Tag Archives: US Congress

June 7, 2023 · 20:40

The boom what?

Yes, a few hours ago, the AL-Monitor gave me the news (and anyone else who reads it) that ‘Canada’s arms exports boom to Saudi Arabia, Israel, Qatar’ (at https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2023/06/canadas-arms-exports-boom-saudi-arabia-israel-qatar) now you think this is great news (as in size of the news), but you would be wrong. Canada, the other commonwealth nations as well as America are waking up to the coffee (optionally served by Tim Horton himself). When we read “most of the shipments coming from a $15 billion contract reached in 2014 but only approved for export by Canada’s current government” and you consider ‘Is it too little, too late?’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/06/02/is-it-too-little-too-late/), which I wrote on June 2nd and you take the scale of the setting, you will see just how desperate the US is at present. Is it that Saudi Arabia is siding with BRICS? Is it because Saudi Arabia decided to cut production by a million barrels per day? Your guess is as good as mine, yet this is the setting and the Canadian BS line that it only got approved by the current government does not compute with me. This is the result of bad management on too many levels of US administration and now that the end-line is in view and the US is seeing that several nations, and a few not friendly to America are ahead of them. They are trying whatever they can to avert disaster and I am not sure if that is even possible at present. As I personally see it, China played the long game and they are now the expected winning team. Ahead in defence contracts with the KSA, ahead with infrastructure contracts with the KSA and Telecom contracts and now that the others are waking up, we get “The aims of Blinken’s trip, analysts say, include regaining influence with Riyadh over oil prices, fending off Chinese and Russian influence in the region and nurturing hopes for an eventual normalisation of Saudi Arabian-Israeli ties.” What a surprise! I wrote on June 3rd in ‘Would you believe that?’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/06/03/would-you-believe-that/) where I mentioned Russia, China and Iran. I also gave a list where we see these 4 points now directly or indirectly mentioned. 

2. Oil prices.
3. BRICS membership.
4. Defence spendings lost.
5. Iranian diplomatic settings.

And it does not end there. The article (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/6/7/blinken-starts-saudi-arabia-visit-aimed-at-steadying-relations) also gives us “Richard Goldberg, a senior adviser at the Washington, DC-based think tank, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said that discouraging a closer Saudi Arabian-Chinese relationship is probably the most important element of Blinken’s visit.” With the underlining “[Blinken should explain] why Chinese interests do not align with Saudi Arabia and why closer relations in a strategic way inhibit closer relations with Washington”. You see, here is the delusional stage. They are thinking that America still has options. I personally believe it is too late for that, if that was the case then this stage would be handled in 2019 (2015 would have been better), not in 2023. As I see it China merely waited for the US and EU bungle this to the largest degree and that happened in 2020 as China successfully courted The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for a whole range of issues and with the US president labelling the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia a pariah, that moment was reached. It wasn’t merely the straw that broke the camels back, it inhabited the entire convoy of Camels and now the end-game is coming into focus. For me (where I am now) it would in part be nice if Blinky Tony (Anthony Blinken) pulls it off, but he will have to sweeten the deal by a massive amount, not merely 1-2 promises, but a whole range of issues on paper signed by the president of the United States and here Congress, as well as the Senate better get out of the way, the loss will be too great if they bungle this. Still the chances of success are slim as I see it. Too much has passed and even as the United Nations played its anti-Saudi cards it might not be enough. As such a whole range of issues that got started by a United Nations essay by someone no one cares about, just like that columnist, that names eludes me for now.

More of my ‘insane predictions’ as some trolls would say are now a matter of fact and slowly we see the facts placed on papers as what is ‘stated’, but last week there was none of this. As such is the media doing its job? Are they looking into matters? What else are they missing? For me the case does not change much, other than the chance that Amazon wakes up to the billions they are missing out of, for me Tencent Technologies is a viable solution, it might cost me a little, but that is nothing to what Amazon and Facebook will lose out of. Google decided not to go ahead in this direction and as I am seeing certain players evolving ideas I had on a few occasions, the timing is decent (but it could have been better), still in light of where America is heading, I should be thankful for every dollar I will get out of this deal and as I see it time is growing shorter and shorter. Still as we see America trying to avoid sinking on the spot, we are all in decent fear of how it hits us, because there is no way that the western world (as well as most Commonwealth nations) will not get hit to some extent. All because we had faith in ego driven idiots (sorry, I meant politicians).

So, how is all this playing out for you?

Enjoy the midweek, we are now at 50% of the next weekend timeline.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

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

May 27, 2023 · 12:47

Ding Ding, the premise is set

Yes, this is not new, I made mention of this danger several times over the last two years. And now the media is tarting to catch on. The Guardian (at https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/26/russian-weapons-manufacturers-hosted-at-saudi-trade-event) gives us ‘Russian weapons manufacturers hosted at Saudi trade event’, you see, some might think one part, or the other part, but personally I believe that they were invited as a courtesy. There is the option that they were invited to make sure that the China offers are financially sharp, but that is the sales world for you. You see, they might offer Russian Helicopters, like the Ka-52 Alligator helicopter. Yet the Ukrainians have ben shooting them out of the sky by the dozens, so the options are speculatively not there I reckon and the way Russia is losing hardware, every machined piece of cavalry and artillery better come with a ballpoint (for write off purposes). This was the stage that was going to happen no matter how you slice it. The US thought it was clever and it is now (not so) cleverly losing billions in defence spending by Saudi Arabia and its allies. So when we see “Perhaps the most significant participant in the meetings with the Saudis is Rostec, a Russian state-owned defence systems” and we consider the byline “Companies with direct links to Russian military set to attend, which is likely to heighten tensions with US” no one seems to be noticing that Stephanie Kirchgaessner with her anti-Saudi writing is involved and the larger question is missing is “a similar trade forum with Chinese businesses had also been held recently, although those businesses did not involve firms with connections to the Chinese military.” Really? 

The Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group has no links to the Chinese Military? Tell me another one. Then there is “What is different here, and these recent business events are just one sign of it, is a major reorientation of Saudi policy towards Russia and China, and away from the USA and west Europe”, which comes from some unnamed source. The fun part is that I have ben saying this for close to two years and the first year there was an option to turn this around, yet the US and UK were sitting on their hands and now it is seemingly too late. This is the consequence of a stupid game played by the Pentagon, US Congress, the White House (in and out of office) and the House of Commons. This is the result of stupidity and there is no “heighten tensions with US”, the US is about to lose so much revenue that certain banking moguls will cut up the US credit card (and lower credit ratings in the process). 

Another step achieved by ego grandstanding and inactions. So where will Saudi Arabia, the UAE and a few other players go to? My money is currently on the Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group, but it is a speculative view and I lack certain levels of industry knowledge in that direction. As such I could be wrong, but I do feel that the failures in the Ukraine makes Russia a non-player in this game. Merely a column C option and it is there to make sure that those in Column A and B keep their prices down. This make makes it (for me) about half a dozen predictions right on the nose. Not bad in this day and age I reckon.

Enjoy the Weekend

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

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

April 13, 2023 · 04:17

The song remains the same

Yes, that is the setting we hear at times. We think that we are hearing something different, but when we listen closely, it is merely the same song we are hearing and this concert is all about ‘Oil in the family’ (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5vrWeHvErQ) yes, the song actually exists and it was created by Jan Akkerman (Dutch musician) a long time ago.

Yet the news comes from different sides. There is Arab News (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2285261/saudi-arabia) who gives us ‘Saudi crown prince and US Senator Lindsey Graham discuss bilateral ties’, wasn’t he one of these people who would not discuss things whilst his Royal Highness Mohammed bin Salman Al Saud was in office? I remember something of that nature. So whilst we see “Graham, a member of the Republican party, has served as a senator since 2002. His visit was said to reflect a continuation of Saudi-US bilateral ties and reciprocal visits through the years” make no mistake, this was about restoring lost oil settings, it has the ability to set the stage I saw yesterday (previous article) I dreamt of. I reckon the Iranian setting would be raised as well. A setting that defines the coming end of the United States as the middle eastern power player is now in discussion and for the US it sucks, the ally they shorthanded for too long now has the US (as some younglings state) by the short and hairy and the US does not like that. They will do almost whatever they can to restore settings, but they are as I personally see it too late. There is every change they can restore 500K barrels a day, but they will pay for that, they will have to pay top dollar and the energy shortages head of them will make them pay. Oil rules the world at present as it has the last few decades. So whilst they mull over their options lets take a short sidestep The US and its people were all (including media) so set on letting Jack Dorsey pass by and hammer Elon Musk, his power-cell solution could have lessened the impact of oil in energy for a massive amount three years ago, now there isn’t enough times and they keep on hammering Elon Musk. Now, this is their western ‘right’ but it also largely enables oil and therefor Saudi Arabia (Aramco). 

ABC4 news (at https://abcnews4.com//senator-lindsay-graham-meets-with-crown-prince-of-saudi-arabia-mohammad-bin-salman-jeddah-international-relations-boeing-airline-money-wach) gives us ‘Sen. Lindsay Graham meets with Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia’ with the added “I just had a very productive, candid meeting with the Saudi Crown Prince and his senior leadership team. The opportunity to enhance the U.S.-Saudi relationship is real and the reforms going on in Saudi Arabia are equally real”, with the added “I also expressed deep appreciation to the Kingdom for purchasing $37 billion worth of Boeing 787s – which are made in South Carolina – for the new Saudi airline. Investments like this are game changers” all whilst the topic oil is never mentioned and mostly because that part was handled behind closed doors. Iran is avoided as the US needs the lollipop named Oil (most likely a liquorice lollipop). The more it is avoided, the stronger it pushes to the foreground. Just like the 1981 song that rocked disco’s all over Europe. A good song can never be held down, just ask Mozart, the man is dead and requiem (1791) still shines on. No matter whether it is for you of for someone you know, that song remains a hit in every funeral parlour. Last there is Politico (at https://www.politico.com/story/2018/12/04/graham-senate-rebuke-saudi-arabia-1041379) that gives us ‘Graham on Senate rebuke of Saudi Arabia: ‘Someone’s got to do it’’ there we see “Sen. Lindsey Graham on Monday championed the Senate’s willingness to publicly rebuke the Saudi Arabian government despite the White House’s unwillingness to do the same, slamming the Gulf monarchy and calling out Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by name for accusing senators of grandstanding on the issue” there we see the larger problem and it is not that the White Houses unwillingness to do something, it is that they and others remain in denial. And guess what if the energy crises goes south and places like Google, Microsoft, IBM and Amazon see the impact of losing around 70% of the abilities during summer to do business because there isn’t enough energy to keep the equipment running, that is when the economic meltdown starts and panic hits several states. I think my early prediction of 90 days is right on the nose. At that point the US sees waves of panic it never faced before and China will be on the sidelines laughing. Their game worked perfectly. In my assessment (a purely personal one) action trumps inaction EVERY SINGLE TIME and that is what we see, and that is not nearly the end of it. Politico also hands us “the president, secretary of State and secretary of Defense have all said there is no definitive proof that the Saudi crown prince ordered Khashoggi killed. Multiple media outlets have reported that U.S. intelligence agencies have “high confidence” that the crown prince ordered the journalist’s murder.” The takeaway here is “there is no definitive proof”, something I mentioned several times, the gameplay via the United Nations (via someone called Eggy Calamari), its essay writer is falling flat and that goes back to February 2021  (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2021/02/27/that-was-easy/), more than two years ago, I already saw the failings of a United Nations being the useless tool of whomever. I even attached the document that shows their failings. It is so much easier to attach their folly, makes reading it easier. I don’t think the most powerful element that NO ONE investigated and forensically investigated the tape, there is mention of the tape, but when you read closely you see it surrounds things as ‘possible’ and ‘could’ the effect of forensic lacks. So this game was continued for over two years and that is what the US needs to claw back and they can not. 

Then the article ends with “Responding to Pompeo’s insistence that Congress breaking with the administration over Yemen would undermine the possibility for peaceful resolution there, Graham retorted in his op-ed that Congress is “a coequal branch of government exercising leadership to safeguard the country’s long-term interests, values and reputation.”” This shows that the US is still all about the discord, the denial and that is why the US is about to fail massively. The media played along and now they are caught between two difficult situations, because when they lose the energy and they cannot produce they will cry like the little girls they were all along. And there we see the final part of what I stated in the beginning, the song remains the same.

Have a great days and consider whatever you can upgrade to systems that rely on chargers, because soon enough for many hours a day, you will not have any options. The wealthier people will embrace the Elon Musk energy solution, but it will cost them top dollar. The others (like me) we will not be that fortunate, it is the consequence of an inactive political engine on a near global level. 

Enjoy the day and the working lightbulbs (for now).

 

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics, Science

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

January 1, 2023 · 20:12

BBC to the whatever

There was an issue from the start. I had reported on it before, so I initially decided to let it go. Yet then I remembered something. It is time to hold the BBC like other papers accountable for their fuck ups, and that includes the BBC as a media outlet. So lets take a look at the article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-64109777) giving us ‘Twitter in data-protection probe after ‘400 million’ user details up for sale’. You see, it might be about Twitter but it is larger then Twitter. The first instance is “Ireland’s Data Protection Commission (DPC) says it “will examine Twitter’s compliance with data-protection law in relation to that security issue”. Twitter has not commented on the claim.” The second part is “The data is said to include phone numbers and emails, including those belonging to celebrities and politicians, but the purported size of the haul is not confirmed. Only a small “sample” has so far been made public.” Wo far it is very neat, the extent of lack of mentions is also a lot more clear. You see there are two issues. When it was gotten and how it was gotten (the how is given to some extent later on). There is a setting emerging, but I will mention it soon. Then we get “data of US Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was included in the sample of data published by the hacker. The data of broadcaster Piers Morgan, who recently had his Twitter account hacked, is also reported to be included. Twitter has so far not responded to press inquiries about the claimed breach. Chief executive Elon Musk did not reply to a tweeted request for comment from leading cyber-security reporter Brian Krebs – though the breach, as Mr Krebs notes, probably occurred before the Tesla boss took over.” The first gem is here. It is “probably occurred before the Tesla boss took over” and another stage where the media should have held Jack Dorsey to account, but it could not be bothered to do their bloody jobs. The media is showing to be as useless as a silent politician without the limelights. Then we get “While acknowledging the amount of data taken had not been verified, the firm’s chief technology officer, Alon Gal, told the BBC a number of clues appeared to support the hacker’s claim. The data did not appear to have been copied from an earlier breach in which details were published from 5.4 million Twitter accounts, Mr Gal said. Only 60 emails out of the sample of 1,000 provided by the hacker in the earlier incident appeared, “so we are confident that this breach is different and significantly bigger”, he said.”

There are all kinds of issues here, but the fact that there is an earlier breach gives a larger rise that the media should have looked at the fares of Jack Dorsey, but they ignore that part. I wonder what Jack Dorsey has on the media, because that is the only part that makes sense to me. And there is no reliability with ‘Only 60 emails out of the sample of 1,000 provided by the hacker in the earlier incident appeared’ which is at best merely an alleged side of the matter. There are heaps of other sides (like alternative email address) but there remains an issue. Was it the same hack? There might not be reliable information there, so Jack Dorsey is back in the frame. But the media keeps him intentionally out, on at least 5 events and that is worrisome. That they report now makes sense, but the earlier absence of reporting does not and they pushed for a stage where Elon Musk paid well over twice the amount he should have, and the media is no longer a trustworthy institution, no matter what they claim on their websites. 

So when we see ““Ryushi” has said that it exploited a problem with a system that lets computer programmes connect with Twitter to compile the data. Twitter fixed the weakness in the system in 2022. But the flaw is also believed to have been used in the earlier breach affecting more than five million accounts.” There are several issues here, but the fact that it was fixed in 2022 indicates that he became the owner on October 27, 2022. That gives the hack 8 weeks at best and even shorter if it was fixed, as such there is another issue and the BBC is not clean on mentioning it and even less on the responsibilities by Jack Dorsey and that too is on the BBC (and other media). 

My issue with the article is that is was so cleanly written, to keep names out of it and to make sure that nothing hits Jack Dorsey, why not? They never had that issue before, so something is up and it is time the media is seen as the untrustworthy source it has been for too long. But I reckon they will decide not to do so and make claims to IPSO that they can police themselves. In the meantime there is now a too large an issue with the media. Perhaps it is whoring for digital dollars, perhaps it is something more and the course of the media to avoid Jack Dorsey all over the field makes me believe that there is more. I wonder when we get that part, if ever.

For me, I am having another beer, the first 5G IP went public on 4Chan 20 hours ago and I wonder who finds it and who registers it. I hate waiting, but that I all I can do at present. Such is life.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

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

December 6, 2022 · 16:06

The other white paper

Yes, there are always white papers, but which one is true? You see, they are all true, they are all a point of view. Yet the truth from a point of view is relative, that has always been the case. This is why we have peer criticism for academic papers. Yet that is not the case for the media, they are all fighting to remain around with some feigned form of value. This has been the case for over a decade and now the BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-63869013) ‘Meta threatens to remove US news content if new law passes’, you see the truth of the matter is that the people no longer need the news, the news is no longer if value. It started when the media starting soliciting (aka whoring) for digital dollars. Flamed bring revenue, actual news not so much. The events surrounding Elon Musk, the abstinence around Jack Dorsey and a dozen other cases made it so. The newspapers are irrelevant and they know it, so in a last gesture to remain not completely irrelevant they rely on laws to force funds from social media. Even as the shared instances from places like the Australian link to paywalls, they are all about ‘lost revenue’ And the Australian is not alone, loads of American newspapers and media (like Forbes) do EXACTLY the same thing. They will tell you the scoop AFTER you pay, so how is that lost revenue? Not all papers are like that, but many are and now we get “It would give publishers and broadcasters greater powers to collectively bargain with social media companies for a larger share of ad revenue”, I believe this is to be a false setting and Meta gives it to you in the form of “Meta claims their platform, in fact, provides increased traffic to struggling news outlets.” They are correct. Consider the truth, it I simple, how many times did you go to the news site? How many times was this because THEY shared news on social media? This has been the case for a decade and now that Meta is taking off the gloves, we see how irrelevant the media has become. In the last year alone I highlighted close to a dozen cases of incompetency and a lack of information vetting by the media, so why should they get paid for shortcomings? It is almost like the decapitated chicken.  It’s running around, but it is already dead, the rest of its body did not figure it out yet. Is it fair? Does it matter? No, the media had the option to evolve, it merely decided that is was cheaper and more profitable to hang onto someone else’s coattails. It did not work out well for them and now they cry foul, almost like the yellow pages. Their era died and they just never adjusted in time and I am adding to the pain as my 5G seemingly goes to China. Setting a new stage in several ways and taking advertisement power away from all and leave it where it should have been all along, with the advertising people. With the locations of advertising and that is the lesson that they never picked up on, and it is not their fault. A place like Google missed it too and I mentioned it at least twice this year. 

A stage that is moving away from them faster and faster and if Meta makes the move it is threatening to a lot of players in the media world will be done for. Such is life, Media Erectus is getting eaten before passing on its whinges. So do not focus on the whinge, consider the place technology had for almost 2 decades and see where the media is not, and they have not been where they needed to be for almost a decade and now that they are about to become irrelevant they cry laws. Bu the way these same people never championed law changes to the environment, law changes to taxation and they simply went for the emotional targets, it had more expected digital dollars, so where are these dollars now? 

And when we see “Media companies argue that Meta generates huge sums of money from news articles shared on the platform.” So where is THAT evidence? Meta generates advertisement towards people through free accounts, and this gets me to (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n2H8wx1aBiQ) the congress statement April 2018 where the answer is ‘We run ads’ a setting that was in place for well over a decade. The news was never an element and as such the media better be quick with presenting ACTUAL evidence in that case.

When I see how irrelevant the media and Microsoft have become and I see them cry like little chihuahua’s all whilst they screw up options left right and centre, what the actual F*** (censored word) the world around them is doing protecting something this irrelevant is beyond me, it actually is.

We can debate things but look at the numbers. the Paris based World Association of Newspapers, which represents 18,000 newspapers gives us that there are a lot more. The world has 8,000,000,000 people, which implies that there is an average of 445,000 people per newspaper. When you start doing the math, you will see that the numbers o not add up. The newspapers that are still relevant are so as they have well over 2 million subscriptions. The Washington Post has 3 million, and The Wall Street Journal 2.4 million subscriptions. The Dutch Telegraaf had in 2001 807,000 subscriptions, in 2017 it was only 393,000. The larger national newspapers are losing ground and now we see the larger play. There are 195 countries in the world. So why are there 18,000 newspapers? They nearly all rely on Reuters, making at least 17,000 irrelevant already. But these are the numbers no one looks at, and they are all vying for advertisements. Look at ANY newspaper and look how many advertisements they have and how much they charge and you will see their actual loss. They are no longer a relevant advertisement group, digital media replaced them, they lost relevancy by allowing to become a family of 18,000 brothers and sisters and that is before you see the rest of the media relying on advertisement sales to qualify their existence. But no one looks at that side are they?

The other white paper that no one gets to see is the one no one in media wants to look at, it merely shows how irrelevant they have become.  

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Law, Media, Politics

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

March 14, 2022 · 21:41

Two issues connected

It is easy to see the connection, but at that point one wonders whether the real connections are made. The first article is ‘White House faces oil standoff with Saudi Arabia and UAE as prices soar’, the article (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/mar/13/white-house-us-joe-biden-oil-output-prices-saudi-arabia-uae) gives us “Saudi Arabia’s de facto leader, Mohammed bin Salman, and his counterpart in the United Arab Emirates, Mohammed bin Zayed, are yet to agree to a phone call with the west’s most powerful man”, my takeaway is the question whether the ‘west’s most powerful man’ is actually that. We also get “Each capital is a major supplier of oil, with excess capacity, which would soften the effect on US consumers through fuel prices before midterm elections in November that threaten Democratic control of Congress” and this is enough for article one. We see a few issues, the oil pries are still soaring and so far that so called most powerful man has not really achieved anything, has he? 

In the second article called ‘Iran suspends talks with Saudi, slams Riyadh’s executions’ (at https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-suspends-talks-with-saudi-arabia-nour-news-2022-03-13/), which is kinda hilarious, especially as Iran had 299 documented executions in 2021. Yet the story also gives us ““Iran has unilaterally suspended talks with Saudi Arabia,” Nor News said, without providing a reason. It said no specific date had been scheduled for a new round of talks”, not unexpected, but that is the effect of diplomacy with a toddler like Iran. You see I think there is more to it. I think Russia is trying to put the pressure on the west, the US is the weakest with its ‘nuclear deal’ ego. And as Iran suspends talks they continue to enrich uranium. Delay after delay until it is too late. 

Am I correct?
To be honest, I am not certain, I could very well be wrong. But consider Russia entanglement in the middle east and especially with Iran, it wants to play tits for dad (oops) by withholding the milk (oil) and this play seems to be actually working out. President Biden did this in part to himself. And now the larger stage is pushed into directions it should not have been going in. Yemeni’s and Syrians feel more and more betrayed by the west, and honestly, I cannot blame them for that. 

My issue is that Russia is playing a way too dangerous game, as they are now part of the delays, Iran might finish what it wants and when that goes the wrong way and Israel gets its first nuclear detonation, the bars are sealed. The USA must prove its word or be seen as flaccid and irrelevant on the political stage. And their play (as I mentioned in previous articles) in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was badly managed and even worse constructed and now that the US is desperate for cheaper oil they will feel the sting of biting the hand that was feeding them. It was bad already and now there is every indication that Russia is making matters worse via Iran. 

Russia is the connection. It is souring the Nuclear deal, and it has a handle on the Middle East to some degree, how much I cannot tell, but some who can are not talking (for obvious reasons) and that sets the sliding scales for the US who is now on a worsening scale economically. Even as some state that oil prices are going down, I personally feel that it is temporary. It is nowhere near the old price and there are chances that it will go back to $123.70 (March 8th) and optionally higher than that. President Biden could influence it positively, but if he does not succeed then the first sign of failure is shown and the Russians want that because for them the Republicans are easier to deal with (allegedly). For President Biden it all hangs here, He is down in the senate, but if he loses even one more seat the senate will be overwhelmingly republican and that COULD happen. He has a majority in the house, but only by 11 seats and there is no guarantee that he can hold onto them. When the house is lost as well, the Democratic Party will find obstacle after obstacle and that is what they signed on for. 

The failures in the middle east, especially Iran will haunt this administration for a long time to come. And the oil prices? Well that is still up n the air, but there are indications that this will not go their way either, it is wholly due to the way they dealt with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

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

October 19, 2021 · 21:58

Searching for a reason

We all do that at times, we all search for a reason. Whether it is for a solution, to blame or to incite. These are the most likely reasons, but they are not the only ones. The thought came to mind when the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-58961836) gave me ‘Amazon’s Jeff Bezos ‘may have lied to Congress’’ a stage where ‘may’ is operative. So there is not even any level of assurance that he ‘had most likely’ lied, that on the premise it was highly likely that he was not truthful, or any other stage of ‘creating doubt towards sincerity’. We are also given the claims that “Amazon copied products and rigged its search results in India to boost sales of its own brands”, as well as “sought to correct the record on the inaccurate media articles in question” and in finality we get “they were considering referring the firm “for criminal investigation””, so in the third, what ‘criminal investigation’? For allegedly rigging results in India? For inaccurate media articles? It is an open field and in all this, we need to consider that US congress is merely trying to get fines from rich companies any way they can get, it is what incompetent people tend to do, play the blame game. 

Yet to understand it we need to take a look at the Reuters article (at https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/amazon-india-rigging) where we get ‘Amazon copied products and rigged search results to promote its own brands, documents show’. Here we are given “The internal documents also show that Amazon employees studied proprietary data about other brands on Amazon.in, including detailed information about customer returns” this is indeed a solid accusation. In addition we get “It is difficult to develop this expertise across products and hence, to ensure that we are able to fully match quality with our reference product, we decided to only partner with the manufacturers of our reference product”, it is quite the accusation, yet this happened in 2016. So in the first, why is this not in Indian courts? In the second, why do we see a bland US Congress setting when it is not an activity on American soil? It was Amazon.in, it was in India and referred to Indian products. In addition we get the small part at the very end of “In sworn testimony before the U.S. Congress in 2020, Amazon founder Jeff Bezos explained that the e-commerce giant prohibits its employees from using the data on individual sellers to help its private-label business. And, in 2019, another Amazon executive testified that the company does not use such data to create its own private-label products or alter its search results to favour them” I see it as two parts, in 2019 there is a stage of “Amazon executive testified that the company does not use such data to create its own private-label products or alter its search results to favour them” which would support the stage of wrongful action mentioned earlier, and in 2020 we get “prohibits its employees from using the data on individual sellers to help its private-label business”, as such a stage optionally exists that a flaw was found and dealt with. Optionally there remains a stage that in 2016 “Amazon employees working on the company’s own products, known as private brands or private labels, planned to partner with the manufacturers of the products targeted for copying”, so a stage remains that Indian employees became creative to create their own private fortune in debatable ways, a stage that was close over time and there Reuters has a larger issue. The documents, what EXACTLY do they prove? I am not against Reuters here, they have proven themselves a few times over, so I am asking exactly what internal documents were in play? If they were emails and there the language and the path is also important. Reuters might be on the money, but they start with “A trove of internal Amazon documents reveals how the e-commerce giant ran a systematic campaign of creating knockoff goods” and there we see the assumption it is linking ‘internal Amazon documents’ towards ‘the e-commerce giant’, yet these employees, how high up the ladder were they, were they all Indian? In that case can a quality case based on quantifiable data be made against the e-commerce giant, or is this the event involving a few rotten apples (sorry, rotten pieces of fruit). So when we see the questions that rise from the Reuters article, the US Congress made leaps without investigating the evidence before referring it for Criminal investigation. You see, there needs to be a viable case before referring it, so there needs to be decent questionable evidence and so far, no one has seen it and I reckon it might not be there in the way the BBC article gives us the goods. I think there is a lot more and in all this, when we see “sought to correct the record on the inaccurate media articles in question”, we could have seen evidence and more importantly the media can show the evidence that it was wrongful data handed to them, but we do not see that either (at present), the media is very protective of one another at the alleged expense of anyone else. 

Can Amazon have done something wrong? Yes, absolutely, the firm is too big, things fall through the cracks. Yet the chance of Jeff with the Telly Savalas hairdo Bezos, or Nate Sutton, Amazon’s associate general counsel to openly lie to Judiciary Committee is too ludicrous to consider. That is the stage and when I see “We strongly encourage you to make use of this opportunity to correct the record… as we consider whether a referral of this matter to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation is appropriate,” I feel that this is an attempt to get another fine out of Amazon. Yes, I agree that the letter is merely good form, but I reckon that the players would have done a decent level of homework before that letter went out, and with another shutdown 9 weeks away, America needs all the cash they can lay their fingers on, I am merely wondering if their path is all on the up and up. But that is merely me, questioning whatever I see. I merely wonder if anyone else noticed the questions that the article brings up, it might be my not so trusting nature.

If Amazon did something wrong, OK. It happens and a fine will be the result, but this happened in India, so why is there no reference to a request from India, a request from Indian vendors and a more thorough investigation into the evidence. All that seems to be missing, weird, is it not?

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

January 7, 2021 · 23:19

The expensive Presidential joke

That is how I felt for most of the last 24 hours. It got to be worse when the international media decided to ignore the events given to them. To see this, we need to consider the first part.

Here is the image (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lX2gQsQElJY), the poster set the premise that it is open to interpretation, yet when you consider the quote by Reuters stating “after the police force that protects the legislative complex was overrun by a mob of Trump supporters in what law enforcement officials called a catastrophic failure to prepare”, the Dutch NOS, basically copied that text, yet when we see the police opening the gates, there is a larger failure, some would say that the metropolitan police in Washington DC can no longer be trusted. This is incorrect, when we see the quote “security initially was handled almost entirely alone by the U.S. Capitol Police, a 2,000-member force under the control of Congress and dedicated to protecting the 126-acre Capitol Grounds. For reasons that remained unclear as of early Thursday, other arms of the U.S. federal government’s vast security apparatus did not arrive in force for hours as rioters besieged the seat of Congress”, we see that their own security force is blatantly failing and my own personal interpretation is that in two weeks close to 2,000 pink slips need to be handed out. Remember when we saw Gerard Butler in Olympus has fallen, we need to realise that it does not require a large North Korean force, 2000 Trump fans driven to lunacy will do and for the most no firepower was required to turn the Capitol building into a war-zone. So when we pause and consider ‘For reasons that remained unclear’, there is a much larger stage, the first one is soon to be fired President Trump stating giving us that he won by a landslide, ABC gives us “Twitter hid three of the President’s tweets — including a video message repeating false claims that he won the election by a “landslide” — for “repeated and severe violations” of its civic integrity policy, warning it would permanently suspend him from the platform in the event of future violations. Facebook and Instagram followed suit soon after, tweeting that the platforms would block Mr Trump’s account from posting for 24 hours due to policy violations”, my issue here is the claim ‘it would permanently suspend him from the platform in the event of future violations’, they did a lot more to a lot of people for less, especially in light of other stages like ‘Black Lives Matter’, interesting how they closed speaking valves in that situation, is it not?

My anger is that for the most, I am a Republican, I am not American, but I identify with the republican side of politics (in many cases), I feel that this is the right way, yet I have always heralded the need for accountability. If you are not accountable, you are close to nothing. We take pride in our successes and as such we must also accept (and perhaps to a small degree herald) our failures. At times I believe that we learn more from failures then successes, but that might just be a setting limited to a few, in Business (and intelligence) most people hide or wash away failure like it is a bad habit and that setting gave us many failures (including 9/11 and Benghazi), there is a larger stage and we are setting the outline for that right now, as such it was a bit of a surprise to see James Comey (former director of the FBI) giving us “Donald Trump should not be federally prosecuted once he leaves the White House no matter how much evidence has been amassed against him”, it is a quote from his new book ‘Saving Justice: Truth, Transparency and Trust’ launched later this month. When you read the setting (at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/05/james-comey-donald-trump-prosecuted-saving-justice-new-book) it makes sense, yet even as a Republican I would prefer to foster the trust of the American people with Trump in prison with a $400,000,000 tax bill around his neck. As I personally see it Trump has championed petulant childish behaviour for too long and it is too sickening to see this continue. In part I like the idea of Merrick Garland being the new Attorney General, I never understood the lack of wisdom in stopping his nomination. It was the right of then president Obama to choose a new justice. Lat year or not, like I supported the right of President Trump to chose this justice in the last months of his reign of stupidity, then President Obama was equally entitled to select a justice. Now, the process is clear, he still had to be voted in by the senate, yet to refuse to hold a hearing was wrong in my personal opinion. 

And the stage America is on right now is not a good one, and as we go back to that building and Reuters giving us “The force’s officers are trained to keep protesters off the Capitol’s marble outdoor steps, to protect the complex like a citadel. But there are so many windows and doors in the 19th-century complex that it is difficult to defend them all, said Terrance Gainer”, the fact that security let the people right through is a much larger failure that is not debated or considered, a stage we all see and we all ignore, why is that Mr Gainer?

So as we take notice of the failures under this president, we all hope that the next one will be better, as I see it, he will be cleaning house for most of his first term, not merely his administration, he will need to address a failed infrastructure in a few more places than he will be comfortable with, on the upside, the Capitol security services might have up to 2,000 new positions open in the next few months. So those seeking a job (if you survive COVID-19) there is one lace you could apply.

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Military

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

October 2, 2020 · 02:14

You’re useless and you know it

Yup, quite the opening headline and  would like to tell the reader the it is about him or her, but no such luck, the headline (as is) can only be given to the most useless of useless, the US Senate. Yup, as some voices stated in the past, the US has fruits (US Congress) and nuts (US Senate) and there we sit in the middle of the tutti frutti of the dance floor, one might almost invite Madonna to come over and add a little spice to the mixture.

Yet Reuters who gives us (at https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-senate-tech/senate-panel-approves-sending-subpoenas-to-ceos-of-twitter-facebook-google-idUSKBN26M6FA) the headline ‘Senate panel approves sending subpoenas to CEOs of Twitter, Facebook, Google’, with the quote “The U.S. Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday unanimously voted to approve a plan to subpoena chief executives of Twitter, Alphabet’s Google and Facebook for a hearing likely to be held before the election on a prized legal immunity enjoyed by internet companies”, We can go in every direction possible, but lets start with “passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (a common name for Title V of the Telecommunications Act of 1996), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230. Section 230 generally provides immunity for website publishers from third-party content”, In this we see two elements, the first being that in 1996 there was no Google, no Twitter and no Facebook, in the second on larger beneficiary was the online presence of FoxNews, Yahoo and lets face it as I personally see it, Microsoft who started part of the mess we have now. 

To invoke what I did (the useless part), it is important to see “After passage of the Telecommunications Act, the CDA was challenged in courts and ruled by the Supreme Court in Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union (1997) to be partially unconstitutional, leaving the Section 230 provisions in place. Since then, several legal challenges have validated the constitutionality of Section 230”, in this Justice John Paul Stevens (Supreme Court) wrote in June 1997: “We are persuaded that the CDA lacks the precision that the First Amendment requires when a statute regulates the content of speech. In order to deny minors access to potentially harmful speech, the CDA effectively suppresses a large amount of speech that adults have a constitutional right to receive and to address to one another. That burden on adult speech is unacceptable if less restrictive alternatives would be at least as effective in achieving the legitimate purpose that the statute was enacted to serve. … It is true that we have repeatedly recognized the governmental interest in protecting children from harmful materials. But that interest does not justify an unnecessarily broad suppression of speech addressed to adults. As we have explained, the Government may not “reduc[e] the adult population … to … only what is fit for children.””, as such how stupid does a US Senator tend to be? It passed the Supreme court, it passed a few stations over the term of 20 years and optional alleged beneficiaries (Google, Facebook, Twitter) are called into a Senate hearing? Some sources even state ‘Letting Platforms Decide What Content To Facilitate Is What Makes Section 230 Work’, the latter one is up for debate, but the setting of section 230 is not, it is a legal thing, so why would someone set the stage for a hearing the is basically pointless set the stage? To get a few free dinners and perhaps tax deductibility? I do not know, I merely ask.

The setting of a stage 40 days before election, is the current view and when we see “top Democrat Maria Cantwell, who opposed the move last week, saying she was against using “the committee’s serious subpoena power for a partisan effort 40 days before an election,” changed her mind and voted to approve the move” I wonder what this really is, because as I see it, it has nothing to do with big tech, and optionally section 230 is also not in play, but what is? There is the optional quote given “Republican President Donald Trump has made holding tech companies accountable for allegedly stifling conservative voices a theme of his administration. As a result, calls for a reform of Section 230 have been intensifying ahead of the elections, but there is little chance of approval by Congress this year”, yet optional settings of “stifling conservative voice” would not change that, this is about intentional hurting facilitation, changing the premise of free expression, the moment big tech is held responsible, no opinion is heard and the anti-Trump (those who highlight stupidity) is seen nearly everywhere, as such, President Trump needs every amount he can get. I do not think that this is the right path and more important changing law on this scale to bake (not make) awareness of something set almost in stone for 20 years does not help. 

In this I want to extend my friendliness to give a shout to the largest part of the problem, mainly Republican Senator Roger Wicker, even s he gives us “After extending an invite to these executives, I regret that they have again declined to participate and answer questions about issues that are so visible and urgent to the American people”, I merely wonder if he has any clue who the American people are. This train of thought is seen as Politico gives us “under the newly unveiled Online Freedom and Viewpoint Diversity Act, the legal shield would protect the companies only when they take down specific types of content, including material “promoting terrorism” or which promotes “self-harm” or is otherwise illegal”, as such, when was there an upside when we consider ‘specific types on content’, as I see it it the setting towards a biased filter of what constitutes free speech and freedom of expression. As such the simple question becomes: ‘Who has seen S.4534 – Online Freedom and Viewpoint Diversity Act?’ Deputy Counsel Elizabeth Banker did and gives us “Section 230’s otherwise objectionable clause underpins crucial content moderation efforts that make their platforms safer for everyone. Eliminating that clause will make it harder, not easier, for online services to remove content like misinformation, platform manipulation, or bullying that’s neither illegal nor in the bill’s new description of allowable moderation. This bill would also hamper platforms from adapting to future moderation challenges.“We also have serious First Amendment concerns with this bill. This bill would limit the ability of private online platforms and services, including small forums for schools, churches, and local sports leagues, to set and enforce rules for their communities.””, a direct powerful view given on September 8th (at https://internetassociation.org/news/statement-in-response-to-the-introduction-of-the-online-freedom-and-viewpoint-diversity-act/), as such we takeaway “Eliminating that clause will make it harder, not easier, for online services to remove content like misinformation, platform manipulation, or bullying” does this constitute the idea that the speculated biggest bully in America wants a free pass? And there are also “serious First Amendment concerns” which cannot be ignored. 

When we see this level of issues from the very beginning, how stupid is any senator participating in this, and when we demand under freedom of information their names and tell people that this lit constitutes a list of people attacking free speech, how happy will they be? There is of course the issue of the elected Democrat from the state of Washington Maria Cantwell, I wonder what she has to say for herself, especially it he hearing happens before the elections, I reckon that President Elect Biden will not have too much need for her, but that is merely my speculation.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Law, Media, Politics

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

September 26, 2020 · 02:00

View of a different nature

We all have a view, we all have a way of looking at things. I am no exception, that is the sight we have. Yet some people (and I personally count myself among them) have a much stronger ability to adjust the views we have. Some (like myself) have the ability to adjust when needed. In this age of being told a story, it is important to be able to look at the data.

My adjustment started in early 2018 when I was made aware of Neom City. The new city that was to be build by Saudi Arabia. Its foundation was so overwhelming that it was enticing to applaud it. Never in the history of mankind was something like this ever conceived. A city around 20 times the size of New York was to be build. That setting was inspiring and it drove me to create some of the IP I ended up having. The setting of a new all tech city was overwhelming, yet that was only the beginning, it was then that we got to see an increasingly amount of anti-Saudi events and articles. So when the Guardian gave us ‘Revealed: Saudi Arabia may have enough uranium ore to produce nuclear fuel’, I decided to dig. The first thing I noticed was the presence of Stephanie Kirchgaessner. I saw her name on ‘Jeff Bezos hack: Amazon boss’s phone ‘hacked by Saudi crown prince’’ in January this year. There we are introduced to “that had apparently been sent from the personal account of the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, sources have told the Guardian”, I had an issue with the hatchet approach, no matter what Kirchgaessner calls herself. I basically debunked the hacking issue, as well as security forensics firm FTI Consulting in less than an hour, the Guardian was that thorough before publishing what they would call at best ‘highly probable’, yes that is what we need from those so called investigators and the fact that I was able to pump holes in the setting within an hour, in addition to actual electronic forensic experts giving even more evidence that led to believe that the accusations were debatable at best, completely ejectable at worst, that is not a good setting to be in and now that same name comes back to the Guardian article. Now we see “The disclosure will intensify concerns about Riyadh’s interest in an atomic weapons programme”, yet the monarchy of Saudi Arabia have always stated the they would not go near an nuclear arsenal until Iran does and it seems that the pussies of this world (politicians and journalists all over the world) have not been able to do anything ab out Iran, so they have another go at Saudi Arabia. In all this the entire setting that the quote: “Confidential Chinese report seen by the Guardian intensifies concerns about possible weapons programme” is driving this all. Let’s be clear, the two places where journalists have no access, the Guardian gets a report? And the evidence is debatable, it is all linked to “These are “inferred deposits”, estimated from initial surveys”, so it is based on estimations, a debatable source. Now we can accept that it is possible the there is Uranium in Saudi Arabia, and it was never a secret, there has been plans that go back to 2016 that Saudi Arabia has had plans to extract uranium for the domestic production of nuclear fuel. The UN nuclear watchdog, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) was also assisting Saudi’s nuclear ambition (at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-15/saudi-arabia-s-atomic-ambition-is-being-fueled-by-a-un-watchdog)

Yet the Guardian gives us “The greatest international concern is over the kingdom’s lack of transparency. Under a 2005 agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Saudi Arabia avoided inspections through a small quantities protocol (SQP), which waives IAEA monitoring up to the point where fissile fuel is introduced into a reactor. The nuclear watchdog has been trying to convince the Saudi monarchy to now accept a full monitoring programme, but the Saudis have so far fended off that request”, And in this Reuters gave us 3 weeks ago “IAEA providing support for Saudi Arabia as it plans to adopt nuclear energy”, it seems that the Guardian is giving us an adjusted negative view, with a lacking support on several fronts and I wonder why that is happening. In all this the Guardian also evades the entire enrichment issues the are required for nuclear warheads in opposition to enrichment for fuel, why is that part missing? All this, whilst the escalating party (Iran) is given leeway after leeway. You see, in this the one party is fuelling the other and Saudi Arabia has been up front about the from the beginning.

The Guardian gives us that with “The kingdom’s nuclear ambitions have become a source of heightened concern in the US Congress and among allies, particularly since Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman declared in 2018 that if regional rival Iran develops a nuclear bomb, “we will follow suit as soon as possible”” Yet part from the Iran drive, the Saudi drive was for fuel only and that part is missing, there is a lot missing and when we consider the quote “who have been scrambling to help Riyadh map its uranium reserves at breakneck speed as part of their nuclear energy cooperation agreement” whilst this started in 2017, I merely wonder if the writers at the Guardian have any clue of the concept ‘at breakneck speed’, as I see it, in 3 years mapping is not breakneck speed, especially when we add the ““inferred deposits”, estimated from initial surveys” it smells like something it is not and yes, we should keep our eyes open (both Saudi Arabia and Iran), yet IAEA part is merely a small paragraph, and part of that is inferred, not the way I would go, but the is me. I think that the Guardian went wrong here, I would have made the entire IAEA a lot more important, and as the headline gives us ‘may have enough uranium ore to produce nuclear fuel’, my question becomes, why is there a ‘may’ in the headline? I would consider the setting that if there is a ‘may’ after the entire setting had been going on for 3 years, we have a larger issue and the stage of ‘confidential documents seen by the Guardian’ becomes a lot more debatable when there is a massive absence of ‘enrichment’ in the entire article. Did anyone notice that? So where is the fuel getting enriched? So whilst the article goes on with “for either an energy or weapons programme” we need to consider that enrichment is essential for weapons, so where does Bruce Riedel (the expert from the Brookings Institution) get his information? Why is the article skipping enrichment, the most essential element towards weapons? We are happy to see “The Guardian could not independently verify the authenticity of the report”, yet that merely makes the article more debatable, not less so.

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Media, Politics, Science

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