Category Archives: Politics

September 4, 2019 · 11:26

Unemployed or UN employed?

I got hit by the news last night and I had to sit down to settle a little. Now, I already had plenty of issues with the UN, the first one is Eggnog Calamari (aka Agnès Callamard) with her essay, several parts of that being debatable (as I personally see it) and too much on speculation and what might have been. OK, besides that point there are plenty of other issues, yet the news yesterday takes the cake. The news (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/france-britain-complicit-yemen-war-crimes-190903103122355.html) giving the headline ‘US, France, Britain may be complicit in Yemen war crimes: UN‘ makes the UN now come across as a joke. Even as we get the same approach with their ‘secret list’ the quote: “The United States, United Kingdom and France may be complicit in war crimes in Yemen by arming and providing intelligence and logistics support to a Saudi-led coalition that starves civilians as a war tactic“, it is the ‘as a war tactic‘ that is the part that bothers me. There has been enough news and enough mentions that Houthi forces took food from the people. In addition there is enough evidence that Houthi forces stopped the flow of food and medicine. There is equal sources (unconfirmed) that Hezbollah set that stage, in addition the Iranian part in all this remains unmentioned. Apparently the report also gives us: “The Houthis for their part have shelled cities, deployed child soldiers and used “siege-like warfare”” yet no mention of the famine actions that have been reported on a few occasions instigated and pushed through by Houthi forces. I am clearly not stating that Saudi Arabia and the UAE did the same tactics, the acts that the report accuses them of. I am not aware of this part and I am not saying that this is not so, yet there is now allegedly (because the Al Jazeera article is the source) more than one piece of evidence missing, as such the UN can no longer be trusted at present. The intentional absence of Iranian actions, the absence of Hezbollah mentions, as well as the fact that UN volunteers earlier this year reported that Houthi force claimed and blocked food supplies is a large issue and as it is unmentioned now gives rise to the UN becoming a questionable presence.

The quote “Its appendix lists the names of more than 160 “main actors” among Saudi, Emirati and Yemeni top brass as well as the Houthi movement, although it did not specify whether any of these names also figured in its list of potential suspects” is equally debatable. By trying to steer clear through: “it did not specify whether any of these names” implying that Houthi forces are less guilty. Still the actions of Iran supplying arms, drones and missiles are seemingly not mentioned. And if there is truth to the quote: “the information in these reports is absolutely crucial to build cases in the future“, the absence of Iran and Hezbollah become even more interesting. The question with me is whether the person behind that report is UN employed, or should that person become unemployed immediately.

When I take a helicopter rise (or a magic carpet ride) I can agree that there are no real innocent sides, all sides will transgress, make mistakes and so on. Did Saudi forces refuse to feed people, or were the food supplies already seized by Houthi forces? It is not a case of bias; it is active strategies on a theatre of war that was active. The fact that Houthi forces were mostly unmentioned is a much larger issue; the absence of Iran makes the entire Al Jazeera article optionally worthless. I will wait for the actual report to come out and nit-pick that report to death. Yet the article in France 24 gives us: “US, Britain, France, Iran and others that they “may be held responsible for providing aid or assistance for the commission of international law violations if the conditions for complicity are fulfilled.”” gives an optional first stage where the bulk the question is larger, Al Jazeera voiced it as: “while also highlighting the role Western countries have played as key backers of the Arab states and Iran has played in support of the Houthis“, yet it is the only mention of Iran and no mention of the acts of Hezbollah at all, which is still an issue on several levels.

There is one additional failing in the article, and optionally in the report as well. the quote: “it found that a Joint Incidents Assessment Team set up by Saudi Arabia to review alleged coalition violations had failed to hold anyone accountable for any strike killing civilians, raising “concerns as to the impartiality of its investigations”“, the quote shows a larger failing in the train of thought here. It is the task of a Joint Incidents Assessment Team to see of proper procedures were adhered to, that is not an impartial task, that is a clear task whether military protocols were ignored. The Human Right Watch (at https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/08/24/hiding-behind-coalition/failure-credibly-investigate-and-provide-redress-unlawful) gives us a few parts, but the quote: “JIAT originally consisted of 14 individuals from the main coalition members. It has a mandate to investigate the facts, collect evidence, and produce reports and recommendations on “claims and accidents” during coalition operations in Yemen” is seemingly accurate. The task is to initially investigate whether proper military procedures were adhered to. This is important as this sets-up the investigation through the chain of command. At that point SIGINT can determine whether communications were passed on correctly, it is there where I believe that one additional independent member would be required to investigate ALL the raw data. It is a time consuming job, but that is the path to find out what happened. And anyone thinking that this is simple, think again any event could take months to investigate if ALL the data is available. Yes, I agree it might seem partial, but it optionally is not. If anyone accuses this JIAT to be partial, than there might be a case for that, but it is still edged on the need for the Saudi Government to investigate whether they did something wrong. A defence attorney is not impartial, he or she opposes the prosecution to find all the evidence and applies the law to show innocence (or better stated an absence of guilt); it is a military approach, a Judge Advocate General (JAG) job to investigate. They apply the law and at present I have not seen any evidence clearing or properly accusing Saudi Arabia and the UAE from being actually guilty. Yet the other HRW parties are eager to ignore Iran’s part in all that. In addition, as the HRW gave rise 6 months ago with ‘Yemen: Houthi Landmines Kill Civilians, Block Aid‘ (at https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/04/22/yemen-houthi-landmines-kill-civilians-block-aid) where we see: “Mines have also prevented aid groups from bringing food and health care to increasingly hungry and ill Yemeni civilians“, gives a larger truth. The article in Al Jazeera (and France 24) give no rise to that given, Houthi involvement was minimalized and that is a much larger crime (as I personally see it) giving rise to my premise that this person behind the report should not be UN employed, that person should be unemployed.

That took less than 20 minutes to figure out, I wonder why Al Jazeera made no clear mention of that failure, where is their head at and where is their media allegiance at?

1 Comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as Agnes Callamard, Al Jazeera, Hezbollah, Houthi, HRW, Human Rights watch, Iran, Joint Incidents Assessment Team, Saudi Arabia, SIGINT, UAE, UN, United Arab Emirates, Yemen

September 3, 2019 · 11:05

Anacusis through silence

This is about an article I wrote on June 2nd 2018, the title ‘Cheese Pizza with Oregano‘. The story (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2018/06/02/cheese-pizza-with-oregano/) looks at the finance situation that the big 4 face. With Brexit 7 weeks away that premise is becoming a lot more important. You see the big 4 (including the UK) had a lot of debt, now the issues for the UK do not dwindle, yet the other three are in a less savoury position. As sources gave us then we see: “Spain will have refinancing requirements that exceed €300 billion per annum before 2022. In 2018, 41.2 billion euro, in 2019, 82.4, in 2020 83.9 and in 2021 58.5 billion euro, with 60.4 billion maturing in 2022“, the second part is not Spain, it is Italy where we see: “4 billion euro maturities in 2018, 161 billion in 2019, 164 billion in 2020 and 172.5 billion euro in 2021“. Bloomberg (at https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-08-29/conte-s-five-star-democrat-coalition-offers-italy-respite) gave us last week ‘Italy’s Unlikely Allies Offer a Brief Respite From Crisis‘, a brief respite is not a solution and there well over a quarter of a trillion Euro to refinance in Europe alone. Where is that coming from? You see Italy is merely one of three players that is in the deep waters, I have no numbers on Germany, yet Spain is in a similar place and whilst we thing that there is no issue, there is. Two nations represent an outstanding invoice totaling €250,000,000,000 due in three months and there is no real solution (as far as I can see it). Refinancing is fine by the banks; with the added interest these two nations will sign an addition burden of no less than €2,500,000,000 and optionally close to twice that amount. This implies that in the two nations every person adds between €24 and €50 to their debt (read: taxes) just to pay for the increased interest. You might not think this is a lot and over a year it seems little but EVERY person in Spain and Italy must pay it, no exceptions and it is merely to pay for the additional interest on the debt, not the debt itself and next year it will be about twice as much and with the outstanding debt still there (I am ignoring the debt of 2018), in 2019 people will have to pay between €75 and €150 each, young, old, it will not matter. So how large is the percentage of people that have to face this invoice and have no means to pay it? Those having to live below the current poverty line is clearly one of these groups and it is not a small group. We all are placed in denial of outstanding bills because the media seemingly ignores it. I gave warning to this in 2017, I reiterated it in 2018 and now the issue is on the doorstep, pushing it forward one more year will make it all come apart. It is the clear stage of deafness through silence. If we keep silent, it goes away. Well, there is some news for you. Anyone who ever faced a debt collector can tell you, it never goes away and that feeling of hardship can follow you up to a quarter of a century. And all this is negating the French situation. Germany is in a much better place, but when the recession hits it will deteriorate and in addition, Germany is seemingly tired of carrying the burden of irresponsible politicians. And when it comes to France, I personally wonder how much Credit Agricole gets to pocket this time around (perhaps you remember the Libor scandal). I agree that Credit Agricole was not alone in this, yet this time around Deutsche bank and Credit Suisse have additional problems and they are not in a position to get caught with their fingers in the cookie jar (or is that fingers in the cocky jar?)

the problem is that these people tend to not learn, in addition, the wealth tends to outrun the fine by a fair bit and that is where the problem lies, the issues of debt needed to have been negated harshly a lot sooner and these governments pushed it forward again and again and this now directly interacts with any additional stimulus, because Spain, Italy, France and Germany (Germany a lot less) will get to feel the pinch on both ends of the pliers, the Stimulus branch and the refinancing branch. The UK is not out of reach of it all, but as it is on the way out it cannot be held responsible for a lot of these upcoming cost and the remain group just does not realise how much money is added to the debt in that way. It was the biggest issue that mattered and it has arrived at the front door of the UK, The Brexit door avoids that issue that was part of the larger problem all along. And now 12 of the 27 nations are eager to say yes to whatever infusion they can manage also becomes a worry, as they now face a much larger share of that expense, so they are complaining as loud as possible.

