here comes the New Atheist wet dream
enjoy your horrible dystopia you “Science”-obsessed shitheads
![venusofnatalie:
Discuss.
welcome to hell(o kitty). I have no mouth, but I must scream [end of discussion]](http://24.media.tumblr.com/07e52ab9b55db67130c09f64bb5ee195/tumblr_mnkadb9NFp1r4ctvro1_500.png)
this New York Times article is just disgustingly liberal, combat it »
You can’t have the fun, pro-democracy, anti-Putin feminism without the incendiary anarchism, extreme sexual provocations, deliberate obscenity and hard-left politics.
Unless you are comfortable with all that (and I strongly suspect 99 percent of Pussy Riot’s fans in the mainstream media are not), then standing behind Pussy Riot only now, when it is obviously blameless and the government clearly guilty, is pure opportunism.
hahahah look at this fucking nitwit.
It’s particularly funny because the author very nearly makes a set of good points but then is swallowed up by shallow Liberalism. For a moment I thought Nikitin was going to point out that the obsession with Pussy Riot and anti-Russian politics draws our attention away from the equally fucked up (essentially the same) horrible actions carried out by our own joke of a Democracy in America. The point in re: Soviet dissidents is a good example in that regard. Instead this is pro-Capitalism fear mongering horseshit. Thanks NYT’s. Nikitin’s conclusion?
Pussy Riot’s fans in the West need to understand that their heroes’ dissent will not stop at Putin; neither will it stop if and when Russia becomes a “normal” liberal democracy. Because what Pussy Riot wants is something that is equally terrifying, provocative and threatening to the established order in both Russia and the West (and has been from time immemorial): freedom from patriarchy, capitalism, religion, conventional morality, inequality and the entire corporate state system. We should only support these brave women if we, too, are brave enough to go all the way.
Yes, going all the way is exactly the point, you fucking coward.
this ghost, referencing Samantha Power and Anne-Marie Slaughter (via thenewephemera)
Power and Slaughter are jokes operating within jokes contained within a larger farce. Good thing they’re just fictional characters with punny names and no one takes their horrible ideas seriously, yknow?
Headline: "Koran Burning in NATO Error Incites Afghans for 2nd Day" »
versus a quote buried towards the end of the article:
“This is not just about dishonoring the Koran, it is about disrespecting our dead, and killing our children,”
Fuck the Times.
The Jeremy Lin Problem - NYTimes.com »
David Brooks knows less about sports than he does about politics, economics, and culture, and that, my friends, is saying something.
One of the easiest and possibly most abrupt ways to learn that Liberalism sucks is when one of your Liberal friends tells you how much they like columns by David Brooks.
In Libyan Rebel Capital, Shouts of Thanks to America and the West »
“The pizza, too, is respectable, especially at Pisa Pizza in Benghazi, where the pies are about a yard in diameter. Proof that Italian colonialism accomplished something after all.”
From an actual article published by the New York Times.
(via Inanities | Sarah Carr)
Next time you ask me why I think the NYTimes international reporting is horrible, stupid, and (at times) absolutely disgusting (and i’m not even touching on the war mongering yet), I’m just going to refer you to this one.
