With Mike Blyth, Sigma 7
Dr. Mike Blyth of risk services company Sigma7, joins the podcast to discuss ‘unknown unknowns’ facing next week’s US election.
Blyth is a career national security professional, having worked for US and British civil and military operations globally.
This podcast episode was recorded on Oct. 30, 2024 and was made available to premium subscribers that day. To learn about premium subscription options, visit our Substack.
Content Highlights
- Background on the guest and why he is qualified to speak of all things national and international security (1:42);
- Main concerns entering the election. External and internal agitators have raised the risk of political violence (4:57);
- Gaming out the various scenarios. Almost all involve violence, especially if former President Donald Trump is not elected (7:26);
- The narrative on social media and elsewhere is consistent with what typically presages violence. “It’s a tinderbox. We’re waiting for the flame to be lit” (11:26);
- What parts of the economy might be most at risk and which might be more resilient (16:49);
- What about geopolitical risks? (20:42).
For more about the guest, visit the website S7risk.com.
Watch the Recording
Transcript
1
00:00:02.700 –> 00:00:06.089
Nathaniel E. Baker: Welcome to the 3rd and final
2
00:00:06.140 –> 00:00:10.130
Nathaniel E. Baker: episode of our pre-election special
3
00:00:10.470 –> 00:00:12.989
Nathaniel E. Baker: talking all things Presidential
4
00:00:13.020 –> 00:00:16.730
Nathaniel E. Baker: and I guess Congressional election 2024,
5
00:00:16.990 –> 00:00:25.770
Nathaniel E. Baker: and to date the 1st 2 episodes focused on the investing outcome, and this one will, of course, discuss
6
00:00:25.780 –> 00:00:31.730
Nathaniel E. Baker: the investing outcome as well, and keep the investing lessons in close mind. However.
7
00:00:32.240 –> 00:00:33.489
Nathaniel E. Baker: I wanted to
8
00:00:33.630 –> 00:00:38.880
Nathaniel E. Baker: use this episode to look at the what we’re calling unknown unknowns
9
00:00:38.890 –> 00:00:43.689
Nathaniel E. Baker: of this Presidential election, which takes place next week, Tuesday, November 5, th
10
00:00:43.820 –> 00:00:47.990
Nathaniel E. Baker: and my search for a guest led me to Mike life
11
00:00:48.070 –> 00:00:53.019
Nathaniel E. Baker: and he is kind enough to join us here on the contrarian investor Podcast today
12
00:00:53.270 –> 00:00:55.859
Nathaniel E. Baker: and Mike, and and to start off.
13
00:00:56.250 –> 00:01:03.029
Nathaniel E. Baker: perhaps just because your your background isn’t isn’t the typical one that we usually have on this show.
14
00:01:03.040 –> 00:01:13.259
Nathaniel E. Baker: I might, I thought it would be interesting for you to tell listeners just about yourself, your background, and I guess your your expertise in all things security.
15
00:01:14.620 –> 00:01:26.520
mIKE: Yeah, well, thank you very much for inviting me to participate, as you can tell by the funny accent. I’m originally from the Uk. Although I have lived in America for over 22 years now, and I’m a Us. Citizen.
16
00:01:26.904 –> 00:01:42.729
mIKE: I started in the Royal Marine Commandos. I was enlisted. There was a clerical error, and they promoted me to officer after about 3 or 4 years, and I left at 15 years as a major, during which time I commanded us military forces during 9 11, about 500 of them
17
00:01:42.760 –> 00:01:49.920
mIKE: spread across the Navy and the the Air Force, one of which then became my wife and I ended up with 5 kids. Hence, being in America.
18
00:01:49.920 –> 00:01:50.510
Nathaniel E. Baker: Congratulations.
19
00:01:50.955 –> 00:01:52.734
mIKE: Thank you very much.
20
00:01:53.270 –> 00:01:58.482
mIKE: And then I’ve worked in about 50 or 60 countries, developing training and and
21
00:01:58.870 –> 00:02:08.800
mIKE: various other strategies for various governments during my military career. Then I left. I went into the commercial security sector, leading some of the biggest projects in Iraq.
22
00:02:08.820 –> 00:02:11.860
mIKE: including all the gas infrastructure protection programs
23
00:02:11.970 –> 00:02:18.119
mIKE: worth about 2 billion dollars all across the country, developing police stations, prisons.
24
00:02:18.190 –> 00:02:21.680
mIKE: border forts and courthouses.
25
00:02:21.790 –> 00:02:26.519
mIKE: And then and then I moved into a corporate site here in America.
26
00:02:26.800 –> 00:02:33.109
mIKE: leading all Us. Government contracts for a big security company and then migrated into business development.
27
00:02:33.130 –> 00:02:39.260
mIKE: And then I set up my own company risk and Strategic Management corporation about 15 years ago, 14 years ago.
28
00:02:39.581 –> 00:02:46.910
mIKE: During this time I also got a Master’s degree in security risk management, a doctorate in organization resiliency, and I wrote a couple of rather boring books
29
00:02:46.930 –> 00:03:07.750
mIKE: on crisis security and emergency management through Wiley and Sons, and then my company was acquired 2 and a half years ago by a group called Sigma 7, and I’m now the chief revenue officer, where I support their 5 business practices, integrate and provide unified solutions for both domestic and international clients.
30
00:03:08.340 –> 00:03:14.100
Nathaniel E. Baker: Wow, okay, so your background is, your entire career has very much been focused on security, national security, be it.
31
00:03:14.170 –> 00:03:17.459
Nathaniel E. Baker: you know, in Iraq, UK. And us?
32
00:03:17.670 –> 00:03:23.470
Nathaniel E. Baker: And what are your who are your clients now? And how do? In what capacity do you advise them to the extent that you can tell us.
33
00:03:23.910 –> 00:03:25.076
mIKE: Yeah. So
34
00:03:25.890 –> 00:03:33.369
mIKE: I’ve supported over 800 organizations spanning from government sectors, destroying chemical weapons in Libya for Ditra
35
00:03:33.430 –> 00:03:59.519
mIKE: to Usaid in various countries supporting risk, consulting and training services, and then into the commercial space some of the big names in terms of water gas, it consulting and infrastructure development, and then also in terms of schoolings as well. So we do a lot of work with schools, authorities in the Us. So my perspective spans all of this sectors, with few exceptions.
36
00:03:59.570 –> 00:04:08.819
mIKE: both domestic resiliency, security crisis management, but also internationally as well, projecting outwards. So I’m lucky to have quite a unique insight into how.
37
00:04:08.820 –> 00:04:09.180
Nathaniel E. Baker: Yeah.
38
00:04:09.180 –> 00:04:10.949
mIKE: Things happen in the United States
39
00:04:11.030 –> 00:04:15.350
mIKE: and abroad, and then how they come together as well within a risk, perspective.
40
00:04:15.770 –> 00:04:19.669
Nathaniel E. Baker: Fantastic. Okay, so that this is a perfect lead into the next question, which is
41
00:04:19.790 –> 00:04:23.279
Nathaniel E. Baker: ahead of this election election day. And beyond.
42
00:04:23.350 –> 00:04:26.270
Nathaniel E. Baker: what are your concerns right now?
43
00:04:27.640 –> 00:04:37.850
mIKE: The Us. Is facing a very different set of risks than it has in the past, both domestically and internationally. The risk of this election.
44
00:04:38.060 –> 00:04:40.769
mIKE: regardless of your political leaning.
45
00:04:40.790 –> 00:04:46.170
mIKE: is the the danger of external actor, influence different government actors
46
00:04:46.490 –> 00:05:00.450
mIKE: from from hostile nations and or terrorist groups seeking to influence or distort the electoral process and seeking to excite people into potential violence and also cyber attacks. So we’ve got that external threat
47
00:05:00.460 –> 00:05:02.120
mIKE: that’s prevalent now
48
00:05:02.160 –> 00:05:23.580
mIKE: and then. We’ve also got the internal discord in terms of. There are 2 very polarized sets of the population sitting on either side, and rather than in the past, where people leant in one direction or another politically, but there wasn’t any aggressive stance on either side. Now there is a very polarized stance.
49
00:05:23.820 –> 00:05:31.009
mIKE: The narrative of this being a spiritual or patriotic war or decision is concerning.
50
00:05:31.030 –> 00:05:36.809
mIKE: because it means that people are very, very fixated on a win, and if it doesn’t go their way.
51
00:05:36.930 –> 00:05:46.879
mIKE: They feel that it could be the undoing of America in terms of you know what America stands for, or indeed a good versus evil situation, and that that is
52
00:05:47.140 –> 00:05:51.780
mIKE: a serious concern in terms of aggravating violent outcomes.
53
00:05:52.310 –> 00:06:10.180
mIKE: We’ve also got people feeling that violence is acceptable in order to reach a political outcome, and one of the concerning studies suggested that the acceptance of violence to reach a political outcome is higher now in America than it was in Northern Ireland in the height of the troubles in the 19 seventies.
54
00:06:10.440 –> 00:06:12.679
mIKE: and that that is a serious concern.
55
00:06:13.050 –> 00:06:24.749
mIKE: and the the spark that may fan the flames could come internally or externally, and we’ve already seen 2 attempted assassination attempts on the former President.
56
00:06:24.910 –> 00:06:28.810
mIKE: We’ve seen, you know, people articulating violence
57
00:06:28.930 –> 00:06:38.400
mIKE: as a means to achieve the political outcome or the willingness to to engage in violent protests if the outcome isn’t in their favor.
58
00:06:38.600 –> 00:06:44.579
mIKE: and that should be concerning for Americans wholesale, and also for businesses, as well.
59
00:06:45.700 –> 00:06:52.930
Nathaniel E. Baker: Yeah, indeed, indeed. As you game this out. What are your can you tell us about that process of gaming it out in terms of
60
00:06:53.070 –> 00:07:00.729
Nathaniel E. Baker: assessing, assessing where the risk risk is, I guess, to the economy and to civil society, and and how that might all play out.
61
00:07:01.520 –> 00:07:07.690
mIKE: Absolutely. I did a study, an academic study with over 70 senior security professionals.
62
00:07:07.910 –> 00:07:13.260
mIKE: And what was concerning was that 91% felt that physical violence would occur certainly.
63
00:07:13.260 –> 00:07:14.710
Nathaniel E. Baker: 91%.
64
00:07:14.710 –> 00:07:20.810
mIKE: 91% of senior security professionals from some brand name organizations. I can’t name them, obviously.
65
00:07:20.980 –> 00:07:23.140
mIKE: but you would recognise them, felt.
66
00:07:23.140 –> 00:07:27.030
Nathaniel E. Baker: We’re talking like corporate, like just basic corporations or defense corporation.
67
00:07:27.210 –> 00:07:37.059
mIKE: Big big corporations, some of them involved in security, specific in terms of what they deliver. Some are, you know, major pharmaceuticals or oil and gas companies or
68
00:07:37.070 –> 00:07:38.600
mIKE: retail outlets.
69
00:07:38.690 –> 00:07:48.729
mIKE: Some of them are articulated within the study, such as apple and anthropic. They were part of it, and they were co-authors within the study.
70
00:07:48.890 –> 00:07:57.659
mIKE: but 91% felt that violence would occur. Certainly if the candidate trump is not elected because of the sentiment that’s going on.
71
00:07:57.910 –> 00:08:09.800
mIKE: 93% felt that it would be premeditated. It wouldn’t be spontaneous in nature, it would be planned. Somebody would actually go out with the intent to commit violence versus respond to a reactive situation.
72
00:08:10.670 –> 00:08:19.200
mIKE: 59% felt that violence would include the the use of firearms which obviously amplifies the potential for harm in terms of injuries and deaths.
73
00:08:19.420 –> 00:08:26.119
mIKE: and then 81% felt that violence would occur in multiple cities versus just being contained within the capital.
74
00:08:26.160 –> 00:08:33.220
mIKE: So you know, we saw the violence within September, you know. Sorry. January 6.th
75
00:08:33.679 –> 00:08:42.730
mIKE: They felt that that would be expanded out into multiple urbanized areas as well, which would make it more of a challenge for for populations and businesses.
76
00:08:44.070 –> 00:08:50.930
Nathaniel E. Baker: Wow, okay. And then, how does that all game out like in the days have assuming like, Yeah, what does what does that look like in this scenario?
77
00:08:51.450 –> 00:09:00.469
mIKE: Yeah. So you know, there is a protracted, protracted period of potential violence. We got the pre electoral process
78
00:09:00.850 –> 00:09:10.910
mIKE: where tensions may become heightened and thankfully. We’ve seen little in the way of violence now. We’ve then got the electoral vote where where the decision is then made.
79
00:09:11.060 –> 00:09:21.759
mIKE: and that could spark violence depending on which way it goes. And then we’ve got the period leading up to the inauguration, and then beyond. And so there are kind of calendar points within the process
80
00:09:22.100 –> 00:09:42.719
mIKE: where we could see heightened violence. We can also look at it in terms of how crowds and groups mobilize in terms of the pre-mobilization social media suggesting that there are rallies and demonstrations, the mobilization period itself, where people gather hopefully in a peaceful manner, but it can be aggravated by internal agitators
81
00:09:42.820 –> 00:09:48.170
mIKE: who seek to promote violence, and then, obviously, the immediate hostile outburst phase.
82
00:09:48.280 –> 00:09:54.419
mIKE: where we will see individuals or groups committing violence, and we saw them through various protests
83
00:09:54.510 –> 00:10:05.270
mIKE: in the previous years. Here in America and abroad, civil disorder, violence, and political violence isn’t just in America. It happens globally as well.
84
00:10:05.600 –> 00:10:23.970
mIKE: and then we see the post hostile outburst phase where you know things quiet down, and then they’re sparked again. Something aggravates the population or groups within it in order to generate more anxiety, fear, frustration, anger, and they can be
85
00:10:24.170 –> 00:10:37.699
mIKE: predicted generally. You know, the the moment where violence occurs, you know it can be spontaneous, but the leading into violence is often, you know, predictable in terms of social media gatherings of crowds.
86
00:10:37.850 –> 00:10:44.670
mIKE: you know, sparks of violence occurring that then accelerate quite quickly.
87
00:10:45.530 –> 00:10:50.339
Nathaniel E. Baker: Is there anything on that that you you’ve started to see? I mean yet.
88
00:10:51.700 –> 00:10:53.040
mIKE: The narrative.
89
00:10:53.040 –> 00:10:53.630
Nathaniel E. Baker: Generic.
90
00:10:53.630 –> 00:11:02.280
mIKE: Obviously causing elevated concern. So the narrative in itself the precursor to the actual violence.
91
00:11:02.540 –> 00:11:09.209
mIKE: is deeply concerning, and I think you know, many would would agree that it’s quite hostile. It’s quite negative.
92
00:11:09.510 –> 00:11:14.260
mIKE: There are individuals, you know, insinuating or stating that violence
93
00:11:14.330 –> 00:11:28.129
mIKE: should and could occur, and that that is concerning. So really, it’s a tinderbox. We’re waiting for the the flame to be lit and the fuse to be ignited. And that’s a deep concern, and I know that there’s a lot of
94
00:11:28.220 –> 00:11:40.919
mIKE: businesses paying particular attention to what’s going on. Certainly, if they are retail outlets sitting within the high streets, or whether they’re relying upon critical vendors and suppliers that may be affected by
95
00:11:40.950 –> 00:11:42.640
mIKE: violent outcomes.
96
00:11:42.960 –> 00:11:49.420
Nathaniel E. Baker: Yeah, wow, okay, is there any thought, as far as you know, the the various candidates? And
97
00:11:50.173 –> 00:11:55.819
Nathaniel E. Baker: you know, if the if trump loses versus. If Harris loses.
98
00:11:55.900 –> 00:11:58.390
Nathaniel E. Baker: is there a greater concern on one side or the other?
99
00:11:59.200 –> 00:12:07.480
mIKE: Yeah, I mean, everything I do in terms of studies or reporting is apolitical. So I’m not in favor of one or the other.
100
00:12:07.480 –> 00:12:08.210
Nathaniel E. Baker: Same, yeah.
101
00:12:08.210 –> 00:12:18.809
mIKE: Yeah. Yeah. But the the hard facts are that if Harris loses, there’ll be a potential lot of disappointment, but probably not much in the way of violence.
102
00:12:19.250 –> 00:12:21.070
mIKE: However, if trump loses.
103
00:12:21.270 –> 00:12:25.889
mIKE: there are groups that obviously very, very emotionally tethered to his success.
104
00:12:26.150 –> 00:12:32.940
mIKE: and there will be accusations that the electoral process was not fair, that it was stolen.
105
00:12:33.000 –> 00:12:37.979
mIKE: and then that could ignite those who feel that this is a spiritual or patriotic
106
00:12:38.130 –> 00:12:40.249
mIKE: risk to the country.
107
00:12:40.510 –> 00:12:43.860
mIKE: and that is where we will probably see violence occurring.
108
00:12:44.960 –> 00:12:49.880
Nathaniel E. Baker: Okay, that’s not very encouraging. And but okay.
109
00:12:50.590 –> 00:13:01.309
Nathaniel E. Baker: And just, you know, further gaming this out, you know, is there a realistic concern that the Us. Could disintegrate into a Northern Ireland troubles type of situation.
110
00:13:01.430 –> 00:13:08.179
Nathaniel E. Baker: probably not a completely fair comparison, because that was sectarian versus this. But but what kind of historical precedent can you point us to, if any.
111
00:13:09.650 –> 00:13:17.769
mIKE: I think every country is vulnerable to civil discord, or indeed civil war, at the most extreme end of the spectrum.
112
00:13:17.830 –> 00:13:24.499
mIKE: I don’t think any country could escape that potential possibility, you would hope that America and other Western nations
113
00:13:24.840 –> 00:13:38.140
mIKE: would be more resilient to that based on the fact that, you know we’re democratic. People have better levels of education. There’s less kind of internal fractions and terrorism or interest rate, and you know, conflict and risks.
114
00:13:38.530 –> 00:13:48.809
mIKE: But that is still a concern, and there could be a fracturing of society, maybe not on a whole scale level, but certainly on a localized level. We have militias in America
115
00:13:48.860 –> 00:13:57.049
mIKE: that could be mobilized in order to serve a particular agenda or political purpose. We have lone shooters or small groups who could activate
116
00:13:57.170 –> 00:13:58.360
mIKE: violence.
117
00:13:58.400 –> 00:14:04.459
mIKE: We saw, you know, with the accusations of Haitians, you know, eating pets.
118
00:14:04.480 –> 00:14:11.920
mIKE: you know, bomb threats and risks occurring against schools and other kind of government institutions that could be amplified quite significantly.
119
00:14:12.180 –> 00:14:15.970
mIKE: We’ve already seen fires being lit within mailing boxes
120
00:14:16.000 –> 00:14:17.040
mIKE: and balance.
121
00:14:17.230 –> 00:14:21.719
mIKE: and the sense that there is an unfair electoral process
122
00:14:22.160 –> 00:14:26.240
mIKE: could lead to to sparks of violence.
123
00:14:26.280 –> 00:14:33.930
mIKE: and at the worst extreme, which is highly unlikely, but certainly not off the table. It could lead into some level of kind of civil war.
124
00:14:34.230 –> 00:14:37.270
mIKE: but I would suggest that that’s relatively remote.
125
00:14:37.550 –> 00:14:38.960
Nathaniel E. Baker: Right? Yeah, okay.
126
00:14:39.713 –> 00:14:43.819
Nathaniel E. Baker: in terms of, you know, just to turn things economically here. You mentioned retail
127
00:14:43.980 –> 00:14:45.890
Nathaniel E. Baker: being one possible
128
00:14:46.200 –> 00:14:47.850
Nathaniel E. Baker: obvious casualty
129
00:14:48.220 –> 00:14:51.280
Nathaniel E. Baker: and what other and supply chains?
130
00:14:51.913 –> 00:15:00.120
Nathaniel E. Baker: What you know. If you put on your investor hat, I know it’s not really necessarily your thing. But what types of areas, do you think might be safer
131
00:15:00.700 –> 00:15:02.000
Nathaniel E. Baker: from this type of stuff?
132
00:15:03.890 –> 00:15:08.090
mIKE: Safer, I think, in any business that is not
133
00:15:08.690 –> 00:15:13.889
mIKE: located within urban areas. Any business that is not relying heavily upon.
134
00:15:14.140 –> 00:15:16.800
mIKE: you know. Tenuous supply chains and vendors
135
00:15:16.870 –> 00:15:19.040
mIKE: would be more resilient and robust.
136
00:15:19.720 –> 00:15:26.180
mIKE: I would suggest. You know, it related companies may be a threat from cyber attacks, hostilation access.
137
00:15:26.270 –> 00:15:31.670
mIKE: seeking to disrupt business operations in order to further destabilize the economy
138
00:15:31.680 –> 00:15:33.160
mIKE: they could be at risk.
139
00:15:33.440 –> 00:15:44.320
mIKE: Those most at risk would be sitting kind of within urbanized areas where they would be a prime target, a secondary target from violence, you know. So if you’re if you’re a shopping outlet
140
00:15:44.400 –> 00:15:50.359
mIKE: and you’re selling Tvs and other things that would be attractive to writers, then then I would be concerned.
141
00:15:50.400 –> 00:16:00.670
mIKE: or, if you’re, you know, relying upon others to provide you assets, materials, and so forth, you could be caught up in the, you know, the after effects of violence as well.
142
00:16:01.960 –> 00:16:07.840
Nathaniel E. Baker: You mentioned this all being, you know, easy or relatively straightforward to spot in advance.
143
00:16:07.980 –> 00:16:17.029
Nathaniel E. Baker: Can you talk to us about? You know if you can’t. That’s fine. But what kind of warning signals you might see on social media? Is it? Is it obvious stuff like, hey? Let’s attack X and
144
00:16:17.760 –> 00:16:22.400
Nathaniel E. Baker: you know things like that, or is it? Is there other more underlying signals that we might not be aware of.
145
00:16:23.660 –> 00:16:33.770
mIKE: In terms of social media. I mean, the the trick is obviously being able to filter out all of the fluff, the irrelevancies, and identify
146
00:16:33.860 –> 00:16:45.220
mIKE: the real triggers for potential violence. So you know, for the average citizen, you know, watching reliable news sources versus ones that lead in one direction or the other would be useful.
147
00:16:45.290 –> 00:16:51.810
mIKE: identifying hotspots of potential violence outbreaks. And there obviously would be in the swing States as an example
148
00:16:51.910 –> 00:16:54.319
mIKE: and or other areas where
149
00:16:54.440 –> 00:17:05.910
mIKE: people are becoming agitated about the situation and the outcome, so I would keep a keen eye on the news, and certainly reliable news isn’t trying to conflate or mislead
150
00:17:07.650 –> 00:17:09.129
Nathaniel E. Baker: The news that people listen to nowadays.
151
00:17:09.130 –> 00:17:20.789
mIKE: Well, that’s the trouble. You know. Society seems to split into to 2 different you know, news lines. One leans heavily on one side, one leans incredibly heavily on the other as well.
152
00:17:20.910 –> 00:17:26.230
mIKE: and therefore they’re not necessarily getting an accurate picture on the situation, so I would try, and I would try and find
153
00:17:26.650 –> 00:17:39.520
mIKE: more unbiased news outlets. And sadly, they may be internationally based versus American, based because they don’t necessarily lean in one particular direction or another from the political influence.
154
00:17:39.690 –> 00:17:47.939
mIKE: So I would, I would, maybe, you know, watch those as well with some level of interest. The challenge will be where there are external actors
155
00:17:48.170 –> 00:17:50.240
mIKE: who are using
156
00:17:50.600 –> 00:17:57.220
mIKE: gaming in order to communicate terrorist attacks or other encrypted means where
157
00:17:57.390 –> 00:18:04.760
mIKE: you may not be able to necessarily predict where they’re going to focus on. But you can assume that they will be focusing on large crowd gatherings.
158
00:18:05.685 –> 00:18:09.060
mIKE: or government buildings, or political offices, or prominent people.
159
00:18:09.370 –> 00:18:15.810
mIKE: And so those kind of targets will be obvious, but which targets they choose, and when may be less obvious.
160
00:18:17.060 –> 00:18:18.560
Nathaniel E. Baker: Yeah, wow, okay.
161
00:18:18.960 –> 00:18:32.689
Nathaniel E. Baker: yeah. Talking about these external actors. When, while I have you here geopolitically, you know how real is the Us-china Cold war type of thing is is China. One of these external actors is Russia.
162
00:18:32.900 –> 00:18:39.039
Nathaniel E. Baker: And you know, where do you? Where do you see geopolitical risks? Also, if there is a change in administration here.
163
00:18:40.200 –> 00:18:44.949
mIKE: Well, I mean in terms of those who may try and cause problems. You know
164
00:18:44.970 –> 00:18:46.050
mIKE: Russia.
165
00:18:46.874 –> 00:18:49.780
mIKE: north, you know North Korea, Iran.
166
00:18:49.900 –> 00:18:51.679
mIKE: China. To some extent
167
00:18:52.100 –> 00:19:04.509
mIKE: these individuals don’t want a stable America. Obviously, we’re funding military campaigns that are directly harming them. So anything they can do to destabilize America is in their interest.
168
00:19:04.790 –> 00:19:10.151
mIKE: so I think you know we would we should be very conscious of how they may want to influence things.
169
00:19:10.490 –> 00:19:16.910
mIKE: How the electoral process, then influences the geopolitical landscape after the elections
170
00:19:16.930 –> 00:19:21.129
mIKE: is going to be very interesting. Are we going to be withdrawing funds from
171
00:19:21.360 –> 00:19:23.650
mIKE: Ukraine, Israel? And so forth?
172
00:19:23.980 –> 00:19:28.039
mIKE: Is that going to further stabilize or destabilize the world?
173
00:19:28.370 –> 00:19:34.350
mIKE: That’s certainly a very interesting and complicated situation. And of course, the question also is.
174
00:19:34.460 –> 00:19:37.850
mIKE: is the incumbent or the new incumbent
175
00:19:38.340 –> 00:19:44.419
mIKE: going to be able to make those changes quickly? Or is it going to be a slow, laborious process? That kind of
176
00:19:44.480 –> 00:19:51.450
mIKE: equalizes out the risk over a long period versus causing a transformative change within the risk. Landscape.
177
00:19:52.380 –> 00:19:53.810
Nathaniel E. Baker: Yeah, yeah.
178
00:19:54.110 –> 00:19:59.240
Nathaniel E. Baker: wow, okay, there’s a lot of stuff here. My life that you have discussed with us.
179
00:19:59.991 –> 00:20:06.620
Nathaniel E. Baker: What would you say is your number one concern here right now, as we record this on October 30, th 2024.
180
00:20:07.440 –> 00:20:13.409
mIKE: My number one concern wouldn’t necessarily be immediately post election. It would be leading up to the inauguration if
181
00:20:13.660 –> 00:20:21.490
mIKE: the wrong candidate was selected from those who may be the perpetrators of violence.
182
00:20:22.110 –> 00:20:29.960
mIKE: because there would be some kind of planning phase going on in order to oppose. You know the the new elected official.
183
00:20:30.240 –> 00:20:33.669
mIKE: So I I’d be very, very concerned. I would
184
00:20:34.340 –> 00:20:47.610
mIKE: be mindful of urbanized areas, certainly within swing States. I’d be keeping a keen eye on that. And I, if I was a business owner, or indeed just the average, you know, citizen, I would be making some contingency plans
185
00:20:47.710 –> 00:20:52.920
mIKE: to say if, as a business. If I saw some of the triggers being activated.
186
00:20:53.260 –> 00:20:58.890
mIKE: how would I make myself and my my people more resilient? So I’d be looking at
187
00:20:59.100 –> 00:21:04.969
mIKE: protecting my people, protecting my facilities, my assets, my operation, my information, and my reputation
188
00:21:05.180 –> 00:21:13.009
mIKE: and building up contingency factors to to implement just in time, training, or predictive training for people, whether they’re individuals
189
00:21:13.190 –> 00:21:21.529
mIKE: who may work or move through areas of violence or potential violence. So I’d be looking to look after those I’d be looking at vulnerable populations.
190
00:21:21.670 –> 00:21:27.330
mIKE: such as you know, females, members of the Lgbtqi community who may be singled out or ethnic groups
191
00:21:27.520 –> 00:21:29.280
mIKE: who may be singled out.
192
00:21:29.520 –> 00:21:38.390
mIKE: I’ll be looking at developing training programs and exercising programs for my management teams at the site level so that they are rehearsed and ready to react in a
193
00:21:38.890 –> 00:21:43.580
mIKE: a consistent and educated manner to a potential emergent or occurring threat.
194
00:21:43.760 –> 00:21:54.229
mIKE: And I’ll be looking at developing competency within my executive team as well because they’re the decision makers who are going to shape how the organization plans for response to a potential threat.
195
00:21:54.390 –> 00:22:01.589
mIKE: I’d be dusting off my policies and plans so that my business continuity and crisis and emergency management plans were up to date.
196
00:22:01.630 –> 00:22:04.810
mIKE: We’re we’re distributed and and we’re effective.
197
00:22:05.100 –> 00:22:14.670
mIKE: And I’d be assigning the right resources to address risks, whether they were internally based or or engaging external experts to help augment my team.
198
00:22:14.890 –> 00:22:22.849
mIKE: and then I’ll be tracking things on a real time basis. Certainly up to and past the inauguration point.
199
00:22:22.970 –> 00:22:25.810
mIKE: and that’s what I would be doing as a company.
200
00:22:25.980 –> 00:22:27.590
mIKE: as an individual
201
00:22:27.890 –> 00:22:36.030
mIKE: I’d be. I’d be discussing with my family and my friends, you know what the triggers were for me as a person or as a family.
202
00:22:36.090 –> 00:22:43.760
mIKE: and then identifying what I would do if violence broke out within my neighborhood or area, you know. How would I react? What would I do?
203
00:22:43.950 –> 00:22:47.570
mIKE: Would I relocate to to a safe area with a family friend
204
00:22:47.760 –> 00:22:56.400
mIKE: or family member in order to get my kids and my loved ones out of danger. So I’d be I’d be kind of tracking the individual level as well.
205
00:22:57.390 –> 00:23:00.190
Nathaniel E. Baker: So you mentioned swing states and urban areas? And
206
00:23:00.270 –> 00:23:05.250
Nathaniel E. Baker: is is it correct that those would you say those are the the kind of the focal points now.
