Category Archives: Media

Simple History

It all started with a tweet I saw a few hours ago, it was tweeted 14 hours ago. See the image below, Elon Musk gives a response that sounds nice, but he is more clued in on finance, so he was every bit as aware as I am, this is going south really fast now. 

This jugged my memory and I had to search the system (and my memory) for this. It was an article I wrote in May 6th 2020, well over 2 and a half years ago called ‘New World Order’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/05/06/new-world-order/) where I wrote “Even at 1%, the US will have to hand over $25,000,000,000 in interest, and there the setting is stage, or better yet the stage is set. The BBC reported that “The government has also extended the annual 15 April deadline for tax payments adding to the cash crunch” it is the final downfall acts through a consumer based economy and we will all feel that crunch as the US governing table will now mandatory include a representative of the banks, not some ‘political commission’, no a stage where the banks set the stage of what is allowed to be done.” I was overly optimistic, the tweet gives rise that the interest is a whopping $853 billion, a lot more than I guessed at, over 25% of the entire budget to merely pay interest, no debt reduction, to do that about a third of the budget needs to go there and the impact will finally be visible 15-35 years from now. As I also gave you then “No matter how we see it, the US has no stage to pay for the interest on $25,000,000,000,000. Their economy will not allow for that, so what will drain first, their pension plans, or will they pay out of the unemployment funds? The banks will get their pound of flesh and they do not care how the US brings the numbers, as long as they bring them, when this new bill comes across, the numbers are reached and the needs of the banks can no longer be ignored. Aneconomy by commission driven people, the almost ultimate nightmare towards an economy you do not want to consider.” And now we are there, the USA is inches away of a debt interest of a trillion dollars. Do you still think I was an idiot trying to sell my IP to Saudi Arabia? They are about the only player that has any money left and some there would think my $50,000,000 is mere lunch money for them. The US has no funds left and over the next few years as infrastructure buckles over the lack of repairs and upgrades. The US played the wrong cards all whilst they had very little options to begin with and now it starts to hurt them. 850 billion is a large interest ticket, too large. And it could have been prevented so as the US is now drawing close to sell whatever IP they have to stay afloat, others will own what the US should never have surrendered and as I see it my (still unsuccessful) choice to sell my IP to Saudi Arabia or the Kingdom Holding Company seems to have been the better idea (would be nice for them to buy it) and soon there is every chance that Saudi Arabia will have no problems holding defence options. The US might have to sell their airforce IP to reduce debt by 2-3 trillion dollars. A choice they would have never considered in the past might soon become their only way out and with that sell they would keep revenue away from China as well, so there is more than one reason to do whatever they will decide on. 

A stage I saw coming in May 2020, so how much media was on board? Interesting that they remained silent on serious matters. As such we will see what will come next, but to be honest I left clues in m articles over the last 2 years and when it happens showing you when I saw it coming whilst some media will give you some exclusive news, you just wonder how exclusive it actually was. The US went from superpower to close to a third world power in less than a quarter of a century. Presentation is all fine, but if you have nothing to show for it, it becomes a slideshow no one cares about and that is what I expect will happen a lot sooner than even I expected it to happen.

Advertisement

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Some hypocrisy

I saw the news earlier this week and I kinda shrugged it off. In the end it was about “Djokovic’s father was photographed with the Putin supporters after his son’s quarter-final win over Russia’s Andrey Rublev.” I cannot judge this part as I did not see how it all happened. This is important for a few reasons. And the idea that his father has to watch it on TV is a bit of an issue for me.

You see to get that part of the equation, you need to learn something. Yesterday I was given ‘Why are so many Western companies still doing business in Russia?’ by the Strategist. The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (at https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/why-are-so-many-western-companies-still-doing-business-in-russia/) here we see “The study identified 1,404 companies headquartered in EU and G7 countries with a total of 2,405 subsidiaries in Russia before its February 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Only 120 of these companies, or 8.5% of the total, had ‘exited’ at least one of their subsidiaries by the end of November.” So where is your outrage now? Why is the media not hounding these players? Actually, why is the media not hounding these players? You have a go at some father whilst we see that the bulk is selling their wares in Russia, what a bunch of cowards you are. So 90% is still filling their pockets and I actually do not care what they are selling, they are supporting the Russians and their war efforts, so here is my message for Ukraine’s Australian ambassador Vasyl Myroshnychenko who stated that “Tennis Australia should ban Srdjan Djokovic for “such a disgrace’’”. I have nothing against Vasyl and he has genuine beef with the Russians, so I get it. But I am PERSONALLY holding him responsible for investigating the media and why they are not all over these thousands of businesses who are still selling to Russia. I get that we are given “The researchers acknowledge that there are many sound reasons why companies might fail to withdraw. ‘A Western firm operating in a sector excluded from official sanctions may decide that it is inappropriate to abandon its Russian customers, who may have played no part in the decision to invade Ukraine or in the prosecution of the armed conflict,’ they wrote.” But is that enough? What do you think Vasyl Myroshnychenko? Is it enough? In this US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has repeatedly called on the US business sector to strengthen the resilience of its supply chains by ‘friend-shoring’, or redirecting investment to allies. In the context of the risk of conflict in the Taiwan Strait, she urged US businesses to pay greater heed to geopolitical realities. Which is also massively fair. Yet in light of the outburst that Vasyl Myroshnychenko gave us, I reckon he is now equally responsible to hand out outrage of these businesses still doing businesses with Russia and he needs to expose them all, because when over 1,000 businesses are still selling to the Russians, they are sure to miss out on the pressures that would force the Russian army to fall back. What do you say? Do you think I have a case here? I believe I do, but I am but one voice (so is Janet Yellen) should more be done? I will let you decide on that and decide what you should do to make is harder on Russia, even if it is for the simple reason to give Paddington bear time to eat his marmalade sandwich.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

And I was right (yet again)

This all started for me on the 8th of January when I wrote ‘Little shits’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/01/08/little-shits/) I asked questions then which was mere hour after the event. Now the BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-64406295) ‘Three warnings before US boy, 6, shot teacher – lawyer’ a mere hour ago. We get to see “This included a request to search the boy and a report from another child who said the boy had shown him a gun. The teacher – Abigail Zwerner, 25 – is recovering after being released from hospital last week. In the fallout, the school’s superintendent has now lost his job.” I had clear questions which did not reflect on the quotes. I wondered why the mother had not been taken away on suspicion of attempted negligent manslaughter, there is a case to be made for co-conspirator for grievous bodily harm, none of that happened. And when we get to “The removal of Mr Parker happened only hours after Ms Zwerner’s lawyer, Diane Toscano, announced plans to sue the district, saying the shooting was “entirely preventable”.” It is sacrificing superintendent Parker to make the optional damage less. But that is not the case, it is actually a lot worse. It is seen with “Virginia law prohibits anyone from recklessly leaving a loaded, unsecured firearm in such a way that may endanger a child under 14 years of age.” The added “the gun used by the boy had been legally purchased by his mother. The boy’s family said the weapon had been “secured”. Police have not responded to this claim” merely makes this worse. You see, if it was secured a 6 year old should not be able to get to it, you do get that, don’t you. I saw this in the first instance, questions should have been asked and they are brushed away on a few levels, so as I see it, the monetary claim for the shot teacher will go into the millions and she will win. When her lawyer Diane Toscano has a go at the people still there, this case will be decided for the teacher and I expect this will be a quick decision. And it also shows how much of a joke American schools are. They are all about safety and no guns and basic security is overlooked as the article clearly shows. So when I hear another idiot shout gun laws, I will tell them to get a clue and leave their young child at the Richneck Elementary School in Virginia. The quote “The official allegedly responded: “Well, he has little pockets.”” Merely angered me more. 

You see, I can kill a person with a simple Derringer .22. A gun is a tool and the army trained me to use this tool properly. One you see the elements that make for a gun, a flintlock pistol can be just as deadly as a magnum .44, the bullet kills and the bullet does not need to be large, a decent understanding of anatomy gets you there. So the entire Richneck Elementary School farce is a big joke from start to finish and I saw the elemental issue on January 8th, it seems that the BBC is only catching on 2 weeks after the fact and they aren’t even there yet. If they were the articles would have been a lot more aggressive and the media as a whole failed people and future victims in all of this. A stage that has been visible for weeks and no one acted, more important, the media isn’t asking any questions. With all the anti gun sentiments, are you not curious why?

Consider “The boy’s family”, no mention of the father, the mother and the mother is only mentioned to the smallest degree. So who was responsible for keeping the firearm secured? How did a 6 year old get to it? It might be an acceptable reason, but that also sets the bar for Doli Incapax higher and the mention of “the family of the young boy said he suffered from an “acute disability”” just doesn’t cut the mustard. This case stinks to high heaven and the media isn’t doing it job. Why not?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

Pussies in the Pentagon?

OK, that is not really true, I get it. This all reminds me of an old joke. The doctor arrives in the morning asking the night nurse if something happened during the night. She says nothing, and then ohh yes, the hypochondriac they brought in during the night died. 

You think it is funny and of course to some extent it is, but there is another side. For decades we were kept in fear that Russia was the big bad, the great evil, the big fighter. Yet at present, a year after they tried to overtake Ukraine, a nation with the 21st largest armed forces is fighting off and winning against one of the top three nations (there will always dispute whether China, Russia or America is number one). Russia is becoming the defence joke of all time. Their army is demoralised and unable to keep any kind of battle tactic in play. They are for the most nothing more than rapers and war criminals. Their materials are buckling under minimum pressure and whatever is abandoned by Russian armed forces is repaired and added to the Ukrainian battle tactics. They rely on the Wagner mercenaries who are getting killed as easily as the Russian armed forces and their commander ran to Norway to defect. That is the army we all feared for decades. Or as some might say, their trains cannot run as they have flat tires. We see the introduction of horses carrying the wounded and in the demonstration the horse kicks the bed dummy of its saddle. The Russian army is failing on many fronts. Their missiles are not as they pound civilian targets again and again. And the west does very little. I saw week after week some debate on leopard 2 tanks. They are apparently finally shipping to Ukraine. 

So is the failing Russian army the best kept lie in NATO? There is no way that these failings were not on the visors of the CIA, and if they were not how massively did they fail? It is like the Dutchman Rob de Wijk, we need to acknowledge that Russia is a nuclear power (if that part works) so we need to tread carefully, but there is a difference to tread carefully and there is treading cautiously letting Russia get away with war crimes and crimes against humanity and the second part has been in play for much too long. 

To be honest, it would be an idea to try my contraption on one of the 38 nuclear plants Russia has. Three or four would be enough to show Russia what an energy crises really feels like. I got the idea from a snow globe, so it could be flawed, yet isn’t it better to test it in Russia at present? In Russia alone there are enough people willing to try that idea out. The setting is however not that simple. We see all the nations contributing weapons and armour, but at present for the most the Ukraine at present is alone when it comes to soldiers and I wonder why. We see Russia rely on Wagner mercenaries who are even less effective than the 122,000 soldiers they lost at present. 

And at present Russia is not stopping with their acts of terrorism, willing to allow others to lose even more. At what cost and can we afford to lose the losses that the Ukraine is losing? What more should we allow to lose? There comes a time that enough is enough and we are very far past that point, but the news is shouting, they are dangerous. Are they? When the FBI (certain people) aid Russian oligarchs (Oleg Deripaska) in certain matters, we have gone long past the time of catering and we are seemingly whoring for the Russian bear. It is now time to stop that and we all need to chip in, or we become a simple Russian knave forever at their back and call, I am certainly not willing to become one of those, are you?

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics

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.

Leave a 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

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.

Leave a comment

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.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media

Little shits

That happens, we meet kids and some are nice, some are actual and factual shits. So what do we do about them, just feed them to the wolves? So what about one of them who at the age of 6 shoots their teacher? That is what we are left with when I saw the Dutch NOS and a few others give us (at https://www.npr.org/2023/01/06/1147629793/shooting-virginia-elementary-school-6-year-old) ‘A teacher shot by 6-year-old in Virginia is showing signs of improvement’ with “He also would not comment on how the boy got access to the gun or who owns the weapon”. In my view this case stinks. The parents have not been arrested for questioning. The gun is not currently identified to an owner. A six year old shit got a gun and gunned down its teacher! Even if he is not responsible under the law through doli incapax, there are a few who are and I point at the parents in the first instance. So far NO report shows that the parents were arrested, or interrogated over the case. If that is the stage, the US has earned the right to see many more shootings in schools until they fix this mess. They have the gun, so they can trace (to some degree) the owner, where it was sold and so on. In addition, we see the press avoid all kinds of places here. The lack of press is almost impressive. If Kim Kardassian breaks her bra clip on TV, we would have the retailer as well as the fashion designer on TV within the hour being interrogated by the media. Now we have close to nothing. Someone is orchestrating here, there is pretty much no other explanation left. 

I saw some of the news, they do not know how it got past the detectors. Well, if you have seen one 6 year old you have seen dozens of them, all with their favourite metal lunch box. It is speculative, but there was intent here, so put the sandwiches on top and the security guard will think nothing of it, and lets be fair, a six year old with a gun? After that it is simple. But it is not entirely that is it? A six year old shot a teacher. That took mindset, stupid mindset, but mindset none the less. The press is not looking into this, optionally merely trivialising it. So what part do the parents play? Well, as I see it the mindset tends to come from parents, not peer pressure, not at that age. But no one is looking at the parents, why not? 

The lack of information leaves me with a lot more questions and I wonder what we will hear in a few days, but I intent to take another look at all this down the road, I have to.

2 Comments

Filed under Media, Politics

It is the same coin

I got alerted to something via Twitter. It has two sides and a friend of mine had one side, as such I give you the tweet below. This of course made me look at the YouTube by Simon Pegg (the Hot Fuzz man). 

He was emotional and he has a point, but so does my friend. Optionally they do not realise that they are both a side of the same coin, one cannot exist without the other. It is a flaw in those heralding science as the one solution, it never is. It merely becomes some Theranos creation, all science and too much of it debatable. You see my friend had the answer in her tweet. Alan Turing created something from nothing. A setting that is utterly impossible. He got there through an artsy side in him. Alan Turing created the foundations of computers and AI, both required an art element to get there. You see, even when we realise it was all science, his brain had to make some leap of faith and that requires art, science alone will not let you do that. He created these two and his foundation of AI is still used today, over half a century later, with all the elements of evolved science, his artsy side overcame what did not yet exist. It is one of the reasons that (even if I was not eligible), I would have voted for Brian Blessed to become Chancellor of Cambridge in 2011, but I was not eligible. It became Lord Sainsbury of Turville, my issue here is that science was taking too big a chunk of what was almost an even Steven setting. I personally believe that Science without art is pointless, art without science is useless. It is not completely true, but as an axiom it often works. Science without art cannot grow because science for the most relies on previous data and as such NEW technologies cannot evolve. Alan Turing created (for the most) the foundations of electronics. It required investigations into the electron as well, but when you see that Alan Turing created AI half a century before we had any partial foundation of that is optionally evidence enough. 

The other side needs to be illuminated as well. Simon Pegg did this (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHEpywFCtwA) in his own emotional way and he does have a point, but so did my friend. The artsy people tend to ignore that science is their friend. Take any movie, the lights are set up to maximise the effect, it is not art, that foundation is science, science created the camera and a lot of other parts. They use that technology and they use it well. But it supports art and that is forgotten. That being said that children need maths, but they need art too and the science pushers are all about ‘forgetting’ the art and that power. You see, if you have all science and no art, you end up creating Theranos minded creators. The ones that are convicted for fraud and end up well over 11 years in prison. Art might have prevented this (and created an actual solution). In that same setting it might be the flaw that created FTX and the $33,000,000,000 losses it ensued. 

I myself tend to grasp back to an old Market research credo. “The scientist, or mathematician will show you the course of best margins of profit, or best results. The presenter, or politician makes sure that you look forward to the attached invoice” it is a bit artsy but therefor not any less true. We need to realise that art and science are to sides of the same coin. Science made it circular and the artsy people gave it a nice image. We need another and there is one part we should all agree to, if Rishi Sunak wants to imbue a sense of science, he better be ready to imbue an equal measure of art in these people, because Simon Pegg is right about that part. Science without the art will have far reaching negative impacts. We need one another to see it, one shows us, one presents it and that has been the case from before that writer William Shakespeare became a reality. It goes back all the way to the outdoor Theatre of Dionysius where in 500BC Sophocles, Euripides, Aeschylus, and Aristophanes performed, but we forget that science created the stage for over 15,000 people to enjoy, that part was science, not art. And it was there centuries before Christianity became reality.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science