Category Archives: Law

October 10, 2025 · 16:28

Empty luck for bad guys

That happens, it doesn’t make them more bad, or more evil, they just are and to be honest when I saw the news that he had lost my heart skipped a beat. That news made me I personally happy. I get that at times people do not get to rely on ‘Freedom of speech’, don’t get me wrong, I do not believe that he was entitled to that. So as I saw the news (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy856qxzq01o) there was a thought on the core of the setting. It started with “The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting occurred on December 14, 2012, in Newtown, Connecticut. The perpetrator, Adam Lanza, fatally shot his mother before murdering 20 students and six staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School, and later committed suicide.” Here is where the Conspiracy Theorists come to ‘live’ and here we get “In September 2014, conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, who runs the website InfoWars, which had previously claimed that the murders were a “false flag” attack perpetrated by the government, made a new conspiracy claim that “no one died” at Sandy Hook Elementary School because the Uniform Crime Reports showed no murders in Newtown for 2012, and that the victims were “child actors.” This claim is false and misrepresents the FBI report. In reality, because the Connecticut State Police was the lead investigator after the attack, the Sandy Hook victims were included in Connecticut’s statewide records (under “State Police Misc.”) rather than under the Newtown statistics.” And we get the continuance that “In November 2016, Erica L. Lafferty, daughter of Dawn Lafferty Hochsprung, the school principal who was shot and killed at Sandy Hook School, wrote open letters to then-President-elect Donald Trump (published in Medium and USA Today), calling upon him to denounce Jones, after Trump had appeared on InfoWars during his presidential campaign and lavished praise on its presenter, saying that the conspiracy theorist had an “amazing” reputation and pledging not to let him down. On February 20, 2017, the Newtown School Board wrote to President Trump and urged him to recognize the murders of 26 people at Sandy Hook and to “remove your support from anyone who continues to insist that the tragedy was staged or not real.”Trump did not respond to the letter. On April 16, 2018, parents of two victims of the shooting sued Jones in Travis County, Texas (where Jones’ media company is based), for $1 million each. On May 23, 2018, six families of victims of the shooting, as well as an FBI agent who responded to the attack, filed a defamation lawsuit in Bridgeport Superior Court in Connecticut against Jones for his role in spreading conspiracy theories about the shooting. In a deposition in the last week of March 2019, Jones acknowledged the deaths were real, stating he had “almost like a form of psychosis”, where he “basically thought everything was staged.”By 2021, Jones did not provide information to support his claims, defaulting in favor of the plaintiffs.” So over the setting of more than 7 years, Alex jones was found guilty and in November 15th of 2021 NPR reported ‘Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones ruled liable in Sandy Hook defamation case’ with ““Mr. Jones was given every opportunity to comply, but, when he chose instead to withhold evidence for more than two years, the Court was left with no choice but to rule as it did today,” Mattei said. “While the families are grateful for the court’s ruling, they remain focused on uncovering the truth.””

So now whilst we are given “Right-wing conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has asked the US Supreme Court to put on pause the nearly $1.5bn (£1.1bn) defamation judgment against him that is forcing the sale of his Infowars media company. Jones was ordered to make the payout in 2022 for claiming the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School was a hoax. He has asked the high court to prevent Infowars from being sold to the satirical news site The Onion in order to fund judgment against him, arguing that it will cause irreparable harm to him and his audience of 30 million.” The folly called ‘Justice of the United States continues’ and whilst we also see that they ‘rely’ on “Jones is asking the justices to put the judgment on hold while deciding on an appeal he has filed. The court is expected to consider his application on Friday in private.

Attorneys for Jones and his company, Free Speech Systems, characterized him as a media defendant in their court filing on Thursday. They argued that Jones, who founded the platform in 1999, should enjoy the same free speech protections under the First Amendment of the Constitution that journalists have, according to court documents filed on Wednesday.

They also said the record-breaking payout and the shuttering of his platform would have a “chilling effect” on similar media figures.” And I have to wonder ‘Why Not?’ If there is any setting it is that the media is now a behemoth that is not about the truth of the matter, but largely on the cash of the setting. I have had that for some time, but this case will drive this out in the open to a much larger audience. And I am still in confusion why this conspiracy theorist is given any quarter at all, but the American setting is one where appeal has the largest dollar gain and as I see it, it will play out, will it play out in favor of Alex Jones is something that we have to watch, but as I see it, should Alex Jones win, the larger audience from the United States will start to be denied on a near global scale as the global media will not want to be painted in the American Red, White and Blue colors because of that. That is merely my take on that setting. There will be no stars and the stripes will be seen as bars, horizontal prison bars thwarting American media because of that. But as I see it, we will have to wait until the verdict from the American Supreme Court comes in. So as I see it, after the Connecticut Supreme Court had turned down his verdict of such a lot of coins, $1,500,000,000 if my memory serves correctly. And as we remember that Jones was ordered to make the payout in 2022 for claiming the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School was a hoax. So it amounts to him haven over three years to try and ‘auction’ of whatever he could for the time, but the amount of over 1 billion is a lot and if his 30 million audience would hand him $50 each, he might have been able to pay it all. But it seems that his audience doesn’t love him that far, it smilingly comes down to the average hooker gets more credit for a ‘simple’ act then Alex Jones does. And come to think of it, he ‘entertained’ his audience for months, a hooker is done in 15 minutes (if that much is required) and that comes with a protein drink at the end of that sitting. And these people (their clients) got to live behind “It never happened, prove it” so as we get to the next week we will see how the Supreme Court will dress Alex Jones address (or is that redress).

Bygones I say. So have a great day and look out for optional entertainment from the United States Supreme Court, because no matter how you turn this, that nation might go strategically bonkers should Alex Jones get what he wants and then he will cry about all the gun violence coming to his front door. But then they can say “Don’t worry Alex, its just a hoax”

I reckon that Saturday Newscasts will give us more entertainment. It almost sounds like the beginning of a David Sylvian song. Have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

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

October 8, 2025 · 00:20

The weighted fabrication

That is how I see it and the article by Stephanie Kirchgaessner (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/18/saudi-arabia-turki-al-jasser-executed) goes straight into this. You see, I am not debating whether someone was ‘deleted’ it is what you can prove and we cannot prove anything. You see, The Guardian ‘hides’ behind a piece by the United Nations and I dove into this in ‘That was Easy!’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/02/27/that-was-easy/) I even added the UN document there and I made several connections, I used the setting of something called ‘evidence’ it is how I roll and seemingly the Guardian does not. Somewhere today I stumbled upon a Kirchgaessner article that was from June 18th 2025. I do not track everything that is out there, so I have an excuse. But the setting that the media uses requires me to illustrate where they went mad like a lemming. We get “It was the first high-profile killing of a journalist by the Saudi state since the 2018 murder of Jamal Khashoggi, the Washington Post columnist and prominent critic of the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, who was lured into the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and murdered by Saudi agents. A UN report concluded that the murder was an extrajudicial killing by the state, and an intelligence assessment released by then president Joe Biden in 2021 concluded that Prince Mohammed approved the murder.” We need to take heed of the two settings here. The first one is “A UN report concluded that the murder was an extrajudicial killing by the state” and the second one is “intelligence assessment released by then president Joe Biden in 2021 concluded that Prince Mohammed approved the murder”. So, we have two settings. Lets start with the second on first. How was this assessment obtained? That is the question. There is a chance that it came from Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri and the ‘pasted’ solutions that the Americans give him (read: CIA) sounds that he is all on the up and up. Yet “Aljabri has strong support in the US, where former intelligence officials have credited their Saudi counterpart for helping to save American and Saudi lives following the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the US.

On 60 Minutes, the former acting CIA director Mike Morell said Aljabri was “honorable”. Intelligence relayed to the US by Aljabri – Morell said – had led to the interception of bombs that had been planted by al-Qaida in 2010 in two desktop printers that were being flown as cargo on two planes. Morell said there were also other examples of Aljabri saving the lives of Americans, but that they were still classified.” Yet here too I have questions and they might be invalid and when we see the accusations of “The Saudi government did not address Aljabri’s allegations but said in a statement that “Saad Aljabri is a discredited former government official with a long history of fabricating and creating distractions to hide the financial crimes he committed”” So how does a general get these billions? That was the issues that I saw when I looked at the CBC article (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/investigates/saad-aljabri-assets-frozen-1.5903422) 

Where we see ““Although the investigation is ongoing, it is clear that from at least 2008 to 2017, Aljabri masterminded and oversaw a conspiracy incorporating at least 21 conspirators across at least 13 jurisdictions to misappropriate at least [$4.3 billion] from the plaintiffs,” the lawsuit states.” As well as “It alleges Aljabri funneled security and counterterrorism funds from Saudi Arabia’s Interior Ministry to himself, his family and associates.” So is one true, or is the other true? It is a fair question as the sources of the “intelligence assessment” remain valid if Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri was involved. At that point, merely one issue remains and I blew that apart in my initial blog (link above) and what wasn’t mentioned is that the so called ‘torture tapes’ were never forensically cleared in any way. There are mentions of “I heard them and they were dreadful” or something of that nature. That is not evidence. Evidence is “The tape(s) consist of x number of tapes (or files). They are set to a length of XXX minutes and the voices on the tapes include Jamal Khashoggi” That NEVER happened, that was NEVER done. As such there is no evidence and the shoddy journals behind blood and oil added a few inches of fantasy to that counter. That as well as the issues in that UN report gave me enough to call Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud innocent. Evidence is set to that, not thoughtful processes of ‘I don’t believe he is guilty’ a person is innocent until proven guilty and that proof never came, no matter how intensely all the media is pushing for it and the media with people carrying trash bags stating “This could be the part of the body of Jamal Khashoggi” is nothing less than a joke, a bad one at that. So as Stephanie Kirchgaessner is linked to several of these articles the journalist is just as guilty as the story. She never properly investigated the articles she wrote and I just called out several parts. There is no such setting with Saudi journalist Turki al-Jasser, as the news gives us “the Saudi interior ministry announced that al-Jasser had been executed in Riyadh, for crimes including “high treason by communicating with and conspiring against the security of the Kingdom with individuals outside it”.” It seems like a setting that is. There is no wonder about guilt or innocence. He was found guilty and executed, but leave it to the Guardian to add the columnist no-one ever cared about to the mix (Jamal Khashoggi). Yet I have seen this game being played by the Guardian and several other sources and I have had enough. As such I have questions. Questions like will Stephanie Kirchgaessner ever be questioned and will there be a larger setting where journalists like this are held to account on what they write, because as I see it this cannot continue as it is. The CBC gives us a lot more. You see as we see “Aljabri, 62, was MBN’s chief advisor. As Minister of State and head of security and counterterrorism, he was a key member of the regime. He was stripped of his duties in 2015. Following the power change in 2017, he fled the country and now lives in a mansion on The Bridle Path, one of Canada’s most upscale residential neighbourhoods.” Is a setting that does not imply he is guilty of anything, but as I see it, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has 4.3 billion reasons to want him and I do not know any government that takes such a loss for granted. And they would be right. And as I see it, there is an easy setting, get a forensic accountant go over the records and I reckon that this is where the CIA is not to happy over that happening and I expect neither is Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri. I wonder why the media didn’t set this setting to paper, do you know? 

So when the Guardian gave us (in June) “The former intelligence chief also claimed Prince Mohammed “feared” the information Aljabri knew about him, including a 2014 recorded discussion between Prince Mohammed and the then crown prince, Bin Nayef, in which Prince Mohammed allegedly said he could kill the sitting king, Abdullah, to clear the throne for his own father, Salman.” The use of ‘allegedly’ makes the quote dubious, did anyone hear that recording? Was it forensically analyzed? Simple questions that could lift the veil of this. Did no one catch on to this?

I think I have raised enough doubt on the settings we see. And as we go back to the setting of “an intelligence assessment released by then president Joe Biden in 2021 concluded that Prince Mohammed approved the murder.” As such, as it was released, why didn’t the Guardian include this to give weight to the article? Was it because it relied to heavy on Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri? I don’t know, I never saw the assessment. So have a great day and consider what others want you to think. I, merely want you to see the evidence because that decides the guilt of someone, I could (of course) be wrong.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

October 6, 2025 · 10:18

The light goes on

That was the setting and it is all on me. You see, when you consider the setting of a greedy billionaire ‘wannabe’ (President Donald Trump) I would be settled in the knowledge that he knows what he was doing (silly me). Yet the interview that someone had with Jen Psaki gives us a whole new ballgame and the facts she hands us might fit the premise. I use might, because she is a democrat and they have a natural fear/distrust of Republicans. So I was set on the opposing view, but as we are seeing. The way he basically destroyed American Tourism, the distrust he gave all international travelers who are unlikely to return until close to a year after he vacates the White House. The way he is dealing with the Russian setting that is going on at present and a whole range of other settings (like tariffs) and the way he made an enemy of Canada gives her explanation some credit. 

We see it in MSNBC (at https://www.msnbc.com/the-briefing-with-jen-psaki/watch/psaki-trump-may-be-too-clueless-to-understand-consequences-of-his-shutdown-249077317970) the title ‘Trump may be too clueless to understand consequences of his shutdown’ is a rather rude wake up call. And if he is apparently that clueless, is there a greed driven setting to his $500,000,000,000 Stargate project? So when we get “Jen Psaki points out examples of Donald Trump not being aware of what his own administration is doing, or of the fallout of his own actions, raising questions about whether Trump understands the political consequences of the harm he is causing the American people with his shutdown of the federal government” we are getting second thoughts on the political views that America has. Could it be this simple? And as we get this, how can Americans be safe from the dealings of some person who is clever enough to grasp 1+1, but fails the concept of 2+2? We might think this is a mere offset of 100%, but the implications are seen when we consider that 5 AI and 5 AI is not 10 AI, but goes somewhere towards 496 AI clusters, you do need the implied grasp of Near Intelligent Parsing (AI does not yet exist) and as Jen points out, there is seemingly a lack of communications in this White House administration. And that is enforced with the ABC view we were given on Saturday when we saw ‘Trump reverses $187M funding cuts for New York counterterrorism after bipartisan outcry’, the fact that New York got any cuts in the first place makes me wonder how clever that person was and $187 million is a whole mountain of money and it wasn’t that the so called New York City Police Department (NYPD), which divides the city into 78 precincts and various specialized units like Counterterrorism, Emergency Service Unit, and K-9 units, and the New York State Police (NYSP), organized into 11 troops for statewide law enforcement had a whole lot of money to begin with. That is one of the oldest police forces on the planet consisting of roughly 50,676 individuals. So did anyone get the memo how the $187 million cut was achieved? I don’t care if it was reversed, that cut could be seen as evidence that this white house isn’t fit to address milk money for the United States kindergartens. 

And all this is seemingly a day after Jen Psaki gave us ‘‘A perfect storm of ugly’: Trump’s policies are devastating U.S. farmers’ where we get “Jen Psaki reports on how Donald Trump’s trade war, combined with his weird favoritism for his international buddies like Argentine President Javier Milei, has resulted in brutal economic conditions for American farmers. Not only is Trump devastating their businesses, but Trump’s policies are hurting their living expenses and particularly their health care costs.” And that is where we get the US shutdown, the Democrats are refusing so sign anything that is cutting healthcare as it is done. Millions will end without healthcare and that is on top of the hardship given to them by decreased incomes because the tourists have been driven away. Did anyone consider the damage that 15% less tourism costs? We see that ‘generic’ $12.5B less, but the impact is a lot more. Farmers, B&B business (and all connected businesses) and that is happening in Florida, California, Nevada and New York. I got to $80B-$135B (it is hard to get a precise reading. Yet there is a chance that January will reveal somewhere around $100B and there are posts that I did not consider, so it might end up being worse. But not to fret, AI will make it all fine. That is until you realise that AI at present does not yet exist and that is where you might wonder what the $500B was used for. Some are giving the setting that it is bout mass monitoring of the people in the United States. I have no idea, but I do know that these Oracle implementations will be considered essential as they are the only one to make it work either way and as we are considering the setting that this is an essential setting no matter how it goes, consider the setting that Jen Psaki gives us with “Donald Trump not being aware of what his own administration is doing” it seems like a heartless and anti republican speech, but what we have seen gives rise to all this and considering that these ‘data centers’ are requiring power, the setting that I evoked with ‘How is this powered?’ We see a failing of media and administrations scurrying to give some excuse, all whilst that setting cannot continue without massive verification and massive power influxes and there is seemingly no sign of that. 

So what happens when someone switches the power on in these data centers and the power goes off (for the most) in Austin and San Antonio? I am just asking but the premise that Jen Psaki gives us is one that required mulling and the press is seemingly not doing that and hasn’t done that for at least a year. So what are they here for? Playing courtesan to the digital dollar?

Food for thought, so as I have had my brekky, it is time to become a nuisance again for at least 15 hours. Have a great day.

Leave a comment

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

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

October 2, 2025 · 05:04

Military incompetence?

Consider the military, we all have them. Australia has theirs, Canada has theirs, apparently America has them and Russia have them. They all have their best of the best of the best of the best warrior style drafting. And some of them have a massive amount of tests, especially the top 3 in military and to get into their airfare you have to jump a massive amount of hoops. They are trained, dressed and drilled to a millimeter precision and they all have their own ways.

So when I saw (at https://www.highnorthnews.com/en/russias-violations-norwegian-and-allied-airspace-sign-desperation-says-professor) with the headline ‘Russia’s Violations of Norwegian and Allied Airspace: “Sign of Desperation,” Says Professor’ as such we have a new setting. We are given “Russia has violated Norway’s airspace in the North three times this year, as well as the airspace of several other NATO countries. This suggests that the war in Ukraine is going much worse than Moscow wants to admit, says Professor Tormod Heier at the Norwegian Defense University College.” And we all think that he might have a case. With the highlighting quote ““I interpret these violations as a sign of Russian frustration, desperation, and discouragement,” says Tormod Heier, Professor of military strategy and Operations at the Norwegian Defense University College, to High North News.  “After three and a half years of war in Ukraine, the Russians have only won 120,000 km2 of terrain. This nearly equals the total area of Finnmark, Troms, and Nordland [the three counties in Northern Norway, ed. note],” he points out and continues” He makes a fine point. The second/third largest army in the world and they are slapped around like a cheap crack whore by the 20th largest army (Ukraine). Russia is more than frustrated, it needs to be broken by NATO, or the usefulness of the Russian higher ranking officers is shown to be classified as useless (and their president with them) and that is a lot to be set on by the media. Even the Russian media can no longer tell the Russian people that the war is going their way. They’ve lost over 1.1 million troops and more are getting conscripted. They lost over 400 planes and now they are putting their most valuable stealth fighters into the mix, the SU-57 Felon. It is a war they are losing at present and it seems that the military needs to add NATO in the mix, so that they can gracefully exit the battlefield. They can claim that NATO was always the enemy they could not defeat, for that they need NATO to participate. And as we see others like Estonia report similar setting (at https://extra.ie/2025/09/19/news/russia-estonia-fighter-jets) where we see “NATO says it has responded after what it described as ‘Russian military jets’ violated Estonian airspace this afternoon (Friday). In a statement released this evening, the Estonian Government reported that the incident involved three Russian MiG-31 fighter aircraft, which flew over Vaindloo Island, off the coast of Finland, without permission.” As well as NPR who (at https://www.npr.org/2025/09/30/nx-s1-5557908/why-are-russian-aircraft-violating-nato-airspace) give us “NATO’s airspace is busy these days. And not in a good way. That’s especially true for member nations on the alliance’s eastern flank. It’s not supposed to be that way. In recent weeks, states like Poland, Estonia, Romania, and Denmark have seen drones or other aircraft violate their airspace. In some cases, these airborne craft clearly identify they’re Russian in origin. Multiple countries have called on NATO to consult about what to do next. So, what’s going on? What is Russia up to?” So, before we get the excuses we are likely to get, do you think that any government will let one of these young sprouts into any plane before they can properly read maps and navigate their Cessna’s over spaces that are not Russian? And these planes go for millions.

As such, I am with professor Tormod Heier on this. It is not an isolated case, and putting your fighter planes over someone else’s terrain tends to be seen as a sign of war. Russia needs more involvement from NATO as they at present are seen as the losing clowns of the global defense departments. You can blame losing a ground war on demoralized soldiers, even if you call for help from North Korea, but for them to let their ‘proud’ pilots taking the blame does not go over well and these generals are now desperate, and apparently too many have fallen out of windows. 

So as I see it, something has to change and I am all for Russia waving a white flag, but you know how Russian politicians are: better dead than dropping the red. And at present, this is how it looks, so it is better (for them) to get NATO involved. So they can cry that it was always NATO and they just weren’t ready. The Russian prostitutski’s will eat that like borsht with black bread. Besides that, there aren’t too many solutions out there for them at present. I reckon that the NATO card will be played more openly soon enough, because the NATO nations have figured out that play, as such the next step would be a larger incursion and an ‘accidental’ event of the “Oops” variety, but how large an event remains to be seen. I reckon that they will most likely target Tallinn for that, It is in view of Helsinki and too close to Stockholm, Oslo and Copenhagen for that to go unnoticed. And the NATO has been loading up their weapons for Russian bear in the last few months. Feel free to disagree and I am very willing to be seen as wrong, because this is not a happy moment for me, but that is seemingly how it sizes up to.

Oh, for the next story I will be loading up on Conspiracy Theory by a lot, so there is that to look forward to All that AI and not a predictive analytics mind in sight? I’m game. Have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics

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

September 25, 2025 · 02:51

That’s one way to see it

I saw a setting in the CBC yesterday, the setting was given (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/us-h1b-visa-canada-benefits-1.7640068) with the capture ‘The new, steep price for this U.S. visa could be a blessing for Canadian tech’. Well that’s one way to look at it I reckon. As such plenty of Amazon employees might wanna consider switching to Vancouver for that. The second reason is that they are a mere 90 minutes from the greatest ski slopes on the world. And the text “As the Trump administration moves to limit some skilled workers from entering the U.S. on a specialized visa, the Canadian tech sector is champing at the bit — hoping the new restriction will send talent up north.” I the directly seen setting for that. So with the added text ““Canada has built an entire industry by capturing this talent. And with this $100,000 fee, that trend is about to grow much stronger,” she said. “This is almost a gift because every time the U.S. closes the door on global talent, Canada gains.”” And as I see it, a direct blessing for Vancouver in disguise, other cities might benefit too from that. And it will benefit places like Amazon to set up locations in Vancouver, Toronto and Ottawa for AWS pools. I reckon that Google Portland, Google Seattle, Google Ann Harbor, Google Detroit might see the same setting as they are relatively close to Canada, which could save them a clean billion from the get go. I reckon that others like Microsoft would follow that example. It stands to reason that the new set places like AI verification places would be created in Canada as the whole range of NIP locations would require hundreds of Verification stations. Canada might do well to ensure these locations as President Trump is now making them too expensive to create them in the USA. Perhaps he forgot that Stargate without verification becomes useless near the moment those settings are switched on?

So as we are given ““There’s going to be a net benefit effect for Canada across the board,” said Andres Pelenur, an immigration lawyer and founding partner at Borders Law Firm in Toronto.” I guess he is seeing the upbeat Ka-Ching of the cash registers in his location and he might consider branching out to both Vancouver and Ottawa in the near future.

So as we are given “The visa isn’t exclusive to the tech sector, but 60 per cent of H-1B holders approved since 2012 have held computer-related jobs, according to Pew Research — and the visa is used heavily by giants like Apple, Amazon and Google.” Gives us the other setting that we until now ignored. What is Apple going to do? Set up a much larger distribution shop in Canada? Doesn’t that imply that President Trump is shooting himself in the foot yet again?

So as we see the response by Pew Research (which hilariously relies on foot shooting) with “The fate of the H-1B program – which offers U.S. employers a way to temporarily hire foreign workers in specialty occupations – has divided influential Republicans. Tech leaders like Elon Musk strongly support the program, while other Republicans question its impact on American workers. President Donald Trump imposed restrictions on the program in his first term, but his current policy agenda on H-1Bs remains under discussion. Meanwhile, bipartisan calls for H-1B reforms advocate for more oversight to protect American workers while addressing skill shortages.” But as I see it, the setting set into law with the use of a handpscribble makes that a little too late unless President Trump undoes the damage he has done, which is seemingly unlikely. Some will remember his smudging up the error that the coffee typo gave the press. And you can mesmerize on that whilst having a Trump Sandwich in Lambo’s Deli (176 Bellwoods Ave, Toronto). It being a sandwich with Baloney with a small pickle. The other one is on 1372 Queen St E, Toronto. Others might have it that option on their menus too.

Yes, Canadians like their comedy that is easy to swallow as good as Australians do. As such we are also relieved that around 400,000 H-1B applications for high-skilled foreign workers were approved in 2024. That’s more than twice the number of applications approved in fiscal 2000. Approvals peaked in 2022, when 442,425 applications were approved. (source: Pew Research Centre) Since 2013, the majority of approvals each year have been applications to renew employment. In 2024, 65% of approved applications, or 258,196, were renewals. The other 35%, or 141,207, were new applications for initial employment. And all that gathered workforce could now be heading toward Canada as well, and optionally reduce the pool of work seekers in Canada as well as adding fresh blood to Ottawa, a setting that place needs like yesterday. I reckon that the pools in Vancouver and Toronto are already well set. 

Beyond what is great for Canada, there is a larger industrial move already on its way and the VISA costs merely enhanced that setting and added a few requirements to the needs of Canada. Making it fast into the new work-hub to be for the Commonwealth. 

Good going Trump, you American president you. 🙂

So you all have a great day and start dreaming of a job in Canada whilst snacking on a Pizza at Eataly, they are opening in the Eaton centre in the near future, your place to be for fashion and interior needs in Toronto. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Politics

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

September 23, 2025 · 11:30

The time has come

I have been sitting on a story for about three days. I have been hesitant as it is a field I am thoroughly unaware off, but it could hit me in the future and as we are given (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-09-19/first-guardian-shield-collapse-asic-and-superannuation-flaws/105783328) the setting of ‘First Guardian, Shield superannuation disasters expose deep flaws in Australia’s $4.3 trillion retirement system’ we see that ABC is giving us not only cause for pause, but also cause for alarm we are set in a stage of almost desperate inability to protect our retirements. And lets be clear if Australia is set to a $4.3 trillion danger, what is the dangers towards America, Canada, the United Kingdom, France and Germany? 

I tried to illustrate dangers like this in ‘Wages of fear’ which I wrote in May 2023, two years ago (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/05/02/wages-of-fear/) and there I wrote “Lets be clear, this was NOT his fault, but the point where we cannot avoid what comes next was achieved. If only people had woken up a lot sooner. But there we got past a point where the problems would accelerate and now we are almost at that point. And the banks will be no help. I tried to warn you a few times over. Some of their risk and liquidity is in US bonds and when the US forfeits payment your 401K and many other things will become worth close to nothing” Now the fair question is, is this the same? I don’t think it is, but there is a larger failing into the retirement systems as it is not a hands on pathway. ABC in another story hands us “Ms Wohlers is one of about 12,000 Australians haunted by the loss of more than $1 billion of retirement savings after the collapses of First Guardian and Shield.” As well as “ASIC deputy chair Sarah Court, who has commonly described the First Guardian and Shield cases as “industrial-scale misconduct”, says the regulator acted as soon as it could. “We don’t think we missed red flags,” she told ABC News ahead of ASIC’s appearance at a parliamentary hearing on Thursday, when she was grilled by politicians about whether it was a tough cop on the beat properly identifying financial misconduct.” And it relates to the story we are given with ‘140 targeted by ASIC on Shield, First Guardian’ as I see it, a mess of a disastrous kind. Where the latter gives us “So, for example, the financial advisers are saying to us ‘you can’t hold us accountable for this because the ratings house had rated the Shield Master Fund as of investment grade’, while superannuation fund trustees are telling us the same – ‘well, we relied on the ratings houses’, or ‘we relied on the fact that these members had financial advice’,” (Source: Financial Newswire) I see it as a setting where there is a ring setting with no beginning and no end. I am in a setting where Microsoft could steal my IP and my only defense would be to convict 280,000 Microsoft employees to death and kill them myself. I get that this is utter madness, but that would be the result of one party just playing a game with other whilst that party knows that they cannot be held to account. I remember the rating houses in 2008 and they got away whilst millions lost it all. I see the simpler setting “You take from me, I take from you” and the setting that Microsoft losing over 45% of its staff (I am utterly destined to fail) making it implode on itself. Now take that to the setting of rating houses and the the truth comes out (if it ever does) the people need to react and react harshly. It is not ‘business as usual’ it will become business at the cost of souls and that is a harsh reality to face.

So whilst some will lawyer up and that is their right, they should not be allowed to walk away with even a dime. I reckon that they will sue the rating houses and those rating houses will need to get sanitized (to some extent) because losing billions is a larger setting and when Australia with their billions in losses (up to 4,300 billion) the setting for America and Canada is a lot more severe. And America up to ten times as much as Canada faces. And about a month ago we were given ‘ASIC takes further action against Ferras Merhi over First Guardian and Shield superannuation advice’ where we are given “ASIC has sought leave from the Federal Court to expand its existing proceeding against former financial adviser Ferras Merhi to allege he engaged in unconscionable conduct, failed to act in the best interests of clients, gave conflicted advice, and provided defective statements of advice whilst receiving millions of dollars.” Yet my question becomes did Ferras Merhi do anything illegal? You see, in my setting I would be, but did he do anything illegal? The setting revolves around “provided defective statements of advice whilst receiving millions of dollars”, so what makes a statement ‘defective’? You see, I am not protecting Ferras Mehri. I am looking at the following:

s12CB of the ASIC Act – engaging in conduct in connection with the supply or possible supply of financial services, which was in all the circumstances unconscionable.

So, what makes the setting of “all the circumstances unconscionable” an economist looks at this in one way and I as a law graduate and IT technician in another way. 

Then we get:
s952E of the Corporations Act – providing defective disclosure documents. As such, what makes the documents “defective disclosure documents”, I do not know and I look at them separately as that is what the law does and when merely one law falters, it all collapses (it matters later on).

Then we get:
s961B of the Corporations Act – failure to act in their client’s best interests, and what is that at the start? Most clients are ‘greed’ driven, they want the highest return and that is ‘their’ best interest. It is a hard lesson to learn that looking back the client gave the wrong advice to the advisor. I myself only work a balanced portfolio, I will never make large leaps but then again I am unlikely to lose a lot either. 

So in that setting we see:
the Court made interim freezing orders over Mr Merhi’s property. These orders remain in place until 12 December 2025 (25-024MR).
ASIC cancelled the AFSL of FSGA, effective 7 June 2025 and permanently banned its responsible manager (25-102MR).
In July 2025, the Court made travel restraint orders against Mr Merhi. Those orders prevent him from leaving or attempting to leave Australia until 12 December 2025, or until further order of the Court (25-024MR).

That is fair enough I reckon. But now we get to the settings that ABC at the top gave. We see there “In all of these cases, no criminal charges have been laid, but ASIC is heading to court to make allegations against the people at the centre of the Shield and First Guardian funds — those involved in managing and promoting the schemes.” The no criminal charges gives pause to consider that no criminal acts have transpired and when we look at some of the allegations the two that take the cake (a Tiramisu cake) is that the settings of “defective disclosure documents” must be proven and the lawyers will fight that. Then we get “all the circumstances unconscionable” and that is the ballgame, ‘unconscionable’ is not per se illegal and it is about the legality of the matter in court and that is the setting we see. So when I made a statement two years ago saying “Some of their risk and liquidity is in US bonds and when the US forfeits payment your 401K and many other things will become worth close to nothing” we see what bonds were worth 5 years ago. There we see “For the year, long-term U.S. Treasuries were by far the best-performing fixed-income investments, with a nearly 17% gain,” (source: Reuters) at present they are “the 10-year yield settled around 4.36%” that represents a loss of 13%, so who pays for that bond? This was a danger I saw 5 years ago (as uneconomical as I am) and 10 years ago I heard people to buy bonds as the interest is like free money and I stopped. There is no free ride and this is almost pushed into the AI field all whilst there is no verification in place. All settings that are interconnected and we now see the ABC giving us “expose deep flaws in Australia’s $4.3 trillion retirement system” so, what do you think you will end up with because as I see it, there is the chance that these people can do what they like all whilst there is no criminal accountability. Yes, he is stopped for now, but Ferras Merhi is about to walk away with more than $19 million in payments. As such he is willing to sweat it out for a few months. It is a lot more (like 79.2581 times more) than I ever made in my lifetime. 

So I see this case that ABC alerted me to with some suspicion. These people live by the setting of walking the edge of legality, there is no risk at that edge and I expect that Ferras Merhi is doing just that not doing anything illegal. As such 12,000 Australians are about to learn that they could lose it all without any illegal actions transpiring and I fault it to two settings (mentioned above) and we all considering setting the clocks to Islam where we see “Islamic banking prohibits the use of interest, speculation, and excessive risk. It emphasizes profit and loss sharing, fairness, honesty, and transparency in financial dealings.” By the way this setting was in place for hundreds of years. 

Have a great day and see that Statista gives us “Robusta, named because it can grow at a wider range of altitudes and temperatures, sold for 1.87 U.S. dollars in 2018, projected to sell at 5 U.S. dollars per kilogram in 2026” did you predict in 2018 that you would be setting your retirement to pay 267% for your coffee?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

September 18, 2025 · 06:59

The setting changes

That is at times a rule, but to call it the massive rule to measure things to is not the greatest rule to live by (you might have to think that sentence over a little while before it makes sense). You see, there is a story that bugs me and I was almost willing to let it go. But Yesterday in ‘Name Calling’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/09/17/name-calling/) I started down a rabbit hole, a hole that smothers and makes it hard to breath. You see the press to a much larger degree has become a populist media, they do not check sources (as shown yesterday) The media is losing credibility in massive waves. The problem is that I thought I was alone. When you are the only one shouting at a wall, is there a case that you yourself might have lost the focus? 

That was my premise (at first).

So when you start looking at the wall, not being a wall, but a sea the dimension changes. It is no longer the height, but the amount of water that becomes an issue (it makes sense after a little while) and when you start looking into the water and you realise that water is transparent, you start looking for things. As such I found several sources (I already had a few) and these sources are a lot more focussed on the sham that is the International Association of Genocide Scholars. There was the simplest setting that “a member in good standing—a status achieved simply by paying an annual fee of 30 dollars. No academic credentials are required” and this comes with the added quote “Dr. Sara Brown, regional director of the American Jewish Committee in San Diego and a scholar who has served on the IAGS advisory board, told The Media Line: “I was silenced. And the resolution was forced through. What really troubled me was the way that it was presented to mainstream media, that 86 percent of the association had unanimously agreed to condemn Israel for genocide. That’s inaccurate. And to be perfectly honest, it lacks academic integrity, basic integrity to falsely represent the association and falsely cite statistics.”” (source: the media line) The France24 news (added in yesterday’s blog) had a few other settings that were weird, but the overbearing setting was that the media didn’t care, they preferred to not do their job. They became (as I personally see it) as courtesans towards the digital dollar. 

The medicine also gives us “Only 28 percent of the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) cast a ballot in the resolution declaring Israel guilty of genocide in Gaza. Of those who voted, 108 supported the measure—less than a quarter of the association’s total membership. Yet international outlets, including The Guardian, AP, Reuters, The Washington Post, and the Financial Times reported the outcome as if it were a sweeping consensus of the world’s foremost genocide experts. Critics inside and outside the association now argue that the process was unrepresentative and that the coverage misled the public into believing in unanimity where none existed.” Now I wanted to have a setting that if people like Amal Clooney (a revered British lawyer and human rights activist) was part of that list, you get a mixed setting, but that is as I see it less of a case. The doughty street chambers adds this to her name “Amal Clooney is a barrister who specializes in international law and human rights. She is ranked in the legal directories Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners  as a leading barrister in international human rights law, public international law, and international criminal law. She is described as ‘a brilliant legal mind’ who is ‘in a league of her own at the Bar’. The directories spotlight her ‘commanding presence before courts’ and describe her as ‘a dream performer before international tribunals’ with ‘superb advocacy’ that is ‘crystal clear in focus and highly persuasive’. The rankings emphasize her ability to galvanize ‘heads of state, foreign ministers and business … in a way that is very effective’ for victims of human rights abuses.” That would be a legal mind to say ‘wow’ to, but when you see the feedback from the IAGS (in the France24 story) stating that it goes through a “rigorous peer reviewing process” and that it went through three separate committees. Now here is the crunch, there are 500 members, did they came from that pool? Where is the paperwork on that? And that happens before the vote. So how was the voting set? What was the minimum amount of votes? Only 28% voted as other sources gave its (the France24 article never brought that out) the article also ‘pressed’ of those who voted. As I see it, Melanie O’Brien never gave the details and more over France24 never pushed anything on this. And she skipped over the report being a three page document. That alone should have halted the press. They didn’t. The joke about the journalist no one cares about was 106 pages (the UN document). One person, so how come that the ‘genocide’ setting that players like Hamas feed us can be summarized in three pages? So how is ‘extensive’ research done in three pages? And who are these reliable and extensive sources? That entire sham (about 4 minutes of it) was swallowed whole by the audience.

So, here I am digesting several matters. As such it is time to call in some assistance and (at https://www.thefp.com/p/another-reason-not-to-trust-the-experts) wee see that the Free Press gives us ‘Another Reason Not to Trust the ‘Experts’’ and it starts by giving us “The International Association of Genocide Scholars calls itself a body of experts, but joining requires only a form and a fee. Members include parody accounts like ‘Mo Cookie’ and ‘Emperor Palpatine.’” And the story start of in a most interesting way. “This week, the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) voted on a resolution that accused Israel of committing genocide in its war against Hamas. Like moths to a flame, the mainstream press ran wild with the story of the organization’s declaration. “Israel Is Committing Genocide in Gaza, Leading Scholars’ Association Says,” ran the headline in The Washington Post.”

And in continuation we get “The Guardian quoted the president of the association, Melanie O’Brien, declaring that the resolution represented “a definitive statement from experts in the field of genocide studies that what is going on on the ground in Gaza is genocide.” In another interview with ABC News Australia, O’Brien boasted that the resolution passed with nearly 90 percent support. The BBC’s headline read: “Israel Committing Genocide in Gaza, World’s Leading Experts Say.” The problem for these publications is that if you kick the tires—even slightly—it becomes obvious that the resolution is a sham, top to bottom.” And the press is not waking up? You have gotta be joking me. With the source that according to most started the wave of looking into this setting we are given “On Tuesday evening, Salo Aizenberg, a board member of HonestReporting and contributor to NGO Monitor, tested that proposition. After exploring the IAGS website, he found that he could become a member of the organization with just a $30 contribution. “This organization that purports to be a leading organization of scholars is open to anyone who is interested,” he told The Free Press.” I got alerted to this setting by the Javier Bardem (who told us all on the red carpet in the Emmy event) and someone who went to town on this in LinkedIn. That was my trigger to give you yesterday’s blog and I found out most of what I know in under an hour of investigation. As such what did the Guardian, the Washington Post and ABC News Australia do? Is it weird that I call the ‘Courtesans of the digital dollar’? (I considered that calling them greed driven whores was too crass a statement to make). We then get “IAGS’s open membership is important because as Aizenberg learned in his research on the website, 80 of the 500 members of IAGS all claim to be based in Iraq—a country not known for universities with robust genocide scholarship. But it’s even worse than that. Only 108 out of the organization’s 500 members actually voted for the resolution. So contra O’Brien, only 21.6 percent of the IAGS supported it, not nearly 90 percent. That figure represents 108 out of the 129 people who bothered voting for the resolution at all.” As well as “One IAGS member, Sara Brown, the author of Gender and Genocide in Rwanda, posted on X that the leadership of the organization prevented members from filing comments criticizing the resolution before the vote. “We were promised a town hall, which is a common practice for controversial resolutions,” she wrote, “but the president of the association reversed that. The association has also refused to disclose who were the authors of the resolution.” After reading through the resolution, it’s easy to understand why the identities of the authors were shielded from the other members of the group. It’s riddled with inaccuracies and deceptive language. For example, the first paragraph asserts that Israel has killed “59,000 adults and children in Gaza,” without distinguishing between civilians and Hamas fighters.” You need to read the rest in the Free Press article (link above) And there is more to ‘convict’ the IAGS of, they make a sham of several settings and the press has no other recourse but to convict them as well, because if they do not, the press will have proven themselves to be biased and unworthy to call themselves news media. There is of course the funny setting that all these papers will have to be charged VAT from now on as most hide behind the zero VAT setting for being news sources. When that stops their advertisers go the way of the Dodo really fast.

The media line also gave us “For her, the flaws went beyond procedure. “They cite U.N. sources … and if you look at the citation, it says data that has not yet been verified by the United Nations, and then in footnote five it says Ministry of Health Gaza—the Hamas-run Ministry of Health,” she pointed out. “The fact that those are the statistics that they had to cite and it’s in the first paragraph immediately speaks to a lack of academic integrity … It’s not even academically lazy. It’s reckless. And the harm is real.””

The article can be seen (at https://themedialine.org/top-stories/only-28-of-scholars-associations-members-voted-on-gaza-genocide-resolution-but-global-media-missed-the-story/) and that part gives us that The Media line as ‘trusted news’ is a lot more trustworthy than the mainstream media at present. 

Darn, I forgot to shine the limelight on Microsoft again (my personal behemoth) and in that same setting I now wish you a good day and consider trusting the news media a lot less than before. So to all of you, have a great day today and don’t forget to question your news vendor at some point.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics

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

September 17, 2025 · 05:18

Name calling

That is the uncertain certainty we all face. We talk about rats, we call people turncoats, but how many people are aware of the term ‘Dicky Dick’? That is what I saw evolve last night. You see, there is a stage of misinformation that I found repulsive. In this I am calling towards the Emmy’s and in particular the quote by Javier Bardem, he made mention of the IAGS.

As such I offer the video (at https://www.youtube.com/shorts/BDPoQ273RmU) that will give you a considerable jolt. Whilst on the other side we get (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LrUXCU6_mjI) France24 with the IAGS talking on air. So here is the setting and the first one is important as it gives the issues we tend to ‘ignore’ Who are these scholars. How many voted, how many members? In another video I saw member names like Adolf Hitler and a few more hilarious settings, like a canola Jedi. Then we get to a publication called Quillette (I have never heard of them) giving us (at https://quillette.com/2025/09/11/the-genocide-scholars-who-cant-define-genocide-iags-israel/) ‘The Genocide Scholars Who Can’t Define Genocide’ giving us “The International Association of Genocide Scholars (“IAGS”) recently announced that 86 percent of their members had concluded that Israel was committing genocide in Gaza. This was extremely misleading. First of all, only around 28 percent of their members voted on the resolution and a mere twenty percent of total members approved it. And this was not the only problem with the resolution. It also misrepresented the crime of genocide.” As I see it, this should wake you up and it is just another slap n the face of the media, not vetting the sources they have. It gives us the supporting setting of “Genocide is an act undertaken with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, as such. If you cannot establish a specific intent to commit this crime (such an intent is known in legal parlance as dolus specialis), you cannot establish genocide.” As well as “The IAGS resolution did not even attempt to establish such an intent, relying instead on statements made by other entities and by extrapolating from what the organisation B’Tselem has described as a “broader analytical framework.” However, legally, genocide requires a fully conclusive finding, meaning that no other explanation exists for the event or events in question other than the intent to commit the crime of genocide. This does not apply here, as there are alternative explanations for the casualties in Gaza that the IAGS fails to recognise.” And then we get to the report of France24. Can anyone tell me why Gaza’s cannot escape to Egypt? It borders Egypt on one side. As such they aren’t “boxed in” so why isn’t the press asking clarification from the government of Egypt? I am certain that at least a dozen media channels haven’t done that. Has anti-Israel grown that much in the western media?

And the Quillette article is showing us a lot more and shows the media to be at fault for ever relying on the IAGS. The article was written by Elliot Malin is apparently an attorney and policy advocate. I am using the word apparently as in this instance I am confronted with a whole heap of sources I never heard before and as such there are issues. Oh, and before you sign off on anything. When has anyone mentioned the setting of Hamas in all of this, because THEY started this. And whilst their ‘leaders’ are hiding in Qatar (were until recently, before the Israeli air force made short work of them). Now there are further escalations and no one is wondering why Qatar was keeping Hamas leaders in the first place. 

This setting has all the works of misdirection. So now the setting of a Dicky Dick. That is a legal professional who knowingly and willingly works for organized crime. As such, what do you call a person who knowingly and willingly is calling himself an expert in (for example) ‘Genocide’ whilst having no legal or military expertise in the matter? Something to consider and what do you call the media who is optionally intentionally using such sources for painting an anti-semitic image?

Another part to consider. I am not an expert (even though I have some military expertise) and this setting is turning my stomach and when people like Javier Bardem take stage to elevate these non-experts. Questions need to be asked. I am very willing to state that the intentions of Javier Bardem were good. After all the media is the bigger culprit, how big? That remains the question.

Have a great day.

1 Comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

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

September 7, 2025 · 11:10

Continuity through science

That is what I realised last night, science is a balancing continuous factor in our lives. It isn’t good, it is’t bad, it merely is. You see, we all saw the end of the United States on the last day. It wasn’t tariffs, it wasn’t economic sanctions (although they helped). It was the simple rebranding of the Department of Defense to the Department of War. That act ended the United States. Whatever President Donald ‘the duck’ Trump sets it, it is the end of a world setting the stage of a better day from 1776 to 2025. And you can read ‘his’ reasoning (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/05/department-war-defense-trump-executive-order-pentagon). The world needs a balance, not some woke balance, a real balance and his actions are a joke to begin with. He has given Russia pause by two weeks again and again. Some war department he has. 

And my setting in this is that at some point he goes around the need for congressional approval the next time he needs it (like Canada and Greenland) and that next tier gets set to a massive destabilizer. At present his acts are setting the scientific world in an uproar. Their continuation is gone and now they are finding Chinese settings, at times through the Arabian peninsula to moderate whatever they need and I reckon before the end of 2027 The bulk of scientific progress comes from China, no longer from America (or South Korea). At present the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Keir Starmer is no longer useful to the scientific community either. He is too much of an American appeaser to be taken seriously. This leaves us Canada, but at present they are in danger of becoming the 51st state and that is not what they want, or what the Canadians want, but that setting is now getting more and more in the open. As the scientific community wants stability, at present, it seems that only China can offer that. Could I be wrong?

That is the ball game, but as we see Australian politics seemingly catering to American needs, the Commonwealth is done for and they will at some point rally behind Prime Minister minister of India Shri Narendra Modi. I reckon he never thought that he might become the leading voice of the Commonwealth. That is the reality the world faces and at that point China will be strong enough to take on Russia and America at the same time. I reckon that when the dies are cast, America will enter another civil war, not like in the movies, but a setting where the poor learn that their pensions are gone, Wall Street banked it all on red, all whilst the common people were black. That is the second setting America faces. We all see the media throwing a tantrum stating that some state made 4 billion in 2024, all whilst the 2025 numbers are ghastly. Now they demand an explanation and the media will come up short ending their short lived courtesan lives towards the digital dollar. 

You can agree or disagree with my views. I’m fine with that. I do not care. I’m just alerting you to the settings that by 2028 I will have been proven right with my views on the matter. I don’t care to be correct, I merely demand to be recognised after the fact and the media has a way of retrenching the truth according what makes them the most money.

So see what I told you and take the facts you are given and make your own conclusions. The $703 billion revenue state of California is about to get a rude awakening as 2026 goes on its merry way and $235 billion state of Florida will not do much better. They are about to get the rudest wake up calls in lost revenue and bankruptcies in their own histories in about 3 months. That basically set the tender to New York and Wall Street will take that lesson and bank in whatever they can and their captains of industry will walk out of whatever they had with whatever they can carry, as such diamonds will become a swift moneymaker as these people will walk out with whatever they can carry to a non-extradition zero tax place. 

And me myself and I (the Lawlordtobe) called it today that I accept that verdict as well if I’m wrong. You see, it is not merely about being right, it is about recognizing that I might be wrong and I can blame the media, but is that fair? I am merely reacting to a setting that the media gives me over a number of countries and I am trying to make my fortune with what I have as clearly as day. So have a great day, California and British Columbia join us on this Sunday in less than six hours.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

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

August 30, 2025 · 23:03

Disconcerting thoughts

We all have those, it isn’t about being nice, or being not so nice. They merely are and they are at times thrust upon us by outside influences. As such I had a few when I was told that ‘Federal judge allows 9/11 lawsuit against Saudi Arabia to proceed’ (at https://www.aa.com.tr/en/americas/federal-judge-allows-9-11-lawsuit-against-saudi-arabia-to-proceed/3672771) I was puzzled. Saudi Arabia was on the side of America as they hunt Al Qaeda, more over there has been more than one report that the CIA aided Osama Bin Laden in their needs in the time frame From 1979 to 1992, as part of CIA activities in Afghanistan, specifically Operation Cyclone. As such why aren’t these people suing the CIA? I am not saying that is the best course of action. I am merely saying that if justice is what you are seeking, that might be one way to go. Of course if it is money you seek, the CIA might not have as much. I got a lot from CBS as well.

They give me (at https://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-families-911-victims-sue-saudi-arabia-over-hijackers/) ‘Judge allows families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia for allegedly helping hijackers’ the setting becomes, what kind of assistance has been given? And lets not forget Osama Bin Laden as a CIA asset would have been able to thwart any ideology and assistance setting to make people pay for what they need. It is a CIA tactic, as such ‘what gives?’

That is the setting we need to look at. So whilst we are looking at “A federal judge in New York denied a motion by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to dismiss a lawsuit brought by families of 9/11 victims who are seeking to hold the Middle Eastern country responsible for potentially providing support to the hijackers, allowing the suit to proceed.” As well as “Saudi Arabia had the suit temporarily dismissed in 2015, before the dismissal was overturned by a federal appeals court. While the appeal was pending in 2016, Congress enacted a law known as the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act, which allowed victims of terror attacks to sue foreign governments and individuals if they provided material support to the attackers. It also gave U.S. courts jurisdiction over potential lawsuits filed over injuries and deaths in attacks on U.S. soil.” Here I get a laughing spell. You see when we consider “Congress enacted a law known as the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act” this little act would put the hairline on the CIA. As such the Saudi Government would be able to push the CIA to spill the beans on several projects running from 1979 through to 1992. And that will et the markers against the CIA for the largest extent. The question becomes does the Saudi Government have the events documented? If might give the Saudi Government the opportunity to get Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri to give evidence as he was a mainstay link between Saudi Arabia and western intelligence agencies, including the Five Eyes alliance, and was credited with helping Muhammad bin Nayef transform and modernise the Saudi security services and their counter-terrorism methods. As such he would be a person Saudi Government would like to ask a few questions of and in that same setting former-CIA Director John Brennan and both would have had ‘interactions’ with Osama Bin Laden. Yes, this case is really a good way to expose the dirty laundry of the CIA.

My interest? I don’t really have any, other than the ‘evidence’ that “Decades ago, investigators also found a notebook in Bayoumi’s home that seemed to show a drawing of a plane and a mathematical equation that could be used to calculate the rate of descent to a target.” I found that piece strange. You see the Microsoft Flight Simulator is an excellent simulator. As such why the ‘evidence’ when a top notch PC has the ability to set a lot more in motion and that is the figment I found missing. That evidence would not need to be in America. A place like Indonesia would be able to hide it, they could have a muslim vacation there and as such there would be a lot to be made available. The entire setting could be moved to a memory stick and kept on the person (or in a safe space) when pieces don’t fit I wonder about things. And this is a yummy exercise and it can go in all the wrong directions and this justice setting introduced by US District Judge George Daniels gives a new setting, one that puts the briefs of the CIA out to the open and the added delicacy is that they get to expose Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri allegedly yet again.

It is but a small cog in the wheels of justice, but in this case the people get their day in court. I merely wonder what court they get into and what Saudi Arabia could bring to the table. 

We can focus on the setting that “Omar al-Bayoumi and Fahad al-Thumairy — assisted the hijackers while they were in California.” But the larger issue become, is there a direct link between Osama Bin Laden and these two nationals. Then we get to the setting what these two nationals actually did and did they have certain people allowing them the acts, or merely graced the misuse of Saudi officials. That second part is important, because that comes with a larger setting. There would be little evidence putting it to the front of the evidence pile and whilst that is happening, the Saudi Government will be able to call former-CIA Director John Brennan to the stand with the setting that now current exile Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri gets called into the court and the CIA was so adamant into ‘protecting’ him from exposing the billions he brought to the table.

Yes, this episode of comedy capers will get a few reruns over the entire globe. All whilst it is done in the name of Justice. As such what evidence will suddenly ‘find’ its way to the leaky press corp?

Just a few details to keep in mind here. Have a great day today, my Monday starts is 56 minutes.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics

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