September 18, 2013 · 21:13

Bankrupt or failed? It’s all the same!

This topic applies to two events that are hitting two groups. The first one is about one of the final nails that are getting hammered into the coffin that is laughingly called the US economy.

Yet, what is actually in play? On one hand there are the mentions that the US economy is on the rise, so why is the debt limit such a strong issue?

The second issue is one that is playing in the UK, but about that later.

For these issues we need to consider a few chess pieces, that had been ignored in the past and there is only so much you can do before those ‘forgotten’ pieces rear their ugly head. Yes, I agree that there are signs that the US economy is again slightly on the rise. More jobs are offered, people are getting back onto the horse of labouring enterprises. There is however the other side. The government seems to ignore the need to get their budget in order, they ignore that there is a consequence to non-stop borrowing. Excuse upon excuse, story upon story and where does this lead?

The issues got visibility after Sky News reported on a story that involved the interview with Treasury Secretary Jack Lew. Reuters quoted him stating “We cannot afford for Congress to gamble with the full faith and credit of the United States,” Lew told the Economic Club of Washington, a business forum. Yes, he is correct in that, yet the strong story to hunker down on excessive spending is not loudly voiced. That same situation is what the Dutch government is currently facing. The story there was that it will never be like is was ever again is the story in the Dutch case. The pre 2008 life style is gone and likely gone forever. It will take a small nation like the Netherlands 5-10 years to get their spending under control, but it will never be as good as it was before. Why mention the Netherlands? With 16 million people they are at 5% of the American population. Their debt is around 430 billion. This is less than 2% of the national debt the US has and they have now announced austerity measures to reduce their deficit. The measures will be a helping of bitter fruit to nearly all Dutch. The total US debt is said to be around 60 trillion dollars, which boils down to $9000 for every person on the planet.  Basically, the annual US Currency degradation is larger than the total debt of the Netherlands and the Dutch are looking at the next 10-15 years of financial hardship, and then only if the economy has picked up to the smallest extent by the end of 2015. If not, then those 15 years might not be enough. So the summary ‘the good times are gone forever’ seems amply put. More important, as the US debt devaluates quicker than the annual interest payments, is there any way out left for the US but bankruptcy?

The RABO bank director had made a comment that ‘all will have to tighten the belt’. Sounds nice, but let’s not forget that financial institutions playing fast and loose with other people’s money was cause to most of these issues. The second link is that he is not just mentioning the massive debt, yet a small mention on how the Dutch have such a good retirement treasury. It is another first attempt to get their fingers on the one place that was supposed to keep a population safe. (at http://nos.nl/audio/552545-directeur-rabobank-we-moeten-met-zn-allen-de-broekriem-aanhalen.html)

The US seems to ignore again and again that there is a limit to spending, so the lesson the Dutch are learning the hard way is one that American is currently not ready to face. They might say yes, there is a limit, but then state that they are nowhere near these limits. I disagree! I reckon that the point of no return was reached in 2011. The outstanding debts are now a matter of more than just multiple generations. The fact that we are given stories about returning economies are one thing, the part on how taxation must be paid (and is not) is silenced again and again. the rich move away their fortunes to the Bahamas or other places that will keep it ‘safe’, in addition corporate America is doing the very same thing by moving their ventures to places like Ireland, which allowed several corporations to pay less than 0.2% in taxation. How can the US survive when people without jobs cannot pay taxation and the super-rich move outside of the reach of the US treasury so they do not have to? These steps are socially undesirable and in my mind it is a form of treason. How can a company hide behind the US as a shield stating they have rights and then move away as they shun their own duties? These ignored elements are part of the problem that is likely to soon leave the US in a state of bankruptcy.

The US claims to be a nation of laws, which is fair enough. I think that they forgot that when greed calls the shots, the law becomes a shield for criminals, whilst becoming an anchor for those they are supposed to protect. It is a topsy-turvy world indeed.

So as we move towards the next 8 weeks of uncertainty, as the Democrats and Republicans are moved into a space that is more polarised then sunglasses, we will see that some will get a few coins from the jittery movement of the markets. Also take notice on how some of these people proclaim on how this is all so much unfair and how spending just a little more will save the people. No! It will not. It has not been a solution for almost 2 administrations. It is time to look for an actual solution, instead of prolonging an absolute failure.

So time to take a look at the UK now!

They have their own deficit, but more importantly, they do have a different set of problems. The NHS was at some point to have some kind of system that would record some forms of information. (Or so it would seem).

The NHS IT system is a failure. So much so, that it is the biggest failure in UK history. I reckon it is big enough to be the biggest failure in European history, but that seems too much like splitting hairs. The program had cost 10 billion pound, which makes it a 0.5% of the total British debt. That takes some doing to be such a failure.

Why are these two events connected?

Apart from the usual suspect that both involved politicians, it seems to me that both situations require a clear vision of what needs to be done. In both places they are lacking. It actually goes further than that, however for that part, let us take a look at the NHS laptop.

The Guardian is giving it some attention at (http://www.theguardian.com/society/2013/sep/18/nhs-records-system-10bn)

To do this, we will need to look at a few quotes that were made in this regard.

“MPs on the public accounts committee said final costs are expected to increase beyond the existing £9.8bn because new regional IT systems for the NHS, introduced to replace the National Programme for IT, are also being poorly managed and are riven with their own contractual wrangles.” This is one of the stronger quotes. We are looking at three distinct parts.

1. ‘Own contractual wrangles’ looks to me that the wrong people were involved in the contractual parts. Too much baggage or too little know-how, no matter how you twist this, when the contract is about ‘disputes‘ the people are not linked to a contract, but driven apart though paper (not unlike less successful marriages). This all makes for a nasty ‘separation’.

2. ‘new regional IT systems‘ and ‘being poorly managed‘ means that this is again a track of issues that are set to how good one’s PowerPoint presentation looks, not on how well an infrastructure can be managed. It is a fatal flaw in any IT project.

3. ‘Final costs are expected to increase beyond the existing £9.8bn‘ Like that is a surprise? This means that the costing’s were never properly done. Even in an age where the UK had a 3 year bad run with the economy, it seems to me that proper setting out a charter was never done. No charter, no limits and no results. It is again the same story we see too often when interested parties see the government not as a customer, but as a gravy train with no end in sight.

The IT is no different from any other business, when they see a governmental place where the gravy train just runs through it and they hope they are the station the train will stop. In my mind I see these places as a spot with too many managers and not enough workers. This is often the situation in many organisations. When it is in a commercial organisation it is a nuisance, and if they do not bring home the bacon, they are often let go at some point. With governmental organisations it is a different thing, more important, when it is done on regional area’s where they all want to be ‘in charge’ it adds up to nothing less than a death sentence to any structure that does not have commercial goals. It will collapse onto itself.

Here is the comparison with the US government. Like the NHS both are spending huge amounts they do not have to reflect upon. Not unlike the US their incomes are going down fast as tax havens take away the annual incomes the UK/US used to have. So in all, we are a looking at an engine that is supposed to run whilst we allowed the fuel tank to be external and no longer attached to the car. How stupid is that approach?

Richard Bacon, who had co-written a book on failing government projects, said that the NHS’s particular problems stem from the original contracts signed before 2002.  It comes from a book he wrote with Christopher Hope called Conundrum. I am not disputing his view; it does however show that 10 years later a situation is holding the UK back. Perhaps a better contract team is/was needed? This all reads like my first item I mentioned. Nice that someone from Norfolk can see the issue that the London bigwig’s can’t be bothered to identify on a good day.

The issue I see is that the contracts might have been OK or acceptable at that time, but government situations require a different scope, and signing something that is holding back the UK 10 years later is really a bad contract (from the NHS point of view). So people were hired who lacked that same insight. It is not just on what they were instructed to do, I am questioning whether the right people were ever asked to question the outstanding approach to the long term extent it was needed to be looked at.

Too many are trying the same approach to other scenario’s, which is fair enough, yet those who should be in charge are NOT thinking this through. The mind is lazy, when something works, use it again, I get that! In this case it was not a solution and neither is it when it comes down to spending again and again to shove forward an economy that requires $10 for a return of $0.10. It is bad business through and through.

The one quote from the Guardian article is the crux ‘The government was keen to distance itself from the problem.‘

That is just not an option. Moreover, if it wanted that, it should have never gone near this issue to begin with. If we look at the BBC in 2011 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15014288) the following quote comes forward “Health Secretary Andrew Lansley will say: “Labour’s IT programme let down the NHS and wasted taxpayers’ money by imposing a top-down IT system on the local NHS, which didn’t fit their needs. We will be moving to an innovative new system driven by local decision-making.”

Whilst in July 2010 the issue stated by the BBC (at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10557996) was: “Mr Lansley also announced he expected all NHS trusts, which run hospitals and mental health units, to get foundation status by 2013.” So what did get done? More important, it states nothing about abandoning this ‘new’ system at the moment of release.

It all gets a little more hairy when you consider the quote in that very same article ‘Professor Chris Ham, chief executive of the King’s Fund think-tank, said: “It is a very radical programme. We have never seen anything like this since the inception of the NHS in 1948.“‘

It seems to me that this was another PowerPoint approach by those who talk nice but have no idea where the keyboard is stored. Certain quality questions should be asked from those who can only think in election terms. These systems are supposed to outlast them all. This is an issue which has, not once been properly dealt with in either the US or the UK.

How much more tax money will be spent on trains that lead to a place called nowhere?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

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

September 16, 2013 · 04:31

The marks of trade

Even as we look into an abyss of unsettling economic prospects, we notice that many of the gadgets providing entities are still playing the high game for now. The fact of the matter is that even though many places are in recession, some places seem to be getting through and only a few are on the path of former comfort, all of the people are looking at some light point in their life, whether it is for them personally, or for the entire family. However, in the US there are the upcoming Thanksgiving Day and Christmas. A large portion of the world relies on Christmas day with a few places having an added feast of Saint Nicholas. Basically three moments the retail industry relies on these days to stop them from turning into Lemmings and run of the nearest cliff (could be an excellent game).

The following players (some of them) are:

  • Sony is going for the Playstation 4
  • Microsoft is going for the Xbox One
  • Nokia (a Microsoft company) is aiming at the Lumia 1020
  • Apple has a league of ‘new’ options, with all kinds of letters (and/or numbers).

So if these places have trademarks, then are they about protecting their recognisable design or expression. Yet, is that true, or is that what they proclaim they do?

What if their recognisable design becomes:

  • Playstation 4 – An average renewed system where they forgot about harddrive space?
  • XBox One – The place where your privacy truly went lost forever
  • Lumia 1020 – Another model, now with 41Mp camera, but where to store all those pics?
  • iPhone – more of the same and additional ways to run out of battery power before lunch.

So whist the brand (Apple, Microsoft, Nokia, Sony) have the one story, their products are getting different labels, and it is likely that the junior marketeers as stated ‘Junior’ seem to be not on par with HQ as it goes for the mission of the brand, and drop the ball all over as it comes to the product. When I see the trade shows, as I saw the stories and the way they try to hype the concept, I do wonder whether some of these ‘soldiers’ are on proper par with the concepts of trademark and long term damage that they seem to invoke.

So let us go over these ‘Trademarks’ in that order.

Playstation 4 – This is the one system I have decent levels of faith in. It’s initially weaknesses has been dealt with. The too small hard drive can now be upgraded. Mind you the 500 Gb should last a while, however, as 500Gb to 1 Tb is a mere $25 extra, so I wonder why 500Gb was chosen. If you spend an additional $100, you can upgrade immediately to 2Tb. I agree it is overkill, however upgrading once at start could prevent a 1-2 day loss down the line. I did it with my PS3 and never regretted it. ‘Sony, where storage was left at Kennard’s!’

XBox One – There have been loads of messages about online all the time, or even once a day. This has now been ‘removed’ as an issue as Microsoft no longer requires it. You see, it is so much better to get these people connected with a carrot then with a shotgun, so now the console comes with a free digital copy of FIFA 14. Which still needs to be downloaded! Whether this is only once, or the start to get people online in a sneakier way is yours to debate or conclude. Gamers for the most (the multi-player group) need to be online; the rest could be if the game is good. Many of the issues are about digital privacy fears. Some are realistic, some are speculated rumours, but a large portion is just absurd conspiracy theory. There was a rumour that deliveries were down, but this was denied by two sources. So in case you heard the 1 million less consoles on launch day, be sure to check your sources. I personally believe that the invasion of privacy was the biggest blast this trademark took. The additional issue of online once a day did not help, especially knowing how irritating broadband has been in plenty of places outside of the US. It would be nice to just dump this on Don Mattrick, yet I feel that this was not just his call and those above him should start taking a long hard look at the population of gamers. Calling this an ‘entertainment system’ instead of a ‘gaming console’ might seem nice and claiming that it will make you win the war is also nice, but the reality is that this multi-billion dollar market is all about gamers, not knowing that population will turn out to be ultimately fatal to the Microsoft XB-1 brand, no matter what else it can do.

Lumia 1020 – This is a new contraption. It has two sides. One, it is really fun to use (I tried it) and the camera abilities blew me away. Yet, the other side is that it is linked to Microsoft and they will have a few issues to deal with down the line (not just that weird OS). The device itself is no longer a Nokia device, or not in the traditional sense. Nokia was always the number one brand for me and it lost appeal as it was too slow moving into the smart phone world. They are coming back strong, but a 2 Gb ram when you have a 41Mp camera? Seems a little short sighted. So, they added a free 7 Gb SkyDrive option. Oh, wait? Is that not the place from Microsoft who gave their access to the NSA? So what about your privacy, not to mention the data usage price?

As you see, we are getting more and more towards the new Microsoft Trademark ‘Microsoft, because privacy is just an illusion!’ Is that fair? Not sure! You see, in the end I do not care whether the NSA gets access to my data. My worry is that overall, cyber criminals have more resources and abilities then we see at federal places. You know those small, massively underfunded places where they try to stop cybercrime (read FBI). The fact that the NSA gets access means that there is external access, which means that criminals get to have a go too. To that part I do object.

iPhone – the device that truly revolutionised smartphone and mobile usage is now going towards mobile phones in the same way Russia showed diversity for the S-300 (22 letters added over 30 years). Apple seems to forget to truly move their battery forward and in other fields of smartphones the iPhone is no longer regarded as the heralded winner. The device wants to be too much of everything and ends up coming up short in many of the fields they are in. So will the new Apple Trademark read ‘Apple – Master of none, drowning in some?’

There are plenty more devices out and about for the expensive festive season, yet it seems to me that some of the players entered that field by using spokespeople with a golf handicap equalling their IQ, or is that the other way round? When the digital world is entering the field where more and more possible ‘new’ consumers are updated through the net, it seems that their marketing and party lines need to get a massive overhaul and it should all get a much better mentor system then it currently seems to have.

Trademarks!

They might be seen as great assets, yet when those trademarks get assigned by the audience (example: Vodafail, because Vodafone just doesn’t connect) and it gives your brand itself a twist moving its customers towards to competition, you know you have problems coming (and many of these from your own board of directors).

 

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media

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

September 12, 2013 · 03:13

Foreign and Domestic

America is under attack. The question becomes whether this is a new one, or one that has been ongoing. There are several thoughts and they all, too some extent link together.

