Have you ever had something taken from you that you’d never forget? February 2008. I’m 3 years old. 7:30 A.M. I’m walking with my mother to her car so she can drive me to pre-school, and we see broken glass.

My Mother: “Fucking hell, why me?”

I’m confused as to why my mother is now cursing and looks angry. Did I do something? Is she cursing at me? Before I can ask what’s happening, she hops on the phone with either my father or the police. I’m not sure because they both showed up. At the point everybody shows up, I’m just bored out of my mind sitting on the curb. My father asks me if I am ok, and I respond yes not knowing the bombshell that’s about to be dropped on me. Some losers broke into my mother’s car, stole the TVs, and stole my bookbag which had some of my toys.

My Father: “Jonathan, are you listening buddy?”
Me: “Yes?”
My Father: “Someone broke into your mother’s car and stole the tv’s and your bag”

Who the fuck steals a bookbag full of toys? What value can you get out of that? That’s just lame. Anyways, once my father tells me I go ballistic. I started crying, screaming, and trying to hit anybody in sight. My mother grabs me by the arm and looks me in my eyes with the most intense look I’ve ever seen. Genuine fear struck my body, and I froze. I had no choice but to listen to her and calm down because her anger for this situation was and still is much greater than mine. She had to deal with the damages done to her car, deal with the jerkoff police officers who insisted it

was her fault for parking by an elementary school, and she had to deal with my anger towards the whole situation. I have no idea how she didn’t explode and curse out everyone. I think any rational human being would freak out in these moments but not her. Anyways after I was forced to calm down the police officers told my parents that there was no working security camera, or any evidence left behind, so we were shit out of luck. At this moment my mother should have freaked out, but she kept her cool. I think she held it together for me which I appreciate but the damage was done. I was angry that some degenerates broke into the car and stole my stuff. I was very angry. That car was the car that drove me home right after I was born, I watched SpongeBob on those TVs when I was nervous before going to the dentist or the doctor, some of those toys were given to me by my great-grandmother who had passed away a year before.

I never got any of that stuff back by the way. I was confused by the lack of effort that the police officers gave. I know that it seems petty, I know that it seems selfish to blame the officers that were there, but I felt at the time and still a little bit now that they did the bare minimum. NYPD couldn’t find two more enthusiastic or dedicated officers? These two idiots try to blame this whole thing on my mother like she parked the car there so it could be broken into. I remember that one of the cops started listing off a bunch of reasons that it was her fault. They blamed her for parking by a school, they blamed her for moving the car afterwards so that more people didn’t try to steal stuff, they blamed her for the type of car she had. It was possibly the dumbest situation I’ve been involved with to date.

After the cops left my mother brought me home while my father brought the car to the mechanic to get the window fixed. I took a mean ass nap. I woke up with my hair all messed up

and I still felt angry. If I could have, I would have hunted down the guy(s) that broke into the car. And it’s not like all the cars on the block were broken into, only her car was and only my shit was taken from the car. I walked around the house like an angry old man. I was mad at the world. I entered the living room where my mother is on her laptop and asked,

Me: “Why?”
My Mother: “Why what?’
Me: “Why me?”
My Mother: “God knows. There’s a bunch of assholes in the world.”

Those words that came out of her mouth changed me. “There’s a bunch of assholes in the world”. I appreciated and still do appreciate her honesty and looking back I wouldn’t have been able to say it any better if I was her, but to say it so bluntly to a child might not have been such a good idea. Up to that point I had no idea that people did stuff like that. I thought that the world was all about coexistence and trying to help others if you can, because that’s all my parents taught me. But that idea was shattered in my mind, just like the car window. It didn’t help that the cops were two barely qualified losers who probably had no other choice but to become an officer and I know you think that I should probably be less harsh on those guys since it’s been 14 years, but I need a face to blame, and they fit that bill perfectly. I understand that this whole thing can be seen as trivial and minor in the grand scheme of everyone involved life but still to this day, I feel that this event changed everything. It’s almost like I had rose tinted goggles on up until the event and then after they stole those too. I’ve been told by my family that I was/have been more negative, pessimistic, and closed minded since then. Unfortunately, I must agree. If I could change my perspective on life I would in a heartbeat, but I can’t. I don’t even think that the next day I was the same person I was before. I vaguely remember going to pre-school the next day and not wanting to talk or play with anyone. I was just angry. And when it got to lunch time, I protected my life with my life as if anyone was going to take it. I hope those idiots enjoyed the tv’s that they most likely broke, removing them for the back of the front seats, and the toys that were half broken and had almost no value. If I had to put a number on the cost of the stuff, they stole I’d have to say about $200. But that might have been the most important $200 in human history so maybe I’m mad for no reason. But now I don’t trust my parents leaving their cars anywhere near that school. I have constant anxiety about potentially getting robbed or worse, and I think I might have stopped the average person as a person. I almost see them as a potential threat and try to plan for any sudden actions or moves. I don’t know if this makes any sense to you but to me it makes perfect sense. It would take a positive event in that magnitude to potentially change me, and God knows if that would revert me back. At the end of the day the thieves not only stole my bookbag and the TVs. They stole my childhood joy from me, and they took my belief in the world away. But that’s just another day in the Bronx. Now that I think about it, this is one of like 10 times that one of my parent’s cars got broken into in the Bronx. If this had been in the newspaper, I would have put it in here but since getting your car broken into over here is a common occurrence there wouldn’t be enough space in the newspaper to cover every instance of this happening every day.

The ethics of the use of performance-enhancing drugs, also known as doping, has been a controversial topic in the world of sports for many years. In the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC), the use of performance-enhancing drugs has the potential to significantly impact the fairness and safety of fights. In recent years the UFC has cracked down significantly on the use of PEDs inside of contests but for about 15 years they didn’t test as heavily as they do now. 

In 2015 the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA) reached an agreement with the UFC to start facilitating testing for all UFC athletes for banned substances, which solidified the UFCs stance on PED usage in their sport. But since then athletes have been popping up for PED usage like crazy. Two massive stars for the UFC named Jon Jones, and T.J. Dillashaw were caught doping and instantly served a suspension and fined. Jones flagged in 2016 right before his match at UFC 200 with rival Daniel Cormier. Jones served a 12-month suspension and got his light heavyweight championship taken away. Jones later fought rival Cormier at UFC 232 for the vacant light-heavyweight championship which Jones won, then got flagged again for doping and was served a 15-month sentence and a $205,000 fine and vacated the championship again. T.J. Dillashaw was flagged after his loss to Henry Cujudo at “UFC Fight Night: Cejudo vs. Dillashaw”. Dillashaw served a two year suspension and was fined $10,000. He hasn’t been flagged again for doping. These two instances show that even top-level guys can be flagged for doping. Jon Jones is in the G.O.A.T debate, and T.J. Dillashaw is in that conversation for his weight class. Another example of this was when Former middleweight champion and G.O.A.T. of the middleweight division, Anderson Siva failed not once, but twice for doping. “Details of Silva’s second failed drug test emerged this week, casting his future into peril. The former UFC middleweight champion faces a possible four-year ban after turning up positive for synthetic testosterone and a banned diuretic in a sample collected in October 2017. His reps are apparently asking for a lighter sentence, arguing that Silva’s first test failures—for a pair of steroids in January 2015—didn’t fall under the auspices of the UFC’s current anti-doping policy and therefore shouldn’t count against him, according to Combate (h/t MMA Fighting’s Marc Raimondi). Silva, who initially denied knowingly taking performance enhancers, remained mum this week.”. Silva didn’t need to cheat to win, he was known as the best middleweight fighter ever! Right? This incident leaves a massive blemish on his otherwise perfect carrier, but this is irrecusably cheating. 

One argument against the use of performance-enhancing drugs in the UFC is that it gives an unfair advantage to those who use them. If one fighter is using performance-enhancing drugs while their opponent is not, it could give the doped fighter an edge in strength, endurance, or recovery time. This could lead to an unfair and potentially dangerous situation in the octagon. An example of this is Brock Lesnar at UFC 200. Brock Lesnar is a fan-favorite fighter who had forgone a lengthy break from the UFC, and due to the main events of UFC 200 falling through (Jon Jones vs. Daniel Cormier, and Conor McGregor vs. Nate Diaz) the UFC needed a big draw for their 200th Pay-Per view show so they decided that they needed to bring back fan favorite Brock Lesnar. But Brock didn’t undergo the mandatory necessary 4 months in the USADA testing pool. He only took pre-fight and post-fight drug tests which he failed both. “But afterward, Lesnar tested positive for the banned substance clomiphene, an estrogen blocker.” Lange Pudmire from the LA Times reported. His opponent Mark Hunt was not on any type of steroids. And Unfortunately, Brock won the fight and later had the result changed to a no-contest afterward due to his failing of the drug tests. His opponent later sued the UFC. In 2016, former UFC fighter Mark Hunt sued the UFC, Dana White, and Brock Lesnar on the heels of UFC 200. Hunt claimed that the UFC and White, specifically, knew that Brock Lesnar had taken performance-enhancing drugs and let him fight anyway. Lesnar won the fight, but the decision was overturned to a no-contest when it was revealed that Lesnar failed a drug test. With that, Hunt alleged a slew of wrongdoings, including fraud, unjust enrichment, breach of contract, battery, and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.” Jason Morrin from ConductDetrimental.com reported. Another example of PEDs being unfair is during a 2013 bout between Former UFC middleweight champion and Hall of Famer Michael Bisping and Former UFC light heavyweight champion Vitor Belfort. Belfort was 36 when this fight happened and was on something called TRT (Testosterone Replacement Therapy). This meant that he had elevated testosterone levels for someone his age which helped with, strength, speed, and recovery time. TRT wasn’t yet on the ban list, but this fight and its implications led to it being on the ban list. Belfort was in the best shape of his life at 36 and had the testosterone levels of a 19-year-old male, with the combat experience of a 36-year-old man. He won this fight and in doing so landed a leg kick that detached Bisping’s retina, which lead him to go blind in that eye. Bisping would win the UFC championship after this but after issues with his other eye, he was forced to retire. “ After a back and forth first round, Belfort connected with a head kick that dropped Bisping. Belfort jumped on with some ground and pound and won the bout via knockout. However, the bigger issue was with Bisping, as it was revealed that Bisping had a detached retina as a result of the knockout. Doctors and Bisping didn’t even notice the injury until months later, which played into the severity of the injury. “. This already dangerous sport of fighting can be Jurrasicly more danger if one fighter Is on PEDs and the other one is not. This is supposed to be seen as the “Manly sport” yet all I see are a bunch of cowards who are scared to work hard so they cheat to win. Say NO to PEDs. 

Another concern is the potential long-term health effects of performance-enhancing drugs. Many performance-enhancing drugs are banned by the World Anti-Doping Agency because they have been shown to have serious side effects, such as organ damage, hormonal imbalances, and increased risk of cardiovascular disease. In a sport as physically demanding as the UFC, the use of performance-enhancing drugs could put fighters at an even greater risk for these types of health problems. The UFC has had no cases of organ failure, but this is mostly because it is a newer organization. The UFCs doors opened in the 1990s and had fought since then. But negative effects have been shown with the use of TRT in the UFC. People who had used the TRT in the UFC were helpless after its ban in 2014. Vitor Belfort won 2 of his last 6 fights after TRT, Chael Sonnen another TRT user won 2 out of his last 5, last Dan Henderson won 3 out of his Last 7. Additionally, the physiques and overall strength of the athletes diminished after the 2014 TRT ban. The fighters all had TUE (Therapeutic-Use exemption) due to low testosterone, but their low testosterone was most likely due to prior steroid use! “According to several doctors and scientists who weighed in over the years, the most likely culprit for low testosterone among pro fighters (assuming it was a condition that existed at all) was prior steroid use. That had the potential to shut down the body’s ability to produce testosterone naturally, sometimes for years.” Ben Fowlkes from MMAJunkie.com reported. These negatively affect other aspects of the lives of the fighters, such as their abilities to have families and their abilities to self-sustain. Say NO to PEDs. 

On the other hand, some may argue that the use of performance-enhancing drugs is a personal choice and that fighters should be allowed to make their own decisions about whether or not to use them. They may also point out that performance-enhancing drugs have been used in other sports, such as cycling and baseball, and that banning their use in the UFC could be difficult to enforce. This is true, that completely banning the use of steroids is and would be nearly impossible as there is no way for the UFC and USADA to know every PED known to man, but the UFC employing USADA to test their fighters shows initiative, an initiative to clean up their sport. They have caught more cheaters in the last 7 years, than in the entirety of UFC history before that date. “This includes all routes of administration (e.g., oral, intravenous, and inhaled). Most inhaled beta-2 agonists are prohibited, including arformoterol, fenoterol, indacaterol, levosalbutamol (levalbuterol) , orciprenaline (metaproterenol), olodaterol, pirbuterol, terbutaline, tretoquinol, tulobuterol.” This list is directly from the UFC and USADA website and is only a handful of the banned substances in the sport. The opinion that some people have about fighters using PEDs as a personal choice is a terrible opinion. That “personal choice” is eliminated when they sign the contract to go fight another man for 3-5 rounds. The fighters’ lives are in each other’s hands and luckily, we haven’t had a death in the UFC but if the use of PEDs is sanctioned, then that sad day may come sooner rather than later. Say NO to PED usage in sports. 

Ultimately, the ethics of performance-enhancing drug use in the UFC depend on one’s perspective. However, given the potential risks to both the fairness and safety of fights, it is important for the UFC to have strict rules and penalties in place to discourage the use of performance-enhancing drugs. It is also important for fighters to be aware of the potential consequences of using these drugs and to make informed decisions about whether or not to use them. Thankfully over the last couple of years, the UFC has taken a strict anti-PED stance against all usage and are saying NO to PEDs.

Glittering Generalities:
1. When a company guarantees satisfaction with its product. What does that mean? The vagueness of a satisfaction guarantee is an example of a Glittering Generality.
2. When an equipment company says that its products will improve performance.

Climax:
1. Ichigo is the sole survivor of the attack
2. He vows to never lose again
3. He trains as hard as he can for months
4. Eventually he believes he can win against Aizen
5. He rushes to Hueco Mundo
6. He confronts Aizen
7. Before Ichigo can even react Aizen attacks him
8. But Ichigo’s speed saves him and he luckily dodges
9. What ensues in the greatest battle ever seen
10. And Ichigo is victorious

Parallelism/Chiasmus:
Exercise 2:
1. It only lists the activities, and the last one differs from the rest.
I run, write, read, and swim for fun.
2. Boring word choice.
During my time off, I’ll be doing the opposite of my time at work, watching TV, playing golf, and catching fish
3. It’s ok, but it could have a better word selection.
The Boys like the paper route, and the paper they make from it.
4. Too many words
While preparing to write, she sharpens her pencil and organizes her paper.
5. Again too many words
Her daughter took her to the shower and got her ready for work.
6. Weird word choice, and format
The neighbor’s complaints, the late rent, and the loud noise were only some of the landlord’s problems.
7. The sentence is good but has too many words
Wild intoxication and lyrical novels are only some of the staples of F. Scott Fitzgerald.
8. No comparisons just actions and picking up your room makes no sense
All you have to do is Fold your clothes, and then you can come to the kitchen
9. It’s ok.
She was so blind that she can’t see his lies, deceit, and tricks.
10. Too many words
The kid’s values were honesty, determination, and pranks against everyone.

Euphemisms:
1. When doctors use “repairing” while fixing someone’s broken bone. This minimizes the stress put on the patient without lying about what they are doing.
2. The saying for being below average in an area is “In need of improvement”. This minimizes the negativeness of the situation without downplaying it.

The Occupy Wall Street movement, which began in 2011 in New York City and spread to other cities around the world, was a grassroots protest movement that sought to address income inequality and corporate influence in politics. This movement used various rhetorical devices to effectively communicate its message and advocate for change. Such literary devices are catchphrases, rhetorical questions, and repetition which they used to hammer down their points about income inequality.

The Occupy Wall Street movement was a movement based on the idea that most of the world’s money is held by the 1% at the top, which causes a major imbalance of income for the lower 99%.

One rhetorical device that was commonly used by Occupy Wall Street protesters was the use of slogans and catchphrases. One of the most well-known slogans of the movement was “We are the 99%,” which referred to the idea that the majority of people in society were being left behind by the wealthy elite, who were referred to as the “1%.” This idea that the 99% were left behind was used by the speaker because they knew the audience would feel outraged about the Jurassic imbalance of power and money, between them and that 1%. By using this slogan, protesters were able to effectively convey their message and inspire a sense of unity and solidarity among supporters.

Another rhetorical device that was commonly used by Occupy Wall Street protesters was the use of rhetorical questions. These questions were used to challenge the status quo and encourage people to think critically about the issues being raised by the movement. For example, protesters might ask, “Why should the 1% have so much power and influence, while the rest of us struggle to get by?” By using rhetorical questions, protesters were able to engage their audience and inspire them to think more deeply about the issues at hand. These questions made the audience outraged at the fact that they work for these giants that own a disproportionate amount of the world’s wealth, and that they are inadvertently helping them get richer.

In addition to slogans and rhetorical questions, Occupy Wall Street protesters also used the rhetorical device of repetition to emphasize the importance of their message. For example, they might repeat the phrase “Occupy Wall Street” over and over again, in order to make it clear that they were not going to back down in their fight for change. Another cause of repetition was the slogan “We are the 99%” which was coined as the most successful slogan since “Hell, no we won’t go” from the Vietnam war protests. This repetition helped to emphasize the importance of the movement and inspire a sense of determination among supporters.

Overall, the Occupy Wall Street movement was successful in using rhetorical devices such as slogans, rhetorical questions, and repetition to effectively communicate its message and advocate for change. Through the use of these techniques, protesters were able to mobilize a large and diverse group of supporters and bring attention to important issues of income inequality and corporate influence in politics.