It started with a meme

Yes, I ignored the impeachment news for the longest of time, until the act is there, there is no impeachment. Just for the numbers people, this would be the 5th presidential path to impeachment, John Tyler (10) got his overturned 127-83, Richard Nixon (37) resigned before proceedings began and we got Andrew Johnson (17) and Bill Clinton (42) who both did impeached, by the way, I will forever have issues with a girl who keeps a sperm covered dress out of the laundry unless it was intentional the fact that she intentionally kept it for 9 months, and that is all I have to say on that subject. Now we get to the 45th President Donald Trump. When we look beyond the ‘grabbed her by the pussy‘ issues, we see a stage of bad decisions again and again, oh and I am a Republican at heart, so I am not giving you democratic rhetoric.

The first one is his inability to use social media correctly, even if we ignore the grammar issues on covfefe (aka coffee), we see the foundation of a person who apparently states his own frame of mind in all the wrong ways. In addition to this we see his choices on what to tweet, GQ magazine gave us in addition ‘The CIA Reportedly Pulled Its Top Spy From Russia Because Trump Can’t Keep His Mouth Shut‘ (at https://www.gq.com/story/cia-pulled-russia-spy-because-trump), this is actually the very first moment when impeachment became a reality, when an elected official cannot keep proper national security in line, the entire presidency becomes an issue and doubly so when the transgressor of national security is the President himself. Even if he did not do it, the stage of ‘is it more likely than not‘ has been met and for national security that is enough.

Musical chairs with clowns and politicians

The meme did not strike a chord because of John Oliver, even if he is a well-deserved comedian with a critical side towards politics. It was Jon Steward with the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund bill (at https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/07/29/trump-sign-9-11-victim-compensation-fund-bill-first-responders/1835550001/), where he addressed a nearly empty congress. The idea that congress would not be there to give support to a bill where firefighters knowingly met certain doom is just beyond acceptable, from my point of view; those who were not there should be named and shamed for years to come. It must be mentioned that President Trump signed it into law and that might be the best thing he has done in his presidency.

The impeachment process continues as I get only an hour ago: “House investigators heard from Fiona Hill, the White House’s former top Russia adviser“, the Washington Post also gave us: “Trump renewed his call to unmask the whistleblower whose complaint sparked the impeachment inquiry“, the fact is not that he wants to know the whistle blower, it will be about the materials that the whistle blowers (plural) are bringing. The additional fact that we get: “Gordon Sondland, the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, who is scheduled to appear Thursday under subpoena” that the mess is a lot larger, the mess that hits the media is not a mess that we could avoid, the issue is that this mess should not have existed in the first place. The call from the democrat from Massachusetts is not to be taken lightly: “Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) shared a link to an article about Cheney’s comments. He argued that within the past week, Trump has “endangered our troops,” “allowed ISIS to regroup,” “abandoned our allies” and “empowered” the leaders of Russia and Syria. McGovern used another name for the Islamic State“, basically his own fat tweeting fingers got him into this mess. The foundation of what a fashion magazine brings (GQ) is the cornerstone for a much larger issue, the fact that the president of the United States of America is the national security issue is something America has (as far as I can tell) never faced before.

It all comes to blows with “Republicans have seized on a ruling that Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) cannot participate in Monday’s deposition of Hill as they continue to argue the process should be open to the public“, for those in the dark, watch the movie called the Post, this is a direct stage where Republicans wanted things out of the media, there the issue was: “With help from editor Ben Bradlee, Graham races to catch up with The New York Times to expose a massive cover-up of government secrets that spans three decades and four U.S. presidents“, the Pentagon papers showed levels of folly never before imagined, and there was a need to go public, however, the Pentagon papers was about a stage 4 years after the war, in the end proving that the Johnson Administration “systematically lied, not only to the public but also to Congress” source NY Times. this time it is different, these are events now playing out, even as the Russian news got out AFTER the agent was safe, the fact that the president is part of a national security danger is just too unacceptable and before this goes to the public, the sources must be heard and vetted behind closed doors, I fully agree and I see the wisdom in that, even if the current president and the current administration does not.

I believe this administration made massive errors in the US China trade wars, and even more errors in the entire Huawei ban, the most visible one is that no evidence was ever presented that Huawei is a national security risk, because of the unproven accusations they are wrong, this is different in the UK where the head of MI6 (Alex Younger) gave the clear premise that no government should be dependent on essential infrastructure from foreign suppliers, which does make sense, but then they order their hardware from Finland and Sweden, so there is still some level of issue in place. the entire matter comes to blows in different ways as the larger group of EU nations (Germany being the latest) has kept the doors open for Huawei, now we get to the stage that America feared, Huawei will enable these nations to make faster headway in Europe, expected losses for the US will go between $5 Billion and $8 Billion in the next three years alone. My own expected IP would be available for implementation by Q2 2021 (if Huawei accepts), implying that there will be a boost to the 400 million small business owners outside of the United States, leaving an optional $4 billion out of reach of the US in that time frame alone, the moment my projection is proven values should double, in addition to that the entire telecom service model will change to a larger degree, giving the small business owners a lot more options to choose from, that part is also part of the impeachment.

When the economic models under this administration fail, the democrats will add that entire cart (whether valid or not) to the blame game. Whether we consider this or not, the current president will to some degree be blamed for not being a Guardian of the Economy. The Huawei and China trade pacts are merely one part in this. This administration has pushed the American deficit to the highest in history, even if we accept that the bulk of that failure are the American corporations who became complacent and flaccid, it is more likely than not that the democratic party will voice this in another way. In addition, the guilty of life for Americans have only gotten worse. At present it seems that the current president failed in at least 6 of his 7 roles, as far as I can tell the other impeachment had less on those presidents, we can argue that an adulterer is supposed to lie about those actions, so let’s not go there.

The roles

Chief Diplomat. Failed, the China trade war, I believe that the acts against Iran were justified.

Chief Legislator. Undecided

Party Leader. Failed, his racist tweets are a clear example and they are not the only one.

Chief Executive. Failed, openly hostile to challenges, his manner towards the National Security Advisors as well as his issue with academic opposition makes him a failed chief executive, He used 4 National Security Advisors in ONE term, which is a record as well.

Chief of State. Failed, the G-20 summit, as well as his dealings with the media gives him a fail mark.

Commander in Chief. Failed, the actions in Syria call his military insight and decision making into doubt to the largest degree.

Chief of Guardian of the Economy. Failed, Chinese trade war could have been prevented, outside factors (like iterative corporations merely added to the failure) and of course there were a few fiscal blunders as well.

The entire national security issue, as well as the connections that are being investigated should have sparked impeachment well over a year ago, perhaps the entire CIA matter ended up being the straw that broke the impeachment camel’s back. #Justsaying 

Yet this entire matter is far from over, the Guardian reported: “Donald Trump’s secretary of defense said on Sunday the Pentagon would cooperate with the House’s impeachment inquiry, while cautioning that Trump may try to restrict his disclosure of information“, whilst CNN gives us “Democrats also face extra scrutiny over their strategy as they race to prove that Trump abused his power by seeking election dirt on former Vice President Joe Biden from the President of Ukraine“, the question becomes why focus on strategy? Are the actions valid or not? Can a case be made or not? That is the mother lode of impeachment. Yet the fact that even Republicans are now more and more in support of the Ukraine investigations are making the map of red a hazardous place, it means that not only is there every chance of the next elected president being a Democrat, they have a real chance of winning both congress and the senate in 2020, this would push republicans out of play for 4 years, 4 years on the sidelines with their only option to play interference to some degree.

This was a race with growing chances; the entire impeachment matter merely hastened the shift from red to blue. At present there are numbers giving rise to the chance that the republicans will lose 7 senate seats, with an additional 4 unknowns that could optionally make the next election the biggest loss for Republicans in the Senate since 1936. In that year Democrat Joseph Robinson ended with 74 seats, I am willing to wager my last $1 that there is an option that the Democrats are at present optionally in a position to get 75 seats; it would be a new record. Republican Nebraska has one small advantage as Ben Sasse was openly critical of President Trump, in 1936 they were independent, this time around there is a chance for Chris Janicek to become Senator for the Democrats if he gets the right support, and of course if he plays his cards right.

Impeachment did no start with a meme, but my look at the shift of comedians and politicians did, when national wisdom and honour comes from a man like Jon Steward (never my favourite comedian) we stop and pause to reassess our values and we look at what we hold to be endearing and holy to us, holy values are not religious values, our family tends to be holy, our achievements are enshrined, but the steps we take to enable the next generation (usually our kids) are our step towards holy grace, we all want to leave something behind that lasts and when the clowns are running the asylum (congress) and Donald McDonalds has a large white Kentucky Fried Chicken mansion on Pennsylvania avenue (a little upstream from the FBI building, we see the folly of choices and we tend to demand change, in the case of America it took almost 4 years to figure out the folly beyond the minimum required degree.

When we seriously consider replacing Donald Trump with Jon Steward as President of the United States, at that point we realise that our values need to be restored, and we will elect whoever will give value to the values that truly matter, social media be damned.

I believe that there is a larger need; not merely the separating from church and state, the separation from corporations and state is now becoming a larger imperative, especially with a national debt that at present exceeds $22.8 trillion dollars with absolutely no plan in sight to repay any of it.

 

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics

Update to include monsters

I was thinking of some of the old games I used to play, especially one I never mastered. The game was released in 1985; I played the Atari ST edition. The game was called ‘Balance of Power‘ and it was basically the east versus the west and through the interface you could interfere (take control of) the balance of power between east and west. In the end I got overly comfortable to the expression “You have ignited a nuclear war. And no, there is no animated display of a mushroom cloud with parts of bodies flying through the air. We do not reward failure“, yes diplomacy was never my forte. There was an update 5-10 years later when the 1990 edition was launched, I never played that edition.

I believe that the world is ready for a true update of that game. When we add the atrocities by Turkey only a few days ago, when we add the Khashoggi debacle and the impact of social media and spin doctors at the heads of media outlets we see that the world has changed to a much larger degree and the impact of what actually could happen is perhaps worthy of a new game. We need to see and play with the impact of ISIS minded forces as political parties play with the impact on a global stage. The fact that the USA is no longer a real superpower and the fact that the treasury of Saudi Arabia, the consumer base of India as the technology footing of China are much larger influences than foreseen; we get to debate a much larger spectrum of what the balance of power looks like. I believe that when the people see the impact of these elements, we see that the world reshapes almost like some Sim City version with larger repercussions. When we consider the global powers of Google and Facebook we see that the game of world politics gets filtered by economic markers. The evolution of what was once regarded as the ‘Balance of Power‘ is optionally now the stage for a larger form of balance (or is that a forum of balance) staged in a collection of seesaws where one resets the balance of two others. the old balance of power staged on the bear and eagle are outdone, less valid, the entire proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran clearly shows that and the impact of the media as they filter the news is also a larger impact and we have never been able to truly look at the impact there is, hence the idea of a new Balance of power, optionally called: ‘the Power to balance powers‘, the optional new truth that Turkey is the fourth power to instigate multiple genocides (America as it degraded the population of Native American tribes to zero, as well as the Catholic powers who removed well over a dozen civilisations, and Russian combined actions in 1931 and 1932) is something we need to consider in a much larger scope.

It is this stage where we look at the news and we are confronted with ‘The Kurds’ commander in chief explains why his forces are finally ready to partner with Assad and Putin‘, I have no way of seeing how this plays out, but there will be larger repercussions on many stages. It is time that the youth takes a serious look at the large issues that their parents are dumping on their doorstep, we need to figure things out and it is time that this is done out in the open, no longer hidden behind a screen of media filters and silencing diplomatic teams as they are trying to remain ‘non-accountable’ towards actions chosen.

The problem is not merely that we ignore the actions; the larger stage is that all kinds of ‘compromises’ are being made for the long term and the next generation needs to learn what those repercussions are and I believe that the right video game could do this. The previous generation was apparently taught that evil should never be allowed to win, yet 25 years after WW2 we all became complacent and we thought that evil was gone, evil never is and we all have optionally become part of evil as we condone the actions of many, hide behind the shallow needs that social media offers and we remain unaware as the news is decided by the wealthy (read: corporations) as they became the shareholders, stake holders and advertisers; they get to tell the media and the news what is important, what is filtered out. That is the stage where the balance of power can educate a lot of people just how dangerous our status is at present, not dangerous as if a war comes, we are beyond that, I mean dangerous as we have set the stage for multiple generations of anger, hatred and feelings of revenge, and a growing lack of tolerance towards one another. It is almost like a 4 seat seesaw and each of these seats is the balancing point for another seesaw, it becomes a game of trying to stay balanced, it also means that there is a lack of movement available, which implies that some parties will be about claiming actions when none (or that specific one) was not available.

when we see the media, we are pushed to the question ‘What is the omitted Information that Remains Missing?‘, this is a spin on two levels, the first is ‘Which question should have been asked?’, which brings us to ‘Has a quote or testimonial been taken out of context?‘ this is harder to answer, but it is an influence, which gets influenced by: ‘Is someone approaching the issue from a different set of values?‘, as well as the stated answers ‘Are the claims supported by well-done research as well as based on reliable sources?‘ and that is the foundation for merely looking at the media how it filters information, the entire stage becomes a much harder game to program, yet should it not be done because of that?

And that is all before we get to the political and diplomatic stage on “If the answer is not helpful, can we change the question to make it so?” these two elements interacting in media causes all kinds of communication (read: presentation) issues whilst both sides remain intentionally ignorant to the equation. The next generation needs to be educated on what a mess this generation is creating. That part is seen (only in part) with: ‘12 Hours. 4 Syrian Hospitals Bombed. One Culprit: Russia‘ (source; NY times), with the quote “The Russian Air Force has repeatedly bombed hospitals in Syria in order to crush the last pockets of resistance to President Bashar al-Assad, according to an investigation by The New York Times“, which was set to events on May 5th 2019, many newspapers gave that information when it happened, the repeat from the NY Times gives us the quote “Russia’s position as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council has shielded it from scrutiny and made United Nations agencies reluctant to accuse the Russian Air Force of responsibility“, this is important as the United Nations Security council is now presented as an umbrella that offers a shield from actions it was supposed to stop, a stage we knew existed, but not to the degree we see now.

So when we see the NY Times quote: “Nabad al Hayat Surgical Hospital in southern Idlib Province served around 200,000 people before being destroyed in a Russian airstrike on May 5” which comes with assisted high resolution graphics of 40 mega pixels or better whilst we look at the exploding hospital, we wonder how lucky that photographer was, or perhaps someone knew in advance what would happen, we are left with too many questions and no real explanation that fits the morality and values within us.

It is becoming more and more important that we see the world as it is now being pushed by the monsters among us, we like to set the stage to merely Iran, Turkey, ISIS and Hezbollah, yet the real monsters are the ones claiming to fight the atrocities and in the end merely facilitate to it, it goes beyond the wear events, the technological feats we see in regards to 5G is also a global impact, and we can go on and on on all the events that are part of the stage, and it would soon become too complex. Perhaps that too would be the strength on any new version of ‘Balance of Power‘ the fact that too many issues are intertwined for several reasons. Yet when we add greed to the mix, the game becomes awfully transparent, add to that the actions by some making claims that they cannot prove; the created stage of carefully phrased denials, all out in the open and when we ask specifics we are left with half-baked answers that are not answers at all. This is a part that plays a role in all this, we seem to forget that governments have a duty to properly inform us, yet in the listing from government, through corporations to media to the viewer, we forget that there are three iterations of information, all bound by their own personal issues. It is almost an applied variation from Mark M. Lowenthal ‘Intelligence: From Secrets to Policy‘, the application of stages towards the drive of any policy (governmental or not) is also baked into the media and is subject to what we are allowed to see. Consider that impact, as well as the impact of data on the whole, it might become a massively complex new game, yet when we are able to show the impact of these elements to the people, we would optionally get a much more informed person, one who ends up asking the right questions, the questions that politicians, CEO’s and CFO’s fear. When that part comes out in the open, we get a first stage to truly fix things.

Yet with my sense of humour, we should make a lot more space to include the stages that Darrell Huff introduced us to when we were given ‘How to Lie with Statistics‘, and this gets us to today, we know that the balance of power is not merely what we have, what we get and how we get there. There is an internal stage where political power is also set to the stage of people in jobs (as enabled consumers) that was proven ages ago. Yet how that stage is managed is an entirely different matter. the pushed stage where enablers, facilitators and consumers become the ‘have group’ the rest will be the ‘have not’ group.

As we got told today (source: the conversation), we see this stage in Australia, “Centrelink generally requires evidence of looking for 20 jobs per month in order to keep receiving Newstart“, that sounds fine in theory, yet in the applied practice we see that the job search government links to a job search collector, whilst the seeding player of this group is another matter. So when we look at IT jobs in Sydney we see: ‘594 jobs with 715 positions‘, with the largest bulk (over 90%) being Adzuna, yet the reviews from some are stating that this source is riddled with ‘scam’ mentions, as well as overly positive claimed stages. There is a larger issue afoot and there is not enough scrutiny, even as the people can go to really valid places like Indeed, LinkedIn and Jora; the choice we see in the governmental site calls for question of scrutiny.

Why on earth did I mention that?

We see that the balance of power is set to what is done and what can be achieved, yet when we are confronted with a stage that is not available or realistic, how will we interact? When we are set in a stage of age discrimination on a stage where our issues are not heard, or set in a long winded stage of registration where the IT parts fails too often, the government gets to optionally report that no complaints were received. In Australia the mess with Centrelink data matching, the failing Biometrics Identification Services, the UK failures on IT in the NHS and the list goes on where the costs keeps on adding billion after billion, that directly impacts a government, its budget and its waning options, very much issues on a larger scale and the claim we see with “aggressive ICT outsourcing has led to agencies being left at the mercy of external vendors“, whilst there is no proof that growing the internal options would not have resolved the issue. It is a stage where corporations have a hold over the government, pushing cheaper solutions (another reference to age discrimination get pushed to the backbench and no solutions come forward. this is a direct application of the earlier mentioned ‘in the listing from government, through corporations to media to the viewer, we forget that there are three iterations of information, all bound by their own personal issues‘, which in the application of the Balance of Power means that corporations have a much larger option to disable or limit government actions. That is what the impact of corporatocracy is. In the original games there was no real corporatocracy, nowadays there is. The US is perhaps the strongest example and the impact we see in the FDA and DEA (see yesterday’s article) as well as the ATF limited through the powers of the NRA and by corporations addressing attachments to governmental needs we see a larger impact of where governments show limitations on the world stage.

Yes, the entire game has become a lot more complex which in the end leads us to the question, is any application of the ‘Balance of Power‘ still actual and realistic? That is partially seen in 2013 when the NY Times gave us: “Eight major companies, led by Google and Microsoft, are calling for tighter controls on surveillance of their customers’ data by governments“, yet the opposite was never put in place, the existence of Cambridge Analytics, the application of selling consumer data as well as the abuse of data collection through apps has never been stopped. We get all kinds of options to market through mined data giving a larger rise to corporatocracy, whilst the media remains silent on the dangers of corporatocracy. So when we see ‘This is what happens when corporations run the government‘ (Washington Post, March 2019) and ‘Australia’s march towards corporatocracy‘ (the conversation Feb 2017) we see merely two mentions on Google search page one, whilst he situation set the stage that there should have been dozen of clear mentions and investigations, yet the media seemingly have almost zero mentions, how is that? I think that there is a clear stage where corporations do not want to see any mention if possible and as I mentioned earlier ‘in the listing from government, through corporations to media to the viewer, we forget that there are three iterations of information, all bound by their own personal issues‘, and here we see how ‘through corporations to the media‘ is directly inhibiting exposure. The Balance of Power would be an awesome game if we can incorporate it into a new game, especially when we see how the media and corporations make sure that a lot of the information will not be shown, active censorship in nations that proclaim freedom of speech and freedom of expression, when you own the printing house you get to tell the people what they care about, we apparently forgot about that small part again and again.

It is the beginning of a rigged game where the next generation gets to pay for the screw ups of the current generation, feel free to ignore or deny that, yet when we consider the US with a debt of $21 trillion, the EU has around € 10.1 trillion and on a global scale we see that the Global debt had reached an all-time high of $184 trillion in January 2019, we see that the Balance of Power is a term that has become debatable, a stage where banks are basically in charge, limiting or directing the options that any government is allowed to consider. The original game never anticipated that reality, but there you have it. John Perkins tried to inform the audience with ‘Confessions of an Economic Hit Man (2004)’, yet even after Berrett-Koehler published it, gaining an instant bestseller, whilst the major U.S. media refused to discuss Confessions or the fact that, because of it, terms such as “EHM” and “corporatocracy” were now appearing on college syllabi. A stage where the media claiming to advocate freedom of speech, whilst we see that its absence is allegedly corporation controlled, a direct (still alleged) piece of evidence showing that whatever balance of Power we envision, when it is set to nations and governments we get less than 50% of the players in view, making a larger injustice to the people.

In this, I wonder who exactly the real monsters are; are they identified by the acts of nations like Turkey, Iran and North Korea, are they the acts by organisations like ISIS, Hezbollah and Hamas, or are the corporations and the media they control a lot less innocent in all this. Will the next generation be ready for what we, the current generation have facilitated for?

I honestly do not know.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, IT, Media, Politics

A larger failure

The Washington Post had an investigation, it had been published months ago (at https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/the-opioid-crisis-15-percent-of-the-pharmacies-handled-nearly-half-of-the-pills/2019/08/12/b24bd4ee-b3c7-11e9-8f6c-7828e68cb15f_story.html) and I did look at a few sides of what was happening, yet the larger failure was never looked at. The fact that the DEA has failed its nation to this degree is almost too weird for words.

The headline might give us: ‘As overdoses soared, nearly 35 billion opioids — half of distributed pills — handled by 15 percent of pharmacies‘, there was a clear need to investigate the pharmacies and the FDA who had been a failing regulator in all this, yet the Washington Post gives us that there is enough blame to go around. When we see: “The DEA has maintained this database for roughly two decades but did not regularly mine the records to identify pharmacies buying unusual quantities of opioid pills, according to current and former DEA officials. The agency relies on drug companies and pharmacies to monitor and report suspicious purchases“, we see more than mere stupidity and laziness, the DEA shows that there is a systemic failure in America. The mere mention of ‘The agency relies on drug companies and pharmacies to monitor and report suspicious purchases‘, shows just how stupid the DEA has been, a stage where a commercially driven enterprise will monitor itself has in all of history never ever worked. Looking at the top 15, the three pharmacies in Kentucky sold enough opioids to hand every citizen in Kentucky 3 tablets each, that is merely the three pharmacies in that list, and there are close to 300 (as far as I have been able to count them). The simplest stage that I could have shown the DEA using IBM modeller/IBM statistics in less than one hour (providing the data was transferred).

The DEA and the FDA failed to this degree. A stage that could have been addressed half a decade ago, it was never mined; that is the size if what I will plainly call incompetence. Even as the New York Times gave us Yesterday: ‘Judge Orders Pause in Opioid Litigation Against Purdue Pharma and Sacklers‘, we see (at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/11/health/purdue-bankruptcy-opioids.html) that there is another stage, it is not about the “mounting costs of litigation”, I see that there is a larger systemic failure and whilst we accept that the people can go after Purdue Pharma and its owners, the Sacklers. There is a clear stage where the FDA and the DEA should have stepped in half a decade ago, they did not!

Even as politicians and law makers are giving rise to the option “They would also give up ownership of Purdue, which would be restructured into a new company, overseen by public administrators. The new company would continue to sell its signature opioid, OxyContin, as well as other medications, but all profits would go to pay the cities, counties and states for the costs of the opioid epidemic“, that sounds nice, but in the end the problem is larger than one company and the failure of the DEA is out in the open and left alone, untapped and not really investigated, the same can be said for the FDA in all this. Large companies had too much hold on these institutions and now that the dam is build, this can all happen again. Sanitation of the DEA and FDA will be essential in all this.

Even as there is in the most extreme some validity to the claim by B. Douglas Hoey, chief executive of the National Community Pharmacists Association when he gives us “There are legitimate reasons small pharmacies can have outsize volumes” so far his words do not sound true. The fact that three in Kentucky and the list of 15 pharmacies where the smallest transgressor prescribed 65 pills per person with a total of 1,294,890 pills (in Oklahoma of all places), we see a large failure and the rods by Hoey come across as hollow. In this the National Community Pharmacists Association should have mined its data as well, that was seemingly never done to any degree. I would have needed less than an hour to see initial top line results and raise red flags all over America. The idea that someone in West Virginia prescribed 70 pills per person and in total prescribed 13,168,350 pills should be out in limelight, none of the three ever gave this, none of them decided to arrest the people in Strosnider in Mingo County and prosecute them (after investigations) regarding the prescriptions of opioids.

When we get the results where over 6 years 15% of the pharmacies received 48% of pain pills is a metric that is too unacceptable and Hoey hiding behind “The numbers don’t always tell the whole story” clearly implies that he needs replacement, in addition the entire facilitation towards pharmaceutical companies must change. In addition, when the Post gives us “Many of the high-volume pharmacies had annual double-digit growth in pain pills and bought far more opioids than competitors in the same counties. The analysis also considered proximity to urban centers“, I feel certain that there is a lot more in those numbers and beyond the need for greed there is no valid explanation forthcoming any day soon. A systemic failure that is now the driver behind an addiction pandemic. The disbelieve merely grows when we are confronted with: “A judge recently ordered the release of seven years of database records, which expose the paths of more than 70 billion pain pills distributed to about 83,000 pharmacies“, this gives us an average of a little over 843,000 pain pills per pharmacy over 7 years, making it 120,000 pills per pharmacy per year. A simple search via:

SPLIT FILE PER YEAR pharmacy.
FREQUENCIES
/NOTABLE
/STATISTICS=mean.

It would have given us the results of something that would have knocked over any junior analyst making that person push every red alert that this person could lay their hands on. One hundred and twenty thousand pain pills per pharmacy per year is a massive result! The fact that the DEA and the FDA fell short of something I typed in 14 seconds shows just how large the failure is (processing that amount of data takes additional time). I reckon that if I started this in 2013, with a monthly dashboard, I feel 99.5% certain that the phones of the top brass of the FDA and the DEA would be red hot from every politician that saw those results.

If I had changed it towards:

SPLIT FILE PER YEAR STATE pharmacy.
FREQUENCIES
/NOTABLE
/STATISTICS=mean MIN MAX STDDEV.

I would get a lot more to work with, in addition as those who do not prescribe pain pills would not be part of the numbers, the results would be rather interesting to read and this is merely top line results, when we start digging into the numbers and start looking into the specifics like Kroger Pharmacies (KY) and Walmart Pharmacies (KY) and look at them per state (merely examples) we will get an even more descriptive stage of the data involved, so when B. Douglas Hoey stated: “The numbers don’t always tell the whole story” he ended up being more wrong than you could ever imagine, it is not merely the numbers, it is about asking the right questions, but he did not offer that point of view, did he?

The failure of the DEA becomes a larger issue when we see: “A DEA spokesman said he could not provide a complete list of all enforcement actions by the agency against pharmacies nationwide for violations of the Controlled Substances Act“, this shows a failure in logistics and organisation, In all this the National Community Pharmacists Association has a larger role to play, if the quality of a pharmacy is everything, any association would need to remain aware of any legal and prosecution issues playing, not merely because it is a prosecution or an action, but it is up to the association to make sure its members are aware of issues that play in the legal and enforcement field in all this, so there is a carpet hiding a truckload of trash, even as we point at the DEA, the failure is actually larger and involves pharmaceutical corporations, the FDA, the DEA, the Pharmacy association, as well as optionally accounting, bought and sold pills should be in the audit, something this big would have had to show up, unless the books were designed to keep such numbers out of view, yet when one player (Strosnider, Mingo County, WV) sells 13,168,350 pills whilst prescriptions are set to $6 per pill, that one place has to book $13 million dollar per year on pain pills only, and that was NOT noticed?

Go cry me a river!

The failure is large, the stage that the Washington Post gives us is merely one side, the NY Times gives another part, but the overall failure where the US government collects all data and does nothing is the real largest failure. As the NY Times gives us: “the eight individual Sacklers who are typically named in the litigation argue that because they have been sued for their roles with Purdue, Purdue’s protection in bankruptcy court should cover them too“, yet the US government (specifically FDA and DEA) had the data and for the longest time they apparently did nothing, in a stage of such a systemic failure, will anything ever get resolved?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Been there, done that

We all have those moments, we have all seen events where we attend, take notice and basically after 5 seconds we are in the stage of ‘What else is new?‘, that was the stage when I got my fingers on ‘The Name of the Rose review’ by Lucy Mangan. I am not judging her review, the article (at https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/oct/11/the-name-of-the-rose-review-john-turturro-umberto-eco) seems decent enough, yet the very first part where we could relate to the movie (also based on the book), released in 1986, where Sean Connery is the monk, Christian Slater is his apprentice and the prosecutor is seen in the shape of F. Murray Abraham. It is a wonderful movie and we get the story in less than 2 hours. In addition we see the rise of Ron Perlman as ‘La Idiota di stupido‘ (aka Salvatore) is not to be missed; he really puts his print there. In the movie the entire stage makes sense, the people, the interactions and the squabble (Gui versus William), we see that pride lives on many planes.

So when I see the review missing out on that reflection I wonder how much Lucy knew (perhaps the omission was intentional), yet I believe that when we look at stars the size of Sean Connery and John Turturro, both with very distinguished careers that comparison makes sense. When I see ‘Monk Soup’ (according to the reviewer) it is important to see the cast as it is. In that same stage, the shaping of Adso under William first by Christian Slater and now by Damian Hardung is also important, the movie makes that clear, whether the series will is presently unknown to me. It gives us how knowledge is seen and how some is optionally is wisdom but a lot is not, the presentation of evidence that gives rise to Bernardo Gui as the evil tool, first by F. Murray Abraham and now by Rupert Everett is equally important. And it is interesting that both sides have actors and stars that would be on equal footing. So why is the BBC version seen as ‘Monk Soup’? If I were to judge going by: ‘Episode 1: The Name of the Rose Series 1‘ then it would be that the Name of the Rose would be a great movie, optionally a great mini-series, but a TV series with seasons? Let’s not forget that the entire story plays over the time of around a week, so how are you setting that in multiple seasons? As I did not watch it I would speculate that we would be watching paint dry, making Monk soup a nice change of pace for the viewers.

In the end, I am not reflecting on the BBC series (not until I have seen them and I am curious), especially with this cast. My issue will become, where was the wisdom to do this story in series? Why not a mini-series of 3-4 episodes of 1-2 hours per episode, perhaps even merely one season all 8 episodes, the fact that the entire matter played over a week makes that an option, yet to set the stage of 60-90 minutes to cover a day at an abbey might make it long, slow and optionally dry. Abbeys were famous for an absence of wine and hookers, so whilst pharmacies and scrolls will not get the same result, it might have an impact on the people in the now (opposing those who were around in 1327).

In the end, I did not dislike the view of Lucy Mangan, yet the absence of any mention of the movie, the radio play and so on gives an incomplete view, a view absent of comparison, it was her choice and as such automatically a valid one, I merely would have taken a different look, hoping to give an optional clear view for all those curious to see it.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media

Chess with a twist

Perhaps you remember the blog 2 days ago (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2019/10/09/one-failing-director/) where we get confronted with the Malka Leifer case. This case got heated news as the Israeli supreme court (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/10/israels-supreme-court-overturns-ruling-to-release-malka-leifer) gave us about 7 hours ago: “following an appeal by the prosecution to Israel’s highest court, judges decided that Leifer should remain in jail for the remainder of an already five-year long extradition case“. And that is not all, you see the Australian media was interestingly not very forthcoming when we look to the article (at https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-israel-s-health-czar-threatened-psychiatrists-in-australian-principal-sex-abuse-case-1.6939570) and we are given: “Deputy Health Minister Yaakov Litzman has been questioned by the Israel Police over allegations that he tried to use his influence, including the use of threats, to get government psychiatrists to have Leifer declared unfit for trial and to block her extradition“, the Haaretz article gives us a larger issue and (obviously) I never knew that part, hence me pointing the finger at Mossad. Consider the premise “Leifer’s subsequent arrest in Israel in 2014, has involved lawyers, media advisers and ultra-Orthodox “fixers.” According to sources in the Gerer (or Gur) Hasidic sect, the campaign has been funded by Leifer’s family, as well as loans and donations“.

If members of the Gerer Hasidic sect are willing to put pressures on so that a pedophile is not prosecuted, what else are they willing to do? I admit that I have to be careful here, my limited knowledge of Hasidic is limited to the movie Left Luggage by Jeroen Krabbe from 1998 (marvelous movie). From a source I got the two interesting linked quotes. The first one is: “Yakov Yosef Moskowitz, told me, between 400 and 500 families receive these packages; this week being Passover, the number had more than doubled. Moskowitz had arranged 76 delivery routes around the county, each carefully assigned to volunteer drivers from other shuls and other villages to preserve the recipients’ anonymity. Drivers were trained to turn off their lights and drop the boxes off silently, on the stoop, so the charity was unseen. Often, Moskowitz hears from wives whose husbands have no idea they are getting food, or husbands whose wives don’t know“, and the second one is: “Some Hasidic acquaintances told me that whenever they encounter another Hasid in a secular environment, even if he is a stranger, they will greet him warmly and often share a meal. One way to understand this embrace is that life inside the Hasidic community has been, for those within it, rendered so complete that simply to see another Hasid is to enter it again, and to enter it is to move from the chimerical to the real.

It is here that we see the danger ‘from the chimerical to the real‘, or in plain English from hoped for but illusory or impossible to achieve towards an actual premise. In my view: ‘to make a delusional state of being a reality‘, the harsh danger is that these people would be in a stage where they could be manipulated by the right person to do the greater harm. From my interpretation when we revisit Haaretz we get: “One source said that the community does not deny the gravity of the acts with which Leifer has been charged or think that she shouldn’t be punished; rather, the argument is that she should be in an Israeli prison, rather than in an Australian facility alongside non-Jewish inmates“, whilst the staged premise was “to get government psychiatrists to have Leifer declared unfit for trial and to block her extradition“, basically leaving Malka Leifer non trialled and free to roam around Israel optionally creating more victims, in addition to that, any elected official giving support to these acts is often willing to close one eye to other actions, for example when we take the other example of ‘receiving packages’, what when the delivery does more than deliver food and when the recipients remain anonymous, the chance that those with non-friendly intentions towards the state of Israel receive goods as well, the larger problem becomes clear. In any cell based structure where silence is key and the higher participants have no real oversight bad things become a larger danger and a realistic possibility. As such Mossad was very much the party to get involved, if only to make sure that the state of Israel is not being undermined.

Even as Haaretz gave us “There was no explicit request for a specific conclusion, but apparently the intention was clear, and a number of the psychiatrists were uncomfortable with it“, the initial source in the Guardian gave us “Her case has dragged on for five years, involved 57 hearings and more than 30 psychiatrists“, slightly opposing the stage of ‘a number of the psychiatrists were uncomfortable with it‘, which indicates that not enough were uncomfortable with it dragging this case on for 5 years, right under the noses of Mossad I might add (it seems cruel and overstated, but it is not). If Deputy Health Minister Yaakov Litzman did this, what else was done? I need to move more careful now, because there are indicators that there is a concern that Haredi support is almost based on blind faith (my interpretation), as such there is optionally a larger non guilty side to Yaakov Litzman, even if his support of Malka Leifer implies the opposite, even as I found “a separate bribery charge for helping to prevent the closure of a food business that his own ministry had deemed unsanitary” (source: Times of Israel), the stage at this point is that the bribery charge is out in the open, even as the Times of Israel gives us: “Litzman attempted to influence officials in the Health Ministry in order to prevent the closure of a food business whose owner “he is close to” — a closure that had been ordered due to “serious sanitary findings found that led to the sickness of a number of people who ate from its products” the stage remains that I do not see all the facts of basically both sides of the equation and in that a ‘just’ point of view is hard to maintain. Yet the revelations by Channel 13 in May (also never revealed in the Guardian article) gives us in addition: “Litzman helped at least 10 serious sex offenders obtain improved conditions, including home visits and other benefits, by pressuring state psychiatrists and prisons service officials” the larger question becomes, how was he able to maintain a larger undocumented presence (something Mossad should have been aware of), and my own premise (not entirely based on facts) that we know scores of terrorists who would never accept or condone the actions of a pedophile, as such those who do would have much less concern not dealing with terrorists, that is the pie that does directly hit Mossad, would a person like that knowingly did one thing also optionally impede the safety and security of the State of Israel. Consider that (almost) nothing is done for free, if a person is able to ‘obtain improved conditions, by pressuring state psychiatrists and prisons service officials‘ exactly what favour was done in return to the people that were pressured? Even if it was to merely hand over a few ‘innocent’ messages, we get to optionally see a much larger issue and the media is seemingly blind to that part.

The fact that in early 2019 Channel 13 gave the people “Earlier in the year, the TV channel had reported that police were investigating suspicions that Litzman and his chief of staff pressured a psychiatrist, Moshe Birger, to ensure that another imprisoned sex offender close to Litzman’s Gur sect of Hasidim was placed in a rehabilitation program” we see the facilitation of people in the Gur sect of Hasidim, as such what else was done? That ‘what else was done’ is almost a given, especially as the facilitation was optionally done by non-members of Gur sect of Hasidim.

It is my speculation that this is not merely the work of one person, merely one front man and as such there are other players under the carpet doing the work for alternative third parties, the question soon becomes what other parties which brings me back to my original placement two days ago when I (accidentally) specifically stated: ‘A case has been out in the open and I cannot fathom how Yossi Cohen left the game this open, and his pieces unprotected and setting them in the optional sunlight of direct peril‘; in all fairness, he might not have left it in the open and for the longest of times Director Yossi Cohen has not shared any issues of state security with me (for reasons unknown), yet the absence of other people in all this merely implies that the case was left in the open, yet that and the fact that this case has dragged on for 5 years gives a larger concern, one that should be dealt with before the end of the year at best. In all this there is still a larger concern in Australia as well, in a case where we see direct criminal transgressions we see the actions of School management moving alleged criminals to Israel, what else did they spirit away? The fact that the actions of Malka Leifer are directly in opposition to what the State of Israel finds acceptable is foundation enough to warrant deeper investigation to all who were involved and facilitated towards the non-prosecution of Malka Leifer; an important factor as the Australian prosecution will dig into that part, I reckon that Mossad would be most interested in setting the premise where they will not face questions that they cannot answer, or facing questions where the answer ends up being unknown to them, it makes for a really bad game of Basketball.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

Not a small house for boys

Yes, we all have moments when we want to avoid events, the call to ignore the European Song Festival in Tel Aviv, The Summer Olympics, 1980, the British Empire boycott (1764-1766), some become successful, and some do not. the problem is that it is not always possible to prove its validity up front, in one case, only after that disgruntled clambake (1764) did the boycott succeed and the United States of America were born. Yet when we see the Dutch times (at https://nltimes.nl/2019/10/08/mp-wants-netherlands-boycott-g20-summit-saudi-arabia) are we confronted with: “SP parliamentarian Sadet Karabulut wants the Netherlands to boycott the G20 summit in Saudi Arabia next year“, with the most outstanding reason “The Saudi regime is too controversial, Karabulut said, referring to the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi“, all whilst evidence of Saudi governmental evidence was never shown, merely implied (by that well known UN essay writer).

And it does not end there, Socialist party member Sadet Karabulut was (fortunate for me) rather stupid to boot, when we see: “Crown prince Mohammed Bin Salman is most likely responsible for cutting journalist Jamal Khashoggi into pieces“, it is an assumption, there is no evidence at all that he was responsible, there is no beyond reasonable doubt, moreover, there is no evidence of the ‘cutting into pieces bit‘ in any way as the body was never found. We just do not know what happened, and to let some socialist party hack decide what a nation does and what a nation attends, especially as this (if ever proven) was the act of an individual, yet not of any government (it cannot ever be proven), the stage is merely that of a Dutch Socialist of Kurdish origins that sets the stage of a boycott without proper staging in evidence. In addition, the Netherlands had only been invited as a courtesy, the EU is a member, the Dutch are not, in previous years, HRH Queen Maxima was invited as a representative for her work for the United Nations. more important, the Netherlands are merely one of 27 participants and even as the complete EU decides to boycott it, it would in the end be a really stupid dick move (as the expression goes), however I am quite willing to attend (in their place) and set the stage to get construction jobs away from Dutch players, as well as jobs currently with Smit Tak as well as Nedlloyd (via Maersk) and hand them over to Salini Impregilo and the Evergreen group. I do not think that the Dutch government will mind, and if they do, they can ask Sadet Karabulut to explain herself (phone: +31 88 243 5555). It is time that wannabe limelight seekers like Sadet Karabulut learn that there is a cost of doing business, especially when they make claims that cannot be proven in any way. In addition when you consider that she was elected in 2013, where was her call to boycott the G20 in 2015 (G20 Antalya summit), we can accept that her Kurdish origins would oppose any international stage towards thousands of murdered Kurds, as well as dozens of executed journalists would call for that boycott of the Turkish G20, yet Google search does not reveal anything there, does it?

Boycotting an event is one of the harshest actions there are, even if they are not always successful, they do tend to give a larger rise to awareness and to some degree that is fine, yet when this is done in a stage where evidence is not there, when the case is too largely based on speculation and tainted presentations the entire matter falls apart and at that point a boycott could work in a very different direction. consider that companies like Royal Dutch Shell PLC, Smit Tak (aka Smit Salvage), P&O Nedlloyd (part of Maersk shipping), Unilever and a few others all have sizeable interests in Saudi Arabia, I personally think that politicians better have their facts, ducks and lack of cluelessness clearly on a row. The Dutch brainless rambles of politicians like JanMaat need to be a thing of the past. When the bad thing happens and two of more of these larger players get asked to leave, whilst their competitor walks in, that loss is massive and runs into the billions over time. There is at this point not one economy that can take a hit of that size and to that degree.

We might all shout that it is not about business and you are not wrong, yet when you falsely accuse a party and that evidence cannot be presented, you the presenter become the problem. Even as we can state that Sadet Karabulut was merely seeking the limelight does not mean she cannot get it, I believe that there is great limelight to begotten when Maersk (P&O Nedlloyd) loses the Saudi jobs and they are given to Evergreen shipping, do you think for one minute that Maersk, P&O Nedlloyd, and Smit Salvage directors will be appreciative of the brainless actions of Sadet Karabulut? It’s a sellers’ market in this unstable economy and the Persian Gulf is a treasure trove for several players, and when unfounded actions are called for whilst the outstanding hypocrisy can be proven several times over it all becomes a much larger problem. We can argue on the fine lines in the accusation, yet the fact is that most likely nothing will ever be proven, the lack of evidence is just too big a deal, and whilst you consider the life of one journalist, consider how many died in Turkey, how many are in prison in Turkey and why they ended on one pile or the other. In all that Saudi Arabia should not be a blip on anyone’s radar in that regard.

I can understand that the choice: “Last year the Netherlands cancelled a trade mission to Saudi Arabia due to Khashoggi’s disappearance“, yet there is a difference between a trade mission and a G20 summit, the stakes are a lot higher and when we decide not to attend a place where optional informal deals could be made and informal changes could be proposed, not being there also implies that no success will follow. You have to be in it to win it, the simplest of premises. When you have to hide behind ‘most likely responsible‘, and ‘It is believed‘ you have nothing to work with. You can decide to boycott, but when it is on unproven actions, you better be ready to accept what happens afterwards, after being in office for almost 13 years Sadet Karabulut should have known better. However, I am most willing to see who wants to take over the Dutch interests all over the Persian Gulf (as an unofficial non-elected global participant seeking coinage for services).

And whilst we see another wave of ‘Justice for Jamal’ new messages on the New York Times, the Business Insider, The Guardian and a whole range of papers, consider the murders of Naji al Jurf, Firas Hammadi, and Ibrahim Abdulkader. They were all clearly murdered (cadaver available) on the 27th of December 2015 in Turkey. The NY Times claimed 6 days ago that Jamal is still owed Justice, what about these three murdered journalists? Why are they not in the NY Times, the Washington Post and a whole range of newspapers every day? Can anyone explain that and in that same regard, why is Sadet Karabulut not speaking out for boycotts regarding these three journalists. Merely three of a much larger list, several dead and many in jail, where are their advocates?

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics