Category Archives: Politics

At times I hate being right

To get that we have to take a trip into the past. To February 5th 2021. It was the day I wrote ‘Not a good thing’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/02/05/not-a-good-thing/). In the article I wrote about the energy shortage that certain players were certain to face. I also made reference to ‘Trillion Dollar Musk’ a story written on December 3rd 2020 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/12/03/trillion-dollar-musk/). The important reference is “the UK has an increasing need for Scandinavian power and soon it cannot be met. I reckon that in the next 2-3 years that shortage will be close to systemic all over the EU”, with the added “now that the stage is here, Eon Musk has a massive opportunity and soon enough it will grow into Europe as well, I wonder who will cash in before the half baked solutions stir their ugly heads. Because the impact of that stage is not a good thing.” And now that we get the Dutch NOS making reference to “Companies that want to establish or expand, often cannot meet their energy needs. This applies, for example, to Royal Smilde Bakery in Edam, a retail company in bake-off products. The company cannot run at full capacity. “And that means we are not at the production capacity that the market demands,” says Andries Tuinenga. The grid operator has imposed a maximum on the company that may not be exceeded. And then the peak months are yet to come.” Now this setting comes early because of the Russian gas situation, but it gives a larger stage, the shortage is here now, consider the Netherlands going towards summer and if summer bites (a realistic chance) we see a nation with millions of AC units and no power to fuel them all. That is a realistic future this year and for two years they could have opted for discussions with Elon Musk and all his energy solutions but how many governments exactly have started this discussion? 

A stage I saw coming two years ago, so why isn’t anyone else? And the small laughable story by BBC Technology that gives us ‘Energy supplier counts cost of devices on standby’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-61235367) does not cut the mustard as I see it. Lets be clear, they are not wrong, but the setting is way too late for that. With the giggle moment supplied through “households would save around £55 per year by switching off all their devices when not in use. The organisation, which promotes sustainability and energy efficiency, did not give exact details of how it came to this figure.” I get it if everyone does that you do save, but at what cost? Larger changes have been needed for well over a year and the UK (EU too) are not ready. The age of ACDC is coming (hah, me making a funny yet again) and the saving will not operate the millions of households that want to enjoy the AC they have no matter how much DC it requires. I stated two years ago that energy changes were becoming essential, but it seems that governments has ego and ostrich issues. It seems that they all were willing to attack Elon Musk and too little of them would be ready to engage with him in serious conversation. Now that time is up they might all want him at the same time, as such it becomes a problem Anyway, should Elon Musk buy my IP, they get added hardship, because I can see that there are options (not big ones) to connect what I have to domotics and smart grids. So connect my IP to a smart grid and collect energy numbers from all the domotics around it. It is not what I had in mind, but it could work and the value of my IP goes up, so what do I care. 

The problem is that GOVERNMENTS should have been on this page in 2018, but are they? The fact that we see shortages now is not merely the impact of Russian choices, it was ALWAYS going to happen in this way, they merely got to this point faster in this way. So who will you blame? Will you have another go at Elon Musk, or will you start asking YOUR government for ignoring the painfully obvious for well over a year now?

I will let you decide. Have a really nice sunny not air-conditioned day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Politics, Science

Blackmail as premeditation

These is a side to everything. Peace, War and everything in-between is in the eye of the beholder, in the wake of political needs some will say, but that too is a side of a mere point of view. So when I saw the Bloomberg article (at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-28/manchester-city-s-owner-helps-usher-more-russian-tycoons-to-uae) titled ‘Manchester City’s Owner Helps Usher More Russian Tycoons to UAE’ we see the side that many shy away from. It starts with “Sheikh Mansour also has a behind-the-scenes role that’s become increasingly important in recent months: Helping manage relationships with wealthy Russians looking to move money into the UAE, according to several people familiar with Abu Dhabi’s engagement with Russians, who requested anonymity as the information isn’t public.” With the added “Even as the U.S., EU and other countries have blitzed Russia with thousands of new financial restrictions, making it the world’s most-sanctioned nation, the UAE hasn’t imposed any. Officials in the Middle Eastern nation have taken the stance that Abu Dhabi respects international law but isn’t required to follow measures implemented by specific countries and that the UAE has the right to adopt its own policies, several people familiar with their thinking said.” It is supported by “That approach, though, has fuelled concern among some Western officials who are worried about holes in their own sanctions programs. Earlier this month, Deputy U.S. Treasury Secretary Wally Adeyemo voiced Washington’s worries about Russian tycoons moving assets to the UAE in a call with UAE officials, two people with knowledge of the discussions said”. You see, the setting is even more different from what we see. You see, some places cannot be touched, some ships are unattainable and other material matters cannot be touched as the owners identities are hidden from view. There are two parts in all this. 

