Category Archives: Politics

July 19, 2020 · 00:17

When the game changes

That is the question, this is not about gaming, but Microsoft is about to get a black eye. This one is not one I saw coming for a few reasons, but the stage is set in very different ways at present.

It all starts with European Court of Justice and their Schrems II case (C-311/18), in this case we see that the Privacy shield, as US Department of Commerce concoction to appease Europe and the European Commission has fallen, like Humpty Dumpty the setting got pushed by the judges, and it cannot be superglued, it is dead. The term is ‘invalid under European Law’, So all the American contractors and subtractors of personal data in Europe (mainly Microsoft, Google, Facebook and AWS) now have a much larger issue to content with, it is the stage that President Tump cannot use, it will be another mail in his election coffin. The source Aigine also gives us “It is close to impossible that the rules of GDPR will be enforced, as US-Companies have given capabilities to US Intelligence authorities (example the No Such Agency)” The implied seizing of transfer of data to US-controlled companies will be a much harsher reality than ever seen before. Basically it works for me, but there is a larger station where data pools will have a national setting. If players like Google want to stay ahead, they will need data and hardware specialists in a much larger region of the world, happy me! And this will follow in other nations as well, the GDPR will have larger considerations in the Commonwealth as well, and as I see it the US has set the stage to open a can of worms I always saw coming, yet I believed that the EU gravy train and US Wall Street people would be more aligned, in the end it now seems that they were not and the data field will change in a much more refined way than I thought was possible. As a data cleaner my options open up, yet Google will set a new parameter of systems as they already have, however they will have a much broader need and as this war continues, we will see these players overreact to make sure that their data is lacking gaps, again, happy me.

So as we see that there is an assessment on what an how things are transferred, we will se. Much larger shift internationally. There is still a lacking state. The text “if possible, personal data should be stored within the EU, and on servers controlled by EU companies” whereas we see questions on ‘if possible’, I see options and opportunities, and the stage for legal interpretations will open up on the larger stage as older (90’s) solutions are revisited on the method of storing personal data. As such there is a new data war coming, and in this there is an open field who will grow, pretty much all European data vendors can, because there is a whole shipment of US companies who cannot rely on the FAANG group, and that is where the commercial opportunities are staged. To be honest, Microsoft has an actual opportunity now that it did not have in the past. Even as Aigine gives no consideration in this, but the Azure systems have a greater ability to decentralise, it is something that they had in place for other options, but Google did not (not to that degree is more correct), and that is the stage that pushes Sunday into the IT gathering of the week. I reckon that the news will be about the PDPR and the impact that US systems will face over the next week, but this impact is too large, I reckon that there will be a larger impact on a larger scale, yet I will agree that my view lacks the clarity of certain players and what they put in the field over the last 3-4 years. No matter how we see the EC Judgment, there were enough voices around to see a downplaying of the verdict, a verdict that is now a much larger stage than in the last 5 years.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Politics

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

July 18, 2020 · 01:23

When is a terrorist not a terrorist?

Isn’t that an interesting question? You might think it is not, but what happens when we consider our own pat, the letters of marque and the bounty arrangements many European nations had preceding the 19th century? And when we consider those ‘privateers’, how far away were they from being pirates?

That is underlying the stage we see in the Jerusalem Post when we see ‘EU must designate Hezbollah as terror organization, 230 lawmakers say’ (at https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/eu-must-designate-hezbollah-as-terror-organization-230-lawmakers-say-635378). We can argue on the premise of this, yet let’s be clear, when was Hezbollah not a terrorist organisation? The quote “The EU already recognizes Hezbollah’s military wing as a terrorist group, but has not extended that designation to the organization’s political wing. Such a designation must be made by the unanimous consent of the EU’s Council of foreign ministers, where opinions on the matter are divided”, So apparently there are white sheep and black sheep, yet what about the grey and brown sheep? The letter as stated had all these signatures, so for the record we see “Signatories to the letter included 131 members of European national legislatures, 73 members of the European Parliament, 17 members of the US Congress, eight members of the Parliament of Canada and six Knesset members” In addition we see “Among those who already recognize Hezbollah in its entirety is Argentina, Bahrain, Canada, Colombia, Germany, Honduras, Israel, Japan, the Netherlands, Paraguay, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States”, So apart from the fact that 2 EU members are already seeing Hezbollah as a complete danger, what gain is there for the EU to keep this debate going? This entire sheep fur issue is what gives Hezbollah the edge they need to remain a danger in the EU and beyond. 

This is seen in a different way, I remember, I was (indirectly) around in 1982 when Hezbollah started. When we see the quote “For Iran, the creation of Hezbollah represented the realisation of the revolutionary state’s zealous campaign to spread the message of the self-styled ‘‘Islamic revolution’’, whereas for Syria the Shia party was a fortuitous instrument for preserving its interests: Syria’s alliance with Iran presented it with the means to strike indirectly at both Israel and the United States, as well to keep Lebanese allies, including the Amal movement, in line.” We get this from The Role of Hezbollah in Lebanese Domestic Politics by Augustus Richard Norton. We see the clear and direct interaction of its political and military side, this could not have continued if military and political sides were not in the same direction, which means that they needed to align, which gets us the direct interaction. We might think that they are clever, using a seemingly Chinese wall side with different people, but they have a connection through a person and optionally through other links as well. “Hezbollah’s speedy distribution of $12,000 payments to each family made homeless by the war. The opposition alliance, formally sealed in a written compact on February 2006, has proven remarkably durable.” It comes with the reference The full translated text may be found at yalibnan.com/site/archives/2006/02/full_english_te.php. The military did not have the funds, there is a larger political connection meaning that they are not separate, no matter the reason for the interaction, there is interaction. In the stage that I see it, the EU is seemingly knowingly blind to that interaction, perhaps as a way to keep the door open for business, this is my speculative implied  consideration that when it comes to money the EU is willing to let go of whatever ethical needs it has, it is not beyond the scope of things, but the idea that they remain in denial of that small part is a little to sour for consideration. 

