Tag Archives: United Nations

April 3, 2026 · 17:19

The change I am predicting

That is the setting, but it is merely a speculation. It might be called presumption if I knew all the players, but I do not. We see ourselves in the west versus the Middle East (the crusader setting) and the West versus the Iron Curtain (cold war) or the West versus Asia (Perpetual Foreigner setting), but those are yesterday’s settings. We need a new setting. It is more and more imperative that the Commonwealth seeks a closer working relationship with the Middle East, particular Saudi Arabia and the UAE. It isn’t merely because the money and oil are there. The setting that the United States of America is about to become our most enemy is coming too close for comfort and we need to stay with our Canadian brethren (sisters too), we can watch from a distance, but soon it will be too late and politicians better realise that ‘It was too complex’ or ‘we never banked on that’ will not be an excuse to get away from it all. It starts with the (as I personally see it) the illegal war on Iran. Now don’t get me wrong, Iran is evil and they needed to be dealt with. But a war has an actual declaration and we see too much media giving us the bytes by America giving us that there was not a war in play (really?) We know that the united States are based on laws, which they basically threw away when it suited their needs.

The U.S. Constitution is very clear that only Congress, not the president, has the power to declare war. But President Trump did not even consult with Congress before attacking Iran, let alone receive a congressional declaration of or even authorization for war.

This is the first setting, so as there is no war, it is merely an exercise in bombing civilians and the upcoming looting of oil.

International law is equally clear. The Nuremberg trials following World War II determined that the “supreme international crime” was that of aggression. The International Military Tribunal ruled in 1946 that initiating a war of aggression differed from other war crimes because “it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” War crimes, crimes against humanity, and all the related international crimes, therefore, are understood to stem from that fundamental crime of going to war illegally. The United States went to war illegally. They are waging a war of aggression against Iran. The UN Charter declares that no country may attack another country, and that “all Members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered.” It also prohibits UN member states from using “the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations.”

So we are there at the moment. I also took Israel out f the equation, Iran has been attacking Israel for decades and they now have the United States backing them. The UN is useless, they sided with all opposing Israel for so long, it is not to be considered a factor here. The United States did sign a charter voiding what they did on June 26, 1945, in San Francisco, California. It was signed by representatives of 50 nations at the conclusion of the United Nations Conference on International Organization, with the US Senate subsequently ratifying the treaty on July 28, 1945.

As such we see the clear markings of an illegal war. And the media has this clearly in their history banks, so whatever they do it now seen as invalid, let them chase their digital dollars, but as I see it, the media is now tax liable, and in many places it is 20% or more. Did they consider this?

As such we (the Commonwealth) needs to find a much better alliance. Whilst some might turn to Asia (China), I am mindful that a union with the Middle East is a much better fit. Unions with the UAE and Saudi Arabia might fit the Commonwealth charter better, I am against embracing Sharia law, but it is a low in the UAE and Saudi Arabia, so we need to be mindful that this is a setting we have to embrace the we are there and schools need to prepare for this shift, because this shift has never happened before. Even as we have 11th century hang ups on this, we need to move forward and moving forward with the United States is a one step movement into a debt driven setting. (USA is now 39 trillion in debt) and they are unlikely to be able to pay the interest in 2027. As such we are massively out of time and as Saudi Arabia and the UAE are setting up their tourism settings and the Commonwealth could be bringing a larger part of its 2.5 billion people to these regions (and taking them away from the USA)

So, yes, this is speculation, but ask yourself, did you ever consider that the United States would become the instigator of an illegal war? Don’t get me wrong, Iran had to be taken down a few pegs, but we all agree that we are a nation of laws and there are ways to proceed, the fact that someone is waging water to get its hands on oil (whilst they claim they have enough) might be a step too far for several people and the Commonwealth is almost a third of the global population. So how desperate will the United States become when they realise they played the wrong song in a dancehall that is still set to the conservative settings it sees?

It is about time to select where we go to, I for one am a Commonwealthian and I go where more intelligent people (like PM Mark Carney, aka Marky Mark of the British Bank) tells us to go. I see his intellectual mastery of economics and as we see it, America is losing battle after battle against Canada, because whatever they have is not to confused with actual intelligence.

And I foresee that the Commonwealth needs to take a side and in thesis settings for them there is the Middle East or there is China and I feel (a personal feeling) that China might not be the best solution for the Commonwealth. Don’t get me wrong they do a lot right, but whilst the EU is overturning the settings that the United States gave us concerning Huawei, TikTok and a few other vendors, there is a stage where some options need to be examined and whilst the USA is making acquisitions, it is them not others who are interfering with national interests and for the most we let them. Time to set a new stage, one that excludes the United States, I see that several changes are being made like FourEyes (Australia, Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom) in a new shape of intelligence for these nations and as sick say the United States is no longer being considered as a valued source. But in business other settings will be required and here my vote goes towards the Middle East, because we are most likely more alike than unalike. I reckon that the Vatican might oppose that side, but they squandered their options as I see it.

Is my speculation valid?

That remains to be seen. I think it is, but I am the one postulating that setting and before you go all high and mighty, consider this:

Were the attacks on Venezuela and Iran legal?
What solutions does the United States administration have to dilute $39 trillion.
And what losses will the United States see over the next 15 months?

Now consider that the more then one trillion interest that is due in 2026 and 2027 needs to be paid for?

So this is interest, not even a lessening of the debt. And was I see it, it is only getting harder in 2028 and now we add the cherry. As the United States is abstaining from NATO, how many bases and people will be made to move back to the USA? My ‘limited’ calculations give me the setting that these troops are around 65,000. Now they end up seeking jobs in the United States, and there is not enough place all over the USA to place them all, and this also implies a reduced return of investments in Europe. The US has to deal with over 100K dismissed staff from 2025 onwards and all to that thousands being replaced in the military. That is a decrease in revenue that might be too complex to calculate, but there will be an impact. So as others are reevaluating their stance towards the United States (Japan for one) what more losses in an age where a nation is almost unable to pay for its interest bill. So what happens when the United States defaults on a $39 trillion debt? I saw this a decade ago when out was merely $25 trillion. The picture wasn’t nice then, it is utterly ugly now. As I see it, the Commonwealth needs new alliances and it needs them fast. My vote goes towards the Middle East, but I reckon that many votes toward China are coming too. Whatever we do, we better do it fast. So, have a great day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as Australia, Canada, China, FourEyes, Iran, Israel, Mark Carney, Middle East, NATO, New Zealand, Nuremberg, politics, San Francisco, Saudi Arabia, UAE, UN, United Kingdom, United Nations, United States, USA, war

March 17, 2026 · 18:32

Where is the trust?

That is most of the time the setting, so as ABC gives us (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-03-17/middle-east-live-updates-march-17-2026/106462358) “A tanker has been struck by an unknown projectile while anchored near the Strait of Hormuz. Earlier, US President Donald Trump turned his ire on European allies who he claimed “weren’t that enthusiastic” about helping the US secure the passage. The threat of Iranian missiles and drones targeting oil tankers in the strait has effectively closed the shipping channel, amid the country’s conflict with the US and Israel.” With the added ‘Rockets and drones fired at US Embassy in Baghdad’ an hour ago. Consider that President Trump gave us (on march 8th, Politico) ‘Trump says Starmer seeking to join Iran war ‘after we’ve already won’’ so, that was 9 days ago? What changed? Then yesterday, the Guardian gives us (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2026/mar/16/iran-war-live-updates-news-oil-trump-hormuz-dubai-airport-israel-targets) “As Donald Trump expresses frustration with countries declining to send warships to reopen the strait of Hormuz, the response remains muted among those he directly called upon.” And this happened a mere 4 hours ago. Where are the vessels of the United States? Where are their minesweepers? Simple questions and it defies knowledge why this is not front and centre everywhere. So when the Sydney Morning Herald adds spice to the setting (at https://www.smh.com.au/world/north-america/with-10-damning-words-pete-hegseth-says-the-quiet-part-out-loud-20260314-p5oafr.html) with ‘With 10 damning words, Pete Hegseth says the quiet part out loud’ where we see “US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth believes the media has not been sufficiently effusive about the success of the American military operation against Iran.

