Final Call DePOPULATION SECTION • October 5, 2021

depopulation: (dē-pŏp′ye-lā′-shŭn)

To reduce sharply the population of, as by disease, war, or forcible relocation. A reduction over time in a region’s population can be caused by sudden adverse events such as outbursts of infectious disease, famine, and war or by long-term trends, for example sub-replacement fertility, persistently low birth rates, high mortality rates, and continued emigration.


Click to access FC.10.5.2021.DePOP_.Coverage.pdf


The Jewish Assault On Black Thinkers

Pulitzer Prize-winning author Alice Walker

Richard Cohen and the Antisemitism Industry Attack Alice Walker

Washington Post columnist Richard Cohen’s attack on Alice Walker, the Pulitzer Prize-winning writer, scholar, activist, and poet, exposes a repugnant Jewish mindset, one that our great athlete Lebron James just called a “slave master mentality.”

Lebron was speaking of the overwhelmingly Jewish owners of the NBA and the NFL, who—just as in slavery—force their intelligent, grown Black men into utter silence on social, economic, and political issues. This “relationship” exists in the literary world, where Blacks are policed by the likes of Richard Cohen, Alan Dershowitz, and that den of spies the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith.

Having no respect for Ms. Walker at all, massa Cohen is outraged that she has chosen to read a book by David Icke, and that she stated her choice of reading material publicly in a New York Times interview. Cohen, good citizen that he is, is reminding his fellow overseers at the Times of the Jim Crow law his own Jewish ancestors helped put into effect in 1833:

If any person shall teach any slave, negro
or free person of colour to read or write
either written or printed characters, or
shall procure, suffer or permit a slave, negro,
or person of colour to transact business
for him in writing, such person so offending
shall be guilty of a misdemeanor,
and, on conviction, shall be punished by
fine, or imprisonment in the common jail,
or both, at the discretion of the court.

True to the beloved slave-master model, Cohen won’t even dialogue directly with Alice Walker or her fans and admirers. To him, the respected author does not possess the capacity to analyze Icke’s writings and place them in proper perspective—namely, a Jewish perspective. Instead, Cohen addresses his complaint about Walker’s unlawful literacy to his New York Times brethren, whom he upbraids for not applying the whip with enough gusto.

These Jewish overseers have created a truly untenable dilemma. What if she had said she was reading Philip Roth, Margaret Mitchell, Norman Mailer or Saul Bellow, all of whom have been accused of racism in their writings? Would Cohen have been so quick to lead his Inquisition? Great American writers Mark Twain, H.L. Mencken, Toni Morrison, and James Baldwin have all been tarred by the Jews as “anti-Semites”—what shall we do with their writings? During his eight years President Barack Obama was besieged by Jewish accusations that he was “anti-Semitic,” with one Jewish newspaper publisher openly advocating that the Israeli Mossad assassinate him! What if Alice Walker had Obama’s Dreams From My Father on her nightstand? How about the writings of other American presidents, Mr. Cohen? Jefferson enslaved 200 Black human beings, Monroe, 75, Washington, 350, Madison, 106, and Hamilton also bought and sold Black Africans. So, no more civics classes (or Broadway plays) in all of America? Shall we burn ALL the books and writings of those prominent Americans in one great bonfire at the Washington Post under grand wizard Cohen?

The weaponization of the “anti-Semitism” charge has long ago passed into the realm of the bizarre. And their propensity to target Blacks of renown, Jewish leaders have learned, is most profitable, because it cynically exploits a latent Jewish racism that has always existed just below their liberal façade. It also allows them to keep the idea of Jewish “victimhood” front and center in the news without upsetting those whites with the power to counter-attack. But the “anti-Semitism” industry’s growing list of Black villains is as dangerous as it is absurd: Alice Walker? Toni Morrison? Mahatma Gandhi? Nelson Mandela? Desmond Tutu? Barack Obama? Martin Luther King? Oprah? The ADL, SPLC, and Simon Wiesenthal Center, with the prodigious assistance of Zionist imps like Alan Dershowitz and Richard Cohen, use these Black notables to frighten Jews and extort donations—the ADL now scamming annual revenues of $60 million.

