo: STR/AFP

 Home/Air/Israeli Strike Kills 15 in Syrian Capital: War Monitor


Israeli Strike Kills 15 in Syrian Capital: War Monitor

FEBRUARY 19, 2023

An Israeli air strike killed early Sunday 15 people including two Syrian civilians and badly damaged a building in a Damascus district housing state security agencies, a war monitor said.

The strike targeted a meeting that included Syrian regime officers and was “the deadliest Israeli attack in the Syrian capital” since the civil war began, said Rami Abdel Rahman of the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.

The overnight strike cratered a road and wrecked the adjacent 10-story building in the Kafr Sousa district, which is home to senior state officials and Syrian intelligence headquarters, said the Britain-based Observatory.

A woman was also killed in the Mazraa district, possibly hit when Syrian anti-aircraft munitions crashed down, it added.

It was not immediately clear who was the intended target of the strike, which AFP correspondents reported shook Damascus and left a gaping hole in the street.

Other missiles overnight hit a warehouse used by pro-regime Iranian and Hezbollah fighters near Damascus, said the Observatory, which relies on a wide network of sources inside Syria.

Iranian news agency Tasnim said “no Iranian was harmed,” adding that the strikes hit “exactly the spot” where Hezbollah’s top commander Imad Mughniyeh was killed in a 2008 car bombing that the Lebanese Shiite group blamed on Israel.

Syria’s defense ministry gave an initial death toll of five, including one soldier, and 15 wounded civilians, some in critical condition.

Shortly after midnight “the Israeli enemy carried out an aerial aggression from the direction of the occupied Golan Heights targeting several areas in Damascus and its vicinity, including residential neighbourhoods,” a statement said.

Defense forces “shot down several missiles”, it added.

Historic buildings near the medieval Damascus citadel were also “severely damaged,” said the head of the Syrian antiquities department, Nazir Awad, blaming “an Israeli missile.”

Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad said Sunday that the strike was “a crime against humanity, especially as Syria races against time to face the disastrous consequences of the devastating earthquake.”

Syria is currently seeking to recover from the February 6 earthquake, which did not affect Damascus but killed more than 44,000 people across the country’s north and west, and southern Turkey.

An Israeli military spokesperson said: “Israel does not comment on reports in foreign media.”

Syrian government ally Russia condemned the strike, with foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova also urging Israel “to put an end to armed provocations” against Damascus that could endanger “the entire region.”

More than Decade of War

Israel, during more than a decade of war in Syria, has carried out hundreds of air strikes against its neighbor, primarily targeting the army, Iranian forces, and Hezbollah, allies of the Damascus regime.

“We will not allow Iran to obtain nuclear weapons and we will not allow it to entrench on our northern border,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Sunday’s cabinet meeting, without referring directly to the Damascus strike.

In Tehran, foreign ministry spokesman Nasser Kanani “strongly condemned the attacks of the Zionist regime against targets in Damascus and its suburbs, including against certain residential buildings.”

The raids had left “a number of innocent Syrian citizens” dead and injured, he said.

The Gaza-based Palestinian militant groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad also denounced the strikes.

An Islamic Jihad official told AFP that none of its members in Damascus were killed or wounded, requesting anonymity as he was not authorized to speak to the media.

The Syrian conflict started in 2011 with the brutal repression of peaceful protests and escalated to pull in multiple foreign powers and global jihadists.

Nearly half a million people have been killed, and the conflict has forced around half of Syria’s pre-war population from their homes.

President Bashar al-Assad‘s regime receives military support from Russia as well as from Iran and Tehran-allied armed Shiite groups, including Hezbollah, which are declared enemies of Israel.

Sunday’s attack comes more than a month after an Israeli missile strike hit Damascus International Airport, killing four people, including two soldiers.

The January 2 strike hit positions of Hezbollah and pro-Iranian groups, including a weapons warehouse, the Observatory said.

Russian horn puts nuclear weapons on high alert with Monolith threat to West: Daniel 8

Twisted Putin puts nuclear weapons on high alert with Monolith threat to West

US President Joe Biden carried out a secret visit to Kyiv on Monday morning ahead of a three day visit to Poland, in what amounted to the most significant symbol of Western support to Ukraine since the beginning of the war.


19:14, Mon, Feb 20, 2023 | UPDATED: 19:14, Mon, Feb 20, 2023

0 seconds of 31 secondsVolume 90%SUBSCRIBE

We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and 3rd parties based on our understanding. You can unsubscribe at any time. 

Vladimir Putin has attempted to “blackmail” the West by upgrading Russia’s strategic nuclear forces to their “highest level of combat readiness”, Ukrainian intelligence has warned, as President Biden arrived in Kyiv to reaffirm support for the defending nation. In the hours leading up to Mr Biden’s European tour, Russia reportedly began “large-scale” nuclear exercises, including preparing “components of the strategic nuclear forces for the launch of sea and land-based ballistic missiles”, and the carrying out of a “a check of the centralised combat control system of the Russian Air Force ‘Monolith’”, according to the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine.