Fill in the Blank:
The Gallup Poll may interview a ______ of 2500 American adults in order to predict the opinions of all American adults. Characteristics estimated in this way are called _________.
A. population,parameters
B.Sample,Statistics
C. Sample, Predictions
D. Subpopulation,Parameters
Statistics question?
B.
The Gallup Poll may interview a sample of 2500 American adults in order to predict the opinions of all American adults. Characteristics estimated in this way are called statistics.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Do you want to read a great speech on the debate to enter Iraq?
Delivered on 8 October 2002 on the floor of the House by Ron Paul, U.S. Representative for the state of Texas.
Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution. The wisdom of the war is one issue, but the process and the philosophy behind our foreign policy are important issues as well. But I have come to the conclusion that I see no threat to our national security. There is no convincing evidence that Iraq is capable of threatening the security of this country, and, therefore, very little reason, if any, to pursue a war.
But I am very interested also in the process that we are pursuing. This is not a resolution to declare war. We know that. This is a resolution that does something much different. This resolution transfers the responsibility, the authority, and the power of the Congress to the President so he can declare war when and if he wants to. He has not even indicated that he wants to go to war or has to go to war; but he will make the full decision, not the Congress, not the people through the Congress of this country in that manner.
It does something else, though. One-half of the resolution delivers this power to the President, but it also instructs him to enforce U.N. resolutions. I happen to think I would rather listen to the President when he talks about unilateralism and national security interests, than accept this responsibility to follow all of the rules and the dictates of the United Nations. That is what this resolution does. It instructs him to follow all of the resolutions.
But an important aspect of the philosophy and the policy we are endorsing here is the preemption doctrine. This should not be passed off lightly. It has been done to some degree in the past, but never been put into law that we will preemptively strike another nation that has not attacked us. No matter what the arguments may be, this policy is new; and it will have ramifications for our future, and it will have ramifications for the future of the world because other countries will adopt this same philosophy.
I also want to mention very briefly something that has essentially never been brought up. For more than a thousand years there has been a doctrine and Christian definition of what a just war is all about. I think this effort and this plan to go to war comes up short of that doctrine. First, it says that there has to be an act of aggression; and there has not been an act of aggression against the United States. We are 6,000 miles from their shores.
Also, it says that all efforts at negotiations must be exhausted. I do not believe that is the case. It seems to me like the opposition, the enemy, right now is begging for more negotiations.
Also, the Christian doctrine says that the proper authority must be responsible for initiating the war. I do not believe that proper authority can be transferred to the President nor to the United Nations.
But a very practical reason why I have a great deal of reservations has to do with the issue of no-win wars that we have been involved in for so long. Once we give up our responsibilities from here in the House and the Senate to make these decisions, it seems that we depend on the United Nations for our instructions; and that is why, as a Member earlier indicated, essentially we are already at war. That is correct. We are still in the Persian Gulf War. We have been bombing for 12 years, and the reason President Bush, Sr., did not go all the way? He said the U.N. did not give him permission to.
My argument is when we go to war through the back door, we are more likely to have the wars last longer and not have resolution of the wars, such as we had in Korea and Vietnam. We ought to consider this very seriously.
Also it is said we are wrong about the act of aggression, there has been an act of aggression against us because Saddam Hussein has shot at our airplanes. The fact that he has missed every single airplane for 12 years, and tens of thousands of sorties have been flown, indicates the strength of our enemy, an impoverished, Third World nation that does not have an air force, anti-aircraft weapons, or a navy.
But the indication is because he shot at us, therefore, it is an act of aggression. However, what is cited as the reason for us flying over the no-fly zone comes from U.N. Resolution 688, which instructs us and all the nations to contribute to humanitarian relief in the Kurdish and the Shiite areas. It says nothing about no-fly zones, and it says nothing about bombing missions over Iraq.
So to declare that we have been attacked, I do not believe for a minute that this fulfills the requirement that we are retaliating against aggression by this country. There is a need for us to assume responsibility for the declaration of war, and also to prepare the American people for the taxes that will be raised and the possibility of a military draft which may well come.
I must oppose this resolution, which regardless of what many have tried to claim will lead us into war with Iraq. This resolution is not a declaration of war, however, and that is an important point: this resolution transfers the Constitutionally-mandated Congressional authority to declare wars to the executive branch. This resolution tells the president that he alone has the authority to determine when, where, why, and how war will be declared. It merely asks the president to pay us a courtesy call a couple of days after the bombing starts to let us know what is going on. This is exactly what our Founding Fathers cautioned against when crafting our form of government: most had just left behind a monarchy where the power to declare war rested in one individual. It is this they most wished to avoid.
As James Madison wrote in 1798, "The Constitution supposes what the history of all governments demonstrates, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has, accordingly, with studied care, vested the question of war in the legislature."
Some - even some in this body - have claimed that this Constitutional requirement is an anachronism, and that those who insist on following the founding legal document of this country are just being frivolous. I could not disagree more.
Mr. Speaker, for the more than one dozen years I have spent as a federal legislator I have taken a particular interest in foreign affairs and especially the politics of the Middle East. From my seat on the international relations committee I have had the opportunity to review dozens of documents and to sit through numerous hearings and mark-up sessions regarding the issues of both Iraq and international terrorism.
Back in 1997 and 1998 I publicly spoke out against the actions of the Clinton Administration, which I believed was moving us once again toward war with Iraq. I believe the genesis of our current policy was unfortunately being set at that time. Indeed, many of the same voices who then demanded that the Clinton Administration attack Iraq are now demanding that the Bush Administration attack Iraq. It is unfortunate that these individuals are using the tragedy of September 11, 2001 as cover to force their long-standing desire to see an American invasion of Iraq. Despite all of the information to which I have access, I remain very skeptical that the nation of Iraq poses a serious and immanent terrorist threat to the United States. If I were convinced of such a threat I would support going to war, as I did when I supported President Bush by voting to give him both the authority and the necessary funding to fight the war on terror.
Mr. Speaker, consider some of the following claims presented by supporters of this resolution, and contrast them with the following facts:
Claim: Iraq has consistently demonstrated its willingness to use force against the US through its firing on our planes patrolling the UN-established "no-fly zones."
Reality: The "no-fly zones" were never authorized by the United Nations, nor was their 12 year patrol by American and British fighter planes sanctioned by the United Nations. Under UN Security Council Resolution 688 (April, 1991), Iraq’s repression of the Kurds and Shi’ites was condemned, but there was no authorization for "no-fly zones," much less airstrikes. The resolution only calls for member states to "contribute to humanitarian relief" in the Kurd and Shi’ite areas. Yet the US and British have been bombing Iraq in the "no-fly zones" for 12 years. While one can only condemn any country firing on our pilots, isn’t the real argument whether we should continue to bomb Iraq relentlessly? Just since 1998, some 40,000 sorties have been flown over Iraq.
Claim: Iraq is an international sponsor of terrorism.
Reality: According to the latest edition of the State Department’s Patterns of Global Terrorism, Iraq sponsors several minor Palestinian groups, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). None of these carries out attacks against the United States. As a matter of fact, the MEK (an Iranian organization located in Iraq) has enjoyed broad Congressional support over the years. According to last year’s Patterns of Global Terrorism, Iraq has not been involved in terrorist activity against the West since 1993 – the alleged attempt against former President Bush.
Claim: Iraq tried to assassinate President Bush in 1993.
Reality: It is far from certain that Iraq was behind the attack. News reports at the time were skeptical about Kuwaiti assertions that the attack was planned by Iraq against former. President Bush. Following is an interesting quote from Seymour Hersh’s article from Nov. 1993:
Three years ago, during Iraq's six-month occupation of Kuwait, there had been an outcry when a teen-age Kuwaiti girl testified eloquently and effectively before Congress about Iraqi atrocities involving newborn infants. The girl turned out to be the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to Washington, Sheikh Saud Nasir al-Sabah, and her account of Iraqi soldiers flinging babies out of incubators was challenged as exaggerated both by journalists and by human-rights groups. (Sheikh Saud was subsequently named Minister of Information in Kuwait, and he was the government official in charge of briefing the international press on the alleged assassination attempt against George Bush.) In a second incident, in August of 1991, Kuwait provoked a special session of the United Nations Security Council by claiming that twelve Iraqi vessels, including a speedboat, had been involved in an attempt to assault Bubiyan Island, long-disputed territory that was then under Kuwaiti control. The Security Council eventually concluded that, while the Iraqis had been provocative, there had been no Iraqi military raid, and that the Kuwaiti government knew there hadn't. What did take place was nothing more than a smuggler-versus-smuggler dispute over war booty in a nearby demilitarized zone that had emerged, after the Gulf War, as an illegal marketplace for alcohol, ammunition, and livestock.
This establishes that on several occasions Kuwait has lied about the threat from Iraq. Hersh goes on to point out in the article numerous other times the Kuwaitis lied to the US and the UN about Iraq. Here is another good quote from Hersh:
The President was not alone in his caution. Janet Reno, the Attorney General, also had her doubts. "The A.G. remains skeptical of certain aspects of the case," a senior Justice Department official told me in late July, a month after the bombs were dropped on Baghdad…Two weeks later, what amounted to open warfare broke out among various factions in the government on the issue of who had done what in Kuwait. Someone gave a Boston Globe reporter access to a classified C.I.A. study that was highly skeptical of the Kuwaiti claims of an Iraqi assassination attempt. The study, prepared by the C.I.A.'s Counter Terrorism Center, suggested that Kuwait might have "cooked the books" on the alleged plot in an effort to play up the "continuing Iraqi threat" to Western interests in the Persian Gulf. Neither the Times nor the Post made any significant mention of the Globe dispatch, which had been written by a Washington correspondent named Paul Quinn-Judge, although the story cited specific paragraphs from the C.I.A. assessment. The two major American newspapers had been driven by their sources to the other side of the debate.
At the very least, the case against Iraq for the alleged bomb threat is not conclusive.
Claim: Saddam Hussein will use weapons of mass destruction against us – he has already used them against his own people (the Kurds in 1988 in the village of Halabja).
Reality: It is far from certain that Iraq used chemical weapons against the Kurds. It may be accepted as conventional wisdom in these times, but back when it was first claimed there was great skepticism. The evidence is far from conclusive. A 1990 study by the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College cast great doubts on the claim that Iraq used chemical weapons on the Kurds. Following are the two gassing incidents as described in the report:
In September 1988, however – a month after the war (between Iran and Iraq) had ended – the State Department abruptly, and in what many viewed as a sensational manner, condemned Iraq for allegedly using chemicals against its Kurdish population. The incident cannot be understood without some background of Iraq’s relations with the Kurds…throughout the war. Iraq effectively faced two enemies – Iran and elements of its own Kurdish minority. Significant numbers of the Kurds had launched a revolt against Baghdad and in the process teamed up with Tehran. As soon as the war with Iran ended, Iraq announced its determination to crush the Kurdish insurrection. It sent Republican Guards to the Kurdish area, and in the course of the operation – according to the U.S. State Department – gas was used, with the result that numerous Kurdish civilians were killed. The Iraqi government denied that any such gassing had occurred. Nonetheless, Secretary of State Schultz stood by U.S. accusations, and the U.S. Congress, acting on its own, sought to impose economic sanctions on Baghdad as a violator of the Kurds’ human rights.
Having looked at all the evidence that was available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the State Department’s claim that gas was used in this instance. To begin with. There were never any victims produced. International relief organizations who examined the Kurds – in Turkey where they had gone for asylum – failed to discover any. Nor were there ever any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
It appears that in seeking to punish Iraq, the Congress was influenced by another incident that occurred five months earlier in another Iraqi-Kurdish city, Halabjah. In March 1988, the Kurds at Halabjah were bombarded with chemical weapons, producing many deaths. Photographs of the Kurdish victims were widely disseminated in the international media. Iraq was blamed for the Halabjah attack, even though it was subsequently brought out that Iran too had used chemicals in this operation and it seemed likely that it was the Iranian bombardment that had actually killed the Kurds.
Thus, in our view, the Congress acted more on the basis of emotionalism than factual information, and without sufficient thought for the adverse diplomatic effects of its action.
Claim: Iraq must be attacked because it has ignored UN Security Council resolutions – these resolutions must be backed up by the use of force.
Reality: Iraq is but one of the many countries that have not complied with UN Security Council resolutions. In addition to the dozen or so resolutions currently being violated by Iraq, a conservative estimate reveals that there are an additional 91 Security Council resolutions by countries other than Iraq that are also currently being violated. Adding in older resolutions that were violated would mean easily more than 200 UN Security Council resolutions have been violated with total impunity. Countries currently in violation include: Israel, Turkey, Morocco, Croatia, Armenia, Russia, Sudan, Turkey-controlled Cyprus, India, Pakistan, Indonesia. None of these countries have been threatened with force over their violations.
Claim: Iraq has anthrax and other chemical and biological agents.
Reality: That may be true. However, according to UNSCOM’s chief weapons inspector 90-95 percent of Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons and capabilities were destroyed by 1998; those that remained have likely degraded in the intervening four years and are likely useless. A 1994 Senate Banking Committee hearing revealed some 74 shipments of deadly chemical and biological agents from the U.S. to Iraq in the 1980s. As one recent press report stated:
One 1986 shipment from the Virginia-based American Type Culture Collection included three strains of anthrax, six strains of the bacteria that make botulinum toxin and three strains of the bacteria that cause gas gangrene. Iraq later admitted to the United Nations that it had made weapons out of all three…
The CDC, meanwhile, sent shipments of germs to the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission and other agencies involved in Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. It sent samples in 1986 of botulinum toxin and botulinum toxoid — used to make vaccines against botulinum toxin — directly to the Iraqi chemical and biological weapons complex at al-Muthanna, the records show.
These were sent while the United States was supporting Iraq covertly in its war against Iran. U.S. assistance to Iraq in that war also included covertly-delivered intelligence on Iranian troop movements and other assistance. This is just another example of our policy of interventionism in affairs that do not concern us – and how this interventionism nearly always ends up causing harm to the United States.
Claim: The president claimed last night that: "Iraq possesses ballistic missiles with a likely range of hundreds of miles; far enough to strike Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey and other nations in a region where more than 135,000 American civilians and service members live and work."
Reality: Then why is only Israel talking about the need for the U.S. to attack Iraq? None of the other countries seem concerned at all. Also, the fact that some 135,000 Americans in the area are under threat from these alleged missiles is just makes the point that it is time to bring our troops home to defend our own country.
Claim: Iraq harbors al-Qaeda and other terrorists.
Reality: The administration has claimed that some Al-Qaeda elements have been present in Northern Iraq. This is territory controlled by the Kurds – who are our allies – and is patrolled by U.S. and British fighter aircraft. Moreover, dozens of countries – including Iran and the United States – are said to have al-Qaeda members on their territory. Other terrorists allegedly harbored by Iraq, all are affiliated with Palestinian causes and do not attack the United States.
Claim: President Bush said in his speech on 7 October 2002: " Many people have asked how close Saddam Hussein is to developing a nuclear weapon. Well, we don't know exactly, and that's the problem…"
Reality: An admission of a lack of information is justification for an attack?
Do you want to read a great speech on the debate to enter Iraq?
Good speech by Ron Paul on the Iraq war.
(Unfortunately, it doesn't make his other policies any saner.)
And a good catch by Chris. Except, the Speaker pro Tempore is also referred to as Speaker and the person filling that role changes several times over the course of the day.
To be specific, Congressman Shelley Capito (WV) became Speaker pro Tempore in the middle of Congressman Sherman's comments shortly after 1:45. After that time, everyone's comments are directed toward "Madam Speaker". Ron Paul spoke for a few mintues between 2:15 and 2:30. (You finally find out who, exactly, is the Speaker pro Tempore at about 3:00 when she has call the Sergeant at Arms to quell a disturbance in the gallery. Unfortunately, they don't give any details about the disturbance.)
For the record, his actual speech on the floor ended at "military draft which may well come." The rest was inserted into the Congressional record as accompanying material, hence the reference to Mr Speaker in the middle of his "speech". While it's certainly possible to have the Speaker pro Tempore change in the middle of a person's speech (as happened to Congressman Sherman), that wasn't the case in this instance.
As to why the majority of his speech wasn't actually spoken on the floor and was merely inserted into the Congressional Record afterward? Get real! There's 435 members of the House of Representatives (as opposed to only 100 Senators). If all got a chance to speak as long as they wanted, nothing would ever get done.
In other words, it's very common for Congressman to give a very short version on the floor and insert what they wish they had time to say into the Congressional Record.
Reply:I have the same reservations as the first answerer, but it is a great speech.
Irrelevant at this juncture, but a great speech nonetheless.
Reply:Its a real speech and he was 100% correct.
Rebecca, nobody wanted to challenge this because it was unpopular at the time to go against the President.
Congress failed us as much or more than the President did. Do you know why? They put the ball in his court and said "we dont want to be burdened with the tough issues, we would rather blame you in the end if it doesn't work out."
Another example of how fractured our system is because of partisan politics and a lack of leadership in Washington D.C.
(in other links to the speech its "Mr. Speaker" so it seems there is a typographical error in other references. The body is the same thoughout).
Reply:It was a bit too long for me to stay with, but it sounds like something Paul would say.
Reply:If Congress passed a law giving the president authority that The Constitution did not give him... then that law is unconstitutional and therefore is invalid. If there was such a law that was passed then it should be challenged in a court of law.
Bush is obviously doing things which are illegal and he needs to be challenged in this... both in Congress and in the courts!
Reply:Why does his speech start as"Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution". The speaker in 2002 was a man. Either the date is wrong, the speech is false, you are incorrect, or you have been fooled. Which is it?
peony
Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution. The wisdom of the war is one issue, but the process and the philosophy behind our foreign policy are important issues as well. But I have come to the conclusion that I see no threat to our national security. There is no convincing evidence that Iraq is capable of threatening the security of this country, and, therefore, very little reason, if any, to pursue a war.
But I am very interested also in the process that we are pursuing. This is not a resolution to declare war. We know that. This is a resolution that does something much different. This resolution transfers the responsibility, the authority, and the power of the Congress to the President so he can declare war when and if he wants to. He has not even indicated that he wants to go to war or has to go to war; but he will make the full decision, not the Congress, not the people through the Congress of this country in that manner.
It does something else, though. One-half of the resolution delivers this power to the President, but it also instructs him to enforce U.N. resolutions. I happen to think I would rather listen to the President when he talks about unilateralism and national security interests, than accept this responsibility to follow all of the rules and the dictates of the United Nations. That is what this resolution does. It instructs him to follow all of the resolutions.
But an important aspect of the philosophy and the policy we are endorsing here is the preemption doctrine. This should not be passed off lightly. It has been done to some degree in the past, but never been put into law that we will preemptively strike another nation that has not attacked us. No matter what the arguments may be, this policy is new; and it will have ramifications for our future, and it will have ramifications for the future of the world because other countries will adopt this same philosophy.
I also want to mention very briefly something that has essentially never been brought up. For more than a thousand years there has been a doctrine and Christian definition of what a just war is all about. I think this effort and this plan to go to war comes up short of that doctrine. First, it says that there has to be an act of aggression; and there has not been an act of aggression against the United States. We are 6,000 miles from their shores.
Also, it says that all efforts at negotiations must be exhausted. I do not believe that is the case. It seems to me like the opposition, the enemy, right now is begging for more negotiations.
Also, the Christian doctrine says that the proper authority must be responsible for initiating the war. I do not believe that proper authority can be transferred to the President nor to the United Nations.
But a very practical reason why I have a great deal of reservations has to do with the issue of no-win wars that we have been involved in for so long. Once we give up our responsibilities from here in the House and the Senate to make these decisions, it seems that we depend on the United Nations for our instructions; and that is why, as a Member earlier indicated, essentially we are already at war. That is correct. We are still in the Persian Gulf War. We have been bombing for 12 years, and the reason President Bush, Sr., did not go all the way? He said the U.N. did not give him permission to.
My argument is when we go to war through the back door, we are more likely to have the wars last longer and not have resolution of the wars, such as we had in Korea and Vietnam. We ought to consider this very seriously.
Also it is said we are wrong about the act of aggression, there has been an act of aggression against us because Saddam Hussein has shot at our airplanes. The fact that he has missed every single airplane for 12 years, and tens of thousands of sorties have been flown, indicates the strength of our enemy, an impoverished, Third World nation that does not have an air force, anti-aircraft weapons, or a navy.
But the indication is because he shot at us, therefore, it is an act of aggression. However, what is cited as the reason for us flying over the no-fly zone comes from U.N. Resolution 688, which instructs us and all the nations to contribute to humanitarian relief in the Kurdish and the Shiite areas. It says nothing about no-fly zones, and it says nothing about bombing missions over Iraq.
So to declare that we have been attacked, I do not believe for a minute that this fulfills the requirement that we are retaliating against aggression by this country. There is a need for us to assume responsibility for the declaration of war, and also to prepare the American people for the taxes that will be raised and the possibility of a military draft which may well come.
I must oppose this resolution, which regardless of what many have tried to claim will lead us into war with Iraq. This resolution is not a declaration of war, however, and that is an important point: this resolution transfers the Constitutionally-mandated Congressional authority to declare wars to the executive branch. This resolution tells the president that he alone has the authority to determine when, where, why, and how war will be declared. It merely asks the president to pay us a courtesy call a couple of days after the bombing starts to let us know what is going on. This is exactly what our Founding Fathers cautioned against when crafting our form of government: most had just left behind a monarchy where the power to declare war rested in one individual. It is this they most wished to avoid.
As James Madison wrote in 1798, "The Constitution supposes what the history of all governments demonstrates, that the executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it. It has, accordingly, with studied care, vested the question of war in the legislature."
Some - even some in this body - have claimed that this Constitutional requirement is an anachronism, and that those who insist on following the founding legal document of this country are just being frivolous. I could not disagree more.
Mr. Speaker, for the more than one dozen years I have spent as a federal legislator I have taken a particular interest in foreign affairs and especially the politics of the Middle East. From my seat on the international relations committee I have had the opportunity to review dozens of documents and to sit through numerous hearings and mark-up sessions regarding the issues of both Iraq and international terrorism.
Back in 1997 and 1998 I publicly spoke out against the actions of the Clinton Administration, which I believed was moving us once again toward war with Iraq. I believe the genesis of our current policy was unfortunately being set at that time. Indeed, many of the same voices who then demanded that the Clinton Administration attack Iraq are now demanding that the Bush Administration attack Iraq. It is unfortunate that these individuals are using the tragedy of September 11, 2001 as cover to force their long-standing desire to see an American invasion of Iraq. Despite all of the information to which I have access, I remain very skeptical that the nation of Iraq poses a serious and immanent terrorist threat to the United States. If I were convinced of such a threat I would support going to war, as I did when I supported President Bush by voting to give him both the authority and the necessary funding to fight the war on terror.
Mr. Speaker, consider some of the following claims presented by supporters of this resolution, and contrast them with the following facts:
Claim: Iraq has consistently demonstrated its willingness to use force against the US through its firing on our planes patrolling the UN-established "no-fly zones."
Reality: The "no-fly zones" were never authorized by the United Nations, nor was their 12 year patrol by American and British fighter planes sanctioned by the United Nations. Under UN Security Council Resolution 688 (April, 1991), Iraq’s repression of the Kurds and Shi’ites was condemned, but there was no authorization for "no-fly zones," much less airstrikes. The resolution only calls for member states to "contribute to humanitarian relief" in the Kurd and Shi’ite areas. Yet the US and British have been bombing Iraq in the "no-fly zones" for 12 years. While one can only condemn any country firing on our pilots, isn’t the real argument whether we should continue to bomb Iraq relentlessly? Just since 1998, some 40,000 sorties have been flown over Iraq.
Claim: Iraq is an international sponsor of terrorism.
Reality: According to the latest edition of the State Department’s Patterns of Global Terrorism, Iraq sponsors several minor Palestinian groups, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), and the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK). None of these carries out attacks against the United States. As a matter of fact, the MEK (an Iranian organization located in Iraq) has enjoyed broad Congressional support over the years. According to last year’s Patterns of Global Terrorism, Iraq has not been involved in terrorist activity against the West since 1993 – the alleged attempt against former President Bush.
Claim: Iraq tried to assassinate President Bush in 1993.
Reality: It is far from certain that Iraq was behind the attack. News reports at the time were skeptical about Kuwaiti assertions that the attack was planned by Iraq against former. President Bush. Following is an interesting quote from Seymour Hersh’s article from Nov. 1993:
Three years ago, during Iraq's six-month occupation of Kuwait, there had been an outcry when a teen-age Kuwaiti girl testified eloquently and effectively before Congress about Iraqi atrocities involving newborn infants. The girl turned out to be the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to Washington, Sheikh Saud Nasir al-Sabah, and her account of Iraqi soldiers flinging babies out of incubators was challenged as exaggerated both by journalists and by human-rights groups. (Sheikh Saud was subsequently named Minister of Information in Kuwait, and he was the government official in charge of briefing the international press on the alleged assassination attempt against George Bush.) In a second incident, in August of 1991, Kuwait provoked a special session of the United Nations Security Council by claiming that twelve Iraqi vessels, including a speedboat, had been involved in an attempt to assault Bubiyan Island, long-disputed territory that was then under Kuwaiti control. The Security Council eventually concluded that, while the Iraqis had been provocative, there had been no Iraqi military raid, and that the Kuwaiti government knew there hadn't. What did take place was nothing more than a smuggler-versus-smuggler dispute over war booty in a nearby demilitarized zone that had emerged, after the Gulf War, as an illegal marketplace for alcohol, ammunition, and livestock.
This establishes that on several occasions Kuwait has lied about the threat from Iraq. Hersh goes on to point out in the article numerous other times the Kuwaitis lied to the US and the UN about Iraq. Here is another good quote from Hersh:
The President was not alone in his caution. Janet Reno, the Attorney General, also had her doubts. "The A.G. remains skeptical of certain aspects of the case," a senior Justice Department official told me in late July, a month after the bombs were dropped on Baghdad…Two weeks later, what amounted to open warfare broke out among various factions in the government on the issue of who had done what in Kuwait. Someone gave a Boston Globe reporter access to a classified C.I.A. study that was highly skeptical of the Kuwaiti claims of an Iraqi assassination attempt. The study, prepared by the C.I.A.'s Counter Terrorism Center, suggested that Kuwait might have "cooked the books" on the alleged plot in an effort to play up the "continuing Iraqi threat" to Western interests in the Persian Gulf. Neither the Times nor the Post made any significant mention of the Globe dispatch, which had been written by a Washington correspondent named Paul Quinn-Judge, although the story cited specific paragraphs from the C.I.A. assessment. The two major American newspapers had been driven by their sources to the other side of the debate.
At the very least, the case against Iraq for the alleged bomb threat is not conclusive.
Claim: Saddam Hussein will use weapons of mass destruction against us – he has already used them against his own people (the Kurds in 1988 in the village of Halabja).
Reality: It is far from certain that Iraq used chemical weapons against the Kurds. It may be accepted as conventional wisdom in these times, but back when it was first claimed there was great skepticism. The evidence is far from conclusive. A 1990 study by the Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College cast great doubts on the claim that Iraq used chemical weapons on the Kurds. Following are the two gassing incidents as described in the report:
In September 1988, however – a month after the war (between Iran and Iraq) had ended – the State Department abruptly, and in what many viewed as a sensational manner, condemned Iraq for allegedly using chemicals against its Kurdish population. The incident cannot be understood without some background of Iraq’s relations with the Kurds…throughout the war. Iraq effectively faced two enemies – Iran and elements of its own Kurdish minority. Significant numbers of the Kurds had launched a revolt against Baghdad and in the process teamed up with Tehran. As soon as the war with Iran ended, Iraq announced its determination to crush the Kurdish insurrection. It sent Republican Guards to the Kurdish area, and in the course of the operation – according to the U.S. State Department – gas was used, with the result that numerous Kurdish civilians were killed. The Iraqi government denied that any such gassing had occurred. Nonetheless, Secretary of State Schultz stood by U.S. accusations, and the U.S. Congress, acting on its own, sought to impose economic sanctions on Baghdad as a violator of the Kurds’ human rights.
Having looked at all the evidence that was available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the State Department’s claim that gas was used in this instance. To begin with. There were never any victims produced. International relief organizations who examined the Kurds – in Turkey where they had gone for asylum – failed to discover any. Nor were there ever any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
It appears that in seeking to punish Iraq, the Congress was influenced by another incident that occurred five months earlier in another Iraqi-Kurdish city, Halabjah. In March 1988, the Kurds at Halabjah were bombarded with chemical weapons, producing many deaths. Photographs of the Kurdish victims were widely disseminated in the international media. Iraq was blamed for the Halabjah attack, even though it was subsequently brought out that Iran too had used chemicals in this operation and it seemed likely that it was the Iranian bombardment that had actually killed the Kurds.
Thus, in our view, the Congress acted more on the basis of emotionalism than factual information, and without sufficient thought for the adverse diplomatic effects of its action.
Claim: Iraq must be attacked because it has ignored UN Security Council resolutions – these resolutions must be backed up by the use of force.
Reality: Iraq is but one of the many countries that have not complied with UN Security Council resolutions. In addition to the dozen or so resolutions currently being violated by Iraq, a conservative estimate reveals that there are an additional 91 Security Council resolutions by countries other than Iraq that are also currently being violated. Adding in older resolutions that were violated would mean easily more than 200 UN Security Council resolutions have been violated with total impunity. Countries currently in violation include: Israel, Turkey, Morocco, Croatia, Armenia, Russia, Sudan, Turkey-controlled Cyprus, India, Pakistan, Indonesia. None of these countries have been threatened with force over their violations.
Claim: Iraq has anthrax and other chemical and biological agents.
Reality: That may be true. However, according to UNSCOM’s chief weapons inspector 90-95 percent of Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons and capabilities were destroyed by 1998; those that remained have likely degraded in the intervening four years and are likely useless. A 1994 Senate Banking Committee hearing revealed some 74 shipments of deadly chemical and biological agents from the U.S. to Iraq in the 1980s. As one recent press report stated:
One 1986 shipment from the Virginia-based American Type Culture Collection included three strains of anthrax, six strains of the bacteria that make botulinum toxin and three strains of the bacteria that cause gas gangrene. Iraq later admitted to the United Nations that it had made weapons out of all three…
The CDC, meanwhile, sent shipments of germs to the Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission and other agencies involved in Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. It sent samples in 1986 of botulinum toxin and botulinum toxoid — used to make vaccines against botulinum toxin — directly to the Iraqi chemical and biological weapons complex at al-Muthanna, the records show.
These were sent while the United States was supporting Iraq covertly in its war against Iran. U.S. assistance to Iraq in that war also included covertly-delivered intelligence on Iranian troop movements and other assistance. This is just another example of our policy of interventionism in affairs that do not concern us – and how this interventionism nearly always ends up causing harm to the United States.
Claim: The president claimed last night that: "Iraq possesses ballistic missiles with a likely range of hundreds of miles; far enough to strike Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey and other nations in a region where more than 135,000 American civilians and service members live and work."
Reality: Then why is only Israel talking about the need for the U.S. to attack Iraq? None of the other countries seem concerned at all. Also, the fact that some 135,000 Americans in the area are under threat from these alleged missiles is just makes the point that it is time to bring our troops home to defend our own country.
Claim: Iraq harbors al-Qaeda and other terrorists.
Reality: The administration has claimed that some Al-Qaeda elements have been present in Northern Iraq. This is territory controlled by the Kurds – who are our allies – and is patrolled by U.S. and British fighter aircraft. Moreover, dozens of countries – including Iran and the United States – are said to have al-Qaeda members on their territory. Other terrorists allegedly harbored by Iraq, all are affiliated with Palestinian causes and do not attack the United States.
Claim: President Bush said in his speech on 7 October 2002: " Many people have asked how close Saddam Hussein is to developing a nuclear weapon. Well, we don't know exactly, and that's the problem…"
Reality: An admission of a lack of information is justification for an attack?
Do you want to read a great speech on the debate to enter Iraq?
Good speech by Ron Paul on the Iraq war.
(Unfortunately, it doesn't make his other policies any saner.)
And a good catch by Chris. Except, the Speaker pro Tempore is also referred to as Speaker and the person filling that role changes several times over the course of the day.
To be specific, Congressman Shelley Capito (WV) became Speaker pro Tempore in the middle of Congressman Sherman's comments shortly after 1:45. After that time, everyone's comments are directed toward "Madam Speaker". Ron Paul spoke for a few mintues between 2:15 and 2:30. (You finally find out who, exactly, is the Speaker pro Tempore at about 3:00 when she has call the Sergeant at Arms to quell a disturbance in the gallery. Unfortunately, they don't give any details about the disturbance.)
For the record, his actual speech on the floor ended at "military draft which may well come." The rest was inserted into the Congressional record as accompanying material, hence the reference to Mr Speaker in the middle of his "speech". While it's certainly possible to have the Speaker pro Tempore change in the middle of a person's speech (as happened to Congressman Sherman), that wasn't the case in this instance.
As to why the majority of his speech wasn't actually spoken on the floor and was merely inserted into the Congressional Record afterward? Get real! There's 435 members of the House of Representatives (as opposed to only 100 Senators). If all got a chance to speak as long as they wanted, nothing would ever get done.
In other words, it's very common for Congressman to give a very short version on the floor and insert what they wish they had time to say into the Congressional Record.
Reply:I have the same reservations as the first answerer, but it is a great speech.
Irrelevant at this juncture, but a great speech nonetheless.
Reply:Its a real speech and he was 100% correct.
Rebecca, nobody wanted to challenge this because it was unpopular at the time to go against the President.
Congress failed us as much or more than the President did. Do you know why? They put the ball in his court and said "we dont want to be burdened with the tough issues, we would rather blame you in the end if it doesn't work out."
Another example of how fractured our system is because of partisan politics and a lack of leadership in Washington D.C.
(in other links to the speech its "Mr. Speaker" so it seems there is a typographical error in other references. The body is the same thoughout).
Reply:It was a bit too long for me to stay with, but it sounds like something Paul would say.
Reply:If Congress passed a law giving the president authority that The Constitution did not give him... then that law is unconstitutional and therefore is invalid. If there was such a law that was passed then it should be challenged in a court of law.
Bush is obviously doing things which are illegal and he needs to be challenged in this... both in Congress and in the courts!
Reply:Why does his speech start as"Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to this resolution". The speaker in 2002 was a man. Either the date is wrong, the speech is false, you are incorrect, or you have been fooled. Which is it?
peony
What do i do?
I been seeing a wonderful new woman, we'll call her "C". I been seeing C for a few weeks and i'm extremely attracted to her in every way. I've had lots of girlfriends but I’ve only slept with two or three of them. Each time the way they had sex were different. C is much older and more experienced than I am, I would really like to please her but I’m very sexually intimidated by her. I really want to give her my "treasure" but I’m afraid that I won't please her because I don't know what to do with her in particular. My question is how do I find out what she likes and how she likes it without sounding like I’m interviewing her?
What do i do?
two girls can't have sex. it's impossible.
just eat her out.
Reply:If you're going to be in a real relationship with someone, then honesty is ALWAYS the best way to go. Explain to her exactly what you've just explained to us, and be sure to tell her how much you want to please her because you are so very attracted to her.
She should be very understanding and kind, and teach you what she likes. She wasn't always experienced either, you know, someone had to teach her at one time! So she will know exactly what you mean. Just talk to her! It will be fine, don't worry.
Reply:be honest with her and let her know that your fairly new to this ... and that she should be gentle .....lol, don't worry she will help and lead you through everything and she will let you know what she likes ....just be your self and relax and most of all ... enjoy your self !.....
p.s.. don't forget to let her know what you like as well....its a 2way street
Reply:Go slow. Let her lead you. Be sharp and listen to what she Say's. Just in general conversation about T.V shows and adult conversations. Some where there may be a hint. Then you can boldly ask her what is she saying. What you call "Treasure" may not be what she like and if you make the move. You could lose her. Just a little advice from an older woman
Reply:Good question... I had this very problem once before... I was intimidated by this girl I was seeing bcuz she was about seven years older than I was... So what I did (since it was too new to be asking those personal questions) I bought this romance board game from this specialty shop... It came with two tiny paint brushes, two jars of chocolate, feathers, playing cards and note pads... one of the challenges was for us to write down our most intimate fantasy and whoever made to the end of the game first got their fantasy played out for them... of course I lost, but the point is, make it fun... some people don't like to just come out and talk about what they like... make it a game or something else fun you could think of. It worked and it helped us become more open with each other. Try it... and GOOD LUCK!!!
Reply:dont worry about it . just let the experience unfold . Youll both have a good time .
Reply:Hide in her attic, her bathroom closet, where she works, her bedroom closet and any where else and just observe study obsess about every detail untill you know exactly how to please her but if she finds out kill her hide the body and move on
Reply:Just ask her, (maybe in a exotic type of way), so that it sounds sexy and not like an "interview." Or you can ask her to physically show you what she like in bed. Or you can be honest and just sit down and tell her exactly what you wrote to us, and see what she says.
Reply:Ask her. There is nothing better than a woman willing to talk about sex and the things that make her go omg that feels good.
Talk, talk, talk, then get it crackin'. Sex should be a open thing in a relationship. Everyone likes different things. So the only way to know is to open it up for discussion.
If she's not the type to talk then you can do things to her and if you get good reactions and sounds then you're on a roll. If not try something else until you start to learn what she likes and doesnt like.
Reply:I think people have given you some really good advice. One other thing I would add is that sex is not a job or an audition. It's wonderful to want to please your partner. Also, experience sex as YOUR enjoyment of someone else's body. Do what you find interesting and experiment with what you enjoy. For example, if you really like kissing someone's neck and smelling her hair, do that. Maybe she will dig it, maybe not, you can find out. Don't place the entire emphasis on performing, it can be a more natural experience than that.
Reply:Open, honest communication is the key to a relationship. Tell her what you've just told us. Trust me, if someone told me she wanted to know how to please me, it would be a total turn on.
What do i do?
two girls can't have sex. it's impossible.
just eat her out.
Reply:If you're going to be in a real relationship with someone, then honesty is ALWAYS the best way to go. Explain to her exactly what you've just explained to us, and be sure to tell her how much you want to please her because you are so very attracted to her.
She should be very understanding and kind, and teach you what she likes. She wasn't always experienced either, you know, someone had to teach her at one time! So she will know exactly what you mean. Just talk to her! It will be fine, don't worry.
Reply:be honest with her and let her know that your fairly new to this ... and that she should be gentle .....lol, don't worry she will help and lead you through everything and she will let you know what she likes ....just be your self and relax and most of all ... enjoy your self !.....
p.s.. don't forget to let her know what you like as well....its a 2way street
Reply:Go slow. Let her lead you. Be sharp and listen to what she Say's. Just in general conversation about T.V shows and adult conversations. Some where there may be a hint. Then you can boldly ask her what is she saying. What you call "Treasure" may not be what she like and if you make the move. You could lose her. Just a little advice from an older woman
Reply:Good question... I had this very problem once before... I was intimidated by this girl I was seeing bcuz she was about seven years older than I was... So what I did (since it was too new to be asking those personal questions) I bought this romance board game from this specialty shop... It came with two tiny paint brushes, two jars of chocolate, feathers, playing cards and note pads... one of the challenges was for us to write down our most intimate fantasy and whoever made to the end of the game first got their fantasy played out for them... of course I lost, but the point is, make it fun... some people don't like to just come out and talk about what they like... make it a game or something else fun you could think of. It worked and it helped us become more open with each other. Try it... and GOOD LUCK!!!
Reply:dont worry about it . just let the experience unfold . Youll both have a good time .
Reply:Hide in her attic, her bathroom closet, where she works, her bedroom closet and any where else and just observe study obsess about every detail untill you know exactly how to please her but if she finds out kill her hide the body and move on
Reply:Just ask her, (maybe in a exotic type of way), so that it sounds sexy and not like an "interview." Or you can ask her to physically show you what she like in bed. Or you can be honest and just sit down and tell her exactly what you wrote to us, and see what she says.
Reply:Ask her. There is nothing better than a woman willing to talk about sex and the things that make her go omg that feels good.
Talk, talk, talk, then get it crackin'. Sex should be a open thing in a relationship. Everyone likes different things. So the only way to know is to open it up for discussion.
If she's not the type to talk then you can do things to her and if you get good reactions and sounds then you're on a roll. If not try something else until you start to learn what she likes and doesnt like.
Reply:I think people have given you some really good advice. One other thing I would add is that sex is not a job or an audition. It's wonderful to want to please your partner. Also, experience sex as YOUR enjoyment of someone else's body. Do what you find interesting and experiment with what you enjoy. For example, if you really like kissing someone's neck and smelling her hair, do that. Maybe she will dig it, maybe not, you can find out. Don't place the entire emphasis on performing, it can be a more natural experience than that.
Reply:Open, honest communication is the key to a relationship. Tell her what you've just told us. Trust me, if someone told me she wanted to know how to please me, it would be a total turn on.
Question for Anyone Who Works in Public or Government Industries. ANSWER NEEDED ASAP.?
An answer for these would be appreciated ASAP, given that the paper on this interview is due tomorrow, and my other interviewees flaked on me.
1. What is your...?
A) Age
B) Position
C) Agency
D) Years in Position
E) Current Salary
F) Top Salary
G) Best Part About Your Job
H) Worst Part About Your Job
I) Interesting Story From or About Work
2. What classes or experiences did you have in high school that prepared you for your current career?
3. What classes or experiences did you have in college that prepared you for your career?
4. Did any local people or family members inspire you or push you into your career?
5. What degree did you get and from what school? What other special training or licenses were required for this work?
6. On a day-to-day basis, what are the three main things you do at your job? What skills do you use to do those things?
7. What is the most exciting or unusual thing that has ever happened to you at work? How about the most unexpected?
Question for Anyone Who Works in Public or Government Industries. ANSWER NEEDED ASAP.?
1.
A 38 years old
B Engineer
C State Highway Dept.
D 5
F Unsure of what top position in my dept. makes
G Designing new roads, making bad roads better
H How slowly everything progresses. We can never do anything when it needs to be done. We have to get funding, approval, and make sure all the politicians are happy with the plan. By the time we upgrade, it needs to be upgraded even further! We are always years behind where we should be, and it is getting worse and worse.
I When I first started, we began redesigning a section of road that was way overdue to have additional lanes added etc to to increased traffic volume along this ten mile section. Every time we complete the design and everyting is ready for construction to begin, we have to start over for some reason or another (not enough money allocated by the state, problems with landowners taking legal action, etc.). It's been five years and the problem is probably five times worse than it was five years ago. We will start redesigning again after the first of the year. If we're lucky, and no other delays occur, the road will be completed by the end of 2011.
2. Calculus and physics helped with my career the most. My father also gave me small "chores" which I was responsible for which made me a more responsible person.
3. Most all of my college classes helped me in some way wether directly or indirectly.
Working for construction and/or engineering companies during the summer helped me to better see if I was going to like what I had chosen as my major.
4. My father directed me some because he saw my likes, dislikes as well as what my strengths were both in school and at home.
5. I obtained a BS in Civil Engineering. I later obtained an MBA by taking night classes after I graduated. I first had to pass the EIT (engineer in training) exam. I then had to work a minimum of 4 years under a licensed Professional Engineer to qualify to take the Professional Engineer's exam. Once I passed this I was licensed in the state I took it in. I pay yearly fees to keep it and I also must take 15 hours of continuing education classes each year.
6. Review other technicians work; make changes to plans; do field inspections. Main skill is experience. You don't know how to do it unless you've done it yourself.....book knowledge is just the base for you to start getting experience by doing.....
7. Most exciting .......got an unexpected promotion. Most unexpected...........almost was transfered to new location.
1. What is your...?
A) Age
B) Position
C) Agency
D) Years in Position
E) Current Salary
F) Top Salary
G) Best Part About Your Job
H) Worst Part About Your Job
I) Interesting Story From or About Work
2. What classes or experiences did you have in high school that prepared you for your current career?
3. What classes or experiences did you have in college that prepared you for your career?
4. Did any local people or family members inspire you or push you into your career?
5. What degree did you get and from what school? What other special training or licenses were required for this work?
6. On a day-to-day basis, what are the three main things you do at your job? What skills do you use to do those things?
7. What is the most exciting or unusual thing that has ever happened to you at work? How about the most unexpected?
Question for Anyone Who Works in Public or Government Industries. ANSWER NEEDED ASAP.?
1.
A 38 years old
B Engineer
C State Highway Dept.
D 5
F Unsure of what top position in my dept. makes
G Designing new roads, making bad roads better
H How slowly everything progresses. We can never do anything when it needs to be done. We have to get funding, approval, and make sure all the politicians are happy with the plan. By the time we upgrade, it needs to be upgraded even further! We are always years behind where we should be, and it is getting worse and worse.
I When I first started, we began redesigning a section of road that was way overdue to have additional lanes added etc to to increased traffic volume along this ten mile section. Every time we complete the design and everyting is ready for construction to begin, we have to start over for some reason or another (not enough money allocated by the state, problems with landowners taking legal action, etc.). It's been five years and the problem is probably five times worse than it was five years ago. We will start redesigning again after the first of the year. If we're lucky, and no other delays occur, the road will be completed by the end of 2011.
2. Calculus and physics helped with my career the most. My father also gave me small "chores" which I was responsible for which made me a more responsible person.
3. Most all of my college classes helped me in some way wether directly or indirectly.
Working for construction and/or engineering companies during the summer helped me to better see if I was going to like what I had chosen as my major.
4. My father directed me some because he saw my likes, dislikes as well as what my strengths were both in school and at home.
5. I obtained a BS in Civil Engineering. I later obtained an MBA by taking night classes after I graduated. I first had to pass the EIT (engineer in training) exam. I then had to work a minimum of 4 years under a licensed Professional Engineer to qualify to take the Professional Engineer's exam. Once I passed this I was licensed in the state I took it in. I pay yearly fees to keep it and I also must take 15 hours of continuing education classes each year.
6. Review other technicians work; make changes to plans; do field inspections. Main skill is experience. You don't know how to do it unless you've done it yourself.....book knowledge is just the base for you to start getting experience by doing.....
7. Most exciting .......got an unexpected promotion. Most unexpected...........almost was transfered to new location.
Is a degree/diploma from a reputed institute necessary to get a job in the software industry?
I am 17 now, and I found out that I have a huge flair for programming, and can make effective basic programs in C# and C already....unfortunately,I couldn't get a seat in an engineering college because I got as low(53,939/2,00,000 candidates)rank in EAMCET(the entrance exam in my state).
I can't afford the back-door methods to get into the colleges as they demand huge sums of money....
If I prove myself to be capable in programming by performing outstandingly in the interviews,will I get a job without a degree?
More importantly,is it possible for me to learn everything,right from the ubiquitous C to Java,Perl and the huge vista of other programming languages on my own?Is it advisable?
Someone plz reply,becoz this is the question of my life,career,and......everything!!!!
Is a degree/diploma from a reputed institute necessary to get a job in the software industry?
Absolutely necessary? No.
Extremely helpful? Yes!
In most industries once you've been in the business 5-10 years all that matters is your work history. A degree / diploma is a substitute for that experience to get you in the door (it shows that you have some knowledge and a certain amount of dedication to that subject).
IF (and it's a big if) you can get in the door without that you may be fine. However, as any industry matures it gets harder and harder to get in the door without some schooling. Also, without a degree you will start substantially lower (if you get in it will be in the lowest position at a smaller company) than you might with a degree.
Reply:Well you basically have 2 options because the odds of you being hired with out some kind of college education in a field like software engineering is quite low.
Go to a community college and take everything out on student loans. This would fast track you to a job but you will end up low on the totem poll. You would have to repay the student loans too unless you joined the military or something, with a degree in software engineering odds are you wouldn't see any front lines fighting and then you could go to a university and get a full bachelors degree which would make you more likely to get a good position in a company after you finished.
I would advise against teaching yourself everything simply because you gain the ability to program stuff, but can you use the advanced mathematics needed and understand the concept of algorithm design well enough to build something that is both efficient and correct.
Also don't just limit yourself to engineering colleges. I go to a public university and am getting a perfectly good degree in software engineering from a university that specializes in all fields not just engineering.
Reply:Ok here is something to consider for you. While a degree is very valuable in getting a job it seems in this industry it is not required in some cases. You could certainly start up your own business as a consultant without one for example. You can learn through self study far diverse subject matter then you can learn through formal education from any school.
As far as not qualifying for college due to a test result or money that is a different problem all together. A visit to their financial aid office may find you getting approved for a grant to learn more and retake that test if need be.
There is also one other thing that most people do not know or remember. If you can get a job working at a school typically one of the benefits is your education is free. I know it is like that with most if not all of the colleges nationwide.
Reply:well,nowadays B.E/MCA/M.SC(it) are almost considered equivalent while selection of a canidate as a employee.there might be little difference in pay package,but at the end of the day what really matters is your knowledge.obviously,a degree from good college will help you in making good impression i.e. it shows that you are meritorious student,but anyhow if you dont get into one then its not to much worry about.
after some exp.what really matters is your knowledge and exp.
you can learn yourself if you are confident about yourself,but i think formal teaching would help making things easy.
Reply:I would say with no training and being so young it is going to be hard. The fact is, it depends on who is hiring. Some places have absolute minimum standards on what credentials and experience employees need. If you can show them that you can do the work and impress them, you may have a shot. Just remember, the original programmers didn't have a degree in programming. Find some local firms and ask them if you can just go talk to them. They may be able to help you and give you advice.
I can't afford the back-door methods to get into the colleges as they demand huge sums of money....
If I prove myself to be capable in programming by performing outstandingly in the interviews,will I get a job without a degree?
More importantly,is it possible for me to learn everything,right from the ubiquitous C to Java,Perl and the huge vista of other programming languages on my own?Is it advisable?
Someone plz reply,becoz this is the question of my life,career,and......everything!!!!
Is a degree/diploma from a reputed institute necessary to get a job in the software industry?
Absolutely necessary? No.
Extremely helpful? Yes!
In most industries once you've been in the business 5-10 years all that matters is your work history. A degree / diploma is a substitute for that experience to get you in the door (it shows that you have some knowledge and a certain amount of dedication to that subject).
IF (and it's a big if) you can get in the door without that you may be fine. However, as any industry matures it gets harder and harder to get in the door without some schooling. Also, without a degree you will start substantially lower (if you get in it will be in the lowest position at a smaller company) than you might with a degree.
Reply:Well you basically have 2 options because the odds of you being hired with out some kind of college education in a field like software engineering is quite low.
Go to a community college and take everything out on student loans. This would fast track you to a job but you will end up low on the totem poll. You would have to repay the student loans too unless you joined the military or something, with a degree in software engineering odds are you wouldn't see any front lines fighting and then you could go to a university and get a full bachelors degree which would make you more likely to get a good position in a company after you finished.
I would advise against teaching yourself everything simply because you gain the ability to program stuff, but can you use the advanced mathematics needed and understand the concept of algorithm design well enough to build something that is both efficient and correct.
Also don't just limit yourself to engineering colleges. I go to a public university and am getting a perfectly good degree in software engineering from a university that specializes in all fields not just engineering.
Reply:Ok here is something to consider for you. While a degree is very valuable in getting a job it seems in this industry it is not required in some cases. You could certainly start up your own business as a consultant without one for example. You can learn through self study far diverse subject matter then you can learn through formal education from any school.
As far as not qualifying for college due to a test result or money that is a different problem all together. A visit to their financial aid office may find you getting approved for a grant to learn more and retake that test if need be.
There is also one other thing that most people do not know or remember. If you can get a job working at a school typically one of the benefits is your education is free. I know it is like that with most if not all of the colleges nationwide.
Reply:well,nowadays B.E/MCA/M.SC(it) are almost considered equivalent while selection of a canidate as a employee.there might be little difference in pay package,but at the end of the day what really matters is your knowledge.obviously,a degree from good college will help you in making good impression i.e. it shows that you are meritorious student,but anyhow if you dont get into one then its not to much worry about.
after some exp.what really matters is your knowledge and exp.
you can learn yourself if you are confident about yourself,but i think formal teaching would help making things easy.
Reply:I would say with no training and being so young it is going to be hard. The fact is, it depends on who is hiring. Some places have absolute minimum standards on what credentials and experience employees need. If you can show them that you can do the work and impress them, you may have a shot. Just remember, the original programmers didn't have a degree in programming. Find some local firms and ask them if you can just go talk to them. They may be able to help you and give you advice.
Question about the staples hiring process?
I went to an interview at Staples Business Depot a week ago, they just called back and asked if I had another reference (i provided 2, but one was a ski instructor that I worked with who was not avaiable) so i gave them another reference (someone I built a computer for). I am just wondering if its a good sign they asked for another reference, and what do you think my chances are of getting the job,
My info:
-I have worked as a ski instructor, and have CSIA Level 1
-I have worked in a computer shop for one summer
-I have built a lot of computers
-I have CPR Level C
-I know how to fix/upgrade computers (software and hardware)
Question about the staples hiring process?
Hard to say, but at least they are contacting your references. If they were not considering, they would not even bother to call.
Good Luck.
long stem roses
My info:
-I have worked as a ski instructor, and have CSIA Level 1
-I have worked in a computer shop for one summer
-I have built a lot of computers
-I have CPR Level C
-I know how to fix/upgrade computers (software and hardware)
Question about the staples hiring process?
Hard to say, but at least they are contacting your references. If they were not considering, they would not even bother to call.
Good Luck.
long stem roses
Employment law florida- non compete?
My question is a little confusing. I was registered with a temp agency, "A". A assigned me to one of their clients, Company B. "B" asked the temp agency workers to sign a Non-Compete Agreement to not work for Company B's competitors for stated amount of time and distance. I signed the non-compete for Company B to keep my job. As an employee of Company A, assigned as temp labor to company B, is this a valid legal agreement? All of my paychecks came from Company A and I was for all intent and purpose an employee of Company A, not Company B. With the experience with company B on my resume, I have been contacted by local competitors of Company B. I have turned down interviews because I am afraid of Company B trying to sue me (Yes, they would sue or at least threaten. There was a lawsuit against one of Company B's own employees for N.C. violation while I was there as a temp) Should I accept these interviews? Does company B have a leg to stand on as I was not a direct employee of Comp. B?
Employment law florida- non compete?
First and foremost, you need to check the documents given to you by Agency A. They usually state that you are an employee of Agency A and are bound by their rules.
Non-competes are signed by employees to prevent them, primarily, from bringing their expertise to the competition. Since you were not an employee of Company B when you signed it (but rather an employee of Agency A), I'd say it's null. However, I'd bring this to the attention of the agency. If their clients are asking the Agency's employees to sign non-competes, I think it may create a conflict of interest somewhere.
You can always double check with an attorney. Most states have a bar association (check the yellow pages) that will answer questions for little or no money.
Reply:You are bound by the non-compete unless the term is up. But, I would check with a lawyer to be absolutely sure.
Reply:Does your temp agency know that you were asked to sign a separate agreement with the company you were assigned to? Are they comfortable that this is being done?
I would take the non-compete agreement to a lawyer or maybe someone at the department of labor and ask your question. Non-compete agreements are being overturned by the courts as being invalid, but you may still have the cost of defending it if you violate it. Some states are even making it law that they are not legal and binding.
Employment law florida- non compete?
First and foremost, you need to check the documents given to you by Agency A. They usually state that you are an employee of Agency A and are bound by their rules.
Non-competes are signed by employees to prevent them, primarily, from bringing their expertise to the competition. Since you were not an employee of Company B when you signed it (but rather an employee of Agency A), I'd say it's null. However, I'd bring this to the attention of the agency. If their clients are asking the Agency's employees to sign non-competes, I think it may create a conflict of interest somewhere.
You can always double check with an attorney. Most states have a bar association (check the yellow pages) that will answer questions for little or no money.
Reply:You are bound by the non-compete unless the term is up. But, I would check with a lawyer to be absolutely sure.
Reply:Does your temp agency know that you were asked to sign a separate agreement with the company you were assigned to? Are they comfortable that this is being done?
I would take the non-compete agreement to a lawyer or maybe someone at the department of labor and ask your question. Non-compete agreements are being overturned by the courts as being invalid, but you may still have the cost of defending it if you violate it. Some states are even making it law that they are not legal and binding.
Batista Speaks On Murders, Three-Ways & More?
Batista was interviewed on the Elliot in the Morning Show in Washington D.C. this morning. They discussed his upbringing in the area, such events as murders in his neighborhood and learning that his mom was a lesbian.
When asked the big steroid question, he admitted that in the 90's he had taken them, but now would never think about it. He mentioned being furious that his name came up on the list of the 10 caught wrestlers a few months back. Talking about addictions he brought up that it was Chris Benoit who pointed out to him his sex addiction.
They brought up the quote from his book that his been going around the internet about his wife and three-ways, he says that quote is not in his book and he has only been in one three way. He said he never knew his wife had cancer until they split, and once she was diagnosed he got back with her to try to support her. Although split now they are very close, he congratulates her on just having a baby. Batista talks about his 17 year old d
Batista Speaks On Murders, Three-Ways %26amp; More?
Bad for Batista; People {These Batista Haters} convinced the Wrestling Spoilers, to misquote the written words published in his book!
Thanks Troll Terminator, I Hated him like I Hate Vince for a few hours.
Chris was known to speak with meaning.
Steroid's users all lie about their genetic damage to the grave, so testing required.
Reply:I agree with Kjors.......
About ALL OF IT!!!!!
Reply:Batista's a Prick
Reply:Agreed with the_kjors! Except for the addicted to sex part!
Reply:Thats not true he is liar and a moron
Reply:who cares batisteroids sucks plain and simple
Reply:Batista is the best!!!
Reply:Maybe Batista will get a lower fan base now and head over to Heat!!!!!!!!!!
His daughter is a mini-him.... EWW....
What A lying bag of BS.
He's so damn stupid.
Cant even describe this pitiful excuse for a being.
Reply:Lol, 2 babies at 17.
Great going.
I am not going to buy his book. I am waiting for Khali's book (lmao, the title would be ' #^%#$^#$^#$^')
Reply:HIS DAUGHTER MUST ALSO BE A SEX ADDICT WITH 2 KIDS AT AGE 17.
MY NAME IS THE KJORS AND IM ADDICTED TO SEX
Reply:i still say he needs a beating with a baseball bat and im starting to hate him even more now
Reply:I am definately buying Batista's book..
Reply:Batista is a fool
When asked the big steroid question, he admitted that in the 90's he had taken them, but now would never think about it. He mentioned being furious that his name came up on the list of the 10 caught wrestlers a few months back. Talking about addictions he brought up that it was Chris Benoit who pointed out to him his sex addiction.
They brought up the quote from his book that his been going around the internet about his wife and three-ways, he says that quote is not in his book and he has only been in one three way. He said he never knew his wife had cancer until they split, and once she was diagnosed he got back with her to try to support her. Although split now they are very close, he congratulates her on just having a baby. Batista talks about his 17 year old d
Batista Speaks On Murders, Three-Ways %26amp; More?
Bad for Batista; People {These Batista Haters} convinced the Wrestling Spoilers, to misquote the written words published in his book!
Thanks Troll Terminator, I Hated him like I Hate Vince for a few hours.
Chris was known to speak with meaning.
Steroid's users all lie about their genetic damage to the grave, so testing required.
Reply:I agree with Kjors.......
About ALL OF IT!!!!!
Reply:Batista's a Prick
Reply:Agreed with the_kjors! Except for the addicted to sex part!
Reply:Thats not true he is liar and a moron
Reply:who cares batisteroids sucks plain and simple
Reply:Batista is the best!!!
Reply:Maybe Batista will get a lower fan base now and head over to Heat!!!!!!!!!!
His daughter is a mini-him.... EWW....
What A lying bag of BS.
He's so damn stupid.
Cant even describe this pitiful excuse for a being.
Reply:Lol, 2 babies at 17.
Great going.
I am not going to buy his book. I am waiting for Khali's book (lmao, the title would be ' #^%#$^#$^#$^')
Reply:HIS DAUGHTER MUST ALSO BE A SEX ADDICT WITH 2 KIDS AT AGE 17.
MY NAME IS THE KJORS AND IM ADDICTED TO SEX
Reply:i still say he needs a beating with a baseball bat and im starting to hate him even more now
Reply:I am definately buying Batista's book..
Reply:Batista is a fool
Conditional Probability?
Conditional probability question.
A new drug was administered to 100 people. Follow-up interviews were conducted in which patients were asked whether or not they experienced various side effects. 7 of the patients reported experiencing a rise in blood pressure, 6 of the patients reported experiencing a loss of sleep, and 3 reported experiencing both of these side effects. According to these results, what is the probability that a person taking this drug
(a) will experience a rise in blood pressure, given that the person experiences a loss of sleep?
(b) will experience loss of sleep, given that the person experiences a rise in blood pressure?
(c) will experience both of these symptoms, given that the person experiences at least one of these symptoms?
Conditional Probability?
The general answer for conditional probabilities is:
P(A∩B) = P(A|B)P(B)
a) P(loss of sleep) = 0.09 (a total of 9 patients experimented a loss of sleep: 6 had that symptom only, and 3 had both)
P(loss of sleep ∩ high blood pressure) = 0.03 (3 patients had both a loss of sleep and a rise in blood pressure)
P(rise in blood pressure| loss of sleep) = 0.03/0.09 = 1/3 = 33.33%
b) P(high blood pressure) = 0.1 (a total of 10 patients experimented a rise in blood pressure: 7 had that symptom only, and 3 had both)
P(loss of sleep ∩ high blood pressure) = 0.03 (3 patients had both a loss of sleep and a rise in blood pressure)
P(loss of sleep | rise in blood pressure) = 0.03/0.1 = 0.3 = 30%
c) P(at least one symptom) = 0.07 + 0.06 + 0.03 = 0.16 (16 patients reported at least one symptom)
P(at least one symptom ∩ both symptoms) = P(both symptoms) = 0.03 The intersection of the two sets is the set of people with both symptoms.
P(both symptoms | at least one symptom) = 0.03/0.16 = 3/16 = 0.1875 or 18.75%
A new drug was administered to 100 people. Follow-up interviews were conducted in which patients were asked whether or not they experienced various side effects. 7 of the patients reported experiencing a rise in blood pressure, 6 of the patients reported experiencing a loss of sleep, and 3 reported experiencing both of these side effects. According to these results, what is the probability that a person taking this drug
(a) will experience a rise in blood pressure, given that the person experiences a loss of sleep?
(b) will experience loss of sleep, given that the person experiences a rise in blood pressure?
(c) will experience both of these symptoms, given that the person experiences at least one of these symptoms?
Conditional Probability?
The general answer for conditional probabilities is:
P(A∩B) = P(A|B)P(B)
a) P(loss of sleep) = 0.09 (a total of 9 patients experimented a loss of sleep: 6 had that symptom only, and 3 had both)
P(loss of sleep ∩ high blood pressure) = 0.03 (3 patients had both a loss of sleep and a rise in blood pressure)
P(rise in blood pressure| loss of sleep) = 0.03/0.09 = 1/3 = 33.33%
b) P(high blood pressure) = 0.1 (a total of 10 patients experimented a rise in blood pressure: 7 had that symptom only, and 3 had both)
P(loss of sleep ∩ high blood pressure) = 0.03 (3 patients had both a loss of sleep and a rise in blood pressure)
P(loss of sleep | rise in blood pressure) = 0.03/0.1 = 0.3 = 30%
c) P(at least one symptom) = 0.07 + 0.06 + 0.03 = 0.16 (16 patients reported at least one symptom)
P(at least one symptom ∩ both symptoms) = P(both symptoms) = 0.03 The intersection of the two sets is the set of people with both symptoms.
P(both symptoms | at least one symptom) = 0.03/0.16 = 3/16 = 0.1875 or 18.75%
I have another K1 visa question.(Philippines)?
How long does it take for my girlfriend to get her visa
(Philippines) after the U.S.C.I.S sends the visa papers to the N.V.C,Soon she should be taking her medical exam and have interview.I was just wondering how long it take after they get it.We have been doing this now for 6 monthes.Just wondering when i can see her aganin and get her here.
I have another K1 visa question.(Philippines)?
You've got another 2 to 6 months to go IF no investigation is needed by the embassy in Manila. If they suspect fraud and order an investigation it could be another year.
gifts
(Philippines) after the U.S.C.I.S sends the visa papers to the N.V.C,Soon she should be taking her medical exam and have interview.I was just wondering how long it take after they get it.We have been doing this now for 6 monthes.Just wondering when i can see her aganin and get her here.
I have another K1 visa question.(Philippines)?
You've got another 2 to 6 months to go IF no investigation is needed by the embassy in Manila. If they suspect fraud and order an investigation it could be another year.
gifts
Can some help me with this question...?
This is a college crimminal justice class " INTERVIEWING".
If you can help me answer this I will be really thankful
1, When the needs change in an interview it is referred to as____shift.
a. risky b. motivational c. hypothetic d. investigative
2. In a study of police interviwer's, the approach that had association with admissions to the crime was___.
a. dominance b.humanity c.mental toughness d. persistence
Can some help me with this question...?
1. investigative
2. persistance
If you can help me answer this I will be really thankful
1, When the needs change in an interview it is referred to as____shift.
a. risky b. motivational c. hypothetic d. investigative
2. In a study of police interviwer's, the approach that had association with admissions to the crime was___.
a. dominance b.humanity c.mental toughness d. persistence
Can some help me with this question...?
1. investigative
2. persistance
I have been applying to be a teaching fellow. Have you had this experience?
Please share any advice or personal experiences... I have been offered interviews in NYC, Chicago, Oakland, Austin/San Antonio, D.C. and Dallas. Please offer up both pros and cons of the experience (and please don't answer with a question) Thanks!!
I have been applying to be a teaching fellow. Have you had this experience?
I was a DC teaching fellow for two years. It's a long, tough road, and some of us dropped out. People who are used to doing everything well (this kind of program does attract overachievers) suddenly find themselves with days so full they have to do a crappy job at everything. We also find that the teaching culture and administration of DCPS is ridiculously illogical.
As far as working conditions, I taught for two years in a leaky, moldy annex that was designed to be used for five to ten years and had been used for more than 25. There were asbestos tiles in the floor and ceiling that needed to be removed. A pipe above the ceiling of my classroom would freeze and burst every year. The first year, the leak poured into my classroom library until the whole annex was flooded and a ring of dissolved ceiling material was left about a half inch around the walls in every room in the annex.
One day, I was trying to teach in two pairs of pants and three tops. My colleagues pointed out to me that the parents of our Ethiopian and Salvadoran children did not dress their children the way I dressed myself. They also put a thermometer in the hallway which showed a temperature of 45 F. That was a "light bulb moment" for me. We doubled up in temporary classrooms with better heat, but when the time came to demolish those classrooms to make way for new construction, we had to teach 6 classes of fifth and sixth graders in the cafeteria for a couple of days before we were ordered to return our classes to the original, nasty annex.
We had chosen to lose the vacant librarian position in a budget cut, and they moved a class into the school library, cutting off access for other students. We walked our students a mile and a quarter to the public library and a mile and a quarter back to school from time to time.
A water outlet in the building tested at 3 times the EPA's safe levels for lead, and I still believe it was the water fountain across from my classroom.
Most of us are still in teaching, and a few are still in DC even. The ones who are most successful in the DC Teaching Fellows are usually the ones who grew up in DC. I would say that the people in the DC Teaching Fellow office are fabulous people, but there's been a lot of turnover in that office, and I don't know who's there anymore.
I became a DC Teaching Fellow because I wanted to make a difference. I don't know if I did. I felt like I'd been banging my head against a brick wall for two years. I did earn my certificate, but--much to my relief--my job at DCPS was one of hundreds lost in a budget cut.
innia
I have been applying to be a teaching fellow. Have you had this experience?
I was a DC teaching fellow for two years. It's a long, tough road, and some of us dropped out. People who are used to doing everything well (this kind of program does attract overachievers) suddenly find themselves with days so full they have to do a crappy job at everything. We also find that the teaching culture and administration of DCPS is ridiculously illogical.
As far as working conditions, I taught for two years in a leaky, moldy annex that was designed to be used for five to ten years and had been used for more than 25. There were asbestos tiles in the floor and ceiling that needed to be removed. A pipe above the ceiling of my classroom would freeze and burst every year. The first year, the leak poured into my classroom library until the whole annex was flooded and a ring of dissolved ceiling material was left about a half inch around the walls in every room in the annex.
One day, I was trying to teach in two pairs of pants and three tops. My colleagues pointed out to me that the parents of our Ethiopian and Salvadoran children did not dress their children the way I dressed myself. They also put a thermometer in the hallway which showed a temperature of 45 F. That was a "light bulb moment" for me. We doubled up in temporary classrooms with better heat, but when the time came to demolish those classrooms to make way for new construction, we had to teach 6 classes of fifth and sixth graders in the cafeteria for a couple of days before we were ordered to return our classes to the original, nasty annex.
We had chosen to lose the vacant librarian position in a budget cut, and they moved a class into the school library, cutting off access for other students. We walked our students a mile and a quarter to the public library and a mile and a quarter back to school from time to time.
A water outlet in the building tested at 3 times the EPA's safe levels for lead, and I still believe it was the water fountain across from my classroom.
Most of us are still in teaching, and a few are still in DC even. The ones who are most successful in the DC Teaching Fellows are usually the ones who grew up in DC. I would say that the people in the DC Teaching Fellow office are fabulous people, but there's been a lot of turnover in that office, and I don't know who's there anymore.
I became a DC Teaching Fellow because I wanted to make a difference. I don't know if I did. I felt like I'd been banging my head against a brick wall for two years. I did earn my certificate, but--much to my relief--my job at DCPS was one of hundreds lost in a budget cut.
innia
Question about previous pay on job application?
Ok, I worked at my former job for almost 6 years (small company that I helped my boss develop). I was his first employee and started at $31,000/yr salary. Once we started hiring others at an hourly wage, I requested to have my salary changed to non-exempt/hourly b/c I was the only one working overtime regularly.
When I left my "salary" would have been $47,736. Can I put $48,000 on the online application for previous pay, since I don't want them to know I was paid hourly?
I'm scared and freaking out b/c I had to work really hard to get this interview.
Question about previous pay on job application?
Speaking as a VP who has hired many, many people, and read (skimmed) literally thousands of resumes, I can tell you with all sincerity, no one cares if you "round up", so long as you don't do it by a large percentage. No one will give a second thought to $264. Where you will run into trouble is if you directly lie regarding your method of pay, salary vs. hourly. If they ask the direct question, give them the same answer outlined in your question. Chances are excellent they won't ask.
I will say that if you expect to "climb the ladder", you better get used to working hours you don't get paid for, especially in the earlier stages of your career. The good news is that as you rise through the ranks, and gain more responsibility, you should find yourself working less and less, despite being paid more and more. Paradoxical, but true. I now rarely work more than fifty hours a week, whereas I have worked as many as 120 hours. No overtime.
The bottom line is this: present yourself in the best possible light, without flat out lying. This is merely selling yourself, and is expected of prospective hires in all but the most menial jobs. Best of luck!
Reply:Previous Employers will only provide verification of employement. NEVER put your previous salary down, it's none of their business!!! Your experience should speak for what you're worth. Just tell them what you want your salary to be......any more info and you'll just be shooting yourself in the foot! They will low ball you for sure. I've made three major employement moves over the last 10 years, and NEVER did I tell them what I previously made;
If they asked, I just polietly said "it was comparable with my peers" and they moved on to the next question. I have also done a lot of hiring in my career......I dont care what you've made befpre, but I will ask you what you're looking for now just to see if I can afford you or not.
Reply:First and foremost, I do not think you should worry about what you did.
If the company is interested in hiring you they will most likely do an employment verification and contact your former employers and inquire about your dates of employment, last salary or hourly rate and reason for leaving.
Most employers want to know what your "last" salary or hourly rate was when you left.
Hope this helps...
Best of luck with your interview!
God Bless.....
Reply:yes don't worry about that part
Reply:I don't see how being paid hourly would hurt your chances at getting a position. Most employers won't look at that adversely. "Salary" usually just refers to how much you were paid. So, putting down your annual amount (hourly rate x 40 hours x 52 weeks= annual income) into the "salary" field should work just fine. :)
Reply:Yes you can do that but you have to be honest and explain what you told us when they ask. If they don't ask its cool you don't have to bring it up and it is not being dishonest, if the employer were that interested they would ask. I used to do a lot of hiring and when it was necessary I always asked for the details I needed. Most of the time I only wanted to know what they were making so I could try to determine if I could match what they made and if they would stay or look for other work if I hired them.
Reply:don't freak out just put the 48000 in the salary area and get a good nite sleep. they just want to no a general amount so they can decide if they will pay anywhere near that amount.
Reply:that would be fine to put the 48,000 on the application. If the company would call about a reference they can only verfy that you worked there. Everything else is protected by the new privacy laws.
When I left my "salary" would have been $47,736. Can I put $48,000 on the online application for previous pay, since I don't want them to know I was paid hourly?
I'm scared and freaking out b/c I had to work really hard to get this interview.
Question about previous pay on job application?
Speaking as a VP who has hired many, many people, and read (skimmed) literally thousands of resumes, I can tell you with all sincerity, no one cares if you "round up", so long as you don't do it by a large percentage. No one will give a second thought to $264. Where you will run into trouble is if you directly lie regarding your method of pay, salary vs. hourly. If they ask the direct question, give them the same answer outlined in your question. Chances are excellent they won't ask.
I will say that if you expect to "climb the ladder", you better get used to working hours you don't get paid for, especially in the earlier stages of your career. The good news is that as you rise through the ranks, and gain more responsibility, you should find yourself working less and less, despite being paid more and more. Paradoxical, but true. I now rarely work more than fifty hours a week, whereas I have worked as many as 120 hours. No overtime.
The bottom line is this: present yourself in the best possible light, without flat out lying. This is merely selling yourself, and is expected of prospective hires in all but the most menial jobs. Best of luck!
Reply:Previous Employers will only provide verification of employement. NEVER put your previous salary down, it's none of their business!!! Your experience should speak for what you're worth. Just tell them what you want your salary to be......any more info and you'll just be shooting yourself in the foot! They will low ball you for sure. I've made three major employement moves over the last 10 years, and NEVER did I tell them what I previously made;
If they asked, I just polietly said "it was comparable with my peers" and they moved on to the next question. I have also done a lot of hiring in my career......I dont care what you've made befpre, but I will ask you what you're looking for now just to see if I can afford you or not.
Reply:First and foremost, I do not think you should worry about what you did.
If the company is interested in hiring you they will most likely do an employment verification and contact your former employers and inquire about your dates of employment, last salary or hourly rate and reason for leaving.
Most employers want to know what your "last" salary or hourly rate was when you left.
Hope this helps...
Best of luck with your interview!
God Bless.....
Reply:yes don't worry about that part
Reply:I don't see how being paid hourly would hurt your chances at getting a position. Most employers won't look at that adversely. "Salary" usually just refers to how much you were paid. So, putting down your annual amount (hourly rate x 40 hours x 52 weeks= annual income) into the "salary" field should work just fine. :)
Reply:Yes you can do that but you have to be honest and explain what you told us when they ask. If they don't ask its cool you don't have to bring it up and it is not being dishonest, if the employer were that interested they would ask. I used to do a lot of hiring and when it was necessary I always asked for the details I needed. Most of the time I only wanted to know what they were making so I could try to determine if I could match what they made and if they would stay or look for other work if I hired them.
Reply:don't freak out just put the 48000 in the salary area and get a good nite sleep. they just want to no a general amount so they can decide if they will pay anywhere near that amount.
Reply:that would be fine to put the 48,000 on the application. If the company would call about a reference they can only verfy that you worked there. Everything else is protected by the new privacy laws.
Did You See Illegal Alien Kills COP In HOUSTON?
Of course pro illegal will say he is innoncent -
By BRIAN ROGERS and MIKE GLENN
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle
Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal said today that he will lead the prosecution of the man accused of killing Houston police Officer Rodney Johnson.
Referring to it as "coming out of retirement,'' Rosenthal said he could not recall the last time he took part in prosecuting a case, but guessed that it has been two or three years.
A judge, meanwhile, ordered this morning that Juan Leonardo Quintero remain in the County Jail without bail.
Quintero, 32, is charged with capital murder in connection with the shooting of Johnson near Hobby Airport on Thursday afternoon.
Johnson had stopped Quintero, a Mexican national, for a traffic violation and arrested him because he had no identification. Police said Johnson failed to detect that Quintero had a pistol hidden in his clothing.
Quintero, although handcuffed, managed to get his hands in front of him, pull the gun and kill Johnson while locked in the backseat cage of the officer's patrol car, investigators said.
Rosenthal said this is a "bizarre'' case because Quintero is accused of killing Johnson even though Quintero was locked in the back of the car and could not escape.
In this morning's hearing, state District Judge Joan Campbell granted a defense request for funds for such expenses as hiring an investigator.
Rosenthal said he believes Quintero could come to trial sometime next spring. The next step in the case will be another court hearing in 15 days, he said, and the case could go to a county grand jury shortly after that.
The arrest of Quintero has renewed debate over the enforcement of immigration laws and HPD's policy of not questioning suspects about their residency.
Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt appeared on ABC television's "Good Morning America," this morning where he accused the federal government of not properly securing the nation's borders.
With 250,000 to 400,000 illegal immigrants believed to be living in the Houston area, Hurtt said the resources are not available for HPD officers to assume a greater role in immigration enforcement.
"I would need another 2,500 officers," Hurtt said. Hurtt was interviewed for the ABC program from Charlotte, N.C., where he is attending a meeting of the Major Cities Chiefs Assocation that he heads.
Quintero was deported as an illegal felon in 1999, following a charge of indecency with a child, HPD officials said.
Court records show Quintero was given deferred adjudication in that case.
His previous criminal record included an arrest for driving while intoxicated, for driving with a suspended licensed and for failing to stop and give information after an automobile accident, HPD officials said.
Did You See Illegal Alien Kills COP In HOUSTON?
DEPORT DEPORT NO AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS.
But But they are only here for a better life.they don't cause any trouble honest. they just want a better life for their families.
*rolls eyes*
How much more will we stand for America? A 11 year old girl was hit in my town the other day by a very drunk illegal. She is still in the hospital. She was playing in her yard when the useless bastard went over the curb and plowed into her.
I know we have bad people here in this country that are citizens. I know accidents happen.......but wouldn't it be smarter to make our safety odds better. SEND ALL ILLEGALS BACK TO MEXICO!
Reply:AMERICANS kill cops every day too, you bigot. you dont make a big deal out of that.
of COURSE he's guilty. i dont think anyone can dispute that. (though if the cop failed to find a gun on the guy, he certainly didnt help.) it's not like the cop killed himself.
the problem here is the individual, not the fact that he's an immigrant.
Reply:WOW! Not even close to the deaths of the Native Americans killed by those immigrants in the 1600s!
Did you hear they completely wiped out some tribes?
Reply:Yes I saw it, and wonder why that piece of trash is still alive. Illegals that kill or rape or rob etc should have immediate execution and body put in trash.
Reply:pro-illegals aren't pro-murder. most illegal immigrants are simply here for a better life for them and their family. most of them are hardworking, law abiding citizens.
p.s. this murder would have never happened if guns were banned.
Reply:It is true, it doesn't matter whether this man was an illegal immigrant or a citizen of the country, he still killed another human being.
This is a perfect reason why we have immigration laws. This man was deported once for felonious behavior.
But in order to uphold one law, society must uphold all laws. I suppose there are those who are going to try to say he didn't know any better?
There are legal citizens of this country who have committed horrible crimes - Lee Harvey Oswald, Charles Manson, Timothy McVeigh, Jack Ruby, John Wayne Gacy, Susan Smith, just to name a few.
But if you are illegally residing in the United States, you are already in violation of our laws. Any further crimes just compound the original crime - illegal entry into our borders!
Reply:Hey, maybe Americans do kill cops, but this guy is an ILLEGAL ALIEN, if he was not here, the incident would not have taken place. You can take all your racist crap and stuff it... I am sick to death about hearing about Mexico's plight... Fix your own country, do not come to mine illegally and expect the same rights as Americans. This officer would be alive today if policies ALREADY IN PLACE WERE ENFORCED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am sure his family and his fellow oficers would all agree with my sentiment. My condolences to the officers family and friends...
Reply:yes, sealrborders put it out the other day. It was an automobile accident, We had the same thing happen here in St Louis, but it was 2 cops, one was off duty and driving drunk, he drove on the wrong side of the road and hit the other cop, killing both of them.
Reply:Yes, I knew about it. I live in the Houston area. Sad, isn't it?
Reply:"Auslander raus" has a nice ring to it, huh?
Reply:If you look at the statistics, it is staggering the amount of crimes that are committed by illegal immigrants. Those facts alone should be enough for the country to stand up for itself and protect it's borders.....but of course, we still keep quiet. It makes me so sad to read articles like this one.
Reply:There exists in the USA today two standards of justice. One for Americans and one for the illegal immigrants/alians. The bar for proper behavior is way up on Americans. The other bar for illegals is either non existant or laying on the ground.
It is outrageous that our police departments can't or are not given the authority to handle illegal immigrant crimes.
The cops are the cops. We have criminals living amongs us, doing bad stuff to the rest of us. We need and pay for protection with out tax dollars. The death of this police officer allegedly at the hands of an illegal, preditory criminal immigrant is a small metaphor for what is, has and will continue to happen in this country, if we don't get a handle on illegal behavior by foreign folks that come here and who's first action on American soil is to break the law.
Have you noticed that once the law is broken, the criminal has nothing really to lose but presses forward and violates the law andtime it suits their purpose and goals.
Remove illegal immigrants from our land, our neighborhoods, our schools and our social programs.
Send them to their homelands and keep them out of the USA until they go through legal means to be here and obey our laws.
Reply:I live in Houston and have heard about this non stop but it seems certain news /media groups like to leave certain things out or make it seem like quintero was the victim.One station went so far as to open the story saying "Lulac has reported death threats"Probably never happened, but is a great way to twist a story.
Also is the problem of Houston police having a no tell policy when dealing with illegals.You would think this would make them re-think that but instead Hurtt is openly blaming the feds.I guess I should be glad he's not passing the buck to them on drug crimes or murder.
Reply:Yesterday was my birthday and two days before that was my sweetie's birthday. He is 45 and I am 35. I don't
I feel like I have let my dreams go like a fast moving train that can't be stopped. I feel powerless to do anything productive. Is that crazy? It is, isn't it? Anyway, mom surprised us on the 21 with a beautiful party in which Renegade and I celebrated together. There were balloons and a beautiful cake, pizza, subs, you name it. It was very nice. I won't forget it. Thank you mom and dad.
Reply:EVERYBODY KILLS IN THIS F****** WORLD DON'T TRY TO PASS AS BETTER THAN OTHERS
By BRIAN ROGERS and MIKE GLENN
Copyright 2006 Houston Chronicle
Harris County District Attorney Chuck Rosenthal said today that he will lead the prosecution of the man accused of killing Houston police Officer Rodney Johnson.
Referring to it as "coming out of retirement,'' Rosenthal said he could not recall the last time he took part in prosecuting a case, but guessed that it has been two or three years.
A judge, meanwhile, ordered this morning that Juan Leonardo Quintero remain in the County Jail without bail.
Quintero, 32, is charged with capital murder in connection with the shooting of Johnson near Hobby Airport on Thursday afternoon.
Johnson had stopped Quintero, a Mexican national, for a traffic violation and arrested him because he had no identification. Police said Johnson failed to detect that Quintero had a pistol hidden in his clothing.
Quintero, although handcuffed, managed to get his hands in front of him, pull the gun and kill Johnson while locked in the backseat cage of the officer's patrol car, investigators said.
Rosenthal said this is a "bizarre'' case because Quintero is accused of killing Johnson even though Quintero was locked in the back of the car and could not escape.
In this morning's hearing, state District Judge Joan Campbell granted a defense request for funds for such expenses as hiring an investigator.
Rosenthal said he believes Quintero could come to trial sometime next spring. The next step in the case will be another court hearing in 15 days, he said, and the case could go to a county grand jury shortly after that.
The arrest of Quintero has renewed debate over the enforcement of immigration laws and HPD's policy of not questioning suspects about their residency.
Houston Police Chief Harold Hurtt appeared on ABC television's "Good Morning America," this morning where he accused the federal government of not properly securing the nation's borders.
With 250,000 to 400,000 illegal immigrants believed to be living in the Houston area, Hurtt said the resources are not available for HPD officers to assume a greater role in immigration enforcement.
"I would need another 2,500 officers," Hurtt said. Hurtt was interviewed for the ABC program from Charlotte, N.C., where he is attending a meeting of the Major Cities Chiefs Assocation that he heads.
Quintero was deported as an illegal felon in 1999, following a charge of indecency with a child, HPD officials said.
Court records show Quintero was given deferred adjudication in that case.
His previous criminal record included an arrest for driving while intoxicated, for driving with a suspended licensed and for failing to stop and give information after an automobile accident, HPD officials said.
Did You See Illegal Alien Kills COP In HOUSTON?
DEPORT DEPORT NO AMNESTY FOR ILLEGALS.
But But they are only here for a better life.they don't cause any trouble honest. they just want a better life for their families.
*rolls eyes*
How much more will we stand for America? A 11 year old girl was hit in my town the other day by a very drunk illegal. She is still in the hospital. She was playing in her yard when the useless bastard went over the curb and plowed into her.
I know we have bad people here in this country that are citizens. I know accidents happen.......but wouldn't it be smarter to make our safety odds better. SEND ALL ILLEGALS BACK TO MEXICO!
Reply:AMERICANS kill cops every day too, you bigot. you dont make a big deal out of that.
of COURSE he's guilty. i dont think anyone can dispute that. (though if the cop failed to find a gun on the guy, he certainly didnt help.) it's not like the cop killed himself.
the problem here is the individual, not the fact that he's an immigrant.
Reply:WOW! Not even close to the deaths of the Native Americans killed by those immigrants in the 1600s!
Did you hear they completely wiped out some tribes?
Reply:Yes I saw it, and wonder why that piece of trash is still alive. Illegals that kill or rape or rob etc should have immediate execution and body put in trash.
Reply:pro-illegals aren't pro-murder. most illegal immigrants are simply here for a better life for them and their family. most of them are hardworking, law abiding citizens.
p.s. this murder would have never happened if guns were banned.
Reply:It is true, it doesn't matter whether this man was an illegal immigrant or a citizen of the country, he still killed another human being.
This is a perfect reason why we have immigration laws. This man was deported once for felonious behavior.
But in order to uphold one law, society must uphold all laws. I suppose there are those who are going to try to say he didn't know any better?
There are legal citizens of this country who have committed horrible crimes - Lee Harvey Oswald, Charles Manson, Timothy McVeigh, Jack Ruby, John Wayne Gacy, Susan Smith, just to name a few.
But if you are illegally residing in the United States, you are already in violation of our laws. Any further crimes just compound the original crime - illegal entry into our borders!
Reply:Hey, maybe Americans do kill cops, but this guy is an ILLEGAL ALIEN, if he was not here, the incident would not have taken place. You can take all your racist crap and stuff it... I am sick to death about hearing about Mexico's plight... Fix your own country, do not come to mine illegally and expect the same rights as Americans. This officer would be alive today if policies ALREADY IN PLACE WERE ENFORCED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I am sure his family and his fellow oficers would all agree with my sentiment. My condolences to the officers family and friends...
Reply:yes, sealrborders put it out the other day. It was an automobile accident, We had the same thing happen here in St Louis, but it was 2 cops, one was off duty and driving drunk, he drove on the wrong side of the road and hit the other cop, killing both of them.
Reply:Yes, I knew about it. I live in the Houston area. Sad, isn't it?
Reply:"Auslander raus" has a nice ring to it, huh?
Reply:If you look at the statistics, it is staggering the amount of crimes that are committed by illegal immigrants. Those facts alone should be enough for the country to stand up for itself and protect it's borders.....but of course, we still keep quiet. It makes me so sad to read articles like this one.
Reply:There exists in the USA today two standards of justice. One for Americans and one for the illegal immigrants/alians. The bar for proper behavior is way up on Americans. The other bar for illegals is either non existant or laying on the ground.
It is outrageous that our police departments can't or are not given the authority to handle illegal immigrant crimes.
The cops are the cops. We have criminals living amongs us, doing bad stuff to the rest of us. We need and pay for protection with out tax dollars. The death of this police officer allegedly at the hands of an illegal, preditory criminal immigrant is a small metaphor for what is, has and will continue to happen in this country, if we don't get a handle on illegal behavior by foreign folks that come here and who's first action on American soil is to break the law.
Have you noticed that once the law is broken, the criminal has nothing really to lose but presses forward and violates the law andtime it suits their purpose and goals.
Remove illegal immigrants from our land, our neighborhoods, our schools and our social programs.
Send them to their homelands and keep them out of the USA until they go through legal means to be here and obey our laws.
Reply:I live in Houston and have heard about this non stop but it seems certain news /media groups like to leave certain things out or make it seem like quintero was the victim.One station went so far as to open the story saying "Lulac has reported death threats"Probably never happened, but is a great way to twist a story.
Also is the problem of Houston police having a no tell policy when dealing with illegals.You would think this would make them re-think that but instead Hurtt is openly blaming the feds.I guess I should be glad he's not passing the buck to them on drug crimes or murder.
Reply:Yesterday was my birthday and two days before that was my sweetie's birthday. He is 45 and I am 35. I don't
I feel like I have let my dreams go like a fast moving train that can't be stopped. I feel powerless to do anything productive. Is that crazy? It is, isn't it? Anyway, mom surprised us on the 21 with a beautiful party in which Renegade and I celebrated together. There were balloons and a beautiful cake, pizza, subs, you name it. It was very nice. I won't forget it. Thank you mom and dad.
Reply:EVERYBODY KILLS IN THIS F****** WORLD DON'T TRY TO PASS AS BETTER THAN OTHERS
Bad Employer?
Hi, I recently got terminated. I am glad I got terminated because there was so many illegal things going on at the place I worked...unethical, and immoral, and illegal things... such as pressure to sell customers stuff they DO NOT need, gouging the customers prices, managers physically getting WAY TOO close to employees.
I've learned alot on what I do not want in a future employer, but I am having trouble trusting future employers after this one... especially because of the way this one went about terminating me... he sneaked around, interviewed a girl secretly, and hired her b/c of her butt and boobs... she has no experience at all... then hid her til the day i was fired, and had me train her a little on the day i was fired.
My question is: What do I look for in a future employer that will help me not worry about being screwed over as I was at this place, and how do I get rid of the negative prejudice Ive developed about managers?
Bad Employer?
Perhaps it would do you good to investigate the company you're considering applying for before you go interview.
They want to know all about you - why shouldn't you know all about them?
Talk to their current employees. Get a feel for the environment there.
In other words, make informed decisions about your career before you end up with a bunch of short term jobs on your resume.
Reply:Let me start by telling you I was a service advisor and a service manager for an automotive dealer, I can tell you that things go on in a dealership that do not happen in the "real world". I wish I had better news, but I do not think that your employer did anything illegal in terminating you. If you were an at will employee, and there was no discrimination, your termination was not illegal.
What I will share with you is how I got out of the business. I let the automotive industry to work for a national pest control company. I was surprised how much alike they were. They have a sales department and a service department. Sales is the same, and the service technicians develop skills that make then a valuable asset. I would suggest that you find another industry that can use your skills outside of the automotive industry. Best of luck!
I've learned alot on what I do not want in a future employer, but I am having trouble trusting future employers after this one... especially because of the way this one went about terminating me... he sneaked around, interviewed a girl secretly, and hired her b/c of her butt and boobs... she has no experience at all... then hid her til the day i was fired, and had me train her a little on the day i was fired.
My question is: What do I look for in a future employer that will help me not worry about being screwed over as I was at this place, and how do I get rid of the negative prejudice Ive developed about managers?
Bad Employer?
Perhaps it would do you good to investigate the company you're considering applying for before you go interview.
They want to know all about you - why shouldn't you know all about them?
Talk to their current employees. Get a feel for the environment there.
In other words, make informed decisions about your career before you end up with a bunch of short term jobs on your resume.
Reply:Let me start by telling you I was a service advisor and a service manager for an automotive dealer, I can tell you that things go on in a dealership that do not happen in the "real world". I wish I had better news, but I do not think that your employer did anything illegal in terminating you. If you were an at will employee, and there was no discrimination, your termination was not illegal.
What I will share with you is how I got out of the business. I let the automotive industry to work for a national pest control company. I was surprised how much alike they were. They have a sales department and a service department. Sales is the same, and the service technicians develop skills that make then a valuable asset. I would suggest that you find another industry that can use your skills outside of the automotive industry. Best of luck!
Harry Potter POA DVD special features question?
In the interview section of the POA special features, Alfonso C. and JK Rowling were discussing the movie. JK said she got goosebumps watching the movie, citing that some parts she saw in the movie foreshadow what will happen in books 6 %26amp; 7. What are they? Alfonso said he wanted to put a graveyard in, but he said that JK said that the graveyard's not there, possibily foreshadowing Dumbledore's death? I know book seven isn't out yet, but what do you guys think was foreshadowed?
Harry Potter POA DVD special features question?
You get to see the stadium in the lake, where the Triwizard Tournament thing took place in Goblet Of Fire, but apart from that, there's not much.
gerbera
Harry Potter POA DVD special features question?
You get to see the stadium in the lake, where the Triwizard Tournament thing took place in Goblet Of Fire, but apart from that, there's not much.
gerbera
A hypothetical question: What would you do?
You are the owner of a fine steakhouse that is about to open for business. The community is excited about it because there isn't another for miles. Pretty much a guarantee of high revenue. You are in the process of hiring your wait staff and upon interviewing, you learn that one of the very well qualified prospects is a vegetarian but wants to work knowing that the possibility of high tips are there.
Would you:
a) Hire this person without question or restriction.
b) Hire this person with the provision that they do not discuss their dietary choices and if the situation came up, recommend items on the menu even if it might be dishonest.
c) Do not hire this person based on a conflict of interest, inablility to promote and recommend key items on the menu and the chance of possibly making the customers uncomfortable.
This was a heated debate I had with a friend and I was just wondering what others might think. Thanks!
A hypothetical question: What would you do?
I'm between B and C. If the person can assure me that serving meat and recommending meals won't be a problem, then I'd probably the hire person. I'd be worried if the applicant volunteered his vegetarianism in the interview, though. That's just stupid. I'm running a steakhouse here. Are you trying to not get hired?
Reply:I have never known a vegetarian who could promote an aged rib eye that is nicely marbled or a thick lamb chop cooked medium rare. I wouldn't hire the person. I would hire the person who had actually sampled the food and could vouch for it, and do a great job selling it.
Reply:He might be Vegetarian because of an allergy etc-- Did you establish the reasons for his preferences? I would not consider him unfairly against the other Applicants .
I would not judge him on that one fact alone.
Reply:I personally don't know any vegetarians who could stomach serving platters of meat to customers. If the applicant listed this, it sounds important to her. Both she and you could make better choices.
Reply:I would hire this person with the provision that if they did not do the job well or they made the customers uncomfortable, they would no longer be employed by me.
I think that everyone deserves a chance but if they can't do they job to my satisfaction, then they would have to go. But I would make them understand the conditions before they took the job.
Reply:I would hire the person and explain the rules of employment before she/he begins the job. I do not see why being a vegetarian would even be an issue for his/her employment. Obviously the person just wants a job or they wouldn't have put in an application.
Reply:B. An employer has the right to ask if an applicant can perform the job he/she is applying for, e.g. if you apply for a warehouse job lifting 100 pound boxes you have to be able to lift 100 pounds.
Above, if the applicant will not do the job applied for the owner should not make the hire.
Reply:I am hiring wait help, I really don't care if they personally are a vegetarian, satanic cult member or a Protestant as long as they are qualified. I expect them to do the job, and will train them and everyone else the exact same way. If they cannot do the job as they were trained to do than they will be released before the end of their probation period. I am in it to make money and to give the best service to my guest at the restaurant. If their being a vegan gets in the way, see ya.
Reply:A) If the person is expecting high tips, then the person won't be trying to get people to not eat steak at a steakhouse. That's where the money is.Therefore, their vegetarianism is a non-issue.
Reply:A. What does it matter if they are vegetarian? If they wants to work at the steakhouse, I think the issue of being around meat is their own. And even if they discussed their dietary choices, what would it matter? People that go to steakhouses aren't vegetarians. I don't think they are going to change their minds about ordering a steak.
Reply:I would say B. I don't give a damn if the person I hire is a vegetarian, greek orthodox or scientologist. I care about his qualification and whether he can do his job well. However, there must be a condition that he does not make the customers uncomfortable.
Would you:
a) Hire this person without question or restriction.
b) Hire this person with the provision that they do not discuss their dietary choices and if the situation came up, recommend items on the menu even if it might be dishonest.
c) Do not hire this person based on a conflict of interest, inablility to promote and recommend key items on the menu and the chance of possibly making the customers uncomfortable.
This was a heated debate I had with a friend and I was just wondering what others might think. Thanks!
A hypothetical question: What would you do?
I'm between B and C. If the person can assure me that serving meat and recommending meals won't be a problem, then I'd probably the hire person. I'd be worried if the applicant volunteered his vegetarianism in the interview, though. That's just stupid. I'm running a steakhouse here. Are you trying to not get hired?
Reply:I have never known a vegetarian who could promote an aged rib eye that is nicely marbled or a thick lamb chop cooked medium rare. I wouldn't hire the person. I would hire the person who had actually sampled the food and could vouch for it, and do a great job selling it.
Reply:He might be Vegetarian because of an allergy etc-- Did you establish the reasons for his preferences? I would not consider him unfairly against the other Applicants .
I would not judge him on that one fact alone.
Reply:I personally don't know any vegetarians who could stomach serving platters of meat to customers. If the applicant listed this, it sounds important to her. Both she and you could make better choices.
Reply:I would hire this person with the provision that if they did not do the job well or they made the customers uncomfortable, they would no longer be employed by me.
I think that everyone deserves a chance but if they can't do they job to my satisfaction, then they would have to go. But I would make them understand the conditions before they took the job.
Reply:I would hire the person and explain the rules of employment before she/he begins the job. I do not see why being a vegetarian would even be an issue for his/her employment. Obviously the person just wants a job or they wouldn't have put in an application.
Reply:B. An employer has the right to ask if an applicant can perform the job he/she is applying for, e.g. if you apply for a warehouse job lifting 100 pound boxes you have to be able to lift 100 pounds.
Above, if the applicant will not do the job applied for the owner should not make the hire.
Reply:I am hiring wait help, I really don't care if they personally are a vegetarian, satanic cult member or a Protestant as long as they are qualified. I expect them to do the job, and will train them and everyone else the exact same way. If they cannot do the job as they were trained to do than they will be released before the end of their probation period. I am in it to make money and to give the best service to my guest at the restaurant. If their being a vegan gets in the way, see ya.
Reply:A) If the person is expecting high tips, then the person won't be trying to get people to not eat steak at a steakhouse. That's where the money is.Therefore, their vegetarianism is a non-issue.
Reply:A. What does it matter if they are vegetarian? If they wants to work at the steakhouse, I think the issue of being around meat is their own. And even if they discussed their dietary choices, what would it matter? People that go to steakhouses aren't vegetarians. I don't think they are going to change their minds about ordering a steak.
Reply:I would say B. I don't give a damn if the person I hire is a vegetarian, greek orthodox or scientologist. I care about his qualification and whether he can do his job well. However, there must be a condition that he does not make the customers uncomfortable.
Help with question concerning Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person. Explanation would be real helpful. Thanks
Constable DOUGHTY wishes to question MILLS about an alleged assault. The officer attends at MILLS's home address and tells him the nature of the incident. Knowing that he is about to be arrested, MILLS grabs hold of Constable DOUGHTY's arm and pulls him into the doorway; he then slams the door on the officer's arm and makes good his escape. As a result of this attack, Constable DOUGHTY's arm is broken in two places.
When, interviewed, MILLS states that he did not intend to cause the injury, but accepts that his conduct presented a risk of some harm to the officer.
Which of the following statements is correct?
A This would not amount to s.18 assault, as there was no malice, i.e. premeditation.
BThis would not amount to s.18 assault, as there was no intention to cause serious harm.
C This would amount to s 18 assault, as MILLS intended to prevent his lawful arrest.
DThis would not amount to s.18 assault, as MILLS had not actually been arrested.
Help with question concerning Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person. Explanation would be real helpful. Thanks
C for sure
Reply:c
Reply:In the USA this would be charged as an assault on a police officer and resisting arrest. Resisting is defined as interfering with the lawful arrest of oneself or another and their need not be premeditation in order to commit an assault. Regardless,in this case, I do not believe that anyone would believe that in closing a door on a police officer's arm one had no intent to cause physical harm anyway.
BTW- perhaps you should read your textbooks more closely and do your own homework!
When, interviewed, MILLS states that he did not intend to cause the injury, but accepts that his conduct presented a risk of some harm to the officer.
Which of the following statements is correct?
A This would not amount to s.18 assault, as there was no malice, i.e. premeditation.
BThis would not amount to s.18 assault, as there was no intention to cause serious harm.
C This would amount to s 18 assault, as MILLS intended to prevent his lawful arrest.
DThis would not amount to s.18 assault, as MILLS had not actually been arrested.
Help with question concerning Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person. Explanation would be real helpful. Thanks
C for sure
Reply:c
Reply:In the USA this would be charged as an assault on a police officer and resisting arrest. Resisting is defined as interfering with the lawful arrest of oneself or another and their need not be premeditation in order to commit an assault. Regardless,in this case, I do not believe that anyone would believe that in closing a door on a police officer's arm one had no intent to cause physical harm anyway.
BTW- perhaps you should read your textbooks more closely and do your own homework!
Tough statistics question....?
The Wall Street Journal recently ran an article indicating differences in perception of sexual harassment on the job between men and women. The article claimed that women perceived the problem to be much more prevalent than did men. One question asked to both men and women was: "Do you think sexual harassment is a major problem in the American workplace?" Some 24% of the men compared to 62% of the women responded "Yes." Suppose that 150 women and 200 men were interviewed. For a 0.01 level of significance, what is the critical value for the rejection region?
A) 6.635
B) 2.33
C) 7.106
D) 7.173
Tough statistics question....?
Use the formula on the site below. The test statistic is 7.173. The critical z value for a 0.01 one tailed test is 2.33.
This question just asks for the critical rejection value, so that would be 2.33
Reply:Ho: p1 = p2
Ha: p1 %26lt; p2 (one-tailed test)
α = 0.01
Z critical = - 2.33 I guess this is your answer, but in the interest of science, I'll continue:
Z calculated = (0.24 - 0.62)/√(phat(1-phat)(1/200+1/150))
Where phat = (X1+X2)/(n1+n2) = (48+93)/(350) = 0.4029
Z calculated = (-0.38)/√0.0028 = -0.38/0.053 = -7.17
Conclusion: Because -7.17 %26lt; - 2.33 the Ho cannot be accepted and conclude that men don't think it's as much a problem as do women.
A) 6.635
B) 2.33
C) 7.106
D) 7.173
Tough statistics question....?
Use the formula on the site below. The test statistic is 7.173. The critical z value for a 0.01 one tailed test is 2.33.
This question just asks for the critical rejection value, so that would be 2.33
Reply:Ho: p1 = p2
Ha: p1 %26lt; p2 (one-tailed test)
α = 0.01
Z critical = - 2.33 I guess this is your answer, but in the interest of science, I'll continue:
Z calculated = (0.24 - 0.62)/√(phat(1-phat)(1/200+1/150))
Where phat = (X1+X2)/(n1+n2) = (48+93)/(350) = 0.4029
Z calculated = (-0.38)/√0.0028 = -0.38/0.053 = -7.17
Conclusion: Because -7.17 %26lt; - 2.33 the Ho cannot be accepted and conclude that men don't think it's as much a problem as do women.
Is it me or is my love life simply cursed?
I'm 22, very attractive, talented in the performing arts, fun to be around, and natural sense of humour. I'm a nice guy who puts his foot down only when it is necessary. I really mean it when I commit to someone and that person does the same. Not to brag or anything, but I know for a fact that I'm one of the best men out there that a girl would ever want and many of the women I'm gonna tell you about have said the same:
Girl #1 - I was 14, we were going out for 2 months, we met online, had no complaints about her. This was mostly my fault b'cuz I didn't know how to handle relationships, so it ended due to my lack of action.
Girl #2 - I was 15 going on 16, we met online, mostly talked on the phone, didn't get to see each other much for two reasons: 1) Her mother was a cruel, careless witch who wanted nothing for her daughter (so she was seeing me "secretly"); 2) She had an older guy friend online whom she never met but he was always putting things in her head and trying to end the relationship b'cuz he wanted her all to himself. So she had a hard time making up her own mind, she thought of killing herself a couple times. So this one was not my fault but rather her mother and mostly that idiot she knew. Lasted for 6 months.
Girl #3 - I was 16. Knew this girl for a couple years, she was a few years older than me. Year #1 was perfect. Year #2 she lost her job, lots of bad things started happening with her, she got very depressed no matter how much I helped, she tried breaking up with me on and off, started seeing ghosts and dead people, dolls talking to her, turning evangelist, etc. Oh and did I mention there was no sex included with all that crazy stuff? Absolutely not my fault.
Girl #4 - I was 18. We were only together for two weeks. This is my fault because I scared her away, it was right after the previous one ended and I guess I was trying to rekindle what I had lost and had been missing out on.
Girl #5 - 18 yrs old. Together for a couple months. This girl was down for EVERYTHING and I mean everything, she was hot too and very sweet personality. But the problem was that she was down for way too much, she was a bit too slow, said yes to almost anything, that was kind of a turn off. If she can say yes to anything, then imagine some other guy coming along while and I'm with her and... you know.
Girl #6 - 19 yrs old. Ooooo boy, complete and total b****. I'll tell you right now, the only thing she was good for was the sex, outside of that, she was a selfish, stuck-up, and cold-hearted chick who spent more time trying to de-edify than anything else. Lasted for about 3 months.
Girl #7 - I was 19 as well. This one is definitely my fault. She girl was sooooooooo sweet to me, like the perfect best friend. There were a lot of mixed signals though. We went on one date, everything was fine, then at the end I tried to kiss her but she laughed and was like what is it? I said nothing. Couple months later, I met Girl #8 and she met a new guy, she called me up, we talked and then asked me why I didn't kiss her. I was shocked, I told her the truth, she said its ok we're still good friends. I still know her to this day but we don't talk much anymore cuz shes so occupied with that guy she met back then, they're still together and she is so IN LOVE with this man its crazy, talking bout how shes all about building up a foundation with him. I feel like I missed out.
Girl #8 - Was still 19. She was 4 years older, knew her for 6 months then we got married. We were gonna marry sometime in the far future but only did it then for financial reasons cuz she was in this online business. So we didn't get out own place until a year later, then I discovered her true self -- A huge anger problem, a menstrual disorder, gave herself too much work to do and didn't want any of my help regardless, the house always looked like hurricane katrina complete with bug infestations (you should have seen the fridge), didn't matter if I spent 9 hours one day cleaning the whole place myself, she messed it up again. We got into more fights than anything else, she didn't wanna do anything, no sex, going out, etc. It ended by the time I was 21.
Finally, Girl #9 - Presently dating right now for about 2 months. Ok, everything is perfect with this relationship, it's going smooth. The one thing that stands out is the chemistry, it is unlike any that I've had with the past women, it is C-R-A-Z-Y chemistry and we get along so perfectly. Here's the problem: Her parents (she's 19) don't care about her, they don't know how to show her they love her. See, she wasn't supposed to be born at birth, it was her and her brother, something happened and she wasn't supposed to make it, she thinks it has something to do with that. But her mom won't let her go out and experience life, she always wants to know where she is, always questioning what she's eating at home or why she's sitting a certain way or looking a certain way. So she has to "secretly" see me, we do this at least once a week, mostly after midnight though when her parents are at work. If its during the day, I have to call out of work cuz I work in the day, I did this twice already and I had a job interview that I went to each time after I saw her in the day, so it wasn't just for seeing her. She's moving to Atlanta with her family in July (they got a new house there), shes gonna go to school there for 2 years then come back here to NY. We both want to continue the relationship long distance until she gets back and take turns visiting each other periodically. I would move down there but I currently make $24,000 a year so ummm..... NO. Yeah you know it does cost money to travel, even worse, move.
On a positive note, I really feel like this one can work. I feel more aware and conscious of doing things the right way this time around. I wanna continue and build a foundation with this girl. We're so into each other, there have been no problems outside of her twisted parents. But man I tell ya, if her folks weren't that way, this would be one HOT relationship if they'd her go out, we can do so much more together -- movies, parks, have dinner, long walks, summer time, all that good stuff... oh man. But unfortunately, everyone else is doing that with their normal boyfriend/girlfriend relationships.
So what do you think? Is my love life cursed or what? I'm not saying I'm not happy with this current girl, I am despite the dark lords of the sith *cough* sorry i mean her parents. But I'm just saying isn't it ironic that God never grants a great guy like me to have a normal relationship? My definition of normal relationship = The girl I'm with now but with normal parents.
Is it me or is my love life simply cursed?
Okay man. I got to level with you right off the back. You say the relationship is smooth and great, but how is it going so well when you cannot even connect with the girl, let alone, the parents? Before getting past the point of no return, I recommend you sit back and think what this relationship will look like if you married this girl. Think how this will change you and her. Now, I recommend you form a list of what you think she can contribute to a relationship, and what you can contribute to a relationship. (The things that hold a relationship together like honesty, commitement, funny, attractive, etc). Write a second list of those things that you and your girlfriend do that can destroy the relationship, or make it real bumpy. (Get specific. No since of lying to yourself). If the good benefits of you and your girlfriend outweigh the bad "hurdles" you will be presented with or could be presented with, then your relationship has a chance. If you are confident that this relationship deserves the effort, continue on.
Step 2: Two things concern me the most as you told your story: your girlriend has highly controlling parents, and you two live a substantially loong distance away from each other. Starting with the parents. Remember, her parents, whether they treated her like a diamond or dirt, they are still there and they still influence her in huge ways. The question is: How much do the parents really influence her attitude? Is she just being rebellious right now, or is this her true self? Just on my perspective, it seems she is just going through a rebellious moment, for she is mostly seeing you and keeping in contact with you secretly, without her parents knowledge. This can be extremely damaging if the parents forbid you two seeing each other, not just to you (losing a potentially wonderful girl), but to her as well (losing any respect and trust she gained with her parents plus you). You must find a way to prevent yourself from looking so secretive and find a way to open up communications with the parents. If you truly want to be with her, eventually you are going to have to meet the parents. Suddenly appearing on the doorstep and saying I'm engaged, to the parents, with their little girl can really start some carnage! Try to demonstrate a friendship with the girl to the parents and see if that works. At least try to get it to the point to where the parents do not mind seeing you two together. (You might have to hold off on the sexual urges and glances around the parents). If you got okay parents, try to get them to loosen the dirt as well with her parents (or a sister if you got one!). Above all else, she needs to know your parents, and you need to know hers. Whether good or bad, you will have a hard time understanding her, and her understanding you, if you cannot even determine how you two were brought up during the good times and bad times in your life. Try to use this time between now and July to at least get things started.
Long distance relationship: By far, extremely difficult. For this to work, communication will have to be a definite focal point. Make sure before she goes that you two will be able to communicate effectively about the good things, the bad things, and definetly the ugly things. During the time of separation, focus on getting to know each other intently. She may not want to, and you may not either, but you two must explore each other, and learn to accept each other. Remember also, some things you must allow her to solve on her own. Being the guy with all the answers will form an unhealthy attachment with her to you, which you will loathe. Try to offer advice, but if she does not drop the subject, allow her to vent! If her parents are like you say they are, you are going to have to listen to her vent A LOT!! Allow her this process of healing, and she will respect you and love you deeply. Connect with her. Do not make her feel as if you do not like listening to her or understand her. Acknowledge that you heard her, and even dig into yourself and let her know, I know what you are going through. (No man or woman is an island. We just like to perceive ourselves as such.) If possible, try not to focus on sexual cues much. She may say okay, but she may have not built a structually sound backbone, (do to her lifestyle right now) and may agree to anything you say. (Girl #5 ring any bells)? Promote her from time to time to admit when she does or does not like something you do. Allow her to critisize from time to time, but allow her to know where your boundaries are at times as well. Also, try to arrange a visit from her every once in a while. Take pictures, write to her, send her a postcard, let her know that you are still thinking about her even when you are not talking. Encourage her to do the same. Phone conversations don't compare when a girl has wrote you a love poem that you can read over and over again! Finally, use this time to reflect on youself as well. If this relationship is going to work, you must know your bearings and she must know hers. Figure out what previous relationships have taught you, and how you could have responded. Try to focus not on what they did wrong, but what you did wrong, whether you did everything right or not. Nobody is perfect, and if you reflect like this, you will find many things you could have done to alter the results of your previous girlfriends. (This one will be pretty tough, but keep focus on learning, not condenscending yourself. A mistake is not an error until you refuse to correct the mistake). Try to improve your current relationship with such reflections, and ask for help if you need it! Encourage her to do the same, and I am sure you two will do fine!
Don't give up and do your best. I am rooting for you!!
Reply:No. i think you are doing great.
rosemary
Girl #1 - I was 14, we were going out for 2 months, we met online, had no complaints about her. This was mostly my fault b'cuz I didn't know how to handle relationships, so it ended due to my lack of action.
Girl #2 - I was 15 going on 16, we met online, mostly talked on the phone, didn't get to see each other much for two reasons: 1) Her mother was a cruel, careless witch who wanted nothing for her daughter (so she was seeing me "secretly"); 2) She had an older guy friend online whom she never met but he was always putting things in her head and trying to end the relationship b'cuz he wanted her all to himself. So she had a hard time making up her own mind, she thought of killing herself a couple times. So this one was not my fault but rather her mother and mostly that idiot she knew. Lasted for 6 months.
Girl #3 - I was 16. Knew this girl for a couple years, she was a few years older than me. Year #1 was perfect. Year #2 she lost her job, lots of bad things started happening with her, she got very depressed no matter how much I helped, she tried breaking up with me on and off, started seeing ghosts and dead people, dolls talking to her, turning evangelist, etc. Oh and did I mention there was no sex included with all that crazy stuff? Absolutely not my fault.
Girl #4 - I was 18. We were only together for two weeks. This is my fault because I scared her away, it was right after the previous one ended and I guess I was trying to rekindle what I had lost and had been missing out on.
Girl #5 - 18 yrs old. Together for a couple months. This girl was down for EVERYTHING and I mean everything, she was hot too and very sweet personality. But the problem was that she was down for way too much, she was a bit too slow, said yes to almost anything, that was kind of a turn off. If she can say yes to anything, then imagine some other guy coming along while and I'm with her and... you know.
Girl #6 - 19 yrs old. Ooooo boy, complete and total b****. I'll tell you right now, the only thing she was good for was the sex, outside of that, she was a selfish, stuck-up, and cold-hearted chick who spent more time trying to de-edify than anything else. Lasted for about 3 months.
Girl #7 - I was 19 as well. This one is definitely my fault. She girl was sooooooooo sweet to me, like the perfect best friend. There were a lot of mixed signals though. We went on one date, everything was fine, then at the end I tried to kiss her but she laughed and was like what is it? I said nothing. Couple months later, I met Girl #8 and she met a new guy, she called me up, we talked and then asked me why I didn't kiss her. I was shocked, I told her the truth, she said its ok we're still good friends. I still know her to this day but we don't talk much anymore cuz shes so occupied with that guy she met back then, they're still together and she is so IN LOVE with this man its crazy, talking bout how shes all about building up a foundation with him. I feel like I missed out.
Girl #8 - Was still 19. She was 4 years older, knew her for 6 months then we got married. We were gonna marry sometime in the far future but only did it then for financial reasons cuz she was in this online business. So we didn't get out own place until a year later, then I discovered her true self -- A huge anger problem, a menstrual disorder, gave herself too much work to do and didn't want any of my help regardless, the house always looked like hurricane katrina complete with bug infestations (you should have seen the fridge), didn't matter if I spent 9 hours one day cleaning the whole place myself, she messed it up again. We got into more fights than anything else, she didn't wanna do anything, no sex, going out, etc. It ended by the time I was 21.
Finally, Girl #9 - Presently dating right now for about 2 months. Ok, everything is perfect with this relationship, it's going smooth. The one thing that stands out is the chemistry, it is unlike any that I've had with the past women, it is C-R-A-Z-Y chemistry and we get along so perfectly. Here's the problem: Her parents (she's 19) don't care about her, they don't know how to show her they love her. See, she wasn't supposed to be born at birth, it was her and her brother, something happened and she wasn't supposed to make it, she thinks it has something to do with that. But her mom won't let her go out and experience life, she always wants to know where she is, always questioning what she's eating at home or why she's sitting a certain way or looking a certain way. So she has to "secretly" see me, we do this at least once a week, mostly after midnight though when her parents are at work. If its during the day, I have to call out of work cuz I work in the day, I did this twice already and I had a job interview that I went to each time after I saw her in the day, so it wasn't just for seeing her. She's moving to Atlanta with her family in July (they got a new house there), shes gonna go to school there for 2 years then come back here to NY. We both want to continue the relationship long distance until she gets back and take turns visiting each other periodically. I would move down there but I currently make $24,000 a year so ummm..... NO. Yeah you know it does cost money to travel, even worse, move.
On a positive note, I really feel like this one can work. I feel more aware and conscious of doing things the right way this time around. I wanna continue and build a foundation with this girl. We're so into each other, there have been no problems outside of her twisted parents. But man I tell ya, if her folks weren't that way, this would be one HOT relationship if they'd her go out, we can do so much more together -- movies, parks, have dinner, long walks, summer time, all that good stuff... oh man. But unfortunately, everyone else is doing that with their normal boyfriend/girlfriend relationships.
So what do you think? Is my love life cursed or what? I'm not saying I'm not happy with this current girl, I am despite the dark lords of the sith *cough* sorry i mean her parents. But I'm just saying isn't it ironic that God never grants a great guy like me to have a normal relationship? My definition of normal relationship = The girl I'm with now but with normal parents.
Is it me or is my love life simply cursed?
Okay man. I got to level with you right off the back. You say the relationship is smooth and great, but how is it going so well when you cannot even connect with the girl, let alone, the parents? Before getting past the point of no return, I recommend you sit back and think what this relationship will look like if you married this girl. Think how this will change you and her. Now, I recommend you form a list of what you think she can contribute to a relationship, and what you can contribute to a relationship. (The things that hold a relationship together like honesty, commitement, funny, attractive, etc). Write a second list of those things that you and your girlfriend do that can destroy the relationship, or make it real bumpy. (Get specific. No since of lying to yourself). If the good benefits of you and your girlfriend outweigh the bad "hurdles" you will be presented with or could be presented with, then your relationship has a chance. If you are confident that this relationship deserves the effort, continue on.
Step 2: Two things concern me the most as you told your story: your girlriend has highly controlling parents, and you two live a substantially loong distance away from each other. Starting with the parents. Remember, her parents, whether they treated her like a diamond or dirt, they are still there and they still influence her in huge ways. The question is: How much do the parents really influence her attitude? Is she just being rebellious right now, or is this her true self? Just on my perspective, it seems she is just going through a rebellious moment, for she is mostly seeing you and keeping in contact with you secretly, without her parents knowledge. This can be extremely damaging if the parents forbid you two seeing each other, not just to you (losing a potentially wonderful girl), but to her as well (losing any respect and trust she gained with her parents plus you). You must find a way to prevent yourself from looking so secretive and find a way to open up communications with the parents. If you truly want to be with her, eventually you are going to have to meet the parents. Suddenly appearing on the doorstep and saying I'm engaged, to the parents, with their little girl can really start some carnage! Try to demonstrate a friendship with the girl to the parents and see if that works. At least try to get it to the point to where the parents do not mind seeing you two together. (You might have to hold off on the sexual urges and glances around the parents). If you got okay parents, try to get them to loosen the dirt as well with her parents (or a sister if you got one!). Above all else, she needs to know your parents, and you need to know hers. Whether good or bad, you will have a hard time understanding her, and her understanding you, if you cannot even determine how you two were brought up during the good times and bad times in your life. Try to use this time between now and July to at least get things started.
Long distance relationship: By far, extremely difficult. For this to work, communication will have to be a definite focal point. Make sure before she goes that you two will be able to communicate effectively about the good things, the bad things, and definetly the ugly things. During the time of separation, focus on getting to know each other intently. She may not want to, and you may not either, but you two must explore each other, and learn to accept each other. Remember also, some things you must allow her to solve on her own. Being the guy with all the answers will form an unhealthy attachment with her to you, which you will loathe. Try to offer advice, but if she does not drop the subject, allow her to vent! If her parents are like you say they are, you are going to have to listen to her vent A LOT!! Allow her this process of healing, and she will respect you and love you deeply. Connect with her. Do not make her feel as if you do not like listening to her or understand her. Acknowledge that you heard her, and even dig into yourself and let her know, I know what you are going through. (No man or woman is an island. We just like to perceive ourselves as such.) If possible, try not to focus on sexual cues much. She may say okay, but she may have not built a structually sound backbone, (do to her lifestyle right now) and may agree to anything you say. (Girl #5 ring any bells)? Promote her from time to time to admit when she does or does not like something you do. Allow her to critisize from time to time, but allow her to know where your boundaries are at times as well. Also, try to arrange a visit from her every once in a while. Take pictures, write to her, send her a postcard, let her know that you are still thinking about her even when you are not talking. Encourage her to do the same. Phone conversations don't compare when a girl has wrote you a love poem that you can read over and over again! Finally, use this time to reflect on youself as well. If this relationship is going to work, you must know your bearings and she must know hers. Figure out what previous relationships have taught you, and how you could have responded. Try to focus not on what they did wrong, but what you did wrong, whether you did everything right or not. Nobody is perfect, and if you reflect like this, you will find many things you could have done to alter the results of your previous girlfriends. (This one will be pretty tough, but keep focus on learning, not condenscending yourself. A mistake is not an error until you refuse to correct the mistake). Try to improve your current relationship with such reflections, and ask for help if you need it! Encourage her to do the same, and I am sure you two will do fine!
Don't give up and do your best. I am rooting for you!!
Reply:No. i think you are doing great.
rosemary
Do any of you think that when you were younger you weren't racist, but as you got older you became racist?
just a question....IT IS NOT MENT TO PROMOTE RACISM OR TO INSULT OTHER USERS!!!!
i think that this has happened to me...I think that it happened when i went to the Social Services Office with my father about 6 years ago...He was out of work and had HIV and HEP C and had no health insurance...He was trying to get on Medicad but was denied! But when you go to DSS where we live you see a lot of minorities dressed in desiner clothing, driving nice cars...and receiving free services....I think that is where it began...just a note: i grew up in the Ghetto for a while and my stepfather is black....Also my husband works for Kodak...he is white...but when he goes up for an interview...even though he is more or just as qualified as the other interviewees Kodak always hires the minorities...and when a minority is really bad at their job...Kodak just gives them a slap on the wrist...too scared of getting sued...i presume...So what are you opinions?
Do any of you think that when you were younger you weren't racist, but as you got older you became racist?
I think that it is a good question and that you are going to be totally trashed for asking it. You will also find that many people won't answer but will instead tell you about some white guy they saw doing the same thing. I would answer but I am really tired of being trashed today for my opinions (which I'm obvioulsy not allowed to have unless it agrees with the PC freaks). Good luck!
Reply:it usally by experice or how u are raised
Reply:First, I am not taking this as an insult or you being racist, just my thoughts. Racism is pointless really. Without some of the people in history who did great things, we wouldn't be where we are now. But, it is true that some places will pick a minority first. There are people out there, white...black...hispanic, that for ANY given reason will scream you're a racist...and places know this, so they try to save some trouble. Or, in some instances....they may be racist themselves, or they may just be selfish and decide that if someone is willing to do something that won't require as much as the next person, they will pick them. Racism won't ever disappear, and as you got older you may have started noticing favortism at certain places, but that doesn't make you a bad person. You can look at someone of another race with negative thoughts, but you must be able to not hold it against that entire race. Every race has an idiot, and that can't be changed. Just don't let is consume you to the point that you begin thinking it's cool to run around with a sheet over your head lol.
Which I must state....just for general purpose....the KKK, for them being such proud people and being so highly racist...why do they insist on hiding their identities and faces....just a thought.
Reply:Yes, that is true for me.
Reply:as a child the seeds are planted how we think. and to be so openly shown to our fragile hearts and soul that different race is treated better makes hate even more deweling in us as adults. it does play a big role in our lives. its is some form of racist even if we dont mean it, its what our eyes have seen
Reply:vise-versa
Reply:Welcome to the USA
Reply:yeah
Reply:Your question...with the part about the Kodak hiring practices just drained all energy from my body save my fingers. I wasn't racist when I was young and I am not know, however like you I became aware of hatred, division, discrimination, and the prejudices people have against one another without RELATIONSHIP. Please do not lump experiences with a company into a list of generalities that cause your heart to harden. Maybe Kodak has its reasons for hiring as they do: making up for a lack of diversity for several years? Maybe they have less honorable reasons. You should ASK and try to find out ~ please do not assume. You've experienced some pain and have witnessed some unfortunate events. Poor people can take care of themselves just as wealthy people can and be clean and well dressed. Been to a thrift store lately? OR they can have misgivings about their priorities and how they spend their money. That can be why they are poor in the first place. Isolated events shouldn't be used to decide how you in your heart will look at the world. What we need is more tolerance, more love, more understanding, more empowerment. Please remain a part of the solution.
God bless.
~A black hardworking woman who's received no handouts: just the results of hard work and determination through adversity.
PEACE
Reply:I understand what you are going through. I'm in a minority dominated area, which makes me the real minority. I am discriminated against everywhere I go.
When we are kids we are taught everyone is equal, that if you work hard enough you will have everything you need, if you are nice to people they'll be nice to you, and if you ignore bad people they will go away. Then you grow up and find out that the middle class white racist stereotype just doesn't apply to you or anyone else you know. And the people in charge have no sympathy for you or your problems. It's a hard knocks life for us.
Trickle down economics begins with the rich men at the top, down to the middle class, then to the working class (most people and most white people). Lastly, it trickles down to the poor (mostly white women making us last to get anything, unfortunately).
Once you are poor enough to need services you have to wait for services and aid to trickle down from working class people of other protected races. Then from there it trickles down to poor blacks, to poor foreigners, and lastly to poor whites (mostly women and their dependants). You'll be lucky to get any help at all and have to scream help for years before they'll send emergency services to your aid.
I hope things get better for you soon.
Reply:Maybe he is not as qualified as you think. Do you work for Kodak? Are you involved in management decisions for Kodak? if you are not then you really are just speculating.
i think that this has happened to me...I think that it happened when i went to the Social Services Office with my father about 6 years ago...He was out of work and had HIV and HEP C and had no health insurance...He was trying to get on Medicad but was denied! But when you go to DSS where we live you see a lot of minorities dressed in desiner clothing, driving nice cars...and receiving free services....I think that is where it began...just a note: i grew up in the Ghetto for a while and my stepfather is black....Also my husband works for Kodak...he is white...but when he goes up for an interview...even though he is more or just as qualified as the other interviewees Kodak always hires the minorities...and when a minority is really bad at their job...Kodak just gives them a slap on the wrist...too scared of getting sued...i presume...So what are you opinions?
Do any of you think that when you were younger you weren't racist, but as you got older you became racist?
I think that it is a good question and that you are going to be totally trashed for asking it. You will also find that many people won't answer but will instead tell you about some white guy they saw doing the same thing. I would answer but I am really tired of being trashed today for my opinions (which I'm obvioulsy not allowed to have unless it agrees with the PC freaks). Good luck!
Reply:it usally by experice or how u are raised
Reply:First, I am not taking this as an insult or you being racist, just my thoughts. Racism is pointless really. Without some of the people in history who did great things, we wouldn't be where we are now. But, it is true that some places will pick a minority first. There are people out there, white...black...hispanic, that for ANY given reason will scream you're a racist...and places know this, so they try to save some trouble. Or, in some instances....they may be racist themselves, or they may just be selfish and decide that if someone is willing to do something that won't require as much as the next person, they will pick them. Racism won't ever disappear, and as you got older you may have started noticing favortism at certain places, but that doesn't make you a bad person. You can look at someone of another race with negative thoughts, but you must be able to not hold it against that entire race. Every race has an idiot, and that can't be changed. Just don't let is consume you to the point that you begin thinking it's cool to run around with a sheet over your head lol.
Which I must state....just for general purpose....the KKK, for them being such proud people and being so highly racist...why do they insist on hiding their identities and faces....just a thought.
Reply:Yes, that is true for me.
Reply:as a child the seeds are planted how we think. and to be so openly shown to our fragile hearts and soul that different race is treated better makes hate even more deweling in us as adults. it does play a big role in our lives. its is some form of racist even if we dont mean it, its what our eyes have seen
Reply:vise-versa
Reply:Welcome to the USA
Reply:yeah
Reply:Your question...with the part about the Kodak hiring practices just drained all energy from my body save my fingers. I wasn't racist when I was young and I am not know, however like you I became aware of hatred, division, discrimination, and the prejudices people have against one another without RELATIONSHIP. Please do not lump experiences with a company into a list of generalities that cause your heart to harden. Maybe Kodak has its reasons for hiring as they do: making up for a lack of diversity for several years? Maybe they have less honorable reasons. You should ASK and try to find out ~ please do not assume. You've experienced some pain and have witnessed some unfortunate events. Poor people can take care of themselves just as wealthy people can and be clean and well dressed. Been to a thrift store lately? OR they can have misgivings about their priorities and how they spend their money. That can be why they are poor in the first place. Isolated events shouldn't be used to decide how you in your heart will look at the world. What we need is more tolerance, more love, more understanding, more empowerment. Please remain a part of the solution.
God bless.
~A black hardworking woman who's received no handouts: just the results of hard work and determination through adversity.
PEACE
Reply:I understand what you are going through. I'm in a minority dominated area, which makes me the real minority. I am discriminated against everywhere I go.
When we are kids we are taught everyone is equal, that if you work hard enough you will have everything you need, if you are nice to people they'll be nice to you, and if you ignore bad people they will go away. Then you grow up and find out that the middle class white racist stereotype just doesn't apply to you or anyone else you know. And the people in charge have no sympathy for you or your problems. It's a hard knocks life for us.
Trickle down economics begins with the rich men at the top, down to the middle class, then to the working class (most people and most white people). Lastly, it trickles down to the poor (mostly white women making us last to get anything, unfortunately).
Once you are poor enough to need services you have to wait for services and aid to trickle down from working class people of other protected races. Then from there it trickles down to poor blacks, to poor foreigners, and lastly to poor whites (mostly women and their dependants). You'll be lucky to get any help at all and have to scream help for years before they'll send emergency services to your aid.
I hope things get better for you soon.
Reply:Maybe he is not as qualified as you think. Do you work for Kodak? Are you involved in management decisions for Kodak? if you are not then you really are just speculating.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)