Category Archives: Law

November 6, 2024 · 00:24

iRan is not an Apple product

There is a larger setting in the world (predominantly the middle east). We are given by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce3yqzx72zno) ‘Iran’s supreme leader says enemies will receive ‘crushing response’’. I left it to the left at first (three days ago) for the reason that the entire Iran debacle is like hauling water to the sea. Where the text starts with “The US and Israel “will definitely receive a crushing response”, Iran’s supreme leader has said, following an Israeli attack on Iran a week ago.” It sounds nice, but Iran is limited to deliver attacks through terrorist fractions. It is too scared to attack directly. In the beginning it was about deniability, but that is gone now and Iran is on the verge of be labelled “a terrorist nation” by pretty much all nations. And it is scared of that as such it is trying to kiss up to Antonio Guterres. Yet Israel decided on October 13th “Israeli Foreign Minister Israel Katz reinforced on Sunday his decision to declare U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres persona non grata over what he described as a failure to condemn Iran’s missile attack and antisemitic and anti-Israel conduct.” There are other nations thinking that Guterres has outlived its usefulness as a UN tool (I speculate that Ukraine is one of them). So when we see the BBC give us “The threat comes as Iran assesses whether and how to respond to Israel’s attack last month, that Iran said killed four soldiers, which was in retaliation for an Iranian missile attack against Israel earlier in October.” There is only so much Iran can get away with and whilst the US is begging to leave the oil fields alone (they get a slice of that revenue I reckon). Iran is now losing whatever options they had. As I see it Robert F. Worth said it best “‘The Iranian Period Is Finished’. Hezbollah’s losses have led some in Lebanon to imagine a future without it.” You see Hamas might seen shelter behind civilian bodies there, but Hezbollah is merely a small part of the 5.5 million population and Israel has had enough. 

Now that U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has been called a persona non grata, the options for the UN will diminish a lot more and Hezbollah has none left. Their only option is for Iran to engage in a full scale war and Iran is hesitant to do so. With the attacks on Saudi Arabia (via Houthi proxy) they only stand the smallest of chances if other Arabian nations support them and those nations are not willing to do that (as I personally see it). And the issue continues (and worsens). The BBC also reported “Iran’s so-called “axis of resistance” is an alliance of Tehran-backed groups that include Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and well-armed groups in Iraq and Syria. Most have been designated as terrorist entities by some Western states.” Let me be clear, they merely voiced the words of Iran and there is the problem. Do you think that the BBC would have given Germany the ‘respect’ by calling it the third kingdom? (1933 – 1945) And the larger option becomes that ‘their’ axis of resistance is in shambles. The Hamas terrorists are hiding behind the population they claim to protect. Hezbollah terrorists are relying on exploding pagers and the rest of Hezbollah has no clue what to do and Houthi terrorists are in a dangerous position. Lloyds reported yesterday “Houthis’ reported to be earning an estimated $180m a month from illegal safe-transit fees paid by unnamed shipping agents to secure safe passage through the Red Sea” as well as a report from ynet news that ‘Houthis turn to social media to raise funds for war’, this tells me that they are now cash strapped and here the UN is close to useless. They might talk a nice talk but it seems to be finally falling on deaf ears. In the meantime a report a mere 15 hours ago gives us that Houthi forces are trying to align themselves with Al-Qaeda forces. This happened whilst one source gives us “the two terrorist groups agreed to put aside their differences and focus on weakening the Yemeni government” the beginning of all kinds of escalations. And that is the setting for Iran, or as the American voices state “Become Al-Qaeda’s bitch or fall alone”, I cannot vouch for that, but Iran depended on deniability and now that this is gone Iran faces the reality of going to war. So how long until that goes wrong? In all these settings the United Nations might be out of options as well (until a new CEO is elected). You see on October 24th we got to hear “UN Secretary-General António Guterres reiterated in a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday that his country’s on-going invasion of Ukraine violates the United Nations Charter and international law.” ‘Reiterated’? This has been going on for 10 years and now we see ‘reiterated’? I reckon that the insertion of North Korean troops is making this a larger stage. Basically it is now a world war. You see, there is no real definition, one that aligns with todays setting of “In order to qualify as a world war, at least one of three criteria must be met: the conflict takes place between multiple nations across the globe, battles are fought in many different locations, and the war must be fought against great powers with significantly advanced technology.” It now involves Russia, Ukraine and North Korea. At this point I believe that the setting of a World War is reached. You see one criteria was met and this reflects back unto Iran too. Because in this setting, Iran might be getting cozy with Russia, but Russia has its own brand of troubles and that is setting the grind in another direction. As such Iran loses whatever friends they thought they had. As such we are given “Saudi Arabia, Jordan and United Arab Emirates unite against Iran, with support from the United States.” A statement that is presumptuous, but lacks clear evidence (as I see it). It is likely to be true, but I have not seen that evidence. And in this setting Iran has two options, the first is to engage is all out war, the other is to drop the terrorist organisations Hezbollah and Houthi, leaving them to fend for themselves. 

I could be wrong but this is as I see it the political chessboard where we have three players. I would personally see a different stage where the board is used with the chess pieces of Chinese chess. It would be a decent challenge to get any player to actually win whilst the other two are hacking on the pieces and that applies to all sides in this equation. If we get a ‘dopey to dollars’ equation I reckon that Israel has a lead because Iran is about to lose two thirds of its ‘axis’ and that results in less pieces to move around and more exposure of its own pieces. And the number one weakness for Iran is that they cannot move their oil fields or oil infrastructure. That is the bottleneck for Iran, and they have less and less options for securing that financial option.

As I personally see it Iran is about to become ‘I ran’ and they now have no place to run to.  

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

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

October 29, 2024 · 15:28

Laughing Out Loud

Yup this happens too and in this case it was an article that Bloomberg showed its paying customers. I am not one of them. As such I am attaching the image that made me laugh.

I saw it about 8-10 hours ago and it had me rolling with laughter. So what gives? First the setting of ‘Consider Re-entering’ as I see it Barclays and other banks are strapped for capital and bleeding a client dry (service fees and commissions) is a tell tale story towards any bank trying to make a living. There is no consideration, there is merely the trap they put themselves in 10 years ago. As for the “capitalise on the kingdom’s growing need to access capital markets” is even more hilarious. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has options to consider HSBC, JP Morgan, Bank of America and the 5 largest banks in China. All stronger and more able than Barclays. There is also Credit Agricole and the Citigroup. All in the top 12, Barclays stands at 18. So there is the first part. In addition I can hand you Rothschild & Co. The one bank no one mentions. It’s value was around €18.1 billion a year ago, as such I reckon it is pushing well over €20 billion at present. Barclays has nowhere near that capital or those connections. I reckon that Rothschild can access around 20% more clients than Barclays can (a casual speculation by little old me). 

So why this action?
Well it started in 2012 when we were given “Barclays is fined for manipulating the benchmark Libor interest rate in 2012, after revelations stretching back to 2005” It’s CEO C. S. Venkatakrishnan didn’t forget about that, did he? Then we get 2014 when Reuters gave us ‘Barclays sued by Saudi developer for $10 billion’, so how did that end? We got “A Saudi real estate company has sued Barclays for $10 billion (6.24 billion pounds), claiming the bank ceased pursuing lease payments due from the Saudi government on military complexes in the kingdom in order to obtain a lucrative banking license there” when we were given (source: Reuters) “The company, Jadawel International, a unit of London-based MBI International Holdings Inc., claims Barclays “hatched a fraudulent scheme” to secure the rare Saudi banking license, selling out Jadawel in the process, according to the lawsuit filed in New York state Supreme Court on Tuesday” One says potato and the other claims tomato. In the end as far as I can tell Barclays won the dismissal. It doesn’t make them innocent, but the claimant could not prove guilt (as far as I can tell). And last but not least only this year we were given that Barclay was one of the players in getting Andrea Orcel “derivatives linked to Commerzbank for the Italian lender in the weeks before Berlin sold a stake earlier this month, sources familiar with the matter said. Barclays and Bank of America subsequently helped Orcel to effectively expand UniCredit’s holding in Commerzbank to the current level of about 21 per cent, they said asking not to be named discussing the private information” now, this last bit does not seem to be illegal, but the stakes against Barclay (all over Europe) are increasingly high and now they hope that Saudi Arabia gives them a chunk of business before they are forced to hand over their bank to any of the upper 15 banks. I say good luck to them. Yes there is all kinds of banking issues I am not familiar with, but governments need to work with banks that are cleaner then clean and as such I am entertaining howls of deriving laughter if Barclay thinks they are that. The LIBOR scandal took care of that. 

And lets be clear Barclay didn’t (as far as I know) hand the statement “Mistakes were made in the past and we have sanitised our structures and people to meet the challenge that a customer the size of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia brings”, nope, none of that. We were given “Barclay plc is considering re-entering Saudi Arabia as it looks to capitalise on the kingdom’s growing need to access capital markets”. I actually wonder if they would be allowed in the country at present. There are seemingly better viable candidates and that is before you consider Rothschild as a contender. 

I get it. I also tried to access Saudi Arabia as a partner (read: future owner) of my IP. I merely wanted 50 million, a Canadian passport and 2% of the revenue for 20 years. With my believe (a presented believe) that the idea would give them 6 billion annual and their investment to that would be 50 million (for happy old me). And this is about as decent as it gets. A mere 0.8% risk and that is at the time of the presentation. A mere trivial amount and I feel certain that this would have worked. There was one condition Microsoft was not allowed near it. Amazon would be OK, but Microsoft is a no go.

This is why I contacted Kingdom Holdings and Tencent Technology as well. They can drive the innovation I brought. As such I feel a stronger contender than Barclay ever could be (Yes, I am blowing my own horn).

So as I see it, re-entering a market when the others have seemingly had enough of you isn’t re-entering. It is running for the hills to avoid being taken over. But I am not a banking person, so what do I know.

Have a fun day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

October 28, 2024 · 07:43

The setting of coins

The BBC had an interesting article yesterday. I was drawn between two settings. There is nothing wrong with the article. It is a point of view and anyone has that right. My setting was that the dimensionality is wrong. Some see Iran as a wimpy weasel, others as a weaselly wimp. I think they are both at the same time. That is as far as the difference is seen. The BBC in the shape of Jeremy Bowen hands us ‘Iran faces hard choices between risks of escalation or looking weak’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm2742rynqgo). I don’t think they look weak, they are weak. When you have to rely on terrorists to bring your message across, you are weak. And the setting that this brings is that a stabilising effect that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia brought was torpedoed (for a lack of a better word) by Iran. Iran is so afraid to be the trivialising party in the middle east that they rely on three terrorist entities. Hamas, Hezbollah and Houthi forces. 

