Before the first votes were cast, I penned a unique piece on how the election could be “legally rigged” by manipulating the votes of state electors. LMS was the only alternative news…or any source warning about this possibility. In particular, I singled out Michigan and Pennsylvania as key states to watch and they turned out to be key swing states for Trump, just as predicted. See: (http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/2016/11/07/1325/). Today, news is breaking, just as I had warned in the above linked to article, the Left is trying to lobby the Electoral College to ignore their pledges and vote for Hillary. This is feasible and actually legal, but would clearly cause a crisis within the US. See: (https://www.yahoo.com/news/millions-sign-petition-urging-electoral-college-to-elect-hillary-clinton-175038196.html). Make no mistake, Donald Trump was legitimately elected as the next president and will be president, but that doesn’t mean the Left will not try to disrupt this in every way possible. You can expect this push to sway the Electoral College to gain significant momentum in the coming days once the government propaganda outlets catch on that this is a viable. The implications of this action, should it gain traction, are serious. Read more
Trump Wins in Historic Anti-Establishment Victory, but Temper Your Jubilation: The Good, Bad, and Ugly of What’s to Come
Last night, Donald Trump won a historic victory by all accounts. America’s silent, dispossessed majority has spoken and it should serve as a warning to anyone discounting the anger of the CITIZENS the government has failed to serve. His victory was more about defeating Hillary and the overwhelming corruption and arrogance of the elites she represents than a referendum on his policies. With their support, Trump took on what amounts to the entire establishment and stunned the elites. The magnitude of this victory can’t be understated and we should have immense respect for what he has accomplished. The “Donald” went head-to-head with the media complex, fended off judicial attacks, and even successfully overcame his own party sabotaging him all while essentially saying exactly what the pundits said he couldn’t say…the truth. Donald Trump lived up to “his” own hype and proved he does have what it takes to outsmart even the dirtiest of career political elites. However, once the celebrations are over, the real work begins. Trump will have one of the most challenging jobs as President of anyone in our time and it is far from certain he will turn out to be what the people that voted for him believe he will be. Trump won by capturing populist anger, but when it comes to the nuts and bolts of healthy policies, it isn’t all sunshine and rainbows if you now analyze what the American voter just elected. Here is a list of what we can look forward to, be worried about, and outright fear from President Trump.
The good: Read more
Sometimes when searching for truth in the maze of media spin, your best technique is to focus on what is not being talked about. In the case of election rigging, it is clear there is already ample evidence to prove election fraud at the ballot boxes and by the two major political parties during the primaries. However, what is not being talked about is far more important than double voting, identification laws, or illegals voting and it is not just legal, it is constitutional. This election may come down to the electors that cast the state votes that are actually counted toward the Electoral College. The fact the media has all but ignored the most obvious “check and balance” to our election system is curious to say the least. These electors are handpicked by the elites and often owe loyalties to parties much like super delegates during the primaries. If they do not vote the will of the people, and they are by no means bound to do that, violence in the streets can be expected. Read more
Last week, news broke that the Islamic State (IS) had issued threats against New York, Virginia, and Texas. The report claimed that intelligence sources indicated that IS may be planning an attack to disrupt US elections. After the announcement, I had a few questions. Is it real and if so, then what is being done? If not, why would the threat information be publicized and who made the announcement? The answers are disturbing. Read more
Jack Murphy, an author at SOFREP recently had the opportunity to interview Syrian President Assad. Whether or not you like President Assad, you need to hear Andrew Wilkow’s short interview with Jack about the meeting broadcast on The Wilkow Majority radio show. Jack may not realize it, but his observations are accurate and completely contradict Washington’s talking points. To be specific, our government is lying to us about Syria. If you do not get smart about the real facts on the ground that Jack discusses, you will be tricked into World War III by your propaganda masters.
As I have detailed from the beginning, the war in Syria has been engineered by global elites using terrorist proxies. (See http://www.lastminutesurvival.com/?s=syria). These special interests are solely interested in advancing their own agendas and care not for the damage it does to others. If successful, their strategy will result in disastrous strategic consequences for the region and the US. Read more
The political timing of the assault on Mosul was no coincidence. It was timed to correspond with the election and to be used as a diversion if necessary. Ready to support their political masters, the complicit government propaganda outlets, otherwise known as the American Media Establishment, were right there to announce how everything was going well and success against ISIL was right around the corner. Of course the media failed to investigate the valid claims that the US actually let ISIL evacuate the city before the assault. This action allowed murderous terrorists to escape to kill more innocent people so that the US can claim it effectively “liberated” Mosul. If the media was being honest, it would have long ago made it blatantly clear the US has no intention of defeating ISIL anytime soon and the Mosul operation is a sideshow. Further, in spite of many fighters being allowed to escape, the Mosul operation still has not been going as planned. The battle began to bog down almost as soon as it began, which was easily predictable. Cutting through all of the cross talk and false information is tough and has left most people at a complete loss for what is going on. To help, here is a quick summary of what happens next with respect to ISIL.
For starters, the bulk of ISIL fighters have escaped to fight another day. This means many thousands more people will unnecessarily die in the Middle East, Europe, and the US. The US, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and even Israel made sure this was the case because they still are desperately trying to salvage their diabolical scheme to overthrow Syrian President Assad. They are not in the smallest way moved by the fact their actions have led to the death and displacement of millions. Their hope is the bulk of these fighters will race to Aleppo to relieve their jihadist allies. Some fighters undoubtedly will move quickly to try and reinforce Aleppo. However, ISIL is out of the box and may have other plans. Read more
The following summary of recent world events is decidedly negative. This is not due to overt pessimism as much as the facts are just plain bad. In fact, I didn’t even include events like the effects of Hurricane Mathew, the attack on our warship off the coast of Yemen, and the assassination of more police around the US. The world is not getting any safer and indicators are all pointing to things worsening as we move into late fall and winter. The following are major events you should be taking note of with short comments.
- Situation in Syria: Syrian government forces backed by Iran and Russia continue to pound Aleppo and are nearing a strategic breakthrough. All actors in Syria recognize that if Assad is able to recapture Aleppo from the Islamic extremists it will be the beginning of the end for Washington’s terrorist proxies in Syria. As such, there is panic from Doha to Washington. The terrorist coalition knows that it is now or never for major intervention, which may force the White House to order direct strikes against the Syrian regime, which undoubtedly will be countered by Russian retaliation. This creates the potential for a rapid outbreak of a major regional war that could go global. We have effectively arrived at the point I have repeatedly forecasted would occur in Syria where either Moscow or Washington accepts a massive strategic policy defeat or there is a major war…perhaps both. This is inescapable at this point. The best case scenario is if the US backs out by aligning with Russia to defeat ISIL and negotiate a peace deal that leaves the regime in place for now. This is highly unlikely and if Hillary Clinton is elected, all but impossible.
- I am forecasting that the US will continue to spread false anti-Assad and anti-Russian propaganda to drum up war sentiment in the US to prepare the public for the announcement airstrikes against Syrian military positions. If the neo-cons within the establishment get their way the air strikes will happen, but there will be an immediate cost to US forces. Russia will defend its positions on the ground and engage any US forces that directly threaten Russian lives and interests. In this event, it is possible we will witness the first combat losses of US Fifth Generation Fighters, which Washington is rightfully terrified will occur. The loss of these jets will show everyone how much superiority the US has lost against countries like China under Obama. This will jeopardize the multi-billion dollar acquisition program that has been riddled with corruption, failures, and delays. As such, it is far more likely Washington will lead with cruise missile and drone strikes that are easier to deny and hide if they fail to achieve their objectives, but are also much less likely to achieve decisive results.
One of the single biggest mistakes preppers make is that they buy into the myth that relocating to a small region in the North West corner of the United States is their “best” chance of survival. As you now know from my previous three articles in this series, this theory is inaccurate and is not based on any sound research. Further, it causes people to unnecessarily incur significant additional costs and difficulties when developing their preparedness plans. However, what you still may not know is that there is a large body of empirical evidence that repeatedly demonstrates people living in isolated, remote areas are often at the greatest risk during wide spread social chaos and collapse. Not coincidentally, these people also suffer some of the most hardships. Therefore, with respect to our contemporary situation in the United States, preppers relocating to Idaho with the explicit intent to escape an oppressive government and or are planning to escape widespread instability during a systemic collapse of the system might very well be signing their death warrants. Instead, contrary to contemporary prepping strategies, it would be better to be closer if not in the midst of a more densely populated area.
I understand what I just wrote probably sent many readers into anger and shock. Nonetheless, it is far better to get the right information now then to continue along a misguided path to destruction. No doubt, some readers will immediately discount what I am about to say because they are blinded by their own preconceived biases. I cannot help those people. Thankfully, the majority of my readers are intelligent thinking people that will quickly grasp the conclusions to be drawn from the evidence and modify their preparedness strategies accordingly. In fact, don’t take my word alone, I invite everyone to conduct their own independent research into our prepping assumptions and disseminate their findings.
My theories seem counterintuitive to the premise that the farther from people you are, the farther from harm you are. This is because the basic assumptions of this safety distance premise are flawed. As the theory goes, in the event of a collapse or major catastrophe, being located away from people in a remote, self-sufficient redoubt is your best chance. I have already discussed why the 300 mile rule is a useless metric and that the notion of a “Golden Horde” of refugees fleeing a city and destroying all in their wake is equally unfounded and completely untrue. The last pillar of this theory is that being isolated conveys additional survival benefits. To test it accurately, one must evaluate case studies from around the world and then correctly apply them to a realistic scenario domestically. Read more
Before I post Part IV, I want to pause and recap the huge amount of ground already covered in parts one and two of this series (See links below to read and catch up). Previously, I showed that the most common assumptions preppers base their relocation decisions on are completely false and actually counterproductive to outright dangerous. The research I presented is groundbreaking within our community because it completely overturned the very foundation of what many have spent a lifetime basing their preps around. Understandably, some people within the prepper community have received the new information as radical heresy and immediately took to the defense. When new information is presented to any community, this visceral reaction is to be expected. After all, it challenged their entire basis for their preps and in this case, proved that much of their foundational assumptions were based on bad information. Read more
In part one of our series on “Prepper Relocation,” I directly addressed a common false logic amongst preppers that led to bad conclusions regarding why one should relocate to Idaho. Specifically, I challenged the idea that a bunker was a viable long term survival strategy for a major catastrophe many prep for such as nuclear war. Simply establishing a second residence in a modern first world location like Santiago, Singapore, or New Zealand offer far better options for survival, both physically and economically, than hiding in a hole while a nuclear war is carried out above you. Today, I continue the slaughter of the sacred cows and challenge the merits of relocating to a site far from other people. As I previously discussed, relocation isn’t a subject to take lightly. It may be the single most important decision a prepper makes and therefore any plan should be heavily vetted before time and money is invested in executing it. Therefore, one must consider counter arguments to contemporary “expert” recommendations. By leveraging the information in this series, you will be far better prepared to develop a personalized answer to what truly is you “best prepper place to relocate.”
Contemporary prepper logic states that the farther your relocation site is from dense centers of population, the better. In fact, the magic number often touted is that you must be at least 300 miles from any major population center. However, is this really the case? This is very important because if 300 miles is accurate, it severely constrains your relocation options. If it is not a valid constraint, then suddenly you have many good options for relocation depending on the specific scenario you are prepping for. As such, let’s examine what that conclusion is premised upon. Breaking the theory down, you have two main hypotheses to vet. The first is that 300 miles provides a necessary and adequate buffer from an urban center. The second is that from said urban area a horde of starving refugees will emerge and overrun your redoubt.
Let me be the first to tell you neither hypothesis constituting this prepper theory, which to date has been held up as prepper law, is valid. Read more
I routinely read articles online where individuals pontificate about where the best places for preppers to live or relocate too are. What I don’t usually see is any real cognitive effort to do a realistic analysis and assessment. This should be a red flag. Selecting your relocation site is one of the most important decisions a prepper must make. It is too important to be made on hearsay and opinions. Therefore, I am going to question that contemporary prepper relocation logic. I am going to debunk common myths and offer better alternatives that will help you develop a personalized answer to what truly is you “best prepper place to relocate.” When this series is complete, you will be armed with critical information necessary for identifying your ideal relocation spot. Don’t be surprised if after this eye opening series your philosophy on how you previously evaluated and envisioned your relocation site looks completely different.
Most preparedness “experts” would define the common prepper relocation logic is to find a place as far as possible from other people in an area still suitable for an off-grid, self-sustaining lifestyle. This implies the location has ample water, good soil, and a good growing season. Add a couple wild card factors like being outside the blast radius and fallout pattern of a nuclear detonation and avoiding known earthquake prone areas and most preppers conclude that Idaho is the choice destination. James Wesley Rawles, a man well known and respected throughout the prepper community and a recognized expert on the field is a big advocate of this relocation option. In Rawles’ defense, Idaho may indeed be a good location for some preppers for some reasons. However, Rawles and many others are basing many of their primary assumptions on outdated information, obsolete tactics and techniques, and generally old school logic that when tested in real world scenarios, fails. I don’t take this indictment lightly. If we get this wrong, we die and that is why it is so important we first question some of the fundamental assumptions the conventional prepper relocation plan is based upon. Read more
White House Answers Petition to Label Black Lives Matter a Terrorist Organization: Careful What You Wish For
A White House petition was generated that gathered over 100,000 signatures to label the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement a terrorist organization. In response, the White House stated it didn’t have the power to label anyone a terrorist organization. Although, the White House clearly was ignoring the petition, be glad they did ignore it. Irrespective of whether or not you support BLM or not, declaring it a terrorist organization would have been a huge mistake and disaster for freedom and liberty. Whoever started the petition was probably good intentioned, but if you considered for a moment the true implications of what you were asking for, you would realize you are a complete idiot. Read more
Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey announced Wednesday that she will enforce a ban on the sale of what she called “copycat” assault-style weapons, effective immediately. This new interpretation of gun law obliterates a decades old precedent on “compliant guns.” Not only did it make tens if not hundreds of thousands of weapons in Massachusetts illegal, but it will soon be copied in other anti-gun states and cities across the nation. Make no mistake, the anti-gun movement is alive and well and ready to seize every last firearm in our nation if given the change. Read more
Those of us that fought in Iraq are well aware of the potent militia force, known at the time as the Mahdi Army, controlled by the Iraqi Shiite Cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. Al-Sadr is a leading Shiite figure in Iraq and controls a militia with tens of thousands of fighters. He is also viewed as the leader of Iran’s proxy force inside of Iraq. Al-Sadr’s fighters at one point during the Iraq War became one of the most potent enemies facing America and inflicted a considerable amount of casualties on the US. Now al-Sadr is calling again for his followers to attack US forces in Iraq “fighting” ISIL. His call for war against the “American Occupiers” signals an ominous policy change in Iraq that will result in dead Americans and could trigger another full scale war with the US. (See: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-usa-idUSKCN0ZX0XL )
Al-Sadr’s instructions to attack US troops in Iraq will not go unanswered by his followers. Unlike other groups in Iraq, al-Sadr’s militia is motivated and well-armed, trained, and equipped. Read more
On a short note, I would like to point out a bit of hypocrisy and genius. Throughout both wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US military has been shackled and hamstrung by the necessity to cause no collateral damage. The theory went that causing any “unnecessary” damage would alienate the population leading to the US losing the war. Well, at least myself and a few hundred thousand other American servicemen repeatedly tested this and found the theory to be false, but no one at the War College has mentioned it. In short, worrying about collateral damage only helps the enemy and increases friendly casualties. Oh, and did I mention we have lost every war that we employed a strategy of limited collateral damage? Read more