Friday, March 17, 2017

Trump Sends Hate Group to Represent US at UN Women's Rights Conference

"The members of the president's delegation to the United Nations' annual summit on women are opposed to the U.N. as a whole and the fundamental rights of women in particular"

Go to Original
By Nika Knight



Since President Donald Trump's November election, hate incidents nationwide have increased—and now he's chosen a leader from one group that has itself espoused violence to represent the U.S. on the international stage.
Earlier this week, the State Department announced that representatives from infamous anti-LGBTQ hate group the Center for Family and Human Rights (C-FAM) and from the far-right Heritage Foundation will represent the U.S. at a United Nations conference on women's rights later this month:

Trump State Department sent reps from C-FAM - a SPLC-recognized hate group - and Heritage to accompany Haley at UN women's rights conference

Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) noted on Twitter: "Trump is sending hate groups to a U.N. conference on women's rights."
Slate's Christina Cauterucci summarized the groups' views, which not only include denigrating rights for women and LGBTQ people, but also antipathy toward the U.N. itself:
One delegate, Lisa Correnti, is an executive vice president at the Center for Family & Human Rights (C-FAM), which the Southern Poverty Law Center has labeled a hate group since 2014. C-FAM was explicitly formed in the '90s to push back against the rights of women in U.N. resolutions and policies. One of C-FAM's core missions is to advance laws that restrict the rights and protections of LGBTQ people; its president recently called contraception and gay rights "devilish gospel." The organization signed on in favor of Russia's anti-gay laws, which have led to arrests, prosecution, and physical assaults from government agents for gay Russians.
The Heritage Foundation will send to the CSW Grace Melton, the organization's associate for U.N. social issues and the author behind such riveting texts as "In Bed with Radical Feminists: The U.N.'s Misguided Women's Agenda." Her employer is one of the most high-profile anti-LGBTQ organizations in the country. The foundation likes to argue that laws preventing any kind of discrimination—in schools, housing, and employment, for instance—against LGBTQ people grant them "special privilege" and are contrary to the values of the United States. Heritage takes a special interest in advocating against protections for transgender people and insurance coverage for contraception. In advocating for the repeal of the Violence Against Women Act, the Heritage Foundation has called grants that fund the prevention of and response to violence against women "a misuse of federal resources and a distraction from concerns that truly are the province of federal government," claiming that the act is "watering down services" by including funds for incarcerated survivors of abuse. When Trump proposed cutting all 25 federal grant programs managed by the Office on Violence Against Women, it was under the advice of the Heritage Foundation.
"Fundamentalist notions about how women and girls should behave should never be the basis of advising or negotiating U.S. foreign policy," said Jessica Stern, executive director of the LGBTQ advocacy group OutRight International, in a statement.
"We want the State Department to be a beacon of freedom and safety for communities, and this is the opposite of that," Heidi Beirich, director of the Southern Poverty Law Center's (SPLC) Intelligence project, told Reuters.
"It is also a bad sign that two organizations that have tried to delegitimize the United Nations and human rights internationally now sit on the official U.S. delegation," added Stern. "Maybe the violent mentality that got C-FAM labeled a hate group successfully panders to their base, but the U.S. government must ensure protection for the world's most vulnerable people."

For the First Time, Police Ask for Entire City’s Google Searches and the Court Says Yes

Go to Original
By Matt Agorist

An Orwellian precedent is underway just outside of Minneapolis, Minnesota, which could be the downfall of internet freedom as we know it. Police in Edina, MN, have been granted a warrant requiring Google to determine everyone in an entire city who has used its search engine to look up a specific term and identify them to authorities.


The case doesn’t involve some massive terror plot to destroy an entire city or a high-level child trafficking ring. It is for a wire-fraud crime — worth less than $30,000. However, if Google caves to the warrant, it could set off a precedent that will undoubtedly be used by police across the country.
According to Ars Technica, investigators are focusing their probe on an online photo of someone with the same name of a local financial fraud victim. The image turned up on a fake passport used to trick a credit union to fraudulently transfer $28,500 out of an Edina man’s account, police said. The bogus passport was faxed to the credit union using a spoofed phone number to mimic the victim’s phone, according to the warrant application.
According to the warrant, Google must help police determine who searched for variations of the victim’s name between December 1 of last year through January 7, 2017.
The ominously worded warrant makes some chilling demands — all over a small fraud case.
A Google search, the warrant application says, as reported by Ars Technica, reveals the photo used on the bogus passport. The image was not rendered on Yahoo or Bing, according to the documents. The warrant commands Google to divulge “any/all user or subscriber information”—including e-mail addresses, payment information, MAC addresses, social security numbers, dates of birth, and IP addresses—of anybody who conducted a search for the victim’s name.

Independent journalist and public records activist, Tony Webster discovered the warrant and posted photos of it online. He has also expressed the grave reality surrounding such broad and sweeping dragnets — and their ability to sweep up innocent people in the process.

According to Webster:
But search warrants require supporting probable cause, not just mere suspicion or theory. For that reason, “anyone-who-accessed” search warrants like Detective Lindman’s can be risky to execute, as evidence could potentially be thrown out in a pretrial motion. Moreover, it’s possible that such a wide net could catch completely routine and non-criminal searches of the victim’s name by neighbors, prospective employers or business associates, journalists, or friends.

Could this type of search warrant be used to wrongly ensnare innocent people? If Google were to provide personal information on anyone who Googled the victim’s name, would Edina Police raid their homes, or would they first do further investigative work? The question is: what comes next? If you bought a pressure cooker on Amazon a month before the Boston bombing, do police get to know about it?

Prior to the actual warrant, Edina police sent Google an administrative subpoena “requesting subscriber information for anyone who had performed a Google search” for the victim’s name. However, according to the documents posted by Webster, Google easily refused to comply with that order as it does not have a judge’s signature.However, after Google balked at complying, authorities pushed back even harder.

“Though Google’s rejection of the administrative subpoena is arguable, your affiant is applying for this warrant so that the investigation of this case does not stall,” officer David Lindman wrote the judge in the warrant application.

The good news is that Google, while they declined to specifically address the warrant, appears to be fighting it.

“We aren’t able to comment on specific cases, but we will always push back when we receive excessively broad requests for data about our users,” Google said in an e-mail to Ars.

If Google does comply with this order, the implications for what comes next are shocking, to say the least. Political activists, peaceful anti-establishment folks, and any generally but peaceful subversive individual could be identified and rounded up through this process. If ever there was a time to change your habits and begin using startpage.com, it is now.

As the Free Thought Project has previously reported, Google maintains a record of not only your entire search history but also your browsing history and voice recordings of all sounds associated before and after you say the words, “Okay Google.”

If you would like to know how to find out what Google has on you, how to stop it, and how to clear all of your data from their database, you can do so by clicking this link. 

Bannon's Dangerous Domination of National Security

The White House adviser saves an acolyte and undermines a rival.

Go to Original
By Jefferson Morley

The neutering of the National Security Council by White House adviser Stephen Bannon continues.
Not only has Bannon established a shadow NSC, known as the Strategic Initiatives Group in the White House, but he has also blocked National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster from naming his own staff.
Last week McMaster, a three-star general brought in to replace Gen. Michael Flynn, told Ezra Cohen-Watnick, the NSC's intelligence director, to look for work elsewhere after CIA officials reportedly “expressed reservations about the 30-year-old intelligence operative and pushed for his ouster,” according to Politico.
Cohen-Watnick worked for Flynn at the Defense Intelligence Agency and “saw eye to eye" with his former boss "about the failings of the CIA human intelligence operations,” a Washington consultant told Politico. “The CIA saw him as a threat, so they tried to unseat him and replace him with an agency loyalist."
Cohen-Watnick appealed to Bannon and Jared Kushner, and on Sunday Trump saved his job.
“The incident raises questions about just how much autonomy Trump is giving to McMaster, who was tapped last month as national security adviser amid questions about whether he’d have full staffing authority over the NSC,” said Politico.
Competing Power Center
Bannon’s unprecedented role as a statutory member of the NSC where he speaks as an equal with the Secretaries of Defense and State is “bizarre,” said Daniel Benjamin, a former State Department official, in an email to AlterNet. His position “gives him a power base to push back against the others in the room, as well as an outsize say in the whole interagency process.”
To have acolytes like Cohen-Watnick on the NSC only enhances his power, Benjamin said.
“As a statutory member, [Bannon] can send representatives to interagency working groups and deputies committee meetings," he said. "Others in those meetings will be loath to cross his reps—especially given the icy chill running through the bureaucracy now.”
Bannon’s outsized role “seems like a recipe for ensuring that Trump gets muddled recommendations instead of the best policy advice, and, of course, it sets up a competing power center to McMaster and the NSC staff, which is no way to run a White House,” said Benjamin, a former NSC staffer under President Clinton. Benjamin also served as Ambassador-at-Large and Coordinator for Counterterrorism at the U.S. State Department in the Obama administration.
At stake, Benjamin said, is not just ideology or office politics but also the ability of the U.S. government to respond to a national security crisis.
Benjamin described McMaster as “a much more capable, intelligent individual’ than Flynn, who was fired for dissembling about his pre-inauguration contacts with Russian officials.
“But he too has no background in diplomacy, no experience of note in European affairs or the Far East," Benjamin said. "The State Department is gutted. It's never clear who is in charge in the White House—you don't know who will have the final word when you have someone like Bannon empowered as he is. Obviously, it depends on the crisis, but the possibility of a real crisis is something that keeps me up at night.”

Pentagon prepares to send a thousand more troops into Syria

Go to Original
By Bill Van Auken

The Pentagon is preparing to submit a request that would send 1,000 more US soldiers and Marines into Syria, doubling the number of ground troops now deployed in the war-torn country.
The proposed escalation, following close upon the sixth anniversary of the US-orchestrated war for regime change that has killed close to half a million Syrians and turned millions more into refugees, signals a turn toward a qualitative escalation of the US intervention in that country and in the broader Middle East.
The request for the troop buildup comes in the wake of the a report submitted by the Pentagon at the end of last month outlining proposals requested by the Trump administration for an escalation of the US intervention being waged in Iraq and Syria in the name of combating the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
Gen. Joseph Votel, the head of the US Central Command (CENTCOM), which oversees US military operations in the region, “is set to forward his recommendations to [Defense Secretary James] Mattis by the end of this month, and the Pentagon secretary is likely to sign off on them,” the Washington Post reported Thursday, citing an unnamed Department of Defense official.
The troops would likely come from the 24th Marine Expeditionary Unit and the US Army’s 82nd Airborne Division. The Marines would be drawn from a force of 2,200 which is aboard ships now headed toward the Syrian coast, while the Army paratroopers would come from a force of some 1,000 troops that have been pre-positioned in Kuwait. The initial escalation of troop levels could be quickly increased further from these additional forces being deployed to the region.
Such an increase would formally abrogate caps imposed on US deployments in Iraq and Syria by the Obama administration, 5,000 in the first country and 500 in the second. These limits have already been breached with “temporary” deployments continuously rotating more US troops in and out of the region. Meanwhile, earlier this month the Pentagon dispatched 250 US Army Rangers and 200 Marines into Syria.
The proposed changes in US deployments would not only increase the number of troops on the ground, but also “increase the potential for direct US combat involvement in a conflict that has been characterized by confusion and competing priorities among disparate forces,” according to the Post.
This “confusion” and multi-sided character of the ongoing fighting in Syria is the direct product of Washington’s abortive attempt to topple the government of President Bashar al-Assad through arming, funding and support for Islamist, Al Qaeda-linked militias in collaboration with Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other Sunni gulf oil sheikdoms.
The further buildup of US forces, carried out against the opposition of the Syrian government and in violation of international law, is ostensibly aimed at combating ISIS, itself the product of the protracted US intervention in the region.
In combating ISIS, the US has relied on a militia force dominated by the YPG, a Syrian Kurdish militia. At the same time, Washington’s NATO ally in the region, Turkey, has intervened in Syria in the name of combating ISIS, but directing much of its military power at preventing the YPG from consolidating a Kurdish autonomous zone on Turkey’s southern border.
The US Ranger unit, equipped with heavily armored Stryker combat vehicles, was deployed to the northern Syrian city of Manbij as part of what the Pentagon described as a “reassurance and deterrence” mission, i.e., an attempt to prevent Turkish and Kurdish forces from engaging in all out clashes.
Meanwhile, however, there is also the possibility of a far more dangerous military clash erupting in Syria between the US and Russia.
Russian forces, supporting the Assad government, are also operating inside Manbij. At a press briefing Wednesday, a spokesman for US operations in the region spoke from Baghdad to Pentagon reporters, acknowledging that US and Russian troops were close enough to “observe each other’s movements.”
“They can see each other,” said Col. John Dorrian. “They are not talking to each other, and they are not hanging out together.”
All of these disparate and mutually hostile forces are massing in the area for an attack on Raqqa, a city of 300,000 controlled by ISIS. The US is backing the Kurdish-dominated militia, which has said it will resist any Turkish role in retaking the city. Turkey, meanwhile, is supporting Turkish Islamist forces that are opposed both to the Kurds and to the Syrian government, whose own forces are moving against Raqqa with the backing of Russia.
As the Pentagon prepares its escalation in Syria, an influential Washington think tank has called for an even greater expansion of US operations aimed at furthering US strategic interests throughout the oil-rich region.
The Institute for the Study of War, which is funded by major military contractors, including Raytheon, GeneralDynamics and DynCorp, issued a report entitled “America’s Way Ahead in Syria.” Its principal authors are Kimberly and Frederick Kagan, a husband-and-wife team of neo-conservative advocates of global US military escalation who acted as advisors to US commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The report criticizes the current plans for escalation as an attempt to “supersize the Obama administration’s strategy by lifting constraints on US forces and adding a few additional resources.”
Instead, they advocate, “President Trump and his team must change the strategy fundamentally. They should orient their new plan on American interests rather starting from what the US had been doing.”
The strategy advocated by the Kagans points toward a US confrontation with both Iran and Russia for hegemony over the Middle East.
“The Russo-Iranian military buildup and attempt to dominate the regional system and resources constrain and weaken the United States,” the report states. “Russia and Iran are building a regional order based on their shared near-term interests, which will not diverge any time soon. This developing system denies America the freedom to protect its own interests. The Russo-Iranian coalition will make it more difficult for the US to respond to terror threats against it, defend key allies such as Israel, and ensure unfettered access to trade routes the US economy depends on.”
The report states that “the US must maintain and likely increase its military presence in Iraq even after Mosul’s recapture.” It calls for the building up of forces in Iraq to confront and defeat Iranian influence.
“We must show once again that we are wiling to fight and die with Sunni Arabs against their enemies and ours--Al Qaeda, ISIS, and Iran,” it insists.
In Syria, the report adds, the US should “seize and secure a base in southern Syria ... and create a de facto safe zone” where US forces can “recruit, train, equip, and partner with” local Sunni militias.
It also states that Washington must prepare for direct military confrontation with Russia over control of Syria. “The US must be prepared to conduct a full suppression of enemy air defense if necessary and to use alternative sources of leverage over Putin to deter him from attacking US forces. The US must position a joint package of strike and air defense assets in theater before beginning this course of action to strengthen this deterrence. The package must be obviously able to attain air supremacy throughout the theater and maritime supremacy in the Mediterranean if required.”
Behind the initial plans for escalating US troop deployments in Iraq and Syria, what is being discussed in the White House, Pentagon and CIA, as well as the think tanks connected to the US military and intelligence apparatus, are proposals that pave the way to a third world war.

12 Reasons Why The Federal Reserve May Have Just Made The Biggest Economic Mistake Since The Last Financial Crisis

Go to Original
By Michael Snyder

Has the Federal Reserve gone completely insane?  On Wednesday, the Fed raised interest rates for the second time in three months, and it signaled that more rate hikes are coming in the months ahead.  When the Federal Reserve lowers interest rates, it becomes less expensive to borrow money and that tends to stimulate more economic activity.  But when the Federal Reserve raises rates , that makes it more expensive to borrow money and that tends to slow down economic activity.  So why in the world is the Fed raising rates when the U.S. economy is already showing signs of slowing down dramatically?  The following are 12 reasons why the Federal Reserve may have just made the biggest economic mistake since the last financial crisis…
#1 Just hours before the Fed announced this rate hike, the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta’s projection for U.S. GDP growth in the first quarter fell to just 0.9 percent.  If that projection turns out to be accurate, this will be the weakest quarter of economic growth during which rates were hiked in 37 years.
#2 The flow of credit is more critical to our economy than ever before, and higher rates will mean higher interest payments on adjustable rate mortgages, auto loans and credit card debt.  Needless to say, this is going to slow the economy down substantially…
The Federal Reserve decision Wednesday to lift its benchmark short-term interest rate by a quarter percentage point is likely to have a domino effect across the economy as it gradually pushes up rates for everything from mortgages and credit card rates to small business loans.
Consumers with credit card debt, adjustable-rate mortgages and home equity lines of credit are the most likely to be affected by a rate hike, says Greg McBride, chief analyst at Bankrate.com. He says it’s the cumulative effect that’s important, especially since the Fed already raised rates in December 2015 and December 2016.
#3 Speaking of auto loans, the number of people that are defaulting on them had already been rising even before this rate hike by the Fed…
The number of Americans who have stopped paying their car loans appears to be increasing — a development that has the potential to send ripple effects through the US economy.
Losses on subprime auto loans have spiked in the last few months, according to Steven Ricchiuto, Mizuho’s chief US economist. They jumped to 9.1% in January, up from 7.9% in January 2016.
“Recoveries on subprime auto loans also fell to just 34.8%, the worst performance in over seven years,” he said in a note.
#4 Higher rates will likely accelerate the ongoing “retail apocalypse“, and we just recently learned that department store sales are crashing “by the most on record“.
#5 We also recently learned that the number of “distressed retailers” in the United States is now at the highest level that we have seen since the last recession.
#6 We have just been through “the worst financial recovery in 65 years“, and now the Fed’s actions threaten to plunge us into a brand new crisis.
#7 U.S. consumers certainly aren’t thriving, and so an economic slowdown will hit many of them extremely hard.  In fact, about half of all Americans could not even write a $500 check for an unexpected emergency expense if they had to do so right now.
#8 The bond market is already crashing.  Most casual observers only watch stocks, but the truth is that a bond crash almost always comes before a stock market crash.  Bonds have been falling like a rock since Donald Trump’s election victory, and we are not too far away from a full-blown crisis.  If you follow my work on a regular basis you know this is a hot button issue for me, and if bonds continue to plummet I will be writing quite a bit about this in the weeks ahead.
#9 On top of everything else, we could soon be facing a new debt ceiling crisis.  The suspension of the debt ceiling has ended, and Donald Trump could have a very hard time finding the votes that he needs to raise it.  The following comes from Bloomberg…
In particular, the markets seem to be ignoring two vital numbers, which together could have profound consequences for global markets: 218 and $189 billion. In order to raise or suspend the debt ceiling (which will technically be reinstated on March 16), 218 votes are needed in the House of Representatives. The Treasury’s cash balance will need to last until this happens, or the U.S. will default.
The opening cash balance this month was $189 billion, and Treasury is burning an average of $2 billion per day – with the ability to issue new debt. Net redemptions of existing debt not held by the government are running north of $100 billion a month. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin has acknowledged the coming deadline, encouraging Congress last week to raise the limit immediately.
If something is not done soon, the federal government could be out of cash around the beginning of the summer, and this could create a political crisis of unprecedented proportions.
#10 And even if the debt ceiling is raised, that does not mean that everything is okay.  It is being reported that U.S. government revenues just experienced their largest decline since the last financial crisis.
#11 What do corporate insiders know that the rest of us do not?  Stock purchases by corporate insiders are at the lowest level that we have seen in three decades…
It’s usually a good sign when the CEO of a major company is buying shares; s/he is an insider and knows what’s going on, so their confidence is a positive sign.
Well, according to public data filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, insider buying is at its LOWEST level in THREE DECADES.
In other words, the people at the top of the corporate food chain who have privileged information about their businesses are NOT buying.
#12 A survey that was just released found that corporate executives are extremely concerned that Donald Trump’s policies could trigger a trade war…
As business leaders are nearly split over the effectiveness of Washington’s new leadership, they are in unison when it comes to fears over trade and immigration. Nearly all CFOs surveyed are concerned that the Trump administration’s policies could trigger a trade war between the United States and China.
A decline in global trade could deepen the economic downturns that are already going on all over the planet.  For example, Brazil is already experiencing “its longest and deepest recession in recorded history“, and right next door people are literally starving in Venezuela.
After everything that you just read, would you say that the economy is “doing well”?
Of course not.
But after raising rates on Wednesday, that is precisely what Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen told the press…
“The simple message is — the economy is doing well.” Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen said at a news conference. “The unemployment rate has moved way down and many more people are feeling more optimistic about their labor prospects.”
However, after she was challenged with some hard economic data by a reporter, Yellen seemed to change her tune somewhat…
Well, look, our policy is not set in stone. It is data- dependent and we’re — we’re not locked into any particular policy path. Our — you know, as you said, the data have not notably strengthened. I — there’s noise always in the data from quarter to quarter. But we haven’t changed our view of the outlook. We think we’re on the same path, not — we haven’t boosted the outlook, projected faster growth. We think we’re moving along the same course we’ve been on, but it is one that involves gradual tightening in the labor market.
Just like in 2008, the Federal Reserve really doesn’t understand the economic environment.  At that time, Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke assured everyone that there was not going to be a recession, but when he made that statement a recession was actually already underway.
And as I have said before, I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if it is ultimately announced that GDP growth for the first quarter of 2017 was negative.
Whether it happens now or a bit later, the truth is that the U.S. economy is heading for a new recession, and the Federal Reserve has just given us a major shove in that direction.
Is the Fed really so clueless about the true state of the economy, or could it be possible that they are raising rates just to hurt Donald Trump?
I don’t know the answer to that question, but clearly something very strange is going on…

The Muslim ban and the ethnic cleansing of America

Trump's Muslim ban is integral to his long-term plan to make the US a solely white, Anglo-Saxon and Protestant 'nation'.


Go to Original
By 



The Muslim ban did not happen in one day - and it means more than one thing.
The Muslim ban did not happen last January or later in March. It happened a long time ago - day after day, piece after piece, one slander after another, systematically, consistently, with liberal laughter and conservative malice alike.
The Muslim ban was Trump's triumphant finale of a chorus long echoed in the sinuous xenophobic labyrinth of a nation always in denial of its own foreign origin, too eager to imagine and identify itself as "white" to demonise and expel from the shadow of its own fears all its colourful differences.
Trump is no aberration. Trump is a culmination. He is a salesman. He knows what sells in the United States, and he sells the cultivated hatred of Muslims because he knows he has customers.
From Michele Bachmann and Pamela Geller, to Bill Maher and Sam Harris, from Bernard Lewis to Daniel Pipes, all have been drumming up customers for Trump's fearmongering against Muslims for a very long time.
Laser-beaming on and demonising Trump for taking full advantage of marketing conditions, the liberals and conservatives have come together to create the conditions that have allowed Trump's xenophobia to flower in even more bitter and stranger fruits.

The known and unknown Muslims

The Muslim ban is not merely against those unknown numbers who can no longer come to the United States. The Muslim ban is far more a condemnation of those known Muslims who are already here - immigrant, naturalised, or US-born.
It is to suspend their constitutional protections and Bill of Rights, turn them into strangers in their own land if they are naturalised or US born. It is to wag Trump's finger at them and all other Muslim immigrants and tell them that they will never be "American".
The Muslim ban is here to intimidate, frighten, and silence them into obedience, leading to the eradication of any trace of their character and culture. They will not be allowed to add their sign and signature to what it means to be "American". As a noun, "American" is and it is to remain white.
The Muslim ban is to silence American Muslims into accepting the final theft of Palestine. There is a link between the Muslim ban and the appointment of a zealot settler colonialist as the next US ambassador to Israel. There is a link between the Muslim ban and the presence of another committed settler colonialist in the Oval Office as Trump's son-in-law and a key adviser.
The Muslim ban is here to make an example of them for any other non-white, non-Christian immigrant, never to dare to stand up and claim a pride of place.
Every man, woman and child must look like Trump and his family - speak as they do, think as they do, dye their hair blonde if they have to, starch their skin white, wear colourful contact lenses if they must and preferably sport Ivanka Trump's merchandise to prove their patriotism.
The Muslim ban is the first strike towards the militant whitening of America.

The bigger picture

"A close look at what the administration has been doing since the now-infamous executive order was issued on January 27 - banning travellers and refugees from seven Muslim-majority nations," it has been rightly suggested , "reveals a clear intent from Trump's inner circle to depopulate the United States of Muslims."
The depopulation of Muslims is the singular sign of an ideological project for the systematic ethnic cleansing of America.
"The Real Goal of Trump's Travel Ban Is to Make America White Again," another headline correctly diagnoses this terrorising decision. "White House adviser Stephen Bannon insists that Muslims don't have the right 'DNA' for democracy."
Calling Trump's immigration policies "ethnic cleansing" has been in the air soon after his election and even before he assumed office and began implementing his vociferous campaign promises.
We are an affirmation - all in our own differently defiant ways and our very existence is the undoing of the very pernicious myth of 'white people' that for the longest time has sustained the unending course of conquest and plundering of this forever immigrant country.

Taking a page from the Zionist playbook, Bannon has expanded the puritanical epithet to white Christianity in the US: "When two-thirds or three-quarters of the CEOs in Silicon Valley are from South Asia or from Asia, I think … a country is more than an economy. We're a civic society," he is reported to have said.
That "civic society", that "nation", for Bannon and his fellow storm troopers is white, it is Christian and it is now militantly triumphalist.
It is imperative to see the Muslim ban as integral to the rest of Trump's white supremacy project for America as an exclusively White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (WASP) "nation".
We Muslims now - as have Native Americans of this land for ever, then blacks, followed by Latinos and Asians - pollute Bannon's puritanical white supremacy conception of "his nation".
For him we have become the pariah, the untouchables, the Dalits, outside the fourfold of humanity. The Muslim ban declares Muslims as Muslims as "bare life", as Italian critical thinker Giorgio Agamben calls it, we have become "homo sacer".
The Muslim ban is therefore immediately related to the proposed building of a wall along the US southern border specifically designed on the Israeli apartheid wall keeping Palestinians outside their own homeland.
Trump's remarks against Mexicans being criminals and rapists just because they are Mexicans echoes similar remarks against Muslim being "terrorist" just for being Muslims.
Muslims and Mexicans are now the two bookends of the Trumpian dystopia. But there are many other layers in between.
The Muslim ban is equally integral to the systematic gutting of the public schools by Trump's Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos for these schools primarily cater to the poor and disenfranchised among black and Hispanic communities.
She intends to keep these schools underfunded, dilapidated, dispirited, so they would not educate and raise the next generation of visible citizens with a sense of civic responsibility.
DeVos' conception of public school is the self-fulfilling prophecy of all supporters of private schools for the rich and mass incarceration for the poor.
She wants to see those who go to public school disappear from the public scene and and locked up in prisons, as her boss wants to see Muslims and Mexicans go back to where they came from and make America safe for white supremacy.

"White people" is a fiction

The Muslim ban is equally integral to the continued theft and desecration of Native Americans' sacred lands for the sustained course of corporate greed leading the cause of predatory capitalism.
Trump does not want to see the Comanche, Apache, Navajo, Pueblo, Sioux, Cree, Ojibwe, Chippewa, Aztec or California tribal nations proudly march in Washington against his greedy Dakota Access Pipeline.
He wants them to disappear from the public sight as his supporters oppose seeing Muslim mosques or Jewish synagogues in public sight.
This is what Trump and his neo-Nazi-like alt-right stormtroopers like Stephen Bannon, Stephen Miller and Sebastian Gorka, now all gathered at the White House will and want and intend - and the more they unleash their violent racism against all of us, the more the necessity of not allowing him to play one non-white group against the other.
We are not "non-white". We are not "their negro", in the immortal words of James Baldwin. We are people. We are not a negation. We are an affirmation - all in our own differently defiant ways and our very existence is the undoing of the very pernicious myth of "white people" that for the longest time has sustained the unending course of conquest and plundering of this forever immigrant country.
"White people" is a fictional code-name for one particularly violent group of settler colonialists who are dead-set determined to repress the fact that they are as much immigrants to this land as everyone else.