Legend of the Corsair

All previous reports are bullshit. In the words of The Fair & Balanced News commenting on Sat, 2007-05-26 23:42:

"The EEVS System is addressed beginning on page 196 or so of the PDF. NO WHERE in the wording does it state that ALL employers of ALL employees will be required to obtain pre-approval from the System. Of course, any Govt agency can do whatever the hell they want at any time the want."

Before I had gotten to this guy's statement, the only person out of all the commenters here who actually appears to have read the immigration bill, I decided to go looking for myself. Someone had given false directions to where to look earlier in the comments and instead of just walking away from it I actually started to read the damned thing to find what everyone was going on about.

I found it. I say again: All previous reports of "the sky is falling" are bullshit. If you open the pdf file, here are your directions to finding the refutation of all the headless chicken action going on the last day or so - page 217 Unlawful Employment of Aliens, page 221 Document Verification Requirements, and the kicker... page 228, lines 18-22 No authorization of National Identification Cards... and much more as I continues to read the document.

Baisically, the hoops we already have to jump through - using our license or passport - to prove our identity to our prospective employer during the initial hiring process is THE SAME. Nothing has changed for U.S. Citizens. There are no requirements to participate for employers in the U.S. at this time.

Page 228, line 18-22: "(6) NO AUTHORIZATION OF NATIONAL IDENTIFICATION CARDS.--Nothing in this section may be construed to authorize, directly or indirectly, the issuance, use, or establishment of a national identitification card."

The Electronic Employment Verification System seems like just an extension of what the IRS in conjunction with the Social Security Dept already has in place. Recordkeeping seems to be the same for employers as before... Info about the EEVS starts on page 228 line 23 - employers and employees of said employers are already required to register themselves and be tracked in databases via the IRS, using state & federal employer ID numbers and state & federal ID cards (social security card and state license or other id). Reminds me of how Homeland Security swallowed the US Coast Guard.

Something that seems new for the prospective employee appears on page 233 under INFORMATION REQUIRED: that employee must provide to the prospective employer: "(III) the employment identification number of the individual's employer during any one of the 5 most recently completed calendar years" which, in an additional section on page 234 said previous employer is required to provide to an individual upon request in order to comply with their new employment situation.

For flubs in the system, where a person cannot be confirmed (as a citizen or employable alien) which is actually referred at this point as "tentative nonconfirmation" people DO have an opportuntiy to CONTEST (within 10 days of written notification by prospective employer) and that (page 236 line 23) "An individual's failure to contest a tentative nonconfirmation shall not be considered an admission of guilt with respect to any violation of this Act or any other provision of law." and if contested, it will be cleared up within 30 days.

Page 243 line 18 begins another section on Contest and Self-Verification. This new power by "The Secretary" is in consulation with the Commissioner of Social Security. There is a provision for an idividual to "seek to verify the individual's own employment eligibility prior to obtaining or changing employment, to contact the appropriate agency and, in a timely manner, correct or update the information used by the System. Which reminds me of the working permit you have to get when you are a teenager in school... interesting parallel there. And I am sure that the employers will look favorably on prospective employees who allow the burden of confirmation to fall on their individual shoulders.

Page 240 line 15 provides protection to individuals who are in a process of contesting: "(viii) PROHIBITION ON TERMINATION.--An employer may not terminate the employment of an individual based on a tentative nonconfirmation notice until such notice becomes final... or a final nonconfirmation notice is issued for the individual by the system." however they allow a loophole immediately following "nothing in this clause shall prohibit the termination of employment for any reason other than such tentative nonconfirmation."

Another caveat in favor of the prospective employee is found on page 246 line 18-24: "(i) IN GENERAL.--If the Secretary makes a determination under subparagraph (C) that the final nonconfirmation notice issued for an individual was not caused by an act or omission of the individual, the Secretary shall compensate the individual for lost wages... beginning on the first scheduled work day after employment was terminated and ending 180 days after completion of the administrative review process described in this paragraph or the day after the individual is reinstated or obtains employment elsewhere, whichever occurs first." Of course, the source of funds for this compensation is a bit vague. You can contest, appeal, and even go on to obtain judicial review by a civil action commenced "not later than 60 days after the date of such decision..." wherein the above compensation kicks in.

There is a limit on the amount of information collected and penalties for collecting more than the "minimum requirement" for the purposes of identification of confirmed employability. There is allowance (compliance) with the rights for individuals and entities to file complaints (and one may assume, civil suits) giving investigative authority to our friend The Secretary of Labor under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and so forth.

Overall, this is a confirmation process of U.S. Citizenship and registered aliens that are allowed to be employed in the U.S. specifically geared toward disallowing employment of illegal aliens. Of course, it does not take into account the possibility that there will likely be an increase in "under the table" employment. Protectionists should be ecstatic that some percent of jobs will be "safely preserved for people who need them and are entitled to" however, this extra hoop to hop through is disturbing. Mainly because the policy and procedure already in place should be enough to get this self-same job done. This just seems like another power grab by Homeland Security, and they are assuming that none of the people who want to commit terrorist acts in the U.S. can be U.S. citizens. Timothy McVeigh anyone?

Of course, before any of this can be implemented, the program needs to appropriate $400,000,000.00 first... and that appropriation needs to be annual btw. Gah. Four hundred million dollars and it would probably be a lot less if it were just added to the policies and procedures already in place for verification purposes.

CIA Leak Investigation C-Span

Current interviewee: Victoria Toensing

Panelist repeatedly, when VT tries to monopolize the panelist's time to ask questions of her, "I am reclaiming my time."

Interpretation into plain language: "Shut up bitch."

I swear, the way that she said it with contmpt, that is what she sounded like she was saying. All the while VT is saying "under my interpretation of the law" while repeatedly deflecting everything thrown at her and Never admitting anything... No admission of wrongdoing on her part or anyone else's part about the leak.

As the Crabby Ol' Bastard said George Herbert Walker Bush (as a former director of the CIA) was quoted as saying (when this first came to light) "In my day at CIA, outting an undercover agent would be treason."

Apparently VT's only there because the minority insisted on having one of their own people dissemble concerning a twenty five year old act concerning a CIA agent's length of covert status. "She didn't serve overseas for over five years, under the law she would not be considered covert... under my interpretation of the law."

And now... back to doing econometrics homework. *sigh*

Will they do it? Is it really gonna happen? Will the festivities continue? One can only hope. If they actually have the evidence for this, and win... What happens to all those people who were convicted if they were "only following orders"? Not that I condone torture but how do you do one without doing the other? And what about rendition? Where does that fit in? Because the claim that "everyone is doing it" is supremely childish and isn't an acceptable excuse for torture.

Rumsfeld faces German legal test

A lawyers' group has asked Germany to sue former US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld over alleged prisoner abuse in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay.

( Read more... )

I realize this is an old article (late june issue of business week) for some of you... However, as I was working out at the gym (yay! finally found a nice gym without any of the environmental factors that previously kept me out of one.) I discovered this article an read most of it while I was on the recumbent bicycle. I found it not only fascinating but also something that common sense should have had us recognizing. We are living longer, we are healthy and can be productive within our society longer... Why, in a culture where we sometimes define ourselves by what we do would we retire so "early" that we feel useless (to ourselves) instead of carrying on like we always have? I like the implications that as we become more at ease in our positions over time, we become better at doing our jobs, we work smarter... a master craftsman as it were in our profession. The secretary for my department had retired a couple of years ago, and it took two people to replace her - and they dreaded letting her go when she finally decided to retire because she was so efficient. Of course, I am really fascinated to see how this plays out economically. It makes sense though, and gives people a chance to try out a couple of different careers before settling into the one that they can, like a good wine, get better at with age/experience. This also gives people who return to college at a later date - another form of career switching I guess...

If you wanted to, a woman could look at this and say - I do have time to do everything. The only issue is finding a partner enlightened enough to understand and mature enough to grow with you over time, oh and committed enough to stay the course (of course, the eternal marraige ideal is changing too). A woman can have her children when she is young and it is healthier for her to have children, she can go back to school after staying at home (unless the father is the one who decides to stay home)... Or she can get her degrees, establish herself in her field, take time off for having children, retrain a bit and get back into the workforce. Needless to say, because of our greater lifespan we have more optionson what we do with that life. Because of increasing flexibility in both societal expectations (gender roles, profession choices, etc.) we can change, adapt, thrive. More chances, the ability to have 3-4 careers, and so forth. The only roadblock for this is knowing that it is possible - like any other chances or possibilities in life - you have to KNOW WHAT YOUR OPTIONS ARE. Hence, when someone tells a child: "you can do anything you put your mind to, you can be anything you can think of" you are inspiring that child to go out and find that what/who/how.

Great stuff.




Old. Smart. Productive.
Surprise! The graying of the workforce is better news than you think

Emma Shulman is a dynamo. The veteran social worker works up to 50 hours a week recruiting people for treatment at an Alzheimer's clinic at New York University School of Medicine. Her boss, psychiatrist Steven H. Ferris, dreads the day she decides to retire: "We'd definitely have to hire two or three people to replace her," he says. Complains Shulman: "One of my problems is excess energy, which drives me nuts."

Oh, one more thing about Emma Shulman. She's nearly 93 years old.
( Read more... )

Okay, I've sent an email to FX requesting them to reair the movie Oil Storm for the benfit of the American Public. For all of you who haven't seen it, here is some more information about it.

Aired on Sunday, June 5th, 2005 – Oil Storm; America’s Lifeline Has Been Severed.

As per the Synopsis of Oil Storm on FX.com:

Oil Storm examines what happens when a Category 6 hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico slams into Louisiana, crushing the city of New Orleans and crippling the vital pipeline for refined oil that is Port Fourchon. It examines the ripple effect of that event and the ensuing cascade of disasters associated with it, though the eyes of public officials, a brutal winter, and a ranching family in South Dakota who have their subsidy’s completely taken away and question whether we need oil or food to survive.

As the country reels from the loss of life and energy reserves associated with the hurricane’s fury, the price of crude oil skyrockets and the United States government sets forth to take immediate action. It puts in motion efforts to rebuild the infrastructure of Port Fourchon (8 months minimum) and the sagging and disabled deep sea rigs in the Gulf of Mexico (of equal length). It re-routes activity normally associated with the Port Fourchon shipping lanes to the Port of Houston and compels Houston to work 24/7 in order to get the crude to our refineries and out to the public.

As gas lines quickly begin and the price per gallon passes three dollars, the government reaches out to our good friends in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, to increase its oil production. However the decision by the Saudi’s to help the Americans inflames an already unsteady Muslim population in that country already emboldened by the continuing challenges in the war in Iraq. Extremists’ interests then commit a terrorist act in an upscale shopping mall in Riyadh, killing some 300 Americans employed by multi-national oil companies in the country. With big business directly impacted and the need for more oil keen, the United States government agrees to send American troops to Saudi Arabia to help protect the oil infrastructure.

Meanwhile, in Houston, the increased activity in their notoriously narrow shipping channels has inadvertently created another challenge to the oil crisis when two, large tankers collide, creating a huge oil spill that shuts the channel down completely for an extended period of time.

As the country absorbs the Houston blow and anticipates increased production from the Saudi’s, those same terrorist interests strike again by assassinating the Saudi Oil Minister responsible for advocating the deal with the US and then, in an enormous act of cowardice, those same terrorists blow up sections of the huge Ras Tanura facility on the outskirts of Riyadh killing a vast number of American soldiers sent there to protect the infrastructure.

Lines at the gas pumps are the least of our worries. As the country grieves, winter has set in and heating oil is not only expensive, it’s often not available. Many in the country die from the cold. So the government turns to Russia for help and strikes a deal for 3 million barrels of oil per week for the foreseeable future. The Russians however are compelled to shop the deal to the other, largest consumer of energy in the world, China. The Chinese outbid the Americans for the oil, leaving the United States diplomatically exposed and with growing chaos on our streets.

As the year of 2005 continues, the true spirit of American sacrifice emerges. Aspects of a new agrarian philosophy take root, alternative sources for energy are put on a fast track and the basic decency of Americans rises to the occasion as the country attempts to take care of itself in ways that hearken back to a more simple time.

While this occurs, the United States government steps into the Russian oil deal and with diplomatic skill, heretofore abandoned, manages to put the deal back on track changing the course for the oil from China back to the United States.

As the story concludes, an awakened populace reconciles its losses and learns more about the character of our great nation. Our government expends all its financial, political and diplomatic resources to get the country’s infrastructure back on track. And our country emerges from these terrible events, stronger and more dedicated to protecting the American way of life; a way of life that now means a permanent gas price of almost 4 dollars a gallon.

But something nobler comes to pass. We are now amid a great shift into the future, a future filled with renewed purpose and renewed exploration of all means at our disposal for survival in a world that is not the world of our parents, but the world of our children. It’s a world that does not forego oil as an energy source, but rather creates a more healthy association with it. It’s a world that invigorates, in real terms, a look at all forms of energy creating an approach to that vital industry that will allow our children to thrive in the 21st Century.

To make a request of your own, send an email to FX at this address: user@fxnetworks.com

This is very reminiscent of all those spy thrillers, and actual training dating back thousands of years... To blend in, to become invisible to the surrounding populace in order to achieve your objective. We teach our own special forces (and spies) to do just that. Why does it take so long for it to be considered as something the enemy might do? Curious.

My one problem with the implementation phase of prevention is that it is a great excuse for anti-homeless enforcement goons to sweep the streets clean of those who have chosen (or been driven to, or have fallen into - I realize that each individual has a unique story of how they came to be there) homelessness. What would happen to all those people? Are they going to be institutionalized? Some of the homeless are those who were released into the world when asylums became politically incorrect due to all of the abuse scandals and of course, the cost. There has always been a call to help the people who fell through the cracks and got themselves into a situation where they ended up homeless. To set up halfway houses to reintegrate them into society, a leg up so to speak. Then there are the treatment centers that would have to be established for those of the homeless who have become homeless because of their various addictions. So part of me is outraged, because this may be used as an excuse to "Disneyfy" city streets (as people referred to Guiliani's reforms of NYC) by rounding up the undesirables ... Part of me is also outraged because of what would be done with these people, not what would be best for them and for society as a whole, (the long run) but just what is most cost-efficient in the short run. They'll probably be exported, locked up and forgotten by those who put them there. Oh, and don't forget - don't trust anyone!

Or am I getting too close to the edge?


Tuesday, August 23, 2005; A02

Terrorists May Pose as Vagrants, Memo Warns

Asking for increased vigilance since the London bombings, the U.S. government has warned that terrorists may pose as vagrants to conduct surveillance of buildings and mass transit stations to plot attacks.

"It is crucial that police, fire and emergency medical personnel take notice of their surroundings, and be aware of 'vagrants' who seem out of place or unfamiliar," said the message, distributed via e-mail to some federal employees by the U.S. attorney's office.

It is based on a State Department report issued last week. The warning is similar to one issued by the FBI before July 4, 2004; it said terrorists may attempt surveillance disguised as homeless people, shoe shiners, street vendors or street sweepers.

The e-mail emphasizes that there is no threat of an attack and that it is intended to be "informative, not alarming."

( the following announcement is no longer valid. I was sent an email refusing my choice of dates, which might not be working out for me anyhow... There was an insistence to hold the event on next weekend (7/8-710) so that they could get another ACTION organized in the near future after that. Ah well. Better luck next time. Maybe I'll just start up a Progressive Movie Night of my own, on my own, thank you very much! )

Funny thing is, we already own most of the films mentioned. Whatever we don't have we can get from NetFlix right quick. There will be snacks and drinks, some of them maybe provided by you. There will be music, background, when the film isn't playing. I'm assuming there will be discussion afterwards, I'm not sure if there is any "guided questions" of any sort sponsored by MoveOn. I'm still waiting for the full information package to arrive in my email. Okay, that's all set, I'll check it all out tomorrow.

Let's do this people! MYAH!

Okay, I had been curious about this, I knew that the Pledge of Allegiance originally did NOT have any mention of god in it... I had also heard that there was no "In God We Trust" on our money... before we had the real beginning of neocons in power. I found the proof. On the article about the pledge you will find a bunch of links for further information scattered throughout the article. For the most part, the three sites occasionally overlap (when reporting dates at least) but each one brings a bit of information that the other does not. Thoughts? Comments? Ideas on how to disseminate this to keep the neocons from continuing to claim that all this god crap was the idea of our founding fathers??

Found at: http://slate.msn.com/?id=2067499

The Pledge of Allegiance
Why we're not one nation "under God."
By David Greenberg
Updated Friday, June 28, 2002, at 1:39 PM PT
( Read more... )

I found this: http://quasisemi.com/ego/money.htm


I recently sat down with my wallet and began ritualistically crossing out the "In God We Trust" off the back of all my bills. I do this regularly to support the idea of separation of church and state. This particular time I came across a ten dollar bill that lacked the offending mark. Closer examination indicated that it was a 1950 series ten dollar bill. In addition to the lack of a "In God We Trust" mark this bill also promised to pay me ten dollars in legal currency upon presentation to the department of the treasury, an interesting element for another writer and another article.
( Read more... )
And I will conclude with this: http://www.religioustolerance.org/nat_mott.htm

The original national motto: "E Pluribus Unum"
( Read more... )
The replacement motto: "In God We Trust:"
( Read more... )

So here we have it folks. How long are we going to have to deal with this? Another four years, that's what. Probably more, because we will have to pay off that mounting deficit after he's finally gone. To top it off I'm currently reading this great short book called The Two-Income Trap and damn it all if it isn't depressing. We are in such deep shit economically speaking. And then there is the story over at COB's blog - which I showed to him in the first place and was going to post on my blog but... damn you! Heh. It's alright, I'll just link to it here. I want you to pay special attention to Rove's mumbled comments (to his tour guide) and to Bush's actions during the whole episode. Enjoy! And now... On with the show! (Man am I glad I already was able to take advantage of the un-cut Pell grant while an undergraduate.)


Sunday News Quiz
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN


My wife constantly regales me about her favorite National Public Radio show, "Wait Wait ...Don't Tell Me." The show features three journalists who have to answer questions about the week's news. Some of the news stories they are quizzed about seem totally unbelievable, while others are straightforward. Well, this is my last column for 2004, so let's play a little "Wait Wait ... Don't Tell Me." I'll give you 10 news stories from the past few weeks and you tell me what they all have in common.
( Read more... )

That's right folks, our beloved Dubya is preparing to utilize that "mandate" of the people to sink us into an even DEEPER hole. And wouldn't ya know it, he snuck it in on a Friday evening... AGAIN! Way to go. ::rolls eyes::

Bush signs bill to raise US government's debt ceiling

www.chinaview.cn 2004-11-20 04:56:33

    WASHINGTON, Nov. 19 (Xinhuanet) -- US President George W. Bush on Friday signed a legislation raising the US debt ceiling by 800 billion dollars, allowing the US government to borrow more money to cover the soaring spending.

    On his way to a economic summit meetings in Chile, Bush signed the legislation raising the government's debt limit to nearly 8.2 trillion dollars, according to local news report.

    The decision on raising the government's debt ceiling was approved with a vote of 52 to 44 in the Senate on Wednesday and passed the US House of Representative on Thursday.

    The US Treasury Department had told the US congress that it needed the approval by Thursday to avoid a government default.

    It was the third increase of US government's debt ceiling sincePresident Bush took office nearly four years ago and there was a federal surplus of 237 billion dollar in 2000 before Bush became the US president.

    The federal deficit of the US government continued to rise in the past three years and surged to a record high of 413 billion dollars in fiscal year of 2004 which ended on September 30. Enditem