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

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

Released: 11/6/2012 8:30:00 AM

Earthquake shaking in the eastern United States can travel much farther and cause damage over larger areas than previously thought.

“We used landslides as an example and direct physical evidence to see how far-reaching shaking from east coast earthquakes could be,” said Randall Jibson, USGS scientist and lead author of this study. “Not every earthquake will trigger landslides, but we can use landslide distributions to estimate characteristics of earthquake energy and how far regional ground shaking could occur.”

“Scientists are confirming with empirical data what more than 50 million people in the eastern U.S. experienced firsthand: this was one powerful earthquake,” said USGS Director Marcia McNutt. “Calibrating the distance over which landslides occur may also help us reach back into the geologic record to look for evidence of past history of major earthquakes from the Virginia seismic zone.”

This study will help inform earthquake hazard and risk assessments as well as emergency preparedness, whether for landslides or other earthquake effects.

The research is being presented today at the Geological Society of America conference, and will be published in the December 2012 issue of the Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America.

The USGS found that the farthest landslide from the 2011 Virginia earthquake was 245 km (150 miles) from the epicenter. This is by far the greatest landslide distance recorded from any other earthquake of similar magnitude. Previous studies of worldwide earthquakes indicated that landslides occurred no farther than 60 km (36 miles) from the epicenter of a magnitude 5.8 earthquake.

“What makes this new study so unique is that it provides direct observational evidence from the largest earthquake to occur in more than 100 years in the eastern U.S,” said Jibson. “Now that we know more about the power of East Coast earthquakes, equations that predict ground shaking might need to be revised.”

It is estimated that approximately one-third of the U.S. population could have felt last year’s earthquake in Virginia, more than any earthquake in U.S. history. About 148,000 people reported their ground-shaking experiences caused by the earthquake on the USGS “Did You Feel It?” website. Shaking reports came from southeastern Canada to Florida and as far west as Texas.

In addition to the great landslide distances recorded, the landslides from the 2011 Virginia earthquake occurred in an area 20 times larger than expected from studies of worldwide earthquakes. Scientists plotted the landslide locations that were farthest out and then calculated the area enclosed by those landslides. The observed landslides from last year’s Virginia earthquake enclose an area of about 33,400 km2, while previous studies indicated an expected area of about 1,500 km2from an earthquake of similar magnitude.

“The landslide distances from last year’s Virginia earthquake are remarkable compared to historical landslides across the world and represent the largest distance limit ever recorded,” said Edwin Harp, USGS scientist and co-author of this study. “There are limitations to our research, but the bottom line is that we now have a better understanding of the power of East Coast earthquakes and potential damage scenarios.”

Learn more about the 2011 central Virginia earthquake.

Shi’a Horn Strikes at Babylon the Great (Daniel 8:4)

A file picture shows US military vehicles, part of a convoy arriving from northern Iraq, drive through the countryside of Syria’s northeastern city of Qamishli, in October 2019. (AFP)
A file picture shows US military vehicles, part of a convoy arriving from northern Iraq, drive through the countryside of Syria’s northeastern city of Qamishli, in October 2019. (AFP)

Blasts hit US army in Iraq, pro-Iran militias suspected

The blasts could be part of an Iranian campaign by proxy ahead of the next round of US-Iraq strategic dialogue.
Tuesday 11/08/2020

BAGHDAD–At least two explosions have hit convoys supplying US-led coalition forces in Iraq in the last 24 hours, security sources said, the first on Monday evening near the southern border with Kuwait and the second on Tuesday north of Baghdad.

The explosions, which caused no casualties but did some material damage, are the latest in a string of such incidents in recent weeks. An attack in southern Iraq on Sunday hit a convoy carrying supplies to coalition forces, the military said.

Several thousand US forces are still based in Iraq, leading a coalition whose mission is to fight Islamic State extremists.

Those forces are also a target for Iran-backed Shia militias, which the United States blames for regular rocket attacks on bases hosting the coalition, and on other US targets such as Washington’s embassy in Baghdad.

The militias have vowed to avenge the death of paramilitary commander Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, who was killed alongside Iranian military Quds Force chief Qassem Soleimani in a US drone strike in Baghdad in January. Political forces aligned with the militias demand a full withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq.

They also oppose Iraq’s Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi, who took office in May. He is viewed as friendly with the United States and has challenged the power of Iran-aligned armed groups in Iraq.

Explosions and denials

Tuesday’s explosion near the Taji military base north of Baghdad caused a fire to a container on one vehicle, the Iraqi military said in a statement. There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the blast.

