Yes, we see that at times. There is legality to nearly anything and it is not always clear how to steer the law. Even as we were given yesterday (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-64897423) the headline ‘US six-year-old who shot teacher won’t be charged – prosecutor’ there are no real questions on that setting. A 6 year old is too young to understand the law (Doli Incapax), as such he cannot be prosecuted. Yet when we look back at ‘United States of Criminality’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/01/09/united-states-of-criminality/) now over two months ago. I gave the reader “more important nothing on the parents. Is anyone waking up? Then there is CBS who used the line “a handgun was used”, was that all? There are over 170,000,000 of handguns in the US (according to one source) there are thousands of brands. I think that the police from day one could have done better than “a handgun was used” and the media never followed up on it, at least not from the dozen or so sources I saw. So why not? What makes this case different? Who are the parents? I let you simmer on this” and even more on the story before that, a day before that I gave the readers “He also would not comment on how the boy got access to the gun or who owns the weapon” that was more than two months ago. Now we see “authorities in the city of Newport News have yet to decide if any adult will face criminal charges in the case” with the added “once we analyse all the facts, we will charge any person or persons that we believe we can prove beyond a reasonable doubt committed a crime” It took me less than 5 minutes to get to there in January and two months later the locals did not even wake up yet. So any weapon BS approach is now non existent in the US. Two months and nothing was done, so don’t come to me on anti gun laws, on anti violent crimes. A setting that was clear where the parents had clear responsibility to keep guns out of the hands of children these parents failed miserably. I would speculate that this stinks of nepotism. The Law, the media they all failed here and there is enough printed evidence to make that case of failure. There is enough evidence to wonder what on earth the police forces in Virginia is doing, so far they did close to nothing. The school failed, the police failed, the law failed. As I see it that teacher is due a 7 figure payout and the first number will be well higher than a ‘1’. As I see it the media is merely milking these situations, if not the entire Virginia case would have been on the forefront of EVERY news cycle for weeks to come and perhaps something would have been done, but it isn’t. So if you want to get angry about gun laws, do something about these failures, because they are clear failures on multiple levels no less.
Tag Archives: BBC
Words of a feather
That is at times the setting. It starts nice for me, as I got subjective confirmation that one branch of my solution is set to a stage that is unfolding EXACTLY how I expected it, and as such the first stage to 50 million subscriptions is close to set, the second branch is in the same setting, but requires something specific. Which now leaves the third branch and there is some friction there, but for the most, it should work, especially if advertisements on rules and regulations unfolds the way I hope. In this I created three advertisement tomes. Like the Yellow pages, but with a difference and if that works Facebook will see the impact too. A stage where I had the right approach all along and that feels good, especially when a player like Amazon buys it (I had hoped for Kingdom Holding to buy it), but beggars can’t be choosers.
And this gets me to the story of the day. The story came from the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-64859780) and is less then an hour old. And the reflection is seen in the article (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/02/27/on-the-subject-of-failure/) called ‘On the subject of failure’ which I wrote on February 27th, a week ago. There I wrote “The logistics of the Russian armed forces are a mess. Their soldiers are ineffective, their hardware is failing on many levels and their supply systems are (from my point of view) broken in many ways. Russia has a problem.” And here we get Yevgeny Prigozhin complaining about a lack of ammunition. He throws it towards ‘betrayal’ but I know better, all information shows us that Russia blatantly ignored overhauls from the 90’s onwards and the Russian Mafia took whatever they could and left the Russian bear with a flask of nail polish for its claws. A nice and shiny red (like the original flag). We are also given “Mr Prigozhin said his representative was unable to access the headquarters of Russia’s military command. It is unclear where the headquarters is located. Mr Prigozhin said it came after he wrote to the chief of Russia’s “special military operation”, Army General Valery Gerasimov, about the “urgent necessity to give us ammunition”.” Yes, in what army would one need ammunition? Oh right, the winning kind. The logistical issues I saw last week and I saw it a mile away was not some business appeal. It was a simple setting from my army days in 1981-1983. Logistics was giggled at from some branches, but the supporting units are just as important. It seems that the Russian army never learned that lesson.
And it it always fun to see a mercenary use his fingers and shout “pew pew pew”, although, at that point his life expectancy is reduced to less than a minute. It will still be entertaining for the Ukrainian armed forces to see how desperate the Russian Army and the Wagner group have become. The Kyiv independent tells us that in a week over 12,000 Russian soldiers have been killed. I reckon that this is the Russian army and Wagner mercenaries. In addition they lost 317 tanks,120 artillery pieces, 56 MLRS and 482 cars and a lot more all over the field. These numbers are important, because when you realise that there is no train system in play to replace it all, you will get a first inkling on how bad the war is going for Russia and all these people fleeing to places like Argentina, that becomes a different story. As I personally see it under these conditions there is no life left in Moscow and the 6 million women there better start getting pregnant today, if not, by 2038 there will not be much of a workforce left in Moscow. On the upside, there is every chance that Russia could become a matriarchic society. The war took care of the man and the ones who did not flee Russia are about to be dead in an offensive that only one person seemed to have wanted. As the setting changes and the stage becomes clear there is a second danger one that becomes a big one if not tended properly. But that is a story for another day. For now realise that any organisation with substandard logistics gets run over fast and that is what we are seeing here.
Just my point of view. Feel free to disagree.
The wicked chaser
This all started on February 26th when I wrote ‘Surprise, surprise’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/02/26/surprise-surprise-3/). To be honest, I thought that this would be the end of it, but to my disgust there are more issues and it is with western sport reporters. Especially the wanker at the Guardian, BBC, Australian and New Zealand media. They are so all up in arms about Cricket and we accepted that notion, but that was not the real deal was it? It was only when national interests are at stake, thats when these losers wake up.
It is strict, direct and it is unforgivable.
You see, it was a few hours ago when the Arab News alerted me to ‘Saudi Arabia overcome Bahrain to win ACC Men’s Challenger Cup 2023’ (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2262701/sport) and there we are told “Dominant 10-wicket victory in final means Kingdom’s team maintained perfect record of 5 wins from 5 matches”. Now we can spin this any way we like, but the Saudi Team played 5 matches and won all five of them. This matters, it makes Saudi Arabia a contender on the larger cricket field. This does not mean that they are about to defeat Australia or New Zealand (England possibly), but they should matter. If cricket is to grow its pool of nations in there, it very much matters. And we are given “Saudi Arabian Cricket Federation Chairman Prince Saud bin Mishal told Arab News from Thailand: “I’d like to congratulate our leadership for the endless support we’ve always received, and the board of directors, the managerial team and especially the players. They’ve played excellent cricket, resulting in winning the cup.”” Now, I never watched the match, so I merely see what is printed in Arab News, but as I see it the bulk of the Western papers ignored the entire event. I saw one Australian media on page 2 of the Google search and it merely gave a score. I think that you can find a sport journo to wrote a few lines when the game is won, but that might merely be me.
You see, we are also given “Saudi Arabia will now enter the ACC Premier Cup, to be played in Nepal next month, full of confidence as bigger challenges loom on the horizon”, as such what are the chances that the western media ignores that cup too? I reckon that we need to consider that we are on the wrong side of a losing track, when sports are trivialised like this it really matters, we need to do some soul searching to say the least.
The blocking question
That is what CB left me with. The article (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/alphabet-google-committee-block-summon-1.6762908) gives us “A parliamentary committee is calling four of Google’s top executives to appear before it after the company began testing ways it could block news content from searches if Parliament passes the Online News Act.” And this MP Julian, perhaps MP Julian Assange? No, my bad. It was MP Peter Julian. You see, we do not get the proper setting. And it is not on Google. We are given “Google’s actions have been irresponsible. Google’s actions amount to censorship and Google’s actions are disrespectful of Canadians.” I do not think this is true and because some politicians are trying to remain as vague as possible, issues and question remain, but the people who are pushing this are the remnants of William Randolph Hearst and they all should become as obsolete and buried as Hearst is now.
They lost credibility and they lost integrity, but that is not how we need to proceed. You see the article gives us “All types of news content are being affected by the test, which will run for about five weeks, the company said. That includes content created by Canadian broadcasters and newspapers. An Australian law similar to C-18 took effect in March 2021 after talks with the big tech firms led to a brief shutdown of Facebook news feeds in the country. The law has largely worked, a government report said.” Well, not exactly, has it?
You see, we are given one line, but it is not one line, it is a document with many paragraphs, many facetted paragraphs. But the politicians do not want to go there, do they?
This is the first example. It comes from Twitter. The LA Times gives us the heads up, but it is not that, when we click on it it becomes a block. An advertisement block and the LA Times is not alone. So, did we accept that FREE advertisement by the LA Times? That is the question and it is not a simple one line answer.
The second example is Google search, I wanted something on Bundaberg (where the good rum comes from) and I looked at the news, the top part is what I saw and there is nothing wrong with reading about youthful enthusiasm in medicine, so I clicked on the article, but was I informed? No! I got an invitation to PAY for the article. Lets be clear, it might be OK for newspapers to allow this approach, but is it up to Google Search to cater to free advertisement? These two examples are the tip of a mountain a lot bigger than the ice-block that sank the Titanic, but the article as well as PM Julian are keeping us in the dark about it. There are others like the Guardian, the Dutch NOS, BBC, CBC and many others that do not use this approach, but for news outlets that cater to this approach we see a different catering and I think that Facebook and Google get to block these players. They newspapers are making claims of loss of revenue, but they advertise in this way, so is blocking all the question? I do not think so, but I am not on the board of directors of Google (even after I was able to hand them close to $20,000,000,000 in revenue). Ah well, another day, another dollar.
The block setting is not that simple and these politicians are nowhere neat ready to properly look at this. They want their cowboy story and Google is the nasty evil, but that is not true, it was never true. But then the politicians involved could never figure this out, but that is how I see it, and I accept that others have a different point of view. That is fair, I can only give you my point of view and perhaps it will stir questions, perhaps it will not.
Surprise, surprise
That is how I felt an hour ago when Arab News gave me (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2257936/sport) ‘Saudi Arabia beat Indonesia by 8 wickets at 2023 ACC Men’s Challenger Cup’ I honestly did not know that Saudi Arabia has a Cricket Team. That is not even close to the end of it.
You see, Saudi Arabia has 11 associations. They are Western Province Cricket Association, Jeddah Cricket Association, Riyadh Cricket Association, Riyadh Cricket League, Eastern Province Cricket Association, Yanbu Al Sinayiah Cricket Association, Aseer Cricket League, Jizan Premier Cricket League, Jizan Region Cricket Association, Madina Cricket League, and the Madina Cricket Association. I will do you one wilder, Saudi Arabia is playing Thailand tomorrow and when you search “Saudi Arabia Cricket” in Google, we see the match come up and in the whole first page of News Nine’s Wide World of Sports is the only one in the entire page who mentions it. The first three pages go back to August 2022, BBC sports never shows up and neither do most of the Australian papers. And Cricket is their bread and butter? How about giving possible opponents in the world a fair mention? You still think that Australian news is about sports and facts? Where were these facts filtered out? The fact that I never knew that Saudi Arabia did not have a Cricket team is on me, but I had help, for the most the sports world of Australia and England went out of their way not to mention it, nothing at all. That part is seen in the top three pages in Google Search. You tell me why the media ignores it, I have no idea.
So what else are we not being told? This is a simple setting, this you can look up and there you see how western newspapers treat other teams, especially the ones that are filtered out. Is this a storm in a teacup? Yes, I will admit that it is, there should not be so much focus on one element, but what is the element that we should ignore, that Saudi and Indonesian cricket events do not make the news, or the fact that neither show up at all? Because a few days ago the news was full of Women Cricket (and I am fine with that), but nothing at all on other events? I honestly cannot tell what the filtering was all about, but when one party comes with the BS excuse that they ran out of space all whilst the BBC app is rehashing news from Feb 4th, I will throw a tantrum.
That is the news that the west gives us, all unbiased and honest, too bad it does not give us the additional “Filtered for the need of shareholders, stakeholders and advertisers” because I personally reckon that was part of that deal.
The stage between two stages
Sounds weird and perhaps that is a little true. You see, I saw the article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64178956) ‘Staff must be free to work for employer’s rivals – US regulator’, the article was from January 5th and I did see it, but I was unsure how I felt. You see, that setting allows for poaching and there Microsoft has been a little too active in the past. Now they are in the process of trimming the fat by well over 10,000 people and so are the others, so you would think that this is a moot process. But it is not. Microsoft is pretty much done for and their setting (a personal view) is to create shortages everywhere else so that they can get an extension on life. So we would see hundreds of essential workers at Amazon and Google now being offered a nice cushy position in Microsoft. IBM is also on that list, but IBM and Microsoft have too much alike, so there will be issues. They both preferred image above creativity and that is on them, it is also their right. As I personally see it IBM has a setting and poaching might happen, but it is often directly in league of what they are trying to design, so there is less of an issue and their stage of representation does not feel the same. I have less of an issue with IBM on that horse (which is seemingly rare), Microsoft however has a different setting. Just like their acquisition of Bethesda and Activision. It is not that they needed them (well they did in one way), it was to take away choice from Sony players and that is just not on with me. It would be nice if Amazon bought my IP, so I can really stick it to Microsoft, but that is another matter. The case is poaching.
As such the article gives us “The FTC, which enforces competition law, said a ban would foster a more dynamic economy. The proposal was immediately challenged by the business community. It will now enter a long rule-making process. Non-compete clauses were developed to prevent leavers from joining rivals and sharing trade secrets”, it is not untrue, but to have people trained by Google, or Amazon (Web services) leave after a year (or two) of training and then use all that know how in the service of a player like Microsoft is a dangerous step. I understand and to some degree support non-compete clauses. The problem is that some of the players abused that non-compete setting in a much wider scale that should have been allowed for. So I am on the fence here and there is another stage that the US now opens up for. These people can due to this change now join a player like Tencent, who can open up European markets to a much larger degree. I wonder if they thought of that? Yes, we see the US limiting their workforce from joining Chinese players. Yet the EU has different stages and there these players are still shedding thousands of people and the UK is ripe for Tencent to come in and create a new workforce. If they weren’t becoming a hazard to my pension, I would not care, but they could be and as such I would care.
You see, I have in part opposition to “Lina Khan, who leads the agency and made her name criticising the might of big tech firms such as Amazon, on Thursday called the ability to switch jobs “core to economic liberty and to a competitive, thriving economy”. “Noncompetes block workers from freely switching jobs, depriving them of higher wages and better working conditions, and depriving businesses of a talent pool that they need to build and expand”, in this my opposition is that we see the clear mention of Amazon, and the weirdly avoidance of mentioning Microsoft (or Google) in this and that matters. Amazon has one of the most complete Web Services solutions including cloud solutions. Both Google and massively more Microsoft need people with these skills. I am not sure where Apple is with that but they all have some return to office setting and the noises we hear all over the place, they all have extensive needs soon enough, but Linda Khan is mentioned with her opposition of Amazon, who is leading that trump with most than a nose-length advantage. A player like Microsoft wants to get ahead and getting their hands on senior developers at Amazon is for them the way to go (Azure sucks too much according to some).
As such with these elements in play, the need for a diminished non-competition clause is not entirely wrong, but the timing sucks and would luck have it, the timing would work for Microsoft and Tencent alike, a setting I am actually not happy about. Yet, I will admit that parts of this are personal views and personal settings I saw evolve over the last 30 years. And that is not all, in the last week we were given two parts. The first is “Microsoft last week laid off around 150 employees from a team tasked with convincing medium-size companies to adopt cloud services such as Azure server rentals and Microsoft 365 productivity apps, said a person with direct knowledge of the matter”, which in part makes sense, but when you add the next view that came 2 days later “Microsoft has officially joined the FinOps Foundation, a non-profit organisation that promotes financial management in cloud technology.” Consider that they need to promote that with 150 less staff, does that make sense? It makes a lot more sense when you poach the Amazon AWS staff pool and replace 150 narrow minded watchers by people with a much wider cloud view. It is pure speculation on my side, but they did a similar track in the Netscape days, as such I worry and you should too. A choice by a lack of options is not a choice and that is where Microsoft has been playing the field a little too long as I see it, which is why I am on the fence a lot more on the non-compete clause as I personally see it.
You should watch too because when your choices are lowered and Microsoft is clearly in the ‘surviving’ pool of choices. We see the power of stakeholders and they were never there for you, merely for their own wallets. But I might be seeing it too dark as some will respond.
My view is merely one view, make sure you learn all the elements in play when you go one direction. Its almost like the life of Harry the Hermit (Harry Styles), he makes an album of his house and the 13th track is about the love of his life (Remy “Thirteen” Hadley, M.D) which makes sense, but when you make 12 songs about your house and one about Olivia Wilde (mucho LOL), you do have your priorities wrong. It is all about the glasses you wear when you see the events unfold. This is nearly always true as is my view on Microsoft. They wanted to be the IBM clone, they played there games and they played it on Netscape and others alike and those who have been in IT long enough see the bitter taste that Microsoft leaves behind and that is before you add the Microsoft failures, they have become obsolete and in this I much rather support Amazon and what they could bring to the table of tomorrow than Microsoft who is merely copying the plate settings of yesterday. Yet that is a personal view, believe me or not but make sure you get a good view on where you stand, that is worth a lot more than merely following me. I want you all to be your own leader, not my follower. I am not some shepherd, I never was.
A house by any other owner
OK, this is the third time I am raising this. I raised it twice before. The reason is that the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-64547396) gives us the event a mere 7 hours ago by Nadine Yousif, BBC Toronto. So are they very late to the party, or is this a lot larger? I honestly cannot tell. The reason is that in the first the article is largely void of dates. In addition we get “A Canadian couple recently learned that their home was sold by fraudsters without their consent while they were out of town. Experts say theft of this nature is rare, but there has been a notable rise of similar cases in the country’s most populous city” the use of ‘recently’. Really BBC, you could not be precise? Then we are given “The BC Land Title and Survey Authority (LTSA) said it is aware of two title fraud attempts since 2020, only one of which was successful. The public corporation added it only knows of one prior case in 2019, and two in 2008 and 2009”, really? The news gives a lot more recently, but here I might be in error as there are two forms and title fraud is seemingly less used. That is fair, but there is a much larger stage here now. So what happens when any act on title transfer or mortgage acquisition, the person acquiring it must get a biometrical scan? That gives us non-repudiation. That person and only that person could have done this. It is not the weirdest idea. A house tends to be over $500K and a house is a setting of ones identity. When we add the actuary as a control setting, we get a massive drop in these activities. The biometrics and photograph give a much larger stage for prosecution and optionally deportation of these criminals. I reckon the LTSA would applaud such a move as it secures and provides safety for those who own their property. There is still a risk that someone uses the stage to quickly get in under the radar, but the use of an actuary might dwindle this risk and those who tried this approach would soon find themselves looking for a place to live outside of any commonwealth nation, because this is happening in the United Kingdom and Australia. As such a stage needs to be set where the people can create a safety setting and keep their own little castle safe from exploitation by criminals. This is not a fool proof system. I get that. The old expression is “In confusion there is profit” an expression which started during WW2. But if we can lower the risk and 4 out of 5 people currently afflicted could avoid this nightmare scenario, it would be a win win situation. Are there better solutions? That is hard to say, all kinds of instances have used IT as a easy grab for all kinds of shortcuts and I am not aware which of these shortcuts apply to Canada, but the rise implies that there are weaknesses in this setting and as such the biometric stage might lower the risks for the Commonwealth. It is just an idea, but it took me less than an hour to think it up, consider that against the stage where we were given “by the time they found out that it had been stolen last June. As of February, the couple is still working through having their title on the home restored” a nightmare of at least 8 months, so I reckon my hour was well spend and if they can sway this as well as the demand for any title change two sets of biometrics are required, the stage becomes a non-option for criminals. You see, in the EU, they have biometrics on their passports. A second biometric could be scanned at the point of sale, which might take 24 hours (optionally less), the transgressor will not get a match, which now also suggests that this transgressor could be prosecuted, but that is merely an idea. The treasure is to keep realestate safe for its rightful owner.
Operation fat woman
Yes, that is one way of saying it, the other one is ‘Операция “Толстая женщина”’ That is what the BBC shows us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-64610954). There we are given ‘Pregnant Russian women flying to Argentina for citizenship, officials say’. Yes, that sounds ice, but what about the men? When will they come? Is this some FSB (or GRU) sleeper solution? Don’t think that these questions are weird. Consider how many people (in Russia) can just get on a plane and travel to South America? And what happens when these ‘fathers’ start a new Russian Mafia cel? Argentina will have a completely new stage of problems. I wanted to inform you yesterday, but the article in Wired had my blood boiling and straight thinking was not possible at that moment. So here I am catching up. The article also gives us “More than 5,000 pregnant Russian women have entered Argentina in recent months, including 33 on a single flight on Thursday, officials say” as such Argentina already has a problem. 5,000 pregnant women implies up to 5,000 man will join them soon enough. They are just awaiting the citizenship jump and away they go. As such Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay will get its own sort of problems and this will escalate quickly. And we see the issue with “Having an Argentine child also speeds up the citizenship process for parents. As it stands, Russians can travel visa-free to only 87 countries” these Russians will get access to 84 additional countries and that is merely the beginning of the mess that will land on Buenos Aires. The other countries will either remove the Argentinian passport from their ‘safe’ list or open up a whole mountain or troubles down the road.
I get that plenty of women are trying to get away from it all, but the bulk of the women cannot afford to travel to South America, which beckons the question what else is happening. I cannot say for certain, but I reckon that the Commonwealth and the US will now have to take more drastic steps to keep their borders safe. I merely wonder what other countries are facing this, I refuse to believe that this is an Argentina only problem, this is a setting that could hit over a dozen places, as such what will come next? Something will come, and it is not just the baby, it is more. At present I just do not know what will be next.
History, repetition mode
This is a little harder to write about. It actually started in 2017 when I wrote ‘The finality of French freedom’, the story (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2017/03/17/the-finality-of-french-freedom/) makes a few accusations as I personally saw them. We got some kind of a warped excuse towards ‘we made a mistake’ a year later, but I reported it as I saw it, fear mongering by the IMF. Yes, all those people filling their pockets on the Credit Card of the United Kingdom were missing out on exquisite lunches. This was (as I personally saw it) starting to happen again on February 1st when I wrote ‘Insecure Masturbation Fraternisers (IMF)’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/02/01/insecure-masturbation-fraternisers-imf/), there we were given via the BBC (no allegations towards them), that the ‘UK expected to be only major economy to shrink in 2023’, ‘expected’ and ‘major’ being key elements there. Now we see “53% of business leaders in France said they expect a recession in 2023”, it is important to note that this does not make that true. All this whilst Reuters reports ‘Meloni: Italy could be in recession in 2023, faces tough times’, here too we see ‘could’ and that is important, but that gives us that there is a case that the IMF is nothing more than a stupid political tool, fear mongering yet again. So we return to the January 31st BBC story where we see “The IMF said the economy will contract by 0.6% in 2023, rather than grow slightly as previously predicted”, now it is time to look at the story now 17 hours old. Here we see (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-64584295) ‘UK economy avoids recession but not out of woods – Hunt’, where we are given “the ONS revised up its figures for the July to September quarter, to show that the economy shrank by 0.2% instead of the previous estimate of a 0.3% fall”, as well as “some think the UK will avoid a technical recession completely”, as such I also admit that what some admit does not constitute evidence. Yet the fact that the IMF (yet again) makes an error of 0.6% which amounts to almost 23 billion. It is hard to put a number on anything and the flaw seems small, but the 0.6% seems more dangerous than that. The problem is, who is right. One cannot be regarded as wrong because of the negativity, the other cannot be regarded as wrong because of the lessened negative setting. But I can tell you this. The EU credit card is tapped out, the only way to get a handhold on that is by adding the UK back to it, there is no care on how the UK does, it is that if the UK rejoins the EU (after all that bullying) that the EU credit card is back in business and that (especially after the Mario Draghi fiasco’s) should not be allowed. I always stated that things would get worse before they get better and when they get better it becomes a lot better in a hurry, there aren’t 21 countries dragging the UK economy down, as well as their budgets.
There is a much larger field and serious questions might have to be asked about the seeming incompetent acts of the IMF. I would state that a player like the BBC needs to clearly show sources regarding some of their reports, but I get that this might not be possible, yet the time for questions grow ever larger, especially after I showed issues on at least three events. In the end it might be me, but I was right the first time, I have questions the second time and we need to ask questions, especially when the Bremain bullies are out in force and there are indications (not evidence) that the IMF is aiding them. But that is merely my point of view on the matter.
Lawrence van Rijn - Law Lord to be 