In the first there is the matter of his highness Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan. He is from the UAE, he does what is best for the UAE, a Emiratian as it were (is that the right pronunciation?) The larger setting is not what he does, it is that there is no war with Russia in the UAE, more important, the blackmail grip on these oligarchs is not entirely legal. Lets look at the clear evidence. These oligarchs are Russians, they therefor embraced friendships with the ruler of that place (Vladimir Putin), this was never a crime. Then the Ukrainian issues started and the oligarchs were split in two teams (as Roman Arkadyevich Abramovich most likely would say) those who openly support Putin and those who do not. Take Roman Arkadyevich Abramovich he is also a philanthropist and the former owned of Chelsea FC (they might be the same). So are the acts against him valid? Consider what he did in the BEGINNING of the war. It casts a shadow over the acts against the oligarchs. And the demented statement by President Biden “We’re going to seize their yachts, their luxury homes, and other ill-begotten gains”, really? What laws were broken, what prosecution was not correctly made? I do not care either way, but there are laws and yes, Russia has to pay for EVERY kopek of damage that they created in Ukraine. But should the oligarchs? Perhaps those in Russia, but those abroad? Those who openly supported Putin’s war in Ukraine perhaps, the rest? I feel uncertain. 

And when we reconsider “some Western officials who are worried about holes in their own sanctions programs” we see the folly of their taxation laws, the holes are large enough to park a 500 feet yacht in. Failure after failure and the entire emotional setting does not help any, mainly because the emotional setting is not a legal one and now we see that Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan has a case to present to his nation. And if this works the UAE will see another wave of long term investments. Long after the US is deserted by too many players, the UAE will hold on. Is it fair? Fair does not come into it. These oligarchs are not involved in a war, they are not involved in bombing the Ukraine. That is the Russian government, the Russian army, navy and airforce. If an oligarch is part of those, then yes, he (or she) become fair game. And should the American government object, then perhaps they can pull the papers on a place called IG Farben and certain people that were given options in the US. So how come that BASF and Siemens were allowed to continue AFTER WW2? Did they not have factories in Auschwitz? As I see it, the US does not have a billionaire problem, it has a hypocrisy problem and the refusal to overhaul tax laws is pretty much a top 3 item in American economy. As I personally see it Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan found a way to propel his nation (as a citizen), is he to blame? I do not believe that he is. Yes, some people and a lot of Ukrainians have an issue with that and I accept that the Ukrainians are not happy, they have every right to be, but laws are laws and there is a dangerous line that the west is trying to avoid. It is a dangerous line as it leads to WW3 and these nations are either fully committed or they are not. I cannot judge here, because war is a dangerous play, a World War even more so and there could be nuclear repercussions, we need to accept that and that is the red line that a lot of nations are trying to avoid. It makes perfect sense. If there is on upside to all this (the UAE) it will be that the harbour that they hand the oligarchs is also the roof that stops them from becoming a nuclear target. It could be seen by some as premeditated blackmail. Can we blame them, or blame anyone for having that thought? The UAE must do what is best for the UAE and as I see it, that is exactly what Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan seems to be doing.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Soup with sarcasm

There is a setting we all know, we go to a restaurant, we order menu 2 instead of menu 1 and the waiter tries to apologise when we ‘accidentally’ receive menu 1, however menu 2 will be ready in 15 minutes, and with that he hopes that we will accept what we never ordered in the first place. That is the setting I see when we are given ‘Saudis’ Biden snub suggests crown prince still banking on Trump’s return’. The article (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/24/saudi-arabia-kushner-trump-biden-mohammed-bin-salman) gives us “Refusal to help US punish Russia and $2bn investment in Kushner fund signal crown prince’s displeasure with Trump’s successor”. You see, President Biden is playing the wrong game, he did so because he never played the right game to begin with. The US has trampled on friendships with the Middle East for too long. Russia is one option and Saudi Arabia is considering any ally that has a positive approach towards them and that puts both China and Russia on the map for Saudi Arabia. We see the news, we see the implications, but the number one setting they all overlook (whether intentional or not) Saudi Arabia must do what is best for Saudi Arabia and that is not what America wants, it is not what President Biden wants. They want ‘vassals’ yet they want them with an empty treasury coffer and at present Saudi Arabia can buy them out. That is what the US fears the most, they have become the paper tiger the feared they one day might be. 