We are given “They must decide on the least bad of a series of difficult choices. At one end of the spectrum is hitting back with another wave of ballistic missiles. Israel has already threatened to retaliate again if that happens” And the options of a bad series of choices is ‘encouraged’ by the west. Politico brought me this month the setting of loopholes that were created to enable other players to sell Russian oil, all legal (which is why we call it a loophole), yet this wasn’t created for Russia. Russia got to exploit the loophole the west made for Iran (my presumptuous thinking). Do you really think that Iran could have played the game this long if they didn’t have that loophole?

We are then given “Iran’s official media in the hours before and after Israel’s attacks carried defiant statements that, at face value, suggest the decision to respond had already been taken. Its language resembles Israel’s, citing its right to defend itself against attack. But the stakes are so high that Iran might decide to walk its threats back” which sounds nice on paper, but the reality is that this weasel was hiding behind three terrorist organisation. Hamas has now been bombed back into the stone age and their leaders are hiding in Doha, Qatar (according to some sources). As far as I see it, Gaza did this to themselves. Hezbollah decided to rely on pagers and the top of Hezbollah basically messaged themselves to death. That is number two down. The assault was so complete that pretty much the entire top of Hezbollah blew themselves up. Who ever didn’t do this will follow soon I reckon. Then there is just the Houthi brach left. I reckon that the next 3-5 years amounts to Iran calling that branch with requests for the good of Shia Islam. Not sure how they will bring that news, but it is likely to take on that form. All the money that Iran invested would now be asked to validate through actions. Hamas has seemingly lost around 50% of its fighting force and the rest is dubious of continuing and finding real solutions for their family. Hezbollah has no top, this means that Iran needs to put advisors on the ground, or lose whatever they had left. And the Houthi’s will go in a new direction. As I personally see it, with the recruitment of child soldiers they are taking on the direction Hamas had and as some drone technology that evolved in the Ukraine, we will see soon a new frontier develop where drones can be sent to a generic location and start auto targeting a scope of realistic issues. There is every consideration that whatever drone abilities the Saudi government has will soon gain serious teeth. 

We are then given “Iran’s foreign ministry invoked its right to self defence “as enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter”. A statement said Iran believed it was both entitled and obligated to respond to foreign acts of aggression”, this sounds nice, but Iran played the terrorist card and has done so for years, which makes its statement baseless. We can see America ‘pleading’ with Israel not to hit the oil reserves and the loophole for oil makes it a desired move, but Israel has its own concerns. These terrorist actions are funded by Iran and defund their oil is a tactical move to temporary stop funding, making the tactic valid. As we see “The men in Tehran thought they had a better idea than all-out war. Instead, Iran used the allies and proxies in its so-called “axis of resistance” to attack Israel. The Houthis in Yemen blocked and destroyed shipping in the Red Sea. Hezbollah rocket fire from Lebanon forced at least 60,000 Israelis from their homes.” We are confronted with the harsh reality that Iran is considering extreme options and that is the final straw for Israel. They could bring to bare 125 missiles on Iranian oil fields and with that Iran will have no more options. A setting that was accelerated since 1979 comes to a stop when the oil becomes to tainted to be sold, it will be the oil that glows in the dark. And the world is fearing that moment. Too many stakeholders with their slice of pie that came from the oil loophole will end and there will be a lot of voices trying to delay this point. On the upside it would enable Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to set some solid work to make these two the solidifying hub of international cooperation on the Arabian peninsula. 

The largest question for the world will be what will Iran decide and they could find a way to make hay out of that. Because any escalation will lead to the end of Iran, a path that started 6000 years ago. It is anyones guess if the Iran of today realises that they are out of survivable options. I see three paths and two remain silent because it amounts (without evidence) to fear mongering. And I am not inclined to openly support that view. The play nice card sounds nice, but it would require Iran to disband sections of the IRGC as well as stop supporting terrorism. Will Iran see that light? When people have been on that violent streak for decades, it is hard to stop. I get that, but does Iran have any resolution left? Empty threats will not bring home the veal as they say.

Well, it’s Monday now, so have a great new day. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Military, Politics, Science

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

October 19, 2024 · 17:26

Kettle, pot and colouring

Yup, that is the setting for today. I saw the news yesterday or the day before and it angered me. The article (at https://cpj.org/2024/10/saudi-arabia-sentences-cartoonist-mohammed-al-ghamdi-to-23-years/) from the CPJ (committee to protect journalists) is as misguided as it is hypocritical. In the first instance I do not know Mohammed al-Ghamdi, I never saw his cartoons or red anything from him. As far as I am concerned as long as the CPJ does not hold its western journalists and editors up to any kind of standard, it needs to shut up. Yesterday I touched on the Politico article regarding Prince Khalid bin Bandar al Saud and it opened up some issues for me. There is more, the media neglects the interesting ‘good’ Saudi Arabia does and trivialises the harm that Saudi Arabia gets from Houthi terrorists. As such I say that the CPJ needs to shut up.

