This blog is written by
Alagan Elavalagan.
To contact me, please send an email to alaganblog@gmail.com
October 22, 2010 From Pakistani Islam to Tibetan Buddhism Dear Dalai Lama, It was Pakistani Islam - not any other Islam but Pakistani Islam - about 65 years ago. And it is Tibetan Buddhism - not any other Buddhism, but Tibetan Buddhism now. It was and now, however, nothing else but one being friendly to its enemy’s enemy. Jinnah allowed international politics to ride on his back, and today you allow anti-faiths and politics to ride on your back, if not you riding on the back of them. Here are a few questions to wonder: Issue 1: Separating the Church from the state but not in Tibet? If you had a land on your hand, would you legally prohibit Tibetan Buddhism from the state? If yes, why don’t you start doing that now? If not, why don’t you preach to your anti-faith friends? It is really laughable to see some of the Christians loathing their faith and coming to Tibetan Buddhism to satisfy their thirst for spirituality. If they were really starving for spirituality, they could be satisfied by any faith; no need to loath one and join another. There is no scientific proof that says one is spiritually better than the other. Issue 2: Buddhism or Darwin’s ‘physical’ evolution? In Darwin’s theory, a new gene is created by two previous genes (node). For example, a child’s new gene is created by a mother’s gene and a father’s. Darwin’s theory also says life on Earth shares a common ancestor. So the question is how the first single gene was able to produce the third gene without the second gene? Even one of the youngest religions, Christianity, was smart enough to understand that you need two to produce a third. Furthermore, was that first gene limited to Earth? What if there is another planet out there with some form of life? If we put the other bedtime story of the Big Bang theory into the equation, the first gene must have had to come from the Big Bang. Darwin and the science world that adopted his view unconditionally are trying to explain life by just explaining the variation of physical body. They simply ignore the soul of a life while no one knows how much the soul influences a life. What does influence the mind of an animal, like a human – is it the physical body or the soul? There is a lot more to learn; we’ve only just scratched the surface. If you had a land on your hand, would you forcefully remove Buddhist beliefs like reincarnation from education and forcefully insert Darwin’s idea as the final conclusion? Issue 3: Condom for Dalai Lama and HPV vaccine for Mother Teresa? In one extreme, one of the politicians (Governor of Taxes) even issued an ‘executive order’ to make the HPV vaccine mandatory so a steady flow of profit would be guaranteed for them. Did you know in 2009 alone, the US federal government collected more than $20 billion in sin taxes? And did you know your anti-faith political friends’ new found goldmine is online gambling? If you had a land on your hand, would you forcefully vaccinate school girls with the HPV vaccine instead of preaching to them about prevention? And, would you run your government on sin tax? In fact, contrary to your understanding, the Chinese government promotes moral values better than any of your anti-faith friends who are riding on your back. I would like to reference an educational flyer that I had seen when I was in the city of Wuhan, China. This flyer, titled “Stop AIDS keep the Promise”, listed “An essential way to prevent sexual transmission of AIDS is to lead a clean and honest life and to be loyal to one’s sexual partner” as the first most “Measure for AIDS preventions”. But your anti-faith friends promote pills and plastics because for them sin is profitable, and prevention is not. Issue 4: Pope’s marriage vs. Dalai Lama’s marriage If you had a land on your hand, would you redefine and legalize marriage to include marriages between two men and two women? Shouldn’t those who support marriage between two women and two men also support marriage between mother and son, father and daughter, and brother and sister? Egyptian sister married her brother; Canadian father lived with his daughter. Do your anti-faith friends expect them to stay in the closest now? Do they apply the “don’t ask, don’ tell” policy on them? Equality provision of the Charter of Rights and Freedom of Canada must accept all the above marriages – no politician’s or judge’s acceptance is needed. Issue 5: Judge promoting prostitution If you had a land on your hand, would you allow a child to have three or more parents but prohibit those parents from legally marrying? Section 293 of the Criminal Code of Canada bans polygamy with a five-year prison term. Politically smart crown attorneys on the other hand are carefully avoiding taking polygamy charges into courts – knowing there is a real possibility that they will lose. Avoiding these questions in the Supreme Court enables them to proudly parade together one more day. Issue 6: Is the fetus a mother’s expendable asset? If you had a land on your hand, would you allow abortion and at the same time give the fetus the right to sue the mother? In fact, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) couldn’t hide the truth and titled the story: “Alberta family wins landmark settlement for injuries to fetus”. The term ‘family’ here represents both: the plaintiff and the defendant. It is like your left-hand suing and winning a case against your right-hand. Welcome to our legal system: a word game. Issue 7: Maximum cloth is a crime but nudism is not? If you had a land on your hand, would you ban maximum clothing in public but allow nudists riding bicycles in public? Issue 8: Topless in Tibet If you had a land on your hand, would you legalize women going topless since men can? If not, can you be seen as a sexist person? On Sep 18, 2010, during his official visit to the UK, a Protest the Pope group said the Pope’s views are due to “lack of commonsense, lack of justice and lack of compassion” But they love the Dalai Lama even though you have the very same views in every aspect. Did you ever wonder why there is a double-standard? Answers to these questions will determine whether you are a real preacher of Buddhism or an enemy within for all the faiths.
======================================================================================= March 3, 2010 I return my right to vote in a partition-democracy Wonder why? Ask yourself how well our partition-democracy is working for you? The answer is: nothing much. The partition-democracy we have is nothing more than a practically ill-fated theoretical glory. It doesn’t matter what theory says; practically, it is not ‘by the people, for the people’ but instead ‘by the citizen, for the partitions’. To be fair, ask what you can do for your country AND what your country can do for you. Hopeless Democracy: Jul 2000: Nortel trading at C$1245.00 a share on the TSX (corrected to 1:10 consolidation) Nov 2001: Frank Dunn becomes Nortel’s CEO Jan 12, 2009: Nortel Director John Manley says “I think all of the bad stuff is behind us” If one couldn’t trust Nortel, then is there any other company Canadians can trust? In 1997, investors lost everything on Bre-X. Once, Bre-X had $6 billion in market capital when its stock was traded at $280 a share. It was a fraud but no one was found guilty. Will anyone be found guilty in the Nortel case? Not really. Earl Johns gets just 11 yrs for his 20 yrs long $50M fraud. In fact, this is the way business is here. So, you continue trading only if you are an insider, otherwise you are gambling between insiders trading. Prorogued Democracy: While Canada’s minority government was prorogued twice in an year, Canadian forces were fighting and dying in Afghanistan, Nortel was on ‘liquidation’ in the name of ‘restructure’, the global economy was unstable, etc. Even for the Canadian government, it wasn’t a ‘mission accomplished’ situation but the democratically elected government prorogued for their partition benefit. If a partition entity can prorogue an elected government, then let me prorogue my right to vote in the first place. Abstained Democracy: Conservatives, Liberals and NDP have all been abstained from voting in the parliament at one time or another. Democracy shouldn’t give a partition enterprise the right to be abstained from voting in the parliament. Elected members of the parliament MUST cast their vote in person or remotely in case they are unable to do so in person. Failing to do so should remove them from the post. If our MPs can be abstained from a parliament voting, then let me be abstained from voting in the first place. Whipped Democracy: The Liberals and Conservatives made the HST bill from a ‘whipped’ vote in December 2009. NDP on the other hand cried that Liberals couldn’t whip all of its members. MPs are elected by the public, paid by the public, and not by the partition enterprises. Therefore no partition enterprise can have the right to force an elected MP to align with a whipped vote one way or another. It must be illegal to force one to do so. If a partition entity can whip our democratic representative, then allow me to whip myself from democracy in the first place. Partitioned Democracy: If there was a reason for separating the state and the church, now we have the same reason to separate partition politics from democracy. Partition politics divide citizens instead of uniting them. It abruptly distracts and diverts government in opposing directions, while an un-partitioned nation focuses and moves forward. If faith failed then, partition-democracy failed us now. The only people who glorify partition politics are those who benefit from partitioning: partition-pundits, partition-think-tanks, partition-media, partition-interest groups, etc. Things get even worse when the partition parliament is evenly divided. The glorious definition of ‘partition’ democracy doesn’t even talk about it – but the country goes nowhere. There’s probably no partition-democracy. Now stop worrying and vote for an independent candidate of your choice. Real democracy must be ‘by the people, for the people, and not for the partition’ Alagan Elavalagan (www.alagan.com/blog.html, alaganblog@gmail.com)
======================================================================================= June 24, 2009 NORTEL Gets Headstone
===================================================================================== June 24, 2009 Reject Herdism, Be Independent If democracy cannot see the light of a day without the party enterprises, Why are the so-called democracies leading to crises and total failures? The truth is self-evident; what we are forced to exercise is not democracy but ‘herdism’. Nearly everywhere, it is a two-party system that is exclusively controlled by two monopolistic political enterprises; the left-wing and the right-wing. The periodical-ballot-counting process is ‘for the enterprises, by the people’, not ‘for the people, by the people’. The voters in these countries just reject the most evil. After the collapse of the USSR’s economy, the excessively self-promoting politicians of herdism and their buddy-pundits have been explaining that the absence of the periodical-ballot-counting was the cause. They even went further and forcefully expected the whole world to follow their periodical-ballot-counting process while their claim was never proven. Now, their claim has been proven untrue. Simply having carnival-style periodically-ballot-counting did not and will not confirm a good governing system that truly works for the people. The recent collapse of housing, financial, investment, and legal systems in the West proved that. This mayhem is several folds worse than the collapse of the USSR's economy, yet no politician is capable or willing to investigate the cause. Instead, these politicians only try to bankrupt the future generations with trillions in debt for the frauds that occurred while they were asleep at the wheel. Don’t continue to fill the tank if it has a hole in it; fix it first. Open market failed in the West because it has been mangling with herdism. The governments that came to power through the periodical-ballot-counting process utterly failed to protect the people who elected them. Since all the members of these governments became the stakeholders of a scandal-ridden corporate world, periodical-ballot-counting could not protect the ordinary people. Today, the West is full of partition politicians, partition pundits, partition judges, and partition journalists. They divide and conquer us. The right-wing has no interest in conservatism but uses it to conquer the natural conservatives. At the same time, the left-wing is using liberal branding to conquer the natural liberals. Once an issue is adapted by one side, the other will attack it with full force regardless of the benefits to the public. It is a fight for branding. For example, the right-wing wants to conserve the families but is not interested in conserving the environment. The left-wing on the other hand wants to conserve the environment but is not interested in conserving the families. In herdism, a voter cannot conserve the families and the environment; they have to pick one and loath the other. When it comes to gun control, the right-wing wants you to be conservative in crime but liberal in guns while the left-wing wants you to be liberal in crime but conservative in guns. There is no room for you if you want to control guns and be tough on crime. It is against the ‘herdism’ business model. All of these are based on connections, influences, and stakes, but not on beliefs. This has to change. The third option, the capitalist-unionist, wants to ride on you for the lowest possible cost while blackmailing you for the highest possible revenue. For example, they want to work for the monopolistic corporations like TTC or OC Transpo with the right to strike but shop at places like Wal-Mart. On the other hand they want you to work for the open market (Wal-Mart) and pay the highest price for their services (unionist monopoly). No monopoly should have the right to unionize or strike. Will you allow the members of Canadian forces to go on strike? If not, why not? Why are we denying their rights? If we look into thousands of years of the world’s history, we may even find Dynasties, Kingdoms and other forms of governments that had better governing systems than what the periodically-ballot-counting method has produced for us. The question is not what kind of the government you have, but does it work for the people? No one can blindly glorify a process when the outcome is a hell for the general stakeholders. Some corporations were punished by the political enterprises in the name of the anti-trust law. This law was created to prevent enterprises from practicing against open market beliefs. But the same political enterprises themselves repeatedly eliminate independent candidates from most of the political debates. This must be against the law. In recent days, some of us have been promoting Percentage Representation. Percentage Representation will be a one-way path to enterprises-only politics. It is the perfect way to put the voters in the corner and hijack the industry. Compare it to the way the petroleum enterprises eliminated the independent gas stations before hijacking the gasoline market where the consumers ended up with flawless Olympic quality synchronized pricing from the cost to cost. Demands: Party enterprises prohibiting the elected Independent MPs from asking questions during the question period is simply discrimination based on their political beliefs and an insult to democracy. It is against the Canadian Charter of Rights and the Human Rights violation. Demand 2.1: Each Member of Parliament (MP), including the Independent MPs, should be legally given the proportional rights in every form. The MPs are elected by the electors to represent their interest in the parliament in every aspect. No individual or enterprise can take away this basic democratic right. But in 2005, Thunder Bay-Superior North MP was denied the right to represent his electors in the parliament by the Liberal Party enterprise. He was forced to resign his cabinet post (Minister Responsible for Northern Ontario) so he could represent his electors. Consequently the citizens of Thunder Bay-Superior North were denied the very basic democratic right by the Liberal Party enterprise while its benefits were protected. We should understand that the cabinet ministers’ salaries and benefits are paid by the tax payers, not the political enterprises like Liberal Party Enterprise. Demand 2.2: Every MP should have the right to vote to represent the electors’ interests regardless of their political association and no political party enterprise can directly or indirectly intimidate them. In 2005, the New Market-Aurora MP jumped from the Conservative Enterprise to the Liberal Enterprise after a closed-door deal awarded her a cabinet minister post. In 2006, the Vancouver MP jumped from Liberal to Conservative just a day after election. It is like the CEO of an enterprise forcefully taking away its customers to his or her new found enterprise. We should make it illegal for the elected members to cross the floor to change their party membership and hold the seat. If one crosses the floor, a by-election should be called to re-elect the MP. An elected member of one party does not have the ownership of the supported electors. Demand 2.3: It must be against the law for a MP to join another political association without calling another election. Courts should be separated from the state. Selection of Supreme Court judges should be based on merits, not political influences. Candidates should be encouraged to have, in addition to a degree in law, additional degrees in the fields of his or her involvement. Please consider voting for an Independent Candidate of your choice in the future.
====================================================================================== Reject the Corrupt Corporations Innocent investors have trusted our political, legal and regulatory protections and in return have been investing their life saving in the publicly traded corporations like Nortel Networks. Once again the system has failed us. It is time for us to examine why the ordinary investors are robbed again and again even in a first-world country like Canada. Bre-X wasn’t the first and Nortel won’t be the last unless we change it. A Politician: John Manley, as a democratically elected Member of Parliament, had the legal and moral obligations to protect the interest of the general public. Instead, this politician (Industry Minister 1995-2002, Finance Minister 2002-2003, Deputy Prime Minister 2002-2003) had been cementing his revolving door while the ‘politically protected’ executives of Nortel Networks were cooking the financial books again and again. This continued even after Manley left politics and became one of the Board of Directors at Nortel in May 2004. Only in June 2008, after the inventors’ uproar, the RCMP unenthusiastically charged Frank Dunn (ex-CEO), Douglas Beatty (ex-CFO) and Michael Gollogly (ex-Controller) to face multiple charges including allegations of criminal accounting activity during 2002 and 2003. As expected, the case is getting dust now while Manley’s law firm defends Dunn! This pattern of fraud has been continuing for a long time, thanks to our corrupt politicians, useless security agencies and the clueless courts. Self-centric members of these sectors are only to look after their own interest. A Corporate General: Only in August 2008, Nortel’s newfound CEO Mike Zafirovski and his buddies acquired Pigtel for an ‘undisclosed’ amount and DiamonWare for another $10 million, just to liquidate four months later. Shouldn’t Zafirovski, Manley and others have allocated $107 million for the upcoming interest payment before continuing on acquisition spree? For generations, the engineers at Nortel have been designing world-class technologies but the executives have been designing the world-class corruptions. In February 2009, Nortel sold Alteon division for about 18 million – a division it acquired for more than 10 billion in 2000. Bay Networks, Alteon, Pigtel – the list is very long. A Court: In January 2009, just five months after buying Pigtel and DiamonWare, Nortel asked for and received bankruptcy protection (or should we say ‘they told the court’). Another insult to the investors’ wound came when the Ontario Superior Court took away another $100 million from the investors to protect these fraudulent personals from lawsuits when they filed for bankruptcy protection. To add more insult, these swindling Executives and Directors were unlawfully awarded by the court to receive their compensations in CASH instead of stocks - their original legally binding choice. These swindlers wanted to swap the pays from stock to cash because the one-time above $1245.00 dropped to $0.00 cents. But the question is who gave the Judge the right to make unethical and illegal decisions based on the ‘market price’? Where is the just here? And wait, Geoffrey Morawetz, the Superior Court Judge, gave away even more millions of dollars to Nortel Generals in bonuses. Bonuses are for achievements, not for failures. Demand 1: On January 14, 2009, the Ontario court approved Nortel’s ‘preemptive’ bankruptcy protection while Nortel had enough money to pay the $107 million interest payment, which was unjust; it must be voided. Bankruptcy courts are not given the right to modify the legally binding compensation methods, especially based on the market price. Demand 2: The Ontario court approving Nortel’s request for modifying the legally binding compensation methods was unjust and it must be voided. Furthermore, trading cash payments for common stocks with insider knowledge is simply an insider trading; the court and the judge are accomplices to insider trading. Nortel was awarded to liquidate while the criminal case against the former executive was not concluded. Who would receive the recovered money, if any? Demand 3: Liquidating Nortel before the claims against Frank Dunn and others were concluded is unjust. The case against Dunn and others must conclude before liquidating Nortel. Demand 4: Ontario Securities Commissions should be punished for allowing the Nortel executrices, the insiders, to trade their stocks for CASH payments while NT.TO had been traded on TSX. Executives swindling the common-stock investors are very common in Canada and it has a long history. Private companies going public, swindling the public investments, taking back to private and then again going public to continue to swindle again even by the same executives are possible here and legal. In 1988, Air Canada went public and sucked the public’s money (to pay for the Air Bus scandal?). But in April 2003, Air Canada filed for and was granted creditor protection. Its common shareholder’s pockets were emptied when the Original Air Canada shares became worthless during the restructuring. In October 2004, the New Air Canada shares began trading again after it emerged from 18 months of bankruptcy protection. Old Air Canada President and CEO became the new President and CEO of the new ACE Air Canada. Is it planning for its second bankruptcy protection and the third IPO? Investing in common stocks doesn’t have to be a last-owner-lose scheme like the Ponzi scheme. We may have protection against pyramid schemes but there is no protection against LOL scheme. Before investing in Canadian common stocks, one should ask how many corporate executives went to jail in Canada for the crime they did and who is protecting them. Before investing in Canada, we should rewrite corporate law to include the following: Demand 5: The executives and the Board of Directors who lead a public corporation to bankruptcy protection should be removed from the positions during restructuring and they must be prohibited from returning to their posts after re-emerging from bankruptcy. In the case of Nortel, since Mike Z. and the Board of Directors including John Manley failed to fulfill their promises, they should be fired and barred from returning to Nortel. Zafirovski hasn’t achieved anything better than his predecessors like Dunn. But in 2006 alone he pocketed more than $10 million of compensations while the stock went from $35.00 to $ 8.00. He made it $0.00 now. Demand 6: Publicly traded corporate laws should be rewritten so all non-salary benefits (i.e. bonuses) for each quarter must be proportional to the dividend paid during that quarter (i.e. multiplication of the dividend paid). Demand 7: Publicly traded companies that have abandoned their common stocks and gone private should be prohibited from publicly trading again. The financial damage done by the Bay Street and Wall Street corporate Generals (AIG, Bear Stearns, Bernie Madoff, Enron, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Lehman, Nortel, WorldCom, etc.) has proven to be much worse than the damage done by the USSR military Generals.
====================================================================================== Stolen Investments (externl link)
|
