Venezuela Crisis: A Warning to America

Don’t elect a democratic socialist like Sanders or Clinton

From gun confiscation to economic collapse, what’s happening in Venezuela is exactly what a Clinton or Sanders Presidency would mean for America.

Advertisements

The “Migrant Crisis” is About Imposing Multiculturalism on the West

A backdoor plot to enforce mass immigration that European voters had previously rejected

by Paul Joseph Watson | September 7, 2015


NATO Heavy Weapons Fueling World War III

Threat of global thermonuclear war looms as Ukraine crisis intensifies

by Alex Jones | Infowars.com | June 22, 2015


NATO is pushing civilization dangerously closer to a new world war by antagonizing Russia with the Ukrainian conflict.

Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced just this week that the United States would be contributing “weapons, aircraft and forces, including commandos, for NATO’s rapid reaction force” to push back against Russia’s presence in the region.

The situation, which began with billionaire George Soros’ admitted overthrow of the Ukranian government, has led to dangerous nuclear rhetoric, far surpassing the Cold War era.

Total Emergency Alert: Elite Now Evacuating

Signs of a coming financial meltdown are accelerating

by Alex Jones | Infowars.com | June 20, 2015


The financial elite are hinting that an impending financial collapse is on the horizon.

From the Greek-Euro crisis to gold’s sudden rise in popularity, the writing on the wall points to unavoidable economic doom.

Texas Governor Greg Abbott recently indicated his distrust of the Federal Reserve’s fiat monetary system in a move to repatriate $1 billion of gold back to his home state.

Countries such as China and Germany have made similar moves, with the German Central Bank, or Bundesbank, earlier this year saying it also has plans to repatriate 300 tonnes of gold from the New York Fed by 2020.

Just today, a British hedge fund manager Ian Spreadbury who handles billions in investments revealed he warns clients of the market’s “systemic risk,” and said he advises them to store “physical cash” due to its volatility.

All of this, coupled with the fact that billionaires are purchasing doomsday bunkers and offshore hideaways, paints a bleak picture of the global economic future unless more of humanity awakens and forces a sea change.

California Has Never Experienced A Water Crisis Of This Magnitude – And The Worst Is Yet To Come

Things have never been this dry for this long in the recorded history of the state of California, and this has created an unprecedented water crisis
California Has Never Experienced A Water Crisis Of This Magnitude – And The Worst Is Yet To Come

Image Credits: armaggeusa, Flickr.

by Michael Snyder | End Of The American Dream | June 18, 2015


Things have never been this dry for this long in the recorded history of the state of California, and this has created an unprecedented water crisis.  At this point, 1,900 wells have already gone completely dry in California, and some communities are not receiving any more water at all.  As you read this article, 100 percent of the state is in some stage of drought, and there has been so little precipitation this year that some young children have never actually seen rain.  This is already the worst multi-year drought in the history of the state of California, but this may only be just the beginning.  Scientists tell us that the amount of rain that California received during the 20th century was highly unusual.  In fact, they tell us that it was the wettest century for the state in at least 1000 years.  Now that things are returning to “normal”, the state is completely and total unprepared for it.  California has never experienced a water crisis of this magnitude, and other states in the western half of the nation are starting to really suffer as well.  In the end, we could very well be headed for the worst water crisis this country has ever seen.

When I said that some communities in California are not receiving any more water, I was not exaggerating.  Just consider the following excerpt from one recent news report

The community of Mountain House is days away from having no water at all after the state cut off its only water source.

Anthony Gordon saves drinking water just in case, even though he never thought it would come to this.

“My wife thinks I’m nuts. I have like 500 gallons of drinking water stored in my home,” he said.

The upscale community of Mountain House, west of Tracy, is days away from having no water. It’s not just about lawns—there may not be a drop for the 15,000 residents to drink.

So what are those people going to do?

And what is this going to do to the property values in that area?

Who in the world is going to want to buy a home that does not have running water coming to it?

Other communities throughout the state are pumping groundwater like crazy in a desperate attempt to continue with business as usual.  In fact, it is being projected that groundwater will account for almost all water used in the entire state by the end of this year

Underground aquifers supply 35 percent of the water used by humans worldwide. Demand is even greater in times of drought. Rain-starved California is currently tapping aquifers for 60 percent of its water use as its rivers and above-ground reservoirs dry up, a steep increase from the usual 40 percent. Some expect water from aquifers will account for virtually every drop of the state’s fresh water supply by year end.

But of course this creates a huge problem.  When the groundwater is gone, it is gone for good.  Those aquifers took centuries to fill up, and now they are being drained at a staggering rate.  In some parts of the state, aquifers are being drained so fast that it is causing thousands of square miles of land to sink

Californians have been draining water so rapidly from underground aquifers that tens of thousands of square miles of land reportedly are sinking — so drastically that the shifting surface is starting to destroy bridges and crack highways across the state, according to a recent report by the Center for Investigative Reporting.

So what is the solution?

Some of my readers have suggested that desalination is the answer.  But the truth is that desalination is very expensive and it is really bad for the environment.  The following comes from a recent Natural News article

For those who are saying, “There’s no water problem in California! It has the entire Pacific Ocean right next door!”, you need to look into the catastrophic environmental destruction tied to ocean water desalination.

Not only does desalination use fossil fuels which emit the very same carbon emissions that the California government insists caused the drought in the first place, the desalination process itself pollutes the ocean with high concentration salt brine that kills marine ecosystems and destroys ocean life along the California coastline.

And that’s on top of all the Fukushima radiation that’s already causing a marine ecosystem collapse in many areas of the coast. Add more salt brine to the mix and you get a state where rich, self-entitled Hollywood celebrities demand their lush, green lawns at the expense of ocean life, climate change and the global ecosystem. If that happens, California will lose all credibility as a “green” state, and its wealthiest residents will be living an ecological lie.

Others have suggested that California can solve their water problems using “toilet to tap” technology

Potable water reuse – or converting sewage effluent to heavily-treated, purified drinking water – is receiving renewed attention in California in the midst of the state’s four-year drought.

According to a report by the Los Angeles Times, “California water managers and environmentalists” are pushing the idea of recycled sewage water. Yet past efforts in the state to employ similar systems have stalled, as opponents have dubbed the concept “toilet to tap.”

How would you feel about that?

Would you be willing to have your family drink water that came from the toilets of your neighbors?

I don’t think that I could do that.

But something has to be done.  It is not just the state of California that is experiencing a major water crisis.  All over the world, underground aquifers are being drained rapidly.  In fact, according to the Washington Post, 21 out of the 37 largest aquifers in the world “have passed their sustainability tipping points”…

The world’s largest underground aquifers – a source of fresh water for hundreds of millions of people — are being depleted at alarming rates, according to new NASA satellite data that provides the most detailed picture yet of vital water reserves hidden under the Earth’s surface.

Twenty-one of the world’s 37 largest aquifers — in locations from India and China to the United States and France — have passed their sustainability tipping points, meaning more water was removed than replaced during the decade-long study period, researchers announced Tuesday. Thirteen aquifers declined at rates that put them into the most troubled category. The researchers said this indicated a long-term problem that’s likely to worsen as reliance on aquifers grows.

Sadly, this is just the beginning.  There is a reason why experts refer to fresh water as “the new oil”.  Without fresh water, none of us can survive.  But we are very quickly getting to the point where there simply won’t be enough of it for everyone on the planet.

As for the state of California, it was once a desert and now it is turning back into a desert.  As I mentioned earlier, the 20th century was the wettest century that part of North America had seen in at least 1000 years.  During that time, we built enormous cities all over the Southwest that currently support millions upon millions of people.  But now we are learning that those cities are not sustainable.

So what should be done?  Please feel free to share what you think by posting a comment below…

The Forecaster

Can a computer model predict the world economy?

MARTIN ARMSTRONG, once a US based trillion dollar financial advisor, developed a computer model based on the number pi and other cyclical theories to predict economic turning points with eerie accuracy. In the early 80s he established his financial forecasting and advising company Princeton Economics. His forecasts were in great demand worldwide. As Armstrong’s recognition grew, prominent New York bankers invited him to join “the club” to aid them in market manipulation. Martin repeatedly refused. Later that same year (1999) the FBI stormed his offices confiscating his computer model and accusing him of a 3 billion dollar Ponzi scheme. Was it an attempt to silence him and to prevent him from initiating a public discourse on the real Ponzi Scheme of debts that the world has been building up for decades? Armstrong predicts that a sovereign debt crisis will start to unfold on a global level after October 1, 2015 – a major pi turning point that his computer model forecasted many years ago.

Click Here For The Official Website

Did You Know Bilderberg Created the 1973 Oil Crisis?

OPEC just played along with crisis orchestrated by Bilderberg!

by Kit Daniels | Infowars.com | June 11, 2015


The Bilderberg Group orchestrated the 1973 Oil Crisis and talked OPEC into playing along to ensure that Anglo-American oil companies with ties to Bilderberg would profit from oil exploration in the North Sea.

Now that’s a deep secret they won’t teach you in school because, frankly, Bilderberg doesn’t want you to know.

This is why it’s important to cover the Bilderberg Group.

Follow on Twitter:
@RealAlexJones | @KitDaniels1776

Infowars is proud to announce the launch of Resistance News, a new YouTube channel showing you how to apply the concepts of liberty to empower your personal life. Resistance News brings you hard-hitting reports, tips on activism, the latest in human empowerment through liberty and even movie reviews! Subscribe to Resistance News today!

Emergency Powers Give Barack Obama Authority Over Just About Everything During A Major National Crisis

Barack Obama is the most powerful president in all of U.S. history
Emergency Powers Give Barack Obama Authority Over Just About Everything During A Major National Crisis

by Michael Snyder | May 28, 2015


Presidents have always exercised emergency powers, but now thanks to dozens of new laws, regulations, court decisions and executive orders, Barack Obama is the most powerful president in all of U.S. history.  Of course the U.S. Constitution does not actually give the president any special powers during a time of national emergency, but over time presidents have decided that they should be able to exercise such powers and the courts have generally agreed with them. 

During World War II and prior to that, these emergency powers were largely uncodified and were primarily used during times of war.  But since World War II things have completely changed, and this has particularly been true since 9/11.  Over the past decade or so, a whole host of extraordinary powers have specifically been given to the office of the president, and all that it takes to exercise them is a major “national emergency”.  So if we do have a full-blown economic collapse, a historic natural disaster, a significant war or a massive pandemic, Barack Obama could use the emergency powers that he has been given to essentially take authority over everything.

There is not a single document or series of documents that contain all of the emergency powers that Barack Obama could potentially wield during a major national emergency.  As I mentioned above, these powers come from literally dozens of laws, regulations, court decisions and executive orders.  But in this article I will discuss a few important documents.  One of these is a presidential directive that was issued during the second term of George W. Bush.  It is entitled NATIONAL SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/NSPD – 51/HOMELAND SECURITY PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE/HSPD – 20, and you can take a look at it on the FEMA website right here.  This document is primarily concerned with the continuity of our federal government in the event of a catastrophic emergency.  So precisely what would constitute a “catastrophic emergency”?  The following is how the document defines that term…

“Catastrophic Emergency” means any incident, regardless of location, that results in extraordinary levels of mass casualties, damage, or disruption severely affecting the U.S. population, infrastructure, environment, economy, or government functions;

That sounds quite broad to me.  It could apply to all sorts of scenarios.

If we do have such a “catastrophic emergency”, the president essentially becomes a dictator at that point.  The document certainly talks about the need to ensure that “constitutional government” continues, but during the course of the emergency there really is not much of a role for the other two branches of government to play.  Instead, the “shadow government” takes over under the overall command of the president.  The following is a short excerpt from the document…

The President shall lead the activities of the Federal Government for ensuring constitutional government. In order to advise and assist the President in that function, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism (APHS/CT) is hereby designated as the National Continuity Coordinator. The National Continuity Coordinator, in coordination with the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA), without exercising directive authority, shall coordinate the development and implementation of continuity policy for executive departments and agencies. The Continuity Policy Coordination Committee (CPCC), chaired by a Senior Director from the Homeland Security Council staff, designated by the National Continuity Coordinator, shall be the main day-to-day forum for such policy coordination.

Of course the 11 page document that we have on the FEMA website is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to continuity of government planning.  Unfortunately, most of the plans are top secret and are not allowed to be seen by the public.  Astonishingly, this even applies to members of Congress.  The following comes from Wikipedia

On July 18, 2007, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR), a member of the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security, requested the classified and more detailed version of the government’s continuity of government plan in a letter signed by him and the chairperson of the House Homeland Committee, which is supposed to have access to confidential government information. The president refused to provide the information, to the surprise of the congressional committee.

Another document that raises a lot of red flags is an executive order entitled “National Defense Resources Preparedness” that was issued by Barack Obama on March 16th, 2012.  This particular executive order updates previous executive orders, and it gives the president extraordinary authority during a time of national emergency.  Below, I have posted most of section 201 of that executive order.  As you can see, it potentially gives Barack Obama authority over just about everything during a time of national emergency if he feels it is needed for “national defense”…

Sec. 201Priorities and Allocations Authorities.  (a)  The authority of the President conferred by section 101 of the Act, 50 U.S.C. App. 2071, to require acceptance and priority performance of contracts or orders (other than contracts of employment) to promote the national defense over performance of any other contracts or orders, and to allocate materials, services, and facilities as deemed necessary or appropriate to promote the national defense, is delegated to the following agency heads:

(1)  the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to food resources, food resource facilities, livestock resources, veterinary resources, plant health resources, and the domestic distribution of farm equipment and commercial fertilizer;

(2)  the Secretary of Energy with respect to all forms of energy;

(3)  the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to health resources;

(4)  the Secretary of Transportation with respect to all forms of civil transportation;

(5)  the Secretary of Defense with respect to water resources; and

(6)  the Secretary of Commerce with respect to all other materials, services, and facilities, including construction materials.

