Category Archives: Law

April 22, 2025 · 19:25

No Uber to the rescue

That is the setting that CBC gave me today and it angers me. For the most any situation that sets danger to children angers me. I reckon that is within all of us. Our first care is to a child, any child and that takes precedence over almost anything else.

The CBC (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/uber-drives-off-with-child-1.7513379) is giving us ‘An Uber drove away with her kid. Then Uber wouldn’t connect her or police with the driver’ with the subtext “Uber representatives refused to help them or Toronto police contact the driver” a blatant setting that optionally will endanger a child. Lets be clear, there could be a setting that a person is not to be connected to a driver, but the police? The Toronto metropolitan police force towards the protection of a child? As I personally see it, all Uber activities will stop immediately until this setting is resolved. No matter what the impact is, to optionally endanger a child is something you don’t get back from.

So when we get “An officer called Uber to get contact information for the driver but Julia says a representative for the ride-sharing company refused to provide it — stating the police needed to fill out a form” your blood should be boiling, as did mine. So, I do get part of this, still the operator could have contacted the driver and take it from there. The driver could then have called, the operator could have logged the event and within 1-2 minutes there would have been clarity. Now, the child was left in danger, as such I have no value for the statement “Toronto police found her child about an hour and a half later, without the company’s help” or the ‘official’ excuse “An Uber spokesperson said in a statement the safety of everyone who uses the platform is the company’s top priority”, well that setting is a downright lie, because the setting of the operator calling was seemingly overlooked. And the setting that a child was without her mothers care for 90 minutes should wake up every mother in Canada ignoring Uber as a solution for them for some time (or ever again), the latter setting is not to be ignored. Especially against “We immediately began reviewing the details of this incident internally to identify opportunities to improve our processes and support systems.” In under a minute I found a solution that ANY call centre operator could have considered in seconds. But it was to no avail, Uber fell short everywhere (Überall in German) and it goes from bad to worse from there. You see the setting of “The company says its support team followed Uber’s standard protocols, which are designed to protect the privacy and safety of all users” is a debatable one, I reckon that Uber set that setting to protect themselves and optionally illegals that might get some cash by becoming an Uber driver. You see, in villages like New York they have the setting “Under New York’s Vehicle and Traffic Law, ride-share companies such as Uber and Lyft are regulated as “transportation network companies” (“TNC”). To become a TNC driver, a worker must be at least nineteen years old and hold a valid New York State driver’s license issued by the DMV.” I reckon that this rule applies in many American cities, as such, as Uber needs drivers, they need to get space to keep their illegals ‘somewhat’ safe. And this setting with the child, a freak, one in a million events got in the way from what I personally see, the ‘protection’ of illegals. Now it is fair to say that I am wrong, but consider the simplicity of a call centre operator contacting the driver, optionally handing the data to a police officer against the escalation that the CBC is handing us implies that my version is likely correct. Just the setting that Uber refuses to aid the police department to resolve this situation gives it a much nastier turn and as such there is a larger setting that actions against Uber becomes essential, if only to guarantee that children get a much better safety net under this unsafe premise. And for those who state that I am wrong. Consider the following scenario. The child fell asleep, the mother was moving the three children and when she returns the cab is gone. So far, so good. Now the taxi driver rides off, hits a bump or pit in the road, as mother is no longer there, the child is thrown in the cab optionally causing damage to neck or other body part. This could have been not noticed (because mother is gone) and she falls out of sight and the taxi driver might be unaware. This is a possible setting and calling the driver could have stopped this from happening within minutes, and the child was ‘found’’ 90 minutes later, so for over an hour she remained in optional danger. 

As we get the last insult with “Julia’s boyfriend later received a $10 credit from Uber, which she considers “a massive slap in the face.””, as I see it, make Uber not an option for 10 months in Canada, a dollar a day so to say.

Yes, I am going for the larger danger, but as I see it, there is a clear need for this. In this I also oppose the setting that Carmi Levy, a technology analyst give with “traditional elements of customer service have been lost in today’s gig economy”, I oppose it, because as I see it the proper setting that seems to apply is “traditional elements of customer service have been lost in today’s gig economy for the larger need of profit, margins of profit and the pleasing of shares and stake holders” Yes, you forgot that, didn’t you? Uber works for profit slashing as many of the margins that they can to remain profitable and the funny part is that the phone call of the operator to the driver would not have impacted it. 

I will let you decide what the proper form of action is, consider that Uber gives us “Whether you’re in the back seat or behind the wheel, your safety is essential. We are committed to doing our part, and technology is at the heart of our approach. We partner with safety advocates and develop new technologies and systems to help improve safety and help make it easier for everyone to get around”, yet the website give us no information on where they are. So where do Canadians send their complaint letter to? For that matter, the line “technology is at the heart of our approach”, really? So is a phone call to the driver not technology? As such technology is not in any heart of approach and as I see it, a clear reason to block Uber from operating In Canada (optionally for 10 months), how does that go over with the share and stake holders?

Just a small merry thought, so you all have a lovely day and if you are Canadian consider City Taxi Toronto, 130 Westmore Drive, Suite 219, Toronto (reachable at (416) 740-2222)and keep yourself and your children safe, a random taxi service in Toronto was chosen. I personally do not know how good they are, but as I see it, optionally better than Uber.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

April 20, 2025 · 23:27

Rollback

That is the word of the day, I have always had that word in my vocabulary. The setting that any solution o programmed in Clipper had the setting for a rollback. This is how I grew up (growing up in the Clipper age was a little weird). You see, I had two settings. The first was the data didn’t change and as I was a ‘little’ verbose with my data creation there was the option of registering a data version, so that was the setting. We needed a rollback in several situations and that is where the setting ends. You see, today I got to see a few news lines. 

First there was Reuters (at https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/boeing-jet-returns-us-china-victim-trumps-tariff-war-2025-04-20/) giving us ‘Boeing jet returns to US from China, a victim of Trump’s tariff war’, now that is a scrumptious hotdog to say the least. At almost $100 million, according to one source, that is a delicious snack to say the least and as we are told. China send it back. The tariff could cripple Xiamen Airlines as the tariff is 125%, and even as Reuters give us that the plane is a mere $55 million, we can say that the price difference is a little too much to be acceptable, the larger setting is that several players are trying to dam in the losses that are projected to become American losses. 

Most of us will have seen the trade agreements that China made with Mexico, so there is that. Then there is the setting we see at where Business Insider gives us the setting that ‘Some Canadian Stores Are Labeling US Imports With a T for ‘Tariffs’’ (business insider put it behind a paywall, so that’s all you get. And only three days ago I saw the headline ‘China’s Strategic Pivot from US to Canadian Oil Imports’ (at https://discoveryalert.com.au/news/chinas-pivot-canadian-oil-imports-2025/) I cannot vouch for this source, yet in that setting we are given “Data reveals Chinese refiners have slashed US crude purchases by approximately 90% between 2023 and 2025, redirecting roughly 1.2 million barrels per day (bpd) toward alternative suppliers, with Canada capturing a substantial portion of this market share.” So the first step to a change has been given and I foresaw these changes even as I never knew about the oil. So as I see it, these changes show billions upon billions in losses for America whilst we see damage to their export, their revenue making defense industry, their tourism and we can go on a little longer. Wouldn’t it have been great if America had a rollback setting for their elections? 

