Semoga rakyat Malaysia waspada akan berita di bawah ini – Temasek Holdings, syarikat pelaburan global milik Kerajaan Singapura , tukar CEO. – Ruhanie Ahmad
SINGAPORE'S TEMASEK HOLDINGS ANNOUNCES LEADERSHIP CHANGE
SINGAPORE, Feb 6 (Bernama) - Temasek Holdings, Singapore's government global investment firm, today announced that its chief executive officer (CEO) Ho Ching will step down this October.
Ho, 55, who is the wife of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, will be replaced by former CEO of BHP Billiton, Charles W. Goodyear, 51, an American who joined the Temasek board on Feb 1.
Goodyear will assume the position of CEO-designate on March 1 and succeed Ho on Oct 1 to run Temasek which manages a diversified US$134 billion portfolio. – BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsworld.php?id=388167
SINGAPORE'S TEMASEK HOLDINGS ANNOUNCES LEADERSHIP CHANGE
SINGAPORE, Feb 6 (Bernama) - Temasek Holdings, Singapore's government global investment firm, today announced that its chief executive officer (CEO) Ho Ching will step down this October.
Ho, 55, who is the wife of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, will be replaced by former CEO of BHP Billiton, Charles W. Goodyear, 51, an American who joined the Temasek board on Feb 1.
Goodyear will assume the position of CEO-designate on March 1 and succeed Ho on Oct 1 to run Temasek which manages a diversified US$134 billion portfolio. – BERNAMA
http://www.bernama.com/bernama/v5/newsworld.php?id=388167
11 comments:
Puteramaya
Salam Siber!
Whoa!
Teori Konspirasi menyatakan:
neo-con dan neo-imperialist
kepalanya Kapitalisma
- bisanya Demokrasi terpimpin
bilamana orang puteh mat saleh
guru si-yahudi timur.
bekerja berkoordinasi
monopoli termanipulasi
hsbc - your local bank
pandai-pandailah pulas pili uang
di mana si-muslim dengan ekonominya
seorang gembala dan biri-birinya
abraha datang dengan gajah besarnya
kambing ku harta ku
rumah tuhan harta tuhan
dan burung-burung abaabil
bi hijjaratin min sijjil
surah nur banyak berbicara
tentang rahmat tuhan
commodities and investment
commodities and investment
di mana yusuf? tanya si-aziz misri
Why - Is A good Question
(and what do they know that we don't)
Thai official rebukes Jolie for refugee plea
1 hr 49 mins ago
BANGKOK – A senior Thai diplomat rebuked Hollywood star Angelina Jolie on Wednesday for speaking out on behalf of Muslim refugees from Myanmar.
Jolie — who is deeply involved in the plight of refugees in her capacity as a United Nations goodwill ambassador — called on the Thai government to respect the human rights of Myanmar's Rohinyga "boat people" last week while touring a camp in northern Thailand for other refugees from the military-ruled nation.
The Rohingya, who are denied citizenship in their native land, have been trying to land in Thailand after treacherous sea journeys in recent months only to be towed back to sea and cast adrift by the Thai Navy.
Virasakdi Futrakul, permanent secretary of Thailand's foreign ministry, said Jolie's mission last week was to inspect a camp that houses refugees mostly from Myanmar's ethnic Karenni minority not deal with the Rohinyga.
"We probably have to warn UNHCR that they should not have comment on this because it was not the purpose of her visit," he said.
UNHCR spokeswoman Kitt McKinsey declined to comment on Virasakdi's remark.
"She was extremely touched by the plight of the Rohingya people. She expressed the hope that the human rights of the Rohingya people will be respected just as the human rights of everyone in the world should be respected," McKinsey said last week.
nota:
berani bersaing dengan temasek?
apa sudah ada persediaan, dong?
Puteramaya
Salam Siber!
Ilmu Mencuri Tanah
(diwarisi oleh temasek)
How Banks Are Worsening the Foreclosure Crisis
By Brian Grow, Keith Epstein and Robert Berner Brian Grow, Keith Epstein And Robert Berner
1 hr 31 mins ago
The bad mortgages that got the current financial crisis started have produced a terrifying wave of home foreclosures. Unless the foreclosure surge eases, even the most extravagant federal stimulus spending won't spur an economic recovery.
The Obama Administration is expected within the next few weeks to announce an initiative of $50 billion or more to help strapped homeowners. But with 1 million residences having fallen into foreclosure since 2006, and an additional 5.9 million expected over the next four years, the Obama plan -- whatever its details -- can't possibly do the job by itself. Lenders and investors will have to acknowledge huge losses and figure out how to keep recession-wracked borrowers making at least some monthly payments.
So far the industry hasn't shown that kind of foresight. One reason foreclosures are so rampant is that banks and their advocates in Washington have delayed, diluted, and obstructed attempts to address the problem. Industry lobbyists are still at it today, working overtime to whittle down legislation backed by President Obama that would give bankruptcy courts the authority to shrink mortgage debt. Lobbyists say they will fight to restrict the types of loans the bankruptcy proposal covers and new powers granted to judges.
The industry strategy all along has been to buy time and thwart regulation, financial-services lobbyists tell BusinessWeek . "We were like the Dutch boy with his finger in the dike," says one business advocate who, like several colleagues, insists on anonymity, fearing career damage. Some admit that, in retrospect, their clients, which include Bank of America (NYSE:BAC - News), Citigroup (NYSE:C - News), and JPMorgan Chase (NYSE:JPM - News), would have been better off had they agreed two years ago to address foreclosures systematically rather than pin their hopes on an unlikely housing rebound.
In public, financial institutions insist they've done their best to prevent foreclosures. Most argue that giving bankruptcy courts increased clout, known as cramdown authority, would reward irresponsible borrowers and result in higher borrowing costs. "What we're trying to do now is target the bill to make it as narrow as possible," says Scott Talbott, a lobbyist for the Financial Services Roundtable. On the defensive, the industry nevertheless benefits from one strain of popular opinion that home buyers who took on risky mortgages -- even if the industry pushed those loans -- don't deserve to be rescued.
An Industry In Denial
However the skirmish ends, the industry's contention that it has done as much as possible to limit foreclosures seems hollow. Some statistics it cites appear to be exaggerated. Even pro-industry figures such as Steven C. Preston, a Republican businessman who headed the Housing & Urban Development Dept. late in the Bush Administration, concede that many lenders have dragged their heels. "The industry still has not stepped up to the volume of the problem," Preston says. One program, Hope for Homeowners -- which Bush officials and banks promised last fall would shield 400,000 families from foreclosure -- has so far produced only 25 refinanced loans.
Meanwhile, an already glutted market sinks beneath the weight of more foreclosed homes. Borrowers whose equity has evaporated have nothing to tap into if the recession costs them their jobs. Some lawmakers and regulators are calling for a foreclosure moratorium. "People are falling through the cracks," Preston says. "That's bad for communities, bad for the individuals losing their homes, and bad for investors."
In early 2007, as overextended borrowers began to default on too-good-to-be-true subprime mortgages, housing experts sounded an alarm heard throughout Washington. Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.), chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, wanted to push a bill requiring banks to modify loans whose enticingly low "teaser" interest rates soon give way to tougher terms. But he knew that with Republicans strongly opposed, he lacked the muscle, according to Senate aides. So Dodd did what politicians often do. He convened a talkfest: the Homeownership Preservation Summit.