(b)  The Secretary of each agency delegated authority under subsection (a) of this section (resource departments) shall plan for and issue regulations to prioritize and allocate resources and establish standards and procedures by which the authority shall be used to promote the national defense, under both emergency and non-emergency conditions.  Each Secretary shall authorize the heads of other agencies, as appropriate, to place priority ratings on contracts and orders for materials, services, and facilities needed in support of programs approved under section 202 of this order.

A similar executive order regarding national communications was issued on July 6th, 2012.

But the powers that Barack Obama could potentially wield during a time of national emergency are not just limited to what is written down.  This may shock many Americans, but it is true.  In the past, presidents have used their “emergency powers” to suspend habeas corpus, to place American citizens in internment camps and to seize private property.  The following comes from Wikipedia

A claim of emergency powers was at the center of President Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus without Congressional approval in 1861. Lincoln claimed that the rebellion created an emergency that permitted him the extraordinary power of unilaterally suspending the writ. With Chief Justice Roger Taney sitting as judge, the Federal District Court of Maryland struck down the suspension in Ex Parte Merryman, although Lincoln ignored the order. 17 F. Cas. 144 (1861).

President Franklin Delano Roosevelt similarly invoked emergency powers when he issued an order directing that all Japanese Americans residing on the West Coast be placed into internment camps during World War II. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld this order in Korematsu v. United States. 323 U.S. 214 (1944).

Harry Truman declared the use of emergency powers when he seized private steel mills that failed to produce steel because of a labor strike in 1952. With the Korean War ongoing, Truman asserted that he could not wage war successfully if the economy failed to provide him with the material resources necessary to keep the troops well-equipped. The U.S. Supreme Court, however, refused to accept that argument in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, voting 6-3 that neither Commander in Chief powers nor any claimed emergency powers gave the President the authority to unilaterally seize private property without Congressional legislation. 343 U.S. 579.

And it is important to keep in mind that Barack Obama now possesses far more power than any of those presidents ever did.  All it is going to take for him to exercise those powers is a major national emergency.  This is something that Jim Powell discussed in an article for Forbes

Not long after that, we found ourselves in an open-ended national emergency declared on September 14, 2001 and extended since by both George W. Bush and Barack Obama.  This means the president has standby powers from hundreds of statutes that would enable him to re-introduce military conscription, seize private property and in myriad ways establish a government-run economy.

Thankfully, things are still somewhat stable for the moment so Obama does not have a reasonable excuse to use all of the powers that he has been given.  But that could change at any time.  If we do see a “catastrophic emergency” in the next year or so, there are very few limits on what Barack Obama would be able to do.  That includes potentially postponing or suspending the 2016 election so that he can remain in office throughout the course of the national emergency.

We have never seen such a thing happen before, and hopefully we never will.  And of course it isn’t just Barack Obama that we need to be concerned about.  A future leader of this nation could potentially be even worse than him.  It has been exceedingly foolish for us to give a single person so much power in the event of a “catastrophic emergency”, and in the end we may regret this bitterly.

Survival Vs. Bushcraft: Why Your Gear May Not Save You In A Crisis

Image source: doritweber.com

After having been in the survivalist business since 2007, there was always this one issue that I seemed to run into on an oddly regular basis. I was all about buying survival gear, and believe me when I say, you can drop LOADS of cash on that stuff. Especially if you’re trying to purchase only items that are durable enough to last through, say, the apocalypse.

But here’s the problem: if you’re trying to prepare for a long-term survival or bunker scenario, then you DON’T want survival gear, per se. Sure, that might be able to get you through a short-term pinch. But in the long run, that category of gear just won’t be sufficient for your particular needs.

And that’s why I began to study bushcraft once I noticed the difference between the two categories.

The Difference Is In the Scenario

Yes, there’s certainly a major difference between those two categories of wilderness self-reliance/sustenance living. Essentially, I tend to break it down like this:

  • Survival(craft) – This is the type of gear needed during a desperate, unplanned 72-hour scenario, helping you stay alive in less-than-optimal conditions, such as having minimal gear or sustained injuries. The main objective is beyond just survival, as you will eventually need to make it back home, either via search and rescue teams, or your own navigational capacity.
  • Bushcraft – This is completely different, but many of the skills and tools in survivalcraft are based on those, which had originated from the African-born art of bushcraft. Essentially, the reason for studying, practicing and acquiring gear for bushcraft is not for the mere objective of staying alive in the wilderness … but rather to exist and thrive there.

So basically, in survivalcraft, you’re stuck in the wilderness and need to find civilization so that you can get back home alive.

In bushcraft, you’re in the wilderness because you felt stuck in civilization. And you feel quite at home and at peace in the backwoods. (Not to mention you’ve got some strips of rabbit meat on the smoking rack at the moment and it’s almost all done drying out. Good thing you brought that small tin of homemade spices, because that jerky will need a dash of salt n’ pepper before it can be called “delectable”).

wildernessSure, these two wilderness existence categories can mesh in MANY aspects, but where they differ most comes down to the overall reason for finding yourself in the backcountry in the first place.

Why This Should Matter To You

This matters for several reasons and it took me about five years (and quite a few dollars) to realize that I had been trying to accomplish two different tasks, thinking they were the same one. Consider these facts:

  • Most survival gear is made to be disposable, single-use, or optimal only over a period of 72 hours. Bushcraft gear is made to last pretty much forever and ever.
  • The methodology side of survivalcraft is largely equipment-oriented, whereas bushcraft is knowledge-oriented. For example:
    • In survivalcraft, you’d break out the first-aid kit and dab some antibiotic ointment on a small cut (because you were darn smart for packing it in).
    • As for bushcraft, you’d go and get your stash of wild medicinal herbs and use the antiseptic ash from burned cattails.
  • In bushcraft, while you might have a whole bunch of camp tasks to accomplish while the sun’s still up, you’re not in much of a rush. You’re a pretty happy camper, aside from the fact that it’s your turn to dig the new latrine this time. In survivalcraft, there is NO time. You’re not there on purpose, which means that you’ve probably sustained injuries in getting there, you’re lost (and possibly dehydrated), or you’re inadequately clothed to handle the dropping nighttime temps.
  • Much of bushcraft methodology is taken from experimental archaeology and is largely based upon the old way of wilderness/frontier existence out of appreciation for historical lifestyles and ye olde legends. Survivalcraft is largely based on military methods, rationale and strategy. Which is likely why the main objective is to hook up with “evac” or hoof it back to friendly territory.

Why Study Survival(craft)?

Survivalcraft teaches you to think calmly during a crisis and be able to handle minor injuries. It also teaches you how to keep hydrated, maintain the body’s core temperature at a healthy 98.6, use basic navigational skills, and ultimately signal for rescue so you can make it back home alive.

Why Study Bushcraft?

You’ll be using bushcraft within a couple days after you’ve finally made it to your bugout location or established homestead retreat. At this point, the survival-phase is over and the existence-phase has begun. So, this is when you begin to build sturdy shelters and traplines, identify wild edibles and medicinals, check the area for tracks and game, and basically set up your new home away from the one that just got raided by an APC full of troops fresh outta’ Moscow.

(Read our earlier story, Wilderness Medicine When You’re Sick And Desperate.)

During this phase of your bugout, it’s now about the long game, thinking ahead of nature’s challenges (and possible encounters with two-legged crazies). At the same time, you can now slow down a bit and create a longer-term strategy. And yes, you can probably throw away that giant, tanto-serrated, foot-long, $11.99 survival-tactical knife, because it’s pretty much going to be useless out there unless you run into zombie mall ninjas … along with Sasquatch … and Elvis.

Of course, you could always study bushcraft because it’s a great way to enjoy nature and build community with other bushcrafters. That tends to be the most common reason to get into it.

Which Should Be Your Forte’?

Image source: JackMtn.com

My best advice for newbie survivalists and bushcrafters would be this: if you go into these studies with a preference for one and not the other then you’re going to handicap your skillset and short yourself on the gear that you’ll likely come to need. It’s best to have a pretty darn good handle on both fields of study because in a crisis-chaos scenario, you are probably going to need BOTH.

The reason why I simply decided to explain the differences between the two areas of study is so you’re better able to strategize your purchases and DIY projects in advance. This way, you can avoid purchasing an overly-expensive survival pack thinking that it’s supposed to be built to last like a bushcraft pack.

A survival kit only needs to last about 72 hours, so you don’t have to spend oodles of cash on the top brand-name stuff. And if anything, it needs to be lightweight (so you can cover greater distances on foot), yet just durable enough to get the job manageably done for the next three days.

