Blog For Free!
Archives
Home
2004 May
2004 March
2004 February
My Links
My Resume
What Employers Need To Know About Job Applicants
Why the US is in Iraq
tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images
Sponsored
Blog
|
| Why the US is in Iraq |
| 05.12.04 (10:44 pm) [edit] |
With less US influence in Israel, ability to retain military bases in Saudi Arabia, the general, but historical continuance of unrest in the Middle East and hatred against Americans, increasing problems with OPEC - you can bet the US is in Iraq not to fight terrorists since 14 of the 16 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia, not just to take out Saddam cause he was a bad guy who treated his people horribly, but to weaken Saddam enough over time to ensure a planned long process to secure Iraq for US interests, a planned slow military infiltration to systematically take control of pockets of Saddam supporters and those who dislike American military presence, to provide a cover for the real reasons of the take-over process while laying in a multiple number of US and allied military bases without protest for the long term to gain a major Middle Eastern ally through which to diminish OPEC power, from which to extract oil from Iraq to lower oil prices worldwide, to position the US to handle and stabilize Middle Eastern and Pakistan/India conflicts, limit Russian routes and access to major Middle Eastern oil locations, to have direct ability to assess and manage the Iranian nuclear program problem, easier access to northeastern African conflicts, and secure control of the Persian Gulf - in a nutshell: to establish a major position upon which to stabilize the Middle East and if necessary by force.
9/11, Al Queida, WMDs, and even Bin Laden were just vehicles the US needed to establish both legal and political means to justify attacking Iraq, to handle the world's general public who for the most part can't or won't understand the big picture of the real reasons the US is in Iraq, and to secure control of a large area of the Middle East since Israel is acting on its own to handle its problems and pull away from US influence. Israel is simply not enough nor reliable to handle the kinds of conflicts and directions the US wishes to move into to solve or take control of in the Middle East. And US allies and the countries they support with Middle Eastern resources have grown tired of the ongoing conflicts and games in the Middle East. They have looked toward the US to solve the problems there. And these problems have impacted the US enough for them to take action because they can, because they have an obligation to so many, and because of nuclear proliferation in the region putting the world at risk, especially three of the world's largest countries: India, Russia and China. Of course, North Korea doesn't help, but causes a major distraction due to its close proximity to China, Japan and the United States.
Terrorists are nothing new and they won’t be going away anytime soon. There is no war on terror because terrorists can operate in any country at any time and there simply is no way to be everywhere at once to stop an attack. And the money trail is highly integrated with big business and governments throughout the world. In fact, while the United States establishes their presence in the Middle East – terrorists will continue to attack various targets worldwide because the media is hot for it and Americans are in countries where they are highly disliked not by a few, but many. The war on terror is now nothing more than a mantra for politicians and upcoming elections. And as long as high tech continues to move forward and be readily available then terrorists will continue to plan and attack their targets much to the surprise of citizens around the world, but unlikely that much of a surprise to the US military and network of security forces around the world. In fact, I wouldn’t doubt some of the attacks, including 9/11, were calculated and planned with government influence and executed by selected terrorists in the effort for certain long range plans to take control of the Middle East for the good of the rest of the world and certain Middle Eastern communities.
|
|
|
| |
| The Supercomputer Race is On! |
| 05.12.04 (1:03 am) [edit] |
The supercomputer development race is on in the United States who’s goal is to be Number One – apparently for scientific discovery! It’s interesting because history shows that such supercomputer development efforts end up for use in nuclear defense applications (See WorldNetDaily's 1999 article: The Super-Computer China Trail).
Cray, IBM, and Silicon Graphics, according to the Yahoo news article U.S. Aims to Regain Lead in Computer Speed, will be working at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee on what the US hopes to make them the leader with the fastest computer on the planet.
There are times when I wish as much effort and monies could be toward supercomputers to solve many of the social and medical problems in the world rather than nuclear proliferation and war planning. But as usual military advancements are the source where other benefits result when there is time to use such supercomputers for non-military applications. I also wish those with supercomputer design know-how would just work together on building supercomputers instead of competing with each other especially when it is governments trying to win contests.
|
|
|
| |
| What Employers Need To Know About Job Applicants |
| 05.08.04 (3:36 pm) [edit] |
Note: My concerns expressed here only apply to those employers who do what I believe needs to be fixed otherwise they are adding to the problem of the growing unemployment rate, focusing on that which does not answer the question they need answered: Can this person do what I need done in this position?
1. If a job is posted as being open - it should be. Employers and temp services need to stop posting jobs that aren't real and stop collecting resumes for 'IF' jobs. Job applicants spend a lot of time looking for suitable positions. The least employers could do is stop wasting their time with posting positions that do not exist.
2. Job applicants spend a lot of time crafting their resumes. The least any employer should do is read the resume before the interview not during it.
3. Employers need to stop always looking for what is wrong about a person when they read their application or their resume and start reading these materials with the sole focus of: 'Can this person do what I need done for this position?'
4. If employers are going to behaviorally interview a job applicant then they should expect and accept they can be behaviorally analyzed too. Otherwise, employers ought to realize job applicants don't like to be psychologically analyzed anymore then they do.
5. Job applicants cannot read the minds of the employers evaluating their resumes for a position and therefore cannot write the resume specific to what the employer wants to read. They can write to the job description, but not the reader.
6. Employers need to stop telling job applicants their resumes need to be redone. Instead, the employer should give examples of resumes they would like to see. Otherwise, the employer's comments are of no use at all to the job applicant.
7. Employers need to stop asking stupid and insulting questions during interviews especially when their answers are already indicated or implied in the resume or application. For example, if the job applicant shows years of purchasing experience the employer should not have to ask if the job applicant has ever filled out a purchase order. Such an inquiry is simply insulting to the job applicant and tells the job applicant the employer is either unprepared for the interview or isn't all that smart or both.
8. Employers need to stop thinking that job applicants will be sticking around for long periods of time if they accept a position that pays near or at minimum wage or an entry level salary. Employers need to be realistic that most job applicants are not looking to spend an eternity in a low paying job. The only time an employer should seek a long term applicant is if they know the applicant does not need the position to live on.
9. Employers are always demanding that job applicants polish their skills without ever considering polishing their own hiring skills or keeping up with the changing job-seeking environment.
10. Employers need to start spending serious time reading resumes and stop complaining they don't have the time. Job applicants take a lot of time learning about the companies they wish to land a position in, crafting their resumes for the position they are applying to, sending out their resumes for the position and in completing the employer's application process. The least employers could do is spend more time learning about the people interested in the positions they have open. Employers need to stop acting as if they are in a resume speed-reading contest. They also need to stop thinking they have to read every single resume they ever get for an open position. They don't. With the amount of money employers plan on paying to an applicant for any position they have open they owe it to themselves to be spending more time in reading the resumes they receive for the position. After all, job applicants need to know that since they are going to give a lot to the employer if they land the position that the employer will be giving a lot back to them for doing so. That needs to come across during the hiring process.
11. Every employer that posts an open position needs to acknowledge job applicants they have REALLY received their resume and/or application materials. Employers need to stop sending out replies without actually seeing the resume and/or application materials. For those open positions applied to online employers need to acknowledge those who apply with a bit more then the reply that comes with hitting the submit button which sends out a reply regardless of whether or not a resume or online application was actually received on the employer's side. Submit buttons online simply call a software routine to email a reply.
12. Employers need to personally test their online application process. Too many times it is clear to the job applicant that this has never been done.
13. Employers need to know that job applicants are pretty tired having to justify every tiny bit of space between jobs. Employers need to stop asking for such information as it does not apply to the positions they have open unless the applicant wants to supply such information.
14. Employers need to stop asking for a job applicant's social security number on an application. This number should only be asked when filling out the W-4 forms for tax purposes.
15. Employers need to stop doing credit checks on job applicants unless they can supply the same information about themselves to job applicants.
16. Employers need to have read the job description advertising the open position prior to the interview. Most don't.
17. Employers need to stop lying about keeping applicant materials on file. Job applicants know this isn't true. If it were true - employers would hardly ever have to advertise open positions asking for more resumes and applications when they would have so many of these materials on file.
18. Employers need to be on time when they set a time for a phone interview.
19. Employers should invite an applicant to the company for an interview if the applicant lives nearby instead of doing a phone interview. Otherwise, job applicants feel like a number or that they are unimportant or that the employer is trying to hide something from them.
20. Employers should look up and confirm if an applicant's resume and/or application has been received. Too many times job applicants learn the employer never received their materials. Employers need to stop complaining they don't have the time, the resources or the means. Job seekers know better. Afterall, if the employer can't look up the information for the job applicant then how can the employer find it? And if employers don't have the time to look up if applicant's materials have been received because adequate resources have not been put in place to do so then the position should not have been announced in the first place. If the employer isn't willing to show as hard of work in filling the position as the job applicant is working to get the position then the employer should not start the process till they are ready.
21. Employers need to give positive feedback and real reasons as to why a job applicant was not considered for a position instead of sending out blanket letters of rejection with the politically correct, public relations, corporate communications, business appropriate, least liability and snobbery flair. If employers want job applicants to better meet their needs then the applicant needs informative and useful feedback. Otherwise, job applicants have nothing to work with the next time they apply for a position with the employer and the employer has no reason to be complaining applicants aren't meeting their needs.
22. Some employers are obsessed with hiring only the 'best' people. They claim, for instance, those with degrees from private colleges are of a better 'pedigree'. They also claim those from the biggest name companies are automatically better then those from lesser known companies. And if you are over the age of 45 then you can't possibly be an effective contributing member of any company then those who are younger. In other words, you don't fit their perception of who is their idea of the 'best'. Employers need to know they tread on unfounded assumptions and project prejudice that could land their companies with employees who turn out not meeting their expectations necessary to meet the requirements of the positions they will be working in. Employers need to know job applicants want fair consideration based not on how elite the school is they attended, how old they are, what big name companies they have worked for, but on what they have learned, what they have acquired from their experience, what they know, have actually accomplished, and how they are able to translate their background to what needs to be done in the open position they have applied to.
23. Employers need to stop playing games when they announce their open positions. One game includes experimenting with what day to post the openings. Most of us applicants will search on Sundays because some of us work on the weekdays. Don't post your openings on days when we are less likely to be looking hoping to snag someone that looks everyday as if that is something of value. Those of us that plan on Sundays to look are just as valuable if not more so because we plan our weeks to fit in job searching. We also look on Sundays because that's been the norm for when jobs are posted. Employers need to realize that if they don't post their openings on Sunday they lose out on valuable candidates.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
