Tag Archives: Italy

Mad(e) in Sweden

We have seen the news for weeks now on how one activist named Greta Thunberg, one activist who will be exactly 201 months old in 3 days is shaming politicians all over the world on environmental issues, and she is 100% correct. Even now as I see how she privately met with Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau and how she is urging to do more for the environment, the media is eating it up and spewing how one girl is fighting the established order like David met Goliath, yet that is not what is in play is it?

When we see the tweeting sarcasms giving us ‘Make America Greta Again‘, we see what happens but we ignore the issues at hand; as does the media to the largest degree. In all the news articles I read there is one massive part missing, one part that is at the foundation of environmental failure, from Southern California to northern Canada, from the East of China to the West of Russia, they all accomplish the not mentioning of the one element that has been the foundation of this failure.

The non-politicians

We see that the noted climate change sceptics are all doing someone’s biding, yet we do not see who they are ‘fighting’ for. We have entered an age of Corporatocracy, they are the powers in the US, in Canada, and they seemingly have the largest sway in France, Germany, Italy and Spain. They have large footing in most monarchies and for the most they have a larger iron grip in Russia to the degree we never fathomed. Through Corporatocracy the growth of billionaires has never been stronger and they want their wealth and they need it to keep on growing. Over the last 8 years their combined wealth went from $2 trillion to $8 trillion whilst the amount of billionaires dipped a little, it is harder to enter that pool whilst those in that pond are growing fatter day by day, in that pool the premise of environment has no hope of survival and until these governments take back the power from these corporatocratics and give it back to the people and the established order there will be no change, it will only get worse.

The fact that the EU gravy train can continue almost completely unhindered is evidence still to a failing much larger that anyone fathoms and as these corporations are shareholders, stake holders and advertisers, the media will only respond to actions that the controlling corporatocratics find acceptable. That is the failing in this entire matter and the fact that the media is ‘catering’ to her is only a viewpoint towards populist stages that are under control of the corporations, it will instil them to make ‘environmental’ donations, but only as long as it can be wielded as a form of advertisement and exploitation down the road. For them it is a double whammy, because Greta Thunberg is doing the right thing and she is fighting all the right windmills, as she is seen as a larger greater good, the people will herald her, yet in their hearts they know that almost nothing will come of it. For the ruling of Corporatocracy is bound to the needs of Wall Street and surpassing those set markers. As they play their games they basically surpassed the Gnomes of Zurich, the Swiss bankers that dictated economic policies for decades, yet as economic dictates moved more and more towards Wall Street and as the Gnomes of Zurich revoked their legendary discretion matters we see that Wall Street becomes the more powerful voice and without the balance that the Gnomes of Zurich brought to some degree we see that only the bottom line remains, a bottom line that is about profit and set on a stage of ‘contribution’ (a better stage of profit metrics), as such the environmental stage was mostly removed and in Sweden it is still at an all-time high because monarchies are about the whole nations, not just the actual consumers and facilitators, like New Zealand their environment needs are among the highest. So whilst the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/27/greta-thunberg-justin-trudeau-meeting-climate-strikes) gave us: “I really believe in Greta’s movement. She is doing amazing things and it’s great that she’s able to press politicians to act on climate change, during an election“, the quoted was 13 year old Annabelle Vellend, the reality is that whatever gain she makes, it will be small and optionally overturned within 2-4 years. In the end when it crosses the needs of Wall Street hard choices will have to be made and in that stage there is a close to 100% certainty that the environment loses.

That is the reality of the matter and the media knows this, they merely like to sprout the fairy tail (pun intended) and when that tail gets shortened it was not due to a young lady of 200 months, it was merely the heart of the economic matter, yet it will be voiced in such a way that it still reads lovely, because that is how the shareholders, stake holders and advertisers need it to be, and as long as the corporatocratic engine is not shown in the out and open this game continues.

In the end Corporations will claim that the desire from Sweden was nice, but in the end not attainable, it was mad to think it ever was, when you see those words consider who you elected and who they enabled in the process, it does not matter which side you elect, corporations have elected beneficiaries on both sides of the political line, it makes continuation a certainty. And whilst we see the positive spark of ‘planting of 2,000,000,000 trees‘ consider what some forests will be valued at for cutting in 3-5 years, and who gets that profit?

In the end this is not a failure of Greta Thunberg, it merely shows the world where the media is at, did you consider that part of the equation?

 

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

The shocker of the week

I am not great when it comes to sports. I have some skills, I am a decent hockey player, I love my hockey and I enjoy cricket. That is pretty much the life I have and I am content. I am not really that deep into Rugby. I have nothing against the game, but it was never my cup of tea. I know that the Rugby trophies tend to end up on Kiwi soil and that is fine by me. As such we all have our view of sports and its players.

When I think Ireland and Rugby, my mind sprints to Devin Toner, standing almost 7 feet tall, wearing 15″ shoes, ladies taken notice of that as men with big feet, need big socks ;-). As such when you see him stand next to two team mates, making them look like 6 foot shrimps, you know that there is a force to be reckoned with. As such when I heard that Japan was going up against them, in my mind the score seemed a forgone conclusion. Imagine my surprise (and utter shock) as the game ends 19-12 in favour of Japan. It is not just me, the amount of memes crossing my screen is adding up fast, and I am still reeling from the idea that Japan was a contender in Rugby finishing up the second best team in the world.

And for the meme’s, well they are risky and hilarious, yet it is interesting how the Springboks see themselves and how they see Japan, Japan has 2 out of 2 wins, yet they still have to face Samoa and Scotland before the quarter finals start. Pool B has Italy on top, however New Zealand has only one game played, as such New Zealand could rise to the top soon enough. Pool C has the UK slamming both Tonga and the USA with a serious amounts of scores. Leaving us with Pool D, only Fiji has had two matches bumming out on both. As such the big game there is today; Australia versus Wales and the winner in this one is most likely to become the pool winner, with the other one decently likely to be runner up.

Even as I love my boatload of meme’s, this world cup is not settled, not by a long shot, and the scores will take a beating, as I see it (slightly biased) the big match might be tonight for the pool, but it is the Australia versus Argentina match on October 20th that will keep most of Australia on the tip of their seat. It could end up being UK versus Australia on day before, but that is speculation at best, what is not a speculation is that at present there is a decent chance that Japan becomes winner Pool A and they will have to fend off either Italy or New Zealand, to change that South Africa must win both matches. The chance of winning against Canada is good, against Italy not so, implying that they would be cut.

