Tag Archives: ICIJ

January 6, 2024 · 07:09

Media is done for

This is what I have been saying all along. Whoring for digital dollars comes at a price. Now, if it was only me no one would care. Yet at this point the stage is altering for the media. The Khaleej Times (at https://www.khaleejtimes.com/uae/gaza-crisis-has-become-global-media-war-uae-minister) gives us ‘Gaza crisis has become global media war: UAE minister’ with the byline “Al Gergawi called out the double standards and political agendas hindering true resolution of the Palestinian cause” It is a little less complex than that. You see media is exploiting anything they can to gain the digital dollar. Clicks are everything and as more and more media is aiming for that goal there is no place for political agenda’s other than the local ones protecting the media through their political connections (at home). This is what I regard to be the stakeholders game. As such this article touches me as it covers what I have been saying all along. 

So is it more correct?
That remains a danger. To seek out those who hold your view is what many do, but it is a dangerous path. If their (or your) setting is showing a flaw or is only partially correct, the premise becomes a dangerous one. You must always be able and willing to go back to the drawing board to verify and to double check whatever you believe in. It is essential that you can be critical of your own ideas. Mohammed Abdullah Al Gergawi, UAE Minister of Cabinet Affairs also gives us “This war was not only between the Palestinians and Israel. We also witnessed a global diplomatic war, international polarisation, and a global media war. Today, war is not won on the battlefield but rather in the media field, as he who has the strongest narrative shall become the winner.” In this I would like to add that it is not merely ‘the strongest narrative’, it is who employs the better and better connected stakeholders. They can win you the narrative war. It is not unlike the stakeholders on Capitol Hill. At some point the media figured out that these people could wage their media war FOR them and get kudos points that way. The winner then gets benefits and is more likely to gain the iterative advantage over digital dollars through clicks. The flammable populist voices are merely one side of this. To see this you need to be able to see how digital dollars are gained. How clicks are obtained. At present that is flaming for Gaza, but make no mistake, the moment that this changes to Israel all the narratives will alter accordingly and the media will have no issues with changing the voice. They will hide behind ‘The people are voicing this’. 

Gergawi in continuation gives us ““In 2004, His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum gave a speech at this very forum about the need for finding a just solution for the Palestinian case based on international law,” he recalled. “Today, 20 years later, the case is still the most pressing issue in the region and the world.”” As such when we see that the digital click war has been raging on since 2015 the stage alters slightly but does not changes. The stakeholders of then are the same stakeholders of now, their game merely changed. They now have media moguls in their pockets as well. So who was stalling in those first 10 years? 

And this gets the added ““All the states that ask for this solution, I want to ask you, what did you do in the last 10 years to have this solution,” he asked of them. “Almost nothing. Since 2014, there has been no communication to solve the issue. If you were silent for ten years, why would you come back to the two-state solution? Just to prove to the world you are doing something?”” That is the question. I personally believe that there was a second war going on. The one I mentioned, but these same stakeholders were serving more than two masters. You see there is one part that remains unmentioned. I have made mention of this a few times before. I was not outspoken about this as I cannot prove it. There is no purpose served by howling against the storm. It tends to be pointless, it is never heard and it deflates your own energy levels. It is my personal view that the third war brewing under all this is (a speculated view) war served by Strasbourg and Washington DC. They need destabilisation of the middle east. Israel, Saudi Arabia and Iran were the three points of pressure that the west required. The moment the Middle East realises that they are better off without the west, that is the moment fear strikes in the hearts of power players in Strasbourg and Washington DC. In all this the actions of inactions regarding Palestine start making sense. There is a clear need. America (and EU) require cheap oil. If they cannot get that, their economies implode. Their commodity needs are fuelling a transient and mobile workforce and without that these two places will have a whole new range of internal problems. 

The problem is how do you prove that? That is less easy to answer. The press is no longer impartial, they are partial to their digital dollars and will take whatever they can at all our expenses. By seeing several sources you get a slightly better view, but it is a filtered view and places like the ICIJ are a joke. They too rely on the media and clicks to be seen, so the story is adjusted accordingly.

And there is no solution, not until you get a real verifiable and reliable source, as such the press and media are no longer one. It has become a populist game for digital clicks.

On a sidenote
This is a little awkward, you see my offensive against Washington DC is taking a turn as this article and a few others made me see a new option. The match between Blogger (me) and DARPA is at present 4-0. I speculatively just saw a new way to find hundreds if not thousands of terrorists. Making the score 5-0 for yours truly and that is a personal goal worth winning for. It might never get me a dime, but to knock (at some point) on haven’s door stating that I made DARPA my bitch and defeated them five over nil is very tempting for the ego, lets be clear about that. In the end that match was my ego having a great time. The problem is that this new approach needs the NSA to wake up. They are the source of interest when it comes to layer one (hardware) issues and if I am correct that setting should be pushed through iOS and Android making them one of the few parties who could solve this. The article opened a door. There is a side I do not completely agree with even if what they say was true. It links to a few other parts that are not mentioned here and that got me thinking. What if we see both sides of that coin? Now, when it is on its back, one side remains invisible, but what happens when that coin falls on a mirror? If will not reveal that side either, but what if a mirror is a reflection of itself? That got me thinking on the sides that do not speak, to focus on the side that can speak and that gave me the idea. If my thought is correct you get more than an image, you get a timeline of total events and with that GEOINT becomes the power core of that setting. A transient force still requires deployment which is part of that solution. My mind remains racing towards that goal (my fifth goal over DARPA). I know it is selfish in nature and even more so when it is not bout money but about the ego. At times we need to feed that monster. The best thing anyone can do is feed it when it serves the best purpose and not to overfeed that monster. I get that, but feed it now and the voice of ego dies down enough, leave it alone and its voice will drown all other voices and that is the lesson the media never learned. They went from Cash is King to ‘Cash is king in the empire of clicks and clickers’ it was nothing more than self defeating short sightedness. 