The explosion on Monday night near the Jraischan border crossing between Iraq and Kuwait targeted a convoy carrying equipment for US forces, three sources from different branches of Iraq’s security services and military said.

The Iraqi military denied that incident took place.

Kuwait’s military on Twitter also denied any attack along its border with Iraq.

Vehicles are regularly loaded with military equipment at the crossing, the security sources said, and cargo is usually loaded or unloaded before entering or exiting Iraq.

Foreign companies are contracted by US forces to provide security in the area, the Iraqi security sources said.

‘Companions of the Cave’

A little known Iraqi Shia militia group by the name of Ashab al-Kahf claimed responsibility for the attack and published a video showing an explosion at a distance. It said it was able to destroy US military equipment and large parts of the crossing.

The group issued a statement overnight claiming it destroyed “equipment and vehicles belonging to the American enemy” in a bombing targeting a border crossing south of the Iraqi city of Basra.

It later published an 11-second video clip it claimed showed the blast, according to the SITE Intelligence Group, which monitors militant groups.

The out-of-focus video shows what appeared to be an explosion and lights in the distance, with a man speaking in Arabic. The Associated Press could not immediately verify the video.

US Army Major John Rigsbee, a Central Command spokesman, said the American military was looking into reports of the explosion.

The Iraqi military issued a statement early Tuesday through the state-run Iraqi News Agency denying an attack took place

Ashab al-Kahf means “Companions of the Cave” in Arabic, referring to a Christian and Islamic story about youths escaping religious persecution hiding in a cave for hundreds of years.

The group has emerged alongside renewed threats by Shia militias amid rising tensions between the US and Iran. In January, an American drone strike killed a top Iranian general in Baghdad. Tehran responded with a ballistic missile attack that wounded dozens of American troops at a military base in Iraq.

The SITE Intelligence Group has referred to Ashab al-Kahf as “reportedly an Iranian proxy unit.” The group initially threatened US forces in April and claimed an attack on a convoy in July.

According to experts, the blasts could be part of an Iranian campaign by proxy ahead of the next round of US-Iraq strategic dialogue scheduled in Washington later this month.

Soviet Advance Lead to U.S. Atomic Mass Murder of Japan

Soviet Advance Not U.S. Atomic Bombings Forced Japan To Surrender

Jonathan Power11 August 2020

Viewpoint by Jonathan Power*

LUND, Sweden (IDN) –Seventy-five years ago the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima on August 6 and on Nagasaki on August 9 was premeditated mass murder.

President Harry Truman had a workable alternative to using the atom bomb – to cooperate with Stalin, as Roosevelt and Churchill had done on the Western front, in the Soviet advance on Japan, rather than making it a race for control.

Indeed, it was the Soviet advance that convinced Japan to surrender.** Although unaware of each other’s thinking both Truman and the Japanese leadership shared a common cause – they both wanted to pre-empt the possibility of the Soviet Union occupying parts of Japan before the U.S. had got its boots on Japanese ground. Truman did not want to be compelled to concede Soviet participation in the government of post-surrender, occupied, Japan.

But the atom bombing of the two cities was always explained by President Harry Truman as a necessary step that was only taken because there remained no other way of forcing capitulation and saving the lives of hundreds of thousands of American troops. But it is simply not true. A good part of his motivation to use the first nuclear bombs was to pre-empt the Soviet advance.

The evidence now available suggests that the nuclear bombing was not decisive in persuading Japan to surrender. The Emperor and the war leadership were told about the atomic bombing but it did not affect their will to continue the war. The Soviet invasion did. Without the Soviet entry into the war the Japanese would have continued to fight until quite a few more atomic bombs had been dropped and until there had been a successful U.S. invasion of the main home islands.

When the Red Army invaded Manchuria on August  9 – which President Truman, Prime Ministers Winston Churchill and Clement Atlee, and Premier Joseph Stalin had agreed to at their meeting in Potsdam in July – the Japanese political leadership were taken by total surprise.

The invasion undermined their confidence as well as punching a fatal hole in its strategic plan. Without Japan’s surrender Tokyo knew that the Soviets would occupy Manchuria, southern Sakhalin, the Kuril Islands and a good half of Korea and then move further southward into the mainland. This, not the nuclear bombing, was the key factor in the Japanese surrender.

The U.S. conventional bombing attacks on Japanese cities in the spring and summer of 1945 were almost as devastating as Hiroshima. They often caused more damage and even more casualties. Altogether 66 Japanese cities were attacked that summer, and a typical raid of 500 bombers could deliver 5 kilotons of bombs. The Hiroshima bomb was the equivalent of 16 kilotons, only three times bigger than the average conventional raid. The conventional bombing hadn’t convinced the Japanese leadership of surrendering. So it was not surprising that the atomic bombing didn’t either.

The nuclear bombing was unnecessary. None less that Dwight Eisenhower, later to be U.S. president, the supreme Allied commander in Europe, said that at the time the decision to bomb was being fashioned,“I voiced my grave misgivings on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary.” Admiral William Leahy, who presided over the combined U.S./UK chiefs of staff wrote that, “We had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the dark ages”.

Neither the American conventional nor the nuclear bombing turned the heads of Japan’s leaders. Its Supreme Council did not meet until two days after the Hiroshima attack of August 6. Yet when the Soviets intervened on August 9 word reached Tokyo by 4.30 am and the Supreme Council met by 10.30am. Following Hiroshima, Emperor Hirohito had taken no action. He merely asked for “more details”. When he heard of the Soviet invasion he immediately summoned Lord Privy Seal Koichi Kido and told him, “In the light of the Soviet entry…. It is all the more urgent to find a means to end the war.”

As Prime Minister Kantaro Suzuki explained on August 13, “Japan had to surrender because the Soviet Union will take not only Manchuria, Korea, Karafuto, but also Hokkaido, (a large northern island belonging to Japan). This would destroy the foundation of Japan. We must end the war while we can deal with the United States.” The Japanese surrendered on August 15. The Soviet advance was halted in its tracks.

Saturday is the date we remember the defeat of Japan and it’s time the world should decide to revolutionise its poorly attempted effort to rid itself of nuclear weapons, capable of destroying all our major civilizations.

How far have we progressed in getting rid of nuclear weapons which now have proliferated far and wide? Briefed by the military in 2017 on the levels to which American and Russian nuclear arsenals had been reduced through arms treaties, President Donald Trump reportedly demanded that the United States increase its nuclear stockpile tenfold. According to some reports, this was what prompted the secretary of state at the time, Rex Tillerson, to call the president a “moron”.

Trump has withdrawn the United States from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and the Iran nuclear deal, and he has not yet extended the New START accord that cuts the U.S. and Russia’s long-range rockets by 1000 each, the only agreement still in place limiting American and Russian most deadly nuclear forces. It was signed by Presidents Barack Obama and Dimitri Medvedev and expires, unless renewed, in early February next year.

We should never forget that it was the Americans who dropped those two bombs and they, more than any other nation, have the duty to get rid of them. Yet a recent poll showed that although a majority (a bare one) thought that Hiroshima was wrong, 55% of Americans think that if their country was about to be defeated in war today nuclear weapons should be used.

“Now I become death, the destroyer of worlds.”– the words of the scripture of the Hindu Bhagavad Gita, quoted by Robert Oppenheimer when the bomb went off. He had led the team that made the first atom bomb. Later he preached against the H-bomb and promoted the message that there was a lack of utility in ever-larger arsenals. If he could come to his senses so then must we.

** [The Soviet invasion of Manchuria, formally known as the Manchurian Strategic Offensive Operation or simply the Manchurian Operation, began on 9 August 1945 with the Soviet invasion of the Japanese puppet state of Manchukuo. It was the largest campaign of the 1945 Soviet–Japanese War, which resumed hostilities between the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the Empire of Japan after almost six years of peace. Soviet gains on the continent were Manchukuo, Mengjiang (Inner Mongolia) and northern Korea. The Soviet entry into the war and the defeat of the Kwantung Army was a significant factor in the Japanese government’s decision to surrender unconditionally, as it made apparent the Soviet Union had no intention of acting as a third party in negotiating an end to hostilities on conditional terms. – Wikipedia]

* Note: Copyright Jonathan Power. Website: The writer was for 17 years a foreign affairs columnist and commentator for the International Herald Tribune. [IDN-InDepthNews – 11 August 2020].

Map: Soviet Invasion of Manchuria (1945), based on Glantz’s maps in Levenworth Paper No 7 – Feb 1983. CC BY-SA 3.0

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

Visit us on Facebook and Twitter.

This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence. You are free to share, remix, tweak and build upon it non-commercially.

How Israel is Provoking the Iranian Nuclear Horn

From Condemnation To Praise: Why Israel’s Bombing of Iraq’s Osirak Nuclear Reactor Stands Test of Time

Dov LipmanAugust 11, 2020

Imagine this: It’s August 1990. Saddam Hussein, dictator of Iraq, begins to act on his plan for world domination by invading Kuwait. Billions around the world must sit silently and watch as Hussein takes over country after country, because they know that Hussein will unleash his nuclear weapons against any nation that tries to stop him.

Thankfully, this nightmare scenario never materialized.

