youthincare:

[ image description is tweet by shailija Patel that says, “imperial feminists love girls in Muslim countries who want to go to school. But were silent when the US bombed Baghdad’s National Library, burning every PhD dissertation ever written by an Iraqi woman.” ]

brainstatic:

“At least Nixon was-” please stop, Nixon was a fascistic lunatic. When Daniel Ellsberg revealed the Pentagon Papers, Nixon had his goons break into Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office to find things to discredit him with. He wanted to firebomb the Brookings Institute. He tanked the 1968 peace talks with Vietnam because he wanted a war to help him win the election. The most annoying thing liberals do is act like modern conservatives are a disgrace to the noble conservatives of the past. They’ve always been this bad. 

Border Separation Myths

sirfrogsworth:

Dr. Michelle Martin is a researcher and professor at California State University, Fullerton. She has a Masters of Social Work, Masters in Global Policy, and a Ph.D. in Peace Studies (Political Science). She teaches Social Welfare Policy in the Master of Social Work program.

The following is her write-up on the separation of families at the border. She dispells a lot of common myths going around and provides sources which are linked. This might be helpful in your personal debates and discussions.

———————————————- 

There is so much misinformation out there about the Trump administration’s new “zero tolerance” policy that requires criminal prosecution, which then warrants the separating of parents and children at the southern border. Before responding to a post defending this policy, please do your research…As a professor at a local Cal State, I research and write about these issues, so here, I wrote the following to make it easier for you:

Myth: This is not a new policy and was practiced under Obama and Clinton.

FALSE. The policy to separate parents and children is new and was instituted on 4/6/2018. It was the “brainchild” of John Kelly and Stephen Miller to serve as a deterrent for undocumented immigration, and some allege to be used as a bargaining chip. The policy was approved by Trump, and adopted by Sessions. Prior administrations detained migrant families, but didn’t have a practice of forcibly separating parents from their children unless the adults were deemed unfit. 

[ source ]

Myth: This is the only way to deter undocumented immigration.

FALSE. Annual trends show that arrests for undocumented entry are at a 46 year low, and undocumented crossings dropped in 2007, with a net loss (more people leaving than arriving). Deportations have increased steadily though (spiking in 1996 and more recently), because several laws that were passed since 1996 have made it more difficult to gain legal status for people already here, and thus increased their deportations (I address this later under the myth that it’s the Democrats’ fault). What we mostly have now are people crossing the border illegally because they’ve already been hired by a US company, or because they are seeking political asylum. Economic migrants come to this country because our country has kept the demand going. But again, many of these people impacted by Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy appear to be political asylum-seekers. 

[ source ]

Myth: Most of the people coming across the border are just trying to take advantage of our country by taking our jobs.

FALSE. Most of the parents who have been impacted by Trump’s “zero tolerance” policy have presented themselves as political asylum-seekers at a U.S. port-of-entry, from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras. Rather than processing their claims, according to witness accounts, it appears as though they have been taken into custody on the spot and had their children ripped from their arms. The ACLU alleges that this practice violates the US Asylum Act, and the UN asserts that it violates the UN Treaty on the State of Refugees, one of the few treaties the US has ratified. The ACLU asserts that this policy is an illegal act on the part of the United States government, not to mention morally and ethically reprehensible. 

[ source ]

Myth: We’re a country that respects the Rule of Law, and if people break the law, this is what they get.

FALSE. We are a country that has an above-ground system of immigration and an underground system. Our government (under both parties) has always been aware that US companies recruit workers in the poorest parts of Mexico for cheap labor, and ICE (and its predecessor INS) has looked the other way because this underground economy benefits our country to the tune of billions of dollars annually. Thus, even though many of the people crossing the border now are asylum-seekers, those who are economic migrants (migrant workers) likely have been recruited here to do jobs Americans will not do.

[ source ]

Myth: The children have to be separated from their parents because the parents must be arrested and it would be cruel to put children in jail with their parents.

FALSE. First, in the case of economic migrants crossing the border illegally, criminal prosecution has not been the legal norm, and families have historically been kept together at all cost. Also, crossing the border without documentation is typically a misdemeanor not requiring arrest, but rather has been handled in a civil proceeding. Additionally, parents who have been detained have historically been detained with their children in ICE “family residential centers,” again, for civil processing. The Trump administration’s shift in policy is for political purposes only, not legal ones. 

See page 18: [ source ]

Myth: We have rampant fraud in our asylum process, the proof of which is the significant increase we have in the number of people applying for asylum.

FALSE. The increase in asylum seekers is a direct result of the increase in civil conflict and violence across the globe. While some people may believe that we shouldn’t allow any refugees into our country because “it’s not our problem,” neither our current asylum law, nor our ideological foundation as a country support such an isolationist approach. There is very little evidence to support Sessions’ claim that abuse of our asylum-seeking policies is rampant. Also, what Sessions failed to mention is that the majority of asylum seekers are from China, not South of the border. 

Here is a very fair and balanced assessment of his statements: [ source ]

Myth: The Democrats caused this, “it’s their law.“ 

FALSE. Neither the Republicans nor the Democrats caused this, the Trump administration did (although the Republicans could fix this today, and have refused). I believe what this myth refers to is the passage of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which were both passed under Clinton in 1996. These laws essentially made unauthorized entry into the US a crime (typically a misdemeanor for first-time offenders), but under both Republicans and Democrats, these cases were handled through civil deportation proceedings, not a criminal proceeding, which did not require separation. And again, even in cases where detainment was required, families were always kept together in family residential centers, unless the parents were deemed unfit (as mentioned above). Thus, Trump’s assertion that he hates this policy but has no choice but to separate the parents from their children, because the Democrats “gave us this law” is false and nothing more than propaganda designed to compel negotiation on bad policy. 

[ source ]

Myth: The parents and children will be reunited shortly, once the parents’ court cases are finalized. 

FALSE. Criminal court is a vastly different beast than civil court proceedings. Also, the children are being processed as unaccompanied minors (“unaccompanied alien children”), which typically means they are in the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR), which is part of the Department of Health and Human Services (DHS). Under normal circumstances when a child enters the country without his or her parent, ORR attempts to locate a family member within a few weeks, and the child is then released to a family member, or if a family member cannot be located, the child is placed in a residential center (anywhere in the country), or in some cases, foster care. Prior to Trump’s new policy, ORR was operating at 95% capacity, and they simply cannot effectively manage the influx of 2000+ children, some as young as 4 months old. Also, keep in mind, these are not unaccompanied minor children, they have parents. There is great legal ambiguity on how and even whether the parents will get their children back because we are in uncharted territory right now. According to the ACLU lawsuit (see below), there is currently no easy vehicle for reuniting parents with their children. Additionally, according to a May 2018 report, numerous cases of verbal, physical and sexual abuse were found to have occurred in these residential centers. 

[ source ]

Myth: This policy is legal. 

LIKELY FALSE. The ACLU filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration on 5/6/18, and a recent court ruling denied the government’s motion to dismiss the suit. The judge deciding the case stated that the Trump Administration’s policy is “brutal, offensive, and fails to comport with traditional notions of fair play and decency.” The case is moving forward because it was deemed to have legal merit. 

[ source ]

Here is Michelle’s original Facebook post.

Michelle’s Social Media [ facebook | twitter ]

actupny:

thisoneshade:

kamikazesoundsociety:

kamikazesoundsociety:

kamikazesoundsociety:

kamikazesoundsociety:

kamikazesoundsociety:

kamikazesoundsociety:

kamikazesoundsociety:

kamikazesoundsociety:

kamikazesoundsociety:

So I was doing some research on common medications for a pharmacology class at school, and realized that Wikipedia is calling out the outrageous practices of pharmacological sales in the US. Right up there in the main intro to the medication they’re showing how much the drug costs to produce, versus how much a typical course of treatment costs in the USA.

Amoxicillin, a front line antibiotic, typically taken at one pill per day. 10 pills cost between 0.20 and 0.50 USD to produce, marked up at up to 80 times the price in the US.

Salbutamol, AKA an asthma puffer, on the World Health Organization’s List of Essential Medicines (considered to be the most important basic medications needed to be stocked by a pharmacy/hospital), a life saving medication.

How about oxygen? A tank of oxygen, used as a basic treatment for everything from low blood oxygen to respiratory failure to maintaining oxygen while administering anesthesia for an operation?

Epinephrine/adrenaline, AKA an epipen, given to people having a type of severe allergic reaction called anaphylaxis, where their airways swell and close up. A person in anaphylaxis will die without epinephrine/adrenaline. Costs at most $0.95 to produce, and they’re sold for $70 at the absolute cheapest for a single vial.

Naloxone/Narcan, used to stop an opioid overdose. $5.30, at most, to produce. $4500 to buy.

Bisoprolol/Zebeta, given for high blood pressure, angina (chest pain), and heart failure, sold at over 1000% it costs to produce.

The combined birth control pill, ethinylestradiol/levonorgestrel. 

Also, just so you’re aware, as of late Mat 2018, 1.80 GBP is 2.40 USD. For a three month supply of the pill. The same amount could cost you 150 USD in the United States.

The MMR vaccine, given to prevent mumps, measles, and rubella – diseases that could leave you deaf, blind, infertile.

Casual reminder that the for-pay medical system is vicious and morally bankrupt.

image
image

Emtricitabine/tenofovir is PrEP (Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis), the daily pill you can take to protect yourself from HIV. But the people in the US who need it most struggle to access it because of price gouging by its manufacturer, Gilead Sciences.

wilwheaton:

“Taking a stand against adultery was easy when it was a Democratic president. But the right’s obsession with abortion, gay rights and other “sins” that straight white men generally aren’t inclined or even biologically able to commit reveals something very dark about religious conservatives: They’re fierce defenders of their right to force their religion on their perceived enemies, and only their enemies.”

Stormy Daniels brought to you by Mike Pence and evangelical Christians

The Pentagon Can’t Account for $21 Trillion (That’s Not a Typo)

zvaigzdelasas:

violaslayvis:

Twenty-one trillion dollars. The Pentagon’s own numbers show that it can’t account for $21 trillion. Yes, I mean trillion with a “T.” And this could change everything. But I’ll get back to that in a moment. 

There are certain things the human mind is not meant to do. Our complex brains cannot view the world in infrared, cannot spell words backward during orgasm and cannot really grasp numbers over a few thousand. A few thousand, we can feel and conceptualize. We’ve all been in stadiums with several thousand people. We have an idea of what that looks like (and how sticky the floor gets).

But when we get into the millions, we lose it. It becomes a fog of nonsense. Visualizing it feels like trying to hug a memory. We may know what $1 million can buy (and we may want that thing), but you probably don’t know how tall a stack of a million $1 bills is. You probably don’t know how long it takes a minimum-wage employee to make $1 million.

That’s why trying to understand—truly understand—that the Pentagon spent 21 trillion unaccounted-for dollars between 1998 and 2015 washes over us like your mother telling you that your third cousin you met twice is getting divorced. It seems vaguely upsetting, but you forget about it 15 seconds later because … what else is there to do?

Twenty-one trillion.

But let’s get back to the beginning. A couple of years ago, Mark Skidmore, an economics professor, heard Catherine Austin Fitts, former assistant secretary in the Department of Housing and Urban Development, say that the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General had found $6.5 trillion worth of unaccounted-for spending in 2015. Skidmore, being an economics professor, thought something like, “She means $6.5 billion. Not trillion. Because trillion would mean the Pentagon couldn’t account for more money than the gross domestic product of the whole United Kingdom. But still, $6.5 billion of unaccounted-for money is a crazy amount.”

So he went and looked at the inspector general’s report, and he found something interesting: It was trillion! It was fucking $6.5 trillion in 2015 of unaccounted-for spending! And I’m sorry for the cursing, but the word “trillion” is legally obligated to be prefaced with “fucking.” It is indeed way more than the U.K.’s GDP.

Let’s stop and take a second to conceive how much $21 trillion is (which you can’t because our brains short-circuit, but we’ll try anyway).

1. The amount of money supposedly in the stock market is $30 trillion.

2. The GDP of the United States is $18.6 trillion.

3. Picture a stack of money. Now imagine that that stack of dollars is all $1,000 bills. Each bill says “$1,000” on it. How high do you imagine that stack of dollars would be if it were $1 trillion. It would be 63 miles high.

4. Imagine you make $40,000 a year. How long would it take you to make $1 trillion? Well, don’t sign up for this task, because it would take you 25 million years (which sounds like a long time, but I hear that the last 10 million really fly by because you already know your way around the office, where the coffee machine is, etc.).

If my mental arithmetic is right that’s like a trillion dollars a year, so (very) roughly 6% of the US economy has been being siphoned off by the pentagon per year over the last two decades unaccountably. And that’s in addition to the exorbitant overengorged budget they’ve had. USAmerica Delenda Fucking Est

The Pentagon Can’t Account for $21 Trillion (That’s Not a Typo)

closet-keys:

Michelle Wolf: *makes jokes about how Sarah Huckabee Sanders is an unapologetic liar and implies she’s a traitor to other women comparable to a fiction character who helps indoctrinate other women into a hyper-misogynist dystopian society*

Men who so deeply objectify women that they cannot fathom a joke involving a woman going deeper than comments on her appearance: Wow did that bitch just call another woman ugly??? So much for the tolerant left