Aruba's First International Online Newspaper
Follow Us And Stay With Us Because You Deserve To Be Told The Truth

Global News Aruba 

GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA INTERNATIONAL
CREATED BY THE EDITOR IN CHIEF MR NORBERTO TJON AJONG  THE USA, NETHERLANDS & THE CARIBBEAN.

 
 
 
GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA
AINA

ASIA-AFRICA-EUROPE
THE AMERICAS-AUSTRALIA

 
 
 
 
 
 

A pedestrian walks in front of the U.S. Supreme Court building on May 12, 2020, in Washington, D.C.ALEX WONG / GETTY IMAGES

06/12/2020

The Supreme Court Is About to Make Seismic Rulings on Reproductive Rights

By Dr. Marjorie Cohn Juris Doctor / Global News Aruba

The rights of women to terminate their pregnancies and to receive free contraceptives under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) are on the chopping block. Those challenges to reproductive freedom are consistent with Trump’s agenda of pandering to the religious right while erasing Barack Obama’s achievements. The Supreme Court will rule on these cases during the month of June.


Burdening the Right to Abortion

Although the Court does not yet have a case that contests the constitutionality of Roe v. Wade, it has the opportunity to chip away at the right to abortion as opponents continue to erect obstacles to reproductive health care. Their strategy is to bring about death of abortion by a thousand cuts.


Four years ago, in Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, the high court struck down a Texas law that required doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at hospitals within 30 miles of the location of the abortion. The Court held that the law did not provide “medical benefits sufficient to justify the burdens upon access that each imposes” and erected “a substantial obstacle in the path of women seeking a previability abortion, constitut[ing] an undue burden on abortion access.”


In June Medical Services LLC v. Russo, the high court is now facing the same issue it resolved in Whole Woman’s Health. Louisiana has a law identical to the overruled Texas law. If upheld, the Louisiana law would leave only one doctor in one Louisiana clinic to perform abortions. The lower court found that closing all other clinics in the state would impose a heavy burden on low-income women, requiring them to travel long distances to obtain abortions.


What changed in the four years between Whole Woman’s Health and June Medical Services? Justice Anthony Kennedy, who voted with the 5-3 majority in Whole Woman’s Health, retired and Justice Brett Kavanaugh replaced him. Although Chief Justice John Roberts dissented in Whole Woman’s Health, he joined the four liberal justices in tabling Louisiana’s law while the appeal was pending.


During oral argument in June Medical Services, the four liberals saw no difference between the Texas and Louisiana laws. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked, “What sense does the 30-mile limit make?” She noted that most complications arise once a woman returns home. Justice Elena Kagan said that Hope Clinic in Shreveport, Louisiana, “has served over 3,000 women annually for 23 years, so that’s around 70,000 women and has transferred only four patients ever to a hospital.”


Roberts and Kavanaugh were not sure whether the situations in Texas and Louisiana were identical. Roberts queried whether they should take a state-by-state approach to the issue. Justice Samuel Alito’s questions appeared to signal support for the Louisiana law. Neither Justices Neil Gorsuch nor Clarence Thomas asked any questions.


Denying Coverage for Birth Control

The ACA, signed by Obama in 2010, provides coverage for preventive health services for women. In 2011, the Obama administration accepted the recommendation of a scientific panel and required that employers and insurers provide women with free FDA-approved contraception.


Religious organizations were exempted from the requirement. Hospitals and schools affiliated with them were not. The Obama administration, however, provided an accommodation allowing affiliated institutions to opt out so that other sources of funding could be identified in order to guarantee seamless contraceptive coverage. Once they notified the government, insurers or plan administrators they wanted to opt out, either the government or insurance companies would finance the birth control coverage.

In 2014, a closely divided Supreme Court held in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby that a corporation owned by a family who objected on religious grounds to furnishing insurance coverage for contraceptives for their female employees could also opt out.

But many religious groups complain that having to opt out means they would still play a role in securing birth control for their employees even if they don’t have to pay for it. In 2016, that issue was raised in Zubick v. Burwell, but the high court sent the case back to the lower court to see if a compromise could be reached. It could not.


The Trump administration issued new regulations in 2017, expanding the exemption and allowing private employers who were morally or religiously opposed to birth control to opt out. Employers were no longer required to provide an accommodation.

Little Sisters of the Poor is a group of Catholic nuns who run nursing homes for poor seniors. They have religious objections to furnishing insurance coverage for contraception. In Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Pennsylvania challenged the 2017 regulations. The states argue that they would bear the costs of providing contraceptive coverage to women who lost it. They secured a nationwide injunction against the regulations.


There was no consensus among the justices at oral argument. Ginsburg and Justice Sonia Sotomayor thought the regulations violated Congress’s intent that women have seamless coverage for birth control. “The glaring feature of what the government has done in expanding this exemption is to toss to the winds entirely Congress’s instruction that women need and shall have seamless, no-cost, comprehensive coverage,” Ginsburg said. “This leaves the women to hunt for other government programs that might cover them.” She added, “For those who are not covered by Medicaid or one of the other government programs, they can get contraceptive coverage only from paying out of their own pocket, which is exactly what Congress didn’t want to happen.”

Sotomayor wondered if a requirement that insurers must pay for free COVID-19 vaccinations could be found unconstitutional because some employers had religious objections to vaccines.


Kavanaugh indicated that the exemption was reasonable. Alito favored accommodation of religious beliefs. Roberts and Kagan thought the exemption may be too broad. Gorsuch seemed to think the ACA grants expansive authority to government agencies. Roberts and Justice Stephen Breyer were frustrated that the opposing parties could not reach a compromise. Thomas queried whether the states even had the legal right to challenge the regulations.


If the Supreme Court upholds the Trump regulations, the government estimates that 70,000 to 126,000 women would lose birth control coverage from their employers.


The addition of Gorsuch and Kavanaugh to the Court will likely be reflected in how these cases are decided. In the abortion case, Kavanaugh’s substitution for Kennedy may well tip the balance against reproductive rights.


Copyright Truthout. Reprinted with permission.

Prof. Dr. Marjorie Cohn Juris Doctor Phd. , has been a contributor and journalist of Global News Aruba. She is an author of many published books and a Professor Emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law where she taught  from 1991-2016, and a former President of the National Lawyers Guild. She lectures, writes, and provides commentary for local, regional, national  and international media outlets. Professor Dr. Marjorie Cohn has served as a News Consultant for CBS News and a legal analyst for Court TV, as well as a legal and political commentator on BBC, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, NPR, and Pacifica Radio.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

06/15/2020

Trump’s Executive Order on Police

 Report by Stephen Lendman / Global News Aruba

It’s being prepared for release in the coming days. More on it below.

Throughout his tenure, Trump showed he’s hostile to peace, the rule of law, and government serving everyone equitably.

In early February 2017, days after his inauguration, he signed what the White House called “pro-law and anti-crime executive orders (to) support the dedicated men and women of law enforcement.”

Ignoring police violence that’s part of the US landscape, including over 1,000 killings by cops in the country annually, Black youths a primary target, Trump said police “on the front lines…protect Americans…”

They serve and protect privileged ones at the expense of beneficial social change, he failed to explain.

Last October by executive order, he established a “Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice (Commission).”

Its purpose is to address issues related to “law enforcement and the administration of justice…to prevent, reduce, and control crime.”

The EO had nothing to do with crimes in high places by public, military, or private officials — everything to do with being tough on ordinary Americans, especially the most disadvantaged.

It’s how US law enforcement always operates — unfair and unjust by design.

Police brutality in the US in longstanding and excessive, including a systematic pattern of abuses nationwide.

Little is done to monitor or constrain it. Driving while Black is criminalized all too often.

Racial profiling stops and searches for suspected possession of illicit drugs or other reasons largely target people of color.

The 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, including its police accountability section, failed to criminalize its use of violence, excessive force, or other human and civil rights violations.

The late Rep. John Conyers denounced a US “policy of institutionalized racial and ethnic profiling” that’s gone on for generations.

The ACLU stressed how millions of “African American, Asian, Latino, South Asian, and” Muslims from the wrong countries are grievously harmed in America, adding:

A “major impediment to (stopping it) remains the continued unwillingness…of the US government to pass federal legislation (prohibiting all forms of police brutality) with binding effect on federal, state or local law enforcement.”

US ruling authorities repeatedly and consistently breach international and constitutional law, including the 1994 UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (ICERD).

A Trump administration statement on “law & justice” said it took steps “to restore the rule of law, forge new partnerships with state and local law enforcement agencies, encourage respect for officers nationwide, and adopt aggressive strategies” against challenges to the US system.

On June 8, Trump praised US police. Ignoring hundreds of complaints about police violence and other forms of abuse against peaceful protesters nationwide, he claimed “(t)hey’ve done a fantastic job (sic).”

“I’m very proud of them. There won’t be defunding. There won’t be dismantling of our police.”

“(T)here’s not going to be any disbanding of our police. Our police have been letting us live in peace (sic).”

“They’re “99.9 percent…great, great people (sic).”

On US city streets in the aftermath of George Floyd’s killing by 4 Minneapolis cops (and at all times in defending privilege over social justice nationwide), police use battlefield weapons designed for combat against unarmed people protesting against longstanding grievances.

On Thursday, Trump said his administration is preparing an executive order “that will encourage police departments nationwide to meet the most current professional standards for the use of force, including tactics for de-escalation,” adding:

He supports use of law enforcement to “dominate the streets. And that means force, but force with compassion” — ignoring that they’re incompatible.

Calling for “real strength, real power” on US streets shows where he stands, a prescription for continued law and order toughness unrestrained the way things have always been in the US.

In response to the establishment of an autonomous zone in Seattle by city residents, a six-square block area with no police, Trump threatened to send National Guard or Pentagon forces to disband the zone if state and city authorities don’t do it on their own.

Calling individuals involved “ugly anarchists,” Washington Governor Jay Inslee slammed Trump’s threat, tweeting:

“What we will not allow are threats of military violence against Washingtonians coming from the White House.”

“The US military serves to protect Americans, not the fragility of an insecure president.”

“The Trump (regime) knows what Washington needs right now – the resources to fight the COVID-19 pandemic.”

“If the president wants to show leadership, and that he cares about the people in this state, he should send us the PPE we’ve needed for months” — but haven’t gotten.

Nor have other US states gotten federal aid to contain COVID-19 outbreaks, including supplies of personal protective equipment (PPE).

The Seattle autonomous zone reflects justifiable anger against festering injustice in the US.

Perhaps similar actions will happen elsewhere nationwide.

As long as longstanding grievances go unaddressed, the only recourse for ill-served people is taking to the streets against what’s unacceptable.

Protests nationwide are the largest since the 1960s, aside from the Occupy Wall Street movement that began in September 2011 with considerable energy that waned and accomplished nothing.

Will this time be different? Will public anger on US streets against state-sponsored injustice have staying power?

Will they accomplish what earlier activism failed to achieve?

It’s only possible by sustaining activism for social justice longterm.

With tens of millions of Americans out of work at a time of economic collapse, it’s an ideal environment for taking to the streets and staying there until demands for social and economic justice are met legislatively.

Power yields nothing unless pushed nonviolently. Positive change never comes any other way.

GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA offers factual information and viewpoints that might be useful in arriving at an understanding of the events of our time. We believe that the information comes from reliable sources, but cannot guarantee the information to be free of mistakes and incorrect interpretations. GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA and its Editor in Chief Norberto Tjon Ajong, has no official position on any issue and does not necessarily endorse the statements of any contributor, news reporter, or affiliated news agency.  Contact the source and author and journalist for any further question on any article. or contact [email protected] 
Read our disclaimer policy for more information.

06/15/2020

Donald Trump Peacenik?

Report by Stephen Lendman / Global News Aruba

From day one in office to now, Trump breached virtually all his positive pledges to the American people.

No “transferring power from Washington, DC, and giving it back to you, the people” occurred.

No governance serving all Americans equitably, “starting right here and right now.”

No “forgotten men and women of our country…forgotten no longer, (no) stop(ing) (of) the American carnage, (no) allegiance to all Americans.”

No end to US imperial wars by hot and other means that rage in multiple theaters with no prospect for ending them.

Like most others in Washington, Trump’s lofty promises were empty rhetoric by a president serving privileged interests exclusively at the expense of peace, equity, justice, the rule of law, and other democratic values throughout his time in office.

Is the transformation of Trump from belligerent president, hostile toward ordinary people everywhere, to peacenik likely ahead?

Has he about-faced on wanting “a very, very strong military,” wanting it more “buil(t) up” than already, wanting to more “greatly strengthen and expand” the US nuclear arsenal (to) outmatch (and) outlast” other nations by leading the nuclear arms race?

The US is a belligerent state, an imperial state, a nation from inception run by its privileged class for its own self-interest — a nation at war on invented enemies at home and abroad throughout most of its history.

No real ones existed, notably not for the past 75 years, no threats to national security from foreign nations.

Yet, with all categories included, the US spends as much or more on militarism, the Pentagon’s global empire of bases, its intelligence apparatus, and wars on humanity than all other nations combined.

Throughout his time in office, Trump supported all of the above.

On Saturday, he addressed West Point graduates.

It’s one of five US military academies that are symbolic of America’s violent culture, its endless wars, its abhorrence of world peace and stability.

“There is no place on earth I would rather be than right here with all of you,” DJT “trumpeted,” adding:

“(T)he American warrior (is) noble (and) righteous…American heroes (sic).”

The US “military’s contributions to our society are an everlasting inspiration to us all (sic).”

It “carr(ies) on the traditions of freedom, equality, and liberty that so many gave their lives to secure (sic).”

From colonial America to the present day, US military forces massacred Native Americans “from sea to shining sea.”

US troops were involved in stealing half of Mexico in the mid-19th century — today’s California, Utah, Nevada, as well as parts of New Mexico, Arizona, Wyoming and Colorado.

Following the 1898 Spanish-American war based on a Big Lie, the US illegally annexed Cuba, the Philippines, Guam, Samoa, Hawaii, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Canal Zone, Puerto Rico and other territories.

After pledging to keep the US out of WW I if reelected president, Woodrow Wilson’s propaganda campaign transformed pacifist Americans into raging German haters — giving him the war he wanted.

Franklin Roosevelt manipulated Japan to attack Pearl Harbor. US intelligence tracked the Japanese fleet across the Pacific, fleet commander Admiral HE Kimmel not warned.

Mass casualties gave FDR the war he wanted.

Numerous 1949/1950 South Korean cross-border incursions provoked Pyongyang’s June 1950 defensive response. Truman got the war he wanted.

US war on North Vietnam followed the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin false flag.

In October 1983, US forces invaded Grenada — based on a Big Lie about a threat to US medical students that didn’t exist.

In 1989, Panama was invaded by US troops, former ally Manuel Noriega deposed for forgetting who’s boss.

So-called Operation Just Cause massacred thousands of civilians.

For the past 30 years, endless preemptive US wars of aggression followed.

Based on Big Lies and deception, one nation after another was raped and destroyed, millions of lives lost.

US troops led by graduates of West Point and other US military academies waged and continue to wage preemptive war on humanity.

Their training and indoctrination are all about serving US imperial interests — endless wars against nations threatening no one Washington’s favored strategy.

In his 1935 book titled “War Is a Racket,” General Smedley Butler (1881 – 1940), two-time congressional medal of honor recipient explained what US imperial wars are all about, saying:

“I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers.”

“In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914.”

“I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in.”

“I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street.”

“I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912.”

“I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916.”

“I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927, I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested.”

“Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.”

For the rest of his term and if reelected, will Trump focus on peacemaking over “endless wars (by the US) policeman of the world?”

Was saying “(w)e are ending the era of endless wars…(It’s) no longer the policy of US forces to solve ancient conflicts in faraway lands that many people have not even heard of” an unprecedented change of longstanding US policy?

Not a day of world peace and stability existed throughout his tenure, the same true for most of his predecessors.

The US ruling class considers peace, stability, and adherence to the rule of law anathema to its imperial aims for unchallenged dominance of planet earth, its resources, and populations.

What Trump called “defending America’s vital interests” is all about waging war on humanity by hot and other means at home and abroad so privileged US interests can benefit at the expense of vitally needed peace, equity and social justice.

Changing longstanding US policy won’t ever come from sitting presidents, legislators, the courts, or so-called elections that assure continuity when held.

US ruling authorities yield nothing without being pushed.

Positive change can only come from sustained nonviolent activism in the streets nationwide, not quitting until achieved.

It’s the only way possible for government serving everyone equitably, not just for the privileged few like now.

Nothing else can work, not now or ever.

GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA offers factual information and viewpoints that might be useful in arriving at an understanding of the events of our time. We believe that the information comes from reliable sources, but cannot guarantee the information to be free of mistakes and incorrect interpretations. GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA and its Editor in Chief Norberto Tjon Ajong, has no official position on any issue and does not necessarily endorse the statements of any contributor, news reporter, or affiliated news agency.  Contact the source and author and journalist for any further question on any article. or contact [email protected] 
Read our disclaimer policy for more information.

Ellen Hodgson Brown, Adviser of the Editor in Chief of Global News Aruba is an American author, attorney, public speaker, and advocate of alternative medicine and financial reform, most prominently public banking. Brown is the founder and president of the Public Banking Institute, a nonpartisan think tank devoted to the creation of publicly run banks. She has appeared on cable and network television, radio, and internet programs and podcasts. She ran for California Treasurer in the California June 2014 Statewide Primary election. She is the Financial Analyst & Editorial Writer/Journalist of Global News Aruba.

 
 
 
 

06/15/2020

Education Is Offensive and Racist and so is America

By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts Phd. Global News Aruba

Years of teaching blacks to have grievances against white people for things that happened centuries ago have come to fruition. Rioting and looting are not enough, the violent thugs and ignorant woke creatures are pulling down historic monuments in public parks and defacing public buildings while police and public authorities stand down.

In Richmond, Virginia, a statue eight feet tall of Christopher Columbus in a public park has just been pulled down and rolled into a lake by a group of thugs. Why? “Columbus represents genocide.” What the barbarians mean is that by discovering America, Columbus exposed the inhabitants to invasion from abroad, which is what the US has been undergoing since 1965.

Who hasn’t suffered invasions? Why of all the countless invasions in history is European entry into the new world so upsetting. Columbus wasn’t looking to invade any country. He was testing a theory and hoping to find a shorter route to the spice trade.

Any number of Confederate memorials are being pulled down. Not even Robert E. Lee will be spared. Are public authorities so stupid that they do not understand that their acquiescence to lawlessness and destruction of property lets the genie out of the bottle?

The new word for racist is white. By definition a white person is a racist. The two words are synonyms. Every stature of every white person is a statue of a racist and can be pulled down. The Republican-led Senate Armed Services Committee has amended the defense bill to require the US military to rename bases named after anyone who served under the Confederate flag. They don’t understand that as white is a synonym for racist, all whites, including Union officers, are racists. All US military bases will have to be named after blacks or it will be racist. Grant and Lee were both white and served together fighting for American empire in the war against people of color in Mexico. The only difference between Grant and Lee is that in addition to fighting for American empire against Mexico, Grant also fought for American empire against the South.

History is also being pulled down. Future historians will be perplexed to find no signs of the racism on which the NY Times says America was founded.

Ignorance is everywhere. RT describes Columbus as “another notorious figure in the history of slavery.” What!? The year 1492 was long before the black Kindgom of Dahomey created the black slave trade and long before there were any colonies needing a labor force. But facts no longer matter. Truth is whatever is emotionally satisfying.

America is said to be a superpower, but its inhabitants collapse in excruciating pain over a mere word. The pain felt by mental and emotional weaklings is so severe that it has caused universities to overthrow academic freedom. At UCLA, once a university and now a propaganda ministry, a faculty member is under investigation for reading Martin Luther King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” to the class he teaches. The letter (April 16, 1963) was King’s reply to black pastors who expressed their concern to him about his arrival as an outsider to their community to stir up confrontation when they were working to negotiate the achievement of the same goals peaceably. King’s answer was that confrontation sharpens the issue and will aid their negotiations. Creating a crisis, King told the pastors, fosters tension and forces a community to deal with the issue.

What did the professor do wrong by reading King’s own explanation of his strategy? The professor is in trouble because King in his letter used the word “nigger” and in reading King’s letter to the class, the professor read the word “nigger.” OhMyGod, a white man said “nigger.”

Oh, the hurt, the offense! University administrators have denounced the professor. To keep the controversy going students are urged to come forward with complaints. A town hall will be held to outline future next steps.

Think about this for a minute. According to reports “numerous students plead (sic ) with Professor Ajax Peris to not use the n word.” But it was King, not Peris, who used the n word. What is the message here? Does it mean that a white person cannot read out loud Martin Luther King’s letter? If the professor wanted students to be aware of the letter, would he have to bring in a black guest lecturer to read the letter? Would the professor still be accused of insensitivity if he gave Martin Luther King’s letter to the students as a reading assignment? Does it mean that King himself committed an offense by using the n word?

The professor also showed the class a documentary about lynching. The documentary had graphic descriptions that distressed and angered the students. Do we have here the plight of what sounds like a leftwing professor trying to rile up blacks against whites and finding that he cannot succeed because the necessary words and images cause them paroxysms of pain?

In our oh-so-sensitive-times, no one is concerned about giving offense to Southerners. White Republican senators are leading the charge to rename military bases. Not to be outdone, black members of the House want to remove what they call Confederate statues from the vicinity of the Capitol as part of the protest against police violence in Minneapolis. They are having a fit over Jefferson Davis, who for 3 or 4 years of his life was president of the Confederate States of America. Much more of Davis’ life was spent serving the United States of America as a military officer, a US Senator and as US Secretary of War (they were more honest in those days; today they call it “defense”). Davis was a West Point graduate. As an officer in the US Army he fought for the US empire in the Mexican-American war. It was Davis who led the sucessful charge on the La Teneria fort in the Battle of Monterrey. He was married to the daughter of US President Zachary Taylor. He argued against secession. These are the reasons that there is a statue of him.

Davis, like Robert E. Lee, and so many others from Southern states spent their life in service to the United States. They rallied to the Confederacy only because Lincoln invaded their states. People are so ignorant today, especially those who go around shouting “racist,” that they are unaware that in those days people regarded their home state as their country. The US Constitution gave governing power to the states, reserving to the states all powers not ennumerated to the federal government. All of this was changed by Lincoln’s war which consolidated power in Washington and eventually turned largely independent states into vassals of Washington.

Robert E. Lee, a West Point Graduate, spent his life in the US military fighting wars for the US empire. He served as Superintendent of the United States Military Academy. He was so highly regarded that he was offered a Union command in Lincoln’s war. Lee’s response was that as a Virginian, he could not lead an army to invade his country. If the US was going to invade Virginia, he would have to resign his commission in the US Army.

An ignorant person once wrote in CounterPunch that Lee had 200 slaves. Lee had no plantation. He spent his life fighting against Indians and Mexicans for the American empire. It did not occur to the peabrain at CounterPunch what a person fighting Indians on the frontier and Mexicans in Mexico would do with 200 slaves. But as I have often observed, it you are out to demonize someone—Trump, Putin, or Lee—you say whatever does the job.

Lee had to take a leave from the US army for 2 years in order to settle his father-in-law’s estate, which had land holdings and slaves on one side of the ledger and massive debts on the other. The aim was to emancipate the slaves. Knowing that, some slaves pushed it before it could be done. They were punished, and ever since it has been used to blacken Lee who had fiduciary duties.

The current line is that Confederate memorials “pay tribute to white supremacy and slavery,” as the most ignorant Barbara Lee (D, CA) put it. So, according to a person regarded by people in California of sufficient intelligence and integrity to represent them in Washington, a Southerner who resists the invasion of his country is a white supremacist.

As has been proven so many times, the so-called “Civil War” was fought over economics, not slavery. Lincoln himself intended to send the blacks back to Africa, judging them unfit to live among white people. Lincoln said over and over that the war was fought to preserve the Union. He gave assurances to the South that they could have slaves as long as they stayed in the Union and paid the tariff. Historians have researched the letters and diaries of participants on both sides of the war and found that soldiers were not fighting for or against slavery. The North was fighting for the Union, and the South was fighting because the South was invaded. There is a famous book in which the contents of the wartime letters and diaries are recorded.

Yet the real documented history has been replaced with a false made-up history that serves the sole purpose of creating dissention and hatred in a vulnerable and fragile multicultural society.

As I recently wrote using Richard Weaver’s title, ideas have consequences. The stand downs of police and public authorities while criminals loot and destroy are consequences of the false history that has been created for the United States.

The United States is a Tower of Babel from which white people should flee. The state of collapse is advanced. With mayors and governors refusing to protect property from black looters, President Trump threatened to call out the US military. His own Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper, and his own Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, Mark Milley, quickly informed the US military that their duty was to the Constitution, not to the President. The two made a show of this to undercut President Trump and to present him as a tyrant for trying to fulfill his constitutional obligation to protect private property and the lives of citizens. Apparently, both Esper and Milley are too dumbshit to understand that it is a constitutional duty to protect property.

Trump is not Establishment, but his government is. Trump is a President surrounded by his enemies. Trump attempted to be a president of the people, but the Establishment will not permit it. Trump will be the last president who attempts to represent the American people. All future presidents will have learned the lesson in advance. An American president serves the ruling elite and no one else. The elite have worked long and hard to acquire a divided population that cannot unite against them. They have succeeded.

Prof. Dr. Paul Craig Roberts Phd./ Global News Aruba is an American economist and author. He formerly held a sub-cabinet office in the United States federal government during the US President Reagan Administration as an adviser and co=author of Reaganomics, as well as teaching positions at several U.S. universities. He is a promoter of supply-side economics and an opponent of recent U.S. foreign policy. He held former positions as an editor in the Wall Street Journal. He is a contributor of Global News Aruba since 2018.
 
 
GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA offers factual information and viewpoints that might be useful in arriving at an understanding of the events of our time. We believe that the information comes from reliable sources, but cannot guarantee the information to be free of mistakes and incorrect interpretations. GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA and its Editor in Chief Norberto Tjon Ajong, has no official position on any issue and does not necessarily endorse the statements of any contributor, news reporter, or affiliated news agency.  Contact the source and author and journalist for any further question on any article. or contact [email protected] 
Read our disclaimer policy for more information.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Dr. Binoy Kampmark Phd. , has been a contributing reporter and 

Geo-Political Analyst of Global News Aruba since 2018. He resides 

and lectures at Australia's top RMIT University in Melbourne

He is also a frequent contributor to Global Research and Asia-Pacific Research.   Dr. Binoy Kampmark Phd. was a Commonwealth Scholar 

at Selwyn College, Cambridge.

GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA offers factual information and viewpoints that might be useful in arriving at an understanding of the events of our time. We believe that the information comes from reliable sources, but cannot guarantee the information to be free of mistakes and incorrect interpretations. GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA and its Editor in Chief Norberto Tjon Ajong, has no official position on any issue and does not necessarily endorse the statements of any contributor, news reporter, or affiliated news agency.  Contact the source and author and journalist for any further question on any article. or contact [email protected] 
Read our disclaimer policy for more information.

GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA offers factual information and viewpoints that might be useful in arriving at an understanding of the events of our time. We believe that the information comes from reliable sources, but cannot guarantee the information to be free of mistakes and incorrect interpretations. GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA and its Editor in Chief Norberto Tjon Ajong, has no official position on any issue and does not necessarily endorse the statements of any contributor, news reporter, or affiliated news agency.  Contact the source and author and journalist for any further question on any article. or contact [email protected] 

Read our disclaimer policy for more information.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Whitney Webb is a MintPress News journalist based in Chile. She has contributed to several independent media outlets including Global Research, EcoWatch, the Ron Paul Institute and 21st Century Wire, among others. She has made several radio and television appearances and is the 

2019 winner of the Serena Shim Award for Uncompromised Integrity in Journalism. She is also contributor of Global News Aruba. 

 
 
 

LINK BELOW TO THE BEST PROMOTIONS

 
GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA offers factual information and viewpoints that might be useful in arriving at an understanding of the events of our time. We believe that the information comes from reliable sources, but cannot guarantee the information to be free of mistakes and incorrect interpretations. GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA and its Editor in Chief Norberto Tjon Ajong, has no official position on any issue and does not necessarily endorse the statements of any contributor, news reporter, or affiliated news agency.  Contact the source and author and journalist for any further question on any article. or contact [email protected] Read our disclaimer policy for more information.
Puffy
 
 
Puffy Lux

GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA offers factual information and viewpoints that might be useful in arriving at an understanding of the events of our time. We believe that the information comes from reliable sources, but cannot guarantee the information to be free of mistakes and incorrect interpretations. GLOBAL NEWS ARUBA and its Editor in Chief Norberto Tjon Ajong, has no official position on any issue and does not necessarily endorse the statements of any contributor, news reporter, or affiliated news agency.  Contact the source and author and journalist for any further question on any article. or contact [email protected] Read our disclaimer policy for more information.

 
Aruba News Papers