The Impeachment of Ted Cruz

The purpose of this blog post is to impeach the testimony given my Senator Ted Cruz on ABC This Week about the crimes of President Donald Trump against the people of Ukraine and the people of the United States. Specifically, what he said to George Stephanopoulos impeaches this "juror” even before the “trial”:

Now, I'm not suggesting that you can cook up fraudulent attacks on your opponents. This would be a very different allegation if someone would say: If the president had said, “Please concoct something that isn't real,” that would be qualitatively different. That's not what the transcript says. The transcript says, “Investigate what happened, find out what happened.”

Trump never said, “Investigate what happened, find out what happened,” in the redacted transcript released by the White House. He didn't ask for an honest investigation of corruption in Ukraine. He did precisely what Ted Cruz was so quick to deny he did; he asked the Ukrainians to cook up a fraudulent attack on his opponents. In effect, he said to President Zelenskyy “Please concoct something that isn't real.” They even left the proof in the redacted transcript, as we shall see.

It is well known that Trump never spoke of corruption in either of his calls with Zelenskyy. He also never spoke of “investigation” or “investigations,” although the eager-to-please Zenlenskyy mentioned “the investigation” four times, and “that investigation” once in the infamous 25 July call, including:

“...and in addition to that investigation..."

"...so, we will take care of that and will work on the investigation...”

“I would kindly ask you if you have any additional information that you can provide to us, it would be very helpful for the investigation..”

“I also want to ensure you that we will be very serious about the case and will work on the investigation.”

Now, the Ukrainian President may say that he felt no pressure, but back then he seemed more obsessed with Trump's “investigation” than with the war with Russia that is killing thousands of his own countrymen.

While Trump never spoke of corruption or investigation, he made it very clear to Zelenskyy what “the investigation” was expected to find. Right after he famously said, “I would like you to do us a favor though,” he goes on to elaborate on his expected return:

“I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike... I guess you have one of your wealthy people... The server, they say Ukraine has it.”

Later, on a call-in to Fox and Friends, 22 Nov., Trump put a little more meat on the bones of these conspiracy theory buzzwords:

Donald Trump: “A lot of it had to do, they say, with Ukraine. You know, it’s very interesting, it is very interesting. They have the server, right? From the DNC, Democratic National Committee.”

Brian Kilmeade: “Who has the server?”

Donald Trump: “The FBI went in, and they told them, 'Get out of here, we’re not giving it to you.' They gave the server to CrowdStrike, or whatever it’s called, which is a company owned by a very wealthy Ukrainian, and I still want to see that server. You know, the FBI has never gotten that server. That’s a big part of this whole thing. Why did they give it to a Ukrainian company?”

Steve Doocey: “Are you sure they did that? Are you sure they gave it to the Ukraine?”

Donald Trump: “ Well, that is what the word is. And that’s what I asked, actually, in my phone call, if you know. I mean, I asked it very point-blank, because we’re looking for corruption.”

Even if there are legitimate areas of investigation with regards to Ukrainian involvement in the 2016 US election, the conspiracy theory that Crowdstrike is a Ukrainian company, or owned by a Ukrainian, and that it is hiding the DNC server in Ukraine is utter nonsense. But does anybody seriously think that the leader of a country at war can risk the consequences of doing an investigation, and coming back and telling Donald Trump the truth? That his conspiracy theories about Ukraine, Crowdstrike, and The Server, are so much phooey? Of course, Trump was demanding that they “concoct” something up. Everybody seems willing to cover up this deeply criminal aspect of Trump's corruption with the euphemism of “investigation of the 2016 election.” This was to be an “investigation” Trump Style, an investigation designed to reach a foregone conclusion.

Crowdstrike

CrowdStrike is the “who ya gonna call” of cybersecurity. It is a publicly traded US company based in Irvine, CA with $250 million in revenues last year. It was founded in by two cybersecurity experts, George Kurtz, and Dmitri Alperovitch, that left the software security firm McAfee after Intel bought it, and Gregg Marston, now retired, from an IT security provider owned by McAfee. No Ukrainians, although Alperovitch, now a US citizen, was born in Russia, and came to the US as a teenager

It partners with more than 40 IT companies, including IBM, AWS, Dell, and Google Cloud. Its thousands of customers include Rackspace, Amazon, Verizon, Pacific Life, Well Cornell Medicine, Union Bank, Tribune Media, Sony, Sega, Prime Insurance, Mack Industries, ADP, Berkshire Bank, Hyatt, Pokémon, and the City of San Diego. It has also been widely used by both Republicans and Democrats, including Bernie 2020 and Emily's List.

Maybe the confused mind of Donald Trump “concocted” his “Ukraine company” nonsense from stuff being promoted along those lines by ultra-right and pro-Putin websites all over the Internet. This excerpt from Liberty Blitzkrieg is a “perfect” example of facts woven together in such a way that the weak-minded might well conclude that Crowdstrike is a Ukrainian company:

The firm’s CTO and co-founder, Dmitri Alperovitch, is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, a think tank with openly anti-Russian sentiments that is funded by Ukrainian billionaire Victor Pinchuk.

The Russian immigrant Alperovitch is Senior Fellow for Cyber Statecraft Initiative. Victor Pinchuk is one of 48 members of the Atlantic Council International Advisory board, along with Rupert Murdoch, who probably also funds it. Nevertheless, Russian sources, like Sputnik, have been promoting the view:

{T]hat some of the key assumptions underpinning the [Mueller] report's entire argument had been verified by entities with a vested interest in Ukraine.

Trump was parroting Russian propaganda about Ukraine to Zelenskyy, and asking him to verify it with a bogus investigation.

The Server, The Server..

There was no “The Server,” OK? The Democratic National Committee didn't run on “a” server, it ran on a great many servers, most of them cloud servers, and lots of them got hacked by the Russians. They had to “decommission more than 140 servers,” according to 2018 DNC court filings. CrowdStrike did much of the detective work and post-attack security. Ever since they published their conclusions about Russian government responsibility for the DNC hacks, they have been on the hit-list of a curious collection of groups, and Donald Trump.

Also, when the right-wing media pundits proclaim “the patent importance of the physical server system to the FBI," they only reveal their own ignorance. I've been in IT for half a century, and I'm here to tell you that you don't do a cyber investigation on the physical server. It's not like you're going to find the hacker's fingerprints on it. What you need is an image of the server's storage, and if possible, its memory dump at the time of the breach. That is the subject of your investigation. Once the image is taken, that is everything you need. You never examine the “physical server” even to the extent that there is one in cloud computing. The server itself is wiped clean and rebuilt so the enterprise can carry on after the attack.

When deputy assistant attorney general for the DOJ’s National Security Division Adam Hickey appeared on a panel before the House Judiciary Committee, 22 October 2019, and was asked by Debbie Lesko (R-AZ 8th District):

“Looking back at the FBI’s activities investigating the 2016 election, it has been reported that the FBI never obtained the original servers from the Democratic National Committee that had allegedly been hacked by Russia, instead relying upon imaged copies. First of all, is that correct?”

Hickey simply said that they got what they needed from Crowdstrike, noting that “it’s pretty common for us to work with a security vendor in connection with an investigation of a computer intrusion.”

If you think you may have been hacked, the way this works is that you don't just call the police, because they don't drop everything and come over to investigate your systems. You call a cyber-security company, like CrowdStrike, and if they find evidence of an illegal intrusion, then you have something to make the cops, or feds, take you seriously, for what that's worth. The sad truth of cyber-crime is that the victim almost always pays for the investigation. That's just the way it is. So, there was really nothing to see here with regards to charges made by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), in the Putin-friendly Consortium News and promoted by Moscow-based Sputnik that:

Major deficiencies include depending on a DNC-hired cybersecurity company for forensics.

These claims promoted by Trump have absolutely no basis in fact, although they appear to have their origins with Paul Manafort, and have been strongly supported by many Russian backed, and right-wing websites. It should not be overlooked that these conspiracy theories Trump was pushing onto the Ukrainians are really stupid-crazy, and have been refuted many times by NBC News, Axios, Daily Beast, Buzzfeed, Wired, and many others.

Ironically, Ted Cruz, in his rush to deny something Stephanopoulos never charged, revealed the real extent of the corruption Trump was demanding of Zelenskyy. He wasn't just demanding what both Republicans and Democrats have deceptively referred to as “an investigation of the 2016 elections.” Trump let Zelenskyy know that “the investigation” had to support his loony theory about Crowdstrike and “The Server” hidden in Ukraine. Trump provided Zelenskyy with “alternate facts” to find, along with his marching orders for an investigation. Trump wasn't just asking Nolenskyy to do an investigation, he was inviting him to a meeting in Fantasyland.

I rest my case.

Syria is the Paris Commune of the 21st Century!

Click here for our posts on the 2016 US Election Click here for a list of our other blogs on Syria Click here for a list of our other blogs on Libya

The Whistleblower's Catch 22 Denied!

Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire claimed that he didn't have to deliver the whistleblower's complaint to congress in seven days because it was about Trump and he isn't under the supervision of the DNI. While the focus of the whistleblower's complaint most certainly is the extortion of Ukraine by Trump in demanding dirt on Biden while withholding congressionally mandated arms from a country fighting a Russian invasion, the DNI still should have forwarded the complaint to congress within the statutory limit because it also contained a small complaint about the abuse of an NSC code-word server that almost certainly would have fallen under the purview of the DNI.

In his opening statement to congress, DNI Maguire made this excuse for his failure to deliver the whistleblower's complaint to it in a timely manner:

Joseph Maguire: 00:45:22 Let me also discuss the issue of urgent concern. When transmitting a complaint to me, the Inspector General took the legal position that because the complaint alleges matters of urgent concern and because he found the allegations to be credible, I was required onto the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act to forward the complaint to our oversight committees within seven days of receiving it. As we have previously explained in our letters, urgent concern is a statutorily defined term. To be an urgent concern, the allegations must in addition to being classified, assert a flagrant, serious problem, abuse or violation of law and relate to the funding, administration or operation of an intelligent activity within the responsibility of the Director of National Intelligence. However, this complaint concerns conduct by someone outside the Intelligence Community unrelated to funding, administration or operation of an intelligence activity under my supervision. Because the allegation on the face did not appear to fall in the statutory framework my office consulted with the United States Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel and we included the Inspector General in those consultations.

On Fox New's Sunday morning Journal Editorial Report, Paul Gigot argued similarly that the whistleblower complaint didn't have standing:

The issue is—the whistleblower is suppose to be about intelligence abuses, the president is not formally a part of the intelligence community.

Ever since Maguire made this lame excuse for running straight to the White House with a whistleblower's complaint about the White House, this has been a frontline argument of the pro-Trump crowd. It is also the basis of their claim that this informat isn't entitled to the protections given to the whistleblower by the Act—the one thing that could give the president's death threats legal teeth.

This is their ultimate Catch 22 to this whistleblower: True, anyone going through proper channels and procedures to inform the government of wrong-doing in the Intelligence Community(IC) will be covered by the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, but — Catch 22 — POTUS isn't a member of the IC, you're not covered! Who knew?

This might well have been the case except for the fact that the whistleblower also complained about the misuse of IC assets. From the Whistleblower's Complaint:

White House officials told me that they were “directed” by WhiteHouse lawyers to remove the electronic transcript from the computer system in which such transcripts are
typically stored for coordination, finalization, and distribution to Cabinet level officials.

Instead, the transcript was loaded into a separate electronic system that is otherwise used to store and handle classified information of an especially sensitive nature. One White
House official described this act as an abuse of this electronic system because the call did not contain anything remotely sensitive from a national security perspective.

Some have dismissed the Whistleblower's complaint as hearsay. “White House officials told me,” etc.,etc. Be that as it may, like its account of Trump's conversation with Zelenskyy, this is another revelation from the Whistleblower's complaint that has panned out.

My response to those who repeat Zelenskyy said there was no pressure

We now know that phone memo wasn't the only “politically sensitive” document being improperly stored by lawyers on a NSC code-word security system. The DNI is on the NSC, so those “intelligence abuses” almost certainly should be covered by the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, even if the POTUS isn't. That alone is enough to give the Whistleblower's complaint standing. That alone was reason enough to transmit the complaint to congress within the statutory seven days. Maguire got it wrong.

Many a criminal thought he has committed the perfect crime, and the FBI wouldn't be involved because he was careful not to commit any federal offenses, but he slipped up when he used the US mail in his scheme. Trump may think he had a “perfect”  conversation with Zelenskyy because he choice his words carefully and because the president isn't covered by the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act but he may have slipped up when he hid the evidence on an NSC code-word security system.

Still, I fear for this whistleblower. Unlike your usual wiseguy informant, our hero can't hide from enemies behind the anonymity of the Federal Witness Protection Program. Not with Bill Barr at Main Justice.

Syria is the Paris Commune of the 21st Century!

Click here for our posts on the 2016 US Election Click here for a list of our other blogs on Syria Click here for a list of our other blogs on Libya

Friday's Global Climate Action Los Angeles in Pictures

People packed the streets when marching from Pershing Square to City Hall

Paul Krehbiel, a familiar face at progressive protests in Los Angeles

Traffic in downtown LA was brought to a standstill as protesters filled the streets.

Global Climate Protest in LA on Friday 9/20/2019-Marching to City Hall

Marching down the hill

Marchers on Main St began filling in City Hall Park

Los Angeles City Hall Park hasn't looked this good since Occupy LA in October 2011

Global Climate Protest in LA on Friday 9/20/2019 City Hall Park

Readers of this blog know that I have long stressed that white supremacy isn't just the ideology of domination of white men over people of color, it's also about the domination of the Earth. These protesters get it!

They raised their important banner high in the center of the park.

Looking backward

Global Climate Protest in LA on Friday 9/20/2019 - "The wrong ICE is melting"

This was my favorite chant!

Rally on the steps of City Hall

City Hall Park was packed!

Many colorful and thought provoking signs were carried by the protesters.

Planet over Profit

"System Change not Climate Change!"

"Wake Up"

People demanded the major come out, shouting "Eric, Eric."

But first a line of LAPD brass formed a line at the top of the stairs.

Help!

Denial will not save us

Dear Big Oil - Take Responsibility - Tax Oil 

Sign reads: You are going to die of old age. We are going to die of climate change.

"This Generation's Resistance Will Ensure Our Existence"

The Power of the People will never be defeated!

In the end, Mayor Garcetti was forced to come out and address the protesters.

Mayor Garcetti was surrounded by LAPD brass as he spoke.

I’m struggling here. How can actual adults - thousands apparently- believe it’s the child has created this stir and not the massive media mobilisation engaged by the corporate greenwashing industry? Have they even checked the specific demands being promoted? https://t.co/Z1LzTQY5Cw

— Tim Hayward (@Tim_Hayward_) September 21, 2019

These "anti-imperialists" just don't get it. They have no belief in people power and think everyone is a puppet of some western imperialist.

Global Climate Protest in LA on Friday 9/20/2019

Venice Community Organizer Lydia Ponce

Syria is the Paris Commune of the 21st Century!

Click here for our posts on the 2016 US Election Click here for a list of our other blogs on Syria Click here for a list of our other blogs on Libya

Why didn't state & federal officials release the name of the Odessa shooter?

Did they withhold his name so they could scrub is social media profile first?

After Texas authorities released the name of the El Paso shooter - Patrick Crusius, we quickly learned that he was a white supremacist Trump supporter, and that he left a racist manifesto that showed that he was strongly motivated by Trump's genocidal rants about immigrates of color "invading" the United States via the southern border. From their decision today, it's clear they wish they hadn't done that.

Santino William Legan,the 19-year old white man who murdered three people of color, and injured a dozen more, in a shooting spree at the Garlic Festival in Gilroy, California, on July 28, 2019, also seemed to be motivated by white supremacy. In an Instagram post before the shooting, he advised people to read Might is Right, a 1890's pamphlet very popular with white supremacists and neo-Nazis.

With Saturday's Odessa/Midland shooter, they didn't repeat that "mistake." They have unveiled a new policy. They are keeping the shooters name a secret, because they “Don’t want to give him the notoriety.” They have only said that he is a white male about 30 years old. They know his exact age, of course.

They want us instead, to focus on the victims, as though that might help us understand why they were shot, and help us prevent such tragedies in the future. That is nonsense.

Never mind that to stop these mass murders we need to understand the motivations of the shooter. Never mind, the shooter may have associates capable of similar actions, and there are undoubtedly people in the shooter's circle that could shed light on that crucial fact - provided they know who the shooter is. Making his name public is not a question of giving notoriety to the dead shooter. It's a question of public safety.

In The making of Trump's American Holocaust, I wrote

US President Donald Trump speaks the language of mass extermination while his administration prepares the infrastructure for it. He calls refugees “invaders." He says the inner-cities are “infested.” By speaking of people of color as an “infestation,” Trump has called forth the “exterminators.” In recent attacks in Gilroy, El Paso, and beyond, we are seeing the frightful results.
...
While Trump talks the language of genocide, his administration is using an immigration crisis it largely created, to justify the building of concentration camps. It tries keep any public knowledge of what it is doing to a minimum, while using the occasional “reveals” to acclimate that public to the inhumane treatment of people of color by its government. And now he has brought back the federal death penalty. That some of his unhinged supporters should “get ahead of the program,” as we have seen recently in Gilroy and El Paso, may be unintended, but it certainly is a predictable consequence of the overall direction he is pointing.

Seth Aaron Ator, the Odessa shooter

So now it looks like they are engaged in a cover-up. Is it because they don't want us to know if this mass shooter is a continuation of that pattern, and another tragic result of Trump's fear-mongering?

UPDATE: Odessa city officials, not state or federal officials, have revealed that the name of the shooter is Seth Aaron Ator, 36, of Odessa, Texas. Now we can begin to unravel this mystery. Check back for future updates.


US Daily Report is saying:

Not much is known about the mass murderer because most of his social media pages seem to have vanished.

And some people have taken to social media to ask why do authorities reveal the identities of killing suspects rapidly when they are black or Muslim, and delay the process when the mass murderer is white.

One person asked: “The black kid’s name was made pubic very fast, but now we have the name of the Texas shooter finally. Seth Aaron Ator. Look I would rather they never shared any of these peoples names, but they can’t have this double standard.”

Another commenter had this to say: “Everything about #SethAtor has been scrubbed off social media why? What are the authorities hiding about this Killer? My Life has been edited about him. What in the hell is going on with this Midland Odessa Shooting Terrorist.”

In my own search, I went straight to the Internet Archive Wayback Machine hoping I would find something there, and while I got four hits on "Seth Aaron Ator," it would appear I got there too late. I got a couple of 404 Not Found errors, one said "Hrm. The Wayback Machine has not archived that URL." Then why store a link to it? One said simply "Purged Account."

And now his Linkedin Profile, which was there only minutes ago (I found it from this Heavy.com piece. "There is one LinkedIn page with Ator’s name attached to it." Why didn't I make a screen shot.) has been replaced with "This profile is not available." This leaves little doubt the his social media profile was being scrubbed even as I was writing this.

For a history of how the second amendment was originally designed as a measure to support slavery, and its application to people of color, see my Murders of Alton Sterling & Philando Castile: No 2nd Amendment rights for blacks.

There is also this, indicating he was a Republican:

Posted from long before the shooting. You can search with a date filter. pic.twitter.com/OE3MgcPrgH

— Todd Melcher (@Immersionpv) September 1, 2019

I did find his MyLife profile in Google's webcache. This time I took screenshots:

Syria is the Paris Commune of the 21st Century!

Click here for our posts on the 2016 US Election Click here for a list of our other blogs on Syria Click here for a list of our other blogs on Libya

Climate Change and the 1st Great Replacement: Why white supremacy is toxic for the Earth

On Monday, the Trump administration announced two devastating policy changes. One change will make it harder for poor people to immigrant to the US, the other will basically gut the Endangered Species Act. While it may not be obvious to those in the habit of thinking of white supremacy as an issue only in areas of race, ethnicity, immigration, nationality, and so forth, but both of these measures are driven by the same white supremacist outlook. The same view that sees white men as superior to all other people, with therefore, the right to dominate them, and use them as they see fit, also gives the “white race” the “right” to dominate the Earth, and used all of it, and not just its human resources, as they see fit. It is important to understand that white supremacy isn't just the view that white men have a “god given right” to dominate people of color, it is also the view that they have the right to dominate the Earth, and everything on it. That is the reason why almost all white supremacists are also climate change deniers. If they are just exercising their “god given rights,” then “he's in control,” so what could go wrong?

In the first place, it should be called white-male supremacy, as Rep. Steve King, who supports the racist “The Great Replacement” conspiracy theory, is pointing out with his belief in the necessity for rape and incest. The only reason it isn't is that those who imposed white supremacy on the people of the Earth in the 17th century assumed the domination of women by men was a settled matter and a foregone conclusion. While there was great struggle over the question of whether the US would be a country where slavery was legal, there was never any question that it would be a society based on patriarchy. That being said, Southern slavery would change nature of patriarchy forever.

Although patriarchy and misogyny obviously pre-dated the invention of the white race, and white supremacy by thousands of years, the capitalist development of patriarchy would be powerfully influenced by the various sexual, reproductive, family, and marriage practises developed along with Southern slavery. So many of today's headlines find their roots in the US slave economy. For example, the relative acceptance of Trump administration's practise of separating immigrant children from their parents, is one result of a culture that regularly separated African American, and Native American children from their parents whenever there was money to be made by doing so, as is the case now. It was also generally considered “legitimate” for a plantation master to take sexually any female slave as young as fourteen, if that rings any bells. But I digress. That is not the topic of this essay.

The first Great Replacement

While the first known literary reference to “white people” as a race took place in England on 29 October 1613, when an actor in blackface, playing the role of an African king, looked out over his English audience and said “I see amazement set upon the faces/Of these white people, wond’rings and strange gazes.” in a performance of Jacobean playwright Thomas Middleton's “The Triumphs of Truth,” it wasn't used in any law until 1691. That was in a Virginia law titled “An act for suppressing outlying Slaves.” In the intervening 80-plus years, culminating in the Virginia Slave Codes of 1705, the “white race” was invented, largely in the Maryland-Virginia areas of colonial North America. It was invented in the slave-holding colonies of Virginia and Maryland, and then exported to Europe, and the rest of the world. Even as late as 1680 Morgan Godwyn, “found it necessary to explain” to their European readers that “white people” was the new term for Englishmen or Christians over here.

Context1607 First permanent British settlement founded in Virginia, North America
1619 The London East Amazon Company is created
1619 Circulation of blood is discovered
1620 Puritan Pilgrim Father establish colony in New England
1652 Dutch establish first colony in South Africa
1652 Dutch establish colony (present day New York) in North America
1660 Royal Society (scientific organization) founded in London
1664 New York taken from Dutch by British
1670 Britain establishes Hudson Bay Company in Canada
1682 French claim large territories in Louisiana
1687 Sir Isaac Newton publishes his "Principia"
1687 Lloyds of London insurance company established
1694 Bank of England founded

The cobbling together of all the fair-skinned Europeans from England, Ireland, Scotland, France, Germany, Italy, Russian, etc. into a new synthetic so-called racial grouping could be called the first “Great Replacement,” in that all those individual cultures and heritages, some dating back thousands of years, became submerged and diluted in the new synthetic “white culture.” This change was not easily accepted by many, so a certain amount of coercion was involved. Hence, the growing use of “white” to define people in law after 1691, first as a synonym for “Christian” or “English,” and eventually as a replacement for them. Increasingly, to vote, to own land, to exercise the ordinary rights of citizenship, the light-skinned colonial American had to renounce his French, German, Irish or English identity, and declare himself “white."

Nor did this “Great Replacement” confine itself to the living. It insisted on rewriting history, so that in all the books going forward, the history of all sorts of people who never called themselves “white,” or even cared about skin-color, such as the ancient Greeks and Romans, where posthumously declared “white,” and their history plagiarised as “the history of white people.”

The “white race” was invented once the colonial rulers decided that plantation labor shortages could best be met by importing African laborers to work as slaves. Prior to that, these North American plantations were unique in relying mainly on European labor, mainly indentured servants, but also some wage laborers, increasingly so as servants ran "out of time.” In this period, white supremacy was also born, as an inseparable part of the fraudulent application of the label “white” to a group of people for the purpose of dominating other people. Fraudulent, because as the “color” of sunlight, white carried with it intrinsically positive values for ten thousand years before it was self-applied to a group of people that, although light-skinned as compared to others, aren't really white. Paradoxically, the application of the label “white” to some people, happened at the same time (1666-1672) Isaac Newton, was proving that so-called “white” light, was really composed of all the colors of the rainbow.

White supremacy means the white man is the master of the universe

When it came to kidnapping Africans and bringing them to America, the argument was that the white plantation owners had the “right” to enslave Africans because they were sub-human, but when it came to removing the native peoples from their land, the argument was that they had a right to land that was uninhabited by other humans, and the since they have declared the current inhabitants sub-human, they had a right to the land, and everything on, or beneath it. This was the reasoning behind everything from the first Jamestown expansions, to the Indian Removal Act of 1830 and Manifest Destiny.

This is why white supremacy isn't just toxic for people of color, it is toxic for the Earth

From the beginning, land take from the native peoples was used to get the poor and laboring class Europeans to buy into white supremacy. While the wholesale adoption of African slavery was a solution to their plantation labor problem, and defused the “dangerous” situation created when European and African bondsmen revolted together, at the same time it improvised many of the now unemployed, but newly “knighted white” workers. It became routine to defuse this situation by telling the young men to “go West, young man, go West” to serve on the bleeding edge of the struggle to confiscate new native lands. Since, such privileges where typically, by law, afforded only to white people, those that could join the white race, were forced, over time, to do so.

Rudyard Kipling's “The White Man's Burden” (1899) wasn't just a call for white men to rule people of color, it was a call for the US to build an empire. It was a call for white men to rule the world. A week after the poem was published, the US Congress ratified the Treaty of Paris. as a result the U.S. established geopolitical hegemony upon islands and peoples in two oceans and in two hemispheres: the Philippines and Guam in the Pacific Ocean,Cuba and Puerto Rico in the Atlantic Ocean.

From the beginning, not only did white supremacy as an outlook set white men in destructive opposition to humanity as a whole, it also became the outlook that was used to justify the most ruthless imperialist exploitation of the Earth. Their belief in their own omnipotents, not only with regards to people of color, but with regards to nature itself, leads to the conclusion that climate change isn't a problem, at least not one that can't be resolved by population reduction.

See also:
The making of Trump's American Holocaust

Syria is the Paris Commune of the 21st Century!

Click here for our posts on the 2016 US ElectionClick here for a list of our other blogs on SyriaClick here for a list of our other blogs on Libya