HISTORY: The Black Ticket

in the bag of silver

Then one of the Twelve—the one called Judas Iscariot—went to the chief priests 15 and asked, “What are you willing to give me if I deliver him over to you?” So they counted out for him thirty pieces of silver. 16 From then on Judas watched for an opportunity to hand him over.

Matthew 26:14-16

The Black Ticket

Dr. Cornel West has picked Dr. Melina Abdullah, a university professor and Black Lives Matter activist, as his vice-presidential running mate. Listening to the media, one would believe all American blacks should be excited and exhilarated as this is the first time in history two black candidates have led a presidential ticket.

When first hearing the name Dr. Melina Abdullah, I had to google to remember who she was. But figuring that out, and listening to her rhetoric, the reason West picked Dr. Abdullah was clear.  Not only does she share the same social justice ideology, but there is the added benefit that they are both scholars.

On the surface, Dr.  Abdullah is a replica of Dr. West. She is a college professor, a BLM advocate, supports policies to defund the police, and she supports Palestine. To top all that off, Dr. Abdullah aligns with the cultural narratives, a black-Muslim, single female parent. Unlike Robert Kennedy’s VP pick, Nicole Shanahan, no one would question why Dr. West selected Melina Abdullah, except to say there was no other serious American black person who would join his ticket. 

Campaign Contradictions

West’s decision encapsulates their "Black Ticket" platform, where they position themselves as advocates for the American black community. Their promise, if elected, will be to destroy the oppressive-American colonial regime, defund the police, reshape the Supreme Court and rid America of pro-life advocates, impose massive taxation on corporations under the guise of paying their fair share, provide free housing, healthcare, and education for all—even illegal immigrants, and demand a ceasefire in Gaza. West claims to have selected Melina Abdullah because he wanted to make ancestors of the Black Civil Rights Movement, long dead and buried, smile from their graves. He made this grand announcement on the Travis Smileys Show on KBLA radio on the last day of Eid Mubarak.

Some may question the balance between the two candidates, as although they share similar beliefs, Dr. Abdullah is a faithful Muslim who believes her selection is a sign from her god and underscores the depth of her commitment to socialist causes. While West is a Jesus-loving Christian—serving a very different God. His stance against American ideology while professing to be a Christian and his choice of a Muslim donor and candidate highlight a contradiction within his platform.  Yet he is blind, or doesn’t care, as he proudly proclaims, “I am running for Jesus.  She’s running for allah.  That’s a beautiful thing.”  Jesus said, “a house divided against itself can’t stand.” Islam and Christianity are fundamentally opposing religions.

Campaign struggling strategy 

Considering these things, this brought a question front of mine. What is motivating West to run for the highest office in the land.  He clearly hates American democracy. He has no platform to run on. He speaks about left-leaning struggles and romanticizes solutions for struggling American “black and brown people,” but he offers no solutions. His campaign has no focus, no vision and until recently, besides appearing on countless podcasts and events.  His loquacious nature leads him to extensively discuss topics such as Gaza and the imperialist American regime with profound disdain.

Pre-Oct. 7, I didn’t believe Cornel West was even serious about running for president. He seemed to make a mockery of the office. As he visited podcast after podcast, singing lies and spitting hate all in the name of a need for a radical return to ethical and moral standards in America. His gibberish outdated and sometimes incomprehensible—amounts to nothing more than propaganda. I started to wonder how serious journalists engaged with Dr. West.  That is until Anderson Cooper pushed back on Dr. West, calling his language “inappropriate,” after West made a comparison between the Russian bombing of Chechen with the US War in Iraq. Listening to that interview, finally a journalist called West on his outlandish rhetoric.

Financial strains and skepticism

However, over the last several months, or since West has shifted to the Independent Party—again, his campaign seems to have developed a strategy focused on dividing the vote.  He is using the plight of the Palestinians to campaign for the vote of Arab Americans, knowing this may put Joe Biden’s campaign in a difficult position.

Early in his campaign, Cornel West was not thinking about the Palestinian people.  When he first decided to run, Dr. West appeared on CNN with Jake Tapper. During the interview, West spoke about his reasoning for running for president and during the conversation he made no mention of Gaza. He mentioned solidarity with Iran and Guatemala and he spoke, using poetic language, about the plight of Vietnam.  Prior to the tragedy of Oct. 7, mentions of Gaza by Dr. West were few and far between. 

Today Gaza has become the oil that is fueling the West campaign. Wherever Dr. West makes an appearance, he sings the songs that expresses his woes for Palestine. Genocide, imperialism, apartheid are words West utilizes as the weapons to signal to the Arab community that he is on their side.  Over the last several months, West’s rhetoric against America has become downright treacherous. Like Judas, he has turned his back to God for a bag of silver.

West is being propped up by the Muslim community. Hence the selection of Dr. Melina Abdullah—Muslim. Although, the media would lead you to believe that West is being positioned by Republicans to divide the vote for Joe Biden, while ignoring which community will create the divide.   West's acceptance of donations from controversial figures like Justice Clarence Thomas's long-time billion friend, Harlan Crow, a right-wing supporter has raised questions about the intentions of Dr. West.  However, West, after being called out returned the $3,300 donations.

We ignore other doners—namely Arab American donors.   West’s primary donor is Asadullah Khan, EPlanet, CEO and Muslim.  In 2023, West raised his largest donations during an event hosted by an Arab community in California and needless to say he is courting Muslims across America, including Dearborn MI.

Lately, West rhetoric has become increasingly inflammatory of America and Israel. With bold, freedom fighter language, West has promised, if elected, he would ask the International Criminal Court to investigate the IDF for war crimes.  He has called Joe Biden a war criminal who is supporting genocide.

With his new VP pick at his side, Dr. West hopes to get on ballots in more states in America, particularly in the battleground states.

I don't believe Dr. West will affect Biden's vote count significantly. Most blacks do not support his anti-American rhetoric, as they do not align with our core values.  Furthermore, I don't think the amalgamation of third-party candidates:  Cornel West, Robert Kennedy, and Jill Stein, will have a devastating impact on Joe Biden's chances of winning the White House for a second term, simply because I believe Joe Biden/Kamala Harris chances of winning are already slim. 

Biden's economic policies and the ongoing immigration crisis highlight his numerous missteps over the last four years.  In addition, global issues, such as Biden's weak stance on Israel and the war in Ukraine, combined with his inability to effectively manage African countries like Niger, will likely be the deciding factors that will cost him this election.

Barring some historical event or tragedy, I think West will stay on the campaign trail with the hopes of securing the Michigan ballot.  This seems unlikely, but nevertheless, this is his main goal.  West is only running for President for speaking engagements.

As West goes across the country pretending to be the moral and spiritual voice of America, or more specifically Black America, his campaign faces significant financial challenges. Having raised $850k he has spent nearly $830K, and only has about $26,000 in cash on hand.  This financial strain is compounded by reports of West's personal financial struggles, including outstanding federal taxes and child support. Despite these difficulties, West presents himself as a self-righteous freedom fighter of justice.  But all that does is raise questions about the transparency and viability of his campaign.

Dr. West is intelligent. He knows he does not have a fighting chance in hell however, he is an opportunist. He is going to hang on for as long as he can remain relevant. West is a character. An image of one of those whistling, shuck and jive negros, standing in darkness, with his hands tucked inside his pocket, beneath the stoplight waiting for an opportunity to stroll along. He has nothing to offer but slick street-talking soliloquies. 

West has no loyalty to the black community—in fact black situations doesn’t align with his current narrative.  West is not loyal to his profession or his community. Not the black community, not the liberal community, and not the Arab community. His selection of Dr. Melina Abdullah is nothing more than theatrics. A political stunt. 

The Truth

West had picked up a stray black cat and promised it milk in the name of freedom and justice, knowing he doesn’t even own a bowl. Nevertheless, he continues to sit on platforms damming America to shame and pretending he cares about the Muslim community —all along collecting pennies to keep himself gassed up.

Let me double talk by doubling down to reiterate my main point, to ensure there's no misinterpretation. The selection of Melina Abdullah by Cornel West is, in my view, a strategic political maneuver. Their common socialist ideologies and advocacy for radical changes may find favor with certain sections of the Black community, but some of us can discern the underlying motive.

Dr. Abdullah might be championing what she perceives as a noble cause for justice, although painfully unrealistic; Dr. West's actions are seemingly financially driven—but more realistically ego driven. It appears he is merely seeking opportunities for guest appearances that serve his own financial interests while inflating his ego.

In reality, Cornel West's 'Black Ticket' campaign featuring Melina Abdullah as his running mate presents a blend of ideologies, contradictions, and strategic ambiguities that do not align with the broader aspirations of the American Black community.

While the ‘Black Ticket’ will be stamped by history as the first American black political campaign, it’s legacy will forever be a farce. An example of poor black leadership. Still, I am certain, that as the campaign unfolds, the evolving complexities will undeniably influence the political discourse and shape the perceptions of West's candidacy within the American electorate. However, given the intricacies and potential misalignment with the broader aspirations of the American Black community, the 'Black Ticket' campaign has no chance of victory.

But even still, Judas, said unto them, What will ye give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they covenanted with him for ^athirty pieces of silver. Matt 26:15

Patriotic Reflections: At the Crossroads of Our Nation's Destiny

'We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.'" Abraham Lincoln

As we embark on another US election cycle, the familiar refrain that "this is the most important election of our lifetimes" echoes once again. Actively engaged in the democratic process since the '70s, I can attest that at no point in history has this statement been truer than in our current political landscape. Remembering impactful events like the Iran-Contra affair during Ronald Reagan's election, the allegations of infidelity surrounding Bill Clinton, including the Monica Lewinsky scandal, and the contentious allegations of rigged elections nearly costing Bush an election, and of course I distinctly recall the historic night when Barack Obama was elected president. In the face of the historical echoes that resonate through our past elections, it becomes evident that our participation in this democratic journey holds unprecedented weight. As we stand on the precipice of another crucial election cycle, may our collective voices resound with the gravity of our responsibility to shape the course of our nation's future.

In the past, perceived existential threats lingered on the outskirts, but today, these threats have come to the forefront, jeopardizing the trajectory of our nation. As we approach 2024, it is crucial, especially for American blacks, to confront the pressing realities and implications that this election may carry, recognizing that active participation and awareness are paramount in shaping the collective future of our country.

Leading up to the 2024 US election, political pundits on news shows and podcasts like The Native Land persistently advocate for Black support for Joe Biden. Overlooking the growing narrative suggesting that American blacks are increasingly aligning with Donald J. Trump and his policies, it highlights the diversity of political opinions within the community that may not align with the narrative presented by social media.

In this election cycle, it is essential to recognize the evolving perspectives within the black community and the attempts by various voices to shape the narrative surrounding their political affiliations. Most of the left-leaning media go as far as threatening American blacks, resorting to name-calling to suppress voices with diverse viewpoints.

Charles Barkley recently expressed his disapproval of Black individuals wearing Trump mugshot shirts on the King Charles show, stating, "If I see a Black person walking around wearing a Trump mugshot shirt, I’m gonna punch him in the face." Barkley's extreme reaction sheds light on the lengths some individuals might go to align themselves with the Democrat narrative, even resorting to physical confrontation for those supporting opposing political figures.

To be clear, I am unsure who is watching King Charles. I believe the show is a ploy by CNN to boost black viewership, a strategy often used by stations to build ratings. Additionally, both Gayle King and Charles Barkley lack moral standing when it comes to the American black community, but I won’t digress.

Al Sharpton gave a visceral rebuke to blacks considering voting for Donald J. Trump, questioning, "Have you no shame?" for blacks contemplating a vote based on mugshots. Really!? Does he genuinely believe that American blacks want to vote for Trump in exchange for T-shirts and sneakers? Is he truly that clueless? He talks about the black fight—without acknowledging that it was Democrat party that blacks fought against during Jim Crow. He thinks blacks don’t know the first blacks elected to Congress were Republicans. Now in 2024 we should listen to the black house negros. Us field-negros should be ashamed of ourselves for even considering voting for Trump.

