Showing posts with label Not. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Not. Show all posts
Saturday, November 12, 2016
King Jesus The Messiah Or Not Quite
Today we witness a sad Hebrew tattoo indeed. Not only is our victim apparently a Smurf, but his tat is seriously misspelled too.
This guy wanted "King Jesus the Messiah", and he even managed to get his grammar right. The sentence makes perfect sense... if you manage to decipher it, that is.
Unfortunately, Hebrew letters got our guy confused real bad. I see a Yod turned into apostrophe, a Vav turned into Resh, a Lamed turned into number seven with apostrophe on top (how can that even happen??). Also, all spaces are missing.
It's really quite unreadable if you haven't been clued in first. A very bad, sad, blue Hebrew tattoo.
This is what the guy was going for, "King Jesus the Messiah" in correct Hebrew:
If you want to take it a step further, though, the sentence "Jesus the King Messiah" is a more popular form in Hebrew:
Monday, November 7, 2016
You Shall Not Tattoo For Real
On the website where this picture was originally posted, it was labeled as "Honor thy Father and Mother":
In reality, it says no such thing. This Hebrew tattoo in fact says: "You shall not tattoo", and it's written in Rashi Script of all things - an old Hebrew script used to write comments in religious texts.
Mind, the tattoo was not posted online by the owner, but by someone who just took a picture. It might well have been a novelty tattoo done on purpose, then regretted - leaving the owner lying about what it really says.
If it is genuine, though, and the owner is clueless, then someone really pulled one over on him.
This is why you should be vary of the advice that's often given online - to go consult with the nearest Rabbi about your Hebrew tattoo. I can totally see a pissed off Rabbi giving out this translation.
Right. Now if you actually wanted "Honor thy Father and Mother", it translates to Hebrew like this:
Thursday, November 3, 2016
Only 10 Countries in the Entire World Are Not Currently at War
United States — A troubling report by the Institute for Economics and Peace found a mere ten nations on the planet are not at war and completely free from conflict. According to the Global Peace Index 2016, only Botswana, Chile, Costa Rica, Japan, Mauritius, Panama, Qatar, Switzerland, Uruguay and Vietnam are free from conflict. Iceland tops the list of most peaceful countries in the world, followed by Denmark, Austria, New Zealand, Portugal, Czech Republic, Switzerland, Canada, Japan, and Slovenia — while the United States ranked far lower, at 103. Palestine, placed in the index of 163 nations for the first time this year, ranked 148th.
War-torn Syria placed at the bottom of the list, lower than only South Sudan, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, Central African Republic, Ukraine, Sudan, and Libya.
“The index gauges global peace using three broad themes: the level of safety and security in society; the extent of domestic or international conflict; and the degree of militarisation,” the report states.
Though 81 countries improved their level of peace according to those criteria, those gains were muddied by deteriorating peace in 79 other nations. In the last decade, “the average country score deteriorated by 2.44 per cent with 77 countries improving while 85 countries deteriorated, highlighting the global complexities of peace and its uneven distribution.”
While Central and South America continue to earn the worst marks for societal safety and security, the U.S. represents one of the only exceptions due to its “excessive incarceration rate.”
Overall, Europe held its spot as the most generally peaceful region, while the Middle East and North Africa region (MENA) remains consistently the most tumultuous on the planet.
“The historic 10-year deterioration in peace has largely been driven by the intensifying conflicts in the MENA region,” the report notes. “Terrorism is also at an all-time high, battle deaths from conflict are at a 25-year high, and the number of refugees and displaced people are at a level not seen in 60 years.
“Notably, the sources for these three dynamics are intertwined and driven by a small number of countries, demonstrating the global repercussions of breakdowns in peacefulness.”
According to the report, the United States spends an outrageously high percentage of the globe’s military expenditures — 38 percent — while the next largest military spender, China, accounted for considerably less, 10 percent of the global share. In the score of militarization, the least peaceful countries include Israel, Russia, North Korea, Syria, and the U.S.
Of particular note in this year’s tenth anniversary index — the most comprehensive to date — globalization of conflict, in repercussions such as the growing refugee crisis, is driving a growing disparity between the least and most peaceful nations.
In fact, the “number of refugees and displaced persons increased dramatically over the decade, doubling from 2007 to 2015, to approximately 60 million people. There are nine countries with more than 10 per cent of their population classified as refugees or displaced persons with Somalia and South Sudan having more than 20 per cent of their population displaced and Syria with over 60 per cent displaced.”
While actual terrorist activity most heavily impacts Syria, Iraq, Nigeria, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, its ripples spread worldwide.
“Many countries are at record high levels of peacefulness, while the bottom 20 countries have progressively become much less peaceful, creating increased levels of inequality in global peace,” according to the report.
As the world descends into a far less peaceful state overall, the staggering cost of militarism and violence becomes painfully clear — 13.3 percent of the globe’s total economic activity, $13.6 trillion in purchasing power parity, concerned violent conflict. That’s the equivalent of “$1,876 for every person in the world.”
Working toward peace will require the international community to promote peaceful, just, and inclusive societies, the IEP urged in conclusion, though such goals aren’t expected to be reached quickly or easily.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)