🔥 | Latest

Being Alone, Batman, and Friends: HIS PARENTS DIED WHEN HE WAS SO YOUNG SHOT KILLED RIGHT IN FRONT OF HIM HIS WHOLE PLANET WAS DESTROYED HE'S THE LAST OF A HOLOCAUST HE WAS RAISED ALONE HE GREW UP IN THE DIRT A KID IN A HUGE MANSION FINDING OUT SLOWLY HOW DIFFERENT HE WAS WITH HIS MEMORIES OF HIS MOTHER AND FATHER A STRANGER DISCOVERING EVERY DAY HOw STRANGE HE WAS HE HAD LOVE, AND THEY TOOK IT FROM HIM НЕ SHOULD BE A KILLER HE HAS THE POWER TO TEAR THE HE SHOULD WANT TO TEAR THE WORLD APART FOR WHAT IT DID WORLD APART AND HE COULD WITH A PINKIE. HIS WORLD. WE'RE IT'S NOT NOT HIS PEOPLE. WE SHOULD BE ANTS TO HIM IMAGINE THAT. ALWAYS BEING ON THE OUTSIDE THE PAIN THAT WOULD COME FROM ALWAYS BEING ON THE OUTSIDE AND YET HE TOOK THAT PAIN THAT SHOCK OF DEATH AND YET HE TOOK THAT PAIN AND BECAME THE SYMBOL OF HOPE AND HE TURNED IT INTO HOPE I HAD THE LOVE OF PARENTS, I HAD MA AND PA THE WHOLE WAY I'M JUST A RICH KID FROM THE CITY I KNEW MY PARENTS I KNEW WHO I WAS, WHAT I HAD TO BE. I HAD A CHILD HOOD FULL OF LAUGHING AND LEARNING I HAVE POWERS. I HAD TO DO THIS ALL HE HAS ARE HIS WITS AND HIS CHOOSES TO I DIDN'T HAVE ANY CHOICE BUT TO BE WHO I AM AND HE DO THIS WILL HE HAD EVERY CHOICE -AND HE BECAME WHO HE IS. EVERYONE WANTS TO BE HIM EVERY KID IS INSPIRED BY HIM HE'S JUST A BETTER MAN THAN I AM HE'S A BETTER MAN THAN I AM. acutelatios: samalexandxr: - He got engaged. He didn’t call me. Okay. That’s his way of telling me… We’re not friends. Not really.   - You can’t be friends with him. Not when you’re… He doesn’t need to congratulate me. Look at me. Who am I compared to him?   - He is who he is. He doesn’t need a friend. He doesn’t need… He isn’t like me.   - He’s Superman.   - He’s Batman. Batman #36 (2017) HOLY SHIT I THINK THIS IS THE NEXT PANEL?
nsfw
Being Alone, Batman, and Friends: HIS
 PARENTS
 DIED WHEN
 HE WAS SO
 YOUNG
 SHOT
 KILLED
 RIGHT IN
 FRONT OF
 HIM
 HIS WHOLE
 PLANET WAS
 DESTROYED
 HE'S THE
 LAST OF A
 HOLOCAUST
 HE WAS
 RAISED
 ALONE
 HE GREW
 UP IN THE
 DIRT
 A KID
 IN A HUGE
 MANSION
 FINDING
 OUT SLOWLY
 HOW DIFFERENT
 HE WAS
 WITH HIS
 MEMORIES OF
 HIS MOTHER AND
 FATHER
 A STRANGER
 DISCOVERING
 EVERY DAY HOw
 STRANGE HE
 WAS

 HE HAD
 LOVE, AND
 THEY TOOK IT
 FROM HIM
 НЕ
 SHOULD BE
 A KILLER
 HE HAS
 THE POWER
 TO TEAR THE
 HE SHOULD
 WANT TO TEAR
 THE WORLD APART
 FOR WHAT IT
 DID
 WORLD
 APART
 AND HE
 COULD
 WITH A
 PINKIE. HIS WORLD. WE'RE
 IT'S NOT
 NOT HIS PEOPLE. WE
 SHOULD BE ANTS
 TO HIM
 IMAGINE
 THAT. ALWAYS
 BEING ON THE
 OUTSIDE
 THE PAIN
 THAT WOULD
 COME FROM ALWAYS
 BEING ON THE
 OUTSIDE
 AND
 YET HE TOOK
 THAT PAIN
 THAT
 SHOCK OF
 DEATH
 AND YET
 HE TOOK THAT
 PAIN AND BECAME
 THE SYMBOL OF
 HOPE
 AND
 HE TURNED
 IT INTO
 HOPE

 I HAD
 THE LOVE OF
 PARENTS, I HAD
 MA AND PA
 THE WHOLE
 WAY
 I'M JUST
 A RICH KID
 FROM THE
 CITY
 I KNEW
 MY PARENTS
 I KNEW WHO I
 WAS, WHAT I
 HAD TO
 BE.
 I HAD
 A CHILD
 HOOD FULL OF
 LAUGHING AND
 LEARNING
 I HAVE
 POWERS. I
 HAD TO DO
 THIS
 ALL HE
 HAS ARE HIS
 WITS AND HIS CHOOSES TO
 I DIDN'T
 HAVE ANY CHOICE
 BUT TO BE WHO
 I AM
 AND HE
 DO THIS
 WILL
 HE
 HAD EVERY
 CHOICE
 -AND
 HE BECAME
 WHO HE
 IS.

 EVERYONE
 WANTS TO BE
 HIM
 EVERY KID
 IS INSPIRED
 BY HIM
 HE'S JUST
 A BETTER MAN
 THAN I AM
 HE'S
 A BETTER
 MAN THAN
 I AM.
acutelatios:

samalexandxr:


- He got engaged. He didn’t call me. Okay. That’s his way of telling me… We’re not friends. Not really.  
- You can’t be friends with him. Not when you’re… He doesn’t need to congratulate me. Look at me. Who am I compared to him?  
- He is who he is. He doesn’t need a friend. He doesn’t need… He isn’t like me.  
- He’s Superman.  
- He’s Batman.
Batman #36 (2017)


HOLY SHIT I THINK THIS IS THE NEXT PANEL?

acutelatios: samalexandxr: - He got engaged. He didn’t call me. Okay. That’s his way of telling me… We’re not friends. Not really.   - Yo...

Amazon, Amazon Prime, and Children: taylor @taylor_welker Would like to purchase this to see what all the fuss is about AT&T LT 611 PM amazon prime R9920 47 Sol Coastal Wonderful, except... A fun way to ruin a weekend and The Beach Behemoth Giant inflatable 12-Foot Pole-to- By Zia Aud on December 31, 2017 Do not inflate in your living room....Or anywhere that has a door between you and where you want blow 100 bucks. Pole Beach Ball by Sol Coastal By Reid hamlin on February 3, 2018 We took this ball to the beach and after close to 2 hours to pump it up, we pushed it around for about 10 fun filled minutes. That was when the the ball to be. 289 people found this helpful wind picked it up and sent it huddling down the beach at about 40 knots. It destroyed everything in its path. Children screamed in terror at the giant inflatable monster that crushed their sand castles. Grown men were knocked down trying to save their families. The faster we chased it, the faster it rolled. It was like it was mocking us. Eventually, we had to stop running after it because its path of injury and destruction was going to cost us a fortune in legal fees. Rumor has it that it can still be seen stalking innocent families on the Florida panhandle. We lost it in South Carolina, so there is something to be said about its durability. Read less Report Helpful Not Helpful Five Stars By Amazon Customer on February 16, 2018 o ooo00 Verified Purchase $95% This thing will single handedly destroy a third world country with hilarity. Buy one. prime .
Amazon, Amazon Prime, and Children: taylor
 @taylor_welker
 Would like to purchase this to see
 what all the fuss is about
 AT&T LT
 611 PM
 amazon
 prime
 R9920 47
 Sol Coastal
 Wonderful, except...
 A fun way to ruin a weekend and
 The Beach Behemoth Giant inflatable 12-Foot Pole-to-
 By Zia Aud on December 31, 2017
 Do not inflate in your living room....Or anywhere
 that has a door between you and where you want
 blow 100 bucks.
 Pole Beach Ball by Sol Coastal
 By Reid hamlin on February 3, 2018
 We took this ball to the beach and after close to 2
 hours to pump it up, we pushed it around for
 about 10 fun filled minutes. That was when the
 the ball to be.
 289 people found this helpful
 wind picked it up and sent it huddling down the
 beach at about 40 knots. It destroyed everything
 in its path. Children screamed in terror at the giant
 inflatable monster that crushed their sand castles.
 Grown men were knocked down trying to save
 their families. The faster we chased it, the faster it
 rolled. It was like it was mocking us. Eventually, we
 had to stop running after it because its path of
 injury and destruction was going to cost us a
 fortune in legal fees. Rumor has it that it can still
 be seen stalking innocent families on the Florida
 panhandle. We lost it in South Carolina, so there is
 something to be said about its durability.
 Read less
 Report
 Helpful
 Not Helpful
 Five Stars
 By Amazon Customer on February 16, 2018
 o ooo00
 Verified Purchase
 $95%
 This thing will single handedly destroy a third
 world country with hilarity. Buy one.
 prime
.

.

Family, Friends, and Head: anarchy404x 1d You must understand the weird logic of the left. To them life is priceless and should always be prioritised over property. They would literally let the statue of Liberty burn to save one person. Through inaction let one person starve? You monster, you literally murdered them. Reply Vote tsunderepup: randomslasher: pastel-selkie: lesbianshepard: stupid leftists and their belief in *checks notes* the intrinsic value of human life Reblog if you would burn down the statue of liberty to save a life Here’s the thing, though. If you asked a conservative “Would you let the statue of liberty burn to save one life?” they’d probably scoff and say no, it’s a national landmark, a treasure, a piece of too much historical importance to let it be destroyed for the sake of one measly life.  But if you asked, “Would you let the statue of liberty burn in order to save your child? your spouse? someone you loved a great deal?” the tune abruptly changes. At the very least, there’s a hesitation. Even if they deny it, I’m willing to bet that gun to their head, the answer would be “yes.”   The basic problem here is that people have a hard time seeing outside their own sphere of influence, and empathizing beyond the few people who are right in front of them. You’ve got your immediate family, whom you love; your friends, your acquaintances, maybe to a certain degree the people who share a status with you (your religion, your race, etc.)–but beyond that? People aren’t real. They’re theoretical.  But a national monument? That’s real. It stands for something. The value of a non-realized anonymous life that exists completely outside your sphere of influence is clearly worth less than something that represents freedom and prosperity to a whole nation, right? People who think like this lack the compassion to realize that everyone is in someone’s immediate sphere of influence–that everyone is someone’s lover, or brother, or parent. Everyone means the world to someone. And it’s the absolute height of selfishness to assume that their lives don’t have value just because they don’t mean the world to you.  P.S. I would let the statue of liberty burn to save a pigeon. 
Family, Friends, and Head: anarchy404x 1d
 You must understand the weird logic of the left. To
 them life is priceless and should always be
 prioritised over property. They would literally let the
 statue of Liberty burn to save one person. Through
 inaction let one person starve? You monster, you
 literally murdered them.
 Reply Vote
tsunderepup:
randomslasher:

pastel-selkie:

lesbianshepard:
stupid leftists and their belief in *checks notes* the intrinsic value of human life

Reblog if you would burn down the statue of liberty to save a life

Here’s the thing, though. If you asked a conservative “Would you let the statue of liberty burn to save one life?” they’d probably scoff and say no, it’s a national landmark, a treasure, a piece of too much historical importance to let it be destroyed for the sake of one measly life. 
But if you asked, “Would you let the statue of liberty burn in order to save your child? your spouse? someone you loved a great deal?” the tune abruptly changes. At the very least, there’s a hesitation. Even if they deny it, I’m willing to bet that gun to their head, the answer would be “yes.”  
The basic problem here is that people have a hard time seeing outside their own sphere of influence, and empathizing beyond the few people who are right in front of them. You’ve got your immediate family, whom you love; your friends, your acquaintances, maybe to a certain degree the people who share a status with you (your religion, your race, etc.)–but beyond that? People aren’t real. They’re theoretical. 
But a national monument? That’s real. It stands for something. The value of a non-realized anonymous life that exists completely outside your sphere of influence is clearly worth less than something that represents freedom and prosperity to a whole nation, right?
People who think like this lack the compassion to realize that everyone is in someone’s immediate sphere of influence–that everyone is someone’s lover, or brother, or parent. Everyone means the world to someone. And it’s the absolute height of selfishness to assume that their lives don’t have value just because they don’t mean the world to you. 
P.S. I would let the statue of liberty burn to save a pigeon. 

tsunderepup: randomslasher: pastel-selkie: lesbianshepard: stupid leftists and their belief in *checks notes* the intrinsic value of human...

Being Alone, Amazon, and Bad: CW CNN @CNN Follow European colonizers killed so many Native Americans that it changed the global climate, researchers say cnn.it/2DR3W1C 8:00 PM -2 Feb 2019 924 Retweets 1,321 Likes SULLDHONHS Sophia Chang Follow @sophchang "European settlers killed 56 million indigenous people over about 100 years..." 56 million. It took a long time for me to process that figure CNN @CNN European colonizers killed so many Native Americans that it changed the global climate, researchers say cnn.it/2DR3W1c 9:45 AM -3 Feb 2019 1,872 Retweets 2,388 Likes Follow @RadRoopa Replying to @sophchang And to think, the world population in 1900 was only 1.5 billion compared to today's 7.5 billion I don't know what the world pop was like in 1500 but 56 millions would've been a HUGE percentage of that. That astronomical number is definitely hard to process 9:25 PM - 3 Feb 2019 Follow @RadRoopa Replying to @RadRoopa @sophchang I just looked it up and the world pop in 1600 was about 570 million. They wiped out TEN PERCENT of the world's population. That's the equivalent of 750 million ppl today. Whoa 9:50 PM - 3 Feb 2019 evergreennightmare: red-stick-progressive: aossidhboyee: red-stick-progressive: burdenbasket: gahdamnpunk: This is insane holy fuck, this is A LOT Also that figure is way too low, modern population estimates might be as much as twice that. There were between 25 and 40 million in central Mexico alone, almost as many people in the North Amazon, almost as many in the Andes, and almost as many in the American South. All saw 80 to 99 percent population loss in the period of 2 to 3 generations. The Greater Mississippi River Basin had a population somewhere between 5 and 12 million, the Eastern Woodlands had about as many, about as many in the Central Amazon, and almost as many on the American West Coast and North West Coast respectively. All of which saw 85 to 99 percent population losses in 2 or three generations after the others. Multiple factions if European interests killed all the natives they could and destroyed all the culture and history they could. They were not limited by gender, language, religion, culture, ethnic group, nationality, geography, or time period; just every single person they could. That’s not even genocide, it’s apocalypse. Why are you all omitting the well known fact that it was not purposeful genocide but simply new microbes introduced that no one knew about at that time. Cuz that’s not true. Tw genocide, tw violence When Columbus realized the pigs they brought were getting the Islanders sick he arranged to loose as many as possible ahead of them primarily into the Benne region, I believe. Cortez loaded sickened corpses into Tenochtitlan’s aqueducts, Spain deliberately targeted the priests of Mexican society first because they knew it would severely undermine the public ability to treat disease. When the post Incan city states developed a treatment for malaria, the Spanish deliberately targeted the cities producing the quinine treatment and made it illegal to sell it to non-christians. The Spanish took all the sick and forced them at sword-point to go back to their homes instead of to the sick houses or the temples throughout the new world, and forced anyone who wasn’t sick to work in the mines or the coin factories melting and pressing their cultural treasures down into Spanish coins. The English were just as bad, they started the smallpox blankets. A lot of the loss was not deliberate infections like this but it was preventable at a million different crossroads and every European culture took the opportunity to weaponize the plagues when they could. They knew what they were doing, just cuz they didn’t know what germs were doesn’t mean they have some accidental relationship with it. Alexander the great used biological warfare after all, so it’s not like you can pretend the concept was alien to them, they wrote about it. Besides they did plenty of old fashioned killing too, there were Spanish conquistadors that estimated their own personal, individual killings might have numbered over the ten thousands. They were sure they’d killed more than ten million in “New Spain” alone. They crucified people they smashed babies on the rocks, they set fire to buildings they forced women and children into and cooked their meals over the burning corpses, they loosed war dogs on people. They sold children into sex slavery to be raped by disease riddled pedos back in Europe and if taking their virginity didn’t cure the sick creeps the native children would be killed or sometimes sent back. The English were just as bad, shooting children in front of their mothers and forcing them to mop their blood with their hair. Turning human scalps into currency. Feeding babies to dogs in front of their mothers and fathers. Killing whole villages and erasing them from their maps so that historians would think God had made it empty just for the English. The Americans after them burned crops and drove several species of bison to extinction just to starve the plains tribes. They pushed the blankets too. On top of the wars of extermination and scalp hunting and concentration and laws defining natives as non-persons so that we’d never be protected by the Constitution. And even if you wanna live in some dreamy fairytale where God just made a whoopsie and then there were no natives left, nobody forced them to erase our history. The Spanish burned every document they found to erase the literacy and literary tradition of the Central and South Americans. There are essentially three Aztec documents left and some excavated pottery, and some archeological inscriptions and that’s it. The single most advanced culture in math and anatomical medicine erased probably forever. Same to the Inca, the most advanced fiber and alloy engineers and economists gone forever. Nobody made them do that. Nobody forced the American colonizers to steal political technology and act like they invented democracy or sovereignty. Nobody forced them to build their cities on top of native ones and erase them from history forever. Baltimore was built on Chesapeake, which translates roughly to “city at the top of the great water” in most Algonquin tongues. My favorite example is Cumberland in Western MD, they didn’t even reshape the roads or anything, they paved the steps and walking paths natives had used for hundreds of years and now it’s almost impossible to drive cuz the streets are too narrow or steep. The culture that built them didn’t have horses. Phoenix AZ, called Phoenix cuz the settlers literally found an old city and “brought it back to life.” Did they save any history or cultural artifacts? No. Most cities on the east coast are like this. Nobody forced them to erase that history. Colonizers are not innocent just cuz the germs did a lot of the work of the apocalypse. (tlaxcallān had a democratic form of government)
Being Alone, Amazon, and Bad: CW CNN
 @CNN
 Follow
 European colonizers killed so many Native
 Americans that it changed the global climate,
 researchers say cnn.it/2DR3W1C
 8:00 PM -2 Feb 2019
 924 Retweets 1,321 Likes
 SULLDHONHS

 Sophia Chang
 Follow
 @sophchang
 "European settlers killed 56 million
 indigenous people over about 100 years..." 56
 million. It took a long time for me to process
 that figure
 CNN
 @CNN
 European colonizers killed so many Native Americans that it changed
 the global climate, researchers say cnn.it/2DR3W1c
 9:45 AM -3 Feb 2019
 1,872 Retweets 2,388 Likes

 Follow
 @RadRoopa
 Replying to @sophchang
 And to think, the world population in 1900
 was only 1.5 billion compared to today's 7.5
 billion
 I don't know what the world pop was like in
 1500 but 56 millions would've been a HUGE
 percentage of that.
 That astronomical number is definitely hard
 to process
 9:25 PM - 3 Feb 2019

 Follow
 @RadRoopa
 Replying to @RadRoopa @sophchang
 I just looked it up and the world pop in 1600
 was about 570 million.
 They wiped out TEN PERCENT of the world's
 population.
 That's the equivalent of 750 million ppl today.
 Whoa
 9:50 PM - 3 Feb 2019
evergreennightmare:
red-stick-progressive:

aossidhboyee:


red-stick-progressive:

burdenbasket:


gahdamnpunk:
This is insane
holy fuck, this is A LOT


Also that figure is way too low, modern population estimates might be as much as twice that. There were between 25 and 40 million in central Mexico alone, almost as many people in the North Amazon, almost as many in the Andes, and almost as many in the American South. All saw 80 to 99 percent population loss in the period of 2 to 3 generations. 
The Greater Mississippi River Basin had a population somewhere between 5 and 12 million, the Eastern Woodlands had about as many, about as many in the Central Amazon, and almost as many on the American West Coast and North West Coast respectively. All of which saw 85 to 99 percent population losses in 2 or three generations after the others.
Multiple factions if European interests killed all the natives they could and destroyed all the culture and history they could. They were not limited by gender, language, religion, culture, ethnic group, nationality, geography, or time period; just every single person they could. 
That’s not even genocide, it’s apocalypse.


Why are you all omitting the well known fact that it was not purposeful genocide but simply new microbes introduced that no one knew about at that time.


Cuz that’s not true. 
Tw genocide, tw violence
When Columbus realized the pigs they brought were getting the Islanders sick he arranged to loose as many as possible ahead of them primarily into the Benne region, I believe. Cortez loaded sickened corpses into Tenochtitlan’s aqueducts, Spain deliberately targeted the priests of Mexican society first because they knew it would severely undermine the public ability to treat disease. When the post Incan city states developed a treatment for malaria, the Spanish deliberately targeted the cities producing the quinine treatment and made it illegal to sell it to non-christians. The Spanish took all the sick and forced them at sword-point to go back to their homes instead of to the sick houses or the temples throughout the new world, and forced anyone who wasn’t sick to work in the mines or the coin factories melting and pressing their cultural treasures down into Spanish coins. The English were just as bad, they started the smallpox blankets. A lot of the loss was not deliberate infections like this but it was preventable at a million different crossroads and every European culture took the opportunity to weaponize the plagues when they could. 
They knew what they were doing, just cuz they didn’t know what germs were doesn’t mean they have some accidental relationship with it. Alexander the great used biological warfare after all, so it’s not like you can pretend the concept was alien to them, they wrote about it.
Besides they did plenty of old fashioned killing too, there were Spanish conquistadors that estimated their own personal, individual killings might have numbered over the ten thousands. They were sure they’d killed more than ten million in “New Spain” alone. They crucified people they smashed babies on the rocks, they set fire to buildings they forced women and children into and cooked their meals over the burning corpses, they loosed war dogs on people. They sold children into sex slavery to be raped by disease riddled pedos back in Europe and if taking their virginity didn’t cure the sick creeps the native children would be killed or sometimes sent back.
The English were just as bad, shooting children in front of their mothers and forcing them to mop their blood with their hair. Turning human scalps into currency. Feeding babies to dogs in front of their mothers and fathers. Killing whole villages and erasing them from their maps so that historians would think God had made it empty just for the English. 
The Americans after them burned crops and drove several species of bison to extinction just to starve the plains tribes. They pushed the blankets too. On top of the wars of extermination and scalp hunting and concentration and laws defining natives as non-persons so that we’d never be protected by the Constitution.
And even if you wanna live in some dreamy fairytale where God just made a whoopsie and then there were no natives left, nobody forced them to erase our history. The Spanish burned every document they found to erase the literacy and literary tradition of the Central and South Americans. There are essentially three Aztec documents left and some excavated pottery, and some archeological inscriptions and that’s it. The single most advanced culture in math and anatomical medicine erased probably forever. Same to the Inca, the most advanced fiber and alloy engineers and economists gone forever. Nobody made them do that. Nobody forced the American colonizers to steal political technology and act like they invented democracy or sovereignty. Nobody forced them to build their cities on top of native ones and erase them from history forever. Baltimore was built on Chesapeake, which translates roughly to “city at the top of the great water” in most Algonquin tongues. My favorite example is Cumberland in Western MD, they didn’t even reshape the roads or anything, they paved the steps and walking paths natives had used for hundreds of years and now it’s almost impossible to drive cuz the streets are too narrow or steep. The culture that built them didn’t have horses. Phoenix AZ, called Phoenix cuz the settlers literally found an old city and “brought it back to life.” Did they save any history or cultural artifacts? No. Most cities on the east coast are like this. Nobody forced them to erase that history.
Colonizers are not innocent just cuz the germs did a lot of the work of the apocalypse.

(tlaxcallān had a democratic form of government)

evergreennightmare: red-stick-progressive: aossidhboyee: red-stick-progressive: burdenbasket: gahdamnpunk: This is insane holy fuck, t...