Re: Is there a trick behind the NEP agenda?

"alex®" <alexcsm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> Timmermans wrote:
> > "alex®" <alexcsm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:432cd047_2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > Yeah let other do it... very local again!!!
> >
> Am I detecting a note of belligerence here?? Just to remind you, I have
> provided a set of numbers and you disagree with them. So I ask you to
> produce your sets and you accuse me of asking you to do stuff so I can
> get out of doing it??? hahaha nice :)

They were not YOUR numbers... you borrowed a faulty set.

> > Number available are bullshit, obviously I am not in the position to
> > out with a fresh set... but it is
> >
> > "official numbers" come in one flawed set only, and they be copied
> > times. I know their numbers are incorrect, damn man, even a blind
> > can see that. Though it is lower for sure, me as a commoner am not able
> > provide an acurate number... neither are you for that matter. But then
> > again, you're naive enough to believe what you see, so for you it is ok.
> >
> People like the CIA would not use those numbers if they suspected they
> were highly unreliably. Nor would countless other institutions and
> countries for that matter.

Nobody would use those numbers if they had any alternative. A matter of how
you look at things.

> >
> >>>>It's weird, but you do remind me of Mahathir. You certainly have his
> >>>>of believing there's a conspiracy lurking in every corner. For
> >>>>during the 1997 financial crisis, foreign fund managers were pulling
> >>>>money out of Malaysia fast, and the situation was further exarcebated
> >>>>when Standards & Poor downgraded Malaysia's ratings. More funds went
> >>>>and Mahathir blasted them for 'unfairly potraying' Malaysia and said
> >>>>that the ratings could not be trusted. That was funny.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>From what you say, it turns out I'm not alone ;-)
> >>>
> >>>And I'm not talking about conspiracy, stop throwing crap on my lap... I
> >>>never mentioned such. Incorrect review is what I say!
> >>>You seem to have a constant need to provide words and thoughts for
> >
> > now
> >
> >>>how 'local' is that? Are you part of the propaganda machine??? It
> >
> > would
> >
> >>>prove me right by default!
> >>>
> >>
> >>It's not only GS's review that you have a problem with. Even the set of
> >>numbers about GDP per capita are unreliable according to you. Everything
> >>is rigged. Stop beating around the bush. You can't even choose a pool of
> >>countries to compare Malaysia with.
> >
> >
> > F*** you man, putting words in my mouth AGAIN!!
> Calm down, don't pop a vessel :) That is what you are saying, all the
> numbers available are bullshit.

What I write and what you read obviously are two different things! You
don't just live in a bubble, you're part of it, promoting it, defending it!

> >
> > As long as Malaysian number are manipulated there is little to choose
> > nothing to compare with... you want to compare... how about comparing to
> > countries ranking 20-25 spots lower! That in my view would just about
> > correct.
> >
> Again...your gut feelings. Dude your credibility is zilch. If every
> opinion on this forum is backed by nothing other than one's gut feelings
> we shouldn't bother. GS wants to protect it's client's interests. So the
> CIA and one of the world's leading investment houses are bullshit. Look
> in the mirror, do you see Mahathir staring back?

If everybody swalowed the same bullshit as provided by third parties, then
the word 'opinion' would no longer have a place in a dictionary. We would
not have a use for any groups or forums... communism to the max, a single
mind, a single voice...

My credibility is zilch? LOL... your bullshit is based on smoke blowns from
biased people. And uhm... so far I have retained more credibility as an
individual then Malaysia as a nation. You my friend should wake up and
smell the humus!

> > Do not refer to current numbers as I do not consider them valid.
> > is always doing good on paper, always...
> >
> > GET REAL!!!
> >
> But you can't provide any other facts to prove otherwise except your
> considerable gut feelings. *Yawn* catch ya some other time. It's obvious
> you are never ever going to come up with anything concrete.

I, a loner, a single person, relatively insignificant... you, no less...
hence the reason why there are numbers of a third party which you happen to
believe and I happen to find at best doubtfull. So be it mate...

As I said urlier, we agree to disagree... but that's about all we are going
to agree on.

You protect numbers thrown in your lap, I don't. Do I need to defend that?
Not at all, it's just my opinion! Should it stop me from expressing my
views? Nope! Do I ask for you to see it my way? No need! And all of that
goes vice versa as well!

At the very least we got to express each others thoughts, and that is what
matters in places like this. There's no need to agree! Ain't that great?

See you around buddy, until the next one!