truthout--2020-10-13--Trump Will Never Admit Error. His Lack of Self-Accountability Is Deadly.

There has never been , nor will there ever be again , a timeline quite like this in the annals of U.S. presidential history : On September 9 , Bob Woodward ’ s new book Rage revealed that Donald Trump knew back in February how lethal COVID-19 was , and deliberately chose to play down the threat .
“ It goes through the air , ” Trump told Woodward on February 7 .
“ That ’ s always tougher than the touch .
You don ’ t have to touch things .
Right ?
But the air , you just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how it ’ s passed… .
It ’ s also more deadly than even your strenuous flus.
” At the time of this revelation , the U.S. was knocking on the door of 200,000 COVID deaths .
That bombshell barely had time to pour itself a drink before The New York Times exposed the shabby truth behind Trump ’ s long-concealed tax records on September 27 .
“ The resulting product , ” I wrote , “ is a thunderclap of venality and greed astride a form of grasping self-interest unseen in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Warren Harding.
” The next day , Trump defenestrated himself in a debate performance that made Godzilla look like Gene Kelly , and his already-bad poll numbers began to actively crater .
For four years , most people had only heard about what Trump had said or done , choosing not to subject themselves to the raw voltage of his ghastly personality .
That night , a Super Bowl-sized audience grabbed the live wire , saw it for themselves , and their hair stood on end like Tim Burton ’ s characters .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ diagnosed with COVID and raced to the hospital , where he was dosed and injected with everything ( presumably ) short of bleach and the blood of the Wendigo to keep him from getting killed by the same disease he ’ d spent eight months ignoring , dismissing or openly mocking .
Among the medications given to Trump was the Regeneron cocktail , which was “ developed using cells derived from aborted fetal tissue , ” according to CBS News .
His anti-abortion base didn ’ t so much as blink .
Meanwhile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ through the White House , infecting staffers and senators along with donors from all points on the compass .
Suddenly , a year that had already bent “ strange ” into bold and terrifying new shapes just… stopped .
Is Trump going to die ?
What if Pence has it , too ?
Did Biden catch it at the debate ?
What happens if… ?
Who would… ?
What can we… ?
The markets shuddered , and a nation struck to silence by ceaseless lethal crisis became quieter still .
Of course , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ number of comorbidity categories that drastically increased his risk , the best doctors and medicine government can provide prevailed .
Those doctors were aided by the combined scientific data collected after more than 215,000 COVID deaths and 7 million infections in the U.S. showed them how to better fight this thing .
Put another way , Trump ’ s chaotically poor response to the pandemic probably saved his own life .
The overwhelming death and suffering caused by COVID has been distilled by medical science into practical data that saves far more people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
In the end , it ’ s battlefield knowledge — the practice of surgery always makes great leaps forward after wars give the surgeons piles of casualties to work on — and it is no different here .
Like as not , Trump is still breathing because of the medical data gathered from people he allowed to die .
What did he learn from this astonishing privilege ?
“ I went through it , ” Trump crowed at a packed , virtually mask-free campaign rally in Florida yesterday .
“ Now they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feel so powerful , I ’ ll walk into that audience .
I ’ ll walk in there , I ’ ll kiss everyone in that audience .
I ’ ll kiss the guys and the beautiful women and the — I ’ ll just give you a big fat kiss.
” Nothing .
He learned nothing because he already knows everything he will ever know , and will never know anything else , ever .
A few days earlier , Vice President Mike Pence peddled his pale milk before a huge shoulder-to-shoulder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Florida .
On Friday , Trump will return to the Sunshine State for another crowded , maskless rally .
Any or all of these could easily become super-spreader events , and Florida has spent the entire pandemic on very shaky ground .
Trump ’ s top COVID doctor , Anthony Fauci , dared to criticize these rallies before demanding the Trump campaign stop using his image in their commercials .
Trump responded by declaring that Fauci knows nothing about COVID .
“ Tony ’ s pitching arm is far more accurate than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Trump was right.
” “ Trump was right.
” That will be his campaign theme until the deal goes down .
No regrets , no self-examination , sure as hell no apologies , and full speed ahead doing all the wrong things — like these rallies — because to do otherwise by even half an inch would be to admit error .
As bad as 2020 has been , the next three weeks will be a crucible the likes of which this nation has seldom seen .

Trump already knows everything he will ever know, and will never know anything else, ever.
There has never been, nor will there ever be again, a timeline quite like this in the annals of U.S. presidential history:
On September 9, Bob Woodward’s new book Rage revealed that Donald Trump knew back in February how lethal COVID-19 was, and deliberately chose to play down the threat. “It goes through the air,” Trump told Woodward on February 7. “That’s always tougher than the touch. You don’t have to touch things. Right? But the air, you just breathe the air and that’s how it’s passed…. It’s also more deadly than even your strenuous flus.” At the time of this revelation, the U.S. was knocking on the door of 200,000 COVID deaths.
That bombshell barely had time to pour itself a drink before The New York Times exposed the shabby truth behind Trump’s long-concealed tax records on September 27. “The resulting product,” I wrote, “is a thunderclap of venality and greed astride a form of grasping self-interest unseen in the White House since the epic corruption of Warren Harding.”
The next day, Trump defenestrated himself in a debate performance that made Godzilla look like Gene Kelly, and his already-bad poll numbers began to actively crater. For four years, most people had only heard about what Trump had said or done, choosing not to subject themselves to the raw voltage of his ghastly personality. That night, a Super Bowl-sized audience grabbed the live wire, saw it for themselves, and their hair stood on end like one of Tim Burton’s movie characters.
Two days later, Trump himself was diagnosed with COVID and raced to the hospital, where he was dosed and injected with everything (presumably) short of bleach and the blood of the Wendigo to keep him from getting killed by the same disease he’d spent eight months ignoring, dismissing or openly mocking.
Among the medications given to Trump was the Regeneron cocktail, which was “developed using cells derived from aborted fetal tissue,” according to CBS News. His anti-abortion base didn’t so much as blink. Meanwhile, COVID took a nice long burn through the White House, infecting staffers and senators along with donors from all points on the compass.
Suddenly, a year that had already bent “strange” into bold and terrifying new shapes just… stopped. Is Trump going to die? What if Pence has it, too? Did Biden catch it at the debate? What happens if…? Who would…? What can we…? The markets shuddered, and a nation struck to silence by ceaseless lethal crisis became quieter still.
Like as not, Trump is still breathing because of the medical data gathered from people he allowed to die.
Of course, Trump survived. Despite squatting in a number of comorbidity categories that drastically increased his risk, the best doctors and medicine government can provide prevailed. Those doctors were aided by the combined scientific data collected after more than 215,000 COVID deaths and 7 million infections in the U.S. showed them how to better fight this thing.
Put another way, Trump’s chaotically poor response to the pandemic probably saved his own life. The overwhelming death and suffering caused by COVID has been distilled by medical science into practical data that saves far more people than we could have in the spring. In the end, it’s battlefield knowledge — the practice of surgery always makes great leaps forward after wars give the surgeons piles of casualties to work on — and it is no different here. Like as not, Trump is still breathing because of the medical data gathered from people he allowed to die.
What did he learn from this astonishing privilege?
“I went through it,” Trump crowed at a packed, virtually mask-free campaign rally in Florida yesterday. “Now they say I’m immune. I feel so powerful, I’ll walk into that audience. I’ll walk in there, I’ll kiss everyone in that audience. I’ll kiss the guys and the beautiful women and the — I’ll just give you a big fat kiss.”
Nothing. He learned nothing because he already knows everything he will ever know, and will never know anything else, ever.
A few days earlier, Vice President Mike Pence peddled his pale milk before a huge shoulder-to-shoulder crowd of senior citizens in The Villages, Florida. On Friday, Trump will return to the Sunshine State for another crowded, maskless rally. Any or all of these could easily become super-spreader events, and Florida has spent the entire pandemic on very shaky ground.
Trump’s top COVID doctor, Anthony Fauci, dared to criticize these rallies before demanding the Trump campaign stop using his image in their commercials. Trump responded by declaring that Fauci knows nothing about COVID. “Tony’s pitching arm is far more accurate than his prognostications,” he tweeted. “Trump was right.”
“Trump was right.” That will be his campaign theme until the deal goes down. No regrets, no self-examination, sure as hell no apologies, and full speed ahead doing all the wrong things — like these rallies — because to do otherwise by even half an inch would be to admit error. As bad as 2020 has been, the next three weeks will be a crucible the likes of which this nation has seldom seen.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-10-13--To Decolonize Indigenous Lands, We Must Also Abolish Police and Prisons

The movement to decolonize Indigenous lands is intimately connected to the movement to abolish police and prisons .
As the idea of decolonization is discussed among wider circles , we must recognize this interconnectedness , especially in the midst of a resurgent Black Lives Matter movement that calls for the defunding — and , in fact , the dismantling — of police .
Both decolonization and abolition are not simply seeking an end result .
Instead they are continuous creative processes : an imagining of life beyond prisons and the theft of land .
They require creativity and a willingness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supremacy that impact all of our lives on a scale from the local to the global , and occupy the “ common-sense ” perceptions of the world around us .
When statements are made such as , “ We can give land back ” or “ We can exist without prisons , ” some people are perplexed , others are scared , and some will defiantly argue that it is not possible .
Imagining a world beyond what we know and experience on a daily basis can be extremely difficult .
Neither abolition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want what they say — an end to policing and prisons , and an end to land theft and return of the land to Native peoples — and argue that it is fully possible to have an end to the prisons and policing , and to end colonization and therefore , for Native peoples to have their lands back .
Both movements are meant to benefit everyone , not just Black people or Indigenous people .
White supremacy – a structure of social organization and human dominance — shapes imprisonment , enslavement , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theft .
It is premised on the consumption of one ’ s life for another .
This structure eats at the being of those who are not in the position of authority , and includes consuming the land .
Increasingly , people of color are selectively incorporated into positions of authority and are actively shaping white supremacy to be multicultural .
The police , for example , are rapidly increasing their ranks to include people of color .
Another example is how universities have included Indigenous peoples in writing and performing land acknowledgment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This authoritative inclusionary process is similar to the inclusion of people of color into capitalism as workers and business owners .
However , this selective inclusion should not be mistaken for an end to Euro-Americans being the historical and ongoing beneficiaries of white supremacy who accumulated wealth and land .
Rather , the inclusion of people of color further solidifies white supremacy , positioning it as a structure that can be reformed .
As abolitionist scholar and activist Dylan Rodriguez explains , white supremacy is “ a flexible and changing apparatus of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engaged in creatively imagining an end to white supremacy , rather than fashioning ways to include more people in its institutions .
California Indians , as they call themselves , have experienced extreme forms of racial violence since the beginning of colonization in 1769 .
Their populations plummeted , and for some tribes there were few survivors of genocide .
They were enslaved through Anglo-American law in the 1850s and ‘ 60s , with a slave market in downtown Los Angeles .
The laws enacted by California ’ s legislature functioned much like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was used by the criminal legal system to force Indians into captivity and involuntary labor .
The first governor of California , Peter Burnett , declared a war of extermination against the Indian .
The sheriff of Mariposa County announced that “ the Indian ” was outlawed and authorized militias to kill any Indian on site as long as the killers buried the dead and told law enforcement where and how many they had killed .
The state of California authorized payment of over $ 1 million to individuals and militias for killing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the federal government .
During the Spanish era the missions enslaved Indigenous people , holding them captive and forcing them to work .
Most historians have disavowed enslavement at the missions , some saying the conditions were “ slavery-like , ” but not enslavement due to Native people not being held as chattel .
I would argue that mission studies scholars have not been creative enough to utilize the teachings and theories developed through the radical Black tradition .
Utilizing the scholarship of Orlando Patterson and others , coupled with the experience and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is clear that the missions were racial slave regimes , and included a natal alienation of the missionized from the lived experience of their ancestors .
As land is central to a Native world and understanding of self , the natal alienation also worked to separate Native people from their relationship to land .
Although they struggled to maintain ties to their ancestors , they did so under the threat of racialized violence .
The Spanish military were the patrollers of the missions , and if Native people escaped from their captivity , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ punished by means of the lash and confinement in the stockade .
If a child ran away to be with her mother , her mother would also be severely punished .
As a colony , California begins through the racialized technologies of both slavery and the prison .
The monjerio , the girl ’ s dormitory within the mission complex , was a racialized and gendered prison .
The incarcerated Native girls , as young as six years old , were taken away from their families and locked in buildings whose confines have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ transported African slaves across the middle passage .
The young Native girls were particularly susceptible to sexual violence , and the only release from their imprisonment was through marriage , thereby further institutionalizing heteropatriarchy .
The logics of white supremacy in California , beginning with the mission system , were transformed , added to , and augmented by Mexican colonialism , and then that of the United States , which brought with them centuries of a distinct form of anti-Blackness .
There is much to be compared , both historically and contemporarily , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Indigenous people in California .
Black people ’ s experience of the middle passage and their racialization as Black is not the same as California Indian experiences of natal alienation .
The two are on different scales based on space and time .
Yet the suffering at the level of ontology due to natal alienation is part of a related conversation .
How do Black people and California Indians whose ancestors were enslaved become whole again ?
The worlds of their ancestors are gone forever .
The worlds of California Indian ancestors are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our names for ourselves .
What we were dispossessed of , is something that we can not know .
We can theorize , we can imagine , we can dream , we can relearn our languages and songs , and we can even regain sovereignty , but none of us will ever have the ability to fully comprehend what we have lost , because we have never lived the lives our ancestors did .
As Tongva scholar Cindi Alvitre has stated : “ We live in a continual state of mourning.
” We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our lands , and the way that our dead have been treated as objects .
Despite our prolonged state of mourning , Tongva people have continued to creatively resist , including through political organizing , but also through song , dance , story , poetry , art , canoeing and language learning .
All of this is part of the long movement toward decolonization .
Through white supremacy , we are not viewed as human beings , but merely human , as objects like our lands , to be consumed , converted and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that brings together diverse communities who have had their lives , their being , taken from them , and creates and grows ways of living beyond .
One such possible way of living beyond is viewing ourselves in relation to the Earth as guests .
In the Tongva language , the word for guests is kuuyam .
Our ancestors had well-established protocols on how to welcome people as guests .
When the first colonizers came through our territories , we welcomed them , offered them food and a place to stay .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protocols , and we can continue to be welcoming .
The Earth herself continues to be welcoming despite how she has been treated with disrespect .
She continues to offer us food and a place to live .
If we are going to transcend white supremacy , we have to think creatively about how we are not only in relation to one another , but also to the Earth .
Kuuyam is a creative re-imagining of human relationships to place , beyond the structures of white supremacy .
I would like to end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ complex ask : Please give our lands back .
This request is radical , and yet there shouldn ’ t be anything radical about it .
If people can acknowledge it was stolen , they can give it back .
For example , public and state lands , such as city , county , state and national parks can be returned to and stewarded by the tribe whose territory it is within .
There are examples of this already happening .
For instance , in collaboration with the Wiyot Tribe , the Eureka @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over 200 acres of coastal land .
Like abolition , giving land back is often difficult for people to comprehend as a real possibility .
If we have any job to do , it ’ s to help people see that it is possible .
With our lands freed from the clutches of white supremacy , we can collectively abolish the prison , and through the abolition of the prison , Native people can regain their lands .
These projects are intimately connected .
Acknowledging that you are on Native land is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s move beyond the land acknowledgement : View us as human beings and do what is right .
Give the land back .

Part of the Series The Road to Abolition
The movement to decolonize Indigenous lands is intimately connected to the movement to abolish police and prisons. As the idea of decolonization is discussed among wider circles, we must recognize this interconnectedness, especially in the midst of a resurgent Black Lives Matter movement that calls for the defunding — and, in fact, the dismantling — of police.
Both decolonization and abolition are not simply seeking an end result. Instead they are continuous creative processes: an imagining of life beyond prisons and the theft of land. They require creativity and a willingness to move beyond the structures of white supremacy that impact all of our lives on a scale from the local to the global, and occupy the “common-sense” perceptions of the world around us. When statements are made such as, “We can give land back” or “We can exist without prisons,” some people are perplexed, others are scared, and some will defiantly argue that it is not possible. Imagining a world beyond what we know and experience on a daily basis can be extremely difficult.
Neither abolition nor decolonization are metaphors. Both movements want what they say — an end to policing and prisons, and an end to land theft and return of the land to Native peoples — and argue that it is fully possible to have an end to the prisons and policing, and to end colonization and therefore, for Native peoples to have their lands back.
Both movements are meant to benefit everyone, not just Black people or Indigenous people. White supremacy – a structure of social organization and human dominance — shapes imprisonment, enslavement, capitalism, conquest, genocide and land theft. It is premised on the consumption of one’s life for another. This structure eats at the being of those who are not in the position of authority, and includes consuming the land.
Increasingly, people of color are selectively incorporated into positions of authority and are actively shaping white supremacy to be multicultural. The police, for example, are rapidly increasing their ranks to include people of color. Another example is how universities have included Indigenous peoples in writing and performing land acknowledgment statements in lieu of giving land back. This authoritative inclusionary process is similar to the inclusion of people of color into capitalism as workers and business owners.
However, this selective inclusion should not be mistaken for an end to Euro-Americans being the historical and ongoing beneficiaries of white supremacy who accumulated wealth and land. Rather, the inclusion of people of color further solidifies white supremacy, positioning it as a structure that can be reformed. As abolitionist scholar and activist Dylan Rodriguez explains, white supremacy is “a flexible and changing apparatus of power.” Abolition and decolonization are actively engaged in creatively imagining an end to white supremacy, rather than fashioning ways to include more people in its institutions.
Neither abolition nor decolonization are metaphors. Both movements want what they say.
California Indians, as they call themselves, have experienced extreme forms of racial violence since the beginning of colonization in 1769. Their populations plummeted, and for some tribes there were few survivors of genocide. They were enslaved through Anglo-American law in the 1850s and ‘60s, with a slave market in downtown Los Angeles. The laws enacted by California’s legislature functioned much like the Black codes where “vagrancy” was used by the criminal legal system to force Indians into captivity and involuntary labor. The first governor of California, Peter Burnett, declared a war of extermination against the Indian. The sheriff of Mariposa County announced that “the Indian” was outlawed and authorized militias to kill any Indian on site as long as the killers buried the dead and told law enforcement where and how many they had killed. The state of California authorized payment of over $1 million to individuals and militias for killing Indians. This money was reimbursed by the federal government.
During the Spanish era the missions enslaved Indigenous people, holding them captive and forcing them to work. Most historians have disavowed enslavement at the missions, some saying the conditions were “slavery-like,” but not enslavement due to Native people not being held as chattel. I would argue that mission studies scholars have not been creative enough to utilize the teachings and theories developed through the radical Black tradition. Utilizing the scholarship of Orlando Patterson and others, coupled with the experience and stories of California Indians themselves, it is clear that the missions were racial slave regimes, and included a natal alienation of the missionized from the lived experience of their ancestors. As land is central to a Native world and understanding of self, the natal alienation also worked to separate Native people from their relationship to land. Although they struggled to maintain ties to their ancestors, they did so under the threat of racialized violence.
The Spanish military were the patrollers of the missions, and if Native people escaped from their captivity, they would be swiftly hunted down and punished by means of the lash and confinement in the stockade. If a child ran away to be with her mother, her mother would also be severely punished. As a colony, California begins through the racialized technologies of both slavery and the prison. The monjerio, the girl’s dormitory within the mission complex, was a racialized and gendered prison. The incarcerated Native girls, as young as six years old, were taken away from their families and locked in buildings whose confines have been compared to the slave ships that transported African slaves across the middle passage. The young Native girls were particularly susceptible to sexual violence, and the only release from their imprisonment was through marriage, thereby further institutionalizing heteropatriarchy. The logics of white supremacy in California, beginning with the mission system, were transformed, added to, and augmented by Mexican colonialism, and then that of the United States, which brought with them centuries of a distinct form of anti-Blackness.
Abolition and decolonization are actively engaged in creatively imagining an end to white supremacy, rather than fashioning ways to include more people in its institutions.
There is much to be compared, both historically and contemporarily, between the experiences of Black folks and Indigenous people in California. Black people’s experience of the middle passage and their racialization as Black is not the same as California Indian experiences of natal alienation. The two are on different scales based on space and time. Yet the suffering at the level of ontology due to natal alienation is part of a related conversation. How do Black people and California Indians whose ancestors were enslaved become whole again? The worlds of their ancestors are gone forever. The worlds of California Indian ancestors are our lands, our cultures, and our names for ourselves. What we were dispossessed of, is something that we cannot know. We can theorize, we can imagine, we can dream, we can relearn our languages and songs, and we can even regain sovereignty, but none of us will ever have the ability to fully comprehend what we have lost, because we have never lived the lives our ancestors did. As Tongva scholar Cindi Alvitre has stated: “We live in a continual state of mourning.” We mourn our loss, the desecration of our lands, and the way that our dead have been treated as objects. Despite our prolonged state of mourning, Tongva people have continued to creatively resist, including through political organizing, but also through song, dance, story, poetry, art, canoeing and language learning. All of this is part of the long movement toward decolonization.
Through white supremacy, we are not viewed as human beings, but merely human, as objects like our lands, to be consumed, converted and controlled. Abolition can be a project that brings together diverse communities who have had their lives, their being, taken from them, and creates and grows ways of living beyond.
One such possible way of living beyond is viewing ourselves in relation to the Earth as guests. In the Tongva language, the word for guests is kuuyam. Our ancestors had well-established protocols on how to welcome people as guests. When the first colonizers came through our territories, we welcomed them, offered them food and a place to stay. I know that we can learn from these protocols, and we can continue to be welcoming. The Earth herself continues to be welcoming despite how she has been treated with disrespect. She continues to offer us food and a place to live. If we are going to transcend white supremacy, we have to think creatively about how we are not only in relation to one another, but also to the Earth. Kuuyam is a creative re-imagining of human relationships to place, beyond the structures of white supremacy.
Please give our lands back. This request is radical, and yet there shouldn’t be anything radical about it.
I would like to end with a simple, and yet incredibly complex ask: Please give our lands back. This request is radical, and yet there shouldn’t be anything radical about it. If people can acknowledge it was stolen, they can give it back. For example, public and state lands, such as city, county, state and national parks can be returned to and stewarded by the tribe whose territory it is within. There are examples of this already happening. For instance, in collaboration with the Wiyot Tribe, the Eureka, California, city council has returned over 200 acres of coastal land.
Like abolition, giving land back is often difficult for people to comprehend as a real possibility. If we have any job to do, it’s to help people see that it is possible. With our lands freed from the clutches of white supremacy, we can collectively abolish the prison, and through the abolition of the prison, Native people can regain their lands. These projects are intimately connected. Acknowledging that you are on Native land is a great first step, but let’s move beyond the land acknowledgement: View us as human beings and do what is right. Give the land back.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-10-13--Trump Claims Immunity From COVID Even as New Study Shows Reinfection Is Possible

During a campaign rally he held in Sanford , Florida , on Monday night , President Donald Trump told audience members that he was now immune from coronavirus , after having been treated for COVID-19 earlier this month — an assumption that health experts have warned against , especially in light of evidence that reinfection is a real possibility .
The president also suggested that he wanted to engage in physical acts with people in the audience , saying he would “ kiss everyone ” at the rally — an action that , as the pandemic continues to infect tens @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would be dangerous for both him and those he interacted with .
“ I ’ ll walk in there and kiss everyone in that audience .
I ’ ll kiss the guys and the beautiful women .
I ’ ll give you a big , fat kiss , ” Trump said .
Trump ’ s declaration that he ’ s immune from coronavirus runs counter to what health experts say about the virus .
While the suggestion from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ( CDC ) that testing a person after @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least three months unless they begin to exhibit symptoms of the disease again may imply that there might be some immunity , new evidence suggests , however , that the three-month timetable may itself may be too long to consider a person immune .
According to a recent study , a 25-year-old man from Nevada contracted COVID-19 twice within a two month period , being the first confirmed case of reinfection in the U.S .
This individual first exhibited symptoms in late March , testing positive for the disease in early April .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in late May , testing positive again in early June .
The man was able to recover from the disease the second time around , but according to those who followed his progress , the second instance of infection was worse than the first .
Health experts are still unsure about how prevalent reinfection might be — it could be that a second instance of contracting coronavirus is a rare thing , or it could be occurring more often than previously thought , especially since individuals can be asymptomatic and not even realize @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , for example , contract coronavirus without knowing it , then become reinfected a month or two later and believe that they have been infected for the first time because they are experiencing symptoms this time around .
There have been at least 22 documented instances of reinfection around the world .
Trump ’ s comments from Monday are problematic for other reasons beyond his insistence that he is now immune to COVID .
It ’ s not clear , for example , that he is no longer contagious .
Trump ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote in a memo on Saturday that he believed that the president was no longer able to transmit the disease to others , citing CDC guidelines that say passing a 10-day period from the onset of symptoms typically means one can assume they are no longer contagious .
But those same guidelines also recommend individuals with severe symptoms wait 20 days before making that assumption .
It ’ s unclear whether Trump falls into that latter camp or not , because his team of doctors hasn ’ t exactly been forthright with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or the treatment he received .
The only thing we can be sure of is that the president had access to state-of-the-art medical care that is unavailable to the rally-goers he wanted to kiss .
It ’ s also a possibility that Trump may still have COVID-19 .
In a separate note issued on Monday , Trump ’ s doctor announced that he had tested negative two days in a row , using a rapid form of testing called Abbott BinaxNOW .
That test , however , is not considered to be highly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ validated in testing individuals within the first seven days of displaying symptoms .
Conley did not state when those two days of testing occurred , but the announcement came 11 days after the president had initially announced he had contracted coronavirus .
As of Tuesday morning , more than 8 million Americans have been diagnosed with COVID-19 , with 220,000 having died from the disease so far .

During a campaign rally he held in Sanford, Florida, on Monday night, President Donald Trump told audience members that he was now immune from coronavirus, after having been treated for COVID-19 earlier this month — an assumption that health experts have warned against, especially in light of evidence that reinfection is a real possibility.
“They say I’m immune — I feel so powerful,” Trump told rally-goers.
The president also suggested that he wanted to engage in physical acts with people in the audience, saying he would “kiss everyone” at the rally — an action that, as the pandemic continues to infect tens of thousands daily in this country, would be dangerous for both him and those he interacted with.
“I’ll walk in there and kiss everyone in that audience. I’ll kiss the guys and the beautiful women. I’ll give you a big, fat kiss,” Trump said.
Trump’s declaration that he’s immune from coronavirus runs counter to what health experts say about the virus. While the suggestion from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that testing a person after they recover is not necessary for at least three months unless they begin to exhibit symptoms of the disease again may imply that there might be some immunity, new evidence suggests, however, that the three-month timetable may itself may be too long to consider a person immune. According to a recent study, a 25-year-old man from Nevada contracted COVID-19 twice within a two month period, being the first confirmed case of reinfection in the U.S.
This individual first exhibited symptoms in late March, testing positive for the disease in early April. He recovered but began showing symptoms again in late May, testing positive again in early June.
The man was able to recover from the disease the second time around, but according to those who followed his progress, the second instance of infection was worse than the first.
Health experts are still unsure about how prevalent reinfection might be — it could be that a second instance of contracting coronavirus is a rare thing, or it could be occurring more often than previously thought, especially since individuals can be asymptomatic and not even realize they have COVID. An individual could, for example, contract coronavirus without knowing it, then become reinfected a month or two later and believe that they have been infected for the first time because they are experiencing symptoms this time around.
There have been at least 22 documented instances of reinfection around the world.
Trump’s comments from Monday are problematic for other reasons beyond his insistence that he is now immune to COVID. It’s not clear, for example, that he is no longer contagious.
Trump’s White House doctor, Sean Conley, wrote in a memo on Saturday that he believed that the president was no longer able to transmit the disease to others, citing CDC guidelines that say passing a 10-day period from the onset of symptoms typically means one can assume they are no longer contagious. But those same guidelines also recommend individuals with severe symptoms wait 20 days before making that assumption.
It’s unclear whether Trump falls into that latter camp or not, because his team of doctors hasn’t exactly been forthright with the public about the severity of his infection or the treatment he received. The only thing we can be sure of is that the president had access to state-of-the-art medical care that is unavailable to the rally-goers he wanted to kiss.
It’s also a possibility that Trump may still have COVID-19. In a separate note issued on Monday, Trump’s doctor announced that he had tested negative two days in a row, using a rapid form of testing called Abbott BinaxNOW. That test, however, is not considered to be highly accurate, as it has only been validated in testing individuals within the first seven days of displaying symptoms.
Conley did not state when those two days of testing occurred, but the announcement came 11 days after the president had initially announced he had contracted coronavirus.
As of Tuesday morning, more than 8 million Americans have been diagnosed with COVID-19, with 220,000 having died from the disease so far.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-10-13--The Art of the Weapons Deal in the Age of Trump

The United States has the dubious distinction of being the world ’ s leading arms dealer .
It dominates the global trade in a historic fashion and nowhere is that domination more complete than in the endlessly war-torn Middle East .
There , believe it or not , the U.S. controls nearly half the arms market .
From Yemen to Libya to Egypt , sales by this country and its allies are playing a significant role in fueling some of the world ’ s most devastating conflicts .
But Donald Trump , even before he was felled by Covid-19 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could not have cared less , as long as he thought such trafficking in the tools of death and destruction would help his political prospects .
Look , for example , at the recent “ normalization ” of relations between the United Arab Emirates ( UAE ) and Israel he helped to broker , which has set the stage for yet another surge in American arms exports .
To hear Trump and his supporters tell it , he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for the deal , dubbed “ the Abraham Accords.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was eager to brand himself as “ Donald Trump , peacemaker ” in advance of the November election .
This , believe me , was absurd on the face of it .
Until the pandemic swept everything in the White House away , it was just another day in Trump World and another example of the president ’ s penchant for exploiting foreign and military policy for his own domestic political gain .
If Trump had been honest for a change , he would have dubbed those Abraham Accords the “ Arms Sales @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part , induced to participate in hopes of receiving Lockheed Martin ’ s F-35 combat aircraft and advanced armed drones as a reward .
For his part , after some grumbling , Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to one-up the UAE and seek a new $ 8 billion arms package from the Trump administration , including an additional squadron of Lockheed Martin ’ s F-35s ( beyond those already on order ) , a fleet of Boeing attack helicopters , and so much more .
Were that deal to go through , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Israel ’ s more than ample military aid commitment from the United States , already slated to total $ 3.8 billion annually for the next decade .
This wasn ’ t the first time President Trump tried to capitalize on arms sales to the Middle East to consolidate his political position at home and his posture as this country ’ s dealmaker par excellence .
Such gestures began in May 2017 , during his very first official overseas trip to Saudi Arabia .
The Saudis greeted him then with ego-boosting fanfare , putting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into their capital , Riyadh ; projecting a giant image of that same face on the hotel where he was staying ; and presenting him with a medal in a surreal ceremony at one of the kingdom ’ s many palaces .
For his part , Trump came bearing arms in the form of a supposed $ 110 billion weapons package .
Never mind that the size of the deal was vastly exaggerated .
It allowed the president to gloat that his sales deal there would mean “ jobs , jobs , jobs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he had to work with one of the most repressive regimes in the world to bring those jobs home , who cared ?
Not he and certainly not his son-in-law Jared Kushner who would develop a special relationship with the cruel Saudi Crown Prince and heir apparent to the throne , Mohammed bin Salman .
Trump doubled down on his jobs argument in a March 2018 White House meeting with bin Salman .
The president came armed with a prop for the cameras : a map of the U.S. showing the states that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Saudi arms sales , including — you won ’ t be surprised to learn — the crucial election swing states of Pennsylvania , Ohio , and Wisconsin .
Nor will it surprise you that Trump ’ s jobs claims from those Saudi arms sales are almost entirely fraudulent .
In fits of fancy , he ’ s even insisted that he ’ s creating as many as half a million jobs linked to weapons exports to that repressive regime .
The real number is less than one-tenth that amount — and far @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. employment .
But why let the facts get in the way of a good story ?
Donald Trump is far from the first president to push tens of billions of dollars of arms into the Middle East .
The Obama administration , for example , made a record $ 115 billion in arms offers to Saudi Arabia during its eight years in office , including combat aircraft , attack helicopters , armored vehicles , military ships , missile defense systems , bombs , guns , and ammunition .
Those sales solidified Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ primary arms supplier .
Two-thirds of its air force consists of Boeing F-15 aircraft , the vast bulk of its tanks are General Dynamics M-1s , and most of its air-to-ground missiles come from Raytheon and Lockheed Martin .
And mind you , those weapons aren ’ t just sitting in warehouses or being displayed in military parades .
They ’ ve been among the principal killers in a brutal Saudi intervention in Yemen that has sparked the world ’ s worst humanitarian catastrophe .
A new report from the Arms and Security @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( which I co-authored ) underscores just how stunningly the U.S. dominates the Middle Eastern weapons market .
According to data from the arms transfer database compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute , in the period from 2015 to 2019 the United States accounted for 48 % of major weapons deliveries to the Middle East and North Africa , or ( as that vast region is sometimes known acronymically ) MENA .
Those figures leave deliveries from the next largest suppliers in the dust .
They represent nearly three times the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ times what France contributed , 10 times what the United Kingdom exported , and 16 times China ’ s contribution .
In other words , we have met the prime weapons proliferator in the Middle East and North Africa and it is us .
The influence of U.S. arms in this conflict-ridden region is further illustrated by a striking fact : Washington is the top supplier to 13 of the 19 countries there , including Morocco ( 91 % of its arms imports ) , Israel ( 78 % ) , Saudi Arabia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 73 % ) , Lebanon ( 73 % ) , Kuwait ( 70 % ) , the UAE ( 68 % ) , and Qatar ( 50 % ) .
If the Trump administration goes ahead with its controversial plan to sell F-35s and armed drones to the UAE and brokers that related $ 8 billion arms deal with Israel , its share of arms imports to those two countries will be even higher in the years to come .
None of the key players in today ’ s most devastating wars in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which means that imports from the U.S. and other suppliers are the true fuel sustaining those conflicts .
Advocates of arms transfers to the MENA region often describe them as a force for “ stability , ” a way to cement alliances , counter Iran , or more generally a tool for creating a balance of power that makes armed engagement less likely .
In a number of key conflicts in the region , this is nothing more than a convenient fantasy for arms suppliers ( and the U.S. government ) , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weaponry has only exacerbated conflicts , aggravated human rights abuses , and caused countless civilian deaths and injuries , while provoking widespread destruction .
And keep in mind that , while not solely responsible , Washington is the chief culprit when it comes to the weaponry that ’ s fueling a number of the area ’ s most violent wars .
In Yemen , a Saudi/UAE-led intervention that began in March 2015 has , by now , resulted in the deaths of thousands of civilians through air strikes , put millions at risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ desperate conditions for the worst cholera outbreak in living memory .
That war has already cost more than 100,000 lives and the U.S. and the United Kingdom have been the primary suppliers of the combat aircraft , bombs , attack helicopters , missiles , and armored vehicles used there , transfers valued in the tens of billions of dollars .
There has been a sharp jump in overall arms deliveries to Saudi Arabia since that war was launched .
Dramatically enough , total arms sent to the Kingdom more than doubled between the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 2019 .
Together , the U.S. ( 74 % ) and the U.K. ( 13 % ) accounted for 87 % of all arms deliveries to Saudi Arabia in that five-year time frame .
In Egypt , U.S.-supplied combat aircraft , tanks , and attack helicopters have been used in what is supposedly a counterterror operation in the Northern Sinai desert , which has , in reality , simply become a war largely against the civilian population of the region .
Between 2015 and 2019 , Washington ’ s arms offers to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ billions more in deals made earlier but delivered in those years .
And in May 2020 , the Pentagon ’ s Defense Security Cooperation Agency announced that it was offering a package of Apache attack helicopters to Egypt worth up to $ 2.3 billion .
According to research conducted by Human Rights Watch , thousands of people have been arrested in the Sinai region over the past six years , hundreds have been disappeared , and tens of thousands have been forcibly evicted from their homes .
Armed to the teeth , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ systematic and widespread arbitrary arrests — including of children — enforced disappearances , torture , extrajudicial killings , collective punishment , and forced eviction.
” There is also evidence to suggest that Egyptian forces have engaged in illegal air and ground strikes that have killed substantial numbers of civilians .
In several conflicts — examples of how such weapons transfers can have dramatic and unintended impacts — U.S. arms have ended up in the hands of both sides .
When Turkish troops invaded northeastern Syria in October 2019 , for instance , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some of the $ 2.5 billion in arms and training the U.S. had supplied to Syrian opposition forces over the previous five years .
Meanwhile , the entire Turkish inventory of combat aircraft consists of U.S.-supplied F-16s and more than half of its armored vehicles are of American origin .
In Iraq , when the forces of the Islamic State , or ISIS , swept through a significant part of that country from the north in 2014 , they captured U.S. light weaponry and armored vehicles worth billions of dollars from the Iraqi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ trained .
Similarly , in more recent years , U.S. arms have been transferred from the Iraqi military to Iranian-backed militias operating alongside them in the fight against ISIS .
Meanwhile , in Yemen , while the U.S. has directly armed the Saudi/UAE coalition , its weaponry has , in fact , ended up being used by all sides in the conflict , including their Houthi opponents , extremist militias , and groups linked to Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula .
This equal-opportunity spread of American weaponry has occurred thanks to arms transfers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ military and by UAE forces that have worked with an array of groups in the southern part of the country .
Just four companies — Raytheon , Lockheed Martin , Boeing , and General Dynamics — were involved in the overwhelming majority of U.S. arms deals with Saudi Arabia between 2009 and 2019 .
In fact , at least one or more of those companies played key roles in 27 offers worth more than $ 125 billion ( out of a total of 51 offers worth $ 138 billion ) .
In other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than 90 % of the U.S. arms offered to Saudi Arabia involved at least one of those top four weapons makers .
In its brutal bombing campaign in Yemen , the Saudis have killed thousands of civilians with U.S.-supplied weaponry .
In the years since the Kingdom launched its war , indiscriminate air strikes by the Saudi-led coalition have hit marketplaces , hospitals , civilian neighborhoods , water treatment centers , even a school bus filled with children .
American-made bombs have repeatedly been used in such incidents , including an attack on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ children among them , were killed by a GBU-12 Paveway II guided bomb manufactured by Raytheon .
A General Dynamics 2,000-pound bomb with a Boeing JDAM guidance system was used in a March 2016 strike on a marketplace that killed 97 civilians , including 25 children .
A Lockheed Martin laser-guided bomb was utilized in an August 2018 attack on a school bus that slaughtered 51 people , including 40 children .
A September 2018 report by the Yemeni group Mwatana for Human Rights identified 19 air strikes on civilians in which U.S.-supplied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the destruction of that bus was “ not an isolated incident , but the latest in a series of gruesome [ Saudi-led ] Coalition attacks involving U.S. weapons.
” It should be noted that the sales of such weaponry have not occurred without resistance .
In 2019 , both houses of Congress voted down a bomb sale to Saudi Arabia because of its aggression in Yemen , only to have their efforts thwarted by a presidential veto .
In some instances , as befits the Trump administration ’ s modus operandi , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Take , for instance , a May 2019 declaration of an “ emergency ” that was used to push through an $ 8.1 billion deal with the Saudis , the UAE , and Jordan for precision-guided bombs and other equipment that simply bypassed normal Congressional oversight procedures completely .
At the behest of Congress , the State Department ’ s Office of Inspector General then opened an investigation into the circumstances surrounding that declaration , in part because it had been pushed by a former Raytheon lobbyist working in State ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the inspector general in charge of the probe , Stephen Linick , was soon fired by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for fear that his investigation would uncover administration wrongdoing and , after he was gone , the ultimate findings proved largely — surprise !
— a whitewash , exonerating the administration .
Still , the report did note that the Trump administration had failed to take adequate care to avoid civilian harm by U.S. weaponry supplied to the Saudis .
Even some Trump administration officials have had qualms about the Saudi deals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a number of State Department personnel were concerned about whether they could someday be held liable for aiding and abetting war crimes in Yemen .
If Donald Trump is re-elected , don ’ t expect U.S. sales to the Middle East — or their murderous effects — to diminish any time soon .
To his credit , Joe Biden has pledged as president to end U.S. arms and support for the Saudi war in Yemen .
For the region as a whole , however , don ’ t be shocked if , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ weaponry continues to flow in and it remains business as usual for this country ’ s giant arms merchants to the detriment of the peoples of the Middle East .
Unless you ’ re Raytheon or Lockheed Martin , selling arms is one area where no one should want to keep America “ great .
”

The United States has the dubious distinction of being the world’s leading arms dealer. It dominates the global trade in a historic fashion and nowhere is that domination more complete than in the endlessly war-torn Middle East. There, believe it or not, the U.S. controls nearly half the arms market. From Yemen to Libya to Egypt, sales by this country and its allies are playing a significant role in fueling some of the world’s most devastating conflicts. But Donald Trump, even before he was felled by Covid-19 and sent to Walter Reed Medical Center, could not have cared less, as long as he thought such trafficking in the tools of death and destruction would help his political prospects.
Look, for example, at the recent “normalization” of relations between the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Israel he helped to broker, which has set the stage for yet another surge in American arms exports. To hear Trump and his supporters tell it, he deserves a Nobel Peace Prize for the deal, dubbed “the Abraham Accords.” In fact, using it, he was eager to brand himself as “Donald Trump, peacemaker” in advance of the November election. This, believe me, was absurd on the face of it. Until the pandemic swept everything in the White House away, it was just another day in Trump World and another example of the president’s penchant for exploiting foreign and military policy for his own domestic political gain.
If Trump had been honest for a change, he would have dubbed those Abraham Accords the “Arms Sales Accords.” The UAE was, in part, induced to participate in hopes of receiving Lockheed Martin’s F-35 combat aircraft and advanced armed drones as a reward. For his part, after some grumbling, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu decided to one-up the UAE and seek a new $8 billion arms package from the Trump administration, including an additional squadron of Lockheed Martin’s F-35s (beyond those already on order), a fleet of Boeing attack helicopters, and so much more. Were that deal to go through, it would undoubtedly involve an increase in Israel’s more than ample military aid commitment from the United States, already slated to total $3.8 billion annually for the next decade.
Jobs, Jobs, Jobs
This wasn’t the first time President Trump tried to capitalize on arms sales to the Middle East to consolidate his political position at home and his posture as this country’s dealmaker par excellence. Such gestures began in May 2017, during his very first official overseas trip to Saudi Arabia. The Saudis greeted him then with ego-boosting fanfare, putting banners featuring his face along roadways leading into their capital, Riyadh; projecting a giant image of that same face on the hotel where he was staying; and presenting him with a medal in a surreal ceremony at one of the kingdom’s many palaces. For his part, Trump came bearing arms in the form of a supposed $110 billion weapons package. Never mind that the size of the deal was vastly exaggerated. It allowed the president to gloat that his sales deal there would mean “jobs, jobs, jobs” in the United States. If he had to work with one of the most repressive regimes in the world to bring those jobs home, who cared? Not he and certainly not his son-in-law Jared Kushner who would develop a special relationship with the cruel Saudi Crown Prince and heir apparent to the throne, Mohammed bin Salman.
Trump doubled down on his jobs argument in a March 2018 White House meeting with bin Salman. The president came armed with a prop for the cameras: a map of the U.S. showing the states that (he swore) would benefit most from Saudi arms sales, including — you won’t be surprised to learn — the crucial election swing states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Wisconsin.
Nor will it surprise you that Trump’s jobs claims from those Saudi arms sales are almost entirely fraudulent. In fits of fancy, he’s even insisted that he’s creating as many as half a million jobs linked to weapons exports to that repressive regime. The real number is less than one-tenth that amount — and far less than one-tenth of one percent of U.S. employment. But why let the facts get in the way of a good story?
American Arms Dominance
Donald Trump is far from the first president to push tens of billions of dollars of arms into the Middle East. The Obama administration, for example, made a record $115 billion in arms offers to Saudi Arabia during its eight years in office, including combat aircraft, attack helicopters, armored vehicles, military ships, missile defense systems, bombs, guns, and ammunition.
Those sales solidified Washington’s position as the Saudis’ primary arms supplier. Two-thirds of its air force consists of Boeing F-15 aircraft, the vast bulk of its tanks are General Dynamics M-1s, and most of its air-to-ground missiles come from Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. And mind you, those weapons aren’t just sitting in warehouses or being displayed in military parades. They’ve been among the principal killers in a brutal Saudi intervention in Yemen that has sparked the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophe.
A new report from the Arms and Security Program at the Center for International Policy (which I co-authored) underscores just how stunningly the U.S. dominates the Middle Eastern weapons market. According to data from the arms transfer database compiled by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, in the period from 2015 to 2019 the United States accounted for 48% of major weapons deliveries to the Middle East and North Africa, or (as that vast region is sometimes known acronymically) MENA. Those figures leave deliveries from the next largest suppliers in the dust. They represent nearly three times the arms Russia supplied to MENA, five times what France contributed, 10 times what the United Kingdom exported, and 16 times China’s contribution.
In other words, we have met the prime weapons proliferator in the Middle East and North Africa and it is us.
The influence of U.S. arms in this conflict-ridden region is further illustrated by a striking fact: Washington is the top supplier to 13 of the 19 countries there, including Morocco (91% of its arms imports), Israel (78%), Saudi Arabia (74%), Jordan (73%), Lebanon (73%), Kuwait (70%), the UAE (68%), and Qatar (50%). If the Trump administration goes ahead with its controversial plan to sell F-35s and armed drones to the UAE and brokers that related $8 billion arms deal with Israel, its share of arms imports to those two countries will be even higher in the years to come.
Devastating Consequences
None of the key players in today’s most devastating wars in the Middle East produce their own weaponry, which means that imports from the U.S. and other suppliers are the true fuel sustaining those conflicts. Advocates of arms transfers to the MENA region often describe them as a force for “stability,” a way to cement alliances, counter Iran, or more generally a tool for creating a balance of power that makes armed engagement less likely.
In a number of key conflicts in the region, this is nothing more than a convenient fantasy for arms suppliers (and the U.S. government), as the flow of ever more advanced weaponry has only exacerbated conflicts, aggravated human rights abuses, and caused countless civilian deaths and injuries, while provoking widespread destruction. And keep in mind that, while not solely responsible, Washington is the chief culprit when it comes to the weaponry that’s fueling a number of the area’s most violent wars.
In Yemen, a Saudi/UAE-led intervention that began in March 2015 has, by now, resulted in the deaths of thousands of civilians through air strikes, put millions at risk of famine, and helped create the desperate conditions for the worst cholera outbreak in living memory. That war has already cost more than 100,000 lives and the U.S. and the United Kingdom have been the primary suppliers of the combat aircraft, bombs, attack helicopters, missiles, and armored vehicles used there, transfers valued in the tens of billions of dollars.
There has been a sharp jump in overall arms deliveries to Saudi Arabia since that war was launched. Dramatically enough, total arms sent to the Kingdom more than doubled between the 2010-2014 period and the years from 2015 to 2019. Together, the U.S. (74%) and the U.K. (13%) accounted for 87% of all arms deliveries to Saudi Arabia in that five-year time frame.
In Egypt, U.S.-supplied combat aircraft, tanks, and attack helicopters have been used in what is supposedly a counterterror operation in the Northern Sinai desert, which has, in reality, simply become a war largely against the civilian population of the region. Between 2015 and 2019, Washington’s arms offers to Egypt totaled $2.3 billion, with billions more in deals made earlier but delivered in those years. And in May 2020, the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency announced that it was offering a package of Apache attack helicopters to Egypt worth up to $2.3 billion.
According to research conducted by Human Rights Watch, thousands of people have been arrested in the Sinai region over the past six years, hundreds have been disappeared, and tens of thousands have been forcibly evicted from their homes. Armed to the teeth, the Egyptian military has also carried out “systematic and widespread arbitrary arrests — including of children — enforced disappearances, torture, extrajudicial killings, collective punishment, and forced eviction.” There is also evidence to suggest that Egyptian forces have engaged in illegal air and ground strikes that have killed substantial numbers of civilians.
In several conflicts — examples of how such weapons transfers can have dramatic and unintended impacts — U.S. arms have ended up in the hands of both sides. When Turkish troops invaded northeastern Syria in October 2019, for instance, they faced Kurdish-led Syrian militias that had received some of the $2.5 billion in arms and training the U.S. had supplied to Syrian opposition forces over the previous five years. Meanwhile, the entire Turkish inventory of combat aircraft consists of U.S.-supplied F-16s and more than half of its armored vehicles are of American origin.
In Iraq, when the forces of the Islamic State, or ISIS, swept through a significant part of that country from the north in 2014, they captured U.S. light weaponry and armored vehicles worth billions of dollars from the Iraqi security forces this country had armed and trained. Similarly, in more recent years, U.S. arms have been transferred from the Iraqi military to Iranian-backed militias operating alongside them in the fight against ISIS.
Meanwhile, in Yemen, while the U.S. has directly armed the Saudi/UAE coalition, its weaponry has, in fact, ended up being used by all sides in the conflict, including their Houthi opponents, extremist militias, and groups linked to Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. This equal-opportunity spread of American weaponry has occurred thanks to arms transfers by former members of the U.S.-supplied Yemeni military and by UAE forces that have worked with an array of groups in the southern part of the country.
Who Benefits?
Just four companies — Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and General Dynamics — were involved in the overwhelming majority of U.S. arms deals with Saudi Arabia between 2009 and 2019. In fact, at least one or more of those companies played key roles in 27 offers worth more than $125 billion (out of a total of 51 offers worth $138 billion). In other words, in financial terms, more than 90% of the U.S. arms offered to Saudi Arabia involved at least one of those top four weapons makers.
In its brutal bombing campaign in Yemen, the Saudis have killed thousands of civilians with U.S.-supplied weaponry. In the years since the Kingdom launched its war, indiscriminate air strikes by the Saudi-led coalition have hit marketplaces, hospitals, civilian neighborhoods, water treatment centers, even a school bus filled with children. American-made bombs have repeatedly been used in such incidents, including an attack on a wedding, where 21 people, children among them, were killed by a GBU-12 Paveway II guided bomb manufactured by Raytheon.
A General Dynamics 2,000-pound bomb with a Boeing JDAM guidance system was used in a March 2016 strike on a marketplace that killed 97 civilians, including 25 children. A Lockheed Martin laser-guided bomb was utilized in an August 2018 attack on a school bus that slaughtered 51 people, including 40 children. A September 2018 report by the Yemeni group Mwatana for Human Rights identified 19 air strikes on civilians in which U.S.-supplied weapons were definitely used, pointing out that the destruction of that bus was “not an isolated incident, but the latest in a series of gruesome [Saudi-led] Coalition attacks involving U.S. weapons.”
It should be noted that the sales of such weaponry have not occurred without resistance. In 2019, both houses of Congress voted down a bomb sale to Saudi Arabia because of its aggression in Yemen, only to have their efforts thwarted by a presidential veto. In some instances, as befits the Trump administration’s modus operandi, those sales have involved questionable political maneuvers. Take, for instance, a May 2019 declaration of an “emergency” that was used to push through an $8.1 billion deal with the Saudis, the UAE, and Jordan for precision-guided bombs and other equipment that simply bypassed normal Congressional oversight procedures completely.
At the behest of Congress, the State Department’s Office of Inspector General then opened an investigation into the circumstances surrounding that declaration, in part because it had been pushed by a former Raytheon lobbyist working in State’s Office of Legal Counsel. However, the inspector general in charge of the probe, Stephen Linick, was soon fired by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for fear that his investigation would uncover administration wrongdoing and, after he was gone, the ultimate findings proved largely — surprise! — a whitewash, exonerating the administration. Still, the report did note that the Trump administration had failed to take adequate care to avoid civilian harm by U.S. weaponry supplied to the Saudis.
Even some Trump administration officials have had qualms about the Saudi deals. The New York Times has reported that a number of State Department personnel were concerned about whether they could someday be held liable for aiding and abetting war crimes in Yemen.
Will America Remain the World’s Greatest Arms Dealer?
If Donald Trump is re-elected, don’t expect U.S. sales to the Middle East — or their murderous effects — to diminish any time soon. To his credit, Joe Biden has pledged as president to end U.S. arms and support for the Saudi war in Yemen. For the region as a whole, however, don’t be shocked if, even in a Biden presidency, such weaponry continues to flow in and it remains business as usual for this country’s giant arms merchants to the detriment of the peoples of the Middle East. Unless you’re Raytheon or Lockheed Martin, selling arms is one area where no one should want to keep America “great.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
To stay on top of important articles like these, sign up to receive the latest updates from TomDispatch.com here.


truthout--2020-10-13--Black Doctors Fight for More Equitable Coronavirus Testing

When the coronavirus arrived in Philadelphia in March , Dr. Ala Stanford hunkered down at home with her husband and kids .
A pediatric surgeon with a private practice , she has staff privileges at a few suburban Philadelphia hospitals .
For weeks , most of her usual procedures and patient visits were canceled .
So she found herself , like a lot of people , spending the days in her pajamas , glued to the TV .
And then , at the beginning of April , she started seeing media reports indicating that Black people were contracting the coronavirus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than other demographic groups .
“ It just hit me like , what is going on ?
” said Stanford .
At the same time , she started hearing from Black friends who couldn ’ t get tested because they didn ’ t have a doctor ’ s referral or didn ’ t meet the testing criteria .
In April , there were shortages of coronavirus tests in numerous locations across the country , but Stanford decided to call around to the hospitals where she works to learn more about why people were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ heard was that a doctor had to sign on to be the “ physician of record ” for anyone seeking a test .
In a siloed health system , it could be complicated to sort out the logistics of who would communicate test results to patients .
And , in an effort to protect health care workers from being exposed to the virus , some test sites wouldn ’ t let people without cars simply walk up to the test site .
Stanford knew African Americans were less likely to have primary care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely to rely on public transportation .
She just couldn ’ t square all that with the disproportionate infection rates for Black people she was seeing on the news .
“ All these reasons in my mind were barriers and excuses , ” she said .
“ And , in essence , I decided in that moment we were going to test the city of Philadelphia.
” Black Philadelphians contract the coronavirus at a rate nearly twice that of their white counterparts .
They also are more likely to have severe cases of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 44 % of Philadelphians but 55 % of those hospitalized for COVID-19 .
Black Philadelphians are more likely to work jobs that can ’ t be performed at home , putting them at a greater risk of exposure .
In the city ’ s jails , sanitation and transportation departments , workers are predominantly Black , and as the pandemic progressed they contracted COVID-19 at high rates .
The increased severity of illness among African Americans may also be due in part to underlying health conditions more prevalent among Black people , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ care is the greatest driver of the disparity .
“ When an elderly funeral home director in West Philly tries to get tested and you turn him away because he doesn ’ t have a prescription , that has nothing to do with his hypertension , that has everything to do with your implicit bias , ” she said , referring to an incident she encountered .
Before April was over , Stanford sprang into action .
Her mom rented a minivan to serve as a mobile clinic , while Stanford started recruiting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medical students in her network .
She got testing kits from the diagnostic and testing company LabCorp , where she had an account through her private practice .
Fueled by Stanford ’ s personal savings and donations collected through a GoFundMe campaign , the minivan posted up in church parking lots and open tents on busy street corners in Philadelphia .
It wasn ’ t long before she was facing her own logistical barriers .
LabCorp asked her how she wanted to handle uninsured patients whose tests it processed .
“ I said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have insurance , you ’ re gon na bill me , and I ’ m gon na figure out how to pay for it later , ” said Stanford .
“ But I can ’ t have someone die for a test that costs $ 200.
” Philadelphians live-streamed themselves on social media while they got tested , and word spread .
By May , it wasn ’ t unusual for the Black Doctors COVID-19 Consortium to test more than 350 people a day .
Stanford brought the group under the umbrella of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tutoring and mentorship to youth in under-resourced schools .
Tavier Thomas found out about the group on Facebook in April .
He works at a T-Mobile store , and his co-worker had tested positive .
Not long after , he started feeling a bit short of breath .
“ I probably touch 100 phones a day , ” said Thomas , 23 .
“ So I wanted to get tested , and I wanted to make sure the people testing me were Black.
” Many Black Americans seek out Black providers because they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the health system .
Thomas ’ preference is rooted in history , he said , pointing to times when white doctors and medical researchers have exploited Black patients .
In the 19th century American South , for example , white surgeon J. Marion Sims performed experimental gynecological treatments without anesthesia on enslaved Black women .
Perhaps the most notorious example began in the 1930s , when the United States government enrolled Black men with syphilis in a study at Tuskegee Institute , to see what would happen when the disease went untreated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consent to the terms of the study and were not offered treatment , even when an effective one became widely available .
“ They just watched them die of the disease , ” said Thomas , of the Tuskegee experiments .
“ So , to be truthful , when , like , new diseases drop ?
I ’ m a little weird about the mainstream testing me , or sticking anything in me.
” In April , Thomas tested positive for the coronavirus but recovered quickly .
He returned recently to be tested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even though the testing site that day was in a church parking lot in Darby , Pennsylvania , a solid 30-minute drive from where he lives .
Thomas said the second test was just for safety , because he lives with his grandfather and doesn ’ t want to risk infecting him .
He also brought along his brother , McKenzie Johnson .
Johnson lives in neighboring Delaware but said it was hard to get tested there without an appointment , and without health insurance .
It was his first time being swabbed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bad as I thought it was gon na be , ” he joked afterward .
“ You cry a little bit — they search in your soul a little bit — but , naw , it ’ s fine.
” Each time it offers tests , the consortium sets up what amounts to an outdoor mini-hospital , complete with office supplies , printers and shredders .
When they do antibody tests , they need to power their centrifuges .
Those costs , plus the lab processing fee of $ 225 per test and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to roughly $ 25,000 per day , by Stanford ’ s estimate .
“ Sometimes you get reimbursed and sometimes you don ’ t , ” she said .
“ It ’ s not an inexpensive operation at all.
” After its first few months , the consortium came to the attention of Philadelphia city leaders , who gave the group about $ 1 million in funding .
The group also attracted funding from foundations and individuals .
The regional transportation authority hired the group to test its front-line transit workers weekly .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Consortium has tested more than 10,000 people — and Stanford is the “ doctor on record ” for each of them .
She appreciates the financial support from the local government agencies but still worries that the city , and Philadelphia ’ s well-resourced hospital systems , aren ’ t being proactive enough on their own .
In July , wait times for results from national commercial labs like LabCorp sometimes stretched past two weeks .
The delays rendered the work of the consortium ’ s testing sites essentially worthless , unless a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the results .
Meanwhile , at the major Philadelphia-area hospitals , doctors could get results within hours , using their in-house processing labs .
Stanford called on the local health systems to share their testing technology with the surrounding community , but she said she was told it was logistically impossible .
“ Unfortunately , the value put on some of our poorest areas is not demonstrated , ” Stanford said .
“ It ’ s not shown that those folks matter enough .
That ’ s my opinion .
They matter to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me going.
” Now , Stanford is working with Philadelphia ’ s health commissioner , trying to create a rotating schedule wherein each of the city ’ s health systems would offer free testing one day per week , from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m .
The medical infrastructure she has set up , Stanford said , and its popularity in the Black community , makes her group a likely candidate to help distribute a coronavirus vaccine when one becomes available .
Representatives from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services visited @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sites , to evaluate the potential for the group to pivot to vaccinations .
Overall , Stanford said she is happy to help out during the planning phases to make sure the most vulnerable Philadelphians can access the vaccine .
However , she is distrustful of the federal oversight involved in vetting an eventual coronavirus vaccine .
She said there are still too many unanswered questions about the process , and too many other instances of the Trump administration putting political pressure on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food @ @ @ @ @ @ @ commit now to doing actual vaccinations in Philadelphia ’ s neighborhoods .
“ When the time comes , we ’ ll be ready , ” she said .
“ But it ’ s not today.
” This story is part of a partnership that includes WHYY , NPR and KHN .

When the coronavirus arrived in Philadelphia in March, Dr. Ala Stanford hunkered down at home with her husband and kids. A pediatric surgeon with a private practice, she has staff privileges at a few suburban Philadelphia hospitals. For weeks, most of her usual procedures and patient visits were canceled. So she found herself, like a lot of people, spending the days in her pajamas, glued to the TV.
And then, at the beginning of April, she started seeing media reports indicating that Black people were contracting the coronavirus and dying from COVID-19 at greater rates than other demographic groups.
“It just hit me like, what is going on?” said Stanford.
At the same time, she started hearing from Black friends who couldn’t get tested because they didn’t have a doctor’s referral or didn’t meet the testing criteria. In April, there were shortages of coronavirus tests in numerous locations across the country, but Stanford decided to call around to the hospitals where she works to learn more about why people were being turned away.
One explanation she heard was that a doctor had to sign on to be the “physician of record” for anyone seeking a test. In a siloed health system, it could be complicated to sort out the logistics of who would communicate test results to patients. And, in an effort to protect health care workers from being exposed to the virus, some test sites wouldn’t let people without cars simply walk up to the test site.
Stanford knew African Americans were less likely to have primary care physicians than white Americans, and more likely to rely on public transportation. She just couldn’t square all that with the disproportionate infection rates for Black people she was seeing on the news.
“All these reasons in my mind were barriers and excuses,” she said. “And, in essence, I decided in that moment we were going to test the city of Philadelphia.”
Nina Feldman / WHYY
Black Philadelphians contract the coronavirus at a rate nearly twice that of their white counterparts. They also are more likely to have severe cases of the virus: African Americans make up 44% of Philadelphians but 55% of those hospitalized for COVID-19.
Black Philadelphians are more likely to work jobs that can’t be performed at home, putting them at a greater risk of exposure. In the city’s jails, sanitation and transportation departments, workers are predominantly Black, and as the pandemic progressed they contracted COVID-19 at high rates.
The increased severity of illness among African Americans may also be due in part to underlying health conditions more prevalent among Black people, but Stanford maintains that unequal access to health care is the greatest driver of the disparity.
“When an elderly funeral home director in West Philly tries to get tested and you turn him away because he doesn’t have a prescription, that has nothing to do with his hypertension, that has everything to do with your implicit bias,” she said, referring to an incident she encountered.
Before April was over, Stanford sprang into action. Her mom rented a minivan to serve as a mobile clinic, while Stanford started recruiting volunteers among the doctors, nurses and medical students in her network. She got testing kits from the diagnostic and testing company LabCorp, where she had an account through her private practice. Fueled by Stanford’s personal savings and donations collected through a GoFundMe campaign, the minivan posted up in church parking lots and open tents on busy street corners in Philadelphia.
It wasn’t long before she was facing her own logistical barriers. LabCorp asked her how she wanted to handle uninsured patients whose tests it processed.
“I said, for every person that does not have insurance, you’re gonna bill me, and I’m gonna figure out how to pay for it later,” said Stanford. “But I can’t have someone die for a test that costs $200.”
Philadelphians live-streamed themselves on social media while they got tested, and word spread. By May, it wasn’t unusual for the Black Doctors COVID-19 Consortium to test more than 350 people a day. Stanford brought the group under the umbrella of a nonprofit she already operated that offers tutoring and mentorship to youth in under-resourced schools.
Tavier Thomas found out about the group on Facebook in April. He works at a T-Mobile store, and his co-worker had tested positive. Not long after, he started feeling a bit short of breath.
“I probably touch 100 phones a day,” said Thomas, 23. “So I wanted to get tested, and I wanted to make sure the people testing me were Black.”
Many Black Americans seek out Black providers because they’ve experienced cultural indifference or mistreatment in the health system. Thomas’ preference is rooted in history, he said, pointing to times when white doctors and medical researchers have exploited Black patients. In the 19th century American South, for example, white surgeon J. Marion Sims performed experimental gynecological treatments without anesthesia on enslaved Black women. Perhaps the most notorious example began in the 1930s, when the United States government enrolled Black men with syphilis in a study at Tuskegee Institute, to see what would happen when the disease went untreated for years. The patients did not consent to the terms of the study and were not offered treatment, even when an effective one became widely available.
“They just watched them die of the disease,” said Thomas, of the Tuskegee experiments.
“So, to be truthful, when, like, new diseases drop? I’m a little weird about the mainstream testing me, or sticking anything in me.”
Nina Feldman / WHYY
In April, Thomas tested positive for the coronavirus but recovered quickly. He returned recently to be tested again by Stanford’s group, even though the testing site that day was in a church parking lot in Darby, Pennsylvania, a solid 30-minute drive from where he lives.
Thomas said the second test was just for safety, because he lives with his grandfather and doesn’t want to risk infecting him. He also brought along his brother, McKenzie Johnson. Johnson lives in neighboring Delaware but said it was hard to get tested there without an appointment, and without health insurance. It was his first time being swabbed.
“It’s not as bad as I thought it was gonna be,” he joked afterward. “You cry a little bit — they search in your soul a little bit — but, naw, it’s fine.”
Each time it offers tests, the consortium sets up what amounts to an outdoor mini-hospital, complete with office supplies, printers and shredders. When they do antibody tests, they need to power their centrifuges. Those costs, plus the lab processing fee of $225 per test and compensation for 15-30 staff members, amounts to roughly $25,000 per day, by Stanford’s estimate.
“Sometimes you get reimbursed and sometimes you don’t,” she said. “It’s not an inexpensive operation at all.”
After its first few months, the consortium came to the attention of Philadelphia city leaders, who gave the group about $1 million in funding. The group also attracted funding from foundations and individuals. The regional transportation authority hired the group to test its front-line transit workers weekly.
To date, the Black Doctors COVID-19 Consortium has tested more than 10,000 people — and Stanford is the “doctor on record” for each of them. She appreciates the financial support from the local government agencies but still worries that the city, and Philadelphia’s well-resourced hospital systems, aren’t being proactive enough on their own. In July, wait times for results from national commercial labs like LabCorp sometimes stretched past two weeks. The delays rendered the work of the consortium’s testing sites essentially worthless, unless a person agreed to isolate completely while awaiting the results. Meanwhile, at the major Philadelphia-area hospitals, doctors could get results within hours, using their in-house processing labs. Stanford called on the local health systems to share their testing technology with the surrounding community, but she said she was told it was logistically impossible.
“Unfortunately, the value put on some of our poorest areas is not demonstrated,” Stanford said. “It’s not shown that those folks matter enough. That’s my opinion. They matter to me. That’s what keeps me going.”
Now, Stanford is working with Philadelphia’s health commissioner, trying to create a rotating schedule wherein each of the city’s health systems would offer free testing one day per week, from 9 a.m. to 9 p.m.
The medical infrastructure she has set up, Stanford said, and its popularity in the Black community, makes her group a likely candidate to help distribute a coronavirus vaccine when one becomes available. Representatives from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services visited one of her consortium’s testing sites, to evaluate the potential for the group to pivot to vaccinations.
Overall, Stanford said she is happy to help out during the planning phases to make sure the most vulnerable Philadelphians can access the vaccine. However, she is distrustful of the federal oversight involved in vetting an eventual coronavirus vaccine. She said there are still too many unanswered questions about the process, and too many other instances of the Trump administration putting political pressure on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Food and Drug Administration, for her to commit now to doing actual vaccinations in Philadelphia’s neighborhoods.
“When the time comes, we’ll be ready,” she said. “But it’s not today.”
This story is part of a partnership that includes WHYY, NPR and KHN.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.