That is at times the setting we face (me included). You see, I felt that it was time to set in motion my first script. I submitted it to Salem Belyouha, CEO of media content sector at Dubai Media on July 25th 2024. I had two more submissions in other places and so far no luck. Some said to me “perhaps your script is no good”, that is fair. I am no scriptwriter, but it was my consideration that a story surrounding the assassination of Prime Minister Geert Wilders might have some appeal to some. To be honest when I designed the script he was not yet a prime minister. Merely one of many islamophobes (to keep it nicely).
And yesterday I saw (at https://www.broadcastprome.com/news/saudi-arabias-streaming-market-shifts-as-local-content-gains-popularity/) the headline ‘Saudi Arabia’s streaming market shifts as local content gains popularity’ with the byline “Streaming preferences in Saudi Arabia are undergoing a significant transformation, with 71% of online media consumers reporting they had watched locally produced content in Q1 2024. This growing demand for local programming is reshaping the streaming market and shifting platform market shares.” This clearly gives the summoning that my timing was good (which helps matters). It does not reflect on how bad my script was, but the two ‘reviewers’ were positive. This might just be that they hate Geert Wilders in equal matter, but that is a matter for another day. The viewers (mostly Islamic) might enjoy seeing him assassinated 5 times over. We all need a hobby at times (me especially) and that is the simple truth behind the matter. I am still awaiting word from Al Saudiya at present and I must admit I am not the most patient person. I know that they are part of the Saudi Broadcasting Authority and I have no idea who to contact there. Still, the premise of ‘attacking’ islamophobia in this way gives the idea that this script might have an eager audience in Indonesia with its 260,000,000 optional TV viewers and they have more than one reason to be a little negative about the Dutch (ask former president Sukarno if you are curious). You see I figured that you can can attack the person or the goal. The person is not as effective in reality, but it makes for optional great TV.
And good business is where you find it. I initially planned to go to Dubai Media as they operated in the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, optionally more places. But now I wonder where is the best place to go? Al Arabiya and the Saudi Broadcasting Authority might be an equally good option, Especially if they also operate in the UAE, Egypt and Indonesia. Will it work? I have no idea, but if you do not try, you will never succeed. In the mean time it is time to grow the second script, which would end up being a mini series. The third script has a greek foundation and might appeal to a wider audience. And whilst the mainstreamers will appeal to the dried up well of Hollywood, I merely have to take notice of “Saudi Arabia’s streaming landscape is increasingly driven by demand for culturally relevant and Arabic-language content, with local platforms like Shahid benefiting from this trend. To remain competitive, global streaming services will need to diversify their offerings to meet the growing preference for local productions” hoping that (if my scripts are good enough) I could get some dollars (via Riyals) to get my retirement funds up.
And to make sure that I do not make a booboo, the Riyal must be divided by 3.75 to get the dollar amount, we can’t expect to get a simple shawarma on $0.27 (In nearly all places, you need a little more than that).
Well that is it for now from me. But stay tuned, hopefully in about 8 hours there will be more.
That is the topic of the day (for me). You see, we all have our ways and that is fine, however one app that I ‘embraced’ is Conqueror. Conqueror is a walking tool that keeps you on point to a degree. To a degree is a little ‘stiff’ but as I had to endure two open heart surgeries within two months, I thought it a good idea to embrace a little more active lifestyle. Conqueror had that and it was on point for me, the gamer in me embraced it. I am now on the third Tombraider challenge and I only started this third one yesterday.
The first thing I got was a gaming stage to a real deal, a virtual challenge. And with this, besides the ‘postcards’, the maps and the videos was a setting that with every 20% done a tree was planted. As such I have been the instigator on 10 trees so far. This gave me food for thought. You see it takes 8 trees to create the oxygen that I require. The first realisation was that if there are 8 billion people at this time. We need to have 64 billion trees to keep this world oxygenated. So, how many trees in the amazon, Indonesia and other places have been cut for the need of money? There is a limit that ‘brown gold’ gets you and in a global economy. What places have this? A partial fact was given in 2015 “We estimate that there are approximately 3.041 trillion trees in the world, an entire order of magnitude greater than the previous estimate of 400.25 billion. For each person on Earth there are 422 trees”, this presumptuous estimation is rough and not entirely believable. You see, in the last decade massive lumber issues were seen in several places. And when we consider “there are approximately 3.041 trillion trees in the world, an entire order of magnitude greater than the previous estimate of 400.25 billion.” My issue in this is that there are always issues with these numbers, that’s fine but to make an estimation issue that is off by almost 800% is too far fetched. Even being off by 100% makes the issue dubious at best. One of the estimations was not done with a clear scope in mind. So was it the first or the second? In 2023 we were given “Cattle ranching and soybean farming are colossal culprits, with cattle ranching accounting for 80% of current deforestation in the Amazon. As demand for these products increases, more and more land is cleared to make room for crops and grazing.” Which gives us the first worrying issue “80% of current deforestation in the Amazon” the issue is the percentage. This doesn’t state this as a percentage of the stated Amazon, which might have been X. Then there was the issue in Indonesia and Global Forest Watch gives us “In 2001, Indonesia had 93.8 Mha of primary forest*, extending over 50% of its land area. In 2023, it lost 292 kha of primary forest*, equivalent to 221 Mt of CO₂ emissions. 144 kha of this loss was found to be within Indonesia’s official forest land cover classes and with a patch size larger than two hectares according to MoEF-WRI analysis.” As such, when we consider these two facts, how believable was the first numbers we got? There is no other way to consider these facts then the clear notion that certain people are trying to sell us a bag of (optional corrupt) goods. As such we need to get real numbers. Because we are wasting the oxygen we desperately need to breathe. The optional thought that I have 5-10 years ago that we would have to decimate the population by 97.3%, a harsh but not unrealistic number. This gets me to the third issue, the fires of New Guinea. It was stated that from 2001 to 2023, Papua New Guinea lost 139 kha of tree cover from fires and 1.73 Mha from all other drivers of loss. So how does the initial statement of “We estimate that there are approximately 3.041 trillion trees in the world, an entire order of magnitude greater than the previous estimate of 400.25 billion. For each person on Earth there are 422 trees” with these three simple setting there is no way that this is set to any level of truth. People are optionally lulled to sleep and the danger is that soon Russia with its East Siberian taiga is now the only region remaining having the title ‘the lungs of the earth’ possible shared with the forests of Africa. Namely the rainforest of the Congo Basin, the Guinean Forests of West Africa, which run from Sierra Leone to Cameroon; the Eastern Afromontane, which span Ethiopia to Southern Africa; the Coastal Forests of Eastern Africa from Kenya to Mozambique; and the forests of Madagascar. So there are a few, however, how many trees there are remains a topic of debate. Is there any validity in the statement of “3.041 trillion trees” or “400.25 billion trees”. In both cases we are still OK, but in case of the second, I feel a lot better that I have contributed to my oxygen supply with so far 10 trees. I reckon that as these numbers are actually revisited and counted with some level of precision (Google, wake up, your Gemini talents are needed) we need to be cautious. I predict that someone will start vamping up the phrase ‘Oxygen neutral’ we might be in a lot more trouble than we think we are.
And that is merely the first issue. A second one was the challenge that I will be doing next (my fourth trial). Here I a stepping away from the gaming section to something more historically real.
It is the challenge ‘the St Francis way’. This is a virtual walk of 503km.
It is the walk Giovanni di Pietro di Bernardone made around 1204 when he went on a pilgrimage to Rome. The part I walk was a description from Florence to the Vatican.
It is a ‘mere’ 503km but still a decent challenge. The ‘issue’ here is that we have become complacent in our luxuries. We are too eager to resort to cars and planes (I am not against any of them), I am merely a person who walked everything with a public transportation or two on the side. Living next to the office (place of business) is no longer an option for many of us. And as Sergey Brin is not likely to fuel my retirement, walking is nearly all I have. No complaints from my side mind you. I made my own bed and I accept my larger part in this. But as this trial came across my eyes I started to consider a few things. First of all the realisation what St. Frances accepted as his goals. He was a child of an Italian father, Pietro di Bernardone dei Moriconi, a prosperous silk merchant, and a French mother, Pica di Bourlemont, about whom little is known except that she was a noblewoman originally from the French Provence and decided to marry his ‘lady Poverty’ as a bride. I have seen many things in my life, but the wealthy accepting the life of poverty is not one of them, and in all honesty, neither would I (although I have next to nothing), so what does that matter. The setting of walking that distance is not one of contemplation, it is a drive to succeed. A very different dive Giovanni ever had. And this challenge is one that we should all have, if it was only to get into a better healthier shape.
One mere app giving me more than one train of thought. There are still a few other trials to get and to complete after this one. The Harry Potter trials (7 of them) and the Lord of the Rings with 5 trials all towards an ending at Mount Doom is a wanting achievement as a Tolkien fan. So I can proudly state (if ever) to Elijah Wood: “I did that too. Nah, nah, nah, nah, nah” OK, I admit, a little childish, but at times proud moments must be diminished by simple words to make the act (a total 1095km) a seemingly trivial one. The distance or journey didn’t matter, it is the total achievement that has meaning (be it in my own mind).
So what did you learn (virtual or not)? Have a great Saturday, I still have almost half a day to go.
On the 11th of September I wrote ‘A brief recollection’, a story where I had issues with the setting of ‘monopolisation’ by Google and with that I also stated “Google innovated this market more than anyone ever considered. The fact that Microsoft has no chance and lacks expertise in software to make any dent in Google application is one part of the evidence. It also didn’t stifle competition, the fact that Microsoft had no option to push anything in Google’s path seems to me that this is the second part of the evidence is also nullified. After decades of ‘exploitation’ of customers, Google gave them all a fair chance. So why doesn’t anyone see that?” And now, less then four hours ago, the BBC gives us ‘Google scores rare legal win as 1.49bn euro fine scrapped’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c62rjd363j1o) with the text “It said the Commission had not considered “all the relevant circumstances” concerning the contract clauses and how it defined the market. Because of this, it ruled the Commission did not establish “an abuse of dominant position.”” That was what I basically said. The lack of creativity by others (read Microsoft) is no evidence of abuse. Their failure to see an equal footing five times over (once by Apple, once by Amazon, once by Sony and twice by Google) is not a setting of dominant abuse, it is merely dominant captaincy due to a failing to set the stage on creativity and I myself am about to give that lesson to Microsoft twice more. So how stupid do they need to get?
As such it seems that the legal profession had to admit defeat on the mere stage to scrap the fine with the quote “The Commission concluded Google had abused its dominance to prevent websites from using brokers other than AdSense when they were seeking adverts for their web pages”, which is not correct either. You see Microsoft has edge and its advertisement solution. It is however failing on several fronts It falls behind Chrome having 65% and behind Safari with its 18.5%, Edge has a mere 5.3%. And behold, Safari is only on Mac systems. In February 2024 MacOS systems had a mere 15.42% and PC’s had over 72% and even in that environment Edge has a mere 5.3%, failing to come close to Safari. Does that not tell you something. It isn’t that Google is abusing dominance, there simply isn’t anything close to compatible. It isn’t abuse, there is simply no equivalent in that game and the advertisement game is cut throat to say the least. And as I see that, I see two additional blows I can give Microsoft and that pretty much ends Microsoft to be the competitor. It is a mere agent of mediocrity and as such it loses more and more market share. I can give (for a fee) one to Google and the other one to Amazon and they can show Microsoft what it is to be dead last in a game that only has space for the victor. Soon America will try its luck on shaking down Google for cash as we are told “The US government is also taking the tech giant to court over the same issue, with prosecutors alleging its parent company, Alphabet, illegally operates a monopoly in the market.” I wonder how they tend to prove that when the competitors (mainly Microsoft) are showing to be ridiculously short changed on competition. As I see it, it is a court session waiting to fail. The nice side is that I could optionally still rely on Kingdom Holding and Tencent Technology to enter a deal with me to broker technology and is definitely worth it when it comes to Kingdom Holding, and optionally Tencent Technology would be a worth the talk to. Amazon waked away from this and once these two setting pan out, all can see how much of a shortage Microsoft had. And that is a shortage that has been visible to those who think critically for at least a decade. The media spin has no hold over them and as we are told ‘Microsoft Wants To Stop The Next CrowdStrike Error Before It Causes PC Shutdown’ a mere 10 hours ago is set against “Microsoft even got everyone together at a security summit earlier this month where the company had talks about changing the dynamics of who can access the Windows kernel and control the changes” with the added “Microsoft realises that unrestricted access to Windows kernel is the big reason why the Crowdstrike outage occurred in the first place. It was even pointed out that Apple will never give that kind of access to its partners and vendors, which explains why no Mac machine was down on that day.” As such we get that MAC systems never had the issue and the collaborated events give rise to the stage that the CrowdStrike issues could optionally still happen. Did anyone guess what happens to cloud systems when this is not addressed in the next 48 hours? How many vendors will switch to AWS as such? When we consider that “changing the dynamics of who can access the Windows kernel and control the changes” could not normally be resolved in 48 hours at all. This is the setting that Microsoft is up against and that is all before we realise that it is a fundamental shift required in search and advertisement systems that makes Edge even less of a competitor soon enough and that gives Google more leeway. That realisation is what these courts are fighting against. There is no monopoly when there is not competition. And Microsoft is no longer any kind of interfering factor. That merely leaves Google, Amazon and Apple. Amazon holds 7.3% of the online ad market, Apple gets 30% from Google, which only leaves the optional others. And when we consider that Amazon has a bigger share than Microsoft/Edge. How much of a competitor was Microsoft to begin with? So who is setting the fictive breach towards ‘abusive monopoly’? Isn’t that the critical question? What voices speak to the EU and US lawmakers? That is the question that matters and I personally think that it is those who have a personal gain through Microsoft stages that are screaming murder. They bet on the wrong horse and as I see it Microsoft is a horse no show. The EU had to cancel that €1.49B euro fine as this could optionally backfire as well. The stage as I saw it was always different. As Microsoft went its way into the boardrooms, they forgot that those dozen people (times Fortune 500) depend on millions of workers doing stuff and that was where Google grew. And the Microsoft strategy fell flat. I myself found another nice worth billions in pretty much the same way. As such one of my solutions was primarily for Amazon as Google dropped their Stadia, which made the Amazon Luna the only contender and Microsoft with its solution fell flat behind Sony (PlayStation) and Nintendo (Switch), yet Tencent came roaring with its solution and became a contender. This shows how certain people in the US are using the Department of Justice and as (September 9th) we were given “According to the lawsuit filed by the Department of Justice (DoJ) and a coalition of states in 2023, Google dominates the digital ad marketplace and has leveraged its market power to stifle innovation and competition.” I see the same failing happen under Google “leveraged its market power to stifle innovation and competition” and equal shortage as there are no innovators (they heed to solve their CrowdStrike issues before they also lose the cloud market and there is no competition as there is a competition of one, that is no monopoly, it is the lack of equally sharp minded people gaining serious forward momentum. That is the actual stage and that was the setting all along. And the setting is easy to fathom. Consider the mere first strike “On the 9th of October 2006, YouTube was purchased by Google for $1.65 billion” In 2006 Microsoft had the cash and the option to buy this, but they did not.
The former employees of PayPal were out there and Microsoft didn’t see the option. That is how much they failed for 18 years. After that Microsoft had at least three options to compete, but they did not. 2005, 2006, and 2014. Microsoft did nothing (as far as I know). More over in September 2016 ByteDance created TikTok. In 4 years it surpassed 2 billion downloads and still Microsoft was in the dark on what they had missed. You think this is not related, but it is. The competitors a near complete lack of comprehending its audience for close to 18 years and that is where the Department of Justice comes in? Competition is created by the players who understand their audience. It is something that is known for half a century. A monopoly is created when there are like minded players stifle matters like innovations (which requires innovators) and competition (which requires market share) most (especially Microsoft) failed on both matters. Amazon had its own niche market and had its own 7.3%. The only one with any right to cry foul (or is that fowl) is ByteDance, but the Department of Justice are silencing that voice.
So as I am having fun because I saw the field correctly all along will (hopefully) soon have two more reasons to roll on the floor laughing and the fun part is that a player like Microsoft is too stupid to see the audience that they are disregarding.
That is seemingly the question. We are given by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y3y79llndo) where the headline gives us ‘TikTok to begin appeal against being sold or banned in US’ with the added text “TikTok will start making its case on Monday against a law that will see it banned in the US unless its Chinese owner ByteDance sells it within nine months.” I don’t really have a voice in this. I do not use TikTok, I don’t have the app. I use YouTube and YouTube shorts and that fits me just fine. There is only so much procrastinating a person can do until the battery of his mobile/tablet gives out. I have nothing against TikTok, but YouTube got here first and it does more than I ever needed.
And for the text “The measure – signed into law by President Biden in April – has been prompted by concerns that US users’ data is vulnerable to exploitation by China’s government.” It gives me the question, what evidence is presented? What evidence has been verified? You see America has seen its OWN influencers hand over data (or make available) to Russia, after 8 years we FINALLY see action and more nations are following. As such I am weary of anything anti China appearing after the BS stage America did regarding Huawei and for that part we still haven’t seen clear evidence. A mere mention of ‘could’ and ‘possible’ were given, but no hard evidence. A mere case that was settled and 10 years old. Even as we are given “advocates of America’s powerful free speech rights, enshrined in the First Amendment of the US Constitution, say upholding the divest-or-ban law would be a gift to authoritarian regimes everywhere.” I need to agree that these first amendment rights were never ready for the digital revolution we are seeing and we see that in relationship to the Russian paid influencers. I find it weird that they can call themselves ‘victims’ all whilst they got a million dollar deals. Influencers need to be addressed and cut short. If this is not done then you hand a victory to ByteDance and its TikTok. Then we see the accusation “Mr Wang also criticised lawmakers for being vague about the specific national security threats that they say TikTok poses”, really? So where were they (US intelligence) when social media influencers decided to invade national security for Russia. We have yet to see results from that and that is the setting stage for TikTok to be held accountable (if there is any accountability). We see too many anti-China rhetoric, all whilst America is merely trying to keep issues in America and still they cannot tax the minimum part of this, so what is it about? Another claim was seen in another BBC article. We are given “They fear the Chinese government could force ByteDance to hand over data about TikTok’s 170 million US users. TikTok insists it would not provide foreign user data to the Chinese government.” So how is this on ByteDance? As far as I can see it, Facebook already took care of that (via Cambridge Analytica), that is seen as we were given “Facebook later confirmed that it actually had data on potentially over 87 million users, most of them in the USA” (source: the Guardian, NBC, CNET) oh, and that is not all. Politicians Ted Cruz and convicted politician Donald Trump were accused of using this tactic. From there we see the quote “It has not been proven, because the difficult thing about proving a situation like that is that you need to do a forensic analysis of the database”this gets us to the next session. What forensic analyses was used to prove the TikTok matter? It does not because as far as I can see, it is a revenue tactic using the accusation of data. So how often is a firm forced to sell on the accusation? In that case, what cases of forced sales exist for Microsoft?
That is one of the pillars we need to see and investigate. In March 2024 we got from the BBC “a similar test carried out by Citizen Lab concluded “in comparison to other popular social media platforms, TikTok collects similar types of data to track user behaviour”” does this not imply that similar settings need to exist to the other social media channels? America is a mere 325 million, Europe has over 742 people, the middle east 381 million people and Asia is near 5 billion people, America is a shoddy minority, but these settings are not tested against Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Whatever Elon Musk has and a few other players. This is as one-sided as it gets. And that is not even considering Russia and its poor poor influencer victims in all this. So how is that going? It frustrates me that Huawei had such scruffy treatment whilst NO evidence has ever been produced.
And in this a report that was given in 2023 where we see “Similarly, a report by the Georgia Institute of Technology last year stated: “The key fact here is that most other social media and mobile apps do the same things.”” So where is the banding of ties to these American social media settings because I do not believe that the NSA isn’t on that same page of collecting non-American data points. And then we get the largest issues “Although it irks privacy experts, most of us accept that handing over swathes of private data is the deal we make with social networks” it is the price of these free mobile networks. So what is this stage? It is fuelled by the item “Article seven of China’s National Intelligence Law states that all Chinese organisations and citizens should “support, assist and co-operate” with the country’s intelligence efforts. This sentence is often cited by people suspicious not just of TikTok, but all Chinese companies.” If people have an issue with that, that’s fair. However be warned that America let data go to Russia without so much as a threat for 14 years, in the end (2022) we get “Facebook owner Meta has agreed to pay $725m (£600m)” and as far as I know a mere £500,000 was the part for the UK, I think that America has a lot more issues than China. It had to overhaul its data policies at least a decade ago. So how many apps via Twitter, Apple apps, google apps (mostly games) and Facebook has been collecting data? This is seen with “Data was collected on at least 30 million users while only 270,000 people downloaded the app”, so where was the anguish there? I personally see this TokTok issue as a governmental money grab and a consolidation of data in America (away from China). If it becomes a side whether I want my data abused by America versus China is entirely up to the elections as I do not now, not ever trust Trump and I feel that China is the safer place for data and I know I am not alone in this. To be honest, I don’t want either to have it. Perhaps it is an option for Evroc to expand its governance from cloud to include social media data to be placed in Sweden (GDPR) or perhaps Saudi Arabia. It seems that bank violations are harshly dealt with there. If data transgressions are dealt with equally harshly it might be an option.
Just some food for thought, time for a sandwich for me, yummy. Enjoy your day this Monday, knowing it is almost Monday in Vancouver.
In this I have to warn upfront that fantastic is not a good side of collected, it is related to fantasy as in a story fantastic in nature, perhaps not as science based as Star Trek, but it started with a gut feeling. So what is in this feeling? It isn’t related to anything I am writing, not to the script I delivered to Dubai Media (no idea how bad they think it is), but two stories triggered something in me, I have no idea if it is foresight or just imagination running wild in any unforeseen direction.
The first story (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/certified-teacher-struggles-schools-1.7323688) tells us the story based out of New Brunswick giving us ‘Certified teacher struggling to land full-time job in spite of shortage’, this gives us “New Brunswick anglophone schools started the year at least 32 teachers short, according to union”. As such I see saw initially two directions. The one is that the union is banking on staff that they can not realistically hope for. The second is that the schools are out of funds, they do not have enough funds to complete even one year. I do not have any evidence to the stage of the second side of it all. But then I saw a third side. It brushed my senses. It comes from the Evangelical Focus (at https://evangelicalfocus.com/europe/27839/christian-schools-rise-in-germany) ‘Christian schools rise in Germany’ with the setting that has a different premise, in Germany of all places. You see, in this I see the republican sides (many nations). They tried the influencers, they tried fear mongering. But they are coming up short and now these same people are involved in visibility fights with Russia, or China and people are panicking. But the right sees a need to control the narrative and in this religion has been for a long time their favourite tool. So is one the evidence to the other? No, it is not. But there could be a clear path of evidence that the Muslim population needs. First the Catholic press to avoid putting 6% of their clergy in prison (see: Spotlight movie). As such another path is needed or the people. Is Islam the answer? I am certain that this path is seen as optional, hence we see the rise of christian schools. The third stage links indirectly to the first, it is now France (at https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20240914-why-french-teachers-walking-away-from-jobs-education-france) which gives us ‘Why so many French teachers are calling it quits’ with “French teachers are quitting in record numbers, overwhelmed by low pay, crowded classrooms and increasing demands. Despite successive reforms by previous governments, staffing shortages persist. And leaving the profession is often a difficult process. With the announcement of a new education minister just around the corner, will France’s public education crisis finally ease up?” And there is the rub, one already has a shorts (Canada), one resolved the shortage (Germany) and one is pushing the shortage (France). Germany and France settles the need of pressure from the EU, they are the strongest voices and a clergy approach to schools puts the mind at ease for a future generation or two. That depends if there is a real push in place. But we have a new influencer stage coming. And soon this will hit TipTok and YouTube in a larger scale, how large? I have no idea, so here is the phase whether I am merely delusional, I am seeing data connected in a personal stage that could be genius or foolish (anyone’s bet). But am I wrong? That is my first question. Then we see a new stage evolving, Iranian satellites being launched by the IRGC and there is already a fear that this is a prelude to an attack on Israel and at that point the influencers are getting hit with dozens of high paying contracts. The narrative will need to be fed. I think it will be a sudden protest by Iran stating that they will cooperate with any decision the west offers. It puts Iran back on the table and as Israel was destroyed, they will receive millions of prayers by Iraq, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Yemen and Jordan. Iran is back on the table. That will be my moment to decide to give all my support to Saudi Arabia, there is no narrative with Iran at the table. The west and east are willing to sacrifice Israel for a longer time at the table with goodies. In this the dangers of influencers are shown and no one is willing to do anything about it. No matter what they think, the FBI files on influencers will be ignored to too large an extent. The narrative for the west is everything. How do you think that the European Union Government Debt is 12.7 trillion dollars? Now add the US debt ($35 trillion) and Japan ($9.23 trillion) and they decide on the narrative? I think it is important to them that the narrative is controlled, that hatred (anti muslim) is fuelled in all kinds of ways, by the next ave of people, the next wave needs to be ‘protected’ and that is where the clergy comes in. They are always happy to help those who enable them. A nice circle that enables the people who waste money to a new weird degree and in this they are all banking on a nearly non-existent world of Quantum computers with 1 trillion up for grabs between now and 2035. I reckon within the next 6 months certain stake holders will tie this with amazing amount of money towards the AI, all whilst the two are nearly there, but not quite. Seemingly in the UK they have a £630,000,000 investment in something that not yet works (source unavailable). But the simplicity of this is that an actual AI requires a trinary system, currently systems will not work, or only in part. We are still in the binary stage. I made mention of this on August 8th 2022, two years ago in the story Altered Image. I did not record all the details, but the Ypsilon particle will enable trinary based systems when the proven theory allows the practical setting to emerge and at that point I saw IBM as the most likely one to pursue this. That and shallow circuits will be the cornerstone of a real AI field.
So as we see this. Am I merely delusional? Is this a factual presumption towards what could come (based on the facts I have been exposed to), or is this merely my creative side founding facts to fantasy, but my mind did not make the leap to a new storyline. I already have three stories evolving and merely published a first one. Four stories in less than a year, not bad.
Well, feel free to Judge me, but this is what is (at present), enjoy your day.
That is on my mind. What set it off was a response (not by me) to a story on Twitter. It amounted to something that would optionally happen under the upcoming wannabe Trump regime. The story went that a settlement would be struck with Russia that Ukraine would hand over a slice of their land to Russia, something I find utterly unacceptable. It would trigger me to change atlases and maps changing all references from USA (United States of America) to FBP (Federated Bitches of Putin). My reasoning?
Look at the losses that they so far have under Putin, 631 thousand soldiers, 17,000 AFV (troop carriers), 18000 artillery systems, 28 warships, a submarine and 24500 vehicles and fuel tanks, 368 airplanes, 945 anti aircraft systems, over 300 helicopters and more than 8600 tanks. They lost this to the 20th size army in the world. So when Trump negotiates this ‘settlement’ America loses the right to call themselves some united sort of stated, they become Putin’s bitches. Plain and simple.
The other side There is another side to this. As America hands lands to the loser there is every indication that several nations in Europe, optionally in Australia and oceania as well will turn to China to become a more close friend than America will be. We already heard (lacking evidence) that Huawei was a danger, something that has met with large opposition, particularly in Germany and the world has had enough of a collection of Karen’s and their joker (Donald Trump). The larger setting could be that they would agree to enter BRICS under condition that Russia is evicted from that group which could coincide with alignments to Beijing. And this would only be opposed to Russia, not much of an opposition after 2025. In one strike the new world order would have taken Russia And America out of the equation. Is it a real chance? I am not sure, but the powers that currently are have a setting to obliterate any view that takes Wall Street out of this equation. At present the largest danger that America faces is that the age of McCarthyism went south on May 2, 1957. The day Joseph McCarthy died. We all thought he was no good, but all those who had that opinion (me included) can now see that Joseph McCarthy might not have been wrong at all, ask any Ukrainian for a first opinion.
Is there any good to report on this setting? It is an election year and as such there is a larger stage where neither side will give the goods on the Ukraine. This is partially seen in “Russian restraint in the expectation of a potential Trump victory in November is also matched by caution on the part of the Biden administration for similar reasons. The overriding priority of the US and its allies in their support for Ukraine has always been guided by the desire to avoid the conflict between Ukraine and Russia escalating into a wider war with Nato” There is also the second threat, which a see as a primary threat to Russia. When Europe and allies side with China. Russia and America will both be out of the race. All whilst they think that they are both ‘semi-courageous’ (read: cowardly hyena’s) the setting that comes is economic betterment and as Europe and others side with China, the two who need the recovery the most are abandoned at the drop of any conical hat.
Could I be wrong? Yes, but this is (as I see it) the very tactic that Beijing would employ. To be certain of their economic rise over the next 10 years. Together with Saudi Arabia and the UAE they could even employ larger stages including introducing of free language skills and get the voice of the people by handing them a voice to employ in a non English way. Don’t think this will not happen, Saudi Arabia is already doing this for other reasons as well. It will not be long until universities will employ those stages to students. As I need to see the stage that I could be wrong. I have been correct too many times as well as the stage that certain greed driven policies are abundantly strong in Europe. That takes America with their $35,300,000,000,000 debt is forcing them to consider. As that pile of debt comes crashing down on America, all with connected debts will choose a safer path for themselves. As I see it France and Germany are the first to switch. Germany now has the AfD to deal with and they will see the debts they have and easily switch to China, no matter what the media states. The Media is too linked to American ‘values’ and there the larger stage is thrown over, especially as their influencers (read: stakeholders) will be trying to find a safer harbour to keep whatever they had. As I personally see it, with that large debt it would only take one third of the 760 billionaires in America for the walls of the American economy come tumbling down and I reckon that it will be the first half of the 253 billionaires to switch another country for the American administration to throw out the ‘freedom’ that these people had to shore up the banks and financial institutions. As such the ‘wealthy’ will secure whatever they can via Monaco (optionally), Nassau and the United Arab Emirates. They will merely take small portions on a monthly basis (until a few panic) and they will suddenly leave with whatever they can and live somewhere else for no less than two decades. And that is the second marker Beijing needs. When it is shown to be not on the premise of national security China will buy it all for approximately 16.55 cents on the dollar. That is how I speculate the hardship for America starts and they did it themselves by electing a greed driven idiot (read: Donald John Trump). A stage that I at present speculative, in part presumption. But in this greed driven tactics are a lot more easy to foresee. So how is that peace stage with Russia going now?
What can be done? Not a lot, certain stages are seemingly already happening. As I see it the softness (aka anti-McCarthyism) on Russia will be the straw that breaks the camels back. As I see it, the masses that choose Trump are the second marker, his one sided view with both Russia and against China currently complete the picture.
Try to have a good weekend and ‘أتمنى لك عطلة نهاية أسبوع جميلة’
That is the question that I saw coming my way (via my brain). I stumbled on an article accusing something bad, in many ways. The issue becomes that there was only ONE source. No one touched the article. Does it make it fake news? Or is the media now so corrupt that Microsoft gets a pass on everything? It is a serious question. You see the story starts with ‘Bombshell allegations that Microsoft is using Chinese employees inside China to oversee DoD, Federal government cloud infrastructure’ after all the anti-China rumbles, they are OK with this?
The article (at https://lawenforcementtoday.com/bombshell-allegations-that-microsoft-using-chinese-employees-inside-china-to-oversee-dod-federal-government-cloud-infrastructure) gives plenty to worry about. If not Microsoft then at least the media. The setting tarts with “In September 2023, FBI Director Christopher Wray told a conference that China has a “bigger hacking program” than the competition. He warned that Beijing has a “cyber espionage program so vast that it is bigger than all of its major competitors combined.”” And it gets a lot worse after that. We get “Tom Schiller, a senior software developer with a stellar resume, is the CEO of Next Defense, a consultancy agency specialising in Virtual Reality and Artificial Intelligence for defense training. Schiller is a subject matter expert. He reached out to Law Enforcement Today, and what he told us was chilling. He told us of a program hatched between Microsoft and the Obama administration that is directly tied to China and puts our national security in peril.” This is the first setting that the media should have referred to this article. They have no issues copying text on faceless accusations against Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud, but this is not touched? And I waited a fair amount of hours (in case all the media was suddenly asleep). And before you think that this is nothing we get “After the raid, a China-based Microsoft spokesperson emailed, “We’re serious about complying with China’s laws and committed to SAIC’s questions and concerns.” That statement contradicts the Microsoft president’s statement before the House Homeland Security Committee in June 2014, when he said that the Chinese government had previously ordered the company to comply with their laws and probes. He said the Chinese were told that he “was not allowed that and will not.” Schiller also noted that Microsoft has shared source code with China and let them insert their own source code into Microsoft’s proprietary source code. That is a direct contradiction to the Microsoft president’s statement to Congress.” So we get the setting that a key member of Microsoft made a statement to Congress that seemingly is found to be contradictive. Take time to read the article, there is way too much in there and copying the text seems a little overactive, so I am putting a pdf version of that page at the end of the article. So the end does give a hot stick of dynamite.
We are given “Schiller advised Gimenez that he had alerted the DoD CIO and DISA IG about a possible breach in the US cloud infrastructure.
“In my expert opinion, the breach has significantly compromised all U.S. Government and DoD cloud services, posing a grave ongoing and present danger to our nation’s security and the safety of the American people. He continued to explain to Gimenez Microsoft’s use of “un-cleared Chinese nationals based in China to conduct and control over 90% of the work and support for the Microsoft U.S. Government and DoD cloud environments,” explaining that the “authorisation agreement…was inadequately written, leaving things open-ended and unclarified.” He told Gimenez that “Microsoft has taken full advantage of this and has in turn used to essentially hand over control of the U.S. Sovereign Cloud to China,” adding that this had “actively been going on since around 2016.” Schiller told Gimenez he has “three additional senior-level whistleblowers from the Microsoft U.S. Government and DoD contract who are prepared to testify.” Schiller asked Gimenez to contact him so a complete briefing of facts could take place.” So lets recap the lessons of history. America goes anti China in a heartbeat. It sanctions Huawei (A Chinese company) and tells Europe to stop handing business deals to Huawei and now we see that China is managing the clouds of the Department of Defence and the US Governments? Where is the logic in this?
And the way the media is silencing this makes even less sense. They weren’t the source and they could have stuck with their usual BS (like inserting words like ‘alleged’ and ‘anonymous sources let us know’) we see non of that and only ONE article comes up in Google Search? This does not make sense. I will not blame Microsoft without ‘evidence’ but this article is a clear setting of time going back to 2022 and no one saw this?
I wonder if the media suddenly wakes up, their is something amiss in all of this. It is either one side, or the other side. In this scenario there is no non-side. Oh and the source of this piece was Law Enforcement Today, so I would side with the fact that this is a serious stage for the United States, or do we call them the Peoples Republic of America from this forward?
So have a nice day and remember in China they prefer Long Jing tea, you should have some in stock if you are in America.
That is the setting we face as we see the article on MEMRI (at https://www.memri.org/reports/article-saudi-government-daily-saudi-arabia-has-legitimate-right-develop-nuclear-weapons). I would be in favour of this. The speaker sheikh Muhammad Al-Husseini, (Lebanese in origin) is unknown to me. He also has Saudi citizenship. He wrote “Saudi Arabia has “a legitimate right” to develop and attain nuclear weapons, and in fact has “an urgent need” to do so in light of the growing threats it is facing and Iran’s rapid progress towards nuclear capabilities. Establishing a nuclear balance of deterrence in the region, he says, will enhance regional stability and cause the kingdom’s enemies to think twice before taking aggressive measures against it.” I personally agree with that point of view. Iran has become too unstable and too aggressive against the state of Israel as well as the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The second front Iran manages through Houthi forces and there is too big a chance that they will have nuclear potential. It was a setting that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad catered to in his presidency (2005-2013), it was then that Saudi Arabia had to cloak itself with a nuclear deterrent. As things go now, it might not have another option. Most of us do not want this and it was clear that Saudi Arabia didn’t want that either, yet Muhammad Al-Husseini makes a strong point. Establishing a nuclear balance of deterrence might be unavoidable. I want to make this clear. In all matters regarding this path I would happily be proven wrong. I certainly hope it isn’t required, yet in this setting we are all reacting to the acts of Iran and that is a problem. With their approach to the state of Israel, Saudi Arabia might not be left with an option. It is better that Iran clearly knows that any attack to Saudi Arabia will have a nightmare scenario as a response.
sheikh Muhammad Al-Husseini then gives us “Iran is working to advance its nuclear program, and is apparently approaching its goal. In light of the concerns about developments in the nuclear policy of the region’s, Saudi Arabia, which does not currently possess nuclear weapons, is entitled to discuss this issue.” I agree on this. In this light when the problems act in Iran, Saudi Arabia better have options of any kind. He ends it all with “At the same time, there is a need for prudent management of the potential dangers associated with nuclear capability” he is right again. The problem that I see is that Saudi Arabia does it in reaction to their current enemies. This take the yellow cake in directions we do not like. As I see it, the first danger I see is that the Houthis get their hands on a dirty bomb equivalent and launches it on a tactical target. Iran will state: ‘We know nothing, we never handed them anything’ and then point they finger at any would be additional target that they hope Saudi Arabia will resolve for them. This will massively increase tensions in the middle east. I would hope there would be a way to stop this, but too many weapons deliveries have gotten through to Houthi forces, so I do not think this path will be stopped any day soon. The idea that third parties will use this to set the hammer against Saudi Arabia is not without fear, the point that there are parties who will ‘act’ to get in the good graces of Iran is a real danger and they will see a mere weapon shipment to Houthi forces. That is the real danger. The acts to appease Iranian political players. There are few enemies to pick from and whomever sides with Iran on this better be ready to pay a hefty price here.
There is no need to say who, there are too many options and scenarios. But that setting does plays towards to voice that Muhammad Al-Husseini is raising. The problem here is that this voice and my view could be regarded as fear-mongering. I get that, but does Saudi Arabia have any option to avoid this? The larger problem is not Saudi Arabia, it is Iran. The Gaza tensions as well as the standing against the state of Israel is becoming a worrying setting. Then there are the settings that complicate matters, namely Syria and Hezbollah. Any of them could become a nuclear parts courier. As such there are several ways that these materials could find their way to Houthi hands and that is the real scenario. Iran pretending to have clean hands whilst Saudi Arabia get the damage and the political fallout of any nuclear strike. As such I agree with Muhammad Al-Husseini that there is a essential need for Saudi Arabia to have a nuclear deterrent in place. My original design was not meant against Russia, but against Iran who had Russian equipment. It was meant to get the plant in Sirik to melt down setting nuclear options back for at least 1-2 decades. These things are expensive and a new site would set a lot of markers back as well as the essential need to increase security to almost 5 fold which leaves them largely without troops. Al that from a simple snow globe, how sick was my creativity?
But overall Muhammad Al-Husseini is right, Saudi Arabia needs a deterrent. Iran thinks it can play with others, but at some point the others need to react and that is where disaster could strike.
Have a great day preferably not glowing in the dark.
That setting is a much larger setting then we realise. The BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y3rnl5qv3o) gives us ‘Musk’s X banned in Brazil after disinformation row’ and I honestly don’t get it. He has the premise of gaining billions closing in on a trillion in business. We get to see “X, formerly Twitter, has been banned in Brazil after failing to meet a deadline set by a Supreme Court judge to name a new legal representative in the country” and that is merely the beginning. Judge Alexandre de Moraes has suspended X (aka Twitter) until that is done and in addition Musk sets all fines that are outstanding. I have no idea how much that amounts to. The larger premise is that Musk is sitting on IP that could gain him close to a trillion, if only these people had woken up. The current setting is that this case could invigorate a much larger anti-Musk stage and Twitter (aka X) could be banned from a whole range of nations with anti-Musk feelings. That is not a given, but Brazil just opened that door. Basically any nation with a right wing nuisance could entertain that premise diminishing Twitter and as such Jack Dorsey could buy back X/Twitter for 125 million after selling it for $44,000,000,000 not a bad deal for a 3 year gap. I surmised that it was only worth a maximum of 24 billion at that time. As such Jack Dorsey could be making a killing on the deal whilst the value of that company doubles in the first month he regains control. They say that a foolish billionaire and his money are soon parted, but here that expression takes on a whole new meaning.
And it got so far because Twitter/X, Meta and Telegram because they would not set the larger premise. There needs to be accountability and they all were eager to avoid those. Now we see that social media is being thumped on by a whole range of governments. There is such a think as accountability. I already said so in 2013, now we see that governments have had enough and this first case is likely to open the floodgates.
If is an attack on free speech? No, I do not believe it is so. People should have free speech, but not under the guise of anonymity. If you disagree, say so, but the digital world sees a lot more flames and digital waves when they can say things without revealing themselves. It is the stopgap for chaos to spread their wings. The media has everything to do with this and they are equally guilty (like ‘unnamed sources told us’). So when was that at any time a long standing solution?
Now Elon Musk is cutting his own fingers and soon the solution he had for the world will be largely ignored, and if accepted there will be massive constraints, which would cost him up to 20% from what he could have had. In my book 20% is a lot and when you get close to a trillion it is a lot more than I have ever seen (many like me have that setting).
There is another side to this. At this point Mastodon, Reddit, Threads, Bluesky, Discord, Tumblr, and Truth Social will get to have a place to gain market share against the accounts of Twitter/X. It might not be much, but it is a start. As more nations follow suit there places will gain momentum whilst Twitter/X could she well over 10% of the accounts and even when reinstated, the time gives the others time to get the advertisement revenue that Musk losses. So how will he bring that news to the people who invested in that 44 billion dollar caper? They want to see cash and when that doesn’t come Elon Musk must put up his own cash or lose a lot more. That wasn’t hard was it?
And with the early threat that Musk is pulling out of Europe (October 2023). It becomes an early grave for Twitter. China has its own settings and that will become an increasing pressure whilst one person (aka Elon Musk) gets to live with the invoked byline ‘2022-2025 where has my $44,000,000,000 gone’. A weird setting for a person who at one time had the products that everyone on the planet wanted.
The higher the climb the harder they fall. Enjoy your day
That is the skeptical look I have. You see social media is a flammable stage of all kinds of woke and non woke commitments. Some are real and most aren’t very real in the mindset of anyone else. I am not belittling any ‘cause’ but that is how I feel. We get exposure to a million and one causes and they are the settings for a mere speculated 100,000 people. Everyone has a cause and most of them have a dozen causes. I will not bother you with the amount of influencers touching on any cause that helps THEM get more visibility. It is a crackpot mix of people at times. So when I saw the Middle East Eye give us ‘How the UAE crushes dissent by arbitrarily revoking citizenship’, I became a little more aware. The opinion story (at https://www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/how-uae-crushes-dissent-arbitrarily-revoking-citizenship) gives us the link to UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan with the stage that he is pictured in Abu Dhabi on 6 December 2023 is a nice touch, but he is not mentioned in the opinion piece, not even once. So why is his picture there? Then we get to the MENA group, which is mentioned once “A report by the Mena Rights Group, published last month, exposed the extensive and troubling nature of this trend”, as such I have questions. With the “the extensive and troubling nature” it is the first mention I see of this. We see the mention “3 March 2011, when 133 Emirati academics, judges, lawyers, students and human rights defenders signed a petition addressed to the president of the UAE and the Federal Supreme Council, calling for democratic reforms”. As such there are seemingly mentions of this since 2011 and this I the first time I hear of it? There is no visible mention of the MENA rights group in Al Jazeera or Arab News, as such I have questions on the validity of this. We see the mention of “Many affected by this practice are either defendants in the “UAE84” trial or their family members.” With a reference that it was “politically motivated and marred by fair trial violations.” As such I raise questions. You see, if that was the case, would it not be in nearly every Muslim writing from Al Jazeera to Arab News, not to mention the Guardian, BBC and a whole range of American woke news casts? Then we get to one of the writers of the opinion piece Jenan al-Marzooqi. Is that a relative of the accused Ibrahim al-Marzooqi? It might be, but I do not know this. The opinion piece is largely a one sided mention relying on the MENA Rights group who was founded in 2018 in Geneva. I would think that if it was an actual counted group a whole range of newspapers (western and Arabic) would have made mention of it, perhaps they did, but this is the first I see of this.
We then see the mention of “citizenship revocation be applied under the principle of proportionality – a principle that was clearly disregarded in this case.” With the word proportionality referring to the link (at https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/newyork/Documents/Human-Rights-Responses-to-Foreign-Fighters-web_final.pdf) a United Nations document. This is funny, but when you read the document the reference is toward “American Convention on Human Rights, art. 20.” A serious notion, if it was not for the setting that this is playing not in America. With the stage of “deprivation of nationality must be in conformity with domestic law” we get an issue, but I am not sure it is an important one. I am not the expert on Emirati law, a setting not raised in this case. That document also gives us “Some States also allow the deprivation of nationality for naturalised mono-nationals, thereby leaving them stateless.” Is that the case in UAE law? If it is the opinion piece becomes largely pointless, if they only had thought of including that point in the opinion piece. Add to this “In July 2016, five of his six children travelled to the US for medical treatment.” Really? 5 of his 6 children? All for medical treatment? It could be, but this one liner gives a serious boost to disregarding this piece (in my humble opinion). And when we get “concluded last month with at least 43 defendants sentenced to life in prison on bogus terrorism charges” where the word ‘bogus’ is a personal view by the opinion writer and could be ignored. You see if it was serious, that line was accompanied with at least one paragraph addressing that setting, giving optional weight to the word ‘bogus’.
The more I read of this article, the more I wonder what Middle East Eye had in mind with this opinion piece. I am not saying it is invalid, it is an opinion piece after all. Validity is given through evidence, or at least that is what I have always believed. Validity and verification go hand in hand. At the end we see one answer and two more linked names.
Jenan al-Marzooqi is a human rights activist and the daughter of Emirati prisoner of conscience Abdulsalam Mohammed Darwish al-Marzooqi
Estelle Allemann is a legal fellow at MENA Rights Group
Alexandra Tarzikhan is the legal adviser for Southwest Asia and North Africa with the American Bar Association Center for Human Rights.
All very neat, so we have one MENA Rights Group waving their hand for visibility, one activist and a legal adviser linked to the American Bar Association Center for Human Rights.
I would have thought that 2 of them would have created a much better piece. This gets me to the issue of what were they after? You see, I do have legal training, but I am not a lawyer, I have been a Trade Mark Attorney. And as I see it, there are all kinds of verifications missing. Basically, there is no indiction that anything illegal (according to UAE law) was done, or at least the article does not clearly shows this. I did not completely ready the links to the other articles. When a case is made in THIS opinion piece, you have to present the evidence in THIS opinion piece, not link to it. Even if you merely quote it. I feel that more and more media (news and other media) are making a mess of things. They all have to get to the news and opinion pieces faster and as such they create short cuts and deprive the readers of a complete view of the matter, whether it is an opinion piece of now and a legal adviser, as well as a Human Rights person would (or at least should) know this.
We all create awareness, mostly to fuel the fire that lights us. This is not wrong, especially in this social networking world. We have always done this to some degree, but now we have merely increased the visibility of us. Whether that is a good thing remains to be seen. If there is one winner it is the MENA rights group, they got the most visibility here.
Have a lovely day. My Friday starts in 26 minutes.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 