Tag Archives: Daily Mail

June 19, 2025 · 05:50

What adults?

That was the setting I had yesterday. I didn’t act on it as I had other thoughts on my mind. Yet when it passed my eyes again this morning, something just clicked. It set of a few thoughts in my mind as the reporter from Arab News a Mr. Faisal Abbas gave me (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2604732) ‘Iran vs. Israel: Adults in the room need to act quickly’, and my initial thought was “Is he for real? Are there adults in Iran?” You see, for the longest time Iran is like the raging (read: petulant) child who wants to be in charge and Iran just isn’t ready. They have hidden their acts (to remain in denial) behind Houthi forces, Hamas forces and Hezbollah forces. The three H’s of evil as I would presume. That setting went a lot more will in 2016 after starting on 2004 (21 years ago). In 2016 Houthi forces struck into Saudi Arabia, with 2017 attacking King Khalid International Airport. Iran had been busy using Houthi terrorists attacking civilian targets in Saudi Arabia. Colonel Turki Al-Maliki showed the world plenty of evidence, but the western press was eager to ignore it, all whilst media attack after attack was done on the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, all whilst ignoring the real world around them. Last month we were given ‘Hamas document shows Oct. 7 attack aimed at derailing Saudi normalization’ (source: Times of Israel) and as a source gives us “In the years 1987–89 the party launched attacks against official Saudi targets inside and outside Saudi Arabia. After being implicated in the Khobar Towers Bombing in 1996, the party was outlawed in Saudi Arabia. The party was part of the Iranian government’s “exporting the Islamic revolution” policy.” This is all due to involvement of Iran and we were given that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia would consider having nuclear weapons when the evidence is given that Iran has them. It clearly shows that there would be one adult and it is not Iran.

So as Israel has had enough of Iran playing the crying child, they are adamant that Iran should not have any nuclear weapons and now the new stage of an escalating war on the Arabian peninsula should be avoided. 

So, as Arab News gives us “Saudi Arabia has taken swift action, demonstrating its commitment to regional peace through intense diplomatic engagement. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has personally communicated with leaders around the world, emphasizing the urgent need to de-escalate tensions and unify international efforts to prevent further violence. Riyadh recognizes that unchecked military confrontation will not only destabilize nations but also hinder progress, development and the fight against violent extremism.” Faisal Abbas forgets to mention that Iran has to be stopped and as he is seemingly unwilling to do this, Israel has another frame of minds. You see, the moment that Iran has a nuclear weapon, it will be deployed to Israel making peace not longer an option and the timing of that moment merely takes an egg timer from completing the weapon until it is released from a deniable source by one of the three H’s (to be in denial whilst the blame is shifted to a member of the IRGC who will then spend the rest of his live in a palace being revered by all Israeli hating muslims) Did I make that to simple?

I get the response we see in “The Kingdom has unequivocally condemned the attack on Iran and the violation of its sovereignty, denouncing it as a clear breach of international laws. However, Saudi Arabia understands that words alone are insufficient. Proactive measures must be taken to prevent the situation from deteriorating further. Riyadh is rallying diplomatic channels to reduce tensions, working to ensure that strategic decisions prioritize stability over reckless militarization.” Iran is after all a Muslim nation, I get that and siding with Israel is as I see it not done by any Muslim nation, but their is a setting that they have had enough of Iran, so I am speculating that in many Saudi houses a glass is raised not in support of Israel but in the ‘accidental’ downfall of Iran. As I see it, the larger failing is that Iran gets mentioned four times, including under the photo that shows the impact of a location in Haifa. 

And in all this America didn’t do too much in stopping Iran either. See, speaking words do not hold the bacon (as the expression goes). And the actions of Iran has been a clear setting that acts were inbound on Tehran from the many transgressions that Iran had undertaken in the last 20 years alone. And in the last hour we were given that “this is the dirty work Israel is doing for all of us, words from German Chancellor Friedrich Merz”whilst two minutes ago the Washington Post gives us “Trump demands Iran’s ‘unconditional surrender’ as strikes continue” things are escalating all over the place all whilst the world seemingly has had enough of that petulant child called Iran. And as most of the world believes that Iran getting nuclear weapons is one tantrum too many and I tend to agree because it puts both Israel and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia in harms way. Consider that “On 27 October 2016, a Yemeni Houthi ballistic missile known as Burkan-1 was launched towards Makkah City. The missile was intercepted and destroyed by Saudi ground forces 65 kilometers from the city. A similar attack by the Houthis was carried out on a Saudi Airbase in Taif on 10 October.” I personally wonder if there is any evidence that Iran supplied the hardware for an attack on Makkah, but I have little doubt that it was just as it was seen and that was the point where western media should have clearly stated that Iran is the larger danger to Islam, but did they? Now that Israel has had enough the western media (and Russia) are trying to ‘limit’ involvement. And for Russia it is not good news as this limits the acts it can do on Ukrainian civilian populations and if America does get involved, the options for Iran will fade away really fast (especially their oil reserves) and that might be good news for other oil producing nations. And that is important as only minutes ago I got the news that ‘The Houthis join Iran’s attacks on Israel’, as I see it, it is the escalation no one wanted but we all get the impact of this and no-one is asking how Houthi forces (after waging war for 21 years) where these missiles are coming from. Because there is merely one source where they could have come from (my personal speculation), they are coming from Iran. Can you truly believe that there is any scenario where Iran could be allowed to have nuclear fight capacity? I reckon that it will be in hour one where Iran transports a missile into Iraq and when that thing flies towards Israel and Iran will be in denial claiming it came from Iraq and that is where the egg times comes in as it will hit Israel, near Tel Aviv a mere 20 minutes later. That is what s at stake and Israel is speculatively unwilling to be a nuclear target and that is at stake and we need to realise that Iran shouldn’t be seen as an adult. The setting that a child is given a nuclear pacifier is equally unacceptable. As such when you consider the dangers we all face, that is the larger setting and I was there in 2007 (as an opposer of Iran having any nuclear weapons) when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (as 6th president of Iran) became a larger supporter of nuclear weapons.

That is what is at stake, as such the article is fine, but it is lacking a massive amounts of mentions of Iran having an impossible mindset. And as the Daily Mail (not the greatest source of information) gave us 7 minutes ago that a Iranian government jet had diverted to Oman we are given “Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei threatened an attack on U.S. naval ships and troops if Donald Trump authorizes strikes on its nuclear bunkers” as it seems, Iran is rather scared that this will be met with issues and he feels safer in another country. As such we can assume that he feels happier being the petulant child in another place whilst Iran gets hit with all kinds of attacks. That is not the person who should be allowed to have any kinds of weapons, least of all the nuclear variety.

As I personally see it, the adults are acting, that being said. I feel that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia did nothing wrong, even as they have plenty of reasons to act, the refrained from acting. That too, in many situations is the act of an adult. 

As such the words ‘Adults in the room need to act quickly’ is a little presumptuous. Sometimes it is important for adults not to act. As we wrestle told by Sun Tsu “He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight” words that were given to us 2500 years ago and the second part “when not to fight” is too often ignored. A small part that Faisal Abbas seemingly overlooked.

Have a great day, I am now 129 minutes away from breakfast.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

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

September 26, 2024 · 17:47

Xenophobia

Xenophobia is a real thing, it is not the version we see in Star Trek. Xenophobia quite literally translates to ‘foreign fear’. The fear of foreign issues. The media exploits it for any flames it can create, as fear invites flames, flames create ‘clicks’ and clicks translate to advertisement money. It is the simplest way for media to use people to generate revenue for them. Yet I saw the other f this exploited fear in another way last night. I was about to write an article to something related to this, as such that story gets pushed back and now I focus on this as it is related to the bigger picture. 

The first trigger were the Crusade memes we have seen this year (there were a few). Now I like the age of Crusades to some degree, but we were deceived to a much larger degree. The crusades were mostly the nobles pillaging the Arabian lands and it was done with the blessing of Pope Urban II. The treaty of Claremont (1094) gave rise to this and many people (often in states of near starving) rallied to the sound of the the call to free the land of Christ, which was largely ludicrous as that was Jerusalem and that was debatable Jewish/Saracen (Muslim). So here came the crusades and that was a massive slaughter around Accra, Jerusalem and a few other places. Yes, there are a few inaccuracies here, but the sentiment is decently sound. An interesting telling is seen in the movie Kingdom of Heaven by Ridley Scott. The western world had a decent technological advantage, but they could not stop the Arabian nations to unite in their anger to the west. Between 1092 and 1291 approximately 1.7 million people died. These people died by warfare, disease, starvation, and murder by banditry. In the current Russian losses against the Ukrainian defenders there were merely 647,800 losses, so the losses were then 300% larger. So what do you think will happen now that the Arabian lands have an economic advantage and the west no longer have a technological advantage? Did the Karen’s of this world consider that small setting in ‘their’ crusades?

And when you consider that stage, we get to the article that ‘set’ me off. It was the Daily Mail (at https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/boxing/article-13889805/Anthony-Joshua-Daniel-Dubois-selling-national-soul-Saudi-PR-silence-criticism-SIMON-JORDAN.html) where we see ‘SIMON JORDAN: We must stop selling our sporting soul to the Saudis, I don’t like the sense that everything in this country is there solely to be bought’ It is a weird sense. You see, the owners of whatever is there to be sold, because they want money and the Saudi’s (and other nations) have it. The byline “I found it a tad perplexing to sit in our own Wembley stadium on Saturday night and listen to the national anthem of Saudi Arabia” which is nice, because on September 23 1932 the country Saudi Arabia was established. The Saudi’s are proud of this and they should be allowed to be proud. So I went over to YouTube and I found the Saudi National anthem. It was beautiful. Now, I was lucky because I cannot speak Arabic to any degree. I cannot even order a Shawarma if my life depended on it (as I die of starvation), as such YouTube was the answer as the movie had the song and the texts both in Arabic and English. 

Hasten!
To glory and supremacy,
Exalt the Creator of heavens!
And raise the green flag
Carrying the written light of aegis;
Repeat: “Allahu Akbar!”
O my country!
My country,
As pride of Muslims live on!
Long live the King
For the flag
And the land!

It reveres their country, their faith, their king and their flag. What is wrong about that? Because it isn’t revering the Union Jack? The owners (the governing body of English football, the Football Association) decided to honour the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia on their national day. I see nothing wrong with that. So how did he come to “I don’t like the sense that everything in this country is there solely to be bought”? Shouldn’t his first though be “I don’t like the sense that everything in this country is there solely to be sold” In that the question refers to their inner ‘christian’ being, get cash now before it is too late. And in this America is already ahead of them, making all kinds of ‘unions’ before the wells of wealth run dry. And when we get “Though I consider myself a capitalist, I find it a little bit distasteful that we seem so willing to give away our national soul for the right price” and there is the larger story. The idea that the people would hand over ‘their national soul’, they sold their soul for a price and the buyer was willing to buy. I don’t see this part anywhere. We then get “I turned up to our most iconic sporting arena in the country, recognisable around the globe and the seat of our national game, to watch two British heavyweights Daniel Dubois and Anthony Joshua, and it felt like downtown Riyadh.” And I wonder (apart from the fact that Riyadh is prettier and a lot cleaner than London). Wembley Stadium is, as far as I can tell, still owned by the Football Association, so what gives? Was it merely a sign of respect to play the Saudi National anthem on their national day? I don’t know what the driving force was to playing that song, but I am willing to see that it as a sign of respect to the Saudi involvement on their national day. But what do I know. What is interesting is that the Daily Mail gives us “A British journalist has claimed he was barred from Saturday’s showpiece fight between Anthony Joshua and Daniel Dubois at Wembley after labelling the event an ‘unashamed sportwashing exercise’.” Was this the case? I do not know as too many media is about creating flames. Perhaps that journalist could not afford the ticket and whomever he ‘represented’ had another journalist assigned to the event. I do not know, but I wonder what the facts are. The Daily Mail is a decent expert in creating flames and this time around they let Simon Jordan create the flames. 

That is the larger stage, the media is losing more and more reliability as they more and more depend on ‘clicks’ from flames. We do not know what to believe and the article does not help. For one, an no point do we see who the owner of Wembley Stadium is, as far as I know it is still owned by the Football Association. The article does not bear that out, not even once. Weird isn’t it. Oh and before you start a crusade, remember that wars are won by those who are better informed and as such you would get a massive beating from whomever represents the new Saracens. Something to think about.

Have a lovely day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics, sport

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

January 17, 2024 · 21:58

Added views

I saw an article in the Khaleej Times and suddenly remembered a story I wrote on January 10th called ‘The other way contemplation’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2024/01/10/the-other-way-contemplation/) where I inferred that changes would be required. Now in the KT we see ‘Dubai: Emirates to hire 5,000 cabin crew; eligibility criteria revealed’ (at https://www.khaleejtimes.com/jobs/dubai-emirates-to-hire-5000-cabin-crew-eligibility-criteria-revealed) consider that they are hiring more staff than several airlines have as a total. We are also given “In 2023, Emirates hired a staggering 8,000 cabin crew and held recruitment events in 353 cities as the airline ramped up its services post the pandemic”, this isn’t like Emirates airlines is off to the races. This is more like a landslide victory and there are no competitors left. Now, I am happy for those people landing such a job (I am way too old) and that is fine. But me old noggin started to mull things over. You see to do this you need to have a very upgraded infrastructure. Staff care (customer care) resource deployment and so on. That list goes on for a little while and I am not implying that Emirates airlines isn’t ready for that. I am merely wondering that on a global scale Emirates airlines will have one hell of a cloud based system. It won’t work any other way. That gives me pause. You see several airports are massively under managed and decently outdated. And here we get places where Toronto Pearson International Airport is an obvious first mention. So how will Emirates airlines go about it? It could create new hubs on a global setting, but that too requires staff. IT and operational are the two obvious ones. I am not sure how Dubai manages their luggage, but that system in Toronto Pearson International Airport is nowhere near ready if last years stories are to be believed. You see, you can add 13,000 flight staff, but if the infrastructure fails the rest is pretty much a no go and no show. Now this is not on the Emirates airlines, but they will feel the impact of the short comings of others. So is that the golden opportunity for Emirates airlines? I don’t know. But in light of what I wrote then (January 10th) implies that such upgrades are required a lot sooner than I thought and it is required on a much larger scale than previously thought. So whilst we are given “The airline is looking for fresh graduates with internships or part-time jobs experience, those with a year or so of hospitality or customer service experience.” They might throw a few dozen university drives in the mix for IT and operational staff. Places like Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Delft University of Technology (TU Delft), Georgia Institute of Technology, University of Technology Sydney and the Technical University Berlin to name but a few. If these numbers that the KT gives us are correct, they will soon need 500-1000 IT and operational staff as well and I have no idea if they can get them all from the UAE. That is long before we see the essential need to stress test servers, cloud solutions, operational equipment (CCTV, Radio, Comsat) and various other equipment. And this is not merely Dubai, wherever they have seatings (Dulles, JFK, Schiphol, Le Gaulle) they will need to stress test the systems they use. For example, Dutch airline KLM has 24,789 as cabin crew and BA has 15,000 cabin crew. Now add 20% global staff members for Emirates airlines alone and you start seeing a still image, not a pattern, but a snapshot of what is required. Now consider that the worst (Toronto Pearson International Airport) has no way to the added pressures and I am merely looking at luggage and they are not alone (merely according to some sources the worst) now we have ourselves a clambake. We have 50 additional guests, but still the one BBQ and one cook. The BBQ in this is the infrastructure. It will not be able to cope. This is not in the near future, it is now. Toronto is merely one example. Last year we saw ‘EasyJet, British Airways and Ryanair amidst airlines getting most luggage complaints’ and that was only Heathrow. That list is starting to grow and buckle. Now none of this is on Emirates airlines, but there is a chance that they could drive the beginning of a new global operational player with systems as well. Now this is not a given and most airlines (airports too) will get hindered by pride stating that they are working on it. But I wonder if Emirates airlines might get another option to a lot more non-oil revenue. It is only a thought, but if you see what is coming and 2024 will see another 1,000,000 additional flights, I mentioned it on November 13th 2021 in ‘A COP26 truth’ 

(at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/11/13/a-cop26-truth/) so tell me, does anyone know how many systems were upgraded in the last 2 years? Enough upgrades to deal with 25,000 additional staff (global) and 3,000,000 additional flights? When you start grinding the numbers I see speculative gaps (I need actual data to be less speculating) and they airports are sitting on them spouting party lines. If Toronto is anything to go by, the problem will get a lot worse and Emirates airlines is optionally ready in Dubai, but are the other airports? I somehow doubt it. And that might be the next lucrative solution for Emirates airlines on the next cycle of events. Them as well as the KSA have a new option, one that they might not have considered. A new system but edged on global deployment.

Just a thought, enjoy your day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT

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

June 23, 2023 · 20:24

This news is not news

Yup that happens as well, sometimes the news agencies are right on top of something (in this case the Canadians) and we heard it before. That doesn’t make it not news in Canada, but when the same failings happen, it becomes a little less applauding. For this we need to take a look at the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-65969970) where we are given ‘Facebook and Instagram to restrict news access in Canada’ a setting that happened in Australia in 2021, yet here too the setting is slightly irritating. You see, News agencies USE Meta to advocate their brand, They advertise. As such we might see (see images below) choices of what news they offer. For example the Daily Mail

We get a forced login at times with a paywall (like the New York Times)

This is called advertising. So not only are they advertising on Facebook (or Meta), they now demand fees for their own advertising? How lame is that? In the defence of Canada, none of the Canadian news outlets have done this Montreal Gazette, CBC to name but a few. BBC and the Guardian do not employ those tactics either. But there are too many who do and if one is set to scrutiny, it must be demanded that these news outlets either vacate Meta completely (and do so until an agreement is reached) or they offer that news freely, which is fine by me. Yet I think that they are not on board for option two. In case of the Daily Mail you get taken to a different screen with all the advertisement that they offer, which is fair enough, especially as they do not invoke a paywall that many do. In the age of digital awareness newspapers become more trivial and less of a credible news source, which adds to the equation as I personally see it. 

So when we see another imploding gas tank in a field with someone humming the music of Titanic (by James Horner) consider that this is soon to become the quality news we can expect from some sources. 

The article also gives us ““A legislative framework that compels us to pay for links or content that we do not post, and which are not the reason the vast majority of people use our platforms, is neither sustainable nor workable,” a Meta spokesperson told Reuters.” A stage which I have to agree with, it is not what some Canadian news outlets were hoping for, but that is what it is, and it bites in several cases, but the stage was never workable and that is the truth of the matter. We see journalists (and wannabe’s) being fired left right and center, yet the message is not that they did the wrong thing, their bosses leached on a digital platform they never properly understood and the money went nowhere and definitely not into their pockets. Some people will wonder what now. I think just like the Yellow pages lost their appeal plenty of others are on that same boat and evolution tends to do that (I am happy is solved it in other ways). 

Will certain things happen? They all will, it is a shifting timeline and it will come to everyones doorstep. As world powers collapse (which is inevitable) the media will suddenly be confronted with a new line of demarcation and there they have no say in the matter. This is starting right now and some will chose to diversify (preferably before they fire their journalists) and new grounds will open to those who can see the new fronts (and news fronts), but I give you one clear message. Those who have been screaming ‘Jamal Khashoggi’ on every turn they had are pretty much done for. A personal vision, but I feel that I am getting that one correctly.

The weekend is coming, be ready.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

October 31, 2022 · 20:47

That screwed up media

Here I was, relaxing, looking at tweets when suddenly a tweet Elon Musk passes by (see below). 

Now I had a hard time here. You see I do not trust the media, but the top shelf media (LA Times, SF Chronicle, Boston Globe, and Washington Post) were always above board. Actually there was one more, but it seems that the NY Times now joins the third tier newspapers right next to the Daily Mail (UK). How could any newspaper be so stupid to give us the article (see below). 

The idea that a newspaper does not properly vet the information they have is not new, but in the past the NY Times was always above board. Whether they hate Elon Musk, whether they have other needs (like towards former Twitter owners) or whatever the reason, not vetting information is a problem, it is one I have been talking about for years. When the media cannot differentiate between real news and fake news the media has a problem, they merely hand over the news to TikTokkers like the one claiming that there are a large number of UFO’s over Australia (a TikTok ad), so now you know.

Now what was one the huge and mighty NY Times is now a bringer of debatable fake news, which will deteriorate any other news they bring. Although, I do realise that if Elon Musk was not honest my goose is cooked. Yet Elon Musk has a lot more credibility than most media ever could hope to have, so I am presently siding with the E Musk group. I could not read the whole article because the subscription nag overlapped my article again and again, so there might be an ulterior reason for the NY Times.

In this day and age when we trust the media less and less, they need to bend over backwards to vet the information again and again and hiding behind a mention of Reuters no longer does the trick.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

November 5, 2021 · 03:41

As Credit Cards run dry

That was pretty much the first thing that went through my mind as Reuters gave me ‘UK could speed up criminal sanctions for big tech, minister says’ an hour ago. The article (at https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-could-speed-up-criminal-sanctions-big-tech-minister-says-2021-11-04/) gives us the first dangerous setting ““It will not be two years, we are looking at truncating that to a shorter time frame,” she told lawmakers. “I’m looking at three to six months for criminal liability”” in the first I have all kinds of emotional outbursts as to the uselessness of certain political players. Then there are a few more chapters, yet it is not yet the moment for that (it will come soon enough). When we see “Powers to make executives liable have been proposed as a “last resort” to be introduced at least two years after the rules have been set, the government has said”, we see the first part that it is a timeline change of almost 75%, then there is the statement ‘as a “last resort”’ and I personally believe that none of it will hold up to scrutiny. There is of course the ‘old’ setting of “In general, Facebook may not be held liable for slanderous or defamatory posts due to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Section 230 protects internet service providers, like Facebook, from liability for content posted to their platform by third-party users” Yet it also means that a demand could be made to hold Journalists up to those same standards, and that is where the shoe stops fitting and the dance ends real quick.

Consider Stephanie Kirchgaessner, someone at the Guardian. On July 19th 2021 she gives us “A phone infected with NSO malware, as Kanimba’s has been, not only gives users of the spyware access to phone calls and messages, but it can also turn a mobile phone into a portable tracking and listening device. In the period before she was alerted to her phone being hacked, Kanimba said she had contacts with the US special presidential envoy for hostage affairs, British MPs, and the UK high commission office in Rwanda – all of which could have been monitored”

We now see:
A. ‘A phone infected with NSO malware, as Kanimba’s has been’
So where is that evidence? As such the guardian could be just as liable and hiding behind ‘big tech’ optionally constitutes a case for discrimination and the Guardian is also on Facebook, Twitter and so on, so what gives there?
B. When was the phone infected? Can the moment of infection be proven?

The Daily Mail reported on October 25th 2021 “The alarm was raised after an online harms issue known only to a few people at the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport was raised by a senior executive at Facebook in a recent meeting” So we see “I’m looking at three to six months for criminal liability”, basically Facebook would be prosecuted for events that the employees of that government leak on Facebook? How insane is that train? Who would be the conductor of that crazy brain train and with that in sight, when we consider that some of these messages come from all over the globe. And in plenty of those cases the so called trolls are to blame for some messages. When we consider that the track record in the US, UK, EU and larger commonwealth fails to deal with trolls, can we demand more from Facebook? Consider that the Council on Foreign Relations reported on June 7th 2021 “Chinese trolls are beginning to pose serious threats to economic security, political stability, and personal safety worldwide”. So how long until not so intelligent politicians see a larger string of attacks and fine Facebook whilst the business shifts to China where the US, UK and EU have no say in the matter? How stupid does one need to get to consider their stretched credit cards to get fines whilst losing billions in taxable revenue and optionally global revenue? When it all shifts to China (as well as the Russian equivalent) people like Britain’s Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries were too close to clueless to understand the digital media? Yes, we get it, Zuckerberg created a Behemoth, one a lot larger then even he thought was possible, but the rest had no idea whatsoever (I used to work for a few of them). So in all this we see lofty words like ‘criminal liability’, yet that same government (as the BBC reported) gives its population just 1.6% of rape allegations in England and Wales result in someone being charged, something the government has said it is “deeply ashamed” about. Charged, not convicted, that is a mere 80%, leaving 98% of the assailants free to do it again. That government who failed its population for well over three decades thinks it can judge “big tech firms already had the capability to make their platforms safer”, how is that insight gotten? Because as I see it in too many places the people have no clue on digital media issues, especially in social media. 

I believe that this is another ‘tax the wealthy’ stage, this time it is on what I regard as ‘false grounds’. And in that light, lets take a gander into another stage (adjusted stage in this case) of ‘flawed reasoning’

6 Most Common Causes of Wrongful Convictions

Eyewitness misinterpretation.
The stage where the observer does not comprehend all the elements of a digital track and uses his or her status as expert witness, or witness to the event all whilst the stage cannot be seen as a lot of the variables involved are not visible to that witness.

Misinterpretation.
Misinterpretation is set to what is seen, the data behind it and the stage on why and who placed it. In many cases (especially with flamers and trolls) several of these elements are faked and wrong values are captured mainly because flamers and trolls know what to change. This is similar to all the scam calls showing a UK/US number whilst the scammer is in India. YouTube is filled with those examples.

Incorrect forensics.
Is slightly the wrong term, it is incomplete forensics, because governments listened to self righteous pinko’s who demanded privacy and as such digital platforms cannot capture what needed to be captured to do more, so first (overly graphically stated) the government cuts off the hands of the media giant and then tells the media giant to pick up the right ‘pick-a-stick’, how lame is that part of the equation?

False confessions.
There is the cry-baby (hoping to get freebee’s), the trolls and flamers and those with a natural aversion to one side (abortion, politics, vegans), take a subject and there will always be a crying opponent and they are willing to embellish their side and optionally lie on what they feel, all sides that goes straight into social media and often several times over.

Official misconduct.
Basically is is seen on both sides and always will be, I used the government staff leaking lists, but the opposite side is also there (like Amazon staff greasing personal (family) needs. Several options and these things happen and time is the only way to get there, yet the issues mentioned earlier drains close to all resources.

Use of informants.
That is the larger problem, who is a real informant, and who is there to play some political game? The data will not reveal either but it also constitute a wrongful case.  A seemingly small but growing issue on a stage where size is the least visible element of all.

Inadequate defense.
The largest problem issue. It overlaps with technical abilities, privacy abilities and false confessions, they all impact the defence that is offered and as such is the easiest overrun in court or in a hearing. This also is a stage with documentation and as we see with some players at the ICIJ (Pandora papers) as well as the NSO group. There is no adequate defence as the presented attacks are too often absent of evidence, yet still there is a conviction against the players and the media became part of that problem. A stage where defense was not possible because some players were allegedly tainting the field. 

Six elements and they are out in the open, so when we see “Britain’s Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries, who was appointed to the job in September, said she wanted the powers brought forward” I personally wonder whether she is clueless on what is involved, or is this a mere ruse to get fines so the governmental Credit Card is not cut into pieces by too many banks? And if the UK is in that stage, how deep is the EU and the US at present?

Before we leap to rush to the small minded people, lets make sure that they do not end up driving business to players like WeChat. A site that will not adhere to anything that is seemingly non-Chinese.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

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

August 13, 2021 · 00:19

Who you gonna trust?

That is the issue I have and you should too. The news is no longer reliable, catering to people who they have no business of catering too. The numbers are questionable, many articles are all on a template that I personally call ‘How to create a click bitch’, but in this too I wonder who is right. This is given to us by the Daily Mail (at https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9885013/Pfizers-Covid-vaccine-42-effective-against-Indian-Delta-variant-Modernas-76.html). Here we see “Pfizer’s Covid vaccine is only 42% effective against Indian ‘Delta’ variant while Moderna’s jab is 76% effective, Mayo Clinic study suggests”, the problem is that I am not a health official and the Daily Mail is throwing plenty of graphs at us. There is a clear admission, we see this with “For the study, published on pre-printer server medRxiv.org – meaning it has not yet been peer review – the team gathered data on more than 25,000 Minnesotans from January to July”, yet I will also admit that Minnesota, a state with 5.75 million people, a group of 25,000 is decent.
It is the claim “The Delta variant being able to bypass the existing vaccines also confirms what many feared, that the virus could potentially mutate to a point where it can bypass vaccines.” That is the scary one. There is no clear setting to prove it yet, but the numbers give rise to this and in the past Dr. Fauci gave a similar worry. I am not sure who to trust, but the setting is starting to get louder, at least if 10% of the population dies, nature might in part restore itself, and the 10% might be low, you will have the anti-vaxxers to thank for that part. 

The issue is actually worse, from my point of view, when we see the numbers from India, I believe that they are low, beyond acceptable. Now, here I will not blame the Indian government. With a population of 1.3 billion, no system will hold up, not in this case, but the numbers are way low and all these people screaming to open airports and travel, they might be pointed at when we see a larger escalation in Delta and Echo variations (I am assuming that there will soon be an Echo variation).
Yet this is not about speculation, so when we look at the CDC, we get “In two different studies from Canada and Scotland, patients infected with the Delta variant were more likely to be hospitalised than patients infected with Alpha or the original virus strains”, as well as “CDC is continuing to assess data on whether fully vaccinated people with asymptomatic breakthrough infections can transmit. However, the greatest risk of transmission is among unvaccinated people who are much more likely to contract, and therefore transmit the virus.” These are merely two quotes, yet they counter certain people and even worse people almost openly opposing the vaccine. In this several newspapers now give us ‘Anti-vax Red Cross nurse ‘injected 8600 people with saline solution instead of vaccine’’, here I get the urge to ask ‘How can a red cross nurse be ‘Anti-vax’ and work at the red cross?’, There is a reason for vaccines. I grew up in the 60’s whilst Polio thanks to the humanitarian push by Jonas Salk who invented it, and unlike many, he no wealth, he made it an open solution, he did not patent it and as such 34 years later Polio became eradicated in the US in 1994. So when we see “In the late 1940s, polio outbreaks in the U.S. increased in frequency and size, disabling an average of more than 35,000 people each year”, now the number in the US is ZERO, it has been since before the 80’s, there are cases but these are all cases that come into the US. It took a decades to eradicate polio and there is every chance that COVID will take time too. The bigger issue is that polio did not mutate to the degree COVID does and yes at all times getting the vaccine is better than not getting it. So when we see the Guardian giving us last Sunday ‘Rightwing radio host and anti-vaxxer dies of Covid’, we need to consider that even as this is in the US, they are not alone, the anti-vaxxers are everywhere and when we see “Dick Farrel was a vociferous critic of Dr Anthony Fauci and urged people not to get vaccinated”, some might be happy that he is dead, but the problem is not that he is dead, thousands are voicing similar non scientific thoughts and it is becoming a problem.

And as Sydney had its lockdown protests two weeks ago, we now see 345 new cases of Covid in NSW, so with the protests, what are the chances that this number goes down over the next week?  Two months ago, we had a mere 3 cases added, over 8 weeks this escalated to 343 cases with a 7 day average of 312. When you consider this and you also consider that Australia has 25 million people, consider what the damage is expected to be in India with 1300 million and a population pressure that is a lot higher than Australia has, you still think I am talking out of my ass? India peak of May 9th has now decreased from 414,000 new cases to 42,000. I personally believe that there is no way that this is correct, implying that a lot more problems will emerge in
India quite soon. You see there are 200M cases and India has a mere 15% of the cases, you might think that this adds up, because the numbers match, but India with its population pressure and its lack of medical supplies as well as a lack in vaccine should be in a much larger setting, I would personally speculate that the numbers should be 30%-40% higher at the very least, and the media for the largest extent is not looking into it. In addition a few sources, give us that by end July half a billion doses will be done in India, yet what everyone ignores is that the population of India is 1.3B, implying that 2.6B doses are requires, so a mere 20% will have one shot, and whilst we now see that there is dealings over 50M more shots, it also shows that with that many not being inoculated the Delta variant can reap a lot of losses in India, but we do not get that stage illuminated, do we, or the larger impact of how these vaccines will not stop Delta, yet there is also the acknowledgement that for those who had the vaccine, they are most likely to recover from the delta versions. There are no real numbers out there, but several sources gave us that most recover. I am voicing news sources, but when we look at the greater setting there is a larger stage of who and what is to be trusted, I honestly do not know, but I do believe that places like the CDC are the most reliable ones. 

Am I right or am I wrong? I could be either, but I truly believe that the real scientific places (like www.CDC.gov) will be the most reliable source for covid information. I also believe that the people trying to silence Dr. Fauci are not opting for freedom of speech, they are betraying their constituency, leaving them to die of their own devices, but that part is something that the almighty USA and their first amendment are not willing to call out for, in history this is the first time where the first amendment is one of the handles in the USA that will get people killed and a lot of them too. I am certain that the American forefathers would never have dreamed that freedom of speech would throttle science and common sense, but here you have it, that is the setting and I have no idea how large the casualty list will be in a few months. With global protests on common sense solutions, the casualties will merely go up, but in London that also means that housing prices will drop, so there is that to look forward to. 

So who you gonna trust? You better think that through, because now you do it whilst gambling with your life. Will you trust some anti-vaxxer? Will you trust science and doctors? It is your right to chose, but remember, you life has no sequel, and this time it is your life you are taking a gamble with (as well as the people around you). So chose wisely and good luck!

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

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

August 10, 2021 · 02:08

The part we seem to forget

I was reading an article on the Guardian when something hit me. You see, we have been told parts of this again and again since the 90’s, for 30 years, more likely than not even longer, were we warned for the issues we now see unfold in Greece and all over the world. 

When we consider that and we consider ‘Major climate changes inevitable and irreversible – IPCC’s starkest warning yet’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/aug/09/humans-have-caused-unprecedented-and-irreversible-change-to-climate-scientists-warn) we see “Human activity is changing the Earth’s climate in ways “unprecedented” in thousands or hundreds of thousands of years, with some of the changes now inevitable and “irreversible”, climate scientists have warned. Within the next two decades, temperatures are likely to rise by more than 1.5C above pre-industrial levels, breaching the ambition of the 2015 Paris climate agreement, and bringing widespread devastation and extreme weather.” Yet what we do not see, not by any media, is the job the media is supposed to do, the part we expect and the part we should DEMAND they will do, but they will not. The media is the bitch of shareholders, stakeholders and advertisers and their stakeholders will not hear of it, their friends will not like this. We should demand a list, a list of EVERY scientist who opposed the papers showing these dangers for decades. We should demand a list of these scientists and the corporate links they had, the corporate donations they received. The people are entitled to them, but the stakeholders who are behind the screens will not like this and I wonder why not. Actually, I am not that surprised that stakeholders tend to be bitches too, they will have friends they cater too and they do not like it that they are not the powers they pretend to be, but the game is now in a stage where we should look at that part, even as the media is willing to let that part go, just like they play footsie with people like Martin Bashir. So as the Daily Mail gives the people ‘Diana whistleblower who sounded the alarm over ‘dirty tricks’ used by Martin Bashir to secure interview ‘will be paid £750,000 by BBC after losing career’’ we see that the BBC catered to other needs for 25 years and they do not like the limelight of catering, just like others catered to Jimmy Saville and a few others, all (as I personally see it) due to connections to stakeholders, that needs to end. I believe that any media shown to cater to non-media needs, need to get its 0% VAT status revoked for no less than 10 years, see if that motivates them. 

The Guardian gave us (at https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/30/climate-crimes-oil-and-gas-environment) “Instead of heeding the evidence of the research they were funding, major oil firms worked together to bury the findings and manufacture a counter narrative to undermine the growing scientific consensus around climate science. The fossil fuel industry’s campaign to create uncertainty paid off for decades by muddying public understanding of the growing dangers from global heating and stalling political action.” This is fine, but this was not enough, the scientists who put their name under some of these marketing plays need to be out in the open, they made their choices, the now need to be banned for life. Catering to stakeholders need to come at a price. It is nice to blame the fossil fuel group, it might not be wrong, but it is shallow, there was an entire support engine of academics and politicians, they need to be pushed into the limelight. Politicians that set the agenda of inaction, supported by academic statements, we need those to be out in the open in all nations, so that we can flush out. The stakeholders, a side the media is for the most unable (read: unwilling) to do. So as the Guardian also gives us “Last month, a Dutch court ordered Shell to cut its global carbon emissions by 45% by the end of the decade. The same day, in Houston, an activist hedge fund forced three new directors on to the board of the US’s largest oil firm, ExxonMobil, to address climate issues. Investors at Chevron also voted to cut emissions from the petroleum products it sells.” So, where were they in the last 2-3 decades? As I personally see it, these people could react well over a decade ago when the water was up to our necks, they decided to fill their pockets a little longer until the water was up to our eyeballs, optionally making reference that clever people had a snorkel. Yet, snorkels have weaknesses, and the eyeballs might see the waves from one direction, not from all directions in that state, for that the water needed to be at no more than neck level, less would have ben better. 

So as we are in this setting, we are all driven to blame fossil fuel and as most oil comes from the middle east it will be appealing to most, yet the truth, the ugly truth is that they could only preserve their income with political and academic support form the west and we want those names, preferable with the names of the stakeholders. 

I wonder if any media will dig into that part, they might say that they do and they might make efforts, but after 2-3 weeks there will be another crises and some stakeholder will drown the effort, that is how the world runs, greed driven against the needs of everyone and at the cost of everything that is not theirs. It is merely my point of view, but I believe it to be a correct one.

1 Comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

June 20, 2021 · 00:16

The stage of what is

Yes, we all have that and I am no exclusion, ‘what is’ is the first part of a question that is dangerous. The answer that follows tends to be subjective and personal, as such it is loaded with bias, not that all bias is bad, but it defers from what actually is. This was the first stage when I saw ‘Lina Khan: The 32-year-old taking on Big Tech’. Then we get “when it comes to unfair competition, there is one sector that has been singled out by Democrats and Republicans alike: Big Tech”, this is the beginning of a discriminatory setting. There are two sides in this and let me begin that Big Tech is not innocent, so what is this about? Lets add ““What became clear is there had been a systemic trend across the US… markets had come to be controlled by a very small number of companies,” she said”, now we need to realise that there are two parts here too, in the first she is not lying and for the most, she is correct. 

So why do I oppose?

The US, most of the Commonwealth and the EU all have a massive failing, they have no clue what they are doing. I have seen that side for over 30 years and it is the beginning of a larger stage. You see the big tech part needs to be split in two elements big tech and those who ‘use’ (or abuse) the elements of big tech. Big tech was more than the FAANG group (Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, Google), in the beginning there was Microsoft, IBM and Sun as well (there were a few more players but they were gobbled up or ended up being forgotten. When we see charts of technology and market capitalisation we see Microsoft in second place, so why is Microsoft left outside of the targeting of these people? Microsoft is many things, but it was never innocent or some goody two shoes, the same can be argued for IBM, IBM have been gobbling up all kinds of corporations in the last 20 years, so why is IBM disregarded so often? It it nice to target the companies with visibility towards consumers, but that puts Microsoft with more than one issue in the crosshairs, but they are ignored, why is that?

Then we get back to the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-57501579) where we see “Her general criticism is that Big Tech is simply too big – that a handful of large US tech firms dominate the sector, at the expense of competition”, she is not incorrect, but there are more sides to that story. In 1997 I gave an idea to bosses (in a software firm) on consumers messaging each other and for a firm to be in the middle of that. Being a gateway and a director of messages and giving visibility to people of other matters (I never used the word advertising). It was founded on a missing part when Warner Brothers created (in partnership with Angelfire) a website hub. So fans of Babylon 5, Gilmore Girls and a few other series could Create their own webpage, they got 20MB for free and an address, like in Babylon 5 I was something like Section Red number 23 (I forgot, it was 25 years ago), the bosses stated that there would never be a use for that, it was not their business and there was no business need for something like that and 4 years later someone else created Facebook. Now I am no Facebook creator, what I had was in no way anywhere near that, but that is a side a lot of people forget, the IT people had no clue on what the digital era was bringing and what it looked like, so as they were unaware, politicians had even less of a clue. So when Google had its day (search and email) no one knew what was going on, they merely saw a free email account with 1GB of storage and everyone got on the freebee train, that is all well and good, but nothing is for free, it never ever is. 

As such a lot of companies remained inactive for close to half a decade, Google had created something unique and they are one of the founding fathers of the Digital age. Consider that Microsoft was clueless for close to a decade and when they started they were behind by a lot and there inaccurate overreaction of Bing, is merely laughable. Microsoft makes all these claims yet it was the creators of Google who came up with the search system and they got Stanford to make this for them, just look it up, a patent that is the foundation of Google and Microsoft was in the wind and blind to what would be coming. By the time they figured it out they were merely second tier junkyard vendors. And (as I personally see it) the bigger players in that time (IBM and Microsoft) were all ready to get rich whilst sleeping, they were looking into the SaaS world (diminishing cost to the larger degree), outsourcing as a cost saving and so on, as I see it players like Microsoft and IBM were about reducing cost and pocketing that difference, so as Google grew these players were close to a no-show and do not take my word for that, look at the history line of what was out there. In retrospect Apple saw what would be possible and got on the digital channel as fast as possible. Yet IBM and Microsoft were Big Tech, yet they are ignored in a lot of cases, why is that? When you ignore 2 out of 6 (I am not making Netflix part of this) we get the 2 out of part and that comes down to more than 30%, this is discrimination, it grows as Adobe has its own (well deserved) niche market, yet are they not big tech too? One source gives us “As of June 2021 Adobe has a market cap of $263.55 B. This makes Adobe the world’s 32th most valuable company by market cap according to our data”, which in theory makes them larger than IBM, really? Consider that part, for some reason Adobe is according to some a lot larger than IBM (they are 112th), so when we consider that, can we optionally argue that the setting is tainted? In a stage where there are multiple issues with the numbers and the descriptions we are given, the entire setting of Big Tech is needing a massive amount of scrutiny, and when I see Lina Khan giving us “markets had come to be controlled by a very small number of companies” I start to get issues. Especially when we see “there is one sector that has been singled out by Democrats and Republicans alike: Big Tech”. You see singling out is a form of discrimination, it is bias and that is where we are, a setting of bias and to some extent, we are all to blame, most of us are to blame because of what we were told and what was presented to us, yet no one is looking to close to the presenters themselves and it is there that I see the problem, This is about large firms being too large and the people who do not like these large firms are the people who for the most do not understand the markets they are facing. Just like the stage of media crying like little bitches because they lose revenue to Google (whilst ignoring Bing as it has less than 3% marketshare). 

The who? The what? Why?

This part is a little more complex, to try to give my point, I need to go back to some Google page that gives me “What is Google’s position on this new law? We are not against being regulated by a Code and we are willing to pay to support journalism—we are doing that around the world through News Showcase. But several aspects of the current version of this law are just unworkable for the services you use and our business in Australia. The Code, as it’s written, would break the way Google Search works and the fundamental principle of the internet, by forcing us to pay to provide links to news businesses’ sites. There are two other serious problems remaining with the law, but at the heart of it, it comes down to this: the Code’s rules would undermine a free and open service that’s been built to serve everyone, and replace it with one where a law would give a handful of news businesses an advantage over everybody else.”

This is about that News bargaining setting. Here we get ‘by forcing us to pay to provide links to news businesses’ sites’, and I go ‘Why?’ A lot of them do not give us news, they give us filtered information, on addition to this is that if I am unwilling to buy a newspaper, why should I pay for their information? If they want to put it online it is up to them, they can just decide not to put it online, that I their right. In addition some sources for years pretty much EVERY article by the Courier Mail get me a sales page (see below), this is their choice and they are entitled to do so.

Yet this sales pitch is brought to us in the form of a link to a news article. It still happens today and it is not merely the Courier Mail, there are who list of newspapers that use the digital highway to connect to optional new customers. So why should they get paid to be online? In the digital stage the media has become second best, the stage that the politicians are eager to ignore is that a lot of the ‘news bringers’ are degraded to filtered information bringers. In the first why should I ever pay for that and in the second, why would I care whether they live or die? Do not think this is a harsh position, Consider the Daily Mail giving us two days ago ‘Police station is branded the ‘most sexist in Britain’ after investigations find officers moonlighted as prostitutes, shared pornography with the public and conducted affairs with each other on duty’, so how did they get to ‘most sexist in Britain’? What data do they have and hw many police stations did they investigate? There is nothing of that anywhere in the article, then we get to ‘after a series of scandals’, how many is a series of scandals? Over what time frame? Then we get to ‘Whatsapp and Facebook groups used to exchange explicit sexual messages and images have been shut down’, as such were the identities of the people there confirmed? How many were there? What evidence was there? All issues that the Daily Mail seems to skate around and ‘In the latest scandal, PC Steve Lodge, 39’ completes the picture. Who else was hauled to court and is ‘hauled’  a procedural setting in an arrest? When one rites to emphasise to capture the interest of the audience it becomes filtered information, it becomes inaccurate and therefor a lot of it becomes debatable. Well over a dozen additional questions come to mind of a half baked article on the internet, and they get paid for that? And as we consider ‘He was alleged to have’ we get the ‘alleged’ part so that the newspaper cannot be held liable, but how accurate was the article? That same setting transfers to Lina Khan.

