Houses Shake Before the Sixth Seal (Revelation 6)

‘My whole house shook’: Overnight 3.1 magnitude earthquake rocks parts of New Jersey

Posted: Sep 09, 2020 9:17 AM MDT Updated: Sep 09, 2020 3:09 PM MDT

The United States Geological Survey has confirmed a 3.1 magnitude earthquake struck New Jersey early Wednesday morning, with the epicenter near Freehold.

Monmouth County 911 dispatch centers were flooded with calls around 2 a.m. as people were awoken by rumbling and shaking in their beds.

“My whole house shook,” one caller said. “Yeah, we felt it here in Freehold,” the dispatcher replied.

Other callers thought there was a crash or explosion.

The Monmouth County Sheriff’s Department says the office fielded 125 calls about the quake in just 30 minutes.

Eventually the USGS confirmed around 3 a.m. that the shaking was caused by an earthquake. While the epicenter was around the Freehold area, the effects of the quake were felt as far away as New York City and Philadelphia.

Monmouth University Geology Professor Michael Tarullo says that it is unusual for an earthquake to happen in New Jersey this time of the year.

“I don’t do an earthquake lecture until five or six weeks from now,” Tarullo says.

Tarullo says that a 3.1 magnitude earthquake may not be larger in other parts of the country and the world. But for New Jersey, it is unusual.

“A 3.1 earthquake here in New Jersey is like a 7 or 8 in L.A. It’s not common and it’s certainly not common in the area where this one occurred,” Tarullo says. “In North Jersey, there are still some active faults we can see at the surface, like the Ramapo fault.”

Tarullo says that he wouldn’t expect to see another earthquake hit the Freehold area again for quite some time.

Anyone who felt the earthquake can fill out a survey on the USGS website to describe what they felt.

Another Hurricane Of God’s Wrath (Jeremiah 23)

Tropical Storm Rene forecast to become hurricane, Paulette may near Bermuda

The two current tropical systems are not forecast to impact the US

By Travis Fedschun, Janice Dean | Fox News

The latest named tropical system over the Atlantic Ocean restrengthened on Wednesday to a tropical storm and is expected to become a hurricane later this week, according to forecasters.

The U.S. National Hurricane Center (NHC) in Miami said that Rene is now a tropical storm again, after bringing heavy rain and gusty winds to the Cabo Verde Islands.

“Additional strengthening is forecast during the next 48 hours,” the NHC said.


As of 11 a.m. EDT, the storm was located about 510 miles west-northwest of the islands, with maximum sustained winds of 40 mph as it moves west-northwest at 13 mph.

Tropical Storms Paulette (left) and Rene (right) are seen over the Atlantic on Sept. 9, 2020. (NOAA/GOES-East)

Rene is expected to become a hurricane this week but then weaken over the open waters of the Atlantic, according to the NHC.

Bermuda may need to keep an eye on Tropical Storm Paulette, the second system currently in the Atlantic.

The NHC’s advisory at 11 a.m. EDT had the storm with 60 mph winds and located about 1,090 miles east of the Northern Leeward Islands, moving west-northwest at 9 mph.

The forecast tracks of Paulette and Rene. (Fox News)

The storm is forecast to continue moving northwest through Friday night and Saturday.

“Some weakening is forecast during the next couple of days,” the NHC said.


Bermuda needs to monitor Paulette early next week for possible impacts, but for now Paulette isn’t expected to strengthen significantly through the weekend. The storm is expected to generate rough surf that will reach the Greater Antilles, Bahamas and Bermuda into the weekend.

Forecast models for Paulette and Rene. Bermuda may need to keep an eye if Paulette draws closer. (Fox News)

Neither of these storms will have a direct impact on the U.S.

Another tropical disturbance southwest of Bermuda has a slight chance of gaining some tropical organization as it approaches the Carolinas by Friday. As of Wednesday, it’s not a major concern, as environmental conditions are marginal at best.

