thepeoplesrecord:

TW: Transmisogynist murder, rape - Justice for Jennifer: Protests sweep Philippines after US marine murders transgender women
October 19, 2014

Protests continue across the Philippines following news of the murder of Jennifer Laude, a transgender Filipina woman, allegedly at the hands of a U.S. marine in Olongapo City. Coming just months after the U.S. signed a controversial pact to boost its military presence in the Philippines, protesters say the killing is stoking deep-rooted anger over the U.S. military’s treatment of Philippine civilians and prompting renewed calls to boot U.S. troops from the country.

"We are not only hoping to be able to bring justice to our fellow Filipina, but also to force the U.S. and Philippine governments to rethink their strategy in the region," Joms Salvador, Secretary General of GABRIELA—a Philippine alliance of women’s movement organizations—told Common Dreams on Friday over the phone from Manila.

"Here We Go Again"

Jennifer Laude, 26 years old, was killed in a Olongapo City hotel room on October 11, with signs that she may have been beaten and strangled. Philippine police on Wednesdaycharged a U.S. marine, Private First Class Joseph Scott Pemberton, with the murder. Pemberton was one of 3,500 U.S. military service members taking part in a joint military exercise with the Philippines.

U.S. military officials, who have not publicly confirmed or denied Pemberton’s identity, say that a marine under investigation is currently being held by the U.S. military on the USS Peleliu, an amphibious vessel currently in the Subic Bay free port northwest of Manila.

The Philippine government served a subpoena for Pemberton on Friday. However, past atrocities, and relative immunity for U.S. troops in the Philippines, leave many skeptical that the U.S. service member will be held to account.

In the infamous Subic Bay rape case in 2005, Lance Corporal Daniel Smith—who was found guilty in Philippine court of raping a Filipina woman while other Marines watched—was transferred from Philippine to U.S. custody. His conviction was later overturned, and he was never made to serve the life sentence handed to him by a Philippine court.

Bernadette Ellorin, New York-based Chairperson of BAYAN-USA, an alliance of Filipino organizations in the U.S., told Common Dreams that she considers the killing of Laude a “hate crime against a transgender woman.” Ellorin continued, ”There is a long history of the U.S. military committing heinous acts against people in the Philippines and not really being brought to justice because military agreements more or less protect them.”

"Here we go again," said Salvador. "We have another case, and we are still not sure if there will be justice for Jennifer and her family."

Expanding U.S. Military Presence

Meanwhile, the U.S. military presence in the Philippines, enabled by mounting pacts between the U.S. and the Philippines, is growing.

The Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement between the U.S. and the Philippines, signed in April, is a 10 year deal that allows the U.S. to drastically increase its military presence in the Philippines. The accord is part of an Obama administration push for a military pivot to the Asia-Pacific region in a bid to hedge against China’s rising power.

The pact is broadly opposed in the Philippines, as it reverses a 1992 decision by the Philippine government, under pressure from the public, to kick the U.S. out of its last permanent base in the country, located in Subic Bay. Social movements in the Philippines have long opposed U.S. power over their country, which includes more than five decades of direct colonial rule and the backing of dictator Ferdinand Marcos.

However, the 1992 decision did not actually keep the U.S. military out. The U.S.-Philippines Visiting Forces Agreement, signed in 1998, allowed the U.S. to establish over 20 “semi permanent" military installations in the country. It also includes language that has been used by the U.S. military to shield service members from Philippine laws, including in the Subic Bay rape case.

Residents say that the U.S. military, and the agreements protecting it, is deeply destructive to local communities. Soldiers commit atrocities with impunity, said Salvador. And the military’s environmental destruction and waste dumping harms ecosystems and public health. This includes a U.S. Navy ship’s damage last year to Tubbataha Reefs Natural Park, which the U.S. still has not paid reparations for.

"There are also concerns about the displacement of many communities because the U.S. military is already building facilities in several parts of the country, including Oyster Bay in the Pelawan Islands, which is home to indigenous communities," Salvador continued. "The U.S. military has not been fully been held responsible for the damage it has done."

"Justice for Jennifer"

Salvador says that protests in the country are issuing calls for the U.S. military to leave, and “bringing to the fore” the pressing issue of LGBTQ and women’s rights.

"Every day there have been protests in front of the U.S. embassy in Manila or the department of foreign affairs office in Manila," she said. "Protests are taking place in schools, in communities, and other parts of the country. We are seeing not only women’s and LGBTQ organizations protesting, but also students, workers, and poor people. Even media personalities, legislators, and actors, who before were not vocal about their views, have recently also shared their indignation over Jennifer’s murder."

Demonstrations have taken place across the U.S., including New York, San Francisco, and Lost Angeles. “The response has been overwhelming from our community and the LGBTQ community as well,” said Ellorin. “Transgender people are taking leadership and sticking up for value of Jennifer’s life.”

"We are demanding justice for Jennifer," Ellorin added. "We can’t take the context away: there is a problem with us military presence in the Philippines."

Source

357 notes

zubat:

Astronauts selfies (1966, 2003, 2008, 2012, 2014)

(via carazelaya)

658 notes

thepeoplesrecord:

John Carlos & Tommie Smith give Black Power salute at 1968 Mexico City Olympics medal ceremony
When the medals were awarded for the men’s 200-meter sprint at the 1968 Olympic Games, Life magazine photographer John Dominis was only about 20 feet away from the podium. “I didn’t think it was a big news event,” Dominis says. “I was expecting a normal ceremony. I hardly noticed what was happening when I was shooting.”
Indeed, the ceremony that October 16 “actually passed without much general notice in the packed Olympic Stadium,” New York Times correspondent Joseph M. Sheehan reported from Mexico City. But by the time Sheehan’s observation appeared in print three days later, the event had become front-page news: for politicizing the Games, U.S. Olympic officials, under pressure from the International Olympic Committee, had suspended medalists Tommie Smith and John Carlos and sent them packing.
Smith and Carlos, winners of the gold and bronze medals, respectively, in the event, had come to the ceremony dressed to protest: wearing black socks and no shoes to symbolize African-American poverty, a black glove to express African-American strength and unity. (Smith also wore a scarf, and Carlos beads, in memory of lynching victims.) As the national anthem played and an international TV audience watched, each man bowed his head and raised a fist. After the two were banished, images of their gesture entered the iconography of athletic protest.
"It was a polarizing moment because it was seen as an example of black power radicalism," says Doug Hartmann, a University of Minnesota sociologist and the author of Race, Culture, and the Revolt of the Black Athlete: The 1968 Olympic Protests and Their Aftermath. “Mainstream America hated what they did.”
The United States was already deeply divided over the Vietnam War and the civil rights movement, and the serial traumas of 1968—mounting antiwar protests, the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy, the beating of protesters during the Democratic National Convention by Chicago police—put those rifts into high relief. Before the Olympics, many African-American athletes had talked of joining a boycott of the Games to protest racial inequities in the United States. But the boycott, organized by sociologist Harry Edwards, never came off.
As students at San Jose State University, where Edwards was teaching, Smith and Carlos took part in that conversation. Carlos, born and raised in Harlem, was “an extreme extrovert with a challenging personality,” says Edwards, now emeritus professor of sociology at the University of California at Berkeley. Smith, the son of sharecroppers who grew up in rural Texas and California, was “a much softer, private person.” When they raised their fists on the medals stand, they were acting on their own.
Among the Games athletes, opinions were divided. Australia’s Peter Norman, the winner of the silver medal in the 200-meter sprint, mounted the podium wearing a badge supporting Edwards’ organization. Heavyweight boxer George Foreman—who would win a gold medal and wave an American flag in the ring—dismissed the protest, saying, “That’s for college kids.” The four women runners on the U.S. 400-meter relay team dedicated their victory to the exiled sprinters. A representative of the USSR was quoted as saying, perhaps inevitably, “The Soviet Union never has used the Olympic Games for propaganda purposes.”
Smith and Carlos returned home to a wave of opprobrium—they were “black-skinned storm troopers,” in the words of Brent Musburger, who would gain fame as a TV sportscaster but was then a columnist for the Chicago American newspaper—and anonymous death threats. The pressure, Carlos says, was a factor in his then-wife’s suicide in 1977. “One minute everything was sunny and happy, the next minute was chaos and crazy,” he says. Smith recalls, “I had no job and no education, and I was married with a 7-month-old son.”
Full article

thepeoplesrecord:

John Carlos & Tommie Smith give Black Power salute at 1968 Mexico City Olympics medal ceremony

When the medals were awarded for the men’s 200-meter sprint at the 1968 Olympic Games, Life magazine photographer John Dominis was only about 20 feet away from the podium. “I didn’t think it was a big news event,” Dominis says. “I was expecting a normal ceremony. I hardly noticed what was happening when I was shooting.”

Indeed, the ceremony that October 16 “actually passed without much general notice in the packed Olympic Stadium,” New York Times correspondent Joseph M. Sheehan reported from Mexico City. But by the time Sheehan’s observation appeared in print three days later, the event had become front-page news: for politicizing the Games, U.S. Olympic officials, under pressure from the International Olympic Committee, had suspended medalists Tommie Smith and John Carlos and sent them packing.

Smith and Carlos, winners of the gold and bronze medals, respectively, in the event, had come to the ceremony dressed to protest: wearing black socks and no shoes to symbolize African-American poverty, a black glove to express African-American strength and unity. (Smith also wore a scarf, and Carlos beads, in memory of lynching victims.) As the national anthem played and an international TV audience watched, each man bowed his head and raised a fist. After the two were banished, images of their gesture entered the iconography of athletic protest.

"It was a polarizing moment because it was seen as an example of black power radicalism," says Doug Hartmann, a University of Minnesota sociologist and the author of Race, Culture, and the Revolt of the Black Athlete: The 1968 Olympic Protests and Their Aftermath. “Mainstream America hated what they did.”

The United States was already deeply divided over the Vietnam War and the civil rights movement, and the serial traumas of 1968—mounting antiwar protests, the assassinations of Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy, the beating of protesters during the Democratic National Convention by Chicago police—put those rifts into high relief. Before the Olympics, many African-American athletes had talked of joining a boycott of the Games to protest racial inequities in the United States. But the boycott, organized by sociologist Harry Edwards, never came off.

As students at San Jose State University, where Edwards was teaching, Smith and Carlos took part in that conversation. Carlos, born and raised in Harlem, was “an extreme extrovert with a challenging personality,” says Edwards, now emeritus professor of sociology at the University of California at Berkeley. Smith, the son of sharecroppers who grew up in rural Texas and California, was “a much softer, private person.” When they raised their fists on the medals stand, they were acting on their own.

Among the Games athletes, opinions were divided. Australia’s Peter Norman, the winner of the silver medal in the 200-meter sprint, mounted the podium wearing a badge supporting Edwards’ organization. Heavyweight boxer George Foreman—who would win a gold medal and wave an American flag in the ring—dismissed the protest, saying, “That’s for college kids.” The four women runners on the U.S. 400-meter relay team dedicated their victory to the exiled sprinters. A representative of the USSR was quoted as saying, perhaps inevitably, “The Soviet Union never has used the Olympic Games for propaganda purposes.”

Smith and Carlos returned home to a wave of opprobrium—they were “black-skinned storm troopers,” in the words of Brent Musburger, who would gain fame as a TV sportscaster but was then a columnist for the Chicago American newspaper—and anonymous death threats. The pressure, Carlos says, was a factor in his then-wife’s suicide in 1977. “One minute everything was sunny and happy, the next minute was chaos and crazy,” he says. Smith recalls, “I had no job and no education, and I was married with a 7-month-old son.”

Full article

181 notes

petarted:

Probably some of my favorite photos I’ve ever taken.

Rented some tradition wooden plank boats used by fishermen in Ghana and met some young Ghanaians who definitely showed us a thing or two how it’s done. Thankful I was able to wade out and capture some awesome shots of these guys.

(via vethox)

6,107 notes

(Source: fuckyeahdragrace.com, via alrightdarling)

1,659 notes

(Source: rajaspookative, via granny-glass)

2,855 notes

oldgregrenegade:

pizzaotter:

immaculatellamalord:

lauriejuspeczyk:


221becquerel:



queenaglaia:



uncalmly:



silentknightley:



rookieoftheday:



Do you understand how scary this picture is



god forbid a real person do real person things he wasnt just a robot who killed people jesus fucking christ



uh yeah its not like he killed and tortured six million jews or anything



Hold on just a tick. Listen, I’m Jewish, so I’m perfectly capable of understanding that what he did was just…..well, there are no words for it. But let’s not round it up to simply Jews that got killed. It was six million people that died in those camps, not just Jews. Did you know that homosexuals were sent there, too? Yeah, I’m sure you did. They had to wear special little symbols on their clothes. Do you know what it was? It was a pink triangle.
It was six million PEOPLE. 
But you let that roll over in your mind for a while and you are going to forever see this man as a monster, but that’s not what he was. He was someone who thought he was truly doing something right for his nation, no matter how shitty he was doing it. Believe me when I say that I don’t like him. I really don’t. My grandfather’s brothers died in those camps, and my grandfather escaped to Spain, then to Mexico. He was lucky.
This is not a monster holding hands with a little girl.
This is Adolf Hitler, a man, holding hands with a little girl. 
Yeah. It’s fucking scary. It really is. Do you know why?
It’s because you’re seeing that he wasn’t, in fact, a monster. You’re seeing in this picture that he was a man. He was a man, and that’s really the saddest part of it all.






As a History major who specializes in the history of early modern Europe, I’ve studied a lot of dictators in detail, not just Hitler. The number one mistake anyone could ever make in history is making the assumption that only inhuman monsters are capable of doing terrible things. Stop dehumanizing Hitler just so you can reassure yourself that “normal” humans aren’t capable of doing bad things. Hitler liked children and dogs, he was a vegetarian and he cried like a little boy when his mother died. I’m not saying he was a good, innocent person, but when you stop attributing human characteristics to historical figures like Hitler, it’s how you overlook people just like him in real life, and it’s how people like him end up back in power.


That last statement.

Wow, this is deep cutting stuff.


Good read.

oldgregrenegade:

pizzaotter:

immaculatellamalord:

lauriejuspeczyk:

221becquerel:

queenaglaia:

uncalmly:

silentknightley:

rookieoftheday:

Do you understand how scary this picture is

god forbid a real person do real person things he wasnt just a robot who killed people jesus fucking christ

uh yeah its not like he killed and tortured six million jews or anything

Hold on just a tick. Listen, I’m Jewish, so I’m perfectly capable of understanding that what he did was just…..well, there are no words for it. But let’s not round it up to simply Jews that got killed. It was six million people that died in those camps, not just Jews. Did you know that homosexuals were sent there, too? Yeah, I’m sure you did. They had to wear special little symbols on their clothes. Do you know what it was? It was a pink triangle.

It was six million PEOPLE. 

But you let that roll over in your mind for a while and you are going to forever see this man as a monster, but that’s not what he was. He was someone who thought he was truly doing something right for his nation, no matter how shitty he was doing it. Believe me when I say that I don’t like him. I really don’t. My grandfather’s brothers died in those camps, and my grandfather escaped to Spain, then to Mexico. He was lucky.

This is not a monster holding hands with a little girl.

This is Adolf Hitler, a man, holding hands with a little girl. 

Yeah. It’s fucking scary. It really is. Do you know why?

It’s because you’re seeing that he wasn’t, in fact, a monster. You’re seeing in this picture that he was a man. He was a man, and that’s really the saddest part of it all.

As a History major who specializes in the history of early modern Europe, I’ve studied a lot of dictators in detail, not just Hitler. The number one mistake anyone could ever make in history is making the assumption that only inhuman monsters are capable of doing terrible things.

Stop dehumanizing Hitler just so you can reassure yourself that “normal” humans aren’t capable of doing bad things. Hitler liked children and dogs, he was a vegetarian and he cried like a little boy when his mother died. I’m not saying he was a good, innocent person, but when you stop attributing human characteristics to historical figures like Hitler, it’s how you overlook people just like him in real life, and it’s how people like him end up back in power.

That last statement.

Wow, this is deep cutting stuff.

Good read.

(Source: satanel, via vethox)

747,024 notes

mightyhunter:

Correct.

mightyhunter:

Correct.

(via afternoonsnoozebutton)

829 notes

blackdenimjeans:

Marsha P Johnson by Andy Warhol

(via vegan-queer)

3,262 notes

stoptellingwomentosmile:

I walked up to a woman as she was taking a picture of this piece and she told me that, to her, as a Brooklyn native, “You Are Not Entitled To My Space” made her also think of gentrification.

stoptellingwomentosmile:

I walked up to a woman as she was taking a picture of this piece and she told me that, to her, as a Brooklyn native, “You Are Not Entitled To My Space” made her also think of gentrification.

(via vegan-queer)

1,552 notes

superbestiario:

Andy Warhol by Pierre Houles, 1982

67 notes

dekolonial:

zahgurim:

zuky:

herzundseele:

newfilosofee:

Jim Hurlbut: You were born in Omaha, is that right?
Malcolm X: Yes sir.
Hurlbut: And your family left Omaha when you were what? One year old?
Malcolm X: I imagine about a year old.
Hurlbut: Now, why did they eave Omaha?
Malcolm X: Well, to my understanding… the Ku Klux Klan burned down one of their homes in Omaha.
Hurlbut: This made your family feel very unhappy actually?
Malcolm X: Well insecure if not unhappy.
Hurlbut: So they must have a somewhat prejudiced point of view — a personally prejudiced point of view. In other words, you cannot look at this in a broad, academic sort of way, really, can you?
Malcolm X: I think that’s incorrect, because despite the fact that that happened in Omaha and then when moved to Lansing, Michigan our home was burned down again — in fact, my father was killed by the Ku Klux Klan, and despite all of that, no one was more thoroughly integrated with whites than I. No one has lived more so in the society of whites than I. 


This portion of this famous interview has always fascinated me. Hurlbut is asserting that people of color cannot be objective about racism because they have experienced the violence of racism, which apparently “prejudices” you. Only white people can look at racism in a “broad, academic sort of way” because they are the architects of racism and only experience the benefits of white supremacism. And he’s sitting there saying this on national television as though he’s making sense. Hurlbut is pushing this intellectual depravity at Malcolm X as though he has found a clever way to discredit Malcolm’s perspective. This is what white racism does to white people: it makes them stupid. This is why I’ve often described whiteness as a cognitive trauma, a lifetime of conditioning which inhibits certain neural faculties and results in a certain kind of dissociative disorder. Only people who have dissociated themselves from their own humanity can happily picnic under swinging corpses.


(via zahgurim)(via dekolonial)

dekolonial:

zahgurim:

zuky:

herzundseele:

newfilosofee:

Jim Hurlbut: You were born in Omaha, is that right?

Malcolm X: Yes sir.

Hurlbut: And your family left Omaha when you were what? One year old?

Malcolm X: I imagine about a year old.

Hurlbut: Now, why did they eave Omaha?

Malcolm X: Well, to my understanding… the Ku Klux Klan burned down one of their homes in Omaha.

Hurlbut: This made your family feel very unhappy actually?

Malcolm X: Well insecure if not unhappy.

Hurlbut: So they must have a somewhat prejudiced point of view — a personally prejudiced point of view. In other words, you cannot look at this in a broad, academic sort of way, really, can you?

Malcolm X: I think that’s incorrect, because despite the fact that that happened in Omaha and then when moved to Lansing, Michigan our home was burned down again — in fact, my father was killed by the Ku Klux Klan, and despite all of that, no one was more thoroughly integrated with whites than I. No one has lived more so in the society of whites than I. 

This portion of this famous interview has always fascinated me. Hurlbut is asserting that people of color cannot be objective about racism because they have experienced the violence of racism, which apparently “prejudices” you. Only white people can look at racism in a “broad, academic sort of way” because they are the architects of racism and only experience the benefits of white supremacism. And he’s sitting there saying this on national television as though he’s making sense. Hurlbut is pushing this intellectual depravity at Malcolm X as though he has found a clever way to discredit Malcolm’s perspective. This is what white racism does to white people: it makes them stupid. This is why I’ve often described whiteness as a cognitive trauma, a lifetime of conditioning which inhibits certain neural faculties and results in a certain kind of dissociative disorder. Only people who have dissociated themselves from their own humanity can happily picnic under swinging corpses.

(via zahgurim)

(via dekolonial)

Notes

radicalqueerbrownboy:

jcoleknowsbest:

sancophaleague:

The Move Organization is a Black Liberation group from Philadelphia started by John Africa in 1972. According to the group, the word MOVE is not an acronym. It means exactly what it says: MOVE, work, generate, be active. Their philosophy is everything that’s alive moves and If it didn’t, it would be stagnant, dead. Movement is their principle of Life.  Self Defense is also one of their principles of life and On May 13, 1985 they definitely showed that. The confrontation began when police came to their house over 100 strong with guns aimed and demanded the MOVE members come outside. Still angry from the 1978 confrontation with police, which resulted in 9 MOVE members being sentenced to 30 to 100 years in prison, they refused. The police then began throwing tear gas and opening fire at the house. The MOVE house had been built as a bunker and they began shooting back. After hours of shooting, the Police called for a helicopter and dropped a BOMB on the house. Yup, you read right. The cops dropped a bomb in the middle of a neighborhood in Philly. It’s Crazy how far America will go to subdue Black people. After the bomb dropped, 65 homes were destroyed and 11 people including 5 small children were killed. As the survivors of the MOVE house began to surrender, police continued to open fire at them with automatic weapons. One of the MOVE children actually ran into a burning house to avoid being shot by police. She would later be found burned to death. There is a great documentary that was released that illustrates the constant police brutality they faced and the bombing.
Today 29 years later, the MOVE 9, like many other black political prisoners, continue to sit in Prison and each year they are denied the right to parole. In a system that has always been so hell bent against us, one must wonder, When Will We Overcome?
 “Revolution starts with the individual. It starts with a person making a personal commitment to do what’s right. You can’t turn someone into a revolutionary by making them chant slogans or wave guns. To understand revolution, you must be sound. Revolution is not imposed upon another, it is kindled within them. A person can talk about revolution, but if they are still worshiping money, or putting drugs into their body, they obviously haven’t committed themselves to doing what’s right. Revolution is not a philosophy, it is an activity.” MOVE
Post by @KingKwajo

in case anyone forgot…

Whats this noise about “America not tolerating terrorists”?  ACAB

(via dekolonial)

11,497 notes

lightspeedsound:

Bethann Hardison on racism in the fashion industry.

From About Face: Supermodels then and now

(via dekolonial)

110,800 notes

shelbyworks:

All shook up by Ms. Emeke’s words during this interview for the No Gloss Film Festival. 
Its interesting to know that these issues are not isolated to people in the US. 
Nice to know that the issues she raises here are global.
Thanks cecileemeke

shelbyworks:

All shook up by Ms. Emeke’s words during this interview for the No Gloss Film Festival. 

Its interesting to know that these issues are not isolated to people in the US. 

Nice to know that the issues she raises here are global.

Thanks cecileemeke

(via dekolonial)

354 notes