It all gets worse when you consider the Arab News (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/1705556) where we see ‘Desperate Lebanese forced to look to Hezbollah’, and here we get “It is already clear that the tribunal will issue a judgment concerning the four accused and not against the group to which they belong: Hezbollah. This means that each of the nowhere-to-be-found accused will be issued with a judgment independently, which insulates Hezbollah from any direct legal accusation, even though the political accusation has been issued by all since the day of the assassination of Rafik Hariri in 2005” a political push to insulate Hezbollah? Do you still think that there is not a stronger level of interactions and at what point will the military arm not herald the consequences of the desperate Lebanese? The essential pushes, now intensified through Covid-19 on a global scale means that Hezbollah has a larger and wider stage of interactions. Still the EU considers the military and political arm apart? What evidence do they have that there is no interaction when there are mountains of evidence (A Golan joke if you please) that there is interaction?

And when the issues between Israel and Syria starts, how much more interactions within Hezbollah will be ignored? At some point we will need to accept that the EU needs a much closer look on who they go to bed with and a publication of names connected to the EU Gravy train will suddenly be stopped on national security reasons, there are more interactions and there is more denial than too many politicians are comfortable with and the stage that unfolds will have a few larger traps, I wonder how it will turn out.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Military, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , ,

July 15, 2020 · 22:34

Changing the mindset?

I had an interesting stage, there is the potential that I was changing my mind in a case. The stage is given via the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53416206) ‘Apple has €13bn Irish tax bill overturned’, my first thought was (and I have written about it in the past) the clear stage where Apple (Google also) has had its fingers in the tax-is for too much and for far too long, but the article gives two parts that requires thought. The first is “The European Commission brought the action after claiming Ireland had allowed Apple to attribute nearly all its EU earnings to an Irish head office that existed only on paper, thereby avoiding paying tax on EU revenues” in that instant there is all the drive and motivation to bring that supervillain Taxman to bear on the tech giant, let them suck the blood from the body of Apple until it cries for mercy. Yet the other part is “However, he said Brussels was likely to appeal and EU efforts to tackle tax avoidance would continue” ad here we see two parts, the first is ‘tax avoidance’, you see, tax avoidance is legally allowed, it means to pay the least applicable amount of taxation. Tax evasion is illegal, it is the setting where no taxation is paid at all, as such Apple did not break the rules and the stage is actually larger, the quote ‘tackle tax avoidance would continue’ is an issue that optionally Margrethe Vestager should (or could) be regarded as a joke, the issue is not whether Apple is being dodgy, it is the fact that the tax laws after all these years (10 at least) have not been adjusted to the degree that they should be adjusted to. Instead of large windbags of claimed activity that go nowhere, we see the need that the EU had to properly set the tax laws and in this Apple (as well as other FAANG members) did not commit any crimes. They merely used the tax laws to set the proper stage and apparently you can have an empty office, just like the Apple Stores have almost no stock, it is all shipped from the US (sometimes after 9 weeks) so nearly every Apple store is basically a gigantic display case (oversimplification, I know). Yet no matter how joyful and enjoying kicking Apple is, in this case they seemingly did no wrong, the fact that a judge is willing to hand back 13 billion Euro, as such, what is Margrethe Vestager crying about? It is seemingly clear that the tax laws are at fault, in this the organisations above the European Commission have faltered and Apple lived towards the letter of the law and applied what was legally allowed. So when we realise that these laws have been unadjusted for the better part of a decade, who is to blame, Apple or the European lawmakers? 

So when we see the end of the article giving us: “However, he said Brussels was likely to appeal and EU efforts to tackle tax avoidance would continue. “We expect the EU to continue applying pressure in this area,” he said.” And when we see this, how useless is the EU? Tackle appeals whilst the tax laws themselves are flawed, and Ireland is part of this, the stage where Apple was allowed to have “an Irish head office that existed only on paper”, so there wasn’t even a staff-member member? In which universe can we blame Apple for using the law to avoid taxation? If we are a nation of laws, the stage must be that the law states “Law is commonly understood as a system of rules that are created and enforced through social or governmental institutions to regulate behaviour”, this is not me, we get that from Robertson, a bit of an expert on the subject. So when we see that part and agree that we are are a nation of laws, the entire matter we observe becomes a farce, and a bad one. We agree that we use laws as a system of rules, and then let the rules be applied in the way it was, so why blame Apple? It is merely another example on just how useless the EU has become, a gravy train without rules of accountability. 

The EU get what it deserves, as far as I can tell, and as we cannot see any opposition to the black letter law that applies here, Apple is almost scot free. We will enter a new debate soon, the spirit of the Law versus the letter of the law, and in this Apple remains innocent, optionally Ireland ends up in the dock for setting a stage where the spirit of the law is avoided. 

I never changed my mind, I merely adjusted my personal verdict to the facts that were made public.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

July 15, 2020 · 13:29

Light at the end of the economy

Yes, we all see the light at the end of the tunnel, but what if that light was the realisation that it was the end of the economy? What happens when we realise that the bullies have won, the stupid people took over? I am not talking about people with a lesser degree, an academic is not increasingly clever than an agrarian, to be an expert in livestock might not hold weight in Whitechapel, but it holds weight and more than we realise. No, I am talking about these so called clever people that make claims and then refuse to back up the claims. It is seen in ‘Huawei 5G kit must be removed from UK by 2027’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53403793). In that part we see “Digital Secretary Oliver Dowden told the House of Commons of the decision. It follows sanctions imposed by Washington, which claims the firm poses a national security threat – something Huawei denies.” Sanctions imposed by the fat fucking bully in the White House? How about the clear claim that evidence is presented, not like the US Joker with the silver briefcase, but ACTUAL evidence. So far we see US companies being out on a limb not able to secure jack shit (pardon for the impression), but that is the short and sweet of it. If factual evidence was presented it was a different stage, but this is all greed driven and the US cannot continue its path when Huawei gets to win the massive share it gained due to true innovation, not marketed innovation that US companies have with ‘5G Evolution’, but actual factual innovation. And who are we the Commonwealth to get bullied by a nation with no solutions, a 25 trillion dollar debt, and claims that they cannot back up?

At present the 5G war will be settled in 2024 with at present Huawei, a Chinese company becoming the clear winner, Ericsson and Nokia are growing by only because of American bullies. In all the stages my voice was clear “Show us the Evidence”, the US setting its parameters on ‘should’ and ‘could optionally’, not on stages that contain ‘evidence found’ and ‘this is the stage of pressing data’, which is still being done by US companies, but the US does not care about that. It is the loss that Huawei represents that has them showing of as the number one bully, telling number 10 Downing Street what the UK needs to implement. And in light of the ‘or there will be intelligence repercussions’, all whilst the CIA has been failing and applying dew uptime conduct to its allies, is not really the most reliable situation to face.

You see, the stage would be different if actual evidence was presented and that has so far not been done, a mere example that was settled in 2011 is as bad as it gets, when we hold the jobs of these politicians to bear when they make a claim and they cannot give proof is another path, but at the point they will hide behind ‘national security’ with the added phrase ‘It is a really complex situation’, as far as I can tell, it is simple. There either is evidence, or there is not. 

Even as late as last January, politics.com give us “While US officials are declining to comment on specifically what the new evidence may encompass, one delegation member hinted that part of the risk revolves around speculation that Huawei may be engaged…”, so still after more than two years we see ‘hinted’ and ‘speculation’ and no evidence. This is not me making the claims as a novel thing, whole groups of cyber experts are in the same boat as I am in and they know these systems. So as the UK is basically throwing away the economic advantage it might have all for the grace of a bully who stops mattering in the political field soon enough. We see a larger stage, the new economy in Europe will be largely in the hands of the Huawei wielders, and not for governmental reasons, but for the simple reason that their equipment is 3-5 years more advanced than whatever is out now and those making claims that they will equal it, will already be behind the new Huawei devices. The advantage the USA has was washed away through the use of bullet point driven flaccid presenters of slides and so-called new forms of presentations, all whilst they were talking ‘concepts’ someone else made an actual device that works and that is the stage we are in now. So even as we see the Wall Street Journal (at https://www.wsj.com/articles/ericsson-emerges-as-5g-leader-after-u-s-bruises-huawei-11591095601) handing the world leadership to Ericsson last month, we need to consider part of that headline ‘After U.S. Bruises Huawei’, as per: when do we allow a bully to dictate our rules? There is no doubt, both Nokia ad Ericsson are good, but what some regard to be the two Sony sound systems, Huawei is wielding a Bang & Olofsson sound system, two are good, one is better. And for some good is good enough, I get that. There is no shame and no opposition from them if that is the choice, but to be forced to take a second choice system is not a choice and it is done because the US wants things to remain the way they are and they refuse to fix anything. We can add to this the acts of the media, even as Forbes came out with the news ‘Cisco Confirms 5 Serious Security Threats To ‘Tens Of Millions’ Of Network Devices’, we must equally herald Cisco of keeping the people in the loop. This is not an attack on Cisco, if anything they deserve their position, they have a temporary unfortunate stage, and they will resolve it, but the rest of the media largely stayed quiet, even as millions of network devices were in actual danger, but they will not inform the public. They have no issues publishing conjecture and speculation, as such they are still surprised when social media cannot tell the difference between real news and fake news? I wonder why?

In all this, it was just two years ago when we were given ‘Huawei Joins the Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation’ with the added quote “The Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation (CTO) is pleased to announce that Huawei, the leading global information and communications technology solution provider, has joined the organisation as ICT Sector Member. This is membership category of the CTO that is open to the private sector.” It does not matter whether the CTO is real, whether this is some virtual distinction that has no real bearing, I wonder where the actual threat is showing to be that Huawei is a danger, so far no real evidence has ever been presented other than some case that was settled 9 years ago. So as we see more noise of ‘stolen IP’ consider that Huawei is further along than anyone else, as such how can the IP be stolen? How can IP be stolen from others that sets them 3-5 years ahead of the competition? Is that not a valid question? 

In the end, when politicians proclaim in 2028 that the economy is moving along too slow because of 5G gaps, be sure to remember that elected officials put the UK and the Commonwealth in that stage in the first place. The rules of evidence also apply to real life, not merely the courts, and so far the accusing players have not presented any relevant evidence, merely speculated options that come from fear, fear of losing the super comfy life they currently have.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

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

July 14, 2020 · 15:46

Can’t stop the message

That is the name of the game, at times, no matter the source, we cannot stop the message, we can optionally reduce the impact, that is as good as it gets and that has been the centre stage, not for a day, a month, a year, a decade, but for several centuries. The message will get across, history is filled with examples of that all over the world.