For a bushcraft pack, it’s a whole different philosophy: it must endure. That means it will be made of heavy canvas, steel and leather. (Mine happens to be a lovely Norwegian Bergen pack, which you can usually buy at any military surplus store. Though admittedly, she still needs a little DIY-love and canvas patches to get her where she needs to be). Since you’re not in a desperate scenario and time is NOT of the essence, then you can afford to cover a little less distance on your trekking/scouting excursions due to the added weight.

So in review: Yes, I believe that you should get to know both survivalcraft and bushcraft if you’re just starting out. Just make sure that you’re aware of the differences between the two areas of study BEFORE you start dropping cash on gear. It’s such an easy mistake to make, trust me.

At the end of the day it’s better to have knowledge on your side. It weighs nothing and will direct you to the exact gear that fits your own system and purposes like a glove.

When The Elites Wage War On America, This Is How They Will Do It

Crisis is the best weapon the elites have at their disposal
When The Elites Wage War On America, This Is How They Will Do It

by Brandon Smith | Alt-Market | May 7, 2015


The consequences and patterns of war, whether by one nation against another or by a government against the citizenry, rarely change. However, the methods of war have evolved vastly in modern times. Wars by elites against populations are often so subtle that many people might not even recognize that they are under attack until it is too late. Whenever I examine the conceptions of “potential war” between individuals and oligarchy, invariably some hard-headed person cries out: “What do you mean ‘when?’ We are at war right now!” In this case, I am not talking about the subtle brand of war. I am not talking about the information war, the propaganda war, the economic war, the psychological war or the biological war. I am talking about outright warfare, and anyone who thinks we have already reached that point has no clue what real war looks like.

The recent exposure of the nationwide Jade Helm 15 exercise has made many people suspicious, and with good reason. Federal crisis exercises have a strange historical tendency to suddenly coincide with very real crisis events. We may know very little about Jade Helm beyond government admissions, claims and misdirections. But at the very least, we know what “JADE” is an acronym for: Joint Assistance for Deployment and Execution, a program designed to create action and deployment plans using computer models meant to speed up reaction times for military planners during a “crisis scenario.” It is linked with another program called ACOA (Adaptive Course of Action), the basis of which is essentially the use of past mission successes and computer models to plan future missions. Both are products of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).

As far as I know, no one has presented any hard evidence as to what “HELM” really stands for, but the JADE portion of the exercise explicitly focuses on rapid force deployment planning in crisis situations, according to the government white paper linked above. This fact alone brings into question statements by the Department of Defense that Jade Helm is nothing more than a training program to prepare military units for “foreign deployment.” This is clearly a lie if Jade Helm revolves around crisis events (which denotes domestic threats), rather than foreign operations.

Of course, if you also consider the reality that special operations forces ALWAYS train like they fight and train in environments similar to where they will fight, the entire notion of Jade Helm as a preparation for foreign theaters sounds absurd. If special operations forces are going to fight in Iraq, Iran or Syria, they go to training grounds in places like Kuwait. If they are training in places like Fort Lauderdale, Florida (including “infiltration training”), then there is no way around the fact that they are practicing to fight somewhere exactly like Fort Lauderdale with a similar culture and population.

I would further note that Jade Helm exercises are also joint exercises with domestic agencies like the FBI and the DEA.  Again, why include domestic law enforcement agencies in a military exercise merely meant to prepare troops for foreign operations?  I often hear the argument that the military would never go along with such a program, but people who take this rather presumptive position do not understand crisis psychology.  In the event of a national catastrophe many military personnel and government employees may determine that they will do what is “best for them and their families”.  And if following orders guarantees the security of their families (food security, shelter, etc), then they may very well follow any order, no matter how dubious.  Also, a large scale crisis could be used as a rationale for martial law; otherwise well meaning military men and women could be convinced that the loss of constitutional freedoms might be for the “greater good of the greater number”.  I believe some military will indeed resist such efforts, but of course, Jade Helm may also be a method for vetting such uncooperative people before any live operation occurs.

So if Jade is actually a crisis-planning system for the military and the military is training for domestic operations, what is the crisis it is training to react to? It’s hard to say. I believe it will come down to an economic disaster, but our economic and social structures are so weak that almost any major event could trigger collapse. Terror attacks, cyberattacks, pandemic, a stiff wind, you name it. The point is the government expects a crisis to occur. And with the advent of this crisis, the ultimate war on the American people will begin.

