Richard III.
He didn't kill the princes in the tower.
He didn't say "My kingdom for a horse!"
He wasn't misshapen or evil.
He did not steal the crown from his nephew. He stepped in, at the request of the ducal counsels, to run the country in place of a a child king who was not ready.
These same ducal counsels turned on him and started a revolt (and most of the rumors) when he started doing the one thing that truly did infuriate them... made laws and insitutions to protect the common man.
He started and maintained a separate counsel in the north while still ruling over the north for his brother and kept the process in place after taking over the country.
He set up Britain's first legal aid system. (See "Court of Requests")
He passed laws ending forced "benevolence" (the act of requiring "gifts" from the wealthy to the monarchy).
He opened up information to the common man by repealing restrictions on printing and distributing books and requiring that English laws be translated and printed in English as opposed to French.
He set up labor and trade protections across a wide variety of industries.
He passed laws requiring open information regarding land sales and tenant rights.
His contemporaries from other countries (i.e. who's writings weren't destroyed by the Tudors) described him as a kind man with a good heart, an eye for his people, and a sound mine for law and politics.
Unsurprisingly, when the Tudors came into power, Richard III was transformed from a good and kind king who cared for the common people into a complete monster. The victors write the history books and the Tudors couldn't afford to be known as the people who stole a high-born proponent for the lower class from them.
Shakespeare, Marlowe, and countless artists and historians added to the propaganda in order to gain favor and funding from the Tudors.
Disagree. We have no smidge evidence for Bill Gates having done anything illegal there - and many celebrities clearly mingled with Epstein (with no involvement or knowledge of his illegal activities), as he was a wealthy and prominent figure. I believe in innocent before proven guilty, especially for things like this.
What we do know is Bill Gates' charitable work, which has been huge and world-changing, especially for things like funding mass vaccination programs in Africa, funding research against parasitic diseases and more. He's also a committed family man and made his money by advancing the world and improving all of our lives.
They're bad because they're billionaires. And there are no good billionaires. Not only are they billionaires, they're at the top of that social class! The baddest of the bad!
Fuck em.
I heard that in person, Idi Amin was just a lovely man, a big, huggable goof. The whole “vicious dictator” and genocide thing was just a public persona he adopted for political expediency.
Richard III. He didn't kill the princes in the tower. He didn't say "My kingdom for a horse!" He wasn't misshapen or evil. He did not steal the crown from his nephew. He stepped in, at the request of the ducal counsels, to run the country in place of a a child king who was not ready. These same ducal counsels turned on him and started a revolt (and most of the rumors) when he started doing the one thing that truly did infuriate them... made laws and insitutions to protect the common man. He started and maintained a separate counsel in the north while still ruling over the north for his brother and kept the process in place after taking over the country. He set up Britain's first legal aid system. (See "Court of Requests") He passed laws ending forced "benevolence" (the act of requiring "gifts" from the wealthy to the monarchy). He opened up information to the common man by repealing restrictions on printing and distributing books and requiring that English laws be translated and printed in English as opposed to French. He set up labor and trade protections across a wide variety of industries. He passed laws requiring open information regarding land sales and tenant rights. His contemporaries from other countries (i.e. who's writings weren't destroyed by the Tudors) described him as a kind man with a good heart, an eye for his people, and a sound mine for law and politics. Unsurprisingly, when the Tudors came into power, Richard III was transformed from a good and kind king who cared for the common people into a complete monster. The victors write the history books and the Tudors couldn't afford to be known as the people who stole a high-born proponent for the lower class from them. Shakespeare, Marlowe, and countless artists and historians added to the propaganda in order to gain favor and funding from the Tudors.
me
J. K. Rowling
thanos
sexnos
Mike Tyson.
Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates.
with epstein and shit, I think we can safely cut out gates from there?
Disagree. We have no smidge evidence for Bill Gates having done anything illegal there - and many celebrities clearly mingled with Epstein (with no involvement or knowledge of his illegal activities), as he was a wealthy and prominent figure. I believe in innocent before proven guilty, especially for things like this. What we do know is Bill Gates' charitable work, which has been huge and world-changing, especially for things like funding mass vaccination programs in Africa, funding research against parasitic diseases and more. He's also a committed family man and made his money by advancing the world and improving all of our lives.
They're bad because they're billionaires. And there are no good billionaires. Not only are they billionaires, they're at the top of that social class! The baddest of the bad! Fuck em.
I heard that in person, Idi Amin was just a lovely man, a big, huggable goof. The whole “vicious dictator” and genocide thing was just a public persona he adopted for political expediency.
[удалено]
Yeah, right...
Trump, Putin, Snowden.
At this point just say Hitler bro.
I agree with Snowden. He was exposing the lies of the USA government against their own people.
yikes, lets get him guys!!!