The Native Land podcast, hosted by Angela Rye, Tiffany Cross, and Andrew Gillum, serves as another social media source that speaks down to the American black community, as if we are unaware and don’t completely understand the depth of issues impacting our community. Notably, these three individuals held prominent positions in the past – Angela being a CNN commentator, Tiffany hosting a far-left show on CNBC, and Andrew Gillum, a complete embarrassment to the Democrat community after his loss for Governor in Florida to Ron DeSantis – I will leave that there. These three are seeking to revamp their careers by pretending to be experts.

These individuals believe they represent the voices in the black community, assert that Republicans are 'gaslighting' successful blacks like 50 Cent, who criticized Eric Adams for his handling of the illegal migrant crisis in New York. 50 Cent’s tweet alluded to support for Donald Trump. During one of Native Land’s recent podcasts, when Angela Rye showed a video of blacks supporting Trump, Tiffany Cross almost jumped out of her seat. "Take that down," she shouted. A supposed journalist made a blatant attempt to hide the truth in support of their one-sided narrative.

Roland Martin vehemently claims, "it's a hoax!” Support for blacks hasn't risen. However, according to the New York Times: Cross-Tabs: February 2024 Times/Siena Poll of Registered Voters Nationwide conducted on March 2, 2024, black support for Trump increased from 4% in 2020 to 23% in 2024. Dismissing the polls, some argue that we, as a community, lack the common sense to make these decisions independently. So we need commentators to tell us how to vote. Last I checked—we are all FREE. Roland is correct. We really don’t need to look at the polls to understand who is the best choice for president in 2024, we can have that conversation with our neighbor.

Democrats need to wake up. American blacks are gradually shifting towards Republican policies, exercising their freedom to do so, yet facing condemnation from other blacks for this choice. This paradox mirrors the tension Joe Biden grapples with in the current election cycle. Biden finds himself navigating the complexities of evolving left-leaning political ideologies within the broader community of his own party, while being condemned for being moderate. The political left is so unsupportive of their leader that they staged a so-called 'uncommitted' vote in Michigan to appease pro-Palestinian voters. This is a self-inflicted wound indeed and plays right into the hands of Trump.

The shift within the black community is driven by a growing awareness of the adverse effects of Democratic socialist policies on values, voices, and communities within the black population. Some individuals within the black community disagree with the increasing government involvement, doubt the effectiveness of welfare social programs, and oppose climate change initiatives that emphasize a one-size-fits-all solution.

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are caught in this complex dynamic, with Biden's moderate stance conflicting with the far-left progressive ideology prevalent in his party and held by Harris. Even though Biden aims to address broader issues, the far-left faction's influence is preventing him from taking decisive action. Nowhere is this more evident than on the War in Israel, where Joe Biden has expressed his unwavering support for Israel, while Harris has called for a ceasefire and has visited the opposition of the Israeli government, as if that move would guarantee a ceasefire.

Kamala Harris has represented a socialist mentality that has been rejected around the world. She visited the AIDS capital of the world, Uganda, demanding changes to their LGBTQ laws related to prosecuting men who rape boys and infect them with AIDS. Unsurprisingly, Harris was rejected and sent back to the West. She had the same experience when she visited Ghana, pimping the narrative around LGBTQ rights. At once she was rejected in Ghana, however, due to insufficient resources, they may eventually concede their stance when it comes to LGBTQ policies in that country.

What I find most egregious is the way Kamala Harris sells abortion to the black community – that is her biggest crime. To suggest abortion is necessary for the black community is wicked and cruel. This can’t be overstated enough, when this argument comes from a women that never had a child of her own. However, over the last several months, I believe blacks have shifted their opinions on Democrat policies due to the illegal migrant crisis. The mishandling of illegal immigration will likely be the linchpin that costs Biden/Harris the election.

Most importantly, this crisis highlights Harris’ inability to be President, should something happen to Biden. Harris had been Initially tasked with managing the illegal migrant crisis. For two years, she advocated globally for migrants, providing millions of dollars to countries like, Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala, to prevent the rise of illegal migrants into the US from those countries. They will give millions to standup other countries yet our government says no to reparations that will help build and scale American black business. I have never once heard Harris advocate for reparations and yet she has made it her business to stand up other nations and at the same time advocate for blacks to destroy their own America legacy. I wish I was making this up.

All Kamala Harris’ efforts when it came to managing the illegal migrant crisis, have failed. All that money and resources didn’t improve the border crisis. Although her attention was directed towards three countries, she overlooked nations such as Mexico and Venezuela. Now there are millions of illegals entering the US and neither Biden or Harris have effectively dealt with this crisis. Today, Kamala is on one side, signaling for migrant rights, while Biden contemplates reinstating Trump's 212F Law through an executive order to manage border control.

Considering the political landscape and the influence of social media outlets, this election holds great significance for the black community. I think the top two candidates: Biden and Trump, will not play a crucial role in determining the outcome. The Vice-Presidential pick will be the decisive factor—at least for me.

Biden and Harris currently confront significant challenges, ranging from immigration issues to internal party divisions. Harris's positions lean too far left. Joe Biden needs to get rid of Harris and select a new Vice-Presidential candidate. I heard someone say, Biden can’t get rid of the first African American Vice-President. I wonder what that means—once again the media pretends Kamala Harris is American black. She is not. Kamala Harris is Indian-Jamaican American. Harris strategically misappropriates the term "black" to resonate with and appeal to a black audience. Regardless of her race, if Biden comes to his senses and selected another VP candidate, one that believes in America and willing to address the border crisis, and support Israel—then he will get my vote.

Otherwise, I may find myself voting for Trump, depending on his Vice-Presidential choice. If Trump makes a sensible selection, such as Nikki Haley, he will secure my vote. I would be less concerned about potential hostilities at the end of his term. While Haley has some issues, her consistency is noteworthy. I don't believe she would compromise her principles or attempt to overturn an election, as Trump initially tried to do. In the case of Tim Scott, despite shooting himself in the foot with his presentation of a white woman, before his black Mama, amid allegations surrounding his sexuality, I trust that Scott would not allow Trump to subvert an election. However, I won't vote for Trump if he selects Vivek Ramaswamy or Ron DeSantis as his Vice President.

In the midst of a pivotal US election cycle, the importance of thoughtful consideration and strategic decision-making is paramount for the black community. The top contenders, Biden and Trump, share the stage, but the ultimate sway lies in the choice of the Vice President. Given the intricate challenges encompassing immigration, internal party divisions, and international affairs, it is clear that there is a demand for a Vice-Presidential candidate with a well-defined border-crisis policy and a sustained commitment to supporting Israel. The upcoming election, influenced by the political landscape and social media, carries profound significance for our community. As we approach November 5, 2024, let our decisions be guided by prayer and a deep understanding of the political impact on our collective future.

“ Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” And they marveled at him.”

— Mark 12:17

THE SACRAFICE

“If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine.

And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,
.”

— Exodus 21:22-23

On February 28, 2024, I was engrossed in a Capitol Hill hearing delving into Abortion Access & Economic Costs. The event explored the Dobbs vs. Jackson decision, abortion access, economic stability, and the vital concepts of bodily autonomy and freedom. While attentively listening to five white-skinned women discuss abortion, I was struck by the frequent mention of black women in their opening remarks. Every panelist asserted that abortion is deemed necessary for black women. Particularly noteworthy was Senator Woodward, emphasizing that overturning Roe vs. Wade has had the most significant impact on black women, especially those in the south.

Speaking as a black woman who grew up poor, it's time for white women to stop dictating what black women need. Speak for yourselves. From personal experience, I can tell you that we don't need rights to have an abortion. We don't need someone telling us that, due to unfortunate economic situations, we should terminate our pregnancies. Not all black women live in poverty; we work, have healthcare, and, in some cases, even pay for it ourselves. I know that may be hard for some to believe—but it's true. However even if poverty was an economic constraint responsibility and not abortion, should be the solution.

I had healthcare since I was eighteen when I graduated high school and stepped onto the American train to economic opportunity. I delivered two healthy babies—in the hospital and had the best OBGYN care in both cases. In fact, my first son was born when I was 21-years old; he was an emergency C-section, and I can’t even begin to tell you the impact a white male doctor had on my life as he guided me through that process. My son’s cord had wrapped around his neck—the doctor came in and said, 'We lost his heartbeat, but we got it back, and if we lose it again—we are going to do a c-section.' He walked out of the room and back in, and the next thing I remember is opening my eyes to my baby in his grandmother’s arms. That was the healthcare I received. I AM a child of the Most High—a poor black woman.

I raised two sons as a single parent, worked hard, day and night. I worked from sunup to sundown. I attended college and graduate school at night—making pennies—yet I have thrived. These women who sit on panels, with all of their education, elite credentials, and accolades, are misguided; they testify that the lack of abortion rights will result in 30,000 more live babies in states where abortion is restricted—as if that is a curse. They pretend the flip side of this circumstance is not death, but rather economic prosperity. Are we so lost and wicked that we argue it is better to terminate pregnancies than to bring forth children, especially black children. Haven’t black women always aligned ourselves with the Word of God, which states to be fruitful and multiply? That’s too much like right—I know. but I will spare you the religious sentiment— I won’t even go there.

This year, on Martin Luther King Day, Kamala Harris took to the stage to defend the right of women to terminate pregnancies due to economic hardship and lack of resources. Harris asserts that the government has no right to decide what choices we should make for our own lives. Does she not see the contradiction—she is championing personal autonomy and freedom while simultaneously advocating for governmental control over reproductive choices in the pro-choice debate. Throughout her discourse, she never once recognize the life of the innocent, unborn child—given no choice.

The abortion topic is the foundation of the Democratic political campaign. It is all this political party has to run on. They can’t run on Bidenomics or the boarder. The irony, they would have nothing to campaign on, were it not for Trump. It is disheartening to hear this language from a woman who has no children. Despite never experiencing childbirth herself, she actively engages in discussions about reproductive rights. For clarity, reproduction and termination are fundamentally opposed to one another. When you terminate a pregnancy, there is no way to reproduce.

I understand that people argue that abortion is a form of reproductive care, that is a lie. Like the notion that a man can give birth. Reproductive care is specifically designed for reproduction and only women can reproduce. That's why healthcare related to reproduction is administered by an OBGYN. Women seeking abortion services will visit abortionists to terminate a pregnancy. Maybe they have an OBGYN title—but to the unborn they are monsters in white jackets.

Many women in this world have babies in the direst economic situations you can imagine. Women have babies in refugee camps. Women who live in the most impoverished countries in the world have babies. Many women, with nothing more than the clothes on their back and breasts filled with milk, don't consider bringing life into the world a death sentence.

Here we are American black women, listening as white women, or women of color, twist our stories to support their argument that women have the right to decide —as if a court decision will prevent them for committing such a crime. Blacks fail to realize where this is coming from; it's coming from a community of individuals whose foundation started with the KKK. It’s coming from a community of folk who were once on a mission to curb the number of black births. Remember eugenics. It's coming from a community of people that hold out particular resources, like carrots but tell women, "You can have this, but you must get rid of that: the father or your man.”

What happened to black women like Claudine—a movie I know is fictitious, but her mentality to keep her children, to lover her baby that was having a baby, was held by many black women. My mother had four children; my grandmothers on both sides birthed thirteen children. Yes, we were poor, we received food stamps, stood on cheese and peanut butter lines, and ate stale bread, but we made it. My mother picked cotton and would tell us stories of why the tips of her fingers were faded dark-blue and how spiderwebs were used in place of stitches after a chicken wire nearly slashed her foot into two as a child—but she made it. Considering all the economic safety nets, it is something that black people want so much more. They now want the right to terminate pregnancy and are being told by whites that this is a good idea.

One of the women on a panel was a mother who had lost her child. I listened to this mother cry about not being able to abort her baby, in her hometown after discovering the baby's life wouldn't be viable. With tears in her eyes, she told the story of how she had to buy plane tickets and travel out of state alone to have an abortion—only to get there and discover the baby's heart had stopped beating. That baby girl had died on it’s own. She felt no guilt that she was attempting to take away that babies right to fight on its own.

That is a sad story—considering a baby with unknown defects could be so unwanted. The woman who testified cried because she was alone and never shed a tear for the life of the baby that had died. It is sickening to listen to these people as they pretend to be so hurt, yet only demonstrate sympathy for their own selves. She dedicated her opening remarks to the life of the baby she willing jumped through hoops to destroy. Can you imagine—she dedicated her remarks to a fight to end the life of her baby.

Republicans are speaking out about abortion rights because they are looking at their birth rates. There numbers are low. Black women may be the primary demographic obtaining abortions, but white women are not far behind. White Republicans are saying, 'this ain't right.' Nobody on the black side is standing up for black babies—but we are quick to pronounce Black Lives Matter—seriously. Black lives matter, as long as they are not threatening your own road to economic prosperity. All other lives we can justifiably terminate.

I keep hearing this song, “Blacks are coming off the plantation.” Blacks have hung to democrat policies despite its wreckage on the black family structure. We continue to support ideas that dismantle our community, from individuals that tell us we are in need of social programs to help us make it day to day to those who will argue it makes sense to terminate your baby. It's quite offensive to consider that body autonomy is directly tied to economic opportunity, when it means terminating a life.

But I think we are in need of housing, education and economic opportunity. Last I checked this is the same thing most Americans are in need of. Democrats are saying it is okay to terminate your baby because they would much rather allow the termination of poor children than provide resources for their growth. What is worse is they blame radical Christianity for the idea that a zygote and an embryo are human life. Yet they will march in the name of Hamas and support a radical group of Islamists that wants to enforce Sharia Law, where if a woman even thinks about abortion, she could be killed. Where women are stoned to death, and girls are sold into marriages.

I am not saying, white women have no right to speak on the topic of abortion. They have every right to do so, but why does their focus always shift to poor black women. Speak for the poor whites, or white women in general, after all—blacks and women of color are not the only ones aborting babies. This topic sounds better when it’s something that benefits poor black women.

I am writing this not just because I think black women need to rethink the narratives we support. I am writing this because we need to recognize when individuals tell you they have your best interests in mind, you should wonder—at what cost.

claudine

That’s right! That’s right—six kids! That’s all I got in this world, my children.

To married men: Willis Wade controversy

Samuel 12:14

And David's anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, As the Lord liveth, the man that hath done this thing shall surely die:

Several months ago, news circulated in the media favorably highlighting two black women prosecuting Donald Trump. The New York City case, alleging Trump's fraud over two decades, secured a victory for Letitia James, although it went relatively unnoticed. In contrast, the Georgia case, which drew significant attention, involved Fani Willis, a prominent black attorney.

The seemingly destined success of the GA Election Interference case, which involved prosecuting Trump for attempting to manipulate Georgia officials into overturning an election, now faces jeopardy due to a shocking revelation. Fani Willis, the star attorney, engaged in an adulterous relationship with the lead special prosecutor, Nathan Wade telling a profound story of sin, infidelity and politics that cast a shadow on the case's integrity.

This controversy adds to the broader cultural conversation about black women in influential roles post-George Floyd. The community's strained faith in leaders due to inappropriate actions and claims of unfair treatment based on skin color, gender, and religious beliefs prompts critical reflection.

The media narrative underwent a transformation upon the revelation of Fani's illicit relationship with the special counsel, and the tale of her resistance to these allegations unfolded at the doors of the church.

The Church  

On Jan. 14, 2024, Bethel AME Church in Georgia extended a welcoming invitation to Fani T. Willis, allowing her a platform to present her perspective on a captivating tale circulating in the media regarding her personal life. This narrative had been influenced and shaped by far-right pundits aligned with the former President, Donald J. Trump, particularly in the context of the Election Interference case deemed the century's most significant.

The case, initiated by DA Fani Willis, is a response to Donald Trump's attempt to steal the 2020 election after he had clearly lost to Joe Biden.

The argument presented by Trump's legal team is centered on the claim that Fani Willis engaged Nathan Wade as a special prosecutor on the Election Interference case, amidst allegations of a seemingly inappropriate romantic relationship between them.  Adorned in somber black attire, Fani ascended the pulpit, embodying a woman of virtue unjustly subjected to that condemnation, to address these false allegations. 

Standing before God and a community of believers, Fani condemned her accusers as if she were standing before a judge.   She stood as the, imperfect servant of God whose chastity was being questioned by the right-wing mob.  Between forced tears and sniffles, reminiscent of Scarlett O'Hara, Willis, deeply offended by the allegations, hurled a glass vase filled with half-truths towards the congregation, with hopes that the American Black church community could somehow piece together a very different narrative and rally to her side.  

She classified herself as a strong black woman who leads with integrity. Her life experiences have taught her that Jesus was her source, and He is the reason she holds her current position as DA of Fulton County. She dismisses all allegations against her as nothing more than the hearsay of right-wing Republicans.

“America has normalized bigotry and hate and our adults have no respect for authority,” she proclaimed. 

During her impassioned message, Fani Willis delved into a personal letter she had penned to God, offering a poignant insight into the emotional toll she has endured since filing charges against Donald Trump. In this heartfelt revelation, she articulated the profound impact the attacks have had on her personal security and mental well-being, emphasizing the agony experienced throughout this tumultuous journey. 

Reviewing the challenges, she faced in life; Fani recalled her progression from a divorced single mother raised on the less privileged side of town to a determined and committed leader.  Under the guidance of her father, she confronted adversities with integrity, embracing each challenge presented by God with dignity and honor.  Landing the prestigious role of District Attorney in Fulton County was, for Fani, a dream realized—a remarkable feat and a testament to her ability to overcome setbacks.

Despite her successes, Fani found herself under intense scrutiny, attributing the stress and toxicity to unwarranted persecution. She called out individuals like Marjorie Taylor Greene, condemning their hateful rhetoric, which, according to Fani, was not related to her professional capabilities but rather fueled by her race, her identity and religious beliefs. 

In the midst of these unfolding events, Nathan Wade, chief among the group of prosecutors, emerged as a significant figure in this complex narrative. A former judge with a wealth of experience and knowledge, Wade played a key role despite lacking the specific experience required for prosecuting RICO cases. Nevertheless, Fani argued passionately, listing Wade's impressive qualifications that, in her view, made him a suitable representative for the state. His history as a highly capable and respected judge stood at the forefront of her defense.

As Fani justified her decision to have Wade on her team by emphasizing his capabilities and reputation, it marked a crucial moment in her narrative. This defense tactic would later intertwine with a personal revelation during a segment of her message on that fateful Sunday. Fani began to confront her own truth, reflecting on a poignant visit from a longtime girlfriend just weeks before her appearance at the church. This friend grappled with a myriad of challenges, from a cheating husband to a cancer diagnosis, financial setbacks, and the responsibilities of single parenthood.

Fani's girlfriend had mistakenly believed that God would perfect her. However, as Fani pointed out, when God sends you on a mission, He never guarantees it will be easy. According to Fani, this visit had been ordained by God to convey the message that He had appointed her as the DA of Fulton County, and on this journey, she would encounter difficulties, nevertheless, she was on the right path. Blinded by her own self-righteousness, Fani managed to reinterpret her friend’s unfortunate circumstances to justify what she perceived as her own persecution.

Standing in the pulpit, Fani implied the allegations against her were untrue.  She took no responsibility for her behavior and exited Bethel AME with God and the church community clearly on her side.  All this was the prelude to February 15, 2024, the day Fani appeared to testify before the court regarding the allegations that she had hired her lover to prosecute Donald Trump’s RICO case and had benefited finically because of this relationship.

The Court

Witness

The primary witness for Trump's legal team, Robin Yeartie, a former friend and employee of Fani Willis, who had resigned her position from the DA’s office after accusing Willis’ team members of mishandling state resources allocated for Children’s programs in Georgia. Yeartie had firsthand knowledge of Fani’s interactions with Wade, as the couple would visit her from time to time.  Moreover, Mrs. Yeartie, had rented her condominium to Fani during the early years of Fani and Wade’s relationship. Yeartie testified to the personal relationship between Willis and Wade, confirming that the pair had begun dating as early as 2019.

Offender

With Mrs. Yeartie confirming this inappropriate relationship, Nathan Wade’s testimony followed. Trump's legal team raised concerns about Wade's limited experience as a municipal judgement and his inexperience in RICO cases. There was also questions of the substantial compensation his firm received—$650,000 for legal services from the state of Georgia. This amount starkly contrasted with the $70,000 and $90,000 received by the other two prosecutors from different law firms appointed by the state during the same timeframe.

Wade defended the amount the state paid for his services. He indicated that he had worked hard on this case and clarified an invoice in which he had billed for 24 hours. Wade also testified that he had arranged trips for himself and Fani, inviting his mother and his sisters to accompany them on some of these vacations. He confirmed that he and Fani had traveled to Belize, Aruba, and California. Wade insisted that for every trip he had booked using his business credit card, he had been reimbursed in cash by Fani Willis.

Wade’s credibility came into further question when Trump’s team began to question his divorce documents.  In Dec. 2023, Wade had signed and submitted an interrogatory to the courts that claimed he had not had sexual intercourse, dined, or given any gifts to individuals of the opposite sex.  Wade had lied to the court, however had went back to the courts and adjusted the records, pleading Attorney-client privilege to the questions. 

Wade's alterations to legal documents suggested an attempt to cover up incriminating information, but he seemed to have the situation under control. The claim of a pre-existing romantic relationship with Fani before his appointment remained unproven, and despite compelling testimony from Robin Yeartie, there was no definitive evidence. The belief in Wade lying under oath lacked conclusive proof, making it his word against Mrs. Yeartie’s. When Wade left the stand, it was clear, Trump's lawyers failed to gather enough evidence for disqualification. Then came Fani.

Accomplice

DA Fani Willis flew into the courtroom, unexpectedly and stole the air. Her arrogance and pride percolated as she stood to the side.  In moments when God reveals our sins, before He passes judgment, He provides an escape. Judge Scott McAfee had been questioning Trump’s legal team about the necessity for Fani’s testimony, when she emerged. She shut down McAfee and without objection she walked to the witness chair.

What unfolded was the projection of a stereotypical angry black woman. Fani seemed nasty, rude, disrespectful, and unrepentant. Before the end of her testimony, she played the race, gender, and religious cards in her defense. Even after admitting that she and Wade had a romantic relationship, she confirmed her affair with Wade began after his appointment to the special counsel.  The relationship did not last very long; however, they had spent a great deal of time together.  Without taking clear responsibility for her behavior, she faulted the prosecutors, stating, 'I object to being accused of sleeping with a man on the first night I met him,' proclaiming it with audacity. as if that was the claim for her disqualification.

With an angry attitude, Fani feigned offence. To ask a black woman about her relationship and her expenses. DA Willis downplayed her relationship with Wade. Alluded to his sexual inabilities, while contended, she’d never emasculate a black man. Yet she filibustered every question about her romantic relationship with Wade. They had shared many romantic trips and had spent a beautiful night sipping wine (though she drank Grey Goose) in places like Napa.

During her lengthy soliloquies, Fani used language that contradicted professionalism. It reeked of that unfortunate term, so often used to refer to blacks, “ghetto.” The black, redneck behavior spoke volumes. The blatant disrespect from a DA was appalling. Listening to Willis' testimony, I found myself wondering the intended audience of the stories she told. She appeared to take pleasure in recounting the extravagant journeys and romantic locations she and Willis had experienced.

She confessed to the world that she had committed adultery and made no apology and no excuses. Fani was not speaking to the court; she had been testifying to an audience of one—Wade’s estranged wife. What greater space to set the facts straight than on a witness stand? What greater force to have on your side than God? There is nothing worse than a scorned black woman.

After a day of testimony, it became clear to the world that DA Fani Willis had an affair with Nathan Wade, a married man. It was also evident that Wade, who lacked any integrity and was not a savvy businessman, having used his corporate card for personal expenses, had been overpaid for his services as special counsel and that he had spent at least $8,000 on lavish vacations for him and Fani, between November 1, 2022, of which she supposedly paid him back in cash. Also combined with the allegations regarding the disqualification, her testimony brought up questions about cash. She claimed to keep a safe full of cash—some of which she stated came from “campaign funds.” Fani’s testimony had weaved together an unfortunate plot to cover up the truth. However, the extent of their dishonesty and what they were both willing to sacrifice to cover their lies did not reveal itself until day two of the hearing when Terrence Bradley, Nathan Wade’s former divorce attorney, took the stand.

