UN Amb. Thomas-Greenfield Doubles Down: Acknowledging ‘Imperfections’ is ‘Our Strength’
Face the Nation host did not ask Thomas-Greenfield to point to exact places slavery wove white supremacy in our founding documents.
UN Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield doubled down on her remarks about how the “original sin of slavery weaved white supremacy into our founding documents and principles.”
She stressed that acknowledging this supposed truth is our strength.
What ticks me off is that Face the Nation host Margaret Brennan did not challenge Thomas-Greenfield. You know, “Exactly where do you find this white supremacy?” and “Why are you preparing Chinese Communist propaganda?”
In my post, I explained how our founders should have outlawed it but knew it would happen eventually.
Brennan lobbed soft questions to Thomas-Greenfield, basically opening the door for any excuse (emphasis mine):
MARGARET BRENNAN: This past week, you gave a speech that I want to ask you about, because it’s gotten quite a lot of attention. You said, “The original sin of slavery weaved white supremacy into our founding documents and principles.” You talked about white supremacy being linked to the killing of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor continued discrimination against Muslims and Asian-Americans. America likes to think it provides moral leadership to the world. Are you saying we’re deluding ourselves?
AMB. THOMAS-GREENFIELD: No, I think we’re being tremendous leaders, our country is not perfect, but we continue to perfect it. Those imperfections are part of our history and we have to talk about them. It’s- it’s our strength that we can talk about our imperfections to the world and call out other nations for those same imperfections. So it’s not a- a criticism. It’s an acknowledgement of our history. It’s an acknowledgement of where we started. But we need to look at where we’ve come. The fact that I came from a segregated high school and I’m now the permanent representative of the United States in- at the United Nations says everything about what our country is about. And I look forward to continuing to engage with other countries, to use our example, to show those other countries what they might achieve. But we still have a lot of work to do and we have to acknowledge that. But we also have to work to continue to improve our country. (00:08:16)
MARGARET BRENNAN: But it is precisely because of the- the role you have as a cabinet member, that it drew so much criticism. I mean the Wall Street Journal editorial board called you the “Ambassador of Blame America First” saying, “It sounded like you were reciting Chinese propaganda about America and that you believe your job is to bring critical race theory to the world with a focus on criticizing your own country.” To be clear, were you comparing bigotry in America to mass atrocities carried out against minorities around the world?
AMB. THOMAS-GREENFIELD: I was acknowledging what is a fact in the United States. Racism does exist in this country and I think it was a powerful message. Imagine any other country doing that. Our country, the uniqueness of our country, is that we can self-criticize and we can move forward and our values are clear. And the purpose of that speech was to lay out our values, but also acknowledge our imperfections and acknowledge that we are moving forward. I don’t think you will see a Uyghur -a Chinese Uyghur getting on the national stage acknowledging China’s issues with- with human rights. I am not comparing our situation. I am acknowledging that we’ve come a long way and I’m very proud of what we have been able to achieve. But I’m realistic about what we have to do moving forward. And I think if we are going to be a voice around the globe for raising issues of human rights, we cannot whitewash our own issues in- in our own country.
First of all, ma’am, Uighurs have taken the stage and described how China violated their human rights.
I found an article from 2018 with interviews of thosee who escaped the concentration camps.
Second, Thomas-Greenfield specifically said white supremacy is in our founding documents and principles. I do not deny racism still exists in this country. No one should deny it.
Third, Thomas-Greenfield can spin it all she wants, but she did not say this to encourage others to admit their racist past and present.
Thomas-Greenfield said the U.S. could not join the UN’s Human Rights Council until it acknowledges its failures. It has nothing to do with other countries and their racism.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“UN Amb. Thomas-Greenfield Doubles Down: Acknowledging ‘Imperfections’ is ‘Our Strength’”
And one of these ‘imperfections’ was to select a black female communist as UN Ambassador…
Who thinks she knows a lot more than she actually does.
But she knows she cannot be fired by the spineless Biden administration.
Fixed that for you. She could be fired. But the Biden regime would never do that. The optics would be terrible if they did. And who knows how Psaki would be able to spin it at a press conference.
Mary Chastain: You know, “Exactly where do you find this white supremacy?”
You could start with how the original U.S. Constitution didn’t just permit slavery, but allowed slave chasers to cross state lines, to invade Boston or Bangor, to pursue whom they claimed were escaped slaves.
The right of habeas corpus for those who were captured by slave-catchers was often denied, and even free blacks were taken South into slavery. The racial nature of American slavery is well-established history.
Which was not specific to whites…perhaps, you should look up indentured servitude.
This is a (rightfully) outdated labor policy that was commonplace at the time and not specific to one race.
healthguyfsu: Which was not specific to whites…perhaps, you should look up indentured servitude.
We provided citations concerning the racial nature of American slavery. You can ignore it, but that doesn’t constitute an argument.
You can provide citations of how it was used for nefarious purpose, but your argument is moot on the grounds that it doesn’t demonstrate that white supremacy was woven into those founding documents.
You have a bigger burden of proof than you are willing to admit. Thus, you are using an old dem trick of moving the goalposts.
healthguyfsu: it doesn’t demonstrate that white supremacy was woven into those founding documents.
What part of blacks “had no rights which the white man was bound to respect,” and the U.S. Constitution was “established exclusively by the white race,” don’t you get?
You’re either disingenuous or a complete dumbass. Neither one of those phrases is written in the Constitution.
Your shared brain of friends fails again because you quoted parts of the SC Dred Scott decision, which is again NOT part of the Constitution NOR is it a founding document.
Are all of you collectively able to share enough synapses to understand the difference???
healthguyfsu: Neither one of those phrases is written in the Constitution.
Perhaps you are not familiar with U.S. jurisprudence, but in the U.S., the Supreme Court determines what the Constitution means. The racial nature of American slavery is hardly of historical dispute. In any case, what is specifically written into the Constitution is that slave owners have the power to cross state lines, to go to Boston or Bangor, to retrieve their slaves, who were often denied due process. That specific provision was one of the leading causes of civil war.
All slaves were black, but not all blacks were slaves. Slavers were black and white. Then Americans in Union stood up and confronted the Democrat forces. Today, they stand up against abortionists, diversitists, sexists, genderists, and other manner of progressive bigots.
n.n: All slaves were black …
That’s right. We provided citations concerning the racial nature of American slavery.
No, it wasn’t motivated by diversity. The sellers were black, the consumers were a minority. The majority opposed the progress of slavery and diversity, but compromised in order to avoid a social conflict on diverse fronts.
n.n: No, it wasn’t motivated by diversity.
Gibberish isn’t much of an argument either. We provided reference to the U.S. Constitution’s fugitive slave provision and how it worked in practice, as well as the U.S. Supreme Court which made explicit the racial nature of American slavery.
Did you bother to document or cite that blacks enslaved their fellows and sold them (original sin). In fact, African’s are still enslaving their fellows.
Also, lots of people have been enslaved over time, of all races. African slaves were only notable for their extreme dullness. I think that American blacks should have to compensate whites for raising their average IQ from the low to mid sixties to 85. Since about 70% of blacks now enjoy white linage of 30% to 70%, it is time to start directing your hate for whiteness inward.
What a jackass.
Where would you be today without your whiteness? I guess a moron.
Delete “about 70% of “
JusticeDelivered: Did you bother to document or cite that blacks enslaved their fellows and sold them (original sin). In fact, African’s are still enslaving their fellows.
That wasn’t the issue raised, but whether the distinctly American institution of slavery was based on white supremacy.
JusticeDelivered: I think that American blacks should have to compensate whites for raising their average IQ from the low to mid sixties to 85.
Speaking of white supremacy…
What then? Shall we condemn the righteous law because wicked men twist it to the support of wickedness? Is that the way to deal with good and evil? Shall we blot out all distinction between them, and hand over to slavery all that slavery may claim on the score of long practice? Such is the course commended to us in the City Hall speech. After all, the fact that men go out of the Constitution to prove it pro-slavery, whether that going out is to the practice of the Government, or to the secret intentions of the writers of the paper, the fact that they do go out is very significant. It is a powerful argument on my side. It is an admission that the thing for which they are looking is not to be found where only it ought to be found, and that is in the Constitution itself. Frederick Douglass March 26, 1860.
Your argument is old. It didn’t survive Frederick Douglass 160 years ago. It fares no better today. You can read his entire speech here: https://www.blackpast.org/global-african-history/1860-frederick-douglass-constitution-united-states-it-pro-slavery-or-anti-slavery/
ALPAPilot: Shall we condemn the righteous law because wicked men twist it to the support of wickedness?
Not at all. Douglass argued correctly that the U.S. Constitution gave the means to end slavery, but that was not to be. The Constitution failed, and the U.S. plunged into civil war.
And while the U.S. Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution were seminal steps in the development of modern representative government, that wasn’t the issue raised in the original post.
Lincoln argued correctly, numerous times that the Constitution did not fail.
The sophism itself is that any State of the Union may consistently with the National Constitution, and therefore lawfully and peacefully , withdraw from the Union without the consent of the Union or of any other State. The little disguise that the supposed right is to be exercised only for just cause, themselves to be the sole judge of its justice, is too thin to merit any notice. July 4, 1861
If I be wrong on this question of constitutional power, my error lies in believing that certain proceedings are constitutional when, in cases of rebellion or Invasion, the public Safety requires them, which would not be constitutional when, in absence of rebellion or invasion, the public Safety does not require them — in other words, that the constitution is not in it’s application in all respects the same, in cases of Rebellion or invasion, involving the public Safety, as it is in times of profound peace and public security. The constitution itself makes the distinction; and I can no more be persuaded that the government can constitutionally take no strong measure in time of rebellion, because it can be shown that the same could not be lawfully taken in time of peace, than I can be persuaded that a particular drug is not good medicine for a sick man, because it can be shown to not be good food for a well one. June 12, 1863.
The Constitution still stands; slavery does not.
UN Amb. Thomas-Greenfield said:
“I’ve seen for myself how the original sin of slavery weaved white supremacy into our founding documents and principles,”
She says this about a document that was the weapon of choice by all the American Heroes that have fought four equality: Douglass, Lincoln, Stanton etc.
As Lincoln said: All honor to Jefferson–to the man who, in the concrete pressure of a struggle for national independence by a single people, had the coolness, forecast, and capacity to introduce into a merely revolutionary document, an abstract truth, applicable to all men and all times, and so to embalm it there, that to-day, and in all coming days, it shall be a rebuke and a stumbling-block to the very harbingers of re-appearing tyranny and oppression. April 6, 1859
ALPAPilot: Lincoln argued correctly, numerous times that the Constitution did not fail.
Clearly, the purpose of a political constitution is to provide peaceful means for resolving disputes. The constitution clearly failed in this regard.
Article I, Section 8: To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions . . . .
Weird, then, that the founders foresaw a possibility of insurrection – I just don’t understand why someone would need a Militia to quell a “peaceful” insurrection.
In an early speech Frederick Douglass gave us one imperative:
I have said that the Declaration of Independence is the ring-bolt to the chain of your nation’s destiny; so, indeed, I regard it. The principles contained in that instrument are saving principles. Stand by those principles, be true to them on all occasions, in all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost
You can read this speech here: https://masshumanities.org/files/programs/douglass/speech_abridged_med.pdf
ALPAPilot: I have said that the Declaration of Independence is the ring-bolt to the chain of your nation’s destiny; so, indeed, I regard it.
We agree with Douglass, but that wasn’t the issue raised. The Constitution failed to resolve the issue of slavery and racial oppression. Slavery was too structural to the American project.
Moved the goalpost again and twisted yourselves into a knot….even your shared brain acknowledges that the founding documents are not embedded with white supremacy by agreeing with Douglass.
healthguyfsu: Moved the goalpost again
Our focus on the original topic has not changed. You do realize that the Declaration of Independence is not the only founding document? You are diverting. We have address the problematic nature of the U.S. Constitution, in particular Article IV, Section 2, Clause 3. This doesn’t even get to the root problem that the Constitution allowed for slavery.
John C. Calhoun say quite clearly the implications of your incorrect assertions:
We now begin to experience the danger of admitting so great an error to have a place in the declaration of our independence. For a long time it lay dormant; but in the process of time it began to germinate, and produce its poisonous fruits. It had strong hold on the mind of Mr. Jefferson, the author of that document, which caused him to take an utterly false view of the subordinate relation of the black to the white race in the South; and to hold, in consequence, that the former, though utterly unqualified to possess liberty, were as fully entitled to both liberty and equality as the latter; and that to deprive them of it was unjust and immoral. To this error, his proposition to exclude slavery from the territory northwest of the Ohio may be traced, and to that the ordinance of ’87, and through it the deep and dangerous agitation which now threatens to ingulf, and will certainly ingulf, if not speedily settled, our political institutions, and involve the country in countless woes. John C. Calhoun June 27, 1848
The Ambassador joins a long list of Democrats throwing mud on our Founding Documents – not company that I would like to keep.
ALPAPilot: We now begin to experience the danger of admitting so great an error to have a place in the declaration of our independence.
We disagree with Calhoun about the U.S. Declaration of Independence. But again, the U.S. Constitution countenanced slavery, and even provided provision for slave owners to cross into free states to capture their escaped slaves, often without due process. This led to increasing tensions, and eventually to the failure of the Constitution and civil war.
DOUBLE SPEAK
The George Orwell Award of the week goes to America’s Ambassador to the UN. She barely beat out 2nd prize winner Rep. Maxine Waters who wants verdicts to be decided by the mob rather than by courts that apply the law. (Note, Mad Max did come in first in the Irony Category because why do we need lawmakers if we don’t allow courts to apply the law.)
As for our UN Ambassador:
……WEAKNESS = STRENGTH
……DIVISION = UNITY
……DIVERSITY = ONE POINT OF VIEW
……EDUCATION = INDOCTRINATION
……HATE AMERICA = PATRIOTISM
Another dope representing America.
The Constitution never discriminated by color or sex. The original compromise was to avoid confrontation on multiple fronts with foreign and Democrat extremists. Americans stood up to slavery and stand against diversity.
That said, it is estimated that the richest man who ever lived was a black Islamic imperial slaver from the Malian Empire. So, through diversity, equity, and inclusion, there was progress.
Baby Lives Matter
War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
Ignorance is Strength.
– George Orwell, 1984
Libertarianism is self-organizing. Liberalism is divergent. Progressivism is [unqualified] monotonic change. Conservativism is moderating. Principles matter.
I’m surprised slavery is such an important issue. Slavery was abolished Years ago when Lincoln freed all the Democrat’s slaves. Boy were they mad. I guess they never forgave the Republicans for that one.
It’s not, today. It’s significance progresses from social, political, and economic leverage to suppress competing interests, while sustaining diversity, inequity, and exclusion on a forward-looking basis. Think Obamacares and progressive prices. Immigration reform and labor arbitrage. Environmentalism and regulatory arbitrage. Social justice and wars without borders. People aren’t so green to sell life, liberty, and happiness for redistributive greenbacks. #HateLovesAbortion
Actually, the African slave trade was always about a special and peciliar minority interest. It is estimated that the world’s richest man was a black Islamic imperial slaver. The Hutu/Tutsi recycling of redistributive and retributive change did not happen in a vacuum free from diversity. And, with respect to Obama’s bigoted characterization of “burden”, his ancestors were motivated to abort, redistribute, and profit from theirs.
r2468: I’m surprised slavery is such an important issue.
It’s an issue relevant to the original post. See above.
Great! Now can we stop pretending that any leftist is seriously capable of swearing an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.
That is, the U.S. Constitution.
I realize that you leftists will always be faithful to the Soviet one.
Arminius: Now can we stop pretending that any leftist is seriously capable of swearing an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution.
You mean American leftists? Most leftists believe in the rule of law, and would have no problem with taking and fulfilling an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. Not sure why you claim otherwise.
I have come to the conclusion that America made a terrible mistake when they decided to not return all slaves to Africa. I did not believe this in the past, times change.
JusticeDelivered: I have come to the conclusion that America made a terrible mistake when they decided to not return all slaves to Africa.
Speaking of white supremacy…
So, how does Jew privilege… Tutsi privilege benefit the majority? And what do the Democratic Socialists intended to do about it?
#DiversityBreedsAdversity #HateLovesAbortion
I’d like to see someone ask the inpsufferable pspokes-wench, Psaki, why Xi-den’s appointees feel it’s appropriate to bash the U.S. in front of foreign audiences, when Iran and China are happy to do that?
Because Iran and China are just not as good at bashing the U.S. as our democrats are.
This vile woman is full of crap. The issue isn’t acknowledging our “imperfections.” The U.S. and its citizens have done plenty of that. The issue is that focusing on the U.S.’s past wrongs is all that the despicable Dhimmi-crats do, 24/7 – stew and marinate in past wrongs, foment grievance, resentment and anger, and, never acknowledge and celebrate our progress.
Note that this twit was only moved to acknowledge the country’s progress, after rightly being criticized for her idiotic remarks. She couldn’t celebrate America’s undeniable progress in racial matters, first.
The Biden-Harris Junta (it is not a duly-elected administration), knew exactly what she was when they nominated her.
The Junta is a CCP puppet, and she is useful toward the CCP’s agenda.
The CCP and their Biden-Harris Junta hate America as founded, and intend to take us down.
Morons are running our country – again.
Shades of 2008 to 2012.
It is amazing how many morons have managed to gain office, probably because of how many morons were brought in by Obama.
You gents need to get the idea we’re dealing with morons out of your head.
They’re not stupid.
They are winning. They are twisting language and brainwashing kids. They are like a relentless predator.
Before you torture people, first torture the language. Before you commit atrocities, first believe absurdities. Before you burn people, burn books.
This is like a bad dream. I know how it’s going to end, and it never ends well. The nice thing about this website is at least I know I’m not alone.
https://himalayan-imports.com/khuk1.html
One of my sister squadrons in the airwing was VAQ 134, the Garudas. Variations of Garud are apparently common in several Asian languages. It means dragon, and in Asian mythology the dragon is a symbol of good luck.
“The Ang Khola has a characteristic forged depression that helps to distribute the weight forward on the blade, making the Ang Khola a powerful chopper.
Ang Khola means “back-valley” or “back-hollow”, referring to the depression near the spine (‘back’) of the blade.”
Right now Nepalese bladesmiths are making my Garud Ang Khola. My dragon knife. The nice thing about knives is you don’t need to reload them. And something tells me I may need a good chopper.
Be well. And be of good cheer.
I, too, took an oath of office. Biden’s is specified in Article II, Section One, Clause 8.
“Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:—’I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.'”
Mine was this.
“I, (state your name), having been appointed a (rank) in the United States (branch of service), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foriegn and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the office upon which I am about to enter. So help me God.”
The difference between us is I meant it. No leftist who could puke the words this evil lying wench is vomiting in public could say claim to have meant it.
Good ol’ devout Catholic Biden swore on a Bible he’d preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. Then he appoints this witch to be our U.N. ambassador?
Work your pretzel logic and try to square that circle. It will be fun to watch. I think I’ll grab another beer and microwave some popcorn. This woman isn’t just un-American. She’s openly anti-American.
Biden isn’t just sh***ing on the Constitution. He’s sh***ing on the Bible.
Arminius: She’s openly anti-American.
Admitting the flaws in American society doesn’t make one anti-America. Indeed, confronting problems is how problems get fixed.
If you can stomach it, here’s Zhou Bai Zhien lying his ass off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Joe_Biden_takes_the_presidential_oath_of_office.webm
If it wasn’t so horrible, it would be funny. The people who claimed Trump was a liar don’t even believe in the concept of objective truth.
Apparently only white supremacists believe in something called truth.
I hope I didn’t come across as too ominous. It’s just that a good khukuri feels good in the hand. It’s reassuring.
The Swedes make the best axes.
https://www.gransforsbruk.com/en/
I don’t know what I would do without one of their forest or splitting axes.
A K-Bar is also a handy thing. Both the USMC fighting knife and the BK11 Becker Necker. The bottle opener comes in handy.