Asking My Readers A Quick Favor Here....Again

Update: New fundraiser here (the last one ended and raised nothing ☹️).  So, #help me #fundraise for @Boogawes to be able to #fund her teacher-certification #education. https://t.co/5JscxZezPv 👩🏽‍🎓🏫📚💵 https://t.co/FS6soKwNn4

— N.V. Mara Czarnecki (@Nickidewbear) August 30, 2018

I Normally Don't Ask For Favors Like This, And...

I'm fundraising for Michelle (whom is pictured) to have enough money to get her teacher's certification. She needs to have the money to pay for the classes, etc.. She majored in Education at UMBC and graduated in 2015, and would like to become a teacher—not to mention be able to spend more time with Camille (whom is also pictured), as her current situation affects how much time she can spend with her.

Please donate if you can. Thanks. PS The donations will go directly to Michelle.

On a Wilkes-Barre High School Debate, Fragmented Computers, and Segregation

I think that Vice President Walker knows what he's saying. Besides, the two schools have clearly worked together in the past (I did my research here.), and consolidating them would just make their working together (among other things) permanent. Also, think about Coughlin-Meyers JSHS like a computer: if you don't want a fragmented computer with too many files in the first place, you don't want what could easily be one school continuing to be two schools. In addition, Vice President Walker (quite literally) is putting the schoolboard's money where his mouth is: for the people whom actually want to have the concept of school choice, he's giving it to them.

As far as segregation, real segregation "is the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age or sex"¹. By the way, I as well know what I'm saying²: any of my ancestors and their relatives who attended Coughlin³ didn't get a choice as to whether they'd be openly of their ethnic group ("race") or open about their religious choices—consolidating schools and giving school choices are as related to bigotedly segregating as defragging and cleaning up computers is: they aren't! Let me know, though, when saving taxpayer money and real-estate space, and giving school choice are related to—for example—being implicitly and explicitly hostile to Jews on ethnic and/or religious grounds, and then we'll talk! 

¹Or ability, though never mind us people with disabilities, again 🙄

²Except apparently about people with disabilities—but hey, what's new? 🙄 Ableism is ingrained into the culture and as old as the Anti Semitism that my ancestors faced—when a third of the angels fell, they were intent as bringing ableism into the to-be-created world as they were to bring Anti Semitism, perhaps especially because they foreknew that many Jews would have disabilities.

³Paradoxically enough, the one who I know attended Coughlin ended up being a busha and a boged—never mind that he was one of the ones given a Yiddish diminutive and a second-generation pogrom survivor whose first-generation-pogrom-survivor mother was closest to him and my other great-granduncle whom she gave a Yiddish diminutive. In his (and the other great-granduncle's) eyes, exploiting another one of my great-granduncles—and probably my great-great-grandma, too—was totally okay!

The Accomplishments Of Gio Managadze, (Self-Proclaimed) UMD Valedictorian Of 2017

Congratulations to Gio Managadze on the following:

1. Proving to be an aspiring D****d Tr**p.
2. Insulting UMD and other UMD University System Students And Alumni (myself included)
3. Aiding and abetting the propagators of the excuse and misconception that sociopathy and narcissism are mental illnesses as opposed to evil and egoism.
4. Aiding and abetting the propagators of the ageist stereotype that Millennials are Me-llennials.
5. Getting your first real legal experience—looking at charges of first-degree criminal libel, theft via embezzlement and misappropriation, fraud, and conspiracy to commit all of the acts thereof—your parents and UMD have every right to press criminal-libel, fraud, and conspiracy charges against you; and your parents charges of theft via embezzlement and misappropriation against you.
6. Getting sued along with getting criminally charged, and having either the lawsuit used against you in Prince George's County Circuit Court or the verdict in "Maryland v. Managadze" used against you in "Managadze, University Of Maryland, et. al. v. Managadze".
7. Finding yourself in Prince George's County Correctional Center sometime down the road, and having a well-known criminal history and record thereof.
8. Ending up as an equivalent of the guy whom berated the Chick-Fil-A^® employee.

You've found yourself, alright—and you've found yourself headed down a path to being a self-made indigent prison inmate and litigatee, and a self-made and infamous loner whom lives a life of torment and misery.

Regarding The "Snowflakes" At Oxford

Some or even many of these researchers are researching what they and/or loved ones have endured, and they are researching to understand more what happened to them & to help others. By the way, would Heat Street mock (for example) Holocaust survivors and the descendants of Holocaust survivors and victims whom needed counseling and/or to leave certain lectures?

Even imagine, for example, a doctoral student whom is attempting to finish the degree that she forcibly had to suspend do to the Nuremberg Laws. While she sits in a lecture about Anti Semitism throughout history, she sees a picture of her twin sister while the pictorial slideshow plays. Given that her sister was among the Mengle Twins whom were murdered, she has flashbacks to when she was one of the twins whom "Dr." Mengle exploited and her twin was murdered shortly thereafter.

Also imagine that she sees a picture of the crematoriums, and flashes back to when her parents were burned alive in the crematoriums (This really did happen to Elie Wiesel's father on January 29, 1945, per "Night": "They must've taken him away before dawn and carried him to the crematory. He may still have been breathing.").

If she is a "snowflake", perhaps she was a cold and icy one whom (figuratively) melted in her own tears (tears that would not come before, since she had held them back).

Who's the "snowflake" now, Heat Street? Who's the cold and icy one now?

How Popular Is One's...

1) Identifying as a Messianic Jew on his or her Facebook profile—not to mention constantly making known his or her Messianic faith on Twitter, Blogger, etc.—especially when his or her ancestors were Anusim?

2) Staying a Christian after he or she has found out that he or she is Jewish, and even because he or she is Jewish—not to mention that saying that b'nei-Anusim who convert to Non-Messianic Judaism have fallen away—and not to mention refusing to make aliyah as a "Non Jew of Jewish descent" and wanting to even make aliyah "illegally" if he or she can?

3) Noting that Psalm 18 (מזמור חי\יח) prophesies Yeshua?

4) Calling out Michael Freund, Benjamin Netanyahu, Agudat Yisra'el and many other Haredim, etc?

5) Wearing tzitiyot techelet that haven't been dyed with chilazon?

6) Citing Da'at Emet and others who know what the Talmud really is?

7) Saying, e.g., "Yeshua, Hu gam l't'chiyah"?

8) Pointing out that HaNeged Mashiach (the One Against the Messiah) will be a Karaite, not a Muslim?



I could go on, but the point is that it's not popular. When my sister even wondered if I would convert to Non-Messianic Judaism ("I never know what's next with you.") just because I thought about going to a mikvah "just because" (since it is a part of my heritage), I asked her "How popular..."?

So, how popular is one's, e.g., identifying as a Messianic Jew publicly, especially when his or her ancestors were Anusim?...

Didn't think so! So, don't ever let anyone tell me that I might convert to Non-Messianic Judaism!

Closing Thought For the Night: Affirmative Action and Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson (Originally To Have Been a Facebook Page Post)

Think about this: Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson, an African-American man of Puerto Rican descent, had to overcome ethnic discrimination (including ethnic stereoptying), for example. Nobody just gave his Ph.D. to him because he was a Black man who'd been presumptuously asked if he wanted to be an athlete.

Why, then, should other Blacks and Hispanics be unfairly favored or unfavored? Dr. Tyson had to work to get where he is today, even though Affirmative Action became part of the law when he was 14 years old. He stated:

"Interestingly, when I applied to Cornell, my application dripped of my passion for the study and research of the Universe. Somehow the admissions office brought my application to the attention of the late Dr. Sagan, and he actually took the initiative and care to contact me. He was very inspirational and a most powerful influence. Dr. Sagan was as great as the universe, an effective mentor." (PBS NOVA, "A Conversation With Neil Tyson")

Before that, "Neil attended the Bronx High School of Science and passionately studied astronomy.  He made a name for himself in the astronomy community by giving lectures at the age of 15." (Parle Magazine, "Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson – The Prodigy Astronomer")

Dr. Sagan didn't look at Neil Tyson because he was Black. He looked at him because he was intelligent, studious, and driven to work hard.

As someone quoted Dr. Martin Luther King here, "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character." And that's what the to-be Dr. Neil deGrasse Tyson was judged by.

My Internet Connection Is Slower Than Me, Though Things Could Be Worse...

But I missed a class by accident today-- which I'll explain on YouTube (See my latest video.). As for my other class today (for a lack of a better term, and without saying "Antimissionary"), Non-Messianic professor who may be very liberal alert!-- although I'm not sure; but I think that a professor who openly wears a kippah, teaches at liberal UMBC (at which I am amazed that I have not been persecuted for watching FOX News on my dorm floor's community television, by the way), and has the following response to what was originally a Blackboard post is certainly Non Messianic and probably very liberal (whereas many or even most Jewish conservatives and moderates usually tread carefully on the outward symbolism, unless they're on the other extreme-- Far Right or even Meir Kahanist-- at least in America. Most Jewish conservative and moderates, for a lack of a better term, play it safe on showing outward religiosity. Think of many Modern Orthodox Jews who one can't tell are Orthodox just by looking at them-- for example, Michael Medved and Dennis Prager, and even Mark Levin).

By the way, most Messianic Jews (including myself) who I've seen usually don't go showing our Yiddishkeit the way that Non-Messianic Jews do when they do-- many or even (I daresay) most Messianic Jews are much like most secular Non-Messianic Jews and Reform Jews, gentile Christians, and others who show (for a lack of a better term) little to no outward religiosity. For comparison; take most secular Non-Messianic Jews and Reform Jews, and mainstream gentile Christians who might have only a bumpsticker on a car or keychain (whether the bumpsticker or keychain be a URJ or JCC sticker, or an Ichthys sticker or keychain), or a necklace (be the necklace a Magen David, cross, or Magen David-and-cross or an other Messianic Jewish-symbol necklace), or a copy of Tanakh (either with or without the Brit Hadashah) in a pocket, purse or other bag, or car.

As for the response on Blackboard:


"I appreciate your passion and the fact that you took time to comment. Please continue to do so throughout the semester.

But please also cut out the polemic language and try to keep your posts as concise as possible. I want the discussion boards to be a friendly place. It's possible to be passionate and opinionated, while also being polite and concise--and doing so will make this forum a lot more effective.

If you have any questions about these guidelines, please speak with me.

Again, I look forward to hearing what you have to say!"

What was apparently "polemic" and not "polite and concise"? I can more than guess. For example:

• ""Like the Bible, it ought to be read again and again". (FDR via Epstein and Walker 1) In my personal opinion, no wonder FDR was an Anti Semite: that is, he treated the Constitution-- a living document-- and the Bible-- a fixed document-- as on the same par: that is, he thought that each was a document into which could read his own interpretation and thus implement said interpretation with the supposed support of said document. As FDR read Anti Semitism into the Bible, many have read their own interpretations into the Constitution."

That FDR was an Anti Semite is known fact. Even liberal Wikipedia cites that FDR did not support a Jewish State in "Palestine".

• "The late Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall correctly stated that "the framers 'could not have imagined, nor would they have accepted, that the document they were drafting would one day be construed be a Supreme Court to which had been appointed a woman the descendant of an African slave.'" (ibid. 6) The Constitution was inherently "'defective from the start'" (ibid.) because of its status as a living, amendable document and scarily framed by WASP Supremacist, Unitarian, and Deist misogynists who treated the Bible in the same way that FDR later would-- and by treating the Bible as such, they framed the Constitution based on their inherently UnJewish and UnChristian concept of (for a lack of a better term) Judeo Christianity (or at least Judeo-Christian priniciples).As in the awful perversion of Biblical study known as modern Biblical scholarship, Constitutional scholarship has produced schools of original intent, textualism, and original meaning-- all three of which (in the case of Constitutional scholarship) harken back to what the framers (often chauvinistically, WASPishly, Unitarianistically, and Deistically wanted); and stare decisis, polling jurisdictionism, and pragmatism-- all three of which seek to interpret and implement the Constitution within the context of changing times and other factors."

Again, the professor wants me change historical fact. The framers indeed (as, of all people, Newt Gingrich once cited in a special based on one of his books for FOX News) were 95% Unitarian and Deist (if not 95% just Unitarian). Also, the 3/5-of-a-person clause and the lack of the 19th Amendment spoke for that  "the framers 'could not have imagined, nor would they have accepted, that the document they were drafting would one day be construed be a Supreme Court to which had been appointed a woman the descendant of an African slave.'" 

I can't change that "The Constitution was inherently "'defective from the start'" (ibid.) because of its status as a living, amendable document and scarily framed by WASP Supremacist, Unitarian, and Deist misogynists who treated the Bible in the same way that FDR later would-- and by treating the Bible as such, they framed the Constitution based on their inherently UnJewish and UnChristian concept of (for a lack of a better term) Judeo Christianity (or at least Judeo-Christian priniciples)." 

Yet, I get a professor who gives much a pass to FDR and the framers of the Constitution as Shmuely Boteach gave to Mohamedians (and in comparison to Christians) on Geraldo Rivera's radio show. He (like Shmuely Boteach) has no problem blatantly implying that he's of the school that says that Jews must be both outwardly religious and proudly Democratic as you can get-- apparently, G-d forbid that one can have a moderate or conservative, factual view of history and try to assimilate as much as possible so as not to bring trouble on him- or her-self or anyone else. I'm just saying, wearing a kippah that openly and being liberal to the point of being revisionist is inviting stereotypes from and wrong rubs toward both fellow Jews and gentiles. 

Two Take-Home Essays For Corrections And a Sidenote

"What is 'corrections'?" is the descrpitive/informative essay. Reflecting on my experience in the Introductions to Corrections class is the obvious reflective essay. The descriptive essay will require some review. The reflective will not. I'm going to be frank about Dr. Traurig and what a macher he is, how I still stand by that Torah was the first lex talions, weirgild, and punishment to fit the crime, etc.. I'm going to tell how I didn't like that, for one matter, his language wasn't that of a doctorate scholar. I'm also going to state that I didn't like how he mocked religious belief, etc..

As for the sidenote: most or all of the views from Columbia, Maryland on my Feedjit feed are mine. I go to Howard Community College for the time being, and the browsers aren't automatically set up (unlike at home) to ignore my own views of my blog.