Don’t Shoot the Little Birdies

I take for the text of today’s sermon, an address by President Spencer W Kimball, in October General Conference, 1978, General Priesthood meeting. When first I heard this lecture, I was a student at BYU, surrounded by over 30,000 priesthood brethren, young and old, at the Marriott Center Arena, on campus. I don’t remember if the president was there in person, or if this was a satellite projection. (I’m thinking he was present however, as in those days the Marriott Center was used a lot for major addresses and gatherings, like the priesthood session, because the old tabernacle was tiny in comparison and of course, the Meganacle, the Great and Spacious Building, hadn’t been built yet.) In either case, the talk was live, and inside the Marriott with its 30,000 priesthood holders young and old, the effect was palpable. It seemed as if the stadium itself was cringing, begging silently for President Kimball to cut short his pondering on the subject, before it got too close to putting a damper on the imminent state holiday just days away: the opening of deer season.

“Don’t go there! Please! No, not now!” rang the mental panic of this consecrated, but by now very unsettled mob in its silent screaming ’round the amphitheater.

President Kimball started out with a casual, warm and fuzzy, typical conference-talk-like salute to the recent “Women’s Conference,” possibly the first of the BYU women’s conferences or perhaps the first “Women’s Session” of General Conference. He proceeded to meander disarmingly into some preliminary praising of our sisters, wives, mothers, women in general, and then took a hairpin turn, and veered, nay, darted, inexplicably, jaggedly, and utterly blindsiding, yay and verily, dumbfounding his gathered posse of LDS brethren into this piercing observation:

I read at the priesthood meeting at the last conference the words to the verse of the song years ago, “Don’t Kill the Little Birds,” with which I was familiar when I was a child growing up in Arizona. I found many young boys around my age who, with their flippers and their slings, destroyed many birds.

In Primary and Sunday School we sang the song:

Don’t kill the little birds

That sing on bush and tree,

All thro’ the summer days,

Their sweetest melody.

I remember that my predecessor, President Joseph Fielding Smith, was a protector of these feathered and other wild life creatures.

While President Smith at one time was in the Wasatch Mountain Area, he befriended the creatures from the hill and forest. He composed four little verses as follows, and opposite each he drew a little picture. Of the mountain squirrel first, he wrote:

This is little Chopper Squirrel

Up in the mountains high.

He begs us for some grains of corn,

With thanks he says goodbye.

[By now the stadium was physically shuddering, because as he noted, President Kimball had already given a preview of his sentiments on the matter at the last conference in April of that year, but now it was six months later, the deer hunt was upon us, and he obviously had not finished expressing his feelings on the matter of “bloodlust” as he’d previously characterized hunting as he’d alluded to the killing of wildlife.]

Then he came to the deer:

This is little Bambi Deer

Who comes to the cabin homes.

She licks the salt we feed to her,

And on the mountain roams.

[Note that Bambi is a dog whistle for tree huggers, PETA types, and animal rights activists in general. In today’s American English: OMG!]

And then the birds:

This, our little feathered friend

Who sings for us all day.

When comes the winter and the cold,

He wisely flies away.

Now, I also would like to add some of my feelings concerning the unnecessary shedding of blood and destruction of life. I think that every soul should be impressed by the sentiments that have been expressed here by the prophets.

And not less with reference to the killing of innocent birds is the wildlife of our country that live upon the vermin that are indeed enemies to the farmer and to mankind. It is not only wicked to destroy them, it is a shame, in my opinion. I think that this principle should extend not only to the bird life but to the life of all animals. For that purpose I read the scripture where the Lord gave us all the animals. Seemingly, he thought it was important that all these animals be on the earth for our use and encouragement.

President Joseph F. Smith said, “When I visited, a few years ago, the Yellowstone National Park, and saw in the streams and the beautiful lakes, birds swimming quite fearless of man, allowing passers-by to approach them as closely almost as tame birds, and apprehending no fear of them, and when I saw droves of beautiful deer [feeding] along the side of the road, as fearless of the presence of men as any domestic animal, it filled my heart with a degree of peace and joy that seemed to be almost a foretaste of that period hoped for when there shall be none to hurt and none to molest in all the land, especially among all the inhabitants of Zion. These same birds, if they were to visit other regions, inhabited by man, would, on account of their tameness, doubtless become more easily a prey to the gunner. The same may be said of those beautiful creatures—the deer and the antelope. If they should wander out of the park, beyond the protection that is established there for these animals, they would become, of course, an easy prey to those who were seeking their lives. I never could see why a man should be imbued with a blood-thirsty desire to kill and destroy animal life. I have known men—and they still exist among us—who enjoy what is, to them, the ‘sport’ of hunting birds and slaying them by the hundreds, and who will come in after a day’s sport, boasting of how many harmless birds they have had the skill to slaughter, and day after day, during the season when it is lawful for men to hunt and kill (the birds having had a season of protection and not apprehending danger) go out by scores or hundreds, and you may hear their guns early in the morning on the day of the opening, as if great armies had met in battle; and the terrible work of slaughtering the innocent birds goes on.

I do not believe any man should kill animals or birds unless he needs them for food, and then he should not kill innocent little birds that are not intended for food for man. I think it is wicked for men to thirst in their souls to kill almost everything which possesses animal life. It is wrong, and I have been surprised at prominent men whom I have seen whose very souls seemed to be athirst for the shedding of animal blood.” (Gospel Doctrine, 5th ed., Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1939, pp. 265–66.)

[Emphasis mine, but no, really that’s how the prophet delivered it. With unmistakable emphasis. And he didn’t leave it at that. It wasn’t just a passing thought or personal observation. This was a repeat performance, targeted to the most likely Mormon culprits of wildlife slaughter, and at this point it had become truly uncomfortable for a coliseum full of 30,000  hunters, young and old, and a state full of Mormon outdoorsmen eager to get into the fields and canyons and start killing wildlife, repeatedly, and in large numbers, specifically including all species of which were systematically being included in the prophet’s condemnatory address. Had I not been there, I was would have never realized that moment of crisis in Mormondom. I had no dog in the fight. No horse in the race. Was not, still am not a hunter. I was and remain just an observer.  Back then, new to my Utah Mormon Odyssey, I was learning as I went.  Thinking however, that this was not really going over well, I sat back and waited faithfully for the prophet to start massaging back out of it. Yet, President Kimball just kept driving home the point, and all the throng around me could do was squirm and sit quietly, hoping for it to end soon.]

One of the poets stated in this connection:

Take not away the life you cannot give,

For all things have an equal right to live.

—and I might add there also, because God gave it to them, and they were to be used only, as I understand, for food and to supply the needs of men.

It is quite a different matter when a pioneer crossing the plains would kill a buffalo to bring food to his children and his family. There were also those vicious men who would kill buffalo only for their tongues and skins, permitting the life to be sacrificed and the food also to be wasted.

When asked how he governed so many people, the Prophet Joseph Smith said, “I teach them correct principles, and they govern themselves.”

We look to the Prophet Joseph Smith for proper teaching. He said once: “We crossed the Embarras river and encamped on a small branch of the same about one mile west. In pitching my tent we found three massasaugas or prairie rattlesnakes, which the brethren were about to kill, but I said, ‘Let them alone—don’t hurt them! How will the serpent ever lose his venom, while the servants of God possess the same disposition and continue to make war upon it? Men must become harmless, before the brute creation; and when men lose their vicious dispositions and cease to destroy the animal race, the lion and the lamb can dwell together, and the sucking child can play with the serpent in safety.’ The brethren took the serpents carefully on sticks and carried them across the creek. I exhorted the brethren not to kill a serpent, bird, or an animal of any kind during our journey unless it became necessary in order to preserve ourselves from hunger.” (History of the Church, 2:71–72.)

Now, there are many apocryphal stories arising out of this conference talk, all up and down the Wasatch Front, of tearful, burly Mormon men and boys who put away their rifles, shotguns, and gave up hunting deer and duck, quail and partridge, and blowing away wild animals and woodland creatures in general. But statistically, it didn’t seem to make a difference in the statewide game management system. And some year later, my soon-to-be-wife and I were at the Springville Drive Inn Theater, waiting for the classic Cold War Era Clint Eastwood flick, FireFox, to spool up on the screen, coming back from the snack shack with dubious popcorn and flat soda pop, when an 8-10 point buck with a big bush-like rack sauntered nonchalantly down from the side of the mountain, strolled directly across the arc light of the projector trying to get me to go buy popcorn, with a doe and two fawns casually tripping behind. “Now they’re just taunting us,” I heard somebody say, from the deep rows of pickups and gun racks arced around the proscenium, half of them miming kill shots as the deer family traipsed through the spotlight and made their exit somewhere off into the night.

(I say the Wasatch Front, meaning, what the professional arm of Mormon facilities management and PR entities now call the “Pioneer Corridor” meaning all along the actual Wasatch Front up into southern Idaho, and down into Arizona/Nevada. This new label is due to trying to hide the fact that all current FM employees are soon to be replaced with Emcor or other “Campus Based” facilities management/houskeeping subcontractors under the new “Integrated Facilities Management” scheme, or “IFM.” Oh yes, yes it’s true my Utah brothers. The “Pioneer Corridor” has only been spared becoming the first conversion zone for political reasons, like mass desertions from the membership rolls and riots in the streets, or some very heated fast and testimony rants and so forth. But the East Coast is already gone, the West Coast is scheduled for this year, and the Midwest north and south is only spared for lack of facilities concentration, but this only for another year or two. But I digress.)

Some years later, around 1985, I found myself back in my more-or-less home state of Minnesota, in a small town called “Lake Wobegon.” Well, that’s a lie, but it’s more truthful than anything Gary Keillor ever made up. (He was from the fairly large city of Anoka, never lived on a farm, never knew a Norwegian bachelor farmer, and was of Scottish Presbyterian background.) The town most similar to Keillor’s fictional construction in the vicinity, in reality was called “Buffalo,” with a great lake and historic downtown waterfront area, county seat of Wright County. We had a full ward by hook, crook, and creative attendance counting. And I had just been called (as an outsider really) to teach elder’s quorum, freshly back from “Zion,” facing a group which consisted in large part of rural Minnesotans who’s worship of the deer opener, duck, goose, quail, grouse, snipe and whatever else was shootable, not to mention a massive worship of fishing season, probably exceeded the Utah bloodlust for freshly killed wild critters by a factor of 10.

It was fall. The deer opener was again, a few weeks away. And the lesson was the boilerplate admonition to “Follow the Prophet” because, “he will never lead the church astray.” It was a litany of quotes from prophets making statements about following themselves, based entirely on their own history of self-defending statements over the course of massive changes in various revelations during the early years of the restoration, even if they directly contradicted the last prophet who also said he’d never lead the church astray. This remains a common theme in official LDS teaching, even though, as the official statement on Race and the Priesthood admits, Brigham Young and every successor did indeed lead the church astray on the issue of Race and the Priesthood until 2012, if nothing else.

Or, as now counselor in the 1st presidency, and my old BYU president, Dallin Oaks once said, I think tongue in cheek, “It is wrong to criticize leaders of the church even if the criticism is true.”

(He fleshes out that thought here:

At any rate, I was in that frame of mind to mess with my brothers in the Buffalo elders quorum at that particular moment, I had no deep historical connections with any of them, so I put their conceptualization of what it truly means to “follow the prophet” to the acid test. I thought I’d see what happened if I stopped being a kid in all things LDS, and just spoke up. I read the above little birdie sermon, and then posed the question: So what if President Kimball had gotten up in conference this October and cleanly closed the door on the subject of hunting? What if he’d came straight out and said deer hunting and wild bird hunting in this day and age is pointless and bloodthirsty? Would any of you be hanging up your shotguns and rifles and staying home this season?

Nope. Not even willing to entertain the notion. That was pretty much the answer I got. My rural Minnesotan Brethren were not in the mood to philosophize.

“Why not?” I prodded.

“He wouldn’t say that, that’s not what he meant.”

“But what if he did say that and that was what exactly what he meant this time.”

“He wouldn’t. It’s not a commandment.”

“What if he said it was a commandment. Or a revelation from God?

“God gave us all the animals to have dominion over them. That’s in the Old Testament. God wouldn’t go back on that.”

“But what if the prophet says otherwise. The Latter-day, current prophet. What if he says, this is a new dispensation, a new day of enlightenment. All unnecessary bloodshed is wrong. We should all become vegetarians. Fish, fowl, all animals, especially in the wild are now a needless killing of God’s creatures.”

“That’s false doctrine!” Came the increasingly desperate and vehement rebuttals to a theoretical question that by definition couldn’t be rebutted. You can’t rebut an hypothetical.

“But would it be false doctrine if the prophet said it was a new revelation? Would you accept that? Even if it meant eating tofu and soy burgers?”

“He didn’t say that. And he wouldn’t.”

At any rate. I found my brethren fundamentally incapable of humoring a “what if” proposition even simply for the sake of a doctrinal or philosophical debate. The bottom line I discovered, seems to be the institutionalized, hereditary sort of LDS mentality of paying fervent lip-service to following every syllable that spills from any given “prophet’s” lips at any given time, at any meeting or event, official or unofficial, or even just ordering lunch or making a shopping list, as if it were directly from the mind and will of the Almighty, while simultaneously reserving the right to ignore even generations of canon and tradition if that specific bit of “prophetic” utterance personally doesn’t fit your longstanding American, Utah based Mormon world-view about manly pursuits and End Time, Apocalyptic bunker scenarios.

Orrrhhh…. on the other hand, as the decades come full circle, I find the same to be true if you’re a bunch of cheerful Mormon leftists, all too happy to throw the generations of embarrassingly Constitutional, American boosterism fundamentally incorporated into LDS doctrine and history, if, (as I have only recently discovered,) some black-ops, smuggled YouTube video of some big LDS authority at some venue out in the field, seems to support your “progressive” political world view that we really ought to ban all firearms from civilian use, repeal the 2nd Amendment, and begin the wholesale confiscation of all the personal firearms in America.

If it please the court, I will show relevance. Follow this:

Now, my people came from Norway and Denmark to the US in the waning 1800’s, (Norway, Denmark, Sweden, pretty much all the same deal in terms of “nationality,” but that’s a long story about Scandinavian politics and history.) They were very independent and politically active, and for example, built farmer’s co-ops the church eventually copied and ET Benson promoted as model systems when he was Secretary of Agriculture in the Great Depression/Dustbowl days. They also founded the Farmer Labor Party in the upper Midwest/plains states of the United States of America. They only very reluctantly decided to associate with the “Democratic Party” for national election purposes, in part because at that time, and for another 60 years or so, and generations before that, they were the party of the KKK. My people, were the first to sign up for the “Minnesota First Volunteers” and ride down there when the Civil War broke out, kick ass and take names and win that war.

That’s not much of a “Right Wing” heritage. I consider myself a “classic liberal,” or “Jeffersonian Democrat,” or “Libertarian” in political orientation. So, imagine my surprise at this showing up on my Facebook Messenger app:

Hey Royce, I’m blocking you on social media. You know I almost left the church last week right? It’s because conservative Mormons have been harassing me on social media. Nowhere in LDS sites does it suggest that if you are Mormon, you have to be conservative. I’ve noticed people have been putting politics over doctrine and the gospel, and I couldn’t stand it. I contacted Bishop XXXXXXX, and told him how you called me a red hick idiot. I am blocking you for my sanity. And because this is in God’s and Bishop’s hands. I hope you pray and heal your clearly angry heart.

Sent from Messenger

Chat Conversation End

Let’s just examine this. First of all, don’t know her, don’t know she almost left the church, and really, why would I? This Facebook message came out of the blue for all I knew,  from one “Bannana Carp.” (Fake name. Just for laughs.) As far as I can tell there’s only one post I replied to which she quotes incorrectly, yet it was so disconcerting it drove her insane. (I contend a very short drive.) Worse yet, here tremendous influence and testimony with my bishop has now condemned me to church discipline, eternal Hell and damnation.

I searched for this sister on Facebook, hunted my timeline for the offending post, searched for her membership in my LDS groups, especially my ward group, and she was a complete non-entity. As she was in the process of “blocking” me, she’d also apparently scrubbed her entire presence on any social media connected to me and the ward, or Facebook. To date then, I have no chance of going back to see whatever it was I wrote that might have driven her over the edge. As I have alluded, I vaguely remember commenting about some hillbilly teacher having kids walk out because she berated them for speaking Spanish in class, and scolded them for not speaking “American.” That seems to be the post in question.

My point in rebuttal to the following video and comments accompanying it was there might have been any number of valid reasons for demanding English in an English speaking country, in an English speaking classroom, especially if it was an English class for example. And we have no idea what was going on before the video starts, or if they were cursing their teacher in Spanish, shouting or conspiring in a secret code or what. The phrase I used was directed at this teacher, suggesting that her comments may sound like “redneck hick idiocy” but she’s probably not entirely out of line.

So much for Banana Carp’s reading comprehension. I wasn’t addressing her at all.

I found a “Harrison Carp” on my local ward site, (Yeah, fake name, still fair game though.) but nothing connected with anything I’d posted anywhere to help decipher who or what this “fellow saint” was going on about or if this was indeed “Harrison’s” wife. So this is the Messenger post I sent to who I believe was her husband:

You’re apparently new to my ward and you have the same last name. So… Who is Banana Carp, why is she on my timeline in the first place, why is she claiming I’m a conservative, why is she claiming I’m part of some Mormon conspiracy harassing her on social media because I guess she’s a self-identified “liberal,” why is she crying to my bishop about leaving the church because of all the persecution she’s getting, claiming I’m calling her names, why would I be allegedly calling her (don’t know her) a “red hick idiot,” because unless she’s a schoolteacher who threw some Spanish speaking punks out of her classroom on some fake news video, the closest I’ve come to that phrase in the last day or two was “redneck idiocy,” in regard to the teacher’s rant about the military not fighting so they can speak Spanish in class and they should speak American? If this is your wife or family member, she’s got some serious problems if she’s this bent out of shape over a Facebook debate, and it’s got nothing at all to do with me. She can block all she wants, but that’s her problem not mine. Maybe I should just post this whole thing on the ward web site to clear the air? She’s not left me any other options really. She’s already spreading lies around the ward. In any case, I don’t see anything in your posts that come off as SJW based, I can’t access that post or her to verify her claims, and frankly am not sure what she’s on about. It’s a bit egocentric to imagine she’s uniquely persecuted by a dark conspiracy of Mormon harassers in the first place. That’s bona-fide snowflake territory. It’s pretty chicken-poop to message me a big private rant and go crying to my bishop telling him lies about stuff I never wrote to a person I don’t even know, and then block me so I can’t even reply. Seriously chicken-poo. (Epithet cleaned up for the Mormon audience.) Sorry if you’re not related. Even sorrier if you are I suppose. Get her some help.


Some couple of weeks later I walked into a Gospel Doctrine class where she, as I believe her to be, was bearing testimony about being enlightened by some diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia (not actually the current vernacular in the loonie bin industry, under DSM-5) and how that helped her understand mental health issues better. Apparently she’s a masters candidate in psychology or something close to that, which only proves my observations as a psych aid and psych tech, wrestling lunatics at the Utah State Hospital in the mid-80’s in the “therapeutic community,” that professional psychiatrists/psychologists/social workers get into the  industry because they need to validate their own totally f’d up family and personal lives.

I have well over a thousand Facebook friends and discuss dozens, scores of topics with hundreds of people all over the internet every day. One random post from Banana Carp is nothing to me, one threat typed out for a few seconds like many others–however much it threatened her sanity, sanity which she confessed in Sunday school was not in her possession anyway it seems. I did however, through my wife, I find out what was really going on. This sister had long been on the ward web site and Facebook pages of ward members, posting politically based “gospel” rants with great abandon, most of which were promoting gun control and 2nd Amendment theories about a certain black market video from YouTube, that was secretly shot in Las Vegas this year, of President Russell M Nelson addressing a gathering of youth, and allegedly taking a political stance on “gun control.”

I’ll include another link just for security and validity:

Turns out this self-confessed resident ward schizophrenic had been promoting the above “hot” “undercover” video for weeks, fomenting ward dissension, and openingly challenging members of my ward and Latter-day Saints in general, to “follow the prophet” and pass oppressive gun laws and eradicate the 2nd Amendment. My wife had followed these comments with a wince, but other than that, I would not have been able to discern the subtext of this frantic sister’s PM and thus would have missed the background of the entire debacle, and simply gone on despising her as an idiot and a coward for without good reason. Now I completely understand. If you’re paranoid, everything is about you I suppose.

But let’s just have a look and listen to what this off-the-cuff video actually says about current LDS President Nelson:  Was Parkland the result of “men passing laws that allowed guns to fall into the hands of those who should not have them”? Well no. That’s the most ignorant, er, uninformed assessment I’ve ever heard. To date, there were some 69 laws and intervention points where the FBI, local sheriffs, child protective services or others could have swooped in and prevented this. 4 deputies stood outside and picked their noses while the slaughter continued and actually never went in. Some neighboring cops arrived eventually and strode past them as they hung outside and didn’t even follow as they went in.

Obama era philosophies enforced a policy that paid schools and law enforcement to under-report “black” arrests, thus to look “fair,” incentivized them to just skip all arrests on minor offenses and ignore even the basic reporting of minor offenses or suspicions or just weird activity, which clearly contributed to the tragedy. The kid was never flagged as mounting trouble, in spite of repeated episodes of clear warning that he was about to go off. 69 and probably more times, at least twice by the FBI and repeatedly by local law enforcement. This kid, this young loonie went through all the background checks required. His record was clean. But mostly, this was far worse than it would have been because 4 local deputies given cushy political jobs by a Democratic apparatchik sheriff who rewarded them for their support in his election, sat there and let this lunatic shoot kids down for 6 minutes instead of moving in and stopping it when it first began.

If President Nelson is claiming Brigham Young, and Joseph Smith are wrong, that the Constitution is not divinely inspired, that this nation, this continent, is not set apart for the restoration of the gospel, that the Founding Fathers were ignorant white a-holes and the 2nd Amendment didn’t really protect us from anti-Mormon rioters who were beating off and killing Mormons at the polls at Gallatin, or that “Zion” used thoughts and prayers alone to repel Johnston’s Army from the conquering of Utah, or that the US “government” was sufficient protection for Mormon freedom of religion coast to coast, that the Nauvoo Legion was just a scary, uncivilized bit of arrogant Mormon rebel bluster, that Joseph Smith was an apostate, fallen prophet when he armed his golden city with rifle, sword, canon, and all the weapons of war, and that governor Ford and his mob militia, the Carthage Regulators who killed Joseph Smith, was just a fine and dandy organization to protect LDS rights under the Constitution, that the “Utah Wars” in Missouri and Illinois and Utah, were just Mormon treason they should never have had arms to wage, and that blocking Johnston’s army from invading SLC by highly organized militia and guerrilla warfare under force of arms, was treacherous un-Americanism, well then, our new LDS president needs to read a book or two. Maybe take a walk across the street and look at the pepper box pistol Brother Joseph died firing, dropping a man with every shot, downing 4 in self-defense, only falling short of a full six due to 2 misfires.

Maybe president Nelson isn’t familiar with the notion of a “citizen’s militia.” Or its importance. Maybe he’s never read the US Consttution, or has forgotten its doctrinal significance. They have been in that valley, a very long, long, long time. Maybe it’s good that the “prophet” should get out more to speak at places like Vegas. As long as you as a Latter-day Saint realize, if he burps, it’s not scripture.

More on “prophetic” infallibility…

The Prophet Joseph Smith himself is quoted in Documentary History of the Church as admonishing us that prophets are mortal men with mortal frailties, so that “a prophet (is) a
prophet only when he (is) acting as such” [History of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: Period I, History of Joseph Smith, the Prophet, by Himself, edited by B.H. Roberts, (Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1902-images-48_thumb11912), 5:26]. The complications in identifying which directives from Church leaders are to be understood as binding on the Saints were extensively addressed by President J. Reuben Clark in a lengthy Church News article of July 31, 1954. See the reprint of that article, “When are the Writings or Sermons of Church Leaders Entitled to the Claim of Scripture?” Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 12:2 (Summer 1979), 68-81. Applying all of this to Brigham Young’s 1852 declaration in a political forum (the Utah Legislature), despite his citing of prophetic authority, leaves us with an interesting quandary, considering that today’s Church leaders (at least since 1969) have clearly retreated from Young’s ideas on race, priesthood, and many other things.