He had just finished speaking about the massive damage inflicted upon the regime in Tehran – its leadership, its missile stocks, its navy, its weapons infrastructure – when he turned his attention to the Pentagon press pack.” Now, I am willing to accept that I have not been part of any defence department for 43 years. I can assure you that a certain clarity is required in communication (from the defence side) and whilst I feel ready to blame the press on several matters, they are massively without blame here. The March 8th setting was the first damning setting. Then as I yesterday lighted on the ‘Just for fun’ setting that President Trump gave us and whilst the tactical setting that Kharg Island provides a sea port for the export of up to 90% of Iran’s oil products, as well as supplying storage for up to 30 million barrels. Bombing the hell out of it might have been essential, but it is a mere export point. There are 10 refineries doing the bidding of capturing oil and whilst I was able to device methods of stopping those settings, the clear message is to bomb those 10 locations to really put pressure on Iran. So when were they done? No, As I personally see it, President Trump what’s that oil this is the clear setting that is tactically seen and now that 2,500-5,000 boots are getting on the ground, that setting becomes the pressure point that Iran can put on the United States. So whilst I created IP to close harbours and disable trains, stopping the bulk of oil transits, it was merely one stage that Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the UAE could do to take pressure away from themselves and as such I gave Saudi Arabia and the UAE that IP. I did my thing to stop the war to go towards the gulf states.

So what are we now left with?

Well, the SMH also takes care of that. We are given “As former CNN Pentagon reporter Barbara Starr noted, it’s possible that Ellison will be none-too-pleased about Hegseth’s implications.

Starr, a 21-year veteran of the defence beat, pointed out on X that CNN has sent personnel to combat zones for decades, with some even losing their lives. “You have a legal and moral obligation to defend the free press, even the ones you don’t personally like,” she told Hegseth.

As a former TV presenter before he was tasked with running the world’s most powerful military, press freedom should be Hegseth’s instinct. His comments today – and his vainglorious move to banish press photographers from his briefings – suggest he sees the media more as a vassal to serve his interests.” I can get behind that thought. As such there are sides to this entire setting that aren’t reported on this enough. The first one was that no formal declaration of war was ever given by the United States. As such we were given: “the Trump administration officials have offered various and conflicting explanations for the war, such as to ward off an imminent Iranian threat, to pre-empt Iranian retaliation against US assets after an expected Israeli attack on Iran” My issue here is that the international courts in The Hague might side with Iran concerning the seemingly unprovoked attacks by Iran (I know that is hilarious), Iran has been waging proxy wars for decades and that is the power of a proxy war. I reckon that the attacks by Israel and the United States give a bitter taste in the eyes of the law. Israel is decently clear because of all the attacks by Iran via Hamas and Hezbollah, but the idea given “to ward off an imminent Iranian threat” is laughable. It is like New Zealand attacking Australia, the Sopwith Camel doesn’t have the range to cross that distance and as far as I know New Zealand does not have an aircraft carrier. The same applies to Iran. There is no way that an attack can result from Iran. Even Lone Wolf attacks are unlikely to succeed and the United States still has their boy-scout organisations (FBI, CIA, DIA) in place, as such they can either do their job or they cannot.

As such my speculative view was that the United States needed the oil that Iran has (for now). After failing to get to Canada’s rare earths (the 51st state attempt), Greenland resources (through failed annexation) and Venezuela oil (which is seem simply useless to the United States) the United States are now going for the Iranian oil. After that merely Russian oil remains (and Ukraine is doing something about that too) so what is left? I might be wrong in all this and there is a simple way to show me I am wrong. Merely bomb the 10 refineries. Several sources seemed to side with me on this as we are given ‘GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham Brags ‘We Are Going to Make a Ton of Money’ on Iran War’, which was given to us on March 9th. So as we were given “Graham seemingly suggested that the conflict with Iran as well as President Donald Trump’s abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro aim to help the United States take control over major oil reserves. “Venezuela and Iran have 31% of the world’s oil reserves. We’re going to have a partnership with 31% of the known reserves. This is China’s nightmare. This is a good investment,” he said.” As well as ““We’re going to blow the hell out of these people,” Graham said, adding that “nobody will threaten [the U.S.] in the Strait of Hormuz again.” He also said there could be a collapse of Iran’s leadership. “This regime is in a death throe now, it is gonna be on its knees, it’s going to fall, and when it falls we’re going to have peace like no other time,” he added.” It seems that after 9 days he was proven on nearly all fronts and now that it is out in the open that the United States needs oil (because they have so little at present) there is now the setting that the United States are too broke to seemingly pay their bills and as I see it, the moment the boots come on the ground, the media will report on nearly everything and that will put team Trump/Hegseth in a new folly and in the limelight, Because if I can figure this out in the last decade and now we get that Dave Kelly (JP Morgan, as per OCT2025) can figure this out, you should wonder why others couldn’t figure this out. I get that I am a no one in all this, but David Kelly is the Chief Global Strategist and Head of the Global Market Insights Strategy Team of JP Morgan and he is a voice to consider no matter how you slice it.

So whilst we now get the Guardian (read: recently) give us “March 2026, Hegseth stated during a press briefing that US forces in Iran would show “no quarter, no mercy” to enemies. Analysts and Sen. Mark Kelly pointed out that a “no quarter” order—meaning to take no prisoners and kill them instead—is a direct violation of international law, specifically Article 23(d) of the 1907 Hague Convention IV.” All whilst media like the Conversation give us “Legal scholars have argued that Hegseth’s actions, particularly regarding the Venezuelan boat strikes and statements on the Iranian conflict, could expose him to investigations for violations of international and U.S. criminal law.” As such I reckon that both President Trump and Pete Hegseth fear the international courts. Iran optionally have a case here (I rely on optional as they have done plenty of bad things, among them attack Saudi Arabia without a formal declaration of war), so it makes sense that Pete Hegseth is in the stage that he wants to trivialize the international courts of law in the Hague, which is set through “The International Court of Justice, or colloquially the World Court, is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations (UN). It settles legal disputes submitted to it by states and provides advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by other UN organs and specialized agencies. The ICJ is the only international court that adjudicates general disputes between countries, with its rulings and opinions serving as primary sources of international law. It is one of the six principal organs of the United Nations.” It was established in 1945 and it should now confuse all the readers on why António Guterres remains silent on this. It merely gives my thoughts on the United States being broke seeming validity. The person who attacks Israel at any option he gets, remained silent on too many settings we are seeing here. Even the rebuke on the settings of Pete Hegseth ‘attacking’ the international courts should have put him up in arms. There is the smallest notion that the media had not covered it, but I doubt that. As I see it, the seat that António Guterres hold is seen as one of the 100 most powerful seats in the world. It might not be as powerful as that uncomfortable seat that the pope has, but that would be a buttock conversation.

So I think I have given you something to think about and consider why the bulk of the refineries are left untouched, because that creates the wealth of Iran and isn’t that the superiority of any army? We are given “Sun Tzu’s The Art of War emphasizes that the supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting, making the destruction of an opponent’s economic base (or wealth of a nation) a superior strategy to direct physical conflict. Sun Tzu advises that a protracted war exhausts a state’s resources, dulls weapons, and dampens morale, meaning attacking an opponent’s economic ability to sustain a fight is crucial.” And I wrote about that on March 8th (and before that too, at https://lawlordtobe.com/2026/03/08/ones-creative-process/) the story ‘Ones creative process’ gave you the setting that the harbours and railway of Iran should be destroyed and I was happy to hand the IP that could set that in a certain view of certainty to both Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Because I am just that sort of guy. It is never about personal profit in some stage of war and these two countries were hammered with drones and missiles. As such I did more than talk (are you watching this Pete Hegseth), I delivered.

So you all have a great day and enjoy the day because Vancouver just joined us this Tuesday.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics, Science

Tagged as Antonio Guterres, Art of war, Australia, Barbara Starr, BBC, Canada, Chief Global Strategist, China, CIA, CNN Pentagon, David Kelly, DIA, Donald Trump, FBI, Greenland, Head of the Global Market Insights, Iran, Israel, JP Morgan, Keir Starmer, Lindsey Graham, New Zealand, Oil, Pete Hegseth, Politico, politics, President Nicolas Maduro, President Trump, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, SMH, Strait of Hormuz, SunTzu, Sydney Morning Herald, the Guardian, The Hill, Trump, UAE, UK, United Nations, Vatican, Venezuela

February 11, 2026 · 20:42

Is anyone still in doubt?