A system is moving off Africa in the next couple of days and has the potential to become a tropical depression by the weekend.

Rene was one of two storms that formed Monday; Tropical Storm Paulette took shape earlier in the day in the central Atlantic, far from land.

Historically, September produces the most Atlantic Ocean basin tropical activity. The two current tropical storms are the earliest 16th and 17th named storms, continuing a trend during the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season.


The two previous storms, Nana and Omar, were the earliest 14th and 15th named storms on record.

Hurricane season peaks on Sept. 10, and then starts to decrease. (Fox News)

Tropical activity historically climbs through Sept. 10, when it peaks and starts to slowly go back down.

The patterns during the peak of hurricane season that influence where storms travel. (Fox News)

NOAA forecasters are now calling for up to 25 named storms with winds of 39 mph or higher; of those, seven to 10 could become hurricanes. Among those hurricanes, three to six will be major, classified as Category 3, 4 and 5 with winds of 111 mph or higher.

The names of the 2020 Atlantic hurricane season. (Fox News)

That’s far above an average year. Based on 1981-to-2010 data, that is 12 named storms, six hurricanes and three major hurricanes. So far this year, there have been 17 named storms, including five hurricanes.


The 2020 Atlantic hurricane season runs from June 1 to Nov. 30 and includes the names Arthur, Bertha, Cristobal, Dolly, Edouard, Fay, Gonzalo, Hanna, Isaias, Josephine, Kyle, Laura, Marco, Nana, Omar, Paulette, Rene, Sally, Teddy, Vicky and Wilfred.

Fox News’ Adam Klotz and Brandon Noriega contributed to this report.

Trump and Babylon the Great’s ‘Secret Nukes’

Trump disclosed secret weapons system to Woodward: book

BySeptember 09, 2020 – 02:47 PM EDT

President Trump bragged about a supposedly secret nuclear weapons system in an interview with Bob Woodward, according to excerpts from the veteran journalist’s new book.

Trump discussed the weapons system while reflecting on how close the United States and North Korea came to nuclear war in 2017, according to excerpts from “Rage” published Wednesday by The Washington Post, where Woodward is an associate editor.

I have built a nuclear – a weapons system that nobody’s ever had in this country before. We have stuff that you haven’t even seen or heard about,” Trump told Woodward, according to the Post.

“We have stuff that Putin and Xi have never heard about before,” Trump added, referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping. “There’s nobody – what we have is incredible.”

Woodward’s book says unnamed sources later confirmed a new weapons system but would not provide any further details and were surprised that Trump had disclosed it, the Post reported.

When reached for comment by The Hill, the Pentagon said it does not have a comment “on a book that hasn’t published yet.”

James Acton, co-director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace’s nuclear policy program, suggested Wednesday that Trump may have been referring to the controversial submarine-launched low-yield nuclear warhead, the existence of which is known, although details remain classified.

The Trump administration called for the low-yield warhead as part of its 2018 Nuclear Posture Review.

In February, the Pentagon disclosed the warhead had been deployed for the first time after reports that it deployed on a submarine at the end of 2019. But the exact timing and location of its deployment are classified.

It’s unclear from the excerpts when Trump made his comments on the weapons system to Woodward. Trump conducted 18 on-the-record interviews with Woodward from December to July.

Trump has a track record of bragging about new weapons that are publicly known, though he’s gone further by disclosing details that were previously unknown.

In May, Trump touted a “super duper” missile he said could travel 17 times faster than anything in the current U.S. arsenal.

Reports later said Trump was referring to the U.S. military’s hypersonic glide body and that the speed Trump disclosed referenced how much faster than the speed of sound the missile flew in a March test.

The Pentagon had announced the hypersonic missile test in March but did not disclose the speed.

Updated at 3:56 p.m.

Babylon the Great’s Enemies Want Iran to Have More Weapons

A view of the reactor building at the Bushehr nuclear power plant as the first fuel is loaded, on August 21, 2010 in southern Iran.

