Sunday 28 February 2021

“Environmental Racism” in America: A Public Health Crisis

 


“Environmental Racism” in America: A Public Health Crisis


Last month, after a year-long investigation, former Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder and eight other officials were charged for their roles in the Flint water crisis – the environmental disaster that shocked the nation seven years ago. All nine defendants pleaded not guilty to 42 charges, including willful neglect of duty, manslaughter, extortion, perjury and obstruction of justice.

In Flint, extremely high levels of lead in the city’s drinking water had wide-ranging and severe health effects, including a community-wide outbreak of Legionnaires’ disease, a form of pneumonia. The children of Flint experienced serious and lasting health problems, including lost teeth. A study conducted by the state found that from 2014 to 2017, the share of third graders with reading proficiency plummeted from about 42 percent to less than 11 percent. Lead is a potent neurotoxin that can cause diminished IQ in young children.

The water crisis in Flint, a majority-Black city of about 100,000, is the “most egregious” example of environmental injustice and racism in recent history, says Paul Mohai, a University of Michigan professor who has studied the U.S. environmental justice movement for decades. The Michigan Civil Rights Commission’s investigation foundthat the water crisis resulted from “systemic racism that was built into the foundation and growth” of the city.

This sobering fact is true of the entire nation.

Environmental racism in America disproportionately burdens communities of color with health hazards and polluted environments through policies, structures and practices. As the Michigan commission said: “Environmental Justice requires that all people and communities receive the equal protection of environmental and public health laws, and should have an equal and meaningful voice in decisions related to their environment.”

Many of the most polluted places in our nation are close to or even in poor, largely non-white communities. According to a recent report by the Shriver Center on Poverty Law and Earthjustice, 70 percent of the country’s Superfund sites, America’s most polluted environments, are located within a mile of government-assisted housing, where a majority of residents are typically Black.

In EWG’s almost three decades, we have seen time and time again how racism lies at the root of many of the worst threats to public health. Here are just two tragic examples:

PCBs in a small Southern town

In Anniston, Ala., another largely Black community, carcinogenic PCB chemicals contaminated the soil and water for almost half a century, unbeknownst to the residents. The chemical manufacturer Monsanto routinely dumped toxic waste into a creek on the west side of town and released millions of pounds of PCBs into open landfills.

For decades, Monsanto deceived the residents of Anniston, attempting to cover up the extent to which their community had been contaminated by these toxic chemicals. When government and environmental laws failed them, community organizers had to take matters into their own hands and file their own lawsuits against Monsanto to ensure justice.

In 2002, EWG worked with local activists in Anniston to help draw attention to Monsanto’s decades-long deception and coverup of its PCB contamination, which ultimately resulted in a $700 million fine after the company was found guilty by the state of “negligence, wantonness, suppression of truth, nuisance, trespass, and outrage.” Still, today Anniston remains one of the most toxic cities in the U.S.

Factory farms in North Carolina

In North Carolina, intensive hog and poultry confined animal feeding operations, or CAFOs, place an immense burden on the environment and the health of the residents in rural, poor and largely minority communities.

In 2017, an Environmental Protection Agency review of a civil rights suit alleging discriminatory impacts of state permitting of hog operations found a “linear relationship between race/ethnicity [of residents within three miles of industrial hog operations] and … density of hogs.” Duke University researchers found that North Carolina communities located near these concentrated hog operations had higher total and infant deaths, deaths due to anemia, kidney disease, tuberculosis, septicemia and higher hospital admissions, and emergency room visits of low birthweight infants.

In 2016, in collaboration with Waterkeeper Alliance and local environmental justice advocates, EWG mapped the location of every swine and poultry factory farm in North Carolina, allowing residents to see for the first time how many CAFOs are close to their homes, schools, churches and places of work.

On the long road to environmental justice, the U.S. has far to go.

Following a vote of the Virginia legislature this week, a state “long associated with racist and segregationist behavior” is expected to become the first Southern state to declare that racism is a public health crisis. The sponsor of the measure, Delegate Lashrecse D. Aird, told USA Today that systemic racism “defines the Black experience in our nation and in our commonwealth.” The resolution, she added, “provides the framework for all of us to formally and finally reckon with those injustices so we can build a more equitable and just society for us all.”

To address systemic racism, we must acknowledge the role race and racism have played in our history and how they continue to affect the present; develop a deeper understanding of how structural racialization and implicit bias influence decision-making; and ensure that public concerns get heard and addressed. Until all communities are met with equal protection, racial equity and justice must be the foundation of environmental and public health laws and standards.

Biden’s Reckless Syria Bombing Is Not the Diplomacy He Promised

 


Biden’s Reckless Syria Bombing Is Not the Diplomacy He Promised


The February 25 U.S. bombing of Syria immediately puts the policies of the newly-formed Biden administration into sharp relief. Why is this administration bombing the sovereign nation of Syria? Why is it bombing “Iranian-backed militias” who pose absolutely no threat to the United States and are actually involved in fighting ISIS? If this is about getting more leverage vis-a-vis Iran, why hasn’t the Biden administration just done what it said it would do: rejoin the Iran nuclear deal and de-escalate the Middle East conflicts?

According to the Pentagon, the U.S. strike was in response to the February 15 rocket attack in northern Iraq that killed a contractor working with the U.S. military and injured a U.S. service member. Accounts of the number killed in the U.S. attack vary from one to 22.

The Pentagon made the incredible claim that this action “aims to de-escalate the overall situation in both Eastern Syria and Iraq.” This was countered by the Syrian government, which condemned the illegal attack on its territory and said the strikes “will lead to consequences that will escalate the situation in the region.” The strike was also condemned by the governments of China and Russia. A member of Russia’s Federation Council warned that such escalations in the area could lead to “a massive conflict.”

Ironically, Jen Psaki, now Biden’s White House spokesperson, questioned the lawfulness of attacking Syria in 2017, when it was the Trump administration doing the bombing. Back then she asked: “What is the legal authority for strikes? Assad is a brutal dictator. But Syria is a sovereign country.”

The airstrikes were supposedly authorized by the 20-year-old, post-9/11 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), legislation that Rep. Barbara Lee has been trying for years to repeal since it has been misused, according to the congresswoman, “to justify waging war in at least seven different countries, against a continuously expanding list of targetable adversaries.”

The United States claims that its targeting of the militia in Syria was based on intelligence provided by the Iraqi government. Defense Secretary Austin told reporters: “We’re confident that target was being used by the same Shia militia that conducted the strike [against U.S. and coalition forces].”

But a report by Middle East Eye (MEE) suggests that Iran has strongly urged the militias it supports in Iraq to refrain from such attacks, or any warlike actions that could derail its sensitive diplomacy to bring the U.S. and Iran back into compliance with the 2015 international nuclear agreement or JCPOA.

“None of our known factions carried out this attack,” a senior Iraqi militia commander told MEE. “The Iranian orders have not changed regarding attacking the American forces, and the Iranians are still keen to maintain calm with the Americans until they see how the new administration will act.”

The inflammatory nature of this U.S. attack on Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, who are an integral part of Iraq’s armed forces and have played a critical role in the war with ISIS, was implicitly acknowledged in the U.S. decision to attack them in Syria instead of in Iraq. Did Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi, a pro-Western British-Iraqi, who is trying to rein in the Iranian-backed Shiite militias, deny permission for a U.S. attack on Iraqi soil?

At Kadhimi’s request, NATO is increasing its presence from 500 troops to 4,000 (from Denmark, the U.K. and Turkey, not the U.S.) to train the Iraqi military and reduce its dependence on the Iranian-backed militias. But Kadhimi risks losing his job in an election this October if he alienates Iraq’s Shiite majority. Iraqi Foreign Minister Fuad Hussein is heading to Tehran to meet with Iranian officials over the weekend, and the world will be watching to see how Iraq and Iran will respond to the U.S. attack.

Some analysts say the bombing may have been intended to strengthen the U.S. hand in its negotiations with Iran over the nuclear deal (JCPOA). “The strike, the way I see it, was meant to set the tone with Tehran and dent its inflated confidence ahead of negotiations,” said Bilal Saab, a former Pentagon official who is currently a senior fellow with the Middle East Institute.

But this attack will make it more difficult to resume negotiations with Iran. It comes at a delicate moment when the Europeans are trying to orchestrate a “compliance for compliance” maneuver to revive the JCPOA. This strike will make the diplomatic process more difficult, as it gives more power to the Iranian factions who oppose the deal and any negotiations with the United States.