Even now as we see the Coup D’état message of: ‘Brussels would reluctantly agree Brexit extension if rebel MPs succeed in preventing no-deal‘, and other messages of delay, the delay is essential for Europe because they decided to remain in denial of Brexit, for three years these EU people got fat wages and remained possum, so now we see a larger issue. What use is the EU when it cannot contain any control over the irresponsible spending of the ECB? What use is the EU when the players have shown an inability to get a proper budget? The problem is actually a lot larger. You see the next part is speculative and I cannot prove it, but bare (or bear) with me. It connects to the IMF Data produced for the year 2018. Now we can agree that there is always an interaction. There is expected positive and actual positive. My issue is that EVERY nation in the EU gained (actually except Turkey). All are gaining, now we can agree that most might have had a positive impact, yet when we look back at the news we see: “The weaker end to the year weighed on the economy’s performance in 2017 overall, with growth revised down from 1.8% to 1.7%” (the Guardian), “Britain’s economy slowed to a virtual standstill in the first three months of 2018” (the Guardian), “It felt as though the sector was losing its lifeblood this month as Brexit worries continued to claw away at confidence, new orders and business margins” (the Independent) all these bad news linking Brexit, all whilst the IMF data shows that nominal GDP numbers for the UK went up by 7%.

IMPORTANT

Now there are two important parts here. The first is that the metrics are not the same, yet the premise of one side claiming that there are losses, the positive is down, yet the year before the IMF showed that the UK GDP went down by 0.011% the numbers make no sense, we are thrown between different metrics and those different metrics do not reflect the battering news again and again. The people are being handled with data that is not reliable and that part is obvious not reported on. Just like the news three years ago that the IMF reported that UK austerity was a really bad idea, something that they had to retract later on. The second danger is that the GDP is a lot more complex, yet the premise that the UK economy is so bad, so less good and growing so much less so than before the Brexit ‘threat’ is not seen in a -0.011% versus a plus 7%. Even I agree that 7% is way too positive, but these are the reported numbers and they do not add up, not compared to the media and all the anti-Brexit reporting.

This comes to blows when we see the issues in the other large three European players. In addition, the setting ignores the fact that the medium economies (Netherlands, Belgium, and Sweden) had been doing a lot better. Their economies might be ‘too’ small, yet their good venture might reflect to Eastern Europe to a much larger degree. Merely agreeing with the big four is seemingly folly too.

Oh, and before I forget, we can now also consider the forceful removal of any politician in the European economic field if so desired. They can be fired without any legal repercussions at present. The EU enabled us to do that when they decided to label the no-deal Brexit as a major natural disaster. This works for the remain as well as the Brexit group as the ECB was the biggest flaw in all this. When the Coup D’état works in the UK, we can demand the immediate firing of Mario Draghi and his ECB associates (read: cronies). If the economy is seen as a natural disaster, those setting and prolonging the stage of a natural disaster are wielders of that natural disaster and as such should be pushed out of office without pay.

I wonder if they thought that through, I guess not. I hope I did not oversimplify matters here 😉

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics

Tagged as Austerity, Belgium, Brexit, Coup D’état, Crédit Agricole, ECB, Eu, France, Germany, IMF, Italy, LIBOR, Mario Draghi, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, UK

September 2, 2019 · 11:23

Funny Money, Amusing Thickheads

There are two issues and they do not link, but they are supportive of one another. I made notice of this situation 5 months ago in my article (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2019/04/27/then-the-hard/) called ‘Then the hard‘, in the article I give “Now we get to the part where the €2.5 trillion mark matters, as the ECB is trying to find new ways to convince others that the continued provision of stimulus to the economy matters“, as I see it the stimulus protects banks, makes them more powerful, it allows for political stupidity, yet the economy has not been saved (not in the two attempts), it has not been jump started, and it has not been a positive impact for its citizens, merely the industrial executives and the rich CEO’s (OK, that was a more biased view from yours truly, the writer).

As Bloomberg gave us on Saturday (at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-31/more-ecb-officials-pile-into-stimulus-debate-as-economy-wilts) ‘More ECB Officials Pile Into Stimulus Debate as Economy Wilts‘, and when we see: “the ECB should keep all options on the table to reinvigorate inflation and growth, including a relaunch of quantitative easing“, it is at that point that the EU citizens are getting screwed (again), more debt (again) and no resolution because the ECB is about the gravy train and not about resolutions. Yes that same article gives opposing voices, yet I would not be surprised that (by a narrow margin) the stimulus people win. This is why Brexit was so important!

In the end the retirees get hammered for those debts, the ECB officials have too fat wallets to care. At this point the debts have surpassed €3,000,000,000,000 and it seems that the end is nowhere near, yet the stage of bankruptcy is there. Even at 0.1% (no debt interest is ever that low) implies that the interest is €3 billion a year. A payment that is way beyond the budgets of any of the EU nations, payment due every year whilst the bulk of them have overextended themselves with budgets that should have been shrunk by well over 5%, so pretty much all the EU nations are running an economic deficit whilst the Mario Draghi Posse is handing out more money, printed money, for a lack of a better term funny money.

What the ECB is not telling anyone that most stimulus options fall flat when the UK officially leaves the EU that is the despair there. Their options melt away when the UK is out and that is why everyone is suddenly in a panic, that is why we get these moronic acts and even UK Labour is all about remain now. And with that part we move to the second part of this.

Now we get to the Chief of Grief, the Duke of Fluke, the one and only real loser in history (as I personally see it) Jeremy Corbyn. When we see headlines like ‘No-deal Brexit: Jeremy Corbyn vows to ‘pull Britain back from the brink’‘, or ‘Final sovereignty on Brexit must rest with the people‘ we see the idiot he is. There was a referendum, there was a voice and Brexit won, the issues with the ECB shows us that we are a lot better outside then inside that mess. There is no brink of Brexit, there is an economic mess and we will enter a stage of recession, anyone telling you that it can be presented is lying to you, or they are wielding massive amounts of money, amounts that no one has. This has been shown by people more intelligent than me and by people with actual economic degrees; they all are on the ‘remain’ fence, merely because it butters their bread. It gets worse when we see that the Hysterical Remain groups that have become violent, abusive and out of control, more important, to a larger degree the media isn’t even covering it. How is that for balanced information?

I have heard one or two actual ‘remainers’ who made a really good case, yet in the end, they have no control over the ECB and the ECB is in Europe at present the great evil. What they claim is good for Europe is to a much larger extent merely good for big business. When we look at those companies leaving the UK, these are all companies hiding behind taxation options, or facilitating to really large players and to some degree that is fine, but the ECB forgot that the well over 150 million small business owners see nothing of any of that and more important, they will see the impact of the 3 trillion euro of debt that the ECB created, things are that much out of whack and I do not get why people accept the presented BS that people like Jeremy Corbyn have been presenting to the masses. I am aware and I also believe that Brexit had its own waves of BS presenters. I made up my own mind and for the most I was leaning towards Remain, Mark Carney (the Marky Mark of the British bank) and especially his speech to the House of Lords was the setting of that stage. Yet he too had one flaw (if you want to call it that), there was no controlling the ECB and they are out again making some lame excuse on the essential economic need for more stimulus, whilst we already know now that it will not save the economy and they are willing to wager another trillion euro and spend it up front.

These people are not held accountable in any way and I say: ‘Enough is enough!‘ The UK is better off by itself steering the economic waters as it had done for centuries. Oh, I almost forgot the second part on sovereignty, sovereignty does not rest with the people, it rests in Buckingham Palace with HRH Queen Elisabeth II. There was a referendum and the Brexit group with a little over 51% won. And to those people still in doubt, you only have yourself to blame with the mess you are creating. There were 46 million votes, representing a 72% group, so 28% did not even bother to vote! Those 13 million votes were invalid straight of the bat, with only 25,000 invalid or blank votes we see no real impact, it they were all remain voted it would not have mattered. When you consider all this and you see the hooligan masses being remain people, we see two parts, the first is that they are moronic (worthy of UK Labour), yet the larger issue is that a lot are in anger because they are not getting properly informed. Stories like: ‘UK government officials told the food industry that supplies of liquid egg could run out in a no-deal Brexit‘, yet the operative word is ‘could‘ we just do not know, and not knowing is adamant in a lot of this, yet the people have faced two years of fear mongering, all large consortiums that see a danger to their margins, not the margins of the shop, the margins to executives and their bonuses, and the people are eating the fear hook, line and sinker. There will be actual issues, but the foundation of all this is that this has never happened before and the EU and the ECB did this to themselves. We all forget how this started, this all started when Greece in 2009 had misrepresented itself and we saw issue after issue, debt after debt and the politicians that caused it merely walked away. Then we were told stories on how Greece might be evicted from the EU, the news was all over that yet the truth was that we were misled (or is that made Miss Led?) The Guardian (in 2015) gave us: “As Athens will be unable to satisfy its financial obligations after a default, many hardliners expect Greece to leave the Eurozone, and printing as much neo-drachma as necessary. Some see this as the only solution to the Greek crisis: it would allow Greece to devalue its new currency, supposedly making the country competitive and resulting in economic growth and the ability to repay its debt“, in addition we get: “while only article 50 of the EU treaty regulates how a state can leave the union. And a mechanism for leaving only the Eurozone or for expulsion even has not been provided for at all“, basically the stupidity of the EU was that they stated that every member will always be up front and do what must be done, which was deceptive in its own rights. So a group that is merely inclusive and under stringent rules can they leave, yet in addition other sources gave us that NO MEMBER can be expelled. This is called a Corporatocracy, not a democracy. Corporations decide on what happens and that is what we basically see at present. The problem here is that any Corporatocracy will limit its actions towards enablers and consumers; the rest is pretty much screwed. In a monarchy all citizens matter and the people do not seem to be able to grasp that, the UK (and the Netherlands, as well as Sweden, Belgium and so on are monarchies within a Corporatocracy and that is a very different setting, that stage can only be made profitable where debts are soaring and the banks not the government decide where you can be at, a situation we see all over Europe. this is not new, I did not invent it, other voices going back to 2014 say pretty much the same thing, I merely have a lot more data available at present. The media relies on advertisement money from any Corporatocracy, so you cannot expect them to actually inform you, it is a double edged blade and both sides are pointed at YOUR guts, it is that detrimental a situation.

So as Greece made a few issues clear in the wrong way, people like Nigel Farage went with the notion of ‘Better Out than in‘, I agree with him, yet I remained on the fence for the longest of times. It was the second ECB stimulus who would put us so much deeper in debt that got me across. The first stimulus was fine, it was an option and even as it did not work out, it gave Europe time, yet the second one the best we could hope for was time and that is where the problem started and now as stimulus 3 is on the table the setting is too unacceptable, the UK needs to get out and fast, deal or not.

Let’s not make a fairy tale, this will not be a nice time and things will get worse for a little while, anyone telling you different is lying to you. The issue is that with the ropes cut the EU cannot force debts on the UK to the degree it is doing now, more important the UK gets to make a few other choices and it will down the road (3-4 years) turn the economy in something stronger. It will result in an actual better quality of life over time, but it will not be immediate. This is why the ties and economic options with players like Huawei (5G), nations like Saudi Arabia (all kinds of goods) and a few other players become important (optionally India with generic medication). Anyone with the misguided notion that Human Rights are the optimal route better stay at home. If Human Rights were an actual power there would be no age discrimination, there would be actual better (and more) housing and there would be a better social security. All missing and mostly because in a Corporatocracy, corporations are largely tax exempt, exactly what we see today. In that stage we now see the rumblings, even as players like Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple and others are all making noises on leaving, they do so at the risk of losing 69 million consumers. Facebook is truly global, so is Google to the largest extent, yet for Apple we get Huawei, ASUS and HP, Amazon leaving would give the people a slimmer HMV and optionally small businesses come back (my preferred solution), and even as corporations are shouting, screaming, streaming and threatening, they all realise that you cannot walk away from 69 million consumers. Not when they need to share the smaller EU pool with 3-4 competitors at every corner. That is the part we all forgot, consumer power is actually power and we listened to the likes of Jeremy Corbyn for far too long. To be honest, I never thought that it would be possible to be more dim than Nick Clegg (LIBDEMS), yet I was wrong, Jeremy Corbyn pulled it off nicely. I am not stating that Boris Johnson is without flaws (his barber being the obvious one). I am stating that the UK has been in a dangerous position for far too long and as long as the ECB does the way it does it, the danger stays, getting away from that danger is an immediate need at present.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as Amazon, Apple, Asus, Belgium, bloomberg, Boris Johnson, Brexit, Corporatocracy, democracy, ECB, Eu, Facebook, google, Greece, HMV, House of lords, HP, Huawei, Human rights, Jeremy Corbyn, LibDems, Mario Draghi, Mark Carney, Monarchy, Netherlands, Nick Clegg, Nigel Farage, Remain, Saudi Arabia, stimulus, Sweden, the Guardian, UK, UK Labour

September 1, 2019 · 13:55

Change is coming

Well, actually change is always coming, some in the form we know, some innovative new and sometimes change is of a very different variety. We already knew that the Americans weren’t too bright when it comes to trade wars, and the one that is getting fuelled here is definitely a wrong one. Yet it is not about that trade war and it is not in the billions of impact that the war will have on consumers. There is a second war brewing. One that Europe and America were not ready for, one they did not prepare for. It is a new armistice race, they were not prepared because it is not the high technology they usually deal with, it came from the lower regions. Yet let that not underestimate the stage. Two players in that stage are Fabrique Nationale Herstal, established in 1889. Less than a 60 years later They would produce the FN FAL, a rifle used in over 90 countries, in that same year the final push was made for the FN MAG, use in over 80 countries. These weapons are even today lethal and can go up against the most modern side arms. One factory created two behemoth successes, merely two of dozens of weapons that are regarded as a top quality arms. Yet, it is not about FN Herstal. It is neither about the long term number one Heckler and Koch was founded after WW2 and soon became a success story in several fields surpassing FN Herstal, yet these two are not facing a new competitor. Both FN and HK face a rather troublesome future. You see, they are stopped by all these political Human rights laws and whilst we get the need for Human Rights, the people in there seem to have a view so altruistic that it also kills commerce.

Number three is delighted, SAMI, or in its full name the Saudi Arabian Military Industries, is about to equal and surpass in less than half the time that the previous two required to get established. All the data on patents, technology and deals with Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and General Dynamics, as well as partnerships with Thales and CMI Defence opens new doors, doors the other two were barred from. SAMI is now in a position to surpass both and become bigger then the two earlier mentioned combined. In 2017 SAMI got Andreas Schwer (former boss of Rheinmetall AG) and the man has not been sitting still. At the same steps we see Neom growing, we see the mandate of SAMI to create 40,000 jobs by 2030 and it seems that SAMI is ahead of that curve too. With all the issues playing in Asia, Africa and Latin America SAMI has created the stage where they can outbid and surpass all expectations from the buying companies. It goes beyond the assembly of 150 Lockheed Martin Blackhawk helicopters. With the partnership with Navantia less than a year ago, we see the additional growth sectors in Latin America pop up, yes, it is all new, it is all change, but not the change you would hope for. We might see shunning of arms in America, but it remains a large export business, one that is now getting pushed to the side by the Saudi Arabian Military Industry, and it is not stopping. As the links with Navantia matures, we see the option to cater to the needs of coast guards on several national levels and these are not the small players. Some might have noticed the small mention of ‘Offshore Patrol Vessels Market 2024: New Business Opportunities for Manufactures to Upsurge in Coming Years‘, yet Navantia and therefor SAMI are in the thick of that part of the equation, growing faster than anyone took notice of. We might look towards the Dutch Damen, Australian Austal and Turkish Dearsan, yet they all have the same flaw ‘each player can deliver few numbers of OPV‘, Neom city changes that premise as it has a massive chunk of red sea at their disposal, basically SAMI has the option of building space well over 5 times the combined spaces that Damen, Spanish Navantia and Dearsan combined have. It changes the equation a fair bit. It sets a different market premise; it took slow growth of 130 years for FN Herstal to get where they are now. It takes SAMI 12-15 years to get that same stage, more important it seems that tall the contracts and memorandums out there gives SAMI a much larger option to grow and more important a lot more industry to bring home through export, another promise made by Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman Al Saud delivered in advance of the date he wanted it to be. CEO’s and goal driven executives all set in a stage to exceed expectations. It might be fuelled by oil, but more important it is fuelled to success whilst the EU is making more and more issues on exporting all kinds of goods and the US – China trade wars are not helping. In addition the news quotes like “Europe must develop a much stronger common approach to the new 5G technology to make itself less vulnerable to security risks“, which sounds nice, but I already saw two elements they overlooked and my IP pushed a solution, a solution they are not ready for and seemingly Google is less and less ready for making Huawei the only remaining player and Saudi Arabia has a lovely deal in place. You see, that premise of 5G with ‘to make itself less vulnerable to security risks‘ requires 5G to be firmly in place and whilst we see delay after delay Saudi Arabia keeps pushing communication and other solutions forward implying that they are setting a much larger stage creating new technologies for other regions and in that the other players forgot one interesting side effect. Any stage of armistice and war requires communications to be upgraded and Saudi Arabia can deliver that too. It is there where we see a larger change and a larger group of options for Saudi Arabia. Walid Abukhaled, CEO of global defense and aerospace corporation Northrop Grumman has created a stage that is approaching a global one all from the comfort of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and whilst the rest is bickering over scraps of food form the European table we see an entire industry growing silently day by day to almost exponential proportions. An interesting part that can be verified on several levels and the news and the European media remain oblivious to that part.

The Arab News states that he ‘aims to export weapons‘, I believe that SAMI has progressed a lot further, as I see it they are almost ready to implement defense solutions on a global scale, and this includes defense systems to several nations that Europe refuses to talk to for whatever reason. This goes beyond what we see in the Arab News (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/1547956), it goes beyond ‘electronic warfare and cybersecurity‘; it goes beyond the mere operational stage, beyond the educational and implementation stage. Together with General Authority for Military Industries (GAMI) they have created a new wave on a much larger scale than we have seen before.

Good business is where you find it and it seems that Walid Abukhaled is currently finding it everywhere.

2 Comments

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics, Science

Tagged as 5G, Andreas Schwer, Arab News, Austal, Boeing, CMI Defence, Cybersecurity, Damen, Dearsan, electronic warfare, Fabrique National Herstal, FN, GAMI, General Dynamics, google, Heckler & Koch, HK, Huawei, Lockheed Martin, Mohammad Bin Salman Al Saud, Navantia, Northrop-Grumman, Raytheon, Rheinmetall AG, SAMI, Saudi Arabia, Saudi Arabian Military Industries, Thales, Walid Abukhaled

August 31, 2019 · 11:06

When in doubt

It started 5 days ago when I wrote ‘Bitches on parade‘ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2019/08/26/bitches-on-parade/). The premise from my point of view is that you cannot heckle a country based on a lack of evidence (read: CEO Jamie Dimon), so whilst he pulled out of the Saudi Conference, he was eager and willing to take a chunk of a $2,000,000,000,000 pie at the drop of a hat (any hat). The man has no principles when it comes to money, which is fine. Yet now the entire event is exploding in several directions as the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/aug/29/political-uncertainty-puts-london-listing-in-doubt-for-saudi-aramco) informs us that “state oil company may rule out the London Stock Exchange amid Britain’s rising political uncertainty“, in one word brilliant! Two years of whining and lack of decision is not about to hit the British MP field in a massive way. It gets to be even better when we consider the impact for the EU as a larger field, the current favourite according to insiders will be the Japan’s Tokyo stock exchange. If that happens, I get to smile whilst a whole range of bonuses will not arrive with Wall Street, the ECB or London (I am least happy about London missing out). There is a price, there is a cost to doing business and it seems that this week Saudi Arabia is making the tally to that event.

And now we see that the field changes. With quote: “Saudi energy minister, Khalid al-Falih, reignited plans for the float earlier this summer after announcing that officials were working to list the company within the next two years. Aramco announced earlier this month, in its first investor call, that it is ready for the listing whenever its shareholders agreed market conditions were “optimal”” It is here that we need to see the profit, the sudden option for Tokyo, who was not in the race at all also implies the added risk that Tokyo says ‘yes’ (read: Hai!) too eager giving the Saudi Aramco executives a much larger bonus than they expected, making the wave on the market gives rise that there will be two waves and these executives get to enjoy the windfall of both waves. I reckon that Lürssen Yachts (optionally Damen Yachts and CRN) will get to look forward to at least 5 additional commissions for yachts over 90 meters before the end of the year.

There is a much larger issue; it is not merely who gets what, and where we buy in. Bloomberg gave us on Thursday: “It’s been a good week for those seeking to pare bets on a market that brokers including Morgan Stanley say has become too expensive, given weakening fundamentals. MSCI on Tuesday wrapped up the second phase of including Saudi shares in its developing nations index, prompting billions of dollars in inflows from passive funds. Some active managers took advantage of the increased liquidity to reduce their holdings“, there is no way for me to comment on the issue as stocks are not my trade EVER! Yet consider the quote ‘brokers including Morgan Stanley say has become too expensive‘, yet they too are rallying to get their fingers on Aramco. Business is hard and I am fine with the directness that the market needs to be. Yet Aramco is different, everyone wants in and as such Saudi Arabia gets to elect the offerings and as such some players are about to enter the new field, they are optionally becoming the next Ricky Fuld, who was the only person not offered a deal in 2008 whilst the others got one. I am not sure on how to see that, The Wall Street Journal gives us ‘Branded a Villain, Lehman’s Dick Fuld Chases Redemption‘, these people walked away with massive amounts whilst almost one in two households got foreclosed in the end, that is a massive amount of anger to deal with and I personally believe that the Saudi’s will do business with everyone, just a certain group of people will have to be willing to cut their margins by a fair bit. Certain actions have impact and will have a considerable impact of the option to do business, Saudi Arabia could afford to wait, of those people had only decided to wait factual evidence, that would have been nice, not?

I believe that their hypocrisy on Jamal Khashoggi now has a price (to some degree); in addition the economic turmoil gives Saudi Arabia the option to select the host, who will gain a lot. I never considered Japan before today on this, but the choice makes sense.

We could go with the option: ‘When in doubt select the ally that seems more sincere‘ or we can go with ‘Be careful who you wake up with presented and insincere morals‘ I reckon that Wall Street and Especially the ECB need to learn from the second option. No matter how things unfold, pretty much everyone will be keeping 100% attention on the Tokyo exchange, something that has not happened in a long time and Aramco made it happen. And all whilst this is going on, the UK is still in all kinds of childish banter, especially by opposition parties. So when we get the Jeremy Corbyn quote “avoiding a No Deal Brexit” my (absolutely less than diplomatic) response would be “If you weren’t such a stupid dick, you could have done something 2 years ago, but you all played the ‘it will blow over’ tactic ignoring the democracy when they majority decided to Brexit!“, and now the mess is becoming even larger as London lost the option for hosting the Aramco deal. We even see Dutch issues with: “Dutch Foreign Minister Stephen Blok said on Thursday that “serious talks” on Brexit had taken place in Brussels this week, but warned the two sides “are not there yet” on a deal“, there was never going to be a deal, all delays were set to try and overthrow Brexit, now you see that there will be a much larger impact and there will be trade deals in the end no company will walk away from the option to tap into a 69 million consumer base.

That was a clear setting from the very beginning, anyone ignoring that part is delusional. Let’s not forget that the need to exceed shareholder expectations also automatically imply that the EU customer base representing half a billion people also means that 13.5% of them will not ever be shunned, someone else will walk in and take over.

For some, the entire Aramco was icing on the cake and now that this falls away and falls away from Europe also means that the EU will have several grim numbers to report in January 2020, plenty of people are already scared whit less and ready to retire as soon as the October 2019 numbers are released.

When in doubt, never trust Status Quo to actually remain. It is the deadliest of traps and it just sprung.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as Aramco, bloomberg, CRN, Damen Yachts, ECB, Eu, Jamie Dimon, Jeremy Corbyn, Khalid Al-Falih, Lürssen Yachts, Lehman, London Stock Exchange, Morgan Stanley, MSCI, Richard Fuld, Saudi Arabia, Tokyo Stock Exchange, UK, Wall Street, Wall Street Journal

August 30, 2019 · 11:25

Sign of the Times

There are issues we see and at times issues we ignore. It is not because we want to be indifferent; it is because until it lands on our doorstep (quite literally) we remain ignorant of the actual size of the condition. The LA Times is giving us two parts in this. The second will come a little later as the page was not working correctly, yet the first part is given with ‘Seniors facing eviction fear homelessness and isolation as California’s housing crisis rolls on‘. It is not a local issue, it is a global issue and for the most, the inaction by governments imply that they remain in denial on just how big the issue is.

The premise “It also helped that even as the surrounding neighbourhood gentrified, rent control held his rent below $400. But three months ago, a real estate investor purchased the complex and soon told all tenants to leave. Suddenly, Canel faced the prospect of having to find a new home in a market where nearby studios rent for more than his monthly Social Security benefits — his sole means of support” is not a unique one. It is the direct result of ‘trying’ to attract large businesses. Just ask anyone renting in San Francisco on the Google pressures they face (similar from LinkedIn, Apple and a few others swimming in that pond).

And it seems that Los Angeles got a decent deal with: “Households with at least one person 62 or older made up 26% of no-fault evictions in Los Angeles city rent-controlled buildings between June 2014 and May 2019, according to the Los Angeles Housing and Community Investment Department“, In places like Sydney Australia or London United Kingdom the mess is a lot worse and it is not getting better any day soon. The article (at https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-08-28/senior-housing-crisis-impact) gives us a lot more. The feeling you get with: “the average price for a vacant apartment in L.A. County is nearly 40% higher than it was in 2012, at $2,329 a month, according to Zillow” implies that the shift to work until the day you die is no longer a fabrication; it is the direct impact of the cost of living. To give the Australian example, I looked into an apartment. The pictures might not give the whole story, but the impact is visible. The area has a safety score of 2 out of 10, yet the rest of the information is lacking and missing, which is odd to say the least. We see so many stats option, yet they are there merely mimicking distraction. It seems that the NSW government does not like to hand out too much negative information. As I arrived the police was dealing with (another) dead person. It seemed to be drug related, but there is no clarity or reliability on that.

As the images imply it is a studio apartment with separate bathroom and separate kitchen (kitchen not added here). It is on the ground floor with merely one of three without protected bard on the windows, all the flats around that place have them, not that location. A serious kick would remove the door if they are unwilling to go via the window. I was standing in the two opposite corners implying that the living space is less than 4 meters long and almost 3 meters wide, so it is around 12 square meters; the inner doors were removed, so the kitchen and bathroom were all open. If the doors are added, usable space for the living room decreases by over 1 square meter twice over. More important, if you add a one person bed, a table and a chair, the available space is pretty much gone, even more important, it seems unlikely that a TV and a computer will fit; there will be no space for a sofa, entertaining guests is out of the question. Neither the bathroom nor the kitchen will fit a washing machine, so laundry will need to be done by hand. The kitchen was actually decent sized, yet there is a lack of storage there too and with one corner requiring the fridge (there was space for that) we will have to just eat in the living room, which is what most people do anyway. The door for the bathroom was missing and the frame implies it opens outwards, forcing the bed to be right in front of the window. The bathroom is luxurious in size compared to all other parts or this place, yet no space for a washing machine here either. The shelves on the right are the only shelf space I saw in this ‘apartment’, implying the need for a cupboard for clothes, but where to place it, there was no space left. Yet Housing NSW sees this as a very acceptable unit for one person. I think I have to disagree with that. Pricing was not an issue, the price was decently amazing for this dog shed, compared to what else I saw the price was right, but who is willing to live in a dog shed even if the price is right?

The place is away from most options and conveniences and that is not the big issue, not if the place was more secure and larger, the living unit needed to be 50%-100% larger and have space for a washing machine (in either kitchen or bathroom). I believe that only prisons are smaller and whoever comes out of prison might find it acceptable, which is until that person starts yearning for a washing machine to keep clothes clean when that happens all bets are off.

I know that there are perfectly decent places to get, but they are rare, really rare. Only last Monday did we see: ‘Homelessness in NSW reaches ‘crisis point’‘, the problem is that political Sydney has been catering (read: sucking up) to big corporations for too long, there has not been one clear action, not one clear activity to actually achieve anything regarding social housing or affordable housing in general. In this article (at https://probonoaustralia.com.au/news/2019/08/homelessness-in-nsw-reaches-crisis-point/)

We see: “To break the cycle of homelessness we need the [New South Wales] and federal governments to fund more social and affordable housing in the inner city“, as well as “A recent City of Sydney street count found while the number of people sleeping rough fell from 278 in August last year to 254, the use of temporary accommodation rose by 16.8 per cent“. Both are debatable on a few levels. In the first, the housing issue is far beyond the inner city, even when we take out a few high end suburbs (like Kiribilly and Bondi), the bulk of all suburbs have a large lack of affordable housing. the lack has been clearly seen in the inner city, inner west, eastern suburbs, northern suburbs, northern shores, Chatswood, St. Leonards, Woolloomooloo, Kings Cross, Edgecliff, and this list goes on for close to a dozen suburbs more, all lacking, all failing. The second larger failing is that it only seems that rough sleeping fell, the homeless support systems are now all in a stage where they are not allowed to offer sleeping places for more than a year, all that whilst everyone knows that the waiting list on NSW housing is 6 or more years. Even as we accept “The NSW government has invested around $1 billion in funding for homelessness services over the past four years” that number becomes highly debatable when we nit-pick through that list and see where all the money had gone to. In this when we look at the statement by NSW Communities Minister Gareth Ward “Since 2017, our assertive outreach teams have helped house more than 450 people previously sleeping rough on inner city streets” we need to add a little dimensionality, 450 people in two years comes down to less than 19 a month. Now, I am happy for those 19 people, yet if the house I showed is all they get, they are still in a bad place, missing doors, essential options and some level of security. This is not on Gareth Ward. This is on a much larger Australian parliament failing its residents and citizens. Yet that government has been catering to players like CBRE Residential Projects, with a dozen projects, according to their search engine options below $700K (not that affordable, yet there are no prices given, not anywhere. So when you look https://www.cbresi.com.au/, wonder what you can afford. Because as I stated, these places usually are not given a price and only after you give all YOUR details will someone optionally get in touch with you. so if buying a place is what you need consider that at a max of $500K, most real estate places will give ‘We couldn’t find anything that quite matches your search‘, when you seek rental in Sydney and you are able to afford $300 per week (which is way above senior budget, the most likely response from the system is ‘*****THIS IS FOR A CARSPACE ONLY******‘, so a dog shed is all you can hope for (at best).

Whilst rentals in a place only slightly bigger than the one I visited started at $345 a week, implying that the old given “Economists say you shouldn’t spend more than 30% of your earnings on rental costs” is a bloody joke, many are in a stage where they spend 50% or more on rental, some even is high as 75%-85%, that number shows just how delusional some housing economists are, the numbers they rely on have been outdated for well over a decade, even in my good days is was already on 40% of income for rental, and when it comes to food 10% is a massive difference on any budget.

Housing issues is a sign of the times, it is not a mystery, it is a given, what is also a given is that many governments needed to do a lot more well over a decade ago and it was all pushed forward in some empty scheme to let realtors pay for it all, something that was never ever going to happen. It is a large population. In the Netherlands the housing shortage is dangerously close to 1% of its population, In Sweden is was given that 80% of all municipalities faced a housing shortage (not just the big cities), what is interesting is that I saw the dream house in Sweden (in a smaller town) that was the size of a villa (with 4 bedrooms) and went at the price of €40,000, which is truly unbelievable. So sad I missed out, it actually was on a hill and looked out over Långsjön Lake, the fact that I missed out on that palace still makes me sad 15 years later.

The fact is not merely the entire housing issue, when you combine housing issues and age discrimination, the entire matter becomes a lot worse and more pressing, but not to worry, at least 5 governments remain in denial of age discrimination as well, so it is all a nice and compact package ruled by short sighted people (seemingly the trademark of many politicians).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as Australia, CBRE, eviction, Gareth Ward, homelessness, housing, LA Times, Långsjön Lake, Los Angeles, Netherlands, NSW, NSW Communities Minister, Sweden

August 29, 2019 · 14:33

Dimensionality

There is growing unrest and growing movement. People are changing and relocating. It is all about Brexit. We see the news; we see the blips and the funny quotes. This week the funny moment was a Scottish girl who would not accept the outcome of the Brexit referendum, because this was a democracy. OK, we all have moments and that was a golden one, no doubt about it. I am pro Brexit, not because it is a great idea, but because the ECB did not leave us an option. The irresponsible spending by Mario Draghi with his stimulus got the EU €3,000,000,000,000 in additional debt with no hope of resolving it within several decades. Now with another recession on the horizon, the EU member states will learn the hard way what a recession does when there are no checks, balances or reserves available so this time around it will strong to the largest degree.

Yet, that is not what this is about. We see part of the issue (at https://www.euronews.com/2019/08/26/nearly-100-companies-move-to-netherlands-ahead-of-brexit-dutch-agency) where “Nearly 100 companies have relocated from Britain to the Netherlands or set up offices there to be within the European Union due to the United Kingdom’s planned departure from the bloc, a Dutch government agency said on Monday” It is a move that might seem nice, but there is a hidden trap in all this. These players are shifting to a nation (whichever nation), and whilst they think that setting up shop in the EU with its 513 million people was a good idea, that number still includes the UK and after the switch they are vying with other competitors for 444 million customers, whilst they left the 69 million people they already had. Germany has 82 million, France, Spain and Italy have less than the UK as population, implying that they are a smaller pond to fish in. The issue is not that they are all part of one EU, they are well over 20 member states, all with their own little local laws and that is what these people forgot. They walked away from 69 million UK consumers and now others can grow in their place.

This is not always the case, but yes, to the largest extent, these 100 companies have moved house leaving opportunity to others. Would you remain a customer of (example) Lloyds insurance when you have to connect to the Netherlands for your insurance? When the ‘main office’ gets involved all little quirks come out. We saw it in the past and we will see it in the future. A large block of people will vacate and seek local representation that is how people work. And it all sounds nice to have the new office in Amsterdam, but that market is pretty saturated and even if it was not, The Dutch have their own language, things will take a beating and those vacating British shores will face impact and reduced clientele, as well as diminished exposure and opportunity.

Feel free to remain in denial, just remember, you yourself are your own best example. For the bulk a lot will seem the same, you get your Netflix, you get your amazon and you get from Google what you need. These are true global players. Your services will alter, your goods will be localised and your financial needs will be locally catered. That was the path everyone ignored, it was the path that would always impact. Listening to European politicians was never a good idea and these players will face that certainty soon enough.

When we look at the quote: “The businesses are in finance, information technology, media, advertising, life sciences and health, the NFIA said” you think you have a good deal, but do you? Finance? Banks are local, mortgage tends to remain local and a whole host of options was always available globally, that never changed and those trying to skim more lucrative deals will soon learn that others will vie for the 69 million Brits needing services and they will adhere to local markets. IT, that will not change, it is an import market and moving out of the UK was never going to be a larger issue, yet losing a 13.5% market to other players is never a good idea. Those who relocated against those who opened another office for the time being are going to see things very differently soon enough and once these 100 companies see that the shift out of the EU will start to pay off much better in years 3 and 4 for the UK. At that point the momentum in the plus will start stronger and that results in better investments and stronger needs for these 69 million consumers. The problem is that once out of the UK these players will find it much harder to get deals done as there is no local representation. It will be a lot more expensive to get and retain British customers. The lessons learned the hard way 35 years earlier will rear its ugly head once more.

More important, the additional Stimulus cannot be pushed onto the UK so the other member states will have to pays for that, taking the UK out of the decision stream allowed for that change and now a large chunk of that €3,000,000,000,000 is now all on the other players (mostly Germany, France and Italy) and they will not like that one bit.

Yes, I acknowledge that there are some situations that have an optional advantage, but the larger extend falls away as those people are truly global and moving out of the UK merely implies that 13.5% of the total EU customer base is now not on their income path, it needs to be an alternative path with jumps, kicks, levels and springs. It lowers their revenue margin giving them additional worry down the road to please their shareholders and that is beside the point that they lost out on 13.5% of the entire EU market.

Now that the Queen has accepted the plan to suspend parliament, we see outrage, at this point a lot of 11^th hour plans for people to make some Bremain move are no longer an option, now the panic sets in and those who have not made a clear investigation on the opportunity that Brexit offers will run and jump the ship, only to learn that they forgot they needed swimming lessons to make it to another shore. So as we consider UK’s largest Joke (Jeremy Corbyn) with “Suspending Parliament is not acceptable, it is not on. What the prime minister is doing is a smash and grab on our democracy to force through a no deal“, to him the message is simple and rather clear: “You had three years to find a solution as the people had elected to Brexit. The childish games, long winded speeches and inconsiderate choices will now cost you dearly” , my personal response is even more apt when we consider the Sun with “Jeremy Corbyn ‘plots coalition of chaos’ as he softens terms for Remainer pact to block No Deal Brexit. Jeremy Corbyn is leading pro-Remain talks with opposition parties to block a No Deal Brexit” only two days ago. As I personally see it, it was a childish attempt to stop Brexit from happening. The math is actually simple. The got nowhere in three years, that means that they are incapable of getting anything done, or they merely wanted to stare Brexit to death, neither option was acceptable and it is time for everyone to accept the stupidity of UK Labour. In all this the EU has acted like a petulant child for the longest time and now that Brexit, optional no-deal Brexit becomes a fact the larger players will have figured out that 69 million consumers are important. The people who vacated the UK whilst nothing was a given have given up their jobs to others, others who will now feel the caress of having some decent money. It is not a great place, but a better place and as the economy takes off as unemployment levels drops with a larger skip, the math of deficit also changes to the favour of the UK coffers. there are more impacts, not all positive, but to a larger extent the UK will have a stronger position in year two and it only reinforces the options for years three and four, making larger waves in decimating debts whilst the EU will get a truckload of additional debts soon thereafter.

It was always about dimensionality and those who could see past the simple top line that he media was hiding behind. The status for the UK will not change overnight, but it will change for the better soon enough and once those running rats (a ships reference) figure that out that they changed a passenger liner for a sinking barge, at that point will we see an interesting demonstration in entertainment and long winded speech wankers (for lack of a better term).

In my view, there is one small additional truth, Jeremy Corbyn might become the Caretaker PM, but merely a ‘Catetaker Pro Mortuarium’, a cemetery where he left the cadavers of his own short sighted stupidity and good luck to him weeding out those graves, it will be a full time task. I wonder how many large corporations are willing to stand behind Jeremy Corbyn whilst we know that those players are only in it to extent the status quo of their required greed. Who could ever support that stage when they can clearly see all the players and what they really care for?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics

Tagged as Brexit, ECB, Euronews, France, Germany, Italy, Jeremy Corbyn, Mario Draghi, Netherlands, NFIA, No Deal Brexit, Suspending Parliament, UK, UK Labour

August 28, 2019 · 11:41

Corrosion or corruption in media?

We see more and more evidence that the media is by their own hand corroded, the word which comes the Latin word ‘corrodere‘, means ‘gnaw through‘. I have given the limelight to several events where Houthi forces attack with drones into Saudi Arabian civilian targets. We can argue on the validity of the attack, yet the part that is not in dispute is that the Western media is not giving any light to the attacks at all. Despite the clear evidence that someone is supplying Houthi forces with military drones. One of the missiles was headed to Khamis Mushayt, whilst the destination of the third was not the same, but Saudi forces have been speculating that the target was al-Jawf, a city in northern Saudi Arabia and as far as I could tell at best a civilian target with no military or strategic economic targets. The issue here is not the target, it is that the Houthi forces are trying to show that it could hit a target 1400 Km away, which is already a challenge for high end drones with a well-trained pilot. It shows that the ante is up and it limits the optional source to only one, Iran. The western media was extremely able to not report on any of that.

Colonel Turki Al-Maliki was able to tell that one of them was fired from Sanaa. I reported earlier this week on “On Sunday, coalition forces also destroyed a drone and intercepted six ballistic missiles targeting Jazan in Saudi Arabia’s southern border with Yemen“, the Arab News gave another mention of that, yet the western press is clearly of the mind that this does not need to be reported. The problem in all this is that Houthi forces do not have any infrastructure to create this; neither do they have the technical expertise to make them. This is all via Iran who either delivers directly or uses Hezbollah to deliver. There is also additional shallow evidence that Houthi forces do not have the ability and expertise to fly these drones with such precision. To illustrate this consider your child (if you have one) a nine year old and let that kid fly a predator drone over Europe, no automatic pilot and let it fly into the Eifel tower. There is one guarantee, that drone will crash, it will fly into something, just not the Eifel tower that is the stage we are in. Even as we are given from other sources “A Houthi supporter wears a headband praising the Houthi movement for making drone aircraft as he attends a pro-Houthi rally in Sanaa“, showing us merely a push for fabricated marketing. There is no way that Houthi forces can make them. Even now, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Iraq have drones, but they mostly come from places like China. When we look at drone builders we see: Israel, Turkey, United States, United Kingdom and Iran. These are the makers of drones, Yemen and Houthi forces are not creating them and the media is not looking into it. The fact that the media ignores this is also an indication that the media is no longer corroded, it should be considered to have become a corrupt vessel for whatever facilitators need. Most likely to appease their own governments that need some Iranian deal, or needs to adhere to American policy so that they can push an Iranian deal. Even the Hill (not the most neutral player) is giving us: ‘EU still hasn’t stopped trying to appease Iran‘, all playing their game and they are willing to keep quiet on drones attacking Saudi Arabia to the largest degree. Is it not weird that the last two attacks within a week were not covered at all?

This is not about G7 coverage; this is about the option of meeting after the G7 with Iran, the most likely perpetrator in delivering drones to Yemen (Houthi forces).

the Washington Post gave us: ‘Saudi Arabia, UAE vow to back Yemen war effort amid cracks‘ three days ago, yet nothing on drones, the BBC gave us ‘Wingsuit scientist dies in Saudi Arabia base jump‘ a week ago and nothing on drones, the Guardian gave us ‘Walking through a war zone: Ethiopians heading for Saudi – in pictures‘ 13 hours ago and nothing on drones, the list goes on and on and it is time for us to recognise that the western news has degraded to nothing more than a media outlet facilitating to others, not informing the people of what is actually happening. Why is that?

Forbes gave us different news (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenrwald/2019/08/26/saudi-arabias-100-billion-tourism-pipe-dream/#4dd68b561367), but they are Forbes, their focus is different. There we see: “Now the government is touting its plans for a new tourism industry with an announcement alongside the CEO of Six Flags and an exclusive for CNBC. The kingdom released a grand vision, but with no substance and a disappointing look at unrealistic goals“, I believe that the choice made was a partial mistake.

There is nothing wrong with 6 flags, yet when you consider the excellence and amazing rides that the Dutch Efteling offers, there is also Universal Studios Hollywood, both offer a range of rides that will take the breath of people away. The issue with 6 flags is that they are all about rides, yet a theme park needs to be about a lot more to keep interest high, the Efteling figured that out decades ago and they achieved just that, whilst also creating the Python (a really intense ride) in 1981, the interest in that ride never faded and was upgraded and renewed in 2005 (trains) and tracks in 2017. Yet I believe that his is only the start. The Efteling had from the very beginning stories from 1001 Arabian Nights in their fairy tale land, I personally believe that if Saudi Arabia wants to become international they cannot merely have another version of existing rides; they would need to get a creative team and create their own.

There is the story of the Jinn (Afreet), we all remember Aladdin. Yet how many remember or even know about ‘the Sage and his three sons‘? What if that story is presented not unlike the Efteling ride ‘Haunted Castle‘? Part of the story we walk through and the second part is a show, there are many options for Saudi Arabia to consider the way they grow their theme parks (plural), I merely hope it will be a lot more than merely another 6 flags. Yet it must be said that Forbes also raises valid points, with: “much of Saudi Arabia is prohibitively hot in the summer months, with average high temperatures of about 110 degrees Fahrenheit. Florida is part of the U.S. and thus an easy destination for over 300 million Americans. Florida allows alcohol. Florida has gambling through American Indian casinos. Florida allows men and women to dress and interact freely. Florida allows churches, synagogues and general freedom of religion“, as well as “in 2017, total tourism spending in Florida was only $88.6 billion“, what it does not mention (optionally a mere oversight, with no accusation towards Forbes) is the small fact that in 2015 an estimated 1.8 billion or about 24.1% of the world population is Muslim. That does not mean that they all want to go to Saudi Arabia, yet in combination with the Hajj, there is a larger interest in Saudi Arabia and that too needs to be accepted. If only 1% visits Saudi Arabia we see that this represents 18 million tourists, in light of all the anti-Muslim minded nations, these people might really like the consideration of a large theme park that is mostly visited by Muslims, all kinds of food worries would fall away, all kinds of direct Muslim needs would be attended to, and that is merely the tip of the iceberg.

Yet all this was limited to Forbes, many others have taken documents towards Neom City (like the Wall Street Journal) where from one source we get: “While construction has started on Neom, there are concerns that not all of its technology (which Neom chief executive Nadhmi al Nasr told WSJ “is cutting edge and beyond — and in some cases still in development and maybe theoretical”) can ever make it out of science fiction” is a view that comes across as trivialisation. Interesting that the Wall Street Journal as one source was willing to go into that direction whilst well over $500 billion has been made available for the creation of Neom city, as I personally see it, there is a clear larger need to know and illustrate on Wall Street. The end will be more and there had always been a clear path towards high tech future. so whilst the Wall Street Journal gives us: ‘Flying Cars, Robot Dinosaurs and a Giant Artificial Moon‘, we see an utter lack of the planned intertwining of 5G, from the very beginning it will be 5G and faster, so why is the Wall Street Journal trivialising a planned path that will surpass most construction feats over the last century alone?

Is this corrosion or corruption? I cannot tell and it is likely to be a combination. The fact that Neom is to be well over 20 times the size of New York and will include a bridge connecting Saudi Arabia to Africa is another matter not covered to the degree it should.

There is a lot wrong and it merely shows us that the media can no longer be trusted; whatever they claim comes with a side story a business connection and more often political policy in the making. And this matter stretches far beyond the topic of Saudi Arabia. If we look at the word news and accept in part ‘newly received or noteworthy information, especially about recent events‘, yet when we start looking for ‘age discrimination in Australia‘ we get very little, there is an abundance of evidence especially as close to 20% of Australian workers is over 55, we see very little of them in Apple, Google and a whole host of other players. In a test the same application from the same person got immediately hired in Greece and Portugal, yet bounced for the same position well over 75 times in Australia. Yet the media is shunning it to a much larger degree, I speculate that these publications rely on Apple and google advertisement to some degree and it is not merely them, the problem is a lot larger, but the media can no longer be trusted to give light to this. So if the media is super corrosive on national issues, what chance does a place like Saudi Arabia have to get a fair shake from the media?

It is funny, but Women’s Agenda had the same idea I had 22 hours ago, there we see ‘This government wants to blame ‘choices’ over discrimination‘ and “In “Towards 2025”, the word discrimination appears just four times, one time in reference to age discrimination and three times in the footnotes in reference to other documents where discrimination appears in the title“, from my point of view it implies that a non-youthful lady doesn’t have a chance in hell to get a job, how is that NOT discrimination? When we demand that all the large corporations give a top line report for all non-board members and non-senior management staff to present a staff review of age and gender hires with age brackets ‘up to 25′, ’26-49′ and ’50+’. When this is part of their tax audit we might end up getting an actual clear view. The results will be more likely than not scary be slightly too read and governments (not just the current local Australian one) will have a lot more to explain that they are willing to do at present; their anti-discrimination acts all failing and visibly no action taken for a much longer time. In all this the failing is a much larger one and the media is, as I personally see it, a direct player in not showing the people what is going on.

Corrosion is already a dangerous path, but when there is a much larger implied level of corruption in place (they won’t call it that), we see that the news has become a much larger problem that before, they will trivialise it towards time, space to publish and they will steer clear from directives that include shareholders, stake holders and advertisers. Yet that is the larger truth as I personally see it. more and more of the media can no longer be trusted to give us what is actually going on, we merely get what they consider is the news that 70% of us wants to learn about, there was a lack of resources. We accept that in the printed word, yet in the digital age where space is never a shortage of, we see publications willing to filter diligently what they are willing to show us. And there is still the worry of all the matters that we are not being informed on, it should worry you too.

Yet there is a larger play for Australia as well. That is seen when we consider the news that “On Wednesday, Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced we would join the US-led mission to protect shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow sea strip that serves as one of the region’s most important choke points”, now consider that Houthi forces have attacked Saudi tankers in the Persian Gulf (May 2019), Iran Backed Houthi forces made the attack, so already the Australians are left in the dark on these attacks and we are sending a frigate, surveillance aircraft and troops. All optionally relatives of ours and the news decided not to inform us on the drone attacks. Do you still think that I am exaggerating on the danger that the media now represents by keeping us all in the dark?

This game is a lot larger than we realise, and it is larger than we know it is because the media has seemingly decided that informing on plenty of issues us was not essential.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics, Science

Tagged as age discrimination, al-Jawf, Australia, Efteling, Eifel tower, Florida, Forbes, Hajj, Houthi, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jazan, Jordan, Khamis Mushayt, Muslim, Netherlands, Sanaa, Saudi Arabia, Scott Morrison, The Hill, Turkey, Turki al-Maliki, UAE, United Kingdom, United States, Yemen

August 27, 2019 · 11:44

Legally dopey dealings

We all know people who are out and about, some are out for dope, others are merely dopey. As such we have all kinds of checks and balances in place (or so one would think). It was there for a little surprising to see: ‘Johnson & Johnson responsible for fuelling opioid crisis in Oklahoma, judge rules‘ (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/26/johnson-and-johnson-opioid-crisis-ruling-responsibility-oklahoma-latest). I was of the mind that this would not happen. Not because I like the firm, not because I like the product Pledge (for my furniture), and optionally I use other materials by Jay & Jay, I merely am unaware of it.

I am also not debating the events, or the guilt of Johnson and Johnson, I merely have a lot of other questions, questions that as far as I can tell are not answered. To get there, we need to see the accusation: “the giant drug maker helped fuel the deadly opioid epidemic in the state“, first of all, there is a larger failing. When we focus on the ‘deadly opioid epidemic‘, we need to see that this does not go over the counter. So when we look at the words of AG Mike Hunter “a “cunning, cynical and deceitful scheme” to ramp up narcotic painkiller sales alongside other opioid manufacturers by using their huge resources to influence medical policy and doctor prescribing“, I wonder who these prescribing doctors were. Did they not study medicine? The fact that thousands of doctors prescribed opioids is a larger issue, it does not make J&J less guilty, it makes others a lot less innocent. J&J should not be standing there alone. The claim “selling as many narcotic painkillers as possible” calls for an inclusions of the doctors giving out the recipe and the pharmacy accepting that doctors kept on prescribing the drug. We also need to look at the FDA who approved the drug in the first place. Here we are looking at three guilty parties, with two groups consisting of thousands of people involved. Yet the article shows merely a J&J in the dock, having to shell out $572,000,000. This leads to questions that do not add up.

In addition we see: “Oklahoma resolved claims against Purdue Pharma in March for a settlement of $270m and against Teva Pharmaceutical Industries in May for $85m“, it calls for additional questions and they are not given, it seems that the essential questions are not even asked in the article. Even the CDC has questions to answer. This part is given with: “Opioids were involved in almost 400,000 overdose deaths from 1999 to 2017, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention“, there is already a clear case on how these opioids were prescribed, yet we see nothing of that. And as the article continues with: “Since 2000, some 6,000 Oklahomans have died from opioid overdoses“, this implies 300 deaths a year and we see nothing demanded from doctors and more important on how dosage had this effect. All elements that might be attributed to J&J, but it took a doctor to decide on the medication, is that not the case?

The truth of that is seen at the very end of the article by John Sparks, Oklahoma counsel for Johnson & Johnson. “Not once did the state identify a single Oklahoma doctor who was misled by a single Janssen statement, nor did it prove that Janssen misleadingly marketed opioids or caused any harm in Oklahoma“, I would phrase it: “Not once were doctors and their pharmacies called to explain these numbers, the total numbers who got prescribed these opioids and not once do we see any alerts to the CDC on any of this“. The evidence in this is that the 22,500 overdoses a year should have rattled the CDC no later than 2003, so where are the actions shown that there was an issue? The American pharmacy system failed on several levels and even as no one denies that Johnson and Johnson had a role to play, the FDA and the CDC should have clearly intervened no later than 2005 that is seemingly not the case, because the cadavers kept on stacking for at least another decade.

It took me less than 600 seconds to see this truth; as such Mike Hunter is actually dealing with a massive systemic failure that goes all the way to his own office.

And as we read: “cunning, cynical and deceitful scheme“, it seems more apt to accuse the office of the Attorney General for inaction, complacency on a matter that endangered the lives of hundreds of his state constituents every year and his office has remained inactive for well over a decade, it seems to me that his office should equally be investigated for reckless endangerment of people. In all this the pharmacies and doctors need to be heard on how and why these patients were prescribed. My view was supported in July 2019 when we were told (by the Guardian) “The company has previously acknowledged delivering 5.7m opioid pills between 2005 and 2011 to the small town of Kermit, West Virginia, with a population of just 380 people“, this shows the larger extent of pharmacies and their distributors. More important, who was prescribing these opioids?

We can argue that Johnson and Johnson is guilty or innocent, yet the truth is that this reckless abuse system is a lot larger than the pharmacy creating the opioid containing medicine, it is a much larger greed driven setting and I believe that Oklahoma and specifically Mike Hunter failed the American people. He might feel all happy and joy joy that he won the case, yet I believe that it is merely part in covering up a much larger crime that goes all the way to the top of the CDC, as well as a national pharmacy failure. The article does not give us that, does it?

It gets to be even a little wilder when we consider a 1978 episode of Lou Grant (season 2 Episode 1 – pills). In that episode we get a similar setting, more important, in the dialogue at the end we hear: “246 kids went to the same three places. Druggists are obliged to report any doctors who are prescribing abnormal amounts of dangerous drugs, the state pharmacy board had not received a report from any of the three“, now I accept that this is the text from a TV series, a drama series. Yet the premise remains, is there a legal premise in the US (still) in place that this reporting needs to happen? If there isn’t why was this never done? The danger of substance use disorder has been around for decades, this failing cannot be held over the head of a pharmaceutical company. There is a clear indication of violations on local, state and federal level, it is a systemic failure and we might large applause that a large pharmaceutical gets the bill, but the failing is much larger and because of that there is an injustice in all this.

I believe that Johnson and Johnson has a much larger role to play and they are not innocent, yet the failing is systemic, as such there is every chance that their appeal will have large consequences on a national level in America.

I wonder if Ed Asner, Robert Walden and Mason Adams ever considered that they would be part of a stage where they pointed out a much larger American failing 4 decades before it went to court. I remember the series as I was almost 18 (just two years short of that) and It was my dream to become a wartime photo journalist (a younger Daryl Anderson). It was not meant to be, but I never lost my passion for photography.

This case is more than we see and I reckon that jurisprudence papers will soon enough fill up on the systemic failings that Mike Hunter is eager to avoid in the court room.

Even now, we see another article from the Guardian that is almost an hour old. There we see: “It was also revealed that Johnson & Johnson hired the consultants McKinsey, which recommended the company’s sales force should focus on doctors already prescribing large amounts of Purdue’s OxyContin”, there is a level of validity of looking into that practice, yet the part linked to all this, the doctors prescribing the medication in the first place, they had a duty of care towards their patients. A marketing strategy might be debatable, it might also be immoral, yet in the end the doctor is the one acting, so is the pharmacy handing it out again and again, where are they in all this?

It is in that article where we see a two sided issue (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/26/johnson-and-johnson-opioid-crisis-ruling-responsibility-oklahoma-latest), with: “Sabrina Strong, one of the trial lawyers for Johnson & Johnson, said the ruling was flawed. The company argued that the drugs it sold were approved by federal regulators and that they could not be tied directly to any deaths in Oklahoma”, we see that Sabrina Strong is opening two doors, one bad one. Yes, we can agree that they were approved; the error was ‘they could not be tied directly to any deaths’. Were all hundreds each year all vetted? That is the flaw, because that data could also reveal which physicians prescribed them and which pharmacies filled the prescription. That evidence was not covered by the media, and as this goes over almost two decades, how did the CDC cover this? 300 deaths a year in one state is too large to ignore, especially when it is part of a larger failing. That is the part that Johnson and Johnson have seemingly not covered. I feel certain that the appeal will cover it and it will make life for Mike Hunter a much larger problem than he realises.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as Attorney General, CDC, Daryl Anderson, doctors, Ed Asner, FDA, John Sparks, Johnson & Johnson, johnson and johnson, Lou Grant, Mason Adams, Mike Hunter, Oklahoma, opioids, OxyContin, Pharmacies, Pledge, prescriptions, Purdue Pharma, Robert Walden, Sabrina Strong, the Guardian

August 26, 2019 · 10:42

Bitches on parade

Yes, the time is now nearing. Bloomberg gives us (at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-25/bankers-head-to-saudi-arabia-to-compete-for-world-s-biggest-ipo), and as it starts with “Global banks will this week start making their case on why they should be hired for what’s set to be the world’s biggest initial public offering“, we see an interesting shift. It is the initial public offering (IPO) towards Aramco and all the bankers are dressing up like they are the bitches on the Easter parade. The question is how will these American bankers be seen? Those who were eager to exploit their options; events emphasized via media friends these so called events of Jamal Khashoggi. Should they be allowed to make a bid? As Bloomberg informs us on “The oil producer was originally working with Evercore Inc. and Moelis, as well as HSBC Holdings Plc, JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Morgan Stanley“.

Now let’s walk a little time line, Morgan Stanley chairman and chief executive James Gorman gave the people on January 24^th 2019 (several sources) ““The murder of Jamal Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul was utterly unacceptable,” Gorman said as he responded to questions on a panel“, yet actual and factual evidence was never presented, was it? Merely speculation on events and evidence that remains debatable. OK, I feel certain that Khashoggi is unlikely to be alive, but there is nothing pointing at ACTUAL evidence and the essay by Agnes Calamari never changed my position. Perhaps merely wrongly chosen words by James Gorman, which now implies he should not be part of this $100 billion+ windfall (I’ll take his place). Then we get to J.P. Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon, he pulled out of the conference on October 2018, so he should be disregarded as well (I’ll fill in for him too). Now, HSBC Holdings Plc held their ground, in light of innuendo, the active use of implied events that remained unproved, HSBC Holdings Plc kept a straight wave; this was business, not emotion, so I say welcome HSBC (if I had a say in the matter).

And the story on Evercore Inc. and Moelis is simple, they blew their chanced way before July 2019, as such it seems that they are out of the picture too. I am of course willing (for a modest fee) to take any of those three seats, business is business. I have no idea what I would be doing, yet uniting with HSBC whilst we share 50% and I get a really nice retirement bonus to unload my part to them is not out of the question. This is a market worth well over 100 billion, I’ll be really willing to take a 7.5% part and hand the rest over to HSBC, I reckon that I am the first person in their history to hand them close to $40 billion for them being supportive to my needs, the average hooker gets $50 at best, so there! Oh, and I do realise that there are Chinese banks eager to take place, so it might end up being a three way split.

And a man like me has dreams, with that amount a nice house in belle air and a super yacht becomes an actual reality (yes, I am typing this whilst I am not awake at present). The stage for me is simple and clear.

For the other players the case is less nice. I believe that those being sanctimonious and hypocrite need to be held to account. There is a consequence to play certain games and resetting the ledger so that they can courtesan themselves into a market worth will over 100 billion is not that acceptable to me and it should not be acceptable to you either.

The entrepreneur gave us yesterday ‘Why Saudi Arabia Is Being Increasingly Seen As The Place To Be To Start A Business In The Middle East‘ (at https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/338516), they are right, but they need to see the thorns that the roses bring. the article starts so nice with: “Alper Celen’s decision to trade his cushy job at the prestigious global management consulting firm’s Scandinavian offices for a move to Saudi Arabia to grow a start-up there didn’t make much sense to his colleagues“, yet these players need to realise that this is an Islamic nation, under Islamic law and etiquette. It is a lot more rigid than France is and I have seen a 6 figure Euro deal fall away because the salesperson accidentally used ‘pour toi‘ (informal) instead of ‘pour vous‘ (formal), the buyer walked away and went straight to the competitor. When it’s merely €100K most ‘big players’ will shrug, yet now the game comes in suitcases set to the billion dollar plus that game becomes a whole new dimension. The problem is that those you talk to are indifferent to the billions, it is their bread and butter for you it optionally is not. Those players in dime sized poker games are all willing to bluff like the cardinal for the large games, but a bluff is still a bluff, when you are found out, or seen as unworthy, you will lose a lot, you will lose it all and you might not have the means to get back from where you came.

Yes, you can win big, but the whole game is larger and there is every indication that the Saudi families have kept score on those rallying behind a journalist no one cared about, with a larger lack of evidence of any kind. Soon we see their move and their idea of the Easter Parade flaunting their dresses on Takhassusi St hoping that they are still regarded to be in the game and perhaps they are. I merely wonder if they should be allowed to be in there (HSBC excluded from this consideration).

Now that Vision 2030 is off to the races they all want in (as would I), yet in all this, after all they did and all that they connected to, should they be allowed to? We have to pick certain fights and that is fine, we have certain values which make us jump in certain directions and that is fine too, but to make a 180 degree turn when it is about the money, should we accept such a party in that event when there are hundreds who want to take a slice of that cake? I do not think so.

The events regarding the Saudi conference were larger, there was a distinct impact and as such those play that game should not be allowed to play when the large trophies become available. I lost my option to an apartment in Rotterdam because I did not have the right ‘friends’, OK, fine, but you cannot rely on me giving you a pass when you come knocking. It is then a tits for dad situation at that point and now that there are really serious gains, those people should always be disregarded.

I suddenly remember a quote from Age of Ultron; there we hear: “Keep your friends rich, your enemies rich and wait to see which is which“, well Saudi Arabia found that out, after they discovered that, they have no real need to keep the charade up, so as I personally see it, goodbye Evercore Inc. and Moelis, JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Morgan Stanley, it was nice knowing you. The nice part is that when they are evicted from the offer, they will have to reconsider the game they played, the media they embraced and the values that they gave to fattening the cow whilst ownership remained in the air. I actually love it when people get to learn a lesson by losing billions, it feels like that for one moment, one tiny moment the playing field was level for all of us.

The Aramco train is now officially on the road and we will hear a lot more in the coming month, I for the most will be most interested to see how much the Chinese banks end up with. And yes, I have woken up and I know that any chance for any of those billions were delusional at this point. Yet there is always tomorrow.

Hot News

In light of all this, Al Jazeera reported less than two hour ago ‘Houthis ‘fire 10 ballistic missiles’ at Saudi airport‘, at this moment, I see Arab News, Saudi Gazette and two more all having a version of that, yet nothing on the BBC, not the Guardian, not the Washington Post, not the LA Times and not Reuters. I got the news before all them and I have nowhere near their tools. So, are you still convinced that some people should be allowed at certain tables to fill their pockets whilst they shun the people whose money they want? And as we realise the quote “The rebels fired 10 Badr-1 ballistic missiles at Jizan airport, killing and wounding dozens, the group’s military spokesperson said in a statement on Sunday“, a quote made by Colonel Turki al-Malki, we need to see that US corporations are playing a convoluted game. Consider the impact that some have, do you think that when the newsgroups get wind that something really matters to the heads of these banks that they go to bed and sleep, not with 100 billion for grabs. The world media is all about fairness and then jinxes the game by taking balance away. From my point of view it is increasingly important that those players are denied a seat at the table (any table for that matter). Saudi Arabia needs to take a hard look at who they consider their friends. In light of all the unreported news of events by Houthi forces I feel more and more inclined to think that the US is turning into a player that no one should ever consider an ally, their only allegiance is to currency, I hope that the people who need actual allies realise that part before it is too late.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as Al Jazeera, Alper Celen, Aramco, BBC, bloomberg, Colonel Turki al-Malki, Entrepreneur.com, Evercore Inc. and Moelis, Houthi, HSBC Holdings Plc, Islamic Law, James Gorman, Jamie Dimon, Jizan airport, JPMorgan Chase & Co., LA Times, Morgan Stanley, reuters, Saudi Arabia, the Guardian, Washington Post

Category Archives: Politics

Hot News

Recent Posts

Archives