A who's who of banking executives gathered on Apr. 18, 2007, behind closed doors in an ornate hearing room in the marble-faced Dirksen Senate Office Building. Dodd told them they needed to get out in front of the foreclosure fiasco by adjusting loan terms so borrowers would continue to make some payments, rather than stopping altogether. Foreclosure proceedings typically cost banks about 50% of a property's value. That's assuming the home can be resold -- not a certainty when empty houses multiply in a neighborhood. "What are you doing?" Dodd asked the executives. "What do you need me to do to help you modify loans?"
Some from the industry denied a foreclosure problem existed, including Sandor E. Samuels, at the time chief legal officer of subprime giant Countrywide Financial. They vowed to continue selling loans with enticing introductory rates as well as those requiring minimal evidence of borrowers' income. "We are going to keep making these loans until the last second they are legal," Samuels later told a fellow participant.
On May 2, 2007, Dodd's office issued a "Statement of Principles" stemming from the summit. It outlined seven vaguely worded industry aspirations, such as making "early contact" with strapped borrowers and offering modifications that could include lowering loan balances. The principles had no effect, some summit participants now concede.
Much of Dodd's attention shifted to his campaign for the Democratic Presidential nomination. Senate Banking Committee spokeswoman Kate Szostak says Dodd aggressively pursued the foreclosure issue, but "both the industry and the Bush Administration refused to heed his warnings." The lawmaker accepted $5.9 million in contributions from the financial-services industry in 2007 and 2008.
Asked about his role at the summit, Samuels confirmed in an e-mail that he "did speak -- formally and informally -- about the performance" of subprime loans. But he declined to elaborate. He now works as a top in-house lawyer for Bank of America, which acquired Countrywide in July 2008.
A major reason financial institutions and investors are so determined to avoid modifying loan terms more aggressively has to do with accounting nuances, say industry lobbyists. If, for example, a bank lowered the balance of a certain mortgage, there would be a strong argument that it would have to reduce the value on its balance sheet of all similar mortgages in the same geographic area to reflect the danger that the region had hit an economic slump. Under this stringent approach, financial industry mortgage-related losses could far surpass even the grim $1.1 trillion estimated by Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS - News) in January. A desire to postpone this devastating situation helps explain lenders' intransigence, says Rick Sharga, vice-president of marketing at RealtyTrac, an Irvine (Calif.) firm that analyzes foreclosure patterns.
By mid-2007, Bush Administration officials were deeply worried about the financial industry's unwillingness to confront the growing catastrophe. Even banking lobbyists say they realized that their clients had lapsed into denial. The K Street representatives agreed that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson needed to step in, says Erick R. Gustafson, then the chief lobbyist for the Mortgage Bankers Assn. "It was like an intervention," he says. "We had to get Treasury involved to get the banks to give us information."
That summer, Paulson, a former CEO of Goldman Sachs, summoned industry executives to the Cash Room, one of Treasury's most elegant venues. There, beneath replica gaslight chandeliers, Neel T. Kashkari, a junior Goldman banker whom Paulson had brought to Treasury, urged industry leaders to move swiftly to keep more consumers from losing their homes. Bankers know how to adjust interest rates, extend loan durations, and, if necessary, lower principal, said Kashkari, who has temporarily remained in his post. A couple of months later, Paulson summoned the executives again, this time to his conference room. "We told them we need to get over the goal line," recalls a former top Treasury official. "Cajoling is a euphemism for what we did. We pounded them."
One product of the Treasury conclaves was the Hope Now Alliance, a government-endorsed private sector organization announced by Paulson on Oct. 10, 2007. Lenders promised to cooperate with nonprofit credit counselors who would help borrowers prevent defaults. Faith Schwartz, a former subprime mortgage executive, was put in charge.
Window Dressing?
The alliance got off to a shaky start. An early press release contended that there had been more foreclosures nationally than the Mortgage Bankers Assn. was conceding at the time. "We looked like the Keystone Kops," says an industry lobbyist. Soon it became apparent that the program was primarily a public-relations effort, the lobbyist says. "Hope Now is really just a vehicle for collecting and marketing information to the Treasury, people on the Hill, and the news media."
In a press release last Dec. 22, Hope Now said it had prevented 2.2 million foreclosures in 2008 by arranging for borrowers to catch up on delinquent payments and, in some cases, easing terms. But the data don't reveal how many borrowers are falling back into default because many modifications don't, in fact, reduce monthly payments. The alliance doesn't receive this information from banks, says Schwartz.
There's reason for skepticism. Federal banking regulators reported in December 2008 that fully 53% of consumers receiving loan modifications were again delinquent on their mortgages after six months. Alan M. White, a law professor at Valparaiso University, says the redefault rates are high because modifications often lead to higher rather than lower payments. An analysis White did of a sample of 21,219 largely subprime mortgages modified in November 2008 found that only 35% of the cases resulted in lower payments. In 18%, payments stayed the same; in the remaining 47%, they rose. The reason for this strange result: Lenders and loan servicers are tacking on missed payments, taxes, and big fees to borrowers' monthly bills.
Consider the case of Ocbaselassie Kelete, a 41-year-old immigrant from Eritrea who called Hope Now last fall. Kelete, a naturalized U.S. citizen, bought a $540,000 townhouse in Hayward, Calif., in November 2006 with no down payment and 100% financing from First Franklin Financial, a subprime unit of Merrill Lynch. At the time, he and his wife earned $108,000 a year from his two jobs, with a pharmacy and an office-cleaning service, and hers as a janitor. Kelete says First Franklin and his realtor convinced him that he could afford a pair of mortgages, one with a 7.5% initial rate that would rise after three years, and a second with a fixed 12% rate. His monthly payment would total $3,600.
"Work With Me"
"The realtor said, 'Just make sacrifices for two years. Home prices will go up, and you can refinance at a lower rate,' " Kelete recalls. He regrets signing a mortgage he couldn't afford -- a mistake many people made during the subprime craze. Home prices didn't go up. He lost his office-cleaning job. First Franklin modified his loans, but added on property taxes it had failed to collect earlier. Kelete's monthly bill rose to $3,900. In October 2008, he called Hope Now. A counselor set up a conference call with First Franklin. The lender's representative said Kelete should get another job or give up the house, the borrower says. Kelete responded that he'd already lost his second job cleaning offices and couldn't find another in a faltering California economy. "Why don't you work with me?" he asked First Franklin. The lender declined. The Hope Now counselor said there was nothing more to do. "Foreclosure is the only future I see," Kelete says. A spokesman for BofA, which acquired Merrill in December, declined to comment, citing the borrower's privacy. After BusinessWeek's inquiries, however, First Franklin contacted Kelete about lowering his monthly payments.
Hope Now's Schwartz acknowledges she is fighting an uphill battle. By her calculation, 45% of the borrowers her organization advises still end up in foreclosure. "If I seem frustrated," she says, "it's because we are dealing with nothing but an exploding problem." She has a full-time staff of four in Washington; 500 counselors participate in the industry-funded hotline. "You shouldn't take it lightly, what we have achieved," Schwartz says. She bristles at suggestions that the statistics she disseminates are misleading. "I print what I know," she says, noting that some of her bank members aren't forthcoming about loan modifications. "It's like herding and juggling cats."
By early 2008 it was obvious that Hope Now wasn't halting a significant percentage of foreclosures. Democrats in Congress began gathering ideas for a government-sponsored remedy. Many of those ideas came from the industry. Lobbyists and congressional aides referred to one concept as "the Credit Suisse plan." Another, "the Bank of America plan," would allow borrowers to refinance mortgages with loans guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration. Representative Barney Frank (D-Mass.), the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, had solicited BofA's advice via an old Boston acquaintance, Anne Finucane, the bank's chief marketing executive and a politically active Democrat. He assigned several aides, including Michael M. Paese and Rick Delfin, to work out the details.
Francis Creighton, a Democratic former staff member on the Financial Services panel who had gone to work as a lobbyist for the Mortgage Bankers Assn., negotiated with Paese and Delfin. Creighton's Republican colleague Gustafson huddled with aides to such GOP lawmakers as Representative Spencer Bachus and Senator Richard Shelby, both of Alabama.
Before long, the anti-foreclosure provisions were being altered in ways the industry favored. Shelby, the ranking Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, along with other Republicans insisted on the pro-industry language in exchange for their support, aides say.
In the end, the program included stiff up-front and annual fees and a requirement that homeowners pay the government 50% of any future appreciation in the property's value -- all of which made it much less attractive to borrowers. Moreover, the banks' participation was made entirely voluntary; there was no way to pressure them to cooperate.
Congress approved Hope for Homeowners on July 26, 2008, as part of a larger measure imposing restrictions on the mortgage finance firms Fannie Mae (NYSE:FNM - News) and Freddie Mac (NYSE:FRE - News). At the Mortgage Bankers Assn., lobbyists gathered in Gustafson's corner office to lift plastic cups of wine in celebration.
Those familiar with Hope for Homeowners anticipated that its fine print would discourage all but a few borrowers. "We knew it was likely to have limited appeal," says Preston, the former secretary of HUD, which oversees the FHA. George Miller, executive director of the American Securitization Forum, a Wall Street trade group, calls the program and its 25 refinanced loans "useless" because of the onerous details.
Broken Bill
Shelby, for his part, never expected Hope for Homeowners to accomplish much, according to Republican Senate aides. He agreed to it to gain Dodd's support for greater regulation of Fannie and Freddie -- and only when assured the program wouldn't drain tax dollars. "My consistent aim throughout this crisis has been to protect the American taxpayer," Shelby told BusinessWeek in a statement. He accepted $565,000 in contributions from the financial-services industry in 2007-2008.
Frank, whose industry contributions totaled $948,000 over the same period, says he became skeptical Hope for Homeowners could achieve its initial goal of helping 1 million people. But he expected much more progress than the mere 25 refinancings that have occurred so far, according to HUD. He blames Republicans and the industry for undercutting his legislation. "I didn't have the votes to do more," he says.
The Massachusetts liberal hasn't given up hope of repairing Hope for Homeowners. He is working on changes that would cut borrowers' up-front fees and provide bonus money for mortgage servicers that agree to participate in the voluntary program. Frank aides Paese and Delfin aren't assisting with the fixes: They have left their congressional staff positions for lobbying jobs with the Securities Industry & Financial Markets Assn. in Washington. They say they are observing the one-year federal ban on speaking with their former boss about business they did on the Hill.
In the first days of 2009 it appeared that progress might be possible on a different front. A slumping Citigroup came back to the Treasury Dept. for a second round of bailout money. Bowing to pressure from regulators, Citi broke ranks with its rivals and dropped its opposition to bankruptcy cramdown.
Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), who since 2007 had led unsuccessful efforts in Congress to give bankruptcy judges authority to modify home loans, dispatched his senior economic policy adviser, Brad J. McConnell, to talk with lobbyists for JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America. "Each agreed to take (the idea) back to their folks to see what they could do," says a person familiar with the talks. Citi's concession, the imminent Obama inauguration, and intensifying public hostility toward big banks contributed to an atmosphere Democrats assumed would be conducive to compromise.
Talking Points
By the time McConnell talked to the JPMorgan and BofA representatives the next day, however, "they had gone on full defense mode and started to complain about how lousy a deal Citi had struck," says the person familiar with the exchanges. Bank opposition, Durbin says, "was very shortsighted in light of the mess they have created in our economy."
In the following weeks, banking lobbyists launched a renewed attack on the cramdown legislation, enlisting as an ally Republican Representative Lamar Smith of Texas, among others. Apart from Citi, "the industry remains united in that bankruptcy cramdown would destabilize the market" by creating widespread uncertainty about the value of numerous troubled mortgages, says Steve O'Connor, senior vice-president for government relations at the Mortgage Bankers Assn. His group is distributing talking points to key congressional aides laying out reasons why "Congress should defeat bankruptcy reform legislation." These include the argument that if lenders can't be confident that loan terms will survive, they will raise rates and reject riskier borrowers. Industry lobbyists are organizing home state bankers to pressure moderate Democrats they hope will be receptive to limiting the kinds of loans eligible for cramdown. One target: Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana.
Stefanie and James Smith of Santa Clarita, Calif., fear they may need the help of a bankruptcy court if they are to keep the subdivision home they bought for $579,000 in November 2005. Stefanie, 37, a university human resources coordinator, and James, 40, a federal law enforcement agent, borrowed the entire amount in two subprime loans that required a total monthly payment of $3,000. A representative of their lender, Countrywide, told them not to worry, says Stefanie: They would be able to refinance in a year.
By mid-2007 they were running late on payments, and refinancing options had dried up. With their monthly bill scheduled to jump to more than $4,000 this January due to a rising mortgage rate, Stefanie contacted Countrywide last summer. She asked for a loan modification so they could avoid default. In December the lender said it would be willing to increase their payment by $600. That was better than the scheduled rise of $1,100, so the Smiths agreed.
But now they are struggling to pay the higher amount. Countrywide's parent, BofA, declined to comment, citing the Smiths' privacy. After BusinessWeek's questions, though, Countrywide called them to discuss cutting their payments.
"We knew when we bought that the payments would be a stretch," says Stefanie. She regrets assuming they would be able to refinance at a lower rate. "We are not deadbeats," she adds. "All we want is a mortgage we can afford."
kenapa?
Time:Ad-Dhar:Ringgit:2.48USD
(what is the implication: commodities-lah)
G7 finance ministers reject protectionist measures
By COLLEEN BARRY and ARIEL DAVID, Associated Press Writers Colleen Barry And Ariel David, Associated Press Writers
9 mins ago
ROME – The Group of Seven finance ministers strongly rejected protectionism Saturday, pledging to work together to support growth and employment and to strengthen the banking system so the world can overcome its worst financial crisis in 50 years.
Still, bad economic news darkened the horizon. The final statement on their two-day meeting in Rome predicted a gloomy forecast, with the severe economic downturn continuing through most of 2009. That came a day after new economic data showed the recession in Europe deepening to its worst levels in decades.
The meeting marked the international debut of U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who appealed to the "common imperative" to sustain open trade.
"These are global challenges and it is imperative that we work together to address them," Geithner told reporters afterward. "Effective global response will require sustained action by governments working with the international financial institutions."
Geithner got a boost coming into the meeting by Friday's passage of President Barack Obama's $787 billion plan to resuscitate the economy over Republican opposition — but the plan has raised concerns abroad of creeping U.S. protectionism...
what is the malaysian approach?
what is a muslim's approach?
from muslim to mukmin
is another leap of faith
we lack not the talents;
but the courage, actually
and the secrets of the heart
ar-ruhi min amri rabbi!
ar-ruhi min amri rabbi!
ar-ruhi min amri rabbi!
and the echoes in the valley
under the desert stars
lights up the night, o faqir
Garis-Garis Kepala
(saham mewah murah: do we want temasek)
Turkey angered by comments made by Israeli general
13-02-2009:-
DAP lodges corruption report against Zambry
IPOH: DAP yesterday lodged a report with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) regarding the appointment of three advisers to Perak Menteri Besar by Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir.
Perak DAP secretary Nga Kor Ming said the appointment was without the approval of the state executive council and contravened the state constitution.
“Zambry’s move in making the appointment was clearly and obviously a form of power abuse and a form of political corruption to enrich Barisan Nasional (BN) leaders who had been rejected by the people in the 12th general election,” he told reporters at the MACC office compound here.
He said no posts with executive councillor-status could be created unless provided for by the state constitution and no individuals, except members of the state legislative assembly, were eligible to be appointed as state executive councillors.
“Bear in mind that without a motion in the Perak state assembly against the legitimate Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin, all actions by Zambry which bring financial implications to the state government are void and can be viewed as a form of abuse and abuse of power,” Nga said.
Zambry on Wednesday announced the appointment of three advisers — Datuk Chang Ko Youn (Chinese community affairs), Datuk S Veerasingam (Indian community affairs) and Datuk Mohd Najmuddin Elias (Islamic affairs) — to Perak Menteri Besar and Datuk Hamdi Abu Bakar as state information chief.
Nga noted that the three would receive all remunerations including salary and privileges of a state executive councillor estimated at nearly RM1 million.
He said Zambry’s announcement was a betrayal against the royal institution in Perak because all executive councillor-status appointments required the consent and conferment of credentials by Sultan Azlan Shah of Perak.
Without the Sultan’s consent, it was a conduct in disregard of the constitutional monarchy principle, he said.
He also said the appointment of that many executive councillor-status advisers reflected Zambry’s lack of credibility as menteri besar and the six appointed executive councillors.
MACC director Bahari Mohd Zain, when contacted, said that the commission received the report by a political party representative at 11.15am but refused to elaborate. — Bernama
12-02-2009:
Zeti: Not constructive to have too low rates
by Yong Yen Nie
KUALA LUMPUR: Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) governor Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz said yesterday it is “not constructive to have too low” interest rates and the focus now should be on improving access to financing.
Stressing that the overnight policy rate would be maintained at 2.5% for now pending further developments in the global financial conditions, she said: “Our assessment is that it is not constructive to have too low rates. The issue is more access to financing, and that is why we are focusing on this.”
Speaking to reporters after deli-vering her closing remarks at BNM’s High Level Conference 2009 in conjunction with its 50th anniversary here yesterday, Zeti said the central bank had already taken measures such as significantly reducing rates and statutory reserve requirement to provide liquidity into the system.
She said BNM would now focus on resolution and restructuring of bank clients’ debts...
13-02-2009:
M'sia leader in syariah advisory regulations, says expert
by Ellina Badri
nota:
Saudi king shakes up religious establishment
investors look at the promised returns, but what if we are fussy?
Consider:
The Turkish military's harsh reaction on Saturday reflected its deep uneasiness, given its close defense ties with Israel. They include training agreements and Turkish defense purchases from Israel worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
(Turkey angered by comments made by Israeli general)
(temasek in menopause)
Mahanomics And The New World Order
(the trillions sound exciting)
Weekend Edition
February 13 - 15, 2009
Why Obama's Red Ink is Different From Reagan's
Deficit Nonchalance
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Who remembers economists’ hysteria over the “Reagan deficits”? Wall Street was in panic. Reagan’s fiscal irresponsibility was bringing the end of the world.
The fiscal year 2009 federal budget deficit that Obama is inheriting, and adding to, will be ten times larger in absolute terms than Reagan’s biggest and a much larger share of GDP in percentage terms. Yet, economists are sending up no alarms.
Paul Krugman, for example, couldn’t damn Reagan’s puny deficits enough. But today he thinks the deficit can’t be large enough!
The central issue of the stimulus and bailout plans is how to finance the massive budget deficit. This issue remains unaddressed by economists and policy makers.
As far as I can tell, the government, its advisers and cheerleaders think financing the deficit will be a cakewalk, like the Iraq War.
I am tempted to claim that economists’ nonchalance about the massive deficit is an indication that Krugman and the whole lot of them are converts to supply-side economics--”deficits don’t matter.” I triumphed, and economists have become my acolytes. The Nobel Prize will arrive tomorrow.
Only we supply-side economists never said that deficits don’t matter. We said that deficits have different causes and consequences. Some are problematic. Some are not, or are less so.
Obama’s deficit is problematic. It is a massive deficit, far beyond anything ever before financed on planet earth. It is arriving at a time when pressures on the dollar as reserve currency have mounted from decades of rising trade deficits. The deficit is hitting the financial markets when the rest of the world is in turmoil from ingestion of toxic Wall Street financial instruments. The US must service massive debt when the US economy is hollowed out from the offshoring of manufacturing and professional service jobs. The Obama deficit is a far more serious deficit than the “Reagan deficits.”
As President Reagan’s first Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy, my job was to find and implement a cure for “stagflation.”
“Stagflation” was the word used to describe the worsening “Phillips curve” trade-offs between inflation and employment. The postwar policy of Keynesian demand management relied on easy money to expand employment and GNP and used recession and unemployment to cool down inflation when inflation got out of hand. Over the years, the trade-offs worsened. It took more inflation to get the economy going, and more unemployment to cool down the inflation.
This problem worsened during Jimmy Carter’s presidency. Reagan used the “misery index,” the sum of the unemployment and inflation rates, to boot Carter from office.
Keynesian economists concluded from the Great Depression that the way to maintain full employment was for the government to manage aggregate demand. If the sum of consumer and investor demand was not sufficient to maintain full employment, government would step in. By running a deficit in its budget, economists thought that government could add enough additional demand to bring employment up to full.
The way this policy was implemented was to use easy monetary policy to stimulate demand and high tax rates to restrain excessive consumer spending that could push up inflation. The Keynesian economists did not understand that the high tax rates contributed to inflation by restraining the output of goods and services, while the easy money drove up prices.
Keynesians had no solution for the problem their policy had caused, so Congress and President Reagan turned to supply-side economists who offered a solution: restrain demand with tighter monetary policy and increase supply with greater after-tax rewards.
Supply-side economics reversed the policy mix of demand-side economists. Instead of easy money and high tax rates, there would be tighter money and lower tax rates.
This change caused consternation. Keynesian economists, who sat atop of the profession, bitterly resented the de-throning of their orthodoxy. They turned on supply-siders with a vengeance. We were “voodoo economists,” “trickle-down economists,” “tax cuts for the rich economists.” Keynesians had been the great defenders of budget deficits, but Reagan’s were intolerable. They forgot their own Kennedy tax rate reductions. Supply-siders were bringing the end of the world.
Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker was part of the problem. Volcker had limited economic understanding. He did not understand the worsening boom-bust cycle that the Keynesian policy had set the Fed upon. He viewed the Reagan tax rate reductions as a Keynesian stimulus to consumer spending that would worsen the inflation, the subduing of which he saw as his responsibility. He feared that the tax rate reductions would cause inflation and that he would be blamed.
At the Treasury we had weekly meetings with Paul, attempting to bring him into an understanding of what it meant to reverse the policy mix. We patiently explained the importance of the Fed bringing money growth down slowly as the tax rate reductions came into play in order to avoid a monetary shock to the system.
Volcker just couldn’t get it. He thought the Reagan Treasury consisted of dangerous inflationists. He went home to the Fed and turned off the money supply, reasoning that if there was no money growth he couldn’t be blamed for the inflation that Reagan’s fiscal policy would cause.
Volcker’s fears were reinforced by his advisors. As the Treasury’s representative at the Fed’s meeting with its outside advisors, I heard Alan Greenspan, Volcker’s successor, tell Paul that in view of the Reagan tax rate reductions (which Greenspan also saw as a demand stimulus) “monetary policy was a weak sister that at best could conduct a rear-guard action.”
It was amazing to us at Treasury that the Federal Reserve chairman could not understand that monetary policy controlled inflation and that fiscal policy, or the right kind of fiscal policy, helped control inflation by increasing the output of goods and services.
But this was over Volcker’s head. Instead of giving us the gradual reduction in the growth of the money supply, he slammed on the brakes. The economy went into a serious recession just as Reagan’s tax cuts passed.
The embittered Keynesians wanted to blame the recession on the tax cuts, but that was inconsistent with their own analysis. So they seized on the deficits that resulted from the recession and blamed the tax cuts. This was also inconsistent with Keynesian analysis. However, they used writings by people who had popularized supply-side economics. Some of these people made claims that “tax cuts pay for themselves.” In other words, there would be no deficits.
No supply-side economist ever said this. And neither did the Reagan administration. The Reagan administration used static tax analysis and forecast that every dollar of tax cut would lose a dollar of revenue.
The forecast went wrong for an entirely different reason. The Keynesian orthodoxy of the time was that it was impossible for the economy to grow without paying for it with a rising rate of inflation. Yet, the supply-side position was that by reversing the policy mix, the economy could grow while the rate of inflation fell, which is in fact what happened during the 1980s and 1990s.
As economic forecasting was locked into the “Phillips curve”--the belief that inflation was the price of full employment, and that unemployment was the price of lower inflation--the Reagan administration’s budget forecast was restrained by the “Phillips curve.” Orthodoxy would not permit us to forecast the extent to which a supply-side policy would bring down inflation as the economy grew. Even if we had been able to disregard forecasting orthodoxy, our forecast would have been off as Volcker brought money growth in below target.
The “Reagan deficits” thus resulted from the unanticipated collapse of inflation. As inflation came in below forecast, nominal GNP came in below forecast. Thus, tax revenues were less. But appropriation bills are in nominal dollars, which meant that real spending was greater than intended because inflation was less than forecast.
Wall Street believed that the “Reagan deficits” would cause inflation, but, of course, they did not cause inflation as they were the consequences of the collapse in inflation.
This shows how totally wrong conventional opinion can be even when it tries to think. Today no policy maker or establishment economist is thinking at all.
The “Reagan deficits” were neither financed by printing money nor dependent on recycling of surplus dollars by trading partners. The deficits were no threat to the dollar, which was thought to be too strong. The increased after-tax return on investment reduced the flow of US capital abroad, and we financed our own deficit.
This brings us back to the original question: How is the Obama deficit going to be financed?
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions.He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com
nota:
di kala istana terlena dengan ngilaian hauri...apa hanya sultan-sultan dan raja-raja sahaja yang boleh murka, dong?
Soalan: Bolehkah Mahathirisma membantu negara OIC keluar daru kemelut kegagalan ekonomi kapitalisma ala Wall Street?
(apa nak buat, komen-komen hilang begitu saja - kenalah soal siasat; tak begitu, Puteramaya)
Graduate with honors, Sdr Ruhanie Ahmad.
Yang DiPertimbangkan Lestari Minda
(waspada tukar cerita)
Tindakan Speaker Sivakumar 'Kelakar' - Nazri
KUALA LUMPUR, 18 Feb (Bernama) -- Sambil menyifatkan tindakan speaker Dewan Undangan negeri (DUN) Perak V. Sivakumar hari ini sebagai kelakar, Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, berkata speaker itu berkelakuan mempersenda dewan berkenaan.
Nazri berkata, seluruh episod itu adalah satu "komedi" kerana keputusan oleh Sivakumar itu "amat tidak masuk akal".
Dalam tindakan di luar jangkaan sama sekali itu, Sivakumar menggantung dan melarang Menteri Besar Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir dan anggota exconya dari menghadiri sesi DUN Perak selama 18 bulan berkuatkuasa serta merta.
Pergolakan terbaru dalam kemelut politik Perak ini tercetus selepas speaker memutuskan bahawa Zambry dan enam exconya telah menghina DUN.
"Speaker bertindak sendiri menjadi hakim dan juri sedangkan beliau tidak langsung mempunyai bidang kuasa itu.
"Ini benar-benar kelakar dan satu persendaan dalam seluruh episod," kata Nazri pada sidang akhbar di bangunan Parlimen di sini.
"Saya rasa untuk menghentikan ini semua, anggota-anggota DUN Barisan Nasional hendaklah ke mahkamah untuk menyelesaikan kebuntuan dan menjelaskan situasi," kata Nazri.
-- BERNAMA
(tak disangka-sangka habis pancat dan penyet empat-empat tayar kereta baru bently continental sport raja muda, dicakari dan digurisi badan kereta itu, saperti telah sedia ada dilembaran akal raja; tetapi siapa yang mahu mati dilanggar digelek kereta itu tergilis putus dua puluh satu mona fandey; sambil berita ini dipinggir-pinggir keujudan: Pelukis Tersohor Negara Datuk Ibrahim Hussein Meninggal Dunia
KUALA LUMPUR, 19 Feb (Bernama) -- Pelukis tersohor negara Datuk Ibrahim Hussein, 71, meninggal dunia di Hospital Pantai pada 4.30 pagi tadi akibat sakit jantung.
Beliau meninggalkan seorang balu dan seorang anak perempuan.
-- BERNAMA
(al fatehah!): )
Kren Terbalik: Jambatan P. Pinang Sesak Teruk
PULAU PINANG, 19 Feb (Bernama) -- Ribuan kenderaan terperangkap dalam kesesakan lalu lintas lebih lapan jam di Jambatan Pulau Pinang pagi ini apabila sebuah kren yang diguna untuk kerja pelebaran jambatan itu terbalik.
Jurucakap Penang Bridge Sdn Bhd (PBSB) berkata kren yang terbalik di Kilometer 3.6 Jambatan Pulau Pinang dari bahagian pulau menghala ke tanah besar itu menyebabkan satu daripada dua lorong di atas jambatan berkenaan terhalang.
"Hanya satu lorong laluan menuju ke Perai dibuka dan ekoran itu berlaku kesesakan teruk di semua laluan masuk jambatan dari Lebuhraya Jelutong, Gelugor dan Bayan Lepas," katanya ketika dihubungi di sini hari ini.
Beliau berkata PBSB terpaksa membuka laluan kontra di laluan dari Perai menghala bahagian pulau bagi mengurangkan kesesakan ketika kerja mengalihkan kren berkenaan dijalankan.
"Kren yang terbalik pada kira-kira pukul 3 pagi itu berjaya dialihkan pada pukul 11 pagi dan kesesakan di jambatan dijangka pulih beberapa jam lagi," katanya.
Tinjauan Bernama mendapati kesesakan teruk berlaku dengan deretan panjang kenderaan dapat dilihat sehingga di kawasan Lebuhraya Jelutong di sini sejak pukul 7 pagi apabila kakitangan awam dan swasta mula keluar untuk ke tempat kerja.
Pemandu dari bandar raya yang cuba mencari jalan alternatif menerusi perkhidmatan feri, turut terperangkap dalam kesesakan apabila kenderaan berpusu-pusu beralih kepada perkhidmatan itu.
-- BERNAMA
(tentunya jika lebih berhati-hati kerja mengalih kren itu mesti makan masa yang lebih panjang - satu tahun kerja melebarkan jambatan itu tertangguh)
Hillary Clinton Tiba Untuk Lawatan Dua Hari Ke Indonesia
JAKARTA, 18 Feb (Bernama) -- Setiuasaha Negara Amerika Syarikat Hillary Clinton tiba di Lapangan Terbang Halim Perdanakusuma di sini hari ini untuk lawatan dua hari ke Indonesia.
Lawatan ke Indonesia merupakan sebahagian kunjungan Clinton ke Asia selepas Jepun dan dari sini beliau akan ke Korea Selatan dan China.
Di Indonesia, Clinton dijadual bertemu dan berbincang dengan Menteri Luar Hassan Wirajuda mengenai isu-isu dua hala, serantau dan antarabangsa yang melibatkan kepentingan bersama.
Beliau juga akan melawat Sekretariat Asean di sini dan mengadakan perbincangan dengan Setiausaha Agung Asean Dr Surin Pitsuwan.
Esok Clinton dijadual menemui Presiden Indonesia Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono.
-- BERNAMA
(indonesia kuasa besar di rantau asia tenggara saperti juga amerika syarikat piutang besar dunia - Goodyear! kenapa anda kata waspda tanpa alasan, puteramaya. Lebih wajar berhati-hati atau tahniah! Temasek itu negeri kita tanah kita orang melayu - inilah komedi dan tragedinya)
Konsumerisma Patriotisma II
(siapa kawan kamu det)
Charles Waterhouse 'Chip' Goodyear:
...Goodyear helped to grow a debt-ridden BHP company in 1999 into the world's largest miner via a merger with South Africa's Billiton (2001); then through further acquisitions, corporate restructuring and benefitting from a commodities boom, BHP Billiton's market capitalisation grew from US$12 billion to about US$200 billion by the time he left nine years later...
Singapore's Temasek taps former BHP boss as CEO
By Alex Kennedy
Associated Press Writer / February 6, 2009
SINGAPORE—Singapore state investment company Temasek, sitting on large paper losses from its Merrill Lynch investment, said Friday that Chief Executive Ho Ching will be replaced by Charles W. Goodyear, the former boss of the world's largest mining company, BHP Billiton.
Temasek Holdings, which has a Singapore dollars $185 billion ($123 billion) investment portfolio, said Chip Goodyear, as the 51 year old Connecticut native is usually known, will be CEO-designate from March and replace Ho on October 1.
Although Temasek doubled net profit to SG$18.2 billion for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2008, the fund made a number of missteps under Ho, including a $5 billion investment in brokerage Merrill Lynch in late 2007.
Merrill's shares fell 78 percent in 2008 amid the global financial turmoil and the storied Wall Street firm was ultimately bought by Bank of America Corp. on Jan. 1 in a lifesaving deal.
Ho's resignation has "got nothing to do with performance," Temasek Chairman S. Dhanabalan said at a news conference. "We have a long-term view of our investments and it's too early to say whether some of them will result in losses."
Temasek has also bet big on other financial companies, owning large stakes in Standard Chartered Plc, DBS Group Holdings Ltd. and Barclays Plc.
Ho, the wife of the city-state's prime minister, Lee Hsien Loong, was appointed to Temasek's board in early 2002 and became chief executive in January 2004.
She was hired "purely on the basis of merit and not on her relationship with anyone," Dhanabalan said.
Goodyear said his experience at BHP, which is also Australia's biggest oil and gas producer, prepared him to run an investment fund. He retired as CEO in late 2007 after nearly five years at the helm of the miner, which had enjoyed unprecedented profits as a result of China and India's insatiable demand for ore and other minerals.
"The common denominator of business is numbers," Goodyear said. "Being able to understand those numbers and the application of capital is a universal aspect of business."
Goodyear, who has a masters of business administration from the Wharton School of Finance, University of Pennsylvania, said he had been in talks with Temasek about the job for the last 15 months and in "contact even before that."
Ho, 55, said she has not decided what she will do after vacating the CEO's office on October 1. She will also resign from the board of directors.
"Chip brings capabilities that I don't have," Ho said. "I don't see myself as needing to direct it (Temasek) in any way."
Ho has a master's degree in electrical engineering from Stanford University and worked at a Temasek-owned company, Singapore Technologies Pte, from 1987 to 2001.
Singapore's Ministry of Finance is Temasek's only shareholder. The company, which is smaller than the city-state's other sovereign wealth fund, the Government of Singapore Investment Corp., owns large stakes in many of the country's biggest companies, including Singapore Telecommunications, bank DBS Group Holdings and Singapore Airlines.
Ho Ching, center, with S. Dhanabalan, right, chairman of Temasek, and Chip Goodyear, who will be chief executive.
Former BHP chief to replace head of Singapore state fund
Bloomberg News
Friday, February 6, 2009
SINGAPORE: Ho Ching will step down as chief executive of the Singaporean state investor Temasek Holdings at a time when turmoil in global markets is slashing the value of its investments.
Chip Goodyear, the former chief executive of BHP Billiton, will replace Ho, wife of Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, on Oct. 1. The move, announced Friday, could help Temasek build a more global image.
Temasek, which had assets worth 185 billion Singapore dollars, or $123 billion, as of March 2008, is nursing losses from high-profile investments it made in Merrill Lynch and Barclays as it aggressively expanded outside its core Asian market.
"These are turbulent times, and I'm sure she must have had a stressful time this year," said David Cohen, economist at Action Economics in Singapore.
Temasek's $5 billion-plus investment in Merrill alone has resulted in a loss of more than $2 billion.
The state investor controls some of the most high-profile Singaporean companies, including Singapore Airlines and Singapore Telecommunications, and has stakes in global companies like Standard Chartered.
S. Dhanabalan, Temasek's chairman, said that the decision by Ho, 55, to step down was not linked to performance and that it was too early to determine whether investments made in the last two years will lose out in the long term.
"The team has already embarked on a different stance since mid-2007 and has begun to review its long-term plans under different scenarios prompted by the economic downturn," Dhanabalan said at a news media briefing. "If we are to bring in new leadership, it would be just as good a time as any to involve a new leader in this review."
Goodyear, 51, left BHP Billiton in early 2008. He joined Temasek's board on Sunday.
"Goodyear understands the financial crisis, and having an expertise within metals and mining is very good for the future because that is where all the investors will be," said Christoffer Moltke-Leth, head of sales trading at SAXO Capital Markets in Singapore.
Asked whether he had the necessary experience to lead Temasek, Goodyear said a news conference that he had started his career as an investment banker at Kidder Peabody, where he advised corporations on mergers and acquisitions and financing.
"In the resources business, our payoff times are decades," he said.
Ho, who will also resign from the Temasek board, joined the fund as a director in 2002. She became executive director that year and chief executive in January 2004, according to information posted on Temasek's Web site.
Ho, who holds a master of science in electrical engineering from Stanford University in California, led the drive to increase Temasek's holdings outside the 680-square-kilometer, or 263-square-mile, island.
She increased investments in financial services to 40 percent of Temasek's total portfolio.
On her watch, Temasek bought stakes in the Chinese lenders China Construction Bank and Bank of China and became the largest shareholder in Merrill Lynch before its takeover by Bank of America.
But the MSCI World/Financials Index has slumped 60 percent in the past year as credit losses and write-downs at the world's biggest financial firms have surged past $1 trillion.
In October 2004, Ho ended 30 years of financial secrecy at the company by publishing Temasek's first-ever annual review.
Temasek invested about $5.9 billion in Merrill Lynch. It bought about 9 percent of the New York-based firm in December 2007 for $5 billion, or $48 a share, though its effective purchase price was reduced in July when the bank gave it a further $2.5 billion in shares.
The investment bank's shares lost 78 percent last year before the stock was delisted following the Bank of America purchase.
The Singapore investment company now holds about 189 million shares in Bank of America after having converted its Merrill Lynch stock. In a Jan. 5 filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Temasek said it held about 219.7 million Merrill Lynch shares. Bank of America completed the Merrill Lynch purchase on Jan 1.
Temasek is one of the largest shareholders in Standard Chartered and in DBS Group Holdings and owns stakes in Barclays, India's Icici Bank and lenders in Indonesia, South Korea and Pakistan.
Temasek posted losses smaller than the decline in the global markets last year because it had reduced stock holdings early in the crisis, Tharman Shanmugaratnam, the finance minister, said last month.
Singapore's Temasek loses $39 billion in 8 months
Singapore state investment company Temasek lost about $39 billion, or 31 percent of its holdings, in eight months last year as big bets in the financial sector went sour...
(waspada! - watch out! - mr. arabs! and malaysian companies in resource business...financial buyout...investment and banks, Puteramaya)
World Bank chief economist proposes new 'Marshal Plan'
10 Feb 2009, 1407 hrs IST, AGENCIES
WASHINGTON: World Bank's chief economist Justin Lin has called for the establishment of a $2-trillion Global Recovery Fund to help the low-income
countries to cope with the current financial crisis.
Lin, who proposed for the setting up of the massive fund Monday, said it was in "the spirit of Marshall Plan for the development" that would help the low-income economies to invest in the bottleneck areas and achieve sustained growth.
In a speech at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, a leading think tank in the United States, Lin warned that the current crisis is the most serious one since the Great Depression in the 1930s.
"Consider this global crisis we encountered now, I think we need to be more aggressive," said the China-born World Bank chief economist, the first person from a developing country to hold this position.
"I'd like to propose a global recovery fund in the spirit of Marshall plan for the development," said Lin, referring to his ambitious plan.
(subhanallah. ahh, the best news:
G7 to discuss 'Buy American' stimulus clause: Japan
10 Feb 2009, 1223 hrs IST, AGENCIES
TOKYO: Finance chiefs from the Group of Seven rich nations are expected to discuss the "Buy American" clause in a US economic package when they meet
this week, Japan's finance minister said on Tuesday.
Finance ministers and central bankers from the Group of Seven will renew their resolve to fight protectionism when they gather for talks on the global economic crisis in Rome Friday, said Shoichi Nakagawa.
He warned against a return to the protectionism of the 1930s -- seen as a catalyst for the Great Depression.
"We've learnt from the Great Depression that it would lead to disaster" if the same kind of steep import duties were imposed again, he said.
"Previous G7 and G20 meetings have confirmed that we shouldn't get mired in protectionism," Nakagawa told reporters.
The European Union and Canada have fiercely attacked the "Buy American" clause, warning it could start a global round of tit-for-tat trade reprisals and set a bad example for other countries mulling their own stimulus projects.
US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner urged G7 finance ministers Monday to act "promptly to restore health to the global economy," the Treasury said in a statement.
The G7 -- the United States, Japan, Germany, France, Britain, Italy and Canada -- in recent months has taken a back seat to the Group of 20, which also includes leading emerging economies such as China and Brazil.
G7 finance chiefs may also discuss currency issues in Rome, a Japanese finance ministry official said.
"As usual, some people may talk about foreign exchange issues in the context of macroeconomic discussions," the official told reporters on condition of anonymity.
Japan is concerned about the strength of the yen, which is taking a heavy toll on the country's exporters.
Are You Okay, Prince
(while i like what the sultan did)
HANAN 2
By Dr. Mahathir Mohamad
on February 19, 2009 7:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (177) | TrackBacks (0)
Dear Hanan,
1. I think I cannot convince you on anything simply because your perception of things is not based on logic or reason but merely on your strong belief that you are always right, even if the whole world says you are wrong.
2. Jews have lived with Muslims in Muslim countries for centuries without any serious problem.
3. On the other hand in Europe, Jews were persecuted. Every now and again there would be pogroms when the Europeans would massacre Jews. The Holocaust did not happen in Muslim countries. Muslims may discriminate against Jews but did not massacre them.
4. But now you are fighting the largely Muslim Palestinians. It cannot be because of religious differences or the killing of Jews living among them. It must be because you have taken their land and expelled them from their homeland. It is therefore not a religious war. But of course as you seek sympathisers from among the non-Muslims, the Palestinians seek sympathisers among the Muslims. That still does not make the war a religious war.
5. Whether you speak Hebrew or not is not relevant. Lots of people who are not English speak English. They don't belong to England. For centuries you could speak Hebrew but remained Germans, British, French, Russians etc.
6. Lots of Jews cannot speak Hebrew but they are still Jews. Merely being able to speak Hebrew does not entitle you to claim Palestine.
7. The Jews had lived in Europe for centuries. They identify themselves with their domicile. They fought the wars of these countries often against other Jews living in enemy countries.
8. These countries are their homeland. So why should they take Palestinian land to make their own country? They could take any of the European countries as their own country. The United States of America should offer one of its states as Israel.
9. As to history, the Malays had occupied a lot of land in Southeast Asia since time immemorial. Today much of our land has become part of neighbouring countries, having been conquered or because of treaties entered into by the British. We should really go to war to regain our land especially as there are Malays living there.
10. But we want to live in peace with our neighbours. So we accept the borders drawn by the colonialists.
11. You may say it is a joke to believe the Philistines are the forebears of the Palestinians. But what may be a joke to you is a serious belief of much of the non-Jewish world.
12. We did not have a Jewish representative at our conference. But I am sure when you have a conference in Israel you did not have Muslim representatives either.
13. I can sympathise over the killings of the Jews. But show me pictures of total destruction of Israeli towns and villages. Show me the effect of the primitive Hamas rockets on the Israeli people. Compare them with the effects of your bombs, rockets, shells, chemical weapons you used on the Gazans. When did Hamas blockade you and starve Israeli people and deprive them of medical attention. Did Hamas build a wall to separate Israelis from other Israelis including from family members? Did Hamas build settlements in Israel?
14. This idea of out-terrorising the terrorists, of massive retaliation on a scale that horrifies the whole world will not work.
15. Our people who went to Gaza were amazed at the attitude of the people there. Even after the deaths of so many of them, the deaths of their children and babies; even after their towns have been flattened, their schools and hospitals destroyed, they show no fear. Every one of them expects to die at any time because of your attacks but they would never surrender. When asked they simply said it is their land and they would defend it to the last. Even an Arab Christian priest was determined to stay on in Gaza. Those of their children who survive will prepare themselves to defend their land like their parents. Your attacks fail to terrify them or to force them to submit. You only succeed in instilling greater hatred of Israel and the Israelis.
16. When it was pointed out to them that they are no match for the Israeli forces and their weapons of mass destruction, when it was pointed out that their rockets were primitive and cannot compare with the destructiveness of Israeli rockets, they were not disheartened. The Israeli attacks simply strengthened their resolve to go on fighting. The Israeli idea to out-terrorise them has not worked and I believe it would not work.
17. Your arguments simply confirm my belief that the Jews have the same degree of hatred for the Palestinians, despite the fact that you suffer less than them.
18. The war has degenerated into a feud between Palestinians and Israelis. The Palestinians know they cannot win the war but that simply heightened their hatred for Israelis. They will nevertheless try to kill Jews, even if that will intensify Jewish hatred for the Palestinians. And you will retaliate with many times greater ferocity because you cannot force them to their knees. Their resistance simply increase your anger and hatred of them.
19. We have come to an impasse. If Israel is bent on occupying Palestinian land, on building Jewish settlements, on building Berlin walls and on sanctions and blockade, the Palestinians will continue their futile attacks. Arabs will die, maybe 10 for every one Jew. But with the hatred for Jews which they harbour, that is a worthwhile sacrifice. And Jews will kill more Arabs to express their hatred. And so it will go on as it had gone for 60 years, as it will go on for another 60 years or more.
20. Dear Hanan, tell your Government to compromise.
sementara di bumi melayu
sultan perak raja melayu
dirgahayu tuanku
adakah in cukup bahan bukti
saperti yang akan dineracakan
segala amalan dan berbicara segala saksi
terima kasih beras tujuh butir
bismillah dan selawat baginda rasul
kemudian kunyah dan telan
(tertibnya - niat di mana?)
kepada allah berserah
Boycott Israel and American Companies Supporting Zionist Israel user
by dulcefloare,
on Fri Jan 9, 2009 9:09am PST 12 Read More from This Author
I don't have the time to give you a lengthy expose on why I am against the ethnic cleansing in Gaza done by Isis Ra El. Do your own research.
Please, don't come here commenting about how Hamas is bombarding Israel with rockets. Hamas rockets have no targeting capabilities, and 99.9% of the time never do any damage to buildings, much less kill any people.
Israel's response is about as fair as dropping a 2-ton bomb on your neighbor because he fired fireworks in your yard.
If you support Israel because you think the Jews are God's "chosen" people, go read The Thriteenth Tribe by Arthur Koestler. The majority of Jews aren't even Semitic, they're Ashkenazi, of Turkish descent, who converted to Judaism about 700 years after Jesus died. (???? - mine a muslim: ?))
http://jewishcompanies.com/
http://www.mavensearch.com/subjects/165
Top 13
1) General Electric
2) CATerpillar (bulldozer that killed Rachel Corrie in 2002)
3) The Home Depot
4) The Limited
5) Starbucks
6) McDonald’s
7) Estée Lauder
8) L’Oréal
9) Delta Galil
10) Marks & Spencer
11) Sara Lee
12) Coca-Cola
13) Intel
The Home Depot
Bernie Marcus, founder of Home Depot,
Les Wexner, founder of The Limited (see below),
Edgar Bronfman Sr., who once owned Seagram’s,
Lou Ranieri, a major Wall Street player who now co-owns one of Israel’s largest banks, Jeanne Kirkpatrick, former U.S. Ambassador to the UN,
and Jack Kemp." (Kemp was the running-mate of Bob Dole in the 1996 presidential election – Google him for lots of Zionist connections.)
Products and Affiliated Companies:
Home Depot retail stores
EXPO Design Centers
Villager’s Hardware stores
Apex Supply Company
Georgia Lighting
Maintenance Warehouse
National Blinds & Wallpaper
The Limited
Products and Affiliated Companies:
Intimate Brands:
(Bath & Body Works, White Barn Candle Company, Victoria’s Secret)
Express (667 stores)
The Limited (389 stores)
Lerner New York (560 stores)
Structure (469 stores)
New York and Company (79 stores)
Mast Industries (apparel manufacturer)
Henri Bendel (Fifth avenue – single store)
Hollinger Publishing
Starbucks
Products and Affiliated Companies:
Starbucks Coffee Stores (4,709 locations world-wide)
Starbucks coffee, chocolates, biscuits & ice-cream products
Seattle Coffee Company in the United Kingdom
Pasqua Inc., a San Francisco based coffee retailer (acquired 1998).
Hear Music, a San Francisco based music company (acquired 1999).
Tazo®, a Portland, Oregon based tea company (acquired 1999).
Hotels with Starbucks:
Hyatt Hotels
Marriott Hotels
Starwood Hotels (Sheraton)
Bookstores with Starbucks:
Canadian bookstore Chapters Inc
Barnes & Noble, Inc bookstores
Albertson’s Supermarkets
The New York Times
Estee Lauder
Products and Affiliated Companies:
Estée Lauder cosmetics
Aramis, Clinique, DKNY, Prescriptives, Origins Natural Resources
MAC Cosmetics, La Mer, Bobbi Brown Essentials
Tommy Hilfiger Toiletries, Jane, Donna Karan Cosmetics
Aveda, Stila Cosmetics, Jo Malone, Bumble & Bumble, Kate Spade
L'Oreal
Products and Affiliated Companies:
LaRoche – Posay Pharmaceuticals
Maybelline, Ralph Lauren, Helena Rubinstein
Redken 5th Avenue NYC
Giorgio Armani Perfumes, Lancome Paris
Delta Galil - Israel's Largest Textile Manufacturer
Marks & Spencer (underwear, socks, baby wear, leisure wear, and rugs – see below). http://www.odaction.org/challenge/60/textil.html Also supplies
* Victoria’s Secret, the GAP, J. C. Penny, Playtex, Ralph Lauren, Calvin Klein, Hugo Boss, Banana Republic, Structure, J-Crew, and Pryca. Is one-quarter owned by
Sara Lee (see below)
Sara Lee
Sara Lee Bakery
Meat: Hillshire Farm, Jimmy Dean, Bryan, Ball Park, Aoste
Coffee and coffee systems: Superior Coffee, Douwe Egberts, Maison Café, Pilao
Tea: Pickwick
Body care: Sanex, Body Mist, Brylcreem, Aqua Velva, Radox
Shoe care: Kiwi
Air fresheners: Ambi Pur
Hanes – Intimate apparel, hosiery, socks, knitwear, work wear, casual wear
Playtex – Intimate apparel
Champion – Men’s and women’s athletic apparel and men’s underwear
L’eggs – Hosiery
Dim – Intimate apparel, hosiery
Bali – Intimate apparel
Just My Size – Intimate apparel
Lovable – Intimate apparel, men’s underwear, socks
Outer Banks – T-shirts, sport shirts
Wonder bra – Intimate apparel
Gossard – Intimate apparel
Coca Cola
Products and Affiliated Companies:
Soft Drinks:
Coca-Cola (incl. Cherry Coke)
Fanta, Fresca, Frescolita, Sprite, Tab
Bacardi Mixers, Hi-C, Fruitopia
Dr. Pepper and other Schweppes brands (in some countries – check the can)
Other:
Dasani Water
Minute Maid, Five Alive, Sun Valley
Nescafé, Nestea, Tasters Choice
Source, information and research found here (on clicking: This Domain (wakeupfromyourslumber.com) Has Been Disabled
For information on restoring your account please call customer service as soon as possible
When/If you call our support help line, please have your site name ready)
nota:
do we have list of companies with arabs involvements and strategic arab companies?
Post a Comment