Weirdly enough, my mind came up with something that was out there and for some reason it matters. The rhyme goes like “They touch, they break, they steal. No one here is free. Here they come, they come for three, unless you stop the melody.” You see, there is a second meaning to steal, it can also mean ‘move somewhere quietly’, we forget that sometimes, we all do. And with this I saw a few articles.
The first step
The first article is seen (at https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/oct/05/australia-fifa-world-cup-2034-bid-saudi-arabia-challenge) where we hear ‘Australia given 25-day deadline to challenge Saudi Arabia’s 2034 World Cup bid’. It is here that we see “Football Australia, state and federal governments and potential Asian co-hosts have been given 25 days by Fifa to decide whether they will bid for the 2034 men’s World Cup”. Other articles give us that Australia is pissed. The why part is out there and it is not asked. Consider that I wrote some time ago regarding “Department of Jobs, Skills, Industry and Regions secretary Tim Ada told the inquiry that the event’s costs had nearly doubled from $2.6 billion in March 2022 to $4.5 billion a year later.” As such, they already fumbled the ball once, so now they want to give that another try, now with FIFA? And why is 2034 so important? We have 2026 (USA, Canada, Mexico) and in 2030 we get that on October 4th 2023 it was announced that Spain, Portugal and Morocco would host the majority of the 2030 FIFA World Cup in an unanimous decision from the FIFA Council, with one “celebratory game” each being held in Uruguay, Argentina and Paraguay. The game is evolving, it is too big for one place, so who would be able to afford to host the games? The general costs were in 2014 (Brazil) $19.7 billion, in 2018 (Russia) $16 billion, and 2022 (Qatar) had a $229 billion cost message. We can agree that the last one was outlandishly big, but a country that could not fork over $5,000,000,000 for the Commonwealth Games will share well over triple that with New Zealand? What is wrong with people? I am not debating that this event is good for a nation who hosts this, but Australia and a few other places are not in a financial sound place. Saudi Arabia is one of the few nations who have that kind of money available. The 2030 innovations that the kingdom is showing could (or should) show the world that Saudi Arabia has what it needs to make it work.
We are all in the need for games, but these games (FIFA, Commonwealth Games, Olympics) are slowly pricing themselves out of a global market and no one is asking serious questions here. I get why the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia wants this and lets be clear, they can afford it. Australia? I am not certain, yet the errors made last year and the triple costs now make me wonder if some politicians have any idea the amount of money that they are spending.
The second step
The second step is not that clear, we are given (at https://uk.sports.yahoo.com/news/hamas-strike-israel-force-market-190723900.html) ‘Hamas’ strike on Israel will force the market to ‘beg’ Saudi Arabia to pump out more oil, famed crude trader says’, so when the market begs. How sturdy are they? The fact that this event is used as an excuse to beg for more oil. How shoddy as their position to begin with? The USA and EU are not reliant on either Hamas or Israel for oil and their oil needs are not on the USA or EU. OK, perhaps Israel might benefit, but Gaza does not. So when I see “the militant group’s raid will disrupt longer-term supplies, with Riyadh unlikely to start pumping out more crude until Brent hits $110 a barrel.” I wonder who believes that setting. I get that oil prices will increase that was already a given, but that is mostly due to the fact that OPEC has decided to decrease outputs. It was the hard lesson the USA had to learn from being politically utterly stupid. The price it had in June 2022 will be returned to and most likely get surpassed, neither of the two Gaza players had a hand in that. Yes, these tanks will require fuel, but that would be on Israel.
The third step
The last step comes from Business News Australia. The article (at https://www.businessnewsaustralia.com/blog/trademark-group-connects-aussie-businesses-to-saudi-boom) gives us ‘“Like Dubai 20 years ago”: Trademark Group connects Aussie businesses to Saudi boom’, we get the notion and the act to get close to any business boom that can be ‘exploited’. As such we are given “Australian businesses that missed out on the Dubai growth story of the past 20 years have been urged to take a closer look at Saudi Arabia, a country that Trademark Group founder and CEO Sam Jamsheedi describes as the sleeping giant of the Gulf region.” Yes, I agree. But I saw that essential setting over two years ago and I wrote about that in this blog on numerous occasions. As such it is nice that Sam Jamsheedi woke up to the notion two years late. My issue with the article is not the notion. It is also accepted that we see “Each industry that the Saudis are trying to develop provides massive opportunities for Australia businesses to capitalise on – from construction and agriculture to food, beverage and even sport.” In this I agree, yet my thoughts are where the article failed. You see the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is a Muslim nation, it largely acts and reacts as the Quran inspires them. Yet the article does not even once mention ‘Islam’ or ‘Muslim’ settings. That was my first stage when I was testing my IP. Yet Muslim rules are all over Saudi Arabia, they are in advertising which is a first hurdle ANY business needs to overcome. They need to test that their advertising adheres to those rules. The article makes no mention there either. It reads like a wishful thinking article, all whilst basic needs are not mentioned. It reads to me that these are ‘small’ hurdles that they will overcome in due time. That is an entirely wrong setting to take.
We see three settings, They touch (oil), they break (FIFA), they sneak (Business) and they all want a piece from Saudi Arabia. Yes, the second one is flimsy, but when we see the cost part, I am almost clueless that Australia is setting it all up. It is my speculative view that with Qatar players like Coca Cola missed out on too much and now they are anxious and eager to make sure that FIFA is set in a place where their interests are larger like in Australia. All at the same time we see a setting of 5G and a few other settings where Australia is not in the best place and I feel 99% certain that the drain on 5G will be enormous in 2034 and I am not entirely certain that Australia will be ready at that point. They politicised too much, which made them massively non acting, merely talking loud. As such, when we were given in May 2023 the setting of New guidelines, we were also given “These renewed warnings come amid the Australian government’s plan to strengthen national security and make Australia one of the most secure countries in the world by 2030” that sounds nice, but the fact that the nation is lacking security settings for 8 years is flimsy to say the least. But no one is looking at that, are they? I still get 4G mentions all over Sydney today, as such I fail to see that they are ready by the time it matters and it mattered yesterday. We are presented several issues and no one is looking at the picture we should be seeing. As I personally see it “unless you stop the melody” refers to presentations given and these presentations are lacking on several levels. Feel free to disagree, but when you look behind the presentations you need to see a solid setting, solid numbers and solid facts. We aren’t given those. Why not?
Enjoy the final part of the first half of the week.
X to the power of sneaky
I was honestly a little surprised this morning when I saw the news pass by. The BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-67137773) gives us ‘Twitter glitch allows CIA informant channel to be hijacked’. To be honest, I have no idea why they would take this road, but part of me gets it. Perhaps in the stream of all those messages, a few messages might never be noticed. The best way to hide a needly is to drop it in a haystack. Yet the article gives us “But Kevin McSheehan was able to redirect potential CIA contacts to his own Telegram channel” giving us a very different setting to the next course of a meal they cannot afford. So when we are given “At some point after 27 September, the CIA had added to its X profile page a link – https://t.me/securelycontactingcia – to its Telegram channel containing information about contacting the organisation on the dark net and through other secretive means”, most of us will overlook the very setting that we see here and it took me hours to trip over myself and take a walk on the previous street to reconsider this. So when we are given “a flaw in how X displays some links meant the full web address had been truncated to https://t.me/securelycont – an unused Telegram username” the danger becomes a lot more visible. And my first thought was that a civilian named McSheehan saw this and the NSA did not? How come the NSA missed this? I think that checking its own intelligence systems is a number one is stopping foreign powers to succeed there and that was either not done, or the failing is a lot bigger then just Twitter. So even as the article ends with “The CIA did not reply to a BBC News request for comment – but within an hour of the request, the mistake had been corrected” we should see the beginning not the end of something. So, it was a set of bungles that starts with the CIA IT department, that goes straight into the NSA servers, Defence Cyber command and optionally the FBI cyber routines as well. You see, the origin I grasp at is “Installation of your defences against enemy retaliation” and it is not new, It goes back to Julius Caesar around 52BC (yes, more then two millennia ago). If I remember it correctly he wrote about it in Commentarii de Bello Gallico. Make sure your defences are secure before you lash out is a more up to date setting and here American intelligence seemingly failed.
Now, we get it mistakes will be made, that happens. But for the IT department of several intelligence departments to miss it and for a civilian in Maine to pick it up is a bit drastic an error and that needs to be said. This is not some Common Cyber Sense setting, this is a simple mistake, one that any joker could make, I get that. My issue is that the larger collection of intelligence departments missed it too and now we have a new clambake.
Yes, the CIA can spin this however they want, but the quote “within an hour of the request, the mistake had been corrected” implies that they had not seen this and optionally have made marked targets of whomever has linked their allegiance to the CIA. That is not a good thing and it is a setting where (according to Sun Tzu) dead spies are created. Yet they are now no longer in service of America, but they are optionally in service of the enemies of the USA and I cannot recall a setting where that ever was a good thing. You see, there was a stage that resembles this. In 942 the Germans instigated Englandspiel. A setting where “the Abwehr (German military intelligence) from 1942 to 1944 during World War II. German forces captured Allied resistance agents operating in the Netherlands and used the agents’ codes to dupe the United Kingdom’s clandestine organisation, the Special Operations Executive (SOE), into continuing to infiltrate agents, weapons, and supplies into the Netherlands. The Germans captured nearly all the agents and weapons sent by the United Kingdom” For two years the Germans had the upper hand, for two years the SOE got the short end of that stick and this might not be the same, but there is a setting where this could end up being the same and I cannot see that being a good thing for anyone (except the enemies of America). Now, I will not speculate on the possible damage and I cannot speculate on the danger optional new informants face or the value of their intelligence. Yet at this point I think that America needs to take a hard look at the setting that they played debutante too. I get it, it is not clear water, with any intelligence operation it never is. Yet having a long conversation with the other cyber units is not the worst idea to have. You see, there is a chance someone copied the CIA idea and did EXACTLY the same thing somewhere else. As such how much danger is the intelligence apparatus in? Come to think of it, if Palantir systems monitor certain server actions, how did they miss it too? This is not an accusation, it is not up to Palantir to patrol the CIA, but these systems are used to monitor social media and no one picked up on this?
Just a thought to have on the middle of this week.
Leave a comment
Filed under IT, Military
Tagged as Abwehr, BBC, CIA, Commentarii de Bello Gallico, Common Cyber Sense, DoD, Englandspiel, FBI, Julius Caesar, Kevin McSheehan, Maine, NSA, Palantir, SOE, Special Operations Executive, Sun Tzu, Twitter