(Comments posted in Malaysia Today)
Geniuses are born out of the environment they live in and a product of their eco-system.
History has shown that humanity made significant leaps in the standard of living for most of its people only in the last 200 years or so, as a result of modern science and the Industrial Revolution.
In Asia, one only has to look back 3 generations or less. Before that, unless you are some 'tuans' (lords) most of the rest lived wretched lives no better than that of slaves or animals. [According to my father, my grandfather came to Malaya from China 100 years ago with only 1 shirt and a pair of pants. When he died, that was also all he left behind. Part of the cause was because he was an opium smoker]
Some historians estimated that modern technology enabled an average human today to live the life of one who had the equivalent of 30 to 40 slaves in the past. They averaged things out over all 6+ billion people (400 million in India today do not even have electricity). Those flying around on airplanes or proton cars for fun would appreciate that it would not be not possible 200 years ago without technology even if they tuaned (lorded) a million slaves.
[That's why supposedly god's son, god's agents etc. had god's permission to own female slaves but could not fly. Yes, all knowing and powerful gods cannot get their sons and agents to fly or make airplanes but ride donkeys, camels and slaves? And go around 'saving' others using wild animals with swords but no F15s and M1 Abrams? Send a battalion of those things out and those Romans and Sassanians would have submitted without a fight! Instead, one god’s bugger got nailed by a few Romans and suckers think it was a ‘great sacrifice’. Gods send messages without even paper, DVD or thumbdrive? That's why suckers that loudly extol those characters today are known as ‘idiots from the dark ages’]
The great leap in technology came about because of the development of rational thought (of which science and maths are the results) in place of ‘faiths’ in some parts of the world where people (along with some protestants) managed to free themselves from the feudal lords and religious idiots tuaning over them from places like Rome and due to the availability of a cheap information (and therefore knowledge) spreading technology called paper and printing.
Stephen Hawking in his book 'God created the Integers' listed 17 great mathematicians without whose breakthroughs today's advanced physics would not be possible. Of that,
- 2 came before the coming of a god's son (Euclid of Egypt, Archimedes of Sicily),
- 1 came before coming of a god's messenger (Diophantus of Egypt),
- 14 came after the arrival of paper & printing in Europe
Of the last 14, 4 were British, 4 French, 6 Germans. Can see the protestant link? German’s contribution was shorted by one because Hawking (a Brit) attributed Calculus to Newton and left out the German Liebniz whose symbols for Calculus we use today [the same way some people think Euclid and Diophantus were Greeks and not Egyptians].
That is one reason why the other animals gang up to whack the Germans. Out of the European 'sovereign debt crisis’ even those without history may notice signs of who the real big brother (and idiotic spoiler) of Europe today is.
[The concept of space-time curvature that many attribute to Einstein (and his Relativity) would not be possible without the geometry of Riemann, a German. Einstein was a German Jew who did not speak any Jewish language and whose dying words were in German. Some idiots from the dark ages today cite Einstein as proof that their religion is ‘the truth’ because his ‘genius’ supports their holy book’s claim that Jews are ‘god’s chosen people’. Einstein on the other hand said people who believe in personal gods are ‘child-like’ – see above for reason why]
In between the first 3 mathematicians and the others is a period of 1,200 years of little major mathematical progress. The period historians call 'the dark ages' falls within that gap.
During that gap, that part of the world was tuaned by 2 groups of people: feudal lords who settle things with swords and religious zealots who burnt disagreeable people on stakes.
[See what happened to Egypt since Diophantus? They went into deep freeze after the coming of some idiots]
With today’s Thievesland tuaned by thieves with crooked knives and a set of idiots from the dark ages, what chance do you think history would give a potential genius to bloom?
There is a higher chance that animals like Ibrahim Ali would do to them what the Anglo-Saxons did to the Germans…
Thursday, December 01, 2011
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
How Japanese Killed Chinese
[Could not upload PDF with pictures here]
Attached mail contains pictures of what those animals in the Japanese army did to the Chinese people during World War II.
Although they did the same to people in all the countries they invaded, the Chinese were particularly targetted because of the ferocious resistance put up by them. In Malaya and Singapore, for example, people of my parents' generation witness first hand the chopping of (mainly Chinese) heads and the display of decapitated heads in prominent places like major road junctions - supposedly to strike fear and hopefully submission into the populace.
The Japanese on the other hand claimed they were 'liberating Asia from the white colonisers'. Just like some western countries today claim they are 'saving' the Afghans, Iraqis, Libyans etc.
[In fact all throughout history, every occupier would say something similar to the local people of the lands they were about to occupy. Alexander to Napoleon in Egypt, the Conquistadors in the Americas, white colonisers of the 18th and 19th centuries like the British in Africa, mid-East and India. They all claim to be 'saviours' but they always turn out to be anything but. Which is why only historical fools believe what the Americans say about their intentions in places from Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya today.]
The Chinese are particularly tough nuts for those screwed up Jap animals probably because of their strong cultural history and the unity of their people. For example, an uncle of mine volunteered to go back to China to serve in the Kuomintang army (he was assigned as a lorry driver carrying supplies over the Burma-China border). When the Japs 'reached' Malaya, a younger brother of his was taken away one night and never returned.
[It is interesting to note that some other races were not treated quite as brutally perhaps partly because a significant part of those people actually believed the 'saviour' story the Japs were spinning and were happy to cooperate. The most notable example were some Indians under a fella called Bose. To be fair, Bose had to choose between 2 devils - the Brits and the Japs - and did not have the opportunity to know the Japs first hand for the Japs never reached India because the Chinese were keeping them 'occupied' - otherwise pictures of Indian heads being chopped off may also be circulating today]
Any Malaysian or Singaporean Chinese of my generation would have heard stories like above via first-hand witnesses in their families. In other words, those bloody Japs were really animals.
That is the reason why until today, the Chinese and Korean people still hold a big grudge against the Japs.
Made worse by some white devils that many idiots of today think are the 'greatest country in the world'.
Firstly, they let the Japs go on with the war and those killings by not fighting the Japs. See how easy the Japs took places like Malaya and Singapore - it was literally a walkover (that means someone didn't want to play). They only 'supported' the Chinese with arms supplied across Burma - probably just enough to keep Chinamen from losing but not enough to win as many Chinamen had to fight with swords! And to ensure the Japs would not reach someone's 'jewel' in India.
[It was the same trick in Europe where the same devils pretended to fight over some African desert and on ships, and let the Germans and East Europeans kill each other by the 10s of millions first before joining in when the tide has already turrned. That's why when their soldiers landed in Europe they were surprised to find that they were fighting German kids! The real men were on the eastern front]
Then and after the Russians started shifting their army to Asia after whacking the Germans (and after a few 10 millions of Chinamen's lives), that white devil decided to 'end' the war in Asia by nuking the Japs (before that they only fought the Japs on small islands or on ships in the Pacific).
[Interestingly, a senator of that devil at that time said that Truman was his 'hero' for nuking the Japs but his mistake was he should have dropped at least 4 of those things instead of 2. Well, that senator finally got his wish 70 years later. Fukushima has 4 of those things... supplied by who else]
First, they wanted the Japs on their side against Russia and a future China (see today) so they let them off with little accountability.
Those so-call war crimes tribunal were a farce. Other than a few top Japanese generals put up for show, few attempts were made to account for the millions of lives those Jap animals took. As example, my father's family never knew what happened to that young son who was taken away. So many Chinamen were killed anyway, so who cares.
Which is why some Japs today claim that all those Chinese and Korean casualty claims and war history books are hog-wash and instead claim that their Jap version of the war history is the correct one.
[For children and half-childs that cannot get it, it is like this. If a mass murder happened and the policeman not only didn't bother to investigate but also told the mass murderer that if the murderer work for him he would be protected, then the mass murderer is left to write anything he likes about the mass murder! The same policeman, on the other hand, says (to the buying fools) that it is all about the right to 'free speech' and the victims' families therefore have no reason to be pissed]
Then in the early 70s, the same devils under Nixon (perhaps because they were running out of gold to support the Dollar Bluff and needed something from the Japs - remember 'temporary suspension of Bretton Woods'?) agreed to the Japs transferring the ashes of those few 'top generals' above to the Yasukuni Shrine. Since then, Japanese leaders make it their point to make regular visits to that so-called 'heroes shrine' of theirs. Thus the unending stoking of Chinese and Korean anger till today.
[It is like China and Korea setting up a 'heroes shrine' for Truman and his admiring 'my hero should have at least 4-nukes for the Japs' senator, and have their heads of governments go visit that place at every anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and then pretend to act innocent]
So nice, every year they can essentially go show Chinamen and Koreans their 3rd finger and say 'hah see, we slaughtered you fellas like pigs and you cannot touch us!'
Many around the world today wonder why Chinamen and Koreans are so sensitive with a simple visit to a shrine. Yah, so simple. The Chinese did not invent paper for no reason.
In his book 'On China' Kissinger said that in all their dealings the Chinese have a few thousand years of history to refer to as guide while the Americans had only a couple of centuries' worth. In his book 'The Argumentative Indians' Amartya Sen noted that Indians had to learn their own early history from 2 major sources - the Greeks and Chinese.
Now you see why many whitemen today die also claim Greece to be the source of everything great with them and why the Chinese would never submit to the Japs? It is their history.
Seven-11 (or is it 7-Eleven?) idiots, on the other hand, would simply sing to any book they can lay their hands on. And then go tell others to 'be a scientist!' Yah, so simple to be a scientist... to be an idiot is infinitely simpler.
Attached mail contains pictures of what those animals in the Japanese army did to the Chinese people during World War II.
Although they did the same to people in all the countries they invaded, the Chinese were particularly targetted because of the ferocious resistance put up by them. In Malaya and Singapore, for example, people of my parents' generation witness first hand the chopping of (mainly Chinese) heads and the display of decapitated heads in prominent places like major road junctions - supposedly to strike fear and hopefully submission into the populace.
The Japanese on the other hand claimed they were 'liberating Asia from the white colonisers'. Just like some western countries today claim they are 'saving' the Afghans, Iraqis, Libyans etc.
[In fact all throughout history, every occupier would say something similar to the local people of the lands they were about to occupy. Alexander to Napoleon in Egypt, the Conquistadors in the Americas, white colonisers of the 18th and 19th centuries like the British in Africa, mid-East and India. They all claim to be 'saviours' but they always turn out to be anything but. Which is why only historical fools believe what the Americans say about their intentions in places from Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya today.]
The Chinese are particularly tough nuts for those screwed up Jap animals probably because of their strong cultural history and the unity of their people. For example, an uncle of mine volunteered to go back to China to serve in the Kuomintang army (he was assigned as a lorry driver carrying supplies over the Burma-China border). When the Japs 'reached' Malaya, a younger brother of his was taken away one night and never returned.
[It is interesting to note that some other races were not treated quite as brutally perhaps partly because a significant part of those people actually believed the 'saviour' story the Japs were spinning and were happy to cooperate. The most notable example were some Indians under a fella called Bose. To be fair, Bose had to choose between 2 devils - the Brits and the Japs - and did not have the opportunity to know the Japs first hand for the Japs never reached India because the Chinese were keeping them 'occupied' - otherwise pictures of Indian heads being chopped off may also be circulating today]
Any Malaysian or Singaporean Chinese of my generation would have heard stories like above via first-hand witnesses in their families. In other words, those bloody Japs were really animals.
That is the reason why until today, the Chinese and Korean people still hold a big grudge against the Japs.
Made worse by some white devils that many idiots of today think are the 'greatest country in the world'.
Firstly, they let the Japs go on with the war and those killings by not fighting the Japs. See how easy the Japs took places like Malaya and Singapore - it was literally a walkover (that means someone didn't want to play). They only 'supported' the Chinese with arms supplied across Burma - probably just enough to keep Chinamen from losing but not enough to win as many Chinamen had to fight with swords! And to ensure the Japs would not reach someone's 'jewel' in India.
[It was the same trick in Europe where the same devils pretended to fight over some African desert and on ships, and let the Germans and East Europeans kill each other by the 10s of millions first before joining in when the tide has already turrned. That's why when their soldiers landed in Europe they were surprised to find that they were fighting German kids! The real men were on the eastern front]
Then and after the Russians started shifting their army to Asia after whacking the Germans (and after a few 10 millions of Chinamen's lives), that white devil decided to 'end' the war in Asia by nuking the Japs (before that they only fought the Japs on small islands or on ships in the Pacific).
[Interestingly, a senator of that devil at that time said that Truman was his 'hero' for nuking the Japs but his mistake was he should have dropped at least 4 of those things instead of 2. Well, that senator finally got his wish 70 years later. Fukushima has 4 of those things... supplied by who else]
First, they wanted the Japs on their side against Russia and a future China (see today) so they let them off with little accountability.
Those so-call war crimes tribunal were a farce. Other than a few top Japanese generals put up for show, few attempts were made to account for the millions of lives those Jap animals took. As example, my father's family never knew what happened to that young son who was taken away. So many Chinamen were killed anyway, so who cares.
Which is why some Japs today claim that all those Chinese and Korean casualty claims and war history books are hog-wash and instead claim that their Jap version of the war history is the correct one.
[For children and half-childs that cannot get it, it is like this. If a mass murder happened and the policeman not only didn't bother to investigate but also told the mass murderer that if the murderer work for him he would be protected, then the mass murderer is left to write anything he likes about the mass murder! The same policeman, on the other hand, says (to the buying fools) that it is all about the right to 'free speech' and the victims' families therefore have no reason to be pissed]
Then in the early 70s, the same devils under Nixon (perhaps because they were running out of gold to support the Dollar Bluff and needed something from the Japs - remember 'temporary suspension of Bretton Woods'?) agreed to the Japs transferring the ashes of those few 'top generals' above to the Yasukuni Shrine. Since then, Japanese leaders make it their point to make regular visits to that so-called 'heroes shrine' of theirs. Thus the unending stoking of Chinese and Korean anger till today.
[It is like China and Korea setting up a 'heroes shrine' for Truman and his admiring 'my hero should have at least 4-nukes for the Japs' senator, and have their heads of governments go visit that place at every anniversary of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and then pretend to act innocent]
So nice, every year they can essentially go show Chinamen and Koreans their 3rd finger and say 'hah see, we slaughtered you fellas like pigs and you cannot touch us!'
Many around the world today wonder why Chinamen and Koreans are so sensitive with a simple visit to a shrine. Yah, so simple. The Chinese did not invent paper for no reason.
In his book 'On China' Kissinger said that in all their dealings the Chinese have a few thousand years of history to refer to as guide while the Americans had only a couple of centuries' worth. In his book 'The Argumentative Indians' Amartya Sen noted that Indians had to learn their own early history from 2 major sources - the Greeks and Chinese.
Now you see why many whitemen today die also claim Greece to be the source of everything great with them and why the Chinese would never submit to the Japs? It is their history.
Seven-11 (or is it 7-Eleven?) idiots, on the other hand, would simply sing to any book they can lay their hands on. And then go tell others to 'be a scientist!' Yah, so simple to be a scientist... to be an idiot is infinitely simpler.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
6 Bosses in a Family
It was Sunday and my father and I had lunch with 2 cousins. One of them (the sister) was from USA and visiting the other (her brother). After lunch, they invited us to visit my male cousin's home. It was newly bought by his daughter who has 3 young children below 8 years old.
The home was a small apartment of about 1,100 square feet (that includes the balcony). The bedrooms were so small that there is hardly space even to do a stretch!
While chatting there, my cousin from the US started telling us that she had been trying to convince her brother for a few years to teach his grandchildren Chinese so that they will be equipped for the future when China will be more important in the world. But apparently, the family 'refused'.
As I agreed with his sister's suggestion (see note below), I curiously asked the brother why they did not think it was a good idea. My cousin's view was too many languages would 'confuse the kids' while his daughter's said his Chinese was 'not good enough' and afraid the kids may end up learning 'bad chinese'!
Note: educationists are of the view that young children can learn and can manage with a few different languages at the same time. In fact, children should start learning new languages when young! Their ability to learn is highest at young ages. So the fear should be under educating.
That made me more curious but I quickly found out that the 'problem' was much bigger. The children's father was not at home (on a sunday) and usually goes home late in evening, the children's mother complained that the grandfather (my cousin) was pampering one of the kids and not the others, his wife said that he complains about her cooking, etc. etc.
After that I told my cousins bluntly that even though I don't know things in detail (don't wish to anyway) my sense is the family's problem is major. And if immediate actions were not taken the young family will be destroyed and one of the causes is my cousin and his wife although they may not see it.
It starts with the size of that household. There were 10 people living in that small apartment. In addition to the 3 children and their parents and their maid, there were my cousin and wife (the in-laws) and their son and his new but expecting wife (so 11 people soon)!
With so many adults around with each probably having their own views on how things should be done in the house, even the maid would be confused and not sure who to listen to, not to say the kids.
And no wonder the supposed 'man of the house' was not coming home! The poor guy must have found his home had been taken over by others. Imagine, living in such a small apartment and having so many people looking over your shoulder even when you shit? It is not healthy.
Told my cousin that he and his wife (grandparents) should not stay at their daughter's house 100% of the time and should go back Malaysia once a while so that the young family can be left alone to have more time together. Family bonds are built by doing things together and not by others getting in the way all the time. And if their bonds is to be rebuilt it has to be done when the children are young. Which father would not want to go home and play with his kids unless some one is interfering?
Even when they are staying there, the grandparents should go out of the house (go take a walk outside for a few hours) when the children's parents return from work so that the family can have some private time together.
But they gave the excuse that they must be there because they were helping look after the children. Otherwise, 'dangerous' if no adult to watch over. Millions of families in the world lived without grandparents around helping out 100% of the time - theirs so special?
As it is, I think that young family was already in danger (likely contributed somewhat by their staying there)!
Told them that better still they should go stay at another place with his son and wife who I think were also affecting his daughter's family. The response I got? The son pays his sister rent ($500)! I said, money is not everything. One cannot buy privacy and time with family with money.
A few weeks after that, I ran into the cousin's son at nearby hawker center and told him about my views above and that he should shift out so that the family has more space and hopefully a better chance at rebuilding their bonds.
His response? His sister and husband's riocky relationship had nothing to do with his staying there but rather because they were not 'mature enough' to work out their problems. In addition, he has to wait for the 'right time' to move out, he was paying rent ($400, not $500 and market rate is close to $1,000), it was his sister who 'invited' him to stay there and it is more convenient to be near his parents when his wife delivers in a few months.
Essentially, his view was it was not his problem, his staying there was not part of the problem, and he cannot help his sister rebuild her family at all.
I found out that he had been staying with his sister for 10 years! Yet, to him the right time to move out is when he has saved enough to buy a flat of his own and when he manages to get a government flat near his in-laws! (for people not familiar with Singapore housing, affordable homes are built by the government and because supply is lower than demand interested buyers have to 'draw' for a chance to buy one. After successful 'draw' there is a few more years of waiting for it to be built).
So when does he plan to buy one and move out? Don't know, as he hasn't applied yet..
Since he planned to get his flat near his in-laws then how about staying with his in-laws for time being? His in-laws were living with a daughter - 3 persons - in a similar sized government flat but it was not convenient for him and wife to stay with them. But his staying in a house with 10 persons was not inconvenient?
At the end, I was convinced that he and his parents were part of the cause of his sister's problem with her husband but they will never see it.
I finally told that guy that humans are like that. It is always self first and consideration for others comes after or none at all. Worse, some even think they were sacrificing and helping others out when they were in fact either taking advantage of them or worse causing destruction.
That's the danger with living or dealing with such people...
See German Field Marshall's People Management Guide: http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2001/02/german-field-marshalls-people.html
The home was a small apartment of about 1,100 square feet (that includes the balcony). The bedrooms were so small that there is hardly space even to do a stretch!
While chatting there, my cousin from the US started telling us that she had been trying to convince her brother for a few years to teach his grandchildren Chinese so that they will be equipped for the future when China will be more important in the world. But apparently, the family 'refused'.
As I agreed with his sister's suggestion (see note below), I curiously asked the brother why they did not think it was a good idea. My cousin's view was too many languages would 'confuse the kids' while his daughter's said his Chinese was 'not good enough' and afraid the kids may end up learning 'bad chinese'!
Note: educationists are of the view that young children can learn and can manage with a few different languages at the same time. In fact, children should start learning new languages when young! Their ability to learn is highest at young ages. So the fear should be under educating.
That made me more curious but I quickly found out that the 'problem' was much bigger. The children's father was not at home (on a sunday) and usually goes home late in evening, the children's mother complained that the grandfather (my cousin) was pampering one of the kids and not the others, his wife said that he complains about her cooking, etc. etc.
After that I told my cousins bluntly that even though I don't know things in detail (don't wish to anyway) my sense is the family's problem is major. And if immediate actions were not taken the young family will be destroyed and one of the causes is my cousin and his wife although they may not see it.
It starts with the size of that household. There were 10 people living in that small apartment. In addition to the 3 children and their parents and their maid, there were my cousin and wife (the in-laws) and their son and his new but expecting wife (so 11 people soon)!
With so many adults around with each probably having their own views on how things should be done in the house, even the maid would be confused and not sure who to listen to, not to say the kids.
And no wonder the supposed 'man of the house' was not coming home! The poor guy must have found his home had been taken over by others. Imagine, living in such a small apartment and having so many people looking over your shoulder even when you shit? It is not healthy.
Told my cousin that he and his wife (grandparents) should not stay at their daughter's house 100% of the time and should go back Malaysia once a while so that the young family can be left alone to have more time together. Family bonds are built by doing things together and not by others getting in the way all the time. And if their bonds is to be rebuilt it has to be done when the children are young. Which father would not want to go home and play with his kids unless some one is interfering?
Even when they are staying there, the grandparents should go out of the house (go take a walk outside for a few hours) when the children's parents return from work so that the family can have some private time together.
But they gave the excuse that they must be there because they were helping look after the children. Otherwise, 'dangerous' if no adult to watch over. Millions of families in the world lived without grandparents around helping out 100% of the time - theirs so special?
As it is, I think that young family was already in danger (likely contributed somewhat by their staying there)!
Told them that better still they should go stay at another place with his son and wife who I think were also affecting his daughter's family. The response I got? The son pays his sister rent ($500)! I said, money is not everything. One cannot buy privacy and time with family with money.
A few weeks after that, I ran into the cousin's son at nearby hawker center and told him about my views above and that he should shift out so that the family has more space and hopefully a better chance at rebuilding their bonds.
His response? His sister and husband's riocky relationship had nothing to do with his staying there but rather because they were not 'mature enough' to work out their problems. In addition, he has to wait for the 'right time' to move out, he was paying rent ($400, not $500 and market rate is close to $1,000), it was his sister who 'invited' him to stay there and it is more convenient to be near his parents when his wife delivers in a few months.
Essentially, his view was it was not his problem, his staying there was not part of the problem, and he cannot help his sister rebuild her family at all.
I found out that he had been staying with his sister for 10 years! Yet, to him the right time to move out is when he has saved enough to buy a flat of his own and when he manages to get a government flat near his in-laws! (for people not familiar with Singapore housing, affordable homes are built by the government and because supply is lower than demand interested buyers have to 'draw' for a chance to buy one. After successful 'draw' there is a few more years of waiting for it to be built).
So when does he plan to buy one and move out? Don't know, as he hasn't applied yet..
Since he planned to get his flat near his in-laws then how about staying with his in-laws for time being? His in-laws were living with a daughter - 3 persons - in a similar sized government flat but it was not convenient for him and wife to stay with them. But his staying in a house with 10 persons was not inconvenient?
At the end, I was convinced that he and his parents were part of the cause of his sister's problem with her husband but they will never see it.
I finally told that guy that humans are like that. It is always self first and consideration for others comes after or none at all. Worse, some even think they were sacrificing and helping others out when they were in fact either taking advantage of them or worse causing destruction.
That's the danger with living or dealing with such people...
See German Field Marshall's People Management Guide: http://cckplanetblog.blogspot.com/2001/02/german-field-marshalls-people.html
Monday, September 05, 2011
From Housing Riches to Peanuts
http://www.property4peanuts.com/
Follow above link to see a listing of properties in the 'greatest economy in world' and see how cheap houses there are now. One can get a nice landed house for less than USD 100k! According to the ads, the current prices are about 40% of what it used to be and can now get returns of more than 10%!
Compare that to prices in 'a first world island in a third world sea' where a landed house costs at least USD 1 mil and with rental returns of less than 5%. (Wah, 'first world island' 10 times more first world than 'greatest economy in the world'.)
That's how a small island get to claim to be first world - squeeze more and more people into that small island and the frenzied competition for the limited space would drive house prices sky high. And voila everyone gets to be filthy rich....on paper. And, like all ponzi schemes, it works as long as there are more and more late comers willing to pay higher and higher prices for them.
Like those Americans used to imagine, so they think....
Follow above link to see a listing of properties in the 'greatest economy in world' and see how cheap houses there are now. One can get a nice landed house for less than USD 100k! According to the ads, the current prices are about 40% of what it used to be and can now get returns of more than 10%!
Compare that to prices in 'a first world island in a third world sea' where a landed house costs at least USD 1 mil and with rental returns of less than 5%. (Wah, 'first world island' 10 times more first world than 'greatest economy in the world'.)
That's how a small island get to claim to be first world - squeeze more and more people into that small island and the frenzied competition for the limited space would drive house prices sky high. And voila everyone gets to be filthy rich....on paper. And, like all ponzi schemes, it works as long as there are more and more late comers willing to pay higher and higher prices for them.
Like those Americans used to imagine, so they think....
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Chinese in Kolkata, India
http://www.uglychinesecanadian.com/?p=3976
Follow the link above to see video on Chinese living in Kolkata (Calcutta). Interesting for a few reasons below.
Note 1:
It is interesting to know that the Chinese in India are so much like the Chinese elsewhere in the world except for a few things: they speak like Indians and they like tandooris. Even when they have moved on to Canada, the Chinese that went there from India still sing their Indian songs and crave for the chicken tandoori they grew up with. May be the 'dust of history' is indeed not easy to remove.
When asked by Lee Kuan Yew why India could not do away with the problem of castes in India, Indira Gandhi said that it was not easy as we are all 'covered by the dust of history'.
Similarly, a Chinese songwriter wrote, 'our ancestors engraved it in our hearts long ago' (apes lost in history excepted) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77WQj18rDA4&feature=related
Note 2:
Recently, there was a big hoohah in Singapore about some recent Chinese immigrant complaining to the authorities about the strong curry smell from their Indian neighbour's cooking. They had to go for 'voluntary arbitration' and the Indian family agreed to cook curry only when the Chinese family are not at home! I suppose those Chinamen would bang on their Chinese gong when they go out.
If I was the arbitrator, I'd suggest that Chinaman go live in Kolkatta for a few years instead. Or, like what neighbours I used to grow up with in Malaysia did, the Indian family should regularly give those Chinamen some of their curry treats and vice versa. Then those Chinamen would be craving for curry wherever they go after that! (Actually there are easier solutions. E.g. both houses can install a set of exhaust fans or they can buy their own 1-acre properties but that would be less 'integrative').
This is a real story. About 25 years ago, when I was a young Andersen employee working on a project in Jakarta (Indonesia) my company assigned a similarly young Australian kid from Sydney to the project. Back then in Indonesia of Suharto (the animal that killed hundreds of thousands of ethnic Indonesians that supported Sukarno, and large numbers of Chinese when he was in power), nothing foreign was allowed. So no western food like MacDonalds etc outside of foreign owned hotels. Thus everyday, lunch was Indonesian fares that inevitably came with sambal (a mix of chilli and prawn paste). Although the sambal was too much for him, the Aussie had no choice but to start having them. Within the first week, that Aussie was down with stomach problem (as the case with most of us). After his component of the IT system went live a year later, the Aussie was assigned to Mauritius. But a month later he was back for a week to look into some problem in the component that he built. When it was time for lunch on his first day back, he said he really missed those Indonesian sambal and he must go and have it for lunch! The rest of us had a good laugh.
It was a nice story and one can say it is an example of how food can make the world a better place for humanity.
But can you imagine what happens when you have people who think that some one else's food or cooking are beneath them and therefore not even touchable as is the belief of some idiotic people in some parts of the world? Worse thing is when that belief is pat of their religion. Then you have a world where idiots go round feeling full of themselves (like Omar Khayyam said 'they got the secret') but wondering why other people cannot get along with them! Yah, other people have to be nice to you not just on your terms but by doing so to also accept the implication that their cooking of thousands of years are untouchable or dirty? Very unlikely, esp if that culture has little to show or contribute to the rest of the world. Worse when others know that more of their cookings were copied from the Indians rather than the religious master race they think they are aping...
Note 3:
The Chinese in Kolkatta seem to be Hakkas, the dialect group that people like me belongs to. In Chinese, 'Hakka' literally means 'guest family'. That name came about because they were considered as non-locals wherever they ended up at in China i.e. they were guests to the other Chinese.
Their place of origin is unclear but are generally thought to be from the northern part of China i.e. north of the Huang He (Yellow River), the cradle of the Chinese civilisation. Although commonly considered today as a part of the Han (main Chinese) race group, some people think they were related to the Xiongnus (a Mongol or Turkic people) that used to invade northern China more than 2,000 years ago.
Over time, they were dispersed all over China as a result of the never ending wars that happened in northern China - that was why the Great Wall was built over northern China by successive Chinese empires.
[According to history, to get rid of the Xiongnu's perennial threat to China, the Han emperor Wu Di sent a huge force to whack the Xiongnus about 2,100 years ago and drove them westward into today's Central Asia, and never to threaten China again. May be the Hakkas were Xiongnus caught inside the Great Wall and had no choice but to go south instead of west....] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Wu_of_Han
Today, the Hakkas are generally found in Southern China, Southeast Asia and forms a significant part of the oversea Chinese pouplation. My grandparents came from a village town near Guangdong called Zeng Cheng (about 60 km north of Shenzhen Bo An airport).
In the past, wherever they 'set up camp' in China the Hakkas would build houses that form round fortresses as protection from attacks by the other locals who understandably felt threatened by their 'invasion'. Even in China, they lived out of the grace of the other Chinese, thus the term for them was somewhat fitting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakka_people
That is perhaps the reason why Hakkas form a significant part of the oversea Chinese population. Wherever they go, they are 'guest familes' anyway. So what the heck...
----- Forwarded Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 9:53 AM
Subject: Fw: Chinatown in Kolkata ,India
The Legend of Fat Mama
“The Legend of Fat Mama” is a bittersweet story of the Chinese community in Kolkata, India, intertwined with the nostalgic journey in search of a woman who once made the most delicious noodles in the city’s Chinatown district. Kolkata once had a thriving community in its Chinatown, engaged in different trades, like medicine shops, food and shoemaking.
Though a small number of Chinese still live there, many of them left India in the aftermath of the 1962 India-China war. Thriving street food, disappearing family-run eateries, mahjong clubs, a Chinese printing press that has shut down and its handwritten counterpart that continues to deliver the news every morning, and the first all-woman dragon dance group preparing for the Chinese New Year make up the Chinese heritage in Kolkata.
About the director:
Rafeeq Ellias is an internationally known photographer. As a cinematographer, he has shot three documentaries: ‘The Nectar of Immortality’, a Channel Four film on the Kumbh Mela; ‘Slum Mumbai’, on Mumbai’s pavement-dwellers; and ‘Steps in Time’, on the Asiatic Society, Mumbai. ‘The Legend of Fat Mama’, made for BBC World, was Ellias’ first documentary as director and scriptwriter.
“The Legend of Fat Mama” won the Best Anthropological/Ethnographic Film at the 52nd National Film Awards.
Follow the link above to see video on Chinese living in Kolkata (Calcutta). Interesting for a few reasons below.
Note 1:
It is interesting to know that the Chinese in India are so much like the Chinese elsewhere in the world except for a few things: they speak like Indians and they like tandooris. Even when they have moved on to Canada, the Chinese that went there from India still sing their Indian songs and crave for the chicken tandoori they grew up with. May be the 'dust of history' is indeed not easy to remove.
When asked by Lee Kuan Yew why India could not do away with the problem of castes in India, Indira Gandhi said that it was not easy as we are all 'covered by the dust of history'.
Similarly, a Chinese songwriter wrote, 'our ancestors engraved it in our hearts long ago' (apes lost in history excepted) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77WQj18rDA4&feature=related
Note 2:
Recently, there was a big hoohah in Singapore about some recent Chinese immigrant complaining to the authorities about the strong curry smell from their Indian neighbour's cooking. They had to go for 'voluntary arbitration' and the Indian family agreed to cook curry only when the Chinese family are not at home! I suppose those Chinamen would bang on their Chinese gong when they go out.
If I was the arbitrator, I'd suggest that Chinaman go live in Kolkatta for a few years instead. Or, like what neighbours I used to grow up with in Malaysia did, the Indian family should regularly give those Chinamen some of their curry treats and vice versa. Then those Chinamen would be craving for curry wherever they go after that! (Actually there are easier solutions. E.g. both houses can install a set of exhaust fans or they can buy their own 1-acre properties but that would be less 'integrative').
This is a real story. About 25 years ago, when I was a young Andersen employee working on a project in Jakarta (Indonesia) my company assigned a similarly young Australian kid from Sydney to the project. Back then in Indonesia of Suharto (the animal that killed hundreds of thousands of ethnic Indonesians that supported Sukarno, and large numbers of Chinese when he was in power), nothing foreign was allowed. So no western food like MacDonalds etc outside of foreign owned hotels. Thus everyday, lunch was Indonesian fares that inevitably came with sambal (a mix of chilli and prawn paste). Although the sambal was too much for him, the Aussie had no choice but to start having them. Within the first week, that Aussie was down with stomach problem (as the case with most of us). After his component of the IT system went live a year later, the Aussie was assigned to Mauritius. But a month later he was back for a week to look into some problem in the component that he built. When it was time for lunch on his first day back, he said he really missed those Indonesian sambal and he must go and have it for lunch! The rest of us had a good laugh.
It was a nice story and one can say it is an example of how food can make the world a better place for humanity.
But can you imagine what happens when you have people who think that some one else's food or cooking are beneath them and therefore not even touchable as is the belief of some idiotic people in some parts of the world? Worse thing is when that belief is pat of their religion. Then you have a world where idiots go round feeling full of themselves (like Omar Khayyam said 'they got the secret') but wondering why other people cannot get along with them! Yah, other people have to be nice to you not just on your terms but by doing so to also accept the implication that their cooking of thousands of years are untouchable or dirty? Very unlikely, esp if that culture has little to show or contribute to the rest of the world. Worse when others know that more of their cookings were copied from the Indians rather than the religious master race they think they are aping...
Note 3:
The Chinese in Kolkatta seem to be Hakkas, the dialect group that people like me belongs to. In Chinese, 'Hakka' literally means 'guest family'. That name came about because they were considered as non-locals wherever they ended up at in China i.e. they were guests to the other Chinese.
Their place of origin is unclear but are generally thought to be from the northern part of China i.e. north of the Huang He (Yellow River), the cradle of the Chinese civilisation. Although commonly considered today as a part of the Han (main Chinese) race group, some people think they were related to the Xiongnus (a Mongol or Turkic people) that used to invade northern China more than 2,000 years ago.
Over time, they were dispersed all over China as a result of the never ending wars that happened in northern China - that was why the Great Wall was built over northern China by successive Chinese empires.
[According to history, to get rid of the Xiongnu's perennial threat to China, the Han emperor Wu Di sent a huge force to whack the Xiongnus about 2,100 years ago and drove them westward into today's Central Asia, and never to threaten China again. May be the Hakkas were Xiongnus caught inside the Great Wall and had no choice but to go south instead of west....] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emperor_Wu_of_Han
Today, the Hakkas are generally found in Southern China, Southeast Asia and forms a significant part of the oversea Chinese pouplation. My grandparents came from a village town near Guangdong called Zeng Cheng (about 60 km north of Shenzhen Bo An airport).
In the past, wherever they 'set up camp' in China the Hakkas would build houses that form round fortresses as protection from attacks by the other locals who understandably felt threatened by their 'invasion'. Even in China, they lived out of the grace of the other Chinese, thus the term for them was somewhat fitting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakka_people
That is perhaps the reason why Hakkas form a significant part of the oversea Chinese population. Wherever they go, they are 'guest familes' anyway. So what the heck...
----- Forwarded Message -----
From:
To:
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2011 9:53 AM
Subject: Fw: Chinatown in Kolkata ,India
The Legend of Fat Mama
“The Legend of Fat Mama” is a bittersweet story of the Chinese community in Kolkata, India, intertwined with the nostalgic journey in search of a woman who once made the most delicious noodles in the city’s Chinatown district. Kolkata once had a thriving community in its Chinatown, engaged in different trades, like medicine shops, food and shoemaking.
Though a small number of Chinese still live there, many of them left India in the aftermath of the 1962 India-China war. Thriving street food, disappearing family-run eateries, mahjong clubs, a Chinese printing press that has shut down and its handwritten counterpart that continues to deliver the news every morning, and the first all-woman dragon dance group preparing for the Chinese New Year make up the Chinese heritage in Kolkata.
About the director:
Rafeeq Ellias is an internationally known photographer. As a cinematographer, he has shot three documentaries: ‘The Nectar of Immortality’, a Channel Four film on the Kumbh Mela; ‘Slum Mumbai’, on Mumbai’s pavement-dwellers; and ‘Steps in Time’, on the Asiatic Society, Mumbai. ‘The Legend of Fat Mama’, made for BBC World, was Ellias’ first documentary as director and scriptwriter.
“The Legend of Fat Mama” won the Best Anthropological/Ethnographic Film at the 52nd National Film Awards.
Thursday, August 18, 2011
40 Years of Dollar Destruction
Wrong title. Should be 'Celebrating 40 Years of Living Off the Rest of the World'
40 years ago Nixon told the world that the US would stop convertibility of the US Dollar to gold 'temporarily'.
The sharp people of the world then knew that those liars did not mean what they said - the 'temporarily' part of it. One of the result was the 'oil crisis' of the 1970s where countries with oil started demanding more dollars for their 'black gold'.
Well, 40 years later Nixon's 'temporarily' is still temporary. In that time however, their 'dollar' has lost 98% of its value in gold terms. After they 'won the war' and till 1971, they guaranteed the world that 35 of their 'beautiful gold' (that's the term chinamen call the US dollar till today) would be exchangeable for 1 troy ounce of gold. Today, an ounce of gold costs 1,800 US dollar.
In other words, anyone keeping their money in that currency for the last 40 years would have lost 98% of their wealth.
A year or so ago, their Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told his audience in a Chinese university that China's US dollar holdings are safe. The Chinese students broke into loud laughter. Those Chinese students know their Confucius - that man had an advice whose popular English equivalent is 'talk is cheap, show it by your action'.
2,500 years ago, when Confucius was asked what would be the first thing he would do to improve public administration. Confucius said 'to ensure the correct use of terms'. Everyone was surprised. How could that be the key to the well running of a state?
His answer was something along this line (my interpretation only lah - me no handy bible to quote from) : When words do not reflect reality, people would be confused. When people are confused, business cannot be conducted in a fair manner. When business cannot be conducted in a fair manner, there will not be true justice. When there is no true justice, the state is doomed...
They deploy many tricks to keep that Dollar Bluff of theirs going - the longer it lasts the more they can live off the rest of the world.
Here is one of those tricks:
12 years or so ago, Joseph Stiglitz (then chief economist with the World Bank) wrote about how the IMF's 'standard formula' for helping to 'revive' 3rd world countries in financial crisis are actually meant to help creditors take advantage of those poor countries.
The standard IMF formula says that the only way out of financial crisis is to maintain a strong currency so that foreign investors would continue investing in those countries. To keep the value of their currency strong, countries must maintain sufficient foreign reserves so that those reserves can be used to buy back their currencies when their value drops. [A sharp kid with some history would quickly realise that the US itself does not follow that IMF standard formula - they don't hold foreign reserves and instead of keeping it strong, they had been continuously devaluing their currency throughout its 100 year history!]
The IMF loans were to be denominated in USD and have interest rates of 10% (because those countries have low credit ratings). Since those countries have insufficient reserves, they should use those USD loans to buy US Treasuries that pay 5% interest (because those papers are the best around and have very good credit ratings).
As result, those poor coutnries end up with a 5% interest cost for loans whose money they cannot use! (because those loans were immediately passed to the US government who ended up being the real user of those money!). [On top of that, the value of those foreign reserves would go down per above!]
From the perspective of the creditors, their so-called 'loans' come out of their left pocket and goes right back into their right pocket - 5% interest earnings at no risk of losing their capital!
Celebrating 40 Years of Dollar Destruction
By Sean Hyman, Editor,Currency Cross Trader
Dear Sovereign Investor,
This week, we’re celebrating the anniversary of the greatest heist in recorded history.
Exactly 40 years ago yesterday, President Nixon severed the dollar’s ties to gold forever.
It was a government game so the politicians could easily pay off their debts with “cheaper dollars” for the foreseeable future.
In reality, this one decision effectively stole all our dollars’ value for decades to come. And you and I are the ones still paying for this mistake.
Strangely this decision also created the $4 trillion Forex market...and eventually sent gold racing above $1,800 an ounce.
But these profitable side effects were not Nixon’s intention...
You see, up until 1971, each dollar was physically backed by gold.
Gold was $35 an ounce and every dollar in circulation could be redeemed for gold. So every dollar was backed by the power and security of gold.
But when Nixon removed us from the gold standard, that responsibility flew out the window - along with the dollar’s long-term value.
It’s the reason the dollar has lost massive purchasing power against other currencies in the last four decades (and gold has risen 51-fold against the buck).
And get this: the worst is still yet to come for the dollar.
I’ll explain how to protect your savings in just a moment. First, let’s take a closer look at how our dollar has lost that much in value.
The Greenback Is Backed By the “Hot Air” of Washington, D.C.
Given that the dollar has lost so much value, backing dollars with gold simply wouldn’t fly today.
In fact, it’s estimated that if you took all of the gold that has ever been mined in the world, it would only come up to about $5 trillion.Well we print trillions of dollars and run up over $14.6 trillion in debt all by ourselves in the U.S. (and that’s just one country of the world).
All these dollars are only worth something if the U.S. government says so. It’s backed by the U.S. government promise, “we’re good for it.” In other words, our dollars are basically backed by hot air straight from Washington.
But the harsh truth is they couldn’t back all of the dollars in circulation right now even if they wanted to.
Even worse, the more investors realize how shaky our currency is, the more they start looking elsewhere for more fundamentally sound currencies.
That’s one reason why the U.S. just raised our debt ceiling for the 75th time in 50 years. It’s also why the Standard & Poor’s just downgraded our debt.
Toss in the Fed’s nasty habit of creating money out of thin air anytime we need extra resources, bailouts and stimulus packages - and the dollar is in serious trouble.
The Government has Two Choices and Both are Bad...But Here’s What They Will Choose
Our economy is in shambles, and our currency is losing clout every single day. And we are no longer competitive with the rest of the world in terms of exports. We really only have two choices left to stay competitive with the rest of the world.
Either the government can allow “wage devaluation” or “currency devaluation.” In other words, they can let wages fall or let the currency drop in value.
Do you really think Americans will elect politicians that force them to take pay cuts? Heck no! So if the guys in Washington want to keep their jobs, they really only have one choice - devalue our dollars further.
As you can imagine, voters pay closer attention to how many dollars are in their paycheck than how much those dollars buy. (In fact, most Americans don’t even understand the concept of the dollar losing purchasing power anyway.)
That’s why it’s almost too easy for Washington to dilute our currency and accomplish their “cheap dollar” agenda.
A Glimpse Into the Future...
So here’s how all of this is going to play out. The U.S. will continue to stack on more debt and dilute the dollar by creating more money. Call it QEIII or just ridiculously low interest rates until 2013, but either way, this can only end one way.
The dollar is sinking in value, and central bankers around the world know it.
Therefore, they are “ever so quietly” shifting their central bank reserves slowly away from dollars and into currencies that aren’t being diluted, that have superior fundamentals.
Some, like China and India, are even buying up commodities for their reserves (like gold, silver, iron ore, etc.).
This practically guarantees there will be a constant shift away from dollars through the years - especially as our politicians believe the quick solution is “dollar dilution.” But no country in history ever brought themselves to prosperity by continually diluting their currency.
Therefore, you won’t really be able to “protect your dollars” because of the government’s overall agenda.
So what can you do? Well, you can protect your money - your wealth - by taking your money (dollars) and investing them in other currencies that aren’t playing the debt-stacking, currency dilution game.
You can also buy the traditional forms of “hard money” including gold.
Dollars...On Sale...50% Off!
Now remember when I said that our currency will have to be diluted even further?
One well-respected hedge fund manager ran the numbers and said that the dollar would have to be devalued by another 50% to make us competitive with the world again.
That means, if you’re paying $5 for your Starbucks coffee...you’ll be paying $10 in just a few short years. If you’re paying $400 for your car payment now, better get used to $800 payments.
Do you think “wage growth” is going to keep up with that? Hardly!
In fact, Ben Bernanke flat-out admitted last year that it will likely take five years or more to get our unemployment rate back down to 5-6%.
So if there is a glut of unemployed people, there’s no need for employers to raise wages when there’s an everlasting supply of employees willing to work for peanuts.
So the bottom line is: you’ve got to get positioned into currencies that aren’t “singing the same tune” as America.
That includes places like Switzerland, Norway and Singapore. All three have stronger currencies that can shield you from the dollar’s long-term destruction, and even provide some measure of safety as stocks drop.
So before the greenback devalues another 50% over the upcoming years...shift into something that will retain its value and grow through the years. And do it while the buck is still worth something!
Have a Nice Day,
Sean Hyman
Editor,Currency Cross Trader
40 years ago Nixon told the world that the US would stop convertibility of the US Dollar to gold 'temporarily'.
The sharp people of the world then knew that those liars did not mean what they said - the 'temporarily' part of it. One of the result was the 'oil crisis' of the 1970s where countries with oil started demanding more dollars for their 'black gold'.
Well, 40 years later Nixon's 'temporarily' is still temporary. In that time however, their 'dollar' has lost 98% of its value in gold terms. After they 'won the war' and till 1971, they guaranteed the world that 35 of their 'beautiful gold' (that's the term chinamen call the US dollar till today) would be exchangeable for 1 troy ounce of gold. Today, an ounce of gold costs 1,800 US dollar.
In other words, anyone keeping their money in that currency for the last 40 years would have lost 98% of their wealth.
A year or so ago, their Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told his audience in a Chinese university that China's US dollar holdings are safe. The Chinese students broke into loud laughter. Those Chinese students know their Confucius - that man had an advice whose popular English equivalent is 'talk is cheap, show it by your action'.
2,500 years ago, when Confucius was asked what would be the first thing he would do to improve public administration. Confucius said 'to ensure the correct use of terms'. Everyone was surprised. How could that be the key to the well running of a state?
His answer was something along this line (my interpretation only lah - me no handy bible to quote from) : When words do not reflect reality, people would be confused. When people are confused, business cannot be conducted in a fair manner. When business cannot be conducted in a fair manner, there will not be true justice. When there is no true justice, the state is doomed...
They deploy many tricks to keep that Dollar Bluff of theirs going - the longer it lasts the more they can live off the rest of the world.
Here is one of those tricks:
12 years or so ago, Joseph Stiglitz (then chief economist with the World Bank) wrote about how the IMF's 'standard formula' for helping to 'revive' 3rd world countries in financial crisis are actually meant to help creditors take advantage of those poor countries.
The standard IMF formula says that the only way out of financial crisis is to maintain a strong currency so that foreign investors would continue investing in those countries. To keep the value of their currency strong, countries must maintain sufficient foreign reserves so that those reserves can be used to buy back their currencies when their value drops. [A sharp kid with some history would quickly realise that the US itself does not follow that IMF standard formula - they don't hold foreign reserves and instead of keeping it strong, they had been continuously devaluing their currency throughout its 100 year history!]
The IMF loans were to be denominated in USD and have interest rates of 10% (because those countries have low credit ratings). Since those countries have insufficient reserves, they should use those USD loans to buy US Treasuries that pay 5% interest (because those papers are the best around and have very good credit ratings).
As result, those poor coutnries end up with a 5% interest cost for loans whose money they cannot use! (because those loans were immediately passed to the US government who ended up being the real user of those money!). [On top of that, the value of those foreign reserves would go down per above!]
From the perspective of the creditors, their so-called 'loans' come out of their left pocket and goes right back into their right pocket - 5% interest earnings at no risk of losing their capital!
Celebrating 40 Years of Dollar Destruction
By Sean Hyman, Editor,Currency Cross Trader
Dear Sovereign Investor,
This week, we’re celebrating the anniversary of the greatest heist in recorded history.
Exactly 40 years ago yesterday, President Nixon severed the dollar’s ties to gold forever.
It was a government game so the politicians could easily pay off their debts with “cheaper dollars” for the foreseeable future.
In reality, this one decision effectively stole all our dollars’ value for decades to come. And you and I are the ones still paying for this mistake.
Strangely this decision also created the $4 trillion Forex market...and eventually sent gold racing above $1,800 an ounce.
But these profitable side effects were not Nixon’s intention...
You see, up until 1971, each dollar was physically backed by gold.
Gold was $35 an ounce and every dollar in circulation could be redeemed for gold. So every dollar was backed by the power and security of gold.
But when Nixon removed us from the gold standard, that responsibility flew out the window - along with the dollar’s long-term value.
It’s the reason the dollar has lost massive purchasing power against other currencies in the last four decades (and gold has risen 51-fold against the buck).
And get this: the worst is still yet to come for the dollar.
I’ll explain how to protect your savings in just a moment. First, let’s take a closer look at how our dollar has lost that much in value.
The Greenback Is Backed By the “Hot Air” of Washington, D.C.
Given that the dollar has lost so much value, backing dollars with gold simply wouldn’t fly today.
In fact, it’s estimated that if you took all of the gold that has ever been mined in the world, it would only come up to about $5 trillion.Well we print trillions of dollars and run up over $14.6 trillion in debt all by ourselves in the U.S. (and that’s just one country of the world).
All these dollars are only worth something if the U.S. government says so. It’s backed by the U.S. government promise, “we’re good for it.” In other words, our dollars are basically backed by hot air straight from Washington.
But the harsh truth is they couldn’t back all of the dollars in circulation right now even if they wanted to.
Even worse, the more investors realize how shaky our currency is, the more they start looking elsewhere for more fundamentally sound currencies.
That’s one reason why the U.S. just raised our debt ceiling for the 75th time in 50 years. It’s also why the Standard & Poor’s just downgraded our debt.
Toss in the Fed’s nasty habit of creating money out of thin air anytime we need extra resources, bailouts and stimulus packages - and the dollar is in serious trouble.
The Government has Two Choices and Both are Bad...But Here’s What They Will Choose
Our economy is in shambles, and our currency is losing clout every single day. And we are no longer competitive with the rest of the world in terms of exports. We really only have two choices left to stay competitive with the rest of the world.
Either the government can allow “wage devaluation” or “currency devaluation.” In other words, they can let wages fall or let the currency drop in value.
Do you really think Americans will elect politicians that force them to take pay cuts? Heck no! So if the guys in Washington want to keep their jobs, they really only have one choice - devalue our dollars further.
As you can imagine, voters pay closer attention to how many dollars are in their paycheck than how much those dollars buy. (In fact, most Americans don’t even understand the concept of the dollar losing purchasing power anyway.)
That’s why it’s almost too easy for Washington to dilute our currency and accomplish their “cheap dollar” agenda.
A Glimpse Into the Future...
So here’s how all of this is going to play out. The U.S. will continue to stack on more debt and dilute the dollar by creating more money. Call it QEIII or just ridiculously low interest rates until 2013, but either way, this can only end one way.
The dollar is sinking in value, and central bankers around the world know it.
Therefore, they are “ever so quietly” shifting their central bank reserves slowly away from dollars and into currencies that aren’t being diluted, that have superior fundamentals.
Some, like China and India, are even buying up commodities for their reserves (like gold, silver, iron ore, etc.).
This practically guarantees there will be a constant shift away from dollars through the years - especially as our politicians believe the quick solution is “dollar dilution.” But no country in history ever brought themselves to prosperity by continually diluting their currency.
Therefore, you won’t really be able to “protect your dollars” because of the government’s overall agenda.
So what can you do? Well, you can protect your money - your wealth - by taking your money (dollars) and investing them in other currencies that aren’t playing the debt-stacking, currency dilution game.
You can also buy the traditional forms of “hard money” including gold.
Dollars...On Sale...50% Off!
Now remember when I said that our currency will have to be diluted even further?
One well-respected hedge fund manager ran the numbers and said that the dollar would have to be devalued by another 50% to make us competitive with the world again.
That means, if you’re paying $5 for your Starbucks coffee...you’ll be paying $10 in just a few short years. If you’re paying $400 for your car payment now, better get used to $800 payments.
Do you think “wage growth” is going to keep up with that? Hardly!
In fact, Ben Bernanke flat-out admitted last year that it will likely take five years or more to get our unemployment rate back down to 5-6%.
So if there is a glut of unemployed people, there’s no need for employers to raise wages when there’s an everlasting supply of employees willing to work for peanuts.
So the bottom line is: you’ve got to get positioned into currencies that aren’t “singing the same tune” as America.
That includes places like Switzerland, Norway and Singapore. All three have stronger currencies that can shield you from the dollar’s long-term destruction, and even provide some measure of safety as stocks drop.
So before the greenback devalues another 50% over the upcoming years...shift into something that will retain its value and grow through the years. And do it while the buck is still worth something!
Have a Nice Day,
Sean Hyman
Editor,Currency Cross Trader
Saturday, August 13, 2011
All In God's Service...
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-naw-warren-jeffs-guilty-20110804,0,5668344.story
Apparently, this fella had numerous charges against him for years and this is the latest one that 'sticked'.
According to him and his followers (inspired by some 'great book'), he is the "Prophet, Seer and Revelator" of their church. And like other distant fellow 'men of the book' of theirs, they believe in polygamy and 'arranging celestial marriages between married men and teenage girls' (normal people call that 'child sexual abuse' which is what that idiot is convicted of this week).
That fella even recorded his acts, one of which (see above LA Times report) had him claiming that he 'perform this service in the name of... his deity' (that one nailed to wood I talk about) while performing his animal act. Presumably, that holy bastard was recording his acts for the benefit of his god - may be as proof of his great 'services' to his deity in case that all-knowing and all-powerful deity of his loses some of those abilities.
According to today's BBC report, the parents of those children were actually happy with what that fella did because they also believed that their children were 'servicing god'.
That is the problem when animals and idiots are given 'holy' excuses to do the stupidest and wildest things (and they think they are smarter than apes). Religion fits that bill perfectly. With those 'celestial' claims, both idiots and animals find their respective excuses easily - 'if some one says he is godly and he is doing it in the name of their god, then it must be okay' is how the stupid reasoning goes.
That is why those reports of more than 90% of the churches (they call them 'house of god') in the US having cases of child sexual abuses are most telling.
Imagine 90% of all households in the world having fathers (which is what they call their church leaders) sexually abusing their children? I am not sure such a thing is as prevalent even among apes and monkeys. And you will certainly not find that among the great civilisations (go see if 90% of Indian and Chinese families are like that).
So young chilren reading this mail, don't ever believe those people that go round telling others that their book is a 'book of god' and their book 'has only good effects on people'.
The above is one (of many reasons) why I call Chinamen that do that complete idiots.... (analogy: a blindman claiming the rope he is holding is an elephant does not make that rope an elephant. It only makes him an idiot).
p.s.
For Chinese children: one of the reasons why you will never see 90% of Chinese households having the kind of things above is because of the teachings of people like Confucius, Mencius and thousands of years of moral teachings coming out of the Chinese civilisation. We are all fortunate inheritors of those teachings. So, go read about the history of our people, their books (none of them arrogant enough to claim to contain 'words of god') and their teachings.
Only yellow fools full of themselves reading some one else's book that among others say that, at worst, chinamen do not exist and, at best, are rungs below the Jews, would go round telling others that their book is a 'great book of god'. And they think they are very sharp.
Yah, their ancestors were all useless half-child half-devil (as Kipling famously called them in his Whiteman's Burden) waiting for some whtiemen to bring those civilising 'words of god' to chinamen - chinamen not worth even the effort of one of people's many 'god messengers' so burden went to whitemen - and only they are sharp enough to 'get it'...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Jeffs
http://topics.cnn.com/topics/warren_jeffs
Polygamist leader Warren Jeffs found guilty of child sex abuse
Prosecutors used DNA evidence to show Warren Jeffs fathered a child with a 15-year-old girl and played an audio recording of what they said was him sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl. They also played audio recordings in which Jeffs was heard instructing young women on how to please him sexually.
From the Associated Press
August 4, 2011, 3:08 p.m
A Texas jury convicted polygamist sect leader Warren Jeffs of child sexual assault Thursday in a case stemming from two young followers he took as brides in what his church calls "spiritual marriages."
The 55-year-old head of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints stood stone-faced as the verdict was read.
Jeffs, who acted as his own attorney, faces up to life in prison. The jury went immediately into sentencing proceedings. They had deliberated on a verdict for more than three hours.
Prosecutors used DNA evidence to show Jeffs fathered a child with a 15-year-old girl and played an audio recording of what they said was him sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl. They also played audio recordings in which Jeffs was heard instructing young women on how to please him sexually.
Jeffs has claimed he was the victim of religious persecution. The FLDS, which has at least 10,000 members nationwide, is a radical offshoot of mainstream Mormonism. The church believes polygamy brings exaltation in heaven and that Jeffs is God's spokesman on earth.
Police had raided the group's remote West Texas ranch in April 2008, finding women dressed in frontier-style dresses and hairdos from the 19th century as well as seeing underage girls who were clearly pregnant. The call to an abuse hotline that spurred the raid turned out to be a hoax, and more than 400 children who had been placed in protective custody were eventually returned to their families.
But authorities brought charges against several men from the group, with Jeffs by far the highest-profile defendant.
Jeffs stood mute and expressionless, staring at the floor, for all but a few seconds of the half hour he was allotted for a closing argument on Thursday. At one point he mumbled, "I am peace," and said no more.
The only noise in the courtroom was the creaking of wooden benches brimming with spectators.
Prosecutors said the case had nothing to do with his church or his beliefs.
"You have heard the defendant make repeated arguments about religious freedoms," said lead prosecutor Eric Nichols. "Make no mistake, this case is not about any people, this case is not about any religion. It is about one individual, Warren Steed Jeffs, and his actions."
Prosecutors relied heavily on information found during the raid on the compound and after a traffic stop in Nevada in 2006, when Jeffs was arrested. Much of the material was discovered in a vault at the end of a secret passageway in the temple and another vault in an annex building.
"You might have asked yourselves," Nichols said, "a lot of people may ask, why would someone record sex? ... This individual considers himself to be the prophet. Everything he did, hour after hour, he was required to keep a record of that."
On one of the tapes played at the trial, Jeffs made a reference to "drawing close" or "being close," which authorities testified is how church members refer to sex. Two female voices said "OK."
"A good wife is trained for her husband and follows the spirit of peace," Jeffs was heard saying.
Another audio tape included Jeffs and the younger girl from a recording made in August 2006 at the Texas compound, according to testimony from Nick Hanna, a Texas Ranger involved in the 2008 raid.
Played in court, it was difficult to decipher, but Jeffs' and a female voice are heard. He says, "I perform this service in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen," then mentions the alleged victim by name. When she says something, he responds, "don't talk while praying." Several minutes of heavy breathing followed.
The jury wore headphones to better hear the recording and also followed a transcript. One female juror covered her face with her hand as she listened.
Jeffs represented himself after firing seven attorneys in the six months leading to the trial. He broke his courtroom silence with an objection marked by a nearly hourlong speech defending polygamy, and twice threatened the judge and the court with warnings of punishment from God.
He refused to cross-examine the state's witnesses, and delayed giving an opening statement until he began presenting his own defense. In that statement, he evoked images of the civil rights movement and mentioned former Mormon leader Joseph Smith Jr. He also asked the jury to remember constitutional guarantees of religious freedom.
The lone defense witness Jeffs called, church elder JD Roundy, spent about 10 minutes on the stand Thursday discussing FLDS history after 4½ hours of testimony Wednesday evening.
Jeffs failed three times to remove state District Judge Barbara Walther from the case, the last rejection coming even without a hearing. He claimed Walther was biased because she issued the warrant for the original raid and was frequently updated as it progressed.
Eleven other FLDS men were charged with crimes including sexual assault and bigamy. All seven of those who have been prosecuted were convicted, receiving prison sentences of between six and 75 years.
[Below is exchange with one of the recipients of above]
From: Long
To: CCK
Sent: Monday, August 8, 2011 1:31 AM
Subject: Re: All in god's service....
When we all die, our real eternal lives begin. We will not be judged on the colour of our skin or our cultural heritage. Here is a real testimony of a man who died and came back from Hell to tell the world the truth.
A logician will clearly listen and watch and compute the probability that Jesus is the God: even 10% chance based on his computations justify an insurance policy. becase the cost, if real, is infinitely costly.
http://www.baptizingfire.com/apps/videos/videos/show/14313968-christians-that-wound-up-in-hell-by-caramelo-brenes
From: CCK
To: Long
Sent: Monday, August 8, 2011 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: All in god's service....
Ya, people whiteman can go from earth to hell and back but chinamen like your ancestors so useless and cannot do the same (that's why only non-chinamen get to be holy prophets and messengers in people's book - chinamen more useless than you think).
Hah, luckily that white idiot forgot to bring his videocam along with him - more idiotic than Warren Jeffs. Which is where you chinaman has a great opportunity to 'out-shine' all of them.
I'd believe it when you bring your Sony videocam and your family with you on a similar trip and your whole ching gang return to show me what hell looks like. Then I'd lead the entire chinese race to brag about the 'great feat' of you chinaman. (Don't try that cheap 'aiyah I forgot my SD card lah' trick on us hor?)
And if your 'insurance policy' is too good for hell then you can always do a round-trip to heaven. Many chinamen will be all the happier with that greater feat. Imagine, after thousands of years we finally have a chinaman with abilities anywhere close to that of some other non-chinamen in your great book?
And why worry since you have your 'insurance policy'? Even if you end up being considered by your deity to be too low class to do that holy return act and cannot make it back, you'd still get to start your 'eternal life' that billions of other past and present chinamen cannot get to - what privilege...
And oh, in case your skin color finally does not matter to your deity (after those thousands of years of irrelevance) and you get to make that return trip, don't forget to bring back an updated version of that great book of yours with your great feat and name included. Then a chinaman would finally get to 'star' in that book (instead of me looking high and low for you in Noah's queue list and still cannot find. Which category are you under?)
If your deity considers your act too cheap for his edtitorial bother, you can always ask him to part Andromeda (or an equivalent) for you to cross on your way back to earth. Preceded, of course, by a huge supernova event to ensure the entire world would not miss that deitical show with you in starring role. Wah, then your tribe would look more impressive than the one for whom a small sea was parted hor?
I have more ideas inspired by your book for you to show off with but would rather not bother an as yet deitical nonenity with too much trouble. Show me some of the above first...
From: Long
To: CCK
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: All in god's service....
This is what happens to a sensible Malaysian who lives in Singapore for too long....inferiority complex and xenophobia about the world, split into wise chinaman, white chinaman and white masters and slaves.
Be a scientist and test your assumptions/belief by the testimony of real honest people. it takes more than this hallucinatory drivel to make any solid case against Christianity. Even Einstein could not imagine a personal God because he couldnt copy and improvised the cosmic idea as much as he did with relativity.
From: CCK
To: Long
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2011
Subject: Re: All in god's service....
Ya, you are the sharpest deitical chinaman in history - billions of chinamen including your ancestors over thousands of years could not get it but you can. And without your smart insurance policy they are all in hell now.
Which is why you should be the 'star' in the scientific test I suggested. I'd love to more than listen to your honest testimony after that 'round trip' experiment - like confucius said before your doll got nailed, talk is cheap, show it - that video clip would provide a more scientific prove. Those pictures of you, your ancestors and billions of past chinamen swimming in hell would be very convincing.
What more, with you being a deitical star in that new edition book, billions of future chinamen would feel very superior. So don't let your inferiority complex get to you (if that whiteman can do it you can), come star in my scientifc experiment.
Unlike you, Einstein also cannot get it hor? But just a few months back you said that he was a great example of why Jews are smarter than other races and therefore special. Now he has lost his smartness and specialness, and you chinaman are now sharper than him? Is it because I told you that he said people like you are child-like? Aiyah, that smart Jew cum scientist didn't know what he was talking about... you 50 year old child sharper.
And do you think that unto such as you;
A maggot-minded, starved, fanatic crew:
God gave the secret—and denied it me?
Well, well, what matters it? Believe that, too.
- Rubaiyat, Omar Khayyam
Apparently, this fella had numerous charges against him for years and this is the latest one that 'sticked'.
According to him and his followers (inspired by some 'great book'), he is the "Prophet, Seer and Revelator" of their church. And like other distant fellow 'men of the book' of theirs, they believe in polygamy and 'arranging celestial marriages between married men and teenage girls' (normal people call that 'child sexual abuse' which is what that idiot is convicted of this week).
That fella even recorded his acts, one of which (see above LA Times report) had him claiming that he 'perform this service in the name of... his deity' (that one nailed to wood I talk about) while performing his animal act. Presumably, that holy bastard was recording his acts for the benefit of his god - may be as proof of his great 'services' to his deity in case that all-knowing and all-powerful deity of his loses some of those abilities.
According to today's BBC report, the parents of those children were actually happy with what that fella did because they also believed that their children were 'servicing god'.
That is the problem when animals and idiots are given 'holy' excuses to do the stupidest and wildest things (and they think they are smarter than apes). Religion fits that bill perfectly. With those 'celestial' claims, both idiots and animals find their respective excuses easily - 'if some one says he is godly and he is doing it in the name of their god, then it must be okay' is how the stupid reasoning goes.
That is why those reports of more than 90% of the churches (they call them 'house of god') in the US having cases of child sexual abuses are most telling.
Imagine 90% of all households in the world having fathers (which is what they call their church leaders) sexually abusing their children? I am not sure such a thing is as prevalent even among apes and monkeys. And you will certainly not find that among the great civilisations (go see if 90% of Indian and Chinese families are like that).
So young chilren reading this mail, don't ever believe those people that go round telling others that their book is a 'book of god' and their book 'has only good effects on people'.
The above is one (of many reasons) why I call Chinamen that do that complete idiots.... (analogy: a blindman claiming the rope he is holding is an elephant does not make that rope an elephant. It only makes him an idiot).
p.s.
For Chinese children: one of the reasons why you will never see 90% of Chinese households having the kind of things above is because of the teachings of people like Confucius, Mencius and thousands of years of moral teachings coming out of the Chinese civilisation. We are all fortunate inheritors of those teachings. So, go read about the history of our people, their books (none of them arrogant enough to claim to contain 'words of god') and their teachings.
Only yellow fools full of themselves reading some one else's book that among others say that, at worst, chinamen do not exist and, at best, are rungs below the Jews, would go round telling others that their book is a 'great book of god'. And they think they are very sharp.
Yah, their ancestors were all useless half-child half-devil (as Kipling famously called them in his Whiteman's Burden) waiting for some whtiemen to bring those civilising 'words of god' to chinamen - chinamen not worth even the effort of one of people's many 'god messengers' so burden went to whitemen - and only they are sharp enough to 'get it'...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Jeffs
http://topics.cnn.com/topics/warren_jeffs
Polygamist leader Warren Jeffs found guilty of child sex abuse
Prosecutors used DNA evidence to show Warren Jeffs fathered a child with a 15-year-old girl and played an audio recording of what they said was him sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl. They also played audio recordings in which Jeffs was heard instructing young women on how to please him sexually.
From the Associated Press
August 4, 2011, 3:08 p.m
A Texas jury convicted polygamist sect leader Warren Jeffs of child sexual assault Thursday in a case stemming from two young followers he took as brides in what his church calls "spiritual marriages."
The 55-year-old head of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints stood stone-faced as the verdict was read.
Jeffs, who acted as his own attorney, faces up to life in prison. The jury went immediately into sentencing proceedings. They had deliberated on a verdict for more than three hours.
Prosecutors used DNA evidence to show Jeffs fathered a child with a 15-year-old girl and played an audio recording of what they said was him sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl. They also played audio recordings in which Jeffs was heard instructing young women on how to please him sexually.
Jeffs has claimed he was the victim of religious persecution. The FLDS, which has at least 10,000 members nationwide, is a radical offshoot of mainstream Mormonism. The church believes polygamy brings exaltation in heaven and that Jeffs is God's spokesman on earth.
Police had raided the group's remote West Texas ranch in April 2008, finding women dressed in frontier-style dresses and hairdos from the 19th century as well as seeing underage girls who were clearly pregnant. The call to an abuse hotline that spurred the raid turned out to be a hoax, and more than 400 children who had been placed in protective custody were eventually returned to their families.
But authorities brought charges against several men from the group, with Jeffs by far the highest-profile defendant.
Jeffs stood mute and expressionless, staring at the floor, for all but a few seconds of the half hour he was allotted for a closing argument on Thursday. At one point he mumbled, "I am peace," and said no more.
The only noise in the courtroom was the creaking of wooden benches brimming with spectators.
Prosecutors said the case had nothing to do with his church or his beliefs.
"You have heard the defendant make repeated arguments about religious freedoms," said lead prosecutor Eric Nichols. "Make no mistake, this case is not about any people, this case is not about any religion. It is about one individual, Warren Steed Jeffs, and his actions."
Prosecutors relied heavily on information found during the raid on the compound and after a traffic stop in Nevada in 2006, when Jeffs was arrested. Much of the material was discovered in a vault at the end of a secret passageway in the temple and another vault in an annex building.
"You might have asked yourselves," Nichols said, "a lot of people may ask, why would someone record sex? ... This individual considers himself to be the prophet. Everything he did, hour after hour, he was required to keep a record of that."
On one of the tapes played at the trial, Jeffs made a reference to "drawing close" or "being close," which authorities testified is how church members refer to sex. Two female voices said "OK."
"A good wife is trained for her husband and follows the spirit of peace," Jeffs was heard saying.
Another audio tape included Jeffs and the younger girl from a recording made in August 2006 at the Texas compound, according to testimony from Nick Hanna, a Texas Ranger involved in the 2008 raid.
Played in court, it was difficult to decipher, but Jeffs' and a female voice are heard. He says, "I perform this service in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen," then mentions the alleged victim by name. When she says something, he responds, "don't talk while praying." Several minutes of heavy breathing followed.
The jury wore headphones to better hear the recording and also followed a transcript. One female juror covered her face with her hand as she listened.
Jeffs represented himself after firing seven attorneys in the six months leading to the trial. He broke his courtroom silence with an objection marked by a nearly hourlong speech defending polygamy, and twice threatened the judge and the court with warnings of punishment from God.
He refused to cross-examine the state's witnesses, and delayed giving an opening statement until he began presenting his own defense. In that statement, he evoked images of the civil rights movement and mentioned former Mormon leader Joseph Smith Jr. He also asked the jury to remember constitutional guarantees of religious freedom.
The lone defense witness Jeffs called, church elder JD Roundy, spent about 10 minutes on the stand Thursday discussing FLDS history after 4½ hours of testimony Wednesday evening.
Jeffs failed three times to remove state District Judge Barbara Walther from the case, the last rejection coming even without a hearing. He claimed Walther was biased because she issued the warrant for the original raid and was frequently updated as it progressed.
Eleven other FLDS men were charged with crimes including sexual assault and bigamy. All seven of those who have been prosecuted were convicted, receiving prison sentences of between six and 75 years.
[Below is exchange with one of the recipients of above]
From: Long
To: CCK
Sent: Monday, August 8, 2011 1:31 AM
Subject: Re: All in god's service....
When we all die, our real eternal lives begin. We will not be judged on the colour of our skin or our cultural heritage. Here is a real testimony of a man who died and came back from Hell to tell the world the truth.
A logician will clearly listen and watch and compute the probability that Jesus is the God: even 10% chance based on his computations justify an insurance policy. becase the cost, if real, is infinitely costly.
http://www.baptizingfire.com/apps/videos/videos/show/14313968-christians-that-wound-up-in-hell-by-caramelo-brenes
From: CCK
To: Long
Sent: Monday, August 8, 2011 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: All in god's service....
Ya, people whiteman can go from earth to hell and back but chinamen like your ancestors so useless and cannot do the same (that's why only non-chinamen get to be holy prophets and messengers in people's book - chinamen more useless than you think).
Hah, luckily that white idiot forgot to bring his videocam along with him - more idiotic than Warren Jeffs. Which is where you chinaman has a great opportunity to 'out-shine' all of them.
I'd believe it when you bring your Sony videocam and your family with you on a similar trip and your whole ching gang return to show me what hell looks like. Then I'd lead the entire chinese race to brag about the 'great feat' of you chinaman. (Don't try that cheap 'aiyah I forgot my SD card lah' trick on us hor?)
And if your 'insurance policy' is too good for hell then you can always do a round-trip to heaven. Many chinamen will be all the happier with that greater feat. Imagine, after thousands of years we finally have a chinaman with abilities anywhere close to that of some other non-chinamen in your great book?
And why worry since you have your 'insurance policy'? Even if you end up being considered by your deity to be too low class to do that holy return act and cannot make it back, you'd still get to start your 'eternal life' that billions of other past and present chinamen cannot get to - what privilege...
And oh, in case your skin color finally does not matter to your deity (after those thousands of years of irrelevance) and you get to make that return trip, don't forget to bring back an updated version of that great book of yours with your great feat and name included. Then a chinaman would finally get to 'star' in that book (instead of me looking high and low for you in Noah's queue list and still cannot find. Which category are you under?)
If your deity considers your act too cheap for his edtitorial bother, you can always ask him to part Andromeda (or an equivalent) for you to cross on your way back to earth. Preceded, of course, by a huge supernova event to ensure the entire world would not miss that deitical show with you in starring role. Wah, then your tribe would look more impressive than the one for whom a small sea was parted hor?
I have more ideas inspired by your book for you to show off with but would rather not bother an as yet deitical nonenity with too much trouble. Show me some of the above first...
From: Long
To: CCK
Sent: Friday, August 12, 2011 12:48 PM
Subject: Re: All in god's service....
This is what happens to a sensible Malaysian who lives in Singapore for too long....inferiority complex and xenophobia about the world, split into wise chinaman, white chinaman and white masters and slaves.
Be a scientist and test your assumptions/belief by the testimony of real honest people. it takes more than this hallucinatory drivel to make any solid case against Christianity. Even Einstein could not imagine a personal God because he couldnt copy and improvised the cosmic idea as much as he did with relativity.
From: CCK
To: Long
Sent: Monday, August 13, 2011
Subject: Re: All in god's service....
Ya, you are the sharpest deitical chinaman in history - billions of chinamen including your ancestors over thousands of years could not get it but you can. And without your smart insurance policy they are all in hell now.
Which is why you should be the 'star' in the scientific test I suggested. I'd love to more than listen to your honest testimony after that 'round trip' experiment - like confucius said before your doll got nailed, talk is cheap, show it - that video clip would provide a more scientific prove. Those pictures of you, your ancestors and billions of past chinamen swimming in hell would be very convincing.
What more, with you being a deitical star in that new edition book, billions of future chinamen would feel very superior. So don't let your inferiority complex get to you (if that whiteman can do it you can), come star in my scientifc experiment.
Unlike you, Einstein also cannot get it hor? But just a few months back you said that he was a great example of why Jews are smarter than other races and therefore special. Now he has lost his smartness and specialness, and you chinaman are now sharper than him? Is it because I told you that he said people like you are child-like? Aiyah, that smart Jew cum scientist didn't know what he was talking about... you 50 year old child sharper.
And do you think that unto such as you;
A maggot-minded, starved, fanatic crew:
God gave the secret—and denied it me?
Well, well, what matters it? Believe that, too.
- Rubaiyat, Omar Khayyam
Wednesday, August 03, 2011
Sugar Coated Satan's Sandwich
One of their congressmen that happens to be a pastor said that their political 'deal' to increase their country's debt limit (see Note 1) and cut spending is a 'sugar coated satan sandwich'. The reason that 'holy' fella said that was because he is afraid that those pending cuts would affect medicare, social security etc which according to him is 'anti-thesis to the teachings of all the great religions of the world which say that less fortunate people should be helped' (see video in below link). Wah, so righteous...
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/dem-rep-emanuel-cleaver-calls-debt-deal-a-sugar-coated-satan-sandwich/
What that holy lying or dumb fella does not say or know is they had for centuries been making their satan sandwiches from other people's flour! And they sugar coated it so well that many a fool around the world thought that those satan sandwiches were made out of their country's greatness and not out of conduct anti-thesis to the teachings of their own religion (as if it mattered). See Note 2.
Anyone from places like Africa that see Americans collecting social benefits and free medical care would be scratching their heads wondering how those 'poor' Americans got to be so fat if they are so poor. For those that had not seen real poor people in Africa and India etc., really poor people in those places are 'skin and bones only' hor (may be because they don't get to eat sugar coated satan sandwiches).
The explanation for that 'contradiction' is best summed up by the Russian leader Vladimir Putin who said that that country is a 'parasite on the world' living on credit from the rest of the world.
http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/Putin-US-parasite-world-afpsg-1485206393.html?x=0
The more hosts a parasite can feed off the fatter it gets - Parasite Principle number 1.
Parasite Principle Number 2? Keep the parasitic act going for as long as possible (dead hosts are of no use to parasites). That's what 'extending the debt ceiling' essentially means.
At the ASEAN meeting a few weeks ago where leaders from Asia were present, Hilary Clinton was asked by reporters whether the debt limit issue will be 'resolved'. Her confident reply was 'it will be resolved'. The smirk in her face was more telling. That smirk said 'of course we will, that way we can screw you fellas some more...' (the biggest creditors for that parasite are Asian countries).
Note 1:
The US has a 'law' set in the first half of the 20th century that requires its government to get approval from its legislature (i.e. parliament) before it can borrow more money beyond the limit previously approved. Depending on which report you read, they have extended that limit by 80 to 100 times in less than a century! They do it so often they have lost count of it. It is also psychologically 'good' for thieves not to remember (at least pretend to forget) the not so pleasant things they did.
One president alone extended it 18 times in 8 years! It is not a coincident that that country's debt grew the most during that fella's presidency. But that did not seem to be such a big deal then - the whole world was busy crying over some 'Sept 11' and supporting their 'wars on terror'. You can say, the world was too shocked and awed by that bully to know what was happening behind the curtains. But, as many people said, those wars were just excuses for them to raid others' wealth to pay for their 'parasitic growth' and perhaps to distract others from what was really happening to their debt driven economy. It is not a coincident the 2008/9 financial crisis happened at the end of the same idiot's 8-year presidency.
Note 2:
Anyone that knows their history knows that they started off by robbing the lands of others a few hundred years ago (like Chinamen in Malaya/Singapore, they were just losers from Europe looking for 'paradise').
In fact, it was so good they decided to keep the spoils to themselves by whacking their British lords and send them packing to concentrate on India, Asia and Africa - only suckers think it was because of some dispute over tea (there is always more to Tea Parties...)
By then they already were in debt (for whacking the greatest empire of that time is not cheap hor) and you know how they pay those debts off? They settled their 'war bonds' by exchanging them with titles to 'worthless' lands belonging to.... the Red Indians (that's why it was worthless). Sound like selling Facebook shares?
After 'independence', they were free to do what they liked. So, when they needed to grow they just grabbed more and more lands belonging to...the Red Indians again (according to the British they had more respect for the indigenous people and used to stop indiscrimate land grabs...of course).
Every 'agreement' they signed with the Red Indians did not mean anything to them. Basically, each time they wanted more land, they got the Indians to agree to cede more. When the Indians did not agree and decided to fight back, they just called them savages and killed them off and sign a new agreement. Then repeat the cycle again and again until nothing left (don't know how but the Red Indians and their land just disappeared - may be they read some great book and turned white).
A few decades later they grew big enough to whack their biggest competitor left in that continent - the 'Mexicans' who were really Spanish bastards with tiny amounts of Aztec blood to qualify them as 'savages' and thus deserving of gringo's domination.
That was how that country 'grew' from the east coast to the west coast of North America - they called it their Manifest Destiny (which is not very manifest to many till today).
Then supposedly to get them from east to west quicker, they decided to build rail roads (pony express too slow). But to do that they needed cheap labour which Chinamen had huge supply of (better and cheaper than black slaves). So a fella (who later started a famous university) lobbied their government to allow him to import large numbers of chinamen workers.
But those chinamen soon found out that those rail roads were also meant to get gringo to some gold mines at a place chinamen soon called 'gold mountains'. That was also why they whacked the Mexicans (don't believe? go watch Zorro). So when the rail road jobs were done, those half-child half-devil (according to the English writer Rudayrd Kipling in his poem - below link) chinamen turned to competing with great free whitemen for those gold which is of course a no-no (people had to whack the Mexicans for that right and you chinamen get it free?).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Man%27s_Burden
So the same fella that imported cheap chinamen railroad labour then sponsored a 'bill' called the Chinese Exclusion Act to get rid of those idiotic chinamen who then had no choice but to go to places like Singapore and Malaya to 'star' as coolies while that whiteman got filthy rich on railroad and Mexican gold....rich enough to start his 'great' Stanford University. (Canada and Australia also adopted similar legislations to ban Chinamen - can see why they all are such 'coveted' places for Chinamen idiots of today?)
But even that vast Mexican land and gold grab was not enough to satisfy those bastards and they ended up fighting each other for the right to boss over that by then 'huge empire' . There was nothing civil about their civil war. And only half-childs reading children history books think that it was all about freeing slaves.
After they sorted out whether the blue or the red gang become the boss, they decided that Spanish north America was not enough and declared that the remainder of Spanish America is their 'sphere' (Monroe Doctrine). After that, any one in Central or South America that did not listen to them (i.e. let them boss around and take their resources on the cheap) would get popped. Only in the last decade or so (as gringo empire stealth collapses) did those half countries got some real freedom.
Then, even Spanish Americas were not enough. They wanted all of Spain's colonial possessions. That's how islands from Hawaii to Guam to Philippines got to be 'part of USA'.
Then came the World Wars where everyone else just killed each other off while gringo pretended to play nice guy while selling arms and other supplies to some of them. After all the other major powers were left half-dead, they stepped in to become 'leader of the free world' where anyone around the world (not just Americas) that did not listen to them were not allowed to trade with others by way of various excuses like being communists, leftists etc.
With such history you think they really believe in freedom, fair trade and free markets?
[Guardian Report]
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
guardian.co.uk, Monday 1 August 2011 19.45 BST
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/01/us-debt-republicans-smell-victory
It was easy wandering round the corridors of Congress yesterday to spot who had won the debt standoff. In huddles with party colleagues or heading off to caucus meetings to discuss the details of the deal or standing in front of TV cameras, it was the Republicans who had all the smiles.
Democratic members of Congress looked uneasy, at times shifty; and some downright were angry. "If I were a Republican, this is a night to party," Emanuel Cleaver, a Democratic member of the House from Missouri, told MSNBC. Cleaver, a Methodist pastor and chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, which met to discuss its reaction to the deal, dismissed it as a "sugar-coated Satan sandwich".
Even the Democratic leader in the House, Nancy Pelosi, who helped negotiate the compromise with Barack Obama and the Republican leaders at the weekend, had serious reservations. Pelosi, a Californian on the liberal wing of the party on many issues, picked up on Cleaver's food metaphor and expanded on it. The deal, she told ABC, was a "Satan sandwich with Satan fries on the side". She voted last night for the bill to raise the debt ceiling, which passed by 269 to 161, but told colleagues in advance she would leave it to their consciences how they voted. Democrats came into the House chamber in a subdued mood, walking slowly as if at a funeral. The near silence on their side of the chamber contrasted with the noise on the Republican side, as members chatted away and hugged one another.
The 15-minute vote began at 6.50pm. Unlike parliament, there is a screen above the chamber with all the names of members in lights and their votes recorded electronically with either a green Y or red N. The Republicans watched cheerfully; the Democrats could barely watch.
Republicans aligned to the Tea Party movement voted against but even they did not appear unhappy with the deal. In return for Congress raising the debt ceiling, normally a routine matter, the Republicans have secured more than $2 trillion in spending cuts and forced the Democrats to do this without any tax rises. The Tea Party Republicans did not get all they wanted but they got most of it, and sacrificed almost nothing in return.
The decisive day in Congress after weeks of a standoff was Sunday, when the Republican and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, in negotiation with Barack Obama, reached agreement on the broad outline of a deal. Congress itself was eerily quiet. The Democratic leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, warned his fellow Democratic senators to remain on Capitol Hill. "I would not suggest [going to] a ball game," he said.
Even though they were around, the place was far from full of frantic politicians running up and down staircases and corridors, as might have been expected in a major crisis. Congress felt almost empty, occupied mainly by journalists, sitting at the foot of the statues of dead politicians and military leaders waiting for the leaders to come out.
By yesterday the place was packed, and there was excitement, the staircases and corridors filled with politicians discussing the merits of the deal and the looming votes. Obama opted against marching from the White House up Pennsylvania Avenue to Congress, as Jed Bartlet did in the West Wing, and instead sent vice-president Joe Biden, a Senate veteran. His job was to sell the deal to disenchanted members in the Senate and the House.
Getting the vote through the Senate was regarded by the Republican and Democratic leaderships as relatively easy. The House was the potential problem, with a revolt on the Republican side by Tea Party Republicans and a revolt from Democrats fearful of the impact on the poor. One of the left-leaning Democrats in the House, Raul Grijalva, from Arizona, reflected the view of many of his party colleagues, that the White House had surrendered too much: "This deal trades people's livelihoods for the votes of a few unappeasable right-wing radicals, and I will not support it. This deal weakens the Democratic party as badly as it weakens the country.
"We have given much and received nothing in return. The lesson today is that Republicans can hold their breath long enough to get what they want."
What is galling for Democrats is that they hold the White House and the Senate while the Republicans hold only the House, the more junior of the two chambers. And yet is it the House that appears to be dictating events.
The House, which saw the Republicans take control in November, when there was an influx of members backed by the Tea Party movement, secured a win earlier this year when it threatened to shut down the federal government and Obama gave in. Now it appears he has again. "Capitulation" and "Cave-in" summed up the mood of many left-leaning Democrats.
One of the few independents in the Senate and one of the few American politicians to describe himself as a socialist, Bernie Sanders from Vermont, voted against. Expressing worry about the impact on social security, Medicare, Medicaid, community health centres, education and other programmes, he said he could not support a proposal that "balances the budget on the backs of struggling Americans while not requiring one penny of sacrifice from the wealthiest people in our country".
The House Speaker, John Boehner, addressing his own members, said that while the Republicans had not got everything they had wanted (such as an assurance that the Pentagon will not be a major victim of spending cuts), they had got most of it and changed the debate in Washington.
But his stance failed to sway the Tea Party Republicans, such as Michele Bachmann, the Congresswoman who is seeking the party's nomination to take on Obama for the White House next year. She voted against.
"Throughout this process the president has failed to lead and failed to provide a plan," she said. "The 'deal' he announced spends too
much and doesn't cut enough. Someone has to say no. I will."
Boehner had better luck with other potential rebels. First he used policy arguments, but he saved his best for last: He told his colleagues that if they voted for the bill they could embark on a five-week holiday immediately afterwards. For a few waverers, that might have done the trick.
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/dem-rep-emanuel-cleaver-calls-debt-deal-a-sugar-coated-satan-sandwich/
What that holy lying or dumb fella does not say or know is they had for centuries been making their satan sandwiches from other people's flour! And they sugar coated it so well that many a fool around the world thought that those satan sandwiches were made out of their country's greatness and not out of conduct anti-thesis to the teachings of their own religion (as if it mattered). See Note 2.
Anyone from places like Africa that see Americans collecting social benefits and free medical care would be scratching their heads wondering how those 'poor' Americans got to be so fat if they are so poor. For those that had not seen real poor people in Africa and India etc., really poor people in those places are 'skin and bones only' hor (may be because they don't get to eat sugar coated satan sandwiches).
The explanation for that 'contradiction' is best summed up by the Russian leader Vladimir Putin who said that that country is a 'parasite on the world' living on credit from the rest of the world.
http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/Putin-US-parasite-world-afpsg-1485206393.html?x=0
The more hosts a parasite can feed off the fatter it gets - Parasite Principle number 1.
Parasite Principle Number 2? Keep the parasitic act going for as long as possible (dead hosts are of no use to parasites). That's what 'extending the debt ceiling' essentially means.
At the ASEAN meeting a few weeks ago where leaders from Asia were present, Hilary Clinton was asked by reporters whether the debt limit issue will be 'resolved'. Her confident reply was 'it will be resolved'. The smirk in her face was more telling. That smirk said 'of course we will, that way we can screw you fellas some more...' (the biggest creditors for that parasite are Asian countries).
Note 1:
The US has a 'law' set in the first half of the 20th century that requires its government to get approval from its legislature (i.e. parliament) before it can borrow more money beyond the limit previously approved. Depending on which report you read, they have extended that limit by 80 to 100 times in less than a century! They do it so often they have lost count of it. It is also psychologically 'good' for thieves not to remember (at least pretend to forget) the not so pleasant things they did.
One president alone extended it 18 times in 8 years! It is not a coincident that that country's debt grew the most during that fella's presidency. But that did not seem to be such a big deal then - the whole world was busy crying over some 'Sept 11' and supporting their 'wars on terror'. You can say, the world was too shocked and awed by that bully to know what was happening behind the curtains. But, as many people said, those wars were just excuses for them to raid others' wealth to pay for their 'parasitic growth' and perhaps to distract others from what was really happening to their debt driven economy. It is not a coincident the 2008/9 financial crisis happened at the end of the same idiot's 8-year presidency.
Note 2:
Anyone that knows their history knows that they started off by robbing the lands of others a few hundred years ago (like Chinamen in Malaya/Singapore, they were just losers from Europe looking for 'paradise').
In fact, it was so good they decided to keep the spoils to themselves by whacking their British lords and send them packing to concentrate on India, Asia and Africa - only suckers think it was because of some dispute over tea (there is always more to Tea Parties...)
By then they already were in debt (for whacking the greatest empire of that time is not cheap hor) and you know how they pay those debts off? They settled their 'war bonds' by exchanging them with titles to 'worthless' lands belonging to.... the Red Indians (that's why it was worthless). Sound like selling Facebook shares?
After 'independence', they were free to do what they liked. So, when they needed to grow they just grabbed more and more lands belonging to...the Red Indians again (according to the British they had more respect for the indigenous people and used to stop indiscrimate land grabs...of course).
Every 'agreement' they signed with the Red Indians did not mean anything to them. Basically, each time they wanted more land, they got the Indians to agree to cede more. When the Indians did not agree and decided to fight back, they just called them savages and killed them off and sign a new agreement. Then repeat the cycle again and again until nothing left (don't know how but the Red Indians and their land just disappeared - may be they read some great book and turned white).
A few decades later they grew big enough to whack their biggest competitor left in that continent - the 'Mexicans' who were really Spanish bastards with tiny amounts of Aztec blood to qualify them as 'savages' and thus deserving of gringo's domination.
That was how that country 'grew' from the east coast to the west coast of North America - they called it their Manifest Destiny (which is not very manifest to many till today).
Then supposedly to get them from east to west quicker, they decided to build rail roads (pony express too slow). But to do that they needed cheap labour which Chinamen had huge supply of (better and cheaper than black slaves). So a fella (who later started a famous university) lobbied their government to allow him to import large numbers of chinamen workers.
But those chinamen soon found out that those rail roads were also meant to get gringo to some gold mines at a place chinamen soon called 'gold mountains'. That was also why they whacked the Mexicans (don't believe? go watch Zorro). So when the rail road jobs were done, those half-child half-devil (according to the English writer Rudayrd Kipling in his poem - below link) chinamen turned to competing with great free whitemen for those gold which is of course a no-no (people had to whack the Mexicans for that right and you chinamen get it free?).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Man%27s_Burden
So the same fella that imported cheap chinamen railroad labour then sponsored a 'bill' called the Chinese Exclusion Act to get rid of those idiotic chinamen who then had no choice but to go to places like Singapore and Malaya to 'star' as coolies while that whiteman got filthy rich on railroad and Mexican gold....rich enough to start his 'great' Stanford University. (Canada and Australia also adopted similar legislations to ban Chinamen - can see why they all are such 'coveted' places for Chinamen idiots of today?)
But even that vast Mexican land and gold grab was not enough to satisfy those bastards and they ended up fighting each other for the right to boss over that by then 'huge empire' . There was nothing civil about their civil war. And only half-childs reading children history books think that it was all about freeing slaves.
After they sorted out whether the blue or the red gang become the boss, they decided that Spanish north America was not enough and declared that the remainder of Spanish America is their 'sphere' (Monroe Doctrine). After that, any one in Central or South America that did not listen to them (i.e. let them boss around and take their resources on the cheap) would get popped. Only in the last decade or so (as gringo empire stealth collapses) did those half countries got some real freedom.
Then, even Spanish Americas were not enough. They wanted all of Spain's colonial possessions. That's how islands from Hawaii to Guam to Philippines got to be 'part of USA'.
Then came the World Wars where everyone else just killed each other off while gringo pretended to play nice guy while selling arms and other supplies to some of them. After all the other major powers were left half-dead, they stepped in to become 'leader of the free world' where anyone around the world (not just Americas) that did not listen to them were not allowed to trade with others by way of various excuses like being communists, leftists etc.
With such history you think they really believe in freedom, fair trade and free markets?
[Guardian Report]
Ewen MacAskill in Washington
guardian.co.uk, Monday 1 August 2011 19.45 BST
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/aug/01/us-debt-republicans-smell-victory
It was easy wandering round the corridors of Congress yesterday to spot who had won the debt standoff. In huddles with party colleagues or heading off to caucus meetings to discuss the details of the deal or standing in front of TV cameras, it was the Republicans who had all the smiles.
Democratic members of Congress looked uneasy, at times shifty; and some downright were angry. "If I were a Republican, this is a night to party," Emanuel Cleaver, a Democratic member of the House from Missouri, told MSNBC. Cleaver, a Methodist pastor and chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus, which met to discuss its reaction to the deal, dismissed it as a "sugar-coated Satan sandwich".
Even the Democratic leader in the House, Nancy Pelosi, who helped negotiate the compromise with Barack Obama and the Republican leaders at the weekend, had serious reservations. Pelosi, a Californian on the liberal wing of the party on many issues, picked up on Cleaver's food metaphor and expanded on it. The deal, she told ABC, was a "Satan sandwich with Satan fries on the side". She voted last night for the bill to raise the debt ceiling, which passed by 269 to 161, but told colleagues in advance she would leave it to their consciences how they voted. Democrats came into the House chamber in a subdued mood, walking slowly as if at a funeral. The near silence on their side of the chamber contrasted with the noise on the Republican side, as members chatted away and hugged one another.
The 15-minute vote began at 6.50pm. Unlike parliament, there is a screen above the chamber with all the names of members in lights and their votes recorded electronically with either a green Y or red N. The Republicans watched cheerfully; the Democrats could barely watch.
Republicans aligned to the Tea Party movement voted against but even they did not appear unhappy with the deal. In return for Congress raising the debt ceiling, normally a routine matter, the Republicans have secured more than $2 trillion in spending cuts and forced the Democrats to do this without any tax rises. The Tea Party Republicans did not get all they wanted but they got most of it, and sacrificed almost nothing in return.
The decisive day in Congress after weeks of a standoff was Sunday, when the Republican and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate, in negotiation with Barack Obama, reached agreement on the broad outline of a deal. Congress itself was eerily quiet. The Democratic leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, warned his fellow Democratic senators to remain on Capitol Hill. "I would not suggest [going to] a ball game," he said.
Even though they were around, the place was far from full of frantic politicians running up and down staircases and corridors, as might have been expected in a major crisis. Congress felt almost empty, occupied mainly by journalists, sitting at the foot of the statues of dead politicians and military leaders waiting for the leaders to come out.
By yesterday the place was packed, and there was excitement, the staircases and corridors filled with politicians discussing the merits of the deal and the looming votes. Obama opted against marching from the White House up Pennsylvania Avenue to Congress, as Jed Bartlet did in the West Wing, and instead sent vice-president Joe Biden, a Senate veteran. His job was to sell the deal to disenchanted members in the Senate and the House.
Getting the vote through the Senate was regarded by the Republican and Democratic leaderships as relatively easy. The House was the potential problem, with a revolt on the Republican side by Tea Party Republicans and a revolt from Democrats fearful of the impact on the poor. One of the left-leaning Democrats in the House, Raul Grijalva, from Arizona, reflected the view of many of his party colleagues, that the White House had surrendered too much: "This deal trades people's livelihoods for the votes of a few unappeasable right-wing radicals, and I will not support it. This deal weakens the Democratic party as badly as it weakens the country.
"We have given much and received nothing in return. The lesson today is that Republicans can hold their breath long enough to get what they want."
What is galling for Democrats is that they hold the White House and the Senate while the Republicans hold only the House, the more junior of the two chambers. And yet is it the House that appears to be dictating events.
The House, which saw the Republicans take control in November, when there was an influx of members backed by the Tea Party movement, secured a win earlier this year when it threatened to shut down the federal government and Obama gave in. Now it appears he has again. "Capitulation" and "Cave-in" summed up the mood of many left-leaning Democrats.
One of the few independents in the Senate and one of the few American politicians to describe himself as a socialist, Bernie Sanders from Vermont, voted against. Expressing worry about the impact on social security, Medicare, Medicaid, community health centres, education and other programmes, he said he could not support a proposal that "balances the budget on the backs of struggling Americans while not requiring one penny of sacrifice from the wealthiest people in our country".
The House Speaker, John Boehner, addressing his own members, said that while the Republicans had not got everything they had wanted (such as an assurance that the Pentagon will not be a major victim of spending cuts), they had got most of it and changed the debate in Washington.
But his stance failed to sway the Tea Party Republicans, such as Michele Bachmann, the Congresswoman who is seeking the party's nomination to take on Obama for the White House next year. She voted against.
"Throughout this process the president has failed to lead and failed to provide a plan," she said. "The 'deal' he announced spends too
much and doesn't cut enough. Someone has to say no. I will."
Boehner had better luck with other potential rebels. First he used policy arguments, but he saved his best for last: He told his colleagues that if they voted for the bill they could embark on a five-week holiday immediately afterwards. For a few waverers, that might have done the trick.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Steal Not Enough
They can steal by printing more money for themselves and yet that is not enough. They want even commissions for doing the printing...
Bribe probe hits former Malay PM
Nick McKenzie and Richard Baker
July 5, 2011
The Reserve Bank of Australia's banknote firms are suspected of attempting to bribe former Malaysian prime minister Abdullah Badawi in order to get his help to win a $31 million currency contract.
Mr Abdullah is one of a several highly influential Malaysian political figures whom anti-corruption authorities believe Securency and Note Printing Australia— firms respectively half and fully owned and overseen by Australia's reserve bank— allegedly sought to bribe using part of $4.2 million in commission payments made to two Malaysian middlemen.
Malaysian sources confirmed to The Age that the Australian Federal Police have gathered information about attempts to bribe Mr Abdullah by Securency and Note Printing Australia, which are respectively half and fully owned and overseen by the RBA
The Age sought comment from Mr Abdullah last night.
Asked about the approach to Mr Abdullah yesterday, an AFP spokesman said: "Given that matters relating to investigations into Securency International and Note Printing Australia are currently before the court, the AFP is unable to make any further comment."
It is understood the attempt to bribe Mr Abdullah related to contract negotiations that occurred around 2003, the year he became prime minister and finance minister. He served as prime minister until 2009.
Before becoming prime minister, Mr Abdullah was deputy to long-serving Malaysian leader Mahathir Mohamad.
The alleged attempt to bribe of Mr Badawi, who remains a serving MP, adds to the list of high-profile Asian politicians and central bank officials targeted by the RBA firms.
The AFP last week alleged Securency bribed Vietnam's former central bank governor by paying his son's English university tuition fees. Authorities in Malaysia last Friday arrested a former Malaysian central bank assistant governor accused of receiving two bribes from NPA.
The revelations about the attempt to bribe Mr Abdullah come as the fallout from Australia's plastic note bribery scandal continues to spread, with The Age reporting yesterday about the intimate involvement of senior officials from the Australian government trade agency Austrade in Securency's allegedly corrupt Vietnam dealings.
An AFP-led international corruption taskforce continues to work towards further arrests, having already charged seven former senior Securency and NPA executives with foreign bribery offences.
Mr Abdullah is believed to have been involved in approving the contract won by the RBA firms to supply Malaysia with its polymer five Ringgit note, which began circulating in 2004.
Securency and NPA's agents for the 2004 were former state MP and senior figure in the country's ruling party, UMNO, Dato Abdullah Hasnan Kamaruddin and arms trader Abdul Kayum, who was arrested and charged on friday with two counts of bribery.
Mr Kayum, who pled not guilty to the charges, worked as NPA and Securency's main middleman in Malaysia and allegedly promised the firms that he was able to convince senior Malaysian officials to buy the plastic bank note technology.
Several senior Securency and NPA former executives are believed to have been aware that payments to Mr Kayum may have been used to pay bribes. He acted as their agent between 2000 and 2007, before being sacked after an internal audit raised probity fears.
His hiring and subsequent receipt of several million dollars from the RBA firms raises further questions about the adequacy of supervision provided by the RBA-appointed directors of Securency and NPA.
Mr Kayum also represented one of the Pakistan Government's main weapons making facilities, the Air Weapons Complex, which is believed to play a central role in the nation's nuclear weapons program.
The Australian Securities and Investment Commission yesterday refused to confirm or deny whether it was investigating the performance of the Securency and NPA boards after Greens leader Bob Brown and federal Labor backbencher Kelvin Thomson suggested last Friday that it should.
Former RBA deputy governor Graeme Thompson, who is also a former chief of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority, chaired Securency and NPA during the 1999-2005 period the alleged bribes in Malaysia, Vietnam and Indonesia took place.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/bribe-probe-hits-former-malay-pm-20110704-1gz6c.html#ixzz1TMkmDa25
Bribe probe hits former Malay PM
Nick McKenzie and Richard Baker
July 5, 2011
The Reserve Bank of Australia's banknote firms are suspected of attempting to bribe former Malaysian prime minister Abdullah Badawi in order to get his help to win a $31 million currency contract.
Mr Abdullah is one of a several highly influential Malaysian political figures whom anti-corruption authorities believe Securency and Note Printing Australia— firms respectively half and fully owned and overseen by Australia's reserve bank— allegedly sought to bribe using part of $4.2 million in commission payments made to two Malaysian middlemen.
Malaysian sources confirmed to The Age that the Australian Federal Police have gathered information about attempts to bribe Mr Abdullah by Securency and Note Printing Australia, which are respectively half and fully owned and overseen by the RBA
The Age sought comment from Mr Abdullah last night.
Asked about the approach to Mr Abdullah yesterday, an AFP spokesman said: "Given that matters relating to investigations into Securency International and Note Printing Australia are currently before the court, the AFP is unable to make any further comment."
It is understood the attempt to bribe Mr Abdullah related to contract negotiations that occurred around 2003, the year he became prime minister and finance minister. He served as prime minister until 2009.
Before becoming prime minister, Mr Abdullah was deputy to long-serving Malaysian leader Mahathir Mohamad.
The alleged attempt to bribe of Mr Badawi, who remains a serving MP, adds to the list of high-profile Asian politicians and central bank officials targeted by the RBA firms.
The AFP last week alleged Securency bribed Vietnam's former central bank governor by paying his son's English university tuition fees. Authorities in Malaysia last Friday arrested a former Malaysian central bank assistant governor accused of receiving two bribes from NPA.
The revelations about the attempt to bribe Mr Abdullah come as the fallout from Australia's plastic note bribery scandal continues to spread, with The Age reporting yesterday about the intimate involvement of senior officials from the Australian government trade agency Austrade in Securency's allegedly corrupt Vietnam dealings.
An AFP-led international corruption taskforce continues to work towards further arrests, having already charged seven former senior Securency and NPA executives with foreign bribery offences.
Mr Abdullah is believed to have been involved in approving the contract won by the RBA firms to supply Malaysia with its polymer five Ringgit note, which began circulating in 2004.
Securency and NPA's agents for the 2004 were former state MP and senior figure in the country's ruling party, UMNO, Dato Abdullah Hasnan Kamaruddin and arms trader Abdul Kayum, who was arrested and charged on friday with two counts of bribery.
Mr Kayum, who pled not guilty to the charges, worked as NPA and Securency's main middleman in Malaysia and allegedly promised the firms that he was able to convince senior Malaysian officials to buy the plastic bank note technology.
Several senior Securency and NPA former executives are believed to have been aware that payments to Mr Kayum may have been used to pay bribes. He acted as their agent between 2000 and 2007, before being sacked after an internal audit raised probity fears.
His hiring and subsequent receipt of several million dollars from the RBA firms raises further questions about the adequacy of supervision provided by the RBA-appointed directors of Securency and NPA.
Mr Kayum also represented one of the Pakistan Government's main weapons making facilities, the Air Weapons Complex, which is believed to play a central role in the nation's nuclear weapons program.
The Australian Securities and Investment Commission yesterday refused to confirm or deny whether it was investigating the performance of the Securency and NPA boards after Greens leader Bob Brown and federal Labor backbencher Kelvin Thomson suggested last Friday that it should.
Former RBA deputy governor Graeme Thompson, who is also a former chief of the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority, chaired Securency and NPA during the 1999-2005 period the alleged bribes in Malaysia, Vietnam and Indonesia took place.
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/bribe-probe-hits-former-malay-pm-20110704-1gz6c.html#ixzz1TMkmDa25
Friday, July 15, 2011
Who the Hack is Running the Country?
According to reports, these fellas had eavesdropped on thousands of people's voice mails and messages over at least a decade, and the British police had closed an eye to the whole thing until recently when these fellas were on the verge of buying BskyB (below you will see why the British politicans are now sufficiently alarmed to raise the alarm).
Apparently, those fellas control so much of the country's news organsations that for the last few decades anyone that The Sun (owned by the same fellas) supported ended up winning the country's elections.
Quote: 'If you do not read newspapers you are uninformed, if you do you are misinformed' - Mark Twain
As a result, all their politicians from all parties had 'coddled up' to these fellas and employed their employees as their 'press czars'.
For those that cannot get it, here's the reason: by doing that they hope to get the 'support' of those fellas' newspapers, TV stations etc and thus 'win' elections.
[side note: Anyone familiar with US financial regulatory history would know that this is akind to the US government appointing employees of large banks (like Goldman Sachs) as their financial czars]
They reportedly even 'tapped' Gordon Brown's (the previous PM) phone for years from when he as finance minister to prime minister and that bugger apparently did not even know about it until now!
That and the fact that those fellas had 'eavesdropped' on an 'industrial scale' on thousands of people for so many years tells us a few things.
That country's political leaders and government were either not aware of the whole thing, or they were aware but too 'afraid' to antagonise those devils and have them turn their 'news' against them. In both cases, one wonders who are the ones really running that country.
For the benefit of children in my mail list, one does not have to have direct control of a country to be in control of it. It is the same reason why a lead British financier (Lord Rothschild) from 100 plus years ago once claimed that 'I care not who sits on the throne of the British empire. The one who controls its finances controls the empire, and I control its finances'.
The recent behaviour of those fellas in response to the 'recent revelations' are also telling (and these are just the ones I am aware of).
- the father refused to attend the British parliament inquiry on the matter and instead now says that he will setup his own 'independent' committee to investigate all charges (yah, a thief tells the whole country to bugger off and says he will pick his own judge),
- he also says that it is just a 'minor mistake' (stealing from thousands of people is a minor mistake to him)
- when asked what is the most important thing to him now that the case is 'blown up' he pointed to his CEO and said 'to save her' (that woman was the head of his british operations at the time of those 'hackings' and many people were calling for her to be charged). You see what is important to those people. It is not justice but his fellow tribeswoman by name of Rebekah
- his son tells the same parliamentary committee that he will appear at a date of his own choosing!
For those that do not know - all those devilish characters above are from one single race. Coincidence? Not really. They are people that many fools say are 'god's chosen people'.
So now you can see why those fellas talk and behave as if they are 'kings'? That is why I say chinamen that go round telling others that Jews are 'god's chosen people' are complete idiots (for those idiots will be dying to suck up to those people).
Some notes on 'phone hacking':
A few days ago a local Singapore newspaper ran an article written by some local 'electronic games developer' that talked about how easy it is for people to 'hack' into other people's phone mails and messages. According to that 'expert', the method is to 'imitate' the phone's owner and try to log into the owner's voice and message box, and it is quite easy as most people do not bother to change the default passwords assigned by telcos.
Yah, only simpletons believe that people that do it on 'industrial scales' take that route. There are easier ways like gaining control of the telcos' computers or just simply having access to them (i.e. be on the inside).
Despite the impression that 'phone hacking' is something different, it is actually computer hacking and there is no difference between the two. At the core of the entire 'modern phone system' is nothing but many computers acting as switches and as storage so that phone users can sign in later to retrieve. So with so many computers all over the network, it would not be surprising that copies of those mails and messages are siting on multiple computers which makes it all the easier get to from the inside.
Thus, those fellas above did not have to hack into people's phones and unlikely even to have to pretend to be the rightful owners. It is more likely that they were accessing those computers from the inside and did not even have to hack into those computers. Remember: the ones that control those computers can access anything they want and that is the easiest and most efficient way of getting people's mails if you are operating on an 'industrial scale'.
So and unless you think the ones managing those telco networks are total idiots that did not really know what was happening, you imagine what sort of 'power' is needed for that to happen?
People with that sort of reach don't do things the way the average joe or joker does, or the way they think things are done...
Rupert Murdoch attacks Gordon Brown in first interview since NoW closed
Speaking to Wall St Journal, media tycoon defends News Corp's handling of scandal and says MPs' comments are 'total lies'
David Batty
guardian.co.uk, Friday 15 July 2011
Rupert Murdoch has attacked Gordon Brown in a fierce defence of News Corporation's handling of the phone hacking scandal. Murdoch accused British MPs of lying about allegations of corrupt practices at his newspapers
In his first interview about the crisis that has engulfed his media empire, Murdoch said some MPs' comments on the scandal were "total lies" and singled out Brown for criticism over the former prime minister's accusation that News International was guilty of "law-breaking on an industrial scale".
The media baron said Brown "got it entirely wrong" when he alleged that Murdoch's British papers had used "known criminals" to get access to his personal information when Labour was in power.
"The Browns were always friends of ours" until the Sun withdrew its support for Labour before the last general election, he told the Wall Street Journal, his flagship US paper.
On Twitter, Murdoch's biographer Michael Wolff said he "seemed genuinely distressed about Gordon Brown not liking him anymore."
Murdoch said he had agreed to appear before the Commons culture, media and sport select committee after being told he would be summoned to a hearing on the hacking scandal next Tuesday. He said he wanted to address "some of the things that have been said in parliament, some of which are total lies."
The summons was issued after Murdoch said he would not give evidence to the committee until after having appeared before the public inquiry chaired by Lord Justice Leveson.
Murdoch, who will join his younger son James and News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks at the hearing, added: "We think it's important to absolutely establish our integrity in the eyes of the public."
The chairman and chief executive of News Corp also defended the company's handling of the crisis, claiming it had made only "minor mistakes".
The damage to the company was "nothing that will not be recovered," he said, adding that the company had a great reputation in the US.
He admitted "getting annoyed" about the negative media coverage of the scandal but said: I'll get over it."
Amid growing calls from News Corp shareholders for James Murdoch to step down as the chairman of BSkyB, his father also attempted to quash speculation that the scandal had dashed the chances of his younger taking over his media empire.
Rejecting criticism that James Murdoch had reacted too slowly to the scandal, he said: "I think he acted as fast as he could, the moment he could."
He also claimed that his own his reponse to the situation had been prompt and appropriate.
"When I hear something going wrong, I insist on it being put right," he said.
He also denied there were plans to sell News International, or separate it from the rest of News Corp, describing such reports as "pure rubbish".
"Give it the strongest possible denial you can give," he added.
But Murdoch said it would set up an independent committee to "investigate every charge of improper conduct" made against News International.
The committee would be headed by a "distinguished non-employee" and also establish a "protocol for behaviour" for new reporters across the company.
Apparently, those fellas control so much of the country's news organsations that for the last few decades anyone that The Sun (owned by the same fellas) supported ended up winning the country's elections.
Quote: 'If you do not read newspapers you are uninformed, if you do you are misinformed' - Mark Twain
As a result, all their politicians from all parties had 'coddled up' to these fellas and employed their employees as their 'press czars'.
For those that cannot get it, here's the reason: by doing that they hope to get the 'support' of those fellas' newspapers, TV stations etc and thus 'win' elections.
[side note: Anyone familiar with US financial regulatory history would know that this is akind to the US government appointing employees of large banks (like Goldman Sachs) as their financial czars]
They reportedly even 'tapped' Gordon Brown's (the previous PM) phone for years from when he as finance minister to prime minister and that bugger apparently did not even know about it until now!
That and the fact that those fellas had 'eavesdropped' on an 'industrial scale' on thousands of people for so many years tells us a few things.
That country's political leaders and government were either not aware of the whole thing, or they were aware but too 'afraid' to antagonise those devils and have them turn their 'news' against them. In both cases, one wonders who are the ones really running that country.
For the benefit of children in my mail list, one does not have to have direct control of a country to be in control of it. It is the same reason why a lead British financier (Lord Rothschild) from 100 plus years ago once claimed that 'I care not who sits on the throne of the British empire. The one who controls its finances controls the empire, and I control its finances'.
The recent behaviour of those fellas in response to the 'recent revelations' are also telling (and these are just the ones I am aware of).
- the father refused to attend the British parliament inquiry on the matter and instead now says that he will setup his own 'independent' committee to investigate all charges (yah, a thief tells the whole country to bugger off and says he will pick his own judge),
- he also says that it is just a 'minor mistake' (stealing from thousands of people is a minor mistake to him)
- when asked what is the most important thing to him now that the case is 'blown up' he pointed to his CEO and said 'to save her' (that woman was the head of his british operations at the time of those 'hackings' and many people were calling for her to be charged). You see what is important to those people. It is not justice but his fellow tribeswoman by name of Rebekah
- his son tells the same parliamentary committee that he will appear at a date of his own choosing!
For those that do not know - all those devilish characters above are from one single race. Coincidence? Not really. They are people that many fools say are 'god's chosen people'.
So now you can see why those fellas talk and behave as if they are 'kings'? That is why I say chinamen that go round telling others that Jews are 'god's chosen people' are complete idiots (for those idiots will be dying to suck up to those people).
Some notes on 'phone hacking':
A few days ago a local Singapore newspaper ran an article written by some local 'electronic games developer' that talked about how easy it is for people to 'hack' into other people's phone mails and messages. According to that 'expert', the method is to 'imitate' the phone's owner and try to log into the owner's voice and message box, and it is quite easy as most people do not bother to change the default passwords assigned by telcos.
Yah, only simpletons believe that people that do it on 'industrial scales' take that route. There are easier ways like gaining control of the telcos' computers or just simply having access to them (i.e. be on the inside).
Despite the impression that 'phone hacking' is something different, it is actually computer hacking and there is no difference between the two. At the core of the entire 'modern phone system' is nothing but many computers acting as switches and as storage so that phone users can sign in later to retrieve. So with so many computers all over the network, it would not be surprising that copies of those mails and messages are siting on multiple computers which makes it all the easier get to from the inside.
Thus, those fellas above did not have to hack into people's phones and unlikely even to have to pretend to be the rightful owners. It is more likely that they were accessing those computers from the inside and did not even have to hack into those computers. Remember: the ones that control those computers can access anything they want and that is the easiest and most efficient way of getting people's mails if you are operating on an 'industrial scale'.
So and unless you think the ones managing those telco networks are total idiots that did not really know what was happening, you imagine what sort of 'power' is needed for that to happen?
People with that sort of reach don't do things the way the average joe or joker does, or the way they think things are done...
Rupert Murdoch attacks Gordon Brown in first interview since NoW closed
Speaking to Wall St Journal, media tycoon defends News Corp's handling of scandal and says MPs' comments are 'total lies'
David Batty
guardian.co.uk, Friday 15 July 2011
Rupert Murdoch has attacked Gordon Brown in a fierce defence of News Corporation's handling of the phone hacking scandal. Murdoch accused British MPs of lying about allegations of corrupt practices at his newspapers
In his first interview about the crisis that has engulfed his media empire, Murdoch said some MPs' comments on the scandal were "total lies" and singled out Brown for criticism over the former prime minister's accusation that News International was guilty of "law-breaking on an industrial scale".
The media baron said Brown "got it entirely wrong" when he alleged that Murdoch's British papers had used "known criminals" to get access to his personal information when Labour was in power.
"The Browns were always friends of ours" until the Sun withdrew its support for Labour before the last general election, he told the Wall Street Journal, his flagship US paper.
On Twitter, Murdoch's biographer Michael Wolff said he "seemed genuinely distressed about Gordon Brown not liking him anymore."
Murdoch said he had agreed to appear before the Commons culture, media and sport select committee after being told he would be summoned to a hearing on the hacking scandal next Tuesday. He said he wanted to address "some of the things that have been said in parliament, some of which are total lies."
The summons was issued after Murdoch said he would not give evidence to the committee until after having appeared before the public inquiry chaired by Lord Justice Leveson.
Murdoch, who will join his younger son James and News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks at the hearing, added: "We think it's important to absolutely establish our integrity in the eyes of the public."
The chairman and chief executive of News Corp also defended the company's handling of the crisis, claiming it had made only "minor mistakes".
The damage to the company was "nothing that will not be recovered," he said, adding that the company had a great reputation in the US.
He admitted "getting annoyed" about the negative media coverage of the scandal but said: I'll get over it."
Amid growing calls from News Corp shareholders for James Murdoch to step down as the chairman of BSkyB, his father also attempted to quash speculation that the scandal had dashed the chances of his younger taking over his media empire.
Rejecting criticism that James Murdoch had reacted too slowly to the scandal, he said: "I think he acted as fast as he could, the moment he could."
He also claimed that his own his reponse to the situation had been prompt and appropriate.
"When I hear something going wrong, I insist on it being put right," he said.
He also denied there were plans to sell News International, or separate it from the rest of News Corp, describing such reports as "pure rubbish".
"Give it the strongest possible denial you can give," he added.
But Murdoch said it would set up an independent committee to "investigate every charge of improper conduct" made against News International.
The committee would be headed by a "distinguished non-employee" and also establish a "protocol for behaviour" for new reporters across the company.
Wednesday, July 06, 2011
Scrxwing the Europeans 1 by 1
See the Anglo-Saxon trick? No change to Gringo and Poodle's ratings while Iceland, Ireland, Greece, now Portugal all 'queue' in almost perfect timing. Even the gods cannot get the timing of those rating downgrades as well as those fellas...
Breaking News
Moody's downgrades Portugal into junk territory
Ratings agency Moody's has cut Portugal's main credit rating by four notches to Ba2. The group cited what it saw as a great risk that the eurozone nation would need more official financing.
Breaking News
Moody's downgrades Portugal into junk territory
Ratings agency Moody's has cut Portugal's main credit rating by four notches to Ba2. The group cited what it saw as a great risk that the eurozone nation would need more official financing.
Free Lunches (Trading using CFDs)
Only for people that want to invest in stocks ('stock playing' not encouraged). Esp those that have been using or wish to use CFD for some leverage.
Those that wish to open account with Saxo can let me know and we can have a few free lunches on the referral fee I collect.
FYI for those interested, foreign brokers like Saxo have following differences over local ('1st world brokers for 3rd world investors'?) ones:
- their 'long' CFD financing premiums are around 1.5% above interbank offered rates (for the respective currencies), and are much lower than that charged by local (con) brokers. E.g. SGD is 3+% vs 5.5% for local brokers
- they pay 'interest' for short CFD positions, local con ones charge for short too
- they do not rollover positions every month or so, local ones do that and charge 2x (sell & buy back)commissions again on each rollover. Some have 'promotions' where they 'give' waivers for some period (so nice).
In addition, the 'forced' regular rollover causes financing principal (and therefore their charge) to rise as share price goes up.
E.g. you bot your share initially at the cheap/low of $10 and price has since doubled. The local con brokers rollover your position to the new price of $20 and you end up paying interest on $20. Since foreign brokers do not rollover your position, their financing charge is based on your original purchase price $10 for as long as you hold that position.
That difference of course works the other way too i.e. as price drops, local brokers charge less financing. But then that situation should not apply as much to more savvy investors since they would more likely buy when prices are cheap and less likely to go down as much as up (if lose more often than gain, then don't invest. sure jialat).
If price drops appreciably, one can always do voluntary rollovers (self-directed sell & buyback) to take advantage of lower price (principal) and financing cost. Or simply rollover to cash position using dividends earned. That's what I (loser) do when prices drop by more than 20%...
From: Helen Yudan Zha (HZH)
To: CCK
Sent: Wed, July 6, 2011 11:12:38 AM
Subject: Saxo: Refer a friend to Saxo and receive SGD 200
Dear CCK
Good morning and thank you very much for trading in Saxo!
Do you know of someone who may benefit from our award winning SaxoTrader platform? Refer your contact to us and you may be eligible for our referral fee of SGD 200 per client !
A quick view for some terms and conditions:
Referrer (You)
- You must have a SaxoTrader account with Saxo Capital Markets Singapore
- You must have executed at least one trade
- You must Not be married to the referee
- There must be no executed or pending request for account closure
Referee (The person you refer)
- He/she must open a Saxo Trader account (min SGD 10,000 initial deposit) with Saxo Singapore
- He/she must have executed at least one trade
- He/she must not be married to you
- He/she must not have been previously registered with Saxo
- He/she must not have been previously referred to Saxo
- There must be no executed or pending request for account closure or funds withdrawal
To refer clients to Saxo
Please reply to me with your referee’s name, mobile number and email address if available. We will then follow up with your referee. Please feel free to forward my contacts to your friend. Let me know if you have any questions here.
Once you and your referee have met the conditions, your trading account will be credited with SGD 200 !
Thank you very much and have a nice day!
Yours Sincerely
Helen Yudan Zha
Manager – Private Account Management
Mailto: HZH@saxomarkets.com.sg
Phone: +6563037706
Those that wish to open account with Saxo can let me know and we can have a few free lunches on the referral fee I collect.
FYI for those interested, foreign brokers like Saxo have following differences over local ('1st world brokers for 3rd world investors'?) ones:
- their 'long' CFD financing premiums are around 1.5% above interbank offered rates (for the respective currencies), and are much lower than that charged by local (con) brokers. E.g. SGD is 3+% vs 5.5% for local brokers
- they pay 'interest' for short CFD positions, local con ones charge for short too
- they do not rollover positions every month or so, local ones do that and charge 2x (sell & buy back)commissions again on each rollover. Some have 'promotions' where they 'give' waivers for some period (so nice).
In addition, the 'forced' regular rollover causes financing principal (and therefore their charge) to rise as share price goes up.
E.g. you bot your share initially at the cheap/low of $10 and price has since doubled. The local con brokers rollover your position to the new price of $20 and you end up paying interest on $20. Since foreign brokers do not rollover your position, their financing charge is based on your original purchase price $10 for as long as you hold that position.
That difference of course works the other way too i.e. as price drops, local brokers charge less financing. But then that situation should not apply as much to more savvy investors since they would more likely buy when prices are cheap and less likely to go down as much as up (if lose more often than gain, then don't invest. sure jialat).
If price drops appreciably, one can always do voluntary rollovers (self-directed sell & buyback) to take advantage of lower price (principal) and financing cost. Or simply rollover to cash position using dividends earned. That's what I (loser) do when prices drop by more than 20%...
From: Helen Yudan Zha (HZH)
To: CCK
Sent: Wed, July 6, 2011 11:12:38 AM
Subject: Saxo: Refer a friend to Saxo and receive SGD 200
Dear CCK
Good morning and thank you very much for trading in Saxo!
Do you know of someone who may benefit from our award winning SaxoTrader platform? Refer your contact to us and you may be eligible for our referral fee of SGD 200 per client !
A quick view for some terms and conditions:
Referrer (You)
- You must have a SaxoTrader account with Saxo Capital Markets Singapore
- You must have executed at least one trade
- You must Not be married to the referee
- There must be no executed or pending request for account closure
Referee (The person you refer)
- He/she must open a Saxo Trader account (min SGD 10,000 initial deposit) with Saxo Singapore
- He/she must have executed at least one trade
- He/she must not be married to you
- He/she must not have been previously registered with Saxo
- He/she must not have been previously referred to Saxo
- There must be no executed or pending request for account closure or funds withdrawal
To refer clients to Saxo
Please reply to me with your referee’s name, mobile number and email address if available. We will then follow up with your referee. Please feel free to forward my contacts to your friend. Let me know if you have any questions here.
Once you and your referee have met the conditions, your trading account will be credited with SGD 200 !
Thank you very much and have a nice day!
Yours Sincerely
Helen Yudan Zha
Manager – Private Account Management
Mailto: HZH@saxomarkets.com.sg
Phone: +6563037706
Monday, July 04, 2011
Real Use of Temples
Aptly dedicated to the Hindu deity Vishnu (the Preserver) - the other key ones being Brahma (the Creator) and Siva (the Destroyer) - this temple managed to preserve a lot of 'kurunge' (money in Tamil).
Smart deity. Don't trust paper money and convert those things into real stuffs for storage. And that is just what the deity preserved (left behind). One wonders how much the deity have 'used' to-date.
I wonder which of the Hindu deities is the re-incarnation of 'AGNI' the Auditor General N Inspector.
Everywhere such 'holy' institutions are filled with money hoarders. Coincidence?
According to the report, the 'secret chamber' where the valuables were held had not been tempered for 140 years. You believe that?
If that is true, that means the people who hid those valuables did not want others to know about it. Why?
If those few (if not few how to keep secret?) people are the only ones that know about it, do you think they would not help themselves to some of it?
The more likely scenario is that there had been some falling out between the different people managing the 'secret chamber' and the ones who lost out (and therefore could not use those valuable anymore) threatened to spill the beans. So the others had no choice but to 'reveal' the existence of those valuables.
Note: Throughout history temples are good places to hide or store valuables because only a few 'top religious leaders' (i.e. insiders) are allowed into the temples' inner sanctums (where valuables are stored) supposedly because those places are 'super sacred'. In addition, temples enjoy fanatical protection from worshippers who would protect the temples with their lives when called to do so by those 'holy leaders' - those dumb suckers think they are protecting their gods. A good example is the Greek Parthenon which the Delian League used as their 'treasury'.
Indian temple yields priceless treasure
Russia News.Net
Saturday 2nd July, 2011
Gold and silver jewellery, coins and precious stones have been discovered in an Indian temple.
The treasure, thought to be worth billions of dollars, had been hidden in secret compartments in the Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple in southern India.
Indian officials have hinted that the valuable find might be worth over ten billion dollars.
While one more secret chamber is yet to be opened, thousands of necklaces, coins and precious stones have already been brought out of the underground vaults.
The secret chambers had not been tampered with for over 140 years.
The Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple is dedicated to Hindu lord Vishnu.
It was built hundreds of years ago with devotees continuing to contribute to its upkeep.
Smart deity. Don't trust paper money and convert those things into real stuffs for storage. And that is just what the deity preserved (left behind). One wonders how much the deity have 'used' to-date.
I wonder which of the Hindu deities is the re-incarnation of 'AGNI' the Auditor General N Inspector.
Everywhere such 'holy' institutions are filled with money hoarders. Coincidence?
According to the report, the 'secret chamber' where the valuables were held had not been tempered for 140 years. You believe that?
If that is true, that means the people who hid those valuables did not want others to know about it. Why?
If those few (if not few how to keep secret?) people are the only ones that know about it, do you think they would not help themselves to some of it?
The more likely scenario is that there had been some falling out between the different people managing the 'secret chamber' and the ones who lost out (and therefore could not use those valuable anymore) threatened to spill the beans. So the others had no choice but to 'reveal' the existence of those valuables.
Note: Throughout history temples are good places to hide or store valuables because only a few 'top religious leaders' (i.e. insiders) are allowed into the temples' inner sanctums (where valuables are stored) supposedly because those places are 'super sacred'. In addition, temples enjoy fanatical protection from worshippers who would protect the temples with their lives when called to do so by those 'holy leaders' - those dumb suckers think they are protecting their gods. A good example is the Greek Parthenon which the Delian League used as their 'treasury'.
Indian temple yields priceless treasure
Russia News.Net
Saturday 2nd July, 2011
Gold and silver jewellery, coins and precious stones have been discovered in an Indian temple.
The treasure, thought to be worth billions of dollars, had been hidden in secret compartments in the Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple in southern India.
Indian officials have hinted that the valuable find might be worth over ten billion dollars.
While one more secret chamber is yet to be opened, thousands of necklaces, coins and precious stones have already been brought out of the underground vaults.
The secret chambers had not been tampered with for over 140 years.
The Sree Padmanabhaswamy Temple is dedicated to Hindu lord Vishnu.
It was built hundreds of years ago with devotees continuing to contribute to its upkeep.
Why Leaking State Secrets Can Be Dangerous
Before Gringo, Poodle and all attacked Iraq, their own weapons experts (like Scott Ritter and the man in below story) were coming out with the truth which is there were no weapons of mass destruction and that excuse for attacking Iraq was just a big lie.
There are simpletons I know that ape the main stream media in those states and their 'allies', and tell others that disclosing such state secrets is 'not good'. To them WikiLeaks is also a bad thing.
One can see why leaking state secrets can be dangerous - the ones leaking the secrets may die much sooner than the ones perpetuating the lies (Bush Jr and poodle are still kicking around...no ICC 'crimes against humanity' charges for them).
May be simpletons like elephants to be simple like them... one simple blindman telling them what an elephant looks like is sufficient. To them, other blindmen's stories especially those that deal with elephants more often (i.e. insiders) are either unimportant or 'dangerous'.
Only such simpletons would believe that men willing to risk their careers and lives to speak out for truth in the hope of saving hundreds of thousands of other people's lives would be so weak as to take their own lives just because they are 'exposed' as the source of leaks.
To such men, even the thought of some devils taking someone else's lives is below them and should be fought against (unlike cowards). You think they'd put those good lives of theirs to such simple waste?
http://worldpress.org/Europe/1405.cfm#down
Suicide and Suspicions over War with Iraq
Barry Shelby and Sarah Coleman
Aug. 13, 2003
The July 18 suicide of British Ministry of Defense (MoD) weapons expert David Kelly has intensified the ongoing British row over the reasons Britain went to war, the quality of Western military intelligence, and news media bias. British commentators from across the political spectrum agree that it also represents the most serious challenge Tony Blair’s government has yet faced.
Kelly, 59, committed suicide after being named by the government as the source for a press leak. In a conversation with British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) reporter Andrew Gilligan in February, Kelly was an unnamed source who debunked Downing Street’s claim that weapons of mass destruction could be launched from Iraq within 45 minutes. That information was part of a dossier of evidence against the Iraqi regime, published by the British government last September and thought to be enormously influential in giving a moral justification for removing Saddam Hussein. Asked who had been responsible for “sexing up” the dossier, Gilligan’s source named Blair’s top press secretary Alistair Campbell.
Kelly later denied that he had been the main source for Gilligan’s story, telling a parliamentary committee on July 15 that “from the conversation I had I don't see how [Gilligan] could make the statements he was making.” By that time, Gilligan’s story was dominating the news and the pressure on Kelly was apparently intolerable. Four days after he gave his evidence, he was dead.
In the aftermath of the suicide, British commentators were divided as to whether the lion’s share of blame for Kelly’s suicide rested with the government or the BBC. Some blamed the news agency for refusing to release Kelly’s name sooner; other fingers pointed at the MoD for violating its normal rules of secrecy by telling reporters that it would confirm the mole’s name if they submitted it to the ministry. For its part, the government accused the BBC of having an antiwar bias that had led to sensationalist reporting.
“Make no mistake, this is serious,” wrote David Cracknell in the conservative Sunday Times (July 20). “Early in the Iraq dossier row, one MP said this was New Labor’s Watergate. That looked like hyperbole then. It does not now.” Kelly’s death “is not merely a political event, it is a moral event, and it has made people feel not only sad, but ashamed,” William Rees-Mogg wrote in The Times the next day (July 21).
Britain’s conservative tabloids were eager to point fingers at the BBC. “Are the BBC to blame?” asked the conservative, mass-circulation News of the World (July 20). “Maybe….It is the reputation of the BBC that will be covered in Kelly’s blood.” The Sun (July 21) was even more damning in its rhetorical questions: “The BBC is in the gutter…How can we ever trust them again?”
But others argued that it wasn’t clear exactly what the BBC could have done to save Kelly. Writing in the liberal Guardian on July 21, Jackie Ashley offered an explanation for the conservative attacks on the corporation. “The attacks on the BBC have been led by two groups—Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers and New Labor spin-doctors—which have been closely intertwined in recent years. The covert Murdoch message is clear enough: Tony, we are your real, reliable supporters, not the dodgy lefties of the BBC.”
Others cautioned against making too much of the battle between the BBC and press secretary Alistair Campbell, saying that they were simply actors in a larger drama. “Blair went to war arguing that Iraq posed an imminent threat,” said an editorial in London’s liberal Independent on Sunday (July 20). “It is not scientific advisors, or Campbell, or the BBC...who should be in the dock but the prime minister….We need [an inquiry] into the real reasons why this country was taken into a war that has claimed not only too many lives as its victims but the nation’s trust in its leaders as well.”
Blair, who was on a tour of Asia when Kelly’s death was announced, appeared visibly shaken in press conferences and immediately announced that an inquiry—led by Irish judge Lord Hutton—would be launched into the scientist’s death. He averred that he would appear before the inquiry’s commission himself. Hutton subsequently announced that he would also be calling Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon and Campbell to the witness stand.
But for some editorialists, the Hutton inquiry was doomed before its first hearing. “Limits have been imposed on Lord Hutton…His investigation, however rigorous, is likely to produce only half the story,” wrote Glasgow’s centrist Herald (July 22). “He is being asked to consider Kelly’s death as if it occurred in isolation from other events. In truth, however, it was but one part of a
larger narrative.”
British headlines after the inquiry’s first days focused on internal BBC memos indicating that Gilligan’s “loose use of language and lack of judgment” in his choice of words had been a millstone around the corporation’s neck. “BBC admits Iraq scoop was flawed,” The Times trumpeted in its top headline on Aug. 13. “Gilligan report ‘flawed,’ “ The Scotsman announced. The Guardian, which had declared itself to be “gunning for the BBC” in a July 22 editorial, conceded an “Inquiry blow for the BBC” in its lead headline on Aug. 13. Of the most prestigious British papers, only The Independent devoted its top headline to the other important revelation from the previous day’s proceedings: that Kelly had also told Susan Watts, science editor of BBC2’s Newsnight, that Campbell had insisted that the controversial “45-minute claim” be inserted into the September dossier.
In the days before the inquiry opened, the controversy had taken a new turn. On Aug. 3, Tom Kelly, the prime minister’s spokesman, referred to the Nobel Prize-nominated David Kelly as a “Walter Mitty” character. Newspaper columnists and editorialists were quick to seize on the comment as an example of the government’s desperation and increasing reliance on spin.
“The sheer incompetence and self-destructiveness of this administration’s handling of the Kelly crisis has become epic,” wrote Iain MacWhirter in Glasgow’s Herald (Aug. 6). “The government propaganda machine seems to have taken on a life of its own; has turned on its masters, and is now destroying them. Terminator meets All the President’s Men.”
“Even before Lord Hutton begins his inquiry into the death of David Kelly, the
government manages to keep itself on the front pages as if it is determined to alienate public opinion in advance of the formal proceedings,” wrote Steve Richards in The Independent. “The once-sharp antennae of the publicity-conscious New Laborites have been blunted by power, and the prospect of power for years to come.”
The reference to Mitty, the protaganist of a 1939 short story for the New Yorker whose name has become a byword for a person who dreams about a life much more exciting than his own, caused one columnist to do some literary sleuthing and to conclude that the comment was more of a compliment than a slur.
“The whole point of Thurber’s story…is that Mitty fantasizes wildly about becoming someone else, but never actually changes,” Andrew Buncombe wrote in The Independent (Aug. 7). “Mitty is a hero for every one of us who has played the lottery….So, it’s perfectly possible that, from time to time, the Nobel Prize nominee Kelly was a Walter Mitty character; but then, so, hopefully, is his namesake who tried to undermine the scientist’s reputation with such a cheap
shot.”
On Aug. 5, the day before David Kelly’s funeral, Tom Kelly apologized for the comment. Nevertheless, the centrist Financial Times felt that “Tom Kelly should be suspended,” while the conservative Daily Express described him as a “the fall guy.” There was much speculation about whether his comment had been a case of individual tactlessness, or part of a calculated strategy by the administration to smear the eminent weapons expert.
"[Tom] Kelly’s briefing was not part of a carefully planned operation,” wrote Steve Richards in The Independent (Aug. 6). “Such a development would be a clear sign the collective forces in Downing Street had gone insane. Imagine the conversation: ‘Why don’t we get it into the newspapers that we regard David Kelly as a fantasist just before his funeral?’”
“If the government is found to be engaging in the character assassination of a dead man then the implications could prove devastating. The wider public will find the whole business distasteful in the extreme,” read an Aug. 6 editorial in the Irish News. However, the paper concluded, there were larger issues at stake. “The tragic death of David Kelly looks set to dominate Tony Blair’s political life for months.”
There are simpletons I know that ape the main stream media in those states and their 'allies', and tell others that disclosing such state secrets is 'not good'. To them WikiLeaks is also a bad thing.
One can see why leaking state secrets can be dangerous - the ones leaking the secrets may die much sooner than the ones perpetuating the lies (Bush Jr and poodle are still kicking around...no ICC 'crimes against humanity' charges for them).
May be simpletons like elephants to be simple like them... one simple blindman telling them what an elephant looks like is sufficient. To them, other blindmen's stories especially those that deal with elephants more often (i.e. insiders) are either unimportant or 'dangerous'.
Only such simpletons would believe that men willing to risk their careers and lives to speak out for truth in the hope of saving hundreds of thousands of other people's lives would be so weak as to take their own lives just because they are 'exposed' as the source of leaks.
To such men, even the thought of some devils taking someone else's lives is below them and should be fought against (unlike cowards). You think they'd put those good lives of theirs to such simple waste?
http://worldpress.org/Europe/1405.cfm#down
Suicide and Suspicions over War with Iraq
Barry Shelby and Sarah Coleman
Aug. 13, 2003
The July 18 suicide of British Ministry of Defense (MoD) weapons expert David Kelly has intensified the ongoing British row over the reasons Britain went to war, the quality of Western military intelligence, and news media bias. British commentators from across the political spectrum agree that it also represents the most serious challenge Tony Blair’s government has yet faced.
Kelly, 59, committed suicide after being named by the government as the source for a press leak. In a conversation with British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) reporter Andrew Gilligan in February, Kelly was an unnamed source who debunked Downing Street’s claim that weapons of mass destruction could be launched from Iraq within 45 minutes. That information was part of a dossier of evidence against the Iraqi regime, published by the British government last September and thought to be enormously influential in giving a moral justification for removing Saddam Hussein. Asked who had been responsible for “sexing up” the dossier, Gilligan’s source named Blair’s top press secretary Alistair Campbell.
Kelly later denied that he had been the main source for Gilligan’s story, telling a parliamentary committee on July 15 that “from the conversation I had I don't see how [Gilligan] could make the statements he was making.” By that time, Gilligan’s story was dominating the news and the pressure on Kelly was apparently intolerable. Four days after he gave his evidence, he was dead.
In the aftermath of the suicide, British commentators were divided as to whether the lion’s share of blame for Kelly’s suicide rested with the government or the BBC. Some blamed the news agency for refusing to release Kelly’s name sooner; other fingers pointed at the MoD for violating its normal rules of secrecy by telling reporters that it would confirm the mole’s name if they submitted it to the ministry. For its part, the government accused the BBC of having an antiwar bias that had led to sensationalist reporting.
“Make no mistake, this is serious,” wrote David Cracknell in the conservative Sunday Times (July 20). “Early in the Iraq dossier row, one MP said this was New Labor’s Watergate. That looked like hyperbole then. It does not now.” Kelly’s death “is not merely a political event, it is a moral event, and it has made people feel not only sad, but ashamed,” William Rees-Mogg wrote in The Times the next day (July 21).
Britain’s conservative tabloids were eager to point fingers at the BBC. “Are the BBC to blame?” asked the conservative, mass-circulation News of the World (July 20). “Maybe….It is the reputation of the BBC that will be covered in Kelly’s blood.” The Sun (July 21) was even more damning in its rhetorical questions: “The BBC is in the gutter…How can we ever trust them again?”
But others argued that it wasn’t clear exactly what the BBC could have done to save Kelly. Writing in the liberal Guardian on July 21, Jackie Ashley offered an explanation for the conservative attacks on the corporation. “The attacks on the BBC have been led by two groups—Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers and New Labor spin-doctors—which have been closely intertwined in recent years. The covert Murdoch message is clear enough: Tony, we are your real, reliable supporters, not the dodgy lefties of the BBC.”
Others cautioned against making too much of the battle between the BBC and press secretary Alistair Campbell, saying that they were simply actors in a larger drama. “Blair went to war arguing that Iraq posed an imminent threat,” said an editorial in London’s liberal Independent on Sunday (July 20). “It is not scientific advisors, or Campbell, or the BBC...who should be in the dock but the prime minister….We need [an inquiry] into the real reasons why this country was taken into a war that has claimed not only too many lives as its victims but the nation’s trust in its leaders as well.”
Blair, who was on a tour of Asia when Kelly’s death was announced, appeared visibly shaken in press conferences and immediately announced that an inquiry—led by Irish judge Lord Hutton—would be launched into the scientist’s death. He averred that he would appear before the inquiry’s commission himself. Hutton subsequently announced that he would also be calling Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon and Campbell to the witness stand.
But for some editorialists, the Hutton inquiry was doomed before its first hearing. “Limits have been imposed on Lord Hutton…His investigation, however rigorous, is likely to produce only half the story,” wrote Glasgow’s centrist Herald (July 22). “He is being asked to consider Kelly’s death as if it occurred in isolation from other events. In truth, however, it was but one part of a
larger narrative.”
British headlines after the inquiry’s first days focused on internal BBC memos indicating that Gilligan’s “loose use of language and lack of judgment” in his choice of words had been a millstone around the corporation’s neck. “BBC admits Iraq scoop was flawed,” The Times trumpeted in its top headline on Aug. 13. “Gilligan report ‘flawed,’ “ The Scotsman announced. The Guardian, which had declared itself to be “gunning for the BBC” in a July 22 editorial, conceded an “Inquiry blow for the BBC” in its lead headline on Aug. 13. Of the most prestigious British papers, only The Independent devoted its top headline to the other important revelation from the previous day’s proceedings: that Kelly had also told Susan Watts, science editor of BBC2’s Newsnight, that Campbell had insisted that the controversial “45-minute claim” be inserted into the September dossier.
In the days before the inquiry opened, the controversy had taken a new turn. On Aug. 3, Tom Kelly, the prime minister’s spokesman, referred to the Nobel Prize-nominated David Kelly as a “Walter Mitty” character. Newspaper columnists and editorialists were quick to seize on the comment as an example of the government’s desperation and increasing reliance on spin.
“The sheer incompetence and self-destructiveness of this administration’s handling of the Kelly crisis has become epic,” wrote Iain MacWhirter in Glasgow’s Herald (Aug. 6). “The government propaganda machine seems to have taken on a life of its own; has turned on its masters, and is now destroying them. Terminator meets All the President’s Men.”
“Even before Lord Hutton begins his inquiry into the death of David Kelly, the
government manages to keep itself on the front pages as if it is determined to alienate public opinion in advance of the formal proceedings,” wrote Steve Richards in The Independent. “The once-sharp antennae of the publicity-conscious New Laborites have been blunted by power, and the prospect of power for years to come.”
The reference to Mitty, the protaganist of a 1939 short story for the New Yorker whose name has become a byword for a person who dreams about a life much more exciting than his own, caused one columnist to do some literary sleuthing and to conclude that the comment was more of a compliment than a slur.
“The whole point of Thurber’s story…is that Mitty fantasizes wildly about becoming someone else, but never actually changes,” Andrew Buncombe wrote in The Independent (Aug. 7). “Mitty is a hero for every one of us who has played the lottery….So, it’s perfectly possible that, from time to time, the Nobel Prize nominee Kelly was a Walter Mitty character; but then, so, hopefully, is his namesake who tried to undermine the scientist’s reputation with such a cheap
shot.”
On Aug. 5, the day before David Kelly’s funeral, Tom Kelly apologized for the comment. Nevertheless, the centrist Financial Times felt that “Tom Kelly should be suspended,” while the conservative Daily Express described him as a “the fall guy.” There was much speculation about whether his comment had been a case of individual tactlessness, or part of a calculated strategy by the administration to smear the eminent weapons expert.
"[Tom] Kelly’s briefing was not part of a carefully planned operation,” wrote Steve Richards in The Independent (Aug. 6). “Such a development would be a clear sign the collective forces in Downing Street had gone insane. Imagine the conversation: ‘Why don’t we get it into the newspapers that we regard David Kelly as a fantasist just before his funeral?’”
“If the government is found to be engaging in the character assassination of a dead man then the implications could prove devastating. The wider public will find the whole business distasteful in the extreme,” read an Aug. 6 editorial in the Irish News. However, the paper concluded, there were larger issues at stake. “The tragic death of David Kelly looks set to dominate Tony Blair’s political life for months.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)