It is a fair question and it has been asked before. You see, I hate hypocrisy to the largest extent. And thanks to the Australian Arms Control Coalition (AACC) there is now a larger chance that I will be able to sell the Chinese Chengdu J-20 to Saudi Arabia. The planes are around $100 million each and I will try to start with 6 planes, with a service setting and training that will add up to almost a billion, as such 3.75% of $1,000,000,000 is still 37,500,000, with the option of two more sales tracks it adds up to serious money. To be honest, I would have preferred to sell the BAE Typhoon, yet the idiots t the CAAT made an end to that and as I want my commission, I will sell Chinese goods if I so please, so not only did the CAAT and the AACC not achieve anything, they dislodged their governments for a billion in taxable goods, as such things will go from bd to worse rather quickly. And as the ACCC is so about “Instead of exporting arms and military equipment to Saudi Arabia and the UAE for use in Yemen, Australia, the US, and other nations should be pressing these governments to end their unlawful attacks in Yemen and hold those responsible to account” (at https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/02/04/australia-freeze-arms-sales-saudi-arabia-uae), we see the stupidity of Elaine Pearson, Australia director at Human Rights Watch in action. You see they have absolutely nothing to stop the Iranian/Houthi side of things, and they started this mess. So the entire she said/she said mess that both the CAAT and the AACC are revolving around, the stage where we see is thwarted and made useless because they are focussing on one side and no one has the balls (especially Elaine Pearson) to do something about the Iranian side of things and it will get hampered more as the EU does not want any anti-Iranian intervention, they are still in that delusional stage where they think that they can offer some kind of nuclear pact that no one will heed, especially the Iranians.
And in a one sided setting, I still whole heartedly agree that Saudi Arabia has a right to defend itself, in this the attacks by Houthi forces on Saudi civilian targets should enable Saudi forces to strike back, and if you do not know about the attacks on Saudi targets, it will be because the bulk of the western media remained silent on it, probably a stakeholder issue.
And as I have to eat at some point, I see no issue selling the Saudi Airforce the Chinese Chengdu J-20. In the first we are not at war with China, in the second it will be delivered to an established government, I feel that I am in the clear.
So when I see “especially those who have committed grave violations against children”, I wonder just how Archie Law can continue with a brain that much lacking in insight, breathing should be the challenge he is facing. Houthi forces in Yemen have been systematically depriving food from Yemeni children. This has been known for well over 6 months, headlines like ‘Houthi militias attack humanitarian organisations, block aid to Yemenis’ are not new or unique. A one sided stage against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, it is time that those shortsighted voices are given a new level of opposition, as such I see no reason not to aid Saudi Arabia in acquiring the weapons they need to keep their nation safe. I reckon China will not object, especially if the end result is that they churn close to 9 billion from the EU, UK and US. I hope to get up to $2,000,000,000 in sales which will get me a nice retirement funds, but I am happy with just the one shipment (two is always better) and it gives me a larger stage to show just how shortsighted these people are.
I know, I am slightly too angry, but that happens, we all have our short stages,, and mine is the hypocrisy of others. Just like that they are all about the actions against certain Chinese groups, yet the setting that Apple is accused of using slave labour is quickly silenced, I reckon that Apple and Nike are as advertisers too big for the newspapers to really take a look, it is my assumption that these two do not advertise on ABC, or am I wrong?
There we have it, several sources voiced it yesterday. I wanted to answer then, but I wanted to look at it a little more. There is no reason to stop it, there is no reason to avoid it, it is a false setting of morality, nothing more.
As President Biden has stated that they will ‘Biden administration pauses weapons sales to Saudi Arabia, UAE’, now in itself that they can do that, but it is the by-line that caught my eye “arms sales aims to ensure they advance US ‘strategic objectives’”, I am on the fence there, I accept that the American have an agenda, they always do. Yet what about the agenda to allow the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to defend itself? In addition, is there an acceptable stage where ‘strategic objections’ will overrule basic needs? The US has a 25 trillion dollar debt, to alienate basic source of income seems extremely counterproductive. I am very willing to step in and set a stage where the KSA will consider the hardware, consultancy and support from the UK and the BAE. I will happily take the 3.75% commission, even if it is initially only over $1,000,000,000. That still means I end up with a taxable $37,500,000, I’m not greedy, merely facilitating. And that amount is a decent amount to set retirement to. Now, is this merely greed driven?
No, I believe that any sovereign state has a basic right to defend itself, and even as we to some degree understand that the anti-war people who are in London Ontario and CAAT in the UK trying to stop the arms deals, I believe that they are misguided, they are, so that they are stating that this is fuelling the Yemeni war, In comparison we should see them as allied pacifists opponents of WW2, stopping the allies from continuing war in Europe, whilst Europe is being attacked by Germans and no one does anything there. In this setting Germany is played by Iran, Iran is continuing to fuel Houthi forces with weapons, weapons that are aimed at Saudi civilian targets and that is a big no-no in my book.
The second part is that I prefer to capture the revenue in western ways, because there pacifists seem to be ignorant of the setting that China or Russia will deal with Saudi Arabia, with the future investment that they have set both nations want to have a slice of that pie and even more, they like it just fine if the west (UK or USA) will not get that revenue. That is the setting we seem to face, billions of revenue will go towards the west, Russia or China and the media is seemingly unable to properly inform us, more important I have spoken in the past on the setting that western media remained SILENT on several attacks by Houthi’s on Saudi civilian targets, more important they have downplayed the acts by Iran, even though it is blatantly obvious that Yemen has no infrastructure, no trained users and no way to properly guide drones. Yemen lacks that ability and some sources have clearly stated that. I see the essential need to stop Iran by making sure that the KSA is able to stop Iran, the stage that we are informed on is the need for ‘strategic objectives’, perhaps destabilisation is what the USA needs in the Middle East, and is that not worse than prolonging one war that the KSA never started, but was asked to assist in by the legitimate government of Yemen?
