Tag Archives: Fraud

Euphemism for the sake of reporting

It happens, there is no fault, at least often enough there isn’t one. In this case I have issues and it is withe the BBC who gives us (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-63649695) ‘Gambling: Boy, 16, lost thousands after seeing advert’. In this, did he lose it, or did he steal it? Lets look at the reported facts. In the first we are given “Nick Phillips, from Swansea, said the boy opened an account in his father’s name an hour after a match.” As such the boy committed identity theft. Then we get “after seeing the gambling ad”, here we have a problem. Yes it is an advertisement and we can argue that the advertiser is not at fault, yet the ‘boy’ needed an hour to arrange for the opening of an account. So where were the checks and balances? Why is there no mention of the lack of checks and balances by the banks? Then we get (of course) the reference to loot boxes. I do not agree with these assessments, but I get that some see it different than me and that I fine. Then the BBC gives us the part that is indeed important. With: “Every video game console has a parental or family settings area. One of the things I really like is the ability to say ‘can this account make transactions? can it spend money? Also, how much can it spend?’” That is true, as such safeties can be imposed and I am fine with that, but the stellar amount of non-accountability is not OK. The boy was a thief and it had nothing to do with the advertisement. He took an hour to get an identity and get spending, according to the article thousands. I do not see, or agree with ‘this poor lad’, no it is ‘the degenerate criminal’. OK, the word ‘degenerate’ is optional, but it is a setting that we need to heed. In an hour a family member took the identity of another family member and how was that possible? How was it possible that credit cards, identity papers were so readily available? They mentioned he had a gambling problem, so why were certain blocks not in place? And we still haven’t seen anything on HOW it was done in an hour and what facilities gave rise to this stage? I am assuming that there were bank issues, but that is merely an assumption. I reckon that the credit card, if suddenly a certain amount goes into a non usual place alarms go off, did they? 

So why is there such a lack of information, and we see ‘poor boy’, references to loot boxes and whilst we agree that kids need to be protected, my personal view is that if they were so easily swayed to crime, the problem resides equally somewhere else and in this the parent get the blame. To be honest, I am not entirely sure that this is fair, but when a 16 year old can overcome legal loopholes and enter the field as an identity thief, we can agree that the parents failed to some degree at this point. I am not willing to fully blame them as peer pressure could be massive at that age (I was a teenager once, yes it is true, I was). 

But there is a lot more going on and the BBC (as I personally see it) intentionally decided not to inform you on that. And I wonder why.

I have no issues with euphemism. There is nothing to gain by telling someone that their child was decapitated. It makes sense to phrase it more like ‘He got ahead of himself and was unfortunately a casualty of events’, but when factual parts are misplaced and not reported on, is it still to serve the greater good, or to cater to an agenda? I will let you decide.

Advertisement

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Gaming, Media, Politics

Check out this Johnson

Yes, I could not resist. Even as some media places keep on attacking Elon Musk. I see a larger need to look behind me and even as the Media will not (it does not serve their purpose), I feel it is important to be fair to Elon Musk. The first item on the agenda is Keith Johnson, the person who is allegedly representing people in a class action. So whilst we take notice of ‘Keith Johnson v. Elon Musk et al: Class Action Complaint (‘Dogecoin fraud’)’ and we take notice of the list of defendants (Elon Musk, Space Exploration technologies Corp., Tesla Inc.) as well as the allegation ‘Fraud’, we need to take note of the attorney for Keith Johnson ‘Evan Spencer’. We start this rollercoaster. 

In the first there is “Keith Johnson, a dogecoin investor, sued Musk in June, accusing him of intentionally driving up dogecoin’s price by more than 36,000 percent between 2019 and 2021 and then letting it crash, causing huge losses for retail investors while profiting tens of billions of dollars himself.” In December 2013 – December 2019 the value went from $0.04 to $0.2. After that the value in December 2020 rose to $0.47 (as the graph by Statista clearly shows), After that the Dogecoin took a massive rise (to the value of $30.63 in April 2021). 

It started fluctuating then to $17.16 in December 2021. As such the value went up by 3600% (from $0.47 to $17.16) so what the hell is this Johnson crying like a baby about? And where does he get the tenfold difference from? The media is clearly not looking into this. Also, the value increased in that time by 3600%, not decrease by anything. Over the time until October 20th 2022 the value did decrease to $5.89, yet that is still a massive increase from $0.47, so where are these numbers coming from? My numbers come from Statista a reliable source for data. So then we get “Johnson is seeking a total of $258 billion in damages, representing three times the drop in dogecoin’s market value between May 2021 and the time the suit was filed.” Yes, that sounds nice, but lets take a look at a small detail. “Defendants were aware since 2019 that dogecoin had no value yet promoted dogecoin to profit from its trading”, yes profit through trading. This is where losers and pussy’s (like Johnson) lose their wealth, or whatever wealth they THOUGHT they had, because in no form did he had the cash to lose out to even $20 million dollars. Of course I could be wrong and he will have to show evidence of that. And then we get the ‘class’ action. Where is the list of defendants? I have not once seen any media look into that. Another Musk bash and a tool (Johnson) allegedly eagerly used for digital dollars. 

In addition we also get “The amended suit added The Boring Company as a defendant”, so who is the Boring company, what is its value, who are their directors and members of the board? If it is TBC (if they are one and the same) that  company has a revenue value below $5 million, so there is that damage of $258 billion coming from? The allegation is Fraud, what evidence is there that fraud was committed, where are the FTC reports. In addition, who is the certified cryptocurrency investigator in this matter? None of that information is shown, the media is merely enjoying the hype. It seems that they are not interested in news or the truth, merely interested in filtered information and digital dollars.

This is such a sad state of affairs it isn’t really funny at all and the media is every bit to blame. Oh and by the way, if this becomes a frivolous lawsuit will any actions be taken against Evan Spencer? #JustAsking

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

Cyber Security Impressions

Here I am, a little after 23:00. I am in a decent level of agony as I hurt my back and the painkillers do not work, at least it is having no effect. In this I also have been forgoing sleep since Saturday (pain levels tend to do just that). Yet I just had an idea. I just figured out another usage for my 5G devices. A setting to limit and downsize credit card fraud and identity theft. I saw some of the damage a few days ago and it kept it in the back of my head. 

Now, let’s take a little detour to anti viral solutions about two decades ago. In those days one solution was to create thumbprints of every file, the checkmarks would give an indication that a file was optionally infected. 

Now let’s take a step to tomorrow. Most people are wage slaves. Often working from 8am to 8pm, and their routine changes to the smallest degree. Now consider that you could create a thumbprint of your day, not in detail but to some degree. Now consider that the credit card thief would try to make a purchase somewhere in town, but the thumbprint of you will not match up. More important when you set up your daily station and upload that (encrypted) to your bank server your bank can check whether you were anywhere near the purchase. Consider that credit card fraud surpassed $24,000,000,000 in 2018 and it is only getting worse. Yes, you can wait for the bank to return your cash or you can be proactive and that is the station where the daily file is encrypted and it does not have specifics, merely connect points, yet those points will not fit the credit card thief and that is where we can stop him proactively. More important, it could also give banks clues on HOW and more important WHERE the credit card theft was done. Why did no one think of this earlier? Perhaps before 5G the system would be overly taxed. I do not know, I am merely  trying to see if this could be the optional solution and my hardware is already on station to make a mark, yet I am not the only one. Mobile phones could easily have a similar function, so there are alternatives and that is good. This is an issue we should all try to solve, not to simply see if it is a moneymaker. On the other hand preventing loss is also a moneymaking solution, it makes money for banks and it stops YOU from losing money you might optionally not get back, or get back after a long delay. And as this solution gets better it would be near direct resolutions making the thief the loser as we all want it to be.

Now at first it will not be the perfect solution, yet as the people submit more and more thumbprints, deeper learning systems will be able to tell more rapidly and more quickly if the purchase was for real and done by the actual purchase. It could even set the stage where kids cannot go on a spending spree with mommy’s or daddy’s credit card. So far I can only see upsides and that is always nice. I am still trying to see if there are downsides, and perhaps I will find 1-2, but at present there are seemingly none. 

A simple (and painful) day and I found another way to stop credit card theft, what a lovely way to start Wednesday, which started 18 minutes ago.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Science

Card or Con? Friend or Foe?

Forbes got my attention, just as I was reconsidering part of something that happened a few months ago. It was the article https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/03/20/i-need-medication/ titled ‘I need medication!’ It reverberated in me as I took notice of Forbes (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2021/12/27/is-it-time-to-disrupt-your-call-center/)there I got served the quote that matters, it was “I recently received a letter from a major credit card issuer. To process my application, they needed some additional information and verification. The problem? I had not applied for a new credit card. The letter was valid, but the application was fraudulent. The letter instructed me to send the required information for verification or call a toll-free number, with no option to text or chat. I opted to call the toll-free number. This was truly a call center, not a contact center.” The setting where we have “Monday morning, I navigated the maze again and got into the hold queue where I was informed my hold time was one minute. Success! Two hours and twenty minutes later I hung up. I looked up the credit card fraud phone number for the provider and called them. Within moments, I was connected to an agent. Yes, she would be able to help me. Before I could speak, I was transferred to — you guessed it — the same number I had called previously.” Here we get a setting, a setting that takes hours, in that time all kinds of fraud could have been commenced. Of course there is all kinds of chances that Forbes was adding the spice of drama, but I think it is simpler than that, there is a failing in Fintech as a whole. It seems that it is about revenue and for the most they will not care about the people, no matter what claim they make. If there was a true customer service then there would be checks and balances, there would be more than “To process my application, they needed some additional information and verification.” I believe that this is not an American issue, it is a European, a British, and Australian, a Canadian and several other nations. A massive failing in Fintech and the policy makers and lawmakers are falling behind, no matter what the excuse, they are falling behind. 

We see some laces giving us numbers (they call it statistics).

  • In 2018, $24.26 Billion was lost due to payment card fraud worldwide
  • Identity theft makes up 14.8 percent of reported fraud
  • 69 percent of fraud starts with a consumer being contacted by telephone or email, such as overdue loans or prize scams

Those were the numbers, now we see: 

  • Instances of identity theft by credit card fraud increased by 44.6% from 271,927 in 2019 to 393,207 in 2020
  • Identity theft by new credit card accounts increased by 48% in 2020.
  • From 2019 to 2020, the number of identity theft reports went up by 113% and the number of reports of identity theft by credit cards increased by 44.6%.

This shows (to some degree) that the larger stage is Fintech and a much better system is required, a much larger check needs to be in place. The fact that a consumer got “they needed some additional information and verification” could be seen as evidence. Overall systems are designed as ‘customer friendly’ all whilst it is (as I personally see it) a system for automated credit allocation not allowing a person to take time to reconsider, a straight push for credit and spending sprees. What happens if credit cards are treated like the acquisition of a pet? To set the stage of a ‘cooling off period?’ Is it that weird to let the person going for the credit reconsider for 24 hours? 

In this day and age there is a larger concern, it is not merely that we see the passing of 5,419,538 people, a large amount of them might be facing all kinds of fraud and hardship and that passes on  to the next of kin who are already devastated. 

However, it is not all Fintech. Forbes also gives us “I received a phone call from another card issuer’s fraud department. Their question was simple: Did I apply for one of their cards? When I responded no, they immediately flagged it as fraud and advised me to check my credit reports for other suspicious activity. Their systems analysed the same data available to the first bank and flagged it as possible fraud.” So some are better than others, the question becomes, how can the system be improved? That is the real conundrum and the customer service part is essential in all this. Whether we look at a Friend of Foe solution, whether we have a connected bank or not. I reckon that there is a solution to implement blockchains that allow for a much more secure station, a setting that is not propagated. What if the block chain is in two parts? A part that only the consumer has, one part that the bank has, one can check the other, yet a new bank will not have that part, only the current bank has it, a setting that could limit the damage we see with 

  • Identity theft by new credit card accounts increased by 48% in 2020.

It is not a perfect setting (yet) but when we consider the part I wrote about in the earlier blog. “To make sense, I need to take you back to the 80’s. There was a fab in those days, radio’s had a sort of enhanced METAdata part, so when a song was playing, you saw the band and the title in your display. It is almost like someone took that idea and put it on steroids, I cannot think of another explanation, what is more, I have no idea what my brain was working out. It is like someone figured out to hide more than a FoF (Friend or Foe) message in the radios broadcasting, with some cypher that gave the relevant information to any visor it faced. Yup, quite the ride and it went on for some time in my dream, the arrows had numbers, but the numbers made no sense to me, but to the co-pilot they made a lot of sense. They were following along the path of a canal with several branches, and the arrows were pointing along the canals they were on, several (not all) pointing in some sort of flight guidance setting.” So what happens when block chain meta data points at the actual person, not the applicant. There might be a station where we see that the 48% increase dwindles down by a lot, optionally arresting a lot of fraudulent players in the process. This is not a given, it is a mere thought, but I am trying to consider a new approach, one that a lot of players are not making, I am not saying that they weren’t doing anything, because I cannot answer that question, yet as I see it a lot of issues are ignored due to ‘customer friendly’ issues, whilst it tends to benefit fraudulent behaviour a lot more. 

And it is essential, because in 5G this station will get a hell of a lot higher and the Law, Big Tech and Fintech are not ready, none of them seem to be. However, that is merely my take on the issue.

Enjoy the day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Science

When a jigsaw is not enough

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

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

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance

Eureka, sort of

I just had an idea, it woke me up, in light of the main story of the game I have been designing in my mind, I suddenly had a setting that has never been done to this degree before. There is the optional discussion on what drives a main story and what drives the side quests, yet what happens when they are related. My good friend and trusted adversary (Dante Alighieri) had given me an idea before, but I never thought it through, this time I did. As such, what if Greed, Gluttony, Violence, Fraud and Treachery are the foundation of the main quest in one side, and the stories are set around these 5 items, yet there are also the other settings, for the artisans, we rely on norse mythology, Alfheim, the bright elves where the skills of pottery (agility are maximised), Jotunheim, the realm of giants where strength is maximised and Hela where the necro spear of Hela is worshipped. 

A setting where norse mythology is not copied, but it is the foundation of the three warrior sides, an overlap of Greek, Celtic and Viking lore, to shape each of the three worlds and the three story lines giving a stage where a player has several story lines to follow, but they need to be scripted as main storylines, not side quests to follow from point A to B. Each part of the tory might have up to 5 missions and linked to that one side quest (which opens up another story), in that setting the people will replay the game again and again, optionally at some point merely to see all the stories, but in a stage where we see a larger story behind the 5 stories (partially) emerge. As I see it, in all of RPG history this has not happened, as such any exclusive Sony developer (who can use this freely) we see an optional first in open world RPG. Some will say, but we saw this here, and that part there and they would optionally be right to some degree, but none of the games has ever linked the stories to a larger whole, that would be the new part and that would guide the player to a stage of exploration and subtle pushing in one direction, whilst not demanding the player goes that way, they are optional routes and whether the person does the optional path will lead to one way, the other route to route B to a similar but not the same mission. As far as I can tell, this was never done before and it pushes ‘the story is everything’ to a much larger degree. It is not where we go, it is how we. Get there that fuels the sweetness of porridge, and as such we see an optional third progression, it is a little wing to the makers of the term ‘Would you kindly’, yet it is not a prerequisite. I is a larger stage, like learning to cook, we did it all in Skyrim, but now it becomes essential. You can play Skyrim without ever eating a bite, in this game food is more than a source of energy, it becomes a source of support to strength, agility and/or magic. So having food and the right ingredients will be a much larger part of you, and lets be fair, in what universe did you ever conquer the evil mother-in-law without a bite to eat? 

All considerations, all stages that implement a much larger storyline, it is like a collection of stories, like we see in the movies Into the woods, the league of extraordinary gentlemen or even the movie van Helsing (2004), a stage I merely a stage if you call it that, others will refer to it as a podium or a floor of commerce, it is your action that decides how far you can take each in the same space at the same time.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gaming

Is it merely timing?

When I looked into some off the Mario Draghi matters two days ago, I made a reference to his little kart, a kart full of tricks or is it a kart of indiscretion? So let’s take a look at the alphabet, the alphabet of ABLV

A is for Actuality

You see, the European Central Bank publishes a list where all the supervised entities are and the list starts with “Cut-off date for significance decisions: 1 January 2018“, so as we are in March (way past January 1st) and that same attached list gives us on the 81st position the ABLV Bank, AS, with the mention of ‘Among the three largest credit institutions in the Member State‘, whilst there is also (non-supervised) the ABLV Bank Luxembourg, S.A. in Luxembourg, yet stated and linked to the ABLV, should we wonder if we are being had? In light of the news two days ago when we were treated to “Draghi did address a question on why ABLV Bank received emergency support from the Latvian central bank before the ECB declared it failing or likely to fail. He said that the Emergency Liquidity Assistance policy – under which national central banks rather than the ECB decide to provide support to troubled lenders – is a “remnant of a past time” and should be reformed” (Source: Australian Financial Review), whilst the bank was being supervised according to the ECB, the fact that they are grasping at the notion that the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing, is that not an indication on how massively useless and overpaid the members of the ECB are? Just so that we are all in clear and that we all understand what is going on, let’s look at ‘supervision’, which the dictionary calls ‘the action of supervising someone or something‘, and with ‘supervising’ we get ‘observe and direct the execution of (a task or activity)‘, it seems to me that the ECB was not doing any observing or directing, so if the ABLV did not inform the supervising entity, I have a hard time to comprehend the Bloomberg article (at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-02/latvia-analyzing-rimsevics-s-role-at-ecb-as-he-returns-to-work), where we see: “Latvia is still considering the ramifications of central bank Governor Ilmars Rimsevics’s status as a suspect in a bribery probe, as he returned to work this week and weighs up how to continue his role at the European Central Bank“, in my view, either the ECB knew in advance certain matters, or we have a different puppy in our midst. Now let us be clear, one is a setting of corruption, the other is the ‘receiving of emergency support from the Latvian central bank‘, yet the fact that this all happened during the oversight of the ECB makes it twice the size of the issue. The ABLV went to the Latvian Central Bank (Governor Ilmars Rimsevics) and got emergency funds, yet what was the origin of those funds? So when we see “Both ABLV and Rimsevics deny the accusations in cases that the authorities say aren’t linked“, my response would be ‘Really? So who are exactly those authorities?’ It seems like a simple question but it is one that we will never see an honest answer to I reckon. The links are not clear, but consider the following accusations.

First we have “The U.S. Treasury Department alleges ABLV engaged in institutionalized money laundering and violated sanctions put in place to counter North Korea’s weapons program

Second we get “Rimsevics has denied any wrongdoing, and Latvia’s Defence Ministry said that the allegations were part of a “massive information operation” by an external actor.” I used them in the article (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2018/03/01/the-failing-mario-draghi-kart/), yet who exactly was the external actor?

It is the second one that is weird, so how did the Defence Ministry get involved in a banking issue? Did it come from the office of Minister Raimonds Bergmanis, it would be an interesting tug of war between him and me, because I have my own centre of gravity and he is a three time Olympic contender in the category of weightlifting. I did not have all the information I needed in that piece, and I was juggling a few issues, so I moved it all along to today.

B is for Bloomberg

Bloomberg ends with “there are no signs other Latvian banks are experiencing outflows after the ECB decided to close ABLV on the grounds that it was failing or likely to fail. What happened to ABLV is a signal to other banks to follow the rules, she said“. Yet is Finance Minister Dana Reizniece-Ozola giving us the goods? Why did the Defence Ministry get involved? Was it to emphasize the weapons accusation? Clearly that would have been an issue that resides with Latvian Intelligence. So as Reuters gives us “Ainars Latkovskis, the head of the national parliament’s anti-corruption committee of lawmakers, who also urged Rimsevics to step down” as well as “Latkovskis, who is authorized to listen to reports from the heads of the Latvian intelligence agencies, dismissed hints by some local officials and politicians that a Russian campaign of disinformation might be behind the case“, it seems that the Intelligence official is either trying to stay out of this or we can see this as a sign that the SVR RF (the Foreign Intelligence Service of the Russian Federation) has been whispering in someone’s ear and the culprits have overplayed their hand. Now no matter what has happened in that tier of the industry, it still gives us that the ABLV made a deal for funds with the Latvian Central Bank and the news as shown by the media is giving us that the ECB was either unaware or was informed after the fact with ‘Good news, we solved the problem‘ and now we see that the banks who are on the oversight list are either not getting supervised or they are ignoring their supervisors, I wonder which scenario is worse for the ECB.

L is for Liable

If you think it does not matter, think again. We pump billions into the UN and it cannot arrange a ceasefire (Syria), we pump billions into the European Union and the ECB is casually unwilling or unable to do their job and those people are fetching a lot of money every year. Two entities who are now proving to be more and more facilitators for the wealthy as well as paper tigers with a fluidic agenda that merely spells ‘compromise to keep the engine going’. So when did wee surrender our tax funds to those ends?

So was this all done through the allowed whisper via Sergey Yevgenyevich Naryshkin? I am merely speculating here, but the parts and numbers currently do not add up. You see, as Reuters gives us “The ECB appears to have been blindsided by the ABLV case, highlighting how thinly it is spread in supervising Europe’s biggest lenders and raising questions about a system of euro zone supervision just three years old“, this is seen (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecb-russia-vtb/ecb-drops-supervision-of-russias-vtb-arm-in-the-euro-zone-idUSKCN1GE2N8), can we say that it is that simple? It remains pure speculation from my side, yet when we see “The European Central Bank has stopped supervising the Austrian arm of Russian state bank VTB after it slimmed down its European operations, the ECB said on Friday. A spokeswoman for the ECB said VTB’s new set-up in Europe no longer warranted direct supervision, which was now in the hands of Germany’s national regulators, Bafin and the Bundesbank” I wonder if there was anything simple on this. We could argue that Sergey Yevgenyevich Naryshkin did exactly what he was supposed to do, to serve HIS country. Yet the information gives me the feeling that this looks like a line of banks with Latvia between the Latvian ECB and the Russian ‘SVCR RF‘ bank. The two outside parties agree to keep each other afloat by shaking hands and pushing at the same time the ABLV over the edge in a combined effort. What some did in primary school (the old tactics are usually the best).

Still, this is all merely speculation from my side mind you!

V is for Voter

The question that remains is how the US authorities got to that jump and where is the evidence? Apart from the fact that one accused of bribery is allowed back into his office until the dust (read: investigation) settles is also cause for concern. You see, the news (at http://www.mod.gov.lv/Aktualitates/Preses_pazinojumi/2018/02/20-01.aspx) gives a part, but when we consider it and dissect “Latvia’s security-sector personnel have raised the alarm that outside actors could be using these current financial and banking scandals against Riga. The Latvian Ministry of Defence has pointed out that the AP news agency’s reporting on Latvia’s connection to various international financial corruption schemes has been reposted with unusual frequency on numerous websites known for distributing messages supporting Russia. As such, the defence ministry has called this media blitz a possible “hybrid”-style operation within a broader information war against Latvia“, we could agree that part of this is an issue. Yet is the foundation wrong? Is the bribery a fact? If so, why the hell is Ilmars Rimsevics allowed back in his office? If we see statements that there is proof, why not give that out to the open? So who were the outside actors? You see, accusation of bribery requires evidence and it is not out of the blue that Russia would expose bribery so that their operations could profit. That is not merely Russia, American politics and Wall Street have operated on that premise for decades, so it is not altogether weird to see Russia play a similar game, if that was the case. So even if there was an ‘information war against Latvia‘, it was done under the noses of the ECB and Mario Draghi. It was not merely a “remnant of a past time that should be reformed“, it was an option where the ‘the Emergency Liquidity Assistance policy‘ was overlooked by overpaid ECB executives, especially in light of the fact that by their own reports that the ABLV was under supervision.

Bloomberg supports my views (at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-03-02/draghi-confronts-limit-of-his-powers-as-latvian-standoff-endures), where we see ““This reveals the impressive lack of power of the ECB in such circumstances,” said Stanislas Jourdan, the director of Positive Money Europe, an advocacy group calling for more transparency and accountability on economic policy“, which on one side is just as it should be about the sovereignty of a nation, but the fact that the ECB are confronted with their own foot in mouth protocol at the expense of millions, if not billions is a larger worry, because they already pushed a $3 trillion debt on the people of Europe. I also support the view we see at: “Draghi already expressed dissatisfaction to ECB officials in the week after Rimsevics’s detention that enough details from Latvia hadn’t been forthcoming, according to people familiar with the matter, and that may still be the case. Latvian Finance Minister Dana Reizniece-Ozola said on Friday that the anti-corruption office is “in the process” of giving the ECB all relevant information“, it is not about the ECB, it is a Latvian situation and in this Mario Draghi gets to do what most EU puppeteers do so well, they can bloody well wait (whilst still getting paid high amounts of money). Yet, in part this is not merely a waiting game, the fact that the voters are taking more notice of this mess is not helping him any, but that is the way life works and it is not always working in your favour. So when the Globe and Mail gives us “Did European Central Bank boss Mario Draghi save Italy or merely set up the world’s third biggest debtor for permanent zombie status? As Italians head to the polls on Sunday, the parties, big and small, are showering voters with promises of goodies galore“, we see the deadlines that the ECB has, it has a few and even as there is unlikely to be a stable Italian government, the fact that they won’t worry the ECB like Frexit Marine Le Pen or Brexit Nigel Farage, so they are not too worried, but the overall financial issues will remain and Latvia is not helping any with the news that they are the cause of at present. In the end, the question should become, how come that a supervised bank was able to do this? Because the answer needs to be coming from the people who are seemingly overpaid for work they basically did not achieve and that is not merely Mario Draghi; that list is a lot larger and in this case it might just exclude the one man at the top.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics