Tag Archives: United Nations

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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, VENEZUELADownload

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

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

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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 , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 3, 2025 · 17:59

The need of some

That is what I see, the need of some. You see, as far as I can tell, we see all kinds of pretenders (especially around Gaza and Palestine) but for the most, these losers are all about the limelight and none of them are about resolving anything. They go on binges around anti-Israel events, they go on binges around Palestine, but in the end, they merely like the limelight. Yes, it is getting to me. For the most I am on the “Eradicate Hamas” train. But there is a setting that needs illumination. You see I have already done this 3-4 times over the last two years. Arab News gave us yesterday (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2610380/saudi-arabia) ‘KSrelief extends support to 5 nations in need’ actual events that the west is oblivious about. KSrelief has done plenty in the Arabic settings and now we see that Yemen, Jordan, Syria, Pakistan and Lebanon are getting help and I reckon that some of this has been going on for some time. 

We are getting that “In Yemen’s Aden governorates, the agency concluded a week-long general surgery project recently, during which 18 volunteers performed 26 operations.” It comes with the additional “KSrelief also launched the distribution of 6,000 cartons of dates in Yemen’s Al-Mahrah governorate, benefiting 42,000 displaced and vulnerable people — part of a broader plan to distribute 625,000 cartons across 12 governorates.” You can read the rest in the article. What I do want to give you is the end, which is “Since its launch in May 2015, KSrelief has implemented 3,612 projects worth more than $8.1 billion across 108 countries, in partnership with more than 325 organizations.” As I see it, KSrelief has achieved more in 10 years than the United Nations has in over 25 years. There is a chance that I am getting it wrong, but that is the political side of this that we are seen BS on many levels even though we get through AlJazeera (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/7/26/israel-says-its-distributing-aid-in-gaza-so-why-are-people-starving) where we get ‘Israel says it’s distributing aid in Gaza, so why are people starving?’ Where we are given “Israel claims that shortfalls are occurring because much of the aid lies “rotting in the sun” because the UN has not distributed it. Israel’s military radio, Kan, recently reported that the Israeli army has burned or buried some 1,000 trucks’ worth of aid that it deemed spoiled or expired.” I personally feel that it is a setting of she said versus she said and the media cannot be trusted to give us the truth. There are too many games played by the United Nations and by Hamas. This is a personal feeling, but there are too many factors and in earnest none of them can be trusted. I don’t trust the Israeli side, I do not trust the UN side, not the BBC side and certainly nothing that Hamas gives us. 

Yet what is done and I feel that I can trust this is what Arab News gives us about KSrelief and I feel I can trust what I see on these fields. The assistance that KSRelief gives us in these last 10 years sits well with me. My problem is that I hope that the western media will give KSrelief that they deserve. I feel that I am about the only non-muslim that is paying attention to what they do. 

I went through the first 5 pages of links searching for KSrelief and none of them are western media. It is basically despicable to see such non-caring and I personally blame the western need for digital dollars. We might ‘hide’ behind that things are more complex and that is fine, but at present Saudi Arabia is getting aid to 5 places that seemingly are ignored by western media. Mostly I stay away from Gaza issues as I was there in 1982 and I have had my fill of it, It is a drawn setting of something I do not understand. It is prolonged by politics I do not consider valid and politics that seems weird (optionally because I do not understand it) But I was there (44 years ago) and nowadays I still do not understand it and don’t try to convince me as most people are shouting what they read, but what you read is basically false, so there. Yet KSrelief is giving us the setting that matters and even as it seems trivial they are getting help to the people who need it, one package at a time and in this we see That in these 5 nations they brought relief and aided over 50,000 people. That is real assistance and it might not be enough, but it is a start and in the end they will have given “a broader plan to distribute 625,000 cartons across 12 governorates” in Yemen, a setting that is working, and as I see it more was achieved than the United Nations, now my thought might be off here, it is fair to say that, but at present we see all these political settings and we do not see any actual results in Yemen. That is what the thoughts get to when we see the media. There is a larger need other instances to show us what is done, the media is not giving them to us, so who can? Perhaps Arab News could follow through with an expose as to what the United Nations achieve and what KSrelief gets done. The issue is that at present KSrelief has implemented 3,612 projects worth more than $8.1 billion across 108 countries. Whilst on the side of the UN (regarding the UN) we are given “From 2014 to 2020, U.N. agencies spent nearly $4.5 billion in Gaza, including $600 million in 2020 alone” seemingly it isn’t working in Gaza, so what did they achieve in Yemen? These question are important, because as I see it the UN is merely a political beast and no one knows what funds are used and what makes it to these people out there. We might get images of rotting food at Rafah, yet what is true remains to be seen and too many media is a political tool for the ones that care of self, not of the victims. 

And that needs to be addressed and it needs to be addressed soon. I personally believe that any media guilty of spreading disinformation needs to be held to account and with that the media guilty needs to be blocked from transmitting and other needs to give voice to these media players to be cut short from transmitting. I know it is a tall order and I have no idea how to do that (verification of data) but something needs to be done. For the same setting is the question of I am a source of information or a source of disinformation. It will be a fair question, because I no longer know and my visit to rafah in 1982 is no guarantee that I am giving information regarding Gaza. I feel that Arab News is correctly informing me regarding KSrelief, but that is all. 

We need to see where aid is required and the media needs to illuminate this, not illuminate the path that it is giving regarding what the media stakeholders what us to know and how much we are told. That is all.

So I apologise is this writing is a little all over the place, but there are issues with this setting. I hope I made at least that clear. So have a great day and try to find some joy this Sunday.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

May 26, 2025 · 06:03

To all the dopey’s in the land

It sounds weird, but there are times that I have to flex my disgust. It might not be nice but at times you cannot stay indifferent to ignorance. And as such I start this Monday with a blog with a little scent of negativity. So Yesterday I saw an image. It doesn’t matter who send it as I do herald free speech at times. The person did nothing wrong and perhaps they believe this to be true. But I know better, or at least the evidence (I am pretty much always driven by evidence) gives my view the larger credibility.

As you can see, it is seemingly a leftish opinionated view. Some people feel that way and that is their right. But I have looked into this and what do I get as my response to “Based on what evidence?” I get:

As such, well I have read books (plural) the works of Stephen King, Alistair McLean, Desmond Bagley, John Le Carre, William Gibson, JRR Tolkien, JK Rowling, James S. A. Corey and many many more. I would feel safe to say hundreds more. So I have read books. So the person who did this:

Yet more importantly, I also read the UN report on this issue which I discussed in ‘That was easy!’ Which I did on February 27th 2021 (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/02/27/that-was-easy/) I shot holes in that document by some UN essay writer and I specified them, but there was one part I left out in the open. There was also the fictional setting from a book called ‘Blood and oil’ written by two wannabe reporters (as far as I can remember) and my response was “All whilst the report that gives us “the Crown Prince’s support for using violent measures to silence dissidents abroad”, a stage that is not met with actual facts and factual evidence.”

It is evidence that counts. Do I know that he is innocent? No, I do not, yet the law was unable to prove this to any degree and more important the media made all kinds of speculation whilst hiding behind ‘might’ and ‘could have’, similar to the UN report where we see terms like ‘high confidence’ by the CIA and ‘high confidence’ is not evidence. These are the people who claimed Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) and they never gave us the factual evidence even though even though they had around 16,000 troops there. Evidence counts and we weren’t given any. It is as I personally see it ‘an American smear campaign’ and Huawei can tell you what that is like. They are still going through it. So what was the ‘evidence’ I omitted? Well we have all heard of those torture tapes but no-one (I say again no-one) gave us any factual and forensic evidence of this/these tape(s). There is not forensic report stating how long this torture lasted, forensic evidence that it was the voice of Jamal Khashoggi and such matters. Perhaps it exists and perhaps it does not. In the meantime the media threw all kinds of loosely connected stories and more than one by people who were ‘protected’ by anonymity.

That is the factual setting and the story I referred to has the actual document that the UN spread, so feel free to check that reference and the list of issues I found within an hour, isn’t it strange that the media never did that? It is the result of a smear campaign on behalf of a stakeholder vying for the needs of unnamed people. 

As such I debunked the setting of “On the left, the guy who ordered his 15-man death squad to kill and dismember American journalist Khashoggi in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul.” In the first what order was there and who gave it? Then we get to “kill and dismember”, how is that proven. There was never a body and as for kill? Apparently he is living the sweet life on Bora bora with his mistress. A speculation that was never proven either. We merely know for a fact that he was at some point in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul. That is all we know for sure. The rest is speculation and even the UN resorted to an essay writer, to set certain cogs in motion. Is my evidence any better? I can agree that some people state that this is not, but I am resorting and critically analyzing the data we are given and I used that UN document. At no point did I use any Saudi Documentation. So have a great day (it felt good to get this of my chest yet again).

135 minutes until breakfast.

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics

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

May 10, 2025 · 07:23

From B to A

That is how this feels. After the ICJ drops the case against the UAE, which I discussed in ‘Accused United Arabs’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2025/05/07/accused-united-arabs/)

we get Aljazeera giving us (at https://aje.io/yppdhg) ‘UAE denies supplying Sudan paramilitaries with Chinese arms’ where the byline is “UAE says it “strongly rejects” accusations of arming Sudan’s paramilitary forces”. I for one am a little surprised. Is this news? Aren’t journalists supposed to be intelligent? We are also given “Salem Aljaberi, the UAE’s assistant minister for security and military affairs, said on social media on Friday that the allegations, contained in an Amnesty International report released the previous day, are “baseless” and “lack substantiated evidence”.” With the additional “Amnesty said on Thursday that it had verified footage showing RSF fighters using Chinese GB50A guided bombs and 155mm AH-4 howitzers during attacks in Khartoum and Darfur. According to the rights group, the UAE was the only known buyer of the howitzers from China, citing data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.” The UN has become more of a joke then most others as they are playing (as I personally see it) some political game, the same can be said for their hilarious essay’s against Saudi Arabia. And in this I wonder about the “lack of substantiated evidence”, what evidence does the UN give the world? How was the footage verified? Who what parties and why doesn’t AlJazeera show the footage? Same can be said for the 155mm howitzers. What evidence is there that the UAE send them? And as such the quote giving us “Sudan’s Defence Minister Yassin Ibrahim on Tuesday accused the UAE of violating the country’s sovereignty by backing the RSF, and the military government announced it would cut diplomatic relations.” What evidence has Defence Minister Ibrahim given the world that the UAE was behind this. I feel comfortable asking that question as the ICJ threw out the case with a 14-2 vote. So is the Sudan now in the market of staking Aljazeera for market research purposes so that the media can be the ‘match’ that lights the track of awareness for the Sudan. We get recognition by Aljazeera, followed by recall through the lager media, which gives us top of mind through people who have read the articles and preference of the accused party by all. And how were these weapons shipped (I got to this question a little early, but this will make sense shortly.

You see, the second article I saw in that hour was ‘Amnesty Says UAE Supplying Sudan Paramilitaries With Chinese Weapons’ (at https://thedefensepost.com/2025/05/09/amnesty-uae-sudan-rsf-weapons/), a piece even more debatable then the Aljazeera piece. They did give us “Amnesty said its research was based on weapons used by the RSF in operations in the western region Darfur and during its loss of the capital Khartoum in March.” So how is the origin of these weapons tracked? 

Perhaps some of these weapons still had the Abu Dhabi mall Toys-R-Us sticker, with the discount barcode so that the armies in the Sudan could afford them? I’m not sure, so I thought I’d ask.

As such the laughable UN also sticks his fingers in here as we are given ““Sophisticated Chinese weaponry, re-exported by the United Arab Emirates, has been captured in Khartoum, as well as used in Darfur in a blatant breach of the existing UN arms embargo,” Amnesty said.” Please tell me what corroborating evidence is there? I am not dismissing these statements if there is evidence. What makes it the setting of the UAE? I asked the same question 3 days ago. What makes this a responsibility of the UAE? What proves that the UAE was active here, and not some idle quick rich wannabe Emirati citizen? The UAE has an estimate 116,500 millionaires. What evidence sets at least one of these in the limelight, what evidence makes the UAE the guilty party? None of any evidence I ever saw gives us that. The evidence the world has seen is bitterly little. As I see it UN chief Antonio Guterres is making more and more a fool of himself which lads to more countries now considering abandoning the UN charter. If only clear evidence was presented to the world at large. Even a nice picture of the Chinese goods found in Sudan would have helped, but all I saw were soldiers with Kalashnikovs (a Russian invention). 

The entire farce I have seen over the last three days completely lacks evidence. There is no documented money trail, there is not shipment trail and there is no physical evidence presented. That is a simple three way tier that is missing and Aljazeera takes itself serious with this?

It is easy for me to go from B to A, as the events have taken place and in that time responsible parties should have been ahead of me by some lengths. Even the Defence post shown from yesterday is lacking making the issue larger and more of a joke than a serious case of accusation. I for one agree with Salem Aljaberi, this is totally lacking substantiated evidence. I personally wonder what the editor of Aljazeera was doing, polishing his nails? Hoping for digital dollars? Your guess is as good as mine and consider that I saw the gaps in less then 30 minutes on these two articles, how long will it take you to see that this is about something else. 

Have a great day, for me it is a simple 90 minutes until breakfast.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Military, Politics

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

March 18, 2025 · 20:36

And another stage erupts

That was always going to be the case. Hamas thinks it can play the blame game and Israel has had enough. So when you think of the Trump setting as well as the Egyptian setting for a ‘riviera’ stage, Consider that this was not due to Israel. It was Hamas that decided not to release the hostages. They are holding onto and straws they can and now the world see that any peace is possible, but not until Hamas is eradicated, even the people in Gaza are starting to realise this.

And in the setting we see Mark Rubio (at state.gov) give us “They feel like Hamas is not serious about negotiations.  They are still holding hostages and bodies in terrible conditions.  They are insisting on these dramatically lopsided trades of hundreds of people for one or two.  The President’s expressed his frustration about it as well.  So the Israelis are going to do what they believe is in their interests to sort of force Hamas to make decisions.  As I said, Mr. Witkoff is heading to Qatar, and hopefully that’ll bear fruit and all of these hostages will be released.  They should all be released.  They should all be released.” In addition there are settings where we get Al Jazeera also gives us “Rubio says Hamas ‘must be eradicated’, casting doubt on Gaza ceasefire deal”, as I see it, my response is: “Welcome to the party pal”, I have been telling you this for over a year. The setting is that the hostages have been there for over 528 days. Enough is enough. 

And this is not the only thing. The disgraceful setting of that UN loser (António Guterres) is also one that requires mention. We are given “UN Secretary-General António Guterres says he is “shocked” by the Israeli airstrikes in Gaza and has called for the ceasefire to be respected.

In a statement, Guterres urged for humanitarian aid to resume for people in Gaza and for the hostages held by Hamas to be released unconditionally.” He didn’t say “He is “shocked” by the Israeli airstrikes in Gaza. The hostages held by Hamas are to be released unconditionally and immediately and has urged for humanitarian aid to resume for people in Gaza and the ceasefire to be respected.” No, he is setting to onus on Israel, what a loser he is. I understand the setting that there is no talking to Hamas, and that is the only way he might make some inroads into Gaza. But I reckon that after 528 days it is over. We have no idea how many people are still alive and Hamas knows it will be the end of them. So as Gaza’s are dying today and tomorrow, let it be clear that this is due to Hamas, they started this and now it is coming to an rather rough end. 

So as these Palestinian losers in Universities go all anti-semitic, consider that we also get
(via Reuters) that ‘Rubio says US to revoke more student visas in coming days’, with the byline “In the days to come, you should expect more visas will be revoked as we identify people that we should have never allowed in”, as such the people who think they had a clue (and mindlessly repeated slogans from actual Israel haters) consider that mindlessly repeating slogans you never understood is removing you from academic consideration and throwing in the lap of the fast food industry (they are short staffed now), and it will come with a maximum annual income of $27557 or $13 per hour. Do you really think that you had a clue what was going on? I was in Rafah in 1982 and I did not completely get it, but in those days Yasser Arafat and the PLO were a much larger danger. So as you are reporting the words “From the river to the sea, we will be free” consider that you openly called for the eradication of 9,757,000 million Israeli’s and you are getting all that comes on top of you now. 

 And for your consideration, when you see the damage that is, how does Al Jazeera get the numbers “At least 326 Palestinians have been killed as Israel launched a massive assault on Gaza, shattering the fragile two-month-old ceasefire with Hamas.” How did they get the number 326? There is little communication, there is a lack of resources and a lack of adequate assistance in Gaza. They are summoning Humanitarian aid, but they know EXACTLY how many people were bombed? I doubt this sincerely. I will not argue that there are victims here (like the Israeli hostages) but the rest is all on the people in Gaza’s. Just remember the hundreds that came to ‘wave goodbye’ to the Israeli’s, to show ‘force’ to Hamas. Now it counts against you and Israel will not feel to burdened by the amounts of people killed in Gaza. You all support a terrorist organisation and the world has had enough. As such what is the UNRWA still doing active? Wasn’t there a call on October 29th 2024 ‘Coalition calls for UNRWA funding to be diverted to other aid groups after laws passed to ban group from Israel’? We were given “Israel’s parliament, the Knesset, passed laws overnight banning UNRWA from operating on Israeli soil — putting it at risk of collapsing when the laws take effect in 90 days.” So how are they still operating? Did Hamas ‘offer’ a helping hand? 

In this Simon Birmingham “The Coalition supports increased humanitarian aid into Gaza, but it should be delivered by groups other than UNRWA.” In this I wonder what is more important to these individuals. Actual aid, or their pay-slip. I reckon that there is some provision around that they still get paid as long as they are there. So in this, who is minding the UNRWA store as there is every indication that Hamas gets their piece of pie from that bag of money and eradicating Hamas is what is at stake at the moment (or should I refer to the steak).

Well that is the goods I have today, it was only time when Hamas goofed it all up, all whilst them releasing all the hostages stating “You see, we can be talked to, we can negotiate”, I knew that was never going to happen.

Have a peaceful day today.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military, Politics

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