The article gives us ‘or rather a perceived lack of competition’ as well as ‘markets had come to be controlled by a very small number of companies’, they are generalising statements, statements lacking direct focal point and specifications. In the first ‘perceived’ is a form of perception, biased and personal, ones perception is not another ones view of the matter. It is not wrong to state it like that, but when you go after people it is all about the specifics and all about data and evidence, as I see it evidence has been lacking all over the board.
And when we consider ‘markets had come to be controlled by a very small number of companies’ I could add “PetSmart has 1650 shops in the US, they could set the price for tabby’s on a national level, is that not a cartel foundation?” Yet these politicians are not interested in a price agreement of pets are they, it is about limiting the stage of certain people, but by doing so they will hurt themselves a lot more than they think. On November 14th 2020 I wrote the article ‘Tik..Tik..Tik..’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/11/14/tik-tik-tik/), where I wrote “if HarmonyOS catches on, Google will have a much larger problem for a much longer time. If it is about data Google will lose a lot, if it is about branding Google will lose a little, yet Huawei will gain a lot on the global stage and Apple? Apple can only lose to some extent, there is no way that they break even”, and a lot ignored the premise, but now as HarmonyOS has launched (a little late), the stage is here. When it is accepted as a real solution, Google stands to lose the Asian market to a much larger degree and all because a few utterly stupid politicians did not know what they were doing, more important Huawei still has options in the Middle East and in Europe. So the damage will add and add and increase to a much larger degree, especially if India goes that way, for Google a market that could shrink up to 20%, close to 2,000,000,000 consumers are per July 1st ill have an alternative that is not Apple or Google, that is what stupidity gets them. My IP will connect to HarmonyOS, so I am not worried, yet as I see it the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) better start getting its ships properly aligned, because if HarmonyOS is indeed a decent version from version 2 onwards the US tech market could shrink by a little over 22.4%, the US economy is in no way ready for such a hit, all because politicians decided to shout without evidence and knowhow of what they were doing, a nice mess, isn’t it?

The stage of ‘What is’ depends on reflection and comprehension and both were lacking in the US, I wonder what they will lose next. 

1 Comment

Filed under IT, Law, Media, Politics, Science

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

October 19, 2020 · 14:17

Anticlimactic

Yup we all have these moments, it usually comes after a ‘watch this’, or ‘you’ll never believe what I just heard’. There is no escaping these moments and anyone reading this has a few instances where this happens, or as some married women say, welcome to my life, I get this at least once a day. Such things happen and for one station one could argue that they should not have married that person (40% divorce ratings proof me right).

Oh, and before I forget, the next instalment of the free RPG IP for Sony products comes next. So that is one part that will be coming, I was actually about to work on it when ‘Sheikh Khalifa’s £5bn London property empire’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/ng-interactive/2020/oct/18/revealed-sheikh-khalifas-5bn-london-property-empire) passed my eyes. I wanted to add a comic I remembered, but I cannot find it. It was the early 80’s and in that instance you see three Arabs talking, one saying ‘Shopping was nice, today I bought Bond street and Piccadilly’, which was a reality around 1985, the shops would worship you if you came with German Marks or American Dollars, it was that bad, so the idea that a lot of prime real estate is not British owned is not really a surprise. In 2014 the Daily Mail gives us ‘How wealthy Gulf Arabs are buying up huge swathes of the capital – and now make up a tenth of all buyers in exclusive Mayfair’, as such what the Guardian had in mind to make it some exclusive ‘revealed’ story seems to be a bit of a stretch. In addition to this we can argue (and no disrespect intended) that Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed Al Nahyan with a £5,500,000,000 real estate empire is according to some sources not really super wealthy, but he is getting up there. Yes, how sad are we when we gawp at an amount that other refer to as ‘Meh!’. The article goes on with “Now, leaked documents, court filings and analysis of public records have enabled the Guardian to map Khalifa’s property holdings in the UK, revealing how the oil-rich nation’s president became a major landlord in London. Khalifa’s London property empire appears to surpass even that of the Duke of Westminster, the 29-year-old billionaire aristocrat who owns swathes of the city”, which makes me go ‘Really?’ Consider 1 Hyde Park, how many British owners are in that building? Can we get a rundown per nationality please? In 2019 we got (source: Elite Traveller) “London’s luxury real estate market has been given a well-timed boost with the news that a super-prime penthouse has sold for a reported $72million. The sale represents one of the biggest in the United Kingdom in the last year. The property is the largest in the new Clarges Mayfair development on Piccadilly, which has proved popular with the global elite since its completion last year. The purchase was completed by Quintessentially Estates working on behalf of an international client”, there are actual Arab run investment firms in the UK who specialise in real estate projects, and they are pretty much the only ones who can afford living in London, so why is anyone surprised? Why is the Guardian (in this instance) going all ‘revealed’ over one person who might not be the biggest investor in London, and in a stage where the London city administration is pushing these events, why is there a lack of that part of the equation? Even as Forbes gave us earlier this year ‘Is It Time To Move Out Of London?’, we see stage where the Coronavirus is hitting landlords with almost no manoeuvring space, they are all panicking. Even as they focus on “Similarly, rents in the capital are also extortionately high for many, with the latest Rightmove Rental Index putting average London rents at £2,119 per month in Q4 2019, compared with £817 in the same period for properties outside of London. And although the latest ONS Index of Private Housing Rental Prices showed that London prices increased 1.3% year on year in January, compared to 1.6% for the rentals outside of the capital, it’s of little meaning in the bigger picture where capital rentals are on average more than twice of their surrounding neighbours” the stage of landlords is less clearly stated, some when on a limb because it was a sure deal, as such no-one was ready for an even outlier like Covid-19, and no-one was expected to, so nw we see that others are taking over with discount a large setting of the housing available. London will grow back to strength and those with a few millions here and there and not needing them will make a rather nice profit over the next 3-4 years. That is how it works, so when I look at “Analysis of Land Registry data suggests Khalifa’s commercial and private property portfolio includes about 170 properties, ranging from a secluded mansion near Richmond Park to multiple high-end London office blocks occupied by hedge funds and investment banks” I merely shrug and say ‘Meh!’, and the stage of “hedge funds and investment banks” has been the stage of London properties for decades, so why is this big news? Was it so you could avoid reporting on ‘Islamic State calls to attack Saudi Arabia over Israel’s deals with UAE, Bahrain’, yes it makes perfect sense to attack nation A, because nation B and C had a deal with nation D. Yes, that might actually have revolutionary details (sorry, pun intended). And as I go over the Guardian article, I cannot say that it is a bad article, it is actually a good article, yet the entire ‘revealed’ part is a little anti-climatic and the idea that a decently wealthy person from the United Arab Emirates is investing in London might not even constitute news, or newsworthy. That  has been going on for well over a decade. So when we consider “housing a secretive Liechtensteinian company, Holbein Anstalt, which manages the royal family’s private affairs”, an optional actual fact (I did not check the fact), we might consider asking the editor of the Guardian (Katharine Viner) if she has been drinking the other cool-aid. 

The issue is not the current owners, it is the setting where the City of London is doing actual work to set a stage where affordable housing becomes more readily available. I wonder if the waiting list of that part has diminished below 10 years yet. London is one f the few plays in the world where a first house is only affordable for people at the END of their career, it is quite the achievement for the City of London.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics

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