The tiny fish Meiacanthus nigrolineatus, also known as the fanged blenny fish, doesn’t look like much, but it has a secret weapon to keep predators at bay: venom. This venom is used to stop predators in their tracks, causing their blood pressure to drop and their ability to eat the blenny to diminish. While most fang-based venom causes extreme pain … Continue reading
Michele Bangsboll and Nick Anderson’s wedding day was absolutely purr-fect.
The couple, who are both veterinarians and cat lovers, had two very special feline wedding guests by the names of Jeeves and Houdini at their March 25 nuptials at Spruce Mountain Ranch in Larkspur, Colorado.
Both kitties are rescues from Divine Feline in Denver, Colorado, where the couple volunteers in their free time.
“We thought of the idea to help promote our volunteer organization by featuring some adorable adoptable kittens in our wedding photos,” the bride told The Huffington Post. “Nick and I have always adored cats, which is why we decided to volunteer with the Divine Feline and have them be a part of our special day.”
The couple posed with the kitties during their bridal portrait session after the ceremony. And can we just say that they are exceedingly photogenic?
Only the bride and groom knew about the fur-tastic surprise.
“Everyone in the bridal party was freezing since we had been standing outside without jackets for a while and we told them all to wait for one more surprise and then we brought out the kittens,” Michele told HuffPost. “I think everyone’s voice jumped up an octave when they saw the cuteness overload and no one cared about being cold anymore. One of the groomsmen was even reluctant to go back inside when we were done with group photos because he wanted to hold them!”
Jeeves and Houdini will be looking for forever homes in a few weeks, once they are big enough to be neutered.
The couple also incorporated their love of animals into their cake toppers:
Their table names:
And even their shoes.
Michele and Nick first met in 2011 during their first semester of veterinary school at St. Matthew’s University on Grand Cayman Island. While they were there, they adopted two cats named Bam-Bam and Wiggles from a local shelter.
For more information on Divine Feline, you can visit their website. Below, more photos from the couple’s big day.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Kirsten Dunst has only been on Instagram for about a year, but she already knows how to werk it like a pro.
But what truly makes her Instagram account all that and a bag of chips are the fab throwback photos she posts of herself from the 1990s.
Dunst, who has been in the public eye since she co-starred in the 1994 film “Interview with the Vampire” at the age of 12, was also in other notable ’90s movies such as “Little Women” in 1994, “Jumanji” in 1995 and 1999’s “The Virgin Suicides,” “Drop Dead Gorgeous” and “Dick.”
She’s got some photographic nods from many of those films on her page. We have to tell you: It’s the bomb.
Hit Backspace for a regular dose of pop culture nostalgia.
Tina Fey, Alec Baldwin, Tom Hanks, Tracy Morgan, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Michael Moore, Padma Lakshmi and a whole host of other stars are teaming up for Stand for Rights: A Benefit for the ACLU. Donate now and join us at 7 p.m. Eastern on Friday, March 31 on Facebook Live. #standforrights2017
You can support the ACLU right away. Text POWER to 20222 to give $10 to the ACLU. The ACLU will call you to explain other actions you can take to help. Visit www.hmgf.org/t for terms.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
In an appalling move to keep low-wage workers locked in poverty, the Iowa legislature this week gave final approval to a bill that reverses local minimum wage increases already approved in several counties and bans cities and counties from setting any wage and benefit standards. It is the first time that a state has nullified local minimum wage ordinances that had already taken effect and forced jurisdictions to lower minimum wage rates that had previously been raised.
On a vote of 29-21, Republicans in the Iowa Senate voted unanimously for the bill, which passed the House earlier. After signing it today, Governor Terry Branstad will forever be known as the governor who robbed tens of thousands of Iowa’s lowest-paid workers of their pay raises.
Immediately, minimum wages for 29,000 workers in Iowa’s Johnson and Linn counties, who have received raises thanks to higher local minimums enacted in the last two years, will be reduced to the poverty-level federal minimum of $7.25 from $10.10 and $8.25 respectively. The Wapello County minimum wage, now $8.20, will also be cut back to $7.25. Another 36,000 low-wage workers in Polk County, the state’s most populous, will be denied the raises they were scheduled to receive starting April 1, when the local minimum is set to rise from $7.25 to $8.75 per hour. And this week, Lee County became the fifth county in Iowa to approve a higher minimum wage. Its first raise, to $8.20 starting May 1, will be reset to $7.25 as well. All told, more than 85,000 Iowans will be robbed of the raises they were to see over the next two years.
Eighty-four percent of these workers are 20 years of age or older. Nearly 60 percent work full-time. More than half are women. Thirty-one percent are parents. Almost a third are at least 40 years old. And now they face not only low pay, but pay cuts.
Who does this to people? How do they sleep at night? And, more practically, how did this happen?
It’s been nearly ten years since the statewide minimum wage was last raised in Iowa, and that was to $7.25 an hour shortly before the federal minimum wage became $7.25 as well. Since then, Republican lawmakers in the state have stymied all attempts to enact any increase, as have Republicans in Congress on the federal level. So Iowa has remained one of 21 states stuck at the shamefully low $7.25 minimum wage.
Faced with such obstruction, most states and more than 40 cities and counties have enacted higher minimum wages in recent years – including seven states and 18 cities and counties last year alone. In Iowa, starting two years ago, local county boards of supervisors began considering ways to raise the pay floor for their lowest-paid workers. In 2015, Johnson County, home to the University of Iowa and Iowa City, the state’s fifth largest, became the first county in Iowa to enact a local minimum wage ordinance. It raised the minimum wage in stages over three years, first to $8.20, then to $9.15, and hitting $10.10 this year. Linn, Polk, and Wapello counties enacted higher minimum wages in 2016, with their ordinances raising minimum pay to between $10.10 and $10.75 by 2019. Lee County supervisors began considering a higher wage plan last year – one they adopted this week ― to reach $10 by 2020. Local activists have been looking to spark additional campaigns in other cities and counties.
Seeing the momentum building, a gaggle of business lobbying groups, working hand in glove with their statehouse Republican allies, first sought to slow things down and undermine the county-based raises by getting some towns to opt-out of the increases. But undoing the county raises entirely, and stopping other localities from pursuing their own would likely take a Republican “trifecta” – GOP control of both chambers of the state legislature and the governor’s office. And, for nearly two decades, Republicans had not won total control of state government.
Then came the 2016 election. The majority which Democrats had maintained since 2007 in the Iowa Senate was lost to the Republicans last November. When the state legislature began its new session this year, Republicans had their “trifecta.” And the business lobbyists unleashed a slew of anti-worker bills, including HF295 to nullify and preempt local minimum wages.
In recent years, more and more cities have enacted local minimum wage laws as a means of improving jobs for local workers – especially when state legislatures refuse to act. In response, corporate lobbyists from groups like the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) are going over the heads of local leaders and pushing preemption laws to strip cities of the power to act. To date, 23 other states have enacted minimum wage preemption laws, including the notorious case of Alabama last year, which blocked a higher minimum passed by the City of Birmingham from taking effect.
But never before has a state government acted to reverse minimum wage increases already in place, and remove long-standing local self-governing rights in such a brazen fashion as today in Iowa. Unfortunately, they could well be joined shortly by equally heartless lawmakers in Missouri.
For the struggling workers and families harmed so directly by these lawmakers ― these pawns of the rich and of powerful business interests ― it is troubling to realize that there are elected “leaders” who would be so singularly devoted to ensuring that they stayed poor.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Over 100 million Americans ― close to a third of the total population ― suffer from neurological diseases such as Alzheimer’s, multiple sclerosis, migraines, epilepsy and spinal cord injury.
These conditions put an enormous financial strain on the health care system, totaling nearly $800 billion in annual costs, according to a new report published in the journal Annals of Neurology. To put that into perspective, the figure exceeds the U.S. military budget by over $100 million.
That number reflects the total cost of the nine most common neurological diseases, but the total costs related to the more than 1,000 known diseases of the nervous system would be much higher, the researchers noted.
Neurological disorders disproportionately affect older adults. The costs are expected to increase exponentially in the coming years, as the elderly population will double by 2050.
“The extraordinary rise in the total cost for neurological disease is first due to the dramatic increase in the number of people in the U.S. over the age of 65, who are especially susceptible to neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s,” Dr. Clifton Gooch, a neurologist at the University of South Florida and the study’s lead author, told The Huffington Post.
The gift of older age for most of Americans now brings the risk of debilitating neurological diseases for which no adequate treatment exists.”
Dr. Clifton Gooch
“Ironically,” he added, “the gift of older age for most of Americans now brings the risk of debilitating neurological diseases for which no adequate treatment exists, and the cost of that care will shortly rise to levels high enough to destabilize the health care system and damage the economy.”
