"The more pity, that fools may not speak wisely what wise men do foolishly." I'm Sam, and this is my multifandom blog. Enjoy, or don't, I'm not in charge of you. He/She/They pronouns. Whatever's fine.

 

brolinapproved:

catchaglimpseofalleble:

nikkysclit:

Can you not?

AHG, I fucked this up!

omfg I’ve seen the high school musical post about 15 times and I’ve never understood why it had so many notes. Now I finally understand

brolinapproved:

catchaglimpseofalleble:

nikkysclit:

Can you not?

AHG, I fucked this up!

omfg I’ve seen the high school musical post about 15 times and I’ve never understood why it had so many notes. Now I finally understand

(Source: doctor-in-a-policebox)

thepeoplesrecord:

Hong Kong’s unprecedented protests & police crackdown, explained
September 29, 2014

Protest marches and vigils are fairly common in Hong Kong, but what began on Friday and escalated dramatically on Sunday is unprecedented. Mass acts of civil disobedience were met by a shocking and swift police response, which has led to clashes in the streets and popular outrage so great that analysts can only guess at what will happen next.

What’s going on in Hong Kong right now is a very big deal, and for reasons that go way beyond just this weekend’s protests. Hong Kong’s citizens are protesting to keep their promised democratic rights, which they worry — with good reason — could be taken away by the central Chinese government in Beijing. This moment is a sort of standoff between Hong Kong and China over the city’s future, a confrontation that they have been building toward for almost 20 years.

On Wednesday, student groups led peaceful marches to protest China’s new plan for Hong Kong’s 2017 election, which looked like China reneging on its promise to grant the autonomous region full democracy (see the next section for what that plan was such a big deal). Protest marches are pretty common in Hong Kong so it didn’t seem so unusual at first.

Things started escalating on Friday. Members of a protest group called Occupy Central (Central is the name of Hong Kong’s downtown district) had planned to launch a “civil disobedience” campaign on October 1, a national holiday celebrating communist China’s founding. But as the already-ongoing protesters escalated they decided to go for it now. On Friday, protesters peacefully occupied the forecourt (a courtyard-style open area in front of an office building) of Hong Kong’s city government headquarters along with other downtown areas.

The really important thing is what happened next: Hong Kong’s police cracked down with surprising force, fighting in the streets with protesters and eventually emerging with guns that, while likely filled with rubber bullets, look awfully militaristic. In response, outraged Hong Kong residents flooded into the streets to join the protesters, and on Sunday police blanketed Central with tear gas, which has been seen as a shocking and outrageous escalation. The Chinese central government issued a statement endorsing the police actions, as did Hong Kong’s pro-Beijing chief executive, a tacit signal that Beijing wishes for the protests to be cleared.

You have to remember that this is Hong Kong: an affluent and orderly place that prides itself on its civility and its freedom. Hong Kongers have a bit of a superiority complex when it comes to China, and see themselves as beyond the mainland’s authoritarianism and disorder. But there is also deep, deep anxiety that this could change, that Hong Kong could lose its special status, and this week’s events have hit on those anxieties to their core.

This began in 1997, when the United Kingdom handed over Hong Kong, one of its last imperial possessions, to the Chinese government. Hong Kong had spent over 150 years under British rule; it had become a fabulously wealthy center of commerce and had enjoyed, while not full democracy, far more freedom and democracy than the rest of China. So, as part of the handover, the Chinese government in Beijing promised to let Hong Kong keep its special rights and its autonomy — a deal known as “one country, two systems.”

A big part of that deal was China’s promise that, in 2017, Hong Kong’s citizens would be allowed to democratically elect their top leader for the first time ever. That leader, known as the Hong Kong chief executive, is currently appointed by a pro-Beijing committee. In 2007, the Chinese government reaffirmed its promise to give Hong Kong this right in 2017, which in Hong Kong is referred to as universal suffrage — a sign of how much value people assign to it.

But there have been disturbing signs throughout this year that the central Chinese government might renege on its promise. In July, the Chinese government issued a “white paper” stating that it has “comprehensive jurisdiction” over Hong Kong and that “the high degree of autonomy of [Hong Kong] is not an inherent power, but one that comes solely from the authorization by the central leadership.” It sounded to many like a warning from Beijing that it could dilute or outright revoke Hong Kong’s freedoms, and tens of thousands of Hong Kong’s citizens marched in protest.

Then, in August, Beijing announced its plan for Hong Kong’s 2017 elections. While citizens would be allowed to vote for the chief executive, the candidates for the election would have to be approved by a special committee just like the pro-Beijing committee that currently appoints the chief executive. This lets Beijing hand-pick candidates for the job, which is anti-democratic in itself, but also feels to many in Hong Kong like a first step toward eroding their promised democratic rights.

Full article
Photo 1, 2, 3

hplotrfantasy asked
*hides face* hey fuckface

Aww. Don’t hide your face. You’re wonderful.

mcgaskarth:

Steal his look: Brendon Urie
Versace 24k gold plated waste bin ($88,894.32)

mcgaskarth:

Steal his look: Brendon Urie

Versace 24k gold plated waste bin ($88,894.32)

zemedelphos:

vagabondaesthetics:

thefemaletyrant:


generalbriefing:


So….I totally never thought about this. I’m sure very few of you have. I don’t know about you, but I’m a bit disturbed…


Wow. Food for thought. I’m sure there’s an answer though.


Their names were translated/Anglicized after going from Greek to English.
The names of the Apostles are of Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew origins. The Hebrew, Aramaic and “Greek” named Apostles were:  Shim’on = Simon (Hebrew origin).  Y’hochanan = John (Hebrew origin).  Mattithyahu = Matthew (Hebrew origin).  Ya’aqov = James (Hebrew origin meaning Jacob).  Bar-Tôlmay = Bartholomew (Aramaic, which is related to Hebrew).  Judah = Jude / Saint Jude (not to be confused with Judas Iscariot, Hebrew origin).  Yehuda = Judas Iscariot (Hebrew origin, Betrayed Yeshua/Yehosua the Messiah).  Cephas / Kephas = Peter (Hebrew / Aramaic origin meaning “Rock”).  Tau’ma = Thomas (Aramaic origin).  Andrew = Andrew (Greek origin. Is the brother of Cephas / Kephas).  Phillip = Phillip (Greek origin).  You will note that there are only 11 names, that is because there were 2 Apostles named Ya’aqov (James), which brings the total to 12 apostles.
Link 

To expand on this, Jesus’s name is Anglicized in this way as well. We get Jesus from the Latin form of the Greek “Ἰησοῦς”(Iēsous), which is derived from the Herbrew “ישוע”(Yeshu’a, which meant “YHWH is Salvaion”, YHWH, or Yahweh being the name of God). When another form of that name, ” יְהוֹשֻׁעַ”(Yeoshu’a) was allowed to Anglicize through a different set of corruptions, it entered the English Language through Reformist Protestants as the name “Joshua”.Yes. Jesus’s actual name is Joshua.

zemedelphos:

vagabondaesthetics:

thefemaletyrant:

generalbriefing:

So….I totally never thought about this. I’m sure very few of you have. I don’t know about you, but I’m a bit disturbed…

Wow. Food for thought. I’m sure there’s an answer though.

Their names were translated/Anglicized after going from Greek to English.

The names of the Apostles are of Greek, Aramaic and Hebrew origins. The Hebrew, Aramaic and “Greek” named Apostles were:

Shim’on = Simon (Hebrew origin).

Y’hochanan = John (Hebrew origin).

Mattithyahu = Matthew (Hebrew origin).

Ya’aqov = James (Hebrew origin meaning Jacob).

Bar-Tôlmay = Bartholomew (Aramaic, which is related to Hebrew).

Judah = Jude / Saint Jude (not to be confused with Judas Iscariot, Hebrew origin).

Yehuda = Judas Iscariot (Hebrew origin, Betrayed Yeshua/Yehosua the Messiah).

Cephas / Kephas = Peter (Hebrew / Aramaic origin meaning “Rock”).

Tau’ma = Thomas (Aramaic origin).

Andrew = Andrew (Greek origin. Is the brother of Cephas / Kephas).

Phillip = Phillip (Greek origin).

You will note that there are only 11 names, that is because there were 2 Apostles named Ya’aqov (James), which brings the total to 12 apostles.

Link 

To expand on this, Jesus’s name is Anglicized in this way as well. We get Jesus from the Latin form of the Greek “Ἰησοῦς”(Iēsous), which is derived from the Herbrew “ישוע”(Yeshu’a, which meant “YHWH is Salvaion”, YHWH, or Yahweh being the name of God). When another form of that name, ” יְהוֹשֻׁעַ”(Yeoshu’a) was allowed to Anglicize through a different set of corruptions, it entered the English Language through Reformist Protestants as the name “Joshua”.

Yes. Jesus’s actual name is Joshua.

(Source: stfueverything)