So as Goldman Sachs gives us “The decline in the world’s reserve asset during an episode of elevated volatility comes as investors are increasingly focused on the US’s growing debt burden and other countries are also increasing their borrowing. “Markets are dealing with a lot of competing factors right now — fairly significant drivers where it’s hard to trade all of them at once,” says William Marshall, head of US rates strategy in Goldman Sachs Research.” Really? Only now do we see “investors are increasingly focused on the US’s growing debt burden”, that’s about 4 years too late, but whatever. I saw (and reported on this danger for a few years at least). If the EU, Japan and China dump their bonds (that will be an expensive exercise) the value of the Dollar doesn’t just drop, it ends up having getting a CCC− grade (to give a mere view on the matter). At that point the imminent suicide risk will spike all over Wall Street (a clear but reliable speculation).

I reckon that the one dropping them first gets the best value for it, but after that it will be a quick fall to the luxury value of zero. But it is not just America, the bonds of the EU and Japan will face a similar risk, America is merely the highest as someone thought it was a great idea to introduce the tariff game to their economy. Global News told their Canadians ‘Avoid U.S. travel if possible, Canadian academics are being urged’ with others following in similar settings. The Detroit News gives us ‘Avoid U.S. or take burner phones, Canada executives tell staff’ and there are more sources that give us that, with the added “Arrivals of noncitizens to the United States by plane declined by nearly 900,000 people, almost 10%, in March from a year earlier, according to data from the U.S. International Trade Administration. Travelers are reacting to President Donald Trump’s trade war and to stories of harsh detentions at U.S. airports. Border figures show 4,970,360 came to the U.S. from Canada in March 2024. That number dropped to 4,105,516 travelers a year later. More visitors reportedly traveled from Canada to the U.S. in March 2022 under pandemic-related travel restrictions than they did last month.” I think that Canada is the most likely of number drops, but I reckon that it is not the only one. So as I see it, the danger is not only to Tourism, but business travel too and in that case, hotels in all the major cities in the United States will report on losses of 10% or more, so what does that mean for the value of Marriott International, who operates 9,361 hotels worldwide as of 2024. In addition there is Hilton who operates over 8,400 hotels worldwide. I have no idea how many they operate in the USA, but these are merely the two larger players, especially in the business travel setting. So how many businesses are under the hammer because of this situation? And now as Canada is growing closer to the Commonwealth and they will protect their bigger brother (Canada is 9.985 million km² and the UK a mere 243,610 km²) OK, Australia is 7.688 million km², away highly smaller brother than the United Kingdom. But that setting now gives us that these business meetings are likely to be held in the United Kingdom or Australia. Hilton and the Marriott will still get their coins, but the underlying issues will hurt America to a much larger degree. And as this escalates over the next month or so, the damage to America will increase. Additional damage as China and India rolls in as expecting ‘saviors’ to Saudi Arabia and the UAE will change global politics and global economics to a much larger degree. India will get new options to get additional Pharmaceutical products sold to Saudi Arabia and that is another slice of a billion dollars. Then we get the UK, Australia and Japan hammering on improving their slice of Optical, photo, technical, medical apparatus, as such the American slice of $1.39B will decrees a lot more. All this started with tariffs and basically this setting was staged by President Trump. I merely wonder what got into him to drive America to the edge of insanity (and bankruptcy). What a miss that politics don’t have rollbacks and I reckon that the lawmakers in America will push for a larger change of settings, because I am certain that the Republicans are desperate to see this damage undone and it is me personal believe that they will accept any other politician, even a democrat to undo the damage they are seeing right now.

A mere 21 hours ago we got (at https://jakartaglobe.id/business/indonesia-seeks-stronger-trade-ties-with-eu-australia-to-offset-potential-us-export-losses) that Indonesia Globe gives us ‘Indonesia Seeks Stronger Trade Ties with EU, Australia to Offset Potential US Export Losses’, which is fine by me as I love the Indonesian version of Bami Goreng with Saté Ajam with peanut sauce. The best dish I ever had, even now after a decade, the scent penetrates my nose, even as I haven’t had it in over a decade. So I am looking forward to stronger ties with Indonesia and I kinda miss the spices we had in Batavia (my weird sense of humor). But the stage is drawn as more countries seek replacement for America, their tariff becomes their setting for isolation and Australia will be happy to have ties with a country that has 281.2 million potential consumers. I already gave the premise to Saudi Arabia as they have access to something Indonesia desires. As such there are more players to take over the places that America is about to lose and lose more of them. Next in line are the international students who will seek safer places to be. In this Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia have good chances as they all have great places Oxford, and Cambridge might be the first you think of, but not everyone can afford these places. There is till the University College London, University of Melbourne, University of Sydney, University of New South Wales, University of Toronto, University of Manchester, University of Technology Sydney, University of Southampton. These are merely a Commonwealth grasp of those who are in the top 100 and I reckon that the losses for America start to add up now. And that was merely the Ivy League, America has more good universities and now that the international students will seek education elsewhere, the economic picture of America will deteriorate more and more. 

Wouldn’t it have been great to have some kind of political rollback in place? 
Have a great day and consider where you need to set your focus to next. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Politics, Tourism

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

April 18, 2025 · 17:18

A viewpoint is not a point of view

Yes, nice and confusing. But that is the meaning of this exercise. You see, I don’t agree on the point of view the law makes in this case. They have altered their point of view on the law in motion. In a setting that ran for over a decade. I don’t think they are to blame, there is no real guilt here (apparently), but the setting stands. In this I call to attention the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3674nl7g74o) stating ‘Google has illegal advertising monopoly, judge rules’ I do not agree and for this I call to attention two ‘pieces’ of evidence. The first is the actor Ryan Reynolds, a person I have called more than once the craziest marketeer on the planet. The second piece of evidence is a firm named CAASIE.co, an advertisement services firm apparently in Brisbane (I thought they were in New York). These two stand out, in a pool of millions. Set in a presence of “The US alone spent almost $481 billion on marketing in 2022, with digital marketing seeing significant growth. Australia’s marketing industry is also substantial, valued at over $20 billion.” With the added “While a precise count isn’t available, the scale of the industry suggests a large number of professionals are involved in marketing roles worldwide. The demand for marketing expertise is strong, and the industry is continuously evolving, particularly with the rise of digital marketing”. Don’t get me wrong, there are good marketing teams. The bigger brands have decent teams and at times places like Coca Cola and Heineken stand out. Yet in that setting of millions of people these two stand out. Why? Perhaps marketing is seen by some as the path you take when you can’t do anything else? Perhaps these men (women too) can talk their way into the panties of the youthful ladies and they thought, perhaps I can make money out of this venturous situation. And they went into marketing, mainly because ‘sex sells’. The truth couldn’t be farther (or is that further) removed from the truth. 

