Tag Archives: Narcotics

February 5, 2025 · 13:25

News to me

That happens. I do not know everything and it is not my business to know everything. I learned that early in life, before I know thought I knew everything, I learned as I took the oath of a radio operator, that there is a price for knowing too I much and as such I tried to ‘calm’ the need to know too much. When it is in my business to know, I try to know the materials pretty thoroughly. I tech support there was one program I had to know, but I had to know it on dozens of systems and for the most I knew the goods. This is not some spreadsheet or a presentation program and you know the in’s and outs of the program (not dissing these software solutions) but in one program know the issues on IBM MVS, DEC digital VMS, AS/400, Sun systems, Unit systems, Windows Systems and a whole lot more, and every mainframe had its own coordinators handbook. For the most it was OK. The dealers could help its own customers but when working deeper they came with questions on installation, data cleaning, syntaxes of the system and of course the limitations that existed per system. In an age where there was no system (it was promised, but was always a month away) I kept my head above water. So what does this have to do with the current issue?

It was given to me in the Conversation (at https://theconversation.com/trumps-trade-war-is-forcing-canada-to-revive-a-decades-old-plan-to-reduce-u-s-dependence-248433) where we get ‘Trump’s trade war is forcing Canada to revive a decades-old plan to reduce U.S. dependence’ it is here that we are given “After threatening Canada and Mexico with illegal tariffs, and Canada with annexation, United States President Donald Trump has agreed to hold off on imposing tariffs on Canada for at least 30 days. This decision came after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spoke with Trump and committed to strengthening border security” with the added “Early responses seem to have coalesced around two policies: for Canada to trade less with the U.S. and more with other countries and to strengthen the internal Canadian economy.” This implies that the free trade agreements were signed up with that in mind and to ‘diverge’ Canada to go that way. It seems weird that the ‘councilors’ of this US administration did not hammer on this, or seemingly did not hammer this. You see, as I see it President trump shot himself in the foot here. And then watered all over himself. Two distinct settings that could have been avoided. Now America faces tariffs themselves and come to boot Allies of Canada are signing up deals on all markets which will cost America dearly. It also means that the Commonwealth will become stronger as one together. I don’t know (at present) where India stands, but in retail and pharmaceutical solutions there is every chance that Canada will seek solutions in that field. So as we see “But it will impose significant costs on Canadians and require a fundamental readjustment in how we think about our economy and society.” This might be fair, but that all depends on what India could help save Canada costs, if that is achieved (though pharmaceuticals mainly) the net savings for Canada are a lot greater then expected. There will be cost in the beginning yet in the end it might work out cheaper (not easier) for Canada.

