Tag Archives: reuters

March 28, 2026 · 02:56

Facting a check

I find myself in this setting. A few days ago, I remember that President Trump said that the Iranian missiles were taken care of and in light of the 2000 drones and missiles fired at the UAE it sounded plausible. So the Deutsche Welle gave us “Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu say that Iran’s missile capacity is “destroyed” and “degraded,” yet Iran still strikes. How many missiles and drones remain, and how quickly can Iran rebuild its arsenal?” Which came with ‘How well armed is Iran, and can it replenish missiles?’ I was ahead of that by designing a new IP to take care of the roads, I started with crazy glue, but I changed this to small pellets with a 10 seconds delay. Based on the original setting it was a small pellet about 5mm in size with crazy glue around the core in the outer shell and whilst trucks drove over them the 10 seconds delay would enable the solution to be ‘grabbed’ by several trucks and in the Iranian ‘wilderness’ a truck without tires gets stopped right quick and no help is expected to come for hours. So whilst these trucks are out in the open and no help is coming, you get missiles without a clue, trucks without tracks and you can fill in the rest. So I was feeling pretty happy that my 2.0 solution seemed to be on a roll so to say.

But now, only an hour ago we are given by Reuters ‘Exclusive: U.S. can only confirm about a third of Iran’s missile arsenal destroyed, sources say’ (article behind paywall) this means that Iran can keep on firing its missiles into the UAE and Saudi Arabia. As such I am happy that I gave them the IP to take care of their harbours and railways, and now of course my 2.0 solution to trucking. So, this gives us the light wondering if President Trump has the ability to speak the truth, because we get exaggeration after exaggeration and there is no stopping this man as he is might be seen as the first president that has a failed fact check list that humbles a New York Phonebook for its amount of pages.

And whilst the Wall Street Journal gives us ‘Trump Tells Aides He Wants Speedy End to Iran War’ where we are given “President Trump has told associates in recent days that he wants to avoid a protracted war in Iran and that he hopes to bring the conflict to an end in the coming weeks.” So, what is his idea of a speedy end? The United States is now in week 4 of the Iranian clambake, it is ‘halting’ 10 days with CNN giving us “US President Donald Trump has for a second time extended his deadline for Tehran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz – or face its power plants being “obliterated.” The status of the talks remains unclear, with both sides giving mixed signals. Iran has expressed deep distrust toward Washington, while Trump is growing frustrated with the pace of progress. And on the ground, the war, which has killed thousands across the Middle East since it began nearly four weeks ago, shows no signs of diminishing.” All whilst CNBC gives us “The U.S. is preparing to send thousands more troops to the Middle East, prompting speculation about a ground attack on Iran amid conflicting accounts of peace talks. The Pentagon is reportedly preparing to send about 3,000 troops from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East, alongside two Marine Expeditionary Units, to assist military operations in Iran.” All whist BBC News gives us that “Pentagon denies report that US considering sending 10,000 troops to Middle East” Now, I get that armies ‘wallow’ in misinformation, so that is fair as they do not want their enemy to know which way is up. As such I am all for that level of misinformation and it is according to the writings of Sun Tzu (the art of war), but there is a massive missing level of fact checks on a few levels and I reckon we should know what was not destroyed, especially when the enemy knows what was not destroyed. But I could be grasping at straws here. 

The larger setting is that there is too much out of bounds and that also goes into the failing credibility of the US administration, and as I see it, they cannot deal with too much loss there. Especially as they are losing more allies they ever had and at present it only has Israel as an ally left. At present the ‘calculus’ setting as the United States as an ally is giving Israel as 71%, and in that list, the lowest is Japan at 63%, after that it goes down fast, at the top is Canada claiming the United States as an ally with 46%, Australia at 38% and more below, with the United States calling the United States an ally for 1%. (Source: PEW Research), now, this is not the most recent research, but the setting of this should scare the United States government into springing into action, because before 2025 Canada was its top ally and now Canada is resentful of the United States and its tourism numbers are in the basement. Forbes gave us that “As of early 2026, Canadian travel to the U.S. has seen 13 consecutive months of declines.” And in this economy as it stands, this is really bad. 

So what do these two have to do with one another?

Fair question. There is a setting that the armies can only continue when the money comes rolling in and that is not happening, the US economy is largely losing on tourism, all whilst the Financial Times gives us (at https://www.ft.com/content/15117219-c1e1-4da8-866b-817b75643c18) “The costs of Trump’s war are staggering. The most consequential is the effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which has caused global oil prices to rise at the fastest rate since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The average gasoline price in the US is now $3.98 — nearly $1 higher than just a month ago. For the average household, the pain at the pump could add up to nearly $750 in extra costs this year.” Take that number, add to that the amount of people that are hurt though tourism, manufacturing and services and take into consideration the number offers that JP Morgan gave us last October and the cost of warfare is rearing its ugly head. Add to that the amount of fact checks that are getting a failing grade and this mess is near complete.

So whilst the Financial Times also gives us “Higher prices on everything from groceries to furniture to clothes will tear a hole in family budgets at a time when more Americans already report skipping meals, delaying medical care, or dipping into their retirement savings to make ends meet. The response from Trump’s top economic adviser, Kevin Hassett, was that consumer pain caused by the Iran war is “the last of our concerns right now”.” I personally think that Kevin Hassett is seemingly on the wrong medication at present, consumer pain goes through everything and Sun Tzu’s The Art of War actually advises avoiding harm to civilians and promoting their goodwill. This is not happening now (as far as I can see) and this has been a truth for over 2500 years. So as I see it, Kevin Hassett better take a renewed look at what is happening at present, because he gets to eat his own words when this so called war is still in effect in 3 weeks, because at that point the breaking point of the people will have been surpassed by a lot and that (speculative) rating of United States calling the United States an ally decreases to 0% and as I see it, no nation ever faced that setting before. There is a new setting coming up (and I don’t like it) there is now a chance that the United States might face another civil war, because when the people lose whatever they have and face more and more hardship the bulk of its population (now assessed at 342,000,000) cannot be controlled by 1,300,000 troops and there is every chance that many will walk out of their units to stand by their family. This is what this administration seemingly achieved and that is the harsh view they need to face. 

So, am I wrong? 
This is also a fair question, because no one is looking at this, but I believe that this speculative view I have will gain traction in the next two weeks and I would be happy to be wrong, but the checks and balances that need to be in place aren’t there and the larger group of the media is no longer credible, so you have to figure it out. Have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics, Tourism

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

March 20, 2026 · 00:54

Alleged confirmation Bravo

That is what I saw. It was less then an hour after the previous article, as such I thought it was essential to get this to you quicker than the usual grace period of 15-20 hours. First news I saw was Deutsche Welle (at https://www.dw.com/en/iran-war-trump-says-no-more-israeli-attacks-on-south-pars/live-76422645) where we see ‘Trump says no more Israeli attacks on South Pars’, so why would anyone keep the refineries save of their enemies? Sun Tzu in the Art of war gives us plenty of reasons to stop Iranian money sources. And the article gives us “US President Donald Trump has threatened to “blow up” Iran’s South Pars gas field if Tehran continues retaliatory strikes against Qatar. He also promised Israel would stop its attacks on South Pars.” So one is threatening to do harm, the other one is actually doing harm and that is now stopped? To me (which might be wrong) is the setting that the United States want what Iran has and they are willing to put boots on the ground to set these places safe for the United States. And all along the Strait of Hormuz is still closed (to some effect). So whilst the UAE, Saudi Arabia and Qatar remain under attack, others are cleaning their slate to get into the Iranian oil. And only 30 minutes ago we hear (via the Guardian) ‘Hegseth claims Trump ‘knew nothing’ about gasfield attack, declines to say when war will end’ as such we get a new setting. If this so called war is set in motion by the United States and Israel and these two do not talk strategy, what on earth is going on? As such I would like to call to attention Admiral Daryl L. Caudle, Chief of Naval Operations (CNO), General Randy George, the current Chief of Staff of the United States Army, General Kenneth S. Wilsbach, Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force and General Eric M. Smith, who serves as the Commandant of the Marine Corps to attention. Not because I mean them ill will, but what kind of military is Pete Hegseth making them out to be (this might be restricted to the commanders involved) and that is also up for debate. So when we are given by the Guardian “When asked by a reporter whether he felt Israel was pursuing its own objectives, in relation to the attack on Iran’s South Pars gasfield which Donald Trump said the US “knew nothing” about, Hegseth said: “We hold the cards. We have objectives. Those objectives are clear. We have allies pursuing objectives as well,” he added. He explained earlier in the press conference that the US’s objectives were to destroy Iran’s missiles, launchers, defence industrial base and navy, and for Tehran to never obtain nuclear weapon.” As I see it, there are no clear objectives, there is seemingly no clear communication and that is the mere start of this pile of stuff that makes the grass grow in Texas. I was in the mindset to destroy the capabilities of Iran (which I made available free of charge for both the UAE and Saudi Arabia. When you consider harbours and rails, Iran would be hindered immensely by taking those two out of the equation. There was also the need for someone to bomb the 10 refineries. Not threaten, just demolish these places. Refineries can be rebuilt (over time) and it would hinder Iran near completely and as these places are gone, its money spending days are over and as I see it, without money, there wold be a larger problem creating missiles and drones, they all cost money and resources. It might be oversimplified, but I am no longer in the army, actually I left the army before the Internet became a popular thing.

In addition we are given “Badr Albusaidi abandoned the usual reserve of diplomatic language to call the war a “catastrophe” and said Donald Trump’s administration had “lost control of its own foreign policy”. Albusaidi claimed the US and Iran had been “on the verge of a real deal” on Iran’s nuclear program twice over the last nine months, including in June last year when the process ended with Israeli-US attacks on the Islamic republic. He mediated a second round of indirect negotiations that resumed in Oman on February 6, with the final round held in Geneva on February 26. “It was a shock but not a surprise when on February 28th – just a few hours after the latest and most substantive talks – Israel and America again launched an unlawful military strike against the peace that had briefly appeared really possible,” Albusaidi wrote.” I cannot respond to this, but to see the accusation that the United States had “lost control of its own foreign policy” is troublesome to some degree. Badr bin Hamad Al Busaidi is the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Oman as such I reckon he knows a few things and an accusation of that degree is troublesome. At present as I see it, this falls in the corner of President Trump and Marco Rubio. As such this accusation falls on their turf. Now (only 6 minutes ago) we are given “We’ve just heard from Pete Hegseth. He reiterated the claim from Donald Trump that the US president knew nothing about the attack on Iran’s South Pars gasfield. However, Reuters is reporting that Israel says its attack on the gas facilities was coordinated with the United States. It cited three Israeli officials.” And weirdly enough I wonder how these 4 United States commanders would react as we have a setting with three alleged Israeli officials. So who are these officials? If they are luggage officials at Ben Gurion airport listening to their radios it is one thing, if it involves members of the Israeli air force or/and Mossad, it becomes a very different thing. As such what does Reuters have? I do not know the source as such it is all alleged and presumably. It is just my thought on that setting. 

All this might be my economic downfall, but that is also presumed and even as I have data going back years, it merely might have connection to military actions and it would all be so much easier if there was clear communication and clear communication between fighting allies. None of that seems to be in place at present and my view? What doe the commanders of the involved parties have to say? Because that is one track that the media has allegedly not been considering. As I see it, it is quite simple and you merely had to read the Art of War to realise this. The alternative is von Clausewitz with his version ‘On War’ but I personally liked the Sun Tzu version better and it was written centuries before the other version. 

Perhaps I oversimplified the setting. Have a great day, it just became Friday for me (45 minute ago).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

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

March 19, 2026 · 13:12

Say what, when?

That is a statement we are familiar with. We get things wrong. You, me, people we know. But the setting that Al Jazeera gives us (at https://www.aljazeera.com/video/newsfeed/2026/3/18/top-us-spy-accused-of-omitting-iran-intel-that-contradicts-trump) is different. The setting that is given us is ‘Top US spy accused of omitting Iran intel that contradicts Trump’ a spymaster (yes, I am laughing at this too) should not be allowed to give us anything like “US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has been accused of altering her Senate testimony on Iran, omitting details that contradict President Trump’s claim that the country posed an imminent threat.” You see, as a person of ‘direct interpretation of intelligence’ you are in a position that if you cannot say what you mean, you can never mean what you say. That is the direct involvement of Intelligence and as such we can deduce that America is more of a joke than anyone has been considering for some time. And this is not to the audience, as stated this is towards the people ‘steering’ that comedy stage. Altered intelligence was offered (as said) towards the US senate. That is a more ludicrous setting to say in the least. 

And it gets to be worse we get ‘US counterterrorism chief resigns over Iran war’ from Defense One (at https://www.defenseone.com/policy/2026/03/counterterrorism-center-head-resigns-over-iran-war/412171/) where we are given “The head of the National Counterterrorism Center resigned from his post Tuesday over the U.S.-Israel war on Iran. “I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby,” Joe Kent, the head of the center, wrote in a letter to President Donald Trump.” As such we now get a new kettle of fish. I personally believe that the setting of “due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby” is additional dishonest. What it gives me is (beside a weird taste in my mouth) is that the setting that I have been giving for some time that America is too broke to matter, that this administration will steal whatever they can to get the revenue they need to pay interest payments. That could also result in the International courts in The Hague and the United Nations giving the United States a written summons to adjust or be made irrelevant. I think this is a much better resolution than Rubio telling the world that the United States decides on International law than the world does (a little sloppy explanation, but it suffices), like we see the how the United States are setting the setting for Cuba now. A setting that is merely muddling the pool. As I personally see it, it is a way to get Russia involved so that the United States can cry like little bitches that they are under attack from Russia, and Europe much act in its defence. 

So as we are now given a new state through Reuters as we are given ‘Exclusive: US weighs military reinforcements as Iran war enters possible new phase’ (at https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-weighs-military-reinforcements-iran-war-enters-possible-new-phase-2026-03-18/) a mere two hours ago. We see here “President Donald Trump’s administration is considering deploying thousands of U.S. troops to reinforce its operation in the Middle East, as the U.S. military prepares for possible next steps in its campaign against Iran, said a U.S. official and three people familiar with the matter. The deployments could help provide Trump with additional options as he weighs expanding U.S. operations, with the Iran war well into its third week.” But this has come AFTER Tulsi Gabbard has been accused of “altering her Senate testimony on Iran, omitting details that contradict President Trump’s claim that the country posed an imminent threat.” So the question becomes is Tulsi Gabbard the decoy to hide the financial setting of the United States, or is there more in play and that is something that the minute by minute logs will carry to the top of the limelight as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is approached by Iran and the Gulf states for financial appeasement because of the aggressive actions of the United States (and Israel). And do not think that this is out of the realm of possibilities. The United States (through President Trump) and its lackeys made statements like ‘Just for Joy’ and ‘no quester and no mercy’ all settings that does not fare well in the articles of war and beside the point that the United States never gave a writ through the declaration of war makes this an almost slam dunk for Iran. We can be against Iran for all we like (I personally am) but we adhere to the law and there Iran (the Gulf States too) have a valid claim in a setting of musical chairs the Gulf States against Iran and Iran against the United States and Israel. I tend to give the hand of adjustment to Israel, but is there an official declaration of war against Iran? Specifics matter in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and I get that, I am all for the law (even if it does not make sense at times) and the media is too some level at fault there as they have been omitting information at times because it didn’t ‘play well’ with its audience and as such there is a larger omission to deal with. If you doubt this, that is fair, bit tell me which international newspapers dealt with the setting that Defense One gave us in the setting that Joe Kent, the head of the National Counterterrorism Center. Who else had this in their intelligence summary? As some say, if you cannot say what you mean, you can never mean what you say and as it stands (as I see it), people like Tulsi Gabbard cannot hide behind episodes of expressive aphasia, so whilst we get to “The Trump administration has also discussed options to send ground forces to Iran’s Kharg Island, the hub for 90% of Iran’s oil exports, the three people familiar with the matter and three U.S. officials said. One of the officials said such an operation would be very risky. Iran has the ability to reach the island with missiles and drones.” We get to another setting in all this. Why send troops when it has been ‘bombed back into the stone age’? What is the need to put boots on the ground there? The Strait of Hormuz has more issues and troops there have seemingly no valid interest. It merely shows that the United States want to allegedly siphon off there what it can and that does not serve any purpose but their impeding invoices. But I might be wrong here.

The setting is that the media and through that parties don’t react the way they are supposed to, António Guterres is definitely one of them. When did he clearly speak out in favour of international law? Perhaps he did and the media merely ignored it. Too many questions and the fact that European leaders are ignoring Washington DC is perhaps the only clear setting we currently see. 

As I see it, the entire Iranian setting is about to be heralded the largest shit show the world has ever seen and I reckon the media will get their digital dollars out of that fine setting for a long time to come.

Have an optional great day, it’s almost Friyay. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

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

March 13, 2026 · 00:11

Keep this in mind

As I was looking at ‘the news’ a few things hit me. The first one was the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/11/the-shine-has-been-taken-off-dubai-faces-existential-threat-as-foreigners-flee-conflict) where we see ‘‘The shine has been taken off’: Dubai faces existential threat as foreigners flee conflict’ I have to disagree as I have seen some crypto boys run for their lives, but they don’t amount to anything. The internet (Youtube specifically) is flooding with people enjoying life in Abu Dhabi (Dubai too). So when I read “leaving beach bars, malls and hotels eerily empty” This gives me the mind on how it was a year ago? You see, Islamic nations are in the middle of Ramadan, as such these places are massively empty during the day and I reckon that malls have a similar standing. I wonder what the attempt was by writer Hannah Ellis-Petersen (who claims to be in Dubai). I am not saying that is a lie (or an exaggeration) I am merely asking how the public goes to the places during Ramadan. I guess that some families would avoid Dubai and Abu Dhabi during these settings but to see “They are among the tens of thousands of residents and tourists that have fled Dubai since the US and Israel launched joint strikes on Iran almost two weeks ago.” I get that tourists are not in the ‘appeasing’ setting towards the hostilities of Iran and I get that. As I personally have Abu Dhabi on my bucket list (preferably intact) I still hope to see this place before my corpus delicti kicks the bucket (not the one with the list). It happens some cards fall out of reach, but I still hope that I will see this place, preferably staying at the Warner Brothers hotel and seeing my youthful idol Joker (Batman too). Still, the setting we are given “The Fairmont hotel, located on Dubai’s famed artificial palm tree-shaped island, home to mega-mansions, lavish hotels and upmarket beach clubs, was also dramatically hit.” Yet I also learned a few days ago that it had a mere $550 damage, as such what is this “dramatically hit” the Guardian is talking about? So when we get “I don’t want to be in Dubai any more, there is no business, we are earning nothing since this war, and I don’t see the tourism coming back. A lot of taxi drivers like me, we are thinking to go to a different country now. Everybody knows that Dubai is finished.”” I have no idea what that pussy was that was talking about, but I don’t believe that Dubai is finished. Neither are Abu Dhabi and Sharjah. If my IP works Saudi Arabia and the UAE will have plenty of damage to do to Iran and they should, because they were attacked by Iran. 

As such the setting intensifies and the hollow word from President Trump need to be ignored. As such I was thinking about the mines in the Strait of Hormuz. A thought had come to my mind. You see, there is a setting we ignore, there are different ways of detecting mines. But have lasers been used? You see, there todays lasers are a lot faster and consider the setting:

Now consider that no one looked at mines for the longest of times (as far as I know) and here we see a laser scanning to the bottom of the sea, it will not do so in a mere line. It can use arcs going up and down, the idea is that this is done with GPS and more accurate maps (which already exists) and now that mine shows up ‘brightly’ considering the setting with DML, mapping solutions and powerful computers, I personally feel that this should be a setting of easy. Peasy, chicken easy (I could be wrong). I haven’t worked on disposing, but I reckon the Navies of the world already have a setting here and I feel bad at reinventing the wheel. So this is the setting I currently see. So what is taking the United States nay this long? They had enough time to consider that and as President Trump stated that they have already won, this setting should not exist. 

