Beldeu Singh's Blog

AN AIDS VACCINE WILL NEVER COME

Unknown user — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 11:10:58 EST

ONLY FOR THE BLOKES WHO ARE WAITING FOR AN AIDS VACCINE

Beldeu Singh

Why are scientists who support the AIDS industry looking for an AIDS vaccine? To control the spread of HIV-AIDS? It is advisable to look at their crap and junk science before you answer that question. Critically look at some of the key "facts" that form the foundational premise of their science that supports the HIV-AIDS industry.

On the surface it would appear that such a vaccine would stop the spread of AIDS that is caused by a virus they call the HIV. Dr Gallo said in his seminal paper that a virus is the "probable cause of AIDS." The mainstream media created a stir and a scare when it was said this was a virulent virus that targets the cells of the immune system and impairs it and opens it for opportunistic infections. But look at the fact that is contained in his testimony in an Australian Court of Appeal when the lawyer said that Dr Gallo found the HIV in about 40% of the patients. Look at the testimony below and let it speak for itself.

On Page 1294 of the court transcripts where Gallo agrees that he found evidence of HIV in only 40% of the AIDS patients in his original study, and that 40% is not enough to prove HIV is the cause of AIDS:-

Attorney to Gallo: “You had 48 out of 119, or 40%?”

Gallo: “I agree.”

Attorney: “Do you agree that the isolation of HIV from only 40% of patients is not proof that HIV causes AIDS?”

Gallo: “I would say of course, in and of itself, 40% isolation of a new virus, I would not say is the cause.” (Hannilie Zulu, April, 2007).

Everybody knows that for a virus to be the actual cause of a disease, it must be present in 100% of the patients, otherwise there must be another cause or that the actual cause is some other factor or a set of factors. That is secondary school science. Strangely, while the media and a lot of blokes accepted an idea without any question or rationality that HIV is the probable cause of AIDS, they overlooked the use and meaning of the word "probable". A probable cause cannot be substituted with actual cause. Most interestingly, these blokes and the rest of the world are now ignoring Dr Gallo's testimony given in an Australian Court of Appeal that his virus is in itself, not the cause! Why? In fact they are actually looking forward to the production of a vaccine ... omg … they want a vaccine when a virus is not in itself the actual cause.

He said it was the probable cause and now he says it is in itself not the cause.

In the first place, many of the scientists and doctors who are the proponents of the dogma that says HIV is the cause of AIDS are ignoring the many factors that suppress and impair the immune system, one of which is drugs, as all drugs are immuno-suppressive to various extents.

The most wildly disturbing part of their science is that, many of these funny people say that a person who is HIV positive has antibodies for the HIV disease and must be given toxic drugs such as the AZT which is "toxic by inhalation and causes the same symptoms as AIDS." So, if people are given an HIV vaccine, they will or are supposed to develop antibodies against the HIV, which means they must then be given the toxic drugs that can sufficiently suppress the immune system and cause the same symptoms as AIDS. Wow, a resounding hurrah for modern medical science and its philosophy for treatment. Which sane person would give a toxic chemical as a medicine for a disease when it is known to cause those same symptoms of the disease? What happened to evidence-based medicine?

Some of the supporters of the HIV dogma say that they are only testing for viral specific proteins that are specific to the HIV. But that argument falls flat on its ass because, firstly, because there are a large number of false positives that appear in people recovering from flu and malaria and even pregnant women may test positive during the pregnancy. So, where is the specificity? And secondly, the disclaimers on the test kits say that they cannot be used to diagnose and treat AIDS! Thirdly, the manual that goes to the labs, says that the test kits are testing for a protein called p24 and clearly says the significance of p24 is not known. New research has shown that people who test positive on these test kits are about 30% lower that the average in the level of an enzyme called glutathione. That explains the high percentage of false positives in about a 100 disease conditions. So, who is bullshitting whom?

And why is the mainstream media not blaring away Dr Gallo's testimony? Why is Larry King not talking about it? Why is Dave Letterman not putting it on his show? Of course, their silence does not mean they are supporting it but it stands out as a weird sociological phenomenon, that there are people and establishments and governments who want this dogma of HIV causes AIDS and want this fictitious HIV to stay as a virus in the media as it is now part of a multi-billion dollar industry.

Finally, the mainstream media told the world that HIV is a virulent pathogen that targets the cells on the immune system but it did not bother to tell the world that Dr Gallo is growing the same virus in an immortal line of white blood cells (cells of the immune system found in blood) for the last 25 years as stated in a patent dated 1984. So, is it a media created disease that built a multi-billion industry?

Oh ... one last word ... please ... an Ad placed in a reputable medical journal says that AZT is well tolerated and promotes cognitive development in children ... well it sounds like a health supplement which I hope the manufacturers and promoters of the HIV causes AIDS dogma, including Dr. Gallo are taking everyday. For the politicians and senior health professionals who support the HIV causes AIDS dogma, please don't miss your daily HIV pill please. It is good for your cognitive development and will keep HIV at bay.

Now, please go ahead and answer the billion dollar question - Why are scientists who support the AIDS industry looking for an AIDS vaccine?

AND the most important question - How many billions of dollars would the US govt save each years, if not for a fictitious virus and bogus testing and tests kits that test for a protein (p24) whose significance is not known. When will all those who have been fooled wake up?

Obama's Dilemma - BEATING THE DRUM ON BOTH SIDES

Unknown user — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 04:04:39 EDT

BEATING THE DRUM ON BOTH SIDESBeldeu Singh

Beating the drum on both sides is an old syndrome, as old as human existence and something that all managers must know. What constitutes this hideous phenomenon? It is best understood through a simple and short story. The story:-

The Company is organizing a convention for its sales and will be held in a few months. A senior manager is put in charge of printing the program and the folder. During the course of committee meetings, it is found out that he has not done anything about it. With two weeks to go, another manager is given the responsibility. He, too, doesn’t do it. With a week to go, the alarm bells ring. Another person is put is charge who reports that it is the festival season and most of the printers are busy. However, due to the pressing issue, one of the printer’s who regularly does the company’s printing work is willing to help out but the printer has to stop other jobs and his employees must work extra hours to complete this job on time. Accordingly, he will charge double the normal costs. Since, that was the only way out, the Management agrees. The pressure eases and the job is done on time. Two weeks after the convention, the bill arrives. The Management queries the high costs and refuses to settle. Now the pressure shifts.

When there was a pressing need to get the job done to prevent the precipitation of a problem, it had to be done at all costs - they beat the drum on one side. Now that the job is done, the pressure is gone. The value of having got it done on time under the pressing circumstances is no longer appreciated – appreciation evaporates into thin air. Now they query the costs of a job done well – they are beating the drum on the other side. Sounds familiar? Situations may change but the same thread can be found in different situations. There is no shame. Shame does not always work, especially when many people are involved.

People were angry at the executives who plundered wealth away into a sink hole and created the Wall Street meltdown. The world came to realize that “too big to fail” is a myth and some of the world’s biggest corporations will be falling down and many giant companies around the world will face colossal losses and millions of people will have to be laid off. Consumer spending would shrink and so would global trade in tandem with the contraction of GDPs of most of the countries. People understood the meaning of the meltdown at Wall Street and its ensuing ripple effects on the global economy. Rightly, experts called it a financial tsunami, the world has ever seen. The experts assessed the vicious effects of the downward spiral and pundits spelt the doom that would shadow the economies in developed and developing countries and how it would adversely affect the average family. The alarm bells rang. Something had to be done quickly. They beat the drum to quickly shore up these Wall Street companies to prevent their collapse. It was a pressing need of the hour to prevent the final trigger of a tsunami generated by collapsing giants that could crumble the world economy and paralyze it for decades to come.

All of this happened while Bush had his eyes glued on to Iraq – trying to topple Saddam and trying to “create a linchpin of democracy in the middle-east.” The world had never dealt with such a phenomenon before but in good time came the huge investments through the Obama administration. The inevitable collapse of giants had been averted. The prancing ripple effects died down. The economies of India and China are on the upward trend while the economies of most countries are on the mend to various extents. Recovery is in sight, at least there is a vibrant hope, excepting in countries where their economies were traumatized by their own leaders and myopic policies and by policies that run counter to wealth generation based on excellence in harnessing human capital and strategic use of tools and resources.

Of course the problem of reining in of executive pay at Wall Street companies remains. Executives are paid for performance that does not result in such problems. They are paid to solve-problems, not create them. They are paid to create wealth not destroy it. Embarrassment, remorse and shame did not work to rein in executive pay and multi-million dollar bonuses. The compensation philosophy did not change and possibly there is no change in Wall Street behavior that would alter practices in business and management pointing to the need of a spice dose of regulatory framework to prevent that kind of thorny financial eruption again, frightening as it was.

On hindsight, yes, the Wall Street meltdown relates to practices that resulted in the destruction of wealth. Giant corporations posted multi-billion dollar quarter losses. At the end of 2008, the world’s population of high net worth individuals (HNWIs) shrunk by about 15% while their wealth was shaved off by about 20% representing a whooping 6.4 trillion dollars. By 2013, the global financial wealth of HNWIs is expected to recover to US48.5 trillion, which signifies a state of recovery in the global economy.

Asian economies are not the epicenter of the crisis that led to so much destruction of wealth and perhaps the US might want to consider strategies to twin investments into countries with a strong legal system that was inherited from Britain and have not departed from it or have not signaled departure from the Commonwealth legal system or otherwise practice it intact in form and spirit such as India to help accelerate its own recovery. This is one economy with its large post-graduate pool of expertise, large middle income group and a very large domestic market led by liberal moves of an intellectual Prime Minister who believes both in democracy and freedom in economic activity as foundations and prime movers in driving vibrancy into the Indian economy. The Indian economy is a good store house of value in itself and for the dollar as the value of currency lies in the vibrancy of its economy and its growth and in the potential of empowering its young minds through education and research. India is increasing its funding of research in a wide range of fields including phytomedicine and biotechnologies.

At the same time, American companies need to spend its “mountain of cash” to help boost consumer confidence in the recovery phases of the economy that generates a sharp improvement. With that confidence there is hope of increases in global trade to turn around the balance sheets of shipping companies that are still posting huge losses. But, the silver lining has already appeared. Currently, it is just possible that the top 600 companies in the US have earned more than the amount invested by the Obama administration in the prevention of the inevitable collapse of giant corporations that would have triggered a free fall in the global economy and prevent an all out destruction of wealth on a global scale.

Just when the silver lining was emerging in an economic environment that is financially more stabilized, thanks to the huge investments made by the Obama administration, transformational change met with resistance from the Gang of Six. One in the gang wants to break Obama’s back which is an attempt to break the back bone of change. He forgot that this is people’s change, not a politician’s change and nobody actually succeeds in breaking the people’s back. All change does draw resistance and managing the resistance to change is an integral part of change management but that resistance would manifest through the Gang of Six was unthinkable. However, the real and more important issue is not this puny resistance that defies the aspirations of people and the desire of a new and more vibrant America that would spend more money in investing in developing people and in science and research to broaden its economy and create more jobs rather than let a big chunk of its wealth be gobbled up by pharmaceutical companies in exchange for toxic drugs. And that issue is about beating the drum on the other side.

That is obvious in the empirical findings from the grassroots by a much respected intellectual and economist – Paul Krugman whose many conversations reveal that “people who voted for Obama, yet dismiss the stimulus as a total waste of money.” Why are people now beating the drum on the other side?

Interestingly, people often beat the drum on both sides. Now the pressure of collapsing giants, financial storms, ripple effects of a global tsunami emanating from the Wall Street meltdown is released as the economies are mending to various extents and the silver lining is encouraging indeed simply because the downward spiral leading to the destruction of wealth has been halted. The process of creating wealth and building economies is on some hopeful footing, already. What is the lamentation? Is it costs or anger? What are people angry about now that they beat the drum on the other side?

As Paul Krugman puts it – “After I press them, it turns out that they’re really angry about the bailouts, rather than the stimulus…” Obama did not bailout companies but made investments. This investment is not about the classic notion concerning valuable collaterals which is how a bank ought to work. So, the taxpayer is not left holding valuable collateral but the value in preventing destruction of wealth and the value in recovery. That is what it was from the start, to invest in the value of a stimulus.

That part is not too hard to fathom and to make a distinction is relatively easy. Lending money against valuable collateral is not the same as investing in a turnaround on which to expand the economy and one that would function to keep the store house of value for the US currency. Yet the American people are really angry about something. The real anger may not be about the investments made by the Obama administration that has had such positive effects on a global scale but may be confined to the executive salaries and the fat cats that are still playing the same old games.

The fat cats have become irksome and disdainful and let’s not forget the culture of fiefdoms and the French Revolution. The people invariably always rise up if their anger is not properly dealt with even though they, as Americans, understand that the White House cannot micro-manage and as the leader of taxpayers, Obama cannot become the wage-setter. Americans understand that such a move is not within the grains of the democracy they have built. They, I think are pressing on the genius in Obama to pull out the rabbit from the hat, one that would alter things without harming the charm of democracy so that the fat cats cannot play. Just perhaps, the beating of the drum on the other side is loud because of the anger against the fat cats. No taxpayer wants a fat cat to play games that lead to destruction of wealth. They want sincere performance that protects and enhance the store house value of the economy.

JIM DeMint - THE PAIN POLITICIAN

Unknown user — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 13:17:23 EDT

The top three basic concerns in any society are security (which translates into peace), education and access to healthcare. The last is now attached to an attendent issue of toxic medication and getting a pharmaceutical benefit instead of a health benefit.

How does Jim DeMint plans to address these concerns of the people?

Republican senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina says he wants to "create pain" for his colleagues in the Senate and "break" President Obama by defeating health care reform (TPM, July 20, 2009).

In America, you work through the American democracy and your work must create value and benefit to the people of America. Working to create pain is unconstitutional, undemocratic and wasteful. It is a notion that is contrived in a very base heart. Jim is the first politician who has officialy and formally declared that he shall work to create pain. Jim has gone against the grain of good and divine love and against the good of democracy. Going by his statements, he represents a bad ferment and a bad fruit. If your mind runs away in disagreement thinking that is a bad ordor with a bad label, I will not dispute with you for in the final analysis, it puts American democracy and the working of American democracy in bad light.

What makes him think he has the power to create pain for Obama? God bless America. Who knows God might have some pain for him, rewarding him with a three week stay in hospital? Will I let him create pain for Obama? Will any man of peace let jim mint any pain for anyone?

Who is he working for anyway? The American people or the drug industry, is the question that might arise in many a sober mind.

The fundamental difference between a pharmaceutical benefit and a health benefit can be seen, say from the prescription of aspirin for "thinning" the blood. This achieved by the destruction of L-selectin, the adhesion molecules on the surface of red blood cells (RBC). The destruction of L-selectins on the surface of RBC prevents adhesion among themselves which prevents platellet aggregation and is presented to the public as a positive "blood-thinning" effect. In normal and healthy people who take adequate amounts of antioxidants through a diet rich in fresh fruits and vegetables, platelets do not aggregate unless when they are under heavy drug medication. Healthy blood cells acquire a negative charge on the surface by taking electrons from antioxidants from food sources. Negative force repels another negative force and nature has selected this mechanism to prevent platelet aggregation. Aspirin does not promote this phenomenon in order to prevent red blood cell aggregation but instead achieves it through its pharmaceutical effect by destroying the L-selectin molecules on the surface of these cells. This is not the desired health benefit that people look for if they really understood what drugs do in the L-form biochemistry of the mammalian biological system.

Aspirin is also destructive to other adhesion molecules that bind cells in other tisues and organs which explains its side effects including gastro-intestinal bleeding.

American studies also tend to show that taking an aspirin a day reduces the risk of stroke whereas a British study on 5000 doctors does not support that conclusion at all. Taking an aspirin a day comes with the problem of internal injuries as from an accident and the need for an unplanned surgery. That also points to the need to a radical change in health education to late teens and college students.

Reducing insurance premiums for most people by "as much as $2,500 per family" may not be a solution as it would reduce insurance benefits as well for insurers work on a profit motive. Insurance is an indemnity and it is a business based on indemnity. Indemnity is the underlying principle in insurance business. Creating the means and the mechanisms to find a minimum premium of USD2,500.00 per family per annum may be a better idea to look at, at least.

Insurance companies do not deliberate to discriminate applicants for insurance within the commonly understood meaning of discrimination. They arrive at the premiums to be charged based on risks and potential payouts, ie liabilities and as they work out their acturial equations to determine the amount of premium to be charged and pooled into the insurance fund, it is based on the equitable principle such that the amount collected from each person and pooled represents an equitable contribution depending on his/her risk to that pool. This pool is organized in a manner such that it is not at risk but can meet its liabilities. Let us not didturb that fundamentally and risk collapse of the insurance industry.

In the end, we will have to face the "insurance company discrimination against people with pre-existing conditions" with a strategy that favors the American people. America came together as a government of the people, by the people and for the people. It must remain so. A government for the people must find ways to address the health and health concerns of the people. It must not become a government run by big pharma for the interests of the pharmaceutical industry. National health is a much bigger concern in terms of productivity dollars than the bottom line of the pharmaceutical industry. Also, drugs only gace toxicity, they never gave health.

With regard to insurance clauses on "pre-existing conditions" are obnoxious, especially those on diabetic complications as virtually most degenerative conditions that develop in diabetics are considered in medical science as diabetic complications. This and related issues on healthcare can be addressed through CHANGE by making the necessary paradigm shifts as follows:-

   1. Build more government funded polyclinics and mini-hospitals across the country to provide access to the people as well as to keep costs low as private facilities are expensive and prohibitive. Private facilities tend to charge acording to the extent of your cover rather than the actual service plus treatment rendered and they tend to order unnecessary tests. Build government funded referral hospitals to take referrals from these polyclinics and mini-hospitals. Big hospitals are not as cost-effective.

   2. Pay for more doctors to be trained in top institutions in India for a two year degree post-graduate program after completing the basic medical degree in the US . They will get a wider experience especially in tropical diseases and will tend to order fewer tests but these programs must get accreditation in the US.

   3. Create the MEDICAL TRUST as follows;- Lower corporate tax by at least two percent. The company will then pay one percent of salary of the employee to the MEDICAL TRUST while the employee also contributes one percent of his/her salary to the MEDICAL TRUST. The MEDICAL TRUST will pay for all medical costs at government facilities and upto the limits specified.

4. Train more doctors and naturopaths in clinical nutrition. Educate the American people about the human biological system which is based on the L-form biochemistry. This biological system works optimally by supply it with a broad range of antioxidants and minerals from organic and food sources and edible herbs. This system that can be disrupted and destroyed by drugs and chemicals. Educate people on drug toxicities. Teach it in health science as a subject in schools and colleges.

5. Expose the mafia tactics of the drug industry. Look at Truehope, a company in Canada as an example. Look up the case of a Danish writer on antioxidants and vitamins who was arrested and charged in court for writing on these molecules and their role in health.

6. Fund research in clinical nutrition, antioxidant therapies and integrative medicine.

"The time has come to solve this problem, to cut health care costs for families and businesses, and provide affordable, accessible health insurance for every American," Obama said. The time is NOW.

ABOUT REFORMS AND THE CRUTCH MENTALITY AND MINDSETS

Unknown user — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 12:32:11 EDT

ABOUT REFORMS AND THE CRUTCH MENTALITY AND MINDSETSBeldeu Singh President Robert Mugabe’s controversial land reforms, that took a radical turn since 2000, are portrayed as a logical continuation of the colonial experience – the struggle over the ownership of land. They are presented as "logical" and as a "struggle" over land ownership. However, the radical stage of the reforms from 2000 coincided with the period of rapid economic collapse in Zimbabwe.

"For many post colonial states in Africa, land reforms constituted part of a general wave of radical economic readjustment after colonial rule. Many of them considered land reform as part of the decolonization process. These reforms were founded on the need to extract resources from what Craig Richardson calls a “less deserving” rich minority and distributing them to a “more deserving” poor majority" (Tongkeh Joseph Fowale).

It was thought that land as a resource is a basic resource for economic advancement and accordingly a redistribution of land was necessary and important as a strategy. In neighboring South Africa President Mbeki in 2005 expressed willingness to revisit the “willing-seller, willing-buyer” principle of land redistribution. They thought that this property brought value and was the key that controlled wealth generation and social advancement.

Historian Walter Rodney gave full support for land reforms throughout Africa. “Exploitation of Land and Labor”, Rodney says “is essential for human social advance, but only on assumption that the product is made available in the area where the exploitation takes place." He, too, thought that economic advancement rested and lay in owning land and redistribution of land was essential and supported land reforms.

Their obsession with land reforms that revolved around taking land from people who became rich through the land ownership for purposes of redistribution to the poor landless was born out of their blind spot to factors that create value and wealth. Partly and unfortunately, they saw it as part of a decolonization process. They also lost view of the more important facts and factors that serve to create value from land, namely:-

1. The land must be of some reasonable size to generate the economies of scale or organized into a size for productivity and profitability per hectare, and2. The output or produce of the land is managed as a resource for the market or markets, and3. The owners must have some capital to work the land, for as resource it requires an expense as input in order to generate its harvests as outputs, and4. Land output requires some expertise and capabilities, which is ability to work the land, and5. Land output must find markets for the raw produce or processed, and

6. Failing the above, land can become idle in a few years.

History has also shown that ancestral land become smaller and smaller in size, as it becomes subdivided as inheritance to members of the new generations until it become plots that cannot be worked economically. Such natural redistribution of land over generations ought to have shed some logical light on Walter Rodney and the land reformers. Tragically they were myopic with regard to flight of human capital which is experience, knowledge and expertise and access to markets, and the power of capital flight that can go along with its owners.

Such land reforms that end up in redistribution to a large number of poor people and also results in human and capital flight can shatter the agrarian economy of a nation and can shatter it to a point that is indeed crippling.

In neighboring Namibia, where settlers still had a firm group on the land after independence, President Sam Nujoma announced his intention in 2004 to expropriate 192 “absentee land-lord” farms owned mainly by German and South African nationals. This announcement added momentum to boost Mugabe’s reforms. The groups that opposed Mugabe’s reforms were the commercial farmers (both blacks and whites) and their employees all of whom were adversely affected by Mugabe’s reforms. Commercial farms are big enough to employ people to carry out a diverse range of activities while redistributed small farms and farm plots means loss of jobs for these employees. That, on a large scale, can put an economy into a tailspin. Craig Richardson, one of the opponents of Mugabe’s reforms, defined Zimbabwe in 2005 as being “in an economic tailspin…shrinking faster than any other country on earth that was not at war.” The gears could not be reversed as by then, Mugabe had transformed his reforms into an emotional political tool. Many white farmers left for England.

Mugabe thought he had successfully galvanized poor people into people power that would translate support for him in politics. He forced it on the nation and against a just law with a mind of steel. He reckoned that it was a wave he could ride on. Such reckoning is quite endemic in political leaders in third world countries. He failed, from the start, to realize that commercial farms are critical in supporting an agrarian economy and breaking them would break the economy. He had no strategies that would use the economic resource to create an excellent and quality education system that can transform, over time, an agrarian economy into a knowledge-driven with a vibrant biotech industry as well. His mind was too suffocated and claustrophobic to nurture this type of mindset, as it never occurred to him that value can be created by knowledge and intellectual property that can generate far greater wealth and in ways that can reshape the demographic structure and economic and social advancement while it kept its commercial farms relevant to the nation’s economy.

His strategy was land reforms through redistribution of land that broke up commercial farms into uneconomical plots held by poor people rather than keep an unwavering focus on economic reforms by facilitating change in the human capital through excellent education that would empower people with knowledge and expertise and enable them to plug in to the global markets. Small plots of land given to poor people are not part of such an enabling factor in contrast to empowerment through a sound education system.

Sooner or later, all reforms that serve only as political tools tend to explode in the face or become boomerangs. It must never ever be forgotten one cannot alter the flight path of shrapnel after the explosion and equally it is difficult to alter the flight paths of boomerangs when they miss their targets. Big tools have big problems and so all large and titanic ships are difficult to steer away from an approaching iceberg. Soft issues that have solidified like water into ice can tear and cut the steel in politics. Likewise, Mugabe’s clarion calls that “Zimbabweans must come” as he “pleads with them to return home to help rebuild the shattered country” has met with boos and are unlikely to return to help build an economy traumatized by his land reforms.

Today, Zimbabwe currency comprises of billion and trillion dollars as a direct result of hyperinflation which is the highest in world history. Its turmoil in the economy is further afflicted by the world's highest rate of inflation which now greatly hampers its progress although the country has reserves of metallurgical-grade chromite and other commercial mineral deposits of coal, asbestos, copper, nickel, gold, platinum and iron ore. It currently has the lowest GDP real growth rate in an independent country, deteriorating from one of Africa's strongest economies to the world's worst.

The Mugabe Reforms stand as a lesson in strategy-making and in attempting to transform national economy by going against people and resources that generated wealth and employment that very quickly deteriorated and shattered by forging reforms into a political tool instead of developing other tools to broaden the economy. Now that political tool is broken and shattered like brittle cast iron.

Many years ago, the Former Prime Minister of Malaysia, spoke about the “crutch-mentality” and that it was unhealthy but had no concrete weaning strategies and approaches that would transform the people suffering from such a mentality so that the crutches can be done away with while the transformation would produce resilient people who can participate in the natural competition fostered by the ideals of democracy and contribute more effectively to boost the economic vibrancy in ways that it helps build the nation and promote progress and prosperity to be enjoyed by all people. In the face of the Wall Street meltdown that sent waves of tsunami across the globe resulting in drop in consumer spending, rising unemployment due to loss of jobs attributable to the corresponding shrinking in exports and a decline in world trade that put a tailspin resulting in contracting GDP, the incumbent Prime Minister, a graduate in industrial economics, has taken bold steps to free and liberalize the economy that grew with robust direct foreign investment and a strong entrepreneurial culture in the past. From these twin factors the national revenues grew that helped to flourish its brick and mortar development and the many facilities and programs that aimed to redistribute wealth.

Amid some concerns, of course based on the fallacious belief that such liberalization “would affect the position of the Malays” the Deputy Prime Minister stated that these concerns arise from a misconception that must be corrected” and stressed that “the party would never abandon its responsibility to champion the cause of the Malays” reminding them that “the special privileges of the Malays as enshrined in the Federal Constitution will continue to be protected …”

He said, “There are some quarters who allege that the present leadership is no longer interested to defend the rights of the Malays. We are opening too much space to the extent that the Bumiputeras are not in a position to face the competition.” The competition will always be there. Competition forces responses and the ability to respond. It is a positive force while protection can be negative in its effects. It is a privilege to face competition and to learn in a competitive environment and it is a privilege to churn out success by facing competition.

It is detracting to say, as some quarters allege, that Bumiputeras are not in a position to face competition. There are many who have faced competition and created success. Besides, there is the strategy of enabling factors that prepare people for competition and develop human capital for success and to learn from failures which are nothing less than stepping stones to success. On the hand, there is possible nurturing of allegations that the Bumiputeras are not in a position to face competition and the corresponding political tool that seeks to defend the policy of redistribution of wealth and never to abandon the party’s responsibility to champion the cause of the Malays. Naturally, the Deputy Prime Minister, in his wisdom asked an appropriate and thought-provoking question that is positive in its fundamental essence – “For how long must the Bumiputeras depend on aid and not make any effort to be self-reliant just because of the protection by the government to them?” (ref:NST, July 19, 2009). A more stimulating question that may spur some meaningful affirmative action that is beneficial to the economy of the nation is –“Does constitutional or legal protection help as an enabling factor to face competition, as competition is always present in some form?” That is something for the leaders to deliberate on if it registers positively in the neocortex instead of sinking into the inner depths that only produces reflexive reactions.

Datuk Dr Agoes Salim says,”What is more important is to bring people together,” which may be a basis in the 1M concept being furiously promoted by the Prime Minister as he reflects on times gone by when “we felt that we were Malayans” and “we socialized much better then” as “we did not think in terms of race in the way people do now”. He is of the opinion that we need to bring people back together and work together rather than push anything too hard that it alienates people. And to prevent the feeling that a nation was breaking down, “we came up with the Rukun Negara” to “bring people back together – unite them”. “You don’t have to have a common language if you have the same jiwa (heart, spirit, devotion, devotion)” and so the first part of the Rukun Negara is about the objectives of the nation. Unfortunately, we did practically nothing to promote an understanding of Rukun Negara.” (Datuk Dr Agoes Salim, NST, Tuesday May 12, 2009).

And Datuk Dr. Agoes succinctly states one important objective of a new policy when he said – “We wanted to restructure the economy so that the Malays would come out of the rural agriculture sector into the commercial sector.” That was then, in the context of an agrarian economy that prevailed after independence. Today, it can be modified in line with the many and rapid changes in the world that has become a knowledge economy driven by change, innovation, paradigm-shifts and research as well as by continuous improvements. And of course, competency in science and mathematics are enabling factors while proficiency in the English language remains the most critical tool that can prevent people from languishing or perishing in their cocoons. Putting people into the comfort of cocoons is easy but afterwards to get them to fly out requires a metamorphosis.

