That's the problem - like serba - bigger potential to trap bilises too

Can't move. Calvin is disposing

MAS 2.0 coming?

Don't leave the front seat. One long candle can reach 4.50!! Hawk eye

Over? Think sharks still want to play (nobody will jump from building at this level, right?)

Be patient. Wait for sharks to give signal - then only all in

When musangs are assigned to jaga reban, this is the end results: The staggering losses incurred by Felda in 2022, amounting to RM1 billion, nearly double the losses from the previous year, highlight the consequences of entrusting unworthy individuals with leadership roles. The auditor-general's report sheds light on the mismanagement and poor decision-making that have plagued Felda, ultimately leading to dire financial outcomes.

Firstly, the significant increase in losses reflects a systemic failure within the organization's leadership structure. When individuals lacking the necessary expertise and integrity are placed in positions of power, they may make misguided decisions that jeopardize the financial health and stability of the institution. This lack of competent leadership fosters an environment ripe for mismanagement and financial missteps.

Secondly, the mounting debt owed to external institutions underscores the repercussions of allowing individuals unfit for their roles to oversee crucial financial matters. Incompetent leadership can result in reckless spending, unsustainable borrowing practices, and failure to implement effective debt management strategies. As a result, Felda finds itself burdened with substantial debt obligations, further exacerbating its financial woes and hindering its ability to operate efficiently.

Furthermore, the slight decrease in debt owed from the previous year offers little consolation in the face of continued financial mismanagement. While the reduction may signal attempts to address the issue, it falls short of addressing the root causes of Felda's financial distress. Without fundamental reforms and competent leadership at the helm, the organization remains vulnerable to further losses and indebtedness in the future.

In conclusion, the alarming losses and debt accumulation experienced by Felda in 2022 underscore the dire consequences of entrusting unworthy individuals with leadership responsibilities. To safeguard the financial stability and prosperity of institutions like Felda, it is imperative to appoint qualified and ethical leaders who possess the expertise and integrity necessary to make sound decisions and steer the organization towards success. Failure to do so only perpetuates a cycle of mismanagement, losses, and indebtedness, ultimately compromising the institution's ability to fulfill its mandate and serve its stakeholders effectively.

Bye Apple888

Very little amount- can ignore. Don;t buy just for such a small gain in dividend. Share= high risk to lose capital for years

fundamentalism is detrimental to both the mental health cultivation and brain development of children and the unity, prosperity, and harmony of a country. Here's why:

Stifling Critical Thinking: Fundamentalism often promotes rigid adherence to dogma and discourages questioning or critical thinking. This stifles the intellectual curiosity and cognitive development of children, hindering their ability to analyze complex issues, form independent opinions, and engage in creative problem-solving. A healthy mental environment for children should encourage exploration, curiosity, and critical thinking skills, which are essential for their overall development.

Promoting Fear and Anxiety: Fundamentalist teachings often instill fear and anxiety in children by emphasizing punishment, judgment, and the concept of eternal damnation. This can have profound negative effects on their mental health, leading to feelings of guilt, shame, and inadequacy. Children raised in such environments may struggle with anxiety disorders, depression, and low self-esteem, hindering their overall well-being and hindering their ability to thrive.

Fostering Division and Intolerance: Fundamentalism tends to promote an "us vs. them" mentality, dividing communities along religious, ideological, or cultural lines. This fosters intolerance, bigotry, and prejudice, undermining social cohesion and unity within a country. Instead of celebrating diversity and embracing pluralism, fundamentalist ideologies promote exclusivity and hostility towards those who hold differing beliefs, exacerbating societal divisions and hindering efforts towards peace and harmony.

Undermining Social Progress: Fundamentalism often opposes progressive social values and human rights, such as gender equality, LGBTQ+ rights, and freedom of expression. By promoting regressive attitudes and discriminatory practices, fundamentalist ideologies impede the country's progress towards a more inclusive, equitable, and just society. This can lead to social unrest, political instability, and economic stagnation, hindering the country's overall prosperity and development.

Fueling Conflict and Violence: In extreme cases, fundamentalism can fuel extremism, terrorism, and violent conflict, posing a serious threat to national security and stability. Children raised in environments where violence is glorified or justified in the name of religion are at risk of being radicalized and recruited into extremist groups. This not only endangers their own lives but also undermines the safety and well-being of society as a whole.

In conclusion, fundamentalism poses significant risks to both the mental health cultivation and brain development of children and the unity, prosperity, and harmony of a country. By promoting closed-mindedness, fear, division, and intolerance, fundamentalist ideologies undermine the foundations of a healthy, inclusive society. Instead, fostering an environment that values critical thinking, tolerance, diversity, and social progress is essential for nurturing the well-being of children and building a more united, prosperous, and harmonious nation.

Fundamentalism is detrimental to both the mental health cultivation and brain development of children and the unity, prosperity, and harmony of a country. Here's why:

Stifling Critical Thinking: Fundamentalism often promotes rigid adherence to dogma and discourages questioning or critical thinking. This stifles the intellectual curiosity and cognitive development of children, hindering their ability to analyze complex issues, form independent opinions, and engage in creative problem-solving. A healthy mental environment for children should encourage exploration, curiosity, and critical thinking skills, which are essential for their overall development.

Promoting Fear and Anxiety: Fundamentalist teachings often instill fear and anxiety in children by emphasizing punishment, judgment, and the concept of eternal damnation. This can have profound negative effects on their mental health, leading to feelings of guilt, shame, and inadequacy. Children raised in such environments may struggle with anxiety disorders, depression, and low self-esteem, hindering their overall well-being and hindering their ability to thrive.

Fostering Division and Intolerance: Fundamentalism tends to promote an "us vs. them" mentality, dividing communities along religious, ideological, or cultural lines. This fosters intolerance, bigotry, and prejudice, undermining social cohesion and unity within a country. Instead of celebrating diversity and embracing pluralism, fundamentalist ideologies promote exclusivity and hostility towards those who hold differing beliefs, exacerbating societal divisions and hindering efforts towards peace and harmony.

Undermining Social Progress: Fundamentalism often opposes progressive social values and human rights, such as gender equality, LGBTQ+ rights, and freedom of expression. By promoting regressive attitudes and discriminatory practices, fundamentalist ideologies impede the country's progress towards a more inclusive, equitable, and just society. This can lead to social unrest, political instability, and economic stagnation, hindering the country's overall prosperity and development.

Fueling Conflict and Violence: In extreme cases, fundamentalism can fuel extremism, terrorism, and violent conflict, posing a serious threat to national security and stability. Children raised in environments where violence is glorified or justified in the name of religion are at risk of being radicalized and recruited into extremist groups. This not only endangers their own lives but also undermines the safety and well-being of society as a whole.

In conclusion, fundamentalism poses significant risks to both the mental health cultivation and brain development of children and the unity, prosperity, and harmony of a country. By promoting closed-mindedness, fear, division, and intolerance, fundamentalist ideologies undermine the foundations of a healthy, inclusive society. Instead, fostering an environment that values critical thinking, tolerance, diversity, and social progress is essential for nurturing the well-being of children and building a more united, prosperous, and harmonious nation.

Bilises must have the discipline to be patient when it is sideways- easy to lose $$$$$. Stay vigilant,maintain hawk eye and buy in when clearly bull run could earn consitently

Really kah?

Balian de Ibelin

Someone trying to Short YTLPower to hell today.

Really kah?

osted by Eagle77 > 17 hours ago | Report Abuse

Operator dumpin

if a breakout above the 78 sen immediate resistance happens, the counter should trend upwards and head for the 82 sen resistance, followed by the 90 sen mark.

Meanwhile, falling below the 75 sen immediate support will nullify the bullish setup

It's essential to approach these teachings with caution and provide children with a balanced and nuanced understanding of their religious heritage, emphasizing values of peace, tolerance, and respect for others. Encouraging critical thinking, open dialogue, and exposure to diverse perspectives can help children develop empathy, understanding, and appreciation for the richness of cultural and religious diversity in a pluralistic society. Additionally, promoting education about human rights, equality, and the importance of coexistence can empower children to become advocates for social harmony and unity.

Teachings of Exclusivity: Certain interpretations may convey the idea that one's religion is the only true faith, potentially leading to feelings of superiority or exclusivity among children of that faith, which could hinder their ability to embrace diversity and coexist peacefully with others.


EngineeringProfit

16,272 posts

Posted by EngineeringProfit > 2 minutes ago | Report Abuse

Teachings of Intolerance Towards Others: Some unhealthy verses may contain language that encourages intolerance or hostility towards individuals of other faiths or beliefs, instilling divisive attitudes in children and undermining efforts to promote understanding and respect for diversity.


EngineeringProfit

16,272 posts

Posted by EngineeringProfit > 1 minute ago | Report Abuse

Teachings of Discrimination: Certain teachings may imply or explicitly state that adherents of a particular religion are superior to those of other faiths, potentially fostering discriminatory attitudes among children and perpetuating social divisions based on religious identity.

It's essential to approach these teachings with caution and provide children with a balanced and nuanced understanding of their religious heritage, emphasizing values of peace, tolerance, and respect for others. Encouraging critical thinking, open dialogue, and exposure to diverse perspectives can help children develop empathy, understanding, and appreciation for the richness of cultural and religious diversity in a pluralistic society. Additionally, promoting education about human rights, equality, and the importance of coexistence can empower children to become advocates for social harmony and unity.

Teachings of Discrimination: Certain teachings may imply or explicitly state that adherents of a particular religion are superior to those of other faiths, potentially fostering discriminatory attitudes among children and perpetuating social divisions based on religious identity.

Teachings of Discrimination: Certain teachings may imply or explicitly state that adherents of a particular religion are superior to those of other faiths, potentially fostering discriminatory attitudes among children and perpetuating social divisions based on religious identity.

Teachings of Intolerance Towards Others: Some unhealthy verses may contain language that encourages intolerance or hostility towards individuals of other faiths or beliefs, instilling divisive attitudes in children and undermining efforts to promote understanding and respect for diversity.

Teachings of Intolerance Towards Others: Some unhealthy verses may contain language that encourages intolerance or hostility towards individuals of other faiths or beliefs, instilling divisive attitudes in children and undermining efforts to promote understanding and respect for diversity.

Teachings of Exclusivity: Certain interpretations may convey the idea that one's religion is the only true faith, potentially leading to feelings of superiority or exclusivity among children of that faith, which could hinder their ability to embrace diversity and coexist peacefully with others.

Teachings of Exclusivity: Certain interpretations may convey the idea that one's religion is the only true faith, potentially leading to feelings of superiority or exclusivity among children of that faith, which could hinder their ability to embrace diversity and coexist peacefully with others.

Advocating for the removal of the word and concept of "haram" in a multiracial society is essential for fostering inclusivity and reducing divisions based on religious beliefs. Instead, embracing the politically correct terminology of "legal vs. illegal" offers a more neutral and universally understandable framework, which promotes harmony and understanding among diverse communities.

1. **Promotion of Inclusivity**: Using terms like "halal vs. haram" inherently prioritizes one religious group's beliefs over others. This exclusivity can alienate members of different faiths or non-religious individuals within a multicultural society. By employing the terms "legal vs. illegal," the focus shifts from religious doctrine to universally applicable laws and regulations, fostering a sense of inclusion for all citizens regardless of their beliefs.

2. **Avoidance of Religious Bias**: The term "haram" carries strong religious connotations associated primarily with Islamic teachings. Its widespread use in public discourse may inadvertently perpetuate religious bias or favoritism, marginalizing individuals who do not adhere to Islamic beliefs. In contrast, using neutral terminology like "legal vs. illegal" ensures fairness and impartiality in addressing societal norms and regulations, free from religious bias.

3. **Clarity and Understanding**: While "halal vs. haram" may hold significance within the Islamic faith, its meaning may not be universally understood or accepted outside of Muslim communities. On the other hand, "legal vs. illegal" provides a clear and easily comprehensible framework for all members of society to understand and abide by laws and regulations governing various aspects of life, including food consumption.

4. **Facilitation of Integration**: Multiracial societies thrive on mutual respect, understanding, and integration among diverse cultural and religious groups. By adopting inclusive terminology such as "legal vs. illegal," we promote a shared sense of citizenship and belonging, facilitating greater social cohesion and harmony among all members of society.

5. **Recognition of Individual Choices**: Using terms like "food for Muslims or non-Muslims only" can inadvertently reinforce stereotypes and divisions based on religious identity. Embracing inclusive language acknowledges and respects individuals' personal choices and dietary preferences without imposing religious labels or restrictions.

In conclusion, advocating for the replacement of "haram" with "legal vs. illegal" in public discourse and embracing inclusive terminology regarding food consumption is crucial for promoting unity, inclusivity, and understanding in a multiracial society. By prioritizing neutrality, clarity, and respect for individual choices, we can build a more cohesive and harmonious community where all citizens feel valued and accepted.

.....if the society were to flourish

Advocating for the removal of the word and concept of "haram" in a multiracial society is essential for fostering inclusivity and reducing divisions based on religious beliefs. Instead, embracing the politically correct terminology of "legal vs. illegal" offers a more neutral and universally understandable framework, which promotes harmony and understanding among diverse communities.

1. **Promotion of Inclusivity**: Using terms like "halal vs. haram" inherently prioritizes one religious group's beliefs over others. This exclusivity can alienate members of different faiths or non-religious individuals within a multicultural society. By employing the terms "legal vs. illegal," the focus shifts from religious doctrine to universally applicable laws and regulations, fostering a sense of inclusion for all citizens regardless of their beliefs.

2. **Avoidance of Religious Bias**: The term "haram" carries strong religious connotations associated primarily with Islamic teachings. Its widespread use in public discourse may inadvertently perpetuate religious bias or favoritism, marginalizing individuals who do not adhere to Islamic beliefs. In contrast, using neutral terminology like "legal vs. illegal" ensures fairness and impartiality in addressing societal norms and regulations, free from religious bias.

3. **Clarity and Understanding**: While "halal vs. haram" may hold significance within the Islamic faith, its meaning may not be universally understood or accepted outside of Muslim communities. On the other hand, "legal vs. illegal" provides a clear and easily comprehensible framework for all members of society to understand and abide by laws and regulations governing various aspects of life, including food consumption.

4. **Facilitation of Integration**: Multiracial societies thrive on mutual respect, understanding, and integration among diverse cultural and religious groups. By adopting inclusive terminology such as "legal vs. illegal," we promote a shared sense of citizenship and belonging, facilitating greater social cohesion and harmony among all members of society.

5. **Recognition of Individual Choices**: Using terms like "food for Muslims or non-Muslims only" can inadvertently reinforce stereotypes and divisions based on religious identity. Embracing inclusive language acknowledges and respects individuals' personal choices and dietary preferences without imposing religious labels or restrictions.

In conclusion, advocating for the replacement of "haram" with "legal vs. illegal" in public discourse and embracing inclusive terminology regarding food consumption is crucial for promoting unity, inclusivity, and understanding in a multiracial society. By prioritizing neutrality, clarity, and respect for individual choices, we can build a more cohesive and harmonious community where all citizens feel valued and accepted.

Advocating for the removal of the word and concept of "haram" in a multiracial society is essential for fostering inclusivity and reducing divisions based on religious beliefs. Instead, embracing the politically correct terminology of "legal vs. illegal" offers a more neutral and universally understandable framework, which promotes harmony and understanding among diverse communities.

1. **Promotion of Inclusivity**: Using terms like "halal vs. haram" inherently prioritizes one religious group's beliefs over others. This exclusivity can alienate members of different faiths or non-religious individuals within a multicultural society. By employing the terms "legal vs. illegal," the focus shifts from religious doctrine to universally applicable laws and regulations, fostering a sense of inclusion for all citizens regardless of their beliefs.

2. **Avoidance of Religious Bias**: The term "haram" carries strong religious connotations associated primarily with Islamic teachings. Its widespread use in public discourse may inadvertently perpetuate religious bias or favoritism, marginalizing individuals who do not adhere to Islamic beliefs. In contrast, using neutral terminology like "legal vs. illegal" ensures fairness and impartiality in addressing societal norms and regulations, free from religious bias.

3. **Clarity and Understanding**: While "halal vs. haram" may hold significance within the Islamic faith, its meaning may not be universally understood or accepted outside of Muslim communities. On the other hand, "legal vs. illegal" provides a clear and easily comprehensible framework for all members of society to understand and abide by laws and regulations governing various aspects of life, including food consumption.

4. **Facilitation of Integration**: Multiracial societies thrive on mutual respect, understanding, and integration among diverse cultural and religious groups. By adopting inclusive terminology such as "legal vs. illegal," we promote a shared sense of citizenship and belonging, facilitating greater social cohesion and harmony among all members of society.

5. **Recognition of Individual Choices**: Using terms like "food for Muslims or non-Muslims only" can inadvertently reinforce stereotypes and divisions based on religious identity. Embracing inclusive language acknowledges and respects individuals' personal choices and dietary preferences without imposing religious labels or restrictions.

In conclusion, advocating for the replacement of "haram" with "legal vs. illegal" in public discourse and embracing inclusive terminology regarding food consumption is crucial for promoting unity, inclusivity, and understanding in a multiracial society. By prioritizing neutrality, clarity, and respect for individual choices, we can build a more cohesive and harmonious community where all citizens feel valued and accepted.

Advocating for the removal of the word and concept of "haram" in a multiracial society is essential for fostering inclusivity and reducing divisions based on religious beliefs. Instead, embracing the politically correct terminology of "legal vs. illegal" offers a more neutral and universally understandable framework, which promotes harmony and understanding among diverse communities.

1. **Promotion of Inclusivity**: Using terms like "halal vs. haram" inherently prioritizes one religious group's beliefs over others. This exclusivity can alienate members of different faiths or non-religious individuals within a multicultural society. By employing the terms "legal vs. illegal," the focus shifts from religious doctrine to universally applicable laws and regulations, fostering a sense of inclusion for all citizens regardless of their beliefs.

2. **Avoidance of Religious Bias**: The term "haram" carries strong religious connotations associated primarily with Islamic teachings. Its widespread use in public discourse may inadvertently perpetuate religious bias or favoritism, marginalizing individuals who do not adhere to Islamic beliefs. In contrast, using neutral terminology like "legal vs. illegal" ensures fairness and impartiality in addressing societal norms and regulations, free from religious bias.

3. **Clarity and Understanding**: While "halal vs. haram" may hold significance within the Islamic faith, its meaning may not be universally understood or accepted outside of Muslim communities. On the other hand, "legal vs. illegal" provides a clear and easily comprehensible framework for all members of society to understand and abide by laws and regulations governing various aspects of life, including food consumption.

4. **Facilitation of Integration**: Multiracial societies thrive on mutual respect, understanding, and integration among diverse cultural and religious groups. By adopting inclusive terminology such as "legal vs. illegal," we promote a shared sense of citizenship and belonging, facilitating greater social cohesion and harmony among all members of society.

5. **Recognition of Individual Choices**: Using terms like "food for Muslims or non-Muslims only" can inadvertently reinforce stereotypes and divisions based on religious identity. Embracing inclusive language acknowledges and respects individuals' personal choices and dietary preferences without imposing religious labels or restrictions.

In conclusion, advocating for the replacement of "haram" with "legal vs. illegal" in public discourse and embracing inclusive terminology regarding food consumption is crucial for promoting unity, inclusivity, and understanding in a multiracial society. By prioritizing neutrality, clarity, and respect for individual choices, we can build a more cohesive and harmonious community where all citizens feel valued and accepted.

The research house said that if a breakout above the 78 sen immediate resistance happens, the counter should trend upwards and head for the 82 sen resistance, followed by the 90 sen mark.

Meanwhile, falling below the 75 sen immediate support will nullify the bullish setup

No need to be too early to arrive in party. Sharks now main acah acah saja. In-out in-out. Be patient.

Yes, mentioned in the copycat version of 600AD too. But, the problem is ancient historians such as Josephus and Tacitus, who wrote about events in the Roman Empire during the first century CE, do not record any widespread darkness covering the land during the crucifixion period. Additionally, there are no records from other civilizations or regions of the world that report such an event occurring simultaneously with the crucifixion.

The darkness had never occured. And the three days reflected the period before resurrection

It was an astro-myth code book after all. Three Days of Darkness: the story of his death and resurrection are symbolic of the sun's disappearance for three days during the winter solstice. Just as the sun appears to "die" as it reaches its lowest point in the sky before gradually rising again, his crucifixion and entombment for three days can be viewed as a metaphorical representation of this celestial phenomenon during the period of sun worshipping days.

It was an astro-myth code book after all. Three Days of Darkness: the story of his death and resurrection are symbolic of the sun's disappearance for three days during the winter solstice. Just as the sun appears to "die" as it reaches its lowest point in the sky before gradually rising again, his crucifixion and entombment for three days can be viewed as a metaphorical representation of this celestial phenomenon during the period of sun worshipping days.

Despite over 4 billion gullible blind followers got exploited and what the initial and subsequent medieval scriptures claim, the lack of reliable contemporary evidence and the presence of alternative explanations cast doubt on the historicity of Jsus as an actual person who walked among humans.


EngineeringProfit

16,253 posts

Posted by EngineeringProfit > 13 minutes ago | Report Abuse

The claim about darkness covering the land during his crucifixion is indeed primarily found only within related dogmatic texts. These texts describe a supernatural event where darkness fell over the land for three hours during the crucifixion.

From a historical perspective, it's essential to consider contemporary records outside of bblical texts to corroborate such an extraordinary event. However, there is a lack of corroborating evidence from other parts of the world or contemporary historical records.

Ancient historians such as Josephus and Tacitus, who wrote about events in the Roman Empire during the first century CE, do not mention any widespread darkness covering the land during the crucifixion period. Additionally, there are no records from other civilizations or regions of the world that report such an event occurring simultaneously with the crucifixion.

This absence of corroborating evidence outside of bblical texts raises questions about the historical reliability of the claim regarding the darkness covering the land. Without additional contemporary sources or archaeological evidence to support the bblical account, it becomes challenging to verify the occurrence of such a supernatural phenomenon.

Therefore, while the claim may find support within bblical texts and among believers, from a historical perspective, it clearly lacks external validation and cannot be confirmed through contemporary historical records from other parts of the world.

No, just that there had never been such this as an actual person who walked among humans despite being believed by over 4 billion ppl worldwide

The claim about darkness covering the land during his crucifixion is indeed primarily found only within related dogmatic texts. These texts describe a supernatural event where darkness fell over the land for three hours during the crucifixion.

From a historical perspective, it's essential to consider contemporary records outside of bblical texts to corroborate such an extraordinary event. However, there is a lack of corroborating evidence from other parts of the world or contemporary historical records.

Ancient historians such as Josephus and Tacitus, who wrote about events in the Roman Empire during the first century CE, do not mention any widespread darkness covering the land during the crucifixion period. Additionally, there are no records from other civilizations or regions of the world that report such an event occurring simultaneously with the crucifixion.

This absence of corroborating evidence outside of bblical texts raises questions about the historical reliability of the claim regarding the darkness covering the land. Without additional contemporary sources or archaeological evidence to support the bblical account, it becomes challenging to verify the occurrence of such a supernatural phenomenon.

Therefore, while the claim may find support within bblical texts and among believers, from a historical perspective, it clearly lacks external validation and cannot be confirmed through contemporary historical records from other parts of the world.

Still, despite over 4 billion gullible blind followers got exploited and what the initial and subsequent medieval scriptures claim, the lack of reliable contemporary evidence and the presence of alternative explanations cast doubt on the historicity of Jsus as an actual person who walked among humans.

Over 4 billion gullible blind followers got exploited at the end. Despite what the initial and subsequent medieval scriptures claim, the lack of reliable contemporary evidence and the presence of alternative explanations cast doubt on the historicity of Jsus as an actual person who walked among humans.

Yup, from Pudar Harapan to Putus Harapan

Sad. Sad

RIP

Deepest condolences to u

1 or 2 sen dividend kah?

RIP

No use. Can't go up bcos every bilis hold over 1 mil stock here.

Even shark like Paktua73 has to give up pushing. Bilises have eaten into the sharks' portion!!!

Think bit early- operator has to take care of ytlp too. Those sold at peak, can hold FOC tickets and watch at the front seat

And watch like Dan Zanger for the next ride, if any real break out

Volatility is normal - for bilises to have the discipline to take back their capital and leave behind free tickts