FOREIGN
The foreign groups ‘attacking’ America include both China and Russia. They are both using to some extent their own puppets. Let us call them Syria and Iran for now. Russia’s pulling the strings of Iran. No matter how the strings are pulled, no matter how acts are ‘begotten’, the issue is that Iran has been given the one carrot it cannot ignore. It is the support to get a nuclear power plant placed within Iran. Russia gets a string of benefits; this includes making America look bad, making their claims fall short, which according to the speakers in the Kremlin will look pretty good on the front page of Izvestiya (Известия). China is now giving support to Syria as Syria in a last moment of desperation plays the ‘oversight on my Chemical Romance stockpile’ card. The question becomes, whether it is just last minute, or certain cards were offered during the G20 to be played, because any of this, must seemingly be cast on making the US President to not look bad (the view projected after the fact will be an entirely different issue).

To support certain new options goes decently further than just the ad-hoc statement by United States Secretary of State John Kerry. These issues have been playing for some time and most issues started to accelerate as we all saw in the news. Many of the top tier papers reported these events. So how come that these events are still seen as a foreign attack?

That would be a fair question!

China and Russia had been blocking many of the events needed to make any stance against the indecent slaughter of the people of Syria (on both sides). I could cleverly state that Russia and China removed the ‘s’ and used laughter to block the US and other nations to get anything done there. The fact that the Bushehr plant is announced to get a new baby brother as reported by Polina Garaev “Putin will present Rohani with new deal worth $800 million for new batch of S-300, construction of new nuclear reactor at Bushehr” gives additional weight on the Iranian ‘support voice’ in regards to the Syrian question. Whether this will become the Alice Cooper nightmare remains to be seen, it is however clear that the S-300 additions do mean that they fear the response by Israel towards this new billion dollar baby. Trust me when I say that there will be well beyond $200 million in additional fees for consultancy, education and other requirements. The one part I do like about this all is that Iran seems to not trust their own propaganda on the ‘advanced’ Mershad from 2010 and prefers to rely on solid Russian technology as it was developed in 1978 (sometimes life throws you a nice juicy steak to blog about). Still, if Israel cannot get there via the air, I think I have found a way to super charge the fuel rods to melt them down all by themselves (pretty much stopping both reactors from ever working again). It should take only three elements and I got the idea from a snow globe, go figure!

All four players in this parade are anti-American; their union is not because they like one another, but because of their individual needs united in non-American likes. That does not make for an attack. That does not mean they are attacking America. That part had been shown in http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23845800, which is only one of many newscasts on that topic. In addition there is http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/world/middleeast/new-us-envoy-to-un-strongly-condemns-russia.html. This could be seen as a first level of evidence that the United Nation Security Council (UNSC) was nothing more than a political tool to stop any kind of condemnation and the lowest forms of support for the victims of the chemical attack.

Are there doubts?

Yes, even though some claims came that there was ‘evidence’, I am still having certain doubts in regards to the actual attacker. When a State secretary goes on a world tour visiting heads of state showing ‘secret’ evidence, parts are not right. It is shown to a group that is too large. Instead of giving it all to the media letting EVERYONE publish it would have been a much better policy, it could have had the result that the UK would have been in favour of actions. The delays, the Intel that WOULD have been there from those big boxes high in the sky, (commonly known as satellites), could have shown much of the evidence. Yet, personally, I am not completely convinced that they were attacks ordered by Assad (directly or indirectly), which I admit is a personal view and based on gut feeling more then anything else. Is it possible that some misguided Assad supporter did this? Yes, that is a definite possibility. I dealt with these thoughts in a previous blog called ‘tactical choices of inactivity‘. I have always believed that Al-Qaeda is only about Al-Qaeda and their goals. It was never about Syria for them (I personally believe this). The theatre of war in play gives them ample opportunity to get to USA and Israel. There is a chance that the number of military opposition leaders, who knew about chemical caches seems larger than most considered, which means that others knew too. This entire new play is as I see it is not about the fear from Syria AND Russia that unwanted elements might want to get things going out of hand. It is likely that this is already the case and a USA offensive would stop any chance of that part getting a certain level of control. It could be that this danger is in play, meaning that both Russia and Syria want to get out of the way fast, allowing the new diplomatic play to proceed, whist the US gets left holding the bag.

No matter how this plays out in any diplomatic way. We will see soon enough that Syrian victims will get overly victimised soon enough with added by-lines on how America never intervened.

DOMESTIC
In my view, I see that the domestic enemy of America seems to fit into three distinct categories. First of all, this is not about lone wolf terrorists, or any terrorist groups, they fall in the foreign enemy group. No, the Americans do not get to be that lucky as such.

The first enemy group are those libertarians hiding behind ‘freedom of information‘. This group is for the most the direct one we see, receiving all kinds of media support and protection. They do not need to fear the House of Lords and some Leveson report, but they do ‘fear’ what the NSA had been doing. The electronic Frontier foundation did instigate a case which they won. Sky News covered this at http://www.skynews.com.au/world/article.aspx?id=905204. My issue is the quote “as part of the agency’s effort to track potential terror plots”

In my mind, when (not if) the next attack on America succeeds, then the EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) should MANDATORY in the light of ‘freedom of information’ reveal the names of all their supporters in this case to the family members of the victims the next attack has. There will be no carefully phrased denials; there will be no talk about ‘we so sorry’. I want to see those names clearly shown on-line. In addition, the EFF board members John Perry Barlow, Brian Behlendorf, John Buckman et al will have to visit all the funerals of those victims and look the survivors and family members of the deceased straight in the eyes. I wonder how ‘ideological’ they will feel at that time. Interesting that they (as far as I could tell) have not been too active in protecting people from places like Microsoft and others when we see articles like http://rt.com/usa/yahoo-microsoft-campaign-political-862/

That is another matter, which is ALL about personal gain (by those corporations) and not about keeping the American people safe. Another article is http://tv.msnbc.com/2013/06/13/gamers-fear-microsofts-xbox-one-could-be-future-of-prism-after-nsa-revelations, I do not agree with that article. That is not about some PRISM project, it is about Microsoft making sure that Microsoft gets more and others less. That is about greed and spawning INACTIVITY to the future new developers (unless it is in the hands of Microsoft). With gaming as a hundred billion dollar market, and as the gamers market surpassed the porn industry as a revenue group, did you expect these events not to happen?

I personally see the EFF as a sanctimonious group at best, of course others have their own view which are quite opposite of mine and as such they are very welcome to have that view, because I do believe in freedom of speech. I do have an issue with it when you endanger the safety of a nation.

The second group are the economic leprechauns (‘leper cons’ might be a better term). These are not the good and fiddledy diddledy types walking around with a cauldron of 100 gold coins. These are greed driven monsters in need of more and more at the expense of everything and everyone. They will enable their voice to whatever keeps them playing the game. The attack on Syria would have meant that their profits go down, so they would do whatever they could to stop it by forcing a diplomatic solution view. It seems such a humane view, yet, they will avoid taxation by moving funds offshore, they avoid taxation by becoming a virtual entity and they will prolong their game by removing your rights and your future. I personally believe that in many cases banks are on that side too. Did you forget on how in the lowest moments over 3.5% of mortgages are added to the foreclosure listings? Why are THEY a domestic enemy of America? Are sound business strategies suddenly outlawed? No, they are not, yet there have been too much personal and corporate gain preferences in the past and war is usually bad for business, unless you sell ammunition. In that regard my words might seem to be empty in the view of certain people, yet consider that America is an ideal by the people and for the people. How come that those views are so often drowned out by corporate greed, to give view to what is good for corporations and their stakeholders?

The third group is the most dangerous of all, it is a wild-card called ‘the self-centred person’. They are traitors, manipulators, journalists and/or politicians. The reader could even see me as one of these types of people. This group is dangerous as they could also be members of the first or second group. Yet, whilst wearing one of the other two cloaks they are only in it for the good of self. Edward Snowden falls in this group. Too much ‘evidence’ showed that he was all in it for himself. This was never about freedom of information or the security of America, it was about his life style, his future, his fortune and he was so willing to sell America down the drain in the process. The evidence? If that was truly about some level of honour, he would never have gone to Hong Kong or Russia. Several countries do not have an extradition treatment with USA, the fact that he ran to nations who are direct opposed to the American way of life should be seen in that light. Bradley Manning basically does not fit this group very well. There is a valid concern that he was misguided in his choices, when the choice was there he just gave it all away to Wiki-Leaks. In the smallest of defence of Manning, it seems that he at least was never out for personal gain; his ideology was, as I see it utterly misguided, which makes him the odd duck out. The recipients were however very willing to push his buttons for what they believed was a ‘righteous cause’, manipulative steps to say the least.

The problem with my own view (I will admit to that), is that my view has evolved from information given to me from journalistic and other sources, whilst I know that many in this ‘game’ have their own agenda to maintain. That means that it is about a target they have. The time of truly neutral journalism has been over for some time and I fear it will never return, which makes for an interesting view of the first amendment. The freedom of speech would become the freedom of representation of those we service, because the board of directors in a media group are often linked to other endeavours, making their freedom of speech a lesser item.

America is in my humble opinion under attack, and Syria is just the new stage where the American chess pieces are about to be moved, whilst some of them will be removed. I wonder where we all stand on the 1st of January 2014. That date will be soon upon us and that view might partially depend on the steps the growing New World Order coalition of Russia, China and India will take.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics, Science

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

September 6, 2013 · 13:20

The Syrian principle

Syria has been on the forefront of most minds. Some look at it to solve it, some to see stability as a reason and some, or so it seems see Syria as a solution to a second game that has stages in play. So the question from this moment becomes whether Syria is now altered into a stack of dominoes? If we apply the domino principle to certain events in the Middle East, then the question becomes, how fair is that assessment?

First there is the fact that Brahimi, envoy to the UN has been very ‘outspoken’ in getting Iran involved. This is not me questioning Mr Brahimi as to why he wanted Iran to be part of it anyway. The question I have is valid, yet, I will admit that Mr Lakhdar Brahimi has an impressive list of achieved levels of expertise and as such we should regard him as the NHL coach bringing back the Stanley cup more than once. Like Jack Adams and Tommy Ivan. As a true blue Capitals fan, I still think the Red Wings suck (massively). Yet, these two coaches brought home Stanley three times each. They needed the players, but the coaches made it happen. We hate the team, we respect the coaches (it’s a screwed up world, I know). Such is life! Lakhdar Brahimi is in the same league. We do not like, or even care for the players at present, but the mitigation has made it happen in the past and as such we will watch how the play unfolds.

The mentioned play does have a lingering after taste. When Russia set into motion another Nuclear Power plant, when their support to Iran was given and they requested Iran to make certain moves, was this the upcoming play they had started to begin with?

Of course Russia has the resources, the power, the persuasion and the economic interests to make this all happen. It does however bring the question who or what Iran is actually representing? Syria, the Syrian people or just themselves?

Does this reflect on Lakhdar Brahimi?

I do not believe that this is the case. His work for the Elders, his work as a board member for the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute as well as his work for both the UN and the Arab League. He is trying to solve an issue and he will use any ethically accepted method to make the members to his party Waltz for peace. The question validly remains what the invitees have in mind. If we see the evidence through time and space that Russia cares about Russia, plain and simple, then their acts are not wrong, or not wanted, yet when the dance is not about the dance but about trademarking the fashion they wear, then who are the real dancers and what do they stand for?

Russia is not alone. We could ask somewhat similar questions of the USA. The UK is out of reach as they started the parliament step. The result is not one they wanted, but they stood by it. It was an admirable step, but not the greatest moment in David Cameron’s career.

Does it matter?

It does, but for different reasons you could imagine. We are all getting in a world that is getting more and more complicated. Like the inefficient use by some managers to hang onto ‘bullet point statements‘ in their memo’s, we genome in an unrealistic way the issues in play. At times a 2000 word document cannot be tweeted in a 144 character statement; the unrealistic approach that this always works will mean that people judge on inaccurate and incomplete information. In case of the Middle East it is not one, but hundreds of documents on that size. A tweet will not get us there and at times we need a person to make the choices to keep the story minimised, clear and correctly complete. Here Lakhdar Brahimi has his work cut out.

This is where the current situation just gets murky. No matter how clean the presiding speaker is, we know that there are dancers like Russia in play. Doing the right thing for the wrong reasons still corrupts the idea, the notion and the act. What to do?

I do not know, but I do know that the talks will not just be about Syrian victims and Chemical weapons. It will have attached talks of Iranian nuclear power and a few more non-disclosed points of discussion.

What is an interesting development, which weirdly enough is not getting the level of exposure through the PRESS are the acts of King Abdullah II of Jordan and Pope Francis (the Bishop of Rome, in case you did not know) as they are trying to find solution through dialogue. Yes, I know that many others are in favour of this. Consider that Jordan is currently getting pounded on lack or resources as they deal with close to 1.5 million refugees. Still, His Royal Highness is not hiding behind others, or seeking an easy way out. No, he is hoping that dialogues will bring a solution. THAT is character of the highest level!

I would like that talks will solve is this issue, yet my sense of reality tells me it is no longer an option when two teams are so polarised. I am no standard to be based upon, but people like Pope Francis and King Abdullah II should be heralded for taking such a strong stance of principle, especially when we see what their stance is costing the Jordan government. Consider that we saw European nations back down lately for issues a lot less than that.

The world is a lot more complex for all players involved. We the people must accept this and we must accept the responsibility of knowing a lot more. If we do not, then we do not get to blame our representation and their choices for action, because we did not know. Ignorance is NOT a defence!

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

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

September 2, 2013 · 13:06

A plea for our future

This is a call to students, teachers and companies all over. It is to the group that work in the field of chemistry, environments and other areas. We need their help and we need it more desperately then even they can imagine.

The issue is Fukushima!

Yes, we all know issues happened, we know mistakes were made and we know that nature itself has had an impact on the events. Fukushima stands alone, but is not the only danger we face. Yes, there are al kinds of environmentalists cheering and partying on how the bad, evil and unneeded nuclear power solution is just not a solution. This is not about their inherent lack of insight. This is about finding a solution that works!

We need to find a way to diminish radiation and a way to clean up irradiated water. Yes, I get it, there are in some conditions options where we do not need to rely on nuclear power. Yet, consider that wind farming is not always an option. The London array consists of 175 huge windmills and they give less than 50% of an above average sized nuclear reactor. Yes, the Aswan Dam is Hydroelectricity gives of a lot more then that, yet many nations lack the options to get such a solution (it’s not like every nation has a waterfall or a Nile to dam in). So Nuclear power is here to stay (for now).

Why the plea? Japan is facing more and more hazardous events with the Fukushima power plant. The water around it seems to be getting irradiated and the radiation levels in the area are too high and in some places rising. A person would get killed there in less than 4 hours. We need to find new solutions!

Not just for them, or for this situation. We see the need for nuclear type solution in many more places. Until a better solution comes, we get to live with this risk. If someone stated, no we do not! Then that person must sign a voucher approving coal plants and accepting to live in smog. If it is abroad then your taxation in carbon tax will still be levied at $500-$750 per person on national scales and a power usage limit that is 20% lower than these persons have today. See the picture?

We either accept to live in smog like conditions forever, live without view or find something better. Until true fusion comes around Nuclear reaction is what we are faced with. Just so you know, even though true fusion will be cleaner on several levels, once an accident happens there, your goose is likely cooked on a massively larger scale then a nuclear reactor could achieve. If we believe the past, then we will have to face at least two fusion reactor accidents. This gives additional power to the need to find solutions for Fukushima. Whatever direction we take, we need to find alternative ways.

Can we suck away radiation?

I am not coming with answers here, but I learned many times over that nature is a mother, a taskmaster and a teacher. If depleted Ozone was reason for UV-radiation, is this not a lesson we could use in the opposite way? I do know that they are different forms of radiation, I just wonder if scientists took a good look at alternative approaches to the Fukushima disaster. If we have a leaky basement we need a sponge to suck the last water of the floor. If the current sponge does not do the job, we will need to invent one that does. I am not claiming that there is a simple solution; I am more worried that certain scientific quests have been neglected and forgotten about.

If we do not push ourselves forward then we can never be ready for the larger quest that will hit us around the corner. There are many industrialists who will counter this with their needy call on how the new innovation will also bring new solutions. There is a truth in there, but their answers are misguided and intentionally misdirected. Because cleaning up is not a profit, it is for those people a cost. A cost that is later pushed onto others anyway. The Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) is clear evidence of that.

Fukushima operator Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco) is struggling to deal with the vast – and growing – volume of water it has used to cool the broken reactors. Growing? So if that is the case, what would happen if we treat the core with liquid nitrogen or liquid oxygen? These users seem to go for the readily available options, what if we step away from that? What other options are there?

This is exactly the issue, when a solution does not work; some seem to use it longer, hoping that this will solve it. The initial quote as we read it in the South China Morning post “The world’s nuclear watchdog has urged Japan to explain more clearly what is happening at Fukushima and avoid sending ‘confusing messages’, the country’s atomic regulator revealed.”

If that is true, then the Japanese government should hereby be placed under a mandatory position to reveal the complete chain of communications. From the spokesperson to the one giving out the information, reveal the entire chain! If we are to solve anything then it is only with proper information. It could even be that people like Kazuhiko Shimokobe and Naomi Hirose might be removed from office. This is not about bowing and apologising, this is about solving the issues. Like any scientific endeavour, that will only ever work if complete and correct information is given out. I reckon that this is even more prudent when we look at the fact that this disaster, not unlike the events at Hiroshima and Nagasaki could change the Japanese landscape for decades.

The world events are also in play. The dangers of a dirty bomb has not diminished, it has actually only increased. Now consider that in the late 70’s NBC (Nuclear Biological Chemical) wash streets were designed to deal with radiation and irradiated dirt on vehicles and on personnel. This was 40 years ago and since then no real forward steps have been made. In 40 years of innovation, no better solution was produced. Seems odd doesn’t it?

In an age where more energy is needed on a global scale, in places where those in charge just blunder forward and where profit is the bottom line, we need to find new solutions for questions not answered for decades. We need to find them now, before we irreparable poison the well we all eat and drink from.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Science

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

September 2, 2013 · 00:20

FISA? Gezundheit!

 

In a column for ‘all things D‘ (democratic I guess), Arik Hesseldahl wrote an article called ‘Microsoft and Google Will Sue U.S. Government Over FISA Order Data‘. A decent article! I did not completely agree with it, but the man wrote a decent story of his view and he was not playing the ‘spin’ game. I can respect that, even if I do not agree. The same could be said for Bill O’Reilly. I do not always agree with him either, but his clear and clear outspoken views are valuable to hear. So, in the case of Hesseldahl I responded.

The response (from another reader), which was “Your analogy is accurate, but your point is misguided. The government was afforded specific rights by the people via FISA laws. Not only were those rights abused, but activities outside the scope afforded them were taken, and are therefore illegal.” was interesting to read. There was more than that, but basically I was the misguided one.

Fair enough!

So let’s take a legal look at this Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), especially the amendments which are extended until July 2015. It is the work of Edward Liu, who is currently the Legislative Attorney at the Congressional Research Service.

The initial find where this all starts can be found on page 4 of that work “National security letters, which are analogous to administrative subpoenas and are authorized by five federal statutes, require businesses to produce specified records to federal officials in national security investigations.”

I will ignore the footnotes, as they will just delay. The important one for this quote refers to “Legal Background and Recent Amendments, by Charles Doyle“. The person not agreeing with me relied on the quote “but activities outside the scope afforded them were taken“. Was it? Let us not forget, this is about Foreign Intelligence. Google, Facebook, MSN are global organisations. Collecting and servicing billions (with 330 million US citizens, we can clearly state that there is a massive amount of foreign involvement).

The next part is how this is about transgressions on US citizens. Is it really? These Americans, mostly innocent people, include a fair amount which are playing fake identities, often trying to impress women showing the sexiest outfits. This is not wrong, illegal or questionable (actually, that might be a case), yet many of those profiles are linked to people not being those people at all. Some are criminals collecting identity details, some are simple scammers and possibly 1 out of roughly 734 will really be that woman, 1/734 is not that good an odd. The alphabet groups do not really care about these parties, but when we consider that some of these tactics are employed by the very terrorists and the supporters they are trying to find it becomes a new ball game.

Page 5 of that document gives us the next little snack “During the examination of the events leading up to the attacks, it was reported that investigations regarding Moussaoui’s involvement were hampered by limitations in FISA authorities.“, so accepting that, then finding these dangers require a little more than they are now getting.

That gem is presented on page 9 of the aforementioned document.

“In United States v. Petti, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit was presented with a challenge to a roving wiretap under Title III alleging that roving wiretaps do not satisfy the particularity requirement of the Fourth Amendment. The court initially noted that the test for determining the sufficiency of the warrant description is whether the place to be searched is described with sufficient particularity to enable the executing officer to locate and identify the premises with reasonable effort, and whether there is any reasonable probability that another premise might be mistakenly searched.
Applying this test, the Ninth Circuit held that roving wiretaps under Title III satisfied the particularity clause of the Fourth Amendment. The court in this case relied upon the fact that targets of roving wiretaps had to be identified and that they were only available where the target’s actions indicated an intent to thwart electronic surveillance.”

The latter part was also a footnote link to United States v. Bianco, 998 F.2d 1112, 1124 (2nd Cir. 1993) (similarly holding that a provision authorizing roving bugs under Title III was constitutional)

So why are Americans so set upon claiming illegality?

My initial response was about people bragging on Facebook the 243.1 ‘stupid’ things they do to every Tom, Dick and Harry and then nag about the fact that the government takes a look. It was never about them, but about finding those attacking America. It seems to me that many of these people are way too eager to complain when they are asked to help keep their nation safe.

From my point of view all Americans should hand their on-line ‘data’ to the NSA.

Why?

Well, consider the field of predictive analytics. If we are to flag a terrorist, then we need to know the data that makes for non-terrorists too. Whether this profile data concerns a horny student, an adulterous husband/wife, a fence not the one in the garden), a carjacker, a geek or an average parent. If the system has ALL the facts, the more we know, the more pronounced an identifying flag becomes. If predictive analytics is about finding the odd one out, then basing the search on grey people alone will not do, or at least will result in many flags that need more checks. So if we accept that this is about the need to analyse current and historical facts to make predictions about future or otherwise unknown events, then we must have all the data. If we know what a US Apple Pie eating and cuppa Joe drinking person does, then we can see many more elements. This all reflects on our acts on-line and off-line. They will give us a line that raises flags. Flags based upon things we do and even more flags on things we are not doing. That results in a picture!

Now wonder, why are you against helping your nation?

Is this about your privacy? If so, then why are you on Facebook/Google+? These places are to share with friends and THEIR friends (so often your data is shown too many more then you anticipated/expected. In addition, many seem to incorrectly use Facebook a lot more often then they think, which in turn means that your birthday party invitation went to 17 million connected people (it happened in the US, the Netherlands and a few other places, and it happened more than once).

And those so called ‘criminals’ claiming privacy? Well the previous case actually left those in power as Amendment 4 transgressions were about “intent to thwart electronic surveillance.” we are not talking about the level the ordinary criminal goes through. This is avoidance on levels that require highly advanced router hacking skills. Can it be used by both? Yes it can, but let us not forget that the court judge could throw some of these facts out in court at a moment’s notice, giving the alleged bank robber a free out of jail card on the spot. The NSA (and peers) know this and they have ZERO interest in these types. They care about the next attack that will come at some point. They just want to figure out when, where and by whom!

If you are still worried about all this, then consider the amendment as discussed on page 14. “a statement of facts showing that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the tangible things sought are relevant to a [foreign intelligence, international terrorism, or espionage investigation.]” So in case of those ‘excited’ students fearing privacy, when was the last time you tried to C-4 her lingerie drawer so that your date arrived without panties? If not, then why worry? (Apart from the small fact that you should not be having access to C-4 to begin with).

So, I disagreed with the assessment made on my response, which remains fair enough. I believe that intelligent people on both sides of the isle can come to wisdom. Whether you stand next to the NSA council, or you side with a civil-libertarian. The origin of UCLA proves the need for civil liberties in no lesser degree. I personally believe that the wisdom is somewhere in the middle. The only part that I never agree with are those blindly hiding behind the quote from Benjamin Franklin “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” The quote is wise, but based on another age where there were clear nations, clear missions and where life did not revolve around greed. Because considering the events from the past few years we see more and more correlation with terrorism enabled through desired greed than anything else, for the greedy will only remain loyal to the currency they worship, a simplistic life without true values.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military

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

September 1, 2013 · 22:44

Politically phrased budgets

I don’t get to take a jab at the Guardian too often, so when that day does come (like today), then I like to enjoy every moment of it (overall it is still the best paper though). In this case it is an article by Lenore Taylor on the article ‘Rising cost of living, just an illusion‘ (at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/30/household-bills-australia-wages-rising)

The new ‘analyses’ show that the average household was better off by $5300 compared to 2008. Are you for real Miss Taylor?

Let’s look at some numbers. I have lived in the same place since 2008, I will even add to that that most of what I have is from around that time, and according to Energy Australia I am regarded to be a stable user, which means that my usage has not changed that much over the years. Yet, in 2007 my average bill was $160, in 2012 it was $275 and now it is $375. So in 6 years my electricity bill went up with a whopping 134%. the bills in 2013 have been less than $2 apart per bill so it seems that overall my usage remains the same.

Her reference to the ‘Natsem modelling’ is there, and apparently it claims that the annual increased cost of living is 1.7%. My train ticket had gone up by 8% (which was better than the NSW projected 10%) and my rent in the last 2 years had risen by 15%, the last step was a 7% increase. As the last two costs are costs we all see regular like clockwork, it seems to be that her article is only slightly weirder then just plain bogus, but that might just be my view on it!

Consider that many people have not seen decent raises in the last few years as some companies had hit hard times; it seems that I was reading a story with the missing bang of realism.

So the question becomes, is she just quoting a source, or is she missing the ball by a lot?

I leave that to you the reader!

There are other sides. Yes, groceries have gone up, yet the milk from my supermarket seemed to have been the same for a long time. In these times, even though I feel for the farmer, the fact that milk remains affordable is a good thing for me, as many other things go up. So even though the groceries, which is a chunk out of anyone’s budget seems remain almost stable, the overall cost of living did go up.

The second increase is the cost of one’s credit card. Most people, if they have a job, they tend to have a credit card. When I got mine, it came with an awesome 9.9%. And for a time it stayed there. It is now a little over 13%. This means a plus 3% rise, I am not blaming the banks (even though I would love to do that). When we consider rent, travel and credit cards, three of the most common items used, is seems that the 1.7% annual increase is just a tale, for the simple reason that most of the other stuff we daily need did not get cheaper and our regular cost of living went up by a lot more than 1.7%

So who did she write the article for?

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

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

August 30, 2013 · 14:23

Tactical choices of inactivity

I reckon that many are awaiting the events as they are unfolding currently in Syria. Will we be investing in Boeing Defence stock, should these missiles be used? (At $1.2M a pop that would mean a nice increase of revenue for Boeing). Will we change our investments in oil and gas as the Syrian situation continues?

These are the questions that matter. The hundreds of deaths because of a chemical attack do not seem to matter.

Are you wondering why I have that opinion?

Then read the BBC quote in regards to these attacks. “The United Nations Security Council said it was necessary to clarify what happened in the alleged attack, but stopped short of demanding an investigation by a UN team currently in Damascus, following an emergency meeting on Wednesday evening.” This was published on August 21st.  So there was a chemical attack and the UNSC did NOT demand the immediate investigation in regards to chemical attack deaths. The worse matter was that the bulk of the casualties were all civilians.

But where is the case of what matters?

If we look at the UNSC charter we see the following “The UN Charter established six main organs of the United Nations, including the Security Council. It gives primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security to the Security Council, which may meet whenever peace is threatened.”

So clinically we see that they are not an issue. Peace was not an issue in Syria at all. It stopped existing well over two years earlier. The UNSC is set in a charter. They are called the “Provisional rules of procedure of the Security Council” (at http://www.un.org/en/sc/inc/pages/pdf/rules.pdf). They actually do not help that much, only to illustrate certain steps. Yet, this is about the procedures of the UNSC, this will not help at all. So where is their decision making tree? For that we need to take a look at the charter of the United Nations. I took a specific look at Chapter VII: Action with Respect to Threats to the Peace, Breaches of the Peace and Acts of Aggression.

The premeditated crux is set in Article 45 which states: “In order to enable the United Nations to take urgent military measures, Members shall hold immediately available national air-force contingents for combined international enforcement action. The strength and degree of readiness of these contingents and plans for their combined action shall be determined within the limits laid down in the special agreement or agreements referred to in Article 43, by the Security Council with the assistance of the Military Staff Committee.”

So we need to look at Article 43, which actually does not help us that much. That part is about making available troops “in order to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security“. I think we can agree that that part is at least two years late, and nothing here gives us a pass to start anything AFTER chemical attacks.

 

Yet we see in that same chapter that Article 51 (partially shown) states: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations” This is all very nice, but Syria is not a member state, which makes this all a little moot. In addition, this is a civil (local) war, so other member states are not in question.

So let’s take a look at ‘Customary International Humanitarian Law Volume I: Rules‘ (at http://www.icrc.org/eng/assets/files/other/customary-international-humanitarian-law-i-icrc-eng.pdf).

Rule 11 states “Rule 11. Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited.” Ah! Now we are getting somewhere. Even the rules of war have some level of distinction, yet for the most; this is all based on the previous Article 51, as is quoted “The prohibition of indiscriminate attacks is set forth in Article 51(4) of Additional Protocol I.” Darn! I am caught in some sort of looped program. It reminds me of my very first program I wrote on the Commodore VIC-20 in 1983.

10 PRINT “You are crazy!”
20 GOTO 10
RUN

Ah! The simple old days, how I miss them at times.

The same book lists an interesting part on page 38. “several States invoked the prohibition of indiscriminate attacks in their assessment of whether an attack with nuclear weapons would violate international humanitarian law.9 When the ICRC appealed to the parties to the conflict in the Middle East in October 1973, i.e., before the adoption of Additional Protocol I, to respect the prohibition of indiscriminate attacks, the States concerned (Egypt, Iraq, Israel and Syria) replied favourably.10”

9 See. e.g., the pleadings of Australia (ibid., § 65), India (ibid., § 77), Mexico (ibid., § 85), New Zealand (ibid., § 86) and United States (ibid., § 99).
10 See ICRC, The International Committee’s Action in the Middle East (ibid., § 139).

Yes, I agree that a chemical attack is not a nuclear attack, yet when I was taught the elements of NBC (in army days long ago), we tended to count the Nuclear and the Chemical similar to some extent. The Biological element is one that might be considered to be one worse than that as it can continue its damage and even transcend borders.

So we can now add a look at additional protocol I, especially as Syria was one of the parties who replied favourably. As such, we could see Syria as a party that accepted these rules (to some extent).

You see, these parts underline the part as set in Rule 13 (from the IHL), which states “Rule 13. Attacks by bombardment by any method or means which treats as a single military objective a number of clearly separated and distinct military objectives located in a city, town, village or other area containing a similar concentration of civilians or civilian objects are prohibited.”

This my dear readers includes ANY level of chemical attack, as that form of attack that is utterly indiscriminate as well as encompassing the area as one military objective.

Taking into account these elements, why did at that point did the UNSC, as stated by the BBC in the first mentioned article “but stopped short of demanding“. The stopped short in these elements were utterly unwarranted, in my humble opinion.

Now we all watch a political runaway train disaster where politicians stop short of acting in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Germany and France await ‘evidence’ which they can deal on. The one cowboy state (the United States) would be at present the only hope the Syrian population has for now. Are these nations correct in holding of? Well, they do have a case there. However, the evidence as UN investigators were delayed, the possible evidence on how the chemical spread started. If we take the elements we have, then we need to consider the firing mechanism. That part had been made near impossible with 5 days of bombings. Yet, in all honesty, did Assad do this? The question is important for two reasons.

1. If he did not do this, was it an intentional act?
2. What other intelligence has Assad silenced?

The two are related, because the earlier fear the US had is now truly coming to fruition. If these missiles were inadvertently fired by the opposition forces, the theory I have is that as they lack military expertise, they might have known and partially learned how to fire a SCUD, but did they know about the payload? Let us not forget that many fighters are anything but military trained. Even those who had training, it is possible that they had too limited knowledge on how to work and identify these types of equipment.

The danger is that they might have found chemical payloads, so here is the danger. Al-Qaeda is currently helping the opposition forces. We now have a trained AQ with support from people lacking knowledge, and they gave AQ access to a chemical storage area. Here is where it becomes dicey! Assad knows the assets lost, he is playing high stakes poker by keeping these locations a secret. For him it is a win-win. If the opposition figures it out they have a time-bomb they cannot use. AQ will use it no matter what and preferably on Israel. Whichever of those steps happened (when they do), the world would have no option but to remove his enemy for him.

Proving that Assad did the actual firing is almost non-provable. The evidence is scattered and at best we can see that NBC components were used, but by whom is less of an option which will leave doubt.

Time is on the side of Assad and elements stopping activities to attack, whether justified or not will only strengthen Assad’s position. I can side with the politicians when they claim that they do not want another Iraq, yet when we look at the initial quote from the BBC “but stopped short of demanding an investigation by a UN team” we must more actively wonder what it would take for them to get anything done. It should be seen as tactical inactivity of the very worst kind!

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Military, Politics

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

August 28, 2013 · 00:09

I miss the cold war

It is a line from a movie, yet at times that is how I feel. Most of the elderly who served will likely feel the same. We had a common goal and a common enemy. We ‘feared’ the values that would be given to us by the Iron curtain. Then something happened, they seemingly went bankrupt. Not unlike India, Russia now has the fastest growing numbers of billionaires on the planet. Yet, the numbers do not add up. This relates to what happens today in Syria. No matter how the events in Syria began and I will admit, I know not when that premise there changed, but it had. The roughest of estimations would be that somewhere in September 2012 the game changed. I believe that it was before the UNHRC statements of September 28th (now exactly a year ago). Those against were China, Cuba and Russia. China seems to have been ‘sincere’ in their deliberations and Cuba did what Russia asked. Russia changed the game. In their minds this would be the beginning of a new cold war. There is one massive difference. This time we would likely lose!

The factors involved are a nothing less than an incompetent American administration. As the banking issues had hit them, their inability to solve or reacquire anything, with in addition two very expansive and expensive wars in Afghanistan and Iraq had depleted the American coffers to less than nothing. When two parties are not in agreement, then the winner hits when the other party is down for the count, words spoken before by several parties and ignored or silenced by greed driven parties. Edward Snowden was not part of this in any way. I think this is the one lucky break both Russia and China never expected to see. You see, there are ripples connected to that. If the NSA has breaches to this extent, there would be a chance or even nothing less than likely that GCHQ (UK) might have similar flaws. Unlike their building, the donut, which has a hole in the middle, they will have a hole somewhere. If it does exist, then it is in the technology and not likely in the people they have. I reckon that I count myself to that cause where we protect and preserve the monarchy, even if I am just an Australian. The fact is that if technology was unable to stop Snowden, then it is not unrealistic that GCHQ has similar flaws, especially as GCHQ is given a mere fraction of resources the NSA gets on an annual base.

There is supporting evidence to these thoughts. The ALLEGED hacking of the UN building might count. If the alphabet groups were aware that there are issues with any upcoming cold war, then knowing as much as possible is essential. This could have driven the events if the hacking of the UN was a fact. Why the video conferencing? It was not about getting the voice feed, which is not too hard; it is however to find and identify people through the video link(s). If there is a new cold war brewing, knowing where certain people are is an actual must. If we can believe ‘Der Spiegel’ then staff members from the NSA had been tracking their wives. Leave it to some idiotic American to use these resources to keep an eye on his wife instead of giving her the orgasms she was entitled to (at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/30/nsa-spying-europe-claims-us-eu-trade)

Yet back to the Syrian chess pieces. Assad, or as he should be known now as ‘Pinocchio 2’ has been doing the things that Russia wanted them to do. Slowly moving him and whatever reasoning he has (whether valid or not), to instil the safety and security of his current position. Yet that part is actually slowly but surely being forfeit. Russia needs the UK, France and US to intervene. Consider that this intervention will drain troops and costs in excess of 200 billion Euros. After that Pinocchio’s strings can be cut, his role will have been played out. This will not be a quick step and a likely aftermath of no less than 2 additional years. That is all they need to stop economic restoration. It is all they need to ensure an upcoming advantage.

Russia has been handed a massive advantage by several parties involved.

Are we considering suspending humanitarian laws in the UK? In the UK it is Home secretary Theresa May who stated “Britain should consider leaving the European Convention on Human Rights because it interferes with the government’s ability to fight crime and control immigration, Home Secretary Theresa May said on Saturday (9 March)”. Leaving the European Convention on Human Rights does not mean that the UK is abolishing Human rights all together, yet, taking into account the dwindling support for legal aid is a clear second part of this. For Russia it will be the flag they raise to state that Western values are flawed, to be suspended when times get hard. They would be correct. Instead of stopping greed driving consumption and acquisition we enabled it for too long.

Back to Syria!

At present the game has changed. We see carefully phrased denials, the game to postpone. In addition we saw an interview with an Assad loyalist, claiming he was a victim of a chemical attack by the Syrian opposition. Did anyone notice that the video’s from the Syrian opposition were people hardly able to speak and hardly able to breath. The Syrian soldier was in a hospital looking no worse than someone going there for a broken toe. Interesting that this was not that illuminated by the journalist. The fact that one soldier seemed to be in the crossfire whilst dozens of dead civilians, children and Syrian opposing troops on the other side. Let’s call a spade a spade shall we?

The conference by Walid al-Muallim did not help the Syrian cause either. They went one step further by now implying that Israel is now a likely strike point. Now let’s disseminate their ‘statements’. From Fox news we see the statement by Mohammed Javad Zarif: “We are in close contact with the Syrian government and they have reassured us that they had never used such inhumane weapons and would have the fullest cooperation with the U.N. experts to visit the areas affected.” (At http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/25/us-naval-forces-move-closer-to-syria-hagel-suggests)

Really? Then why were these investigators stopped for a week? Their promises are hollow for the simple reason that whatever attack the opposition made would be a danger to any chance the opposition has, whatever attack Syria made on these investigators would condemn them. Not reporting anything is in Syria’s interest. The simple truth at present is that both Israel and Jordan prefer to stay out of the way as much as possible. Israel needs to wait whether Hamas or Hezbollah will start attacking Israel first. If Israel is part of the attack to Syria, then both Hamas and Hezbollah will launch strikes on Israel, this is why Walid al-Muallim adds Israel to the mix. In addition, Russians next puppet is about to enter the field. In an age where we thought that the tension between Iran and the west would lighten up, the Iranian news reported the following: “The Iranian ambassador to Russia says the Islamic Republic can play a ‘constructive role’ in the Geneva 2 conference which is expected to be held on the Syrian crisis.” Of course Russians motive is simple, whatever happens they win. If Iran fails, then the tension on Iran versus West lights up again, if they win America looks weak and in addition Russia makes another billion for loads of concrete for a ‘power plant’ (and then some more including a dozen 7 figure bonuses). In addition, these talks will show initial failings and weaknesses for the Americans as the west will not interfere with Syria and the ‘red line’ Syria crossed.

These are the facts behind certain strategies and in addition most of them are public. The parts that are not that visible were those that were brought to light by Wikileaks. We could argue that those illustrated involving Brown Lloyd James were to be investigated, yet, is that an actual truth? If we consider their mission statement which is “BLJ crafts high-impact communication strategies that move diplomacy forward.” then it might not be the pure smell of Lavender, yet, we should not forget that Assad is still the sovereign ruler of Syria, if BLJ keeps diplomatic channels open, then that is not a bad thing.

How are these events linked?

That is part of the issue. Even though the UK wants and could enter the field to intercept Syrian chemical war abilities, PM David Cameron will go via Parliament (even though not officially needed). When the vote is up, consider who will oppose this and how many of them have had dealings with BLJ. It might make for an interesting picture. The other part where BLJ becomes visible through one of its executives (Mike Holtzman) was an article that goes back to 2003. In that part it was the quote “A solid majority of Americans-over fifty percent-believe the U.S. should lift restrictions on Americans’ freedom to travel to Cuba, allow U.S.-produced food and medical products to be sold to Cuba unimpeded and take steps toward normalization with Cuba as a matter of America’s national interest.” At present the Cuban travel embargo still exists. There are more connections that Mike Holtzman had, and many of them in his work serving both Syria and Cuba, so where does he truly stand? Let me be clear! This man broke no laws, is doing his work and chose his customers as he is allowed to choose them (even though many would call the choice questionable). Yet, in the light of Russia-Cuba and the issues at play we must wonder whether a second cold war has started, or is about to start. That evidence can be seen in several places, many of them public newspapers. The issues that the US has in regards Edward Snowden as well as the issues many nations have with Russian’s anti-Gay approach do not help to diminish tensions (its not like the Russians actually cared about them tensions).

They (the Russians) do play this type of chess game well. As they stated “In connection with this, the Russian side calls for [Washington to] refrain from the threat of force on Damascus, to not fall for provocations and to try to help create normal conditions to give the UN chemical experts’ mission, which is already in the country, the possibility of conducting a thorough, objective and impartial investigation” the foreign ministry statement said (as published by the Guardian), we see that the delays from snipers and administration, the only outcome is that the UN inspectors will now be unlikely to uncover evidence to point to a clear transgressor. No matter who wins that part, no action will only show weakness on the American shores, which serves Moscow, Havana and Beijing just fine.

So is there an actual second cold war? I honestly do not know, but plenty of events are there to turn my ‘Do not know‘ into a very strong ‘likely‘.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

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

August 24, 2013 · 14:41

Fair trade or trade fairy?

Cavendish Elithorn was on Sky news today. As the speaker of the office of fair trading, who is now coming out in regards to the practice that people see all over the world. We saw several issues in the news. There are mentions of ‘reference pricing’ where we see the ‘was’ and ‘now’ price, which in some cases is 50% less, or the after sale price where it is now 50% less, until the sale ends, where at that moment you will pay twice the price. The news casts speaks that at the higher price only 5% was ever made.

My issue is that even though it is great that this is done, yet is it a fair trade issue? Do not get me wrong, I think in one part it is, yet, can we act on this? This issue is especially questionable when we are hit through the internet with these same practices on a daily basis? Then there are for example the infomercials like Rapid Loss where we heard again and again to ‘respond within 15 minutes because this could be the last time this offer appeared‘, which of course is not the case as the same offer is given weeks later. The final example is the one that really gets my goat. We are talking about Ethical Nutrients when they claim on TV “You would need to eat 1.23 kg of snapper, or 1.1 kg of tuna, or take nine standard2 fish oil capsules every day or one teaspoon of Ethical Nutrients to get the required dose.” That pretty much implies that Arthritis correlates 100% to the population has NO ONE can afford that much fish. Even their web page title is ‘debatable’ It stated “How Much Omega-3 Fish Oil Do You Need For Arthritis?” (at http://www.ethicalnutrients.com.au/content/how-much-omega-3-fish-oil-do-you-need-arthritis) is this to get Arthritis, or to prevent it? These matters are not a case for fair trade?

We are getting in a field where many of these shops are going on a slippery marketing path to stay afloat, especially to survive against certain on-line presence that can change or reword visibility at a moment’s notice. Many of the smaller dealers might not like the fact that these mega houses, who can set prices of retail reference and actual price all by themselves, yet, consider the fact that this path had been walked by many of the A-brands for a very long time (several have been doing this for over 30 years). Consider the pricing in shops dealing in items from places like Lenovo, Sony, Samsung, Philips, Blaupunkt and that list goes on. So, when (or likely if) we see this case going forward we need to ask certain questions.

How will Cavendish Elithorn police the other areas too?

If not, he might not have a case. Not because of the reason quoted as “They are doing it, so why can’t we“, because if a small group is guilty of speeding, the rest is not allowed to speed either. The issue is that the small group that is speeding do not seem to be dealt with at all. There are often too many complications to these kind of cases, like the complications of dealing with internet cases to name but one, the fact that they are doing it short term and by the time the office of Fair Trade gets around to them they retract (or rephrase) the campaign and as such there would be no prosecutable case to begin with.

Do not think that the OFT (Office of Fair Trade) is a toothless tiger, or that they are fighting windmills. That part is clearly shown by the BBC at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-22109188

A situation where kids are pressured into buying extras on web games that are now pushed through smartphones, Facebook and stand-alone games that are played on tablets. This is a dangerous situation where parents get confronted with hundreds (some even thousands) of dollars in unwanted bills. There is even a new danger developing. As some makers publish several games, the fact that they now link to one another, stating that you get a special reward in ‘game 1’ if you get to a certain level in ‘game 2’ and so on. I found a maker linking 5 games to each other in that way. How long until children suddenly purchase certain amounts in several games, or even in 5 games? Let me be clear here. This is not about a few who are addicted to gaming, but the bulk who do not realise the consequence of certain costs and pressing ‘OK’ in certain places. Part of this goes beyond just ‘fair trade’, not unlike your daily required need of 1Kg of tuna; this is about levels of ‘miscommunication’ where children and at times adults where pressing ‘OK’ would end up having severe financial consequences. This issue is even more unacceptable as these makers seem to point to iTunes as a policing authority (or enabling authority) for in-app spending, instead of standard disabling in game purchasing from the start and requiring specific acts to enable spending money for these special in-app forms of currency. However, that is likely to be regarded as ‘bad’ business.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

Tagged as , , ,