Tag Archives: Airbus

March 16, 2025 · 05:59

Political Dundie Awards anyone?

There is a special award that people fear. It is a lot worse than the Razzies (Golden Raspberry Awards), it is the “Dundie Award for Worst Salesman of the Year” and this year it goes to President Trump. In one swift setting he made the Commonwealth drop America as an ally and in the second setting over two articles the first being (at https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/portugal-wary-trumps-nato-policy-pick-fighter-jets-2025-03-14/) ‘Portugal wary of Trump’s NATO policy in pick of fighter jets’ where we see “Portugal could replace its aging American-made F-16 fighter jets with European jets rather than F-35s following U.S. President Donald Trump’s policy shifts, the country’s defense ministry said on Friday.” And the second one is seen (at https://news.az/news/canada-explores-alternatives-to-us-made-f-35-fighter-jets) with ‘Canada explores alternatives to US-made F-35 fighter jets’, where we are given “Canada is considering alternatives to the U.S.-made F-35 stealth fighters and has begun discussions with competing aircraft manufacturers, Defense Minister Bill Blair announced late Friday, shortly after being reappointed to the role in Prime Minister Mark Carney’s newly established Cabinet.” The F35, which is currently going as hot cakes although each of these hot cakes go for the price of $109,000,000 each. So I reckon that Lockheed Martin is out a few pennies now and in light of the fact that sustainment costs are estimated to be around $1.58 trillion for the entire life cycle, these pennies tend to add up. And that is before you realize that several countries are still on the fence to change their order now. As such we might think that Saudi Arabia now certainly gets consideration as a customer (after a few years of denying them as a customer), yup President Trump really put his foot in that one. The nice part is that Portugal wasn’t a factor until yesterday and now it is costing Lockheed Martin billions. Considering that Norway recently got three of them nearly completing their order of 52 of them bad boys, consider what Portugal is now replacing and Canada is openly seeking another vendor. Of course, the Eurofighter (Eurofighter Typhoon) might have the inside track here. Yet wouldn’t it be the icing on the cake if China with its Chengdu J-20 wins that one? The irony to this  will be seen as howling with laughter.

OK, I admit that it is unlikely to happen, but the setting that President Trump started with the option of gaining a 51st state and now needs to build second wall to the north to keep the dozens of mighty dragons at a walls length. Canadians merely will have to fill the space between the two walls with water and we have a whole new setting movie like setting. I merely ask that they send 10 canoes to every Native American community there is (there are a few dozens), as such we get a new setting. It is as far as I can tell the first time a president became a clear and present danger to its own defense system selling on a near global scale. The distance between Canada and Portugal makes it near global as I see it. A parameter I actually didn’t see happen as a president is there for a mere 4 years and these babies get sold with decades in mind, but there you have it and there is more. YouTube is getting more and more video’s with American shops (Supermarkets and LCBO shops) where alcoholic drinks from the US and groceries from America are banned by the thousands of Canadian customers, this is all adding up. Perhaps the White House could consider pissing off the people with a nationalistic view? As I see it America first is now becoming America dropped first. In the last week we saw headlines like ‘Jack Daniel’s maker says Canada pulling stock worse than tariffs’ and in this case it grows with “Morgan Stanley analyst Eric Serotta said in a note to investors that tariffs would pose unique challenges for Brown-Forman, with the effects likely to linger. He added that 55% of the liquor manufacturer’s sales come from outside the U.S., and bourbon laws require domestic production so it cannot be produced internationally.” And this opens the doors of ‘connoisseur’ of that liquid as they might now explore the excellence of Japanese Whiskeys. A worry that the makers of Jack Daniels never had before. It makes it not a temporary, but a permanent loss. That threat is now at Lockheed Martins door if these nations pick the Eurofighter. It makes a tremendous win for Eurofighter GmbH, BAE Systems, Airbus, Alenia Aermacchi, and DASA. They are now offered billions of new business on a silver plate because of this and that could also mean that Saud Arabia might now set their sights to the Eurofighter as well. The one nation that was fixed on the F35 could now be shopping somewhere else. That implies a loss of planes, support systems and infrastructure spanning up to a new market of up to 283 combat aircrafts. How many trillions will that amount to? I reckon that it is up to five times the infrastructure of Norway, making the RSAF a $6,000,000,000,000 crown jewel for any company. All that lost by trying to force annexation down the throats of Canadian and pissing off NATO by catering to President Putin all whilst they are in a stage to denying assistance to NATO. So what is next? Consider that The Five Eyes is comprised of Commonwealth nations plus America, it is not without risk that the four will go it alone. You see intelligence merely matters as long as you have it and that is where the CIA might come up short soon enough. A larger setting that short sighted people in the White House administration overlooked. That can be considered as we saw the news by AP yesterday ‘Musk meets with head of National Security Agency to ensure it is aligned with Trump, spy agency says’, I reckon that there will be a certain level of panic whilst the CIA reports that their meeting could get seemingly cancelled. Now the NSA will have to focus on local issues and read in the FBI to at least a dozen projects. I know, it is merely speculative what I say, but that danger wasn’t even realistic last August, now in less than 9 months the pregnancy issues of intelligence might become a massive issues for America and it only recently got over the issues of that traitor Manning and COVID issues. So that is another mess America now has to deal with.

In the second stage, why was Elon Musk dealing with this? Shouldn’t the NSA address any issues directly with the President of the United States? And the questions rise. And the Political Dundie Awards (PDA) has a nice ring as Pathological Demand Avoidance (PDA) is a pattern of behavior in which kids go to extremes to ignore or avoid anything they perceive as a demand. That aligns here just so beautifully. 

Ah well, Another day another giggle with a coffee. So you all have a nice day and Canada, I have your back (although from a distance). By the way congrats to Markie Mark of the British Bank, now to be known Markie Canuck of Canada.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

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

August 24, 2024 · 21:06

The price of fake stability

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

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

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

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

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

January 19, 2021 · 22:59

When a jigsaw is not enough

It happens, we all need a puzzle to make sense of the things we are not addressing. Whether it is a game, the idea of a TV-series, a movie concept, at some point, each and every one of us hits a blockade, a road-sign we cannot circumvent. I tend to look into data puzzles, I have always done that. It is how I found how certain people in Rotterdam were baking the books in the Rotterdam harbour, it is how I saw the stage of fabricated data by [redacted]. Now I see ‘How to investigate a firm with 60 million documents’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-55306139). There we see ““Airbus was like a tower block with 900 apartments in it. We had to decide which ones we were going to go into and investigate,” she says.”, this implies if only 9 apartments are checked, there is a mere 1% chance that they optionally find anything. How dissatisfying and idiot driven does that come across? Then we see “Artificial intelligence (AI) and a bespoke computer unlike any PC you have ever worked on played a big part in this epic data trawl”, which is interesting, for the mere reason that at present AI does not yet exist, as such it seems that Airbus is not really investigated. And when we see “A daunting collection of 500 million documents and transactions had to be whittled down”, it might be daunting, but how did Airbus pass accountancy audit after accountancy audit? If we consider that, what is left to optionally find? 

My success in a harbour event was because I looked where no one else was looking, it amounted to the fact that those programming data and events were not really from a harbour origin like I was, as such the idle time folly sprung out to me, idle time is never ever linear, so making three times more times on the crane does not mean that idle time increases the same way and as that was not registered, adding idle time tickets implied the false numbers, a harbour has a set amount of cranes, in this I see similar steps in Airbus (not exactly the same), I wonder how consultancy hours is booked and settled against the books of the actual consultant, as well as the consultancy firms involved. Then there is the stage of advertisements, sponsors (mentioned in article), storage and a few other stages, as such the quote “After duplicates and other irrelevant material were eliminated the investigators were left with 60 million documents for review”, I wonder how much was duplicate (optionally valid) and what percentage was irrelevant. The second side is that when people set a larger stage (to hide millions) time and travel are equally a setting to be investigated (and perhaps they are), In all this, there is no issue or opposition to the BBC article, the title merely woke me up, it was a jigsaw of a different nature. It is “No business is ever really ready for a full forensic investigation,” Ms Khalil says, but her co-workers from Airbus were very responsive. “When the regulator pushed for a quick response on something they moved on it”, it might be right, and it might be dimensionality, yet how does ‘the regulator pushed for a quick response’ fit? Something this large cannot and will not adhere to ‘quick response’, yet I also accept that something this big is unlikely to be checked for 100%, that too makes sense, as such, who was the accountant of Airbus? What do they not look at? You see a jigsaw can be solved in all kinds of ways, there is first the outline, after that it becomes a jumble of hat captures your eyes. Different image, different approach, in some cases, we concentrate on colours, in some cases on an element in the jigsaw, all different ways and it fluctuates per puzzle, yet it is set to the constraint of the outline of the puzzle, in this case we have no outline. As such it is about more than the stage we see, it is about the links we do not see. As such I considered: time, consultants, materials, storage and booked elements that only indirectly hit Airbus. And yes, I could be completely wrong, I merely looked at an article and I know there is more, but the fact that we also see “Airbus opened up its operations to intense scrutiny in 2016”, as well as “Ms Khalil and a 70-strong team faced an ocean of files, transaction data and emails spanning worldwide activities”, all that whilst there is no AI at present, I merely wonder what they are up to and what they have been doing for 4 years, optionally getting a 6 figure payment for 4 years or more, are you not on that page yet?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

November 20, 2019 · 12:09

Will the punishment fit the crime?

There are crimes out there, some are small, some are not called crimes, they are labelled as an ‘improper offense‘, these offenses are offenses, yet so small that the CPA might decide not to look into the matter.

The Guardian had an opinion piece on the Arms trade two days ago called ‘Is the government turning a deaf ear to arms deal bribes?‘ (at https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/18/attorney-general-geoffrey-cox-gpt-arms-deal-corruption), now this is an article on bribery, one would consider it to be an improper act, optionally a crme, yet the facts do not bear this out. The setting is not that someone enriched themselves, no, they stated that they spend less than an addition 1%, almost 30% less than one percent to secure a contract: “to win a £2bn contract to provide communications and electronic warfare equipment to the Saudi national guard“, the so called former employee of GPT “Ian Foxley. When he was about to blow the whistle, he fled Saudi Arabia overnight fearing that his life was in danger“, the fact that we overlook ‘the fact that he was merely allegedly fearing that his life was in danger‘ is the first part, the fact that the bribery was there would be an issue for the Saudi Government to pursue (one would imagine), we see in the cold light of day that someone spend 1% extra to make sure that the order was accepted, OK, by law it would be an offense, it would be an ‘Improper offense‘, it might be a crime in Saudi Arabia as well, but they are seemingly not pursuing the matter are they? When we look at the black letter law we see that there is optionally a case to go after GPT Special Project Management, a UK-based subsidiary of the European aerospace group Airbus, yet in light of the thousands of cases not touched, and the fact that there is no actual victim here, should we pursue? Don’t get me wrong, corruption is nothing less than the proverbial blight on life, yet the EU gravy train is not stopped is it? Corporations are not being pursued in light of their activities to self-enrich themselves, are they? Yet there are a lot of eyes on anything accomplished in the Middle East, in this case in Saudi Arabia, I wonder if Ian Foxley would have shown the same candour if the buyer was the US, and they have the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. And there actually have been cases on that combination. Siemens (2008), Marubeni Corporation (2012), Biomet Inc. (2012), Goodyear (2015), and there have been plenty more, yet why is this one case important?

It is not seen immediate, or not until you take a longer look at the UK Bribery Act 2010, The BA 2010 received Royal Assent on 8 April 2010 and entered into force on 1 July 2011 in the UK, a guardian article spent a little time on it in 2013 (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/10/whistleblowers-snowden-truth-sets-free) there we see: “In 2010, Ian Foxley was working as the programme director for a British subsidiary of defence giant EADS on a £1.96bn contract to modernise the communications systems for the Saudi Arabian National Guard. When he came across evidence of corruption and bribery he fled the country and reported it to British officials“. There is an overlap, the UK Bribery Act 2010 was not part of law at that point. The act was not entered into law until 1st July 2011 in the UK, this does not make the act of Bribery all right, it merely states that an act that is privy to the Prevention of Corruption Act 1906, and there we will learn that he agent might optionally be held to the dock, but it will not apply as the one bribed was allegedly part of Saudi Arabia, hence not part of England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Republic of Ireland. It is the little things that make life satisfying, and the Guardian hiding behind “The delay in making a decision speaks to a deep malaise: suggesting that Britain is simply unwilling to prosecute major companies that are accused of paying bribes to foreign politicians and officials” is both unfair and incorrect, an alleged event took place in the time when the law was being adjusted, is it not interesting on how this one case, a case that should be in the hands of Saudi Arabia to consider prosecution (for the most) seems to get such attention, it seems that Anti-Muslim issues are rearing its ugly head, you see that statement is also alleged, yet I see no such news prosecution regarding Smith & Nephew paid US$22.2 million to the DOJ and SEC in 2012 regarding a deferred prosecution agreement. The idea of “possible improper payments to government-employed doctors” seems to hit people in general, but there is no real overwhelming amount of news there, is it? It seems to me that we are in a larger caser of ignorance when it comes to non-Muslim considerations, oh and that was in the US, how many prosecutions and investigations did Stephen and Nephew face in the UK? I am not telling, I am asking, the news does not seem to make mention of that.

There is also the case CAS-Global Ltd. and the Private Nigerian Coast Guard Fleet (at https://sites.tufts.edu/corruptarmsdeals/cas-global-ltd-and-the-private-nigerian-coast-guard-fleet/), the Independent was seemingly the only paper taking a look at that (at https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/two-british-businessmen-arrested-on-suspicion-of-involvement-in-sale-of-naval-vessels-to-nigerian-9991217.html), as I see it, the Guardian might not be guilty, it does have a few explanations to hand out, it will seemingly lash out at Saudi Arabia, but not much beyond that, Nigeria is loving it, I wonder how Saudi Arabia feels about being singled out and let’s face it, I personally perceive the GPT issue what could be set as an ‘Improper Offense‘, so I leave it up to the powers that be to decide, that was Jeremy Wright, trying it again and having Geoffrey Cox decide on it is a little childish, but OK, such are the rules, yet no one is asking questions too loudly on the Nigerian private security company setting up some similar form of payment for services whilst this involved selling 6 Norwegian former naval vessels to a privately owned security firm? And why does it matter, because like me two British business subjects thought it would be lucrative to enter the arms dealer world. It is a whole different level is it not? Robe Evans and David Pegg did write a good piece, and it is an opinion piece and we are and should be asking questions, yet I wonder if the writer intended the questions that are on the mind are the ones he wanted us to have on the mind.

The fact that in this day and age, whilst the UK STILL has not figured out its tax laws on properly taxing corporations filling its pockets in the UK whilst paying so little tax, it should be regard as an insult, are given all the space they need and the laws we see enable them and seemingly set the stage where other cases are not ignored for a decade, all whilst that one case had no real UK victims. OK, I admit that this is the wrong direction to go, but there are cases with an abundance of UK victims that seemingly do not get the attention or the jurisprudence it deserves, should that not be a first for the UK?

It is just one part in all this that we should consider before we consider anything else. And when we compare the Norwegian Navel issue towards private companies and one deal going towards the Saudi Government, where was our focus? That is before we see the elements in the Smith & Nephew deal, so they paid for it in the US, yet how much investigations was done regarding their actions in the UK?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

May 23, 2015 · 20:45

The outspoken lie

This is the issue we have seen many times in the last months. The lie perpetrated by people (including journalists) to keep them in some fake shape of ethical non-prosecution. The clearest one was shown by the Guardian Yesterday (at http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/may/22/secret-bank-of-england-taskforce-investigates-financial-fallout-brexit), it is not the first one, it will not be the last one and until some individuals get out of their lazy chair, it will never improve. The quote “News of undercover project emerges after Bank staff accidentally email details to the Guardian including PR notes on how to deny its existence“. This is not even close to an accident, you do not ‘accidently‘ add journalists to confidential e-mails. This is almost like me going to Lucy Pinder (famous UK Presenter) stating: “Can you please stand there, now bend backwards a little and please keep your legs spread and without knickers, so I can ‘accidently’ land my penis into your vagina” (sorry about the graphical intensity Miss Pinder)! Either event does not happen accidently, only intentional or orchestrated as I see it! We will likely hear on ‘accidental’ typos, on how names were the same, but the cold reality is, is the mere fact that some people are trying to be some misguided whistle-blower yet the other group are doing that intentionally, some to warn ‘friends’, some to influence the market. And this event is nowhere near the only one. I wrote about Brexit yesterday in my article ‘Is it all Greek to you?‘ there are several issues in play. There is the link to Natixis, regarding their over half a Trillion Euro issue. Is that information not really handy to have? So in my view what is currently ‘regarded’ as an accident is possibly a simple case of either whistleblowing or corruption! The next quote is another one we need to take issue with “The revelation is likely to embarrass the bank governor, Mark Carney, who has overhauled the central bank’s operations and promised greater transparency over its decision-making“. The issue is, is that there is no issue. The Bank of England has a clear responsibility to investigate economic impacts, this means that both Brexit and Grexit are to be investigated. You see, if Brexit becomes a necessarily evil, those making the decisions would need to have all the facts, not just ask for the facts at that point. So, 30 seconds after the Guardian revelation, Natixis and all its links, Airbus, HSBC and a few other players will now be preparing their own kind of noose, threatening the UK government on the consequences of going forward on Brexit, the equations as per today will be pushed in other directions, including by the US, who would get into deep insolvent waters the moment Brexit becomes a fact. So, the accidental mailer is in my view an intentional traitor to the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth. That person is an even bigger traitor as this is not about where the freedom of choice for a sovereign nation lies, but the fact that it is no longer able to get the true facts ready for the people to freely make a choice on, so when the referendum does come, the people are likely to get misinformed because powerful players do not like it when their profitability is on the line. It is of course every little bit useful for the large industries who believe in keeping the status quo of exploitations high, dry and mighty. So even though Mark Carney will likely be under fire of questions as per Monday, we must also see that in this case our Canadian Marky Mark is totally innocent (in this case). He did what a responsible governor of the Bank of England did. He made sure the correct facts were collected (tried to do so without kicking a fuss), a task that is now less likely to be successful. So as we look at what happened, according to the Guardian article, we see “The email, from Cunliffe’s private secretary to four senior executives, was written on May 21st and forwarded by mistake to a Guardian editor by the Bank’s head of press, Jeremy Harrison“, so as I see it a mail from Sir Jonathan Cunliffe went to 4 senior executives. Now we suddenly see that Jeremy Harrison had it. Was he one of the 4 recipients? It seems unlikely as the text would have stated something slightly different. It is the formulation that gives way to the notion that it is likely (read: possible) that one of those executives forwarded the mail to Jeremy Harrison and he did give it to the Guardian. So we have two issues. Who gave it to Jeremy and was the release to the press more intentional than not? That question remains an issue. Is this orchestration or blatant treason. Let’s not forget that treason means: ‘The betrayal of someone’s trust or confidence‘, in this case the trust AND confidence of the British parliament. So the people are confronted with a spokesperson who likely spoke out, against the wishes of the ruling governor. So this event will have consequences from Monday onward. The markets will react and after that we will see more events into escalations as the British people will get to see over the week how the Greek fallout will hit the markets and the European economies as a whole. The non-actions, or any act regarded too small by the people will shift political allegiances fast, yet that effect is less likely to be felt in the UK and more likely to impact France at present. And these Brexit revelations are not the first ones. That Greek tragedy called insolvency is riddled with ‘leaked’ documents all over the place. In February 2015 we had ‘Leaked documents reveal what Greece had to say at the Euro group negotiations‘, in this view, I agree with blogger Raúl Ilargi Meijer who wrote less than a week ago “Whenever secret or confidential information or documents are leaked to the press, the first question should always be who leaked it and why” (at http://www.theautomaticearth.com/2015/05/the-imf-leaks-greece/), but that is not what orchestration is about, is it? So are the events from the Bank of England orchestration too? If so fine (well not entirely, but that would not be my call), if not then please fire Jeremy Harrison and give me his job. I have no proper degree for the function, but at least I will not be leaking any documents. These events go a lot further then just Greece of course. The Herald Scotland gives us ‘Civil servant who issued RBS leak email links with Better Together leader‘ (at http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/revealed-civil-servant-who-issued-rbs-leak-email-links-with-better-together-leader.120666908) gives us “THE Treasury civil servant who issued an email leaking sensitive information about Royal Bank of Scotland’s plans to leave the country in the event of a yes vote had links to the head of Better Together campaign, it can be revealed“, so again the question regarded is, is this not corporate treason? Consider the quote “Now the civil servant who issued the communication can be identified as Robert Mackie, the son of Catherine MacLeod, who was a special adviser to Better Together leader Alistair Darling when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer“, was he preparing his own more comfortable future? Getting himself into the proper future setting with friends of Alistair Darling? These are questions to be asked, for sure. Of course, a valid question might be, why would the Royal Bank of Scotland, leave Scotland if it becomes independent? Is it about the lost power of image of its board members? I do not proclaim or imply to have the actual answers, but the truth is not likely to come out, which means we end up living an outspoken lie, does it not? My own little island Australia is not without its own negative merits here. The title ‘Leaked documents reveal problems within Air Warfare Destroyer program‘ should give cause for concern, because that is not a mere commercial/political issue, it is a military issue, where one might expect a little more bias into ‘disclosing’ classified information (me going out on a limb here). we see the information (at http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2015/s4232702.htm), where we get the quote “But documents obtained by Saturday AM reveal the alliance is now worried continued cost blowouts and delays are harming its shipbuilding reputation“, of course ‘cost blowout’ usually means that the leaders of those projects did not have a proper clue to begin with and the amount of 9 billion gives a lot more weight to my statement (the UK NHS IT program being a nice piece of 11 billion pounds in evidence), but that is not too unexpected. The quote “MARK THOMSON: With an alliance contract where you don’t have somebody clearly in charge, you can rapidly find yourself in a situation where things go wrong and people are looking at one another passing blame, not taking responsibility, and decisions aren’t made” is precisely to the point. Our own Marky Mark (not the one running the Bank of England) shows the major influence, a person that is clearly in charge. I would add that quality of communication tends to be a solid second one in these projects. You see, as these elements go back and forth the e-mail (read Memo) goes on and on. When someone is in charge we get that defining moment when they hear (or should hear). ‘Shut Up! This is what we have decided on!‘, yet military contractors (like Raytheon and Northrop Grumman) are very trained in encapsulating questions within answers, adding premises so that the water is murky, as this is all about their continues consultancy as those people are like lawyers, they bill by the hour per project (as I personally see it), so here again, we see the outspoken lie, now not by telling, but by omission through non-clarity. So as the article ended with “Last year problems with the AWD program prompted former defence minister David Johnston to warn he wouldn’t trust the government-owned Australian submarine corporation to build a canoe“, on one side it seems odd to bite the hand that feeds you, on the other hand the question becomes what evidence did he have access to? Was this a political move to shelter individuals or signal true issues? So now we get the news (less than 2 hours ago at http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/first-air-warfare-destroyer-launched-at-asc-osborne/story-fni6uo1m-1227366174513) ‘First Air Warfare Destroyer launched at ASC, Osborne‘, which should be a huge reason for parties as well as spoil a bottle of bubbly against the hull of that beauty. Yet, the article is not all good news. We see that in the quote “The occasion was overshadowed to a degree by Friday’s release of a Federal Government audit claiming the destroyers cost three times as much to build in South Australia as they would if they had been built overseas. It also found the total cost of the project had blown out to $9 billion“, so here are my questions in this:

  1. Could we ever rely on our defense by getting things build overseas?
  2. Who kept check on the expenses?
  3. If I go over the books and If I can cut more than 20% by invalidating time wasted on drawn out lines of ‘communications’ (I mean those long winded memos from these military contractors), will I get 10% of the 20% saved? (This should amount to 180 million) not bad for a few months’ work! You know, I had a dream where I ended up with 160 million and bought a nice house on Guernsey. I am willing to settle on 20 million less!

So here we see the outspoken lies! Political, commercial and even military, lines of miscommunication drained through ‘leaked’ documents. Is it all orchestration? Is orchestration not the same as treason when we consider the allegiance those people were supposed to have (in opposition where ‘leaked’ documents are a tactical move)? It would be for a court to decide, yet we will soon learn that these matters will not make it into any court, and as the cost blowout of 9 billion is shown, this leaky path will pay handsomely into the hands of businesses like Raytheon and Natixis, and what do you know, there are links between these two as well! So is this last statement my outspoken lie? Or can we agree at least to some degree that these companies all talk to one another? So in the end are governments getting played and who is actually in charge? That would be a very valid question as the bill got pumped by 9 billion, where 10% of that 9 billion could have solved the Australian legal aid issue (as well as a few other issues), so will any investigation into that issue result in a new outspoken lie (read: carefully phrased political conclusion without further accountability by anyone)? Time will tell!

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

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