Here we must have in mind–must know–that only the President of the Church, the Presiding High Priest, is sustained as Prophet, Seer, and Revelator for the Church, and he alone has the right to receive revelations for the Church, either new or amendatory, or to give authoritative interpretations of scriptures that shall be binding on the Church, or change in any way the existing doctrines of theScreen-shot-2012-02-05-at-11.31.16-P Church. He is God’s sole mouthpiece on earth for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the only true Church. He alone may declare the mind and will of God to his people. No officer of any other Church in the world had this high right and lofty prerogative.

So when any other person, irrespective of who he is, undertakes to do any of these things, you may know that he is not “moved upon by the Holy Ghost,” in so speaking, unless he has special authorization from the President of the Church. (D.C. 90:1-4, 9, 12-16; 107:8, 65-66, 91-92; 115:19; 124:125; D.C. 2:477; 6:363).

Thus far it is clear.

But there are many places where the scriptures are not too clear, and where different interpretations may be given to them; there are many doctrines; tenets as the Lord called them, that have not been officially defined and declared. It is in the consideration and discussion of these scriptures and doctrines that opportunities arise for differences of views as to meanings and extent. In view of the fundamental principle just announced as to the position of the President of the Church, other bearers of the Priesthood, those with the special spiritual endowment and those without it, should be cautious in their expressions about and interpretations of scriptures and doctrines. They must act and teach subject to the over-all power and authority of the President of the Church. It would be most unfortunate were this not always strictly observed by the bearers of this special spiritual endowment, other than the President. Sometimes in the past, they have spoken “out of sum,” so to speak. Furthermore, at times even those not members of the General Authorities are said to have been heard to declare their own views on various matters concerning which no official view or declaration has been made by the mouthpiece of the Lord, sometimes with an assured certainty that might deceive the uninformed and unwary….

images-29_thumb1There have been rare occasions when even the President of the Church in his preaching and teaching has not been “moved upon by the Holy Ghost.” You will recall the Prophet Joseph declared that a prophet is not always a prophet.

How shall the Church know when these adventurous expeditions of the brethren into these highly speculative principles and doctrines meet the requirements of the statutes that the announcers thereof have been “moved upon by the Holy Ghost”? The Church will know by the testimony of the Holy Ghost in the body of the members, whether the brethren in voicing their views are “moved upon by the Holy Ghost”; and in due time that knowledge will be made manifest….

But this matter of disagreements over doctrine, and the announcement by high authority of incorrect doctrines, is not new.

It will be recalled that disagreements among brethren in high places about doctrines made clear appeared in the early days of the Apostolic Church. Indeed, at the Last Supper, “there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest”; this was in the presence of the Savior himself. (Luke 22: 24.)

The disciples had earlier had the same dispute when they were at Capernaum. (Mark 9:33; Luke 9:46.) And not long after that, James and John, of their own volition or at the instance of their mother, apparently the latter, asked Jesus that one of them reflectionseurope_com_Last_Supper_wi[1]might sit on his right hand and the other on his left. (Matt. 20:20 ff.; Mark 10:35 ff.)

This matter of precedence seems to have troubled the disciples.

There were disputes over doctrine. You will recall that Paul and Barnabas had differences (not over doctrine, however), and, says the record, “the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other.” (Acts 15:36 95.)

Paul had an apparently unseemly dispute with Peter about circumcision. Paul boasted to the Galatians, “I said unto Peter before them all ….” (Gal. 2:14.)

Peter, replying more or less in kind, wrote: ” . . . even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.” (II Peter 3:15-16.)

This same question regarding circumcision became so disturbing to the Church that “the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter,” in Jerusalem. Paul, Barnabas, and Peter were there and participated in the discussion. The Pharisee disciples stood for circumcision of Gentiles. James delivered the decision against the necessity of circumcising the Gentile converts. (Acts 15:1 95.)

So, in summary. Whatever President Nelson was on about in Las Vegas in an underground video is irrelevant. That’s one of the reasons underground videos are banned by official church policy relative to any visiting general authority. But apart from the gun control issue, President Nelson did take a definite stand in favor of universal amnesty for illegal aliens. And that is a political directive coming directly from the church’s highest authority. For some reason, it hasn’t resonated in or out of the church as much as his apparent condemnation of current gun laws and the “evil” men who allow crazies to get guns, in his “inspired” opinion. Unfortunately, on both issues, the “official” church news page and media liaisons have given a strict “no comment” reply.

It’s tough being a Mormon sometimes. It would be nice to have a litany of rules and memorized dogma to just mindlessly follow from an organizational standpoint. But that’s sort of what Mormonism was created to eradicate. On the one hand, “Never Mind all that Stuff About the Negro.” Happy to eradicate 160 plus years of that and write it off as “folklore” and “speculation,” as Jefferey R Holland called it in 2006. You can look that “policy” change up on the church web site and you can see and hear and read multiple reiterations of it from general authorities. It’s an official “policy” statement signed off by the First Presidency, in which they officially throw Brigham Young and anyone after him under the doctrinal bus, saying clearly that they were wrong on the matter.

That, is a “change” in doctrine, or that, is “new doctrine” or that, is a clarification of doctrine. (Even if they want to pretend it was never “doctrine,” just a “policy” change.) That, is what it looks like when the Brethren want you to learn, teach and preach a new thing.

On the other hand, no, President Russell M Nelson did not condemn the AR-15 or convict the nation of deliberately passing laws to enable gunshops in their desire to be handing out “assault weapons” willy nilly to nutjobs. That was one ad-libbed line in a speech in Vegas that was never meant to be recorded, published or broadcast. That’s not even close to “doctrine.” It’s not any closer to “policy” either. It’s just a throwaway sentiment.

But don’t take my word on it. We have Dieter F Uchtdorf:

Some struggle with “unanswered questions about things that have been done or said in the past,” Uchtdorf explained. “We openly acknowledge that in nearly 200 years of church history — along with an uninterrupted line of inspired, honorable and divine events — there have been some things said and done that could cause people to question.”

“To be perfectly frank,” Uchtdorf said, “there have been times when members or leaders in the church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles or doctrine.”

God is perfect and his doctrine is pure, he said, but human beings — including church leaders — are not.





Posted in Don't Shoot the Little Birdies | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Nature of the Godhead

Based upon an assigned talk:

The Only True God and Jesus Christ Whom He Hath Sent

Jeffrey R. Holland

OCTOBER 2007 General Conference

The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles

We declare it is self-evident from the scriptures that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are separate persons, three divine beings.
But even as we invite one and all to examine closely the marvel of it, there is one thing we would not like anyone to wonder about—that is whether or not we are “Christians.”





I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the Virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to the dead.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
and he will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting.


The Lutheran Service Book has the following text:

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
Maker of heaven and earth.
And in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died and was buried.
He descended into hell.
On the third day He rose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven
and sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty.
From thence He will come to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy Christian Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.[36][37][d][e]

The creed is footnoted in the LSB for the word “Christian”: “Christian: the ancient text reads “catholic,” meaning the whole Church as it confesses the wholeness of Christian doctrine.”[40]

Church of Denmark[edit]

(Note: As I read this creed from the pulpit, many in the congregation were reciting it themselves in their heads, and afterwards several came forth to point out it was not quite the one they’d learned in Confirmation class etc. This is because even this small creed has been under constant polishing from sect to sect, and even within generations of the same sect, for some 1900 years.)






By and large any controversy in this matter has swirled around two doctrinal issues—our view of the Godhead and our belief in the principle of continuing revelation leading to an open scriptural canon. In addressing this we do not need to be apologists for our faith, but we would like not to be misunderstood. So with a desire to increase understanding and unequivocally declare our Christianity, I speak today on the first of those two doctrinal issues just mentioned.

Our first and foremost article of faith in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is “We believe in God, the Eternal Father, and in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost.”2 We believe these three divine persons constituting a single Godhead are united in purpose, in manner, in testimony, in mission. We believe Them to be filled with the same godly sense of mercy and love, justice and grace, patience, forgiveness, and redemption. I think it is accurate to say we believe They are one in every significant and eternal aspect imaginable except believing Them to be three persons combined in one substance, a Trinitarian notion never set forth in the scriptures because it is not true.
Indeed no less a source than the stalwart Harper’s Bible Dictionary records that “the formal doctrine of the Trinity as it was defined by the great church councils of the fourth and fifth centuries is not to be found in the [New Testament].”3

So any criticism that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not hold the contemporary Christian view of God, Jesus, and the Holy Ghost is not a comment about our commitment to Christ but rather a recognition (accurate, I might add) that our view of the Godhead breaks with post–New Testament Christian history and returns to the doctrine taught by Jesus Himself. Now, a word about that post–New Testament history might be helpful.

In the year A.D. 325 the Roman emperor Constantine convened the Council of Nicaea to address—among other things—the growing issue of God’s alleged “trinity in unity.” What emerged from the heated contentions of churchmen, philosophers, and ecclesiastical dignitaries came to be known (after another 125 years and three more major councils)4 as the Nicene Creed, with later reformulations such as the Athanasian Creed. These various evolutions and iterations of creeds—and others to come over the centuries—declared the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to be abstract, absolute, transcendent, immanent, consubstantial, coeternal, and unknowable, without body, parts, or passions and dwelling outside space and time.


















It is too late in the day for men of sincerity to pretend they believe in the Platonic mysticisms that three are one, and one is three; and yet that the one is not three, and the three are not one . . . But this constitutes the craft, the power and the profit of the priests. Sweep away their gossamer fabrics of factitious religion, and they would catch no more flies. We should all then, like the Quakers, live without an order of priests, moralize for ourselves, follow the oracle of conscience, and say nothing about what no man can understand, nor therefore believe.

—– To Dr. Waterhouse, 1815

The priests have so disfigured the simple religion of Jesus that no one who reads the sophistications they have engrafted on it, from the jargon of Plato, of Aristotle and other mystics, would conceive these could have been fathered on the sublime preacher of the Sermon on the Mount. Yet, knowing the importance of names, they have assumed that of Christians, while they are mere Platonists, or anything rather than disciples of Jesus.

—– To Carey, 1816: N. Y. Pub Lib., MS, IV, 40






The Nicene Creed (A.D. 325)

The Council of Nicaea convened in A.D. 325 to settle a dispute regarding the nature of Christ. Arius (a presbyter of Alexandria who was the founder of Arianism) argued that the Son was created from the nonexistent, and was of a different substance than the Father. There was a time, Arius argued, when the Son was not. But Christ was the highest of all created beings. Athanasius of Alexandria, the champion of orthodoxy, stressed the oneness of God while maintaining three distinct Persons within the Godhead. He maintained that the Son was the same substance as the Father (and hence, was fully divine). Athanasius argued for the eternally personal existence of the Son. A mediating position was set forth by Eusebius of Caesarea, who argued that the Son was of a similar substance with the Father. After considerable debate, Athanasius won out and Christ was recognized by the council as being on a level with the Father as an uncreated Being.

The Nicene Creed reads:

I believe in one God the Father Almighty; Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds [God of God], Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance [essence] with the Father; by whom all things were made; who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge both the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And [I believe] in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceedeth from the Father [and the Son]; who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified; who spake by the Prophets.

And [I believe] in one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. I acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. (This last paragraph was added in A.D. 381.)

The Athanasian Creed (Date: Unknown)

The Athanasian Creed is essentially an amplification of the Nicene Creed. (Note that in the wiki link below, it is not the work of Athansius at all, and furthermore, has been re-worked numerous times through the centuries.) It came to be generally adopted among the Western churches. This creed contains the words:

We worship one God in trinity, and trinity in unity, neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance. For the person of the Father is one; of the Son, another; of the Holy Spirit, another. But the divinity of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is one, the glory equal, the majesty equal. Such as is the Father, such also is the Son, and such the Holy Spirit. The Father is uncreated, the Son is uncreated, the Holy Spirit is uncreated. The Father is infinite, the Son is infinite, the Holy Spirit is infinite. The Father is eternal, the Son is eternal, the Holy Spirit is eternal. And yet there are not three eternal Beings, but one eternal Being. So also there are not three uncreated Beings, nor three infinite Beings, but one uncreated and one infinite Being. In like manner, the Father is omnipotent, the Son is omnipotent, and the Holy Spirit is omnipotent. And yet there are not three omnipotent Beings, but one omnipotent Being. Thus the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God. And yet there are not three Gods, but one God only. The Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, and the Holy Spirit is Lord. And yet there are not three Lords, but one Lord only. For as we are compelled by Christian truth to confess each person distinctively to be both God and Lord, we are prohibited by the Catholic religion to say that there are three Gods or Lords. The Father is made by none, nor created, nor begotten. The Son is from the Father alone, not made, not created, but begotten. The Holy Spirit is not created by the Father and the Son, nor begotten, but proceeds. Therefore, there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits. And in this Trinity there is nothing prior or posterior, nothing greater or less, but all three persons are coeternal and coequal to themselves. So that through all, as was said above, both unity in trinity and trinity in unity is to be adored. Whoever would be saved, let him thus think concerning the Trinity.

The Westminster Confession of Faith (A.D. 1646)

The Westminster Confession arose out of the stormy political scene in England during the reign of Charles I. “Charles met with resistance when he attempted to impose episcopacy on the Church of Scotland and to conform its services to the Church of England’s Common Book of Prayer. A civil war erupted and Oliver Cromwell led the Puritan forces to victory. Charles I was beheaded in the process. In 1643 the English parliament commissioned the Westminster Assembly to develop the creed of the Church of England. The 121 English Puritan ministers met for 1,163 daily sessions from 1643 to 1649. The Westminster Confession of Faith, completed in 1646, affirmed a strong Calvinistic position and disavowed ‘the errors of Arminianism, Roman Catholicism, and sectarianism.'”
Below is the statement of God found in the Westminster Confession of Faith:

I. There is but one only living and true God, who is infinite in being and perfection, a most pure spirit, invisible, without body, parts, or passions, immutable, immense, eternal, incomprehensible, almighty, most wise, most holy, most free, most absolute, working all things according to the counsel of His own immutable and most righteous will, for His own glory; most loving, gracious, merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; the rewarder of them that diligently seek Him; and withal most just and terrible in His judgments, hating all sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty.

II. God hath all live, glory, goodness, blessedness, in and of Himself; and is alone in and unto Himself all-sufficient, not standing in need of any creatures which He hath made, nor deriving any glory from them, but only manifesting His own glory in, by, unto, and upon them: He is the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, and to whom, are all things; and hath most sovereign dominion over them, to do by them, for them, and upon them, whatsoever Himself pleaseth. In His sight all things are open and manifest; His knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature, so as nothing is to Him contingent or uncertain. He is most holy in all His counsels, in all His works, and in all His commands. To Him is due from angels and men, and every other creature, whatsoever worship, service, or obedience He is pleased to require of them.
In the unity of the Godhead there be three Persons of one substance, power, and eternity; God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son.


We declare it is self-evident from the scriptures that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are separate persons, three divine beings…To whom was Jesus pleading so fervently all those years, including in such anguished cries as “O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me”14and “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me”?15 To acknowledge the scriptural evidence that otherwise perfectly united members of the Godhead are nevertheless separate and distinct beings is not to be guilty of polytheism; it is, rather, part of the great revelation Jesus came to deliver concerning the nature of divine beings. Perhaps the Apostle Paul said it best: “Christ Jesus … being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God.”16

A related reason The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is excluded from the Christian category by some is because we believe, as did the ancient prophets and apostles, in an embodied—but certainly glorified—God.17 To those who criticize this scripturally based belief, I ask at least rhetorically: If the idea of an embodied God is repugnant, why are the central doctrines and singularly most distinguishing characteristics of all Christianity the Incarnation, the Atonement, and the physical Resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ? If having a body is not only not needed but not desirable by Deity, why did the Redeemer of mankind redeem His body, redeeming it from the grasp of death and the grave, guaranteeing it would never again be separated from His spirit in time or eternity?18Any who dismisses the concept of an embodied God dismisses both the mortal and the resurrected Christ. No one claiming to be a true Christian will want to do that.

Now, to anyone within the sound of my voice who has wondered regarding our Christianity, I bear this witness. I testify that Jesus Christ is the literal, living Son of our literal, living God. This Jesus is our Savior and Redeemer who, under the guidance of the Father, was the Creator of heaven and earth and all things that in them are. I bear witness that He was born of a virgin mother, that in His lifetime He performed mighty miracles observed by legions of His disciples and by His enemies as well. I testify that He had power over death because He was divine but that He willingly subjected Himself to death for our sake because for a period of time He was also mortal. I declare that in His willing submission to death He took upon Himself the sins of the world, paying an infinite price for every sorrow and sickness, every heartache and unhappiness from Adam to the end of the world. In doing so He conquered both the grave physically and hell spiritually and set the human family free. I bear witness that He was literally resurrected from the tomb and, after ascending to His Father to complete the process of that Resurrection, He appeared, repeatedly, to hundreds of disciples in the Old World and in the New. I know He is the Holy One of Israel, the Messiah who will one day come again in final glory, to reign on earth as Lord of lords and King of kings. I know that there is no other name given under heaven whereby a man can be saved and that only by relying wholly upon His merits, mercy, and everlasting grace19 can we gain eternal life.

My additional testimony regarding this resplendent doctrine is that in preparation for His millennial latter-day reign, Jesus has already come, more than once, in embodied majestic glory. In the spring of 1820, a 14-year-old boy, confused by many of these very doctrines that still confuse much of Christendom, went into a grove of trees to pray. In answer to that earnest prayer offered at such a tender age, the Father and the Son appeared as embodied, glorified beings to the boy prophet Joseph Smith. That day marked the beginning of the return of the true, New Testament gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and the restoration of other prophetic truths offered from Adam down to the present day.

I testify that my witness of these things is true and that the heavens are open to all who seek the same confirmation. Through the Holy Spirit of Truth, may we allknow “the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom [He has] sent.”20 Then may we live Their teachings and be true Christians in deed, as well as in word, I pray in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.


Posted in General Talks | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Donald J Trump and LDS “White Nationalism.”

I came across an interesting commentary in another blog called, By Common Consent, here at WordPress. Most of it was off the main path into an almost patronizing critique of the whole Mormon history of racism thing that I’ve written about so much I’ve frankly typed my interest away. I argue by instinct about it, but find I’m not caring about the history and ethics of it much any more. Half the “white” population is afraid to jump in and just wants to stay out of the predictable “black community” pissing and moaning, the other half have a compulsive need to berate themselves and virtue-signal their loathing of their “white privilege,” and most black folks just have a kit-bag of personal and group excuses for not having to listen to my “white ass.” I have, after all, been dubbed “White Savior,” for daring’ to have an opinion, well, really on anything that doesn’t first confess my evil whitness, and then indulge the entire narrative of BLM, Reparations Movement, Black Liberation Theology, Black Israelite Mythology etc, in a black LDS Facebook group. In any case, I have written extensively about black-white-LDS crapola right here if you want to read it all. Check the index for topics.

I did however find the blogger’s sort of, boilerplate “liberal Mormon” throwaway central premise quite intriguing and commented myself under his article, the bulk of which this following rambling represents, presented here with embellishments that would otherwise steal way too much storage space in his comment section to be polite. So, first, a quote, posted by Steven Evans on 21 June 2017:

First, let’s define some terms, specifically what I mean by “white nationalism”. It’s not quite the same thing as white supremacy, that racist belief in the innate ‘superiority’ to people of other races. White nationalism is about maintaining dominance – cultural, economic, political – over other races. It manifests itself via cultural anxiety, a longing for “older times” when the nation was built around white identity, and its tools are anti-immigration policies and limited government services to the poor. Most white nationalists would probably not see themselves as such; rather, they see themselves as wanting to protect the cultural values, traditions, and neighborhoods of their youth (or, more accurately, their parents or grandparents’ youth). When Donald Trump says that he wants to “make America great again,” the expression taps into a fictional nostalgia and feeds anxiety, particularly among older and less educated white voters. The boundaries of what level of racism is “acceptable” are shifting as this anxiety rises and populist politicians take power. When we talk about the “alt-right,” it’s a modern collection of white supremacists, white nationalists, internet trolls, monarchists and others. The SBC proposal decries every form of racism, including the alt-right, as “antithetical to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.” Could Mormonism issue such a statement? I don’t think so.

SBC and LDS vs the Alt-Right 

For my purposes here, I must first take umbrage with his characterization of a “false nostalgia,” which in concept is an oxymoron. By definition, “nostalgia” is inherently romanticized and thus “false” in a sense, but the reality is, if his white-society focus is a genuine argument, frankly, white folks had it pretty good “back in the day,” and the concerns he later promotes as the basis of the “falsehood” of this “nostalgia” for grandma and granddaddy’s time, really have nothing to do with how well “Whitey” was getting along in the dim past. Having said that, Donald Trump’s fundamental supporter doesn’t call or see themselves as “white nationalists” at all. That’s a moniker smug lefties out of academia and Democratic political propaganda schools have hung on them with or without any consideration of their own social or political concerns.

When Donald Trump says “Make America Great Again,” it has only incidentally to do with great crowds of Black Lives Matter rioters, or a president repeatedly apologizing for the nation and bowing before foreign kings, being “black.” It has almost nothing at all to do with Mexicans and South American drug lords, job stealing illegal aliens, and roving criminal thieves, robbers, rapists and murderers having a nice caramel skin tone. It really has to do with having no need to openly invite them into the country, put out a welcome mat, protect them from deportation or legal detainment, or graciously hand out jobs, driver’s licenses and welfare to them, making ME pay for it, and having an administration and ruling political party tell ME and the rest of us “guys” for 8 years it’s the new normal, it’s patriotic, it’s not important to be unique and distinct as an American, what’s important now is to make America no better than anywhere else. And yes, it is possible for a Trump supporter (white nationalist as Evans so transparently labels them by inference at least) to be concerned about national or ethnic heritage, to “see themselves as wanting to protect the cultural values, traditions, and neighborhoods of their youth (or, more accurately, their parents or grandparents’ youth)” and yet have no particular interest in oppressing the dark-skinned masses of the world. Indeed, the “Left”makes a groin-wrenching effort to promote, propagandize, perpetuate, protect, rescue and glorify all manner of ethnic, cultural, social and “racial” heritages–with the single exception of what it labels “white” culture.

I’ll get back to that.

The most ignorant, perhaps deliberately so, statement in Evans’ article follows:

The SBC proposal decries every form of racism, including the alt-right, as “antithetical to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.” Could Mormonism issue such a statement? I don’t think so.

I say it is a statement, and indeed it is, though posed as a question. However, this writer’s polemic device is either entirely disingenuous, if not willful misrepresentation, or as I suppose, sheer investigative, journalistic laziness or hypocrisy. The “Church,” or “Mormonism” made exactly this statement some 6 years ago, and has expanded and reinforced it many times since. Furthermore, I have no reason to trust that the so-called “alt-right” was specifically designated in this alleged proposed declaration being alluded to by the author regarding the Southern Baptist Convention, and in any case it’s merely a “proposal,” at this point. It’s a thin stretch the writer clutches at to connect his comparison of SBC KKK-based wholesale white supremacy with the Trump movement. The device being employed here to likewise incriminate “Mormonism” (because Evans obviously thinks “Mormonism” is inherently part of the “alt-right” and “MAGA” is inherently “alt-right” as well,) is clearly to compare the openly racist, SBC, which was founded specifically in support of racism and slavery, to the LDS Church today, and conclude that the barbarians who raped, brutalized, butchered, lynched, burnt out and dehumanized the “Negro” and “Mormon” alike all through the 19th and 20th Centuries, who only renounced the doctrine that the “Negro” had no soul and therefore no shot at salvation in 1995, is more “progressive” than “Mormonism.”

Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.24

That’s a little tome titled, “Race and the Priesthood,” released in December of 2012 or so, which as you see is a verbatim denial of what Richard Evans claims is a statement the LDS Church could never make. If he “thinks not,” it’s because he “looked it up not.” Google is a marvelous tool.

Later in his piece Evans makes this claim:

The LDS history of racism is a matter of public record. W. Paul Reeve’s book is a good starting point. And while there are schismatic entities within Mormonism, there are none (to my knowledge) based on the issue of slavery. For most of LDS history, this church has been a white church, with black members deprived of full fellowship and rights to ordinances. There is no Southern LDS Convention, but none was ever necessary within Mormonism — insular and homogeneous demographics of culture and race made this church a de facto white church from the beginning.

A couple of points to be taken with this: W. Paul Reeve may have written a fine book, with some interesting insights into the Mountain Meadows Massacre amongst other things, but the best primer on LDS doctrines of the Curse of Cane, Curse of Ham, and so-called “Mormon Racism,” is my blog. Right here. Seriously. Check out the index. the whole topic is  covered in a far more readable and understandable form than ever scribbled out by fashionable Mormon liberal intellectuals and historians could ever scribble it, and every bit as frank and well documented as any Sandra Tanner fan could want it to be.

(By the way, that title should read: Religion of the SAME Color, or Religion of the USUAL Color.)

Also, Evans throws out the phrase “deprived of full fellowship,” when in fact he knows well that women for example do not have the priesthood, children do not have the priesthood,

but indeed they are in “full fellowship.” So too, he knows, or should know, that while the SBC was running the KKK, the Latter-day Saints were openly named the arch enemies of the KKK by the KKK itself, and that Joseph Smith was murdered in part for inviting “free Negroes” to move into their settlements in Missouri and live and worship freely like any other Mormon (including at that time being ordained to the priesthood) and mounting a presidential candidacy that proposed to buy up all the slaves in the US, and send them to a free state of their own back in Africa. (Which James Monroe tried eventually much later on.) But read my several rants on that at the above link.

In any case, that the LDS church is a “white” church is semantically incorrect. It is a church founded by and dominated by people with Caucasian complexions. It inherited a lot of Neanderthal Christian traditions about “race” from British Isles-originated and European-originated sects that joined and converted. Brigham Young was the chief purveyor of most of these from his Quaker background. But there has never at any point been any liturgical, canonical, central mission statement about “white” supremacy, or a “white” destiny for “white” people to rule the world. You might argue that, like all “white” churches until very recently, a lot of that was assumed as a subtext. But to say Mormonism is a “white” religion amounts to a deliberate vilification for rhetorical advantage and the purposes of cheap and easy denigration of the faith.

But Evans misses the greater point. The Southern Baptist Convention could never be more “progressive” than the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, because, as an “orthodox,” or “traditional” Christian sect, it not only believes America is a “Christian Nation,” which “Christians” are destined to rule, chosen in fact, by God to do so, it still believes “Negroes” all over the “Dark Continent” are going to burn in hell because they never ran into a dude with a Bible and a pond deep enough to get dunked in. Those people, under Roman, Eastern, Calvinist, Presbyterian, Anglican, Arminian, Wesleyan, indeed all conventional “Christian” dogma, are not born universal brothers and sisters of God. They are literally children of the devil by birth and righteously condemned to hell by a just God who is not their father.

Steven Evans is going to hell. Especially if he’s actually an active LDS member. Every brown and black and beige poor, oppressed, Pakistani, Indian, African, Mexican, South American, and so forth, who manages to run into a guy with a Bible, and then finally confess Jesus as Lord, (the one the SBC describes as genuine) and then gets baptized, is “saved.” (Well, maybe those Roman Catholics in Mexico, Spain, Portugal and places like South America don’t count. It’s debatable.) But all those Muslims, Hindus, Bhuddists, Godless Commies, Atheists, Agnostics, the whole lot.  Mormons. Anyone anywhere who doesn’t do that, they’re all burning in hell.

The “Christian Nation” movement is founded upon the notion that God demands this country be governed by Christians, for Christians, else it is doomed. Non-Christians are not capable of governing it according to God’s will.

Many “Mormons” would like to make the same sales pitch of course, but it’s not doctrinally possible. Because we aren’t “Christians.” They own the franchise, and it has nothing to do with believing anything Jesus Christ taught or accepting Him as Saviour, when it comes down to that. But that’s another topic I’ve written my brains dead with and you can start reading here, if you have the willpower, this character’s more long-winded than even I am:

The Church proclaims that redemption through Jesus Christ is available to the entire human family on the conditions God has prescribed. It affirms that God is “no respecter of persons”25 and emphatically declares that anyone who is righteous—regardless of race—is favored of Him. The teachings of the Church in relation to God’s children are epitomized by a verse in the second book of Nephi: “[The Lord] denieth none that cometh unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; … all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile.”26

And now we finally come to my direct comments made to Mr, “brother?” Evans on his blog:

Some excellent observations, except you’ve fallen for the self-hating moniker “white,” developed by the truly ignorant elements of the “black” SJW community, as if that really were a race, or nationality, or any sort of homogeneous ethnic, religious, or social identity. It’s really a code word for “All of Western Civilization.” Or perhaps you haven’t “fallen” for it, and actually embrace the distortion of the concept as they do.

You claim “white nationalism” is, bla bla bla, all about oppressing other “races.” This is a fundamentally false proposition. Yes, in some variations, in some truly ignorant incarnations, this far from universal label may be all of that, or at least has been all of that in the case of the British Empire, Imperial Japan, et al. (Though I imagine Imperial Japan would be an example of “yellow nationalism?”) At this late date, “white nationalism,” as implied, is about a nation, not a race, and not so much really about “whiteness,” as it is about not being overrun by Mexicans, South Americans, and sneaky, murderous, Jihadi soft-invaders. It’s in reality only coincidental that skin color or “race” enters into the question at all. Mexico is not a “race.” Not wanting Mexicans to move in and take over your culture and customs is not therefore, in any possible way, “racist,” under the real definition of the word. (Though the word has become meaningless, and could be as easily replaced with “white,” or just “mean.”)

Unfortunately, yes, all of western civilization was founded and flourished, from the ox cart to iPhone, by people from the British Isles, Scandinavia, and Europe–with some obvious input from the middle east and Asia. It doesn’t matter ethnically if this “foreign” input was stolen, appropriated, miscegenated, knocked-off, copied or voluntarily added to the mix. And yes, some of this technological advancement came through contributions of “Negro” descendants of slaves and other non-“white” co-riders along the trail to modern

America, but America, specifically in a “Mormon” context, and the American religious, or “nationalistic” sense, still centers around a basically “white” complected group of people, still quite keen on preserving the great enlightenment of “Western Civilization,” as we have known it for the last several hundred years at least, probably at least from the Reformation, and definitely since the Founding Fathers codified a number of eternally correct principles into the Constitution, and sidestepped generations, centuries, two millennia of “orthodox Christian” oppression and repression, not just of the “heathen nations,” or “black and brown-skinned” cultures, but itself, its own, and anyone who deviated from their brokered interpretation of “true Christianity,” including Joseph Smith Jr.

Though most LDS folks like Glenn Beck and his fans, ignorantly imagine that today’s modern American enlightenment must surely have arisen out of conventional “Christianity” as it was presented in the day, that is only marginally true. Rather, Constitutional notions of “innocent until proven guilty,” for but one single illustration, and the very idea of a civil government not directly managed and overseen by a state church is utterly foreign to “traditional” Christian theology and politics. The most “Christian” of political or civic principles ever incorporated into United States policy and legislation would be Slavery, and “Manifest Destiny,” the attempted genocide of the Native American population.

Skin color for the record, is not a racial designator. And black and brown-skinned “races” have perpetually discriminated against blacker or browner or less brown-skinned “races,” worldwide, and within the context of their own societies, black and brown cultures and races have maintained caste systems or effective caste systems based upon skin tone. This still remains a modern consideration in nation-states, “races” if you will, like Pakistan and India. Black Muslims kidnapped black tribal animists, sold them to the Portuguese, and kicked off the trans-Atlantic slave trade in the first place hundreds of years ago, and practice it today. Brown skinned Arab Muslims wiped out black-skinned Muslims and Christians in Darfur some decade or so back, because they believed “Negroid” Muslims were not as pure Muslim as they were, and Christians of any sort were infidels who deserved nothing short of butchery.

I’m afraid like many of us, “brother” Evans, you’re too eager to throw current events into this big historical pot of poo as if they’re just another handfull of recognized chunks in an ongoing and

Sides clash at a dual rally for and against President Donald Trump at Martin Luther King Jr. Civic Center Park in Berkeley, Calif., on Saturday, March 4, 2017. The initial event was a March 4 Trump rally, but anti-Trump protesters were on hand to make their feelings known as well. (Dan Honda/Bay Area News Group)

familiar stew. The Trump effect may or may not have anything to do essentially with this pat, knee-jerk, historically convenient straw-man entity known as “white nationalism.” Certainly there is a fringe element of those who would have no problem couching their interests in the Trump agenda in those terms, but it’s just intellectually, if not spiritually lazy to choose to process any large movement, political, religious, or cultural, in tones that ultimately just tend to fall back on clichés and old-school polemics and apologetics to make the so-called “liberal” point.

I find those eager to weave “white nationalism” and “white supremacy” and “alt-right” and “KKK” and “Fascism” and “NAZIs” into the Trump story more often than not know little about Trump and even less about the “Right.” They look at the whole phenomenon like a set of bugs under a microscope. It’s something intangibly strange to the way they think and has to be translated through a matrix of dogmatic formulas till it falls into some pat, rote narrative category they can comprehend.

To understand Trump and company, you have to look first at the New Left. The fact is, this “liberal” self-hating white movement is essentially an hysterical over-correction of the Great Enlightenment that led our Founding Fathers to start this American experiment in the first place. As such, though it seeks to condemn western culture, it’s really just an extension of “All of Western Culture.” Unfortunately it’s a funneling, a generational concentration of every desperately loonie-left hyperbole and crackpot, naive social theory, which has finally decided to destroy itself and turn the whole operation over to even less competent, less self-sustainable, stupid young “brown” and “black” people out of crippling, historical guilt.

The simplest way to explain Donald Trump, and any of his supporters, is that he’s a “guy.” In the same way we can understand many LDS political perspectives by realizing that Glenn Beck is NOT a “guy,” but rather a purist, alcoholic snowflake who spends a year on a massive media empire, declaring that Ted Cruz is the strait and narrow gate that leads to national salvation, and that if you vote for Trump you lose your soul, that the lesser of two evils is still voting for evil, and yet, now marvels at the polarization in our current political discourse, wonders why his yet another “pivot point” and “born again” epiphany still finds so many on both the left and right unwilling to engage in a dialogue with his ministry, we can easily figure out what drives Donald Trump and his supporters, by walking into any pub, tavern, small-town bar and ordering a beer. A beer and some chips and a burger maybe. The object is a pleasant evening. All the

“guys” in the room are watching the game, playing pool, maybe having a tune together, maybe singing, maybe even arguing politics on both sides or more of the daily questions. That is, until the self-righteous reformed hookers on the Right, or the Social Justice Warriors on the Left, decide they can’t take it any more, and being by definition, zealots, compulsively impose themselves upon a perfectly harmonious scene of comfortable fraternization of the great unwashed, including most of the pretty-well washed alike.

One “guy” in the room might well be “alt-right” aligned. Even a few bona fide Neo-NAZIs might be in there. You don’t know. You don’t care. It’s irrelevant to the comity of the ongoing social fellowship you are enjoying. Some “guys” in there may at least know somebody who’s Far Right, or White Supremist. Grab some cheap “guilt by association” claim if it makes you feel better about yourself getting your arse kicked in the election. But the KKK and that ilk simply have their own thing, their own places they hang out to do it, which is not generally with the “guys” in a “guy” hangout. Their thing tends to repel regular “guys” and thus regular “guys” gravitate to “guy” bars, not Fascist clubhouses.

Likewise, the millennial snowflake warriors and BLM fanaticists, self-hating “whites” and neo-liberals, the “Antifa” who are instead “Fa,” are in today’s world far more oppressive, outgoingly violent and disruptive, than genuine white racists were in some of the worse days of the Civil Rights wars. It’s not

George Wallace standing in the school doorway screaming against integrating the school systems today. That would be fake “black” leaders like Shaun King, and BLM black-separatists blocking campuses with their “day of solidarity,” driving all “white” students off campus.

So, Glenn Beck, well he’s got no chance with the “guys.” Too snooty. Too purist. He’s a guy who HAS a “guy.” He’s not the “guy.” Glenn’s too obsessed with preaching to “guys” about drinking beer and smoking to be listened to on anything else. There’s nothing more self-righteous than a reformed drunk, or born-again prostitute, or nut-job now addicted to therapy. Everybody needs therapy. Everyone needs to reform. Look at me–see how much it’s done for me? Wouldn’t you like to have that in your life?

Well, no. Because we’re not drunks, or whores, or nut-cases. We’re just fine. If I have to choose, it’s not going to be you unless there’s something far more dangerous and severe out there.

So, now, as I’ve pointed out, there is something even worse out there. Given the choice, I, as a “guy,” am not going to sidle up with a movement that tells me just for waking up in the morning, I’m a piece of human filth who’s raped and pillaged the entire world, a member of a satanic “white” race that has stolen everything it has from the “brown and black” races, that has no inherent value or “culture” to offer the world, that I am the only “race” on the planet that can be bigoted or “racist,” that I owe anyone with darker skin a living and reparations, that gangs of black thugs are free to beat and rape and steal and murder as compensation, or “reparation payments” for outrages none of my friends or family perpetrated on people who weren’t for the most part any of their family either, some hundreds of years ago. And yes, this is what the “Left,” the SJW’s and BLM-types are teaching in today’s universities and other classrooms at all levels.

What happens when the SJW come spit in my face while I’m hanging with the “guys,”trying to finish my beer and burger? (And this is the norm, not an exception–it is not the so-called “alt-right” who’s instigating these clashes and violence. It is quite often false-flag trojans or overt counter-demonstrators or simply open instigators who come against “freedom of speech” events or truly mainstream conservative speakers and programs.) Well, I am now forced to pick sides, and as a “guy,” I’m not very concerned with the “alt-right” in the room, because they’re not making trouble and they’re not a threat to me. They’re just quietly drinking beer and being unobnoxiously backwards. The BLM/SJW thugs are the ones in my face. The punks George Soros and Bernie Sanders and the DNC pay to come put a bad face on me and mine are. So, yeah, might be a few real Right Wingers in the bar fight that results. But I’ll choose to deal with those later. Those have been castigated and relegated to the fringes of society for at least a couple of generations now. I have a more immediate and personal problem to deal with.

Even the Holy Beckites will tend to join ranks with the Trumpsters, and put up with their New York Gumba/Wiseguy “guyness,” if that’s the choice between Bernie, Hillary, and their attendant New Left taskmasters. But Trump is not a function or outgrowth of the Tea Part Movement. That’s just silly. The movement’s uncontested central leader, Glenn Beck, spent half a million of his own dollars and a full year preaching that Donald Trump was the end of freedom–a despot and tyrant waiting to happen. Likewise, central Republican insiders openly sabotaged Trump with a fake “dossier” made up by some would-be ex British “spy.” It is not the old Left’s much-hated “neocons” backing Donald J Trump either. it’s just regular “guys.”

From a “guy’s” perspective, the New Left is out of control. This bunch they murmer amongst themselves, isn’t my old pals from the union bitching about better wages and working conditions. This isn’t my best black friend getting me involved with a Civil Rights march against actual racism and bigotry you can see and feel–it’s some entirely perceptual, micro-subtle concept of “oppression” and privilege that’s totally intangible and impressionistic. I’m not changing my life and nation on THAT whim, thinks Bubba!

And Donald Trump is the only one clearly telling me, Bubba sees, that he wants to clean this whole confusing new mess up. Or at least throttle it back, contain it to within normal social standards of discourse. It’s like Barack Obama just getting elected, and the way he skirted the whole law-and-order issue flicked a switch and gave a green-light for every screaming Leftist, especially the black variety, with all those particularly bigoted demands they would make of me, to flood the streets with violence and thuggery, and call it “demonstration,” or “resistance.”

There’s not any deep ideology in the Trump experience. It’s all down to self-preservation. Bernie Sanders learned that even a self-avowed Socialist and far-left “liberal” wasn’t good enough for BLM. Ask Don Lemon how much being black and a normal “liberal” counted in his favor with BLM. I’m all for healthcare reform and some social services and whatnot.

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, is confronted on the Westlake Park stage by Mara Jacqueline Willaford CQ over “Black Lives Matter” issues. She and another activist took over the rally at this point leading to the Senator leaving the stage, making his way through the crowd which thanked him for coming, and getting in a car and being driven away.
Saturday August 8 2015,

Equal rights fine. Race, don’t care. Live and let live. God bless America. I’m just not down with having some whining weasel out of a very privilaged, sanctified, politically and legally enforced abstract ramblings of academia forcing me to eat excrement every day and confessing I’m a white scumbag by birth and nature, expecting me to be obligingly handing over what little I have of money, power, and influence, on a leftist whim, as if that would actually fix the problems of either the nation or the world. And yes, that is what the New Left is proposing.


There’s a racial angle to the Trump Movement, but it’s not one injected by the so-called “alt-right.” It’s a reactionary development arising out of the interjection of mostly bogus BLM-Nation of Islam ideology-base black-separatist/reparationist attacks on the “white” culture. Meaning “All of Western Society.”

And the full truth of the matter, is they have no viable alternative to offer, apart from mythical, irrelevant examples of ancient Egypt, and maybe Liberia. I’m not interested in re-making America into either. Neither is any other “guy.” Whatever color he or she is.

Posted in Donald Trump and LDS "White Nationalism" | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Black LDS Lives Matter Part 3: Black Jesus

The first noted objection to using the word “Negro” in connection with the “Negro,” came from Malcolm X, formerly Malcolm Little, eventually known by his enlightened moniker, El Hajj Malik Elportrait Shabazz, who always prefaced the use of the label with “so-called,” as in, “so-called Negro.” Brother Malcolm was a smart man, but self-taught, and admitted to have been deluded from his first introduction to the religion about the whole nature of Islam, the literal content of the Koran, and racial matters universally. This is because he learned everything he originally thought he knew about Islam from a Pakistani con-man and88750eb69c9f carpet peddler named Wallace Farad, or WD Fard, or Farad Muhammad and a couple of other aliases. Wallace vanished shortly after brainwashing one Elijah Muhammad (formerly Elijah Robert Poole, son of a sharecropper from Sanders Georgia) into believing the “black race” had been created by God, but the “white race” was the accidental offshoot of genetic experiments by a quasi-divine mad scientist named Yacub, who orbits the earth in a huge mothership, and the “white race” is literally the carnal manifestation of the devil as the result of Yacub’s failed experiments.

Fard had an East Indian appearance, and was a dapper dresser with perfect white teeth and dark eyes. He told followers he was born in the holy city of Mecca, and his light-skinned appearance, courtesy of his Russian Jewish mother, was “pre-ordained” so that he could more easily mix with white people. He claimed to have attended Oxford and the University of California, and then to have begun Wallace-Fardtraining as a diplomat for the kingdom of Hejaz (now a part of Saudi Arabia). He was drawn to the United States in order to liberate the African Americans from their “half-slave and half-free” condition. He arrived in Detroit’s Paradise Valley on July 4, 1930, in order to achieve this goal.

Fard worked the streets as silk peddler, but his real sales pitches were religious beliefs and dietary restrictions. He gained a4photos fard jp reputation as a healer when his customers, after having adhered to the pork-free diet that Fard espoused, began noticing improvements in their health. His main goal, he often stated, was to bring salvation to African-Americans, whom he often referred to as his “lost uncle in the wilderness of North America.”

Fard taught that approximately 6,000 years ago a black 41dnd57xBKL._SX320_BO1,204,203,200_scientist named Yakub conducted gene-manipulation experiments that resulted in the creation of the inferior white race. Their tainted, weakened blood was to blame for the white race’s immorality, which they frequently used to keep the black race in a perpetual state of half-freedom. His concepts attracted hundreds of followers to the Allah Temple of Islam (ATI), as he called his group.

Fard’s demise as the leader of the temple was brought upon him when, on Thanksgiving Day in 1932, one of his followers, Robert Harris, renamed Robert Karriem, committed a human sacrifice in order to bring himself closer to Allah. Karriem cited a quotation from a book entitled Secret Rituals of the Lost-Found Nation of Islam, authored by Wallace D. Fard Muhammad, which read, “The believer must be stabbed through the heart.” This quote, as well as another stating, “Every son of 75eb9598316e19249b97071c1e7cb7eaIslam must gain a victory from a devil. Four victories and the son will attain his reward,” convinced the Detroit Police Department — motivated in part by the anti-Muslim hysteria fueled by media coverage of the event — to seek out Fard in conjunction with the murder.

Karriem was found to be legally insane and was committed. 2ab6ccdf78a388a081cb7bdef162b402Fard, facing possible charges, confessed that his teachings were dangerous and that he would use his influence to disband the ATI. He agreed to leave Detroit forever in order to receive immunity, and boarded a train bound for Chicago on Dec. 7.

The ATI was disbanded as ordered, though in name only; as the 5454574_origNation of Islam, it continued to grow. Fard snuck back into Detroit in January 1933, but was identified by authorities, arrested in May and again ordered to leave the city.

He returned to Chicago, was arrested on charges of disturbing the peace through his preaching, and again returned to Detroit. After another brush with the law in April 1934, Fard left Detroit for good. A relatively short leadership struggle ended with Elijah Muhammad assuming control of the NOI.

The true origins of W. D. Fard remain mired in obscurity. In contrast to Fard’s 9eb53b10726bstory, Karl Evanzz, noted NOI authority and author of The Messenger: The Rise and Fall of Elijah Muhammad, has argued that Fard was born Wali Dodd Fard in New Zealand in 1893. His parents were Zared Fard (a New Zealander whose parents were from an area of East India that eventually became Pakistan) and Beatrice (of New Zealand’s minority British population).

Evanzz believes that Fard immigrated to the United States via Canada in 1913. He earned his living at various times as a restaurateur, gambler, bootlegger and traveling salesman. Before arriving in Detroit in 1930, under the alias of David Ford, he attained a high rank in the Moorish Science Temple, amsta.chicago vaguely Islam-like religion that disbanded that same year. Evanzz reported that Wallace D. Fard died in Chicago in 1971 at the age of 78.

To further muddy the waters, C.E. Lincoln, author of The Black Muslims in America, originally published in 1961, recounted a legend that described Fard as the black Jamaican son of a Syrian Moslem. Another story described Fard as Palestinian.

On the other hand, in a speech made on April 1, 2001, titled “The Greatness of Master Fard Muhammad,” the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan reiterated Fard’s origins in the Holy City of Mecca, and referred to him as the “Mahdi,” a man 11absolutely guided by God in the Islam faith. Farrakhan referred to the knowledge that Fard passed onto the NOI as “actual facts.” (The speech is at the Nation’s Web site at

It is important to realize that Farrakhan is the current leader of one of two main NOI factions that emerged after the Honorable Elijah Muhammad’s death on Feb. 24, 1975. Two days later, Elijah Muhammad’s son, Wallace Muhammad, was named leader of the NOI, and quickly distanced himself from certain aspects of his father’s teachings — most notably those denouncing whites as devils. Farrakhan, a high-ranking member of NOI at the time of Elijah Muhammad’s death, becameartim-20091201 disillusioned with the new direction and quit the NOI in 1978. After Wallace had renamed the group the World Community of Al-Islam (one of many name changes to follow), Farrakhan was able to reconstitute the NOI under his own auspices in 1979.

To make a long story short, Elijah Poole was born October 7, 1897 within a generation of the emancipation proclamation being signed, had no education at all, and Malcolm Little was a young thug who could have been a successful porter on the thbooming 30’s train lines except for greed and ambition that led him down the criminal path. In fairness, life for them as “black” men in the 1930’s was every bit as oppressive as Black Lives Matter and today’s generations of MoZoo Millennial whiners claim it is now. Little and Poole were both legitimately ignorant through no fault of their own, and the story being peddled to them by a Pakistani huckster struck home. WF, or “Wali” Farad however, it must be noted strongly, the founder of what became all variants of  “Black Liberation Theology” in America, wasn’t “black.” No, we wasn’t a “Negro” at all. And he wasn’t really dark skinned in any way. A nice tan maybe. But nowhere near “black.” Best guesses place him beingimages (6) born in either Mecca, Saudi Arabia, or more likely, an area of India that became Pakistan. He was either Semitic, or a nicely tanned Caucasian.

Think about that irony.

More importantly, Malcolm X, and Elijah Muhammad’s son, Wallace, after actually reading the Koran and meeting actual Muslims, retracted and repudiated their previous anti-“white” statements and sentiments, and began to preach a universal, peaceful surrender to the will of Allah–who made no distinction between races or “colors.”–bNAhUKVT4KHd5gB88Q6AEIbzAO#v=onepage&q=wallace%20muhammed&f=false

The current political revision of names associated with the “Negro” are not helpful. “Black” is A-Pakistani-woman-bleeds--012“Negro” in Spanish and Latin-based languages. It’s simply a political manipulation, a set of sophomoric semantics games with some agenda in mind to go about parsing the difference. “People of color” is now the pop-fad tag for “non-whites,” but frankly, the older term was “colored people,” it means the same thing. “Afro-American,” came and went, and now “African-American” holds that slot. For a while certain “black” academics tried to coin the term “Africoid” particularly in discussing the “Negroid” features of Egyptian paintings etc. But images (7).jpg “African Africans” exist in the United States and around the world, so “African-American” doesn’t work much in terms of being universal. The truth is, “Negro” has never been impolite, but now is considered to be old, stodgy, vaguely racist and stupid. But frankly, there is such a thing as a “Negro,” itpakistani_man_by_raeid-d3fixcp.jpg ain’t “black,” it’s an actual race, not a skin color. It’s a precise, scientific classification and it still holds up as the most accurate label, insofar as any racial assessment can be entirely “accurate.” Likewise, “Caucasian” still holds up pretty well over “white,” because there is no “white” race. Granted, modern researchHamza20Ali20Abbasi203-41-1442612855 concedes that the “white” tribes probably didn’t originate in the Caucasus mountains, but as a well-known tag it still serves a useful function. “Asian” has taken over the job of “Oriental” for some reason having to do with Mongol_amazing_facts_1some vague reference to British colonialism, but really, Indians, Sikhs, Pakistani’s, Mongols, Chinese, Japanese, aren’t all the same “race.” “Asian,” is a continent, not a race.

This little dissertation isn’t really about Black Lives Matter, the Nation of Islam, or any specific group of “Negro” liberation movements through the ages. It’s really about the notion of race itself, and where races come from, and what that means, and what it matters in the end–and this from an LDS point of view. Or, to a lesser extent, from a basic Judeo-Christian point of view. The Mormon faith however, has a few more difficulties than its religious predecessors in resolving longstanding doctrinal, scriptural racial and skin-color concepts. The latest statement on the matter from the Brethren, “Race and the Priesthood,” basically says it doesn’t matter at all at this point. Still, it’s curiously rewarding on both a spiritual and intellectual plane to ponder how modern science and anthropology and archaeology figure into LDS theology. It’s problematic how past dark-skinned and “Negro” LDS doctrines conflict with longstanding Christian, Jewish, Islamic and general Western world views, even if we do agree to “forget all that stuff about the Negro.” Forgetting all that stuff about the “Negro” that we now confess was never true is one thing, but re-writing the entire history of the “Negro” just so the “black community” can feel better about the whole mess is another thing entirely–and some are determined to do it.

From the early days of American “Negro” slavery, the victims of this dehumanizing download (11)institution began a close religious identification with the Old Testament plight of the ancient Israelites, who became  enslaved by the Egyptian Pharaohs. This, contrary to what you will now be told, was a religion introduced to them by the “white” man, not some ancient cultural heritage reaching back into the dawn of ancient Israel. Fairness has nothing to do with it. That’s just the way it went down. So, what has to be admitted first thing, in order to follow the degeneration of this originally purely metaphysical identification with the Hebrew slaves of ancient Egypt in the beginning, into cultic fables and the invention of a revisionist history about the very lineage and nature of the primarily western African “Negro” slaves who endeddownload (10) up in the US, is that they came across the pond not as civilized, practicing Jews, Muslims, or Christians. Sorry. No, they were never a single, unified clan of practicing Jews, Muslims, or Christians in West Africa before they got rounded up and sold. They were a disparate, random collection of “savages.”

American “Negro” slaves came across the Atlantic already in their second stint at bondage–first as the pagan, animistic prisoners of largely Muslim, “civilized” fellow “Negroes” who rounded up their grub-eating, varmint scavenging, subsistence-level, stone-aged neighbor village citizenry by the thousands, from all over the continent, and sold them on to the Portuguese and Spanish et cetera. No, the ADasdAunfortunate reality of actual, well-recorded history concludes that American “Negro” slaves were not Pharaohs, Torah-Canting High Priests, or disciples of our Lord Jesus Christ keeping the True Faith in Godly harmony, minding their own business in a closed community in West Africa. Neither “white” men nor “Hamites” or Arab or “Negro” Muslims came out of nowhere and dragged them away from their faithful worship and brainwashed them into forgetting who they really were. (Yes, that’s the gist of the actual fable now being spun.) They were not the kings and queens of Africa. They were not the movers and shakers of a continent. They were not the best and brightest. If they were “God’s Chosen,” you’d have to wonder, “chosen for what?” and ask yourself what “god” chose them. That’s simply fact. They were savages even by images (13)“civilized,” technologically, and intellectually advanced Muslim, Christian, and Jewish standards of the region. That is specifically why they were enslaved.

More to the point, even assuming you could go back to Kunta Kinte’s village now, some hundred, two-hundred and more years later, you would still find them chasing down lizards for lunch and digging download (8)grubs and berries, hopping around with penis cones and grass skirts. His allegedly more “advanced” “Negro” neighbors with their AK-47’s and Western knowledge, would be only slightly better off, raping, pillaging, shooting up, torturing and maiming each other in traditional, tribal fashion. Whatever ills befell Kunta Kinte as a slave and captor of American, “Western” society, his offspring and descendants faired farimages (12).jpg better in America, under, through, and after slavery, than did his kinfolk back in Africa. In fact, as a modern African American, I hope you feel free to move back to Liberia any time you want, which began as a repatriation effort of president James Monroe and political associates generations ago, who felt it would be a good idea to offer to return former slaves to image002their “homeland.” Oddly enough, most of the the noted “educated” ex-slaves and early Civil Rights pioneers wouldn’t go. They said America owed them everything guaranteed in the Constitution like any other American. Those who went back “home” to Africa almost immediately became a permanent upper-images (14)class, ruling over the “natives” who as I say, were still chasing locusts for a snack and worshipping trees and wood-sprites. Monrovia, and Freetown Sierra Lione, another freed-slave re-colonization attempt, suffered through generations of civil wars and wars of “liberation,” and corrupt dictatorships–and still do.

There’s no particular shame in wanting to believe that you’re the progeny of Kunta Kinte, the brave Mandinka warrior, who as a free man from some proud, strong, and mighty civilization was unrighteously bound and opressed by the great White Villains. But even assuming that’s true–at least in your own mind–and you manage to prove that your venerated ancestor really was the Mighty Nimrod of some isolated, backward, micro-culture like Kunta Kinte’s back-bush little village, you are still left to admit that Kunta Kinte was by world-standards, outside of that little circle of grass huts, in all fairness, a images (21)failed Mandinka warrior who got his ass whupped and became enslaved by other “black” tribes who were bigger, smarter, stronger and braver.

What’s happened in large factions of the “black community” in the US is a sort of shame and self-denial that has so overwhelmed all sense of logic that the “Negro” has first emotionally, and then schizophrenically, changed historical, genetic, and cultural places with “God’s Chosen” as a form of mental defense mechanism, and automatic excuse for failure to achieve. In this re-invention of African-American history, the “Negro’s” suffering and status at the bottom of the social heap is a “sign” of “chosenness,” not a sign of cultural backwardness, and certainly not an indication of personal sloth or ignorance. It’s a sneaky, mentally-creeping self-loathing thatimages (19).jpg emerged after a few generations from its dark place of hiding in the “black community’s” psyche, a rebuttal from the socially oppressed and intellectually crippled “Negro,” who, seeking  a defendable premise for a race-wide self-image improvement, went about appropriating an extreme pride in being the oppressed, and embracing membership in a race, a culture, they never were–a people they’d rather be. It was a “feel good,” highly romanticized history, a genesis you’d be happy to be yours–even if it clearly wasn’t.

All that you and I know to be good, smart, wise, powerful, organized, orderly, influential, artful, beautiful–everything that makes the Western World what it is today, a modern “civilized” society, came primarily through the drive, direction, leadership and inspiration of “white people.” Even if you argue that they travelled the whole world and stole every good thing from every culture they encountered, it was in the end, a bunch images (20)of plain dumb white guys who put it all together and called it “Western Culture.” If you want to reject “whiteness,” you have to in effect reject all of modern civilization. Then you have to figure out what you’re going to replace it with–and even given what is usually no more than “micro-irritation” at “micro-aggressions,” you have to ask yourself  if there’s really anything better out there.

The Church, from Abraham to Jesus Christ came to us today, for the purposes of this exercise, through “white people.” You can go back past all the Romanization, and the Hellenization to try to prove the Biblical Hebrews were really well tanned, but they were clearly Semitic, Western, non-“Negroes.”They were not “black” in the American sense of the word, meaning “Negro.” And even if they were pitch-black, that’s simply a skin tone, and in “scientific” terms, or even Brigham-Young’s early LDS “Curse of Cain” theology, they still wouldn’t be “Negroes.”And more to the point: The LDS restoration and American Protestantism came through some seriouslydownload (16) “white”people. I can’t help you argue one way or another if that’s good, bad, a mix, or all down to “God’s will” and Manifest Destiny. It just happened that way. It’s a fact. It’s reality. If you believe there is a God who guides His Church–well, He seems to have guided it from some very “white” nations, through some very “white”clergies, and that arrangement has pretty much conquered the world. So you’re stuck with it.

There is no “white privilege.” There is only “privilege.” And this emanates from the completely racially neutral fact of who got there first. “White people” got there first, so sure, from your “Afro-centric” social justice perspective, you’re probably biased and ego-centric enough to think this has something uniquely to do with “whiteness.” In reality however, the remarkably and increasingly diverse  world-dominating force of “Western Civilization” encountered the “Negro” some couple of hundred years ago first in Africa, images (23)as a technologically helpless, powerless, ignorant regional type of savage. And yes, Western Society exploited them as a resource just like anyone or anything else it encountered across the globe. That’s just the way it happened, that’s how the modern, Western “Negro” came to be incorporated into the present, ongoing wave of Western culture and “Enlightenment.” Now, you can either accept that, or, as many have chosen to do, invest generations of mindless, wasteful, counter-productive mental and physical energy trying to prove to yourself that this history isn’t fair, it’s all backwards, and the way to fix it is to inflate the “Negro” input into our modern world until it seems “balanced”–and then some. You can go so far as to convince yourself it was the “Negro” who founded all of that, and “white people” stole it. Or, you can acknowledge the trueimages (24).jpg time of your bloodline’s entry point into the modern social system, stop whining about who got there first, who built it, and conquer it, own it, make it your own, and prosper.

African American “Reparation” activists run around claiming the entire American nation was built on the backs of their slave ancestors. The truth is, even at the height of American slavery less than 1.4% of the US population owned slaves. Some 3000 free “Negroes” owned roughly  20,000 slaves, or 28% of all free “Negroes” owned slaves, compared to only 1.4% of “whites,” and of course, all of these only in the southern states where it was legal.

“Reparation” activists will tell you that Washington DC was built on slave labor. download (17)Washington DC was however, actually built by skilled Irish, British, European and other “white” craftsmen and Scottish masons. Slave labor was used mainly to supplement unskilled construction cleanup and menial labor largely done by “whites,” like cutting stones. Sure you can say slave labor “helped” construct Washington DC, but that’s a few buildings in one city out of thousands in the US. The notion that slave labor built the entire infrastructure of our modern United States is just silly. At best, slave labor played a hit-and-miss role mostly at menial and semi-skilled labor, as a supplement to the vastly larger bulk of the non-slave workforce. Slave labor, even in the south, played only a part of building the nation. The fantasy that slave labor was the make-or-break engine of the American founding is patronizing and insulting. Nobody “owes” the American nation’s success to slave labor, not even in the construction of its capitol city.

Hidden Facts about Slavery in America

Michelle Obama Claims the White House Was ‘Built by Slaves’… But There’s One HUGE Problem

images (16)

All my Scots buddies think they’re descended from this or that great Laird of the Highlands. My Norwegian cousins all think they’re descended from Leif Erickson. In Norwegian circles, nobody’s great-great-great-great-great-great Viking grandfather ever just un-dramatically spent his life shoveling dung in some obscure fjord for a subsistence living, or lived in a simple, longhouse shed with the pigs to stay warm allimages winter. They all set out from huge farmsteads with massive great halls, in finely crafted great longships, to merrily go raiding England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales, inbetween discovering America and slaying dragons. In any case, likewise, in the “black community,” especially since actual geneology is so unknown in most cases, speculation was allowed to run rampant. And even the most “respectable” attempts to dig out the “true” story of the American slave, have been less than candid. For  one, that whole Roots book and the two TV series that spun off of it are entirely fake, and Alex Haley’s been debunked and discredited as a plagiarist.

“Virtually every genealogical claim in Haley’s story was false,” Nobile has written. None of Haley’s early writing contains any download (12)reference to his mythic ancestor, “the African” named Kunta Kinte. Indeed, Haley’s later notes give his family name
as “Kante,” not “Kinte.”

And a long-suppressed tape of the famous session in which Haley “found” Kunta Kinte through the recitation of an African “griot” proves that, as BBC producer James Kent noted, “the villagers [were] threatened by members of Haley’s party. These turn out to be senior government officials desperate to ensure that things go smoothly.”

Haley, added Kent, “specifically asks for a story that will fit
his predetermined American narrative.”

Historical experts who checked Haley’s genealogical research discovered that, as one put it, “Haley got everything wrong in his pre-Civil War lineage and none of his plantation ancestors existed; 182 pages have no basis in fact.”alex-haley-fraud-roots-22.1.2013

Given this damning evidence, you’d think Haley’s halo would long ago have vanished. But – given this week’s TV tribute – he remains a literary icon. Publicly, at least.

The judge who presided over Haley’s plagiarism case admitted that “I did not want to destroy him” and so allowed him to settle quietly – even though, he acknowledged, Haley had repeatedly perjured himself in court.

The Pulitzer Prize board has refused to reconsider Haley’s prize, awarded in 1977 – in what former Columbia President William McGill, then a board member, has acknowledged was an c5231d70509b6efdb4b92685674e11bcexample of “inverse racism” by a bunch of white liberals
“embarrassed by our makeup.”

Yet the uniqueness of “Roots” is that it was presented as factual history, albeit with fictional embellishments. Haley himself stressed that the details came from his family’s oral history and had been corroborated by outside documents.

But Professor Henry Louis Gates of Harvard, a Haley friend, concedes that it’s time to “speak candidly,” adding that “most of us feel it’s highly unlikely that Alex actually found the village from whence his ancestors came

What really happened in America with the “Negro” however, was that after being introduced to the Bible, fisksingChristianity in general, and hearing the stories of ancient Israel, the American slave caste became increasingly more invested in identifying with the captivity, and eventual Godly liberation of the House of Israel. Excluded for the most part from Christian worship with “whites,” this identification became a strong metaphorical theme in all black churches, hymns and literature. Eventually, this theme has evolved into a literal belief that the “Negro” and specifically the very “Negroes” captured in west Africa and taken in slavery to America–specifically the US–were in fact the actual ancient Israelites who were driven from prophets2Jerusalem, and the contention that God’s own word makes this clear. Or so proponents of this revisionist fable will tell you.

(It must be noted that contrary to African American propaganda, the US received a very small portion of the slave trade, the bulk of African slaves being destined for South America, and countries like Brazil.)

Now, the Nation of Islam, and its revived version under Louis Farrakhan has a different screen-shot-2015-03-13-at-3-22-56-pm.pngspin on this whole theme obviously, but like the Christian and Jewish versions of this modern “Negro Israelite” theory, the Old Testament, and sometimes the New Testament, are relied upon heavily to justify these claims of “Negro” choseness. (The Nation of Islam in fact doesn’t use much of the Koran at all.) It’s this seemingly “logical” or “reasonable” warping of familiar Bible verses that makes the whole bogus notion of a “Negro” based Jewish or Christian legacy palatable to some. It can be a potential pitfall for any “black” LDS member who feels compelled to affiliate with Black Lives Matter, or any number of affiliated “Social Justice” crusaders.

While not necessarily bound by formal, written, organized central documents and dogmas, invariably, BLM and most other Black Hebrew Cult“black” protest groups are riddled with persons and factions deeply committed to a number of “black” pop-liberation doctrines allegedly traced to the Bible or simply “science” intended to “prove” the spiritual, genetic, cultural, or moral superiority of the “black race.” The first error of course in that, is that there is no “black race,” because they really mean “Negro race,” but refuse to say so, or have twisted scriptures into “proving” that the “black Africans” who sold them into slavery weren’t really “Negroes,” but “Hamites.” Only “real Negroes” were captured and sold to the Americans, and it is these whom they claim to be the real, original Israelites. True hard core proponents of the movement not only embrace the word “Negro” and

make the same arguments I might make for using that designation in terms of identifying the race itself–but then turn around and deliberately ignore the cultural and genetic connection between themselves, and a whole bunch of other “Negroes,” for alleged Biblical reasons. They arbitrarily divide one “Negro” tribe from others, calling them “real Negroes,” while claiming others who look like “Negroes,” aren’t really “Negroes,” meaning that only “real Negroes” are descendants of ancient Israelites. Of course, how they justify their “Negro as the ancient Israelite” claims in the first place, get to be rather circumstantial in a hurry and often it comes down to randomly pointing at Egyptian hieroglyphs and labeling people depicted there however it best suits their theories. And most of the time, they point to pure-fresh-off-the-boat African “Negroes” and segregate themselves from these so-called “Hamites,” by pointing out their own smoother facial features and lighter skin tones. (Never mind the DNA at this point.) They try to overlook the fact that they’ve been in the country for 400 years inter-breeding by force or by choice with “white” folk, and maybe that’s why they look different than African Africans…


Nubian Afros-man&wombman

And this couple is supposed to “prove” African Americans are ancient Israelites because they have nappy hair and beards like the Egyptian cartouche to the left.

11 (1)

This is supposed to be ancient Israelite slaves in Egypt, and it’s supposed to prove they are “African American.” I’m not seeing it.

The above carteuche is supposedly labeled “ancient Israelites in Egyptian captivity.” adamfalls2The light skin of these so-called “Shemites”is dismissed by the Negro-as-ancient-Israelite theorist as a “variant.” Honestly. They don’t look very Negroid to me. Particularly the noses. They look Semitic. If this is the best evidence they’ve got, I don’t even see the “Shemites” looking very black at all, much less “Negroid.” And these other very black depictions the author calls “Hamites,” and dismisses them as worthless savages. The very white guy he calls, er, a “white guy.”images (5);wap2

In the most Christianized versions of the “Black Israelite” cult of course, they take this revisionist strategy up to Jesus of Nazareth, whom they accept as the Savior, the 12965696_210948272614934_1381375287_nMessiah, but not a “white” fake-Jew, like they claim inhabit Israel today. Jesus they assert was “black,” and for the most part by this they mean a “Negro.” He is the Negro Messiah, who died to save the Negro–the true House of Israel. Oddly enough, most of the cranks linked above have also decided that dark-skinned Native Americans, Pacific Islanders, and a bunch of other dark-skinned races are also originally ancient Israelites. They come to this conclusion by reading Bible verses, and looking at pictures. One of the most transparently stupid claimsdownload made by some of these characters, is that American “Negroes”–descendants of slaves, never came from Africa. They were kidnapped by Africans after being driven from their homeland in Israel, and sold into slavery and then stripped of all memory of their true Hebrew culture and religion.

Again, so much for the DNA studies.

Under all of these theologies lies the claim that the “white race” or “races,” were all barbarians who came down from the north and “took all our stuff.” “White” tribes these hyper-“Negro” theologians claim, are uniquely evil by nature and persecute God’s chosen not because the Negro is inferior maxresdefault (1)culturally, militarily, intellectually, or spiritually, but by guile, cunning, and one sort of dirty trick or another, by sheer force of stupid numbers, or sometimes as a punishment from God for the Negro Israelites being weak and wicked. The specifics don’t even matter in terms of the desired effect: “black” separatism, a dependence upon the ministry preaching it, and the mindless hating of all “white” people. Eventually these world views all culminate in the destruction and subjugation of the “white race” by God’s chosen “Negroes.” This is not considered racism, because “racism” has been dumbed-down and re-defined to mean anything that a “white” person does that annoys a “black” person. This is a specifically “black” subset of the several “Social Warrior” mentalities, which as I say, range all over the Leftist social cause map. It is maintained that “black” people are incapable of being “racist,” because they have no power in the society so they can’t be an oppressor.

I’d summarize this overview of “black social justice” theories, by saying that at one level or another you will find yourself surrounded by and associated with all of these “black” belief systems at nearly any gathering of any brand of “Social imagesJustice” activism. Though not terribly up-front in discussions across the whole “black community,” these attitudes are very prevalent in those elements who have chosen to form BLM-type coalitions. (As I’ve said before, the term “Social Justice” is also used to label a whole Leftist gamut of LGBT/feminist/income equality movements that may also be incorporated into your attempts at “black activism” whether you like it or not.)

Where did this “black” Jesus, “Black Hebrew Israelite” gibberish come from? Clearly it originated in the Nation of Islam (which I remind you has nothing whatsoever to do with real Islam) and was then permutated by one or two spinoffs into its Christian and Jewish forms directly to the credit of one Hulon Mitchell Jr in the late 1970’s and early ’80’s.

Hulon Mitchell Jr, a son of a Holiness Pentecostal preacher and former NOI member. He later proclaimed himself to be God and had a cult following of nearly 20,000 members in 45 cities. Michell was a handsome, charismatic speaker, known for his flowing white robes and jeweled turbans. He controlled a asdfasdfmultimillion-dollar business empire that included schools, grocery stores and real estate. His message of black empowerment and black superiority resonated with his supporters. The ranks of his cult were not only made up of the poor and the uneducated, but many of his members were college educated, professionals and even in law enforcement. Membership was as diverse as fraternity boys, sheriff’s deputies, grandmothers, and ex-cons fresh out of prison. Mitchell claimed that he was the “Original Jew,” and taught that blacks were the “true Jews.” He taught his followers that African Americans were one of the missing 12 tribes of Israel, driven

The National Law Journal, February 10, 1992 -- "Florida Jurors Hear Tales of Sex, Religion, Death" November 25, 1986 press conference -- Yahweh ben Yahweh was the adopted name of Hulon Mitchell, Jr. (October 27, 1935 Ð May 7, 2007), founder and leader of the Nation of Yahweh, a black supremacist new religious movement founded in 1979. Born into a family affiliated with the Antioch Church of God in Christ in Enid, Oklahoma, his father, Reverend Dr. Hulon Mitchell Sr. was the minister and his mother, Dr. Pearl Mitchell was the pianist. In 1991, Mitchell was convicted of conspiring to murder white people as an initiation rite to his cult, as well as former members who disagreed with him, in one case by decapitation. He was released on parole in 2001 on the condition of not reconnecting with his old congregation. He died of prostate cancer in 2007. CONTACT Carla Hotvedt at SILVER IMAGE Photo Agency and Weddings 352.373-5771 or

The National Law Journal, February 10, 1992 — “Florida Jurors Hear Tales of Sex, Religion, Death” November 25, 1986 press conference — Yahweh ben Yahweh was the adopted name of Hulon Mitchell, Jr. (October 27, 1935 Ð May 7, 2007), founder and leader of the Nation of Yahweh, a black supremacist new religious movement founded in 1979. Born into a family affiliated with the Antioch Church of God in Christ in Enid, Oklahoma, his father, Reverend Dr. Hulon Mitchell Sr. was the minister and his mother, Dr. Pearl Mitchell was the pianist. In 1991, Mitchell was convicted of conspiring to murder white people as an initiation rite to his cult, as well as former members who disagreed with him, in one case by decapitation. He was released on parole in 2001 on the condition of not reconnecting with his old congregation. He died of prostate cancer in 2007.
CONTACT Carla Hotvedt at SILVER IMAGE Photo Agency and Weddings 352.373-5771 or

from their homeland. He taught his flock that God was black, as were the heroes of the Old Testament. He proclaimed himself as the black messiah. He named himself Yahweh ben Yahweh, Hebrew for “God, son of God.” He would lead the Black Hebrews back to the promised land of Jerusalem so they could establish their kingdom on earth. He soon focused his religion on a hatred of white people and urged his followers to murder “white devils” and bring him back body parts, a sliced-off ear, finger, or head, as proof of the kill.