So when Arab News gives us ‘Are Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthis firing warning shots across Biden administration’s bows?’, yet the Sydney Morning Herald gives us ‘Economic profiteering is fuelling the war in Yemen: UN panel’ which was yesterday, with two mentions of Iran, one being ““an increasing body of evidence suggesting that individuals and entities” in Iran supply “significant volumes of weapons and components to the Houthis””, a stage that has existed for well over 5 years, so after that time we see ‘an increasing body of evidence suggesting’, how deranged is that level of filtering? All whilst we are told “the Central Bank broke its foreign exchange rules, manipulated the foreign exchange market and “laundered a substantial part of the Saudi deposit in a sophisticated money-laundering scheme” that saw traders receive a $US423-million windfall”, so traders walked out with part of the $2,000,000,000 deposited by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to “intended to fund credit to buy commodities – such as rice, sugar, milk and flour – to strengthen food security and stabilise domestic prices”, all whilst the Central Bank of Yemen had its own path to set the needs of that money, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the painted bad person? (At https://www.smh.com.au/world/middle-east/economic-profiteering-is-fueling-the-war-in-yemen-un-panel-20210127-p56xar.html)
So in all this, me taking a stance for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, or perhaps better stated a stance AGAINST Iran is greed driven? We need a stable strong nation in the Middle East and we have 8-12 years of data that Iran will never be that player, all in a stage where the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has a plan to evolve towards a non oil driven economy, how is this a bd thing? How is the simple fact that Saudi Arabia is trying to make Neom City, a place 20 times the size of New York, a feat never ever done before by any nation and all I see is trivialisation and downplaying by other media, how is that an act by any evolved nation? That plan gave me the idea to create the 5G IP I have and as such Neom City is a start of innovation, and in that stage if Huawei completes that level of innovation all whilst at present 5G in Saudi Arabia is 725% faster than the 5G in the USA, the difference is that much and when Huawei sets that stage in Neom City, we lose, in that stage I would rather see Saudi Arabia as our friend than our enemy.
The world stage is changing and the greed driven iterative idiots in the US and the EU are setting a stage where we are left with no options, at that point where will you run, because if it is up to China, we are left with nothing, so is it that much a stretch to set a stage where preferably the BAE sets a larger stage with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as a larger player? Consider that the stage changes, where do you want to be, in the arms of filtered news creators who hide the facts, or drive innovation? Because I can tell you where Saudi Arabia and China want to end up, they want to be on the far end of innovation, when the Chinese apps come at the uberspeed that Huawei can deliver, we lose and we lose a lot. It is a simple equation, and the western media telling you that it is more complex will add all kinds of actors that given to them by their stake holders, and guess who they are?
We are running out of time, the entire Corona setting did that to us, it forces us to make a choice much earlier than most wanted to and the US and their friends at Ericsson and Nokia are out of time and options.
That is how I felt for most of the last 24 hours. It got to be worse when the international media decided to ignore the events given to them. To see this, we need to consider the first part.
Here is the image (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX2gQsQElJY), the poster set the premise that it is open to interpretation, yet when you consider the quote by Reuters stating “after the police force that protects the legislative complex was overrun by a mob of Trump supporters in what law enforcement officials called a catastrophic failure to prepare”, the Dutch NOS, basically copied that text, yet when we see the police opening the gates, there is a larger failure, some would say that the metropolitan police in Washington DC can no longer be trusted. This is incorrect, when we see the quote “security initially was handled almost entirely alone by the U.S. Capitol Police, a 2,000-member force under the control of Congress and dedicated to protecting the 126-acre Capitol Grounds. For reasons that remained unclear as of early Thursday, other arms of the U.S. federal government’s vast security apparatus did not arrive in force for hours as rioters besieged the seat of Congress”, we see that their own security force is blatantly failing and my own personal interpretation is that in two weeks close to 2,000 pink slips need to be handed out. Remember when we saw Gerard Butler in Olympus has fallen, we need to realise that it does not require a large North Korean force, 2000 Trump fans driven to lunacy will do and for the most no firepower was required to turn the Capitol building into a war-zone. So when we pause and consider ‘For reasons that remained unclear’, there is a much larger stage, the first one is soon to be fired President Trump stating giving us that he won by a landslide, ABC gives us “Twitter hid three of the President’s tweets — including a video message repeating false claims that he won the election by a “landslide” — for “repeated and severe violations” of its civic integrity policy, warning it would permanently suspend him from the platform in the event of future violations. Facebook and Instagram followed suit soon after, tweeting that the platforms would block Mr Trump’s account from posting for 24 hours due to policy violations”, my issue here is the claim ‘it would permanently suspend him from the platform in the event of future violations’, they did a lot more to a lot of people for less, especially in light of other stages like ‘Black Lives Matter’, interesting how they closed speaking valves in that situation, is it not?
My anger is that for the most, I am a Republican, I am not American, but I identify with the republican side of politics (in many cases), I feel that this is the right way, yet I have always heralded the need for accountability. If you are not accountable, you are close to nothing. We take pride in our successes and as such we must also accept (and perhaps to a small degree herald) our failures. At times I believe that we learn more from failures then successes, but that might just be a setting limited to a few, in Business (and intelligence) most people hide or wash away failure like it is a bad habit and that setting gave us many failures (including 9/11 and Benghazi), there is a larger stage and we are setting the outline for that right now, as such it was a bit of a surprise to see James Comey (former director of the FBI) giving us “Donald Trump should not be federally prosecuted once he leaves the White House no matter how much evidence has been amassed against him”, it is a quote from his new book ‘Saving Justice: Truth, Transparency and Trust’ launched later this month. When you read the setting (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/05/james-comey-donald-trump-prosecuted-saving-justice-new-book) it makes sense, yet even as a Republican I would prefer to foster the trust of the American people with Trump in prison with a $400,000,000 tax bill around his neck. As I personally see it Trump has championed petulant childish behaviour for too long and it is too sickening to see this continue. In part I like the idea of Merrick Garland being the new Attorney General, I never understood the lack of wisdom in stopping his nomination. It was the right of then president Obama to choose a new justice. Lat year or not, like I supported the right of President Trump to chose this justice in the last months of his reign of stupidity, then President Obama was equally entitled to select a justice. Now, the process is clear, he still had to be voted in by the senate, yet to refuse to hold a hearing was wrong in my personal opinion.
And the stage America is on right now is not a good one, and as we go back to that building and Reuters giving us “The force’s officers are trained to keep protesters off the Capitol’s marble outdoor steps, to protect the complex like a citadel. But there are so many windows and doors in the 19th-century complex that it is difficult to defend them all, said Terrance Gainer”, the fact that security let the people right through is a much larger failure that is not debated or considered, a stage we all see and we all ignore, why is that Mr Gainer?
So as we take notice of the failures under this president, we all hope that the next one will be better, as I see it, he will be cleaning house for most of his first term, not merely his administration, he will need to address a failed infrastructure in a few more places than he will be comfortable with, on the upside, the Capitol security services might have up to 2,000 new positions open in the next few months. So those seeking a job (if you survive COVID-19) there is one lace you could apply.
We all seem to have views, it is not wrong, it is not bad it is not evil, it merely is. I saw in 1998-2002 how governments sat on their hands, how lawmakers sat on their hands (and optionally on their mistresses) and they all vocally agreed that hackers were nothing more than a nuisance, and as I see it the traitor Bradley Edward Manning (aka Chelsea Elizabeth Manning) gave up secrets that it was not allowed to reveal and gave it to the world. There is no doubt on guilt, there was no doubt on treason, there merely was the act and that was that, it was the first moment where governments got the first clear hint that hackers were a much larger danger. After that came Julian Assange and Edward Snowden. Julian might be many things, but technically he was not a traitor. Edward Snowden was one, and the law again disregarded the steps that were taken, he went intentionally to a place where he might get the most value out of his deeds, Russia picked him up, just to piss of the US, which they were speculatively allowed to do, yet the stage is rather large, more hackers, all under the guise that the law saw them as a mere nuisance, we all got introduced to ransomware, now we see governments hacked through a sunny breeze (Solarwinds), and the voyage does not end. Now we see less than a day ago ‘Hackers threaten to leak plastic surgery pictures’, as well as ‘National Security Agency warns hackers are forging cloud authentication information’, now I do not care for the plastic surgery part, but it is another case where personal and person inclined data is no longer free, the two elements also give a rather large stage for us to place a new premise. One could now argue that hackers are the clear and present danger to personal and corporate needs and as such they can be hunted down and put t death. So from nuisance to global danger, as such when all these mommies cry that their little boys did not know what they were doing, I have no issues putting a HK model 23 to their foreheads and executing them (optionally with silencer as to not scare the neighbours).
I think it is time for lawmakers and government administrative types to wake up and smell the situation, and in this, perhaps some remember the words of Martin C. Libicki in Newsweek (2015) where he pushed the view ‘Cyberattacks Are a Nuisance, Not Terrorism’, well that is not really true, is it? When we see the definition of terrorism we see “The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims”, there we see two parts up for debate, the fist is that ‘mental violence’ is still violence and the setting of intimidation is already achieved, the stage we still need to address ‘the pursuit of political aims’, not all terrorism is set to political aims, unless if you call self-enrichment the pursuit of political aims.
And with ‘National Security Agency warns hackers are forging cloud authentication information’ we see an initial stage where commerce will come to a screeching halt. My IP does not cover for that, darn. But there is the old way (1981-1991), just kill them, be done with it.
Now some (especially in law) will state that I am overreacting, yet am I? It is the lawmakers that could optionally be seen as cowards, hiding behind their golden calf called jurpisprudence. The law, for the most does a good job, it is not perfect, so be it, but for the most, it is OK. This covers the never trespassers and the limited trespassers, they make up for 75% of all people, then there are the criminals, 24.99%, the law takes care of them, they are repeat offenders, career criminals and as such the law was designed to deal with them, then there is the remaining 0.01%, these criminals are in it for the kill, to create a maximum amount of cadavers physically, mentally and financially, to make life for nearly all impossible, and that golden calf, the law cannot deal with them and we accept that, so we remove them in other ways. We hunt them down and put them to death, and when it is some 16 year old claiming he didn’t know what he was doing, we know, he did it to seem cool, he was willing to make all others suffer, just to look cool, to get the tits, to rub the vagina, his friends never could, as such there is a 9mm solution that solves it, if only his parents had raised him right.
You think I am kidding? You forget the poverty line is shifting massively because of COVID-19 and soon the insurances will not cover the impact, the media will merely snigger and cash in on all those clicks they got from the $x donation to an unnamed source, and it is now time to make the long overdue change, before governments are pushed to take away more and more of our freedoms, which will push us into the dark-web, a situation these criminals would love. And it is close to 15 years too late, but in this case it is better to be late to the party than not get there at all.
Am I overreacting? That would remain a fair question, I do not believe so as this step is well over a decade overdue, it is not something that was pushed to the top in the last few days, and it is partially due to governments and lawmakers not acting when they could have and especially when they should have, now the dike is levied and people are soon to be drowning and something must be done. From my point of view, to hit terrorists, you hit them harder, so the more extreme you hit these hackers, the clearer the message becomes. And a clear message is years overdue.
In this there is a two step setting, there are the “cool wannabe’s” who are mot likely teenagers, some of them are easy to find and after the first examples a lot of them will hide like cockroaches, but the second tier, the one the media and governments intentionally ignore are those in organised crime, they will be the real challenge and as most governments have nothing on stopping them, at best they can limit the damage, which is basically no solution, that gap will take time, but with ‘hackers are forging cloud authentication information’ less than a week old, there is now a chance that the NSA and other intelligence networks will realise that compromised clouds will have global commercial implications, as such governments must now act, the moment any cloud is openly seen compromised, it will be too late for well over a decade. It becomes a clearer situation when you consider that global e-commerce was set to ‘Global e-Commerce hits $25.6 trillion’, by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), s how much losses must global commerce endure before we act? Oh and if you think that this is the end? How much more powerful will organised crime become if they only get their fingers on 0.1% ($25,600,000,000)? It will become a sliding scale that goes from bad to worse, and governments knew that, they knew for well over a decade, but their delusions saw other non-solution, like perhaps, it will go away on its own, so tell me when was that ever a solution?
Within the mind there is a setting we forget, it is pondering, we ponder thins, we always do, at times not ever conscious or frontally aware, but we do. It is a part of us and my part would not let the previous story ‘Intent or Not?’ started something that would not let go, most likely to the stage of my youth, in this, my idea of DECCA gave me another optional idea. Consider any map, as such the map I drew has no features, it has however has three DECCA options and the clever station uses one signal of each to create a 4th option. So the three stations 1, 2, 3 create a new option, there would be the optional advantage of internal checks, as such it is harder to decipher how the data is concluded, there is also the need to find a larger amount of numbers to optionally hack, but how?
The idea is to create an offset, of all the 9 stations, each in different ways to create a new set of locations, optionally an offset the size of the circle, giving is A2, B2 and C2. It is hard to see the precise location, and if the offset is done, it needs to be the offset of the circle, and all three need to receive the same offset, the station is to create a second location that fits within the application of error towards the home and new DECCA configuration. My mind sees part of the solution, but I do not completely get what I see. If we change the signal according to one, we should change them equally to all, it gives (for now) the setting that the target could not be hit but in this configuration, the best we can hope for I that the missile hits somewhere in the circle, the close to the rim, the more accurate the missile was, but can we direct it exactly in the way we want it? If so, the three coloured circles would set the optional new location, if so, it will be in the area of the intersections where blue and red, or green and red connect, optionally in the space between the two, as such there is some way to guide the missile away from harm if a GOLIS approach is used in these missiles. If the missiles is using GOLIS DECCA, there remains two problems, how to find what and which one they use and second how to offset the received signal. Yet as I see it these are seperate matters, what matters is that I am (again) awake and my mind will not stop pondering. Perhaps this idea is merely between my ears and it would never work in real life, but one can only wonder where innovation drives us towards, it is not always a reachable destination, we can only hope it is.
This is a question that has been forming in my mind for some time now, and today the question rose again. The article that started it all is “Oil tanker off Saudi Arabian port hit by explosion caused by ‘external source‘’’ (source: the Guardian). The setting is not new, we have seen it a few times in the last year. We all want to point fingers and blame people left right and center, but the truth of it is that the problem goes deeper and the west is largely in denial or refuses to acknowledge the events. Less than a decade ago, an attack on Saudi Arabia was for the most unthinkable. Even as we see the crying blame game, this is not a Houthi issue. You see, the Houthi’s are firing drones and missiles on Saudi Arabia, but everyone is in denial and refusing to look at Iran. There is no Yemeni infrastructure to create and optionally test drones and missiles, there is no quality control, there is no technology available in Yemen for any of this and that has been shown by different sources over the last 2 years. Even as the New York Times gives us an opinion piece that gives us “Saudi Arabia is not entitled to U.S. military or diplomatic support. It’s not a treaty ally like Japan. Its importance to U.S. security has dwindled as the United States seeks to reorient its foreign policy away from the Middle East. And if Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s tutelage is any indication, the kingdom is proving to be a wildly destabilising force in the region”, Saudi Arabia, for the most has been the stability the Middle East (outside of Israel) needs, feel free to give it to Iran, but in this, the next time they elect another Ahmadinejad, all the linked nations will target Israel AND the United States AND Europe, is that what you want?
So whilst the New York Times is slamming Saudi Arabia, or seemingly so, it is actually proving the opposite. Saudi Arabia is entitled and worthy of support. It’s events into Yemen was done by the elected government of Yemen, and that is also ignored most of the time, just like the setting that Houthi forces are getting direct support from Iran, the Houthis are getting Iranian hardware, missiles and drones. They seemingly smuggle it by all naval intelligence operations. It is almost like the EU and the US are keeping the Middle East destabilised. That is at least what it looks like, you see, for the last two years someone is feeding the Houthi forces drones and missiles and that needs to stop. I would venture that the involved parties like the price of oil to go up, up by a lot.
In this I will tell you right now that this is my speculative view, I cannot prove the latter part (other than the Iranian support which has been proven by several parties), yet the media is silent on that part, why is that?
My mind has been busy considering an anti drone option, but as I see it, the larger part of Saudi Arabia is an empty sandbox, so how to go about it (without creating ecological and environmental devastation), a setting that needs thought, because the cure cannot be worst than the disease. The Brookings institute (at https://www.brookings.edu/blog/techtank/2016/03/16/six-ways-to-disable-a-drone/) give us 6 methods, but to deploy them in any rural situation (which is the bulk of Saudi Arabia) is not a good thing, yet it did give me an optional idea, not a great one mind you, but one that might work.
They had Radio waves (3) and Hacking (4), This gave me an optional idea. What if we create a wifi network, one that actively pushes. Consider 4 jeeps, each jeep is a network node, and as you can see, moving the second jeep to another location sets a larger and a different curtain. Now, consider that the latest Iranian drones can fly up to 250KM/H, now the Houthis will not get those (and they lack monumental amounts of skill to operate them), but the older ones are slower, as the jeeps get a lock on a danger, the remote operator uses the created network to disrupt drone operations. I reckon that a setting of 8 jeeps might be a good start, but how to deploy them? I see the need to create 3-5 clusters of up to 4-8 jeeps, it gives the remote operator a decent amount of time to crash the drones far away and safely, optionally (and harder) is to land them so that the evidence can be collected. A secondary option is to fry the electronics, so that the drones would return to the point of liftoff, giving Saudi Intelligence a place to work from. This is the drones, not sure yet how to stop (in a cheap way) Iranian missiles, but I reckon Raytheon has something they eagerly want to sell. I merely want it to cost Iran the farm, not Saudi Arabia, like in Charlie Wilson’s War, there Charlie Wilson provided the Afghans with stringers to stop the Russians, Stinger $38,000, Russian Hind (Mil Mi-24) $36,000,000, so almost 1000:1, those are numbers to work with and that stage needs to be found to top Iran as well. So as I was looking into the Shahab-1, Shahab-2, Shahab-3, can the same network be used to create a false image, or a setting to fool the missile?
GOT systems It is one of two systems, and any Go-Onto-Target missile has three subsystems (or so I am told), they are :
Target tracker We are told that the target tracker is also placed on the launching platform, yet is that so with the Iranian version? If that is true, then we need to find a way to infect both, or find a way to disrupt the link.
Missile tracker This is where it is, I asked the missile, but it had no sound system installed, hence, I watched a USAF training tape and I learned “The missile guidance computer scenario works as follows. Because a variation has modified some of the information the missile has obtained, it is not sure just where it is. However, it is sure where it isn’t, within reason, and it knows where it was. It now subtracts where it should be from where it wasn’t, or vice-versa, and by differentiating this from the algebraic sum of where it shouldn’t be, and where it was, it is able to obtain the deviation and its variation, which is called error”, this seems effective and simple, I merely wonder what if we could find an automated way to mess with the error so it will assume wrongly where it was, and if this accumulative, it will crash ahead of schedule, optionally in a place where there is only sand.
Guidance computer Guidance computers are in the missile and in the target tracker, it has the same setting as the Target Tracker, we cannot intervene in time, but what happens if we flood the missile with both disrupting and false information? (At the same time mind you)
This is where I found myself, my only reference to missile technology is pointing my own missile at a biological silo (me, as a once proud teenager), I just had to go there to make this story not too serious. Yet there was corroborating materials (not on the Silo though), it is seen in Northrop Grumman’s Patent US4589610A, the Guided missile subsystem. Here I see a little more, but it also gave me a thought. The patent gives us “The IMU driven Kalmanised radar track loop accommodates the use of a high performance radar, like a synthetic aperture radar, for example, which operates to measure radar data at a low rate on the order of 1 Hz, to generate estimates of relative target and missile kinematics to drive the control loop at rates compatible with high performance missile kinematics”, I believe that Iranian missiles are not that advanced, but the groundwork matters. The idea that we have “operates to measure radar data at a low rate”, so it reads signals to differentiate, what is we mess with that instance to create a different error in the Shabab missile? Radar is basically a radio signal, a specific one and specific signals are more easily messed with, yet can it be done efficiently and not expensive, or can we create a setting where on system can impact the next 200 missiles fired?
The second system is a GOLIS systems (go-onto-location-in-space), it is autonomous and created for targets that do not move (for example the IRS building at 300 N. Los Angeles St.), I would presume a building almost everyone hates, especially in Hollywood. I will not go into all the details, but it had one option I recognised, it was the Hyperbolic navigation, DECCA. Maritime uses (or used) it. It requires 3 stations to operate and if that is so, that is something we can use. We can actually guid a missile when we alter the signal of any two out of three elements. The nice part, as it is obsolete, there is a decent chance the Iranians are till using it, the DECCA system was pretty decent as a concept and for maritime navigation (before we had satellite navigation) was the most precise way to find ourselves in the ocean, it was precise up to 7M2, when you are 2432 KM from shore, that is pretty awesome. So as we see “Hyperbolic navigation is a class of obsolete radio navigation systems in which a navigation receiver instrument on a ship or aircraft is used to determine location based on the difference in timing of radio waves received from fixed land-based radio navigation beacon transmitters”, that is one principle, there is every chance that if we can intercept and relay 2 of the signals, we can create a different error and as such the missile becomes a lot less reliable.
These are merely a few thoughts and they should be seriously considered (except targeting the IRS building, these people have lives too), if we can change the game for Iran we can support Saudi Arabia in creating more stability, less stability is to adhere to Iran, I wonder if the New York Times considered that part that they are voicing, whether it is opinion or not.
OK, I knew about DECCA from my days at the. Merchant Naval Academy, so that might not be completely fair, but this is me thinking out of the box (and out of bed), which implies that this was another day, another dollar, and all done in less than 2 hours. I wonder what more Iranian stuff I can screw up this week, we all need a hobby at times.
The first sentence that waved like a hammer and sickle flag was “according to people familiar with the matter”, this was not some official brief by the FBI or the DHS, it was some anonymous setting and as that nations current president is mad as a hatter (or in possession of less common sense then the Court Jester entertaining Reniero Zeno) gives rise to worry. Now, let be clear, I am not stating that this isn’t happening. Consider “but three of the people familiar with the investigation said Russia is currently believed to be responsible for the attack. Two of the people said that the breaches are connected to a broad campaign that also involved the recently disclosed hack on FireEye, a major U.S. cybersecurity company with government and commercial contracts”, so now it is not from one source, but one journo has access to ALL THREE? Then there is (the secnd one) “cyber spies are believed to have gotten in by surreptitiously tampering with updates released by IT company SolarWinds”, which also affects the military, and in this, we grb back to the earlier statement “they asked the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the FBI to investigate”, really? Military integrity is in play and you think that none of the Defence intelligence groups, or cyber command is invited? Then we get the end which gives us “The hackers are “highly sophisticated” and have been able to trick the Microsoft platform’s authentication controls, according to a person familiar with the incident, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not allowed to speak to the press”, that and the consideration (not fact) that “Hackers broke into the NTIA’s office software, Microsoft’s Office 365. Staff emails at the agency were monitored by the hackers for months”, consider that and set the light towards a transgression on the Microsoft Azure cloud that makes their cloud useless, or turns it into a public domain Bulletin board, something EVERY industrial wants to hear. You think that this was not out in force and Microsoft was on every channel on the PLANET explaining to the people that there was no cause for alarm? All this and some Christopher Bing has three sources? Anyone else concerned with the quality of news? And the last line giving us ‘because they were not allowed to speak to the press’ did it for me.
Is this a ploy to avoid the limelight, or make sure that the stage lights are pointing somewhere else? Now, I reckon that the Russian government is forever trying to get its fingers on all kinds of hush hush details, the CIA does pretty much the same thing, yet in this we see “highly-sophisticated, targeted and manual supply chain attack by a nation state”, what evidence is there? This is important, because it could well be organised crime or a super rich singular player who wants the low-down on deals that syphon his or her money more efficiently and that has been done before as well. In this the entire approach is one of chaos, even if the chaos seems organised. The fact that it was allegedly possible to “Staff emails at the agency were monitored by the hackers for months” with the mention of Microsoft 365 and the news was limited to one person at Reuters? That and the fact that it as seemingly ‘months’ is a larger cause for concern, the fact that this was going on for well over a week and not every Christmas light would shine brightly red at 2624 NE University Village St, Seattle, WA 98105, United States is a first, the fact that not every siren is blasting on EVERY Microsoft 365 and Azure data centre is a second. But no, we get “there was a breach at one of its agencies and that they asked the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the FBI to investigate”, yes because dimensionality in alarms and corporate dangers are passed on forever to the FBI in such a blasé way.
So I have several issues on the matter and in all this I can in all honesty not determine whether the light shining is a limelight to give visibility to someone else, or a stage light to make the people look to the left all whilst the people on the right are running off the stage, hoping no one will notice. It can be either or both, but the picture they are painting for us does not make sense and lust like that Italian dude (read: doge), the 45th no less, had his own battles to fight (mostly with Genoa), it was set in one quarter, but had underlying conditions (like Michael VIII Palaiologos) and in this certain nobility members profited greatly, I wonder why that never got properly investigated. And as such I do not oppose the pointing fingers at the Kremlin, but doing so before we see “the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and the FBI to investigate” deliver a finished report is a little fast, so fast even McDonalds cannot compete. All whilst cybercrime has a much larger reach to a great deal many more people and still Microsoft remains silent.
There is a bright light over yonder, yet what it is used for, I cannot tell.
There are several news articles out there. They are not related, not directly, not indirectly, but the underlying events are. The first one is (on the light side) ‘Tesla announces second $5bn share sale in three months’ (at https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2020/12/8/tesla-announces-second-5bn-share-sale-in-3-months), it is the given quote “Tesla’s shares touched a record high on Monday, pushing the electric-car maker’s market value above $600bn”, he has, as one might say, almost reached the midpoint of his directly achievable wealth. The second part is seen in ‘Christchurch massacre: Inquiry finds failures ahead of attack’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55211468), there we see “correcting these failures would not have stopped the Australian national, who was sentenced to life in prison without parole earlier this year, from carrying out the attack, it said”, as well as “the patchwork of clues discovered by police after the massacre – including his steroid abuse, a hospital admission after he accidentally shot himself, and visits to far-right websites – would not have proved enough to predict the attack”. These issues are unrelated. It is about the markers, whether they are markers of wealth, markers of rage, markers of alleged insanity, the list goes on, but we are driven and pushed by markers, all whilst there is a larger stage where these markers matter not, not now, not ever. It is there that we need to look and we need to identify the pushed markers, the driven markers and we need to hold them out to the light and openly debate them.
You see, prevention was actually possible (as far as I can tell), now I am not debating the 6 guns, I am a gun person myself and if I had the means and a safe place to put them, I might have them, yet no one is debating ‘more than 7,000 rounds of ammunition’, why is that? Even a gun lover like me, having more then 100 bullets per rifle is a bit of a stretch, so why would he have needed the other 5,400 bullets for and to be honest, I tend not to miss, as such, the 51 people who died, would imply 2 magazines optionally 3 and my one FN FAL (the gun I started my training with in 1981), that is 90 bullets, oh and in the military, if there is not an active war theatre, having more than one magazine is pretty much frowned on, actually it is openly questioned. As such I wonder who looked into this inquiry? Especially as he acquired ‘ammunition online’, I might buy ammunition online, yet I also accept that someone is keeping track of what I buy, and the fact that one person was able to buy more ammunition than the average base has in stock calls for all kinds of questions. The fact that more than 1 box is shipped to one address is also reason for questions. So when I see ‘The commission found no failures within any government agencies that would have allowed the terrorist planning and preparation to be detected’, I have to stop and laugh for a couple of minutes. If one man can do that, what can several lone wolves accomplish? So as I took a look at the report (at https://christchurchattack.royalcommission.nz/the-report/), I get to the setting here, the 4 documents (or basically one large one in 4 parts) is actually quite good, it is a decent piece of work and even as some state no fault was due, issues of improvement are there. I see the failing in the second PDF where I see “not for the purpose of keeping records of these purchases”, it reflect on the ammunition bought. They were seen and approved, and they were allowed. So how many documents were seen? To get this much ammunition, you would need to make purchases several times. The math is not looking good here. We see a Marker of enabling, but the marker of questioning is absent. I see this as a clear failure on some part, especially on the system, it might not have prevented the event, but it would have lessened the damage and lowered the fatality list. Volume 3 of the report gives us on page 476 “To assist staff in prioritising leads, the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service has produced a table that sets out various security indicators and the priority associated with them. For example, “Skills/Knowledge – Research into basic weapons, firearms and ammunition” is identified as a critical indicator of security relevance for assessing whether a person has the capability to carry out a terrorist act”, yet keeping records on ammunition bought (for example 7000+) is not. Who would be the larger danger, the man being able and operate a rifle with a 100 bullets, or one with 7000 bullets? I mean, most man hate their mother in law (some passionately do), but ever we think 7000 pieces of ammo is a bit much. Volume 2 gives more (42.21) “We do not know how much ammunition the individual purchased in total as most sellers do not keep records of the ammunition sold in store. We do know that on 24 March 2018, he spent $1,358.00 at Gun City Dunedin on 2,000 rounds of .223 calibre Remington 55Gr SP.” This is the smoking gun (sort of), in one purchase we see 2,000 rounds at $1,358. I would have chimes every bell possible at this point, especially if this was not a gun-shop or a federal enforcement agency. You still think there was no failure there? A marker of investigation was required and none was found, merely a commercial need to enable a person to buy, buy, buy. He was not buying two Tesla’s, he was buying ammunition. We se even more at (42.22), there we get “we are aware of 11 ammunition purchases made online between 5 December 2017 and 12 July 2018. The details of these purchases are provided in the table below. The individual completed the required New Zealand Police mail order form for these purchases” In December he bought enough to outmatch the entire New Zealand Army, and no questions were asked, failure? I personally believe that is the case. Yes, I cannot disagree with the finding that the event could not be stopped, yet I believe that the casualty list would be a lot lower if more effort had been made. As we look at the markers of identity and the markers of enabling, I feel that we all failed, not just a New Zealand administration. Someone delivered these packages, 1,000 rounds is heavy. When we see delivery from Lock, Stock and Smoking Barrel, Gun City, Aoraki Ammunition Company, Ammo Direct NZ, Ordnance Developments, and Arsenal Limited someone should have sounded the bells of worry, the alarms of wondering and in all this no one seemingly did. Well over $5,000 and no one was seemingly the wiser. He could have rearmed the larger extent of Al Qaeda (or the KKK) and it would only be known after the shooting took place. There was a failure, a larger one.
Let me be frank, I love guns, I am not a gun nut, but I do not have to be, even I think that this much ammo is just insane. And it was at the top of the pile, there are other parts that I found which were not part of the inquiry, yet I feel that it is important to let these issues lie down for a while, I feel that certain people are looking into matters and me ringing that bell whilst they are near the door is a stupid, silly and all kinds of irresponsible, and I tend not to be any of the three (most of the time).
So why the mention of Tesla in the beginning? Commerce is strong all over, it is essential in too many places and the marker of commerce is too eagerly accepted, all whilst questions are not being asked in too many places. No one is debating that Elon Musk is a genius, optionally a visionary and he is on route being the first trillionaire, yet no one is wondering whether that should be questioned. Consider that any person being the owner of well over 1000 billion has more power than most governments, Elon Musk is about to become that person and s an achievement I wish him well, he did it by building something, as did Mark Zuckerberg, as did the late Steve Jobs (well he set the Apple horse in motion). Yet this stage is supported by a marker that is questionable and we need to see this, or failures like the Christchurch shooting will happen again and again. What if the next time it is not ammunition, what if it is something else? Part of this tragedy was enabled by commerce, I will happily sell the Saudi Government $8,500,000,000 in weapons, yet this is a government, not a person. There is a difference and we need to set the systems up to identify certain markers, if we do not do that the next event will happen and no one is at fault then either, but scores of people will be dead, how does that sound?
It comes back to an old jab I heard somewhere “You get more done with a shotgun and a kind word, then merely with a kind word”, it is true. The bulk of all people require external motivation. Arab News gave me an update yesterday and I was actually a little surprised.
I had expected that Saudi Arabia had well above the basic needs there, but it seems I was wrong. The article (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/1773046/business-economy) gives us ‘Experts warn businesses in Saudi Arabia to ramp up their cybersecurity’, which is fair enough, but that opens up a whole range of other issues as well. Remember the accusations handed against the KSA (specifically their Crown Prince), I dealt in part with it in ‘Evidence? Why?’ (At https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/01/24/evidence-why/), consider that it was Julius Caesar who taught its armies (now known as Esercito Italiano) “The first rule of war is to install your defences against enemy retaliation”, he did that 2073 years, 4 months and 15 days ago (roughly). So as the Arab News gives us “As Saudi companies become more technologically advanced, cybersecurity experts have warned of a general lack of awareness about industry best practices and are worried that businesses are not adequately protecting their systems”, we see an implied lack of cybersecurity, as to what stage is there a lack all whilst the teams of the Crown Prince were accused of attacking Jeff Bezos? I hd a few doubts when I read the article, I have a hell of a lot more now. The added “95 percent of businesses in the Kingdom last year were the victim of a cyberattack” give rise to additional questions and in all this, when we see the American goods that the KSA is acquiring, no one asked or looked into the cybersecurity issues there? I wonder why?
There is a lot more in the article It starts with “85 percent of Saudi respondents said that they had witnessed a dramatic increase in the number of attacks over the past two year” and it gets to me a lot bigger when we consider that Cisco is lending hand in the KSA (at https://www.cisco.com/web/ME/sa/netversity/whatis.html).
So where does the shotgun come in? Well, it doesn’t directly, but when Americans see ‘shotgun’ they tend to take notice. Indirectly, when we consider the activities of Raytheon, Northrop Grumman, Booz Allen Hamilton, and a few others in the KSA, no one raised the issue of cybersecurity? I have no reason to doubt Arab News, but there is a larger setting and it does not add up. You see the quote “Al-Jaber applauds the new government improvements being implemented by the National Cybersecurity Authority (NCA) and the new Saudi Cybersecurity strategy, and recommends that those concerned brush up on their cybersecurity protocols to ensure that they are being protected”, you see ‘cybersecurity protocols’ is something to some, but a partial solution to others, there is version control, OS update and upgrade protocols, investigation into software solutions and apps, it is nice to know that the KSA has the fastest 5G in the world, but if that is not met with correct cyber protocols, it merely means that more and more data goes somewhere else, the question is where it goes.
And this gets us back to another piece of evidence, it was given to us in the Financial Times on January 22nd 2020. There we see “The forensic analysis of Mr Bezos’s phone could not ascertain what alleged spyware was used. However, the report said: “It is believed that the compromise was likely facilitated by malicious tools procured by [Saud] al-Qahtani””, the imbalance of cybersecurity and cybertools is way too high, especially when we consider “forensic analysis of Mr Bezos’s phone could not ascertain what alleged spyware was used”, in light of the overall stage of cyber imbalance of the KSA, this statement (at https://www.ft.com/content/83dcdf74-3c9b-11ea-a01a-bae547046735) is equally a consideration for additional questions. As such, the questions I had almost a year ago are now roosting and giving birth to additional questions. That is beside the questions I have on conversations that others should have had with decision makers of the KSA on Saudi cyber security. Do you not agree?
We all seek confirmation, it is for the most in our core, even now (after the idiocy ordeal) of dealing with Indeed and their ‘so called tests’ on a multiple choice test for answering the phone, I remembered things that actually mattered (to me that is). You see, Iran lost a nuclear physicist, the man Mohsen Fakhrizadeh did not see the beginning of December. And when we see “the architect of Tehran’s nuclear strategy, was killed on Friday on a highway near the capital in a carefully planned assassination”, I merely wonder how carefully the stage was planned. Yes, there is a chance that Mossad arranged for the release in stress to the State of Israel, there is also the chance that some hardliners are thinking that the nuclear escalation is not fast enough and they needed to increase tensions, or basically the IRGC promoted Mohsen Fakhrizadeh from citizen to dead citizen. Now, mind you, my view is highly speculative, but think on the lack of security a scientist apparently has in Iran and how little the IRGC has done to ensure ‘prompt response’ on those failing protection, is that not weird?
So whilst the Guardian gives voice to Hassan Rouhani and the quote “blamed Israel and reiterated that Fakhrizadeh’s death would not stop the country’s nuclear programme”, we can look at the horizon for a few matters. So whilst SBS relies to some degree on “Fakhrizadeh has been described by Western and Israeli intelligence services for years as the mysterious leader of a covert atomic bomb programme halted in 2003, which Israel and the United States accuse Tehran of trying to restore. Iran has long denied seeking to weaponise nuclear energy”, I merely wonder, how many scientists do YOU know that sit on their hands for 17 years? How many academic papers has he released since 2003? That too is evidence, if he actually worked towards safe nuclear energy. It is the same as the traps the Rotterdam harbour made in the late 80’s, idle time is NEVER linear. So when we get to the goods we see “He was the only Iranian scientist named in the International Atomic Energy Agency’s 2015 “final assessment” of open questions about Iran’s nuclear programme. The IAEA’s report said he oversaw activities “in support of a possible military dimension to (Iran’s) nuclear programme”. He was a central figure in a presentation by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2018 accusing Iran of continuing to seek nuclear weapons”, and my need for precision needs to say that this too does not constitute evidence, merely alleged accusations, it is where is his team? A man like that does not work alone and his team and their actions are part of the chain of evidence, so where is it and what did the media uncover (if they took effort). It is a stage and the scientific stage tends to be ego fuelled, the man with the largest team is the most important, that is true pretty much everywhere. Only the established experts in a field that is too limited, too precise tends to be small, the nuclear field cannot boast this setting. Oh, and as for Mossad getting an operation this deep into Iran, weird, but OK, I can go along with excellence and well managed, yet that too is evidence. It implies that the IRGC is dropping essential balls all over the place and that is also an indication, perhaps Israel might be interested in Gorman One and Evia Miden, I have to sell to someone, Christmas is coming and I want to give myself a nice present, I reckon that these two weapon systems will do just that, how pathetic is my life? Me, willing to sell a weapon system to harm Iran for a video game and a cheese pizza? (Which was me oversimplifying matters).
And in all this, we still have not seen any acceptable level of evidence to show it was Israel tht did the attack, for all we know it was Turkey who did this, lets face it we saw the headline ‘Erdoğan uses syncretism of neo-Ottomanism and pan-Turkism to build Greater Turkey’, and they cannot go after Greece, the EU won’t let them, Greece has too many friends, so who has no friends and can be used to show greatness? Ah yes, Iran! The evidence is super flimsy, but Iran is used to super flimsy evidence, so I jut thought I would help them out. You see, when you stop relying on actual data and evidence. Where do you end? Well, that is merely part of the evidence seen and in light of the nuclear aspirations of Iran, we need to start worrying on the EU taking actual notice of the dread that is Iran, when an attack does happen, and the target is Israel, it will hit the Mediterranean and as such it will hit European interests in no less than 8 countries, it is time for the EU to wake up, so when I see the Guardian giving us “Iran calls on international community – and especially EU – to end their shameful double standards & condemn this act of state terror”, we need to consider the play that follows this and ‘especially EU’ was not a suggestion, it was a specific tone meant for a specific person, as such we need to consider what we are all getting into, the EU especially because the nuclear game Iran is aiming for will happen in the EU backyard with decades of damage to follow, anyone not seeing that is a clear and proper fool.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 