And there the problem starts. You see, Google isn’t monopolising things, they merely had the proper handle on things. The marketing bulk doesn’t know what it its doing and as ‘they’ see it Google is in the way. In the early days Google (read: Larry Page and Sergei Brin) figured out a few things. As Microsoft was talking dirty to the CFO’s in the land (in the late 80’s and beyond) these two youthful young sprouts figured out that the work was done by the m inions of these CFO’s, so as they catered to the bulk of the worker ants, Microsoft was wasting its time on expensive dinners and drink parties and they got all the CFO’s and CTO’s of the Fortune 500. But these people needed their worker ants and Google had created a search system that catered to THEIR needs. So whilst these youthful young sprouts were at Stanford University, their buddies all went for the knickers of the ladies. They created a page rank system, because they saw ahead that the web was going to be a mess, millions of voices create cacophony and they cut through the mess.

So ahead we go 20 years (take or leave a year) and Google figured out that their system is gold. So they venture forward and they create Google Ads (formerly Google Adwords) and that was in 2000. Again they hit gold, although it was a natural continuation from page rank and again Microsoft wants ink on the game, but wannabe’s and spin creators can merely make shallow creation and it is seen in their product. At present known as Microsoft Advertising, holds a market share of around 3-4% of the global search engine market. This is bad news for the marketing wannabe’s as they bought the shite that Microsoft is seemingly selling. Even I saw the bing hijacking of people seeking and as Microsoft is all playing innocent, they did (as I personally see it) enable the system to be abused. It matter not, Google created a firm product and now the marketing bitches (both male and female) decided to cry fowl (intended typo) So that I the setting.

Marketing today is people who talk a lot present a lot, but as I see it, they do not know what they are doing. Merely hoping that their revenue cup runneth over and it is based on decade old settings (which is what schools rely on). At UTS (University of Technology Sydney) we had one lecture on page rank and that opened my eyes (unlikely as much as it hit Sergei and Larry), but the setting was clear. Google created the largest setting by thinking of what to do, not to wine and dine the people with money and they followed Microsoft as they didn’t realise what they were up against. The internet of things is a massive beast with plenty of horns and these are the horns of plenty.

So now we get to the ‘court case’ that the BBC gives us. So as we are given “The US Department of Justice, along with 17 US states, sued Google, arguing the tech giant was illegally dominating the technology which determines which adverts should be placed online and where” and as I personally see it, they are catering to millions of people who do not know what they are doing and they think it is unfair that these people should miss out on a business they are unlikely to understand. You see, I name these two at the start as they have figured out a few things. Ryan Reynolds created billions from understanding the world and its business (Mint Mobile, Aviation Gin, and Wrexham AFC. He also co-founded Maximum Effort, a marketing agency and production company) he figured out a few things and that sprout is a mere 48 springs old. He saw the options and turned several products in a multi billion dollar empire by engaging with an audience and telling a story in a way they remembered. The other (the wannabe’s) can scoop up a mere $100,000 dollars at a time as I see it. Let’s not forget that this man started as an extra on the X-Files, now he surpassed the main cast of that series (including the director) in several ways.

Second we get CAASIE.co, they come with “buy outdoor ads globally – from your browser”, with the byline “Self-service. No contracts. No commitments” and consider this quote “In 2007, São Paulo, Brazil instituted a billboard ban because there were no viable regulations of the billboard industry.” For decades these billboards were out there and in 2020 (a mere 5 years ago) they decided to change the premise. So as we get “They are an advertising company specializing in Digital Out of Home (dOOH) advertising, programmatic advertising, and digital signage. Their headquarters are in Brisbane, Australia”, a setting that was clear for decades but no one considered what there was and these people did, so as they gain favor and altitude by being innovative the wannabe marketeers can (for all I care) go duck themselves. 

These two examples are a clear sign that the crying marketeers need to grow up, or as the Americans say “Go big or go home” and that is noticeable on the future of marketing as I see it. Now they are all about AI and creating hypes, but that doesn’t pay for the yacht (or for diner as I see it). 

So as I see “US district judge Leonie Brinkema said in the ruling Google had “willfully engaged in a series of anticompetitive acts” which enabled it to “acquire and maintain monopoly power” in the market.” Is wrong by at least half a continent (a mile seems so shallow), so as I see it, when did the law start catering to village idiots? The fact that there are thousands of voices doesn’t make this clever. Reynolds and CAASIE were clever, they were very clever and that is a setting that CAASIE can enjoy, you see when they get access to the stage where the Google Ads people use CAASIE as the global interface to get global visibility, CAASIE will grow a lot more and what will the marketeers do to get their slices of pie? Cry a little more? Since when did we cater to the stupid to give value to this world?

The is the setting I see and as I see it the larger folly of US district judge Leonie Brinkema, so their goes her “willfully engaged”, Google walked a path for decades and that thought paid off and as I see it, Google was not catering to CAASIE, CAASIE found its own niche of global needed marketing. These two settings (Reynolds and CAASIE) show that there was space and these are raking in the billions (CAASIE not yet) but they can get a lot more by expanding into the UAE and Saudi Arabia, optionally Bangladesh and Indonesia as well. A setting that will iterate in new areas and that was something that a player like Microsoft never understood. My evidence in that statement is the fact that they lost marketshare 6 times over.

So the viewpoints of Google, Ryan Reynolds and CAASIE are not points of view, they are intentional strides in the Internet of Things and their views of how to make money. A lesson a lot of marketeers never learned in the first place. Although they got their collection of panties n their trophy cabinet, something I never ever had, but I decided to remain innovatively engaged. So as I had the ball several times from DARPA, Ubisoft and Microsoft (optionally Amazon and Apple as well) I can relax to see these departments of Justice (globally) fumble their balls and as things go from bad to worse I can giggle (not Google) from the sidelines. How the stage is the play of things, something Shakespeare figured out in 1623.

Have a great day whilst you ponder the wisdoms I left here with two hidden snags, the clever people out there can work out what I left for others to find. Have a great one.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

April 15, 2025 · 10:24

The clever get the advantage

That was always the setting to be envied, when the bullies come calling, the last breath is given to the clever people. In this the NY Times gives us (at https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/14/us/harvard-trump-reject-demands.html) ‘Harvard Says It Will Not Comply With Trump Administration’s Demands’ and I was skeptical at first, but as we see “Harvard University said on Monday that it had rejected policy changes requested by the Trump administration, becoming the first university to directly refuse to comply with its demands and setting up a showdown between the federal government and the nation’s wealthiest university.” My skepticism comes from the setting we saw last year when the Guardian gave us “Minouche Shafik, the president of Columbia University, appeared beleaguered and uncertain as one Congress member after another assailed her over her institution’s supposed inaction to stop it becoming what one called “a hotbed of antisemitism and hatred”.” For universities to let anti semitism unanswered and the setting of “who became Columbia’s president last July, into changing her testimony after she earlier told the Democratic representative Ilhan Omar that she was not aware of any anti-Jewish demonstrations at the university.” Which is a massive problem at the first setting as I see it. Now that Harvard sets a new line, they could massively profit by that standard. So as we see “Harvard’s response, which called the Trump administration’s demands illegal, marked a major shift in tone for the nation’s most influential school, which has been criticized in recent weeks for capitulating to Trump administration pressure.” We see two advantages for Harvard, the first first being that the wokiest woke people (whatever that means) will take their money out of their previous donation university and basically had it to Harvard (the people who openly hate President Trump might do the same), the second advantage is the academics who were unsettled by the federal ‘guide lines’ are likely to make a move from place previous to new place Harvard. This will name Harvard more renown than ever before and I reckon (a mere speculation) that these academics might increase the distance between Harvard and whomever has places 2 through 8 and in the academic world that matters (a lot). 

Is it right? Well, I think that the federal setting should not have gotten involved (but that is a personal view), I do believe that if a university is guilty of crimes than that is a different matter, and as most law student have been cast in the reading of the Nuremberg trials and the acceptance of illegal orders the setting for Harvard was (blatantly) simple. Don’t think it is a simple setting, because Harvard has the most money at present (read: the richest), other universities are a lot more dependent on Federal funding and that makes it a hard sell for a lot of them, but perhaps the setting that Harvard now has given the rest of America, others will follow. 

We can only hope.

In other news I just saw that Canada had to bid farewell to Gerry McNamara at the age of 90. As a wannabe goalie I give a heartfelt goodbye salute to this actual former goalie and former General Manager for seven seasons of the Toronto Maple Leafs. And I give my condolences to his family, friends and former team mates. And below we see Gerry McNamara at a slightly younger age

Have a great day and enjoy the end of the pre week today, midweek tomorrow.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics, sport

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

April 1, 2025 · 01:46

Accused, Bluff, Carney

It is a regular A,B,C. And at first I let it slide but then I got a response from the most ignorant stupid Canadian on the planet, I kid you not. As such I had to pick this up. 

Mark Carney (formerly known as Markie Mark of the British Bank) is now at present the PM of Canada and there is an election coming up. So now we get the accusation (as far as I can see) from the National Post. A magazine who is on the side off whomever opposes Mark Carney (conservatively minded), and will you believe it, they are pushing for plagiarism, weirdly enough, the article is well written making the setting a larger problem and all the other sources basically repeat what the National Post gave its readers. 

Two stood out
First there is the Independent (at https://www.independent.co.uk/politics/mark-carney-canada-prime-minister-plagiarism-oxford-b2723812.html) here we also see ‘Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney accused of plagiarism in his Oxford thesis’, now the issues I had was that the accusation came right when there is an election, the larger setting is that this happened 30 years ago and it was at Oxford and academics take plagiarism as the big booboo. As such there is a larger look at Plagiarism (I remember my days in Uni and there is a frightening fear for that word). 

The independent gives us “The accusations were reportedly made by three academics chosen to assess the liberal leader’s 1995 theses for his doctorate by the conservative newspaper the National Post.” More important we were given ““As an academic of nearly 40 years, I see no evidence of plagiarism in the thesis you cited, nor any unusual academic practices,” she emphasized.” This is given to us by Margaret Meyer, an American economist and an economics fellow at Nuffield College in Oxford University. In addition she gives us “Mark’s thesis was evaluated and approved by a faculty committee that saw his work for what it is: an impressive and thoroughly researched analysis that set him apart from his peers” added to that we get “A spokesperson for the Liberal campaign, Isabella Orozco-Madison, called the allegations an “irresponsible mischaracterization” of Carney’s work.” So far, so good. I believe that a thesis would not be unattended for 30 years, not from a place like Oxford. You see, Oxford is surrounded by close to a thousand reporters in any given day, and they have Cambridge looking over their shoulders, just like Oxford is watching Cambridge like a hawk. As I see it, there are issues to some degree and as such we get to the second piece. It comes from 

Where we are given “In my January 2024 blog post, “Plagiarism Witch Hunts Cause Harm,” about the case of former Harvard University President, Dr. Claudine Gay, I pointed out that we appear to be in an era where plagiarism is increasingly weaponized against public figures. Following the resignation of Dr. Gay amid plagiarism allegations, we have seen a troubling pattern of using academic integrity as a political weapon rather than an educational concern.” And this is followed by “There is no singular or universally accepted definition of plagiarism. Oxford University defines it as “presenting work or ideas from another source as your own.” However, interpretations of definitions, as well as the definitions themselves can vary from one university to the next, as I have pointed out elsewhere. In Carney’s case, his doctoral supervisor defended his work, stating she saw “no evidence of plagiarism in the thesis,” whereas academics consulted by the National Post disagreed. One professor, Dr. Geoffrey Sigalet, a political science professor at the University of British Columbia Okanagan (UBCO) stated that the unattributed quotes are “what we call plagiarism.” According to the National Post article, Dr. Sigalet is a member of the UBCO’s institutional president’s advisory committee on student discipline, “which handles cases of plagiarism for the university”. This disagreement underscores the subjectivity in evaluating academic integrity.” With the added question that gives weight to a few issues I have being “Upon reading the National Post article, one question that I had was: was Mr. Carney informed of the allegations before they were investigated?” My issues was that the media could be in hotter waters than they think. As I see it they propagated this setting by basically whaling whatever the National Post handed down to their audience. The added setting given to us is the one why I basically rejected the article, especially as Markie Mark is an Oxford graduate, on a personal note it isn’t the University of Technology Sydney, but they are a larger lead in university educations. And as such when we are given “Investigating work completed nearly 30 years ago raises questions about motives and impact. As I have pointed out previously when I commented on the Dr. Claudine Gay case, “a retroactive investigation into a person’s academic work while they were a student is often an exercise in discrediting someone in their current professional role.”” I basically rejected the stance as I presumed the clarity of the “using academic integrity as a political weapon”, yet I personally would want to call it “abusing academic integrity and misaligning it as a political weapon” A setting that one raised probably in favor of their Conservative Leader (I believe that in Canada it currently is Pierre Polivicious) and that setting we get to the last part given to us by Sarah Elaine Eaton, PhD, a Professor and Research Chair in the Werklund School of Education. She gives us the cherrie of the pie. It is given through “So, Did Mark Carney Plagiarize or Not? The answer is, I don’t know. When I conduct an analysis of text for possible plagiarism, it is a meticulously in-depth and detailed process. I start with the allegedly plagiarized text and I go through it line-by-line comparing it to the original sources from which text has been allegedly lifted without attribution. That can show whether or not there is a potential ‘text match’. There are examples of possible text matches in the National Post article, but they are selective. I cannot make a call on whether or not there was plagiarism based on excerpts. I would want to see the full texts (original and allegedly plagiarized), not bits and pieces.

