Finnish 419 scam...

Fortunately, this is not a very clever or sophisticated scam. But it is disconcerting for another reason. That being that I received this in my email and they, as stated, found my resume on CareerBuilder. Well, I guess it's time to cancel that one out for real this time since all I seem to get from them is scams. So here is the poorly written (translated) mail. Check it out, it's fairly obvious that this is bogus.

Dear **********,
Our Organization have found your resume in CareerBuilder,www.careerbuilder.com resume base reviewed it and think that you to be a great candidate for this job which we propose.
We are now looking for a few qualified persons for a vacant position "Account Coordinator".

The main task of this position is to collect payments bank transfers and checks from our customers in USA.
If you haven’t bank account our manager will help you to open a new one.

Average salary is $600-$800 per week.

Basic Requirements:

- Computer skills MS Word personal e-mail address
- US Citizenship
- Age: 21+
- Ability to work at home
- Responsibility


NO FEE IS REQUIRED FOR ENTERING THE JOB

If you want to join our company please apply here

I left the last link intact so that it is still possible to go look at their atrocious site. It's bare, it's ugly and if you click through to the "about us" page it gets worse. They use a cropped up Declaration of Independence in their header and WARNING they have bad new-jazz set to autoplay. Overall, this is not very impressive and what's worse is that the "name" of their company doesn't even mean anything. Apparently according to Artists Against 419 it could mean "about international". At any rate, this is the thing that finally pushed me to get as far away from the ass-hats at CB.com. What a bunch of fuckers.

Research into "Moral Turpitude" bears interesting results...

I am a word and language aficionado, love word play and have a thirst for general trivia about how we communicate. (And a whole bunch of other topics too.) So as it happens I occasionally find myself just looking up random shit on the internet to satiate my need for knowledge. Today I was applying for a job and came across a question about "moral turpitude." I have heard this term before and never much thought about it. Originally I assumed it had something to do with morals and that is pretty much right on. However, in this day and age one can never be too careful and I of course thought to myself that I really never had bothered to look it up to see what exactly "moral turpitude" actually meant. So I did and I actually learned something.

Turns out that it is a legal term that pretty much means what I thought but is also quite broad and/or vague. From Wikipedia: "Moral turpitude is a legal concept in the United States that refers to "conduct that is considered contrary to community standards of justice, honesty or good morals." Talk about a cultural relativist's field day. Does that mean the whole US (or other nation) as the community; a state, a county, a city, my weird neighbor, my not-so-weird neighbor, various net fora I frequent? I guess it really doesn't matter much just as long as the "community" you are part of can all agree on what is good and what is bad. Then again that has been a problem from time immemorial. Hell I often disagree with myself depending on given circumstances. For instance "killing is wrong" unless it's a situation of me or the other guy. Or if killing one person saves a hundred, or killing a perfect saint can save a hundred rapists. See it's all a bunch of grey area, well I'd let the hundred rapist die and really who could blame me? Oh right their families and other like-minded sociopaths.

Anyway, that's all very interesting but to me the interesting part is that this definition can be used and is used for all sorts of strange crap. Certain states and even cities in the US have "moral turpitude" statutes regarding such things as credibility to testify in court (prior "conviction" in this case is not even a requirement to impeach a witness, just the accusation), homosexual activity (remember that there are still back ass-ward states in the Union that have "sodomy" laws), and also as grounds for denying a visa for entry to the US. What is strange about all of these examples is that it ranges from arbitrary to absurd in multiple ways. Thankfully the US State Department has a specified list that breaks this concept down for people that would otherwise be divided on just what constitutes "moral turpitude" *spoken like the guy saying "gingivitis" on those mouthwash commercials years ago* According the the USSD "moral turpitude" is a whole list of fairly random and loosely consistent crimes ranging from murder, arson, rape, lewdness (okay that one doesn't really fit), prostitution, fraud, bigamy (not kidding), abandonment (leaving a child in destitution), tax evasion (willful), robbery, theft, and on and on. Generally on this list are all things that I am against and I think most rational people would be too. So essentially it is a catch-all term for shit "we" don't like (who-the-hell-ever "we" happens to be.) So I am left wondering why we need such a term. Obviously it's easier to insert it as a clause in contracts rather than a whole list of specific items one should not do while under said contract. Probably less obvious to those that are under a contract with such a clause is that it is broad, vague and open to interpretation. Which leaves the door open for some legal department weasel or the executives to suddenly decide that talking about celebrity sex tapes constitutes some form of "moral turpitude" and have somebody fired for exercising free speech. That's just one example off the top of my head about how such a term could be abused.

And just for randomness sake, a little further down the rabbit-hole I hit on a link for "Mayhem." Also something that is considered "moral turpitude."
Now this one really blew my mind. I was certain that I knew what "mayhem" was. I would have put it in the same category as riots, destruction, and general acts of violence. But as it turns out "mayhem" is a specific and well defined crime that is more akin to aggravated battery. Technically, according to the great Wiki, "mayhem" is:

...the intentional and wanton removal of a body part that would handicap a person's ability to defend himself in combat. Under the strict common law definition, this required damage to an eye or a limb, while cutting off an ear or a nose was deemed not sufficiently disabling. Later the meaning of the crime expanded to encompass any mutilation, disfigurement, or crippling act done using any instrument. The noun "mayhem", and the verb "maim", came from Old French mahaigne.

Now that makes sense. Mahaigne, Maim, Mayhem is a nice clear progression. Where or when it got to mean violent ruckus still eludes me but I'm sure at some point I will find out. Thanks for tuning in for this week's random etymology post.

Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution...

Just got this in an email from my Grandmother...

Governors of 35 states have already filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon them. It only takes 38 (� of the 50) States to convene a Constitutional Convention.
Really important! Hope you all do it!
This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, please pass it on.
An idea whose time has come;
For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they didn't pay into Social Security, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform that is being considered...in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn't seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop. This is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come.
Have each person contact a minimum of Twenty people on their Address list, in turn ask each of those to do likewise.
In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.
Proposed 28th Amendment to the United States Constitution:

"Congress shall make no law that applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States ."

While this proposed Amendment makes a hell of a lot of sense and I am all for this as an idea, there are some problems here. Since I am feeling a little lazy this morning (and I really want to bang this out so I can get to work on another project) I just dropped by snopes.com and did a little checking. Right off the bat I found something else that made sense. That being that the above proposed amendment is a little too broadly worded to come out the end of either a constitutional convention or a congressional debate unscathed and unchanged. Of course "we" can circumvent the congressional debate but remember that the "we" that can do this are still politicians, most of which are "lifers" that likely want to continue on in their career path and are probably just smart enough to realize that if they passed such a bill it would first off be mostly meaningless and secondly (if it ended up having any teeth at all) would come back to bite them and their colleagues in the a$$. To the meaninglessness of this (amendment and the assumtions on which it is presented in the email) I present quoted text from snopes.com with a few links.

• Can members of Congress retire with full pay after serving only a single term?

No. This is a long-standing erroneous rumor which we cover in a separate article.

• Are members of Congress exempt from paying into Social Security?

No. As noted in our article about Congressional pensions, although Congress initially participated in the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) rather than Social Security, since 1984 all members of Congress have been required to pay into the Social Security fund.


• Are members of Congress exempt from prosecution for sexual harassment?

No. The passage of Public Law 104-1 (the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995, also known as CAA) made a variety of laws related to civil rights and workplace regulations applicable to the legislative branch of the federal government. Section 201 of the CAA specifically prohibits sexual harrassment (as well as harrassment on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin).


• Did members of Congress try to exempt themselves from current health care reform legislation?

No. This claim was based on the erroneous assumption that congressional efforts to establish a "public option" for health insurance would have required everyone (except members of Congress) to participate in a new federal insurance plan. The proposed legislation would merely have required everyone (including members of Congress) to have health insurance that met minimum benefit standards, and to that end called for the creation of insurance exchanges which would offer health insurance plans to those who could not otherwise afford insurance plans meeting the minimum benefits criteria.

In fact, the final version of the health care reform legislation that was eventually passed in March 2010 stated that "Members of Congress and congressional staff" will only have access to plans that are created by the health care bill or offered through the exchanges established by the bill:
(D) MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN THE EXCHANGE.

(i) REQUIREMENT — Notwithstanding any other provision of law, after the effective date of this subtitle, the only health plans that the Federal Government may make available to Members of Congress and congressional staff with respect to their service as a Member of Congress or congressional staff shall be health plans that are:

(I) created under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act); or

(II) offered through an Exchange established under this Act (or an amendment made by this Act).
(A suggestion by Louisiana Congressman John Fleming that "members of Congress should be forced to enroll themselves in the health care plan they vote for" is therefore moot.)

So in the end, sorry Grandma, things unfortunately are not that simple. While I support the concept of this proposed amendment I really don't see this as any more that a little internet politicking. But for what it's worth, I'm glad there are people out there that do care enough to try to get involved.

And finally, I think Gore Vidal said it best when he said this, "We should stop going around babbling about how we're the greatest democracy on earth, when we're not even a democracy. We are a sort of militarized republic. The founding fathers hated two things, one was monarchy and the other was democracy, they gave us a constitution that saw to it we will have neither. I don't know how wise they were." (Thanks Spencer for the quote.)

EZ Cracker...

...a definable object that represents the stupidity of America, or a least some marketroid's perception of that stupidity.

This is not a new thing to me but I was reminded of it's existence last night while shopping at a local low-class big-box. This invention brings up in my mind several things that are wrong with the world and specifically in the US.
The metaphors are myriad.
The funny man in me imagines Dave Chapelle saying in his all too distinctive way "easy, CRACKER!" in response to some hilarious set up involving ridiculously backward and sublimely "racist" content. You can hear it too, right? Yeah, whatever. Which brings me to another point, who the hell thought that this was a good way to brand such a dumb-ass invention? It sounds like some bad remake of Easy Rider, that is if instead of biker hippies we had biker cops tootling around beating up the hippies.
What really bugs me is that some engineer, who you would think was at least semi-intelligent, made this thing. I mean, seriously, this looks like a complicated devices intended to perform the simplest of tasks. So what was the genesis moment here. Some engineer/inventor wakes up one morning and decides that cracking a couple of eggs is TOO hard and that he has a better way? Some dude smoked too much dope and thought, "AW DUDE!.!.! I just had the most rad idea ever!" Whatever the case it is my assertion that people that see this product and think that this is the thing for them should just give up on life. Maybe I am too advanced but it seems to me that this is the sort of thing that is just dumbed down to aid in diluting the gene pool even more.
What's worse is the damn commercial for this overly Rube Goldbergian contraption.



Pretty much everything that could go wrong given a long enough time scale and enough attempts at cracking an egg is presented here. Which brings me to my main point here. Capitalism is pretty damn stupid sometimes. Such that in the modern world any goofy thing can be considered by some to be a decent way to make money. And this device says a lot to that idea. At 20 bucks a pop, disregarding the "bacon wave", this seems a steep price for something that only has one use. And on top of that you get to clean the damn thing every time you use it. I guess in the age of ubiquitous dish washers (I don't have one but most do) this wouldn't be such a big deal. The point here is that marketing like this is literally going to destroy our world. The Ad people are telling us that we are stupid and inept and therefore need some new thing to save us all from the travesty of -INSERT SIMPLE TASK HERE-. And the hucksters think that for the convenience we will gladly pay two to four times over for something that was made dirt cheap in some foreign land. That leads to trade imbalance. Then add in the rampant and skyrocketing laziness here and what do we get? DOOM!
I suppose there is one legitimate reason to buy this specific contraption, that being for the disabled. But in that case this is being marketed all wrong. Fully able and sensible people don't just smash the egg to bits like the Hulk or decapitate them with a fork like an executioner. And if you think that peeling hard boiled eggs (as a fully able person) is hard then maybe you should get the fuck out of the kitchen.

Be sure to watch for such awesome inventions as the "milk jug caddy for kids" no more wimpy youngsters spilling milk everywhere except in the bowl or glass, and the "EZ Flipper" perfect for flipping pancakes, hamburgers, eggs and any thing else that your silly uncoordinated ass couldn't do without some foolishly over-engineered piece of junk taking up space in your kitchen. When it gets to that point you can be sure that the apocalypse is not too far off.

Why doesn't Israel just nuke Gaza?

It seems to me that Israel has adopted a policy of slow strangulation and starvation of it's Palestinian wards. The situation in Gaza is about as deplorable as any other oppressed group or place in the world past or present. And I dare say it is almost as bad if not worse than the concentration camps organized by the Nazis. It is worse to me because this shit has been going on for decades and there is still no end in sight, whether that end be the sweet release of death or a cessation of Israel's atrocities.

Here's a question. Which is better, slow torturous death grinding out every day for a lifetime or a brief flash of light and destruction?

Obviously neither of those options looks good. In a perfect world I would want Israel to hang up the spurs and guns and come to the table with genuine interest in peace. But that would negate the whole idea of the "peace-process" which is just that, a process (a never-ending shoving and shouting match that leave regular people in the lurch). And the system has been processing for a long damn time. So really either we let the fuckers just keep processing or we hit the reset button and start over.

One way for Israel to do that is just to wipe out the Palestinians wait about 70 years for the outrage to settle and go about their business. Or the Palestinians and their supporters could just wage outright war on the oppressive state that is killing them slowly. (Neither option really works out in the end but then again the "peace-process" isn't working out either.)

Reality time...
So what can we do? For one stop buying shit from Israel. Another would be to yank the plug from the war machine, in other words find some way of stopping the US Govt. providing material support to the Zionist regime. And yet another would be in finding some way of facilitating an alternative, outside dialogue to negotiate a real peace between the two for the people, not the powers that be. Fat chance there. Yet another thing we can do is yell, scream, rant and rave (sort of like I am doing here) in the hopes that something will give. Again fat chance, but for me it makes me feel a little better. And ultimately, we could (and should) give of our time, money and effort to help people in need.

Aid flotilla anyone? Oh, they did that one already. Well shit man... um, try again? Yeah maybe that'll work out. So in conclusion, I have no conclusion and not much in the way of good ideas. However, I do give a shit about what is happening and proudly add my voice to the growing din heard around the world for Israel to stop acting like those that once almost put out their flame forever. Palestinians are people too and they have just as much right to be in their homeland and to enjoy safety and tranquility as the Israelis do.