Category Archives: Politics

What is the colour of cowardice?

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.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

Delusional, Collected or Fantastic?

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.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Stories

The change of a name

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’

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

Is the media now too corrupt?

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.

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Military, Politics

The cake is in the oven

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.

Leave a comment

Filed under Military, Politics, Science

If you Musk, you Musk

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

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics

Awareness is fuel to any cause

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.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

The price of fake stability

It is the question that flew my mind as I read a BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cwy3lxqlwl1o) here we are given the ‘plight’ (for the lack of a better word) of Boeing. The once heralded brand of a saviour of technology. Most will wonder about “A US campaign group has accused Boeing of concealing information about electrical problems on a plane that later crashed” , as well as “The organisation said more than 1,000 planes currently flying could potentially be at risk of electrical failures as a result of production problems. The foundation’s claims relate to an aircraft which hit the ground minutes after take-off from Addis Ababa in March 2019” yet whether the truth is a given here, remains the question. We are given a host of other settings in this partial boxing ring, which leads to “among the apparent issues indicated by the documents are a lack of electrical parts, missing and improperly installed wiring, and employees being placed under extreme pressure to rework defective parts” It is anyones guess how accurate these settings are, and my thoughts are that the once great airplane brand has fallen so far. Yet at this point my speculating self started to fill doubt with conjecture, a partial presumption on my side with a larger dose of speculation. And let there be no doubt, I am about to speculate, which is what one does when the facts are not completely to be trusted and when you fail to optionally see the good in people. Yet the BBC does not entirely fail to give the goods. And it does so in the last paragraph of the matter. We are given “Mr Pierson said reports from people within the factory alleged that efforts to improve conditions on the production line had so far been “woefully inadequate” – largely because FAA inspections were known about well in advance and could be prepared for”

So why does the FAA give Boeing the goods? I believe it to be the faltering lines of the American economy. Another failing setting to NASDAQ would throw the American economy in a sliding scale towards an abyss. Whilst we are given that there is a positive year to year change, the reality is that Boeing hasn’t been positive since 2019, thats a 5 year thumper of debt when we see that Boeing had a revenue of 76.5 billion dollars and a net income of minus 600 million, we see that the numbers grow to a 77.8 billion with a net income of minus 2.2 billion. As such the Boeing numbers are not a good message and now we see that the FAA allegedly tells Boeing when they are coming for a ‘visit’? I believe that these firms are against the wall. And the previous CEO Dave Calhoun, who wielded the sceptre from January 2020 to August 7, 2024 has a lot to explain. He took over from Dennis Muilenburg who was fired amid safety concerns with the Boeing 737 MAX following two fatal crashes that claimed the lives of 346 passengers and crew on board. It is here that I personally believe that Dave Calhoun allegedly played a very dangerous game, the unsubstantiated believe that he played with lives using a set of dice. And as I see it, the FAA was willing to play with the lives of people. With the safety setting of Boeing at play, the FAA had no business to give advance warning. A setting we need to give rise to, so far 346 lives are lost and the economy is seemingly more important that hundreds of lives lost. America has an apparent 334,914,895 (2023) lives. Who cares how the Americans keep their population high, a few hundred is all that is needed, so fuck around and find out. And with another (speculated) 800 lost, due to the next 2-3 planes. the media will use all the soundbites to create flammable stories. In the mean time we see a system that is all about keeping the appearance of an economy high, does it matter how many lives are lost? In the end, when Boeing goes down, Airbus and Lockheed Martin. In retrospect United Airlines is waiting on 497 planes from Boeing, I reckon that they might want to change their order to Airbus (no idea if that is a valid option). The larger setting is that Boeing makes military aircrafts making it a touchy subject. I wonder if any media will truly take a look at how (as well as why) the FAA played chicken with American lives and the American economy. Is any of it a given? No, as I said there is a lot of presumption (read: in part speculation) on the subject. But anyone in Business Intelligence would have had similar thoughts. The problem is that this article by Theo Leggett is 15 hours old. I wonder what more information will be divulged to the people in the next 5 days. In addition there is a lot we do not know about Ed Pierson, a former manager at Boeing’s 737 factory in Renton, Washington State. I speculate that the FAA will face a serious shake up, the card will most likely fall against Michael Whitaker, but that is not a given. Someone will be buried alive for playing footsie with Boeing, of that I have no doubt, who? It will be anyones guess but it will be someone high up. And the stage between Boeing and its stock for the sake of stability. A faltering fake setting of a nation that couldn’t bring its debts about and merely try to play a longer game. If they did this to Boeing, who else what given some level of protection? I don’t know, but the American media is not keen on truly digging into that hornets nest.

As I said, plenty of speculation/presumption, the facts? Well, as I see it the media is no longer to be trusted, so who is? It is anyones guess I think.

Have a great day and try to enjoy tomorrow, that is, if you are not being a passenger on a Boeing.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

What makes it a story?

That is the question that floats to the top. You see, the bulk of the media, including the BBC nowadays have lost too much credibility. The issue becomes verification, and in too many places there isn’t to much of that. So in this mindset I stumbled upon an article. This was in part funny, as I mentioned the ‘disgraced’ Al Jabri only two days ago and 11 hours ago this article was published by the BBC. I do not think the two are connected and it is clear that no such connection should be made other than the mention of these timelines (to keep my blog to some degree a valid source). But 11 hours ago (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gz8934wrro) we see the appearance of ‘Power, oil and a $450m painting – insiders on the rise of Saudi’s Crown Prince’ by Jonathan Rugman. The article was glared over by me, until I noticed a name. This set me in a different mindset and it is time to report on this.

It all starts with “he summoned a senior security official to the palace, determined to win his loyalty” and the name Saad al-Jabri is mentioned. The man who seems to manage a multi billion portfolio for the CIA (allegedly) and was in a court case in America, whilst he is in Canada and setting the space not to allow certain evidence to be mentioned. We then get mentions like “According to Jabri” and (did I mention) that he is a disgraced official, but that part is not mentioned in the article? The mentioned stage “he was friends with the heads of the CIA and MI6” makes for ‘exciting’ reading, but in my mindset it is a dangerous connection because there is a lot of non-verification. So we get the first reference ‘Family of exiled top Saudi officer Saad al-Jabri ‘targeted’’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-52790864). There we get “Dr Saad al-Jabri, who helped foil an al-Qaeda bomb plot against the West”. My issue was that there is little verification. Now, this makes sense because it is intelligence related and they do not spout these issues in open places. But with the accusation of treason and ‘funds removal operations’ according to other Saudi sources it sets the possibility that Al Jabri made a sting using optional Al Qaeda plants and now we get the setting that the CIA gave him safe passage whilst Al Qaeda gets the optional blame for it all. I am not saying that this is what happened, but the timing of the intertwined facts are a little too convenient (for Al Jabri). This could have been all set aside with proper verification, but the term ‘according to sources’ allows for my speculation, and lets be clear, I was and still am speculating on this.

And the stage of “He was also the linchpin in all Saudi Arabia’s relations with the “Five Eyes” (US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand) intelligence agencies.” This is important because linchpin means “a person or thing vital to an enterprise or organisation”, as such Saad Al Jabri was important to the stage of some (most likely the CIA) and Al Jabri in a self professed difficult situation was eager to carry that mantle (my speculation), especially as he was accused to have taken the quick way out with billions. People have done a lot more for a mere 0.1% of such an amount. 

Then we get to “we shed new light on the events that have made MBS notorious – including the 2018 murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi” and this had issues with me. On February 27th 2021 I wrote ‘That was easy!’, (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/02/27/that-was-easy/) in this blog article I shot holes in an United Nations document, with a lot more issues that I was happy with. The fact that I had even one issue with a document from the United Nations should have been close to impossible. The fact that I did implies that this was a hatchet job and I added the UN document so that people could see it for themselves. In addition at a later stage I added the mention that Khashoggi was alive with a mistress spending their days on Bora Bora (I also mentioned that this came from a non-reliable source). The setting we have now is that there is a debatable story (in depth) due to at least one main source that is debatable and the mentions of Al Jabri needs to be seen as at the very least debatable. This is what you get when the lack of verification is there, there is simply no other outcome as I see it.

We then see “accusing MBS of forging his father the king’s signature on a royal decree committing ground troops”, as well as “The prince was apparently so impatient for his father to become king that in 2014, he reportedly suggested killing the then-monarch – Abdullah, his uncle – with a poisoned ring, obtained from Russia. “I don’t know for sure if he was just bragging, but we took it seriously,”” my issue here is two fold, the one mention of “I don’t know for sure if he was just bragging” sounds nice, but in both cases the source is Al Jabri and in my view he is a debatable source on more than one issue and verification is missing here and that is all on Jonathan Rugman as I see it. This all takes me back to the 70’s. A writer named James Grady wrote a book that was made into a movie with Robert Redford, the movie was called Three days of the Condor. After I saw the movie I also read his sequel ‘Shadow of the Condor’ (I believe that was the book). There we come across the term ‘Gamaljoen’ (I read the book in Dutch). The term makes reference to a person that is raised to a much larger status than he (or she) should be. Because of the status those who are wielding that person are raised as well. That is the feeling that I have on Al Jabri. Now lets accept that I could be (totally) wrong, but that requires verification to see and we see no verification with the debatable doubts I throw on to the Khashoggi issue we get an unbalanced stage. And I am trying to avoid the “he said, she said” debate. This is why there are issues with an in depth story. There are other sources mentioned, but these are all to ‘trivial’ matters. 

We then get a part that reflects on my story yesterday ““He planned for my assassination,” Jabri says. “He will not rest until he sees me dead, I have no doubt about that.”” Whether he did or did not is also debatable. The ‘simple’ fact is that I created an optional plan to do just that, in under an hour no less. And I am not a professional on the matter. The fact that Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud has actual specialists on the matter and we see some ‘tiger team’ bungling it puts question marks on it all. Is there an actual execution order out on Al Jabri? It is a valid question. I have no doubt that Al Jabri is likely to face jail time at the very least is he ever goes back to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, there is a wallet with billions (allegedly) missing to support my view. 

With “The killing of Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in 2018 implicates MBS in ways that are very hard to refute. The 15-strong hit squad was travelling on diplomatic passports and included several of MBS’s own bodyguards” the writer of the BBC story is missing the beat. You see, the setting of “implicates MBS in ways that are very hard to refute” is what I did (in part) in the UN document in the article I mentioned earlier (That was Easy!) I cast a really large doubt in the issues, in the second setting ‘15-strong hit squad’ is also extremely debatable. If it was a hit a mere 1 person would have sufficed. That there was an optional team to ‘retrieve’ is possible, but the media used the setting to explode their paper revenue, so too much of it is too ludicrous for words. The media is nowadays too much about creating emotional flames for the supportive need of clickbait, at the expense of their own credibility. 

Then we get “A declassified US intelligence report released in February 2021 asserted that he was complicit in the killing of Khashoggi” yet the linked article states “The report released by the Biden administration says the prince approved a plan to either “capture or kill” Khashoggi”, whilst we see “We assess”, which in CIA terms would be seen as fairy tale material. It lacks evidence, merely conjecture. All whilst the linked report (by the office of the US director of national intelligence) can no longer be retrieved. That’s your evidence? 

There is a lot to make up for and the BBC better do that soon, as the article ends with “Jonathan Rugman is consultant producer on The Kingdom: The world’s most powerful prince” the writer being a producer of materials as well? Whatever could be wrong next.

The amazing amounts of fairy tale materials that goes back as far as the United Nations gives pause for a larger setting, whatever you call ‘inDepth’ is almost a new kind of story with the APNews happily posting it with the mention of ‘Former Saudi official alleges Prince Mohammed forged king’s signature on Yemen war decree’ a mere 4 hours ago. Is that how the news goes around nowadays?

And to all I say have a great Tuesday, a mere 4 hours until breakfast for me, time that I snore like a lumberjack. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

Cold War 2.00.05/LW

The BBC alerted us to an optional issue, the article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clyn8vk4g42o) is a tap on the door. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the article. It alerts us and it tells us stuff, but there is an underlying setting. You see there is an absolute chance that Russia is active in Germany, but there are doubts within me. Russia has a lot more problems than many of us realise. And there we, optionally, now have a new player in the German field. The radical sited lone wolf getting their message from Tehran. I will come right out with ‘it is speculative’, it is my speculation. You see with “Holes mysteriously found cut in army base fences” we see part of the deception. If it was me, I would hide 2-3 drones, out of sight with a good view of several buildings, not flying in a landed state. Army camps have many roofs and not of them are watched all the time. And a landed drone leaves no signature. So there the culprit, optional plural have drilled a hole in a fence, nicely hidden, but not strong enough that it will avoid detection. So the guard patrols call it in and suddenly the base is rushing to the sensitive places and checking them out. And now with the drone cameras they will know WHERE to hit that place, optionally not hitting that place at all (that week). The army signature move is to check all the sensitive areas as well as the munition storage and armouries. Their alert giving the lone wolves where to come soon enough and that time there are no holes at entry. 

Not a case they expected, but this is not an intentional Cold War or Cold War 2.0, it is a Cold War 2/LW (Lone Wolf). A new setting and most standard procedures will not suffice, well they might but you are up against a different enemy, the Lone Wolf is desperate for success and more important, he/she will be more desperate for success, as such they will resort to killing a lot sooner, as such the plan changes somewhat. Whether they are out for secrets to dispense to a player like Iran (optionally one of their agents via Hamas, Hezbollah, or Houthi). I see this as a realistic setting. 

We cannot merely rely on:

  • An alleged plot to assassinate Germany’s top weapons manufacturer.
  • Phone taps on a high-level Luftwaffe call.

These are still settings that are happening and it is even possible that these are separate issues. In any espionage setting the Luftwaffe taps could most definitely be Russia as for the alleged assassination. It is anyones guess who it is and how real it is. The danger of an assassination cannot be ignored, but these people are aware of those dangers and the replacement is likely to be a lot more dangerous than the one they replaced. When the danger becomes realistic, the claws come out and they will suddenly be a lot more dangerous, as well as the BND (Bundesnachrichtendienst), they will at that point be out for blood, all of the blood they can lay their hands on. 

So am I right?
Not sure, but I just gave you a scenario that I came up with in 5 minutes. These Lone Wolves have been brooding over a plan for months. It is there that we see the folly that I saw in the case involving Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri in Canada. In 2021 we get from 60 minutes that Mohammed bin Salman wanted him dead. This might be true, but then we get in August 2020 that ‘Saudi hit squad was sent to Toronto to try to kill former intel official, lawsuit alleges’ (source: Toronto Star) with a 100 page lawsuit and in the end none of the allegations have been proven in court. What a jolly shit show. There was another article (I forgot where it was) stating that the Tiger Team of 30 man were employed. To give you a little rundown, after 42 years leaving the army (draft) I came up with a simple idea of using 3 teams of 2 man and at the end of that exercise that would have taken a mere 20 minutes with one team active for an additional 12 hours, there was no living Al Jabri, he would be as dead as the concrete building he was living in. OK, I do not know the setup of that building, but it would be a simple exercise for 3 teams of 2 (one team observing and directing. An optional use for the M202A1 66mm FLASH with adjusted missiles would be used (in a certain debilitating case) but that is merely on a ‘what if’ whim. The rest is a simple exercise using two boom boom items. Hard case, a mere exercise and I am certain that certain parties (who are in this field) could have thought of this long before I did. I have had my issues with the assumptions that Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri have tried to sway us with. The other fact was that the US, where a lot was set in their courts (even though he was in Canada) with all kinds of objections against the Saudi representative there. I had my doubts on a lot of it. This is a mere setting and this now goes back to Germany. Is there an optional Cold War brewing? That is very much possible, but in all this the Lone Wolf is optionally overlooked. So are these the actions of a Lone Wolf, or a Lone Woof. Anyone can make a hole in a fence, having the Army run around would be fun the the lone woof looking from a distance, it does not make for a base invasion. So at the near end of the article we get “Not all of these events can definitively be blamed on Moscow, but Germany is on heightened alert for possible acts of Russian sabotage, because of Berlin’s continued military support for Kyiv” this is a better be safe then sorry and I cannot disagree, but the media had a decent responsibility to state more than this and the mere ‘Not all of these events can definitively be blamed on Moscow’ was not enough. With Russian sympathisers all over Europe a lot more was required, because belief it or not Lone Wolves are a clear and present danger to many European nations. Troll farms are ‘their’ essential misinformation, but merely misinforming people and watch it unfold tends to be only entertaining in the first few hours. When we get to tipping scales, actions tend to be needed to make the scales tip over a lot more, but that is merely my point of view.

As “last month when CNN reported that US officials had told Berlin of an alleged Russian plot to kill the chief executive of Germany’s biggest arms company Rheinmetall” doubts come into play again. You see a player like Rheinmetall has procedures in place for this level of events, of that I have no doubt. So what is to be gained from a simple and single execution? Is it the target, or is it a ploy to keep the BND active in the wrong places? Lets not forget that Sun Tzu taught us that all war is based on deception. So how did CNN get the news? Any alleged plot (especially from Russia) would be based on the expertise by people like the GRU and they do not talk (if they do President Putin has a lot more problems that he realises). So how did CNN get it, what were the sources? As such I have to some degree my doubts on this.

Have a fun day and that red dot you see on your chest? It’s merely your imagination.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics