Thursday, March 31, 2011
By Reginald Kaigler (DEMCAD)
The United States' bombing campaign in Libya has absolutely nothing to do with helping the Libyan people. Just as the Bush and Cheney spread lies about Iraq, Obama and his underlings are using misinformation to manipulate the uninformed American masses into supporting another imperialist power grab for oil in the Middle East. For anyone who still has the delusion that the United States spent 600 million dollars in one week bombing and launching Tomahawk missiles into Libya for the sake of protecting innocent people, look at the U.S. operations and allies abroad.
In Gaza, America's prime ally, Israel, just started a new campaign of bombing civilian areas. Of course, innocent people where killed, but who cares? Israel is our friends. So what if they have one of the most brutal embargos in the world, it's not a big deal as long as you're a friend of the United States governemnt. And what about those unmanned predator drones dropping bombs on civilians in Afghanistan? Well, they don't count. No, really! They literally don't count in the eyes of the U.S. government.
Salon is reporting that the Department of Defense has recently confirmed that it does not gather statistics about the total number of civilians that have been killed by its unmanned drone attacks. And the only reason why we know this is because the American Civil Liberties Union filed a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to acquire the information.
So why are we in Libya? Why did we go to Iraq? Why did we go to Afghanistan? What is the one significant variable that all three countries posses that countries like the Ivory Coast lacks? Oil. Invading Afghanistan allowed the Americans to control oil pipelines and create a strategy launchpad to Iran's east, while invading Iran allowed the Americans to control a significant amount of oil, prevent Saddam from threatening the U.S. Petro Dollar by selling oil in Euros. Libya has the largest oil reserves in Africa.
I think the United States government is backing the rebels because it wants to control the oil by controlling the rebels. After all, if the U.S. starts World War 3 by invading Iran, we're going to need plenty of oil (which we have in Alaska and the Dakotas) and the ability to prevent our enemies from acquiring oil.
What do you think? Is Libya a stepping stone to World War 3?
U.S. doesn't count civilians killed by drones
Israeli jets bomb Gaza cities
You can also find me on
Monday, March 28, 2011
By Reginald Kaigler (DEMCAD)
Yesterday, I came across one of the most disgusting articles that I’ve seen in months. Keep in mind, I spend hours a day reading news articles as part of my research for my current events blog. The article entitled “Unpaid jobs: The new normal?” provided an interview with an employer who has used 50 unpaid interns his small business’ in marketing, editorial, advertising, sales, account management and public relations.
In recent years, the nation has experienced the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression and over 14 million workers are unemployed, many of them for over 6 months. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average number of weeks for the unemployed is 37.1 (as of Feb 2011.)
To put this into perspective, this number remained in the teens for most of the last decade. The average number of weeks for the unemployed ranged from 12.7 in 2001 to 19.9 in 2004 and 17.5 in 2008. But since the economy has taken a downturn, millions of people have lost their jobs, the middle class has contracted and food stamp participation has soared (to 44 million as of Jan 2011.) Simply put, many people are becoming poorer and desperately need of job. SO when I hear about Kelly Fallis, chief executive of Remote Stylist (a Toronto and New York-based Web-based interior design services company), boast about the advantage of using unpaid workers to start her business, I can’t help be ask myself if this is the beginning of a modern day serfdom.
Traditionally, unpaid interns have been good for compliment college students who were looking for a way to gain experience and build a network within their field. But now, we’re seeing unemployed and experienced professionals offer their services for free to keep their resume fresh and maintain connections with the hope that this will give them an edge in this brutal job market. I’ve heard all of the arguments.
Let’s start with the “work ethic will get you a job argument”. The belief is that an unpaid internships allow workers to show potential employers that they are hard workers and will increase the likelihood that they will get hired. In reality, virtually no one is hiring. If you can get 3 experienced professionals (former managers, computer technicians and accountants) to work 20 hours for free in a horrible economy, why hire a full-time worker to do the same job? After all, an employer can simply replace the interns and avoid paying for health insurance.
What about networking? Networking is important, but I doubt an unpaid internship or volunteering will help. The problem with working for free is that it lowers your social value and makes you look desperate.
“…it can also give employees needed experience, a reference letter or even a self-esteem boost in a depressing economy,” proclaims Katherine Reynolds Lewis of Fortune.com.
A self-esteem boost? How does working for free provide you with a self esteem boost when you have bills to pay? And how low must your self-esteem be to take pride in believing that your labor is worth ZERO dollars? Can someone show me any proof that a significant amount of people are getting hired because of volunteering and working as interns for free? I seriously doubt it. I don't mean to hurt anyone's feelings, but I strongly believe that this will not help most people.
Here’s what I’m doing. I have a youtube channel with over 16,000 subscribers and a steady viewership. I have monetize my online work and have turned it into an important source of income. Frankly, this is how I pay my bills. My 47 year old sister has been out of work for 3 years and my 67 year old mom is too sick to work. So the energy bill must be paid. The water bill also needs to be paid. I can’t afford to waste 6 months working for free and I think employers will respect you more if you show that you were able to get paid.
One of the most important things you’ll learn about America is that, the more you need something, the less people want to give it to you. If you look desperate, women won’t sleep with you, employers won’t hire you and professionals will not want to have a drink with you. Have you ever wondered why people are so quick to give gifts to celebrities, but we have millions of homeless people leaving in the streets of America's metropolis?
Everybody wants to be around a winner. They don't want to be around someone who needs help. I know how mean that sounds, but this is why you need to give people the impression that you don't need them and that you are not desperate. So I think people need to network through friends and college contacts while creating an income. Working for free doesn't raise your social profile and I think that will affect your ability to get the job you want. Personally, I'm going to see if I can create a new career all together. Wish me luck!
Kelly Fallis was convinced that businesses using unpaid workers as a part of their strategy was the wave of the future. "Ten years from now, this is going to be the norm," she explained. If that is true, it will be traffic to watch American descend into a modern day serfdom.
So what do you think? Is it a good idea to use an unpaid internship to get back into the workforce?
Unpaid jobs: The new normal?
SNAP Participants 44 Million
Average length of unemployment creeps up to 37 weeks in February
You can also find me on
Wednesday, March 23, 2011
By Reginald Kaigler (DEMCAD)
Joe Biden appeared on the MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews in 2007 and made a bold claim. He said that if President Bush had launched an attack against Iran without Congressional approval, he would have called for impeachment hearings.
"I don't say those things lightly, Chris. You've known me for a long time..The president has no constitutional authority to take this nation to war against a country of 70 million people until we are attacked or unless there is proof that we are about to attacked!"
Fast forward to 2011: Democrat Barack Obama is now the President of United States. He has authorized an air attack against Libya without Congressional approval or proof of a threat to America. Obama is clearly violating the boundaries that Biden set for Bush. And if you use his own words, Obama is clearly violating the United States constitution. So where is Biden's call for Obama's impeachment?
I'll go a step farther. In 2007, candidate Obama attended a Q&A hosted by Boston Globe Staff Writer Charlie Savage. Here are a couple of quotes that stuck me as odd, especially considering how Obama has clearly contradicted his own promises and claims.
"The President does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation," Obama claims. Yet, he authorized the bombing of Libya without permission from Congress or proof of a threat to America.
Here's my favorite quote from Obama, "I reject the Bush Administration's claim that the President has plenary authority under the Constitution to detain U.S. citizens without charges as unlawful enemy combatants."
That's strange. I thought Guantanamo Bay was still open. Oh wait, it is.
So let's review. By Obama and Biden's own words, the decision to bomb Libya is an impeachment offense. Obviously, no one in Washington will respond. They only pretend to have principles, but I think it's critical that we recognize their lies and spread the word. So that they can be held accountable when it matters the most.
Barack Obama's Q&A
Saturday, March 19, 2011
By Reginald Kaigler (DEMCAD)
As dire as the situation in Japan may seem, this nuclear disaster in Fukushima will not be the end of this economic power. Popular Youtuber Jbern released a video entitled 'Fukushima update - Japan's last days' where he descisses what he believes to be a situation worse than Chernobyl. Unlike the Soviet Union's nuclear disaster, the Fukushima crisis hasn't been upgraded to a level 7 (major accident), but with explosions at four different nuclear reactors and a significant amount of radiation leakage, the seriousness of the situation can not be taken lightly.
I think Jbern's description of the Japanese government response is fitting.
"I think Japan has very weak leadership...and they are not taking the right action."
Many nuclear facility workers have abandoned their post and the Japanese government has failed to handle the situation in a timely and effective manner. The leadership needs to pull nuclear experts from other power plants and use its military personnel and technology to get more workers involved. The more people they have working on the nuclear reactors, the more they can accomplish. With a limited amount of people, they will be slowed down by the fact that a worker can only be exposed to so much radiation.
Jbern asks some very important questions that I would like the answers to, "Where are the 5,000 employees from the Fukushima plant? Because they have left their plant. They have deserted from their troops...their job in a war-like situation."
My answer: They saw the writing on the wall and decided to get their families as far away from this mess as they could. Maybe they don't have much faith in their own ability to stop a catastrophe.
Another good Jbern question: "Ask yourself, where are the families of the managers and the government?"
I'm dying to know the answer to that one. I agree with Jbern's assessment of the severity of the damage at reactor 4. But I disagree with his assertion that "Japan is lost." He goes as far as to declare that the Japanese government should have evacuated pregnant women and children from the island. The problem with that scenario is that it would have been impossible to evacuate that many people from japan in a short period of time. And how would have accepted them? The United States of America. That would be a huge political risk for the host nation. If the people couldn't return or didn't want to return, the host country would have millions a people living on the soil. What economy can support that level of a population increase? None.
My biggest concern is the economic impact of Japan on the world economy and America. It seems that Japan will be seriously affected by this crisis in its financial and manufacturing sectors. Even GM is halting its 'nonessential' global spending, because of this disaster. I think Japan will be hit with a tremendous amount of debt and worsen its status as one of the largest public debt burdens in the world. However, it's industry and ability to actually produce products will give it a strong chance to rebuild and recover. it may take 10 years, but I am confident that Japan will recover as long as they can offer products to trade for natural resources.
GM Halts 'Nonessential' Spending Globally Due to Japan Crisis
March 15th Polar Shift
People, we made it. March 15th came and passed. We didn't see massive earthquakes across the globe, we didn't see the end of the world and the U.S. government didn't bring out the ark. We didn't see a major and rapid polar shift. So what does this mean? Internet conspiracy theorists and bloggers will jump on a new date and uplaod more videos to scare the hell out of people about a possible end of the world. I call these events "Dates of Doom." It always amzes me how certain youtubers can scare people will this ridiculous information and never apologize for being wrong and scaring people for no reason.
You can also find me on
Monday, March 14, 2011
Japan Will Be Forever Changed
By Reginald Kaigler (DEMCAD)
The earthquake in Japan may have created a series of tsunamis that claimed 10,000 lives, but the building crisis at it's Fukushima nuclear power plant could changed the face of Japan. As of today, Japan has six reactors that are unstable and at risk of a full meltdown. On Saturday, this was an explosion and partial meltdown at the no. 1 reactor that leaked radiation into the atmosphere. How much? We don't know. But another power plant had an explosion on the following day, possibly leaking more radiation into the atmosphere. Fortunately, the weather patterns will force it out into the Pacific Ocean. Which is good for Japan, but troublesome for the West Coast of the United States, since the jet stream could carry the radiation across the ocean.
So far, Japanese authorities have evacuated over 200,000 people from the nuclear zone, recovered over 800 bodies, projected a possible lost of 10,000 people, scanned thousands of citizens for radiation poisoning, treated over 160 for radiation sickness, dealt with six unstable nuclear reactors and assured as that the situation is under control.
Frankly, seeing explosions at a nuclear power plant doesn't convinced me that the situation is under control. And anyone who thinks that this crisis will not affect America is dislusional. Nuclear power plants are usually very efficient and safe, as long as the engineers are able to keep the fuel rods cool. The problem at the power plants is that the earthquake has damaged the coolant system and made it difficult to keep the rods cool enough to control. To make things worse, if the floor of the reactor room is cracked, the melting fuel could reach the ground and become uncontrollable. This is the worse case scenario. And given the fact that there has already been two explosions at the plants, I think it is time to take this scenario very seriously. If there is a significant leakage of radiation, it could travel across the Pacific in a storm system and threaten areas in California, Hawaii, Washington, Oregon and other states.
There have already been two explosions in the containment building of two reactors. If six reactors have a full meltdown and explode, this radiation will claim lives. If I still lived on the West Coast of the United States, I would consider stocking up on Potassium Iodine. Your thyroid absorbs iodine, whether it is radioactive or not, if you fill your thyroids with potassium, it may reduce the radiation sickness. I would also make sure that I am not allegoric to Potassium Iodine. Hopefully, you guys have been listening to me when I warned you to stockpile food and water. If not, now is a good time to start.
Today, I'm going to the suburbs to meet up with a guy who is forming a preppers group in the Flint, Michigan area.
I also recommend you follow Youtuber Dutchsinse. He's been doing a good job on covering the story. I'm also vblogging about the crisis on my channel (DEMCAD).
U.S. Navy crew members get radiation sickness.
Second explosion at Japanese nuclear plant
Japan battles nuclear meltdown