HR lawyers call for action against cops involved in attack on NPM picket

  • 29 Oct 2005 09:56:00 GMT

    However there won`t be any trail against Karuna by Tamil courts but he will reveal all his illegal activities incited by SLA and the government in the presence of

  • 29 Oct 2005 09:59:11 GMT

    I Karuna rejoins LTTE, he will not be trialed by any Tamil Courts in Killinochchi but he will reveal all his illegal activities iagainst Tamils incited by SLA and the government.

    If Mr.kruna rejoins LTTE there is no more any question on para military attacks throughSLA.

    Unconfirmed sources say that Mr.kruna has taken this decision early in the morning to rejoin LTTE and he is anxiously waiting to smeet Mr.Prabhakaran for an excuse and leave to rejoin LTTE forces.

    Is this a Election BOmb or nothing.

  • 29 Oct 2005 16:09:46 GMT


  • 29 Oct 2005 16:39:41 GMT

    People have seen some groupes of Kruna haved travelled all the way from Colombo to Belgium to support LTTE european gatherings in Brussels and no body can deny.( inclduing Karuna close relatives partipated)

    This will be the endo of SLA zand paramilitary illegal activities in tamil Home Lands in eastern province.

    Thank you Mr.karuna for your reformed and well disciplined decision to come back once again to fight all these JVP thungs and SLA .

  • 29 Oct 2005 18:57:42 GMT


    Are you brother of Mr.karuna to have more worries?

  • 29 Oct 2005 19:55:47 GMT


    Many thanks for your attempt to answer my quarries. I am wondering whether your answers were complete.

  • 30 Oct 2005 00:33:39 GMT


    I did foretell such a possibility (of Karuna come back) when Karuna defected. This is because Karuna is driven more by economic prosperity than social elevation. There is everything right about this - as long as he does not expressly fool his people. How people read him is their problem and not his.

    I give below, my letter to the Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission here in Australia where the government is introducing new Anti Terrorism laws to disadvantage Asian (particularaly Muslim) migrants. Someone in a remote corner of Australia (which can also be in Sydney institutions with high walls) without government supervision, can interpret these laws against any migrant linked to his country of origin.

    Gaja Lakshmi Paramasivam from Australia



    906/ 56, Carr Street; Coogee N.S.W. 2034; Australia ;

    Email ; Phone 61 2 9315 7417

    Mr. John von Doussa, QC


    Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission


    Your Ref : 205347FD:DV

    29 October 2005

    Dear Mr. von Doussa,

    Race Discrimination Complaint Against The Maroubra Mental Health Unit

    Of The Prince Henry and The Prince of Wales Hospital Group

    Further to my previous communications with the Commission on the above complaint, I attach a copy of the report sent by Dr. Sumanathissa of The Prince Henry & The Prince of Wales Hospitals Mental Health Program. The Commission indicated that this was needed for my complaint to be recognized. I got the feeling that the Commission was thinking that I was imagining that such a report existed. I trust that the Commission now has physical proof that such a report was sent against me.

    Dr. Sumanathissa says in his report `We suggested supportive counseling for her but this was refused.`

    I do not understand whether the doctor is saying that I refused the counseling or whether his supervisors denied me the facilities or worse whether he is making it up to downgrade me further. Dr. Sumanathissa?s opening statement is ?I have seen Ms Gaja Paramasivam on 27th May 05, 3rd June 05, 09th June 05, 17th June 05 and 23 June 05 at the Maroubra Centre and she was seen by Consultant Psychiatrist Dr Jagdeep Sachdev (FRANZCP) on 3rd June 05.?

    Does this not confirm that I have NOT denied counseling - I confirm that I attended all the sessions scheduled by the Center and that at times the schedules were changed at the last minute. I therefore ask you to consider this false statement as confirmation that I was not recognized by Dr. Sumanathissa as an Equal citizen but rather as a person whose word would be given less significance than his. I also ask you to ask the Center to produce the notes or any other documentation available, that confirms that I refused counseling. I made the adjustment and I attended the sessions despite the anxiety and pain during the sessions when the doctors told me lies about me. They told me who they were and what they would have done under similar circumstances and therefore were trying to bring me within their boundaries to suit their convenience.

    They are allowed to do this provided they are independent at that point in time and place and are proven to be the wisest at that time and place. In Medical Administration I have proven that I was wiser than Dr.Sumanathissa and Dr Sachdev at that time and at that place. Unless therefore they produce Objective and Independent evidence stands on its own merits, my word on the Administration must be given higher value than Dr Sumanathissa?s or Dr. Sachdev`s.

    Instruments of Delegation of Powers indicate that these experts are considered capable of applying the law without needing the support of another person. Dr. Sumathissa did not have this Delegated Power to certify me to the Courts. Dr. Sumanathissa told me that he was NOT allowed to do forensic work in Australia. In addition to this, Dr. Sumanathissa kept going back to his supervisor Dr. Sachdev, for directions. The conclusions Dr. Sumanthissa expressed before seeing Dr. Sachdev were that I was `normal.`

    The Legal Aid Commission has now forwarded to me, the report from Dr Rosalie Wilcox. After reading the final verdict by Dr Wilcox that `I have a paranoid psychosis` I felt very upset. I had felt higher respect for Dr. Wilcox than I had felt for Dr Sumanathissa and Dr. Sachdev put together. Hence the greater pain. As is my way, I cried, picked fight with my husband and went to bed feeling sorry for myself. Then I read some of the responses to my work in the public forum and allowed myself the luxury of feeling happy that a UNSW citizen wrote openly `Gaja, you are the Best of the Best.. you and I will meet at His Lotus Feet`. I spoke to Sai Baba in my mind and fell asleep. When I woke up in this morning, my husband apologized for not expressing strongly enough his appreciation of my services to him and our family and said that what mattered to him was the Truth he knew about me and not the opinions given by these experts. I felt better valued after that and decided to take an intellectual approach rather than an emotional one. Towards this I had to consciously and expressly separate myself from Dr. Wilcox - through what I considered to be most possible reason for the Subjective parts of Dr. Wilcox`s report - my race and therefore the lack of authority I had (in the opinion of Dr. Wilcox), to challenge the Vice Chancellor of the University of New South Wales . I therefore consciously overrode the subjective concessions I had given Dr. Wilcox, a medical expert and became a `number` for the administrative part of the report.

    The first thing I told myself was that Dr. Wilcox did not care enough about me to influence me in any way to take medical treatment for my perceived `paranoid psychosis`. In my mind, her report was to the Legal Aid Commission which believed that I was NOT mentally ill. It was due to the strong feeling that the Legal Aid lawyer had about me and my actions that they did not present this medical reports in court.

    I therefore felt that I had to treat Dr. Wilcox as a number and allow myself to be treated as a number. In other words, we did not have any ?hidden? subjective connections that would enable us to protect each other from wrong-doers and inefficiencies.

    The report indicates that Dr. Wilcox was a keen listener. She has reproduced fairly accurately, the details of my matter with the UNSW Vice Chancellor. There are some minor misrepresentations in statistics but in essence the report represents the physical level facts of the matter.

    Dr. Wilcox however, failed to limit herself to the boundaries of the matter before her. Dr Wilcox has given me advice through Legal Aid Commission to protect the UNSW Vice Chancellor who is of her culture.

    Dr. Wilcox states in the second last paragraph of her report `Without treatment I believe there is a considerable risk that she will reoffend`.

    This proves that Dr.Wilcox examined me to see whether I would reoffend - the starting point being that I was already guilty of having offended.

    I was sent to Dr.Wilcox, not to be assessed right or wrong regarding my work at the UNSW but for my conduct in court. The LAW gives these boundaries and no expert has the authority to probe beyond those boundaries. The Mental Health Act under which I was sent for this assessment is very clear about the boundaries. As per the Mental Health Act:

    (1) A person is not a mentally ill person or a mentally disordered person merely because of any one or more of the following:

    (a) that the person expresses or refuses or fails to express or has expressed or refused or failed to express a particular political opinion or belief,

    (b) that the person expresses or refuses or fails to express or has expressed or refused or failed to express a particular religious opinion or belief,

    (c) that the person expresses or refuses or fails to express or has expressed or refused or failed to express a particular philosophy,

    (d) that the person expresses or refuses or fails to express or has expressed or refused or failed to express a particular intimacyual preference or intimacyual orientation,

    (e) that the person engages in or refuses or fails to engage in, or has engaged in or refused or failed to engage in, a particular political activity,

    (f) that the person engages in or refuses or fails to engage in, or has engaged in or refused or failed to engage in, a particular religious activity,

    (g) that the person engages in or has engaged in intimacyual promiscuity,

    (h) that the person engages in or has engaged in immoral conduct,

    (i) that the person engages in or has engaged in illegal conduct,

    (j) that the person has developmental disability of mind,

    (k) that the person takes or has taken alcohol or any other drug,

    (l) that the person engages in or has engaged in anti-social behaviour.

    On page 5 of the Report, Dr. Wilcox says `Mrs Paramasivam acknowledged that for several years she had been in communication with a range of people including Yoga Swami, Our Lady and Si Baba, the leader of an Indian Religious Group. She told me that Si Baba was a saint and on the 5 November 1998 red powder materialized on her picture of him. She interpreted this as meaning that he was in communication with her and felt that it was a miracle, a sign of his love for society.

    She said that Si Baba was able to anticipate her thoughts and she felt comforted by this and said that she had experienced an intuitive relationship with Si Baba and her communication with him had continued to this day. She described the communication as a `blissful state` it felt as if she did not have a care in the world. She acknowledged that her current charges did not concern her because of the comfort she received from Si Baba and said that he was the only one whose opinion counted with her.`

    Inclusion of this as part of the report, I believe is in breach of sections (b) and (f) above.

    I wonder what religion Dr. Wilcox follows? Medicine? Does she then not hear the messages of her professional elders who made it possible for her to enjoy her current status as a medical practitioner? Does she not ever ask them whether something is right or wrong - by referring back to their work -either expressly in books or intuitively in her memory? Yoga Swami says that we must learn the language of silence. Dr. Wilcox did not give the rest of the story about the materialization on 05 November 1998 - that it was a Thursday and that the Sydney Morning Herald published an adverse report by the NSW Auditor General on that day about the University Budgetary / Financial systems. This report upheld the essence of my criticism about the UNSW Financial systems - for trying to correct which I was persecuted and dismissed. By leaving out the parts relating to the news-report Dr.Wilcox was withholding reported facts that are of `nuisance` value to her.

    Yesterday, I wrote as follows in a Public Forum in response to someone who believes that Sai Baba is fraud - just like Christians thought about Jesus and Hindus about Krishna.

    Thank you kanthun for responding.

    I have never seen Sai Baba officially to confirm or deny that He claims He is God. I identify with His reported statements that we are all God.

    Sai Baba came to me through my mind and heart when I was feeling really lonely after my Discrimination pain at the University of New South Wales. The red Holy Powder denoting love appeared on His picture gifted to me by a cousin. On that day - 05 November 1998 the Sydney Morning Herald published a report by the NSW Auditor General about the University Financial systems, that upheld my reports for which I was persecuted and dismissed by Central Administrators at the UNSW. Since then Sai Baba has given me visions when I deeply needed Divine help. God comes to us in the form we seek. I believe that I needed the Sai Baba form to continue with my professional work. Hence God came to me as Sai Baba. I have had similar experiences but not as strong through my faith in Mother Lakshmi / Mary and Her son Lord Muruga / Jesus. If we realise Truth - then we have realised God. We give it the form that best suits our investment. I did not invest in the Sai Baba form - but now that He has come to me in that Form, I believe that He is God. Why else would I need God for - except to realise Peace and Happiness.

    I now ask Him in my mind - whether I am right or wrong and feel Him in my heart when I need to be loved. All other opinions help me know the other person through my trueself.

    As for the golden chariot - gold is the most precious material for Hindus. Hence it is used heavily by the richer temples. It shows our appreciation. I have not given anything material to Sai Baba. Yet I am being helped by Him. So I know that gold or sand makes no difference to Him - but the feeling with which we give makes all the difference. When we feel, we do not need to give. We automatically share.



    Similarly, on 01 November 2004, I was handcuffed and sent by Waverley Local Court for a psychiatric assessment at Price Of Wales hospital because the Magistrate did not want to order the Police to withdraw their bail application and at the same time the magistrate`s conscience would not allow her to send me back to Mullawa prison - despite my words of acceptance. The report from this assessment by Dr. Peter Vaux (copy attached) has been included by Dr.Wilcox in her assessment. But Dr.Wilcox has stated in her report that Dr.Vaux is a registrar whereas the report states that Dr.Vaux is a senior registrar. Dr.Wilcox has therefore diminished the value of the report from Dr.Vaux who identified with my Truth and said to me and my daughter in law that I was following in Gandi`s path of passive resistance. On that say day, the Daily News in Sri Lanka published my article on Gandhi. This to me is a divine message. It was not to my husband who does not have an opinion either way and not to Dr. Wilcox who has expressed a specific opinion that I have a paranoid psychosis. May be I do, may be I do not. But is it hindering the lawful resolution of the matter? THAT was the only matter that Dr.Wicox should have seen and no more.

    I did not talk about Sai Baba or Gandhi in the presence of the Magistrate. I shared my facts with the doctors who examined my mind as per the court orders. From their reports, I know that they exceeded their lawful authority and because they did not include me as if I were a part of their world, the Truth / Facts / Statistics they learnt have been abused to suit their preconceived ideas - that I am a `nuisance` who needed to be kept away from the authorities.

    Dr Wilcox may not believe in Our Lady or Jesus. But I do. I talk to Them and I hear Their Voices within me - through our silent language. Likewise I talk to all those who live within me. That to me is the higher purpose of my intellect and memory. Packaging my memory and selling it for money and status is secondary to this higher purpose. I do sincerely believe that when I am genuine I connect to another genuine person, including you - when you are genuinely seeking. Left to Dr.Wilcox, it is likely that I would be forced to limit myself to intimacy and no romance ? as in the animal world. I believe I have earned much more than that. Romance packaged by others is still intimacy but higher intimacy. True Romance comes from within and it is a silent language.

    Dr Wilcox continues to state `She mentioned that she was a follower of Ghandi and when she meditates she believes that she is able to connect directly with Ghandi`s mind and she referred to how this was a form of `mental telepathy`. `

    Others started telling me that I was like Gandhi. I do identify with Gandhi`s work. Following is a contribution that expresses how I feel about Gandhi:

    Dear kanthun,

    Thank you for seeking my response.

    I feel that we assess on the basis of what we see, know and feel. To those who merely see and believe - Indians would not seem idealists. To those who know - they would. To those who feel they are Truth.

    I myself seek not to see Indians through only the Indians I directly interact with.

    India to me is primarily the Indians I carry within me and the values they represent. Topping this list is Sri Sathya Sai Baba, my Spiritual Guru. Like you, I am also an admirer and follower of Gandhi. Here in Australia, I was listed as a mentally ill person for declaring my belief in Sai Baba and in Gandhi. If I chose to see Australia through the eyes of the low level courts, I would conclude that Australians are ignorant and backward. But if I see Australia through the genuine Australians I have interacted with and identified with - including Professor Bruce Dowton, the immediate past Dean of Medicine at the University of NSW (UNSW take note), Dr. John Yu, the immediate past Chancellor of the UNSW, Dr. David Garlick, the founding director of UNSW Sports Medicine, the Hon Philip Ruddock Australian Federal Attorney General - I would say that Australians are smart, Inclusive, Caring and Compassionate. Australians such as Professor Dowton are also idealists. Just because there are no visible calculations of their strengths, we sometimes fail to know their hidden strengths.

    To the extent my expressions are based on my feelings rather than my thinking of my mind or counting by my body - I have to include myself in the assessment. Hence yes, Indians are idealists.

    At body level - they may be `few` but a strong mind that includes many in its thinking is equal to that many bodies. That is the difference between man and beast. That is also the purpose of `positions` in any system. We have the capacity to include in our thinking and therefore planning and our law making, even those we do not see.

    Gandhi loved India. Hence Gandhi is India to every person who believes in his Truth.

    During my recent visit to Northern Sri Lanka, the chief administrator of a leading educational organization said to me that he was a `Tiger` on the basis that he believes in the autonomy of Tamils. I responded by saying that I was a Tiger supporter to the extent I recognize the genuine WORK of Tigers. Likewise with the assessment of Indians. Until out knowledge and wisdom is overtaken by our repeated direct observations - we must be driven by our wisdom and knowledge rather than by what we observe. It`s wrong to mix the two as per our convenience.

    As for Gandhi`s non-violence being `timely` - yes it was - but no it was NOT coincidentally so. It was planned by Gandhi directed by the Rama / Krishna in him. Gandhi submitted himself to the Geetha. Hence he had the benefit of Krishna as his Guide. Gandhi earned that Divine Guidance through his own sacrifices. They were everyday sacrifices of comforts that he would have enjoyed had he not included others in his thinking. Even in terms of calculations - give Gandhi the credit for knowing the time and place that would best suit his presence to benefit all Indians and all minorities. I know that I have gained immensely from that great Indian idealist. To me therefore Gandhi still lives, counting as millions of Indians who follow him consciously. Just because we do not see these expressions, we must not leave them out of our counting - especially at policy level.

    I agree therefore that Gandhi`s non-violence would not have worked with people Gandhi did not identify with. Gandhi identified with and deeply appreciated the British. He was also a British at professional and policy level. It was when he had to expressly take sides that he showed himself up as an Indian opposing the British. I know because I do that here in Australia - when I need to show myself as a migrant from Sri Lanka.

    Gaja Lakshmi Paramasivam from Australia

    In India and Sri Lanka, my disagreement about Gandhi and Sai Baba have not earned me the label `mentally ill`. In Sri Lanka, I am able to connect to the authorities up to the President`s level, through the people who connect to my Truth intuitively. This is because Sri Lanka is a more spiritual country than Australia. Australians in powerful positions have been actively rejecting spiritualists and Truth in return for material benefits.

    Dr.Wilcox`s rulings on the basis of Gandhi are in breach of subsection (a), ( c) and (e) of the above section of the Mental Health Act.

    Dr.Wicox says on page 7 of her report `Mrs Paramasivam is mentally ill and although she has made a nuisance of herself I do not believe that she would harm either herself or others, in particular members of the university. `

    The word nuisance indicates that Dr.Wilcox is expressing an opinion outside the boundaries of the law. Such opinions could be acceptable with voluntary patients but not with those who do not accept that they are mentally ill. This is confirmation that subsection (l) of the above mentioned section of the Mental Health Act has been breached by Dr.Wilcox.

    By stating that I would reoffend, Dr.Wilcox is acting in breach of subsection (i) of the above section of the Mental Health Act.

    On Page four of her report, Dr.Wilcox says ?At this stage, Mrs Paramasivam applied for an AVO and said she wrote to the Vice Chancellor on numerous occasions and suggested that if he believed she had been acting unlawfully, he should apply for an AVO. The day after their second meeting (22.10.04) the police arrived and she was charged however she said that as far as she was aware no AVO had been taken out against her and for this reason she presented to the university the following week (29.10.2004) because she believed that she was not breaking the law.

    She said that if there had been an AVO taken out against her she would have respected this however at that time she did not believe that there was an AVO in place and she said she still does not know if the university has taken an AVO out against her.?

    These statements have not been overridden by any independent observations by anyone else and therefore have to be accepted as evidence that Dr.Wilcox knew that I knew that I was not guilty of Trespass and that I respected the law ? even when I might disagree with the final verdict.

    By stating (on the last page) ?I believe that it would be appropriate to seek a Community Treatment Order under Section 32 of the Mental Health Act? Dr Wilcox was confirming her familiarity with the Mental Health Act and therefore with the subsections 11 (1) (a ) to (l) above.

    By failing to demonstrate that she consciously and expressly applied those provisions, Dr. Wilcox is confirming that she used her subjective opinion, which often happens when Time is money in private sector and where the assessor takes up a higher position instead of an equal position in Public Service overloaded with theories.

    Having established that Dr.Wilcox failed to assess me objectively, through Medical Administration, we come to the question as to what kind of subjective influenced my pain.

    I knew back in July this year that Dr.Wilcox had given an adverse report. But until yesterday I did not see the report ? to know what Dr. Wilcox has chosen to publish. Now that I know, I feel the pain. Since I have the ?right? to use my investment to give my Pain / Truth the form that I believe best fits my pain, I give it the description that it was Race based. It is not different to me giving Sai Baba?s form to the God in me. I am entitled to do it and it is unlawful to try to stop me from doing it ? through medication and imprisonment.

    It would be unlawful of me to enforce my thinking and beliefs on someone through my higher position with that person. I have never done that and do not propose to do that in the future. I have not done that even with my children who followed the religious forms common to our family and now I do not even ask them what religion they follow. If one of my children were to say to me that s/he is now a Muslim, I would feel upset, but I will not persecute the child by use of my higher position. Nor would I deny that child, her / his earned rights and opportunities within our family and community circles.

    It is therefore obvious to me that Dr.Wilcox is trying to enforce her medical religion on me. Had I voluntarily sought the services of Dr.Wilcox, I would have been her patient and therefore that subjective relationship is the primary influence on the outcomes. But given that the Legal Aid Commission is her customer for legal purposes, the Objective method ought to have been expressly followed. If Dr.Wilcox`s subjective findings could not be expressed through the laws available to her - then any madness / disorder she detected in me - is outside those legal boundaries.

    Many friends said to me that all of us suffer from mental disorders. This is true. When we are upset with some and when we are moody - that is also a mental disorder. Dr.Wilcox says on page 6 of the report ` Mrs Paramasivam was punctual for the interview. She was accompanied by her husband. She was casually dressed in jeans and T-Shirt. She was very polite, pleasant and appropriate in her manner of relating. She had a broad range of emotional response and there was not indication that she was suffering from any disturbance in her mood.`

    THAT is Dr.Wicox`s direct observation of me. Given that the courts did not inquire into my employment history with the UNSW, Dr.Wilcox did NOT have the authority to probe my mind through those details. Dr.Wilcox had the authority to probe through what happened on 22 October 2004 and 29 October 2004 and in Police custody, the Courts and in Prison.

    Dr.Wilcox states on page 7 `Following the termination of the assessment I spoke to her husband briefly and asked him about her behaviour. He was very supportive and he did not believe that his wife was mentally ill.`

    As per my observations Dr.Wilcox spoke to my husband only for a few minutes. My husband said that Dr.Wilcox had asked him whether he had thought that I was mentally ill and he had said no.

    The report however confirms that Dr.Wilcox did not give weight to my husband`s belief about this. Given that my husband is the person who spends most time with me, what measures did Dr.Wilcox take as a doctor to preserve his security at home? Is the security of the Vice Chancellor of the UNSW more important than that of my husband. Given that Dr.Wilcox subjectively concluded that the Vice Chancellor was the owner of the UNSW and not I, I conclude that Dr.Wilcox would have given the `head of family` position to my husband and not to me. Hence if I were to question my husband about his breaches of our family codes, I would be considered mentally ill. That is the reality for me. I depend on MY memory and therefore if I am to respect and accept Dr.Wicox`s verdict, I must fear my husband and stay away from him - or take medication to think like him.

    Mr. John von Doussa, we have lawful positions so we do not depend on others to interpret our rights. We take our rights on the basis of our contribution through our position. Is this not the basis of democracy? Or do you seek that those of us who have invested in democracy through it all away and blindly follow those in power ? Just as much as my husband has the power of his position, I also have the power of my position as wife. Likewise, with my parents, I have the power of the position of a child. When they take responsibility for me I do not have the right to seek individual and divided benefits / outcomes. When I take responsibility as a child as per our family code or to a higher degree than any my parents, then I have the right to take the lead. Where I family stands to lose its status with wider society, I have the responsibility to take that leadership role. Likewise at the workplace with my supervisors.

    Dr.David Garlick described me as an extremely moral and ethical person. That aspect of me has been described by Dr.Wilcox as `she has prominent obsessional traits in her personality with a tendency to be quite moralistic, rigid and somewhat inflexible in her manner of relating to the world`

    And on Page 6 `She was supremely confident that her course of action was the right course and her self righteousness verged on grandiosity.`


    And `Although she is prone to her own interpretation of the law, she does have a strong moral code.`

    Dr.Wilcox states on page 5 about my relationship with Dr.David Garlick ` She went on to tell me about a doctor who is now deceased. She believed that as a result of forgoing her love of mangoes she had prolonged his death. She now believes that the doctor sends his thoughts to her and said that when he is reborn the work she is doing based on their partnership will benefit him.`

    David did not need other people`s endorsement to know my Truth. David respected and valued me highly for these high values. His family still is friends with me and continue to show respect for my wisdom. Yes, David`s statements were also subjective but David included me in his world - as if I were a part of him. Not Dr. Wilcox - not even as a low grade patient. I was just a number to her and therefore I ought to have been given the status of a number - requiring specific definitions of the parts to be assessed by Dr.Wilcox.

    It is natural for people to first form an opinion and then give that opinion a lawful or cultural form. But if there is no law describing that opinion - the work must be thrown away and not forced into legal form without any logical derivation or genuine identity.

    I had to do the work to consciously and expressly override my pain and disappointment with the group called White-Australians when I held positions over those White Australians. Otherwise I would have passed on the discrimination pain to lower level employees who were dependent on my certification. If ever I was subjective, it was in favour of the other person. If the outcome was likely to be unfavourable, I made sure that I had the support of the law to express that unfavourable report to someone outside that relationship.

    I am therefore entitled to my rights as an independent citizen and refuse to be limited by the low moral standards of the Vice Chancellor, the Police, the Magistrate and the Psychiatrist. I ask you to therefore take this as a complaint against Dr.Rossalie Wilcox on the basis of my race. I believe that the Vice Chancellor spoke through Dr.Wilcox who was receptive to his brains that certified her. The danger is subjective assessment is that all those who are not `included` in the thinking of the leader have to contend with what they get and do not have the right to demand their earned benefits. Left to the UNSW Vice Chancellor who is speaking through Dr.Wilcox, my investment in the system of democracy through my taxes paid to the government have been wasted.

    The Anti Terrorism Laws will lead to more terrorism by those who feel they have nothing more to lose. Tamils say that the British did not like the fact that Gandhi outsmarted them. I now know that this is true because I know that White Australians who did not include me in their worlds also did not like that I outsmarted them. The Policeman who tried to enforce the bail conditions on me showed physical signs of his ego pain on 22 October 2004 and thereafter.

    The Commission does not seem to have Objective measures to assess whether I qualify as a customer. Since I have done the work to know that I qualify, I ask the Commission to uphold my democratic rights as a customer. Without at least that ego pain, you will not relate to our real pain.

    Yours sincerely,

    Gaja Lakshmi Paramasivam

    CC: All Concerned, including the Race Discrimination Commissioner.

  • 30 Oct 2005 05:33:41 GMT

    I honestly pity tamils agony not because of you do not have your tamil homeland but you people are becoming mental patients because of a few thousands of tamil extremists.

    I think there are many tamils like this.

  • 30 Oct 2005 09:18:20 GMT

    Many are truly mentally ill. Even some people in this forum as well. Many Sinhalese, Tamils and Muslims etc. All over the world this is a problem. People become slaves of their minds and also frustrated of conflicts within themselves, conflicts between human beings and conflicts between man and nature. World need more and more psychiatrists and counsellor`s.

  • 30 Oct 2005 09:27:19 GMT

    Yes ,you can say this any more.

    we tamils are the victims of these bas*r**ds.