Kuala Lumpur police chief Mazlan Lazim said that 35-year-old Dr Fadi Al Batsh was shot by one of two men on a high-powered motorcycle at a pedestrian walkway at about 6am on Saturday.
“The suspect fired 10 shots, four of which hit the lecturer in the head and body. He died on the spot. The police also found two empty bullet shells there,” he said....
Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, said Dr Fadi was "an electrical engineer and an expert at making rockets".
The
Palestinian was "believed to have become a liability for a country
hostile to Palestine", said Ahmad Zahid, who is in charge of Malaysia's
security....
Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/palestinian-lecturer-shot-dead-in-malaysia-10161438
Malaysian police would request the help of Interpol to track down the suspects, believed to be European nationals....
Hamas did not accuse Israel of killing him but
called Dr Fadi a "martyr" - a word it usually uses for people killed by
Israeli forces....
Hamas has accused Mossad of assassinating one
of its drone experts - Mohamed Zouari - in Tunisia in 2016, and the spy
agency is also believed to have been behind the 2010 murder of top Hamas
militant Mahmud al-Mabhuh in a Dubai hotel.
Read more at https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asia/palestinian-lecturer-shot-dead-in-malaysia-10161438
The above extracts from an article in CNA said it all. The 'good' people
have all the right to kill the 'bad' people and the 'bad' just have to
accept this as the natural order of things. And at most they could
complain but they cannot do anything about it. They are hapless, they
have no legs and hands, so cannot go killing the 'good' people to stop
them from killing the 'bad' people. Or is it another case of stupidity
has no cure, and just resign to their fate, that they deserved to be
killed? They cannot think that they can do the same thing to the 'good'
people. They cannot learn how to do the things the 'good' people did to
them,
The invasion of Iraq, Libya and Syria are all examples of how 'good'
people go around killing 'bad' people, and not only the bad people
accepted this, the people of the world, the UN, also accepted this as a
natural thing, a natural order of thing. 'Good' people has the right to
kill 'bad' people. And they are blessed with the intelligence and
resources to do it to the 'bad' people with the blessing of God of
course.
Now you 'bad' people out there, what are you going to do about it? I bet
you, nothing. You are damned for your own stupidity. And after the
killing the 'good' people will party. This thing has been going on for
decades, even centuries.
The 'bad' people somehow never learn, cannot learn, and allow history to repeat over and over again with them as the victims. If only they could do what the 'good' people are doing to them, they would be saved or at least let the 'good' people have a taste of their own medicine, to feel the pain and the loss of someone dear to them.
After Iraq and Libya, the 'good' people wanted to kill do the same in Syria to the 'bad' people. The Syrians were lucky that the Russians came in to prevent the massacre. Now the 'good' people knew that they could not do any more harm to the Syrians, they have started another plot to demonise Iran with all kinds of fake allegations, to start another war and another round of killing the 'bad' people in Iran.
War is starting soon in Iran, led by the Jews and backed up by the evil Empire.
The 'bad' people somehow never learn, cannot learn, and allow history to repeat over and over again with them as the victims. If only they could do what the 'good' people are doing to them, they would be saved or at least let the 'good' people have a taste of their own medicine, to feel the pain and the loss of someone dear to them.
After Iraq and Libya, the 'good' people wanted to kill do the same in Syria to the 'bad' people. The Syrians were lucky that the Russians came in to prevent the massacre. Now the 'good' people knew that they could not do any more harm to the Syrians, they have started another plot to demonise Iran with all kinds of fake allegations, to start another war and another round of killing the 'bad' people in Iran.
War is starting soon in Iran, led by the Jews and backed up by the evil Empire.
In the book based on an inquiry into the nature and causes of the 2008 Global Financial Crisis entitled "FREEFALL - Free Markets and the Sinking of the Global Economy", Economics Nobel Prize Laureate (2001) and Columbia University Professor Joseph E. Stiglitz wrote:
Quote
"Finding root causes is like peeling back an onion. Each explanation gives rise to further questions at a deeper level: perverse incentives may have encouraged shortsighted and risky behavior among bankers, but why did they have such perverse incentives? There is a ready answer: problems in corporate governance, the manner in which incentives and pay get determined. But why didn't the market exercise discipline on bad corporate governance and bad incentive structures? Natural selection is supposed to entail survival of the fittest; those firms with the governance and incentive structures best designed for long-run performance should have thrived. That theory is another casualty of this crisis."
Unquote
Market failure is a common term in microeconomics to reflect the need for some form of regulations and accountability of agents (consumers and producers) in the unfettered free market when externalities, imperfect information, socially undesirable market dominance etc arise. In the area of perverse incentives in the market place, two forms of asymmetric information can be associated with such possible market failure. One, adverse selection; and two, moral hazard. To simplify the understanding of such market failure, let's take two simple examples.
For moral hazard, a similar example in day to day economic activities is that of motor insurance. Why is moral hazard considered a form of market failure and thus socially undesirable? This is because no insurance company can be certain, at the point of underwriting the motor insurance of any driver, of the future behaviour of the driver. Motor insurance companies would be OUT of Business if there is no way of ensuring the responsible FUTURE behaviour of drivers insured under them. Thus, there is this concept of CO-PAYMENT known as "EXCESS" or "DEDUCTIBLES" mechanism built into a motor insurance agreement. For example, if the excess of a motor insurance is $3,500, then any accident repair amount below that sum is fully borne by the driver/ owner of a vehicle. By having the co-payment mechanism built-in, motor insurance become feasible in the market place and minimise the moral hazard of reckless FUTURE behaviour.
In the banking sector where executives take undue risks for short term gain (such as those causing the 2008 GFC), inherently similar moral hazard exists but DOES NOT seem to be mitigated by any "co-payment' mechanism in the {perverse} incentive packages they receive.
In 1970, another Economics Nobel Prize Laureate (2001) Professor George Akerlof (husband of former FED chair Professor Janet Yellen) of University of Berkeley, California published a paper entitled "The market for 'lemons': quality uncertainty and the market mechanism" which led to the growth and research in the field of asymmetric information. This publication subsequently led to the enactment of the "Lemon Law" in many countries including the United States, Canada, Australia, and in recent years Singapore {Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act} where it addresses the market failure arising from adverse selection in the used car market and other consumer goods.
Now, market failure due to asymmetric information arising from moral hazard and adverse selection in different sectors of an economy is CERTAINLY NOT NEW as it can be traced as far back as 1970 which is almost half a century ago.
ALAS, in the field of banking, unfortunately and mostly, moral hazard in the area of excessive risk taking is left to the free market mechanism (as what happened during the 2008 GFC). There does not seem to have any material "co-payment mechanism" to keep the market failure of moral hazard in check. What were the consequences?
Professor Joseph Stiglitz wrote in his book "FREEFALL":
Quote
"In the great recession that began in 2008, millions of people in America and all over the world lost their homes and jobs. Many more suffered the anxiety and fear of doing so, and almost anyone who put away money for retirement or a child's education saw those investments dwindle to a fraction of their value. A crisis that began in America soon turned global, as tens of millions lost their jobs worldwide -- 20 million in China alone -- and ten of millions fell into poverty.'
Unquote
What is the lesson learned?
Quoting from Professor Stiglitz again: "We have to be wary of too facile explanations: too many begin with the excessive greed of the bankers. That may be true, but it doesn't provide much of a basis for reform. Bankers acted greedily because they had incentives and opportunities to do so, and that is what has to be changed."
In short, could perverse incentives be the ROOT CAUSE?
Professor Stiglitz made the following observations in the same book: "In peeling back the onion, we need to ask, Why did the financial sector fail so badly, not only in performing its critical social functions, but even in serving shareholders and bondholders well? Only executives in financial institutions seem to have walked away with their pockets lined -- less lined than if there had been no crash, but still better off than say, the poor Citibank shareholders who saw their investments virtually disappear."
Could it be the skewed structure of "perverse incentives"? Despite technology disruption and what not, this so called supposedly modern economic system and technological advancement in this age of AI (artificial intelligence) seems to be at a loss (and clueless) in the field of building in a mechanism of accountability and "co-payment" when potentially rogue high pay executives run amok and threatened to bring down the entire system, just as what happened in the 2008 GFC (Global Financial Crisis).