- Home
- A week ago RREV (voting advisory group) advised voting against & L&G agreed. Now:
L&G Investment Management Chief Executive Peter Chambers says,“we recognise that in these exceptional circumstances, a failure to secure this capital could lead to a material detriment in shareholder value. As a result, where we have discretion from our clients, we will vote in favour of the plan.” L&G Investment Management owns about 5% of Barclays, according to reports.
- Vote “yes”, they say: Barclays Official Announcement on their capital raising plans for Monday’s meeting, 24th November, 2008 (a date that will do down, down, down in British banking history)
Comment at end
21st November, 2008
WHAT!!!
YOU DON’T MEAN YOU’RE STILL WITH BARCLAYS?
Oh Happy Day – Sharia Banking’s Comin’ Your Way!
Monday is D-Day. The slippery slope for Barclays Bankers. So if you’re not outta there yet, shift yourself!
And don’t say I didn’t warn you.
The huge financing initiative involving Middle East investors is all but unstoppable now. That’s regardless of your wishes as a customer or even if you happen to hold a share or two. If as a small shareholder you rush along to their meeting on Monday to listen to all the reasons why it’s the answer, and how it’ll ensure that Barclay’s finishes way ahead of HBOS-Lloyds/TSB, NatWest and the rest – it won’t matter one penny if you vote against. You, my fearful friend, will have no say in the matter.
At the shareholders coffee and biscuits (cookies to American visitors) get-together you know how it’s going to end before it starts. Come on now – you look as though you’ve been around long enough! You KNOW that only the big investment companies have any power to control such major decisions. Those large enough to own at least 5% of the shares. Those such as Legal & General Investment Management. And they have now capitulated.
Not that any of them are raising concerns over WHO is about to own a third of Barclays. Oh, the trust. the innocence, the naivety, the carelessness. Moving, isn’t it?
SHAKING IT (THE SUKUK) ALL AROUND
So don’t bother making an early start to get there by next Monday at 10:00am. Your few thousand or even few million shares aren’t going to weigh up to anything more than the fine, dry sand shaken from a Saudi sheik’s sandal.
You’ve had it, my friend. It’s Sharia Finance for you. But at least I warned you here. If only you’d stopped watching that dancing political journalist a few days before he opted out of Strictly Come Shuffling About (now there’s a man who knows when the game’s up), you might have read something useful about the pound … er … 70p in your pocket! Or should I say, in Barclay’s pocket?
Not that you’re going to notice anything different with the bank. Not much … not yet. But in a year or two’s time, while the rest of us are struggling along with the government’s backing for our banks, the arrangement Barclays eschewed, you will be getting some interesting offers from Barclays or … whatever they call themselves then.
Sharia-compliant bonds, mortgages and loans (well, more or less compliant). You’ll be spoilt for choice. And before you know it, if you miss a month’s payment … well … that’s stealing, don’t you know? And you DO know what happens to thieves under Sharia Finance/Law, don’t you?
Wave goodbye to your right hand … with the left one.
I bank elsewhere, I’m pleased to say. I’ve always preferred two hands.
WARNING – SERIOUS WARNING
THIS VIDEO IS HORRIFIC. DON’T WATCH IF YOUR STOMACH ISN’T TOUGH
The video below is from former Muslims. Note: I do not say that all branches of Islam are like this. I never have and I never will. But we do need to understand what slope we may be on by adopting the financial elements of Islam. Sharia Law & Sharia Finance are two sides of the same coin. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
Click here to watch this Windows Movie Video Or visit Apostates of Islam here
So, with the thousands of people every week who now pay a visit to my little corner of the internet, my hope is that one or two of you may have heeded this warning.
Move your account away from Barclays.
[Sadly, I expect you to pay as much attention as you did over the getting rid of Blair business. And yet I was right there too, wasn't I? I mean, think of it; it would have been so much easier for good Ol' Gordy to save the world's finances if he didn't ALREADY have to do TWO jobs (Chancellor & PM!) And they used to say John (two-jags) Prescott was greedy.]
LONDON (Reuters) – A top investor in Barclays said on Thursday it would back the bank’s controversial fundraising plan despite voicing concerns.
Barclays has faced a backlash among some shareholders who are unhappy that investors in Qatar and Abu Dhabi have been offered attractive terms to provide the bank with 5.8 billion pounds of capital.
Barclays investors are due to vote on Monday on plans to raise cash from the sale of complex capital instruments.
News reports had said top investors Legal & General (L&G) Investment Management and Aviva Investors may vote against the plan, intended to help the bank repair damage from the global financial crisis and avoid taking government rescue funds.
L&G Investment Management said in a statement on Thursday it regretted Barclays had decided to raise the capital “without due consideration of its impact on existing shareholders and on terms that we consider to be expensive.”
Expressing deep disappointment with the financing deal, L&G Investment Management Chief Executive Peter Chambers said in the statement that normal policy would have been “to advise our clients to vote against the proposed capital raising.
“However, in this case, we recognise that in these exceptional circumstances, a failure to secure this capital could lead to a material detriment in shareholder value. As a result, where we have discretion from our clients, we will vote in favour of the plan,” he added.
L&G Investment Management owns about 5 percent of Barclays, according to reports.
Chambers said that, in future, L&G Investment Management would advise its clients to vote against capital raisings that disregarded pre-emption rights — shareholders’ traditional right to first refusal on funding.
Barclays tried to head off a backlash from shareholders by selling them a slice of some lucrative capital instruments that had been earmarked for the Middle East investors.
Barclays executives effectively said “back us or sack us” by putting all the board up for re-election in April as part of this week’s concessions. It also scrapped bonuses for directors.
Approval is expected on Monday, with the bank set to get the required 75 percent of investors who vote, although many could abstain.
(Reporting by Adrian Croft; Editing by Leslie Gevirtz)
A LITTLE REMINDER TO SHAREHOLDERS: Abstentions DON’T COUNT.
It’s a little like voting at general elections. Despite my pointing out that ONLY big investors count in this shareholders’ vote, if you, as a Barclays shareholder, decide to turn up on Monday, remember, as in general elections – don’t moan if you don’t groan.
Having said that, please don’t be tempted to charge into your local Barclay’s branch in this fashion!
“A have-a-go-hero wrestled a knife-wielding maniac to the ground after she stormed into a bank screaming for money.”
OTHER INTERESTING MATTERS
US site Family Security Matters, on the American motor industry’s problems says:
Oil, U.S. Auto Industry, Jihad, and Islamic Supremacism
As the U.S. automobile industry seeks funds from the U.S. government, Americans need to ask if this industry understands that Islamic supremacists are at war with America, and how the automobile industry is going to change its product lines to recognize the need to reduce petrodollars to our Islamic supremacist enemies.
After the 9/11 attacks, I looked in the mirror and asked myself that, if I was going to do to challenge others on Jihad and Islamic supremacism, what was I going to immediately change in my own life. I had to be able to walk the walk – personally. Among other answers, the easiest one for me was to commit to driving out Jihadists by using a fuel-efficient vehicle or other non-oil based transportation as much as possible. I am not suggesting that this is all it takes for America’s energy independence crisis, nor is this a solution that will work for everyone. But we have to be able to show willingness to change and sacrifice as individuals in the larger and longer human rights war against Islamic supremacism.
Of the 19 suspected 9/11 hijackers, 13 came from Saudi Arabia. What does Saudi Arabia export other than oil and Islamic supremacism? Sand?
Muslims & Jews combine to fight Islamophobia & anti-Semitism. I suppose that’s a start. Now – HOW can they get the politics out of religion?
Not to mention the human rights into fundamental Islam. Are you listening, Liberty and Chakrabarti?
Tags: 1. Tony Blair, 5.8 billion investment, Barclay's Bank, Barclays shareholders vote, Brown (Gordon Brown & his Labour Government, from June 2007), jihadists, John Prescott, John Sergeant, L&G, Legal & General Investment Management, Liberty, Qatar and Abu Dhabi, saudi arabia, Shami Chakrabarti, Sharia Finance, sharia law, Strictly Come Dancing
November 29, 2008 at 1:05 am |
[...] Barclays Sinks In The Saudi Sands (OK – Qatar & Abu Dhabi) …plans for Monday’s meeting, 24th November, 2008 (a date that will do … said “back us or sack us” by putting all the board up for… [...]
December 7, 2008 at 7:38 pm |
PHILADELPHIA — Trent Cole is not exactly sure how many friends and family members will be in attendance Sunday when he returns to his native Ohio with the Eagles to play the Cincinnati Bengals. He does know his No. 1 critic will be there.
December 18, 2008 at 3:11 pm |
you bloody dumb ass in islam charging interest is not allowed, interset is unislamic and missing a payment has nothing to do with stealing, and they would never cut off hands for missed payment nor do they do this in qatar or abu dabi either
it is statements like this that make you look so dumb and stupid
i am irish catholic not defending islam just objecting to stupidity
December 18, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Update to the reply below:
I forgot to mention, Mr GoodWithWords Smith. When I referred, tongue partly in cheek, to hand-chopping for “late payments” I did not refer to late “interest” payments, just late payments.
Oh, why do I waste my time explaining things to the ignorant?
And I even give them an undeserved mention, reminding him NOT to be tempted in ANY way in Malaysia.
And just to emphasise the point:
The first, initial response I made to this commenter follows:
……………………………………………………………………..
Mind your language now, Mr Smith! We don’t approve here, y’know. You’ll find that elsewhere online if you like that sort of thing. Something to do with morals, I suppose. And I know that catholics have morals!
I suppose you are right in some small ways. They don’t ALL cut off hands officially. But the issue is that some elements of fundamental Islam do. And some signed up to this fundamentalism think it is fine so to do, in fact they believe the Koran tells them so.
I used this as an example to show the extremes of punishments that some following a radical form of Islam follow, and which was even proposed by a British imam last year in order to STOP theft forever. He even said we’d only have to do it once. ONCE is too much, imho.
I thought intelligent people might “get ” this analogy. Evidently not.
So if I am charged with exaggeration to make a point I plead (more or less) guilty. I am not the only one who uses literary licence in this way!
It is the mindset that fundamentalist political/religious followers of this doctrine cling to which concerns me. For For instance their approach to women is abominable, and completely foreign to modern western culture.
Or as a good catholic perhaps you agree with them that a woman is worth half of a man, and can be divorced by his uttering of the words “I divorce you”, whereas SHE has to prove WHY she needs to be free of him – in front of a men-only Sharia Court, of course.
Go off and learn a little more about Sharia and its implications for western democracies before you call others names.
December 19, 2008 at 4:28 pm |
[...] reminds me. I had a commenter here the other day – a rather rude Irish catholic – taking me to task for exaggerating the punishments meted out by [...]
December 22, 2008 at 12:11 pm |
your either thick or very very ignorant MR keeptonyblairforpm (or what ever your are!) either way you dont realise its UK and in this christian country (oh sorry in atheist country) sharia wont apply but sharia finance will SUCCEDD at least it doesnt bring the Finance system to its knees based on jewish crap….. and look at HSBC they have it and i happily bank with them because they are good unlike barclays. either way i think you dont have any insight on sharia finance else you wont talk rubbish and have a cnnhead or skynews_head learn your knowledge through journalist who feed general public through there back!
December 22, 2008 at 7:48 pm
Probably “thick” and “stupid” – unlike your good self – whoever you are.
At the moment Sharia Law does NOT apply on an equal par with English Law, but it does apply in family courts. I have been assured by my MP than it is not the government’s position that it should be on an equal par with English Law. However, my MP says that Sharia courts do deal with social issues and will not override English law, whatever that means. I am not exactly re-assured. I see ANY form of Sharia as a slippery slope to ALL forms of sharia, and that is not acceptable in my SECULAR country where religion does not enter into the practice of the law.
My contention is that once Sharia Finance takes a grip and more Muslim women in my country are subjected to the iniquities of Sharia Law, it may become a stronger, more acceptable code, as it is intrinsic to Islam.
I do not want it here. NONE of it.
If people immigrate here they accept the whole package or go home. Simple. As I would if I went to a Muslim land.
If I had emigrated to Pakistan or another Middle East country where Sharia is the norm, the last thing I would EVER ask is that English Law should be set up for me and other British immigrants. I would have emigrated and I would have to take the whole package.
Immigrants from Muslim lands should do the same. They take our free health service and education systems and generous social support for sometimes SEVERAL wives (while bigamy is an imprisonable offence for the rest of us) and STILL expect us to accept their form of law.
A double whammy!
I am completely disenchanted with the fact that my government has allowed this to kick off at ALL here. They never asked ANY of the voters in ANY of their manifestos what we think, so determined were they to capture the Muslim inner-city vote. The opposition parties, Conservative and Liberal Democrats were just as culpable, and they say nothing about it yet.
I can see where you are coming from since you insult the present finance system as “jewish crap”. Thank you for the insight into your gentle, easy-going and kind approach to the system which has brought us centuries of increasing success and has taken millions out of poverty.
My readers will no doubt take note.
Your last sentence was hard to decipher. I can’t quite work out whether you think journalists are a good or a bad source of information.
But I take my information from ALL sorts of sites, both promoting and criticising sharia finance.
I have no doubt it works for some, and parts of it we should likely incorporate into our system. But anything that is tied to a religion is OUT for me, on a personal basis.
Religious leaders in Islam often have trouble explaining to fundamentalists that they should not kill for revenge or in Allah’s name.
Why should I trust such incoherence to poke its nose into my financial affairs?
NO SHARIA HERE.
Go home and take it with you.
July 20, 2009 at 11:16 am |
[...] http://keeptonyblairforpm.wordpress.com/2008/11/21/barclays-sinks-in-the-saudi-sands/ [...]