JUAL GENSET LOVOL MURAH DI JAKARTA

Jual Sparepart Genset Lovol Murah di Jambi Hubungi : 0821 - 1310 - 3112/(021) 9224 - 2423 PT. Tribuana Diesel Adalah penjualan Generating-Set (genset) berkualitas import (builtup) bagi anda yang membutuhkan product berkualitas serta pengadaan yang cepat urgent tanpa berbelit-belit, Genset kami di lengkapi dengan dokumen Certificate Of Original , Manual book engine dan manual book generator, Kami sediakan Genset kapasitas 10 Kva - 650Kva (ANDA PESAN KAMI ANTAR).

Jual Sparepart Genset Lovol Murah di Jambi Kami juga menerima pembuatan box silent dan perakitan diesel generator set. Produk kami meliputi berbagai diesel generator set model open, silent lokal yang ukuranya menyesuaikan lokasi pondasi genset, mobile/ trailer . Sebagian besar mesin kami menggunakan Merk : Perkins, Cummins, Deutz, Lovol, Isuzu Foton dengan generator Leroy Somer, Stamford, kualitas terbaik brushless alternator. Jual Sparepart Genset Lovol Murah di Jambi

Jual Sparepart Genset Lovol Murah di Jambi

Tag :
Jual Genset Lovol | Jual Sparepart Genset Lovol Murah di Jambi | Jual Genset Lovol kav 45 kva | jual genset lovol Kap 70 Kva Prime Power type 1004TG | Genset Lovol | Genset Lovol kav 45 kva | Jual Genset cummins |

Jual Genset Cummins 30Kva Built Up bergaransi dan berkualitas di Maluku Tenggara Barat

Jual Genset Cummins 30Kva Built Up bergaransi dan berkualitas di Maluku Tenggara Barat Hubungi : 0821 - 1310 - 3112/(021) 9224 - 2423 PT. Tribuana Diesel Adalah penjualan Generating-Set (genset) berkualitas import (builtup) bagi anda yang membutuhkan product berkualitas serta pengadaan yang cepat urgent tanpa berbelit-belit, Genset kami di lengkapi dengan dokumen Certificate Of Original , Manual book engine dan manual book generator, Kami sediakan Genset kapasitas 10 Kva - 650Kva (ANDA PESAN KAMI ANTAR). Jual Genset Cummins 30Kva Built Up bergaransi dan berkualitas di Maluku Tenggara Barat

    saco-indonesia.com,     bergetar hati ini saat mengingat dirimu     mungkin

    saco-indonesia.com,

    bergetar hati ini saat mengingat dirimu
    mungkin saja diri ini tak terlihat olehmu
    aku pahami itu

    reff:
    bagaimana caranya agar kamu tahu bahwa
    kau lebih dari indah di dalam hati ini
    lewat lagu ini ku ingin kamu mengerti
    aku sayang kamu, ku ingin bersamamu

    meski ku tak pernah tahu kapan kau kan mengerti
    ku coba tuk berharap

    repeat reff [2x]

    Editor : dian sukmawati

 

Bekasi, Saco-Indonesia.com - Segmen yang selama ini diam, terletak 37 km di selatan Kroya, Jawa Tengah, pada sabtu (25/1/2014) bersuara.

Bekasi, Saco-Indonesia.com - Segmen yang selama ini diam, terletak 37 km di selatan Kroya, Jawa Tengah, pada sabtu (25/1/2014) bersuara. Gejolak segmen itu menimbulkan gempa yang mengguncang wilayah hampir seluruh Jawa dengan goncangan terkuat di Kebumen.

Menurut informasi dari United States Geological Survey (USGS), gempa bermagnitud 6,1, terjadi pada pukul 12.14 WIB, pada kedalaman 89,1 km. Gempa tidak menimbulkan tsunami tapi disusul oleh 6 gempa susulan.

Terkait gempa tersebut, pakar tektonik dari Institut Teknologi Bandung (ITB), Irwan Meilano, sempat mengungkapkan adanya potensi gempa Kebumen untuk tidak hanya mengakibatkan gempa susulan, tetapi juga gempa yang terpicu (triggerred earthquake).

Irwan mengatakan, gempa yang terpicu oleh gempa Kebumen itu "bisa memiliki magnitud yang lebih besar dari gempa sebelumnya." (Baca artikel "Waspada, Gempa Kebumen Bisa Memicu Gempa Lebih Besar").

Peringatan ini mendapatkan respon beragam dalam kotak komentar di Kompas.com maupun media sosial Twitter, salah satunya adalah ketakutan dan tuduhan bahwa informasi tentang potensi gempa yang terpicu adalah upaya menakut-nakuti masyarakat.

"Jangan nakut-nakuti bos!" demikian komentar salah satu pembaca Kompas.com dengan akun bernama Juragan Minyak - kecewa Gubernur DKI abaikan sumber polusi bising di ibu kota, pada Sabtu pukul 20.19 WIB.

Sementara, di Twitter, pengguna bernama Dariel Siregar mengatakan, "Kepo!! Berita buat masyarakat resah aje." Anggi Anggarini punya kicauan hampir sama. "Jangan nakut2in donk :'(," katanya.

Haruskah Panik dan Takut?

Menanggapi komentar pembaca, Irwan memahami bahwa informasi potensi gempa memang bisa membuat publik panik. Tak sepenuhnya salah, sebab Indonesia memang memiliki historis gempa mematikan, seperti gempa Aceh tahun 2004 dan gempa Yogyakarta tahun 2006.

Namun, ia menegaskan bahwa tujuan pemberian informasi bukanlah untuk membuat panik. "Informasi potensi bencana memang harus diberikan untuk meningkatkan kewaspadaan kita," kata Irwan saat dihubungi Kompas.com, Minggu (26/1/2014).

Irwan mengungkapkan, seringkali terjadi, Indonesia menganggap rendah potensi bencana. Informasi yang diberikan kepada masyarakat tidak sesuai dengan potensi yang sebenarnya. "Agar masyarakat tenang," tuturnya.

Menurutnya, bencana-bencana yang merenggut banyak nyawa dan membuat negara merugi sebenarnya adalah akumulasi dari ketidakpedulian kita pada potensi bencana. "Kalau kita meng-underestimate potensi gempa, ini juga salah satu bentuk ignorance," ungkapnya.

Informasi potensi gempa yang sebenarnya memang bisa membuat panik dan takut. Namun, bagaimanapun tetap perlu diberikan dengan cara komunikasi yang pas sehingga tumbuh kesiapsiagaan menghadapi bencana serta perubahan sikap.

Irwan menuturkan, sejarah memang mengharuskan warga yang hidup di selatan Jawa untuk mewaspadai gempa. Aktivitas lempeng lautan terbukti telah memicu gempa dan tsunami di Banyuwangi pada tahun 1994 dan gempa dan tsunami Pangandaran tahun 2006.

Mengapa tak detail?

Akun Andri Jalu menulis dalam kotak komentar di Kompas.com, "Jelaskan dengan lebih detil tentang selang waktu gempa yang terpicu, buat orang awam yg bukan ahli, jadi tidak menimbulkan ketakutan kalo ada yg membaca artikel ini."

Mungkin memang sebuah keharusan bila pemberitahuan ancaman disertai dengan detail selang waktu gempa yang terpicu akan terjadi, wilayah mana yang kemungkinan mengalami, dan berapa besarnya. Sayangnya, detail tersebut sulit didapatkan.

Widjo Kongko, peneliti gempa dan tsunami dari Badan Pengkajian dan Penerapan Teknologi (BPPT), mengatakan bahwa gempa Kebumen terjadi di segmen yang jarang bergejolak. Dalam 4 dekade, cuma ada 10 gempa dengan magnitud lebih dari 5 yang terjadi di segmen itu.

Pada saat yang sama, patahan dan segmen penyebab gempa di selatan Jawa belum banyak terpetakan seperti di Sumatera. Karenanya, Widjo menyebut bahwa pengetahuan tentang wilayah tersebut masih gelap.

Karena belum banyak dipelajari, sulit memerkirakan wilayah yang akan terpicu aktivitasnya akibat gempa Kebumen kemarin, di samping memang sampai saat ini sulit memerkirakan waktu dan lokasi yang akan mengalami gempa.

Widjo hanya bisa memberi petunjuk lokasi yang masih umum. "Lokasi di Jawa selatan, bisa mendekati palung atau sebaliknya, ke daratan," ungkapnya. Berapa lama setelah gempa Kebumen gempa terpicu mungkin terjadi, belum bisa dikatakan.

Irwan mengungkapkan, gempa Kebumen kemarin terjadi dengan mekanisme sesar turun akibat slab pull. Slab pull secara sederhana adalah bergeraknya lempeng samudera karena adanya tarikan lempeng samudera yang berada di zona subduksi.

Menurut Irwan, gerakan turun lempeng akibat gempa Kebumen cukup curam. Ini bisa berarti bahwa bagian atas lempeng tersebut saat ini memiliki akumulasi energi dan berpotensi menimbulkan gempa yang terpicu.

"Jadi yang bisa diberikan, gempa yang terpicu ini mungkin terjadi di wilayah yang lebih dangkal," ungkapnya. Wilayah dangkal berarti berada pada kedalaman palung hingga 50 kilometer.

Gempa dangkal memang hanya akan dirasakan di wilayah yang cakupannya lebih sempit. Namun, goncangannya akan lebih terasa dampaknya jauh lebih merusak. Gempa Yogyakarta pada tahun 2006 dengan kedalaman episentrum hanya 10 km adalah salah satu gempa dangkal.

Gempa dangkal yang terjadi di lautan juga bisa berarti memiliki potensi tsunami bila gerakan sesarnya naik. Dengan goncangan lebih besar dan berpotensi tsunami, maka suatu gempa akan lebih mematikan.

Di luar konteks gempa yang terpicu, gempa Kebumen juga memberi petunjuk bahwa subduksi Jawa aktif. Selama ini, seringkali dianggap bahwa subduksi Jawa aseismik, tidak seaktif subduksi Sumatera.

Ilmuwan membagi subduksi Jawa menjadi tiga bagian, Selat Sunda hingga selatan Jawa Barat, selatan Jawa Tengah, serta selatan Jawa Timur hingga Bali. Masing-masing memang bisa memicu gempa dengan magnitud 8,5.

Apa yang harus dilakukan?

Perkembangan ilmu pengetahuan saat ini belum mampu memberikan kemampuan bagi manusia untuk meramal gempa. Pada saat yang sama, penelitian tentang beragam patahan penyebab gempa serta yang terkait masih terkendala dana. Di tengah situasi itu, apa yang harus dilakukan?

Widjo menuturkan, saat ini masyarakat bisa melakukan penyesuaian setelah mengetahui bahwa dirinya tinggal di lokasi rawan gempa. "Misalnya bangunan rumah dibuat tahan gempa," ungkap Widjo.

Sementara, Irwan mengatakan, informasi adanya ancaman seharusnya sudah cukup bagi pemerintah dan masyarakat untuk memulai perubahan.

"Warga harus lebih waspada, edukasi yang diberikan pemerintah ke masyarakat terus dilakukan, institudi pendidikan juga harus mulai membangun kesadaran tentang gempa," jelas Irwan.

Terkait adaptasi yang bisa dilakukan warga, peneliti dari Pusat Penelitian Geoteknologi LIPI, Eko Yulianto, saat ditemui Desember 2013 lalu menuturkan perlunya warga memiliki ruang aman untuk berlindung saat gempa.

Ruang aman bisa berupa ruang atau sudut mana pun di dalam rumah yang dibangun  tahan gempa. Strategi ini merupakan alternatif ketika membangun rumah tahan gempa masih sulit. Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana (BNPB) perlu mengampanyekannya.

Sumber : Kompas.com

Editor : Maulana Lee

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.”

Mr. Haroche was a founder of Liberty Travel, which grew from a two-man operation to the largest leisure travel operation in the United States.

Artikel lainnya »