It’s Saturday for me, Vancouver is still 12 hours away from the weekend. Enjoy yours.

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Military, Politics

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

December 6, 2023 · 02:36

Angle, Bigotry, Chauvinism

Yes, all words, these three words represent the bias of the media. And it has started some time ago. But here in this case lets take a look at Sky News (at https://news.sky.com/story/unprecedented-2-400-fuel-lobbyists-at-cop28-in-dubai-claim-campaigners-13023153). Here we are given ‘‘Unprecedented’ 2,400 fuel lobbyists at COP28 in Dubai, claim campaigners’ but that is not where the bias is. As we are given names like Amin Nasser (CEO Aramco) and Sultan Al Jaber. Yet what I find weird is that there is no names linked to Brent Crude oil, there is no mention anywhere in COP28 of anyone from Brent in this. Welcome to bias.

Then we get “At least 2,456 fuel lobbyists have been given access to the COP28 summit in Dubai” so not “more than 2,400” but an actual specific number. And it comes from the group called “Kick Big Polluters Out”,  or KBPO, which could also mean Keep Boneheaded Packs Out. You see, this is not on the oil industry, but on the media. When you consider “Many of the fossil fuel lobbyists are said to have gained access by being part of a trade organisation”. This gets us two questions. Were they all in the blue zone, or the green zone and what was the spread of these people? The second part is what countries were these 2456 people from? How many from the US? How many from Venezuela and Russia? All top-line numbers we aren’t given. So is this the angle Sky News (and others) are working with, or is this part of more? Like all the BS that places like ICIJ gives us with ‘emotional’ stories, devoid of real numbers, real groupings and clusters. The media is becoming less and less reliable. 

We see names like Shell, TotalEnergies, Equinor, BP, ExxonMobil and ENI. However, the name Brent Crude oil is absent, why is that? 

Why can’t the media do its job? Why can’t they give us CLEAR numbers. They got 2456, how did they get there? It might be right, but we aren’t given anything clear and that is the larger station. We aren’t given clarity and the media is making it worse through emotions, speculations and assumptions. How is that for media claiming to be independent, fair, balanced and proclaiming to be trustworthy.

The Guardian also gives us “Al Jaber is also the chief executive of the United Arab Emirates’ state oil company, Adnoc, which many observers see as a serious conflict of interest”, yet no one is asking serious questions from the media and that is the larger failing. I have shown their failures for over two years and things are (as I personally see it) getting worse. It is all about the emotion and the digital dollar, in that process clear reporting seems to be going out the window. 

I wonder if we bulk all the reporting together, will we see anything clearly reported, or should we ask people from Monash University who sees to be there too? I will let you decide, but consider all the things we aren’t being told.

I have arrived to the middle of the week, see you all soon at this point as well.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics, Science

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

November 28, 2023 · 00:55

Jokes in denial

Yup, we see that at times, we see the jokes making claims and then we see them equally in denial making us wonder what this was all about. This doesn’t start with the BBC article, yet it is a good starting point to make my case. The article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-67508331) gives us ‘COP28: UAE planned to use climate talks to make oil deals’ and my first reaction is ‘and?’ You see good business is where you find it and a climate change event has hundreds of people all looking for an edge to make their bank accounts fat. This is not new, FIFA has done it for decades as has plenty of other players. But I digress. 

You see, we are then given “The documents – obtained by independent journalists at the Centre for Climate Reporting working alongside the BBC – were prepared by the UAE’s COP28 team for meetings with at least 27 foreign governments ahead of the COP28 summit, which starts on 30 November.” As such, where is the evidence? A mention of an independent journalist? Which one? Then we see a screenshot of something I could optionally create with PC Write in seconds (a 1983 text editor). If this is such a large issues, where is the ACTUAL evidence? This is the ICIJ joke all over again. Now consider the quote “This year it is being hosted by the UAE in Dubai and is due to be attended by 167 world leaders, including the Pope and King Charles III.” Now consider the setting the UK is in. Should the option arise where the UAE could sell the UK oil at $2 cheaper. Do you think that the UK would not accept? Consider that the UK In 2021, some 13 million metric tons of crude oil from Norway and that the larger image is “Norway ($11.7B), United States ($5.48B), Russia ($1.41B), Libya ($1.37B), and Nigeria ($1.19B)” (estimated numbers in 2021). That means that the UK would save well over a billion dollars. With the shortages they currently have a billion solves a lot of issues. Should it therefor not be done? Oh, and that is if there is ACTUAL evidence on the matter. I am willing to go on faith that ANY event will open doors to business arrangements. It will not hinder or lessen the impact of COP28 will it? And all this is related to someone claiming that they have documents, so where are they? What are these sources? Two simple questions.

The joke in denial
Now it is time to refer to the joke in denial. 

This all started with ‘Uniform Nameless Entitlement Perforation’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2020/12/10/uniform-nameless-entitlement-perforation/), it was my response to that Guardian idiot with its ‘jets for the rich must stop’ You see the EEA had given us a document on environmental damage in December 2020, it shows that 147 facilities created 50% of that damage. I even added that document at the end.1% creates 50% of all the damage and the Guardian and the BBC never picked up on it, they didn’t even attack the document, they never drilled into the data. They did NOTHING. That makes them the jokes in denial. Now, if they opposed the document and handed us the evidence that would have been fair. But we got nothing and now we get even more garbage without actual or factual evidence. Why is that?

Consider that this day and have fun.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

May 1, 2023 · 13:31

The premise of danger

That is what I feel is in play, but there is a word of warning, my premise is speculative. To see this we need to take a look at two new articles, both from the BBC. The first one is ‘First Republic makes last ditch bid to find rescue deal’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65441302). I will go into details shortly. The second one is ‘US Fed admits failure to take forceful action on SVB’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65428206) which came in a day earlier, but it all links to ‘I honestly don’t get it’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/03/12/i-honestly-dont-get-it/), which I wrote on March 12th. As such we have a growing concern that stretches well beyond 6 weeks and now we get “According to reports, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), a US financial regulator, sought bids for First Republic by the end of last week and has been assessing them over the weekend. Investment banking giant JP Morgan Chase is believed to be one of the banks invited to bid for First Republic, according to news agency Reuters. Bank of America is also understood to have been approached.” And in those six weeks I made a few clear presumptions/speculations. Yet NONE of the media looked into any of that, not even by their own accounts. The setting is that slippery and as such the media has shown that it can no longer be trusted. You see, there was a clear premise that some banks have too many US Bonds, but no one is willing t report on it and now people are withdrawing cash. The global setting becomes that putting your wealth in your mattress (or in a Saudi or Dubai bank) tends to be safer and that is not a good thing. No one is willing to look into the bulk of the US bonds and where they are, more importantly, no one is looking into which banks have US Bonds and how may they have of them, but the journalistic joke (ICIJ) was willing to play the NSA game (Credit Suisse leak) and emotionally speculate away whatever they could. The media is failing us all, because many are driven to ‘governmental’ needs. Yet, this is speculative, but look at what was published and what we are told, the numbers do not add up (neither do the topics). And in the second article we get “The US central bank has said it failed to act with “sufficient force and urgency” in its oversight of Silicon Valley Bank”, as such they didn’t learn in 2008 and they are seemingly not learning now. I use the word seemingly because of the Bonds issue, as I personally see it, some aren’t willing to report on connected matters and that is a whole different kettle of fish, but it is my view and if there is decent evidence proving me wrong, I will accept that. 

So when we are given “Michael Barr, the Federal Reserve’s vice chair for supervision, who led the review, said the US central bank should toughen its rules in response to what it had learned from SVB’s demise” we need to consider a few things. Basel III was created in 2010 (13 years ago) and in the US it was named the “Dodd-Frank Act” which was supposed to stop banks from taking excessive risks, which was partially repealed on May 24, 2018 by former President Trump. And now we have several new messes that could (in a most dire setting) bring about a new age of poverty in the US. Yet the larger setting that pushed for this is how many banks have US Bonds and how many do they have? 

And there is enough evidence out there, but for some reason the bulk of the media will not go near it, why not? If you follow the timeline and you start digging into 

Silicon Valley Bank (SVB)
Signature Bank
First Republic Bank
Credit Suisse
UBS Group AG (they bought Credit Suisse)

A weird setting starts to evolve and I am not an economist, as such someone will tell me I am wrong, but when you start comparing where $20 trillion in US Bands are, the picture shifts. Some are well established ‘banks’ like Rothschild & Co, as such plenty will have bonds, but some took a chance on getting rich quick and the partial repealing of the Dodd-Frank act allowed them, as such several are now in problems and there are more in this level of problem, but someone is brushing these facts under the carpet (and the banks themselves are hiding issues), as such I expect to see more revelations like this over the next 2 quarters. I recon the US Central banks are doing whatever they can to douse that fire before a full baking meltdown is on the horizon and the media is assisting, because if they were not, we would see a lot more facts come to light. Or as my grandfather would say ‘the best secret keeper of an adulterer is a brothel’, to state that someone is getting rich of keeping the secret at present and as I personally see it, the media is assisting them. Why is that? It is (again as I personally see it) because you are no longer entitled to getting the actual news. You get filtered information. News that is censured and approved by share holders, stake holders and advertisers.

Take notice of that small fact and enjoy Monday, only 112 hours until the weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

March 24, 2023 · 22:49

A nice surprise

It started early this morning, the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65057809) gives me ‘Jack Dorsey business target of Hindenburg report’, so someone is finally asking questions of this person? With the byline “Tech billionaire Jack Dorsey is facing scrutiny, after a report accuses the payments company he leads of inflating user numbers and catering to criminals” one part some people noticed that about Twitter, which is why Elon Musk paid well over twice the price and no one in the media was willing to ask questions. I know nothing about the payment company, as such I have no view. The catering to criminals is new, not sure where I stand on it. As such when I see “Block, which former Twitter boss Mr Dorsey co-founded in 2009 and leads as chief executive, said it was exploring legal action against Hindenburg for the “factually inaccurate and misleading report”.” I stopped my response as I did not want to give more ammunition to Jack Dorsey, but the statement ‘factually inaccurate’ requires investigation and data. So as we are given “Now worth more than $30bn (£24.4bn), it was renamed Block in 2021, to reflect another, fast growing side of its business: Cash App, a payments app that was the focus of Hindenburg’s report.” No one seemingly reacts and that is fine, these places happen. Yet the setting is that it grew by well close to 1,000% over the period of less than 8 years. That implies a 125% year on year growth, that is a bit much and the accusation seemingly makes sense. And the criminals (or organised crime) would see the benefit of a cash app. There would be all kinds of benefits for them. This does not make Jack Dorsey guilty, but after the Twitter debacle it makes sense that a deeper look is given to this event. I reckon that I would be able to find a few more items if I had access to all that data, but that is the second stage. Not merely the data, the income streams would be invaluable for a player like China (or Russia for that matter). So as the BBC gives us “While conducting its research, Hindenburg claimed it had easily created obviously fake Cash App accounts in the names of Donald Trump and Elon Musk and made public records requests, which allegedly showed that Cash App was used to facilitate millions in fraudulent pandemic relief payments from the government.” Which leads to “that reflected “key lapses” in compliance processes” and there is one of the elements I warned for for well over two years. The BBC calls (or quotes) key lapses, but I see another fintech app lacking checks, balances and the ability to vet the correctness of information. And the added ““Former employees described how Cash App suppressed internal concerns and ignored user pleas for help as criminal activity and fraud ran rampant on its platform,” Hindenburg said. “This appeared to be an effort to grow Cash App’s user base by strategically disregarding Anti Money Laundering (AML) rules”” merely gives rise to my thoughts. And the world seems to be stagnant to act to any FinTech when needed. Yes, we see it at the BBC now, but how many more will look into this? How many media will give Jack Dorsey another free pass? I cannot tell at present, but over the last 11 hours the media did not go nuts over this, yet jokes like the ICIJ with their Pandora papers, their Pickwick papers and their cups of tea are seemingly in the dark on too much of this. So whilst some will wonder why Charles Dickens comes into play. Consider “A great hokey-cokey of eccentrics, conmen, phony politicians, amorous widows and wily, witty servants, somehow catching an essence of what it is to be English, celebrating companionship, generosity, good nature, in the figure of Samuel Pickwick, Esq, one of the great embodiments in literature of benevolence.” Now consider that view whilst I edit that part into “A view of FinTech solutions, conmen, phony media, and, silly exploiters, somehow catching an essence of what it is to be a wannabe, celebrating greed, need, and exploiters, in the figure of an unknown person at present, one of the worst instigations of hardship creators” it took less than a minute to get to that part of the equation and the crumbles of the media pie were all over the table for well over a year. So it is good to see the BBC make mention of this, but I wonder who will follow and will there be a real investigation? And I have to make one alteration, the Australian Financial Review got there about an hour ago, so they were on the ball. Yet who else was? Not that many for sure. 

This situation is still fluidic and I will take more looks, because I think I owe people like Elon Musk to take a larger look into this person, merely for the reason that the media refused to do so and that ain’t right. So will Jack Dorsey join the flock containing people like Elisabeth Holmes and Sam Bankman-Fried? I do not know, that is for a court to decide, at present it is an accusation. But in this the BBC has for the most been a righteous party, so for now they are getting the benefit of the doubt and the fact that the AFR is supporting that view is not a bad thing either. Perhaps the twist and dance of Jack Dorsey is in its last stage Time will tell. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

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

March 16, 2023 · 18:07

Oh boy, there was more

It all started 4 days ago when I wrote ‘I honestly don’t get it’. I comprehended the stage just fine, it is the lack of comprehension of greed, what people will do to fill their own pockets at the expense of everything and everyone. You see Basel III was published in 2010 after the first meltdown, it was extended to 2015 with extensions going as far as January 2023. So 13 years and the whining bitches (aka banks) still will not learn. SVB is merely one example and the actions by congress made perfect sense. Now we have Credit Suisse and the setting changes.

It now needs (and apparently just received) 45 billion to be ‘secured’. This is a little more than the national budget of Qatar which is 53rd on a list of national budgets with 228 nations with on last place Wallis and Futuna. To give you a better picture, it is twice the amount Oman has for its citizens, they are in 68th position. They need THAT MUCH money. The issue is that big and do not talk to me about journalists or those clowns at the ICIJ. They are all about their Pandora papers and what a joke they are. 

You see, I stated in the first article the Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) and now we see the BBC give us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64964881) giving us “After Credit Suisse shares plunged on Wednesday, a major investor – the Saudi National Bank – said it would not inject further funds into the Swiss lender”, it matters and I will get back to this. In the mean time The Guardian gives us “The bank had been forced to delay the publication of its annual report last week after a last-minute call from the US Securities and Exchange Commission relating to what Credit Suisse described as the “technical assessment” of revisions to cashflow statements going back to 2019. The bank said those discussions had now been concluded” I believe it is more, I personally believe that was why Yellen got involved in day one. I think the SVB and others have too many bonds and they are not ready to mature yet and with interest up these things are making banks bleed money and they are bleeding a lot. You see, there is an estimated total of TWENTY THREE THOUSAND BILLION DOLLARS in US government bonds floating around and I reckon the SVB and Credit Suisse are now in levels of pain, they had too many of those. As such the outstanding part, not merely these two represent $23,000,000,000,000 and no one can cover it they are all stretched beyond thin. This is what I expect is happening and I warned for this as early as 2016, there is a point of no return and the banks are way past that. Putting your IP in the USA is about to become one of the most expensive jokes tech firms have faced in well over half a century.

Could I be wrong?
Yes, that is the case, but that can be tested quite easily. You see, if you make a tally of where all these US government bonds were and you set that tally in a mineable solution especially with pre 2016 and past 2016 when Dodd-Frank got cancelled you will learn a few things and this is what I saw on day one, but weirdly enough the media is not going there (neither is the ICIJ), so you get to wonder why.

Oil in the family
now we get back to the Saudi National Bank. In this I agree with Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman. Oil is a commodity, there is no cap, if you need oil more and more, you are working from the wrong business plan and if that relies on exceeding your budget by over 30 trillion dollars you get what’s coming to you. In addition I would add the Republican Party making small talk stating that they need to pull away from Ukraine, I lose the little sympathy I had left for them. The US has slammed Saudi Arabia again and again, in some cases with the assistance of a United Nations essay writer. There is only so much people will take. They had the option to help Saudi Arabia create a nations defence strategy, they bailed out and now China is there. They made fake promises and most were not kept and now we see banks asking Saudi Arabia (in Oliver Twist style) can we have some more please? 

As such we see event after event and now that things are on the rails, the train has speed and they just ran out of rails. This is early and before I expected it, but I never considered the impact of Russia being stupid and attacking the Ukraine, it merely escalated things. 

America has two options, does it become part of China or part of Russia. It seems that the Republicans want to be part of Russia, the rest I do not know, but we are now in the process of the final financial act. And my evidence? Investigate the CET1 setting of EVERY bank (especially the two in trouble) and then look at where the bonds are and how many of these bonds are/were with the SVB and Credit Suisse. I have no doubt they both have too many. Then consider Basel III and see how many banks hold up at that point. They were warned for 13 years, so let them rot, let them collapse and let the investors and share holders take the fall and live life in minimum wage. 

And in all this, too many of the media are all about flaming and not doing too much about it, merely pushing towards bailouts. That time has gone as I personally see it. 

All whilst the Australian Financial Review gives us a mere 45 minutes ago “The failure of Silicon Valley Bank has exposed fresh divisions on Capitol Hill over banking reform, as US lawmakers from both parties trade blame for the lenders’ collapse and squabble over future legislation to shore up the financial system” squabble on something that was shown 13 years ago. Still think I am wrong? 

Enjoy the money you have, there might be a lot less soon enough.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics

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

April 13, 2022 · 19:55

Inclination of letters

We tend to act in certain ways. I am no exception (as you are about to find out). Yet, before we have a go at the BBC and another go at the ICIJ, lets take another look at how Microsoft has FAILED its audience. Now, this is not out in the open and I do not really reveal what has happened, but I am making a jab at it as it will set fortunes to Adobe and this is for their eyes only. So, there I was watching several presentations in the last 24 hours (from several sources) and something occurred to me, it was the third time when I heard something. My mind started to race and suddenly I wondered why Microsoft had left all this in the open, unsolved, unattended for a DECADE. It was so out in the open that I was wondering what on earth they were doing. Yes, their 365 solution is all about making sure their customers pay, and that I fine, but to leave gaps in their office solution out in the open for over a decade, how stupid is that. Yet, no fears. Adobe will fill up that hole nicely with their adjusted suite of programs which will start a new age in corporate needs and Microsoft will be looked at with the look of ‘How could you have been this stupid to such a degree?’ Yet I will not care, I will be giggling in a corner. Watching the wannabe’s seek jobs and seek solutions. 

So now we get to the main event. It is the BBC article ‘Hidden wealth of one of Putin’s ‘inner circle’ revealed’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61028866). There is so much wrong here, I almost do not know where to start, so the beginning it is. 

We see from the start “They reveal how a Swiss tattoo artist was falsely named as owner of a company that transferred over $300m (£230m) to firms linked to Suleiman Kerimov. They also show how $700m of transactions – and the secret ownership of luxury properties – went undetected. The investigation exposes failures of the banking system and the obstacles impeding Western sanctions.” It sounds nice, it really does. But lets take a closer look, shall we? 

“Transactions worth $700m linked to Suleiman Kerimov and his closest business associates were reported as suspicious by banks between 2010 and 2015” So was anything done? Were ACTUAL crimes committed? ‘Suspicious’ is merely a word that shows no side towards legality. Then we get “Swiss accountant Alexander Studhalter posed as owner of properties actually owned by Mr Kerimov” So were laws broken? Was anything illegal done? The BBC shows itself to be as big a loser as the ICIJ shown it is. And when we get “Mr Kerimov was the secret owner of properties on the French Riviera and in London, including the most expensive terraced property ever sold in the UK” we see again the small setting ‘If he was a real secret owner, how did they find out?’ But the larger stage is whether LAWS were broken. The BBC does not really inform us of this, do they? They merely illuminate how useless journalists have become. Who is Suleiman Kerimov? I actually do not care. He is not part of my life, I never expect that to happen. But the BBC, the player claiming to be so trustworthy, where are they? Where is the list of broken laws? Where is the EVIDENCE showing us that laws were broken in Switzerland, the UK, and France? We can grasp at the Oligarch foundation all we want, but if we are a nation of laws we need to be shown the laws that were optionally (and allegedly) transgressed upon. So when we are finally given “Experts say Western countries have a lot of work to do because, for years, they have taken a lax approach to the fight against dirty money and failed to hold banks to account.” We see a clear path to something I have been stating for DECADES. Internationally tax laws need to be overhauled and politicians were lax, politicians were all about inaction and now we see the BS tap turned open all whilst we are not given the real deal. What laws were transgressed upon? I reckon that the answer will be none. I cannot tell because I am not a lawyer, I am not a tax lawyer and I am not an attorney. I have my Master of Intellectual property and when (or if) Amazon (or Google) buys my IP, my ship will arrive and I can retire nicely. Yet in this I have questions and the BBC answers none of them, so when we are finally given “In 2020, Swiru Holding accepted its involvement in evading the tax and was fined €1.4m and made to pay another €10.3m to settle the case. Mr Kerimov’s lawyer put out a statement saying that the French courts had “officially dismissed the allegations made by the former Nice Prosecutor against Suleiman Kerimov of having carried out money-laundering operations.”” We basically see a fine less then €12,000,000 for avoiding a taxable amount of €127,000,000 so as it seems crime pays and that is the part we do get to see. So when we are given how $700m of transactions were seemingly ‘undetected’ were laws broken? We are shown the transgression of 20% which was dealt with, but we have no information on the large amount and whether laws were broken. How come? We are given “The transaction was just one in a series of wire transfers carried out from 2010 to 2015 totalling $700m reported to US authorities as suspicious”, yet there is a large gap between ‘suspicious’ and ‘criminal’ and neither the ICIJ or the BBC give us anything on that, merely the alleged indignation. So is the BBC as useless as the ICIJ is showing itself to be? That is my question and I feel that this is not on James Oliver, Nassos Stylianou or Steve Swann. I believe that it is Francesca Mary Unsworth, chief editor of BBC News that needs to come forward and do some explaining on what should be seen as reporting and what should be seen as trivial filtering of news. 

I will let you decide what is what, but I reckon that the entire ICIJ mess needs a long hard look by a few people in all kinds of business walks.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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

March 5, 2022 · 05:46

Where are we heading?

That is the stage we comment on and most comment on events in Europe, most would and that is not bad. But something happened in Lebanon that got my attention (something is always happening there). You see, many might have noticed ‘UAE set to be put on money laundering watchdog’s ‘grey list,’ report says’ (source: CNBC), we are given quotes like “The Financial Action Task Force, an intergovernmental organisation dedicated to combatting money laundering and illicit cash flows, is set to put the United Arab Emirates on its “grey list” over concerns that the Gulf country isn’t sufficiently stemming illegal financial activities”, now I am not debating it, it might be true, it might not. I cannot lay claims to events I have no data on. But whilst we see that, Reuters also gives us (at https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/lebanese-bank-closes-over-30-british-held-accounts-after-uk-ruling-depositors-2022-03-04/) ‘Lebanese bank closes over 30 British-held accounts after UK ruling-depositors’ group’. There we see “A Bank Audi official told Reuters the bank was “asking that the UK residents apply the terms applicable to anyone opening a new account: no international transfers, no cash withdrawals””, so just to help me out. You create a bank account and you are not allowed to withdraw cash? How does that make the bank a bank? And we also get “More than $100 billion remains stuck in a banking system paralysed since 2019, when the economy collapsed due to decades of unsustainable state spending, corruption and waste”, as such my question becomes what on earth is the Financial Action Task Force doing monitoring banks? First Credit Suisse, through state sponsored hacking and now we see Bank Audi. Two elements showing a massive cash stage running into the hundreds of billions. So what the hell is the Financial Action Task Force doing? Why are they not investigating banks? We see the mention of Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates, the mention of nations, not banks. Banks are seemingly flying below the radar and we see an alleged flaccid response from action groups. Oh and it would be nice to see specifics. Not some journo’s BS approach towards emotional garbage. I discussed this in ‘The presumption is mine’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/02/21/the-presumption-is-mine/) where I wrote “so all that space on what amounts to 0.03% of the entire amount. Just like the ICIJ, shortsighted and a waste of time. So we get repeated invitations to explain 0.03% of what is such a massive leak? Is anyone waking up yet?”, now if the FATF did its job and also gives us why the UAE needs to be on a grey list and NOT the bank it becomes a different story, optionally an acceptable one. That same setting applies to Switzerland, home to 242 banks and Credit Suisse. Oh, and before I forget the data leak never explained (it never will) why such harsh methods needs to be applied to the other 242 banks. No one ever asked that question, not other authorities, not the wannabe journalists either. Is that not weird too?

We need to see where we are going and what games certain parties are playing. I saw the Credit Suisse for nothing but a simple fishing expedition. A chumming exercise by the NSA (most likely culprit) to get some of the fish out there. And no one saw that? I am clever, but I am not that clever (compared to self proclaimed clever people), which (as I personally see it) implies orchestration. 

Am I right, am I wrong? I also ask that question from myself. The Switzerland setting alerted me to weirdness of it all, the UAE draws the setting to the surface. The UAE and its 20 local and 30 foreign banks. Yes that is also the case, so the FATF better come with a very good and very large folder with evidence on a whole range of banks. And before you think the UAE does nothing, we saw a week ago “The government confiscated assets worth $625m last year.” As such I hope that the FATF can prove its setting of “concerns that the Gulf country isn’t sufficiently stemming illegal financial activities” it seems that the UAE has proven activities, so is the FATF merely blowing its own horn? Perhaps it needs to look into the Audi bank and a few other banks too and several of them are not in Switzerland or the UAE. When we see quotes like “About $227.8 million money laundering in USA in 2020 according to our calculation that based 2020 Money Laundering Offense Report”, so how much did the US confiscate? Just asking.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

February 21, 2022 · 04:59

The presumption is mine

There is a setting that does not agree with me and I have seen this before. Yet before I do that there are two words we need to look at. The first one is speculation, it means ‘the activity of guessing possible answers to a question without having enough information to be certain’, then there is presumption ‘the ground, reason, or evidence lending probability to a belief’. So one is a guess, the other is an educated guess. It is always stronger than a guess, but it is till lacking certain levels of evidence and that is important to know.

This all started as I was just unwinding of several (too many) hours playing Horizons 2: Forbidden West. I started that second play-through without completing the first. I did this with the first game. You see, Eloy needs power and skill and running after the main quest (something I erroneously did in the first game) will not do it. You need skill points and the game is large, really really large and when you start finding adversaries that are (on land) a lot bigger than you think you will be either running for your life or running for cover. Those who go meet the challenge head on are shredded. Yet I digress (or do I)?

The Guardian gives us (at https://www.theguardian.com/news/2022/feb/20/credit-suisse-secrets-leak-unmasks-criminals-fraudsters-corrupt-politicians) where we see ‘Credit Suisse leak unmasks criminals, fraudsters and corrupt politicians’. There Is one problem. You see I do not think that this is happening, the Guardian was a happy tool just to get the exclusive. So as we are given:

Massive leak reveals secret owners of £80bn held in Swiss bank
Whistleblower leaked bank’s data to expose ‘immoral’ secrecy laws
Clients included human trafficker and billionaire who ordered girlfriend’s murder
Vatican-owned account used to spend €350m in allegedly fraudulent investment
Scandal-hit Credit Suisse rejects allegations it may be ‘rogue bank’

You see, my issue is that just like the ICIJ Pandora papers farce, this is an orchestration. I cannot say by who, we can point towards the NSA or a likeminded player (GCHQ), but the setting is larger. The US and EU are close to bankrupt, they play a nice tune, but the musical instrument has not been tuned for too long. A debt surpassing $30,000,000,000,000 and the EU is set to be in debt for about €10,973,338,444,376. They need to do something and going after some specific people is a first need. You cannot overhaul finances until certain ‘progressive entrepreneurs’ (aka white collar criminals) are dealt with ad the courts take too long, the problem is two fold. In the first the ICIJ was all about tantrums and BS, not much real useful info. We saw the accusations here and there with added ‘No actual laws were broken’ additions and it was a farce from beginning to end. Basic intelligence gathering acts were ignored, basic dashboarding was cast aside, and after 304 messages I know it was a wash. It was all about the power towards a ‘tax the rich’ flame which was happily drowned in whatever they used. Now we see the scolding of Credit Suisse and there are two parts here: 

  1. In the first they are accusations, so there will be a time gap, not a short one either. But it will be a message to ALL other banks that certain people have had enough.
  2. We see “billionaire who ordered girlfriend’s murder”, which might be fine, but which of the 2,755 billionaires was it? Well, the article gives us “his Lebanese pop star girlfriend”, so it might not be that hard. 

The issue is not the article perse, it is “A massive leak from one of the world’s biggest private banks, Credit Suisse, has exposed the hidden wealth of clients involved in torture, drug trafficking, money laundering, corruption and other serious crimes. Details of accounts linked to 30,000 Credit Suisse clients all over the world are contained in the leak, which unmasks the beneficiaries of more than 100bn Swiss francs (£80bn) held in one of Switzerland’s best-known financial institutions.”

Let me take you through the numbers. There is not one employee that has access to the 30,000 accounts, so it is the CEO, CTO, CFO, or something like that. Do you think that they are the whistleblower? Nope? Neither do I! Then there is the IT, but Credit Suisse is global, so it we get back to the CTO. One IT person does not have this kind of access without getting caught. This level of data has all kinds of security. It needs to have it. Then there is the inside part Who is the drug trafficker? Who is the corrupt? Who is the torturer? This is not set into an account, it requires data aggregation, something a way to large computer can do but leakers tend to now have that access, without getting caught. And the Swiss laws are strict, massively strict so there is doubt on the stage of “held in one of Switzerland’s best-known financial institutions” as well. The levels of security and insight cannot come from a leaker, just like with the Pandora papers. I stated that from the beginning. This was a state operator and the NSA is the most likely culprit. The USA is in too much debt, it needs to release pressures and they are out of options. So when the ICIJ strikes out, we get this. 

I have worked in data for decades and I have had less then 5 instances where I had national levels of data access, but I was monitored all the time (as one does), one protects the data it has. And I was able to do my job and aid the people involved. In an age of data being currency, do you think this is some leak? An £80bn leak no less? Then there is “leak reveals secret owners of £80bn held in Swiss bank”, a bullshit header if ever there was one. You see Swiss bank laws are strict, very strict and have been for a very long time but someone wants access and a leak would never reveal that. Such information can only come from state players, players with aggregated data on a very large level and there is every indication that the dat did not come from the bank but from other sources who transferred the funds from one to the other. The setting of ‘Credit Suisse leak unmasks criminals, fraudsters and corrupt politicians’ debunked in mere minutes. It took me at least 4 times longer to type this all. And when we get one example where the article is so ‘huge’, we get “the leaked Credit Suisse data shows his accounts were left open until at least well into the last decade. At one point after he left Siemens, one account was worth 54m CHF (£24m). Seidel’s lawyer declined to say whether the accounts were his. He said his client had addressed all outstanding matters relating to his bribery offences and wished to move on with his life”, as well as “The lawyer did not respond to repeated invitations to explain the source of the 54m CHF. Siemens said it did not know about the money and that its review of its own cashflows shed no light on the account”, so all that space on what amounts to 0.03% of the entire amount. Just like the ICIJ, shortsighted and a waste of time. So we get repeated invitations to explain 0.03% of what is such a massive leak? Is anyone waking up yet? 

This is about something else, it always was and in this the Guardian is allowing themselves (yet again) to be the tool in all this. It is not rocket science and it took me minutes to debunk a setting that is intentionally being misrepresented by 5 writers, I did this all alone in less then an hour (including the writing), so what fairy tale will the newspapers (via a state actor) serve up next?

Charging in full frontal will get some state players shredded, so they decided on the Eloy solution, illuminate from the tall grass and stay out of sight, plenty of players eager to take that limelight.

2 Comments

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

January 31, 2022 · 20:04

Cives tantum

It is an old setting, I forgot about it for the longest of times. You see in the old days there were announcers, they would give the people the knowledge of the events taking place. Yet in some cases some area’s would not be told everything. It was a case of ‘citizens only’, a filtering of what non-citizens needed not know. It still happens today, governments and corporations are filtering the news to protect their interests. So what happens when everyone demands to know?

It started a few days ago, but today I see another setting, a setting that goes beyond filtering, a setting that we need to know about. Several outlets reported on ‘UAE intercepts Houthi missile as Israeli president visits’ (at https://aje.io/jww3hn), I am taking the Al Jazeera link (it was a lot shorter) but they all give the same news. We are given “The UAE is part of a Saudi-led coalition fighting the Iran-aligned Houthis in Yemen, in a seven-year-old conflict that has left tens of thousands of people dead, displaced millions and spawned what the United Nations describes as the world’s worst humanitarian crisis”, we are given the news, we are given the news again and again, yet the important part in this is not merely the attack. It is the part that is left away from us. It is the part that Houthi forces cannot create (and allegedly operate) drones and ballistic missiles. There is no infrastructure, there is no knowledge and there is no manufacturing options. There is only one setting, Iran is delivering and optionally operating the events. There is an additional side that involves Hezbollah, but that evidence is too slim to consider even whilst Iran is the larger culprit, Hezbollah is for now not off the hook. 

Yet the media is all but silenced on the involvement of Iran. Those idiots had no issues spouting innuendo, nonsense and fabrication regarding the journalist no one cares about (Jamal Khashoggi), but in case of Iran all these settings are not working, there is a need to keep Iran out of the limelight and I wonder why that is. Consider the knowledge we have, the smuggling we see and the non activities against Iran. Why is the media keeping us in the dark? Who are they catering for? All questions that we do not see answered. And even as some players (read: BBC) are now handing us the Children in Yemen, they did not do it until 3 hours after I posted my blog, which was 10 hours after the ABC posted it. So the BBC who tends to lead was now 13 hours late on Children used by Houthi forces, another filter on Yemen, and I reckon that too many were posting, so they could no longer hold off, they merely delayed and posted the minimal numbers with the occasional error in calculations. Too many people are filtering the events Iran is a part of. Too many are not mentioning Iran driven events and many are not questioning certain events and it has been going on since before 14 September 2019, but that too was not decently looked at, was it?

Civis Tantum was to some degree acceptable in those days 2000 years ago, but today the press states again and again that they are all fair and balanced, shining light on the darkness that threatens democracy and whatever other claim they can make. So, when you see these questions, all whilst we see them not come from them, with all the other failings from drone strikes to hacking and even the ICIJ, a much larger failing is given to us, we are merely told what those looking over their shoulders allow them to tell us, so how is that independent and revealing?

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

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