So when I wrote “the same model could optionally be used to misinform (or disinform) the person through links that have ‘altered headlines’ One party could use it to flame to larger base of the other party and no matter what claims Facebook makes, the PDF report shows that they are seemingly clueless on how to stop it.” In ‘Presidents are us’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/07/11/presidents-are-us/) I knew what I was talking about, as such it gives me great pleasure to see the BBC give us ‘ISIS ‘still evading detection on Facebook’, report says’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53389657) with the added text “One network’s tactics included mixing its material with content from real news outlets, such as recorded TV news output and the BBC News theme music. It also hijacked Facebook accounts, and posted tutorial videos to teach other Jihadists how to do it. Facebook said it had “no tolerance for terrorist propaganda”.”” They are basically all stages we have seen before and stages we will see again. History has shown that you can not stop the message, you can merely delay the spread and optionally the impact. That is as good as it can get and the fact that we still see: “The researchers believe that at the centre of the network was one user who managed around a third (90 out of 288) of the Facebook profiles. At times, this user would boast of holding 100 ‘war spoils’ accounts, saying: “They delete one account, and I replace it with 10 others.”” People basically never learn. 

And it is not better, not gets to be worse, I wrote in 2013 “This technology should also include Microsoft services including their search engine Bing. Tracking in mobile devices remains a key point. The big advantage of Microsoft’s emerging technology is that it could track a user across a platform.” In the article ‘Patrons of Al-Qaeda’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2013/10/22/patrons-of-al-qaeda/) that was more than 6.5 years ago, do you think that these people sit on their laurels?  So if big-tech can be flaccid and automated to keep track of nearly anyone, what do you think that Trolls and Terrorists will use to get their message across and this is not new, it is not news, it is the situation that has been out in the open for years. As the BBC gives us “another key to the survival of ISIS content on the platform was the way in which ISIS supporters have learned to modify their content to evade controls.” Yes! And that is news how? Consider that the top 10 technical universities graduate close to 15,000 every semester, so 3 teams a year. Now consider that these parts can only persuade 0.1% (which is massively low), that implies that these players gain 15 tech savvy experts every 4 months and that is before we add those who cater to organised crime, in that numbers game we see that the government’s involved are not in a place to compete, their infrastructure had been downplayed for close to a decade and as salespeople from big-tech come around on the ease of automation we see that the mess merely gets worse and that INCLUDES several defence departments in Europe, the Commonwealth and America. That is the situation and there will be no release any day soon (except for the tech person on the help desk relying on his right hand, plenty of release there). So when you consider that I was merely looking at 10 schools, and the mess is actually a lot larger, how much of a joke is the entire ‘dealing with election bias’? If players like Facebook cannot stop or largely diminish a group that nearly all want gone, how about a situation where a larger group is in doubt of acting? How many backdoors will be given to the Cambridge Analytica minded people? That question becomes a lot more important when we consider the LA Times giving us less than 5 hours ago ‘How Facebook keeps its biggest advertisers happy’ with the quote “The social media company made nearly all of last year’s $71 billion in revenue from advertising and has worked hard to build relationships with both brands and advertising companies through a clubby network of invitation-only groups called client councils”, do you think that people spending $71 billion are kept happy with “offering everything from birthday cakes to ski trips, and dinners at the Silicon Valley home of its chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg.” Do you think that is all it takes? So the people ending up having dinner at that place will also get access and that is where some will be looking, the people with access and that is why the message cannot be stopped, that is why some will persevere and that is before my 5G IP hits the markets. I honestly have no idea to stop some, because some will not be stopped, I can only minimise the dangers, but I am also at the mercy of some Telecom minimisers (or was that mini-misers). Anyway, if Trolls and Terrorists get through 0.5% of the time, those with election needs and other message needs are likely to get through 20-40 times as often and any of the Big-Tech players will remain unable to stop them, unless we employ the bullet through the back of the head solution, this will not ever stop, history has proven me right and the fact that I saw this well over 6 years ago and the BBC got up to speed just now (OK, that was an exaggeration) gives wind to a much larger problem. 

You can never stop the message. Wake up! It is actually that simple.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics, Science

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

July 13, 2020 · 17:07

The Iran and Judy show

We have seen the show, we applauded for Punch and his stick (we were kids after all), yet there is no punch this time around, punch was mixed with watermelons, pineapple, cranapple juice and blackberry juice, with a few added distilled options and he got served in a room a small meeting room on 405 East 42nd Street, New York. The meeting room had a limited population, primarily what most meeting rooms have in that building, so there is nothing special about that, and it is just like the meeting on the use of Sarin in Ghouta 2013, for some reason the important question of WHO was avoided by a whole range of paperback politicians (as well as spokespeople of the UN), so I am not surprised to see the next axe job in Al Jazeera (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/07/qa-agnes-callamard-drone-strike-killed-soleimani-200711080404877.html). You see the stage is a lot larger and we need to be aware. Not the question, even as the staged outcome is not one anyone not Iranian can agree with, the stage is larger and that needs to get the forefront.

