Tag Archives: BBC

March 23, 2022 · 23:28

Obsessed with doubt

We all have that at times, doubt comes in and does not leave. Sometimes it does not matter, trivial settings, unimportant settings and settings we do not care about. Then we get the important settings, the ones we care bout, we are passionate about, even if it is in the second degree. In some cases we can program around it if it is our own design (like IP) sometimes we cannot and it gets to us, because we would want to know. If it matters on a larger scale and I have been stumped on a few matters. The circle completed when something passed my eyes that was unrelated. The parts just clicked and for anyone that is a different path and a different way of resolving. We all have our tools and methods to deal with doubt. 

The resolving part
Around 4 hours ago (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60843262) we are given ‘Evan Neumann: US Capitol riot suspect gets asylum in Belarus’, so one of the man connected to the Trump Tantrum in the US Capitol on January 6th 2021. He got asylum in Belarus, one of Russia’s tools. The man could have gone to China, the Russian Federation, Namibia, the United Arab Emirates, North Korea, Bahrain, Belarus, chunks of the Middle East, chunks of Africa and a few other places. This man went to the place that directly supports Russia and their Campaign, so why is that? The entire BBC article reads like a lie, which is not on the BBC. Yet when I see ““I do not believe that I have committed any crime,” he said. “One of the accusations was very upsetting. It is alleged that I hit a police officer. That is baseless.”” I wonder how stupid this all sounds and how on earth the Republican Party keeps on protecting in what I personally see is a loser who keeps on running to court ‘Trump files appeal against Manhattan judge in latest bid to overturn subpoena’ and the American people do not catch on? How stupid can people get? 

An earlier stage
In the earlier stage we see (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/1/9/saudi-arabia-may-run-out-of-interceptor-missiles-in-months-ft) a stage weeks ago when we are given “The situation represents the latest test for US-Saudi relations, which President Joe Biden’s administration has sought to reshape in light of the October 2018 murder of Saudi dissident journalist Jamal Khashoggi by Saudi operatives in Istanbul.” The stronger language that followed was an American sign to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Which in light of ‘US sends Patriot interceptors to Saudi to ease tensions’ (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/21/us-sends-patriot-interceptors-to-saudi-to-ease-tensions-reports) 8 weeks later seems odd, well not if you take into consideration oil prices. Which as I mentioned in earlier articles aligns with biting the hand that feeds you. And the mention of “Riyadh has also voiced anger over the Biden administration’s decision to remove the Houthi movement from its list of “international terrorist organisations”, although Washington in recent months has mulled reversing the decision following a series of drone and missile attacks on the United Arab Emirates (UAE)” does not help the US of A, especially as the mention of Iran is slimmer than slim. The absence of simple investigations like How could Houthi forces manufacture these drones is blatantly absent, Iran is deeper involved and denying that any longer is no less than an absolute insult, but the media does not seem to think that matters, the US and the EU do not seem to think that matters. They still believe that a deal is possible all whilst that was never was a deal in the making. Iran is simply watching how the Russia setting plays out to see if there is a weaker deal to be made, and the stage is not done playing. 

Even earlier we saw
It all came after the story (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/21/ukraine-war-exposes-cracks-us-ties-middle-east-allies) giving us ‘Russia-Ukraine war shows cracks in US ties to Middle East allies’, I had issues here. Russia is part of OPEC, as such they have the table in places. The US wants Saudi Arabia and the UAE to take stands, but why should they? It is not THEIR war, it might become so, but for now it is not and if people have an issue with that, talk to Syrians and Yemeni’s who have been waiting for the US and the EU to make moves for years. Inactivity is not so much fun when you need and answer is it? So when we are given ““Al-Assad coming to the UAE, shortly after the Gulf Arab country voted to abstain from a UN Security Council resolution condemning the Russian invasion of Ukraine last month, tells us that the Emiratis are very serious about asserting their autonomy from the United States,” said Giorgio Cafiero, CEO of Gulf State Analytics, a Washington, DC-based geopolitical risk consultancy.” We can accept the line “the Emiratis are very serious about asserting their autonomy from the United States”, I am not convinced that this is the real reason. The plays give us that these nations are making the plays that do not box them in and Syria is a larger player and it makes sense that the UAE will have questions that no one would set to a simple call, a face to face meeting between two heads of state makes sense. I agree that there are cracks, yet that stage was set by the US, and it was done on a collection of moves, all populist actions and they are now biting the current administration and the current administration made several of these moves.

Yet these are the thoughts as I ended up with and they have doubts here, they do and I admit this. Yet the media is no longer a reliable source and I feel uncertain who will give us the truth not the political play and it involves the media and the United Nations. But what do you do when the sources are a source of doubt? It is not a puzzle, it is a question, I have some ideas but for now they are mine to have and you need to find yours. 

For me the situation is simplified. If there is too much doubt in one direction, see what truths another direction can give you and this is not a simple matter, some give credence to sources when others see debatability in those sources. And with me doubt is an obsession, I need to take doubt apart piece by piece and see what cogs are getting hindered, that is how I roll. You might have different methods. We all have our ways.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

March 22, 2022 · 17:51

Influenced by license holder

Yup, this could be a setting according to the BBC. It started on March 19th 2022 when I wrote ‘57 seconds until the next sucker’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/03/19/57-seconds-until-the-next-sucker/), there I discussed two types that go for your budget. The deceptors and the influencers. Now we see (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60787296) that gives us ‘Influencers in Australia risk jail for breaking finance tips rules’. In this article we get to see “The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) says they may need a licence to give such advice. A 2021 ASIC survey suggested 33% of 18 to 21-year-olds follow financial influencers. And it also found that 64% of young people in Australia changed a financial behaviour because of an influencer.” And here the issue starts. You see, the difference between a flaccid proclamator and the gung-ho prosecutor are mere results. So If “A 2021 ASIC survey suggested 33% of 18 to 21-year-olds follow financial influencers” means that 1-4 people are now facing prosecutions, we could say OK, thats nice, but 1-4 out of? It implies that the female influencers are about meeting a man who can skin a gator so that they can get a really cheap handbag and the male influencers would be about how to best poach a gator and turn that into a handbag to score the sheila in the wild (a subtle Crocodile Dundee reference). But if this implies that you are reporting on 50-100 influencers the message becomes “So, WTF are you waiting for?” Influencers have been on the radar for years, as such reporting on this NOW implies that you need to find your viagra stash, that stash has tablets that looks like (see below)

So as we see “In February, the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) urged caution over the use of influencers in the marketing of financial products. “Retail investments’ use of social media influencers on various platforms to market investments is becoming a concern for us,” the financial watchdog said. “Firms should ensure they have taken appropriate legal advice to understand their responsibilities prior to using influencers.” And there has been particular concern about the use of influencers in cryptocurrency marketing.” I personally wonder why this news is not 2+ years old. Because as I personally see it at present influencers will now react to the degree of “I did not know it was illegal, I only saw the news last Tuesday”, impeding prosecutions. Yes, that a really bright idea. We would like results, not excuses and according to one source an influencer “is someone with a loyal and larger than average social media following. Some influencers have as few as 3,000 followers! Influencers are paid by brands to create and post promotional content.” So we get two settings now, the influencer and the brand who engages the influencer. I would state that the brands warrant investigations as well. And lastly we get “In the same month, Spain’s National Securities Market Commission also revealed plans for new rules for advertising crypto-assets, including promotions by social media influencers.” As such Spain might be 2 years late, but Australia? How up to date were they, how many influencers were confronted, how many brands were confronted? We see nothing of that here and that beckons questions. How behind are the lawmakers and their governmental watchdogs exactly? A simple question and train of thought that the article raised, are you not curious how protected you actually really are?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

March 21, 2022 · 23:20

5 houses in London

Yes, it is a setting we have all wanted in Monopoly, to own the rich side of the game, to feel a winner. I remember in my youthful young driven rat-race age. Running to that side of the game as fast as possible and buy all the real estate in sight. This view altered over time like we all alter the view on how we play the game. Oh, and on the bright side, I just came up with a new game for the Google Stadia, how screwed up is this?  But this is not about a game, this is about reality. Consider the game, consider the locations and consider the impact we face on a daily basis.

In that stage, how about the BBC article ‘Grenfell tragedy: Government is failing to act on inquiry report, says London mayor’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60816108) where we are told “The mayor of London says the government has “failed to complete” any of the 12 recommendations directed at them during phase 1 of the Grenfell Tower inquiry.” So here is the question. How much power do the Real estate tycoons have over the British government? 

You think I am kidding, consider monopoly, how much actions would be enabled if the 72 cadavers were on green side of the board and not the brown side of the board? Have you considered that? So when we see “The LFB was criticised in the report for its failure to revoke the “stay put” advice – in which residents were told to remain in their individual homes as the fire raged through the 24-storey tower block.” Is that really true? Consider the movie we saw (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QM4RJE81fh4) how would a revoke ‘stay put’ would have been any solution? And in that movie, do not just watch, listen to the response of ACTUAL fireman. The sequential movie (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSYUp8j8P1Q) from the FIRST FIRE-CAR on the spot. When you see the two movies my feelings become clear. How screwed up was this investigation? The issue of “The LFB was criticised” becomes a joke. How is it possible that THIS government has not acted on at least the first 15 points making them MANDATORY. Do the real estate tycoons have THAT much power in London? We see the media jump on the ‘stay put’ order whilst the big deal is that the ENTIRE building was on fire, these fireman hd never seen anything like that and in my initial article (23rd June 2017) called ‘Under cover questions’ where I show the PDF’s on the goods where we see that the solution was good for cladding up to 30ft. So what gives and when I add “The external cladding material on this building did not prevent the spread of the fire as required by the Building Code of Australia,” said MFB chief officer Peter Rau“ an issue that was shown 3 years prior to Grenfell, how much of a chihuahua is the British government to the London real estate tycoons? We can argue whether the ‘stay put’ order was the right one to use in high rises, but the news is all about how wrong it was instead of how wrong it was to install cladding like the one in Grenfell, but we do not really get to see that, do we? 

So when we see “I am extremely concerned the government has failed to complete a single recommendation from the first phase of the inquiry”, yes for some the 72 cadavers are a mere balancing act, is it not? And in this the statement “the government is failing the Grenfell community” is wrong. The government has already failed them by not implementing any of the recommendations. We see criticism on the LFB, all whilst they were given a stacked deck, stacked towards the tycoons bleeding London dry. When you see and hear London fire people state ‘I have never seen anything like that’ you know things are out of control and the response from people on the first car arriving gives additional fuel to the matter and we get it things can be weird, things can be scary. Yet what do we do when the setting becomes weird and scary for the firefighters? The BBC article should unleash a wave of anger towards an inactive flaccid government, it should unleash a wave of anger towards these tycoons and it would be nice to see a list of these people in EVERY newspaper. The article raises a lot of questions and before the critical people have a go at the firemen, have a go at what I found and what questions I had in 2017, I found plenty on a laptop, so why did this investigations not find any and why were no recommendations acted on?

I leave it to you and if you live in London you might want to hurry before you become on of the cadavers the real estate tycoons do not care about.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming, IT, Media, Politics

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

March 20, 2022 · 03:53

The first coin drops

I have stated it a few times in the past. The US is basically bankrupt, it can merely feign activities and merely resort to financial pressures, as such the Canadian CBC gives us ‘After Biden and Xi speak, U.S. warns China could face sanctions if it aids Russian invasion’ (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/biden-xi-call-china-russia-invasion-ukraine-1.6390235), yes, yes, yes. We all heard it sanctions. It is what the opposing parties see and expect. You see a paper tiger only looks menacing to those who cannot see that it is merely only a paper one. So when we get “President Joe Biden warned Chinese leader Xi Jinping on Friday there would be “consequences” if Beijing gave material support to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine”, I wonder what President Biden expects to happen? I think that President Xi Jinping understands really well that the longer the Ukraine situation takes, the weaker the US looks, the less he gets involved the better China stands. If I were to move this into an old saying, for China it is better to watch the two junkyard dogs slug it out (US and Russia) and walk away with the bone when they are too tired to move. And there is a lot to be gotten. There are increasing indications that the US is done in the Middle East and when China gets their military contracts, when more Chinese firms get options towards building Neom, the US will have lost. In the Ukrainian setting, President Xi Jinping merely has to wait. The US royally screwed up too many options and they are now at the end of the options tether. In addition, with China winning options in Saudi Arabia, they will get a foot in the Egyptian door as well. A station that the EU feared for a while. Whilst they are shouting options and opportunities opposing the silk road. As the US goes, so does the EU, too deep in debt and no real options remain. For a quarter of a century they refused to overhaul the tax laws (both US and EU) and now the stage becomes too uncomfortable for both as you are about to find out. 

This takes us to the second article that the BBC gives us ‘War in Ukraine: America is learning the art of humility’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60799659), well actually they haven’t. They shouted ‘Money talks, bullshit walks’ and now that stage is in play. The US basically shows that it cannot afford too much anymore. So now we get treated to “The US’s leverage over China is limited, and readouts from both sides suggest the call didn’t achieve much. But it was part of an orchestrated diplomatic strategy that contrasts with much of the first year of Joe Biden’s presidency.” There is a problem here. You see ‘Inaction through inability’ is different from ‘orchestrated inaction’, when a nation is unable to fund what is needed they will desperately look towards “This was genuine alliance building”, I personally believe it to be incorrect. You see, we were given all the actions of a nation who (sort of) bullies others into complacency, but the credit card is no longer working, the US method cannot be afforded and some administrations (read: CIA and NSA) have played the wrong Trump card and now credibility is in the basement. They pissed off France, Saudi Arabia, Germany and the UK (to some extent). So when we see “US diplomacy helped win German support” we merely get a partial story, we merely get half the teacup and not that much tea. The US will not be opposing any German needs in several places, they are now that much in a state of ‘inaction through inability’. Feel free to oppose this view and that is your right, but consider what the US has actually achieved since their departure from Afghanistan. That list is short. Very, very short. 

And you do not need to consider me the problem, the problem is out in the open. It is not really President Xi Jinping, it is the fact that he realises more than ever that he gets the shielded threats from a paper tiger and that makes him giggle (I expect that he is giggling). He knows he is about to win a global war without ever firing a bullet, China is showing orchestrated inaction (as I personally see it) and when the silk road comes to the doors and windows of Europe, they know they have won. The largest win will be a direct connection to Neom, which gives them a massive boost into Saudi Arabia and most of Africa as well. That is the point the EU and the US have lost and at present neither have any option to counter the engineering path China is on. So when President Xi Jinping stated “War is not in anyones interest” He was right, it slows down his Silk Road and that takes precedence for China, so their inactions are orchestrated and as the US (EU too) show inactions towards an active field in the Ukraine there are a few reasons, a full fletched war in Europe being one of them, but their inability to afford a war is another. If only that USS Zumwalt worked, it would be a great pressure point, but wait, it was a failure on many levels and now it is useless. The United States is losing options and Russia knows this, they are also learning (the hard way) that the Ukraine is more of a threat than the US has been in close to half a decade, so cheers all around.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Military, Politics

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

March 19, 2022 · 14:10

57 seconds until the next sucker

Yes, I have heralded Meta as the next setting that will bring them billions. That is if they do not screw it up beforehand and the BBC gives us two examples. The first (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-60789802) was given to us last night with the byline ‘Australia sues Facebook over scam ads impersonating celebrities’. In that article we see “The tech giant had engaged in “false, misleading or deceptive conduct” by knowingly hosting the ads for bogus cryptocurrencies, a regulator said. The US company could face financial and other penalties.

Meta is yet to comment but has previously said it is committed to keeping scammers off its platforms.” We are also given “The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) says the ads in question used Facebook’s algorithms to target susceptible users and featured bogus quotes by Australian celebrities.” All elements of deceptive conduct, all because Meta does not properly vet the people advertising, and this is on Meta. There is no excuse, there is no “We need this advertisement to be completed today” that is merely evidence that the advertising party did not properly time manage their project. I have seen decades of stupidity that way, decades of people on the phone “I am on route, I will be there in 5 minutes” all whilst we know that it takes well over 15 minutes to get there. No time management, no proper project management and decades of excuses sees the wrong people enabling stupidity. And now Meta will feel the brung of that impact. And that was merely example one.

In example 2 (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-60348334) we are given ‘‘Dangerous’ tanning products promoted by influencers’ influencers are a different story, it will still hurt Meta, but there will also be a larger station for Google. Influencers will need to feel the brunt of choices. I am not talking about people like Georgia Love (see yesterday’s article for that) but people that use their influencer status to promote “It is illegal in the UK to sell nasal sprays or injectables made with “melanotan-2”, an artificial hormone that can accelerate tanning.” Here these influencers need to learn the lesson of not doing their homework. I say that all their video’s are at that point set to zero counter, they lose all their revenue and their channel is removed. Now this is a harder setting. We see “It is illegal in the UK”, so if this influencer is American? We get it and I do not know whether this is illegal in the US, Canada, or the EU. But influencers are so driven to numbers, they do not check where they are watched. There should be an impact, but fairness remains part of this. Yet, when we see “BBC News has spoken to 20 people who have experienced complications, including lesions, fungal infections and abscesses.” Is it truly about fairness? Lives were put in danger and the influencers do not have a really good excuse. I reckon that influencers need to abstain of any product that could impact the health of another, but how to recognise that? There is a dangerous stage, so to stop it in it track now before there is a full 5G network seems essential. Personally I believe that there is no social media source that gives proper investment opportunities. An actual opportunity is for a chosen few, not social media. Social media is for blanket media solutions, get in as many as you can, as quickly as you can. As such I feel a little less for the person with “a consumer who lost more than A$650,000 (£360,000; $480,000) due to one of these scams being falsely advertised as an investment opportunity on Facebook.” Someone who does that does that is too stupid for words. Vetting goes both ways and any investor vets the sources they have and Facebook (Meta) is not a source, neither is Twitter and neither is YouTube. All three could open the door to a direct location that is optionally a good investment, but the chances of that are slim, very slim. Consider the people falling for the Facebook apartment? Someone has a rare option for an apartment in location X where finding a place is hard. Now consider that this person has friends, would you not offer it to your friends first? Would you prefer that a personal friend has a nice new place instead of a person you do not know? That is the stage and it applies to investments a much as it would apply to housing. When dealing with strangers it is in that same setting, direct and to the point. Why? Because I want to make money too, you have got to give a little to get some. So when I offer the options to Randy Lennox and Gary Slaight it is not a shakedown, but it is because they can see the solution that could drive them forward and they can see the benefit of a $50M investment that could bring them in excess of $600,000,000. It is a simple execution of math. This solution could just as easily apply to Amazon, Google a little less so. These people will not now, not ever get such offers, such real offers from Facebook, Meta, Twitter or YouTube. That is how life is and anyone trying to sell you the goods there is fooling you. 

But that is the stage Meta faces, a stage that is drowning in deceptive conduct and there is seemingly no proper vetting in place. There are laws and when the Australian ACCC makes its case Meta could face massive fines and once the first one is there all the others will come calling. The influencers are a different issue, connected to some extent, but there we see that influencers need to be stopped and removing their channel and setting their count to zero will do the trick. When they lose that much money once of twice over these people vanish, a simple equation. It does not sound fair, I get that. But these influencers decided to endanger people and there lies the rub, whether that danger exists in nations where these materials are legal, that becomes a different setting, and I will be happy to admit that I see no easy workable solution here, it starts with Meta. That much is a given at present.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Science

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

March 15, 2022 · 18:49

WTF are they doing now?

Even now, even as I am contemplating new things, I am also considering other elements from the previous article (about the slot machines), I figured out a few more things, but it seems wrong to put them here. I could, but who does it serve? Not me and not most people, it might interest the wrong people. Now in case of a previous article where I designed a weapon to sink the Iranian fleet, it makes sense to put it online (not merely to show support to the kingdom of Saudi Arabia), but mainly to show Iran that a lot of people have had enough of them. In the case of the slot machines, it serves the wrong crowd, yet the elements that I did not mention might find its use somewhere else, which might make for an interesting security setting for people like Google and Amazon, so I keep it in my back pocket. Part of it is already in my 5G IP, so there is that. 

My issue today is with the BBC. They gave us this morning (at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60736185) ‘Roman Abramovich: New evidence highlights corrupt deals’, I get it, everyone is on the anti-Russia beat. For the mot I do not care, Russia will find out the hard way how stupid they have been. At present they are seen as the weak player. It has taken them 3 weeks to get here and so far Ukraine is still free. The germans in WW2 took most of Western Europe in that same time. My issue is with “The Chelsea owner made billions after buying an oil company from the Russian government in a rigged auction in 1995. Mr Abramovich paid around $250m (£190m) for Sibneft, before selling it back to the Russian government for $13bn in 2005.”

They give us “The Russian billionaire has already admitted in a UK court that he made corrupt payments to help get the Sibneft deal off the ground.” As well as “he described in court how the original Sibneft auction was rigged in his favour and how he gave Mr Berezovsky $10m to pay off a Kremlin official” my issue here is that BBC Panorama is stated to be so competent. If so, what case was it? Which court was it? These are parts that I would have added for value. Something like “On [date] in [court location] the following statement was given by Roman Abramovich”, this isn’t rocket science, this is the stage of PROPER journalism! As such the setting of “BBC Panorama has obtained a document that is thought to have been smuggled out of Russia.

The information was given to the programme by a confidential source, who says it was secretly copied from files held on Mr Abramovich by Russian law enforcement agencies” is window dressing at best. I reckon that BBC Panorama likes cloak and dagger words like ‘smuggling’ and ‘secretly’, all whilst the initial issue was in a British court. As for the Russian deal, he used opportunity to get a nice deal that got him $13,000,000,000, to be honest, who cares? So when we are given “The document says that the Russian government was cheated out of $2.7bn in the Sibneft deal – a claim supported by a 1997 Russian parliamentary investigation. The document also says that the Russian authorities wanted to charge Mr Abramovich with fraud”, as such was he really a friend of Putin? The article gives us more questions (overall) than answers. And the fact that ‘Russian authorities’ wanted to charge him and did not calls for even more questions. This looks like a simple draw in the blank space and the lack of information is staggering, is that what BBC Panorama amounts to now? And when we get “trick the government and not pay the money that this company was really worth” we ‘merely’ see a government that did not do its homework and how is that the fault of Abramovich? So when we get these emotional elements with “the document says” what EVIDENCE do they hold, what is factually verifiable? Me? I do not care, I really do not. I do not care for soccer, or Chelsea so there is that too and I find these lame articles from a place that states that they are trustworthy whilst they refuse to properly investigate the murderer of Lady Diana Spencer (Martin Bashir) that is how I see it, so personally I think that BBC Panorama needs to up their game by a lot. This article was a wash, washing what is unclear but it was not the stuff the BBC and BBC Panorama were known for in the past.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

March 6, 2022 · 03:13

The intelligence nightmare

Yes, that is how I see it. You think that you have seen it all? It is about to get worse and the BBC actually is showing us the start of it. With ‘Thousands of pro-Russia Serbs march in Belgrade’ we are merely scratching the surface. The article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-europe-60630351) does not give much, but it gives us “Friday’s march was a show of support for Moscow after its invasion of Ukraine. Serbia has religious, ethnic and political ties with Russia that have existed for centuries” You see it is a lot worse, Serbian arms dealers are all over Europe. Paces like Rotterdam, London and Paris come to mind, but there are more and now as we see all the pro Russian events starting, we see a stage where Serbs could destabilise most of western Europe. They can fuel lone wolves tying hands all over the place and they sit back and watch the chaos unfold. A setting Moscow really likes. So how speculative is this? Well the issues with arm dealers in these three places alone are worrisome and they have been for the longest of times seeing a lot more visibility in 2020. Now with this BBC article it is still speculative to connect the two, but I am not sure that it is merely speculation. There have been issues for the longest of times and it is merely brought to the surface and a more visible pedestal now. 

The problem is that a lot was not monitored for the longest of time and now the intelligence organisations are lacking information on too many sides. Some sources (unconfirmed ones) give rise to activities in Denmark, Sweden, Germany, France, Italy, Spain, UK, Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Luxembourg, USA, Norway, Montenegro and Austria. Do you really think it is all speculation? They have been busy under nearly everyones noses for over a decade and now that Russia is pushing the buttons, some are claiming allegiance, some are waking up and some are set to set Western Europe on fire. Which is which? I cannot tell, but there are connections on all kinds of levels. Did no one consider why Russian weaponry was relatively easy to get in Amsterdam and Rotterdam? In 2020 the Times gave us “While Serbia had a glut of Cold War-era stockpiles and a robust but underused defence industry, the Iraqi government was ill-equipped to battle an insurgency. So in late 2007 the two countries struck a £190 million deal to bring Serbian assault rifles, machine guns, anti-tank weapons, ammunition, explosives and other ordnance to Iraq”, I personally believe that these pipelines were there to also get Russian weapons into Iraq, and not merely the ones they have, to a larger degree the Russians provided hardware and that sets a new station, the station of storage. The Netherlands has been (for the longest time), a transitional port of arms, but there is also the speculation (never proven) that at times a container was ‘misplaced’ and ended on Dutch soil, a container filled with arms. So, how much of this is speculation? There is a fair amount of it, but I worked in the harbours of Rotterdam, when I was young and gullible, so anything is possible. Yet in this day and age, when serbs are ‘proclaiming loyalty’ do you want to take that chance? I will let you figure it out.

And whilst you do the Intelligence organisations of Europe will have to take a harsh look at what they have on the Serbs in their domain, because they really do not get to have a choice in that matter, not anymore.

And me? I have found a few more cogs to add to the previous story, I like to remain creative.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

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

March 1, 2022 · 13:11

Doubt favouring speculation

This is what we have at times, we see the news, we do not completely trust the news but we see what we see and we think we are being deceived. This is not at the front of our minds, but it is definitely in the back of our minds. I a not different, I tend to check several sources, but in the end, this is not always possible. So the BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-60525591) ‘IPCC report warns of ‘irreversible’ impacts of global warming’ you would think this was serious enough, and you could (not would) be wrong. You see, we see “the authors of a new report say that there is still a brief window of time to avoid the very worst”, is there? We are also given “there’s hope that if the rise in temperatures is kept below 1.5C, it would reduce projected losses”, now for the bad news. You see on the 11th of February the BBC also gave us “The number of trees cut down in the Brazilian Amazon in January far exceeded deforestation for the same month last year, according to government satellite data. The area destroyed was five times larger than 2021, the highest January total since records began in 2015”, as some might say it, that weasel Jair Bolsonaro was so eager to be seen ‘positive’ at the COP26, yet we also get (from the HRW.org), ““The Bolsonaro government now wants the world to think it is committed to saving the rainforest,” said Maria Laura Canineu, Brazil director at Human Rights Watch. “But these commitments cannot be taken seriously given its disastrous record and failure to present credible plans for making urgently needed progress in fighting deforestation.”” The Brazilian government (those connected) are eager to fill their pockets before some deforestation commitment will more and more likely be delayed by 3-5 years. So matters will go from ‘worst case’ to ‘worse then worst case’ soon thereafter and most reports seemingly do not take that into account, so when I see “a brief window of time”, I wider what window they are talking about, we are being buried alive and governments are letting this happen. Although, my sense of humour tells me that Vladimir Putin could save is here. If he presses the nuclear button, we will see a global population drop of 60%-85%, at which point the problem is solved. There is no deforestation required when no one needs wood and what forests are left will be enough to give oxygen to the 15%-40% remaining. You think I am kidding? You thought that America would intervene? They did less then that, as I personally see it they are more likely filling their credit cards as we are given “the Biden administration recently announced the creation of a taskforce that will take aim at their lucrative assets, including yachts and mansions”, the media does not give us the list of where those ‘registered’ assets will go. I doubt that 100% will go to the Ukraine. Yet I am diverting. You see, the article also gives us “Coral reefs are being bleached and dying from rising temperatures, while many trees are succumbing to drought” which is inaccurate, in Australia, the delicate balance was disrupted for some time through pollution and overfishing, all whilst the lame reactions to overfishing and the Australian super weak legal responses is making that happen again and again. Then we get the angering quote from the UN ““I’ve seen many scientific reports in my time, but nothing like this,” – UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres”, you see if he never seen anything like this, then the United Nations have a much larger problems, because environmentalists have been saying issues in this direction for a decade, so someone (or a collection of grapes) at the UN is not doing their job, most likely they are given a too specific brief and waste year after year (with a high income) on that brief and whose fault is that?

So far the only truth at the COP26 was given by Greta Thunberg with the accurate setting of “just more bla bla bla” And when I wrote about it, I already predicted it (well not Putin pushing the button). And in the end, did anyone pause at “since records began in 2015”? Perhaps I was asleep, but was the environment, pollution and deforestation not a larger stage for well over 25 years? We could of course go for the extreme solution and just get rid of 95% of the population, it solves employment issues, agism, population, housing issues, deforestation, overfishing issues, and carbon footprints. If a person is not there, they have a carbon footprint of zero. You see, the worst could be just around the corner and you won’t see it until you wonder why you are glowing in the dark. Nuclear winter will clean up the rest, that is now becoming an actual possibility.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics, Science

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

February 26, 2022 · 23:19

I had to take this one

I was alerted to an article in the BBC, the article was about 10 hours old and gives us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-60499391) in the headline, but only once and it does not replicate.

You see the setting of ‘Putin saw America has become weak under Biden’ is wrong, it did not become weak, it was weak and has been for some time. Getting a bully to talk loud does not make America less weak. The American inactions regarding: 

  • Chemical attack Homs Syria 2012
  • Chemical Attack Douma Syria 2018
  • Houthi terrorist attacks Yemen 2014-2022
  • Ukraine under Russian attack 2022

As you can see, Americans are all talk and lack actions. It is not because they do not want to act, it is because they can no longer act. A debt surpassing $30,000,000,000,000 is making sure that this cannot happen, the US has become nothing more than a paper tiger. And let’s be clear, this is not merely the US, the EU is in a similar state. How I went to school and heard these preaches and stories, that if there was ever a chemical attack, the nations would unite against the attackers. In 2012 we saw the reality of what was preached for decades, they merely united and scolded the transgressor making very sure that words like ‘seemingly’ and ‘alleged’ were everywhere in that text. We saw a repetition, with the western media not reporting on Iranian involvement and remaining silent on Houthi attacks on civilian targets, the United Nations added to this by calling out one party and not the other one (Iran). The complete view on the uselessness of western politics set in action.

So when we get ‘told’ the simplicity of “America has become weak under Biden”, it did not, it was weak and will become weaker still. It is the order of things when your credit card is telling you to stay at home whilst the neighbours house is on fire and you cannot afford to buy a bucket. You do not want to let the neighbour know that you cannot afford a bucket, so you set in motion talks, but the neighbour does not want to talk, HIS HOUSE IS ON FIRE! 

/so when Al Jazeera reports ‘New sanctions come as Yemeni rebels ramped up attacks against Saudi Arabia and the UAE in recent weeks’ (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/2/23/us-issues-new-sanctions-on-alleged-houthi-financing-network) 3 days ago, my response is that the US gets a functional navy that can stop smugglers, so far I have seen less than 3 successes over a time of 6 years (at least) and we see how the US Navy seemingly cannot stop anything. That is not their fault (I think) and there could be half a doze reasons, but let’s be clear, the western media to a much larger degree is silencing that part all over the place. And we can shelter on the setting that no one cares about Syria and Yemen, but the Ukraine is too close to home (for the EU) and now we get to see the blame game, we get to see the opposite side, just like the US and EU were silencing any issue on Iran, we now see ‘China refuses to call Russia’s move on Ukraine an invasion’ (source: Australian Financial Review). So how does that feel? The blunt question is ‘Why would China care about Ukraine?’, Why would China push for a setting that it does not need to do? I do not think it is right, I merely think it is as it is. 

We need to accept that inaction comes with consequences and a consequence now is that Russia wants EU expansionism stopped and Russia took the step it felt it could take and that sucks for the Ukraine, but the inactions of the EU and the US (economic sanctions are not real actions), and I am proven right in another BBC article where we saw yesterday “Ukraine isn’t in America’s neighbourhood. It is not located on the US border. Nor does it host a US military base. It does not have strategic oil reserves, and it’s not a major trade partner”, it was the sad truth for Syria, for Yemen and now for the Ukraine. It is what the US calls policy and that is their take on it, it doesn’t make any president weak, but as I see it, when you need to set a filter to that degree, it also implies that you are no longer a superpower, especially if you cater to Iran who allegedly is now (or will be soon) enriching Uranium to 20%, so when this escalates in the state of Israel and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, will it still a stage of inaction? I reckon so, the debt will remain for decades giving China and Russia an almost uncensored way to change the political map all over the Far East and the Middle East. Now there will be people who do not agree, and that is fair. I would merely like to point out that the past has proven me right and the present is merely continuing the stage that I am still not wrong. 

Europe is in danger of a lot more than you think and it seems that in this case the US is not playing the game to the harder degree, they seemingly no longer can.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

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

February 24, 2022 · 03:27

Red flags

We all have them, we all see them, it is what comes next that matters. For me it was a visit to the introduction of a cyber course. There were so many red flags it was weird. The first flags came two days before the presentation, two emails to set the stage, one with the option to delay payment to six months after the course was done, the first sales pitch. Now there is nothing wrong with sales pitches, but here it seems misplaced, cyber space os pedantic to say the least. So I went to that presentation, even though there were already red flags going up. Then there was the event. To be honest, it wasn’t all their fault. There were IT issues and IT couldn’t figure out what was wrong. This happens, the moment sucks, but that is part of the game. 

