Author Topic: Dispatches - Channel 4 - Mumbai  (Read 11428 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Mike Philbin

  • Guest
Dispatches - Channel 4 - Mumbai
« on: June 28, 2009, 01:45:11 pm »
Exclusive: new film of Mumbai gunmen
By Krishnan Guru-Murthy
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/world/asia_pacific/exclusive+new+film+of+mumbai+gunmen/3237557

See the exclusive new material in full on Dispatches on Tuesday 30th June at 9pm on Channel 4 including a special interview with Kasab, the only terrorist to survive, and phone conversations as the massacre was taking place.

It turns out that the Mumbai crew were Pakistani-ISI-funded terrorists.... and where does that lead back to?

It was really sad listening to the awe in the terrorists' voices, "They have computers with 30 inch screens."  Poor, sad, poor folk sent on a terrible suicide mission (oh, sound familiar ahum 9/11) in the name of their God.

:)

PatAndrews

  • Guest
Re: Dispatches - Channel 4 - Mumbai
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2009, 02:07:29 pm »
I was actually beginning to look into this more and more after seeing that there has been a trend of more investment into India.  Here's an example article I ran across. 

Investors Swoop in after Mumbai Attacks

http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9877

by Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar

Swaminathan S. Anklesaria Aiyar is a research fellow at the Cato Institute's Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity.

Added to cato.org on January 2, 2009

This article appeared in Forbes on January 2, 2009.

Are foreign investors fleeing India after the Islamic militant attack in Mumbai on Nov. 26-29? Not at all. They have adopted Nathan Rothschild's maxim that the best time to buy shares is when blood runs in the streets. On Nov. 28, in the middle of the Mumbai gunfight, they bought $151 million worth of Indian stocks and bonds. And then in the first 12 days of December, they injected another $524 million into India's equity and debt markets.

Gruesome though it may sound, foreigners are treating the bloody Mumbai attack as a buying opportunity, not a tragedy that dents global business confidence. They remember that the terrorist attack on the U.S. on 9/11 was horrific but that this very horror made it an excellent time to buy equities, and they are following the same principle in India today.

Before Mumbai, foreign institutional investors had been pulling out of India on a massive scale. From the start of 2008, they pulled $13.5 billion out of Indian markets, sending the Bombay Sensex crashing from a peak of 21,000 to barely 9,000 today. Pessimists feared that the Mumbai attack would lead to further outflows. Surprise, surprise, dollars have flowed in instead.

Veteran economic analysts say that the attack may have a short-term negative impact in some areas, notably tourism. But long-term flows of foreign direct and portfolio investment are unlikely to be affected. The long-term India story remains unchanged, since terrorism is part and parcel of that story, and the risks are familiar and well understood by foreign and Indian investors.

India has been subject to Islamic terrorist attacks for two decades, and major Indian cities witnessed a series of bomb blasts in 2008. The Mumbai attack was notable for providing reality television for 60 hours rather than for high casualties, and in showing that the business elite (including foreigners) were as vulnerable as ordinary folk. Only 174 were killed in Mumbai (including 26 foreigners), a small figure compared with over 50,000 killed in Kashmir over the last two decades. Indeed, 3,500 people die in Mumbai every year falling off over-crowded trains. Every death is a tragedy, but the Mumbai attack was not exceptionally tragic in numbers.

Nor is Islamic terror the only security issue India faces. Sundry Maoist groups have been waging insurrection in several states, and Maoist incidents have been reported from 157 of India's 600 districts. Many of these are in the central Indian jungle belt, which is rich in mineral ores. This has made it problematic to get some mining and steel projects off the ground.

Such risks are, however, already factored in to the calculus of foreign investors. Hong Kong-based Political & Economic Risk Consultancy had already assessed India as the riskiest of 14 Asian countries, not including Pakistan and Afghanistan. The Mumbai attack will worsen perceived risks only if it seems that tensions will escalate in South Asia and that India and Pakistan might go to war.

That, fortunately, is unlikely to be the case. India is focused on diplomacy and organizing international pressure against Pakistan. This effort has been successful. Pakistan has complied, though reluctantly, with the U.N. Security Council mandate to close down various militant outfits and stop their leaders from spreading the culture of terror. The security forces in Pakistan have used terrorists groups to inflict a thousand cuts on India, especially in Kashmir, and are reluctant to quash the very militants they have nurtured for so long. However, those militants are no longer under the control of Pakistan's authorities, as shown by the assassination of Benazir Bhutto.

Her husband, the current president, may be more serious about ending terrorism than his predecessors. Besides, after the Security Council's strictures, even Islamic elements in the Pakistani establishment will want to rein in the wildest groups, not out of love for India but simply to avoid further diplomatic embarrassment. So, we may see a diminution rather than escalation of Pakistan-inspired militancy in India, and that will be positive for the economy.

This does not mean, of course, that the Mumbai attack will have no adverse impact at all on the Indian economy. The most serious short-term consequence is a massive cancellation of tourist bookings. Hotel occupancy is down 20% to 25% in prime destinations, and hotels have slashed their room rates.

However, tourism is not among the top Indian industries. The global recession was already taking its toll before the Mumbai attack, and tourist cancellations will worsen the situation. But foreign exchange earnings from tourism, at around $10 billion per year, are barely 1% of India's GDP. They are less than a quarter of the $42 billion of remittances to India by overseas Indians. While tourist hot spots will suffer, the Indian economy as a whole will shrug this aside. Indian businessmen and economists are far more worried about the impact of the global recession than of the Mumbai attack. As the saying goes, when you are fighting the alligators in a swamp, you do not worry about the mosquitoes.




PatAndrews

  • Guest
Re: Dispatches - Channel 4 - Mumbai
« Reply #2 on: June 28, 2009, 02:15:12 pm »
Also, our friends the Rothschilds have a keen interest in India. 

Infrastructure is a significant challenge for India: Rothschild

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/Infrastructure-is-a-significant-challenge-for-India-Rothschild/299486/

New Delhi, Apr 20 : Even as the government's grand plan to transform Mumbai into an International Financial Centre (IFC) is moving at a snail's pace, Sir Evelyn de Rothschild—the legendary banker and chairman of the India-focused private investment corporation EL Rothschild Ltd—said the factor that can prevent this vision from becoming a reality would not be lack of finance, but the city's pathetic infrastructure.

In an exclusive interview with FE on the sidelines of IISS-Citi India Global Forum, Rothschild - who is from a banking dynasty which is over two-and-a-half century old with interests in several sectors in many countries—also noted that while American, Swiss and British banks have posted huge losses due to their sub prime exposure, Indian banks are on a "very stable footing" financially thanks to their conservative approach.

Though Hong Kong and Dubai have made rapid strides as an IFC, Rothschild - who as chairman and CEO of the international investment bank NM Rothschild and Sons Ltd for close to three decades during which he managed to increase the total assets of the business from £400m in 1976 to £4.6b in 2003 - said "I don't think India is late in trying to develop Mumbai as an IFC."

"We all have to be in Mumbai for financial reasons regarding investment and banking. But it is sad they (the authorities) have not done as much as they could have on improving the infrastructure," he said. Noting the improvements on the city's airport, Rothschild, however, said the authorities have to build flyovers and roads to improve traffic movement. "With the increase in traffic, they have to clear away a lot of the slum areas and improve the living quality and help the place to be a real IFC," he said.

Though the restrictive regulations in India have helped the country's banks to behave in a more balanced manner, he said "borrowing money and controlling investment is something that has to be educated for the people working in the business. Pointing to interesting times ahead for the banking sector, Rothschild said he expects public sector banks to become more realistic in their approach as the sector sees more mergers and acquisitions. While he was pleased with the growing presence of foreign banks in India, Rothschild stressed that the crucial issue is whether the government would "allow foreign banks to be more active or will they still control them."

Reiterating that infrastructure is a significant challenge for India, Rothschild said the government needed to change direction if they have to get foreign investment in the sector. "The question that is going to come up about India more and more is about movement of finance, which means that some of the restrictions will have to be relaxed further," he stressed.

Referring to UK-based private equity firm 3i recently raising over a billion dollars for an India Infrastructure Fund, Rothschild said raising funds is a challenge."I understand that FDI regulations (need to be strict) upto a point and one is very responsible for who invests in what. But (when it comes to raising funds for infrastructure) regulations in India are quite strict. It is unfair and they should be more relaxed. Some states are more advanced than the others as they are more open and have a higher literacy rate. It depends very much on the internal governments of each state."

Rothschild, who was also the chairman of influential The Economist Group, said at a time when the financial sector is going through a difficult period of readjustment, it is important to ensure greater transparency. "Management has to be more aware of shareholders interest. At the same time, one must look into some of these leveraged situations where money is freely used now," he said.


Mike Philbin

  • Guest
Re: Dispatches - Channel 4 - Mumbai
« Reply #3 on: June 29, 2009, 01:00:00 am »
Pakistani ISI funded ... no one understand what this means?


Offline Atomgrad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
Re: Dispatches - Channel 4 - Mumbai
« Reply #4 on: June 29, 2009, 03:16:19 am »
Pakistani ISI funded ... no one understand what this means?

We funded it via Pakistan, in the same way we paid Mohamed Atta.

The problems were designed to cause the crisis so our corrupt bankers and investors could make Billions during the ensuing price crash.
I'm a human being, g*ddammit, my life has value

Offline nedc

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 109
Re: Dispatches - Channel 4 - Mumbai
« Reply #5 on: June 29, 2009, 03:25:53 am »
Pakistani ISI funded ... no one understand what this means?



CIA

Mike Philbin

  • Guest
Re: Dispatches - Channel 4 - Mumbai
« Reply #6 on: June 29, 2009, 03:29:46 am »
oh, dear,

one wonders if the Channel 4 documentary will be brave enough to follow the 9/11 rabbit down the ISI rabbit hole.

:)

Offline Atomgrad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
Re: Dispatches - Channel 4 - Mumbai
« Reply #7 on: June 29, 2009, 08:46:26 am »
We can always hope

 ;)
I'm a human being, g*ddammit, my life has value

Mike Philbin

  • Guest
Re: Dispatches - Channel 4 - Mumbai
« Reply #8 on: June 29, 2009, 08:51:02 am »
We can always hope...

I hope you're taking REGULAR breaths there...

:)

Offline Atomgrad

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
Re: Dispatches - Channel 4 - Mumbai
« Reply #9 on: June 29, 2009, 08:55:46 am »
Nah man, I've been holding my breath since 2002.

Oxygen? It's over rated I tells ya.

 :D
I'm a human being, g*ddammit, my life has value