So then, was Jesus “black?” No. But more importantly, why does Jesus have to be “black” in your world view? Why is this such a compelling need? Anglo-Europeans drew andimages (23) painted Him the way they thought people of great stature looked–like Europeans. OK, so obviously he wasn’t Anglo-European. He wasn’t a “white guy.” You win. Leave it at that–He was whatever He was, and it definitely wasn’t a “Negro.” That entire silly notion was invented in the disturbed imagination of a failed Nation of Islam convert who, looking for his own race-baiting franchise, fabricated his own shtick to gain converts to his own independent cult images (22)operation in 1979. Then he went around killing “white” people.

Jesus was a Semite. He was Semitic. Semites had a fairly wide range of facial features and skin tones. Some are pretty dark, but the ancient Israelites were not “Negroes,” they were Semites. One of the telling proofs against the whole asinine Black Jesus/Black Israelite fable is that when you dig up 2000-4000 year-old bones from crypts around the area, (and they’re all still there, all still full of dead ancient Israelites,) you don’t come up with any Negroes. You come up with Semites, like the ones reconstructed in the associated photos here.

Where did the Semites come from? Good question. Supposedly the offspring of Shem, son of Noah, who begat Arphaxad, who is also noted in some Jewish traditions to have become Melchizedek, King of  Salem. He’s not listed in the Bible as carrying a pedigree from Africa, however. Here’s the best discourse I have on that, including a map of where the Semitic language group has been spoken:

The original homeland of all ancient Semitic peoples, including Hebrews, was not northern Arabia, as is currently believed, but northwestern Mesopotamia. Around 6,0004,000 years B.C., an ecological catastrophe in the Black Sea area forced the IndoEuropean tribes to migrate outward in all directions. On 2000px-Semitic_1st_AD.svgtheir way to the south and the south-east, the Indo-Arians displaced and partially mingled with the Hurrians of Eastern Anatolia. In turn, arianized Hurrians first displaced the Eastern
Semites (Akkadians) from the upper courses of Tigris, and then, at the end of the 3rd millennium B.C., occupied the land of Western Semites (Amorites) in the upper courses of Euphrates. The referencing by the Bible of Harran as the original birthplace of Abraham is the indirect evidence of these ethnic changes. The last wave of Western Semites (Arameans) in 12-11 centuries B.C. was also caused by the movements of Hurrians and Indo-Europeans in northwestern Mesopotamia.

The Bible concretely designates the fatherland of the Jewish patriarchs, specifying the region surrounding the city of Haran which was situated approximately 30 km to the southwest of today’s Turkish city Sanliurfa (ancient Edessa), not far from the border with Syria. The biblical texts unambiguously showabe_emigration_map that the city of Ur in Sumer, from which Abraham came into Canaan (Palestine), was never his place of birth. Moreover, on the way to Canaan, the family of Abraham and his father Terah, stopped for a long time in the place of their birth, Haran.3 This is where Terah died and the clan leadership was transferred to his son – Abraham. Later, the Bible again recalls that the native land of the ancient Jewish forefathers was not Canaan, but Haran, in northwestern Mesopotamia

–Dr. Igor P. Lipovsky
Where did the Ancient Semites come from?

Just for reference, Adam was not a “Negro” either. The argument that would make him download (13)one comes from a mix of revisionist fantasy and secular science. It’s nothing to do with the Jewish, Christian, or even Islamic canon, and nothing to do with ancient traditions connected with any of these three religions, even though the proponents of the “Black Jesus,” “Black Abraham,” “Black Adam” cults would have you believe all three were founded by “Negroes,” (“True” Negroes that is,) and the scriptures and prophets of all three clearly support the notion. I’m not going to argue my way from Adam to 1979 when it’s just simpler to say that the whole theory was made up, pulled out of some religiousdownload (12) huckster’s backside in 1979 and its origins are clearly documented in above arguments, and easily found in a net search.

We must admit however, Biblically, and even in modern LDS canon, the whole race thing gets very murky. Was the Garden of Eden in northern Mesopotamia? Daviess County Missouri? I just don’t care, so I won’t argue that further. But either way, it was not, Biblically speaking, in Africa. Did races get supernaturally designated when the languages were scrambled at the Tower of Babel? Who knows?

And likewise, Biblically speaking, all the “Africans” and everyone else got killed off in the Great Flood–Negroes or not, so it’s just Noah and his immediate family we have to pinpoint. Which brings us back, Biblically speaking, and LDS Standard Works-speaking, to that one genetic line through Ham, son of Noah:

 21 Now this king of Egypt was a descendant from the loins of Ham, and was a partaker of the blood of the Canaanites by birth.

 22 From this descent sprang all the Egyptians, and thus the blood of thedownload (11) Canaanites was preserved in the land.

 23 The land of Egypt being first discovered by a woman, who was the daughter of Ham, and the daughter of Egyptus, which in the Chaldean signifies Egypt, which signifies that which is forbidden;

 24 When this woman discovered the land it was under water, who afterward settled her sons in it; and thus, from Ham, sprang that race which preserved the curse in the land.

 25 Now the first government of Egypt was established by Pharaoh, the eldest son of Egyptus, the daughter of Ham, and it was after the manner of the government of Ham, which was patriarchal.

 26 Pharaoh, being a righteous man, established his kingdom and judged his people wisely and justly all his days, seeking earnestly to imitate that order established by the fathers in the first generations, in the days of the first patriarchal reign, even in the reign of Adam, and also of Noah, his father, who blessed him with the blessings of the earth, and with the blessings of wisdom, but cursed him as pertaining to the Priesthood.

 27 Now, Pharaoh being of that lineage by which he could not have the right of Priesthood, notwithstanding the Pharaohs would fain claim it from Noah, through Ham, therefore my father was led away by their idolatry;

As Latter-day Saints then, I guess we agree canonically with the secular consensus that images (2)at one time, and in our case, originally, the Egyptian empire was founded by “Negroes.” Or at least, that has been the universal LDS belief to date–assuming it has not been quietly changed by a memo on’s news bulletin page. This line of Pharaohs came through the maternal line via Egyptus, a descendant of Cain, a “Negro.”

21 And it came to pass that the Lord showed unto Enoch all the inhabitants of the earth; and he beheld, and lo, Zion, in process of time, was taken up into heaven. And the Lord said unto Enoch: Behold mine abode forever.

 22 And Enoch also beheld the residue of the people which were the sons of Adam; and they were a mixture of all the seed of Adam save it was the seed of Cain, for the seed of Cain were black, and had not place among them.

 23 And after that Zion was taken up into heaven, Enoch beheld, and lo, all the nations of the earth were before him;

You could fairly say then, that 4000 years ago the “Negro” of Egypt was sitting in the cat-bird’s seat of civilization. But I’m not going to wade through all of that againdownload (7) either. It’s just a fact. There is nothing inherently marvelous about it one way or another. The question is: What have you, as a self-boasted, “chosen,” “Negro” race done since ancient Egypt? If you are indeed God’s chosen, descendant from this self-professed great race of world-conquering “Negroes,” OK. But really, it’s been more than 4000 years. Are you still blaming your woeful fall from world domination on GW Bush?

Therefore, if you’re going to argue that all of modern science says all mankind and all civilization began in Africa, and that’s what you’re going to go with to prove Adam and Eve were “Negroes,” and Abraham was a “Negro” and so forth, then don’t be disappointed when I don’t buy your quasi-Biblical arguments and pseudo-science when you’re well off the mark of all the empirical evidence, unanimously disproving your other wacky theories, like the abundance of DNA evidence that soundly mocks your “Negro” Hebrew Israelite nonsense. Because in some cases, the science is pretty clear. The fact is, the genealogy, the histories, the DNA, the records of priesthood ascension in the existing “Jewish” communities around the world are very conclusively indicative of a very non-“Negro” homeland, religion, culture, and family tree.

So let’s instead get to something thoroughly entwined in the “Black Israelite” theology that’s more recent, really stupid, and a myth we can actually verify scientifically. Are “white” European Jews “real” Jews, with bloodlines to their Abrahamic forefathers, or are they images (4)the descendants of the so-called “Kazar” converts in the 8th to 12th century or so? This is largely an anti-Zionist political argument, because the so-called Palestinians would lay claim to Israel by “right of return” and deny these “fake” Jews by the same blood-connection rules. It’s not strictly a religious question of faith. But I would remind the Latter-day Saint that as Mormons we’re pretty much “Zionists” and absolute boosters for the modern state of Israel. So, can we as Latter-day Saints even toy with the notion that half the population of Israel, the “Ashkenazi” or European Jews, could be “fakers” with no valid, blood-right to the Promised Land?

Basically, no. Short answer.

DNA studies trace “Jewish” bloodlines throughout all of these “fake” Jews, concluding that they all had at least a mother or more commonly a father, of original Semitic/Hebrew/Israelite heritage all along the family tree. These are not just “white” converts with no blood connections to father Abraham. They intermarried, yes. That doesn’t cut them out of the bloodline.

The theory that all or most Ashkenazi (“European”) Jews might be descended from Khazars (rather than Semitic groups in the Middle East) dates back to the racialism of late nineteenth century Europe, and was frequently cited to assert that most modern Jews aren’t descended from Israelites and/or to refute Israeli claims to territory also sought by Palestinians. It was first publicly proposed in lecture given by Ernest Renan on January 27, 1883, titled “Judaism as a Race and as Religion.” It was repeated in articles in The Dearborn Independent in 1923 and 1925, and
popularized by racial theorist Lothrop Stoddard in a 1926 article in the Forum titled “The Pedigree of Judah”, where he argued that Ashkenazi Jews were a mix of download (2)people, of which the Khazars were a primary element. Stoddard’s views were “based on nineteenth and twentieth-century concepts of race, in which small variations on facial features as well as presumed accompanying character traits were deemed to pass from generation to generation, subject only to the corrupting effects of marriage with members of other groups, the result of which would lower the superior stock without raising the inferior partners.” This theory was adopted by British Israelites, who saw it as a means of invalidating the claims of Jews (rather than themselves) to be the true descendants of the ancient Israelites, and was supported by early anti-Zionists.;id=14622

And the science:

Not only did the genetic researchers corroborate the oral history of an ancient Jewish priestly caste, but they also confirmed the genetic link between both Sephardic and Ashkenazi populations, indicating that before the two populations separated, those who shared the CMH also shared common Israelite ancestry.  Today, the CMH is considered not only the standard genetic signature of the priestly Cohanim, but also the yardstick by which all Jewish DNA is compared for determination of Israelite genetic ancestry.  Thus, if a haplogroup is not shared by both Sephardim and Ashkenazim at a similar frequency, then it is generally not considered to be of Israelite origin.

Part of the problem of “Jewishness” has to do with the tradition of passing the religion download (6)along via the maternal line, not the paternal. That’s a recent invention. In the case of the Ashkenazi Jews, it seems their particular diasporatic pattern of community and family centered around a male Israelite, usually Sephardic, (from around Spain) taking on a local European wife. So on the one hand, if you’re a neo-NAZI you can argue that this is not a valid claim to being a “real” Jew relative to any offspring of this union because of a “Gentile” mother. On the other hand, scientifically speaking, it’s a completely valid, genetically verifiable bloodline. According to the Torah, and the earlier Aaronic Priesthood tradition, priesthood authority is passed down the bloodline father-to-son. So in any case, the priesthood claim of authority would be more than valid amongst the Cohanim, the priesthood line of the Ashkenazi. And also please note that this particular study definitely disproves the bogus “Kazar” fake-Jewish convert lie.

Overall, we estimate that most (>80%) Ashkenazi mtDNAs were assimilated within Europe. Few derive from a Near Eastern source, and despite the recent revival of the ‘Khazar hypothesis’16, virtually none are likely to have ancestry in the Northdownload (9) Caucasus. Therefore, whereas on the male side there may have been a significant Near Eastern (and possibly east European/Caucasian) component in Ashkenazi ancestry, the maternal lineages mainly trace back to prehistoric Western Europe. These results emphasize the importance of recruitment of local women and conversion in the formation of Ashkenazi communities, and represent a significant step in the detailed reconstruction of Ashkenazi genealogical history.

Khazarian myth

The Khazarian theory–which historians and scientists now believe should more accurately be called a myth—was more recently recycled (to great applause by anti-Israeli activists and some pro-Palestinian groups) in no less convincing form by Israeli French historian Shlomo Sand in The Invention of the Jewish People, published in 2008—a book panned by both historians andgeneticists.

Elhaik reengaged the controversy late last year when the Oxford journal Genome Biology and Evolution published his study, “The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses.” The young Jewish researcher challenged the so-called “Rhineland hypothesis”—the broadly accepted genetic and historic evidence that about 80 percent of Jewish Ashkenazi males trace their ancestry to a core population of approximately 20,000 Eastern European Jews who originated in the Middle East. Elhaik wrote that the Khazars converted to Judaism in the eighth century, although historians believe and genetic evidence confirms that only a fraction of the population converted, including almost certainly royalty and some members of the aristocracy.

A paper published in 2000 by geneticist Harry Ostrer, a professor of genetics at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, and University of Arizona geneticist Michael Hammer showed that most Ashkenazis, Italians, North Africans, Iraqi, Iranian, Kurdish and Yemenite Jews share common Y-DNA haplotypes that are also found among many Arabs from Palestine, Lebanon and Syria.  Only a small percentage of the Y-DNA of Jews originated outside of the Middle East—some in the Caucuses.

The competing Rhineland and Khazarian theories were most recently discussed by Ostrer in two studies published in 2012 and in his well received book, Legacy: A Genetic History of the Jewish People. He found that geographically and culturally distant Jews still have more genes in common than they do with non-Jews around them, and that those genes can be traced back to the Levant, an area including modern-day Israel. “All European [Ashkenazi] Jews seem connected on the order of fourth or fifth cousins, Ostrer has said.

The concept of the “Jewish people” remains controversial. The Law of Return, the Israeli law that established the right of Jews around the world to settle in Israel and images (15)which remains in force today, was a central tenet of Zionism. The DNA that links Ashkenazi, Sephardi and Mizrahi, three prominent culturally and geographically distinct Jewish groups, could conceivably be used to support Zionist territorial claims —except, as Ostrer has pointed out, some of the same markers can be found in Palestinians, distant genetic cousins of the Jews, as well. Palestinians, understandably, want their own ‘right of return’.

That disagreement over the interpretations of Middle Eastern DNA also pits Jewish traditionalists against a particular strain of secular Jewish ultra-liberals who have joined with anti-Israeli Arabs and many non-Jews to argue for an end to Israel as a Jewish nation. Their hero is the Austrian-born Shlomo Sand—and now Elhaik. His study gained buzz in neo-Nazi websites and radical anti-Israeli and more radical pro-Palestinian blogs.

And then in the same article I found this little LDS faith-promoting nugget:

Unlike Christianity and Islam, Judaism is not solely a faith-based religion. Its origins, as is the case with the other prominent surviving ancient religion, Zoroastrianism, are tribal. The blood connections mentioned endlessly in the Hebrew Bible are not just symbolic; the Jews of ancient Israel were a clan of connected tribes who coalesced over hundreds of years. While Jesus and later Mohammad transformed the notion of “blood” into “faith”—one could become a Christian or Muslim through faith alone—Judaism has always retained an ancestral component.

In the Torah, that blood link is patrilineal, passed on from father to son. That tradition is preserved today in the Jewish priesthood, known as the Aaronite line. According to the Bible (and we have no way to know if this is historical or apocryphal), Aaron was anointed as the first Jewish priest and his sons and their descendants became the seed population of the Jewish priesthood. Jewish Cohanim—the word means ‘priests’ in Hebrew—supervised the inner sanctum until the destruction of the Second Temple in the first century, after which the Aaronite line was preserved by tradition, with Cohanim having special privileges and responsibilities to this day.

Are present day Cohanim descended from Aaron? That question download (21)is unanswerable; we do not even know for certain that Aaron or Moses even existed. However, DNA studies of the Y chromosome have determined that a majority of self-proclaimed Cohanim (it’s an oral tradition) has a set of genetic markers that trace back approximately three thousand years to a single common ancestor. In other words, if there was no Aaron, there was certainly a High Priest early in the Jewish tradition whose ancestors have retained evidence of that tradition in their DNA.

DNA Tester: 75 Percent of Jews Trace Ancestry to Middle East Founder of U.S.-based company says that anti-Jewish polemics can’t hide the science proving that Jews did indeed originate from the region.

“We’re not interlopers who came here from Eastern Europe, and we’re not Serbs or Kazars,” says Greenspan. “You can use whatever polemic you want to discredit the Jews or discredit the nation, but saying that we weren’t here is a lie.”download (18)

Greenspan was referring to the controversial book written by Tel Aviv University historian Shlomo Sand, which asserts that the Jews of today did not originate in this part of the world and that a “nation-race” of Jews never existed. Most of today’s Jews, he argues in “The Invention of the Jewish People” (2008), are the descendants of people who lived elsewhere in the world and were converted to Judaism. However, a major study published two years later by Harry Ostrer, a medical geneticist from the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, claims that many contemporary Jews do, indeed, have a distinctive genetic signature and can trace their ancestry back to the Middle East.

Greenspan delivered a guest lecture in Israel on Wednesday at the Netanya Academic College on the DNA of the Jews. Nothing download (19)more than a bit of saliva, insists the entrepreneur and genealogy enthusiast, is required to prove the similarities in the genetic make-up of most Jewish men and women, and that’s because their ancestors once lived the same place. In response to a question from Haaretz, Greenspan said he estimates that “No less than 75 percent of Ashekanzi, Sephardi or Mizrahi Jews, their ancestors came from what we call the general Middle East” – an assessment which he says is based on his company’s database.

read more:

And a formal paper:

I was going to wrap this up with a list of false religious and social beliefs spread through these perverted “Black Supremist” religious cults into the “Social Justice” and “Black Community Organizer” cultures. You know how it generally goes:

1–All white people are racist.

2–All white cops are racist, and even black cops aren’t “black,” they’re “blue,” which is also “white.”

3–Jesus was black. All the prophets were black. All the Hebrews were black.images (27)

4–White people are just as racist today as they ever were and it’s just as bad in America as it ever was.

5–Black people are forced into violent criminal lifestyles by the “white power structure” that prevents them from any meaningful achievement, political, or social power.

6–There is a war on against black males. Cops and white people kill black men by the hundreds every day.

7–Jews are the worst of all “white” people.

Bla bla bla bla bla….

But frankly, I’m tired of typing to myself. If you haven’t bothered to read deeply enough into my work, or if you just can’t see the folly and self-destructive nature of these sorts of social-failure, self-justifying fables, or if you can’t even admit or see that you’re surrounded by them every time you’re in a group of “Social Justice Warriors,” I’mimages (8) wasting time for both of us. And all you’re doing for yourself is perpetuating hate and insuring you’ll be on the losing side of a race war you’re starting on yourselves.

If you can embrace any of these intellectually and spiritually dishonest central principles and still call yourself LDS, I guess that’s between you and the Lord and I’ll leave it at that.

God bless.

Liberal elite school separates white students; teaches them they’re “born racist”

How Anti-White Rhetoric Is Fueling White Nationalism


Rumors, Accusations and Fear Roil Dallas’ Black Lives Matter Community







Posted in Black LDS Lives Matter: Part 3 Black Jesus | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Black LDS Lives Matter: Part 2 Mormon Doctrine

A black LDS Facebook group called, “Latter-day Saints for Social Justice,” which seems todownload (19)
have gone black now, (no pun intended) prompted my first investigation into black LDS Facebook activity with its lead post or header, posing this question:

Should the Brethren speak out more openly about Social Justice?

The answer to that is: NO.

Why not? “Social Justice” relative to the Black Lives Matter movement, is Newspeak for a quagmire of spirit-sucking, life-draining far-Left social, political, cultural and religious world views that are for the most part download (17)dogmatically and un-negotiably anti-LDS. It’s also millennial code for such a tangled, convoluted litany of self-hating white, ultra-liberal guilt trips so far off the Mormon track that it’s not worth setting out on that path in the first place. In an “ethnic” sense, it’s made up in part by a club driven by black, career, professional race-baiters determined to make a living off playing the victim and defending strawmen of color from the worldwide “white”CUREauthors conspiracy to oppress and deny the “black” race any power or influence at all in any sphere of international culture, industry, politics or society. You will not enlighten those who preach it, and the only possible involvement you can have successfully with it, is to confess your sins, bow down, and download (18)obey the mandates of its ministers.

Really, you retort? How could you say that about “Social Justice?” It sounds so “fair.” So “just.” How could you be against that? Well, believe me, if it were down to just those two words and their common dictionary definitions, I’d be all for
it. But aside from the naïve do-gooders tripping alongside, the central heart of the “Social Censorship-1160x457Justice” crowd wants very little to do with “Justice,” and everything to do with “Social Engineering” and censorship. (In fact, the white on-campus version of the movement is centered around championing extreme interpretations of political correctness that has shut down any pretense at “learning” at the university level any more.)

The current Pope may drewsheneman-wagesbe all for “Social Justice,” whatever that means to him. But he’s a self-confessed communist from a third-world background where his entire political and social experience is centered around poverty, ignorance, political despotism, oppression and corruption. That’s his world-view, that’s all he knows. It
may even be correct throughout the third world. If I lived in Argentina or Bangladesh or Venezuela, his observations might be entirely applicable. But the “socialism” or “workers of the world unite” element of download (12)the movement, the “world peace and prosperity” spiel is but one facet out of the jewel of the movement, held out into the sun at just the right angle to proudly sparkle and distract you from the streaks and weird stuff amalgamated all around it. The movement incorporates factions of gay, or more modernly, LGBT activists, priesthood feminists demanding equal clergy representation for women in LDS and all other clergies, and a host of other fringe social causes. For instance, and not surprisingly, Black images (62)Lives Matter and other American “Social Justice” champions, are claiming that their experience in the United States as a “black community,” in present day context, is exactly that experienced by His Holiness: a miserable subsistence centered around poverty, ignorance, political despotism, oppression, and corruption.

Black Lives Matter and the “Social Justice” movement in the United States (and probably2ab6ccdf78a388a081cb7bdef162b402 everywhere else) literally believe that there is an exact social and moral equivalent between the way the “black community” in America is treated by the “white privileged classes” and the golden age of European colonialism, the aristocracies, monarchies, the slave trade, and at best, the Jim Crow south. They hold that nothing substantial has changed at all for them in the post-Civil Rights Era.


BYU student poll placing Bernie Sanders (avowed socialist) at the top of the poll

The so-called “Social Justice” movement in America that I observe, is often more about revolution, and a cry for heavy-handed, imposed socialism, true, state-owned-everything socialism, “Marxism,” or “Communism,” to be clear about it. And Mormons are buying into it along with everyone else. You can call it “Democratic Socialism,” but again, that’s code for “Just Plain Socialism.” “Social Justice” in this context means taking by force the capital and property of the rich, and giving it to the poor, regardless of the merits of either party’s claim on said wealth and property. The lazy, the stupid, the wasteful, get the same “fair” portion as those who images (34)actually produce, perform, earn, create, manage, and benefit society and culture. You can parse it out all you want into little clauses intended to prove its “fairness,” IE: Just how much money you let a rich guy keep out of “fairness,” or just how much you take from him and give to a layabout because of “fairness,” or just how much in-between those two a real producer, worker, creator should get out of “fairness,” but the bottom line is, it’s all about white-privilege-meme1you and your mob hand-picking winners and losers, arbitrarily defining rewards of merit and awards of payment, through ideological biases, and attempting to manipulate and regulate the economy and marketplace of goods and labor, so that you and your mob are happy with what you’ve gotten out of the “rich,” and you’re personally satisfied that the “rich” have been put in their place.

Now, Glenn Beck-haters in and out of the Mormon church will argue that the “United Order,” or the Book of Mormon as a whole, is a study in the Christian mandate to take care of the poor. That’s the “go-to” argument. They neglect to continue the lesson into just how this was accomplished in either case. CaptureThe easy answer is, voluntarily, and on an individual basis, or as a collective “church” congregational effort. They also never mention that the United Order failed miserably as a human institution, and the official stand of the church is that it would have to be overseen and administered by Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Himself, to work properly and fairly.

