Slashdot Mirror


Whistleblower In Limbo After Reporting H-1B Visa Fraud At Infosys

McGruber writes "The New York Times has the sad story of Jack B. Palmer, an employee of Infosys, the giant Indian outsourcing firm. 17 months ago, Mr. Palmer made a quiet internal complaint that Infosys was committing visa fraud by bringing 'in Indian workers on short-term visitor visas, known as B-1, instead of longer-term temporary visas, known as H-1B, which are more costly and time-consuming to obtain.' Since making his complaint, Mr. Palmer 'has been harassed by superiors and co-workers, sidelined with no work assignment, shut out of the company's computers, denied bonuses and hounded by death threats.'"

276 comments

  1. Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by crazyjj · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Jack B. Palmer first made a quiet complaint through internal channels at Infosys,

    Was he really naive enough to think that these were the actions of some rogue managers and that the company would be thrilled to have him put it all in writing? Did he expect them to send him a Thank You letter, beginning with "Thank you for putting this illegal activity, that we've been quietly doing for years under the table, into writing. We really appreciate that you've opened us up now to criminal liability and that your complaint will cost us a fortune. We're so glad that you did this instead of looking the other way and keeping your fucking mouth shut like everyone else in the company. Here's your bonus!"

    Dude, if you're going to be a whistleblower, accept that it means you have to burn that bridge. There is no going back across it and expecting everything to be the same afterwards. Being a whistleblower means making the right moral choice and then paying the price for it. Yeah that sucks--but what's new, huh? Jesus and Superman didn't fight the Romans and Lex Luther without expecting some backlash, you know.

    --
    What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    1. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Norwell+Bob · · Score: 1

      That pretty much sums it up.

    2. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by mbstone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Thank you for putting this illegal activity, that we've been quietly doing for years under the table, into writing. We really appreciate that you've opened us up now to criminal liability and that your complaint will cost us a fortune. We're so glad that you did this instead of looking the other way and keeping your fucking mouth shut like everyone else in the company. Here's your bonus!"

      He had to write it. Otherwise he would sue, and their lawyers would say, "Heavens to Betsy, who knew? Why didn't you tell us?"

    3. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by manoweb · · Score: 1

      Jesus fighting the Romans??? ...

    4. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by rastilin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Was he really naive enough to think that these were the actions of some rogue managers and that the company would be thrilled to have him put it all in writing? Did he expect them to send him a Thank You letter, beginning with "Thank you for putting this illegal activity, that we've been quietly doing for years under the table, into writing. We really appreciate that you've opened us up now to criminal liability and that your complaint will cost us a fortune. We're so glad that you did this instead of looking the other way and keeping your fucking mouth shut like everyone else in the company. Here's your bonus!"

      For one thing, no one's going to say "Yeah I expected they were totally going to shaft me for it because I always knew they were evil.".

      Personally I am surprised, there was still time for the company to go "my bad", pay a fine and just walk away. Once people start putting pressure on the whistleblower like they're in the mob or even something really stupid like death threats, the company has essentially made it impossible for themselves to back down. They're virtually guaranteeing that management will be criminally prosecuted and will probably go to jail for what will turn out to be a fairly small amount of money.

      --
      How do you kill that which has no life?
    5. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by jesseck · · Score: 4, Funny

      Jesus fighting the Romans??? ...

      The Roman Empire didn't fall on its own.

    6. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I don't believe that the complaint he made, via internal channels, was "whistle blowing." Now that he's taken it to the media, it definitely is whistle blowing, but he claims that the harassment started after the internal complaint, and before he informed any external parties. Given that, why would he expect to be harassed and discriminated against for following the proper procedures, within the company? That's why they exist, after all; or they exist to black-hole the complaints, but why would that lead to harassment?

    7. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 5, Funny

      Apparently the Romans *and* Lex Luthor. Good thing he had Superman on his side. Must've been one helluva team-up.

    8. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 5, Funny

      Neither did the British Empire, or the Incan empire, or the Japanese Empire, or the Russian Empire, or the Galactic empire. Man Jesus is awesome at killing empires!

      If you ever build something that might be called an empire, its probably safer to just call it a principality, lest Jesus kill it.

      --
      Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    9. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by interval1066 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He wasn't really a whistleblwer. The action he took is described as a "quiet internal memo". The story only blew after 17 months of the company screwing with him. They should have thanked him, at least told him they were working on the situation, and left him alone, If they had taken that action, we probably would have never heard of it. Now, they come out smelling like garbage, he has a hell of a lawsuit he can throw at them, and all becuase they wanted to act like babies when some one told THEM that they were screwing up. I don't think naivete has anything to do with this.

      --
      Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
    10. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by crazyjj · · Score: 5, Informative

      Because putting it in writing in an formal internal complaint creates a paper trail that forces the company to either address it or face criminal liability. It's no longer an wink-wink-nudge-nudge, under the table thing. Now the company can no longer say they didn't know about it when the FBI comes calling.

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    11. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by cpu6502 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Speaking of "whistleblowing" there's a law making the rounds through Congress that would make it illegal. If you are a government or corporate employee, you can only blow your whistle to internal "mediators". And if you get fired, you're not allowed to tell anyone why you were fired.

      I guess I shouldn't be surprised given Congresses' other recent actions (mandatory inurance purchase, the Protect IP Act, U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. A.C.T., NDAA passage).

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    12. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by crazyjj · · Score: 4, Funny

      Best issue of World's Finest ever.

      --
      What political party do you join when you don't like Bible-thumpers *or* hippies?
    13. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      In the not so distant future, Superman's clash with Lex Luthor results in him retreating into a strange chamber. Before Superman's eyes, the world shifts, imagery of the America he knew is replaced with what looks to be ancient Roman stylings. With the aid of dissident Centurion Wayne, he is able to get the time-chamber working again and Superman is propelled to the ancient past. But not the past we know of, an ancient world where Roman rule is enforced by Lex Luthor's cunning and genious. In this strange alien past, Superman finds the only one who can help him right the timeline, Jesus.

    14. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Applekid · · Score: 1

      Which is why we need strong whistleblower protections to encourage a decent culture where law is still important. You would think they would be right up there in the ladder of government protection with soldiers, police, firefighters, and paramedics.

      --
      More Twoson than Cupertino
    15. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus and Superman didn't fight the Romans and Lex Luther without expecting some backlash, you know.

      Please tell me what issue that was in, because that sounds AWESOME.

    16. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by mydn · · Score: 2

      The only people Jesus fought were bankers. He whipped their ass!

    17. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Regardless of what he expected to happen, it's reasonable for him to publicize the discrimination he has receive as a result of this. I'm not sure if you're saying "he had it coming" but if so, i think that people who believe in rule of law would disagree.

    18. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by jellomizer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      A good portion of the world is Monotheistic, the majors religions that are not Monotheistic are not praying to Roman Gods.
      Jesus +1 Romans -1

      The reason why the Jewish people were really hoping for a Messiah to come was because their land has been taken over by Rome, and pressured to change religions to the Roman one. They didn't care much for it. Jesus came and according to Christianity and some sects of Judaism he was the Messiah however he didn't do it the way they thought so the Jewish people dishearten and basically had him killed.

      However most of Jesus teaching had a sharp tongue against the Priests who basically worked for the Romans and was allowed to be corrupted by them.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    19. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Funny

      Lex Luthor goes back in time to give the Romans Modern Technology, in exchange he will become Emperor. Superman flies back in time to join forces with Jesus to stop them.

      As Luther amazes the Romans with modern water purification systems Jesus turns it into wine where the Luther and the Romans get so drunk that allows Superman to catch Luther and destroy the advance technology.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    20. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well the series started out alright, but shortly after the teamup, Superman kept invoking his new "turnTheOtherCheek" attack. The series devolved into long rants with little progress. Although it perks up again after the duo attempt a double-martyr, and we get to see a test of skill between Roman engineers' ingenuity and Superman's ability to put up with this shit.

      And Lex Luthor forgetting to bring along some kryptonite? Isn't he a genius? Shouldn't he ALWAYS have an emergency vial of the stuff on hand? Simply unbelievable.

    21. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 0, Troll

      I guess you didn't read the article - he's already sued them.

      They're also paying him $90,000 a year to sit at home and do NOTHING.

      In the meantime, he's turned into a nutcase. He bought a gun and keeps it strapped to his ankle when he goes out. He even drew down on a door-to-door salesman.

      So someone taped a death threat to his chair at work, and he's gotten a few crank phone calls. Big. Bloody. Deal. Get a dozen women in a room and you'll hear at least six have gone through a lot worse without ending up pointing guns at unarmed strangers.

      I have NO sympathy for this guy. He cries about how he can't stand not having real work to do. He outsourced plenty of jobs - let him experience some small measure of the misery he's caused in other people's lives. Karma's a b*tch.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    22. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by cpu6502 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Carrying a gun doesn't make you a nutcase. Given how many get killed, raped, or assaulted, it is only logical to carry a gun or stunner.

      As for your claim that he's whining "hw has no real work to do" please provide a link. Otherwise I have to reject your claim as having no basis.

      I also have to reject your claim that he deserves death threats -- for what reason? Obeying the law??? I don't benerally listen to people who advocate law-breaking with falsified Visas. That makes you a criminal.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    23. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So someone taped a death threat to his chair at work, and he's gotten a few crank phone calls. Big. Bloody. Deal. Get a dozen women in a room and you'll hear at least six have gone through a lot worse without ending up pointing guns at unarmed strangers.

      Hah. What an argument. Some women have gone through something worse, so a man has no right to feel physically safe. Right.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    24. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carrying a gun doesn't make you a nutcase.

      Pulling it on unarmed people does. Pay attention.

    25. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Ironchew · · Score: 1, Informative

      A good portion of the world is Monotheistic, the majors religions that are not Monotheistic are not praying to Roman Gods.
      Jesus +1 Romans -1

      False cause. Jesus died centuries before Christianity was anything more than a persecuted cult. If anything, the Roman emperor Constantine I was more directly involved with saving Christianity from total obscurity.

    26. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1, Insightful

      As for your claim that he's whining "hw has no real work to do" please provide a link. Otherwise I have to reject your claim as having no basis.

      It's right there in the NY Times story that the summary linked to.

      Mr. Palmer is still on the Infosys payroll, but with no work and little communication from the company, and his moods swing erratically, he said. He has struggled with drinking, gained and lost 20 pounds and taken medication for anger and depression.

      â€oeYouâ€(TM)re around people every day, and then all of a sudden you are staring at four walls,†Mr. Palmer wrote in an e-mail. â€oeNo one will hire me and I canâ€(TM)t quit, so they just torture me. I have become numb and cumbersome to this world.â€

      Menacing calls to his home and his motherâ€(TM)s nearby prompted him to buy a handgun, which he straps to his ankle whenever he goes out. Always on edge, he drew the gun in February on a salesman who tried to approach his house to offer cleaning goods.

      He's getting full base pay - $90,000 a year - to sit at home and do NOTHING!

      His job deprived some of his fellow citizens of work AND a pay-check. So no, he has no work, but he keeps the pay? Call me back when they've stopped paying him, so I can make a point about karma.

      And no, one death threat and a few crank phone calls is not a reason to go all paranoid, hit the booze (it's in the story), and become a risk to passers-by. If that were the case, most women would be be toting complete body armour, an RPG launcher, and a mini-gatling gun.

      And nowhere did I advocate falsifying visas, so STFU and DIAF. Oh, look - now you can go around and get a gun too!!!

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    27. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Tassach · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I also have to reject your claim that he deserves death threats -- for what reason? Obeying the law??? I don't benerally listen to people who advocate law-breaking with falsified Visas. That makes you a criminal.

      You could also argue that it was his duty to inform the higher-ups that their lawbreaking was obvious. You have a moral as well as a fiduciary duty to inform management of risks that could impact the business. If you know of a situation that could cost the company millions/billions in fines, civil judgements, and bad PR, and you *don't* report it, you're not doing your job.

      (AFIK) Under Sarbanes-Oxley, not reporting illegal activity to management could wind up costing *you* your freedom. A paper trail will cover your ass when the shit inevitably hits the fan.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    28. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by ZipK · · Score: 1

      Jesus fighting the Romans??? ...

      No - Jesus fought Lex Luther. Superman fought the Romans.

    29. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by guttentag · · Score: 1

      Jesus and Superman didn't fight the Romans and Lex Luther without expecting some backlash, you know.

      I was wondering what Christopher Reeve was up to these days. Glad to know he's still finding top-notch co-stars for his movies. Is that available through Netflix?

    30. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Kreigaffe · · Score: 3, Informative

      They still only made things worse for themselves by mistreating this dude. Both legally over the visa fraud, and over their retaliatory actions against dudeman.. though I'd think the latter would be a civil matter.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    31. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They're virtually guaranteeing that management will be criminally prosecuted and will probably go to jail for what will turn out to be a fairly small amount of money.

      In what country do you live in? And how can I get citizenship?

    32. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 0, Troll

      You obviously didn't read the story. The guy has turned into a paranoid drunk on anti-depression meds (nasty combo) who is a menace to the safety of passers-by.

      Not the sort of person who should be carrying a gun, especially since he HAS since used it carelessly.

      Sitting at home while being paid $90,000 a year to do nothing is hardly an excuse for his current actions. Most sane people would love to have that sort of opportunity, to have time for self-improvement, follow up on a pet project or two, write a book, check out new career options, party a bit, travel, do some outside consulting, whatever.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    33. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He's getting full base pay - $90,000 a year - to sit at home and do NOTHING!

      ...so he needs to man up, take the $90K and use it to carry him while he builds up his own business or upgrades his skills. I can tell you, if you paid my salary, but sent me home and told me to hang around at home, I'd have no shortage of fun/interesting projects to do with my time. Yes, some of them would be a bit frivolous, but some of them have the potential to turn into something, and if I'm being paid to sit on my arse, there's no risk involved.

    34. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention it's pretty stupid to whine about a $90,000 dollar/year paid vacation. Sure it's not "what would you want to do if you were a millionaire" money, but it's enough to find something more productive to do then spend it drinking and strapping a gun to an ankle.

      I agree though, it's hard to feel bad for him simply for the job he had before they detailed his own self destructive bout with paranoia and alcoholism as he whines about being paid an incredible salary to do nothing.

    35. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Moheeheeko · · Score: 1
      Especially seeing as whistleblowers are protected by the law,

      http://www.whistleblowers.gov/

      but then again we know these guys give fuckall about laws.

    36. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      His job deprived some of his fellow citizens of work AND a pay-check.

      Did you just say that you approve of illegal activity if it results in a paycheck?

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    37. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to subscribe to the newsletter first...

    38. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1, Insightful

      So you believe that a note left on his office chair and a couple of crank phone calls, and then sitting at home and being paid $1,800 a week to do NOTHING should turn someone into a paranoid gun-toting pill-popping drunk? Wow. Just .... wow ...

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    39. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by causality · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That pretty much sums it up.

      Nice "me too" but no, not entirely. There's a lesson here for other would-be whistleblowers.

      The lesson? Don't try to be a nice guy by going through channels, keeping it internal, identifying yourself, etc. Instead, quietly collect all the absolutely damning evidence you can gather, be certain that it names names, and then bring it straight to the authorities. If you can remain anonymous while doing that, like an informant, then so much the better.

      If this is how someone who raises a benign warning is going to be treated, then just fucking nail them as hard as you can. They are obviously unworthy of someone who wants to be amiable and play softball, as one would expect of the kind of sociopaths who create this situation in the first place. Instead of letting this frighten you into reluctant silence, just don't put the ball in their court to begin with as that's terrible strategy.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    40. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 0, Troll

      His job deprived some of his fellow citizens of work AND a pay-check.

      Did you just say that you approve of illegal activity if it results in a paycheck?

      Hey, I can play at that game too. Did you just say that you approve of continuing to outsource jobs illegally because what happens to your fellow citizens is not your problem so long as you're making the bucks?

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    41. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Daniel+Phillips · · Score: 1

      His job deprived some of his fellow citizens of work AND a pay-check.

      Did you just say that you approve of illegal activity if it results in a paycheck?

      Hey, I can play at that game too. Did you just say that you approve of continuing to outsource jobs illegally because what happens to your fellow citizens is not your problem so long as you're making the bucks?

      Indeed, you proved you are a game player. But did you or did you not state that you approve of illegal activity? Don't twist away from the question again please.

      --
      Have you got your LWN subscription yet?
    42. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently the Romans *and* Lex Luthor. Good thing he had Superman on his side. Must've been one helluva team-up.

      Nah... this was one hell of a team-up!

      Clinton Goes Back In Time, Teams Up With Golden-Age Clinton

    43. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by zootbar · · Score: 1

      Now, where's the +1 Cynic when you need one?

    44. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the American Empire? /me ducks

      Ironic captcha: empires

    45. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by PRMan · · Score: 2, Informative

      A good portion of the world is Monotheistic, the majors religions that are not Monotheistic are not praying to Roman Gods. Jesus +1 Romans -1

      False cause. Jesus died centuries before Christianity was anything more than a persecuted cult. If anything, the Roman emperor Constantine I was more directly involved with saving Christianity from total obscurity.

      Jesus died decades before Christianity was anything more than a persecuted cult. Ever hear of Nero?

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    46. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Oswald · · Score: 1

      Jesus and Superman didn't fight the Romans and Lex Luther without expecting some backlash, you know.

      Damn, I can't believe I missed that issue. I'll bet the story kicked ass. Who drew it?

    47. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by mbstone · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually there are two legal reasons to write the obviously futile letter to the company. The first is mitigation of damages: you have to give the wrongdoer the opportunity to stop the wrongdoing (and to stop running up the plaintiff's damages tab). The second is scienter; if they receive this letter and keep on with the wrongdoing even now, after they can be proved to have knowledge of it, this raises the inference that the wrongdoing is intentional (as opposed to merely negligent) and this could be the basis for a claim for punitive damages.

    48. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by cusco · · Score: 5, Insightful

      management will be criminally prosecuted

      Seriously? You apparently haven't been paying attention to world events for, oh, the last four decades or so. The only executives that ever go to jail are those who lose rich people's money. Tyson got caught, repeatedly, paying truckers $200/head to bring illegals from Mexico to work in their Arkansas chicken processing plants to avoid having to pay workers compensation claims (injured on the job? must be time to call Immigration!) Their penalty? A fine of about half the amount that they saved by abusing the mojados. IIRC, no one was even disciplined internally. Infosys won't even be banned from working US gov't contracts.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    49. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, I did not. But YOU have made it clear that you think it's okay to outsource jobs to other countries even if it harms your neighbours, by trying a really lame straw-man argument.

      For the record? Tell any company selling product here that they have 2 choices - either also invest in jobs here, or pay up to a 100% import duty. "Free" trade isn't free when its' hidden costs are the decimation of whole sectors of the economy, and when companies can off-shore the problems of pollution, etc. to havens where everyone is looking the other way.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    50. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by digitig · · Score: 1

      Jesus and Superman didn't fight the Romans and Lex Luther without expecting some backlash, you know.

      Please tell me what issue that was in, because that sounds AWESOME.

      No, it all went a bit lame once the Romans worked out to make the nails out of Kryptonite.

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    51. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have taken the whistle blower thing both ways. I reported wrongdoing and last a career. I have kept quiet and retired early.

    52. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Friendly tip: You're just making yourself look like an ass regardless of the (in)correctness of your opinion.

      I'm sorry you had a bad day. Try and smile some.

    53. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

      That pretty much sums it up.

      Still, it blows.

      --
      Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    54. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by tibman · · Score: 1

      Unisys made great keyboards!

      --
      http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
    55. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by laughingcoyote · · Score: 2

      The Roman Empire didn't fall on its own.

      No, but they never taught us it was brought down by zombies!

      --
      To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
    56. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by dgharmon · · Score: 1

      "Was he really naive enough to think that these were the actions of some rogue managers and that the company would be thrilled to have him put it all in writing?", crazyjj

      "It has been 17 months since Jack B. Palmer first made a quiet complaint through internal channels at Infosys, the giant Indian outsourcing company he works for, saying he suspected some managers were committing visa fraud" link

      --
      AccountKiller
    57. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 0

      The Roman empire collapsed for a variety of reasons, among which were corruption and a political-economic system that depended upon expansion from medium to large (and couldn't continue when it got large). Although it nominally collapsed from outside pressure, it was already rotten to the core and did fall on its own.

      The British Empire did demonstrably fall on its own, without ever really being defeated.

      The Russian empire fell twice in the 20th century mostly from internal problems.

      The Japanese empire fell from external military action

      The "empire" of the United States is in the process of collapsing from internal corruption, entirely its own fault. How's that "hope and change" working out for you?

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    58. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1

      This guy was doing illegal crap and said nothing - it was only after they asked him to sign some letters - which would have left a paper trail pointing to him - that he got cold feet.

      FTFA:

      Indian employees he had placed as full-time programmers on projects he managed told him they were struggling to survive in the United States on Indian wages. "The B-1 workers were fully employed in this country, and Infosys was charging its customers full-time wages," he said.

      So he's just as crooked as them. He placed them as full-time employees, knowing that they were not allowed to be.

      Again, I have zero sympathy for him, or his employer. They deserve each other.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    59. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So someone taped a death threat to his chair at work, and he's gotten a few crank phone calls. Big. Bloody. Deal. Get a dozen women in a room and you'll hear at least six have gone through a lot worse without ending up pointing guns at unarmed strangers.

      News flash. Men and women tend to react differently to death threats. Women avoid, men confront (in general). And 1/2 of women get actual death threats? Really?

    60. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Its actually worse than you think.

      Why is John Corzine not in jail? He "lost" $600 million of investor money with no trace, yet there is a record of him transferring $200 million just days before it disappeared. Thats not the suprising part though. His firm had to comply with SOX regulations so money can't be transferred without someone's name being on it. In addition any lost investor money would be the sole responsibility, criminally as well, of the CEO who signed off on the SEC filings. They were apparently not SOX compliant. The BEST part of the story, Corzine was actually in the Senate when SOX was voted on and he voted yes.

      So you have someone who agreed with SOX rules, running an investment company not following the SOX rules, breaking the law, signing illegal statements, and he is not in jail. There isn't a more clear cut case of SOX violations possible and it was done by someone who agreed with SOX laws enough to vote on them.

      If they won't enforce the law on Corzine they should just drop it. Anyone in the future gets caught by it just brings up his case and the 14th Amendment and they should get off instantly.

    61. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Indians are human beings too. Is your objection to hiring foreigners racist or nationalist? Not that it matters.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    62. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a fair, free bargain. The US loses the benefit of some sectors of the economy, but in return it gets to make sure that pollution happens overseas instead of domestically. If it wants to change that deal, it can just loosen pollution control laws.

    63. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the story was about the company importing cheap labor, not outsourcing job to other countries.
      H-1B vs B-1 visa is still bringing in jobs.

    64. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      John Corzine has dirt on one or more powerful people. Duh.

    65. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      In the meantime, he's turned into a nutcase. He bought a gun and keeps it strapped to his ankle when he goes out.

      Huh, that's funny. I didn't realize exercising a Constitutional right made one a nutcase.....

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    66. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I would like to subscribe to your newsletter

    67. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That pretty much sums it up.

      Still, it blows.

      I work at Infosys and have been for the past 9 years, I am no top brass, nor am I am manager, I am a developer. I am in the UK not in the US but I am in the firm. Now I am no big fan of Infosys, for me it gives me work i like and pays the bills I don't worship the founders nor do I bad mouth them. But one thing I can guarantee is that hounding and death threats from Infosys are not possible, I know of an Infosys that listens to its employees, it may not act on their issues but it _will_ listen. In my experience over the last 9 years, if you escalate bad behavior it is acted upon every single time. If an employee acts as a whistle blower he is protected. Infosys goes over the board with transparency in its dealings with employees, regulators and customers.
      Heck I have to tell clients of a mere possibility of a schedule slipping. Something that is routine is most IT projects (outsourced or not) but we do it.
      Infosys quarterly filings to the shareholders are some of the most comprehensive.
      Infosys' insistence on detail and procedural oversight in everything it does is thorough to an extent of being painful at times.
      I cant help but think this rabbit hole goes far deeper than what it seems and in both directions.
      I cant claim to know the in's and out's of this case and for all my statements here there may be a serious procedural flaw or a managers greed in saving a few bucks and getting work done on an unacceptable visa. But this is certainly not an endemic problem, if any thing this is a case of exception to the rule, that's my gut feeling.

    68. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by blackraven14250 · · Score: 2

      Jesus was the first to die once Christianity became a persecuted cult.

    69. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      What's the name/number of this law?

    70. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably the naivete was in thinking it was just low or mid level managers instead of realizing that so many of these firms are based on the business model of cheating on immigration laws.

    71. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1

      And 1/2 of women get actual death threats? Really?

      I think you missed the point - after all, actions count for more than words, and we don't hear all that much about men being stalked, groped in the subway, etc. Sure, there are the nut-case exceptions, like the "NASA stalker woman in a diaper" Lisa Nowak, but even she was trying to kidnap another woman.

      So this guy - who had no problem doing illegal stuff as long as he didn't leave a clear paper trail pointing to him - I have no sympathy for. FTFA:

      Indian employees he had placed as full-time programmers on projects he managed told him they were struggling to survive in the United States on Indian wages. "The B-1 workers were fully employed in this country, and Infosys was charging its customers full-time wages," he said.

      His own statements show that he knew the B-1 workers were not allowed to do that - but he not only placed them - he managed them. It's only when he was asked to write some cover letters that he had his "on the road to Damascus moment".

      So again, why should I, or anyone else, have any sympathy for a crook who abused the system to deprive local workers of jobs for his own financial benefit? Let him eat his gun, for all I care - nothing of value will be lost.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    72. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      ... he was the Messiah however he didn't do it the way they thought ...

      So, sort of like Obama then?

    73. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by couchslug · · Score: 2

      Jesus is Entropy? Cool!

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    74. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1
      Neither: It's based on the idea that companies that want to participate in the local economy should do so by the local rules. And that if they only want to cheat they should be stopped.

      This guy is a crook. B-1 visa holders are not supposed to be working locally full-time, and yet - FTFA:

      Indian employees he had placed as full-time programmers on projects he managed told him they were struggling to survive in the United States on Indian wages. "The B-1 workers were fully employed in this country, and Infosys was charging its customers full-time wages," he said.

      He placed them. He managed them. To do so, he had to know what the job was, and that they weren't legit. To all of a sudden get cold feet when he's asked to write some cover letters, because THAT would leave a paper trail pointing clearly to him, is just another facet of his character flaws - the same flaws that have him now whining about how, because they're still paying him $1,800 a week, "he can't quit so that means they're torturing him."

      The same flaws that are also exposed in his drug and alcohol abuse, and his paranoia, and pointing a gun at a total stranger for no reason.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    75. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I work for a company that uses Infosys' services in the UK and I've seen first hand how close to the line of immigration law Infosys like to play.

      My gut feeling is that this is not a one-off.

      That said, the Indian team members brought over by Infosys are hard working and well paid, and enjoy a standard of living in India that's far ahead of my own in the UK.

      Posted anon for reasons of commercial sensitivity.

    76. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by milkasing · · Score: 1

      Where did you get the "17 months of the company screwing with him"?
      From TFA: He sent his first report in oct 2010. He filed a lawsuit in Feb 2011 against the company. Given how little happens in the holiday season, he well could have been planning the lawsuit in advance of filing the memo.

    77. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1
      B-1 "workers" are not supposed to be workers, so it IS about importing cheap labour. And the guy knew it, and fully participated in it for the 2 years he worked there. FTFA:

      Indian employees he had placed as full-time programmers on projects he managed told him they were struggling to survive in the United States on Indian wages. "The B-1 workers were fully employed in this country, and Infosys was charging its customers full-time wages," he said.

      1. He placed the workers.
      2. He managed the projects.
      3. He knew they weren't allowed to work locally.

      He only got cold feet when asked to write a few letters to help cover up the situation. In other words, the manure was about to hit the ventilator, and he didn't want to accept his responsibility for his role in it.

      So when I see the summary say "the sad case of ...", and all the people who, without reading the article itself, think this is a case of whistle-blowing and not cowardice and trying to blame others (plus all the mod-bombing I'm taking), it makes me really wonder. Maybe I should go and become a drunken pill-popping paranoid gun-waving leech who complains about how mean the company is for paying almost $2,000 a week to sit at home too - after all, it's what the mindless slashbots want.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    78. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1

      In the meantime, he's turned into a nutcase. He bought a gun and keeps it strapped to his ankle when he goes out.

      Huh, that's funny. I didn't realize exercising a Constitutional right made one a nutcase.....

      Pointing it at a total stranger (a salesman) is kind of beyond "exercising a Constitutional right". Or do you believe that sticking a gun in $RANDOM_PERSON'S_FACE is exercising some sort of constitutionally-protected freedom of expression?

      The guy is just as guilty of illegality as InfoSys:

      Indian employees he had placed as full-time programmers on projects he managed told him they were struggling to survive in the United States on Indian wages. The B-1 workers were fully employed in this country, and Infosys was charging its customers full-time wages, he said.

      So here we have this guy placing people as full-time programmers (something he knew was illegal), managing them for 2 years, and suddenly he gets cold feet when it starts to go pear-shaped and he's asked to help cover it up by writing some letters.

      And then he whines about how cruel the company is paying him almost $1,800.00 a week to stay home and do nothing??? Sign me up, baby!

      This wasn't a whistle-blower story.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    79. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Roman empire collapsed for a variety of reasons, among which were corruption and a political-economic system that depended upon expansion from medium to large (and couldn't continue when it got large).

      Minor nitpick: the Roman empire probably hit its largest size under Trajan, but didn't collapse for another 350 years. The Eastern Roman empire also held out for nearly another thousand years. Does not affect your overall point, but the collapse was a lot more complex than that.

    80. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by slew · · Score: 1

      Jesus was the first to die once Christianity became a persecuted cult.

      Some might think that title would have gone to John the Baptist...
      But of course that's only if you believe the bible. Matthew 14:10-12

    81. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Omestes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The "empire" of the United States is in the process of collapsing from internal corruption, entirely its own fault. How's that "hope and change" working out for you?

      If the American "empire" is falling, the causes stretch back long before Obama. I'd say that these problems were endemic when Obama hit office, and he is but a further symptom of them.

      I'd like to say Reagan was the start, but I'd be wrong, I'd say these things stretch back to, at least, Truman. Some of the seeds were probably existent since almost back to our founding.

      I'm not an Obama fan or apologist. I don't think we'd be any better off with any of the people who were running against him (even Ron Paul), and I don't think we'll be any better off with any of the people running against him now (even Ron Paul). The problems run deeper than just the president, or petty partisanship, or any single body of the government.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    82. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have NO sympathy for this guy. He cries about how he can't stand not having real work to do. He outsourced plenty of jobs - let him experience some small measure of the misery he's caused in other people's lives. Karma's a b*tch.

      Sounds like someone's insecurities are showing. If you don't feel like you can compete on quality in IT - i.e. if you have no talent, no value add - then you should feel threatened by outsourcing. The rest of us are doing fine.

      I'm sorry you feel so disrespected, apparently, in your life and career.

      On the other hand, if you suck so much at what you do that you fear a team of low quality, commodity programmers...Or you are operating in a commodity area...Then maybe you should move into another sector.

      Not all the tariffs in the world will save anyone anymore and that's life and the world we live in. If you have a problem with the GPL because it "doesn't allow programmers the right to earn a living," then you should be in favor of free trade.

      Hopefully, you'll choke on the experience and learn to pick a lane and stay in it (capitalism or Something Else). My bet is, given your feelings about outsourcing, you're not going to be in the capitalist camp.

    83. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for posting this. You sound like a Lawyer..... Are you?

    84. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What kind of a twisted mind would put mandatory insurance purchase in the same bin as PIPA, PATRIOT, etc.?! Looksie, insurance only works if most people in the group carry it. Otherwise it won't be affordable, and that's precisely why self-employed people often cannot afford health insurance. Because even if you work for a 10 person business, their insurance contract says that, say, 80% of their employees must be insured under that contract. So you can't have people hop in-and-out depending on whether they are sick or not (or have planned procedures, etc). When you're self employed, there's nothing to stop you from dropping the health insurance once you are healthy or whatever. You must obviously have no clue about any of that, to claim that somehow letting people not be insured is fine because that's a right we should have. Nope, it's a right that costs starting at around $1k/month for those who want to get insured and are self employed, and have any family dependents. People who can least afford it are effectively subsidizing your right not to be insured, that's what the real world is like. I say good riddance of such a right, since it's a subsidized right for now, let's drop it and have everyone at least fairly contribute.

    85. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He doesn't just walk in there and know what to do. They tell him to do stuff here and there.

      On day 1 they tell him that he needs to manage this project with all these people.
      Day 2 he works the project and is told to process some new hires and show them around and to their desks. He doesn't see paperwork but is told to get them up to speed on the project.

      Eventually he realized they were B-1 and was like "oh shit, that's not legal *what they had me just do*! Hey guys!" .

      What's wrong with that. You really fell for this crap? He's the fall guy here!

    86. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by gman003 · · Score: 1

      Well, he didn't say he wasn't...

    87. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1

      Come off it - this isn't "day 1, day 2" - this went on for 2-1/2 YEARS before he complained! He both placed and managed these people. Placing them meant making sure they were qualified to do the job, and to present their qualifications to prospective employers - in other words, he had their paperwork, and knew the score as to where, how, and for whom they were working for - after all, he works for an Indian outsourcing company, duh!

      He knew exactly what was going on. Para. 12 of his statement of claim he went to Bangalore in March, 2010 for a meeting to discuss ways to "creatively" work around the visa requirements.

      He knew (Para 30) of plenty of other illegal activity, but didn't complain about ANY of it until after he was asked to take part in the visa fraud cover-up. In other words, as long as there was no paper trail pointing to his tush, he continued to turn a blind eye.

      He and Infosys are a marriage made in heaven.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    88. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, there are laws like that? It's not just the Doctor?

    89. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jesus and Superman didn't fight the Romans and Lex Luther without expecting some backlash, you know.

      I would read that comic.

    90. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you on the crack?

    91. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And nowhere did I advocate falsifying visas, so STFU and DIAF. Oh, look - now you can go around and get a gun too!!!

      Oh God, Ms. Pleasant is back to torture us once again. I've never heard this sorry human being say anything but this kind of shit, ever. Go ahead, get it all out.

    92. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by techhead79 · · Score: 1

      The "empire" of the United States is in the process of collapsing from internal corruption, entirely its own fault. How's that "hope and change" working out for you?

      Actually it's statements like this that will cause our nation to crumble from "internal problems". No amount of corruption will destroy a nation if that nation remains united regardless of who is fucking over who. If you honestly believe any amount of corruption in the federal government today is going to destroy the nation then you honestly need a history lesson in what real federal and state corruption has existed before in the USA.

      The media brain washing of countless people to believe exactly what you just stated is what can destroy this nation. Let me put it another way. We're more likely to collapse from the extreme political positions we've seen in the past 15 years than any amount of corruption. Our nation has lived through and ignored far worse corruption than anything you could list about the current legislative or executive branches.

      Our "internal problems" are far simpler than any deviate being in power. Greed and the lust for control has destroyed a lot in history...we'd be wise to understand what our real destructive forces are instead of blindly blaming "the other team".

    93. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Friendly tip: You're just making yourself look like an ass regardless of the (in)correctness of your opinion.

      I'm sorry you had a bad day. Try and smile some.

      Dude- She's ALWAYS having a bad day. She flies in on her broom once in a while to torment everyone then flies off.

    94. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Sigg3.net · · Score: 1

      Jesus Christ.

      (Try the lobster!)

    95. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barsteward · · Score: 1

      yes, but Jesus is fictional

      --
      "The hands that help are better far than lips that pray." - Robert Ingersoll (1833-1899)
    96. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by freedom_india · · Score: 4, Informative

      As someone who hires Infosys as a vendor, i can say this with confidence: 1) Infosys Consultancy is a Brilliant organisation who can actually bring value to a client. 2) Infosys Delivery is a piece of shit that is like the useless two frontlegs of a T-Rex. Attention to detail? Infosys is paid to follow the rules of the company that hires it: not its own inane rules. Infosys tries to bill us for doing their work. Their approach has been : "When the weight of the paperwork equals that of the plane, it will fly". Worst of all, most paperwork is Infosys-own crap- and they try to bill us for producing their compliant stuff. 3) Schedule: slippage is common, even when Infosys tags a 40% buffer. 4) Unless you have a clear, contracted say in what resources they give you, timelines, etc., they will take you for a ride: Their consultancy wing will dazzle you and make you sign a fixed-bid blackbox contract. Then, their delivery wing will come in and negate everything that the consultancy told you. They will stuff their project with 90% freshers from the market. 5) Once i asked Infosys to give me an experienced Business Analyst to handle a business workshop with me. The person landed next day from India. He was a mainframe developer who was the only one available. When asked, the Infosys manager cooly said: "You said you needed an experienced BA. Well, he is experienced in mainframe and he is now a BA. Poof! " I was stunned. Infosys hires the top 99% percentile from the market and acts as such. Each developer, each project manager and each delivery manager is a prima-donna and has a "without us you would be dead" attitude. They get paid to manage their paymasters. Weird, isn't it?

      --
      "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    97. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by freedom_india · · Score: 1

      The British Empire fell because most of the entreprenurial souls were sucked into running the empire instead of doing business.

      --
      "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    98. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'd like to say Reagan was the start

      Politics is a dirty business. But I will say Reagan was the start; he turned that dirty business from minor dishonesty into bare-faced hypocrisy. He was the one who said it was good to put the wealthy before the poor, the gun before the negotiation, (it worked on Iran and maybe Libya, but not Russia, Grenada, the Arab gulf, all South American countries), and use government debt to cover the difference. It has been the philosophy of the Republican party ever since; little wonder they canonize him.

    99. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      P. Whatever happened to those whistle blower protection laws under the current administration rather than protecting whistle blowers it just seems to have made them bigger targets. Perhaps there is an Bradley Manning - Uncle Tom Obama, amendment memo floating around "report a corporate or government crime and you'll be the one doing the time", that the rest of us aren't aware of but are pretty much seeing the consequences of.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    100. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This is hardy unique to Infosys. Accenture and other larger orgs who use consultancy to sell in delivery all tend to operate this sort of approach. I have heard a programme director inform a client who was getting cold feet something along the lines of "if I go down I'm taking you with me", basically threatening to sabotage things so badly that the client's own rep in his organisation would be screwed unless he acted in the consultant's best interest.

      This sort of thing is rarely as explicit as that, but it's implicit that once a client sponsor is in bed with consultants on something big, everyone wins or loses together. This is where the conflict of interests happens: really both of them should be keeping an eye on one another for the benefit of the company, but actually it's better for them to just have each other's backs. If one of them happens to be a somewhat rare individual with a backbone then they just have to hope they have the intelligence and power to genuinely hold their 'partner' to order.

    101. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention that if you can prove that you lodged your complaint in writing, and you subsequently are subject to punishment/dismissal, the courts will presume it's retaliation as a matter of law (not a guess).

    102. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by dodobh · · Score: 1

      It's free trade. Just that instead of material goods, the other side is exporting services.

      Keep in mind that Infosys isn't selling products (or material goods). Just services. They could very well just ship the work to India.

      Free trade rules should apply to services and labour as well as physical goods, surely?

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
    103. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by tincho_uy · · Score: 1

      That's true, but it wasn't Jesus who did that, it was the Bolivians! Ask Evo Morales! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SnGCQGFt81Q (skip to 30s for the relevant bit, but the whole thing is hilarious)

    104. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wasn't the romans taking palestine from the jews, nor was palestine known as "israel", sure the romans named it palestine from it's previous name caanan and a bunch of other names the different areas had, probably because of the greek philistine who were pretty new there and assimilated with the people living there. Only parts were the kingdom of the israelites was which wasn't the complete area of palestine, but city kingdoms joined under one king. Also palestine has never been "clean" as isrealis (!israelites) are trying to do, the jews lived side by side with non-jews, during and after they lost power there. "a people without land for a land without people" is probably the biggest lie ever, as palestine has a history stretching back more than 10000 years (documented), is a central passage, and never been abandoned as long as we can remember or document.

      Fun fact: Palestine is the only and first country which has borders defined by God in the old testament and the quran.

    105. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1

      If you read the court filing, he admitted to going to India for a meeting half a year before he made the internal complaint, to discuss ways to "creatively get around the visa problems." He then knowingly continued to place and manage people with the wrong visas, and only filed an internal complaint when he was asked to write cover letters, because THAT would leave a paper trail exposing his complicity in the whole scam.

      If you read the article itself, they're still paying him NOT to show up at the office ($90,000 a year), he takes meds for "anger and depression", has "problems with alcohol" (and mixing psycho-pharmaceuticals and booze is never a smart move), bought a gun which he keeps strapped to his ankle whenever he's out, and even when he's home, he's a raging paranoid, as he admits to sticking it in the face of a door-to-door salesman.

      Also, while he mentions the crank phone calls in the court filing, he never mentions the supposed death threat - so it probably never happened except in his own mind, months after, "embellishing" his story. Certainly, if someone wrote me one, I'd keep it as evidence and mention it in the filing before I'd worry about a few crank phone calls.

      The best outcome would be for this guy to eat his gun, before he kills some innocent bystander with it. I have *no* sympathy for a crook who, when he's about to get caught, tries to blame others.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    106. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by sribe · · Score: 3, Interesting

      ...as one would expect of the kind of sociopaths who create this situation in the first place.

      Exactly. Unfortunately, I have found that there are a surprising number of nice, functional, competent and reasonably successful people in this world who have not encountered sociopathy directly and have no real clue how it works, and are completely shocked when they finally encounter a sociopath head on. Almost makes me glad I grew up with one in the house ;-)

    107. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I sure hope the American Empire is listening to you!

    108. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by lsatenstein · · Score: 1

      Jack was loyal to his country, not to the money hungry grubs. The truth is obvious, Infosys is Indian and has no loyalty to the USA, and does not respect the USA, even though it earns it profits from US companies

      Time to wake up and bar them from offering services in the USA..

      --
      Leslie Satenstein Montreal Quebec Canada
    109. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Companies in the UK behave better than they do in the states unfortunately any history or Industrial relations in the USA will show you this. I have also heard credible reports of whistle blowers "committing suicide in motel rooms" by shooting them selves in the chest.

      I doubt any death threats came from senior management I would suspect that death threats came from people at risk of being deported.

    110. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by ananthap · · Score: 1

      Really a fresh take on Infosys and how IT companies work post initial contract committment.
      Its not new. I am a systems analyst in India and have experience with at least three such companies (one larger than Infosys and two slightly smaller) on Indian projects for about two decades now.
      When I think back, I think its really.
      (a) CAVEAT EMPTOR = customer beware.
      (b) Link payment to results (not to project stages) your users can see. Typically in a waterfall model the vendor has expenses throughout the project life cycle while the customer sees the result only in the end. (This includes package implementation, Saas models).
      (c) Stretch it a bit. Make the vendor responsible end-to-end including data.
      (d) Have your own feed back mechanism which should translate into the same metrics agreed with the vendor.
      (e) Get a good team and spend time to manage the project.
      (f) Never give advance. Cover the vendor for actual expenses and see that the vendor's profits are only at the end of the project - as the gains would be for a customer.
      OK

    111. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by freedom_india · · Score: 1

      That explains a LOT of things for me. I guess there is a special place in hell for Consultants.

      --
      "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    112. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by freedom_india · · Score: 1

      Thank you. Irrespective of how many lawyers we get to put in a good contract, we find Infosys one step ahead. They ALWAYS seem to find a way to screw us. I guess, its the price you pay for hiring them. Only in Software do you pay a Consultant to screw you.

      --
      "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    113. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Whatever happened to those whistle blower protection laws

      They've fulfilled their aims : a whistleblower has been fooled into exposing himself and is now being punished for whistleblowing. The corporation meanwhile, will manage to contain the problem (whistleblowing) cover up the evidence and continue getting away with it.

      What other possible reason could you have for buying politicians and getting them to design and implement "whisltblowing" laws?

      I have a bridge for sale. Are you interested?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    114. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Christians 0 Lions 45

    115. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Bradley Manning is about the worst name to put on a whistle blower law. He wasn't blowing the whistle on corruption, but to the best that we can tell (they never confirmed he was the leak to wikileaks) he just made a huge dump of classified data, most of it not breaking any laws, but with a few juicy bits.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    116. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      >>>What kind of a twisted mind would put mandatory insurance purchase in the same bin as PIPA, PATRIOT, etc.?!

      These laws all have the same thing in common.
      They all violate the Bill of Rights.
                PIPA/ACTA/SOPA violates portions of Amendment 1. The Patriot act violates the 4th (home searches w/o warrants). NDAA violates the 6th. And forced purchase of a product violates the 9th (we have the right to not buy something we don't want) and the 10th (the power to mandate a purchase does not belong to the Congress; it is reserved to the People and their Legislature exclusively). It makes sense to group these laws together when they are all guilty of violating one of our most sacred documents (the Bill of rights).

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    117. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the power to mandate a purchase

      As I understood it, they "mandated" that you buy insurance in the same way that they "mandated" you buy new energy efficient doors/windows for your house. Which is to say they didn't mandate it at all. What they did was they offered a tax credit for those that already had insurance, much the same way that there is a tax credit for replacing your older doors/windows with new energy efficient doors/windows.

      Would you care to correct my understanding, or am I right?

    118. Re:Was he really naive enough to expect otherwise? by Anguirel · · Score: 1

      That would make more sense. Lex makes all of his gadgets out of Kryptonite to stop Superman, so he'd be completely unprepared to fight Jesus. Brilliant strategy.

      --
      ~Anguirel (lit. Living Star-Iron)
      QA: The art of telling someone that their baby is ugly without getting punched.
  2. He still draws a check from Infosys? by KrazyDave · · Score: 5, Funny

    They should just outsource his job - true poetic justice.

    --
    www.chihuahuarescue.com- Help to end dog abuse, abandonment and cruelty
    1. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by Reverand+Dave · · Score: 1

      I don't know if that is poetic justice as I think that him trying to expose an illegal practice and unethical staff as being a source of injustice needing to be corrected via an apt or ironic punishment. Just saying.

      --
      I got here through a series of tubes
    2. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      When I was interviewed for the company, I was informed that you're paid hourly for the contract work you do, and are not salaried.

    3. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 0

      I have to wonder if this is some sort of elaborate troll.

      The guy is still drawing a check, but doesn't have to work, and he's upset? Why can't he work on his own projects if he's got all this free time? I understand that there may be legal ramifications to freelancing while in an employment lawsuit, but that doesn't mean you can't do your own stuff, or volunteer. He says he was used to people being around, but now he's describing a prison-like experience. If he really craves human interaction that much, why can't he just go out to a bar? Find local singles groups? Go to the mall? Volunteer for an animal shelter? So little of this makes sense.

      “You’re around people every day, and then all of a sudden you are staring at four walls,” Mr. Palmer wrote in an e-mail. “No one will hire me and I can’t quit, so they just torture me. I have become numb and cumbersome to this world.”

      And did he just quote a Seven Mary Three song?

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    4. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Outsourcing his job would require firing him, I'd think. Although, I'd admit that they could create a new position with the same roles and responsibilities and outsource that, but that would look rather conspicuous to the federal investigators.
      If he quits, he gets no unemployment benefits.
      If he's fired, he can apply for unemployment. There's also a possible severance check.
      Add to that, if he's fired, it strengthens his case, as well additional liability claims against Infosys.
      There may be an anti-moonlighting clause as well. Violate that, Infosys has just cause for termination and no unemployment benefits for him.

      So, they idle him, hoping to force him to quit.

      If it was me, I'd sign up for classes online and work on getting additional certifications or even another degree. That would keep me occupied while all this settles out.

      Bottom line, importing 'slave labor' from other countries is common practice in the U.S., and at a time of economic crisis, it should be criminal.

    5. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      Bottom line, importing 'slave labor' from other countries is common practice in the U.S., and at a time of economic crisis, it should be criminal.

      I think his complaint revolved around the improper documentation of the imported slave labor, B-1 Vs. H-1b...
      At my company we have only H-1b for those working on a Visa, I think the only B-1's we use are for those who are already employees with us in their home country and are on a job rotation assignment. The reason is simple: While a B-1 is cheaper and easier, if you screw up even once, the fine will make up the savings counted against ~12 H-1b's...
      I don't know if that made sense... 1 'bad' B-1 is more expensive than ([12*H-1b's] - [12*B-1's]), give or take a couple. It's just not worth it when you deal with huge numbers of staff in a global company, too much room for error.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    6. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by dgatwood · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The guy is still drawing a check, but doesn't have to work, and he's upset?

      It all comes down to whether you have a good work-life balance or you live to work and work to live. A lot of retirees have the same reaction to retirement. Going from having a list of things that you have to get done to not having one can be stressful for some people.

      For me, it would be awesome because I have so many tens of thousands of hours of backlog in my personal projects that I may never catch up as it is.... But if you don't have a wide range of outside creative interests, I could see how it could be very uncomfortable. It would be like starting your life over from scratch—a cold reboot of sorts.

      --

      Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.

    7. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He only gets paid contract working hours. To keep his job they can reqire him to be there, but not give him work, so no pay.

    8. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 2

      I don't know, it just seems really odd to me, to hold an employer responsible for your life and happiness at the level he's doing. Like, if you're going to hold them responsible for making you a happy, fulfilled person, how do you reconcile any sort of separation of work and personal life? I don't think it would even be morally right to tell a company they're responsible for my happiness in that kind of way and then say, "no, I don't want to spam links to the product on my personal blog" or "no, you cannot see my cellphone records".

      Hell, I think it's weird to even put that kind of responsibility on your spouse. Maybe I'm the weird one there, but I don't think so--I'm pretty sure that's at least some form of codependency.

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    9. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 1, Informative

      It says explicitly not that in the article though.

      But in December, he said, he received only about $3,000 of a $45,000 bonus he believed he had earned. Since Infosys has assigned him no work at all since last April, he received no bonus for 2011, losing one-third of his income.

      If a loss of $42,000 means he lost 1/3 of his income, he's still collecting $84,000 a year.

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    10. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 2, Interesting
      It's even worse - he has a duty to mitigate any long-term loss to his own income. So he can't just say, in the damages portion of his ongoing lawsuit, that when they finally get around to stopping his paycheck that he's going to lose future revenue for $x number of years down the line.

      He absolutely should be using the $1,800 a week they're paying him to prepare for a new career, or to set himself up to work independently, rather than complaining that he can't quit because ... wait for it ... they're paying him good money to do nothing but sit around his home.

      Instead, he's abusing anti-depression meds and traquilizers, boozing it up, and pointing guns at strangers.

      White trash about sums it up. "I can't try to do something else because then I'll lose my corporate 'welfare' check." Call me a whaaaamulance.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    11. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by cusco · · Score: 4, Interesting

      it just seems really odd to me, to hold an employer responsible for your life and happiness

      Unfortunately that's the case with an awful lot of executive types. The husband of my wife's co-worker came very close to suicide when the dot-com he worked at folded and he suddenly had no reason to live. He made her life miserable until he finally found another job that he could spend 90 hrs/week at. I knew a fellow years ago who barely noticed when he got divorced, since the primary focus in his life was his job. It's a sad, sick lifestyle.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    12. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he's abusing anti-depression meds and traquilizers, boozing it up

      That's just how you make management weasel Foie Gras. Amazing how decadent the undead become. I've said too much.

    13. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 1

      Huh, lots of downmods on this post. Since I'm such an excellent poster, the only viable conclusion is that there are a lot of Seven Mary Three fans in the audience. Who could have known?

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
    14. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      The guy is still drawing a check, but doesn't have to work, and he's upset? Why can't he work on his own projects if he's got all this free time? I understand that there may be legal ramifications to freelancing while in an employment lawsuit, but that doesn't mean you can't do your own stuff, or volunteer. He says he was used to people being around, but now he's describing a prison-like experience. If he really craves human interaction that much, why can't he just go out to a bar? Find local singles groups? Go to the mall? Volunteer for an animal shelter? So little of this makes sense.

      They probably changed his job description to "work-from-home, on call 12 hours a day", and require him to be home whenever they randomly call to make him log in and start a batch script or some other random thing that is easy but proves he's not just on vacation in the Caribbean. Since he can't get another job, he's chained to this $90,000 non-life. Even if he invites people over, he's got that whole death threat thing going on, and his paranoia's got to be getting thick without other humans to help him tone it down.

    15. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... to not having one can be stressful for some people

      That's what wives and grandchildren are for. I realise a senior citizen isn't the go-getter he use to be, but if he can't occupy his time, that's his failure and it's likely the first of many in failing to be a 'self-employed' retiree. Why do you think many old people become grey nomads, making a point of using a different toilet and shower each night?

    16. Re:He still draws a check from Infosys? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why doesnt he work on opensource projects?

      Integrity is valued there.

  3. Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's what happens to most whistleblowers.

    It does not pay to do the right thing anymore. (if it ever did)

    Hey at least he's not in jail like the goverment whistleblowers.

    1. Re:Not news by Quila · · Score: 1

      Hey at least he's not in jail like the goverment whistleblowers.

      If you're talking about Manning, only a tiny fraction of what he released could be even remotely considered potential whistleblower material. The vast majority was random classified material that he found, and it's enough to put him in jail for life.

    2. Re:Not news by cpu6502 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "Classified" material that never should have been classified, but instead was trying to cover-up military blunders. Example: The whereabouts of the journalists who were killed. The military said "We don't know" to the poor family members, but they knew all along it was a friendly fire incident.

      Other examples: Covering-up the shootings of kids and torture of POWs. I'm glad Manning and other wikileaks persons are not "just following orders" while military/war crimes are being committed. We the People deserve to know what is actually happening.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    3. Re:Not news by QuantumRiff · · Score: 1

      Yes! Bradly Manning is the ONLY government whistle-blower in jail. Nothing to see here comrade, please shuffle along.. and encourage your political representative to vote down these silly, useless laws.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whistleblower#Legal_protection

      --

      What are we going to do tonight Brain?
    4. Re:Not news by Quila · · Score: 2

      "Classified" material that never should have been classified

      Some things we look at and think that people should know, and we may be right. However, information is often classified not because the information itself could damage national security, but because its release could reveal the identity of valuable intelligence sources to the enemy or could have other consequences not in our interest.

      but instead was trying to cover-up military blunders.

      Much of it wasn't even related to military, such as the hundreds of thousands of State Department cables. The military could throw out charges based on anything that could even be remotely considered to be whistleblower material, and still have enough to send him away for life.

      We the People deserve to know what is actually happening.

      No, we don't. Imagine a leak resulting in a New York Times front page in 1943, "Allies Crack German Enigma Code Machine!" when the Germans thought it was secure in a practical sense through the end of the war. How many battles would we have lost? Maybe even the war.

    5. Re:Not news by Quila · · Score: 1

      Your source states nobody else in the US who is in jail for government whistleblowing.

      But it does reference the fact that Manning could have communicated his concerns to a member of Congress and be covered by federal whistleblower law.

    6. Re:Not news by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Imagine a leak resulting in a New York Times front page in 1943, "Allies Crack German Enigma Code Machine!" when the Germans thought it was secure in a practical sense through the end of the war. How many battles would we have lost? Maybe even the war.

      Actually, what could have been done was to publish stories about the code being cracked well before it was. DIsinformation is a very effective wartime tool.

      From that point on, every failed plan would be attributed to the imaginary "they cracked the code!"

      And then when it was finally cracked, even if someone leaked the truth, they wouldn't be believed, because by then it would be "obvious" that the stories were just a plant designed to encourage FUD.

      Similar to how the brits published bogus accounts of german attacks (v1, v2) that caused high casualties when they missed their targets, to encourage them to keep missing ...

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    7. Re:Not news by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      During WW2 the Congress had declared a war, so different laws apply (such as keeping secrets crucial to the war). But we are currently in a peacetime state. There's no reason to keep secrets from the people..... a democracy can no more function w/o full disclosure, than a stock market can function if the corporations don't publish financial statements.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    8. Re:Not news by Quila · · Score: 1

      But it wasn't done your way, and it worked quite well.

      The Germans had what they thought was a secure communications channel, and broadcast their movements and intents to us daily. Had they thought it was compromised, we wouldn't have had that intelligence.

      We won battles, sunk ships and avoided submarines for two years, and got some major victories over the Japanese too, because of our UNKNOWN ability to break the enemy's codes.

      You would throw all that away, and probably lose the war, over an nonexistent right to know.

    9. Re:Not news by superwiz · · Score: 1

      "Classified" material that never should have been classified, but instead was trying to cover-up military blunders.

      Oh, so you want any military personal to be able to make a decision on what civilian leaders can deem classified and what they cannot deem classified? Civilian leadership is in charge of the army, you know. Are you advocating for that to be changed? He was a uniformed soldier when he did it.

      --
      Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
    10. Re:Not news by tqk · · Score: 1

      But it does reference the fact that Manning could have communicated his concerns to a member of Congress and be covered by federal whistleblower law.

      The story we're commenting on shows how well that course of action works, except in Manning's case innocents would be dieing while the Congresscritter stonewalled. You have laws that protect whistleblowers and a president who feigned support of them in order to get elected, yet in case after case the individual trying it gets persecuted mercilously by your legal system, only to be ultimately exonorated.

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    11. Re:Not news by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1

      First, that is NOT what I wrote. Please read it again, and avoid "reading in" what you want.

      Now, as to the right to know, the public had the right to know that the "babies ripped from incubators in Kuwait" story was a lie, that Colin Powell intentionally lied to the UN about the "aluminium tubes" and other stuff (funny how the rest of the world got to watch the UN inspectors debunking it hours before Powell went and lied, but it was blocked in the US), that the US was conducting a secret war in the middle east well before Vietnam, that the Japanese had offered to surrender before Hiroshima and Nagasaki:

      It was only after the war that the American public learned about Japan's efforts to bring the conflict to an end. Chicago Tribune reporter Walter Trohan, for example, was obliged by wartime censorship to withhold for seven months one of the most important stories of the war.

      In an article that finally appeared August 19, 1945, on the front pages of the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Times-Herald, Trohan revealed that on January 20, 1945, two days prior to his departure for the Yalta meeting with Stalin and Churchill, President Roosevelt received a 40-page memorandum from General Douglas MacArthur outlining five separate surrender overtures from high-level Japanese officials. (The complete text of Trohan's article is in the Winter 1985-86 Journal, pp. 508-512.)

      This memo showed that the Japanese were offering surrender terms virtually identical to the ones ultimately accepted by the Americans at the formal surrender ceremony on September 2 -- that is, complete surrender of everything but the person of the Emperor. Specifically, the terms of these peace overtures included:

      Complete surrender of all Japanese forces and arms, at home, on island possessions, and in occupied countries.
      Occupation of Japan and its possessions by Allied troops under American direction.
      Japanese relinquishment of all territory seized during the war, as well as Manchuria, Korea and Taiwan.
      Regulation of Japanese industry to halt production of any weapons and other tools of war.
      Release of all prisoners of war and internees.
      Surrender of designated war criminals.

      Is this memorandum authentic? It was supposedly leaked to Trohan by Admiral William D. Leahy, presidential Chief of Staff. (See: M. Rothbard in A. Goddard, ed., Harry Elmer Barnes: Learned Crusader [1968], pp. 327f.) Historian Harry Elmer Barnes has related (in "Hiroshima: Assault on a Beaten Foe," National Review, May 10, 1958):

      The authenticity of the Trohan article was never challenged by the White House or the State Department, and for very good reason. After General MacArthur returned from Korea in 1951, his neighbor in the Waldorf Towers, former President Herbert Hoover, took the Trohan article to General MacArthur and the latter confirmed its accuracy in every detail and without qualification.

      and

      "The Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing ... I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon," Eisenhower said in 1963.

      The ultimate death toll from just the two a-bombs was 200,000. If the censored stories of surrender offers had been published, the American public would have demanded that the surrender be accepted.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    12. Re:Not news by Quila · · Score: 1

      at the Japanese had offered to surrender before Hiroshima and Nagasaki:

      The ones offering surrender had no power to make it happen. The hardliners were in charge and were relying on the inevitable invasion to be so expensive for us that we'd lose the will to keep going. At the very least we envisioned having to conduct a years-long firebombing campaign to force Japan to surrender, should we decide not to lose the estimated hundreds of thousands of US lives in an invasion. Not just two bombs, but burning the whole fucking country to the ground. Dresden times a thousand.

      In the balance, the atomic bombs saved Japanese lives, since millions were estimated otherwise. Publishing ineffectual offers for surrender may have resulted public outcry against the war as you say, and in Japan not losing.

    13. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, we don't.

      Yeah, actually, WE DO. We have a right to know we're not throwing 1,000s of kids into a fucking meat grinder for no goddamned purpose. We have a right to know that the situation in Afghanistan is that the population is still basically tribal primitives who want to go right on back to killing each other the moment we leave and don't have us to shoot at. We have a right to know that Afghanistan's government is fundamentally corrupt and not worth supporting.

      The presidents don't fight the wars - we the people do.

    14. Re:Not news by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1

      The ones offering surrender had no power to make it happen.

      That's an outright lie. The emperor himself had ordered that the Japanese offer a complete surrender, and several offers were made months before the nukes were dropped.

      This was reported shortly after the war, and confirmed by, among others, McArthur and Eisenhower. There was no question that the offers were anything but completely genuine. The nuking of Japan was part of the positioning of the US for after the war, nothing more.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    15. Re:Not news by Quila · · Score: 1

      That's an outright lie. The emperor himself had ordered that the Japanese offer a complete surrender

      Cite source. The military was still planning complete armageddon.

      Some facts while you wait:

      The firebombing of Tokyo had already caused 100,000 deaths. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were spared this destruction because we wanted untouched cities for the nuclear bombs. Minus the nukes, the cities would have been destroyed by conventional means, likely resulting in the same number of deaths.

      Japan was still murdering civilians by the thousands every day in occupied countries. Each day of waiting doomed thousands more to death.

      It was expected that the aftermath of total bombing and invasion would be a humanitarian disaster in Japan, with millions dying of starvation and disease.

      The US was so sure it needed to invade, that it made half a million Purple Heart medals in advance. We're still using those medals for present-day casualties.

      If nothing else, the last one should show you the truth. Our government didn't believe there could be an easy peace, or it wouldn't have ordered these medals.

    16. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fuck the military up the ass. theyve never done me or anyone else any fucking good cept to waste fuking money.

    17. Re:Not news by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1

      You're so full of sh*t - you couldn't even be bothered to read the rest of the stuff in the original link - which cited sources, including the US generals involved at the time, one of who went on to be president.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    18. Re:Not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying the atomic bomb is not necessary to stop the Indian invasion?

  4. Is anyone surprised they do this? by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    Infosys is out to make money. Companies are out to boost short term share prices. Do you think either care about the government's visa requirements?

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:Is anyone surprised they do this? by h4rr4r · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Of course, and that is why the punishments for these things have to make it not profitable. The simple way to do that is ban those people from ever coming back to the USA and fine the company millions. If the execs knew about it toss them in the clink.

    2. Re:Is anyone surprised they do this? by lcam · · Score: 1

      I would be cheaper to telecommute anyway. What's wrong with a video conference call?

    3. Re:Is anyone surprised they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course they dont care, but they should. They should be made an example of because they are unfairly competing in the marketplace with people who would follow the rules.

    4. Re:Is anyone surprised they do this? by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      Execs hate them, timezone differences, outages of all kinds, in short they seem great but have a ton of drawbacks.

    5. Re:Is anyone surprised they do this? by rickb928 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Banning the exec from coming to the USA might also be a deterrent.

      Rounding up all the current visa holder documents and giving them a good once-over would be fun too. But don't stop at Infosys.

      Seriously, though, my bank rarely lets a withdrawal go by unnoticed, but our government can't keep track of work visas, much less tourists. Pathetic. No one in government or business as a dog in this fight - they all have reasons to avert their eyes from illegal immigration in all of its forms, work visas and H1whatevers included, and no less grievous than all the other forms.

      --
      deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
    6. Re:Is anyone surprised they do this? by lcam · · Score: 1

      They still have to deal with Jetlag and 12 + hours of airplane noise plus the requirement to going through TSA checks in their socks.

      I didn't think about the drawbacks until you mentioned them. Thanks.

    7. Re:Is anyone surprised they do this? by cusco · · Score: 2

      This is deliberate, they can't track the visas because Congress won't allot the funds necessary to do the job. Newt Gingrich's moment of brilliance was when he realized that he didn't have to go to all the trouble to eliminate the EPA and IRS, just de-fund enforcement of the laws that his sponsors dislike. Did you know that the IRS is now required by a 1990s law to spend considerably more on searching for cheats on the Earned Income Tax Credit (a huge money loser) than on searching for corporate and millionaire tax evaders (a money maker)?

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    8. Re:Is anyone surprised they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean "keep track of visas"?! Visa is a document that gets stuck in your passport, and you need it to be allowed into the U.S. It's a necessary but not by itself sufficient to pass through the border, the immigration officer makes the final determination. The government knows exactly when your visa was issued, and when you used it to cross the border, so they keep track of them pretty darn well, thankyouverymuch. Having fake visas doesn't work precisely for that reason: they are looked up in a database, if there's no record for your visa, you aren't going anywhere.

      You must mean keeping track of people, then. If you mean that, then well, how the heck do you do that?! Have a private investigator tail everyone? Tourists don't love coming here due to TSA, can you imagine how much worse it would be if DHS was not only groping you but also tailing you wherever you go?

    9. Re:Is anyone surprised they do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ban who from coming back to the USA? The poor immigrants who just want a better job/life in the US, or the managers/execs who are responsible for the visa fraud? Sure the immigrants need to be sent back, but aren't they also victims of Infosys's management? So banning them from returning (so long as they get the correct visas) seems unfair. If you are refering to the management who are responsible for this, then yes that would seem a fitting punishment.

    10. Re:Is anyone surprised they do this? by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      They were complicit in the law breaking. That is why deportation and banning from reentry makes sense. It will discourage others from going along with this kind of fraud.

  5. Guest Worker programs == pro-employer Fraud. by sethstorm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "The New York Times has the sad story of Jack B. Palmer, an employee of Infosys, the giant Indian outsourcing firm. 17 months ago, Mr. Palmer made a quiet internal complaint that Infosys was committing visa fraud by bringing 'in Indian workers on short-term visitor visas, known as B-1, instead of longer-term temporary visas, known as H-1B, which are more costly and time-consuming to obtain.'

    Hopefully this is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to more of these kinds of things.

    Since making his complaint, Mr. Palmer 'has been harassed by superiors and co-workers, sidelined with no work assignment, shut out of the company's computers, denied bonuses and hounded by death threats.'"

    Isn't that something called retaliation? People that have a vested interest in moving work offshore really hate it when there is evidence that you're doing it based on fraud - especially fraud that exposes them for being against US citizens.

    If Infosys willing to do everything against this guy, he sure must have something damning enough to warrant death threats.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
    1. Re:Guest Worker programs == pro-employer Fraud. by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      If Infosys willing to do everything against this guy, he sure must have something damning enough to warrant death threats.

      I was going to ask, how are death threats coming into this? It was short-sighted and foolish for the company to act against him through CIVIL means, but criminal means? To me, someone who has no legal or corporate experience, that sounds like some executives saying "Hey, don't just fine the company, send ME to jail too!"

    2. Re:Guest Worker programs == pro-employer Fraud. by JustSomeProgrammer · · Score: 2

      I got the impression that it was other employees that were in the states on the wrong visas and had built a life here that were sending death threats, not random exec who is looking to save money.

  6. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  7. How are they doing it? by TheSpoom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How are they getting around it? Are these workers completely undocumented? Are they lying at the border? Did they not fill out I-9s? Because if they filled out I-9s, and those were looked at by USCIS, this sort of thing would be picked up pretty goddamn quick.

    Given the amount that I've personally spent on legal immigration, this pisses me off a little bit. I'm not exactly surprised, but it seems to be yet another case where breaking the law as an individual would have adverse consequences (e.g. in this case, where one would be banned from the United States between three years and indefinitely, depending on the overstay) while breaking the same law as a corporation is completely overlooked.

    --
    It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
    - E. Debs
    1. Re:How are they doing it? by cpu6502 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      >>>Given the amount that I've personally spent on legal immigration, this pisses me off a little bit.

      Most legal immigrants feel exactly the same. Oftentimes the legal immigrants are the strongest supporters of blocking the illegals from coming in.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    2. Re:How are they doing it? by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Informative
      B-1 visas is the tourist visa. Typically you can stay in the country legally for some 4 months or 6 months once you enter. The duration is decided by the immigration officer depending on the purpose of the visit. Typically Indian seniors visiting their sons/daughters would ask for 4 or 6 months. Once you are in, you cant get a driver's license, you cant get a SSN, you are not supposed to work, you can't get a US pay through any US Bank. But if you actually show up for work with a jacket and a laptop and call yourself "contractor visiting from off shore site to provide close technical support" no one is going ask for the employment authorization. So you work, though you are not supposed to.

      Typically the visitor is employed in India and his/her Indian salary will continue to accrue in India. They give an expense account, which will be almost 40% of US salary. The workers usually live quite frugally and save it all and take it home. It is tax free in India because it is not really pay, just left over money in the expense account. Way back in 1980s when they offered such a deal to me, they were offering me 5000 Rs a month in India (twice the pay of a commissioned officer or as they call in India gazetted officer) and an expense account of $1800 a month. US starting salaries those days were around $36000 for an engineering undergrad.

      This has been going on for a long time. I know of people who came like on B1. I know people who applied for B-1, the embassy in India smelled a rat and got "banned from applying for USA for two years" stamped on their passports.

      Me, I came as F-1, struggled as PIGS (poor indian grad student) got H1-B then green card and then hurried to get my citizenship just in time to vote against Santorum in the senate election. woot!

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    3. Re:How are they doing it? by Urban+Garlic · · Score: 2, Informative

      > Given the amount that I've personally spent on legal immigration, this pisses me off a little bit.

      You must have a nice, even temper. I'm also a legal immigrant to the US, and this stuff pisses me off a lot.

      I was an academic H1-B for a while, and got a pretty good view of the hoops that my host university had to go through to do it, so I understand about the hassle and expense referred to in the article. The consensus where I did this was that the regulatory burden was mostly due to the corporate history of cheating, and they resented it a fair amount, but they were also pretty much terrified of screwing it up, even accidentally, because this might jeopardize their numerous federal grants. They were very, very careful to comply with all the regs.

      If we could find a way to put that kind of fear into the corporate types, this problem would go away.

      --
      2*3*3*3*3*11*251
    4. Re:How are they doing it? by scottbomb · · Score: 1

      Because if they filled out I-9s, and those were looked at by USCIS, this sort of thing would be picked up pretty goddamn quick.

      If I'm not mistaken, no one ever looks at them unless they Feds come knocking.

    5. Re:How are they doing it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They dont really have to lie. B1 visa is supposed to be used for high level business functions (negotiations, contract signing, business meetings). I suppose one could claim they are part of the negotiations team for an upcoming contract with some company, and continue to work (code) for an existing contract with same or a different company. It is illegal, but it cannot be easily proven. They are not paid in the US (except for daily allowances). The reporting structure can be complicated. They could report to someone in a foreign country, who is probably willing to claim that it is him, that actually, performed that piece of work. Also the requirements gathering meeting (which I believe is what majority of Infosys employees in the US perform), can be considered just a business meeting, and well within B1 visa requirements.

      Posting anonymous, as a friend on mine works there (he is on H1-b for the record).

    6. Re:How are they doing it? by jpate · · Score: 2

      [citation needed]

    7. Re:How are they doing it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good for you! That's the American way! Welcome to the club!

    8. Re:How are they doing it? by Shados · · Score: 1

      No need for a citation when its not a quantified statement really. "Often" can mean anything.

      As a legal green card holder, illegals also piss me off. I waited years to be in a position where I could apply and i'm freagin Canadian (there's treaties between the two countries to make it super easy for some people to just move in, but i wanted permanent resident, and besides, I didn't qualify).

      If there wasn't all the illegals to push aside, how hard do you think it would be for a senior software engineer married to an american citizen to just come in? I doubt i'd have had to even be either of those to do so.

    9. Re:How are they doing it? by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      And I'm saying that for a gigantic foreign company like Infosys with such large amounts of visa-based employees, the feds should come knocking a hell of a lot more.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    10. Re:How are they doing it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How are they getting around it? Are these workers completely undocumented? Are they lying at the border? Did they not fill out I-9s? Because if they filled out I-9s, and those were looked at by USCIS, this sort of thing would be picked up pretty goddamn quick.

      They don't fill out I-9s because they're not employees of the US company. The way it works is that the Indian company employs workers, and sends them to visit the US on business trips. So long as the people are normally resident in India, employed in India and are visiting the US to do business on behalf of the Indian company, this is entirely above board. The problem comes when the Indian company is a shell which hires people (on Indian wages), send them to the US for a 3 month business trip to "consult", "meet with clients", "get training" or whatever, then fires them and cycles a new set of people through for 3 months.

    11. Re:How are they doing it? by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      My guess is that part of the reason is that they're coming from India, and not places where English is well spoken natively. My understanding is that the less Western your country is, the less likely you are to actually be allowed in... see: massive immigration from North Africa; H1B vista'd Indians and Chinese.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    12. Re:How are they doing it? by quarterbuck · · Score: 2

      I believe the visa in question is the B1/B2 visa. The visa is issued as B1, B2 or B1/B2. If it is B1 alone, it is a tourist visa. B2 is a business visa. B1/B2 includes both, but i believe you have to declare at the port of entry what the purpose of the travel is.
      B2 is not a tourist visa, but allows a visitor to negotiate contracts etc.(do business, not necessarily work) while in US and being on a foreign payroll. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-2_visa#Uses_of_a_B1.2FB2_visa

      --
      http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
    13. Re:How are they doing it? by jpate · · Score: 1

      If there wasn't all the illegals to push aside, how hard do you think it would be for a senior software engineer married to an american citizen to just come in? I doubt i'd have had to even be either of those to do so.

      There are no quotas for spouses of American citizens. As a spouse (assuming you're in a heterosexual marriage), you can get an Immediate Relative visa after just the processing time for the visa, and immediately apply for an Adjustment of Status to become a permanent resident ("green-card holder"). While you wait for the Adjustment Of Status to process, you can get an Employment Authorization Document (EAD). From what I've read, the whole process takes between 6 months and a year, and you can work as soon as you get the EAD.

      Anyway, IMHO, undocumented immigrants are not the right target for frustration with long and complicated immigration policies. The proper target is American xenophobia and the policies it enables. Undocumented immigration happens because, for centuries, Western powers have siphoned wealth from what is now the third world. Anti-immigration policies are just one component of a strategy to maintain and, when possible, exacerbate imbalances rooted in colonialism.

    14. Re:How are they doing it? by Raenex · · Score: 1

      No need for a citation when its not a quantified statement really. "Often" can mean anything.

      The qualified statement was, "Most legal immigrants feel exactly the same." For that, you'd need a survey, as I would think many legal immigrants have friends or family who are illegal. Also, considering the pandering to the hispanic vote about amnesty for current illegal residents, I doubt that his statement holds water.

    15. Re:How are they doing it? by IMightB · · Score: 0

      My wife is a legal immigrant and feels this way.

    16. Re:How are they doing it? by afgam28 · · Score: 2

      Actually it's the other way around; B1 is the business visa, and B2 is the tourist visa.

    17. Re:How are they doing it? by Vijaysj · · Score: 1
      The way this works out is as follows.
      1. You send the employee on the pretext of attending meetings and planning sessions (B1 is not a visitor visa it is a business visa)
      2. Typically the employee has a printed schedule of topics he is going to discuss and people he is going to meet over the next three months
      3. Sometimes it is the same topic that he has to discuss individually with over 2 dozen stakeholders as per their convinence
      4. This gives him a pretext for being in USA for upto 3 months
      5. If additional time is required the employee on completion of three months will fly to a neighboring country (Mexico/Canada) spend a week there and then comeback on a renewed business visa to have further follow up meetings

      The reasons companies do this is.

      1. It is cheaper than H1 (You pay per-diem instead of a US salary)
      2. There are no limits for a B1 Visa.
      3. Low waiting time for approval. H1-B takes months where as B1 is available within a week or two
      4. It is easier to get. All you need is a letter from the US Office stating that they are inviting you for a business meeting and will be taking care of your food and boarding. Not documentation required to show their best-case effort for hiring locally etc.
      5. No Risk of employee flight: A Person immigrating to US on H1-B has the freedom to apply for jobs at other compaines. A person on B1 cannot do this

      And if you think that only Infosys is doing this Wake up. Each and everyone of the fortune 500 companies with a branch in India has been doing this for over a decade now.

      --
      To Share Is To care
    18. Re:How are they doing it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "after just the processing time for the visa"

      That's funny:-) The processing time can take years because they have to investigate all the possible fraud.

    19. Re:How are they doing it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is it about a VISITOR visa that you do not understand?
      http://travel.state.gov/visa/temp/types/types_1262.html

      They are coached to lie about their reason for coming here!

      They say that they are here for "training", a "business meeting", or one of the other valid uses of a B-1 visa. A foreigner coming into the country on a B-1 visa is a VISITOR - not a guest worker. Since the legal use of a B-1 visa precludes "work", there is no requirement to fill out an I-9 form. Furthermore, the Indian workers who are being brought over illegally to work while in the USA on B-1 visas are being paid in their home currency, not U.S. dollars.

      BTW, if only 1% of the B-1 visas issued in 2010 were fraudulent, it would represent almost 40,000 workers...
      http://www.immigrationdirect.com/immigration-statistics/immigrant-visas.jsp#b1b2visa

      Furthermore, a thorough investigation will show that ALL of the Indian bodyshops are abusing the B-1 visa program in the same fashion as Infosys. I have been complaining about B-1 visa abuse since 2003...

    20. Re:How are they doing it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, at Carnival Cruise Lines, they do a variety of things to accomplish this -- one thing is that when they bring in workers from the ships to Miami for work, they claim that they're "training" them which is, of course, false. They just put them to work in the offices quite often. When this was mentioned they responded that they have two floors of lawyers to deal with this. (Then there's the whole issue of CCL being separate from Carnival and the ships, as well, which is just a big gong show to avoid taxes.) In short, they contribute little to the country and bring in what amounts to illegal labor.

    21. Re:How are they doing it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The background check used to take years, but in the past five years computers have made it much faster. Now it's only a few months.

