Here in my home

Here in my home

Lyrics: Here in my home

Hold on brother hold on
The road is long. We’re on stony ground
But I’m strong. You ain’t heavy

Oh there’s a misspoken truth that lies
Colors don’t bind, oh no.
What do they know? They speak falsely.

Here in my home
I’ll tell you what its all about
There’s just one hope here in my heart
One Love undivided
That’s what it’s all about
Please won’t you fall in one by one by one [with me]?

Push back sister won’t you push back?
Love won’t wait. Just keep pushing on.
Yes I’m strong. You ain’t heavy.

Oh don’t you worry about that…
What we have the shadows can’t deny
Don’t you know it’s now or never?

Colors don’t bind, oh no.


Years of fears and years of tribulation
The heart keeps searching for that endless devotion

Hand in hand we’ll march like blood brothers
I speak for my people hope we’ll find peace forever

May the road ahead quench my thirst for success
May the road behind echo a song of the blessed

So I will let it be known yes I feel it in my bones
No matter where I roam this is home sweet home

– Words & Music by Pete Teo featuring rap by KLG Sqwad &
Altimet. copr Redbag Music 2008. All Rights Reserved –

A song that every citizen of Malaysia should support. Just got to know about this project from my junior Calvin’s blog and it gave me the shivers when I listened to the song created by the talented artistes we have back home. It is true that finally it lies in the hands of us, the “rakyat”, to decide what we can do for our motherland, a place where we call home. Fellow Malaysians, enjoy it and help to spread the word, the message of love for the unity of our people. The song and the video clip “Here in my home” is available here for download and visit the website to know more about the project.


GE looking to sell appliance division

GE looking to sell appliance division

Thursday, May 15, 2008

General Electric is planning to sell its appliance division, one of the oldest businesses in the conglomerate’s 120-year history, people briefed on the proposal said Wednesday.

A sale of the unit, which makes refrigerators, microwaves and washer-dryers, among other items, could fetch at least $5 billion, these people said. GE and its investment bank, Goldman Sachs, have been laying the groundwork for an auction over the last few weeks.

The appliance unit, which helped make GE an American icon, may end up in foreign hands. Wall Street bankers are rushing to lay claim to potential bidders, and the expected suitors include Haier of China, which bid on Maytag two years ago; LG Electronics and Samsung, both of South Korea; Bosch of Germany; Electrolux of Sweden, which makes Sears’s Kenmore line of appliances; and Controladora Mabe, a GE partner based in Mexico.

The sale would mark the end of a brand of household products that made General Electric a fixture in American homes over the last century.

Jeffrey Immelt, its embattled chief executive, has been trying to refashion General Electric in the face of widespread calls to break up one of America’s largest companies. That mission has taken on greater urgency with the credit squeeze and the slumping economy, which have affected many of GE’s businesses.

The division, based in Louisville, Kentucky, has faced increased pressure in recent years from Chinese manufacturers, which have been growing at double-digit rates thanks in part to significantly lower costs.

Asian manufacturers are expected to be particularly drawn to the division, seeking to take advantage of GE’s widely known brand name as they try to become global businesses. Lenovo, the Chinese electronics company, successfully acquired IBM’s personal computer division in 2004, in part to help establish itself on the world stage.

As part of a potential sale, GE is likely to hand over a license to use the GE brand for a short period of time, the people briefed on the proposal said. After the initial license for using the General Electric brand expires, the buyer of the appliance unit would be allowed to continue to use the Monogram and Profile badges.

The arrangement is similar to the way Lenovo held onto the IBM badge for several years before using its own.

The news was first reported on Wednesday by The Wall Street Journal on its Web site.

GE’s once high-flying stock price has fallen 20.5 percent during Immelt’s seven-year tenure, and many analysts and investors have called for transformational changes at the corporate behemoth. Last year, it sold its plastics business to Sabic, the big Saudi Arabian industrial company, for $11.6 billion.

Immelt’s critics long have urged him to consider more unit sales, including the appliance unit, NBC Universal and GE Money, the company’s consumer finance unit. The company has focused on higher-growth technology businesses of late, moving out of consumer-oriented operations. GE’s light bulbs, however, continue to be made by the company’s lighting division.

That critical chorus grew louder and more insistent last month when GE’s first-quarter earnings badly missed analysts’ estimates and its own projections.

GE’s stunning announcement, made more notable by its status as a barometer of the economy, shook Wall Street’s confidence: the company’s shares fell 13 percent that day, its biggest one-day loss in two decades. Even worse, for a company that prided itself on meeting expectations, GE was forced to cut its projected earnings growth for this year to 5 percent from 10 percent.

The appliance business generated $7 billion in revenue last year, only a small fraction of GE’s $173 billion in total annual revenue, but divorcing it from the company would carry great historical import. Begun in 1907 as a maker of cooking and heating appliances, it has since grown to manufacture a broad range of products. Among its firsts are the room air-conditioner (1930), the combined washer-dryer unit (1954) and the toaster oven (1956).

As of last year, the appliances unit had about 13,000 of GE’s 327,000 employees.


My dear American friends, how do you really feel when reading this piece of news ? Some may find it surprising and some may find it depressing. Some journalist said that GE is selling its soul. This is just simply because the home appliances that American consumers are used to might just be handed to a foreign company and it is true that it is sad to see that there is no American companies among the bidders of this major auction handled by Goldman Sachs. Plus, GE is going to let go its most historical business line which will cut off a big connection to the general consuming public. It was also surprising to see that Japanese companies are not making a move in this bid. $5 billion to $8 billion, this is one big deal so only super growing companies who wants to be global and want to have a chance to control the American market are into it.

Anyway, I am not sure about the home appliances situation in the States. Are your homes filled up with GE appliances or mostly from foreign countries’ brands ? Although most of these are manufactured in China, I wonder how the American brand itself really means to the people of US. We, in Asia, as long things are cheap and of reliable quality, we would choose that. It’s just that simple here. So, naturally, Japanese, Korean and Chinese products fill our homes here in our side of the world. Americans reading this article, please let me know how you feel and I would be grateful to get some input on the current consumer home appliances situation there. According to this article, “Ask many Americans what they associate with General Electric and they’ll give you two words: light bulbs and ovens. Ask investors what they would like to see GE dropkick from its family and you’ll often hear the same words.”. Let me know how true this is. Thanks and peace.

Invading for the cause of good

Is it Time to Invade Burma ?

From Time

The disaster in Burma presents the world with perhaps its most serious humanitarian crisis since the 2004 Asian tsunami. By most reliable estimates, close to 100,000 people are dead. Delays in delivering relief to the victims, the inaccessibility of the stricken areas and the poor state of Burma’s infrastructure and health systems mean that number is sure to rise. With as many as 1 million people still at risk, it is conceivable that the death toll will, within days, approach that of the entire number of civilians killed in the genocide in Darfur.

So what is the world doing about it? Not much. The military regime that runs Burma initially signaled it would accept outside relief, but has imposed so many conditions on those who would actually deliver it that barely a trickle has made it through. Aid workers have been held at airports. UN food shipments have been seized. US naval ships packed with food and medicine idle in the Gulf of Thailand, waiting for an all-clear that may never come.

Burma’s rulers have relented slightly, agreeing Friday to let in supplies and perhaps even some foreign relief workers. The government says it will allow a US C-130 transport plane to land inside Burma Monday. But it’s hard to imagine a regime this insular and paranoid accepting robust aid from the US military, let alone agreeing to the presence of US Marines on Burmese soil — as Thailand and Indonesia did after the tsunami. The trouble is that the Burmese haven’t shown the ability or willingness to deploy the kind of assets needed to deal with a calamity of this scale — and the longer Burma resists offers of help, the more likely it is that the disaster will devolve beyond anyone’s control. “We’re in 2008, not 1908,” says Jan Egeland, the former U.N. emergency relief coordinator. “A lot is at stake here. If we let them get away with murder we may set a very dangerous precedent.”

That’s why it’s time to consider a more serious option: invading Burma. Some observers, including former USAID director Andrew Natsios, have called on the US to unilaterally begin air drops to the Burmese people regardless of what the junta says. The Bush Administration has so far rejected the idea — “I can’t imagine us going in without the permission of the Myanmar government,” Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Thursday — but it’s not without precedent: as Natsios pointed out to the Wall Street Journal, the US has facilitated the delivery of humanitarian aid without the host government’s consent in places like Bosnia and Sudan.

A coercive humanitarian intervention would be complicated and costly. During the 2004 tsunami, some 24 US ships and 16,000 troops were deployed in countries across the region; the mission cost the U.S. $5 million a day. Ultimately, the US pledged nearly $900 million to tsunami relief. (By contrast, it has offered just $3.25 million to Burma.) But the risks would be greater this time: the Burmese government’s xenophobia and insecurity make them prone to view US troops — or worse, foreign relief workers — as hostile forces. (Remember Black Hawk Down?) Even if the U.S. and its allies made clear that their actions were strictly for humanitarian purposes, it’s unlikely the junta would believe them. “You have to think it through — do you want to secure an area of the country by military force? What kinds of potential security risks would that create?” says Egelend. “I can’t imagine any humanitarian organization wanting to shoot their way in with food.”

So what other options exist? Retired General William Nash of the Council on Foreign Relations says the US should first pressure China to use its influence over the junta to get them to open up and then supply support to the Thai and Indonesian militaries to carry out relief missions. “We can pay for it — we can provide repair parts to the Indonesians so they can get their Air Force up. We can lend the them two C-130s and let them paint the Indonesian flag on them,” Nash says. “We have to get the stuff to people who can deliver it and who the Burmese government will accept, even if takes an extra day or two and even if it’s not as efficient as the good old US military.” Egeland advocates that the UN Security Council take punitive steps short of war, such as freezing the regime’s assets and issuing warrants for the arrest of individual junta members if they were to leave the country. Similar measures succeeded in getting the government of Ivory Coast to let in foreign relief teams in 2002, Egelend says.

And if that fails? “It’s important for the rulers to know the world has other options,” Egeland says. “If there were, say, the threat of a cholera epidemic that could claim hundreds of thousands of lives and the government was incapable of preventing it, then maybe yes — you would intervene unilaterally.” But by then, it could be too late. The cold truth is that states rarely undertake military action unless their national interests are at stake; and the world has yet to reach a consensus about when, and under what circumstances, coercive interventions in the name of averting humanitarian disasters are permissible. As the response to the 2004 tsunami proved, the world’s capacity for mercy is limitless. But we still haven’t figured out when to give war a chance.


The death toll due to the hideous cyclone that hit the Burmese land lately is rising as we speak. The number shows no sign of stop due to the delay of aid in the country mainly because of the cruel military dictatorship which is controlling the country, and those who are having the unrighteous power over the country right now are sending unbelievable messages to the world that they will only accept aid reliefs under certain conditions which simply can be taken as “silent death sentences” for people who really need instant aid which are not reaching them at all. According to this article, not much actions are taken and even if they were taken, they are all delayed due to the intolerable manners of the juntas.

Will America fly in and do some “dictatorship cleaning” in order to ease the situation ? Well, but I think the country would not need a war right now which will only worsen things up and which will also only lead to a bigger number of deaths. What would be the most optimum solution for this catastrophe ? Leaders of the world and experts of political science, this is the only thing I have to say : be fast !