Restructuring the economy, as Dr. Agoes Salim clearly states was about enabling Malays to participate in economic activities at all levels; it was not about redistribution of wealth. He correctly puts forth the most important enabling factor in human development in the simplest form when he said, “We wanted Malay participation at all levels of economic activity. We wanted to uplift the Malays without reducing the position of others. And this was supposed to be in a situation of growth. Not just sharing the existing cake but the cake must grow, so that these people also have the opportunity to grow.” This fundamental wisdom eluded Mugabe and missed its inherent resourcefulness. Any right thinking Malaysian can see the importance of the fact that no one community should fail as it affects and impacts consumer sending power that is essential to the circulation of money and the creation of wealth that in turn is a resource for nation building.

We cannot let groups of people fail in their participation the economic activities and ability to contribute to the creation of wealth and prosperity and that opportunity to grow comes with the natural competition. It is possible to work together for the common good and purpose of creating a democracy that works to bring people together without violating just principles and God-given equality that is always above the constitution though it may be enshrined in it, and that works to bring progress and prosperity for all people to enjoy and the Tunku (the first Prime Minister of Malaysia) was right in saying so and it can only be achieved through enabling factors as other tools, incorrect as they are, may miss the target and fly back as does a boomerang that misses its target. That is a law of nature, not a new political doctrine.

The ideals of democracy and democracy in its pure form always ensure that this participation in economic activities, without the need to impose on others or dominate comes to fruition in ways that benefits the participants as well as the economy. That is the power of democracy and its ideals in creating and supporting the development of a vibrant economy and supports its growth and expansion and its broadening as well. Yet, many leaders in the third world fear it and like Mugabe would rather believe in reforms that are purely redistributive in effect that end up hurting and traumatizing the national economy, killing free enterprise that finally shatters the national economy. Actions that start with the creation of political tools that violate the tenets of democracy can harm human endeavor that charms into free enterprise to fuel the economy. It robs the full potential of human capital that in very adverse reactions invariably curtails the economy, progress and development. It is a truth of human existence, not a philosophy.

The freeing of the Indian economy in 1990 by its liberal reforms unleashed the power of its human capital to become the powerhouse it is today. While the GDPs of most nations contracted in the post-Wall Street meltdown, the Indian economy continued to grow albeit at a slower pace. All Indians were exposed to the open competition of the global arena. That positive force helped create a vibrant and responsive private sector that has made leaping strides in biotechnology, technology, construction, IT, medicine, nutraceuticals, integrative medicine, space and defense technologies, film media etc etc. Within twenty years it has grown into a market that most people want to do business in and to access it. One needs the right tools. With the change, out from the cocoon came out new mindsets that created dynamic CEOs and researchers and managers.

So, is it any surprise or wonder that President Barack Obama “had a tough-love message for fellow African-Americans” recently, urging black parents to push their children to think beyond dreams of being sports stars or rap music performers”. In nature we know that eagles push their eaglets from their nests lodged in high places, after the secondary feathers (enabling factors) have appeared to force them to practice flying and those that will never be pushed never take off.

Obama, like the Deputy Prime Minister, “urged blacks to take greater responsibility for themselves and move away from reliance on governmental programs” (Reuters).

“We need a new mindset, a new set of attitudes – because one of the most durable and destructive legacies of discrimination is the way that we have internalized a sense of limitation: how so many in our country have come to expect so little of ourselves,” he said (Reuters). The fact of durable and destructive legacies of discrimination lies in its hideous capacity to become internalized. The longer the legacy, the stronger is the product of its internalization. A sense of limitation is crippling and hence the internal craving for crutches. There must be a push. Without the push, the crutch mentality stays. And with it, comes like a robber that robs one of the full human potential. One of the symptoms that begin to manifest is the phobia about competition.

So, the Deputy Prime Minister is quite right in directing his penetrating question - “For how long must the Bumiputeras depend on aid and not make any effort to be self-reliant just because of the protection by the government to them?” There must be urgings and proper pushing supported by enabling factors.

Obama noted that his own life could have taken a different path, had it not been for his mother’s urgings. “That mother of mine gave me love, she pushed me, and cared about my education,” he said (Reuters). Someone has to love, push and care. Without the push, there is no metamorphosis. Without the push, no eaglet will take to the sky and soar. Pushing is love. Competition is positive. Without competition there is no opportunity to grow. The enabling factor is to care about education. This care is not about putting degrees in the hands of students. It is about quality and excellence in education that empowers them and metamorphoses them with knowledge that lets them fly.

CODEX ALIMENTARIUS IS A WASTE OF FUNDS

Unknown user — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 09:22:55 EDT

The Powers of the Codex Alimentarius CommissionBeldeu Singh

The Codex Alimentarius Commission was created in 1963 by FAO and WHO to develop food standards, guidelines and related texts such as codes of practice under the Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Program. Its stated main purposes of this Program are protecting health of the consumers and ensuring fair trade practices in the food trade, and promoting coordination of all food standards work undertaken by international governmental and non-governmental organizations.

The propaganda may be trying to propagate that Codex Alimentarius is all about “consumer protection” but looking at the its stated purposes it is obvious that it wants to exert itself whether by control of some form or through guidelines to extend its tentacles to ensure fair trade and practices in the food trade as well as to promote coordination of all food standards and includes whether your papadams must be crispy or soft. Codex is set to govern every aspect and standard of every food! Next they may want to create guidelines on curries and how curries might be spiced.

Codex has come on into scene on the pretext to sound like a noble trumpet to promote consumer protection. Like a cloud that rises from the horizon, it is creating a soft gulag, much of it through definitions. It was created as a “trade commission” that is growing to promote itself to regulate, and thus control every aspect of how food and nutritional supplements are produced and sold to the consumer. It does not easily dawn on people and governments that it has absolutely nothing to do with freedom of health or “consumer protection”. Conversely, careful examination reveals that Codex may be working against these sacrosanct issues in human society and national economies. Governments must reexamine the garb worn by Codex and the cloak under which it operates and its modus operandi.

The knowledgeable consumers in markets around the world are going back to nature to prevent the deterioration of health and are looking to push their productive middle-age as far as possible into the 70s or 80s. More and more people are going back to nature for preventive medicine and are beginning to enjoy clinical nutrition as an effective therapy that applies natural phytochemicals, natural antioxidants and bioavailable minerals from food sources to reverse health problems and disease states to restore health. More and more people are becoming aware that the mammalian biological system is akin to the L-form biochemistry that generates the natural antioxidants and vitamins in edible plants and herbs and they work within the L-form biochemistry of humans and animals while drugs are toxic to this biochemical system and can be disruptive to the healthy biochemical pathways in the system. Hence, the numerous side-effects and suppression of the immune system in humans and animals by the free radicals that are produced by drug metabolism in mammalian cells. Now, there is a quiet and exciting interest in the possibility of nano-bitechnology and biologics in treating disease conditions, including degenerative conditions, infections (bacterial, viral and protozoal), allergies, biochelation od very very fine (VVF) particles that stick onto cell surfaces, improve the function of the natural antioxidant system that converts hydrogen peroxide into water and oxygen to relief oxidative stress and improve the biochemistry relating to nitric oxide production et etc. This is a meaningful shift away from toxic and chemical based treatments.

The drug companies see this momentum picking up and turning into the main market over time. Instead of taking the plunge into research into integrative medicine and natural medicine, which is the opportunity in the health business, they want to confront it in a sinister way with definitions and regulatory framework to control the use and application of food based health supplements by controlling “food” and its production and how it is to be consumed.

The Road Traffic Act defines animals as “traffic” but does not require them to display road tax discs. The law is an ass that can be made to do different things, not necessarily all that are intelligent or that serve the interest of justice. It is the ass in the law that is being employed by Codex to do its sinister work. So, food can be defined in ways including in its result in producing a physiologic beneficial to make it a drug and hence it can be controlled and regulated. Already, Codex is using the wrong methods to classify nutrients as toxins and uses “Risk Assessment” to set ultra low so-called “safe upper limits” for them.

Risk Assessment is a branch of Toxicology, the science for assessing toxins whereas the proper science for assessing nutrients is biochemistry to measure amounts that yield in the proper rate of elimination of hydrogen peroxide produced by cells during metabolism and under oxidative stress, or the amounts of a broad range of antioxidants required to prevent the formation of secondary radicals such as the hydroxyl radical or prevent the formation of the highly reactive oxidant called the peroxynitrite formed by the reaction between nitric oxide and excess oxygen free radicals, or for healthy gut function, or for improving cell function, for example. In any case, any excess nutrients obtained by the body, say by eating fruits are stored by the body. The body has a system of storing antioxidants and minerals from organic sources that can be brought out of this system when they are needed, as in the case of the sudden increased activity or when there is a need to produce antibodies or repair proteins or prevent oxidative damage to molecules in the body. Also, excess L-vitamin store in lung cells is maintained in a reservoir that under an activation triggered in response to lung infection and oxidative stress in the lungs, it enters biochemical pathways that either prevent oxidative damage or promotes “oxidative burst” against pathogens effectively.

Codex has used the ass in the law, very cleverly to control the amount of nutrients people may consume which is on the ultra-low side. So, who then shall take legal liability arising from malnutrition and oxidative stress related to or directly attributable to such ultra-low level doses? If you take the ass out of the law, then the law transforms itself into an intelligent and logical tool that say that Codex shall bear such legal liability and damage to health. The doctrine of law is clear in that if you control or control by some frame then you shall take responsibility and legal liability for its effects.

Codex has empowered and set itself to curb and destroy the natural vitamin and antioxidant business and by extension the prospects of health based on such nutrients. One of these standards was ratified and approved in July 2005. It is the destructive code of Codex Alimentarius called the Vitamin and Mineral Guideline (VMG). The VMG can ban all high potency and clinically effective vitamins & minerals. For example, Vitamin C would be restricted to only a few milligrams per dose. Other nutrients, such as amino acids, will also come under its control and threat. That will help to wipe out clinical nutrition which will be a major victory for Big Pharma. Next will be the field of biologics.

There was much grass-roots action in the US that managed to organize into a major force to bring about legal protection of the American people and give then health freedom. Now the US has a, act, a legal tool for health freedom in the form of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), passed in 1994 after the massive grass-roots action. DSHEA scientifically classifies nutritional supplements as food and prevents dosage restrictions. As Codex unscientifically classifies them as toxins and sets ultra-low doses its VMG violates US law.

India and China have many scientists and researchers working on the plants and herbs used in their traditional medicinal systems that is yielding interesting scientific information about what works in different situations in healing and more importantly information about how to formulate using biomolecules from various plants and herbs to improve health or treat disease conditions including cholesterol and blood sugar lowering formulations as well as those conditions associated with or caused by inflammatory changes in tissues. Will these nations, when they wake up it, allow Codex to extend its tentacles in their health systems and affect their progress in research? Will nations with large biodiversities like Brazil allow Codex to grow and promote itself in the way it is doing now? Will Japan and Taiwan with their advances in biotechnology and organic farming allow Codex to dictate to them what is food and how much nutrients to eat daily?

The World Health Organization (WHO) is the directing and coordinating authority for health within the United Nations system. Its responsibility within that system is to improve public health setting norms and standards, articulating evidence-based policy options, providing technical support to countries and monitoring and assessing health trends. As a body in the UN it is responsible for providing leadership on global health matters and claims to be responsible for shaping the health research agenda. The latter should be shaped by the nations themselves and by the people in their respective societies under the umbrella of freedom for health to improve health with WHO providing the inputs when consulted or by way of dissemination of expert views and findings. It must be said now, that unfortunately, taking ultra-low doses of natural antioxidants does not fall in the way of improving public health as it can be detrimental to health as is the case in many communities in the underdeveloped world that suffers from malnutrition and nutritional deficiencies even in people in the developing world and developed societies.

Under its General Rules, the main agenda of the Food and Agriculture Office (FAO) is the review of the state of food and agriculture and of the programs of Member Nations and Associate Members. It has a concern pertaining to the responsibility for food safety managed by agencies in member nations and an interest in the strategy for the protection of human health from food borne disease.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is the only global international organization dealing with the rules of trade between nations. At its heart are the WTO agreements, negotiated and signed by the bulk of the world’s trading nations and ratified in their parliaments. The goal is to help producers of goods and services, exporters, and importers conduct their business. Naturally, the agreements and commitments do not apply to non-members.

It cannot be seen that Codex is a legal instrument or a law making body body with legal authority to create artificial definitions that humanity must abide by or follow its guidelines to shape our lives and our health and our businesses and our economies. It is only a commission set by two bodies, the FAO and WHO to provide guidelines under a Food Standards Program. It cannot dictate fair practices in the food trade as it is currently attempting to do by various means including new definitions that are ridiculous or otherwise absurd and it certainly is not legally empowered to tell us whether we should eat our papadams soft or crispy or how much spices should be put into curries or how to blend them into our cooking to retain the maximum antioxidant potential of their bioflavinoids or amounts that may prevent or reduce inflammations. Neither, can Codex code for how much papaya and pineapple or radish I should eat daily to benefit from the vitamins, minerals and other antioxidants and phytochemicals in them that have an anti-parasitic benefit or how much of these and noni and omega-3 fatty acid I should take to enjoy their “blood-thinning” properties without the nuisance and threat of impeding the blood-clotting factor as brought on by aspirin. Codex is not a governing body that it is posturing itself to be through its conferences and dictating guidelines. If I allow Codex to do that or define my food then I shall be guilty of promoting a new gulag of a biological nature.

On the other hand, people need to organize grass-root action to define drugs in its proper way so that they cannot be positioned as safe enough to sound like health supplements and they cannot be referred to as medicines save only as drugs of chemical origin and there must be provisions of law to code for the right to know of their toxicities before they are allowed to enter the human biological system. Also the law must require all chemicals in food be stated on the labels. It is more important for such education and grass-root action. That CODEX I will support but will the FAO and WHO? Codex is a waste of funds.

Naturally I do not approve any form of any tiff between the National Health Federation and the Natural Solutions Foundation nor any undiplomatic or unfriendly moves requiring the use of attorneys and lawyers for the bottom-line is that both must work together at the various levels as well as in actually organizing grass-root action against the Gulag of Codex.

ARCHITECTURE OF A MODERN HEALTHCARE SYSTEM

Unknown user — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 00:01:46 EDT

Some notable Greeks were the Father of modern medicine who developed and documented a system to "diagnose" and treat with herbs. This Unani system reached India through the Arabs a long time ago. Today it is being taught in universities and institutes and Indian researchers are working hard at developing strategies in integrative medicine that incorporates herbal remedies into allophatic medicine but such integration is based on scientific research and methodology and evaluation in rat models and clinical trials. They are making pretty nice strides.

Many conditions may not be properly diagnosed. Doctors may just put labels on conditions with little knowledge of the underlying causes, including the disturbances or alterations in the healthy biochemical pathways associated with mineral depletion or excess hydrogen peroxide that is not converted into water and oxygen fast enough. Excess hydrogen peroxide can alter biochemical reactions in the body. Chronic inflammation is another major factor in the development of disease and aids the progression of disease conditions. Chronic inflammations can be initiated by:-

1. oxidative stress especially when associated with poor nutrition or the empty calorie syndrome, the symptoms coming from exidative damage to molecues in the body, cell membranes and to the genetic molecules and/or

2. weakening of the body's natural antioxidant defense mechanism that may be accompanied by sharp declines in glutathione levels, keeping in mind that excessive use of drugs in treatments can lead to mineral deplation and/or

3. decline in the production of ATP and antioxidant enzymes such as coenzyme Q10 that may be associated with decline in mitochondrial density and/or

4. toxins produced by pathogens including afflatoxins and/or

5. heavy metal accumulation in the body including from cosmetics with lead, aluminium from perfumes and several heavy metals from cigarettes, amd mercury from power plants and haze or from thimerosal and/or

6. chemicals such as benzene used in petrol and its derivatives used in drugs and food preservatives, keeping in mind that excessive use of drugs can lead to problems in the mitochondria and/or

7. allergens from protozoal infections that can be very toxic.

Health problems such as elevated blood pressure can be caused by very very fine (VVF) particles, from cigarette smoke and haze and exhaust fumes, that stick to the surface of red blood cells, surface of epithelial cells in the air passages and to the heart cells where they can cause minerals to leak out. On the surface of heart cells they can cause magnesium to leak out leading to sudden heart failure. Formulations using alpha-lipoic acid and pectins in the nano-form extracted from edible substances is the most effective and fastest way to biochelate toxins, heavy metals and VVF in the bloodstream and in the cells of the body especially the fat cells in which they may bioaccumulate.

Diagnosing a condition is not about putting a label on a condition or health problem. The underlying causes or assicated factors must be determined. Psoriasis, for instances can be caused by low production of the natural corticosteroids in the body or by allergens from protozoa or may be due to free-radical chain reactions initiated by heavy metals. The treatments for these are not the same.

Such issues in modern medicine now arise simply because of the voluminous and diverse research published in the myriad of scientific and medical journals as well as research in alternative therapies including clinical nutrition, biologics and nano-technologies.

The sudden increased knowledge must now be put to good use to create and develop the architecture of modern health systems and modern medicine, the two not being identical. There must be a legal distinction between drugs for treatment which primarily are toxic or synthetic and contain both the L-form and D-form molecules in contrast to antioxidants and phytochemicals obtained from food and edible substances that must be further seggregated from toxic molecules or preparation obtained from plants which are in the L-form. The human body is an L-form biological system that thrives on L-form antioxidants.

Treating a condition must now be distinguished from approaches in healing. To see the difference, consider scurvy. Healing such a condition is by using natural vitamin C or fruits that are rich in vitamin C. Treatment science based on drugs and the healing sciences are not the same but can be part of modern medicine together with modern procedures. They are not the same as they clearly fall in two separate categories.

Life is about good creativity and productivity that serves people well by giving a benefit or benefits or creates value for them. Perhaps the Americam Dream was built around that notion. It remains a great and wonderful notion to create wealth. I am not sure if drugs do such a wonder to this notion and the economy. Drugs are a bitter pill for the economy. I do not think there is such a thing as a wonder drug as the wonder of drugs is that they all have toxic side effects to varying extents. The damage they do depends on their ability to generate free-radicals in the body and promote oxidative stress and in mineral depletion and in their ability to damage adhesion molecules. It also depends on the dose and the length of time they are consumed or administerd. So, there is no such thing as safe drugs, only doses deemed "safe" and their use in based on their benefit/risk profile unlike non-toxic preparations or formulations that are made from edible. It is not surprising therefore, that thousands of patients worldwide suffer adverse drug reactions, enough in numbers to create a specialist post-graduate training in this field. Many of such adverse reactions are due to or related to the damage of adhesion molecules and the healing approach lies in a cocktail of natural antioxidants not more drugs. Drugs cannot perform biological repair or cell membranes or promote genetic repair or promote the production of repair proteins or elevate the blood antioxidant levels in the patient.

W. Scott, someone whose writings I have great regard for, recently wrote about A BITTER PILL TO SWALLOW FOR A BUSY SMALL CITY. In it he wrote that the "American health system is scandalous. True, at its high end, it is by far the best in the world with the latest equipment and highest standards of treatment."

Yes that is correct in its context. That context being equipment, procedures but the treatment that on proper and careful analysis in not within the framework of healing science, treatment and healing being very different. You can treat a cancer patient with toxic chemo and risk losing his wellbeing in many ways and if the treatment succeeds in remission, there is still the need to heal the patient to wellness. Similarly, you can treat so called "HIV-positive" patients with toxic AZT that causes the same symptoms as AIDS, which means if you administer it to healthy people long enough, the treatment can sufficiently suppress the immune system to result in opportunistic infections or intiate the development of cancers with damage to the genetic molecules.

Of course. W. Scott Thompson is right in the context of his article and the points he made therein.

There is now a need in creating a new architecture for modern medicine to first understand the basic need to develop L-form interventions and the need to concieve and nurture the notion that the best healthcare system is the one that focusses on wellness and healing by promoting the production of antibodies and repair proteins and by supporting the natural antioxidant defense mechanism of the body that drives healthy biochemical pathways and helps to boost the body's immune system, not one that suppresses it, there being exceptions in preventing rejection in organ transplants, and in developing non-toxic approaches. Good health and healing is a multi-factorial process and hence the need to understand and teach it as healing approaches. That is where the future lies for health whereas the future for treatment science lies in drugs and chemicals.

So, what shall or should or ought to constitute the foundation of the new architecture? That is the primary question along with the scandalous costs.

Beldeu Singh

VURUSGATE?

Unknown user — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 12:01:21 EDT

VIRUSGATE?

Beldeu Singh

There appears to be the most complete analysis of H1N1 (NST, p44, June 7, 2009) and Dr Nancy Cox, Chief of the influenza division at the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention says that the results of their study show the global need for a more systematic surveillance of influenza viruses in pigs. That suggestion may be only partially correct but it is of critical importance in view of their researcher’s findings that clearly confirm that that the H1N1 is a new virus which is a “mixture of mixtures”. We may need more than a systematic surveillance.

It is unlikely that such a virus had been “circulating undetected among swine herds somewhere in the world.” And it is unlikely that pigs were the source of the current human pandemic, not even a remote potential. They have not yet seen this new virus infecting swine. Let’s consider the facts about this new virus and relate it to mutation and evolutionary biology.

The researchers confirm that the new virus is an “odd mixture of human, pig and bird genes” and their study on the genetic code sequencing of the 70 samples from the US and Mexico confirm that this new virus is a mixture of genes from human, pig and bird genes as it is possible to determine where each of those genes originate. This new virus is called a mixture of mixtures because it includes :-

1. Part of so called reassortant virus first seen in 1998 that contains elements of human, bird and swine strains.

2. Bits from so called Eurassian strains of flu, including a segment most closely related to a sample from a patient in Hong Kong infected with swine flu in 1999.

One must note that in item (2), it includes bits, not from a Eurassian strain of flu but bits from Eurassian strains of flu. Secondly, note that these bits are incorporated into the reassortant virus first seen in 1998. That beat both evolutionary biology and the normal process of mutation and hence scientists conclude that it is an odd mixture and how such an odd mixture can arise so quickly is the real mystery especially from strains in different parts of the world that reemerged in Mexico in humans, not in pigs. The mystery now begins to draw a very suspicious frown.

It is a very deep frown because we are surrounded by runaway approaches in medical science. They use toxic drugs that can cause the symptoms of AIDS to treat patients tested positive for a virus (HIV) infection by tests kits that carry a disclaimer that these kits cannot be used to diagnose and treat AIDS. Then they try to position toxic drugs as “well tolerated and improving cognitive development” that make them look like health supplements but may in fact be “toxic by inhalation.” Some oncologists in third world countries tried to position chemo-drugs by saying that they are safe and kill cancer cells selectively, again trying to bring them close to the category of as safe as health supplements. Then we have drugs that can cause nausea to treat nausea. Next we have blood-thinners that destroy adhesion molecules in cells and prevent clotting as well. We also have anti-inflammatory drugs that can effectively destroy adhesion molecules that they can cause serious side-effects like intestinal bleeding or create problems through the bio-feedback mechanism. Some specialists say that IBS is caused by stress when quite clearly the underlying causative factors may lie elsewhere that are related to diarrheal disease and blastocytosis and protozoal infection. These facts are the basis of a persistent frown of concern.

If you look at the prevailing crude and raw equation that governs the drug industry, it does draw a frown of some other economic interest …

Drugs + patients à side-effects + ADRs + problems that may appear later + $$$

If a real economy is about creating value then the first thing to notice is that while many do benefit from medical science as currently practiced, it does create a loss as well for a large number of people and it fails to always create value and the desired benefit to the economy that grows and creates wealth through creation of value and circulation of money. Within this scenario, let’s go back to the new virus – H1N1.

The critical piece of information about this new virus, something that any scrutinizing investigation must take into account is that :–

1. The new H1N1 shows very little genetic mutation and what is most disturbing is that a sample from Mexico is virtually identical to samples from US states and other countries.

2. Flu experts get worried when viruses go straight from animals to humans. Usually they do not get any further from one person. So, it is unlikely that the new H1N1 was circulating undetected in hordes of swine somewhere in the world and then suddenly it spread in humans in Mexico.

3. The new H1N1 does not have the usual mutations that allows animal viruses to jump into people and then to spread in people. (source, NST, June 7, 2009).

It is more of recombinant and not one that arose through mutation. So, Nancy Cox did come to the correct conclusion that, without this possibility of such a mutation, ability to cross species, and then spread among humans so rapidly and with special reference to the fact that it is an odd mixtures of genes from several sources from different parts of the world that this “indicates that this virus may have been introduced into humans in a single event” as many humans were suddenly and quickly infected with the genetically identical viruses.

The five parts of genes from the swine fly virus cause the symptoms of the flu, the two parts from the bird flu genes makes it spread easily while incorporating the human flu genes allows it to infect humans and cause the flu symptoms in humans. How ingenious, indeed. But it is this very ingenuity that takes it out of the known dynamics of evolutionary biology and mutation and makes it look more like an artifact created in the laboratory. That is the most apt explanation to date that accounts for the observation that it may have been introduced into humans in a single event. Since pigs were not found to be infected and hence they suggested that it be not called swine flu virus but be referred to simply as H1N1 proves that there was no cross-over from other species but that it was suddenly found infecting humans. Its mystery is not in missing links.

Only a proper investigation can show where and who created the H1N1. From the facts available so far, it is pretty clear that the various strains were placed together in a tube with enzymes to splice the genetic molecules. After 25 minutes, the spliced viruses and the enzymes were separated through a very simple process and after the separation the spliced genetic molecules were allowed to recombine which were sequenced and the selected sequence was used to reinfect healthy cells to produce copies for introduction into humans in a single event.

A nice piece of science and a good plot for a movie but deadly from the ethical and moral point that can affirmed only by a virusgate investigation. But, from the information already available, this is a very grave and serious matter for it is nothing short of criminal bio-terrorism against humanity. And it is very bad for the economy and much worse for an ailing economy suffering under the weight of the Wall Street meltdown. It is certainly bad for insurances that cover such treatments.

THE "BLIND-DRIVE" SYNDROME

Unknown user — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 09:43:19 EDT

THE "BLIND-DRIVE" SYNDROME

Beldeu Singh

Blind drivers stay blind. Worse still, if they are bitten by the arrogance bug. To add to a bad headache is a diarheal disease caused by constipated thinking in marketing with regard to creating brands and brand attributes. That succintly describes GM. That also describes to some extent many American corporations and many third world governments.

GM was driving blind to the changes in the motor world, changing demographics in which middle income earners and women entered the market, safety designs became important and the quiet celebration of the compact car followed by the concept of affordable luxury on wheels.

GM, like many third world governments forgot about the power of market dynamics that drives sales and what was driving the competition. They cherished their domestic markets more than anything esle. They were driving blind when they thought that Americans will always buy American. The not-so-blind in GM either refused to see that markets will relish or savor or love and punish a product while statisfactory market acceptance is always short-lived or would rather blend in with the blind rather stand out. They forgot that decisions about comfort, quality, design, style, sturdiness, reliability, luxury, safety, fuel economy and image though initially made in the lab and assembly are in fact made by the consumers in the fragmented market segsments in due course and that is where the product development ought to begin. The lab is in the market not an extrinsic and isolated entity located in the ivory tower surround by mimosa managers.

Governments in the third world forget those factors, too, losing touch with the reality that it is not oil but change and the consumer in the global market are the key factors that drive economies and drive the competition and determine where the jobs will be created and energy powers the turbines. The real jewel lies in thinking and what drives the thinking. The market thinks too and can drive you out of the market or out from the seat of power.

They forgot to ask with changing times what are buyer preferences and what new factors drive buyer preferences, choices and what finally influences buying decisions. Many corporations forget that and these lapses produce companies that suffer from a decline in staying market-oriented. While the Japanese were caught in the quality imperative they always had an eye to the future and remain interested in technologies of the future and fuels that will power their cars in the future. GM and many other corporations dwell in the present. Even the principle of continual and incremental changes are illusive factors in their management. That spells the idea of developing responsive companies and responsive governments.

Even developed countries made blunders. Affordable education and quality education are critical factors in developing excellence and it remains the single most vital enabling factor to remain competitive in the knowledge economy. Yet, Tony Blair increased the cost of education in Britain. Does that stem from a blind spot or is it purely about turning a Nelson's eye to an important situation. But how responsive is such a move with far reaching consequences? If want to win the Waterloo, you need more than an armada.

The selling of a car is a complex phenomenon. Other than affordability there are issues in the case of consumers in the market fragments that can afford more than one car. In these people, the car could be more than a product. It could be more than a technology. It could be an extension of pesonality and image is important. Then comes the issues surrounding the purchase of the second car. Is it for a working spouse or is it a safe run-about-vehicle or is it just a pair of wheels on economy that they want? Matching product attributes to the consumers is the key. This key cannot be found in the American arrogance of building big and building gas guzzlers that did not always fit the designs and styles and safety into the demands of the changing markets. Listening to the ego within was easier than listening to the customers out there. Now comes the beating, a ruthless beating indeed.

Ford had the same huge ego pulsating inside him. He built cars and painted them black. When he heard about the demand for cars in other colors he said, "You can buy a car in any color so long it is black." His ego was talking and he was driving blind. He took the beating, too, in due course. He did not know then that the market makes the final decision and that he had to be positively responsive. He did not know then that markets will relish or savor or love and punish a product while statisfactory market acceptance is always short-lived. The only constant is change to match the changes in the consumers in the market or market segments and consumer buyer behavior and changes in consumer preferences.

