Tag Archives: JFK

When one domino falls

That is always the case, isn’t it? For completely unrelated settings, one tends to dump over the other one. It isn’t fair, it doesn’t always make sense, but there you have it and whilst several players reported on it, I was pushed into motion by the Army Recognition story giving us “Canada is reexamining its plan to buy 88 F-35A fighters after Sweden used a royal state visit to promote a Gripen E or F production and R&D hub in Canada. The debate now pits industrial and political incentives against warnings from former RCAF leaders that a mixed fleet could dilute combat power and strain a tight defense budget.” It comes from the article ‘Canada Reconsiders Full U.S. F-35A Fleet As Swedish Gripen-E Fighter Offer Gains Ground’ which we see (at https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/aerospace-news/2025/canada-reconsiders-full-us-f-35a-fleet-as-swedish-gripen-e-fighter-offer-gains-ground) it isn’t merely about Swedish precision (Hasselblad is a great example), but the American administration is rearing its ugly head in a few nasty ways. There was the massive setting on the Ukraine peace plan, which according to some (unreliable sources) was delivered in Russian on a napkin, then there is the Epstein files, which first never existed, then it was a Dem Socratic hoax and now (source: the guardian) ‘US justice department renews request to unseal Epstein grand jury materials’, so the DoJ had to renew its request? This happens with “The justice department has renewed its request to unseal grand jury materials from the Jeffrey Epstein investigation that led to the disgraced financier’s federal indictment on sex-trafficking charges in 2019.” And with the actions of Ambassador Pete Hoekstra  actions in Canada. These matters all influence what is happening and with ‘Hoekstra hints F-35 deal could impact stalled U.S.-Canada trade talks’ (source: CBC) the Canadians have had enough and with the lingering ‘51st state’ comments from all over the place (mostly from America)  the entire setting of $20.2 billion is about to be thrown out of the window. And would you know it, the Gripen is cheaper, has a better Arctic track record (it tends to get really cold in Calgary and Winnipeg) and it is NON-AMERICAN and whilst PM Carney is making deals all over the globe and the 2 deals with the UAE and India setting the investment score for Canada at 125 billion. That is money not going to America, merely Canada and now they also lose out on 20 billion to their defense industry. Loss upon loss upon loss. How long can America pretend that it was no big deal? 

So while we read “Canada’s fighter replacement program, long anchored on an order for 88 F-35A Lightning II jets under the Future Fighter Capability Project, has entered a new and politically charged phase, as reported by Newsweek. During a state visit to Ottawa by King Carl XVI Gustaf, Swedish officials and Saab executives pressed a structured proposal to meet part of Canada’s requirement with Gripen E or F aircraft assembled in the country, tied to sizable job-creation and technology transfer promises. According to those familiar with the discussions, the idea of a dual fleet is now being floated just as former Royal Canadian Air Force officers publicly urge Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government not to trim the F-35 buy or introduce a second fighter type that would require separate training, infrastructure, and logistics.” This makes me wonder the ‘financial position’ of these FORMER officers. Wouldn’t ask that question? I am also wondering why they became former officers, but that is me because I do not know these people and I question everything. I reckon that Lockheed Martin might be worried when they lose 20 billion, making the deal with Saudi Arabia almost essential to make a living (an exaggeration for sure).

But the story from the Canadian side is whether the Gripen can uphold keeping the Canadian air-force competitive enough over Canadian sky. I tend to think yes, but then I am not a pilot and I never flown a jet, I merely watched Tom Cruise do so. My biggest flight setting was using the bar on a jet from Amsterdam of JFK international, so there, not entirely a noob. ;-P

And as Defence Industry Europe gives us ‘Canada considers shifting F-35 order toward Sweden’s Gripen as Ottawa reviews jet procurement’ (at https://defence-industry.eu/canada-considers-shifting-f-35-order-toward-swedens-gripen-as-ottawa-reviews-jet-procurement/) with “Canada has already selected the F-35A to renew its Royal Canadian Air Force fleet and has committed to buying 88 aircraft to replace its Boeing F/A-18 Hornets. Ottawa has allocated funds for 16 F-35s now being built in Fort Worth, Texas, but the remainder of the order appears uncertain amid worsening relations between Canada and the Trump administration”, so Lockheed Martin won’t lose all the dineros, but a large amount is seemingly move towards Sweden and as I see it, Sweden now needs to properly fund two Christmas baskets (nuts that time again). One for President Trump and one for Ambassador Pete Hoekstra for making this possible, expected Hamper shown below.

You see, this all seems clear cut, but I am wondering what this domino will throw over, because that is almost certain happening, especially with the American Ambassador throwing his accusations in the air. He might be claiming that Canadians are meddling in American politics, but they started the ‘51st state’ claims and the next Canadian step might be even less nice, Canada now have options especially when they are gaining so much ground in revenue, investments and manufacturing options (aka jobs). All these parts never involved America (other than making them no longer part of any equation), so what is next? I see options in possible ammunition replacements for the entire Defense industry. Jets and ships might make the news for the larger amounts, but the steady stream of revenue that ammunition brings could also fall to other places (like the UK), so what will that cost America?

Have a great day, I am now 83 minutes removed from the upcoming breakfast and there is a subtle hint hidden in that part too.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

Added views

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

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

Just a thought, enjoy your day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT

Put the hammer down

It sounds overly dramatic, but I believe that enough is enough. The idea that a bully gets awarded is just too disgusting to me. I am of course speaking about the attack on Paul Pelosi in San Francisco. The idea that some nut job gets a glove treatment after a man, whose ‘crime’ is to be married to the speaker of the house is just too unsettling. I have never been much of an American democrat, that side ended after JFK. The democrats are pushing too much for a nanny state and I have an issue with that, but I accept that the Democrats were elected, they call the shots as is the consequence of an election. So as we learn “Bill Scott, chief of the San Francisco police department, said the suspect in the attack on Paul Pelosi will face charges of attempted homicide and assault with a deadly weapon, among others.”, as well as “The chief identified the suspect as 42-year-old David Depape. In addition to attempted homicide, he’ll also face charges of “elder abuse, burglary, and several other additional felonies”, Scott said.” All this and more is given to us by the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2022/oct/28/democrats-obama-midterms-republicans-us-politics-live-updates) some other sources described David Depape as another conspiracy theorist, not unlike the loads of people we see more and more in the Dutch political landscape. They are no longer an annoyance, they are now a danger and I personally believe that the Nanny state empowered them, the masses gave people like this a voice on digital media whilst those behind the screens are cashing in on the digital advertisement revenue. And people like Alex Jones are making this worse. A mere 5 days ago he files for a new trial. We get to hear (also from the Guardian) “Jones filed the requests Friday, saying Judge Barbara Bellis’s pretrial rulings resulted in an unfair trial and “a substantial miscarriage of justice”.” It is the ‘miscarriage of justice’ part that gets to me, we see “the shooting was a hoax staged by “crisis actors” to impose more gun control”, we see how this man exploits the damage to the families of 24 murdered children and he has the guts to rely on ‘miscarriage of justice’? This is too rich. I reckon that the Conversation had it right with ‘Hypocrisy is beneath them – political figures in the Trump era don’t bother concealing their misdeeds’ and the nanny state is merely growing their voice. It is there that we see Journalist Carlos Lozada give us “Their bad behaviour is now acceptable, so it needs no disguise” and that is is the setting behind this. This is what drives it and I gave a solution a long time ago, whilst the money hungry people went after tech firms, they forgot that the people no matter how entitled they are to their opinion, they should be held to account and if that was done people like Alex Jones have no recourse, people like David Depape would have been held to account long before he handed that hammer. And in the US with over 320,000,000 people this becomes more and more pressing. The land of opportunity has become overcrowded and the wannabe’s shout louder and louder at the expense of innocent children and a business man whose only ‘crime’ was to be married to a politician. 

It is time for the politicians to wake up and do something about this and hold the wielders of their voice accountable for their actions and for what they claim. People like Alex Jones saw the first trial as a way to get even more limelight, to get even more people relying on the Nanny state to listen to what he has to say. Yet no one is looking at the laws that allow these lie spouters to continue. This has been a setting for decades and now we see more and more impact and it does not end with the US. The Netherlands which is almost the size of Maryland (4,000 sqm larger) has a very different setting. Maryland with its 6.1 million people is nowhere near crowded as the Netherlands with 17.53 million people. A nation with the population pressures of Manhattan. There is a reason why I mentioned them, you see they are dealing more and more with pro-Russian trolls, conspiracy theorists and spouters of anti-Ukrainian stages and this will have a much more violent outcome. People like David Depape weren’t leading this, they were merely the first to go nuts and consider that this happens in a place like the Netherlands where in my youth an attack on politicians was almost unheard of, now people, via trolls propagate their home addresses. A man creating discord with intent to cause harm outside of Sigrid Kaag’s house. Merely because someone published the address. This will get a lot worse unless these laws are adjusted and until these conspiracy theorists are held accountable. I mean we all have the innocent conspiracy (funny example: Matt Damon is an alien, he’s Martian) but to exploit 24 murdered children takes a new (and lower) level of sick and the law is seemingly falling short here, that feeling comes with Alex Jones demanding a retrial, these families have to go through it all again. I personally hope that the financial damages are upheld and that he get an additional 15 years in federal prison, that might wake up the other theorists enough to reconsider the harm they are creating.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

We forgot the slogan

Yes, we forgot the slogan, the one I will tell you later and it was not mine, but it is a slogan I have admired for years. The view exploded as I saw ‘Toxic avengers: what Scorsese and Tarantino’s new films say about male violence‘ (at https://www.theguardian.com/film/2019/dec/16/scorsese-irishman-tarantino-once-upon-a-time-in-hollywood-toxic-male-violence), I need to be careful here as I do not wish to attack the views of another person, in this case David Alexander. Yet he almost forces me to do that when we see ‘are they doing anything to move the discussion forward?

I am not certain, you see “Outside the Tarantino dreamscape, in which men enact their fantasies of aggression in defence of quasi-fictional innocents, what is the implication of violence for male relationships – with families, women, indeed other men? It’s surely devastation, Scorsese tells us, as he presents male violence as a problem rather than a solution“, in the end a movie is like a book, it is entertainment. I could watch either movie and then still have fun to watch ‘Spies in Disguise‘ as well, Will Smith as a turned pidgeon might be nice and the movie made me slightly curious. Me wanting to see film number three as well does nothing to the value of movies number one and two.

Just like a good book, a movie can be entertaining, educational or even inspirational, yet the inspiration could be the drive in any discussion and moving something forward, yet am I an Irishman? De Niro (for the most is not, he is American (with descendancy from both Italian and Irish side), so does that make him an Irishman? Nope, but he is an Irishman in the movie, still we focus on the actor when it is a Scorcese movie. Scorcese is the director, the author of the movie, Scorcese controlled the artistic and dramatic aspects and he visualizes the screenplay by Steven Zaillian all whilst he guides the crew and actors in the fulfilment of that vision. We can state that we wanted to have a discussion, but it is in the end a discussion on a piece of fiction, we forgot the slogan that mattered ‘The story is everything‘, it was the slogan of FX and it is still the best slogan in entertainment I know of.

And this movie? It is a movie and we can see from actual events that this could optionally have happened, yet when we realise “Hoffa vanished in late July 1975; his body was never found. He was declared legally dead in 1982“, as well as “At 3:27 p.m., Hoffa called Linteau complaining that Giacalone was late. Hoffa said, “That dirty son of a bitch Tony Jocks set this meeting up, and he’s an hour and a half late.” Linteau told him to calm down and to stop by his office on the way home. Hoffa said he would and hung up; this is Hoffa’s last known communication” A lot of this can be found in FBI files, does this make the movie truthful? No, it makes it a story that seems believable and that is not the same thing. Yet the issue that it does show is that we all love movies that are dipped in reality, whilst we leave space for Will Smith as a pigeon. Yet to be honest, how does a movie like that ‘move the discussion forward‘? It is in that context that I do not see “Both present vibrant ecosystems of toxic masculinity. And both reveal much about the largely male environments they present and the shocking violence within them, through the way they think about their central female characters“, both are basically pieces of fiction and one has been dosed with the facts of events making the movie a massive dose of realism, realism that was out and about in the 70’s.

If my movie became a reality (optionally as a short movie), would ‘How to Kill a politician‘ be the stuff of fiction that drives a conversation, Yes, I would hope so, yet what conversation it would drive is another question. I thought through ‘How to Kill a politician‘ as a viewed version of my response towards anti-Islamic feelings in Europe and the anti-islamic feelings driven by politicians (in this case a Dutch one). It is a different setting, and it does not oppose the view of David Alexander, who in the end states “Scorsese tells us, as he presents male violence as a problem rather than a solution. In doing so, he ultimately creates the more meaningful film“, that is a fair enough view and we see that it is up to the director to validate or partially invalidate that view, perhaps it is not valid but it is what we take away from the story that is the beauty of the book and movie, they inspire us to have thoughts, they inspire us to dream and they inspire us to consider, three very meaningful and essential points that are in anyone’s self. And in all this we forgot one more point of inspiration, it is the story that David Alexander gives us his view on the matter, or on the matters at hand. 

It does not matter whether he is right or wrong, it is HIS point of view and it made us consider issues, so in this he became ‘the story is everything‘. That is also a point of view that we need to consider. There are points that come from within us, yet are they fictive or realistic? ‘How to Kill a politician‘ is a point of view that is all about fictivity, but the events around it were real, still it is fiction, can fiction become reality? It is the serious question behind it all, especially as the article is about the Irisman and Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, it is in that that I see not the question can fictivity become reality (a side every Harry Potter fan yearns for), yet the view can fictivity drive reality is another matter. It can drive things (the movie JFK is evidence of that), yet the drive is specific and that part matters to me, it was a central consideration in the drive as I thought through ‘How to Kill a politician‘, I wanted there to be a drive for questions, yet I wanted to be clear in the fictivity and in this the optional view of children as they considered how to counter hate. I considered that the stronger the drive for questions, the larger the drive from people to see it and that part intersects with both Quentin Tarantino and Martin Scorcese, I believe that they push a similar drive as this is one way to make people curious and keeping a curious person away from any movie is a non-option (my sense of humour is voicing that as it refers to curiosity and all those people who saw Deep Throat). 

It gets us to the one sentence that I oppose (partially) towars the view of David Alexander in “Both present vibrant ecosystems of toxic masculinity“, I have an issue with ‘toxic masculinity‘, we can go from the part where all violence is toxic, but it does not stop us from watching it, and we can see that it is about the story and in this violence sells, just like sex sells. Both make most men (and some women) curious, and that grips back to the curiosity setting in watching a movie, any movie maker wants to set the stage in a place where it leaves the people really curious and of course the movie needs to settle that curiosity, yet at this point that feeling need not be based on reality (Spies in Disguise anyone?) that is just my feeling in this and they all adhere to the one side I still admire ‘the story is everything‘. In the end we are all slaves to what we need, what we need satisfied and curiosity has been a number one for a long time, Hollywood figured that out long ago, if they had not record after record would not be broken in Hollywood, but it has. 

I merely wonder when we see a historic movie based on the era that comes over the next 20 years, will we see the optional “what X and Y new films say about female violence“, we might not believe it, we might ignore it but it is there and there are facts all over the place that violence by women is on the rise, to be honest I wonder when people figure out that violence is an issue for all homo sapiens, not just men. It has been merely more visible in that group. That realisation makes me wonder how we see violence and do we see it correctly. Violence tends to be a tool to get from one point to another nothing more, it is hard to see it in that way, but it is a truth, and Yes, I do understand that violence is overwhelmingly a male tool, I am merely stating that it is not ignored by women. And it is important to realise that the movies were not about that, they were stories and for the most we all love stories, we were addicted to books for centuries (those who could read), over time we went to the cinema’s and both the cinema and TV replaced books for the longest time now, yet the need for a story remains.

A lot of us forgot the slogan (or were not aware), let us never do that again.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, movies