Islam

At U of Michigan, a Muslim Student Unmasks the Hypocrite He Says Vandalized His Apartment

The perpetrator was a liberal activist and decorated campus Muslim leader who said American Sniper promoted violence.

|

Omar Mahmood
Gage Skidmore / Flickr

Is the University of Michigan a hostile place for Muslim students—or just a hostile place for freethinkers?

Zeinab Khalil, a recent UM graduate, Muslim, and progressive activist who won numerous distinctions during her time on campus, including an award named for Martin Luther King, Jr., thinks it's the former. A UM group's decision to screen the film American Sniper offended the sensibilities of some Muslims, including Khalil, who claimed on Twitter that the campus "is already a hostile place for Arab/Muslim students. In one tweet posted on April 9th, she despaired:

"Spent 4 yrs at @umich doing anti-oppressive work; admins used me to educate campus. this is what i get in return as exhausted/exploited alum."

In a sense, she's right. UM has indeed proven to be a hostile place for at least one Muslim student: Omar Mahmood, whose off-campus apartment was vandalized last December by a trio of women who pelted his door with eggs and left him hateful messages because they didn't appreciate a satirical column he'd written mocking trigger warnings and microaggressions.

Who perpetrated this act of intimidation against a Muslim student? It was Khalil herself, according to Mahmood, whose account is supported by the testimony of other students, video footage, and emails obtained by Reason.

Khalil was assisted by two others, according to Mahmood, who are also recent graduates and progressive activists in the UM Muslim community.

Mahmood has known this all along—the amateur criminals were caught in the act on the apartment complex's surveillance video and are identifiable to those who know them—but he says he didn't report their names to the media in hopes that they would reconcile with him privately. They never did.

In the wake of the controversy over American Sniper and Khalil's statements about campus hostility toward Muslims, Mahmood says he couldn't hold back any longer.

At 1:40 a.m. on Friday, December 12, 2014 the three women entered Mahmood's building. They vandalized the door leading to his apartment unit, pelting it with eggs, gum, and hot dogs, and left hateful messages such as "You scum embarrass us," "you have no soul," and "everyone hates you you violent prick." They also left a picture of Satan and defaced copies of the thing that had drawn their ire: a satirical column he had written for the campus's conservative alternative newspaper, The Michigan Review.

The column, titled "Do the Left Thing," was written from the perspective of a left-handed student up in arms about all the microaggressions right-handed students had committed against him. Mahmood lamented political correctness in the piece:

It is 2014, people. Still, change starts with awareness. Until right-handed people, especially cis-gendered hetero white males in salmon shorts, do not start checking their privilege, we will continue to live in inequality.

That was enough, says Mahmood, to provoke Khalil.

But even though the perpetrators were caught in the act on surveillance video and their identities were known to many on campus, according to Mahmood, no official action or reprimand took place. And despite the incident garnering attention from national news media—both Fox News and New York Magazine cited it as a prime example of the culture of censorship at the modern American university campus—Mahmood never received any kind of apology. Leaders of the UM Muslim community tried to mediate, but the women were unwilling to meet.

"They have not apologized," Mahmood told Reason.

Khalil's tactics are all the more astonishing given her level of distinction and importance on campus. During her time at UM, she was a model leader with a considerable resume. She was a student commencement speaker for the Honors Program graduation ceremony in May 2014, president of the Muslim Student Association, a columnist for the main campus newspaper, The Michigan Daily, and founder of several activist groups. The university chose her as a Rhodes Scholarship nominee last September—just a few months before Mahmood's door was vandalized. She even received the Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Spirit Award for exemplifying "the leadership and extraordinary vision" of King, an apostle of non-violence. She interned at the Century Foundation and the Brookings Institution, both left-leaning think tanks in Washington, D.C.

Embedded image permalink

Khalil did not respond to repeated telephone calls, voicemail messages, and emails seeking comment on their actions. Reason obtained messages between a UM employee with knowledge of the incident and the people involved; these documents support Mahmood's assertions. An individual who spoke to Reason on condition of anonymity recognized the women from the surveillance footage and said there was no doubt of their identities.

The Michigan Review has also reported that Kahlil took part in the vandalism and was investigated by the UM Dean of Students over the matter last year.

University administrators are committed to a "diverse, open, and friendly campus," according to The Michigan Journal, which reported that President Mark Schlissel believes all students should be able "to express their opinions openly." Much lip service is paid to the idea that college is a place for tolerance of diverse viewpoints.

Why then did the attempted intimidation of a student—particularly one belonging to an ethnic, political, and religious minority—go unanswered by officials? Rick Fitzgerald, director of the Office of Public Affairs at UM, told Reason that the administration's hands were tied. Mahmood never filed a bias complaint, so the university had no grounds to take action, he said.

"Violations of the Statement of Student Rights and Responsibilities are initiated by complainants who bring forward certain facts in the form of a complaint," said Fitzgerald.

Mahmood told Reason that he called the university hotline to report a bias incident, but was informed that because it had occurred off campus, nothing could be done.

Mahmood's situation is interesting because muted responses to bias incidents—even unofficial ones—are atypical, at UM and other colleges. Indeed, at UM the administration acted swiftly when the feelings of certain Muslims were at issue. After hundreds of students sign a petition demanding that UM cancel a planned screening of American Sniper, organizers substituted Paddington—a film starring an anthropomorphic bear, based on a children's book—in its stead. Criticized for caving to some students' hurt feelings, officials changed their minds and decided to show both films.

Where was the outcry over Mahmood's door?

Derek Draplin, a UM student, editor of The Michigan Review, and friend of Mahmood's called his treatment "completely hypocritical."

"The Muslim community on campus has basically excommunicated him for not adhering to their dogmas," he told Reason. "They preach tolerance, then try to shut any dissenters up."

NEXT: The Novels of Jim Webb

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Wow, Soave is really trying to get added to that block-list, isn’t he?

    1. This should take care of it I think.

      1. Her twitter account appears to have fallen down the memory hole.

    2. I make up to $90 an hour working from my home. My story is that I quit working at Walmart to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $40h to $86h? Someone was good to me by sharing this link with me, so now i am hoping i could help someone else out there by sharing this link… Try it, you won’t regret it!……
      http://www.work-mill.com

  2. she was a model leader

    Damning with faint praise. I find all model leaders to be insufferable assholes.

    1. Yeah. Well the “Model Leaders” are always the worst authority-sucking jerks in any student body.

      Can you remember anyone on any ‘student council’ anywhere who wasn’t a self-important twit?

      1. I wasn’t, but then again I never showed up for meetings.

      2. HEy…ok, well, fair enough.

      3. I was class president my junior year of high school after running on the platform of mocking the student government system and destroying it once in office. I even got a little political party to put the motion before every session of student council. We actually got enough support to vote the parliament out of existence and then the school’s guidance counselor intervened and banished me from the government and threatened my party members with suspensions if they persisted. A mockery was indeed made.

        1. If I were your mother, I would be proud.

        2. I am Mises, and I approve this message.

        3. Guidance counsellors are always the worst moralizing busybodies.

          They’re always the C-grade psychology grads.

        4. I got suspended from my HS radio show for playing “Nobody for president” political ads, they just dont have any appreciation for satire… it also may have been due to me reffering to hillary as Clitdong when she was running for state senator- id say it quickly and i didnt think anyone but my few friends who listened to my death metal/ comedy show knew what i was saying.
          My Dad was never prouder of me.

      4. I embezzled like 40 bucks when I was 10th grade class treasurer but otherwise what a goddamn waste of time.

        (I paid it back just in time…)

      5. Can you remember anyone on any ‘student council’ anywhere who wasn’t a self-important twit?

        You misspelled “twat.”

        1. I lost my hit while reading your comment.

          +1

      6. I’m pretty sure you just misspelled twat.

    2. A “model leader” is to a “leader” what a “model airplane” is to an “airplane”?

  3. Zeinab “Jackie” Khalil?

  4. wow what a shitty human being this young lady comes off as

    1. I don’t think she’s just coming as a shitty human being.

      I think she is a shitty human being.

      1. *puffs on pipe. bubbles come out.*

        Indeed.

  5. “They preach tolerance, then try to shut any dissenters up.”

    If you’re going to preach tolerance, you also need a way to enforce tolerance.

    1. Ve vill haf no intoleranze heer!

      1. You know , it wouldn’t be so bad if the only thing they weren’t tolerating was actual intolerance. The problem is they have a habit of defining anything with the slightest whiff of anti-whateverism as intolerance and bigotry.

        So like, writing an op-ed in the student newspaper making fun of microagressions – That’s BIGOTRY! It must be STAMPED OUT! Making fun of the ‘check you privilege’ – same thing.

        Saying anything that contradicts the SJW agenda – obviously you’re a racist bigot who cannot be tolerated!!!

  6. So glad Mahmood got pissed enough to go public on this.

    1. I’m impressed by his ability to take the high road. Seems like a classy guy.

  7. Holy God, I forgot how funny that video is. Watching them waddle down the hallway mischievously is one of life’s great joys.

    1. Waddle? OMG TRIGGERING

    2. *Nice* job with the hoodies, too.

      1. SO TRIGGERED.

      2. Like bank robbers who enter a bank, and then put their masks on. Put on your disguise before you reach the cameras, you criminal masterminds.

  8. OT: CHELSEA CLINTON OPENS UP ABOUT MOTHERHOOD

    Um, you may want to reconsider that headline.

    1. Charlotte? That’s an asshole name for an asshole baby.

      1. I imagine she’s nicknamed “Mlle President”.

      2. How do we know a baby is any more of an asshole than other babies?

        1. Compare them to my baby, who is definitely not an asshole.

          1. Give it time, give it time…

          2. Babies are all assholes. They don’t care about anything but satisfying their immediate desires.

            1. Do you put on movies adapted from children’s books about anthropomorphic bears to salve their many hurts?

            2. Babies are libertarians?

          3. Compare them to my baby, who is definitely not an asshole.

            Right. Put natures purest food in one end, and see what comes out the other.

            Not unlike campus activists.

            1. In terms of what goes in and out, campus activists are more like human centipedes.

        2. The wake up multiple times a night screaming for you to give them a meal or pat their ass.

          I think it’s safe to say all babies are assholes.

      3. I once knew a big, strong lesbian from Maine named Charlotte. She was pretty cool.

        1. Sure it wasn’t sarcasmic?

          1. One can never be sure.

  9. Who perpetrated this act of intimidation against a Muslim student? It was Khalil herself…

    Now, wait just a minute. Any aggression taken for the cause is completely justified. Is it the building cleaning crew’s fault that Mahmood’s writings made these three women feel so unsafe that they had to defend themselves with eggs?

    1. ” defend themselves with eggs?” What better way for a woman to defend herself?

        1. *hands Swiss giant black sunglasses old people wear after cataract surgery*

          1. +1 Pussy Eye

  10. The Muslim community on campus has basically excommunicated him for not adhering to their dogmas

    I had to laugh. You don’t say. I mean this must be the first time ever that a bunch of committed religious activists excommunicated someone who didn’t adhere to their dogmas.

    1. +1 Emperor Barbarossa

    2. You know who else purged people that contradicted their dogmas?

      1. Ed, Edd, and Eddy?

    3. Except, from the sound of it, the dogma Mahmood didn’t adhere to wasn’t even so much Islam as the Social Justice Warrior Code.

        1. SJWs are not however

    4. I have to admit, it is a little interesting that the local branch of a global religion that tends to get headlines for the tendency of some of its foreign branches to murder the shit out of people to stop women from getting an education, is excommunicating someone for mocking academic femprog bullshyte.

    5. I guess he’s in the dogma house now.

  11. Leaders of the UM Muslim community tried to mediate, but the women were unwilling to meet.

    I notice a trend in all of these stories. These progressive social marxists (typically female) are fine attacking people, but only behind their backs. They rarely show any interest in establishing a dialogue with those they disagree with or attempt to persuade through reason. It’s as if, and maybe I’m crazy here, they just want ostracize and blacklist those guilty of thinking differently than they do…

    1. It’s not their job to persuade you. Why should they? They’re here, they’re annoying, get used to it. Why should they have to justify themselves? They’re not going to enact your labor for you. GOOGLE IT.

      1. Well, I did Google it, but wish I hadn’t. The fact that i have learned so many SJW buzz phrases disturbs me. Good thing they’ll change them all again in a few years once they’ve grown stale.

        On that subject, the unwillingness not to engage in actual discussion with their ideological opponents also confirms what I kind of already knew. The entire movement consists almost entirely of a group of people trying to send social signals to one another. It’s not about enacting meaningful change, but crying the loudest and out-righteous’ing one another.

        Most people here would agree with that, but it really can’t be stated enough. They are intellectual frauds, and I don’t even agree they are well-intentioned ones at that.

        1. It’s all incredibly intellectually incestuous, and vacuous. They literally reject reason and logical argument so the only options are shouting, mobbing, blocking, etc.

          I always wonder about the “google it” thing though. If none of them are willing to explain themselves, won’t googling it only turn up their ideological opponents?

          1. They have plenty of pontificators that are ready and willing to explain it all to you.

            Salon, Slate, Jezebel, Gawker, most of Tumblr, etc…

            1. But it’s not like they all agree, not remotely. I mean I get what you’re saying, but I wouldn’t just tell someone to “google it” about libertarianism. Too many strains.

              1. They don’t have to agree, that’s the beauty of their system. It doesn’t even have to make sense It’s all principals instead of principles.

                1. But WHICH principals?

                  1. They do fight over that, but they agree it’s not white men

              2. Or you end up at Slate or Salon and their “explanations” of libertarianism.

                1. From the mouths of pantomime libertarians, no less.

            2. Tumblr? I thought that was just a porn site.

          2. If none of them are willing to explain themselves, won’t googling it only turn up their ideological opponents?

            Probably projection. They’re unwilling to go to any trouble to understand their opponents, so they assume the same is true for the cisgendered white male shitlords

          3. Khalil actually expounds on this topic somewhat:

            In the case of emotion versus logic, the latter always trumps the former, especially when it comes to knowledge and scholarship. The problem with ranking binaries is that we’re not only ranking concepts, but identities and experiences informed by these concepts. In this case, the logic-emotion binary elevates Eurocentric cultures that emphasize less expressive ideals, while debasing non-western/non-white cultures that may be differently or more emotionally expressive.

            It’s a full-on rejection of the Enlightenment because the Enlightenment was largely a Western movement. Since “Western” implies privilege, it must be bad, right?

            Of course, it also solidifies and makes unassailable their moral position as the most emotional and the under-privileged. Convenient for them since arguing and debating becomes unnecessary under their system.

            1. In this case, the logic-emotion binary elevates Eurocentric cultures that emphasize less expressive ideals, while debasing non-western/non-white cultures that may be differently or more emotionally expressive.

              I have no problem saying that Western culture is vastly superior to the Arab culture she claims in nearly every conceivable way. But I’m supposed to respect the sort of thinking that (at least in her view) has produced a culture where they rape little boys and don’t let women drive because of feelings…

              In the case of emotion versus logic, the latter always trumps the former, especially when it comes to knowledge and scholarship.

              A point she never bothered to explain in anyway. But I guess that’s the point.

              1. In all fairness, she’s probably insane from the cognitive dissonance it requires to be a practicing Muslim and a progressive feminist. On one hand advocating for Arab influence in intelligentsia and on the other working to end their traditional treatment of women.

                1. In all fairness, she’s probably insane from the cognitive dissonance it requires to be a practicing Muslim and a progressive feminist.

                  There are an oddly large number of prog femnazis who become convert to Islam in Europe.

                  It’s truly bizarre.

                  Like “man eats own head” bizarre.

                  1. become

                  2. She’s probably a deconstructionist, so theoretically the text of the Koran means whatever she wants it to mean.

                    1. the text of the Koran means whatever she wants it to mean.

                      Thinking that would get her executed in some places

                    2. Lucky for her, she’s in a Western civilization (that she would dismantle if given the chance)

                  3. When you consider that most femprog bullshyte, if you took them at their word and considered it logically, would be a compelling argument for ending women’s rights, it’s not actually that surprising.

                2. Maybe this whole thing is just some bizarre Muslim courtship ritual we don’t know about.

                  Girl eggs guy’s door
                  Guy rapes and beats girl
                  And they all live happily ever after

                  1. You forgot the honor killings

                    1. Like egging someone else’s door, yes, that seems sensible.

                    2. You forgot the honor killings

                      That’s what having kids is for.

                  2. It’s all fun and games until someone loses a clitoris.

                    1. My commie aunt says that is exactly the same as a corporation not wanting to cover all forms of birth control on a company health plan. EXACTLY te same as the clitorectomy.

                    2. She doesnt get laid often then?

              2. I have no problem saying that Western culture is vastly superior to the Arab culture she claims in nearly every conceivable way.

                Well, not in every conceivable way. After all, she’s a woman. By the standards of Arab culture she shouldn’t be going to college and lecturing men.

            2. It is a damn shame that you are branded some kind of bigot now if you try to say that European civilizations got some really important things right. The only way those things could possibly have spread to the rest of the world to the extent that they have is some kind of brutal imperialism. Couldn’t have anything to do with the ideas being good ones. Of course Europeans engaged in some brutal imperialism, but they were hardly the only ones, or uniquely brutal in how they did it.

              I’d suggest that a good way to state it is that Europeans happened to come across these ideas first through historical accidents of geography and available resources and it is only because of that that the ideas are “western”. Such ideas were bound to spread. But that’s probably still too racist.

              1. through historical accidents of geography and available resources

                Privilege!

              2. I’ll go one step further, European civilization is the most significant one in human history with all due respect to Asia.

                1. Two words: blue jeans.

            3. She’s not entirely without a point. Logic and emotion aren’t some sort of polar opposites, where one is good and useful, and the other dumb and bad; they’re two important parts of a healthy mental diet. Even in scholarship, you need to have an emotional grounding when dealing with issues that involve other people (less so pure STEM stuff). Emotions aren’t just happy/sad, they deal with horror, guilt, empathy, and all the stuff that keeps us from solving a problem by just murdering half of humanity, if it would technically work.

              That said, it’s the sort of thing illogical people say to try to confuse the underutilization of logic with the reasonable utilization of emotion.

              1. “May I say that I have not thoroughly enjoyed serving with humans? I find their illogic and foolish emotions a constant irritant.”- S

                1. “I find their illogic and foolish emotions a constant irritant.”

                  Holy crap – I’m a Vulcan.

                2. But if you take the Vulcan ideals at their word, they can be very Stalinist.

                  Logic over emotion, in fact, the banning of emotion. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Those can be used to justify mass murder against any that refuse to join the collective

                  1. Or a schismatic break between those who agree and those who don’t. Maybe with the one’s who don’t agree becoming the perceived villains?

                    http://www.etsonly.com/images/…..mulans.jpg

            4. “It’s a full-on rejection of the Enlightenment”

              Incorrect. It’s a rejection of Cartesian dualism. Descartes wasn’t the only thinker of the Enlightenment. You ever heard of the writer Spinoza? More or less a contemporary of Descartes, but a materialist. These days it’s fashionable for post modernists, feminists etc to embrace the thinking of Spinoza. Classical Liberals, Marxists and apparently Libertarians see this as a rejection of the Enlightenment but I’m not so sure.

              1. The ‘enlightenment’ is something of an arbitrary term anyway; much like ‘rannaissance’ it was invented as a ‘movement’ after the movement has already taken place. To me, it’s a useless vaguary. Rousseau and J.S. Mill are both part of the ‘Enlightenment’ but they are almost polar opposites. And Rousseau was no rationalist, I don’t care what anyone likes to believe about him.

                What this woman says isn’t as complex as you claim. Her claim is nothing more than a convoluted way of trying to make the use of sweeping generalization a valid argument, rather than a logical fallacy. That’s what the whole ‘lived experience’ bullshit is; ‘European’ logic debases European experiences every bit as much as non-european ones, because personal experiences of any kind are irrelevant.

                It’s basically this: to convince a rational person that the world is such and such a way, you need to present evidence, usually lots of it. I would argue in fact that all reasoning can at least be described statistically, where each article of evidence adds some amount of probability to the hypothesis.

                continued…

                1. This Zalib woman wants to be able to overrule the weight of evidence with her personal experiences. It, and the whole prog/feminist/SJW process is just an attempt to circumvent evidentiary reasoning by making an appeal to pathos. If a policy will wreck thousands of lives to save a single kitten from being left outside in the cold for a night, they will turn your thousands of human lives into a statistic, part of the ‘Eurocentric’ logical framework (and therefore the argument itself is racist) while that one kitten’s being left out in the cold is a lived experience, and letting logic lead you to weigh it as insignificant against the cost is ‘dismissive’ of the experience and therefore racist or whatever. But it’s really just appeal to pathos, couched in convoluted terminology. Like much of late 20th early 21st century intellectualism, it’s an attempt to circumvent the need for empirical reasoning and hiding one’s laziness in jargon.

                  1. “This Zalib woman wants to be able to overrule the weight of evidence with her personal experiences.”

                    Feelings. Wo, wo, wo, feelings. Sing it!

                    Do you have a newsletter?

                  2. You win this round MarkLastName. I defer to your more complete and accurate portrayal of the aforementioned.

                    1. “complete and accurate portrayal”

                      It’s a caricature. Which is fine if all you are interested in is reinforcing your prejudices. But if you want to go further, best thing is to go beyond these second or third hand regurgitations.

                    2. mtrueman: “It’s a caricature. Which is fine if all you are interested in is reinforcing your prejudices. But if you want to go further, best thing is to go beyond these second or third hand regurgitations.”

                      I see you subscribe to the standard leftist school of argumentation that holds ‘if I show disdain for an argument, I have thereby refuted it.’

                      Just because an idea is complicated doesn’t mean it isn’t stupid. Scientology is a case in point. So are Lacanian psychoanalysis, legal positivism, and most other intellectual trends to come out of “postmodern thought.” They did find out one clever thing though: obscurantism is a great way to conceal the internal contradictions of one’s beliefs.

                    3. “Just because an idea is complicated doesn’t mean it isn’t stupid.”

                      Emotion and logic are binary opposites. I would have thought that’s a stupid idea we can dispense with, but some here disagree with me.

                    4. mtrueman: “Emotion and logic are binary opposites. I would have thought that’s a stupid idea… ”
                      I couldn’t care less about binaries and opposite. The idea here is simple: the world is as it is regardless of how anyone feels about how it is. When we are inferring how the world is, how one feels about that is therefore irrelevant to the conclusion we should come to. And so, more or less, is one’s ‘personal experiences.’

                      E.g., somebody telling a sad story about how she was raped and how horrible it was and how it influenced her; or someone tells her perceived experience of sexism day-to-day. These anecdotes or the emotions of their tellers should have no influence at all on our verdict as per the status of ‘society’ or ‘culture.’ Statistically, their stories are a drop in the ocean; they are nothing more than sad stories therefore. To argue that they are relevant is to argue that a single data point is evidence of a trend. And what’s more, that data point is only a perceived data point; whether the teller of the anecdote was even really raped or a victim of sexism can only really be taken so seriously if it can be verified beyond the claim of the teller.

                      Telling me you feel a certain way doesn’t tell me anything about anything or anyone other than you, certainly says nothing about society, culture, blah blah blah, and certainly should be disregarded when crafting policy.

                    5. “the world is as it is regardless of how anyone feels about how it is”

                      This is untrue and nihilistic. And you haven’t thought it through. You underestimate the power of images and feelings to change the world. I’m sure you’ve seen the photograph of a naked young girl crying in terror as she runs down a road toward the camera man, with a napalm strike in the background. It was taken in Vietnam during the war and shocked people into questioning the war. You remember seeing it, don’t you. If you really want to convince someone, logic will only get you so far. With a powerful image, you get them in their gut.

                      Feelings do indeed change the world, like it or not. You’re kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

                  3. While agree with your point, I’d like to add that emotions are not uneccessary or unimportant.

                    It is the emotions felt in toddlerhood and middle school, for example, that teach most of us the truth of the so-called Golden Rule. These emotional responses to attacks from others inform our morals–with teachings from more wise adults. Since emotions are subjective, they are also individual and tapping into them to make decisions makes our decisions more individual than they would be were we entirely objective. But I’m not saying that emotions are good in and of themselves.

                    Reason is a process that allows us to take input from objective facts and subjective feelings and come to a more humane conclusion. Reason alone would make for sociopathy–or maybe just Objectivism. Nonetheless, reason and emotion are not opposites or mutually exclusive.

                    The SJWs are not just relying on emotion but are objectivizing them to the point that collective feelings trump not only individual feelings, but also reason.

                    At least that’s the way I see it so far. You may see it differently.

              2. No, not merely a rejection of dualism, the materialist determinists of the left reject every other ontological possibility and do so in the absence of any rational, logical proof of that assertion.

                That is what places them, not just outside the enlightenment, but in active opposition to it.

                And yes, that applies to historical Enlightenment figures such as Rousseau as well.

              3. Spinoza was neither a subjectivist nor a collectivist in politics. The theoreticians of leftoidism are still stuck on the crappy philosophy that came out of Germany at the end of the Enlightenment (Kant, Hegel, Marx), and all their various intellectual descendants (pragmatism, the analyst movement, etc.). “Postmodernism” is the lowest height they’ve yet been able to reach.

                1. “theoreticians of leftoidism are still stuck on the crappy philosophy that came out of Germany at the end of the Enlightenment”

                  You missed my point. I was not talking about Leftists embracing Spinoza. I was referring to Feminists and Postmodernists.

                2. “Postmodernism” is the lowest height they’ve yet been able to reach.”

                  My guess is that you know about as much about Postmodernism as the others here. And what you do know is like Mark, through third hand regurgitations.

                  My advice, aside from not letting illiterates do your thinking for you, start with Nietschze. He is infinitely more important to Postmodernists than the German Idealists.

                  1. “Postmodernism” is the lowest height they’ve yet been able to reach.”…

                    Ah, the “you just don’t understand us” “argument.” I see you’ve reached the bottom of your arsenal of sophistry. Once again, a leftist operates from the assumption that contempt is a substitute for rebuttal.

                    And btw I’ve read more Nietzsche than anyone you’ve ever met. Once memorized the entire last page of Beyond Good and Evil; was quite proud of that, when I was a teenager. And if you think modern day ‘postmodernists’ are remotely Nietzschean, then I suggest you reread Nietzsche.

                    And no, I am not saying being Nietzschean is something to generally aspire to. But like Kierkegaard and Dostoevsky, modern existentialists have been trying to ‘reinterpret’ him into their camp for decades. Nietzsche of course isn’t really in a camp because, though he has plenty of nice aphorisms, he routinely contradicted himself and at the apex of his career he was basically half insane, and it shows in his writings (came up with some of his best aphorisms then too, incidentally).

                    mtrueman, something tells me you’re the kind of person who loves reading Zizek, and I don’t mean that as a compliment.

                    1. “mtrueman, something tells me you’re the kind of person who loves reading Zizek, and I don’t mean that as a compliment.”

                      If you read less Nietschze and more Zizek, (he’s an entertaining read, if nothing else) you’d realize he’s in agreement with you. He has no time at all for feminism or postmodernism. Zizek is a Marxist. If you can’t tell the difference between them, then I suggest you’ve got something to study up on. Or you could just ask me, I’m quite happy to share what I’ve got but it doesn’t really go much beyond what I originally posted.

          4. They literally reject reason and logical argument so the only options are shouting, mobbing, blocking, etc.

            They’re cadres. Really, it’s that simple. It doesn’t make any sense because you think of people as fully formed human beings with a mind and conscience of their own (or at least it seems like you do). That isn’t what these people are. They’ve traded in their mind and conscience to the will of the collective.

            I hear people refer to the SJW crowd as “the new Victorians” or “the new Puritans”. But, that isn’t really a good fit. As much as they were restrictive and oppressive, they still operated on a twisted sort of individual reason and conscience. If you want a more fitting comparison, look at some of the footage of China’s Cultural Revolution.

            1. I hear people refer to the SJW crowd as “the new Victorians”

              True New Atlantans scoff at this notion, with a tip of the hat and a dip into the snuff.

            2. Bitchy Bees?

          5. They assume that everyone who’s halfway intelligent (and therefore published) agrees with them. So if I ‘google it’ I will inevitably find a whole host of ‘experts’ agreeing with them.

            Which just shows that they themselves never actually research their own positions. Leftist ‘intelligentsia’ is just a Potemkin village in which anyone who goes poking around finds out it’s mostly bullshit with a nice facade.

          6. Reason, logic, and rhetoric are tools of the Patriarchy. Get with it, cis-male scum!

        2. It’s not about enacting meaningful change, but crying the loudest and out-righteous’ing one another.

          No, it’s also about change, or else they would only interact with each other.

          They don’t want to change people through honest and frank discussion because their ideas are so whackadoodle people just laugh in their faces when they espouse them. Instead they are going about changing perceptions the old fashion way, with violence and the threat of violence.

          SJW/progs are Orwellian/Randian villains made flesh.

          1. bingo

        3. The horribly ironic part – this is *exactly* the same thing religious fundamentalists do.

          Each one tries to be more horrible than the others to show how dedicated and pure they are.

          They are behaving exactly like the sort of people they despise.

          As I said before – SJW/Progressivism is exactly the same as religion, just without the calming influence of time and liberalization.

          1. bingo, revisited

      2. “They’re not going to enact your labor for you. ‘

        lol

        Are you quoting Suey Park or is that just coincidence?

        I guess the former. Its the kind of ideal-progressive expression that suggests a “doubly-important-doing-of-stuff” that nevertheless remains completely vague and unstated…

        (e.g. “Enacting” “labor”? “Making work”? “Fostering actions” “Enabling Activity!”)

        1. Yes, I was. She’s not going to do your work for you, darnit!

        2. The mtrueman school of debate.

        3. wow, i missed that the first time around. If I hadn’t read things like Jezebel before I would have sworn it was a piece of performance art.

      3. This seems this an incredibly irresponsible position to take. “We’re not even going to bother to make a rational argument. It’s your job to figure it out an accomodate us, no matter how nonsensical our demands are.”

        An anti-intellectual position even, since it rejects intellectual engagement with opposing ideas.

        The correct response to such people is not to accomodate them, but ignore them and throw them in jail if they resort to violence.

    2. These progressive social marxists (typically female) are fine attacking people, but only behind their backs.

      Is there a *safer* place to stab someone?

  12. Stupid people get really upset about art, don’t they?

    1. FICTIONAL LIVES MATTER!!

    2. Stupid people get really upset about art, don’t they?

      The phenomenon might as well be a physical constant, like the speed of light. Stupid people and art are like Bam Margera and Lorentz transformations.

    3. Yes they do. It’s like they can’t imagine that anyone would ever represent anything in art unless they are enthusiastically in favor of that thing.

  13. I guess some people are more equal than others.

    “At 1:40 a.m. on Friday, December 12, 2014 the three women entered Mahmood’s building. They vandalized the door leading to his apartment unit, pelting it with eggs, gum, and hot dogs, and left hateful messages such as “You scum embarrass us,” “you have no soul,” and “everyone hates you you violent prick.” They also left a picture of Satan and defaced copies of the thing that had drawn their ire: a satirical column he had written for the campus’s conservative alternative newspaper, The Michigan Review.”

    That’s a crime.

    He should go to the police, if he hasn’t already, report the crime and press charges.

    If it isn’t considered some kind of violent threat or intimidation, then it’s at least vandalism.

    He might be able to get a restraining order against them.

    Once there are charges filed against these three, especially if there’s a restraining order against them, then the school should have to act on that.

    “Mahmood told Reason that he called the university hotline to report a bias incident, but was informed that because it had occurred off campus, nothing could be done.”

    If a coed were raped in a frat house off campus and it was caught on video, would the school really claim that it’s none of their business?

    1. If a coed were raped in a frat house off campus and it was caught on video, would the school really claim that it’s none of their business?

      That, it seems, might depend on the raper/rapee socioculturalpolitical dynamic.

      1. This is why, if I ever go a-raping, when I get caught I’ll just say I was gay and that homophobic culture drove me to do it (overcompensating or some Freudian bullshit). In fact you might even be able to turn things around and say the woman’s heteronormative behavior was aggressing you.

        1. You seem to have put a lot of thought into this hypothetical situation.

          1. I have, thank you. I mean I don’t plan on raping anyone, but ya know, I can’t see the future, no river is so long it doesn’t contain a bend. (stole that one from Norm McDonald).

            Oh and fyi, if I do become a rapist, I will, I assure you, rape both women and men in equal proportions, just so it’s not sexist.

            1. Ah, well, so long as it isn’t sexist, I think we’re good here.

    2. Are you allowed to suggest calling the police as a reasonable course of action on Reason.com? Careful — you might get called a “boot-licker” or a “statist” for implying that the police are in any way helpful. Ever.

      1. Perfectly alright.

        If government has any legitimate purpose at all, it’s to protect our rights.

        We have a criminal court system to protect our rights from the police, but we also have police to protect our rights from criminals.

        And vandalism is a crime. It’s a violation of someone’s rights.

        What was done to this guy may have been worse than vandalism if it was meant to be interpreted as a violent threat because of what he wrote.

        I think that should be for a jury to decide. I think the criminal court system exists to protect these three’s rights from the police, but I think the legitimate function of the police is to protect the rights of this guy from alleged criminals–especially when they’re caught on video tape.

      2. Well you kow what we like to say – call the police only if you’re willing to get someone killed . . .

  14. To be fair, Muslim-Americans are routinely lambasted on here by the Reason white power brigade, so now I presume that since Socon Omar Mahmood’s apartment door got a little dirty we’ll have a 500 post whine fest by the Reason in-crowd.

    -Bo

    1. Please don’t call it’s name, it’s been such a nice day.

      1. Boatlejuice! Boatlejuice! Boatlejuice!

    2. Even parodies of Bo are boring.

      1. He’s the new joe, people will be sarcasm quoting him for years after he’s left.

      2. And yet in his absence people are recreating him from echoes and distant memories. Does that not show the yearning of hearts for his return?

        Answer: no, it shows people are insane.

      3. Yeah.

        Being the Bo police isn’t much more interesting than being the socon police.

  15. A UM group’s decision to screen the film American Sniper offended the sensibilities of some Muslims, including Khalil, who claimed on Twitter that the campus “is already a hostile place for Arab/Muslim students.

    You know what else creates “a hostile place,” Arab/Muslim campus activists?
    This:

    Students for Justice in Palestine, with nearly 100 chapters on campuses around the nation, has become increasing strident in promoting its agenda, staging “die-ins,” handing out mock eviction notices in dormitories, and raising funds for Hamas-aligned groups, according to Jewish watchdog groups. Individual members have been accused of assaulting students, vandalizing property and hurling anti-Semitic slurs at Jewish students, all in the name of their cause. … The SJP chapter at Vassar College, in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., is currently under investigation by the administration after one member posted a slew of anti-Semitic images on the group’s social media pages. One post in particular that drew the ire of Jewish groups on campus was an old Nazi propaganda poster on the SJP Vassar’s Tumblr blog. The poster, titled “Liberators,” shows a giant, multi-limbed monster being controlled by a caricature with exaggerated racial stereotypes stomping his missile-shaped feet on a small village and was used to convey the group’s dismay over a perceived pervasiveness of Zionism on campus

    1. Students for Justice in Palestine, with nearly 100 chapters on campuses around the nation, has become increasing strident in promoting its agenda

      That Jewish Question isn’t going to answer itself, ya know. Bunch of evil little shits.

    2. +1 Sheldon Richman

    3. I have to give credit to millenials for being able to squeeze all of this stupidity into their schedules when they’re so busy being raped and microaggressed all day.

    4. LIBERATORS

      So activists are now channeling the Nazis? We’re just ripping the mask off now eh?

  16. OT: This seems nuts even for the US

    Hundreds of Puerto Rico’s residents qualified for federal disability benefits in recent years because they lacked fluency in English, according to government auditors.

    The Social Security Administration’s inspector general questioned the policy this month in light of the fact that Spanish is the predominant language in the U.S. territory.

    Under Social Security regulations, individuals are considered less employable in the United States if they can’t speak English, regardless of their work experience or level of education.

    1. *** scrawls on application for assistance ***

      I can’t speak English.

    2. You know who else was shockingly, laughably out of touch with their crumbling empire?

      1. Emperor Romulus Augustulus?

      2. Me on turn 437 of Civ 5?

        1. That sounds about right for me and Spore, lately. I breeze through cell-to-civilization, get to space and DIE DIE DIEDIE *pewpew* *crash* *buuuuuurn*

          1. I couldn’t get into Spore – I remember how hyped it was and I was super-excited when it came out and then I played it for like an hour and I was like “wut?” Never gave it another chance.

            1. I’d never heard of it ’til some dirty techno-hippie loaded it onto my computer last summer.

              It’s like Minecraft, only with a foreseeable end in sight. The editor is actually super annoying. All my creatures wind up looking like a winged moose.

              1. It’s like Minecraft, only with a foreseeable end in sight.

                Jesus, talk about a game I did not get the point of, at all.

                Admittedly, I have a history of “falling” for games that I should have known I wouldn’t follow through on. Like I bought Skyrim and I have barely played it. I am slowly learning that my taste is for, I dunno, “casual deep” games? Games I can play in short bursts but not that hidden-object or farm-sim crap. My favorite recents are “Fez” and “Stealth Bastard Deluxe”.

                1. Jesus, talk about a game I did not get the point of, at all.

                  Don’t talk shit about my castles!

                  I get into these massively soul-sucking games, the kind of game you can play for sixteen hours straight, every day for a week, and still have an in-game To Do list as long as your arm. I get into them for, like, a month, and then I find myself staying up until 3am protecting an ally from a raid, and I realize this isn’t going to work for me.

                  Have you checked out Mark of the Ninja? I’ve meant to, I heard it was interesting.

                  1. Have you checked out Mark of the Ninja?

                    Yes, it’s really good. Another recent “casual deep” favorite.

        2. “Negative 20 Happiness? You ingrateful fucks! After all I’ve done for you!” – Me

          1. *Converts to communist theocracy*

      3. The Offended White Guys Brigade?

      4. King Joffrey?

  17. Who perpetrated this act of intimidation against a Muslim student? It was Khalil herself, according to Mahmood, whose account is supported by the testimony of other students, video footage, and emails obtained by Reason.

    Careful Robby, this makes it sound like you’re doing actual journalism, and I don’t think you’ve got the degree for that.

    1. And what’s with Reason posting Rico’s big scoop on a Friday evening? I think Welch must feel threatened.

    2. Exactly. Here is the language of the first amendment. Study it well:

      Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of non-hate speech, or of the press Columbia School of Journalism ; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

      1. You may petition for a redress of grievances but only if you have less privilege than the group that offended you.

        1. How about for an undress of grievances?

  18. Press charges against her.

  19. eggs, gum, and hot dogs

    Hebrew Nationals?

    1. God willing!

    2. Yeah, if they aren’t kosher or halal or whatever–if they’re haram–that might constitute some kind of hate crime.

      At any rate, it’s a civil rights violation.

      They included a copy of what he wrote? They’re trying to intimidate him into not writing things like that in the future? …with vandalism?

      That’s a civil rights violation.

      We shouldn’t hold our breath waiting for Obama to swoop in with the FBI though.

  20. It seems that a minority with the wrong opinions and values may be treated the same as any cis-normative white patriarchal oppressor.

    At this point, I don’t even think people like Kahlil are capable of cognitive dissonance. That requires cognition.

  21. If an infantile little twat gets away with petty vandalism, she won’t learn that vandalism is NOT OK.

    Sue the bitch.

    -jcr

  22. Everyone should take note of this article by Khalil, since she’s going to be on the hot seat for a few days.

    ZEINAB KHALIL: THE RISE OF THE NON-APOLOGY

    Why is it so difficult for us to apologize ? and mean it? Apologizing is tough. Our egos often get in the way and make the worst of us. Some of us may truly feel remorseful for something we said or did, but don’t know how to properly express it. On the flip side, some of us may verbally admit our mistake but not really show that we care to rectify it. The good news about non-apologies is that we can unlearn them ? with practice, we can cultivate a culture that cherishes sincere apologies. Here are some ways to examine how we apologize:

    1. “I didn’t mean me. Tccch, gawd.”

    2. I hope English is her second language. Jesus.

  23. Please view the vandalism surveillance video through this link.

    1. Fucking Classic.

  24. dear ms khalil,

    enjoy self-employment.

    1. terrorizing your ideological opponents is a job!

      1. You guys must be crazy if you think she’s going to be unemployable. The reality is that she is probably going to grab a $200k/annum undersecretary of Muslim diversity at the Islamic Students Representation Center at UM within a fortnight.

        1. Dunno, the willingness to use violence seems to point her at a government job.

          1. That was cancelled out by the “avoidance of video” major fail.

        2. Eh no Sudden you have to be a lot more subtle for that.

  25. “Mahmood told Reason that he called the university hotline to report a bias incident, but was informed that because it had occurred off campus, nothing could be done.”

    Yeah, he should have known to call the real-world police.

    1. That was going to be my point.

      Reason goes berserk about colleges investigating on-campus rape allegations instead of the police, then complains when the college doesn’t investigate an off-campus vandalism incident instead of the police.

      1. Agreed. Keep the universities out of it.

      2. To be fair, a sexual assault is something that is worthy of the time of honest-to-goodness police investigators; whereas an egg, hot dog, and nastygram festooned door is exactly what the mall cops were hired for.

        1. honest-to-goodness police investigators

          Honest and goodness do not belong in the same sentence as police investigators.

          Unless as a description of the person that the police investigators beat/maimed/murdered.

        2. Except this was outside the proverbial mall, and property destruction and threats would be a big deal even in Libertopia.

    2. That’s a little harsh. First rule of cop safety is you never point a cop at anything you don’t want to be utterly destroyed.

  26. Known Right-Wing Rape Apologist Joins in Sexist, Islamophobic Attack on College-Survivor Advocates OMG #CoverReasonInHotDogs

    1. #BringMustard.

      1. #LetSlipTheHotDogsOfSocialJustice

      2. Mustard is yellow, which might as well be mayonnaise these days.

        1. uh, you’re clearly trying to inject your racist perception of Asians into a condiment which is undeniably *brown*, but which colonialist-imperialists have tried to Yellowify in order to make the condiment less evocative of subjugated indigenous people’s cultures

  27. “The Muslim community on campus has basically excommunicated him for not adhering to their dogmas,”

    To be fair, is this really the Muslim community on campus at large, or just a few opportunistic activists with the typical and ever-present ax to grind?

    I understand college campuses have become de facto hugboxes for borderline personality cases and emotionally stunted progressive nimrods who equate feelings with facts. But I suspect most of UM’s Muslims couldn’t care less about Khalil and the menstrual narcissism she mistakes for Arab oppression on campus.

    1. Prolly the same phenomenon as when radical-fringe leftist gay activists get away with claiming to represent gays-at-large.

      So, no.

  28. What’s that you said, please post more SJW craziness? No problem.

    Racism in schools is pushing more black families to homeschool their children
    Eurocentric school curricula continues to prevail in a society that is increasingly brown.

    Homeschooling, common among white Americans, is showing an increase among African-Americans kids, as well. African Americans now make up about 10 percent of all homeschooled children in this fastest-growing form of education. However, the reasons for black kids to be homeschooled may not be the same as for white kids. My research shows that black parents homeschool their children due to white racism.

    1. The money quote:

      I found covert institutional racism and individual racism still persist and are largely responsible for the persistence of profound racial disparities and inequalities in many social realms.

      Black inner city schools suck balls, must be racism.

      1. Black inner city schools suck balls, must be racism.

        Actually, it IS racism. It’s the racism of low expectations by the leftards running these squalid little starter-prisons.

        -jcr

        1. That’s not the racism of which they speak.

    2. When it comes to schools, there are at least two important areas of concern: the curriculum and teachers’ attitudes and behaviors. School curricula continue to promote a worldview developed by Western civilization.

      i.e. less logic, more feelings please.

      1. School curricula continue to promote a worldview developed by Western civilization.

        How has Western civilization managed to produce so many idiots that absolute hate Western civilization?

        1. Now that’s a good question.

          1. I truly love that somehow African-American kids are not part of Western civilization. That by virtue of their skin color they must have more commonality with some other culture.

            1. Return to tribalism?

            2. A lot of American culture has African-American roots. Like, almost all the music, for example.

              1. Yes. Gangsta rap originated in 16th century central Africa.

            3. DUH NO ONE IN AFRICA DOES MATH OR USES LOGIC

              1. This basically sums up this morning’s English lecture. “The assumption that all people are capable of using reason is Eurocentric and is used as a tool of hegemony and white oppression.”

                1. ” this morning’s English lecture’

                  Where?

                    1. ah.

                      it seems that a lot of this very-specially-retarded PC stuff is a midwest thing now. It was more “new england” back in my day.

            4. somehow African-American kids are not part of Western civilization. That by virtue of their skin color they must have more commonality with some other culture.

              Sounds like something straight out of the KKK or stormfront.

              Ironic.

        2. How has Western civilization managed to produce so many idiots that absolute hate Western civilization?

          Familiarity breeds contempt.

        3. Too much time on their hands and too much leisure. With a good degree of prosperity it’s easy to forget how we got to where we are.

        4. Other civilizations generally kill malcontents or keep them so busy doing hard manual labor that they never have the leisure or resources to pretend they’re intellectuals.

      2. two important areas of concern: the curriculum and teachers’ attitudes and behaviors

        Yeah, that was what killed me. It’s like the writer has never actually set foot in such a school and resorted to regurgitating educrat claptrap instead.

    3. That’s weird. My anecdotal research shows that black parents homeschool their children due to truancy and expulsions.

      /casual racism

    4. Her sample size is all of 74 families or rather 74 interviews.

      She talked about how black students don’t learn African culture in schools. Well, shit. It’s amazing how Asian students manage to succeed while even less is said about Asian history and culture.

      2) protect African American males from possible entanglement in the criminal justice system, and (3) serve as an effective means to teach and shield African American males from biased expectations of teachers, and society at large

      In reality, she took answers like “I wanted my kid to stay out of trouble,” connected it with stats that show teachers are more likely to be punished (supposedly), and determined that the parents were moving their kids out because of racism instead of just, you know, the public schools they have suck.

      Racism was only the second most commonly given response (from a predetermined list) at 23% behind…quality of education.

      We showed how African American parents’ inspiration to homeschool their children was often couched as a desire to protect their children from forms of institutional racism, or, as is often the case,a reaction to an egregious racist incident in schools.”

      1. Does the Washington Post even have a standard for what it will publish? That study has zero scientific value and doesn’t even raise interesting questions. The sample size is completely bunk. The interview subjects weren’t even all black.

        1. Remember when Bezos bought WaPo and it was the end of the progressive world? Good times.

          1. Well, they did hire Radley Balko.

            1. Sure, but he has a really ethnic sounding name.

      2. I never learned about Ukrainian or Norwegian culture in school. And Africa is a huge and extremely diverse place with greater genetic and cultural diversity than any other continent. What is “African culture” supposed to be?

        1. What is “African culture” supposed to be?

          I bet it doesn’t include Egypt. Or Carthage.

        2. None of my schools offered German as a language or cultural class or club, all because of some stuff that happened awhile ago. I as a German-American am outraged and scarred for life.

          1. Really? Where did you go to school, if I may ask?

          2. I was in high school when blacks came up with the label African-American. As the teacher was explaining it – and since my memory fails me I’m gonna guess he did it poorly because my friend and I joked in class we wanted to be known not as Italian-Canadians but ROMAN-Canadians.

            I don’t mean to mock or demean it but it points to Zebs contention of how bizarre blacks ‘appropriated’ an entire continent without much thought it seems. Besides, weren’t many African slaves from the western part of the continent? Places like Liberia?

          3. None of my schools offered German as a language or cultural class or club,

            I went to a science/tech oriented “magnet school” and we were actually assigned German starting in 8th grade (we did not have a choice in the matter). I think the idea was that German was supposed to useful in technical fields, which sounds ridiculously quaint in hindsight. It was the 80s after all – maybe in the 30s or 40s that might have made sense? Whatever, I was delighted – as a language geek already, German would have been my first choice.

        3. Criminy, we had a whole year of “Afro-Asian Studies” when I was a lad in NYS. Sure we spent relatively more time on Europe and America but I can say the push to diversfy this stuff started decades ago.

    1. He was escaping with their date.

      1. Threadwinner.

    2. Progress?

      Not sure, was it paid leave?

      1. I was commenting more on the media’s willingness to report such things, but to answer your question:

        Ten deputies have been put on paid administrative leave as authorities investigate the videotaped beating of a suspect

        1. Thought so. Plus the over-time for the deputies that have to pick up the vacated shifts. Win-win. It is nice, however that the media seems to be picking this stuff up more frequently, I agree. Not sure if it’s out of any real concern or just dawning awareness that there is a market for such stories, but I’ll take it either way.

    3. Related to this, as it’s why I went there, I just found out PoliceOne has hidden their comments behind registration:

      PoliceOne comments can only be accessed by verified law enforcement professionals.
      Please sign in or register to view or write your own comments below.

      1. They must have realized how embarrassing they were. Which is really a shocking level of self awareness.

        1. I know I had been spreading the word. On other forums I had taken a cue from here and was posting some of the comments from there in various “cop does wrong” threads.

          Though it makes me really want to know what’s being said there now.

        2. Perhaps I am overly optimistic, but I have been seeing some signs that the cops are finally beginning to realize they have to police themselves. This may look like a backwards move, but as you say it does demonstrate some self-awareness, which can be a good first step.

          1. FWIW, there is WAY more push-back on police unpleasantness in recent years, even in the MSM. I haven’t seen anything like it in my lifetime – going back to the 70s and 80s. And it’s especially notable after the disgusting deification they got for a long while after 9/11. Granted, most of it is racially charged but the more attention the better as far as I am concerned.

  29. “Omar Mahmood, whose off-campus apartment was vandalized last December by a trio of women who pelted his door with eggs and left him hateful messages because they didn’t appreciate a satirical column he’d written mocking trigger warnings and microaggressions.”

    Respond by wit of the word? J’amais! WE MUST BE REACTIONARY!

    “Khalil’s tactics are all the more astonishing given her level of distinction and importance on campus. During her time at UM, she was a model leader with a considerable resume.”

    Big fucking tickle. The more stacked your resume is, the more likely you’re an asshole – with apologies to those who aren’t. That was my experience in University anyway. The more ‘active’ the student was, the more idiotic they were.

    “Why then did the attempted intimidation of a student?particularly one belonging to an ethnic, political, and religious minority?go unanswered by officials?”

    Because, I don’t know, they’re cowards?

    1. Look he uses fancy words like jammies, he must have some schoolin’

    1. Shooting a guy who is actively stabbing someone else is about as good a shoot you can get. If anything, this is a case where they were too hesitant to use deadly force.

      1. True, but it seems like he’s running away well after the stabbings which is what they will investigate.

  30. Aside, is the use of Twitter a symptom of being a colossal jackass?

  31. It just kills me that when the students objected to American Sniper the replacement was a children’s movie. Have they no self awareness?

    1. It may have been a passive-aggressive thing on the part of the movie-showing people.

      1. Actually, you might be surprised how many college girls like a movie like Paddington. They think it’s sweet.

        1. College girls of both sexes.

        2. But when I go around in public in my hello kitty pajamas people just think I’m a weird pedo or something. Double standards, man.

      2. People complain about passive-aggressiveness as if it is a bad thing, but it is just the judo of ideological confrontation: maximum efficiency, minimal effort.

        “In short, resisting a more powerful opponent will result in your defeat, whilst adjusting to and evading your opponent’s attack will cause him to lose his balance, his power will be reduced, and you will defeat him. This can apply whatever the relative values of power, thus making it possible for weaker opponents to beat significantly stronger ones. This is the theory of ju yoku go o seisu.” – Jigoro Kano

        But it should not be surprising that people complain about passive-aggressive techniques, just as well-provisioned armies always complain when their impoverished opponents do not offer themselves up to be massacred in the approved manner. Thugs always complain when they are soundly beaten by those they had hoped to victimize, especially when those thugs are too dumb to know how it happened.

        1. Alan|4.10.15 @ 8:28PM|#
          “People complain about passive-aggressiveness as if it is a bad thing, but it is just the judo of ideological confrontation: maximum efficiency, minimal effort.”

          You have a problem there; that’s a premise masquerading as an argument. So the rest of your comment is worthless.

    2. children’s movie

      Uh, this children’s movie?

      Nicole Kidman stars as the villain in the new Paddington film, but admits her knife-throwing skills were so scary, many scenes had to be cut from the final edit.

      “I got obsessed,” the actress tells Graham Norton of learning to throw knives to play Millicent. “They ended up cutting it out of the movie because it was too frightening. I can do a lot more than what’s in the film.”

      But on reflection, the actress admits it was the right call. “I actually recorded myself turning the knife in my hand and when I watched it back even I thought, ‘Wow!'”

      Indeed, Kidman admits she’d hoped this would finally be a film her kids could see but jokes, “then I realised maybe they can’t come and see it because I am chasing a bear with knives ? confusing for a three-year old because they thought I was playing the bear’s mummy! I had to let them down gently.”

      http://www.radiotimes.com/news…..paddington

      1. It’s OK because Paddington kills the wench.

        “Yo, it’s Dunkin’ Donuts, and I’ve brought your bear claws!”

  32. UQAM (Universite de Montreal a Quebec – a leftist university) students are protesting again – this time know one really knows why. Some are angry about ‘austerity’ others ‘tuition’. Others are just endowed with shit-stained brains.

    A guy went around interviewing people and the students couldn’t answer basic questions like, ‘is austerity like inflation?’ The girl said it was the same thing.

    Another one could name the education minister instead guessing it was a PAST Premier who hasn’t been in power in, like, 20 years.

    These losers blocked the entrance to the University – despite student associations voting against it.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3q2_2Akm7LY

    1. Uh oh, did they try to raise tuition by the cost of one Tim Horton’s a day again?

      1. Pretty much. Tuition is absurdly low here.

        1. My bet is soon they will start protesting when private companies raise their prices. Some day the pinto bean harvest is going to be bad and the campus Chipotle will have to raise the price of burritos, and they’ll picket that too.

        1. Oh yeah? take this!

    2. They look so threatening

    3. “students are protesting again – this time know one really knows why.”

      Is it because they’re speaking French?

      1. You know, that *could* be part of the problem!

    4. I always think of this hero when I read about assholes blocking roads.

      Skip to :49.

      1. Clearly that driver was a libertarian who has no respect for Collective Action

      2. It was a PACIFIC BICYCLE MANIFESTATION!

      3. Holy shit.

        Imagine if that happened in the USA? Specifically in the south!

        1. Yep. Then it wouldn’t be something the size of a VW Golf plowing through them. It would be a full size 1ton truck. Oh baby.

    5. students are protesting again

      They’re French – it’s in their genes.

      1. Or, what Cis said -:

        1. Goddammit – that was supposed to be an angry face.

            1. Human – the squirrels swallowed the furrowed brows.

      2. There’s probably something to that.

        Canada is among the leaders when it comes to strikes and lockouts. Nothing like Denmark but still too high for a country next to super power like the USA for my taste. Quebec definitely drives the number up since most of those originate here.

        AND IT’S ALL ABOUT GETTING FREE SHIT that gets paid for, in part, by wealthier provinces like Alberta.

        1. Quebec separatists demanding free stuff from the Canadian federal government, Every one of these people needs to have the page of the dictionary with the definition of ‘irony’ on it stapled to their foreheads.

      3. Young adult angst.

  33. Some more nice news on the day. (I feel like I’m being set up for the mother of all nut-punches)

    EFF Busts Podcasting Patent, Invalidating Key Claims at Patent Office

    Ruling from USPTO Invalidates All Claims Used to Threaten Podcasters
    San Francisco – The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) invalided key claims in the so-called “podcasting patent” today after a petition for review from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF)?a decision that significantly curtails the ability of a patent troll to threaten podcasters big and small.

  34. You know what isn’t fair? That some racist, sexist, downright vile person like Zeinab Khalil gets nominated for a Rhodes Scholarship.

    1. !!!Libertarians!!!!
      !!!!Rhodes!!!!

      1. Dr. Frasier Crane: [about Dr. Simon Finch-Royce] We were students together when I was a Rhodes scholar.

        Woody Boyd: Wow, you were a Rhodes scholar?

        [Frasier nods affirmatively]

        Woody Boyd: Tell me this, how come the stuff they fill in the potholes with is darker than the rest of the road?

        Dr. Frasier Crane: I don’t know Woody. I missed that day.

        Woody Boyd: And now it’s come back to haunt you.

    2. Cecil is believing.

    3. Well, Rhodes was racist and sexist and somewhat vile.

      1. Don’t forget rich.

      2. So we can be sure Zalib would’be declined the free education as a matter of principle…

  35. How mentally fucked up do you have to be to actually do something like this? It just defies logic (which apparently is exclusively the realm of Western culture and therefore invalid, according to this woman).

  36. OT: for your amusement… shirtless man barricades himself in Verizon store.

    Trigger warning: cops standing around looking serious.

  37. Based on this video’s title, I expected something else and was severely disappointed:

    Blowing noodle at Nong Khai Thailand

    1. …that looks soooooooooo good. Now I’m hungry.

  38. Garry Trudeau is a fucking bitch.

    Garry Trudeau, the Pulitzer Prize-winning satirical cartoonist behind Doonesbury, says his fellow satirists at Charlie Hebdo “wandered into the realm of hate speech.” Trudeau made the remark during his acceptance speech of the George Polk Awards in Journalism, according to Peter Bale, the head of the Center for Public Integrity. “Free speech… becomes its own kind of fanaticism,” Trudeau also reportedly said, adding that the job of satirists is to punch up, not punch down. Trudeau was presumably talking about Hebdo’s mocking of Islam, which of course led two terrorists to assassinate the editor in chief and several other cartoonists. Trudeau is the first cartoonist to ever receive a Polk award.

    1. adding that the job of satirists is to punch up, not punch down.

      Yes, because “down” is the direction the Wahhabi petroleum plutocrats lie.

      1. I’m betting it’s more the cartoons about immigrants he’s thinking off instead of ones about rich Saudis.

      2. Trudeau just wants to be relevant in the new political regime, so he’s using the new buzz words.

        Since he’s no longer funny in the slightest he’s got to keep an audience somehow.

        1. Trudeau’s essentially Bob Hope in his later days, no one finds him remotely cutting edge.

          But I’d still want a bit better reporting on what he said before tossing any tomatoes at him.

          1. Except that Trudeau was never funny.

      3. The “punch up” comment is hard to disagree with, though it leads to the question of why Trudeau and his leftist colleagues never punched at the most powerful man on earth the past few years.

        1. The punch up comment is easy to disagree with since often times the worst ideas manifest among the lower reaches of society.

          If we’re only allowed to ‘punch up,’ terrible ideas (like Islamic fundamentalism, which primarily exists among the underclass) will be free from criticism and will be free to flourish without restraint by other, better ideas.

          So the punch up comment isn’t only easy to disagree with, it’s an actively abhorrent belief. What he’s basically saying is that we should never try to divest the poor of their bad ideas because it’s mean, so we should just kind of let them continue with the exact sort of bad ideas that are currently ruining their lives.

          It’s the worst sort of nannying paternalism and it does a lot of damage to the people you’re supposedly ‘helping.’

          1. ^this.

          2. Yes Irish, it’s the awful ideas of the less powerful we should focus on, not the awful ones of the powerful.

            That’s kind of your motto.

            1. Given your penchant for attacking powerless conservatives, isn’t it kind of your motto too?

            2. In other words, we should be more concerned about Western school textbooks not having enough people named ‘Ahmed’ in their word problems than the poor oppressed Taliban massacring people by the thousands. Because while murder and totalitarianism are bad and all, come on, they’re brown, so let’s cut them some slack? But those white privileged fucks and their math problems, “John throws a ball to Peter, who is 30 meters away, and the angle of the throw is…” why that needs to be dealt with.

            3. Ok troll, would you consider attacking Islamic terrorists to be attacking ‘the iawful deas of the less powerful’?

          3. I’m not saying anyone’s bad ideas should be free from criticism, just that it’s cheap and cowardly to mock a hated, powerless minority while giving the powerful a pass. What Charlie Hebdo published could hardly be called a serious criticism of Islam, and their readership demographic was not at risk of being converted to that religion anyway.

            If you think the way to combat Islamic fundamentalism is to draw cartoons mocking Mohammed, you’re the best friend Islamic fundamentalism could have. The first goal of an extremist is to turn their opponents into extremists, for obvious reasons.

            The best way to counter Islamic stupidity is to give people something to live for in this world — unsurprisingly the same way that Christian stupidity has mostly been neutered in the West. Mocking a person’s faith is only going to make them cling to it the more fiercely.

            1. That is totally illogical.

              It is perfectly reasonable to spend one’s time as a satirist satirizing things that deserve satire. There’s no magical checklist that says you can’t get to one topic until you’ve earned your I’m A Good Satirist stripes by hitting the other guys first and harder.

              Unsurprisingly there are TONS of people who satirize, mock, and insult the powers that be. That there are niche players – and when we’re talking about criticizing Islamic fundamentalism it’s a pretty damn small niche – doesn’t eliminate that fact.

              And, given all of this, of course Charlie Hebdo spent a damn lot of time satirizing Catholics, the Pope, the White Male French leaders, and tons of others, but apparently not enough to earn your merit badge.

              The best way to counter stupidity is to point out it’s stupid and that neither you nor any free individual is required to pay it a whit of respect or attention. That’s what took out Christian stupidity.

              1. The best way to counter stupidity is to point out it’s stupid and that neither you nor any free individual is required to pay it a whit of respect or attention. That’s what took out Christian stupidity.

                No. Voltaire was doing this 250 years ago, and there were others centuries before him doing the same. None of it worked until Christian regions got wealthy and found this world more appealing than the next.

                And again, Charlie Hebdo’s readership was not Muslim and not likely to be converted to Islam — so how exactly was it countering Islam? Is there any evidence that it turned a single person away from that religion? The only Muslims known to have seen the publication are those who reacted by shooting up the Hebdo offices and killing people there. Doesn’t seem to be working too well for the countering Islam thing.

                1. Charlie Hebdo’s readership was not Muslim and not likely to be converted to Islam — so how exactly was it countering Islam?

                  Wow, you’re totally right. The CH staff was so silly not printing the magazine in Arabic so their target audience could understand.

                  Or, maybe, the goal of satire is to demonstrate to people other than the targets that the behavior of the targets is absurd.

                  I do, however, agree with your assessment of their effectiveness. They were trying to get people to be shocked, angered, and completely turned against the concept that you can threaten someone with violent force just because they said something you thought was insulting. Instead they’re cold in the ground and all they accomplished was spinning up a bunch of self-congratulatory retards who are pissed at the murdered people for “punching down”.

                  1. Or, maybe, the goal of satire is to demonstrate to people other than the targets that the behavior of the targets is absurd.

                    Sometimes it is. When the targets are powerful it is important to have their absurd exercise of power brought to light. But that’s not what CH did. They piled on to a hated minority to help non-Muslim French feel better about themselves in comparison to those silly Muslims. Certainly not a justification for murder, but pretty cheap and cowardly nonetheless.

                    They were trying to get people to be shocked, angered, and completely turned against the concept that you can threaten someone with violent force just because they said something you thought was insulting.

                    By drawing insulting pictures of Mohammed? That’s hogwash. There are far more effective ways of making that argument. Pardon me for concluding that CH’s purpose with those cartoons was to make non-Muslim French feel superior to Muslims.

                    1. You’re probably right that Hebdo did nothing productive in dealing with the extremists. As Schiller say, opposition, especially in the form of ridicule, never converts the enthusiast, but only enflames him. So no one of that persuasion will be made to ‘see the light’ by being mocked. I’m sure the mockers like to believe otherwise, because it helps them think that they are saving the world, when in fact they are merely entertainers. And that’s what I consider Hebdo: entertainment for people who already agree with them. So yeah, I would disagree with those who think they are doing anything much more profound.

                      But it is beyond absurd and morally incomprehensible that a person receiving an award for journalism would even see the uselessness of what they were doing as worth mentioning, in comparison to the fact that they were massacred by the people they were mocking. The gravity of those two things, mocking a group you disagree with, and murdering them, is pretty fucking big I’d say. So the whole “yes it was terrible, but…” That’s kind of like saying “yes he did murder his wife, but she did overcook the roast.”

                    2. The gravity of those two things, mocking a group you disagree with, and murdering them, is pretty fucking big I’d say. So the whole “yes it was terrible, but…” That’s kind of like saying “yes he did murder his wife, but she did overcook the roast.”

                      *rising applause*

                    3. The gravity of those two things, mocking a group you disagree with, and murdering them, is pretty fucking big I’d say.

                      And I would agree with you on that. Which is why I would give CH no more than silent, passive contempt for their actions, while supporting a govt-provided lead shower for the murderers (which most people here would not support because icky government).

                      That’s kind of like saying “yes he did murder his wife, but she did overcook the roast.”

                      Depends on whether a bevy of commentators use the incident as an excuse to hate on all men everywhere, and insist that not only was it perfectly fine for her to overcook the roast, but that more women should overcook roasts to show solidarity with the victim, and any world leaders who fail to attend a march honoring the roast overcooker are guilty of being soft on murder. In that environment one could forgive a backlash stating that overcooking roasts is not as praiseworthy as it’s being made out to be.

                      This is of course leaving aside that overcooking a roast is a mistake while what CH published was very intentional.

            2. Somehow Islamic nutjobs think that satirical cartoons are threat to their religion, which is why they go berserk over them. And they’re right, mocking the ideas limits their appeal.

          4. exactamundo.

          5. (like Islamic fundamentalism, which primarily exists among the underclass

            As I intimated above, that is not accurate. In fact, Islamic fundamentalism is most popular amongst the educated, upper-middle-class. The underclass of the Arab and greater Muslim world are too busy busting their collective humps to delve deeply enough into the writings of say, Qutb, and feel a sense of outrage and despair at the state of a civilization was once a historic superpower. Are hungry and desperate mud farmers recruited for cannon fodder? Of course, but the ideological core of the movement has always been people like Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakistani neurosurgeon from a family of neurosurgeons or Ayman al-Zawahiri, a regular ol’ surgeon who is the scion of one of Egypt’s most prestigious families.

            1. Are hungry and desperate mud farmers recruited for cannon fodder? Of course, but the ideological core of the movement has always been people like Aafia Siddiqui, a Pakistani neurosurgeon

              The ideological core wouldn’t be a problem without the impoverished recruits. I don’t give a damn about somebody thinking stupid thoughts, it’s the ones blowing themselves up and shooting people who need to be removed from the chain reaction.

              1. Again, those flocking to join ISIS are those who can afford a plane ticket from Heathrow or Kuala Lumpar Intl..

                1. Who do you think is in the Houthi militia? How about Al Shabab?

                  Boko Haram?

                  ISIS is an outlier in that it has bizarre global pull so it ends up with lots of affluent westerners. That is not the case with homegrown terrorist organizations.

                  1. Actually, apparently Al Shabab has a bunch of foreign fighters, although, according to Wikipedia:

                    Most of the foreign al-Shabaab members come from Yemen, Sudan, the Swahili Coast, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. As of 2010, their number was estimated at between 200 to 300 militants, augmented by around 1,000 diasporan ethnic Somalis.[24] Many of Al-Shabaab’s foot soldiers also belong to Somalia’s marginalized ethnic minorities from the farming south.[58]

                    That doesn’t sound like a particularly affluent collection of people.

                    1. There have historically been a disproportionate share of educated and well-to do type people involved in Islamic terrorism. Obviously, the vast majority of them are poor, but that goes without saying, because 99% of the people in these coutries (excepting a few oil states) are poor.

    2. Getting gunned down at work, IMO, means they were punching up. But I’m a nut that way.

    3. Before the Trudeau pile on begins perhaps we might wait until something more substantial than one guys report of his remarks on Twitter?

      1. Thanks Atticus.

      2. It was two separate sources, one of whom was a New York Times reporter and both of whom express sympathy for Trudeau’s views.

        In other words, if you bothered reading the fucking link, you’d know that there are multiple witnesses, one of them is a reporter for a major newspaper, and both expressed a positive view of Trudeau’s statements. All three of those facts make me think this point is legitimate, unless you think there’s some sort of conspiracy to impugn Gary Trudeau’s character that managed to enlist an NYT reporter.

        1. Oh, it’s even better – it’s a New York Times BUREAU CHIEF. So in Boland, a New York Times bureau chief inexplicably made up lies about a Gary Trudeau speech she attended for some reason which is only known to her.

          Add to that the fact that leftists have been making the ‘punching down’ argument for months, and this is an immensely believable story.

        2. You’ve got two not even complete quotes, no context. Each quasi quote has exactly one source linked to, both twitter messages.

          1. What if he said ‘what CH said was close to hate speech, because it punched down, not up like good satire should. Of course a civilized society must allow and protect such speech….’

            We don’t know. We have two incomplete quotes from two Twitter messages. In Irish world that’s all the proof one needs I guess.

            1. “Free speech…becomes its own kind of fanaticism” doesn’t allow for much nuance, does it Bo?

              This is especially funny coming from you, given that you continuously post Right Wing Watch links which outright lie about what some conservative said. Half the time the actual quote is readily available too, you just can’t be asked to look it up.

              Don’t pretend you’re standing on principle when you’re just sucking leftist cock like you always do.

              1. You actually said you thought RWW was valuable as they usually post the direct audio that they report on. Are have you forgotten in your embarrassment at me noting the lack of foundation you were about to base a hate on?

                1. You concede that your initial link contained two half quoted each solely sourced by two separate tweets, right? That’s thin gruel Irish, and you know it.

              2. Shit Irish I bet you don’t even have a Masters degree from Columbia.

              3. He’s just pulling his weak sauce lawyer speak bullshit. Bo is nothing if not diversionary and obfuscatory.

                1. Bo knows Bullshit
                  Bo breathes Bullshit
                  Bo speaks Bullshit
                  Bo is ………..

    4. You do realize it’s possible to think that mocking someone’s faith solely for the purpose of causing offense is wrong, AND that murdering those who do so is also wrong.

      1. OK, you’re right.

        But is getting your feelings hurt an excuse for murder?

        Even if I would concede that both are wrong, the implications of one act are so much more significant than the other.

  39. Wow, quite the Two Hour Hate going on. It being a Muslim, feminist, SJW and college student is the perfect Goldstein around here of course.

    1. And check out Gilmore throughout, orgasmic seems the only appropriate description…

      1. What do you mean by “orgasmic”?

        What’s that supposed to be, some kind of micro-aggression?

        1. I feel for you if the word ‘micro’ pops up in your mind along side the word orgasmic.

          You’re doing it wrong.

          1. You left vandal, intolerant, hypocritical and unrepentant off your little Goldstein list.

            1. In fairness, Bo’s vocabulary isn’t quite that deep. It mostly starts and ends with ‘Gamergate psychopath.’

            2. She’s a stupid college student who, at most, mildly vandalized someone’s door.

              But of course what she REALLY is is a convenient vehicle to focus the out of proportion hate of SJWs, especially of the young, female and ‘non Western’ kind around here.

              1. I finally got an answer to my question:

                https://reason.com/blog/2015/04…..nt_5222447

                1. Eddie’s most scandalized that this female student was allowed near a male students room without a chaperone…

                  1. Useful idiots like Bo are the reason left-wing goons think they can get away with their behavior.

                    “Oh, they just went in a group to the door of a guy’s residence, smeared a little bit of food on the door, planted a teensy little picture of the devil, and notes calling him “scum.” And indicated that it was in retaliation for a newspaper article. Really, why are you making a big deal of this?”

                    No punishment follows, so the next time the “SJWs” steal a picketer’s sign.

                    No punishment, so maybe the next time it’s a little shove. Nothing major of course.

                    No punishment, so maybe the next time it’s breaking a couple panes of glass at the person’s home, and leaving a dead possum at the door with a note saying “wish you were him.”

                    Just good clean fun.

                    The end game, of course, is to provoke the victim into exercising self-defense so that (s)he can be prosecuted for “overreacting” to “just a little fun.”

                    1. I’d punish them. I’d punish them the same way I would any college student that mildly vandalized a students dorm door.

                      I wouldn’t use them as a vessel to channel my out of proportion hate of college activists.

                    2. “activists,” is it?

                      I’m not sure what punishment would be appropriate to you, when getting mocked on the Internet is deemed (by you) to be excessive.

                      Maybe she can be sent to time-out for a couple hours? With her teddy bear for company?

                    3. And when Anita Sarkeesian gets on national TV shows and a police protective detail because someone… said mean things to her on Twitter, no doubt, you’ll be doing everything you can to bring the SJWs rallying for her back into proportion.

                      I don’t get you. This girl’s a stupid hypocritical twit: she deserves all this derision. it’s not anyone’s sending her dead fish in the mail or anything, so why exactly do you bother to defend her?

                      And more importantly, why do you completely miss the point of the entire article? Which isn’t about her really, but about the university, and it’s double standards? Because we know that if this ‘minor vandalism’ happened to some leftist Muslim activist and was done by a conservative white guy, then this would be a ‘big deal’ and more likely than not you’d be hyping it up too. That’s what’s ironic here: every time a racial slur is found on the restroom stall all the leftists lose their fucking minds and I have to read about it on yahoo news; then this happen, and magically, you guys are suddenly calling for a more proportional response.

                    4. Bo, do you know why people hate lawyers? Hint, you’re soaking in it.

                    5. After hearing John’s theories on the subject, I am more and more convinced that the left relies on its good squads to perpetrate violence, in hopes the authorities will go all squishy and Weimar-like and refuse to take action.

                      The time to lay the smackdown on these proto-Brownshirts is to apply zero tolerance, let them know that potential victims, with the help of government, will come down *hard* on any such foolishness.

                      That’s the way to make sure that the “at most, mild vandalism” never escalates.

                    6. Good grief, the fantasizing is so intricate and inflated. Brown shirts indeed.

                    7. You know why we’re *not* Weimar?

                      Because things like this often *do* get punished.

                    8. I think we are not Weimar because we are not Weimar. The differences are myriad.

                    9. Yes, because the bullies actually have to worry about being arrested and punished.

                    10. I’m sorry if you think the only difference between the country you live in and Weimar is strong law enforcement Eddie.

                    11. Who said anything about *strong* law enforcement? Law enforcement of the regular kind would be sufficient for these individuals.

                      It’s when they don’t have to fear any law enforcement at all that we need to worry.

                    12. As are the likenesses.

                    13. The end game, of course, is to provoke the victim into exercising self-defense so that (s)he can be prosecuted for “overreacting” to “just a little fun.”

                      Alternative end-game: wearing people out so they give up trying to defend their right to free speech, et al.

              2. Actually it’s a hate of their beliefs and not the color of their skin or their genitalia. But you keep on being that White Knight instead of responding to an actual argument. It’s what makes you endearing.

                1. Aren’t we defending a Muslim in this case after other Muslims attempted to silence him with threats?

                  So clearly we’re supporting innocent Muslims against anti-intellectual authoritarianism. Why does Bo think we should look the other way when innocent Muslims are terrorized by authoritarian members of their own religion? Does Bo not care about the innocent?

                  1. It’s like when you defend Clarence Thomas against his black detractors, right Irish? You know, the REAL racists, the dark skinned ones, amirite?

                    1. It’s not the brown color of their skin, but the brown color of their shirts, which I object to.

                    2. So you approve of black racism then? And probably racism in general? As long as its perpetrated by people with your political and social views, right Bo?

                  2. Yeah, I fail to see what religion or ethnicity has to do with anything here.

                    I prefer liberty v. authoritarianism.

                2. It’s just coincidence the hate on such beliefs is especially pronounced on threads where the subject is an SJW college girl I guess.

                  I mean, in no way does a young college girl, even one doing something dumb like this, warrant hundreds of these posts with such energy.

                  1. Could you kindly point me to the peer-reviewed laboratory studies which indicate precisely how many posts, and at which energy, any given subject “warrants”? After all, you’re stating it as a fact, to condemn a group of people. Surely you have some kind of evidence to back it up.

                  2. Bo, don’t you think it’s evidence of your own latent sexism that you feel women are such delicate flowers they desperately need your gruff, manly saving?

                    We mock these people because it is funny. Furthermore, they are doing immense damage to the American educational system, so in addition to being funny, this actually is a serious subject worthy of comment.

                    But keep on defending the type of girl who didn’t pay enough attention to you when you were an undergraduate, Bo. I’m sure they’ll express they’re undying gratitude one of these days.

                    1. In taking up for X you’re really demeaning them by saying they need help and protection!!!

                      That’s a tired, if timeworn conservative response to people suggesting perhaps their unfairly attacking a minority or otherwise vulnerable group.

                      So when we talk about how small businesses need protection from regulators we are really saying the business persons are weak and need protection.

                    2. “attacking a minority or otherwise vulnerable group.”

                      Are you talking about the nonwhite person whose apartment was attacked?

                      What exactly do you have against dark-skinned crime victims?

                    3. Are you talking about the nonwhite person whose apartment was attacked?

                      Exactly. We’re ‘attacking’ these poor, darling minority women by making fun of them on the internet.

                      They attacked someone who is not only a minority ethnically (as an Arab) but is a minority politically (as a conservative), only their attack actually consisted of real world harassment.

                      So what Bo is saying is that when a Muslim is harassed in real life by other Muslims, we’re not allowed to criticize the Muslims doing the harassing because that would be racist.

                      By his logic, a Muslim being victimized by other Muslims should be left to his or her own devices and should get no support from anyone, since any white person who comes to his aid is by their nature racist.

                      His logic is impeccable.

                    4. Rush to Clarence’s defense there Eddie! Take his right flank, Irish has the left, and no black or muslim racists shall get past you to harm their innocent black or muslim victims!

                    5. I’m sorry I mentioned *Justice Thomas* (unlike you, I don’t know him well enough to use his first name – I presume that’s the reason you, a white person, decline to address a black man by his title).

                    6. I’m not gonna waste time pointing out the obvious false equivalence in Bo’s; he’s been schooled by so many here and the ignorant twit refuses to learn.

                    7. More false equivalencies used as a diversion from the real point. You are so prosaic.

                  3. Is anyone here calling her house or harassing her? Are we shaming her on Twitter like the SJWs love to do?

                    Being female and a minority doesn’t exempt you from criticism, particularly when you are an outspoken advocate of your beliefs.

                    1. Bo thinks it should exempt you from criticism if you’re a woman (unless you’re a conservative and get attacked on Right Wing Watch) because women are dainty little creatures incapable of defending themselves and it is up to Bo, bedecked in shining armor, to defend them righteously in the face of hordes of Gamergate psychopaths and misogynists.

                    2. Irish works that line like a pro. Much practice I guess.

                      Rush used the same line in his two hour hates over the Guthrie Paul thing this week.

                    3. Rush is back together?

                      Maybe Bo is jealous he isn’t the tallest tree in the forest.

                    4. “Bo, don’t you think it’s evidence of your own latent sexism discomfort in identifying with the gender you were assigned at birth that you feel women are such delicate flowers they desperately need your gruff, manly saving?”

                      I’m just sayin’.

                    5. Of course it shouldn’t exempt, but it shouldn’t magnify either.

                    6. I’m still waiting on your response to my initial comment.

                      You stated, as a fact, that this does not “warrant” the number of posts, or the energy level, of them.

                      Tell me, and link to your sources, how you determine exactly the number, and energy level, of posts any given topic is allotted.

                      Otherwise just SHUT THE FUCK YOU YOU FLAMING PIECE OF GODDAMN FUCKING COCK CHEESE THAT MAKES DISEASED SHIT SMELL LOOK AND TASTE GOOD IN COMPARISON.

                      Do you warrant that energy level? I’m anxious to know.

                    7. I personally don’t think our energy level warrants Bo’s energy level in criticizing us.

                      Boom. What now bitch? Clearly whining about energy levels is a trump card, so I guess I win this round.

                    8. Psychopath, juvenile, Gamergate.

                    9. Well, at least you condensed the only consistent thematic elements of your commentary for us that time, instead of stretching it out into a slew of insufferably solipsistic sentences.

                    10. The Muslim community on campus has basically excommunicated him for not adhering to their dogmas

                      I don’t understand why Bo thinks it’s okay to excommunicate a brown person for disagreeing with other brown people. Does Bo think all brown people should be required to think the same?

                      I am eagerly awaiting Bo’s not at all racist response.

                    11. See, in his relentless focus on black and muslim racists Irish is just protecting blacks and Muslims from those racists.

                      Irish, do you not converse with blacks or Muslims ever? Because I bet you don’t sell many on this.

                    12. We all despise Tony. I see Bo as Tony with a law degree and a bar card. And to paraphrase Michael McKean on ‘Saul’ a few weeks ago, Tony with a law degree is like giving a chimp a machine gun.

                  4. young college girl

                    Without agreeing or disagreeing with your main point, the article notes she is a recent grad, so, 23 maybe. Also found this:

                    “Zienab Khalil was a foreign policy intern at The Century Foundation in 2014. Zeinab wrote her senior honor’s thesis on “the post-coup election and its prospects for democracy,” where she examined the variables of electoral timing and opposition integration in the first parliamentary election following a military coup. Her MENA research interests include civil-military relations, civil society mobilization, security sector reform, and women and militarization. She previously worked with the Cairo-based think tank, Nazra for Feminist Studies, where she researched and documented the strategic targeting of women human rights defenders by state actors. She also worked at the University of Michigan’s Arab American Studies Department. She is a Kathryn Davis Project for Peace Fellow, which she will use next fall to implement a community violence prevention and collective healing program in Antakya, Turkey for Syrian women refugees.”

                    Here: http://tcf.org/experts/detail/zeinab-khalil

                    1. Folks, this is the insufferable twit Bo to whom you’re responding. Do you really think Bo is gonna be other than Bo?
                      Modern medical science has found no fix for ego-maniacal assholes like this.

                    2. In his case there is. I believe they call it ‘disbarment’.

                    3. She’s a stupid college student who, at most, mildly vandalized someone’s door

                    4. Wtf is “collective healing”? Is that like where they all go to sleep at the same time so the cube can repair itself? Does that mean we can beam aboard and they’ll ignore us as long as we don’t start phasing shit?

                    5. I’m imagining beaming aboard some hippie collective in SanFrancisco. All the hippies stoned into a deep trance.

                  5. It’s almost always an SJW college girl doing it. And when ‘the future of this country’, the best and brightest, future scions of the left, whose education is funded by our taxpayers, is a bigoted moronic piece of shit like this Zeinab, and considering the verifiable fact that we know there probably a thousand more like her on that campus alone, it is actually a big deal.

                    Consider a story about some black guy getting treated poorly at a diner in Alabama and writing a story about it in the Huffington Post as an example of every day racism. Would you be singing the same tune then? “Oh, it’s just one dumb redneck who owns a diner, clearly, the fact that you’re all making such a big fuss about it is probably just because you hate white people.”

                  6. Yes, and your posts are even more unwarranted, yes?

              3. But of course what she REALLY is is a convenient vehicle to focus the out of proportion hate of SJWs

                Nonsense. The hate is completely in correct proportion.

                1. But of course what she REALLY is is a convenient vehicle to focus the out of proportion hate of SJWs

                  I’m also confused by this statement. He seems to be arguing we hate them because they’re SJWs. But if our hatred is related to their belief system, it isn’t because they’re women or because of their race, it’s because they believe idiotic things.

                  Which would mean we’re not being racist or sexist. At worst we’re just giving this issue more attention than it deserves.

                  1. “But if our hatred is related to their belief system, it isn’t because they’re women or because of their race, it’s because they believe idiotic things.”

                    That’s true enough, but what I find despicable here is the blatant hypocrisy of the woman preaching tolerance while vandalizing someone’s home as a result of his perfectly peaceful opinions.
                    That seems worthy of some pretty strong dislike. And of course, the asshole Bo totally ignores it, since it wouldn’t allow for his assholery.

                2. Nonsense. The hate is completely in correct proportion.

                  I was thinking it was a little on the mild side.

                  1. Really? I thought I gave that flaming fucking retard a fairly good salvo up there.

              4. “She’s a stupid college student who, at most, mildly vandalized someone’s door.”

                What is the point of trivializing someone making what might be construed as violent threats–in order to intimidate a person out of exercising their free speech rights?

                Free speech on campus is a big deal to a lot of people.

                If the Martin Luther King award winner goes on a rampage off campus to vandalize someone’s door and intimidating them into dropping their criticism, it’s a big deal.

                Just because you don’t like the Anti-Muslim Brigade at Hit & Run doesn’t mean you have to stick up for anti-free speech assholes–caught on tape!

                Is there ANYTHING you won’t stand up for–so long as it’s coming from people who don’t like Islam?

                Do you change your positions to make sure you’re on the opposite side of the Anti-Muslim Brigade? When the Anti-Muslim Brigade takes a position that doesn’t have anything to do with Islam, do you take the opposite position anyway?

                If you answered yes to any of these questions (or trivialized attempting to intimidate someone into stuffing their free speech rights), then you may be completely off your fucking rocker. You may be as bad as the culture warriors in the Republican Party!

                1. I’m not sticking up for her, I said up thread I’d punish her if I were in such a position.

                  What I’m getting at is the culture of many around here who, upon results of white racists acting the fool on campuses respond with ‘why is this even a national story? It’s just some knucklehead college kid acting up’ but when it’s a college kid thats a feminist, minority, SJW then we get 250 posts and talk of Brownshirts engulfing us.

                  1. Ladies and gentlemen….The Botard

                  2. What I’m getting at is the culture of many around here who, upon results of white racists acting the fool on campuses respond with ‘why is this even a national story? It’s just some knucklehead college kid acting up’ but when it’s a college kid thats a feminist, minority, SJW then we get 250 posts and talk of Brownshirts engulfing us.

                    Question 1: Is it a violation of the NAP for members of a private group in a private setting to sing a song amongst themselves that people outside the private group might disapprove of? (Hint: No)

                    Question 2: Is it a violation of the NAP for a group of “activists” to intentionally trespass onto another person’s private property, to damage that person’s private property, and to make threats of additional future action against that person if he does not behave they way the “activists” demand? (Hint: Yes)

                    Question 3: Which is more likely to meet with disapproval and condemnation by libertarians commenting on a libertarian website: behavior which violates the NAP, or behavior which does not violate the NAP? (Hint: the NAP violation)

                  3. Bo, you know the real reason we are all on here- GAMERGATE. I will pwn you noob(noob spelled backwards is bo on ______). Feel free to fill in the blank.

                2. Ken Shultz|4.10.15 @ 9:17PM|#
                  “Is there ANYTHING you won’t stand up for–so long as it’s coming from people who don’t like Islam?”

                  C’mon, Ken. This piece of shit isn’t here to ‘stand up’ for anything; he’s here to prove he can find some pedantry that intelligent people would ignore and hope to get someone to bite on his trolling.

                  1. I wrote that wrong, Sevo. Glad you understood what I meant!

                    “Is there ANYTHING you won’t [criticize]–so long as it’s coming from people who don’t like Islam?”

                    Fixed.

                    “What I’m getting at is the culture of many around here who, upon results of white racists acting the fool on campuses respond with ‘why is this even a national story?”

                    Bringing up the culture of the people criticizing vandalism and intimidation is partially why you’re getting a hard time.

                    White racists don’t have anything to do with this, and you bringing them up now hurts your credibility when the issue really is about white racists.

                    Ever hear the story about the boy who cried wolf?

                    I stick up for Muslims around here all the time. Well, not all the time. …just when there’s a reason to do so. There isn’t any reason to minimize what these three did.

                    None.

                    Pointing out that white racism against Muslims is bad, too, certainly doesn’t justify anything these three did or make for a good reason to minimize what they did. If there’s any legitimate equivalence here to make, it’s that you criticize this behavior when it’s being perpetrated by progressives and minorities–just like you do when it’s being perpetrated by white racists.

                    Don’t fail at that, talk about the culture of the commenters here, and then wonder why everyone’s on your case.

                    1. “What I’m getting at is the culture of many around here who, upon results of white racists acting the fool on campuses respond with ‘why is this even a national story? It’s just some knucklehead college kid acting up’ but when it’s a college kid thats a feminist, minority, SJW then we get 250 posts and talk of Brownshirts engulfing us.”
                      Funny you mention that. Ya wanna know what pisses me off? This bitch is more likely to get a pat on the back from the faculty than censure, and most certainly will not get expelled like the white kids who made those drunken chants.

                      It doesn’t both you that the accepted culture on campuses is that racism, sexism, bigotry of any kind, and to some extent even aggression, are socially acceptable as long as directed against ‘perpetrator/oppressor’ groups?

                  2. Correct Sevo. Bo is the poster child for the kind of weasely bullshit everyone hates about lawyers. Just one diversionary line of crap after another. False equivalencies are his friend.

    2. Yeah, it’s a real shame she’s getting it so bad for being such a bigoted, man-hating hypocritical sack of shit. I mean there’s gotta be a cishet white male we can pile on. What about doing Robin Thicke again, for old time’s sake?

      1. That radical chick just needs a long hard fucking. Most of them do.

    3. Shorter Bo:

      Teh Jeeewwwwsszszszzszszss

  40. Fuck all you mammals. I’m drunk and been shootin out in the country.

    Empty beer cans fear me!

    And now I’m drunk at an arena football game, whatever. I’ve had a blast. Go fuckin commit some felony you warm blooded feed stock!

    1. Couldn’t I just skip the activities and get drunk?

  41. I’m laughing way harder at this than I should.

    It’s Norm MacDonald on some Youtube show. They inexplicably paired him with two insufferable, completely unfunny 20-something hipsters, so Norm spends the entire show a) talking about how he probably wouldn’t be able to kill Hitler if he had a time machine because he’d get lost in his eyes, b) calling one of his cohosts an ‘A-Rab,’ and c) completely freaking out his cohosts by joking about his mother getting raped with a knife by a Youtube troll.

    By the end both of his cohosts clearly hate him and it’s wonderful.

    1. He looks like he is just about to paint a house.

      1. I met james gandolfini in the Greenpoint Taven (the bar closest to the subway in williamsburg, and the only place that remained a mostly-untouched nook of working class polish drunks)…. at like 3 AM on a tuesday.

        …he was wearing sweatpants and a sweatshirt and was already drunk. he was lost (so he claimed), but we convinced him to sit down and have a beer out of a styrofoam cup with us before he wandered off.

        (they served “big gulp” sized, 32 oz beers in giant styrofoam cups. it looked normal sized in his hands)

        he died the next year i think. No one bothed to point out the sweatshirt/sweatpants. it was clearly not because he was ‘working out’.

    2. I always like him. A total dick and he excels at it. I also like his recent role as the voice of ‘Pigeon’ on Adult Swim’s ‘The Mike Tyson Mysteries’.

  42. LIGHT THE AGILE CYBORG GLOW STICK… BITCHES!!!!!

      1. That’s awesome

      2. The Placidylocene?

  43. Uh, they were never teaching tolerance. They were pushing for Islamic superiority.

    That’s how Islam works.

  44. Old racism: “Westerners are more logical than those darker and more emotional races, which makes Westerners better.”

    New anti-racism: “Westerners are more logical than those darker and more emotional races, which makes those darker races better.”

    1. You forgot to declare your privilege. Someone somewhere has been triggered.

      1. Damn your fingers. I was trying to be the first one to get “privilege” in there.

      2. I remember in second grade when they were teaching us about self esteem. God I hated that kind of touchy-feely bullshit even then. They made us take a piece of construction paper and write ‘ILAC’ on it. Then we took. Some twine and attached it in such fashion as to wear them around our necks. We had to wear these retarded ass things all day long.

        The premise was that whenever someone said something insulting or hurtful, we were supposed to tear off a little chink of the ILAC sign. To represent the diminishing of our self esteem. Of course this always all gay. Gay as Hell. Of course several of us boys had recently discovered cursing, and treated it like a shiny new fun toy. So at recess, we ran around telling everyone to ‘fuck off’ amd tore the stupid signs from around their necks. Although no one got too worked up over that. I don’t think anyone particularly enjoyed the exercise to begin with.

        All this ‘triggering’ and.’micro-aggression’ bullshit makes me think back to that day. Except now it’s been gaily retardified to version 24.3 and is being practiced by infantilized adults instead of eight year olds. Progressivism at work.

    2. Math and logic are tools of white male cultural supremacism.

      1. We have too much cargo.

  45. The accelerating rate at which the left are making themselves irrelevant, with the aid of their progressive and SJW loonies, is fascinating.

    The mask really is fully off and the world is getting a shocking view of the madness into which we are descending.

    The insane details of the leftist agenda could be hidden from a large segment of the population in times past, even long enough for them to murder tens of millions before the truth was realized. No more, not in the internet age. They will either have to destroy the internet, or it will destroy them.

    1. Do you think? I think it’s debatable. They’ve used the internet to tremendous advantage. No way back in the best decade of all time (the 80s), a bunch of psychos would have been able to shut down some fucking pizza place for thought-crimes. The idea of flash hate is a very powerful SJW tool.

      1. They have to contend with libertarians and others who do not agree with them now. And that now puts them at a huge disadvantage. There’s just as many of us now as there are proggies, and way more of us than there are SJWs.

        See how rapidly the UVA rape-a-thon was shut down? They better get used to it.

        There lie and get a free pass days are over.

        1. I suppose the question is then, how long until we take power, so that we can begin abusing the shit out of people’s trust?

          We can get that UVA rape-train right back on the tracks baby!

        2. Except libertarians don’t vote, don’t make alliances with larger political groups, and generally shy away from making political statements in public.

          The power of SJWs lies in their ability to give more generic leftists talking points. Show me something libertarianism has that’s as powerful as the War on Women rhetoric the Dems have deployed with great success.

          1. The war on women stuff is actually backfiring on them now. The power is that you just let them destroy themselves and stay calm and focused.

            They’ll totally bug out and go full on Nazi, just watch, I already see it.

            Nothing to do. Just get the beer and popcorn and enjoy the show.

            1. Man fuck you Hyperion, that’s twice tonight you’ve beaten me to make a post saying something I was already going to say. I’m calling shenanigans on this.

            2. How is it backfiring on them? In all likelihood they’re going to clean up in the 2016 elections using it again.

              1. I agree with you Koko. I think Hyperion is optimistic; the reason they are going so much further today is because they know they can and still get away with it. It may backfire from time to time, but that seems almost to be part of the strategy: push things as far as you can, then when you go over the edge, crawl just back onto it and draw the line there and don’t let anyone get any further away from it.

                I think, in the end, yes, it will blow up in their faces. But it’s not going to be people looking up and saying ‘oh my, look how batshit crazy these people are.’ It’s going to be after a couple decades of ‘cultural revolution’ that people will be forced to pick up the pieces.

                1. Hyperion is optimistic, but not overly so. There are many signs that he’s right: the 2014 mid-terms, GamerGate, the failure of Obama and Occupy and MSNBC, the fact that the leading (by far) Democratic candidate is an aging, corrupt, power-hungry enabler of a sexual predator.

          2. Except libertarians don’t vote, don’t make alliances with larger political groups, and generally shy away from making political statements in public.

            And damn proud of it.

            Show me something libertarianism has that’s as powerful as the War on Women rhetoric the Dems have deployed with great success.

            Speaking seriously for a moment, I think that has run it’s course. The recent senatorial campaigns in Kentucky and Texas (my two states of residence, I might add), the dems went all in on that exact theme, and face-planted both times. Wendy Davis served me lunch at Five Guys just yesterday, because that is where she works now.

            1. Irrelevant. The GOP won in TX and KY in 2012 when the WoW shit was first deployed, too. If those two states are its greatest accomplishment in 2016 it’s going to be a tough election.

              1. The War on Women wasn’t particularly successful for Mark Udall, and he was from a purple/tilting blue state where he got unseated as an incumbent by a total political unknown.

                I’m not even entirely positive the War on Women had any impact in the 2012 election, since it’s equally possible people just didn’t like Mitt Romney or preferred Obama and the WoW stuff was just a sideshow.

                1. Romney won among independents. He wasn’t the problem, intense Democrat turnout was… and that was driven largely by WoW rhetoric.

                  1. Romney won among independents. He wasn’t the problem, intense Democrat turnout was… and that was driven largely by WoW rhetoric.

                    Or it was driven by the fact that blacks love Obama and that they’re among the least likely to turnout for an election, which means that Barack Obama had the natural ability to turnout the lowest turnout democratic constituency.

                    Again, I’ve seen no evidence the WoW rhetoric impacted that turnout. If you asked people before the election ‘what issues matter to you?’ abortion was approximately, well, last. It is not a major aspect of peoples’ voting.

                    1. Abortion was second to the economy, and BO won those voters 81-15.

                    2. CITATION NEEDED

                      Also note: Obo won largely due to low turnout by GOPers and conservatives who understood Romney was worthless.

                    3. Abortion was second to the economy, and BO won those voters 81-15.

                      Holy fuck, seriously?

                      Here’s a Gallup Poll from just prior to the 2012 election, Tulpa.

                      You will notice that ‘social issues’ comes in 9th out of 9 among all issues asked about. It’s ‘extremely/very important’ rating is a full 12% lower than second to last place. It came in 33% lower than taxes.

                      Are you seriously going to tell me that abortion was a major crux in that election when all polling data prior to the election proves that isn’t true? Fuck me, Tulpa, this is a dumb claim even for you and it’s dumber due to the fact that you didn’t provide a source for your ludicrous assertion.

                    4. Oh God, I didn’t even notice, if you look at the bottom of the page, Tulpa’s idiocy becomes even clearer.

                      According to the polling data, 46% of Republicans saw social issues as ‘very/extremely important’ in 2012 compared to 36% of Democrats.

                      That’s right! Not only did social issues come in dead last among all issues asked about, but Republicans said they cared more about those issues than Democrats did.

                      Given those numbers, how on Earth can you claim WoW had any impact on that election? Please, cite some sources this time.

                    5. That’s a different metric from what I was talking about. I was talking about voters’ opinion of the “most important” issue, as opposed to simply opining on the importance of issues in a vacuum. In the link you point to, several of those issues overlap, as obvious from the fact that almost all of them rate as “extremely important” to a majority of voters, which shows that the question is meaningless. When you have to pick one there is clarity.

                    6. “Or it was driven by the fact that blacks love Obama and that they’re among the least likely to turnout for an election, which means that Barack Obama had the natural ability to turnout the lowest turnout democratic constituency.”

                      But Irish, Hillary will be in the exact same position in 2016. Only instead of 12% of the population turning out in droves to get ‘one of their own’ into the white house, it will 51%.

                      And I would argue that gender-identity (for women at least) is even stronger than racial identity. Just watch black feminists throw black men under the bus for the sake of the sisterhood.

                    7. But Irish, Hillary will be in the exact same position in 2016. Only instead of 12% of the population turning out in droves to get ‘one of their own’ into the white house, it will 51%.

                      Seriously? 47% of female voters vote Republican. 94% of black voters vote Democrat. A woman running for president won’t have nearly the impact a black man running for president had. This is especially true since Obama is actually charming (so long as you’re a dimwit who doesn’t realize what a narcissist he is) whereas Hillary is immensely unlikable. I’m not even 100% certain Hillary will win the primary since it’s very possible she’ll do what she did in 2008 and meltdown the moment she encounters any opposition.

                    8. Hilary didn’t melt down in 2008. She got caught playing too close to the center in foreign policy and labor issues and had the misfortune of facing the first “clean articulate” black presidential candidate, and still almost pulled out the nom.

                      The Dems had the perfect opportunity to drop her like a wet musty San Francisco grocery bag last month, but they closed ranks instead. Her inevitability may actually be inevitable.

                    9. Maybe “inevitable” as nominee, but not as president. Two-term presidents are rarely succeeded by a president from the same party. Independents are sick of Obama. The Tea Party and libertarians are riled up. The GOP’s task is to articulate a positions appealing to conservatives, libertarians, and others open to persuasion, and withstand the inevitable accusations of bigotry and heartlessness.

                    10. Other than Woodrow Wilson, every 20th century president who was elected twice saw his party either win the first presidential election he wasn’t running in (1908, 1928, 1948, 1988), OR lose a very close election amidst a heavily disputed vote count (1960, 2000). GWB’s second term being followed by his party getting routed was a historical anomaly.

                    11. Coolidge wasn’t elected twice – so throw that one out.

                      And you’re left with 1948 – the tail end of the dims GD-WWII dominance and Reagan’s popularity dragging Poppa Bush across the finish line in 88

                      2016 is neither of those. The closest analogy is 1920 – when an unpopular progressive socialist pathological liar’s ideology was thoroughly repudiated.

                    12. Hilary didn’t melt down in 2008.

                      Yes she did. She broke down in tears on camera.

          3. The only reason the War on Women went as far as it did was because it was deployed against Romney.

            Except libertarians don’t vote, don’t make alliances with larger political groups, and generally shy away from making political statements in public.

            Not me. I vote and make statements.

            1. The only reason the War on Women went as far as it did was because it was deployed against Romney.

              The 1% thing was deployed against Romney. The WoW crap was mostly deployed against their congressional candidates, and the Dems picked up a seat despite having an extremely difficult map to defend.

              1. They were both deployed against Romney and effective against both targets because Romney sucked.

          4. The spying on our own people NSA issue comes to mind. That is one of my favorite subjects to get mad about.

        3. Don’t underestimate the eventual power of Net Neutrality for shielding the faithful.

      2. The internet giveth, and the internet taketh away.

        In that so-called best decade of all time, libertarianism was gasping its dying breaths before being revived by the Internet in the next decade. There’s a reason Ron Paul had to sell his name to racists to put food on the table in the late 80s/early 90s.

        1. Doesn’t matter. The music made up for all of that shit. Plus, communism basically died in ’89. Fucking epic.

          1. We didn’t have the right people in 89, we do… will have soon, and we’re totally going to kil you if you don’t agree with us.

            /the left

          2. Plus, communism basically died in ’89.

            “The devil’s greatest achievement was convincing the world he didn’t exist.”

            A bunch of German concrete falling down was merely a temporary setback for authoritarianism. It’s not even unheard of to spot a hammer and sickle shirt among the flower of American youth at our universities.

            1. Right, and that’s EXACTLY like having the USSR around. You never fail to astound me with your banality and insipidness Tulpa.

              1. that’s EXACTLY like having the USSR around.

                Where did I say that again?

                I really don’t care whether the authoritarians bear hammers and sickles, or swastikas, or fasces, or big O’s with waves inside. The symbols are a gorram merry go round.

                1. Your point is still so banal and insipid only you could make it. It’s not even clear what you’re saying.

        2. My Tulpa detector is bleeping.

          1. Only beeping? Mine exploded after a few posts.

      3. The idea of flash hate is a very powerful SJW tool.

        There is going to be a backlash. Most people are basically good. Good people won’t tolerate where this bullshit is headed. We are seeing the logical conclusion of the PC movement…idiocy.

        My.02

        This business will get out of control.

        1. The backlash is well under way.

          1. GamerGate!

            1. If that’s the backlash, we’re pretty fucked. As far as the real world is concerned, it either never happened or is a blight on humanity. Makes Custer’s charge look like a success.

              1. ‘The Real World’ didn’t like campus ’60s radicals either and they were pretty successful. GamerGate was a cultural watershed moment that created a generational community that hates SJWs and has been given a crash-course on the mendacity of the media.

        2. I certainly hope so. I’m just weary of making predictions. So many hard-money economists and other types I generally like made all kinds of collapse and hyper-inflation predictions back in 09-10, when the printing presses really turned on, and now you go back and look at them, and it makes a lot of us “economic sanity” guys look like clueless assholes.

          It’ll still happen…eventually. But saying the sky is always falling just gets you a bad rap, even if the sky actually is going to fall someday.

          1. We will be vindicated.

          2. You goldbug hard money types are clueless assholes.

            I said repeatedly on this site that there would be virtually no inflation despite the Fed’s actions. We in the USA had way too much excess capacity to cause prices to rise. Excess labor, plants, homes, education, manufacturing and so on.

            But the fucking idiot Austrians think it is all about money supply and nothing else.

            1. It is all about money supply. The money hasn’t moved into the general economy yet. Tell us how gold is going to $800 Shriek.

            2. But the fucking idiot Austrians think it is all about money supply and nothing else.

              So you believe that the law of supply and demand is suspended for money?

      4. Are you sure? There was plenty of mob bullshit on campus back then too, I think.

        Things happen faster now. Bullshit gets called out faster. It’s working to The Enemy’s disadvantage. In the past Love Canal was lied about for years. Now UVA and Trayvon lies get called out in days.

  46. Does anyone else use Greasonable?

    i think its broken

    1. You can always try reasonable. Gotta use Chrome though. It still works, I uses it to vaporize Hihn today. Bo’s probably next.

      1. Yeah, i’m trying it w/ chrome now. it works.

      2. It’s too late. You’re a gamersgater and probably you’re also Clarence Thomas, you know that uncle Tom who hates his own race and probably plays violent video games?

        1. Clarence Thomas secretly posts on here all day under the handle of, “Tony”.

          1. Damnit! I was convinced that Tony is Debbie Wasserman Schultz!

        2. i *do* hate white people

          1. I think that’s supposed to be ok.

            1. You know, whenever white people try to do something good, crackers always show up to mess it up!

              /white Chris Rock

        3. I hear he only kills minority hookers when he plays GTA.

  47. I’m here to stop you all from laughing so much at this wholly regrettable situation. Also, please at least three sources for each quote that is linked.

  48. Grrr: I used it

  49. Ku Klux Nazi Pizzeria reopens –

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/…..story.html

    1. I wonder if this news triggered a few thousand SJWs to jump off a bridge. Well, one can always hope.

      1. I forgot to add my joke about Ku Klux Kalzones.

    2. there are a half dozen people in the comments exorcising their unspent hate on the injustice of the now-wealthy “Anti-Gay”* pizza shop.

      (quoting Robby)

      One goes so far as to insist that “freedom FROM religion” is the truly desirable end. Which is a pretty popularly held notion. Idiotic, but popular.

      1. +1 or 2 communist regimes

      2. And the pendulum swings…surely, never to swing back in “our” direction again.

        I swear, the short-sightedness is really something to be hold. Maybe it’s the rewritten leftist version of history that makes them so dumb. It’s like they’re completely oblivious to what preceded Francisco Franco’s rise to power. It’s like Aza?a never existed, never had his right wing opponents censored and eventually killed by extra-curricular hit squads while sanctioning the widespread burning and looting of churches, thereby turning moderate Spaniards into Falangists. Authoritarianism begets authoritarianism, but who would remember that.

  50. I would just like to say that Bo is a mentally disordered solipsistic fucktard of no value.

  51. OK, time to contextualize this popular talking point:

    ” As historian James McPherson has pointed out, before the Civil War the United States was referred to in the plural ? “the United States are a republic.” But after the war, the United States became singular ? the United States is ? acknowledging that the nation was now more than the sum of its parts.”

    http://www.latimes.com/opinion…..story.html

    Contrast this conventional wisdom with one of the key fruits of the war – the 13th Amendment. Can’t get more national unification-y than that antislavery amendment!

    But look:

    “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to *their* jurisdiction.” [emphasis added]

    The United States isn’t an “its,” they’re a “their.”

    “United States” remains plural. At least according to the neo-Confederate Tea Party fanatics who passed the frickin’ Thirteenth Amendment in 1865.

  52. Watching this video is like driving behind a Prius. It’s vertical fucking video of a horizontal computer monitor, and the person taking the video has to keep moving the phone left/right to get the whole screen. it never occurs to them to… TURN THE CAMERA HORIZONTAL!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bt9zSfinwFA

  53. You goldbug hard money types are clueless assholes.

    I said repeatedly on this site that there would be virtually no inflation despite the Fed’s actions. We in the USA had way too much excess capacity to cause prices to rise. Excess labor, plants, homes, education, manufacturing and so on.

    But the fucking idiot Austrians think it is all about money supply and nothing else.

    1. Have you bought any ground beef lately?

      1. So you have no idea what the word “inflation” means.

        1. In economics, inflation is a sustained increase in the general price level of goods and services in an economy over a period of time.

          Well, yea…

          1. What I love are the leftards who talk up income inequality, then tell us how great the economy is doing because of the stock market. You know, totally has nothing to do with inflation and that totally isn’t bubble, Buttplug.

            And progtard hero Barney Frank said there was no housing bubble, and it wouldn’t collapse. Until it did.

            1. There is no stock market bubble today because EARNINGS are spectacular – best ever by a long shot.

              There is this thing called a Price/Earning ratio that would indicate a bubble when prices rose too fast for earnings.

              Thing is – earnings are rising faster.

              And Barney Frank so what? The housing bubble was pumped up by the Bushpigs.

              1. And Barney Frank so what? The housing bubble was pumped up by the Bushpigs

                Which is why Frank was defending the housing policies in 2005 and dismissing the early warning signs. Because he and other progs had nothing to do with it all…

                It took three years, but reality eventually hit. And that’s the thing – anyone making predictions and blowing themselves based on monthly and quarterly reports (which aren’t that good to begin with) is a fucking idiot.

                1. The GOP ran the House 1994-2007. Barney Frank could not get a meeting room.

                  Find another lie to run with. And tell Fat Rush that please. His lies are obvious and you Dildo-Heads are easy to spot.

                  1. How odd that Frank (along with Paul Krugman) was so vociferously defending a policy that his opponents had sole responsibility for.

                  2. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iW5qKYfqALE

                    People who are talking about a bubble are out of their minds – Frank, 2005.

                    The question isn’t who caused what (an argument you’ve lost enough times around here). We’re just talking about predictions and economic policies, asshole. Both parties pumped up that bubble, and is disingenuous to deny Frank played any part in that policy.

                    1. So Barney Frank = George W. Bush?

                      so what?

                      The difference is that Bush actually signed legislation to GIVE away $10,000 to each first time home buyer.

                      Barney didn’t.

                      Now go fuck yourself.

                    2. The good thing about being a libertarian who isn’t represented in Congress is I don’t have to act as a partisan hack the way you do. Name the libertarians who were behind the housing bubble. I’ll be waiting. I don’t own the shit Republicans or Bush do. Hacks like you DO own what the Democrats and Democrat-lites do.

                      Again, you dodge the actual point of bringing up Frank. Come on, tell me when you predicted that 2008 bubble and collapse, since you’re such a stock market guru. Your buddy Barney sure as fuck didn’t see it coming. So tell us some more how everything in this economy is swell even though wages are stagnant because food prices dropped after hitting 4 year highs. Tell us how PE ratios are great despite the number of reports that talk about the overvaluation occurring.

                    3. Great to see you white knighting for Team Blue buttplug.

              2. P/E is over 20.5 right now, dipshit. That’s not sustainable.

                And it’s come at the cost of corporations eating their seed corn. Thanks to the ridiculous IP landscape and haphazard regulatory environment, they see nothing useful to do with their profits so they buy back stock, driving further price increases but stifling innovation.

                1. Dow P/E ratio is 16.3.

                  http://online.wsj.com/mdc/publ…..yield.html

                  Don’t fucking lie to me. I know markets and capitalism better than anyone here.

                  1. I read all this with Buttplug being voiced-over by the Wicked Witch of the West, and it was a vastly improved experience.

                  2. The earnings are also a bubble.

                    I know markets and capitalism better than anyone here.

                    Tell us how gold is going to 8% $800.

                  3. S&P 500, which is the relevant index in the 21st century, has a P/E of 20.55.

                  4. Palin’s Buttplug|4.10.15 @ 11:30PM|#
                    “I know markets and capitalism better than anyone here.”

                    Turds lie. That’s what turds do.

        2. Damn, you’re a sharp one. True, I wasn’t using the proper definition that refers to the govt-cherrypicked basket of goods with full hedonic substitution. I also haven’t been faithful to the definition of GDP which counts both taxed income and the resulting govt spending, as well as the rent that I would pay to live in the house I own if I didn’t own it.

          After all, the fact that hamburger costs as much these days as steak used to means zero inflation, because I can’t afford to buy steak now so I buy hamburger.

          1. How is gas, coal, wheat, corn, soybeans, and coffee “cherry picked”? It seems you did the cherry-picking by singling out the one commodity that has risen – beef.

            1. How is gas, coal, wheat, corn, soybeans, and coffee “cherry picked”?

              Because those things aren’t representative of our consumption, and the feds change the list on a whim.

      2. I should not be rude. I apologize since it appears you have been seduced by the nutty Austrian bullshit crowd.

        Our currency, the USD, has been gaining strength for years thus stabilizing prices or sometimes even reducing them (gas, oil, coal, dairy, corn, wheat for example).

        Inflation is a GENERAL and SUSTAINED rise in prices and not just an arbitrary one on a single item (remember when Tickle Me Elmos shot up in price? NOT inflation.).

        Anyway, don’t listen to the idiot wingnuts on economics. They don’t understand how a currency can thrive even when the Fed purchases bonds.

        1. Tell us, Buttplug – when did you predict the 2008 crash? When do you think Frank knew?

        2. Our currency, the USD, has been gaining strength for years

          Compared to the dead man walking currencies of the EU and Japan, yes. A plugged toilet raises all turds.

          gas, oil, coal

          Because the global economy is tanking and the Saudis are ramping up supply to starve their enemies who happen to be smaller-scale oil producers.

          remember when Tickle Me Elmos shot up in price? NOT inflation.

          Because ground beef is totally comparable to fad toys! Food is such an arbitrary good to be considering for inflation effects…. look at iPhones instead!

          1. “Food” prices are falling dipshit.

            Wheat, rice, dairy, corn, coffee, soy, and many others.

            1. You don’t say?

              Not from where I sit and I do a LOT of food shopping, you know, because it’s part of my business.

              I remember when pasta on special at .79 cents was common. Now, not so much. The average price point of .99 to $1.99 is now $2.19 to $2.99. On average.

              Never mind about meat/poultry and processed foods which all increased.

              I’m pretty sure a similar scenario has unfolded in the USA – I used to go shop in Plattsburgh 8-10 times a year but haven’t in the last 18 months or so.

              But whatever you say.

              1. Personal anecdotal evidence:

                Beef has risen significantly (like double).
                Chicken is about the same.
                Bacon has gone down (-30% or so).

                Milk has risen (15-20%).
                Eggs have risen (10-15%).
                Bread has risen (20-25%).

                Produce – marginally higher.

                Processed goods, I don’t know cause I usually cook from scratch.

        3. I’m still not sure what your point is. That Obama is magnificent and we should you join in sucking him off?

          You blame Bush entirely for the housing crisis, citing GOP control of Congress from 1995-2007 (apparently Bush and the ’95 congress are one and the same); but Clinton apparently gets a pass from you for his contribution to building the housing bubble; but he still gets credit for the “surplus”, none of which goes to the evil GOP congress that forced budget cuts on him, all the while, the economic improvements of the past few years we owe entirely to Obama, not at all to the spending reductions forced upon him by Congress, but the unusually long duration of the recession we do owe to the ‘obstructionist’ GOP House during the few years before that.

          Have I got everything right? Honestly, the mental somersaults I see from you are always impressive.

      3. The price of bacon and smoked meat has sky rocketed!

    2. People, first you expend time and energy arguing with Botard, now you’re doing the same with Shriek? I expect better, Reasonoids.

      1. You’re just a meek bystander here.

        I have been right over and over again on all my predictions. The jury is still out on my call for gold to return to $700 (which I made 2-3 years ago) but don’t worry. When interest rates hit 4% the goldbugs will be selling at huge losses.

        Uncle Buck is king.

        1. I seem to recall you predicting that the Democratic losses in the last elections wouldn’t be too bad, just off the top of my head.

          1. Not true. I predicted that midterm elections would follow recent norms which they did. I also predicted that NC would dictate who won the Senate and it was a toss-up. The GOP won NC by about 1% underperforming Burr’s last win.

            Obamacare – which was NOT a factor in 2012 was not a factor in 2014 either.

            1. http://www.washingtontimes.com…..controlle/

              “GOP touts historic numbers of Republican-controlled legislative seats”

              “Republicans are on pace to control more chambers and more legislative seats than at any point in U.S. history after a successful midterm election performance.”

              They made their largest gains in, what, over half a century? Yup, completely typical. And Obamacare had no part in any of that…

              To think – the Dems put off the worst of its measures until after 2016, and it’s still massively unpopular.

              1. The “norm” was in the vote count, idiot.

                The GOP won close swing states like North Carolina by FEWER votes than in previous elections. It was a good map for the GOP.

                And of course the redneck states like Arkansas and Louisiana finally just kicked out the conservative Democrats totally.

                1. I recall nothing on vote counts, but lots of talk from you on lost seats and how GOP gains wouldn’t be that large. Only, they were. Historically so.

                  And obviously, again, had nothing to do with the president and his signature piece of legislation that many Democrats ran…against. Or at least denied or downplayed their support of it.

                  So, I’m pretty sure if you asked some of those Dems who lost if Obamacare and Obama played a part, they’d strongly disagree with you. Obamacare played a key part in GOP strategy. But sure, it had nothing to do with the drubbing the Dems took, you lying fraud.

                  1. This is the same retard who linked to an article claiming that it proved the popularity of Obamacare. In case you don’t remember, it’s where the 8% meme came from because it turned out that only 8% of the poll respondents approved of Obamacare. The Buttplug denies it ever happened of course. Because he thinks other people are as stupid as he is.

            2. I also predicted that NC would dictate who won the Senate and it was a toss-up.

              In which case you were wrong, since the Dems would still have lost the Senate even had they won NC.

              The GOP won NC by about 1% underperforming Burr’s last win.

              Beating an incumbent is harder than defending as an incumbent.

              1. The Dems lost elections in relative strongholds. No matter how he phrases it now he was completely wrong.

                1. Wrong. Dems lost red states like Arkansas, West Virginny, Lousianny, Georgia, KenTuck, and lost swing states like Iowa, NC, South Dakota, and Colorado.

                  That be NINE states – which swung to the redneck party.

                  (local dialect intended)

                  1. -9 seats is the most a president lost in a midterm election since 1958. The -15 lost by Obama in the two midterms is the most since Truman, and high numbers of voters saying they considered their vote as being against Obama (32%).

                    Let’s talk about the state level, asshole:
                    http://cookpolitical.com/story/8067

                  2. I didn’t realize Massachusetts, Maryland, and Illinois were red states. Then again, you think oil production on federal lands has gone up under Barry.

                  3. Which local dialect? You really don’t know much about the South, do you? Everyone and everywhere is a binary us or them question to you–isn’t it? You are the queen of anti-nuance. A real, live caricature of caricatures.

            3. Palin’s Buttplug|4.10.15 @ 11:09PM|#
              “Obamacare – which was NOT a factor in 2012 was not a factor in 2014 either.”

              I’ll bet turd figures not more than 8%.
              Right, you ly8ing piece of shit?

        2. When interest rates hit 4% the goldbugs will be selling at huge losses.

          Possibly, but Halley’s Comet probably returns before the Fed raises interest rates that high.

          1. Interest rates at 4% in the foreseeable future. This guy is truly delusional. But he understands markets better than all of us.

        3. And “when interest rates hit 4%”, half the current federal budget would have to go toward interest payments on the national debt. That’s a great sign for stability.

        4. Palin’s Buttplug|4.10.15 @ 11:01PM|#
          “You’re just a meek bystander here.”

          You’re a stinking turd here.

        5. Are you also bi-winning?

  54. Fucking Troll Fridays

    1. It sucks but they are out in full force.

      1. Torgo: I meant no harm, madam. I’ll protect you.
        Joel: ‘Cause there are some weird people around here.

        1. Commenting late to enthusiastically approve of this comment. He looks like a chainsaw sculpture!

      2. Palin’s Buttplug|4.10.15 @ 11:50PM|#
        “It sucks but they are out in full force.”

        Yes, turd, you are and you suck.

  55. So, the default with campus “issues” like this now defaults to, “probably made up, and instigated by someone on the ‘other’ side of the alleged issue.” Oberlin, U of the People’s Repiblic of Aye Squared, others – all false.

    First, hats off the class act who blew the lid off this. You’re a solid dude.

    Fuck these griefer assholes, the U of M, and fuck Michigan (for EDG Reppin’).

    1. As a rule now, whenever a prog gets upset about something, it is only rational to assume that something doesn’t exist until a sensible person conducts an investigation and finds otherwise.

  56. Ah – I hear shrieking again. It’s proclaiming itself “right”. Well, yeah – 8% of the time, you’re right.

    1. At least it and Tulpa keep each other somewhat occupied.

      1. The scrolling’s getting a little out of hand though.

        Fuck an edit button. Give me collapsible threads.

    2. I’m not sure but I think it’s broken. It’s playing the same outdated track over and over. Every time you engage it, it proceeds to act as if you just said “George W. Bush was the best president this country ever had.” That’s about the only thing it seems to hear anymore.

  57. Wow. The Botard still shows up for beatings. What a dumbass.

    1. More than any of our trolls he craves attention.

      1. “More than any of our trolls he craves attention.”

        Not sure turd doesn’t as well.

      2. “More than any of our trolls he craves attention.”

        Oh, and then we get Mike Hihn with Bo-like ego-mania, plus the victim-hood claims of cyber-stalking! A real retard treat, right there!

  58. Did someone file a complaint when the drunken frat boys sung that racist chant? That’s why the Dean of the school expelled the ringleader almost immediately, right?

    The pseudo humans on the left would use every tactic employed by Mccarthy or the Salem witch trial to blacklist and impugn those are “offensive”. Mahmood displayed remarkable restraint and maturity in trying to resolve this privately and not ruin a young woman’s life, still in its prime. Had she just apologized, then this goes away.

    We know the left is guilty of hypocrisy, but sometimes, it’s so brazen that someone should call them out on it. If someone covered in white blanket was seen wandering around the dorms, the school would have cancelled all classes and called for a unity rally.

    Did I mention that Muslim bakers were caught on camera denying cakes to gay weddings? But those owners aren’t receiving thousands of dollars in donations for some reason, the liberal may wonder whether that’s racism.

  59. I see it’s pig-wrestling night.

  60. An anecdote: this Omar Mahmood guy brings to mind a card-carrying conservative I gay-dated in college about a thousand years ago. OK, early 90s. I was never very political but I did assume the default liberal positions that were expected of me when called for. I was really into this guy but I couldn’t get over the whole conservative thing – in retrospect I think I probably treated him like an alien or something. The only other thing I remember about the guy is he smoked Lucky Strikes.

  61. Only because I so badly want to believe my fellow Americans aren’t dumber than a big huge sack full of solar powered ‘only’ dildos I so want to believe that the university students I’m *forced to finance at gunpoint* aren’t any stupider that that…

    … I am *learning* to live with enormous disappointment…

  62. Kill the intolerant, drink their blood!

  63. Her tweet was precious.

    This strong woman, thoroughly educated, fully grown and ready to fly free, with her eyes wide open to the patriarchy and its oppression, nonetheless feels exploited. Exploited and used!

  64. My dear, the next five minutes can change your life!
    Give a chance to your good luck.
    Read this article, please!
    Move to a better life!
    We make profit on the Internet since 1998!
    http://WWW.JOBS-FASHION.COM

  65. There is little, if any hostility towards Muslims on campus. The fact is that the Muslim Student’s Association and Students for Justice for Palestine are part of a campaign of a violent wave of physical attacks against Jewish students on campus.

    Please review this video for proof. There is a part 2 in the video list, as well.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQTtaYyu-7o

    1. Of course they are.

      Because Israel.

      A friend of mine recently called Israel a ‘theocracy’.

      1. You need better friends. Good thing you’ve got me!

      2. Well the fact that “Jewish state” refers to ethnicity rather than religion is not exactly a step in the right direction.

  66. Start working from home! Great job for students, stay-at-home moms or anyone needing an extra income… You only need a computer and a reliable internet connection… Make $90 hourly and up to $12000 a month by following link at the bottom and signing up… You can have your first check by the end of this week……………….

    http://www.Jobsyelp.com

  67. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.netjob80.com

  68. Start working from home! Great job for students, stay-at-home moms or anyone needing an extra income… You only need a computer and a reliable internet connection… Make $90 hourly and up to $12000 a month by following link at the bottom and signing up… You can have your first check by the end of this week………………

    ////////////…………………………….

    http://www,Jobsyelp,com

  69. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.netjob80.com

  70. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do…… ?????? http://www.netjob80.com

  71. I get paid over $87 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing,

    ———– http://www.work-cash.com

  72. Google pay 97$ per hour my last pay check was $8500 working 1o hours a week online. My younger brother friend has been averaging 12k for months now and he works about 22 hours a week. I cant believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    This is wha- I do….. ????? http://www.netjob80.com

  73. The hostility towards Muslims is the result of the actions of college administrators, politicians and others who continue to refuse to acknowledge the truth about Islam. No not all Muslims are terrorists, but the form of Islam practiced by ISIS is the same form practiced by Mohammed. It is not some perversion as the President loves to claim. It is the the most fundamental form of Islam as taught by its founding prophet. Christians and Jews do not kill people over cartoons they believe are offensive, but Muslims do repeatedly. Christians and Jews do not kill people for converting to another faith, Muslims do. Christianity and Judaism do not use force to “convert; people, Islam does. Muslims live in a hostile environment because they follow a hostile religion without tolerance for any other point of view. Sorry folks, you reap what you sow….

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.