We are given that “a Saudi cartoonist for the Qatar-based Lusail newspaper, who was sentenced on an undisclosed date in 2024 to 23 years in prison on charges that his cartoons were sympathetic to Qatar and insulted the Saudi government” Saudi Arabia has laws, they might not be the laws the west heralds, but this is a Saudi event. I might not agree, but if I am in Saudi Arabia I would have to adhere to Saudi Laws and there is the chance that my articles fall in bad waters with Saudi Arabia. I do not know as I am not privy to those laws. As far as I know I never known and intentionally insulted anyone in the Saudi government (I might be wrong in this).

Countries have laws, the west (Commonwealth and Europe) for the most on the issue of freedom of speech and as such I tend to use that freedom of speech, yet in that instance I try to maintain a civil tongue. And when Charlie Hedbo was killed, I also supported France, I stood at a vigil in Sydney. I was not aware to the stage that drove someone to kill Charlie Hedbo, but I was in agreement that we had to protest this because Charlie Hedbo was not anti-Muslim. He drew on several occasions images that would have offended the church (the Vatican), as such he was equally ‘diplomatic’ on all faiths. 

Yet this is not about Charlie Hedbo, this is about the double standard the CPJ uses and until they hold western media to a serious level of account, they need to put up or shut up. 

This is pretty much it. I did not check some of the claims made and I am not saying these claims weren’t true. We get “It is time to break this longstanding pattern of imprisoning journalists. Saudi authorities must release al-Ghamdi and drop all charges against him” and I am not opposing this, but I find it interesting that numbers and reasons for imprisonment aren’t given. It this is about less then 5 journalists, it seems a trivial matter (compared to Turkey and a few other places). And lets not forget these Saudi Laws are all documented and as such these ‘journalists’ (optionally a mere one cartoonist) might have decided to leave the country, was that done? 

The CPJ gives us that 50 Journalists were killed in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory in 2024. So, where is the stink on these 50 journalists? Oh, and why is it “Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory” and why do we not see the segregation between “West Bank and the Gaza Strip” and “Israel”? It was a simple setting, but the CPJ seems to use a simplistic brush for that. And between 2018 and 2024 we see merely one seemingly killed and I raised plenty of articles between 2018 and 2024 shedding doubt on that setting. Another article gives us that 10 people were imprisoned all whilst the 2023 numbers have a top 10 (Saudi Arabia wasn’t there) and the top is China with 44 imprisoned, Russia with 22, Iran with 17, and Turkey with 13 imprisoned. Yet in all of these cases, we see an absence of reasons and there is the issue. The (western) press has in the last 10 years lost pretty much all credibility, as such a reason for imprisonment is required. I have an issue with the CPJ because a population with less credibility than a drug pusher in a school yard has several issues and I do not think the CPJ is in a position to demand any kind of charge drop until the status quo of journalists is re-established with a level of credibility that most of us find acceptable. The chase for digital dollars in the last decade pretty much diminished their right for a ‘protected’ status. 

People might not like my view on the matter, but that is my preview on the matter. Perhaps the CPJ would like to rewrite the article in something more palatable?

Have a great Saturday.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

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

October 18, 2024 · 10:17

An interesting twist

There is an interesting  twist on the premise of timing happening. It is given to us by Politico. The headline ‘Khashoggi death: Saudi ambassador reveals new details’ and I have more than one reason. We read the statement by Prince Khalid bin Bandar al Saud. I would like to add that I presented ‘evidence’ (of a sort) on July 4th 2017 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2019/07/04/demanding-dismissal/) with ‘Demanding Dismissal’. And after that a little more on the 10th of September in ‘Squid rings of theatrics’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/09/10/squid-rings-of-theatrics/) it is nice that others are catching on and I do not blame Prince Khalid bin Bandar al Saud on this, but the media? Yes, the media is pricing itself out of the game really fast now. The article gives us “Speaking to POLITICO’s Power Play podcast, Ambassador Prince Khalid bin Bandar al Saud rejected the claim, insisting that the Saudi royal family continues to oppose the version of events backed by the U.S. as well as the U.K. And he disclosed that those the regime claims were responsible are still alive — casting rare light on the fate of the individuals blamed for the assassination”. Yet here he forgets one player. The United Nations and in particular Agnes Calamard (aka Eggy Calamari), I still have the UN document online where close to a dozen pieces on debate come into play. We also get “A detailed, declassified 2021 CIA report concluded that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had approved the operation during which Khashoggi was brutally murdered and dismembered, possibly after an attempt to kidnap him in the consulate where he had gone to pick up documents for his wedding to his Turkish fiancée” showing us the larger folly (read: failure of the CIA) to dig into the truth. Don’t get me wrong, I was not part on any of this, as such I am a bystander at best, but I can read and illuminate the stupidity of others is a part time hobby of me, as such I found 5 items in the first hour giving us doubt on the entire issue and what is more important, the media neglected actions on ANY of this. More important they were speculatively deciding to fuel this fire to gain digital dollars for their presumptuous aiding the United Nations, as well as other players having the need to bash Saudi Arabia.

