fakeitormakeit2

I hate when people call middle eastern people "abdul" it's grammatically incorrect because it is a prefix and I'm a grammar nazi.

In my school's handbook last year it said you weren't allowed to have you cellphone on you and that you were to keep it in your locker until the end of the day. Then our school had a fire and we all had to rush out of the school and like 3/4 of the school had to ask the other 1/4 of the school to borrow their phones to call their parents to pick them up. So now they removed the rule and they have no clue what the official rule should be.

Please keep quiet, do not judge him and say based on his opinion he must have received a public education. You have been poisoned by American media bias. I condemn the PLO as a terrorist group and they constantly unjustly bombard Israel with missiles which puts them in fault. However, I also personally know many innocent Palestinians, some Christian, some Muslim, who were just citizens are were forcibly removed from their houses by israeli soldiers, so please do not speak because the media has told you something and you have no person experience. Israel also forcibly invaded Lebanon, an ally at the time, who was trying to put down Hezbollah, an enemy of Israel, but instead they decided to just bust right in. They wrongly hold Golan Heights from Syria and they held the Sinai Peninsula. I will not even touch the matter of them occupying land they should not be in, and the European Jews treat the Mizrahi Jews poorly, and if any Jew should be in the Holy Lands it should be the Mizrahi because they've actually been living there. And if you would like to challenge me as someone who was educated in a public system, my family has been attending only private institutions as far as we can prove with record (which is my great great grandfather who attended an academy funded by the sultan of the ottoman empire) and I have one-on-one tutors for Arabic, writing composition, drawing, violin, guitar and fencing (and formerly Italian & Aramaic which I've sufficiently learned). I have been profusely educated and I hold the position you scoff at. Besides, I have no doubt there are probably people who have attended public schooling all their lives and they're more intelligent then me because of their great desire to learn. Even a textbook can lie to suit the victor and listening to only what the media feeds you creates racism and bigotry that you aren't even aware of. I don't even see the point you're trying to make in your post... All i see is gross amounts of pretentiousness. Anyway, your assumption that public schools are inherently worse than private ones* is far worse than Stonewall's guess that the person he's addressing went to public school. *by talking about someone smarter than you who might have gone to public school as if they were some sort of infinitely rare quantity. I said I have no doubt that there are people who have attended public schools and they're more intelligent then me. If I have no doubt that means that there is a 100% chance of me thinking there are these people. You say I said it like they were infinitely rare, which would mean they are little to none existent. Obviously you're contradicting what I said with your own assumption because no doubt is the opposite of an infinitely rare amount >.> And I was not saying that private schools are better then public schools, that's another wrong inference you've made. I was saying I hold the same idea that the other person did and I go to a private school, so even if he went to a public school it makes no difference. So you have literally taken it from the exact opposite end of which I was meaning, you say I'm being pretentious when I was stating that the attendance of private schools, numerous private tutors and what not can easily be superseded by someone who have a sheer desire to learn and is confined to a public institution in their situation.

Please keep quiet, do not judge him and say based on his opinion he must have received a public education. You have been poisoned by American media bias. I condemn the PLO as a terrorist group and they constantly unjustly bombard Israel with missiles which puts them in fault. However, I also personally know many innocent Palestinians, some Christian, some Muslim, who were just citizens are were forcibly removed from their houses by israeli soldiers, so please do not speak because the media has told you something and you have no person experience. Israel also forcibly invaded Lebanon, an ally at the time, who was trying to put down Hezbollah, an enemy of Israel, but instead they decided to just bust right in. They wrongly hold Golan Heights from Syria and they held the Sinai Peninsula. I will not even touch the matter of them occupying land they should not be in, and the European Jews treat the Mizrahi Jews poorly, and if any Jew should be in the Holy Lands it should be the Mizrahi because they've actually been living there. And if you would like to challenge me as someone who was educated in a public system, my family has been attending only private institutions as far as we can prove with record (which is my great great grandfather who attended an academy funded by the sultan of the ottoman empire) and I have one-on-one tutors for Arabic, writing composition, drawing, violin, guitar and fencing (and formerly Italian & Aramaic which I've sufficiently learned). I have been profusely educated and I hold the position you scoff at. Besides, I have no doubt there are probably people who have attended public schooling all their lives and they're more intelligent then me because of their great desire to learn. Even a textbook can lie to suit the victor and listening to only what the media feeds you creates racism and bigotry that you aren't even aware of.

Why Nature runes(like 280 ea)? I don't know if the prices have changed but during the Xp Bonus weekend I RC'd like 1.5k of Deaths and I sold them in GE for like 385gp ea. Edit: Via Abyss

I've found out after some odd number of girlfriends relationships are overrated and cost too much when you have money to spend on them. Recalling my last relationship, I got my girlfriend a pendant from an artisan in Pompeii for Christmas, she got me a t-shirt, granted we have two completely different economic standings, but still.

It's strange though, when I incur racism it kind of feels like the Hester's scarlet letter, people may jeer at it but it's your own sense of identity, they mock you for it, but you wear it proudly.

So you are saying people who believe in an omnipotent creature that shows no sign of existing at all but makes you go to church to hear about what certain people did 2000 years ago, tells you to kill gay people, not have sex if you decide to dedicate your life to "it", consider abortion murder and believe that Jezus can come down from heaven any second to allow all the good Christians to go to heaven (the main criterium of being a good person is going to a building to contribute absolutely nothing to society for one morning every week) are less intelligent? The same people who don't allow other people an opinion on things like other religions that preach excactly the same thing or how species evolved and kill them for it? That article must be pure nonsense. I came up with that years ago. ^ Catholicism You sir are quite ignorant. First of all, I am a Maronite Catholic and we do not believe in the Rapture, or the event described were Jesus comes down and takes the good and leaves the bad to suffer. The book of Revelation is consider to have already happened in the sense that it was all metaphoric and all the beasts and what not represented different people and empires. You're statement is one of bigotry. I particularly like my religion, Marouni, because our second patriarch, Maroun, went around and helped cure people because he was a monk and a doctor. He helped cure even pagans, and he did not discriminate between Christians and non-Christians. As for knowledge, our cultural practices foster intellectuals, as proof Carlos Slim, Ralph Nader, General John Abizaid, Danny Thomas, Khalil Gibran, and Charles Elachi. Our religious beliefs say that religion and science answer two different questions, therefore they both must be pursued wholeheartedly as long as it isn't hurting anyone else. The acquisition of knowledge, intellect and wisdom is a means of becoming closer to God, as God = Love (religious aspect) + Omnipotence (infinite knowledge). Plus you said going to mass once a week contributes to being good? False, as I like to say a lot from Khalil Gibran "Your life is your religion and your temple, when you enter into it take with you your all". That means the accumulations of actions in life truly attests to your religious beliefs. And for atheist, if an atheist is kind for the most part, commits themselves to charity, leads a moral life, then they in a sense "know" God even though they may not believe in Him and they are fully eligible for heaven. Hell is only for people who will infinitely reject the way of God, that is why one cannot even say Judeas or Adolf Hitler is in Hell. Other all bigotry is extremely annoying. The fear to do something to not be a bigot is just as annoying. I didn't like how if you were white and did not support Obama you were racist, but the same was not said about black people who did not support McCain. I find the selection of Sonya Sotomayor as a Supreme Justice a selection based on racial appeal which annoyed me. And lastly I find affirmative action based on race and not income pretty bigoted against people who actually prove themselves but are superseded by tokens for the mere fact the workplace/school needs a token.

I am Middle Eastern, ever since 9/11 I have been the end of a lot of prejudices [even though I am Christian]. Anything from sheer terror of me to disgust. I was speaking with someone from a public school about fights or whatever. They said about how all the Arabs stick together. And I was like yep, that's what we do, support one another. As soon as I said that they looked like they had seen a ghost. They were terrified and lost all interest to talk. I use to be harassed at school by this kid who use to constantly make airport jokes and say how inferior "my people" are. He would find me and my Arab friend just to insult us. It was quite a damper on the spirits and I dreaded seeing him. Till one day I had enough and reported him to the guidance counselor. Somehow he had convinced the guidance counselor that I and my other Arab friend bullied him and we were terrifying and that we said he was a dirty Palestinian and that he wanted to blow up Israel (which is funny because that kind of sounds like what he would say to us...). After explaining to my guidance counselor that I never said such things, and how it is blasphemous to yell Allah in mockery and that he was a damper to my spirit. I was threatened with receiving a suspension and half the amount of demerits needed for expulsion if I did not apologize to him for "threatening" and "belittling" him. I sat next to a moderately dark skinned man on an airplane once. He looked Middle Eastern and it was confirmed when he pulled out something with Arabic writing on it. Not to be rude but I read some of it and it was a prayer to Mary. He saw it had caught my eye and he smiled and handed it to me to read. I thanked him in Arabic with a "shookran sayyid" and passing people saw that I had something written in Arabic and I was muttering I heard "oh my God... I don't feel safe with those crazy Muslims sitting next to each other showing each other their terrorist language". My teacher for Speech was also my debate coach and she knew I like political and educational things. She asked me to give a speech that was really informative and political without being persuasive. So I picked the Israeli-Arab Conflict, illuminating on the Arab side since the Israeli side is covered amply in US media. After my researching and writing of the paper, I had been harassed to the point were I had to change my subject, being called a "Jew hater", etc. My teacher was disappointed in me and I was disappointed in myself. My paper was not anti-Judeo at all, not even anti-Zionist and focused on the political aspect but without people even hearing it I was forced to abandon it. There are certain Eastern Christian religious customs I have which are discriminated against as well. I have been called a stupid towel head for fasting. During one feast day, you hand out roses to people, especially those you have a hard time with to try to make amends with them and someone asked me what I poisoned them with and what plot "my people" were planning. A whole slue of other customs, including bowing, wishing blessings upon people (i.e. God bless your hands for preparing such a delicious meal and may He grant you a long life because of the fruits of your labors) and carrying prayers in Aramaic on me, and when some people see this they attend to [voluntarily and involuntarily] discourage me from my stupid "sand people" things. I'm a Maronite [a type of Christian], extremely anti-terrorism and anti-war and I want to be a consultant for the FBI like someone I know to translate things from Arabic to English. If people hear that, they think I'm joking because I must be automatically a Muslim and pro-terrorism. It is truly sad. I could go on for years, hahaha. Good luck with your paper.

This is so true... We had to give a short background about our family in school once and I said something about my grandma being fascist and someone was like l0l st00pid c0mm13. In my Italian class my teacher had to combine the standard level with the honors level because of his schedule, so all the stupid people are in our class. We have a system of points were it helps your grade if you get more points by answering questions about Italian culture, etc. that our teacher didn't teach us, but you can also get a minus if you speak in English, say something stupid, etc. which hurts your grade. I forget what happened but this really annoying fat kid said something really stupid and ended it with "par favur"(not Italian, and I purposely put a u there to emphasize stupidity) and I told me teacher ' La classe d'espagnolo e' una stanza a sinistra, non e' qui. Questo ciccone ha parlato in espagnolo, allora si batti fuorte con tre meni" (basically give him a minus) and my teacher goes "Si Shami, e' vero, meno" and the [developmentally delayed]ed people kids behind me are like haha meno Shami, meno par Shami. -.- And also someone asked me dead serious, "why my turban head people want to destroy America." I'm not even Muslim.

I've been saying that since I've been able to comprehend it. I use to be deemed anti-American. Now people just agree with me.

I have tried ancestry.com before. The joining point of my dispersed family is at my great great grandfather who was an Ottoman lord, and when the Ottoman empire started to dissolve, many branches of my family fled to California, Texas, Florida, etc. Ancestry.com even displayed their correct addresses and names, as well as what wars our relatives have fought in for the US. However, it failed to reveal anything non-US related, and this is quite a problem since my immediate family moved to America three decades ago. So I would personally hire a personal investigator if I had the personal money or trust [although I know back to at least 1845 so I could somewhat tell if they're lying on a "lead"].

I don't understand. What is the immediate cause and effect of multiplying everything in regards to HP by 10?

I think the Argentinians just want the islands for money. The "nice" thing to do would be to give the islands back and in return Argentina grants Britain a percentage of oil profit. However, if all land disputes were resolved by just ceding land to a country who claimed it first, then technically Italy should be ruling from Ireland to Syria, the US should come under Indian command, the reasons why Middle Eastern people are dissatisfied with Israel, etc. Displacing others for land because you claim you once had it is not a legitimate reason to seize it because then you just displace the people who live there. The islands are obviously under British dominion. If push comes to shove, couldn't the current inhabitants just take a vote of self-determination to affirm that the islands are indeed British? And granting the islands there own sovereignty is completely out of the question. The continuing increase of independent small nations is what leads to unstable governments and global disunion.

I went to France and meant some people. One kid was like oh I'm so sorry my English is so horrible. And he probably spoke English better then some adults I know, hahaha. But yes, knowing more then one language is rare I would say in America unless your parents/grandparents are non-English speakers. Courses themselves just fail in American schooling for language teaching. I am talking Italian IV as an easy A+ since I speak Italian fluently, the teacher butchers the language, uses these gutter slang dialect words that you would only hear in Sicily, etc. I don't think I've learned anything in that class. As for Arabic, I have a private tutor from a language institute because I want to learn Standard [it's different from a colloquial version] and we do so much in one class. I remember my first lesson, I knew only non-Standard Arabic and no knowledge of the alphabet other then alif ba ta basically and in one lesson I learned the entire alphabet and in two more I had 0% mistake rate for connecting the letters (because when you write in arabic some letters don't connect in certain ways) and I had learned the vowel marks (for instance the word kaleb is actually spelled klb, but you can add tick marks which act as vowels differing on their position). It is the manner in which you approach a language and the degree of interest a student has, which goes for anything. I think its important to learn secondary languages, as they can also help the way you think and how. I guess its ok if you aren't very good at linguistics so you decide not to take a secondary language, but I have been to Italy frequently and I was appalled to find Americans demanding that Italians speak English (which a lot of them do) and one called me a [developmentally delayed]ed ginee because I was speaking Italian with a street vender. Language also are mocked by people which annoys me. I was praying in Serto [syriac] with someone else and someone goes kha derca derca moohamud jehaad (in a horrible accent may I say). 1 Wrong religion/time period 2 Aramaic sounds nothing like Arabic.

I believe a Nebraska senator sued God in order to have the court rule for an injunction ordering God to stop harmful behavior which parallels to terrorist activity (natural disasters). I don't know the ruling, but even the hearing of such a case is a failure of the court system. And to the comment that rehabilitation is not justice is incorrect. It is justice to society if the criminal made amends to the victim and resumed a productive post in society. Decreasing society's access to even one productive member is an injustice to all of society, therefore doing the opposite is a justice. A crime is not only committed against a victim but society because it breaks contract with society, therefore all of society is wronged.

NJ has high property and income tax that it almost is stealing. I think about 30,000 "millionaire households" left NJ last year because of how high taxes are. Hopefully with Chris Cristie as governor (good man, I know him) he'll reform taxes in a way that isn't so high and everywhere. Honestly, our Democratic governor's (Jon Corzine) plan was basically just tax small business really really high, force them to get an insurance policy for everyone who they employ, and then kill everyone else with sales tax, property tax and income tax through the roof. I thought Democrats were against Mr. BigBusinessCEO? Because the only type of business that can survive in this type of environment is just that. Taxes wouldn't be so high though if America wasn't such a welfare and police state. If we cut our funding to other countries and our sporadic wars for a decade, call for more public philanthropy again, and kill programs that kill incentive to work like welfare we'd probably have enough money to end world hunger and pay off half of our international debtors while decreasing taxes. I laughed in my economic studies class when in the late 1800s before the depression of 1893, the government had excess money and there wasn't an income tax.

Just because someone is gay does not make them a sinner. Being a homosexual alone does not make them a sinner. It is carrying out gay activity (i.e. any form of sodomy). I also don't agree with the calling of homosexuals sinners because it seems to single them out. To err is human, I'm not gay but I'm even though I try to be good I know that I'm a pretty bad sinner, but the point of the Good News is the promise of forgiveness and acceptance. After reading this read for a bit and seeing some comments, some less in intelligence to say the least I leave with this: "And then a scholar said, Speak of Talking, And he answered, saying: ...[skip irrelevant section] And in much of your talking, thinking is half murdered."

Well they probably want to keep the Church as a branch of the government so the Church cannot criticize the government or teach its congregations against anything the government doesn't want. the Christian Party probably realizes their theology is being compromised but as long as the government can dictate policy, I don't see why they would give up that power, other then petition en masse.

When you can accomplish practically the same goal with a different name(i.e. let gays be civilly union-ed with all the right of the married, but leave the Church as is), yes, it isn't worth it. It's starting a fire when one can be avoided.

This actually is ideal. Since the church isn't the government it should be the government running the benefits behind it. Let the churches cover the religious factor of it, because that's what they're there for. That's what I originally thought of, but that would be removing the right to legally marry from the Church. Stripping power is kind of unfair. A religious marriage should count as a marriage and as a civil union, not just the religious aspect. Our bishops have already been reduced to not being allowed to speak of the morality of politics on threat of legal action and removal of tax benefits (which would hurt Christian hospitals and parochial schools, and one must admit that Catholics do contribute a lot in medicine and education). But if the church does give their powers away from this, what do they loose? The blessing over married couples would by all probability be counted among Christians as the wedding, and where the marriage is started, before the eyes of God. The only difference would be that you also had to sign a couple of papers at the local courthouse (or where you sign these kind of papers) The official part, just for economy, and registration goes for the government, while the religious part, the ceremony, and the celebration would still be at church (if you are a Christian, that is) To put this in a historical context as well: It wasn't before the 5th century (that's 400-499, right?) that Christian marriage also was counted as official marriage. This was when cæsar Constantin made Christianity the official religion of the roman empire. Normally when you take one step in one direction it doesn't just end with a step... It normally advances with a couple more, this goes for good and bad. As a result of the removal of the legality of their wedding of couples, it might be an excuse to move to further stripe them of something as I stated before. Humans have an inclination to not just take one step in a direction, even if that was their initial intent.

This actually is ideal. Since the church isn't the government it should be the government running the benefits behind it. Let the churches cover the religious factor of it, because that's what they're there for. That's what I originally thought of, but that would be removing the right to legally marry from the Church. Stripping power is kind of unfair. A religious marriage should count as a marriage and as a civil union, not just the religious aspect. Our bishops have already been reduced to not being allowed to speak of the morality of politics on threat of legal action and removal of tax benefits (which would hurt Christian hospitals and parochial schools, and one must admit that Catholics do contribute a lot in medicine and education).

Kids at school think I'm really smart and get really good grades, but I currenly have a C+ in US history AP because I keep putting off reading the material.

Let the gays get unioned. Don't call it marriage with all the same benefits. Have it strictly civil and allow the churches to reserve the right to reject marriages. Is that not a decent enough compromise? The gays get all the legal benefits and the right to join, and to the people with religion they retain their sacrament of matrimony. The only problem I see with this solution is there is always the person who wants more, and I'm sure there would be the gay who sues for discrimination between the nominal difference of a union and a marriage. (not that gays are particularly greedy or something, its just in human nature to say I want that, then once you get it, it isn't that big of a deal.)

[hide] If we all took that approach I doubt the world would ever have advanced. "in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock." Kind of relevant. The point is a definitive stance, even if it would be perceived as negative is more productive and producing then an apathetic stance (i.e. Switzerland just lazying around and making clocks). I don't see it as relevant. He said gays don't conern him, so he's not going to care much or ever do anything about it. Thus "If we all took that approach I doubt the world would ever have advanced." 1) And I'm saying we can't by and be apathetic, otherwise we would never accomplish anything. Even when we make war and suppress people we find new technology to help us do so, as opposed to when we don't make definitive choices we waste time. Everything concerns us. If you believe gays should be married you should help fight for their right. If you believe gays shouldn't be married, you should fight to preserve your definition of marriage. Sitting on the fence is cowardly. 2) As for you saying Christians find gays sinners? The Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church both believe and teach being gay is not a sin (loved by God equally) but partaking in gay activity is a sin, and they are the largest and second largest bodies of Christian Communions, so there goes your theory with thinking gays are automatically sinners. May I ask, do you speak from learning from a Protestant sect, or did you go to a parochial school, or another source or did you read some book? 3) And God doesn't send the Israelites to kill people, that is how they interpreted their relationship between themselves and God. Quite frankly I find some of the Israelite writings a bit pompous. 1) That's exactly what I said :S... 2) I don't think the difference is big enough to matter. So it's okay to be gay so long as I don't fulfill my desires? That's just plain dumb. 3) Umm, what about sending them to wars all over to "win" Israel? What about setting rules to wars (such as- before going to war, first ask your enemy if they'd want to surrender, if they wouldn't go for it!)? God repetitively sent his chosen ones to war. Period. EDIT: By the way, it wasn't Israelis I was talking about, it was Hebrews. [/hide]1. I said that because you said you didn't find it relevant and now you say that's what you said. 2. A lot of morals are about controlling desire. If I want to punch someone in the face and I know I could beat the crap out of them, I would restrain my desire to exact physical revenge, same with stealing, being a douche, etc. Just because you fulfill a desire of lust or anything like that, does not mean it's good. Sometimes we have to do something that doesn't make us happy for the better. 3. Again, those are rules of war made by the Israelites, not God. The Israelites have interpreted God's inspiration like that, but Yahweh is not a god of war. Response to your edit: We aren't discussing Israelis, that's modern day. Israelites are descendants of Israel, i.e. Jacob.