So even as there is no objection to the set ‘UN’s Agnes Callamard on drone strike that killed Soleimani’, anyone who has any clue on the massive amount of stages that Qasam Soleimani was connected to sets a stage we cannot agree with, so as the article gives us “I had been speaking with a number of experts for the last year or so about focusing one or more of my thematic reports to the UN on weapons, particularly those being tested or under development, and what these may mean for the future of policing, warfare and, ultimately, the protection against arbitrary killings.” Now consider ‘the protection against arbitrary killings’, we do not disagree with this premise, as to why the Houthi stage against Saudi Arabian CIVILIANS is a much larger stage. The fact that experts have given evidence that Houthi forces have no options for produce Iranian drones, they have no expertise in building the drone, deploying the drones and managing the inflight stagers of drones sets a much larger decor in all this, the report, or at least the Al Jazeera version of it, goes out of its way to make sure that Iranian involvement in all this is averted. Why is that?

It is also set to the question that gives us: “we have entered what I have described as the second drone age, characterised by an increasing number of states and non-state actors using them, and by drones becoming stealthier, speedier, smaller, more lethal and capable to be operable by teams located even thousands of kilometres away.” It is a decent answer and I find little to oppose it, yet the stage we see in the Middle East is largely avoided, and it cannot be avoided. It is the approach that we see with “operable by teams located even thousands of kilometres away”, the optionally avoided “operable by teams located beyond the strategy of the involved theatre” is the question, she is setting the stage of a limited amount of state actors, optionally invalidating the involvement by Iran, again, why is that?

Finally there is “Drones are not unlawful weapons. What need to be regulated is both the technological development and their usage. The use of drones … must be lawful under three bodies of law: The law of self-defence, international human rights law, and international humanitarian law.” No one disagrees with that, yet the stages in several fields is not the technological side, it is out there, it is the stage where players like Iran deploys their drones via Houthi and Hezbollah forces and the report (read: UN Essay) was written to avoid all that. In a stage where Iran has ignored the existence of both International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law, we see the need to chastise this report on a few lacking merits. 

So when Agnes Callamard gives us “Thus far, courts have largely refused to provide oversight to drones’ targeted killings extraterritorially, arguing that such matters are political, or relate to international relations between states and thus are non-justiciable. A blanket denial of justiciability over the extraterritorial use of lethal force cannot be reconciled with recognized principles of international law, treaties, conventions, and protocols, and violates the rights to life and to a remedy.” We find it hard to disagree with this, but in all this, the larger stage of proxy wars (and therefor Iran) is left out of the equation, out of a equation that matters NOW, so why is that?

It all coincides with “The killing of General Soleimani shows how dangerously close the world has been to a major and deadly crisis”, a stage whether valid or not is optional, but the lack of references that Saudi civilians have been under attack on well over half a dozen stages is left unexplained, as such we could wonder why the hatred of aka Eggy Calamari in regards to the Saudi people is not asked. This is the third report that attacks Saudi Arabia (without proper evidence) or negates the attacks on their civilians, all whilst those attacks were show with evidence and the stage of the refineries is show to a degree that it should have been impossible for Houthi forces to be THIS successful, the attack amounts to a person buying tickets to three different lotteries and getting the jackpot on all three of them, it is statistically so far out of reachable stages that it boggles the mood on how certain players were willing to put their name on such a disgraceful place of strategic thinking. 

I am left with the stage where the UN is massively setting the stage to Iranian needs, all whilst Iran has not now, not ever shown any humanitarian resolve, and there is decades of evidence in that bucket. So what is the UN, specifically Agnes Callamard playing at?

So as the article ends with “War is at risk of being normalised as a legitimate and necessary companion to peace. We must do all that we can to resist this deadly creep.” In that stage, can anyone explain why the absence of the actions of Iranian and Houthi forces give light of the avoidance of the deadly creep? No one disagrees that the entire drone stage is setting a much larger stage, a stage we never held before, yet doing so in a way that keeps a player like Iran out of reach of it does not really solve anything does it? And as for Qasam Soleimani? I mentioned his actions on several occasions, as such we need to read that UN Essay with a different light. The fact that the life and attacks under Soleimani does not get the 50 pages of disclosure is a much larger stage and optionally that is not up to the UN, but ignoring that whilst it matters as to why he was killed, optionally with the entire Iraqi stage as to why he was there in the first place is a little bit weird, but perhaps Agnes had some of that funky punch in the meeting room, I do not know, I am merely hazarding a speculation.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Military, Politics

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

July 11, 2020 · 20:34

The Price of knowledge

There was an article in the BBC two days ago, I kept it on the side as I wanted the knowledge to sink in. There is optionally nothing wring with the writer, yet the stage is flawed. The stage includes everyones favourite Essay writer with a matching political agenda, It’s Eggy Calamari. Although she apparently uses her altar ego identity Agnes Calamard at 405 East 42nd Street, New York. The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-53345885) gives us ‘Qasem Soleimani: US strike on Iran general was unlawful, UN expert says’, OK, we are in a stage where we need to differ between what is just and what is lawful, and I get that. Not all just actions are lawful and plenty of lawful actions are not just. That is how it has always has been, so what gives in this case? Well that part is seen with “the US had not provided sufficient evidence of an imminent threat to life to justify the attack”. Are these people for real? Qasem Soleimani was direct threat to Middle East stability every moment he was breathing. This is not some general like most nations have them, this was an absolute virtuoso in the art of terrorism wherever he went. 

So when we see “He was in charge of the Quds Force’s clandestine missions and its provision of guidance, funding, weapons, intelligence, and logistical support to allied governments and armed groups, including Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad”, we see that apart from whatever lawful way he had destabilising the Middle East, we also see that he funded three terrorist organisations, namely Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and that is not enough evidence? These three are a constant threat to imminent threat of life any given day of the week. It seems to me that just like in previous attempts, Agnes Calamard is all about catering to the ‘concerns’ of Iran for some politicians to keep the conversation going for whatever needs these politicians have.