That was the setting that was given to me by the Guardian, who produced ‘Mark Carney reminds Trump that Canada paid for key border bridge US president says he won’t open’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/10/trump-canada-windsor-detroit-bridge), this comes with the fun fact that the Guardian was trailing my previous article by several hours. So as we are given “Mark Carney said he had held a “positive” conversation with Donald Trump after the US leader threatened to block a new key bridge between their two countries, reminding the president that Canada paid for the structure – and that the US shares ownership.” This comes with the additional “Late on Monday, Trump posted a lengthy message on social media, falsely claiming that the $4.6bn Gordie Howe International Bridge between Windsor, Ontario, and Detroit, Michigan, had “virtually no US content”. The bridge is due to open in early 2026. In his post, Trump had also claimed that Canada owns both ends of the bridge and made a bizarre assertion that increased trade between Canada and China would include a ban on Canadians playing ice hockey.” So beside the ludicrous Hockey setting, and it is ludicrous as China has Kunlun Red Star is the most prominent Chinese professional ice hockey club. You know what? Because Canada has an evolving Chinese trade setting. Perhaps Prime Minister Mark Carney could invite Kunlun Red Star and let them play against some of the Canadian teams n Canada. Might be a sight to watch and whilst we all watch these games we could repeat the claims from President Trump on the big screens, so that the Chinese have something to laugh about to. So as we are given ““Now, the Canadian Government expects me, as President of the United States, to PERMIT them to just ‘take advantage of America!’ What does the United States of America get – Absolutely NOTHING!” he wrote.” As I see it, Canada paid for that bridge, as such the united States of America has a sweet deal here and there is another setting (my apologies mr. Prime Minster) it could open up a new stage of shipping Chinese EV cars to the united States, complete with Huawei routers (I have a sick sense of humor). But the story is not this, as I see it, after all the BS we are shown. I am more and more convinced that the United States of America is out of funds. The 2 billion due to the United Nations, we are also given that “In 2025, over $32 billion in U.S. clean energy and manufacturing projects were cancelled, largely driven by shifting federal policies, economic instability, and high interest rates. Impacting over 40,000 jobs, major project cancellations included EV battery plants in Georgia and Michigan, and massive offshore wind developments.” (Source: Fast Company) and that list goes on and when you get to the Jersey tunnel setting that is shutdown in the 11th hour, the only thing remaining is the lack of the US Bank Balance. The tantrums of the President of the united States might have something do to with the Epstein files, but when you see how hundred of thousands of jobs are thrown in the wind, I actually doubt it. The fact that the US can no longer foot the bills that previous administrations vied for and mostly opened funds for gives me the weird setting that we are watching the final hours of a functioning United States of America. And in this there is more, but there is no real link and it is a massive speculation. You see, one day ago we saw (source: TechStock2) ‘JP Morgan’s return-to-office fight turns personal as staff warn of ‘career suicide’’ where we see:

About 2,000 employees—out of a workforce topping 300,000—have signed a petition urging the company to bring back hybrid work.
Other banks are also cracking down on office policies, widening the post-pandemic pushback reshaping finance from within.

I personally believe that it is set to the given mandate of secrecy, there are too many things you cannot keep under wrap in a hybrid workforce. I think that these last days might be massively lucrative for JP Morgan, but this is only possible when all heads look the same way and that is a non-option in a hybrid workforce. I believe that JP Morgan is seeing the water rise and it needs an attentive workforce (in the office) That is the setting that I personally believe is the case (remember: I could be wrong). And it isn’t only JP Morgan, other banks are in the same setting. As I see it, the party is over and to survive what comes requires a massive amount of focus and adherence to protocols. Now, I could be wrong, but the settings as they evolved over the last two months are giving me the shivers. Because when the economy of the United States goes down, Japan and the EU will take massive hits and I am not sure if they could survive these hits. Consider these points:

In 2024, bonds made up about 8.2% of total liquid financial assets held by U.S. households, though this percentage is generally much higher in conservative retirement portfolios.
The $52.1 trillion in total U.S. retirement entitlements includes $48.1 trillion in financial assets, with a significant share held by institutional investors like pension funds, which are heavy holders of U.S. Treasury bonds.

So, what do you think will happen with the US Treasury bonds when the US Administration forgo payment? Consider that you have maximum 6 months to see this unfold and when the US Bonds do take a dive, what will remain of the $52.1 trillion? (It is not a hidden trap, I actually don’t know how much of all this is in bonds, but it is a lot). Another connected piece of information comes from BitGet (source is unknown to me) where we see “JPMorgan Asset Management’s Chief Global Strategist David Kelly has issued a stern warning, stating that the current stock market boom is mainly supported by liquidity and the performance of large technology stocks, showing signs of a “bubble” and is clearly disconnected from the real economy. He described the current economy as a combination of “weak consumption, sluggish employment growth, and low public sentiment.”The report points out that the start of the first quarter of 2026 has been quite turbulent, with a significant reduction in consumer activity.” As such a bubble? And not connected to the economy? When did something like that ever go good? As such we see warnings from all over the field, but to see what is real and what not is anyones guess. You know if we have some kind of register where all this is put down? A place where we can rely on the information given? Because as I see it, the newspapers are too busy starting flames for their digital dollars and both these elements do not inspire confidence, but that might be merely me talking.

So as I see it, with all the issues going on, it would be my (optionally fictive view) that a President of the United States would be bending over backwards to get allies, to get an active economy (not merely stating that is is beautiful) but that might merely be me. Although, Canada has a person in charge who used to be the Governor of the bank of England, what does he think?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as Bank of England, Bitget, Bonds, Canada, CBC, China, David Kelly, Donald Trump, EV car, Fast Company, Gordie Howe International Bridge, JP Morgan, Kunlun Red Star, Mark Carney, Michigan, News, politics, President Trump, TechStock2, the Guardian, Trump, United Nations, United States, US Administration, US Treasury, Windsor

January 9, 2026 · 18:49

The view of a psychopath

That is in question and it is not on Trump or anyone else. It is the view of me. So as I ‘hide’ behind the numbers that the world shows, Am I the Psychopath? A case could be made that I might be a Psychotic sociopath or even a social Psychopath. All optional settings, but I need to investigate me, because the person who accuses all others from being nuts is mandatory required to investigate themself in that same process. We can go (at times) with everyone is nuts except me, but if you do not cross the t and dot the i you get an unbalanced equation and that equation is important in that setting and as such I investigate myself.

In the past I have fervently given the setting that America is broke but the weird setting that no one else is saying that. OK, I found one voice, the voice of David Kelly (at JP Morgan) but is that enough? And the setting that the New York Times is giving us (at https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/08/us/politics/trump-interview-power-morality.html) is a nice handle to use. We are given ‘Trump Lays Out a Vision of Power Restrained Only by ‘My Own Morality’’ where we see “President Trump declared on Wednesday evening that his power as commander in chief is constrained only by his “own morality,” brushing aside international law and other checks on his ability to use military might to strike, invade or coerce nations around the world.” Oh, we are given “use military might to strike, invade or coerce nations” and I am considering here that I am the psychopath? And for that matter, what president, king, or emperor is willing to forego international law? In what universe is that acceptable? I get that we get all the Saudi Arabia mentions, but Saudi Arabia is a monarchy and last I checked they are massively driven by Islam, and the Quran is their manifesto. It is a basic setting of morality, the morality of the Quran and I accept that. But for a western leader to say that he is forgoing international law is a stretch too far. So when the New York Times gives us “When asked what was his higher priority, obtaining Greenland or preserving NATO, Mr. Trump declined to answer directly, but acknowledged “it may be a choice.” He made clear that the trans-Atlantic alliance was essentially useless without the United States at its core.” We see an additional element of the setting that America is broke. It is willing to forgo NATO, even start a war with NATO all to get Greenland? Then we are given ‘Trump Considers Payments to Persuade Greenland Residents’ (source: Business Korea, Reuters has a paywall). As such as Greenland has 57,000 people, even at $1,000,000 each it would still be a bargain. But the American stinginess will come cropping up at some point. These are all actions of a broke nation. All in a setting where Wall Street is willing to remain silent so that they can remain in the party. That is at stake and no one seems to be realising this. And insight that I saw this moment come towards us 12 years ago, the fact that ‘at present’ it is arriving slowly is also important. It is important as the infrastructure will have been left to rot for years and that is before this generation get to collect their retirement and in 2030 the get the ‘last payment’ paper. Some will be only 60 years old. They will go through the rest of life owning nothing at all. That is coming and when others are in denial, I can wait. I will recall this message in 2035 and show the world how useless the economic media has been, they will not be allowed to say ‘it was for the good of Wall Street’ it will be the final straw of treason they face.

So as I am investigating my psychotic setting, I feel that I have passed. As a psychopath I fail because I recognise the need for international law and as a sociopath I understand that other nations (like Saudi Arabia) have values etched in religion, not even my religion and I get that. So I fail twice over. But the New York Times gives us another person with the psyche that must be examined. So draw your own conclusions. And whilst your at it, why Is Canada, Venezuela and Greenland important? Anyone who has hit the limit of their credit card knows. You either have collateral that increases your value, or you find a stash of gold. The stash is found in Venezuela where they have the largest oil reserve in the world. It is not particularly useful, because that oil needs to be gotten and it is different from most oils. It has properties that makes it debatable, but the Guardian reports less than a day ago ‘Trump plans to use Venezuela’s huge crude reserves ‘to cut US oil price to $50 a barrel’’, do you actually think this will happen, or will he sell on and pocket that $10 per barrel for 30 billion barrels giving him the 300 billion to ease interest payments? And that is a simple setting, he might be in there years to vulture Venezuela as carrion eater for all the oil they can get. And that will take time and he is running out of time, so here comes Greenland with all its rare minerals and that gives America the leeway to let it run its creed and a little longer. But in the last setting he want Canada too, all this nations, not because of National Security, but because its credit card is running on empty and Canada is not budging and I for one am willing to aid Canada in its protection (the protection of Greenland too as the Queen of Denmark is originally Australian). So am I the psychopath of does that title fit another person better?

And in all this the economic editors of global news are now in the dock too, because I don’t have an economic degree and they do, so they should have seen this coming a mile away. ‘So whilst we are given ““Ownership is very important,” Mr. Trump said as he discussed, with a real estate mogul’s eye, the landmass of Greenland — three times the size of Texas but with a population of less than 60,000. He seemed to dismiss the value of having Greenland under the control of a close NATO ally. When asked why he needed to possess the territory, he said: “Because that’s what I feel is psychologically needed for success. I think that ownership gives you a thing that you can’t do, whether you’re talking about a lease or a treaty. Ownership gives you things and elements that you can’t get from just signing a document.” The conversation made clear that in Mr. Trump’s view, sovereignty and national borders are less important than the singular role the United States plays as the protector of the West.” He actually ‘hid’ behind “protector of the West” the folly of men behind tariffs, behind the setting of the 51st state mentions, that is the protector of the west? Begging for a Nobel peace price attacked Venezuela in seemingly contraction of International law. I know I am not the most versed person in international law, but I see a few hitches showing up just like that. And now he is ready to go to war with NATO if other means do not work out for him. So how is that sane on any level? Oh and for that matter, where are the United Nations in all this?

As we consider all kinds of options, I also recognise that I am the only one seeing what others cannot see, in the end I am an actual psychopath and I recognize the other psychopath in the game. Perhaps that is a truth, but as I recognized international law and President trump was said to have given the New York Times “his power as commander in chief is constrained only by his “own morality,” brushing aside international law and other checks on his ability to use military might”, so I might be okay, and there was the recognition of the Quran as a guiding principle for some nations. I fear that I failed the psychopath and sociopath test. Too my credit, I also failed the doctor test, I will apparently never be a doctor, so there is that.

Have a great day you all, I feel like the wicked witch of the west. It is 41 degrees in my room and I’m melting.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as 51st state, Canada, David Kelly, Denmark, Donald Trump, Greenland, JP Morgan, NATO, New York Times, politics, President Trump, Psycho analyses, Quran, Saudi Arabia, Trump, UN, United Nations, United States, Venezuela, Wicked witch of the west

December 14, 2025 · 18:36

In opposition

I don’t go into ‘in opposition’ mode too often, because it tends to be an exercise of mopping the floor whilst the tap is spilling right on the floor. And you come to the conclusion that it is better to close the tap FIRST, before you start exercising with a mop. That is merely my opinion, but it holds water (as the phrase goes). The exercise is the ABC article (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-11-23/f-35-fighter-jet-sale-saudi-arabia-uae-australia-weapons-exports/106029218) giving us ‘Australian F-35 exports face fresh scrutiny as jets approved for Saudi Arabia’ where we get.

So, as we get blatant stupidity from Australian shores with “The president also contradicted the 2021 US intelligence assessment by saying the crown prince “knew nothing” about Khashoggi’s killing.” I countered this case on grounds of the United Nations report by UN comedian Egsy Calamari (aka Agnes Callamard) in the article ‘That was easy!’ I found a dozen shortfalls on that report (which also uses the US Intelligence assessment) and beyond that I left the largest folly unspoken. At no time were the tapes actually forensically tested. They could have been listening to a tape with recordings of the Shadow, listening to Orson Welles. I reckon they didn’t do that, but the blatant holes in that investigation were astounding and they are paid 6 figure incomes? For what?

And the least said about “Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are among the groups who have called for arms bans to Saudi Arabia, especially after the 2018 murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the country’s human rights record, and role in the Yemen war.” The better. They turning their backs on the actions of Hamas and Houthi terrorist actions is astounding. As such I do not give too much credence to the writings of Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, and it makes little sense, they were a force for good in the 80’s, how the world turns.

So whilst we get “Andrew Witheford, international and crisis lead from Amnesty International Australia, said putting the highly-lethal jet into the hands of another country in the region was “problematic”.” Really? So how is that view going for America and its Venezuelan repertoire? And beyond the fact that Saudi Arabia is a stable monarchy, it is making great strides in several factors. But don’t worry China is willing to flog their Chengdu J-20 by the Chengdu Aircraft Corporation at any time, and how will that help Australia? Oh, and I hereby claim my 1% bonus if Saudi Arabia switches to the Dragon, over that amount I would get (from China) $52 million, a nice retirement fund, so I can move to Toronto and Abu Dhabi, life can be fun at the autumn of your life.

How is anything that this article gives you all relevant to the setting? So as the ABC gives us “A Saudi-led coalition has been waging a war against the Houthi rebels in Yemen since 2015.” We need to realise that there are no Houthi rebels, there merely are Houthi terrorists.

But do not take my word for it, ask Colonel Turki bin Saleh Al-Maliki he has the recovered several drones used on Saudi civilian airports and civilian targets. The media was so great in filtering out those facts, I wonder if you do the same. Is there a setting where Saudi Arabia uses weapons in defence of IT’S OWN COUNTRY? Yes, there is, defence works that way. But the media is eager to avoid their gaze on the rough stuff, like the Ghouta chemical attack in 2013 where the population was hit by rockets containing the chemical agent sarin. It might not seem related, but it is, when the atrocities of terrorists are laid bare, the people will ask difficult questions of the media. And that is not good for the digital dollar, is it.

So back to the story, as we are given “The UN Arms Trade Treaty, to which Australia is a party, says states must regulate the export of “parts and components” used to assemble weapons if there is knowledge the arms would be used in genocide, crimes against humanity, or certain war crimes.” We see the uncomfortable truth that they do not address action of Hamas as it is not part of the UN Arms Treaty Trade, nicely played. But this sanctimonious setting is getting on the nerves of too many people and the setting of a journalist no one cares about has been playing out for 8 years. All whilst the people are pointing fingers at the one who states that he is innocent and for the better part there is no evidence, the media takes whatever they could to get more digital dollars whilst ignoring clear evidence. So as we now against get the US intelligence assessment, most will not be clued in that some of this is based on

“we need to consider ‘an intelligence service or operative simply has to make a stab at assimilating what all this means’, this can be surmised into one single word ‘Speculation!’, it is fair for Intelligence operatives to do, but in law it is set to evidence and there is none, something I saw in 10 minutes into the initial report.” as well as “The Special Rapporteur was not allowed to obtain clones of the recordings so she could not authenticate any of the recordings. Among other aspects, such authentication would have involved examination of the recordings’ metadata such as when, how the data were created, the time and date of creation and the source and the process used to create it.”

The simplest setting of law, Evidence, you either have it or you do not and no one has any clear evidence and the US intelligence assessment of ‘Highly Likely’ does not hold water in court.

The simplest of settings and it is interesting how the media is filled with Islamophobes drenched in anti Saudi sentiment, it is not a completely correct setting, but that is how I see it. As such I am in opposition for the simple reason of evidence. And consider this, Andrew Witheford, gives us “The F-35 used to only be sold to essentially liberal democratic countries” is that not a from of discrimination? By the way if all sounds right, America has become a (according to some) an authoritarianism, as such why is Australia even producing the parts of the F-35? Just a small question to cleanse the pallet.

Have a great day today, Monday is now less than 325 minutes away.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as ABC, Agnes Callamard, Al-Maliki, America, Amnesty International, Andrew Whiteford, Chengdu Aircraft Corporation, Chengdu J-20, China, F-35, Gaza, Ghouta, Hamas, Houthi, Human Rights watch, Jamal Khashoggi, Middle East, Orson Welles, politics, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turki bin Saleh Al-Maliki, UN Arms Treaty Trade, United Nations, US Intelligence, USA

December 4, 2025 · 10:49

In dubious view I say

This is the continuation of the settings I gave yesterday on Venezuela. More ‘information’ was brought to light. I am not the one rallying behind dubious YouTube settings of someone stating that he heard the admiral say that all he acted after he got the word fro the president. For that dodo I give you that any admiral will follow orders if they are legal and will not divulge anything to anyone not part of the chain of command where that person needs to know. The Military and especially the American defence forces are excellently trained in this. So I need (as always) rely on the printed word and we are given by ABC (at https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-12-03/donald-trump-pardons-former-honduran-president-drug-trafficking/106095618) ‘What led Donald Trump to pardon a foreign leader convicted of helping to flood the US with drugs’ as we were given by the BBC “As part of his war on drugs”, so can anyone (in authority) give me why President Trump pardons Former Honduras President Juan Orlando Hernández after he receives a 45 year sentence for DRUGS no less, more specifically releasing hundreds of tons of cocaine to the United States? I have to ask that question, because this action gives us that the American setting of an upcoming war into Venezuela is nothing more than an alleged oil grab and a grab for rare earths. As It seems to be, I was right on the money with that article and only now is the media asking questions. I got there two days ago, so are they all stupid, our are they hindered by stakeholders and only released if others release the information, so that they do not look too stupid? I know, the last part is speculation, but in a stage of delayed warfare this is an option to consider, it is usually done by tank commanders as a tactical maneuver where tanks withdraw from combat to realign firepower whilst other tanks withdraw from the battle. These withdrawal tactics can be used to the media and they all ‘watch’ each other and they warn each other when someone sills the beans so that they can quickly release what they have. This is the speculative setting I see and that makes sense, especially as some are in a fix not to get their jobs burned and these editors have a backchannel that only they (the editors) can use.

So as ABC releases “the US president has just pardoned and released a man who was in jail for overseeing one of the world’s worst drug conspiracies. Juan Orlando Hernandez used his position as the president of Honduras to help flood the US with billions of hits of cocaine, a New York court was told last year.” His excuse that the attacks on Venezuela will be done to stop the war on drugs goes straight out of the window, as such oil and rare earths becomes the actual stage of the upcoming war and as Reuters gives us ‘US lawmakers to force vote on war powers if Trump attacks Venezuela’ with “Three House of Representatives lawmakers – Democrats Jim McGovern of Massachusetts and Joaquin Castro of Texas and Republican Thomas Massie of Kentucky – filed their own resolution on Tuesday that also would block the Trump administration from engaging in hostilities within or against Venezuela without congressional authorization.

U.S. troops have carried out at least 21 strikes on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and Pacific since early September, killing at least 83 people as Trump escalates a military buildup against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro’s government.” And this wasn’t in the cards before the USS Gerald R. Ford was dispensed to that theatre of escalations? More important, what were the orders given to Capt. David Skarosi who commands that vessel? I understand that there is a setting of concealment (as it is defence and national interests) but I reckon that the secretary of the Navy (SECNAV) in this case John Phelan has some of the goods and as we are getting a president saying one thing and doing something else, these two should make sure that the integrity of the Navy is not being endangered. They have a duty to their navy and the American people as I personally see it. We see the word of these representative lawmakers and it is none that they get the limelight, but did they engage with these two parties on the dangers that President Trump is acting in an optional self-centered consideration of needs (a presumption I assure you) and we see all kinds of saber rattling, but there is a chain of command, was it employed to get to the right answers?

Because the setting above would seem a lot more powerful when it is given in this way:
“Three House of Representatives lawmakers – Democrats Jim McGovern of Massachusetts and Joaquin Castro of Texas and Republican Thomas Massie of Kentucky – filed their own resolution on Tuesday that also would block the Trump administration from engaging in hostilities within or against Venezuela without congressional authorization. And they have met with John Phelan, secretary of the Navy to voice their concerns and they were assured that the SECNAV would be in contact with Capt. David Skarosi captain of the USS Gerald R. Ford to get clarity of its function where it has been deployed and that no settings that belongs to US congress was transgressed upon.” It seems a lot clearer when there is a connection to a chain of command and not some speculative setting in the hands of three whomever they are and not part of the Naval hierarchy. Did I oversimplify that setting, I apologise?

Then we get the Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/dec/02/trump-threatens-strikes-drugs-venezuela) giving us ‘Trump threatens strikes on any country he claims makes drugs for US’ where the Guardian starts of with “Donald Trump warned on Tuesday that any country he believes is making drugs destined illegally for the US is vulnerable to a military attack.” Is that is true, why pardon a president drug ‘champion’ who is serving 45 years? It’s not too weird a question, is it? Followed by “The exchange with reporters followed a lengthy cabinet meeting at which Trump and Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, moved to put the responsibility with a navy admiral for the extrajudicial killing of two survivors of an attack on an alleged drug smuggling boat in September.” So whilst the flim flam bickering is going on, others have clear questions, in the first degree what the United Nations is doing with the half baked answers given from there. It seems that they are more motivated attacking the defense of Israel then the alleged upcoming invasion of Venezuela.

And other places like OtherWords (at https://otherwords.org/trumps-aggression-toward-venezuela-should-be-setting-off-alarm-bells/) is seeing the same settings evolve, a piece by Farrah Hassen. Although, her piece has issues we are given “Meanwhile, the USS Gerald R. Ford is stationed off the coast of Venezuela and Trump has ordered the CIA to conduct covert operations inside the country. And he declared on November 29 that the airspace “above and surrounding” Venezuela is “to be closed in its entirety.”” How does she know what orders the CIA has received, does she have a source? In addition, she gives us “A secret Department of Justice memo has gone so far as to name fentanyl as a “chemical weapon threat” from these “drug boats.” But neither U.S. nor international assessments have found that Venezuela is a primary producer or international shipment point of narcotics, including fentanyl.” So how does she have access to secret memo’s? The part that is interesting is “neither U.S. nor international assessments have found that Venezuela is a primary producer or international shipment point of narcotics, including fentanyl” it is interesting because Venezuela is right next to Colombia, a known source of drugs. So is anyone considering the data involved or are we all happy to blame AI for it all and give the statement ‘Oops’ afterwards?

There were. Few more issues, but it is important to give you these two as news sources seem to copy each other and slip in a few statements by not so high ranked sources. And in this political minefield, it is important to get as clear as possible and It doesn’t get any higher than military sources. They tend to not lie, an important side setting as I see it.

This Venezuela setting has all the trademarks of a bay of pigs setting, but here the centre chess piece is a stage of 1000 years of crude oil, a setting America desperately needs. Are we ready to go to war with a world because America cannot control its budget? Have fun with that one.

Have a great day today and let’s see if we can avoid war in the next 24 hours.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as ABC, David Skarosi, Donald Trump, Farrah Hassen, Jim McGovern, Joaquin Castro, John Phelan, Juan Orlando Hernandez, News, Other Words, Pete Hegseth, politics, President Nicolas Maduro, President Trump, SECNAV, the Guardian, Thomas Massie, Trump, United Nations, USS Gerald R. Ford, Venezuela

December 3, 2025 · 13:06

The land of what?

That is the setting we start with. You see, yesterday, the only things I knew of Venezuela was that the capital was Caracas, at some point a man named Chavez was in charge and that this place has oil and that was all. So what is President Trump aiming for? 15,000 troops and the largest aircraft carriers as well as a few dinghy’s are now ‘patrolling’ the seas, right by Cuba? This is an overreaction of the largest degree. It is like calling for the National guard when you learn that a piece of cheese is missing from your kitchen. So, what kind of posturing did Trump offer in assistance to the Ukraine? So I decided to take a look, especially as we see YouTube videos with that overgrown Armada showing as it is playing Thunderstruck by ACDC (which is a massive impediment of national security in any naval setting ahead of a military operation), as such it is posturing. But why?

Well, apparently in 1990, Gary B. Sidder wrote ‘Mineral occurrences of the Guiana shield, Venezuela’, he did so for the United States department of the interior geological survey, according to that report Venezuela is a fountain of rare minerals having a decent collection of Gold, Diamonds, Aluminum, Manganese, Tin, Niobium, Tantalum, Molybdenum, Uranium, Titanium, Platinum and a few more minerals as well as oil. So what is this about?

You see, as I see it, between now and next July (2026) we see the maturity of bonds, $66B, $40B, $70B, $33B and $47B, making the rough total $256,000,000,000 due and at present (as I personally see it) America doesn’t have that cash, so either America starts a Ponzi scheme creating more debt to pay off this debt or hope that over 90% is set in new treasury bills and that requires serious talks and serious payments to these outstanding debts, optionally roughly 2% over the amount now guaranteed. America is that deep in debt. They couldn’t get Canada or Greenland and now war is the only option for America and its president who was pleading for a Nobel peace plan. Isn’t that hilariously sarcastic?

So could I be wrong?
That is the first question is ask myself and I am not debating that Venezuela might be the tyrannical setting some claim it is, but the actions of a less then upstanding politician shows a side that is likely less then noble. His lack of actions against Russia, his outstanding setting towards our brother Canada is presumed evidence of this. And as we are also given that “The proven oil reserves in Venezuela are recognized as the largest in the world, totaling 300 billion barrels” is another reason why I am seeing President Trump as the guilty party in this. The invoices are due within 8 months and America is desperate for revenue. After they botched their tourism, tariffed his ‘friends’ to be now less than that and as he lost defence contracts all over the field America is now desperate for revenue. Yes, it is not a good story.

In this 9 News (Australia) gives us (at https://www.9news.com.au/world/donald-trump-news-usa-venezuela-oval-office-meeting-amid-growing-questions-about-his-military-moves/11240690-4124-4eeb-91a4-f623fe5a9ab9) ‘Donald Trump to hold Venezuela Oval Office meeting amid growing questions about his military moves’ where we see “US President Donald Trump will hold a meeting at the White House on Monday evening about next steps on Venezuela, sources familiar with the matter told CNN, as the administration intensifies its pressure campaign on the country and questions mount about whether the military is exceeding its lawful authority.” With in addition ““President Trump has been quite clear in his defence of the United States homeland, to stop these illegal narcotics from coming to our borders, whether that’s by land or by sea,” Leavitt said. “He’s also made it quite clear that he wants to correct the wrongs of the weaponised Justice Department under the previous administration.”” And do you really need the USS Gerald R. Ford, several ships and 15,000 troops to stop illegal narcotics? I have my doubts as do several others. I don’t care of these drug dealers, stop them in any way, but to set out an Armada that outshines the Spanish Armada of 1588 is an overreaction of the largest manner and as such I think that America’s Trump is trying to secure his rare materials and oil for the continued salvation of America, not the freedom of Venezuela.

Then we get the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93n4nx5yqro) giving us ‘Why is Trump threatening Venezuela’s Maduro?’ With the setting of “The Trump administration has doubled the reward for information leading to Maduro’s capture, and its warships are within striking distance of Venezuela. Dozens of people have been killed in attacks on boats alleged to have been transporting drugs from the South American country.” Even the BBC resorts to ‘alleged’ in all this. I reckon that evidence that these are drug boats is limited to presentation and assumption, but I al willing to accept that setting, but why would you need 15,000 troops? With the additional “Trump reportedly also gave Maduro an ultimatum to leave Venezuela, in a phone call the two men had on 21 November.” So another threat, how did that go over with President Putin? I honestly do not know who ‘evil’ President Maduro is and perhaps he is evil, but in all this how is this some operation Freedom? To set these oil reserves to America? And the rare minerals and in all this António Manuel de Oliveira Guterres, the 9th Secretary-General of the United Nations is as useless as he seemingly is presented to be. So where is his outcry over the rights of Venezuela? Even if he was doing that, he allegedly never spoke out AGAINST Venezuela either, and if he did, why isn’t every newspapers repeating that setting?

Then we get the one issue that holds weight “In 2024, the electoral council declared Maduro the winner of the presidential election, even though voting tallies collected by the opposition suggested that their candidate, Edmundo González, had won by a landslide.” That does count, but we see this now? It might have been said in the past, but there is a sight to see this in the end of the article, not in a running start at the beginning and now in several news casts clearly outlined. And then? Why is President Trump now so about fairness, all whilst he was supporting Putin in his fight against Ukraine? As I see it, there might be an issue with Maduro, but that is as I see it, not the part that interests President Trump.

So then we get the part that also matters. We are given “Without providing evidence, Trump has accused Maduro of “emptying his prisons and insane asylums” and “forcing” its inmates to migrate to the US. Trump has also focused on fighting the influx of drugs – especially fentanyl and cocaine – into the US. As part of his war on drugs, he has designated two Venezuelan criminal groups – Tren de Aragua and Cartel de los Soles – as Foreign Terrorist Organisations and has alleged that the latter is led by Maduro himself.” It is the ‘Without providing evidence’, we need to take heed here. He goes on his tantrum fentanyl setting and after he accused Canada, that setting is losing steam fast. I am not saying that it is not the case, but there is more than one piece of evidence that President Trump is taking a lose translation towards the setting of honesty, he did this all himself. All the evidence is setting that stage of doubt in all our minds.

Last there is CNN who (at https://www.cnn.com/2025/12/01/americas/venezuela-allies-diplomacy-us-military-caribbean-latam-intl) gives us ‘Venezuela’s Maduro lost two allies in a week. What regional partners does he have left?’ Giving us a political setting of other nations and the other sides are gaining strength and as such they are not aligning with Maduro. This happens, but what surprised me is that NONE of these news cycles made mention of the large oil reserves, it is seemingly a topic out of bounds with them and I would have seen this as a first stage in all this, because that is giving President Trump the reason to get the USS Gerald R. Ford, several ships and 15,000 troops involved, because securing those would be a clear setting for President trump and no one is asking the question that is out in the open. This is why I oppose this setting. An event done for a corrupt reason belittles that event, no matter how just it is. I know it does not make much sense, because the sales person in all of you thinks that the result justifies the means used and that just isn’t true, because the people on that setting have their own agenda’s and greed is too easy a reason to corrupt the foundation of these people and America is too deep in debt, it passed a debt level of 38 trillion last week. So even as I wrote ‘About America, chapter 11’ on August 26th 2014 (over 10 years ago, at https://lawlordtobe.com/2014/08/26/about-america-chapter-11/) it seems that this setting of ‘impeding bankruptcy’ is a lot more real than it ever was before and there is little that America can do to avoid it. They can play the funny card, delay reports on GDP and a few other, but Wall Street has been keeping score and America is showing too little (according to Wall Street) at present, you can fool some people all of the time, you can even fool all of the people some of the time, however you can never fool all of the people all of the time and that setting is now being reached where too many are asking loud questions and as far as I can tell, the blonde in the press office of the White House (Karoline Leavitt) can only do so much and as the world is starting to ask serious questions, her role has been played out as much as it can. Soon we will see a new spokesperson to try and gain credibility towards the press corps, I reckon that as it becomes harder and harder to protect a president of this setting, there is the world view that will be coming into focus and as such America is done for. As far as I can tell no one will be trusting America any day soon and there is plenty of evidence that most are likely to engage into trade deals with China over America, when that happens America might likely and up with one unlikely ally, namely Russia. Lets see how that pans out, shall we?

So feel free to doubt me, but feel free to validate this data with your own research and feel free to present evidence of that. I am not the one saying that my version is correct, but the absence of evidence in several ways are giving me a rather large chance that I am correct.

MINERAL OCCURRENCES OF THE GUIANA SHIELD, VENEZUELA Download

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as 9 News, America, António Manuel de Oliveira Guterres, BBC, China, CNN, Donald Trump, Edmundo González, Gary B. Sidder, Karoline Leavitt, News, politics, President Maduro, President Putin, President Trump, Russia, the Guardian, Trump, United Nations, USS Gerald R. Ford, Venezuela, Wall Street, White House

October 8, 2025 · 00:20

The weighted fabrication

That is how I see it and the article by Stephanie Kirchgaessner (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/18/saudi-arabia-turki-al-jasser-executed) goes straight into this. You see, I am not debating whether someone was ‘deleted’ it is what you can prove and we cannot prove anything. You see, The Guardian ‘hides’ behind a piece by the United Nations and I dove into this in ‘That was Easy!’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/02/27/that-was-easy/) I even added the UN document there and I made several connections, I used the setting of something called ‘evidence’ it is how I roll and seemingly the Guardian does not. Somewhere today I stumbled upon a Kirchgaessner article that was from June 18th 2025. I do not track everything that is out there, so I have an excuse. But the setting that the media uses requires me to illustrate where they went mad like a lemming. We get “It was the first high-profile killing of a journalist by the Saudi state since the 2018 murder of Jamal Khashoggi, the Washington Post columnist and prominent critic of the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, who was lured into the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and murdered by Saudi agents. A UN report concluded that the murder was an extrajudicial killing by the state, and an intelligence assessment released by then president Joe Biden in 2021 concluded that Prince Mohammed approved the murder.” We need to take heed of the two settings here. The first one is “A UN report concluded that the murder was an extrajudicial killing by the state” and the second one is “intelligence assessment released by then president Joe Biden in 2021 concluded that Prince Mohammed approved the murder”. So, we have two settings. Lets start with the second on first. How was this assessment obtained? That is the question. There is a chance that it came from Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri and the ‘pasted’ solutions that the Americans give him (read: CIA) sounds that he is all on the up and up. Yet “Aljabri has strong support in the US, where former intelligence officials have credited their Saudi counterpart for helping to save American and Saudi lives following the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the US.

On 60 Minutes, the former acting CIA director Mike Morell said Aljabri was “honorable”. Intelligence relayed to the US by Aljabri – Morell said – had led to the interception of bombs that had been planted by al-Qaida in 2010 in two desktop printers that were being flown as cargo on two planes. Morell said there were also other examples of Aljabri saving the lives of Americans, but that they were still classified.” Yet here too I have questions and they might be invalid and when we see the accusations of “The Saudi government did not address Aljabri’s allegations but said in a statement that “Saad Aljabri is a discredited former government official with a long history of fabricating and creating distractions to hide the financial crimes he committed”” So how does a general get these billions? That was the issues that I saw when I looked at the CBC article (at https://www.cbc.ca/news/investigates/saad-aljabri-assets-frozen-1.5903422)

Where we see ““Although the investigation is ongoing, it is clear that from at least 2008 to 2017, Aljabri masterminded and oversaw a conspiracy incorporating at least 21 conspirators across at least 13 jurisdictions to misappropriate at least [$4.3 billion] from the plaintiffs,” the lawsuit states.” As well as “It alleges Aljabri funneled security and counterterrorism funds from Saudi Arabia’s Interior Ministry to himself, his family and associates.” So is one true, or is the other true? It is a fair question as the sources of the “intelligence assessment” remain valid if Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri was involved. At that point, merely one issue remains and I blew that apart in my initial blog (link above) and what wasn’t mentioned is that the so called ‘torture tapes’ were never forensically cleared in any way. There are mentions of “I heard them and they were dreadful” or something of that nature. That is not evidence. Evidence is “The tape(s) consist of x number of tapes (or files). They are set to a length of XXX minutes and the voices on the tapes include Jamal Khashoggi” That NEVER happened, that was NEVER done. As such there is no evidence and the shoddy journals behind blood and oil added a few inches of fantasy to that counter. That as well as the issues in that UN report gave me enough to call Prime Minister of Saudi Arabia Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud innocent. Evidence is set to that, not thoughtful processes of ‘I don’t believe he is guilty’ a person is innocent until proven guilty and that proof never came, no matter how intensely all the media is pushing for it and the media with people carrying trash bags stating “This could be the part of the body of Jamal Khashoggi” is nothing less than a joke, a bad one at that. So as Stephanie Kirchgaessner is linked to several of these articles the journalist is just as guilty as the story. She never properly investigated the articles she wrote and I just called out several parts. There is no such setting with Saudi journalist Turki al-Jasser, as the news gives us “the Saudi interior ministry announced that al-Jasser had been executed in Riyadh, for crimes including “high treason by communicating with and conspiring against the security of the Kingdom with individuals outside it”.” It seems like a setting that is. There is no wonder about guilt or innocence. He was found guilty and executed, but leave it to the Guardian to add the columnist no-one ever cared about to the mix (Jamal Khashoggi). Yet I have seen this game being played by the Guardian and several other sources and I have had enough. As such I have questions. Questions like will Stephanie Kirchgaessner ever be questioned and will there be a larger setting where journalists like this are held to account on what they write, because as I see it this cannot continue as it is. The CBC gives us a lot more. You see as we see “Aljabri, 62, was MBN’s chief advisor. As Minister of State and head of security and counterterrorism, he was a key member of the regime. He was stripped of his duties in 2015. Following the power change in 2017, he fled the country and now lives in a mansion on The Bridle Path, one of Canada’s most upscale residential neighbourhoods.” Is a setting that does not imply he is guilty of anything, but as I see it, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has 4.3 billion reasons to want him and I do not know any government that takes such a loss for granted. And they would be right. And as I see it, there is an easy setting, get a forensic accountant go over the records and I reckon that this is where the CIA is not to happy over that happening and I expect neither is Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri. I wonder why the media didn’t set this setting to paper, do you know?

So when the Guardian gave us (in June) “The former intelligence chief also claimed Prince Mohammed “feared” the information Aljabri knew about him, including a 2014 recorded discussion between Prince Mohammed and the then crown prince, Bin Nayef, in which Prince Mohammed allegedly said he could kill the sitting king, Abdullah, to clear the throne for his own father, Salman.” The use of ‘allegedly’ makes the quote dubious, did anyone hear that recording? Was it forensically analyzed? Simple questions that could lift the veil of this. Did no one catch on to this?

I think I have raised enough doubt on the settings we see. And as we go back to the setting of “an intelligence assessment released by then president Joe Biden in 2021 concluded that Prince Mohammed approved the murder.” As such, as it was released, why didn’t the Guardian include this to give weight to the article? Was it because it relied to heavy on Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri? I don’t know, I never saw the assessment. So have a great day and consider what others want you to think. I, merely want you to see the evidence because that decides the guilt of someone, I could (of course) be wrong.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as Bin Nayef, CBC, CIA, Jamal Khashoggi, Joe Biden, MBS, Middle East, Mike Morell, Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud, politics, President Biden, Riyadh, Saad bin Khalid Al Jabri, Saudi Arabia, Stephanie Kirchgaessner, the Guardian, Turki al-Jasser, United Nations

September 27, 2025 · 22:56

So you know

I was about to bitch about something (I will after this), other news hit me. The new just gave me “Trump’s Energy Department warns that Americans could face 800 hours of blackout by 2030” I am not sure that it will be this much, but I warned for this as early as the story I published in February 6th 2023 called ‘When is a car battery not one?’ (At https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/02/06/when-is-a-car-battery-not-one/) And I did so several times. So when I saw this I had to giggle. Some people are catching up and I saw it over 2 years ago. Now there is the use of ‘could’ so it might be less, but the setting came BEFORE all the AI crap we see here, with these data centers taking up massive amounts of energy. The solution was to embrace the solutions Elon Musk already had and to do so before others buy all the batteries in the land. As such I feel kinda vindicated. Feel free to read up on my blog and you will see that I have been saying that these dangers were clear long before 2023. Elon Musk had the solution but no one took me seriously. So now as we see that in 4 years we speculatively see America has one month energy free is a little unsettling and I feel nothing. I warned others and no one took me seriously. Happy me, downer for them.

But now we go to the thing that upset me. The article was given by someone I will not mention here. But there was a Variety article (at https://variety.com/2025/politics/global/marc-maron-human-rights-riyadh-comedy-festival-1236530044/) at ‘Marc Maron and Shane Gillis Slam Riyadh Comedy Festival as Bill Burr, Kevin Hart, Pete Davidson Set to Perform in Saudi Arabia: ‘From the Folks That Brought You 9/11’’ where we see “Saudi Arabia’s upcoming Riyadh Comedy Festival is drawing controversy with several U.S. comedians blasting the star-studded event and Human Rights Watch asking participating artists to “request a meeting about Saudi Arabia’s human rights crisis,” the org. said in a statement. “The seventh anniversary of Jamal Khashoggi’s brutal murder is no laughing matter, and comedians receiving hefty sums from Saudi authorities shouldn’t be silent on prohibited topics in Saudi like human rights or free speech,” said Joey Shea, Saudi Arabia researcher at Human Rights Watch.” So I would like to make a deal with Joey Shea. Either he presents ACTUAL evidence or he shuts his fucking mouth (read: keyboard), Forever. I have gone over this for over 4 years and I have had it with the stupid Islamophobes, Or perhaps better, we ask Saudi Arabia to stop shipping oil to America and sell it to other parties. I wonder how long America will be able to stay afloat. I am sick or reposting that same lacking evidence from UN Essay writer Eggy Calamari. I think it is great that comedians get to ship their version of speaking to Saudi Arabia. I would like to have seen a share of English, Australian and Canadian comedians, but that is up to whomever is arranging this upcoming Riyadh Comedy Festival. I was always partial to the humor of Jimmy Carr, but that is me.

So as we are setting these two issue and the second one was countered in ‘That was easy!’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/02/27/that-was-easy/) And I countered a document from the United Nation. So there.

This is the setting we are seeing and there is plenty of polarization on both sides of the isle. I cannot figure out where the hatred is coming from, but it is a massive issue as I personally see it. Lets be clear. I am not saying the man is guilty or innocent. But as I see it, the law is clear. Guilt must be established and that was never done. Moreover, I saw several loose markers in that document and that is how I see it, as such the remark “I mean, the same guy that’s gonna pay them is the same guy that paid that guy to bone-saw Jamal Khashoggi and put him in a fucking suitcase. But don’t let that stop the yucks, it’s gonna be a good time!” From Marc Maron and for him I have the same message. Hand over the evidence, or shut the fuck up.

OK, it might be a little eras, but I get too many of these ‘claim’ whilst there is no evidence. In the men time the speculative setting of that he had taken his 19 year old mistress to Bora Bora was never investigated either. So what gives?

And that is merely the beginning, but the idea that one month a year there is no electricity in America is a kinda joyful setting. The idea that Americans one month a year will need to find another way to spend the time. In the meantime the rest of the world will mostly continue as is. How is that for the most advanced nation in the world?

Have a great day and I apologise for being a little direct today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

Tagged as America, Bill Burr, comedy, Elon Musk, Human Rights watch, Jamal Khashoggi, Jimmy Carr, Joey Shea, Kevin Hart, Marc Maron, Middle East, Pete Davidson, politics, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Shane Gillis, United Nations, USA

September 18, 2025 · 06:59

The setting changes

That is at times a rule, but to call it the massive rule to measure things to is not the greatest rule to live by (you might have to think that sentence over a little while before it makes sense). You see, there is a story that bugs me and I was almost willing to let it go. But Yesterday in ‘Name Calling’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/09/17/name-calling/) I started down a rabbit hole, a hole that smothers and makes it hard to breath. You see the press to a much larger degree has become a populist media, they do not check sources (as shown yesterday) The media is losing credibility in massive waves. The problem is that I thought I was alone. When you are the only one shouting at a wall, is there a case that you yourself might have lost the focus?

That was my premise (at first).

So when you start looking at the wall, not being a wall, but a sea the dimension changes. It is no longer the height, but the amount of water that becomes an issue (it makes sense after a little while) and when you start looking into the water and you realise that water is transparent, you start looking for things. As such I found several sources (I already had a few) and these sources are a lot more focussed on the sham that is the International Association of Genocide Scholars. There was the simplest setting that “a member in good standing—a status achieved simply by paying an annual fee of 30 dollars. No academic credentials are required” and this comes with the added quote “Dr. Sara Brown, regional director of the American Jewish Committee in San Diego and a scholar who has served on the IAGS advisory board, told The Media Line: “I was silenced. And the resolution was forced through. What really troubled me was the way that it was presented to mainstream media, that 86 percent of the association had unanimously agreed to condemn Israel for genocide. That’s inaccurate. And to be perfectly honest, it lacks academic integrity, basic integrity to falsely represent the association and falsely cite statistics.”” (source: the media line) The France24 news (added in yesterday’s blog) had a few other settings that were weird, but the overbearing setting was that the media didn’t care, they preferred to not do their job. They became (as I personally see it) as courtesans towards the digital dollar.

The medicine also gives us “Only 28 percent of the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) cast a ballot in the resolution declaring Israel guilty of genocide in Gaza. Of those who voted, 108 supported the measure—less than a quarter of the association’s total membership. Yet international outlets, including The Guardian, AP, Reuters, The Washington Post, and the Financial Times reported the outcome as if it were a sweeping consensus of the world’s foremost genocide experts. Critics inside and outside the association now argue that the process was unrepresentative and that the coverage misled the public into believing in unanimity where none existed.” Now I wanted to have a setting that if people like Amal Clooney (a revered British lawyer and human rights activist) was part of that list, you get a mixed setting, but that is as I see it less of a case. The doughty street chambers adds this to her name “Amal Clooney is a barrister who specializes in international law and human rights. She is ranked in the legal directories Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners as a leading barrister in international human rights law, public international law, and international criminal law. She is described as ‘a brilliant legal mind’ who is ‘in a league of her own at the Bar’. The directories spotlight her ‘commanding presence before courts’ and describe her as ‘a dream performer before international tribunals’ with ‘superb advocacy’ that is ‘crystal clear in focus and highly persuasive’. The rankings emphasize her ability to galvanize ‘heads of state, foreign ministers and business … in a way that is very effective’ for victims of human rights abuses.” That would be a legal mind to say ‘wow’ to, but when you see the feedback from the IAGS (in the France24 story) stating that it goes through a “rigorous peer reviewing process” and that it went through three separate committees. Now here is the crunch, there are 500 members, did they came from that pool? Where is the paperwork on that? And that happens before the vote. So how was the voting set? What was the minimum amount of votes? Only 28% voted as other sources gave its (the France24 article never brought that out) the article also ‘pressed’ of those who voted. As I see it, Melanie O’Brien never gave the details and more over France24 never pushed anything on this. And she skipped over the report being a three page document. That alone should have halted the press. They didn’t. The joke about the journalist no one cares about was 106 pages (the UN document). One person, so how come that the ‘genocide’ setting that players like Hamas feed us can be summarized in three pages? So how is ‘extensive’ research done in three pages? And who are these reliable and extensive sources? That entire sham (about 4 minutes of it) was swallowed whole by the audience.

So, here I am digesting several matters. As such it is time to call in some assistance and (at https://www.thefp.com/p/another-reason-not-to-trust-the-experts) wee see that the Free Press gives us ‘Another Reason Not to Trust the ‘Experts’’ and it starts by giving us “The International Association of Genocide Scholars calls itself a body of experts, but joining requires only a form and a fee. Members include parody accounts like ‘Mo Cookie’ and ‘Emperor Palpatine.’” And the story start of in a most interesting way. “This week, the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) voted on a resolution that accused Israel of committing genocide in its war against Hamas. Like moths to a flame, the mainstream press ran wild with the story of the organization’s declaration. “Israel Is Committing Genocide in Gaza, Leading Scholars’ Association Says,” ran the headline in The Washington Post.”

And in continuation we get “The Guardian quoted the president of the association, Melanie O’Brien, declaring that the resolution represented “a definitive statement from experts in the field of genocide studies that what is going on on the ground in Gaza is genocide.” In another interview with ABC News Australia, O’Brien boasted that the resolution passed with nearly 90 percent support. The BBC’s headline read: “Israel Committing Genocide in Gaza, World’s Leading Experts Say.” The problem for these publications is that if you kick the tires—even slightly—it becomes obvious that the resolution is a sham, top to bottom.” And the press is not waking up? You have gotta be joking me. With the source that according to most started the wave of looking into this setting we are given “On Tuesday evening, Salo Aizenberg, a board member of HonestReporting and contributor to NGO Monitor, tested that proposition. After exploring the IAGS website, he found that he could become a member of the organization with just a $30 contribution. “This organization that purports to be a leading organization of scholars is open to anyone who is interested,” he told The Free Press.” I got alerted to this setting by the Javier Bardem (who told us all on the red carpet in the Emmy event) and someone who went to town on this in LinkedIn. That was my trigger to give you yesterday’s blog and I found out most of what I know in under an hour of investigation. As such what did the Guardian, the Washington Post and ABC News Australia do? Is it weird that I call the ‘Courtesans of the digital dollar’? (I considered that calling them greed driven whores was too crass a statement to make). We then get “IAGS’s open membership is important because as Aizenberg learned in his research on the website, 80 of the 500 members of IAGS all claim to be based in Iraq—a country not known for universities with robust genocide scholarship. But it’s even worse than that. Only 108 out of the organization’s 500 members actually voted for the resolution. So contra O’Brien, only 21.6 percent of the IAGS supported it, not nearly 90 percent. That figure represents 108 out of the 129 people who bothered voting for the resolution at all.” As well as “One IAGS member, Sara Brown, the author of Gender and Genocide in Rwanda, posted on X that the leadership of the organization prevented members from filing comments criticizing the resolution before the vote. “We were promised a town hall, which is a common practice for controversial resolutions,” she wrote, “but the president of the association reversed that. The association has also refused to disclose who were the authors of the resolution.” After reading through the resolution, it’s easy to understand why the identities of the authors were shielded from the other members of the group. It’s riddled with inaccuracies and deceptive language. For example, the first paragraph asserts that Israel has killed “59,000 adults and children in Gaza,” without distinguishing between civilians and Hamas fighters.” You need to read the rest in the Free Press article (link above) And there is more to ‘convict’ the IAGS of, they make a sham of several settings and the press has no other recourse but to convict them as well, because if they do not, the press will have proven themselves to be biased and unworthy to call themselves news media. There is of course the funny setting that all these papers will have to be charged VAT from now on as most hide behind the zero VAT setting for being news sources. When that stops their advertisers go the way of the Dodo really fast.

The media line also gave us “For her, the flaws went beyond procedure. “They cite U.N. sources … and if you look at the citation, it says data that has not yet been verified by the United Nations, and then in footnote five it says Ministry of Health Gaza—the Hamas-run Ministry of Health,” she pointed out. “The fact that those are the statistics that they had to cite and it’s in the first paragraph immediately speaks to a lack of academic integrity … It’s not even academically lazy. It’s reckless. And the harm is real.””

The article can be seen (at https://themedialine.org/top-stories/only-28-of-scholars-associations-members-voted-on-gaza-genocide-resolution-but-global-media-missed-the-story/) and that part gives us that The Media line as ‘trusted news’ is a lot more trustworthy than the mainstream media at present.

Darn, I forgot to shine the limelight on Microsoft again (my personal behemoth) and in that same setting I now wish you a good day and consider trusting the news media a lot less than before. So to all of you, have a great day today and don’t forget to question your news vendor at some point.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics

Tagged as ABC News, Amal Clooney, American Jewish Committee, AP, BBC, Gaza, genocide, Hamas, honest reporting, IAGS, International Association of Genocide Scholars, Israel, Media Line, Melanie O’Brien, Ministry of Health, Palestine, politics, reuters, Salo Aizenberg, San Diego, Sara Brown, The Free Press, the Guardian, UN, United Nations, Washington Post

Tag Archives: United Nations

Recent Posts

Archives