or to appear ‘well-rounded’ or ‘spiritual’ or ‘authentic’ or ‘enlightened’ or ‘hip’ or ‘radical’ (via theanimalnamesofplants)
Somebody totally forgot ‘curiosity’. Oh, yeah, and every other motivation that you can imagine, because skin does not define your reasons for acting, any more than it decides what your actions will be.
This kind of broad declarative statement is inflammatory, and not very enlightened overall.
The claim by former Seattle Police Chief Gil Kerlikowske, his second response to a marijuana-related White House petition, is not surprising as it reflects current U.S. policy toward marijuana. It is, however, simply not true that THC in hemp poses any sort of potential for abuse, as it is impossible to become “high” from ingesting the plant.
“America’s farmers deserve our Nation’s help and support to ensure rural America’s prosperity and vitality,” he wrote. “Federal law prohibits human consumption, distribution, and possession of Schedule I controlled substances. Hemp and marijuana are part of the same species of cannabis plant. While most of the THC in cannabis plants is concentrated in the marijuana, all parts of the plant, including hemp, can contain THC, a Schedule I controlled substance. The Administration will continue looking for innovative ways to support farmers across the country while balancing the need to protect public health and safety.”
Tom Murphy, author of the White House petition and national outreach coordinator for advocacy group Vote Hemp, told Raw Story that he was stunned by Kerlikowske’s response, which he said came only after he’d repeatedly followed-up with them for months.
“I’m really at a loss as to why they sat on this for seven months before releasing a one paragraph response,” Murphy said, noting that he’d even previously met with administration officials to brief them what hemp is. ”It’s really quite stunning. It’s stunning like getting hit in the head with a hammer.”
It does not surprise me one tiny bit. Cannabis stands to replace oil, wood, grain, and fiber crops. It is the best single source resource available to man, and it’s development is dangerous to the powerful.
Cannabis will remain illegal until the old power structures based of off the industries of the past have been broken, no question in my mind.
People really like to excuse their actions on the internet with “it’s just the internet” but quite frankly I think that the way that you act when you genuinely believe your actions are of no consequence says much, much more about you than you might be willing to reveal to others
Media liaison staffers have been sent to an international polar conference in Montreal to shadow Canadian government scientists during interviews, in what critics are calling the latest example of extreme information control by the Harper Conservatives.
Hundreds of researchers from around the globe arrived in Montreal this week to attend the International Polar Year Conference, but those scientists working for Environment Canada were also accompanied by so-called “media relations contacts” tasked with monitoring and recording interactions with the press.
Ahead of the conference, the Canadian participants were reportedly sent a memo ordering them to have a government liaison present during conversations with reporters.
While none of the government scientists would speak on record about their media monitors, one researcher told CBC’s Dan Halton off-camera that the strict communications measures were an embarrassment to Canada.
Some leading researchers worry the media intervention may undermine Canada’s scientific reputation abroad.
Climatologist Andrew Weaver, with the University of Victoria, called the tactics excessive.
“The current administration probably has a fear about science,” said Weaver, who compared the monitoring of scientists to something out of the Soviet era.
I don’t want the government regulating anything even our food. What the government tells us usually isn’t for our own good. They tell us what to do in their best interest, our diet is no different.
The free market can regulate food and food safety much better, more efficiently, and with more accountability than any government agency.
by John Stossel
Instinct tells us to fear poison. If our ancestors were not cautious about what they put in their mouths, they would not have survived long enough to produce us.
Unfortunately, a side effect of that cautious impulse is that whenever someone claims that some chemical — or food ingredient, like fat — is a menace, we are primed to believe it. That makes it easy for government to leap in and play the role of protector.
But for every study that says X is bad for you, another study disagrees. How is a layman to decide? I used to take consumer activists’ word for it. Heck, they want to save the world, while industry just wants to get rich. Now I know better. The activists want money, too — and fame.
To arbitrate, it’s intuitive to turn to government — except … government scientists have conflicts, too.
Who becomes a regulator except people who want to regulate? Some come from activist groups that hate industry. Some come from industry and want to convert their government job into a higher-paying industry job. Some just want attention. They know that saying, “X will kill you,” gets more attention than saying that X is probably safe.
I don’t suggest that we ignore the experts and eat like pigs. But the scientific question should not overshadow the more fundamental issue. Who should decide what you can eat: you? Or the state? Should government decide what we may eat, any more than it decides where we live or how long our hair will be? The Food Police claim that they just want to help us make informed choices. But that’s not all they want to do. They try to get government to force us to make healthy choices.
The moral issue of force versus persuasion applies even if all the progressives’ ideas about nutrition are correct. Even if I would be better off eating no fat and salt, that would not justify forcing restaurants to stop serving me those things. Either we live in a free society or we don’t.
It is no coincidence that the push for more food regulation came at a time when Congress obsessed about the rising cost of medical care. When government pays for your health care, it will inevitably be drawn into regulating your personal life. First, politicians promise to pay. Then, they propose to control you.
Where does it stop? If we must control diet to balance the government’s budget, will the health squad next ban skydiving and extramarital sex? How about another try at Prohibition?
Government attracts do-gooders and meddlers who believe that, as Mark Twain put it, “Nothing so needs reforming as other people’s habits.” Or, as Twain’s spiritual descendant, H.L. Mencken, said about Puritanism, government health officials seem to have “the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.”
Often the Food Police strike an innocent pose, claiming that they just want to give people information. Information is good. But it’s not free. Mandated calorie signs in restaurants cost money. Those costs are passed on to consumers, and the endless parade of calorie counts and warning labels make us numb to more important warnings — like, “This Coffee Is Scalding Hot.”
It’s not as if dietary information isn’t already available. Health and diet websites abound. Talk shows routinely discuss the latest books on diet and nutrition. TV diet gurus are celebrities. That’s enough. We have information. We don’t need government force.
Let the marketplace of diet ideas flourish. Let claim meet counterclaim, but let’s not let government put its very heavy thumb on one side of the scale.
The assumption behind so much of government’s policy regarding food (and everything else) is that everything good should be encouraged by law and everything bad should be discouraged.
But since everything is arguably helpful or harmful, this is a formula for totalitarianism.
Thomas Hobbes assumed an all-powerful government was necessary to protect us from violence. He called it Leviathan. But he never imagined Leviathan would plan our dinners.
The North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition is threatening to send a blogger to jail for recounting publicly his battle against diabetes and encouraging others to follow his lifestyle….
When he was hospitalized with diabetes in February 2009, he decided to avoid the fate of his grandmother, who eventually died of the disease. He embraced the low-carb, high-protein Paleo diet, also known as the “caveman” or “hunter-gatherer” diet. The diet, he said, made him drug- and insulin-free within 30 days. By May of that year, he had lost 45 pounds and decided to start a blog about his success.
But this past January the state dietetics and nutrition board decided Cooksey’s blog —Diabetes-Warrior.net — violated state law. The nutritional advice Cooksey provides on the site amounts to “practicing nutrition,” the board’s director says, and in North Carolina that’s something you need a license to do.
Unless Cooksey completely rewrites his 3-year-old blog, he could be sued by the licensing board. If he loses the lawsuit and refuses to take down the blog, he could face up to 120 days in jail.
The board’s director says Cooksey has a First Amendment right to blog about his diet, but he can’t encourage others to adopt it unless the state has certified him as a dietitian or nutritionist.
On January 12, Cooksey attended a nutrition seminar at a church in Charlotte. The speaker was the director of diabetes services for a local hospital.
“She was giving all the wrong information, just like everyone always does — carbs are OK to eat, we must eat carbs to live, promoting low-fat, etc.,” Cooksey said. “So I spoke up.”
After the meeting he handed out a couple of business cards pointing people to his website.
Three days later, he got a call from the director of the nutrition board.
“Basically, she told me I could not give out nutritional advice without a license,” Cooksey said.
Right, so no helping people clue in, because some lady with a license might lose money.
Same deal with Phoenix Tears, and Rick Simpson.
The guy is a hero, and they are making him a criminal.
Check their privilege, and own up to their whiteness.
Don’t apologize for being white. We aren’t looking for sympathy, and we aren’t looking to shame you. We need whites to understand how their whiteness impacts PoC. Although you yourself have not committed the crimes of your ancestors or fellow white scum, you are all connected through your whiteness and benefit from that system of privilege. We don’t need you to hold our hands and apologize for every wrong doing a white person has ever done in the history of ever, but we do expect you to own up to that history and stop trying to disconnect yourself from the whiteness you benefit from for the sake of “solidarity”
Stop claiming racism. Interpersonal acts of oppression=/= what Poc have and continue to go through because of their coloredness.
You are NOT Troy Davis,Trayvon Martin, or a Strong Black Woman. You are the George Zimmerman’s of the world, you ARE the system that was created by whites to oppress, and terrorize PoC. You may worry that your children will grow up and join the patriarchy that fights against you, but you are not the Black Mother fearing that her child will be shot dead in the street for “looking suspicious”. Here is how you show solidarity as an white activist towards PoC
Stop nit picking. Maybe ourr grammer is wrong, maybe we mispelled something, maybe you don’t like our “tone” or feel the need to bring up THAT ONE THING THAT HAS NO RELEVANCE TO THE ARGUMENT BUT YOU FEEL NEEDS TO BE SAID BECAUSE YOUR FEE FEE’S WERE HURT. This is derailing, and because of your whiteness you end up speaking over us. This shit isn’t cool.
Claim color blindness. First and foremost this is extremely ableist. The notion that we should all forsake attachment to race and/or cultural identity and be “just humans” within the framework of white dominated culture means that the subordinate groups must surrender their identities, beliefs, values, and assimilate by adopting the values and beliefs of privileged class whites. This does not create racial harmony nor does race suddenly become obsolete. Rather this thinking creates a fierce cultural protectionism and allows whites to continue with racist behavior unchecked.
[Stop] changing the definition of racism so that you don’t fit into the definition of racism.
Collect your folks. When you see a fellow white person actin’ a fool, it’s time to take the trash out.
Stop questioning our validity, claim we’re being too emotional or “obsessed with race issues”
Not to expect a damn cookie for meeting the basic qualifications of a decent human being
"Although you yourself have not committed the crimes of your ancestors or fellow white scum"
Blanket statements like that are the core of bigotry, and they invalidate the attached opinions in the eyes of many observers.
If the author wants anything out of anyone, perhaps they should refine their approach, and avoid sounding so ignorant.
Anonymous asked: "You are a man" now say that in the same tone but interchange "man" for "woman". Direct your whole argument from the mouth of a man aimed at a woman and it would be misogynistic. You made it personal and condescending, men are not idiots. That is misandry. If it was the other way round it would be misogyny.
Because my husband is allowed to be behind a cannon in the U.S. military and I am not.
Right, because generation after generation of men suffering from the haunting guilt of having murdered for profit just is not enough. We want a society born from the wombs of murderers! That will be AWESOME!!!! Maybe we can eradicate compassion and love altogether!!! YAY!!!!!
“You expected to be sad in the fall. Part of you died each year when the leaves fell from the trees and their branches were bare against the wind and the cold, wintery light. But you knew there would always be the spring, as you knew the river would flow again after it was frozen. When the cold rains kept on and killed the spring, it was as though a young person died for no reason.”—
“You found it unacceptable that they were killing our freedom, our democracy, our dignity. You found it unacceptable as they tightened the harsh noose of economic austerity and apartheid around us, to the unacceptable act of surrendering our independence and the keys to the country. It was unacceptable to you that Greece did not acknowledge its children, and its children did not recognize their own country. You found the bestiality of capitalism unacceptable, that it infiltrated our lives, and no one tried to stop it. Then, you made your decision: to become the fear, the death, the memory, the sorrow of our ruined lives.”—Emi Christoulas (via Democracy Now), daughter of Dimitris Christoulas, “the 77-year-old retired pharmacist who shot and killed himself near the Greek Parliament building last week after writing a note that blamed his suicide on the economic crisis”, speaking at his funeral. (via warriorsrise)
I learned about the American-led sanctions that prevented food, medicine, and medical equipment from entering Iraq, and how – according to the United Nations – over half a million children perished as a result. I remember a clip from a ’60 Minutes‘ interview of Madeline Albright where she expressed her view that these dead children were “worth it.” I watched on September 11th as a group of people felt driven to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings from their outrage at the deaths of these children. I watched as America then attacked and invaded Iraq directly. I saw the effects of ’Shock & Awe’ in the opening day of the invasion – the children in hospital wards with shrapnel from American missiles sticking but of their foreheads (of course, none of this was shown on CNN).
I learned about the town of Haditha, where 24 Muslims – including a 76-year old man in a wheelchair, women, and even toddlers – were shot up and blown up in their bedclothes as the slept by US Marines. I learned about Abeer al-Janabi, a fourteen-year old Iraqi girl gang-raped by five American soldiers, who then shot her and her family in the head, then set fire to their corpses. I just want to point out, as you can see, Muslim women don’t even show their hair to unrelated men. So try to imagine this young girl from a conservative village with her dress torn off, being sexually assaulted by not one, not two, not three, not four, but five soldiers. Even today, as I sit in my jail cell, I read about the drone strikes which continue to kill Muslims daily in places like Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen. Just last month, we all heard about the seventeen Afghan Muslims – mostly mothers and their kids – shot to death by an American soldier, who also set fire to their corpses.
These are just the stories that make it to the headlines, but one of the first concepts I learned in Islam is that of loyalty, of brotherhood – that each Muslim woman is my sister, each man is my brother, and together, we are one large body who must protect each other. In other words, I couldn’t see these things beings done to my brothers & sisters – including by America – and remain neutral. My sympathy for the oppressed continued, but was now more personal, as was my respect for those defending them.
So, this trial was not about my position on Muslims killing American civilians. It was about my position on Americans killing Muslim civilians, which is that Muslims should defend their lands from foreign invaders – Soviets, Americans, or Martians. This is what I believe. It’s what I’ve always believed, and what I will always believe. This is not terrorism, and it’s not extremism. It’s what the arrows on that seal above your head represent: defense of the homeland. So, I disagree with my lawyers when they say that you don’t have to agree with my beliefs – no. Anyone with commonsense and humanity has no choice but to agree with me. If someone breaks into your home to rob you and harm your family, logic dictates that you do whatever it takes to expel that invader from your home.
But when that home is a Muslim land, and that invader is the US military, for some reason the standards suddenly change. Common sense is renamed ”terrorism” and the people defending themselves against those who come to kill them from across the ocean become “the terrorists” who are ”killing Americans.” The mentality that America was victimized with when British soldiers walked these streets 2 ½ centuries ago is the same mentality Muslims are victimized by as American soldiers walk their streets today. It’s the mentality of colonialism.
I learned one more thing in history class: America has historically supported the most unjust policies against its minorities – practices that were even protected by the law – only to look back later and ask: ’what were we thinking?’ Slavery, Jim Crow, the internment of the Japanese during World War II – each was widely accepted by American society, each was defended by the Supreme Court. But as time passed and America changed, both people and courts looked back and asked ’What were we thinking?’ Nelson Mandela was considered a terrorist by the South African government, and given a life sentence. But time passed, the world changed, they realized how oppressive their policies were, that it was not he who was the terrorist, and they released him from prison. He even became president. So, everything is subjective - even this whole business of “terrorism” and who is a “terrorist.” It all depends on the time and place and who the superpower happens to be at the moment.
In your eyes, I’m a terrorist, and it’s perfectly reasonable that I be standing here in an orange jumpsuit. But one day, America will change and people will recognize this day for what it is. They will look at how hundreds of thousands of Muslims were killed and maimed by the US military in foreign countries, yet somehow I’m the one going to prison for “conspiring to kill and maim” in those countries – because I support the Mujahidin defending those people. They will look back on how the government spent millions of dollars to imprison me as a ”terrorist,” yet if we were to somehow bring Abeer al-Janabi back to life in the moment she was being gang-raped by your soldiers, to put her on that witness stand and ask her who the “terrorists” are, she sure wouldn’t be pointing at me.
The government says that I was obsessed with violence, obsessed with ”killing Americans.” But, as a Muslim living in these times, I can think of a lie no more ironic.
1) Black People and White people are different but that doesn’t mean one is better than the other
2) If you don’t know something about Black people ask a lot of them. Your Black friends don’t speak for all Black people.
Click the link for the rest! What do you think?
3) White People as a group have done terrible things to Blacks in this country – and just because they are black (not to mention Asians, Latinos and American Indians).
4) Saying “n——-r” is the same thing as saying “bitch.”
5) Always remember there is a difference between a Black neighborhood, a bad neighborhood and a poor neighborhood.
6) No matter who your sister/brother has dated, or what your friends have told you, or how many episodes of Chappelle Show you’ve watched you do not KNOW Black people.
7) Black people are not pets, so don’t touch them without permission
And finally: the best way to get along with Black people is to not be oblivious. Nothing annoys Black people more than White people who pretend racism doesn’t exist and then proclaim ignorance in the face of overwhelming evidence.
i have an issue with number 4.
i have a major issue with number 4.
Number 4 is wrong as all hell. N***er is not comparable to bitch. In what reality do you live in where those two words have the exact same meaning? N***er was used to oppress, dehumanize, and devalue the lives of a whole race of people. It is a word used to equate blackness with ignorance. The word bitch does not have the same violent and horrific history behind it. Only someone in a place of true privilege and ignorance can compare those two words.
OH MY WORD!!!
This whole thing is a mess!
#1. They are only different in the same way any individual is different from another, in that their experiences and choices have made them who they are, and they have chosen and experienced different things than you.
#2. The black folks around you are not there to provide a free African American studies class for you. Try reading some books by black folks about the subject for starters, that way when you do have a question, it will be a point of refinement you are seeking, not the whole knowledge base.
#3 Please add the word some to this. And take out group. There are white folks out there who have hurt no-one, and spoken out against any racist fuck they see. They might be a minority, but they are there, and their impact is not nothing.
#5. This just creates the assumption that this will be needed to be kept in mind if one is to avoid mixing up the three. It’s literally preparing the child to see all black neighborhoods as poor, and “bad”.
#6 Ok, whatever. If you don’t know any black people you don’t know any black people. That’s kinda obvious if that’s all you mean by it, so what’s the real motive? This to me is like the white parent thinking, "What if little Jimmy acts like he knows black people? Oh! NO! One of those big black mamas will get "up in his face" and yell, "You don’t know me!, you don’t know me!" over and over again! Oh! I just can’t let him out into the world without warning him of this terrible danger! Now, how do I do it without sounding racist?"
#7 OH MY GOD!!! WTF PEOPLE!!! How horrible has your parenting been so far that you are worried that if you don’t mention this your little ignorant child will go up to black people and PET THEM! What did you say before now!!!!!! Did you refer to them as dogs or some shit? HOLY FUCK!
As for the final point, I just can’t believe that the author could choke those words out on to the page after being so obviously oblivious to his own racist comments.