One hour that a simple man like me needed and I handed everyone the goods on what I found and where I found it (except the ‘claimed’ evidence that he was on Bora Bora with a mistress, because there was no evidence on this claim). 

Then we get to “Speaking to host Anne McElvoy, the kingdom’s top diplomat in London described the death and dismemberment of Khashoggi as “an awful crime — a stain on our country, not just the government but every Saudi out there,” while firmly denying any complicity by the powerful Saudi monarch.” My issue on this is ‘Where are the body parts?’ I saw the image that the Daily Mail giving us (I believe it was the Daily Mail) an image of some random person holding a trash-bag, which could have been any trash. That paper lined itself with protection stating somewhere there ‘could have been’ and/or ‘we suspect’ all tidied up. I personally believe that here Prince Khalid bin Bandar al Saud was wrong. You see, this is not a stain on Saudi Arabia, but a stain on the media. To the need of (what I expect to be) the drive for digital dollars the media made themselves the culprit, losing whatever credibility they thought they had.

And for me it is a nice twist on this all. You see I presented these facts going back more than 5 years and in the meantime the media, as well as (wannabe) writers Bradley Hope and Justin Scheck who gave us the fictional story ‘Blood and Oil’ they all ran the money mill to stamp out their revenue using Saudi Arabia as the source of their income. 

The nice twist is that these western lies are now pointing in another direction, is it an option? I think it dies, but the likelihood that Israel did this is remote at best. Who else? Well I have some ideas on this but they are highly speculative and completely absent of evidence. I’ll let the media dig their own hold deeper in this.

But this twist that Politico handed me is putting a smile on my face. On this rainy Friday 5 years of looking into the matter is showing a new sign of life and that is not the best part of this. What was once ‘massive’ evidence can now be proclaimed as useless. You see, none of these reports did a forensic investigation into the tapes of Khashoggi’s ‘interrogation’ the reports give us that no one listened to the entire tape. There is no forensic evidence on the tape and that has been cleverly ‘hidden’ in the full texts. The one part that could have made the Khashoggi case a real case was ignored by the Media, the CIA and the United Nations. 

So how do you like your kippers? With or without aioli?

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

October 12, 2024 · 16:11

The afterthought

It is Reuters that gave us ‘Exclusive: Stop Israel from bombing Iran’s oil sites, Gulf states urge US’ (at https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/stop-israel-bombing-irans-oil-sites-gulf-states-urge-us-2024-10-11/) Now normally this doesn’t bother or alert me, but after the 6th when I wrote ‘Is it merely political?’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/10/06/is-it-merely-political/) where we got to see “A loophole allows middlemen in countries like Turkey, China and India to refine Russian oil in petrol and diesel before selling it elsewhere — exempt from sanctions. According to a report first seen by POLITICO, Western countries spent $2 billion on this rebranded fuel in the first half of 2024” Now we see Gulf states all ‘worried’ about Iran, or are they perhaps worried about the cheap deal they have from Iran counting in the billions? A setting that most of us ignored as we were unaware of the loophole. But now, even after Iran threatens Israel, we are given “Gulf states are lobbying Washington to stop Israel from attacking Iran’s oil sites because they are concerned their own oil facilities could come under fire from Tehran’s proxies if the conflict escalates, three Gulf sources told Reuters” and in the article we aren’t given any names are we? Which Gulf sources? I think that we are entitled those answers, are we not? Isn’t it interesting that Reuters missed that beat, but then the media is becoming less and less reliable. And it makes sense that the first thing Israel goes after is the money, hence the oil. And in all of this Gulf states are urging the US to stop Israel from bombing oil sites? Who are the stake holders, what Gulf nations are involved and how is that money flowing? More important how can we track that money. How can we expose these exploiters? 

These are all questions that are derived from the article on the 6th of October that Politico gave us. If they rebranded 2 billion of Russian oil, there is nothing to stop us thinking that Iran gave others a lot more and from the gulf states there is plenty of players around to do whatever it takes to get a share of a mere 50 million and this has been going on for a while (a speculative thought). The Russia story came out relatively fast, but the Iran dilemma has been going on for decades and now with the Hezbollah eradication as well as the pounding of Hamas, these stake holders are worried that their well dries up and now they are speculatively crying like little bitches that their free ride is drying up. OK, that might have been a little over the top but the sentiment comes across, does it not? Now, I could be wrong, one sides does not prove the other. To put it simplistically every cube is a orthotope, not every orthotope is a cube. As such what is happening in Russia might not happen in Iran. On the other hand, what was set in motion to be applied to Iran was pretty much a setting for Russia as well. And the media isn’t asking questions, why not?

Until recently when Politico showed us the loophole no one asked questions and now they should have asked a few questions, yet they still are not. How weird is that?

Apply that to the fact that we are merely give “three Gulf sources told Reuters” and no one wakes up? Why is that?Journalists are not that dim, as such, I suspect that at least one stakeholders has a larger finger in the journalism pie of Reuters. Just a thought to consider.

Have a great weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

October 9, 2024 · 23:48

Personal perception

It is always funny to see greed and stupidity in one compact package. In this instance I am introducing you to the American department of Justice. The one that will not prosecute Microsoft, the one that hands their economy to China and the one that throws away whatever economic options they have. Hobbled by ego trippers without a clue, chastised by a failing religion, one nation under the league of flaccid atheists. 

Is that clarity enough? In comes the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62504lv00do) giving us ‘Google threatened with being broken up by US’ where we see “The US government is considering seeking the break-up of the world’s biggest search engine, Google, which it accuses of causing “pernicious harms” to Americans.” Really? The US government is accusing Google of “irreparable harm done through evil or insidious corrupting or undermining”? Who is the idiot making that accusation? Lets have a rundown

It was founded in 1998 by Sergey Brin and Larry Page. They released Google search and they were clever they had the IP properly patented. Two clever dudes designed something that Microsoft never considered. Microsoft who was licking the rear end of the CFO’s of the fortune 500 were outsmarted by two students who gave people a system they needed, they handed system the people needed. So in this daytime and age, who would you rather appeal to? 500 persons who think they know it all, or a few million who are happy to be grateful? One implies money, the other gives you clusters of happy workers. In 2010 they improved the search engine making it twice as fast. At that point they had the cornerstone of modern telecom electronics. And  that is when 4G came out. And Google became the power player it is today. The story is a little more complex but this is the gist of it. The power player who proclaimed to be innovating were surpassed by two students who actually were innovative. Apple took the option of letting the innovators be and offered their technology for a large payout. 

There is more to all this, but the lowdown is that innovators recognise other innovators (YouTube) and they came up with Google Ads and in all that time the so called innovators (Microsoft) couldn’t even get close to what Google designed. They failed to offer a decent search engine (Bing) and they had nothing to offer against Google Ads (Microsoft Advertising) they failed 4 times over. And now we get stakeholders to push for breaking up Google. So let’s see how stupid that is.

In 2019 Huawei created HarmonyOS. In 5 years it created a decently worthy opponent to Android. It is now available in 77 languages. Last year it created HarmonyOS NEXT. It allows several smart devices to talk to one another. We can speculate that Harmony OS NEXT is more than a worthy opponent to Google. It will allow Huawei to hand the people in Europe, Africa, Asia and the Middle East with mobile solutions that will be happily accepted in the houses there. That is what the DoJ is achieving. And this is not the first time they are interfering where they seemingly have little knowledge. And for me it could open another door (yay me). 

All this matters because Huawei Harmony OS NEXT will enable seamless interactions among a wide array of device forms, from earphones and automobile head units to smart TVs and mobile phones. Google does this with the devices they have, but until now they had no real competitor, Microsoft was too soft and not enough micro and beside that they are spread too thin. Now that the DoJ is seemingly planning to break up Google Huawei gets a nice clean playing field to promote their brand outside the USA and with that America loses more and more market share. So whatever deceitful claim America makes They are about to be sliced and diced in the mobile industry by Huawei, TikTok (ByteDance) for video and on the electronic field by Tencent. Three companies that have real innovators and the one innovator that needs the space to continue their work is hobbled by “If the DOJ pushes ahead with the proposed remedies – and they are accepted by the judge in the case – it would represent arguably the biggest regulatory intervention in the history of big tech” which hands a clear victory to Chinese entrepreneurs. How silly they are.

As I see it, they are about to lose seven times over with the losses they have and looking at timeline of the innovators, the stakeholders as I personally see it are handing Chinese companies massive victories and I reckon that those ‘siding’ with America will change sides to the Chinese corporations before the ink dries of whatever bankrupt statement America gives the world and with the 35 trillion dollars they have less then 4 years to avoid that and I have no idea what happens to whatever Wall Street will side with. This is my personal perception of what is about to happen. Many will say that I will be wrong and I could be, but there is too much data siding with me and whilst these stakeholders get politicians to side with the need to line their pockets America keeps on losing more and more. 

In 2022, Saudi Arabia signed $4 billion worth of arms agreements with China, including deals for armed drones, ballistic missiles. In 2024 it has grown to $50 billion. This is partially important as I wrote on the 21st of February 2021 ‘How to miss out on $20,000,000,000’ And I was wrong, I stand corrected. Their revenue grew to $50 billion a mere three years later. I saw it coming a mile away and now it is happening. And the DoJ is making it worse. As I see it Google, Adobe, IBM and Oracle are the last of the real innovators and the DoJ is about to hobble one of these four, it will soon be that bad. 

As such, is my perception wrong? It might be, but my presumption has been a lot more correct than it has been wrong. No matter how you view it the entire Google mess is being mishandled (as I personally see it) pretty much from the beginning. 

And now America gives the option for a much larger win to Huawei Technologies. It will not impact  America, but Google is very likely to lose market share on several fronts. There is a much larger loss if Huawei would include TikTok on every Huawei mobile. Should these mobiles come with HarmonyOS NEXT the damage would increase and with their multi sharable sides Apple revenue would also be impacted as well as a loss of revenue to all kinds of accessories. These losses of revenue will hit Apple as well as Google. As I see it a simple creation of imbalance by people who (by my reckoning) have no clue on the internet of things. What a lovely present ego makes for others.

Enjoy the coming day.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Science

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

October 9, 2024 · 01:07

When the credit card stops

That is the setting for the US of A. The BBC gives us ‘US debt would increase under Harris and soar under Trump – study’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce81g9593dro). We are given that there is basically no escape for America, I have articles going back to 2018 where I give sight of what is coming. Oh, and by the way at what point do you cancel someones credit card? We are given “Donald Trump’s campaign proposals would increase the US national debt by double the amount Kamala Harris’s would, according to a new analysis by a non-partisan group.” We are also given “Trump would add $7.5tn” now consider that the interest on this would be around 450 billion, just on the increase alone. Now consider that the total debt is 500% larger and now consider that the US economy needs to come up 2.25 Trillion EACH YEAR to deal with the interest alone and I saw that coming 5 years ago and the news media and these so called financial experts never saw this? I do not believe this. We were all told and presented a story. And they are about to lose whatever leeway they thought they could hang over us. The media was the tool some were able to use (with what I speculatively see) as stake holders to ‘bring’ the presentation. And the media seemingly was left in the dark, or were they?

The problem is that we cannot see or prove any of this. But consider that I saw this coming for over 5 years and I do NOT have an economic degree. What makes you think that I am more clever than these financial wizard in the media (CNN, BBC, WSJ, the Guardian) and many more? Do you really think that they made a miscalculation? They isn’t nickel and dime stuff, this is about 35 trillion dollars. How much sneaky bookkeeping is involved to put such an amount under the tables? This would require the cooperation of media, banks and governments. So when your retirement falls away, who will you blame? The media? The Banks? The Governments? Seems ludicrous, almost some crazy conspiracy. But consider the facts. Consider the evidence and the avoidance of the media to address certain economic facts. That is not some cooky setting, the evidence is out there on the internet. Consider all the media and consider what the media never gave us. I can tell you more, but it is time to consider what I am telling you here and make your own mind up. 

Now consider that the EU had six trillion euros in taxable revenue in 2022. Now we see that America is optionally about to increase its debt more that the taxable income of 27 countries and it does not raise an issue? Now we know that plenty of EU countries have a GDP that equals an apple and an egg. But together they should amount to a fair amount considering that these countries have a total population of 449.2 million, which is a lot more than America (about 34%). Now consider that people pay taxation, companies pay taxation as well. But the tax breaks are mostly for companies. As such I look at the people. There is a baseline that extremely roughly applies and when that baseline is applied the numbers do not match up as I personally see it and I have seen this setting for over 5 years and the media ignores it all. 

Could I be wrong?
Yes definitely, but overall certain numbers create levels of equilibrium and I see that these numbers aren’t here at the moment. And the media seeing these debt levels fail them could also be seen as optional evidence. So how does it work? It seems clear that the media can no longer be trusted (in my opinion). So how to get the numbers? I cannot give you my sources, so you are a little on your own in that regard.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

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

October 8, 2024 · 23:53

Making money

Yup, you can make money in three ways. You create it, you steal it, or you can make the government reimburse you. The third one is one that has its own risks. Yet the BBC informs us ‘Customers of failed crypto firm FTX set for refunds’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0qz3dg21vqo) Where we are given “Creditors of the collapsed cryptocurrency exchange FTX are poised to receive up to $16.5bn (£12.6bn) under a bankruptcy plan approved in the US on Monday.” And we get more with “Last year, former boss Sam Bankman-Fried was convicted of stealing customer funds ahead of the collapse and later sentenced to 25 years in prison. The deal will allow former customers to recover a sum worth about 119% of what they had in their accounts at the time of bankruptcy, according to FTX.” As such it seems that these customers get 19% on top of what they had in their accounts. There are ups and downs. We are also given “Some have suggested the repayment in cash will not match the loss of crypto holdings that would be worth far more today had they not been stolen. The value of bitcoin has more than tripled since November 2022.” As such I would surmise that someone went shopping with an approximate 180% of the total of sums. As the outstanding bill was set to “$8bn in customer funds were reported missing, not including debts to investors and others. Mr Ray’s team has since recovered assets worth $14.7-$16.5bn” As such 8 billion was found missing, Roughly double was retrieved and these customers only get 119%? I think there is a stinky fishy smell coming from the realm of banks. They might small consolation that Sam Bankman-Fried is convicted to 9125 days in Hotel Sing-Sing, but that might be merely the impression some feel. You see, the larger premise might be that we are given “the approval of the plan was a “significant milestone” in the firm’s efforts to repay the money to people and firms in more than 200 jurisdictions around the world” but the underlying issue that the BBC seems to ‘ignore’ is that people like Elisabeth Holmes and Sam Bankman-Fried (aka SBM) are given way to much leeway. Holmes was given 11 years imprisonment, where the Guardian on May 8th gave us that her sentence was reduced by two years and four months before original date. As such her sentence is reduced by almost 20%, so what reductions is SBM looking forward to? If is is a similar 20%, he could be out by 2044 and if he plays nice (good behaviour) he might be out even sooner that that. As such we might surmise that crime pays nowadays. And the media will milk these two for whatever they can be milked for. 

Enjoy the day ahead of you.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

October 6, 2024 · 20:05

Is it merely political?

