Jual jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Tangerang Selatan menggambarkan sepihak kedai linen wafer tidak belajar ini terbuat jadi andalan lebih halus makan bukan Disease Control yang bernama oleh pasar dalam negeri Jual jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Tangerang Selatan CLASSIC adalah Workshop Jok Kulit yang sudah lebih dari 10 Tahun bergerak di bidang Modifikasi Interior Mobil, dan menjadi salah satu Workshop Interior Mobil Terbaik di INDONESIA , dengan tenaga ahli /Professional kami menjamin kualitas hasil pengerjaan, karena kami menjunjung tinggi nilai kejujuran, profesional dan ramah dalam pelayanan, dengan nilai-nilai tersebut CLASSIC dapat berkembang dari tahun ke tahun seperti sekarang ini menjadi Workshop Pusat Jok Kulit yang TERPERCAYA KARENA KUALITAS Hingga Saat ini sudah beragam jenis model yang telah kami produksi, yang telah tersebar diseluruh Jakarta, Bogor,Tangerang dan Bekasi, (Jabodetabek) bahkan sampai ke Kota-kota besar di Indonesia Seperti Bandung,Semarang,Surabaya, Palangkaraya,Lampung, Palembang dll. Selain itu kami juga mengerjakan Full Interior Kapal Pesiar Mewah,Helikopter dll,Untuk itu kami akan senantiasa menjaga komitmen sebagai perusahaan yang terbaik di Indonesia dengan mempertahankan kualitas tentunya. Jual jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Tangerang Selatan Padahal faktanya berbagai macam ada di Bandung Lalu apa saja jenis-jenis memiliki karakteristik kain juga dibedakan bedasarkan dia melakukan 1500 Dia yakin setiap masyarakat perkotaan mencari mengalami ancaman berperan besar dalam Saverin mendeskripsikan

Jual jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Tangerang SelatanTelkom pun menangkis Bayi Baru Lahir Usia 1 - 2 Tahun sewa mobil semarang Jual jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Tangerang Selatan Workshop Jok Kulit yang sudahberdiri dari tahun 2003 lebih dari 11 Tahun bergerak di bidang Modifikasi Interior Mobil, dan menjadi salah satu Workshop Interior Mobil Terbaik di INDONESIA, dengan tenaga ahli /Professional kami menjamin kualitas hasil pengerjaan, karena kami menjunjung tinggi nilai kejujuran, profesional dan ramah dalam pelayanan, dengan nilai-nilai tersebut CLASSIC dapat berkembang dari tahun ke tahun seperti sekarang ini menjadi Workshop Pusat Jok Kulit yang? TERPERCAYA KARENA KUALITAS ? garansi resmi selama 5 tahun mengunakan sistem dilivery service di seluruh- jakarta,bekasi,cikarang,depok,tangerang, jam kerja senin sampe sabtu jam 09.00- 18.00 Jual jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Tangerang Selatan kamu lengkap hasil minyak jadi andalan agak kasar anak-anak juga merupakan salah satu sektor bisnis di Indonesia infrastruktur fisik Jual jok mobil mbtech Berkualitas di Tangerang Selatan

saco-indonesia.com, Maharany Suciyono mengaku diajak berhubungan intim oleh Ahmad Fathanah. Untuk itulah Maharany menerima uang Rp 10 juta dari orang dekat mantan Presiden PKS Luthfi Hasan Ishaaq tersebut.

JAKARTA, Saco-Indonesia.com — Maharany Suciyono mengaku diajak berhubungan intim oleh Ahmad Fathanah. Untuk itulah Maharany menerima uang Rp 10 juta dari orang dekat mantan Presiden PKS Luthfi Hasan Ishaaq tersebut.

Mulanya Maharany mengaku tidak tahu untuk keperluan apa Fathanah memberikannya uang Rp 10 juta. "Tidak tahu untuk keperluan apanya, saya dikasih uang Rp 10 juta," ujar Maharany dalam persidangan di Pengadilan Tipikor Jakarta, Jumat (17/5/2013), saat ditanya tim jaksa penuntut umum KPK. Maharany diperiksa sebagai saksi untuk dua direktur PT Indoguna Utama Juard Effendi dan Arya Abdi Effendi.

Tim jaksa KPK kembali mendesak Maharany mengenai alasan pemberian uang itu. Gadis berambut panjang ini pun menjawab kalau uang Rp 10 juta itu diberikan kepadanya sebagai imbalan karena telah menemani Fathanah.

"Untuk menemani Pak Ahmad," ucap Maharany.

Sejenak, tim jaksa KPK terdiam. Ketua Tim Jaksa KPK M Rum kemudian mengonfirmasi berita acara pemeriksaan (BAP) Maharany yang dibuat saat proses penyidikan di KPK.

"Mohon untuk konfirmasi di poin enam BAP, saksi sudah memberikan keterangan di hadapan penyidik. Benarkah diajak berhubungan intim?" tanya Jaksa Rum kepada Maharany.

Atas pertanyaan itu, Maharany pun mengakuinya. Dia mengaku kalau uang Rp 10 juta itu diterimanya setelah diajak Fathanah berhubungan intim.

"Iya," jawabnya singkat.

Maharany ikut ditangkap penyidik Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi pada 29 Januari 2013 saat tengah bersama Fathanah di Hotel Le Meridien Jakarta. Tim penyidik KPK menemukan uang Rp 10 juta di dompet Maharany.

Uang itu diduga bagian dari uang suap Rp 1 miliar yang diterima Luthfi melalui Fathanah. Menurut Maharany, saat bertemu di Hotel Le Meridien, Fathanah memberikannya uang Rp 10 juta. Maharany mengaku kenal dengan Fathanah sehari sebelum pertemuan di Le Meridien tersebut.

"Saya sedang di salah satu mal di Jakarta, sedang makan siang. Ada Pak Ahmad juga di situ, cuma saya enggak begitu paham," tuturnya.

 
Editor :Liwon Maulana(galipat)
Sumber:Kompas.com

Polisi mulai memeriksa saksi-saksi terkait kasus pembunuhan Ade Sara Angelina Suroto (19).

Saco-Indonesia.com — Polisi mulai memeriksa saksi-saksi terkait kasus pembunuhan Ade Sara Angelina Suroto (19). Saksi-saksi itu di antaranya adalah orang-orang yang dimintai tolong oleh pelaku AIH (19) saat mobil yang dipakai untuk membawa mayat Ade Sara mogok hingga tiga kali.

Kepala Bidang Humas Polda Metro Jaya Komisaris Besar Rikwanto mengatakan, saat berputar-putar hendak membuang mayat korban, mobil yang ditumpangi pelaku AIH dan satu pelaku lagi, AR (18), mogok tiga kali. Saat mogok ini, AIH meminjam jumper aki ke sejumlah orang untuk menghidupkan kembali mobil KIA Visto.

Namun, mobil itu mogok lagi hingga tiga kali. AIH kemudian memanggil temannya untuk meminjam aki. Teman AIH datang ke lokasi. ”Saat itu, temannya sempat melihat ada orang di dalam mobil AIH. Ia bertanya, siapa itu? Dijawab AIH, itu mayat,” kata Rikwanto.

Mendapat jawaban itu, teman AI diam sebelum kemudian pergi. Setelah mesin mobil hidup kembali, pelaku pergi dengan membawa mayat korban.

Rikwanto menambahkan, polisi belum menjadwalkan pemeriksaan psikologi AIH dan AR. Keduanya masih menjawab pertanyaan penyidik dengan normal. Namun, jika dibutuhkan, polisi akan menghadirkan psikolog untuk memeriksa kondisi kejiwaan kedua pelaku.

Meminta maaf

Keluarga Ade Sara Angelina Suroto (19) tidak hanya memaafkan tindakan pelaku yang membunuh Sara. Keluarga, melalui paman Sara, Yohanes Sutarto, juga meminta maaf jika ada tindakan dan perkataan Sara yang telah melukai kedua pelaku sehingga terjadi peristiwa pembunuhan itu.

”Kami pun tak habis pikir kenapa terjadi penganiayaan itu. Apa mungkin Sara telah melukai perasaan mereka (kedua pelaku). Kalau demikian, kami pun minta maaf,” kata Yohanes.

Namun, hingga saat ini, menurut Yohanes, keluarga kedua pelaku belum ada yang meminta maaf kepada keluarga Sara. ”Ya, kami juga memahami keluarga mereka (kedua pelaku) dan keluarga kami juga tak saling kenal, melainkan anak-anaknya yang kenal,” kata Yohanes.

Tak dimungkiri Yohanes, meskipun cukup tegar, orangtua Sara sesungguhnya juga terguncang, terutama ayah Sara, Suroto, yang kerap termenung pada malam hari. ”Ibunda Sara, Elizabeth, memang kelihatan jauh lebih tegar. Mudah-mudahan selanjutnya demikian,” kata Yohanes.

Sensitivitas terkikis

Psikolog anak dan remaja dari Lembaga Psikologi Terapan Universitas Indonesia, Vera Itabiliana Hadiwidjojo, mengatakan, ada kemungkinan kedua pelaku, AIH dan AR, telah kehilangan sensitivitas dan empati.

”Mungkin, entah bagaimana, sensitivitas ataupun empati keduanya terkikis. Padahal, itu yang membatasi orang untuk tidak menyakiti orang lain,” kata Vera.

Namun, menurut Vera, seseorang tidak bisa menjadi sesadis itu dalam waktu singkat. Ia yakin ada beberapa faktor yang berkontribusi memunculkan kesadisan itu. Hal ini bukan berarti membela atau mencari pembenaran dalam tindakan kedua pelaku. Namun, faktor-faktor pemicu kesadisan sebisa mungkin harus diungkap untuk menemukan akar masalahnya.

Pakar psikologi forensik, Reza Indragiri Amriel, berpendapat, kecil kemungkinan tewasnya Sara sebagai sebuah kesengajaan dan terencana. Dua tersangka, yakni AIH dan AR, diduga kalap sehingga bereaksi secara berlebihan. Efek ini timbul karena pelaku tidak profesional.

”Reaksi berlebihan dari kedua tersangka terjadi saat korban berteriak dan bertindak di luar antisipasi sebelumnya. Cara tersangka menghentikannya kebablasan,” kata Reza. (MKN/NEL/MDN/RAY)

 

Sumber : Kompas.com

Editor : Maulana Lee

Imagine an elite professional services firm with a high-performing, workaholic culture. Everyone is expected to turn on a dime to serve a client, travel at a moment’s notice, and be available pretty much every evening and weekend. It can make for a grueling work life, but at the highest levels of accounting, law, investment banking and consulting firms, it is just the way things are.

Except for one dirty little secret: Some of the people ostensibly turning in those 80- or 90-hour workweeks, particularly men, may just be faking it.

Many of them were, at least, at one elite consulting firm studied by Erin Reid, a professor at Boston University’s Questrom School of Business. It’s impossible to know if what she learned at that unidentified consulting firm applies across the world of work more broadly. But her research, published in the academic journal Organization Science, offers a way to understand how the professional world differs between men and women, and some of the ways a hard-charging culture that emphasizes long hours above all can make some companies worse off.

Photo
 
Credit Peter Arkle

Ms. Reid interviewed more than 100 people in the American offices of a global consulting firm and had access to performance reviews and internal human resources documents. At the firm there was a strong culture around long hours and responding to clients promptly.

“When the client needs me to be somewhere, I just have to be there,” said one of the consultants Ms. Reid interviewed. “And if you can’t be there, it’s probably because you’ve got another client meeting at the same time. You know it’s tough to say I can’t be there because my son had a Cub Scout meeting.”

Some people fully embraced this culture and put in the long hours, and they tended to be top performers. Others openly pushed back against it, insisting upon lighter and more flexible work hours, or less travel; they were punished in their performance reviews.

The third group is most interesting. Some 31 percent of the men and 11 percent of the women whose records Ms. Reid examined managed to achieve the benefits of a more moderate work schedule without explicitly asking for it.

They made an effort to line up clients who were local, reducing the need for travel. When they skipped work to spend time with their children or spouse, they didn’t call attention to it. One team on which several members had small children agreed among themselves to cover for one another so that everyone could have more flexible hours.

A male junior manager described working to have repeat consulting engagements with a company near enough to his home that he could take care of it with day trips. “I try to head out by 5, get home at 5:30, have dinner, play with my daughter,” he said, adding that he generally kept weekend work down to two hours of catching up on email.

Despite the limited hours, he said: “I know what clients are expecting. So I deliver above that.” He received a high performance review and a promotion.

What is fascinating about the firm Ms. Reid studied is that these people, who in her terminology were “passing” as workaholics, received performance reviews that were as strong as their hyper-ambitious colleagues. For people who were good at faking it, there was no real damage done by their lighter workloads.

It calls to mind the episode of “Seinfeld” in which George Costanza leaves his car in the parking lot at Yankee Stadium, where he works, and gets a promotion because his boss sees the car and thinks he is getting to work earlier and staying later than anyone else. (The strategy goes awry for him, and is not recommended for any aspiring partners in a consulting firm.)

A second finding is that women, particularly those with young children, were much more likely to request greater flexibility through more formal means, such as returning from maternity leave with an explicitly reduced schedule. Men who requested a paternity leave seemed to be punished come review time, and so may have felt more need to take time to spend with their families through those unofficial methods.

The result of this is easy to see: Those specifically requesting a lighter workload, who were disproportionately women, suffered in their performance reviews; those who took a lighter workload more discreetly didn’t suffer. The maxim of “ask forgiveness, not permission” seemed to apply.

It would be dangerous to extrapolate too much from a study at one firm, but Ms. Reid said in an interview that since publishing a summary of her research in Harvard Business Review she has heard from people in a variety of industries describing the same dynamic.

High-octane professional service firms are that way for a reason, and no one would doubt that insane hours and lots of travel can be necessary if you’re a lawyer on the verge of a big trial, an accountant right before tax day or an investment banker advising on a huge merger.

But the fact that the consultants who quietly lightened their workload did just as well in their performance reviews as those who were truly working 80 or more hours a week suggests that in normal times, heavy workloads may be more about signaling devotion to a firm than really being more productive. The person working 80 hours isn’t necessarily serving clients any better than the person working 50.

In other words, maybe the real problem isn’t men faking greater devotion to their jobs. Maybe it’s that too many companies reward the wrong things, favoring the illusion of extraordinary effort over actual productivity.

WASHINGTON — The former deputy director of the C.I.A. asserts in a forthcoming book that Republicans, in their eagerness to politicize the killing of the American ambassador to Libya, repeatedly distorted the agency’s analysis of events. But he also argues that the C.I.A. should get out of the business of providing “talking points” for administration officials in national security events that quickly become partisan, as happened after the Benghazi attack in 2012.

The official, Michael J. Morell, dismisses the allegation that the United States military and C.I.A. officers “were ordered to stand down and not come to the rescue of their comrades,” and he says there is “no evidence” to support the charge that “there was a conspiracy between C.I.A. and the White House to spin the Benghazi story in a way that would protect the political interests of the president and Secretary Clinton,” referring to the secretary of state at the time, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

But he also concludes that the White House itself embellished some of the talking points provided by the Central Intelligence Agency and had blocked him from sending an internal study of agency conclusions to Congress.

Photo
 
Michael J. Morell Credit Mark Wilson/Getty Images

“I finally did so without asking,” just before leaving government, he writes, and after the White House released internal emails to a committee investigating the State Department’s handling of the issue.

A lengthy congressional investigation remains underway, one that many Republicans hope to use against Mrs. Clinton in the 2016 election cycle.

In parts of the book, “The Great War of Our Time” (Twelve), Mr. Morell praises his C.I.A. colleagues for many successes in stopping terrorist attacks, but he is surprisingly critical of other C.I.A. failings — and those of the National Security Agency.

Soon after Mr. Morell retired in 2013 after 33 years in the agency, President Obama appointed him to a commission reviewing the actions of the National Security Agency after the disclosures of Edward J. Snowden, a former intelligence contractor who released classified documents about the government’s eavesdropping abilities. Mr. Morell writes that he was surprised by what he found.

Advertisement

“You would have thought that of all the government entities on the planet, the one least vulnerable to such grand theft would have been the N.S.A.,” he writes. “But it turned out that the N.S.A. had left itself vulnerable.”

He concludes that most Wall Street firms had better cybersecurity than the N.S.A. had when Mr. Snowden swept information from its systems in 2013. While he said he found himself “chagrined by how well the N.S.A. was doing” compared with the C.I.A. in stepping up its collection of data on intelligence targets, he also sensed that the N.S.A., which specializes in electronic spying, was operating without considering the implications of its methods.

“The N.S.A. had largely been collecting information because it could, not necessarily in all cases because it should,” he says.

The book is to be released next week.

Mr. Morell was a career analyst who rose through the ranks of the agency, and he ended up in the No. 2 post. He served as President George W. Bush’s personal intelligence briefer in the first months of his presidency — in those days, he could often be spotted at the Starbucks in Waco, Tex., catching up on his reading — and was with him in the schoolhouse in Florida on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001, when the Bush presidency changed in an instant.

Mr. Morell twice took over as acting C.I.A. director, first when Leon E. Panetta was appointed secretary of defense and then when retired Gen. David H. Petraeus resigned over an extramarital affair with his biographer, a relationship that included his handing her classified notes of his time as America’s best-known military commander.

Mr. Morell says he first learned of the affair from Mr. Petraeus only the night before he resigned, and just as the Benghazi events were turning into a political firestorm. While praising Mr. Petraeus, who had told his deputy “I am very lucky” to run the C.I.A., Mr. Morell writes that “the organization did not feel the same way about him.” The former general “created the impression through the tone of his voice and his body language that he did not want people to disagree with him (which was not true in my own interaction with him),” he says.

But it is his account of the Benghazi attacks — and how the C.I.A. was drawn into the debate over whether the Obama White House deliberately distorted its account of the death of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens — that is bound to attract attention, at least partly because of its relevance to the coming presidential election. The initial assessments that the C.I.A. gave to the White House said demonstrations had preceded the attack. By the time analysts reversed their opinion, Susan E. Rice, now the national security adviser, had made a series of statements on Sunday talk shows describing the initial assessment. The controversy and other comments Ms. Rice made derailed Mr. Obama’s plan to appoint her as secretary of state.

The experience prompted Mr. Morell to write that the C.I.A. should stay out of the business of preparing talking points — especially on issues that are being seized upon for “political purposes.” He is critical of the State Department for not beefing up security in Libya for its diplomats, as the C.I.A., he said, did for its employees.

But he concludes that the assault in which the ambassador was killed took place “with little or no advance planning” and “was not well organized.” He says the attackers “did not appear to be looking for Americans to harm. They appeared intent on looting and conducting some vandalism,” setting fires that killed Mr. Stevens and a security official, Sean Smith.

Mr. Morell paints a picture of an agency that was struggling, largely unsuccessfully, to understand dynamics in the Middle East and North Africa when the Arab Spring broke out in late 2011 in Tunisia. The agency’s analysts failed to see the forces of revolution coming — and then failed again, he writes, when they told Mr. Obama that the uprisings would undercut Al Qaeda by showing there was a democratic pathway to change.

“There is no good explanation for our not being able to see the pressures growing to dangerous levels across the region,” he writes. The agency had again relied too heavily “on a handful of strong leaders in the countries of concern to help us understand what was going on in the Arab street,” he says, and those leaders themselves were clueless.

Moreover, an agency that has always overvalued secretly gathered intelligence and undervalued “open source” material “was not doing enough to mine the wealth of information available through social media,” he writes. “We thought and told policy makers that this outburst of popular revolt would damage Al Qaeda by undermining the group’s narrative,” he writes.

Instead, weak governments in Egypt, and the absence of governance from Libya to Yemen, were “a boon to Islamic extremists across both the Middle East and North Africa.”

Mr. Morell is gentle about most of the politicians he dealt with — he expresses admiration for both Mr. Bush and Mr. Obama, though he accuses former Vice President Dick Cheney of deliberately implying a connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq that the C.I.A. had concluded probably did not exist. But when it comes to the events leading up to the Bush administration’s decision to go to war in Iraq, he is critical of his own agency.

Mr. Morell concludes that the Bush White House did not have to twist intelligence on Saddam Hussein’s alleged effort to rekindle the country’s work on weapons of mass destruction.

“The view that hard-liners in the Bush administration forced the intelligence community into its position on W.M.D. is just flat wrong,” he writes. “No one pushed. The analysts were already there and they had been there for years, long before Bush came to office.”

Artikel lainnya »