“As a general principle …. the normal social process of group identification and hostility-reaction brings about a selective constriction of empathy, which, in addition to the semi-conscious suppression of insight, enables normal people to condone or participate in the most sadistic social aggression without feeling it or realising it.” – Gustave Gilbert after the Nuremberg trials.

Had Gustave Gilbert been writing in 2012 he might well have been referring to the Australian ocker response to desperate refugees from terror.

"Thomas Jefferson and Barack Obama, you are hereby accused of not being twenty-first century liberals, but instead holding views that are commonplace among persons of your background and position, especially among those who are obliged to take responsibility for their decisions, and required to back them up with what they believe to be the best available evidence. How do you plead?"

After the Bush debacle called the Patriot Act,Obama brought in 'Preventative Dentention' ie even if you are suspected of being a terrorist you can be indefinetly detained without legal council or trial. He also legalised assassination of suspected terrorists and signed in the National Defence Authoristion Act which gives the US Military the powers of the Pariot Act and Preventative Detention.

Are these not the attributes of a fascist state?

Emperor Julian, there you go again,
You're not talking about a race problem you're talking about a White problem, you want Lebensraum in this country for Afghans and Sri Lankans at the expense of my ethnic group,. you consistently identify my ethnic group as the main obstacle to the implementation of your weltanshauung.
Julian you may say you are anti racist, what you are is anti White, Anti Racism is a code word for Anti White.

The US founding fathers wanted a break from England and the consequence was the Revolutionary War, so no Nobel Peace prices here. The background was more complex than the oft repeated taxation issue and the Boston Tea party. George III was a latter-day product of post-Cromwell reforms in England. The general populace had more say “in England”. With regards “white” colonies, George III wanted to keep the colonists on a short leash, for fear of a rival power emerging.

Yet, at the same time US elite wanted more control and to expand the precursor to the American “Manifest Destiny”, by crossing the Appellations, counter to wishes of the Crown, whom had established treaties with indigenous, first clans (The American Indians). The Ruler and the colonists were not on the same page: Nor would “domestic tranquillity” readily emerge. No Nobel prizes here, either.

Further, the other States cum Colonies, needed to counter the power of Virginia and deal with the different development profiles of the North and South more generally: The awkward Electoral college system was born. Moreover, the very existence of the Electoral College smacked of social divisions.

Barack Obama would not have needed to be white to become a slave owner: There were black slave owners too. Again, we don’t have any Nobel Peace prizes.

Jefferson et al were founding a new order, dealing with the agenda of the propertied classes and failingly (ultimately led to Civil War) trying to unify heterogeneous reference groups. The new democracy was struggling to find its way. The Society’s best days lay ahead. Obama’s America, is very different; perhaps, a superpower in decline. Or, at least; reeling from the emergence of China and possibility of “two suns in the sky”.

The US is facing an identity crisis, trying to balance justified self-esteem with the perceived threat to its exalted position in the world. Little wonder it is fearful. In a way, a little like old King George, whether one talks of Red Coats in the colonies or twelve aircraft carriers.

Jefferson’s first draft of the Declaration of Independence did address slavery:

http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/rough.ht