IIPA via Getty Images

In less than two months, the decade-long United Nations arms embargo on Iran is set to end. Letting this happen would be a catastrophic mistake, as it would allow the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, actively pursuing nuclear capability, once again to obtain weapons from Russia and China. Allowing weapons sales to Iran would not only hurt the United States and our allies, but would destabilize the region, giving the Iranian regime access to planes, tanks and other weapons it needs to defend its nuclear production sites, oppress its people, and support its proxies in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen.

Imposed in 2010 by the U.N. Security Council because of Iran’s relentless pursuit of nuclear capability, the current arms embargo has made it harder for the Iranian regime to pursue its malign agenda abroad. Nonetheless, the Iranian military has exported violence with deadly effectiveness. From direct strikes on Saudi oil facilities to proxy attacks killing American soldiers in Iraq in recent years, the Iranian government has continued aggressive action, even in the midst of the global weapons ban. And this doesn’t even account for the tens of thousands of civilians killed in conflicts stoked by the Iranian-supported terrorist groups like Hezbollah and organizations leading the civil wars in Syria and Yemen.

One might credibly ask why weapons shipments could restart by Halloween, and who thinks this is a good—or even acceptable—idea. This all goes back to the unwise “deal” struck by the Obama administration in 2010. That deal—which even under the Obama administration’s analysis wasn’t a binding legal agreement but simply an unsigned “political commitment”—provided for the lifting of the arms embargo on Iran in five years, but only if Iran complied with its obligations. The U.N.—at the Obama administration’s request—so directed in a Security Council resolution.

Critically, that resolution—which didn’t make the entire nuclear deal binding—also provides that if a named party—like the United States—asserts that Iran is out of compliance, all of the U.N. restrictions, including the arms embargo, automatically “snap back” into place. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has already initiated this process by notifying the U.N. Security Council that the United States believes Iran is not complying with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

Iran has long been out of compliance with the deal. From the outset, the Iranian regime transgressed, overproducing heavy water (a nuclear fuel cycle component), exceeding limits on uranium centrifuges, and imposing limits on nuclear inspections. The Iranian violations have gotten even more blatant recently, with Iran increasing its stocks of enriched uranium by nearly 10x from over a year ago and more than 50% since the start of the Covid pandemic alone.

And yet the international community seems willing to give Iran the benefit of a deal it is plainly violating. In August, the U.N. Security Council took up extending the arms embargo. The vote failed, with 11 of 15 nations abstaining from the vote, including all of our European allies. This stunning lack of fortitude is perhaps unsurprising coming from the pliant and fatigued Europeans, but makes little sense, particularly given that in January, the U.K., France, and Germany all formally complained that Iran was in clear violation of the deal.

Even though the U.S., acting alone, can legally trigger snapback under the U.N. resolution, American adversaries like Iran, Russia, and China argue that we have lost the right to do so because the Trump administration—wisely in our view—withdrew from the deal in 2018. That is incorrect as a matter of law.  While the U.S. may have left the deal, under the U.N. resolution, it still has the right, as a named party, to trigger snapback. Nothing the U.S. or anyone else does with respect to the deal itself can change the text of the U.N. resolution. Knowing this, our opponents have argued unfairness; namely, that the United States shouldn’t get the benefit of the snap back provision since we’ve left the deal. However, our continued adherence to the deal is neither at issue nor relevant. What matters is the independent and unambiguous text of the resolution, with which the United States—unlike Iran—is in full compliance.

Of course, invoking snapback won’t do a whole lot unless our erstwhile allies comply with the reinstated arms embargo and compel others to do so as well. While they may not have the fortitude to vote up or down on the ban itself, surely the Europeans must see how critical it is that the Iranian regime not have free access to weapons. They need look only as far as the humanitarian crises in Syria and Yemen to see what happens when the Iranian military has its way.

Finally, if the Europeans are under some misimpression that the U.S. position might change after the November elections, we think they are mistaken. After all, it is the rare American voter who thinks Iran ought to have access to more weapons and, to the extent the candidates’ positions are unclear, surely both will make their views apparent during the upcoming debates. Indeed, each could focus the minds of our shaky allies by simply asking whether they wish to do business with Iran’s $450 billion economy, or with our more than $20 trillion economy. Iran’s ability to obtain weapons must remain restricted and now is the time for us—and our allies—to act.

Michael B. Mukasey is the former attorney general of the United States and the former chief judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. He serves on the board of advisors for the National Security Institute at GMU’s Scalia Law School. Jamil N. Jaffer is the former chief counsel and senior adviser to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and served in senior national security roles in the Bush Justice Department and White House. He is the founder and executive director of the National Security Institute and an assistant professor at GMU’s Scalia Law School.

Khamenei: I Too Am Guilty of the ‘Unforgivable Sin’

Insulting the Prophet an ‘Unforgivable Sin’

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei condemned the French magazine Charlie Hebdo for republishing offensive cartoons of Islam’s Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), saying such hostile moves are rooted in the “deeply anti-Islamic policies” of Zionists and arrogant governments.

In a message published on his website on Tuesday, the Leader said “the grave and unforgivable sin committed” by the French magazine once again “revealed the hostility and malicious grudge harbored by the political and cultural organizations in the West against Islam and the Muslim community.”

Ayatollah Khamenei also denounced as “unacceptable” French politicians’ refusal to condemn the blasphemous caricatures under the guise of respecting free speech.

“The pretext of ‘freedom of expression’ used by some French politicians in order to not condemn this grave crime is completely unacceptable, wrong and demagogic,” the Leader said.

Charlie Hebdo angered Muslims in France and all over the world last week by reprinting the insulting sketches of the Prophet on the eve of the trial of suspects in a deadly attack on the magazine’s Paris offices in 2015.

The weekly said the drawings “belong to history, and history cannot be rewritten nor erased”.

French President Emmanuel Macron declined to condemn the sacrilegious move, citing freedom of the press and freedom of expression.

The Leader also said, “This move made at this point in time might also serve another motive: diverting the minds and attention of nations and governments in West Asia away from the evil schemes that the US and the Zionist regime have hatched for the region.”

Ayatollah Khamenei called on Islamic nations to exercise vigilance in the face of US-Israeli plots for the region and stay alert to the West’s enmities against Muslims.

“While maintaining their vigilance on the issues of this crucial region, Muslim nations, particularly West Asian countries, should never forget the hostilities of western politicians and leaders against Islam and Muslims.”

Iran plays dangerous game with uranium enrichment (Daniel 8:4)

On Friday, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a UN body, reported that Iran’s stock of enriched uranium has reached 2,105 kilograms. This is a figure 10 times higher than what it agreed to under a 2015 agreement – the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The US and Iran both withdrew from the agreement, in 2018 and 2020, respectively.

The IAEA warned that Iran is also exceeding the permitted level of enrichment, which determines whether uranium is suitable for use in civilian nuclear energy or, at if it is high enough, as a critical component of a nuclear bomb. Limiting the proliferation of uranium and the capability to enrich it to weapons grade is fundamental to minimising the threat of global nuclear war. It is also part of the raison d’etre of the IAEA.

In matters of non-proliferation, however, Iran has long been opaque. For months, authorities in Tehran declined to allow access for the IAEA, which acts as the world’s nuclear watchdog, to two Iranian nuclear centres for inspections. Even without access to these facilities, the agency had already surmised that Iran had committed a string of JCPOA violations.

Late last month, in an effort to boost its diplomatic standing, Iran relented. Inspectors attended to the first of the two facilities last week. Friday’s report was released after that visit.

While American officials have repeatedly invited Iran to renegotiate the terms of the JCPOA, Tehran has refused to participate in any talks, demanding the US lifts sanctions it has imposed. In response to these sanctions and other elements of the US’s maximum-pressure campaign, Iran has systematically reduced its compliance with the JCPOA. Since it announced its intention to scale up its enrichment dramatically back in January, Iran has been openly in defiance of its international obligations.

On October 18, a UN conventional arms embargo on Iran is set to expire, and the US has pursued, complicated procedural avenues within the Security Council to activate a “snapback”, in which the embargo would be renewed and the JCPOA would, in effect, be terminated. The UK and France – normally US allies – have pushed back at the American efforts in a bid to keep the JCPOA alive.

The key point of contention within the Security Council over the last month has been whether or not the US – now that it has exited the agreement – still has any right to trigger a snapback. The US and Iran have each submitted opposing legal arguments on this and other questions, and the outcome remains uncertain.

In matters of non-proliferation, however, Iran has long been opaque

Regardless of whether or not the snapback is imposed, however, the accelerated transformation of Iran’s “reduced compliance” into outright noncompliance ought to be alarming. For one thing, it provides Iran greater influence in any future negotiation – a fact that, to some extent, can motivate Tehran’s strategy. For another, it diminishes the force of future agreements by showing Iran’s government that it can engage in noncompliance without serious consequences.

Iran has withstood US sanctions, which have taken a toll on its economy, for years by largely relying on its regional proxies. But the headwinds that rock Iran’s establishment are particularly strong now. The pandemic has worsened existing disillusionment, in Iran and elsewhere in the region, with Tehran and its militias in other states. If European countries do not wish to support the US’s maximum-pressure campaign, whatever solution arrives must emphasise to the Iranians that destabilising moves and the defiance of international law will get them nowhere.

Updated: September 6, 2020 09:56 PM

Pakistan lawmaker warns of the first nuclear war (Revelation 8 )

Pakistan lawmaker warns of nuclear war over Kashmir

KARACHI, Pakistan

A Pakistani lawmaker on Monday urged the international community, including the UN, to swiftly act to sop “genocide” of Kashmiris by Indian security forces, warning the world against a “brewing” nuclear conflict on the long-smoldering Kashmir dispute.

Addressing a seminar in the capital Islamabad, Shehryar Khan Afridi, chairman of the parliament’s Kashmir committee, claimed New Delhi was using backdoor channels to resume talks to Pakistan. However, he said his country would not talk to India unless Kashmir issue was on the agenda.

Kashmir, he further said, became a key issue in the global digital space and that Pakistan would not allow India to mislead the world on the ongoing “genocide” there.

“We are reaching out to all the global platforms to raise Kashmir [issue],” he said adding that the parliament’s committee was engaging with 22 global forums to sensitize the world on the lingering dispute.

Sardar Masood Khan, president of Pakistani-administered Kashmir, also known as Azad Kashmir, charged that extrajudicial killings have become a norm in disputed Jammu and Kashmir.

Indian forces, Khan went on to argue, arrest youth and later gun them down in fake police “encounters.”

“The world knows well about the Indian atrocities being committed by the occupational forces in occupied Kashmir but commercial interests are major hurdle in taking action against India,” he added.

Apart from issuing half a million domiciles to non-Kashmiris, he said, India was planning to award citizenship rights to 1.7 million migrant workers as well.

Disputed region

Kashmir, a Muslim-majority Himalayan region, is held by India and Pakistan in parts and claimed by both in full. A small sliver of Kashmir is also held by China.

Since they were partitioned in 1947, the two countries have fought three wars — in 1948, 1965 and 1971 — two of them over Kashmir.

Also, in Siachen glacier in northern Kashmir, Indian and Pakistani troops have fought intermittently since 1984. A cease-fire came into effect in 2003.

Some Kashmiri groups in Jammu and Kashmir have been fighting against Indian rule for independence, or for unification with neighboring Pakistan.

According to several human rights organizations, thousands of people have reportedly been killed in the conflict in the region since 1989.

Anadolu Agency website contains only a portion of the news stories offered to subscribers in the AA News Broadcasting System (HAS), and in summarized form. Please contact us for subscription options.