Agen Umroh VIP November 2015 di Jakarta Selatan Hubungi 021-9929-2337 atau 0821-2406-5740 Alhijaz Indowisata adalah perusahaan swasta nasional yang bergerak di bidang tour dan travel. Nama Alhijaz terinspirasi dari istilah dua kota suci bagi umat islam pada zaman nabi Muhammad saw. yaitu Makkah dan Madinah. Dua kota yang penuh berkah sehingga diharapkan menular dalam kinerja perusahaan. Sedangkan Indowisata merupakan akronim dari kata indo yang berarti negara Indonesia dan wisata yang menjadi fokus usaha bisnis kami.
Agen Umroh VIP November 2015 di Jakarta Selatan Alhijaz Indowisata didirikan oleh Bapak H. Abdullah Djakfar Muksen pada tahun 2010. Merangkak dari kecil namun pasti, alhijaz berkembang pesat dari mulai penjualan tiket maskapai penerbangan domestik dan luar negeri, tour domestik hingga mengembangkan ke layanan jasa umrah dan haji khusus. Tak hanya itu, pada tahun 2011 Alhijaz kembali membuka divisi baru yaitu provider visa umrah yang bekerja sama dengan muassasah arab saudi. Sebagai komitmen legalitas perusahaan dalam melayani pelanggan dan jamaah secara aman dan profesional, saat ini perusahaan telah mengantongi izin resmi dari pemerintah melalui kementrian pariwisata, lalu izin haji khusus dan umrah dari kementrian agama. Selain itu perusahaan juga tergabung dalam komunitas organisasi travel nasional seperti Asita, komunitas penyelenggara umrah dan haji khusus yaitu HIMPUH dan organisasi internasional yaitu IATA.
PENYUMBANG BAKTERI BAIK BAGI USUS DENGAN MAKAN BUBUR
saco-indonesia.com, Berbagai macam produk makanan atau minuman kaya akan probiotik sedang marak untuk dipromosikan kepada masyar
saco-indonesia.com, Berbagai macam produk makanan atau minuman kaya akan probiotik sedang marak untuk dipromosikan kepada masyarakat. Padahal penyumbang bakteri baik bagi usus bukan cuma makanan atau minuman kaya probiotik.
Seorang dokter yang telah mempelajari bagaimana cara bakteri dapat menyehatkan tubuh menyebutkan kalau bubur juga termasuk makanan wajib konsumsi. Sebab bubur ternyata juga dapat menyumbangkan asupan bakteri baik bagi usus.
"Saya mencoba tidak makan sereal selama dua minggu kemudian enam minggu berikutnya mengonsumsi sereal saja," papar Dr Christoffer van Tulleken dari Skotlandia.
Pada akhir percobaannya, Dr Tulleken juga mengaku dirinya merasa luar biasa. Ia pun telah menemukan kalau beberapa bakteri dalam ususnya mati sementara bakteri lain yang sifatnya baik bagi usus jumlahnya berkembang menjadi sangat banyak.
Menurut Dr Tulleken, asupan lemak dan gula dalam dosis tepat sebenarnya baik bagi usus. Konsumsi kedua nutrisi tersebut pun juga perlu dikonsumsi setiap hari.
Terlepas dari percobaan Dr Tulleken, ternyata bubur tersebut juga memiliki beberapa manfaat bagi kesehatan, yaitu:
Menangkal depresi, karena kaya akan vitamin B6 yang dapat merangsang hormon serotonin pada otak, bubur adalah makanan yang ampuh untuk dapat meredakan stres dan depresi.
Melawan osteoporosis, kandungan bubur sereal yang telah dicampur dengan susu adalah sumber kalsium yang sangat baik, sehingga konsumsinya mampu dapat mencegah kondisi tulang keropos.
Menghentikan kebiasaan merokok, sebab ada senyawa di dalam bubur sereal yang mampu dapat menenangkan sistem saraf dan menurunkan efek kecanduan terhadap nikotin.
Editor : dian sukmawati
TELKOM SISIHKAN DANA UNTUK KEGIATAN SOSIAL
saco-indonesia.com, Selain produk, Telkom Group Balikpapan juga telah berpartisipasi dalam hal sosial, salah satunya dengan tela
saco-indonesia.com, Selain produk, Telkom Group Balikpapan juga telah berpartisipasi dalam hal sosial, salah satunya dengan telah menyisihkan anggaran dana untuk Community Social Responsibility (CSR).
Dana yang telah dikeluarkan tidak tanggung-tanggung. Dalam hal membiayai CSR ini, Telkom Group telah menyisihkan dana sebesar Rp 2,5 miliar. Bentuk dari CSR ini adalah Bina Lingkungan yang telah dimulai sejak tahun 2004 silam.
"Kami juga salurkan dalam bentuk kegiatan Bina Lingkungan sejak 2004 sampai akhir 2013," kata Broto Suseno, Pelaksana Operasional Harian (POH) GM Telkom Witel Kalimantan Timur Bagian Selatan.
Bentuk kegiatan Bina Lingkungan adalah bantuan untuk kegiatan pendidikan, pengadaan sarana umum, sarana ibadah, bantuan bagi masyarakat yang telah tertimpa musibah bencana alam, penyediaan sarana dan kegiatan kesehatan masyarakat serta berbagai pelatihan untuk dapat meningkatkan kualitas pengetahuan mengenai informasi, komunikasi dan teknologi (ICT, information, communication, and technology).
"Kegiatan kami hari ini juga bagian dari CSR ini," tambah Manager Communication Regional Kalimantan, Noercahyo Setiabudi.
Minggu pagi tersebut, Telkom juga menggelar acara donor darah dan kegiatan yang disebut BOMBASTIS di halaman Pasar Segar, Balikpapan Baru. Sampai menjelang siang terkumpul hingga 500 kantong darah berbagai golongan yang segera diserahkan kepada PMI Balikpapan.
BOMBASTIS atau Barang Bosan Masih Bagus Murahnya Fantastis adalah semacam penjualan barang bekas yang masih bagus, yang dalam kegiatan ini berasal dari jajaran Telkom Group sendiri. Uang dari penjualan BOMBASTIS digunakan untuk pengadaan bibit pohon mangrove yang akan ditanam di Kelurahan Teritip, Balikpapan Timur.
"Kami juga targetkan bisa untuk pengadaan 1.000 bibit mangrove," harap Manager Youth and Community Telkomsel Regional Kalimantan Simon Sidabutar.
Broto Suseno juga menjelaskan Telkom Group Peduli merupakan program rutin yang telah diniatkan perseroan sebagai kepedulian terhadap lingkungan hidup, kemanusiaan, dan sosial.
"Kami juga berharap melalui kegiatan ini secara tidak langsung dapat mendorong lingkungan hidup yang sehat, pertumbuhan ekonomi, dan terciptanya pemerataan pembangunan," demikian Broto Suseno.
But an unusual assortment of players, including furniture makers, the Chinese government, Republicans from states with a large base of furniture manufacturing and even some Democrats who championed early regulatory efforts, have questioned the E.P.A. proposal. The sustained opposition has held sway, as the agency is now preparing to ease key testing requirements before it releases the landmark federal health standard.
The E.P.A.’s five-year effort to adopt this rule offers another example of how industry opposition can delay and hamper attempts by the federal government to issue regulations, even to control substances known to be harmful to human health.
Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen that can also cause respiratory ailments like asthma, but the potential of long-term exposure to cause cancers like myeloid leukemia is less well understood.
The E.P.A.’s decision would be the first time that the federal government has regulated formaldehyde inside most American homes.
“The stakes are high for public health,” said Tom Neltner, senior adviser for regulatory affairs at the National Center for Healthy Housing, who has closely monitored the debate over the rules. “What we can’t have here is an outcome that fails to confront the health threat we all know exists.”
The proposal would not ban formaldehyde — commonly used as an ingredient in wood glue in furniture and flooring — but it would impose rules that prevent dangerous levels of the chemical’s vapors from those products, and would set testing standards to ensure that products sold in the United States comply with those limits. The debate has sharpened in the face of growing concern about the safety of formaldehyde-treated flooring imported from Asia, especially China.
What is certain is that a lot of money is at stake: American companies sell billions of dollars’ worth of wood products each year that contain formaldehyde, and some argue that the proposed regulation would impose unfair costs and restrictions.
Determined to block the agency’s rule as proposed, these industry players have turned to the White House, members of Congress and top E.P.A. officials, pressing them to roll back the testing requirements in particular, calling them redundant and too expensive.
“There are potentially over a million manufacturing jobs that will be impacted if the proposed rule is finalized without changes,” wrote Bill Perdue, the chief lobbyist at the American Home Furnishings Alliance, a leading critic of the testing requirements in the proposed regulation, in one letter to the E.P.A.
Industry opposition helped create an odd alignment of forces working to thwart the rule. The White House moved to strike out key aspects of the proposal. Subsequent appeals for more changes were voiced by players as varied as Senator Barbara Boxer, Democrat of California, and Senator Roger Wicker, Republican of Mississippi, as well as furniture industry lobbyists.
Hurricane Katrina in 2005 helped ignite the public debate over formaldehyde, after the deadly storm destroyed or damaged hundreds of thousands of homes along the Gulf of Mexico, forcing families into temporary trailers provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
The displaced storm victims quickly began reporting respiratory problems, burning eyes and other issues, and tests then confirmed high levels of formaldehyde fumes leaking into the air inside the trailers, which in many cases had been hastily constructed.
Public health advocates petitioned the E.P.A. to issue limits on formaldehyde in building materials and furniture used in homes, given that limits already existed for exposure in workplaces. But three years after the storm, only California had issued such limits.
Industry groups like the American Chemistry Council have repeatedly challenged the science linking formaldehyde to cancer, a position championed by David Vitter, the Republican senator from Louisiana, who is a major recipient of chemical industry campaign contributions, and whom environmental groups have mockingly nicknamed “Senator Formaldehyde.”
By 2010, public health advocates and some industry groups secured bipartisan support in Congress for legislation that ordered the E.P.A. to issue federal rules that largely mirrored California’s restrictions. At the time, concerns were rising over the growing number of lower-priced furniture imports from Asia that might include contaminated products, while also hurting sales of American-made products.
Maneuvering began almost immediately after the E.P.A. prepared draft rules to formally enact the new standards.
White House records show at least five meetings in mid-2012 with industry executives — kitchen cabinet makers, chemical manufacturers, furniture trade associations and their lobbyists, like Brock R. Landry, of the Venable law firm. These parties, along with Senator Vitter’s office, appealed to top administration officials, asking them to intervene to roll back the E.P.A. proposal.
The White House Office of Management and Budget, which reviews major federal regulations before they are adopted, apparently agreed. After the White House review, the E.P.A. “redlined” many of the estimates of the monetary benefits that would be gained by reductions in related health ailments, like asthma and fertility issues, documents reviewed by The New York Times show.
As a result, the estimated benefit of the proposed rule dropped to $48 million a year, from as much as $278 million a year. The much-reduced amount deeply weakened the agency’s justification for the sometimes costly new testing that would be required under the new rules, a federal official involved in the effort said.
“It’s a redlining blood bath,” said Lisa Heinzerling, a Georgetown University Law School professor and a former E.P.A. official, using the Washington phrase to describe when language is stricken from a proposed rule. “Almost the entire discussion of these potential benefits was excised.”
“That’s a huge difference,” said Luke Bolar, a spokesman for Mr. Vitter, of the reduced estimated financial benefits, saying the change was “clearly highlighting more mismanagement” at the E.P.A.
The review’s outcome galvanized opponents in the furniture industry. They then targeted a provision that mandated new testing of laminated wood, a cheaper alternative to hardwood. (The California standard on which the law was based did not require such testing.)
But E.P.A. scientists had concluded that these laminate products — millions of which are sold annually in the United States — posed a particular risk. They said that when thin layers of wood, also known as laminate or veneer, are added to furniture or flooring in the final stages of manufacturing, the resulting product can generate dangerous levels of fumes from often-used formaldehyde-based glues.
Industry executives, outraged by what they considered an unnecessary and financially burdensome level of testing, turned every lever within reach to get the requirement removed. It would be particularly onerous, they argued, for small manufacturers that would have to repeatedly interrupt their work to do expensive new testing. The E.P.A. estimated that the expanded requirements for laminate products would cost the furniture industry tens of millions of dollars annually, while the industry said that the proposed rule over all would cost its 7,000 American manufacturing facilities over $200 million each year.
“A lot of people don’t seem to appreciate what a lot of these requirements do to a small operation,” said Dick Titus, executive vice president of the Kitchen Cabinet Manufacturers Association, whose members are predominantly small businesses. “A 10-person shop, for example, just really isn’t equipped to handle that type of thing.”
Big industry players also weighed in. Executives from companies including La-Z-Boy, Hooker Furniture and Ashley Furniture all flew to Washington for a series of meetings with the offices of lawmakers including House Speaker John Boehner, Republican of Ohio, and about a dozen other lawmakers, asking several of them to sign a letter prepared by the industry to press the E.P.A. to back down, according to an industry report describing the lobbying visit.
The industry lobbyists also held their own meeting at E.P.A. headquarters, and they urged Jim Jones, who oversaw the rule-making process as the assistant administrator for the agency’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, to visit a North Carolina furniture manufacturing plant. According to the trade group, Mr. Jones told them that the visit had “helped the agency shift its thinking” about the rules and how laminated products should be treated.
The resistance was particularly intense from lawmakers like Mr. Wicker of Mississippi, whose state is home to major manufacturing plants owned by Ashley Furniture Industries, the world’s largest furniture maker, and who is one of the biggest recipients in Congress of donations from the industry’s trade association. Asked if the political support played a role, a spokesman for Mr. Wicker replied: “Thousands of Mississippians depend on the furniture manufacturing industry for their livelihoods. Senator Wicker is committed to defending all Mississippians from government overreach.”
Individual companies like Ikea also intervened, as did the Chinese government, which claimed that the new rule would create a “great barrier” to the import of Chinese products because of higher costs.
Perhaps the most surprising objection came from Senator Boxer, of California, a longtime environmental advocate, whose office questioned why the E.P.A.’s rule went further than her home state’s in seeking testing on laminated products. “We did not advocate an outcome, other than safety,” her office said in a statement about why the senator raised concerns. “We said ‘Take a look to see if you have it right.’ ”
Safety advocates say that tighter restrictions — like the ones Ms. Boxer and Mr. Wicker, along with Representative Doris Matsui, a California Democrat, have questioned — are necessary, particularly for products coming from China, where items as varied as toys and Christmas lights have been found to violate American safety standards.
While Mr. Neltner, the environmental advocate who has been most involved in the review process, has been open to compromise, he has pressed the E.P.A. not to back down entirely, and to maintain a requirement that laminators verify that their products are safe.
An episode of CBS’s “60 Minutes” in March brought attention to the issue when it accused Lumber Liquidators, the discount flooring retailer, of selling laminate products with dangerous levels of formaldehyde. The company has disputed the show’s findings and test methods, maintaining that its products are safe.
“People think that just because Congress passed the legislation five years ago, the problem has been fixed,” said Becky Gillette, who then lived in coastal Mississippi, in the area hit by Hurricane Katrina, and was among the first to notice a pattern of complaints from people living in the trailers. “Real people’s faces and names come up in front of me when I think of the thousands of people who could get sick if this rule is not done right.”
An aide to Ms. Matsui rejected any suggestion that she was bending to industry pressure.
“From the beginning the public health has been our No. 1 concern,” said Kyle J. Victor, an aide to Ms. Matsui.
But further changes to the rule are likely, agency officials concede, as they say they are searching for a way to reduce the cost of complying with any final rule while maintaining public health goals. The question is just how radically the agency will revamp the testing requirement for laminated products — if it keeps it at all.
“It’s not a secret to anybody that is the most challenging issue,” said Mr. Jones, the E.P.A. official overseeing the process, adding that the health consequences from formaldehyde are real. “We have to reduce those exposures so that people can live healthy lives and not have to worry about being in their homes.”
Nepal’s Young Men, Lost to Migration, Then a Quake
KATHMANDU, Nepal — When the dense pillar of smoke from cremations by the Bagmati River was thinning late last week, the bodies were all coming from Gongabu, a common stopover for Nepali migrant workers headed overseas, and they were all of young men.
Hindu custom dictates that funeral pyres should be lighted by the oldest son of the deceased, but these men were too young to have sons, so they were burned by their brothers or fathers. Sukla Lal, a maize farmer, made a 14-hour journey by bus to retrieve the body of his 19-year-old son, who had been on his way to the Persian Gulf to work as a laborer.
“He wanted to live in the countryside, but he was compelled to leave by poverty,” Mr. Lal said, gazing ahead steadily as his son’s remains smoldered. “He told me, ‘You can live on your land, and I will come up with money, and we will have a happy family.’ ”
Weeks will pass before the authorities can give a complete accounting of who died in the April 25 earthquake, but it is already clear that Nepal cannot afford the losses. The countryside was largely stripped of its healthy young men even before the quake, as they migrated in great waves — 1,500 a day by some estimates — to work as laborers in India, Malaysia or one of the gulf nations, leaving many small communities populated only by elderly parents, women and children. Economists say that at some times of the year, one-quarter of Nepal’s population is working outside the country.