So then we get to The Hill (at https://thehill.com/business/5779706-iran-qatar-financial-institutions/) where we see ‘Banks evacuate, close offices in Qatar, Dubai after Iran threatens attacks’ which is weird as the war is already won (isn’t it?) So as we get “Several banks urged their employees to evacuate offices in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates on Wednesday as Iran threatens to launch strikes on financial institutions. HSBC has closed all its branches in Qatar until further notice, citing safety precautions in a text message sent to clients, Reuters reported.” We can conclude that the United States hasn’t won anything and now the setting changes, because (as others have stated already) it seems that the United States seemingly cannot protect anyone in the gulf states. As such my other ideas will likely gain speed soon enough. So we get back to the Hill article where we also see “Citigroup and Standard Chartered also told their staff in Dubai to work from home amid the regional conflict, according to a memo reviewed by Reuters. 

Goldman Sachs issued the same warning to employees based at their offices in the Dubai International Financial Centre, Bloomberg reported.” This I can agree with, if it is possible to work from home, that setting might be preferable to many. It kinda sucks if you need to get things done at a bank, but a lot can be done by ATM and the UAE have plenty of those around. And as the Guardian also gives us ‘Iran escalates attacks on infrastructure and transport networks across the Gulf’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/11/iran-escalates-attacks-on-infrastructure-and-transport-networks-across-the-gulf) where we see “Iran dramatically escalated its strategy of striking civilian infrastructure and transport networks across the Gulf on Wednesday, attacking commercial ships and targeting Dubai’s international airport as US and Israeli warplanes launched new waves of strikes on the Islamic Republic.” I believe that time has come for the UAE and Saudi Arabia take the fight to Iran, there are 10 major operating oil refineries, take these out and there won’t be any money rolling into Iran any day soon. No matter what others say, they brought the war to the Gulf States and as such there will be a reconning as I personally see it. At least 5 nations were unprovoked under attack. I say two refineries each to quench the feeling of vendetta. There is no after Ramadan, Iran is attacking now, return is required and to honor Ramadan, these nations have sunset to sunrise to make Iran consider the hollow acts they performed on them. Seems fair doesn’t it?

Are there more actions that could be done? Well, my IP takes care of their infrastructure and they could be released on other targets too, but I don’t want to callously attack civilians (I don’t want to be seen as an Iranian), I believe that hurting the infrastructure as I saw it will cause months of delays and it will cost millions to set right and as I took in account land, sea and air. I think I have done my good deed for both Saudi Arabia and the UAE. I am sorry to say that I am not doing that from Abu Dhabi, but we all have our hardships, mine is on Sydney. 

Only 5 hours ago, we get a quote from CBS ‘Trump vows to end war soon as Iran hits ships, threatens banks, and toll on U.S. forces emerges’, which is weird, because he told the PM of the United Kingdom that the war was already won, so something is amiss and I am playing the fool here with intent. You see, to make him show his real colors the Gulf stated merely have to take the 10 refineries out of the equation. I am a devious devil (Lucifer Morningstar told me that himself) and there are at least three little snippet hidden in this story. So whilst CBS gives us “The speed and extent of the damage have so concerned Iran and Lebanon that they sent a request to the United Nations’ cultural agency, UNESCO, this week to add more sites to its enhanced protection list.” I think that this is a bogus act and should be ignored. The setting here is simple as Iran attacks civilian targets in Saudi Arabia, UAE, Iraq, Qatar and a few other places. They should not be able to ask for any protection, they started this they can lose whatever is hit. But that might be the anger speaking in me. So when we consider the CBS story (at https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/iran-war-us-israel-strait-of-hormuz-ship-attacks-persian-gulf-drones-missiles/) A setting that could evolve, but as long as Iran keeps on attacking other nations that never allowed for the United States to launch any attacks against Iran, others can attack Iranian targets as much as they can, but that might merely be my view on the matter.

Have a great day you all.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Military, Politics, Science

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

February 16, 2026 · 21:33

Questions

That is what I was thrown, questions and quite a few. To get there I need to take you on a little journey it was around 1988 I got my fingers on some defence data (can’t tell you which one) the data shows results of some kind (I had no idea at that time what results they were) but the part that was, was the fact that they had log files and these files gave locations. It comes with the setting of log files. These files gives the hacker way too much information, what solutions are being used, what IT architecture was in play, in those days I was a simpleton. I never realised the power that this kind of information had, or as some hackers said in this setting “Copy me, I want to travel” This part matters, because around 2014 (after the traitor Manning gave the files to Wikileaks) I got my hands on some of them. The compression used was one I had never used before and it took a few days to get the program. What I saw was that log files were here too. It wasn’t that obvious, but I noticed them and these log files gave part of that current architecture to whatever hacker got (or was given) access to it. So a setting that was about 37 years old. This setting has been in place for that long a time, so as you see this, we can start with the articles, so keep what I just gave you in mind.

The article was given to us by NDTV (at https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/openai-accuses-deepseek-of-distillation-what-it-is-how-it-works-us-china-tensions-11002628) I got the news from Reuters, but they are behind a paywall, so NDTV gets the honour. We see ‘OpenAI Accuses DeepSeek Of Distillation: What It Is, How It Works’ and hit comes with “In the AI world, distillation is a common technique where a smaller or newer AI model learns by studying the responses of a larger, more advanced model” And we also see “The company told the House Select Committee on China that DeepSeek allegedly relied on a technique known as “distillation” to extract responses from advanced US AI systems and use them to train its own chatbot, R1,” according to a memo obtained by Reuters. The American AI giant stated that the Chinese firm was finding clever ways to bypass safety systems and trying to take advantage of the technology that US companies spent billions of dollars developing.” Now consider that (according to some) “OpenAI is valued at approximately $500 billion, cementing its position as the world’s most valuable venture-backed company” when you get that and when you realise that log files could be used to ‘distill’ information. Now imagine that this information could lead to corporate knowledge? So when you realise that this setting was out there for almost 40 years, do you think that more concise solutions would have been needed? So when we see that Sam Altman is prone to ‘excuses’ like the setting with Nvidia, the stage with Microsoft and now this? What is Sam Altman not telling its audience? Isn’t anyone taking that leap? So whilst I remember that at least one of the Pentagon routers still have the admin password to “Cisco123” you might consider the setting that this article (as well as the Reuters) version is a preamble to bad news and when you consider that Americans have an overactive dislike of anything Chinese (like DeepSeek)  and when we get to “In the AI world, distillation is a common technique where a smaller or newer AI model learns by studying the responses of a larger, more advanced model. Instead of training that model completely from scratch, the newer model observes and mimics the advanced model’s answers and behaviors.” The setting I gave you makes the setting of better protection even more sense. Especially as this impacts a expected $500,000,000,000 valuation. There are days that I don’t have that amount in my wallet (100% of the time) so I am left with questions. So in the first, why was there no better protection and in the second, how did DeepSeek get access to them. I would normally tend towards the inside job notion. And that setting is seen (personally and speculatively)  on a few levels and in a few ways, but happy go lucky, the media isn’t on that level yet (or ever). So does anyone else have the idea that something doesn’t seem to add up or match to the stage of a 500 billion dollar solution? Just a few questions come to mind at this point. 

Have a great day today, there about to have breakfast in Toronto and I kinda miss than frisky cold atmosphere whist drinking an elephant coffee (Jumbo cappuccino with full cream milk and three raw sugars) whilst nibbling on some sandwich (nearly anything goes there). So enjoy your day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Politics, Science

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

February 3, 2026 · 10:07

Excuse towards failure

It is an old expression and I didn’t expect to hear this again, but there you have it. To give reference. In the 90’s sales teams were all about the ‘pipeline’ and making ‘quota’ but at times the bosses of these sales teams didn’t have the right glasses on and they would overcompensate in many ways making life close to impossible for the sales teams. Now we get CEO’s and other ‘things’ needing to do the same thing towards shareholders and that is where the story starts. Reuters gives us ‘OpenAI is unsatisfied with some Nvidia chips and looking for alternatives, sources say’ and we see (at https://www.reuters.com/business/openai-is-unsatisfied-with-some-nvidia-chips-looking-alternatives-sources-say-2026-02-02/) that the setting is pretty much what I expect. As we are given “OpenAI is unsatisfied with some of Nvidia’s latest artificial intelligence chips, and it has sought alternatives since last year, eight sources familiar with the matter said, potentially complicating the relationship between the two highest-profile players in the AI boom.” As I see it, Sam Altman and his OpenAI aren’t making things happen and to thwart things as much the blame game comes into play. He has no other option, he is the top of the mountain and that means that he is subject to shareholders and the story “the chips aren’t cutting it” is as good as it gets for him. I reckon that the “sought alternatives since last year” excuse is about gaining time. But take a look at what Nvidia achieved. 

So, where are the shortcomings? Are the expectations of Same Altman realistic? And who are the 8 sources that Reuters is referring to? So when September came, some were given “Nvidia said it intended to pour as much as $100 billion into OpenAI as part of a deal that gave the chipmaker a stake in the startup and gave OpenAI the cash it needed to buy the advanced chips.

The deal had been expected to close within weeks, Reuters reported. Instead, negotiations have dragged on for months. During that time, OpenAI has struck deals with AMD and others for GPUs built to rival Nvidia’s. But its shifting product road map also has changed the kind of computational resources it requires and bogged down talks with Nvidia, a person familiar with the matter said.” This now gives pause to consider if it is merely the hardware, or the slice that OpenAI gets from it all and why go for the inferior AMD chip? Because if OpenAI claims that it is superior or even equal to Nvidia, the press better get that lowdown, because as far as I can tell there is no western equals to Nvidia (optionally the Huawei chip, but that is an assumption by me, myself and I). 

So when we get “On Saturday, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang brushed off a report of tension with OpenAI, saying the idea was “nonsense” and that Nvidia planned a huge investment in OpenAI.

“Customers continue to choose NVIDIA for inference because we deliver the best performance and total cost of ownership at scale,” Nvidia said in a statement. A spokesperson for OpenAI in a separate statement said the company relies on Nvidia to power the vast majority of its inference fleet and that Nvidia delivers the best performance per dollar for inference” the simple setting is even that OpenAI Marketing is not one of those 8 sources. As such, if we cannot get clear information, could someone please alert these shareholders that OpenAI is making an optional training run with their money? 

As I personally see it, Sam Altman is coming up short for meeting expectations, especially as he is  trying to catch up with Google’s Gemini. I reckon that this will give him nightmares too. But overall the setting is one I expected to come, because in the end AI doesn’t yet exist and now that 100% of that hardware vendors are intentionally wrongfully label their chips AI (they’ll call it ‘Alternative  Intelligence’ at some point) and that is when the class cases will plaster every courthouse from Alberta to Zurich and I reckon it will not take that much longer, especially when the excuse that the chips aren’t good enough are coming out. I might have believed them if it was the Adler chip (a 80186 joke), but it is Nvidia, the hardware darling of the IT world.

As such my skepticism overtakes my feeling of fairness and openminded justice (that being said, justice is almost never openminded) but do not take my word on this, ask the OpenAI program with all that AI in play. 

So time for some ZZZZZZ’s, you all have a great day. I am ready to snore mine away.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

January 2, 2026 · 19:38

Cracking on the down

That is at times the setting, but it is not always clear. As I personally see it, it has nearly always been clear as glass, but the ‘powered that could be’ doesn’t want to hand over any of the greed it can get, and as a result people get scammed. So I have a few issues with the Reuters article (at https://www.reuters.com/investigations/meta-created-playbook-fend-off-pressure-crack-down-scammers-documents-show-2025-12-31/) and as we read its headline ‘Meta created ‘playbook’ to fend off pressure to crack down on scammers, documents show’ we might think that this giant (aka Meta) is the cause of it all, but that isn’t exactly true. To see this we need to look back the last half century, slightly before Meta (then known as Facebook) was born. So as we are given “As regulators press Meta to crack down on rogue advertisers on Facebook and Instagram, the social media giant has drafted a “playbook” to stall them. Internal documents seen by Reuters reveal its tactics, including efforts to make scam ads “not findable” when authorities search for them.” We are shown a half truth that I see as a near blatant lie. You see, in 1961 a man named Luther Simjian came up with the father and mother of the ATM. An experimental Bankograph (as they named it then) was installed in New York City in 1961 by the City Bank of New York, but removed after six months due to the lack of customer acceptance. But on 27 June 1967 it was reintroduced by the actor Reg Varney as a push to control people pressure at Barclay in London. Think of this as the starting point. As security was upgraded, most security was still set to older concepts, they were not bad, but it all comes from this point. And as the law was set to this setting, it fell behind fast. As such things like Two-Factor Authentication are still concepts to be implemented in banking and auto banking and beyond. So as Meta and others are trying to make the sale of advertising ‘easier’ scammers are really happy to bank in on such opportunity. 

