Yesterday’s work, was a bit of a shock, because I suddenly realised that I had been focussing on the wrong things in terms of surviving a nuclear war. So, this article challenges my whole assumption of a “nuclear war”.

My simple conclusion is that a “nuclear war” is a propaganda lie. It is just a war, with bigger weapons, So, anything one would do to prepare to survive a war applies to a nuclear war. The big difference is a nuclear war is a propaganda weapon which means it behaves in a different way in the minds of politicians and public.

There is a basic assumption when researching “how to survive a nuclear war” which needs challenging. And, that is the assumption such a war would be nuclear. For obvious reasons I excluded a non-nuclear war, but in the light of modern precision strike equipment that was a mistake.

I’ve also not specified an opponent, because, that opponent could as easily be the US, France, Israel or the Russian Federation. The crazies have taken over the EU … those crazies could easily create a war with the UK. Bidem could very easily have gone to war with the UK, it only needed a democratically elected government “not approved” by Bidem and the brain dead regime could have taken us into nuclear war (the US never forgave the UK for being the UK).

It is well known how the US would behave: to target civilian centres and kill the maximum people. Because that is how the US prosecute all wars: kill the maximum people in order to terrorise the country into submission. The Israelis are just a more evil form of the US.

It is well known to anyone watching the Russians (which means not well known to most in the UK), that the Russians do not target civilians. Instead they will hit legitimate military targets. Continue reading →

Today I forced myself to look beyond the actual nuclear exchange toward the kind of situation that would exist afterwards. I am beginning to realise the problem I was having trying to understand what can be done. Continue reading →

Russia is not going to accept any outcome from Ukraine, except one that guarantees it is protected from further aggression by Nato. That’s not a red line … one that the US can repeatedly push back and pretend does not exist, nor is it a Minsk “treaty” that can be ignored and pushed back and back. It is THE outcome of the conflict, one which Russia will NEVER concede as long as there is a Russia. And, it is clear to me that Russia is prepared to do whatever it takes, including nuclear war to achieve that security. Continue reading →

The reason for this article is to produce some specific lists (based on Nuclear war) … almost solely for my own use.

Long term

Long term, the key is to get the hell out of countries that are likely to be part of a nuclear exchange. That is not an easy thing to do, but the only way to avoid being hit by a nuclear war, is not to be anywhere near one. Continue reading →

The reason for this article, was to attempt to finish working out how to survive a nuclear war. Because I never faced the aftermath. Instead I focussed on issues like a shelter, because they were much more tangible and understandable. So, now I want to push past the initial month of a nuclear war into the aftermath.

During Bidem’s appalling regime, there were at least a couple of times, when I could foresee a single wrong move by the effectively leaderless US, creating the start of a series of moves that would inevitably end in Nuclear war.

It wasn’t that someone was about to push a button. It was that the situation that Bidem regime was putting the Russian’s into, would force them to respond in a way, which would then cause Bidem to respond in a way … which through a half dozen move and counter moves would inevitably result in the firing of nuclear missiles.

And the reason I knew that, was because I have worked for US corps, and I know how the US intelligence agencies work, and I knew the UK/EU were taken over by brain dead morons who would do nothing to stop the situation escalating. And, then I saw how the Russians were thinking by carefully following their total war strategy … and what I realised, scared the shit out of me several times. Continue reading →

If we look back at the rate of change in science, there was a period from the 1600s to about 1930s where science changed not only totally, but repeatedly totally changed in a series of enormous revolutionary phases.

In contrast, in many areas the science that was being taught in the 1950s could be taught today, with just the change of examples in use to update it. That is NOT because we have discovered all there is to discover, because that is what they constantly thought in the past … until the next revolution came. The reality is that science is stagnating. Yes, there is still a little progress, and in some subjects a lot. But it’s like a wildfire that has nearly burnt to its natural end. The rate of progress is rapidly declining, as shown by the hostility to sceptics.

The simple truth now, is that if anyone of the great scientists of the 19th century came up with anything so radical today, they would get shunned and pushed out of academia. There are fewer and fewer areas where it is permitted to challenge the status quo, and therefore we are already in stagnation. Continue reading →

I’ve reached the stage where I don’t give a fig about the climate unless I can see a change that is agreed by climate sceptics. Because unless they can see it, it doesn’t exist. Yes there are 365 articles a year claiming global warming from the night before … so to speak, but that doesn’t mean the climate is changing, in contrast, it means it is staying the same. The same short forays that it has always had and always will.

In contrast, government & big business (are they really different) are now actively hating the populace and attacking us daily … as we go into a decade of recession. That is a very toxic mix, one which leads to revolutions.

If anyone looks at the changes in the 18th, 19th and 20th century there is no doubt that technology complete utterly changed the world beyond all recognition. Britain went from a country where there were barely decent roads for a cart to a country where a plane could fly from one end to the other.

So, what has happened since the 1950s? They introduced motorways. The average speed of travel in Wales has changed from 26mph (according to one of my ancestors) to … 20mph speed limits. So an order of magnitude change (not).

Basically, whilst a few things still change, and more and more people make more and more money putting up traffic lights to stop people being sensible and stopping the traffic flowing, technology has hardly changed in the last 70 years. The only significant change has been in computer and entertainment. Yet, the change is for far more dross, rather than any actual improvement. Yes, films now show 100s of people’s brains exploding using advanced CGI … but it hasn’t improved the films.

So, what about computers? The basic application, the wordprocessor, invented in the 1980s has hardly changed. Indeed, in many ways the clones of Micr$oft are far worse than what used to be available. Otherwise, there has been no discernible change for the last 20 years. TOTAL STAGNATION.

The same with the internet. Far from getting better, HTML just gets worse. HTTPS has blocked many sites  & Google’s monopoly has destroyed all the altruistic, free thinking sites that used in exist. Things have gone backward. We’ve already reached and gone through peak intelligence, as far as the internet is concerned. It’s downhill from here on.

And, what is the causes?

1. US aggressive policies destroying any major/innovative non-US internet sites
2. US stupidity … because most US sites are as dumb as fuck
3. Monopolisation (by the US)
4. End of freedom of speech (because that is the way the US destroys other countries. It funds organisations that hate free speech in other countries. And that is resulting in the end of free speech throughout the globe.)
5. The monopolisation of “Knowledge” by corrupt interests in academia and the ruthless attacks on scepticism … by those who now control academia who stamp on anyone who tries to challenge their own (totally outdated and corrupt) assertions.

My bet is that the new internet being created by Brics will within a few decades, be seen as the place where speech is free. And, those countries who oppose it, will find that without freespeech, they are the ones being left behind as others start to innovate again.

Because freespeech is essential to challenge the status quo, and if a society is not permitted to challenge the status quo (especially a corrupt one) then it stagnates.

A New Dark Age

Basically, between the US (or Israel that controls the US government) and US academics (who are the prime cause of the rot in academia), the world is entering a new dark age, where instead of the catholic church repressing all dissent, the US will take that role on the internet. Like the medieval catholic church, the US cannot tolerate dissent from its “authority” over all matters … and thus the US would have a world where no one is allowed to do anything without the explicit permission of the US. The result … utter stagnation and even back peddling. The only places that will innovate, will be those free from the dead hand of the US. So, Russia, China, …. Brics and any who join them. And, they will then take over from the US. Not in a few centuries, but in decades.

From Russia’s point of view the targetting killing of many military leaders of a force that had undoubtedly been committing crimes against humanity in the Kursk region, was a huge victory. Apparently 60 military personnel died at an award ceremony for the military, so in some sense almost everyone there was directly connected, supporting and celebrating the crimes against humanity in Kursk.

However, many, especially a few children, were undoubtedly civilians.

In WWII, the allies bombed civilian populations, in a manner that is totally utterly beyond anything even the lying western media has claimed the Russians have done. So, killing civilians has been claimed to be OK, by at least those who killed the civilians in WWII. Continue reading →

Down in Aussie, Jo Nova reports:

Nothing says “Safe and Effective” like destroying all the data from Australia’s giant abandoned vaccine study

In August 2021, as the masses were being coerced and cajoled into vaccinations, the government announced a gigantic long term study with 10,000 Australians that would run for five years. They promised they would include the vaccinated and unvaccinated, and generate 100,000 samples, and 11 million datapoints. No stone would be left unturned to make sure the vaccines were safe and effective. “The Science” was being used to reassure the people.

Less than two years later the data must have looked terrible, because they suddenly stopped the study. They muttered something about archiving the data until more funding was available. (Sure, sure). Now, they want to quietly destroy the data and make sure no one can ever use it, or find out the secrets it hides with an FOI application. The cost of the entire project was $20 million.

There is only one rationale explanation that fits the behaviour and that is the one Jo Nova draws: That the study found serious damage done by the jabs and that, it was so serious, that no amount of fiddling the data could massage the data enough to hide the serious damage (the typical first response in this type of crisis).

So, they decided to TOTALLY obliterate all the data. That means that another report I saw suggesting that more than two doses is estimated to reduce life expectancy by 30 years, is not ridiculous. It may be that the first deaths are from people most seriously affected and that deaths from the covid jab will steadily show greater and greater life expectancy, so that the final outcome could be 10 or even 5 years less life. Not that dissimilar to smoking. But people have a choice about smoking, and they are informed of the risks. But whereas the Nanny-fascist state wants end smoking, the fascists forced people to take the covid jabs, and then they are curtailing all freedom of speech to tell anyone about their murdering ways.