So when we see “Prince Mohammed shows signs of betting on the return to office of Trump in 2024, and the resumption of the Trump administration’s cosy relationship with Riyadh.” We see Saudi reason. The US has not achieved anything regarding the insurrection. It has not exposed the lack of wealth of Donald Trump and as such Trump continues to incite the far right to his causes and with every win he polarises the right further and more of the centre will move to the right. We see all the news that this will never happen, but they also told us that Trump would never become president in the first place. They were wrong then and they might be wrong now. Successful prosecution of Donald Trump was essential for that, but we all forget the stage of “Trump investigations set to accelerate in coming weeks”, yes, and this has been going on for over a year and nothing was achieved and with every delay, every inability to prosecute more and more Americans start wondering if Donald Trump was right all along and that matters for Saudi Arabia, it matters a great deal. So whatever we might think of Saudi Arabia, it did come at the expense of stupid political games by the Democratic party, and Saudi Arabia is hoping for a renewed Republican White House. Will it happen? I have no idea, but the lack of success against Donald Trump implies that Biden is not in a good place and his actions against Saudi Arabia implies that Saudi Arabia has absolutely no intentions of making Russia less of a ‘friend’ Russia is heard by all the 15 OPEC members and alienating them is not in the interest of Saudi Arabia. So yes, Saudi Arabia seems to be banking on the return of Donald Trump, mainly because is serves the interest of Saudi Arabia a lot better. So when we see the view of John Jenkins, a former UK ambassador to Saudi Arabia with “He probably thinks Biden is politically weak and he can therefore afford to spite him. That sends a signal not just to the Dems but also to the Republican party. And – judging by the debate raging in DC policy circles on these matters – it’s working.” Yet I believe that the larger station is that President Biden has not shown himself to be a friend of Saudi Arabia and that is the larger station. You see, we can debate every angle we are shown, but the larger station is missing:

Saudi Arabia does and must do what is best for Saudi Arabia 

And that missing part is where it all revolves around and the media seems to ignore that part, it does not make for good flames. You see that is the other part of any sarcastic view, when it backfires it is merely irony.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

Anger and Envy

The BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-61228552) ‘Anti-Semitism in worldwide surge, Israeli report says’ it also gives us “The report identifies the US, Canada, the UK, Germany and Australia as among countries where there was a sharp rise” yet what is the core of the problem? To see that we need to investigate the word ‘semite’ which means “a member of any of the peoples who speak or spoke a Semitic language, including in particular the Jews and Arabs.” Yet that is not all, when we look deeper into Semitic language we get “a language that belongs to a subfamily of the Afro-Asiatic language family including Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, and Ethiopic” It is a mess and yes, the Israelites see the strongest results, but let that not take away the mention of Arabic settings. 

The BBC then gives us:
In the US, which has the largest Jewish population outside of Israel, the number of anti-Jewish hate crimes recorded in both New York and Los Angeles were almost twice that of the previous year. And that is not all, anti Arabic sentiments are up by a lot. In this the media has its own role to play. As I personally see it, the exploitation of flames (for digital dollars), the one sided reporting on events are also a factor and they are all to please certain people, people that rely on stakeholders to propagate their agenda as I personally see it. 

In France, the number of recorded anti-Semitic incidents increased by almost 75% compared with 2020. I know too little about France, yet the amount of French Jews leaving France is staggering, and as an EU nation, the fact that Strasbourg does way too little gives rise that there is a larger EU problem. 

In Canada, a leading Jewish group reported a 40-year record in anti-Semitic physical violence in one month – August. In Canada anti semitism has been a problem for decades, the fact that it is becoming worse is not a good thing. 

In the UK, the number of recorded physical assaults against Jews increased by 78% compared with 2020. Too much details on YouTube and too little action or convictions. 

In Germany, anti-Semitic incidents recorded by police were up 29% compared with 2020, and 49% compared with 2019. Germany is perhaps in the best place of all, still not in a good place mind you, the fact that in this is is likely more about hatred of Arabs than Jews is speculation, but it might be the case. Germans still have an issue being painted Nazi and are more likely to leave Jews alone (with the neo-nazis as an obvious exemption)

Australia also experienced a sharp rise in recorded anti-Semitic incidents, with 88 in May alone – the highest monthly total ever. Yes there is a rather nasty Australian setting here, not the worst, but the most isolated giving Arabs and Jews less chance to avoid the problems. And for the most, there is a second tier here, the Palestinian violence actions in Australia against Jews do not get the visibility it should. The Australia media is somehow rather generic in this, I wonder why?

I believe that the transgressors (Christians) are getting more and more angry, taking it all out on Jews and Arabs fuelling anti-semite events. In all this the docile acts of churches is one factor, the setting increases when we take into account the events of 2017 when we were given “In move that Jewish community says rewards terror, court upholds Sydney council decision that house of prayer poses unacceptable security risk”, yes to avoid a fire, you can either get a fire brigade or destroy the wooden buildings. It seems that Sydney chose option 2. 

I believe that the article only highlights the tip of the iceberg. I believe that there is a religious polarisation going on and when that escalates the consequences will be enormous in several ways. How it will evolve, I do not know, but some areas will have to give way and the fallout will be a long lasting one. Consider the idea that Eastern Suburbs in Sydney only get 10% of the petrol option they get now. How do you think it falls out? What happens when the oil producing nations state that area’s of anti-semite concentrations will receive no further oil? It is not the weirdest idea. What happens next? These areas plead for oil with Russia and Iran? 

In a stage where resources are the currency of tomorrow, they will also become political pressure points, so several governments will need to consider what they will do. If the people in Bondi Junction will have to drive to Chatswood to get fuel, how long until things really take a turn for the absolute worst? It is fictive, it is speculation but it is not wholly impossible and at some stage it will happen to some degree. Good luck to the people in Manitoba and when those in Winnipeg need to drive 135Km to get to the US fuel pump, the picture changes a lot. It is a mere application of the have’s and the have not’s. A stage that was clearly given to us in the 90’s, we thought in one direction, but there are always other directions to consider. When any resource becomes the discriminant factor in any equation, the people who forgot about that will suddenly scream bloody murder on their rights. But what rights did they leave others? Anger and Envy might be the two most dangerous elements in that equation, and in all this let’s not ignore the pride of politicians (presumed) stating that this will never happen, how wrong have they been the last 5 years?

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics, Religion

State of what?

Yup, that is the question. You see, I made mention of this before, but I never dug into it. It was linked to something else and saw it as a side effect. Yet the Times of Israel gives us ‘NSO spyware allegations poison Spain’s ties with Catalan separatists’ (at https://www.timesofisrael.com/nso-spyware-allegations-poison-spains-ties-with-catalan-separatists/). There we see “Canada’s Citizen Lab group said Monday that at least 65 people linked to the Catalan separatist movement had been targets of Pegasus spyware in the wake of a failed independence bid in 2017.” I am not debating whether this is true or false. Consider that the NSO group charges $100,000 per infection. So who is willing to pay $6,500,000? So when we are given “Citizen Lab, which focuses on high-tech human rights abuses, said it could not directly attribute the spying operations, but that circumstantial evidence pointed to Spanish authorities.” OK, I can go along with that. If there is someone willing to pay $6.5M to monitor Catalan’s the CNI (Centro Nacional de Inteligencia) makes sense. Yet no one is debating or investigating Citizen’s Lab. I am not stating that they are doing anything wrong, yet no one scrutinises that evidence, questions that evidence or digs into that evidence. Then there is the set state that there is no real timeline. So when we see “in the wake of a failed independence bid in 2017” when was it investigated, when was the ‘evidence’ found and when were the expectations seen as transgressions of privacy were in question? All questions that no one seems to be asking. The absence of a timeline? When did we see ‘trivial’ facts as evidence? When did we see assumed connection as set towards facts?

The article does make a much larger stage towards required timelines and s I see it several timelines are missing. From the NSO group, from the Catalan’s and from Citizens Lab. Three timelines that are decently crucial to this all and no one is seeing that basic requirement. 

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Media, Politics

Gapping data

I did take notice of the story, but there were other considerations. So what is the issue with a two week old story? Actually there is nothing wrong with the time gap, it actually works out nicely. Yet before we go anywhere, lets take a look at ‘A data ‘black hole’: Europol ordered to delete vast store of personal data’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/jan/10/a-data-black-hole-europol-ordered-to-delete-vast-store-of-personal-data) there we are given “The EU’s police agency, Europol, will be forced to delete much of a vast store of personal data that it has been found to have amassed unlawfully by the bloc’s data protection watchdog.” Here I have an issue with the stage of “amassed unlawfully”, then we get “The unprecedented finding from the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) targets what privacy experts are calling a “big data ark” containing billions of points of information. Sensitive data in the ark has been drawn from crime reports, hacked from encrypted phone services and sampled from asylum seekers never involved in any crime.” There we get “hacked from encrypted phone services and sampled from asylum seekers never involved in any crime” You see, the biggest problem in any data set are the data gaps. MISSING VALUE analyses will not get you anywhere and data cannot be analysed on data that is not there. As I see it, the commercial world amasses worlds of data and the EDPS (European Data Protection Supervisor) does next to nothing. We could start an argument that the EDPS is catering to organised crime, but that might be a stretch. I know my data has been collected by CIA, FBI, GCHQ, Mossad, DGSE and at least two other organisations. You think I care? I live my life and keep doing what I am legally allowed to do. The data merely reinforces this. So why is there such a rush to maim the mobility of Europol? I have nothing against laws, I believe that laws are important, but how stupid is it to set up the laws to hinder the law? When our data is all over Microsoft, Google, Amazon, GTCOM and whatever Russia has. The 4,000 TB that is to be deleted will serve organised crime and criminals, no one else. And more importantly it will not protect refugees, if anything, the data shows them to be innocent. Did no one make that leap? You see I oppose “Europol had worked with the EDPS “to find a balance between keeping the EU secure and its citizens safe while adhering to the highest standards of data protection”, the agency said.” I oppose it because data does not protect or endanger lives, it is the one wielding all that data does and whilst commercial enterprises are given a wide berth avoiding their ‘legal’ teams, the EDPS has to prove its existence by having a go at Interpol.

Yes, it is their job, but in what job do you hand opportunity to criminals, organised crime and terrorists? 

And the Guardian is appeasing the stage buy giving the simplest of examples, the example that makes you go ‘awww’. But the example “The political activist, whose only serious run-ins with police amount to breaking a window to gain entrance to a building and create a squat for homeless people, was removed from the Dutch watch-list by authorities in 2019. But a year prior to this removal he had moved to Berlin, which unknown to Van der Linde at the time prompted Dutch police to share his data with German counterparts and Europol. The activist discovered his entanglement with Europol only when he saw a partially declassified file at Amsterdam city hall.” So a criminal, guilty of breaking and entering, that is the simple truth. But we are not supposed to see that, are we? And when the next assault is not in London, but Amsterdam and the gapped data will show to have been an option to stop this, what will the EU give as a response? 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science

Tweeter and Sylvester Musk

Yes, it seems like an animated fest. But there is a lot more under the hoods called media. Even there battle lines are being drawn. The problem is that this war is a little more annoying than other wars. T?he media is making sure that every statement is checked. And still there are multiple sides in this war. 

Forbes
Forbes is one side and gives us “Now, four years later, Musk’s desire to purchase Twitter may to be tied, at least in part, to his still-burning desire to correct what he perceives as media bias generally, and toward him and his companies, which is amplified on social media. Twitter’s board of directors has unanimously rejected his offer and vowed to fight the takeover bid. Whether or not he ultimately succeeds in purchasing Twitter, his views about free speech and social media are ill-conceived in at least three ways.” This is a fair point of view. The added “he does not acknowledge that rules pertaining to free speech in the United States are intended to constrain the actions of governments not companies or private actors. The First Amendment to the Constitution provides that Congress shall pass no law abridging free speech, significantly limiting government action. Over the last 230 years, U.S. lawmakers and courts have carved out a few carefully crafted exceptions to this absolute prohibition on government action.” Is equally fair, yet the missing part is that “U.S. lawmakers and courts have carved out a few carefully crafted exceptions to this absolute prohibition on government action” is that this is a statement that the media exploited to a large degree for the push of self. The media has its own media filter systems. They are called stakeholders and they have been around for over a decade, most likely longer. In a TV series called Torchwood, we are given “Harry Bosco was a man who would alter information fed to the public during the Vietnam War. In the words of Esther Drummond, “He did it by mistranslation. He couldn’t censor or change, but he could manipulate the English translation. Change one word, change the entire meaning.”” It is not far from the truth we see today. People are given filtered information, one sided stories and intentional mistranslations and it is EVERYWHERE. The Ukraine coverage by internet trolls on Facebook and Twitter. Filtering by deleting accounts on Twitter and the intentional one sided coverage in Syria and Yemen shows that this is going on and in the media certain stakeholders are as I personally see it filling their pockets. 

And when the additional “In the U.S., these free speech standards were never intended to apply to private companies. It would be especially counter-productive to apply them to social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube or TikTok. It is in both the commercial interest of these firms and the best interest of our society for them to moderate content on their platforms actively and responsibly. If they do not do so, their platforms will quickly be overwhelmed by spam, pornography, hate speech and violent incitement, misinformation, and conspiracy theories, which would drive away both users and advertisers”, and when you see “If they do not do so, their platforms will quickly be overwhelmed by spam, hate speech and violent incitement, misinformation, and conspiracy theories, which would drive away users” you know that I am right. The media is exploiting every digital dollar via flames, hate speech, misinformation, and conspiracy theories. We see them on pretty much ALL social media, so I reckon that that ship has sailed already. 

In all this, I cannot say whether Elon Musk will be a force of good, or bad for Twitter, it is interesting to note that there is a downside to Twitter and if Elon Musk will launch his version of Twitter, some version of Social Media, I will take notice get hop on board to see how good, or how different it will be. And whilst you are all so emotional on Elon Musk, consider that this might be a good thing. When you see the amount of seesaw data (either really good, or massively bad) news on Meta is handed to people via hundreds of sources. We see a slow but certain form of polarisation coming. These people will watch from the sidelines and they will see that whatever Elon Musk has might be an alternative. And it would work for Elon Musk. When he adds Hybrid to his system he would be able to steer in multiple ways and it should give him a larger benefit, especially when his cars have it and others do not, the bough breaks and the car industry will lose a massive chunk to Tesla. All sides that might, that could happen. But it is equally possible that certain sides will fall for him but not completely so. Basically the 50/50 split could become 70/30 with 30 going the Musk way and that is good news for Google, Amazon and Meta. Yet they will have to accept that Musk Social Media could become a powerhouse all by itself and at that stage whatever the Forbes people will say was bad news will get a really quick rewrite. That is how I see it.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Politics, Science

Escalations

Things escalate, this happens and sometimes it is part of a plan, at times it is not. The Ukraine issues can only escalate. If Vladimir Putin states that it is up to the other side we can safely conclude that he is massively delusional. In between headlines like ‘Russia’s unspeakable horrors in northern Ukraine: Torture, murder and cluster bombs’, ‘Russia’s mass rapes in Ukraine are a war crime. Its military leaders must face prosecution’ and ‘Second British soldier captured in Mariupol is paraded on Russian TV’ we see little other path than the path of escalation. Of course there was good news too. 

As speculation goes, the Russian navy is just as dependable as Russian tanks. They are both equally effective in adhering to gravity and the Russian cruiser Moskva is giving testimony of that at the bottom of the Black Sea. The Slava class, Soviet designation Project 1164 Atlant, a class of guided missile cruisers designed and constructed in the Soviet Union for the Soviet Navy, and currently operated by the Russian Navy. Well there were two, now there is one, so 50% of their guided missile class has been destroyed. Is that what they mean with ‘Slava Ukraina’? 

Anyway, escalation. The Dutch are possibly restoring their active duty needs, and many nations are adhering to this as well. There is every thought that Russia woke up a setting they were not ready for and their Nuclear arsenal is all they might have between defeat and utter defeat. With all the Nazi claims they made, we see more and more that their actions represent the Nazi activities. So in the end, will we see a Nuremberg like trial in Strasbourg where the defendants will all respond in the same similar way? We will hear all of them state “Я выполнял приказы”, but in the end in Nuremberg 161 were convicted, and 37 were sentenced to death. I wonder how many Russians will end up with a death sentence. We see rape, torture, murder of civilians, we see the bombing of hospitals, the deployment of cluster bombs and the indiscriminate executions of people trying to flee the war-scene. The drones recorded a lot more than that and the Russians will face the rim reaper in many ways. That and the stage that life of a Russian outside of Russia (or Cuba) is now a thing of the past. These are all escalations that are happening now and will be happening more in the next month. Even now as Forbes is contemplating a G20 without Russia, we see the long term damage and that turns Russia in a 3rd world nation. It was going good and then it turned nearly every nation on the planet in another direction. You see commerce requires trade and how much trade can Syria, Belorussia and Cuba offer? That and the end of Gas-exports are making for a nasty treasury coffer and whilst Russia depends on its army, the hardware that army needs is sinking, destroyed or out of gas. Escalations can go in any direction, yet history shows us that most escalations go in the wrong direction and Russia is experiencing this the hard way. We sometimes forget WW1. My Grandfather was there and as such I keep tabs on that event. Does anyone remember the fallout of WW1? The Treaty of Versailles (signed in 1919) and the 1921 London Schedule of Payments set a massive bill for Germany after WW1, I reckon that Russia faces an even steeper bill on the damage they did to Ukraine. I reckon that 90% of al Russians will pay 20% taxes on their income for 30 years to Ukraine. That is the setting of escalation and that is the consequence of waging war, its invoice has always been the harshest message. And as I consider what might be next, we might see a new NATO, an EU army with France leading it, it is the most ready and the best equiped at present. A setting both the UK and Germany would not have held possible a year ago. What a difference 53 days can make. 

I wonder if older and very grey Vladimir Putin has any idea what is coming his way in the short term?

They say that confidence cannot escalate to arrogance, it only happens if the blood of pride is running through your veins. Knowing that picking a fight with Ukraine was not the best idea to have, but it seems he is learning that the hard way. You can doubt me and it would be fair, just ask the captain of the Moskva, he is in the Black Sea somewhere. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Military, Politics

What’s the name, what’s the game?

I saw the news a few days ago, and for the most it does not matter to me, but there is an awful lot of hypocrisy going around and the media is (as I personally see it) as tainted as anything else. The stage is set to Elon Musk, or better stated is set against Elon Musk. Why? Don’t really know the man, but he seems the modern day Midas. Whatever he touches turns to gold. He made an upheaval in the battery market, the mobile market, the energy market. The man is (allegedly) an inventor like me, or he can see proper innovation just like Steve Jobs. How is this a bad thing? Consider the news that he was getting involved in social media. Why not? I do not know if it is a bad idea. But he has the dough to become part of it. Yet the Sydney Morning Herald gives us ‘Elon Musk launches $58 billion hostile takeover of Twitter’ (at https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/elon-musk-launches-hostile-takeover-of-twitter-20220414-p5admv.html) as such lets take a look at what constitutes a hostile takeover? The definition gives us “A hostile takeover occurs when an acquiring company attempts to take over a target company against the wishes of the target company’s management. An acquiring company can achieve a hostile takeover by going directly to the target company’s shareholders or fighting to replace its management” is this true? CBS gives us ‘Elon Musk offers to buy Twitter for $43 billion’, so who is giving us the truth and who is giving a stakeholder a blow job? You think this is rude? You ain’t seen nothing yet. We can argue until the sun goes down, but the setting of finance is clear. If a company is worth it, or could become worth it, you buy it. This has been the case in many occasions. Yet no one is saying that about Microsoft and Blizzard. There we get ‘Activision Blizzard/Microsoft Deal Discouraged by Letter Penned by SOC Investment Group’, how quaint.

So it was today when I saw (at https://www.reuters.com/technology/twitter-adopts-poison-pill-fight-musk-2022-04-15/) ‘Twitter adopts ‘poison pill’ as challenger to Musk emerges’, it is the Guardian version where we see “The method, known as a “poison pill” in the finance world, suggests Twitter will fight Musk to prevent a hostile takeover. It would go into effect if a shareholder were to acquire more than 15% of the company in a deal not approved by the board and expires 14 April 2023.”You see my issue is with the ‘hostile takeover’ part. The guardian gives us those goods with “Jack Dorsey, Twitter founder and former CEO, noted in a tweet on Friday that such surprise purchases are always a risk for the company. “As a public company, Twitter has always been ‘for sale’,” he said. “That’s the real issue.” Musk is already facing legal action for his Twitter purchases, with one investor suing the Tesla executive in a potential class action lawsuit for failing to disclose his buy-up of shares before the required deadline to do so. The lawsuit comes as Musk faces a number of investigations by the Securities and Exchange Commission for his investment activities, including insider trading allegations related to his own tweets.” So we see ‘insider trading’, we see ‘hostile takeover’ but we are given no real evidence of either. Merely the word ‘allegations’ that everyone is overlooking. 

The stage becomes even weirder as we consider the actions that Microsoft unleashed on the gaming industry and it is casually trivialised by too many media outlets. 

In all this the statement “he wanted to release its “extraordinary potential” to support free speech and democracy across the world.” Is trivialised by “Twitter’s board on Friday unanimously approved a plan that would allow existing shareholders to buy stocks at a substantial discount in order to dilute the holdings of new investors”, there is no real setting of who these board members are, the media seemingly forgot about that part. These members that include Bret Taylor (SalesForce), Parag Agrawal (CEO Twitter), Mimi Alemayehou (Mastercard), Egon Durban (Silver Lake), Martha Lane Fox (House of Lords), Dr. Fei-Fei Li (Stanford), Patrick Pichette (Google), David Rosenblatt and Robert Zoellick (AllianceBernstein Holding L.P.) there was a unanimous objection to the purchase by Elon Musk and no media outlet had anything from these members with the simple question ‘Why oppose?’. There might be a very valid reason, but I and all others were not informed, so what gives?

We can speculate on why it was done. Elon Musk sees that the US is going after the billionaires. As such he might be buying anything he can to drop the tax rift, and lets face it, he has been turning things to gold and Twitter is a golden idea. So whilst we see all kinds of objections on how analysts see (and say) things like “KeyBanc Capital analyst Justin Patterson downgraded the social media company in the wake of Elon Musk’s buyout proposal. Patterson cut his rating to sector weight, after being at overweight since January 2021, saying that the potential for the Musk bid to “go up in smoke” will turn investor focus on a more challenging macro environment that elevates downside risk to financial estimates.” I personally honestly do not know what will happen, but when a person buys a company, a person that has transformed several companies into powerhouses, I wonder what really is going on. It could be simple, it could be complex, yet the larger station is that people laughed at Tesla and now we see “As of April 2022 Tesla has a market cap of $1.018 Trillion. This makes Tesla the world’s 6th most valuable company by market cap according to our data.” So as I see it, the joke is on them. What was an idea is now 6th on the most valuable companies on the market and that is behind Apple, Microsoft, Aramco, Alphabet, and Amazon and as I gave voice to Microsoft, there is every chance that it will head of Microsoft in the next 3 years. And that is whilst no one has a clue where Meta will end, because they will become part of the top 7 soon enough (2024), and that too is out into the market. So I have questions and the media is not asking the board members of Twitter, or Elon Musk a clear set of questions. And all that before someone decides to ask KeyBanc Capital a few uncomfortable questions. So what is in the name Twitter, what is in the name Elon Musk and what is in the shares game being played now. No matter what is happening, I feel certain that the media will not properly inform us, that mush seems a personal given. Yet in all this we see the approximation of “to support free speech and democracy across the world”, it seems to me that Elon Musk is giving us options, options in mobile technology and energy technology. Who else has been giving us that? I see questions and no one asking them, it is weird, is it not?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, Media, Politics