Apart from building big gas guzzlers, what did the GM brand stand for? I do not know. Did GM really bother about building a brand - an endearing brand for America? It does not strike as something obvious except that it will obviously burn holes in the wallets of many consumers in Asian markets. At the subliminal plane, what GM was saying to potential consumers in other markets where gas was not so cheap as in America is - when you buy a GM you buy a gas guzzler for an image! Now that promotes global warming. And of course, with the increase in the automobile population, atmospheric oxygen is consumed at a faster rate and such huge consumption of oil helped create the American dependency on imported oil that led to the outflow of hundreds of billions of dollars. How ridiculous, then it is to say that what's good for GM is good for America?

That was for GM but the truth, in principle, can befall any other industry. The next possible industry to take a ruthless beating is the drug industry. This could primarily be due to the fact that it chose to remain stuck in the drug industry producing toxic drugs for treatments that are immunosuppressive rather than take interest in the healthcare industry that promotes health and well being and improves the immune system and the natural antioxidant system of the body that is integral to driving healthy biochemical pathways and to to follow the back-to-nature trend that is sweeping the educated populations to promote healing. To ignore "natures cures" like how natural vitamin C does cure scurvy is to continue to drive blind.

Secondly, for big pharma to continue to influence and push for regulations and legal definitions that are intended to promote drug use and suppress natures cures and health supplements made from edible plants rich in minerals and natural antioxidants will certainly yield a powerful backlash on then, in due course. Going on this course and against clinical nutrition and harassing proponents and writers of health and natural antioxidants and small companies with formulations that are efffective and either ignoring or refusing to research in healing based on edible plants and phytchemicals and natural biomolecules describes another industry that is driving blind. In due course the markets will make the final decision to go for non-invasive and nontoxic approaches to health problems as the first and natural priority.

In industry there are only two numbers that decide your existence - No 1 or 11. No 1 is being positively responsive to the market and failing that imperative to stay market-oriented or you take the forced march towards filing under chapter 11.

THE "JENKINS TALK" MAKES POLITICS A DISEASE

Unknown user — Mon, 04 May 2009 01:40:47 EDT

There is a saying in Malaysia - that people, ie the public tends to forget after 100 days. In the west, they say the public has a short memory. Perhaps, Lyn Jenkins is banking on this phenomenon and perhaps she thought it was time to chide the stimulus package undertaken by the Obama Administration.

So let us recap:-

1. All the economists said that the Wall Street meltdown was an unprecedented financial turmoil which was well carried by the media in the US and in every country.

2. The former chairman of the Federal Reserve described the magnitude of the financial fallout as a tsunami.

3. Its fallout was clearly stated, including in my articles herein, as leading to massive job loss, reduction in disposable income, reduction in spending, shrinking in global trade volume, contraction in gross domestic output and eventually to negatively impact growth and development. It could curtail new growth areas as well.

4. It is fact that the MNCs have lost or cut thousands of jobs around the globe and 20 million have lost jobs in China while job losses in the US and Europe number more than 5 million. It is a fact that global trade and GDP output has contracted in all countries.

5. It is a fact that the Wall Street meltdown occurred during the Bush Administration and the Bush stimulus budget was in the region of USD800 billion.

Yes, the first two points are indeed correct and actually produced or led to the resulting effects in the third point. There was no dispute about the three cardinal points during the Bush Administration during which time the gargantuan problem actually emerged. There was no dispute at that time that a massive injection of capital was necessary and required as fast as possible to save jobs and to create jobs to not only prevent the crunching impact of an economy that was feding on vicious cycle and starting in a freefall but to stimulate it and help the average American family. Not all people have forgotten that.

And people have not forgotten that the Bush Administration planned to borrow and spend about USD800 billion and tried to get that budget passed through the legislative bodies.Many will continue to hold the view or at least the grudge that Bush was mesmerized by Dick Cheney to go to Iraq to topple Saddam for the untenable and flimsy reasons and excuses that ended up in the daunting task of carrying on a prolonged war that has sucked out USD600 billion out of the US coffers. And while Bush was napping on the American economy, McCain went on to state that the American economy was strong. Or was it a Nelson's eye for the American economy and hawk's eye for the war in Iraq? These Dick Cheney Wars helped America succumb to its quiet bleeding in the Wall Street. Liquidity was evaporating fast. The US was put into a position to borrow in order to nurse and heal the wounds - indeed a most tragic inheritance, to put matters into perspective within memory again. Some historians may even want to consider the possibility that Dick Cheney was running the presidency through Bush.

In came Obama and with his team revamped the stimulus budget of about the same size, turning it into an investment for America rather than spending it away as payments for bailouts. It is steadily going into green development as well as into fueling new engines of growth into the biotech sector and to develop a knowledge-based economy. Will Jenkins dare or care to talk in such straight terms. NO. So, what is she saying?

The Jenkins talk, on careful analysis is a half-truth or less that is packaged to make the Republicans look good after the mess they left for Obama. Perhaps, it is just a cunning mass communication ploy or something that stems from pure ignorance of the recessionary trends and the power of circulation of money and the critical role of liquidity.The Asian Development Bank (ADB), like the leading central banks around the world had reiterated just yesterday that Asia's governments must spend more, not less as they reduce their reliance on export-driven growth even as they grapple with an economic meltdown that will trap tens of millions in poverty. The same goes for the US and the Europeans are doing the same.

The ADB's Chairman has stated that "the collapse in global trade has gathered momentum as export markets suffer a massive contraction." This is exactly what was predicted as one of the fallouts of the Wall Street meltdown that occurred during the Bush era. And the remedy lies in a stimulus package that better serves as an investment stimulus as the "grave situation needs more vigorous and concerted efforts to bring growth in the region back." Naturally regional managers will have to spend more time at their branches to network and manage with a more hands-on approach.

"Some governments in Asia, Japan and China, among them, are already blasting their economies with hundreds of billions of dollars in stimulus spending...and Asian economies must restructure their economies and focus more on domestic demand." National objectives must take precedence to build the nation as a vibrant and responsive corporation rather than apply money in the coffers to serve narrow agendas, keeping poverty eradication as an integral part of the economic restructuring instead of a keeping it as part of a handout policy. At the heart and core lies an excellent education system of Cambridge standards to develop and harness human brain capital. The region needs to restructure in many ways in order to create new opportunities and new engines of growth and develop new sectors to grow and prop up demand as a way to avoid the economic meltdown already affecting the region not just to avoid the impact of the Wall Street meltdown.

So, as Bush kept his watchful eye on Iraq, the Wall Street meltdown was spreading ripples in the form of tsunamis to cause meltdown in Asian economies as well and even in those economies that were not directly exposed to the sub-prime mortgage problem through its securitization across borders. Will Jenkins acknowledge that? Unlikely, simply because the human cost of the economic downturn and contraction will damage the Republicans, which is her party. Will Jenkins go on record to state that if by some quirk of law or fate, Bush could stay on for another year, his Administration would not have to borrow and spend the USD800 billion?

One thing is for certain, Bush would not have done what Obama is currently doing - undertaking to find out where the US does not need to spend in order the reduce the deficit. In Asia, the Obama wisdom is being deployed which is not about borrowing to spend on bailouts as the Bush plan had put forth to Congress, but spend to stimulate growth and spend to restructure and spend to create new engines of growth in new sectors and spend to create more of the knowledge-based economy which also means spending more on research in science to translate scientific information into knowledge for developing products for the markets.

Japan, China and South Korea are also finalizing details of an emergency USD120 billion liquidity fund for 13 Asian countries for liquidity was the one of the key factors hurt or destroyed by the Wall Street meltdown during the Bush Administration. The Wall Street meltdown sucked out liquidity and for an economy it is akin to suppressing the ability to breathe in the human body. The new PM in Malaysia, a graduate in industrial economy from Nottingham University, is also moving very industriously to make some headway to restructure the economy but whether the biotech sector, bioresource industry and green development gets sufficient emphasis to become engines of growth that can create employment for graduates and post-graduates in related sciences remains to be seen.

Fortunately, he has enough funds for a proper investment-oriented stimulus.The Jenkins talk projects the notion that "Republicans believed they could help rebuild people's savings, revitalize the housing market and create twice as many jobs as the Democrats' stimulus at half the cost" is beyond logic and sounds like the cheap talk of politicians in the third world where the talk goes no farther that idle chiding." Since when did the Republicans begin to believe that crap? Jenkins kept mum as a mummy when Bush was furiously trying to get Congress to pass his USD800 billion stimulus spending package? Where is that offer contained in black and white?Anyone that went against Bush was hounded, including those who were entrusted as officers to audit the accounts and spending relating to contracts he gave without tender. That was the era of unchecked spending and no accountability that was turning into a symbol of everything going topsy turvy in contrast to American values and the American system. But Jenkins kept mum as a mummy then but the mummy speaks now with an enigmatic paradox probably coming from the hang over of prolonged desiccation. What is that?

Jenkins says that - "Middle-class families and small businesses across America are tightening their belts and making sacrifices each and every day during this recession (which was precipitated during the Bush Administration) and Republicans believe that it is time for Washington to do the same." Wow, what a paradox. That is indeed hard to swallow because; if the Government stops spending the recession will broaden and deepen and will be more prolonged. The remedy lies in spending to invest and restructure and to increase disposable incomes to improve consumer spending to spur demand that in turn will help to increase GDP output and improve the velocity of circulation of money to create wealth. Is that so illusive that it should beg an understanding?

In order cushion the impact of the recessionary factors during a recession, in which liquidity and spending ability are the twin key factors, any corresponding expansion in spending becomes vitally important to create jobs and to maintain the momentum in the velocity of circulation of money, which when well spent creates new infrastructure and value and wealth. Maintaining liquidity in banking institutions and creating new lending programs at low interest rates therefore becomes critical for small businesses. For more money to circulate for the express purpose of creating value and wealth, Government belt tightening is then nothing more than an anti-thesis to work out of a recession and indeed could entrench it for a longer period. When money is invested to restructure the economy, it adds to its vibrancy by increasing jobs and output and enhances circulation of money. It is therefore rather unfortunate that she speaks, as she claims, for all Republicans.

The moral of the story.....a Jenkins talk though it might be aimed to hit below the belt might end up hurting one's own groins. But whatever the views, the Jenkins ideology stirs curiosity as to how her theory works in which one halfs the spending to create twice as many jobs in a recessionary environment that has precipitated a global contraction in trade and GDP. It is hoped that Jenkins and the Republicans move up the ladder from mere chiding to table their offer in public which she said was made that "curbs spending, creates jobs by cutting taxes and controls the debt." I doubt that all Republicans will step forward to own the Jenkins ideology. Few might be terrifically excited by such an idea.

THE MOST RIDICULOUS TEA PARTY IN THE US

Unknown user — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 23:15:52 EDT

It is easy to get an innocent child to carry outrageously stupid placards and get away with it.

Katerina Demetriades, 5, was made to carry a placard (NST,World p28, April 17, 2009) that said:- " IT's OUR CHILDREN WHO WILL PAY $ FOR OBAMA's STUPIDITY"

They were carrying out a protest, as the reports go, to protest taxes, govenment bailouts and the government's big spending that economists say is part of an necessary program to stimulate the economy and help revive it after the Wall Street collapse that occurred during the Bush presidency and prevent job losses. It is part of the package to aid the US economy while protecting the average American family and their college going kids. And it is expected to have positive effects on the global downturn that if it could be reversed fast would in turn benefit American exports and American business.

The financial tsunami created by the Wall Street meltdown is apparently forgotten by these protestors. They have forgotten its ripple efftcts, too. They are Republicans who have forgotten that it happenned during the Republican presidency of Bush. And they have forgotten that the Bush economists also had a similar stimulus package and it was also of about the same gargantuan size. Well, it is a nice but round about way of calling Bush stupid - an elaborate tea party by Republicans to call their former president stupid after he left office has a nice ring to it.

These protests, now being called grass root opposition should have been orchesterated by the Republicans when Bush was in office trying to bailout the failed and collapsing American corporations and trying to get Congress to pass his stimulus budget.

All in all, this tea party stinks but it smacks in the face of Bush, more than anything else. But why such dirty politics? Tea is cheap and so is the current politics associated with this tea party.

BELDEU SINGH

WHY WE NEED A WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON AIDS

Unknown user — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:29:08 EDT

WHY WE NEED A WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON AIDS “Aids: An Iatrogenic Depopulation Strategy?A Comment Posted At Health SupremeBeldeu Singh It is highly interesting for any researcher to think about and consider the information that is at hand to form a working knowledge about "HIV" Aids. First of all, Dr Gallo himself testified in an Australian Court of appeal that he found the so called "HIV" only in about 40 of the patients and readily agreed that by itself is not the cause of Aids. If a virus was the sole cause of Aids, he would have isolated the virus according to the KOCH principles that are the foundation in virology and electron microscopy would have revealed such a virus, including the "budding process" since it is bandied as an enveloped virus. So far only "particles" have been observed.

Interestingly, Dr Gallo, according to his patent, has been growing the "HIV" in an immortal line of T4 cells, the very cells he says are targeted and destroyed by the "HIV". In all probability, it is the suppression of the biochemical pathways that yield T4 cells that accounts for the depletion and lack of T4 cells rather than an actual direct targeting and destruction of T4 cells.

The following note, at the biochemical level is especially interesting:-"As molecular parasites, and as response of our own cellular reactions to common diseases, foreign proteins or metabolic and even psychological stressors such as an AIDS or cancer death sentence, “retroviruses,” their genes, and their molecules, may be simply a byproduct of our stressed cells, because they always have been, are, and always will be, made by our own cells."

The Perth Group and my articles have pointed out that these are nothing more than polymer proteins called actins that have been broken up by excess free radicals especially hydroxyl radicals and people with poor and chronic malnutrition and those using drugs and chemicals or exposed to them would therefore be the groups most likely to have the Aids symptoms. Clearly, in these groups, then it is an oxidative stress problem that suppresses the cells of the immune system and the thyroxine pathway that is involved in the formation of T4 cells that leads to the extablishment of the "opportunistic infections".

As pointed out over and over again, prevention and treatment of Aids are always highly toxic. This toxicity is suppressive and destructive to the immune system and helps deplete the antioxidants and minerals in the body and further aggravates the problem as the natural antioxidant defense system weakens and the biochemical collapse of this system kills the patient. Andrew Maniotis has correctly asserted that, more Aids victims die of iatrogenic liver disease brought on by the doctor-prescribed pharmaceutical drugs than of the "opportunistic" diseases. I have stated that toxic drugs like AZT, which are toxic by inhalation and can cause the same symptoms of Aids are the very drugs to be avoided by Aids patients.

Since toxins, including viral toxins also produce oxidative stress, blood from patients who have had a viral infection would, very likely, show up this particulate molecular matter. Is it any wonder that editorials in medical journals and researchers have shown in their studies that people recovering from flu and malaria and a host of other conditions are likely to test positive on the "HIV" test kits, creating the well known but alarming situation of false positives? These studies prove that the "HIV" test kits do not test for a viral specific protein nor its specific antibody but something quite obviously associated with stressed-out cells.

Reflecting further, it is not only the toxins from viruses and other microbes that can suppress the immune system in malnourished people, more so the chronically malnourished but the allergens from parasites including the malaria parasite and from protozoa appear to be a factor in producing the so called Aids symptoms. Peole recovering from malaria seem to test positive by the "HIV" test kits.

Most people do not know that each of these test kits display a disclaimer that they cannot be used to diagnose and treat Aids!. However, if parasitic and protozoal allergens are factors in the development of Aids symptoms, these symptoms are merely being confused with regard to their causation as such allergens can be as toxic as chemo-drugs. In the above articles the professors point out as follows:-

"Doctors noticed two troubling things about the limp, sunken-eyed children who flooded pediatric wards across Botswana during the rainy season in early 2006: They were dying from diarrhea, a malady that is rarely fatal here. And few of their mothers were breast-feeding, a practice once all but universal."

I have observed vision impairment and sinking eye in the early stages when the ocular tissues are infected by protozoa. These protozoa can be killed by natural phytochemicals and antioxidants obtained in the nano-form from edible substances with known anti-parasitic properties and formulated into sprays that are very rapidly absorbed through the dermis. Life blood analysis confirms the infestation and the killing of such protozoa with rapid improvements in vision.

Blastocystis is a well known parasitic cause of diarrhea. Parasitic infections are very common in people in Africa as pets and farm animals are hosts to such protozoa and are easily transmitted from such hosts but medical science needs to focus and document from studies the health problems arising from chronic inflammations caused by allergens from parasites especially from protozoa (see Health Freedom: ALLERGENS FROM PROTOZOAL INFECTIONS AND CHRONIC INFLAMMATIONS). Diarrheal disease is not Aids.

Chronic inflammation caused by protozoal allergens can suppress the human immune system and may have a troubling relationship with the spread of AIDS that is not yet properly recognized. Leishmania is a protozoal parasite transmitted to humans through sandfly bites. The allergens may be the primary cause of the destruction of the mucous membranes of the nose, mouth and throat and surrounding tissues; or visceral, resulting in wasting while concurrent infections result in pneumonia and diarrheal disease and bleeding secondary to thrombocytopenia and impaired liver function. In visceral leishmaniasis, the parasite infects macrophages throughout the reticuloendothelial system, compromising the immune system.

Malnourished people have relatively lower levels of B vitamins (including B12) and have decreased immunity. Protozoal infections suppress the immune system and accelerate the onset of opportunistic infections (e.g., pneumonia, tuberculosis) and their allergens promote chronic inflammations that aid the proliferation of disease conditions. In malnourished people as in poor communities in Africa, most patients will be expected to die before their CD4 counts reach the low levels generally observed in seropositive AIDS patients in richer societies as in European communities (see: Aranka Anema and Koert Ritmeijer, Synopsis, Treating Leishmaniasis and HIV/AIDS coinfection in Ethiopia, May 24, 2005, CMAJ 172 (11)).

When CD4+ T cells are fewer than 200 CD4+ T cells per microliter (µL) of blood, cellular immunity is lost, leading to the condition known as AIDS. Protozoal infection of macrophages or the allergenic destruction of macrophages by protozoal allergens can also reduce CD4 cell counts. In a European study, 79–90 of people with HIV–visceral leishmaniasis coinfection were found to have CD4 cell counts of less than 200 106/L (Alvar J, Gutierrez-Solar B, Molina R, Lopez-Velez R, Garcia-Camacho A, Martinez P, et al. Prevalence of Leishmania infection among AIDS patients [letter]. Lancet 1992; 339: 1427). In Ethiopia, most patients die before reaching such low CD4 counts (see: Aranka Anema and Koert Ritmeijer, Synopsis, Treating Leishmaniasis and HIV/AIDS coinfection in Ethiopia, May 24, 2005, CMAJ 172 (11)).

Aids appears to be a multi-factorial health problem, as pointed out by certain scientists. It is associated with the suppression of the thyroxine pathway and consequent low T4 cell and direct suppression of immune function through severe oxidative stress especially in people with chronic malnutrition and it appears to be caused by chronic inflammation whether by drugs and chemicals and/or protozoal allergens in malnourished people. Dr Gallo's testimony in the Australian Court of Appeal helps to rule out a viral cause but supports the contention that the viral infection is either the result of suppression of the immune system through oxidative stress and the viral toxins aid the development of Aids symptoms as they continuously provide stress to the immune system as in MGV infection. It could also be a latency disease of the EBV associated with oxidative stress (See:www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp - THE EPSTEIN-BARR VIRUS IN AIDS) but the idea of molecular parasites may not be correct as these may be nothing more than actin molecules produced by stressed-out cells that have been broken by the excess free radicals (See: Alberta Reappraising AIDS Society - Are Malnutrition and Oxidative Stress the Cause of gp41, gp120 and gp160 in Robert Gallo's HIV Isolate? Beldeu Singh).

Further research should shed more light on this proposition, either way. That is the nature of science but the Aids industry does not like any notes or challenges to the Gallo Aids Dogma, even if it is fundamentally flawed.

BELDEU SINGH Posted by: Beldeu Singh on March 17, 2009 11:36 AMhttp://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2008/12/28/aids_an_iatrogenic_depopulation_strategy.htm

THE CHIP READ TRICK QUESTION

Unknown user — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:19:45 EDT

THE CHIP READ TRICK QUESTIONBeldeu Singh

“Chip Read asked a tough question about Obama's controversial budget. Reid asked if the budget, which will increase the debt to "$7 trillion over the next 10 years," is a case of passing problems onto the next generation. Obama responded that investments need to be made to "meet our growth targets that put us on a pathway to growth." He then pointed out that the critics of his budget have yet to bring forth an alternative” (yahoo News).

The problem arose from the Wall Street meltdown and happened during the presidency of George Bush whose term was defined by the collapse of the Twin Towers and ended with the collapse of the Wall Street. The first collapse sucked Bush and the US into a protracted war which took out half a trillion dollars out of the US economy while the second collapse blew holes on many sides of the US economy that has the potential to vaporize 4-6 million jobs in the US and 80 million jobs worldwide. It has the potential to send corporate giants and the US automobile industry and corporations in the financial industry to the corporate graveyard. Almost everyday and every week there is news in the media about shrinking profits and billion dollar quarter losses from the services and manufacturing industries that all ties in with the decline in consumer demand and shrinking GDPs. The bush administration did not win the war on terror but passed on the sinking cauldron to Obama.

The commonality in both collapses is the sucking of the dollar out of the economy while the US economy did not broaden with new products and services that would have been possible if the dollar was applied to drive a knowledge economy and in particular the development of the biotech sector that is dependent on one key biochemical reaction – photosynthesis. Photosynthesis is that one key biochemical reaction that occurs only in plants that yield the L-form antioxidants and other phytochemicals that form food and nutrition and converts inorganic minerals into the organic form. While in that process, that one key bio-reaction converts carbon dioxide into oxygen and keeps the planet livable and alive. Yet, the Bush administration had orchestrated a PR policy to down play global warming that naturally diminished the role of plants and photosynthesis on our planet. The Bush focus was neatly placed on a vision based on weapons and military action while the economy was quietly leaking its health much like the diabetic patient placed on glucophage and metformin. The blood sugar levels show a better control while the drugs affect the healthy biochemistry, unseen and undetected inside the body, that show up as side-effects over time.

The gargantuan problem was properly pictured as a long-term domino effect across the globe and better portrayed by Alan Greenspan as a financial tsunami of a proportion that the world has not yet seen nor dealt with. And rightly so, for the world’s economy was never so huge and broad and inter-linked globally. Goods and products never moved across the globe as much and manufacturing was never so integrated by MNCs that made parts in one region to be used in plants in other parts of the world.

During the Bush administration, the number of gas guzzling internal combustion engines that take in oxygen and give out carbon dioxide and other toxic chemicals through their exhausts, increased to compete with human lungs for oxygen from our atmosphere. Bush was a non-science president who never saw the global economy and life on earth in one mega perspective. He thought these are naturally separate entities just as some medical specialists who look at and treat aesthetics and erectile dysfunction problems as naturally separate from the intricate healthy biochemistry of the human biological system as a whole. The nitric oxide produced in the endothelial lining of the major arteries is involved in many biochemical pathways from vaso-regulation to having an anti-cancer role as well as in healthy erectile function. Bush never saw the link between the deployment of the dollar with wars and its potential effects on economy, the leaking of financial strength through speculative trades in the insurance industry, bad underwriting in mortgage business that is then repacked into securities and sold overseas, and using some dollars to build a bioscience and green economy that could draw on the lead the US has in research and lab capabilities to add more jobs and broaden the US economy. A broader economy would help to cushion the decrease in consumer demand created by job losses in one industry.

Perhaps, more time was spent on dishing out on-negotiated contracts and on hounding those who would care to audit the contracts and works that would have revealed more leaks of the dollar. Any dollar that does not help to create something new of value or does nor create value or does not contribute to the velocity of circulation while creating value is a dollar wasted and leaked out of the system. About 1.3 trillion dollars ‘leaked out’ from the first collapse to the second collapse. Bush passed on the problem to Obama whose erudite mind could have been better used to build America but now has to pour his efforts with a good team to convert that problem into an opportunity that will enable him to rebuild America. Accordingly, then what has leaked out has to be put back into the system as an investment to launch the rebuilding process.

Thus, it is not a case of ‘jump-starting’ the economy but one aimed to achieve the different goal of rebuilding it. It will be restructured to become a knowledge-based economy with inter-linking goals in bioscience, value addition, job creation and giving photosynthesis its due critical importance for life and biodiversity on earth. It will pass on a long term solution – it will pass of the baton of survival of the average American family, survival of consumer demand and consumer satisfaction in the global market-place and it is good news for biodiversity and it is good news for life on earth as we know it. The American presidency is no longer confined to the American economy and display of military fireworks. Global warming and the inter-linked nature of the global economy that seems to have its heart in the US and liver in Europe and kidneys in China and India and lungs in Brazil and Borneo is made more complex with its energy coming from oil that is antagonistic to the life that plants gives us.

Within this changing and complex frame, to ask the question “if the budget, which will increase the debt to "$7 trillion over the next 10 years" is a case of passing problems onto the next generation – it either comes from the mind of a simpleton or it remains shrouded as trick question. It cleverly attempts to mask a potential solution which is aims to become an investment of 1 trillion that puts back the leaked dollars to redefine and restructure the American economy that would actually help avoid both the increase of debt to USD 7 trillion over the next ten years and simultaneously break the passing of the problem to the next generation. If this investment is not made now, it is threatening to balloon into a 7-10 trillion problem globally, if the governments in other countries fail to create their stimulus budgets as many of them have already announced but these are merely stimulus budgets that give the US the advantage of making the investment as Obama has stated. An investment is different from a stimulus budget and it is hoped that the US investment will make its economy more market-oriented that is capable of continuing R & D to create the continuous improvements, innovations and quantum leaps and paradigm shifts to stay ahead of competition. An investment is made for profits and change and for turn-around, creation of new value and creation of wealth whereas a stimulus budget does not achieve to redefine the economy and may not restructure it but aims to revive it, perhaps on its old agendas.

The Chip Read question assumes that there are other alternatives that are available or have been offered and discussed that can revive or stimulate the American and global economy that do not require dollars or that require dollars that can be had without creating a debt. Clearly there is no need to bite or chew this point because he “then pointed out that the critics of his budget have yet to bring forth an alternative” but he effectively brought to the fore the issue of whether a hole created by debt is better than the hole created by leaking dollars through wars and Wall Street tsunamis. And Obama is quite right in thinking of ‘investment’ into America as a corporate entity to plug both holes. His plan is an investment to meet growth targets. Period.

EXECUTIVE PAY CLAMPDOWN

Unknown user — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 00:06:52 EDT

The huge bonuses to executives in companies that recieved huge bailouts appears ludicrous and naturally draws outrage from the public especially the average American families and more so from those who lost their jobs. But contracts, valid contracts must be honored. So where do you go from here?

Most of these payouts are probably for senior people, but there again, most of them did not get involved nor could participate in those decisions that helped create the huge losses that combined to cause the Wall Street meltdown.

The argument that "smart people have lots of opportunities, and are going to make money one way or other. And if you can't make money in the banking system, they'll find some other way" does not favor nor work towards justification of bonus payments but works more in favor of letting them go and letting them find other opportunities to make money. That is certainly good in times like this 'created recession' which is a preciptation not from the lack of ideas but from the lack and wantoness of not adhering to basic rules of business and investing philosophy which is about the type of integrity required when such free entreneurship was so unfettered by any basic regulations and the lack of adherence to a market-oriented approach dictated or otherwise shaped by global players. To understand this, look at the SPECULATIVE TRADES of AIG and the GAS GUZZLING engines that cannot compete with the super smooth and quiet engines that the Japanese concieved for the market that is better of with higher fuel efficiency as well as fitting into the trend of becoming environment friendly and contributing less to global warming.

Insurance and speculative trades do not go together. Speculative trades undermine certainty required to support contracts of insurance. It does nor foster the kind of certainty that the insuring mind contracts out of his policy. This does not require smart minds with ideas to figure it out. It only require minds smart enough to impart integrity to the contracts of insurance that are in the register and to competency to invest the insurance fund in a proper manner to ensure that it can pay out the calculated liabilities arising from the policies. So, are we going to pay smart people with ideas or those smart enough to work with the integrity required for the business and its contracted liabilities? As the argument put forth, let the smart people with great ideas go and find opportunities in other industries or other systems and make their money. It becomes a double good.

The operatives in AIG and the assembly plant workers in the automobile industry have nothing to do those bad decisions that took their companies into the doldrum. Neither did the middle management. The fat cats at the top and the Board Members were there to make and implement those decisions that sent shivers and jitters into the economy that hurt the nation. Squarely, the scrutinizing eyes must fall and focus on them. Heads MUST roll and they deserve no bonus.

From the first time that human effort was contracted into work to yield an output, it was measured in terms of desirable output. Simple put - what and how much do I get from every dolar I give you. In universities and in the modern workplace, we call it performance management. This principle is not mere philosophy but and underlying and governing legal principle that is implied in every contract of service and becomes an implied term of every employment contract. It has a fundamental intrinsic validity to subsist as an implied term and on that basis, and on a moral basis as well, the fat cats ought to voluntarily subject themselves to a proper performance appraisal to assess whether or not they actually deserve that bonuses or leave it alone to be deployed to improve corporate performance.

