Anonymous asked: I don't think anyone thinks killing civilians is a good thing. No argument here with that,p. But what about Hamas using civilians as shields? What about Hamas hiding weapons in mosques and civilian buildings and on a least one verifiable occasion, firing rockets at Israel from a mosque, then ordering women into the mosque to act as a human shield? Israel might end up killing civilians, but Hamas has no qualms about sacrificing it's citizens or putting them in danger. Why not mention that too?

Hamas using civilians as shields is despicable, if that is occurring. From what I’ve heard from within Gaza civilians are starting to turn to Hamas more than they were before because they are the only resource they have to protect them.

People seem to be forgetting that Gaza has literally no military to protect them. Resources are indeed a factor here, and you’re naive if you believe it isn’t. Gaza is virtually unprotected, Gaza does not have the Iron dome or any form of protection against these attacks. Hence the increasing sympathy for Hamas amongst some Palestinians. 

Not to mention the fact that it is also despicable to fire at people who are using human shields, knowing you are killing innocents. I mean, I’m not one to defer to Russell Brand for any form of authority but he did a pretty damn good job challenging the issue. Hamas clearly was operating under the assumption that Israel would follow international laws and not fire on civilians. Hamas was wrong because Israel has broken multiple laws since this most recent conflict started. Hamas clearly assumed that Israel would care about taking innocent life - and again, they were wrong.

Also, not all Israeli targets were in any way related to Hamas

I suppose I got distracted by the bombing of shelters that were unrelated to Hamas and were actually run by the UN, the destruction of hospitals that were not housing Hamas weapons and the general disregard for any form of civilian safety by Israel. 

They’ve now promised to bomb another hospital that is unrelated to Hamas, another violation of international law. Another example of not caring about innocent, wounded civilians. Yes, they called to tell them to evacuate, which is not so nobel when you consider they’re destroying a place that saves lives and treats the wounded, that they’re targeting, and have repeatedly targeted, places for the sole fact that they help palestinians.

You’re attempting to justify the massive loss of life by directing the blame onto Hamas. Hamas are not the good guys here - they started this current conflict, but despite the fact it’s a terrorist organisation it is still the lesser of two evils - and that’s not because I agree with Hamas but because of the absolute atrocities Israel has been committing. When you look worse than a terrorist organisation that’s when you know you’ve done something seriously wrong. 

0 notes


Anonymous asked: Um Hamas is doing the same thing as Israel: firing weapons in to civilian areas. They may not have the weaponry or technology to do the same damage, but as per their charter they want to kill as many Israeli as possible. That is their intention.

And you genuinely believe that his gives Israel authority to kill as many Palestinians as they please??? 

The existence of an active terrorist threat does not justify the targeting and killing of over a thousand innocent civilians. 

5 notes


Anonymous asked: Hey. I just wanted to let you know that I was the first person to tell you that I thought a lot of your replies were too long and mostly filler. I was not the one who continued it. They went too far, it's a little ridiculous and frightening. I was simply stating my opinion on something that grinds my gears to see from time to time. Just felt as though I should clarify, they were not all from the same person.

To be fair to you the difference in tone and wording to this ask compared to this one from yesterday were quite different and I assumed that they were two different people. Although all of the asks from yesterday were quite clearly from the same person.

That being said both original asks were incredibly rude and the fact that you thought you were in some position to dictate how a person should respond to asks just reflects how entitled you think you are. Yes, you had the maturity not to resort to rape threats or stupid insults about eating disorders, but the original messages were both equally as arrogant and pointless.

5 notes


Anonymous asked: Again there seems to be a lot of bias here... for the sake of parity, why not include the UN criticism of Hamas (which is ample)? Continually pointing out what Israel has done wrong (a lot of which I agree with BTW) while skimming over what Hamas is doing (such as breaking the recent ceasefire, as per the UN) seems as though you are biased. Which if you are, ok. I just don't think saying you aren't taking sides is an accurate statement though.

I am a bit tipsy so probably shouldn’t be answering this.

But look at it this way.

There are now over 1,400 palestinian civilians dead at the hands of Israel. Not 1,400 members of Hamas, but 1,400 innocent people. 80% of palestinian casualties are civilians.

Hamas has killed 56 Israeli soldiers and 3 Israeli civilians. 

Feel free to call me bias, but my bias is on the side of the innocent people being slaughtered. My bias is not with Hamas. If Hamas was doing the same as Israel I would be just as disgusted.

I would say I’m sorry to focus on the faults of those with exceptionally better fire power, man power and defence who are targeting innocent civilians, but I’m not. I’m really not. And no matter how many ceasefires are breached by Hamas Israel will not be justified in killing civilians, or children, on the scale that they are.

And the UN agrees. 

8 notes



Just in, kinda drunk.

But they played Heartbeat by Childish Gambino tonight.

And it was awesome. 

So. Freaking. Awesome <3


22 notes


When serial killer Richard Ramirez was originally arrested, after being attacked by an angry public mob when he was identified as the night stalker, he was described by police as shy, quiet and nervous. However, over the course of his trial he received an incredible amount of both media attention and attention from women who would frequently write to him and visit him in jail. As a result Ramirez&#8217;s confidence grew, and he began acting up in court, behaving more like a rock and roll star than a man facing a multiple murder charges. 


32 notes

Members of French Forces of the Interior carry out the death sentence of six Frenchmen convicted of collaborating with the Germans, Grenoble France September 22&#160;1944.

Israel, as an occupying power, is in direct violation of Article III of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. This convention lays out the minimum standards for the protection of civilians in a conflict that is not international in scope. Article 3(1) states that those who take no active role in hostilities must be treated humanely, without discrimination, regardless of racial, social, religious or economic distinctions. The article prohibits certain acts commonly carried out against noncombatants in regions of armed conflict, including murder, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture. It prohibits the taking of hostages as well as sentences given without adequate due process of law. Article 3(2) mandates care for the sick and wounded. Israel has not only violated the tenets of Article III but has amply fulfilled the conditions of an aggressor state as defined by Article 51. But for Israel, as for the United States, international law holds little importance. The U.S. ignored the verdict of the international court in Nicaragua v. United States and, along with Israel, does not accept the jurisdiction of the tribunal. It does not matter how many Palestinians are killed or wounded, how many Palestinian homes are demolished, how dire the poverty becomes in Gaza or the West Bank, how many years Gaza is under a blockade or how many settlements go up on Palestinian territory. Israel, with our protection, can act with impunity.

-Chris Hedges (via sexualsportswear)

(via youdpreferanastronaut)


117 notes


32 notes


Anonymous asked: you should really write something about jack the ripper tho

I’m personally far more interested in solved crimes, seeing as without a perpetrator understanding why it happened is reduced to guess work.

But I have posted about him before. 

8 notes


mjinwonderland asked: Could you imagine yourself committing the "perfect murder" by not being caught?

Nope. I don’t think I could.

I wouldn’t want to, I’d have a difficult time coming to terms with it and actually carrying out the act. And because of how distressed I would be I highly doubt I’d be objective and detached enough to remove any trace of myself from the scene.

While someone may have all the knowledge in the world to carry out a crime where they’d never be caught, the experience of carrying it out - the adrenaline, the guilt, the emotional response either positive or negative - could compromise your objectivity and impede your judgement. There are no guarantees. 

14 notes


146 notes


Anonymous asked: I want to say thank you for the time you take out of your busy schedule to give thoughtful, insightful, an sourced responses to your asks.

Thank you so much!

9 notes