Monday, 19 September 2011

Mr. Chang - has been banned from Corporate Frauds Watch


The free-thinking readers of Corporate Frauds Watch should be aware that the blinkered nuisance who has kept posting confusing, and potentially dangerous, comments under the name of 'Kasey Chang,' is a de facto, pro-'Amway' infiltrator. He has, therefore, now been banned from CFW.
Mr. Chang (who has kept insisting that he has no connection to 'Amway' and that he supports the stance of the authors of CFW), has also posted confusing and dangerous articles on his own Blog
After exchanging e-mails with Robert FitzPatrick, some of Mr. Chang's articles now contain what appear to be common-sense warnings about the proven 99.9% failure rate of (what he still refers to as) 'legitimate MLM income opportunities,' but these articles also comprise reality-inverting propaganda from the 'Amway/DSA' Ministry of Truth.
Tellingly, Mr. Chang does not care to explain how 'Amway's' so-called 'MLM  income opportunity' can possibly be described as 'legitimate', when it has had an effectively 100% failure rate for its participants during the previous  50+ years, and when (despite 'Amway's' so-called 'Code of Ethics') this key-information has been deliberately hidden from the public. 
A typical recent example (posted by Mr. Chang at the beginning of September) was entitled 'What separates a legitimate MLM from and illegal pseudo-MLM scam?' http://kschang.blogspot.com/2011/09/what-separates-legitimate-mlm-from.html . In this, Mr. Chang ignores quantifiable reality and actually quotes from 'Amway's' own Website. Yet, at no stage, does Mr. Chang cite any quantifiable evidence which proves that any transient adherent of 'Amway' has earned money by regularly selling goods, and/or services, to the public for a profit.
Corporate Frauds Watch takes the view that the quantifiable evidence (in the form of the tax record) proves beyond all reasonable doubt, that the bosses of the 'Amway' mob have always been running, and occulting, a blame-the-victim closed-market swindle, dissimulated as a 'legitimate MLM income opportunity,'  in conjunction with various advance fee frauds dissimulated as 'training and motivation systems.' The overwhelming majority of all the cash which has flowed into the global 'Amway' racket has come from unlawful internal payments made by the organization's own constantly-churning, insolvent adherents in exchange for effectively-unsaleable wampum, and not from lawful sales of goods, and/or services, to the public, as the organization, and its apologists have steadfastly pretended.. 
In one of his latest comments on CFW, Mr. Chang made the extraordinary claim that he has appointed himself as the 'MLM' Devil's Advocate. In the same comment, Mr. Chang stated that Mr. Brear is an educated man who must know that the Devil's Advocate is a real post in the Catholic Church, and that the Devil's Advocate doesn't really believe in his own arguments. 
In reality, the 'Devils Advocate' was a salaried-office in the Vatican until 1983. According to the leadership of the Catholic Church, the role of the 'Devil's Advocate' was to gather evidence which challenged the authenticity of miracles allegedly performed by persons who had been put forward as candidates for Catholic Sainthood.
It is, therefore deeply-ironic that Mr. Chang has conveniently ignored all the evidence which challenges the authenticity of miracles allegedly performed by so-called 'Diamonds' who, in pernicious 'Prosperity Gospel' cults like 'Amway', are the equivalents of Catholic Saints ' - i.e. perfect, unquestioning role-models for rank and file adherents to emulate in the hope of achieving future redemption in Paradise. 
Corporate Frauds Watch (copyright 2011)

4 comments:

Kasey Chang said...

One last comment if you will, Shyam:

As I have explained before and Mr. Brear agreed, it takes TIME for the law to catch up with the reality. There are plenty of "legal frauds" out there. They are "legitimate" in the sense that they have NOT been banned by law. Participation in an ILLEGAL scheme may result in jail sentence in addition to loss of money and reputation. Participation in a "thus far legal" scheme such as MLM usually just result in financial loss and reputation loss.

Is helping people staying out of jail that bad of a motive?

You *could* just say "avoid EVERYTHING EVEN RESEMBLING MLM", which is the position you and Mr. Brear hold. And again, I do agree with that, but for those people who insist on choosing a losing path, what's so wrong about helping them stay out of jail?

But don't worry, I'll be cheering for your consumer advocate actions in India, just not on your blog.

Sincerely,

KC

Kasey Chang said...

Sorry, one last addendum:

Shyam, you did not read the introduction properly, which is reproduced here:

Please keep in mind that even if the company is legitimate, it does NOT guarantee that you will profit from it. Studies have repeated shown, based on data released by MLM companies themselves, that OVER 99% of all MLM participants LOST MONEY, and we are talking about legitimate MLMs!

If you still wish to evaluate MLM as a potential source of income, you should at least make sure you don't end up with a scam, which may subject you to criminal prosecution, not to mention endless ridicule from your friends and family.

Thus, I believe you have the wrong reaction to the article, by seeing that article as some fundamental challenge to your view. It is not.

--KC

Shyam Sundar said...

You are just chirping once again the same old, skewed argument. For the simple reason there were no complaints and the law did not catch up, an illegitimate business would not become legitimate. And this is an established law. You are sounding that it something is legal somewhere because the law did not catch it up. It is sending wrong signals to the gullible. That is why you are not welcome to spread canards.

Kasey Chang said...

It is your blog. So be it.

Good luck with your SAOL lawsuit.

--KC