The United States was able to lead an international coalition to push Iraq’s armed forces out of Kuwait in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, and Hussein’s expansionism came to a screeching halt.

But this dictator was only able to be prevented from carrying out his maniacal plans because of one country:  Israel.

Timeline: from diplomacy to air strike

Iraq had established a nuclear program during the 1960s, and by the mid-1970s looked to expand it through the acquisition of a nuclear reactor. To that end, Iraq purchased a nuclear reactor from France in 1976. Located 17 kilometers southeast of the Iraqi capital Baghdad, the Osirak reactor was immediately recognized by Israeli officials to constitute a serious threat to Israel and the world.

A nuclear reactor in the hands of a dictator like Saddam Hussein presented an immediate and grave dilemma. Israeli Foreign Minister Moshe Dayan initiated diplomatic efforts with France but failed to receive assurances that the reactor program would be halted. Additionally, Israel failed to convince the French government to stop providing aid for the Iraqi nuclear program.

Once diplomatic efforts failed, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin concluded that Israel would have to take military action. In 1979, Israeli secret agents planted a bomb that destroyed the reactor’s first set of core structures as they were being prepared to be shipped to Iraq. Israel engaged in additional covert efforts to try to set the Iraqi nuclear program back.

But in October 1980, Israeli intelligence reported that by June 1981 the reactors would be fully operational, after which nuclear weapons could be developed. While the earliest estimates for Iraq being able to obtain a nuclear bomb were a year or two later, Begin was concerned that delaying the attack until the reactor was fully operational could lead to lethal doses of radioactive contamination reaching Baghdad, killing innocent civilians.

Begin thus ordered the Israel Air Force to bomb the reactor on June 7, 1981. Israel chose to bomb on a Sunday, a day off for foreign workers and consultants, to reduce the number of casualties.  The Israeli air strike of Osirak became known as Operation Opera.

Fourteen Israeli fighter planes flew 1,600 kilometers to reach their target. While flying through Jordanian airspace, the pilots spoke in Saudi-accented Arabic telling the Jordanian air controllers that they were Saudis on a routine patrol that had veered off course. Then, when they flew through Saudi airspace, the pilots pretended to be Jordanians.

Israeli Air Force F-16A Netz ‘243’, aircraft flown by Colonel Ilan Ramon in Operation Opera. This was the eighth and last to drop its bombs onto the reactor. (Wikimedia commons)

Once they reached Iraq, the fighter planes dropped 16 bombs on the reactor in two minutes, evaded anti-aircraft fire, and safely returned to Israel.

Though Iraq vowed to rebuild the reactor, France ultimately pulled out of the project in 1984 and the facility was never repaired.

Israel’s “clear violation” of international conduct

The United Nations passed two resolutions rebuking Israel for the attack. UN Security Council Resolution 487, passed on June 19, 1981, condemned the attack as a “clear violation of the Charter of the United Nations and the norms of international conduct.” The United States voted in favor of the resolution. On November 13, 1981 the UN General Assembly passed Resolution 36/27, criticizing Israel for the “premeditated and unprecedented act of aggression,” and demanded that Israel compensate Iraq for the damage and loss of life caused by the attacks.

Both resolutions called on Israel to refrain from attacks of this kind in the future. US President Ronald Reagan wrote in his diary that he believed the Israeli attack would lead to “Armageddon” and US ambassador to the UN Jean Kirkpatrick compared Israel’s attack to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

The New York Times called the attack “an act of inexcusable and short-sighted aggression.” The Los Angeles Times went even further, calling it “state sponsored terrorism.”

Many of Israel’s critics pointed to the fact that Iraq had signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that put the reactor under the watch of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which would prevent the country from using the reactor to develop nuclear weapons.

US: Bombing Osirak was a ‘good thing’

But Roger Richter, a former IAEA inspector, told the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee that the most sensitive facilities in the reactor were not subject to any safeguards. While Iraq and France insisted that the reactor was constructed for peaceful purposes, SRATFOR, a private American intelligence agency, reported that prior to Israel’s attack the Osirak reactor “was believed to be on the verge of producing plutonium for a weapons program.”

(Photo: Wikimedia commons)

Quite remarkably, while Israel’s attack left the reactor crippled but still standing, coalition forces led by the United States Air Force completely destroyed the reactor during the Persian Gulf War in 1991. Following that war, US Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney thanked the Israeli pilot who commanded the Israeli mission for “the outstanding job” that Israel’s air force did in 1981.

US President Bill Clinton said this at the 2005 World Economic Forum in Davos regarding the Israeli attack on Iraq’s nuclear reactor: “Everybody talks about what the Israelis did at Osirak in 1981, which I think, in retrospect, was a really good thing.  You know, it kept Saddam from developing nuclear power.”

