Manila provocation blasted; Philippine Newspaper: Huangyan Island belongs to China

Photo taken on May 9, 2012 shows deep-water drilling rig CNOOC 981 in the South China Sea, south China, May 9, 2012. China's first deep-water drilling rig CNOOC 981 started operations in the South China Sea at 9: 38 am on Wednesday, marking "a substantial step" made by the country's deep-sea oil industry. The sixth-generation semi-submersible CNOOC 981 began drilling in a sea area 320 km southeast of Hong Kong at a water depth of 1,500 meters, according to China National Offshore Oil Corp. (CNOOC), the country's largest offshore oil producer. Photo: Xinhua

China Wednesday accused the Philippines of instigating demonstrations against Beijing, urging Manila not to further damage bilateral relations by provoking public sentiment over the two sides' spat in the South China Sea.

"We have noted that the Philippine side has repeatedly made strongly worded remarks about the Huangyan Island standoff, which have provoked public feelings and severely undermined the atmosphere of bilateral relations," foreign ministry spokesman Hong Lei said.

"The Philippine side also instigated demonstrations, both inside and outside the country, against China, which have aroused strong responses and concern among Chinese people living around the world," Hong added.

The spokesman said there is no change in China's position on resolving the current tensions through diplomatic efforts, urging Manila to seriously respond to Beijing's concerns and return to the right track.

Loida Nicolas-Lewis, a Filipino-American businesswoman, has called on all Filipinos around the world to mount demonstrations in front of Chinese embassies and consulates at 12 pm on Friday.

According to Reuters, civil society and political groups with links to Philippine President Benigno Aquino III's political allies plan to take to the streets on Friday to "protest the Chinese presence" in waters near Huangyan Island.

The Chinese embassy in Manila has issued a safety alert, advising Chinese nationals to enhance safety awareness, avoid going out and stay away from protesters.

Ctrip.com International Ltd, a leading online travel service provider in China, decided to suspend trips to the Philippines Wednesday, citing safety risks of tours as tensions over Huangyan Island escalate.

A Global Times correspondent in Manila said the Chinese communities there are calm despite Friday's looming protest.

"Issues concerning sovereignty are non-negotiable for China. The Philippines took China's restraint for granted and kept staging provocations," a researcher surnamed Ma with the Southeast Asian Institute of the Guangxi Academy of Social Sciences, said.

"The planned global protest against Chinese embassies has shown Manila's intention to internationalize and complicate the issue. Beijing will lose its patience if Manila doesn't back off," Ma said.

Shen Shishun, a director of the Department for Asia-Pacific Security and Cooperation under the China Institute of International Studies, told the Global Times that stirring public emotions over Huangyan Island is a scheme by Aquino to shift domestic anger away from a gloomy economy.

"The standoff is caused by the Aquino administration. Further development of the matter depends on moves taken by the Philippine government," Shen said.

According to the Philippine Daily Inquirer, the Philippine military reported that the number of Chinese vessels in the waters off Huangyan Island has increased to 33 from 14 last week, while the Philippines has two vessels in the area.

The paper said the Chinese vessels include three big ships, namely fishery law enforcement ship Yuzheng-310 and maritime surveillance ships Haijian-75 and Haijian-81. It said these ships are denying Filipino fishermen access to waters off Huangyan Island.

Also Wednesday, Philippine Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin said he had received assurances during talks in Washington last week that the US would protect Manila from attacks in the South China Sea.

Gazmin said US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta stressed they were not taking sides in the dispute, but assured him the US would honor a 1951 mutual defense treaty.

"The Philippines has always wanted Washington to help it in a conflict with China, but the US won't do so due to its own national interests," Shen said, adding that Manila's attempts to bring Washington on board shows its anxiety and fears over the tensions.

Meanwhile, China's quality watchdog Wednesday ordered intensified quarantines on fruit imports from the Philippines.

The General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine said harmful insects or bacteria have been found in pineapples, bananas and other fruit imported from Southeast Asia since last year, and Chinese authorities have asked the Philippine side to make improvements.

The Philippine Daily Inquirer quoted Stephen Antig, president of the Pilipino Banana Growers and Exporters Association, as saying that the tighter rules imposed by the biggest buyer of Philippine Cavendish bananas have sent jitters through the local industry.

"The Philippine economy will worsen if China, a major trade partner, reduces the import of agricultural products," Shen said. "Such an import ban will not hurt China because the Philippine products are not irreplaceable."

Xu Tianran and agencies contributed to this story

Related Articles and Posts:

Trust needed for joint oil exploitation 

China is willing to hold talks with the Philippines on joint oil and gas exploitation in the South China Sea if Manila shows due sincerity, the foreign ministry said Wednesday in Beijing.

Peace will be a miracle if provocation lasts
Right now, Manila is keen to stir up the situation with its public opinion showing an overzealous nationalistic tendency, and the current administration is exploiting it to cement its rule. Under the circumstances, the Philippines needs to be taught a lesson for its aggressive nationalism.

Deep-water drilling starts
The nation's first indigenous deep-water drilling rig, the CNOOC 981, will begin operations Wednesday in an area in the South China Sea 320 kilometers southeast of Hong Kong.

Huangyan white paper a needed step
The standoff between China and the Philippines over Huangyan Island is still going on. The Philippines has threatened to internationalize the territorial disputes by bringing international arbitration against China.

South China Sea Conflict

Philippine Newspaper: "Huangyan Island belongs to China"

Play Video

The Philippine Newspaper "Manila Standard Today" has released an article titled " It belongs to China" written by author Victor N. Arches II.

The Filipino author looks at evidence and international documents, saying that Huangyan Island has been an integral part of China's territory since ancient times. Recounting his motive in writing the article, Arches says he aims to educate the Philippines on the reality of the situation, versus what the Philippines media is promoting. Let’s take a look.

In the article, the author says that Huangyan Island has been a part of China’s territory since ancient times. Chinese fishermen, from both the Mainland and Taiwan, have used the island for many years.
"The Scarborough Shoal, ( Huangyan Island) does belong to China which discovered it and drew it in a map as early as 1279 during the Yuan Dynasty."



The old maps relied upon by the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs were drawn up only in 1820, 541 years after China's.

'being relied upon by the Philippine Department of Foreign Affairs in its spurious claim on the same territory were drawn up only in 1820, or 541 years after China’s."

Arches said China organized many scientific expeditions around the island in the late 1970s. In 1980, a stone marker marks China’s scientific expedition was installed by China on the South Rock. However, the Philippines removed it without authority in 1997.

" In the late 1970s, China organized many scientific expeditions in the Shoal and around that area. In fact, in 1980, a stone marker reading “South China Sea Scientific Expedition” was installed by China on the South Rock."

"This Chinese marker was removed, without authority, by the Philippines in 1997. "

He adds that all official maps published by the Philippines until the 1990 excluded Huangyan Island from its territorial boundaries. But an act approved by the Philippine government in 1961 stopped the Philippines from the claim.

"All official maps published by the Philippines until the 1990s excluded both the Spratlys and Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island) from its territorial boundaries."

"Republic Act No. 3046, passed by our Congress and approved in 1961, stopped us from our claim."
China holds three international treaties in support of its claim over the territories in question... all limiting Philippine territorial limits to the 118th degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich.

"1898 Treaty of Paris between the US and Spain, the 1900 Treaty of Washington between Spain and the US, and the 1930 Treaty between Great Britain and the US, all limiting Philippine territorial limits to the 118th degree meridian of longitude east of Greenwich. "

Arches say the basis of the Philippine claim is restricted to proximity, relying solely on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. He said that even if it were considered a "law", it cannot be made to take effect retroactively.

"On the other hand, the basis of the Philippine claim is restricted to proximity, relying solely on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea."

Arches believed there is no need to internationalize the Huangyan Island issue.

He said ASEAN is remaining neutral on the dispute and the US has also declared it will not take sides.

Related stories/post

• Crossover: Analysis on China's Huangyan Island 2012-05-10
• It belongs to China: Philippine media 2012-05-09
• China is prepared for escalation of Huangyan Island incident 2012-05-08
• China again summons Philippine diplomat over Huangyan Island incident 
• Tensions in South China Sea: US won't take sides, US-Philippines Naval drills, students attack US embassy
• Who owns the South China Sea islets in the eyes of the world?
• China's warns US of Confrontation over South China Sea  

LinkedIn's Growth Continues: Fueling the Corporate Talent Machine

 Another amazing quarter from LinkedIn: revenues of $188.5 Million, up 101%, with the “hiring solutions” business now driving $102.6 Million or 54% of company revenue. LinkedIn’s revenues in the corporate recruiting market are now larger than Taleo (just acquired by Oracle for $1.9 Billion), SuccessFactors (just acquired by SAP for $3.4 billion), Kenexa, and nearly every other software company which sells recruiting solutions.

Let me highlight how LinkedIn is “fueling the corporate talent machine.”

LinkedIn has become the “must have” in corporate recruiting and is expanding its footprint.

With more than 161 million professional users in its network, LinkedIn is now the “must-have” tool for corporate recruiters around the world. The company’s “hiring solutions” business continues to deliver innovative products which leverage the data in the LinkedIn network for corporate and contract recruiters.

These products include:

• Highly effective job placement ads (recruiters tell me LinkedIn ads generate 2-3X the quality of candidates of other ad placements)
• Licensing  LinkedIn Recruiter, the recruiter’s “secret weapon” which lets corporate HR managers and staffing professionals search, find, and source candidates
• Branded career pages – an offering that lets companies of all sizes create a highly personalized candidate portal within the LinkedIn garden of  professionals
• Talent Pipeline, a new feature set within LinkedIn Recruiter which lets recruiters manage the entire process of “candidate relationship management” – a hot new application area within corporate HR.

And the company has much more to come.

The Corporate Talent Acquisition Market


Corporate recruiters are in a war for talent. Lloyds of London’s 2011 risk assessment survey points out that “Talent and Skills Shortages” are the #2 rated risk among 100 business risks today (following the risk of “losing customers.”)

Despite the high unemployment rate in most countries, companies tell us over and over that there is a paradoxical mismatch between demand and supply of skills. And great candidates are not looking for work.

And the cost of sourcing and recruiting is very high.

The average employer spends over $3500 per hire on all areas of recruiting (from our Talent Acquisition Factbook®), and the spending is much higher in executive positions. This means the entire US marketplace for talent acquisition is around $130 billion by our estimates, so LinkedIn still has a lot of whitespace to cover.

I just finished meeting with the head of corporate recruiting for Pfizer (who is on LinkedIn’s advisory council) and she reinforced that LinkedIn’s network is truly global and has become one of their primary tool for finding great candidates.

Pioneering the shift from cloud-based software to BigData applications.

LinkedIn is benefiting from something else here. The company understands that its future relies in leveraging BigData and the power of the network over the existing markets for cloud-based HR or talent acquisition software.

Raj de Datta describes the shift well in his TechCrunch article “The Rise of BigData Apps and the Fall of SaaS.” The next big thing is data. BigData.

I’m not ready to write-off enterprise software businesses by any means, but ultimately cloud-based applications do become somewhat commoditized. Now that most major applications are “in the cloud,” differentiation comes down to architecture, features, and level of integration with other cloud-based systems.

If you’re an HR manager, can you really tell a huge difference between Oracle, SAP, Taleo, SuccessFactors, Cornerstone, SumTotal, and PeopleFluent? Workday claims they are the “next big thing” – but ultimately even new products like Workday become replaceable. This year I’ve talked with at least a dozen companies who are coming up for renewal on their cloud-based software and they are very willing to switch platforms. So the future of cloud-based software is wrapping all these great applications in rich, highly-integrated data.

A great example of this is trend is Salesforce.com.  We are a big user, and it always bothered me that we have to clean and maintain our own database of accounts when every other Salesforce customer is doing the same thing. Voila. Salesforce acquires Jigsaw, and now Data.com is born. You can now buy data to go along with your new CRM system.

Data, unlike software, becomes increasingly valuable as you collect more. In the enterprise Human Resources market companies are dying to get more data – data about candidates, data about workforce skills and demographics, data about salaries, and data about their own brand. Once this data is integrated with your cloud-based application, the value to a client skyrockets.

And even when you do buy your brand-new cloud-based applications for talent management, you still need to load them with data in order to make them work. Not only do you have to load all types of data about your employees, you also have to load job profiles, assessments, training modules, and dozens of other types of third party data. As HCM software companies mature, they will start building and adding their own data products to their offering.

Companies in the HR space are starting to figure this out. SHL, a leading global assessment provider recently launched its new Talent Analytics ”big data application.” This new platform gives customers access to tens of millions of assessments to compare candidates against the market and their competitors.

Data is sticky, proprietary, and ever-increasing in value.

The acquisition of Slideshare drives even greater data value – fueling both memberships and recruiting revenue.

LinkedIn also announced the acquisition of SlideShare, a great little company that has become the “YouTube” of corporate presentations. Slideshare is an addictive application that encourages you to share your best slide sets with others.

Not only does Slideshare further ignite LinkedIn’s membership business by extending the data people can add to their profiles, it also brings tremendous value to the corporate recruiting segment.

Think about this: Slideshare is a vast database of knowledge and expertise, all published through Powerpoint presentations that are easy to view, download, and share. Some of the most powerful thinkers and practitioners in all industries publish their deep expertise in SlideShare, and the content is trivially easy to find and view.

Once Slideshare is fully integrated into LinkedIn, we can expect the company to link data about slides to data about people.  (The company claims that there are already 9 million content uploads and we can expect that to explode.)

Every time an individual uploads one of their favorite Powerpoint decks their “profile” becomes more valuable to others. And since people can “like” and “comment” on slide sets, LinkedIn can start to see who the real experts are throughout the network.

Imagine the power of using this information to assess someone’s skills and experience. By looking at the traffic and ratings of an individual’s slides, and the relative “authority” of those who link and recommend these slides, LinkedIn can create one of the most powerful expertise-networks in the world.  The company has been working away on its “skills” functionality for a few years (look at the “skills” application under the “beta” link). This will further ignite LinkedIn’s ability to characterize and understand who the real experts are.

Why is skills information so valuable? Because when recruiters search for candidates, one of the most important challenges they face is “finding the right skills.” Companies pay search firms tens of thousands of dollars to find the best highly-skilled candidate. Putting more “skills-related” information into LinkedIn creates a new measure of authority and expertise.

(Skills have become the new currency of success. While experience and raw talent still matter, our research shows that jobs are becoming more and more specialized every year, so deep skills are what makes you succeed.  Read “The End of a Job as you Know It” for more details. )

Plus, of course, Slideshare dramatically increases the amount of information each LinkedIn user can upload – making the whole network far more valuable for individuals and members.

By the way, I noticed that LinkedIn recently removed several features from its free membership service (the ability to see who clicked on your profile, for example). Every time the company adds a new type of data-driven content, LinkedIn can come up with new, higher-value membership packages as well.

LinkedIn is really firing on all cylinders.  Watch the company continue to grow as it “fuels the corporate talent machine.”

I would expect LinkedIn’s hiring solutions segment to continue its growth as a percentage of revenue in the coming quarters. And with little competition in the BigData market for candidates, we should see this growth accelerate as the economy picks up steam.

By  Josh Bersin, Forbes Contributor

Newscribe : get free news in real time

America, a "Generation of Sissies"

The “elephant in the room”— one big question in the minds of so many Americans is—“Why has the middle class in America lost so much ground, and when will it recover to earn better wages (and close the gap between the top earners and the middle class)?”   The answers are brutally simple:  ”Because America’s middle class became non-competitive globally,” and, “Not until American middle class workers—and the kind of work they do—become globally competitive again”   There are two huge problems facing the America in the future:  one is demographic, the other is cultural.

America (Photo credit: acb)

1)  “Baby Boomers” are retiring from the work force at the rate of 10,000 per day, and will do so for 17 years.  Most of them don’t have enough pension or 401(k) assets to support retirement for their life expectancy (15-20 years).  Too few employers will hire these older folks, with their potential problems of age—reduced stamina and more health-related problems (and higher health care costs).

2) In recent decades, American parents have raised a “Generation of Sissies”—of spoiled, lazy, pampered and over-rated youth—who are highly educated, but in things that the world doesn’t value very much (and thus won’t pay for).  The top 25% may be as good, as bright, as motivated as ever, and will likely be as successful as ever.   The vast majority of this generation consists of formally educated, but spoiled, soft post-adolescents, who will struggle to be self-sustaining as adults.  Because of this, they will not be able to support the massive wave of retired “Boomers,” who will be going broke in their later years.  In eras past, the elderly were supported by the coming younger generation(s).  Those days are gone.

Members of this “Generation of Sissies” have been the victims of being coddled, babied, pampered, misled, misguided, and under-educated so badly that their “take care of me” upbringing cannot be sustained as they move into adulthood.   The parents, who did this, also share in the responsibility for the failure of America’s educational system.

I won’t lay all the “blame” for these failures on American youth—although they have been willing accomplices.  Parents and educators failed to prepare them for adult life in the cold harsh world, and where they must compete for gainful employment.  Then the youth chose easy and fun majors in college; not the ones in that are in demand by employers.  Thus they can’t find jobs, or certainly not good paying jobs.

For too long, American parents have also abdicated the responsibilities for educating and raising their children to a cadre of teachers and educational institutions ill suited for the task at hand.  Parents used to prepare children to take care of themselves—sort of an apprenticeship in becoming an adult.  Along the way, they used to teach them, and demand of them, that they learn critical personal skills, and useful, responsible habits—like earning your own way in life.  Not any more.

Now, because of globalization the jobs have gone to wherever qualified workers will do them for the least pay.  American workers have fallen behind global competitors.  Thus, the American middle class, now and for the foreseeable future, will have to “play catch up” —learning new skills and how to apply them—and then employers will have to regain the work that provides the jobs.  Otherwise, the middle class will continue to languish with subpar wages—at least until it becomes competitive again, if that ever happens.  The only part of the middle class with growth prospects are employees of new, small businesses that grow–when they are not stifled by an oppressive government regulations.

Worse yet, is the untimeliness of this “Generation of Sissies,” who think that there are no winners or losers.  They learned this because everyone got rewarded just for participating. Trophies no longer represented hard work and winning to them.  Success meant just being involved and  “showing up”—and sometimes, not even that.  News flash for Americans of this Generation of Sissies: In the cold, harsh world of 21^st century global business there ARE winners and losers—and YOU are losing!

The “Generation of Sissies was victimized by too-busy parents, who abdicated their responsibilities, and tried to pass them off onto schools and teachers.  The teachers were not prepared to handle these new responsibilities.   Add to this the expectations that have been created: “free meals” (government funded, means “free”) that go far beyond the old school lunches; “free transportation” (or being driven to school);  “free extracurricular activities,” and much more.   And for this, all they had to do was“show up.”  Even grades are no longer a dose of reality.  Kinder words replace letter grades, to soften the truth of impending mediocrity.

Schools now teach “softer studies” (some of which used to be taught at home by parents) make up over 1/3 of total credits: “21st century life,” or “career-technical education, or “health, safety, & physical education,” or “visual & performing arts,” and “language arts literacy.”  Many students can’t write a grammatically correct sentence, and some don’t even see the point in learning to write (cursive) at all.  They use Text-messages and Tweets.   Signatures are nearly obsolete.

Schools still require a modicum of Math and Science, but not enough to meet todays employment demands.  In many cases, one 3-credit course (out of 110 credits) is offered on financial, economic, business, and entrepreneurial topics. Teachers are not held to the highest standards either, since doing so would require compensating the best ones more, and removing the worst ones—and teachers’ unions (and tenure) simply won’t allow that.  Today’s youth learn that being late, or absent isn’t so bad, because there is always an “excuse.”  But when they get in the world of work, employers expect employees to show up, on time, every day, and actually work all day.

Then parents pay a fortune (instead of putting it away for retirement) for college because it used to be a sure path to a decent job  (Now students graduate deeply in debt—over $1 Trillion and rising).  A degree in the arts or humanities may have once been the ticket to a job, but it’s not any more!   The youth of today and the adults of tomorrow simply have not been educated in the reality, the necessary skills and the knowledge they need to be competitive and self-sufficient.  Many do not have a clear understanding of how much hard work and  commitment they must invest to ensure their own future.

Too many people  feel sorry for these “underachievers,” even though part of the failure is their own fault.   The “Occupy movement” is filled with members of this “Generation of Sissies.”  They expect someone to “take care of them” and give them what they cannot or are unprepared to earn for themselves.   Who has what that they want?  The very people who worked hard to get a good education, studied, learned, applied themselves and learned to compete.


There will be negative comments about my title: “Generation of Sissies”—as being demeaning.  These comments will come mostly from the very same segment of society that helped create these problems—and still condones them.  To them I say, “Prove me wrong.”  Right now, the results confirm what I have written.  Until America puts the onus for education back onto the people where it belongs—first on youth and their parents, and next on quality schools and good teachers—the American middle class is doomed to remain stuck where it is.  Any other outcome is a delusion.

Can these problems be fixed?  Yes, but it took an entire generation or more to create them, so the fix will be slow and painful–as it is proving to be right now.   There is an even larger question.  It is not, ” WILL AMERICA COMPETE in the global economy of the 21^st century?  It is, “DO AMERICANS HAVE THE WILL TO COMPETE?   Will Americans take the necessary actions to make themselves and future generations competitive.  We can only hope that the answer to this question is YES!

By  John Mariotti, Forbes Contributor
John Mariotti is an internationally known executive and an award-winning author. His newest book, co-authored with D. M. Lukas, Hope is NOT a Strategy: Leadership Lessons from the Obama Presidency is available now at www.amazon.com  in paperback and Kindle, and in other e-book formats at www.smashwords.com 
Newscribe : get free news in real time

American mounting student loans a 'debt bomb' waiting to explode! Inside America’s Student Loan Bubble!

It’s a vicious cycle. Many families in this country cannot afford the skyrocketing cost of higher education without student loans. But many graduates cannot find a job and cannot pay off the loans. As a result, they wind up in a much deeper hole (as the interest and collection fees accrue) with no way out.

Student loan debt in the U.S. now totals more than $1 trillion. That’s more than all the outstanding credit card debt in the country.

A recent report by the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys found that both students and parents are borrowing at record rates.

College seniors who graduated with student loans in 2010 owed an average of $25,250, up five percent from the previous year. Parents had an average of $34,000 in student loans for their children. The report says the number of these parental loans has jumped 75 percent since 2005-2006.

“These are enormous numbers,” says Ike Shulman, a bankruptcy attorney in San Jose, Calif.  “They’re basically setting us up for having a large number of fellow citizens become economically non-functional for the rest of their adult lives.”

Growing numbers of people are being crushed by this debt -- unable to pay and unable to get relief. A recent nationwide survey of bankruptcy attorneys by NACBA found that most (81 percent) had seen a spike in the number of people with student loan debt looking for help. But in most cases, there is nothing a lawyer can do.

Current law makes it almost impossible to discharge student loan debt through bankruptcy. And unlike other unsecured debt, there is no statute of limitations on student loans. Lenders can pursue borrowers to the grave.

“It’s not fair and it needs to be corrected,” says NACBA president William Brewer. “It is a debt bomb that could cripple our society.”

The association’s report says the country faces a serious economic threat from this growing mountain of student debt, one that could be every bit as devastating as the mortgage meltdown.

“This will be a drag on the economy for the foreseeable future,” warns John Roa, an attorney with the National Consumer Law Center and NACBA’s vice president.

It’s a problem for students and parents who co-signed loans Dave Ingham, a disabled Vietnam veteran who lives in Minneapolis, fears he could lose his savings and his house because he co-signed student loans -- now in default -- for his son. Ingham is being sued by collectors.

His son Shannon has been unable to find work since October 2009. He’s now been diagnosed with acute anxiety disorder and depression. He’s still looking for work, but his father says the loan defaults keep him from getting hired.

“It seems that whenever he comes close to a job interview, they run a credit check, see his loan defaults and the interview does not proceed,” Ingham said at a recent telephone news conference arranged by NACBA.

Can something be done? With student loans backed by the federal government, someone in trouble can try to get the payments deferred or modified. There are even loan forgiveness programs.  With private loans, it’s pay or end up in default.

The National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys wants a “safety net” under student loans, just as there is for other consumer lending.

If you start a business that fails, they point out, you can file for bankruptcy and go on with your life. But college students -- or their parents -- don’t have the same protection.

“We need to make some common sense reforms, something like creating an escape valve to relieve some of the pressure before the whole thing blows sky high,” says NACBA vice president John Roa. “There’s no way to diffuse this bomb if the status quo remains the same.”

NACBA wants Congress to roll back the bankruptcy code to 1978, when borrowers who couldn’t pay off their student loans (private or government-guaranteed) could discharge that debt in bankruptcy.

Rep. Steve Cohen, (D-Tennessee), has introduced a bill, H.R. 2028: Private Student Loan Bankruptcy Fairness Act, which would treat private student loan debt the same as other consumer debt.

Congressman Cohen says his bill would “restore fair treatment to Americans in severe financial distress” and give “an honest but unfortunate debtor a chance for a financial fresh start.”

The bill is supported by the American Association of Community Colleges, the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, the American Council on Education and the American Federation of Teachers, as well as various consumer groups. There is currently no formal opposition.

The idea of making it easier to discharge student loan debt via bankruptcy will not sit well with those who backed bankruptcy reforms passed in 2005. Clearly, getting the law changed is a long-shot.

Dave Ingham says he doesn’t know how to solve the current situation. But he believes something should be done before others face the same financial ruin he does.

“It’s something that’s really out of control,” Ingham says. “There are thousands and thousands of us out there who need help with this situation. Please do not give up on us.”

By Herb Weisbaum, The ConsumerMan MSNBC.com

Unforgiven: Inside America’s Student Loan Bubble

by Ben DeMeter

Rickina Velte was four classes away from earning her bachelor’s degree before mounting student debt and the difficulty of raising a family as a student forced her to drop out. “I now am over $65,000 in debt with payments spiraling towards $400 a month,” she says. “I’ve consolidated at least twice, but I can’t keep track of where the payments are going. I can’t see a light at the end of the tunnel. My job barely pays enough to cover childcare and school expenses for my boys. I’m considering filing for bankruptcy, but I know that my student debt won’t be included. And on top of that, my husband is in the military and a bankruptcy could damage his security clearance. I’m at my wits’ end.”

Rickina’s story is tragic, but it’s just one of many. These days, tales of suffocating student debt are a dime a dozen. The national student debt now officially stands just shy of $1 trillion, and default rates for some loans are as high as 20% in some areas of the country. It’s easy to see that there’s something wrong with the way we pay for college.

But while media outlets continue to churn out reports on an impending student loan crisis, nobody has bothered to stop and wonder how exactly we got here in the first place. There’s been no talk of where or why things went wrong. We’d like to fix that. In this article, we’ll review the history of student lending and explore how unchecked enthusiasm for college, combined with an unregulated industry, has lead to the biggest financial crisis we’ve experienced since the housing collapse of 2008.


Sowing the Seeds of Student Aid

Let’s start at the beginning.The idea of financial aid for college students was introduced by the Indiana General Assembly in 1935. The assembly awarded college fee remissions to students who scored the highest on a variety of competitive tests. The pursuit of discounted college tuition quickly became so popular that the state created the Indiana State Financial Aid Association to oversee the distribution of scholarships at state schools like Indiana University.

The program was well-run, and as a result, many colleges in neighboring states elected to join the ISFAA as well. However, despite the ISFAA’s success, the program would remain relatively small until after World War II, when the race against the Soviet Union for global superiority drove the United States to push for higher education harder than it ever had before.

The U.S. government started looking for a way to get more of its citizens into college when the baby boom took off in the years following World War II. When the USSR successfully launched Sputnik in 1957, the U.S finally took action. In 1958, Congress passed the National Defense Education Act. The act set up a loan specifically designed to help students from lower-income families pay for college. The loan carried a 5% interest rate, and students had 10 years to pay if off after graduation. Believe it or not, this loan still exists today, though it’s now known as the Federal Perkins Loan.

The National Defense Education Act proved to be a rousing success. Over the next two decades, the government introduced numerous bills and programs designed to make the dream of higher education attainable by any citizen from any social class. These include the College Work-Study program (which allowed students to take co-ops to help subsidize the costs of their degrees), the Educational Opportunity Grant Program (which allowed exceptional students from low-income families to attend college for free) and the Middle Assistance Act, which removed the income on limit federal aid programs in order to make loans more available to America’s emerging middle class.

By 1983, the Department of Education had paid out more than $6 billion in student loans. Thanks to the availability of financial aid, America’s colleges and universities were enrolling over 10 million students annually. As a result, the perception of higher education changed.

A college degree was no longer considered an exceptional achievement, but a mandatory benchmark in a young person’s career. This, in turn, created an increased demand for graduate degrees, so Congress passed the Student Loan Consolidation and Technical Amendments Act, which allowed students pursuing a Master’s or PhD to consolidate their new loans with their existing ones into a Guaranteed Student Loan with a 10% interest rate.

At the time, the emphasis on higher education made sense. Between 1984 and 2008, unemployment peaked at 7.5% and was sometimes as low as 4%. People with college degrees were expected to earn 75% to 100% more in their lifetimes than people who only had a high school diploma. So where did things go wrong?

A State of Calamity

When we examine the student loan situation today, it looks like the garden we planted during the Cold War has grown out of control. Tuition has risen by 3,400% since 1972. The average student debt is now sitting at $25,000, up 25% in 10 years. The interest on loans guaranteed by the government-sponsored enterprise Sallie Mae is currently 3.4%, but it is set to double in July 2012. If it does, students will incur an additional $6.3 billion in debt over the 2012-2013 school year. Overall, national student debt is expected to exceed $1 trillion by the end of the year.

And of course there are the horror stories, the suicides and the tales of people like Bob Johnson, who took on student debt not once but twice in order to find work in an ailing market and who are now struggling just to stay off welfare. After graduating in 1987 with a BA in journalism, the NYC native struggled to find work. By the time he got a job that paid about $800 a month, he had already been forced to defer his loans twice. When he was laid off in the mid-’90s, he decided to go back to school for his MFA in theatre management, believing that it would increase his chances for employment. “I went back to school,” he says, “and foolishly took out more loans.”

Bob was laid off again when the recession struck in 2008. He has since struggled to find work. He’s managed to stay off of welfare by picking up odd jobs that run the gamut from photography and video production to apartment painting and social media coaching. In the meantime, his student debt has grown from less than $100,000 to several hundred thousand dollars. “The money coming in is not great,” he says. “I currently have $700 or so in the bank, $400 in a drawer and $5K in a retirement account that will probably eventually be seized by the student loan people. It eats at me every day. I don’t ever see myself getting out of debt. I worry about my future.”

Young professionals aren’t the only ones struggling with student debt, either. For every self-made baby boomer who is sick of hearing kids complain about their debt, there’s another for whom the dream of a lucrative post-college career turned sour. At the moment, people 60 and over owe more than $36 billion in student loans, and people aged 40-49 account for 15% of all student debtors.

“I didn’t understand at the time what I was signing or the consequences,” says Faith, who is still paying off her student loans at 44. “I didn’t understand about compound interest. I’ve tried to negotiate with them. I’ve begged for help from them. All Sallie Mae says is, ‘You’ll have to pay it back no matter what.’ But I can’t. I’ll probably die with this debt, and I’m just about to give up and stop even trying.”

A college degree was once the key to a brighter future. Now it’s more like a financial prison sentence for so many Americans. Where did things go wrong?

A Two-Headed Snake

Many people blame the job market, and on the surface, it makes sense. According to the Economic Policy Institute, the unemployment rate for Americans aged 16-24 is the worst it’s been in the 60 years that the institute has been monitoring the data. This is especially true for minorities. While the unemployment rate for white college graduates sits at 8.4%, it pales in comparison to the 13.8% unemployment rate for Latino college graduates and the 18% rate for black graduates. While the terrible job market certainly exacerbates the student debt crisis, it doesn’t explain why so many students have come to struggle with such significant debt.

When we trace the evolution of the student loan crisis, we see two major forces at work. The first is the ever-growing importance that we place on having a college degree, even though the majority of Americans have their doubts as to what higher education can actually provide for their children. For example, a study by Pew Research found that 57% of Americans think that college is not a good value, and 75% believe that it is too expensive for most people to afford. And yet, in a separate study, Pew discovered that 94% of parents still expect their children to go to college.

In many ways, it seems like a natural expectation. Think about what your grandfather did for a living, then what your father did, and then what career your parents expected of you. As a parent, you want your child to have a better life than the one you were able to provide for them. Unfortunately, this becomes exponentially harder to do with every generation, since the number of available “good” jobs is shrinking and becoming increasingly specialized. The Bureau of Labor Statistics states that “mid-skill” jobs – jobs that require less education than a bachelor’s degree – will account for 45% of the available work in 2014. But the rate of enrollment for trade and tech schools isn’t trending that way.

College students from middle-class families enter the system expecting to earn a certain amount of money for a certain career. When things don’t work out that way, life becomes difficult. Saddled with debt and in search of meaningful work, they’re forced to move back home and take a minimum-wage or part-time job that can barely pay for the grocery bill. And according to a Brookings Institution study, the odds that they’ll ever get a job related to their degree shrink with every month that passes.

Thomas J. Fox, the community outreach director at Cambridge Credit Counseling in Cambridge, MA, has seen this disconnect between expectations and reality all too often in his line of work. “Like many people in my generation, I was raised with the advice that securing a degree is the key to prosperity in America,” he says. “For the better part of a century, that logic has held true. However, things have changed. No longer is a degree itself a guarantee of success […]. Many students I’ve worked with have an unrealistic expectation on earnings. Many think they’ll enter the workforce making $80,000, with no experience. More alarmingly, others believe they’ll make a YouTube video that will go ‘viral’ gaining them fame and fortune, or develop the next Instagram.”

Lending Left Unchecked Goes Haywire

Many students enroll in expensive four-year universities without considering their future earning potential, and that certainly contributes to the student loan crisis. But it’s the unregulated lending industry itself that bears much of the blame for the skyrocketing debt. Mitchell D. Weiss, a professor of finance at the University of Hartford and the author of “Life Happens – A Practical Guide to Personal Finance from College to Career” sees the student debt crisis as an example of predatory lending gone out of control.

“I counsel a fair amount of students who are struggling with very large levels of debt and the stories are disturbingly similar,” he says. “Many of them were the first in their families to go to college. Mom and Dad didn’t have a lot of money, and they weren’t well versed when it came to financial matters. So, they left it up to Junior to figure out how to make that side of things work.”

Since the typical college student doesn’t know how to get a loan, Weiss says, they tend to lean on university-appointed loan officers for help. From there, the lenders are free to sign the student up for any sort of loan they please and pass it off as a “discounted” rate.

“Not only were the loans pretty easy to get,” Weiss says. “They didn’t have to be paid back until after Junior was done with school. In the meantime, though, the college got its money, the lenders – both government and private – are getting their interest and Junior’s living in Mom and Dad’s basement because the magnitude of his loan payments preclude his ability to afford a place of his own. Adding up the pieces, you have an educational failure that’s compounded by an alignment of interests between the schools and the lenders that runs contrary to those of the student borrower.”

The degree to which the lending industry’s interests have “conflicted” with those of America’s students is staggering. Testifying before Congress in a 1991 hearing, Senator William Roth stated that the Department of Education had an “abysmal record” in providing oversight to university lending policies.

Even that, though, is an understatement. Since the Department of Education became the officiating body in charge of overseeing university lending policies, it has given lending agency executives free reign over the system, and they’ve used their power to squeeze America’s college students for every penny they’re worth. According to Citizens for an Educated and Democratic Republic co-founder Peter O’Lalor, “Predatory lending has been found to be widespread throughout the industry in both nonprofit and for-profit student loan companies. One student loan collection company even went so far as to install a 4,000-gallon shark tank in their headquarters.”

Even the nonprofits are getting in on the action. A 2007 investigation into PHEAA, Pennsylvania’s state lending agency, revealed that executives of the nonprofit had used the income they gained from jacking up interest rates to 9.5% to reward themselves with luxuries like a $45,000 Learjet rental, spa treatments, limousine rides and falconry lessons. Yes, falconry lessons. Further inquiry revealed that PHEAA had been using a legal loophole to overbill the government, and therefore the taxpayers, for $15 million.

In that same year, an investigation led by New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo revealed that the country’s largest lenders had made illegal arrangements with the loan officers at more than 100 colleges and universities across the country, including Johns Hopkins, Columbia and Syracuse. In exchange for lavish vacations and cash bribes, the officers agreed to put banks like JPMorgan Chase on their school’s list of “preferred lenders.”

And what has the government done to curb this rampant corruption? The late Ted Kennedy probably said it best when he addressed Congress in 2004. “A year ago, Senate Democrats proposed legislation to shut both [lending] loopholes down once and for all. The Senate Republicans did not act on that proposal, did not introduce their own legislation, and did not hold a single hearing. They asked no oversight questions of the Bush Administration. In short, they did nothing.”

Sallie the Jailer 

The most disgusting part about the entire student loan crisis is that the agency created to keep student loans in check has done more than anyone else to guarantee that student debt remains a get-rich-quick scheme for industry executives. Founded in 1972, Sallie Mae is the government-sponsored enterprise tasked with backing, managing and collecting student debt. Since it was given that authority, it has systematically stripped student borrowers of every protection they have ever enjoyed.

In 1996, Sallie Mae led the charge to get student loans exempted from the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. In 1998, it worked with the Consumers Banking Union to lift the statute of limitations on student loans in an amendment to the Higher Education Act. Through these two acts, the heads of Sallie Mae guaranteed that student loans could never be charged off in bankruptcy and that they could never expire. Then, in 2003, Sallie Mae bragged to shareholders that it was able to increase its profit margins by 29% (compared to the previous year’s profits) thanks to the increased amount of debt money it was able to collect under the new legislation.

Under Sallie Mae’s guidance, student aid has become one of the most dangerous loans in the country. These days, when a student takes out a Sallie Mae-backed loan, they’re stepping into a scary financial labyrinth. No matter how old the loan is or how few assets a graduate has, they must still pay their debts – and if they don’t, they’ll be subjected to relentless harassment by debt collection agencies, not to mention lawsuits.

To compound the problem, the average default rate for student loans – 80% of which are backed by Sallie Mae – is 8.8% as of last September. In some states like Missouri, that number can be as high as 20%. 

But if you ask any Sallie Mae employee, they’ll tell you things are just peachy. “The economy poses a significant challenge, but the overwhelming majority of our customers are successful in managing their obligations,” Spokesperon Patricia Christel told the Washington Post this March. “Only 3.5 percent of our private education loans default and no one benefits in that situation. That is why we work so diligently to reach customers and counsel them.”

The For-Profit Sham

But if Sallie Mae is bad, then for-profit colleges are worse. These schools – which include the Art Institutes, DeVry University and other online colleges – have been involved in numerous scandals over the past few years. Fueled by the renewed interest in trade careers, many for-profit colleges charge exorbitant fees in exchange for enrollment in career-specific classes. But often, a student can attend such classes through a local tech school for far less.

The for-profit industry has gotten so out of control that one former student loan executive said this to Congress: “In the trade school system, what you sell are dreams. If the student breathes, can write, and is over 18, he is qualified to become a student and to get a loan”.

Due to the low quality of the education that many students receive, the default rate on loans issued by for-profit colleges is disturbingly high. In an investigation into the industry, Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) found that nearly half of all federal student loan defaults occur at for-profit colleges, even though these schools only enroll 10% of the higher-education student population. Currently, the default rate for all loans issued by for-profit schools is sitting at 15%, much higher than the national average.

A Bubble, or Something Worse?

Now that student debt is pushing $1 trillion, some experts like Robert Reich have begun to throw around the word “bubble” in their articles, likening student loans to the subprime mortgages that collapsed the housing market and triggered the recession in 2008. In many ways, it’s a fair comparison to make. College students are the ultimate subprime borrowers. They have limited, if any, credit history and very little experience with loans – and in many cases the amount of money they’re being handed by Sallie Mae and other lenders is on par with a mortgage. But could the bursting of a student loan bubble really be as catastrophic as the one that toppled the housing market?

Not quite. While some experts are sold on the idea of a bubble, just as many are convinced otherwise. According to For Student Power spokesman Patrick St. John, the structure of student loans inherently prevents them from exploding the way mortgages did in 2008. “The student loan bubble will not burst in the same way the housing market’s bubble burst,” he says. “Federal student loans are fully insured by the federal government, so if a student refuses or is unable to pay, the private loan provider is fully compensated. Because of this ‘built-in bailout’ there won’t be a crisis point like there was with housing.”

However, just because student loans might not be subject to a burst-bubble effect, that doesn’t make them any less problematic. The de-facto bailout that loan companies enjoy may keep the industry from collapsing, but it also makes overhauling the system that much harder – and for every day that passes without reform, our children’s future grows that much bleaker.

“We’re talking about a generation of young men and women who are losing hope of attaining anything close to what their parents have realized for themselves,” says Weiss. “This isn’t only economic in the form of diminished consumerism and the accumulation of wealth, it’s social. Take away the hope for a better tomorrow and the unrest that’ll ensue will, in my opinion, be no less convulsive than what my generation lived through in the late ’60s.”

Fox agrees. “As more people struggle with debt,” he says, “it will make the appeal of college less alluring. We already suffer from a lack of suitable individuals to fill positions. In the end, unchecked student loan debt will diminish our economic leadership position.”

To Forgive or Not to Forgive

Although awareness over an impending student loan crisis is at an all-time high, the debate continues to rage over the best way to fix it. The popular opinion seems to be that we should reinstate student debt forgiveness. Before Sallie Mae had its way with the legislation, the statue of limitations on student loans expired after seven years. They could also be forgiven through bankruptcy. At the moment, the legislators pushing hardest for loan reform believe that rebuilding these escape routes is the best way to ease the burden on America’s students and taxpayers.

Currently, Majority Whip Richard Durbin – creator of the Durbin amendment – is sponsoring legislation that would reinstate the borrower’s right to charge off private student loans in bankruptcy. Though the borrower would still have to pay their federal loans, the amendment would give distressed graduates a little more wiggle room than they currently enjoy. “The student debt crisis in this country is largely ignored by Congress,” he told Congress in a hearing. “There are a lot of lives that are being changed.”

However, some experts believe that Durbin isn’t taking reform far enough. Senator Hansen Clarke (D-MI) is working in conjunction with Student Loan Justice, a nonprofit organization, to push the Student Loan Forgiveness Act of 2012. The act would allow people with student debt to be forgiven of it if they agree to pay 10% of their discretionary income for a period of 10 years. Furthermore, anyone who takes out student loans after the bill is passed would be eligible for the same deal, with a cap at $45,520 – the average cost of obtaining a four-year degree. Currently, an online petition supporting the bill has more than half a million signatures.

While the debate continues to rage over how much we should forgive student debt, Weiss says that there are plenty of ways that students can lessen their debt burden. These include testing out of as many courses as possible via CLEP and AP exams in order to reduce enrollment fees. Students can also start out at a community college and then transfer credits to a four-year university after two years. Another strategy is to take winter and summer sessions at schools that are less expensive.

Final Thoughts

The student loan crisis is every American’s problem, regardless of our political leanings. Our unyielding infatuation with the four-year college degree and an unchecked and unscrupulous lending industry have together created an abscess on our economy. Every year, student loans get more expensive. Every year, more and more college graduates are forced to default on their debt in the face of an uncertain job market. And every year, scores of retirees are reminded that no matter what they do, there is no escaping a student loan.

It’s a hard sell, since even loan forgiveness offers no guarantee that the buck won’t simply be passed on to the next generation. But the need for change – some change, any change – in the lending industry is no less dire. Something needs to be done, and both parties can agree on that. Regulations need to be tighter on for-profit colleges. We must place an emphasis on making accredited two-year schools just as attractive as traditional universities. Most of all, students need to be well-educated about college debt before they apply to school, not after they graduate from it. Anything at all to get us off this road to calamity we’re headed down.

Related posts:
American Student Loan Debt: $1 Trillion and Counting
A "great haircut" for U.S. growth

Pit bull Terrier, a restricted breed; Time to regulate pet shops!

Cross-bred bull terrier a restricted breed, says vet dept D-G

PETALING JAYA: The dog that attacked and killed 74-year-old Yip Sun Wah is a miniature bull terrier cross which is a restricted breed in Malaysia.

Restricted breeds were not suitable as household pets, said Veterinary Services Department (DVS) director-general Datuk Dr Abdul Aziz Jamaluddin.

Such breeds, he added, were only meant for the use of military and enforcement agencies and not to be kept as pets.

He added that bull terriers were allowed to be kept as guard dogs providing they were given proper training and schooling.

“When an application is made to the local council for a licence for a restricted breed, the municipal agency will only issue the licence based on our recommendation,” said Dr Abdul Aziz. He said the DVS has published a guidebook to outline breed classification.

The guidelines can also be obtained at http://www.dvs.gov.my/web/guest/listband.

Dr Abdul Aziz also said restricted breeds were not supposed to be sold in pet shops.

He added that the DVS was currently doing a trace to determine the supplier and find out how a restricted breed could have been made available to the owner.

“I will instruct our enforcement unit to check all pet shops to see if they are selling banned and restricted dog breeds,” said Dr Abdul Aziz.

Meanwhile, dog trainer Wellington Ho said bull terriers have very powerful jaws.

“There is a mechanism in the jaw which tends to lock up when it is clamped shut,” he said.

However, Ho was quick to point out that he personally knew of domesticated bull terriers that have been properly socialised.

“They have very sweet temperaments once they are properly socialised,” he said.

The dog that killed Yip had a valid licence issued by the Subang Jaya Municipal Council.

The case will be investigated by the police under Section 304(a) of the Penal Code for causing death by negligence, which carries a maximum of two years' jail, a fine or both. - The Star

Images for the american pitbull graphics

Time to regulate pet shops, say canine welfare groups

By WANI MUTHIAH wani@thestar.com.my

PETALING JAYA: Canine welfare groups are outraged over the death of 74-year-old Yip Sun Wah after he was mauled by a miniature bull terrier cross.

They claimed that one of the reasons behind Yip's death was the poor regulation of pet shops, which sell restricted breeds suspected of being obtained from backyard breeders.

Save a Stray founder Jacqueline Tsang said Yip's tragic death was due to irresponsible breeders who did not ensure the bull terrier's owner had the expertise to handle the dog.

“I also hold the enforcers liable for not ensuring the restriction (on restricted breeds) was being properly implemented,” said Tsang.

Canine rescue project Malaysian Dogs Deserve Better coordinator Irene Low said it was time for the authorities to seriously regulate pet shops that sold such animals.

“Only then can backyard breeders, who carry out unethical breeding, be put out of business as they would not have a platform to sell their dogs and puppies,” she said.

According to Low, unethical breeders also had a tendency to cross-breed dogs that were not compatible with each other.

“When indiscriminate cross-breeding is done, it can seriously affect the dogs' temperament,” she said.

Furry Friends Farm founder Sabrina Yeap said the temperament of a dog was usually influenced by the environment it was brought up in.

“Whatever the breed, what matters most is the upbringing. I personally know of bull terriers that are loving family pets,” said Yeap.

KL Pooch Rescue co-founder Shannon Lam said the loss of a father and husband to any violent attack was unspeakable.

“Equally tragic is a society that seeks to punish a beast for behaving as such rather than punishing those who are behind its aggression,” she added.

Meanwhile, sources say several rescue groups are getting together to request the authorities not to euthanise the dog.

Dog trainer and G-Pet Boarding and Training Centre Carlos Huertez said he would take the dog in if the authorities were willing to hand over the bull terrier.

Related posts/stories:
American Pit Bull Kills Jogger !
Killer dog's owners make appearance at victim's funeral

American Pit Bull Kills Jogger !

SUBANG JAYA: A man who just turned 74 a few days ago was killed by a american pit bull while jogging in his housing area.

Yip Sun Wah died at the scene after the dog bit him on the neck and almost tore off his left ear in the 9.50am incident in Jalan SS19/5B, about 1km from Yip's house here.

The dog ran out of its owner's house and attacked Yip for almost four minutes before returning home.
A car salesman, who only wanted to be identified as Addy, 44, said he was on his way to meet a customer when he saw Yip being attacked by the dog.

Deadly bite: A family member mourning over Yip’s body in front of a house in SS19, Subang Jaya yesterday.

 

He said he tried to hit the dog with his umbrella but it was too aggressive and only stopped attacking after Yip was motionless.

It is learnt that the owner had just got the animal about three months ago after her house was robbed.

Subang Jaya OCPD ACP Yahaya Ramli said the 25-year-old female accountant had bought the animal from a private kennel. He said she has a licence to keep the dog.

“We have released her after recording her statement,” he added.

ACP Yahaya also said the dog had escaped from the house through the rubbish compartment door which was not properly secured.

The victim's body was sent to the University Malaya Medical Centre while the dog is now with the Shah Alam Municipal Council.

ACP Yahaya said the animal would be tested to ascertain if it has any disease.

The victim's eldest son Hon Mun, 51, said he was informed of the incident by an eyewitness who called him using his father's mobile phone.

“I rushed to the scene immediately but my father was already dead,” he said, adding the victim had been jogging in the area for the past 20 years.

The case is being investigated under Section 304(a) of the Penal Code for causing death by negligence which carries a maximum two years' jail sentence or a fine or both.

Meanwhile, Subang Jaya Municipal Council director Dr Roslan Mohamed Hussin said it had started checking residential areas in the township for breeds that were said to be aggressive and dangerous.

“Seven dog breeds, namely Akita, Neapolitan Mastiff, American Bulldog, Dogo Argentino, Fila Brasileiro, Japanesa Tosa and American Pit Bull are predisposed to aggressive or dangerous behaviour,” he said.

The council is also enforcing a directive from the Selangor Veterinary Department to ban these “unmanageable or possibly dangerous” breeds.

By RASHITHA A. HAMID rashitha@thestar.com.my

Pit Bull Kills 74year old Jogger in Subang Jaya

Dangerous animal: The pit buill being taken away by a man believed to be a family member of the dog owner.

Images for the american pitbull graphics

Batang Kali massacre: British soldiers admitted unlawful killings

Lawyers for relatives of those who died in the 1948 mass killing disclose soldiers' accounts given during police interviews in 1970

Loh Ah Choi (L), Chang Koon Ying (C) and Lim Ah Yin (R), relatives of unarmed Malaysian rubber plantation workers killed in Batang Kali in 1948 arrive at the high court. Photograph: Kerim Okten/EPA

Scots Guards soldiers admitted unlawfully shooting dead 24 Malaysian villagers then covering up the massacre, the high court has been told.

Calling for an official inquiry into the mass killing during anti-insurgency operations in 1948, lawyers for relatives of the victims disclosed for the first time the soldiers' accounts given during police interviews.
The statements were taken in 1970, when the then Labour government ordered an investigation into the deaths.

Six of the eight soldiers interviewed under caution by detectives corroborated accounts that the villagers had been unlawfully killed, Michael Fordham QC, counsel for the Malaysian relatives, told the court.

One member of the Scots Guards platoon, Alan Tuppen, maintained that a sergeant had said beforehand: "The (villagers) were going to be shot and we could fall in or fall out."

William Cootes, another soldier, told detectives he saw as another sergeant "motioned to (a) youth to run and then he shot him".

George Kydd, also a member of the Scots Guards patrol, recalled in 1970 that: "The bandits were then shot but I'm sorry I must tell you the truth, they were not running away.

"There was an inquiry later on and I've got to go along with this, we were told before going in to tell the same story, that is that the bandits were running away when they were shot … I don't remember who told us to tell this story but it was a member of the army."

The police investigation was launched after a newspaper carried some of the soldiers' accounts of what had happened 22 years earlier.

The probe was abruptly cancelled, however, in June 1970 after the Conservatives won the general election.

An internal police report by Detective Chief Superintendent Frank Williams, who led the police investigation, contradicted official explanations that there was insufficient evidence.

His report, disclosed to the high court, said: "At the outset this matter was politically flavoured and it is patently clear that the decision to terminate enquiries in the middle of the investigation was due to a political change of view when the new Conservative government came into office after the general election."

Relatives of those killed in Batang Kali, who have twice petitioned the Queen, are challenging the government's continued refusal to hold an inquiry into the incident.

Judicial review of the decision will continue until Wednesday.

Judgment is expected to be reserved.

The Ministry of Defence and Foreign Office maintain that it is too late for lessons to be learned from any inquiry and that most of the witnesses are no longer alive.

guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 8 May 2012 15.28 BS 

Related posts/articles:

• Batang Kali British massacre:Justice for the dead! 
• Agony of British Massacre Victims' Descendants in Batang Kali, Malaysia

• Batang Kali British Massacre Victims have a legal respite
• British Massacre - Batang Kali Victims win UK court ...
• British Massacre - Batang Kali Survivors and kin seek