Betrayer

Terrance Bradley had been subpoenaed by Trump’s team and was clearly reluctant to testify. On the first day of the hearing, he managed to thwart the defense's efforts by arguing attorney-client privilege. On the second day, Bradley was a no-show; however, Judge Scott McAfee ordered him to court and forced him to testify as per the subpoena.

During Bradley’s testimony, it was discovered that was the whistleblower. He had alerted the Trump’s legal team to the fact that Willis and Wade had lied in court documents about their romantic relationship and Wade had lied on interrogatory divorce documents regarding his extramarital affair.

This severed attorney-client privilege. During cross-examination, Willis’ attorney, Anna Cross, dismantled Terrence Bradley. Bradley admitted that he and Wade were no longer partners, their separation resulting from sexual allegations levied against Bradley by an employee and a client. After being forced to resign, Bradley began colluding with defense attorneys and made statements to one of Trump's attorneys, Ashleigh Merchant, via text, admitting that Willis and Wade had begun their relationship in 2019, before Wade had been appointment as special prosecutor.

With so much collateral damage, Judge McAfee had no choice but to end the hearing and continue Terrance Bradley’s testimony under seal.

PULLING BACK THE CURTIN

Following the two-day hearing, Joycelyn Wade’s divorce attorney provided an interview, presenting the other side of this unfortunate tale. Joycelyn Wade, a woman married for twenty-five years with children, faced infidelity, financial struggles, and health issues, she lacked the resources to manage her well-being. Her situation mirrored that of Fani Willis’ girlfriend. Upon learning of Wade's appointment as a special prosecutor for the election fraud case, Joycelyn discovered Wade had lied on his interrogatories to the court and withheld pertinent information regarding the half-million-dollar salary he had received from the State of GA.

In response to these discoveries, Joycelyn Wade’s attorney subpoenaed Wade and Willis. DA Fani Willis attempted to quash the subpoena. She accused Joycelyn of interfering in a court proceeding and suggested Joycelyn stand down. If not, DA Willis suggested Joycelyn Wade could be criminally prosecuted for harassment and interfering in an ongoing case. Undeterred by Fani Willis’ response, Joycelyn's defense team issued a subpoena on December 22, 2023.

The Truth

Before these allegations surfaced in the media, I had never heard of Fani Willis. Not wanting to form a negative opinion without information, I decided to conduct my own research. After listening to a few of her hearings on YouTube and reading articles about her rise to fame and the cases she has tried, I am impressed with her record.

Fani is extremely intelligent, but she appears to have a chip on her shoulder. In some cases, including her testimony, she comes across as combative. While I acknowledge her hard work, it seems she has done a considerable amount of damage to the black community. One significant case is her involvement in the 2013 Atlanta, GA teaching scandal, where she played a role in bringing down teachers using the same RICO law. Almost all those accused were black, and eleven teachers were convicted of racketeering and other charges related to cheating for black students on statewide exams.

A more recent case of Willis’ is the indictment of Young Thug, or Jeffery Lamar Williams, and YSL, the business Williams started. Out of this formal accusation, eight individuals have taken plea deals, six will be tried separately, and fourteen are being charged alongside Young Thug.  This group of individuals, mostly black, are confronting potential imprisonment for alleged charges dating back to 2012. Whether they committed the crimes is a matter for the jury to decide. However, numerous stories, long considered closed and forgotten, are being unearthed and pieced together to indict a group of men. Whether this is just or unjust—I truly don't know.

From a religious perspective, it appears that Fani is exploiting the black church. After her testimony on Feb. 15, she returned to the black church and once again denied allegations that seem evidently true. Overall, what I have come to believe about Fani is that she is blinded by her own narcissism and self-righteousness, which is unfortunate.

The love story of Willis and Wade is indeed reminiscing of another Biblical story—the story of King David and his affair with Bathsheba.  King David—should have been at war—however, from the rooftop of his palace, he spotted Bathsheba and had to have her, although she had belonged to another man.  David committed adultery and impregnated Bathsheba.  In an attempt to cover up his transgression, David had Bathsheba's husband, Uriah, placed on the front line of battle where he died, and the baby David and Bathsheba conceived also died.

DA Fani should have been at war. She should have been tending to her business. She should have understood that she was going to be scrutinized. She had everything her heart desired—success, stability, beautiful children, and finally having worked hard she was awarded the position of DA for Fulton County. Now she was going to be put on the frontline before America.

Despite having it all, she desired one thing—a man. In her testimony, she expressed loneliness after her divorce and her struggle as a single parent.  In the biblical parallel, Nathan, the prophet told David a story of a rich man taking a poor man’s lamb as his own and killing the poor man.  David was outraged, until Nathan revealed David was that man—David understood the price he had to pay.  It was a life for a life—his son would die.  Still David repented.

As the prophet had paid King David a visit, another prophet had visited Fani.  Fani shared the story at Bethel of her girlfriend who had been dealing with a cheating husband, grappling with troubled children, and facing financial and health issues. This dear friend had poured her heart out to Fani. However, Fani never considered the trails of her girlfriend were brought on by an unfaithful husband. Fani failed to recognize herself as a villain.  She has not yet repented.

As a District Attorney, one would expect this type of person to stand on truth. A person with the responsibility of bringing about justice should be beyond reproach. Unfortunately for democracy, Fani has played with the truth. She was willing to lay everything on the line, sacrifice it for the love of a married man. This story tells the tale of the lengths a sinner will go to portray themselves as innocent. Following her misrepresentation of black women, DA Willis returned to the pulpit, this time before a Seventh Day Adventist congregation. Transitioning from the Baptist to the Seventh Day Adventist denomination, she addressed the scripture, “no weapon formed against you shall prosper” (Isaiah 54:17). According to Fani, it is God who sends weapons to challenge and strengthen us. She blames God, absolving herself of any responsibility for her actions. God does not create weapons; we do when we walk in darkness. The choice to commit adultery and disregard the feelings of others is our own, not God's doing. To be explicit, Fani, echoing the words of Nene Leakes, should have kept “her legs closed—to married men.

American Black-Heritage Taunt

“’Twas mercy brought me from my Pagan land,
Taught my benighted soul to understand
That there’s a God, that there’s a Saviour too:
Once I redemption neither sought nor knew.
Some view our sable race with scornful eye,
‘Their colour is a diabolic die.’
Remember, Christians, Negros, black as Cain,
May be refin’d, and join th’ angelic train.

”

— Phyllis Whitley

I have been contemplating an argument that has gained traction within the black community, a conversation that had once been settled in the 60s, resurfaced after the death of George Floyd, and has recently escalated after Cam'ron, a black rapper, publicly declared his identification as 'Black.' His justification revolves around the belief that 'Africans don’t [associate] with blacks.’ This sentiment is rooted in the historical mistreatment of American blacks by African blacks and dates back to the days of slavery. Despite some Africans and other blacks around the world attempting to adopt American black culture, a lingering disdain for American blacks persists in our contemporary society.

While I appreciate Cam'ron's main argument, it's crucial to recognize that the term 'black' extends beyond its exclusive association with Americans. Distinct differences exist between American blacks and blacks globally, with these disparities rooted more in historical legacy than mere color. The contemporary American black population is diverse and not solely composed of descendants of slaves. Therefore, I hold a minor reservation regarding the term 'black,' as black is a shade or color and doesn’t encompass the broader aspects of race and nationality.

Since childhood, I have always wondered about my African ancestors. I wondered where on that large continent did their story began and how their path led them to a slave cargo ship. I was led to believe that black men and women were purchased by the white men who had told themselves that they were saving a cohort of no good, spoiled souls that deserved to be chained and bound because of their wicked, animalistic behavior. They convinced the world that black-skinned people's progress necessitated the intervention of the white men who purchased them.

When those black souls arrived on the American shores, they were told then they were not human at all. To their surprise, they had become cattle and needed to be bred like other animals. What I learned growing up is people will believe a lie if it brings them comfort. So many white people denied truth and embraced the lie without shame. Years after the Civil War and the Civil Rights movement, blacks continued to be spread that lie, sometimes overtly, other times subtly; nevertheless, we were fed that same narrative.

But then came Roots, the movie. Having watched the movie as a teenager, I recognized that blacks were exploited to build a nation. I learned Kunta Kenta represented the American black man—a real man. He was no animal. He had raped no one. He had stolen nothing. Blacks are human beings that were treated like cattle and purchased to till and build the American dream.

Philadelphia Odunnde Festival

History attests to the fact that our ancestors played a pivotal role in building this nation and have made substantial contributions to its fabric. However, from the perspective of our African cousins, who sometimes rely on US foreign aid to feed their children, certain individuals migrate to America only to look down upon American blacks. While not universally shared, a prevailing belief among some is that they are superior to American black people, often characterizing us as lazy and ignorant, lacking heritage or culture in their eyes.

Many American blacks internalize this narrative, questioning their identity as if black skin doesn’t inherently signify African heredity. Pan-Africanists in search of an identity, embrace this lie. Americans, particularly black women, strive to reconnect with their African roots. Some adopt practices such as idol worship and consultation with ancestral spirits in the name of Asherah or other unknown gods. In Beyonce’s album, Lemonade, she pays homage to Oshun, one false Africian river god. Annually, American blacks celebrate Odunde, participating in African rituals like tossing flowers into a river in homage to another long-forgotten river god—her name lost to the pit of hell and unknown to most American black people.

It has become increasingly evident to me that the falsehoods ingrained in the narrative of American blacks mirror the misconceptions embraced by Africans. The very ancestors who played a role in selling our mothers and fathers into slavery perpetuate the belief that American blacks are ignorant of their true legacy. Similar to Lot’s wife, blacks look back in hopes of reconnecting with their ancestors and cling to this false narrative. Africans employ this perceived lack of heritage, lineage, and culture as a taunt towards blacks, projecting a sense of superiority based on their awareness of their 'heritage' and an indisputable tie to the African continent. This narrative implies that the skin color of black individuals doesn't inherently connect them to the shores of Africa.

Today, Africans have cast a critical eye on their war-torn, famine-infested land and are now asking the question, 'What have we done?'

After having sold off so many blacks, African nations are now witnessing a significant number of their citizens migrating from the continent to pursue life in affluent Western nations. They talk about colonialism but feign for the western lifestyle. Africans receive education in the West, attaining positions as lawyers and doctors in the UK and the US. They are unwilling to return to Africa to tend to their own sons and daughters. African leaders are beginning to raise the alarm. They are urging blacks in the diaspora to return to the motherland, especially American blacks, urging is to return and participate in the reconstruction and unification of their continent.

African Leaders like P.L.O. Lumumba, Peter Obi, Dr. Arikana Chihombori-Quao, and other African leaders have determined it was the white imperial nations from the West who are responsible for the destruction of Africa. Now they call for Western nations to pay them reparations for purchasing their most important commodity—the bodies of their brothers and sisters. At the same time, they quickly make it clear that they don't think African Americans should get reparations for the work our ancestors did for free. As if we don’t have any right to receive our ancestors forty-acres and a mule. Africans fail to read the red writing on the wall. Greed and corruption and, of course, their worship of white skin played a part in the destruction of the African continent—no doubt. However, Africa’s biggest sin was selling black bodies as if they were resources. They sold out their legacy—and now they want them back.

In the contemporary landscape, Africa holds two overarching aspirations. The primary one involves the removal of remaining western-colonial influences from its soil, exemplified by the situations in Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso., where coups have removed leaders with old ideas and Western allegiance. African leaders aspire for their youth to reclaim nations oppressed by white colonists. However, a significant challenge arises as the youth, having displaced their leaders, and now align themselves with communist nations. Both Russia and China engage in resource-for-land transactions, with China constructing airport terminals in Nigeria and Russia establishing gold refineries in Burkina Faso.

The second hope resides in the diaspora, particularly a great migration to Africa. A widespread call encourages all blacks who have demonstrated strength, resilience, and developed talents and skills for success in Western nations, specifically the US, to return and contribute their gifts to the Motherland. Numerous YouTube channels glorify life in Ghana, Uganda, and Nigeria, featuring American blacks showcasing their departure from Western values and their return to their roots. Leaders from Uganda to Nigeria extend their arms wide, calling on blacks to come home. Despite the enthusiastic portrayal of Africa's beauty on social media enticing this great return, certain challenges persist, including concealing issues like South Africa's discontent towards African refugees. South Africans fear that immigrants from other African nations are taking away their jobs, leading to civil unrest and efforts to deport individuals without proper paperwork.

American blacks, captivated by this idea, have relocated to countries like Ghana, Uganda, or Nigeria, only to discover that the promised utopia on social media does not align with reality. The journey of American blacks to the motherland is often driven by a desire to reconnect with ancestral roots. However, many Americans have found themselves confronting challenges ranging from scams to discrimination.

I do recognize that black communities in the United States have serious issues and this promise of hope in Africa brings a certain amount of appeal. Drugs infest many black communities; black men are imprisoned leaving countless children in our community fatherless. There is the vanishing black family, and of course, we continue to face covert and overt racism. At the same time, many people in our community grapple with behavioral challenges, exemplified in protests during the BLM movement and by events like the CHOP takeover in Seattle. However, despite our challenges, American blacks recognize our survival depends on collaboration within diverse communities, both Black and White communities. This is imperative, transcending the divisive narratives propagated by movements like Black Lives Matter.

The older I get the more I understand who I am. First, I am a Child of God—by God, let me be specific: Jesus Christ is God. Secondly, I have learned that I am an American. My legacy began in this land and has grown exponentially. Perhaps my ancestors root formulated someplace on the African continent, it was cut off and replanted in American soil.

In the ongoing discussion surrounding black identification, I've concluded that terms like American Black, African American or Black are all acceptable. Although, the term "black" itself is insufficient, as the world often associates it with Americans, the reality is anyone with African lineage can technically be referred to as such. The term African American in my opinion is much more appropriate as it emphasizes my American nationality and reminds of me of the history of my African lineage. We should never forget. I know there are some that will ask, who identifies as a continent? But my response would be, only a superior group of people could represent an entire continent. —thus the term African American.

I will say that some reject the use of ‘black’ due to the negative associations linked to the term. They use words like: 'blackmail', 'black market,' and ‘blackball’ to make the point that the term itself is negative. But black is also associated with rare beauty, evident in black diamonds, black pearls, black onyx, obsidian, coal and oil. With that understanding I have decided I don’t mind being call black. Feel free to refer to me as American Black, African American, or Black; however, please don’t ever refer to me as African without including the American descriptor.

Isaiah 19:2

And I will set the Egyptians against the Egyptians: and they shall fight everyone against his brother, and everyone against his neighbor; city against city, and kingdom against kingdom.

WAKE UP

An American Response

Thus saith the LORD; “I am returned unto Zion, and will dwell in the midst of Jerusalem: and Jerusalem shall be called a city of truth and the mountain of the LORD of hosts the holy mountain.

Zephaniah 8:2

The conflict

 I attempted to write this piece multiple times but found myself staring at the blank page or struggling to find the words to express my alarm regarding the Black community's response to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I recognized my perspective does not align with the masses in the Black community. It is surprising, leaving me feeling as if I am wandering in a world I no longer comprehend. What is considered right has now become wrong and what is wrong has somehow become right.

How times have changed since the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King. I was born that same year; I lived through the Vietnam War and the inception of heroin in Black neighborhoods. I witnessed firsthand the result of the AIDS crisis, drug overdoses, the crack epidemic, and mass incarceration lodged in between the bricks of clay that built Black neighborhoods across America.

Hindsight being twenty-twenty, I recognize there were losers in this black-skinned game of life, but there are winners as well. Today, my generation affirms Black people rise with grace despite chains. We should take pride in knowing our ancestors came to this nation bound, and without instructors, learned a language, tilled a land, built churches, bridges, and cities, and strategically flipped the American Constitution on the head of the snake.

Many in my generation have beaten back oppression and racism and now live decent lives. Yet, many of our elite scholars, politicians, and pastors in the Black community continue to pimp the narrative that we are oppressed victims of systemic racism. Today, because of our ancestors' oppressions, self-proclaimed leaders call on the Black community to support the Palestinian struggle because they are oppressed.

Scholars

Bourgeois Black scholars (e.g., Angela Davis, Marc Lamont Hill, and Cornel West) are on a mission to deceive their sisters and brothers in the name of solidarity with Palestine. With slick tongues, they use language adopted by black liberationists to pull on the heartstrings of our community. Students and middle-class Black people, deceived like Eve, eat the apple every time.

It is becoming more and more evident many of our Black scholars are being propped up by pro-Palestinian organizations to exploit the narrative of poverty and oppression by the imperialist West.  They appear on networks like Al Jazeera and Democracy Now to decry the Palestine struggle. Like sounding brass, they send the same message: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a ‘litmus’ test for Black Americans. With strong, language they convince our community that the false gods of our ancestors bind us to the Palestinian cause.

Debate is not to be tolerated. Attempts to dispute this narrative are instantly blocked. Condemned and dismissed are those who dare to have a different point of view. Only individuals who fully endorse this storyline are acknowledged. In all good faith, the elite are more than happy to educate you on this topic. Their only request is to contribute to the cause. They advertise books and sharpen their vocal capabilities as they network for future speaking opportunities in the land of the free, on behalf of the Black community and in support of an Islamic agenda.

It is exhausting listening to Marc Lamont Hill debate the Palestinian cause. A colonial occupation that is an apartheid state is what Hill calls Gaza. The conditions are worse than those in South Africa. We, less educated Black people, are enticed into believing Hill must be right because he speaks Arabic. Hill will never say there are no Jews in neither part of Gaza—so it is not an occupied state. He claims Israel has a blockade but will not mention that Hamas is Israel's enemy.  They have every right to block out a group of people bent on their destruction.  Make no mention of the fact that Egypt also has a blockade, to that Hill will quickly respond, “Israel has two bigger boarders.”   

South Africa 2019

While half of South Africans survive on less than US$ 5 a day, the 10 per cent most wealthy earn on average the equivalent of US$ 290 daily practically the same as French in the same se.

Compare

Gaza Pre Oct. 2023

Dr. Cornell West is another educated elite, a proclaimed scholar who pretends to be down with the Black struggle. Every oppressed person is one of his 'precious' babies. He speaks of the ‘precious’ Palestinian babies using a utopic language that appeals to the philosophical, profound, deep black scholars of our day. They are an oppressed group of people living under apartheid, impacted by imperial colonialism imposed by Western ideas. According to West, every black person should relate to the plight of the oppressed in Gaza; we should all understand.

It is all a fallacy. West was born in 1953 in Tulsa, a town that was dubbed 'America’s most beautiful city during the 1950s.' His mother was a teacher and principal, and his father a general contractor for the US Dept. of Defense. West could never comprehend what it meant to stand on cheese lines or to carry laundry bags five blocks for clean clothes. He is a Princeton graduate acting as if he holds a PhD in black oppression, selling a stale twentieth-century narrative as if it were a fresh new idea. He portrays himself to be down with the black struggle, feigns his downtrodden right to speak on behalf of the Black community as he condemns America for Israeli support.

West has no shame using Palestine conditions for his political aspirations. He places all his faith in his reputation, unaware it is tarnished. Yet, filled with the allure of his on self-worth, he is willing to give Biden a run for his money. Oct. 7 was his golden ticket. Israel is wrong! He speaks his moral conviction without recourse. He offers Black democrats an alternative to Israeli-loving candidates and professes unwavering support for the “Palestinians babies.” I don’t think he has a shot—but I have been known to be wrong when I put my faith in logic and reason. It is not surprising to find a number of black intellectuals enamored by the independent candidate..

What makes me cringe even more than West is Angela Davis, a so-called feminist. She expresses profound adoration for Palestinian women. She speaks of them as if they are such strong women that have overcome significant obstacles. According to a UN report, more than 50% of the women in Gaza believe they should be beaten by their husbands to keep their family together. Palestine women want to wear their niqab, yet Davis, a voice of feminism around the world, romanticizes their struggle. With all her intellect, she fails to hear Palestinian women give praise to Allah as they watch their sons and daughters die in the name of martyrdom. These women will gladly strap their daughters with bombs and allow them to go into a community, get on a bus, and blow-up innocent Jews.

She speaks nothing of the rapes and the brutality that Hamas inflicted on Jewish women. Their lives do not matter to Davis—but ain’t they women too? That is dismissed. Instead, she sales a romantic narrative of an oppressed group of women in need of a black savior. She leaves out the abusive tactics of radical Islamic beliefs that keep the women in Gaza in the rubble. Davis ignores the unspoken truth; these same women will condemn her for the lifestyle she has the freedom to live in America.

Davis is as foolish today as she was yesterday when she used her name to purchase guns for members of the Black Panther Party. Today she speaks freedom through peace, but yesterday she allowed a group of Black men to enter a courthouse with guns registered in her name. I know—I know—she was acquitted.

It does not take a wall of degrees to know what is good and evil. Yet Hill, West and Davis ask Black people to believe their distorted views of this situation because they are intellectually superior to those less educated. Hamas and its supporters are evil. They have told us in their charter its intent to kill all Jews. It was Maya Angelou who said, “When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.”

Political Arena

Things are even worse on Capitol Hill. Black members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are guided by representatives like Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar. There are no other voices besides Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who will follow any Democratic cause that brings enough cameras into the room when she grabs the House mic. We only hear echoes of Black voices in the shadows of the cave. How is it that these two individuals have bigger voices than African Americans? Individuals like Ayanna Pressley, Jamaal Bowman, Cori Bush, Summer Lee, and several other Black House members align themselves in solidarity with these radical individuals, as if they do not have a mind of their own, or the only radical idea they can produce is pulling fire alarms.

Tlaib comes from an immigrant family, and Omar is an immigrant; they have benefited from the American system of governing, and yet today, they stand on congressional floors condemning the American government. The disdain Tlaib and Omar feel for Israel and American values is visceral. It is no coincidence they are both Muslims—radicals in Islam—and yet, Black progressive follow their lead without question.

Pastors

“To the church in Laodicea, these are the words of the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the ruler of God’s creation. I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth. ”

— Rev. 3:16

Now, about our Black pastors in America. Some of them are aligned with the ideas of the world, and many Black people follow them into darkness. Black pastors stand in pulpits and give their support for Israel, and in the same breath, they will also support Palestinians—two different ideologies. It is Good vs. Evil. They preach Jesus as God and, in the same breath, lie on Jesus, saying, 'Jesus was a Palestinian?'

To be clear, the term 'Palestine' had no meaning during the days Christ walked the earth, so He never considered Himself to be a Palestinian. Pastors who support this narrative will argue that we should support the Palestinians because they are oppressed, like we are oppressed, like Jesus was oppressed. Jesus did not come to die for every oppressed person; He came for those that believe in Him. Not every oppressed person believes in Jesus Christ; that is just a fact.

Scripture is clear, Jesus is the son of Abraham, the Son of Isaac, the son of Jacob, the son of Jesse, the son of David. He was believed to be the son of Joseph, but He is the Son of God. He became flesh and dwelled among us. He lived, died, and rose again. Herod, the enemy of Jesus, was the son of Esau, an Edomite, and Agrippa was the last of Edomites. They all died. God destroyed the name of Edom, and the remnants of Edomites drifted into what was Judea and Samaria. Rome changed the name to Palestina centuries later. Way, way before that in 70 AD., God allowed the land of Israel to be conquered, and the Jews were scattered. But God promised to return them to the land in Israel. In keeping with his Word, He began calling the Israelites back to their land in 1917—Jerusalem belongs to Israel. That is Biblical.

In the book of Obadiah, it captures the struggle that exists today between Israel and Palestine. The Bible attests to the fact that Esau wanted what did not belong to him. When Jacob stole Esau’s birthright, Esau promised the two would be enemies. Throughout history there has been conflict between the two. There are biblical accounts of the two nations fighting many battles for one reason or another. But each time Palestinians come up short. Despite the substantial number of people, they still lose. It is not that I am being prophetic. The Lord has proclaimed that Esau and its descendants will be destroyed, 'Israel will be the fire, Joseph a flame, and Edom will be stubble,' meaning the Edomites will be defeated.

Black pastors who support Palestinians are as deceived as the leaders in Gaza. They fight a losing battle. They have fought to possess a territory that is not their own and have depended upon a false god to save them. The God of Israel has demonstrated his power, and 'though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.' (Matthew 13:13).

13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.

〰️

13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. 〰️

Back in the day pastors in our communities represented our moral compass. Unfortunately, long gone are the days when Ministers like Richard Allen preached the Word of God. Many of today’s ministers are turncoats.  They wear beautiful robes as they stand before the world watering down the Word of God. They proudly straddle the fence with lies and half-truths. Their contradiction apparent. The values of Islamic communities simply do not align with the Word of God. There is a clear Biblical conflict between the foundation of the Christian faith and what Muslims believe.

It is impossible for anyone to determine if the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine signals the end of days. As Jesus stated, 'No man knows the day or the hour.' What is evident is that God has consistently protected Israel, and according to His Word, He will continue to do so until His return. Everything else seems to be fleeting, akin to dust in the wind, or the enduring cycle of violence, a consequence of humanity's fallen nature.

The truth

I am a Christian and of course that makes my stance on this conflict bias. I understand the struggle of balancing what is right and wrong when social media is flooding our timelines with dead women and children from Gaza. It is heartbreaking to watch women in piles of rubble flipping bread cakes. They have no shame in washing their underwear in public.

That is all a part of clever manipulation on the part of Islamic Muslims. Radical Islamic leaders discovered the vacuum in our Western society. They argue that the West lacks the emotional, spiritual, or intellectual capacity necessary to decipher truth from a lie. We are walking blindly in darkness, taking in information in snippets and believing every story that opens the door for purpose. Islamists understand that the world will repeat what its leaders speak without delving into the facts. We do not have time to get to know the facts — we are too busy keeping up.

The West has been duped. While it may sound like a conspiracy, it was not surprising to hear Shaykh Dr. Haitham Al-Haddad on a UK podcast, Illmfeed, proudly discussing the Islamic agenda. He boasts of the Islamic victory, based on the judgment of the court of public opinion about the situation in Gaza. Their cause has gained momentum after Hamas' attack on October 7. This ummah proudly anticipates the establishment of the Islamic Superpower, attributing it to the sacrifices being made in Gaza. Women are sacrificing their lives in the name of Allah.

Dr. Al-Haddad outlined the strategy, which commenced with the attack on Israel. It had been a carefully planned attack. Their solders were in place in western political arenas, social media platforms, international court discussions and education systems. Now the Islamic leaders, also stationed in the West have cleverly began discipling us Western pagans. They are executing and expanding successfully, influencing sentiments for Islamic ideology, all wear tearing apart the fabric of Western ideas.

AI and advanced technology keep the West distracted. Our media feeds keep us preoccupied with what is happening in Gaza. Meanwhile Iran and Syria are bombing the US. Russia is making bolder moves with Ukraine. China is sitting back picking its teeth and building bridges in Africa while North Korea is testing long-range missiles capable of hitting the US.

To make my point, I am putting aside my theology, my womanhood, and my Blackness. I am looking at this situation from the perspective of an American. I too am America, taking a seat at the table. I support Israel because I recognize they are in battle with darkness. They are surrounded by Islamic nations that want to see them destroyed.

Like Sklar, radical Islamic leaders who have sat back licking their wounds since World War I see what is happening in Gaza as a new opportunity. It is the start of their rule in the West. If they can just take out the State of Israel, the UK will be next, and of course, the US will follow. If Israel loses, what we in America must look forward to is Islamic jihad.

Over the last three months I find myself thinking about Martin Luther King Jr. Many in the Black community have stated that the King was against war. He motivated the Black community with cries on non-violent protest.

Kings daughter, Beatrice King tweeted, she was certain her father would have, “called for Israel’s bombing of Palestinians to cease and for the hostages to be released.”   I wonder if that comment were true. Reading some of the FBI files, It seemed King understood the difference between a just war and unjust war. Surely he would not have opposed the Civil War. I believe King protested the Vietnam War—not because there was a war—but he believed America was on the wrong side of the war. History has determined America was indeed on the wrong side of the war. America sided with the side of the oppressed nationalist who wanted freedom from its “so-called” Communists leaders.

In today’s culture it seems “communism” has somehow taken on the form of “colonialism.”  Many nations having thrown out democratic leaders now jump into bed with communists’ leaders and condemn the west for Imperialism and colonialism. I believe had King had all the information we have now—he would not have called for a ceasefire.

King may have felt that in 1967-America it was better for Black people to take a non-violent approach when dealing with racism in America.  It was necessary. King understood Black people could not rise from oppression and degradation with war. Blacks didn’t have the resources or the military capabilities to win.  He understood such violence would only create more violence and cause a bigger divide between Black people and whites in America.

I dare say Kings approach was much like the approach of Jesus Christ. In scripture Christ used an example of a king going to war. This indicating Jesus understood Kings go to war.

“suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Won’t he first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace.”

From a historical perspective, one can draw parallels between the experiences of African Americans in 1967 and the Palestinian since 1967s. This comparison can be viewed through a Biblical lens as a manifestation of God’s divine purpose or through the lens of history. Both views shed light on the contrast between approaches to adversity. While both communities perceived themselves as oppressed and victims of racism, African Americans, influenced by the leadership of figures like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., chose a non-violent path to address their grievances. Despite criticism, from individuals like Stokely Carmichael, this approach, shaped the course of the Civil Rights movement and highlighted the result of a non-violent approach to the struggle for justice.

In contrast, the Palestinians took a different approach. By 1967, following the six-day war in which Israel fought against three Arab nations—Egypt, Syria, and Jordan—Palestine aligned itself with the Arab side. This led to further territorial losses and significant casualties. Despite the hardships, divine mercy played a role, as over time, lands lost during the conflict were returned to Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. However, the Palestinian leadership persisted in a more confrontational approach, and for seventy-five years, subsequent generations have witnessed the consequences of their choice, culminating in the current conditions in Palestine.

Ten days before King had been assisnated he sat down and had a conversation with the Rabbinical Assembly and during that discussions King made two very important points. On the point of violence in the US Kings states, “I haven’t advocated for violence, because I do not see it as the answer to the problem. I do not see it as the anser from a moral point of view. I am still convincend that violence as the problematic strategy in our struggle to achieve just and freedom in the United stated would be absolutely impratical and it would lead to a dead-end street. We would end up creating more social problems then we solve, and unborn generations would be the recipients of a long and desolate night of bitterness.

Kings words are prophetic. It is eactly the behavior we see from the people in Gaza. Instead of recognizing violence is not the answer to their struggle they continue to make war. King also stated during the same conversation that although Blacks have particular perceptions of Jews (e.g., Carmichael Stokely and Malcom X that even exists today when Kanye West recent rants on the Jewish community), however it is important to understand that some doesn’t represent all. He also stated, “I think it is necessary to say that what is basic and what is needed in the Middle East is peace. Peace for Israel is one thing. Peace for the Arab side of that world is another thing. Peace for Israel means security, and we must stand with all of our might to protect its right to exist, its territorial integrity. I see Israel, and never mind saying it, as one of the great outposts of democracy in the world, and a marvelous example of what can be done, how desert land can almost be transformed into an oasis of brotherhood and democracy. Pease for Israel means security and that security must be reality. What is remarkable is, had King said those words today he would have been condemned.

Black Leaders in America today have no real communication with regular black folk, yet they pretend to be attached to our hips. They speak with the motivation of monetary gain as the condemn the US they take full advantage of the right to pursue. Situations like Palestine are opportunities for the majority of or Black leaders to sell books on podcasts and interviews. Therefore, we should be careful about what information we internalize. In this case Blacks should be aware, there is a difference between good, evil, and justice. God is good. Evil is oppression and death. Justice is retribution. We should oppose Hamas and radical Islamic Muslims, because they are fundamentally opposed to every value we understand, every virtue we hold sacred, and the very God we serve. Black people---

DISAPPEARED

DISAPPEARED

Beware of the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and love to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets. 47 They devour widows’ houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. These men will be punished most severely. Luke 24:46-47

DISAPPEARED | Recently I had an opportunity to visit First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens, in Somerset, New Jersey. I am not a member of First Baptist, and only attended the church this particularly Sunday, after learning the first Black President of Princeton Theology Seminary, Reverend Dr. Johnathan Lee Walton, was scheduled to speak. Now I didn’t know Dr. Walton, had never heard him preach, but I was intrigued knowing he was the First Black man to lead such an elite organization. I figured to have obtained such a position, he had to be at the very least an apologist. I love listening to preachers who break down the bible in a way that is easy to understand and was excited to attend the service to hear Dr. Walton.

Before I begin, let me state, for the record, that the pastor of First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens, Reverand Dr. Dante Quick, is a heretic. I say these words in the most respectful way possible. Despite the constant reminder of his many degrees and his insistence that his sexual preference is for women, he supports abortion, affirms homosexual behavior and makes a mockery of scripture—his most recent study of the Book of Revelation is incoherent and lacks foundation. However, I am skilled enough with the Word of God to eat the meat and spit out the bones. So, I didn’t let my opinion of Dr. Quick, deter my visit.

That Sunday morning, Dr. Walton looked the part of an astute preacher, able to deliver a powerful word. As he took his place at the podium, he reminded me of Dr. Martin Luther King. Jr. Walton articulated with gravitas every consonant and clearly annunciated every vowel attesting to his educational prowess. He used that familiar roll in his tongue and just the right jargon as he spoke about the power of institutions, like Princeton Theology Seminary and Morehouse college, those organizations that bring people together. After a lengthy introduction, he finally got to the Word.

His scripture of choice was Luke 4. It is after Jesus had left the wilderness, filled with the Spirit he returned to Nazareth. Awhile later, on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue.

6 [Jesus] stood up to read, 17 and the scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written: 18 The Spirit of the Lord is on me because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, 19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”[f] 20 Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him. 21 He began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” 22 All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips. “Isn’t this Joseph’s son?” they asked. 23 Jesus said to them, “Surely you will quote this proverb to me: ‘Physician, heal yourself!’ And you will tell me, ‘Do here in your hometown what we have heard that you did in Capernaum.’” 24 “Truly I tell you,” he continued, “no prophet is accepted in his hometown. 25 I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah’s time, when the sky was shut for three and a half years and there was a severe famine throughout the land. 26 Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them, but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. 27 And there were many in Israel with leprosy[g] in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed—only Naaman the Syrian.” All the people in the synagogue were furious when they heard this. 29 They got up, drove him out of the town, and took him to the brow of the hill on which the town was built, in order to throw him off the cliff. 30 But he walked right through the crowd and went on his way.

Dr. Walton's topic was entitled, Being Suspicious of Praise Reports. His focus was the crowd, individuals who were amazed at Jesus,

all spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his lips.

But in almost the same breath, they questioned his authority, “Isn't this Joseph's son?"

While Jesus was in the wilderness, he had been tempted three times by the devil, but according to Dr. Walton, that was not his true temptation.  Jesus’ true temptation happened while he attended the synagogue. Walton shouted, to the warm applause of the audience, "He longed for their embrace." At this point. The audience was going wild. They stood with hearty “Amens” and "Praise the Lord" as Dr. Walton expounded on the scripture. I was a bit confused. If Jesus did long for the embrace of the crowd, he knew their hearts and understood the depth of their disbelief.

Luke 4 is about the unbelief of the Nazarene. Yet somehow, Dr. Walton reshapes this narrative to confirm to the narrative perpetrated by the world. As I listened to the words he spoke and the jubilant response Walton received from the crowd at First Baptist Church, I realized just how woke our churches have become.

Walton places Jesus on the cliff. Doesn’t actually matter that Jesus was never on the cliff. Walton stills warns the audience to be leery of the crowd. In one minute, they will praise you and in the next will kill, oppress, and shun you. Although these things maybe true, none of those things happened to Christ in this scripture. Christ walked through the crowd and left them Nazarites in their unbelief. Jesus, who is presumed to be all loving and kind, leaves individuals from his hometown in their sin. President Walton takes liberties with the text and constructs a strawman for the audience.

Like every other Black pastor who believes they can properly exegete the text for us laypeople, he uses three historical individuals to support his narrative. In an attempt at mere perfect symmetry, he selects three diverse individuals and places each one of them on a pretend cliff.

An alarming indicator of his 'wokeness.' His chosen three represent the intersections of religion, gender, and sexual preference. His chosen three were: Elijah Lovejoy, a Quaker journalist; Mrs. Lucretia Mott, a Quaker suffragist; and Bayard Rustin, a Black activist.

Dr. Walton compares the lives of these three individuals to Christ.  As if that is possible.  He attempts to create a narrative, after being dazzled by the crowd, each one his chosen three was later murdered, oppressed, and shunned by a crowd. He warns the audience that we should be weary of the crowd, as he highlights key points about the lives of his chosen three.

Elijh Lovejoy had been a Quaker journalist, who aggressively published articles that opposed slavery.  He was later murdered by a crowd in 1837.  Ms. Lucretia Mott was a feisty Quaker woman, an abolitionist, preacher and advocate for women’s right to vote.  While Lovejoy's story at least supports Dr. Walton's premise (he was murdered by a crowd), Mrs. Mott's story is much more ambiguous. She may not have been allowed in certain circles, but there was no crowd and no cliff. Mrs. Mott seemed to have lived a relatively happy life and passed away peacefully at the age of seventy-five (according to Wikipedia).

Walton, like a magician mixes truth and lies to support a narrative that Jesus was a merciful prophet that had been morally challenged.  Like the devil in the wilderness, Walton tests Jesus’ humanity.  He contends there are many out here that ignore Jesus’ human nature, and only see him as a “Superman” figure.  Playing to the adoration of the crowd, Walton says, 'Many affirm Jesus’ divinity, but we don't want to discuss the implications of his humanity.' Like the crowd, we question Christ's authority.

Our narrow perception of Christ as a Superman is being inverted in this scripture. Instead of us seeing the Anointed One, Dr. Walton points us to be what he believed to be Christ’s temptation. Jesus sought the applause of men but was disappointed. Without further explanation, Walton shifts his focus to shine a light on the last of his chosen three: Bayard Rustin, the long-suffering Black gay activist.

In today’s woke culture, the church, or so-called followers of Christ teaches us that salvation is about being merciful and accepting, empathetic to the struggles of others.  Every person has the right to live as they so choose. To behave in any other way is to be part of a judgmental crowd.  To build on this narrative, Walton presents the crowd with a fantasy.   Dr. Walton does what Storm Thurmond, accused the Washington Post of doing back in 1963. A few weeks before the March on Washington, The Post ran an article that painted a picture of Rustin as an upstanding, respectable man leading the Civil Rights Movement.  That all seemed to be true, until Storm Thurmond pulled back the curtain to reveal the true character of Rustin.

Rustin had been a long-time advocate of Civil Rights.  He organized Freedom Rides and participated in Bus Boycotts and, according to many, he had been the mastermind behind the 1963 Voting Rights: March on Washington.  Rustin had been a teacher of non-violence and a close confidant of Dr. Martin L. King Jr.  Yet he had been shunned by the crowd when the world discovered the man dubbed, “Mr. March on Washington,” was gay.    

This whitewashed narrative is similarly told by the world. Individuals like President Barak Obama, Gavin Newsome and the soon to be released Netflix movie, entitled Rustin perpetuates this lie.   Walton has no qualms grasping this worldly narrative and presenting it as revelation of scripture.   His pointed is centered on affirmation—his motivation was to silence Christians who believe a homosexual lifestyle is sin.  If you believed that then you are part of the crowd. 

In Luke Chapter 4, after being tempted by the devil in the wilderness, Jesus returns to his hometown filled with the Spirit. He is the Anointed One—the Messiah. However, the crowd does not believe in Him. He is the Truth standing in the flesh, and they ask, “Isn’t this Joseph’s son?” The crowd lacked faith. A great number of social justice advocates today present this narrative of Jesus as a social reformer without recognizing that Jesus is the Anointed One. Setting the captives free means setting men and women who believe in Him free from the bondage of sin. Due to their unbelief, they don't see the Truth.

 “Truly I tell you...no prophet is accepted in his hometown.” Luke 4:24

Ironically, this is the same place where we find Dr. Walton. Yet he would never imagine himself to be part of the crowd. The crowd was part of the elite. They were the ones who sat in the synagogue. They had studied the laws and the prophets but didn't recognize the Truth.

In Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech, he longs for a world where his children will one day be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. Jesus, when looking at the crowd, rebuked them not for who they were (Israelites) but because of the condition of their hearts. Yet, Dr. Walton inverts this and places our Civil Rights, religious, and political leaders in a crowd. To shouts of "Amen," Walton asks the audience to consider Rustin's race and disregard his sin. Walton purposely leaves out key components of Rustin's story to support his false narrative. He omits any details of Rustin's 3-year prison sentence because he refused to sign up for the draft. This omission is egregious enough. There were plenty African Americans that refused to sign up for the draft. Yet, they call themselves American Citizens. Walton also left out any details concerning Rustin’s 60-day jail sentence. He never mentioned Rustin at the age of 43 was caught in a parking lot practicing sodomy with two boys in their early twenties. These facts were exposed in 1963 by Strom Thurmond on the Senate Floor and are recorded in congressional documents. Perhaps it was these revelations that caused King and other civil rights leaders to have concerns regarding Rustin’s behavior.

If Rustin had been silenced by a crowd, it had nothing to do with his sexual preference and everything to do with his character. When a 40-year-old man is caught having sex in a parking lot, that is no trivial matter. If Donald Trump had been caught having sex with two women in their twenties in a parking lot, the media would have gone on a blitz. I guarantee you the word 'rape' would have been tossed around. Such behavior from a Civil Rights Leader, marching with religious leaders for the rights of Black Americans, was detestable. Rustin lacked self-control. That was his character. His behavior was akin to a pedophile. Rustin’s affinity for young men continued throughout his life, and at the age of 67, he adopted his 28-year-old lover as his son.

If Rustin was on any cliff, Jesus would have called for him to repent. Yet, Dr. Walton implies that Jesus would not have questioned this man’s character. Instead, he suggests that Jesus would have been all-accepting and all-inclusive. Dr. Walton separates himself from the crowd. He is not the type to judge. Blinded, Walton fails to see himself as part of the crowd. Just as the religious leaders questioned Christ’s authority (not his identity)—so to today, the crowd questions Jesus's authority.

'Isn’t this Joseph’s son?'

The point the crowd was making, was that Jesus was nothing short of a man, subject to the same proclivities as you and me. Today's woke crowd asks an equally disturbing question: 'Is sin—sin?' Jesus rebuked the crowd who questioned God with contempt and disbelief. But according to Walton, the heroes are those who ignore behavior, and the villains are those who have the audacity to judge a man’s character.

 Verse 25: "I assure you that there were many widows in Israel in Elijah's time when the sky was shut for three and a half years, and there was a severe famine throughout the land. Yet Elijah was not sent to any of them but to a widow in Zarephath in the region of Sidon. And there were many in Israel with leprosy in the time of Elisha the prophet, yet not one of them was cleansed—only Naaman the Syrian."

 Jesus pointed out to the crowd that in the days of Elijah, when there was a famine, those among the house of Israel were not fed; only a widow from Zarephath. He reminds the crowd that during the days of the prophet Elisha, only Naaman, the commander of the Syrian army, was healed of leprosy, though many in Israel were sick with the same condition. Why weren’t the Israelites freed from the Paings of hungry or freed from the bondage of sickness and death? It was because of their sin. Jesus is the bread life; he came to heal the infirmities of those who believe. Jesus is making the point, as the Messiah, he came to set believers free from sin and the bondage that enslaves them to death. This is the Good News. And he was not just sent to the Jews. His ministry extended to the world (i.e., the widow of Zarephath; and Naaman the enemy to Israel). Believers must repent. Yet, Dr. Walton takes this scripture that reveals the authority of the Anointed One and tries to fit it into a twisted narrative.

Unfortunately, the foundation of Dr. Walton’s point crumbles if we had the opportunity to consider another anecdotal story from the pages of history. Consider James Baldwin. He was well-respected by the Black Community. He marched in Washington. He served his country. He had not been shunned by Civil Rights Leaders. He had not been silenced. During the 1963 March on Washington, Baldwin shook hands with many leaders, black and white.

There is a difference between Rustin and Baldwin.  It had to do with moral character.  Baldwin had his struggles—but his level of self-respect, respect for God and the Civil Rights community was unparalleled.  His struggle between truth and righteousness was real.  It didn’t boil down to his sexual preference. You feel Baldwin’s pain and the burden he carried in his book, “Go tell it on the Mountain,” and other writings.  Yet he was never so low down as to be caught having sex in a parking lot with men—not even once.

Had Dr. Walton wanted the audience to think objectively surly he would have presented the entire truth about Rustin. But Truth doesn’t actually matter to the crowds that men like Walton dwell among. Clearly, the First Baptist crowd didn’t see themselves as judgmental believers—they fell for the narrative. The problem is not the sinner. The problem is those that point out sin, “let him without sin cast the first stone.” Men like Dr. King, and Thurgood Marshall and Storm Thurmond, represented the crowd that shunned the sinner.

How dare these civil rights leaders question Rustin’s sin! The First Baptist audience, stood with applause. They didn’t care that the narrative didn’t align with the Word of God. They felt good about removing themselves from the crowd. They shout, praises to the Lord. Jesus came to set the captive free, to set the oppressed free, as if Jesus never called for men and women to repent from their sin.  Without repentance there is no salvation—there is only death.

The problem with Walton’s narrative is it doesn’t call for men to repent, by the authority of Jesus. Jesus walked away from the crowd in Nazareth understanding they were enslaved by their own disbelief. Unbelief leads to death—and Jesus walked away understanding many in that crowd would die from their sins. How evident this narrative becomes when you examine Rustin’s life. Here is the final ending of this story—Walton conveniently left out. Rustin died childless. Later in life he gave up the fight for Civil Rights, in his speech from 1986, Rustin contended the black man was no longer oppressed, “The new nigger in America was the gay-black man.” when Rustin died, he lifts his entire legacy (material) in the hands of the white man he had married.  If his story hadn’t been dug up by the likes of President Obama, Gavin Newsome, Netflix and Dr. Walton, it would have disappeared—and clearly it should have.

I have a dream…

that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character

The Numbing-Down of Blackness In America

Jennifer Lopez’s performance at the 2019 Grammys was trash and I mean that in the in the nicest possible way.  I have nothing personal against Jennifer Lopez, but if I have to be frank, she’s no friend of the African American Community and that makes this honor even more absurd.  As a matter of fact, I think Jennifer Lopez has made certain shifts in her personal and professional life to purposely disassociate herself from the African American Community. 

J.Lo left the dance floors of “In Living Color,” hopped into the left side of an unmade bed with Puff Daddy and rolled out right into the arms of Ben Affleck.   Dear sweet Jennifer transformed herself from Jenny on the block to Maid in Manhattan in a heartbeat and she never looked back at the African American community, until her Grammy performance. 

Speaking of the performance, Jennifer Lopez misrepresented Motown.  During her performance not only were her vocals weak, but all that gyrating and swinging around her long hair like a cabaret dancer was unimpressive and uninspiring.  It was clear from her salsa she lacked any real historical knowledge of Motown, even while giving her heartfelt thank yous, she neglected to thank Barry Gordy, the Founder of Motown, seated in the audience. 

So why did the Grammys choose Jennifer Lopez to perform the Motown honor?  I dare say it was because she had just enough color without being black.  In other words, The Grammys wanted to honor Motown and carefully chose a woman of color—as opposed to a black woman.  I guess they did this in the name of inclusion.  I suppose it didn’t occur to them that there were plenty African Americans they could have included to pay real tribute to the Motown Sound, but with colorism as their main motivation it’s no wonder they considered no alternatives.

I could just be cynical in accusing The Grammy’s of committing such a crime, but then there’s the winner of the best Rap Album of the year.  Not only did this grand honor go to a woman, it went to a woman of color as well.   CardiB won Rap Album of the year for, “Invasion of Privacy,” an album that glorifies bitches and hoes that makes money, popping pussy.  CardiB beat the likes of PushaT to win this honor and even more important, she did something, Mc Lyte, Queen Latifah, Missy Elliot, Eve and Lauren Hill, (the greatest female rapper of all time), never accomplished.  It’s clear like J.Lo, CardiB fit the color script

Maybe I’m being too hard on the Grammys, after all Danny Glover broke records for “This is America,” winning four Grammys for that song.  Ironically the song goes against everything the Grammy’s stand for—but I digress, at least Glover is a true African American.   H.E.R. won a Grammy for Best R&B Album and best R&B Performance, so I do give them some credit, but not much.

In all honesty, I don’t think this idea of colorism is restricted to the Grammys.  You can gleam this in the programs we watch on television.  We live in a day that have limited amount of African American Shows.  And most shows depict images of skinny lighted-skinned or coffee colored blacks with long straight hair.  All too often black shows will force a white character to make the point:  I have white friends too.  As an African American I feel like I’m forced to watch these water-down versions of myself and my community.

There is some consolation to this overindulgence of fakeness, every Saturday BET airs reruns of the sitcom “Good Times.”  That’s a show that deals with black issues faced in America.  The episodes are generally about the African American struggle for survival in a world systematically designed to hold them back.  There is no coloring in Good Times, the characters are black.  There isn’t a great deal of integrating others or pretending the other is down or friendly or real.  Black is not convoluted with light skin and straight hair and even when whites are introduced its natural and unforced.

African American sitcoms today have a light skin mother and a dark-skinned father and children with light skin and straight hair, except that one kid with the dark face, that’s included because it’s politically correct.  It wasn’t that way in the 70’s when shows like “Good Times,” or “The Jeffersons” or even “The Cosby Show,” depicted blacks as blacks.  Not some watered-down version of blackness.   One could argue the Cosby children were a mix of blackness.  Theo, Venessa and Rudy were darker skinned.  Venessa had thick hair and Ruby had straight hair.  Denise was fair, and Saundra was fairer.  It was the same with “A Different World” and “Living Single,” blackness and black culture was celebrated by black people.

What’s clear to me is America and the overreaching media is strategically replacing blackness with light-skinned people of color.  It’s okay to be black—but you better not be black-purple and most certainly shouldn’t be the size of Hattie McDaniel.  There are very few opportunities for dark-skinned black roles, unless you’re starring in Black Panther, Power or even more awful--Precious.     

This same style colorism is prevalent in politics.  While the world embraces Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, as an intellectual woman of color, they’re overlooking people like Ayanna Pressley.  Recently, Ocasio-Cortez was praised by the Huffington Post and other Liberal outlets for her performance during a House of Representative committee meeting on voter rights, ethics and campaign finances.  While she was considered brilliant and intellectual, Huffington Post ignored Pressley all together, even though her questions were much more enlightening.  It’s the same for Kamala Harris, she’s embraced by the African American community for being a woman of color; Meanwhile they all but ignore Stacy Abrams—treat her like a step child. 

I think African Americans need to start opening our eyes, recognize the program and call-out the Grammys and other social media groups for numbing down blackness.  Terming every other race, outside of White American as people of color is blatantly ignoring African Americanism.   Even more than that I am not a person of color, I am now and will always be African American.  When I watch shows like the Grammys I expect no less than a true representation of my community.  Anything else really is colorism and that is racism.

Who's To Blame For Social Media Out Rage And Identity Politics?

Recently, my identity as an African American was questioned by a now ex-Facebook friend, after I posted a comment about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. My comment was in response to an article written by Huffington Post entitled: “Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Exposes The Dark Side Of Politics In 5 Incredible Minutes.” This article put the darling House of Representative star in a glorious intellectual light after her performance during a Campaign Finance hearing. The House was meeting on HR 1 For the People Act, a bill introduced by Nancy Pelosi in January that seeks to establish new rules in regards to voting rights, campaign finance laws, lobbying and ethical rules.

The House committee invited five experts and each House Member had 5-minutes to address the panel. Ocasio-Cortez addressed the panel with a scenario. She sat in a big black leather chair, with a giddy smile on her face and looked and sounded intellectual and quite studious. She purported herself to be a really bad guy who used campaign funds to silence individuals, influenced by Corporations and Super PACS. This bad guy shapes laws in favor of donor’s interest, deregulate industries and invest in company stock options to gain infinitely more wealth for themselves and their Corporate donors.

After Ocasio-Cortez presented her scenario one of the panel members, Bradley Smith, a staunch advocate of Citizens United and the Former FEC Chairman, was given the opportunity to respond. In his response he pointed out the problems with Ocasio-Cortez’s scenario:

• First he pointed out the use of campaign funds for hush money was illegal.

• Second he clarified the difference between campaign funds and dark money.

Mr. Smith basically made Ocasio-Cortez look seriously unprepared and juvenile. Huffington Post apparently didn’t watch the entire hearing, or intentionally misled the public when it ran the article about Ocasio-Cortez’s break down of the dark sides of politics. Huffington Post ran the article from the premises that Ocasio-Cortez exposed something deep and profound in our current political system, that an average American that followed politics, hadn’t figured out in 2016 when Donald Trump was elected president. Instead of focusing on real news, (i.e. Elijah Cummings passionate comments regarding voting rights), they choose to focus on theater and classified her performance as clever and highly intelligent. The Post wanted to paint Ocasio-Cortez as an outspoken, articulate, smart female, “woman of color” so they intentionally left out that part of the hearing that debunked her theory.

When I saw the article and its misrepresentation of the facts, I couldn’t help but reply. Huffington Post perpetrated a fraud when they presented only one part of an argument. If the Huffington Post wanted to adequately address truth, they would have presented both sides of the debate. I posted a link from a twitter account that presented Bradley Smith’s response to Ocasio-Cortez.

Well my ex-Facebook friend responded with outrage. She went into a liberal rant, “why would you repost a tweet from a conservative account that seems to take joy in a white man trying to make this woman look stupid? I feel like, as a Black woman (if that’s how you identify) that there are more edifying ways to call out an argument you disagree with than by pointing to tweets and videos like the one shared.”

My ex-Facebook friend dismissed me with righteous indignation, Girl bye! She claimed I was regurgitating a conservative 101 Manuel, then she questioned my identity and implied I had a motive. To suggest because I’m a black woman, I have no right to respond to a tweet with a comment from a white conservative, is narrow minded. But I’ve come to learn that many liberal-minded people will play this card of shame if you speak out against another woman, especially if it’s supposedly a person that identifies as, woman of color—and these days many races have become people of color—but they stay away from being identified as Black. People who play this card hope to espouse guilt because you disagree with their view. I am African American and there’s no need for me to question my identity. My motive on the other hand was a different story all together.

I don’t blame my ex-Facebook friend for her tyrant liberal outburst. I blame Huffington Post. She fell for the ookie—dookie perpetrated by the Post. She really believed that Ocasio-Cortez made a grand argument that exposed the dark-side of politics and campaign funding. But the narrative is the epitome of fake news. Perhaps Ocasio-Cortez put on a brilliant performance—but why not present the response by Bradley Smith and let people decide. Maybe Ed Mazza, the writer of the piece, was aware Ocasio-Cortez comments lacked substance. Maybe he knew she was an utter spectacle and decided it was best to cut her clip with her comments, thereby removing all truth to the piece. This omission is the very reason hateful people like Donald Trump can declare fake news without a moment of hesitation.

More importantly, Ocasio-Cortez was seated next to Ayanna Pressley, an African American Massachusetts Congresswoman. During Pressley’s 5-minutes she presented a solid, concise, and well thought out discussion about voting rights. Pressley had her facts together and she had a clear understanding of voting rights and the plight of African Americans. She also broke down her reasons for supporting the house bill and was much more profound and thoughtful compared to Ocasio-Cortez. For that matter, so was Rashida Tlaib who thoroughly presented Trumps conflicts of interest, and Debbie Wasserman Shultz was on point with her line of questions on ethics. Yet the Huffington Post chose to run a story glorifying Ocasio-Cortez that was a clear fallacy. Even my ex-Facebook friend acknowledged Bradley Smith’s clip made Ocasio-Cortez look stupid.

In my view Huffington Post should retract its initial story and present the entire truth. If they want to make a credible argument that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a brilliant intellect they need a restart because this story doesn’t support that premise.

Black Face Outrage--STOP IT

When NBC terminated Megan Kelly, I remember thinking how silly it was for a corporation to get rid of an employee for defending blackface.  It was as if NBC had another agenda for firing her and used her comment to settle an ax they already had to grind.  I had similar feelings when news about Ralph Northam and a blackface photo from 1984 appeared on my timeline.  I really didn’t care to much about it, until I noticed a great deal of people, especially African Americans, were so outraged.   I still couldn’t help but wonder, why?

The outrage was fierce.  News shows were all running stories with guests that were livid and offended by the snapshot.  I expected Fox News guests to be fake-offended, after all Northam is a Democrat, but when guests appeared on CNN demanding Northam resign, and Al Sharpton said the same thing on MSNBC, my eyebrows rose.  I was baffled.  Baffled because to think something a person did 30-years ago would suddenly crop up and destroy their career wasn’t very liberal and very disturbing.  Even more importantly in this last election cycle Democrats suffered huge upsets in the governor races with the losses of Stacey Abrams in Georgia, and Andrew Gillum in Florida, now here we are trying to oust another Democratic Governor over a 30-year old photo. 

Don’t get me wrong I understand why blackface can be offensive.  During the nineteenth-century white men in Minstrelsy shows painted their faces black, enhanced the size of their lips and depicted African Americans as violent, outrageous and stereotypical caricatures.  These shows traveled around the world depicting images of black men as rapists or stupid; black women as fat ugly Mammy-like or overly sexualized characters. These shows often twisted the slave experience presenting happy go-lucky slaves that danced around with glee as if slavery was sanctioned by God himself.  But minstrelsy shows are a thing of the distant past.  So, the question I had as an African American was:  does this mean no whites could every wear blackface?  It’s absurd.  Especially when you consider the fact that blacks have worn black face themselves.

Meet Egbert Williams an African American man considered by some to be the First American actor and the greatest comedian that ever lived.  He’s a black man that wore blackface.  And he’s a trailblazer that paved the way for many African American Actors all because he wore blackface.  He brought the first all-black minstrelsy show to Broadway:  In Dahomey in 1903.   Was he racists?  The answer of course is no, his record makes it clear he had African American interest at heart when he performed.

What I concluded is just because a person paints their face black doesn’t make a person a racist.  No more than it would make people that paint their face red, white or blue racist.  And we certainly can’t just claim a person is a racist because of a photo taken 30-years ago that may or may not be the person in the frame.  The only way to determine if a person is truly a racist would be to check their record. 

So, I checked Mr. Northam’s record.  Northam was an army medical doctor and a Pediatric Neurologist, he’s probably saved countless lives, including the lives of African American babies.  He’s a Democratic governor that supports pro-black policies and his interest seem to fall in line with interests of my own.  Heck, Northam had the State of Virginia remove confederate statues. That doesn’t sound like a racists. So why should he resign?

I’ve heard all the arguments. Some say people wore black face to make fun of African Americans, particularly slaves—when the facts are some people did, some people didn’t.  Some say the photo is cringe-worthy because those in the photo are’ future doctors—and may have to one day deliver black babies.  They speak in present tense to leave out the fact that some of them were doctors and probably delivered many black babies, including Northam. I even heard arguments that Northam should resign because he can’t lead; and yet he has led. 

I think this situation speaks to an even bigger problem with social media and the internet.  The fact that someone could go back 20, 30, 40 years and dig up something from your past and use it to destroy you, is terrifying. That shouldn’t be condoned, unless you committed some heinous, vicious act against someone, such as the sexual assault Christine Blasey Ford claimed Judge Kavanaugh committed against her, and even in that situation Blasey Ford only spoke her truth because Kavanaugh was vying for a seat on the highest court in the land.  Other than that, your record should be used to determine your character. The media needs to realize you can’t condemn people for their past, unless a person has demonstrated a continued pattern of racism or hate—like Donald and Mitch.

In my opinion I think African Americans need to stop acting as if we have the power to ban certain things because racists people have used them against us in the past.  Black paint and words like nigger are not racist—wake up!