Tag Archives: Amnesty International

In opposition

I don’t go into ‘in opposition’ mode too often, because it tends to be an exercise of mopping the floor whilst the tap is spilling right on the floor. And you come to the conclusion that it is better to close the tap FIRST, before you start exercising with a mop. That is merely my opinion, but it holds water (as the phrase goes). The exercise is the ABC article (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-11-23/f-35-fighter-jet-sale-saudi-arabia-uae-australia-weapons-exports/106029218) giving us ‘Australian F-35 exports face fresh scrutiny as jets approved for Saudi Arabia’ where we get.

So, as we get blatant stupidity from Australian shores with “The president also contradicted the 2021 US intelligence assessment by saying the crown prince “knew nothing” about Khashoggi’s killing.” I countered this case on grounds of the United Nations report by UN comedian Egsy Calamari (aka Agnes Callamard) in the article ‘That was easy!’ I found a dozen shortfalls on that report (which also uses the US Intelligence assessment) and beyond that I left the largest folly unspoken. At no time were the tapes actually forensically tested. They could have been listening to a tape with recordings of the Shadow, listening to Orson Welles. I reckon they didn’t do that, but the blatant holes in that investigation were astounding and they are paid 6 figure incomes? For what?

And the least said about “Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are among the groups who have called for arms bans to Saudi Arabia, especially after the 2018 murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the country’s human rights record, and role in the Yemen war.” The better. They turning their backs on the actions of Hamas and Houthi terrorist actions is astounding. As such I do not give too much credence to the writings of Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, and it makes little sense, they were a force for good in the 80’s, how the world turns. 

So whilst we get “Andrew Witheford, international and crisis lead from Amnesty International Australia, said putting the highly-lethal jet into the hands of another country in the region was “problematic”.” Really? So how is that view going for America and its Venezuelan repertoire? And beyond the fact that Saudi Arabia is a stable monarchy, it is making great strides in several factors. But don’t worry China is willing to flog their Chengdu J-20 by the Chengdu Aircraft Corporation at any time, and how will that help Australia? Oh, and I hereby claim my 1% bonus if Saudi Arabia switches to the Dragon, over that amount I would get (from China) $52 million, a nice retirement fund, so I can move to Toronto and Abu Dhabi, life can be fun at the autumn of your life.

How is anything that this article gives you all relevant to the setting? So as the ABC gives us “A Saudi-led coalition has been waging a war against the Houthi rebels in Yemen since 2015.” We need to realise that there are no Houthi rebels, there merely are Houthi terrorists.

But do not take my word for it, ask Colonel Turki bin Saleh Al-Maliki he has the recovered several drones used on Saudi civilian airports and civilian targets. The media was so great in filtering out those facts, I wonder if you do the same. Is there a setting where Saudi Arabia uses weapons in defence of IT’S OWN COUNTRY? Yes, there is, defence works that way. But the media is eager to avoid their gaze on the rough stuff, like the Ghouta chemical attack in 2013 where the population was hit by rockets containing the chemical agent sarin. It might not seem related, but it is, when the atrocities of terrorists are laid bare, the people will ask difficult questions of the media. And that is not good for the digital dollar, is it.

So back to the story, as we are given “The UN Arms Trade Treaty, to which Australia is a party, says states must regulate the export of “parts and components” used to assemble weapons if there is knowledge the arms would be used in genocide, crimes against humanity, or certain war crimes.” We see the uncomfortable truth that they do not address action of Hamas as it is not part of the UN Arms Treaty Trade, nicely played. But this sanctimonious setting is getting on the nerves of too many people and the setting of a journalist no one cares about has been playing out for 8 years. All whilst the people are pointing fingers at the one who states that he is innocent and for the better part there is no evidence, the media takes whatever they could to get more digital dollars whilst ignoring clear evidence. So as we now against get the US intelligence assessment, most will not be clued in that some of this is based on 

we need to consider ‘an intelligence service or operative simply has to make a stab at assimilating what all this means’, this can be surmised into one single word ‘Speculation!’, it is fair for Intelligence operatives to do, but in law it is set to evidence and there is none, something I saw in 10 minutes into the initial report.” as well as “The Special Rapporteur was not allowed to obtain clones of the recordings so she could not authenticate any of the recordings. Among other aspects, such authentication would have involved examination of the recordings’ metadata such as when, how the data were created, the time and date of creation and the source and the process used to create it.

The simplest setting of law, Evidence, you either have it or you do not and no one has any clear evidence and the US intelligence assessment of ‘Highly Likely’ does not hold water in court. 

The simplest of settings and it is interesting how the media is filled with Islamophobes drenched in anti Saudi sentiment, it is not a completely correct setting, but that is how I see it. As such I am in opposition for the simple reason of evidence. And consider this, Andrew Witheford, gives us  “The F-35 used to only be sold to essentially liberal democratic countries” is that not a from of discrimination? By the way if all sounds right, America has become a (according to some) an authoritarianism, as such why is Australia even producing the parts of the F-35? Just a small question to cleanse the pallet. 

Have a great day today, Monday is now less than 325 minutes away. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Where is the exit?

That is a question that is more often than not a valid one. We went to exit any setting, but there is the ego to consider, America has skin in the game (as the expression goes). As the Guardian gives us (at https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2025/jul/08/saudi-arabia-capital-punishment-executions-foreigners-drug-offences-crime-600-people-amnesty-international) last week, last Tuesday to be more exact, we are given ‘Saudi Arabia executing ‘horrifying’ number of foreigners for drug crimes’ with the byline “Hundreds put to death for non-violent drug offenses over past decade, with little scrutiny of Saudis, says Amnesty”, yup it is everyones favourite crybaby Amnesty International. I can’t really fault them here. They have a ‘strict’ setting and I get that, but the rest of the world needs to understand that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia takes a harsh views on any drug offense. So as we are given “Almost 600 people have been executed over the past decade for drug-related offenses, Amnesty International has found, three-quarters of whom were foreign nationals from countries including Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, Nigeria and Egypt.” It is like toddlers in a zoo. If you put your hand in the tiger cage, it will be bitten off. There is no ‘but’ or ‘why’ in this. It is the nature of the beast. Saudi Arabia is totally against drugs and they do not accept any other setting. You see, America might have started ‘the war on drugs’ around 1971 (optionally 1970) and for 50 years where we see that the setting should be seen as “at least $100 billion a year, and far from eliminating use, supply and production, as many as 300 million people now use drugs worldwide, contributing to a global market with a turnover of $330 billion a year” as such America has spend a generic $5,000,000,000,000 dollars on a war that has no exit strategy. Saudi Arabia isn’t falling for that trap and is not concerned for the 600 people who threw away their lives and is happy to end their seemingly pathetic lives. I am decently certain that their lives in Pakistan or Egypt would end in the same way. Although, I am certain that these two countries only give the death penalty on extreme cases (whatever that means), still the death penalty is in the cards there too. 

So, whilst every is calling the war on drug in America a lost cause and it is only in the eye of politicians who want to get coin out of this setting that they would ‘see’ an optional solution. I am of the mind that simply putting them all to death might have saved America $100,000,000,000 on an annual basis. That is the setting I personally see. 

So whilst we see “With little international scrutiny of what Amnesty describes as “grossly unfair trials” and a “chilling disregard for human life”, the rights organisation warned that the death toll would only increase.” We need to understand that Saudi Arabia sees drug use as a complete ‘no-no’ and they have strict laws in place. When we understand this, we should consider why these people go for drugs, and more important, how is this setting being supported? I think that most people in that ‘industry’ want their slice of a $330 billion cake and it is an annual cake, as such I wonder what is fueling this. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia isn’t wondering this at all. They merely execute the people who go for that dish and I get that. The American war on drugs is a stalemate for negotiations and a setting for delays and optionally some people get some out of this. Saudi Arabia sees them all as equally unworthy and treats them all to a one way ticket to the grim reaper, or towards Malak al-Maut as they call him. I reckon he is the American version of ‘Kill ‘em all, let god sort them out’ I have no real view on this. You see Saudi Arabia has capital punishment and the results are not unlike “Old Sparky,” who had been executing people since  1924 at the Huntsville Penitentiary. So is that any different? There is no setting of violent or non-violent. If you get caught with drugs in Saudi Arabia, they get a one way ticket to wherever they were supposed to go. It sounds harsh, but it is time that people realise that intentionally breaking the law in some countries has consequences and drugs have a finite consequence here. So when we see “Dana Ahmed, Amnesty International’s Middle East researcher, said: “We are witnessing a truly horrifying trend, with foreign nationals being put to death at a startling rate for crimes that should never carry the death penalty.” According to who? Is my question. You see “Saudi Arabia has a zero-tolerance policy regarding drugs and enforces its laws rigorously” as such I wonder where Dana Ahmed got her law degree. I kinda understand her. I am not in favor of the death penalty, but it is for every government to decide for themselves and as I see it, Saudi Arabia is not interested in wasting $100,000,000,000 a year on this problem. I get that too and I see that they decided to take ‘zero-tolerance’ to the next level and the people who cannot stay away from drugs, need to find a little burrow in America to see they lives through. As I see it Saudi Arabia said ‘not here’ and I get that too, I very well understand that. As such these people should have exited that country (preferably) before they got caught, they had the option between ‘leave now’ or ‘drugs now’ and they chose poorly. 

So whilst we see all parties cry their way into your hearts consider that it is well stated and openly documented that Saudi Arabia does not tolerate drugs of any kind, even as we might, we ned to learn that other countries have other values and they might not condone our recreational approach to drugs. That part I see missing here. There was a larger truth, it was there from day one and now we see that some are trying to seek other solutions, but the fact is that the other solution has proven to be a failure for over half a century and now that the funds are dwindling I reckon that America will get a new premise, it will go from ‘America first’ to ‘Healthy Americans first’ a setting we are likely to see before the years end. Especially when fentanyl is not only fueling political settings, America might take drastic steps to downsize that problem. So does that make Saudi Arabia a trendsetter?

Consider that and not merely the ‘bad’ feeling you get from a death penalty, consider what drugs and the drug market is doing to your economy. There are a few sides to this that Amnesty International does not want you to see, consider the impact of trillions on a war that never had anywhere to go. And you can afford this trillion, can’t you? 

Have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

It’s al about timing

Timing is an odd thing, the ridiculous idea that could be laughed out of the house is ‘suddenly’ accepted when the timing is tweaked. That happens in all walks of life and usually thing comes with a hindrance or an opportunity. It is a balancing of events that enable timing to get away with all things normal or not. In todays world (especially politics) it is a blending of events almost like a chemist mixing volatile matters. It is no longer the 1200’s when a person mixed charcoal, sulfurous ash and gull droppings and with a hail Mary produced gunpowder. So when President Trump announced ‘his’ idea for turning Gaza into a Riviera and set boots on the ground event to move the Palestinians to other places (temporary or not) there was a hushed silence (my giggling was seen as offensive). Yet now mere hours ago Al Jazeera gives us ‘Palestinians reject Trump’s Gaza plan’ with the byline “Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have said they would “never leave, no matter what”, after US President Donald Trump proposed the US would “take over” Gaza and relocate Palestinians from there “permanently”.” And that is not all. The same Al Jazeera also gave us (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/2/5/non-negotiable-saudi-arabia-flatly-rejects-trumps-gaza-takeover-plan) ‘‘Non-negotiable’: Saudi Arabia flatly rejects Trump’s Gaza takeover plan’ with the setting that we are given with “Establishing a Palestinian state ‘is a firm, unwavering position’, Saudi’s Foreign Ministry says, rejecting Trump’s ethnic-cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza.” As well as “Saudi Arabia reacted swiftly and sternly to US President Donald Trump’s pledge to “take over” the Gaza Strip, reiterating no normalisation deal with Israel will occur until Palestinians receive their own independent state.” So all this sweetness, which requires a cherry on top and the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2025/feb/05/trump-gaza-take-over-reaction-israel-netanyahu-middle-east-latest-live) ‘Trump officials try to walk back president’s Gaza comments – as it happened’ which gives us “Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, said the US president does not want to put any American troops into Gaza. Witkoff was on Capitol Hill on Wednesday to clarify Trump’s comments the day before, during which he did not rule out deploying US troops to the Palestinian territory.

“Witkoff said that the president doesn’t want to put any troops into Gaza, and that he doesn’t want to spend any US money on Gaza,” the Republican senator for Missouri, Josh Hawley, said, according to the Washington Post. But Witkoff did not suggest that Trump had abandoned his proposal that Gaza’s population of 2.2 million Palestinians be displaced from their land, the paper writes. It cited one senator as saying: [Witkoff] painted a scenario of a Gazan family moving back into tents, thinking ‘I’m going to get back into a dwelling in five years,’ and that is just not going to happen. It is a wasteland of rubble.

Yet the cherry is not found I n what was said, it is seen in what was not said. There is an overbearing amount of “does not want to”, yet what he wants to do isn’t said either. I reckon that Steve Witkoff was handed a piece of garbage with the message to sort it out (what a life he must have) and that is what he was trying to do. In all this what I seem to miss is that President Trump went in to speak his mind (sort of) and didn’t bother to rely on the people around him to test the speech he had in mind. This gives him bad reviews from the people he desperately wants money from (mainly Saudi Arabia) whilst one person stated that it would be “a breach of international law” all whilst others try to hide behind “it was prudent to sometimes “sit back” and not comment on all of Trump’s claims” which is an almost weasel setting as we have been made to believe during decades of presidency that the word of the president goes, which makes timing an interesting factor. This isn’t President Kennedy stating that we will put a man on the moon in a decade, this is someone stating to get rid of the Palestinians in no uncertain way. I would add to that that if it gets rid of Hamas he gets my blessing. But the reality is that When Egypt gets Hamas in their area they get a new dimension of troubles. As long as Hamas is focused on Israel Egypt is fine with them, in Egypt not so much. The same could be said for Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. Perhaps Iran would take them, but I am not holding my breath on that and for Iran it comes with other issues. As I see it no-one wants the Palestinians as they come with added baggage of terror and violence. Did no one figure this out as the Palestinians had nowhere to run to?

As for the setting of “he doesn’t want to spend any US money on Gaza” I come to the question “Why are you getting involved?” He didn’t want to boots on the ground, he doesn’t want to spend money, so what is there? Why get involved in the first place? As I see it the democratic party of President Bartlett would have done a much better job and they are merely actors. So what gives? As for Amnesty International (that now regarded useless bunch) gives us “Donald Trump’s description of Gaza as “demolition site” completely fails to include the Israeli government’s responsibility for causing the devastation to the Palestinian territory, Amnesty International said.” Gives rise to their uselessness as this started with Hamas starting an attack on the NOVA music festival on October 7th 2023, that was the exploding powder keg and Amnesty International better start doing a much better job at giving us facts that giving us “Israeli government’s responsibility for causing the devastation” which is as I see it a new level of political uselessness. 

That is the missing setting. The responsibility of Hamas. As I see it, the only Political player who had anything to say on this was Melanie Joly (Canada) as she gave us “Canada’s longstanding position on Gaza has not changed. We are committed to achieving a two-state solution, where Israelis and Palestinians can live securely within internationally recognised borders. There is no role for Hamas in the governance of Gaza. We support Palestinians’ right to self-determination, including from being forcibly displaced from Gaza” this is the missing piece. No matter what is done about the Palestinians it needs to clearly state that Hamas is no longer welcome in Palestine or the rest of the world. This will start again and again as they either by themself or through ‘requests’ from Iran will hit Israel again and this will start all over again and at present the Israeli’s are united and the next time could end the existence of Palestine or its people and the Palestines better be clearly aware of this. They better realize that they have lot grip on their media friends and political friends, even support will wane after the next Hamas attack. The film shots of the entire Palestinian population ‘walking out’ the hostages whilst showing them all the hate they could. 

With these images (CNN Drone) they are shown the people they are and people are realising that the world without Palestine could be a better place altogether. That is what Hamas ensured and enabled. That part is hugely missing in what I see it the Palestinian setting. The cause was Hamas, not Israel. Israel is merely fed up with the setting and we cannot blame them for that. 

But that isn’t stated in any of this, so whatever people try to walk back is depending on the realization that the plan was flawed from the beginning, not merely the talk from President Trump, but the actively guilty parties in play.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Hatchet do your job

It is perhaps the first time that I ever felt shame to have given Amnesty International consideration. It is the first time that I saw a once good organisation fall from grace straight into a sewer, that is the Amnesty International I saw today.

I started to read their report ‘Israel’s apartheid against Palestinians’. The problem starts on page 14. There we see: “Since its establishment in 1948, Israel has pursued an explicit policy of establishing and maintaining a Jewish demographic hegemony and maximizing its control over land to benefit Jewish Israelis while minimizing the number of Palestinians and restricting their rights and obstructing their ability to challenge this dispossession. In 1967, Israel extended this policy beyond the Green Line to the West Bank and Gaza Strip, which it has occupied ever since. Today, all territories controlled by Israel continue to be administered with the purpose of benefiting Jewish Israelis to the detriment of Palestinians, while Palestinian refugees continue to be excluded.” Perhaps AI needs a historic education. In 1948, the Jewish population started to see the impact Germany had, the impact inaction from others had. The German European rock tour of 1939-1945 had caused a holocaust where an estimate of 6,000,000 jews were put to death, they were put to death using industrial methodology, a system NEVER used before and the Germans almost pulled it off, a complete act of genocide using industrial methodology. 

[speculative part] I believe that the allies feared what would come next, thousands of super angry Jews would hunt collaborators and antisemites in EVERY corner of Europe, it would halt European rebuilding for decades. It gave urge for a State of Israel as fast as possible. And in 1948, less than 2 years after the end of WW2 it became a reality.
So when was the last time any issue of this size was settled within a decade? 
[end speculative part]

The state of Israel was created and the first thing the jewish population needed to do was to ensure their SURVIVAL. They needed to make certain that the world could not complete what the Germans had started. And within 20 years the state of Israel was stronger, yet also angry. The millions of ‘resettled’ Jews learned that their places of living were now becoming the most sought after and most expensive real estate in Europe. Areas in Amsterdam, Munich, Paris, and many other cities were now worth a fortune, its inhabitants thrown away and cast aside.

That report does not give this, does it? The people of Israel were thrown from one place into another place, a place where everyone wanted them dead. A return to the fears of WW2. That part is not given to us either is it? The report gives us one mention of ‘Second World War’ it is in footnote 69. The report gives us First World War, yet I find no mention of WW2. I searched several other words, there is no mention making this report a joke. There was a real fear for the Israeli’s in the state of Israel, there was a real fear of genocide and AI casually paints over that setting like it never existed. The word ‘holocaust’ appears twice in a report of 280 pages, a setting that was the most real fear jews and the people of the state of Israel ever faced and that fear is still real today with the abundance of antisemitism all over the world and Western Europe, the report ignores this. And it seemingly casually edits the events. I find no mention of “Kill the Jews” a setting that the people of Israel see thrown at them from Palestine, from Iran, from Lebanon. Israel is surrounded by enemies of the state of Israel and the Amnesty International report is blatantly unaware of that, or does a real good job pretending to be ignorant. 

This is important, because this is what set the start of the State of Israel, the Jewish people accepted their own state, but it was set in a poisoned well, a well that the Allied forces set upon the world so that they didn’t need to deal with all the collaborators and antisemites in Europe, a setting still true today. It took me less then 5 minutes to get to this and yes, I did not read the entire report. Just like I never needed to read the whole story of Blood and Oil by Bradley Hope and Justin Scheck a setting where journalists rely on fiction to get their wealth in. In the AI report we see “The following, by no means comprehensive, set of developments in the history of Palestine and Israel are pertinent to understanding the issues covered by Amnesty International’s report.” Interesting the the set of developments that I gave you all is not in their report. And that matters, WW2 was a catalyst of unimaginable proportions, to ignore that is to ignore the room where this political card game was played and this report is a political card game, to what end is not clear to me just yet. But just like the UN with their hatchet job on the Jamal Khashoggi case this report is equally dangerous. Certain people want to start a staged play, I do not know what stage or what play at present, but it is clear we are being played and that is a dangerous setting that the AI report gives us. 

It is a story dipped in misrepresented facts and that is perhaps the most dangerous game of all, because facts are one, but the underlying stream of events that led to these facts are in cases such as just equally important.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

Retry or retrial?

It is time to revisit a few issues, actually one issue and a whole lot connected to it. To start, I decided to go with The Verge, it has its ducks decently in a row, the article ‘NSO’s Pegasus spyware: here’s what we know’ is the best of them all, they also make reference to a lot of articles, and they have a decent line. The article (at https://www.theverge.com/22589942/nso-group-pegasus-project-amnesty-investigation-journalists-activists-targeted) is best if you read it yourself. Mitchell Clark did a good job, and as you have read the article, I can make a few jumps. The important jump gets us to the Washington Post (at https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2021/nso-spyware-pegasus-cellphones/). This came from the link in “However, much of the reporting centers around a list containing 50,000 phone numbers” and when we seek the Washington Post article, we get “reporters were able to identify more than 1,000 people spanning more than 50 countries through research and interviews on four continents: several Arab royal family members, at least 65 business executives, 85 human rights activists, 189 journalists, and more than 600 politicians and government officials — including cabinet ministers, diplomats, and military and security officers. The numbers of several heads of state and prime ministers also appeared on the list”, no evidence mind you, merely statement and boasting. I call it boast, because we see there that the Amnesty’s Security Lab examined 67 smartphones all whilst close to 50% had an inconclusive test. If this is 67, what about the other 49,933? So when we get to “NSO chief executive Shalev Hulio expressed concern in a phone interview with The Post about some of the details he had read in Pegasus Project stories Sunday, while continuing to dispute that the list of more than 50,000 phone numbers had anything to do with NSO or Pegasus”, my support goes to Shalev Hulio. The Washington Post has a declining amount of credibility and this does not help. From my point of view, I would have made a dashboard based on the 50,000 numbers with a clear separation, In the top layer the continents, then the countries, where we see number of mobiles, versus number of landlines. This basic setting was never done, how stupid is that? A second dashboard could be the identifying class (journalist, government, lawyer, NGO) just to coin a phrase, the Washington Post was all about emotion, not about fact. I see this as a prime time hack job, with the alleged journo’s being the hacks, we also do not get any level of trustworthy setting on how the leak got to the Washington Post. Question upon question and in the mean time we get to see “In Hungary, numbers associated with at least two media magnates were among hundreds on the list, and the phones of two working journalists were targeted and infected, forensic analysis showed” 4 people and 50,000 numbers, could the article be any less relevant? And the stupidity of the Washington Post does not end, no it goes further with “Amnesty’s forensics found evidence that Pegasus was targeted at the two women closest to Saudi columnist Khashoggi, who wrote for The Post’s Opinions section. The phone of his fiancee, Hatice Cengiz, was successfully infected during the days after his murder in Turkey on Oct. 2, 2018, according to a forensic analysis by Amnesty’s Security Lab”, we see ‘two women closest to Saudi columnist Khashoggi’, so how did they get there? Because the numbers were on the list? And when we see ‘The phone of his fiancee, Hatice Cengiz, was successfully infected’, so how was that evidence obtained? From my point of view the text “according to a forensic analysis by Amnesty’s Security Lab” just does not cover it. It even gets worse with “Also on the list were the numbers of two Turkish officials involved in investigating his dismemberment by a Saudi hit team”, I see it as a weak approach to mention “investigating his dismemberment” which was NEVER proven, the proof requires a body, they never got that, at best the man is theoretically still merely missing. And from there we get to “Khashoggi also had a wife, Hanan Elatr, whose phone was targeted by someone using Pegasus in the months before his killing. Amnesty was unable to determine whether the hack was successful”, consider the text “Amnesty was unable to determine whether the hack was successful”, if that is true, how come we get “targeted by someone using Pegasus in the months before his killing”, how was that timeline proven? It is a simple question, the article is a bad approach to give more visibility to a journalist no one gives a fuck about. I like the quote ““This is nasty software — like eloquently nasty,” said Timothy Summers, a former cybersecurity engineer at a U.S. intelligence agency and now director of IT at Arizona State University”, is it eloquent because the NSA never made it, or because an Israeli company has the lead on this? I wonder what Timothy would have said if this was an NSA application? 

And the Verge is on my side, they give us “WAIT, WHO MADE THIS LIST?”, as well as “At this point, that’s clear as mud. NSO says the list has nothing to do with its business, and claims it’s from a simple database of cellular numbers that’s a feature of the global cellular network”, which is supported by “A statement from an Amnesty International spokesperson, posted to Twitter by cybersecurity journalist Kim Zetter, says that the list indicates numbers that were marked as “of interest” to NSO’s various clients. The Washington Post says that the list is from 2016” and when we consider these quotes and we read the Washington Post article for the shite it seems to be, I wonder who is waking up to the fact that the media, all the other media is merely re-quoting what the Washington Post stated and it is absent of all kinds of facts, or they merely didn’t bother putting the facts there. 

The entire Pegasus setting seems like a Wag the Dog approach to whatever these papers want to create and it is optionally a setting (a speculative one) that this is the push from stakeholders who have an issue with the NSO group, all whilst no credible evidence is given to us that there is an actual issue. And in all this the money trail was ignored, I ignored it too, mainly because I was unaware, yet the Verge was aware and they give us “At the time, the costs were reportedly $650,000 to hack 10 iPhone or Android users, or $500,000 to infiltrate five BlackBerry users. Clients could then pay more to target additional users, saving as they spy with bulk discounts: $800,000 for an additional 100 phones, $500,000 for an extra 50 phones” this implies that the cheapest option would be 500 times $800,000, which gives us $400,000,000 that is a whole lot of cash for a lot of people no one cares about. Yes, there are a few alleged targets that makes the pricing worth it, but with the setting I have, there is no way that the 50,000 numbers make sense, oh and before I forget, if this is a list for multiple sources, how many of the numbers doubled up? Too many questions and the media stupidly reprinting what the Washington Post is giving us makes no sense at all, unless you are a stakeholder with anti-Israel sentiments. 

In this Shalev Hulio is right that he is “continuing to dispute that the list of more than 50,000 phone numbers had anything to do with NSO or Pegasus”, I would too and I found a lot of the disputable issues within an hour, I wonder how shortsighted the media was when they decided to reprint what the Washington Post gave them. So whilst the Guardian gives us ‘the global impact of the Pegasus project’, I merely see a storm in a teacup, because the issues in the Washington Post were never decently vetted on a few levels and that is likely the biggest failing of the media at present. It is merely my point of view and I am happy to state that I could be wrong, but the lack of credible evidence, all whilst the media has a declining level of credibility makes my view the most likely correct one, most likely, because I have not seen the evidence, but as you read the articles, that are all about details, lacking generic evidence, how would you see it?

2 Comments

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science

The devil rang

This is too good, I had just finished yesterday’s article and the Guardian gives me ‘Spyware can make your phone your enemy. Journalism is your defence’, in this that I have some troubles accepting that journalism is my defence, they are al about circulation and satisfying their shareholders and stakeholders (optionally advertisers too). But the article came at the right moment, even as this is about Pegasus and the NSO group. Whenever I look back at the title ‘Pegasus’ I think back to Pegasus mail and windows 3.1. It is a reflex, but a nice one. So, the article gives us “The Pegasus project poses urgent questions about the privatisation of the surveillance industry and the lack of safeguards for citizens”, which is nice, but Microsoft, Solarwinds and Cisco made a bigger mess and a much larger mess, so pointing at Pegasus at this point seems a little moot and pointless. (Microsoot’s Exchange anyone?)

Yes, there are questions and it is fair to ask them, so when we see “This surveillance has dramatic, and in some cases even life-threatening, consequences for the ordinary men and women whose numbers appear in the leakbecause of their work exposing the misdeeds of their rulers or defending the rights of their fellow citizens”, yes questions are good, but the fact that millions of records went to the open air via all kinds of methods (including advertiser Microsoft) is just a little too weird. And it is not up to me, it was The Hill who asked the people (5 days ago after the Kaseya hack gone public, the larger question that actually matters ‘Kaseya hack proves we need better cyber metrics’ and they are right, when we see “Once “infected”, your phone becomes your worst enemy. From within your pocket, it instantly betrays your secrets and delivers your private conversations, your personal photos, nearly everything about you” we read this and shrug, but at this point how did a third party operator (NSO group) get the data and the knowhow to make an app that allows for this? Larger question should be handed to both Google and Apple. The fact that the phones are mostly void of protection comes from these two makers. This is a setting of facilitation and a lack of cyber security. The NSO group decided to set a limited commercial application (more likely to facilitate towards the proud girls and boys of Mossad) and they took it one step further to offer it to other governments as well, is that wrong?

So when we see “All of these individuals were selected for possible surveillance by states using the same spyware tool, Pegasus, sold by the NSO Group. Our mission at Forbidden Stories is to pursue – collaboratively – the work of threatened, jailed or assassinated journalists”, if that were true, we would see a lot more articles regarding the 120 Journalists jailed in Turkey, not to mention the 60 journalists that were assassinated (read: targeted killing exercise) there as well. The papers are all about a journalist no one cares about (Jamal Khashoggi) but the other journalists do not really make the front page giving pause and skepticism to “the work of threatened, jailed or assassinated journalists”, my personal view is that the advertisers and stake holders don’t really care about those lives. Then I have issues with “This investigation began with an enormous leak of documents that Forbidden Stories and Amnesty International had access to”, was it really a leak, or did one government take view away from them (by Amnesty International) and handed it towards the NSO group? A list of 50,000 numbers is nothing to sneer at, as such, I doubt it was a leak, it was a tactical move to push the limelight away from them and push it somewhere else. As we consider Kaseya, Solarwinds, Microsoft and Cisco, the weak minded democratic intelligence players from the Unified Spies of America come to mind, but I admit that I have no evidence, it is pure speculation.

And then we see the larger danger “But the scale of this scandal could only be uncovered by journalists around the world working together. By sharing access to this data with the other media organisations in the Forbidden Stories consortium, we were able to develop additional sources, collect hundreds of documents and put together the harrowing evidence of a surveillance apparatus that has been wielded ferociously against swaths of civil society”, who did they share access to? Who reports to another faction that is not journalism or is purely greed driven? In this, the article (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/commentisfree/2021/jul/19/spyware-can-make-your-phone-your-enemy-journalism-is-your-defence) gives us one other gem, it is “not to mention more than 180 journalists from nearly two dozen countries”, as such we see 0.36% of the data is about journalists, so if I was to look at a slice and dice dashboard, how will these 50,000 people distribute? So when we see “If one reporter is threatened or killed, another can take over and ensure that the story is not silenced”, yes, how did that end up for those journo’s in Turkey? What about outliers in data like Dutch journalist Peter R. De Vries? He is not getting the limelight that much in the last three days, you all moved on? You pushed the limelight towards Jamal Khashoggi for well over a year, who achieved less than 0.01% compared to Peter R. De Vries. I reckon that this article, although extremely nice is there to cater to a specific need, a need that the article does not mention (and I can only speculate), but when we see all this holier than though mentions and we see an inaction on Turkey’s actions, as well as a lack of news regarding Peter R. De Vries, I wonder what this article was about, it wasn’t really about the NSO group and Pegasus, they are mentioned 4 and 7 times, the article was to push people towards thinking it is about one thing and it becomes about the 0.36% of journalists in a list of 50,000, all whilst the number is mentioned once in the article without a breakdown. Someone else is calling, when you answer, just make sure the local number is not 666.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Military, Science

After the fact

We have all heard the setting, when we set the new premise after the fact. Most will remember the average male response to the option of sex before marriage “Maybe I’ll marry you tomorrow”, and we then congratulate ourselves, as we got some. Some have a slightly altered versions and especially in the Netherlands no one has forgotten some of the songs from the era of the VoC, especially when sharks were thwarted and the other vessel had silver. But that one too did not end nicely for the sailor, he was also promised the daughter of the captain, the other vessel was sunk, but the sailor never made it. After the fact is in some cases brilliant, but is it? That is the question we see when we consider ‘Urgently Waive Intellectual Property Rules for Vaccine’, (at  https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/12/10/urgently-waive-intellectual-property-rules-vaccine), yes it might be a week old, but the vaccine search started a year ago, and now, some want to avoid the IP rules. That is not fair on the makers of the vaccine. Their motives might have ben greed driven, but over half a dozen firms started to look for a solution. That solution is not a cheap one and in this the firms took that investment, because the vaccine sales would set them right. It is a fair setting, the governments were not able to step in to make it themselves and they bought the vaccines, as such I might not like the approach, but I get the setting that is being met. As such seeing “help boost global access to Covid-19 vaccines, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said ahead of a key World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting in Geneva on December 10, 2020”, is as I personally see it utter bullshit. How loud were these two (on every channel) fighting for this a year ago? Why was there nothing to be seen in the mass of newspapers and digital news bringers? 

Yes, after the fact is nice, but AI and HRW do get get to sulk like little bitches a year later. There could be a case if the bulk of the newspapers and media had mentioned that setting over the last year, but they did not, did they? 

I get it, it is not completely fair on some places, but what options were given to these locations by the UN buying vaccines for these regions? 

When we consider the setting we see in the first “At the WTO meeting, the governments will discuss a proposal by India and South Africa to temporarily waive some provisions of the Trade Related Aspects of the Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. The proposal would facilitate technology transfers so that Covid-19 medical products, including vaccines, could be produced quickly and affordably by manufacturers around the world”, and in the second “Higher-income countries have already made deals to buy up the vast majority of the world’s potential vaccine supplies for 2021, so the move would help scale up access for people in lower-income countries”, the question is what will the pharmaceutical companies do? 

We see the Washington Post give us ‘Coronavirus vaccinations have started. But people in Africa face a much longer wait’, and before we start screaming foul, remember, that so far only 1.6 million on 75 million people died and these numbers show is that 23% of ALL the deaths are in America. This leaves us with a mortality rate of 2.13% (which is not a really fair setting), yet what is also given is that 70% makes a full recovery, we seem to forget bout those parts. In this the survival part is more accurate than the non-living part on a few issues, we see that basically, 27% of those who contracted the disease are not out of the woods yet. As such, n this setting we see over reaction and opportunity seekers, opportunity seekers is that this is happening AFTER THE FACT. I get it, they didn’t want to do it ahead of time, because the pharmaceuticals have no intentions to make something for free, which makes sense too. So when we see “Kenya, Eswatini, Mozambique, and Pakistan have joined India and South Africa to co-sponsor the waiver proposal. The proposal was welcomed or supported by 100 countries, most of them low- or middle-income. But a small group of high-income countries and their trading partners have opposed it; including Brazil, the European Union, Canada, the United States, Japan, and the United Kingdom”, we get that the low income nations need a solution and it will come, but the overreaction in light of the numbers we see are a bit out there and even as I have been against a whole range of pharmaceutical issues in the past, they do have their rights too, and TRIPS was there to enforce rights and duties. So to abolish it to deal with fear is just a bit of a no-no as I personally see it.

Is it fair on India and South Africa? Well that remains to be seen, but I do not see why, in India 144,914 died of the disease whilst India has well over 1.35 billion people, implying that their national mortality rate for Covid-19 is 1% of 1%, so what are they needing a vaccine for? The fact that 9,530,530 recovered from the 9,987,949 cases is also debatable, but that gives them that 95.4% fully recovered, as such why is India so up in arms on this? Perhaps the fact that for well over a year the numbers never made sense, perhaps India has a much larger problem, yet their pride got in the way of it all, so if they cannot properly inform us, why should they receive special consideration? I know, you might not agree and that I fair, but that is the setting. That is what we think plays. The Print (at https://theprint.in/health/india-is-missing-about-90-infections-for-every-covid-case-latest-govt-analysis-shows/567898/) gives us “Latest analysis by DST panel, that predicted end of Covid pandemic in India in February 2021, finds that about 60 per cent Indians have been infected so far”, that in light of the reported 9,987,949 total Covid cases, whilst the population of India is 1.35 billion makes less sense when those numbers were reported, all whilst they give us now (well three days ago) that 60%, implying that 810 million people in India have Covid-19, so what happened to the 800 million Indians in the numbers? 

At some point the ego of governments need to be held to account and I see no reason why they get to take the pharmaceutical players for a ride. In this I wrote this on October 31st “Even as India has well over 3 times the population of the US, there is no way that the numbers add up, with the US having over 9 million cases and India barely passing 8 million, the stage is not completely seen”, almost 2 months ago I questioned the Indian setting, the numbers never added up. I did that in ‘As jobs become available’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/10/31/as-jobs-become-available/), but no one (in the media) asked serious questions regarding that stage, why not? 

As such, as I personally see it, India has nothing to complain about, perhaps they need to elect officials that will give them the actual setting, not some story by Mother Goose. It is the stage they set themselves, as such the ‘After the Fact’ premise that we see given now is as I personally see it, a cold spud in space.

And the 100 supporters need to consider their own numbers. India might be the most visible one, but it is not the only one and this Covid-19 stage was a serious one and another one will come, there is no doubt about that part, as such these governments better start playing nice, better start giving the others the numbers that are true, a much larger stage could have been prepared by the world as India hd been upfront about the 800 million missing infections, perhaps the lesson they are handed now will improve their view of what matters, their ego or reality. 

Yes, it almost sounds inhumane, but we accepted responsibility of certain choices, like laws, trade laws and IP Laws, we cannot switch them off when it pleases us, because we might as well throw all laws overboard in that game, a stage that bodes a lot of harsh stages when this happens.

There is of course the conversation that India and South Africa can have on what to do the next time around and that is fair, that is just and yes, it is a stage we must acknowledge, yet it is not after the fact and that is the proper stage to play and perhaps it will result in an adaptation to TRIPS, I cannot deny of oppose that setting, the question is what the pharmaceutical players will set at that point. We can all accept that their IP, is just that, it is theirs. It does not mean that a deal cannot be worked out, but it is done in advance, it is a set stage where they can decide how to act and at that point the HRW can be all dog and less humane, what happens then? Time will tell, for now we have this issue in play and we still have no real view on how many distribution point there are and how 4,000,000,000-6,500,000,000 vaccines will get to their destination. Because that too is a stage we forgot to look at, that many vaccines will imply that mutations are almost a certainty, yet how many we will see is not clear, when that happens, global travel as we know it will change forever. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Science

Media glasses with blinkers

Normally I am all for ABC, they are really good at reporting, they have a credibility that is exponentially higher than anything Channel 7 or Channel 9 ever had, so for the most they are up there with BBC News and a few others. Yesterday however, we see (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-07-25/australian-company-sending-weapons-systems-directly-to-uae/11322974) news that requires reconsideration.

Now we cannot fault the headline, which gives us ‘Fighting Yemen’s dirty war, an Arab military is buying a weapons system made in Canberra‘, yet what is linked to all this is a very different matter. Even as we are given “The weapons systems have been flying across the world, from Australia to the United Arab Emirates (UAE), for months. But neither the company selling them, nor the Australian Government, has said exactly who is buying them“, we see the first inkling of consideration. Now, we should be clear that systems like that should only be available to established governments. So when I see: “More importantly, they reveal Australian company Electro Optic Systems (EOS) is selling its next generation remote weapons system directly to the UAE’s Armed Forces, which stands accused of war crimes as part of its role in the controversial Yemen war“, the news is redundant a the UAE had already pulled out (for now), the second part is that the UAE is a legitimate sovereign state and the Australian government has every right to sell these systems to a sovereign state. It seems to me that Dylan Welch, ABC Investigations has a very different agenda.

We see an initial consideration with: “The Australian Government has come under fire for granting EOS defence export licenses, given the growing criticism of the behaviour of the UAE military in Yemen“, and then we get the photos, we get more information and more directly, we see: “Now, new photos of RWS units at a Sydney warehouse have revealed the role of the UAE military and raise questions about the nature of EOS’s relationship with the Saudi Ministry of Interior. In total, the photos record four consignments for export in June and July — two each to the UAE and Saudi Arabia. One of the photos shows a pallet of RWS gimbals — a pivoting support structure — awaiting export earlier this month“, apart from the photo’s (which I am not disputing) there is a larger concern that this is an attempt by either Palestinian connections to Hezbollah, so a direct facilitator of terrorism, or a facilitator to Iran that is supplying these photos. Merely for the reason that they want their enemies (Saudi Arabia and the UAE to be as weak as possible) Whomever Dylan Welch is ingratiating himself to, it involves either Iran or a terrorist party. So when have you ever considered how certain media people get some scoops whilst not being in a warzone?

The article then relies on a photo by Khaled Abdullah; it is a side step to avoid any mention of Houthi forces and Hezbollah terrorists that have been operating in Sanaa. Now, this is not an attack on Khaled Abdullah, who is a Reuters photographer and is an original Yemeni, it is HIS country. Yet some of his photos (showing an amazing quality of photography and an eye for detail) is walking around in the heat of events with what is likely to be a killer camera. Yet, he seemingly gets around Sanaa without fear of reprisal, so he is either accepted by both Houthi and government forces (which would be fair enough), or there is another side here (I am not speculating here), what is clear this is a photographer with World Press Photo quality results. This part is important because the writer ignores the Houthi element as the quote “to support the internationally recognised Government against Houthi rebels” has the only one mention of Houthi forces. The article has zero mention of ‘Hezbollah‘ or ‘Iran‘, two words that cannot be no non mentions when we reiterate the headline part ‘Fighting Yemen’s dirty war‘, the two players are part of that dirty war and not mentioning them is an issue.

So when we come to the chapter called ‘UN lawyer: ‘Desist from supplying weapons’‘, I wonder how long we can stand this implied hypocrisy by Melissa Parke, whilst the elements, the proven actions by both Iran and Hezbollah are not mentioned anywhere. with my Liberal mind my speculative view would be: ‘Leave it to the stupidity of Labor not to speak out on the short-sightedness of Former Labor MP Melissa Parke‘, two elements that ignore the two damning entities, two players responsible for prolonging the war for well over an additional 2 years. And even as we see the act of arms banning, close to zero actions have been made against Iran and Palestine. Is that not weird too?

The issue will evolve further as we see “A group of Australian aid agencies including HRW, Save The Children, Amnesty International and Oxfam have formed the Australian Arms Control Coalition following the ABC’s stories and are lobbying the Government to suspend the sale of defence materiel to Saudi Arabia until the Arab nation can prove such weapons won’t be used to commit war crimes“, or a I personally see it, children trying to play a grown up game whilst 50% of the problem is ignored. If it was merely a Houthi issue, a lot of the weapons would never have been bought. Do you think that these governments are about buying weapons, whilst they could be buying super yachts made by Lürssen shipbuilders? If there is no direct threat to me, or merely a few confused peasants, do you I would go out and buy an Accuracy International L115 AWM when I could buy a Jaguar XF (2018 model) at almost the same price? You have to be kidding me, and that is not even close to the tip of stupidity, that is given by Melissa Parke when she gives us: “Let’s not forget that it is millions of innocent Yemeni civilians, women and children, who are bearing the brunt of this war. Their suffering is immense,” which is also a direct result of Houthi forces, directed through Hezbollah to keep all humanitarian aid, of food and medicine away from the Yemeni civilians, claiming it all for Hezbollah and Houthi forces. The fact that we were given earlier this month “The Yemeni government and the United Nations have expressed concern over a possible halt of the new relief programs in Houthi-dominated areas because of the group’s continued obstruction of humanitarian aid“, an important fact, especially in light of the senseless quote by Melissa Parke. The article by Dylan Welch should have added all that, as he gives opposition to what might be factual to issues silenced. It is that and the delusional labor strategy that gives light that ABC needs to dig a little deeper before they make certain claims. The fact that someone at the shipper has been supplying details is not for some humanitarian reason; this is propelled exposure to serve Iran and/or Hezbollah.

So when Dylan ends his one-sided stage through: “Australia as a good global citizen and a member of the UN Human Rights Council can play an important role in protecting Yemeni civilians. Providing weapons to a party to the conflict would not be consistent with that role” invokes the required (and utterly lacking diplomatic language): “then you fuck knuckles need to start giving us all the news, not merely make one claim and ignore what Iran and Hezbollah (the other side) are doing in the region“, OK, not my most eloquent moment, but I have had enough of one sided BS, WE get enough of that from too many stations and the fact that ABC is joining those ranks is a much larger cause for concern at present.

That part is reinforced when we consider that the same photo by Khaled Abdullah is use (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-02-20/australian-firm-eos-weapons-systems-bound-for-saudi-arabia/10825660) five months earlier, in addition, all the Dylan articles seem to lack any mention of Iran and Hezbollah, whilst the mention of Houthis is limited to a minimum, often only mentioned once, which is in light of the connected issues a larger concern, so not merely in the current article, but several articles, including the one with the headline ‘Australian Army veterans advising foreign army accused of war crimes‘, it seems to me that the quote: “I don’t carry a gun, don’t work in a uniform, don’t go to conflict zones. I would describe myself as a specialist consultant who deals in military training facilities — the best in the world” would result into actual questions giving us an in depth view, but Dylan was able to avoid that, he did highlight “Last month Buzzfeed America published explosive allegations about a mercenary hit squad targeting figures in the conflict in Yemen in late 2015 to early 2016“, yet absent from evidence and referring to more enlightened journalistic sources, for ABC ‘Buzzfeed America‘ was all that was needed to give delusional weight to it all.

It seems that there are larger issues in the media and that issue keeps on growing. I wonder what I would find on all the parts missed by those visiting the UAE and ultimately what the actual truth of the matter is, because at present it seems to me that the UN and the media are about keeping Iran out of view on certain matters and that is perhaps the most dangerous and equally disgusting path to find the media on.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

Oman’s neighbour

You might remember the state of Oman, capital Muscat. There are several reasons to remember Oman, the fact that they got into the news last March with: “The Central Bank of Iran has allowed lenders to issue guarantees for Iranian businesses planning to invest in Oman or those who seek to take out loans from Omani banks” is merely one reason. The fact that they are next to Yemen is the actual reason to mention them. You see, when you look at Amnesty International, you see (at https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2015/09/yemen-the-forgotten-war/) the quote “On 25 March 2015, an international coalition led by Saudi Arabia launched air strikes against the Huthi armed group in Yemen sparking a full-blown armed conflict. Over the following three years, the conflict in Yemen is showing no real signs of abating. Horrific human rights abuses, as well as war crimes, are being committed throughout the country by all parties to the conflict, causing unbearable suffering for civilians” is the issue. Now, let’s be clear, Amnesty International is not lying to you, but the setting that led to it is equally important. The missing part is: “Houthi forces controlling the capital Sana’a and allied with forces loyal to the former president Ali Abdullah Saleh have clashed with forces loyal to the government of Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi, based in Aden“, the setting is ‘former president Ali Abdullah Saleh‘ versus ‘deposed president Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi‘, deposed by the Houthi’s who had instigated a Coup d’état. I will admit that it is more complex than that (or better stated there are additional unmentioned facts here), yet the forced deposing of the then president Abdrabbuh Mansur Hadi is still an issue; he went for help towards his allies.

That part is an important part that is missing. After that things went from bad to worse with on the frontlines Iran using Hezbollah enabling the deniable launching of missiles on Saudi Arabia, that is a clear setting and this escalation has no sign of letting up or slowing down.

Now we get the setting that Bloomberg is giving us. the setting (at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-07-26/yemen-rebels-say-they-attacked-abu-dhabi-airport-with-drones), with the headline ‘Yemen Rebels Say They Attacked Abu Dhabi Airport With Drones‘, the issue is not merely that they have access to drones, the setting of the Iranian missiles and the fact that the Houthi’s are attacking both Saudi Arabia and the UAE (which is denied by the UAE) gives rise to other parts. with the quote “The source confirmed that the drone, Sammad 3, begun its operations by targeting Abu Dhabi International Airport with several raids, in response to the UAE crimes against Yemen” gives rise to the setting that this is no longer merely a Houthi versus the world setting, the entire premise that not only was there a new Drone developed, the Sammad 3 is also actively attacking the UAE, the question becomes is this done via Saudi Arabia, or via Oman, not merely transgressing on their sovereign land, but is it done whilst some in either government was aware? The direct path via Saudi Arabia makes more sense as there is a whole lot of nothing in that region. The second question becomes: why strategically deploy in this way? We might accept that whatever the Yemeni have is nowhere near what the US has, so it will be less than $12M per drone, but how much less is it?

In addition, what is the operational ability of the Sammad 3 (the speculated drone in question)? When you look into the timeline that one announcement comes after the announcement of the Sammad 2, whilst increasing the operational support 10 fold is also suspicious on a few levels. You see, every system increases as becomes better, but 1000% increase is a little much by any standard. Even as we accept that some strategies are better than others, Middle East Eye gives us: “Since the Saudi-led coalition launched its war in Yemen in March 2015, the UAE has been a key player. Yet, while Riyadh’s goal has been to restore President Abd Rabbuh Mansour Hadi to power and crush the Houthi uprising, Abu Dhabi has focused more on the south, training security forces to secure its own geopolitical ambitions“, in this we might question some actions, and they are to some extent, yet the overbearing issue is that there is an Iranian finger in this pie. Only 14 weeks ago we were treated to: “The Yemeni government says that Iran supplied the Houthi rebels with drones used to attack Saudi Arabia. On Wednesday, Riyadh said it shot down two drones in the south of the country and intercepted ballistic missiles launched by the Houthi forces in Yemen. The drones are “made in Iran”, said Yemen’s internationally-recognised government on Saturday. It added that the country’s military did not possess such aircraft and it was “impossible to manufacture them locally””, this not directly contradicts the Bloomberg news by Mohammed Hatem. You cannot erect a drone solution in this short a time span, not even if you had all the Viagra in the world, so the tool erected setting of Iran trying new tools in the political and escalating statement arena regarding ‘drone strikes’ is more than an issue. When we see the news given from Almasirah Media Network with ‘Air Force Unveils New Drone, Sammad 3‘, are they the tool or, was the statement by The National who by their own words are ‘committed to serving the local UAE community‘ misled and they are misleading the UAE community? You see one of the two is true, not both. No matter which path is the real one, it is my personal opinion that none of this existed without Iran, they are in the middle of this and the other media sources are trying to steer clear as some are trying to ‘save’ an illusionary deal with Iran that was never a real prospect to begin with. No matter which one is true, the Yemeni population remains in the middle of it all. there is a second side to this, the events in the red Sea where a tanker was hit is now stopping transfer of oil via the Bab el-Mandeb strait, potentially upping oil prices. It is a clear intentional push for the US to get involved, especially after we were told “A huge tanker with a shipment of oil from Saudi Arabia bound for Egypt was damaged by a missile attack from the northern Bab el-Mandeb strait in the Red Sea. The Houthi rebels in Yemen, armed and financed by Iran, were responsible for the attack. It happened in the wake of the renewed exchange of threats between the United States and Iran, which could also hurt the oil market” (source: Haaretz), in addition we got “Iran’s Quds force chief Qassem Soleimani said on Thursday that the Red Sea was not secure with the presence of American troops in the area”, so there is a much louder setting that Iran is willing to escalate towards direct outspoken war. I reckon that as Europe is becoming meaningless, the direct involvement of Iran will turn defeat to victory. That is not only not given, there is every chance that the UAE and Saudi Arabia will make a united front, in addition, the naval actions could be bad times for Egypt, so there would be additional support for Saudi Arabia and the UAE. The questions will soon become, where does Qatar stand in all this and what are their options. They have their own worries as accusations more and more ridiculous are hitting the media. It seems that the Sydney Morning Herald is becoming the joke of independent journalism, whilst merely parroting that idiot Martin Ivens (as I personally see him in all this) on “In article published by The Sunday Times alleges the Qatar bid team used a PR agency and former CIA operatives to disseminate fake propaganda about its main competitors, the United States and Australia“, whilst the Sunday Times still has not given the people the millions of documents he stated he had with the previous accusations, so we can all optionally agree that Nine Networks is now wearing the pants in the new merger. That matters, because some are not merely tailoring to the needs of places like (censored name of sponsor), they are setting the stage for unsolicited change and through these events they are adding needlessly to pressures in the Middle East.

Pressures that need avoidance because the expression ‘If you have to fight, fight like a cornered cat‘ is a role that Qatar could be pushed into. I actually prefer the Dutch version of that expression which is ‘A cornered cat can move very unpredictable‘, that is more worrying, because the unsubstantiated accusation are an actual issue on a few levels now. so when we see “the alleged smear campaign included paying a professor $US 9,000 to write a damning report on the economic cost of a US World Cup, recruiting journalists and bloggers to promote negative stories in the US, Australian and international media, and organising grassroots protests at rugby matches in Australia“, we demand to see that report, as well as all other evidence; we need to be shown clearly where the lies in that report were as well as the other evidence. Is that not simple? Show us the ACTUAL evidence!

All these settings are important. We can vocally set the stage against Iran (like I am doing with both evidence as well as a comic look at the two images earlier), and I can look at the presented and i am using the published details available to me with all the settings that are open to the audience at large. I never proclaim to have all the wisdom in the world, yet hiding behind ‘unnamed sources’ and ‘unpublished evidence’ like the Sunday Times, whilst I regard them because of that as nothing more than a mere courtesan to sponsors, that is how I see their actions, when the need to investigate FIFA was there, these media buffs were all about the hooker in the bookcase, the entire setting of the media had become questionable. The setting of the Garcia report, whilst the newspapers and media failed to hammer down on Hans-Joachim Eckert, so when we got the ‘refused to publish on various legal grounds‘, who went after Hans-Joachim Eckert? the entire matter also involved the Qatar 2022 cup bids, so as it stands, we need to make sure that places like the Sunday Times and the SMH are now also optionally the spreaders of Fake News, but that is apparently not the case when they have their unnamed sources.

Even as I spoke out in the end against Qatar 2022, it is only because of the stage that Qatar found itself in. It is not up to me who got them there, some was all their own doing, but a larger part was the act of smear campaigns that we see now. Almost four years of smear campaigns. If we are to actually do something about it, then EVERY newspaper is to offer the 350-page report of Michael J. Garcia from September 2014 on their website with a full page 3 summary of the report. That is the first moment that we can start taking journalists serious again (possibly with the Sun as the one exception). It is my view that anyone who was part of misleading regarding Qatar, or in the other direction supporting in falsehood the Qatar bid should be barred for life from every official sport event. It is the only way and that is merely the one side-track that the Yemen situation now calls for. With Iran upping the stakes in Yemen and with alleged drone strikes on UAE and actual attacks on Saudi Arabia, how long until one of them sees a reason to lash out against Qatar? You see, the plot is also thickening when we see the Iran increasing non-oil trade with Oman by 136% in the last quarter alone. That is half a billion in value, now we can agree that every nation has and needs trade, so I would be the last one to state against it, yet there is every indication that Iran is trying to set the mood fir additional change. Some will remember the setting last year when we were offered “Bank Melli Iran and Bank Saderat Iran will resume their operations in the Omani capital Muscat which had halted during the sanctions that cut off Iran from the international financial network“, this is now seen against the news from March when we saw ‘Iran, Oman resolute to grow banking relations’ with the additional quote “Drafting an operational and practical program with opening joint accounts based on the national currencies of Iran and Oman, independent from foreign currencies, should be considered as one of the requirements of developing banking relations“, so what happens, when the setting of the national currencies becomes the foundation of a credit swap where oil is the determined value? It is merely one step away and the US crying for cheap oil is that one element that could make it happen. The US not acting against Oman, whilst knowingly allowing for the swapping of Iranian originated oil based CDO’s is not that far stretched, is it?

Now we have billions in funds, an operational drone team and additional Hezbollah populists trying to set the stage in Yemen. there is support for that view (to the smallest extent), Arab News two weeks ago gave us: “Yemen’s foreign minister has called on Lebanon’s caretaker government to “rein in” Hezbollah and its aggressive tactics in support of the Iranian-backed Houthi militia“, whilst in addition, whilst the National gave us last week: “The UAE Embassy in Beirut has denied claims made by Lebanon’s pro-Hezbollah Al Akhbar newspaper regarding an “Emirates Leaks” report that says Abu Dhabi is applying pressure on Muscat over the Qatar crisis. The embassy has called the leaked diplomatic correspondence from the UAE Embassy in Muscat “false” and said that it was aimed at creating tension with Oman“. We need to realise that the two are unrelated articles are merely that. One has apples, the other pears and the fact that they both represent pieces of fruit is no evidence, changing one of them into oranges does not behold additional truth that should be clear. Yet the stage where Iran decided to increase trade by 136% is a shown fact and Iran has been doing something similar with Turkey which has not given Turkey an additional amount close to $5 billion in the last 6 months alone. Iran is setting a trade stage where in the end, in light of their devaluation and monetary value can soon (or already) only be honoured with oil, how quaint!

It is not merely the plans in place, it is the funding that these projects require, that is where it seems to make sense, but it is not a given that those are the only paths that are being trodden. You see, there is still the Uranium enrichment program that is worked on. With those in the works, we see the need for serious amounts of cash, skills and equipment, all that from a setting where the infrastructure was no longer able to meet the financial needs and the commitment from Iran towards Yemen by the Iranian commander in chief shows that the next step is not that far away, they will need resources and there is now at least a partial setting in place where the facilitation is close to complete. From my point of view, lowering the pressures on Qatar allows Qatar to walk away from Iran as far as possible limiting the options that Iran has, and that is an essential requirement at present.

Even as we see several sources give us lines like: ‘Oman and Kuwait has taken a neutral position in the dispute involving Qatar‘, I am actually less and less convinced that Oman is completely neutral in all this. Is the trade merely growing sympathy in Oman, or is news from places like Sarfayt and Dhalkut changing the sentiment that the people in Oman have? I actually do not know, but something seems to be stirring in Oman, perhaps it is not a pro-Iran feeling, merely a lessened anti-Iran sentiment, they are not the same. What does matter is that all this is escalating giving Iran more options in Yemen, to counter that outside of a full scale event in Yemen is to take away the available fuel that Iran has and I think that removing pressure from Qatar is a first step in all this. Should this be successful, we might see a setting where Oman feels less comfortable having strong ties with Iran, which seems to serve everyone’s purpose (except Iran of course).

 

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics, Science

Seeing correctly and that view’s danger

The title makes no sense to some, if you see something correctly, why is there danger? You see at present we have what some call a fluidic situation in regards to Iran, Israel, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. They are all connected and as such, certain parts I stated yesterday have been proven correctly. Now, the longer game cannot be predicted, because when they are moves and countermoves in a setting that changes, we cannot always predict certain moves, they are based on intelligence out there and internal intelligence available. For example, in the gaming industry, we see ‘leaked’ information from both Microsoft and Nintendo, yet is it actually leaked as we see it, or did their marketing/corporate department leak information to get the feelers out, to test the audience, in the month preceding the biggest gaming event of the year in the world, it does matter, there are 200 million gamers up for grab and Microsoft felt directly how negative that can get in 2013; what it feels like to piss all them gamers off; it took 3 years to stop the damage, now consider that this is not a video game, but a political arena where it is about billions, about lives and about setting the world stage, the stakes get to be higher. So as I said “the connection between Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and the Iranian military is closer and stronger than either of them ever had for President Rouhani, that is the setting and even as both ‘tolerated’ the elected president, they have been ready to go it alone” (on May 7th in ‘Stopping Slumber, Halting Hesitation‘). Reuters gave less than a day ago (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-nuclear-rouhani/irans-rouhani-seen-as-lame-duck-after-trump-ditches-deal-idUSKBN1IA287), where we see ““Khamenei prefers a weak president. Rouhani will serve his term, but as a lame duck,” the diplomat said“, so not only am I correct, the dangers of a hardliner replacement like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is not just likely, it is now almost a given that whoever comes next is not a puppet, it is a person completely in line with the hard-line position of Ali Khamenei. Now we don’t get to have a ballgame, now we have a hard-line setting that will impact the entire Middle East. Reuters got this from ‘an Iranian diplomat, who declined to be named‘, just like Nintendo and Microsoft, Iran is now testing the waters on who stands where. Iran’s larger issue is not on how it attacks Saudi Arabia, it is on how the others react and at present it seems like there will be forceful defence of Saudi Arabia and Israel, their position and what they feel is justified. The US and Europe are in their corners. That is the issue Iran is dealing with, because there is a clear support against Iran, whilst at the same time we see ‘Putin Is Giving Israel a Free Hand against Iran in Syria. But He May Soon Have to Pick a Side‘ (source: Haaretz), as well as ‘Russia seeks to take mediator role between Israel and Iran‘ (at http://www.arabnews.com/node/1300286/world), this is more important; as we see “Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Thursday that “all issues should be solved through dialogue.”“. There is the crux of the matter where we see that Russia will most certainly not back Iran, but will at times come to their supportive aid (at a price of course), especially when they can have a go at the USA. That last part is speculative from my side, but we have seen enough evidence over the last year to see that be a partial gospel truth, or we could water it down with: ‘it is the crutch of the matter as Israel ends up having Iran by the balls at present

Even as we accept “Russia has become a major player in the Middle East since intervening in the Syrian war on the side of the Damascus regime in September 2015. Analysts also highlight its role as mediator in other conflicts in the area“, as a lot of it is true, depending on the coloured lenses you wear in your glasses, but the foundation has a setting. In this Russian analyst Fyodor Lukyanov is correct. Alexander Krylov, a foreign policy expert at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations gives us “The role of Russia as a mediator is strongly appreciated in the region. This role will be reinforced if the crisis between Israel and Iran worsens,” that too is true, because bluntly stated at present America has no real credibility left outside of the actual support given to Saudi Arabia and Israel. The Middle East is a lot larger than merely Saudi Arabia, even as they are not seen as large players, the still pack a punch and as such the UAE and Qatar will have a voice. The setting at present does not give the UAE a pro Saudi view (speculative) but in equal measure they will not side with Iran as I see it, not on this scale. Even as there is a link between Qatar and Iran, it will not hold, when hostilities grow, Qatar will isolate themselves away from both parties because the largest fear for Qatar is that they become the beachhead for Iran or the entrenchment for Saudi Arabia. When either of the two happens, do you think that after that Doha will look like this?

Just google: ‘Images of Ghouta‘, that is how Doha ends up looking like with a FIFA event merely 3 years away, so that would be instantly cancelled at that point, oh,. FIFA is already on that, not merely because it is Qatar, the anti-Qatar slurs of the media has been long and lasting, a (let’s just be blunt) fucked up situation caused by stupid greedy people who have been taking the longest gravy train ride. When we are all treated to “The British press continues to be hostile towards Qatar because the tournament will be held during winter, to avoid the searing heat in the Gulf“, because they want a 100% exploitative coverage, and Qatar with its weather got in the way of that and large sponsoring corporations like Coca Cola and every other FIFA sponsor now get a 40% reduced bang for their exploitative buck, now they are suddenly willing to go all out, and it links to all this, it matters!

In that setting we are treated to half-truths, especially by the media who willingly looked the other way on all allegations regarding Sepp Blatter, or is that ‘step bladder’ as he was pissing all over everyone for the longest time? When was the last time when you looked at all the work from BBC reporter Andrew Jennings? He was ignored and partially shunned as I see it, and as we saw the escalations regarding all this with “In 2012 the Sunday Times revelations sparked a genuinely independent inquiry by a former US attorney general, Michael Garcia. This report was delivered to Blatter, but he has refused to publish it in full“, the full report was never shown (at that time), merely an example of evidence on how large corporation are in charge and the law is just a nasty side effect that can be ignored when certain people call the shots. So when we see ESPN give us “While the mystery of what details are contained in the full 430-page dossier has been revealed, it does not contain any additional proof of major acts of corruption. However, Garcia said some bidders tested rules of conduct to the limit“, that is ESPN, a sports channel, not the Times, the Guardian or any other newspaper that should have taken it to the front page. The article started with “FIFA released the full contents of the Garcia report that examined alleged corruption in 2018 and 2022 World Cup bidding on Tuesday, one day after it was leaked to German newspaper Bild“, so there is clarity, FIFA only released it when they learned someone else had it already. That is the game played by the press who are ALL afraid for another Leveson inquiry for them to be held to account. In this we see people like James Quincey (CEO of Coca Cola) get to tell the media and others what to do, we see that politicians are no longer in charge, they are merely caretakers, janitors of the high and mighty and the press remains around as mere facilitators of the lot. In this there is another matter that I can feel happy about to message towards Martin Ivens, editor of The Sunday Times to get the fuck out of his office and never return to media (period)! Remember the claim of “obtained millions of secret documents – emails, letters and bank transfers – which it alleges are proof that the disgraced Qatari football official Mohamed Bin Hammam made payments totalling US$5m (£3m) to football officials in return for their support for the Qatar bid“. In all this he is allowed one defence, by publishing all the evidence he claimed to have had. But that will not happen will it?

How is this related?

The entire setting of the Middle East is set for our eyes in misrepresentation by newspapers all over the world. They tell the stories that they are told to tell. I call it at times, writing with blinders, like a horse so they do not get scared by all the events around them. it is one thing to not inform us of everything, another to give us a pack of lies, to stack the deck against us and in all this the media is still at it, facilitating for all the Satya Narayana Nadella’s and James Quincey’s in the world, they are not alone and there are a few. In this these two named people are not evil; they are merely representing the best interest of their shareholders, which is their function is it not?

That is what is in play, Qatar will soon be optionally in the thick of it and their only safe move is not to play the game, to isolate them from their opposition (Saudi Arabia) and their non-friend Iran, they basically have no moves available and that is fine, but we need to make sure that the people realise and understand that no matter how they got to a certain stage, they need to remove themselves from the game, no longer be the pawn in this, the Iranian setting has shown to be adversarial and committed to a long term game to become an active enemy, delusional imagining themselves as conqueror of Saudi Arabia and the exterminator of the state of Israel, but not at the same time, that was never going to work, this is why it is my personal view on the matter that Iran resorted to ‘puppets’. Turkey and Hezbollah are the main ones, they were trying to be as thick as thieves with Russia, but they are no fools and they took the middle path at the earliest setting of them getting into warmer waters. Now the other players see certain matters evolve and whilst Mossad was kind enough to give the people something to read about, it was not enough, yet when we aggregate 15 months of news cycles, we see a path that shows a long term commitment of Iran taking a different path, the path I feared when people were trying to get cosy to President Rouhani to alleviate Middle Eastern tensions (in perfectly valid ways), the truth (as I personally see it) was that Iran had no one to replace Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a committed hardliner, a politician that does the bidding of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Major general Mohammad Bagheri. They needed one that accepted both and I expect that one is in the works, but President Rouhani (the lame duck as voiced by one Iranian diplomat) is not that person and the other two are too powerful for President Rouhani, there will be no moderation in Iran. They are set to destroy their opponents no matter what, their one view is the only one that counts and as such, we might prefer to not be part of it at all, especially as non-Muslims, but they have given us no option, none that are diplomatic that is, we have to side with Saudi Arabia in that setting. Qatar is standing in a shallow spot with too many requiring water, and as solutions dry up, there is every option that Saudi diplomats, together with the GIP (Ri’āsat Al-Istikhbārāt Al-‘Āmah) can change that setting. I personally believe that Iran overplayed its hand a little too soon; perhaps they thought that the timing was right? It remains speculative yet the setting is now that the Iranian Qatar links can be (permanently) broken, in addition to all that the setting offers an option to ‘rekindle’ certain connections with the UAE which now puts the entire Yemen/Houthi situation in play where with the removal of Iran things could be resolved and actual humanitarian aid could commence, which would be a relief for millions of people all over the world. In both matters Iran ends up holding the wrong cards and an additional crack in the Iran/Hezbollah veneer could be created, in this setting, no one will care about the survival of the terrorist organisation Hezbollah and their only path is to hide in the deepest hole, hoping that some of them might survive at best.

I am certain that the matters are seen correctly, we are in an almost hostile setting where we limited options by misrepresenting nations and their views for the need of corporate greed (Qatar), we have been facilitating through all kinds of means to get a fictive deal in place, one that is shown more and more to never have been realistic (Iran), we have alienated other nations by demanding that they adjust to our way of thinking (Saudi Arabia) and in all this we went out of our ways to not hold others accountable because of other needs that the EU had for their personal little deals (Turkey), it is in all this that we should be creating a solution path, yet some have limited moves through previous acts and now that there is a time limit in place to prevent serious escalations, we suddenly see that we are in a place where Russia of all players ends up being the best placed for mediation in this, which will of course delay the second cold war for a fair bit, so we have that to look forward to as well.

In all this we see another reflective part towards this situation and the entire unacceptable mess within FIFA. With ‘Swiss prosecutor appeals for cooperation on FIFA case file‘, we see: “Switzerland’s attorney general has a message for his foreign counterparts as his office pores over reams of seized documents and dozens of criminal cases linked to FIFA: “Come to us.” Michael Lauber said Friday the investigations require both quick action and patience, and noted “good developments” like how growing cooperation has led to 45 requests for legal assistance from Switzerland with regard to soccer“, as well as “One of the complexities, Lauber said, is that Swiss law has no clause for cases of private corruption, meaning that his team has to find creative ways of going after suspected wrongdoing at times — as with the disloyal management allegations against Blatter“. This is interesting as most of the media left us in the dark, but moreover, we see that this was given to us on April 20th 2018. The question becomes regarding FIFA, what other options were never looked at or actively engaged in, and if this escalates and explodes, do we have any recourse left?

Are we in a place where corporate corruption in facilitating towards media and big business in all this is tolerated, what is left for us? If the sports can no longer be trusted, can we merely claw back to the old days that there are no licenses and sports can be freely covered by any media, remove all exclusivity whilst banning advertisements on EVERY sport event. So how many heart attacks could I cause in these higher corporate echelons by demanding this move to be made by the UN on a global scale?  #IDoHaveASenseOfHumour

When you see the media outrage on freedom of the press and the right to know, should that not include coverage of events? In that regard, when the media screams at that point, who will they be representing, the shareholders, the stakeholders, the advertisers or those watching the event, the actual audience? Now take that view towards the Middle East and the escalations and limitations we see, and especially the innuendo not backed by facts or evidence. The Middle East situation is indeed more complex, yet in part we made it that way, so when we see Amnesty International (at https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2017/02/free-turkey-media/) with ‘Turkey: Journalism Is Not A Crime‘, and we realise the quote “Since the failed coup attempt in July 2016, academics, journalists and writers who criticise the government risk criminal investigation and prosecution, intimidation, harassment and censorship. Coupled with the closure of at least 180 media outlets by executive decree under the state of emergency, the message – and the resulting effect on press freedom – is clear and disturbing. The severity of the Turkish government’s repression of the media is such that it has been described by some as the “death of journalism”“, so when we see this and also realise that this is not the leading story in EVERY newspaper in the free world, why is that? Now consider last January we got: “Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan was in Paris for talks with Macron, part of efforts to improve his government’s strained relationship with Europe. Macron confirmed that Turkey’s wait for EU membership was far from over and suggested a partnership instead in the meantime“, the use of ‘meantime‘, an implied setting of facilitation and the fact that Europe is bending over backwards allowing Turkey to get the sweet spots and not being held accountable for not one, but optionally two genocides (Armenia and Kurds). Can anyone explain where the press is in all this, because it remained ambiguous for the longest of time!

So in the end, how should we see that endangered view, is it merely projection versus perception? I do not belief that this is the case, but that might be merely my view on the matter.

And he game is not over, the issues we will see next week will be impacting on several issues at present and not only for the nations separately, some of the links will be influenced by several events and high end meetings, so next week I might end up looking entirely wrong, as we see some state it in a certain way, like for example: “it was in everyone’s best interest to make certain changes to the agreement as it was currently set”. That is the mere reality of the matter. Yet they will not change the answer, they will end up changing the question so that it matches the answer, which in the end is not the same.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, Media, Military, Politics