Inclination of letters

We tend to act in certain ways. I am no exception (as you are about to find out). Yet, before we have a go at the BBC and another go at the ICIJ, lets take another look at how Microsoft has FAILED its audience. Now, this is not out in the open and I do not really reveal what has happened, but I am making a jab at it as it will set fortunes to Adobe and this is for their eyes only. So, there I was watching several presentations in the last 24 hours (from several sources) and something occurred to me, it was the third time when I heard something. My mind started to race and suddenly I wondered why Microsoft had left all this in the open, unsolved, unattended for a DECADE. It was so out in the open that I was wondering what on earth they were doing. Yes, their 365 solution is all about making sure their customers pay, and that I fine, but to leave gaps in their office solution out in the open for over a decade, how stupid is that. Yet, no fears. Adobe will fill up that hole nicely with their adjusted suite of programs which will start a new age in corporate needs and Microsoft will be looked at with the look of ‘How could you have been this stupid to such a degree?’ Yet I will not care, I will be giggling in a corner. Watching the wannabe’s seek jobs and seek solutions. 

So now we get to the main event. It is the BBC article ‘Hidden wealth of one of Putin’s ‘inner circle’ revealed’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61028866). There is so much wrong here, I almost do not know where to start, so the beginning it is. 

We see from the start “They reveal how a Swiss tattoo artist was falsely named as owner of a company that transferred over $300m (£230m) to firms linked to Suleiman Kerimov. They also show how $700m of transactions – and the secret ownership of luxury properties – went undetected. The investigation exposes failures of the banking system and the obstacles impeding Western sanctions.” It sounds nice, it really does. But lets take a closer look, shall we? 

Transactions worth $700m linked to Suleiman Kerimov and his closest business associates were reported as suspicious by banks between 2010 and 2015” So was anything done? Were ACTUAL crimes committed? ‘Suspicious’ is merely a word that shows no side towards legality. Then we get “Swiss accountant Alexander Studhalter posed as owner of properties actually owned by Mr Kerimov” So were laws broken? Was anything illegal done? The BBC shows itself to be as big a loser as the ICIJ shown it is. And when we get “Mr Kerimov was the secret owner of properties on the French Riviera and in London, including the most expensive terraced property ever sold in the UK” we see again the small setting ‘If he was a real secret owner, how did they find out?’ But the larger stage is whether LAWS were broken. The BBC does not really inform us of this, do they? They merely illuminate how useless journalists have become. Who is Suleiman Kerimov? I actually do not care. He is not part of my life, I never expect that to happen. But the BBC, the player claiming to be so trustworthy, where are they? Where is the list of broken laws? Where is the EVIDENCE showing us that laws were broken in Switzerland, the UK, and France? We can grasp at the Oligarch foundation all we want, but if we are a nation of laws we need to be shown the laws that were optionally (and allegedly) transgressed upon. So when we are finally given “Experts say Western countries have a lot of work to do because, for years, they have taken a lax approach to the fight against dirty money and failed to hold banks to account.” We see a clear path to something I have been stating for DECADES. Internationally tax laws need to be overhauled and politicians were lax, politicians were all about inaction and now we see the BS tap turned open all whilst we are not given the real deal. What laws were transgressed upon? I reckon that the answer will be none. I cannot tell because I am not a lawyer, I am not a tax lawyer and I am not an attorney. I have my Master of Intellectual property and when (or if) Amazon (or Google) buys my IP, my ship will arrive and I can retire nicely. Yet in this I have questions and the BBC answers none of them, so when we are finally given “In 2020, Swiru Holding accepted its involvement in evading the tax and was fined €1.4m and made to pay another €10.3m to settle the case. Mr Kerimov’s lawyer put out a statement saying that the French courts had “officially dismissed the allegations made by the former Nice Prosecutor against Suleiman Kerimov of having carried out money-laundering operations.”” We basically see a fine less then €12,000,000 for avoiding a taxable amount of €127,000,000 so as it seems crime pays and that is the part we do get to see. So when we are given how $700m of transactions were seemingly ‘undetected’ were laws broken? We are shown the transgression of 20% which was dealt with, but we have no information on the large amount and whether laws were broken. How come? We are given “The transaction was just one in a series of wire transfers carried out from 2010 to 2015 totalling $700m reported to US authorities as suspicious”, yet there is a large gap between ‘suspicious’ and ‘criminal’ and neither the ICIJ or the BBC give us anything on that, merely the alleged indignation. So is the BBC as useless as the ICIJ is showing itself to be? That is my question and I feel that this is not on James Oliver, Nassos Stylianou or Steve Swann. I believe that it is Francesca Mary Unsworth, chief editor of BBC News that needs to come forward and do some explaining on what should be seen as reporting and what should be seen as trivial filtering of news. 

I will let you decide what is what, but I reckon that the entire ICIJ mess needs a long hard look by a few people in all kinds of business walks.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics