Alabama 15 september 1963: vier zwarte meisjes vermoord, met een herdenking door Martin Luther King en John Coltrane

Op
15 september 1963 hebben witte fascisten van de KKK dynamiet laten
ontploffen in een baptistenkerk in Alabama, daarmee vermoordde dit
geteisem vier zwarte meisjes tussen de elf en veertien jaar…..

De ongeëvenaarde en geweldige zwarte voorvechter voor gelijke rechten (tevens dominee) Martin Luther King, plus de legendarische saxofonist John Coltrane (met het nummer Alabama), waren onder de mensen die de
meisjes herdachten met een kerkdienst en een paar concerten.

Vergeet voorts niet dat men in de vorige eeuw tot de 70er jaren in zuidelijke staten van de VS, als Alabama niet zelden gelynchte zwarten in een boom zag hangen…. Dit zou in 1950 zijn gestopt, echter het ging wel degelijk nog door tot ver in de 60er jaren, ook al liep het aantal terug, het was er niet minder gruwelijk en barbaars om…… (er werden overigens ook zwarten levend verbrand en dat samen met het lynchen van zwarten werd voor het overgrote deel door witten gedaan die op zondag in de kerk zaten……)


Hier de ook al legendarische zangeres Billie Holiday met het nummer ‘Strange Fruit’ dat over dat lynchen ging, een live nummer uit 1959:

 

In het bericht van Brasscheck TV een paar video’s, waar de tweede tevens aandacht heeft voor de
aanhouding van
King* in Birmingham, waar eerder dat jaar, april 1963, ‘onlusten waren uitgebroken’, destijds bedoelde men daarmee dat de witte politie tekeerging tegen geweldloze gekleurden die demonstreerden tegen de rassenscheiding….. (delen van het mooie nummer Birmingham van Randy Newman komen nog een paar keer voorbij) Helaas kan ik die video niet overnemen, ondanks dat deze op YouTube zou moeten staan, vandaar voor de echte tweede video zie het origineel.

Alabama

History:
Coltrane and King

Remembering
the intensity of the struggle

Alabama – The Power of
Jazz

On Sunday, September 15, 1963,
twelve sticks of dynamite were placed in the 16th Street Baptist
Church in Birmingham, Alabama. The bomb had been planted by the white
supremacy group, the KKK, and killed four young black girls between
the ages of 11-14.

John
Coltrane wrote the song ‘Alabama’ in response to this event and
patterned his playing in the song after Martin Luther King’s speech
at the funeral for the four girls.

Coltrane also performed in eight
benefit concerts for King in 1964 and recorded several other songs
inspired by the civil rights movement called, ‘Reverend King’,
‘Backs Against the Wall’ and his album Cosmic Music dedicated to
Martin Luther King.

The back
story to the bombing

Most people are aware of the church
bombing in Birmingham that killed four children in 1963.

Missing from the story is why THIS
particular church was targeted.

It’s a triumphant story, but also
sheds a light on the diabolical hatred that infected (and still
infects) many Americans.

=============================

Zoals
gezegd: de tweede video in het origineel kan ik niet overnemen, dus hier een
paar andere video’s over de bomaanslag en met o.a. de toespraak van King
n.a.v. deze aanslag (luisteren mensen, King was een uiterst intelligente activist en zonder meer een begaafd spreker [en schrijver]): 

 

 

De volgende video gaat over de hiervoor al aangehaalde vreedzame demonstratie tegen de rassenscheiding door de gekleurde bevolking van Birmingham, dit gebeurde zoals gezegd eerder dat jaar in april 1963. King sprak daar ook en werd gearresteerd door de witte politie van die stad…:

En nog een door King ingesproken brief vanuit de gevangenis, duurt even maar meer dan de moeite waard:

 

Voor meer berichten over Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, BLM (Black Lives Matter), vervolging minderheden, Black Panthers, en/of racisme, klik op het desbetreffende label, direct onder dit bericht

Schietpartijen VS gevolg van witte overheersing die is ‘gefundeerd’ in de grondwet

John
McEvoy van The Canary schreef het verslag van een interview met
Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz, een historicus die is gespecialiseerd in het
tweede amendement van de grondwet in de VS. Het interview o.a. naar
aanleiding van de laatste meervoudige moord door een neonazi in El Paso (deze neonazi werd gepord door het 666 beest Trump, die latino’s uitmaakte voor moordenaars, verkrachters, drugsdealers en dieven).

Dunbar-Ortiz
betoogt in het interview dat witte overheersing is ingebakken in de
grondwet van de VS. Veelal wordt het tweede amendement gezien als
bescherming van burgers tegen een autoritaire overheid, die schijt
heeft aan de rechten van de burgers. Ter verdediging tegen zo’n
overheid zou het volk recht hebben op wapenbezit (en in een aantal
staten mogen deze zelfs openlijk worden gedragen)……

Dunbar-Ortiz
betoogt dat het tweede amendement veel meer was bedoeld voor witte
milities die zich moesten kunnen verdedigen tegen de oorspronkelijke
volkeren van de VS >> lees: het verjagen van de oorspronkelijke
volkeren, gepaard gaande met het uitroeien van hele
stammen van die oorspronkelijke volkeren in de VS…… Anders gezegd: de witte immigranten voerden een genocide uit op de oorspronkelijke bevolking, samen met de genocide in Latijns-Amerika, de grootste genocide ooit…….. Deze genocide ging verder gepaard met martelingen, verkrachtingen en de gruwelijkste vormen van moord…….

Deze
milities werden later ook ingezet om weggelopen slaven op te pakken
of opstanden onder slaven uiterst gewelddadig te onderdrukken…..
Het zal je niet verbazen dat deze milities later opgingen in de Ku
Klux Klan (KKK)………

Dunbar-Ortiz zegt niet te geloven dat Hollywood films en tv series bijdragen aan geweld, het zal je niet verbazen dat ik het daar volkomen mee oneens ben. Dagelijks wordt men in de VS gehersenspoeld met leugens als zouden ‘Amerikanen’ (VS burgers) de goede partij zijn en alles wat van buiten de VS komt of een andere religie dan het christendom aanhangt, is fout….. Opvallend ook dat de VS bevolking veelal als slachtoffer van buitenlandse agressie wordt neergezet, terwijl de praktijk het volkomen tegenovergestelde laat zien……* Tevens wordt de geschiedenis van de VS vervalst middels die films en series……. (hetzelfde gebeurt overigens in de rest van wat men het westen noemt, voorbeelden te over, ook op de Nederlandse tv…..)

Lees het verder uitstekende artikel van Dunbar-Ortiz, waarin zij de zaak
veel uitvoeriger beschrijft (heb het artikel overgenomen van TheCanary):

Amid
mass shootings, leading historian says ‘white supremacy is baked
into the US constitution’

John
McEvoy
   
6th
August 2019

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor Amid mass shootings, leading historian says ‘white supremacy is baked into the US constitution’

The Second
Amendment
 of
the US Constitution becomes the focus of intense and
polarised 
debate in
the wake of each mass shooting. It is a debate 
pierced by
economic interest groups and fierce emotional impulses; yet history
rarely enters the conversation at the exact moment that it’s most
needed.

After
the recent 
white
supremacist
 mass
shooting in 
El
Paso
 (the eighth
worst
 in
recent US history), 
The
Canary
 spoke
with leading historian on the Second Amendment, Roxanne Dunbar-Ortiz.
She is the author of 
Loaded:
A Disarming History of the Second Amendment
,
which illustrates how the white supremacy of the country’s settler
colonialists lives on in the country – not least through gun
legislation.

After
each mass shooting in the US, we hear a range of arguments across the
media calling for greater gun control. What are the biggest
misunderstandings and lies told about the Second Amendment, and how
should we really understand it?

Any
conversation about dealing with gun violence in the United States has
to begin with the second amendment and its true function from its
establishment, throughout the 19th-century brutal conquest of the
continent, and its ideological function propping up white nationalism
today.

The
US constitution is unique among nations in mandating a general
individual right to bear arms… A problem with discussing the US
constitutional provision is the regard US people have for the
constitution itself, as a kind of god-given covenant, whereas other
nations’ constitutions are easily amended or replaced entirely and
do not carry a sacredness given to the US constitution, with the
authors, ‘founding fathers,’ near demigods.

Adding
the right to bear arms to the constitution as one of the initial ten
amendments was not the creation of a new right, rather a validation
of an already existing practice of Anglo settlers forming their own
militias to burn and loot Indigenous towns, burning their fields,
killing and raping, torturing, and seizing of the already
Indigenous-developed farms and fisheries of the Atlantic Coast,
colony by colony, to push Native peoples to the peripheries. Those
militias arrived with the first invaders, led by the mercenary John
Smith at Jamestown and mercenary John Mason in the Massachusetts
colony. When racial slavery—the slave codes–became established by
the late 1600s, these militias became slave patrols. The second
amendment contains colonial violence in a nutshell, and neither
liberals or conservatives want to acknowledge that reality.

Many
people have observed that the El Paso shooter’s ‘manifesto’
echoes how Donald Trump 
speaks about
immigrants, and accused Trump of ‘
stochastic
terrorism
‘.
Is the white supremacist rhetoric coming out of the White House a
departure from normal US politics, or does Trump reflect the soul of
the US in ways that people would rather not confront?

The
United States was founded as a white republic and white supremacy is
baked into the constitution and institutions that exist today. For
instance, the slave patrols, citizens’ militias, that were tasked
with controlling slave populations in the slave states, continued to
function during the Civil War that ended in outlawing slavery. But
these slave patrollers simply put on hoods and robes and continued to
play the same role in terrorizing and controlling the freed Black
population. Although illegal during the US military occupation of the
South, they were so many and so widespread that they could not be
stopped. When the Army pulled out, they took off their hoods and
robes and became the local sheriffs controlling the Black population
under Jim Crow. With the Black diaspora escaping the South to
northern and later west-coast cities, southern whites also migrated,
forming all-white police forces in cities. In 1950, the US was a
locked-down white male republic, African-Americans living segregated,
Native peoples on tiny portions of their original territories,
Mexicans as indentured agribusiness workers, women with few rights,
especially if they were married…

With
the humiliating loss of the US war in Vietnam in the mid-1970s, and
with nearly 700,000 combat veterans back in civil society, armed
white nationalist groups multiplied. Ronald Reagan’s presidency was
openly, although coded, white nationalist, with the US covert
counterinsurgencies in Afghanistan and Central America employing many
of the disgruntled, out-of-work vets as mercenaries and domestic
terrorist groups appearing, particularly in eastern Washington and
Oregon, Montana, Colorado, and in the 1990s spreading to the entire
continent. War fever, with the invasions of Panama, the Gulf war, and
the post-9/11 wars produced more armed white nationalists.

The
election of a liberal Black Democrat to the presidency in 2008 was a
blow to increasingly normalized white nationalism, with Muslims as a
new Brown enemy. Immediately, the Tea Party movement began, and
Donald Trump – reality TV star and real-estate developer – began
his campaign to prove that Obama was not US-born, a great boon to
white nationalists who then carried him to the presidency.

Trump
abandoned the ‘dog whistle’ white supremacy that the Republican
Party embraced with its ‘Southern strategy’ under Richard Nixon,
and has gotten by with outspoken white supremacy with no damage to
his solid 40% base. Clearly, the El Paso mall shooter was empowered
to act based on Trump’s characterization of Central American
refugees as invaders.

How
is the relationship between white supremacy and gun culture
reinforced through popular culture – films, action figures and toy
guns, the stories Americans tell about their country – in the US?

I
don’t believe that popular culture, in terms of films, video
gaming, toys, etc. have that much of an effect in reinforcing white
supremacy and gun culture. I do think the reality, not so much the
representation, of US militarism and endless wars against
non-European peoples, which are a continuation of the centuries of
militarism and warfare in seizing the continent, with Native American
peoples and Mexicans being the enemy, form a permanent culture of
violence.

With
the second amendment permission for unlimited gun ownership, that
violence goes beyond words and fist fights. The NRA [National Rifle
Association] and Republican Party talking points about gun violence
attempt to construe popular culture as the cause, particularly
‘Hollywood’ and video gaming, but dozens of studies and simple
observation nullify the argument. The US origin and historical
narratives glorify what are actually acts of genocide in the
establishment of the original colonies and the expansion to the
Pacific.

Rather
than having a reckoning with that past at the end of the Vietnam War
and honoring the anti-war movement and the disobedient soldiers, the
ruling class turned the US into a victim, enabling and encouraging
the myth of US soldiers missing in action in Vietnam. During the
1980s, the continued US wars had to operate clandestinely, covertly,
because the majority of the population was anti-war. But by 1989, the
Marines could invade and occupy Panama and change the regime there
without notable protests; two years later, the US could amass a half
million troops to invade and occupy Iraq. The shadow wars of white
nationalist militias grew domestically, nourished by war fever and
violence. It only got worse after 9/11.

Yes,
John Wayne killing Mexicans and Indians and Rambo killing Asians have
been wildly popular, but they never come near the real thing in
instilling violence and gun fetishism.

Congressman
Steve Cohen 
tweeted after
the El Paso shooting: “You want to shoot an assault weapon? Go to
Afghanistan or Iraq.Enlist!” (He later deleted the tweet.) How was
the US military apparatus forged through the white supremacist
genocide of Native Americans, and how does US foreign intervention
reify gun culture at home today?

The
US military was forged in the hundred years war to take the
continent. The first 70 years, from founding to the Civil War, the
goal was to ethnically cleanse all the territory east of the
Mississippi, generating dozens of wars of aggression and expulsion
against the southern Indigenous nations, marked by three declared
wars against the Seminole nation in Florida, where they gave refuge
to enslaved Africans who escaped. With the Indigenous survivors
forcibly relocated to Indian Territory (Oklahoma), the US invaded and
occupied Mexico, taking the northern half, thereby US territory
reached its Pacific Coast limit…

The
same officers who led those two decades of genocidal war headed the
troops that were sent to conquer Spanish-held territories in the
Pacific and Caribbean. Genocidal tendency is baked into the US armed
forces, particularly the Army and Marines.

US
foreign interventions into non-European countries throughout the 20th
century and continuing in the 21st are essentially ‘Indian wars,’
wars of erasure and chaos, dismantling local and national
institutions, creating dependency, particularly food.

Active
duty lifers and veterans of these foreign interventions are
prominently represented among white nationalists and gun hoarders.
There is is close correlation between multiple gun ownership and
military service.

An
overwhelming response to the latest shootings is to demand greater
‘protection’ from the US state (more funding for an increasingly
militarised 
security and surveillance state).
But if US gun legislation is inseparable from a legacy of violent
state-sanctioned terror, how can this be a satisfactory response, and
how can US society resolve its unhealthy relationship with guns?

Yes,
the solution is said to be ‘more good guys with guns,’ more
militarized police forces, further developing fortress America.
However, the mass shootings are used opportunistically for that
agenda. Tragic as mass shootings are, the deaths incurred make up
only 1% of US gun deaths each year, while 3/4 of gun deaths are
suicides. The easy availability of guns makes what might otherwise be
an attempted suicide a certain death. Likewise, deaths that result
from domestic violence and road rage are soaring with guns in cars
and homes.

One
place to begin resolving the problem is for leaders and professionals
of good will to acknowledge that mental illness is not the cause of
gun violence; rather ‘the need’ to possess firearms, many of
them, is itself a form of mental illness, paranoia. The late
historian Richard Hofstadter wrote of ‘the paranoid style in
American politics’ (1964).

He
had his finger on the pulse of the rising white paranoiac response to
the Black freedom movement. The majority of the white younger
generation embraced the anti-racist struggle, but a significant
minority of white men in particular panicked and reproduced their
paranoia in the following generations, fused with virulent
anti-communism and homophobia, often couched in Christian evangelism,
coming to dominate national politics.

In
fact, this white minority owns the US origin story and carries it
forward. As long as the measure of civic patriotism is based on the
founding narrative and militaristic fetishism, guns will play a
central role in US society, and no laws will be enacted to any
effect.

Cleansing
history

A key facet of ethnic
cleansing is to cleanse the historical record of the act itself. An
honest account of the white supremacy that runs throughout US
history, then, could offer a real solution to the country’s broken
relationship with guns.

For all those who find
‘thoughts’ and ‘prayers’ an insufficient solution to US mass
shootings, Dunbar-Ortiz’s work is essential reading.

Featured image
via 
WikiMedia
– Gregory Varnum

Get
involved

======================================

* Alleen deze eeuw heeft de VS al meer dan 2,5 miljoen mensen vermoord, veelal met hulp van de NAVO, een terreurorganisatie die altijd onder militair opperbevel van de VS staat……

Zie ook: ‘VS geweldcultuur gevaar voor iedereen

Voor meer berichten over het wapenbezit in de VS, klik op dat label, direct onder dit bericht.

Christchurch aanslag: witte nationalistische terreur >> een uitvoerproduct van de VS

De
terreuraanslag tegen 2 moskeeën
 in Christchruch (Nieuw-Zeeland) werd
door witte nationalisten gepleegd. Volgens Paul J. Becker en Art
Jipson is het witte nationalisme dat tot deze en andere
terreuraanslagen tegen moslims heeft geleid, een product van de VS.
De terrorist die in Christchurch schoot, ziet de witte nationalisten
(fascisten) in de VS dan ook als groot voorbeeld….

Trump
stelde eerder dat het nationalisme geen grote problemen oplevert*,
echter de uitkomsten van een onderzoek door de Universiteit van
Chicago en de VN laten het tegenovergestelde zien…..

Het
geweld van witte nationalisten, wat mij betreft in veel gevallen
niets anders dan fascisme, neemt toe in het westen. Niet vreemd als
je ziet dat deze nationalisten de xenofobie die leeft bij een fiks deel van de diverse westerse bevolkingen en de bij deze groepen gekweekte anti-immigratie gevoelens voeden met haat- en angstzaaierij tegen/voor vreemdelingen, of die haat- en angstzaaierij nu tegen/voor hun geloof, huidskleur, of land van
oorsprong wordt gevoerd……

Over
fascisme gesproken: ook in de EU wordt deze ‘ideologie’ steeds groter
en het is niet ondenkbaar dat fascisten binnen afzienbare tijd (10 tot 20 jaar) zelfs
de grootste fractie in het EU parlement zullen vormen……..

Het
volgende artikel werd eerder gepubliceerd op The Conversation en werd
door mij overgenomen van Anti-Media (de tweede foto komt van The Conversation):

Born
in the USA, White Nationalism is Now a Global Terror Threat

March
29, 2019 at 8:52 am

Written
by 
The
Conversation

(CONVERSATION) — The
recent massacre of 
50
Muslim worshippers at two mosques
 in
Christchurch, New Zealand is the latest confirmation that white
supremacy is a 
danger
to democratic societies across the globe
.

Despite
President Donald Trump’s suggestion that 
white
nationalist terrorism is not a major problem
,
recent data from the 
United
Nations
University
of Chicago
 and
other sources show the 
opposite.

As
more people 
embrace
a xenophobic and anti-immigrant worldview
,
it is fueling hostility and violence toward those deemed “outsiders”
– whether because of their religion, skin color or national origin.

Transnational
violence

Most
of the Western world
 –
from Switzerland and Germany to the United
States, 
Scandinavia and New
Zealand
 –
has witnessed a 
potent
nationalist strain
 infecting
society in recent years.

Driven
by fear over the loss of white primacy, 
white
nationalists
 believe
that white identity should be the organizing principle of Western
society.

Every
people in the world can have their own country except white people,”
the 
American
Freedom Party’s William Daniel Johnson
 told
the Chicago Sun Times after the New Zealand attack. “We should have
white ethno-states.”

In
researching our upcoming book on 
extremism –
our joint area of 
academic
expertise
 –
we found that hate crimes have risen alongside the global spread of
white nationalism. Racist attacks on 
refugees,
immigrants, Muslims and Jews
 are
increasing worldwide at an alarming rate.

Scholars
studying the internationalization of hate crimes call this dangerous
phenomenon “
violent
transnationalism
.”


Polish
right-wing nationalists at a rally in Lodz, Sept. 12,
2015.
 Reuters/Marcin
Stepien/Agencja Gazeta

In
Europe, white violence appears to have been 
triggered by
the sudden increase, in 2015, of refugees fleeing war in Syria and
elsewhere in the Middle East.

Ultra-nationalists
across the continent – including 
politicians at
the 
highest
rungs of power
 –
used the influx as 
evidence of
the imminent “
cultural
genocide

of white people.

White
nationalism is a US export

This
disturbing international trend, in its modern incarnation, was born
in the United States.

Since
the 1970s, a small, vocal cadre of American white supremacists have
sought to 
export
their ideology of hate
.
Avowed racists like 
Ku
Klux Klan wizard David Duke
,
Aryan Nations founder 
Richard
Butler
 and
extremist author 
William
Pierce
 believe
the white race is 
under
attack worldwide
 by
a cultural invasion of immigrants and people of color.

The
United States is diversifying, but it remains 
77
percent white
.
White supremacists, however, have long contended that the
country’s 
demographic
changes
 will lead
to an extermination of the white race and culture
.

The
alt-right
– an umbrella term describing modern online white supremacist
movement – uses the same language. And it has expanded this
20th-century xenophobic worldview to portray refugees, Muslims and
progressives as a threat, too.

Alt-right
leaders like Richard Spencer, 
extremist
Jared Taylor
 and
the Neo-Nazi Daily Stormer editor 
Andrew
Anglin
 also use
social media
 to share
their ideology and recruit members
 across
borders.

They
have found 
a
global audience
 of
white supremacists who, in turn, have also 
used
the internet
 to
share their ideas, encourage violence and 
broadcast
their hate crimes worldwide
.

The
hatred that led to violence in Pittsburgh and Charlottesville is
finding new adherents around the world,” 
Jonathan
Greenblatt
 of
the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), a civil liberties watchdog, told USA
Today after the New Zealand attack.

Indeed,
it appears that this attack was not just focused on New Zealand; it
was intended to have a global impact.”

Rising
racist violence

We
know the alleged New Zealand mosque shooter’s hatred of Muslims was
inspired by American white nationalism – he 
said
so on Twitter
.

His
online “manifesto” includes references to cultural conflicts that
the author believed would eventually lead the United States to
separate along ethnic, political and racial lines.

The
alleged attacker also wrote that 
he
supports President Donald Trump
“as
a symbol of renewed white identity.”

Trump
and other right-wing politicians like French 
presidential
candidate Marine Le Pen
 and Dutch
opposition leader Geert Wilders
 have blamed the
very real problems of modern life – growing economic instability,
rising inequality and 
industrial
decay
 –
on immigrants and people of color.

That
narrative has added further hostility into the existing undercurrent
of intolerance in increasingly multicultural societies like the
United States.

Hate
crimes against Muslims, immigrants and people of color have been 
on
the rise in the U.S. since 2014
.

In
2015, the 
Southern
Poverty Law Center documented 892 hate crimes
.
The next year, it counted 917 hate crimes. In 2017 – the year Trump
took office stoking nationalist sentiment with promises 
to
build walls, deport Mexicans and ban Muslims
 –
the U.S. saw 954 white supremacist attacks.

One
of them was a violent clash between counterprotesters and white
nationalists over the removal of a 
confederate
statue in Charlottesville
,
Virginia. The 2017 “Unite the Right” rally, which killed one
person and injured dozens, amplified the ideas of modern white
nationalists 
nationally
and worldwide
.

Last
year, white nationalists killed at least 50 people in the United
States. Their victims included 
11
worshippers at a Pittsburgh synagogue
two
elderly black shoppers in a Kroger parking lot
 in
Kentucky and 
two
women practicing yoga in Florida
.

The
years 2015, 2016 and 2018 were the United States’ deadliest years
for 
extremist
violence since 1970
,
according to the Anti-Defamation League.

All
perpetrators of deadly 
extremist
violence in the U.S. in 2018
 had
links to white nationalist groups. That made 2018 “a particularly
active year for right-wing extremist murders,” the Anti-Defamation
League says.

Nationalist
terror is a danger to the domestic security of the United States and,
evidence shows, a global terror threat that endangers the very nature
of global democratic society.

By Paul
J. Becker
 and Art
Jipson
 / Creative
Commons
 / The
Conversation

========================================

*
Niet zo vreemd dat Trump het nationalisme niet als een bedreiging
ziet, immers hij is zelf een nationalist en gezien veel van zijn
uitlatingen, zoals zijn haat- en angstzaaien tegen/voor vluchtelingen en de woorden van waardering die hij uitspreekt voor
figuren als Bolsonaro, de fascistische president van Brazilië, kan je
ook Trump als fascistisch aanduiden……

Zie ook:

Christchurch terreuraanslag: de normalisatie van anti-moslim terreur en westerse oorlogsvoering in moslimlanden

Christchurch terreuraanslag: maatschappij niet gebaat bij censuur op fascisme

Christ Church >> fascistische terreuraanslag >> 49 doden……

Thierry Baudet (FVD) ging ook na de terreuraanslag gisteren door met verkiezingscampagne‘ (met een verwijzing naar de aanslag in Christchurch)

Het label SPLC direct onder dit bericht staat voor ‘Southern Poverty Law Center’.

Stephen Colbert probeerde zonder enige humor Tulsi Gabbard in het rechtse kamp te drukken n.a.v. de illegale VS oorlog tegen Syrië

De show
van Stephen Colbert is een propaganda orgaan voor de rechtse
democraten en is dat in feite al heel lang. Daarmee staat Colbert ook achter de
illegale oorlogen die onder de democratische ‘vredesduif’ Obama werden aangegaan, dit onder regie van zijn rechterhand destijds Hillary Clinton
(minister van BuZa), een oorlogsmisdadiger van formaat…..

Colbert
had onlangs de democraat Tulsi Gabbard in zijn show en in
tegenstelling tot de omgang met andere politici van de Democratische Partij,
was dit geen gesprek met opgeklopte ‘humor’.

Colbert
probeerde Gabbard zelfs in het kamp te duwen van fascist David Duke
(voormalig Ku Klux Klan top), en dat van rechtse rotzakken als Steve Bannon en Matt
Gaetz……

Wat
betreft de illegale oorlogen van de VS, liet Colbert ten overvloede in zijn gesprek
met Gabbard blijken dat hij die volledig steunt, ondanks het enorme
aantal doden en landen die in puin achterblijven als de VS klaar is
met haar grootschalige terreur tegen in feite de bevolking van de
landen die het illegaal aanvalt…..

Ook de illegale oorlog van de VS tegen het bewind van Assad kwam ter sprake, waar Gabbard Colbert fijntjes liet weten dat de CIA in 2011 de ‘opstand’ tegen Assad heeft georganiseerd en geregisseerd en dat de oorlog van de VS in dat land niet gericht was tegen IS, maar tegen het bewind van Assad, waar ze ook de wapenleveringen aan terreurgroepen als IS en militaire training door de VS aan die terreurgroepen noemde….. 

Jammer dat ze Assad wel een dictator noemt, terwijl hij met grote meerderheid democratisch tot president werd verkozen in 2014, een verkiezing die door internationale waarnemers als eerlijk en goed werd beoordeeld…… 

Vergeet voorts niet dat onder Assad alle geloven hand in hand naast elkaar leefden, een zaak die door handelingen van de VS bijna de nek werd omgedraaid…. Gelukkig leven de teruggekeerde vluchtelingen, in de gebieden die door het reguliere Syrische leger worden gecontroleerd, weer vreedzaam naast elkaar, ongeacht het geloof dat men aanhangt……

Helaas
voor Colbert, maar hij is geen partij voor Gabbard die hem flink bij
de lurven had >> lezen en zien mensen!!

Colbert
Smears Tulsi Gabbard To Her Face While Telling Zero Jokes

by Caitlin
Johnstone

Hawaii
Congresswoman and Democratic presidential candidate Tulsi
Gabbard 
recently
appeared
 on The
Late Show with Stephen Colbert
,
where instead of the light, jokey banter about politics and who she
is as a person that Democratic presidential candidates normally
encounter on late night comedy programs, the show’s host solemnly ran
down a list of textbook beltway smears against Gabbard and made her
defend them in front of his audience.

Normally
when a Democratic Party-aligned politician appears on such a show,
you can expect jokes about how stupid Trump is and how badly they’re
going to beat the Republicans, how they’re going to help ordinary
Americans, and maybe some friendly back-and-forth about where they
grew up or something. Colbert had no time to waste on such things,
however, because this was not an interview with a normal Democratic
Party-aligned politician: this was a politician who has been loudly
and consistently criticizing US foreign policy.

After
briefly asking his guest who she is and why she’s running for
president, Colbert 
jumped
right into it
 by
immediately bringing up Syria and Assad, the primary line of attack
employed against Gabbard by establishment propagandists in American
mainstream media.

Colbert:
Do you think the Iraq war was worth it?

Gabbard:
No.

Colbert:
Do you think that our involvement in Syria has been worth it?

Gabbard:
No.

Colbert:
Do you think that ISIS could have been defeated without our
involvement and without our support of the local troops there?

Gabbard:
There are two things we need to address in Syria. One is a regime
change war that was first launched by the United States in 2011,
covertly, led by the CIA. That is a regime change war that has
continued over the years, that has increased the suffering of the
Syrian people, and strengthened groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS,
because the CIA was using American taxpayer dollars to provide arms
and training and equipment to these terrorist groups to get them to
overthrow the government. So that is a regime change war that we
should not have been engaging.

Colbert:
So, but if it is someone like Bashar al-Assad, who gasses his own
people, or who engages in war crimes against his own people, should
the United States not be involved?

Gabbard:
The United States should not be intervening to overthrow these
dictators and these regimes that we don’t like, like Assad, like
Saddam Hussein, like Gaddafi, and like Kim Jong Un. There are bad
people in the world, but history has shown us that every time the
United States goes in and topples these dictators we don’t like,
trying to end up like the world’s police, we end up increasing the
suffering of the people in these countries. We end up increasing the
loss of life, but American lives and the lives of people in these
countries. We end up undermining our own security, what to speak of
the trillions of dollars of taxpayer money that’s spent on these wars
that we need to be using right here at home.

Like
I said, this is not a normal presidential candidate. How often do you
see a guest appear on a network late night talk show and talk about
the CIA arming terrorists in Syria and the fact that US military
interventionism is completely disastrous? It just doesn’t happen. You
can understand, then, why empire propagandist Stephen Colbert 
spent
the rest of the interview
 informing
his TV audience that Tulsi Gabbard is dangerous and poisonous.

This was unwatchable. Colbert just went down the list of scripted Gabbard smears (Assad, David Duke) then sermonized about how US military intervention is a force for good in this world. All without telling a single joke. Late night “comedy” shows are propaganda for livestock.

Colbert twice interjected the State Dept.’s line about the alleged Assad chemical attack on his own people; Tulsi then corrected him saying several of the groups, including al Qaeda & ISIS, had been trained by the US and had been reported as being a part of those alleged chemical

Colbert:
You got some heat for meeting with Bashar al-Assad. Do you not
consider him a war criminal? Why did you meet with that man?

Gabbard:
In the pursuit of peace and security. If we are not willing to meet
with adversaries, potential adversaries, in the pursuit of peace and
security, the only alternative is more war. That’s why I took that
meeting with Assad. In pursuit of peace and security. 

Colbert:
Do you believe he is a war criminal? Do you believe he gassed his own
people or committed atrocities against his own people?

Gabbard:
Yes. Reports have shown that that’s a fact.

Colbert:
So you believe the intelligence agencies on that. Because I head that
you did not necessarily believe those reports.

The
reason I call Colbert a propagandist and not simply a liberal empire
loyalist who happens to have been elevated by billionaire media is
because these are carefully constructed narratives that he is
reciting, and they weren’t constructed by him.

Trying
to make it look to the audience as though Gabbard is in some way
loyal to Assad has been a high-priority agenda of the mainstream
media ever since she announced her presidential candidacy.

We
saw it in 
her
recent appearance
 on The
View
,
where John McCain’s sociopathic daughter called her an “Assad
apologist” and demanded that Gabbard call Assad an enemy of the
United States. We saw it in her recent 
CNN
town hall
,
where a consultant 
who
worked on Obama’s 2008 campaign
 was
presented as an ordinary audience member to help CNN’s Dana Bash
paint Gabbard’s skepticism of intelligence reports about an alleged
chemical weapons attack by the Syrian government as something that is
weird and suspicious, instead of the only sane position in a
post-Iraq invasion world. We saw it in 
her
appearance
 on
MSNBC’s 
Morning
Joe
 last
month, where the entire panel piled on her in outrage that she
wouldn’t call Assad an enemy of the United States. It’s such a common
propaganda talking point that the 
New
York Times

Bari Weiss famously 
made
a laughingstock of herself
 by
repeating it as self-evident truth on 
The
Joe Rogan Experience
 without
having the faintest clue what specific facts it was meant to refer
to, just because she’d heard establishment pundits saying it so much.

This
is an organized smear by the mass media attempting to marry Gabbard
in the eyes of the public to a Middle Eastern leader whom the
propagandists have already sold as a child-murdering monster, and
Colbert is participating in it here just as much as the serious news
media talking heads are. It’s been frustrating to watch Gabbard 
fold
to this smear campaign
 by
acting like it’s an established fact that Assad “gases his own
people” and not the hotly contested empire-serving narrative she
knows it is.

Gabbard
is being targeted by this smear because she challenges US political
orthodoxy on military violence (the glue which holds the empire
together), so no amount of capitulation will keep them from trying to
prevent the public from trusting her words.

(de video in het volgende Twitterbericht kan ik niet overnemen, zie hiervoor het origineel)

The journalist interrogating Tulsi seems to believe that US forces in Syria are fighting Assad. Tulsi corrects her, says those troops were deployed there to fight ISIS. These people don’t even know what’s happening in the places they want the US to occupy

2:11

640K views

“I
don’t know whether America should be the policemen of the world,”
Colbert 
said after
Gabard defended her position.

“It
is my opinion that we should not be,” Gabbard replied, causing
Colbert to launch into a stuffy, embarrassing sermon on the virtues
of interventionism and US hegemony that would make Bill Kristol
blush.

“If
we are not, though, nature abhors a vacuum, and if we are not
involved in international conflicts, or trying to quell international
conflicts, certainly the Russians and the Chinese will fill that
vacuum. And we will step away from the world stage in a significant
way that might destabilize the world, because the United States,
however flawed, is a force for good in the world in my opinion. Would
you agree with that?”

Again,
this is a 
comedy show.

Gabbard
explained that in order to be a force for good in the world the
United States has to actually do good, which means not raining fire
upon every nation it dislikes all the time. 
Colbert
responded
 by
reading off his blue index card to repeat yet another tired
anti-Gabbard smear.

“You’ve
gotten some fans in the Trump supporter world: David Duke, Steve
Bannon, and, uh, Matt, uh, Gaetz, is that his name? Matt Gaetz? What
do you make of how much they like you?”

This
one is particularly vile, partly because Gabbard
has 
repeatedly and unequivocally
denounced David Duke, who has a 
long-established
and well-known history
 of
injecting himself into the drama of high-profile conversations in
order to maintain the illusion of relevance, and partly because it’s
a completely irrelevant point that is brought up solely for the
purpose of marrying Tulsi Gabbard’s name to a former Ku Klux Klan
leader. Colbert 
only brought
this up (and 
made Newsweek totally
squee
)
because he wanted to assist in that marrying. The fact that there are
distasteful ideologies which also happen to oppose US interventionism
for their own reasons does not change the undeniable fact that US
military interventionism is consistently disastrous and never helpful
and robs the US public of resources that are rightfully theirs.

This
interview was easily Colbert’s most blatant establishment rim job
I’ve ever seen, surpassing even the time 
he
corrected his own audience
 when
they cheered at James Comey’s firing to explain to them that Comey is
a good guy now and they’re meant to like him. Colbert’s show is
blatant propaganda for human livestock, and the fact that this is
what American “comedy” shows look like now is nauseating.

When
Tulsi Gabbard first announced her candidacy 
I
predicted
 that
she’d have the narrative control engineers scrambling all over
themselves to kill her message, and it’s been even more spectacular
than I imagined. I don’t agree with everything she says and does, but
by damn this woman is shaking up the establishment narrative matrix
more than anybody else right now. She’s certainly keeping it
interesting.

__________________________

Thanks
for reading! My articles are entirely reader-supported, so if you
enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, liking me
on
 Facebook,
following my antics on
 Twitter, throwing
some money into my hat on 
Patreon or Paypalpurchasing
some of my 
sweet
merchandise
, buying
my new book 
Rogue
Nation: Psychonautical Adventures With Caitlin Johnstone
,
or my previous book 
Woke:
A Field Guide for Utopia Preppers
.
The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see
the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for
my 
website,
which will get you an email notification for everything I publish.

Bitcoin
donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

Caitlin
Johnstone
 |
March 13, 2019 at 12:38 pm |

Tags: ColbertLate
Show
MSMPoliticspropagandaTulsi
Gabbard
 |
Categories: 
ArticleNews |
URL: 
https://wp.me/p9tj6M-1AH

====================================

Zie ook:

Gekleurde families in de VS worden lastiggevallen in hun huis door witte buren

De
VS, ‘the land of the free’*, het land ook ‘van de ongekende
mogelijkheden’, zoals het neerschieten van groepen mensen, het land
van de witten dat ondanks een eerste gekleurde president nog steeds
gekleurden medeburgers op grote schaal discrimineert, beledigt en vernedert, zowel door
medeburgers als door de overheid, neem het onevenredig grote aantal
gekleurden dat door de politie wordt vermoord, of gearresteerd……* 

Ondanks dat de gekleurde bevolking tot een minderheid behoort,
zitten er onevenredig veel gekleurden in het achterlijk
geprivatiseerde gevangeniswezen van de VS…….. Het land waar je als gekleurde
burger veelal heel anders wordt berecht dan een witte burger en
dat bepaald niet in positieve zin….*

Nu
blijkt ook nog eens dat gekleurde families in overwegend witte wijken
regelmatig worden lastiggevallen door witte racistische buren, waar de politie amper of zelfs niet ingrijpt……

Lees
de voorbeelden van racistisch geweld tegen gekleurde burgers,
geschreven door Rahima Nasa en Rachel Klickhouse:

GET
OUT”: BLACK FAMILIES HARASSED IN THEIR OWN HOMES

File:We want white tenants.jpg

(foto uit 1942, er is intussen maar weinig veranderd in de VS…..)

JANUARY
10, 2019
 FRIENDS
OF GREED 3
HATE
CRIMES
PROPUBLICARACISM

United
States (
ProPublica)
 In
Delano, Minnesota, 
a
black family’s home was broken
 into
in March 2017 and a warning was spray-painted on the walls: “Get
out.” The vandals left a note, too: “Next time it’s going to be
fire.”

In
Athens, Tennessee, the white mother of young biracial children
alleged that she’d been harassed verbally by a neighbor for a year.

For
close to two years, ProPublica has been compiling reports of hate
crimes and bias incidents as part of 
our
Documenting Hate project
.
The database now houses a vast compendium of ugliness in America.
Killings, assaults, threats of terror — they are all there.

One
of the more common entries involves people being harassed or
threatened at their place of residence, often by neighbors, the
people who live next door or down the hall or around the corner. Of
course, this isn’t new. The integration of neighborhoods in the
U.S. has been as fraught as the integration of the country’s
schools.

Jeannine
Bell, a lawyer and author of “Hate Thy Neighbor: Move-In Violence
and the Persistence of Racial Segregation in American Housing,”
said no corner of the country has any claim of immunity from the
problem. She also noted that the total number of such incidents is
not reliably captured in any formal data set, ours or those kept by
federal and local authorities. That’s because, she said, many of
these incidents go unreported.

A
lot of times, the people that are targeted don’t even know that
this is a crime,” Bell said.

The
Documenting Hate database has close to 6,000 entries — a mix of
news reports, tips, personal stories of bigotry and records collected
by law enforcement and some anti-discrimination groups. Among the
most common things reported are anti-Muslim acts, which accounted for
359 entries, and swastikas showing up in public places, which were
the subject of an additional 400 or so.

More
than 300 entries were reports of harassment or menacing at people’s
homes, targeting people of a variety of races and religions. The most
frequent victims were African Americans. Indeed, African Americans
are the most frequently victimized group nationally for hate crimes,
according to data from the FBI.

That
finding prompted us to send inquiries to the dozen or so police
jurisdictions that had reported the highest number of anti-black hate
crimes to the FBI’s hate-crime database from 2010 to 2016. Since we
couldn’t get incident reports from every one of those
jurisdictions, we also made requests to several police departments
where we’d received data that included anti-black hate crimes.

In
total, we were able to identify 639 incidents of anti-black violence
or harassment from the police reports we received. More than a fifth
of those reports, 138 in all, were incidents involving people being
targeted by neighbors or in their homes.

In
Columbus, Ohio, a man went to police because someone had been ringing
his doorbell or banging on his garage 25 to 30 times a night, almost
every night. When the man went outside, the suspect would call him
racial slurs from the darkness. The man and his family are the only
black residents of their cul-de-sac. No arrests were made and the
case is currently listed as inactive.

In
Toledo, at the north end of the state, a man was allegedly harassing
three black neighbors in his neighborhood, using “unwarranted
racist language,” according to the police report. One day, the
suspect saw a car with black occupants throw trash on the street.
Even though they had no relation to anyone on the block, the suspect
came over and dumped trash on a black family’s lawn, the report
said. “Since you all want to nigger up the neighborhood, I’ll
burn you and your nigger family out,” he allegedly told the victim.
Police went to the suspect’s home, but he didn’t answer the door.
A call to the Toledo police to check on the case was not returned.

In
Kansas City, Missouri, an African-American man went to police because
his neighbor had harassed him for three years. The suspect allegedly
stood in his driveway taking pictures of his home and waved a
Confederate flag. The man who filed the complaint wound up moving,
but he told police he was worried because he’d seen the man outside
his new home.

In
Oxford Township, Michigan, a couple — a white woman and a black man
— went to police because they said they couldn’t leave the house
without getting harassed by their neighbor, who called them racial
slurs. When police gave the neighbor a citation for disorderly
conduct, she ripped it up in front of the officer. She was
subsequently arrested for disorderly conduct and her case was turned
over to the local prosecutor’s office.

And
in Spokane, Washington, we got records on two cases of possible
neo-Nazis harassing their black neighbors. In one case, the neighbors
reported that a man with a swastika on his hand called them racial
slurs. He allegedly threw a brick at a woman, calling her a slur. In
another case, a black man said his white supremacist neighbor and
another man assaulted him in his garage while using racial slurs and
threatened him with a gun. “Nigger, you don’t deserve to be
breathing white men’s air,” they allegedly said. Later, the white
supremacist allegedly returned with two other men and yelled “heil
the KKK” and “white power” at the man, shortly before shooting
a gun at his home from a car. The victim told
The 
Spokesman-Review that
one of the suspects had called him racial slurs for months leading up
to the shooting.

According
to the Spokane Police Department, both cases resulted in arrests and
the suspects were charged with first-degree assault and malicious
harassment. In the shooting case, suspect Donald Prichard’s
criminal history record totals to 16 felony convictions,
which 
included
beating and sexually assaulting a woman.
 He’s
awaiting trial on Jan. 22. The second suspect in that case, Jason
Cooper, has 12 felony convictions, including unlawful possession of a
weapon and burglary, and he is awaiting trial on Feb. 25.

Many
accounts, both in our database and that resulted from our queries to
police departments, include frustration at what can seem like a lack
of police interest or action. In the case of the family targeted in
Delano, no one was ever arrested, and the family wound up moving
away. The mother in Athens said police told her there was little they
could do about verbal harassment, that it was a civil matter. The
authorities in Athens didn’t return a request for comment.

That
said, we did find examples where the authorities ultimately took
serious steps.

In
Grapevine, Texas, Dante Petty was harassed by his white neighbor,
Glenn Halfin, for over a year after he moved in. The harassment
became so persistent that he installed surveillance cameras outside
his home and a police officer was stationed outside for over a month.
The breaking point occurred when his neighbor left black baby dolls
with nooses around their necks hung outside his apartment.
Ultimately, Halfin was charged with a hate crime and convicted of
violating the family’s housing rights. He was sentenced to year in
state prison, the maximum punishment based on his guilty plea to the
misdemeanor charge.

No
one should be afraid to go home at night,” said U.S. Attorney Erin
Nealy Cox 
on
the day of Halfin’s sentencing.
 Victims
of such harassment at their residences, it turns out, have an option
other than going to the local police. Harassing one’s neighbor also
violates the federal Fair Housing Act, which makes it illegal for
landlords and neighbors to interfere with someone’s right to
housing based on who they are. And there is an office at the
Department of Housing and Urban Development meant to handle such
cases.

Victims
can file a complaint with HUD within a year of the alleged violation.
Owners, managers and condominium associations may be liable for
neighbor-on-neighbor harassment if they fail to intervene when they
have a duty to do so. Criminal penalties can include fines and
prison.

According
to HUD statistics, there were 8,348 complaints of such violations in
2015, 8,350 in 2016 and 8,186 in 2017. Half or more of those cases
dealt with alleged violations involving people with disabilities. The
HUD statistics show that, historically, very few of the complaints of
any kind wound up with federal prosecutions.

The
number of prosecutions has gotten appreciably smaller in recent
years. In 2015, the Department of Justice closed 84 cases brought to
it by HUD regarding the Fair Housing Act. In 2016, there were only
12. In 2017, there were just five.

Calls
for comment from HUD were not returned because of the federal
government shutdown.

Meanwhile,
as the second year of Documenting Hate came to a close, reports kept
coming in.

In
June 2018, Hubert Roberts, of Clio, Michigan, complained to police
that his truck had been targeted by racists. A Nazi symbol was spray
painted on the truck, along with slurs and boasts of white pride. The
Genesee County Sheriff’s Office would not comment on the case,
other than to say no arrests have been made. When asked about the
current status of the case, the FBI told ProPublica, “Adhering to
DOJ policy, the FBI neither confirms nor denies investigations.”

Roberts
said that this wasn’t the first time he was targeted in the
community because of his race, either. He noted other instances of
being called racist comments, where he was told to “go back to
Africa,” while doing work on his yard.

This
could have been an opportunity for some dialogue in this
predominantly white community,” Roberts said. “I just feel really
disappointed with our justice system.”

This
report prepared by 
Rahima
Nasa
 and Rachel
Glickhouse
 for ProPublica

============================

De VS, een heel ziek psychopathisch land, intussen bijna geheel is getransformeerd tot een politiestaat, een land waar democratie en burgerrechten geen betekenis meer hebben als je tot bepaalde bevolkingsgroepen behoort….. De VS, het voorbeeld van een ultieme klassenmaatschappij, die nog amper onderdoet voor een fascistische staat…….

* ‘Land of the free’, een gotspe als je ziet hoe de bevolking en zeker het arme gekleurde deel van de VS bevolking wordt behandeld….. Vrij om dood te gaan zonder een therapie te kunnen betalen, of vergoed te krijgen, die levensreddend kan zijn…. Vrij om niet te mogen stemmen als je tot bepaalde bevolkingsgroepen behoort….. Vrij om als gekleurde door een witte jury te worden berecht…… Vrij om als gekleurde of arme witte geen kans te krijgen om te studeren, daar de kosten daarvoor niet zijn op te brengen……..Vrij om als jongere in het leger te gaan, daar je verder geen kans hebt om ook maar iets op te kunnen bouwen, daar je nergens anders werk kan vinden….. Vrij om te demonstreren tegen zaken die jouw geboortegrond op gigantische manier vervuilen en dan de kans lopen te worden vermoord, met toestemming van de overheid……. (neem het verzet tegen oliepijpleidingen over grond van de oorspronkelijke VS bevolking, zoals de DAPL zaak) Vrij om te mogen worden neergeschoten door psychopaten met wapens…… (dagelijks vinden er meervoudige moorden plaats in de VS, dit vanwege de achterlijke wapenwetgeving in de VS….) Vrij om te worden uitgebuit, terwijl de welgestelden en grote bedrijven worden ontzien op belastinggebied…….. Vrij om te worden gediscrimineerd, beledigd en zelfs te worden vermoord (bijvoorbeeld door de politie) als je tot de gekleurde bevolking behoort, zoals bijvoorbeeld beschreven in het hierboven weergegeven artikel…….. Vrij om zelfs als je een misdaad niet hebt begaan, deze wel te bekennen, daar je anders een veel grotere straf krijgt opgelegd, middels het vermaledijde ‘plea bargain’ principe in de rechtspraak…… (ondanks dat plea bargain levert Nederland zelfs eigen burgers uit aan de VS……) Vrij om belasting te betalen voor oneindige oorlogen elders, waar de VS op grote schaal mensen vermoordt en daarmee terreur in eigen land creëert….. Vrij om te worden ontslagen of geen orders van de overheid te krijgen, als je je hebt uitgesproken tegen de massamoord op Palestijnen door de fascistische apartheidsstaat Israël….. Vrij om in tentsteden, autowrakken, of dozen te mogen ‘wonen’, daar je vanwege schulden uit je huis werd gezet en een ander onderdak niet kan betalen…….

VS overweegt kritiek op Israël aan te pakken als antisemitisme……..

Met een
wetsvoorstel van het Congres in de VS wil men kritiek op de
fascistische apartheidsstaat Israël gelijk stellen aan
antisemitisme……..

Bijvoorbeeld
het vergelijken van de Israëlische politiek met nazi-politiek wordt
dan antisemitisme genoemd en zou middels beroepsverboden of wegzending van universiteiten kunnen leiden……. Ook zal kritiek worden geweerd in de reguliere media en de sociale media….* Je kan dan niet meer wijzen op een groep Israëlische
officieren die begin 90er jaren aan de bel trokken en stelden dat zij
werden onderwezen uit SS handboeken…..

Uiteraard
zal deze wet worden aangenomen, het huidige politieke klimaat in de
VS is er rijp voor…… Lullig genoeg volgt een groot deel van de EU
de VS in dit soort zaken, dat bleek een tijd geleden met het verzet
tegen de BDS beweging, die een boycot van Israël bepleit zolang
Israël doorgaat met de enorme terreur tegen de Palestijnse bevolking
en haar niet al haar rechten teruggeeft, inclusief land en een plaats
voor de met veel geweld verjaagde Palestijnen. De BDS werd vrijwel
onmiddellijk onder druk van Israël als antisemitisch
afgeschilderd……. 

Te
vrezen valt dan ook, wanneer deze nieuwe wet in de VS wordt
aangenomen, de EU zal volgen…… Daarmee zal de vrijheid van
meningsuiting geslachtofferd worden en om een cliché aan te halen:
als er één schaap over de dam is volgen er meer, ofwel als dit
recht op een dergelijke ordinaire manier wordt aangetast, zal het niet
lang duren voordat men dit soort zaken zelfs strafbaar zal stellen, zoals het
brengen van ‘fake news’ (nepnieuws) in de sociale media….. (het
liefst noemt men alles nepnieuws wat niet overeenkomt met wat je in
de reguliere media wordt voorgelogen….)

Ongelofelijk dit alles, zeker als je ziet dat neonazi’s gewoon mogen demonstreren in de VS, met swastika’s en al, dit nog naast het mogen organiseren van (militaire-) trainingen door dit psychopathische geteisem……..

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor neonazi's in VS

New
US Congress Bill Conflates Criticism of Israel With Anti-Semitism

The Anti-Semitism Awareness Act of 2018, was introduced by lawmakers from both major parties (AFP/file photo)

 Ali Harb's picture    Ali Harb

               Thursday 24 May 2018 00:44 UTC

               Last update: 

Thursday 24 May 2018 18:18 UTC

(MEE— A
US Congress bill proposed on Wednesday conflates criticism of Israel
with anti-Semitism, free-speech advocates say.

The
measure aims to provide the Department of Education with a legal
definition of anti-Semitism to handle discrimination claims.

It
adopts a 2010 report by a special US State Department envoy to combat
anti-Semitism.

The
document provides a list of examples where anti-Semitism “manifests
itself with regard to the state of Israel”. They include applying
double-standards for Israel, attempting to delegitimise it and
comparing Israeli policies to Nazi Germany.

It’s
ridiculous; it’s unconstitutional; it’s against free speech,”
Ahmad Abuznaid, director of the National Network of Arab American
Communities (NAAC), told Middle East Eye.

The
bill, dubbed the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act of 2018, was introduced
by lawmakers from both US major parties.

US
college campuses, where activists attempt to pass student council
resolutions to boycott Israel for its mistreatment of Palestinians,
have become a major arena for debate over the conflict.

Activists
say the bill would censor the exchange of ideas and censor Israel’s
critics.

The
Arab American Institute, a Washington-based think tank, said the bill
focuses on suppressing speech critical of Israel, but it fails to
address the real problem of anti-Semitism.

At
a time when hate crimes against targeted and vulnerable communities
have increased, including against the American Jewish community, it
is imperative that our elected officials do not conflate criticisms
of policies and political opposition with instances of hate,” the
group said in a statement.

Abuznaid
compared the bill with measures to outlaw the Boycott, Divestment and
Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel, “but this is a more
vicious attack on the freedom of speech in the US.”

Last
year, lawmakers proposed a bill that would legally restrict US
citizens and companies from boycotting Israel. The measure failed to
progress after an outcry from free speech watchdogs, including the
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

This
bill is unconstitutional because it seeks to impose the government’s
political views on Americans who choose to express themselves through
boycotts,” Ben Wizner, director of the ACLU Speech, Privacy, and
Technology Project, said in a statement in March after the
anti-boycott bill was amended.

In
January, a federal judge blocked a Kansas law that required state
contractors to certify that they do not boycott Israel.

JewishVoiceForPeace
@jvplive

JVP calls on Congress to oppose the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act

“It’s not an ‘anti-Semitism awareness act’ – it’s the Silencing Students Act,” says JVP’s Rabbi Joseph Berman https://jewishvoiceforpeace.org/antisemitism-bill-silences-human-rights-activists/ 

Antisemitism bill is a cynical attempt to silence human rights on college campuses

Instead of fighting antisemitism, re-introduced legislation is a cynical attempt to silence human rights activists on college campuses

jewishvoiceforpeace.org

The
ACLU also rejected Wednesday’s anti-Semitism bill, saying that it
“risks chilling the free speech of students on college campuses,
and is unnecessary to enforce federal law’s prohibition on
harassment in education.”

We
worry that the law will lead colleges to suppress speech, especially
if the Department of Education launches investigations simply because
students have engaged in speech critical of Israel,”
ACLU executive
director Anthony Romero said in a statement.

College
campuses should be havens for free expression, and students must be
free to express their opinions and viewpoints, so long as they avoid
harassment. We urge Congress to reject this dangerous and unnecessary
bill.”

Abuznaid
said Wednesday’s bill targets students who are developing a sense
of activism.

He
added that the bill would play to the advantage of Kenneth Marcus,
President Donald Trump’s nominee to head the civil rights office of
the Department of Education. Marcus has led civil rights lawsuits
against academic institutions that adopted BDS measures.

It’s
just another avenue to stifle the debate on Israel and Palestine,”
Abuznaid said of the bill.

Proponents
of the bill say its objective is to protect Jewish students from
discrimination.

Jewish
students, like students of any religion, should not live in fear of
attacks because of their religion,” Congressman Ted Deutch, a
Democrat from Florida who co-sponsored the measure, said in a
statement.

They
shouldn’t have to fear wearing Judaic symbols or expressing their
support for Israel.”

By Ali
Harb
 Republished
with permission / 
Middle
East Eye
 / Report
a typo

US may soon recognise Israel’s sovereignty over Golan: Israeli minister#Occupation

US ambassador poses with poster showing Jewish Third Temple replacing Al-Aqsa#Occupation

Californian Muslim woman stands up to Islamophobia#Islamophobia

===========================

* Zo weert Facebook nu al langere tijd kritische Palestijnen van haar medium………. Zie wat dat betreft ook: ‘Facebook wil samen met door Saoedi-Arabië gesubsidieerde denktank censureren…. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Gekleurde man geeft neonazi een knuffel en vraagt waarom hij zo’n haat tegen hem heeft…..

Je vraagt je misschien af, of de Azijnpisser nu ook al met positief nieuws komt en het antwoord is simpel ‘ja’. Al is de oorzaak niet een wil om vooral positief nieuws te brengen, zoals u ongetwijfeld al lang is opgevallen, maar de manier waarop een gekleurde demonstrant handelde tegen neonazi’s, een demonstratie m.n. tegen een spreekbeurt van haat- en angstzaaier Richard Spencer, een neonazi.

Niet vreemd dat anti-nazi demonstranten geweld gebruiken tegen neonazi’s, immers deze figuren vermoorden in de VS jaarlijks zo’n 30 mensen, wiens kleur, ideologie of seksuele geaardheid hen niet aanstaan.

De gekleurde man, Aaron Courtney, een voetbal coach, besloot neonazi Randy Furniss een knuffel te geven en te vragen waarom hij hem en andere gekleurde mensen zo haat. Zo gezegd zo gedaan: Coutney knuffelde Furniss en vroeg hem waarom hij hem zo haat.

Furniss probeerde Courtney te ontwijken, maar gaf uiteindelijk een knuffel terug en antwoordde dat hij niet wist waarom hij gekleurden zo haat…….

Courtney was overigens niet de eerste die een dergelijke aanpak uitprobeerde, Darryl Jones, een gekleurde muzikant, deed hetzelfde in het groot. Hij maakte de documentaire ‘Accidental Courtesy’, waarin hij laat zien hoe hij in gesprek ging met leden van de Klu Klux Klan (KKK),

barrières opruimde en vooroordelen te niet deed. Als gevolg van deze acties hebben intussen 200 leden van de KKK deze beweging de rug toegekeerd……..

Dit soort berichten geven duidelijk hoop voor de toekomst!

Video:
Black Man Hugs Nazi Outside Richard Spencer Talk, Asks ‘Why Do You
Hate Me?’

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor Video: Black Man Hugs Nazi Outside Richard Spencer Talk, Asks ‘Why Do You Hate Me?’

October
20, 2017 at 2:45 pm

Written
by 
Carey
Wedler

(ANTIMEDIA) —
White
supremacist Richard Spencer 
spoke to
a large crowd at the University of Florida on Thursday, further
demonstrating the problem of racism in the United States.

Though
events like these have drawn outrage and understandably angry
reactions from protesters who oppose hateful ideologies,
one 
interaction at
the event potentially signaled a new way forward.

Aaron
Courtney, a 31-year-old football coach from Gainesville, Florida,
gave a neo-Nazi a hug. Courtney, a black man, simply asked Randy
Furniss, who was wearing a shirt emblazoned with swastikas, why he
didn’t like him.

Politics 4 Dummies @Politics4dum

A nazi and a black man…..America 2017 

Why
don’t you like me, dog?

Courtney
is heard saying in the video as he reaches out to hug Furniss.

Courtney
told the New York Daily News he had never even heard
of Spencer until he received a notice on his phone regarding the
declaration of a state of emergency issued over the event. After
researching the prominent, polarizing figure, Courtney decided to
attend.

Though
events like these have drawn outrage and understandably angry
reactions from protesters who oppose hateful ideologies,
one 
interaction at
the event potentially signaled a new way forward.

Aaron
Courtney, a 31-year-old football coach from Gainesville, Florida,
gave a neo-Nazi a hug. Courtney, a black man, simply asked Randy
Furniss, who was wearing a shirt emblazoned with swastikas, why he
didn’t like him.

I
found out about what kind of person he was and that encouraged me, as
an African-American, to come out and protest. Because this is what
we’re trying to avoid. It’s people like him who are increasing
the distance … between people,

Courtney said.

He
recalled his interaction with Furniss, who was identified after the
video went viral on social media:

I
had the opportunity to talk to someone who hates my guts and I wanted
to know why. During our conversation, I asked him, ‘Why do you hate
me? What is it about me? Is it my skin color? My history? My
dreadlocks?
’”

Courtney
says Furniss simply stared off into the distance, ignoring his
questions.

After
beating around the bush, and avoiding my questions, I asked him, I
pleaded with him, I almost broke out in tears, growing increasingly
angry because I didn’t understand
.”

He
continued:

Something
in me said, ‘You know what? He just needs love. Maybe he never met
an African-American like this,

Courtney told the Daily
News, 
citing
the teachers of his father, who is a bishop.

He
told Furniss to give him a hug and wrapped his arms around him.
Furniss initially resisted, but Courtney says that after his third
attempt, he finally hugged him back.

Why
do you hate me?

Courtney asked. He says Furniss finally responded that he didn’t
know.

I
believe that was his sincere answer. He really doesn’t know,”
 he
said, adding that he believes their interaction made a difference.

I
honestly feel that was a step in the right direction, for him to take
a picture with a guy that he hated when he woke up this morning
.”

Courtney’s
attitude runs in stark contrast to many of the violent and enraged
reactions some Americans have displayed toward to the growth of
prejudiced ideologies in the United States.

But
it is not unheard of. Darryl Jones, an African-American musician,
recently released a documentary called 
Accidental
Courtesy
 in
which he demonstrates his experience talking to members of the KKK as
he fosters dialogue, tears down barriers, and challenges preconceived
assumptions. He says he has directly 
contributed to
at least 200 KKK members’ decisions to leave the hate group.

Creative
Commons
 / Anti-Media / Report
a typo

==========================================

De getoonde video is een meer uitgebreide dan die in het originele bericht, waarvan ik de video niet over kan nemen.

Charlottesville: wat er fout ging voor de verzamelde gewelddadige en bewapende fascisten……….

Het hieronder opgenomen artikel verscheen eerder op Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) en werd gisteren op Anti-Media gepubliceerd. De schrijver, Jeffrey Tucker, stelt: ‘sociale en politieke bewegingen kunnen niet volledig de gevolgen bepalen van door hen gedane inspanningen. Acties worden gevolgd door tegenacties, die niet verwacht noch bedoeld zijn. Dit omdat geen beweging of groep, hoe groot en machtig ook de menselijke geest kan beheersen van anderen die geen deelgenoot zijn van hun zaak’.

Schermafbeelding 2017-08-16 om 07.37.16

Het doel van de KKK, neonazi’s en andere extreem rechtse, fascistische bewegingen, was de gelederen te sluiten, het protest tegen het voornemen om het standbeeld van Robert E. Lee te verwijderen, was een excuus om dit doel te bereiken: ‘Unite the Right…’ Het beest Trump en anderen, zoals een fiks aantal ‘journalisten en intellectuelen’ in ons land, stellen dat er veel ‘goedwillende mensen’ onder deze fascisten waren te vinden en wijzen ‘alt-left’ (ofwel: ‘Antifa’) aan als mede verantwoordelijkenvoor de ontstane ellende…… Alsof deze mensen, net als de fascisten in de VS, de ene na de andere moord begaan……… Tucker betoogt dat de deelnemers aan dit ‘Unite the Right’ evenement, alle verschillen die men had met de neonazi’s en KKK leden, opzij wilden zetten en zich zo als een politieke eenheid te tonen…….

Afbeeldingsresultaat voor photos of the riots in charlottesville

Deze foto heb ik op 23 december 2017 geplaatst toen ik zag dat een eerdere foto door Google is verwijderd, hier de tekst bij die eerdere foto, die ik niet terug kan vinden: Zie
de eerste vrouw in uniform, rechts naast de gekleurde man, op haar
bedrukte shirt, kan je nog net een swastika zien…….. Volgens
velen, zelfs intellectuelen in Nederland, moet je dat geteisem de
vrijheid geven hun mening te uiten…….. Walgelijk! 

Lees dit uitstekende artikel van Jeffrey Tucker, waarin hij betoogt, dat ‘alt-right’ haar doel heeft gemist, voorts stelt hij dat het standbeeld van Lee meer symboliseert, dan de persoon zelf (opgenomen een video, die ik al eerder in een bericht heb opgenomen, Tucker adviseert die eerst te zien, voor zijn artikel te lezen):

Charlottesville
Effect: 5 Ways the ‘Unite the Right’ Marches Totally Backfired

August
18, 2017 at 8:11 am

Written
by 
Anti-Media
News Desk

(FEE) —
It’s
a rule of social and political movements that they cannot fully
control the outcome of their efforts. Actions cause reactions, many
of them unanticipated and certainly unintended. This is because no
group, no matter how powerful, can control the human minds of others
not part of their cause.

This
is why so many movements driven by a revolt ethos and revolutionary
intentions have created so many unforeseen messes that are often the
opposite of their stated aims.

So
it is with the “Unite the Right” (alt-right, fascist, white
supremacist, revanchist, Nazi, and so on) marchers who descended on
the peaceful Virginia town of Charlottesville in August. Before
you read on, I would strongly suggest that you watch this video on
the march. It is truth telling, and it provides the context you need.

Donald
Trump and many others like to say that there were “good people”
marching too, but this ignores the entire title of the rally. The
“Unite the Right” theme meant that anyone participating was
necessarily putting aside differences with the Nazis and the Klan in
order to achieve the goal of becoming a national political presence
(the controversy over the statue of Robert E. Lee was only the
excuse).

The
aftermath of the march has been a fallout very different from what
they expected.

Statues
Torn Down

Only
a few years ago, the idea of toppling the statues of Confederate
generals strewn throughout the South would have been unthinkable.
Charlottesville was a test case: perhaps this Lee statue should go,
simply because it seems to be a distraction from the progress the
citizens want and an unnecessary reminder of a painful past. The city
council voted to remove it. This precipitated the rally.

To
be sure, there are defensible arguments for recognizing the
Confederate dead. But the protesters were not drawn from a heritage
society like the Sons of Confederate Veterans (my great-grandfather
was a medic in a Southern troop, and I’m named after Jefferson
Davis), but rather the hardest and most bitter among the hard-right,
anti-liberal ideologues. That association has further fueled the
anti-statue movement among activists, and today none are safe. They
are being torn down in the dead of night, all over the country,
stricken down by city councils all over the South, and condemned as
never before. None will likely survive this.

Should
the statues stay or not? These statues have a complex history. They
were not erected to honor the Confederate dead following the war or
even at the end of Reconstruction. Most appeared in the early 1920s
to send a message that the race-relation liberalization that happened
between 1880 and 1900 would not return. The progress and normalcy
would be replaced by a racist/statist/”progressive” movement
rallying around new eugenic laws, zoning, white supremacy, forced
exclusion, state segregation and so on – policies supported not by
the people but by white elites infected with demographic fear and
pseudo-science. This is when a movement started putting up these
statues, not to honor history but as a symbol of intimidation and
state control of association.

The
statue in Charlottesville statue went up the same year that
immigration restrictions went into place for explicit eugenic
reasons, and Jim Crow laws were tight and an entire population group
faced what amounted to an attempted extermination (that is not an
exaggeration but a description of a well-documented reality).

In
other words, Lee (a tragic figure in many ways) was then being
drafted by a wicked movement he would likely have never supported,
despite all his failings. So the controversy over whether it should
stay or go is not really about the war that occurred a half-century
before the statue went up but a symbol of racial control. This is the
memory we are dealing with here. It’s very similar to how the
Neo-Nazis today are abusing his tragic legacy in service of their
dangerous agenda.

Public
Revulsion

During
the presidential campaign in 2015, Hillary Clinton famous attacked
the “deplorables” who were supporting Trump, including hard
racists and fascists. The result was outrage: it seemed that she was
calling all Trump supporters these names. In fact, Trump supporters –
so many were just people disgusted by the policies of his predecessor
and wanted fundamental change in government – took on the name
“deplorable.”

Most
people in those days – never forget that most regular people do not
follow 4chan or Twitter – had no idea of the burgeoning movement of
hard-right ideologues that was gathering at the time, using Trump for
their own purposes.

The
Charlottesville “Unite the Right” march changed everything. What
we saw from online videos and news reports was what looked like a
dangerous paramilitary force, none from the city, with optics from
the interwar period, carrying torches, Nazi-style insignias, flags,
and screaming anti-Semitic and racist slogans. This was not anything
like a Tea Party protest. It was something completely different and
truly terrifying for the residents of this idyllic town.

In
other words, it looked deplorable. It was the breakout of this
movement into the mainstream. But instead of fueling some kind of
white revolution, the results have been the exact opposite. This
movement seems anti-American, filled with hate, unchecked by normal
civil engagement, truly dangerous to public order, and of strange
foreign origin. This did not look like free speech; it looked like a
threat. It was not about demanding freedom but rather demanding
power.

This
is what accounts for the shock and disorientation among conservative
and Republican commentators who want nothing to do with these people
and the ideas behind it. From my point of view, this is a very good.
From the point of view of this movement, it is presumably not what
they were going for.

What’s
fascinating to me is how these people got to this point of no return,
forgetting to check themselves with observations such as: “do you
think it is wise that we parade around like the very people the US
went to war to defeat only 70 years ago?”

To
understand that requires we plunge into the kind of group psychology
that leads to such fanatic movements – too much to take on here.

Government
Crackdown

The
marchers used Virginia’s open-carry laws and protections for free
speech and association to their advantage. They also used the plea
for tolerating their ideas in order to get a hearing. The ACLU, I
believe, was right in fighting for the speech rights of the marchers.

That
said, this was not a march about human rights; it was a march about
threats to others and a demand for power. It has prompted Justice
Department investigations, a resignation from the board of the ACLU,
and a widespread questioning of how this fiasco that resulted in so
much mayhem was ever tolerated to begin with.

We
are nearly guaranteed to see an increase in government surveillance
of hate groups, of monitoring of our online communications, of
restrictions on political organizing – all in reaction and response
and to the cheers of a terrified public.

It
is precisely events like this that cause people to lose freedoms, not
gain them. If any participants in the “Unite the Right” really
believed they were fighting for freedom, they have achieved the
opposite. But there is also this: groups like this thrive in
persecution. They never go away, especially this one because so much
of its ethos is about how they have been suppressed and oppressed.
Make them victims and they thrive ever more.

Boost
to the Left

The
true tragedy of many responses to the march was the false choice it
set up: that the only alternative to the alt-right is the leftist
antifa. Or conversely, if you hate the leftist antifa, you have no
choice but to back the alt-right. This is sheer nonsense. Most of the
people resisting what had all the appearances of a Nazi invasion were
regular citizens, not antifa. There is nothing “leftist” about
resenting the vision of Nazis taking over public spaces.

It
was a true inspiration to see the response from the merchant class,
condemning racism and fascism in no uncertain terms. Business loves
peace and friendship, not hate and civil unrest.

However,
politically, it is unclear whether this response will find a voice.
The people most in opposition to the rise of the Nazi movement in
America has been the left, and the fallout could actually boost the
prospects of the Bernie Sanders movement, as revulsion leads to an
embrace of its seeming opposite.

Incidentally,
this is precisely why it is so important for libertarians to speak
out with truth and courageous conviction. We simply cannot allow the
left to be the only ideological voice of oppositional.

Trump’s
Legacy

It
is probably too early to say what will define Trump’s legacy in
office, but his defense of the marchers, and the equation of their
bad elements with the other bad elements that opposed them, might be
it. It was the very statement that the most indefensible aspects of
the alt-right truly wanted. And it was thus no surprise that even
some of Trump’s previous defenders bailed on him in the days
following.

You
cannot give up your credibility on basic issues like human rights and
the dignity of every human life and expect to maintain political
support over the long run. We are too far down the path toward peace
and universal emancipation to go there. The future is bright and not
grim and bloody, as these marchers and their backers imagine.

Many
people have predicted the end of the Trump approach before, but
something does seem different this time. It’s very sad because
Trump has many good ideas – ideas that are evidently not that
important to him – and represents too many good causes (for
which he has done very little) for this to happen. But when you
choose to die on a hill of bigotry and intolerance, there is not
enough credibility remaining for anything else.

No
movement based on the aspiration to rule and oppress others can fully
anticipate how their activities will play out over time. In this
respect, the alt-right has done a terrible disservice to itself and
perhaps to everyone else as well.

The
question is: what are people who love human rights and liberty for
all going to do about it? In the end, the only really effective
resistance comes in the what we believe and how we live our lives. We
have seen what we do not love. The real issue is whether we can find
and then build what it is we truly do love.

By Jeffrey
A. Tucker
 / Creative
Commons
 / FEE.org / Report
a typo

=========================================================

Zie
ook: 

Before
Trump, Clinton Democrats Invoked the Term ‘Alt-Left’ to Demonize
Critics

Among
the Racists

(met mogelijkheid tot vertaling)

Neonazi
terreuraanslag in VS, westerse media spreken ‘op hun best’ over ‘een
daad van agressie……’

Charlottesville:
Trump haalt antifascisten toch onderuit………

Charlottesville:
twee schuldigen? Of is het de taak van eenieder te vechten tegen
fascisme?
‘ 


De evolutie van politiestaat VS o.a. te zien in het buitenspel zetten van burgerrechten in steden als Boston en Charlottesville

Charlottesville: twee schuldigen? Of is het de taak van eenieder te vechten tegen fascisme?

Sinds de gebeurtenissen in Charlottesville, waar een fascist een jonge vrouw vermoordde en andere neonazi’s met wapens en knuppels tekeergingen, is er een discussie losgebarsten waarin ook linkse antifascisten* (Antifa) verantwoordelijk worden gesteld voor het geweld…….. Terwijl je kan stellen dat zij zich zelf en andere demonstranten verdedigden tegen het fascistische geteisem, dat zelfs met wapens rondliep in Charlottesville……..

Die antifascisten, o.a. door Clinton cs aangeduid als ‘alt-left’ (dit al tijdens de voorverkiezingen van het presidentschap in de VS vorig jaar), bevechten terecht het fascisme, waarbij ze tot nu toe niet  één dodelijk slachtoffer hebben gemaakt, dit i.t.t. tot de neonazi’s die vanaf het jaar 2000 tot 2016 in de VS al 49 mensen hebben vermoord …….

Na WOII zou het de taak van eenieder moeten zijn, zich te verzetten tegen het opnieuw opkomende fascisme………

Bent u van mening, dat links schuld heeft aan de gebeurtenissen in Charlottesville, dan raad ik ook u aan, de hieronder opgenomen video te bekijken. Onder het begeleidende artikel kan u klikken voor een vertaling:

This
Vice News Documentary from Charlottesville Is Horrifying

Watch
it and share it.

By
Jack Holmes

August
16, 2017 “Information
Clearing House
” – Hundreds of white
supremacists 
marched
with torches in an American city Friday night
.
They arrived the next day brandishing weapons and armor. One white
supremacist 
allegedly
murdered an anti-racist protester
 in
the street with his car and injured several others. This is what
really happened when you peel back all the rhetoric flying in the
aftermath, and after you tune out the first reprehensible response
from the President of the United States, and his subsequent update to
it 
that
was two days late and a dollar short
.


Vice News, to the outlet’s immense credit, was on the ground to document the events in Charlottesville this weekend. Reporter Elle Reeve even embedded, for a time, with white supremacist leader Chris Cantwell. What she found speaks for itself, but keep an eye out for the little things. Like, say, how many guns these white supremacists have

The
question before us is obvious. Is this the country we’ve built for
ourselves? And can we allow it to continue this way?


Click
for
 SpanishGermanDutchDanishFrench,
translation- Note- 
Translation
may take a moment to load.

==============================

* Bestaan er eigenlijk nog rechtse antifascisten?

Zie ook:

Before Trump, Clinton Democrats Invoked the Term ‘Alt-Left’ to Demonize Critics

Among the Racists‘ (met mogelijkheid tot vertaling)

Neonazi
terreuraanslag in VS, westerse media spreken ‘op hun best’ over ‘een
daad van agressie……’

Charlottesville:
Trump haalt antifascisten toch onderuit………

Charlottesville: twee schuldigen? Of is het de taak van eenieder te vechten tegen fascisme?

Charlottesville: wat er fout ging voor de verzamelde gewelddadige en bewapende fascisten……….

De evolutie van politiestaat VS o.a. te zien in het buitenspel zetten van burgerrechten in steden als Boston en Charlottesville

Trumps grote held: Andrew Jackson, een genocidale voorstander van slavernij………

Afgelopen zaterdag ontving ik een artikel van Harvey Wasserman. Hierin vertelt hij over het beest Trump en zijn uitlating dat zijn held, Andrew ‘Andy’ Jackson, de burgeroorlog in de VS had kunnen voorkomen…… ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

Jackson was een genocidale voorstander van slavernij, dezelfde slavernij die ten grondslag lag aan die burgeroorlog……… Jackson was democraat en onder zijn presidentschap is een enorm aantal oorspronkelijke bewoners van de VS vermoord, de zogenaamde indianen…….

Eerst als militair en later als president, heeft deze schoft een fikse steen bijgedragen aan de vreselijke en enorme genocide die de leiders van het gestolen land hebben uitgevoerd op de oorspronkelijke bewoners van dat ‘land’. Het gestolen ‘land’ dat wordt aangeduid als de Verenigde Staten van Amerika………

Het gaat hier overigens over een genocide, die een enorm aantal slachtoffers meer heeft gemaakt, dan de genocide van Hitler en zijn psychopathisch tuig op de joden………

Het maakt alweer het e.e.a. duidelijk over Trumps zieke geest….

Hier het artikel van Harvey Wasserman:

How
Trump’s Genocidal Hero Andrew Jackson Might Have “Avoided the
Civil War”

A portrait of former president Andrew Jackson hangs on the wall behind President Donald Trump, accompanied by Vice President Mike Pence, in the Oval Office at the White House in late March. (photo: Andrew Harnik/AP)

A
portrait of former president Andrew Jackson hangs on the wall behind
President Donald Trump, accompanied by Vice President Mike Pence, in
the Oval Office at the White House in late March. (photo: Andrew
Harnik/AP)

By
Harvey Wasserman, Reader Supported News

05
May 17


onald
Trump’s latest insane excursion into US history has been to claim
that his great hero, Andrew Jackson, might have prevented the Civil
War.

Given
his racist, genocidal nature, our seventh president could only have
done that by giving up slavery in the South, spreading it into the
North or giving the Southwest back to Mexico.

Jackson,
of course, would never have given up slavery, which was the cause of
the war and the core of his fortune.

As
a young man, like a cowboy driving cattle, Jackson personally drove
slaves to market. He eventually owned more than a hundred of them,
and defended America’s “peculiar institution” at every
opportunity.

In
addition to their authoritarian temperaments, Jackson and Trump share
“accomplishments” such as trashing the Constitution, personally
profiting from the presidency, and inciting imperial conquest.
Jackson did stand for the Union against South Carolina’s threatened
secession, but that was about tariffs, not slavery.

Trump
rightly says Jackson was “tough.” In 1806, in one of his fourteen
duels, Jackson took a bullet an inch from his heart. He then killed
his opponent in a manner considered most unchivalrous, and became a
social outcast for many years. The bullet stayed in his chest until
his own death four decades later.

Jackson
was also a pioneer homophobe. As Sen. James Buchanan of Pennsylvania
openly lived with his likely lover, Sen. Rufus King of South
Carolina, Jackson loudly referred to him as “Aunt Nancy.” (After
King died, Buchanan became our only “bachelor president.”)

But
mainstream historians have made a hero of “Old Hickory.” Born to
dirt poor Irish immigrants who died early, Jackson’s hardscrabble
upbringing was the opposite of Trump’s.

Trump
inherited millions from his father, who was a Klan (Kukluksklan, of KKK, AP) sympathizer (or
member), a landlord so cruel that the legendary leftie folksinger
Woody Guthrie wrote a song denouncing him.

Andrew
Jackson pre-dated the Klan, but would’ve killed for an estate like
the one Trump inherited. And he did.

As
an orphan, Jackson began his military career at age 13. Rising
through the ranks as an Indian killer, he conquered the Chickasaw by
recruiting their ancient rivals, the Cherokee. Jackson then turned on
the Cherokee as if they had been the enemy. His racism was open,
lethal, and proud.

With
Trump-style “Common Man” rhetoric, Jackson promised to destroy
the National Bank. He then made insider deals with the smaller banks
that replaced it, enriching his backers and himself. These and other
scams helped buy him his 1000-acre slave plantation in Tennessee.

When
he conquered native land for the US, Jackson and his cronies somehow
wound up with the best parcels. His 1830 Indian Removal Act ordered
all eastern tribes to move west of the Mississippi.

The
Appalachian Cherokee had an advanced tribal government, an elected
leader (John Ross), a capitol, a written constitution, and much more.
Most lived in private homes and ran successful farms. Some (like
Ross) owned plantations and slaves. There were seven Cherokee lumber
mills.

The
Cherokee petitioned for statehood. Supreme Court Chief Justice John
Marshall ruled that the Constitution allowed no new state to be
created from existing ones (Abraham Lincoln dodged that technicality
in 1863 to form West Virginia).

But
Marshall also ruled that the Cherokee had sovereignty (a clause later
used to site casinos) and a Constitutional right to stay on their
ancestral lands.

Jackson
replied, Trump-style, that he would ignore the Court. Under Jackson’s
successor, Martin Van Buren, federal troops forced some 14,000
Cherokee out of their homes at gunpoint. Through the summer of 1838
they were held in a concentration camp. Then, along the infamous
“Trail of Tears,” they were marched hundreds of miles to
Oklahoma. About 3,000 died along the way.

Jackson
promised the Cherokee and other tribes the right to live in that
Oklahoma territory “as long as the grass grows and the rivers
flow.” Fifty years later their “excess land” was given to white
“Sooners” who raced in on horseback and covered wagons to claim
homesteads.

As
for the Civil War, its root cause was conflict over Mexican land.
Mexico abolished slavery in its 1821 revolution against Spain. But
American settlers (many from Tennessee) re-established it in 1836,
when (after the Alamo) they made Texas an independent republic.

Jackson
died in 1845. The next year his protégé, James K. Polk, provoked a
war and took from Mexico what became New Mexico, Arizona, California,
Colorado, Nevada and more. US troops marched all the way into Mexico
City, where young soldiers like Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant
fought side-by-side. Americans like Abraham Lincoln and Henry Thoreau
denounced the conquest as a “poison pill.”

The
Civil War broke out when slave owners demanded the right to spread
slavery into the West. California’s 1850 statehood gave free states
a majority in Congress. War erupted in Kansas, where John Brown and
other abolitionists battled slave owners for control.

The
only way Jackson’s “art of the deal” might have avoided the
Civil War was by persuading northerners to embrace slavery, or
southerners to give it up. But both regions were committed to
expansion, and neither wanted the other’s economic system. When
Lincoln said the nation could not exist “half slave and half free,”
he was tragically correct.

Of
course, war might have been avoided if Jackson’s progeny had given
that land back to Mexico, or restored the Carolinas to the Cherokee,
or persuaded the southerners that slavery was never going to work in
the West anyway. Cotton does not grow in Kansas or the Southwest, and
slavery made no economic sense in the desert, corn or wheat fields.

Without
the Jacksonian conquest of Mexico, the “immigrants” Trump now
attacks would merely be living on their own land. The wall Trump
wants to build tracks a border that did not exist before Polk overran
what was once both our southern and our western neighbor.

Sorting
through his often insane pronouncements about US history, Trump has
seemed surprised to discover that Abraham Lincoln was actually his
fellow Republican, while Jackson was a Democrat. Each was the first
president from his respective party. Both were “men of the people.”
But their views on slavery were, literally, at war with each other.

Trump
might also note that when he retired from the presidency in 1837,
Jackson found a trusted relative had squandered his wealth. Much of
what he’d gouged out of slaughtering Indians and whipping slaves
was gone.

Since
Trump has joined Jackson in using the presidency to enrich himself,
he might want to oversee his sons more carefully.

He
might also try doing a better job with the economy. As Trump’s hero
left office in 1837, his immediate “legacy” featured a major
stock market panic followed by four years of depression.

No
doubt the Great Historian would loudly blame that on the Democrats …
until he realized his hero actually was one.


Harvey
Wasserman’s
 History
of the US is at www.solartopia.org,
along with Solartopia! Our Green-Powered Earth.

==================================

Klik voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, op één van de labels, die u hieronder terug kan vinden, dit geldt niet voor de labels: John Brown, Chickasaw, A. Jackson en Lincoln.