Testimony emerging from the grand jury investigating the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri seems to confirm the police officer’s claims of self-defense. The official coroner’s report reputedly points to a struggle over the police officer’s gun. But more facts need to be known over the controversial encounter that inflamed protests in the majority black town against the majority white police force.

Lack of hard facts did not deter Religious Left activists Jim Wallis and Cornel West from demonstrating and seeking their own arrests in Ferguson last week as part of a “weekend of resistance” ending with a carefully choreographed “Moral Monday” protest. They even confronted police officers to demand their “repentance” for Brown’s “murder” while kindly offering to take their confessions.

After “much confessing, praying, and singing” in a Ferguson church, Wallis and West, with about 200 others, “marched to the Ferguson police station that has been the headquarters for much brutality against the young black people in their community,” as Wallis recounted.

Demonstrators drew a white chalk outline of a body in front of police headquarters as a “memorial to Mike Brown and so many other young black men who have been shot and killed, their names read in a painful but powerful liturgy as we silently prayed,” in protest against the “kind of police violence that is undeniably racial in its implementation.” According to Wallis, “we repented those losses and pledged to hold police accountable for moving in new directions.”

Then Wallis and fellow activist clergy got more personal, confronting individual policemen blocking their path to join them in “repentance,” prompting Wallis to recall, “In all my previous arrests for peace or justice, I had never asked a police officer to join in repentance.” Evidently Wallis’s exchange with his targeted policeman was cordial, as he tells it, although he doesn’t say whether the officer repented on Wallis’s terms.

After their “repentance” demands, Wallis, West et al. moved forward to provoke arrest, which they successfully achieved, as Wallis is an old hand at getting arrested across over 40 years of protests. “Arrests were not made until protesters started bumping police officers’ shields and eventually forcing through the police skirmish line,” a police spokesman told The New York Times.

“As faith leaders we were, of course, treated very well,” Wallis admitted, but adding grimly, “In sharp contrast to the ways young black men are often treated in those same facilities.” But Ferguson “must now be transformed from a moment to a movement,” momentously declared Wallis, who specializes in generating movements. “Racial policing is a sin — against our brothers and sisters, against genuine American democracy, and finally against God,” Wallis explained. “Quite simply, this American sin must be repented of and turned around,” and the “American faith community cannot rest until that repentance is done.”

read more:

http://spectator.org/articles/60762/religious-sanctimony-ferguson

Views: 468

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I say pull out all white law enforcement and let them police themselves.

Do you think it would help if they had more black cops? Or is there a problem with finding enough who can pass the tests, mentally, and honestly as well as physically?

This is not about COP's, this isn't even about race... its about power and revolution. It is about fundamentally changing a nation too embrace a whole new set of moral and ethical values... its about agitation and revolution... about taering down our Republic so it can be rebuilt in a new image.

Many of the groups protesting are not simply Black Activist groups ... an investigation of there pasts will reveal deep ties with the Communist Party or its affiliate socialist organizations... we are seeing the typical use of agitation used by Marxist to foment revolution... divide and conquer... spread heat and call for violence... create victims so you can create conflict and crisis... etc, etc, 

This man apparently has not read the Bible in regard to sin. No where in the Bible does it say that an innocent man who tried to protect his life commits sin for protecting his life. As for the alleged racial sins that black supremist leaders talk about, The Bible is silent. Even the rebuke of Aaron and Miriam because he had a Cushite wife (Cushites are of the E3b genetic phenotype and are native to Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Egypt and North Africa and are not black sub saharan black Africans) It was not a rebuke to Miriam and Aaron because of racism as the distortionist contend, but because they sought to displace the divinely appointed authority of Moses.  Solomon did not meet the queen of Sheba in a sexual liaison as many suppose, and Menelek is only a myth. Sheba or Saba has been uncovered by archaeologists in Yemen which is again a Caucasoid E3b phenotype known to us today as Yemen.

All the myths that corrupt clergy men and politically correct social engineers have tried to perpetuate about unifying and hybridizing the races are damnable lies. The Bible tells us plainly in I Cor 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples. (Greek-Typoi) : and they are written for our admonition upon whom the ends of the earth are come.

This means that the examples of Old Testament heroes and villains as well as the nation of Israel were a example and type of comparison of what is godly and what is wicked and destructive.

There are numerous passages of scripture that show that God did divide the genetic races of men, that he did expect the sons of Israel to maintain their cultural, religious and genetic identity and beware of the Nokrim which are genetically unrelated alien peoples. Even when Israelites did intermarry with related peoples, they were not members of the congregation of Israel until the 3rd generation or grand children. The Tower of Babel was condemned by God and Nimrod was condemned with it because he sought to create a hybrid one world order. God confounded that as he will confound the UN and Cultural Marxist social engineers.

No doubt all races of men are equally the creation of God and all are loved of him. People who have received Christ are united in a spiritual union despite race or nationality. But what the gospel did not say was that the nations were to be abolished, and humanity genetically hybridized. God did not make all men genetically equal. The Sub Saharan African has a genetic power three times as powerful as the R1b and I and J haplogroups of Europe and Caucasoid peoples of the Mideast, in effect that power snuffs out anything that breeds with that genetic type. Those who claim Christianity and condone global hybridization are in effect claiming that God made a mistake when he created the races. Beware, this belief is not Christian. The Christian God does not make mistakes.

Black supremist clergy men believe that it is a righteous thing that they breed out the white race and turn them into blacks, but racial extermination whether by bullets or by genetic engineering is still genocide, and genocide my friends is murder pure and simple. Men like Al Sharpton are the wolves in sheep's clothing that Christ warned us about. Those wolves do not have the right to define their version of what they view as the American sin. Murder is in their hearts, and this should be obvious to all rational people. We do not have much time. Satan is on the prowl, a great civilization, a great people, and ultimately the Christian faith is on the table. Spiritual brothers of any race are still brothers in Christ, and if Christ's love abides in you, then the extermination of any people should be an abomination.

 

As long as the $$$$$ keep coming in these so called religious people will keep up the racism.   Rev AL.. where are you.   Or are you too busy counting the loot.

Don't forget, they can make money of this scandal and the picture doesn't look to favorable, so they will keep on with the beat.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Gary Varvel

Political Cartoons by Al Goodwyn

ALERT ALERT

Gohmert: Dems Will Drag Out Impeachment — Try To Get ‘Best Socialist’ Nominated For President

During an appearance on Huntsville, AL radio’s WVNN on Thursday, Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX) offered his best assessment of what House Democrats were trying to accomplish with their impeachment efforts.

Gohmert told WVNN’s “The Jeff Poor Show” impeachment could tie up the Democratic Party’s presidential campaign efforts but predicted Democrats would use the occasion to nominate “the best socialist” they can.

“They would lose in the Senate,” Gohmert said on impeachment. “And besides that, the entire time it was on trial in the Senate, the Democrats who are running for president wouldn’t be allowed to campaign. That’s in the Constitution. They wouldn’t be able to campaign. I just can’t imagine them wanting to do that because if they send it to the Senate, they have now perfectly set up the scenario of 1996, where they will reassure Donald Trump is reelected as president. They don’t want to do that. They’re probably going to drag this thing out as long as they possibly can … through Iowa, through primaries — try to get the best socialist they can to be nominated.”

“Then just end up and say, ‘Now we’re close enough to the general election. We’ve thrown mud at the president through the House,’” he continued. “What they’re really doing — they’re using taxpayer funds to campaign against Trump. That’s all this is — a campaign fund that taxpayers are paying for in order to try to throw mud at the president. I’ll be surprised if they have that vote, but I can’t imagine they want to set up this president for reelection by having a trial in the Senate where they lose.”

Veteran's Day Tribute

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service