The entire episode – from the difficult decision to bomb the Osirak reactor, to the international condemnation, to the gratitude a decade later – has reinforced Israel’s doctrine to not be held back by likely worldwide condemnation and to act, even at great risk, when it identifies real and present danger to its people and its survival.

Trump Loses the ‘Art of the Deal’

Iran’s Khamenei Rejects Talks With Trump

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei attends a meeting with thousands of students in Tehran, Iran, on Nov. 3, 2019. (Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader via AP)

TEHRAN, Iran (AFP) — Iran will not open talks with the United States that will only benefit Donald Trump, supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said Friday, insisting the U.S. president’s sanctions policy has failed.

Decades-old tensions between Tehran and Washington have soared in the past year, with the sworn enemies appearing several times to come to the brink of war.

The tensions have been rising since 2018, when Trump withdrew the United States from a landmark nuclear accord and unilaterally reimposed crippling sanctions.

“There is no doubt that sanctions are a crime, a blow from the U.S. to Iran,” supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a televised speech.

“But the smart Iranian has made the best use of this attack, this animosity and benefited … by using sanctions as a means to increase national self-reliance.”

Khamenei said Western “think tanks admit that the maximum pressure (policy) of sanctions and U.S. force has not succeeded.”

The 2015 deal between Tehran and major powers promised relief from sanctions in return for limits on Iran’s nuclear program. 

After abandoning the agreement, the United States reimposed sanctions on Iran’s vital oil exports and its access to the international banking system, and pressured allies and rivals alike to fall in line.

Iran has responded by trying to boost its non-oil exports, particularly to neighboring countries.

“This has caused the country’s economy to be naturally less reliant on oil,” Khamenei said, casting the development in a positive light.

Khamenei condemned calls for Iran to open new talks with the United States, saying he would not agree to meetings that were aimed only at boosting Trump’s re-election hopes.

The 81-year-old called Trump an “old man,” even though he is seven years older.

“This old man in charge, he apparently made some propaganda use out of his negotiations with North Korea. Now he wants to use (talks with Iran) for the (Nov. 3 U.S. presidential) election.”

Khamenei said that in return for new talks, the United States would demand: “Reduce your defensive capability, destroy your regional power and give up the vital nuclear industry.”

However, “No logic dictates giving into the aggressor’s demands,” he said.

© Agence France-Presse

Hamas Sends ‘Message’ From Outside the Temple Walls (Revelation 11)

Palestinian Hamas militants attend the funeral of their comrade, in Rafah, in the southern Gaza Strip August 17, 2017. REUTERS/Ibraheem Abu Mustafa
Asharq Al-Awsat

The Gaza Strip’s rulers Hamas fired rockets into the sea on Monday after repeated exchanges of fire with Israel in recent days,Palestinian security sources and eyewitnesses said.
At least eight rockets were seen in the sky, heading toward the Mediterranean Sea, said AFP journalists in the coastal strip, which has been under Israeli blockade for more than a decade.
The interior ministry of the Palestinian enclave under Hamas control since 2007 referred to “an act of resistance”.
The rockets were a “message” to Israel to let it know that armed groups in Gaza will not “remain silent”in the face of an Israeli blockade and “aggression”, a source close to Hamas told AFP.
The source noted that Monday’s rocket fire coincided with the recent launch of incendiary balloons into Israel.
In the past week, such balloons have flown three times from Gaza into Israel, each time triggering retaliatory strikes against Hamas positions.
The latest came Sunday night when the Israeli military announced that one of its aircraft had struck at a Hamas observation post in northern Gaza.

Preparing for Nuclear War Over Kashmir (Revelation 8 )

– The Washington Times – Monday, August 10, 2020

Another war between India and Pakistan is not out of the question a year after India revoked the special status of the disputed Kashmir region, which has led to a government crackdown and allegations of abuse against civilians in the majority-Muslim province, said Pakistan’s ambassador to the U.S.

In an interview Monday with The Washington Times, Ambassador Asad Majeed Khan offered a generally pessimistic view of any chance for successfully walking back tension between the two nuclear-power neighbors.

Mr. Khan said there is a complete lack of dialogue between New Delhi and Islamabad over the ethnically diverse and hotly contested region.“You have a border where you have over 2,000 violations since January. The Line of Control is hot,” he said. “No one can or should rule out the possibility of a larger confrontation.”

The Himalayan region of about 86,000 square miles was in dispute even before India and Pakistan won their independence from Great Britain in 1947. Both countries eventually divided up the area.