Of course, half of my lifetime ago, simple John Burch, cultural isolationist, anti-Communist paranoia would be sound enough argument for most Latter-day Saints to avoid BLM affiliation like the plague. (That of course, and we still had the Civil Rights Movement being depicted as a mixture of Communist plot to overthrow the US images (100)government via race riots, and the whole notion that the “Negro” was a troublesome creature to begin with in any case.) In the modern “enlightened” LDS church, it’s now true that the restored gospel of Jesus Christ is being preached through a worldwide organization that functions in many fully socialist, even Communist nations, and all over the “darkest” of Africa, as it used to be termed. It should be noted however, that even Russia and China, the two big “Commie” states have deconstructed images (64)their Marxist model economies and political organization out of necessity, to create sustainable, healthy economies and ensure productivity and wealth in their “workers’ paradise.” African wannabe Communist satellites have descended into permanent tribal warfare, abject poverty and misery, after a bankrupt Soviet Union stopped propping them up. Bernie Sanders is wont to keep citing Denmark as his ideal of “democratic socialism,” but Denmark recently asked him to stop defaming their free-market economy by implying they were socialists.

Denmark Tells Bernie Sanders It’s Had Enough Of His ‘Socialist’ Slurs

The official policy of the church in this country or any other, is to try to stay politically neutral, with the occasional exception of some particularly “moral” questions that arise in images (60)the political forum, such as gay marriage et al. What I hear demanded from BLM and other “Social Justice” groups however, is a governmentally enforced “stick it to the rich” political revolution, straight down a decidedly far Leftist path. I have no deeply held moral or philosophical disagreement in principle with the sentiment of sticking it to the “rich.” I’d be a Kennedy Democrat, conservative-ish blue-collar Democrat, if there really was such a thing any more. It’s just that skewering the “rich” just for the pleasure of it is usually counter-productive, and destroys wealth, the very thing you’re pretending to images (95)guarantee for all.

There’s an academic word for this: Social Darwinism. Another word for it is: Mob Rule. We saw how that went in both the Russian and French revolutions. The average BLM protester of course, knows nothing about either. Suffice it to say, the Russians found out that the “Party” was just a czar who was less fair or productive, that Yuri the tractor mechanic knew nothing about running the tractor factory no matter how loyal he was toimages (48) the “Party,” and the French discovered like the Russians, that the neighborhood busybody was now a local officer with a guillotine, the “people’s” cops, and an army behind him to enforce his petty demands for your compliance with his personal whims. They both discovered that after you kill off or chase out the “rich” and the educated, the professionals, your country is being run by “community organizers” who’s only skill is rallying a mob to go demand food, jobs and images (67)money from “The Man.” But of course, “The Man” is now dead and gone, along with all his loot, food, employment opportunities and goodies.

More specific to the Black Lives Matter emphasis of my admittedly center-right postulating about the merits of “socialism,” is the implicit and sometimes express demand of these movements for “reparations,” and other direct compensation believed to be owed the “black community” in America, due to slavery and “white privilege.” If only on a subtextual level, these concepts are almost universally incorporated into the philosophies of these sorts of groups’Slavery-Reparations membership. Simply put, these folks believe all black Americans are “owed” a living in perpetuity for work their ancestors did in bondage hundreds of years ago. This they contend, is “Social Justice,” and anything short of that is a justification for perpetual riot and retribution. (No I’m not reparations2exaggerating.) This attitude is extended into police relationships under the guise of “Nigga’s got a right…” arguments, which translated means, “you cops have no right to hassle me in any way.” Why? “Nigga’s got a right…” They look upon the police as an unrighteous imposition upon whatever it is they feel like doing at any given time, including robbing, stealing, or killing each other, and this because they are “owed” for generations of slavery and oppression. Some of the more violent and organized factions of this world view have made a point of spelling it out for you far clearer than I could ever invent or fake on my own, so I’ll let them speak for themselves:

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center [SPLC], the National Black FootSoldier Network is a black separatist group that is active in the following states: AL, AR, CA, DC, FL,GA, IL, IN, KY, LA, MA, MD, MI, MO, NC, NE, NJ, NY, OH, OK, OR, SC, TN, VA, WA.The National Black Foot Soldier Network (NBFSN) identifies white families whose descendants actually owned slaves as “Direct Trans Atlantic Slave Trade Reparationsreparations Offenders” and calls robberies against them “reparations protests” Based on propaganda posted on their websites, the National Black Foot Soldier Network seems to adhere to belief systems stemming from various extremists groups such as the Black Hebrew Israelites and the Nation of Islam.

The dominant theme in their propaganda is anti-White and anti-Jewish rhetoric, along with a strong hatred of “white Police” and the U.S. military. Their websites display disclaimers stating that the NBFSN does not advocate black on white crime pasc-f4rc2d_t4_d2f2nd_s2lfor violence against white police; however, all of the individuals honored or memorialized on their website have successfully carried out or planned to carry out acts of violence against military personnel or law enforcement officers.

So, when I say the “Social Justice” pond is actually a “quagmire” I mean “quagmire,” and why would the Brethren knowingly wade into this fetid pool of slime?:

ALL WHITES R REPARATIONS OFFENDERS;” Definition Of A Reparations Offender: Direct & Non Direct, Which R You? The pasc-b4w_cr3m2entire “Western world” profited and still reaps benefits from both that slave trade and the concept of white supremacy and the institution of the Trans Atlantic Slave Trade. Therefore, the entire white world owes.

The Black Foot Soldier’s Network is one of several like it on the reparations bandwagon. They have absolutely no common sense or moral compass, as self-exposed by their own coded jargon:

Reparations Protest – This phrase essentially refers to the commission of a crime by a black person against a white person. This can refer to rape, torture, murder, assault, assault GBH, attempted murder, robbery with aggravating circumstances and any other sort of violent crime that you can think of – provided the victim is (22)
Generational Race Criminal –  someone who is white – whether their family owned slaves or not. This is usually the reference made when a white person refuses to kiss the ass of the black person attacking them or does not feel that they owe the black population a single damn thing.
Divine Racial Karma – This term was a little harder to ascertain the meaning of because its use was completely mindboggling to me at first. This basically boils down to the blaming of the VICTIM for the crime that was perpetrated against them. For example – white women are to blame for their own rape at the images (73)hands of black men. Whites are to blame for their murders by blacks etc etc etc…
The meaning goes further still to state that they are the victims of this crime not because the criminal was a racist psychopath but because at some point in the distant history (read 400 – 100 years ago) black people were taken as slaves and treated as slaves. In effect the blog’s author tries to justify the blatant malicious and evil actions of blacks against whites as the fault of the victim because they are racist. This assertion of racism is based solely on the images (70)fact that the victims had white skin (is this not racism in itself?? Or has my logic failed me?)
(In one article they actually blame a 12 year old girl that was gang raped and then murdered by 2 black men for what happened. They state that:

“Millions of our people were lured into slavery through the same duplicitous beguile by which brothers Justin and Dante Robinson, unknowingly driven by Divine Racial Karma, led this twelve year old devil to her appointment with this sacred cosmic principle that rewards races according to their generational images (71)deeds to other races,” NBFSN Divine Racial Karma translator Hallowed Yclept reportedly states in  a first network statement about the girls death.

“It is great and terrible that Divine Racial Karma says answer ‘yes’ when you ask yourselves did this so called innocent, twelve year old girl Autumn deserve this.” )

If I really wanted to rabble-rouse, I’d have to note here that Trayvon Martin was involved at least in pretend, with the Black Foot Soldier’s Network and the term “No Limit Nigga,” his Twitter handle, 22cef9b2fa4c22f4d091e8dd002136afwas code for a Black Foot Soldier who was ready to do anything for the cause. My only point here is not to comment on the Trayvon Martin case itself, but to point out that these sentiments have been central to the BLM genesis from the very beginning. If you do not see and hear them in your local Black Lives Matter protests, you Screen Shot 2015-09-06 at 11.43.06 PMaren’t listening or looking very hard. The fact remains that the stated purpose of BLM is specifically to defend these selfsame “Black Foot Soldiers,” whether literally part of that religious branch of the black criminal world, or just soaked andkill-whites-cops dripping in the sympathetic putrid essence of a similar world view. Black Lives Matter has openly declared that it exists exclusively to serve the legal needs of memorializing and avenging these black criminals, who at one level or another, act out their belief in the demonic nature of the “white” race, and their divine right to take or inflict anything they desire from it, or upon it.

The LDS church officially proclaims that the Constitution of the United States of America is an inspired document that has been the cornerstone of a divinely appointed government, built by divinely inspired men (and women) in order to prepare the chosen an-appeal-to-lds-voters-17-728land and God’s chosen people of the Restoration for the coming of the Kingdom of God on Earth. The physical construction of this kingdom is maintained to be taking place literally at some point, in Daviess County Missouri at a place called Adam Ondi Ahman. This is also billed officially as the site of the Garden of Eden. This American location and all the “whiteness” surrounding it diminishes somewhat the importance of all the Afro-centricness BLM and kindred crusaders would have us accept. All of this WASPY “chosenness” was determined to be Eternal Truth by the load of exclusively “white” guys who restored the church as British Isles, Scandinavian, and other “white European” immigrants. They put an official stamp of blessing on the same Constitution that Black Lives Matter and “Social Justice” advocates will tell you is an irrelevant old document scribbled out in sheer bigotry by a lot of racist, misogynist, slave-holding, rich, greedy old white men in order to enslave and oppress the “black” race while enjoying their “white privilege” in luxury forever, fueled by the broken backs of their slave-powered empire. (No time to parse the bits of “truth” out of that argument at the moment…)images (79)

While the church also believes in honoring, obeying, and sustaining the law under a host of worldwide kings, rulers, and other governments, communist, socialist, democratic and otherwise, the basic assumptions, the central LDS principles of self-reliance, combined with a very specific blessing upon the b909c6f6f361556f8c2e78378b901a79Constitutional principles of American free-enterprise, self-determination and self-government, which cannot be mistaken or misconstrued, leaves us with some serious conflicts relative to any attempt to embrace the so-called “Social Justice” movement, not just on political grounds, but on racial, social, ethical and moral grounds, particularly where this very broad movement blends into the mission statement of Black Lives Matter, which as I say, is almost singularly concentrated in defending the criminal class of the “black community” from alleged police abuse.

12 We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.

images (81)Black Lives Matter, like the “Social Justice” movement, is a very large tent in a very 20160522_wadenegative way. There are many good people at least sympathetic or loosely involved with the hearty, wholesome supper going on inside of it. But there is also a whole herd of very smelly camels poking into it, mooching food and wandering about the buffet as well. There are far too many smelly camels to tag them all here. I have listed only a few of the smelliest so far. But I guess there will have to be a third installment to flesh out some of the other doctrinal problems the Latter-day Saint would run into right on the surface of the movement, without digging very deep at all into the crowd running with BLM.

images (89)10 We believe in the literal gathering of Israel and in the restoration of the Ten Tribes; that Zion (the New Jerusalem) will be built upon the American continent; that Christ will reign personally upon the earth; and, that the earth will be renewed and receive its paradisiacal glory.

So far, you may have not been discerning enough, or I may have not really gotten to my point clearly enough, for you to realize that the LDS problem with Black Lives Matter is not a black or white, Left or Right, Republican or Democrat issue in the conventional sense. It is certainly not the case here that I’m simply making a partisan argument from some Glenn Beck/Tea5ee4e633b6f87920e8a795b8406b7680 Party/Conservative Republican point of view. I’m not going to pander to you Lefties by genuflecting with contrast or comparison writing about the KKK or Aryan Nations, the Christian Idententity Movement or the Brotherhood as proof of my journalistic credentials or in some sense of “fairness.” There’s no significant involvement with any of these white supremacist groups in the LDS church and never has been. You as fellow Saints don’t need to be warned about them, you know what to expect from them–with the exception of brother Beck, who’s running dangerously close to a bunch of “evangelical Christians” and other “Christian Nation Movement,” or “Patriot Movement,” folks who rub elbows with the truly dangerous, “Christian Identity Movement” and other white, Anglo-Saxon-based white supremacists. But that’s another lecture I’m planning to give soon.

On this issue of BLM however, there is much truth to be had from the center-right71e6247fc3b13b5c953ee8e55aa81bd8 perspective, though I don’t endorse about half of what the far right has to say about it. I believe the mass population of BLM is sincere, but the “leadership” and the funding of it ranges from those who are out to make a buck, those who are self-deluded “True Believers” of a self-crippling, “black” gospel that’s upside-down and backwards,  and a lot of people black and white, people of all colors, who are simply too stupid for their own good and buy anything proposed in the narrative because it “feels truthy” as pundit Steven Colbert would put it. The center-left, or old-school “liberal” perspective I think is just myopic and selective. It chooses to ignore the evils within, happily relives its liberal heyday where protesting really mattered and was truly “progressive,” because it was about actual Civil Rights issues, and the mainstream Democratic/Liberal base now only cares to see the surface glitter of a charming slogan. What I 87f2bd1f5e9af5f68959d8a47b73e174find unacceptable in an LDS context however, is to shut the mind instantly when one perceives that strange information is coming from an agreed-upon partisan, unacceptable source or a supposedly well known and personally or ideologically adversarial agent or agency. Got that off Fox News? Oh, they just make stuff up. Got that off CNN? Oh, they just make stuff up. Got that from Russia Today? Got that from those Tea Party whackoes? Maddow said that? Ignore it. You should only listen to information from people who already agree with you…”proven” sources. “Reliable” sources. “Acredited” sources (85)

That’s all a load of self-limiting, deliberate ignorance. From an LDS doctrinal stance it’s inexcusable. Even stuff from Alex Jones, the original “911 Truther” is occasionally factual and well reported. The conclusions reached, with Jones, Beck, Fox, CNN, or any other source, is an entirely different matter. Often the basic facts of a case are undeniable, but the spin, the interpretation, the proposed action or perceived causes creating the facts, are sometimes ideologically driven, and in dispassionate, rational examination, are revealed to be just plain crazy and counter to all logic, probability and reason, even self-defeating or deadly.


NY Times Finds Trump Threat to First Amendment, Yet Downplays Anti-Trump Free-Speech Denial in San Jose

First of all, we as Latter-day Saints believe that there is such a thing as an ultimate “Truth.” We go so far as to say that “Truth” does not exist simply because God decrees it to be “True,” but because it exists independently in its own sphere. Over and over again however, I have seen the Black Lives Matter mobs and their leaders demand “Justice,” yet when justice is served, when multiple, deep investigations, when lengthy court trials and hearings do not support their pre-conceived narrative, they refuse to accept the “truth,” or any single piece of evidence leading to it, and contend therefore that there was no “Justice” meted out. What this group is really saying then, is what it really wants, is a cop sent to prison because theydownload (25) have long decided as a mob that the cop is guilty and their poster boy of the day is not the violent criminal or self-defeating idiot the evidence clearly shows him to be, but rather, a fragile martyr and victim of systemic racism.

24 And truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come;

 25 And whatsoever is more or less than this is the spirit of that wicked one who was a liar from the beginning.

Which leads me to the first of a number of very anti-LDS, doctrinal reasons for being wary of entangling yourself with Black Lives Matter or any other “Social Justice” organization as a Latter-day Saint:

Black Lives Matter holds that all police officer-related deaths of black folks, particularly images (84)black young men, (meaning Negro, and almost exclusively African American Negroes,) are essentially due to systemic racism in the police force, and that even if these young black “victims” of police “murder” are indeed violent, ignorant, plain stupid or criminal sociopaths, this is all down to “white privilege,” and the culture of “white oppression” of the “black community” in general.

To be totally honest, this shouldn’t even deserve a comeback after reviewing the last four or five or more big screen, world-shaking national and international trials of the century put up by BLM proponents and attended with riot and mayhem and pillage. Trayvon Martin was a bust. Mike Brown was a bust. Freddie Gray is headed in that Captuppnredirection. [Update, 4 July 2016–a few days ago Caesar Goodson, the black driver accused of the actual “murder” of Freddie Gray, was acquitted of all charges.] Our own Nekima Levy-Pounds the local, Minneapolis NAACP chapter president, BLM cheerleader, and “Social Justice” advocate, is crying in her Chablis at this very moment over the recently returned decision of federal prosecutors not to pursue cee06dd72d8996d899b41a702ca9f1e8a civil rights violation charge against the officers who engaged and terminated her patron saint, Jamar Clark. I shouldn’t have to defend the notion that it’s obvious to all but themselves that their go-to narrative of “white,” systematic, police predation of the “black community” isn’t proving out. What is proving out, is a very clear indication that the “black community” has no universal common sense or civility when it comes to dealing with the police. That, and a giant, sometimes fatal chip on its shoulder.

In a bizarre but predictable turn, our ever-vigilant Nekima Levy-Pounds, who had been a frontliner in demanding that cops be issued body cameras and be forced to use them, spun around on bodycamher own long, vehemently and firmly wall-nailed point in favor of these cameras, when the Minnesota Legislature actually produced a bill to enforce that demand. I heard her but a week ago as of this writing, testifying before the legislature, and in a lengthy Minnesota Public Radio interview, demanding now instead, that this legislation be scrapped until, as she clearly put it on the radio, it could be worded in such a way as to prohibit the use of body camera footage to surveille or prosecute black criminals. In other words, camera evidence could only be used to prosecute or discipline cops. Also, she did not want cops to be able to review the footage to help them fill out a more accurate report of events. And why would she make such a demand do you think? Because as more and more cameras come online, as in all the “poster child” trials so far, imvvvagescamera footage has only served to back up the police version of events, and indict young black criminals. Likewise, as an attorney, she knew that police reports from memory, like any eyewitness recounting of events, were subjective, often contradicted other witnesses at least on minor points, and missed details that she could then use in court to discredit the police version if the audio and visual recording did not completely agree with the written report–and perhaps she could thus even make the claim that the cop or cops involved were “incompetent,” or “lying” or “falsifying” a report over these unavoidable, honest and completely routine discrepancies.

Dayton signs law governing police body cameras and footage

She was not interested in the “Truth.” She was not interested in “black lives.” She was only interested in indicting, suppressing, and taming the police force of Minneapolis and greater Minnesota.

324,000 U.S. Blacks Killed by Blacks In Only 35 Years

But even humoring the validity of blaming “Whitey” for every criminal act committed by the “black community,” we as Latter-day Saints are not believers in the 635914973129134862-65594349_microaggressions everywherefiction that mankind is merely the product of its environment, or even its training and upbringing. The first LDS principle of mortality is the exercise of free-agency. So if “Whitey” is to be blamed for crushing the heart and soul of the “black community,” forcing it to turn evil and violent, there really has to be some overt, brutal suppression of the spirit going on. It should be blatant and obvious. Yet, one still has to wonder why Fredrick Douglass, Rosa Parks, or Dr Martin Luther King didn’t go running around robbing, killing, raping, burning and looting, inasmuch as they actually did experience an obvious, crushing, institutional racism.

 29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed candownload (35) be.

 30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.

 31 Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the download (36)condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.

 32 And every man whose spirit receiveth not the light is under condemnation.

Frankly, evidence of this current vaporous, invisible-but-smothering oppression, alleged to be destroying all free agency of the “black community,” has been so thin that instead of showing us even shadowy whisps of it, Black Lives Matter and the “Social Justice” cabal have dumbed-down the concept of “racism,” to a thing so subtle that you might not even notice it unless you watch and listen very closely for “micro-aggressions.”

Yes, the current working definition of “racism,” or “bigotry” or “opresion,” is hearing anything that hurts your feelings, or seeing anything that makes you feel “unsafe,” however seemingly harmless or innocent it may be.

Truth is as truth does, and it’s just possible that all these black men supposedly being shot download (15)by the police are engaged in behavior, often criminal, and usually stupid, that brings a bullet their way all on their own, not even denying a cop who may for the sake of the argument, at least occasionally be every bit the racist BLM claims they all are, the chance to act out his bigotry because he’s got to shoot the fool either way. It’s just possible that African Americans, and blackimages (47) young men in particular, worship a culture, or sub-culture of thuggery, violence, and disrespect for the law. It may be that the entire “black community” itself behaves in a loud, hysterical, counter-productive and non-cooperative manner, quite unlike the typical “white” population generally does in police interactions. Perhaps that’s what explains at least most of any discrepancy between black interactions and white interactions with the police. Perhaps it’s the black population that needs to change its behavior around cops, and learn to cooperate and respect the authority of law enforcement officers. Cops already take courses in being polite, calm, and rational even in the face of shreaking fools. Who’s giving those same lessons to the “black community?”

It isn’t Black Lives Matter.

I hate to keep doing it. I end up reprising it in half the things I write on the subject, but Chris Rock is going to be linked again out of fairness and clarity…

The most inconvenient truth in the organization of Black Lives Matter however, is that if black lives really do matter, it’s not the cops who are shooting black young men. That accounts for something well short of 4% of all shooting deaths in the young black male population. It’s easier to concede my point by admitting, just to humor me, asdownload (12) BLM leaders have actually done repeatedly and openly, that nearly 100% of all violent deaths in the black community are down to black on black perpetrators, or other feats of self-ending, suicidal black bravado and stupidity. BLM has openly confessed this doesn’t matter to them. It’s just about the cops treating the black criminals they deal with on a daily basis with kindness and understanding, and BLM’s insistence that they should never ever kill one their criminal wards no matter what he’s doing at the time or how much risk the cop perceives to be present during his or her interchange with same.

Beyond all the above, next time you’re having a quiet think and maybe a prayer, ask images (86)yourself, Lord: is it just possible that, even entertaining the bold assertion that the police are “trigger happy” around the “black community,” that in this day and age, in the United States of America, outside of a few anachronistic pockets of hillbillies or flatland rednecks in some holler in Bumfork Tennessee, or Farkle Flats Alabama, it has far less to do with “racism,” and far more to do with anjoWTQXI accurate, professional profile of a likely violent perpetrator based upon experience with multiple similar encounters that have consistently led to serious injury or death of the officer or bystanders. Yeah, that’s “profiling,” even “racial” profiling. But it’s good police work and it saves lives. It’s “stereotyping,” but if it’s fair and accurate stereotyping, if it’s correct most of the time, that’s not “racism,” that’s a good guess based upon observed behavior. If that behavior was not predominant in that profiled group, images (91)it would be less than worthless for cops to apply the profile.

Cops don’t have the time to go through your whole life’s experience to scope out your true nature and worth as a human being. They can’t stand there for an hour and politely humor your demandsdownload (27) about what you think your rights are, or how you don’t have to comply with this or that, or can damned well keep your hands in your pockets if you want to. Everything goes into the profile, that cop is assembling in his or her head: race, customs of locality, demeanor, behavior, tone of voice. Everything. Profiling is a shortcut but a necessary one.

Here’s what happens when you don’t profile, when you try to give the suspect the time and comfort he needs to smooth out the encounter. You can tell by the perp’s behavior something is going to go down without any special training at all:

When “profiling” is applied in police work, it’s not’s because of “racism.” It’s because thedownload (29) profile is accurate most of the time.

Young black males and black folk in general are getting shot by cops at a statistically miniscule rate. Particularly compared to black-on-black shootings, there is no “war on young black men,” there is no “epidemic” of cop “executions” in the “black community.” And when young black men do get shot by cops, it’s almost always because they bring it on themselves. And that’s the truth. Most of the time. You may not see it that way. Young black men may not see it that way. But the other great truth to accept, is that you might be too personally ignorant, stupid, bigoted, biased or racist yourself to see it.

Truth exists in its own independent sphere, however you “feel” about it, however much you don’t want it to be true, however hard you try to pretend it isn’t true, or however many third parties, scapegoats, oppressors, social factors, or “systemic” persecutions you try to blame it on.


Bonus videos:

Posted in Black LDS Lives Matter: Part 2 Mormon Doctrine | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Black LDS Lives Matter: Part 1 Who are You?

What could possibly be wrong with an organization that calls itself images (30)“Black Lives Matter?” Of course black lives matter! Only a bigotty, mean-old racist could object to that. Right? It’s a great handle for a “social justice” movement, but then again, like “Black Lives Matter” itself, “social justice” is a beautiful example of what author George Orwell in his dystopian-future novel, 1984, called, “Newspeak,” or images (35)“Doublethink,” which is language designed by a manipulative nanny-state run by “Big Brother,” that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the actual, very negative meaning of the thing being described.

Some have parodied the mission of Black Lives Matter with the epithet: “Black Lies Matter.” Some very prominent “black” community spokesmen and women have done so. But, why would even some black Civil Rights leaders make this sort of negative dismissal of a movement founded to stop the images (42)universal, systemic culture of blatantly racist police brutality and murder, that is targeting young black males, and black people in general, putting the entire black community under threat of extinction? To answer this question fully, we first have to go back as best we can and try to uncover just who this group really is, and where it came from. The short answer for now is, critics are calling BLM “liars,” because there is no systemic, predatory vendetta by “the cops” to exterminate young black males, or the “black community” in general. This empirical reality has been amply established by the legal proceedings, the social and crime statistics related to every single “poster child” the movement has singled out as a clear example of their premise.

Many Black Lives Matter apologists will try to tell you that they are simply part of the garvey1ongoing Civil Rights Movement’s continuous struggle, as started by the likes of Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and the Reverend Ralph Abernathy. The truth is, Black Lives Matter is a Millennial phenomenon made up of politically useful idiots who’ve been brainwashed by a variety of black race-hustlers and whiteimages (12) “progressive” academic dogmatists who’ve canonized a litany of quazi-Marxist, “black liberation” buzzwords and enabling rationalizations so the “black community” will remain dependent upon mainstream, liberal Democratic governmental handouts, “protected class” legislation and social programs, rather than become true, self-sustaining, self-actualized human beings and free American citizens with full self-determination.

Dr. King had a dream–a “color blind” society where children black and white grow up images (16)together to be judged by the “content of their character,” not the color of their skin. Malcolm X Frederick-Douglass-freedom-quotesgave up his delusions of black separatism and embraced the promise of America and demanded a full share of it for his people–as was their right as Americans. The precursors of these recently departed Civil Rights warriors, the original black Americans, who made their arguments as former slaves, actual full victims of “white” exploitation by actual, bona fide “racists,”(who believed they were fundamentally, spiritually, intellectually inferior creatures because of their race,) likewise argued against being returned “home” to Africa, refused to be separated from or independent of the greater “white” culture and American population, and did not preach of the eternal images (14)separation of “white” and “black” races as an unresolveable conflict. They demanded instead their full rights as American citizens.

The spoiled, “bougie black” grad students and self-hating white, neo-hippie/hipsterimages (25) Millennials that feed the power core of the Black Lives Matter movement, don’t know anything about Fredrick Douglas, or that Malcolm X morphed into El Hajj Malik El Shabazz–a man with a vision of all races and nations united under the peaceful surrender to Allah. If they’re lucky they have a rough understanding of the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, and unfortunately, the “Reverend” Al Sharpton, all  of whom were once well-meaning guys, but bluntly put, were not the movers and the shakers of the historic Civil Rights battles fought not so long ago. They amount essentially to mere hangers-on during the actual heart of the “struggle.” Many, like Sharpton, eventually devolved into blatant frauds and race-baiters who now openly fabricate  racial strife for a living. But the entire company of them images (32)at best, are vestiges of an obsolete, self-defeating “progressive” approach to solving the problems of poverty, education, and productivity in the “black community.” (Again “progressive” is Newspeak for “status quo.”)

During Barack Obama’s first campaign, Jesse Jackson for example, commented that he’d likeimages (43) to castrate Obama. (Basically as an “uppity Nixxer” who was talking down to black folks about not taking enough personal responsibility for their lives and communities.) He was photographed weeping, months later at Obama’s inaugural. Whether this is in joy of Obama’s historic election, or just in the sudden realization that he was out of a gig, is anyone’s guess.

On a bizarre note, Black Lives Matter elements have now even gone so far as to turn on Al Sharpton and his ilk, calling them “House Nixxers” and correctly identifying them as parasites manipulating the black community into relying on them for help, while all they do instead is to extort a handsome living from “The Man,” and revel in fame and fortune off the backs of their dailyimages (34) travails. While on the one hand this should be a positive development, on the other hand, it appears this comes not so much from a true understanding of things as they are and have been, but is a sign that the BLM congregation seeks an even more hysterical, violent, and disruptive mission statement, and constitutes an open rejection of the formerly central ideals of “equality,” and the guarantee of full Constitutional civil rights for all, in favor of the black supremacist, blackimages (15) separatist rationales that had been long dismissed as failed, lesser, fringe ideologies during the real Civil Rights Movement.

While openly  welcomed, even courted, on self-declared “liberal” college campuses, the Black Lives Matter culture is an intellectually dishonest, morally disingenuous, immature and sophomoric collection of spoiled black Millennial slave-fantasy live action role-play enthusiasts, and 60’s protest re-enactors. These catered simpletons equate 400 years of brutal slavery, the barbaric torture and murder of Emmett Till for merely whistling at a white woman, to Oprah Winfrey being shown an $18,000.00 production model images (41)designer purse in an exclusive Zürich boutique, instead of the clerk reaching up and handing her the one-of-a-kind, custom, $40,000.00 original she wanted to oggle. This insanity is enabled and sustained by a couple of generations of white-liberal images (40)guilt in both administrative and professorial academia, which has translated into the systematic production of the current generation of openly self-hating white Millenials who wake up each morning fretting  and weeping about how they can find some way to redeem themselves via a formal, public abdication of their “white privilege.”

A recent example of the BLM Millennial archetype at the University of Missouri, “Mizzou” (MiZoo as I call it) as thedownload (8) president of the Student Union, tried to get a campus-wide crisis going because of a “poo” swastika somebody smeared on a dorm bathroom wall. (This is apparently the only verifiable incident in the entire list of petty complaints that followed.) Payton Head, a near-graduate student funded by a wealthyCTgZgHfUcAAqw_0father, went on to claim that he’d heard someone call him a “nixxer” while listening to an outdoor choir. He then claimed he heard somebody going by in a pickup shout “nixxer” out the window. Not satisfied with the lack of a complete and immediate campus shakedown, AAEAAQAAAAAAAAYhAAAAJGIwOGI2OWZmLThhOTUtNGY4Ny1iMzEzLTA5NThmMTE3ODhmNwhe advanced his rhetoric to claiming there was a KKK death squad sneaking around campus, looking into dorm windows, and threatening to kill every black person they see inside. (He later confessed to making that one up.)

It might also be well to keep in mind, that Mr. Head, the much-oppressed black president of the Student Union, served on this esteemed body with 4 other black students and only one white member. How uninclusive that institution must be! I guess being homecoming king, like being the first black president of the United States, is download (9)just another sign of white privilege. Somehow.

(But then again, some of these folks will tell you that Barack Hussein Obama is not really the nation’s first black president–he’s not really the president at all, and the “white power structure” dances him around like a puppet to distract the oppressed black masses, while the “Man” does what he wants, and won’t let Obama do anything meaningful at all. Others will call him a sellout “Tom,” and “head nigga in charge.” The “house boy.”)

Bogus Bolitics: Dr. Cornel West Calls Al Sharpton “The Bonafide House Negro Of The Obama Plantation”

After weeks of silly Mizzou campus demonstrations, which culminated in things like black mobs throwing white students out of the library because they didn’t feel “safe” withdownload (7) white kids in there, and a central-square mob led by a green-clad, ginger-white pixie woman from the media studies department, who rallied a gang over to threaten away reporters, the president of the university resigned. There followed a list of asinine demands which as far as I know are currently being humored by the subsequent management.

If there’s no connection to or continuous social or organizational legacy download (10)connecting past civil rights agencies, personalities, leaders and traditions, where did Black Lives Matter come from then? That’s the question of the day, because it didn’t come entirely from one source and at best is very loosely organized, if coordinated or organizationally connected at all from one local version of this group to another, all across the nation. It gets funding from professional mob protest enthusiasts from the Left, Democratic Party donor bases and other liberal corporations like Google. But apart from taking money from wherever it can get it, Black Lives Matter is truly a “grass roots,” phenomenon. Or “gutter roots.” This is not to say there aren’t professional figureheads involved and background funding foundations with agendas both open and camouflaged.

Following the money funneling into it is far easier than discerning the organizational chart of Black Lives Matter. It’s a bit like the Tea Partydownload (12) Movement. There is no “The Tea Party.” It’s a “Movement,” its affiliates use the moniker “Tea Party” in common as a sign of unity in purpose, but in reality it’s just a bunch of separate clubs doing each its own thing with no national or overall governing body.

There was no known “big meeting” to kick it off, but there were a couple of precursor national events that set the tone and indirectly led to the formation of the Black Lives Matter movement. One notable preview of what was to come, was when Professor Henry Louiseht_gates_in_cuffs_090721_wmain (1) Gates threw a hissy fit when a neighbor reported a man breaking into his house, the cops arrived, and found Gates breaking into his own house. Gates got arrested for disorderly conduct. Barack Obama took political advantage of the situation to say, “The Cambridge police behaved stupidly.” The fact is, the Cambridge police behaved calmly and quite (13)

professionally in that encounter, and it was Louis Gates who lost his cool, pissed off probably more that the cops didn’t recognize him from his world-famous PBS series on genealogy, than their “racist” suspicion that he was breaking into his house because he was seen breaking into his house. Obama never backed off, but he moved to effect a conciliatory, and very staged “beer summit.” It’s fairly clear from the cop’s demeanor that he attended the president’s invitation only because his police chief ordered him

President Barack Obama, Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Sergeant James Crowley meet in the Rose Garden of the White House, July 30, 2009. Official White House Photo by Pete Souza

President Barack Obama, Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Sergeant James Crowley meet in the Rose Garden of the White House, July 30, 2009. Official White House Photo by Pete Souza

to go meet with Gates and Obama in the rose garden for a drink to kiss and make up. (And probably clinch that federal purchase of war surplus heavy vehicles and automatic weapons.) But that set the tone from the top down—the president had 2851836300000578-3068224-Watts_right_insisted_she_was_just_kissing_her_boyfriend_in_the_c-m-58_1430795521919your “black” back. At long last the “black community” had a champion in the White House. This seemed to embolden the next series of racial “discrimination” claims that suddenly sprayed forth from all directions. With the blessing of the first black president, a media eager to advance the liberal agenda, and the proven effectiveness of what became known as the “race card,” it was open season for claims of racial discrimination. Every black thug, crook, cheat, bad driver and socially retarded idiot was pulling it with pride as trump for any situation dealing with white folk, especially white authority figures. For example,  Danielle Watts, a featured performer in Django Unchained, claimed she’d been 1413928572798_wps_2_1410962575377_wps_15_MINIarrested and roughed-up for merely kissing her white boyfriend in public, and called a “whore” because the cops thought her boyfriend was a “John.” That incident naturally, turned out to be entirely bogus, as the whole thing was videotaped and she’d been photographed from an overlooking office having vigorous sex half-in-half-out of her car. Eventually she was court-ordered to issue an apology to the LAPD.

On the white, ultra-liberal, loonie Leftie side of the BLM movement, the precursors were images (82)first, the “anarchists,” who protested the World Trade Organization and tore the hell out of Seattle, played silly buggers all duringimages (52) the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, and then fizzled or drizzled into the Occupy Wallstreet movement, which Petered out into a general “Occupy…..” whatever movement. (I think all they needed was a good bowel movement.) When all these Renta-Mob hobby protests lost their immediacy, their devotees were redirected and absorbed into the various “Justice for Trayvon,” and then “Hands up Don’t Shoot,” sorts of mobbery, and ultimately into Black Lives Matter, which emerged as the premier protest family.

The first real, African-American-based, serious practice run for what became Black Lives Matter was the “Justice for Trayvon” campaign started by theimages (49) estranged parents of Trayvon Martin. This produced the “hoodie” as a cute, symbolic protest medium. “No justice, no peace,” started to re-emerge from the dim memories of the Compton riots in the early 1990’s. Rodney King was a complete stranger to Trayvon’s contemporaries, but Tracy Martin, his father, and all his gang-banging homies were right there in the thick of the “Thug Life” and “Gangsta Rapper” era. These elder statesmen led the way for their kids and grandkids, showing them how to seek a “Do the Right Thing” solution to what they considered to be a serious threat. What threat was that? At the time it wasn’t the cops. Itimages (39) was roving white rednecks chasing down little black children and gunning them down for daring to be black in a gated “white” community.

The narrative spun by Sybrina Fulton, Trayvon’s mother, to an almost orgasmic media that lapped it up with relish and conviction, was that little baby Trayvon was coming back from the store with Skittles and Arizona Ice Tea when the evil white racist George Zimmerman chased him down and shot him dead on his father’s front porch. And, for as long as the gleeful media, a host of lawyers and hysterical “black community” was allowed to spin that tale, a good month locally, andimages (48) then for nearly two years when the local prosecutors told her she didn’t seem to have a case, so her crisis production team took the fairy tale national in a huge way. The president responded: “If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.” And the rumors, the innuendo, the desperate, racially-charged emotional frenzy was thus legitimized.

After a year of milking every cent they could get out of T-shirts and download (11)donations, shaking down the home owner’s association for something like three million bucks, a million each for mom and dad, and a million for the lawyers, the verdict came in. George Zimmerman was not guilty.

Oh yes, there were multiple, deep, probing, local, state, and federal investigations. The attorney general of the US was all over Zimmerman like black on a bowling ball. Nothing. Not a hint of racism. No racial elements of any kind in the whole trial. Purely self-defence.

How could that be? Because the Fulton narrative was a load of wishful thinking and horsepucky. George Zimmerman was a brown-skinned Hispanic, not a “white redneck.” He went to his senior prom with a black girlfriend. He was the resident-appointed and much respected night watch chairman for a very much mixed-race non-gated community. At the time heimages (54) fired the fatal shot, according to several eye-witnesses, and later admitted by Trayvon’s girlfriend, Rachel Jeantel, Trayvon Martin was straddling his chest, pinning his arms, beating him in the face and bashing the back of his head against the concrete sidewalk. Jeantel described this as opening up a can of “whoop ass.” Trayvon wouldn’t have killed George she said on national TV, he’d just “whoop his ass.”

Turns out Trayvon Martin was a large, very fit 17-year-old, not the cute third grader shown in all the pictures in the media by the Fulton legal team and images (59)liberal propagandists. He was into mixed martial arts and enjoyed “street fighting.” He wasn’t coming back from the store, just desperately trying to get back “home,” he was milling around in the dark and rain for almost an hour, skulking near buildings and doorways, talking to his girlfriend on the phone. He was nowhere near his “daddys porch,” and made no effort to run or walk there. In fact, he seems to be the one who approached Zimmerman, who by that time was hanging around waiting for the cops to arrive in a minute or two. In order to do that, Trayvon would have had to double back, actually moving away from his alleged “daddy’s porch” destination and towards the man he was alleged to be terrified of. But then, that wasn’t his “daddy’s porch,” anyway. That was the porch of the condo of his father’s married girlfriend, and he’d only been there a few weeks. Trayvon had only just arrived that day. It wasn’t Trayvon’s neighborhood and he didn’t belong there at all—certainly not skulking around in the dark and rain. To anyone, especially a night watch commander, he was conspicuously out of place. He’d actually just been expelled from school and thrown out of his mom’s house because she couldn’t handle his misbehavior any more. At best this is a case of some sort of cockfight with one or the other of these guysimages (58) escalating a mere observation into physical confrontation. Sybrina Fulton herself suggest this on national television, saying it was probably some sort of tragic misunderstanding–until her lawyers got to her and shut her up about that likelihood for purposes of getting more cash out of the deal. This was never a case of some white redneck shooting down a helpless little black baby boy for “walking black” or just wearing a hoodie.

(Although, the neighborhood had indeed been the victim of a string of crimes, thefts, robberies and rapes, perpetrated by helpless little black 17-year-olds in hoodies, so in fairness, if you’re wearing the official uniform of a local thug, it’s going to make you look like a local thug. So people might be suspicious of you sneaking around their housing complex in the dark on a rainy night.)

The Trayvon Martin media and “black community” narrative was so fundamentally dishonest that to this day nobody even knows he was not headed to the store for ice tea, butimages (60) was carrying a big can of watermelon punch when he met his end.

After the trial of the century, Zimmerman was pronounced “innocent,” but after more than a year of Facebook and YouTube hit lists, New Black Panther execution orders, and celebrities like Spike Lee handing out (erroneously) George’s home address with an invitation to go finish him off, the beasts of what would soon be BLM had become emboldened, more organized, and were actively seeking the next excuse for street-theatre and riot. They found it in Ferguson Missouri. Out of the death of one Mike Brown at the hands of aimages (50) police officer, evolved the “Hands up. Don’t Shoot” myth. (I say myth, but I really mean “lie.” Hence, “Black Lies Matter.”) The predictable narrative was that of a happy high school graduate, skipping down the street, minding his own business, eager to start community college in a few weeks, shot down for jaywalking, begging on his knees to surrender, hands up and trembling in fear.

Of course Mike Brown, the emerging BLM movement’s first “cop execution” download (15)poster boy, was not a “gentle giant,” as he was billed by his friends and family. He was a thug caught by a police officer who was just rolling by, as Brown was walking brazenly down the middle of the street after pulling a strong-armed robbery of a nearby convenience store, with an armload of stolen Swisherdownload (16) Sweets, probably headed home to load up a blunt or two with his partner in crime Dorian Johnson. When ordered out of the street onto the sidewalk, Brown basically told the cop to piss off, and when the cop cut him off with his cruiser, and tried to get out, Brown slammed the door shut on him, reached inside and tried to grab the cop’s gun. The gun fired once in the car, and after a scuffle the cop got out and resumed firing, as Brown first fled, then turned back and charged the officer, whereupon he was shot dead. download (17)Naturally, that’s not the story Dorian Johnson told. After lawyering up, Johnson went crying to the willing and waiting media with the now famous “He had his hands up, begging that cop not to shoot, begging to surrender,” lie. Later interviews feature the popular line, “He shot him down like an animal.”

Now, you don’t have to take my word for it, because this once again was investigated by numerous local, state and federal agencies, including a follow-up investigation for political reasons by the nation’s first black attorney download (18)general, on the insistence of the “black community” and under the direction of America’s first black president. All of these investigations concluded, based on the witnesses, many whom are black, who actually saw the incident, that the cop’s version was pretty accurate, and Johnson’s “Hands up. Don’t Shoot” scenario never images (65)happened. This of course flew in the face of the “black community” narrative, originally authored by Dorian Johnson, and embellished by himself and thousands of hysterical fans who never saw a thing, but had no moral or ethical problem riffing off of Johnson’s fable, retelling it as if they had seen it all.

Eventually, even the “black community” of Ferguson had to give up the catchy mime act the “Hands Up. Don’t shoot.” download (19)gimmick afforded them. By the time Freddie Gray was killed in transit after being arrested in Baltimore Maryland, the “black community” was looking for an equally clever slogan, a thrilling chant, a catch phrase they could rally under in its place. Somewhere in there emerged the phrase “black lives matter,” probably first as a hashtag on Twitter. It made a great poster. And it was more media friendly than its contemporary jingles like, “pigs in a blanket, fry ‘em like bacon,” “burn this mutherfuxxer download (21)down,” or “kill the cracker-ass pigs.”

As I type this, of the six cops involved in the death of Freddie Gray, three white and three black, are still going through the “justice” system. One has been through a hung jury trial, and a second acquitted of all charges. The only cop actually being charged with “2nd degree depraved-heart murder” is the black driver of the van, the apparent “murder” weapon, wherein it is alleged that Gray wasdownload (20) negligently not strapped into the back, and then deliberately “rough rided” around the neighborhood, allegedly resulting in stoving his head in with some sort of protruding bolt on the wall or floor of the metal interior.

The mayor, the city council, the police commissioner, and roughly half the police force of Baltimore are all black. It’s a liberal Democratic state, a liberal Democratic city, and the neighborhood images (71)where Gray was “cleaned off the streets” was slated by all of the above for “urban renewal” and the spending of 1.8 billion dollars gifted to that city out of “Obama’s stash.” Oddly enough, this “black power structure” that had deliberately set about improving its own city by making an extra effort on the part of the police to take criminals like Freddie Gray off their streets, as a result of their own well-planned program, in the end, demanded a federal investigation of itself to determine if they were institutional racists. images (68)Figure that one out.

In any case, with Freddie Grey, once again what became the Black Lives Matter movement coalesced in making its case for sainted black martyrdom at the hands of the police, in the person of a well-known criminal, a local drug dealer, one of many like him the police had actually been specifically ordered to clean out of the neighborhood for the good of the “black community,” itself. And again, it’s unlikely that the officers charged withimages (69) Gray’s “murder” will be convicted of anything, and certainly not the inflated, entirely political charges wielded against them by the showboating city prosecutor in an effort to pander to and placate the BLM rioters that give the mayor her marching orders.

I have the most direct experience with Black Lives Matter devotees in the two local, Saint Paul, and Minneapolis Chapters. The Saint Paul chapter is run by images (37)a young, up-and-coming grad-student caliber race hustler who seems to have sold out to the mayor and DFL (Democratic Farmer-Labor Party) powers-that-be, sort of extorting whatever concessions he’s getting under-the-table from the liberal establishment, in exchange for not shutting down the Mall of America or the airport again, and backing off shutting down the Twin Cities Marathon, probably in part due to somebody telling him it was always the Kenyans and other Africans who fly over who win it, and he’d be screwing up their qualifying times for entrance into the Boston Marathon. (And also in part due to the mayor and police chief making a very stern public declaration that theyimages (72) would not be handling BLM with kid gloves if they made the attempt.) The Minneapolis chapter has backed one of its chief fans, one Nekima Levy-Pounds, into election as the president of the local NAACP—much to the dismay of the plain, dumb, traditional liberals and old-school “black community” leaders. Her chief claim to fame in a neighborhood that was burned down in 1968 simply because they heard Detroit was rioting, and they figured they ought to have one of their own, is the nearly two-week siege of the 4th precinct station, shutting down a major access thoroughfare into work, food and hospital via public transit, and download (25)turning the neighborhood into a hobo camp and garbage dump, in between throwing Molotov cocktails at the cop shop and hurling long, filthy epithets and accusations at the cops guarding the fences.

True to form, the big 4th Precinct protest and most of the other anti-social mischief Levy-Pounds has sponsored have been on behalf of one Jamar Clark, a local man known for beating on his girlfriends, who was interfering with the paramedics who’d arrived to treat his latest victim. When the police arrived hejamarclark refused to take his hands out of his pockets, he was taken down to forcibly handcuff him, and in the struggle managed to grab the officer’s weapon, attempting to yank if out of the holster. Clark was shot by his partner after the cop pleaded for him to do so, saying, “He’s got my gun! He’s got my gun! Shoot him! Shoot him now!”

The “black community” narrative contended that Jamar Clark was handcuffed and shot in the face at point blank range, execution style. Rather than argue yet another load of BS I’ll just say that none of that was true as proven by the video, DNA, forensic, and witness evidence. Both officers were just exonerated of any wrongdoing in the incident.

Innekima summary, from my personal observations, what Black Lives Matter has proven itself good at is obstructing the business and peaceful, productive activities of normal American citizens for no obvious reason, with no clear relevance to its stated goal of protecting “black lives.” The “black lives” it chooses to protect from police interference, have been thus far almost exclusively criminals. The methods itimages (73) chooses to employ include bullying, threatening with riot and mayhem, cursing, staging disruptive mob scenes to shut down or delay public and private activities ranging from  airports, shopping malls, ball games, marathon races, winter carnivals, political rallies on both sides of the political aisle, and of course, actual riot and mayhem, including rock, battery and bottle throwing at police and counter-protesters, hurling firebombs at police stations, and the download (23)occasional potshot at the cops. I will also include nationally, the execution of several police officers. You can argue all you want that it wasn’t Black Lives Matter operatives who did these murders, but you can’t prove that it wasn’t, and any time I see a mob firebombing a police station, lighting up cop cars, looting and pillaging storefronts shouting BLM slogans, wearing BLM T-shirts, waving BLMimages (75) banners, it’s a fair bet that one or two of those hysterical, filthy-mouthed, cursing animals is not above sneaking up to a cop minding his own business in his squad car, and putting a bullet in the back of his head to “even up the score.”