Then there was the space, 2 attendants, the rest via zoom.  I was one of the two, no drinks, not even water. If it is a sales pitch, you want people relaxed, so how does a thirsty presentation go? They had bought water for themselves. Then there were no handouts, in case of a training you want people have the information, hand outs are a great option for them to have the slides and make notes. The presentation was not updated and was still saying November 2021, remember I stated pedantic? Then the presentation, so much mention of “You do not need to be from IT” and then all the examples of people who were from another education, there were good parts, but so much a sales-pitch. The number of red flags were passed and I left. 

So was I wrong?
There is no indication that they weren’t what they said they were, they were in a decent place, they did this with a well known University, so this was all on the up and up, but the hairs on my neck were up, it was about revenue, it was about sales and the approach was wrong. You see the article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-60387324) gives some of the goods. It was titled ‘the con that tricked dozens into working for a fake design agency’, the BBC gave it two days ago and there we have the problem. The BBC gave us “those who had turned on their cameras didn’t know was that some of the others in the meeting weren’t real people. Yes, they were listed as participants. Some even had active email accounts and LinkedIn profiles. But their names were made up and their headshots belonged to other people.” The enforcing of a sales pitch. As such we see “the real employees had been “jobfished”. The BBC has spent a year investigating what happened.” You still think that being pedantic is something else than a virtue? Yes, we get “the job represented more than just a pay cheque – but a UK visa too. If they passed their six-month probation period, and met their sales targets, their contracts said Madbird would sponsor them to move to the UK” and there is the real pitch, exploitative slavery, hiding behind a piece of shit hiding behind “I have put 16 hours every single day for months and done the best that I could to make this work. I should’ve known better and for that I’m truly sorry.” No he isn’t and I feel that people like that should get one bullet through the back of their heads. We get “By February 2021, not a single client contract had been signed. None of the Madbird staff had been paid a penny”, we are given “Some recruits ended up leaving after a few weeks, but many stayed. Many had been there for almost six months – forced to take out credit cards and borrow money from family to keep on top of bills” that should have been a big red flag but in this world of pandemics, too many feel the pinch of desperation, but an agency that cannot pay you? That is an agency that has no real clients, no revenue and no real future at that point. We are given “a photo showing an open issue of GQ magazine, with Ali Ayad modelling a blazer in a full-page ad for Spanish fashion brand Massimo Dutti. “Hustle in silence, let your success make the noise,” read the caption.” As well as “a post claiming he had modelled for Massimo Dutti in British GQ which received 4,000 ‘likes’”, “Ali Ayad has over 90,000 followers on his Instagram – in his bio he describes himself as an “influencer”” as well as the stolen identities, I personally see a clear case for targeted killing. You see this world is changing and if State players can do the games they play, going after created leaks on Credit Suisse, hack and spell the goods through Pandora Papers, I can make a clear case that some of these exploitative nut-jobs are in the market for targeted killing. It is time that we clean the streets on both sides of the isle but not merely on red flags, that does not constitute evidence and for the Cyber setting I might be wrong, it is more than a gut feeling, it is more then small pressure point, it is more than a sales-pitch (which was never invalid) and the half dozen red flags I do not mention here is because they are personal, they are based on the corporate and university world I have faced over decades, and based on what THEIR bosses see as proper etiquette. The red flags does not mean wrong, it means that the pedantic levels I have seen in the cyber world does not constitute evidence, it does not and I know that. The BBC shows a different version, a version that it takes a year to get to a piece of shit like that. So when we see “We contacted all 42 brands Madbird had listed as former clients – including Nike, Tate, and Toni & Guy. None of those that responded had ever worked with Madbird.” We also see that this is becoming a much larger problem. And I have over 50 people for my case, some who lost thousands. I feel decently certain that the image he used is optionally not him, the stage of “Whilst Madbird and Ayad have seemingly vanished”, as I personally see it, the NSA/GCHQ better get fucking active, if players like this can play their tax the rich approach, they can also hunt down people like Ali Ayad and prove that they are serious about stopping certain crimes. The 50 people have rights and their rights were trampled upon. It was not mischief, it wasn’t some prank and it was not to do “the best that I could to make this work” it was exploitation, it was mislabeled slavery and it needs to stop. We cannot blame some of the social media on how people like this do what they do, but we can execute them. I prefer long term prison but so far Ali Ayad has vanished, and making him run in fear is better than him walking away to restart the scam somewhere else.

That is how I see it but here too is the problem. I am the problem on the relying of red flags, the setting of expectation regarding a pedantic setting, I get that, but between the two events is a borderline, I am not certain where it is, or where it should be, but that border needs to be created, governments have sat on their asses for too long and the wrong people are left with the bill of scammers, that is not completely on social media and more on governments, but that is merely how I see it and I admit, I could be wrong.

1 Comment

Filed under Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,