By John Wilen, AP Business Writer
Crude Futures Hit Record $100 a Barrel on Supply Concerns After Violence Breaks Out in Nigeria
NEW YORK (AP) -- Crude oil prices briefly soared to $100 a barrel Wednesday for the first time, reaching that milestone amid an unshakeable view that global demand for oil and petroleum products will outstrip supplies.
Surging economies in China and India fed by oil and gasoline have sent prices soaring over the past year, while tensions in oil producing nations like Nigeria and Iran have increasingly made investors nervous and invited speculators to drive prices even higher.
Violence in Nigeria helped give crude the final push to $100. Bands of armed men invaded Port Harcourt, the center of Nigeria's oil industry Tuesday, attacking two police stations and raiding the lobby of a major hotel. Word that several Mexican oil export ports were closed due to rough weather added to the gains, as did a report that OPEC may not be able to meet its share of global oil demand by 2024.
Light, sweet crude for February delivery rose $4.02 to $100 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, according to Brenda Guzman, a Nymex spokeswoman, before slipping back to settle at a record close of $99.62, up $3.64.
Oil prices are within the range of inflation-adjusted highs set in early 1980. Depending on how the adjustment is calculated, $38 a barrel then would be worth $96 to $103 or more today.
The White House on Wednesday said it would not release oil from the nation's strategic reserves to drive prices lower.
"This president would not use the (Strategic Petroleum Reserve) to manipulate (prices) unless there was a true emergency," said White House press secretary Dana Perino.
As of early November, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve contained 694 million barrels of oil. The government is working to fill it to its 727 million barrel capacity.
Among the solutions to high prices are expanding domestic oil and gas production and increasing the nation's refining capacity, Energy Department spokeswoman Megan Barnett said.
Crude prices, which have flirted with $100 for months, have risen in recent days on supply concerns exacerbated by Turkish attacks on Kurdish rebels in northern Iraq and falling domestic inventories. However, post-holiday trading volumes were about 50 percent of normal Wednesday, meaning the price move was likely exaggerated by speculative buying.
"I would imagine the speculators are the biggest drivers today," said Phil Flynn, an analyst at Alaron Trading Corp., in Chicago.
It's hard to say whether prices would have risen as quickly on a normal trading day, Flynn said. While oil has soared on mounting supply concerns in recent months, speculators have often been cited as a reason for the swiftness of oil's climb.
Moreover, many of the concerns about supply disruptions have yet to materialize, but that hasn't stopped buyers from driving prices higher.
"Although the (Nigerian) violence has not impacted oil flow out of the country, it has reignited supply concerns as militant attacks have reduced Nigeria's crude output by roughly 20 percent since 2006," said John Gerdes, an analyst at SunTrust Robinson Humphrey in a research note. Nigeria is Africa's largest oil producer.
Separately, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries said its member nations may not be able to meet demand as early as 2024, though OPEC also said that deadline could slide for decades if members increase production more quickly. Word that several Mexican oil export ports were closed due to rough weather added to the gains.
On top of those concerns, investors are anticipating that crude inventories fell by 1.7 million barrels last week, which would be the seventh straight weekly drop.
"(A decline) is not anything unusual for this time of year, but when it happens for seven weeks in a row, it starts to add up," said Amanda Kurzendoerfer, an analyst at Summit Energy Services Inc. in Louisville, Ky.
At the pump, meanwhile, gas prices rose 0.6 cent Wednesday to a national average of $3.049 a gallon, according to AAA and the Oil Price Information Service. Gas prices, which typically lag the futures market, have edged higher in recent days, following oil's approach to $100.
Gas prices peaked at $3.227 a gallon in May as refiners faced unprecedented maintenance issues and struggled to produce enough gasoline to meet demand. A similar scenario is expected this spring, when gas prices could peak above $3.40 a gallon, according to the Energy Department's Energy Information Administration.
The EIA's inventory report, delayed until Thursday this week due to the New Year's holiday, is also expected to show gains in gasoline supplies and refinery activity, and a decline in supplies of distillates, which include heating oil and diesel.
In other Nymex trading Wednesday, February heating oil futures rose 9.1 cents to settle at a record $2.7404 a gallon after setting a trading record of $2.7465 while February gasoline futures climbed 7.81 cents to settle at a record $2.5689 a gallon after setting their own trading record of $2.5784.
February natural gas futures advanced 36.7 cents to settle at $7.85 per 1,000 cubic feet.
In London, February Brent crude rose $3.37 to settle at $97.84 a barrel on the ICE Futures exchange.
Associated Press Writers Dan Caterinicchia in Washington, George Jahn in Vienna and Gillian Wong in Singapore contributed to this report.
Wednesday, January 2, 2008
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Microsoft softens response to piracy
SEATTLE - Microsoft Corp. is pulling back from a system that disables programs on users' computers if it suspects the software is pirated, opting instead for a gentler approach based on nagging alerts.
Microsoft said late Monday it will roll out the new version of Windows Genuine Advantage with the first "service pack" for Windows Vista, due in the first quarter of 2008.
When computer users activate a copy of Windows Vista or try to download certain software from Microsoft's Web site, the Windows Genuine Advantage system scans their PCs for signs of pirated software. Today, if the tool finds an unauthorized copy of Vista, the glassy Vista user experience disappears and other features are suspended.
In the new version, PC users found to have a pirated copy of Vista will continue to be able to use their computers, but with unmistakable signs their operating system is a fake. The desktop wallpaper will turn black, and a white notice will appear alerting users to the problem. Each time they log in, they will be prompted to buy legitimate software, and every hour, a reminder bubble will appear on the screen.
Users with a high tolerance for irritation can put off switching to genuine software indefinitely, but those who relent and buy a real copy of Windows can do so at reduced prices — $119 for Windows Vista Home Premium, half the regular retail price.
"We want to make sure unwitting victims get a great treatment," said Mike Sievert, a corporate vice president in Microsoft's Windows marketing group.
Windows Genuine Advantage collects several pieces of information about a PC during the check, including the serial number on the hard drive and its IP address, but Sievert says none of that can be used to identify individual PC users.
In August, the Windows Genuine Advantage team at Microsoft accidentally updated its servers with computer code that wasn't quite ready for prime time. As a result, Microsoft said "fewer than 12,000" people who tried to validate software over a two-day period couldn't.
Some found legitimate copies of Windows hobbled after the tool labeled them pirated, and an outcry spread across Web forums and technology news sites.
Sievert said the glitch in August was unrelated to the change in how the Windows Genuine Advantage tool will work.
"Microsoft realizes it has to take a different approach with their customers," said Chris Swenson, a software industry analyst for market researcher NPD Group. "If you shut down someone's computer, you're going to anger customers."
Microsoft also said Monday the package of Vista updates will fix two holes in the operating system that have allowed pirates to create counterfeit copies — one that mimics the activation of software by computer makers before a PC is sold, and one that extends a grace period given to people who install new software, before they must activate it.
Sievert said Microsoft plans to offer an update for Windows Genuine Advantage that will run the piracy check regularly without the computer user initiating the process.
Microsoft said late Monday it will roll out the new version of Windows Genuine Advantage with the first "service pack" for Windows Vista, due in the first quarter of 2008.
When computer users activate a copy of Windows Vista or try to download certain software from Microsoft's Web site, the Windows Genuine Advantage system scans their PCs for signs of pirated software. Today, if the tool finds an unauthorized copy of Vista, the glassy Vista user experience disappears and other features are suspended.
In the new version, PC users found to have a pirated copy of Vista will continue to be able to use their computers, but with unmistakable signs their operating system is a fake. The desktop wallpaper will turn black, and a white notice will appear alerting users to the problem. Each time they log in, they will be prompted to buy legitimate software, and every hour, a reminder bubble will appear on the screen.
Users with a high tolerance for irritation can put off switching to genuine software indefinitely, but those who relent and buy a real copy of Windows can do so at reduced prices — $119 for Windows Vista Home Premium, half the regular retail price.
"We want to make sure unwitting victims get a great treatment," said Mike Sievert, a corporate vice president in Microsoft's Windows marketing group.
Windows Genuine Advantage collects several pieces of information about a PC during the check, including the serial number on the hard drive and its IP address, but Sievert says none of that can be used to identify individual PC users.
In August, the Windows Genuine Advantage team at Microsoft accidentally updated its servers with computer code that wasn't quite ready for prime time. As a result, Microsoft said "fewer than 12,000" people who tried to validate software over a two-day period couldn't.
Some found legitimate copies of Windows hobbled after the tool labeled them pirated, and an outcry spread across Web forums and technology news sites.
Sievert said the glitch in August was unrelated to the change in how the Windows Genuine Advantage tool will work.
"Microsoft realizes it has to take a different approach with their customers," said Chris Swenson, a software industry analyst for market researcher NPD Group. "If you shut down someone's computer, you're going to anger customers."
Microsoft also said Monday the package of Vista updates will fix two holes in the operating system that have allowed pirates to create counterfeit copies — one that mimics the activation of software by computer makers before a PC is sold, and one that extends a grace period given to people who install new software, before they must activate it.
Sievert said Microsoft plans to offer an update for Windows Genuine Advantage that will run the piracy check regularly without the computer user initiating the process.
Young chimp beats college students
NEW YORK - Think you're smarter than a fifth-grader? How about a 5-year-old chimp? Japanese researchers pitted young chimps against human adults in tests of short-term memory, and overall, the chimps won.That challenges the belief of many people, including many scientists, that "humans are superior to chimpanzees in all cognitive functions," said researcher Tetsuro Matsuzawa of Kyoto University.
"No one can imagine that chimpanzees — young chimpanzees at the age of 5 — have a better performance in a memory task than humans," he said in a statement.
Matsuzawa, a pioneer in studying the mental abilities of chimps, said even he was surprised. He and colleague Sana Inoue report the results in Tuesday's issue of the journal Current Biology.
One memory test included three 5-year-old chimps who'd been taught the order of Arabic numerals 1 through 9, and a dozen human volunteers.
They saw nine numbers displayed on a computer screen. When they touched the first number, the other eight turned into white squares. The test was to touch all these squares in the order of the numbers that used to be there.
Results showed that the chimps, while no more accurate than the people, could do this faster.
One chimp, Ayumu, did the best. Researchers included him and nine college students in a second test.
This time, five numbers flashed on the screen only briefly before they were replaced by white squares. The challenge, again, was to touch these squares in the proper sequence.
When the numbers were displayed for about seven-tenths of a second, Ayumu and the college students were both able to do this correctly about 80 percent of the time.
But when the numbers were displayed for just four-tenths or two-tenths of a second, the chimp was the champ. The briefer of those times is too short to allow a look around the screen, and in those tests Ayumu still scored about 80 percent, while humans plunged to 40 percent.
That indicates Ayumu was better at taking in the whole pattern of numbers at a glance, the researchers wrote.
"It's amazing what this chimpanzee is able to do," said Elizabeth Lonsdorf, director of the Lester E. Fisher Center for the Study and Conservation of Apes at the Lincoln Park Zoo in Chicago. The center studies the mental abilities of apes, but Lonsdorf didn't participate in the new study.
She admired Ayumu's performance when the numbers flashed only briefly on the screen.
"I just watched the video of that and I can tell you right now, there's no way I can do it," she said. "It's unbelievable. I can't even get the first two (squares)."
What's going on here? Even with six months of training, three students failed to catch up to the three young chimps, Matsuzawa said in an e-mail.
He thinks two factors gave his chimps the edge. For one thing, he believes human ancestors gave up much of this skill over evolutionary time to make room in the brain for gaining language abilities.
The other factor is the youth of Ayumu and his peers. The memory for images that's needed for the tests resembles a skill found in children, but which dissipates with age. In fact, the young chimps performed better than older chimps in the new study. (Ayumu's mom did even worse than the college students).
So the next logical step, Lonsdorf said, is to fix up Ayumu with some real competition on these tests: little kids.
Creative Consumer: Beware of Those Holiday 'Sales'
By ELISABETH LEAMY ABC NEWS Consumer Correspondent
Dec. 3, 2007
The frenetic holiday shopping season is here. Personally, I haven't even dipped my toe in yet. But when I do, I know I'll see all sorts of misleading sales advertised.
Here's the bottom line, sacrilegious as it may sound to the shop-till-you-drop set: Not every sale is a bargain and not every bargain is on sale.
Say you buy a gallon of milk every week for $2.50. Then one day you walk into the supermarket and see a huge sign: "Today Only! Milk Just $2.50!" You would know that's ridiculous because that's what you always pay for milk.
But what about things you don't buy so often -- like refrigerators, stereos and winter coats? How will you know if the big sale claims are for real? To be a truly savvy consumer, you need to be a good comparison shopper. If it's any consolation, to be a good comparison shopper, you need to be a truly frequent shopper.
Retailers play games to get our greedy little hearts going. What do you think those "compare at" price tags are all about? You know, the ones where the store states its price right underneath the "compare at" price, which is supposedly what some other retailer charges. I know of a popular clothing store that marks its classic lines "50% off" one month, then "buy one, get one free" the next month -- and continues this cycle year round.
The New York attorney general cracked down on a store that claimed to be offering huge savings off the regular price. The attorney general's office ruled that since the store always offered the products at the sale price, that was the true price and the items weren't discounted at all.
Some retailers will actually mark merchandise up just so they can mark it down. That way, you think you're getting a great deal, but the store is charging the amount it always wanted in the first place. This practice is actually illegal in some jurisdictions, but it's hard to prove because consumer watchdogs can't monitor stores every day all year round.
Shop Smart Magazine, a publication of Consumer Reports, found major department stores claiming to offer more than 50 percent off on items like knives, toaster ovens, irons and dishes. But when the magazine checked the actual manufacturer's suggested retail prices for the items, the savings were much more modest.
Stores that offer a "low-price guarantee" in which they promise to beat their competitors' prices can be crafty too. Often these stores deliberately invent their own names and model numbers for their merchandise so it's difficult for you to shop and compare.
"Buy one, get the second at 50% off." Don't fall into this trap. If the extra item is something you really want, then great. But if you won't use it then don't pay the extra money. Same goes for jumbo-size products that you buy in bulk. If the medicine will expire or the food will spoil before you can use it, it's not worth paying the extra money to "supersize" it.
Do Your Homework
Let's revise the old rhyme. It should be "comparison shop till you drop."
If you have big-ticket purchases planned, check prices online before heading to the store, so you'll know when you spot a bargain.
Latest Battle in the Stars vs. Paparazzi War
The latest battle in the war between celebrities and paparazzi pits "America's sweetheart" Julia Roberts against a photographer she spotted videotaping kids near a Malibu, Calif., school attended by her 2-year-old twins.
Roberts chased the photographer and pulled him over. Then she insisted the photographer turn off the camera and gave him a piece of her mind, witnesses said.
"I am going to talk to you about the fact that you are at a school where children go," Roberts said sternly.
The shocking confrontation was the buzz of the entertainment shows. Roberts told "Access Hollywood" enough is enough.
"I just told him a school is not a place for a grown man to be crawling around trying to take pictures," the 40-year-old actress said. "I think there needs to be some kind of line. I don't think the magazines and the newspapers should show celebrities' children."
Roberts is not alone. Many celebrity parents have complained about paparazzi stalking their children.
"I get annoyed when my kids, you know, it's really hard to tell a 4-year-old why he's being, you know, a guy with a camera is running after him at the park," said actress Catherine Zeta-Jones.
Everyone Is Fair Game
Dealing with the paparazzi has always been a necessary evil for celebrity parents. Many remember an angry Princess Diana confronting an intrusive cameraman during a ski vacation with her young sons.
"As a parent I want to protect my children because I brought the children out here for a holiday and would really appreciate the space. We have had 15 cameras following us today," she was heard saying.
But in today's market the competition for pictures of famous children is even more intense, the gloves are off and kids are considered fair game.
"These stalkarazzis are trying to create incidents with kids to get a reaction from the famous parents or from the kids themselves," said publicist Ken Sunshine.
Under First Amendment protections, the photographers are usually on the right side of the law."What we find is as long as there is a market for these pictures, paparazzi are going to continue to do it," privacy expert Rick Avery said.
It's not just stars with children who have had it. George Clooney recently confronted a paparazzo when he was riding a motorcycle with girlfriend Sara Larson.
"How many people did you put in danger? Stop ignoring me," Clooney yelled at a photographer.
But will the celebrities ever win the war against paparazzi? Sunshine said that day might be coming soon.
"I think people at the highest level can't take it anymore and won't take it anymore," Sunshine said.
Roberts chased the photographer and pulled him over. Then she insisted the photographer turn off the camera and gave him a piece of her mind, witnesses said.
"I am going to talk to you about the fact that you are at a school where children go," Roberts said sternly.
The shocking confrontation was the buzz of the entertainment shows. Roberts told "Access Hollywood" enough is enough.
"I just told him a school is not a place for a grown man to be crawling around trying to take pictures," the 40-year-old actress said. "I think there needs to be some kind of line. I don't think the magazines and the newspapers should show celebrities' children."
Roberts is not alone. Many celebrity parents have complained about paparazzi stalking their children.
"I get annoyed when my kids, you know, it's really hard to tell a 4-year-old why he's being, you know, a guy with a camera is running after him at the park," said actress Catherine Zeta-Jones.
Everyone Is Fair Game
Dealing with the paparazzi has always been a necessary evil for celebrity parents. Many remember an angry Princess Diana confronting an intrusive cameraman during a ski vacation with her young sons.
"As a parent I want to protect my children because I brought the children out here for a holiday and would really appreciate the space. We have had 15 cameras following us today," she was heard saying.
But in today's market the competition for pictures of famous children is even more intense, the gloves are off and kids are considered fair game.
"These stalkarazzis are trying to create incidents with kids to get a reaction from the famous parents or from the kids themselves," said publicist Ken Sunshine.
Under First Amendment protections, the photographers are usually on the right side of the law."What we find is as long as there is a market for these pictures, paparazzi are going to continue to do it," privacy expert Rick Avery said.
It's not just stars with children who have had it. George Clooney recently confronted a paparazzo when he was riding a motorcycle with girlfriend Sara Larson.
"How many people did you put in danger? Stop ignoring me," Clooney yelled at a photographer.
But will the celebrities ever win the war against paparazzi? Sunshine said that day might be coming soon.
"I think people at the highest level can't take it anymore and won't take it anymore," Sunshine said.
abcnews.com
Who wants to marry a US citizen?
By RUSSELL GOLDMAN
Dec. 4, 2007
A California-based production company says it's looking for a network to air a new dating show that promises to set up American singles with immigrants looking to fall in love and maybe score a Green Card too.
In the midst of a national debate on immigration, "Who Wants to Marry a U.S. Citizen," could be seen as a mirror of national sentiment, a critique of the Byzantine bureaucracy foreigners must negotiate to become citizens or as its producer claims, just as fun.
In the tradition of "The Dating Game," which ran in the 1960s and 1970s, three legal immigrants looking to meet a citizen are quizzed by an American national, before they are chosen for a date.
"The show is basically a dating show with a twist," said Executive Producer Eddie Rivera.
The show's producers have filmed one bare-bones episode, which has been posted on the Internet and aired on a local cable station in Los Angeles.
"One will get to stay in the country; two others will possibly be deported," goes the tagline on an Internet promotion.
Rivera said that "Who Wants to Marry a U.S. Citizen" makes no promises of legal U.S. citizenship, and is only an opportunity to meet someone for a date.
"I think people will be surprised to see how the show really works. No one will get a free pass; we're not giving away the chance to be a citizen."
The show is being produced by Morusa Media, a company with no Web site. ABC News could find no evidence of its registration in California. In different reports the creator of the program has been called both Adrian Martinez and Adrian Rodriguez.
Rivera insisted the program was not a hoax and that the show's producers were in touch with several interested networks, though he would not name them. He said Morusa was an established company that was also behind an Internet radio site that plays music for pets called dogcatradio.com.
Falling in love and getting married, no matter how a couple meets, are the first -- and perhaps most enjoyable steps -- in a long succession of hurdles toward applying for U.S. citizenship.
Meeting someone through a game show is not an automatic disqualifier for citizenship, but it would raise flags with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said Shawn Saucier, a spokesman for the department's Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services.
"If the game show is specifically to meet a U.S. citizen, it could call into question the legitimacy of a marriage. That's not to say that the marriage isn't necessarily legit; we'd just have to look at the case closely," Saucier said.
To become a citizen through marriage, both the national and foreigner have to provide documentary proof that they have been married. They are then interviewed to determine whether the marriage is legitimate or simply a ruse to gain citizenship.
Cathy, 29, a student and part-time bartender who declined to give her last name, said it took a year and half from the time she married her German journalist husband to the time she had her first interview with Homeland Security.
"We spent four hours at Homeland Security for a 15-minute interview, and when it was over he still hadn't been granted a Green Card. … We showed them pictures from our wedding, and they asked us each who everybody was. … We also brought photos from our honeymoon. … It was clear we had spent a lot of money on the wedding, and that we were legit."
In a sort of game show twist of its own, some couples when interviewed by Homeland Security are separated and asked personal questions about each other and then brought together again to compare their responses.
"We ask them questions that a reasonable person would know about their spouse. It is not the sort of deal where if you don't know what hair products your wife uses, you don't get in. … We're living in 2007, and people have a lot of different lifestyles; one spouse might maintain a residence on the East Coast and the other on the West Coast," Saucier said.
Last year, 339,843 people became legal permanent residents and received their Green Cards (a document that gives non-U.S. citizens permanent residence and the right to work) through marriage.
"The penalty for entering a fraudulent marriage for the purposes of gaining citizenship is five years and $250,000 fine," he said.
Two years after a couple has been approved, they must be evaluated again by the government. Even if a couple has divorced, if they can prove they tried to make things work as any other couple would, the foreign spouse is still eligible for citizenship, Saucier said.
Though the pilot episode of "Who Wants to Marry a U.S. Citizen" included only Latin contestants, the show's producers say casting will be open to all legal aliens.
"We've received a flood of e-mails. … The show isn't just about Hispanic immigrants, contestants can be Chinese, Bolivian, German," the executive producer Rivera said.
Some immigrant rights groups are already calling into question the motives behind the show.
"The existence of the show speaks to the problems with immigration legislation, and why people sometimes enter sham marriages to gain citizenship," said Arnoldo García, director of the immigrant justice program at the National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights.
Dec. 4, 2007
A California-based production company says it's looking for a network to air a new dating show that promises to set up American singles with immigrants looking to fall in love and maybe score a Green Card too.
In the midst of a national debate on immigration, "Who Wants to Marry a U.S. Citizen," could be seen as a mirror of national sentiment, a critique of the Byzantine bureaucracy foreigners must negotiate to become citizens or as its producer claims, just as fun.
In the tradition of "The Dating Game," which ran in the 1960s and 1970s, three legal immigrants looking to meet a citizen are quizzed by an American national, before they are chosen for a date.
"The show is basically a dating show with a twist," said Executive Producer Eddie Rivera.
The show's producers have filmed one bare-bones episode, which has been posted on the Internet and aired on a local cable station in Los Angeles.
"One will get to stay in the country; two others will possibly be deported," goes the tagline on an Internet promotion.
Rivera said that "Who Wants to Marry a U.S. Citizen" makes no promises of legal U.S. citizenship, and is only an opportunity to meet someone for a date.
"I think people will be surprised to see how the show really works. No one will get a free pass; we're not giving away the chance to be a citizen."
The show is being produced by Morusa Media, a company with no Web site. ABC News could find no evidence of its registration in California. In different reports the creator of the program has been called both Adrian Martinez and Adrian Rodriguez.
Rivera insisted the program was not a hoax and that the show's producers were in touch with several interested networks, though he would not name them. He said Morusa was an established company that was also behind an Internet radio site that plays music for pets called dogcatradio.com.
Falling in love and getting married, no matter how a couple meets, are the first -- and perhaps most enjoyable steps -- in a long succession of hurdles toward applying for U.S. citizenship.
Meeting someone through a game show is not an automatic disqualifier for citizenship, but it would raise flags with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said Shawn Saucier, a spokesman for the department's Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services.
"If the game show is specifically to meet a U.S. citizen, it could call into question the legitimacy of a marriage. That's not to say that the marriage isn't necessarily legit; we'd just have to look at the case closely," Saucier said.
To become a citizen through marriage, both the national and foreigner have to provide documentary proof that they have been married. They are then interviewed to determine whether the marriage is legitimate or simply a ruse to gain citizenship.
Cathy, 29, a student and part-time bartender who declined to give her last name, said it took a year and half from the time she married her German journalist husband to the time she had her first interview with Homeland Security.
"We spent four hours at Homeland Security for a 15-minute interview, and when it was over he still hadn't been granted a Green Card. … We showed them pictures from our wedding, and they asked us each who everybody was. … We also brought photos from our honeymoon. … It was clear we had spent a lot of money on the wedding, and that we were legit."
In a sort of game show twist of its own, some couples when interviewed by Homeland Security are separated and asked personal questions about each other and then brought together again to compare their responses.
"We ask them questions that a reasonable person would know about their spouse. It is not the sort of deal where if you don't know what hair products your wife uses, you don't get in. … We're living in 2007, and people have a lot of different lifestyles; one spouse might maintain a residence on the East Coast and the other on the West Coast," Saucier said.
Last year, 339,843 people became legal permanent residents and received their Green Cards (a document that gives non-U.S. citizens permanent residence and the right to work) through marriage.
"The penalty for entering a fraudulent marriage for the purposes of gaining citizenship is five years and $250,000 fine," he said.
Two years after a couple has been approved, they must be evaluated again by the government. Even if a couple has divorced, if they can prove they tried to make things work as any other couple would, the foreign spouse is still eligible for citizenship, Saucier said.
Though the pilot episode of "Who Wants to Marry a U.S. Citizen" included only Latin contestants, the show's producers say casting will be open to all legal aliens.
"We've received a flood of e-mails. … The show isn't just about Hispanic immigrants, contestants can be Chinese, Bolivian, German," the executive producer Rivera said.
Some immigrant rights groups are already calling into question the motives behind the show.
"The existence of the show speaks to the problems with immigration legislation, and why people sometimes enter sham marriages to gain citizenship," said Arnoldo García, director of the immigrant justice program at the National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights.
Hmmmm. Something's different about you
STOYSTOWN, Pa. - Police said a Somerset County man fled a traffic stop, went home, shaved his mustache and changed his clothes, and reported the truck he was driving as stolen.
Conemaugh Township police said they stopped Robert Sadlon, 50, for a broken taillight on Thanksgiving night and he ran off. Later, the same officer went to Sadlon's home near Stoystown to investigate the reported theft. There, he found a just-shaven Sadlon in different clothes.
Sadlon is charged with drunken driving, escape and related charges.
Conemaugh Township police said they stopped Robert Sadlon, 50, for a broken taillight on Thanksgiving night and he ran off. Later, the same officer went to Sadlon's home near Stoystown to investigate the reported theft. There, he found a just-shaven Sadlon in different clothes.
Sadlon is charged with drunken driving, escape and related charges.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)