Are Anti-H-1B Fanatics Prone to Workplace Violence?

Don Tennant

If there's one thing I've learned over the many years that I've been covering the H-1B visa issue, it's that there are some people in the U.S. IT work force who appear to be unstable. I have received direct threats in response to some of my blog posts on H-1B-related topics-warnings of the dire consequences I will face because of the views I've expressed-and some indirect suggestions about the fate that should befall people who share views they attribute to me, whether or not I actually hold them. It all begs an extremely important question: To what extent do these people pose a threat of violence in the workplace?


An example of the type of indirect threat I'm talking about came in response to my recent post, "Why the Anti-H-1B Argument Isn't Being Taken Seriously."

Don Tennant, when the 40 million unemployed Americans finally wake up and realize that they will never again be able to afford to buy food, fuel, or clothing, they will do that which they should have done years ago: overthrow the federal government of the USA. Then, they shall round up all you Republican traitors who maximized your corporate profits by giving our jobs to the freaking immigrants. These unemployed, starving, American patriots shall give you traitors your long-overdue comeuppance: violent death.

I've gotten used to this stuff over the years, and it generally doesn't faze me. But I found this one particularly disturbing, simply because the author wasn't the typical whacked-out, anonymous poster with some ridiculous, militaristic pseudonym. It came instead from an IT professional who provided his full name and an email address, which I was able to verify (I receive an email notification whenever a reader posts a comment, so I was able to confirm that the comment came from that email address, barring some elaborate spoofing hoax). I went to the individual's LinkedIn page and learned all about his very impressive professional status.


According to his LinkedIn profile, he lives in the Washington, D.C., area and he has a law degree and experience as a Web administrator, network administrator and digital forensics examiner. As I was reading this guy's profile, I couldn't help but wonder why he had no qualms about being publicly identified as someone who advocates the overthrow of the U.S. government and the violent death of "Republican traitors."


I also couldn't help but wonder whether this guy poses a threat to his coworkers at the "small IT consulting company" where, according to his profile, he currently works as an "IT generalist." What are the warning signs of workplace violence that we can watch out for when we have people like this-not to mention those who are inclined to make more direct, anonymous threats-working alongside us?


Rich Cordivari, vice president of learning and development at AlliedBarton Security Services, a provider of security personnel for workplace environments, has compiled a list of warning signs of workplace violence that we all would do well to familiarize ourselves with. Cordivari cautions against overreaction, but encourages employees to report disturbing behavior:

While every situation and set of circumstances is unique, there are some warning signs that are commonly exhibited by individuals in need of assistance. If you are feeling uncomfortable in any situation with a co-worker, or noticing these warning signs, you should notify a manager or someone in a position of authority within your organization.


Remember that just because someone exhibits one of these behaviors does not necessarily mean they are prone to display an act of violence. It is when someone has a noticeable change in behavior, if these behaviors are observed in combination or if the behavior is displayed constantly that you should consider telling someone about the situation.

Here's the list of behaviors that Cordivari says you should be on the lookout for:


  • Excessive tardiness or absences. An employee who consistently leaves early without authorization, or presents numerous excuses for shortening the work day, should set off an alarm. This is a significant sign if the individual is typically prompt and committed to a full work day.


  • Increased need for supervision. Generally, an employee requires less supervision as he becomes more proficient at his work. An employee who exhibits an increased need for supervision, or with whom the supervisor must spend an inordinate amount of time, may be an individual who is signaling a need for help. Managers should be alert to such a change and consider offering professional intervention if needed.


  • Lack of performance. If an employee who is normally efficient and productive experiences a sudden or sustained drop in performance, there is reason for concern. This is actually a classic warning sign of dissatisfaction, and the manager should meet with the employee immediately to determine a mutually beneficial course of action.


  • Change in work habits. As in the case of reduced productivity, an employee exhibiting inconsistent work habits may be in need of intervention. If you think about your peers at work, they are typically quite consistent in their work habits. If habits change, the manager has reason to suspect the individual is in need of assistance, and action should be taken.


  • Inability to concentrate. If an employee is suddenly unable to concentrate, this may indicate that he is distracted and in trouble. A manager should be notified to try to encourage the employee to seek assistance.


  • Signs of stress. If an employee who has traditionally adhered to safety procedures is suddenly involved in accidents or safety violations, stress-a significant contributor to workplace violence-may be indicated.


  • Change in attitude. A sustained change in behavior is often an indication of an employee in difficulty. People are typically quite familiar with the personalities of their peers and are often quick to notice significant changes. Your work environment should be managed in such a way as to ensure trust and open communication.


  • Weapons fascination. A classic behavioral warning sign is someone who is fascinated with weapons. This should be easily recognized and reported.


  • Drugs and alcohol. Watch for changes in the person's mood or character when drugs or alcohol are used. It's important that every organization has some methodology in place to identify and assist victims of drug or alcohol abuse.


  • Not taking responsibility for his actions. Using excuses and blaming others is a classic behavioral warning sign that is easy to identify but just as often ignored by managers. A worker who engages in this behavior is typically signaling for assistance and may require counseling.

Subscribe to our Newsletters

Sign up now and get the best business technology insights direct to your inbox.


More from Our Network
Add Comment      Leave a comment on this blog post
Mar 28, 2011 8:01 AM hoapres hoapres  says: in response to R. Lawson

Lets just use some common sense.

It's like the family table.  If you don't have enough to feed your family then you don't feed your guests.

H1Bs are apparently contrary to Don's belief "Guest Workers".  We don't have enough food to feed the family (i.e. enough jobs for Americans) so the "guests" (H1Bs) simply go home.

Problem solved.

Don't come back with the "best and brightest" garbage.  The true geniuses come to the US on an O1 Visa.

Mar 28, 2011 8:28 AM EngiNERD EngiNERD  says:

User1926658    says: "If Anti H-1B people are prone to violence you would think it would have happened by now."

Help  me  out.........   I don't recall seeing,  reading,  hearing anything about violence in the workplace by anti-H-1b   activists.

It is a  sure  bet  if it happened it would be all over the Indian websites that do a good  job on reporting on many facets of the H-1b  issue.

Can  any one document a case?  ( besides the rhetoric )

When  Kevin Flanagan  (Bank  of America)   committed suicide years ago  that story  was all  over the Indian websites,  yet as best as I  could tell  only  one American paper  covered the story. 

Mar 28, 2011 8:32 AM hoapres hoapres  says: in response to EngiNERD

A figment of Don's imagination who apparently believes that the US standard of living should decline to third world standards with low cost foreign import labor putting Americans out of work.

Mar 28, 2011 8:51 AM Bob Bob  says:

Well, it looks like others beat me to it in pointing out the actual score when it comes to the H-1b issue:

1) Times Square failed bomber here on h-1b

2) Catastrophic logic bomb planted by h-1b at fannie mae

3) Self inflicted gunshot of American citizen in BOA parking lot after training his H-1b replacement and losing his job.

but they forgot this one

4) DC metro bomber last year - Homeland security wont release his immigration history, even to a US Senator, but he had a degree in computer science and worked in telecom


In case 3 Don, he wouldn't have been eligible for 'company counseling' as you suggested, because he was no longer an employee - but I'm sure his family greatly appreciates your very sincere concern.

So it seems the actual record of violence on the h-1b issue shows that H-1bs direct their anger against the company and random American citizens (3 out of the 4 actual cases, we are protected only by their natural incompetence), whereas the lone citizen case directed their anger inwards to themselves after he left.  Would anyone reading this article and taking it at face value have ever guessed that, or was your article just a tad bit slanted?

Your thinly veiled McCarthy-esque smear of H-1b opponents based on your hearsay of an internet message board posting's origin doesn't change the actual record. 

While any threats or veiled threats of any kind of violence on a message board are a dangerously stupid, illegal and immoral thing to do, i could go out and taunt people (which you clearly have been doing) on the internet on any topic and eventually get the kind of threat i was fishing for, from someone who ought to know better, even a ford vs chevy forum.

It would be absurd for me to then write an article suggesting that employers take a close look at their ford or chevy driving employees for signs of potential violence, but that's pretty much what you've done here.

You've reached a new low Don, and that's an achievement

Mar 28, 2011 8:53 AM URABlindManDon URABlindManDon  says:

Hey Don.

So you get an air medal for posting this dirge!!! The guy states that the anger of US citizens over this "guest worker"  visa fraud and the offshoring of the middle class jobs to everyone BUT US citizens is starting to boil over and that there will hopefully be retribution for people like you who choose to ignore the other 99% of the picture. And you use that to base a whole piece on all visa fraud opponents as violent???? You wonder why you got your marching orders from Computerworld (allegedly)?Balanced ????

We will prevail in bringing some sanity back to this unbelievably corrupt and unjust situation and you will hopefully get what you deserve.

Mar 28, 2011 9:20 AM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to P Henry

You've got to be kidding. Tell you what. If you can find me any other source that has reported as extensively and explicitly as I have about the threats and retaliation made against Jay Palmer by people at Infosys, I'll take your comment seriously. Until then, be advised that if I choose to write about the direct and indirect threats that have been made against me personally, I'll continue to have very little patience for anyone who tries to portray that as some sort of one-sided argument.

Mar 28, 2011 9:23 AM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to R. Lawson

Roy, I know too many people who have lost their jobs under unjust circumstances and whose financial stability has been completely shattered, who have just as little patience for threatening remarks and hatefulness as I do. So I don't buy the 'symptom' argument, and I'll have to plead not-guilty to stereotyping anyone. I have all the respect and admiration in the world for people who are anti-H-1B in the sense of being against all of the damage the program has inflicted. I'm one of them. But the blame game has gotten a little out of hand. If I ever threaten someone, the blame resides nowhere but with me. And if I'm ever hateful or snide or mean-spirited or unjustly accusatory towards anyone, the blame resides nowhere but with me.

And I trust you'll forgive me for having no interest in approaching someone who advocates rounding me up in a group of people to be put to violent death. I find it a teensy bit creepy.

Mar 28, 2011 9:34 AM Donna Conroy Donna Conroy  says: in response to BB

This column turns my stomach.  How dare you attempt to paint patriotic Americans--who are standing up for the freedom to compete for job openings in our own country --to violent criminals!

This intimidation is a not-so-subtle-threat that if an IT professional posts comments you don't like - voila!  You will expose them in their workplace.

Your political intimation does not scare me.  Nor does it scare the board at Bright Future Jobs.  Expose all you want; we will not be intimidated.

Donna Conroy blogs occasionally on HuffingtonPost and has been quoted in Businessweek, New York Times, CIO Magazine,and Computerworld on the impact of corporate visa programs on the US IT workforce. Conroy has spent over 20 years in IT support, technical writing and project management in business, education, and government. She can be reached at donnaconroy (at) brightfuturejobs.com.

Mike Rothschild has worked in all aspects of the industry with focus on SAS, UNIX, MVS, systems integration and automation. Despite holding an MS in Information Science with 30 years experience he, along with other colleagues, faced cyclical unemployment. Several of his positions included offshoring jobs; one included returning jobs to US shores because the company found they couldn't offshore the work. He can be reached at mike (at) brightfuturejobs.com

Brendan Kavanaugh is an ERP Specialist (oracle EnterpriseOne) with over 19 years experience maintaining and installing large scale systems. Originally of British origin, he became a US citizen 9 years ago. He helped the ecological group EIA right the injustice of the ivory and tiger trade, along with maintaining the Whaling ban against immense pressure from whaling countries. Now he's committed to undoing the injustice of US citizens who have the technology skills from being criminally ignored and replaced by American based corporations.

Baxter Swiley is political organizer and consultant who has run campaigns across the country. He has helped scores of progressive candidates find their voice for equality and fairness. Swiley served as Congressman Schakowsky's (D-IL) political director; in 2004, he served as Midwest Director for a Democratic presidential campaign. Having lettered all four years in college football, Swiley understands the central role of teamwork in any winning strategy.

Mar 28, 2011 9:42 AM Bob Bob  says: in response to Bob

This article employs 2 non legitimate tactics of debate, begging the question', and guilt by association

The title 'Are Anti-H-1B Fanatics Prone to Workplace Violence?

' is very much an Are you still beating your wife' question, in a very provocative title, which he then supports with the absolute flimsiest of evidence, his hearsay of the origin of a message board posting, while totally ignoring the actual record of violence among H-1b and citizen tech worker populations.

The guilt by association' fallacy is used to imply that anyone who protests H-1b agrees with such alleged threats, even though it is extremely unlikely such persons have ever met

Fallacy webpage

Begging the question http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/begging-the-question.html

Guilt by association fallacy http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/guilt-by-association.html

Very usefull webpage for understanding Don's articles

Mar 28, 2011 9:51 AM EngiNERD EngiNERD  says:

Who  is doing the violence, the  H-1b  abuse ????

Try  this,  a    GOOGLE  search:      H-1B  visa    Violence

The Tennant  article  is  cited   but  OOOOH  take a look-see what else appears.


Mar 28, 2011 9:54 AM P Henry P Henry  says: in response to Don Tennant

Why so angry, Don?  Are you prone to workplace violence?

Mar 28, 2011 10:27 AM hoapres hoapres  says: in response to P Henry


What does Don expect ?

A "warm welcome mat" by Americans who lost their jobs by H1Bs ???

Mar 28, 2011 10:32 AM hoapres hoapres  says: in response to Don Tennant

>> I know too many people who have lost their jobs under unjust circumstances and whose financial stability has been completely shattered, who have just as little patience for threatening remarks and hatefulness as I do. <<

And the point is ??

I should be happy and be like a "lap dog" while my standard of living drops to the third world.

>>  So I don't buy the 'symptom' argument, and I'll have to plead not-guilty to stereotyping anyone. <<


You are sterotyping everybody who is against H1Bs.

>>I have all the respect and admiration in the world for people who are anti-H-1B in the sense of being against all of the damage the program has inflicted <<

No you don't.

>> I'm one of them <<

No you are not.

Mar 28, 2011 10:43 AM R. Lawson R. Lawson  says: in response to Don Tennant

"Roy, I know too many people who have lost their jobs under unjust circumstances and whose financial stability has been completely shattered, who have just as little patience for threatening remarks and hatefulness as I do. "

I don't have much tolerance for that myself.  I believe it is a distraction from the core issues and that people who make threats work against their own interests.

That said, I think that journalists need to be very careful about stereotyping people based on political views.  Your blog treads into that territory - in my opinion.

The reason I believe that is because your headline begs the question: "If people believe X, are they likely to do Y?"  It's the classic slippery slope argument. 

It's like asking "how often do you beat your wife" as if "not at all" isn't a valid answer.  I feel personally slighted by the article, even though I realize that you had another person in mind when you wrote it.  In order for you to understand why I feel this way, replace "Anti-H-1B" with something describing an issue you are passionate about.  Also the word fanatic implies that anyone who is anti-H-1b is also a fanatic.  I realize that wasn't your intent but that is still how the text is interpreted.

I can understand not wanting to interview the guy who wants you rounded up and violently killed.  If I were a reporter that would be the first person I spoke with - because I think understanding the people who hate you is much more important than understanding the people who love you.  Of course, if I were a reporter I'd probably be killed in a violent manner because I'd let curiosity get the best of me.

Mar 28, 2011 11:47 AM Dolores Dolores  says:

If you want to generate a lively and well-read blog, I think that focusing on the foibles of the H-1Bs and their handlers will go a lot farther than looking for misdeeds in a population that has been conspicuous by their sheepish submission to the global labor arbitrage onslaught. It so happens that words are all that can be pinned on anti-H-1B activists to date, and nowhere near loud or copious enough (IMO). Not so with the erstwhile "immigrants" - in addition to frequent acts of visa fraud, there are numerous accounts of their charm in the workplace and outside. Some listed here already, some not. The respective track records speak for themselves. I'm just saying.

Mar 28, 2011 11:56 AM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to R. Lawson

I adamantly disagree with the 'how often do you beat your wife' analogy, Roy. If the headline had read something like, 'How Prone Are Anti-H-1B Fanatics to Workplace Violence,' then you'd have a point. The headline simply raised a question for discussion. In my opinion, it's a very legitimate, logical question.

There's been a lot in the news recently about online bullying of teenagers. Suppose someone had written a post titled, 'Are Online Bullies Prone to Workplace Violence?' Is that a legitimate question to ask? Would anyone have had a problem with that headline or that blog topic? Would anyone have asserted that the writer was proclaiming that online bullies are prone to workplace violence? What's the difference between that and my post? I have never been subjected to online bullying, but I have been subjected to online threats. So I raised the workplace violence issue in a context I'm familiar with.

Mar 28, 2011 12:20 PM hoapres hoapres  says: in response to Don Tennant

>>In my opinion, it's a very legitimate, logical question.<<

It's not legitimate or logical.

Come on Now

Lets get real

Using your definition, EVERYBODY against H1Bs is an EXTREMIST

We don't have any evidence of (at least significant) workplace violence directed against H1Bs.

Although I am surprised that workplace violence against H1Bs has not occurred due to the number of companies that are "H1B infested".

Mar 28, 2011 12:35 PM Bob Bob  says: in response to Don Tennant

Don says

"I adamantly disagree with the 'how often do you beat your wife' analogy, Roy. If the headline had read something like, 'How Prone Are Anti-H-1B Fanatics to Workplace Violence,' then you'd have a point."

"Are Anti-H-1B Fanatics Prone to Workplace Violence?" vs

"'How Prone Are Anti-H-1B Fanatics to Workplace Violence'

talk about splitting hairs

Don's actually engaging in a very lame form of 'Gonzo journalism', that could perhaps be called 'e-gonzo-lite', since so many of his articles are based on nothing more than internet message board posts in response to his own articles (at least Hunter Thompson got out of the house for his work, even if you didnt 'get' his style)

Read the following and see if you agree

From wikipedia

"Gonzo journalism tends to favor style over accuracy and often uses personal experiences and emotions to provide context for the topic or event being covered. "


"Thompson would instigate events himself, often in a prankish or belligerent manner, and then document both his actions and those of others"

sound familiar?


Mar 28, 2011 1:17 PM jake_leone jake_leone  says:

"Are Anti-H-1B Fanatics Prone to Workplace Violence?"

Don you are stereotyping people who have a political opinion as being "Prone to Workplace Violence"

Don, I care about you, and I would not want anything to happen to you.  You a good guy, even if we disagree on some things.

This guy who is threatening you is wrong, if you can safely persuade him to seek help, you are heroic.  And want to say, the U.S. and the World is better so long as people like Don Tennant can keep on commenting, freely, about what they believe.

But as you know, some might classify me as one of the "Anti-H-1b" people.  And so I would be nice if you could also do an article on all the many reasonable critics (including many of the people who leave reasonable comments).

Maybe you could entitle it "Many anti-H-1b people are actually quite reasonable." (just a suggestion). 

Mar 28, 2011 2:16 PM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to Bob

Splitting hairs? The difference lies in the absence of presupposition vs. the intrinsic presupposition, which is the whole point. With all due respect, if you're unable to make that distinction, the problem doesn't lie with me.

Mar 28, 2011 2:35 PM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to jake_leone

Thank you for the kind sentiment, Jake, I appreciate it. When you say the question 'Are H-1B Fanatics Prone to Workplace Violence?' stereotypes people who have a political opinion, what you're saying is that I am characterizing people who have that political opinion as 'fanatics.' I am doing no such thing. I made very clear in my post that I was referring to people who make direct and indirect threats of violent retribution. That is not expressing an opinion. I've repeatedly said, and demonstrated, that I value differing opinions, which is why I write this blog in the first place. Making threats against people is an entirely different thing. So please understand that I am stereotyping no one. I am referring only to those who threaten some sort of violent retribution against someone who expresses an opinion. I find it difficult to understand why no one who has commented so far appears to have any problem with people who threaten violent retribution against someone who expresses an opinion. And I find it equally difficult to understand why the question of whether people who do that are prone to workplace violence wouldn't be a legitimate, important one to raise.

Mar 28, 2011 2:51 PM hoapres hoapres  says: in response to Don Tennant

>> I am doing no such thing <<

Yes you are.

Mar 28, 2011 4:19 PM Drunken Economist Drunken Economist  says: in response to Don Tennant

Wow, Mumbai Don, this is a new low for you. So, as a fellow beggar of questions, here are mine for you:

- Did you get like +50 more pageviews for this muckraking?

- Will you sleep peacefully in your bed tonight, given this new low, that, dare I say encompasses the definition of the term 'yellow journalism.'

Not that the deadwood press was any better.. seriously, DonnyBoy, if this is what you're posting you're OUT of ideas and should hang up your keyboard.

Guess there's no suitcase of Renbi / Rupees headed your way this month.

Seriously? I think once this blows over there will be many folks just 'not doing business' with you. The 'death threat' post by you, or Vivek Wadhwa is or any other fading 'pundit' is a sign of desperation.

-Drunken Economist



Mar 28, 2011 4:26 PM Dolores Dolores  says: in response to Don Tennant

When it comes to workplace disgruntlement and violence, I'm afraid that our South Asian friends have us beat. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/sacked-workers-burn-boss-to-death-2232350.html

Has any grumpy, anti-H-1B American even come close?

Mar 28, 2011 4:44 PM R. Lawson R. Lawson  says: in response to Don Tennant

I think a more fair headline would read "Are people with extremist viewpoints prone to workplace violence?"  It is up to the reader to decide which viewpoints are extremist or not.  You could then introduce whatever events caused you to write the article.

Back when the war was a hot topic and I opposed it (when it wasn't politically correct or safe to do that) I got hate-mail and some direct threats.  Would it be fair for me in a blog to write "Are war-supporters prone to workplace violence?"

I've had threats - much more explicit than the one you've received - from Indian H-1b holders.  Would a fair blog title be "Are Indian H-1b holders prone to workplace violence?"  Absolutely not - and I would more than likely be chastised by you for inciting fear.

I believe the email you received, assuming you quoted exactly what was said, crossed the line.  No matter what viewpoint someone has - pro or against an issue - we should be able to hold this discussion without fear of retribution of any kind. 

I don't know who sent that email to you, but I assume they may be reading this post.  So to that person: "You crossed the line and you should apologize".  There are better ways to express disagreement than that.

I think jake_leone summarized things well - I share his sentiments.  I think you are a good person, and we don't agree on all things.  That's a product of being an American where we are free to think for ourselves and form our own opinions. 

I also don't support the personal attacks against you - be they threats or just being mean spirited comments.  I think intelligent people can find more more eloquent ways of voicing their disagreement (or agreement) with your blog entries.

My father and I are political opposites, and we are still friends.  I don't understand why our country has become so divided and so divisive.  My theory is that talk radio and news pundits have something to do with that - their tenor is one of "agree with me, or you must be with the terrorists".

Can't we all just get along?   

Mar 28, 2011 4:57 PM R. Lawson R. Lawson  says:

OK, last comment and then I've reached my own personal quota on responding to blog entries

To those who say this is "bad journalism" because of the headline, if this were an article and not a blog entry I would agree.  I believe that people - journalists included - are free to be as unfair and biased as they wish in their blogs.  And you are free, so long as the blog owner allows, to voice your displeasure. 

I don't agree with the blog title because I think it misleads (even though that wasn't Don's intent) - but I also don't think it violates the rules of good journalism since it isn't journalism.

The only time I think blogs should follow the rules of good journalism is when they are intended to be providers of news.  A good example of this is the Huffington Post - which I believe started as a blog but now is in some hybrid category.

If I have a complaint with publications and their incorporation of blogs, it is that they should explain where the lines are so we know when they have been crossed.  I expect the lines will be drawn differently in each organization.

Mar 28, 2011 5:10 PM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to R. Lawson

That wasn't an email to me, Roy. As I explained in the post, it was a reader comment, which included his full name and email address. You can go back and read it yourself. Email him. Ask him why he wrote what he wrote. And ask everybody else why nobody challenged him.

Mar 28, 2011 5:17 PM P Henry P Henry  says:

The question could just as easily been asked "Are H-1B workers prone to workplace violence?".  After all, Faisal Shahzad (failed times square bomber) came here on an H-1B.  Also, I recall there was a buried story a few years ago about an H-1B worker who planted a "logic bomb" for fannie mae.  Most recently, a whistle blower at Infosys received several direct threats because he exposed this program for the cheap labor scam that it is.  How come you didn't bring those up, Don?

Mar 28, 2011 5:36 PM BB BB  says:

Are there any scientific studies on possible immigration status vs. workplace violence correlations out there that someone could reference here? Don Tennant, this could be something that you could get a column or two out of.

Anecdotally, the Postal Service is reputed to have a high rate of this, even though I would assume that there are probably not very many H-1B's (or H-1B haters for that matter) there.


Mar 28, 2011 5:40 PM jobs4us jobs4us  says:

I am truly sorry that you have received some serious and dangerous threats to your well being. Clearly the actions of this individual are unwarranted. These actions should be addressed by legal authorities, not by the media.

The actions of this individual should not overshadow the collective concerns of talented, qualified American citizens, unjustly deprived of our civil rights and denied the opportunity to compete for jobs in our own country -  due to corporate greed and political corruption, and media ignorance.

It  is inappropriate and unjustified to judge the mental health of any group of people who have been been denied their rights to compete for jobs in our own country - no matter their race, religion, anything.  The unfortunate categorization that unemployed Americans pose workplace violence insults the integrity and professionalism of thousands of Americans.  Are we angry. You bet. Are we violent? Let our actions speak for themselves... NO!! 

It is wrong that unemployed Americans, talented and hardworking people who have paid our dues and our taxes, people with state of the art skills and at the tops of our games - are generalized as an at risk group because we were laid off and replaced by less qualified, less experienced citizens from foreign countries.

Like cancer, the injustices of corporate visa fraud have been growing undetected for far too long.  We must remove this malignancy - the fraudulent misuse of US work visas, to restore the health of our country and its people.  

I'm sorry if you think not rolling over to play dead while surrendering my paycheck to people who lack skills and never set foot in my country is considered at risk behavior, so be it.   I'm not getting mad, I'm getting political and plan to be part of the solution to fix the problem once and for all. NOW.

The bloggers who thoughtfully respond to your articles are trying to get our message out to the media... And, as you've pointed out, the media is not listening.

What if the person who wrongfully threatened you just lost their house, family, and healthcare and is screaming out for help and the opportunity to be heard? I can only imagine this person is exceptionally stressed and even more frustrated, maybe they are just trying to get someone to listen to the fact that CRIMES are being committed and they affect all Americans.

We can't pick up the phone and call 911 to fix this problem.... but we need to do something.  We are all frustrated, confused and concerned. Why is no one listening?  What needs to happen to make authorities finally respond?  Will the last American working in US tech please turn off the lights?

Let's hope we can peacefully resolve these injustices like MLK and Egypt instead of Libya.

Mar 28, 2011 5:45 PM Vincenzo Vincenzo  says: in response to Don Tennant

To all who read this -

In my opinion, Don has reached a new low and, as a result, I will not be benefiting him, nor IT Business Edge, with my clicks to the IT Business Edge site.  I've had it.  It's all just link bait.  Please join me in just saying "No" to Don T. and IT Business Edge.  Thank you.  Over and out.

Mar 28, 2011 6:02 PM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to jobs4us

I appreciate your kind sentiment. Regarding this:

"I'm sorry if you think not rolling over to play dead while surrendering my paycheck to people who lack skills and never set foot in my country is considered at risk behavior, so be it."

The risky behavior I'm questioning is making direct and indirect threats of violent ramifications against people who express their views. What's the point in saying that the risky behavior I'm questioning is not rolling over and playing dead? Why equate those two opposite extremes? You have great arguments you can make to support your views. Why completely distort what I wrote beyond recognition to support your views?

Mar 28, 2011 6:41 PM Test Test Test Test  says:

I'm not sure where you're going here Don. The civil rights movement had its share of nutcases and Black Panthers, but the movement itself was right and just. Just about every opinion has its extremists and this has little to do with the core of the arguement itself.

The H-1B cap should not be raised, because there is no shortage of programmers and there is a sufficient number of visas within the cap to cover anyone who is truly gifted. The number of programming jobs is going down, not up--it is impossible to justify raising the cap.

That said, how some choose to react to losing their livelyhoods as little to do with the validity or invalidity of the arguement; it only reflects on the character of the individual in question. After all, we may have a constitutional right to be treated equally but losing ones constitutional rights still does not justify violence. It also does not justify threats of violence.

Mar 28, 2011 6:42 PM Test Test Test Test  says: in response to Don Tennant

I'm not sure where you're going here Don.  The civil rights movement had its share of nutcases and Black Panthers, but the movement itself was right and just.  Just about every opinion has its extremistslook at both sides of the abortion debateand this has little to do with the core of the arguement itself.

The H-1B cap should not be raised, because there is no shortage of programmers and there is a sufficient number of visas within the cap to cover anyone who is truly gifted.  The number of programming jobs is going down, not up--it is impossible to justify raising the cap.

That said, how some choose to react to losing their livelyhoods as little to do with the validity or invalidity of the arguement; it only reflects on the character of the individual in question.  After all, we may have a constitutional right to be treated equall-and H-1B may violate this right-but losing ones constitutional rights still does not justify violence.  It also does not justify threats of violence.

Mar 28, 2011 7:19 PM R. Lawson R. Lawson  says:

Don, you've done a great job lately exposing some serious problems regarding this same issue.

However, this particular blog posting stereotypes people associated with a particular political view and, intended or not, marginalizes those of us with genuine concerns regarding an issue that has a real and measured impact on our profession.

I suspect that anyone who has lost a job to offshoring, free trade, or as a result of training their replacement may be considered a "fanatic" at one point or another.  These "fanatics" are also victims and although their reaction is over the top, it is expected human behavior. 

Why don't you interview this person (if he is willing) and get to know him as a person?  What event would cause an intelligent person, with a law degree and industry recognition, to contemplate a revolution and other violent acts?  There must have been some event that provoked such a response.

You have done a fine job listing symptoms of a problem.  But the root problem isn't that this person is violent.  That is a symptom.  The root problem is a very serious one. 

It has caused some people to kill themselves in company parking lots (Bank of America story).  Self destruction.

It has caused others to become more politically active and to find positive ways to solve the problem.  Problem solvers.

It has caused others to espouse violence and revolution.  Victim becomes the victimizer.

And others may care about the issue, but not enough to act one way or the other.  Perhaps the are too busy with more important things than the future of our profession and country, like the Super Bowl. 

My point is that although we have seen people kill themselves and make threats (as of now, we've not seen actual violence - knock on wood), those people are outliers.  Most people either speak at the polls, engage in some political action, or choose to do nothing.

I'm more interested in knowing why such a large number of people choose to turn their brains off and the TV on - and choose to not be involved in the future of their country. 

Mar 29, 2011 8:05 AM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to Test Test

I absolutely agree -- how some people react to losing their livelihoods has absolutely nothing to do with the validity of invalidity or the argument. But that's not the question that was raised in this post. In fact, it really has nothing to do with the question that was raised in this post. In any case, I appreciate the thrust of the sentiment you expressed in this comment, and the way you expressed it.

Mar 29, 2011 8:17 AM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to Indian_H1B

I sincerely appreciate your input. That's why I threw the question out there. I never intimated in any way that I considered the answer to my question to be a foregone conclusion. I did not. If the answer to the question is no, that's terrific. But I remain absolutely convinced that it is a legitimate question to raise for discussion. If others feel that the question should never have been asked, that's fine. As long as they don't threaten to subject me to violent death for asking it.

Mar 29, 2011 8:39 AM Dr. Gene Nelson Dr. Gene Nelson  says: in response to jobs4us

For IT Business Edge readers interested in the massive scale of both the H-1B Visa program and the political corruption that enabled its growth, please read my 2007 article, "The Greedy Gates Immigration Gambit." http://tinyurl.com/37l8ry Additional background regarding corrupt political processes is found at "American Colleges Have Become Career Destruction Factories." http://tinyurl.com/nn28sp 

In my view, the H-1b Visa program is all about class warfare, with the economic and political and economic elites pitting the world's poor against the American middle class for their enrichment.

Personally, I have been fighting this corruption (which I believe falls under the federal RICO statutes) for about 3 decades. I have testified twice against the controversial H-1B Visa program in the U.S. House of Representatives and twice to the National Academy of Sciences. I attempted to run for the U.S. House of Representatives on this issue. I have helped to organize several peaceful demonstrations against employer abuse of work visa programs.

As I note in my 2007 article, the proponents of the H-1B Visa program spend incredible sums and employ unethical (and criminal) lobbyists to achieve their desired ends. As "Project Censored" noted, coverage of the H-1B Visa program has been actively censored in the media, likely because the owners of the media outlets benefit from the increased profit margins associated with the quasi-indentured servitude of the employer-designed H-1B Visa program.

I know that programmers such as Kevin Flanagan, Lori Bonatakis, and Ed Curry have died either directly or indirectly as a result of the actions of the economic and political elites who promote the H-1B Visa program. There are many other experienced American citizen technical professionals who have quietly died as a consequence of employer abuse of the H-1B visa program. Opposing employer abuse of work visa programs has become a war for survival.

While I am an advocate for working "within the system" to correct an unjust situation, the U.S. has had a history of bloody, lethal riots when citizens have been deprived of the most basic civil right, namely access to gainful employment. I believe that a step in the right direction would be to mandate the use of E-Verify (that checked for issuance of duplicate identities) for all employers. As a 18 February 2008 San Jose Mercury article by Mike Swift noted, the ranks of illegal immigrants are being swollen by H-1B Visa overstayers from India. A Google search of "Illegal emigres defy the image. Fastest Growing Source? It's India" will locate this article. 'White Collar' illegal immigrants are even more docile than work visa beneficiaries.

Aware U.S. citizens need to work towards a common purpose of ending  corporate welfare programs (like H-1B) via such organizations as NumbersUSA, Bright Future Jobs, Programmer's Guild, and the American Engineering Association.  Like Don Tennant, I urge that the tone of this debate be kept civil.

Mar 29, 2011 8:50 AM mark p mark p  says: in response to P Henry

I worked for a company where an H-1B threatened the life of the CEO (both were Indian).    So I think that P Henry has a valid point.  In both this particular case and the upset IT worker who threatened the Republicans there is a common thread.  Both were upset about losing their jobs.

Mar 29, 2011 9:39 AM walterbyrd walterbyrd  says:

Don, you really love BS insinuations, and innuendo, don't you? That way, you can imply all sorts of outright lies, and cowardly hide behind your "all innocent" act "hey, I'm only asking" right?

How about "is Don Tennant a child molester?" Or are pro-H1B corporate shills like Don Tennant really terrorists? Hey Don, have you stopped beating your wife? Just asking, you understand.

Mar 29, 2011 9:51 AM walterbyrd walterbyrd  says:

Honest question Don. If an African American said something that might imply violence, would it fair to ask "are African American prone to violence?" What is it were a Muslim? What if it were a Democrat? What is it were an environmentalist? Are vegetarians prone to violence? Would a dishonest CEO cause you to ask if all business execs are dishonest? Is it ever fair to blame a political viewpoint, held by millions of people, because of the words of one person?

Mar 29, 2011 10:11 AM walterbyrd walterbyrd  says:

Don brazenly violates the privacy of one his commentators. Don posted personal details about someone who responded to one of his articles. Don used the person's email address and looked them up and put details which would be easily used to locate this person using their linkedin profile.

Mar 29, 2011 10:40 AM Jobs4US Jobs4US  says: in response to Dr. Gene Nelson

Dear Dr. Nelson,

Thank you very much for your informative and thoughtful response. I appreciate your leadership in this effort and can only imagine how frustrating it is present clear, compelling  facts that are intentionally ignored by Congress.. Guess deep campaign contributions and drinking the Bill Gates koolaid hypnotize our elected officials and successfully keep we the little people exactly where we belong.  

You make several very interesting points that make me wonder....

- What will it take to get law enforcement involved to crack down on this widespread fraud - and enforce laws already on the books?  And, which agencies need to do this?

- What does it take to initiate class action lawsuits against the perpetrators of these crimes - employers, B1/B2 body shops, politicians, lobbyists, Mr. Gates, and partner in crime, convicted felon Jack Abramoff?

- Are there any lawmakers in office with the guts to stand up and say enough? If so, who?

It is hard for me to believe that Americans will accept this lying down.  Hopefully Wisconsin is just the beginning of a force for Americans to reclaim own country.

All readers, please recommend organizations where we can join together and flex big political muscle -  Let's send the criminals to jail - and seek damages - starting with the illegal misuse of work visas, segregated employment that violates civil rights and EEOC laws.

Game over corporatocracy.  it is time Americans reclaim our country, careers, our American dreams and the American dreams of future generations.

Thank you with deep appreciation

Mar 29, 2011 11:01 AM Paul137 Paul137  says:

The scandal of the H-1B program is just one manifestation of how our ruling elites do their own thing.

And this brings to mind Angelo Codevilla's stunning essay from last summer, "America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution" (spectator.org/archives/2010/07/16/americas-ruling-class-and-the/print).  It's L O N G, so I'll just quote a couple of striking paragraphs:

"Americans' conviction that the ruling class is as hostile as it is incompetent has solidified. The polls tell us that only about a fifth of Americans trust the government to do the right thing. The rest expect that it will do more harm than good and are no longer afraid to say so."


"How the country class and ruling class might clash on each item of their contrasting agendas is beyond my scope. Suffice it to say that the ruling class's greatest difficulty -- aside from being outnumbered -- will be to argue, against the grain of reality, that the revolution it continues to press upon America is sustainable. For its part, the country class's greatest difficulty will be to enable a revolution to take place without imposing it. America has been imposed on enough."

Codevilla's "country class" is the rest of us.  He skates around the question of how our country can actually be restored to its people, implying that doing it via argument will be akin to threading a very small needle.  I'll guess that, deep down, he anticipates that the strife won't be limited to loud arguments.

Mar 29, 2011 1:15 PM hoapres hoapres  says: in response to Don Tennant

>> That's why I threw the question out there.

You threw the question out there in a poor attempt to imply that people against the H1B program were crackpots.

>> ...absolutely convinced...

You would be wrong.

An alien concept but it is called "investigative journalism".  If "violence" has occurred then you report it.  If it hasn't then you don't.

Mar 29, 2011 2:11 PM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says:

You know, I truly wondered if I'd ever see the day when a reader would challenge the disortions and false accusations thrown out by people like the reader you challenged. Thank you for your courage and for your willingness to set the record straight. I truly appreciate it.

Mar 29, 2011 2:33 PM Vincenzo Vincenzo  says: in response to Vincenzo

So, Don is one of a very few that has reported on the Infosys scandal, and what do I do?  I post a somewhat scathing comment for this blog entry.  I've come to my senses and apologize to Don for my quick-to-judgement comment.

Mar 29, 2011 2:48 PM Test Test Test Test  says: in response to Don Tennant

One issue with this blog - when you type two dashes in a row, it starts crossing out text, rather than typing two dashes or a long dash

Mar 29, 2011 4:40 PM Gabe Gabe  says:

I've got zero problem with the content of your post, Don, but I can't help but agree with Roy and several of the other commenters -- the title kinda irresponsibly asks the question solely of ANTI-H1B fanatics when, as has been pointed out in some of your earlier blog posts, there's plenty of fanaticism on both sides of the debate (even if you end up seeing more of one side than the other around here).

Any way to change the name of your post after the fact? Seems to me that something like "Are H-1B Debate Fanatics Prone to Workplace Violence" would, at least, keep your entry from sounding polarizingly political. Trolling though it may be, commentary like Mr. Bain's IS resoundingly inappropriate, and the matter deserves light discussion.

Mar 29, 2011 4:46 PM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to Vincenzo

No apology needed, Vincenzo. Glad you're sticking around.

Mar 29, 2011 4:50 PM Dolores Dolores  says: in response to Don Tennant

More people than we know of have died as a result of our government giving their livelihoods away. I was on an illega immigration board a few years back. A poster had a sig about Kevin Flanagan. I asked him about that, as H-1Bs were not really a topic on that board. Did he know him personally? No, he said, he set up the sig to raise the issue in honor of a neighbor of his, an IT pro, who decided to go to sleep one last time in the house he was about to lose.

And I'm sure there are many more. Suicide. Illness they might not have otherwise succumbed to. Cumulative blows from stress shortening their lives. This really is a survival issue for many of us. 

Mar 29, 2011 5:06 PM BT1024 BT1024  says:

I would like to propose an idea for an article... Title:  "Are Indian Consultancies Prone to Violating U.S. Laws?"

Start out with something like this: "After reading the following articles/documents, I am wondering if Indian "consultancies" are prone to violating U.S. Laws?"

Reference the following articles:

- http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9214730/Lawsuit_against_Infosys_turns_light_on_B_1_visa


   - http://www.itbusinessedge.com/cm/blogs/tennant/infosys-under-federal-investigation-in-visa-tax-fraud-case/?cs=46152





...I believe there are other reports of Indian "consultancies" violating U.S. laws - Google them and add them here....

Mar 29, 2011 5:21 PM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to BT1024

I don't think there's any need for such an article. I think it's pretty clear that the answer is yes. Next question.

Mar 29, 2011 5:27 PM stopthemadness stopthemadness  says: in response to BT1024

Actually, a more accurate proposal  for another article would be" are any Indian consulting firms truly implementing the guest worker visa laws either legally or by intent". There's not just one instance of this Don there are thousands!!!! That you can use as a trend which can be argued!!!!

Mar 29, 2011 5:47 PM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to Gabe

Thanks very much for the valuable input, Gabe, I really appreciate it. As Roy pointed out, my posts are not news articles. This is my blog, and there's a personal dimension to it. I was prompted to raise the question and write the post by the threats that have been made against me personally. So I'm very comfortable with the headline I gave it. If it outrages some people, let them be outraged. I'm outraged by the threats that have been directed at me and others for expressing our views, and I'm absolutely convinced that the question I raised is a legitimate, important one to raise. I'm also outraged by the fact that the threats and hateful comments more often than not are made in response to a gross distortion of my views that people make up and attribute to me. But I never let that outrage prevent me from addressing these issues in a civil manner.

You can bet that if I'm ever threatened by H-1B advocates for my extensive coverage of the Infosys visa fraud case, and the views I've expressed in that regard, I will raise the same questions and make the same points about that fringe element as well.

Mar 29, 2011 5:54 PM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to Test Test

Yeah, I'm not crazy about this blogging software, either. You can prevent what happened in this case by previewing the comment before you post it -- you'll see the damage the software has inflicted on your comment, and you'll be able to change it.

Mar 29, 2011 6:04 PM Bob Bob  says: in response to Don Tennant

Don, if Indian_H1B's post didn't convince you to cut your losses, I don't know what would

He obvously cares about his credibility, and sees your agrument as a loser.

Yet, as usual, you keep struggling, like a Chihuahua tugging angrily on a sock

Let go of it, little one, and maybe we'll take you to Taco Bell

Mar 29, 2011 6:12 PM Don Tennant Don Tennant  says: in response to Dr. Gene Nelson

If my blogging about the H-1B issue has accomplished nothing else, it has provided a forum for this eloquent, spot-on viewpoint to be shared. No more valuable contribution to the discussion has been made in the many years I've covered the issue. Thank you very much, Gene.

Mar 29, 2011 6:20 PM Gabe Gabe  says: in response to Don Tennant

Fair enough, Don, fair enough.

Mar 29, 2011 7:31 PM Indian_H1B Indian_H1B  says:


This is simply not your best effort. You have a record of having stood in the middle of the H-1B debate; you have previously done a good job of pointing out the ills of the H-1B program while also dismissing the nutcases who are often just racist and despondent.

However, "guilt by association" as one of the others above calls is spot-on. It's a case of making a trend out of an anecdote. As an H-1B, I have faced not a single instance of hostility in the work-place. If anything, I have been rewarded for good work without fail and my being an H-1B has never come up of outside HR paper-work. The only anti-H1B sentiments I have ever seen are under the garb of anonymity in these sites. None of these people have accosted me on the street or yelled dirty epithets from their cars when I was walking. Based on my own statistically significant period of observations, some of them are loons, but none is violent. If anything, people like Roy Lawson have been bashing the H-1B for years, but have found it necessary to be respectful even in the relative informality of an internet forum.

I'm sorry, but your article is merely attention-grabbing with no substance. To reiterate: it's not reflective of your general great work in this regard. In this specific instance, you appear to have scraped the bottom.

Mar 30, 2011 8:32 AM Gabe Gabe  says: in response to hoapres

Even BT admitted it was a frivolous suggestion in the first place. To borrow from a certain someone:

Come on now.

Let's get real.

Mar 30, 2011 8:59 AM BT1024 BT1024  says: in response to Don Tennant

OK, I agree, I also think the answer to the question I posed, is "yes"...

For the topic "Are Anti-H-1B Fanatics Prone to Workplace Violence?", I'm not sure what constitutes a fanatic (I guess there may be different interpretations of the word "fanatic")...

You noted in your post, that the author of the noted indirect threat, was not "the typical whacked-out, anonymous poster with some ridiculous, militaristic pseudonym", so I would assume that the noted author has typically made "mild mannered" reply's/posts in the past (Though, I don't know that)...

So, I guess what I am getting at, is that there may be some mild mannered folks out there, that sometimes "snap" and out of anger and frustration and then make comments like what you noted... From my "life" experiences, my guess is that in most cases, those mild mannered folks would never act on a threat...

I've heard people say that you really need to be concerned about the quiet people that never express their anger (in any form) - The belief is that they bottle it up and then one day explode and do something very "bad"....

Anyhow, I think that the answer about "fanatics" in any case ("ford vs. chevy" people, "anti-h-1b vs. h1b" people, parents from one little league team vs. the referee or vs. parents from the other team), being prone to some sort of violent outburst, is that you never know... the quiet non-fanatical people may one day snap and do something violent - or it may be someone from the "fanatic" camp...

I think that what you have listed, as noted by Rich Cordivari, is a good way to look at each case, for any scenario where tension (real or perceived) exists in an environment.... Looking at the overall behaviors to gauge the potential for violent outbursts/actions from suspected individuals.

I made reference to the "ford vs. chevy" people, "anti-h-1b vs. h1b" people, "parents from one little league team vs. the referee or vs. parents from the other team" scenarios because I don't think that the behavior being discussed is something unique to the "Anti-H-1B" (fanatic or non-fanatic) scenario.

Mar 30, 2011 12:22 PM hoapres hoapres  says: in response to Bob

>> the simple fact is, Don has been writing a series of articles, attempting to bait a group of workers who have been severely betrayed and suffered severe losses into making statements that are illegal and/or unwise, so that he can then smear the whole group, and cry that he is a victim <<

You hit the nail on the head.

If you are against H1Bs then you are a nutcase.

The most comical of these articles is the claim that extremists are the reason that H1B topics are not covered by the press which is complete nonsense and then publishing more articles that imply everyone against H1Bs is an extremist.



I believe you.


You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

And you are not fooling me.

Mar 30, 2011 5:53 PM Bob Bob  says: in response to BT1024


the simple fact is, Don has been writing a series of articles, attempting to bait a group of workers who have been severely betrayed and suffered severe losses into making statements that are illegal and/or unwise, so that he can then smear the whole group, and cry that he is a victim - he is a coward and a bully.  He's a kindred spirit of Fred Phelps, the funeral protest nutjob (and like Don, Phelps has a past your wouldnt expect - Phelps was civil rights lawyer, look it up, it's true)

If a guy walked into a bar filled with laid off steelworkers and praised scabs, I would uphold the law in whatever role I had to play.  I would be a witness against a person who either assalted or threatened to assault, as a juror I would uphold the law and convict the steelworker who punched the guy.

But would I have any personal sympathy for the guy that chose to pick a fight and verbally kick people when they're down?  No.

Mar 30, 2011 6:29 PM Dolores Dolores  says: in response to Bob

A better title might have been, "Are Americans affected by the H-1B Visa Program more prone to suicide?" since we actually have some data about that.

Mar 30, 2011 6:31 PM Jobs4US Jobs4US  says:

I suspect IT Business uses blogger feedback on its site to provide "customer insight" to its clients and possibly advertisers. Imagine, which H1b corporate abusers might be interested in getting a pulse on how far they can push American IT pros to the the brink....   Posters, beware, your responses may be used for more than interesting discussions

About IT Business Edge  (verbatim)

IT Business Edge provides a new, easier, and more effective way for you to stay on top of the IT issues affecting your company - and to help you stay on the leading edge of business IT.

We offer you the unparalleled power of a Personalized IT Intelligence Agent - a service that combines the strength of advanced online search techniques with the critical thinking of experienced industry journalists. This unique approach means that we find the information you want, review it first, and give you only the best that is relevant to your professional niche - as concise e-mail reports - along with the key element of contextual analysis.

As a result of this ground-breaking process (read some of our milestones), IT Business Edge delivers information to you that is focused, personalized, thorough, practical, concise, and current. Armed with this kind of intelligence, top-level IT decision makers are able to keep track of technical advances and new solutions, and to pursue IT strategies that are right for their organizations.

Mar 30, 2011 7:35 PM Gabe Gabe  says: in response to Jobs4US

You're grasping, Jobs, and those straws are oh-so-agile.

We should, of course, always be keeping in mind that anything we say publicly -- even behind the perceived anonymity of the web -- can be traced back to us and used by others, and we should be acting accordingly. Don's done a whole lot of rooftop-shouting, but it hasn't sunk in: A vocal number of us DON'T keep tabs on our own outbursts, and that hurts our efforts towards resolving the H-1B issue, regardless of which way we feel it should go.

Mar 30, 2011 7:39 PM hoapres hoapres  says: in response to Don Tennant

>> I don't think there's any need for such an article.

Obviously.  You don't want to give the impression that "pro H1B" types are fanatics.


If you are against H1Bs then you are a nutcase.

>> I think it's pretty clear that the answer is yes.

Then why not write an article.

>> Next question.

Well how about answering this post.

Apr 1, 2011 6:10 PM Susan Chesterfield Susan Chesterfield  says:

I must say I also agree 1000% with Donna Conroy! Thank you Donna.

You nailed the Dirt-bag! LOL!!! Great Job.

But I must also say to every American that it is foolish to comment on blog of a Traitor. As like all Traitors they are of the lowest kind.

Apr 1, 2011 6:25 PM vikpramod vikpramod  says:

"Indian H-1B/L1 Visa holders are more likely to Be Criminals."

1) Rajj Rajaratnam (Largest insider Trading Fraudy EVER! YES Ever!)

2) Sanjay Kumar:

Pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice and securities fraud charges in a massive accounting scandal.

3)Vivek Wadhwa:

Number 1 H-1B PIMP of all PIMPS!

100% a total Fraud and a traitorr to the US.

4) Narendra V. Mandalapa:


had forged immigration papers for more than 250 foreigners. "He caused all of those people to work and live illegally in the United States,"

5) B. Ramalinga Raju, and eight others for stealing millions of dollars from the company.

6) Sushil Bansal,

charged with bribery of a public official, money laundering, wire fraud and conflict of interest.

I could go on and on, too many to list here. Hopefully you get the idea. 

Smoke that don the Indian wanabe.

Apr 1, 2011 6:31 PM Jon Stewart Jon Stewart  says:

The Daily Show!


Apr 1, 2011 6:39 PM Maria Tartiromo Maria Tartiromo  says:

Discrimination Is Occurring On A Massive Scale Against Qualified US Citizens.

The Middle Class Has Been Destroyed.

Families Have Been Torn Apart.

The EEOC, the OFCCP, the DOJ-OSC Have Done Next To Nothing To Protect US Citizens Whose National Origin Is USA.

Immigration Law Firms Are Harming American Workers.

The H-1B Visa guest worker program has 'RESERVED' millions of high-value jobs for citizens of foreign countries.

"Fake Job Ads' consistently and routinely DENY, DEPRIVE, EXCLUDE and DISCRIMINATE against United States Citizens during the hiring process.

Here is Cohen & Grigsby, a prominent immigration law firm, displaying their Good Faith Efforts To Recruit American Workers...


When companies have job opening, they "place an order" with job descriptions to third party recruiters like ManPower, Volt, Adecco, Robert Half, etc.

The job descriptions are not advertised publicly so that qualified US Citizens can apply.

This is a violation of EEO, the law of the land and the Civil Rights Act of 1967's "Unlawful Employment Practices'.

The available talent pool in the US workforce is being COMPLETELY BYPASSED

(and not just under-utilized).

Only mom & pop recruiting firms willing to $ub$cribe to the large third party firms services can see the job descriptions and then submit resumes from H-1bs

Resume Blaster Streams $ubScribe to their service also a violation of EEO segregating resumes by National Origin

and it is all automated using information technology.

Out in the field, we are not seeing the job descriptions and the most meritorious candidates are not receiving any job offers.

US Citizens and Green Card Holders never know the job openings even existed.

This is exclusion / discrimination.

Apr 2, 2011 5:17 PM John Smith John Smith  says:

Visa Fraud Sparks Many Arrests Nationwide

An ongoing federal probe into H-1B visa fraud leads to many arrests and the indictment of IT services firm Vision Systems Group The controversy over the H-1B visa program for cheap labor workers is heating up once again. Federal agents detained many Indians in six states as part of a wide investigation into suspected visa fraud, those arrested are accused of fraudulently representing themselves or other workers in immigration documents. Besides the arrests, Vision Systems Group, an IT services firm based in South Plainfield, N.J., with a branch office in Coon Rapids, Iowa, was indicted on 10 federal counts, including conspiracy and mail fraud charges. The firm allegedly used fraudulent documents to bring H-1B visa workers into the U.S. The government is seeking the forfeiture of $7.4 million from Vision Systems that was gained through the alleged offenses. Five other technology companies, including Worldwide Software Services and Sana Systems in Clinton, Iowa, remain under investigation for document fraud, prosecutors said. "We are only at the tip of iceberg as to where this investigation leads.

Dec 4, 2012 3:40 PM Paul Hanrahan Paul Hanrahan  says:
Hello Don, Are you a psychologist? You seem concerned about responses that do not include contact information. Mine is on my website. Paul Hanrahan, MBA Principle MythReal Enterprises, LLC www.mythrealclan.com Reply

Post a comment





(Maximum characters: 1200). You have 1200 characters left.




Subscribe Daily Edge Newsletters

Sign up now and get the best business technology insights direct to your inbox.

Subscribe Daily Edge Newsletters

Sign up now and get the best business technology insights direct to your inbox.