Putting USD165 million into a national lottery would create 165 millionaires. Controversial and debatable but as a model on which to create provocative thinking, it might be better to create 165 new millionaires who might help create a small but useful trickle in the economy, at least a small ripple in spending as against giving it away to those people who participated in decisions that were indeed toxic and bad for their companies.

With USD165 million I could start nano-biotech medicine using extracts obtained in the nano-form from fruits, flowers, vegetables, spices, all made from edible substances, to improve healthy biochemistry in patients or help improve vision or lower hypertension or lower blood sugar levels or treat even serius infections including biabetic wounds and protozoal infections or help the hole-in-heart child recover very rapidly or remove heavy metals through biochelation and help people with a variety of skin conditions recover which actually helps to bring forth a new field of medicine called Fenton Medicine using these new line and range of products called ediceuticals. There is a pressing imperative to shift away from adminidtering D-form chemicals into the human biological system that is driven and regulated by L-form biomolecules which means a shift away from toxic drugs as medications to improve overall health of the nation and look forward to reduce national healthcare costs.

In other words, it is a lot of money, however you look at it although it appears as a pittance in contrast to the USD173 billion bailout. And it can be usefully deployed in an economy under siege by a recession created by people in high places in the corporate ladder. Which rung of the corporate ladder - that is the real and only issue in the raging bonus payment debate that will cut down thw outrage and pour some meaning into the use of money as a resource.

The second real isue is basic regulation and market-oriented approaches in business and industry. Unfortunately, not many know what it means to be and remain market-oriented so that there is creation of quality and value in oder to create wealth and jobs. Unfortunately, politicians and corporate leaders and heads of institutions in third world countries might rather squander resources to help support agendas that eventually can undermine the development of a vibrant market-oriented economy that looks after the environment.

BELDEU SINGH

FULLY ENTREPRENEURIAL CULTURE AS AN ECONOMIC STUMULUS

Unknown user — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 03:03:16 EST

FREE ENTREPRENEURIAL CULTURE AS AN ADDITIONAL STIMULUS TO ECONOMIES IMPACTED BY THE WALL STREET MELTDOWN

Beldeu Singh

There are almost daily reports of MNCs and giant corporations that :-

1. are posting billion dollar annual or quarter losses, &
2. announcing 4000-20,000 job cuts, OR

1. huge drops in profits, &
2. planned layoffs or implementation of voluntary separation schemes (VSS).

Over the last fifty years, national economies became more and more integrated into regional economies. Technologies also allowed faster interconnectedness between regions and helped create better management of business units that could operate far away from the head office. MNCs and their ancillary manufacturers could manufacture parts or process materials in one region for shipment to another region where the manufacturing process is completed. The finished products are then distributed globally or to markets in other regions that use or otherwise depend on these products to support their industry or lifestyles. International trade increased manifold.

Meanwhile, in the last 2-3 decades, securitization developed in ways that created new products in the form of instruments that allowed borrowings in one country, including mortgage borrowings (as in the US) to be sold and held as investments in other markets (like Europe). Bad or poor underwriting is not reflected in these instruments even if there is a new system to develop guidelines that properly grade them, but that might help to some extent. Consequently, bad or poor underwriting in one economy extends the exposure to other economies in other regions.

Hence, interconnectedness in trade and finance can have implications across borders and in other regions where it impacts growth and development and lifestyles. Sometimes this interconectedness is managed through policies that may be protectionist in nature. It shows that while interconnectedness is generally good and its positive effects can spur progress, it can also produce a fallout in the fact of bad or poor underwriting. And when this practice involves billions and billions of dollars that threaten to churn into a meltdown leading to the possible collapse of giant corporations and MNCs, the job lossses that follow leads to the dwindling of consumer demand and contraction in GDP.

It sets in a vicious cycle that can spin an economy into a downward spiral. In this kind of scenario, the mere pumping of huge amounts of money that serve the purposes of only bailing out may not be sufficient. It requires, another critical factor, other than the conventional economic stimulus package.

South-east Asian and Asian economies are also impacted by the financial crisis triggered by the Wall Street meltdown. The large economies of India and China will be much less affected due to their large domestic demand and India might rebound faster. Other countries are already feeling the cascading effects of the global financial crisis that is slowly and steadily creeping in and hence the panic strains are not so evident as yet, thanks to some extent to better savings rate but largely due to the lack of a direct exposure to the bad or poor underwriting that created the subprime mortgage problem.

But the interconnectness is in place and now functions to slow down the economies in South-east Asia as trade declines and as output shrinks to various extents in the different industries. The certainty of slowed economic growth is a reality that these economies will have to deal with. Growth in jobs will be slow or even negative as the year unfolds due to shrinking demand in the developed regions such as the US and Europe and are embracing a stimulus package. Such packages may not have the desired broad effects for money alone does not churn the wheels of economy – it requires human capital and human endeavor.

Financial markets can be stimulated by isolating the debt problem and liquidity can be improved by injecting money but it is the human activity called entrepreneurship that creates new business and work that helps to circulate money in the economy and help to increase the velocity of circulation of money. The current situation uniquely warrants a change in the thinking hat to generates ideas that aids the economy through entrepreneurship that serves as a stimulus.

The paradigm shift involves the unleashing of human effort that translates into work within the economy and it becomes an imperative that entrepreneurship be encouraged and developed through a fully free entrepreneurial culture rather than curtail it through licenses that control or discourage economic activity such as controls that are intended to support race-based agendas and quotas instead of work that creates wealth. The wealth from this change in attitude can increase the revenue for government coffers that can then properly apply it to further increase opportunities that help generate prosperity for all people to enjoy. People rarely enjoy controls that prevent them from creating wealth. If there is such enjoyment, it must be, indeed, gravely debilitating.

A fully entrepreneurial culture must thrive again, unfettered by licensing controls, and instead, supported and facilitated by specific programs and credit facilities that are closely supervised. Wealth creation through the human endeavor called entrepreneurship that creates work and wealth in the economy is not a new idea. It is the oldest but it suffered through government interferences. It is forgotten in those economies that shifted its focus on wealth creation strategies and have engineered quotas and race-based agendas to suit some warped political ideology. They will have to relearn it and understand it as an integral part of social engineering.

No economy suffers from a fully entrepreneurial culture. No economy suffers from policies that encourage work that benefits the economy and creation of wealth. It is the art and science of management that integrates the use of money, human capital and human endeavor that is transformed into entrepreneurship that serves as a stimulus to any economy. Curtailing this notion in any form is a self-inflicting evil that limits human potential and the potential of national economies. Well there are creative ways to axe one's own leg. One way to becoming poor is to kill free entrepreneurship but a fuly entrepreneurial culturet does not mean free of regulations and quality standards that safe guard the consumer.

WHEN THE DIVINE INTERFERED WITH HUMAN DESTINY

Unknown user — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:40:15 EST

Humans have an in-built mechanism to continue with status quo and to resist change. Humans everywhere, including in the workplave invest a lot of time and effort in these two factors.

They give different excuses to maintain status quo. One of such excuses is - it is better to stick with the devil that you know. Such is the plight of human tragedy that comes from the weak at heart and the frail in mind. Firstly, it is always not good to know the devil. On the flip side, the angel that you do not know is always better than the devil you know so change is the only imperative. Much of human resistance to change is generated and driven by ignorance - ignorance about the people and factors that drive change and ignorance of the benefits of change.

Hence, in most cases there is only incremental change, some of it coming from innovation and continuous improvents rather than from paradiigm and paradigm shifts thatenable the making of quantum change or quantum leaps.

Unfortunately, much of human destiny is the result not of change but of status quo and the resistance to change. Closed mindsets that promote such resistance are are curse to change and the progress that change can bring. Fortunately, this time the Grace of God came forth and His Divine Light was merciful enough to interfere with human distiny that is shaped by the ingredients of wanting status quo and resistance to change. Change was clothed with new power and vigor with the promise of the fruits that change can bring. Change was given a reproductive virility that spread like a wild fire to fertilize so many minds and fertilize incipient thoughts into new and useful ideas that can benefit mankind.

If people continue to think change and think it for safety and peace, healing and progress and freedom and to bring out the best in humans, the fruits of that thinking will surely come to be savoured. And such change must be powered to develop and churn prosperity for all in ways that buttress democracy and the founding principles of democracy that stood in its pure and original form.

Obama represents change. In that perspective he has the power to shape destiny of Americans and fellow humans who will work for such good change. It is hoped that all mankind will channel theit efforts and energies and goodwill that will flow as a river of life full of hope for peace and progress.

Some numerologists predict a good year ahead for Obama while some astrologers believe that as Jupiter, the ruler of finances and entertprise is in Capricorn, which is its sign of debilitation, will mean a troubled year ahead in this area and pundits and analysts say that it will take years for the economy to recover. Astrologers forget that this debilitated Jupiter achieves "neech-bangha" as it said in Sanskrit which means a cancellation of its debilitation and in fact gives good results which means to rise from the bottom. Most of the large corporations that are part of the financial meltdown or have contributed to the meltdown have hit their bottom and will rise again. It is, on the contrary that much of the negative financial impact will have worn away by February 2010 and 2011 will see further change and vast improvents leading towards recovery. As for this year, those with intellectual property and scietific discoveries will make it big to contribute to the well being of mankind and new and interesting books will become runaway successes while some former heads of state and leaders will be brought to book.

Yes, the hand of change has its palm open and fully stretched to sway things in a very big way starting, of course, with the taking of oath on January 20th.

LESSONS FROM "THE HUDSON MIRACLE"

Unknown user — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 07:51:57 EST

LESSONS FROM "THE HUDSON MIRACLE"

Beldeu Singh

At a tea chat with my friends about two years ago the chat diverted to concerns on air safety. One of things I mentioned in passing was that all major airports should have a "water runway" which is basically a canal large and long enough that runs parallel to the main runway and is filled with water but covered with a thin sheet of plastic or some other cover to reduce loss of water by evaporation, so that those planes that have landing gear problems could land safely on this water runway. As soon as touchdown, powerful engines could immediately start pumping water out into adjacent underground tanks so that the water level drops after the landing.

Well, of course, it is an inexpensive safety measure but it does not serve all types of problem situation with regard to flight problems in mid-air. It cannot help two planes that collide in mid air. But every possible case that can be saved must be saved. Like the plane that landed safely in the Hudson river. It still had the height and ability to glide and since it was too far from landing strips or runways, it took the best option available - to try a water landing.

And it paid off. It became a miracle that saved all lives and the salvage footage shows a plane that is intact and ready to take off. Of course it needs an overhaul and change of gauges and engines etc but the landing itself resulted in minimizing collateral damage - collateral damage to the plane and other impact damage that could have been caused if it landed in residential districts. And insurers heave a sigh of relief, too.

The two important lessons of immense critical value are firstly, the importance of water runways outside cities that have busy airports and flocks of birds other than a water runway at the airport itself that is not more than 15 feet deep and with equipped with other features to treat passengers. Secondly, aircraft manufacturers and dsigners must consider some fundamental changes in the underside of the fuselage or body to better facilitate forced landings in rivers or such water runways, including finding ways to keep the plane afloat or to keep such a heavy plane afloat for a much longer time. These are interesting possibilities of change.

The bottomline is that we must capitalize on what the world at large learnt from the Hudson river miracle, forgetting not the possiblity of simple and cosmetic changes that can prevent large birds from being sucked into the jet engines.

If people continue to think change and think it for safety and peace and progress and freedom and to bring out the best in humans, the fruits of that thinking will surely come to be savoured.

TREATING THE AIDS IN THE ECONOMY

Unknown user — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 01:14:27 EST

TREATING THE AIDS IN THE ECONOMY

How should we arrest the current economic crisis and turn it around so that we can have prosperity for all to enjoy? Should we look at the whole scenario and develop and implement total solutions? Should we just treat the companies that created meltdown? Should we treat both the meltdown and its fallout? Treatments are easy to dish out. Finding solutions that matter to the health of the economy and have the desirous effects are quite another alternative.

Contrast the two scenarios on the same coin - the coin that created the economic AIDS. On one face we see massive bailouts by US legislators while equally massive job loss that is taking place in the US and Australia just announced its biggest unemployment figures for the year. The ailing economy has slowed down global exports to the point that it is producing harm and growth in Asia is slowing down. A vicious cycle has set in. Amidst this deepening recession, law makers and the White House has worked out a deal to avert industry collapse. The harm and pain is seen on the reverse face of this coin.

A fifty-nine year old businessman, Paul Nawrocki, who almost made a six figure salary has almost spent all his savings and his unemployment benefits will run out in less than a month. "After nine fruitless months of looking for work, Paul Nawrick decided that desperate times require desperate measures". The very experienced operations and administration manager dorned his suit and tie and hung a billboard around his neck that read - "Desperately seeking full time employment with insurance benefits for self and family. Disabled wife on 15 medications." Painfully he writes, "any kind of help would be greatly appreciated."

That Nawrocki syndrome, like the Carposi sarcoma in AIDS, that now blights the face of the American economy ought to be discussed on the OPRAH Show so that legislators and voters understand the vulnerability of the American economy and the pain it can produce to families. And voters will perhaps attach more value to the power of the ballot and to their individual votes. People are getting panicky and that kind of panic can spread and turn into fear that can further harm the economy as palms become more tight with the money within their grip and curtail spending.

The underlying causes of the recession have been at work for at least a year. The harsh realities began to surface after its "incubation period" when its accumulating effects spread with the build-up of toxic assets that precipitated the meltdown for all to see. It was the failure of the system and more of the same toxic interventions within Wall Street that caused the financial system to collapse on itself. The media (DM, nst, Dec, 12, 2008) now screams that the unthinkable has become the harsh reality. It reminds people of "while Rome was burning Nero was playing his lyre" just as it hapenned on the Titanic while it was sinking, the band played the music. As the flames devoured the world around him, all Nero did was to run around the city without his guards directing efforts to quell the blaze. Are US legislators merely directing efforts to quell the blaze or is there a charted plan that addresses the real and underlying issues that aim to arrest the crisis and to buttress the recovery? Is it a total solution or plain treatment as in the case of AIDS patients who are administered AZT?

People want to know the plan and how it works. They have not seen it excepting for some policy changes to cut BLRs and interest rates and the massive numbers that are bailing out the culprits who created the meltdown or in one way or another contributed to it. While the economy is spiralling downwards propelled by vicious forces, are the politicians and legislators playing the music? World Bank lending programs to help poorest nations "to help weather the crisis" is music that will only increase their debt burden if it is not managed into spending for new income generating and employment generating programs. Giving money to "help weather the economic crisis" is music and it is worse if it continues to be flushed into sunset industries or if it ends up in hands that fail to create wealth or value.

Politicians enjoy making policies that sound like music to the ear and most political leaders bask in it but have little ability to chart out the goals and effects of the programs and measures into which the money will flow. Most of the effort of politicians starts and ends with problems on the obverse face of the coin. The pain on the reverse face of the coin is not seen nor felt by them and largely remains ommited in their plans as they confine to policymaking and often forget that such plans need a broad base and investment in expertise that can and will start new engines of growth and to revitalize the old with shifts to create new worth and value or cost-saving. Some governments are still tuned in to administer the medicine that may not be so helpful rather than in weeding out the root causes of the meltdown and keeping a sustained effort on properly maintaining strong consumer spending to ensure a vibrant velocity of circulating money in areas that create value.

It is also an opportune time to give added perks and increments to high brain capital individuals and genuinely high performers and to those who can improve quality coupled with efficiency and retrain redundant workers to take up new positions as well in those who can create new businesses through managing commercial science. Being yoked to only eforts aimed at bailing out ailing corporations that helped create the economic AIDS without weeding out the senior managers who let it happen and sang the carols of self-regulation is wrong medicine that must be avoided just as AZT is to be avoided for AIDS patients. No more music, please. It is a paradox to administer an intervention that causes the problem it is supposed to cure. Most AIDs patients do not see what is coming when they are given AZT as they do not get to see its label.

THE AZT LABEL

This is what the patient never sees, an actual copy of an AZT label. This label has appeared on bottles containing as little as 25 milligrams, a small fraction (1/20 to 1/50) of some patients' daily prescribed dose.

"WARNING: RETROVIR (ZIDOVUDINE) [AZT] MAY BE ASSOCIATED WITH HEMATOLOGIC TOXICITY INCLUDING GRANULOCYTOPENIA AND SEVERE ANEMIA PARTICULARLY IN PATIENTS WITH ADVANCED HIV DISEASE ( SEE WARNINGS).
PROLONGED USE OF RETROVIR [AZT] HAS BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH SYMPTOMATIC MYOPATHY SIMILAR TO THAT PRODUCED BY HUMAN IMMUNODEFICIENCY VIRUS. RARE OCCURRENCES OF LACTIC ACIDOSIS IN THE ABSENCE OF HYPOXEMIA, AND SEVERE HEPATOMEGALY WITH STEATOSIS HAVE BEEN REPORTED WITH THE USE OF ANTIRETROVIRAL NUCLEOSIDE ANALOGUES, INCLUDING RETROVIR AND ZALCITABINE, AND ARE POTENTIALLY FATAL ( SEE WARNINGS)." - from Glaxo Welcome AZT product information.

AZT was developed back in 1964 for chemotherapy in cancer patients, at a time when it was thought that cancer was caused by a retrovirus, but was shelved because it failed in animal experiments. It was designed to destroy proliferating cells. Normally cancer chemotherapy drugs are used for limited periods. The rationale for cancer chemotherapy is to kill cancer cells during mitosis with cytotoxic chemicals like AZT. Such chemicals cannot distinguish cancer cells from normal cells and they do not selectively kill cancer cells. The price for chemotherapy is the death of normal cells that are in mitosis and therefore chemotherapy must be restricted to days or weeks.

People are thinking. Could it come to this? Could modern medical science work itself into a situation to administer into the AIDS patient a drug that actually causes the symptoms of AIDS? The power of the music when it is played to the ear can make things happen that on hindsight provokes the inevitable question - could it come to this?

AZT is now being advertized in medical journals as good for cognitive growth and that ad makes AZT appear more like a health supplement!

Is there something that legislators are not seeing or something that conveniently rests in their blindspots or is left to nurse in the Nelson's eye? People fall into this trap especially when things get desperate and when there is a scare, the two same things that are common to both AIDS and the current economic crisis.

And the third thing that is appearing to be common is the in understanding the underlying cause. The danger comes in attaching labels such as meltdown, economic slow down, economic down turn, and financial crisis, after which the authorities get into the business of address these labels. Psoriatic dermatitis, for example can be caused by chronic inflammation arising from afflatoxins, free radical chain reactions initiated by heavy metals, protozoal infection or problems with natural corticosteriods production in the body together with problems with CoQ10 production in dermal cells. One label but with different underlying cause factors, the treatment varies for selective action. AIDS patients are paying the price for the funny way in which the test kits are used to diagnose AIDS and due to the ignorance of the fact, as Dr Gallo testified in the Court of Appeal in South Australia, that he found the "virus" (that curiously evades electron microscopy) in only 40% of AIDS patients and went on to state that in itself, this does not qualify as the cause of AIDS simply because for a virus to be the cause of a disease it must infect every patient. They say it is an eveloped virus but how it "hides" its "budding process" beats the mind and eye of every vorologist.

Just as chemicals cannot distinguish normal cellfs from cancerous cells, they do not kill cancer cells selectively. And their metabolism is different from biochemicals. Similarly, money cannot distinguish its application into the problem from its effect in solutions and on its own it cannot selectively work itself into reversing a downturn for recovery that turns it into a prosperity spin to be enjoyed by all people. It is merely a tool to support programs that are charted as part of the process to produce selective results that can be monitored.

Such a process forms the rim of the coin that selectively addresses the problems on the obverse face of the coin with broad recovery on the reverse face of the coin. They are all linked in one coin and cannot be divorced nor addressed separately. It is the inevitable model just as beauty cannot be divorced from total health of the body and just as erectile dysfunction cannot be properly treated as a distinct and separate problem that resides solely in the organ. They are all linked in such a way through biochemistry in systems that form the whole. They are not minor cuts and bruises on the digits. So, all bailouts must be charted for their effects to impact the economy as part of an entire package and measured and weighed against the change they will yield in terms of jobs, products, quality, productivity, cost-saving and the bottomline.

Obama has an excellent team that is churning out some strategic measures that are reassuring and quite meaningful. For one, the extra spending on infrastructure development could put into place facilities of some value while generating employment, Secondly, money will be applied selectively to modernize the US health system for achieving convenience for patients and a cost-benefit that is aimed to save billions annually. New facilities such as installing the broadband internet access and rehabilitating schools are investments in creating brain capital that will serve America as knowledge-workers in the future. Which nation would like to lose out on that score and suffer a certain decline in the future in its functioning economy and global competitiveness. Then, he moves on into investing in energy efficiencies which will also create jobs and save money while helping the effort in arresting global warming.

All of that sounds good with known and tangible effects, not just as music, And it addresses panic and fears, but what seems to give a disturbing tone to a nagging ring in the ear is this - How many people in the US, like Nawrocki's wife are taking 15 medications!

You take one to three medications for a range of health problems and have to take several more to help with their side effects in the liver and kidneys and the heart. Presumably quite a significant percentage of people consume so much drug toxicity on a daily basis. That clearly points to another industry that can be funded - food as medicine - and clinical nutrition that actually reduces the dependence on toxic drugs and on reducing the number of drugs as natural antioxidants can better protect healthy biochemical pathways from the large number of free radical and excess hydrogen peroxide produce in the cells from drug metabolisn not to mention the depletion of minerals that occuers with drug metabolism that can be be replaced to reduce such risk through dietary intake of organically grown herbs. Reducing costs in toxicity consumption leads to better health as well as lower healthcare costs in systems that use toxic drugs.

REIGNING IN THE US INSURERS

Unknown user — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 00:40:39 EST

A USD14 billion dollar bailout is huge by any standard for any one corporation. And such a bailout for an insurer is big shame. What went wrong? The better question, "What went so wry?"

The boon of big corporations is that they provide many jobs, contribute more to the economy. In trying to get more customers, their brochures never fail to highlight their size and financial strengths. But the boon of big corporations exists only if they are well managed and operate on prudent principles, especially insurers. Insurers are not ordinary companies that offer and create goods. Their products are a cradle in which hope is placed for a need in the future, either at maturity or on the happening of a contingency like accident, disability or hospitalization or death. It is supposed to provide an endowment or an indemnity when the consumer needs it most and it is a part of contigency planning for a needs at some unexpected time in life on the happening of specified events or occurrences. These are well catered for by the actuarial assumptions and calculations that also factor expenses and investment incomes.

The bane of big corporations is that when they are run by fat cats and on doubtful decisions that go against the grain of prudence and raise alarms in the manifold creases of the frowns of the auditors and any discerning mind, we see prudent management in cold hibernation giving a chill to customers.

Insurance means providing financial security at an uncertain in the future when its is needed most time. Within that context all investments of funds from the insurance pool must be conducted only with that element in mind and never straying out of the limits of prudence in order to meet the requirements to pay all policy proceeds and benefits promptly. There are no grounds to do otherwise as the insurance fund is not an investment fund of the insurer but represents the sum total of the pooled hopes of the many for the security they purchased on some equitable basis.

The AIG problem may stem from many contributory reasons and excesses including the fat cat syndrome but it appears to be largely due to one primary cause - SPECULATIVE TRADES! Speculative trading by insurers using money from the insurance fund is obnoxious conduct.

The AIG frolic in the way it was running its investment program must come under the scrutiny of the Obama Administration. This type of uninhibited operation cannot go on without amendmends to the insurance legislation or the relevant investment regulations that govern invesments of money from the insurance fund which must be subject to external audit of the Feds. It is a frolic that comes with a huge tag to the taxpayoers and at the expense of the US economy. That is one lesson to learn. And heads must roll.

And the next lesson is that, the bigger the corporation, the bigger the potential of the financial impact and more jobs lost at short notice when it fumbles. Within its veins lurks another danger - the bigger they are, the greater the inertia for change. Such inertia can be greater especially if there is little competition for competition is itself another driving force for change. Take that away and the inner power to change can wither or just wane and disappear.

The large oil giants are but one example who can resist the need to redefine their business from being in the crude oil and petroleum operations to the energy business and will continue to remain in the hydrocarbon business. Some incentives that cleverly reward the development of clean energy seems an obvious option but prompting such giants needs shocks not coaxing. Proper influence to promote drivers of change to top positions would be certainly helpful.

Automobile giants are another breed of culprits who have continued to produce gas guzzling internal combustion engines that are also less fuel efficient than Japanese models. They help to deplete more atmospheric oxygen when moving from point A to point B compared to Japanese models and generate more exhaust. Automobile exhaust contains carcinogens, anthropogenic gases that contribute to global warming and very very fine (VVF) particles that are a hazard to health. In the post-40 age group and in the elderly, sufficient amounts of VVF in the bloodstream that come to attach on heart cell membranes can initiate the loss of magnesium from the heart cells and cause sudden heart failure. Being big, these giants blatantly refused to change engine capacities and make changes in their technologies in the interest of health and in the interest of their nation's need to reduce dependence on foreign oil. Result - health costs move up while money flows out to enrich a handful of oil producing countries. And when they fumble, thousands of workers are cut from their payrolls.

Some countries promoted the idea of the merger of corporations and banks in the belief that big is better. That is a myth. A larger number of smaller players helps create diversity in approaches to efficiencies, conveniences to customers, diversity in corporate cultures to serve the market segments, fragments and niches they identify and target. Specialist companies are just as important as companies with creative and innovative expertise that can effectively foster change and drive competition. There is strength in diversity and numbers can lower risk to economy while at the same time they can also promote the evolution to create a diversity in expertise and products and services in contrast to a few large players. A few large players who can be slow to respond and may want to concentrate on the segments they know how to tap or just go on serving the market at large which throws a curtailing ring around creativity with potential leanings to some kind of monopolicy in the sector. Such large and complacent giants can become sluggish to the economy. And when one or two giants fumble and crumble in the market, the collapse or impending collapse or meltdown reverberates in the economy or in the region or creates chain reactions in the global economy.

The moral of the lessons of bailouts - there is ooomph and power in corporate diversity and when such diversity is significant, a larger number of corporate citizens subject to prudent principles and sound regulatory framework governing the finances and investments tends to lower the risk to national economies. For greater vibrancy, governments must therefore bank on creating such diversities.

THE OBAMA MOMMENT

Unknown user — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:14:44 EST

Writers have played and overplayed the winning bid for the presidency of the US by Barrack Obama with an unsaid message to be read in between the lines that the road to the White House is to be tread only by a white. And that Obama, being black created a defining momment - The Obama Momment. Well, firstly, his mother is white and in that context what does The Obama Momment really mean?

It is hard for me to see the elected person as having scored a victory. It is entirely and solely about getting elected - not about emerging as a victor. The elected person is not a winner, only someone chosen by ballot and put into a position to serve the people and their nation in the capacity of that position. Naturally, other than charisma and eloquence, people look for the unwritten resume that speaks for the abilities, an erudite mind, a good grasp of the issues and problems of society along with the concerns of the people and how to deliver effective and meaninigful solutions and the uncanny ability to put together a dynamic team that in itself sends the correct message of not just an able commander-in-chief but also that an able manager is at work. If such competency is properly buttressed by the power of a vision that aptly pervades and spreads out to hearts and minds, there is inspiration to drive it all with the power of a twister. Coporate America needs just that just as much as communities caught by business downturns and shutdowns across the globe. It is the engines in corporate America that will make the change and the difference to how the economy fares in the world supported by policy shifts and administrative interventions from the mind in the White House.

All of this has come to pass. An impressive team is being put in together that is earning respect and confidence and already the winds of change are reassuring amidst the massive layoffs and shrinking GDP and consumer demand. But that does not constitute The Obama Momment.

Different people look at it and speak of it as it means to them. If democracy could speak, it would have said that this man undertook a duty to prepare himself for the call of democracy and his election was the spark of a plug that gave life to democracy. The Obama Momment is a glow in democracy that shows that it is functioning hale and hearty and it serves humanity well. The process is now better enabled for the human. It cannot be dethroned into the lesser notion of a black man going to the White House to rule. It is a fallacy to think that the idea of rule and being ruled exists within the concept of modern states. Nobody rules and nobody is ruled in a democratic state. The elected only serve within the notion of a democracy to be enjoyed by all people wherein just laws and fairness are pillars that shore integrity and are an integral part of the leadership principle. A good democractic process serves the nation well when it allows for the election of erudite minds with abilities and leadeship principles to be elected to skillfully put up the proper architecture for democracy to be enjoyed by all people and in that web prosperity develops to improve the quality of life while giving opportunities for the sacrosanct American dream.

The Obama Momment has come and gone. It was cherished. It was relished. It was savoured. It was celebrated with song and dance. It was one special momment for democracy. One writer went on to express the popularity and acceptance of Obama as the global president by saying that every community accepts him as one of their own, an expression that he so richly deserves. Well, perhaps, the Sikhs caught in their Obama Momment, accepting him as one of their own, might just as well christian him as Obamajeet Singh.

Whatever, the Obama Momment, it was precious and now comes The Obama Action. This man acts fast. He has wisely used his time as President elect to carefully structure his teams. It is a thoughtful and skillful assembly of people with expertise, intelligence and experience in its varied forms for change and results rather than an assortment of personalities cobbled together for some hopeful work. He is an architect not a cobbler, thank God that he is not burdened with the needs of coalition political partners.

He continues to create waves, true to his personality, and these waves carry a message on their crests that these are dynamo teams capable of changing the economic locomotive that ran into quicksand or otherwise capable of transforming it into something that could soar with new engines for such thrust.

There is an air of expectation of improvements as well as an expectation of paradigm shifts from the brick and motar mentality and chimneys that spew toxic fumes into the atmosphere as the yardstick and measure of development and industrialization to create jobs and products for the consumers to chug the economy to usher in the era of green development which means many things from cleaner air, less pollution, more biotechnology, less processing of food, more natural antioxidants and more products from plants to better serve the back-to-nature trend and the wellness revolution, leading to less chemicals entering the ecosystems and human body and human breast milk.

Enjoyment of health along with the enjoyment of wealth through prosperity and new opportunities, come the prospects of a longer and more productive middle age and golden years - all part of the promise of a democracy to be enjoyed by all people. It is a positive cycle that inherently contributes to the economy. It is the magic of unbridled democracy. It demands competent leadership, only competent leadership that serves people democratically not policies. This, the Obama Momment brought forth.

While, some might say that it is the commander-in-chief that guides policy, it is a higher notion to preach that it is good philosophy that guides the commander-in-chief. So far, Obama has been guided by good philosophy to choose the inspiring vision of change and members of his teams and remains as aspirational as from the start.

Obama's Victory Speech – Looking At The Inner Convictions

Unknown user — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 03:02:47 EST

Obama's Victory Speech – Looking At The Inner Convictions

Beldeu Singh

It is true that we suffer or enjoy the rewards of our inner convictions. They shape us and guide us. They define our profile and how we create solutions and how we respond. Beyond that they spell out our destiny and the type of seeds we shall sow and in accordance with the divine law, we shall reap accordingly. It forms an inherent part of the human nature and either positively affects others and our environment or leaves behind scars and much to lament or regret. Hence, the need to benefit from quality education that develops the mind, not one that merely puts qualifications in the hands that eventually ends up in bringing bodies to a desk who look forward to their next pay cheque instead of the measure of their contribution. Such is the tragedy of a wasted life but good and meaningful convictions do get incarnated into human form who live and work amongst us for the good of man and I thank God for it and sing praises to such handiwork of his.

As equally convictions maketh the man and his service, and charms the leadership qualities, from which good, bad and evil flow, just perhaps it calls for a small pause to analyse and review the unusually profound victory speech of Barrack Obama and whether it yields a peek into his inner self.

If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible; who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time; who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer.

It's the answer told by lines that stretched around schools and churches in numbers this nation has never seen; by people who waited three hours and four hours, many for the very first time in their lives, because they believed that this time must be different; that their voice could be that difference.

It's the answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Democrat and Republican, black, white, Latino, Asian, Native American, gay, straight, disabled and not disabled - Americans who sent a message to the world that we have never been a collection of Red States and Blue States: we are, and always will be, the United States of America.
It's the answer that led those who have been told for so long by so many to be cynical, and fearful, and doubtful of what we can achieve to put their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day. It's been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this day, in this election, at this defining moment, change has come to America.

I just received a very gracious call from Senator McCain. He fought long and hard in this campaign, and he's fought even longer and harder for the country he loves. He has endured sacrifices for America that most of us cannot begin to imagine, and we are better off for the service rendered by this brave and selfless leader. I congratulate him and Governor Palin for all they have achieved, and I want to thank my partner in this journey, a man who campaigned from his heart and spoke for the men and women he grew up with on the streets of Scranton and rode with on that train home to Delaware, the Vice President-elect of the United States, Joe Biden.

I would not be standing here tonight without the unyielding support of my best friend for the last sixteen years, the rock of our family and the love of my life, our nation's next First Lady, Michelle Obama. Sasha and Malia, I love you both so much, and you have earned the new puppy that's coming with us to the White House. And while she's no longer with us, I know my grandmother is watching, along with the family that made me who I am. I miss them tonight, and know that my debt to them is beyond measure.

To my campaign manager David Plouffe, my chief strategist David Axelrod, and the best campaign team ever assembled in the history of politics - you made this happen, and I am forever grateful for what you've sacrificed to get it done.
But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to - it belongs to you.
I was never the likeliest candidate for this office. We didn't start with much money or many endorsements. Our campaign was not hatched in the halls of Washington - it began in the backyards of Des Moines and the living rooms of Concord and the front porches of Charleston.

It was built by working men and women who dug into what little savings they had to give five dollars and ten dollars and twenty dollars to this cause. It grew strength from the young people who rejected the myth of their generation's apathy; who left their homes and their families for jobs that offered little pay and less sleep; from the not-so-young people who braved the bitter cold and scorching heat to knock on the doors of perfect strangers; from the millions of Americans who volunteered, and organized, and proved that more than two centuries later, a government of the people, by the people and for the people has not perished from this Earth. This is your victory.

I know you didn't do this just to win an election and I know you didn't do it for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead. For even as we celebrate tonight, we know the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime - two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century. Even as we stand here tonight, we know there are brave Americans waking up in the deserts of Iraq and the mountains of Afghanistan to risk their lives for us. There are mothers and fathers who will lie awake after their children fall asleep and wonder how they'll make the mortgage, or pay their doctor's bills, or save enough for college. There is new energy to harness and new jobs to be created; new schools to build and threats to meet and alliances to repair.

The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even one term, but America - I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you - we as a people will get there.
There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as President, and we know that government can't solve every problem. But I will always be honest with you about the challenges we face. I will listen to you, especially when we disagree. And above all, I will ask you join in the work of remaking this nation the only way it's been done in America for two-hundred and twenty-one years - block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand.

What began twenty-one months ago in the depths of winter must not end on this autumn night. This victory alone is not the change we seek - it is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were. It cannot happen without you. So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism; of service and responsibility where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves, but each other. Let us remember that if this financial crisis taught us anything, it's that we cannot have a thriving Wall Street while Main Street suffers - in this country, we rise or fall as one nation; as one people.

Let us resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has poisoned our politics for so long. Let us remember that it was a man from this state who first carried the banner of the Republican Party to the White House - a party founded on the values of self-reliance, individual liberty, and national unity. Those are values we all share, and while the Democratic Party has won a great victory tonight, we do so with a measure of humility and determination to heal the divides that have held back our progress. As Lincoln said to a nation far more divided than ours, "We are not enemies, but friends...though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection." And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn - I may not have won your vote, but I hear your voices, I need your help, and I will be your President too.

And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores, from parliaments and palaces to those who are huddled around radios in the forgotten corners of our world - our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand. To those who would tear this world down - we will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security - we support you. And to all those who have wondered if America's beacon still burns as bright - tonight we proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes not from our the might of our arms or the scale of our wealth, but from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity, and unyielding hope. For that is the true genius of America - that America can change. Our union can be perfected. And what we have already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

This election had many firsts and many stories that will be told for generations. But one that's on my mind tonight is about a woman who cast her ballot in Atlanta. She's a lot like the millions of others who stood in line to make their voice heard in this election except for one thing - Ann Nixon Cooper is 106 years old. She was born just a generation past slavery; a time when there were no cars on the road or planes in the sky; when someone like her couldn't vote for two reasons - because she was a woman and because of the color of her skin. And tonight, I think about all that she's seen throughout her century in America - the heartache and the hope; the struggle and the progress; the times we were told that we can't, and the people who pressed on with that American creed: Yes we can.

At a time when women's voices were silenced and their hopes dismissed, she lived to see them stand up and speak out and reach for the ballot. Yes we can.
When there was despair in the dust bowl and depression across the land, she saw a nation conquer fear itself with a New Deal, new jobs and a new sense of common purpose. Yes we can.

When the bombs fell on our harbor and tyranny threatened the world, she was there to witness a generation rise to greatness and a democracy was saved. Yes we can.
She was there for the buses in Montgomery, the hoses in Birmingham, a bridge in Selma, and a preacher from Atlanta who told a people that "We Shall Overcome." Yes we can.
A man touched down on the moon, a wall came down in Berlin, a world was connected by our own science and imagination. And this year, in this election, she touched her finger to a screen, and cast her vote, because after 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change. Yes we can.

America, we have come so far. We have seen so much. But there is so much more to do. So tonight, let us ask ourselves - if our children should live to see the next century; if my daughters should be so lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper, what change will they see? What progress will we have made? This is our chance to answer that call. This is our moment. This is our time - to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American Dream and reaffirm that fundamental truth - that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope, and where we are met with cynicism, and doubt, and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people:
Yes We Can. Thank

SUMMARIZING THE VICTORY SPEECH for the sole purpose of getting a chance to look at the inner convictions and the substance and character or content, we get some insights through the following summary:-

The dream of our founders is alive in our time; the power of our democracy, is in your answer, the answer told by lines, by people. because they believed that their voice could be that difference.The answer spoken by young and old, rich and poor, Americans who sent a message: we are, and always will be, the United States of America. It's the answer that led those to put their hands on the arc of history and bend it once more toward the hope of a better day: of what we can achieve, because of what we did on this day, change has come to America.

I just received a very gracious call from Senator McCain. We are better off for the service rendered by this brave and selfless leader. I congratulate him and Governor Palin for all they have achieved, and I look forward to working with them to renew this nation's promise.

I thank my partner in this journey, who campaigned from his heart. Without the unyielding support of my best friend along with the family that made me who I am: my debt to them is beyond measure. To the best campaign team - you made this happen, and I am forever grateful for what you've sacrificed to get it done. But above all, I will never forget who this victory truly belongs to – it belongs to you.

I was never the likeliest candidate for this office. Our campaign was not hatched in the halls of Washington - it began in the backyards. It was built by working men and women who dug into what little savings they had to this cause. It grew strength from the young people who rejected the myth of their generation's apathy; proved that more than two centuries later, a government of the people, by the people and for the people has not perished from this Earth. This is your victory.

I know you didn't do this just to win an election and I know you didn't do it for me. You did it because you understand the enormity of the task that lies ahead, the challenges that tomorrow will bring are the greatest of our lifetime - two wars, a planet in peril, the worst financial crisis in a century. There is new energy to harness and new jobs to be created; new schools to build and threats to meet and alliances to repair. The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep but America - we will get there. I promise you - we as a people will get there.

There will be setbacks and false starts. And above all, I will ask you join in the work of remaking this nation - it is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were. It cannot happen without you.

So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism; of service and responsibility to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves, but each other. Let us remember - in this country, we rise or fall as one nation; as one people, founded on the values of self-reliance, individual liberty, and national unity. Those are values we all share... "We are not enemies, but friends...though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection." And to those Americans whose support I have yet to earn - I may not have won your vote, but I hear your voices, I need your help.

And to all those watching tonight from beyond our shores - our stories are singular, but our destiny is shared, and a new dawn of American leadership is at hand. America's beacon still proved once more that the true strength of our nation comes from the enduring power of our ideals: democracy, liberty, opportunity, and unyielding hope. For that is the true genius of America - that America can change. what we have already achieved gives us hope for what we can and must achieve.

And tonight, I think about all that America has gone through in one century - the heartache and the hope; the struggle and the progress; the times we were told that we can't, and the people who pressed on with that American creed: Yes we can. Stand up and speak out and reach for the ballot. Yes we can. And we saw a nation conquer fear itself ... and a new sense of common purpose. Yes we can. Even witness a generation rise to greatness and a democracy was saved. Yes we can.
A preacher told a people that "We Shall Overcome." Yes we can.

After 106 years in America, through the best of times and the darkest of hours, she knows how America can change. Yes we can. America, we have come so far. We have seen so much. But there is so much more to do. Let us ask ourselves - What progress will we have made? This is our chance - to put our people back to work and open doors of opportunity for our kids; to restore prosperity and promote the cause of peace; to reclaim the American Dream and reaffirm that fundamental truth - that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope and respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people:

It must come across quite clearly that:-

1. Obama is a true blooded American, with a lot of Harvard in his soul, who believes in the dream of the founding fathers of America, who lives in the American dream and

2. He believes in the power of democracy which is the voice of the people and it is people who change history and their ballot brought change to America, and

3. He lives and breathes “government of the people and by the people” and the election result is their victory, it belongs to the people; it is not his, and

4. He believes in the nationhood of America and the American creed which is to speak out and press on and conquer fear so that the struggle yields progress, and

5. “We shall overcome” in remaking this nation and “I promise you – we as a people will get there”possibly reflects the mentoring of Noah and Moses and a positive faith in that timeless creed and his spiritual strength that make him an optimistic visionary, and

6. His leadership centres on shared values, including hard work, to look after each other, and never to break the bonds of affection (love thy neighbor) that enables him to look at America as one nation of one people and to serve America as such, and

7. He believes in ideals and fundamental truths such as the cause of peace and progress for prosperity and has an eye for the well being of future generations not yet born as well as the perils that threaten our planet but is in touch with the impact of a problem and the enormity of tasks.

Circumstances and close friends had probably been very instrumental in pushing him to the fore that thrust him onto the national platform after noticing his character, eloquence and his mental attributes to shoulder the weight of change that America needs. He believes in the remaking of the nation to achieve progress through change. He is a new locomotive with new fuel, modern and pragmatic and can take bold initiatives without compromise on shared values, the American dream and timeless creed. He believes in working hard and to press on to achieve, not for himself, but for America as one people. He, in that spirit, is a unifying factor but beyond that he believes and knows that America is the beacon whose true strength, as a nation, comes from the enduring power of “our” ideals. He himself is a picture of ideals-centred leadership and portrays it. Beneath that is an efficient organiser-thruster. This President is a complex web inside the skull fired by genius and true concern for fellow people as well as the people as a nation. His team will enjoy working with him because he is an optimistic visionary but he will detest and fiercely defend that ideal web of democracy and respond appropriately, so let no man try to tear it down.

WELCOMING A GLOBAL PRESIDENT

Unknown user — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 01:50:12 EST

WELCOMING A GLOBAL PRESIDENT

Beldeu Singh

Finally, McCain and Obama as men who care about their nation, struck the same note. McCain touched on disappointment and immediately shifted to the need of the momment – tomorrow they must wake up to help pull the nation together while Obama went on to state that this victory alone is not the change we seek. Touching on celebration he quickly reminded the challenges that tomorrow will bring and the haloed leadership principles led him to state that he will listen to those who voted against him. A perfect President elect must naturally cut across more lines to effectively lead the nation as one people.

McCain came out as the lovable and jolly good fellow as he called to congratulate Obama and praised Obama's inspiration and urged all Americans who supported him to join him in not just congratulating him but to also offer “our next president our goodwill” and healed the divide in one swift stroke.

The world that was riveted to the US election burst into euphoria and a rapturous welcome to the President of Change. It signals the dawn of new things that could possibly be the dawn of a new world that has become violent and breeds the politics based on race and beliefs and is facing a financial problem that could develop into a crisis with loss of jobs in tandem with contracting economies across the globe if proper measures are not taken on a more collective basis by governments.

Quite rightly, his pragmatic mind that is in touch with reality, Obama asked people to join him not only to rejoice in victory but to join in facing the rigours ahead while acknowledging that it is victory for the only chance to make the change we seek. His succesful bid for the White House job puts him into a difficult but interesting job under the circumstances. In Malaysia, Prime Minister hoped that the Obama presidency will bring “positive changes to world affairs,” (not human affairs) while the Foreign Minister recognized the Obama victory as “proof that Americans were able to look beyond race and religious beliefs in electing their leader” which amounts to a significant statement as many Malaysian politicians advocate and propagate race-based politics.

This US election captures the imagination of ideal minds. Obama is proof of humanity's noble struggle. Such dreams do not whither, shrivel and become reduced to dust that is blown away by the wind. It heals the festering wounds on the body of humanity that then loses its stink. It is not the realization of a deferred dream but the bloom and fruition of the evolution of the human mind. In itself, it represents positive change as it becomes part of the larger picture that squarely benefits humanity.

Large and growing segments of the American public realized that they were voting for change and the future of America and how America will help shape scenarios in a tumultous world that has become dangerous for people and for the climate and for biodiversity. Obama's leadership and vision of a better world powered by change began to settle into the belief that “our stories are stories of individuals within the sea of humanity that has a shared destiny and that destiny can be shaped by godly and noble values”. Such a leadership must be powered by the glow of inspiration which he naturally emanates in order to stand out as the servant of humanity rather than as the son of an African father and a white mother. And he rose as the son of humanity that enabled voters to cross the Rubicon , leaving the politics of race behind. His words and his eloquence kept him in that grace. He offered support to those who seek peace and gave a warning to potential enemies. “To those who would tear the world down we will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security we support you,” he said (AFP). Like Gandhi, he knew that strength flowed not from weapons and when they are fired but from ideals – like the ideals democracy, liberty, opportunity and unyielding hope. And he struck a chord beyond his supporters to people across the globe. His parentage, raising by loving grandparents, a middle-eastern middle name, an asian childhood, a catholic church membership, a devoted parent and a Harvard education all helped create an erudite American mind linked to the ideals of a good heart that today makes him the first truly global president.

More than a celebrity, Obama is actually celebrated. No American election victory was ever so celebrated, especially by the younger generation and so openly welcome and cherished as the Obama election. At no time was there so much bash and so much dance, drums and rejoicing. At no time in human history did so many people and communities take a president elect as one of their own, from Hawaii to Indonesia to Kenya, Japan and Europe. This US election is a one enchanted leaf in the story of humanity's success. It also reflects the personal pride of many Americans like David Grey who said, “It would be nice to have a president who is celebrated when he goes abroad and his effigy is not burned.”

India's ruling party mingled its welcome with expectant hope and tried to hide its euphoric acceptance of Obama as the next president of the US in British styled diplomacy by saying “Obama's youthful energy was in tune with the dynamism of the emerging country” and looked forward to stronger ties that would rapidly warm up under Obama's leadership. Chinese leadership, as it has still not showered off its old garb, welcomed the Obama presidency in more curt phraseology stating that a closer relationship between “Washington and Beijing would be for the benefit of the Chinese and American people”.

President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, an intellectual, went all the way to state his appreciation that the Obama win “took the world into a new era – an era where race, color, and ethinicity, I hope will also dissappear in the rest of the world.” Equally candid was Kevin Rudd, the Australian Prime Minister who said that America turned Martin Luther's dream into reality which was a dream of an America where men and women would be judged not on the color of their skin but on the content of their character.” But this is not the first time that humanity and the powers that be have given recognition and trust to a man of ideas and substance. To cut across lines of barriers, there must be that functional inspiration and erudite eloquence that rings with sincerity to gravitate and galvanize people into a force that works towards ideals and for the people. That certainly sounds likes the ingredients that flavour democracy.

And Obama, either directly resonated or unconsciously reverberated, through his integrity of having imbibed great ideals which include four of the greatest notions for developing democracy and ecomony and people, and the system that would govern people. These, perhaps form the acid tests at the subliminal level in all people especially the literate and thinking members of society. These are:-

A genuine claim to defining moments or momentous times that would yield some progress or benefit or benefits to all people and future generations, and
A democracy of the people, by the people and for the people, in clear ways that put the power in the hands of the people and to vote for destiny rather than for the person, and
The words expressed in acceptance of the Democratic nomination by JFK - “I hope that no American, considering the really critical issues facing the country, will waste his franchise and throw away his vote by voting either for me or against me because of my religious affiliation. It is not relevant.” Obama remained focussed on his vision and issues facing the people which is again tied to their future rather than stray into personal attacks. He worked towards creating defining moments as well.
The functional role of “a democracy to be enjoyed by all people.” He did not go against anything that would curtail wealth creation and opportunities naturally created by that process for that would hurt the ideal of a democracy to be enjoyed by all people but instead took it further with the notion of “redistributive change” that already works within the American democracy that helps to spread wealth and opportinities that go back to fuel its wealth creation process and added to it, the concept of prevention consumer recession through managing the economy better through healthier disposable incomes. More people with better disposable incomes bring out more from themselves and tend to contribute more back into their economies in many diverse ways, eg more reading and writing, more hobbies, more travel, more small private inventions and innovations etc and more spending.

He sought support from the people of America in a frank manner that put people at ease at a time of growing unease in the world and its economy. His decisions will be his very own as an erudite American and cultured and polished after listening to others and experts rather than those crafted to meet the needs of some agendas or self-serving goals and parochial interests and certainly the Obama policies, though coming from a free man, will flow from those great ideals that he resonated or unconsciously reveberated during his campaign for that is what defines the Obama profile. In that I find solace and my head shall enjoy better quiet as it hits the pillow. Surely humanity has taken a giant leap and a new era is upon us and all those who voted for him and supported him did so what the man is and what he stood for and knew that it would be possible only through change.

He faces many tasks which he recognizes as the “rigours ahead.” While he was growing up and completing his education at Harvard, the US underwent very dramatic shifts. The world's most dynamic economy grew to be the largest but changed from a creditor to become the largest borrower and has the greatest debt to manage. Energy requirements were met with a dependence on oil leading to liquidity transfer to oil-producing countries in the middle-east. Consumer expansion and high cost of production of consumer goods shifted liquidity to Japan and China. Obama has to go to the drawing boards to figure out these shifts and the factors that drive them and manage R& D and create a more dynamic environment for commercial science that will increase the range of new products to be consumed in these regions of liquidity. Obama is the best potential for addressing this scenarios through change. He is not that little boy who grew up to be president. He grew up to be president of change. His values and style of looking at issues add that ornamental hue of becoming a truly global president. What more could America ask for?

THE POWER OF REDISTRIBUTIVE CHANGE

Unknown user — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 11:12:24 EST

THE POWER OF REDISTRIBUTIVE CHANGE

McCain has taken the pleasure to condemn redistributive change saying that he is only for creating wealth. Let’s take a closer look at the power of redistributive change. Social security converts some of the wealth of the nation and redistributes it into a safety net which is one way of how the American nation looks after itself and continues to give some spending power to those adversely affected by an economic downturn and job loss. But redistributive change can be much more and can play an important role in managing disposal incomes.

Amid some confidence arising from the clearance of funds from the USD700 billion bank rescue pragram to go to the affected financial institutions, there was a slight market rebound but coming mostly from support from fund managers rather than from the public. In fact there is evidence of declining confidence among the public as consumers resort to reducing consumer spending. Disposable incomes and consumer spending remain an important factor for economies to turnaround. Consumer recession undermines economies causing them to contract. Sharp falls in consumer spending in the US and in Japan, two of the largest economies and sharp falls in Germany, Europe’s largest economy signals the beginning of being sucked into consumer recession that could slow down the economy, slow down its recovery and hurt the business environment.

Consumer spending and consumer recession can spiral the economy upwards or downwards respectively. Attempting to restart the transactions that enable the banking industry to create money from debt by injecting liquidity into banks alone is not always enough as consumers who create such debt must have the disposable incomes to keep it going by being able to pay the interest and the principal. Hence isolating the banking industry from its own toxicity by taking the toxic assets out of it and placing them in a national mortgage trust that can extend the repayment period to reduce the instalments by 25-50% is the key to allow the ailing banks to effectively reenter into the economy as creators of wealth. The US Federal Reserve chairman, Ben Bernanke is therefore correct in urging the creation of a new system of mortgage financing in the US, from which brewed the current global economic crisis over a period of one year. People are made to think that the barrage of measures being applied around the world to counter the corrosive effects wrought by the financial crisis triggered by the mortgage business that collapsed on its underwriting practices, will help to counter the impending recession as the economies are begining to shrink as characterized by lower demand, cut in consumer spending and decline in GDP output in many countries.

The Bush Administration’s USD700 billion rescue program appears like a bold initiative but it only serves to provide liquidity to banks. The IMF, with a facility not exceeding USD200 billions is only looking at giving help to weather short term credit problems. Central banks are reducing interest rates between 25-75 points that can help new borrowings but that does not address the underlying issues related to mortgage transactions that created its fallout. Other measures include a federal program to provide USD600 billion in guarantees and a possible USD500 billion in guarantees aimed to prevent forclosures on housing property. The only real solution to prevent forclosures and revive the continuity to the creation of wealth from mortgage debt is to find ways for the homeowners to make good on their debt and once that resumes the entire system begins to move forward as it was disrupted by an inability to repay that precipitated the liquidity crunch. Treating the symptom, the liquidity crunch, does not heal the underlying causes.

The root of the problem lies in the way money is created from debt in the modern banking system. The first step in the mortgage business, is the pledge by the homeowner to the bank that creates the debt and whether or not it will actually function to create wealth or disrupt the process, depends on the ability to pay the monthly instalments. In the second step, this debt is securitized and sold to investors through instruments that bring more money into the system, some from overseas. More capital was created but unfortunately, it went into the same bad underwriting that was disrupting the creation of money from debt. Over the year, the banks could not collect from the homeowners but they remain obligated to pay the investors. So, the cogs in the system do not just grind to a halt, they fall out of the system simply because, it is a system of chain reactions either way. When the chain reaction moves in one direction, there is financial health as money is created but in the other direction, there is detriment leading to a fallout – much the same way biochemical pathways work in the body, whether they produce healthy biomolecules or abnormal proteins or excess molecules that can cause water retention or yield excess free radicals and oxidants that can precipitate degenerative changes and wreck havoc on health. That is the crunching trauma which shows that self-regulation has failed and proper regulation is always required to ensure that the system that creates money from debt is not undermined or crippled as it is a sensitive system.

Bank rescue programs that seek to give actual cash, will see that cash go to the investors who are holding the instruments and do not prevent forclosures. Easing the liquidity problem without altering the direction and velocity of the chain reaction related to the toxic assets is just what it is – a bank rescue. Cutting interest rates help to increase the number of other transactions in which money is created from debt but cannot prevent or reduce forclosures of the existing toxic assets and for all of these other borrowings to succeeed, there must be sufficient and broad based consumer spending, which it does not directly help in any significant way. Alan Greenspan correctly labels the fallout as “the corrosive effects” of the crisis as the fundamental turmoil arises from the shutting down of millions of transactions intended to create wealth from debt while forclosures loom due to the inability to make good the underlying debt leading to falling stock prices, decline in the values of the mortgaged properties, cut in consumer spending that ends up shrinking the economies of nations followed by loss of jobs that then spins it into a vicious cycle.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corp, has got some of the thinking right by looking at the root of the problem and asking for “pressing the mortgage industry to modify more loans to curb foreclosures” and “modifying them systematically into long-term and sustainable affordable mortgages”. This can be effectively carried out under the National Mortgage Trust that is capitalized to buy the toxic assets to isolate the banking system. The purchase price will go to solve the liquidity problem in the banking system that is freed from the corrosive effects of the toxic assets and can continue to pursue the creation of wealth from debt. That requires a fundamental change to solve the crisis in favor of homeowners and for the creation of wealth through redistributive change, not by the giving of money to overcome liquidity problem in the banks. It is about using legislation for redistributive change that Obama was talking about with its potential positive effects while McCain pokes cynical spikes at it. Such taunting speaks for itself.

Such redistributive change, when the legislation rolls out the right mechanisms, it generates the real possibility of quick removal of the toxic assets from the banking system, isolating it and modifying it, and with good underwriting and sufficient flexibility to create new instruments, it is ready to become the new system of financing mortgages in the US to benefit homeowners. This crisis as a whole, especially its corrosive effects, leads to the observation that the creativity to act fast and with proper legislation, if necessary, to prevent a loss of confidence and to prevent fears and to prevent panic selling of stocks by the public is necessary and above all any redistributive change that helps to manage to keep the disposal incomes intact is useful in preventing consumer recession. In fact economies can be bouyed and kept vibrant by managing peoples’ disposal incomes. Reasonably large disposal incomes at least 30-60% of the working class and of a growing number of people in the population is a way to prevent or reduce the likelihood of consumer recession and to ensure some form of stability and stable growth of the economy provided the underwriting education and practices work along with those inviolate principle that the portion of income considered disposable is arrived at after calculating mortgage payment and other monthly overhead or living costs.

We live in a petroleum fuelled economy and our lives are shaped by it and perhaps it is shaping our climate more than we care to realize. A redistributive change involving petroleum might also be interesting, for far too long, the petroleum companies have been raking in the wealth to concentrate it in a small percentage of hands. It is paradoxical to find out that oil giants posted huge jumps in profits from 22-58% when “record oil prices more than made up for the largest decline in production”! This is something that happened by squeezing the disposal incomes of the working class and the disposable income of the average household by 15-45%. Such a squeeze of many disposal incomes distributes wealth for concentration in a few hands. A redistributive change that can strategize to formulate the redistribution of such flows through legislation so that the profits of the oil giants remain stable within a narrow band with the difference being kept with the consumer so the consumer’s disposable income is not squeezed thereby ensuring consumer spending that works to some extent to prevent consumer recession would in fact work toward creating wealth. There are strong grounds to relook at the dynamics of redistributive change to manage disposable incomes in tandem with consumer spending and its effects in preventing consumer recession simply because the total disposable income in an economy fuels the creation of wealth and improves quality of life. Alas, that is not an issue on McCain's platform.

A NEW PARADIGM TO ISOLATE THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM FROM THE WALL STREET MELTDOWN CHAIN REACTIONS

Unknown user — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 11:56:01 EDT

A NEW PARADIGM TO ISOLATE THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM FROM THE WALL STREET MELTDOWN CHAIN REACTIONS

Beldeu Singh

The Wall Street meltdown has disrupted the creation of wealth from debt, an established process that forms the bedrock of the current banking system. It has placed many homeowners at risk as property values take a tumble and produced its own chain reactions that affected confidence in the security paper raised on mortagages, liquidity in the financial markets, stocks, profits of financial institutions with the threat of shrinking the real economy as GDP output declines in many countries while prospects of job losses loom on the horizon.

In the midst of this scenario, dubbed as one in a hundred years financial tsunami, by Alan Greenspan who says, “There’s no question that this is in the process of outstripping anything I’ve seen and it still is not resolved and still has a way to go and, indeed, it will continue to be a corrosive force...,” McCain structured no solutions or answers or plans to chart a response that aims to address the corrosive force nor isolate the financial system in a way that it is left to create wealth from debt but goes on to repeat that he is for the creation of wealth but instead remains a staunch torch bearer of the message of military leadership something that reminds me of "while Rome was burning Nero was playing his lyre".

He would like the voting public to believe that his experience as an aviator and his experience of sitting in the cockpit of a fighter aircraft on board the USS Entreprise qualify him to lead the military. He has so heavily skewed his speeches in that slant leaving little time for mention of real plans to help save the working class and the average American family from the impending reverberations and the full impact of this colosal financial tsunami much less of anything that would cushion the impact. No aircraft cockpit will give the insights nor an inspiration to figure out the solutions and answers for such mega financial storms.

This is a unique problem borne out of the practice of outsourcing the financial underwriting for mortgages that resulted in huge bad debt that has a crippling effect on creating money from debt and disrupted the chain of circulating money to yield a liquidity crunch. To put the matter in proper perspective, one financial institution posted a loss of USD29 billion which is more than the annual budget of many small countries and more than the annual development allocations of developing nations. It therefore has the force to destabilize global financial markets, especially those nations in Europe where the debt was sold through instruments, even threatening those Asian nations not exposed to the Wall Street epicentre through fears and panic selling.

There are possibly several ways to address the main problem and surrounding issues and one approach is to isolate the toxic assets and take them out of the financial system so as to allow it to go on with the business of creating money from debt. This process can take its form through the following mechanism:-

1. Establish the NATIONAL MORTGAGE TRUST with an initial capital to buy all the toxic assets, and

2. Extend the repayment schedule so that the homeowners will pay a lower sum, reduced by 25% to 50%, and

3. The Government takes proportional equity in those financial institutions from whom such toxic assets are bought by the Trust.

The fourth item is already proposed by Obama that will effectively reduce taxes of 95% of the working class and put more disposal incomes in their hands for such repayments and other spending that can spur the economy. For this or other such mechanisms to operate, legislation is required and confirms two very important things that Obama had pointed out:

A. That “courts are a less effective vehicle than legislatures to achieve social change” or change that protects financial systems, and

B. Such “redistributive change'' is fresh evidence of an alternate strategy that can be applied to assets of diminished value in order to create wealth and provides a social security through rearranging the placement of such assets that serve to spread the wealth.

What is obvious from such a plan is that it can be implemented in order to immediately achieve two things of critical importance and value to the American economy (item 1 & 2) while protecting the working class from its corrosive effects. These can be summarized as follows:-

1. Immediate improvement of liquidity in the financial system,

2. A simultaneous removal of toxic assets from the financial that caused the meltdown,

3. Government equity in the financial institution to match the purchase value of toxic assets,

4. Better prospects of preventing job losses in the financial institutions, and

5. Better prospects of arresting decline in GDP output with better prospects of recovery and expanding GDP output in a much shorter time.

This approach to the meltdown turns it around on its head as a unique opportunity for the government to earn double profits, with the same capital - one from its equity in financial institutions that are revitalized by its cash injection but now without the “cash-trap” problem and the other from the National Mortgage Trust – an approach that creates wealth and spreads wealth. Such redistributive change can only be ushered in by legislation. It can only happen through the dance of change as it is a new paradigm and it squarely sits on Obama’s platform, not in a cockpit shared with McCain.

THE ADVISERS BEHIND THE CANDIDATES

Unknown user — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 02:48:58 EDT

THE ADVISERS BEHIND THE CANDIDATES

Beldeu Singh

Those in sales and with some sales management training know that like-recruits-like. And that becomes a natural barrier to build a balanced team for corporations that breeds parochialism that often comes with the same blind spots. Advisers are part of the team and can influence the dynamics of the thought process that churns out solutions and programs and policies as well as the strategies and paradigm shifts that shape them.

Orson Swindle is a former prisoner of war in North Vietnam for more than six years, who spent a year and a half as a cellmate with McCain in the “Hanoi Hilton.” He is also a former Marine lieutenant colonel who has been an adviser to the McCain campaign, warns: “Obama and Democrats’ politics endanger American lives. They are not qualified to lead our military and our country.” So a vote for McCain would indirectly also mean you get Orson Swindle on the team.

Orson Swindle talks about military support for McCain and is emphatic about leading “our military and our country” with no words on leading our economy out of its morass and regulating it so that it does not endanger American families through financial meltdowns and credit problems. The McCain camp only see the kind of factors endangering American lives that require the military to protect whereas a profound perspective looks beyond that and considers all views and all angles. More than 55% of Americans are wondering if McCain’s camp can see beyond the military to find answers affecting American lives.

Hutchinson a University of Chicago law professor participated in a public radio discussion with Obama while Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law School professor is advising Obama's campaign.

John McCain is relying on his philosophy of “benefitting the rich so that their wealth will trickle down to everyone else” as his cornerstone to solve America’s gargantuan economic woes in a manner that appears to be the most democratic approach in his mind. That is a funny way of defining a model that is purportedly democratic while at the same time ridiculing the application of funds that in essence spread wealth in the form of solutions, programs and interventions that serve the American economy and are already an integral part of it. It is equally democratic to question the model that benefits the rich only to get trickles from the rich.

McCain is perfecting his craft of seizing comments made by Obama and taking them out of their context or otherwise distorting them to serve his aim of getting elected. Well, that is very commando-like and may work in mililtary operations but not just as well in the political arena. “McCain seized upon comments Barack Obama made on a 2001 radio show about the “tragedy'' of the civil rights movement's failure to achieve ``redistributive change'' as fresh evidence the Democratic presidential candidate would take money from the rich and give to the poor” (see: James Rowley, Oct. 27, Bloomberg). It also leaves a tell tale sign of his power and insight on the use of money. He may not be able to distinguish between “redistributive change” something he coined, from the spread of wealth as an alternate strategy that goes to create wealth or helps to prevent the diminishing value of assets that could spin more problems for the balance sheets as well as for the property owners.

When USD700 billion is applied to stave off the collapsing financial institutions to prevent problems in the financial markets, curb fears and panic-selling and help prevent loss of jobs while the house-owners in America do not suffer from reduced propery prices etc etc., wealth is being spread for a certain economic purpose in a particular situation that requires mega interventions. His philosophy of benefitting the rich so that their wealth trickles down to everyone else would only generate the trickles after the rich have benefitted from him. And the trickles will not amount to USD700 billion even in twenty years. The only alternate strategy is to manage the situation for better and fast economic gain and advantage by redistributing that giant resource directly to the source of the problem, its ground-zero, rather than give it to the rich in the hope that from their benefit will come wealth that trickles down to everyone else and solve problems at ground-zero..

Bush is doing that intervention. The European heads of state are poised for similar and other measures to support their financial systems to protect their people. A pitiful failure in comprehension led McCain, campaigning today in Ohio, said the audio clip shows that Obama ``believes in redistributing wealth, not in policies that grow our economy and create jobs.'' Dennis Hutchinson, a University of Chicago law professor who participated in the public-radio discussion with Obama about the courts and civil rights, said the McCain campaign had quoted Obama out of context, displaying political “desperation wrapped in distortion'' (see: James Rowley, Oct. 27, Bloomberg) .

McCain, lagging in opinion polls in the last two weeks of the campaign, has repeatedly cited Obama's comment to an Ohio voter since nicknamed “Joe the Plumber'' that “when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody” (see: James Rowley, Oct. 27, Bloomberg) . McCain fails to undertand that the American system is a proper system that by and large supports and favors the creation of wealth and within that system are built structures and policies that administrate to redistribute wealth that goes back to feed its capitalistic system. Its social security and unemployment benefit scheme are evident of this happy marriage. And it works for the good of everybody. Greater democratic participation in such administrations and bodies that redistribute wealth that ensure that it goes to the deserving and for good value or returns would be something to work for.

McCain cited the comment in the Oct. 15 debate to argue that Obama's plan to raise taxes on households making more than $250,000 and cut those on workers making less signals the Illinois senator would seek to redistribute the country's wealth. Probably McCain also sees that as taking money from the rich and give to the poor. Every tax regime in the world takes more money from those who earn more. Usually the more you earn after a certain level the tax rates move up and whether that is a fair system to tax and whether a fairer system can be structured is another matter. Obviously one cannot be liable to pay more tax than the man who earns more than him so as to benefit the rich man so that his wealth will trickle down to everyone else. One way to make the rich man’s wealth trickle down to everyone else is through a tax regime that makes him pay more and its spread is managed, not controlled, through the government expenditures for administration and development that help create more opportunities in the economy. That is what is aready in place in developed societies, the US included.

That is the current management system that redistributes wealth and it does not control it as it is controlled in a socialist state. Obama has never called for such a socialistic control. A Harvard man with Harvard advisers will not even think of a socialistic control of pooled wealth. At Harvard you learn to think and manage. Yet, “calling his rival ``the redistributor,'' Arizona Senator McCain told a Dayton rally that Obama, 47, ``is more interested in controlling wealth than in creating it, in redistributing money instead of spreading opportunity'' (see: James Rowley, Oct. 27, Bloomberg). Opportunity is spread through financial resources.

Hutchinson and Cass Sunstein, a Harvard Law School professor advising Obama's campaign, took issue with this description. Obama was merely noting that courts are a less effective vehicle than legislatures to achieve social change. That is a fact and they have correctly pointed out that, “The word redistribution can mean so many different things,'' said Sunstein. “The Social Security Act is redistribution and the earned-income tax credit is redistribution.''

Unfotunately McCain doesn’t understand that and the fresh evidence against his candidacy is showing up in the form of a lack of ideas and substance and plans and there is nothing in his campaign that projects him as an optimistic visionary. Hence he seems to be on a spree to seize on comments made by Obama and take those words out from the dynamic situations and systems, even existing America systems and legislature, attempting to tear them or tarnish them as not democratic and not for the purpose of creating wealth with a tormented hope that it will somehow contort into political success and votes. How about tearing down the Social Security Act or a scholarship program for top and excellent students from low income and working class families?

When American legislature passed the Social Security Act, was it not effecting a “redistributive change” within a capitalistic system? Many developed societies have such redistributive laws and programs.

If the Orson Swindle robocall script continues to remain his only bedrock that trumpets a military leadership, McCain has run out of time to correct his leadership profile and his campaign platform.

The voters have also come to understand that no President can do all those myriad and complex tasks at the White House single handedly. He confers and seeks expertise and advice for shaping the solutions and answer and programs and policies, including interventions and princinples of engagement while military advisers and military planners and generals will advice him on those related matters. Some candidates are just that much better in their selection of advisers and team members and that also ought to figure in the voter’s mind.

HELLO....HANOI CALLING

Unknown user — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 13:07:02 EDT

HELLO... HANOI CALLING

Beldeu Singh

Orson Swindle is a former prisoner of war in North Vietnam for more than six years, who spent a year and a half as a cellmate with McCain in the “Hanoi Hilton.” He is also a former Marine lieutenant colonel who has been an adviser to the McCain campaign, warns: “Obama and Democrats’ politics endanger American lives. They are not qualified to lead our military and our country.”

They got a robocall to read a script to warn American voters.

The script says: “This is Orson Swindle. I’m calling on behalf of John McCain and the Republican National Committee. John McCain and I were POWs together. I know John’s character, integrity, courage and leadership. He supports our troops and veterans. Over 300 retired generals and admirals, 300 retired staff NCOs [non-commissioned officers], and hundreds of former POWs support John McCain. Twenty-one past VFW and American Legion national commanders support him . They trust his leadership. Democrats attempt to cut off crucial troop funding, accuse our troops of war crimes, and Senator Biden predicts Senator Obama will be tested. A weak President will, indeed, be tested. Obama and Democrats’ politics endanger American lives. They are not qualified to lead our military and our country. When you vote, vote for the team that puts leadership, character and country first. John McCain” (Mike Allen).

McCain's character and integrity speaks for itself in many loud ways when he repeatedly says that Obama and Democrats are going to raise taxes when the fact is that Obama's tax plan will reduce taxes for the working class and the middle class and anyone earning less than USD250,000.00 per annum. This tax reduction regime is one of the essential measures to put more money in these Americans by increasing their disposable income that will ride the impact of the colossal impact of the Wall Street meltdown. The military's support of McCain is not going to prop the Wall Street melt down and there are no military solutions to contain that fallout both at home and its ripples across the globe. The fears and panic-selling across the globe reflect the lack of faith in the USD700 billion bailout as the administration did not explain how this money will reverse the effects of the financial meltdown that had also created a credit squeeze in Europe. This situation calls for and demands financial engineering that requires both capital injection, restructuring, review of financial underwriting practices, review of the regulatory framework and finding methods that will enable repayments at the retail level. It does not entail military work to help control a runaway financial reactor that is creating its own chain reactions.

It also requires cooperation from the European governments who are not at all happy with the causes of the financial debacle at Wall Street. Many Americans are getting pissed and concerned about the lack of regulatory management at Wall Street while the administration focussed on military patrol of the streets in Iraq. Protection of American and the American way of life and its prosperity is not the sole product of security and security concerns. This one in a hundred years financial tsunami can disturb life for the average American family for a long time to come if America's focus is inordinately centred on military operations overseas. It goes to prove that security is as important as an issue in protecting America's way of life and prosperity at home as the factors that drive the wheels of economy with integrity and all those factors that impact the velocity of circulation of money at home. The size of disposal incomes and smal businesses are central to this scheme of things in the national economy. McCain is avoiding these issues and would rather talk about his cockpit experience in a fighter plane on the USS Entreprise.

If he does not talk about the entreprise of America and how it will improve the American economy and about all those interventions nevessary to curb and reverse the effect of the Wall Street meltdown, a McCain victory will send new jitters and shivers in the financial markets. That will not help recovery at home but only complicate it and delay it thereby endangering American families at home as the economy threatens to spiral downwards.

A weak McCain is being severely tested and is not scoring with any level of confidence. A McCain with a strong right hand holding a tomahawk and a clean slate in the left hand that does not say anything concrete on the economy and the average American household is a worrisome picture. The prime concern of McCain as it is projected through the Orson Swidle warning is the need to vote a man who can lead the American military. Tragically, that is not the sole job specification of the President. The American President is the commander and head of state who decides on the principles of engagement. If the situation warrants a military response, he is advised by the well trained military leaders within its cadres who study the situation and advise the President of the military options and what is the best deployment. He is not the medieval knight who leads his army, in the traditional sense, into battle.

Leadership at the Oval Office is much more and much wider than affording leadership for its military and its armed forces in the field. Bush was more involved with military moves and military operations and visited the men in uniform often with no visit or concern of what Wall Street was doing until it cooked a financial explosion that led to its meltdown. Such meltdowns will automatically force cuts in military spending which is not healthy as the military-industrial complex must keep working and there is a possible need to build one new aircraft carrier fleet with state of the art systems that fit into a new paradigm. Americans know that America never did embark on wasteful military build-up but maintained a modernization program to keep its hard power responsive and with the ability to deliver a decisive effect. That planning and management is inherent from within the military and amounts to a doctrine and no president has cut military budgets to disable or cripple its military.

The Orson Swindle script speaks of the lop-sided slant on the notion of leadership in the McCain camp. It strikes no balance. It strikes no balance between economic power and military power. It gives no regard to economic power as the fundamental power to support an able military. It confirms some nagging suspicion about McCain's interest and obsession with the military. One can toy with ideas to initiate change for the better but no leader can afford to toy with the military.

Unfortunately, a soldier will always be a soldier. Unfortunately a soldier may end up with military solutions to economic problems as did the Japanese in WWII to “expand its ecomomic shpere” through the use of its military machine. The entire Orson Swindle script is about the military and leadership for the military. Not one word about economy or education or health or foreign relations And unfortunately too, having Orson Swindle who was advising the McCain campaign is a disaster as two POWs do not make one economic genius.

McCain is banking on the warning and military leaderhip to get the votes that will give him the job at the Oval Office. It is a scary gamble for that job is actually much bigger. Also, I have not seen a leader born out of the barrel of a cannon.

OBAMA IS A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN OF THE US BY OPERATION OF US LAW

Unknown user — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 03:42:37 EDT

Attorney Philip J. Berg, who alleged that Obama was not a U.S. citizen and therefore ineligible for the presidency had filed a lawsuit. Berg claimed that Obama is either a citizen of his father's native Kenya or became a citizen of Indonesia after he moved there as a boy.

A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit challenging Barack Obama's qualifications to be president. Surrick ruled that Berg lacked standing to bring the case, saying any harm from an allegedly ineligible candidate was "too vague and its effects too attenuated to confer standing on any and all voters."

Obama was born in Hawaii to an American mother and a Kenyan father. His parents divorced and his mother married an Indonesian man. Internet-fueled conspiracy theories question whether Obama is a "natural-born citizen" as required by the Constitution for a presidential candidate and whether he lost his citizenship while living abroad (AP).

The first issue has correctly been ruled as it was held that the attorney lacked the locus standi to challenge Obama's citizenship status. Perhaps, the only authority to decide and be petitioned is the Election Office as Obama is in the election process. Perhaps, only the Election Office has such locus standi or standing. However Obama has been in the election process before and that office did not rule on his ineligiblity. Quite naturally, for a court of law to intervene, it must be shown to its satisfaction under the law that a real harm would certainly proceed towards the complainant and the public and the nature of that harm must be properly describes for judicial appreciation for the court cannot deliberate on percieved notions of harm. If that harm is only a possibility or if any ensuing harm is nothing more than a prospect that is either remote or too vague, it keeps the court out and the lawsuit will be rejected as did U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick on Friday night.

As the document made available on the internet goes to show that Obama was born in Hawaii when Hawaii was already a part of the US, the US courts have jurisdiction and are bound to look at the facts and info within the four corners of that document to make a determination. The commonwealth position is also the same as ruled in a Privy Council case that the facts and information within the four corners of that document cannot be varied or subtracted or added to and courts will rely on it as it is a public document intended and issued for that purpose and accordingly Obama cannot decide or declare otherwise or anything different also because a man cannot declare his own citizenship status excepting by allowing for the relevant document to speak for itself.

US laws on the issue of a "natural born citizen" are not straightforwardly plain and clear and in fact most legal expersts will say that it is vague and need interpretation especially when read together with the 14th Amendment which must take priority and precedence.

Article II of the American Constitution states that a person must be a natural born citizen of the US to become eligible for President but it fails to give a clear and plain definition to the phrase "natural born citizen."

The 14th Amendment states that "all persons born or naturalized in the US and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the US" is extremely wide and was probably intended to cover a wide range of situations, including children of embassy staff and children born to servicemen posted to US bases overseas to ensure all such children are not excluded by US law.

So if he was born in Hawaii he is a natural born citizen as Hawaii was already an integral part of US two years before his birth. In such circumstances, the onus is on the Election Office to show that Obama had renounced his citizenship while in Indonesia and the mere existence of laws of any of those countries, Indonesia or Kenya, that also confer their citizenship such that he acquires or has rights to dual citizenship are irrelevant for they do not overide nor destroy the effect of those US laws that accord US citizenship and jurisdiction therof. Also a mere complaint of a dual citizenship or its possibility or rights to a dual citizenship are futile and frivolous and shall remain futile to serve any support of a contention of real harm to the public.

Obama's mother was of the age of majority when Obama was born and was within the jurisdiction of the US directly as she was a natural born citizen.

Another US law says that if only one parent was a a natural born citizen of the US, the parent must have resided in the US for at least ten years and at least five of which had to be after the age of sixteen which means that for Obama to be a natural born citizen, his mother must give birth to him when she was 21. This law cannot stand on its own and must be read together with the 14th Amendment for complete legal effect or stands nullified by the 14th amendment or stands modified by it. Also this law presumes the fact of a marriage with a foreign national that is legal ana valid in the eyes of US law.

The alleged marriage to a Kenyan who was his father and the alleged birth at a hospital in Mombasa forms the basis of the complaint by Philip J Berg. Such an allegation would then, it was assumed, automatically takes cognizance of a father who was a Keyan national that would naturally invoke the full effect and extent of that law affecting a Keyan birthh when only one parent is a natural born citizen of the US. However, this marriage as the internet stories go, was a marriage that was solemnized under customary/tribal laws and ceremony and that is not recognized by US law. If so, the US law does not give legal recognition to that marriage and accordingly cannot give recognition to the possibility of a Keyan citizenship through the father but only to the biological fact of a Keyan father and it cannot therefore extend itself beyond the legality of a single parent who was a natural born citizen of the US as the sole parent recognized by US law. In legal effect, that law covering a single parent who is a natural born citizenship blurs into greater vagueness or is stillborn to the extent that it fails to cover the alleged situation and cannot govern the situation as alleged in the complaint.

Several other presidential candidates had been previously sued including McCain who was born in Panama and none succeeded due to the inherent vaguesness of the body of law governing the issue of a "natural born citizen".

On the face of it, going by the available facts or info or internet stories and documents made available on the internet, it appears that either way, Obama is a natural born citizen of the US by valid evidence or it can be correctly argued on a legal basis that US law conferred the status of a natural born citizen of the US or that Us law operates in that manner and fashion.

IS THE SPREADING OF WEALTH A SOCIALIST CONTRAPTION?

Unknown user — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 01:17:37 EDT

IS THE SPREADING OF WEALTH A SOCIALIST CONTRAPTION?Beldeu Singh

"Just this morning, Senator McCain said that he and President Bush 'share a common philosophy,'" Obama said. "I guess that was John McCain finally giving us a little straight talk." Obama said "the Bush-McCain philosophy" benefited the rich and promised the wealth would trickle down to everyone else " (John Whitesides,PC,Sun).

The most beautiful truth about wealth creation is that it will begin to spread one way or another in any system and in that process it triggers more economic activity that can support development or spawn new technologies and new industry. There is not yet a system in our world that can contain and confine wealth to the person who “made the bucks”. The more money is made, the greater the potential to consume more. And that potential always tends to generate more demand and tends to widen the demand for a greater range of goods and services simply because buyer-behavior and customer preferences in the market are fragmented. In time, the spreading of wealth creates more choices and fuels more competition through innovation, continuous improvements in packing, delivery systems, advertising, selling strategies, quality, product attributes, benefits and branding or through paradigm shifts that will satisfy the customer in a different way.

Money spreads because it not only has the power to purchase but that it can be put to work, creating more valuie or more benefits. Creation of wealth cannot be isolated nor divorced from spreading whether it is spread by the creator of the wealth or through a system that imposes a tax on it. So, even if an administration is bent towards wealth creation policies that benefits only the rich, it will as the Bush-McCain philosophy state that it will spread by trickling down to everyone else.

That sounds like a democratic ideology in its very pure form. Nothing bad about it. However, it is only a ideal principle that in practice never exists in that pure crystalline form. All democratic governments impose a tax which is a system that pools money, more from those that create more wealth, in order to spread it around for the benefit of society through development programs, funding of universities, giving research grants, giving scholarships, paying for police work and defence needs of the nation etc. A good system is fully entrepreneurial and liberal that allows the individual and corporations to express themselves and respond to the market and needs so that it succeeds in promoting a sound velocity of circulation of money and keeps the wealth creation machine in perpetual motion. In this system, anyone who wants to plug in to benefit and “make the bucks” ends up contributing to the system.

But it is never so perfect either. The system churns the wheels of economy that is suposed to create wealth but that system does not manage itself entirely. Extrinsic to it is its tax regime that always takes a portion according to some predetermined basis to spend for administration and development and safety and security. A tax system can be modified to spread wealth in the form of incentives to pioneer industries or give tax breaks or factor tax deductibles or tax rebates for economic reasons or for socio-democratic purposes as for giving relief to families for the first three to five children. In the US and in many other countries there is a social welfare system that gives out support to fellow members of society in various forms, including unemployment benefits.

In some countries the paid maternity leave extends from two months to 18 months while other democratic governments plan their budgets to afford free healthcare and medical attention or at a low price at government hospitals. In all of these systems wealth is spread. The giving of aid to disaster victims, wherever they might be, spreads some of it, sometimes in millions and billions. The insurance pools also collect money, use some of it for expense and spread the rest to pay for its specified contingencies and liabilities. Cooperatives and fund managers pool and spread wealth in order to create more. Money will not stagnate. It is a question of how it will spread. The government can support the rich and benefit them, in the hope that wealth will trickle down to everyone else or it can administer policy interventions such as tax cuts for the middle-class and low income earners and provide scholarships to excellent students and study loans and even set up a fund to give loans at low cost to businesses in the knowledge sectors such as in biologics, biomedical or biotechnology etc to help spped up their growth and help to expand their job creation potential fast and that could contribute to narrowing the trade deficits if they are able to export. In all such cases, the spreading of wealth is calculated and aimed at benefitting the economy. It is not a Robin Hood policy of spreading wealth nor a socialist one. It does not aim to steal from the rich to give to the poor but rather is applied for some economic aim and purpose far removed from the established welfare systems or unemployment benefit schemes or free milk for school children or free text books for school children. Sometimes, the trickling process is slow or otherwise inadequate to address an economic situation and requires an interventionist policy or law to apply funds that may be redistributed to many or a few.

When Bush bailed out certain investment funds, he spread some of the public wealth to prevent them from going bellie-up. Similarly, an application of funds upto USD700 billion to shore up some companies on Wall Street is the spread of wealth that came from the man on the street to prevent a credit squeeze created by financial institutions in the mortgage business that outsourced its mortgage underwriting. However, this application of money is termed as an “economic solution” but in its fundamental essence is a spread of wealth to protect these institutions and minimize or contain the recessionary fall out. Equally, there is a spread of wealth by reduction of taxes from the working class and the middle class to increase their disposal income that can help to cushion the effects of this fallout. It is part of a total economic solution, not a socialist contraption that exists solely for purposes of controlling surplus wealth that must go to the state for its redistribution.

McCain is trying to give a new single color to the broad and colorful concept of spreading wealth, which is an application for economic reasons and can be an integral part of an economic solution or part of an incentive scheme that aids development, by preaching that it is a socialist idea. Its is blue idea born out of capitalistic systems as an instrument bearing the nature of an intervention. The current recession triggered by the Wall Street meltdown cannot be contained nor reversed by depending on the idea of benefitting the rich in the hope of their wealth to trickle down to everyone else. We need mega and wholesome interventions for fast containment and reversal of the meltdown effects not trickles from the rich that might take more than a decade to recover.

The New Democratic Party in Canada encouraged numerous writers and movements to begin to discuss alternative economic strategies. There has been a proliferation of new models of socialism and alternate economic strategies that attempt to extend democratic participation in a decentralist fashion by extending workers' control and user participation in the management of enterprises and organizations and to formulate new representative bodies, administrative means, and strategies at the centre to control the economic surplus and redistribute it toward sustainable production for needs and to expand and broaden the economy. Any strategy that incorporates the notion of spreading of wealth is devised for capitalistic goals and not for the socialistic agenda of the state. It always requires policies and bodies with people participation for it to work and to monitor both its performance as well as the intended capitalistic benefits and results. It gets acceptance as an alternate economic strategy only when its underlying function is to support wealth creation and when that is the basic role it gets implanted into the host system as a symbiotic organelle to serve it and the rich benefit in turn.

Pure socialism is dying out because it is not possible to work out a socialistic agenda that confines or spreads wealth only to benefit the working class and to keep it under the control of the working class. As the money accumulates, it will flow out of its pool and coffers to spread again to fuel development and create more jobs and fuel more consumption that will create more products and competition and eventually churn out a capitalistic economy or an economy with capitalistic charateristics. Good governance and prudent measures will ensure that moneys works to create wealth that will spread one way or another.

Wealth creation and the spreading of wealth will always be the twin archs of the prosperity architecture in human culture. Instead of controlling the ecomomic surplus or budget allocations, the US, with its expertise is expected to manage money any spreading of wealth to expand and broaden its economy and redistribute some to support its growing knowledge economy and stay in the lead by giving scholarships, fund bioresearch and fund commercial science as an enabling factor to create more products and generate more jobs. Obama’s list of potential candidates as the Treasury Secretary is the key pointer in this direction . It will never take the form of a pure socialistic agenda to serve the purpose of redistribution of wealth in the socialistic context and within the meaning of a socialist agenda for that never favors excellence nor generates excellence.

TRANSLATING OBAMA-MANIA

Unknown user — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 02:05:38 EDT

The Economist put it like a blunt harpoon – Bush hatred, across the continent, has been replaced by Obama-mania. That, in a sense is a political success for Americans and America’s possible future role in the international area, already cashed in while the man has not yet got the most important job in America.

Whose success is it? Certainly not just Obama’s though his vision and charisma and sharp eloquence made that success possible. Going by the USD5.00 to USD25.00 donations that have helped sustain the record breaking campaign of a vision of fundamental and transformational change, an epic of its own, the political success of Obama-mania outside the US is a success for the ordinary American. They can rightfully lay a claim on it in as much as they will vote for a new paradigm on Nov 4.

Over the months and the last few weeks, Obama-mania translated the voice of a vision into a new paradigm as the importance of change began to percolate into more minds and hearts. In the process, it purified American democracy as it filtered out the issue of melanin concentration in dermal cells which is always a rotten reason to influence the vote, something that scars the sanctity of the ballot.

Why are more and more Americans receptive to a new paradigm? Firstly, there is a growing restlessness that more of the old will not work as it is already sucking the nation into the colossal mess that impacts its image, its economy, jobs and eventually the average American family. The most hard hit will be those families with a mortgage and college going kids. If a parent lost his/her job, it would mean a hit on the future and opportunities for these children. The mess, obvoiuly hurts the American dream just as much.

Secondly, in many ways, the global celebrity status of a well-liked Obama brings communities closer and brings a new sense of pride among many Americans, including those who may stick to voting along racial or party lines. A celebrity status that would add to electrify an Obama victory, it is not the main active ingredient. Literate America, especially the new generation, is thinking hard about America’s future and its role in the global scene. These prospects need a solid and sound foundation to be laid here and now. They do not see McCain and his fashion-accessory icon as having the vision nor the concrete to lay that foundation on which will rest America’s success to broaden American economy fuelled by its giant wheels that must be properly regulated together with new engines of growth through commercial science as well as America’s ability to influence and invite cooperation for greater calm and peace or address global concerns or develop a more market-oriented economy that fosters more trade as factors that will breed more prosperity. They see continuing prosperity as the linchpin for hope and a better life in a more sophisticated and complex world that is both valuable and fragile like antique china.

Nothing is concrete about the ideas, philosophy and doctrines on the Republican platform. They are currently harping like a crow saying that Obama’s tax plan will hurt the middle-class that earns less than USD250,000.oo per annum when Obama’s tax plan will reduce taxes to yield more disposal income for spending and saving. More money for spending and saving are basic factors to revive the economy, extending the survival margins for the middle-class families and increasing the chances for the achievement-oriented hard-working American for a shot at producing work or output for self-actualization such as creating and inventing something new. Tax-cuts for small businesses is an enabling factor to expand or improve quality or innovate and helps increase business within that sector as well as increasing the potential to become more competitive. America was built on these factors. These factors characterize change. McCain’s emphatic crowing of hurt by the Obama tax cut plan is irksome even to the Republicans as it finds no place in any economic theory or economic logic. More than that, it has harmed his chances to demonstrate the simplest of abilities at improving the economy within its current functional frame let alone factoring policy interventions to create a more dynamic and vibrant one.

The peripheral thoughts and feelings at the momment that underpin the sway towards Obama is that Joe Biden is a much better choice than Palin coupled with the fact that Obama’s charismatic and visionary leadership operates on a different mental plane that can help shape America’s principles of engagement and help build America’s political capital and goodwill. Acting on new bearings, new charts can be drawn to map the paths to greater security and peace and to restore America’s global influence and to achieve positive and lasting international objectives. That would require the redefining of America and its posture tempered by soft power that is backed by the continuous modernization of the strongest hard power in the world with quick response abilities for precision and decisive results rather than the use of hard power followed by frantic diplomacy to calm the atmosphere or to charm the practice of containment of any long-term fallout. Such redefining of America is again an essential element of fundamental change to transform its achievements with the global communities, tandem to the change in its principles of engagement. The grey hairs of Joe Biden are a great plus in this field and this team, therefore, has more meaningful substance.

Bullets, bombs, tanks, cannons and figther planes never succeeded in changing the face of radicalism and the radical minds that seek to harm but they can defend the love for freedom and democracy. A mental product of ideology is like mediocrity thar breeds itself. Hard power can only suppress it as it is hard to destroy for it does not face from a trench. History will testify that hard power can only change governments and alter boundaries for some extent of time while a lingering occupation generates its own stink. The only real value of hard power is the defence of democracy and legitimate liberation of people overrun by another military machine. Most American presidents understand the risks arising from the issue of a military stance that leans towards the use and overuse of explosive power to achieve international and peace objectives. And few understood how to apply both soft power and hard power without the bungling potential of hard power. Obama-mania tempered by Joe Biden gives America a new opportunity for soft power to do its work for more meangingful outcomes and earn goodwill.

It is an interesting doctrine to safeguard democracy in which humans get the best possible opportunities to bring out their best to foster prosperity, not forgetting that when humans settle for peace and focus on their good potentials, it aids properity. Leaders in democratic societies, it is hoped, will always lend substance and credence to the divinely visionary words of a charismatic prince, the founding father of Malaysia’s independence – to create “a democracy for all people to enjoy.” Any form of harm detracts from that enjoyment and injures it. It is a cardinal principle of equality and in the development of prosperity. Only the vast majority of ordinary Americans and literate America can translate Obama-mania on Nov 4 and give life to change as the revolution at home and in the global village that will find answers and paths and new bearings to foster prosperity and peace – the least basic things to enjoy beneath the level of a democracy for all people to enjoy of which prosperity and freedom are an integral part.

THE MOISI MYOPIA

Unknown user — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 03:17:16 EDT

THE MOISI MYOPIA

DOMINIQUE MOISI wrote an article titled “what makes McCain the real choice of Asia” that in part stirs a disturbing turmoil on its own tail and in part seems to rest on half-truths while some other parts attempt to run away from cherished principles.

Moisi says that “if you want America to lead by the power of example, you favour Barrack Obama; if you want to be reassured by the continuation of America’s power in a traditional security sense, you probably prefer John McCain”. The modern Asian mindset is disturbed by military coups and the attempts by soldiers to run governments, sometimes under an umbrella of purported democracy. Since WWII, the lessons of history in the region have proven that military interventions tend to degrade economies and human dignity and undermines the potential of human achievement. In this respect, the power of full blooded democracies far outweigh the might of military rules. Besides, Asians are fast learning the importance of the leadership principle of leading by example.

Against this background, a new generation of Asians has helped to build Asia’s wealth that spread to support a wave of prosperity, slowly at first followed by a steady growth, largely through trade and exports within the region and to US and Europe. Later, Asia began to benefit from direct investments from the West and from multi-national companies. Now business-to-business links between companies in Asia and in the West are growing in importance and with better transportation and internet comunications, Asia is part of the global business village with Europe and the US. Asia’s elite are educated or professionals and are born out of this prosperity generated in peace through trade and business. They know the difference between America’s economic power and its hard power.

This elite tend to subscribe to peace and strong economic fundamentals that favour the spreading of prosperity through business and other profitable activities that human potential can create for the global markets. This strategic consideration underlies their hope in change from the use of the military to purposeful soft power and the continuation of the power by example that helped to spread the positive influence of America and its ideals. In this vision, Obama’s victory would be welcome by bewilderment in contrast to the apprehension lining McCain’s victory.

Asians, today, especially the elite, are fully aware and appreciate that power from the White House entails global responsibility while Moisi would like the West to believe that “Asians are slow to acknowledge that power entails international responsibility.” On this issue of responsibility, most of the below-50 Asians believe that Obama can bring the communities of the world closer, something attributable to his winning ways and while military actions drives wedges between people, excepting when the situation calls for it in order to quell the violence and for peace to simmer in again.

Asians are aware of the greater responsibility of the US in international issues simply because the world is no longer regions of communist blocs and ideological blocs as it was decades ago but in essence is a global village in which economic and business activities must thrive for survival of families and the ordinary man. In other words, actions of America must help preserve the hive of economic activities and develop markets that are easily affected and destroyed by military actions. Obama scores on this wide and important issue as he is seen as capable of applying the proper priority of soft power before relying on the explosive role of hard power.

His charisma stems from his eloquence and leadership IQ that is bundled together with an aromatic confidence and cautious poise. Asians understand it as mind-before-fingers so that the fingers don’t get burnt if they jump the mind. Additionally, Obama soared into sudden popularity on his own merits as the man who fits the leadership aspirations of the new generation to promote the kind of peace in which they can continue to achieve their own goals which forms the unspoken claim to equity and a right to contribute value rather than see that potential diminish or be blown away by military might.

India’s consolidation started a long time ago with a silent emphasis on quality education and strong selection processes for the officer cadre, state civil services and the Indian Administrative Service and the building of a large pool of post-graduates and Phds in various fields especially medicine, science, bio-sciences, technology and with the recent addition of biotechnology. Its sudden emergence is attributable to the change from the closed-door economy of the Nehru dynasty to an open and competitive system nurtured by an Oxford-trained mind that was supported by liberalization. India was not dependent on its consolidation on Bush although it progressed at a time when Bush was in the White House.

India has a mind of its own and speaks it as it did through the non-aligned movement and as it spoke against the invasion of Iraq and stated that the doctored intelligence dossier and presentation at the UN “would not stand the scrutiny of a court of law” but Moisi would like to project that India’s elite would favour McCain for the reason that the consolidation of India’s international status coincides with the Bush years in the White House. India has the aircraft carriers and missiles and delivery systems to project its military power in the region but shys away from doing so and is steadily gaining respect and admiration from its economic emergence and soft power. India’s business elite would naturally favour economic mind behind the desk in the Oval Office instead of a man who is stuck in his cockpit on the flight deck of the USS Entreprise. They would prefer a dynamic mind that cares to look at the wheels of economic entreprise that could grease the engines on the sub-continent.

Moisi says that the Japanese elites tend to favour continuity over change. “In their mind the hard power of the US is more important than its soft power. For them, the US is above all the strategic counterweight needed to balance China.” While it is true that Japanese believe that the “US is bound to lead” they believe that this is due to its trillion dollar budgets and trillion dollar economy and its ability to fix economic problems. And the business elite have a direct stake and interest in that. The use of hard power by the US does not benefit the Japanese economy but can put a damper on it. That is a lesson well learnt from the fuel prices that went through the roof and loss of direct contracts in Iraq. These elites no longer view modern China with capitalistic systems that could, perhaps, become a democracy like India and allow democratic principles drive its economy further, as a problem but as a new market and trade partner that counterweighs the American market as well as a long term supplier of minerals and other raw materials, much to the delight of modern China.

Moisi attempts to hound with a dirty and racist question by saying that Asians who have more than caught up with the West may have difficulty adjusting to the idea that the US would for the first time in history not be headed by a white president and questions “How can you define yourself to West, when the West has so spectacularly and visibly changed its appearance, if not its essence? The spectacular and visible part of Aisia’s elite is that they do not define themselves to the West. They only relate to doing things together or with people in the West. It is also clearly visible that the color of the American president does not alter the appearance of the West for in essence it cannot and does not change how the West defines itself. What is visible is that Asia’s elite will welcome Obama and it would indeed bring a spectacular relief and reassurance to these elites who believe is supporting the wings of prosperity but will not lend an inota of their mitochondrial output to support the wings of a bomber plane.

All over the world, elites have pinned their hopes of a more peaceful global environment that helps economies and markets and sustained prosperity for the ordinary people. They see Obama coming on the wings of a dove and McCain taking off on the wings of bomber aircraft. That is a stark picture as it developed with McCain’s entry into the presidential race and it is as naked as it gets. This is the reality that McCain has to deal with in the very short time before voters cast their ballot.

Moisi says that the complex essence of Obama is an absolute plus in Europe. The young generation is going gaga over Obama in Europe not because of the complex essence of Obama. They do not see anything complex about Obama – only the essence of his message and hope of change hit them hard as it came from a charismatic and dynamic personality. They resonate well with his message and with him as a person who built his life by working hard through an education system that tests excellence and brings forth excellence. His candidacy is inspirational to them and to many young people in the US and in Asia. It therefore borders on the absurd to state that to support him fully is a sort of exorcism, if not redemption. That would imply deep psychological guilt far removed from inspiration and positive resonance. It also reflects the importance that young people and elites outside the US attach on the right victory for the job at the Oval Office in recognition of its international responsibility as well balanced with the responsibility of using huge resources for purposes that are beneficial and value-building.

Moisi says that “Europeans have felt oppressed by the excessive demonstration of hard power.... and they do not want the US only to protect them but to transform them”. Firstly the US hard power is real hard and it projects itself without any need to demonstrate it. The world knows that its hard power is decisive excepting in Vietnam due to poor planning where McCain became a POW. Europeans also know that hard power must be destroyed by hard power for maintaining its liberation and its democracy that shapes its economy and enjoyment of life. However, it is hardly a notion that Europeans are in the constant expectation of a protective umbrella held by the US. They can defend themselves collectively and they have defence arrangements going back to the aftermath of WWII. Their real concerns are economic in nature that stem from the Bush willingness to invoke protectionist measures to the extent of paying penalties which is characterized by excessive self-interest rather than work with the same willingness with Europe and sort out issues of conflicting interest in ways that benefit both Europe and America and help create jobs on both sides of the Atlantic. This is not a desire to be transformed by the US but a transformational process that can positively impact both sides for higher competitive output through cheaper supplies and redeployment of skilled manpower. It is an oppression of better economic possibilities that concerns European policy makers not an oppression felt by excessive demonstration of hard power. Either way, the situation can only favour Obama more than McCain.

In essence and as a whole, the European economy and market is large and diversified enough to withstand the Wall Street meltdown. The European governments are fairly proactive and responsive at the momment and have the financial resources to overcome a credit squeeze in the financial system in Europe. The re-invention of America will certainly help Europe but that is not Europe’s last hope. Good economic solutions in America and restructuring how corporate America that comes to Wall Street works to create wealth will help Europe that will fuel a positive feedback demand dynamism back into the American economy.

Hence, the need for America’s next president to redress the recapitalization issue and repayment issue at the retail level quickly in the property sector. So far Obama, is better armed to do a better job than McCain and prevent a global recession and financial turmoil in some countries, although for most of the rest of the world, where the exposure to the US problem is negligible or even totally absent, the selling of stocks is triggered only by panic and fuelled by fears, not realizing that it is not a bubble that burst but merely an issue of financial underwriting that can be addressed.

It is a jittery world that needs a kool and collected mind not a trigger happy fighter pilot to calm the jitters and color our hope with a radiant hue of optimism. History will be decided by the little thought in the last thirty seconds in your mind before you fire your ballot.

Other thoughts that could decisively swing the ballot in favour of Obama are:-

1. – “During rallies in New Hampshire and Ohio, the Arizona senator said Democrat Barack Obama favors taxes that will hurt the middle class and small businesses — despite Obama pledging to cut them for 95 percent of taxpayers” (Glen Johnson – AP), and2. – “Palin, holding her first joint event with McCain since Oct. 13, derided Obama as "Barack the Wealth Spreader" and said: "You have to really listen to our opponent's words, because he's hiding his real agenda of redistributing your hard-earned money” (Glen Johnson –Ap).

How will cutting taxes hurt the middle class and small businesses? And how can you, in America, just take away your hard-earned money for redistributing as part of an agenda, more so when Obama is going to cut taxes for 95% of individual taxpayers?

THE COCKPIT TEST

Unknown user — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 06:14:22 EDT

THE COCKPIT TEST

McCain acknowledged that he was "a few points down" in the polls but vowed to continue to fight for hard-working Americans as he kept up his attack on Obama's economic policies, casting the Illinois senator as a job-killing socialist bent on "redistributing wealth." (Mira Oberman)

The leopard cannot change its spots and McCain will not change his stripes. Under the presidential candidacy, he is still the soldier. He is still the fighter pilot. He did not vow to offer options or management strategies or paradigm shifts that will help carve out policies that reward hard-working Americans. Hard-working Americans need more capital and more opportunities to be able to contribute more to America and its economy. They need more of the enabling strategies and policy frame work that churns their hard work into greater output and greater reward. They do not need anyone to vow to fight for them. They need a thinker, a planner, a manager of change, a paradigm-shifter who is also an organizer-thruster to thrust the engines of change.

Unfortunately McCain is still strapped in the cockpit of his fighter plane. And people see him avoiding the issues, that must be identified in a campaign trail, that affect them and the solutions, other than tax cuts that will help the hard-working Americans alter the prosperity chain that generates spill-over effects. Instead, he wants to focus his campaign effort to keep up his attack on Obama's policies. The disturbing impression is that his target is Obama, not to get answers for the American people. A critical review and an opinion or simulated study would have been enough but he keeps returning to his attack line. And this poise gives the impression that McCain is already spent even before he steps into the Oval Office. Management at the Oval Office will require new ideas to deliver the goods to the people. And he will need to think out of the cockpit.

John McCain raised the specter of nuclear war as he struggled to overcome rival Barack Obama's widening lead in the polls with just 14 days left in the epic race to the White House.Warning voters that the United States faces "many challenges here at home, and many enemies abroad in this dangerous world," McCain returned to the attack line that Obama has poor judgment and is not ready to lead the United States. (Mira Oberman)

The next president "won't have time to get used to the office," the Republican said at a rally on Tuesday.

"I sat in the cockpit on the flight deck of the USS Enterprise off of Cuba. I had a target," McCain said, referring to the 1962 Cuban Missile crisis.

"I know how close we came to a nuclear war and I will not be a president that needs to be tested. I have been tested. Senator Obama has not." (Mira Oberman)

McCain is frittering away valuable time just to prove the point that he is a man in uniform and cannot discard that military garb. Worst still, he is proving the pint that he thinks and will continue to think like one. And he expects the average American to subscribe or otherwise swallow his logic of being tested in a cockpit and to swallow it hook line and sinker! Sitting in his cockpit on the flight deck of the USS Enterprise off Cuba was not time spent in getting used to the work in the Oval Office. It is not the acid test that tests presidential material.

Everybody knows that the man in the Oval Office at that time who put up the confrontation was not tested nor trained in a cockpit. That president did not need time to get used to the idea of such a stand off against another superpower. He made all the decisions that put McCain into the cockpit on the flight deck of USS Enterprise off Cuba. While McCain was waiting for orders in his cockpit, the President was thinking in the Oval Office. It was work that encompassed thinking that requires even more thinking today.

We also do not need a lamentation. Nor do we need a lamenting president. We know that in a fast changing world there are many challenges and the world has become more dangerous and many enemies were created or shaped by ideologies. And people can waste their lives in violence and in spawning harm rather than good. It is time to look at the underlying causes of these developments and think to find the solutions to respond with so that the challenges become opportunities while the danger recedes and fades away. We need a change in the way we respond in order to think of peace strategies that take away the volatility to give way to a simmering hope of lasting calm in which humanity can function towards their well-being as a whole. And this is not work done in a cockpit.

The ominous possibilities in a cockpit are all too limited and predictable. The job specification behind the desk in the Oval Office are for the man who can push the buttons in his mind in all directions and toy with new ideas and endless possibilities. The first duty of that man is to wear the thinking cap and upon thinking, if the need arises, only then, he adorns the military uniform. Til then, the masala (spice) of the job remains in cooking tastier economic solutions and new recipes to face the emerging challenges. It is time to change to cook and throw out the old recipes. It is time for the Iron Chef.

TWO TYPES OF POLITICIANS

Unknown user — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 00:38:59 EDT

It was interesting to read the informative article by W. Scott Thompson who says that the middle class and average American families relate well to the concerns of Obama for home owners who might lose their property. That is not simply because Obama articulates well but because he relates to those issues well. These are people issues that the article goes on to say that people think "McCain is just avoiding the issues."

Obama has said things that are more meaningful with regard to the economy and people issues and has demonstrated a searching mind that seeks to look at the screws and gears that make an economy tick. His tax proposal will ensure that most of the middle-class and small businesses will pay less. That positively impacts about 50 million Americans creating more disposal income for spending and saving while supporting the expansion possibilities of small businesses in a fully entrepreneurial culture. In turn, the economy benefits over time. His poise naturally reflects a serious concern and states his inclination towards wealth creating strategies that spread wealth forming the twin archs of the architecture of prosperity that made America the greatest nation on earth.

It is understandable, then, the critical note of Powell describing "McCain's uncertainty over how to deal with the economic crisis" and its attendant issues that he has failed to identify. At the same time the concern over selecting Palin as his running mate is growing like a rain cloud. She is also not certain about how to deal with such issues but appears certain that by applying oxy-moronic logic that tortures itself might make her look presidential. It is not about what goes to make the looks but whether the personality is presidential or not but she plunged into injecting race issues into the presidential campaign and fumbled by insisting that Obama's former preacher, Rev Jeremiah Wright was a legitimate issue!

The palin logic strays into the belief that if your former teacher was good, you would legitimately make a good president. Obama does not mirror and pace his former preacher. Obama is mentally so different from the Reverend and is hardly possible that he was molded in the former preacher's cast. So, it is not, by any stretch of imagination nor its distortion, that a former teacher or preacher can be a legitimate issue in a presidential campaign.

It is no wonder that the big bang that bolted Palin into admiration ended in creating a fashion accessory icon and reduced her standing to just that by her campaign strategies of fangs and claws. It punctured and tore down her distinguished entry and appears more like a tragic evaporation of an opportunity to serve common and broad goals that benefit all people.

McCain blundered away his chance in a similar way when he delved with the idea of tying Obama to Ayers, a Chicago real estate developer convicted of fraud. He forgot the basic tenet that in such a campaign, an attack strategy only works when it leads the mind to indict which is made possible only if he could show Obama's participation or hand in it. And, not only his effort was futile, it left a bad aftertaste when contrasting his attack with the Keating-five episode.

As nature is charaterized by duality - darkness v light, good v evil, ec etc., it mirrors in people - steady v shifty or steady v unsteady, presidential v unpresidential and distribution of wealth v creation of wealth, so on and so forth just as well. Within this contrasting duality people come to know who is pandering and who is serious about them and can contrast between the demands of the job at the Oval Office and the person just desperate to get elected. And the debates have made it clearer who is confident but cautious for such a job. Obama understands the role of financial institutions as creators of wealth but remains cautious enough to talk about real regulation at the Wall Street and the fat cats at the top that may be too fat to do a healthy job of creating quality, wealth and jobs.

Today that job is made more onerous by the direction of the country. It requires so bold an initiative that it needs a Herculean mind and and cryptonic shoulders to hold a kool spine to pronounce change as the tool and the essential process for a transformation. The winds of inspiration began to blow and have picked by a gusty strength on the sails of a giant ship that sing in rap and melody "Transform America". A new direction is the first step to new goals and new achievements.

THE OPTIMISTIC VISIONARY

Unknown user — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 23:45:22 EDT

The younger Americans are unhappy with the country's direction and its new role as an occupying power. They are more interested in the ability to properly use soft power that is backed up by modern and powerful hard power that can be used to respond swiftly and used in the support of democratic ideals and in defence of the greater good. This American culture of going after the bad guys and disruptive thuggery and the cult of imposing things on others through violence finds a natural and broad support in other cultures as well as it is part of the human psyche. The proposition of being the holder of the compass that would point to the country's new direction would help pave the way and create the golden pass into the Oval Office. Obama did not see that and nor was he looking for the way and the golden pass. He just found himself holding that compass. And the process was change.

His erudite mind and his passionate sincerity as it came across in a persistent manner, week after week and month after month, led to the verdict of those really concerned with the country's direction that this man has the skills and the IQ and the words and phrases resting on a steely calmness and composure to project soft power while it is quite apparent that he has the “kool” to push the buttons of hard power and will not balk if the need requires to do just that. He has made that point but remains focussed on reorganizing on change you can believe for the American people.

McCain, on the other hand, shed his gentleman image and officer-like-qualities when he showed himself as an angry and grouchy fellow who would go on attack strategies on the person when reading scripted but unsubstantiated remarks that can be so annoying. So, many voters are put off by the negativity of his campaign at a time when the public was secretly looking for an optimistic visionary. And Obama came along and gave them more than that – he came with the engine of dynamism.

No man has won by negativity and attacks on the person but paths open up for those with new ideas that would serve the public. In this context, McCain has in his own way and subliminally potrayed himself as a military man who puts his country first and would soldier on. And he has taken a beating. He tried the reform platform as that was the closest to "change" and without speficic reformist views he looked like a copycat. In his attempt to shake up his campaign for the presidential race, he took a new approach by trying to position himself as a fighter for the American middle class. This change played against him and helped Obama to gain the halo of a persistent and dynamic and optimistic visionary. And from the debates, it is clear that his vision is fuelled by change and the dynamism of change and apparently not on empty rhetoric. Its leaves a positive ring that exudes confidence to the setting of a new direction for the country. Ironically, it is these same notions surrounding the direction of America and an optimistic visionary that made Obama popular and a global celebrity. Then came the Wall Street eruptions.

The financial meltdown at Wall Street is already affecting the man on the street. Jobs are at stake. The pinch is being felt. The rippples spread far and wide. There was panic selling, even in the Asian bourses that are not exposed to the toxic asset problem in the US.

The US economy is beginning to falter. The prime issue is to prevent the burning of financial institutions that could lead to the second wave while trying to revamp the practices of American financial institutions especially the practice of outsourcing work that is key and central to financial underwriting so that its triple AAA-rated paper would continue to attract confidence and get acceptance from investors in other developed countries while restructuring the term of individual mortgage loans to allow more individuals the ability to pay for their instalments. New mortgage instruments may have to be created with each mortgaged property as its asset wherein the instrument is transferable and can be redeemed over a much extended term than the original term of the loan at a lower instalment. That would offer one way of rescheduling the debt to ease the credit squeeze and to pay investors. One way or another, the public, not just the middle class, is waiting for answers and the answers must flow in quickly with financial backing. One without the other is potentially disasterous to the faltering it has already triggered.

The economic crisis has fed public unease and by trying to reposition himself as a fighter for the American middle class will not help McCain build the bridge to cross into the Oval Office. He has no comeback strategy leaving change as the only process that will transform America, its economy, its ability to project soft power succesfully and build its image on those premises.

The faltering economy spun out of the Wall Street meltdown can be fixed. It is a matter of time. It is a current and primary issue, too and good answers are important and critical but they can only help build the bridge to help cross into the Oval Office. The paramount issue at heart is the country's direction. Sadly, McCain is not coming out strongly and positively on the matter as a whole. He has drawn a flak all round.

America needs change to reengineer parts of its economy and review some of its regulatory mechanisms and create new engines of growth that will structure a broader base on its strength in research and science that will churn out new products and services. The way forward for the US is to fund and fuel commercial science to help translate new findings through research into products and services. One of these areas is biotechnonlogy and nano-biotechnology that holds the promise in health and therapy that will thrive on the trends of “going-back-to-nature” and drugless approaches that drives the 'wellness revolution”. America can once again find new ways to buttress a market-oriented economy that is entrenched on the quality imperative. That will be money well spent to create a wide range of jobs that can keep the US in the lead in science and research and continue to fuel a knowledge-driven economy. That has always been a factor in the US economy and in the economies of nations that are today referred to as the developed economies.

Given the historical possibility of October as the month in which a crisis could change things, Obama could deliver a celeberative October by deliver an October surprise. Just perhaps, Americans are secretly hoping that the October surprise will be a positive and pleasant surprise that delivers the silver lining of creating more jobs and deliver the pitter patter with sufficient mist to form a rainbow an underline his position as the optimistic visionary.

THE LURE OF TOXIC LANGUAGE

Unknown user — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 00:21:50 EDT

That toxic language and toxic rhetoric actually found its way into the Presidential campaign in the US in the 21st century is more than an amazement and a wonder that it is not localized to the parochial minds of third world political campaigns that have defied the joy of developing into a liberation through education in order to gain the ability to serve all members of humanity. Some of these societies have sedition laws under which racially toxic utterrances made in public campagns and in televised speeches that would have put them behind bars a long time ago but some kind of patronage and fostered delays give them security from the operation of law.

In the selective operation of law against some other parties the people in authority go on to say that there should be “no delay” in bringing them to book under one law or another while those akin to them go scott free. For the enlightened and for those whose spritual development or inclinations to spirituality are shaped by the realization of a just God who is love, to them it is apparent that toxic language and selective application of laws is a character of the mind and not a trait of law itself.

The consistency of the Obama campaign and the cherished hope of change that brands the Obama message had very quickly mothballed into a revolution that is hard to beat. Then he found Joe Biden who professionally reflects those qualities and carries the same hope and trust. Now the torch is carried by candidates who are erudite and gentlemen and they wavered from their path. They did not change the seeds they wished to sow And the momemtum continues to build as it draws more of the thinking and rational Americans to support them with their vote. Is that sufficient to lure people in the opposing campaign for political power to administer toxic language? An unbridled lust for power can color the luring appeal too but it can trigger a backlash that could trun into a tide and there is little time left to manage its ebbing.

Why would people stray into such obnoxious and base conduct other then the reason of a problem with character of mind. Only the foolhardy and demoniacally foolish would dare, at this stage, to plunge into dark waters to call Obama an Arab in town hall meetings. Fortunately, McCain intervened at these meetings. In another corner of the mind, the thinking cap wonders why such people are so devilishly bent on hurting McCain and destroying his diminishing chance to close the widening gap with Obama. Perhaps, they should just visit Hyde Park and let things of their chest for some therapeutic gain that they can bring back to America. ? But, if seething resentment is the root of the problem, it must be treated at a medical facility. If seggregationist fissures are the cause, it is grave and require expert counselling --- all which rule them out from being “fit-and-proper persons for public office and earn the exclusion from any stage or podium.

Toxic language can sow the seeds of hostility and in most cases it is sowed by politicians and their stooges. The public, by and large, abhors it as it is a disturbance to peace, safety, economy and base enough to offend the divine tranquility in the inner recceses of the mind. Toxic language leads to destructive behavior in some people as shown by the chanting of “terrorist” and “kill him”. “Some political commentators have questioned if such seething resentment could be a security threat to Obama” Equally such seething resentment, if left unrebuked and unchecked could also trigger a security threat to McCain if it flows out of its loop.

Toxic language can drive the immature mind into base pits even though it is plain gossip to claim that Obama is linked to terrorist that is fact an impossible claim.. Fortunately, again McCain stepped in to rebuke such hateful rhetoric but how does one get down to manage a democracy for “all people to enjoy” if you are surrounded by people who churn out hateful rhetoric and apply toxic language? Poor McCain has to labor on different fronts trying to handle loose canons and looneys when he has trouble in keeping the campaign in focus on issues that threaten to adversely impact the American economy and the average and low income families. This came at a time when it is apparent that his campaign lost its consistency to the abnormality of developing into a cancerous smear campaign.

There is now a new problem looming above the horizon in this smear campaign that fertilized recently from toxic gametes as the woman in the centre of it denies the “unsubstantiated gossip”. The toxic story goes to say in the rumour grapevine that Obama hired a woman to be on his team for his bid for senatorship and a personal friendship developed between them and Obama’s wife came to know about it and sidelined this woman from her duites!

This story was first hatched at about two weeks before obama won his party’s nomination in August . It may have backfired then but like the terrorist-links gossip it is being rehashed and fed into the rumour mill as allegations. Of course Obama’s wife had no concerns about this relationship nor played any role in changing the woman’s duties and assigments. Obama is still cutely and romatically attached to Mrs Obama and cherishes his healthy marriage and the toxicity of this smear campaign will not even touch one chord of concern.

It is not even a passing asteroid but it hurts the rumour mongers more than anything else for the simple reason that it presupposes the toxic notion that one must only have an impersonal friendship for it to be platonic and for it to remain within the confines of decency and goes on to harm the elements of the social fabric that is woven with the ideals of gender equality. The sulfur from this smear campaign contrasts sharply from Obama and Biden whose campaign naturally give good and sufficient reason to vote for them. At this time, it is cruising on an even keel and only their campaign stimulates rational thinking while it keeps the mind afloat in the “OK” state and within that frame it decides that it is better to stick to issues that will shape America instead of those ingredients that will shape national gossip or feed base emotions.

ANYONE TRAINED FOR THE OVAL OFFICE?

Unknown user — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 01:01:06 EDT

Of course when you're the governor, you leave your household hat at home and you wear another hat and conduct yourself as governor and work as a professional. Professionals do not let problems and problematic officers who cheat the public and threaten people with guns to linger on. They put a just and fair system to work and part of that system is to initiate investigations and proceedings. On the other hand, when the conduct falls short of the professional standard, one merely talks and talks until it becomes numerous conversations with government officials about why Wooten was allowed to stay on the job.

Monegan told The Associated Press on Thursday that he just hope that the truth is figured out and added," "That the governor did want me to fire him, and I chose to not. You just can't walk up to someone and say, 'I fire you.' He didn't do anything under my watch to result in termination.".So, it is no wonder that Palin's critics say that shows she used her office to settle family affairs. That is the true color of a professional - to always organize thy conduct to arrive at the truth. The second true color of a professional is to manage change that is desirable and beneficial to the people without violating the truth. And finding the true colors that embellish a candidate for the Oval Office is not too difficult, if you let your mind do an honest job in thinking.

Instead of doing things the American way as a democracy in full bloom would have it, which is to come to subject to the needs of a legislative investigation into whether she abused her power as governor by firing her public safety commissioner, Palin comes up with her 21-page Campaign Report about a conspiracy to clear herself of any wrongdoing. That is a ploy of self-exoneration, something that third world politicians do. It does not meet professional standards let alone a standard that would merit a qualification to a running mate of a presidential candidate. Beauty can sprout anywhere but the beauty of truth is what the younger generation is looking for in this run up for the Oval Office. It is the sublime part of change.

If there was indeed a vendetta that led to a tragic and false story and nothing more than a story hatched by a blogger after drinks with Trooper Wooten that led the legislature to allocate over $100,000 of public money as her 21-page report concludes and not a story of abuse of high office position to settle family disputes, that ugliness can be cured by a proper investigation. Her report is troubling to a searching mind as it raises the question that if there was in fact a "rogue" trooper with a "long history of unstable and erratic behavior" and allegations of violence, including threatening Palin's family and shooting his stepson with a stun gun, and allegations that Wooten cheated the workers' compensation system. why is it that no investigations were initiated then. That is a serious question because Wooten should have been charged long ago.

McCain, on the other hand, is blundering by trying to play into voter's worries and one of his oft repeated point on the lack of experience of Obama for the Oval Office, is on careful examination standing on the rock of fallacy and flaw. McCain said that the Oval Office is not "an-on-the-job-training". When did McCain get a formal training for that job?

It is a position in which the President conducts himself to arrive at the truth and his true color is seen in his conduct to organize the range of activities and programs that work to solve problems affecting people and address their concerns surrounding safety, healthcare, education and economy and the kind of role America will play to foster peace and goodwill and that may require change as the core element. It requires an ability to fathom problems and their underlying causes and demands aptitude buttressed by a clear and intelligent mind to toy with new ideas and strategic benefits and advantages of new models and new approaches for better results. Some people have the aptitude and a lot of the rest can be learnt in the various fields of work and some of these abilities come more easily to a diligent, searching and intelligent mind. Nobody goes for a course or training to reach a state of preparedness and readiness for the Oval Office, precisely because it is not an administrative job. We do not need people in such an office to perpetuate and propagate the past but rather its nature demands personalities who are assessor-developers, creator-inventors and organizer-thrusters to thrust people and the nation out of problems and into a better realm.

Bush had experience as a governor but was he trained for 9/11? His solution of war on terrorism ended up with toppling of heads of states and military occupation? Was Churchill trained for his premiership? His mind came up with military solutions on how to make beach landings on the French coast and how to properly motivate his officers and his people to take on the might of Hitler. And he ended up liberating Europe from the clouds of war.

Was Bill Gates trained to assume office as CEO of Microsoft? He went on to build it into what it is today. Were the first production employees in the Ford assembly trained as automobile engineers? Was Gandhi trained at Lincoln's Inn to be a Mahatma? Was Mother Theresa trained to look after the destitute who were sick? These people rose to the occasion by the positive emotions of the heart. They put people first. They had the blessing of functional faculties of the mind to do the good they achieved borne out of action orchestrated to take away problems for others or for some purpose or a higher and nobler goal. There is no school for such training. Just as successful people have certain habits that help to propel them, builders of nations and people who lead and shape destinies have their own minds, principles and qualities. This is what deserves scrutiny in candidates and when the screening fails we get to lament the problems caused by people without scruples which is an apt definition for corrosive politicians.

If you serve greed, greed will haunt you in due course. If you serve yourself, you are cursed but a metamorphosis spins you into a cocoon to serve others and you turn into a blessing. If you serve in a professional way, you get the results of a professional. If you serve the people through politics you get a political office. If you serve the market by giving quality and value and solutions to customer needs, you get long term-customer relationships and a valuable corporation. If you serve a noble purpose you are thrust into leadership. If you serve a higher goal you rise up to be looked upon as a Mahatma or a saint. These you will have to contemplate on your own. Your true color is the hue of your service and how you will shape the future. As you serve so will you reap. Which training teaches and prepares you in like manner other than the Scriptures and philosophies?

If Palin wants to yep around about past associations and character and if McCain lingers on with that line on experience in the hope that it will drum up something, I am afraid that it might only help more get to know that this team does have an inherent interest in changing peoples' life for the better which hinges on safety, education, healthcare, economy, peace and goodwill. And that is an inherent vice that the younger generation will vote against. That drum beat favors Obama.

As for Obama, his tenacious consistency and focus of his original message of change and the power of change and the promise of change is more admirable than his erudite mind.

BELDEU SINGH

THE "SO IMPERFECT AMERICA"

Unknown user — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 23:44:06 EDT

Palin has gone on a series of speeches to claim that Obama “sees America as so imperfect that he’s palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.” And she wants to “discuss more” certain associations about “appalling things said by a pastor” that are in reality innocuous to grave issues affecting America and threatening ordinary Americans and the future of the young generation. In fact, she is bent on harping on such issues that are also innocuous to and not part of the personality of Obama or the core of his message.

The McCain camp has a very short memory. They forgot that early in the pirmaries there was a distinct attempt to put the terrorist stamp on Obama but it could not take off and failed miserably.

When a candidate supports the military occupation of Iraq and has no answers to a financial disaster that has struck the national economy that has stirred ripples in the global economy threatening a possible slump McCain's top adviser announced their plan to stop engaging in a debate over the economy and "turn the page" to more direct, personal attacks on Barack Obama, it signals a syndrome characterized by a disinterest in the real issues that affect people and ordinary Americans and jobs as well as businesses.

With a USD700 billion bailout plan in one hand and a promise of a 100 year war in Iraq held in the other hand, it is promise to flush another USD700 billion into the toilet bowl - that is the potential and possible espense for another 5-year occupation of Iraq. That is what is so imperfect about America today and it is an imperfection to place these issues above the priority of the ordinary Americans. The McCain philosophy, as seen from the slogan does not put PEOPLE FIRST.

The problem for the McCain camp is - "Well, having followed Obama's campaign, it is clear what he stands for and he is serious about it. He knows it is the need of the hour." (see:Selecting A President). Obama has remained focussed on his ideal and he never said America was "so imperfect that you need to pal around with terrorists." His life never took that path and as I recall, he never said America was "so imperfect" either, only that it required change in the way we do things to benefit Americans and to benefit the self image of America. And change is not just about curing imperfections. It is about making the shifts to do things better and to do better things and reap better fruits for America and for peace and betterment for the global community of which America is an integral part. Creating better value with change and fundamental reform does not mean that America is so imperfect but that it is a more efficient process but there are imperfections that America must investigate and deal with such as possible abuse of power in Troopergate which if found to be in accordance with the believable allegation it is actually something "so imperfect".

Attempting to tie Obama to some homegrown lunny with radical ideas and bombings when Obama was a child is also "so imperfect" for a political campaign that is shifting its attention and concern away from issues and realities that are threatening to adversely affect the average American family as well as the middle income class and small businesses. In this context Obama is palling around with the proper issues and the right people and has the mind and the heart to address these issues and concerns. He actually toys with them seriously and intelligent people know that the power of change can turn things around. Being clearly aware that most Americans below 48 believe in the dynamics of CHANGE as a solution for America, the McCain advisors may have concocted the potion to fuel personal attacks and leave national and people issues. But the intensification of mudslinging can earn such a grave rebuke in the hearts of the American people that it may digging their own political grave at a time when there is little time left to catapault backwards into the arena of real issues and policies for the poeople and for America.

Finally, do we need to talk about past associations or deliberate on the required change and actions that will shape America and people's lives? Wherein lies the hope of perfection - in gossip or about substance that shapes lives for a betterment? Palin, at the momment is more interested in discussing certain associations more. How often we associated with people and even got involved only to find out later on that it is not an association or an involvement you wanted and you dissassociate and extricate yourself. It is just part of the human experience and part of good judgement that enables humans to continue with the search to do good. Actions speak louder and clearer than mere associations. That is the obvious truth and it is common sense.

Putting the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle in their proper places, people are coming to realize that the Keating Debacle and Troopergate and so imperfect and these are the type of imperfections that Obama sees in his vision of change and dream about a perfect America. Is that American or Unamerican?

Palin's plan on mudslinging and attack dog role that aims to focus on personal attacks and "discuss more" of unsubstantiated issues is turning her into a public gossip mongrel rather than wearing the intellectual garb of an erudite and concerned candidate who is cultured to represent the American aspirations. She is falling short on class and her latest series of attack dog roles may have sealed the final verdict on her quality as a vice-presidential candidate and severely tarnished and undermined the McCain presidential bid.

The October Crisis for the McCain bid may well lie in the self-immolatory nature of their strategy that aims to spread incendiary remarks rather than talk substance and share new ideas to convert America as the cauldron of desirable change.

BELDEU SINGH

PEOPLE FIRST OR COUNTRY FIRST

Unknown user — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 01:05:35 EDT

COUNTRY FIRST - well that is ok provided we understand that first of all, the country's first need is change.

What made America great? And what was the driving force in becoming great?

It was not about COUNTRY FIRST. That was the slogan from communist thought that failed to bring out the best in man. For America, it was about a system of governance based on "a government for the people, by the people and of the people". It was PEOPLE FIRST - the first principle that led to the foundational premise of democracy that created the cultural machine that developed the nation into a land of opportunity. And that carved the crest to cradle the American Dream and embellished it with a noble hue. In that dream, if you privileged yourself to work and harnessed creativity and/or talent and went about to create and deliver something of value to the people, your dream minted the bucks and the wheels of economy churn along to benefit others as well.

From COUNTRY FIRST to PEOPLE FIRST, there is the requirement to make the changes, in perspectives and policies to alter the dynamics to put people first again. It is not about an ornamental switch but real and transformational change in all areas, starting with a new basis to let the working class and the middle income group have more disposal income through a new and simple tax regime followed by an incessant drive to alter the fundamentals and organize the critical success factors that would serve to give opportunities to educate and develop self into human capital and to increase average household incomes that have remained nearly stagnant for three decades.

The basic idea is centred around the kind of change that benefits people and create more opportunities for people benefits the country as a whole over time. The people make up the country in a fully functional democracy while, on the other hand, collective labor aims to put country first as in communist ideology and because the greatness lies in people, those engines of change must breathe democracy and thrust out democracy. Otherwise, as in communist regimes, the country will be first and people second. This seed, the voter is beholden, not to sow in America. This seed is not sterile as it puts forth flowers without fragrance and yields infertile fruits from pure labor. In America, it is time to sow the fertile seeds of change for democracy to bloom again.

What made America tick and made her great lies locked in its original precept of PEOPLE FIRST. It is no secret and from it can flow much good other than opportunities and diligently fermenting a new round of success through the American Dream. And those below 48 yearn to go back to those natural ideals once more. It affords a means to churn out great minds and monumental effort that makes a nation great. Only a transformational change will help young Americans for they have a greater stake in the future of America. And claim it through their vote, they certainly will.

THE POW AND THE BEAUTY QUEEN

Unknown user — Sat, 20 Sep 2008 00:12:07 EDT

THE POW AND THE BEAUTY QUEEN

Beldeu Singh

The McCain Ad got one thing right – “OBAMA was the world’s biggest celebrity…” There is no question that Obama captured the heart of Americans below the age of 48 years. He was a hit in Europe with supporters screaming out his name in London. He captured the heart of young Europe, too. In fact he got the rare adoration from the public, the press as well as the continent’s leaders. The ad missed the chilling point – Obama is still the world’s biggest darling celebrity – and for good reasons too. The “Germans are still gaga over Obama and the Land of the Rising Sun is still “pretty jazzed”. This extra-ordinary American campaign has got everyone involved, especially the ordinary people. And it is not just about a sexy and very intelligent man going for the seat of power. So, what really happened from the day of his first speech? Or more importantly, what is this Obama exuberance that captivates young people and transforms them from fans into ardent supporters?

It is something more than charisma. It is the Obama mantra that adds the halo to his charisma and beyond that it delivers a hope to a world that is so stuck in rut of doing things the old way and trying to address issues with military solutions that make the enjoyment of peace so illusive rather then keeping it as an instrument to thwart the disturbances to peace. The human drama on earth can be so much more with a transformational change that attempts to transfigure the way we live and work and impact other lives around the world, now that the world is reduced to a global village. The human experience can be elevating if the environment stimulates in bringing the best out of each individual with the goal to positively contribute to the human drama worldwide.

Since the Nixon era, more and more individuals began to stereotype the politician as a self-serving pest without scruples and who is either manipulating or imposing on people and undermining democracy and its ideals with the head of a hydra. And the growing unease with the way things are happening in the world needed an explosive satiation. It came with Obama’s mantra’s of transformational change. It swept fast like a global-warming induced mega storm and began “resonating across the rest of the planet” for one simple factor – it sounded sincere and it came with a force from within his heart. The fact that this mantra was voiced by a mind that is sharp and erudite and cast in a gentleman’s body conjures the image of a blend of JFK and Tony Blair is a plus but he is a person much more as he labors with a Gandhian influence that first infects and then draws out a response of solidarity with the need for transformational change. Obama is the perfect brand for this type of change, is the ring you hear in the four chambers of your heart.

He is the positive change in politics that young people, below the age of 48 years were quietly wishing for, but never talked about. And this group in the US population are going to make a clear and resounding statement when they vote with one spirit – that they have much more at stake in the future of this world and they are claiming it. They want political and ideological progress to shape the world as America plays its legitimate role in a dignified style. For the first time, this young group will claim America on how their nation deals with key and defining issues: education, health, economy, Iraq and self-image of America. McCain shot himself in the foot when he aligned to America’s past and blew a hole in his own gut with the underpinning promise of a 100 years war in Iraq.

While Obama let his mantra fly around the world, McCain had the wrong things his oven. He tried to spice it up with a beauty queen who comes with the baggage of Troopergate. Many people are more keen to read how that investigation unfolds or if it will kept under the pressure lid. To a large section Palin was an immediate huge attraction but how Troopergate changes the colors of that initial attraction could have a telling effect of how a beauty handled certain affairs linked to close family members. It is precisely this kind of things that require a transformational change as well. The steam of the change mantra itself could pulverize the initial advantage of Palin for handsome is what handsome does. While McCain is tangled and works out his steps on how to tango, he faltered when he recently pledged to bring change. Perhaps, it was a test to see whether he can recast the cornerstone of his campaign on the popular notion of change that generated the buzz for Obama and made him the “the ideal projection screen for hopes and expectations” (AP) but he cannot steal its obama authenticity. What is real for McCain is this – he is the first POW to run for the White House and Palin the first beauty queen. It is deadly combination of fried ghee and honey.

THE TRUST FACTOR IN A CANDIDACY

Unknown user — Fri, 11 Apr 2008 02:41:00 EDT

THE TRUST FACTOR IN A CANDIDACYBeldeu Singh NOW Hillary tells “backers in Pennsylvania that Obama cannot be counted on to pull troops out of Iraq”. Table table on the wall...who is the truthest of them all?.

100 Years Of War By Vietnam War Hero · He wants to continue the war. He has vowed to stay in Iraq for up to 100 years. · He will get out only when he can save face. Perhaps that is to ‘cure’ the loss of face in Vietnam.· It will cost the US about USD10, 000, 000, 000, 000. And it will be a thorn in foreign policy for 100 years. That money can be spent on primary healthcare, education, scholarships, research, strengthening the financial system and military might and strategically eliminate terrorist threats.

Obama Opposed The War Before Its Start · He did not vote for War In Iraq· Consistently spoke against that war · It is not the best strategy against terrorism and it is not winning the grounds against terrorism but succeeded in topling the Head of a sovereign state and Us became an occupying power while Al Qaeda entered Iraq.· Has clearly stated the cost and its economic burden and his stand to end the war and withdraw troops.

She Voted For The War In Iraq · After voting in favour of the use of military force in Iraq, she said that it was a vote for diplomacy that Bush had abused!· She said she came under sniper fire and was pinned down by sniper gunfire but later said it was a mistake!· Her initial stand on Iraq was not clearly similar to Obama’s. Since more Americans prefer their tax to be spent in the US, she sates the trillion dollar cost of war and switched her the stand to “ready, willing and able to end the war”!

THE SACRED POINT She told the voters that she was a better candidate to win against McCain because she could continue with the war for security reasons. Perhaps security was surveyed to be an important factor. It is ...everywhere in every society. But do you gain security by going to war and to continue it. Counter-terrorism or war to win against terrorists? Trust lies in the primary stand and consistency rather than in being shifty. Is it now a question of what kind of candidate rather than who is the candidate?

The first problem facing Hillary is to try and emulate Obama on the war issue but secondly by tainting it with her questioningon his sincerity to end the war and pull the troops!

CHANGE OR CHUTZPAH OR MORE OF WAR

Unknown user — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 05:27:50 EDT

CHANGE OR CHUTZPAH OR MORE OF THE WAR

Beldeu Singh

WHAT favors the candidate at the present crossroads?

Hillary voted for the war in Iraq. McCain wants more of it as he thinks it will bring security to the American people. A “big backer of the Bush’s troop build-up in Iraq” as a way to slow down the American soldier death toll in Iraq, would “keep US troops in Iraq for 100 years” has gone to visit Iraq as part of his middle East and Europe tour “to remind Americans of his national security credentials” instead tends to remind Americans that a war hero can think of only military solutions for last peace and prosperity. History proves that military solutions and lasting peace and prosperity are usually an anti-theisis to each other in the long term and protracted military engagements can be a drain on the economy and a drain on goodwill while in some cases it can tarnish foreign

Hillary changed tactics during the course of her campaign. With the Obama lead increasing steadily, thanks to the more discerning voters who are voting for the dividends of change, she taunted the voting members that she is more appropriate to take on McCain on the same security platform rather than Obama on the need for change and what change could bring for the US and the people. A genuine candidate is often seen as offering something of value to the Oval Office, which said contribution is leadership that translates into peace or jobs and prosperity or better access to health facilities or safety or goodwill or image etc or some good measure of these. A consistent message and a firm stand adds to the stature of the candidacy as well as its integrity. A change in tactics with the sole intention on getting into the White House can spell a certain disaster as the candidate begins to smell like a politician.

In the minds of the American literate, it is never to be reduced to a race for the White House, not because of the power but simply because of its immense responsibility. And no one could possibly get elected on the platform of war on the grounds of creating a ‘linchpin of democracy’ or occupation or invasion. Empire building is now an archaic notion. Obama voted against the War in Iraq. Obama told in clear and certain terms that it would cost the American taxpayer dearly and sucks in the people for generations to come to foot the war bill. Obama stated that this type of protracted war is a drain on the economy. Obama said that the war in Iraq opened up the borders for infiltration to terrorist networks and did not diminish terrorist threat. When Obama was saying all of these, Hillary stood inclined towards the war effort and its security benefit. Today as “Hillary counts Iraq war costs” she changed her stand again and with that she changed her tactics. She said on Monday that the Iraq war may end up costing US1 trillion and stated the obvious – that the war has sapped military and economic strength and damaged national security!

What a turn around during the course of her campaign. And all for what? For the one goal of getting into the White House. What kind of scruples that such a candidate brings along to work behind the desk of the greatest responsibility on earth? Will it be able to shape lives with the kind of change is now an imperative or shake lives with tactical changes to buttress one’s personal goals? As I see it, the voting members are using their voting power to buttress a change agent as they see it in Obama who is so enveloped in his vision and mission of change and that includes a change in how American dollars are deployed to shape the contours of American economy to steadily create more jobs over the years and to change its position on the role of protracted wars vis-a vis global goodwill and the security for peace backed by its military might and ability to respond. All of that requires a paradigm shift in the way the responsibility in the White House is translated into actions that shall pave the way for the goals so dearly craved for. The Hillary camp has now figured this out and are attempting a

So, Hillary has changed her tactic yet again and now sings the song of the war cost and its fallout. But Obama had sung it better as an integral part of the change he talked about from the beginning. And we are left with chutzpah – is it an unmitigated gall and generally unacceptable brazen behavior or is it to be regarded as an asset and a positive quality of heroic audacity.

Selecting A President

Unknown user — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 09:41:58 EST

At first it was...who is this intelligent guy who exudes so much charisma and youthful dynamism. And that very sincere ring to the voice of change. People tend to resist change. Why would people welcome change?

Well, having followed his campaign, it is clear what he stands for and he is serious about it. He knows it is the need of the hour. But the problem lies in how America chooses its president. Tragically, the American President is not voted directly into the Oval Office by the American voting public. Next, there are equally bad approaches and ideas about how to go about putting the person in the Oval Office. One train of thought is "this is the best shot to put a woman in the White House" and the other, but on the similar platform is "this is the best shot to put a black as the first President of USA". How primitive can you get after 200 hundred years of democracy?

Choosing the personality for the Oval Office is something different and certainly a more serious affair than getting blighted by zebra vision or about getting all worked up about putting a woman in the White House. One needs to pause and think about the work in the Oval Office which is more than just about creating jobs and attempting to treat the budget deficits with different formulas. Its about much bigger issues that will naturally impact those two simple and nagging problems. And it is about the image of America, what makes it tick and what fuels the American dream and the road to success in these areas while rediscovering the founding principles of democracy. If you loose these four pillars, America will become a dry udder under a cow fattened by problems and the sickness will becomes more difficult to cure with the passage of time much like trying to enjoy health by tolerating more and more pharmaceutical benefits.

Close your eyes and try to envision what Abraham Lincoln wrought for America and how JFK fired the pride in every American and see how their fundamental change has shaped your lives and shaped America that in turn allowed and empowered the USA to properly influence the change in the global arena positively wherever there was a geniune interest in humanity, progress and peace. However, there was never a lasting impact when the person in the Oval Office placed American interest above humanity and the interest of peace to yield a peace dividend and there was never a generational effect of Oval Office policies that were cast in American interest alone and colored by the cleverness of the personality traits of the incumbent president. Humanity and leaders around the world are fed up of an Oval Office that tries to shapes things in the various regions of the world based on the myopia of serving the American interest and are equally tired of clever meddling.

The total sum of the power of the Oval Office includes its ability to shape things in the world in ways that shapes the image of America. That requires, not a clever person but a mind that is framed by wisdom and intelligence to see the naked difference between serving American interest and building America's image. The two cannot be the same, for in the later lies goodwill and prosperity and invintingly allows the USA to address global issues. There is a differtent way and it is a better way.

Building America's image does not start with smart weapons and the power of destruction for military might is always better when it stands behind the President than when it serves his goals, excepting when a war is imposed on America, in which event its still stands behind the President. Building America's image has to start with the right mind with the right paradigm and the right words to shape the policies to build the image of America and the ability to organize the actions that best serve humanity in America and humanity outside America and address the pressing global issues that are adversely affecting our environment and ecology, safety and quality of life and the quality of freedom and the nature and quality of human thought and actions in societies, including those directed at the USA. The later was almost entirely good for America after WWII but, unfortunately, that has waned and deteriorated over the last two decades.

So, what America achieves within its borders and outside its borders depends on the mind that is put to work at the desk in the Oval Office. That power is not in the skin color nor in the gender. That power is in the mind and in the goodness of the heart and rests in values and principles and the desire for change on a proper, if not an exciting paradigm shift or a new paradigm of hope that appeals to humanity at large.

The Europeans have traditionally been swayed by charismatic personalities, including Bill Clinton, not so much about change although change breeds progress and generates new hope. Barack Obama exudes both with fragrant enthusiasm and the nectar of youth but Europeans ought really to look at the ideas that maketh the man and the values that maketh his personality. Firstly, he is not out to fool anybody, not even once. That has certainly come across clearly, Secondly, he has not changed his tune. He is a steady ship on a steady course. Thirdly, he belives in the need to change to make America relevant in a modern world and to do things differently. For this he has a human heart and a human face. His has not shown the slimy cleverness of a politician nor the kind of harshness that Russians or Arabs dislike. He appears like a firm mind and trustworthy that wants to confront the problem together with all its thorns and underlying vagaries rather than cosmetically alter the contours and make it appear like it is solved while its beauty covers the simmerring heat and discontent, something we have seen happen before. And these are the ingredients that can help restore faith in America and help build the kind of US legitimacy in world affairs that can make Americans proud as in the 1960s and 1970s. Finally, he has not changed his tune during the course of his campaign with the motive of winning votes. Naturally and deservedly, he has caught the admiration of people outside US as well. And that is vital for the Oval Office.

I sincerely hope people gravitate towards his ideas and his staunch principle-centred leadership for that is how the cake of democracy was founded that began to shape lives and human output and progress for human wel being rather than being attracted by his charming youth and dynamism or charisma which we all cherish. There is global buzz about a 'sexy black JFK' but most see him as neither white nor black but an intellingent mind with ideas that support a real vision. And his real charm is that he is not out to fool anyone. All that is sexy in the Oval Office in the 21st century.

Barack Obama has spoken about a new vision and holds out a vision that we only enshrined in our hearts and perhaps as an ideal - the vision of real change that will shape lives in the US and outside the US that will scale down violence in our world. If that translates into votes, he will have the Oval Office to make it a reality. And for once, we will have an interesting and intelligent professional with ideas in the White House instead of a clever politician whose scruples continuously wag suspicion in the mind.

If you had voted to authorize military force against Iraq and then turn around to say that "it was a vote for more diplomacy that had been abused by Bush" you are either a clever politician without scruples or you suffer a communication disability or you do not know the difference between war and diplomacy. And all three are dangerous elements to be put into the Oval Office.

BELDEU SINGH