For those who are not in the know of General QS. Let’s take a look. First is 2019, when we consider Iraq, we are given “Baghdad: The Iraqi people refuse the pro Iranian personalities”, I will let you guess what happens next, next we see “Soleimani traveled to Iraq aiming to convince various political parties to maintain Mohammed Shia’ Sabbar al-Sudani? as the new candidate for the prime ministry, the Al-Arabiya website reported on December 16. Al-Sudani? is member of the Islamic Dawa Party led by former Iraqi PM Nouri Al-Maleki who is charged with embezzlement, corruption, murder and terrorizing his opponents. al-Sudani? was also a minister in Maleki’s cabinet. Another candidate is Ghosi Al-Sahih. He was a minister in Adel Abdol Mehdi’s cabinet and close to Nouri Al-Maleki. Following his nomination for the PM post, the Iraqi people protested in numerous cities including Baghdad, Naseriyah, Najaf and Basra.” The issues becomes that Qasam Soleimani is not a diplomat, he doesn’t negotiates, he hands out ultimatums and if they do  not know that at the UN, then those people have become slightly less than useless. 

We can go back in time, 2018, 2017, 2016, Qasam Soleimani was there dispersing his brand of justice through the powerful arms of terrorist organisations in the Middle East. That can all be set to the stage of a direct threat to life, an imminent threat to life and an absolute waging of war against civilians. So when we see two botched reports (as I personally see it) against Saudi Arabia, relying on cone cure and ignoring the lack of evidence and now we see her making a black letter law call? I wonder who is paying her ticket, I am not much for conjecture but this is the third case that calls for an investigations into the acts of Agnes Calamard, the fact that this is not happening, implies that certain people require the need for Middle Eastern imbalance and who does that serve? In this economy it actually serves no one but the ones needing funds to go in specific directions for a longer time to come, whilst the need cannot be shown. I would ask the people at Palantir, but they are too busy going public regarding their shares (I am not stating that this is illegal or a bad call).

We can hide behind the price of knowledge, but the actions of Qasam Soleimani are well documented for close to half a century and the opposition got to him before he made a mess of Iraq as well. I reckon that this is the part that upsets them optionally more then taking out the financier of three terrorist organisations, and those are the three we openly know about, there is enough to indicate Qasam Soleimani in dozens of other cases, other fund distributing actions. In most cases he merely approved them, he was not directly involved and we will never find any, including his hands in the entire Yemeni situation, which is interestingly not investigated. Can anyone tell me how 50+ Iranian drones and 200+ Iranian missiles got into Houthi hands without him knowing and approving it? #Just-asking

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Military, Politics

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

July 11, 2020 · 00:16

Presidents are us

Yup, the fight for the White House is intensifying. The BBC gives us ‘Biden challenges Trump with ‘Buy American’ economic plan’. Well that is a step we saw coming, in a stage where any corona virus hit nations will rely not merely on the export of goods, but on the locally required spending consumer base. With the FAANG group in its own world, the US democrats have decided on ‘Buy American’. It makes sense, although the claimed $700bn plan is likely to cost close to twice that amount and will only truly be a win if US export does not collapse whilst the US population will rely on US goods instead of importing. If those two parts are met then Joe Biden does have an optional working plan. The current president says that this plan will fail, but in light of all his claims, does anyone care what he thinks? So whilst the BBC gives us “Many voters are concerned by the Trump administration’s handling of the pandemic. His divisive approach to the country’s recent wave of anti-racism protests has also come under sharp scrutiny” and they are correct, even as there are a few more issues surrounding Trump, there is a larger concern on his presidency and as the foundation of the Republican group are in a stage where they are doubting his presidency can show any positive impact for the Republicans, the idea that a Democratic win for them at present is better than the current White House occupant is also a larger concern as the elections draws near. Even as we see “Analysts have urged caution in over-interpreting the polls, but Mr Biden’s lead is far greater than that of Mr Trump’s 2016 opponent Hillary Clinton at the same point in the campaign” the analysts do have to some degree a point, the American population has NEVER EVER been this polarised before and as some see it, there is a much larger white power population, Al Jazeera showed ‘An Al Jazeera investigation identified some 120 pages belonging to bands with openly white supremacist and racist views’, which adds up to another issue that Mark Zuckerberg and his book of faces has been unable to deal with. And these pages tend to flow towards Trump, not Biden. (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/07/exclusive-facebook-extensively-spread-neo-nazi-music-200710075507831.html) and that is merely the tip of the iceberg that is optionally the reason that the US Titanic will be sinking in unknown waters. The articles also gives us the PDF and “The 89-page report by civil rights experts heavily criticised Facebook, saying it needs to do more about anti-Muslim, anti-Jewish and other hate speech.” In this the article is important when we get to Chapter 6 (Algorithmic Bias), there we see “algorithms used to screen resumes to identify qualified candidates may only perpetuate existing gender or racial disparities if the data used to train the model on what a qualified candidate looks like is based on who chose to apply in the past and who the employer hired; in the case of Amazon the algorithm “learned” that references to being a woman (e.g., attending an all-female college, or membership in a women’s club) was a reason to downgrade the candidate.” Yet the same model could optionally be used to misinform (or disinform) the person through links that have ‘altered headlines’ One party could use it to flame to larger base of the other party and no matter what claims Facebook makes, the PDF report shows that they are seemingly clueless on how to stop it. You see, even if Facebook decides to block politics, it does not stop one account from posting an image, and even as the image might not be political, it can still impact the political base with the misinformation it spreads and Facebook would be largely unable to stop it until it was too late and as it optionally stops one side, the other side can make it worse, so here we see the application of Shareholder, Stakeholder and Sponsors, the S3 equation of big business. 

So even as the news was that the FAANG group saw $58 billion wiped after Trump slammed the ‘immense power’ of big tech (Business Insider), we seem to forget that that same group saw their stocks rise in excess of of $637 billion, so they still made decently well over half a trillion dollars. When you consider that, who do you think that the FAANG group wants as the next president? In all this the entire China matter remains an issue as the US goes towards the polling booths, yet in the end, there is absolutely no guarantee that President Trump is a one term president, yes there is the wishful thinking group, but the issues seen in the economy and the soaring profits that the FAANG group is making is a much larger concern, especially as their voices are a lot more powerful than anyone realises. In all this, the final touch is that so far I have shown again and again that the media is massively sensitive to the needs of the S3 group they dance for, in all this, do you expect to get any neutral news? Consider this week the insincerity of Fox News with ‘Fox News apologises for cropping Trump out of Epstein and Maxwell photo’ and whilst the Guardian reports on this, not many did, and when we realise the byline “Network says it mistakenly eliminated Donald Trump from photo with Maxwell and Epstein at Mar-a-Lago in February 2000” take a moment to consider the choice of words ‘mistakenly eliminated’, which is bias, it is (in my personal view) a form of censoring, which is interesting as it is the media that are all in arms on ‘censoring’ which was shown by Lord Justice Leveson through a novel that exceeds War and Peace (an apt analogy), even as the media reflected on it like it was the horror story fo the century, we see that the media has no issues to ‘mistakenly eliminate’, optionally hoping that no one will notice and there is every chance that a lot of people remained unaware. So in light of all this, there is no way to predict the winner. Even as we hope that Joe Biden will be supported to a much larger degree and that it will be a fair fight, I am not so sure about either premise in this equation.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

July 7, 2020 · 03:40

Light reading

We all have those moments, when the reading gets tough, because we decided to take a stab at Umberto Eco’s the Name of the Rose, James SA Corey’s Tiamat’s Wrath or Neil Gaiman’s American Gods, we tend to require some light reading, in this I am no different, although, my choice was ‘Country Reports on Terrorism 2019’ the US Department of State to provide to Congress a full and complete annual report on terrorism for those countries and groups meeting the criteria of the Act.  It is here that I found a few items that made me wonder, I’ll merely look at one of them.

Now, the important part in all this is the fact that we need to consider what constitutes ‘a complete annual report’, I need to set it in that way, for the simple reason that the application of ‘complete’ is not always a given in some settings. This piece of light reading is set to 304 pages, so I will safe you the state of affairs in a few items and focus on an immediate issue that could be seen as a direct danger and not merely to the US.

Hezbollah, is there another one?

The US Department of State names them Hizballah and then gives us “Aka the Party of God; Islamic Jihad; Islamic Jihad Organization; Revolutionary Justice Organization; Organization of the Oppressed on Earth; Islamic Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine; Organization of Right Against Wrong; Ansar Allah; Followers of the Prophet Muhammed; Lebanese Hizballah; Lebanese Hezbollah; LH; Foreign Relations Department; FRD; External Security Organization; ESO; Foreign Action Unit; Hizballah ESO: Hizballah International; Special Operations Branch; External Services Organization; External Security Organization of Hizballah”, OK, fair enough, they are known in several ways, so we get the entire list of references and no one will ever object to clarity. Yet then we see “In September 2018, Brazil arrested a Hizballah financier, and in December 2018, tunnels reportedly built by the group were discovered on Israeli territory along the boundary with Lebanon. In September 2019, Hizballah launched attacks directly on the Israeli military, firing anti-tank missiles targeting an army base and vehicles near the border. 

Strength: Hizballah has tens of thousands of supporters and members worldwide. 

Location/Area of Operation: Lebanon and Syria”

This is all true, yet it is incomplete. The entire setting to Hezbollah in Yemen is overlooked, intentionally or not is not important. 

The first source is Reuters (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-yemen-security-group/saudi-led-coalition-says-hezbollah-fighters-killed-in-yemen-battles-idUSKBN1JL0YR). They give us ‘Saudi-led coalition says Hezbollah fighters killed in Yemen battle’ in June 2018 “Forces backed by a Saudi-led coalition have killed eight members of Lebanon’s Hezbollah group in Yemen in battles with the Iran-aligned Houthis, the coalition said on Monday. Hezbollah officials could not immediately be reached for comment.” In addition we see ‘Yemen’s Houthi rebels raise nearly $300,000 for Hezbollah’ in 2019 and the entire setting continues until deep into 2020. As I personally see it, the Area of Operation has been proven (via several sources) to include Yemen and that is overlooked. In 2019 there are over half a dozen sources giving us news of Hezbollah in Yemen, I see that as a massive reason for actions and identification, especially as several sources name Hezbollah as the trainer/co-operating partner in the missile attacks on Saudi Arabia.