Showing bipartisan support for attacking sovereign nations, key Republicans on the foreign affairs committees such as Senator Marco Rubio and Rep. Michael McCaul immediately welcomed the attacks. So did some Biden supporters, who crassly displayed their partiality to bombing by a Democratic president.

Party organizer Amy Siskind tweeted: “So different having military action under Biden. No middle school level threats on Twitter. Trust Biden and his team’s competence.” Biden supporter Suzanne Lamminen tweeted: “Such a quiet attack. No drama, no TV coverage of bombs hitting targets, no comments on how presidential Biden is. What a difference.”

Thankfully though, some Members of Congress are speaking out against the strikes. “We cannot stand up for Congressional authorization before military strikes only when there is a Republican President,” Congressman Ro Khanna tweeted, “The Administration should have sought Congressional authorization here. We need to work to extricate from the Middle East, not escalate.” Peace groups around the country are echoing that call. Rep. Barbara Lee and Senators Bernie SandersTim Kaine and Chris Murphy also released statements either questioning or condemning the strikes.

Americans should remind President Biden that he promised to prioritize diplomacy over military action as the primary instrument of his foreign policy. Biden should recognize that the best way to protect U.S. personnel is to take them out of the Middle East. He should recall that the Iraqi Parliament voted a year ago for U.S. troops to leave their country. He should also recognize that U.S. troops have no right to be in Syria, still “protecting the oil,” on the orders of Donald Trump.

After failing to prioritize diplomacy and rejoin the Iran nuclear agreement, Biden has now, barely a month into his presidency, reverted to the use of military force in a region already shattered by two decades of U.S. war-making. This is not what he promised in his campaign and it is not what the American people voted for.

EU Leaders ‘Have All Agreed that We Need Vaccine Passports’

 


Merkel: EU Leaders ‘Have All Agreed that We Need Vaccine Passports’

Commission President urges EU wide implementation now, warning that sooner or later Google and Apple will get involved.


After the European Commission convened to discuss the potential of so called ‘vaccine passports’ Thursday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel told reporters that “We have all agreed that we need vaccine certificates.”

Bloomberg reports that Merkel added

“In the future, it will certainly be good to have such a certificate but that will not mean that only those who have such a passport will be able to travel; about that, no political decisions have been made yet.”

The German leader also stated

“This will make travelling within the EU possible and could pave the way for further travel from third countries into the EU,” suggesting that it will take three months to implement a vaccine passport system.

The report also notes that Commission President Ursula von der Leyen urged member states to make haste in agreeing a Europe wide system before Big Tech gets there first.

Von der Leyen reportedly cited Israel’s ‘Green Pass’ system, which the country is using as a domestic internal document, denying entry for the unvaccinated topublic spaces including sports events, restaurants and hotels.

While admitting that it is “unclear whether you can transmit the disease even if you are vaccinated,” the Commission leader stated “It is important to have a European solution because otherwise others will go into this vacuum.”

“Google and Apple are already offering solutions to the WHO [World Health Organization]. And this is sensitive information so we want to be very clear here that we offer a European solution,” Von der Leyen emphasised.

Alex Patelis, chief economic adviser to Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis, noted

“If we as European Union don’t provide a solution, somebody else will, whether it’s going to be the U.S. big tech companies or somebody else, the solution will be provided.”

“Let’s get the infrastructure ready,” Patelis added.

French President Emmanuel Macron has expressed skepticism over the notion of vaccine passports, but stated

“We’ll have, in the end, a harmonious EU approach,” adding “It’s obvious because there is no other choice.”

While there have been scant reports of Apple or Google developing vaccine passports, and the WHO has expressed caution on the issue, there are plenty of other schemes under development and being rolled out, as we have repeatedly highlighted.

FBI, NYPD Exposed: Deathbed Confession Shines New Light on Assassination of Malcolm X

 


FBI, NYPD Exposed: Deathbed Confession Shines New Light on Assassination of Malcolm X


Fifty-six years after the assassination of Malcolm X, new details from a former New York Police Department officer’s deathbed confession has further implicated the NYPD and FBI in the killing. Raymond Wood, the former NYPD officer, requested the letter be publicized only after his death due to fears of retaliation. Wood’s cousin, Reggie Wood, read out the letter’s contents in a press conference held in New York City on Saturday. Malcolm X’s family has demanded that the investigation of his murder be reopened.

Malcolm X, an iconic revolutionary and fighter for Black liberation, was assassinated on February 21, 1965, in the Audubon Ballroom in Harlem. Three men were tried and sentenced to prison for their role in the murder, but the official investigation has always been criticized for its failure to scrutinize the role of the government.

Wood’s letter claims that the NYPD and the FBI conspired to cover up the details of Malcolm X’s killing.

“I participated in actions that in hindsight were deplorable and detrimental to the advancement of my own Black people. My actions on behalf of the New York City Police Department were done under duress and fear,” the letter stated.

Furthermore, a press release described:

“Without any training, Wood’s job was to infiltrate civil rights organizations and encourage leaders and members to commit felonious acts. He was also tasked with ensuring that Malcolm X’s security detail was arrested days prior to the assassination, guaranteeing Malcolm X didn’t have door security while at the Audubon Ballroom.”

This evidence of FBI involvement in conjunction with local police departments is hardly without precedent. This is a part of a larger pattern, which includes the infamous Counter-Intelligence Program, also known as COINTELPRO. COINTELPRO was established in 1956 targeting the Communist Party and grew to have a particular focus on destroying the Black liberation movement. The FBI accomplished this through illegal wiretapping, surveillance, harassment, spreading false rumors, and even assassinations.

This revelation comes at an important time, particularly in the wake of renewed public consciousness about the murder of leading Black Panther Fred Hampton, who was also killed by the FBI and Chicago police in 1969. The FBI is also widely believed to have been involved in the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968.

The FBI has a long history of disrupting progressive movements using all possible underhanded and illegal tactics in their arsenal. Despite its attempts at rehabilitating its image, this institution continues to be an incredibly repressive force protecting the interests of the United States government against all those who seek a better, more just world.

America’s “Domestic War on Terror”: Under Domestic Terrorism Laws, Anyone Who Disagrees with the Government Can be Considered a Terrorist

 


America’s “Domestic War on Terror”: Under Domestic Terrorism Laws, Anyone Who Disagrees with the Government Can be Considered a Terrorist


Forget Al-Qaeda, Washington has a new domestic enemy in town and they are called the White Supremacists.  But the reality is that the new enemy is basically anyone who disagrees with the US government will be considered a terrorist.  For the Democratic Party and its mainstream-media lapdogs, January 6th, 2021 will live in infamy, in fact, there was even talk on making that day, a federal holiday.  It all began when Trump supporters who showed up in Washington D.C. to reject Joe Biden’s 2020 election results because they claimed that the elections had been stolen, but the Democrats insisted that it was not. 

Then, the unimaginable happened, the so-called White Supremacists invaded the US capital, declaring war on the treasonous congress members who were about to certify Joe Biden’s election victory.  It is widely known as ‘The storming of the capital’ which does sound like a name made for a Hollywood movie.  The Democrats say that they feared for their lives, some people were injured and even killed during the chaos.  There are many questions concerning as to who were the people behind the protests because many of the protesters believed that they were doing something right for their democracy, so it is quite possible that they were led by agent provocateurs.  So was it a domestic false-flag operation by placing agent provocateurs to blame all conservative Trump supporters who happen to be pro-2nd amendment, law-abiding citizens?  As of now, we still don’t know for sure.

The Biden administration and the rest of the Democratic party are in-lock step with the Military-Industrial Complex and the globalist cabal who are using the January 6th incident to further erode the basic freedoms of the US population.

We can say with certainty that the US is one false-flag operation away for the Biden administration to declare war on “right-wing” conservatives and everyone else who does not agree with their policies.

One thing to keep in mind is that if they go after one specific group of people, in due time, they will go after everyone else.  The mainstream media circus of CNN, MSNBC and a number of print media networks including The New York Times are using the term ‘White Supremacy’ to demonize certain groups of people who happen to support Trump.

They say that the White Supremacists are a major threat against anyone who shares the same values of the Democratic Party.  However, Washington’s war on terrorism did not start with the “White Supremacists” on January 6th, it began on September 11th,2001 with Al-Qaeda led by their mastermind, Osama Bin Laden who allegedly attacked the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

It is known as the September 11th Attacks, a proven false-flag operation conducted by the Bush regime and his Neocon cabal with help from their Israeli and to an extent, their Saudi counterparts.

The September 11th attacks allowed Washington to set its sights on invading Afghanistan in early October 2001, but also on Saddam Hussein who was accused of supporting Al-Qaeda, but at the same time, it also initiated the process of targeting US citizens at home and abroad.  

On October 26th, 2001, the Bush administration signed into law the USA Patriot Act against international and domestic terrorism. In Section 802 of the bill, it defines what can be considered domestic terrorism, but the interesting part of the document clarifies which intended acts imposed by the alleged perpetrators can be considered terrorism.

The Patriot Act states that suspected terrorists can “intimidate or coerce a civilian population”and “can influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion” or they can “affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping” as long as the acts of terrorism is within US jurisdiction.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) published an analysis on how the USA Patriot Act can be used on US citizens, ‘How the USA Patriot Act Redefines “Domestic Terrorism” says that “Section 802 does not create a new crime of domestic terrorism”  but it “does expand the type of conduct that the government can investigate when it is investigating “terrorism.”  The ACLU confirmed that “The USA PATRIOT Act expanded governmental powers to investigate terrorism, and some of these powers are applicable to domestic terrorism.”  Examples that the ACLU brings to the table involves various types of organizations that oppose US government policies:

The definition of domestic terrorism is broad enough to encompass the activities of several prominent activist campaigns and organizations. Greenpeace, Operation Rescue, Vieques Island and WTO protesters and the Environmental Liberation Front have all recently engaged in activities that could subject them to being investigated as engaging in domestic terrorism

The absurdity of the Patriot Act on how they can define who or what can fall under the domestic terrorism category mentioned by the ACLU was Vieques Island which is part of Puerto Rico where protests took place against the US Navy’s occupation and constant bombing of Vieques.  Vieques can be used as an example as to how far the US government can go under these new Domestic Terrorism laws.

To better understand what led to the decades-long protests in Puerto Rico began with the US military occupation of Vieques by the US Navy in 1938.  The US Navy had managed to occupy a large portion of the island with the forced evictions of thousands of Puerto Rican residents from their homes, most had to relocate to other areas of the island while active training exercises where taking place.

Bombing sites were open in close proximity to populated areas.  There were other activities conducted by the US Navy that included air-to-ground bombings, ship-to-shore shelling and other maneuvers sometimes in coordination with other allied countries who participated.  The history of civil disobedience campaigns in Puerto Rico began in the 1970’s with the Puerto Rican population forcing US Navy out of Culebra Island, another island east of Puerto Rico in 1974 and continued its struggle to the island of Vieques with the formation of the Comite pro Rescate y Desarrollo de Vieques (Committee for the Rescue and Development of Vieques, CPRDV).  It was not just dropping bombs, which was a very serious problem, but it was also what was in those bombs that was a major concern for the future of the island.

The US government had been dropping bombs that polluted the air and contaminated the island’s soil and its water supplies.  For many years, the US Navy had used depleted uranium, a metal that is made from uranium hexafluoride, technically a compound known as “Hex” used to enrich uranium.  In the nuclear industry, DU is called uranium 238 isotope.  Dr. Doug Rokke is a scientific expert on depleted uranium and former veteran of the 3rd U.S. Army Medical Command’s Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical (NBC) research team released a report titled “Depleted Uranium: Uses and Hazards” exposed what was happening:

The incident in Puerto Rico involved the deliberate use of DU in preparation for combat in Kosovo.  Although DU use is prohibited except during combat, the Navy fired at least 258 rounds in Vieques.  Navy personnel have reported that the Navy has been firing DU into Vieques for years but this was the first time they were caught.  Vieques is currently a national and international issue with confirmed environmental contamination and documented adverse health effects similar to those already observed

In 1998 alone, there were more than 20,000 bombs that were dropped on the island while live training exercises were taking place throughout the year.  In April 19th, 1999, David Sanes, a civilian security guard was killed by an accidental misfire from two F-18 bombs which ignited mass protests on the island.  Many around the world including Americans such as the phony opportunist, the reverend Al Sharpton who moonlights for extra cash on MSNBC sometimes participated in acts of civil disobedience against the US government and its occupied territory.

The ACLU said that “the protesters illegally entered the military base and tried to obstruct the bombing exercises” therefore, according to the ACLU its “domestic terrorism” since the protesters basically broke federal law “by unlawfully entering the airbase and their acts were for the purpose of influencing a government policy by intimidation or coercion.”  Under the USA Patriot Act “the act of trying to disrupt bombing exercises arguably created a danger to human life – their own and those of military personnel.”  In other words, the US government had established a new set of powers that can be used on the Vieques protesters whose actions “falls within the overbroad definition of domestic terrorism.” Despite the fact that a crime committed by the US government against the Puerto Rican people practically destroying the beautiful island with some of the best beaches in the world with depleted uranium, the Vieques protesters would now be considered “Domestic Terrorists.”  This is not dismissing the fact that there has been individuals and movements throughout US history who have committed serious acts of terrorism, because there were incidents.  However, under these new Domestic Terrorism laws, they can target anyone who opposes US government policies or corruption on any issue will be punished accordingly.

The Mainstream-Media Bypasses Al-Qaeda for White Supremacy

The Southern Poverty Law (SPLC) Center, a left-wing nonprofit legal advocacy organization which specializes in civil rights and public interest cases supported by Soros’s ‘Open Society Foundation, J. P. Morgan Chase and others have been leading the charge against White Supremacists:

The vast majority of hate groups – including neo-Nazis, Ku Klux Klan, racist skinheads, neo-Confederates  and white nationalists – adhere to some form of white supremacist ideology. Not surprisingly, the number of white nationalist groups, those particularly electrified by Trump’s presidency, surged by almost 50 percent – from 100 groups to 148 – in 2018.

But in an equal yet opposite reaction, black nationalists groups also expanded their ranks, growing from 233 chapters in 2017 to 264 in 2018. These groups are typically antisemitic, anti-LGBT and anti-white. Unlike white nationalist groups, however, they have virtually no supporters or influence in mainstream politics, much less in the White House

So how many neo-Nazis, neo-Confederates, Ku Klux Klan members are there?  Are they really a threat to a population of 320 million US citizens?

According to a 2016 article published by the Associated Press (AP)

‘At 150, KKK sees opportunities in US political trends’ stated that “the Alabama-based SPLC says there’s no evidence the Klan is returning to the strength of its heyday. It estimates the Klan has about 190 chapters nationally with no more than 6,000 members total, which would be a mere shadow of its estimated 2 million to 5 million members in the 1920s.” 

Even the left-wing based, The Daily Beast which published an article entitled ‘How Many Nazis Are There in America, Really? reiterates what the AP exposed:

However, they estimate that the KKK counts between 5,000 and 8,000 members nationwide. Back in the 1920’s, when cities across the south were erecting monuments to Confederate generals, the Klan had 4 million members. As Roger L. Simon points out, this would be an impressive decrease even if the population of the U.S. hadn’t swelled since the 1920’s. Back then, the Klan constituted about 4 percent of the entire U.S. population. Now, the KKK is near its nadir. That would make them less than 0.003 percent of the population, even on the higher end of the SPLC’s estimate. “It’s a small group of real bad people,” Simon writes

How many neo-Nazis exist in the US? The London-based news organization, The Independent published an article in 2017 with a title that reeks of pure propaganda ’22 million Americans support neo-Nazis, new poll indicates’ reported that  a “Washington Post ABC poll” that was conducted during a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia claimed that:

“If extrapolated to the entire US population, nine per cent would equate to 22 million people” and that “according to the survey, 83 per cent of Americans think holding neo-Nazi views is unacceptable.” 

However, one of the biggest neo-Nazi organizations in the US who call themselves the National Socialist Movement (NSM) has about several hundred members according to the Zionist Anti-Defamation League (ADL) archives who said that it is “the largest neo-Nazi group in the United States” and “Nonetheless, despite the stability of having the same leader for nearly two decades, the group has not managed to attract a large following. It has consistently maintained a membership of several hundred members.”

In other words, White Supremacist groups that the Democratic Party and the mainstream-media who claim that they are threat is an over-exaggeration.  We could probably say that there are over 250,000 neo-Nazis and other ultra right-wing extremists operating in the US, and that is a generous number.

Is White Supremacy an excuse to go after law-abiding citizens just like how Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State was used to invade countries in the Middle East?

Here is something to think about, in a federal study called the 2011 National Gang Threat Assessment – Emerging Trends confirmed that there are at least 33,000 gangs with 1.4 million gang members in the US.  So who is a bigger threat if you look at the numbers?

The  Washington Post recently’ headlined ‘The agency founded because of 9/11 Shifts to Face the Threat of Domestic Terrorism’ sounded the alarm on who can be considered domestic terrorists, and some will surprise you.

The article began its piece from a tragic incident that occurred in 2019 when a “21-year white man” killed 23 Latinos with an Ak-47 in El Paso, Texas.  They claim that the authorities said that “he wanted to kill Latinos.”  The media mentioned the incident that occurred in El Paso to remind the public that it is the conservatives who are armed and dangerous because of this 21 year-old deranged white man who wanted to stop the invasion of illegal immigrants from invading the US.

It was indeed a horrible crime, but that “white man” does not represent all conservatives in the US, but the media wants you to believe their narrative to create a deeper divide among the US population.

The Washington Post article goes on to say that the “the Jan. 6 attack has left many lawmakers, and especially Democrats, insisting that domestic terrorism has eclipsed the threat from foreign actors such as the Islamic State and al-Qaida.”The article said that

“the DHS and its agencies are responsible for securing the country’s borders, ports, transportation and cybersystems, generally leaving the monitoring of extremist groups and terrorism investigations to the FBI” but according to the article “the DHS and its agencies have nearly eight times as many employees as the FBI, and calls for the department to play a more muscular role in combating domestic extremism have policymakers looking at new ways to use its resources.”

Are they expanding the role of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other federal agencies to target White Supremacists?

Homeland Security Investigations, a branch of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), has about 6,000 agents nationwide who investigate drug smuggling, human trafficking and illicit goods or currency. The branch has not focused on countering domestic extremism, but it’s an armed component of the DHS that, in theory, could have a more hands-on role stopping homegrown terrorists and white supremacists

The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a bi-partisan think tank based in Washington, D.C. who in the past and present employed several familiar US government officials who worked in both Democrat and Republican administrations since its founding released an analysis on Domestic Terrorism.  Some of the most infamous war criminals are associated with the CSIS include long-time Globalist Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinki, the former national security advisor to the Carter administration and former CIA director under Barack Obama, Leon Panetta.  The CSIS published a brief on June 17, 2020 titled ‘The Escalating Terrorism Problem in the United States’ made their case claiming that the threat of Domestic Terrorism has become a major problem within the US:

The United States faces a growing terrorism problem that will likely worsen over the next year. Based on a CSIS data set of terrorist incidents, the most significant threat likely comes from white supremacists, though anarchists and religious extremists inspired by the Islamic State and al-Qaeda could present a potential threat as well. Over the rest of 2020, the terrorist threat in the United States will likely rise based on several factors, including the November 2020 presidential election

Interestingly, the analysis excludes religious terrorism associated with Al-Qaeda, the Islamic State (ISIS) and other terrorist organizations (especially when it is well-known that certain factions of the US government has supported these same terrorist groups in the past),

”while religious terrorism is concerning, the United States does not face the same level of threat today from religious extremists—particularly those inspired by Salafi-jihadist groups such as the Islamic State and al-Qaeda—as some European countries.”

So their focus is on Domestic Terrorism, “there are three broad types of right-wing terrorist individuals and networks in the United States,” the categoriesare “white supremacists, anti-government extremists, and incels” who have certain types of ideologies and a specific threat level they might impose including other factors that can fall under the realm of Domestic Terrorism.

However, they say that terrorists operate under a decentralized model” and that the “threats from these networks comes from individuals, not groups.”  The CSIS brief points out that terrorist networks who “operate and organize to a great extent online”, leaving the door open for more censorship, “right-wing terrorists have used various combinations of Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Gab, Reddit, 4Chan, 8kun (formerly 8Chan), Endchan, Telegram, Vkontakte, MeWe, Discord, Wire, Twitch, and other online communication platforms.”

It also highlights the threat of right-wing groups who are mostly described as “anti-government extremists” such as the militias who are legal under the US constitution and the Sovereign Citizen Movement and others who see the US government as threat to their civil liberties, “most militia extremists view the U.S. government as corrupt and a threat to freedom and rights.”

One of the militias ‘The Three Percenters’ believe in their right to bear arms and to limit the power of the U.S. government over the American people mentioned an incident that occurred on August 2017 when an alleged member of the Three Percenters by the name of Jerry Varnell “a 23-year-old who identified as holding the “III% ideology” and wanted to “start the next revolution, attempted to detonate a bomb outside of an Oklahoma bank, similar to the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.”

The majority of militia members are law abiding citizens.  The original Three Percenters website published a home-page in response to the mainstream-media’s demonization campaign, “We Are Not The” Three Percenters. We are “A” group of Three Percenters, known at The Three Percenters Original.  Our group is the exact opposite of what is being reported about Three Percenters in the news today.” their reaction to what the media has been accusing them of is made clear on to what they stand for, “We’re not violent. We’re not anti-government. We’re not extremists. We’re not a militia. We’re not white supremacists. We’re not racists. We’re not terrorists.  We DID NOT conspire or participate in the DC riots and Capitol breach on January 6th.”

The CSIS claims that right-wing activities occurred in various US states and even in Puerto Rico, “these incidents occurred in 42 states, Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico.”  The most concerning claim made by the CSIS is described in a section called ‘The Rising Specter of Terrorism’ mentioned the possibility of those who oppose Covid-19 lockdowns.  They describe what factors can contribute to domestic terrorism because it “will likely increase based on several factors, such as the November 2020 presidential election and the response to the Covid-19 crisis.”

The CSIS admits that both factors do not cause terrorism, but they do say it can “fuel anger and be co-opted by a small minority of extremists as a pretext for violence.”  They say that those who seek violence are strong supporters of former President Donald Trump.  The CSIS brief admits that far-left extremism also exists.  “Alternatively, some on the far-left could resort to terrorism if President Trump is re-elected. In June 14, 2017, James Hodgkinson—a left-wing extremist—shot U.S. House Majority Whip Steve Scalise.”  They conveniently blame Trump for Hodgkinson’s crime.  It’s fair to say that The Washington Post and the CSIS cherry-picked certain incidents to prove their point.  They even said that anti-vaxxers can turn to violence since they oppose the dictates of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Big Pharma, “on the far left and far right, some anti-vaxxers—who oppose vaccines as a conspiracy by the government and pharmaceutical companies—have threatened violence in response to Covid-19 response efforts.”

So who is on the list?

From what it looks like, Biden’s team led by the long-time Democrat warmonger Susan Rice, the former diplomat and policy advisor under Bill Clinton and Barack Obama is now the Director of the United States Domestic Policy Council with other Democrats who want to confiscate weapons from law-abiding citizens.  As I mentioned earlier, they will target all militias who are pro-2nd Amendment who follow the US constitution first.

So who is on the list?

What I will exclude from the list are the billionaire-funded organizations such as Black Lives Matter and others who do the bidding for the Democratic Party establishment.

However, there are many organizations and movements within the US and its colonial territories that will be on the government’s domestic terror watch list who are considered a threat to their agenda of total control over the people.  One of them will surely be the Anti-War movement which obviously want to end all US wars, which is a threat to the Military Industrial Complex.

Then there is the anti-GMO movement who fight for the right to healthy food which is another threat to the Big Food industry such as Monsanto.  Then you have Pro-life movements, a clear threat to the Democrat-supported Planned Parenthood organization.

You have the 911 Truth movement, anti-vaccination movements, various Indigenous organizations including the American-Indian movement, another big one never mentioned in the media is the Tax Protest movement which is another threat to the establishment because without the US government’s Internal Revenue Service (IRS) who tax its people to death, they won’t be able to impose its American-style democracy around the world.

They will also target Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam, the Libertarian Party, The Green Party, Anti-Israel and Pro-Palestinian organizations, student activists who protest for real economic and social change will also be on the list.

They will eventually try to go after the Alternative Media through more censorship and other available means.  Washington will also target their ‘commonwealth’ territories including political parties who want independence from the US government including the Puerto Rico Independence Party and other political movements, the Hawaiian Sovereignty Movement and the growing independence movement in the island-nation of Guam.  Then they will also go after individuals or what they call suspected “lone wolves” who don’t agree with the US government.

This is just the beginning, tyranny has come to haunt US citizens.  Over the last 70 years or so, US military interventions around the world has killed tens of millions of people. Now the war is coming to the US. The guns are now pointing inward on its own population.  I am sure many good people in the US will resist in some form because if they don’t, someday in the Orwellian future, many will find themselves in re-education camps.  I will conclude with the German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemoller who spoke out during the rise of the Nazis when they were purging various ethnic groups they did not like and those who did not agree with their fascist ideology.  Niemöller was eventually arrested on July 1st, 1937 for activities against the Nazi Party.  Here is what he said:

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.