Link 24 Apr 3 notes Texas Family Awarded $3 Million in Nation’s First Fracking Trial»
Video 24 Apr 10 notes

Evidence for Russian Involvement in East Ukraine Based on Shoddy Journalism

Apr. 24 2014

Robert Parry: The Obama administration and Kiev government claimed that Russian soldiers were present at the building occupations, yet it turns out that this assertion was based on photos the U.S. government provided to NYTimes and that the newspaper since has had to retract

Link 24 Apr 7 notes Egypt: U.S. to Deliver Helicopters»

socialismartnature:

US to Egyptian junta: “oh, you just ordered the mass execution of 250 political dissidents? cool, how about some more military hardware?”

===

Link 24 Apr 12 notes Obama Warns Russia of New Sanctions, Backs Japan in Island Dispute »

Speaking today on a visit to Japan, President Obama said Russia has violated the spirit of last week’s truce deal and warned it faces new U.S. sanctions. Obama also offered public support for Japan in its spat with China over a group of islands in the East China Sea. Obama said the islands are covered by a defense pact between the U.S. and Japan.

President Obama: “And let me reiterate that our treaty commitment to Japan’s security is absolute, and Article 5 covers all territories under Japan’s administration, including the Senkaku Islands.”

Japan is the first stop in Obama’s four-country Asia tour. He is expected to discuss the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a secretive deal among Pacific Rim countries to establish a free-trade zone encompassing nearly 40 percent of the global economy. Critics say the TPP would further entrench the failures of the North American Free Trade Agreement, which went into effect 20 years ago and caused mass displacement in Mexico. Protests against the TPP intensified ahead of Obama’s visit, with several marches in the streets of Tokyo.

Link 24 Apr 11 notes U.S. Marshal Shot Unarmed, Compliant Man In the Back, Suit Alleges»

socialismartnature:

gun violence

===

Link 24 Apr 9 notes Necropsy shows dog shot in back of head by deputy»

(Source: timlebsack)

Photo 24 Apr 274 notes hipsterlibertarian:

After storming into her apartment early in the morning while she was still in bed, Henrico, VA police tied up 75-year-old Ruth Hunter with zip ties and began grilling her about drug use and storage. Then, realizing that maybe, just maybe, she was not their target, they left for a neighboring apartment — leaving her tied up while their incompetent investigation continued.
So far, the police have done nothing to make amends. “I’m very irritated and angry, he never said I’m sorry, never apologized for having the wrong house…he said you got to get someone to fix that door,” Hunter said.
Read the whole story here.

hipsterlibertarian:

After storming into her apartment early in the morning while she was still in bed, Henrico, VA police tied up 75-year-old Ruth Hunter with zip ties and began grilling her about drug use and storage. Then, realizing that maybe, just maybe, she was not their target, they left for a neighboring apartment — leaving her tied up while their incompetent investigation continued.

So far, the police have done nothing to make amends. “I’m very irritated and angry, he never said I’m sorry, never apologized for having the wrong house…he said you got to get someone to fix that door,” Hunter said.

Read the whole story here.

Video 24 Apr 116,131 notes

p0kemina:

shrimpwonder:

elluvias:

heterophobicgoat:

stupidandreckless:

NOOOO NO NO NONO FUCK FUCK  FUCKIG CBS IS TELLING WOMEN NOT TO REPORT SEXUAL HARASSMENT BECAUSE IT WILL “DAMAGE THEIR CAREERS” and “HARASSMENT IS AN UNFORTUNATE PART OF CLIMBING THE LADDER” I AM SO ANGRY THEY ARE LITERALLY TURNING SEXUAL HARASSMENT INTO A NORM THIS IS NOT OKAY

This is an actual article and I’m still having a hard time believing it’s real.

IF YOU ARE SEXUALLY HARRASSED YOU REPORT THAT SHIT

Harassment is often something the guy doesn’t even notice. A study of from the American Association of University Women found that in more than half the cases, women thought men were harassing them and the men had no idea. ”

THIS IS A PROBLEM, NOT A FACT OF LIFE

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

Photo 23 Apr 10 notes No-fly list used by FBI to coerce Muslims into informing, lawsuit claims
Case highlights plight of people wrongfully added to database who face lengthy, secretive process to clear their names
Apr. 22 2014
Naveed Shinwari hasn’t seen his wife in 26 months. He suspects it’s because he refused to become an informant for the FBI.
In February 2012 Shinwari, who has lived in the US since he was 14, flew to Afghanistan to get married. He says that before he could get home to Omaha, Nebraska, he was twice detained and questioned by FBI agents who wanted to know if he knew anything about national security threats. A third FBI visit followed when he got home.
The following month, after Shinwari bought another plane ticket for a temporary job in Connecticut, he couldn’t get a boarding pass. Police told him he had been placed on the US no-fly list, although he had never in his life been accused of breaking any law. Another FBI visit soon followed, with agents wanting to know about the “local Omaha community, did I know anyone who’s a threat”, he says.
“I’m just very frustrated, [and I said] what can I do to clear my name?” recalls Shinwari, 30. “And that’s where it was mentioned to me: you help us, we help you. We know you don’t have a job; we’ll give you money.”
Shinwari is one of four American Muslims in a new lawsuit who accuse the FBI of placing them on the no-fly list, either to intimidate them into becoming informants or to retaliate against them for declining.
Filed on Tuesday night in the US district court for the southern district of New York, the case accuses the US attorney general, Eric Holder, the FBI director, James Comey, the homeland security secretary, Jeh Johnson, and two dozen FBI agents of creating an atmosphere in which Muslims who are not accused of wrongdoing are forbidden from flying, apparently as leverage to get them snitching on their communities.
Their lawsuit seeks not only the plaintiffs’ removal from the no-fly list but also the establishment of a more robust legal mechanism to contest placement upon it.
“This policy and set of practices by the FBI is part of a much broader set of policies that reflect overpolicing in Muslim-American communities,” said Diala Shamas, one of the lawyers for the four plaintiffs.
In recent years Muslim community leaders in the US have stated that they feel law enforcement at times considers them a target, particularly thanks to mosque infiltrations and other surveillance practices. Material demonizing Muslims and Islam has been present in FBI counter-terrorism training, which the bureau has conceded was inappropriate. The New York police department recently shut down a unit tasked with spying on Muslim businesses, mosques and community centers in New York and New Jersey.
Like his co-plaintiffs Shinwari does not know for sure that the FBI deliberately placed him on the no-fly list as either a punitive measure or a pressure tactic.
Read More

No-fly list used by FBI to coerce Muslims into informing, lawsuit claims

Case highlights plight of people wrongfully added to database who face lengthy, secretive process to clear their names

Apr. 22 2014

Naveed Shinwari hasn’t seen his wife in 26 months. He suspects it’s because he refused to become an informant for the FBI.

In February 2012 Shinwari, who has lived in the US since he was 14, flew to Afghanistan to get married. He says that before he could get home to Omaha, Nebraska, he was twice detained and questioned by FBI agents who wanted to know if he knew anything about national security threats. A third FBI visit followed when he got home.

The following month, after Shinwari bought another plane ticket for a temporary job in Connecticut, he couldn’t get a boarding pass. Police told him he had been placed on the US no-fly list, although he had never in his life been accused of breaking any law. Another FBI visit soon followed, with agents wanting to know about the “local Omaha community, did I know anyone who’s a threat”, he says.

“I’m just very frustrated, [and I said] what can I do to clear my name?” recalls Shinwari, 30. “And that’s where it was mentioned to me: you help us, we help you. We know you don’t have a job; we’ll give you money.”

Shinwari is one of four American Muslims in a new lawsuit who accuse the FBI of placing them on the no-fly list, either to intimidate them into becoming informants or to retaliate against them for declining.

Filed on Tuesday night in the US district court for the southern district of New York, the case accuses the US attorney general, Eric Holder, the FBI director, James Comey, the homeland security secretary, Jeh Johnson, and two dozen FBI agents of creating an atmosphere in which Muslims who are not accused of wrongdoing are forbidden from flying, apparently as leverage to get them snitching on their communities.

Their lawsuit seeks not only the plaintiffs’ removal from the no-fly list but also the establishment of a more robust legal mechanism to contest placement upon it.

“This policy and set of practices by the FBI is part of a much broader set of policies that reflect overpolicing in Muslim-American communities,” said Diala Shamas, one of the lawyers for the four plaintiffs.

In recent years Muslim community leaders in the US have stated that they feel law enforcement at times considers them a target, particularly thanks to mosque infiltrations and other surveillance practices. Material demonizing Muslims and Islam has been present in FBI counter-terrorism training, which the bureau has conceded was inappropriate. The New York police department recently shut down a unit tasked with spying on Muslim businesses, mosques and community centers in New York and New Jersey.

Like his co-plaintiffs Shinwari does not know for sure that the FBI deliberately placed him on the no-fly list as either a punitive measure or a pressure tactic.

Read More

Photo 23 Apr 6 notes Proof the Supreme Court Doesn’t Understand Racism at All
Apr. 23 2014

If you haven’t, you should read my colleague Emily Bazelon on the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Michigan’s ban on affirmative action if you want to understand the ruling and its implications. For this post, however, I want to look at a single passage from Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion that illustrates a flawed thinking on racism that has huge currency on the Right.


After rejecting the appeals court’s argument that Michigan’s affirmative action ban violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Kennedy questioned the foundation of affirmative action policies writ large, wondering if—by sticking to race consciousness—we’re overmedicating the patient:


In a society in which those lines are becoming more blurred, the attempt to define race based categories also raises serious questions of its own. Government action that classifies individuals on the basis of race is inherently suspect and carries the danger of perpetuating the very racial divisions the polity seeks to transcend.


Each sentence packs a huge claim, and each one is off-the-mark. While Americans like to imagine a future of mixed-race mutts—see this National Geographic cover—the reality will be more complicated. For as much as there are increasing rates of intermarriage between all groups, it’s also true that segregation remains the rule for low-income African Americans, Latinos, and many low-income whites. Huge numbers of minorities live in hyper-segregated neighborhoods of concentrated poverty, isolated from the mainstream of American life. In this world—where integration is stagnant—it’s a stretch to say that the “lines” are blurring.


More egregious is the idea that racial classification—and race consciousness—is the true danger to racial harmony. In fairness to Kennedy, it stems from the common view that “skin color” is the locus for racism and discrimination. Hence, colorblindness: If we ignore skin color—if we disregard race—then we’ll deal with the problem of racial division.


But “race” isn’t responsible for Jim Crow, any more than brown skin is the reason for an unfair police stop, or a “black name” the cause of an unfair evaluation. Those actions—the institutions that support them, and the ideas that justify them—are a product of racism, the system of violence and disenfranchisement that marks the whole of the American experiment.

Read More

Proof the Supreme Court Doesn’t Understand Racism at All

Apr. 23 2014

If you haven’t, you should read my colleague Emily Bazelon on the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Michigan’s ban on affirmative action if you want to understand the ruling and its implications. For this post, however, I want to look at a single passage from Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion that illustrates a flawed thinking on racism that has huge currency on the Right.

After rejecting the appeals court’s argument that Michigan’s affirmative action ban violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, Kennedy questioned the foundation of affirmative action policies writ large, wondering if—by sticking to race consciousness—we’re overmedicating the patient:

In a society in which those lines are becoming more blurred, the attempt to define race based categories also raises serious questions of its own. Government action that classifies individuals on the basis of race is inherently suspect and carries the danger of perpetuating the very racial divisions the polity seeks to transcend.

Each sentence packs a huge claim, and each one is off-the-mark. While Americans like to imagine a future of mixed-race mutts—see this National Geographic cover—the reality will be more complicated. For as much as there are increasing rates of intermarriage between all groups, it’s also true that segregation remains the rule for low-income African Americans, Latinos, and many low-income whites. Huge numbers of minorities live in hyper-segregated neighborhoods of concentrated poverty, isolated from the mainstream of American life. In this world—where integration is stagnant—it’s a stretch to say that the “lines” are blurring.

More egregious is the idea that racial classification—and race consciousness—is the true danger to racial harmony. In fairness to Kennedy, it stems from the common view that “skin color” is the locus for racism and discrimination. Hence, colorblindness: If we ignore skin color—if we disregard race—then we’ll deal with the problem of racial division.

But “race” isn’t responsible for Jim Crow, any more than brown skin is the reason for an unfair police stop, or a “black name” the cause of an unfair evaluation. Those actions—the institutions that support them, and the ideas that justify them—are a product of racism, the system of violence and disenfranchisement that marks the whole of the American experiment.


Design crafted by Prashanth Kamalakanthan. Powered by Tumblr.