That was the thought I had. It came from Politico, as such I would believe that it was political. Yet the larger premise is on the setting of circumstance. This sounds weirdly spooky, but it is the best I can offer. The story (at https://www.politico.eu/article/vladimir-putin-war-economy-pain-saudi-arabia-sink-global-oil-prices-energy-russia-opec/) starts with ‘Putin’s war economy faces pain if Saudis sink global oil prices’ which is a partial truth, but it goes further then that. We are given “A Saudi move to grab market share will squeeze the Kremlin’s finances, experts argue” which is only a partial truth. The entire part is followed by “Riyadh is increasingly frustrated with other petrostates’ failure to coordinate on cutting supply to raise oil prices to about $100 per barrel — up from the current $70. Oil traders say Saudi Arabia is now set to respond by flexing its muscles and turning the tables on smaller producers, exporting more oil itself to grab market share and profits, even as prices fall.” We are also given “The Financial Times reported last week that Saudi Arabia could abandon its long-held ambitions to limit the crude supply to push prices to around $100 a barrel. Oil market experts have little doubt that Saudi Arabia has the enormous production and export capacity to change tactics and gun for market domination through volume instead.” In this view I need to align a few positions. What is missing is that America (the United Kingdom also) are depending in keeping oil cheap. So that is missing. Hanging it on the Russian needs is a bit dorky. Yes, they both matter, but the US an EU need for cheap oil missing as a pre-made need, is just dorky (I can’t find a better word for this). You see when there is a lack of a commodity prices go up and now this fails? The world requires (at present) that 2.4 million barrels per day pumped more than now and that is not done. I actually speculated this a year ago when I stated that we can pump 4 barrels at $3, or 3 barrels at $4. The amount gained is still the same but at 25% less oil. It is a simple equation (and an incorrect version) but the the premise remains. I went through to the next stage that Saudi Arabia could pump 2 barrels as the price goes up to $6, still the same revenue but now at half the oil delivered. This is how commerce works on commodities. I still doubt the statement that the $100 per barrel cannot be reached, I merely believe that certain stakeholders want the premise to keep their pockets lined. How? I cannot tell, I am not an oil person, I merely use it through various means. So what gives? 

When we get to ““The global economy is fairly sluggish and oil demand is not as high as the Saudis would want,” said Ajay Parmar, director of oil markets analytics at commodities intelligence firm ICIS.” I have issues here. You see, this means that the Russia delivers all oil. There is not a lack of demand, some people are playing a high end game to keep their pockets lined. If I had it my way (pretend that I am the new CEO of Aramco, a very fake one) I would stop 5.5 million barrels a day from reaching the US, EU and UK, in the combination 3,2 and .5 it would take less than 90 days for it all to implode. As Tesla is more and more lacking is quality, the other nations will need 2-3 years to overcome their downfall and in that time China is the new superpower with America stumbling over the edge of the abyss. That is clear in my (optionally wrong) point of view. The setting that Politico gives is too partial and slightly too flawed. 

Yes Russia has a problem and they are welcome to the problems they get to harvest now. A second problem is “Russia’s fossil fuel profits have also risen by 41 percent in the first half of this year alone, according to Moscow’s finance ministry, despite Western sanctions imposed over the war in Ukraine.” I don’t doubt these numbers, but who paid for that oil? I doubt is was merely China, North Korea and India. Although these countries were involved. I saw last year that India was buying some of the oil, China is a definite and I guess that North Korea had to pay for their weapons and it seems like a logical choice for them to accept oil as payment. So who more? 

Politico should have stated “Russia’s fossil fuel profits have also risen by 41 percent (from 1M barrels to 1.41M barrels)” but they didn’t if Russia only sold 50,000 barrels it will not be an issue, but that is not the case, is it?

Now if you doubt my reasoning. That is fine. But we have seen plenty of issues where prices go up the moment that commodities has a higher demand. Yet the article does not give us that does it? And who is Ajay Parmar? This article leaves me with plenty of questions and no answers. So in all this, Is Russia in actual trouble? To some degree, but I see this as an alternative way for Saudi Arabia to give in to the west requiring cheap oil. I personally believe that Politico missed their mark and as such loses credibility as such. The one part that I do see is “A loophole allows middlemen in countries like Turkey, China and India to refine Russian oil in petrol and diesel before selling it elsewhere — exempt from sanctions. According to a report first seen by POLITICO, Western countries spent $2 billion on this rebranded fuel in the first half of 2024” As such that should be the story and the story is that more and more nations are fuelling Russian revenue through refining Russian oil and filling their pockets. As such there is a momentum being built, one that is not addressed and one that is trivialised as such I expect that plenty of newspapers will fuel their revenue by posting this story. The 41% is now shown to be big business, especially when we see Turkey and India and how they are short on cash pretty much all of the time.

So we are seeing a larger stage. In the first on where is Russian oil going to and in the second what countries are fuelling their demands for cheap oil? A nice spreadsheet would have been nice, but that was a part that Politico oversaw (I guess).

Still as we see one part, we also see the part that some want us to see, appointed awareness. A combination of social awareness and the influence of appointing. A formal arrangement to create a designed social awareness. The ability to understand a situation as the offical parties would like others to see them. But as I see it, this will be at the expense of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Is that fair all whilst Russia is handed loophole after loophole, as long as the west gets its oil cheap. How is this not exploitation? 

Consider what is being done and at what expense? The question is simple enough. 

Enjoy the Sunday you have left to you.

4 Comments

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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