The $57 Million Dollar Typo
(Or: Reason Number 57 Why I Shouldn't Be a Practicing Attorney)
This morning The Recorder is reporting that Bank of America and Citibank could lose $57 million because of a clerical error that could void the preferred status of BoA and Citibank:
A secured creditor must "perfect" its security interests with uniform commercial code filings and file updates every five years. The bank last submitted such a "continuation" in 2005, so another filing wasn't needed until 2010. On Oct. 1, a week after Heller said it would dissolve, the bank filed a "correction statement" saying the 2007 filing was a "clerical error." On Monday, the bank declined to discuss how or why the error occurred, or who made it -- the 2007 filing required no signature.
The error would nullify BoA's and Citibank's secured creditor status:
The firm had paid the banks $51 million since announcing its dissolution and would owe them almost $6 million more if they remain secured creditors.
Closing the loop on Heller's bankruptcy after the jump.
When Heller announced bankruptcy back on December 29th, the firm explicitly referenced revoking the banks' status as a key part of the move:
The Committee concluded, however, that if bankruptcy proceedings were commenced by December 30, 2008, a Bankruptcy Court is likely to void the banks' security interest because the banks had terminated and released their security interest by means of a UCC filing more than a year ago and did not re-establish a security interest in the Firm's assets until they filed a new UCC statement in early October 2008.If the banks' security interest were voided by the Bankruptcy Court, the banks would
be entitled to repayment of their loans only to the same extent as the claims of all other
unsecured creditors of the Firm are paid. They would not be entitled to be "first in line"
and to have their claims paid before all others. This means that significantly more money
might become available to pay the claims of the Firm's non-bank creditors, including those of former employees, even after factoring in the costs of a bankruptcy proceeding.
Of course, the firm didn't say that their case against the banks rested on a typo.
But the grammar police have a way of winning these types of battles. It's now up to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California.
Banks May Lose $51 Million in Heller Dispute [Law.com]
Earlier: Anatomy of a Dissolution: Heller Files for Bankruptcy, Thacher Proffitt WARNS People to Come to Work
(176) 
LAST!!!
What 2007 filing? Context please.
2 - Its the UCC financing statement. Article 9 anybody?
Agree with 2. This blurb makes no sense.
Article 9 = racist TTT invention
Agree with 2. This blurb makes no sense.
its the UCC financing statement. either take secured transactions or read the article. it isnt too hard.
Agree with 2. What the h*ll are you talking about?
Actually, read the Law.com article. While it's a bit clearer, it's obvious that the writer is also not exactly an Article 9 expert.
This morning Jews just bombed a Gaza school. Keep in mind these are the people blaming Hamas for "not building schools."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/06/israeli-bombs-hit-un-scho_n_155497.html
i would like to article 9 a sheep
Agree with 2, 6, and 8. 7 is a douche
Agree with 2, 6, and 8. 7 is a douche
Agree with 2, 6, and 8. 10 is a douche.
Seems BoA filed a continuation statement in 2005. Another continuation statement was not due until 2010. However, in 2007, BoA filed what appears to be a TERMINATION statement. BoA then discovered in October 2008 that it had lost its collateral/secured creditor status and quickly attempted to correct the termination statement.
So, the question is: if it was a termination statement, can BoA un-terminate a termination by claiming the filing was (or had?) a "typographical" error? If BoA cannot unilaterally void the termination, was a new financing statement required? (most likely yes). If a new FS was required, did the October filing qualify as a new FS? If it does qualify, was permission required to make the filing and if so, did they have permission to do so?
Fun, fun.
I had no idea what this post was about until I read the actual law.com article. BofA accidentally filed a 2007 statement, when it didn't have to do so until 2010, which also terminated its secured lender status unintentionally.
Great job MysTTTal for not quoting the all-important second sentence of the law.com article that tells us what the whole fuss was all about.
Who cares about Heller? It is a dead husk of a law firm. Is Quinn Emanuel next? Any word on the layoffs?
10: Yassir Arafat, on work release from hell to post on ATL
Elie: Instead of cannabilizing other's work (and forcing readers of this blog to go and read the actual article), what if you digested what was being said and gave us the gist of what's happening.
There was NO TYPO. An incorrect amendment to the UCC was filed terminating the perfection.
the problem with this post is MysTTTal's reporting. if you read The Recorder article, it makes perfect sense if you have taken any class on Ch. 9. however, it is obvious that MysTTTal did not take a security rights class because he chose the absolute worst excerpts to include in this post. absolutely pathetic.
the problem with this post is MysTTTal's reporting. if you read The Recorder article, it makes perfect sense if you have taken any class on Ch. 9. however, it is obvious that MysTTTal did not take a security rights class because he chose the absolute worst excerpts to include in this post. absolutely pathetic.
I approve of this headline and its defensive self-criticism.
Well done, Elie.
#3, assuming everyone on this page knows UCC 9 (which is a bit of a leap), the blurb provided on this page still makes no sense. However, the linked article does clarify the matter. Obviously, a UCC-1 financing statement was filed, with a continuation in 2005. In 2007, it would appear that the banks filed a termination statement - thus losing their perfected general security interest.
agree with 14
agree with 14
It's not a matter of not understanding Article 9. The problem is that it refers to filing a continuation in 2005, then immediately refers to the 2007 filing being a clerical error. What 2007 filing? Is that the typo in question? If so, why is it important? If not, is it a typo in the article? None of this makes sense without more info.
Elie: Instead of cannabilizing other's work (and forcing readers of this blog to go and read the actual article), what if you digested what was being said and gave us the gist of what's happening.
There was NO TYPO. An incorrect amendment to the UCC was filed terminating the perfection.
18-
Arafat drinks from the river of wine...
This post is simply incomprehensible -- not to mention that most people would not refer to the erroneous filing of a UCC statement as a “typo”
10, when I read your post, I thought at first that perhaps the Israelis had messed up and bombed a school, which would have been incredibly unfortunate.
But the article says the Israeli strike was OUTSIDE the school not on the school. Which means Hamas is almost assuredly to blame for locating storehouses, etc. close to schools. Furthermore, the school was built by the UN, so Israel's critique could still be valid. And there is no confirmation that the dead from the strike were refugees in the school. The dead could all have been legitimate targets.
So, to summarize, either stop your worthless editorializing or read the article first.
It's not a matter of not understanding Article 9. The problem is that it refers to filing a continuation in 2005, then immediately refers to the 2007 filing being a clerical error. What 2007 filing? Is that the typo in question? If so, why is it important? If not, is it a typo in the article? None of this makes sense without more info.
Jews just bombed Article 9 of the UCC which was being read by some children.
Elie really shouldn't be a practicing attorney. His writing is atrocious.
Israeli strike kills 40 taking shelter in United Nations School:
http://news.smh.com.au/world/israeli-strike-kills-40-in-un-school-medics-20090107-7baw.html
Jews just bombed Article 9 of the UCC which was being read by some children.
Elie AraReallyFAT.
I blame Anderson Cooper's hair for all of this.
15 makes sense, the original entry doesn't.
@33 - I'd take that one step further. He really shouldn't be a writer, author, or blogger... and certainly not editor-in-chief. Oh, wait...
Read the law.com article. It makes sense. The banks should be out of luck because people rely on the public record to make decisions on whether or not to loan money. The public record indicated the firm no longer owed the bank the money. The bank should not now be allowed to correct that. Those are the breaks.
Why did you do us like this Elie? Please come back and correct this, we all know that Art 9 isnt the easiest subject but you seemed to have either rushed this piece or didnt fully grasp what happened.
Come clean it up and make us proud to actually log on to this site Elie!!
Why did you do us like this Elie? Please come back and correct this, we all know that Art 9 isnt the easiest subject but you seemed to have either rushed this piece or didnt fully grasp what happened.
Come clean it up and make us proud to actually log on to this site Elie!!
Elie is completely incompetent. What's the point of this blog? Oh yeah, so that we can make comments such as this.
So I guess the 51 million the banks have already been paid is a voidable preference?
I've spent most of my morning reading through a dense statute. This post was much worse. Fire Elie.
I've never criticized Elie's incessant typos (because, really: who cares?). But this article demonstrates a complete lack of understanding on the issue he is writing about. The most important item ("the 2007 filing") is not included in the description of events.
Elie, your job is not to simply parrot "legal news". Why don't you find out what they are talking about?
"$57 Million Dollar"...seriously Elie? Seriously? That's why you're not a practicing lawyer anymore.
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-01/06/content_10614752.htm - "A spokesman for al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas armed wing, said on Tuesday that his group has dozens of human bombers ready to blow themselves up against the Israeli ground forces." -- Well at least we know that there is a purpose for these people in this world, because living is definitely not one of them.
Elie really screwed the pooch on this one. That first reference to the 2007 filing totally lacked context. Its sad when law.com udnerstands things better than an HLS grad.
Elie = Hamas of bloggers
This will only end when the civilians of Gaza rise up against Hamas for using them as human shields to promote their terrorist objectives.
new year, same MysTTTal
new year, same MysTTTal
Good job to Palestinians fighting for their freedom.
As Patrick Henry said, Give me Freedom or Give me Death.
MysTTTal's understanding of UCC 9 = #10's grasp on reality
I would feel more comfortable and safe if all of the Araby types on this blog would have their tickets revoked and be promptly removed.
Ned Niederlander
Good job to the Israelis for bombing those fucking terrorists. Maybe if Al Queda were trapped in an area smaller than Broklyn we could actually find and kill them too.
A - your blurb makes no sense (you shouldn't have to click to the law.com article to understand what the 2007 filing was.)
B - That is not a typo. It is a clerical error - much like was made when you were hired. A typo is when you check the wrong box or transpose numbers.
Did Elie leave Debevoise because he did not get admitted as an attorney in the State of New York?
Jews just bombed Article 9 of the UCC which was being read by some children.
Elie AraReallyFAT.
This blog was once lively, pithy and informative. Then it became lazy, slipshod and unreliable. With this blurb, it is now incoherent, incomprehensible and illiterate. Blurbs like this one would fail LRW at any school in the T500.
I resolve to stop defending Elie this year. This post does a horrible job of getting his point across. I'd overlook this mess if it weren't characteristic of Elie's sloppy work since he took over this blog.
This is Reason Number 57 why Elie shouldn't be writing professionally, either as an attorney or a blogger.
10:
it is wrong to equate Isreal with "Jews." Your comment comes off as extremely anti-semetic. That's all I have to say.
Elie is the Jason Blair of blogging. This is where affirmative action has taken us.
maybe the twinkies made mysTTTal a horrible writer? we all know he's eaten his fair share of those...
15 - Thanks for clarifying this mess of a post. Elie, I may be TTT but you sure as hell f*%*$#@ write like you're TTT. You are the Goofus of the blogosphere. douchbagsayswhat.
53 - How are they fighting for their freedom? Israel gave them their "freedom" three years ago when they threw out over 9,000 Jews from their homes in the Gaza strip and turned the entire strip to the Palestinian Authority (who Hamas ousted in a bloody coup in which they threw members of the PA off rooftops). They've had freedom and yet they continue to fire misles at Israel. "Give me liberty or give me death"? Clearly they prefer death.
This has been said a bunch, but I'll sum it up again:
To get a perfected interest in collateral, one must file a UCC-1 financing statement (and whatever continuations are necessary).
BofA filed a UCC-1, along with the necessary continuation.
To release a perfected interest, one must file a UCC-3 termination statement.
Someone filed a UCC-3, thus terminating BofA security interest.
Not a typo, but wow, does that suck ...
It's almost funny to read Muslims constantly claiming that the land was "stolen" and is "occupied" - the Jews were there FIRST, long before Islam even existed. Of course, when the Muslims took it by force, it was destiny and sanctioned by Allah, but when the Jews got it BACK, then it's theft and illegal occupation. The absurd lack of logic would be funny if they weren't using it as justification for mass murder day after day.
Same for bombings - ever notice how even Muslims claiming to support peace always argue in defense of Palestinian/Iranian/Syrian terrorism as justified by "occupation"? But when Israelis fight back or try to contain the terrorist attacks, that's murder and oppression. See, by BEING THERE, by EXISTING, the Jews are oppressing the poor, poor, so-called Palestinians (i.e., former Jordanians), who have no where else to go (except of course to rejoin the Islamic states on every side, who invaded in '67, and continue to help by sending weapons instead of building schools or infrastructure or anything else that would improve the lives of the people other than by murdering Jews - and staying and living in peace alongside the Jews not being an option because for Jews to be allowed to live is an offense against Allah).
And when Hamas deliberately stores weapons in and launches attacks from schools and hospitals and apartment buildings, that's ok, and when they blow up women and children in markets and cafes, that's ok, and blow up homes with rockets and buses with bombs, that's ok - in fact it's all cause for dancing in the streets because killing Jews is a ticket to heaven! - but when the Israelis attack the very same places that Hamas is launching attacks from and storing weapons in, it's "Oh, the children, they're murdering the children!"
Murderous lunatics bent on taking the middle east by force to impose insane Islamic rule, the lot of 'em.
62 = Larry from Libya
this post is incomprehensible.
- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said it the best: "Anti-Zionism = Anti-Semitism." Here are some of his quotes:
". . . You declare, my friend, that you do not hate the Jews, you are merely 'anti-Zionist.' And I say, let the truth ring forth from the high mountain tops, let it echo through the valleys of God's green earth: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews--this is God's own truth.
"Antisemitism, the hatred of the Jewish people, has been and remains a blot on the soul of mankind. In this we are in full agreement. So know also this: anti-Zionist is inherently antisemitic, and ever will be so.
"Why is this? You know that Zionism is nothing less than the dream and ideal of the Jewish people returning to live in their own land. The Jewish people, the Scriptures tell us, once enjoyed a flourishing Commonwealth in the Holy Land. From this they were expelled by the Roman tyrant, the same Romans who cruelly murdered Our Lord. Driven from their homeland, their nation in ashes, forced to wander the globe, the Jewish people time and again suffered the lash of whichever tyrant happened to rule over them.
"The Negro people, my friend, know what it is to suffer the torment of tyranny under rulers not of our choosing. Our brothers in Africa have begged, pleaded, requested--DEMANDED the recognition and realization of our inborn right to live in peace under our own sovereignty in our own country.
"How easy it should be, for anyone who holds dear this inalienable right of all mankind, to understand and support the right of the Jewish People to live in their ancient Land of Israel. All men of good will exult in the fulfilment of God's promise, that his People should return in joy to rebuild their plundered land.
This is Zionism, nothing more, nothing less.
"And what is anti-Zionist? It is the denial to the Jewish people of a fundamental right that we justly claim for the people of Africa and freely accord all other nations of the Globe. It is discrimination against Jews, my friend, because they are Jews. In short, it is antisemitism.
"The antisemite rejoices at any opportunity to vent his malice. The times have made it unpopular, in the West, to proclaim openly a hatred of the Jews. This being the case, the antisemite must constantly seek new forms and forums for his poison. How he must revel in the new masquerade! He does not hate the Jews, he is just 'anti-Zionist'!
"My friend, I do not accuse you of deliberate antisemitism. I know you feel, as I do, a deep love of truth and justice and a revulsion for racism, prejudice, and discrimination. But I know you have been misled--as others have been--into thinking you can be 'anti-Zionist' and yet remain true to these heartfelt principles that you and I share.
Let my words echo in the depths of your soul: When people criticize Zionism, they mean Jews--make no mistake about it."
This is great news! I'll go wait by the mailbox for that stipend check I never got.
-Heller Never-Made-it-to-First-Year
Eh, I'd call it a typo. A UCC3 form can be used for either terminations or continuations. You check the box for the type of action you're effecting with the filing. The termination box is directly above the continuation box. Since most people use fillable PDFs for these, this was probably a matter of someone clicking half an inch too high on the page. Ironically, if they had checked the continuation box, the filing would have been rejected because it was too early to file another continuation.
Elie:
Why don't you post an article on the Gaza conflict? That way these haters can post to their hearts content there and not on unrelated articles such as this one.
The hater posts are interesting but create more confusion on this subject matter than necessary.
"On Monday, the bank declined to discuss how or why the error occurred, or who made it -- the 2007 filing required no signature."
If you look at the second page of the 2007 filing (the PDF), it was made by Pillsbury Winthrop. D'oh!
This post is reason number 58
Yo, where's da fag that's always talkin' about spreadin' da butt cheeks and smellin' juices?
Yo, where's da fag that's always talkin' about spreadin' da butt cheeks and smellin' juices?
Is Elie trolling his own blog -- I can't fathom how else he could post with such idiocy.
oh. oh. Looks like someone's gonna get fired.
If anti-zionism is anti-semitism then I guess a lot of the world is anti-semitic, and with good reason.
The most laughable part of your quotation was that "zionism is merely the dream of returning to their holy land."
Did you take your birth-right trip and drink too much of the kool-aid?
Palestinians dancing in the streets on 9/11, worth remembering to keep it straight who you're dealing with:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrM0dAFsZ8k
Elie, I have never been one to criticize your posts and typos/grammar....but this post is atrocious. The content was incredibly difficult to follow, because you lacked an understanding of the material, or you did not edit your post at all. Either way, this posting is inexcusable.
81, yes, because Martin Luther King went on a birth-right trip and then made the quotation in post 71. Genius.
Some idiot probably had the filing rejected because it was too early for a continuation, said "WTF", switched the boxes around and it went through and then went to lunch.
82 = functionally retarded. I almost typed out a long-winded post explaining why, but realized it wasn't worth my time...that level of retardation is likely incurable by a simple post.
2007 filing? WTF man! Fix your shit or I'm calling Lat.
EPIC. FAIL.
Everyone, give Elie a break. He was just about to proof his post when someone told him that the ATL staff was sending out for pizza. Of course, Elie realized that he could add more value to ATL's product by providing input on what toppings would be included, so he simply put up the post and handled his bizness.
75 -- reread the pdf. First page is the unsigned "error" document filed in 2007. Next page, from Pillsbury, is the 2008 attempt at a "correction." Pillsbury did not, so far as is known, make the initial fuckup.
86 - No long post needed. They're celebrating because they're retarded monkeys that love death. Don't try to give me some elaborate bullshit theory on how they're justified because the US supports Israel, and Israel in defending itself is some kind of tyrant. I wish someone would just put these Palestinians out of their misery--then they wouldn't have blow themselves up.
-- Fed up gentile.
91, none of the 9/11 attackers were Palestinian. In fact, no one involved in the 9/11 attack was Palestinian. And using the word "monkeys" really bolsters your credibility, well done.
-- Fed up gentile who is sick of America's blind support of Israel.
how is filing the wrong statement a "typo", you fat mess
92 - You're lack of ability to read what is written really bolsters your credibility, well done. My post said they're animals for cheering the death of thousands of innocent civilians. Animals have no sense of morality or humanity--that definition fits these people well. The U.S. supports Israel because it's the only country in that region where people can live freely, and it's the only country that wouldn't cheer in the streets upon hearing about the senseless massacre of thousands.
Of course 92, "blind support of Israel" - as in, opposition to repeated terrorist attacks and support of a country's right to defend itself from invasion. The gall of those Jews to want to survive in peace!
Allah knows, nothing will be right in the world until the Jews are expelled from the holy land and driven into the sea! Death to the infidels!
correction of 94: you're = your. I know how the far left thinks they win a point by pointing out a typo.
#73 - please explain how typing an 'x' in the box for "termination - rather in the box for 'continuation' or 'amendment' - is a 'typo.' Typing "MysTTTTTal" rather than "MysTTTal" is a typo - not sure if checking the wrong box will be viewed the same.
On the other hand, under old Artile 9, Dewey Ballantime took a walk from a "cleriacal mistake" by saying the secured amiunt was $57 not $57,000,000 in the US Lines bankruptcy case. But that was old Article 9, in New York, and favored a white shoe law firm that had otherwise clearly committed malpractice.
Does anyone know who filed the 'inadvertant' termination statement? I asume that it if were outside counsel, they have put their insureres on notice.
Let's send MysTTTal back to school in Gaza. He nbeeds someone to improve on this Harvard education.
#73 - please explain how typing an 'x' in the box for "termination - rather in the box for 'continuation' or 'amendment' - is a 'typo.' Typing "MysTTTTTal" rather than "MysTTTal" is a typo - not sure if checking the wrong box will be viewed the same.
On the other hand, under old Artile 9, Dewey Ballantime took a walk from a "cleriacal mistake" by saying the secured amiunt was $57 not $57,000,000 in the US Lines bankruptcy case. But that was old Article 9, in New York, and favored a white shoe law firm that had otherwise clearly committed malpractice.
Does anyone know who filed the 'inadvertant' termination statement? I asume that it if were outside counsel, they have put their insureres on notice.
Let's send MysTTTal back to school in Gaza. He nbeeds someone to improve on this Harvard education.
Jews that want to live in peace...by bombing Gaza. If you were well-read at all you would realize that the proportionality of the violence/deaths committed by Israel to Hamas is nearly 100:1.
I never defended Hamas, rather I defended the Palestinian people. Showing a short clip of a small population celebrating hardly constitutes proof of public opinion, nor does it justify killing hundreds of people.
Those rocket-attacks, that Israel supporters are so happy to rely upon for justification, do very little damage and kill very few people each year.
This does not mean that Israel has no right to defend itself. Instead, Israel should respond proportionately, and rely on means which will work towards long term peace... but Israel does not want long term peace. It would rather rely upon racist propaganda about being the chosen people and matyrs, and point back to the Holocaust.
For an fairly unbiased view of the conflict:
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12853965
-92
As a gentile and not ab apoligist or fan of Isreal - let's grow up, drop the Jew vs. Arab vs. Palestinian diatribe, and get back to the topic - the Heller UCC.
While you are at it, look at the story in the Jerusalem Post at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231167272256&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull - "At least 30 people were reportedly killed and 53 wounded in an explosion in a UN-run school in the town of Jabalya in the northern Gaza Strip, according to Palestinians. The IDF issued a statement saying the school grounds were used by terrorists to fire mortar shells at the troops. According to the IDF, among the dead were members of a Hamas launching cell, including operatives Immad Abu Askar and Hassan Abu Askar. The infantrymen returned mortar shell fire into the school grounds, the army said. Defense officials told The Associated Press that booby-trapped bombs in the school triggered the secondary explosions which killed scores of Palestinians on the site."
If Canadians in Sarnia, Ontario, were firing mortars or rockets into Detroit from inside a schoolyard, you can be assured that our United States armed forced would have levelled the school within about ten minutes.
Why all this talk about Israel” -- let's discuss the typo – or the lack of one –
Can one person lay out for me what happened here and if BofA best guesses if BofA will get the money?
Why would BofA file a continuation if it was not needed until 2010?
Therefore, how could it be a typo and not just an attempt to nullify the agreement?
If so, why would BofA want to nullify the agreement early? Is there any reason or benefit in doing so that it now regrets?
I've been reading ATL forever, but never bothered to comment before on anything. But seriously, I fail to understand how the writer could attempt to describe the facts of a story, quote certain portions of another story to back it up, and leave out the ONE KEY FACT that makes the whole story make sense.
I've often thought that all the attacks on Eli were kind of over the top, but seriously, the writing just keeps getting worse. This story is essentially incomprehensible.
99, even one Israeli death caused by the rocket attacks is one death too many.
And the proportionality, even if that were relevant for anything, is skewed because Israel has heavily invested in an extensive bunker and early warning system to minimize its civilian casualties, while Hamas puts its military sites inside crowded schools and mosques, and use civilians as human shields. A Hamas munitions depot blows up and kills schoolchildren, and Israel is blame for some reason. But you already knew that right?
Why all this talk about Israel? -- let's discuss the typo – or the lack of one –
Can one person lay out for me what happened here and if BofA will actually lose this money?
Why would BofA file a continuation if one was not needed until 2010? Was it really a typo then?
What are your best guesses on why BofA would want to terminate the agreement early? Is there any reason or benefit in doing so?
103, proportionality is everything you twit. Have you zero understanding of international politics?
As for your early warning system, this has not prevented many of the deaths, because Hamas' rockets are so rudimentary that there is simply no need. Almost all of the rockets that are fired can only reach miniscule settlements along the border. Israel provides little security for these border villages, because then it has the ability to point to the villages as a justification for atrocities.
-92
"Israel should respond proportionately" to Hamas attacks?
Well, Israel has shown (as did the U.S. during WWII), that "absolute war", which Carl von Clausewitz called a "logical fantasy" is fantasy no more.
66,
You: "How are they fighting for their freedom? Israel gave them their "freedom" three years ago when they threw out over 9,000 Jews from their homes in the Gaza strip and turned the entire strip to the Palestinian Authority (who Hamas ousted in a bloody coup in which they threw members of the PA off rooftops). They've had freedom and yet they continue to fire misles at Israel. "Give me liberty or give me death"? Clearly they prefer death."
Me: I'll say off the bat that I support the right of the Israelis to defend themselves against missles from Hamas. That said, you should be aware that the Israelis have imposed an economic blockade on the entirety of the Gaza Strip.
Freedom from occupation refers to more than just the the absence of an Israeli presence in the Strip. If one is forbidden from using one's ports or airspace, one isn't really free.
Note that I am not arguing whether the blockade is justified or not. That said, the existence of a blockade does deprive one of "freedom."
105, proportionality leads to an escalation of conflicts. When a state is attacked if it shows restraint in its response it is only inviting further attacks. The best strategy is one of massive retaliation, respond to an attack on your state with such devastating force that the next aggressor will have to think twice. In international politics it is about detering future aggression. Proportionality is a fools gambit, your restraint will get you nothing.
92 - You have a major screw loose somewhere, and I can't tell if you think you have a big heart or if you're just plain stupid. Do you want Israel to respond proportionately by firing rockets into Palestinian territories? One dead Palestinian for each dead Israeli and vice versa? What good would that do?
If Israel is attacked it has every right under traditional ideas of war to respond. If Hamas uses children for human shields, or kills a lot of Palestinians so as to blame it on Israeli attacks, then blame Hamas and not Israel. Or are you going to give me some proximate cause argument?
105, international law is enforced by conventions. Israel has not signed on to any convention requiring proportionality in war. Thus, proportionality is irrelevant until Israel binds itself to act with proportionality. Despite what naive idealists might believe, international law is not self-executing.
Or are you trying to say that lack of proportionality might increase disapproval of Israel? Then acting without proportionality is Israel's own prerogative and irrelevant since a few negative foreign opinion polls outweigh saving the lives of their own citizens.
Sderot and Ashkelon are not "miniscule villages." They are also protected by the early warning system, which is needed enough that the government spent a lot of money on it. Israel is a better judge of "need" than you, I think. The system gives residents 15 seconds to escape to a bomb shelter, which is better than 0 seconds and thus dying. If you think rockets are harmless, why don't you tell me your address so I can launch a "rudimentary" rocket with 10kg of TNT at it with you inside.
So in short, every fact in your entire post is wrong, except for the part where you correctly numbered the post you were responding to.
92, 105 - By "international politics" do you mean the traditional practice of sitting around and doing nothing? The U.N. perfected this practice, as exemplified by its habit of condemning Israel for defending itself. Israel knows that when you are the underdog (i.e., the oasis of freedom in a vast desert of people that want to kill you), that you respond with real force and destroy the enemy, or as much as possible.
It is my humble belief that 92/105 just got pwned. Hard.
Crickey, when did the Islamo-loons expand their cyberattack to include ATL?
Yet another venue rendered useless by these rabid idiots...
105, alternatively, a grenade weighs about a pound, so we can duplicate the effect of a Hamas rocket with a 10kg payload with about ten grenades. If you like, we can also set off ten grenades near or on your house, with you inside it, and afterwards talk about how harmless and rudimentary the explosives are.
Love, 110
Good question 104. Why in the hell was anything at all filed on this if nothing was due until 2010? Is no one checking this stuff? Someone at Pillsbury needs a spanking (or perhaps a malpractice claim).
Terrorism supporters, go take that shit somewhere else, you are not finding a sympathetic audience here.
109, obviously this is how proportionality works. Say Cuba, in response to the US economic blockade, begins to launch random rockets at US cities from a launcher in a school. The US military could easily destroy the launcher, but with about 200 military deaths and estimated 100 civilian deaths. Proportionality says that the US must wait until the Cuban rockets attack kill at least one person before the US can respond. Otherwise, with no US deaths, the death ratio is infinity:1 and that is way too high.
Actually, scratch that. A 100:1 ratio is still too high. The US needs to wait until the rockets kill about 10 Americans before it can respond. If the launcher were located in an even more crowded civilian area, the US would have to wait even longer.
That, in short, is how proportionality works, unless you dare risk the wrath of "international politics."
92 here. Proportionality does not refer to an exact eye for an eye tactics, but rather that the response be in relation to the offense. You refer to Israel as an underdog, yet the weapons they yield are vastly superior and they enjoy the support of the most powerful country in the world. You cannot even begin to compare the arsenals of Israel and all of the Islamic countries combined.
I do not recall making any mention of international law, because it really isn't enforced when it comes to war. In terms of international politics, it would be prudent for Israel to come to some sort of peace agreement before rogue groups like Hamas obtain nuclear weapons. The weapons that these rogue organizations are obtaining will continue to become more sophisticated, and it is only a matter of time before Israel is harmed on a massive scale.
I do not really care about your asinine comparisons to US and Canada, or US and Cuba, because they are irrelevant and totally incomparable. The histories are simply not analogous.
The civilians deaths and harm are not simply a result of Hamas using people as a human shield. You are truly delusion if you believe this to be true. The war aside, the general population is suffering because of the blockade.
I am not some left wing pinko on a rant....read the economist article I posted above. This is quickly becoming a centrist viewpoint.
-92
can someone please answer 104's question? I am sure there is a political blog you guys can move this discussion to -- thanks!
118 - the discussion is here, this is where it is happening, shut up. This post is barely coherent. It makes sense that we want to talk about something else. Anyway just blame 10 he started it. He has posted the same thing on other threads and the same thing has happened. This would probably stop is Ellie just created a thread for this discussion so it wouldn't sprawl over a series of unrelated articles.
92, why don't you respond to 110/114's comments on your 105 post while you're here.
116 - Well said. But you left out the part about how the U.S. can never respond in that scenario because they took the land from the indigenous tribes.
Hey 92 - Missile fire against Sderot and the western Negev began in January 2001 so I think Israel has shown restraint for some time. In fact, over the past 8 years, over 10,000 rockets have been launched towards Sderot and the western Negev. The Kassam rockets have claimed the lives of 28 Israelis; 9 of which were residents of Sderot, and 3 of whom were children. In addition, over 600 Israeli citizens have been injured and thousands have been psychologically traumatized by the rocket explosions. The rockets have damaged countless homes and properties in Sderot and thewestern Negev.
Sderot is located approximately 2.5 km away from Gaza, and absorbs most of the missiles fired from Gaza. The rockets have forced thousands of Sderot residents to leave the city and relocate elsewhere in Israel.
117, there is a very real possibility Castro, at least when he was younger, could have launched rockets or missiles at the US. Remember that whole Cuban missile crisis with Castro trying to get better (i.e., nuclear) weapons? You know how Cuba has been under an economic blockade? The only thing that stopped Castro was the fact that US would not have respected "proportionality" and would have obliterated him completely if he attacked Miami even once, regardless of any fear that Castro and his rogue buddies in exile might get better (nuclear) weapons.
120, there is no need to respond to the posts. The article does it for me.
"barely a dozen Israelis had been killed by Palestinian rockets since the Gaza withdrawal"
http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=12853965&source=most_commented
Love,
92
124, I'm not sure what's your point. So those ten or so deaths don't count? Does that mean it's ok if we blow up your house with you inside using 10kg of TNT? What's your address?
Dead Jews aren't human if their number is less than 12, right?
92/124 - "Barely a dozen?" Should Israel wait for Hamas to build better weaponary before they resp0nd?
124 - You are a fool. If the rockets killed one person, then Israel has every right to go destory the source of the rockets if it has a reasonable belief that the rocket attacks will continue. Maybe 120 should start setting off those grenades in your home, and until they kill more than your requisite number for retaliation I just want you to sit there and continue your life as normal.
124, did you also read this quote in your article
Barack Obama said on a visit to one Israeli town in July, “If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I’m going to do everything in my power to stop that. And I would expect Israelis to do the same thing.” In recent months, moreover, Hamas has smuggled far more lethal rockets into its Gaza enclave, some of which are now landing in Israeli cities that were previously out of range.
And please tell 125 your address so he can schedule an appointment with you and your family inside, thanks.
Your continued lack of vision is comical.
You are missing the point entirely. Proportionality can be irrelevant when the end might justify the means, i.e. Hiroshima; however, it is clear that butchering hundreds, or even thousands of Palestinians will not deter their aims. A cursory view of the conflict will lead any reader to this conclusion.
Since large scale attacks will not deter future attacks, the "end justifies the means" argument becomes moot.
At the end of the day, Israel should be looking out for its own self-interest by working towards peace rather than allowing the helm to be steered by their superiority complex and religious hatred. If large scale attacks have not worked inthe past, why would they work this time?
129 - "Superiority complex and religious hatred" Yeah, it's the Israeli's that go around chanting "death to the infidels." They're also the ones that go blow up people because they don't have the same beliefs. Get your head out of your ass.
BTW, I'm not Jewish.
P.S., this is not a large scale attack. They're taking out military targets that are responsible for the attacks against them.
I'm in the minority because I think they should just nuke the shit out of these people and the rest of the middle east, but thenagain, it might make the land worthless. I guess you have to weigh that cost against the (massive) benefit.
129, your bias is obvious. And what "religious hatred" would that be? The only "religious hatred" here is that of the Islamo-Imperialists who believe that the only good Jew is a dead Jew, who have refused to make peace on any terms but the annihilation of Israel and complete domination of the Middle East. READ THE HAMAS CHARTER.
129, if you're 92/105, we're still waiting to know where you live so that people can launch at it some harmless "rudimentary" 10kg TNT rockets that have only killed ten people so far. Harmless results, I'm sure.
132, let the adults continue the conversation. People are inherently selfish, any general or president would not likely subject his own family to facing bombs, but would not think twice about sending a few soldiers....what's your point?
Love,
92
What is the proportional response to a group who (i) bombs you repeatedly, murdering and injuring thousands, and (ii) says openly in its constitution that it will not stop fighting until you are dead?
It would be to kill the people who are sworn to kill you (and working every day on implementing that goal), of course. The Israeli response has been vastly UNDER proportional in the face of people who have sworn year after year to keep bombing until there is no Israel left.
A proportioned response to someone who is sworn to and trying to kill you would be to kill them - carpet bombing the entire area, which Israel could easily do. It's only because they have lacked the heart to kill so many that they are still fighting, and this is Israel's downfall.
What they SHOULD be doing is telling the population of the West Bank and Gaza that they have 72 hours to peacefully evacuate to Iran, Jordan and Egypt, and assisting them with this evacuation, following which no human in the area will be left alive to keep lobbing bombs, and no one allowed back in for 100 years.
No other country on earth would tolerate this continued bombing, and it is laughable (and evidence of bias toward Israel's destruction) that anyone would expect Israel to tolerate it.
133, my point is that Hamas rockets are not so "rudimentary" that countermeasures are not needed, as you lamely tried to claim in 105. What's your point when you said that the rockets only killed ten Jews?
And you still have not responded to 110's assertion that Sderot or Ashkelon are not "miniscule villages." Nor his refutation of your claim that Israel has provided little security for these villages in order to justify attacks on Gaza.
And oh yes, show me an instance of "religious hatred" from the Israeli leadership, please?
It would be interesting to see how the "rudimentary" rockets impact Dimona, Israel's top secret nuclear site. This almost certainly triggered the invasion.
http://www.luclin.org/files/jamond/Retarded.jpg
This conversation about the middle east is a joke people, stop indulging the crazies.
We all know that Iranian and Syrian supported terrorists do not want peace in the region, they want Israel destroyed, and will not stop until that happens. How do we know it? They say so, right up front.
We all know that Israel has tried trading land and everything else for peace, and that every overture has been met with more bombing and terrorism because the Islamo-Imperialists (thanks 131, I'm using that!) don't actually want a peace with Israel, they only want Israel destroyed.
And we all know that the leaders of Iran, Syria, and others prefer to keep these flames hot because it distracts their own people from their corruption, oppression and lack of economic progress.
Unless and until there is an all-out war in the region leaving Israel either destroyed or in total control of its entire territory with mile-wide mined borders, this will continue.
Now let's get back to a more productive discussion, say, Obama's proposed 600,000 new government employees.
nice to see an interesting (albeit poorly written) story devolve into an I/P flame war.
back to the original story- what if Heller had noticed this "typo" before the banks foreclosed on the line of credit in september? would they have had to dissolve?
Actually several Islamic groups/countries have said they would promise peace if Israel stopped expanding settlements in the West Bank and if the borders were returned to pre-1967. Israel has not conceded to these.
138 = FAIL
140, several, but not all, especially not the relevant one right now, Hamas. Hamas only offers a ten year "long term" truce if Israel withdraws back to the 1967 borders, and would still refuse to recognize Israel, which is obviously not good enough. How did that truce the US/S. Vietnam signed with North Vietnam in 1973 work out?
140 = EPIC FAIL
141, you are right...truces with Syria and Lebanon would be useless...
Especially with Iran teetering on a more moderate stance.
142, is Israel at war with the Syrian and Lebanese governments?
Nice try but completely misleading 140, and very revealing that you must be deliberately deceptive in every response in order to try to make a point - the elected governing body in the area has made no such agreement, continues to maintain Israel's destruction as their official goal, and has violated every accord with new attacks.
What's even funnier is that the whole precept is preposterous - I'll tell you what, if I attack you, unprovoked, and you end up winning and taking some territory, and then I KEEP attacking over and over while my buddy occasionally utters that we'd stop if you give something up which I already had BEFORE I attacked you the first time and only lost in that first battle, would you believe me? Absurd - this is a red herring and pure propoganda, THE MUSLIMS DO NOT WANT PEACE, THEY WANT TO CONQUER THE AREA.
143, Israel is in a state of war with both.
wow... semites and anti-semites conversing world politic bombs on a page normally reserved for whether ex-heller employees will get paid or not. perhaps we should discuss racist cops shooting unarmed blacks in the back?
146 - If by racist you mean doing their job, and unarmed blacks you means guys with a laundry list of prior offenses and guys that act like they have guns and then run their car into the cop car then yeah, sure let's discuss that too.
Ah, I get it 142, so Israel withdraws in order to get promises of peace from some parties, while other parties who make no such promises get to use that new territory to continue to mount attacks!
Again, constantly deceptive - defenders of the ongoing Muslim crusade, always lying through their teeth.
COWARDS!
LOL 145, nice dodge. Too bad you're talking to lawyers. The question is whether Israel is AT war with the Lebanese and Syrian governments. You don't need a truce if you're not at war. Or maybe you just couldn't read.
The US is still in a state of war with North Korea, so we're at war with them and desperately need a truce, right?
I think the fact that you term it a Muslim crusade and that Muslims wish to conquer the area is indicative of your own biases.
I wish no harm to the Jewish people, I have many Jewish friends, but Israel should have never been created, nor does it deserve any support from the US.
Is the fundamental issue the Muslim nations in the Middle East has with Israel that it's a Jewish state or is it the land that they occupy?
Oh, 151 has Jewish friends, I guess his anti-semitism is rational.
Btw, Israel wasn't created, the Jews were given their land back after having it taken away many times. They're better stewards of the land than terrorists would ever be, so what's your problem?
152, Israel was formed out of the British mandate in 1948. Several other countries were created from the mandates around the same time. Jordan in 1946. Syria in 1946. Lebanon in 1943. Iraq in 1932. Kuwait in 1961. Why did neighboring countries not invade these other countries one day after they declared independence? Why did nobody object when Egypt occupied Gaza? What's the difference between these countries and Israel? You decide.
White people already know it's hilariously racist to say "I have many black friends, but [I don't like this or that about blacks]." It would be like something Trent Lott would say.
But I'm glad to see that Muslims still desperately (and amusingly) try to argue that their views are not anti-Semitic because they "have many Jewish friends." Guys, that line is not helping.
155, I am not Islamtic. Irish-Catholic here.
So then it is that Israel is a Jewish state that troubles the rest of the Middle East. Aren't there many Jews living in Iran and other countries in the region? It seems that the hatred isn't a pure function of religion as much as the idea of a nation that doesn't accept the Muslim Ideals of its neighbors. This type of behavior seems prevalent in other disputes in that region, even amongst fellow Muslim nations - Shiite/Sunni types of disputes. It's really a rather sad commentary on the people of these nations that are provoking Israel. I certainly would not claim to be an expert in Middle East conflicts, but I think it is fairly obvious that the idea of Israel as the provocateur in this situation is absurd.
Sadly, when faith based lines are drawn it is very difficult to dissuade actions through clear logic. I suppose Israel understands this more so than most people should ever have to.
152
Try again 151, apparently you have not read the Hamas charter, or are more likely just lying. "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." "The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. " "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors." Read the charter - if that is not a crusade, and sponsored by other Islamic nations, I don't know what qualifies.
158, an anti-Israel commentator lying??? Say it ain't so! What is this world coming to if you can't trust Hamas apologists to be truthful?
Guys at my high school used to kill each other over fairy tales all the time, it was no big deal.
-- ATHEIST STUD
158 = 159 = out of work investment bankers
161 - They must be right? I mean, they do seem to be Jews... They probably lie about their Jew gold too.
152/157 "Aren't there many Jews living in Iran and other countries in the region?"
No. There were, but they were all expelled (shocker) by the religously-tolerant arabs:
In the 1940s Arab pogroms against Jews appeared to spread throughout the Arab world, and there were intensified riots in Yemen and Syria in particular. In Libya, Jews were deprived citizenship, and in Iraq, their property was seized. As a result, a large number of Jews were forced to emigrate and they were not allowed to take their property. Between 1948 and 1951, tens of thousands of Jews from Iraq and Yemen arrived in Israel by the airlift operation arranged by the Israeli authorities and local communities. By 1951, about 30 percent of the population in Israel was accounted for by Jews expelled from Arab countries and about 850,000 Jews emigrated from Arab countries between 1948 and 1952. During this time 586,269 Jews came to Israel from Arab countries, and 3,136,436 people live in Israel today including their offspring, which account for about 41 per cent of the total population
Almost all Jews in Algeria left upon independence in 1962. Algeria's 140,000 Jews had French citizenship since 1870 (briefly revoked by Vichy France in 1940), and they mainly went to France, with some going to Israel. Following the brutal Algerian Civil War of 1990s there – in particular, the rebel Armed Islamic Group's 1994 declaration of war on all non-Muslims in the country – most of the thousand-odd Jews previously there, living mainly in Algiers and to a lesser extent Blida, Constantine, and Oran, emigrated. The Algiers synagogue was abandoned after 1994. These Jews themselves represented the remainder of only about 10,000 who had chosen to stay there in 1962.
Bahrain's tiny Jewish community, mostly the descendants of immigrants who entered the country in the early 1900s from Iraq, numbered 600 in 1948.
In the wake of the November 29, 1947 U.N. Partition vote, demonstrations against the vote in the Arab world were called for December 2-5. The first two days of demonstrations in Bahrain saw rock throwing against Jews, but on December 5 mobs in the capital of Manama looted Jewish homes and shops, destroyed the synagogue, and beat any Jews they could find, and murdered one elderly woman.[37]
Over the next few decades, most left for other countries, especially England; as of 2006 only 36 remained.
Egypt was home to one of the most dynamic Jewish communities in the Diaspora.The 1936-1939 Palestinian-Arab revolt and the rise of Nazism affected Jews in Egypt[20]. Local militant nationalist societies like Young Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood were sympathetic to Fascist propaganda, organized themselves along similar lines and were antagonistic to Jews.
By the 1940s, the situation worsened. Sporadic pogroms took place from 1942 onwards. The press attacked "foreigners" and in 1947, Company Laws set quotas for employing Egyptian nationals in incorporated firms, requiring that 75% of salaried employees, and 90% of all workers be Egyptian citizens. The law also required that over half of the paid-up capital of joint stock companies be Egyptian citizen's.
After the foundation of Israel in 1948, difficulties multiplied for Egyptian Jews. That year, bombings of Jewish areas killed 70 Jews and wounded nearly 200, while riots claimed many more lives. During the Arab-Israeli war, the famous Cicurel department store near Cairo's Opera Square was firebombed, probably by the Muslim Brotherhood. It was burnt down again in 1952 and eventually passed into Egyptian control.After the Sinai campaign of 1956, on November 23, a proclamation was issued stating that 'all Jews are Zionists and enemies of the state', and it promised that they would be expelled. Some 25,000 Jews, almost half of the Jewish community left, mainly for Europe, the United States and South America, but large numbers also emigrated to Israel, after being forced to sign declarations that they were leaving voluntarily, and agreed to the confiscation of their assets. Some 1,000 more Jews were imprisoned. Similar measures were enacted against British and French nationals in retaliation for the trilateral invasion. In Joel Beinin's summary: "Between 1919 and 1956, the entire Egyptian Jewish community, like the Cicurel firm, was transformed from a national asset into a fifth column." After the 1967 war, more confiscations took place. A number of Egyptian Jewish men were taken to the detention centres of Abou Za'abal and Tura, where they were incarcerated and tortured for more than three years. The eventual result was the almost complete disappearance of the Jewish community in Egypt; less than a hundred or so remain today. Most Egyptian Jews fled to Israel (35,000), Brazil (15,000), France (10,000), the US (9,000) and Argentina (9,000).[citation needed] Today, anti-Zionism is common in the media. The last Jewish wedding in Egypt took place in 1984.
In 1948, there were approximately 150,000 Jews in Iraq. The community was concentrated in Baghdad, was well established and felt no urge to leave. However by 2003, there were only approximately 100 left of this previously thriving community.
In 1941, following Rashid Ali's pro-Axis coup, riots known as the Farhud broke out in Baghdad in which approximately 180 Jews were killed and about 240 were wounded, 586 Jewish-owned businesses were looted and 99 Jewish houses were destroyed....
I can keep going if you like.
163 - Nice answer :) Can you post your source by chance?
Sure 164: It's from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_exodus_from_Arab_lands
Enjoy!
-163
There still hasn't been any explanation why B of A filed a UCC termination statement in Aug. 2007. We may never find out how that large error came to be.
But bankruptcy estates often take advantage of such errors for the benefit of creditors more generally.
166 - I don't think you're going to get an explanation from a bunch of commentators. You're going to have to ask BofA or PWSP, and I don't think PWSP is going to speak.
166: I'm no UCC expert, but if you look at the 2007 UCC Financing Statement Amendment (p. 1 of the PDF linked to by the law.com article), the only identifying information for the debtor appears to be the "Initial Financing Statement File #". It's very possible that BofA entered the wrong file number, i.e. they might have meant to terminate a different security filing. Can someone confirm that the File # is the only information identifying the debtor in such filings?
By the way, very poor showing, Elie. Clearly inadequate for a blog written for lawyers. Can't a HLS / Debevoise alum do at least as a good job as a law.com reporter?
The REALLY interesting thing about this is that neither the twats on the Dissolution Committee nor their stupid lawyers at Greenberg Traurig noticed this until now. So the firm is now chasing to recover funds from Citi/BofA, instead or telling them upfront to fuck off. Further evidence of the incompetence of the firm's management and the DC. Perhaps we have grounds to sue GT and the DC for malpractice??
168 makes an excellent point. The UCC-3 amendment form identifies the debtor entity only via the filing number of the original UCC-1. B of A's Aug. 2007 error could very well have been a numerical typo in inserting the original filing's number.
I believe the reason the UCC-3 calls only for the original filing number as the referent, rather than the debtor's name, is to avoid errors via mistyping the debtor name in an amendment. That could cause it not to get cross-referenced in UCC searches.
The national UCC committee has chosen a very simple, elegant solution: using only the original filing number to indicate the debtor when doing an amendment or termination. But it's so simple that it is still very easy to go wrong, as happened with B of A.
As a former Heller junior partner, I certainly hope the banks' error is held against them. They acted shamefully during this entire ordeal, and if they are SOL because of their own error, well, bully for them! The bankers should be strung up in Union Sq in Sf for what they did. Maybe, just maybe, Heller can avoid the years-long bankruptcy fights that the Brobeck estate is still involved in.
129 is right. Israel should not try to defend itself by killing the brainwashed (islam) murderers, they should just hug them until they decide to stop murdering people.
Hug it out bitches
As a former Hellerite of 29+ years, I jwould just like to receive my accrued vacation pay (never mind severance, etc.)--shame on BoA!
As a former Hellerite of 29+ years, I jwould just like to receive my accrued vacation pay (never mind severance, etc.)--shame on BoA!
As a former Hellerite of 29+ years, I jwould just like to receive my accrued vacation pay (never mind severance, etc.)--shame on BoA!