Hatred for the police abounds in the political atmosphere of America. The black cause is being manipulated as a means by which to stoke up revolt against law enforcement. This strategy of rebellion — wherein the criminal is elevated and the law enactor is despised — will advance criminality and encourage lawlessness. The rebellion is of the spirit of revolution; but it is also of quite an ancient spirit, one of Nimrod, the builder of the Tower of Babel. Nimrod was a son of Cush, meaning he was an ancestor of the Africans, and he led a rebellion against God. Today we are seeing an Afrocentric revolt that is using the blacks to advance rebellion against the representatives of law, the police. In this movement we find a strategy of destabilizing the currency, something reminiscent to what was done in the Arab Spring in which rebels refused to use the official currency. What we are currently witnessing — with the manipulation of blacks to back the cause to abolish the police — is the American spring.
If we only knew that all of humanity comes from three people, then everything would make sense. We are all the children of just three men: Ham, Shem and Japheth, and from this single family all of mankind springs. Thus humanity is just one family, all related, and all originally descending from one woman and one man. To the members of this family, there are different roles that are given, and there is one verse in Scripture that conveys this:
“And Noah began to be a farmer, and he planted a vineyard. Then he drank of the wine and was drunk, and became uncovered in his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. But Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and went backward and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father’s nakedness. So Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done to him. Then he said:
“Cursed be Canaan;
A servant of servants
He shall be to his brethren.”
And he said:
“Blessed be the Lord,
The God of Shem,
And may Canaan be his servant.
May God enlarge Japheth,
And may he dwell in the tents of Shem;
And may Canaan be his servant.” (Genesis 9:20-27)
Ham scoffed at his father for his nakedness, while his brothers — Shem and Japheth — covered him and turned away. Ham “saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside”; he looked and it was as if he pointed to Noah to condemn him, to expose him with the motive of mockery and viciousness, but his brothers clothed him. Here we see two camps of human thought: one side condemns and points the finger, telling everyone to look so as to put the person to shame, being of the spirit of “the accuser of the brethren” (Revelation 12:10). Noah was naked — yes — but his solution was not to be a made into a spectacle, but to simply be covered. Noah’s condition was simple — he was naked — and thus the solution was simple. But instead of carrying out the simple solution, he made a mountain out of a molehill; in other words, Ham exaggerated the situation, as opposed to his brothers who merely covered their father and turned away, not wanting to mock nor shame the man of the vineyard. Ham, in the words of Josephus, “came laughing, and showed him to his brethren; but they covered their father’s nakedness.” (Antiquities, 1.6.3)
From this event we have the commissions bequeathed to the human family: the God of Shem was blessed, meaning that Shem was given the spiritual role towards man, through his tent — that is, his temple —, and this makes sense given that it was the Messiah Who came from the Semitic line. And we know that tent signifies temple since the tent was used in Judea to denote such a thing, hence St. Peter told Christ after the Transfiguration: “If you wish, I will make three tents here, one for you and one for Moses and one for Elijah.” (Matthew 17:4) Japheth’s posterity was to be a people of empire and they were to dwell in the tents of Shem, meaning they were to take over the temples of Shem. And who was it who really took the helm of the Church, but the Europeans who led Christendom for most of its existence while the Christians of the Middle East got, for the most part, Islamized? As Augustine wrote: “Japheth already dwells in the habitations of Shem” (City of God, book xvi, ch. 2).
Ham, on the other hand, was given the role of a servant to his brothers. While most translations render the verse as “Cursed be Canaan,” it is more of an interpretational translation, showing that the curse was so deep as to effect Ham’s sons, and since the Torah is centered around the journey of the Hebrews, it would then put an emphasis on Canaan who was to be conquered by the Hebrews. The curse is not just to Canaan, and this is indicated in the fact that Noah states that Canaan shall be a servant to his brethren. Canaan did not serve Japheth, but Shem. Thus, the curse was for all of Ham’s sons. Remember what one tribe of Canaan, the Gibeonites, told Joshua: “We are your servants.” (Joshua 9:8) And Joshua made these Canaanites “woodcutters and water carriers for the congregation and for the altar of the Lord, in the place which He would choose, even to this day.” (Joshua 9:27) The Canaanites who made peace with the Hebrews worked under them — Shem —, and those that rebelled against Shem, perished. Although Ham was to be a servant to his brothers, there is a story of a Hamite leading a kingdom that magnetized the earth and influenced mankind. We are speaking of the kingdom of Nimrod which contained the city of Babel which became the religious mecca for all of mankind. Nimrod was a son of Cush, the patriarch of the black African peoples, and ran an entire empire within Mesopotamia. And yet, as mighty as he was, and as prestigious as his empire was, it led the world in a delusion of ascending the heavens and reaching the celestial realm.
“And Cush begat Nimrod: he began to be a mighty one in the earth.
He was a mighty hunter before the Lord: wherefore it is said, Even as Nimrod the mighty hunter before the Lord.
And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.” (Genesis 10:8-10)
It was within this kingdom where man said: “let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven” (Genesis 11:4)
The religion of Babel was astrological; for when they speak of ascending the heavens they are referring to the stars and the planets. It has been assumed that the Babylonians were the originators of astrology, but according to the Roman scholar Lucian, it was the Ethiopians (Cushites) who were the first to come up with this idea:
“It was the Aethiopians that first delivered this doctrine [of astrology] unto men. The ground thereof was in part the wisdom of their nation, the Aethiopians being in all else wiser than all men.” (Lucian, Astrology, trans. A.M. Harmon, ed. Loeb, p. 351, brackets mine.)
So it was a Cushite — an African — who led the world to an astral religion, and it was the Ethiopians (a Cushite people) — according to Lucian — who invented astrology. Here we have an interesting corroboration, and this leads us to another thought: if Ham was to serve, why is he here influencing the world? It was a rebellion. Josephus describes Nimrod’s cause as a revolt against God Himself:
“Now it was Nimrod who excited them to such an affront and contempt of God. He was the grandson of Ham, the son of Noah, a bold man, and of great strength of hand. He persuaded them not to ascribe it to God, as if it was through his means they were happy, but to believe that it was their own courage which procured that happiness. He also gradually changed the government into tyranny, seeing no other way of turning men from the fear of God, but to bring them into a constant dependence on his power. He also said he would be revenged on God, if he should have a mind to drown the world again; for that he would build a tower too high for the waters to be able to reach! and that he would avenge himself on God for destroying their forefathers!”
So here we have several things that we see in Nimrod: A revolutionary spirit towards God and a tyrant. A revolt against God would most definitely mean a revolt against His laws and His system. In the law that was spoken through Noah, Ham is to serve, and Nimrod is not serving but ruling over the minds of the world, leading them astray in his universal empire of pagandom. Ham laughed at his father, and Nimrod scoffed at God Himself. The world followed Ham, and Ham tyrannized and deceived them. But, since the Hamite was to serve and not lead the world, how then did Nimrod accomplish this universal rebellion? It is obvious that he received the assistance from others. St. John of Damascus teaches that it was one of the sons of Japheth, Javan, who partook in the building of the Tower of Babel. Javan, as John wrote, “was one of those engaged in the building of the Tower, when the tongues were all confounded”. (St. John of Damascus, Heresies, 3) Nimrod, it seems, was used by forces behind him as a mean to revolution. The world followed Ham in Babel, and today there is a madness in the atmosphere, one which uses the black cause as an instrument of revolution.
We are not speaking of the decent Black man who goes to Church and takes care of his family, but the manipulation of blacks to believe that the whites, or the police, are his enemy, as part of a strategy to stoke revolt against the established order. We see this in the Black Lives Matter movement, since its leader, Patricia Cullors, admitted that she is a communist and that she wants to push blacks towards Marxism: “We are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories. And I think that what we really tried to do is build a movement that could be utilized by many, many black folk”. BLM is simply a movement that uses the black cause as a way to advance a revolutionary ideology of Marxism. Targeting blacks to become tools for Communism is not something new, but was a strategy utilized by the Soviet Union itself beginning in 1928 when the Comintern — the Communist International — came up with a plan to recruit Southern blacks and spread the idea of “self-determination in the Black Belt.” The ultimate plan of the Soviets was to eventually help create a separate black state within the American South and then use it as a center to spark Communist revolution throughout the rest of North America.
The “defund the police” movement is another example of using blacks to push for revolution. The term, “defund the police” can be traced back to the organization, Black Visions which (as we read on its website) calls for “building visionary, strategic, and sustainable movements led by Black Queer and Trans folks that can hold all of us.” The destruction of the family for Sodom and the defunding of the police — which would only cause more crime and devastate the cohesiveness of the country — is here being advanced through the facade of a black cause.
Black Visions is sponsored by TakeAction Minnesota, an affiliate of People’s Action, a revolutionary Left-wing organization that uses mob rule to pressure and intimidate its enemies. For example, in 2010, People’s Action organized a mob of 500 people to go to the home of Greg Baer, who was deputy general counsel for corporate law at Bank of America, solely because he worked for a major bank. It was a way to stoke up populist rage against the rich as part of the typical Left-wing strategy of class war. The mob was there to not only scare Baer, but his family. As Nina Easton, a journalist who was Baer’s neighbor and who witnessed the event, wrote:
“when hundreds of loud and angry strangers are descending on your family, your children, and your home, a more apt description of this assemblage would be “mob.” Intimidation was the whole point of this exercise, and it worked-even on the police. A trio of officers who belatedly answered our calls confessed a fear that arrests might “incite” these trespassers. … Now, with populist rage providing a useful cover, it appears we’ve crossed into a new era: The politics of personal intimidation.”
The main group behind this mob protest was the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). An organizer for the SEIU is Jewish Left-wing activist, Stephen Lerner. For Lerner, his entire mission is power. In his own words:
“This is about building and creating power … We’re not going to convince the other side that we’re right through intellectual argument. We need to create power, and in a way we need to talk about how we create a crisis for the super rich.”
Lerner’s words are reminiscent of another Jewish revolutionary, Vladimir Lenin, when he said: “What we want is power! Power that is limited by nothing!” The entire goal of these movements is power. They will speak of justice for workers, or for blacks or other minorities, but this is merely the using of such demographics as a means by which to spark revolution the purpose of which is to obtain power. The plan of Lerner to “create a crisis for the super rich” was to, according to Business Insider: “nuke the stock market, and weaken Wall Street’s grip on power, thus creating the conditions necessary for a redistribution of wealth and a change in government. As soon as I heard redistribution of wealth”.
In 2011 Lerner described his strategy to “destabilize the folks that are in power” by breaking down the economy through not paying massive debts. For example, Lerner advocated for students to not pay back student loans: “What would happen if students said we are not going to pay. It’s a trillion dollars. Think about republicans screaming about debt a trillion dollars in student debt.” Lerner’s plan is all about destroying the currency, and thus destabilizing the country. The strategy is within the American policy of toppling a government. This was a strategy of Gene Sharp, the son of a pastor who instructs people on how to do revolutions. His book “The Politics of Nonviolent Action,” has 198 methods of revolt, one of which is not using the government currency. Rebels in Egypt used Sharp’s strategies to topple Mubarak in the 2011 Arab Spring. What we are currently witnessing, with the using of the blacks against the police, is the sparking of the American spring, full of populist rage and hysteria.
Lerner’s plan —full of the spirit of rebellion and chaos — involves people doing a strategic default, not paying their mortgages while they still can, and sucking the capital out of banks to cover those losses. He pushes for truck drivers to go on strike in order to stop entire shipments of products to destabilize the economy: “Shut down the nation’s highways, with striking truck drivers and their supporters blocking major highways in addition to picketing their terminals. This type of action would bring large segments of the economy to a standstill.” In such conniving scheming for chaos and violence, Shem becomes Nimrod, possessed with the spirit of evil. “In transgressing and lying against the Lord, and departing away from our God, speaking oppression and revolt, conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood.” (Isaiah 59:13)
Lerner — a son of Shem — exhorts for physically stoping companies from delivering goods: “Imagine how different our organizing and bargaining campaigns would be if we started using our capacity to physically interfere with the ability of companies to operate, produce, and deliver goods and services”. If goods cannot be transported, that means the economy getting suffocated and people, not getting the products they want, getting infuriated. Imagine if such revolutionaries succeeded in stopping the transportation of food; it would be an engineered crisis that would bring the reality of starvation to people who would then revolt, which is exactly what these agitators want. These very escalators and attention seekers are now using exaggerations of police shootings as a way to stoke up blacks against the government with the hopes of sparking revolt.
One of the organizations that wants to defund the police is the Center for Popular Democracy, directed by Andrew Friedman, Ana Maria Archila and Brian Kettenring. This group supports the idea to “permanently end and cease any further appropriation of funding to local law enforcement in any form.” On their website they speak of “beautiful and powerful actions with calls to defund police” and “invest in black communities,” again using the blacks as the cover for their revolt against authority. Such groups want to ultimately abolish the police altogether. On the official Popular Democracy website, it reads on the bio for Ria Thompson-Washington, the group’s “national democracy manager”, that she “is an enthusiastic advocate for the abolition of police, prisons, and the carceral state.” On Popular Democracy’s official Twitter account it reads:
“Police officers must be held accountable for murder and the police state that keeps killing Black and Brown people must be abolished.”
What these people really want is lawlessness. The great majority of people killed by the police were armed, thus all that these people are asking for is freedom to criminality and for misery for blacks who would suffer the most under this anti-cop delusion, since they would be hit hard by high crime rates.
Our problem is not race nor skin color, but rebellion. When the African American follows God and respects authority, then he is a blessing. In many cases, blacks are actually more vibrant and enthusiastic in the fight against Sodom than many white Christians are. We are not speaking against blacks, but the manipulation of blacks for an evil purpose, for rebellion. The spirit of rebellion is the spirit that laughed at Noah when he was naked, that called for a building of a tower to reach up to the heavens; it was this very spirit that laughed at Christ when He was naked. The rebellion is not confined to a single people, but rather it is a spirit or a mentality that brings about a curse that can span generations.
It came upon Ham when he mocked his father, and it even came upon those sons of Shem when they mocked their King as He was suspended from a cross on Mount Golgotha. The curse upon Ham was one of servitude, and yet Nimrod did not serve but tyrannized; he did not listen to the God of Shem, but rejected Him and sought to burn down the tents of Shem. Here lies the rebellion of Ham. Noah drank of the fruit of the vine, and suffered in his despair, naked and sorrowful, and Ham laughed at him. Christ was tormented in the cup of suffering (Luke 22:42), and as He hung from the cross, naked and in agony, there were the sons of Shem, scoffing at him. At this moment, Shem became Ham; at this moment, the Jews became Nimrod, not wanting to build a tower up to heaven to overthrow God, but delighting that they had killed the King of Heaven Himself.
Ham exaggerated his father’s nakedness, and the Jews exaggerated the words of Christ, twisting the truth for their own despotic manipulation of the Roman government. It is true that Christ spoke of a Kingdom, but the Jews exaggerated this to make it out to be that Christ wanted to supplant the Roman government with His own government. “If you release this man,” they said to Pilate, “you are not Caesar’s friend. Everyone who makes himself a king opposes Caesar.” (John 19:12). Here we see the spirit of Ham; for he exaggerated his father’s nakedness and made it into a major spectacle. Truth is exaggerated, and cruelty is uplifted as the response to what is exaggerated. Christ’s words were exaggerated, and the solution called for by the bickering mob was the most humiliating of deaths. Christ was naked, and yet His suffering clothes our shame amidst the scoffers; Noah was naked, and Shem and Japheth covered his shame with a humility that lied within them, in the face of their brother who mocked and laughed and made a show of his father. “And of this there is a figure in Ham going out to proclaim his father’s nakedness; while Shem and Japheth, to cover or honor it, went in, that is to say, did it inwardly.” (Augustine, City of God, book xvi, ch. 2) Nimrod, the posterity of Ham, leads a revolution against God; the Jews murder God’s son. Shem becomes Ham, and the Jews were possessed by the spirit of Nimrod. If Satan desires to make the world what it was in Nimrod’s city of Babel, then so shall be his plan for the future.
Nimrod was a Hamite who led the world to universal delusion, and thus in far antiquity mankind went through a Hamitization, or a Hamitic revolt against that law of God which was spoken through Noah. Today we see powerful the media apparatus constantly trying to spark sympathy for Black criminals and hatred for the police officers who arrest them or even kill them. We see this with the story of Daunte Wright. He was a black man who choked a woman, put a pistol on her head and then demanded that she give him her money. Wright was arrested and he got out on bail, but he possessed a pistol illegally and a warrant was put out for his arrest. He was caught eventually but tried to escape arrest and ended up getting shot and killed accidentally by an officer who was caught in the heat of the moment. Activists have tried to use the story of Wright as propaganda against the institution of the police. Nimrod became the instrument of rebellion against authority — the laws of Noah — and so today we see blacks being used as instruments to revolt against the authority of the police.
What we are witnessing is the attempt at Hamitization of the country. Whether it be Ham laughing at the leader of humanity — Noah —, or Nimrod building the Tower of Babel to rebel against God, or the current manipulation of blacks to hate the police to foment rebellion, it is all of the diabolical spirit of callousness. “And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold.” (Matthew 24:12) To hate authority is to hate compassion; for it is the sword of the state that unleashes the vengeance of God’s justice against evil doers.
“But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.” (Romans 13:4) Society cannot exist without a monopoly on violence; that is, the state’s exclusive authority to use force to enact justice. Without this, no government can exist. What determines the legitimacy, and the existence of, the state, is its authority to use violence and the collective agreement of the society that such violence is justly necessary. For without violence, the criminals will never respect the state’s authority, and thus they will freely unleash bloodshed and through the use of force the criminals will be the ones taking control, since the populace will fear them and not the government. This is why it is so crucial for the state to enact violence, in order to instill fear into the hearts of criminals and thus keep society stable and safe so as to gain and maintain the cohesion and trust of the population. Once the police are hated, then societal cohesion will breakdown due to violence and the fear thereof. With violence comes polarization; fear of crime will drive wealthier people to isolate themselves in certain areas that are safer, and since the police would be terribly diminished, those with money will have to hire private security (just like in South Africa), and since blacks will be generally the ones hit the hardest, they will have no police to go to for protection.
So, in the “abolish the police” movement’s utopia, its actually the poor who suffer the most, while private security companies get richer. Thus, the very thing Leftists claim to fight against — private guns for hire — will only get more powerful if Left-wing delusions succeed. The solution is not the defunding of the police, or more segregation through having things like a “black national anthem” or obsessions with “Blackness” or any sort of Afro-centric ideology. The solution truly is the realization that we all come from one family, from three people — Ham, Shem and Japheth — and that each member has their role, each role being necessary for the health of the universal family.