Then we are given “In 1972, then-Secretary of State for External Affairs Mitchell Sharp wrote a paper called “Canada-US Relations: Options for the Future.” At the time, international politics were in a moment of transition, and the U.S. was recalibrating its understanding of its national interest.” It is here we are given (at https://gac.canadiana.ca/view/ooe.b1557737E_001/329) a lot more then we bargained for. It is a 332 page paper, as such the 46MB file is not here, but in its original location. As such I would surmise that American administrations forgot about ‘the U.S. was recalibrating its understanding of its national interest’ it seemingly forgot about this. I prefer to think that the setting of pending bankruptcy is making them knee jerk themselves into the next month and the next and the next. Yet there is a rather nasty hindsight to this (not for me). There is a rather urgent need to reassess criminal behavior. So the settings we see in London and other cities (like Los Angeles) imply that a more Venezuelan setting will come to America (thanks to Steve Inman) his comments are setting a new side to the debate. There is no doubt that these ‘free $1000 thefts’ will result in a need to shoot to kill escalation and for the most no one has a problem with that. This escalation is right on the horizon now. The $1000 misdemeanor setting will (according to some) take care of the freeloaders and especially shopkeepers are fine with that. So as America does away with its freeloaders we still have an issue in Canada and for the most part I hesitate to consider what made America consider its tariff setting, especially as Canada was considering the paper in 1972, it might have been long, but not too long and in light of current trends this setting was on the horizon as were other options and now that America is feeling its first brunt with BRICS, there was a cautious tale on the horizon. And now that the US administration is setting up a ‘Sovereign Wealth Fund’ with the underlying ““We have tremendous potential,” Trump said while signing the order from the Oval Office on Monday. “I think in a short period of time, we’d have one of the biggest funds.”” (Source: The Guardian) I personally disagree. They HAD tremendous potential and now that they started the tariff wars (it doesn’t matter if it is on hold for 30 days). Canada is now looking at setting additional channels with the Commonwealth, whilst diminishing trade and we now see that there is a 1972 paper who did the hard stuff. The question is how much of that is still valid. I actually don’t know that, but I left the link for your reference. Then there is the options that America left on the floor and now China has an inner track to set a lot more towards the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. I mentioned it more then once in the last two years. As America stifled the sale of their F35, China has been active on at least two weapons trade shows to give rise to the Chengdu J-20 from the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group. Did you think that China left a call for a few dozen billion unanswered? At $110,000,000 that implies at least 3 squadrons and guess what, they will not be compatible with whatever Northrop Grumman or Raytheon has to offer. As such there could be a bigger shift in that setting. And as soon as China ‘proves’ that the Chengdu J-20 is at least equal or even superior to the F35, America loses that game too. You see, China only have to prove it is at least equal, a much lower threshold. Add that to the Canadian setting and as Canada can prove goods to the UAE and Saudi Arabia (optionally Egypt and Bangladesh) that are a few more markets where Canada will get slices of pizza that were meant for America. All that for a tariff? So how much more does America have to lose to show its ‘Sovereign Wealth Fund’ to be close to irrelevant. Yes, others will profit too. Yet Canada never wanted this setting in the first place and that is where short term considerations make some lose ‘their’ war. And just for consideration. Fentanyl is not new. As given by some “Fentanyl was synthesized in 1960 as an intravenous anesthetic and went on the market in the U.S. in 1968. Transdermal fentanyl was developed in the 1980s and was subsequently used for pain management in cancer patients” it was invented by the Belgiums and it has been on the market over half a century. So it is not new, the (speculated) non-actions by America made it an easy drug to score big on. In addition, it is a pharmaceutical with a boxed warning. So why is it not a controlled substance set to a narcotic? Lets consider that narcotics were ‘outlawed’ in 1914 and went to the American market in 1968. So why was it even allowed? And even as we see in the Conversation where we are given “For the Third Option to be viable today, Canadians must embrace an independent Canadian identity based on respect for democracy, pluralism, the rule of law and human rights. It likely requires consensus that U.S. authoritarianism is wholly unacceptable to Canada.” And this third option point is now reached and so far (as is visible) nearly all the Commonwealth nations. As I see the Australian parties weaseling (my personal assessment) as “Australian Trade Minister Don Farrell is seeking talks with America” (source: News) where we see no clear message to Canada in support as a Commonwealth nation (like weasels as I personally see it). At this setting Scotland shows itself as a much more honorable Commonwealth nation, but the larger issue will be India, as that is where the massive parts of retail goes. I get that India is playing a sensitive game but something must give at some point, Canada needs us now. From a personal note, Canada was there for the Netherlands in WW2. As Dutch born I will stand with Canada on this.

Yet the larger setting is missed. In the end Canada is not the larger play. It will be China and what it can grab from America on the long term from them involving Saudi Arabia, the UAE and optionally Egypt as well.

So have a loverly day and if you are in America try drinking Tim Hortons for a change. It might wake you up faster, stronger and better.

Out of two issues

I am confronted with 2 issues. The first one passed my eyes a few days ago. It came from Arab News (at https://arab.news/946db) where we are given ‘Saudi authorities seize 3.8 million amphetamine tablets in Riyadh’. This is the second event in a year and my doubts are increasing. Not on the Saudi government. What drug dealer ships in one go enough tablets to make over 10% of a population an addict? Weirdly apart from having no knowledge in this, the little knowledge I have comes from a video game named Elite. There we could ‘smuggle’ decently safe 2% of the cargo as narcotics. As such you could ‘decently’ safe smuggle up to 500Kg in a 20 ton carbo haul. There is another matter. This is either done by a really stupid Saudi (with a lot more money than common sense) or this is something else. I personally belief that this is something else. We see the ‘market’ value, but the people with other interests will merely have the manufacturing costs as an expense.

