Military mom ‘proud’ of breast-feeding in uniform, despite criticism
National pride, or disgrace? A photo gone viral of two servicewomen breast-feeding their children while in uniform has added a new layer to the debate over nursing in public.If you think this is a “disgrace”, just quit following me now.
^^^
John Hubner, Last Stop in Texas
Also, just thought I’d mention that Indiana is one of those places where 10-year-old children can be tried with first-degree murder as an adult.
1
By Glenn Greenwald
This morning, the New York Times has a very lengthy and detailed article about President Obama’s counter-Terrorism policies based on interviews with “three dozen of his current and former advisers.” I’m writing separately about the numerous revelations contained in that article, but want specifically to highlight this one vital passage about how the Obama administration determines who is a “militant.” The article explains that Obama’s rhetorical emphasis on avoiding civilian deaths “did not significantly change” the drone program, because Obama himself simply expanded the definition of a “militant” to ensure that it includes virtually everyone killed by his drone strikes. Just read this remarkable passage:
Mr. Obama embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties that did little to box him in. It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants, according to several administration officials, unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent.
(via istellar)
151 
(Source: hammeredtimesthree, via ravenspyre)
A woman in America runs a greater risk of being killed by her husband or boyfriend than a woman in Pakistan.
How I Learned To Stop Worrying And Love Feminists. (via popmuslim)
A woman in America runs a greater risk of being killed by her husband or boyfriend than a woman in Pakistan.
A woman in America runs a greater risk of being killed by her husband or boyfriend than a woman in Pakistan.
A woman in America runs a greater risk of being killed by her husband or boyfriend than a woman in Pakistan.
(via silverqueen)
Let me reiterate that for you all …
A woman in America runs a greater risk of being killed by her husband or boyfriend than a woman in Pakistan.
A woman in America runs a greater risk of being killed by her husband or boyfriend than a woman in Pakistan.
A woman in America runs a greater risk of being killed by her husband or boyfriend than a woman in Pakistan.
(via dank-potion)
I think you’ve missed a crucial point though, let me point it out:
A woman in America runs a greater risk of being killed by her husband or boyfriend than a woman in Pakistan.
A woman in America runs a greater risk of being killed by her husband or boyfriend than a woman in Pakistan.
A woman in America runs a greater risk of being killed by her husband or boyfriend than a woman in Pakistan.
(via themindislimitless)
(via magentafeelings)
Chris Hedges (via azspot)
(via trkshdlite)
86
“I hate it when they say, He gave his life for his country. Nobody gives their life for anything. We steal the lives of these kids. We take it away from them. They don’t die for the honor and glory of their country. We kill them.”
— U.S Navy Admiral Gene LaRocque
(Source: proactivism, via romantic-orthodoxy)
President Barack Obama honored veterans on Monday by noting “the light of a new day” of having U.S. troops home from Iraq and returning soon from Afghanistan, while promising not to send soldiers back to war without a clear need.
Obama did not mention tension with Iran and Syria in his remarks to veterans and military families at a hot, sunny Memorial Day ceremony, focusing instead on the wars started by his predecessor, George W. Bush, that he wound down as president.
“After a decade under the dark cloud of war, we can see the light of a new day on the horizon,” he said at Arlington National Cemetery, drawing applause when he noted the “milestone” of it being the first Memorial Day in nine years without Americans fighting and dying in Iraq.
“As commander in chief, I can tell you that sending our troops into harm’s way is the most wrenching decision that I have to make,” Obama said shortly after laying a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.
“I can promise you I will never do so unless it is absolutely necessary and that when we do, we must give our troops a clear mission and the full support of a grateful nation.”
Later on Monday, Obama will attend a ceremony at the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall in Washington.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, introducing Obama at the Arlington military cemetery, said that 58,000 Americans died in the Vietnam War. More than 4,000 Americans died in Iraq from 2003 to 2011, and nearly 2,000 have died in Afghanistan from the war’s start in 2001 to date.
Who needs a ground offensive, when you’ve merely evolved the apparatus/methods/means of war.
See / Meanwhile -
- US drone ‘kills six’ in Pakistan’s tribal north-west,
- Up to 34 Dead in US-Aided Yemen Offensive,
- Hundreds Die as US-Backed Yemen Offensive Escalates,
- US Drone Strikes Increase in Pakistan: 31 Killed Since Wednesday,
- Nato air strike ‘kills Afghan family’,
- Panetta Vows ‘Enduring Presence’ in Afghanistan,
etc.
Good joke Obama.
Not to mention that Obama (before the withdrawal) put more troops in Afghanistan than Bush did at any time including the Surge. See, if you don’t call it a Surge, it’s just normal, right?
(via marxmaterialized)
47 Much of life, however, is characterized by what the sociologist Robert Merton called the Matthew Effect, named after a sentence from the book of Matthew in the Bible, which laments “For to all those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away.” Matthew was referring specifically to wealth (hence the phrase “the rich get richer and the poor get poorer”), but Merton argued that the same rule applied to success more generally. Success early on in an individual’s career, that is, confers on them certain structural advantages that make subsequent successes much more likely, regardless of their intrinsic aptitude.
[…]
Merton was writing about scientific careers, but as the sociologist Daniel Rigney argues in his recent book The Matthew Effect, the same forces apply to most other careers as well. Success leads to prominence and recognition, which leads in turn to more opportunities to succeed, more resources with which to achieve success, and more likelihood of your subsequent successes being noticed and attributed to you.
Isolating the effects of this accumulated advantage from differences in innate talent or hard work is difficult, but a number of studies have found that no matter how carefully one tries to select a pool of people with similar potential, their fortunes will diverge wildly over time, consistent with Merton’s theory. For example, it is known that college students who graduate during a weak economy earn less, on average, than students who graduate in a strong economy. On its own, that doesn’t sound too surprising, but the kicker is that this difference applies not just to the years of the recession itself, but continues to accumulate over decades. Because the timing of one’s graduation obviously has nothing to do with one’s innate talent, the persistence of these effects is strong evidence that the Matthew Effect is present everywhere.
Everything Is Obvious by Duncan J. Watts (via sociolab)
(via jojoholmes)
30