But the bottom line is, Black Lives Matter has it bass-ackwards. Their entire images (74)effort is concentrated on justifying and enabling the criminal class within the “black community,” while neutralizing the police agencies dedicated to keeping it under control. The numbers, the cold, hard statistics, just don’t support their singular emphasis on police interactions in the first place, nor their insistance that it is law enforcement, not the “black community” that needs to modify its behavior and mental attitude to fix the problem. Furthermore the problem illustrated in the statistics isn’t generally the cops at all–it’s theimages (47) black criminal class that’s the biggest threat to the “black community,” not the cops. Why any Latter-day Saint of any color would want to even try to defend, much less run with that crowd, puzzles me.

11 Major Misconceptions About the Black Lives Matter Movement

Posted in Black LDS Lives Matter: Part 1 Who are You? | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Black LDS Lives Matter: Introduction

For some time I’ve been exploring the relationship between scientific, sociological and black-lives-matter-lolhistorical notions of “race” and LDS theology. This has led me into some pretty sketchy church history examinations and evolved into a cathartic look at LDS doctrines regarding “Curse of Cain,” or “Curse of Ham” traditions from Jewish, orthodox or “historical” Christian, and “Mormon” or “Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ” perspectives. This culminated in a series of essays published elsewhere on this site I’ve here called, with tongue firmly in cheek, “Mormonism and the Mythical Curse of Cain.” The summary of which could be:

“Never mind all that stuff about the Negro.”

This casual dismissal of generations of “doctrine” about race and skin color, when download (3)proposed as it seems to be, as an “ultimate” answer isn’t very satisfying. Not that is, in terms of clarifying the status of over 160 years of LDS interpretation of a canon that is still current, and still contains numerous passages that imply troublesome conclusions about race and skin color. Nor does it do anything to mitigate what clearly has to be the bigoted mindset of a whole string of “prophets” still billed as “infallible,” inasmuch as at one time they were all in locked harmony, condemning the “Negro” to a lesser pre-mortal and sometimes post-mortal existence on one now admittedly lame “doctrinal” excuse or another. But what this research has really taught me, is that it will be a good long time before the Brethren deem it worthy of their immediate involvement to directly address this whole obvious doctrinal screw-up and put the whole mess of inspirational implications in coherent, justifiable order.


The above map comes from the 1975 Ensign article titled, ” Who and Where Are the Lamanites?” By Lane Johnson. More quotes from the article below.

And the skins of the Lamanites [Native Americans] were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob, and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.

Book of Mormon, Alma, chapter 3, verse 6

After the people again forgot the Lord and dissensions arose, some of them took upon themselves the name Lamanites and the dark skin returned. When the Lamanites fully repent and sincerely receive the gospel, the Lord has promised to remove the dark skin. The Lord declared by revelation that, ‘before the great day of the Lord shall come, Jacob shall flourish in the wilderness, and the Lamanites shall blossom as a rose.’ The dark skin of those who have come into the Church is no longer to be considered a sign of the curse. Many of these converts and delightsome and have the Spirit of the Lord. Perhaps there are some Lamanites today who are losing the dark pigment. Many of the members of the Church among the Catawba Indians of therace_headers1 South could readily pass as of the white race; also in other parts of the South.

Prophet Joseph Fielding Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, v. 3, p. 123, 1953

The day of the Lamanites is nigh. For years they have been growing delightsome, and they are now becoming white and delightsome, as they were promised. In this picture of the twenty Lamanite missionaries, fifteen of the twenty were as light as Anglos; five were darker but equally delightsome. The children in the home placement program in Utah are often lighter than their brothers and sisters in the hogans on the reservation…. At one meeting a father and mother and their sixteen-year-old daughter were present, the little member girl-sixteen sitting between the dark father and mother, and it was evident she was several shades lighter than her parents on the same reservation, in the same Hogan, subject to the same sun and wind and weather. There was the doctor in a Utah city who for two years had had an Indian boy in his home who stated that he was some shades lighter than the younger brother just coming into the program from the reservation. These young members of the Churchextremely-racist-mormon-apostle-quote are changing to whiteness and delightsomeness. One white elder jokingly said that he and his companion were donating blood regularly to the hospital in the hope that the process might be accelerated.

Prophet Spencer W. Kimball, General Conference, Oct. 1960

The Lord has never indicated that black skin came because of being less faithful. Now, the Indian; we know why he has changed, don’t we? The Book of Mormon tells us that; and he has a dark skin, but he has promise there that through faithfulness, that they all again become a white and delightsome people.

Apostle LeGrand Richards, Interview by Wesley P. Walters and Chris Vlachos, Aug. 16, 1978, Church Office Building, available online at:

How much, if any of this previous Book of Morman-based understanding of “darkness of skin” cursing remains valid LDS doctrine? (And mind you, this is quite apart from, and a separate doctrinal issue than the “Negro Question.”) It is all apparently cast aside by the new statement on Race and the Priesthood which ostensibly refers to all previous LDS traditions of skin color or racial distinctions as being irrelevant and repudiated as “folk tales,” born of personal ignorance and bigotry. But Book of Mormon and other ostensibly binding and divine canonical quote-shall-i-tell-you-the-law-of-god-in-regard-to-the-african-race-if-the-white-man-who-belongs-to-the-brigham-young-280058references to skin color and “cursings” isn’t addressed at all either there or in any followup statements.

If it is not in the “program” for the “prophet” to lead the church astray, the fact remains that on this one subject, a whole history of “prophets” have done exactly that. Apostle Mark E Peterson, in the quote photographically highlighted just above these paragraphs for example, takes a second or third generation stab at the “Negro,” and claims with all the authority of a “Special Witness of Christ,” that this entire race at best is only eligible to shine shoes and clean toilets in the Celestial Kingdom. That was not down to Brigham Young being the product of 19th century ignorance. That was the stance of the LDS Brethren in 1954 at the swelling height of moral and civil enlightenment in the United States of America now known as the “Civil Rights Movement.”

By not now taking an open, over-the-pulpit stance of condemning this whole train of leadership for lack of “inspiration” if nothing else, at least in this one issue, then current “prophets” are essentially allowing the general membership to fend for themselves until such time as it all blows over–or so they apparently hope. Throwing Brigham Young under the bus and laying all the blame for this 160 year-long “doctrinal” faux pas exclusively upon Young’s personal Mark-E-Petersen-racist-quotepolitical biases does nothing whatsoever to excuse the ensuing train of “prophets” who embraced and amplified his now officially confessed false “doctrinal” pronouncements on the subject of race and skin color. More importantly, it does nothing to redeem either Brigham Young or the train of “prophets” who followed him from the charge of falling short of the much-touted promise of Declaration 1, which is so fondly offered by the Brethren to church membership as an absolute guarantee against any one or all of them “leading the church astray.” The current official Moyle-antimiscegenationstatement on Race and the Priesthood should, if nothing else, once-and-for all put away the popular notion that there is a Mormon version of papal infallibility that applies universally to all issues, pronouncements, and matters that flow from the lips of church leadership, the “prophet”in particular. It should be apparent that President Woodruff’s Declaration 1 obviously applies as a promise pertaining to the single issue of halting the practice of plural marriage, as clearly implied by the actual text when read in its actual context. The Brethren however, continue to use this promise of absolute fidelity to God’s will in a universal context, on its own, and removed entirely from it’s intended subject matter. This they do, I can only assume, out of a combination of authoritative convenience and the need for ongoing self-validation:

  • President Wilford Woodruff declared that we can have full confidence in the direction the prophet is leading the Church: “The Lord will never permit me or5d046 any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty” (Official Declaration 1, “Excerpts from Three Addresses by President Wilford Woodruff Regarding the Manifesto”; emphasis added).

  • President Harold B. Lee taught this same principle: “You keep your eye upon him whom the Lord called, and I say to you now, knowing that I stand in this position, you don’t need to worry about the President of the Church ever leading people astray, because the Lord would remove him out of his place before He would ever allow that to happen” (The Teachings of Harold B. Lee, ed. Clyde J. Williams [1996], 533).

images (5)I’ve dealt with the matter of “papal infallibility” in depth in other essays published on this site so I won’t go here into that whole broad aspect of the current official flipflop on LDS racial “policy,” or “doctrine” on the “Negro Question.” For the purposes of my present musings I’ll simply remind the reader that the terms, “policy” and “doctrine,” or for that matter, anything said or published by the current leadership, in LDS applications are functionally identical and there is no practical difference between them all.

At any rate, it’s not all just going to blow over. “Forget all that Stuff about the Negro” download (4)isn’t a magic reset button for the whole love-hate history of Mormonism and the “Negro” and other racial minorities in this “white,” Anglo-Saxon Protestant, American-founded religious endeavor. There’s always somebody, some enemy of the church or some innocent but logical and curious investigator, who’s going to keep on stumbling into it or have it thrown at them in a big messy heap. It’s all on the cloud, and it’s all an anti-Mormonists’ dream. So, I continue to address the issue in my own clumsy way. In this regard, I spent some months recently following the three LDS “black” Facebook groups currently available. I was hoping for insight into “black” LDS concerns about past LDS teachings about race, how it has affected them as “black” investigators or young members, and how they perceive the latest statements about “Race and the Priesthood,” ostensibly the most “authoritative” position of the Brethren on the matter. (Albeit, published as a news release, rather than an official proclamation, signed, read over the pulpit, and headed for canonization.) What I found instead quite took me aback.

For one thing, “black” African American Latter-day Saints seem to know even less about the history of LDS Curse of Cain mythology than “white” Latter-day Saints do. This is particularly true images (36)of younger, or newer members. Indeed, they seem to take it as a badge of faith to pretend it doesn’t matter anyway. Ignorance is bliss. There’s a clear sense that if you go poking around in there it’ll only damage your testimony. What you don’t know can’t hurt you. Until it hits you in the face I suppose.


Powder horn inscribed “Warsaw Regulators, The end of the Polygamist Joseph Smith kilt at Carthage Jail June 27, 1844.”

Also, and this is quite unfortunate, African American Saints, by ignoring the long history of specifics in LDS policy/doctrine on the “Negro Question,” are all too subject to being sucked into the prevailing notion outside the church, that Latter-day Saints used to hold all the same views that the KKK or orthodox, “historic” Christianity has held concerning dark skin and the “Negro Question.” The black Saint surely has much to forgive concerning past “policy” and the Brethren’s many now-condemned explorations of images (46)Curse of Cain, Curse of Ham theology as represented both in the Bible and the current LDS canon. But the Saints were driven out of Missouri by good “Christians” who called them foul animals and heretics for inviting “free Negroes” to move in, work, live, and worship with them. Joseph Smith ordained several of these “free Negroes” to the priesthood, and in the end was murdered by the “Warsaw Regulators,” precursors or co-conspirators associated with the “Knights of the Golden Circle,” who also murdered Abraham Lincoln, and went on to become the “Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.”

Generations of the KKK listed the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as their mortal enemy. That might be good to know if you’re black and LDS. I think, anyway.

Mormons and the Ku Klux Klan

Actual “black” African members, all of which can be considered “new,” members, generally have almost no common experience with African American sentiments about images (45)“black-white” or any other “racial” issue. The notion of “white privilege” or “reparations” for the whole slavery thing is of no interest to them at all in terms of affecting their daily lives and aspirations. It’s not that they don’t often believe it’s a personal reality, it’s just that since, if true, there’s nothing to be done about it, they tend to just get on with succeeding in life anyway. African Americans on the other hand, deem “white privilege” to be so debilitating and systemic that their entire mentality revolves around being compensated for it one way or another, and preaching the oppressive evil of it to all their brothers and sisters in the “struggle,” citing it as their single reason for all life’s trials and failures, regardless of how high they might rise socially, politically, or financially in the culture and government. But that’s another rant I’ll have to write some day.

I was most surprised to find that what seems to go on mostly in these “black” LDS online groups, or at least a good part of the motivation for these groups, based on the sorts of blatantly anti-“white”prophets links posted from almost exclusively African American “alleged” Saints, is a lot of bitching and moaning about “white people,” in general, along with the specifically LDS hope-filled casting of lots on, and cheerleading efforts supporting the urgent need of the Brethren  to call this or that next general authority out of “black” or other “ethnic” options rather than “white.” This, as I pointed out to the contributors of these groups more than a few times, struck me as very odd, since, as I reminded them, the presidents of the church have all been “white.” Joseph Smith was “white.” Thomas S Monson, our current president or “prophet” is “white.” It’s a “white” church by and large up till this point, led by “white” leaders. That’s just a fact, not a judgement of worthiness. If you first-presidency-2011believe the church to be true, you have to accept the validity of its “whiteness,” it’s long train of “revelation” through “white” leadership, and the notion that these “white” folk were chosen out of all the earth to reorganize the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and so must be sanctioned by God, even for all the 20-20 hindsight of their ignorance in this or that compartmentalized social matter. You have to accept the divine wisdom of over 160 years of God calling these hunkered-down, isolated, exclusively “white” leaders selected for generations from a very “white” and sheltered pool of candidates along the Wasatch Front.

Quorum12_1510_resizedThis observation for some reason, did little to make friends and influence people among my “black” brothers and sisters of Facebook.

Two of the three black LDS Facebook groups I found at the time were administered by one particular contributor who simply did nothing but share far Left, black, very militant activist propaganda from Black Lives Matter and other social-justice, socialist, black liberation theology and other revolutionary sites dedicated to preaching against “white privilege” and demanding compensation of one sort or another from “white” America in download (17)general for “400 years of slavery.” This included sites and propaganda connected to Nation of Islam narratives, “Reparations Movement” arguments, and “Black Jesus” or “Black Israelite” theology. A rundown of other groups he was engaged in did not include a single LDS related web page or blog, and there was no hint of LDS membership, theology, philosophy or language in his contributions to any of them. A number of other like-minded administrators and contributors dominated the first two groups I investigated, and I found little or no LDS-specific analysis or content in either, but the third was administered by an obviously LDS host and contained some very obviously LDS content, but like the other two, was also more than welcoming of boilerplate postings shared daily en-masse  from all the aforementioned, militant, black-Leftist organizations, including those propagating the notion that all of mankind came out of Africa, and “inferior,” genetically mutated white races were barbarians who usurped “God’s Chosen,” and spread misery and oppression in a unique fashion over all the “chosen” dark races of the world. (Who we are led to believe by these proponents of divine “blackness,” were peaceful and images (71)civilized and Godly, before they were torn down and repressed by these freaks of nature, the “White Devils.”) The “black race” they claim would have clearly remained a shining example of genius and human kindness, but for “white” oppression.

In fairness, yes, one has to accept that to one extent or another these extremist, “black supremacist” cults are a counter-reaction to longstanding, and equally deluded “white supremacist” traditions, but ultimately they are just as deluded, self-crippling, and un-Christ-like as the precipitating Christian Identity Movement, the KKK, Aryan Nations, and any of the Neo-NAZI cloister fairy tales about the “Pure Aryan Race.”

Regarding the first “black” Facebook group I engaged, after opening a few comments, I was without warning or ceremony cut off (it being a closed group) for first raising the question of the actual LDS status of the aforementioned contributor/moderator who’s postings seemed so out-of-harmony with LDS principles. Furthermore, I observed openly that the only “white” contributors to the group seemed to be those overtly eager to apologize for being “white,”images (70) and cathartically grateful for the opportunity to repent and apologize for the incursion of “white” men into dark-skinned cultures in general–which I pointed out, seemed paradoxical, as again, any such confession would have to include the LDS church, inasmuch as it’s been until recently an all white phenomena, and thus God must certainly have been OK calling a load of all-“white” “prophets” to restore His church. In the course of debating this general theme over a handful of posts, and therefore delving into the validity of Black Lives Matter as an effective and LDS-friendly organization among other things, I was referred to snidely as “White Savior,” by a “white” Hispanic guy, criticized by a number of “white” LDS contributors who said, “Can’t you see that your posts are entirely different than all of the others?” and then blocked.

The second “black” Facebook group I investigated had very few “white” contributors, and I found, the slightest un-supportive observations about BLM led quickly into a lecture on Black Lives Matter objectives, it’s superior world-view and totally justified tactics, in which it was claimed that LDS perspectives were irrelevant to essentially any “black” issue, by the very selfsame main contributor/moderator I found so off-the-LDS-mark in group one, who was also administering this second group. (Goes by the name of Darron Smith.) At one point I observed that BLM was in fact founded upon a lie, dedicated images (38)nearly 100% of its efforts to defending the very criminals who were committing some 94% of all murders of young black men and black people in general, and that I didn’t see how anyone could join an allegedly LDS group and dictate the tone and content of it when they clearly weren’t LDS, and had no respect for or interest in LDS ethics, doctrines and morals. After a few comments along the lines of, “White images (39)folks aren’t ever going to do anything positive for black folks,” and the predictable denunciation of my observations as a “crazy white conservative,” I was promptly shut out by a co-administrator of this also closed group, who announced from his mobile device that he couldn’t wait till he got home to do so.

The third “black” LDS Facebook group I explored, I hung with for a couple of months, and had a number of lengthy, fairly heated but fair discussions with a number of contributors. Its moderator was obviously LDS, quite reasonable, and open to a wide range of discussion, in and out of LDS context. However, I also found that the same sort of Leftist, BLM propaganda made up a goodly portion of this forum as well, posted by the usual suspects from the other “black” LDS Facebook groups, including our own “Darron Smith,” not a moderator there, and a few other black-centric group-specific regulars. I ultimately withdrew from this open group voluntarily, almost exclusively on the issue of one contributor in particular, who had a few supporters, all of whom were apparently LDS, who kept insisting Jesus was “black” (meaning Negroid) and that the ancient Israelites we all “black,” (again
images (73) Meaning Negroes.) Furthermore, the general consensus of this almost exclusively “black” group seemed to concede that all of mankind came from Africa and was “black” meaning Negroid–and that the northern “white” tribes were the product of genetic mutations. Secularly speaking, skin color is irrelevant to either me or “science,” it’s not a “race” and a lot of “black” people from, in, and out of Africa, aren’t “Negroes.” Religiously speaking, well, there’s the Bible, the Pearl of Great Price and the lingering identification of a clearly very separate “black race” historically labeled “Hamites,” or “Negroes,” and that whole Adam Ondi Ahman thing to figure out. The whole issue isn’t clear from the standpoint of science even at this late date, nor is it clear from LDS or “Judaeo-Christian” orthodox traditions. What I found far more troubling and ignorant, certainly when entertained in an LDS forum, is a second line of reasoning in these black supremacist liturgies, where they are incorporating recent DNA discoveries that the “white” tribes were the descendants of Neanderthals, to claim that “whites” were thus less “human” or “less evolved” than the “black” tribes. (A sophomoric reversal on the Aryan purist’s claim that God made Adam and Eve, and Negroes evolved from apes, or in more “scientific” circles, that Negroes were simply less evolved than “white”download (10) men.) I’ll have more to say on the idea of the “white” Neanderthal sub-race theory in later BLM installments here, but the back edge of that particular propaganda sword is that you are thus effectively admitting that your brilliant, Godly, “pure” Negroid ancient ancestors and their “superior” civilizations had the crap kicked out of them and got enslaved worldwide by a bunch of stupid, grunting, hairy-arsed, stone-axe-wielding, pasty-faced cave men from the northern wilderness.

288646972ded028b0d30086d080497eaThe last streak of posts I recall in this final group were claiming “Mass Resignations” from the church due to protests over the recent policy change on baptizing children of same-sex “marriages” or partnerships until the children in question are of the age of majority, and a long sermon about how un-Christian this move was. Other threads included predictions that gay and lesbian “discrimination” was the next thing to be eliminated in the church, and women were on track to receive the priesthood soon–based upon the new-found “enlightenment” of the Brethren in the “black” question.

Basically I bowed out and said I couldn’t stand to continuously read what was essentially heresy at worst and bad science at best from a group of so-called Latter-day Saints who Human-originscouldn’t even see how problematic it was to justify those beliefs in light of modern
scripture, modern prophecy, and the restored gospel of Jesus Christ. And more so, I didn’t see how a group of so-called Saints could have an almost militant disinterest in even discussing the relationship these sorts of secular propositions had to LDS canon and doctrine. IE:

If Adam Ondi Ahman, the Garden of Eden, was in Jackson County Missouri, how could all of mankind have come out of Africa? Any Latter-day Saint of reason who runs across this net-nonsense should think of the so-called “LDS” propagators of this silliness: While you are online, typing your little heart out, spouting a load of “black” supremacy patter about the “black African master race,” should this LDS canonical reality not automatically occur to you? Shouldn’t at least the plain dumb “white” folks, born and raise in the church along the Zion Front, at least note the doctrinal dilemmas that follow this whole line of reasoning?

Apparently not.

On more than one occasion I was told I sounded like a racist for using the “N” word, and it images (41)took me a while to figure out this meant “Negro.” Replies to my previous essays on other blogs and forums on the matter likewise found more than one otherwise favorable response, claiming they wouldn’t share my blog even though they’d love to, because I would only be dismissed as a racist for using the term “Negro.” The “black” Latter-day Saint apparently doesn’t by-and-large even know that there is a difference between the two terms, “black” and “Negro,” or that “Negro” is and always has been the correct scientific designation of the “black African” race. But then again, there are a lot of “black Africans,” who aren’t “Negroes,” so “black African” or “sub-Saharan African” doesn’t do the same genetically descriptive job as “Negro.”

“Black” is not a race. “Blackness” is not even a reliable indicator of a race. “Negro” is a race. That this not-very-subtle difference would be an important distinction in discussing the history of race and LDS doctrine is beyond today’s “black” Latter-day Saint apparently, and has been replaced with an intellectually and spiritually damaging sense of double-talking, superficial, political correctness from popular, secular, left-leaning political forces, that should be shameful in a church that proclaims “the glory of god is intelligence.”

And make no mistake, there is nothing “Liberal” or “Democratic” about the forces behind either “Politicaldownload (31) Correctness,” or Black Lives Matter. These movements, and organizations connected with them are about shutting down opposing ideas. They are not at all about higher criticism, logic and reason, or a free exchange of ideas. They are not about either uncovering, exposing, researching, or preaching the “Truth.” They exist to prepare and propagandize a financially, politically, and personally advantageous narrative in order to profit and gain power and influence to effect a strictly self-serving agenda.

Several local and national Black Lives Matter “officials” or “leaders” have even admitted their goal really isn’t to save young black men from the mass annual self-slaughter of black-on-black crime. Their only focused object is to harass and persecute police officers who are forced to deal with their own “black” criminal element–which constitutes less than 4% of incidents according to a number of purely statistical surveys, that end up leading to fatalities in America’s “black” population.

“For every black man — criminal or innocent — killed by a cop, 40 black men were murdered by other black men. The, at most, 2.5 percent of the problem generates relentless rage.”

Crime expert releases SHOCKING new statistics about black men killed by cops

I trust I’ve already proven my willingness to harshly examine and criticize the LDS church as a whole and its leadership in particular in a fair, truthful and accurate manner regarding racial history and any lingering related issues. But, the fact is, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, even under the now-admitted 19th century ignorance and bigotry of our recently bus-thrown president Brigham Young, has never restricted priesthood ordination or temple ordinances based upon the color or “blackness” of a person’s skin. This probably seems like a dumbfounding lie to today’s “black” Latter-day Saint, and even more probably like heresy to the plain,images (45) dumb, “white” general LDS membership. That’s because nobody, not even those most interested in the issue, the “black” Latter-day Saint, has an understanding and command of the basic language, science, or genetics of race any more.

While we have no control over the schizophrenic mind-games of the ultra-politically correct, the academically-manipulated general population, of any or all races, we as Latter-day Saints owe it to ourselves and our posterity to scrape off the feel-good Millennial mind fluff from our grey matter, and get back to the basic, hard-core doctrinal issues of moving the church into a world of diverse peoples, races, and cultures–otherwise we are dupes, suckers, and self-defeating victims of our own spiritual and intellectual laziness, just waiting to be walked all over, shut up, shut down and manipulated by the loud mouths and bullies of pop-sociology and permissive politics or bigotry of the Right or Left extremes of our society.

And the worst of this cultivated, deliberate, racial stupidity and ignorance, is concentrated in a movement known as, “Black Lives Matter.” Have a look and listen. Tell me I’m wrong.

TV Host ANNIHILATES ‘Black Lives Matter’ Protester To Her Face

Posted in Black LDS Lives Matter: Introduction | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment