Tag Archives: Media

Bitches be like….

This is the start of an issue I have with a BBC article. The article is not wrong, it is merely short sighted and incorrect, yet the BBC did nothing wrong here. Let’s be clear about that. The shortsightedness comes from the complainers who want to blame Google (YouTube) for everything, but the larger picture is ignored and there my issue starts. The article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-59967190) gives us ‘Fact-checkers label YouTube a ‘major conduit of online disinformation’’ I do not disagree here, it is, but when we get to ““livelihoods have been ruined, and far too many people have lost loved ones to disinformation”. It goes on to accuse YouTube of not making enough effort to address the problem, saying that it “is allowing its platform to be weaponised by unscrupulous actors to manipulate and exploit others”.” This is as I personally see it the moment the wheels comes from the wagon. Let’s take a look. 

Example 1
In the Netherlands there is a person named Willem Engel, he was removed from Twitter for violating rules. The man is a Dutch Covid conspiracy theorist. Now the removal seems plain and simple, yet he created close to half a dozen new accounts within 24 hours, some people go through that trouble and this is merely one person. 

This reflects on YouTube as the same thing happens there, but the problem is a lot larger. First how large is this issue? Some sources give us that EVERY MINUTE 500 hours of video are uploaded, that gives us 720,000 hours of video EVERY DAY. This also sets a different premise as YouTube is visited by 122,000,000 people every day, over a billion hours of video are watched every day.

Example 2
We are given ‘too many people have lost loved ones to disinformation’, yet who of them vet the information? We have to take responsibility people, we need to check and check the data and numbers given to us, we all do. And let’s not forget the disinformation does not merely come from conspiracy theorists. There are over 30 hedge funds channels on YouTube, yet we also get (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQEpHwYer-o), which comes from the University of Buffalo. So is one evidence of the other? Hedge funds are too often about deception, to grow they need your money, yet in the end it is still a heads or tails game. Where is the disinformation here? Where is the disinformation when game makers use young kids offering them the game if they can write something nice? How do you think influencers are made? I have seen video’s that do not seem to be deceptive, but until you bought and tested the product, you cannot tell, so how can YouTube? 

Example 3
We get food, we get it all the time, so we are influenced what YouTube video’s offer us and (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHjbujGPX8Q) we get the view of ‘Tricky Ways Fast Food Restaurants Deceive You’ and we get it, people can often not be completely honest when they are in marketing. 

So here is the conundrum, which are misinformation? The first for certain, yet examples two and three? Who decides that? And whilst you are contemplating this, thousands more movies were uploaded. 

So when I see “YouTube spokesperson Elena Hernandez told the Guardian the company was already investing in ways “to connect people to authoritative content, reduce the spread of borderline misinformation, and remove violative videos”.” I get the steps, but there is another step that these 80 group are ignoring. The need to make the act of spreading disinformation criminal, that is a stage they could take, but in the US there is the First Amendment, the US cannot act in Russia or China and the list of limitations goes on, and even in the US and UK (and many EU nations) we see a lack of acts mainly because the law was never meant for such actions and too many fear a first step towards a totalitarian state. I get it, but to blame YouTube again and again is just folly (but it seemingly give places the limelight they desire). 

So when we we see ‘More context and debunks rather than just deleting videos’ we see the beginning of a dangerous premise towards censorship, also that is not on YouTube is it? Debunking information is YOUR job, it is called vetting information and it has been around since before the Sudan Wars (1885), Julius Caesar dealt with misinformation by coding his letters (2100 years ago) and the list goes on, so when did we become absent of common sense? 

So when you give premise to “a British man who died with Covid-19 after refusing to be vaccinated, made – according to his family – a “terrible mistake” of being influenced by online anti-vaccine content.” As well as “Florida taxi driver Brian Lee Hitchens lost his wife to Covid-19 after they were influenced by Facebook content that claimed the pandemic is a hoax” consider that Dr. Faucci has been blowing the horn of vaccination for the longest time, a real scientist, so when were you stupid enough to listen to a nobody on Facebook, whilst a doctor who

  • Joined the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as a clinical associate in the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’s (NIAID) Laboratory of Clinical Investigation (LCI).
  • He became head of the LCI’s Clinical Physiology Section in 1974 
  • In 1980 was appointed chief of the NIAID’s Laboratory of Immunoregulation. 
  • In 1984, he became director of the NIAID, a position he still holds.
  • Fauci has been offered the position of director of the NIH several times, but has declined each time.
  • Fauci has been at the forefront of U.S. efforts to contend with viral diseases like HIV/AIDS, SARS, the Swine flu, MERS, Ebola, and COVID-19. 
  • He played a significant role in the early 2000s in creating the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR)
  • Driving development of biodefense drugs and vaccines following the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

is largely ignored and debunked by nobodies, in some cases even by presidential nobodies. At what point does a nobody on Facebook, Twitter or YouTube have anywhere near these qualifications? So, we do not care if you kill yourself in one of the most stupid ways imaginable, however I think you need to stop whining like little chihuahua’s and just die so we can take your job and your house. The central point is vetting information and that is on us. Yes, I have been duped once or twice, but it needs to be a real clever person to dupe me (yes, it can still be done). So when I see another this will make you rich, or I can offer this house to you so cheap, I know it is a scam. You see people give good deals to friends and people they really know, if it is someone else then no one wants it, or it is a scam, scammers win by making you believe that you won the lottery even when you never bought a ticket.

My issue with the BBC article is that there is a much larger stage and the first step to that stage is the law, we all know it, but we all ignore it. Just like ‘Tax the rich’ (tax laws), we seem to fall for it every time and it saddens me. In the 70’s I was a youngling (almost a youngling) and I was trying to become smarter and around me were people that were smart (some only made that claim), now it seems that no one takes the trouble to investigate, the answers are on social media and there every minute another sucker is born. Yet in all this, how do the fact checkers look at government propaganda? How do they see through media filters that intentionally keep you in the dark? As the barrier between news organisations and filtered information bringers goes ever thinner, fact checking goes out the window. So let’s not blame YouTube for all this, perhaps more could be done, I will never deny that, but what an be done when people are unwilling to test the setting against the law, that first step? And in all this I reckon that TikTok and Facebook also bare some of the blame, but they are not mentioned here are they?

So when we see the article end with “It cannot be left to internet companies to decide how to tackle bad information or choose how transparent to be about it” we see an uncomfortable statement that is not wrong, but who will do this? Oh, and to be clear who will check TikTok? And how will these be checked? More important, what will we do about the disinformation up-loaders? That too deserves attention, if we are not willing to prosecute them and when we are unable to prosecute them, how can any of this be with YouTube/Google?

If you want to stop disinformation, you need to factcheck yourself, that has been a truth for millennia and we forget that part of the equation a little too often, do we not?

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Politics, Science

The media as enforcer

It is a thought, it is my thought and I wonder if there is enough that I am correct? You see, most people are crying foul, blaming rich people. Making noises on the need to tax the rich and the media is helping out. That is the operative part, the media is helping out. To show you just how far they go, let’s take a little trip.

Search by Google
When you search for ‘Charles P. Rettig’ you see two results. One by LGBTQ Nation, one by Mondaq. Consider the following parts
1. Charles P. Rettig is the Commissioner of the IRS.
2. Taxes are on the plate of responsibility of the IRS.
3. The media has nothing to report on the IRS? They are merely all flaming the tax the rich part?

Looking at the media
The BBC gives us another flame article on how ‘How billionaires pay less tax than you’, yet no one is looking at the simple fact that people like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and other billionaires are doing what they are allowed to do, and it is not “special strategies to avoid paying income tax, say experts”, it is “Merely paying what Tax laws and tax codes are telling people how much to pay”. A setting that comes from the office of Charles P. Rettig, the people who were there before him like John Koskinen, Daniel Werfel, Steven T. Miller, Douglas Shulman, Linda Stiff, and Mark Everson a collection of people that were there for almost 20 years when nothing was done to overhaul taxes, and the media is not reporting on it, is it not news or is it part of the filtered information that some people do not want you to have. Yes, I am focussing here on the US, yet the mess in the EU is not better, it is actually worse as they got well over 20 nations to do NOTHING!

I am not stating that Elon Bezos and Jeff Musk are innocent (or was that the other way round?), I am stating. I am saying that they use tax laws as they are ALLOWED to be used, in black letter setting (meaning: literal interpretation) all whilst the media is shouting about the spirit of the law, the spirit of the law is not in writing, in writing we find “A tax code is a federal government document, usually numbering thousands of pages, that details the rules individuals and businesses must follow in remitting a percentage of their incomes to the federal or state government”, yes, and then the politicians added tax codes, exclusions, tax write-offs and that results in people like the ones we see mentioned as well as the Koch Family ($113,000,000,000), the Walton family ($220,000,000,000) and the Mars family (not the planet) with $127,000,000,000 we do not see these names do we? Just like Charles P. Rettig we see very little on them, we see houses bought and sold and two weeks ago we see ‘Influential Koch network rocked by an alleged affair scandal, donor departures and a discrimination lawsuit’ and I only see the CNBC mention, the other papers seemingly left it alone, why is that?

So whilst we see all flames we do not see anyone (including media) invoking the need to overhaul tax laws, no one seems interested in the essential step that is required. 

More important, no one in media is taking that step either, why is that? You still think that they are free to speak their journalistic minds, or does the hierarchy of Shareholders, stake holders, advertisers starts making sense. To realise that you the reader are a mere 4th place in any media source, how does that feel?

It is not a setting where the rich pay less, it is a setting that non-overhauled tax laws benefits the rich more and this is not semantics, consider that CNBC gave you “So if you want to find a way to lower your taxes like the rich do, it could be a good idea to meet with a financial advisor or CPA”, for a really rich person a CPA ($119,000 annual) is nothing, and they KNOW what tax laws are there to aid and which ones are not. And it was simple, it has been for decades and no one seems to focus on that part, they merely advertise the scream ‘Tax the Rich’ which is funny, because it goes nowhere and gets people nothing and when you realise that the taxation laws were the problem for decades, when will you see that the politicians and their IRS commissioners were part of the problem and never any part of the solution the USA desperately needs. So whilst the news is all about ‘Biden signs legislation raising US debt limit, averts potential default’, now consider your own situation. How much upgrades can you get on your credit card until is gets blocked, banned and retracted? How many upgrades can you get until you show more income? That is the stage; that is also why tax laws need overhaul. It is not names like Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, it is the stage that the USA has according to some sources 614 billionaires. You still think that there is no gain in overhauling tax laws? Oh, and when we look at those with a value that tops $100,000,000 you get to a number of people that is slightly surpasses 5000. When you consider all this, do you think it makes sense that the media has zero interest in people like Charles P. Rettig? Consider that he should be in the targeting view of EVERY American media outlet, but he is not, why is that you think?

I am starting to believe that the media is nothing more than an enforcer that uses the old premise of panem et circenses, a stage introduced by the poet Juvenal. Decimus Junius Juvenalis (his original name) was around in the age of Nero and Galba and a whole lot of other emperors, including the year when they had 4 of them (it is a hazardous job). A stage we see now exploited by media, politicians and rich people. Making us all watch where they want us to look, not where we need to look and the US (EU too) is running out of time. When the US defaults, what do you think will happen to the Yen and the Euro? So when you get angry at Jeff Bezos, wonder why the media is so focussed on giving him the limelight and they are actively avoiding the limelight on a whole group of 614 equally filthy rich as Jeff Ross (sorry the other comedian) Jeff Bezos and we do not see their names, not ANYWHERE, why is that? Consider that for a moment before you start shouting ‘Tax the rich’. Let’s be clear I have nothing against taxing rich people, but that is what tax laws are for, to tax all 5000 of them, not the three overly mentioned in media and there is the rub, that is where the media needs to ask people like Charles P. Rettig and the tax laws makers behind him very serious questions, but the media is not doing that. Why is that?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Part One Bee

Yup, it is that time of the brain again. I was going over the story that I wrote yesterday (hugely with pasted with parts that were on 4Chan (which did not have the valve drawings) and at that point I suddenly realised that I had a new piece of IP as well, I literally thought it up when correcting yesterdays story. And this morning I checked the internet, the idea does not exist, so I might try to  get it out into the open tomorrow (still working on the drawing), another piece of IP, what is wrong with me? 

So whilst I was going over yesterday’s idea setting the station that soon it will be a bad day to live in Tehran, I was contemplating a few idea’s. In the first, is it a good idea? I believe it is not a good idea, but it has become an essential idea. The world (power players) need to realise that we have had enough of fear mongering and loading the dice through media stakeholders and flaccid politicians. We see the dangers that Israel and Saudi Arabia face and we all stand on the sidelines, and the players not standing on the sidelines have their mission in life to make matters worse for those two nations. We get fed lies like ‘Death toll in Saudi-backed western-supplied war on Yemen to reach 377,000 by year’s end, UN warns’, all whilst there is ZERO mention of Iran, 1 mention of Houthi (in a photo) and we see “the United Nations Development Programme said that 60 per cent of predicted deaths were from hunger and preventable disease, with the remaining caused by direct combat and violence”, yet the article goes out of the way to make sure that the atrocities and attacks on UN centres by houthi forces is not mentioned. That is what the media has resorted to, telling the readers lies, half truths and spinned innuendo. And of course we remember the grandmothers with there CAAT banners in London, because it makes workaholics go ‘Awwww’ as they forget to see their grannies the last three months. This is the world we created, the banners we erected and the stupidity we embrace. 

So in that light giving an idea to those ACTUALLY wanting to do something about it was an essential step and when the media goes all crazy on ‘the dangers’ that seem to come, all whilst ignoring the dangers they fuelled I say ‘ARGO’ (pun intended). 

So whilst I still hope to sell my 5G I do realise that the time is running out and setting it to the public domain might be a result, just like publishing the idea of how to add 50,000,000 to a console customer base. If only Google was developing software for the Stadia, they could be in a real good position. Ah well. 

Even now as we are told that some people are looking to alternatives if the Iranian talks fail, I merely look at the good I have done. I already set an alternative in motion, make the reactor meltdown, solves a lot of problems and requires Iran to really look at their manners and protocols, and should the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia deploy my stealth weapon to sink the Iranian navy the chaos will be close to complete. So whilst the media stakeholders will be looking for new pools of revenue, and politicians will be looking for a lot more Viagra (or Cialis) to deal with their flaccid posture (to deal with pubic domain), I merely write more and publish more IP on the public domain, because my way is fruitful and theirs never will be. 

In this I merely wonder that if certain scientists are predicting a massive downfall in 2040, I merely wonder what comes next. In this case, it is hackers. I looked all over the net, all over newspapers and whilst EVERYONE is flaming “A critical vulnerability in a widely used software tool — one quickly exploited in the online game Minecraft — is rapidly emerging as a major threat to organisations around the world”, no one is setting the stage of ASKING, why this got missed by almost EVERYONE. And whilst every company has their ‘this software is sold as is’ software terms and the lack of lawmakers who are in doubt and turning to hold companies accountable for oversights of this magnitude. It like the blind man being the alibi of the alcoholic. “Yes, your honour, I never saw him take an alcoholic drink”, and we are told the man was set free as there was a witness vindicating the alcoholic. This is what the media now adds up to. So whilst we see cries like “Some ongoing government support would lower the cost for new entrants into the news business” (source: the Conversation), we see a lack of quality and demands towards the large players to adjust that, basically by ALL media players. 

In a stage where we see the absurd headlines, where is the outrage?

So do not come to me on why I reveal the makings of a reactor meltdown, have a go at the news and media on NOT reporting the factual and actual transgressions of Iran all over the place and that is before you you realise the headline ‘Iran slams UAE for hosting Bennett, says the Palestinians won’t forget’, and in what universe does Palestine need Iran to whine like a bitch, they can whine like Chihuahua’s all by themselves. This is not an attack on the article, there is nothing wrong with the Times of Israel, not a paper I read, but there are thousands I do not read. It is the news and the media that is adamant about ignoring larger news events like this that is the question. I get it when it is the Epping Forrest Guardian, but when it is mainstream media, is there ever an excuse not to set a full page and minutes of radio / TV times? 

So as I end part one B, I remain busy as a bee and hopefully I have something new to tell you tomorrow.

Have fun!

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

There is doubt

We have doubt, we all do and there is no denying it. I have had my reservations from the press for the longest of time. Today we see another article and this time by Al Jazeera. They give us ‘Palestinian activists hacked by Israeli firm NSO spyware’, I will agree that there are people that we should monitor, this happens. So what makes these Palestinians so special? Consider that in the past we were given that the price of a hack is $100,000. This means that someone lashed out $600,000 on these six Palestinian rights activists. They are not called terrorists (whether they are or not), they are labeled as rights activists. Then Al Jazeera (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/11/8/palestinian-rights-activists-hacked-by-israeli-firm-nso-group) gives us “Spyware from the Israeli surveillance company NSO Group was detected on the mobile phones of six Palestinian human rights activists, in the first known instance of Palestinian activists being targeted by the military-grade Pegasus spyware”, so the paragraph mentions Israel, then the ‘NSO group’, ‘Military-grade’ and ‘Pegasus spyware’. With the added settings that matter. The first is “It is not clear who placed the NSO spyware” which is fair enough, so what gives certainty that it was Pegasus? It is a fair enough question and where is that report? Then we get “Three of the hacked Palestinians work for civil society groups. The others do not, and wish to remain anonymous, Frontline Defenders says” which countermands the earlier statement of ‘six Palestinian human rights activists’, just three and what are the other ones? Terrorists? Yes, I’ll bet they want THEIR anonymity. It is the odd setting we get next “Frontline Defenders is “not absolutely alleging that Israel is behind this,” but that the “timing of all this is very interesting””, yes so is the IRA coming to the rescue of Hezbollah, but I will not judge. Wasn’t it the Times who gave us on September 13th 2020 that gave us ‘New IRA forges links with Hezbollah’, also interesting isn’t it?

So where is the evidence? And whilst we give Andrew Anderson, executive director at Frontline Defenders the benefit of the doubt with “the NSO Group cannot be trusted to ensure its spyware is not used illegally by its customers and says Israel should face international reproach if it does not bring the company to heel”, well, one could argue that no one is bringing Hezbollah to heel, the other part is that the reports have not been given the visibility that they deserve. When did a media outlet like the verge get that full report? Why is that report not out in the open for scrutiny? In my mind the girl stating that that she is the greatest whore in the world whilst we cannot find any man substantiating that, is nothing more than a wannabe women hoping to get rid of her virginity. 

Any equation can be turned on its head and whatever falls out either supports the claim or accelerates the doubt we have. In this case I have doubt, I have way too much doubt. For one it is the lack of a timeline. 

When we see “The non-profit Frontline Defenders disclosed its findings on Monday in a joint technical report together with Amnesty International and the University of Toronto’s Citizen Lab, which independently confirmed the results” It is the only date I see, so when were they infected, when were the suspicions voiced? How long did either party investigate? All parts that are missing and no one hands over the report to any of us. I have doubts, I have a lot of doubts and they are growing. The entire setting of the media being the whoring little chihuahua against the NSO group, optionally on American orders. The US does not need to spy on us, they have the media doing it for them. And as far as I can tell, no one is asking real questions, why is that?

Leave a comment

Filed under IT, Media, Politics, Science

Is a coroner required?

Yup, that is at times the question. Not in all, but in some. You see, I am rewatching Contagion, Steven Soderbergh did an awesome job and now with Covid, it is almost a documentary (nyuk, yuk, nyuk). Yet this is not about covid, it is about mortality rate. It is in the beginning of the movie when Jude Law gives us “Print media is dead, I’ll save you a seat on the bus”. It is that part that woke up something in me. Yes, print media is dead, or to some extent it should be. So as we look into that direction we see a few items. The first is that the quote comes from a 2011 movie, so there is one side. We see all kind of magazines being removed from the magazine stands and that reinforces the view, yet in opposition we see Forbes giving us less than a year ago ‘Stop Saying Print Journalism Is Dead. 60 Magazines Launched During This Crazy Year’ (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/andymeek/2021/12/30/stop-saying-print-journalism-is-dead-60-magazines-launched-during-this-crazy-year/ ), yes that is one view to have and it is a relevant one. We get “the saga of print journalism over the last several years has been one of decay and rot; layoffs; budget cuts; shrinkage. And it’s easy to see where the pandemic has made all that worse. A moribund economy means fewer advertisers are spending money, which dries up print revenue, which means cutbacks, circulation declines, fewer employees, a greater reliance on wire copy — you get the idea. Proclaim your love of newspapers all you want” and we get in addition to that “NBA star Stephen Curry’s wife Ayesha Curry launched a quarterly food, home and lifestyle magazine called Sweet July with help from the publishing giant Meredith”.

We need to consider two things, the first is that new magazines are started all over the world, they al think that they have the formula that advertisers will want and people will want to buy. That is not a bad thing, it merely is a something that happens. A year ago some might have seen ‘News Corp announces end of more than 100 Australian print newspapers in huge shift to digital, this is as I see it a policy shift, it does not end the publication, it merely shifts it to the digital side. And that is what Forbes and others are afraid of, to be disregarded, so the 60 magazines sounds nice, but how many of them lasts beyond year 1? How many are left after years 2? In this it is not merely the buyer, it will be the advertisers, if they stay away, the publication ends and 60 minus 112 is still a negative number. In this I merely looked at one nation, when we add the New York Times we get ‘More Than 1 in 5 U.S. Papers Has Closed’ and that is almost two years ago. So in all this, the response from Forbes seems a little feeble and desperate. 

So is the print media dead? I agree with people stating that it is dying, but dead? No, I do not believe that this is the case, yet I do believe that print media needs to change, how? Not sure, but the catering to everyone will not work, in this it is like gaming. If you make a game that is supposed to please everyone, you end up with a game that satisfies no one. I believe that print media is on that same setting. I also believe that it is the reason why niche magazines will outlast most others. It is also why the dip on local newspapers are missing to a much larger extent. The people like their local news, the national newspapers will often not cover it, and as such we see more and more newspapers disappear.

And when we take the pulse of something like this we also need to consider what the fallout will be on a much larger scale. You see if they do not, those who advertised in print will only have the digital wave, all whilst examining the population per magazine might reveal a few alternatives and here the local newspapers can pick up the slack to a much larger degree, they are in a good place, the niche in some cases is beneficial to a much larger community and I reckon that we will see a lot more of that in 2022-2023. To those who ignore the setting of “Print media is dead”, that is your right and I have nothing against that, but I do recommend you get a data coroner to see where you can get a benefit or two, because the early bird that hesitates, gets worms.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media

When one is obsolete

We all face that moment, I will too, even with over 3 decades of IT experience, at some point I will become obsolete, it is the nature of things, we can all fight it, we can all swim against the current, but there you learn you must exceed the speed of the current just to keep even. At some point we can no longer muster the energy, as such, I have been preparing all my IP for public domain, I might become obsolete, but I will push close to half a dozen wannabe’s in that same stage, but I will have mattered, it is as good as it gets. Jeff Bezos or Sergey Brin might call with that £50,000,000 post taxation offer, but reality does not work that way (neither do fairy tales). As such the stage for Public Domain was created. Well over half a dozen IP points with a lot more on 5G, the application of Fibretech, and optionally Keno Diastima as well, I might never finish that work, perhaps it will make the setting of a few short stories, it is something I need to consider. I know that this is the route where I am heading and many more went that way too, some were aware, some believed that they would make it before the finish line and they did not.

Yet what happens when we do not realise that stage?

And in comes Haaretz with the view on Michelle Bachelet where we see “she had seen no evidence that civilian buildings in Gaza hit by Israeli strikes were being used by for military purposes”, so what evidence did she look at? Perhaps she had lunch with a very angry employee from AP News? As for evidence, have they looked into how 4,000 missiles were built in Gaza? Where the people with that level of knowledge is? Where these materials came from? So when we see “Israel’s deadly strikes on Gaza may constitute war crimes, and that the Hamas Islamist group had also violated international humanitarian law by firing rockets into Israel” a stage where Israel is guilty of war crimes and the actions of Hamas are trivialised. In addition, consider that Gaza is 365 km², it seems like a lot, but well over 70% is under 24:7 satellite coverage, as such, where does one hide 4,000 missiles? It is only possible if the population conspires with terrorists hiding them. Which at that point makes ‘no evidence that civilian buildings in Gaza hit by Israeli strikes were being used by for military purposes’ debatable at best. As such, I personally see ‘we have not seen evidence in this regard’, I see the statement as something a obsolete person would state, we do get “Each one of these rockets constitutes a war crime”, yet it was “Referring to the 4,400 rockets fired into Israel”, I see this as trivialisation of the act, the elements of that, which I showed 11 days earlier was ignored by the media at large. I am not claiming that Israel is innocent, neither side is innocent, too much has happened. Yet intentional overlooking by the media, trivialisation by the political power players at large shows the State of Israel that they are ignored, abandoned and those claiming to be allies are merely that for as long as it makes them rich (one way or the other), as I personally see it, all the events were merely possible through hefty support by a player like Iran and the larger group of media ignores that part too, what does it serve?  Perhaps we need to look into WHO it serves. 

And when we see “her office had verified the deaths of 270 Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, including 68 children, so how was that done? Most people cannot get anything done in a week in Gaza, and suddenly they were able to verify 270 cadavers? Who is writing these reports? What level of verification and who seconded these verifications? So when you look at Haaretz (at https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/un-rights-chief-says-there-s-no-evidence-that-israeli-strikes-hit-civilian-buildings-1.9849501), all whilst the larger media has close to nothing, we need to wonder what the others are doing. So when you look into all the publications that involve Michelle Bachelet, I see no CNN, no Washington Post, no NY Times, no Times, no Guardian. So is this a person swimming against the current to avoid becoming obsolete one more day? It is rough? Yes, it is, but in all this, there is no clear answers on 4400 rockets, that entire mess is trivialised up the gills and several military experts are in that same stage, I reckon they all agree that Iran is involved, but that requires evidence too. The fact that they are the only party who can and would does not make them guilty, that too we must accept. 

But this stage is seemingly more and more evolving on those who matter no more (or t least a lot less), when one week in we see ‘no evidence’, all whilst the UN avoided making calls against Syria in the 2013 sarin attack, how long did that take and what was achieved? And here (not in a chemical capacity) we suddenly see ‘results’ is about a week? There is a need to ask serious questions, but the media is not asking them, why is that?

A stage shown in several lights and they are seemingly all avoiding the limelight and there are no questions. I have an issue with that and there is too much facilitations towards Hamas, a terrorist organisation. When will the people wake up and tart taking notice? 19 hours ago Russell Brand gave us a doze of realistic truth (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qs2_2jJlaqk), he gives us a doze of reality and it is true, I am not the greatest expert in all this, I never claimed to be. Yet, I did see questions that were not asked by those who should have asked them. There is a stage we need to see and one of the most ludicrous comedians gives us a doze of truth, we need to wake up, we are given a clear doze of realism and we need to take notice. And consider the final point, in 8 minutes we get more value from Russell Brand than we get from 3 hours of Michelle Bachelet, we need to realise that the fight against waves towards becoming obsolete is lot more important than you think, in this I raised the evidence used, the source and how evidence was located, verified and used is important, it taints what we see and the media gives us a side where credibility of media evidence is to be questioned to a much larger extent then we are doing, why is that?

Consider the questions I raised and ask your own questions, see where the ACTUAL and FACTUAL evidence is shown, and who offers them. It is a lot more important than you think.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics, Science

Falling short into an abyss

Yes, today is all about the Bogus Blablabla Congregation (BBC). And even as they give us ‘Martin Bashir: BBC fell short over Diana interview, report finds’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57189371), the stage is much worse and much more rotten then ever expected. Yes, more than expected, because of all the news agencies until yesterday the BBC had one that is one of the highest on the planet. We saw the veneer chip with their settings of Gaza, but now with the protective levels towards Martin Bashir, we can safely say that the BBC should now be regarded as just another exploitative media channel and that view will not improve for years to come. You see, as I personally see it the view of “Mr Bashir apologised for mocking up the documents, but said they had no bearing on Diana’s decision to be interviewed. Princess Diana’s interview with Martin Bashir for Panorama was a huge scoop for the BBC – in it, the princess famously said: “There were three of us in this marriage.”” But the stage is already rotten, the element of deception and basically forgery, not ‘mocking up’ shows Martin Bashir to be a shitty little cockroach, just like other reporters from places like the Sun, Daily Mail, or News of the world. The scoop was a stage of forgery where the person interviewed was pushed into a stage of defensive protection of her family and the shitty little roach knows this. So when we get to “Mr Bashir had later lied when he told BBC managers he had not shown the fake documents to anyone, and described significant parts of Mr Bashir’s account of the events of 1995 as “incredible, unreliable, and in some cases dishonest”, it shows the rotten core of the BBC that is largely absent of checks and balances. So when we get to ““The BBC should have made greater effort to get to the bottom of what happened at the time and been more transparent about what it knew. While the BBC cannot turn back the clock after a quarter of a century, we can make a full and unconditional apology. The BBC offers that today.” The chairman of the corporation, Richard Sharp, also said the BBC “unreservedly accepted” the report’s findings that there were “unacceptable failures”. “We take no comfort from the fact that these are historic,” he said.” We get to see a stage where people like Richard Sharp is just as much a roach as the other roaches. I get it, they want to limit the damage, but the BBC is showing itself to be just like all the other Murdoch wannabe’s. In what  Lord Dyson calls ‘woefully ineffective’ we see “In early 1996, the BBC carried out an internal inquiry that cleared Mr Bashir, Panorama and BBC News of wrongdoing” We get to see a setting where some at the BBC saw the issues in play and saw the shit storm that would hit if it got out and the only option was a delay and they were able to set a delay for a quarter of a century. So when we see “Last week he left the BBC, citing ongoing health issues. He had been the corporation’s religion correspondent and editor since 2016”, we see optionally one truth, because the British people are at present ready to Lynch his ass and hang him in a nice high tree overlooking some BBC building. An option that might actually happen, his deception will anger the people to no end, and the BBC is partly to blame. You see we see that part when we consider why a little journo roach like that would endure ‘Martin Bashir lost £ 125,000 when he hurriedly sold his London home to the boss of a lingerie company’, I personally believe that people in the BBC and other part of the UK government were eager to show him out any door possible and the anger of the British people would not have made that place a safe place to live. So as London News today (4 weeks ago) gave us “A BBC reporter moved in the midst of a ruckus over fraudulent tactics allegedly deceiving the princess. Two large removal vans appeared at his front door on Friday before the sale. It is not known that the two-story house is listed on the market, and neighbours seem to know little about the move, leading to speculation that it was a panic sale”, we see and accept a panic sale and that implies that someone gave him a tap on the shoulders, perhaps even Richard Sharp himself. A 25 year career based on a lie and he will most likely get away with it optionally crying that he is merely a victim of a media system. And the exploitation does not stop there, the BBC already has a way to bounce back with “A Panorama investigation into the interview delayed from last week” will most likely show Martin Bashir as the evil deceiver and the rest will be made to be naive and good of faith, or as I see it, a system without checks and balances, a shortcoming that was visible from the time when Guy Burgess was part of the BBC, as such how innocent is the BBC or Panorama? On a slightly different tone, if I put a .338 bullet in the head of Bill Gates, will that solve the issue of Bing hijacking 5 times an hour on my Google Chrome iPad? It is pissing me off and I am already vexed with the BBC as much as it is at present. 

Personally I also have an issue with “Lord Tony Hall – the director of news who carried out the 1996 investigation – said he accepts it “fell well short of what was required” and he was “wrong to give Martin Bashir the benefit of the doubt”” If it is truly short of what was required, Lord Tony Hall should be seen as incompetent, but the other media players are unlikely to push for that side, are they? And that shows just how screwed up the media has become, they are in a stage of keeping each others heads above water so that they can all enjoy more revenue. Did anyone consider the stage that some roach relying on a career based on a lie could end up with a £1.9m London house? Consider that and the information “Editor salaries at BBC can range from $76,291-$114,619” the income and house do not match up, even as we saw late last year “Martin Bashir was one of the greatest journalists in the world right now. He worked for the major part of his life”, it is my speculative view that someone was protecting Martin Bashir, consider the facts and you might get to that same conclusion especially when you realise that his wife was not the expected cause of such an expensive house. 

I personally reckon that looking into Lord Tony Hall will show a few more items in all this. The fact that it took me less than an hour to see certain matters, OK, merely AFTER some revelations were made might not matter. There are a few settings that were out in the open, the lack of checks and balances being one of them. I wonder who else thinks that the UK media is lacking a massive overhaul and in all this it merely shows that Lord Justice Leveson was more and more correct a decade ago, so how long until the people realise that the UK media (actually a global overhaul of media) is long overdue? Especially now that the BBC is shown to be coming out of some sewer reeking of shit and vile crap? 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

The tainted media

Yes, we have all seen it, I wrote about it numerous times, but have you made a tally? In google search for ‘Hamas’, we get ‘Israeli forces destroy media outlets’ Gaza base, says it housed ‘Hamas military intelligence’’, ‘Israeli strikes destroy Gaza tower housing media outlets, and home of Hamas leader’, as well as ‘Israel’s deceptive ‘surprise attack’ an ‘absolute body blow’ to Hamas’. This seems fine, the word ‘Hamas’ is there, yet the third article also gives us “Retired British Army colonel Richard Kemp says in his entire military career he’s never known of such an “extraordinary” surprise attack triggered by “deception” like the Israelis conducted in Gaza by duping the world.” It seems to me that Hamas is very much up to speed on how to use digital media, moreover there is a lack of reporting on the 2,000 missiles fired into Israel. When it is done it is made trivial, even the Miami Herald gives us ‘Some Latin American countries endorse Hamas’ violence against Israel. It’s shameful’ (at https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/andres-oppenheimer/article251425363.html), these missiles were there, ready to be used at any excuse and the media is not asking questions, questions that matter, why is that? And as we go into that, why are we seeing ‘by duping the world’? All whilst this retired military officer should realise that 2,000 missiles will take 10 forty foot containers, if not more to house all that, and questions on that pat remain absent. Missiles that were clearly designed to target civilians, that too is omitted by the media on nearly all levels. Why is that?

We see the media milk the collapse of ‘a building housing various international media, including The Associated Press’ for every bit of milk possible and that is fine, these journo’s can be an emotional lot but to set view on one side but not the other shows the media to be biased. I too have questions, I asked them, the larger extend of the media did not. The BBC was pretty spot-on (even though they missed two spots) but the rest had close to nothing, merely copy and pasting what Reuters had, that is not journalism as I see it.

In that setting we one more example, when you search “Hamas attacks”, Google search, the news has not one of the large newspapers on the first two pages, not one! That is how you should see bias, I am not claiming that Israel is innocent, I am stating that no one is asking Hamas the hard questions, why is that? And whilst you ponder that, have you considered the price of 2000 missiles? As far as I can tell it should have put Hamas out of pocket for anything between $2,000,000 and $11,000,000, so where did that money come from? That is not including smuggle, transport, fuel and a few more options, oh and getting 10 containers smuggles is quite an ordeal, all things out in the open, the media is not touching that one either, why not?

This might be a global affair and we see ego’s all over the place, but no one is asking the media the questions on them being tainted in more than one way, why is that?

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Military, Politics

The tweets that flame

Yes, it seems harsh, and it is not meant to be. You see, this might be the tweet of today, but the setting has never changed not for three decades. Even as political windbags are all claiming that they are doing their bit, they are actually relying on emotional events to keep the flames going, especially when they do not resolve anything. My blog has covered it for almost a decade, and I have been stating it for another two decades. And this tweet is bringing it to the surface yet again.

People are all about ‘taxing billionaires’, ‘taxing corporations’, and ‘taxing churches’, the last one is nice, I hardly ever see that one. So let’s take a jab at this (yet again).

Taxing Billionaires
Yes, it is all about discrimination, taxing the billionaires. I still hope to become one, that is if Papa Smurf (Sergey Brin), Clever Smurf (Larry Page) and optionally Tracker Smurf (Sundar Pichai) wake up and take notice. OK, wake up is incorrect and uncalled for, they are likely awake 18 hours a day and they optionally take notice of a dozen matters every hour of every day, but so far they are not noticing my 5G IP (darn).  So at what point will we ‘tax’ the billionaires? Will we check their bank accounts and levy it for 20%? At what point do you think will these 614 billionaires move to Canada, or Europe and leave the US completely bankrupt? What do you think happens when $5,000,000,000,000 moves to another nation? I have another issue, these people made money in whatever way, and not all are a Lawrence Elliot, Mark Zuckerberg or Google top. As such do you really want the creative top of the world to vacate to another place?

Taxing Churches
There is a larger stage here and I am not against taxing the churches. The Catholic church has pillaged in their own way the planet for centuries. So will you tax one (discrimination) or tax all? It is a slippery slope, and ever as it is not the worst idea, it is a trap waiting t explode in all our faces, we just do not know how. 

Taxing corporations
They are getting taxed, it is the degree of required taxation that is the issue. 

The point is not taxing them, it is overhauling the tax laws and on both sides, both democratic and republican presidents, they all failed. From 1993 onwards the USA has had two democrats, two republicans and now another democrat President, the last 4 all failed to overhaul the tax laws.  As such, blame Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump for this failure. In April 2019 we saw “Amazon, Netflix, IBM, and General Motors are among the 60 big companies paying $0 in federal income taxes in 2018”, not one, not two, not three, but 60 big companies all avoiding taxation, avoiding not evading. Evading taxation is illegal, avoiding it is only paying what the letter of the law tells you to pay and that is how it should be, as such tax laws need an overhaul and this has been clear for 30 years, so why is it not done?

Because we see flames, we react to flames and no one is considering (intentional or not) to push legislation to overhaul the tax laws. It is the same joke again and again. Tax and gun laws are trodden on, we see all the crocodile tears, but people die and die again and until gun laws are truly overhauled, starting by giving the ATF the teeth they need to take a chunk out of guns, this will continue. And the media knows this too, but they cater to their shareholders, their stake holders and their advertisers and none of those three are happy about overhauling tax laws. 

And until the people unite complaining to the media nothing will change. It is funny that a valid objection by a journalist regarding an Oprah Winfrey interview, where we see a reported “Over 57,000 complaints have been delivered to Ofcom” regarding the point of view of a reporter, yet I am willing to bet that NONE of those 57,000 people ever complained on the need to overhaul tax laws. And we notice people complaining that nothing gets done, well, does this not start with you? A person can tweet to high heaven, but that does not change things. Getting hundreds even thousands complain to electable officials never happens (and the politicians, as well as corporations are happy about this), they need the rich to pay for their reelections and that will not happen when tax laws are overhauled.  

This is also not limited to the US, it is a global issue and if people really want poverty to go away, you need to demand an overhaul of the tax laws. It is really that simple. But beware, when you push corporations away it has other impacts. California is now learning that the hard way as more and more corporations are moving to Texas. So this is a much larger slippery scale and their will be consequences, no matter how we slice that tax cake.

But I am not against taxation, but I too will take the tax avoidance route when called on, it is not because I am against paying taxation, I am against paying too much taxation, that is why tax laws were created. A paper in 2014 gave us “‘Tax avoidance is a taxpayer’s course of action in line with the letter but contrary to the spirit of the law’. Definitions phrased along these lines can be found in many policy statements and legal provisions. They are common, but nonetheless problematic. It is the ‘spirit of the law’ part which poses problems. These difficulties not only have theoretical import; they also cast doubt on the legitimacy of efforts to combat tax avoidance. And the skeptics – ‘non-believers’ in the spirit of the law – are many.” The paper by Hanna Filipczyk gives us a lot in that regard, on the problems and on the 27 references that show that this has been going on for a long time, and until politicians stop wanking about the spirit of tax law and do something about the letter of tax law, this will continue, and its continuation will never cease. And the media is making it easy for them as they cater to part of that group. Should you doubt that, then wonder when the media told you to that to achieve a proper level of taxing, tax laws need to change. Do not take my word, check what THEY said, you will see I was right and I have been correct in this case for well over a quarter of a century. 

It was never hard, it was never complex, it merely needed to be done and the previous 4 presidents did not achieve it, why not? I will let you ponder that part for a little part longer.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Both sides against the middle

This is not some wannabe setting, not some educated evolution of events, this is pure fiction, this is purely the idea for a script, for TV (or movie) and none of it is real in any way, or if it is, I am seemingly unaware of it. A “Names, characters, business, events and incidents are the products of the author’s imagination. Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, or actual events is purely coincidental” quote is added, so the neighbours wife (and the neighbour) need not get alarmed when I write about seeing her coming out of the shower naked and me as. Result masturbating, it’s purely coincidental (that was a funny). So the setting is a stage where the world, most nations are now in a setting where the military are set into a station where they have become the police, a sort of governmental Helpdesk and a facilitator of services. In this there are the opportunity seekers that have a balance between the military and the people, not unlike the setting in the Third Man. But here we see that the new military are at the mercy of the marketeer, all whilst the veterans are given the goods at near cost price, all whilst the people pay for the matter, with the exception of children, they get their needs at cost price. By setting these margins the dealer gets to swim through the mazes of the law and through the nets of the facilitators in reasonable safety. Yet the path is changing, a new officer is sent into the field taking care of the exploiters, in an age where resources are dwindling down, the exploiters are ending with too much and the military wants it to stop. As such the dealer gives up whatever black market fish there is to keep himself/herself safe. Yet the stage is even larger than the officer realises when a stage evolves where the large corporations are employing their own black marker dealers to keep the private needs of their board members satisfied, the dealer however knows too many of them and as such a larger stage of cat and mouse begins, a stage the officer dreads and loathes as his bosses need these corporate players as well, as such a larger stage of equilibrium is created and basically nothing gets resolved, for the officer it was a lose-lose proposition from the very beginning, so he sets a premise of safety for the dealer to get the goods on the larger corporate exploiters and all whilst he is trying to document the larger goods on all players including the dealer. 

It is a stage that is purely fictive, yet when we look at todays world, we see these element in play and the media is playing a dangerous game in the middle of share holders, stake holders and advertisers. So what happens when one media member jumps the fence? What happens when that person states enough is enough? We see the impact of FIFA and Sepp Blatter when we see “Blatter was found to have accepted undue economic benefits totalling 23m Swiss francs (just under £18m) and approved payments or bonuses of a further CHF46m to other officials” (source: The Guardian), and all whilst the alarm bells were rung by Andrew Jennings in 2006, it took close to 14 years to get that ball seriously rolling, why that long? As I stated before the media had too much power stating all kinds of facilitating settings all whilst it was the share holders and stake holders pulling the puppet cords, so is that setting that weird? We can see (and accept) the headline ‘Parliamentary inquiry into media diversity is ‘a sham’’, yet in that same setting we also get ‘The Biggest Risks to Big Tech’s Continued Dominance’, we want to be clever and hit out against one or both of the two (big tech and media), yet everyone seemingly forgets that the stakeholders are in the middle keeping the seesaw in a position that profits THEM the most, and everyone is ignoring that part of the equation. This is not a new setting, this has been going on for close to a decade at least and we are given news article after news article, by those who want to flame the audience, because emotions are set into profits, into clicks and into $$$$. A stage ignored by most as the media is at the centre of things, now consider the officer in the story when you have these elements available to you, do you think that the stakeholders in the story will give that officer even an inch? The seesaw is there to unbalance opponent after opponent and the officer becomes a tool of the larger players, because the image and documentations were whatever they allowed to get out into the open. 

A stage that remains a lose-lose for anyone offered that position, with a large promotion as incentive, so when we know that, who do the bosses of that officer serve? That is the stage we see unfold in the story, but the story remains slightly illusive. Because in that setting as the officer is keeping balance on a river standing on an ice-plate as it goes down the river hitting other ice-plates. The result being that the ice-plate with the officer diminishes in size the longer that officer is on the river and the more it hits other ice-plates. The premise of a lose-lose situation, so what can that officer do?

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, movies