About Me

!nversed Poignancy!

...I am an eclectic amalgamation of many seemingly paradoxical things. This can be exemplified in both my seemingly endless persistance on many topics and arguments, as well as my careful cautiousness on other topics and arguments. This is largely due to how astute I am of the topic: more knowledge, more persistant; less knowledge, obviously more cautious. I also have times of obsessive compulsions regarding certain things (mostly just my thoughts, however)...

Life and Death

!nversed Poignancy!


An assembly

Possibly impossible

Perfectly interchangeable..


That lives most upright

Beyond the unspoken

Neither a squiggle nor a quibble..

She and Me

!nversed Poignancy!


A daffodil

Tyrannizer of me

Breaking the colors of dusk!..


The rising sun

Infringed with violations

The impurity in the salt..

Love and Poetry!

!nversed Poignancy!


A puerile desire

Buried in the heart

Never leaves..


Sentimentally melodramatic

Cursively recursive

My thoughts idiotic!

Ok, I guess I'm looking to begin my (yet) another move into the aspects of Science and Con-science relativity principles. This time around, however, I had a team mate to have this theory made up. So, the credit would be shared by both of us and the theory (for a change) would be named as the "Appu-Baggy Theory of Cyberpathy".

Ok, getting our thoughts synced lets start with a quibble. While you are into chatting with a friend over the internet or over the mobile channel- have you ever felt that your thought pipeline has been hacked and suddenly both of you whip out the same one-liner or perhaps (in worst cases) the same curse word too? (:P Yeah, I see some of you nodding..See here also it works..:P). Hmm, I have experienced these a million times atleast.

So, somehow these simultaneous collision of thought processing elements in identically different pipelines creeped into unison, when Appu and I were in conversation (A month ago I guess),. It so happened that the so-called "thought pipeline hacking" seemed to hamper our astonishments one too many times; And for once, our usual and more often technical conversation now turned into some heights of some "Parapsychological Amalgamation of Discrete Mathematical Structures" (yeah, just to make things seem complicated :P :P). Our pathways of talkways changed from acoustics of Ubuntu to Open Office to Beers to Hard Rocks and Soft puns into an all new - "based multitudinal indicies" involving Psychology then to some hues of Mind Reading and  to stuffs that were connecting Thought Transmissions et al. (yeah,some crap!).

Whoa!, it was one heck of a chat , more so because it was Appu's core and without doubt ( and without google :P)  she started explaining the psychology behind the actual "Psychology" (- She's a topper you see..Ok, Ok, second topper it seems :P.) So, what followed this loong and exciting chat which was chronologically somewhere around the wee 00:00 hrs, were these scientifically mathematical thoughts of mine.

So, for the uninitiated, lets start by contemplating on how and why people think alike and emanate "Cybermatica Transmissions" over internet ( In short lets call this "Cyberpathy"). I have in fact (unlike the pressure question) thought many times about how thoughts are projected... I mean in terms of known science. Now here is my thought: When I send cyberpathycally transmitted thoughts, I would usually think and involve my body to some degree and I would focus on some discrete quantum of energy called (say) "the third eye"; I would actually to this initially and then trance. So there is some physical affect that has been imbibed into Cyberpathy and thats even if, hypothetically, the thought is transmitted non-physically (or dimensionally shifted). Let's step back a bit and think about simply how our mind and body connect...

There are two schools when it comes to mind-body problem: One is that the mind is our brain, and the other where the mind is connected but not fully contained in our body, e.g. we have a soul. I fall into the latter, where I believe the brain is a sophisticated sender/receiver.

Now, here is the thing: Some believe there is a physical connection our mind makes, and it interacts with the body. On top of that people have even been able to connect electrodes and control the body by creating signals in the brain that if this is true stimulate the same actions (or alternatively detect the same signatures caused by thought or action) as the mind does through its mysterious connection. I wouldn't be surprised that whatever this connection mechanism is, that cyberpathy simply works on the opposite side of this connection from where our physical body is. So it is safe to say there must be some Electro/ Magnetic [E/M] signature that can be detected from cyberpathy. The other possibility would be that cyberpathy is completely E/M, however I don't believe this to be the case since
(1) I have communicated with beings in other galaxies and the only explanation would be some inter dimensional gate which in and of itself makes it using something which is not strictly classical E/M energy usage
(2) Even assuming that locally cyberpathy is completely E/M, we have never detected a signal frequency through peer-reviewed science as far as I'm aware.

But here's the kicker: Even IF cyberpathy is non-corporeal and causes some kinds of E/M reactions at least locally in our brain, which is very likely if that's how our mind works, then there must be some leakage we can detect. So I have been thinking recently about whether anyone has sat there with someone sending cyberpathically(Hmm, did I hear someone say CYBERPATHETICAL? ) and listened on every frequency for some signature that is consistent. I have sometimes thought about doing this myself, though self-defeatism always takes hold and makes me feel like it's not worth it to bother. However, I have this strong urge to build computer programs and games in the future (more working on the software side) that can use this mind-body connection for more advanced user interfaces.

Additionally, assume that the transmission is not E/M but perhaps some other non-local connection on the other side from our body of this mind-body connection. Then it's safe to say that we have the ability to detect and tap into that energy scientifically simply because our body can. In fact, I imagine there is already some theory out there (probably mathematical and having to do with some very advanced physics) that has already unknowingly identified this energy in a theoretical construct.

One other thought I have is perhaps we could just through trial-and-error and a lot of luck develop some E/M device that sticks on top of the third eye and/or crown through electrodes that stimulates the right E/M signals to cause the mind-body connection to invoke cyberpathy. Now, that to me seems the very inefficient way to go about it, to be rather dangerous, and also does not produce true knowledge of the mechanism involved.

It's kind of sad that people like me who have activated their psychic abilities do not intuitively know what the scientific explanation is, however not surprising since psychicism is natural for us and science requires learning. Connecting what's intuitive to what requires esoteric knowledge isn't so easy.

What's the missing piece? Any thoughts? How long do you think until some scientist gets lucky and finds it? As I mentioned just a bit before, I want to design software user interfaces someday that doesn't require keyboards and mice, just cyberpathy. I want to develop games that help people strengthen their telepathic abilities. However, I DON'T want to get deep into how the actual connection works scientifically. For one thing, I'm good at math but I don't like doing deep math too much. For instance, the class I took on quantum computers was pure torture because aside from the esoteric theory, it was pretty much pure QM dirac notation mathematics :)

Have you ever found a channeling that goes really deep into the science of the telepathic connection and mind-body connection? I mean really in-depth, invoking string theory and some high-level mathematical summaries?

Or alternatively, have you ever found some promising scientific literature?

Have you ever gone to the movies and worried about who you’re going to sit next to? Well, about a fortnight ago, I happened to bump into a comic somewhere on the net( sorry I just couldn't mine back the link). This comic illustrates the common dilemma moviegoers face when filling the theater aisles. I was just contemplating on how to optimize the seating arrangements in a theater to solve this "comic problem"; And the result is this brand new theory that for now is termed as "Theater Base Placement Theory (TBPT)" *Lolz,lolz!*

The complex relationships between each pair of people in a group can be reflected in an acquaintance graph, such as the one shown above in the comic. Most people in such a network are usually acquainted with a majority of the group. Consequently, a problem arises when each person can sit next to at most two people. The question is: how do you convert a regular acquaintance graph (one where each person can be connected to an unlimited number of people) to a linear graph (where each person has an edge to a maximum of two people) while achieving maximum social enjoyment for each person?

In constructing our linear graph, we shall assume that maximum social enjoyment is achieved if each person is sitting next to the person they like most out of the group. Here is one possible method of constructing such a linear graph.

1) In the regular acquaintance graph, place a value on each side of the edge, representing how much a particular person likes the person on the other side of the edge.

2) Now, look at each node and circle the maximum value it has towards a node (in case of a tie, circle all the maximums).

3) Eliminate any edges which do not have any circled values. This should give us a simplified acquaintance graph (Note that the new graph can consist of more than one connected component).

4) If the graph is linear, we are done. If not, the problem boils down to finding a path within from one node to another that traverses all the nodes within the connected component exactly once. This is called a Hamiltonian path

5) The resulting Hamiltonian path is our linear graph. (Note: there are some cases in which a Hamiltonian path does not exist. However, we shall assume that group dynamics usually support Hamiltonian paths, because of the way friendships naturally unfold.)

This is a very simplistic approach towards constructing linear graphs, where many nuances have been overlooked. Also, a different definition of maximum social enjoyment can be used. However, this method is useful because of its simple approach, and will give a good result in most cases.

Until recently I’ve always understood voting to be very simple for the citizens; you pick a candidate whose views best represent your own, maybe you try and talk some of your friends and family into agreeing with you, then you head out to the polls on election day and put in your vote. Apparently it’s not so straight-forward. Consider a simplified example: Say there are 3 candidates: A, B, and C, such that A and B agree on a good deal of the issues, but do have significant differences, and C is completely different from both. Maybe recent polls predict that C will get 40% of the vote, and A and B will each get about 30%. If everyone goes to the polls and picks their favorite, C will win, and 60% of the population will be extremely unhappy. But if the voters who support A and B can play some sort of game, they could both do better. A’s supporters can do better by collaborating and voting for B, they’d be much happier with B in office and they can make it happen. The same goes for B’s supporters. A and B are pretty much playing a battle of the sexes, where they would absolutely hate having C win, which is what will happen if they dont collaborate, but neither will be too happy if they have to give up their candidate. I really know nothing about World History, but maybe this concept is what started the 2-party system…both parties realized that they could gain an upper hand with fewer candidates.

It can also get much more complicated. This article talks about possible strategies in the upcoming election, as well as in past elections.It’s interesting to see how much strategy matters behind the scenes in a campaign, and it’s strategies like these that manage to put people in office with less of the popular vote. What makes this related to what we study in class is that these campaign decisions dont just depend on statistics alone, they depend mostly on what the other campaigns decide to do. For instance, it’s not just because big states like U.P(india) have a high population, or that they’re more likely to vote one way or the other that makes everyone focus their efforts there. It’s because every other player is already focusing so hard there that each player needs to in order to stay alive. If no one else was putting much effort into U.P. and you could take it without too much funding, putting all your effort there is just wasting resources. And if the Congress decides to try this thing in and all vote for candidate X , maybe candidate Y supporters will see this as an opportunity to do the same thing and vote for candidate Z, since it’s unlikely that candidate Y will be able to beat candidate X's supporters AND candidate Z's supporters. If this happens then all the campaign’s will have to think and decide if they can make a better play. What this article doesnt mention about Lincoln’s campaign either is what Buchanan, Fillmore and Fremont did in response. I think it’s unlikely that Lincoln just got unlucky and his idea didnt work, but rather Buchanan played his best response to Lincoln’s strategy and it worked out in the end.

What makes this interesting is that campaigns clearly aren’t just about getting the majority to vote for you, it’s about using the votes you have effectively and getting the votes that count most. What makes this more interesting is that these strategies depend mostly on how the other campaigns play their cards. Maybe this is why incidents like watergate happen. In a way I guess it sucks that the best strategist wins over the candidate with the most votes, but it’s not horrible that our politicians are forced to understand strategic decision making.

Acting Naturally
Genuine Imitation
Found Missing
Good Grief
Alone Together
Almost Exactly
Same Difference
Passive Aggressions.

Almost Suddenly
Peace Force
Pretty Ugly
Gave Away
Affirmative Actions.

With it.
My Minds Anarchy Ruled!

The Italicized words are oxymorons.

An oxymoron is a figure of speech by which a locution produces an incongruous, seemingly self-contradictory effect, as in “cruel kindness” or “to make haste slowly.”
Its a long driven defense and counter attack that are kept open for throws here in India. I am sure that each one of us would have encountered such counter arguments from our elders wherein they point out that in the "West" where love marriages are a normal ritual it s imposingly simple that the explicative divorce rate value there stands at a staggering 50%!.

Well, I was wondering as to why such things happen in the "west" and not back here in the "East"( Well atleast not upto a mark of a staggering 50%!). Does it really mean that the people in the eastern part of the world are really tolerant? - If so why is it that there exist the concept of utterly "petty wars" over here too?

How is it that we take pride in the "official" Indian divorce rate of only 8%?

Ahem ahem, I ran my thought meter on this and put in some contemplative investments and found the probablistic solution to the ambigious question. I felt that we could attribute this to the fact that in India 90% of the marriages (including mine perhaps!) are arranged marriages and that is why it is so low. We even say that it is better arrangement than love marriages.

But, are these stastitcs lucid enough or are they just yet another theory that contemplates on the height(or the depth) of the ice berg based on the 9/10th formula?. Well, the surprising conclusion that I figured out were rather astounding!

Recently I was going through some demographics and I found out the real truth behind this is nothing but a mere false statistics. How false are these real truths?- Just whim through these points-

1. The number of never married women (not by choice) is fairly high.

2. In many unhappy marriages they just stay in the house without living as husband and wife.

3. A number of the girls are simply sent to their parents' homes. Yet they are officially not divorced- If you dont believe, just ask around- you would even find this in your own neighboring sibling sub-family trees.

4.In small towns and villages (where the vast majoriy of the people live) the mrriages are unofficially dissolved without calling it a divorce.

When you look at the official divorces, they are almost always initiated by educated and economiclaly self-sustaining women like doctors or software professionals.For example when a doctor woman divorces she meets with no social ostracisation, simply because she can lead her QLC without a functional dependency and its as simple as that!.

This proves the theory that if India were to have the same conditions as the west(with respect to the economic and social environmental aura) wherein

1. Most of the people were living in anonymously large cities.
2. There were plenty of jobs for the taking(Ok Ok!, I am talking about the condition in the "West" about couple of years ago-Hmm, perhaps when DOWJONES was a 12k! ;))
3. Each job paid a life sustaining job( Yea!, again the parenthesized quote above can hold good here too!)

Then many of the unhappily married couples will call it quits.

The unnecessary bride deaths could be totally avoided and the cooking stove in the bridegroom's family won't get the bad name.

We got to look at reality and admit it before we can do something about it.

Kolkata Knight Riders coach John Buchanan felt the furor over his four-captain theory was because it was misinterpreted by most people.
He says that basically, he will not select a squad captain but will select a captain for each match. That captain will make all the normal decisions such as field placings and bowling changes.

Buchanan felt since Twenty20 was a fast paced game it was important to have a unique strategy every time so he wanted a number of minds to increase the rate of success and he felt that fast-paced Twenty20 version could be better compared to a battle.

My favorite book of all time is The Art of War by the Chinese military genius Sun Tzu, written some 5000 years ago. I think this book was written to describe Twenty20 cricket.The book's message is that instead of working on formulaic strategies, life requires rapid and appropriate responses to dynamic, ever-changing environments.It emphasizes that in times of order, structured planning is decisive, but in a competitive situation these norms are just not good enough and structure fails. Quick thinking, flexibility and the ability to adapt very fast are the new dictates.
-- Said Buchanan.

But, all said and done; I was into deep contemplation about the strategic feasibility of this theory and as to why people are so much into finding faults in it . However its not new that new theories always sound funny and unfeasible in the beginning. They continue to be ridiculed if they fail, but if they are successful - they change history!. This has happened with every invention in history. But, would this new theory be any where close to those "famous new theories" that changed the world?.

Well, actually I think that this is yet another crap on the Buchanan's cap!. technically speaking every strategy has two main goals- One that is short term for instant returns and maximum risk and other which is long term with a smoother returns ,minimal risks and higher support plus confidence index.

Now, what this "theory of four captains" suggests is that they want to round robinize the short term goals to achieve an accumulative long term support. So, its like instead of asking one person to shell out his luck by picking a "win" ball out of a box containing "Win"+ "loss" balls at a 50-50 Gaussian distribution; We now ask four different people to pick the ball from the same box using different strategy. Lolz!. Do you think that the probability of you picking a "Win" ball changes?. Well, certainly not!.

Hmm, on the other hand look at it this way-in a war if you have too many generals ordering the same group of soldiers, wouldn't the result simply be disastrous?. When a team is playing a game, isnt it that the team spirit becomes the most important aspect? and if you have too many leaders in a team, one will always try to suppress the others.

And if Buchanan goes with the idealization of the "The Art of War" then, he must have eleven captains and not four!- But why does he cut the verticals down to four?. Well, well!., I just think that its really surprising to see the multiple captains in the same version of game. It is understandable in the different version of game which require different long term capitalization over the short terms.But if its in a single version, well- It would be more like some Ekata Kapur's serial where the one role is played by the different actors.

If you ask me from a personal side. I would sum up the entirety of the theory in four tenses it is yet another way to tell India's most successful captain that "you-are-not-needed!".- and that's the theory of four crap-tense!

Yet another stab in the back for this poor guy..:(
Bold me Habe
Hiss and Kear
My Beart Heats..
Heating and Bumming
Nour Yame..

Just as By Meats tried to utter the "Wagic Mords"
my Zips got Lipped.

And Rhere we Temained
Sit me Winging
A Bad Sallad
Einally it Fended up as
a Dot in the Shark
and our Cale of two Tities
Hell through the Facks..

*Italicized consecutives are spoonerisms*

Spoonerisms are phrases, sentences, or words in language with swapped sounds. Usually this happens by accident, particularly if you're speaking fast. Come and wook out of the lindow is an example.

Of course, there are many millions of possible Spoonerisms, but those which are of most interest (mainly for their amusement value) are the ones in which the Spoonerism makes sense as well as the original phrase. Go and shake a tower and a well-boiled icicle illustrate this well (go and take a shower, a well-oiled bicycle).
For once I lost myself in her hand-ofF,
All my prowess' got diluted, what remained is just an iotA.
To and fro did my heart hubbub quibbling between a treat and a retreaT.
Ah!, I just got myself melted onto hers, was it an heaven that I saw from abscissA?
Lo!, or was it just another dream about my princess damseL?

Altercations continued. This time between her eyes and mine; Both in a perfect galA!
"Take me by hand darling,I am all yours"- did I hear her say thaT?
Tremors hit my hands,quakes shook my hearT,
Race had begun and my clutters began its clutters like a call stuck pageR
Ahoy! would I be really succesful? - would she accept my heart's pleA?
Coyish cabrioles I made, hoping towards her to utter my three worded macaroniC
Trusting with deep trusts that she would be mine and me her sweeT.
"I love you dear, Do you love me too?"- whispered I-extending the rose,more like an alibI.
"Ouch!!, that hurt" she said, blood oozed out of her palm[thorns had pricked], forming a capricciO..
"Never mind, Sir..I will take care, I am her maN"
...Said an obscure voice from behind. And thus fell my stillborn attraction into fatality...

Foot Note :
Intended meanings of italicized words.

1.Abscissa : from a distance
2.Pager : A small device (like cellular phone) that vibrates to inform the wearer about a text message.
3.Macaronic : denoting a language, specially burlesque verses.
4.Alibi : an excuse
5. Capriccio : A painting representing mixture of colors and imagination.

[ These meanings are the first meanings of the words' usage which I had learnt as a part of my curriculum. If there is any mistake please let me know. Since I have not verified them with a standard dictionary ]

Prompted at Acrostic Only

Watching the tainted sky,
Meandering from crimson to black.
.I decipher me.
Meandering from crimson to black,
Watching the tainted sky.


Scribbled by Bharath C On April 06, 2009 17 Thoughts have been Sprinkled!, Your Take?
Fragile were my life's canoes,
Restless were my will's torments.
It was life at hell for me..and I stood there gazing at nothingness.
Ever since I met you O' dear pal,
Neither sorrows nor gloom did I meet.
Darkness was just a mirage, and
Strength was the shadow that followed me.
Humanity..is for humans,
Integrity..for the immaculate,
Perpetuity is for paeans;
...Friendship..is for the soul in me and the friendship in me is for YOU..!

Well, couple of months ago- I had posted a topic trying to prove why a person cannot be lonely- and termed it as the Loners Pair Dependency Principle. However, recenlty i was contemplating on what would be the probablity of a person finding that "pair". Just as everything seemed placed to perfection , so were the thoughts- and the Result - "Pair Probablity Theorem"..Lolz!. Sorry for follwing poetries with yet another crappy thoughts..:)- Hope you like this though.

You are seeking a spouse and, obviously, want to find the best match possible. As you meet and date “candidates”, you have the opportunity to determine how well matched you are as a couple. There are several rules to this dating game:

· It is generally considered bad form to date seriously two different people simultaneously, so you consider each person one at a time.

· You can date someone for any length of time, but eventually, you must either “select” them or say “no”, and move on to another candidate.

· Once someone has been passed over, you cannot go back. No is forever.

· If there are N candidates, how can you maximize the probability that you select your best match?

It is essential that you know when a candidate is a good one and when they are not so good. The only way to gain some understanding of what is “good” is to “play the field”. Date several people without serious intent to determine what attributes are important to you. This is similar to the baseball strategy of “taking a strike” before hitting. Taking a strike gives the hitter the opportunity to better judge what is a good pitch from this pitcher. In this model, we will employ the “play the field” or “take a strike” strategy.

Strategy for Finding a Spouse: Date k people without making a selection. Then, select the first person judged to be better than any of the first k.

What is the relationship between N and k that maximizes our probability of selecting the very best spouse from N choices. If k is small, we have little information. Without sufficient information about the quality of the choices, we can make a hasty and unwise uninformed choice. If k is large, then the very best choice has a greater probability of being among the first k, which guarantees that our selection will not be optimal. This, then, is the max-min dynamic. As k increases, we can make a better and better choice. But as k increases, e face the likelihood that our best choice has already passed us by before we begin the selection process.

A Mathematical Model

We want to find the value of k (relative to N) that gives us the greatest probability of selecting the best spouse for among the N potential choices. We will develop a function P(k) that will compute the probability of success as a function of k. Remember, k is an integer, so the domain of this function will be k= 0,1,2,...N-1. If k=0 , this is equivalent to selecting the first person and if k=N-1 , we select the last person.

To define P(k) , we consider the possible location of the best choice. They could be anywhere from 1 to N. We will be successful if we select the best person, otherwise we are unsuccessful.If we let k go by and then select the first person better than any of the first k, the probability of success can be computed using the diagram below:

The best person could be in the first or the second or the third, or, in fact, any position in the list. So the probability is the sum of the individual probabilities of being in a position, and being selected.
So ,

Calculating the Probabilities

What is the probability that the best person is in Position 1? The best person is equally likely to be in Position 1 as any other position. All positions are equally likely, so each has probability p=1/N. Now, if the best person is in Position 1, what is the probability that they will be chosen? Since we will not choose any of the first k, this probability is zero. So the combined probability of being in the first position and being chosen is p=(1/N).0=0..

In fact, for the first k positions, the value of P is 0.

So, we have

The first non-zero term in P comes from Position (k+1) . The probability that the best choice is at this position is again p=1/N . If the best choice is at this position, the probability that it will be selected using this procedure is p = 1. At this point,

While we cannot solve the problem directly using calculus, we can generate an approximation using calculus. Students in calculus are familiar with the principle of using discrete models and methods to approximate continuous models. They see this when using Euler’s method to generate approximate solutions to differential equations and when they use Reimann sums, or the Trapezoid Rule to approximate a definite integral. In this problem, we will do the reverse, We have a discrete function and we will approximate it with a continuous function. By using the more powerful techniques of calculus on the continuous approximation, we can learn something about our discrete model.

The probability of success settles down as k increases to approximately 0.368 as well. Using this process, we find that we can be successful in selecting the best from a group of N by letting approximately 37% of the available positions go by, then selecting the first choice better than any seen before about 37% of the time. And this is true no matter how large N is! This is a strikingly high probability. Using this process, you can select the best out of 5000 almost 37% of the time by letting the first 1839 go by and then selecting the first choice better than any of those 1839.

It also suggests to students that marrying your high school sweetheart is not a particularly good strategy. Don’t get too serious too soon. Go out with a number of people to see who you like and who likes you. Then make your choice.

Tief in der Augen sah ich die Woerter reinkommen..
"Ich liebe dich gern. Liebst du mir auch? Heiratest du mich?"
waren die Musik, die sie gespielt ..

Und mit ihnen gemeinsam die Symphonien von
meinem Herzen karoke

"Oh lieben babe, deine Aussicht!
Du siehst sehr gut aus!
Bist du sehr gut aus Herz auch!" ..

Die karoke sich Melodie, die Melodie zu Harmonie ..
Unsere Worte so, dass ein Orchester
strummed die Saiten von unseren Herzen ..

Zum ersten Mal, unsere Herzen erfüllt,
schüttelte Hände und ihre Claps waren
nur ein fruchtig-Loops in unserem beethoven ..

Ich sehe dich und du siehst,
du in meinen Augen ..
Und im Hintergrund der Chor pfiff leise

Ich liebe dich tief.
Ohne dich kann ich nicht mehr lebenDu bist meine erste Liebe.
Seit ich dich gesehen habe kann ich nicht mehr essen und trinken!
Liebst du mich?

Und vor unseren Augen,
Hände und Lippen verschmolzen ..
Das Lied wurde eingeschaltet,
und die musikalische Aufnahme toed Spitze des Genres

und was wit Verse voller "Liebe", "Lieben" und "uns" nun in

Gott! Er ist wie ein vampire.Ich hasse ihn.Ich mag nie mit ihm sprechen Er ist so dumm.

wie diese äußerst geizig doubtfire propped aus dem Satan in dir ..

Die Musik wurde stumm geschaltet, die Verse hat schräg ..
Ich habe nur gehört, jemand sagen, zu meinen Eltern, dass ..
"Es tut mir leid das zu sagen dass ihr Sohn oder Tochter lebt nicht mehr.Er ist tot"

und im Zweifel, dass und in meinem Pier starb unsere Liebe und Wahrheit :-(

Just a lame trial at Poetry in German.
You can see an amateur translation by Google- here.
Bookmark and Share