1. White terrorists are called “gunmen.” What does that even mean? A person with a gun? Wouldn’t that be, like, everyone in the US? Other terrorists are called, like, “terrorists.”

2. White terrorists are “troubled loners.” Other terrorists are always suspected of being part of a global plot, even when they are obviously troubled loners.

3. Doing a study on the danger of white terrorists at the Department of Homeland Security will get you sidelined by angry white Congressmen. Doing studies on other kinds of terrorists is a guaranteed promotion.

4. The family of a white terrorist is interviewed, weeping as they wonder where he went wrong. The families of other terrorists are almost never interviewed.

5. White terrorists are part of a “fringe.” Other terrorists are apparently mainstream.

6. White terrorists are random events, like tornadoes. Other terrorists are long-running conspiracies.

7. White terrorists are never called “white.” But other terrorists are given ethnic affiliations.

8. Nobody thinks white terrorists are typical of white people. But other terrorists are considered paragons of their societies.

9. White terrorists are alcoholics, addicts or mentally ill. Other terrorists are apparently clean-living and perfectly sane.

10. There is nothing you can do about white terrorists. Gun control won’t stop them. No policy you could make, no government program, could possibly have an impact on them. But hundreds of billions of dollars must be spent on police and on the Department of Defense, and on TSA, which must virtually strip search 60 million people a year, to deal with other terrorists.

Juan Cole, 08/09/2012   (via thepeacefulterrorist)

Juan Cole actually wrote this 4 days after a white terrorist, yes, terrorist, murdered 6 and injured 4 people at a Sikh gurdwara in Wisconsin. The terrorist who committed said crime spoke of an impending “racial holy war” beforehand and was a member of white supremacist/neo-Nazi hate groups.

(via mohandasgandhi)

ataxiwardance: I’m not always a fan of Juan Cole, but his point about disparate popular representation of terrorist violence is as obvious as it is worth repeating.

(via jjarichardson)

“So remember: 12:01 a.m., May 26. The schedule after that will be approximately as follows: the first animated GIFs from the first episode will appear at 12:01 and a half, people will complain that Netflix is down at 12:02, spoilers will begin appearing on Twitter at 12:03, angry tweets about spoilers at 12:04, think pieces about how this distribution model affects spoilers at 12:05, think pieces about how this distribution model might result in the return of Firefly at 12:06, listicles of 10 more shows that Netflix should revive at 12:07, complaints that these episodes “suck” at 12:08, complaints about haters at 12:09, questions about why people who are so into Arrested Development refuse to watch Community at 12:10, and 25 pictures of cats watching Arrested Development at 12:11.”
thesmithian:


I don’t mean to compare the rapper and Mad Men’s leading character’s status as sex symbols, because the parallels go beyond the superficial. They are both products of fiction. They’re both identity thieves whose actual life stories hold the potential to ostracize them from their chosen communities. But more importantly, they both have constructed elaborate fantasy worlds around an idea of masculinity they know isn’t true to who they are. And neither one can escape. Or it might be that they don’t want to escape. They both know that what they’re selling is bullshit, but they do it anyway because it affords them the opportunity to indulge every hyper-masculine fantasy they’ve been told would bring them happiness.

more. and more.

Boom.  thesmithian:


I don’t mean to compare the rapper and Mad Men’s leading character’s status as sex symbols, because the parallels go beyond the superficial. They are both products of fiction. They’re both identity thieves whose actual life stories hold the potential to ostracize them from their chosen communities. But more importantly, they both have constructed elaborate fantasy worlds around an idea of masculinity they know isn’t true to who they are. And neither one can escape. Or it might be that they don’t want to escape. They both know that what they’re selling is bullshit, but they do it anyway because it affords them the opportunity to indulge every hyper-masculine fantasy they’ve been told would bring them happiness.

more. and more.

Boom. 

thesmithian:

I don’t mean to compare the rapper and Mad Men’s leading character’s status as sex symbols, because the parallels go beyond the superficial. They are both products of fiction. They’re both identity thieves whose actual life stories hold the potential to ostracize them from their chosen communities. But more importantly, they both have constructed elaborate fantasy worlds around an idea of masculinity they know isn’t true to who they are. And neither one can escape. Or it might be that they don’t want to escape. They both know that what they’re selling is bullshit, but they do it anyway because it affords them the opportunity to indulge every hyper-masculine fantasy they’ve been told would bring them happiness.

more. and more.

Boom. 

Occupy Wall Street: More popular than you think

The conservative criticism of the Occupy Wall Street movement is that it is a “growing mob” (House majority leader Eric Cantor) of “shiftless protestors” (The Tea Party Express) engaged in “class warfare” (GOP presidential candidate Herman Cain) whose grievances - whatever they are - are far outside the political mainstream.

The polls don’t back that up.

A new survey out from Time Magazine found that 54 percent of Americans have a favorable impression of the protests, while just 23 percent have a negative impression. An NBC/Wall Street Journal survey, meanwhile, found that 37 percent of respondents “tend to support” the movement, while only 18 percent “tend to oppose” it.

The findings suggest that the right’s portrait of the movement as a collection of lazy hippies who need to stop whining - to “take a shower and get a job” (Bill O’Reilly) - isn’t resonating with most Americans.

That’s because while the protesters’ aims are vague - Bill Clinton said Wednesday that they need to start advocating specific political goals - their frustrations are easily identifiable and widely shared. The Occupy movement may be a big tent (one with room for opposition to fracking, calls for campaign finance reform, and a host of other positions), but nearly everyone involved says they are angry that a small group of wealthy Americans have grown increasingly rich while “the other 99 percent” have been left behind.

That’s a belief that seems to be shared by Americans across the political spectrum. In 2010, as CBSNews.com reported in a story on the income and wealth divide last month, researchers and Harvard and Duke asked Americans how they thought wealth is spread among income groups, as well as how they thought it should be spread. Overwhelmingly, Americans said they wanted a more equitable distribution of wealth; they also underestimated just how large the wealth divide has grown. (See chart below.)

Table - Wealth Divide(Credit: CBS)

As the study’s authors noted, “All groups - even the wealthiest respondents - desired a more equal distribution of wealth than what they estimated the current United States level to be.” Republicans, Democrats, independents, as well as rich, middle class and poor all said that wealth shouldn’t be so concentrated among the highest earners. 

That goes a long way toward explaining the Occupy movement’s potential staying power and cultural resonance. While most Americans wouldn’t camp out in the freewheeling quasi-society that has sprung up in Lower Manhattan, the vast majority seem to share the protesters’ sense that the economic deck is stacked. They’ve seen the government bail out the banks that helped create the economic crisis, seen corporate profits hit all-time high after all-time high, seen CEO pay balloon to 350 times that of the average worker. They’ve seen average hourly earnings (adjusted for inflation) stagnate for half a century while CEO pay increased 300 percent since 1990. They’ve seen social mobility decline and friends and neighbors join the ranks of the long-term unemployed while the wealthiest Americans have had their tax burden reduced and have increased their share of the nation’s wealth. (For the details behind these statistics, see the extraordinary valuable graphics put together by Business Insider.) 

There’s no denying that some of the protesters fit critics’ characterization of them - many, though certainly not all, of the most committed demonstrators are the sort of outspoken young leftists that O’Reilly seems to disdain. And there’s no question there is a wide variety of opinions about how to move forward - both within the movement and the public at large. But the polls and the data suggest that the protesters’ underlying concerns resonate widely. Occupy Wall Street may have an uncertain future - demonstrators in New York may be de facto evicted Friday morning - but it clearly seems to have tapped into a widespread sense that the economic system is out of whack. And that makes it far more difficult for critics to blithely dismiss the protesters as outside the American mainstream.

reagan-was-a-horrible-president:

abaldwin360:

By Jason Easley | sodahead.com

In what amounts to a declaration of war against Occupy Wall Street, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp has launched a misinformation assault on the 99% across multiple parts of his media empire.

News Corp owned Fox News used the quotes from the also News Corp owned Post to substantiate their claims that the people attending Occupy Wall Street are criminals, druggies, and hippies who are only there for the free food. The point of writing such stories and essentially reading them on Fox News is not only to smear Occupy Wall Street, but also to scare News Corp readers and viewers who might be having sympathetic feelings or even considering standing with the 99%.

[FULL STORY and VIDEO]

The Corporate Media Dismissal Machine® is warming up.

fuckyeahmarxismleninism:

By Glenn Greenwald

It was first reported in January of last year that the Obama administration had compiled a hit list of American citizens whom the President had ordered assassinated without any due process, and one of those Americans was Anwar al-Awlaki.  No effort was made to indict him for any crimes (despite a report last October that the Obama administration was “considering” indicting him). 

Despite substantial doubt among Yemen experts about whether he even has any operational role in Al Qaeda, no evidence (as opposed to unverified government accusations) was presented of his guilt.  When Awlaki’s father sought a court order barring Obama from killing his son, the DOJ argued, among other things, that such decisions were “state secrets” and thus beyond the scrutiny of the courts.  He was simply ordered killed by the President: his judge, jury and executioner. 

When Awlaki’s inclusion on President Obama’s hit list was confirmed, The New York Times noted that “it is extremely rare, if not unprecedented, for an American to be approved for targeted killing.”

After several unsuccessful efforts to assassinate its own citizen, the U.S. succeeded today (and it was the U.S.).  It almost certainly was able to find and kill Awlaki with the help of its long-time close friend President Saleh, who took a little time off from murdering his own citizens to help the U.S. murder its.  The U.S. thus transformed someone who was, at best, a marginal figure into a martyr, and again showed its true face to the world.  The government and media search for The Next bin Laden has undoubtedly already commenced.

prostheticknowledge:

LA Noire / Murdoch Enquiry MashUp

ha! i haven’t played LA Noire but this is pretttttttty perfect.

(△)

whitewhine:

“I missed the White House Easter egg hunt!”

WAAAAAAAAAAH.
MY EASTER WEEKEND WAS RUINED BY THE CONSEQUENCES OF MY ACTIONS. CAN’T A GUY RUN A LAWLESS SECRET TORTURE PRISON WITHOUT HAVING IT INTERRUPT MY PERSONAL LIFE? HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO ENJOY THE FREEDOM TO DINE WITH MY FAMILY IF I HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHY I’M TAKING THAT FREEDOM AWAY FROM OTHERS? JUSTIFYING MY INDEFINITE DETENTION OF UN-CHARGED FOREIGN JOURNALISTS IS REALLY PUTTING A DAMPER ON THIS FAMILY CROQUET GAME.
BOO FUCKING HOO.

whitewhine:

“I missed the White House Easter egg hunt!”

WAAAAAAAAAAH.

MY EASTER WEEKEND WAS RUINED BY THE CONSEQUENCES OF MY ACTIONS. CAN’T A GUY RUN A LAWLESS SECRET TORTURE PRISON WITHOUT HAVING IT INTERRUPT MY PERSONAL LIFE? HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO ENJOY THE FREEDOM TO DINE WITH MY FAMILY IF I HAVE TO EXPLAIN WHY I’M TAKING THAT FREEDOM AWAY FROM OTHERS? JUSTIFYING MY INDEFINITE DETENTION OF UN-CHARGED FOREIGN JOURNALISTS IS REALLY PUTTING A DAMPER ON THIS FAMILY CROQUET GAME.

BOO FUCKING HOO.