207
00:23:05.290 –> 00:23:10.509
Nathaniel E. Baker: and would this be as part of like a certification process for the votes, or something like that, that this would play out.
208
00:23:11.670 –> 00:23:19.972
mIKE: Yeah, well, I mean, the swing states are, because, you know, they’re kind of the decider within the current electoral model of of which way it goes.
209
00:23:20.470 –> 00:23:27.550
mIKE: but I would also look at the States that are very, very blue or very, very red, because they’re going to be upset
210
00:23:27.800 –> 00:23:30.919
mIKE: if it goes in one direction or another more than the others.
211
00:23:31.409 –> 00:23:33.789
mIKE: So that’s why I think you can.
212
00:23:33.850 –> 00:23:36.859
mIKE: you know, accurately predict the Hotspots
213
00:23:36.890 –> 00:23:38.490
mIKE: at the State level
214
00:23:39.060 –> 00:23:49.659
mIKE: at the localized level, or you know, you would then look at major cities, because that’s where crowds will gather, you know, apart from isolated lone shooters, you know, working in small towns and
215
00:23:49.820 –> 00:23:51.500
mIKE: and villages.
216
00:23:51.810 –> 00:24:05.170
mIKE: It’s going to be the public protest where you’ve got 10,000 people marching down the street who are terribly upset. Who, then, may, you know, turn aggressive? There may be a police response that aggravates the situation, or
217
00:24:05.320 –> 00:24:08.120
mIKE: is perceived to aggravate this situation?
218
00:24:08.170 –> 00:24:14.230
mIKE: You can have individuals who are purposely placed within the crowd, who then cause violence?
219
00:24:14.450 –> 00:24:25.669
mIKE: You know a shooter on the rooftop, somebody chanting or pushing or stabbing. Who then cause the rest of the crowd to to become embroiled in violence, and
220
00:24:25.810 –> 00:24:29.740
mIKE: having worked in, you know, over 50 countries. I’ve seen crowds turn
221
00:24:30.110 –> 00:24:31.600
mIKE: within seconds.
222
00:24:31.830 –> 00:24:42.180
mIKE: and you’d be amazed at what the average human being might do if they’re called up in the crowd mentality. It’s quite concerning. So it doesn’t take much
223
00:24:42.300 –> 00:24:48.299
mIKE: to push the normal, average decent person over the edge to do things that they wouldn’t otherwise do.
224
00:24:49.600 –> 00:24:50.630
Nathaniel E. Baker: Yeah. Gosh.
225
00:24:50.660 –> 00:24:59.280
Nathaniel E. Baker: but this again. But it doesn’t sound like Washington, DC. Is, is necessarily much of a focal point. Is that because of the lessons learned from January 6, and that there would be more
226
00:24:59.350 –> 00:25:02.759
Nathaniel E. Baker: precaution this time, around or or just not.
227
00:25:03.640 –> 00:25:15.360
mIKE: I would hope that the Government are thinking about measures to identify perpetrators coming into the city, or to preposition policing authorities in the right spot
228
00:25:15.420 –> 00:25:18.010
mIKE: in order to control any
229
00:25:18.290 –> 00:25:20.409
mIKE: potential or real violence.
230
00:25:20.660 –> 00:25:29.689
mIKE: But I don’t think you know it will be kind of the focal point, because that’s where the inauguration will will occur, but I don’t think it will be the only spot where violence will occur.
231
00:25:30.070 –> 00:25:35.979
mIKE: because there will be time between the votes being counted. And and you know the new President.
232
00:25:36.170 –> 00:25:38.109
mIKE: you know, signing in
233
00:25:38.260 –> 00:25:40.689
mIKE: for people to plan public protests
234
00:25:40.740 –> 00:25:42.120
mIKE: across America.
235
00:25:42.770 –> 00:25:52.490
mIKE: and there will also be time for agitators, whether domestic or international, to plan discord and violence during that period as well. And so that is
236
00:25:52.630 –> 00:25:55.250
mIKE: potentially a planning phase
237
00:25:55.650 –> 00:26:05.990
mIKE: for for hostile actors to to get things into place. Hopefully, the FBI and other intelligence agencies are obviously tracking that and intercepting some or all of it. But
238
00:26:06.350 –> 00:26:13.469
mIKE: it’s a big job for them to tackle, and, as we saw, with the 1st attempted assassination under trump.
239
00:26:13.500 –> 00:26:19.509
mIKE: the individual who perpetrated that wasn’t on their target list, and therefore was a surprise to them.
240
00:26:19.730 –> 00:26:20.450
mIKE: So.
241
00:26:20.590 –> 00:26:23.529
Nathaniel E. Baker: Yeah, all right. Last question to to put things
242
00:26:23.540 –> 00:26:26.629
Nathaniel E. Baker: overall. If you just had to put it in percentage terms.
243
00:26:26.980 –> 00:26:28.709
Nathaniel E. Baker: the chances of
244
00:26:28.860 –> 00:26:30.130
Nathaniel E. Baker: violence
245
00:26:30.630 –> 00:26:33.969
Nathaniel E. Baker: of any violence, I guess, occurring between now and the inauguration.
246
00:26:35.200 –> 00:26:37.859
Nathaniel E. Baker: and then with chances of more widespread.
247
00:26:37.960 –> 00:26:39.679
Nathaniel E. Baker: How would you? How would you put place that.
248
00:26:41.870 –> 00:26:48.689
mIKE: If if and again, I’m apolitical, so I’m not suggesting any candidate is any better than the other. But if
249
00:26:48.800 –> 00:26:51.309
mIKE: Harris is is voted in.
250
00:26:51.590 –> 00:26:53.489
mIKE: I think the potential for violence
251
00:26:53.600 –> 00:26:55.440
mIKE: is is exceptionally high.
252
00:26:55.850 –> 00:26:58.110
mIKE: Whether it’s isolated, sporadic.
253
00:26:58.260 –> 00:27:00.980
mIKE: limited, or more widespread.
254
00:27:00.990 –> 00:27:05.559
mIKE: I think the potential for incidents of violence is particularly high, like 80%.
255
00:27:05.560 –> 00:27:06.179
Nathaniel E. Baker: It’s 70.
256
00:27:06.180 –> 00:27:07.879
mIKE: 80 90%.
257
00:27:10.070 –> 00:27:12.439
mIKE: that’s if Harris is voted in.
258
00:27:12.740 –> 00:27:16.039
mIKE: If Trump has voted in, I think it goes down to 10%
259
00:27:16.930 –> 00:27:22.850
mIKE: because there’s not been any indicators, certainly, in research, and so forth.
260
00:27:23.140 –> 00:27:27.940
mIKE: that the those who support Harris are inclined more towards violence
261
00:27:28.100 –> 00:27:33.499
mIKE: feel as strongly from a spiritual or patriotic standpoint
262
00:27:33.530 –> 00:27:38.040
mIKE: that it’s going to be the end of America. They may feel it’s going to be the end of democracy.
263
00:27:38.260 –> 00:27:40.140
mIKE: but they don’t necessarily
264
00:27:40.150 –> 00:27:42.290
mIKE: have such passion
265
00:27:42.430 –> 00:27:48.409
mIKE: about, or violent passion about the potential outcomes. And I think I think that’s what’s going to
266
00:27:48.590 –> 00:27:50.040
mIKE: cause the violence.
267
00:27:50.310 –> 00:27:56.560
Nathaniel E. Baker: Even though there were 2 assassination attempts granted, like like you said they were lone actors that we know of. But yeah.
268
00:27:56.830 –> 00:28:03.890
mIKE: And and you know, and one might argue that the the first, st you know individual was a registered
269
00:28:03.920 –> 00:28:06.600
mIKE: Republican. So that wasn’t perhaps
270
00:28:06.820 –> 00:28:10.809
mIKE: politically motivated. It may just be a you know, lone lunatic who.
271
00:28:10.810 –> 00:28:11.580
Nathaniel E. Baker: Sure.
272
00:28:11.580 –> 00:28:15.820
mIKE: That was the target that came closest to them, and therefore they took a shot.
273
00:28:15.870 –> 00:28:19.519
mIKE: I don’t necessarily think that that was a politically motivated attack.
274
00:28:19.730 –> 00:28:22.680
mIKE: I’m not so certain about the second one.
275
00:28:22.820 –> 00:28:30.490
mIKE: but when it becomes politically motivated violence, where people are going after groups or individuals, that’s the concern.
276
00:28:31.670 –> 00:28:35.670
Nathaniel E. Baker: wow, okay, Mike Blythe, thank you so much for taking time out of your busy schedule
277
00:28:35.740 –> 00:28:41.700
Nathaniel E. Baker: this morning to speak with us in closing. Excuse me, maybe you can tell our listeners how they can find out more about you.
278
00:28:41.820 –> 00:28:50.650
Nathaniel E. Baker: Your books, if you’re if you are on the social media or anywhere else, websites and things like that. And I will include that. All all that information in the show notes as well.
279
00:28:51.440 –> 00:29:08.969
mIKE: Yeah, yeah, please get in touch more than happy to share any information. We’re providing certainly to organizations, free resources. Because, you know, we, we appreciate that there’s some serious and complex risks occurring. So you know, get in touch to our website, and I’ll provide that as part of this.
280
00:29:09.120 –> 00:29:10.290
mIKE: you know, briefing.
281
00:29:10.420 –> 00:29:13.179
mIKE: and we’d be happy to help you out as much as we can.
282
00:29:13.850 –> 00:29:14.940
Nathaniel E. Baker: And what’s the website?
283
00:29:15.780 –> 00:29:18.109
mIKE: Sigma 7 risk.com.
284
00:29:18.110 –> 00:29:19.257
Nathaniel E. Baker: Okay, cool, awesome.
285
00:29:19.740 –> 00:29:33.029
Nathaniel E. Baker: great, awesome. Thank you so much, Mike, for taking the time again. I really appreciate it. Fascinating conversation, if disconcerting. Thank you all for listening, and we’ll be back in a couple of weeks with our regularly scheduled programming
286
00:29:33.420 –> 00:29:34.310
Nathaniel E. Baker: hopefully.
287
00:29:35.192 –> 00:29:39.559
Nathaniel E. Baker: And with that I thank you once again and sign off, for now bye.