bureaucracybusters

Archive for the ‘Law’ Category

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

KGB AIRWAYS: PART ONE (OF EIGHT)

In Business, History, Law, Self-Help, Social commentary on November 13, 2014 at 12:12 am

During the Thanksgiving holiday period, 24.6 million passengers are expected to travel on American airlines.

The busiest travel day during the holiday–and the year–will be the Sunday after Thanksgiving as many travelers return from holiday visits

And many of them will become the victims of KGB Airways.

In truth, many airline personnel treat passengers the way KGB agents once treated Soviet citizens–with the arrogance that comes from holding near-absolute power over the lives of others.

Consider the following:

  • From the website of American Airlines:

ESSENTIAL NEEDS DURING EXTRAORDINARY DELAYS

In the case of extraordinary events that result in very lengthy onboard delays, American will make every reasonable effort to ensure that essential needs of food (snack bar such as Nutri-Grain®), water, restroom facilities, and basic medical assistance are met.

We are not responsible for any special, incidental or consequential damages if we do not meet this commitment.

Translation:  On one hand, American promises that it will try to ensure that “essential needs of food, water, restroom facilities and basic medical assistance are met” during “very lengthy onboard delays.” 

On the other hand, if they “do not meet this commitment,” that’s just the passengers’ tough luck.

ACCEPTANCE OF PASSENGERS

American may refuse to transport you, or may remove you from your flight at any point, for one or several reasons, including but not limited to the following:

  1. Compliance with government requisition of space.
  2. Action necessary or advisable due to weather, or other conditions beyond American’s control.
  3. Refusal to permit a search of person or property for explosives or for deadly, controlled, or dangerous weapons, articles or substances.
  4. Refusal to produce positive identification upon request.
  5. Your physical or mental condition is such that in American’s sole opinion, you are rendered or likely to be rendered incapable of comprehending or complying with safety instructions without the assistance of an attendant.
  6. Your conduct is disorderly, abusive or violent, or you
    1. Appear to be intoxicated or under the influence of drugs,
    2. Attempt to interfere with any member of the flight crew,
    3. Have a communicable disease that has been determined by a federal public health authority to be transmissible to other persons in the normal course of flight,
    4. Refuse to obey instructions from any flight crew member,
    5. Have an offensive odor not caused by a disability or illness,
    6. Are clothed in a manner that would cause discomfort or offense to other passengers,
    7. Are barefoot, or
    8. Engage in any action, voluntary or involuntary, that might jeopardize the safety of the aircraft or any of its occupants.

Translation: “American may refuse to transport you, or may remove you from your flight at any point” for just about any reason it wants to give.

Click here: American Airlines Conditions Of Carriage On AA.com

DELAYS, CANCELLATIONS AND DIVERSIONS

American Airlines will provide customers at the airport and onboard an affected aircraft with timely and frequent updates regarding known delays, cancellations and diversions and will strive to provide the best available information concerning the duration of delays and to the extent available, the flight’s anticipated departure time.

We are not responsible for any special, incidental or consequential damages if we do not meet this commitment.

Translation: On one hand, American promises to give customers “timely and frequent updates regarding known delays, cancellations and diversions.” 

On the other hand, American absolves itself from any damages “if we do not meet this commitment.”

And how does all this translate into action?

  • In late March, 2012, a woman was barred from boarding an American Airlines flight because its staff disliked her choice of clothing.  She was wearing a T-shirt bearing the words: “IF I WANTED THE GOVERNMENT IN MY WOMB, I’D F— A SENATOR.”

After taking a seat she was told by a flight attendant that she needed to speak with the captain, who found the T-shirt “offensive.”  He said she would have to change before she could re-board the plane.

The passenger claims this interaction caused her to miss her connection: Her luggage was checked and “changing shirts without spending money wasn’t an option.”

Business Insider ranked American Airlines 8th on a list of The 19 Most Hated Companies In America.

  • In July, 2011, Malinda Knowles, a 27-year-old financial consultant, was kicked off a JetBlue flight at JFK Airport in New York because of her attire–a baggy blue T-shirt and denim shorts.

A male JetBlue employee walking down the aisle noticed Knowles.  He told her he didn’t think she was wearing enough clothing.

An argument erupted when the employee put his walkie-talkie between her legs to see if she was wearing shorts underneath. When Knowles objected, the JetBlue worker brought her off the plane and to a hangar.

There she modeled for the employees, showing that she was wearing shorts.

She returned to the plane, but the same employee once again approached her and said:  “The captain is refusing to fly you today. We need to remove you from the flight.”

After waiting four hours for another flight, she arrived in Florida.  Apparently the crew of that plane didn’t have any problem with her attire.

Knowles has since filed a lawsuit against JetBlue.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

THE COMING IMPEACHMENT

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on November 11, 2014 at 12:48 am

Some Republicans–like Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah–want their new majorities in the House and Senate to make “producing legislation” a top priority.

But others will soon make the impeachment of President Barack Obama their top priority.

Here’s how it will happen.

“We now have the votes and we have the ability to call the agenda, so stop name-calling and let’s actually produce some legislation that helps jobs and the economy and moves our country forward,” Chaffetz said in an interview after Republicans captured the U.S. Senate on November 4.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.quotessays.com/images/jason-chaffetz-1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.quotessays.com/bio/jason-chaffetz.html&docid=3MJFI0cdmEdHuM&tbnid=eN2CsKEX89mpoM:&w=570&h=757&ei=UM5bVLnzIdLdoASoloLgCQ&ved=0CAIQxiAwAA&iact=c

Rep. Jason Chaffetz

“I think the country has figured that out, and they’ve given us the mandate to do it, and we better produce, or they’ll kick us out too.”

Obama has vowed to act unilaterally before year’s end to reduce the number of deportations and grant work permits to millions of illegal aliens living in the United States.

After promising to take executive action on immigration by the end of the summer, Obama delayed his plans until after the elections.  Democrats–especially Senators from conservative states–had warned him that such administrative moves could threaten their reelection.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://grumpyelder.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/illegal-immigrants.jpg&imgrefurl=http://grumpyelder.com/2012/01/the-we-cant-deport-all-12-million-illegal-aliens-scam/&docid=N4ERI9jdeY2G8M&tbnid=P-CXa1aFoyJcLM:&w=500&h=329&ei=BM9bVJrKD4jpoATqmIDwDA&ved=0CAIQxiAwAA&iact=c

Illegal aliens crossing American borders by the millions

But on November 4, most of those Democrats lost anyway, leaving immigration advocates–and their millions of illegal alien constituents–feeling that the delay was needless.

“What I’m not going to do is just wait,” the president said as immigration legislation that the Senate passed in June 2013 remained stalled in the House.

Kentucky’s U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell–who will become Senate Majority Leader in January–has warned that this would be an in-your-face affront to the new majority GOP:

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-production/images/14762/large/a302bc9bea18eca2b87cd656e05105cb.jpg?1357627906&imgrefurl=http://kentuckysportsradio.com/main/mitch-mcconnell-is-about-to-come-on-ksr/&docid=UuX87ufrXGUUhM&tbnid=mIFfN17UeL3g3M:&w=512&h=393&ei=yNBbVLzJJsu5ogSEroDQCg&ved=0CAIQxiAwAA&iact=c

Mitch McConnell

“I think the president choosing to do a lot of things unilaterally on immigration would be a big mistake,” McConnell said. “It’s an issue that most of my members want to address legislatively and it’s like waving a red flag in front of a bull to say, ‘If you guys don’t do what I want, I’m going to do it on my own.’ …

“I hope he won’t do that because I do think it poisons the well for the opportunity to address a very important domestic issue.”

To which Obama responded: “I have no doubt that there will be some Republicans who are angered or frustrated by any executive action that I may take.

“Those are folks, I just have to say, who are also deeply opposed to immigration reform in any form and blocked the House from being able to pass a bipartisan bill.”

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://a.abcnews.com/images/Politics/abc_obama_specreport_121114_wg.jpg&imgrefurl=http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/transcript-obama-press-conference/story?id=17719993&docid=aHyTmgZZkmFu3M&tbnid=d6eKt5qgtY_TPM:&w=640&h=360&ei=ANJbVLDlGIG2oQTWpoGABQ&ved=0CAIQxiAwAA&iact=c

Barack Obama

Republicans could use spending bills to restrict or stop such executive action, by cutting appropriations to those agencies that would be tasked with carrying out Obama’s directives on immigration.

Several Republicans hold the deep-seated view that Obama already has been abusing his constitutional authority.

“Abuse of power” is an impeachable offense under the United States Constitution.  So making this assertion would provide Republicans with the weapon they’ve long sought to drive Obama from the White House.

Republicans, in fact, have a tainted history of using impeachment to remove a President who dared to thwart their agenda.

After the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln, in 1865, Republican President Andrew Johnson tried to carry out Lincoln’s humane policies to reunify the nation after the Civil War.

He issued a series of proclamations directing the former Confederate states to hold conventions and elections to re-form their civil governments. In response, Southern states returned many of their old leaders, and passed Black Codes to deprive freed slaves of many civil liberties.

https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.usnews.com/cmsmedia/48/6360399039911f92c124ef13176dcc/10467FS_DA_090409_worst-johnson.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.usnews.com/news/history/articles/2007/02/16/worst-presidents-andrew-johnson&docid=SpfOJ2azMoXRhM&tbnid=Zbb7WgUNRBLe8M:&w=300&h=300&ei=XdJbVJDOIoH9oATYjYL4DA&ved=0CAIQxiAwAA&iact=c

Andrew Johnson

Congress refused to seat legislators from those states and advanced legislation to overrule the Southern actions.  Johnson vetoed their bills, and Congress overrode him, setting a pattern until he left the White House in 1869.

As the conflict grew between the executive and legislative branches of government, Congress passed the Tenure of Office Act, restricting Johnson in firing Cabinet officials.  Johnson then tried to fire Secretary of War Edwin Stanton–with whom he had an antagonistic relationship.

An enraged Congress impeached Johnson in the House of Representatives.  He avoided conviction and removal from office in the Senate–by one vote.

If President Obama tries to end-run Congress on immigration policy, history will likely repeat itself with another round of impeachment hearings.

It was Mitch McConnell who infamously vowed–immediately after Obama’s election in 2008–to make him “a one-term President.”

Moreover, there is actually no reason for Obama to risk his Presidency by granting the privileges of American citizenship to millions of illegal aliens.

Democrats–and especially Obama–had counted on millions of illegal aliens to retain Democratic control of the Senate.  But those masses of Hispanic voters never showed up at the polls, thus giving Republicans control of both houses of Congress.

If Obama practiced ruthless “Chicago politics” as charged by his enemies, his response would be: “You [illegal aliens] didn’t live up to your end.  Therefore, I have no further responsibility to you.”

Unfortunately for the President, he seems unable to break with his past of backing unpopular causes for little in return.

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

“WE WANT TO GIVE YOU MONEY”: PART THREE (END)

In Business, Law, Law Enforcement, Self-Help, Social commentary on November 7, 2014 at 12:00 am

According to the charity Citizens Advice, online scammers are preying on as many as four million people each year.

How can you protect yourself from becoming one of them?  Look for these characteristics in the emails you receive:

  1. Unsolicited:  You’re told you’ve won a lottery you never entered, or have inherited a fortune from someone you never knew existed.
  2. Addressed Generally: “Attention!” “Dear Friend,” “Attention the owner of this email,” “Hello, Dear.”  Your name is not mentioned, because this email has been mass-mailed to thousands of intended victims.
  3. Appeals to religion: “Hello Beloved in the Lord” or “Yours in Christ” seeks to create a bond with those who deeply believe in God.
  4. Misuse of English: Mis-spellings and faulty grammar usually denote someone–probably a foreigner–using English as a second language.   Examples: Run-on sentences; “you’re” for “your”; “except” instead of “accept”; “Dear Beneficial” instead of “Dear Beneficiary.”
  5. Appeals to Sympathy: “My husband just died” or “I am dying of cancer.”  This is to make you feel sorry for the sender and lower your guard as an intended victim.
  6. Use of Important Titles/Organizations: “Director,” ‘Barrister,” “Secretary General of the United Nations,” “Police Inspector.”  This is to impress recipients and convince them that the email comes from a trusted and legitimate organization.
  7. Request for Personal Information: This includes some combination of: Name / Address / Telephone Number / Bank Name / Bank Account Number / Fax Number / Driver’s License Number / Occupation / Sex / Beneficiary / Passport Number
  8. Claims of Deposit: “We have deposited the check of your fund to your account” is a typical line to instantly grab your attention.  Someone you’ve never heard of claims he has just put a huge amount of money into an account you know nothing about.  Nor can you access it unless you first pay a “contact fee.”
  9. The “Bank” is in Africa: Unless you know you have relatives there, this should be a dead giveaway to a scam.  Africa is a continent kept alive by the charity of other nations.  It’s not in the business of doling out large sums of money to Westerners.
  10. Overseas Phone Numbers: If you call these, you’ll have a huge bill.  So many people skip calling and just send the money “required” to receive their “cash prize.”
  11. Highly Personal Requests: Asking you–someone they’ve never met–to assume the burden of acting as the executor of their “Last Will and Testament.”
  12. Love Scams: The scammer poses as a man or woman–usually outside the United States–seeking love.  A series of emails flows back and forth for days/weeks, until the scammer says s/he will be glad to fly to the United States to be yours.  All you have to do is put up the money for the flight cost.
  13. “Make Money From Home”: With most employers refusing to hire, “work from home” scams  promise a way to support yourself and your family.  You’re required to provide bank information or pay an up-front “registration fee.”  Then you wait for job orders–that never come.
  14. Debt Relief: Scammers promise to relieve most or all of your debt–for a large up-front fee.  You pay the fee–and are not only out of that money but still in debt.
  15. Home Repair Schemes: Huge down payments are required for home repairs that never happen.
  16. “Free” Trial Offcers: The service or product is free for awhile, but you must opt out later to avoid monthly billings.
  17. The Email Claims to Be From the FBI: Often the “address” includes “Anti-Terrorist and Monetary Crime Division.”  One such email was addressed: “Dear Beneficiary” and offered help in obtaining a “fund.”  The FBI is an investigative agency responsible to the U.S. Department of Justice.  It does not resolve financial disputes or secure monies for “deserving” recipients.   If the FBI wants to contact you, it will do so by letter or by sending agents to your address.  The FBI’s own website states: “At this time we do not have a national e-mail address for sending or forwarding investigative information.”
  18. “I Need Help”: You get an email claiming to be from someone you know–who’s “in jail here in Mexico” or some other foreign country.  S/he begs you to send money for bail or bribes to win his/her freedom.  If you get such an email, call the person to make certain.  Don’t rush to send money–chances are it will go directly to a scammer.

FBI Headquarters: Where stopping cybercrime is now a top priority.

There are several commonsense rules to follow in protecting yourself from online scammers:

  • Don’t trust people you’ve never met to want to give you money.
  • Shop online only with well-known merchants who have a good reputation.
  • If an email from a stranger asks you to send money, don’t do it.  If the sender claims to be a friend, call your friend first to make sure it came from him.
  • Don’t click on unknown links–especially those in emails from unknown senders.
  • If you’re required to pay an advance fee–“on faith”–to receive a big amount of money, the odds are it’s a scam.
  • If you can’t find any solid information on a company, chances are it doesn’t exist.
  • Under its new director, James Comey, the FBI is mounting a major effort against cybercrime.  Click on its page at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/cyber for solid advice on how to protect yourself online.
  • If it sounds too good to be true, the odds are: It is untrue.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

‘WE WANT TO GIVE YOU MONEY”: PART TWO (OF THREE)

In Law, Law Enforcement, Self-Help, Social commentary on November 6, 2014 at 12:00 am

According to Internet emails, the world is filled with wealthy, generous people who want to make you–someone they haven’t even met–a multi-millionaire.

Here are some more of their emails:

* * * * *

Hello My Dear Winner.

I have contacted you because I have sent you the first transfer of your wining fund sum of $5000.00 from your winning total amount sum of $3.5Million

USD, therefore you need to contact our Western Union agent Dr. Michael David, western union the Manager to give you the transfer payment information and

MTCN to enable you start picking-up your transfer in any Western Union in your city.

Contact Western Union Agent: Dr.Michael David Email;(westerunion005@hotmail.com) Office phone #:+2348166294234

Urgently Contact him to avoid cancelling your wining fund, so try to contact him immediately today for him to forward the MTCN information to you, indicate the Wining Number registration code of EB-2520 to him, when contacting or calling him +2348166294234,

He will be sending you $5000. 00 daily as per our bank discussion with him.

Do get in touch with me once you have received your money complete.

Sinc erely,

Contact him with email below ;(westerunion005@hotmail.com)

Mrs Susan Obrial

* * * * *

Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
Anti-Terrorist And Monitory Crime Division.
Federal Bureau Of Investigation.
INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUNDS
J.Edgar.Hoover Building Washington Dc
Customers Service Hours / Monday To Saturday
Office Hours Monday to Saturday:

Dear Beneficiary,

Series of meetings have been held over the past 7 months with the secretary general of the United Nations Organization. This ended 3 days ago. It is obvious that you have not received your fund which is to the tune of $2.3million Usd due to past corrupt Governmental Officials who almost held the fund to themselves for their selfish reason and some individuals who have taken advantage of your fund all in an attempt to swindle your fund which has led to so many losses from your end and unnecessary delay in the receipt of your fund.

The National Central Bureau of Interpol enhanced by the United Nations and Federal Bureau of Investigation and the International monetary funds have successfully passed a mandate to the current president of Nigeria his Excellency President Good luck Jonathan to boost the exercise of clearing all foreign debts owed to you and other individuals and organizations who have been found not to have receive their Contract Sum, Lottery/Gambling, Inheritance and the likes. Now how would you like to receive your payment? Because we have two method of payment which is by Check or by ATM card?

ATM Card: We will be issuing you a custom pin based ATM card which you will use to withdraw up to $3,000 per day from any ATM machine that has the Master Card Logo on it and the card have to be renewed in 4 years time which is 2018. Also with the ATM card you will be able to transfer your funds to your local bank account. The ATM card comes with a handbook or manual to enlighten you about how to use it. Even if you do not have a bank account.

Check: To be deposited in your bank for it to be cleared within three working days. Your payment would be sent to you via any of your preferred option and would be mailed to you via UPS. Because we have signed a contract with UPS which should expire in the next three weeks you will only need to pay $280 instead of $620 saving you $340 So if you pay before the three weeks 2011 you save $340 Take note that anyone asking you for some kind of money above the usual fee is definitely a fraudsters and you will have to stop any communication with every other person if you have been in contact with any. Also remember that all you will ever have to spend is $280.00 nothing more!

Nothing less! And we guarantee the receipt of your fund to be successfully delivered to you within the next 24hrs after the receipt of payment has been confirmed.

Note: Everything has been taken care of by the Federal Government of Nigeria the International Monetary Funds, The United Nation and also the FBI and including taxes, custom paper and clearance duty so all you will ever need to pay is $280.

DO NOT SEND MONEY TO ANYONE UNTIL YOU READ THIS: The actual fees for shipping your ATM card is $420 but because UPS have temporarily discontinued the C.O.D which gives you the chance to pay when package is delivered for international shipping We had to sign contract with them for bulk shipping which makes the fees reduce from the actual fee of $620 to $280 nothing more and no hidden fees of any sort!

To effect the release of your fund valued at $2.3million Usd you are advised to contact our correspondent in Africa the delivery officer Mr Danny Blessed with the information below,

Full Name:Mr Danny Blessed
Email: dannyblessed07@gmail.com
Telephone: +1 910-300-7443
You are advised to contact him with the informations as stated below:

Your full Name..
Your Address:…………..
Home/Cell Phone:…………..
Occupation:………………..
Preferred Payment Method (ATM / Cashier Check)

Upon receipt of payment the delivery officer will ensure that your package is sent within 24 working hours. Because we are so sure of everything we are giving you a 100% money back guarantee if you do not receive payment/package within the next 24hrs after you have made the payment for shipping.

Yours sincerely,
Miss Donna Story
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20535

* * * * *

Good day;

I wish to inform you that your outstanding debt has been scheduled for immediate payment to you Via Western Union Money Transfer . You are to contact Western Union for your payment of USD$1,500.000.00 USD with the below information’s.

FULL NAME:………………….
CONTACT ADDRESS:…………….
DIRECT PHONE/CELL NUMBER……….(for easy communication)

Send the above listed information’s to the Fund Verification Department Office on the information below:

Contact Person: Mrs.Rosemary Umar
Mobile:  +229 9873 5986
E-mail: ( western.union099@administrativos.com )

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

“WE WANT TO GIVE YOU MONEY”: PART ONE (OF THREE)

In Law, Law Enforcement, Self-Help, Social commentary on November 5, 2014 at 3:13 pm

Receiving unsolicited, get-rich-quick emails has become a regular headache for millions of Internet users.

And the reason for this is that, all too often, they succeed in defrauding their recipients. In 2013, losses from Nigerian scams totaled $12.7 billion.

What follows is a sample of such emails–and ways to spot their fraudulent characteristics.

* * * * *

Hello Dearest Beloved in the Lord,

Greeting and peace be upon you as you read this message, I know this letter  will come to you as a huge surprise, but I implore you to take the time to go through it carefully as the decision you’ll make will go a long way to facilitate my peaceful repose and the  manifestation of my last wish. I am Mrs. Grace Ford an aging widow of 67 years old suffering from long time chronic organ failure resulting from terminal cancer which has left me paralyzed and bedridden for the past 3 years.

I was recently notified my late husband Mr. Terry Ford who died in the Air France Flight 447 crash had an outstanding and unclaimed cash deposit account worth the sum of US$5,500,000.00 whose deposit documents bears my name as the next of kin and is presently facing danger of being declared a dormant account and returned to the government treasury.

My present state of health does not permit me to take any direct action here and I do not wish to have the wealth of my late husband end up in the hands of undeserving government officials. I need a very honest and God fearing Christian who I can make the executor of my WILL and have this unclaimed funds released to so it could be used for charity works.

MY GREATEST WISH IS TO GIVE THIS FUNDS SECURED AND USED FOR CHARITY WORKS. I choose you from the several email contacts presented to by the nursing staff and after honest prayers to the LORD to bring me a helper and I decided to contact you if you may be willing and interested to handle these trust funds in good faith before anything happens to me.

I am in urgent need of your cooperation and I believe a divine force is driving me to contact you for this noble task; you must not fail me and the millions of the poor people in our today’s WORLD. This is my legitimate inheritance and NOT stolen money and there are no dangers involved as all is 100% RISK FREE with concrete legal proof.

Please if you would be able to cooperate with me as my legally appointed executor of my last Will and Testament and ensure my inheritance is put to good use benefiting the less privileged and victims of natural disasters around the globe.

Yours Sister in the Lord

Mrs. Grace Ford. 

* * * * *

Atten,

Western Union Under Eco Bank Head Office Plc has finalize all the necessary
arrangement and your fund $1.6musd has been approved by the board of directors
of ECO BANK, you will be receiving $5000 per day.

Our attorney will go to the Inland Revenue tax office to obtain a letter of
administration tax clearance approval on your behalf from high Court.

Sender Name: Duray Wilson
MTCN:  619.356.0005
Question: When
Answer: Today

Endeavor to email him the following information for Re- Confirmation,

You’re Receiver Name————–
You’re Country——————–
You’re City———————–
Your Tell———————–
You’re Test Question————–
You’re Test Answer—————-
You’re Id————————-

Forward the information here ( wester20union@yahoo.com ) Or Call Mr.
Kenneth Aka On tell phone: +229-68441938

Thanks
From Hon Mrs. Juliet Adams

* * * * *

Dear Friend,

I want you to know that all my efforts to transfer the funds to you through courier company were of no avail due to the amount of money involved is very large to be sent out through courier company.I was later made to understand by the federal ministry of finance that the funds could not be transfer to you via courier company.

Therefore,in order to transfer the funds to you,I have made all the necessary arrangement with Bank Of Africa here in Benin Republic for the wire transfer of your funds $1.5M US Dollars into your account in your country. Actually,bank to bank wire transfer could be the best way to transfer this funds to you for security purpose.

Meanwhile,I have told Dr. Rev. Stephen Okeke the director of Bank Of Africa here in Benin Republic to transfer the usd$1.5MILLION UNITED STATES DOLLARS into your bank account in your country through bank to bank ktt wire transfer. However, all the necessary arrangements of transfer the usd$1.5M UNITED STATES DOLLARS into your account in your country was made with Bank Of Africa here in Benin Republic. Infact, I thank God very much for all the improvement that was made from Bank Of Africa Benin Republic because every thing goes normally.

As for my agreement with the Bank Of Africa, they promised that your funds will be transfer to your bank account in your country as soon as you supply them your banking information. Dr. Rev. Stephen Okeke the Director of Of Africa Benin Republic said that they need your banking information to able them meet up with the wire transfer of your funds,he also said that a new international(non-resident)account should be opened in their bank on your behalf.I suggest that you should send them an application and give them your banking information where you want to receive the funds to avoid any mistake or wrong transfer.

Please write a letter of application to Dr. Rev. Stephen Okeke the director of Bank Of Africa here in Benin Republic on the given address below.

ATTN: Dr. Rev. Stephen Okeke
Bank Of Africa Benin Republic
E-mail: (bofafrica71@yahoo.com.hk)
TEL: +229-9858-8727

Fill the blank spaces below with your banking information as requested by the bank director Dr. Rev. Stephen Okeke and send the letter of application to the given email address above.

Bank Name=
Bank Address==
A/c Number===
Routing Number=
Swift Code====
Beneficiary==
Age/Sex===
Telephone
Fax Number===
A copy of your Picture====
Home Address=
Occupation:==
Your Country=====

Please, Send them your banking information to able them transfer your funds directly to your bank account without any delay.

I want you to contact the director of Bank Of Africa Benin Republic with their telephone number and email address TEL:+229-9858-8727 (bofafrica71@yahoo.com.hk) once you receive this message.

I am waiting for your urgent response.

Thanks and Remain Blessed.

BEST REGARD
Mr. Mohamad Jawad.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

A FRATERNITY OF RAPISTS

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Social commentary on November 4, 2014 at 12:18 am

Niccolo Machiavelli, the father of political science, never attended a university or enrolled in one of its fraternities.

Niccolo Machiavelli

And it’s obvious that members of the Phi Kappa Tau (PKT) fraternity at Georgia Tech never read Machiavelli’s advice on not incriminating yourself through your own writing.

In his masterwork, The Discourses, more than 500 years ago, Machiavelli warned:

I have heard many wise men say that you may talk freely with any one man about everything, for unless you have committed yourself in writing, the “Yes” of one man is worth as much as the “No” of another. 

And therefore one should guard most carefully against writing, as against a dangerous rock, for nothing will convict you quicker than your own handwriting….

You may escape, then, from the accusation of a single individual, unless you are convicted by some writing or other pledge, which you should be careful never to give.

On October 30, two civil lawsuits were filed in an Atlanta court against the Phi Kappa Tau fraternity for fostering a “pro-rape” mentality among brothers at Georgia Tech.

Click here: Here Are Disturbing Examples Of A ‘Pro-Rape’ Attitude At A Georgia Tech Frat

The lawsuits claim this attitude went unchecked, and led to at least two sexual assaults.  Each lawsuit was filed on behalf of an anonymous woman.

With Machiavelli’s counsel in mind, consider how juries in two civil lawsuits will soon consider the following lyrics of a “traditional song” of the fraternity.

Sung to the tune of “The Candy Man,” it goes:

WARNING!  

GRAPHIC LANGUAGE BELOW!

Who can take two ice picks
Stick’em in her ears
Ride her like a Harley while he pokes her in the rear.
Who can take some acid
Pour it on her twat
Then watch the cunt muffin rot
Who can take a blender
Stick it in her cunt
Turn the sucker on and purrate (sic) her little twat.
Who can take a chainsaw
Saw the bitch in two
Take the top half and give the bottom half to you

According to the lawsuit, the minutes for a March 6, 2013 house meeting stated:

“Rape is good.”
“[Fraternity member] is down for rape.”
“Blacklight party this Friday! Watch out for rapebait.”

In October, 2013, a leaked email from the fraternity’s chairman brought PKT national–and unwanted–recognition.  It outlined seven steps for hooking up with women: “Encounter, Engage, Escalate, Erection, Excavate, Ejaculate, Expunge.”

It then noted, “IF ANYTHING EVER FAILS, GO GET MORE ALCOHOL. I want to see everyone succeed at the next couple parties.”

The suits claim an unnamed PKT member in January raped an unnamed woman by following the description laid out in the “rapebait” email: He and other fraternity members “plied” her with a large amount of alcohol until she blacked out.

The same PKT brother followed the same protocol when he sexually assaulted another young woman,  who was physically incapacitated from alcohol in November 2012 at a fraternity-sponsored event, according to the lawsuits.

In April, 2014, Georgia Tech’s chapter of PKT was disbanded for three years after the “rapebait” email surfaced.

Naturally, PKT has a response to the lawsuits.  Its communication director, Tyler Wash, quickly issued a statement:

“The Fraternity is disappointed that the plaintiffs’ attorneys chose to exploit the hypersensitivity of today’s college environment toward sexual assault by drafting the complaints in a manner that sensationalizes completely inappropriate statements, while at the same time alleging that a Georgia Tech student committed criminal rapes of two different women.”

In short: Filing this lawsuit on behalf of two women who claim they were raped by fraternity members takes unfair advantage of the newly-heightened awareness of rape on college campuses.

The PKT national chapter, the local chapter and the chapter adviser are named as defendants in both lawsuits

Interestingly, the lawsuits haven’t been filed against the perpetrator. The student was pursued by the school and expelled.

Nor have the lawsuits been filed against Georgia Tech.  Yet it’s well-known that colleges often fail to police the activities of campus fraternities, claiming these are private organizations that fall outside their jurisdiction.

While the upcoming trials will open a window on the darker side of campus fraternities, they will not end the victimization of women by members of such fraternities.

A 2007 study found that fraternity men were three times more likely to commit rape than other men on college campuses.

According to John Foubert, one of the authors of that study: “What we found was highly instructive. Before they got to college, fraternity men were no different from other male students. They committed the same number of incidents of sexual assaults before college.

“But here’s the difference. Guys who joined a fraternity then committed three times as many sexual assaults as those who didn’t join. It is reasonable to conclude that fraternities turn men into guys more likely to rape.

“Our study confirmed that fraternities provide the culture of male peer support for violence against women that permits bad attitudes to become treacherous behavior.”

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

RIDE ON AND KILL ON

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Politics, Social commentary on November 3, 2014 at 1:32 am

San Bruno resident Sutchi Hui, 71, was visiting San Francisco when Death found him-–just before 8 a.m. on March 29, 2012.

No doubt he felt safe before he died.  After all, he was walking through a crosswalk in the affluent Castro District, one of the city’s safest areas.

And it was there that bicyclist Chris Bucchere plowed into him.

Bucchere, a software engineer, was also hospitalized for injuries in the crash. Later that day, he posted his thoughts about the accident to the Mission Cycling AM Riders Google group.

“I was already way too committed to stop.  The light turned red as I was cruising through the middle of the intersection and then, almost instantly, the southern crosswalk on Market and Castro filled up with people coming from both directions….so, in a nutshell, blammo.

“I couldn’t see a line through the crowd and I couldn’t stop, so I laid it down and just plowed through the crowded crosswalk in the least-populated place I could find.”

Bucchere said he lost consciousness and awoke five minutes later.  Someone told him that a 71-year-old injured pedestrian had been taken to the hospital.

“I remember seeing a RIVER of blood on the asphalt, but it wasn’t mine,” Bucchere wrote. “I really hope he ends up OK.”

Bucchere dedicated the post to his helmet, which “died in heroic fashion today as my head slammed into the tarmac…. May she die knowing that because she committed the ultimate sacrifice, her rider can live on and ride on. Can I get an amen? Amen.”

An “amen” would also be in order for the cause of justice.

Although prosecuted by the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office, what Bucchere got was the following sentence: Three years of probation and 1,000 hours of community service.  He would not serve any jail time.

He might as well have posted that because his helmet made “the ultimate sacrifice, her rider can live on and ride on–and kill on.”

The District Attorney’s office–which has one of the worst conviction records in the country–lost no time in congratulating itself.

“Our goal is to send a message to cyclists about safety,” D.A. George Gascon said. “Just because you are riding a bicycle doesn’t mean all bets are off.  All of the rules of the road that apply to everyone else apply to you, too.”

Gascon said Hui’s family did not want to see Bucchere imprisoned.  Since prosecutors didn’t expect a judge to  sentence him to jail, they offered probation and community service in the plea deal.

That’s what the life of a pedestrian is worth in San Francisco.

In July, 2011, bicyclist Randolph Ang, 23, ran a red light on the Embarcadero–and slammed into 68-year-old Dionette Cherney. She later died of her injuries.

In March, 2012, Ang pleaded guilty to one misdemeanor charge of vehicular manslaughter, as part of an agreement with prosecutors.

Ang faced up to a year in county jail, but a judge sentenced him to three years’ probation and 500 hours of community service, and ordered him to pay $15,375 in restitution to the Cherney family.

According to the website of the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition:

“Pedestrians Always Have the Right of Way. In the crosswalk or not, bike riders and drivers are required to yield to pedestrians.”

“Stay on the Streets.  It’s illegal and unsafe to ride on the sidewalk if you are over the age of 13.”

So much for the official version.

In reality, pedestrians risk their lives whenever they use the sidewalk–especially on tourist-crowded Market Street.

And what role do police play in enforcing the bike laws?  None.

At best, a San Francisco cop might stop an law-breaking bicyclist and give him a citation. This amounts to a bicycle traffic ticket. The bike isn’t confiscated.

Most cops patrol in patrol cars. If they see a bicyclist whizzing down a sidewalk, they aren’t going to cut him off and slap handcuffs on him.

If police show no interest in protecting pedestrians, it’s largely because the Mayor and Board of Supervisors clearly favor the rights of law-breaking bicyclists over those of law-abiding pedestrians and drivers.

The greatest proof of this comes on the last Friday of every month. It’s called Critical Mass.

In this event, hundreds of bicyclists deliberately–at the height of evening rush hour–overwhelm the streets of downtown San Francisco, bringing vehicular and pedestrian traffic to a halt.

Founded in 1992 in San Francisco, the purpose of Critical Mass is not formally stated but nevertheless clear: To protest against those who use cars and public transit–and intimidate their riders and pedestrians alike.

Critical Mass riders often use a tactic known as “corking” to maintain the cohesion of the group: A few riders block traffic from side roads so that the mass can race through red lights without interruption.

Cars, buses and pedestrians are expected to wait patiently for however long these self-indulgent thugs-on-bikes flood the streets.

In March, 2010, reports in local media claimed that then-Police Chief George Gascon was considering shutting down Critical Mass.

Four years later, the bike-thuggies continue to tie up traffic and threaten the safety of any pedestrians stupid enough to think they have a legal right to stroll sidewalks and cross streets.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

TWO LIVES, TWO LEGACIES

In History, Law, Politics, Social commentary on October 28, 2014 at 1:04 am

Benjamin C. Bradlee and Richard M. Nixon.

Both men were driven to succeed.  And both achieved fame and power in doing so.

Bradlee made his name in journalism.

Benjamin C. Bradlee

Nixon made his in politics.

Richard M. Nixon

Both served in the United States Navy in the Pacific during World War II.

Both had strong connections to John F. Kennedy.

  • Bradlee knew him as a friend and reporter during JFK’s years as a Senator and President.
  • Nixon–as a Senator and later Vice President–knew Kennedy as a Senatorial colleague and as a political adversary, unsuccessfully contesting him for the Presidency in 1960.

For both, 1948 was a pivotal year.

  • Bradlee joined The Washington Post as a reporter.
  • Nixon, as a U.S. Representative, accused Algier Hiss, a former State Department official, of having been a Communist spy.  Hiss was eventually convicted of perjury and sent to prison.

Both attained their positions of maximum power in 1968.

  • Bradlee became executive editor of The Washington Post.
  • Nixon became the 37th President of the United States.

Bradlee made it his business to dig up the truth.  Nixon made it his business to distort the truth–or to conceal it when distortion wasn’t enough.

Nixon and Bradlee had their first major clash in 1971 with the Pentagon Papers, a secret government study of how the United States became enmeshed in the Vietnam war.

  • Although the Papers concerned events that had occurred during the Presidencies of John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson, Nixon was outraged at their release by a former Defense Department analyst named Daniel Ellsburg.
  • Nixon ordered his Attorney General, John Mitchell, to enjoin The New York Times–which had begun publishing the study–from continuing to publish its revelations.
  • Bradlee, as executive editor of The Washington Post, urged his publisher, Katherine Graham, to take over where the Times had left off.
  • The controversey ended when the Supreme Court ruled, 6–3, that the government failed to meet the burden of proof required for prior restraint of the press.

In 1972, Bradlee and Nixon squared off for their most important battle–a “third-rate burglary” of the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate Hotel.

Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein and Benjamin C. Bradlee

  • Bradlee backed two young, aggressive reporters named Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, as they probed the burglary.
  • This led to their discovering a series of illegal dirty tricks the Nixon re-election campaign had aimed at various Democratic opponents.
  • The Post’s revelations led to the formation of the Senate Watergate Committee, the discovery of Nixon’s tape-recordings of his private–and criminal–conversations, and, finally, to Nixon’s own resignation in disgrace on August 9, 1974.
  • Bradlee was one of only four men who knew the identity of “Deep Throat,” Woodward and Bernstein’s famous undercover source, then-FBI Associate Director W. Mark Felt.  Felt outed himself in 2005.
  • Nixon, who died in 1994, never learned the identity of the most famous whistleblower in history.

Bradlee became an advocate for education and the study of history.

Nixon entered history as the only American President forced to resign from office.

 Richard Nixon saying farewell at the White House

Bradlee became a media celebrity.  Nixon became a media target.

  • Bradlee was portrayed by Academy Award-winning actor Jason Robarbs in the hit 1976 film, All the President’s Men.
  • Nixon was portrayed–in Oliver Stone’s 1995 drama, Nixon–by Anthony Hopkins.

Bradlee and Nixon each published a series of books.

  • Bradlee’s: That Special Grace and Conversations With Kennedy focused on his longtime friendship with John F. Kennedy.  A Good Life: Newspapering and Other Adventures was Bradlee’s memoirs.
  • Nixon’s:  Among his 11 titles: Six Crises; RN: The Memoirs of Richard Nixon; The Real War; Leaders; Real Peace; No More Vietnams; Beyond Peace.

After leaving the White House, Nixon worked hard behind-the-scenes to refashion himself into an elder statesman of the Republican Party.

  • Throughout the 1980s, he traveled the lecture circuit, wrote books, and met with many foreign leaders, especially those of Third World countries.
  • He supported Ronald Reagan for president in 1980, making television appearances portraying himself as the senior statesman above the fray. 
  • For the rest of his life, he fought ferociously through the courts to prevent the release of most of the infamous “Watergate tapes” that chronicled his crimes as President.
  • Only since his death have many of these been made public.

Nixon died on April 22, 1994.

  • Eulogists at his funeral included President Bill Clinton and former Presidents Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, California Governor Pete Wilson and the Reverend Billy Graham.
  • Despite his efforts to portray himself as an elder statesman, Nixon could never erase his infamy as the only President to resign in disgrace.
  • To this day, he remains a nonperson within the Republican Party.  While numerous Republican Presidential candidates quote and identify themselves with Ronald Reagan, none has done the same with Nixon.

Bradlee remained executive editor of The Washington Post until retiring in 1991.  But he continued to serve as vice president-at-large until his death on October 21, 2014.

  • In 2007, he received the French Legion of Honor, the highest award given by the French government, at a ceremony in Paris.
  • In 2013, he was named as a recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Barack Obama.  He was presented the medal at a White House ceremony on November 20, 2013.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

“WE DON’T CARE, WE DON’T HAVE TO”

In Bureaucracy, Business, Law, Politics, Social commentary on October 23, 2014 at 2:52 pm

Comedian Lily Tomlin rose to fame on Rowan & Martin’s Laugh-In as Ernestine, the rude, sarcastic switchboard operator for Ma Bell.

She would tap into customers’ calls, interrupt them, make snide remarks about their personal lives.  And her victims included celebrities as much as run-of-the-mill customers.

On one occasion, she called then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, letting him know that “it really takes a Hoover [vacuum cleaner] to dig up the dirt.”

She introduced herself as working for “the phone company, serving everyone from presidents and kings to the scum of the earth.”

But perhaps the line for which her character is best remembered was: “We don’t care.  We don’t have to. We’re the phone company.”

Watching Ernestine on Laugh-In was a blast for millions of TV viewers during the mid-1960s and early 70s.  But confronting such corporate arrogance in real-life is no laughing matter.

Clearly, too many companies take the same attitude as Ernestine: “We don’t care.  We don’t have to.”

This is especially true for companies that are supposed to safeguard their customers’ most sensitive information–such as their credit card numbers, addresses, emails and phone numbers.

An October 22 “commentary” published in Forbes magazine raises the highly disturbing question: “Cybersecurity: Does Corporate America Really Care?”

And the answer is apparently: No.

Its author is John Hering, co-founder and executive director of Lookout, which bills itself as “the world leader in mobile security for consumers and enterprises alike.”

Click here: Cybersecurity: Does corporate America really care?

October proved a bad month for credit card-using customers of Kmart, Staples and Dairy Queen–all of which have reported data breaches involving the theft of credit card numbers.

Earlier breaches had hit Target, Home Depot and JPMorgan/Chase.

“One thing is clear,” writes Hering.  “CEOs need to put security on their strategic agendas alongside revenue growth and other issues given priority in boardrooms.”

Hering warns that “CEOs don’t seem to be making security a priority.”  And he offers several reasons for this:

  • The sheer number of data compromises;
  • Relatively little consumer outcry;
  • Almost no impact on the companies’ standing on Wall Street;
  • Executives may consider such breaches part of the cost of doing business.

“There’s a short-term mindset and denial of convenience in board rooms,” writes Hering.

“Top executives don’t realize their systems are vulnerable and don’t understand the risks. Sales figures and new products are top of mind; shoring up IT systems aren’t.”

Anyone who’s ever watched the operation of an airport luggage carousel has seen this principle in action.

If you’ve checked your luggage, then you need to head for the baggage carousel as  quickly as you can get out of the airplane.

Because if you don’t get there in time to grab your own bag, there’s a good chance that someone else will.

The reason?  There’s no security officer there to make sure that your luggage goes only to you, and not to someone else.

Experienced baggage thieves know this.  So they wait at the luggage carousel for a piece of luggage to go around two or three times.  If no one collects it, they assume the owner isn’t there yet–and make off with it.

Sure, there might not be anything of value in it–from the thief’s viewpoint, anyway.

No diamonds.

No jewels.

No expensive cameras.

For the thief, it’s a setback–but only a minor one.  He simply dumps the luggage and perhaps goes back to the carousel for another shot at finding a bag stuffed with valuables.

But for the traveler-victim, it’s a disaster.

Most–if not all–of his clothes are gone.

Anything personal–such as gifts he was bringing for friends or relatives–is gone.

So are any vitally-needed medications–if he was foolish enough to store these in his suitcase instead of a carry-on bag.

And does the airline care?

Don’t be stupid.

Why should they?  They got your money when you bought the plane ticket.

That’s all they wanted from you.  And the truth is, that’s all they’ve ever wanted from you–even during the “golden age of air travel” before airplanes became “flying buses.”

The skies of United were never so friendly that airlines felt an obligation to ensure that their passengers’ luggage was actually waiting for its rightful owners.

And the same principle–or lack of principle–applies with such companies as banks, department stores and insurance companies that hold the most private information of their customers.

There are two ways corporations can be forced to start behaving responsibly on this issue.

First, some smart attorneys need to start filing class-action lawsuits against companies that don’t take steps to safeguard their customers’ private information.

Second, there must be Federal legislation to ensure that multi-million-dollar fines are levied against such companies–and especially their CEOs–when such data breaches occur.

Only then will the CEO mindset of “We don’t care, we don’t have to” be replaced with: “We care, because our heads will roll if we don’t.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

POLYGRAPH BY COPIER

In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Social commentary on October 22, 2014 at 12:01 am

Ever heard of “polygraph by copier”?

If you haven’t, here’s how it works:

A detective loads three sheets of paper into a Xerox machine.

“Truth” has been typed onto the first sheet.

“Truth” has been typed onto the seond sheet.

“Lie” has been typed onto the third sheet.

Then a criminal suspect is led into the room and told to put his hand against the side of the machine.

“What is your name?” asks the detective.

The suspect gives it.

The detective hits the copy button, and a page comes out: “Truth.”

“Where do you live?” asks the detective.

The suspect gives an address, the detective again hits the copy button, and a second page appears: “Truth.”

Then comes the bonus question: “Did you or did you not kill Big Jim Tate on the evening of….?”

The suspect answers.  The detective presses the copy button one last time, and the sheet appears: “Lie.”

“Well, well, well, you lying little bastard,” says the detective.

Convinced that the police have found some mysterious way to peer into the darkest recesses of his criminality, the suspect “gives it up” and makes a full confession.

Yes, contrary to what many believe, police can legally use deceit to obtain a confession.

In 1973, the Supreme Court ruled, in United States v. Russell: “Nor will the mere fact of deceit defeat a prosecution, for there are circumstances when the use of deceit is the only practicable law enforcement technique available.”

In that case, the Court narrowly upheld a conviction for methamphetamine production even though the defendant had argued entrapment.

So what types of interrogative deceit might a police officer use to develop admissible evidence of a suspect’s guilt?

The general rule is that deception can be used so long as it’s not likely to cause an innocent person to commit a crime or confess to a crime that s/he didn’t commit.

Click here: The Lawful Use of Deception – Article – POLICE Magazine

Consider the following examples:

  • A detective is interviewing a suspect in a rape case.  “Oh, that girl,” he says, thus implying that the victim was a slut and had it coming.  The suspect, thinking he’s dealing with a sympathetic listener, starts bragging about his latest conquest–only to learn, too late, that his listener isn’t so simpatico after all.
  • “We found your prints on the gun”–or on any number of other surfaces.  Actually, there are few good places on a pistol to leave prints.  And those that are left can be smeared.  The same goes for other surfaces.  But if a suspect can be led to believe the cops have his prints, a confession is often forthcoming.
  • A police officer is interrogating a suspect in a murder case.  “He came at you, didn’t he?” asks the cop.  The suspect, who murdered the victim in cold blood, thinks he has an escape route.  “Yeah, he came at me”–this confirming that, yes, he did kill the deceased.
  • “Your partner just gave you up” is a favorite police strategen when there is more than one suspect involved.  If one suspect can be made to “flip”–turn–against the other, the case is essentially wrapped up.
  • Interrogating a bank robbery suspect, a cop might say: “We know you didn’t do the shooting, that you were only the wheelman.”  This implies that the penalty for driving the getaway car is far less than that for killing someone during a robbery.  In fact, criminal law allows every member of the conspiracy to be charged as a principal.
  • “I don’t give a damn what you did,” says the detective.  “Just tell me why you did it.”  For some suspects, this offers a cathartic release, a chance to justify their guilt.
  • The “good cop/bad cop” routine is known to everyone who has ever seen a police drama.  Yet it continues to yield results so often it continues to be routinely used.  “Look, I believe you,” says the “good” cop, “but my partner’s a real asshole.  Just tell me what happened so we can clear this up and you can go.”
  • “So,” says the detective, “why do you think the police believe you did it?”  “I have no idea,” says the suspect, confident that he isn’t giving up anything that might come back to haunt him.  “Well,” says the cop, “I guess you’ll just have to make something up.”  Make something up sounds easy, but is actually a trap.  The suspect may end up giving away details that could incriminate him–or lying so brazenly that his lies can be used against him.

So is there a best way for a suspect to deal with an invitation to waive his Miranda right to remain silent?

Yes, there is.  It’s to refuse to say anything and to ask for permission to call a lawyer.

That’s the preferred method for Mafia hitmen–and accused police officers.

Any cop who finds himself under investigation by his department’s Internal Affairs unit automatically shuts up–and calls his lawyer.

Any other response–no matter how well-intentioned–may well result in a lengthy prison sentence.