Posted 6 days ago







Gotta put this on blast.
We never needed a white savior.

I hate this country.

What I learned from this video:

  • 100 million Native Americans died at the hands of white colonists
  • Instead of planting crops the colonists spent their days digging random holes in the ground looking for gold. They started starving and dug up Indian corpses to eat. They took Indian prisoners and forced them to teach the colonists how to farm
  • Native Americans had massive cities with tens of thousands of well constructed houses, intricate water canals and large merchant areas.
  • The Native Americans used soaps, deodorants and breath sweeteners while colonists never bathed or even took of their clothes
  • There was a delousing policy with the mantra Nits create Lice; nits being Native American babies, so their goal was to kill every Indian, including babies 
  • In the 1700’s 80% of the Federal Budget went towards eradicating the Native American population so they could take their developed farmland
  • Colonists leaders went town after town killing men women and children under the approval of George Washington
  • "Pursue Indians to extermination" -Thomas Jefferson
  • California governor (1849-1851): “extermination must continue to be waged until the Indian becomes extinct”

The main factor which prevented Native American extinction was the fact they were used for slave labor. The most prized Native Americans were young girls who were said to be valued for labor and lust (that one white dude in your ethnic studies class that says he’s 1/36th Cherokee?)

In modern times children were forced into Indian Boarding Schools whose goal was to “Kill the Indian in them”. It was federal policy. They were beaten if they used their native tongue, they were forced to dress and style their hair like whites 

This country was literally built on terrorism and mass murder. White people are savage terrorists.

Until, this is taught in schools everywhere- “history class” is merely a racism propaganda course.

Things to marinate on this “holiday” weekend

(Source: blood148)

Posted 2 weeks ago


It’s On Us: 

To RECOGNIZE that non-consensual sex is sexual assault.

To IDENTIFY situations in which sexual assault may occur.

To INTERVENE in situations where consent has not or cannot be given.

To CREATE an environment in which sexual assault is unacceptable and survivors are supported.

It’s On Us

Not Alone

Posted 2 weeks ago



misattributed quotes makes janeway judge you.

remember: look shit up! it’s free! 

I really kind of hope Wil posts this.

Posted 2 weeks ago


"So I thought you guys would like a summary of the facts"

At least half of your “facts” are lies but ok. Here we go…

"I first heard about the events not long after Dorian Johnson gave his interview, where he claimed that a decorated police officer with six years’ of experience decided one day, out of the blue, to murder a teenager in cold blood for no reason whatsoever."

Idk why you included “decorated police officer with six years of experience” in this sentence. By adding that piece of info into Dorian Johnson’s claim, you are implying that Johnson knew this information about the officer. Dorian Johnson didn’t even know Darren Wilson’s name but he’s supposed to know how long he’s been an officer? Ok. Also, please provide the source that says Dorian Johnson said Darren Wilson “decided one day, out of the blue, to murder a teenager in cold blood for no reason whatsoever”.

"First we found out that Michael Brown had performed a strong-armed robbery of a convenience store."

First of all, Mike Brown was described as a suspect. Secondly, “strong-armed robbery” but the clerk never called the cops? Ok. Thirdly, Darren Wilson did not know about the “robbery” when he stopped Mike and Dorian. (And don’t try to tell me that he found out sometime after stopping them but before killing Mike because all of that happened in no more than 3-4 minutes — see below.) Even if Darren Wilson knew about the “robbery” and believed the boys matched the description of the suspects, why did he only go after Mike? Dorian was with Mike the entire time. Why wasn’t he arrested after Mike was shot dead? Why did police refuse to interview Dorian, one of the witnesses to Mike’s murder and apparently a “robbery” suspect? Finally, whether or not Mike Brown was involved in a “robbery” DOES NOT justify his murder in any way, shape, or form.

"We also found out that Darren Wilson, the police officer that shot him, was treated for injuries after the fact."

What kind of injuries? A minor cut or scratch? A broken orbital bone? (Which was proven false btw) Again, you need to provide sources for these so called “facts” because (assuming this is Darren Wilson) he looks perfectly fine and uninjured in these pictures.

"1. After stopping them, Wilson did suspect Brown and Johnson of being the ones to have robbed the convenience store, as they matched the description and there was some plain-view evidence against them."

Shaun King broke down the entire incident, second by second. No more than 3 or 4 minutes had gone by from the time Darren Wilson stopped Mike and Dorian to the time Mike was shot dead. You’re trying to tell me that in the middle of all of this, Darren Wilson accurately heard a call he (may or may not have) received regarding suspects in a “robbery”? (No, he was not responding to a robbery call before stopping Mike and Dorian) And what plain-view evidence are you talking about exactly?

"2. One of the most common ways for a police officer to die in the line of duty is during a routine traffic stop when he doesn’t know that the people he’s stopped have committed a crime.”

What’s your point here? Should cops treat everyone that they stop/pull over as a potential criminal/killer?

"See, criminals, as a general rule, are very paranoid just after committing a crime. Whether or not the police officer knows is irrelevant because they don’t know if he or she does or not.”


Again, what’s your point? Are you trying to say that Mike Brown defending himself while being choked by Darren Wilson and then running away after Wilson pulled out his gun and fired a shot means that he was a “paranoid criminal”?

"To add to that, the injuries suffered by Wilson show that he was, in fact, attacked."


"Eyewitness testimony, as a general rule, is notoriously unreliable,”

6 eyewitnesses have the exact same story. None of them have changed their story once. With the exception of the 2 construction workers, none of the eyewitnesses knew each other at the time of the shooting. Only the police have changed their story, multiple times might I add.

"and people’s memories of events change over time as they hear new things about the events,"

Hmmmmaybe the police should have interviewed witnesses immediately then. 

"…such as a news report claiming that someone had their hands up in surrender just before being shot. You know, as an example."

Except Mike Brown was killed with his hands up in the air, surrendering. This is a fact. All eyewitnesses saw it. 

"With the case of Dorian Johnson, however, his testimony was not a distortion of memory, but to the point where it’s highly unlikely that he didn’t know that what he was saying was a lie. For this evidence.”

What the fuck are you talking about? Dorian’s story matches all other eyewitness’ stories. There’s no way they all came up with the exact same lie without knowing each other before the shooting.

"Michael Brown was not shot in the back, as Johnson claimed."

When did Dorian Johnson ever say he was shot in the back? Again, source your info.

"The autopsy also showed no gunpowder residue on his body, but that doesn’t actually mean a whole lot"

This actually means more than you think. No gunpowder residue on his body means Mike Brown did not have control of Darren Wilson’s gun.

"(especially since he didn’t examine Brown’s clothing)"

Correction. Dr. Baden was not allowed to examine Brown’s clothing or any other physical evidence. 

"keep in mind that both Wilson and Johnson claimed… and both also claimed"

How can Dorian Johnson and Darren Wilson make the same claims when Darren Wilson never wrote his own incident report (and the eventual incident report is essentially blank and there’s no use of force report) and Darren Wilson has never publicly come out to share his side of the story. So unless you are Darren Wilson, you know Darren Wilson, or you were in the room when he testified in front of the grand jury for 4 hours, you have absolutely no idea what Darren Wilson has claimed.

"(Edit: Something I forgot to mention when I originally posted this: The medical examiner claimed that there was “no sign of a struggle,” but this is a gross overinterpretation of the evidence that the medical examiner had available to him, that being Brown’s body. Had there been a question of whether or not Wilson attacked Brown in the way it’s said that Brown attacked Wilson, showing no sign of stuggle would be significant. The question, however, is whether or not Brown attacked Wilson, something that would not show up on Brown’s autopsy.)”

What? “Had there been a question of whether or not Wilson attacked Brown” You say that like it’s not at the very least a possibility. You also have ZERO proof that Mike Brown attacked Darren Wilson. Self defense =/= an attack.

"such as referring to Wilson as a ‘triggerman’”

Mike Brown was a “violent criminal” who participated in a “strong-armed robbery” but Darren Wilson wasn’t a “triggerman”? So you can demonize Mike Brown all you want but demonizing Darren Wilson is unfair? Ok.

"or choosing a headline based off of the ludicrous claims of the family’s attorney and not the facts of the autopsy

(Ok is it just me or does the link not match this part of the sentence? Oh and Josie’s story is fake btw.)

"Someone recording the events after the shooting managed to accidentally capture a conversation wherein a witness is explaining to his friend that Brown charged Wilson. While eyewitness testimony is generally unreliable, because of how general the information is, as well as it being given without outside influence, this telling of the story can be taken as pretty reliable”

So you’re telling me that you are choosing to believe part of a conversation between 2 unidentified “witnesses” that you can kinda almost hear clearly if you turn the volume up all the way over 4 identified witnesses (plus 2 construction workers who asked to remain anonymous) who have all shared their story, the same story, with various news stations? HAHA ok. Moving right along…

"…far moreso than that of a known criminal and liar with plenty of motive to hide the facts and invent new ones."

Are you talking about Ferguson PD or STL Co. PD here? Please be more clear.

"Brown charging is why Wilson shot him so many times."

Mike Brown did not charge at Darren Wilson. Darren Wilson had already fired at least 4 shots as Mike was running away. Who the fuck would turn around after being shot (at) at least 4 times by a police officer and charge at them from around 100 ft. away? Come the fuck on.

"Was Brown unarmed? Yes. Did Wilson know this? Yes. But…"

No buts.

"But the claim that he was unarmed and therefore posed no danger shows a blatant disregard for how dangerous unarmed individuals can be."

If Darren Wilson felt that his life was in danger as Mike Brown was defending himself against Darren, then he probably shouldn’t have approached Mike and Dorian with hostility. If Darren Wilson felt that his life was in danger as Mike was running away or when he raised his hands up in the air and said “I don’t have a gun, stop shooting!”…. do I even need to explain this one?

"Boxing has, from the start, had a mountain of rules to help prevent deaths in the ring, but in spite of that, unarmed boxers still manage to kill their opponents without intending to do soA 125 lb boxer can still threaten the life of someone else, even without intent to kill.”

This is beyond irrelevant to the murder of Mike Brown. Next.

"Double that (more, in fact) and add that intent, plus numerous environmental weapons (the asphalt, for example), and you have Michael Brown."

Intent? Mike Brown had NO intention of killing Darren Wilson. Shut the fuck up. You’re just making shit up at this point. Asphalt is a weapon now? If asphalt is a weapon doesn’t that mean that Darren Wilson could have used it as a weapon too?

So we have unarmed Mike Brown + asphalt + no intent = Threat to Darren Wilson

But armed Darren Wilson + asphalt + intent + actually murdering Mike Brown = No threat and innocent until proven guilty?

"You also have the possibility of him taking the gun from the officer and killing him with that, something which, by the accounts of the only witness that has not been proven to be a liar, he had already intended to do.”

1. The only way Mike Brown could have taken or even attempted to take Darren Wilson’s gun was if Darren Wilson already had his gun out.

2. Darren Wilson stops Mike Brown and Mike decides to try to take Wilson’s gun so he can kill him with it, fails and runs away, changes his mind and charges at Wilson in an attempt to assault/kill him? LMFAO please stop.

3. What witness are you talking about? And what witnesses have been proven to be liars?

"Michael Brown was not some innocent victim of a murderous police officer that was surrendering when he was shot."

Mike Brown was innocent. Mike Brown was murdered by a racist police officer. Mike Brown was surrendering when he was killed.

"He was a violent criminal that forced a police officer to act in self-defense."

Every word of this sentence is a lie.

"While his death sucks,"

Wow could you be any less sympathetic?

"…it came as a result of his actions and is far preferable to that police officer dying."

Excuse me?! Why is Mike Brown’s life automatically worth less than a racist cop’s life?

"And the response from the community has followed the same lines. There’s been rioting, looting, massive destruction of private property, and, more recently, extreme violence."

No rioting. Few looters. What massive destruction? The QT? I wouldn’t call that massive. Either way, the entire community was not responsible for that, nor did they support it. Wow but yeah look at all the extreme violence.

"And when the police respond to these actions with force, they’re vilified."

Tambourines, drums, posters, signs, etc. vs. Riot gear

"When they try to evacuate reporters for their own safety because of the violence in the area, the reporters accuse them of censorship."

So that’s why police ordered them to turn their cameras off and threatened to shoot them if they didn’t? So concerned about the safety of the media.

"Not long afterwards, he was forced to deploy tear gas and other riot control measures against protestors throwing molotov cocktails at police officers, along with other acts of violence and rioting."

Forced? Really? Again, no rioting and only a few people have reacted violently.

"involved in the riots"


"He’s being villified by the very people with whom he sided (prior to actually knowing the facts, mind you)"

How do you side with a group of people without knowing the facts? How are you put in charge of a situation like this without knowing the facts? 

"I have no doubt that some people in that group, probably even most, had nothing to do with the violence of those riots, but when you stand with those committing violent acts, it’s a little hard to distinguish you from those acting violently. And if you stand with them, you have nobody to blame but yourself when authorities respond to them in order to protect themselves and others."

Yeah it’s really hard to tell the “good cops” from the “bad cops”. “Good cops” should really start calling out “bad cops” on their racist and violent behavior instead of standing beside them and doing nothing to stop them. Otherwise they’ll have no one to blame but themselves if citizens react aggressively in order to protect themselves and others.

"People have been asking why the police didn’t reveal this information beforehand. There are two reasons: First, that’s not the way police operate.”

(Not entirely sure what info you’re talking about here but I’ll just throw this out there…) I can guarantee you that if Mike Brown had killed Darren Wilson it would NOT haven taken Ferguson PD 1 week to release Mike’s name. And if he was still free after 57 days? Shit…

"Secondly, they didn’t for the same reason why the US used to have a policy of not negotiating with terrorists”

Did you just fucking compare peaceful protesters to terrorists?!

"If you give people what they want in response to violence"

Protesters have been peaceful for 57 days! Only the police, a few agitators, and a few looters have been violent. Protesters have not.

"They’ve only released information in response to pressure from higher-ups"

You sure about that?

"and the fact that the rioting, looting, and violence only gets worse every time they release evidence only goes go show how much those “protestors” really want the facts"

Nothing but lies here.

"A black man was shot by a white police officer, and that’s terrible."

*Teenager. Not only is it terrible, it’s also nothing new. Mike Brown is not the first, and sadly not the last black person to be murdered by police. Mike Brown is also not the first or the last to have his character assassinated after his death. The murder of Mike Brown is not the first or the last officer-involved shooting that police have tried to cover up.

Mike Brown and his family deserve justice.

Arrest Darren Wilson.

Posted 2 weeks ago
Posted 3 weeks ago



"i’m not white i’m greek"


Posted 3 weeks ago


Historian and Feminist Scholar Gerda Lerner

women fucking starved themselves, y’all - they were arrested and beaten by jailers

(Source: exgynocraticgrrl)

Posted 3 weeks ago


❝ Love will thaw... Of course! Love! ❞

requested by: anonymous

Posted 4 weeks ago
Posted 4 weeks ago




Emma Sulkowicz is on the cover of this month’s New York Magazine and that is the coolest thing wow

DUUUUDE this is a huge fucking deal honestly