These alarming numbers call attention to the urgent need for greater funding for neurological research and care. Unfortunately, research funding and progress for neurological ailments lags woefully behind other common ailments like heart disease and cancer.
“The findings of this report are a wake-up call for the nation, as we are facing an already incredible financial burden that is going to rapidly worsen in the coming years,” Gooch said in a statement. “Although society continues to reap the benefits of the dramatic research investments in heart disease and cancer over the last few decades, similar levels of investment are required to fund neuroscience research focused on curing devastating neurological diseases such as stroke and Alzheimer’s.”
Alzheimer’s is by far the costliest of all these conditions. More than 5.3 million Americans suffer from the disease, and this year for the first time, Alzheimer’s-related health care costs will surpass a quarter of a trillion dollars. By 2030, these costs are projected to exceed $600 million. An annual report from the Alzheimer’s Association, released last month, concludes rising rates of Alzheimer’s could eventually bankrupt Medicare.
A major component of these costs is labor and productivity lost due to disability. In the case of neurological diseases, disability-related costs are greater than any other category of illness, the paper’s authors noted.
With limited resources invested in neurological disorders, we haven’t made as much progress in understanding and treating these conditions as we should have. The crisis in neurological funding has led the U.S., along with Japan, to have the lowest growth rate in brain research worldwide.
To avoid potentially catastrophic effects on our health care system, that needs to change.
“What is urgently needed,” Gooch said, “is a sustained capital investment by the federal government into neurological research designed to find effective therapies and cures for these devastating diseases.”
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Consider the possibility of a world where Carrie Bradshaw didn’t where a tutu in the opening credits of “Sex and the City.” We know, you can’t even attempt to imagine it ― it’s too iconic.
Well, believe it or not, the tutu almost didn’t happen. Entertainment Weekly got its hands on never-before-seen footage of the opening credits that didn’t make the cut. (You can see the video above.)
Series creator Darren Star told EW that they filmed the opening bus sequence with two wardrobe choices. In one version, actress Sarah Jessica Parker wears a blue dress and trips. In the other ― the version we all know and love ― she’s splashed by a bus while wearing a tutu.
Check out the opening credits you’ve seen a million times by now if you want to compare the two sequences:
Tina Fey, Alec Baldwin, Mahershala Ali, Amy Poehler and a whole host of other stars are teaming up for Stand for Rights: A Benefit for the ACLU. Join us at 7 p.m. Eastern on Friday, March 31, on Facebook Live.
You can support the ACLU right away. Text POWER to 20222 to give $10 to the ACLU. The ACLU will call you to explain other actions you can take to help. Visit www.hmgf.org/t for terms. #StandForRights2017
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
Presidents may come and come go, but “30 Rock” is forever.
The beloved NBC sitcom created by Tina Fey might have aired its last episode years ago, but it feels just as politically relevant and hilarious today as it did when Jenna Maroney declared she was voting for Osama on an episode of “Hardball.”
Considering “30 Rock” helped to cement Fey as a TV legend, as well as give Alec Baldwin a mid-career boost that propelled him straight into the White House ― at least the one on “Saturday Night Live” ― it’s time to take a look back at some of the show’s best moments to help us navigate these trying times.
If you think about it, Jack Donaghy was essentially a Donald Trump prototype with the same flair for the dramatics, except with better hair.
Watch the video above to relive “30 Rock” at its best and remember, with Liz Lemon and the rest of the “TGS” crew by your side, you’re never alone.
Tina Fey, Alec Baldwin, Mahershala Ali, Amy Poehler and a whole host of other stars are teaming up for Stand for Rights: A Benefit for the ACLU. Join us at 7 p.m. Eastern on Friday, March 31 on Facebook Live.
You can support the ACLU right away. Text POWER to 20222 to give $10 to the ACLU. The ACLU will call you to explain other actions you can take to help. Visit www.hmgf.org/t for terms. #StandForRights2017
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
For decades, Latina authors have written empowering stories of women navigating family, culture and societal norms to find their true selves.
Books by Gabby Rivera and Alida Nugent have most recently helped paint a portrait of what it means to be a Latina feminist today. But even before these women put pen to paper, authors like Sandra Cisneros and Laura Esquivel were already paving the way with narratives centered on strong Latina women.
In the spirit of intersectional feminism, we compiled a list of 11 books by Latina authors that every feminist should read.
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
So do Mercedes Ibarra and Kikki Eder and for these two who saw marked improvements under ACA, dropping the vote to repeal and replace it last week still leaves them frightened about their healthcare future
Kikki Eder is 61 years old, formerly employed full time as an internal healthcare auditor for a hospital. After being laid off from her job in 2008 because of hospital cutbacks, she pursued a new career as an artist, fiercely pursuing a way to continue working and supporting herself. Eder was enjoying success as an artist until 2012, when she was diagnosed with lupus, suffering constant joint pain, fatigue, pleurisy, brain fog and anemia.
In 2013, her lupus became so debilitating she could no longer work at all. Her medical costs were overwhelming, premiums alone were over $800.00 a month, and since lupus is considered a pre-existing condition, she could not get affordable insurance. She was living on money saved for her retirement and help from family.
“The ACA and Covered California has been a Godsend,” said Eder. “It has made a difference because lupus has affected my life in every way possible physically, emotionally, financially, socially. I would never be getting the treatment from the doctors I can see now without it, it’s incredible. I’m functioning so much better with this level of medical care, I can make plans, do errands and leave the house.”
Even though the vote to repeal and replace the ACA was dramatically pulled minutes before the vote was to take place, Eder remains skeptical about future healthcare overhaul.
“I’m deeply concerned about what may come, I think this is only a temporary relief. I don’t trust or have any confidence in what may happen to those of us with chronic diseases, they don’t care about us at all,” she said.
Currently, Eder pays $294.00 a month for her PPO plan under Covered California, the pre-existing stipulation for lupus no longer an issue under the ACA, and a $3 co-pay for the more than 6 medications she takes. She was denied disability, consulted a lawyer to appeal the decision and has been waiting more than a year and a half for a hearing date.
Lupus affects 1.5 million Americans and more than 5 million globally. Lupus attacks the immune system, causing pain, inflammation, organ and tissue damage, extreme fatigue and can target anywhere in the body including causing serious facial skin rashes from the sun. Nearly 90% of lupus patients are women, the onset of the disease usually occurring between the ages of l5 and 44, with African-Americans 3 times more likely to get lupus than Caucasians and Latino women 2 times as likely to be hit. It is the leading cause of stroke, heart and kidney disease among young women and the number of patients diagnosed with lupus is growing yearly, especially among children and teenagers. In addition, there are few similarities between patients with lupus, it affects each individual differently, often making a firm diagnosis difficult for those who do not have access to specialists.
There is no cure for lupus, and we at Lupus LA, including Toni Braxton who is on our Board, are working hard to raise awareness to fund research to find a cure for this little known, major disease that is more common than MS, Cerebral Palsy and Cystic Fibrosis combined. Since 2000, Lupus LA has raised more than $10 million to fund research, create support groups and assist those diagnosed with lupus with critical medical information, patient conferences to meet doctors and specialists, scholarships for those in need, emergency grants and refer doctors. With global reach and recognition while based in LA, Lupus LA has become the “go to” for the latest in research regarding new drug therapies, world renown doctors and researchers, support systems and a staff committed to reaching out to everyone who has a question about the disease.(www.lupusla.org)
“Lupus LA has been a great resource for me since 2012,” said Eder. “There’s a support group in my area where I can get the latest information on new drugs, recommendations for doctors and specialists, meaningful coping strategies, resources and sharing symptoms with others who suffer from lupus.”
“The goal at Lupus LA is to be comprehensive and invaluable. We work directly with lupus patients and their families to help them navigate the challenges of their disease and we also work to raise worldwide awareness through our celebrity ambassador program to help educate the public about lupus,” said Adam Selkowitz, Chairman of Lupus LA.
Mercedes Ibarra enjoyed an active, full time career in the entertainment industry as a Flamenco dancer, spending her evenings and weekends performing in Spanish restaurants and theatres. Recently diagnosed with lupus, the 40 year found it harder and harder to continue her work.
“I was having crushing fatigue, severe muscle pain, migraines, hair loss, heart palpitations, high fevers and pelvic floor dysfunction making it harder and harder to dance,” said Ibarra. “I had to pare down my work, spending most of the week in bed and trying to work on the weekends.” When she couldn’t keep up her theatre and restaurant commitments, Ibarra turned to teaching dance two days a week. “The kids I teach know I have lupus,” she said. “I’m trying to continue to work while managing my symptoms.”
Ibarra credits Lupus LA for helping her find doctors at patient conferences. “The support group I attend once a month has had a big impact on my life. I’ve made friends who have been great, we share our experiences and how lupus impacts our families, our work, and it’s a new crossroad for me. I got great information at a patient conference that led me to a cardiologist and this has helped me a lot.”
Ibarra signed up for ACA coverage under Covered California in 2014. “It has made a huge difference. It was the first time I’ve been to a doctor in years, I couldn’t get coverage before. And the only reason I can do any teaching at all now is because the medical treatment I’m getting now is great, it’s helping me feel better so I can work.” she said.
Ibarra just got an increase for 2017 under the ACA, now paying $294.06 a month, with a $3 co-pay for the 5 different prescription medications she needs, as opposed to the $800 or $900 a month on the open market, if she could get insurance. “I’m still frightened even though the vote to repeal and replace was pulled,” she said. “ I’m sure they still want to replace it, but with what, I haven’t seen anything that provides the same level of access I have now, plus it is more expensive with less coverage.”
“Since the affordable care act has been in place in California, I have seen my patients have improved access to insurance and healthcare. They have also been able to contemplate different job options without fear of losing the health benefits. The variety of plans available has allowed patients to look for programs that best fit their needs,” said Dr. Jennifer Grossman, Rheumatologist and member of the Lupus LA Medical Advisory Board. “I am very nervous about the possibility of going backwards to a time where such programs don’t exist. If this happens, our patients will suffer.”
According to the latest Congressional Budget Office Report, more than 24 million fewer people will have coverage over the next decade if the ACA is overhauled, which again is currently being discussed, 14 million of those alone by next year if new action is taken, Eder and Ibarra likely among them. Without an immediate plan in place to cover those 24 million, they will be unable to sustain their current health status, with little chance for improved wellness, re-gain jobs and input into society. Under the ACA, they are paying less for coverage, getting better quality, more comprehensive, accessible care, resulting in marked improvements in their conditions.
Both women expressed concern that the perception of the ACA is that “it is some sort of giveaway, which it is not,” and also want those reading this to know they have held jobs, worked hard to support themselves and families, paid taxes and been responsible citizens. Rather, it is their medical condition that prevents them from working full time to get employer sponsored insurance and without their current insurance, all of the progress they have made improving and managing lupus, will send them spiraling backward, and their overall health will regress. Without the ability to get better, sustaining affordable healthcare becomes nearly impossible, thus increasing the cost for all of us.
“I’ve had a lot of stress over this,” said Eder. “My life depends on this insurance, and if it all goes away, this leaves me up in the air. Since lupus is a pre-existing condition I may not be able to get any insurance at all, then what am I supposed to do, leave the country?”
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
This week, something unique happened: a white supremacist was charged with terrorism. Unfortunately, acts like this are rarely called out for what they rightfully are. But they must be if we want to keep America safe.
Too often the terrorism label is reserved for those thought to be Muslim, while others suspected of equally heinous crimes tend to be deemed “mentally ill.” Thankfully, New York pursued accurate charges against James Harris Jackson, a 28-year-old white U.S. Army veteran who had reportedly traveled from Baltimore to New York for one single purpose: to kill black men.
Why did Jackson hate black men? He stated in an interview after his arrest that he was angered by interracial relationships because as he saw it, black men were “putt[ing] white girls on the wrong path.” Jackson, who authorities say is a member of a white supremacist group, added that “the white race is being eroded.”
Too often the terrorism label is reserved for those thought to be Muslim, while others suspected of equally heinous crimes tend to be deemed ‘mentally ill.’
Having arrived in New York, Jackson randomly chose 66-year-old African American Timothy Caughman and then repeatedly stabbed him to death. Worse, police say Jackson viewed the murder of Caughman as “practice prior to going to Times Square to kill additional black men.”
The response by elected officials in New York to thus demand that Jackson be charged as a terrorist should be commended. But I also must admit that I never expected it to happen. After all, Dylann Roof had brutally murdered nine African Americans in 2015 at a South Carolina church but was not slapped with a terrorism charge.
New York County District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance Jr. took a stand that other prosecutors should follow. When the grand jury indicted Jackson on terrorism charges, Vance explained bluntly in a statement Monday that Jackson had, “prowled the streets of New York for three days in search of a black person to assassinate in order to launch a campaign of terrorism.”
Why does it matter that someone like Jackson is charged with terrorism? Simple ― it makes us safer. It makes the vitally important point that terrorism doesn’t come in only one skin color, ethnicity or religion. That someone who is a white American could fit the bill, too.
That’s why charging people like Roof with only a hate crime is not sufficient. It neither conveys the seriousness of the crime nor does it make the bigger point that terrorism can be committed by a person who doesn’t have a foreign-sounding name or brown skin. “See something, say something” must apply to all suspicious behavior, not just Muslims. There is no white person exception for terrorism.
Furthermore, if media and law enforcement label all terrorists as terrorists, it opens up the possibility that those who witness radicalization before an actual attack happens will speak up and say something so that we don’t have another Chapel Hill shooting where innocent Muslims are gunned down or another Charleston church shooting where innocent African American lives are lost. But with such a tailored notion of terrorism, people may not understand the gravity of the situation until it’s too late.
Charging white supremacists like Jackson with terrorism makes the bigger point that terrorists are not only those with brown skin or foreign-sounding names.
Take the case of Dylann Roof. Prior to the attack, Roof told his friend his goal of wanting “to start a race war.” Yet his friend’s response was, “He would say it just as a joke. … I never took it seriously.” Adding to that, Roof had appeared in photos on Facebook openly donning symbols of white supremacy. Despite this, no one was alarmed enough to call the authorities.
And it certainly doesn’t help that U.S. President Donald Trump focuses only on what he calls the threat of “radical Islamic terrorism” but was silent when a right-wing white Canadian walked into a mosque in Quebec and murdered six Muslims. By narrowing the definition of terrorism in his rhetoric, Trump is furthering the narrative that the only terrorist threats come from Muslims and alienating other victims of terror in the process.
As the Southern Poverty Law Center notes, there has been a recent spike in the number of hate groups, especially neo-Confederate and anti-Muslim ones. According to CNN, there have been 35 incidents in which mosques have been targeted with arson, vandalism and threats between January 1 and late March of this year. And just a few days ago, a man was arrested in connection with an incident at a Colorado mosque that included rocks and a Bible being thrown through the Islamic center windows. These instances, some of which are deadly plots by right-wing extremists, rarely attract headlines and even more rarely do we hear the term terrorism used to describe them.
Glendon Scott Crawford is just one of many examples. Sentenced in December to 30 years in prison for trying to build a weapon of mass destruction to kill Muslim Americans, he was not charged with terrorism nor did we see wall-to-wall to media coverage about his case ― something we would’ve likely witnessed if he were Muslim. And while a U.S. attorney did refer to Crawford as a terrorist after the conviction, he was not charged with terrorism and thus most media outlets refrained from using that term.
While some may think deciding whether an incident is terrorism or not has been a tricky and sometimes subjective call, it shouldn’t be. The federal statute covering “domestic terrorism” is on its face broad enough to cover white supremacist plots. This federal law, which has been adopted almost verbatim by various states including New York, defines domestic terrorism as “activities that”:
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
The actions of the right-wing terrorists that are “dangerous to human life” clearly are intended to “intimidate” civilians. Jackson’s case in New York, to which the grand jury applied this statute, is just one example.
By narrowing the definition of terrorism in his rhetoric, Trump is furthering the narrative that the only terrorist threats come from Muslims and alienating other victims of terror in the process.
Going forward, premeditated attacks that are intended to frighten a community ― be it based on race, religion or ethnicity ― must be deemed terrorism. And law enforcement and media must use that term.
Many of the hate crimes we have seen in America are not just desecrations of buildings or places of worship. Rather, the goal is to intimidate a targeted civilian population. That is terrorism. Period.
It’s long past time that we put aside bias, political correctness or whatever is keeping us from acknowledging this reality and call the attacks by right-wing extremists what they are: terrorism. Until we treat these threats as seriously and dedicate resources to fighting them like we do with “radical Islamic terrorism,” none of us can truly be safe.
type=type=RelatedArticlesblockTitle=Related on WorldPost… + articlesList=58d97aa0e4b0f805b3227e96,589347b9e4b0af07cb6bc406,5891f68ae4b0c90eff01328c
— This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
This is site is run by Sascha Endlicher, M.A., during ungodly late night hours. Wanna know more about him? Connect via Social Media by jumping to about.me/sascha.endlicher.
