plain murder

So when I dreamt this, I was very sick, and was so fevered I had been hallucinating while awake. In my dream, I was just a simple baker, living in a kingdom and specializing in cake. I fought my way to become the king baker, through a mix of bake-offs, duels, and plain old murder. I lost nearly everyone I cared about along the way, as a result of my ruthless methods, until I was standing on a cliff with my one remaining friend in the world, and she pushed me off the cliff, so she could become the king baker. Then I woke up, fell asleep, and had the exact same dream three more times.

anonymous asked:

Look. I get why you want JD to be a perfect angel that did no wrong cause let's face it. He's hot. But the reality as it stands is that he is a murder. Plain and simple. He murdered Heather C, Kurt and Ram, and even tried to kill his "beloved" Veronica because she didn't want to murder people anymore. He's a psychopath. Or at the very least has psychopathic tendencies. He's not perfect. He did wrong. LOTS of wrong. Don't be a child. Accept the facts.

They would have stayed together, but with school and baseball, and them being really different (JD is really dramatic and…weird) Veronica thought they should maybe take a break :(

The tragedy in this event is that the sexuality of those killed will be undermined, and that the race, religion, and the ethnicity of the shooter will take precedence in all American media outlets. This will not be an American terrorist shooting gay people, this will be a “Muslim terrorist who killed people.” No one in the media will acknowledge this event as what it is, it will go down as “yet another Islamic terrorist” when the man’s race or religion have nothing to do with it. He was a coldblooded murder who only vouched for his own beliefs, he is not a representation of Islam, Muslims, Afghanistan, or any other country or culture. He’s just a plain old coldblooded murderer. 

Sympathies to the families of those lost or harmed, sympathies to those of us in the LGBTQIA+, and sympathies to all the hate crimes against Muslims that this incident will instigate.

>>edit version here<<

antiblackness is thick on the display today post-oscars, as a cadre of “celebrities of color” who have stayed silent on centuries of oppression, abuse, and plain murder of black people are now infuriated that black people don’t talk enough about them. i’m all about solidarity, but not as a matter of convenience. you wanna ride with us, ride with us. don’t yell at us from the corner to stop after refusing to get on the bus though.
On the Germanwings mass murder

I’m getting really tired of people on this website (and a lot of idiotic and very ignorant people in the media) saying “Well if it’s not suicide and it’s not terrorism then what is it?” The answer is blindingly obvious - it’s mass murder plain and simple. What Andreas Lubitz did is no different to what any mass shooter did - an action designed to take the lives of others and generally their own through violent acts. There was no political or ideological motivation the police have yet ascertained so that alone rules out terrorism by definition. The elements for terrorism simply aren’t fulfilled because this guy didn’t crash the plane for any political or religious agenda. He was perhaps suicidal but people seeking to end their own suffering generally don’t take 150 people with them. That really just leaves plain old mass murder for Lubitz’s crime.

You might ask why Lubitz wasn’t called a terrorist, but the first reaction of many media outlets was to call it a terrorist attack before more information was known. The moment the plane was known to have crashed the media was quick to jump on terrorism as a cause. It was only after further information relating to the blackbox and Lubitz’s history was revealed that they dismissed terrorism because he had no links to political or religious organisations whatsoever as well as it being evident that the pilot was locked out. There was no note, no manifesto, no indication whatsoever that he did this advance something other than a personal cause. Let’s compare a vaguely similar situation that many of us know about: Anders Breivik and his attack in Norway where he killed 77, injured 319 all to spout his far right wing view. Breivik used his attack on a left wing youth camp to draw attention to his rantings about the glories of the right wing, how much he hated Muslims, his hatred of multiculturalism and other such political views. It was this that labelled him as a terrorist. His use of death and mayhem to draw attention to his political ideology is what branded him a terrorist, not the killings themselves. It wasn’t the killings themselves that made him a terrorist, it was how he used them to megaphone his views following the crime that made him a terrorist. He used the fear, panic and death to promote his political view to the world.

What Breivik did is in fact disturbingly similar to what Martin Byrant (the perpetrator of the Port Arthur Massacre in my home of Australia that shot 35 dead and injured 23) had the status of being the deadliest lone gunmen in history until he was usurped by Breivik’s attack. Both picked an island and slaughtered a very great many people. Here’s the thing, Byrant was never referred to as a terrorist, he was always a mass murderer but never a terrorist. What separates Byrant from Breivik is that Byrant‘s rampage was sparked by numerous personal issues in isolation to political or religious beliefs. Byrant like Lubitz had no note, no manifesto and drew no attention to any political or religious goals following or prior his massacre. It simply happened one day. The only attention that was drawn was to the individuals who committed the murders to further promote themselves. Byrant, like Lubitz, apparently told someone “One day I’ll do something that’ll make everyone remember me” so they were attention seekers, but they sought attention for their own sake not the sake of any political or religious ideology. This is why they are simply mass murderers and not terrorists in addition to being murderers. Lubitz and Byrant killed a huge amount of people to have their names spelled out in newspaper headlines, not the name of any religion or political party. They’re just murderers and the amount of people killed alone doesn’t make the actions a terrorist attack. So, neither Byrant or Lubitz have the status of being a terrorist and it has nothing to do with them being white. They don’t meet the elements of the crime, thus they aren’t called terrorists. It really is that simple.

So when most of Europe is saying “Lubitz is a mass murderer and not a terrorist” I’m very much so inclined to agree with them. Lubitz was just another attention whore looking to gain infamy for himself upon his death as he couldn’t achieve the opposite. He’s the same as any other mass murderer, school shooter or anyone else looking for a slice of infamy after death. His actions weren’t motivated by political or religious ideals, but a desire for everyone to know his name and have him live on after death because he was a nobody in life. He wasn’t a terrorist, he was just a bog standard murderer who happened to have a plane instead of a gun.

It’s so important that he’s drunk. It’s so, so important that he is drunk. It is immensely, intensely, incredibly important that Robert is drunk.

Emmerdale is making the purposeful choice to create “wiggle room” with his morality and intentions. They are purposefully giving the audience a way to partially excuse/explain his behavior (other than “evil,” which doesn’t suit him). It’s not just that he’s drunk–but that he was so upset he got super drunk. He isn’t in a good enough mental state to make a logical, moral decision.

This is them making sure he isn’t a clear-cut villain or a plain, one-dimensional murderer. This is them leaving the door if redemption open.

iamprinceofthestars  asked:

GLaDOS, what do I do if I'm the only one in my family that doesn't care about Easter or religion and my mother is forcing it upon me

Murder them; plain and simple.


You make her a happy tree witch :‘3
Her name is Zenobia, based off a famous warrior queen and she’s delightfully, disturbingly chipper given her propensity for violence.
Hilda saved her from being torched by a couple of boys as a Petilil and they’ve been together since.
She’s extremely protective of Hilda (who sometimes refers to her as ‘Tia’) and wants the best for her 'niece’ whether that means hunting down prey (YOU’RE TOO SKINNY MI SOBRINA. YOU MUST EAT MORE) or you know, plain old murder (You want Tia to kill him? Tia will make it clean).

She gets along //very// well with Foxmom, they’re a pair of gossipy hens when they aren’t destroying things and enjoy trading childhood stories of their young charges.
She and N, she finds the fact that she unnerves him amusing and teases him a lot on it. She thinks he’s a good kid, but he could use more backbone. Given that she mistrusts men in general however, that’s positively friendly coming from her.