Ganesh Sahathevan

by Ganesh Sahathevan Much is being said of   President Trump's Executive Order  Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States or “Refugee/Muslim Ban”  , but precious little about the legislation which empowers it. Examples  of  "expert" commentary: President Trump's Muslim ban excludes countries linked to his sprawling business empire How Many Terrorist Attacks in the U.S. Have Been Carried Out by Immigrants from the 7 Banned Muslim Countries? Trump left countries with high terror risk off his banned list What the Obama era legislation which binds Trump's executive order actually says: (12) Designation of high risk program countries (A) In general The Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of State, shall evaluate program countries on an annual basis based on the criteria described in subparagraph (B) and shall identify any program country, the admission of nationals

Comment The following has been copied and pasted from the Pennsylvania State Law School website.It is not that university's opinion or statement of  "alternative facts" but rather a simple summary of the   Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States or “Refugee/Muslim Ban”  executive order. Pursuant to INA §212(f), the President will exclude from entry immigrants and non immigrants “who are from countries referred to in section 217(a)(12), 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12) ” for a period of 90 days. These countries include: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. Additional countries may be added for similar treatment. The Executive Order provides an exception to prohibition of entry in which the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may review on a case-by-case basis, and allow entry as long as it is found to be in the national interest. How this section will be applied remains to be determined- for example, the language could reach LP

by Ganesh Sahathevan  David Collins, ex-Army captain , has been appointed NSW's first Minister For Counter-Terrorism. Given his experience and training he is well placed to understand why the Army's Tactical Assault Group East (Tag-E) should have been given the job of handling the Lindt siege. While there has been some r ecent indication that Tag-E will be called in the event of a future incident,   there needs to be ongoing involvement in both operations and intelligence.The consequences of ignoring Army tactical, intelligence and psyops capabilities have been reported on this blog in this  article: Lessons for Australia from Mumbai 26/11 & Paris 13/11: Ignore Army's Tag-E,and it will happen here NSW Police, under the leadership of Andrew Scipionie and Catherine Burns have already shown that they are incapable of dealing with terrorism related incidents, but as reported in September last year, former premier Mike Baird saw nothing wrong in letting Burns keep her job

by Ganesh Sahathevan For all intents and purposes, Najib as PM and FM is Bank Negara In 1998 Malaysia introduced  capital control rules that added to an already strict regime of capital controls. Those rules were introduced as a result of the USD 10 billion forex loss that Murad Khalid says Bank Negara suffered.Many would disagree and insist that the Asian Financial Crisis was the cause, but  as this writer has  explained, by 1998  Malaysia's forex reserves essentially non-existent. That being the case, Malaysia, being a capital dependent country,  has always had rules, today even more so, to ensure that foreign currency acquired via investment or borrowing is used in the country. Any departure from that rule required then and still requires the approval of the Finance Minister, who since 1998 has also been the Prime Minister. This type of use of US dollar borrowings ,even if it did not include that final transfer to PM Najib's own accounts, would not normally be allowed, and w

by Ganesh Sahathevan Some readers may not realize or have forgotten  that this was a very,very expensive campaign: To again paraphrase Bank Negara's response to this writer's queries in 1996,speak to Hardev who has the answers to your questions. END JAN 27 Murad Khalid is right,more than USD 10 B in cash was lost, and Najib's aide Hardev Kaur has the answers ,and should step forward with the truth of her role in the cover-up   by Ganesh Sahathevan DATUK HARDEV KAUR Datuk Hardev Kaur is special Officer in the Prime Minister's Office. She was Group Editor of The New Straits Times and Editor of Business Times. So refreshing to see this attempt at honesty from one so tainted by his central role in the banking scandals on the 90s,inlcuding Bank Bumi. Nevertheless, he is not wrong in what he has told the NST.It is true that the forex losses totalled more than USD 10 billion, but that must surely include the period 1994-1997 when one Anwar Ibrahim was in power,and Murad was hi