You see, if this was a real exercise, it would have made sense to merely smuggle 0.1% of that haul per shipping and it would most likely go right, as such I personally feel that these people were always going to get caught, especially in a nation like Saudi Arabia, a nation with zero tolerance towards narcotics.

Then the quote “Eleven defendants involved in these activities were arrested. They include seven residents of Syrian nationality, one resident of Nepalese nationality, and three citizens in Makkah, Riyadh, Qassim, Hail and Al-Jawf.” My personal belief is that a government hostile to Saudi Arabia is trying to make Saudi Arabia look bad. This might account for the 7 Syrians and one Nepalese. At that point I wonder how the remaining three were EXACTLY involved. Consider that this is a highly volatile situation. Would YOU trust foreigners to make you run such a risk on you? This is not about foreigners, but lets face it, Saudi’s are for all the right reasons not the most trusting in the world and I expect that the Nepalese person might not be Islamic. Too many red flags are going up and I cannot shake them.

I wonder what deep investigations with something like Palantir Gotham (if it is still called that) would uncover. My thoughts go towards the manufacturer, 3.8 million tablets is (according to some) set to a manufacturing cost of $3 per tablet. So someone handed over $12 million with a 99% certainty to get caught. It does not make sense, $12,000,000 leaves a trail. There is close to no way that it remains invisible, as such Palantir Gotham is one solution to get somewhere. The reason for thinking in this direction is that this is the second catch within a year. Someone has too much money and someone else acquired a lot of money, way more than some hauls. The largest bust in America was a year ago and involved a little over 650,000 pills. That in a nation with over 300,000,000 people makes ‘sense’, still it was a lot, so to see over 600% in a nation with only 10% of that population makes absolutely no sense at all to me. So, I am in a setting where I believe that someone is out there making Saudi Arabia look bad. I have no idea who, or why. My blinkers make me think the only direct (former) enemy is Iran, but that has no foundation in evidence of any kind, merely a gut feeling. But someone was willing to spend well over 10 million twice over to get that done, it is more than I will ever make in a lifetime (unless Amazon, Kingdom Holdings or Tencent Technologies buys my IP). And all this is based on the purity being average, if these pills were more pure, the price tag changes a lot.

Enjoy the day before Halloween.

Mere consideration

An article was given today in the Guardian. We can argue in many ways, there is no ‘Yay’ or ‘Nea’, there is no setting that gives rise to anything wrongfully reported (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/27/cassie-sainsbury-to-serve-six-years-in-colombian-jail-after-judge-accepts-plea-deal). The question that formed in my mind was all about the previous part, all about the part ignored. The Daily Telegraph (at http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/cassie-sainsbury-worked-as-a-prostitute-former-colleague-says-shes-a-compulsive-liar/news-story/e3897bc910b3c4d5d7f97d6b8eb406bc) states “the 22-year-old was a former sex worker who spent months working in a Western Sydney brothel in the lead up to her ill-fated Colombian trip“, another source gives us that she worked for Club 220. It does not make an impact, what does give us the goods is that this 22 year old went to Columbia of all places. I have nothing against Columbia, I worked with the Colombian presidential guards in 1982, all dedicated to their nation, a little fanatic, but all believing in what they did. Yet as a tourist, Colombia would never be on my list. Rio might (not too likely), yet Buenos Aires definitely would be on my list. Still from Australia that is not the most affordable trip. The cheapest was $2400 return whilst Buenos Aires is offered at $1750, all this whilst Jakarta is merely $270 away. Now, she might not like Indonesia, that’s fair. Yet in all this, Colombia is not the actual most desired place to go to. Some, especially those with connections would feel different and that is fair too. In all this there has been very little reporting on the reasoning of the 22 year old and her choice of travel. So as the Sydney Morning Herald reports “The plea bargain was then explained: if the deal was accepted by the prosecutor, the defence and the judge, Ms Sainsbury would be sentenced to 6 years of prison instead of the potential 30 year sentence if she was found guilty” sounds nice, yet in all this, the deciding players behind this, the elements do not add up. How long until we get scores flying to Bogota, because the coffee is just so much fresher in the place where the beans are plucked. We need not wonder on the validity of choice, merely accept the freedom to choose. It is a point of view we can agree with to some extent, yet questions still rise.

Even as we seem to focus on: “the judge asked Ms Sainsbury if she had been coerced into taking the plea deal“, I wonder how a plea deal is coerced, is a plea deal not the best option she could have hoped for? Was the option to stay in prison for 6 years, or be forced into 30 years? It would be the other way round and as such, how much arm twisting would be required? When we see “Ms Sainsbury was caught at Bogota’s international airport in April, trying to smuggle 5.8 kilograms of cocaine inside 18 separate packages of headphones“, so how was this any good idea? To become an exporter of headphones, whilst JB-Hifi sells quality Sony headsets for $34 (and JBL for $50)? How was any of this a good idea? We know that according to urban folk tales that criminals tend to be not too intelligent, but this dim? Nope, I am not buying it! In addition adding 330 grams to a headset package; something like that gets noticed and real fast too!

In all this, the Daily Telegraph now becomes in addition a worry for Cassie Sainsbury in other ways too. We see this in the two quotes “a former colleague of Sainsbury, who told Nine News she worked with her at brothel Club 220 near Penrith, has accused her of being a compulsive liar who once pretended her mother had died from MS” and “The former colleague said she had donated money to Sainsbury to cover her mother’s funeral costs and was horrified to see images of her mother alive and well on television“. Another claim given is “According to the colleague, Sainsbury went under the name of “Claudia” and listed herself online as “19 years old … classy, fun and ready to please”“, which get us to the situation that if the reliability of the accused is found to be non-existing, there is the chance that the judge throws out the option of plea bargain as the defence of the accused was “she was “threatened” into becoming a mule by an international drugs syndicate“, if there was no threat, she becomes the instigator of smuggling for large profits and that sets her on that 30 year train ride to nowhere.

I found the quote “Sainsbury’s fiancé Scott Broadbridge maintained his partner was innocent during an interview with Seven’s Sunday Night program. He said she was employed by a mystery couple who paid her $1800 a week to travel the world to work for their cleaning business“, it is interesting as it is a better income than most people at ASIS get, and they get into a lot more hot water, being in better shape and having a near Olympian constitution and well above decent looks too, which applies to both the boys and the girls working there. All elements Cassie lacked (as well as other shortcomings in education and degrees), so which cleaning business is hiring people at almost $10K a month?

There is a level of befuddlement within me as parts of all these given items are accepted by media, the courts and apparently the gullible audience. In all this, the Sydney Morning Herald gives one additional Gem that the AAP seems to have missed. When we consider “Given that any amount over 5 kilos is considered “aggravated circumstances” and draws a higher penalty, Ms Sainsbury could be facing 30 years in Colombian prison“, so no matter who was involved, the issue of this element which could have been diminished by trying to smuggle 4.9 Kg instead of the 5.8Kg is showing to be an element, especially as the 18 headsets were already a joke, the difference of 50 grams per headset would still have been noticed, but overall, on the two elements (apart from the mindlessness of trying to personally export 18 headsets whilst you are competing against players you have no chance against), we see that there is an element of stupid greed coming in. When drug tourism relied on the elements of stupid and gullible (added with two tits and a vagina to make the package even more appealing), whomever was linked in all this, going for the lower threshold of staying below 5000 grams might have had another (read: better) impact.

This is not merely the limitations of a system, this is a different circus. The Australian Daily Telegraph is also giving us “Bogota hotel manager describes man whom accused drug mule says tricked her into smuggling cocaine“, in addition; the quotes given give additional light on the less factually given job with $1800 a week. The quote “Ms Hernandez saying she stood out at her hotel because she arrived without a reservation and paid for her accommodation only two days at a time“, would a ‘business‘ trip not be prearranged? How would the ‘cleaning business‘ continue without a clear itinerary as well as clear invoices? In addition to that, the quote which is seen in news.com.au “Earlier it was revealed the US Drug Enforcement Agency reportedly alerted Colombian authorities to their suspicions about Ms Sainsbury. “We found her because of an alert from the DEA [Drug Enforcement Agency],” Bogota airport’s narcotics chief, Commander Rodrigo Soler, told News Corp Australia” the entire mess gets another image entirely. If the given is true, not only is the entire mess as I personally speculate it to be a farce, there is every consideration that she was a 5.8Kg decoy for other parties to get out without a hitch. Consider the facts. She got into the hotel on April 3^rd, left April 12^th and got arrested on the airport. So in 9 days, she got approached, likely after a few days the ‘coercion‘ was made so in less than 7 days, a infiltrated drug ring got data to the DEA, the name and details forwarded to other parties so she could be arrested. So someone gave up $20,650 in goods (Colombian value of Cocaine), which in Australia would be $1.74 million. Is that what really happened, or was the actual catch to send two additional models (or a couple) each with 2,450 grams of cocaine (total value $1.45 million), whilst the total venture costed $35.5K and three plane tickets. It could just be me, yet when we hear screaming of a high profile drug dealer being caught on boarding the flight those getting of the plane in Sydney might have a lot more smooth sailing.

In the end, there is a chance that she was merely the patsy in this endeavour, whether it was a willing one or a coerced one is hard to tell, however the evidence is not in her favour at present. In light of all this, when we go back to Chapelle Corby who had a bag and a boogie board and decided to add more than the weight of a boogie board in Marijuana in a place that hates drugs with a passion, now we see equally less intelligent acts by a person nicknamed in the papers as ‘Ccocaine Cassie‘, yes, if all hedge funds managers were only that stupid the economy would have been in a much better place.

In my view, we cannot oppose the fact that the bulk of papers are merely reporting on what the AAP is giving them (read: reporting should be copy and paste), yet the ‘articles’ left me with merely common sense issues on nearly every level. In all this I wonder if the court and prosecutor had done their due diligence in addition to all this. Should we have expected more from the Australian Associated Press? They report themselves to be the “AAP is the media company that businesses turn to for news, information and publishing solutions. With breaking news firmly at our core, our vast range of products and services help clients connect with and engage their audiences. AAP is your integrated, simple solution“, yet the AAP made no mention of the 5Kg threshold and what is the verdict on both sides of that isle. In addition, something that was not on the list is the question on how many trips Cassie had been on since she turned 18? I would love to know how she got to decide on Bogota without knowing where else she had been, as that stands to the character of the accused. In addition, considering that the weight of a headset is around 200 grams, replacing that with in excess of 150% weight in cocaine seems even less intelligent. When we get an overdose of details on the lingerie of Kim Kardashian and a lack of facts and evidence in a reported drug hearing, the lack of questions asked all over the place is a little too deafening to my liking.

In all that, the valid words of immigration minister, Peter Dutton as we hear “People need to abide by the laws of that country. If not, they will face serious consequences,” might be well, but it falls on the ears of those stating ‘who the fuck cares?‘

This directly relates to the lack of visibility we see given to the defence lawyer of Cassie, in this as I see it, only the International Business Times gave any level of visibility to Orlando Herran. Here we see what was given to 60 minutes. With “someone on Craigslist offering a loan and a trip to London, she jumped at the opportunity. However, the itinerary was allegedly changed to Hong Kong, Los Angeles and Bogota“, how was that missed and changed to merely ‘a global cleaning service‘? Does this impede the reliability of the statements of the accused even further? That would be for the court to decide, but overall there has been a level of skipping that is just way too weird. In this the evidence also not reported on was who paid for the flight? Was it in cash (where was it paid) or credit card? All evidence not shown to the audience by the media either.

In the mere consideration here I see a failing on several sides and in all this there would be the required additional forensic digital investigation regarding the Craigslist as well, as it could be useful evidence. This entire event has too many holes and several unlooked places, especially when you consider that the DEA had its own role to play in all this.

Tag Archives: Narcotics

News to me

Out of two issues

Mere consideration

Recent Posts

Archives