If we can identify a possible text match, then we need to look for additional evidence. Was this sloppy scholarship or poor academic literacy? For example, were the original sources perhaps listed in the bibliography, but the direct quotations were not attributed in the main body of the text? In the context of the entire thesis, would it appear as though the student was deliberately trying to deceive their supervisor or academic advisory committee. (Intent to deceive is difficult, if not impossible to prove in many cases.)” This is the cherrie as it allows to ask the media to ask these questions, especially the media that merely copied what the National Post gave us. And these publications gave us lacking settings in addition. Who talked to the supervisor of Mark Carney? Who took the questions to Nuffield College, Oxford? Seems like two essential sources for these articles. I see several sources lacking. 

As such I have said my piece and I do not believe that there is a case for plagiarism against Mark Carney. Not because I got the paper (I basically lack economic knowledge), but for the simple setting that a place like Oxford will slap down any student who pushes Plagiarism, intentional or not. Such plagiarism cases hurt Oxford as much as the student. Then there is the timeline. Do you think that the Bank Of England takes on a student who attempts plagiarism? The timeline includes Goldman Sachs (that place is loaded with economy guys) and his work would have been scrutinized by dozens of people and 30 year later, just at the upcoming election someone makes a breakthrough? It smells like yesterdays diapers as Baby Herman told Roger Rabbit. 

Have a great day and enjoy the smell of coffee today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 20, 2025 · 17:50

A letter from Hugh

Yup, it happened to me, Hugh Grant send me a letter (a modern message in Email).

You know, the man who was made famous through the movie “Four startups and a Bankruptcy”. And behold, this morning there was a letter in my mailbox, stating:

Dear Lawrence,

For over ten years in opposition the Labour Party promised to implement the Leveson reforms.  These reforms would raise standards in the media and protect the public from intrusions into grief, blatant falsehoods, and other abuses. 

Sir Keir Starmer, meanwhile, talked a big game about ending corruption in politics and putting the public first.
Yet since his election as Prime Minister, Sir Keir has done nothing to keep his party’s promises and end the scandal of press abuse.

In his failure to act, he is protecting the status quo and putting newspaper owners ahead of the public.

We need to remind him: his Government is accountable to the British public, not newspaper owners.  And his Party’s promises – to ordinary people affected by press abuse, and the wider public – must be kept.

And here is the link to write to your MP (at https://www.hackedoff.org/campaign-actions/britains-press-power-without-responsibility-demand-real-press-accountability-now?utm_source=brevo&utm_campaign=Hugh follow-up&utm_medium=email&utm_id=38)

You will get to enter your UK Postcode and as I as a test enter a post code of Birmingham (as a test)  The system replies with 

Dear Shabana Mahmood,

Despite reaching over 70% of the public every month national newspapers are unregulated – allowing them to spread lies, disinformation, and to commit intrusions with impunity.

Every issue facing the country – from human trafficking to climate change to domestic violence – is affected by the ability of newspapers and their websites to cover them inaccurately and unethically.

The Government’s inaction on press regulation is holding Britain back from meeting these challenges – as well as leaving newspapers able to cause extraordinary damage to individuals’ lives through harassment and intrusion into grief.

You merely have to add your Name, Address and Email address details and the letter is ready. Easy, peasy, Chicken easy.

It will be a rough reminder for the Labour Party and his fellow minions to do something about the outstanding promise to set the Leveson papers in action. The media has become too much of a clear and present danger to the people, and many people in the UK have had enough. So this is a rather large remembrance page with the automation for the people to add their details and do something about it.

It gave me pause to think of hat the UK media is facing. It is already facing irrelevancy and a loss of readers on a global scale. No matter what our faith is, papers like New Arab, Arab News, Khaleej Times and several other newspapers are making string insides into the world population. And that is not all that is happening. In support we see that Dubai Media (the first recipient of my film script “How to assassinate a Politician”) is making rather larger visibility moves. Mostly in Bangladesh , Egypt and Indonesia, but it is a start). In this Al Saudiya (part of the SBA) is doing the same, but I am unaware how large their foot print is becoming. Mostly due to my lack of Arabic I cannot see the complete setting of the Saudi Broadcasting Authority. A Saudi TV group meant for 33 million is reaching out to a population of over half a billion (the Dubai Media group (UAE) as well). They are diminishing the channels that were until recently the targets of Reuters, AP News and the BBC. The people are through with these false prophets and are now giving these two a chance. After the track of the late eighties and 90’s that CNN had, they are given a green light by the people in many ways a similar setting.