It gets to be worse if some sources can be trusted (unchecked), When we see ‘Hezbollah Isn’t Just in Beirut. It’s in New York, Too. The trial of a senior operative reveals the extent of the terrorist organization’s reach in the United States and Canada.’ We need to equally question “But last month, the criminal prosecution and conviction in New York of the Hezbollah operative Ali Kourani revealed disturbing new information about the extent of Hezbollah’s operations and activities in the United States and Canada.” The issue is as I see it a lot larger, it is not enough that they are recognised as a terrorist force, yet the lack of mentions of their activities outside of the Middle East in 2019 is a rather large factor, especially if their activities in the US, Canada and Europe were published by media sources. The British newspaper ‘the Telegraph’ (OK, not the greatest reliable source) gives us ‘Europe has not faced up to the threat of Hizbollah’ with the added text “Iran’s primary terrorist proxy group, Lebanese Hizbollah, has been deploying operatives to Europe for many years.” We can add text after text, yet the question in all this becomes, why is the ‘Country Reports on Terrorism 2019’ incomplete? As I personally see it, it is an ‘incomplete annual report’, all this whilst this year there are added factors, that give rise to the fact that the Houthi forces as well as Hezbollah has been firing drones and missiles on civil targets in Saudi Arabia making them a much larger threat and optionally the proven threat that Israel has always claimed them to be. 

Light reading or not, when the item is set to complete, I say, it is not. I wonder if I am the only one claiming this and the only one claiming that Hezbollah is a much larger problem than the US Congress is being made aware of. I wonder why?

Country-Reports-on-Terrorism-2019-2

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

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

July 6, 2020 · 20:44

Presenting facts towards oblivion

There is a saying, if you shout it often enough, people will start to believe. The BBC gives us two headlines in this regard. The first is ‘Coronavirus: FDA chief refuses to back Trump’s vaccine prediction’ and the second one is ‘Indian scientists say the August vaccine deadline – set by the country’s medical council – is unrealistic’ all this, whilst a clear message was given in January 2020, a vaccine could take up to 18 months (and that if we get lucky), as such we see the unrealistic side that governments are bombastically advertising. We understand that the IQ of the man in the White House is nothing to be proud of, yet the Indian government should know better, their country has even higher problems than the US is faced with, as such they should know better and the news of an early vaccine ANYWHERE on the planet is a stretch, as such, can we even trust any government to be on par with its population? 

And this is not all, we get the following via Reuters ‘Hundreds of scientists say coronavirus is airborne, ask WHO to revise recommendations: NYT’, the article (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-airborne/hundreds-of-scientists-say-coronavirus-is-airborne-ask-who-to-revise-recommendations-nyt-idUSKBN2460O7) also gives us “Hundreds of scientists say there is evidence that the novel coronavirus in smaller particles in the air can infect people and are calling for the World Health Organization to revise recommendations, the New York Times reported on Saturday” this is huge, it also gives rise to my predictions months ago (not weeks but months) should leave us wondering what the governments are about, other than the creation of discourse. I stated in ‘Vindication is like Maple Syrup’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/06/18/vindication-is-like-maple-syrup/) that the numbers did not add up, I saw that part as early as February 2020, yet the numbers became more defined in June. The setting was direct, the numbers could not be correct, there was more in play. I was not making a claim that I had the answers, but what was presented to us did not make sense and I have to admit that the part of ‘coronavirus is airborne’ is a scary part, but could be part of the explanation. As such the problems we face are a lot larger and if the airborne is proven, at that point these right-wing nuts we see in the US could optionally be prosecuted for manslaughter. So these people without masks infecting others could be seen as “the crime of killing a human being without malice aforethought, or in circumstances not amounting to murder.” yes, in this case “without malice aforethought” and “stupid ignorance” could be seen as one and the same. There is every chance that the light of vaccine time and the White House claim “We are unleashing our nation’s scientific brilliance and we’ll likely have a therapeutic and/or vaccine solution long before the end of the year.” Might be seen as damaging as those with the lack of foresight and deleting the need of a face mask. Consider the fact that an airborne and a non airborne vaccine might require a different track (an assumption on my side) adds to all this and now that we are given ‘China bubonic plague: Inner Mongolia takes precautions after case’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-53303457) adds to all this. A deadly flue and the black death in one and the same stage? That has got to be new and certainly is news. I am not blaming anyone, I am setting the stage that we need real answers and not positively charged speculations to make the financial people happy. We seemingly have a massive problem and in all this, the evolution of our systems will take a massive hit, it is no longer about, will the economy survive, it will be will internal government systems survive what is thrown at them? Whilst some hide behind ‘German healthcare market rich with potential for app developers’ others give us ‘How Covid-19 exposed cracks in France’s cherished healthcare system’, it is not a stage of who is right and who is wrong, they are both right, but until there is an ACTUAL solution on treating patients on a global stage, every ‘potential’ stage is merely a stage that stops people from getting treatment and to be quite honest, there is no way to predict what healthcare needs in 2021 and 2022, there might not be enough people alive to consider an app, or a quick solution. At that point it will be about the quality of care, and anyone disagreeing with me on that is allowed to do so, but the facts are out and about. Even as some swallowed the corona news as it was a vitamin drink, we have now seen several examples that a larger amount of news never added up and those entering carefully phrased denials will be receiving public questions and will be demanded to answer, when they give us ‘we were wrongly informed’ they can either be punished themselves or be required to give their sources of information. 

For some it will be a whole new day in the field of accountability. We have not choice, the people have been led astray from the facts for far too long, the media will hide behind the ‘facilitation’ option, but the people can demand that the stake holders seek another path and that the share holders dump the shares at that point the advertisers will seek safer shores. It will be a brand new day soon enough. Of course that is before we realise that the mortality rate is optionally a lot above 5%, when that becomes fact, the people will see another path and violence through stress and loss will be the handling powers. It has happened before and it will happen again. 

We can present the facts into oblivion, but at some point the people will demand straight answers,  for them loss is a massive motivator to get them and governments hiding facts will see another danger heading their way. I will let them figure that one out.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,