    22. Re:How are they doing it? by ananthap · · Score: 1

      Nice signature.

      Another true fact joke.
      Jackie Chan refused to visit India because he didn't want to run into Amitabh Bacchan.

      OK.

  8. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  9. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  10. Gather evidence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think he did it to collect ammo for his lawsuit.

    Let's assume he's not quite fond of his job, and now he records all this evidence against him. Not only does he collect the whistleblower's fee, but also any civil suit against his managers/ superiors.

    I don't know, but it's something I'd only do near the end of my career and have enough saved up for retirement.

    1. Re:Gather evidence. by larry+bagina · · Score: 5, Funny

      I bet infosys is feeling stupid for outsourcing the death threats instead of using American IT workers to plant kiddy porn on his computer.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    2. Re:Gather evidence. by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      Why?
      He can easily get a job at a company that does not have any foreign workers or break other federal laws.

    3. Re:Gather evidence. by ZombieBraintrust · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They should feel stupid for hiring an American IT worker and placing him in a management position. An Indian dev lead would not have reported this.

    4. Re:Gather evidence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet infosys is feeling stupid for outsourcing the death threats instead of using American IT workers to plant kiddy porn on his computer.

      Nah. Death threats are a union job; not something you want to try to outsource.

    5. Re:Gather evidence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They should feel stupid for hiring an American IT worker and placing him in a management position. An Indian dev lead would not have reported this.

      He wouldn't report it, because he'd be deported.

    6. Re:Gather evidence. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very classy Sir. Indeed very classy

  11. Re:I'm having a hard time being sympathetic ... by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Perhaps he thought they were above-board and honest in their proceedings.

    Either way, we win when there is exposed evidence of fraud.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  12. Naive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many more stories will it take before people realize the new rules? Don't ever talk to police, don't reveal wrongdoing, don't defend yourself, don't try to save people.....

    1. Re:Naive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing new about these rules. Do you think the disciples of Jesus were talking much to the roman police? Nah.

  13. Ethics hotline by FadedTimes · · Score: 1

    Should have reported it anonymously through an ethics hotline the company may have or an anonymous email to people within or may be cc some people outside the company.

    1. Re:Ethics hotline by cusco · · Score: 1

      This is Infosys. If they had a hotline to report ethics violations it would be used to track down the violators and give them bonuses.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    2. Re:Ethics hotline by afgam28 · · Score: 1

      In order for an Indian worker to qualify for a B-1 visa, the company needs to provide a "welcome letter" as proof that they are required to be in the US.

      According to his suit, Mr. Palmer was being asked to write these welcome letters even though he knew that the workers were not going to be following the rules for B-1 visa holders.

      So yes, he could have reported it anonymously, but then he would have had to have written false welcome letters. This is what he was not willing to do.

  14. Yes thank you by gelfling · · Score: 0

    For showing us you are utterly clueless how the real world works. Anything short of taking out a hit on someone I would not snitch on my employer about it. And maybe even not that.

    1. Re:Yes thank you by Red_Chaos1 · · Score: 1

      Thank you for being a scumbag and part of the problem.

      Worthless piece of shit.

  15. Not only costs by legont · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There is much bigger reason why companies don't want to obtain H1-B. While on work visa, it's relatively easy to find some other employer willing to take you on H1-B or even on adjustment of status to Green Card. On the other hand, somebody working on B1 can't look for another job at all - he can't claim experience because it is illegal. Makes nice slaves. It used to be popular in 90s, but in little shops.

    1. Re:Not only costs by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      That's bullshit. I originally came to US on B-1 visa, and found an employer that sponsored H-1B. It was in 1993, and I was not on the level of bottom-of-the-barrel people that outsourcing companies love so much, but I was still a recent graduate with a few years of work experience, all of it outside US.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    2. Re:Not only costs by legont · · Score: 2

      Perhaps, I did not make myself clear. Sure, you can be here on B1 and look for a job based on your *foreign* experience/education. But if asked about current job, you'd have so say unemployed, which would be a lie. You can't say you are working in the US on B1 as it will potentially make adjustment of status much more difficult. It's a catch 22 situation.

    3. Re:Not only costs by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      What? The current job is whatever you still have abroad, or nothing if you for some insane reason already left it. You don't have to claim unemployment to get a job, that's insane!

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    4. Re:Not only costs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dont call bullshit on what you know nothing about. these days sponsoring a new H1 for someone is difficult as few services firms gobble up all available H1 visas at the opening day for the year (and they do not use all of them but this way they have a monopoly for that year). However, there's no yearly quota fro transferring the visa of someone already here on a visa. that's what these companies who try to hire someone already here on an h1 seek to do.

      If you had come over on B1 today and tried to get a fresh H1, you would not have gotten one, because none would have been left after the few major companies grab all available visas in the quota on day 1.

      Now dont go around calling BS on this saying oh I know a student got one last year fresh etc, because students are a different part of the quota now.

    5. Re:Not only costs by Alex+Belits · · Score: 1

      If that was possible, there would be only one company left with all the visas, and no one else would get any.

      --
      Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
  16. Re:I'm having a hard time being sympathetic ... by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Perhaps he thought they were above-board and honest in their proceedings.

    It doesn't change the fact that this guy is sitting at home being paid $90,000 a year (yes, I read the article) and whining about how he is going nuts because he doesn't have any real work to do.

    He deserves it - over the last 7 years his job put plenty of his fellow citizens in the same position, minus the pay-check. I'd have the same level of sympathy for a crack dealer who complains about someone selling them fake drugs. None. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Rien.

    He knew the details of the visas - that they were for people who were not supposed to be working in the country - and let's face it, he placed them anyway. So now he's going around with a gun strapped to his ankle (again, I read the story). He's in fear of his life and ready to blow people away (he drew down on a door-to-door salesman) because someone taped a print-out death threat to his office chair, and he's gotten a couple of crank phone calls?

    He must have led a really, *really* sheltered life. Even high school would have been too much.

    --
    Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
  17. What's up with the title? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The title says "H1-B visa fraud". But the fraud did not actually involve H1-B visas at all; it involved brining people in under B-1 ("business") visas - which do not permit working in U.S., but are for attending meetings, conferences and such - and then having them do actual work while in U.S. It is certainly a visa fraud, but its only relation to H1-B is that those people who were working have to be issued H1-B (or L-1, or one of several other types of visas permitting it) to work.

    Is that just shoddy writing, or a a cheap attempt to stir up the usual flamewar over H1-Bs "stealing our jobs"?

    1. Re:What's up with the title? by JamesP · · Score: 1

      Well, IANAL but

      B-1 allows you to "work" in the USA, that's not the issue. If you're representing a foreign company in a business meeting, that's work, for example.

      What you cannot absolutely do is get payed/compensated by a company in the US.

      There's an extensive list of what's allowed by a B-1 visa, still It's a complicated issue

      And of course, a B-1 allows you to stay up to 3 months (IIRC) in the US for a maximum of 6 months per year.

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    2. Re:What's up with the title? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

      I'm not a legal expert, either. However, a while ago I was living and working in Canada, but on a team that was almost entirely located in U.S. (ah, the wonders of telecommuting...). Every now and then, I'd come in person to attend design meetings and such, which necessitated a B-1 visa. When I was briefed by our legal folk on visa issues, they repeatedly stressed the fact that I cannot write a single line of code or produce any other work-related artifacts while in U.S.; and when being interviewed by a CBP agent while crossing the border, I should never, ever use the word "work" in any context to describe my planned activities.

    3. Re:What's up with the title? by JamesP · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely 100% right about the CBP interview!

      I'm not sure about the "cannot produce any work while on US", but I guess since they don't want to take any chances they took this stance. Especially if this is traceable to you while in the US like source code.

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
  18. Pure unadulterated Hypocrisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When IBM,Accenture,E&Y do it, it is good business when TCS, Infosys do it it is headlines.

    1. Re:Pure unadulterated Hypocrisy by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes, so because American companies abuse immigration policies and (in theory) get away with it, everyone should be so allowed. How many wrongs make a right again? I forget.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
  19. human traffickers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't see any difference between a company bringing over an Indan to the States and paying them the Indian wage on their contract, and people who take Guatamalan 12 year olds and sell them into prostitution.

  20. As someone who dealt with Infosys' "deliverables" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can pretty confidently say any death threats can be outright ignored, as to threaten death would imply the ability to logically plan the act and then execute it properly.

  21. Why did Palmer do it? by Bromskloss · · Score: 1

    For us who aren't familiar with this visa system, whom did Palmer do a service by calling attention to the situation?

    --
    Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    1. Re:Why did Palmer do it? by ahoffer0 · · Score: 2

      >whom did Palmer do a service by calling attention to the situation?

      Job-seekers with a legal right to work.

    2. Re:Why did Palmer do it? by cusco · · Score: 1

      Probably himself primarily, his company secondarily. B-1 is a type of tourist visa, normally reserved for business people who are going to meetings, seminars or some such. They're not supposed to do any actual work. H1-B is a work permit, more difficult, time consuming and expensive to get. Palmer's duties included getting H1-B visas for people and he was apparently annoyed that some of his coworkers were circumventing the system with the B-1 process. They would show up as being more productive than him, and with lower costs for their contracts. There are penalties for abuse of the B-1 visa system, up to and including being banned from the system entirely, so if he could convince his superiors to stop the practice he would be competing on a level playing field again and maybe look like a hero in the bargain.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  22. Seriously? by CAIMLAS · · Score: 0

    Elves? Elves are the factual basis on which Oracle is going after Google/Android?

    You have got to be kidding me. The ludicrous nature of that alone points at how obscene patent law has become...

    --
    ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
  23. Palmer's Dad Never Gave Him "The Talk" by Baldrson · · Score: 1
    If Palmer's dad had given him this talk he might have a career today.

    Obviously child protective services failed him.

    1. Re:Palmer's Dad Never Gave Him "The Talk" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I love it when yo guys spin it as if Palmer is somehow the one at fault, not the firm that's bending/breaking the laws. Gotta LOVE the geeks!

  24. Enough said. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    “It is people like you that make us Indians angry,” said one he received by e-mail. “Why must you drag us down into poverty. You fat lazy greddy American.”

    I just happen to love all these skinny hard-working generous doodes

  25. So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently, he is getting paid to sit at home and do nothing. If I were him, I would take up a side project. Write a book. Write open source software. Travel. Ask them to waive any agreement they have making anything you develop become theirs and prohibiting you from working elsewhere.

    1. Re:So... by erroneus · · Score: 1

      That would seem obvious. I get the feeling they are watching him, though. If he does any of that, they will use it as a reason to fire him.

  26. And do you think Infosys is the ONLY one? by erroneus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is too much like a cockroach problem. Slashdotters have been complaining about these kinds of practices for a very long time. People need to befriend this whistle blower so he doesn't commit suicide or some violent crime. I get the feeling he was quite naive and believed he was doing "the right thing in the right way" and now he is paying the price with his physical and mental health. (If it was me, I'd be riding my bicycle and playing XBox games all day collecting a paycheck or finding other ways to enjoy the vacation... but maybe that's a stupid idea too for reasons I haven't yet considered.) I have dealt with some ugly situaitons in the past (though not quite as ugly as this) and I simply had to maintain my course and attitude through it all. I had to remember not to let "other parties" determine who I am and that I will not change who I am in response to anything anyone else does to me. I also had to keep my eyes on the horizon rather than focusing on "here and now."

    These companies like Infosys are scum. They want to play in the US market and make US dollars, but they don't want to play by US laws and are willing to commit criminal acts in the name of business. I hope people are imprisoned, deported and businesses get shut down. And before anyone makes claims about killing industries and all that nonsense, I just have to say it'll never happen. There is still a lot of money to be made in the software business even when playing by the rules and operating within the law. The only problem these fat, greedy, lazy Indian companies have is they don't want to SHARE the profits according to the law and according to any sense of fairness and respect.

  27. "Declaration of war" is meaningless by Quila · · Score: 1

    The only thing that matters is that in the separation of powers, Congress gives its consent to military actions, regardless of what label you put on it. Given that Congress has given its clear consent to the "War on Terror," any such arguments are bunk. This has a history at least all the way back to President Jefferson and the First Barbary War, so arguments that the Founding Fathers would not agree are obviously wrong.

    There's no reason to keep secrets from the people..... a democracy can no more function w/o full disclosure, than a stock market can function if the corporations don't publish financial statements.

    Here's a secret the government has: Everything known about you: your name, income, deductions, taxes, address, work history, and much more. I think we the people deserve to know that, don't you?

    Even companies publishing financial statements don't publish trade secrets in them.

  28. The only court that matters-public opinion by evanism · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Agreed. Take a baseball bat straigt to the head of these companies. Gather and release. Make it public and nuke them from space.

    All too often the most evil actions are created by big organisations. They all tend towards being sociopathic.

    --
    Just bought a new quantum computer, but I'm uncertain how it works.
    1. Re:The only court that matters-public opinion by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1
      Exactly, all organizations very quickly devolve into something which serves only themselves, which is to say not their mission or their purported purpose (remember that corporations and the fiction of being a corporation is a grant from the government not a right and one to which obligations along with privileges attach) but only the individual personalities involved which see the corporation as an extension of their egos, a mere appendage to their personal selves.

      ALL organizations do this sooner or later and when they do then need to be dissolved. The corporate death penalty - revocation of their corporate charter- is not issued nearly easily enough in the US. Usually we let them go on and on until they commit suicide.

      The fact is Infossy and the amoral sociopaths that run it to keep themselves in whatever vices it is they're into need to simply be dissolved.

      If we had a little more of that attitude and a little less of the ole Ayn Rand corporate worship bullshit, we wouldn't have had a collapse of the economy in the first place.

  29. No good deed goes unpunished. by ThePeices · · Score: 1

    No good deed goes unpunished.

  30. That's 'diversity' for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why don't all the Indians stay in their own (shithole of a) country?

    Not enough white women there?

    Why do you support your own genocide (if you're white, and aren't against mass immigration into white countries)?

    Any answers?

    1. Re:That's 'diversity' for you... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We need Indian expertise in shithole creation, they're among the best in the world at making destination nations into shitholes.

  31. There should be a bounty system. by couchslug · · Score: 2

    There should be a bounty system for whistleblowers to go straight to the government.

    Companies who do these things are the enemy, not to be warned before being struck down.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  32. it's B1 visa fraud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's misleading to call this H1-b fraud, since that suggests that people are using H1-b visas to commit fraud. Rather, it's B1-fraud; companies are using B1 visas because H1-b visas have become too hard to get.

  33. Whistleblowers Get Screwed!! by manifestdestinynow · · Score: 1

    Remember WorldCom, and Enron.. and the "Solution"? The Sarbanes-Oxley Act was designed to prevent financial malpractice. It was enacted in 2004 with the purpose of streamlining corporate reporting guidelines. Well listen to the following: http://renaissance.libsyn.com/peacerevolution/project-constellation-connect-the-dots-see-the-big-picture-may-31-2006-transmission-to-the-future-of-america-by-richard-grove Richard Andrew Grove worked for a Software Company that produced Sarbanes-Oxley compliant software, when he discovered it had a "backdoor" to erase .jar files.. he became a Whistle Blower, he contacted the SEC, was then harassed by his Employer - then fired. To add insult to injury the SEC knowing the software had a back door, made the software a "legal requirement" and purchased it's own copy of the fraudulent software. Mr. Grove went to court, and acting as his own defense was proven to be right, but the Court ruled the Statute of Limitations had passed. The software is still in use. Sounds like a bad novel, but unfortunately Very True. Mr. Grove should be an American Hero..not a "Whistle blower Scorned"

  34. What a dick by buttfuckinpimpnugget · · Score: 1

    We need all the skilled labor we can get.

  35. He's sitting at home being paid by SilverJets · · Score: 1

    And he's complaining. Really?

    The company is paying you to sit at home because firing you right now would look really bad in the middle of all this and you are farking bitching about it?

    Shut the f$@# up and go back to watching television.

  36. Not surprising by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've only worked in one shop where we have had indian contractors. A rather strange bunch at that, but after all i have read and all that i know, i'm not terrably surprised. I think that the United States needs to more tightly control these H1B and H-1 Visas. It would be a difficult job, since uncle sam would literaly have to get into the employment and contracting business to control the amount of people coming in. And of course i'm sure there would be some gaming of the system even than, or the application devlopement work would switch to a strictly overseas model, with corporate networks expanding into India to serve the contractors without them even having to leave their homes.

  37. Bush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Russian empire collapse: Breshnev, fiscal mismanagement, covered by forced borrowing from Eastern European banks.

    American empire, Bush, fiscal mismanagement, covered by forced money printing.

    It's no different to a company collapsing, they make mistakes, then it sort of snowballs to collapse and the 'mistake' always blames his predecessors, the climate, the opposition, yet clearly was the mistake.

    That was Bush, spend like crazy, cut taxes for the rich, ran up a huge deficit, doubled the US$ in circulation without a single year of positive exports. He's set the collapse momentum that can't be turned around within the next 5-10 presidential terms. He ran Arbusto into the ground too I seem to recall, the oil company he similarly mismanaged.

    1. Re:Bush by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      nonsense, the USA's problems go back to them handing financial control the the western banking cartel. p0wn3d.

  38. Jesus is _____. by zooblethorpe · · Score: 1

    Jesus is Entropy? Cool!

    There are a lot of those "Jesus is _____" billboards on the buses here in Seattle, and sometimes stuck in traffic it's fun to play mad libs. But I never thought of that one. Kudos to you, couchslug!

    --
    "What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
    "A four-foot prune."
  39. Just a step in Conflict Resolution by ryzvonusef · · Score: 1

    Jack B. Palmer first made a quiet complaint through internal channels at Infosys,

    Was he really naive enough to think that these were the actions of some rogue managers and that the company would be thrilled to have him put it all in writing?

    I am studying ethics in college (part of paper P1, Governance, Risk and Ethics, if anybody is keeping count), and conflict resolution in a major topic in there.

    The *problem* (if it can be said to be a problem) is that conflict resolution actually requires you do this. You can't just quit, or sue, in either case the moral dilemma and it's consequences don't just leave you. (the quiting part is especially noticeable, you may be considered a rat leaving a sinking ship, and not quiting merely on moral grounds, so don't think you are free of the blame)

    The proper method is to:

    a: Utilize existing internal conflict resolution means, if they exist (the ideas letterbox, no really!)
    b: Discuss with a senior, experienced fellow / colleague that may guide you (your professional body, if you are member of one, can and *will* help, that's what you are paying an annual membership fee for!)
    c: Write to senior management (The relevant Director, BoD...)
    d: if all else fails THEN quit / whitsleblow / sue / whatever

    Given his position, he did the write thing by first highlighting the issue in a *quiet* internal memo. This allowed the corporation to fix the issue *quietly* without loosing goodwill.

    But now that the company's attitude is clear, he can (or rather, this being a legal matter, *must*) now act as a citizen and contact his lawyer as to how best handle this situation.

    TL;DR: There is a proper procedure, ethically, which you must follow. You can't just start the WAHHHmbulence at the slightest fault.

    --
    I am an ACCA student. Got a query on Accountancy/Finance? Maybe I can help!
  40. Something everyone appears to have lost sight of by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

    âoeThey did the worst thing they could do to someone who is used to working 80 hours a week,â Mr. Palmer said.

    Why the hell would you work an 80-hour week?

  41. Re:Something everyone appears to have lost sight o by mrchaotica · · Score: 0

    $90K/year (also mentioned in the article) at 80 hours/week works out to $22.50/hour. I made that much on my first real job out of college, in a down market, in a low-cost-of-living area (and I still considered myself underpaid!). Sure makes me feel better...

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  42. Always complain anon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am in an interesting situation. The place where I work knows a senior staffer has done no work for 5 years.. arrives late.. and leaves early. Yet, nothing is done. This person is now a manager and still does no work and nothing happens.

    It has been made well clear to me that if I complain then I am at fault.

    So, we can now look forward to paying over $100k to an employee who cuts time and does nothing, and no one can complain.

    Will I report this? Hell no. Why? See TFA.

    1. Re:Always complain anon by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      pfft, that's how it's always been done, sonny. now get your ass back to work, drone.

  43. Thank you.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My feeling go out to him, what he did took guts and bravery. Sadly it just shows the state of business ethics or better yet the total lack of it.

    If I was able to hire him for a board seat I would..

    Again

    Thank you

    ()-()

  44. Free trade has never existed. by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1
    No, free trade rules shouldn't apply - neither to goods nor to services.

    The problem with "free trade" is that it results in a race to the bottom on all fronts - work environments, wages, corporate governance, taxes, tax-funded services, inspections, pollution, safety, etc.

    We tried this experiment, and it is a failure.

    The rule should be simple - if you want access to our market, you play by our rules. Same standards for labour, pollution controls, safety inspections, etc. Don't want to contribute back to the country by creating jobs locally? Then expect to contribute back by paying tariffs.

    China does a lot worse. Want to sell in China? They demand that any foreign company partner up with a local entity, and that the local entity own the majority of the merged business. They also demand (and get) technology transfers. That is not "free trade" in any shape, matter, or form. So forget it - free trade is already dead, and those who insist on sticking with the illusion are going to continue to pay a heavy economic toll.

    --
    Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    1. Re:Free trade has never existed. by dodobh · · Score: 1

      Why? At the moment the trade goods India and China have to offer are labour. The trade is free, nothing restricts the US from manufacturing and exporting goods.

      OTOH, you could also require that agricutural subsidies and travel restrictions be removed, and that the US reduce it's per capita energy consumption to the per capita levels of India/China.

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
  45. H1-B is evil by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is so much talk about how bad illegal immigrants are for the US, but the H1-B program is really the evil. I'm not worried about illegals coming in and doing yard work or fast food, they aren't really hurting our economy. These H1-B's are taking American jobs. These big companies say "There aren't enough qualified people in the US." but that is a total crock of crap. What they really mean is "There aren't enough qualified people willing to work for low pay and crap benefits so we need to bring over these people who will work for peanuts and lower the American standard of living." The H1-B program should be eliminated, then we would see unemployment start to come down and students take more of an interest in technology. Who wants to spend $20K - $50K on and engineering or cs degree when American companies are either hiring H1-B's or sending the work overseas? American companies should have to pay through the nose to hire foreigners, period. And ESPECIALLY the big banks that took our bailout money yet continue to send American jobs overseas.

  46. This was a NY Times article... by JBaustian · · Score: 1

    So you must consider that the "reporter" may have exaggerated somewhat, or left out key information, or otherwise presented the facts selectively.

  47. Death Threats? by WOOFYGOOFY · · Score: 1

    Time to get the the FBI involved on a whole different footing because making terrorists threats against someone, especially someone who is exposing the fraudulent transfer of foreign nationals into the country, is basically starting to get into Homeland Security territory.

    How many failed projects does Infosys et. al. have to head up before companies start getting smart and just learn to leave the bodyshops alone? India is a fascinating place filled with very smart people, but none of them work for Infosys. As to infosys's management, they obviously still think their in India where all law, except perhaps blaspheme laws, is optional depending on whose palm you're greasing.

    Welcome to America, where we take shit like this seriously and by and large federal agents are not for sale and laws are not optional.

    Here's your new cellmate. His name is Bubba. You're going to be best friends.

  48. It's all about accountability by Gazzonyx · · Score: 1

    So, what you're saying is that they have to fear 1.) being held accountable and 2.) losing money as a result. History seems to indicate that this will not be the case, but hope springs eternal.

    BTW, welcome to the US, we're not quite as bad as the rest of the world thinks we are. :)

    --

    If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.

  49. Scamming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Indians and Indian companies having been scamming the US and fortunately with the America's appalling education system most Americans are too dumb or too full of diversity propaganda to see it happening.

    And in the meantime the Times of India runs stories on how stupid Americans are and how fortunate they have clever better educated Indians going over to the US to help them out and provide guidance for them. They then usually list Indian CEOs running American companies or who are VCs in Silicon Valley

    And you know what the Times of India is probably right. A nations that is so easily suckered clearly needs help from the master cheats on the planet. (Although arguably the Chinese could beat out the Indians.)

    Silly Yanks celebrating diversity as the country tanks........

  50. How is your source described? by Quila · · Score: 1

    Ah yes, "the world's leading Holocaust denial organization"

    Sorry if I don't take them as authoritative. Even if they cite sources, you can be sure they are twisted.

    How about a believable source?

    1. Re:How is your source described? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1

      Just google for it.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    2. Re:How is your source described? by Quila · · Score: 1

      Sorry if I don't follow leads on WWII historical subjects from proponents of Holocaust revisionist sites.

    3. Re:How is your source described? by Barbara,+not+Barbie · · Score: 1
      First, I'm not a proponent of any such thing - however, your argument is a variant of the "attack the messenger, not the message" for the statements made in that particular page - which go against the lie that nuking both hiroshima and nagasaki was necessary.

      It's like all the other attacks on civilian targets - the intentional ones that would have been classified as war crimes, such as the fire-bombings of Desden and Tokyo.

      Also, the Wiki article on the firebombing of Tokyo mentions the Japanese emperor's personal involvement in the peace talks - which would be 5 months before Hiroshima. So stop with the stupidity - there was immoral behaviour on both sides.

      --
      Let's call it what it is, Anti-Social Media.
    4. Re:How is your source described? by Quila · · Score: 1

      First, I'm not a proponent of any such thing - however, your argument is a variant of the "attack the messenger, not the message"

      You may be too innocent. Holocaust revisionists are experts at twisting what could even be reliable sources to fit their arguments. It is very easy to get misled by them. Their individual arguments sound good until you see the whole picture, which is of course a lie.

      So, no, I will not accept one word from that site or an argument influenced by that site. I'm not going down that rabbit hole.

      Also, the Wiki article on the firebombing of Tokyo mentions the Japanese emperor's personal involvement in the peace talks

      Wikipedia entry, anybody could do it. Source is a dead tree book, can't check context or veracity from here.

      So stop with the stupidity - there was immoral behaviour on both sides.

      That statement, in general, is not being contested.

  51. You have 2 accounts used for trolling on /.? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  52. Ur full of shit with 2 reg'd accounts for trolling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  53. Who's the liar here tom (or Barbie)? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Liars like you keep multiple registered accounts for trolling http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2787367&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=39697575

  54. Nobody believes multiple account using trolls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  55. Imagine a jackass with multiple accounts to troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0