CrazyYoshimitsu
[10] Knight
This thread is for thsoe writer who like to speak their mind on everything. it could essaies you wrote for class. To anything you want. Just no hentai, ok guys? Also, i have a couple of rules for this thread.
Cy's rules
-No flaming
-be postive and help each other improve
-No spamming
Anyways, i'll start things off with a paper I wrote for my english/history final. On the muiltple choice part of the final, I score a 98/100. So, let's see how was my paper. The topic was about the Iranians being better off or before the Islamica Revelution. I said they were better off before. Tell what you guys think. Also, i'll be putting in the grammar correction my teacher added.
Iranians were better off before the terrbile Isamic revolution of 1979.( I should have remove that terrbile.) they were better off under the rule of the shah becuase they had a strong economy. Also, human rights were respected more. And women had more rights.
The Iranians had a strong economy under the rule of the shah because he renegotiated the oil deal with the West t omake it where Iran was getting 50 percent, instead of getting 16 percent.( I should have just added a period after that to. they said that was a run on. this helped many iranians find homes and jobs with this new deal. Also, thanks to the Americans, the shah was able to increase Iran's mililtary strength. With increaseing military strength and a better oil deal with the West, Iran's economy was one of the richest countries under the rule of the shah.( He said this was a strech, but I remeber hearing this in one of the video we watch.)
Iranians had more human right because the shah only targeted political rivals and people who were agaisnt him. Supporters also aruge that he only puished thsoe who spoke harshly of him, and had mass excutions done for these people. Under the rule of Mohammed Ahmadinejad, people were not given fair trails at all. At least the shah gave iranians of 1975 fair trails for his people, and the mthe right to plead their case. So, supporters insist that Iranians' human rights were better under the shah because he punished thsoe who broke his laws and showed them proper respect, unlike Ahmandinejad.( Another run on says Teacher...) So, with proper rights and fair trails, it isn't hard to say the shah had more respect for human rights.
The women of Iran were given more rights when the shah was in power. He gave them the right to vote, increased their education benefits, and gave them a chance to decide if their current husband can have a second wife or not.( gotta love run- on guys.:) These rights gave women more power, but Ahmadinejad, on the otherhand, forced the veils back on, and has tortured or raped women for not wearing their veils. Proponents also( lol I the O is esare from my paper, even though I remember putting it there.) claim, that Iranain women of 1975 were not rape; or beaten before revolution. So, with rights to vote and better edycation, it is not hard to say Women's rights were respected more by the shah.( I put from, but teacher by. Which one fits guys?)
While everyone doesn't agree, objectors say that the idea of modren economy from the shah was just a an excuse to gain more power, and only benefit( Not benefitted, I'm susprise teacher didn't see that.) upper to middle class Iranians. But supporters argue that Ahmadinejad doesn't even give medical care when his people need it the most. Critics go on to say that ( comma was remvoe by teacher.) the shah went agaisnt Allah by removing the veils and making polygamy harder to do. Even though that is their religion, that doesn't cover the fact that women actually had some freedom under the shah's rule. Lastly, opponents suggest that human rights in 1975 were terrbile because the shah would use his secret police, SAVAK, to enforce the law. The same could be said about Ahmadinejad, an his actions against protesters,( period was remove, and repalce wit ha comma.) he arrested them and performed violent acts, like flogging, stoning, and anfilation. these violent acts are very heartless and cruel( lose points for not mentioning the amnesty international to back up my arguements.)
Overall, Iranians were better off before the Islamic Revolution because they had more freedo, a strong economy, ( teacher through my "o" was an "e") and women had mroe rights. Modren day Iranian goverment treats their people much worst( I said worse) than the shah with a bad economy to boot. People were getting killed for speakingg their minds, or being(*faceplam* I should have added that "ing" to my "be.") arrested by the military. Iran in 1975 could have became one one of the strongest nations, but threw it all away. But let's( I lose points for using personal pronous. you can't use them since this is an agruemtnive essay.) have time be the judge for modren day Iran.
That's it!!!! I'm done typing up my paper. thsi what the teacher had to say about my paper.
"Maurice, your arguments are very convincing. I can tell that you took the time to build your case. Very well done!"
He also said" Very goo dwork" too.
My final score on the writing part for the test was 47/50. Which is .94 if ya do the math. So that's an A for me:) So please tell me what you think about this paper I wrote guys. I was one of the last one to finish, and was happy with the results when we got our shit back.
Cy's rules
-No flaming
-be postive and help each other improve
-No spamming
Anyways, i'll start things off with a paper I wrote for my english/history final. On the muiltple choice part of the final, I score a 98/100. So, let's see how was my paper. The topic was about the Iranians being better off or before the Islamica Revelution. I said they were better off before. Tell what you guys think. Also, i'll be putting in the grammar correction my teacher added.
Iranians were better off before the terrbile Isamic revolution of 1979.( I should have remove that terrbile.) they were better off under the rule of the shah becuase they had a strong economy. Also, human rights were respected more. And women had more rights.
The Iranians had a strong economy under the rule of the shah because he renegotiated the oil deal with the West t omake it where Iran was getting 50 percent, instead of getting 16 percent.( I should have just added a period after that to. they said that was a run on. this helped many iranians find homes and jobs with this new deal. Also, thanks to the Americans, the shah was able to increase Iran's mililtary strength. With increaseing military strength and a better oil deal with the West, Iran's economy was one of the richest countries under the rule of the shah.( He said this was a strech, but I remeber hearing this in one of the video we watch.)
Iranians had more human right because the shah only targeted political rivals and people who were agaisnt him. Supporters also aruge that he only puished thsoe who spoke harshly of him, and had mass excutions done for these people. Under the rule of Mohammed Ahmadinejad, people were not given fair trails at all. At least the shah gave iranians of 1975 fair trails for his people, and the mthe right to plead their case. So, supporters insist that Iranians' human rights were better under the shah because he punished thsoe who broke his laws and showed them proper respect, unlike Ahmandinejad.( Another run on says Teacher...) So, with proper rights and fair trails, it isn't hard to say the shah had more respect for human rights.
The women of Iran were given more rights when the shah was in power. He gave them the right to vote, increased their education benefits, and gave them a chance to decide if their current husband can have a second wife or not.( gotta love run- on guys.:) These rights gave women more power, but Ahmadinejad, on the otherhand, forced the veils back on, and has tortured or raped women for not wearing their veils. Proponents also( lol I the O is esare from my paper, even though I remember putting it there.) claim, that Iranain women of 1975 were not rape; or beaten before revolution. So, with rights to vote and better edycation, it is not hard to say Women's rights were respected more by the shah.( I put from, but teacher by. Which one fits guys?)
While everyone doesn't agree, objectors say that the idea of modren economy from the shah was just a an excuse to gain more power, and only benefit( Not benefitted, I'm susprise teacher didn't see that.) upper to middle class Iranians. But supporters argue that Ahmadinejad doesn't even give medical care when his people need it the most. Critics go on to say that ( comma was remvoe by teacher.) the shah went agaisnt Allah by removing the veils and making polygamy harder to do. Even though that is their religion, that doesn't cover the fact that women actually had some freedom under the shah's rule. Lastly, opponents suggest that human rights in 1975 were terrbile because the shah would use his secret police, SAVAK, to enforce the law. The same could be said about Ahmadinejad, an his actions against protesters,( period was remove, and repalce wit ha comma.) he arrested them and performed violent acts, like flogging, stoning, and anfilation. these violent acts are very heartless and cruel( lose points for not mentioning the amnesty international to back up my arguements.)
Overall, Iranians were better off before the Islamic Revolution because they had more freedo, a strong economy, ( teacher through my "o" was an "e") and women had mroe rights. Modren day Iranian goverment treats their people much worst( I said worse) than the shah with a bad economy to boot. People were getting killed for speakingg their minds, or being(*faceplam* I should have added that "ing" to my "be.") arrested by the military. Iran in 1975 could have became one one of the strongest nations, but threw it all away. But let's( I lose points for using personal pronous. you can't use them since this is an agruemtnive essay.) have time be the judge for modren day Iran.
That's it!!!! I'm done typing up my paper. thsi what the teacher had to say about my paper.
"Maurice, your arguments are very convincing. I can tell that you took the time to build your case. Very well done!"
He also said" Very goo dwork" too.
My final score on the writing part for the test was 47/50. Which is .94 if ya do the math. So that's an A for me:) So please tell me what you think about this paper I wrote guys. I was one of the last one to finish, and was happy with the results when we got our shit back.
