Category Archives: Law

A national consequence

I saw the news earlier, but I had to consider a few things, one of them not so really pro-Turkey, another set to the stage of me wondering what was going on. It all started with the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64360528) where we are given ‘Turkey condemns ‘vile’ Sweden Quran-burning protest’, and as I was wondering what was going on I saw “Rasmus Paludan, a politician from the far-right Stram Kurs”, it made me wonder what was needed. And then it occurred to me, why was Turkey the only one protesting? What if Egypt, the UAE, Iraq, optionally Iran, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Saudi Arabia, Oman and Turkey all combined their protest? What if the EU had to deal with retributions from the OPEC nations closing the oil tap a little (500K barrels a day less for the EU), the other nations stopping import of Danish and Swedish goods? Would that wake them up? We might think that a person like Rasmus Paludan can insult islam again and again, but why allow it? We have rules and laws on religious prosecution, religious discrimination and should it end there? What if we make anti religious protests that continue to insult a religion (like burning a Quran) as well. Perhaps we need to state that they need to burn bibles as well, how does that go over?

I cannot claim that I have any solution here, but the levels of inactions that I see against Rasmus Paludan are getting out of hand. As such I think inaction becomes a larger issue and there is actually no real option, so what happens when the EU gets a 10% fuel rise, does that wake them up? I do not care what religion you like, and what religion you hate, but if you go as far as openly insulting that religion things get out of hand and it becomes time to act, inaction is no longer acceptable. If you allow a chaos and hatred seeder like Rasmus Paludan to continue, I reckon you get whatever is coming to you. I personally believe that when civility goes missing to this degree nations have failed on several levels. That whilst we need to realise that Sweden has 5%-10% Muslims, that is up to a million, Denmark has roughly the same percentage size, in numbers it is about half that size, but the population of Denmark is about 50% smaller. When you go out to insult that size of a population there needs to be consequences and even as people like Rasmus Paludan think that it is merely up to 10%, so that they can easily win such fights, they need to consider that there is a larger consequence and that needs to be shown to that kind of people and I reckon that Turkey alone cannot do that, it might block NATO access for Sweden, but a larger lesson needs to be taught and that is where OPEC comes in, where the bulk of its population is Muslim, so what happens when the tap is closed even just a little? For Sweden with its shortages it might become disastrous quickly, I am not sure about Denmark at present. 

Do we need to act? Yes, we all need to act. We cannot let people like Rasmus Paludan to spread hatred to the degree they do, the consequences are too dire to consider, as such I reckon it is time to fight such hatred by letting these nations be overwhelmed by shortages and make sure that everyone knows WHY this was done. You see if you hate muslims THAT much, you can get the oil from Russia or Venezuela or America. But that gets you into other deep waters, does it not? No matter how it plays out, we are too far beyond the levels of inaction we see now and consider that OPEC could close the tap by 1 million barrels of oil a day, or more. What does that give you? Not much and until summer that impact might end up being disastrous.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Raging against the media

I promised this piece and I was a little dragging my feet and also in need of checking certain facts. You see, the media is having a go at Andrew Tate, a person I actually do not care about, but the media, that corrupt institution is one I hate with intensity. It is therefor essential to give idiots like Alice Evans (as I personally see it) a little taste of their own medicine.

You see How much coverage did the BBC give Tyler Shulz? The person that started the clarity of criminal activities by Elizabeth Holmes, founder of that joke named Theranos. You and your peers were all about praising Holmes when it suited your needs. So how much checking did you do into Elisabeth Holmes? If you cannot put your vagina where it needs to be, you can at least put your vagina where it should be and that is in a chair in a Romanian court making sure that everything is reported honestly and correctly. You see, to answer your question on how people ‘How schools are tackling his influence’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/education-64234568). Yet how much influence did Elisabeth Holmes have, she is a convicted criminal now. Did you check? How about the man behind FTX? Sam Bankman-Fried is being investigated. So how about him? How about he just ‘found’ the 5 billions missing, billions till lost. Yet no one is asking how someone misplaces 8 billion, did you? So why would we need to tackle influence? He is innocent until proven guilty, that is the real setting, not the one the media is painting. And lets be clear, at present the bulk of the media has less credibility than a crack pusher in a schoolyard. You and your peers made that so. So when we see “the problem is, she says, Andrew Tate is also pathetic” we accept that this is your view on the matter, not the one that teacher Charlotte Carson has on the issue. You see, Andrew Tate went from nothing to $700,000,000 that is a reality, you all embraced cash is king, so you enabled him. Members of press, members of society, members of government. Then there is the reference of “Taliban beliefs”. He might be Muslim, that does not make him Taliban. And there are a few Middle Eastern papers that see him not as the prominent person they would like him to be. But here we are in the west where cash is king making him pretty much an emperor. As I see it more of an emperor than Jack Dorsey who you and your peers refused to report on. It was so much easier to get digital dollars out of Elon Musk. How is that going for you Alice?

And now we see “Tate, a former kickboxer, has millions of online followers – despite being banned from sites including TikTok, Instagram, Facebook and YouTube for misogynistic comments.” I cannot comment on things I did not see, but here is the crunch. He is banned and criminals like Elisabeth Holmes? Are they banned? And when the case of Sam Bankman-Fried is decided, will he be banned if found guilty? That is beside the captains of industry who liquidate their companies and not pay staff, you will happily give those people a pass too. Have you not figured out that you are part of the problem and not the solution? Now, if Andrew Tate is found guilty will you dig into that, or just let it fly? You do remember that the hell you and your peers allowed Tyler Shulz had to face is on you and your peers, do you see that?

You failed to do your job to the degree you needed to in the cases of Elisabeth Holmes and Jack Dorsey, so how much longer will you hand out filtered information? When will you go back to reporting the news? I am curious about that part because most reporters have eagerly stopped reporting the news in several places as I personally see it. In the end if he is found guilty and you want to do a piece on how schools are tackling his influence, I have no complaints. At that point he is a convicted person, but you better make sure that you report on the actions of Elisabeth Holmes and Jack Dorsey as well. The media is for the most no longer something that should be recognised with positive feelings. You, your peers and their need for digital dollars made that so and that has been an issue for years. That is how I see it. So fix it and start reporting the news, unfiltered by your shareholders, your stake holders and your advertisers.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Delete their asses

There are two stories that need writing. One I cannot do until late Monday, because civil servants do not work on the weekend (weird). The other one is about fraud. The CBC alerted me to ‘It’s happened again. 2nd Toronto home listed for sale without homeowner’s knowledge’ (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/fraudulent-home-sale-1.6710868) and the problem is actually a lot worse than they think it is. You see, I remembered and found ‘Arrest after Luton clergyman reports his home stolen’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-59167750) in November 2021. This has been going on for well over a year and when I see “We work with professional conveyancers, such as solicitors, and rely on them and the checks that they make to spot fraudulent attempts to impersonate property owners. Despite our efforts, every year we do register a very small number of fraudulent transactions.” And when I see this my blood curdles towards psychotic. When we see “rely on them”, I understand, but in the same breath I say that if at that point the conveyancer CANNOT show proper documentations and proper diligence he gets to lose his license for life. I am so sick of this casual approach to responsibilities (you will learn on Monday or Tuesday). It is time to change this level of stupidity. If these players no matter who cannot show due diligence, they lose their licence for life. These players all want ease, they want the internet and as such people lose their houses and their stuff, we need to change that game and we need to change it by a lot. The CBC gives us “the case bears a striking resemblance to an investigation the Toronto Police Service (TPS) asked for the public’s help with last week, in which another family wasn’t so lucky”. First of all, I am not blaming the Toronto Police Service. But the stage of ease of sale and ease of buying property needs to stop. In the old days there ere actuaries and perhaps we need to revisit that stage, they were truly diligent. The world is so much about reduction of sales cycle and now we see that people are getting hurt and some excuse that it is a mere few cases does not hold water. The victims lose to much, even if the damage is undone, the damage is close to permanent and something needs to be done. Perhaps it needs to be more draconian, but I feel strong about someone losing THEIR castle. So when I see “CBC News has reported on numerous allegations of fake identifications and other documents being used to rent homes and take out fraudulent mortgages, but these attempted home thefts appear to take real estate fraud to an alarming new level” I see that the system is failing and it is failing in the UK and in Canada. So we need a new stage, we need new systems of control and the stage of “this is easier” is no longer acceptable. Easy got the grifters and the scammers in, that needs to stop and the conveyancers are a first step, but merely a first. A lot more needs to be done and it needed to be started well over a year ago. 

Perhaps I am overreacting, but the idea of my place to be sold from under me when I go on vacation is a nightmare I never want to face and if that means deleting some overly non-diligent people, then so be it.

Enjoy Sunday.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Law

Andrew Tate, the man, the exploited

Sounds weird does it not, it sounds like I am inverting what is happening, but I am not. The media is exploiting Andrew Tate for every digital dollar they can muster. First off, I know very little of him and the little I do know and what I did find out started after the Thunberg issue. I honestly do not care about the man, why should I? We travel in very different circles. He is a former kickboxer, he went from nothing to $700,000,000 in almost no time flat. He communicates that a little too much in your face and that all makes perfectly sense. Yet when you take a moment to consider what he is saying, we see that he is making sense, he is making too much sense to some.

So when I now reconsider what the media did with headlines like ‘Did feminism create Andrew Tate?’, ‘Andrew Tate isn’t feminism’s inadvertent bastard child. He’s sexism’s last gasp’ (written by a girl of course), ‘‘Vulnerable boys are drawn in’: schools fear spread of Andrew Tate’s misogyny’ and that list goes on, for some time no less. You see, whatever Andrew Tate is, he is accused and anyone accused is innocent until PROVEN guilty. But the media seemingly doesn’t like self made multi millionaires (or billionaires) for that matter. 

Al Arabiya gives us (at https://english.alarabiya.net/News/world/2023/01/10/Romanian-court-to-rule-on-ex-kickboxer-Andrew-Tate-s-challenge-to-detention) “A Romanian court is due to rule on Tuesday on a challenge filed by Andrew Tate, an internet personality notorious for hate speech, against his 30-day arrest for alleged human trafficking and formation of an organised crime group to exploit six women.

Tate, his brother Tristan and two Romanian female suspects were detained by Romanian anti-organised crime prosecutors on December 29 pending a criminal investigation. They have denied wrongdoing through an attorney and have challenged the arrest warrant.” Now lets be clear. 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. We see the confiscation of expensive cars, we see all kinds of emotional reporting, but like that attempted murderer of 6 years old, when do we actually see facts? We got “In a news conference on Monday, police in Virginia said the child brought the pistol to school in his backpack” as well as “A six-year-old child used his mother’s legally purchased handgun to shoot his teacher at a US school” yesterday by the BBC. So where are the parents? Why are they not interrogated by police and the media? Too soft? Too many pussies in the media? How does a 6 year old get his mommies gun? The media left it untouched all this time and now we get back to Andrew Tate, it is all related. The media exploiting whatever they can to get the digital dollars. And Andrew Tate makes a fine target for the media. For 2 weeks the media did not dig into the accusation, merely focussing on misogeny. 

So I tried to look up a few things. Now, this does not make him innocent of that claim, but I wonder how true some claims are. The first is the interview with Piers Morgan, the full interview of 45 minutes is there. He talks about the failing of the UK, why nurses are striking and he makes a lot of sense. And with the ‘in your face’ stage that he has (I personally think that is the kickboxer in him) he does get the interest of all the boys and men, but there is a truth that women should consider to a much larger degree. 

You see, thee are those women who are truly self-sufficient and those merely claiming that they are. I reckon that this is set to 1500:250,000 so for every 250,000 women only 1500 are truly self sufficient, the rest is merely making the claim and calling the nearest man as soon as they can, preferably one that is either gay or one that they can tell that assistance is not agreeing to sex. Let be clear sex is never part of such a deal, but I get that women want to be clear about that upfront. So in a stage where only 0.6% are real self sufficient women, a misogenistic paint will aid the media in colouring a person so that the wannabe’s have someone to hate. Making them instant click bitches to coin a phrase. 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. The videos do show that he is full of himself, but when you consider that he went from nothing to $700,000,000 whilst most people (well over 80%) never get more than 0.1% over twice the lifespan we can agree that he is allowed to be full of himself. 

So there we have one setting. Then we get the image (from a YouTube video) below.

So is this true? YouTube is not a reliable source, and when we seek. We do get a lot of articles linked to Cosmin Gusa. But there is still no real evidence that this was Andrew Tate. In this day and age when we can see cyber transgressions in every direction. Does it make sense for someone like Andrew Tate to go ‘after’ the daughter of some mogul? And this is not America, this is Romania, as such a man like that has all kinds of connections. The math just does not work out. Any loser or non-wealthy might make a move like that. It does not make the Tate’s guilty, not innocent either. EVIDENCE is required and I have so far seen close to ZERO evidence on anything that could prosecute Andrew Tate. This could be a stage where connected people take over his business and that might be the case, but that also implies that we now have a decent setting where the media is jumping to the greedy needs of organised crime.  

Tomorrow his case is decided whether he is to remain arrested, I wonder what will happen next. Because there is a lot wrong here and the media needs to do its actual job (implying not whoring for digital dollars). They need to look into the accusations which Al Arabiya actually did (most others did not), there we also see “The victims were then taken to properties on the outskirts of capital Bucharest and through physical violence and mental intimidation were sexually exploited by being forced to produce pornographic content for social media sites which generated large financial gains, according to prosecutors. Prosecutors also said one of the brothers raped one of the victims in March of last year, which is when the investigation started”, this is an actual accusation, this is something that needs to be investigated, but why did the western media avoid giving us this? It will be about the evidence, not some he said, she said setting and that is not the easiest case to have, no matter where it is. And it needs to be proven, not painted by the media. Time will tell how this ends, I have no idea what will happen next.

2 Comments

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

United States of Criminality

That is a strong expression, but it is a valid one. This all started for me when I took a first look at the Richneck Elementary School shooting. Now there are two stages. The first is the legal setting of Doli Incapax. A six year old cannot decently be prosecuted for this and I accept this. I get it, there is an issue. But there is a larger issue with the media and the news and I am looking at the Washington Post in this case. They have blatantly made claims against Saudi Arabia, they made blatant claims against many and they have at times lost the plot. Like losing that columnist no one cared about. In this case a mere 7 hours ago, they give us dribble, loaded useless dribble on this case. I started this 2 days ago when I wrote ‘Little shits’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/01/08/little-shits/) the Washington Post, NY Times and a few others have had 2 days and no one asks the questions that matter. The parents should have been arrested for questioning. I get that they in the end cannot be arrested for the crimes, but they are clearly covered in responsibility here. Where did the gun come from? There is no arrest, no intelligence on whether the parents had any firearms, perhaps even THAT firearm. Why not? It would have been the first thing I did. And the parents can suffer the experience, THEIR CHILD shot a woman with a gun at the age of six. 

The police might not have been forthcoming in the first hour, but it has been two days. They should have something by now, even if it is to state that no evidence came forward from inspecting the lifeline of the gun. This was a clear hatchet job from the first hour I looked into this. The missing settings and the non-available facts made this from my point of view a simple case of orchestration. 

You can disagree and that is OK, but see for yourself. How much facts have the media exposed to you? They are all about emotion, about flammable events. It is what I personally call ‘whoring for digital dollars’ am I wrong? Even the Washington Post has nothing to offer. 

And when we see the closure of the school, which makes sense, and how stable the teacher is, which is good. Nothing on the child and more important nothing on the parents. Is anyone waking up? Then there is CBS who used the line “a handgun was used”, was that all? There are over 170,000,000 of handguns in the US (according to one source) there are thousands of brands. I think that the police from day one could have done better than “a handgun was used” and the media never followed up on it, at least not from the dozen or so sources I saw. So why not? What makes this case different? Who are the parents? I let you simmer on this.

1 Comment

Filed under Law, Media

Creation of thoughts

This started 2 days ago for me. An actress posted a clip on Twitter. I read it and gave my view on this and I got blocked. Fair enough, not everyone agrees with my assessment. That is until last night I saw the news on SBS (at https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/jeremy-clarkson-said-he-wanted-to-see-excrement-thrown-at-meghan-markle-his-daughter-wasnt-happy/nzwukmwpn) there I saw the clip was from from Jeremy Clarkson. The article gave me more. And also reenforced that my view was almost spot on. 

It was the clip from Dan Walker that supported my view that there were red flags all over the place. Optionally the same I saw. The reference to Game of Thrones season 5 episode 10 was clearly on top. So not only are the thoughts of Clarkson plagiaristic to say the least, the fact that he sets a medieval view in todays world. Now lets be clear, Harry and Meghan are for all intense and purposes royals and I am a royalist. I do not care for reality TV, no matter who brings it. I did not watch the episodes just like I avoid the Kardashians. I do not hate the Kardashians, I think that  reality TV is for those who forget to live and I am not one of those people. Then the idea of hatred to that ‘cellular’ level. I personally believe that unless you personally know a person this level of hate is not real, it is optionally a mental condition, but like I wrote to the actress (name not important) that this is a determination that needs to be made by professionals. But the allegedly delusional setting gives me that there are mental health issues in play. Am I right?

That is under debate, but I believe that a professional needs to assess it, until then Jeremy Clarkson has become an optional danger to the royals and he needs investigating by MI5 and Scotland Yard. The change of endangering a royal makes that essential. Yes, we saw messages that the column is now removed, which gets me to the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-64029690) where we see ‘Jeremy Clarkson says he is ‘horrified’ over Meghan column’ an hour ago, this is not sincerity, this is damage control.

I see the damage control as an essential act when over 12,000 people wrote to complain, but I reckon that is merely the UK, A-listers tweeted the column and the damage is a lot larger than we can see at present. It goes to the degree that I think that MI5 and Scotland Yard needs to investigate a little more and in a wider field. Endangering royals is what I perceive to be a serious crime and “I put my foot in it” does not hold any bacon as I see it. A column is not written in seconds, it is not on the trail of a simple typo, or an oops moment. This took time and it festered, the mention that he lies in bed at night contemplating it makes it wore and it instills the thought to others. The additional worries are seen with ““Everyone who’s my age thinks the same way,” he added. “But what makes me despair is that younger people, especially girls, think she’s pretty cool. They think she was a prisoner of Buckingham Palace, forced to talk about nothing but embroidery and kittens.”” I do not, but mostly for other reasons. The issue becomes that this should not have met with approval of the editor of the Sun, which as far as I know is edited by Victoria Newton and Keith Poole. So both could have stopped this from print and the fact that Clarkson was overwhelmed by a scene from the Game of Thrones should have impacted their block even stronger. 

It gets to be worse when you realise (I did not initially) that the referenced Rose West was a serial killer who, along with her husband Fred, murdered at least 12 young girls over 20 years. That makes it a lot worse, the fact that a Royal is hated more than a mass murderer? I have no real thoughts on the two royals as I do not know them, I have no real intent on getting to know them, I have a life and it is slightly ruled by my desire to sell my IP before I retire. It is a setting of priorities, personal priorities, it is that simple. 

Yet what also happened just now is that SBS and the BBC have not mentioned the Sun (other than casual) or the editors/chief editor of the Sun. This all passed the barge and was published. There is no pointing fingers at a columnist here, yes the brunt of the blame will be on Jeremy Clarkson, but the Sun and its editors do not get away with clean hands here. They are at least in part to blame, whether it was for visibility, digital dollars or whatever reason, they are now part of this and the media protect itself, no matter how disgusting their peers are. 

I wonder if any attention will be pushed in that direction, I doubt it, but we could all remain hopeful.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

The unsettling realisation

There is a stage we all see, it is not the same for all. We see it, but the words do not completely come, there is a sort of disjointment between what we see, what we perceive and what we think is right. It was all over the field when it came to blow in my mind with a Reuters article. Weirdly enough they gave the pieces, the missing pieces to form the new image, an image I did relate to and as such the article becomes a reality.

The article in question is the article (at https://www.reuters.com/technology/elon-musks-twitter-suspension-journalists-draws-global-backlash-2022-12-16/) giving us ‘Elon Musk restores Twitter accounts of journalists but concerns persist’, you see, the elements start with “The reinstatements came after the unprecedented suspensions evoked stinging criticism from government officials, advocacy groups and journalism organisations from several parts of the globe on Friday, with some saying the microblogging platform was jeopardising press freedom” My initial response is that if these idiots did their job, their proper jobs, their credibility would not be on level -23. They did this to themselves. 

When you whore for digital dollars there in a consequence. In addition players like the NY Times print not properly vetted information (see one of my previous articles on the subject). The press does not bring freedom. It brings us filtered information. Information that is approved by share holders, stake holders and advertisers. So stop talking about the freedom of the press. Start doing your bloody jobs or become Uber drivers, they have a shortage at present. So when we get “A Reuters check showed the suspended accounts, which included journalists from the New York Times, CNN and the Washington Post, have been reinstated.” We do not get a clear picture on why certain issues happened, in case of the NY Times I could speculate but this is larger. These people REFUSED to do their jobs when there was time to openly ask Jack Dorsey for answers, there was time to give a clear response towards a stage where a company was overvalued by close to 100%, but you did not do ANYTHING, did you? 

And for the man blocking Elon Musk with a facial covering with license plate CJ82G38? Did you do anything, did you report on who the man was, was the car stolen, was there anything? No, you merely try to collect on digital dollars, didn’t you? 

In that same setting there is an issue with “The German Foreign Office warned Twitter that the ministry had a problem with moves that jeopardised press freedom.” We get that, but when the press isn’t taking its ‘responsibilities’ serious, should we give them any consideration? And with that we get the second part that rubbed ME the wrong way. It was “Melissa Fleming, head of communications for the United Nations, tweeted she was “deeply disturbed” by the suspensions and that “media freedom is not a toy.”” Well, see what pot is calling the kettle black. The UN made its own bed with stupid settings regarding Jeff Bezos (an anti-Saudi stage) and a few others. If the United Nations actually get things done and focussed on areas like Syria and Yemen and got communications on Houthi terrorist events started the people might get informed at some point. For example the Middle East Monitor gives us “The US Special Envoy for Yemen, Tim Lenderking, said on Wednesday that the Houthis’ “maximalist demands” had hindered UN efforts to renew a six-month truce in the country that ended in October.” As such, these so called ‘culled’ papers. How much did they expose to the public of this? I think that Miss Fleming has other problems and making sure that the Press covers the actual news might be a clear first. It comes with the stage where she claims that media freedom is not a toy and it applies to the media just as much, in case she forgot.

So, I got that off my chest. You see, I cannot see if Elon Musk is guilty of anything at all, because we keep on getting one sided news from the media and they have no credibility left (as I personally see it). 

I will let you consider who is correct and consider what you are shown, and what is trivialised by the media.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Bonking to a new place

It started on December 3rd (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/12/03/how-to-destroy-an-economy/)  with ‘How to destroy an economy’, now we see an article giving us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-63948740) ‘Bali sex ban: Indonesia tourists won’t be charged under law’, it is a fair response, but one given in fear. You see it becomes LAW, and at that point there is no distinction, the issue was from the start “and foreigners alike” that is the killer, so when we see “the governor of Bali, a holiday hotspot, said authorities would not check the marital status of tourists.” We need to see that the man is acting in fear, stopping that law could have prevented it, but some lame excuse with the added “Authorities would not check” will not work, the law is in effect (well in three years). How long until some person makes an open complaint to the Indonesian media? Optionally in an election year. At that point will make an example of one or two couples to get by. Do you want to be the example they make? And lets be clear, if you are married you are fine, it is the other 60% that has a problem coming their way and no amount of wheeling and dealing will help. Their only option is to adjust the law to make sure that this law does not apply to tourists. So how many nations have you seen adjusting their laws to tourists? I personally have not seen any, as such Indonesia will see its tourist economy drain only to see it crash near completely in 2024. 

And the quote “Indonesia’s deputy justice minister promised foreigners would not be prosecuted” does not help. The next deputy Justice minister could have a very conservative islamic view and the problem rears its ugly head again. Stopping the law is the ONLY option Indonesia has at present. ABC adds to this (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-12-13/indonesia-summons-united-nations-official-after-laws-criticised/101763920) with ‘Indonesia summons United Nations official after criticism of newly ratified criminal code’. Here we are given “deputy chief of Indonesia’s tourism industry board Maulana Yusran said the new code was “totally counter-productive” at a time when the economy and tourism were starting to recover from the pandemic”. Yes, he would be right and he sees similar data to me, Indonesian tourism will take a 40%-60% fall in the first few years, and that is before you take the Australian backpackers and schoolies into account, the damage will hurt the Balinese economy to a massive degree and after that there is no coming back for close to a decade, the law would require a rewrite and before that is all in effect it could be 2027 with a large number of commercial places already shut down. And the tourists? They will be bonking in a new place like Singapore, Bangkok or Kuala Lumpur. 

I honestly do not understand what the Indonesian law bringers were thinking when they did this and the setting was three words “and foreigners alike”, all whilst the stage of “tourists are exempt” would have prevented this, three words to destroy billions. This has got to be the most expensive typo in history.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Will you never learn?

I just got across an article from December 5th. It was given to us by the BBC with the headline ‘I had £8,000 stolen but Revolut won’t refund it’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-63796738). When we google Revolut we get all the bells and whistles. No hidden fees, ATM withdrawals in 120 currencies and transfers in 29 currencies directly from the app and it sounds amazing. The fact that most people will never see these countries is beside the point. But what is not beside the point is “as of December 2022 they did not have a UK banking licence” and “it does not reimburse victims of authorised push payment fraud.” And now for the stupid people in the back. A financial institution is not a bank, in this day and age if you are not with a bank, anything goes wrong it is on YOUR dime. It costs you! So when we get back to the BBC article we see “The fraudster said her bank account was under attack, and persuaded her to download some software that allowed him to take control of her computer.” Which is never a good idea to say the least and these fraud attacks tend to go on, and until we get clearance to execute fraudsters you are on your own and not being with a bank you will have nothing to protect you for these events. Financial Institutions wash their hands and come with some kind sounding answer that boils down to ‘Not our problem’ and that is what you face. So when we get that Revolut is an e-money company that offers digital banking services, we see the words, but the important part that they are not a bank is missing. And my idea of using targeted killing against these fraud people (not the fintechies) is not without merit. The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-63736573) gives us ‘Police text 70,000 victims in UK’s biggest anti-fraud operation’, which means that we could keep well over 70,000 people safe by killing these economic terrorists. Yes, they are not merely criminals and we do not care about their age. Just like they did not care about the financial situation they put their victims in. There comes a time when any action is better than the level of inaction we see here. In addition people need to know that places like Revolut is not a bank, they applied a year ago, but they are not at present and the call for reduced fee’s does not hold water, not when you end up with a loss of £8,000, but that is something you see after the fact. 

To be honest, there is another side. There is more and more indications that banks are seemingly not bringing home the bacon in regards to their customers. We saw that in the Guardian when the people were told in June 2022 “UK’s largest banks are no longer “too big to fail” and could foot the bill for their own failures, the Bank of England has said” it does not help people much, but it needs to be clear that you need your savings in a bank, because no matter what you have some protection, with e-money companies, financial institutions and other FINTECH options you have little to no protection, or you are in danger of having no protection and a banking license is pure protection for the bank and its customers. And my so called over reaction? Consider that in this economy a new criminal is born every minute, all hoping for that score. When you start executing the offenders and making sure EVERYONE knows, the wannabe’s might seek other avenues of income, not all of them legal, but avenues that keep them alive. And with 70,000 victims in the balance, I have little problems blowing off a head or two, three, four, five. You get the drill.

We want to be the ones finding a peaceful (non terminal) solution. But the police is losing this war too fast, there are too many victims and the parents do not get to cry that their son (or daughter) was such a good person, not with 70,000 people in the mix and one losing £8,000, and there is clear evidence that this was not the biggest gain. There comes a time when we need to acknowledge that the floodgates are bringing in too much trash and do not worry about where to leave them, Exmoor National Park could shelter well over 1000 cadavers, so there is space to grow.

Worried yet? 
You should be there is too much happening and nowhere near enough being achieved and I am not blaming the Police, they are fighting this war with both hands on their backs and it is time to alter the game a little, enough for some of these criminals to get worried. And the price is decent, 70,000 victims is not nothing, even as we see “as many as 200,000 people in the UK may have been victims of the scam” and to tamper your anger, we are also given “Fraudsters paid between £150 and £5,000 a month in bitcoin to use the iSpoof service, contacting, at times, 20 people a minute. Those behind the service are allegedly earning £3.2m and living “lavish” lifestyles” as such I believe they had their life, time to end it and capture these funds. Whose with me?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Politics

Ruler of law goes metric

Yes, we all have settings that are part of us, for the most the rule of law is accepted by nearly all. But when do we realise that it is not that simple? There is the notion that this rule of law has an Imperial and a metric setting and that is the core of what we face today. I got my view from the Canadian CBC (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/us-khashoggi-lawsuit-dismissed-1.6676798). There we get ‘U.S. judge dismisses lawsuit against Saudi prince over Khashoggi killing’, s0 at what point does the US set the stage for events that took place in an alleged Saudi environment in Turkey no less? Lets look at the simple facts, Jamal Khashoggi is as far as I can tell a Saudi dissident, not an American citizen and I do not care what was planned. It never got to be. This person has gotten more ‘alleged’ assistance in a month than most American citizens have seen in a decade. Then we are given “U.S. District Judge John Bates suggested he was reluctant to throw out the lawsuit but had no choice given the Biden administration’s decision.” And I will get back to this in a moment. We are also given “Khashoggi was killed and dismembered in October 2018 by Saudi agents in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul” which is the supporting lie. You see, his body was never found, there is absolutely no evidence that he was dismembered, or killed. For all we know he is spending the rest of his days with his new mistress of 19 years old in a luxurious hotel on Bora Bora. It is equally speculative, is it therefor more wrong?

And we do take notice of “Attorneys for the U.S. Department of Justice said in a November court filing that the Biden administration had determined that Prince Mohammed, “as the sitting head of a foreign government, enjoys head of state immunity from the jurisdiction of U.S. courts as a result of that office.”” It is the stage that was always going to happen, there was no evidence of any kind, mere speculation and Daily Mail categorised forms of speculated innuendo that never goes anywhere. Lets be clear, I cannot prove the innocence of certain people, but I cannot prove their guilt either and a person is innocent until proven guilty. That is the law and there is no metrical version of that, it is imperial, it is black letter law and that is what the law is. The media wants you to forget this so that they can cater to the digital dollar a little longer. And you are the tool they are using for that. In the mean time Jeff Bezos (via Andy Jassy) denied himself an annual 6 billion and change going up to close to $30 billion in full deployment mode. This is the damage Amazon did to themselves and it is fine by my book, although a little less nice as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia decided not to buy it either. My loss and I get that. But below all this is a stage where the US is in a lot more problem. You see, they desperately need the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia assist them with cheap oil and I have stated this before. Why would they do that? The US has proven themselves to be a fleeting and unreliable ally to say the least. Do not take my word for that, look at the victims in Yemen and Syria and ask yourself, what did the US achieve? Close to nothing and now that they are at the abyss, the hangman’s rope has a very uncomfortable feeling. And as I see it, should the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia want it and limit the shipments of Crude Oil by an additional mere 1 million barrels a day, the US will explode in a stage of anarchy, just before Christmas and that realisation is at stake. The US overplayed its hand for at least two years and now we see that anarchy could become the turnstile of events. So do not think this is something that President Biden started. This is the stage 4 previous administrations colluded under (sort of) and yes, former president Trump might be the only one trying to turn it around but it would have been too little and optionally too late too. The previous congresses made sure of that. They were all too ego driven to see that impact grow and grow. And before you consider the immense state of “Khashoggi had criticised the crown prince’s policies in Washington Post columns. He had travelled to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul to obtain papers he needed to marry Cengiz, a Turkish citizen.” You see the US had the option to make him a citizen from 2017 onwards but they chose not to do that (optionally it was in the hands of Khashoggi). So for over a year there was a stage where he had the option to make a change, optionally the US intelligence office could have prevented it if there was a voice, but there wasn’t one. This implies (to me) that there was no real warning, no real danger which now sheds a light on a lot of issues and it does not look good for the US. Hiding behind some metric version of the law was never going to work well and I have highlighted close to half a dozen issues from the beginning and the fictional book of Blood and Oil merely worked for my case. When you see all these articles, all these media evidence and it comes with words like ‘alleged’ and ‘could have’, how wrong do you think I am? 

It is sad watching governments trying to cater to ego and to the clear need of a commodity that their non-allies have, it is a pathetic view and it is not getting better any day soon.

I will let you investigate that, just be sure you rely on the sources you can rely on.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Religion