Their only chance is for New Zealand to strike it super unlucky and with them facing Canada and Namibia, I do not see that happen, against Italy anything is possible; however their match against Namibia indicates that New Zealand will make it.

No matter how we slice this world cup, Japan the host nation was able to shock Ireland into handing over what most would have seen as certain victory. That alone makes this world cup an interesting event, a game where the outcome goes topsy turvy on the game fans tends to be a great year to be watching the world cup, that is almost a given in many sports, Rugby is happily accommodating to its fans this year and the excitement for the game will be better for it.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media

That one sentence

You have all faced it before, the moment where that one sentence stops you in your tracks. I am not talking about the sentence a partner states when they come with ‘If you get naked now, we can have sex‘, most people jump at that point. No, it is the ‘if you value your life‘ moment. It is not always a threat, and more important, it is not a sentence that is an imminent danger to you, that would be a reaction as well, but one of another kind. It is the sentence that makes you realise just how dangerous the stage is. I saw one today that came from Warsaw. It was an opinion piece, but the issue is not that it was an opinion; the issue is that this opinion is shared and it shows just how essential Brexit is to the UK. Besides the two failed stimulus events and a new one rolling off the bankrolls as we speak, a third, or perhaps more accurately stated a second mistake in a three part plan that goes nowhere. We now get that sentence ‘The Financial Times editors, heads of German business and many economists argued that Germany should start spending which it does not intend to do‘ this sentence is dangerous and idiotic, there is no relief in spending more, there is no relief, not merely because a government spends more, it is idiotic because Germany has a debt that surpasses 2,250,000,000,000 €, more important, their debt increases almost €2,000 a second. So every person in Germany has a €27,500 debt to deal with. A nation in that position is not in a good place and needs to reduce debt, but the deception and the brainless issue is that Europeans are all in a stage to take on more debt, whilst the ECB is playing with trillions in stimulus. That danger is too large and leaving the EU is the only option to get a handle on the debt every European faces.

The danger that these exploiters face is that the UK can pull it off, and when the first economic victory is scored. all those EU members will stand still and look at how they can pull it off, the people behind the scenes, the people handing us this contrived stories will then have to report to the large corporations and the custodians of the European corporatocracy that they have failed and they will no longer matter or be considered valued. That is the larger game and whilst the UK moves closer to proving that point, others keep on fear mongering as much as they can for as long as they can. Yet the dangers are becoming real and they are increasing in visibility. The Local in Germany (at https://www.thelocal.de/20190913/should-germany-give-into-pressure-and-boost-spending-to-revive-europe) gives us: ‘Should Germany boost spending to help revive Europe?‘, yet its economy is slowing and they are close to a €2.5 trillion debt. Still, for the economic value of Germany it does not seem much, but it is not a multi-billion valued debt, it is a thousand times worse and people do not seem to get that this debt pushes nations towards a corporatocracy where the banks and corporations are in charge and that danger is not understood anywhere, except perhaps the boardrooms of the Fortune 500 and they are extremely unwilling to explain it to you. As we see the stage of corporatocracy growing, we should also notice the lack of media looking into that matter. I would state it is because the media aligns with Shareholders, stake holders and advertisers and corporations are in charge of all three. So in a stage where we see: ‘a day after the European Central Bank warned it had reached the limit of its powers to avert recession‘, we get two things. The first is the stimulus that is coming, and second German Finance Minister Olaf Scholz gets the news: “Germany faced renewed pressure on Friday to boost public spending and help revive a sputtering European economy“, neither will solve anything and there is now the crux, because if the UK exits the EU and gives a real first sign of improvement (which will be year 2 or 3 after Brexit), we see a change, Germany will anger to a degree not seen before and the German population will demand Gexit, AfD (Alternativ fur Deutschland) is already pushing in that direction, but it is not powerful enough, the first UK signs will push it to such a level that Gexit would optionally happen overnight. That is the problem for the fear mongering lot and they are scared because Brexit is still on the road, and the second problem is that it will bring a better stage to the UK, which also means that Germany will get out as fast as possible. At that point the EU can no longer continue, with three trillion in debt it will collapse. I had actually expected for France to leave as a second country, yet with France electing an investment banker, that danger was temporarily averted. Now as Brexit is in a higher stage the Germans start looking at the ACTUAL issues and FACTUAL problems and benefits that the EU leaving stages bring, it is the one part no one had considered to the degree they needed to. Fear mongering remains a virtual issue and the real facts are not in line with the fears created and now that this void is becoming visible, a lot more people are realising that they were played and that will give the entire EU collapse a speed boost, but in all this, it is the UK that pushes what happens next, that is why we see UK Labour cold calling on every door with some hilarious moments (at https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9924096/homeowners-brexit-rant-terrorist-corbyn-democracy-labour-caller/). Yet they are merely stalling and buying time, at present Labour has no political power to their position, Jeremy Corbyn and his stupidity destroyed the Labour party, so he decided to openly support (read: hide behind) the remain groups. It is a valid strategy, yet the truth is also that more and more people are aware just how dangerous remaining has become and the British people have one full faith, they have full faith in Britannia and in that setting there is no EU, large corporations never understood that, it is not Wall Street, so they cannot comprehend.

So there we see it all and this all started with that one sentence: ‘Germany and others need to spend more‘ and when we see the debts rising and rising more and more people realise the one urging thought ‘Why on earth would we want to do that?

The smallest level of consideration would have been given if the second stimulus has shown levels of victory, it did not and now we have and a €3 trillion debt and no restored economy. The truth does not come from economy, it was Albert Einstein who gave us: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results every time“, it is the realisation of that truth that is now sinking in and spending more and more helps corporations, it helps banks, it does not help people, and that truth comes clear when it all collapses and all the pensions stop existing. That will be the next step and still the ECB will remain in denial, this entire matter is staged around organisations and gravy trains that have no bearing on our economic benefit or our economic long term stability. It serves them and the members of their teams, and more people are figuring that out.

As we are brought more and more revelations on how there will be a new recession, we see others come with news, fake news, bad presentations and so on. The Guardian in 2018 gave us: ‘We are due a recession in 2020 – and we will lack the tools to fight it‘, the recession is still coming, the tools are not there and more debt is coming in at the same time. This was always a formula for bad tidings. More important, it will hit Europe and the US both to a larger degree. It will not be a 2008 event, but it will be bad and as I see it, as Germany has the best economic position as their debt is merely 60% of GDP, they have the best chances to get through it all. The UK follows after that, yet they too will be hit and now we get the kicker, if Brexit has been completed, the drag, the huge drag that the UK would get because it had to tend to the 27 member states will no longer be there, so they can rise faster and sooner. That lesson, when we see that in reality will be the trigger for Germany, France and Italy to get out as fast as possible. It will end the EU, it will make a lot if issues messy yet it is only after that that a global economy can be grown in proper ways.

This was not a mystery, this was not a consideration and it was not a devil plan. It was merely that application of nature. Consider that any economy has high tides and low tides that is how it was, like the seas they have an influencer. For the sea the larger influence is the moon. There is nothing we can do anything about it, yet these tides are also regular, so for a larger part they are predictable. Now consider that tides fall away, on a planet with 24 time zones, we decided to place 4 of them in one group. Then we decided to nullify the tide (which was unnatural) and now we are all screaming that recession is our bane, it never was, economic cycles are as normal as the tides and we all face high and low, it is not something that corporations like and they designed a way around it. They failed, nature always finds a way and that is where they are now. They want to stall as much as they can and they are willing to sell 500 million people in the EU down the drain to keep their profits, and now as we all realise that these times have come and gone, and as we realise that debt helps them, it does not help us, people wake up and decide to find a way to end their struggle. It will be a long fight, but at present we could win it and end the EU cycle called corporatocracy, the nations, their monarchies and republics get to win. There will be a mess, it will not be pretty but it will get better.

So what one sentence woke you up today?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Anacusis through silence

This is about an article I wrote on June 2nd 2018, the title ‘Cheese Pizza with Oregano‘. The story (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2018/06/02/cheese-pizza-with-oregano/) looks at the finance situation that the big 4 face. With Brexit 7 weeks away that premise is becoming a lot more important. You see the big 4 (including the UK) had a lot of debt, now the issues for the UK do not dwindle, yet the other three are in a less savoury position. As sources gave us then we see: “Spain will have refinancing requirements that exceed €300 billion per annum before 2022. In 2018, 41.2 billion euro, in 2019, 82.4, in 2020 83.9 and in 2021 58.5 billion euro, with 60.4 billion maturing in 2022“, the second part is not Spain, it is Italy where we see: “4 billion euro maturities in 2018, 161 billion in 2019, 164 billion in 2020 and 172.5 billion euro in 2021“. Bloomberg (at https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-08-29/conte-s-five-star-democrat-coalition-offers-italy-respite) gave us last week ‘Italy’s Unlikely Allies Offer a Brief Respite From Crisis‘, a brief respite is not a solution and there well over a quarter of a trillion Euro to refinance in Europe alone. Where is that coming from? You see Italy is merely one of three players that is in the deep waters, I have no numbers on Germany, yet Spain is in a similar place and whilst we thing that there is no issue, there is. Two nations represent an outstanding invoice totaling €250,000,000,000 due in three months and there is no real solution (as far as I can see it). Refinancing is fine by the banks; with the added interest these two nations will sign an addition burden of no less than €2,500,000,000 and optionally close to twice that amount. This implies that in the two nations every person adds between €24 and €50 to their debt (read: taxes) just to pay for the increased interest. You might not think this is a lot and over a year it seems little but EVERY person in Spain and Italy must pay it, no exceptions and it is merely to pay for the additional interest on the debt, not the debt itself and next year it will be about twice as much and with the outstanding debt still there (I am ignoring the debt of 2018), in 2019 people will have to pay between €75 and €150 each, young, old, it will not matter. So how large is the percentage of people that have to face this invoice and have no means to pay it? Those having to live below the current poverty line is clearly one of these groups and it is not a small group. We all are placed in denial of outstanding bills because the media seemingly ignores it. I gave warning to this in 2017, I reiterated it in 2018 and now the issue is on the doorstep, pushing it forward one more year will make it all come apart. It is the clear stage of deafness through silence. If we keep silent, it goes away. Well, there is some news for you. Anyone who ever faced a debt collector can tell you, it never goes away and that feeling of hardship can follow you up to a quarter of a century. And all this is negating the French situation. Germany is in a much better place, but when the recession hits it will deteriorate and in addition, Germany is seemingly tired of carrying the burden of irresponsible politicians. And when it comes to France, I personally wonder how much Credit Agricole gets to pocket this time around (perhaps you remember the Libor scandal). I agree that Credit Agricole was not alone in this, yet this time around Deutsche bank and Credit Suisse have additional problems and they are not in a position to get caught with their fingers in the cookie jar (or is that fingers in the cocky jar?)

the problem is that these people tend to not learn, in addition, the wealth tends to outrun the fine by a fair bit and that is where the problem lies, the issues of debt needed to have been negated harshly a lot sooner and these governments pushed it forward again and again and this now directly interacts with any additional stimulus, because Spain, Italy, France and Germany (Germany a lot less) will get to feel the pinch on both ends of the pliers, the Stimulus branch and the refinancing branch. The UK is not out of reach of it all, but as it is on the way out it cannot be held responsible for a lot of these upcoming cost and the remain group just does not realise how much money is added to the debt in that way. It was the biggest issue that mattered and it has arrived at the front door of the UK, The Brexit door avoids that issue that was part of the larger problem all along. And now 12 of the 27 nations are eager to say yes to whatever infusion they can manage also becomes a worry, as they now face a much larger share of that expense, so they are complaining as loud as possible.

Even now as we see the Coup D’état message of: ‘Brussels would reluctantly agree Brexit extension if rebel MPs succeed in preventing no-deal‘, and other messages of delay, the delay is essential for Europe because they decided to remain in denial of Brexit, for three years these EU people got fat wages and remained possum, so now we see a larger issue. What use is the EU when it cannot contain any control over the irresponsible spending of the ECB? What use is the EU when the players have shown an inability to get a proper budget? The problem is actually a lot larger. You see the next part is speculative and I cannot prove it, but bare (or bear) with me. It connects to the IMF Data produced for the year 2018. Now we can agree that there is always an interaction. There is expected positive and actual positive. My issue is that EVERY nation in the EU gained (actually except Turkey). All are gaining, now we can agree that most might have had a positive impact, yet when we look back at the news we see: “The weaker end to the year weighed on the economy’s performance in 2017 overall, with growth revised down from 1.8% to 1.7%” (the Guardian), “Britain’s economy slowed to a virtual standstill in the first three months of 2018” (the Guardian), “It felt as though the sector was losing its lifeblood this month as Brexit worries continued to claw away at confidence, new orders and business margins” (the Independent) all these bad news linking Brexit, all whilst the IMF data shows that nominal GDP numbers for the UK went up by 7%.

IMPORTANT

Now there are two important parts here. The first is that the metrics are not the same, yet the premise of one side claiming that there are losses, the positive is down, yet the year before the IMF showed that the UK GDP went down by 0.011% the numbers make no sense, we are thrown between different metrics and those different metrics do not reflect the battering news again and again. The people are being handled with data that is not reliable and that part is obvious not reported on. Just like the news three years ago that the IMF reported that UK austerity was a really bad idea, something that they had to retract later on. The second danger is that the GDP is a lot more complex, yet the premise that the UK economy is so bad, so less good and growing so much less so than before the Brexit ‘threat’ is not seen in a -0.011% versus a plus 7%. Even I agree that 7% is way too positive, but these are the reported numbers and they do not add up, not compared to the media and all the anti-Brexit reporting.

This comes to blows when we see the issues in the other large three European players. In addition, the setting ignores the fact that the medium economies (Netherlands, Belgium, and Sweden) had been doing a lot better. Their economies might be ‘too’ small, yet their good venture might reflect to Eastern Europe to a much larger degree. Merely agreeing with the big four is seemingly folly too.

Oh, and before I forget, we can now also consider the forceful removal of any politician in the European economic field if so desired. They can be fired without any legal repercussions at present. The EU enabled us to do that when they decided to label the no-deal Brexit as a major natural disaster. This works for the remain as well as the Brexit group as the ECB was the biggest flaw in all this. When the Coup D’état works in the UK, we can demand the immediate firing of Mario Draghi and his ECB associates (read: cronies). If the economy is seen as a natural disaster, those setting and prolonging the stage of a natural disaster are wielders of that natural disaster and as such should be pushed out of office without pay.

I wonder if they thought that through, I guess not. I hope I did not oversimplify matters here 😉

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics

Dimensionality

There is growing unrest and growing movement. People are changing and relocating. It is all about Brexit. We see the news; we see the blips and the funny quotes. This week the funny moment was a Scottish girl who would not accept the outcome of the Brexit referendum, because this was a democracy. OK, we all have moments and that was a golden one, no doubt about it. I am pro Brexit, not because it is a great idea, but because the ECB did not leave us an option. The irresponsible spending by Mario Draghi with his stimulus got the EU €3,000,000,000,000 in additional debt with no hope of resolving it within several decades. Now with another recession on the horizon, the EU member states will learn the hard way what a recession does when there are no checks, balances or reserves available so this time around it will strong to the largest degree.

Yet, that is not what this is about. We see part of the issue (at https://www.euronews.com/2019/08/26/nearly-100-companies-move-to-netherlands-ahead-of-brexit-dutch-agency) where “Nearly 100 companies have relocated from Britain to the Netherlands or set up offices there to be within the European Union due to the United Kingdom’s planned departure from the bloc, a Dutch government agency said on Monday” It is a move that might seem nice, but there is a hidden trap in all this. These players are shifting to a nation (whichever nation), and whilst they think that setting up shop in the EU with its 513 million people was a good idea, that number still includes the UK and after the switch they are vying with other competitors for 444 million customers, whilst they left the 69 million people they already had. Germany has 82 million, France, Spain and Italy have less than the UK as population, implying that they are a smaller pond to fish in. The issue is not that they are all part of one EU, they are well over 20 member states, all with their own little local laws and that is what these people forgot. They walked away from 69 million UK consumers and now others can grow in their place.

This is not always the case, but yes, to the largest extent, these 100 companies have moved house leaving opportunity to others. Would you remain a customer of (example) Lloyds insurance when you have to connect to the Netherlands for your insurance? When the ‘main office’ gets involved all little quirks come out. We saw it in the past and we will see it in the future. A large block of people will vacate and seek local representation that is how people work. And it all sounds nice to have the new office in Amsterdam, but that market is pretty saturated and even if it was not, The Dutch have their own language, things will take a beating and those vacating British shores will face impact and reduced clientele, as well as diminished exposure and opportunity.

Feel free to remain in denial, just remember, you yourself are your own best example. For the bulk a lot will seem the same, you get your Netflix, you get your amazon and you get from Google what you need. These are true global players. Your services will alter, your goods will be localised and your financial needs will be locally catered. That was the path everyone ignored, it was the path that would always impact. Listening to European politicians was never a good idea and these players will face that certainty soon enough.

When we look at the quote: “The businesses are in finance, information technology, media, advertising, life sciences and health, the NFIA said” you think you have a good deal, but do you? Finance? Banks are local, mortgage tends to remain local and a whole host of options was always available globally, that never changed and those trying to skim more lucrative deals will soon learn that others will vie for the 69 million Brits needing services and they will adhere to local markets. IT, that will not change, it is an import market and moving out of the UK was never going to be a larger issue, yet losing a 13.5% market to other players is never a good idea. Those who relocated against those who opened another office for the time being are going to see things very differently soon enough and once these 100 companies see that the shift out of the EU will start to pay off much better in years 3 and 4 for the UK. At that point the momentum in the plus will start stronger and that results in better investments and stronger needs for these 69 million consumers. The problem is that once out of the UK these players will find it much harder to get deals done as there is no local representation. It will be a lot more expensive to get and retain British customers. The lessons learned the hard way 35 years earlier will rear its ugly head once more.

More important, the additional Stimulus cannot be pushed onto the UK so the other member states will have to pays for that, taking the UK out of the decision stream allowed for that change and now a large chunk of that €3,000,000,000,000 is now all on the other players (mostly Germany, France and Italy) and they will not like that one bit.

Yes, I acknowledge that there are some situations that have an optional advantage, but the larger extend falls away as those people are truly global and moving out of the UK merely implies that 13.5% of the total EU customer base is now not on their income path, it needs to be an alternative path with jumps, kicks, levels and springs. It lowers their revenue margin giving them additional worry down the road to please their shareholders and that is beside the point that they lost out on 13.5% of the entire EU market.

Now that the Queen has accepted the plan to suspend parliament, we see outrage, at this point a lot of 11th hour plans for people to make some Bremain move are no longer an option, now the panic sets in and those who have not made a clear investigation on the opportunity that Brexit offers will run and jump the ship, only to learn that they forgot they needed swimming lessons to make it to another shore. So as we consider UK’s largest Joke (Jeremy Corbyn) with “Suspending Parliament is not acceptable, it is not on. What the prime minister is doing is a smash and grab on our democracy to force through a no deal“, to him the message is simple and rather clear: “You had three years to find a solution as the people had elected to Brexit. The childish games, long winded speeches and inconsiderate choices will now cost you dearly” , my personal response is even more apt when we consider the Sun with “Jeremy Corbyn ‘plots coalition of chaos’ as he softens terms for Remainer pact to block No Deal Brexit. Jeremy Corbyn is leading pro-Remain talks with opposition parties to block a No Deal Brexit” only two days ago. As I personally see it, it was a childish attempt to stop Brexit from happening. The math is actually simple. The got nowhere in three years, that means that they are incapable of getting anything done, or they merely wanted to stare Brexit to death, neither option was acceptable and it is time for everyone to accept the stupidity of UK Labour. In all this the EU has acted like a petulant child for the longest time and now that Brexit, optional no-deal Brexit becomes a fact the larger players will have figured out that 69 million consumers are important. The people who vacated the UK whilst nothing was a given have given up their jobs to others, others who will now feel the caress of having some decent money. It is not a great place, but a better place and as the economy takes off as unemployment levels drops with a larger skip, the math of deficit also changes to the favour of the UK coffers. there are more impacts, not all positive, but to a larger extent the UK will have a stronger position in year two and it only reinforces the options for years three and four, making larger waves in decimating debts whilst the EU will get a truckload of additional debts soon thereafter.

It was always about dimensionality and those who could see past the simple top line that he media was hiding behind. The status for the UK will not change overnight, but it will change for the better soon enough and once those running rats (a ships reference) figure that out that they changed a passenger liner for a sinking barge, at that point will we see an interesting demonstration in entertainment and long winded speech wankers (for lack of a better term).

In my view, there is one small additional truth, Jeremy Corbyn might become the Caretaker PM, but merely a ‘Catetaker Pro Mortuarium’, a cemetery where he left the cadavers of his own short sighted stupidity and good luck to him weeding out those graves, it will be a full time task. I wonder how many large corporations are willing to stand behind Jeremy Corbyn whilst we know that those players are only in it to extent the status quo of their required greed. Who could ever support that stage when they can clearly see all the players and what they really care for?

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Politics

When it becomes pointless

Have you ever considered the actions that you need to take, yet you already know that whatever you do, it is a pointless exercise from the very beginning? The problem is not that there is discrimination, it happens everywhere; the fact that the media is part of it to a much larger degree is becoming an increasing problem.

We merely have to look at Saudi Arabia to see that reality. First of the bat, I do not claim or think that Saudi Arabia is innocent, I cannot claim that they are because there is no evidence making them innocent, yet there is also no evidence of guilt and that is the part that matters. When we look at Jamal Khashoggi, a journalist no one actually cares about and we are given: “The report suggested that Khashoggi first struggled with his killers, after which he “could have been injected with a sedative and then suffocated using a plastic bag.”” we see our larger failing. when UN reports hide behind ‘could have been‘ as well as ‘report suggested‘ we see the failure called Agnes Callamard, the U.N. human rights agency’s special rapporteur on extrajudicial executions, places guilt for the murder squarely on the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. When we see: “There was “credible evidence,”” Agnes Callamard is a failure, because the condition of murder (as well as manslaughter) fails as the court must acquit a defendant unless the state can prove beyond a reasonable doubt and that was never done there was no evidence and the UN knows this, the media know this, but they decided to ignore, so that they can blame the death of a nobody to a government. The difference between murder and manslaughter is intent, and even if we had some degree of certainty that there was intent, there is still no evidence of any kind, they all know it, they all ignore it.

Now, did I overstep my mark with the ‘nobody’ statement? Optionally! I use that word because for the most (exception of drug dealers, politicians and in many cases journalists) people matter. My issue is that there are real things happening and they need exposure, yet in one month finding 70 million articles on one person is rich, it is too rich and no one seems to notice that and the media will not tell you, so why not exactly?

Then we take another look at the arms deals, it is an important part not merely for the commerce needs, not merely because any sovereign nation has the right to defend itself, the fact that we stop ourselves and alienate optional strong allies through the banter of bullshit by politicians is just too weird. The UK and US are about to walk away from billions in revenue, billions that are legally fine, will give funds to their treasuries and these coffers fund all kinds of things; Yet some people think it is dirty money, as such it should not be touched. I have no qualms about it; I will take over and sell Saudi Arabia $5 billion at the drop of a hat, any hat. They are a sovereign nation and allowed to purchase materials for their military needs.

Yet the media will not report that, will they? They for the most need the people to live under the guise of emotion in this case. Why is that? When we see the Arab News (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/06/yemen-escalation-houthis-ramp-attacks-saudi-arabia-190622055136031.html) showing us the missiles that were fired on Saudi Arabia, as well as the fact that we see the UN allegations “In January, the United Nations’ experts concluded in an 85-page report to the Security Council that Tehran was illegally shipping fuel to Yemen to finance their war effort. A year earlier, a UN panel had criticised Iran for violating an arms embargo on Yemen by enabling Houthis obtain Iranian missiles“, and how was this proven? Well the missiles impacted, the images show that these weapons are Iranian in origin. In addition Yemen does not have the technology, the skills or the ability to make the drones or missiles, that constitutes evidence. Even as we cannot prove Hezbollah’s involvement here, Iranian involvement is clear, but the media will not give you that, will they? Why is that?

Now, I am not assigning blame left and right, yet we need to remember that the legitimate government of Yemen called for the help from the Saudi coalition, Saudi Arabia did not invade Yemen, they attacked the rebels who started a Yemeni civil war as per request of the legitimate Yemeni government, also a part the media remains silent on. In war there will always be blame on both sides, yet the entire Yemen issue is fuelled and funded by Ian and gets openly assisted by the terrorist organisation Hezbollah, a fact that many members of the media remain silent on. Now that things are escalating in the Middle East the media gets all touchy feely on how the US-Iran escalation goes, yet they still remain silent on the Iranian acts against Saudi Arabia, so how do you classify the media when it is seemingly actively discriminating others?

Yet in most media we see on how parties are being stated to be responsible for carnage, all that whilst the driving force in all this (Iran) is left out of consideration for the most of it. Why is that?

Even as we are all willing to accept Channel 4 airing an investigative documentary – Britain’s Hidden War – on the British role in the Saudi-led intervention and “the extent to which the war in Yemen is made in Britain“, the overall picture takes to a far too large an extent the involvement and activities by Iran and Hezbollah (Lebanon) out of consideration, we accept the story and the articles, yet the lack of balance as none of the other side gets the limelight is still an issue. It is not an attack on that investigative piece which was all above board, the lack of the other side is still to be noticed. And it does not end there. Even in Lebanon things as escalating. We are getting ‘Hezbollah Armed, Ready to Strike Israel, if Iran-US Tensions Grow‘ is speculative and unproven, yet the premise behind it: “The IDF estimates Hezbollah has hidden well over 100,000 rockets in these towns and villages in southern Lebanon. “All of them comfortably hidden behind Lebanese civilians, inside Lebanon.  All of them aimed at our civilians,” said IDF spokesman Lt. Col. Jonathan Conricus.” shows the same tactic that they (Hezbollah) employed in Yemen, that part is not out in the open is it? The problem we see in addition is that neither player has the funds of the infrastructure to have that much firepower, so the question becomes more than how is Iran fuelling it all? It becomes how do you get large shipments of weapons to destinations under watchful eyes? That part matters, as it impacts both the Yemeni and Hezbollah side of the matter and the media remains largely silent. Even the intelligence players remain silent on it as they cannot prove any of it, but the strikes on Saudi Arabia are evidence that it is happening and some are too afraid that it will open additional hot zones, an issue no one wants, yet the consideration is not given towards Saudi Arabia, who is under attack and that does not add up to any extent.

There is a large failing and the wider the newspaper net you look at, the more clarity is given on what I regard to be intentional miscommunication. Even as it all escalates towards US Senate blocking arms sales and it becomes vetoed by President Trump, the entire matter constitutes delays and I will optionally step in and sell them the hardware myself, we all need a hobby and my passions are linked to an 80 meter Yacht names Kore that is to be built at the CRN Shipyard at Via Enrico Mattei, Ancona Italy (we all need a passion that is slightly out of our reach).

To keep it, I will need the better part of $2 billion, so I will sell them the Chinese and Russian hardware if need be, it is after all their sovereign right to be armed and to be well defended, and that is besides the IP that is still up for grabs. Yup, they wanted commerce, now they can all have it at a price. If you want to fuel ethical boundaries and hide behind Humanitarian reasoning whilst leaving the Iranian and Hezbollah involvement completely out of the picture, than I can sell weapons and technology to anyone. The issue with discrimination is not merely the only part that it is wrong, it is that it opens up other venues as well, but then the media did not disclose that either.

When it becomes pointless we can decide to ignore it all and just fill our pockets to the largest degree, the media entitled us to do that. In the end there is a much larger failure and I feel that a humorous side is required and I found it in the shape of a new US candidate for the elections next year. I wonder if that is the person we need to rely on to make matters fair, although fair for who remains the open question, I accept that.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

London Bridge had fallen

This is not some event involving Mike Banning as the never failing US Secret Agent, it is also not a movie involving Gerard Butler in command of a Nuclear Submarine (Cool movie though). No this is reality!

In 2017, on June 3rd an attack took place, the inquest is still going on 2 years later. 3 people ramming pedestrians and after that ran into the public in the Borough Market area and decided to stab a whole lot more people. They were wearing fake explosives, carrying knives. That pretty much sums it up. In the end 8 died and 48 were wounded, the three ‘terrorists’ were killed in the process.

According to all sources these three were ‘inspired’ by ISIS.

I took notice of it initially, but it was not high on my radar, it got my attention again last week, but i was looking into the Strait of Hormuz issue. It kept at the back of my mind. So let’s start with last week: ‘MI5 admin errors meant attackers link ‘was missed’‘, it got to me as MI-5 does a whole lot of things, errors are actually quite rare and anyone stating that there should not be any errors is an idiot. Anything involving intelligence gathering is prone to issues. The right stage, the right interpretation, the right connections and the right actions. These are all matters that influence the stage. You can check this for yourself, go to any recruiter and apply for a job, what are the chances that he/she places you wrong or gives you less useful advice, considers you not to be the ‘right’ person for the job? That chance is rather high.

So when I see the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48626134) giving me: “Youssef Zaghba was stopped at Bologna airport in 2016 after telling staff he was going to Turkey to be a terrorist“, so in the clear setting of a first, a terrorist does not tell anyone he/she is one. The more verbose version is: “Asked why he was going to Turkey, he said to be “a terrorist” before quickly changing his answer to “tourist”, the court heard“, o now we get a person who is basically an idiot and customs has to deal with hundreds if not thousands on a daily basis. This part is already numb and done for. So at best we have a video game wannabe, at worst we have a person with mental health issues. At present neither two score high on the list, at most a police chat would have been warranted.

Regarding Zaghba we also see (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-40169985) In 2016, Zaghba was stopped at Bologna Guglielmo Marconi Airport by Italian officers who found ISIS-related materials on his mobile phone. So what materials were they? He apparently was placed on a watch list, which is shared with many countries including the UK, as such is he merely watched when he travelled or 24:7? There is a difference and one does not warrant the other.

Yet now there is a clarity of optional failure that is increased with: “Witness L, who is head of policy, strategy and capability for MI5’s international counter-terrorism branch, told the court MI6 did not translate the Italian request for two months – and then sent it to the wrong person in MI5“, not only is my question:

  1. How could this be send to the wrong person and why was there no return/response on wrongful send information?
  2. Then we get: ‘The optional escalation had 1 year to find corrections and optional change in surveillance. Why was this not done?
  3. How often is the shared list vetted and checked for additional information whether the watch list is still accurate and more important useful?

Three direct questions that now put MI-5 on the radar for a few failings. In addition we also need to enlarge the scope, if SIGINT is GCHQ, how was this optionally missed twice over?

There are also serious questions regarding the Lawyer of the 6 victims. When we see that he had: ‘previously told the court there had been missed opportunities to prevent the attack.‘ It is important to see this part. In another story we get: “Gareth Patterson, the lawyer representing several victims’ families, said there was evidence the attackers had been in contact since January 2017“, here I disagree to some degree, and with ““any reasonably competent investigation” had the chance to detect the planning that was going on between the three men” I disagree even further.

You see, when we look at the elements. The fake explosives means that it could have been made in any way, for the most stuff from a toy store might have sufficed, at most a stroll through B&Q or Wickes would have sufficed. Then there is the stage of interpreting the Zaghba part, a terrorist claiming to be one is not one. I would have been able to do all the needed parts without setting off any flags or alarms. The biggest risk I run is getting a lorry, they did not get one either for mere payment issues that one element also shows that they commenced a terrorist act, but were not terrorists (or almost the worst prepared one). The absence of planning, the absence of dotting the ‘i‘ and crossing the ‘t‘ is what sets them apart. Merely three men with water bottles, pretending that to be explosives, knives that one can buy at IKEA and when we learn that the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jun/10/worse-terror-attack-on-london-bridge-foiled-by-chance-police-say) that the van had “13 wine bottles containing flammable liquid with rags stuffed in them, essentially Molotov cocktails” that were either forgotten, or just ignored by these three, we see a wannabe terrorist who forgot that they had options to increase the death count by a lot. These are all elements that count, because MI-5 is there for serious threats and these three were seemingly ignoring all their options even during the event. Going back to the lorry, that one might be easy when I stalk the right bars and mickey the right person, with him tied up in the back of the van I could start my spree, no flag raised at all. In my case I would have been able to get the stuff that goes boom; I merely needed to change perspective on the how. All issues that would never raise a flag; that is what MI-5 has to deal with and they have the one additional benefit that they are on an island.

We agree that steps were missed on Zaghba, but none of this is still evident that it would have prevented the attack. The higher part is Khuram Shazad Butt, he has enough flags that warrant consideration, his presence is a real issue, yet how much flags did he raise before the attack? We seem to blame after the effect, yet in the UK we see more whingers and whiners on freedom and privacy than in most other places in the world, well, congratulations! If MI-5 had that data this might have been prevented, they did not. You wanted the Data Protection Act 2018, you got it, you wanted General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and it was handed to you, you also face additional dangers because of it, so stop crying!

Back to the attack! I see Rachid Redouane as the actual fuse here. An illegal immigrant, a failed asylum seeker and he remained under the radar, also implying he could get a lot of stuff done whilst not being noticed, not getting noticed and working as a pastry chef, so how did he get that job? He was the part that Butt needed, and as such MI-5 had optionally even less to work with.

You see, when we look after the event, we might see issues to blame MI-5 (optionally GCHQ) with, but there are a lot more markers making at least 1 out of the three a dud from the start. And in all this, no one seems to realise that a failed Asylum seeker was hopping back and forth between the UK and Ireland, there is a larger failing in all this, yet I am stating that MI-5 was not it.

Yesterday

The Guardian yesterday (at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jun/17/communication-issues-left-london-bridge-attack-casualties-without-first-aid) gives us the larger failing, but not in regards to the attack. When we see: ‘police waited for help that wasn’t coming‘ we feel anger and frustration, yet in which direction?

The first is seen with: “police and members of the public being left to treat victims of the London Bridge terror attacks and not knowing why paramedics were not coming to their aid“, as well as “when paramedics were told to evacuate the area, the officers in the courtyard were left treating the casualties on their own awaiting help that did not arrive” we get the first gist of it. You cannot send paramedics in a dangerous situation, we get it we understand it and we accept it. I believe that an alteration to the armed response unit is required. I believe that any armed response unit requires a trained medic to give first aid like in a metropolitan war zone. Yes, it would be great to send in the paramedics, but let’s be honest how would you feel when a police officer tells you: “Look, there are three terrorists over there somewhere, can you go into that place ad see if you can treat some of the wounded people?” I get it, plenty of them medics would, but it is optionally super reckless and highly irresponsible. The fact that the police was not properly warned on the spot could have been for several reasons, all unintentional. This is a situation that is not merely fluid, it involves a lot of people thinking on their feet, whilst running trying to scope the size of the issue in absence of reliable information. These are not mistakes made, they are to some extent coming from experience and actual successful attacks have been really rare, besides that at some point you cannot just call for boy scouts (SAS) at any point, time is a factor. So when I see: “Five people died in or around the courtyard, one of whom, Sebastian Belanger, 36, a French chef, could possibly have been saved if he had received swifter, higher-quality medical attention“, I accept the stage and I accept the premise, but the score on getting ‘higher-quality medical attention‘ is optionally not a realistic one, not in a location of armed conflict and so there we see the stage of time versus location versus available intelligence. We can jump high and low, but reality is a factor and I feel that the after the fact Monday morning quarterbacks are now feeding an inquest of what ‘might have been done’, and I accept I am in this view a Monday morning quarterback as well.

For the larger view we need to go to the actual inquest and I noticed something in day 20 (at https://londonbridgeinquests.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/LBI-Day-20.pdf). The transcript gives us a side that was not part of the actual attack, yet it does involve Khuram Butt, it is actually a lot more important than you think for two reasons on opposite sides of the scale. The transcript gives us:

Witness M, you will appreciate that the investigation that you are here to help us with lasted for something in the region of two years, so I ’ ve got a fair amount to cover but I ’ ll try to be as concise as I can be.

You were asked questions by Mr Hough about the Transport for London employment and you told us that there came a time when you and your team learnt about this job that Khuram Butt obtained working at Westminster underground station.

A: That is correct , yes.

Q: So can I be clear : you learnt about this after he had begun working at that station ?

A: I cannot recall at what stage we learnt about him either seeking out employment or having that employment.

Q: Was that something that you – –

A: But we were aware of the fact that he was working at London Underground.

Q: So it wasn’t something that you learned at the application stage before the decision had been made as to whether they should give him the job?

A: I cannot answer that.

Q: Were arrangements in place at the time for the counter terrorism police to be notified by Transport for London of the names of people applying to be employed by Transport for London in vulnerable locations ?

A: I ’m not aware of any such arrangement. That’s not to say it doesn’t exist , but it ’ s not something I’m aware of .

Q: So to this day can Transport for London receive applications by people who might be terrorist suspects, the subject of ongoing investigations , and then a decision made to employ them without you or your partner agency being notified ?

A: So, again, I can’ t categorically say whether that process exists . That sounds to me that it’s something, if it did exist , would be more in the ”protect” side of our business.

It is important, and let us look at both sides of this equation. On the one hand if there was stronger vetting there was a chance that Khuram Butt might have been stronger on the radar, yet the attack would not have been prevented as the London Underground was not a stage and was not used to set the stage, more importantly there was a chance to set off alarms within Khuram Butt making him a lot more cautious, optionally resorting to a different style of attack. On the other hand, we see that this path would have given MI-5 up to 1500% more work, so a lot less resources to deal with optional more serious threats.

We see more in Day 20 (on page 4, paragraph 9, 10). Here we see the flags issue I raised earlier and the questioning party who is seemingly not all up to date on intelligence, more on finding a part to blame. When we see:

Q: In September 2016 the categorisation was downgraded to P2M, so the risk is now a medium risk, you told us?

A: That is correct. Yes, it was categorised down to a P2M.

Q: And when you dealt with this in your report at paragraph 5.9, you linked this decision to the fact that there had been no indications of actual steps to plan an attack.

A: That’s correct, that is in my report.

Q: But as you’ve accepted a number of times, from the very start, this is somebody who had, throughout, exhibited a degree of operational security.

A: We see that across the entire range of individuals we investigate.

Q: Yes. But an ordinary member of the public with nothing to hide is unlikely to be taking steps to avoid surveillance or to hide their activities; would you agree?

A: He’s not an ordinary member — he was not an ordinary member of the public; he was under investigation.

Q: But that of itself rings alarm bells, doesn’t it , if he is positively taking steps to disguise what his activities are?

A: It’s concerning, but it becomes more concerning when it is attached to other intelligence around other activity. And that will elevate the risk and elevate our posture and our response.

Q: After that decision to recategorise as medium risk, he then re-engaged, you told us, with ALM in the autumn of 2016.

A: So that – – that’s correct, that was the assessment at the time that he started to re-engage with other ALM individuals.

Q: He was also identified as having an inflammatory presence around other extremists, wasn’t he?

A: How do we know that?

Q: Well, you confirmed yesterday that you were aware of that and that’s information that reached you via MI5. We see it in the report of Witness L at paragraph 116.

A: Okay. So I can’t say with any certainty I was aware of that before that time, but just the mere presence — the mere fact that he was associating with other ALM individuals or becoming further engaged is of concern

I see this as an issue. The issue is not the interview, the issue is the available resources and the questioning party seems to live in la la land as there is the consideration that at any time all resources are available, that one clear failure makes the inquest a problem to some extent and that is merely looking at one day, merely Day 20. The focus on Khuram Butt being an ‘inflammatory presence‘, we could argue that this is a good thing, we could argue that pushing other extremists before they are ready is one clear sign to botch attacks (MI-5 will be pleased), the two parts in the transcript give rise to a larger failing, in part the inquest is set to a stage it does not comprehend, it does not facilitate a stage of comprehension where it concerns lone wolves and wannabe’s. In the second degree we see the push regarding re-engagement and the consideration of a medium risk person. Even as there is no valid intelligence giving us that direct action was called for (implied at least). So when I see ‘there had been no indications of actual steps to plan an attack‘, my less diplomatic view towards the barrister would be ‘move the fuck onwards barrister‘, if there is no indication of actual steps, there is no indication for acceleration of increasing profile surveillance, the resources are just not there.

It is the largest failing, not merely the fact that there is no SIGINT working on data that could have been worked on, the stretch on resources, what is available, its definition and the stage of recognising on how to use resources are in the wind and that failing matters, because that recognition is essential to stop attacks by an actual terrorist, a lone wolf or a wannabe, and as long as that part is not clearly in play, there will be more successful attacks and here I regard the premise of a successful attack any attack where more than 5 lives were lost.

We need to accept that choices have impact, we need to see that the attacks will continue and until we find a better way to register dangers this is how it will be and we need to see that the failing was larger, but there is no one to actually blame.

Consider blaming customs for allowing a failed asylum seeker (Rachid Redouane) going back and forth between the UK and Ireland, getting other places to live, is that landlord to blame? There are cogs that are not working for numerous reasons and when we realise that ‘the machine‘ is off its mark by a decent amount, we do not get to blame MI-5 (or GCHQ for that matter). When we consider that Youssef Zaghba might have made a claim and if GCHQ had a right at that point to capture all data regarding that person, there might have been a chance that together with the Khuram Butt data there was a decent chance that this could have been stopped (in theory), but that was not an option was it? Here the Data Protection Act 2018, as well as the application of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) stopped GCHQ from getting essential results to report to MI-5, you wanted this so from my point of view you have to accept the dead people too. You cannot get it both ways, it is just not on.

There is, as I personally see it a larger failure in play, it is not MI-5, it is not GCHQ, it is not the police, it is us and the bullshit setting of privacy whilst we hand over all of our private lives to Facebook and mobile game data collectors, we are doing this too, we ourselves. We can optionally argue that there needs to be a better direct action armed response unit with a trained medic in these teams, but that is an optional investigation for another day, one that is far far away.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics