Punch Up
Punch Up

Punch Up

Quickly
Quickly

Quickly

Peering
Peering

Peering

Closed
Closed

Closed

late night
 late night

late night

not even
 not even

not even

close
 close

close

tommorow
tommorow

tommorow

conflicted
conflicted

conflicted

assess
assess

assess

🔥 | Latest

Animals, Ass, and Birthday: SNEp DUMBO OFFICIAL TRAILER takineko: libertarirynn: futched: libertarirynn: dragonkyng: libertarirynn: friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: the-mighty-birdy: animationtidbits: Dumbo - Official Trailer Yo quick question why HELLO DARKNESS MY OLD FRIEND There are just so many problems here In the original movie the animals talk and baby Jumbo is called “Dumbo“ by the mean mom elephants. Why in the world do these kids who are supposed to be his friends call him Dumbo? Who thought it was a good idea to make a talking animal movie human centered? That stupid ass slowed down indie remix of “baby mine” is as hilarious as it is awful. Somebody tell Hollywood that you don’t need a slowed down indie remix in every movie trailer. Horrifying CGI is horrifying Why do we keep letting Tim Burton ruin Disney Classics? 1. Becuase its been a weird thing that Dumbo’s name has only ever been an insult and he never had a real name. 2. Not a rehash of the original? Isnt that a good thing? 3. No comment on that. 4. I’ve seen worse 5. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ He absolutely did have a real name did you not read right there where I said it was Jumbo? Literally the whole point of a remake is to be a remake of the original? Change it too much and it’s a reboot. 1. Call me crazy but I swear Jumbo was his mom’s name, and one of the elephants was like “oh look, he’s like a little Jumbo!” And that one bitch was like “with those ears? Nah, he’s Dumbo.” 2. The point is to make money, but I wouldn’t be surprised if this was more of a tax/copyright/contract thing. His name was definitely Jumbo Jr. because the stork character sings “happy birthday Jumbo Jr.“ at the very beginning of the movie do not fight me on this. Their family last name was JumboHis mom was called Mrs. Jumbo right? In the clip above she very specifically says that his name is Jumbo jr. I’m going to assume that as circus elephants, they don’t have surnames.

takineko: libertarirynn: futched: libertarirynn: dragonkyng: libertarirynn: friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: the-mighty-birdy: a...

Animals, Ass, and Birthday: SNEp DUMBO OFFICIAL TRAILER futched: libertarirynn: dragonkyng: libertarirynn: friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: the-mighty-birdy: animationtidbits: Dumbo - Official Trailer Yo quick question why HELLO DARKNESS MY OLD FRIEND There are just so many problems hereIn the original movie the animals talk and baby Jumbo is called “Dumbo“ by the mean mom elephants. Why in the world do these kids who are supposed to be his friends call him Dumbo?Who thought it was a good idea to make a talking animal movie human centered?That stupid ass slowed down indie remix of “baby mine” is as hilarious as it is awful. Somebody tell Hollywood that you don’t need a slowed down indie remix in every movie trailer.Horrifying CGI is horrifyingWhy do we keep letting Tim Burton ruin Disney Classics? 1. Becuase its been a weird thing that Dumbo’s name has only ever been an insult and he never had a real name.2. Not a rehash of the original? Isnt that a good thing?3. No comment on that.4. I’ve seen worse5. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ He absolutely did have a real name did you not read right there where I said it was Jumbo?Literally the whole point of a remake is to be a remake of the original? Change it too much and it’s a reboot. 1. Call me crazy but I swear Jumbo was his mom’s name, and one of the elephants was like “oh look, he’s like a little Jumbo!” And that one bitch was like “with those ears? Nah, he’s Dumbo.”2. The point is to make money, but I wouldn’t be surprised if this was more of a tax/copyright/contract thing. His name was definitely Jumbo Jr. because the stork character sings “happy birthday Jumbo Jr.“ at the very beginning of the movie do not fight me on this.

futched: libertarirynn: dragonkyng: libertarirynn: friendly-neighborhood-patriarch: the-mighty-birdy: animationtidbits: Dumbo - Offic...

Af, Being Alone, and Bad: Tom Sauer @thomasbsauer (THREAD) A few observations from a former bomb disposal officer G.e. Me) 1. Proper pipe bombs don't have wires connected to both ends. That's dumb. 1:15 PM 24 Oct 18 from Washington, DC 1,354 Retweets 1,736 Likes Tom Sauer @thomasbsauer 2. You can find timers/ remote control receivers WAY smaller than whatever that white box is. A proper timer would best be stored inside the pipe, making it fully encapsulated I hat thing is just silly looking 1:15 PM 24 Oct 18 from Washington, DC 224 Retweets 555 Likes Tom Sauer @thomasbsauer 3. Bottom Line: Whoever made that wanted it to be painfully obvious to anyone and everyone that it's a "bomb." This is nearly the same as a bundle of road flares wrapped together with an old-timey alarm clock ticking away. 1:15 PM 24 Oct 18 from Washington, DC 397 Retweets 1,005 Likes Tom Sauer @thomasbsauer 4, "Hoax Devices" are FAR more common than real ones. In which case, we should ask ourselves what the motives of the "bomber" are and "who benefits?" Go ahead. Think deeply and critically. 1:15 PM 24 Oct 18 from Washington, DC 387 Retweets 915 Likes robert-the-redhead-lover: skypig357: robert-the-redhead-lover: skypig357: robert-the-redhead-lover: skypig357: whiskey-gunpowder: skypig357: oldmarine1775: whiskey-gunpowder: the golden rule: if the media pushes something, be very skeptical. If MSM is pushing it, I promise you it’s total BS. If it were Republicans receiving these “bombs” you wouldn’t hear anything about it. Guess you’ve not seen the news. Press conferences. Arrest was made. It was legit. Not hoax devices and not a false flag. And if you don’t think the MSM would cover Republicans getting bombs in the mail you’re insane. Even if they hate republicans they’ll cover that for ratings. Money talks the media is nothing more than a left wing propaganda machine. they report narratives, not facts So is Fox News a right wing propaganda machine they reports narratives, not facts? If the media reports something you want to be true, do you think it’s equally Fake News? Also I’m not basing anything off the media, but the press conference that the FBI and Attorney General made noting the arrest and status of the devices. Then a basic search of the subject (Cesar Sayoc) gives you a trove of information https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-director-christopher-wrays-remarks-regarding-arrest-of-cesar-sayoc-in-suspicious-package-investigationFBI Director Christopher Wray’s Remarks Regarding Arrest of Cesar Sayoc in Suspicious Package InvestigationSourcing of all media is a good idea. Check and double check. But if you go down the rabbit hole of actual distrust and embracing conspiracy theories you’re lost. Weird how the FBI was able to get this guy so quick, yet missed the Parkland shooter, despite years of reports… DNA and fingerprints. If you’re in the system and you’ve committed a national crime, it’ll be over quick. He left evidence Even though I’m in the system (USN), it took them two weeks to run a background check on me when I applied for an airport job, but they nabbed this guy in less than 48 hours? I find that suspicious af. Dude. Your background check act of domestic terrorism that’s targeting politicians and media all over the news in an election year. If you find that suspicious I don’t know what to tell you. What’s the alternative? A conspiracy involving hundreds of FBI agents and techs, local and state law enforcement, postal service, and media? Are you serious? You don’t need all that when folks don’t question and just obey because they’re “taking care of the bad guys.” All you need are a few rotten apples at the top.But, none of those packages went through the mail. That’s given away by the lack of postal cancellation, as well as not enough postage.Otherwise, the timing is what I call suspicious. Hostage situations have taken longer. Hell, since you brought up domestic terrorism, it took them longer to find McVeigh and Kazinski (sp?) than this guy. Even assuming it is the right guy, do we know who he really is? If he was capable of organizing something like this by himself? If he working alone? If he isn’t the face of a larger scheme? It wouldn’t be the first time the “ lone wolf” angle being pushed by the media looked a little suspicious.As an aside, I love it when people get into pointless arguments about CNN vs Fox News and which one is “less biased“, as though they aren’t both owned by the same sort of people and used to pump out varying levels of propaganda for controlled opposition.

robert-the-redhead-lover: skypig357: robert-the-redhead-lover: skypig357: robert-the-redhead-lover: skypig357: whiskey-gunpowder: sky...

Anaconda, Arguing, and Books: SENSATIONA $1.50 US SOMETHING WOT FRivOLOUS ITS NOT FAIR TO ACCUSE ME OF VANITY! BECAVSE IAM A MAN JUST THRIVE 3OTw siryouarebeingmocked: darkado: mornington-the-crescent: mightyoctopus: siryouarebeingmocked: cisnowflake: anti-capitalistlesbianwitch: 100 Women: The artist redrawing ‘sexist’ comic book covers An artist in India is challenging sexist drawings of women in comic books by parodying them using male heroes in poses typically associated with women. She-Hulk has superhuman strength and speed and is one of the most formidable hand-to-hand combatants in the Marvel world. Like Hulk, not only does she have physical power, she’s also completely green. Yet, on a 1991 comic book cover, she is shown in a seductive pose, wearing a G-string bikini, with her curves sharply accentuated. Indian artist Shreya Arora was shocked when she saw the image. “For Hulk, the visual representation focuses on his strength. For She-Hulk, all we see is an emphasis on sexuality,” says Arora, who grew up reading comic books. The 21-year-old graphic designer decided she wanted to flip the narrative. Why is depicting women as sexy considered sexist? The irony, of course, is that there already was a Spider-Man cover like that second one. Also, this is literally judging a book by its cover. Heck, you’re even ignoring the self-aware speech bubble. The book actually starts with She-Hulk on a beach, so the cover is actually appropriate to the contents. And can I just- LOOK AT SPIDEY’S CROTCH. LOOK AT IT. LOOK AT IT. Yes, clearly we needed a view of Tony’s skintight bodysuit. This is doing the same thing as the Hawkeye Initiative. It’s not clever or original. There are blogs I’d expect to caption a Spiderman picture with “LOOK AT SPIDEY’S CROTCH. LOOK AT IT. LOOK AT IT.” and then there is this blog. Guess I was wrong. The artist also completely failed to get the joke: August, 1991, Demi Moore appears on the cover of “Vanity Fair” magazine, nude and pregnant. It caused quite an outrage, but the controversy lead to increased sales. In December of the same year, Marvel decided to riff on that idea, showing She-Hulk in the same pose, with a beach ball instead of a pregnant belly. She even says, “It’s not FAIR to accuse me of VANITY“, a not-so-subtle nod to the famous magazine cover. tl;dr: Artist is offended by someone else’s work, not understanding anything about the history or concept behind the artwork. I’m usually here for pointing out that men can be sexualized like women but wow you guys really chose the wrong thing to argue with. Sure, Spidey has a nice crotch and Tony is in a bodysuit, but I do really need to point out that not all of these comics are even from the same era? Using Civil War II is ridiculous considering it came out only two years when others are over two decades older. Also, trying to say that the She-Hulk cover is a simple nod could be acceptable if they didn’t do this for every single issue of The Sensational She-Hulk. Even a quick Google search will show that they tried to sell the the comics with sex appeal and She-Hulk admitting that doesn’t make it any better. Comepltely unrelated to the story Entirely nude Completely unnecessary (as stated by She-Hulk) I don’t think I need to explain why these are much more gratuitous than Spidey or Tony. Sure, Spidey has a nice crotch and Tony is in a bodysuit, but I do really need to point out that not all of these comics are even from the same era?OP didn’t make distinctions about era.Using Civil War II is ridiculous considering it came out only two years when others are over two decades older.The Spider-Woman cover is from 2014. That Spidey web-ball cover is from 2000 or so. She-hulk is from 1991.So, even if I give you the whopping two years between the Spider-Woman cover and Civil War 2, OP’s range still covers the time period of that Spidey cover.But in the interests of fairness, lets take a gander at 90s Iron Man.Look at that cyber-bulge and those cyber-abs.Also, trying to say that the She-Hulk cover is a simple nod could be acceptable if they didn’t do this for every single issue of The Sensational She-Hulk. You mean the light-hearted, self-aware comic where the fanservice is clearly a joke, and the character still has choice and agency? How does that represent all female-led comics? At least if they had used a few Catwoman Jim Balent covers, they might’ve had some ground, seeing as he actually seems to have a thing for leather, latex, and lace. Of course, these days Shulk has more conventional covers, which explains why the artist had to go back 25+ years to find them.Also, are you absolutely sure it’s every issue?Every single one?Wow, Electro is ripped here. I don’t need to explain the Bugs Bunny ref, do I?This isn’t even an actual comic cover, it’s Frank Cho fanart. If there’s so much actual examples, why is she using a non-cover? The parody artist even admits she’s focusing on the visuals. People who get bent out of shape because of comic book covers really have too much time on their hands.

siryouarebeingmocked: darkado: mornington-the-crescent: mightyoctopus: siryouarebeingmocked: cisnowflake: anti-capitalistlesbianwitch:...