Western people have had enough of the lies and innuendo that Western media gives us. As such the term sports-washing, meaning “Sportswashing is the use of sport to redirect public attention away from unethical conduct. The intended effect is to improve the reputation of the offending entity, by using the immense popularity of sport to ‘wash’ away poor publicity.” A term as I see it invented by the western media and nearly always used to describe Saudi involvement. But as I see it, the Western media should be using the same term (although not always involving sports) to strengthen their innuendo for digital dollars. They do, but to hide the actions of involved people like Sony (TPP policy 2016) and a few others. It was the first clear setting where I saw media ‘protecting’ big tech. I wrote (rather clumsily) about that in ‘Lessening the consumer?’ On April 27th 2016 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2016/04/27/lessening-the-consumer/) after that I saw the actions by Microsoft and others and the media was holding the hands over the heads of Big Tech (speculatively to score advertisement money) and that was how I started to keep my eyes of the media until now and see how the media today has less value than the average porn magazine, they might reflect on ‘Sex Sells’ but the value of their contribution has lost its value and then some. As media largely goes into the same direction, not giving us news, but referring to out as entertainment and as I see it, the ABC News Channel is the only news channel giving Australia actual news, the rest is flaccid entertainment. This is the same all over the western world hiding behind the term “A news and current affairs show”, where the emphasis is set to ‘current affairs show’ and the ‘insiders’ referring to that being the same. The world is waking up to the setting of being lulled asleep by the media and the Leveson papers was the first stage to getting the people awake. That was the first step for the media to wake up and that so far The Leveson Inquiry was a judicial public inquiry into the culture, practices, and ethics of the British press following the News International phone hacking scandal, chaired by Lord Justice Leveson, who was appointed in July 2011. A series of public hearings were held throughout 2011 and 2012. The result were 4 documents giving us over 2000 pages of wake up medicine for the media regulations. So far it hasn’t happened, for reference the Lord Of the Rings is a novel a mere 1077 pages, so there is that too, one is fiction , the other is a rude awakening of what the media is up to. The News of the world owned by Rupert Murdoch shut down in 2011 when the News of the World, owned by News Corporation, had been regularly hacking the phones of celebrities, royalty, and public citizens. Murdoch faced police and government investigations into bribery and corruption by the British government and FBI investigations in the US. He got out when he was no longer able to hide the actions of some. But not all is lost, the Arabian versions of the news are now shown all over the world mainly the three I mentioned in the beginning. And now we see the growth of Saudi and UAE media and they now have solid systems that can reach the whole western world too. Now we might not get all the shows the 1st gives us, but that is merely one step away from coming. The fires in California have settles the people in optionally leaving California and the UAE and Saudi stations could give them a new beginning, many to Canada, but with the promise of decent incomes Saudi Arabia and the UAE could collect on the cream of American Script writers. I saw this option opening up and (even though magnificently unsuccessful)  , I decided to attempt to sell my first script in the UAE (Dubai media). There is an inkling of faith that it was merely my lack of skills, and it was my first script, but I have three more on route. As such other (a lot more successful than me) could open the road to more scripts and that is what Hollywood fears, the drain of knowledge. They thought they were on top of the world with their setting, yet as Covid hit, followed by the strikes and the California fires, the Hollywood setting is to some degree now an empty shell and that leaves Canada, the UK, Saudi Arabia and the UAE open to wildly grown in all directions. The Guardian gives us “The entertainment industry is estimated to create $43bn in wages every year for the Californian economy and recent events have not only forced a pause in the short term but also raised concerns over long-term recovery.” These incomes have been impacted from 2020 onwards. We were given “Many blockbusters originally scheduled to be released by mid-March 2020 were postponed or canceled around the world, with film productions also being halted.” Then we got the strikes in 2023 which stopped it all again and the fires on January 7th 2025, the impact has roasted the core of Hollywood with burning down what was left. Consider the setting that the people in Hollywood were given $43 billion annually and that their incomes have been impeded with a near 80% lacking of a total of over $200 billion. The quality of life is setting the massive options for the other nations and as the Hollywood moguls are happy to pay the others as little as possible, they and up having no recourse for themselves. 

And now we get yet again the Leveson inquiry hitting the UK shores. The mess is now near complete and the media will have to surrender market shares to the Arabian nations and see where they end up being, because the events in Saudi Arabia (2030) and the UAE will likely have all the Arabian journalists and very little other ones, especially with vloggers all over the place and YouTube (and TikTok) having the new fields all to themselves and their creators. That is what I see happening al up to late 2027 and that is long before Hollywood becomes a shadow of itself.

That is the reality of exploitation at some point the people give up and seek richer grounds, Hollywood is now becoming largely without cohesion to itself, so where do you go then? You all have a productive day.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 18, 2025 · 20:36

And another stage erupts

That was always going to be the case. Hamas thinks it can play the blame game and Israel has had enough. So when you think of the Trump setting as well as the Egyptian setting for a ‘riviera’ stage, Consider that this was not due to Israel. It was Hamas that decided not to release the hostages. They are holding onto and straws they can and now the world see that any peace is possible, but not until Hamas is eradicated, even the people in Gaza are starting to realise this.

And in the setting we see Mark Rubio (at state.gov) give us “They feel like Hamas is not serious about negotiations.  They are still holding hostages and bodies in terrible conditions.  They are insisting on these dramatically lopsided trades of hundreds of people for one or two.  The President’s expressed his frustration about it as well.  So the Israelis are going to do what they believe is in their interests to sort of force Hamas to make decisions.  As I said, Mr. Witkoff is heading to Qatar, and hopefully that’ll bear fruit and all of these hostages will be released.  They should all be released.  They should all be released.” In addition there are settings where we get Al Jazeera also gives us “Rubio says Hamas ‘must be eradicated’, casting doubt on Gaza ceasefire deal”, as I see it, my response is: “Welcome to the party pal”, I have been telling you this for over a year. The setting is that the hostages have been there for over 528 days. Enough is enough. 

And this is not the only thing. The disgraceful setting of that UN loser (António Guterres) is also one that requires mention. We are given “UN Secretary-General António Guterres says he is “shocked” by the Israeli airstrikes in Gaza and has called for the ceasefire to be respected.

In a statement, Guterres urged for humanitarian aid to resume for people in Gaza and for the hostages held by Hamas to be released unconditionally.” He didn’t say “He is “shocked” by the Israeli airstrikes in Gaza. The hostages held by Hamas are to be released unconditionally and immediately and has urged for humanitarian aid to resume for people in Gaza and the ceasefire to be respected.” No, he is setting to onus on Israel, what a loser he is. I understand the setting that there is no talking to Hamas, and that is the only way he might make some inroads into Gaza. But I reckon that after 528 days it is over. We have no idea how many people are still alive and Hamas knows it will be the end of them. So as Gaza’s are dying today and tomorrow, let it be clear that this is due to Hamas, they started this and now it is coming to an rather rough end. 

So as these Palestinian losers in Universities go all anti-semitic, consider that we also get
(via Reuters) that ‘Rubio says US to revoke more student visas in coming days’, with the byline “In the days to come, you should expect more visas will be revoked as we identify people that we should have never allowed in”, as such the people who think they had a clue (and mindlessly repeated slogans from actual Israel haters) consider that mindlessly repeating slogans you never understood is removing you from academic consideration and throwing in the lap of the fast food industry (they are short staffed now), and it will come with a maximum annual income of $27557 or $13 per hour. Do you really think that you had a clue what was going on? I was in Rafah in 1982 and I did not completely get it, but in those days Yasser Arafat and the PLO were a much larger danger. So as you are reporting the words “From the river to the sea, we will be free” consider that you openly called for the eradication of 9,757,000 million Israeli’s and you are getting all that comes on top of you now. 

 And for your consideration, when you see the damage that is, how does Al Jazeera get the numbers “At least 326 Palestinians have been killed as Israel launched a massive assault on Gaza, shattering the fragile two-month-old ceasefire with Hamas.” How did they get the number 326? There is little communication, there is a lack of resources and a lack of adequate assistance in Gaza. They are summoning Humanitarian aid, but they know EXACTLY how many people were bombed? I doubt this sincerely. I will not argue that there are victims here (like the Israeli hostages) but the rest is all on the people in Gaza’s. Just remember the hundreds that came to ‘wave goodbye’ to the Israeli’s, to show ‘force’ to Hamas. Now it counts against you and Israel will not feel to burdened by the amounts of people killed in Gaza. You all support a terrorist organisation and the world has had enough. As such what is the UNRWA still doing active? Wasn’t there a call on October 29th 2024 ‘Coalition calls for UNRWA funding to be diverted to other aid groups after laws passed to ban group from Israel’? We were given “Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, passed laws overnight banning UNRWA from operating on Israeli soil — putting it at risk of collapsing when the laws take effect in 90 days.” So how are they still operating? Did Hamas ‘offer’ a helping hand? 

In this Simon Birmingham “The Coalition supports increased humanitarian aid into Gaza, but it should be delivered by groups other than UNRWA.” In this I wonder what is more important to these individuals. Actual aid, or their pay-slip. I reckon that there is some provision around that they still get paid as long as they are there. So in this, who is minding the UNRWA store as there is every indication that Hamas gets their piece of pie from that bag of money and eradicating Hamas is what is at stake at the moment (or should I refer to the steak).

Well that is the goods I have today, it was only time when Hamas goofed it all up, all whilst them releasing all the hostages stating “You see, we can be talked to, we can negotiate”, I knew that was never going to happen.

Have a peaceful day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 8, 2025 · 10:43

Repetition of a speculated lie

That is the setting that the Guardian is giving us (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/07/saudi-arabia-ukraine-us-talks-analysis) with the underlying text “a country with ambitions to be a major diplomatic player despite its horrific human rights record, including the kidnap and murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018”, so how often does a lie need to be repeated before people might accept it as a truth? 

You see on February 27, 2021 I wrote ‘That was easy!’ (At https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/02/27/that-was-easy/) where I blew the massive disregard for evidence to smithereens, an essay presumably written by UN essay writer Eggy Calamari. The report of a lot of pages and several times I blew their ‘assessment’ apart on simple logic. So, does that make me correct? No, but I firmly believe that a person is innocent until PROVEN guilty and that was not to be seen. Just as an apology is not a valid defense, a ‘highly likely’ from the CIA does not constitute evidence. ‘Highly likely’ is a speculation at best, as such it is not evidence. Moreover no one actually did a forensic analyses on these so called tapes. As such it is a mere document of collected speculations. One source gave me that JK escaped to Tora Tora with a young mistress. I do not believe that, but there are speculations all over the field and now with the Guardian 4 years later I basically had enough. 

The terms “kidnap and murder”and “murder of the journalist Jamal Khashoggi” connects to other articles, so there is that too. The first one connects to a 5 year old article named ‘‘Mockery of justice’ after Saudis convict eight over Khashoggi killing’ and the other is ‘‘He couldn’t see light at the end of the tunnel’: Jamal Khashoggi’s widow on their life and his death’. All speculative views. So in 5 years no one was able to prove anything, as such his Royal Highness Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud as well as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are innocent. You think I am kidding? No, I am not. Evidence is central here and the media have been using the JK case as a cash cow for digital dollars. 

I think it is high time that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia takes new steps to silence these innuendo’s. If I had anything to say about this, I would give the media a taste of its own medicine. The Guardian (at al) would be banned from covering sport (and other) news in Saudi Arabia. I reckon that The Times, The Express, The Observer and others (the UK has dozens of newspapers) can cover Sport in Saudi Arabia, the Guardian gets banned until 2035 for all these events. When they are on the outside looking in, they will soon start screaming like little tea grannies on how unfair life is for them. 

I personally also think out is time for Saudi Arabia to take a harder stance on who their allies really are. It is nice that President Trump is coming for a investment donation of 1 trillion, however the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has been barred from the F35 for a long time now. So if China could arrange for the J20 to be released to Saudi Arabia, they would be a much more worthy ally. So why doesn’t Saudi Arabia invest that money in China? Their might be larger considerations and I would not be privy to them, but an ally that merely claims to be an ally and whilst Saudi Arabia was under attack from Houthi terrorists, The US channels or assistance remains closed, even though several parties (including Colonel Turki bin Saleh Al-Maliki) who had shown several times that the Houthi terrorists were using Iranian drones to attack civilian Saudi targets (King Abdullah Airport in the southwestern Jizan province). The western media overlooked (I my view intentionally) that side of the story. And there is a lot more. As I personally see it intentionally silencing these matters should be seen as worse, but that is merely my point of view.

Oh, and the fact that I saw in hours these facts over 4 years ago and the ‘media’ never corrected their point of view is another matter entirely. They had no problems with replicating that work of fiction ‘Blood and Oil’ who used art of effective or persuasive writing, especially the exploitation of figures of speech to make a case that never was. That is how I see it (to be certain I bought the book and I shot it to hell within the hour (I only looked at the Khashoggi mentions)

So how is the Guardian sizing up right now?

I reckon that there is a price to pay for these settings and it is time that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is making these people pay for the intentional distortion of truth, but I am not in command of anything in Saudi Arabia, so my view could be ignored. If it wan’t for that pesky setting that China has another option to put America (and the UK) out of business in certain parts of the world. I wonder if Iran could hand America a trillion dollars (and a lot more for several other parts). 

Did I oversimplify matter for the average reader? Have a great Saturday. I am off to a decent Saturday and Vancouver is still 9 hours away from Saturday.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 3, 2025 · 12:18

A change to pacing

That is what I learned about an hour ago. We all have pacing and we tend to adhere to the pacing within us. In the last few days we see that most are setting the pacing to whatever President Trump says it is. Ukraine is suddenly the dictator and the war is wrong. President Putin is the poor poor puppy who is caught in the middle. This is not a truth. Russia attacked, Russia advertised that it was a small war of mere hours, days at the most. This is not a truth. The Russian-Ukrainian war is well over 1080 days old and it will continue at present. Even as America is too broke to intervene, they set the tempo and now Europe takes over, seeing how broke America actually is they have committed over a billion pounds to reinvigorate the Ukrainian missile defenses. I am assuming here that it is for defense purposes. It seems that UK PM Keir Starmer and President Emmanuel Macron of France are setting the tempo of averting Russian invasion tactics. In this the settings of stages are altering. Soon (I hope) the media will see the upcoming bankruptcy of America in the limelight. The simplest setting we see it that the world will realize that no matter how much spin America shows, how much they are bullying other to think that the rose garden of America is no longer in existence. You see, I saw at least 5 years ago that the current $36,220,000,000,000 in federal debt requires at least $724,400,000,000 in interest payments (based on the 2% rule) and the IRS reported that in the fiscal year 2024, the US federal government collected $4.9 trillion in revenue. That leaves America with only 85%, 15% goes to paying the interest of the debt they have now. And all this whilst the 2025 budget proposes $11.4 billion in discretionary funding and $4 billion in mandatory funding. Can you see the setting? They merely have 85% of 4.9 trillion available whilst they set out a budget that is 271% of what they have. Whenever did that go smoothly? There is no “We have big options coming” or “AI will save America” it is too late for that (apart from AI being an actual reality for well over a decade). The non America nations are catching on and as such I was not surprised that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia took steps like the Saudi Gazette showed me an hour ago. The story (at https://www.saudigazette.com.sa/article/649806) is showing me through ‘Saudi Arabia invites misguided individuals abroad to return home under amnesty offer: State Security chief’.

Here we see “Saudi Arabia has invited misguided individuals abroad, who were exploited by external entities to attack the Kingdom, to return home without facing consequences, as long as they were not involved in grave crimes, according to President of State Security Abdulaziz Al-Howairini.” It makes sense. America has shown itself to be a lot less that an actual ally and when things get hard, nearly everyone will use these dissidents to harm the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and I personally don’t see America pulling punches. If they can get the President of America (President Trump) to do an Oliver Twist asking for up to a trillion, I reckon that many others will try to do the same and Saudi Arabia is still to some degree vulnerable to these dissidents trying attacks to the image of Saudi Arabia. Especially when the media is unwilling to report the actual news, merely partially limelight whatever gives them digital dollars. 

We have seen American options towards Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri (through the CIA) and there are additional setting towards this man, al whilst Al Jabri isn’t even in America, but in Canada. So I believe that this setting is close to essential and whilst we see “President of State Security Abdulaziz Al-Howairini emphasized that the state focuses on rehabilitation rather than punishment and assured that their return would not be publicized” we can see the damage reduction Saudi Arabia will have by these returning dissidents all whilst evading damage through involved extremist parties. So whilst we accept that we are given “The program’s latest episode focused on Saudi Arabia’s counterterrorism efforts, featuring top security officials who shared insights into the country’s progress in combating extremism in recent years.” I personally would like to add that it might not be enough. America has shown its tactics in the Ukrainian folly in the White House last week and I think at will be essential for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to seek actual allies, not wannabe when the going is good allies. I would personally like that the Commonwealth would be the ally of choice (I am a Commonwealthian) but I think that an alliance between China and Saudi Arabia is much more likely. When America goes under, it will be essential to have a strong deviance and Russia is not to be trusted, as such Europe and China are much safer choices. As America could drag Europe under to a much larger setting I believe the choice that remains is China and I don’t like a choice of one, As such I am voicing the need for the Commonwealth to step up. In light of the tariffs it seems that it would hand Canada an option of a new delivery address for the aluminum and steel they have. The UK could use that same setting and Saudi Arabia gets choice to get their goods from both the Commonwealth and China. This is merely a speculation on my side, but the merit for Saudi Arabia is decently clear.

So what will happen?
That remains to be seen, but the damage to Saudi Arabia will be reduced if this dissident plan goes into action. They might not get all the dissidents, but as the numbers of returning Saudi’s increase, the risk of damage its reduced and with that President of State Security Abdulaziz Al-Howairini made a stellar move. To that part of the equation I have little doubt. And I applaud creative thinking towards any solution, so this approach makes me happy. Families are reunited, risks are negated and impacts are lessened.

Have a creatively great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

March 2, 2025 · 06:25

What does it take?

That is the question, what does it take to get a conviction. In this case I am not even fussed about the guilty or innocent part. Any conviction is a deal closer, that is the setting of the law. What does it take? A case is started when there are settings that give rise to the guilt of a criminal. At that point, the police and investigators go to work to collect evidence to prove their point. The people get called into court and the trial starts. This is pretty much the law in action on a global status. So at what point does ANY prosecutor get years to make its case? 

So here we have the setting for Andrew Tate and Tristan Tate. They were accused of Human trafficking in 2022. That was almost three years ago. And they had been unable to leave Romania where they were arrested on suspicion of human trafficking in 2022. So in the logical mind, there was an accusation. And evidence was collected. Well, human trafficking takes evidence at that point the prosecutor produces the people who were trafficked and that set of a court case. So what took three years? 

On January 10th 2023 I wrote ‘Andrew Tate, the man, the exploited’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/01/10/andrew-tate-the-man-the-exploited/) at that point after reviewing some parts I wrote “The man was already a multi millionaire and he did this in numerous ways. So why would he exploit 6 women? What would be in it for him? I am not saying that this did not happen, I am asking if this might not have happened.” I raised the question as the prosecutors had been unable for months to get any traction on their prosecution. In addition we got (on YouTube of all places) some mogul giving us the ‘light’ that his daughter was a target.

At this point which I got in under a day that this was a witch hunt from some wannabe captains of industry who were after the jackpot that the Tate’s created and they wanted it. And at this point the setting becomes “Was the Romanian prosecution corrupt?” And then there was the misogynistic state. By the way ‘misogenistic’ means “strongly prejudiced against women”, and to be honest. The video’s I saw did not give the stage that he is AGAINST women. Well, they have strong convictions, but about all manner of things, not against women in particular. Look at the evidence, the Tate’s are kickboxers and their nature is to be in your face, up close and personal. Not my preferred way of dealing with people, but that is THEIR nature, basically the nature of all kickboxers. And many (basically all non-kickboxers) are not on that setting. In Andrew Tate and Piers Morgan we see all video’s that are in the open. The interview (at https://youtu.be/VGWGcESPltM?si=2XrGCQ9oBtE8MP5Q) should be watched to get a better view on him. And there I saw confirmations. So what gives? That is at the centre of all the issues. In the prosecution the Tate’s are under the magnifying glass and in 2 years Romanian law could not make a case. And when you look at the interview where Andrew is up to Piers and basically in his face. He was the straight talker, strong in convictions and the Romanians could not make a case? Was there ever a case? 

As set, almost three years ago, when I see the ‘other’ YouTube interview. I am still wholeheartedly convinced that the Tate’s were innocent. And now? I think that that the setting is that other Romanians take over a multi million dollar enterprise. So when will the BBC (et al) investigate that part of the setting? So when did anyone investigate Cosmin Gusa and Daria Gusa? What came of that part?

Still, now they are in America and the first setting we see is that Governor DeSantis gives us (yesterday) that they are not welcome. So why did he do that? We are given that “Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has warned controversial influencer Andrew Tate and his brother Tristan they are “not welcome” in the Sunshine State after they arrived there when Romania lifted travel restrictions for the pending criminal case against them.” So what illegalities did either Tate brother do? Perhaps the governor is shining the limelight on himself to appease women? 

I tend to seat myself on the side of Piers Morgan. I think that the in your face setting that Andrew Tate has is not my way and it is not the way pretty much any non-kickboxer has, but that does not make Andrew Tate guilty. Guilt is established by evidence and the Romanian law had nothing, not after two years and change. Perhaps it is time to set the stage to “The wrongly accused Andrew and Tristan Tate” and as I see it, the stage was created by the Tate’s and it seemingly went the wrong way. A setting of their own partial making. Leave it to the rest to take statements out of context. The media has buckets of examples that the media creates to set the flames to the creation of digital dollars.

That’s merely my point of view and I am happy to see that apparently I was right all along (going back to January 10th 2022. Not a bad result.

Have a great Sunday and Vancouver gets to Sunday in 45 minutes.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,