Why wait for a crisis situation? With the cover of a crisis event, opposition to power is more easily targeted. For my starting point on the elite war strategy, I would like to use the following presentation on guerrilla warfare by Max Boot, Council on Foreign Relations senior fellow and military adviser, at the elitist World Affairs Council.

I would first point out that Boot claims his work is merely a historical character study of interesting figures from the realm of insurgency and counterinsurgency and is not “polemical.” I’m afraid that I will have call horse hockey on that. Boot is direct adviser to the Department of Defense. His work and this presentation were obviously a study of guerrilla tactics from the perspective of counterinsurgency and an attempt to explore strategic methods for controlling and eradicating guerrillas and “terrorists.”

Any defense the American people might muster against elitist dismantling of constitutional liberties would inevitably turn to “insurgency”. So using CFR member Boot’s views on counterinsurgency as a guideline, here is how the elites will most likely wage open war on those within the American population who have the will to fight back.

Control Public Opinion

Boot stresses the absolute necessity for the control of public opinion in defeating an insurgency. Most of his analysis is actually quite accurate in my view in terms of successes versus failures of guerrilla movements. However, his obsession with public opinion is, in part, ill-conceived. Boot uses the American Revolution as a supposed prime example of public opinion working against the ruling powers, claiming that it was British public opinion that forced parliament and King George III to pull back from further operations in the colonies.

Now, it is important to recognize that elitists have a recurring tendency to marginalize the success of the American Revolution in particular as being a “fluke” in the historical record. Boot, of course, completely overlooks the fact that the war had progressed far longer than anyone had predicted and that the British leadership suffered under the weight of considerable debts. He also overlooks the fact that pro-independence colonials were far outnumbered by Tories loyal to the crown up to the very end of the war. The revolution was NEVER in a majority position, and public opinion was not on the revolutionaries’ side.

The very idea of the American Revolution is a bit of a bruise on the collective ego of the elites, and their bias leads them to make inaccurate studies of the event. The reality is that most revolutions, even successful ones, remain in a minority for most, if not all, of their life spans.  The majority of people do not participate in history.  Rather, they have a tendency to float helplessly in the tides, waiting to latch onto whatever minority movement seems to be winning at the time.

Boot suggests that had the Founding Fathers faced the Roman Empire rather than the British Empire, they would have been crucified and the rebellion would have immediately floundered because the Romans had no concern for public opinion. This is where we get into the real mind of the elitist.

For now, the establishment chooses to sway public opinion with carefully crafted disinformation. But what is the best way to deal with public opinion when fighting a modern revolution? Remove public opinion as a factor entirely so that the power elite are free to act as viciously as they wish. Engineered crisis, and economic crisis in particular, create a wash of other potential threats, including high crime, looting, riots, starvation, international conflict, etc. In such an environment, public opinion counts for very little, if people even pay attention at all to anything beyond their own desperation. Once this is achieved, the oligarchy has free reign to take morally questionable actions without fear of future blowback.

Control The Public

Another main tenet Boot describes as essential in defeating insurgency is the control of the general population in order to prevent a revolution from recruiting new members and to prevent them from using the crowd as cover. He makes it clear that control of the public does not mean winning the “hearts and minds” in a diplomatic sense, but dominating through tactical and psychological means.

He first presents the example of the French counterinsurgency in Algeria, stating that the French strategy of widespread torture, while “morally reprehensible,” was indeed successful in seeking out and destroying the insurgent leadership. Where the French went wrong, however, was their inability to keep the torture campaign quiet. Boot once again uses the public opinion argument as the reason for the eventual loss of Algeria by the French.

What Boot seems to be suggesting is that systematic torture is viable, at least as a hypothetical strategy, as long as it remains undetected by the overall public. He also reiterates this indirectly in his final list of articles for insurgency and counterinsurgency when he states that “few counterinsurgencies (governments) have succeeded by inflicting mass terror, at least in foreign lands,” suggesting that mass terror may be an option against a domestic rebellion.

Boot then goes on to describe a more effective scenario, the British success against insurgents in Malaya. He attributes the British win against the rebellion to three factors:

1)  The British separated large portions of the population, entire villages, into concentration camps, surrounded by fences and armed guards. This kept the insurgents from recruiting from the more downtrodden or dissatisfied classes. And it isolated them into areas where they could be more easily engaged.

2)  The British used special operations forces to target specific rebel groups and leadership rather than attempting to maneuver through vast areas in a pointless Vietnam-style surge.

3)  The British made promises that appealed to the general public, including the promise of independence. This made the public more pliable and more willing to cooperate.

Now, I have no expectation whatsoever that the elites would offer the American public “independence” for their cooperation in battling a patriot insurgency, but I do think they would offer something perhaps more enticing: safety.

I believe the British/Malayan example given by Boot would be the main methodology for the elites and the federal government in the event that a rebellion arises in the U.S. against planned shifts away from constitutional republic or martial law instituted in the wake of a national emergency.

Isolate Population Centers

There is a reason why certain American cities are being buried in technologically sophisticated biometric surveillance networks, and I think the Malayan example holds the key. Certain cities (not all) could be turned into massive isolated camps, or “green zones.” They would be tightly controlled, and travel would be highly restricted. Food, shelter and safety would likely be offered, after a period of disaster has already been experienced. A couple months of famine and lack of medication to the medically dependent would no doubt kill millions of people. Unprepared survivors would flock to these areas in the hopes of receiving aid. Government forces would confiscate vital supplies in rural areas whenever possible in order to force even more people to concentrate into controlled regions.

I have seen the isolation strategy in action in part, during the G20 summit in Pittsburgh. More than 4,000 police and National Guard troops locked down the city center, leaving only one route for travel. The first day, there were almost no protesters; most activists were so frightened by the shock-and-awe show of force that they would not leave their homes. This is the closest example I have personally experienced to a martial law cityscape.

Decapitate Leadership

The liberty movement has always been a leaderless movement, which makes the “night of long knives” approach slightly less effective. I do not see any immediate advantage to the elites in kidnapping or killing prominent members of the movement, though that does not mean they will not try it anyway. Most well-known liberty proponents are teachers, not generals or political firebrands. Teachers leave all their teachings behind, and no one needs generals or politicians. The movement would not necessarily be lost without us.

That said, there is a fear factor involved in such an event. The black-bagging of popular liberty voices could terrorize others into submission or inaction. This is why I constantly argue the need for individual leadership; every person must be able and willing to take individual action without direction in defense of his own freedoms, if the need arises. Groups should remain locally led, and national centralization of leadership should be avoided at all costs.

According to the very promoters of Jade Helm exercises, training will center on quick-reaction teams striking an area with helicopter support, then exfiltrating within 30 minutes or less. Almost every combat veteran I have spoken with concerning this style of training has said that it is used for “snatch and grab” — the capture or killing of high value targets, then exfiltration before the enemy can mount a response.

Fourth-Generation Warfare

The final method for war against the American people is one Boot does not discuss: the use of fourth-generation warfare. Some call this psychological warfare, but it is far more than that. Fourth-generation warfare is a strategy by which one section of a population you wish to control is turned against another section of the population you wish to control. It is warfare without the immediate use of armies. Rather, the elites turn the enemy population against itself and allow internal war to do most of their work for them. We can see this strategy developing already in the U.S. in the manipulation of race issues and the militarization of police.

The use of provocateurs during unrest in places like Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore suggests that a race war is part of the greater plan. I believe law enforcement officials have also been given a false sense of invincibility. With military toys and federal funding, but poor tactical philosophies and substandard training, LEOs are being set up as cannon fodder when the SHTF. Their inevitable failure will be used as a rationalization for more domestic military involvement; but in the meantime, Americans will be enticed to fight and kill each other while the elites sit back and watch the show.

4th Gen warfare also relies on fooling the target population into supporting measures that are secretly destructive to the people.  For example, liberty movement support for controlled opposition such as Russia or China, or liberty support for a military coup in which the top brass are elite puppets just like the Obama Administration. Think this sounds far fetched?  It has already happened in our recent history!  Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler was hired by corporate moguls to lead a paid army in a coup against Franklin D. Roosevelt (also an elitist puppet) in 1933.  Butler luckily exposed the conspiracy before it ever got off the ground.  Both sides were controlled, but the coup if successful could have resulted in popular support for the expedient erosion of the Constitution, rather than a slow erosion which is what took place.  This is the epitome of 4th Gen tactics – make the people think they are winning, when they are actually helping you to defeat them.

Know Thy Enemy

I have outlined the above tactics not because I necessarily think they will prevail, but because it is important that we know exactly what we are dealing with in order to better defend ourselves. Such methods can be countered with community preparedness, the avoidance of central leadership, the application of random actions rather than predictable actions, etc. Most of all, liberty champions will have to provide a certain level of safety and security for the people around them if they want to disrupt establishment efforts to lure or force the population into controlled regions. Crisis is the best weapon the elites have at their disposal, and exercises like Jade Helm show that they may use that weapon in the near term. The defense that defeats crisis is preparation — preparation not just for yourself, but for others around you. War is coming, and while we can’t know the exact timing, we can assume the worst and do our best to be ready for it as quickly as possible.