Monday, June 25, 2012

SOS

I have been finally forced to leave my humble abode for the last year and a half due to some expected familial problems that have exacerbated lately. I am still in San Antonio but seeking lodgings and a roommate until I can get myself into dental school. Contributions through my tip jar would be kindly appreciated as I am in dire need for any assistance I can get. Z

92 comments:

Anonymous said...

This might actually be my blessing in disguise as I can no longer take their abuse. This morning's episode was the straw that broke my camel's back.

Petes said...

Zeyad, I truly hope it works out for the best. Will lob something in the tip jar later today.

Petes said...

Winging its way now.

Look after yourself. Things will work out.

I'll say a rosary. (I know you don't care, but it'll annoy Lee C ;-)

Petes said...

Actually, seems a bit quiet in here today. ;-)

C'mon folks, your host has been educating you for free for ten years. Time for a modicum of quid pro quo.

:-)

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

I am awaiting a sign.

(No, not one from heaven.:) )

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

More like a lifesign...

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Okay, got it.

Zeyad,

I hope it all works out for you. Living with family can be tough, maybe this will work out better, as you said.

You've been a good host all this time as PeteS said, and you don't ask for much from us. It's the least I can do. :)

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

It seems Morsi is saying all the right things. I hope it bodes well and isn't just a smoke screen. What is rather interesting, though, is that the Egyptian court has overturned the law allowing the military and intelligence services to arrest people without a warrant. Incremental steps, perhaps, to something decent?

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Meanwhile, in Syria things are looking more serious.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Turkey to Help Liberate Syrians from Dictatorship

(Purloined from a reliable source. :) )

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Guess we'll have to wait for Zeyad to get back. Since nobody else seems to want to say anything I'll post another link to an interesting story out of Texas. Rather sad.

Giancarlo said...

Un caloroso saluto...ciao

Petes said...

Yes,Lynnette, it's quite interesting the way this place is suddenly so deserted the first time Zeyad ever made an explicit call for help. Usually there's quite a few people with plenty to say.

Petes said...

Lynnette, your "Texas" video links takes me to:

"Denmark goalkeeping legend Peter Schmeichel gives his thoughts on the Spain/Portugal Euro 2012 semifinal."

Yes it was very sad for Portugal to lose on penalties, but I'm not quite seeing the Texas connection.

:-)

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Really? When I click on it, I get this:

http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_t2#/video/bestoftv/2012/06/27/exp-eb-texas-racial-tensions.cnn

Hmmm...try copy and pasting it.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Yes,Lynnette, it's quite interesting the way this place is suddenly so deserted the first time Zeyad ever made an explicit call for help.

Oh, the contribution thing? Well, maybe they contributed but just don't want to mention it. Only Zeyad knows for sure. :)

(Had to correct some poor phrasing.)

Marcus said...

Pete:

"C'mon folks, your host has been educating you for free for ten years. Time for a modicum of quid pro quo."

and:

"it's quite interesting the way this place is suddenly so deserted the first time Zeyad ever made an explicit call for help."

Oh come on and get over yourself why don't you? People donate to charity or good causes because they themselves want to, if they want to, and if they feel they can do so. They sure as hell don't want someone to tell them they should. If it was mandatory Zeyad should have had a fee attached to a login to his blog. But he doesn't, and he never said it was time for anyone to pay up - you did - he asked for contributions from the willing.

For the record I've been away on work related errands and I haven't had time to read this blog. I might be pitching in but in that case it'll be a donation to Zeyad from me and I won't advertise it to ya'll and I sure as hell won't tell anyone else what they should do, because that's not my business in the least.

Marcus said...

Zeyad: "This morning's episode was the straw that broke my camel's back."

I for one would be interested in hearing about that, if it isn't too personal for you to talk about. If it is, then I hope it will indeeed turn out to be a blessing in disguise.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound
      a trumpet before thee….
"
      Mathew, 6:2, KJV

   Lee C.  ―  U.S.A.    said...

 
Today's entry:  Re American politics:

The EU (in the form of the ‘European Council’) has agreed to further bail-out funds, and, especially to allowing struggling banks to be re-capitalized directly from central bailout funds, bypassing their own, sometimes shakey governments' guarantees.  The Germans appear to be loosening up a little bit in the face of probable further bank failures if they don't loosen up some.

It may not look like it, but, ‘yeah’, this is a big deal in American politics.  The American stock exchanges had a really good day.  And, it probably puts off a day of reckoning in Europe until after the November elections.  Obama had to hoping for that, more bad economic news was way bad for his campaign and way good for Romney's campaign.
So, one suspects Romney is as much not pleased with the news as Obama is pleased.
Burns and Haberman

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
Today's entry re:  American politics:

The conventional wisdom is coming together regarding the political effect of Thursday's Supreme Court ruling to the effect that ‘ObamaCare’ is constitutionally permissible.  The CW is that Obama dodged a bullet; it would have been generally bad for him to have been perceived as having spent his political capital on an unconstitutional law.  But, that the ruling is bad for Democrats in general.  It fires up the Republican base, and Democratic congressional candidates are going to be subject to attack for voting to pass an uppopular law, or to keep the law, as Republicans are going to renew their pledge and rallying cry to ‘repeal ObamaCare’.  Politico.com
(I don't actually subscribe to the conventional wisdom myself, but that's what most analysts seem to be concluding.)

Zeyad said...

Marcus, I told bits and pieces of it in one of the comments threads a few posts down. Suffice to say that they kicked me when I was down and abandoned me when I needed them post. They perceived my kindness towards them as weakness and they preyed on it, particularly my 'father' who because of spending most of his time at home (can't find a job modtly because he only wants an office job) contracted some kind of cabin fever and turned his own rage and sense of inadequacy on me and that translated into daily verbal attacks and veiled insults (including insulting my manhood) and lately violent physical attacks. I brought them here mainly because I wanted a better life for them but because they isolated themselves and limited their interactions to only a few family members here they turned more traditional, conservative and superstitious (which was the most unexpected for me because they were considered westernized and liberal in Iraq) and now they are even scorned by the community here. They spend most of their day watching Arabic channels and skyping with their few friends back in Jordan and bemoaning the American way of life. They only go out for shopping and when I try to encourage them to go out and mingle they say they are not good enough or are too old or their English isn't perfect (they never considered doing anything about these perceived problems either like exercising, overcoming shyness, taking classes). To make things short I somehow ended up being their punching bag being accused of all kinds of things like being a kafir, atheist, Possessed by Satan, drug addict, homosexual, loser, crazy, etc. when they calm down they claim that they only say these things out of anger and because they actually care about me (hey our parents were like that too ad look at how we turned out alright). It culminated in a violent physical attack by my father earlier this week threatening to kill me (i kept telling him I was going to call 911 which only added to his rage and made him grab my phone and slam it into a wall). He told me to pick up my stuff and leave and never come back adding "i wish worms will eat your rotten corpse". I left and havent looked back since. I am in debt because of their actions and i almost killed myself a couple of months ago because i was in huge emotional pain because of their change and insults towards me. I spent two weeks in the hospital, leaving the house in handcuffs ( they called the police on me). They never visited me there or let anyone visit even though everyone was asking what happened to me. They were more concerned anout their 'tarnished image' in front of the rest of the tribe rather than my actual physical and emotional wellbeing. I was a disgrace to them and no matter how i try to make them understand that they drove me to suicide and made me almost lose my job they keep saying im losing my mind or im doing drugs of which both accusations are false (at the hospital they advised me to move out but i made the mistake of returning home mostly at their behest because they wanted to keep an eye on me). Next day i was out of the hospital my younger brother threatened to 'drag my body in the streets' because i accidentally woke him up from hi sleep after he got home from work late at night and he was trying to physically attack me. I am still very overwhelmed by their actions and trying to make sense of what went wrong or why i somehow ended up as a problem for them and why they think its normal to physically and verbally attack me day after day just because they perceive I have a drug problem. They need psychiatric help but they wont admit it. Somehow Im the one who needs help in their minds because i am 'destroying their reputation'

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

   
And, back to the Middle East.
Something I didn't know until today.  The exile Hamas leader, one Khaled Mashaal, who used to keep his headquarters in Damascus, Syria, has moved his operations to Qatar.  Apparently, he did this early this year after the demonstrations against Assad broke out.  (Even Wiki about this.)  Hamas, of course, is associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, which is a Sunni sect based organization, and the Hamas/Iranian alliance was always a marriage of convenience.  More evidence I suppose that the sectarian schisms and sectarian politics will likely dominate a post-Assad Syria.  (Or, even a continued Assad dominated Syria, should Assad somehow survive this.)

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      Zeyad @ 8:08 AM

Whoaaa.  Ya know, I think that if I'd refreshed the page first (I'd kept it open while I was typing that last post of mine)…  If I'd have refreshed the page first and seen that post I don't think I'd have bothered to make that 8:15 am posting of mine.  Seems kinda callous to just drop that in so casually after the 8:08 post.
I hardly know what to say.

Maybe I can say this:  I know something of serious alienation from ones parents.  My situation couldn't have been as bad as yours; I'm not even gonna try to match that; but, without getting into detail, it did get ugly; it did get physical, and I was shocked.  (And me bein’ a pot smoker at the time didn't make them any happier than your parents seem to be.)  Anyway, end of preamble…
It'll get better.  It wears off to a large extent; you learn to adjust.  Hang in there.  Lots of people think very highly of you.  That your parents can't see the good in you isn't the end of the world, although it always hurts.  But it will get better.  Hang in there ‘til it does.

Marcus said...

Zeyad, I can totally see that you needed to distance yourself from that situation ASAP. I never had any similar experiences with family but I think I can say I would not handle it well if something like that happened to me. I can take it if I get what's coming to me, if it was my bad to begin with or if I was at least partly to blame. But being accused of things I didn't do or mistreated when I did nothing wrong - that's something I would totally blow up over. It must feel awful for you. Here's hoping your situation improves, and soon.

My advise would be to think about what's good for you now. Let those family members sort their own problems out and focus on your own well being. Think about what you would like to achieve (home, job, friends, woman, etc.) and try to make a plan for getting there. Then once you feel you are in a happy place (and I'm sure you'll get there), maybe you can gradually reunite with your family from a position of strength, or not if that's how you feel at that time.

Marcus said...

And if you feel you need therapy you've got this comment section with a few folks around who always have an opinion on anything. ;)

Zeyad said...

Marcus that's what drove me to despair: how so unfair it all is and how, coming from the closest people in your life, you can't possibly do anything but to sit there and take it. Even when it got physical I never considered seeking help from law enforcement against them because in our culture that would have been s bigger disgrace to turn to the government against your family than being actually beatrn up or threatened by them, and I would end up being an outcast in my community. They don't seem to understand either that they live in a country where there is rule of law and that you dont threaten a person or physically attack them and take ir for granted that they would do nothing about it just out of respecting 'tradition'. Every time i think about what happened i lose a little bit of self esteem for allowing it to happen to me just because somehow its supposed to be that way. I have flashbacks of incidents from my childhood that ive ling forgotten about like being violently beat up for waking up my dad from his nap or an incident where they dragged me to the stove and threatening to burn my tongue for saying a bad word, etc.

JG said...

[Marcus] Oh come on and get over yourself why don't you?

I might be pitching in but in that case it'll be a donation to Zeyad from me and I won't advertise it to ya'll and I sure as hell won't tell anyone else what they should do, because that's not my business in the least.


Hear hear.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

   
      "Every time i think about what happened i lose a
      little bit of self esteem for allowing it to happen to me…
"

Man, you gotta let go of that one.  Look, the reason athletes practice, the reason soldiers and cops and paramedics and (even emergency room doctors to some extent) train and practice their moves over and over and over again is so that they don't have to think things through under pressure.  They simply react.  There's even a thing called muscle memory where ones body makes the moves one has repeatedly practiced, without any conscious thought going on in ones head.  By the time ya think of the move you've been taught to make, your body's already made the move, and you're halfway through it already.
You've got years of practice in the old ways (you kinda lay out the ‘incidents from…childhood, fairly clearly).
You just don't have enough practice in the new ways you want.  This is not a personal failing, not an indication of some of character flaw.  It's just a matter of not having enough practice yet at being who you want to be, not enough practice yet.  And hit with the crap before you'd gotten enough practice.
That's all that is.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "…I never considered seeking help from law enforce-
      ment…; I would end up being an outcast in my
      community.
"

And, that may very well have been a wise decision, in my perhaps none to humble opinion.  But, I don't see any need to second guess that one either.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

*hugs Zeyad*

Never think that anything your family did to you was in any way your fault. That's classic victim thinking. Don't do it.

I well remember Abbas talking about his relationship with his father and having to deal with some of the same type of abuse. It apparently is not unusual.

The best thing is to get away from it and look to things that make you happy, like Marcus said. There are so many things in this country to enjoy, without breaking the bank. Just sitting on a pleasant summer's evening enjoying a good book, or fireworks, or good conversation is wonderfully relaxing. (Too many vodka shooters may leave you feeling rather sick the next day though. ;))

Btw, you should ask your father if he feels so responsible for you if he feels just as responsible for your hospital bills?

Even when it got physical I never considered seeking help from law enforcement against them because in our culture that would have been s bigger disgrace to turn to the government against your family than being actually beatrn up or threatened by them, and I would end up being an outcast in my community.

But that was in the Middle East where the government can be far worse than family. Here we tend to be more open, and if we have problems, we call someone.

Suicide? Honey, that's never a good answer. I had a friend who tried that. Fortunately she is doing quite well now. She is the one I go with to the plays.

And Marcus is right, you can always talk to us. We have all the answers, you know... ;)

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Marcus,

I won't advertise it to ya'll

I have to admit I had an inordinate amount of fun watching Suz(annoying as she was) flapping around in the comments section when Zeyad was trying to get Nabil (the ungrateful little beast) out of Iraq. It was none of her business if I had sent anything or not. And Zeyad apparently never told her. I always considered it a private joke between him and I.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Lee,

The conventional wisdom is coming together regarding the political effect of Thursday's Supreme Court ruling to the effect that ‘ObamaCare’ is constitutionally permissible.

I have been meaning to leave you a comment regarding that. I was very pleased about how John Roberts handled that whole thing. That was one of the things people were concerned about with the Supreme Court going more "conservative" after the Bush appointments. But Roberts seemed to stay true to the law rather than the party line. In short he did his job, and tried to be fair in his judgement. Wait, there was a good opinion piece in the Star Tribune...Here it is.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "But Roberts seemed to stay true to the law rather
      than the party line.
"

I don't think so.  This is a bit beyond my expertise, but, couple of years' ago one of the major news outlets did a survey of 21 major constitutional scholars, conservatives across the spectrum to liberals, 21 so they'd not get a tie verdict.  19 out of the 21 said it was no contest, not even close, under well settled precedents, ObamaCare was constitutional under the Commerce Clause.  The ‘unconstitutional’ argument was first ginned up by the Heritage foundation (ironically, the very same conservative think tank that originally come up with the ‘mandate’ itself as the conservative alternative to a single payer system).  In the past couple of years there's been an intentional drumbeat among conservatives to sell the notion that what they'd once championed as a conservative idea was instead an unconstitutional overreach by the left.  And, let's face it, some of the questions posed from the bench by Scalia were straight out of the Cato Institute and Heritage Foundation political talking points.  Pretty much both sides, conservative as well as liberal scholars, think that Roberts flipped sides at the last minute, and there's good evidence in the opinions to support that notion.
(By the way, your article doesn't notice that Robers said it wasn't a tax in the part of the opinion where he dodged the Anti-Injunction Act, which prohibits decisions on the constitutionality of a tax before the tax is paid, then he switched to saying it was a tax when he decided it could be upheld under the congressional taxing power.  So, he manage to be simultaniously on both sides of that question.)
You might want to look at this article (from a very conservative writer I might point out).
One thing is clearly true--once Roberts had decided that the law was constitutional under the taxing power, it was completely unnecessary to rule against it on the Commerce Clause.  One way in is enough, so he was going out of his way to slap back the congress on the Commerce Clause.  That's not ‘judicial restraint’; that's activism of the first order.  (And, I count myself among those who think that previous Supreme Court decisions have overextended the scope of the Commerce Clause; I'm glad to see some limits imposed, but this is cheating; I'd much rather see the limits imposed by a Court actually playing by the rules.)

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
(I trust Zeyad will forgive me that somewhat long-winded and off-topic spiel on American Constitutional Law.)

Marcus said...

Zeyad, I'll go back and comment on some of the stuff you revieled to us:

"They perceived my kindness towards them as weakness and they preyed on it"

That's a nasty kind of reaction but not that uncommon among those who are not content with their own situation.

"particularly my 'father' who because of spending most of his time at home (can't find a job modtly because he only wants an office job) contracted some kind of cabin fever and turned his own rage and sense of inadequacy on me"

Again, deplorable but not uncommon. I think you've got it nailed down with him suffering a "sense of inadequacy". And the fact that he is picky about employment opportunities at this point is something he will have to get over. HE will have to get over it, it's not something you can do anything about, because reasoning doesn't help. In a situation like that you will do both him and you a favour by taking your hand off him, refuse to help out, refuse to take any crap, just leave, and in the end he'll be forced to do something about it himself. Then his self esteem might return and your relatonship might get a fresh start.

"translated into daily verbal attacks and veiled insults (including insulting my manhood) and lately violent physical attacks."

You should feel no guilt for leaving then. That crap is just unacceptable, there's no other way to put it. Unacceptable.

"I brought them here mainly because I wanted a better life for them but because they isolated themselves and limited their interactions to only a few family members here they turned more traditional, conservative and superstitious (which was the most unexpected for me because they were considered westernized and liberal in Iraq)"

They pinned their hopes to your example and when it turned out it wasn't that easy they blamed you. That's unfair in every way. Then instead of struggling to move forward in life they backtracked to familiar institutions and habits.

"I somehow ended up being their punching bag being accused of all kinds of things like being a kafir, atheist, Possessed by Satan, drug addict, homosexual, loser, crazy, etc."

It seems you've decided that you won't put up with that. I can only say good on you. You shouldn't have to put up with that, not even a fraction of it.

"when they calm down they claim that they only say these things out of anger and because they actually care about me"

I'm sure they do too. But they have issues that make them lash out at you. And now they're dragging you down with them so it's time for you to look out for number one.

"He told me to pick up my stuff and leave and never come back adding "i wish worms will eat your rotten corpse"."

He'll regret that in time I'm sure. But it's not for you to reach out to him, you were the wronged one here.

Marcus said...

"I am in debt because of their actions and i almost killed myself a couple of months ago because i was in huge emotional pain because of their change and insults towards me."

Don't even contemplate ending your life. Debts can be repaid, pain will subside. You're fairly young, you live now in a country where anyone can make their own future, and you're an intelligent person with a lot going for you. I realise it's not easy right now but you'll find your place eventually, and life will be wonderful again.

"They were more concerned anout their 'tarnished image' in front of the rest of the tribe rather than my actual physical and emotional wellbeing."

Well, screw the tribe then, and focus on what's good for Zeyad.

"I am still very overwhelmed by their actions and trying to make sense of what went wrong or why i somehow ended up as a problem for them"

The only explanation I can come up with is despair on their parts and a feeling of inadequacy combined with a lack of belonging. When they see you going for more they feel jealous and hostile because of their own shortcomings, and you get picked as the outlet for their negative emotions.

"Somehow Im the one who needs help in their minds because i am 'destroying their reputation'"

That's just complete bullshit and you need to never doubt that it is. What they need to do is get their act together and try to improve ther lot in this new life. When they see you doing that they should be supportive. But they feel unable to do it themselves so they instinctively want to drag you down to their level of despair. Don't ever let them.

Marcus said...

@Zeyad, my thoughts about your follow up comment:

"Marcus that's what drove me to despair: how so unfair it all is and how, coming from the closest people in your life, you can't possibly do anything but to sit there and take it."

You can leave and refuse to take it any more. You seem to have done that now and I think you did just the right thing there.

"Even when it got physical I never considered seeking help from law enforcement against them because in our culture that would have been s bigger disgrace to turn to the government against your family than being actually beatrn up or threatened by them, and I would end up being an outcast in my community."

I probably would have reacted the same, but for different reasons maybe. No way I'd call the law on my family. But it'd be becuse mmy feelings for them, not for some larger community which I wouldn't give a crap about (then, if I lived in a tight knit community in a foreign country maybe I'd feell different). All I say is I understand you - you don't call the cops on family.

"Every time i think about what happened i lose a little bit of self esteem for allowing it to happen to me just because somehow its supposed to be that way."

No no no. Zeyad, don't lose self esteeem over something you had no control over. It's NOT supposed to be that way, and you couldn't have anticipated it would come to this.

"I have flashbacks of incidents from my childhood that ive ling forgotten about like being violently beat up for waking up my dad from his nap or an incident where they dragged me to the stove and threatening to burn my tongue for saying a bad word, etc."

It's not supposed to be like that either. And it can never be justified with "culture" or habits. It's just wrong.

Petes said...

[Marcus]: "Oh come on and get over yourself why don't you?"

[Troll]: "Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee…." Mathew, 6:2, KJV

[JG$]: "Hear hear"

LOL. Well I'm glad we are all at ease with our consciences, then. Hope I didn't rankle too much. Oh no wait ... I don't care :-)

Oh, and could we please stick to decent reputable translations of the bible, and not that oul' Protestant shite? If it has to be the Steel Rods, at least make it an interesting version.

JG said...

Lynnette,

Thought this was funny, from your neck of the woods.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/minnesota-gay-community-appologizes-for-ruining-ho

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
If I may be allowed another aside on the subject of American politics…
As of almost 6:00 pm on Saturday now, Mitt Romney's campaign website www.mittromney.com, on its Courts & The Constitution page, still says that:

      "As president, Mitt will nominate judges in the mold
      of Chief Justice Roberts…
."
      (bolding by the Romney campaign)

Gotta wonder why that's still up there, and how long it'll stay up.  The website goes on to praise Scalia, Thomas and Alito as well, but they do not get mentioned in boldfaced type.

             ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
So, Marcus, you decided to give it a point-by-point.  You're braver than I.
But, I don't see a lot there that I would substantially argue with.   I mght add something though.  You mentioned the following:

      "Then his self esteem might return and your
      relatonship might get a fresh start.
"

That may happen sometime down the line.
I'm generally loath to mention my personal details online, perhaps a personal quirk of mine, but I did say before that I'd had a fairly nasty falling out with my father (and I supose I'll go the next step and admit that it came to a fistfight outside the house, his house from that moment on, various other unpleasantries to go along with that).  He was wrong, and I was in the right--I believe that still to this day--still was an emotional hurt.  But, there's a thing that goes along with that:

      "It is a weakness of human nature to hate those
      whom one has wronged.
"
      Publius Cornelius Tacitus

It may be unlikely that Zeyad's father will be ever be able to bridge the gap.  In my case, I had to forgive first, never quite forgot, but managed to forgive, to put it the hurt and the anger away.  And, before I did that I had get myself in better place   I think that if Zeyad is ever to forgive his family, he will have to take care of himself first.  Get his own life going right.  Worry ‘bout forgiveness later.  May come a time for that, but that'll come easier if Zeyad's life is working better.  So, that's the first thing to concentrate upon.  The rest depends on that.  So, it's not selfishness to take care of himself first, considering the situation.  That's the first thing needs done; the rest depends on that coming first.
 
 
             ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
      "…not that oul' Protestant shite? If it has to be the
      Steel Rods, at least make it an interesting version.
"

If you insist.

      "Therefore, when you give alms, do not choose to
      sound a trumpet before you…
"
      Catholic Public Domain Version

For all the good that did ya.

Petes said...

LOL. From the Intro to the Catholic Public Domain Version of the bible:

"Having a Bible version controlled by the Holy See would be a significant advantage over the current situation, where the liberal USCCB controls the NAB version, and Protestant groups control numerous other versions (even the RSV Catholic Edition), and secular for-profit corporations own the copyright on the Jerusalem and New Jerusalem Bibles.

But the Church is about to pass through a time of great suffering. And the City of the Vatican will be destroyed in July of 2013. So it may be some time before the Holy See has Bible versions in various languages over which it has the primary responsibility for editing and maintaining.


by Ronald L. Conte Jr.
January 17, 2006


Perhaps it's an attempt at Good News according to the resident troll -- we're going to survive the Mayan apocalypse in December 2012. LOL.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
You want the NAB?  We can do that too.

      "When you give alms, do not blow a trumpet
      before you…

      NAB

Think you're gainin’ ground, do ya?  (Puts me in mind of his fussin’ during the ‘red giants’ argument he kept up.)

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "And the City of the Vatican will be destroyed in
      July of 2013.
"

Actually, that does sound ‘interesting’, to understate the case a bit.  That was the criteria wasn't it?

JG said...

Belief in sky gods, oh brother.

Petes said...

Zeyad, life isn't fair. One of its few certainties is that people will disappoint you from time to time. Life isn't all about self esteem either. One of its little ironies is that people who dwell too much on it beat themselves up the most. People who are too comfortable with themselves, on the other hand, may lack compassion (or be insufferable prats). Aim for somewhere in the middle.

Your family isn't perfect and neither are you. You have the objectivity to know that on this occasion you are the one who's been wronged. That is a blessing in itself. Nevertheless you're going to feel like shit for while. There's nothing you can do about it. Don't bother telling yourself you don't care about them -- it'll only hurt you in the long run.

If one day you are reconciled with your family, you'll probably have to make most of the effort (as the troll has rightly said, for once). That's another of life's unfairnesses. Yet another is that you won't be properly at peace with yourself if you are never reconciled with your parents, no matter how shitty they've been. (Trust me on this). But there is lots of time. Find your own way first. (Another of life's cruel jokes is that one day you'll realise you're turning into your father. Don't panic. You've got his genes and perhaps a few of his foibles. Your mind is your own).

Finally, for an unbiased opinion you need look no further than the folks here who, though they will never agree on much else, know you to be a thoughtful, compassionate, insightful, hardworking, intelligent human being. Life has its disappointments, but also its rewards. You've already made your mark on the world. Hang in there. There are more and better episodes to come.

Petes said...

And now, Zeyad, you'll forgive me while I attend to the trolls...

[Troll 1]: "Think you're gainin’ ground, do ya?"

It's not always about gainin' ground. Sometimes it's just about yankin' your chain.

"Actually, that does sound ‘interesting’, to understate the case a bit. That was the criteria wasn't it?"

Not sure havin' a nutcase progenitor makes the work more interesting. Btw, the singular of criteria is criterion. Just so y'all know.

[Troll 2]: "Belief in sky gods, oh brother."

Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but "sky gods", "sky fairies", "bronze age gods" etc. are such emblems of the Hitchens-Harris-Dawkins-Dennett axis of idiocy that I can't bring myself to credit their imitators with the ability to string two sensible thoughts of their own together. So you'll forgive me if I give that one a big "whatever".

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "Sometimes it's just about yankin' your chain.  ***
      Btw, the singular of criteria is criterion
"

He spends so much time and effort tryin’ to convince people that I am the one trollin’ him.  And then he just ‘fesses up every now and again.

Zeyad said...

Six years and I still don't know much about the laws here because they make them too complicated. I dont have health insurance but should I be forced to pay a 4000 dollar hospital and EMS bill for having an order of protective services which I had no say in the matter? They wanted to keep me under observation for two weeks even thoigh I protested that it was my family who called the police on me and was taken there. They found nothing physically or mentally wrong with me and all drug and alcohol tests came negative but they still kept me and did a shitload of tests on me including MRI so why do I have to pay for it and what happens if I refuse? (theyvalready started charging me a 100 a month through the Carelink program which Im a member of.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "theyv already started charging me a 100 a month
      through the Carelink program which Im a member of.
"

I believe you may have already discovered what happens if you refuse to pay.  Did you sign something agreeing to that, or did they figure out a way to just tap in to it?  (The hospital will, of course, happily send out a bill to anybody they think can be imposed upon to pay it.  Could be that if you'd refused to pay they might have charged it to the county court or city court or whomever issued the ‘order’ for protective custody.  I really don't know; these laws vary a lot from state to state.)
I also seem to recall that Bridget was telling us once that Texas was an extremely ‘debtor friendly’ state, meaning that there wasn't a hell of a lot they could do to you if you refused to pay a bill.  Maybe she'd know more about how such charges can be handled?  (Or maybe even ignored).
Something I'd be more worried about if I were in your position, do you already have permanent residency status in The States here, or do you have to have your residency status renewed occasionally?  Can unpaid debts affect that?  Check your local phone book or with a local lawyer to see if there's a ‘legal aid’ society in your neck of the woods that might advise you on this.  

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "Check your local phone book or with a local
      lawyer to see if there's a ‘legal aid’ society in your
      neck of the woods that might advise you on this.
"

I had another thought.  Check the phone book for your local ‘bar association’ (that'd be a lawyer's association not drinking places).  They should know if there's a legal aid society locally that can give you good advice on this.

Petes said...

[Troll]: "He spends so much time and effort tryin’ to convince people that I am the one trollin’ him. And then he just ‘fesses up every now and again."

Ah, but sometimes trollery is the most effective form of counter-trollery.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "Ah, but sometimes trollery is the most effective form
      of counter-trollery.
"

Yeah, right, like that was your motive.  Like you were countering anything back there.

It did strike me after I posted that observation (at 8:28 PM) that you have again managed to turn the thread to a discussion that's about you.  Always all about you for you.
I mentioned earlier the role that ‘practice’ often plays in developing a pattern of response.  I have way too much practice at letting you get away with that.  Having had time to consider it further, we're not going to go that route in this thread.  Got something more important as the subject matter.  I ain't gonna cooperate further with you hijacking the thread this time.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Zeyad,

I googled Care Link and came up with this info. If this is the same program, it's in San Antonio, then you should have been able to refuse care. You may want to contact them to enquire about your rights to dispute a claim.

I will see if I can contact Bridget, who may have some ideas.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Zeyad,

Okay, I sent an email to Bridget, but it's an old address, so I don't know if it's still working.

Just FYI, $4,000 for a hospital and EMS bill is actually reasonable comparativley speaking. I have health insurance through my employer, it is a high deductable plan. A high deductable plan has lower premiums, but the catch is that you have to pay up front a set amount of money before the insurance actually kicks in. In my case, for single coverage, the deductable is $3,000. For those with family coverage it is $6,000. Needless to say the people I work with who are married aren't really that thrilled with it.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

JG,

lol! Nothing like pointing out a person's hypocrisy.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Zeyad,

Forgot, I just wanted to emphasize what Lee said about your status here. Make sure that whatever you decide to do, it doesn't interfere with your ability to stay.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "You may want to contact them to enquire about
      your rights to dispute a claim.
"

She got me to thinking with that line…  Insurance companies almost never pay the full bill.  They pay an agreed upon portion of it, 70-80% maybe.  (I ‘think’ that's a fair guess for what's standard.).  The only people who usually pay full price are people who are not insured.  (Doesn't sound ‘fair’ does it?  It's true nonetheless.)  And, people who know that the insurance companies don't pay full price, they can often negotiate to knock down the bill some to standard insurance company rates.  (Your luck with this will vary, of course, depending on how good a negotiator you are, how hard-assed they are, and how willing you are to push back against the system--maybe not something you've practiced in your life, at least, not yet.)
You might get on the internet and find out what Medicare and Medicaid pay for the services you've been billed for.  That'll probably improve your negotiating position, and probably make you a little more confident in yourself when you go back to their billing department and tell them it's time to negotiate and knock down the bill somewhat.

Petes said...

[Troll]: "It did strike me after I posted that observation (at 8:28 PM) that you have again managed to turn the thread to a discussion that's about you. Always all about you for you."

LOL. What a pathetic troll. So you wouldn't have considered your comment of 7:22 PM at all trollsome. Or any of the other trollish comments you regularly litter the place with?

"Got something more important as the subject matter. I ain't gonna cooperate further with you hijacking the thread this time."

I guess you mean your regular unsolicited pronouncements on American politics. Yeah, I guess a troll's own material is always the most important to him. Ain't kiddin' anyone else. However, if I thought you'd reciprocate by shuttin' the hell up I'd still be happy to ignore y'all.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Lee,

I read your link. I would not consider myself an expert in the law. I leave that to those much smarter than I. What I am finding interesting is the scramble by many to understand Justice Roberts thinking and motivations. And everyone has their spin.

From your link:
Similarly, Roberts actually didn't have to address the Commerce Clause/Necessary and Proper Clause issues. Having decided the tax issue, he actually probably could have stopped there. That he didn't suggests that he wanted to make sure that, even in defeat, there were five clear votes for the conservatives' view of the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper Clause.

For good, or ill, the Supreme Court and its members put their stamp on America. We can only hope they do so as a result of their respect and adherence to the law and not to a single party. Maybe Justice Roberts was "hedging his bets" with the way he ruled, but if the end result is a ruling for what is right under the law I guess I'm not going to look too far down the road. It has a lot of bends and twists to it and who knows where it will take us? The election may just take us on a u-turn.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "So you wouldn't have considered your comment
      of 7:22 PM at all trollsome.
"

Maybe it was a little retaliatory.  However, ‘having had time to consider it further…"

      "I guess you mean your regular unsolicited pronounce
      -ments on American politics.
"

Probably you'll want to consider that further; the entries on American politics don't seem to elicit random trollery even from you.

      "However, if I thought…"

I don't give a damn what you think or what you do.  Do as you please.  I've made my decision, and right here I've made the last entry you'll be seeing in this thread on this subject.  (Possible further entries on American politics excepted.)

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "What I am finding interesting is the scramble by
      many to understand Justice Roberts thinking and
      motivations.
"

Yeah, that's fer sure.  Some people were thinking that if, but only if, Kennedy went with the liberal wing, Roberts would join in to make it 6-3 and avoid the look of another politically motivated 5-4 decision.  (Also would have allowed Roberts to assign the writing of the majority opinion to himself, ad he did anyway, and keep it as ‘conservative’ as possible.)  Roberts going with the liberals without Kennedy going there first doesn't seem to have crossed hardly anybody's mind.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Johnny Cash.

Zeyad, I'm sorry I didn't see then. But, you know, you almost have to hit me over the head with a 2x4 before I see anything.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
More re:  American politics:

Recent polling shows an 11% increase in public support for ‘ObamaCare’ among independents since the Thursday ruling saying it is indeed ‘Constitutional’.  (It's still only 38% favorable, so there's only so much bragging rights in that.  But, in a close election what independents think is important.  An 11% increase in favorability beats the hell outta gettin’ a stick in eye.)

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
Lynnette may find this interesting.  Author says flat out that Roberts switched his vote within the last month, not maybe; she claims to know.  Has an analysis of the Court dynamics (not so much legalese) which supposedly followed that.

Bridget said...

Yes, Texas is an extremely debor friendly state.  Here is a list of assets that are exempt from collection by creditors:

http://www.13network.com/hupdocs/HUPexemptproperty05.pdf

Plus, creditors cannot grab assets based on the mere fact that you owe a debt. They first have to successfully sue you and then try to collect from non exempt assets.  In the case of debtors with few assets, they generally won't bother.

Creditors can, and will, put debt collectors on you to harass you.  There are federal laws regulating the activity of debt collectors, should it come to that.

From Carelink online info:

Q:  What happens if I stop making my payment and still have a balance?
A:  You risk losing your CareLink benefits and your account being sent to a collection agency.
Q: Do I still owe the balance on my CareLink account if I do not re-enroll?
A: Yes. As a member, you have the responsibility to pay your complete balance. Even if your contract expires, you will have up to 4 years to pay the complete balance. If you fail to make your payments, then your account may be sent to a collection agency.
 
Creditors can, and will, also damage your credit rating.

In looking at the Carelink online handbook, it appears that this is a household based medical assistance program.  http://www.universityhealthsystem.com/files/frontEnd/carelink/careLink-member-handbook-2012.pdf

Perhaps the household that caused these expenses to be incurred should be responsible for paying them? Is the $100 per month payment billed to you directly, Zeyad, or to your parent's household? 

Also, do you remember signing any consent forms for the treatment you received?  This Carelink program appears to be something you might want to stay with, and so negotiating a better payment program with them based on the horrible circumstances you describe might be an option you should look at.  

Lee is correct in thinking that entry into certain licensed professions is subject to background checks.  What I don't know is what sort of checks a dentist has to undergo, and if the checks are strictly related to criminal records or if credit problems are also the subject of inquiry.  I will see what I can find out.

BTW, I was talking to someone just last night who told me that the dental hygienist profession can be a pretty good gig.  She has a friend who makes $85,000 per year, never works on Friday, and has4weeks vacation every year when her dentist takes off.  Just sayin'.

Bridget said...

The Texas State Board of Dental Examiners has licensing information online. It makes no mention of credit checks, just fingerprinting and criminal history evaluation.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Bridget,

I wondered about the Dental Hygenist thing myself. While Zeyad is over qualified, the money is good and the fact that he already has training might allow him to test out of some of the classes, making it a shorter route to a very good paying job. He could still pursue qualifying as a dentist, if he chose to.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Lee,

Author says flat out that Roberts switched his vote...

But did he? He always appeared to agree that the law was not constitituional under the Commerce Clause, but I don't see anything about the Tax Clause, which it was upheld under.

Looking at this I think John Roberts is a very, very, smart man. He has stayed true to his conservative bent, by taking the court out of the Affordable Care Act issue and throwing it back to the American people in the next election. He has also given the Republican party something to beat the Democrats over the head with, in that they in effect created another tax. Perhaps he is in the wrong job, and should be running for President.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
More re:  American politics:
(specifically, ObamaCare)

Another post-Supreme Court ruling poll:  Overall approval/disapproval of the Supreme Court decision, 50% to 49%.
Approve of all or most of the provisions of the law itself, 52% to 47%.
Support for total congressional repeal (repeal and start over), 51% to 47%.
Support for the controversial ‘mandate’ provision, 48% in favor to 51% opposed.
Agreement with Roberts' finding that the mandate is a tax, no matter what they choose to call it, 60% to 39%.
Percent who think it's a done deal, and it's time for the politicians to move on to more important things rather than continue trying to block implementation of the law, 56%.

(I am surprised by, and probably even a bit skeptical of, these numbers.  I wouldn't think that the court's seal of approval would have moved the numbers that much, this quickly.)
The numbers do suggest that, while Republican stalwarts are possibly fired up all over again, this may not be a winner for them in the general election, other than in how much extra motivation it gives to the base to turn out and vote.   I think their base was plenty ‘nuff motivated all ready.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "But did he?"

After looking at several analyses of the situation, and of the three written opinions (Robert's opinion, the dissenting opinion by the four, and Ginsberg's, concurring in part and dissenting in part), I am convinced he probably did switch votes late in the game.  I do not claim to know why, nor do I claim the evidence in favor of that conclusion goes beyond a reasonable doubt.  I think it's fairly convincing though.  Can't say it's proven beyond doubt, but seems right to me.
And, like I said before, I think the feds and the courts have way overstretched the fair boundaries of the Commerce Clause over the years past, and I'm not too upset to see it pruned back some.  I generally approve of that outcome.   But, I don't think I approve overmuch of the way he did it; I'd have approved more of a decision that said, flat out, that this thing's been overstretched over the years, and it's time to prune it back some.  Perhaps unsurprisingly though, they never asked me for my opinion.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "…but I don't see anything about the Tax Clause,
      which it was upheld under.
"

From what I've been seeing, liberal and conservative scholars alike are mostly thinkin’ that was a bit of a stretch on Roberts' part, a fairly tortured reading of the precedents.  You'll probably be hearing more ‘bout that in the days coming.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
A little more analysis of the recent polling numbers here

Bridget said...

If you look at the list of exempt assets, you will see that salary owed to you is exempt. This prevents your wages from being garnished while still in the hands of your employer. Once you receive the salary, the cash is no longer exempt. However, as I said, assets, including cash, cannot just be grabbed by a creditor because of debt owed. The creditor still has to sue in a court of law to establish thatbthe debt is legitimately owed. And then, they have to know where your bank account is. And then, they ave to know when your bank account happens to have money in it.

So basically, there is nothing they can do except file a bad credit report and sic a debt collector on you unless they sue you. If they sue you, they then have to locate non exempt assets, which in your case will probably only be what cash you leave lying around in a bank. Don't use any direct deposit for salary, but instead have your paychecks mailed to you and cash them or deposit into an account the creditor does not know exists.

But I'd still try to negotiate a discount first. Especially if you did not consent to treatment.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
And, mostly for Lynnette, more on the behind-the-scene stuff with Justice Roberts.  (Conservatives are getting progressively more and more unhappy as the shock wears off, not takin’ this at all well.)

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
      "But I'd still try to negotiate a discount first.
      Especially if you did not consent to treatment.
"

I think I'll take the opportunity to re-empasize my agreement with that proposition.  I especially find that trip through the MRI highly questionable, and I am reminded of the tendency of some hospitals to do unnecessary tests when they think they can get away with them, to help pay off high-dollar machinery.  Obviously, I'm in no position to make an accusation here, but Zeyad already suspects that himself, and I'm equally suspicious of he need for that, and that's a big chunck of the bill.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
Not even gonna bother ‘bout the typos up there.

Bridget said...

And I should add, document everything. I recently disputed part of a charge from a hospital incurred by a family member. I stated the grounds for the dispute in writing, sent the letter by certified mail, and kept a copy. I kept track of the conversations I had with the billing department, noting the date and time of the calls, the name of the person with whom I spoke, and a short synopsis of the conversation.

The hospital nevertheless sent the matter to a debt collector. I researched the federal debt collection protection laws, and timely notified the debt collector that the charge was disputed, and sent copies of all of the documentation.

The collection agency asked the hospital to refute the matters in dispute, which it was unable to do. The collection agency then closed it's file with no further action.

So, dispute the charges early, often, and in writing.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Gotta run, so will just leave a quick comment.

Zeyad,

So basically, there is nothing they can do except file a bad credit report and sic a debt collector on you unless they sue you.

The problem with having a bad credit report is that it follows you whereever you go. When you rent an apartment, try to get a loan etc. they check those things for credit worthiness. So think carefully before you go that route. Same goes for someone who files bankruptcy, that can follow you for years before it's wiped off a credit report.

Lee's right about the MRI, that does seem a stretch.

Bridget said...

http://www.medicaldebthelp.com/Negotiate_Medical_Debt.html

Lots of info online regarding negotiating medical debt.

Bridget said...

I agree that a bad credit report is not desirable, which is why he is best off trying to negotiate a reduction in the bill for questionable treatments, treatments he tried to refuse, etc. And then make the payments as best he can.

Since he is now on his own, he may also be able to negotiate reduced payments based on changed circumstances. In looking at the Carelink website, it would appear that his payment plan is already based mor on ability to pay rather than the cost of treatment.

But he also wanted to know what happens if he refuses to pay. the consequences can be very different, depending on what state you live in. Texas is a good state for debtors.

Bridget said...

Wage garnishment in Texas

http://www.ehow.com/about_7420277_can-wages-garnished-texas_.html

If you have a car with a valid lien, the lien holder can send a repo man after the car if you fail to make your payments, but other creditors cannot take your car, even if they sue you. Debtors can exempt two automobiles...per the list of exempt property in my first comment.

Bridget said...

Good article with info about Carelink payment plans. It looks as though Z may well be able to get a reduced payment if he is a single person and no longer part of a household.

http://www.rwjf.org/files/research/safetynettexas201006.pdf

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

I should think that negotiating would be something Zeyad would have experience with and be good at. Or at least I have been led to believe that it is a common practice in the ME.

My guess is he would have looked into this if he hadn't been so stressed with the situation at home. He's a smart guy and internet aware. Hopefully we have given him some starting points.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
I'd repeat my suggestion that he discover what Medicare and Medicaid are paying for the ‘services’ for which he's being billed.  (In his area; the reimbursements vary according to region.)  And he'll probably want to make sure he gets a look at their ‘billing codes’ which might give him some insight into how much markdown the provider is usually willing to accept, if he can find that on the internet--probably out there somewhere.

   Lee C.  ―   U.S.A.     said...

 
Post Script:

      "…how much markdown the provider is usually
      willing to accept…
"

And by that I meant the mark down on services for which the validity of the charge is not even in question--that's on top of possibly disputing the need for the MRI in total.

Marcus said...

Pete: "LOL. Well I'm glad we are all at ease with our consciences, then. Hope I didn't rankle too much. Oh no wait ... I don't care"

OK, that's fair. Just try and spare us your holier than thou crap because we don't care about what you say we ought to do either. That fair?

Petes said...

Marcus, that's illogical. If you don't care what I say, why do I need to spare you anything? By way of explanation, I make no pretensions of being "holier than thou" ... I reckoned Zeyad's case would not be hurt by the fuss I made, and there was a minor chance it would be helped. I had no other motivation. You can take that or leave it.

Lynnette In Minnesota said...

Pete,

I am sure your intentions were good. I got to thinking that you might misunderstand my earlier comment to Marcus. So just so you know, I would never equate you to Suz.

Petes said...

Don't worry, I wouldn't have assumed that. Nor did I intend to diss anybody ... just thought I bit of gentle encouragement wouldn't go amiss. Marcus obviously thought it was a bit OTT, but I've nothing against him or anyone else.

:-)