Consider three points, the advertiser, its payment and its location are three separate issues, whilst the initial setting is almost never confirmed as these players are set to ease of business and commerce instead of security of business and commerce.

And we see this in the article as “Meta, owner of the two social media platforms, feared Japan would soon force it to verify the identity of all its advertisers, internal documents reviewed by Reuters show. The step would likely reduce fraud but also cost the company revenue.” This is true, but the setting goes far beyond Meta and that is as far as I can tell not set either. So as Reuters gives us “Meta launched an enforcement blitz to reduce the volume of offending ads. But it also sought to make problematic ads less “discoverable” for Japanese regulators, the documents show.” Which bus likely true, but it is a larger field. If the EU, the Commonwealth and America keep shoulder to shoulder to “verify the identity of all its advertisers” we could actually get somewhere, but then the conversation goes into the direction of complication and such, the greed driven are ready to hand victory to the scammers. And as we are given “The documents are part of an internal cache of materials from the past four years in which Meta employees assessed the fast-growing level of fraudulent advertising across its platforms worldwide. Drawn from multiple sources and authored by employees in departments including finance, legal, public policy and safety, the documents also reveal ways that Meta, to protect billions of dollars in ad revenue, has resisted efforts by governments to crack down.” The setting that Japan is trying to overcome, the establishment of identity of advertisers become frightfully clear. And that costs Meta revenue, but it goes far beyond Meta, Amazon is likely to have similar settings and they accept that as the cost of doing business, but the people caught in-between are  settled with the bill of BigTech doing business. So as Sandeep Abraham, a former fraud investigator at Meta gives us “Instead of telling me an accurate story about ads on Meta’s platforms, it now just tells me a story about Meta trying to give itself a good grade for regulators.” We are being told the picture that regulators are part of the problem. In stead of the cold hard question “How is the identity of the advertiser established” the people are told a different picture. It would be regarded as Artsy, but not the truth. So whilst the world is ready to accept “The tactic successfully removed some fraudulent advertising of the sort that regulators would want to weed out. But it also served to make the search results that Meta believed regulators were viewing appear cleaner than they otherwise would have. The scrubbing, Meta teams explained in documents regarding their efforts to reduce scam discoverability, sought to make problematic content “not findable” for “regulators, investigators and journalists.”” The larger question on what happens when these fraudulent go getters get access to more finely trained DML/LLM solutions, to capture the wallets of millions more? That question remains in the background and soon it will be too late, because soon places like America will try nearly anything to keep their shareholders happy and that comes with additional cost of doing business. And that setting is given with “The playbook, as it’s referred to in some of the documents, lays out Meta’s strategy to stall regulators and put off advertiser verification unless new laws leave them no choice.” And again, the lawmakers are shunning their duty, not merely in America, but in Europe and partially the Commonwealth as well. And that is, as I see it, the gist of the setting and whilst we might want to blame Meta, the direct setting is that places like Apple, Google, Microsoft are at least equally guilty. So, as I see it, Microsoft could have done something years ago, but they were chasing Google, instead of becoming real innovators. They might have trailed, but at this point they could have taken a lead and as I see it, they did not.

So as we see Meta, no one is asking where Amazon and Apple were at that time. So how many scammy advertisements did they make way for? I don’t know the number and it will be less than Meta, but is it small enough? I fear not (a speculation on my side).

Oh, and before you think this was all new stuff, consider that I raised this issue in ‘Enabling Crime’ and article I wrote in 2017 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2017/12/02/enabling-crime/) so this has been over 8 years in rotation, 8 years that BigTech and lawmakers did close to nothing and I was taught an issue like “Two-Factor Authentication” in University (aka UTS) in 2012. So it is over a decade where legal Impotency is shown. It was in the trend of non-repudiation where you and you alone could have set this in motion. The law seems uneasier to bind itself and tech doesn’t want to be bound by this. So as I showed close to 13 years of inability to do something about that setting we are given a slightly different setting, not an incorrect one, but one that is slightly larger than anticipated. 

So I wish you all a good day and a lovely time enjoying coffee (I just had mine). Those lazy bastards in Vancouver are likely snoring the night away, it’s half past midnight this morning there.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Science

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

November 7, 2025 · 01:52

Blame who?

You see, we all like to blame the first party we see and the richer that person is, the more guilty he can be painted. That was the setting I saw in the Reuters story (at https://www.reuters.com/investigations/meta-is-earning-fortune-deluge-fraudulent-ads-documents-show-2025-11-06/) where we are given ‘Meta is earning a fortune on a deluge of fraudulent ads, documents show’ and the underlying text “Meta projected 10% of its 2024 revenue would come from ads for scams and banned goods, documents seen by Reuters show. And the social media giant internally estimates that its platforms show users 15 billion scam ads a day. Among its responses to suspected rogue marketers: charging them a premium for ads – and issuing reports on ’Scammiest Scammers.’” Seems to lay the blame squarely in the lap of Sir Mark Anthony Zacharias of the Zacharians from the city of Rome (I need to introduce drama here) but is that correct? I am not claiming he is innocent, but is it completely there? Or is there another side to this. You see, Meta, Facebook and legions others are in that same setting. What brings out the stage of Meta is the numbers of ‘willing to be fooled fish’ in that batter. And when we are given “A cache of previously unreported documents reviewed by Reuters also shows that the social-media giant for at least three years failed to identify and stop an avalanche of ads that exposed Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp’s billions of users to fraudulent e-commerce and investment schemes, illegal online casinos, and the sale of banned medical products.” We see the blame and the blame at the top of the hill is a youthful young sprout (41) called Mark Zuckerberg with his $251,000 million in his wallet (I am willing to wager that this amount does not fit in his wallet) and there is a reason for my approach here. You see, everyone is so happy that there is a setting for advertisements and that ball is thrown all over the place and as I personally see it, I reckon that LinkedIn is in a similar place and there another setting exists. The scammers place an job ad in LinkedIn and from there they get their pool of optional gophers to dig into. In the last week I have had over half a dozen scam attempts and I believe the source to be LinkedIn. As such I have a different setting. I reckon it becomes a massive essential development to tackle the Advertisement settings of these settings. Better protection is required and larger systems are required to vet the advertisers. I know that all kinds of people will object for whatever reason, but that means that you do not get to whine if you are scammed. And what about the FTC? The FTC has primary responsibility for determining whether specific advertising is false or misleading, and for taking action against the sponsors of such material. You can report consumer fraud to the FTC. So what did they have to say? And that becomes interesting as the Article by Jeff Horwitz does not mention the FTC, not even once. So what did they have to say? Or was the win here to paint the guy with the big wallet? So how does that play out with LinkedIn, what about TikTok (I am not on TikTok, so I am clueless here), I also dropped Facebook over a year ago. 

But the setting is clear, the Reuters story is massively not-finished. And there is a bigger setting. We went with the old settings and applied them to social media, but there are different rules that need to be applied and a simple portal or over the phone advertisement sale will not be sufficient for the safety of the consumers getting scammed. So, basically I am merely on LinkedIn and as such (with the scammers to try me) there is every chance that they have a similar problem and in that setting there are several job sites that need thorough sanitation (my personal view) because they are in the setting that every advertiser is revenue in the bank and that is not always the case. 

So the short and sweet of it is that there is little doubt that Mark Zuckerberg holds some of the blame, some, not all. Because as I see it, the FTC has a much bigger problem. And where is the Federal Trade Commission in all of this? And when we see “A cache of previously unreported documents reviewed by Reuters also shows that the social-media giant for at least three years failed to identify and stop an avalanche of ads that exposed Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp’s billions of users to fraudulent e-commerce and investment schemes, illegal online casinos, and the sale of banned medical products.” As such the FTC remained dumb dumb for over three years? And Reuters never fave that any thought? Neither did many other players and the FTC never went to the media saying that the advertisements require a larger overhaul giving them a new setting of hunting down scammers. And as most of them are abroad, other settings need to be considered, but Reuters missed that part too.

Have a great day and if you get an email from a prince in Nigeria telling you that you inherited a million dollars, there is a chance that this is not on the up and up.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Politics

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

October 14, 2025 · 21:08

It was a phrase

Yes, we have that. We see a line and something is not quite right. That is not on the reporter or the reader, sometimes a certain setting merely rubs you the wrong way. That was what I felt when I saw saw Zawya (at https://www.zawya.com/en/business/investment/davidson-kempner-latest-hedge-fund-to-be-lured-by-abu-dhabi-kweef386) giving us ‘Davidson Kempner latest hedge fund to be lured by Abu Dhabi’, personally I see ‘lured’ with a negative connotation. And yes it is personal, with the decade of military training I see ‘lure’ and I think ‘oh oh’, nothing intelligent about it, it is merely instinct. But the setting is “Davidson Kempner has more than $37 billion in assets under management.” Well, if you say it fast, it doesn’t seem like much, but the setting is that these around 60 partners control the setting of 37,000 million dollars and as they pour some of that into Abu Dhabi, the UAE gets a massive jolt of productive energy. And whilst America is roughly down and out, these people (mostly from New York) are basically hiding behind ‘the grass is always greener on the other fellow grave” and there is every chance that they will move portfolios for their customers who have (sorry to say it) greed on the brain. And let’s face it, the UAE is happening, it is a delicious plate of revenue and returns served with a nice decanter of Cognac. As I said it before, Abu Dhabi is the new El Dorado and whilst I showed that the simplicity of a lost and found application could resolve a number of issues in both Dubai and Abu Dhabi, that setting is merely showing us that the UAE is embracing (when the embrace is good) to the implementation of AI in the UAE. Yet whilst that is being said, Reuters gives us ‘First 200 MW from UAE’s Stargate AI campus to come online next year’ with the China escape clause close at hand. And as we are told “During a Gulf visit by U.S. President Donald Trump in May, the UAE signed a multibillion-dollar deal to build one of the world’s largest data centre hubs in Abu Dhabi with U.S. technology. G42 said at the time that the project would be powered by nuclear and solar power, as well as natural gas.” As well as “the first phase, known as Stargate UAE, set to go online in 2026” and “the deal to build the campus has not been finalised amid security concerns due to the UAE’s close ties to China, Reuters has previously reported, citing sources” this is a little weird for more than one reason as the earliest of the Barakah (1 through 4) reactors will come online in 2030 earliest. So what will they do in the other 4 years? Solar and Gas? IO am not sure if that will hold especially as the current plants are feeding the needs of the UAE citizens and I personally have no idea how much surplus there is. I find it amazing that Reuters didn’t dig into that part of the equation. As I see it, the Huawei solution is ‘boasting’ “This AI processor delivers 256 TFLOPS@FP16 and 512 TOPS@INT8 of compute performance with just 350 W of max power consumption. The massive boost in power efficiency is thanks to Huawei’s own Da Vinci architecture” Some shout that the Nvidia solution is more powerful, but at what energy settings? And the press isn’t giving us the numbers, so I have to ask. And this reflects back at the setting of Davidson Kempner. You see, it will go where the markets are and that is their ‘duty’ to the people holding the funds. And as I see it America with their anti-China setting and Europe with their similar feelings are not the places to be. It is a mere phrase set to ‘lure’ but the other setting is ‘good business is where you find it’ and that setting gives Davidson Kempner the upper hand and Abu Dhabi is happy to see them (as far as I know). So give a happy clap to these 60 parts era who are protecting the (greed driven) needs of their customers. 

So as we are given “the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA) issued a total of 52 In-Principle Approvals (IPAs) for financial services firms, up 27% year-on-year. Global names such as Kimmeridge and Fortress announced their expansion to Abu Dhabi earlier this year” gives the UAE (and Abu Dhabi in particular) the space to breath and they will let the dice roll on the markets and on the return on investment shares because as I see it, those who invested in that place (Yas Island is a good indication) are getting a lot more than a mere simple percentage growth. You just have to look at places like Saadiyat Island to see that this will be the dream of billionaires for the foreseeable future. Not bad for a place that hardly existed on the mind of people a decade ago, now pretty much everyone knows that is it the capital and that it is regarded to be the El Dorado of the future.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Science

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

September 23, 2025 · 11:30

The time has come

I have been sitting on a story for about three days. I have been hesitant as it is a field I am thoroughly unaware off, but it could hit me in the future and as we are given (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-09-19/first-guardian-shield-collapse-asic-and-superannuation-flaws/105783328) the setting of ‘First Guardian, Shield superannuation disasters expose deep flaws in Australia’s $4.3 trillion retirement system’ we see that ABC is giving us not only cause for pause, but also cause for alarm we are set in a stage of almost desperate inability to protect our retirements. And lets be clear if Australia is set to a $4.3 trillion danger, what is the dangers towards America, Canada, the United Kingdom, France and Germany? 

I tried to illustrate dangers like this in ‘Wages of fear’ which I wrote in May 2023, two years ago (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/05/02/wages-of-fear/) and there I wrote “Lets be clear, this was NOT his fault, but the point where we cannot avoid what comes next was achieved. If only people had woken up a lot sooner. But there we got past a point where the problems would accelerate and now we are almost at that point. And the banks will be no help. I tried to warn you a few times over. Some of their risk and liquidity is in US bonds and when the US forfeits payment your 401K and many other things will become worth close to nothing” Now the fair question is, is this the same? I don’t think it is, but there is a larger failing into the retirement systems as it is not a hands on pathway. ABC in another story hands us “Ms Wohlers is one of about 12,000 Australians haunted by the loss of more than $1 billion of retirement savings after the collapses of First Guardian and Shield.” As well as “ASIC deputy chair Sarah Court, who has commonly described the First Guardian and Shield cases as “industrial-scale misconduct”, says the regulator acted as soon as it could. “We don’t think we missed red flags,” she told ABC News ahead of ASIC’s appearance at a parliamentary hearing on Thursday, when she was grilled by politicians about whether it was a tough cop on the beat properly identifying financial misconduct.” And it relates to the story we are given with ‘140 targeted by ASIC on Shield, First Guardian’ as I see it, a mess of a disastrous kind. Where the latter gives us “So, for example, the financial advisers are saying to us ‘you can’t hold us accountable for this because the ratings house had rated the Shield Master Fund as of investment grade’, while superannuation fund trustees are telling us the same – ‘well, we relied on the ratings houses’, or ‘we relied on the fact that these members had financial advice’,” (Source: Financial Newswire) I see it as a setting where there is a ring setting with no beginning and no end. I am in a setting where Microsoft could steal my IP and my only defense would be to convict 280,000 Microsoft employees to death and kill them myself. I get that this is utter madness, but that would be the result of one party just playing a game with other whilst that party knows that they cannot be held to account. I remember the rating houses in 2008 and they got away whilst millions lost it all. I see the simpler setting “You take from me, I take from you” and the setting that Microsoft losing over 45% of its staff (I am utterly destined to fail) making it implode on itself. Now take that to the setting of rating houses and the the truth comes out (if it ever does) the people need to react and react harshly. It is not ‘business as usual’ it will become business at the cost of souls and that is a harsh reality to face.

So whilst some will lawyer up and that is their right, they should not be allowed to walk away with even a dime. I reckon that they will sue the rating houses and those rating houses will need to get sanitized (to some extent) because losing billions is a larger setting and when Australia with their billions in losses (up to 4,300 billion) the setting for America and Canada is a lot more severe. And America up to ten times as much as Canada faces. And about a month ago we were given ‘ASIC takes further action against Ferras Merhi over First Guardian and Shield superannuation advice’ where we are given “ASIC has sought leave from the Federal Court to expand its existing proceeding against former financial adviser Ferras Merhi to allege he engaged in unconscionable conduct, failed to act in the best interests of clients, gave conflicted advice, and provided defective statements of advice whilst receiving millions of dollars.” Yet my question becomes did Ferras Merhi do anything illegal? You see, in my setting I would be, but did he do anything illegal? The setting revolves around “provided defective statements of advice whilst receiving millions of dollars”, so what makes a statement ‘defective’? You see, I am not protecting Ferras Mehri. I am looking at the following:

s12CB of the ASIC Act – engaging in conduct in connection with the supply or possible supply of financial services, which was in all the circumstances unconscionable.

So, what makes the setting of “all the circumstances unconscionable” an economist looks at this in one way and I as a law graduate and IT technician in another way. 

Then we get:
s952E of the Corporations Act – providing defective disclosure documents. As such, what makes the documents “defective disclosure documents”, I do not know and I look at them separately as that is what the law does and when merely one law falters, it all collapses (it matters later on).

Then we get:
s961B of the Corporations Act – failure to act in their client’s best interests, and what is that at the start? Most clients are ‘greed’ driven, they want the highest return and that is ‘their’ best interest. It is a hard lesson to learn that looking back the client gave the wrong advice to the advisor. I myself only work a balanced portfolio, I will never make large leaps but then again I am unlikely to lose a lot either. 

So in that setting we see:
the Court made interim freezing orders over Mr Merhi’s property. These orders remain in place until 12 December 2025 (25-024MR).
ASIC cancelled the AFSL of FSGA, effective 7 June 2025 and permanently banned its responsible manager (25-102MR).
In July 2025, the Court made travel restraint orders against Mr Merhi. Those orders prevent him from leaving or attempting to leave Australia until 12 December 2025, or until further order of the Court (25-024MR).

That is fair enough I reckon. But now we get to the settings that ABC at the top gave. We see there “In all of these cases, no criminal charges have been laid, but ASIC is heading to court to make allegations against the people at the centre of the Shield and First Guardian funds — those involved in managing and promoting the schemes.” The no criminal charges gives pause to consider that no criminal acts have transpired and when we look at some of the allegations the two that take the cake (a Tiramisu cake) is that the settings of “defective disclosure documents” must be proven and the lawyers will fight that. Then we get “all the circumstances unconscionable” and that is the ballgame, ‘unconscionable’ is not per se illegal and it is about the legality of the matter in court and that is the setting we see. So when I made a statement two years ago saying “Some of their risk and liquidity is in US bonds and when the US forfeits payment your 401K and many other things will become worth close to nothing” we see what bonds were worth 5 years ago. There we see “For the year, long-term U.S. Treasuries were by far the best-performing fixed-income investments, with a nearly 17% gain,” (source: Reuters) at present they are “the 10-year yield settled around 4.36%” that represents a loss of 13%, so who pays for that bond? This was a danger I saw 5 years ago (as uneconomical as I am) and 10 years ago I heard people to buy bonds as the interest is like free money and I stopped. There is no free ride and this is almost pushed into the AI field all whilst there is no verification in place. All settings that are interconnected and we now see the ABC giving us “expose deep flaws in Australia’s $4.3 trillion retirement system” so, what do you think you will end up with because as I see it, there is the chance that these people can do what they like all whilst there is no criminal accountability. Yes, he is stopped for now, but Ferras Merhi is about to walk away with more than $19 million in payments. As such he is willing to sweat it out for a few months. It is a lot more (like 79.2581 times more) than I ever made in my lifetime. 

So I see this case that ABC alerted me to with some suspicion. These people live by the setting of walking the edge of legality, there is no risk at that edge and I expect that Ferras Merhi is doing just that not doing anything illegal. As such 12,000 Australians are about to learn that they could lose it all without any illegal actions transpiring and I fault it to two settings (mentioned above) and we all considering setting the clocks to Islam where we see “Islamic banking prohibits the use of interest, speculation, and excessive risk. It emphasizes profit and loss sharing, fairness, honesty, and transparency in financial dealings.” By the way this setting was in place for hundreds of years. 

Have a great day and see that Statista gives us “Robusta, named because it can grow at a wider range of altitudes and temperatures, sold for 1.87 U.S. dollars in 2018, projected to sell at 5 U.S. dollars per kilogram in 2026” did you predict in 2018 that you would be setting your retirement to pay 267% for your coffee?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

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