"Democracy? I want nothing to do with a system which operates on the premise that my rights don’t exist simply because I am outnumbered."

— R. Lee Wrights (via paleolibertarian)

(via laliberty)

"Let me be clear: If blame should fall on the executive branch, I am prepared to claim any level of incompetence, no matter how absurd, in order to avoid culpability."

-President Obam— errrrr umm I mean, black president from this SMBC comic.

Coincidence? I think not.

My friend [who was violently mugged for his laptop] told me he’d rather be mugged again than be subjected this kind of police *protection*.

Yeah. What does that say about how fucked up our system is?

"Call me old fashioned, but if you really wanted peace couldn’t you just stop fighting?"

— The wisdom of the Tenth Doctor knows no bounds

Cops Fire 100 Rounds at Two Innocent Women and…

…They’re Getting Their Jobs Guns Back, Hooray!

I love the headlines saying, “LAPD Cops at Fault for Shooting Innocent Women" Gasp!_DUH.jpg, because apparently,

"For months, police officials have been deliberating whether the officers’ mistakes were reasonable in light of the extreme circumstances that led to the incident."

…YEAH, because unloading more than 103 bullets at a truck [a truck that happens to be a different color, make, and model from the one they were looking for] with two Hispanic women, and NOT one African-American male in it, THAT IS TOTALLY REASONABLE. I can see how that took months of deliberation.

Oh, and it’s also good to know that while any normal person who shot two women because he *thought they were someone else* would be sent to jail, AND while the LAPD have publicly stated that the officers involved grossly violated policy, these eight fine gentlemen will be “re-trained” and sent straight back to the public streets with their guns on their hips.

I’m sure the people of L.A. will rest well knowing that their police chief’s faith is all that keeps them from being wrongfully assaulted,

I have confidence in their abilities as LAPD officers to continue to do their jobs in the same capacity they had been assigned, Beck said.

And what capacity is that? You can shoot innocent people, but only if you’re under pressure, guys!

Not like police officers are supposedly vigorously trained and tested so that they do NOT crack under pressure. Not like those who do are a damned good example of people who should be sat at a desk and not in life-or-death situations. As explained here.

This guy couldn’t have said it any better:

In no other field does being a professional mean you are held to a lower standard than any random idiot, and the results show in the quality of police work.

I love it. Want to shoot innocent people, or stop firefighters from helping crash victims, or even rape the woman who called you for help? Well a shiny little badge will let you do all that and more.

tenthamendmentcenter:

hipsterlibertarian:

So Buzzfeed got NSA staffers to describe (anonymously, but on the record) exactly what they’d like to do the Edward Snowden. The results are creepy in terms of how psychologically revealing they are and in what they reflect about these guys’ perspective on the rule of law. Take a look at just one example:

[….] “His name is cursed every day over here,” a defense contractor told BuzzFeed, speaking from an overseas Intelligence collections base. “Most everyone I talk to says he needs to be tried and hung, forget the trial and just hang him.” 

Techdirt’s commentary is spot-on [emphasis added]:

Do people like that sound like the kinds of people you can “trust” to not abuse their power? Do they sound like people you can “trust” to not spy on people they don’t like? They’ve already admitted that they’re willing to kill someone they don’t like just because they don’t like him. 

The article is chilling not just because of what these employees of the American public are openly discussing doing to someone who sought to inform the American public — but because it shows the lengths they will go to to trample the American ideal and the Constitution, which they took an oath to uphold. They are directly admitting that all of that, all logic, all reason goes right out the window when someone pisses them off. 

And that’s the very reason why the NSA needs to be reined in. The people working there seem to be bloodthirsty and emotional, prone to lashing out and dismissing the very basis of the Constitution. After hearing those statements, I don’t see how anyone in the NSA can possibly claim that the American public can “trust” them not to abuse the system. They appear bloodthirsty and eager to abuse the system.

There are dangerous people in the NSA.

(via antigovernmentextremist)

Let me start by saying that I think the overall message of this post is good [despite it’s contentious title]. Martin Luther King Jr. didn’t just make pretty speeches, he took action. And in the face of overwhelming hate and violence, he just the non-violent path of resistance, and with that he won. [Pretty much the exact opposite of a certain warmongering pretty speech-giver who ironically gets compared to MLK by people who can only be described as delusional.]

However, with the good message this post brings, there’s also a message that I find a little disturbing:

"If you didn’t get taught such things, let alone experience them, I caution you against invoking the memory of Dr. King as though he belongs exclusively to you and not primarily to African Americans."

I’m not sure what the author meant by this. Certainly this was the last article I expected to find talk of people belonging to other people. Or maybe he was saying that King’s memory belongs to other people, which is also somewhat strange… How does one “invoke the memory of Dr. King as though he belongs exclusively to you” and who have you seen do this? I’ve never heard a single person claim anything even remotely like this. What is the author trying to get at here?

That’s not even my main problem with the statement actually; my problem is the second part in which the author states that the memory (or person?? Syntax is unclear) of King belongs primarily to African Americans.

In fairness, I think what the author meant was maybe that King fought primarily for African Americans and therefore African Americans have a greater right to invoke his memory? I’m actually not sure, but that’s what his “main impact” prologue leads me to believe.

That’s fine, and even fair to a certain extent. What bothers me is the implication that non-African Americans have little or no right to invoke the memory of Martin Luther King Jr because it is the property of African Americans.

Nobody owns King’s memory. It belongs exclusively or primarily to no one. And it certainly should not be invoked to bolster the kind of attitude which is exactly what set MLK apart from say Malcolm X.

Malcolm X handled things in the exact short-sighted manner as those he oppposed: fight violence with even more violence and don’t try to reconcile with your enemies, but instead advocate complete segregation from each other. Recognize these methods? You should because they’re the favorites of the U.S. government to this day.

The U.S. government was/is concerned only with Americans (and before minorities were accepted as African/Asian/Latin Americans they did not fall under this concern). Malcolm X was only concerned with African Americans and may whites be damned. And the author of this piece seems to be of a similar mind as his concern seems to extend “primarily to African Americans”.

But Martin Luther King Jr. didn’t just care about Americans or even African Americans, he cared about people who were oppressed anywhere.

“I have tried to offer them my deepest compassion while maintaining my conviction that social change comes most meaningfully through nonviolent action. But they ask — and rightly so — what about Vietnam? They ask if our own nation wasn’t using massive doses of violence to solve its problems, to bring about the changes it wanted. Their questions hit home, and I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent.”

King delivered that line exactly one year before his death in his anti-war speech, “A Time to Break Silence.” He understood—in a way so few people do—that to be against violence, oppression, and injustice, you must be against it happening to anyone anywhere, not just those of your nation or race.

If King’s memory belongs to anyone, it is primarily to everyone subjected to and/or fighting against injustice and oppression, and exclusively to no one.

"This I believe to be the privilege and the burden of all of us who deem ourselves bound by allegiances and loyalties which are broader and deeper than nationalism and which go beyond our nation’s self-defined goals and positions. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation and for those it calls "enemy," for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers."

His “main impact” may have been on the living conditions of African Americans in the US, but had he lived longer, he hoped to have impact on so much more.

So my recommended read is this: http://academic.udayton.edu/race/2008electionandracism/raceandracism/race18.htm

Instead of words about him, try some words FROM him.

"‎Don’t let anybody make you think God chose America as his divine messianic force to be a sort of policeman of the whole world."

— Martin Luther King Jr. (via educateamericanow)

(Source: beyond-liberty, via statistsgonnastate)

"Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."

— Martin Luther King (via canadian-resistance-army)

(Source: free-metis-army, via statistsgonnastate)

"I knew that I could never again raise my voice against the violence of the oppressed in the ghettos without having first spoken clearly to the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today — my own government. For the sake of those boys, for the sake of this government, for the sake of the hundreds of thousands trembling under our violence, I cannot be silent."

— Martin Luther King Jr. [From A Time to Break Silence] (via statistsgonnastate)

"This I believe to be the privilege and the burden of all of us who deem ourselves bound by allegiances and loyalties which are broader and deeper than nationalism and which go beyond our nation’s self-defined goals and positions. We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for the victims of our nation and for those it calls “enemy,” for no document from human hands can make these humans any less our brothers."

— Martin Luther King Jr. [A Time to Break Silence] (via statistsgonnastate)

"Perhaps only his sense of humor and of irony can save him when he hears the most powerful nation of the world speaking of aggression as it drops thousands of bombs on a poor, weak nation more than eight hundred, or rather, eight thousand miles away from its shores."

Martin Luther King Jr. on American aggression in Vietnam [From A Time to Break Silence]

Everything he said is still relevant.

(via statistsgonnastate)

"

The Western arrogance of feeling that it has everything to teach others and nothing to learn from them is not just.

A true revolution of values will lay hand on the world order and say of war, “This way of settling differences is not just.”

"

— Martin Luther King Jr. [A Time to Break Silence] (via statistsgonnastate)

"

Dear Barack Obama,

While you try to trick people into thinking the spying will stop, we’ll be working in the states to turn off your water and power.

Soon, the whole world will be watching the states take on the NSA - and you - head on.

Peace

"

Michael Boldin, Tenth Amendment Center (via tenthamendmentcenter)

I really doubt that this is going to work, but there’s still a sliver of hope inside me…

(via antigovernmentextremist)

statistsgonnastate:

statistsgonnastate:

Martin Luther King Jr.’s A Time to Break Silence. 

[For those of you who can’t be bothered to read the speech, I’ve found a video for you.]

Somehow this madness must cease. We must stop now. I speak as a child of God and brother to the suffering poor of Vietnam. I speak for those whose land is being laid waste, whose homes are being destroyed, whose culture is being subverted. I speak for the poor of America who are paying the double price of smashed hopes at home, and death and corruption in Vietnam. I speak as a citizen of the world, for the world as it stands aghast at the path we have taken. I speak as one who loves America, to the leaders of our own nation: The great initiative in this war is ours; the initiative to stop it must be ours.

This is the message of the great Buddhist leaders of Vietnam. Recently one of them wrote these words, and I quote:

Each day the war goes on the hatred increases in the heart of the Vietnamese and in the hearts of those of humanitarian instinct. The Americans are forcing even their friends into becoming their enemies. It is curious that the Americans, who calculate so carefully on the possibilities of military victory, do not realize that in the process they are incurring deep psychological and political defeat. The image of America will never again be the image of revolution, freedom, and democracy, but the image of violence and militarism (unquote).

If we continue, there will be no doubt in my mind and in the mind of the world that we have no honorable intentions in Vietnam. If we do not stop our war against the people of Vietnam immediately, the world will be left with no other alternative than to see this as some horrible, clumsy, and deadly game we have decided to play. The world now demands a maturity of America that we may not be able to achieve. It demands that we admit that we have been wrong from the beginning of our adventure in Vietnam, that we have been detrimental to the life of the Vietnamese people.

This entire speech is GOLD.

I strongly recommend everyone listen to or read it in it’s entirety.

It is still extremely relevant.