Dr. Marc Lamont Hill

All Blacks would have to agree that Dr. Marc Lamont Hill’s recent presentation at the United Nations in support of Palestinian rights was incisive, scholarly, impassioned and impressively delivered. Even if one does not endorse his views on that subject, he proved that his voice is formidable. Jews in his home base of Philadelphia had a different take:

“The Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia strongly condemns hate speech in our community and throughout the world. When antiSemitic hate speech was expressed by Temple University Professor Marc Lamont Hill, we immediately took action with national and local partners. We have and will continue to condemn comments that reject the state of Israel and the Jewish connection to our homeland.” 

These Jewish groups abuse the “anti-Semitism” charge—even falsely inflating their statistics—in the very same way they abuse the memory of the Nazi Holocaust. Dr. Norman Finkelstein described this scheme in his book The Holocaust Industry: Reflections on the Exploitation of Jewish Suffering, in a chapter he titles “THE DOUBLE SHAKEDOWN”:

Cloaking itself in the sanctimonious mantle of “needy Holocaust victims,” the Holocaust industry has sought to extort billions of dollars from these already impoverished countries. Pursuing this end with reckless and ruthless abandon, it has become the main fomenter of anti-Semitism in Europe.

Unfortunately, the mass of Jewish Americans has chosen to support these money-grubbing antisemitism peddlers—just as they did Jewish gangsters Arnold Rothstein, Bugsy Siegel, and Meyer Lansky—feigning ignorance of their crimes.

In speaking of the Jewish Holocaust and Black writers, Richard Cohen exposes the ugliest of Jewish double standards. What if Ms. Walker had said she had Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf on her reading list? No doubt, Cohen and crew would be apoplectic. As we all know, Mein Kampf is considered the very blueprint of anti-Jewish evil—the book that the Simon Wiesenthal Center calls “the basis for Hitler’s policies and for the Nazi genocide.” Yet, if one peruses the ADL website, one would find Mein Kampf with an introduction written by longtime ADL leader Abraham Foxman! The very same notorious head of that gaggle of spies who are determined to scapegoat every Black man and woman they cannot buy. The ADL’s excitement is palpable as it announces that Foxman’s Mein Kampf intro is “In response to a surge in digital downloads of e-book editions of Adolf Hitler’s biographical manifesto” and “in anticipation of the expiration of the book’s Bavarian copyright in 2015.”


Only silence from Richard Cohen, and from the Simon Wiesenthal Center, which has tried to force Hitler’s book off Ebay, Amazon, and the shelves of university libraries. Turkey’s foreign minister received a protest from the Wiesenthal censors for its sale in his country, but neither Foxman’s Mein Kampf nor the ADL’s promotion of it has generated any concern. Instead, we get front-page Jewish outrage over what is on Alice Walker’s nightstand!

Enough is enough. The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan is the very worst nightmare for these shadow-lurking “anti-Semitism” peddlers. He has called for an open and public Showdown with them to either prove their false charges or shut down their corrupt and deceitful Anti-Semitism Industry for good. It is only when those who profit from lies, confusion, and discord are fully exposed that an honest and truthful discourse about real issues can begin.

‘Termite’ Is EXACTLY Right, part 1

Turns Out that ‘Termite’ Is EXACTLY Right, part 1


Sura 114 – Say: I seek refuge in the Lord of men, The King of men, The God of men, From the evil of the whisperings of the slinking (devil), Who whispers into the hearts of men, From among the jinn and the men.

There couldn’t have been a more potent demonstration of rank ignorance than Joy Behar’s tour de force  statement on ABC’s The View. She was referring to The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan when she let fly this monstrous absurdity: “I mean, what is his problem with Jews? The Jews did not own slaves—I don’t know what his issue is.” Meghan McCain quickly added a “Yeah,” thus compounding the offense. They were both in a state of agitation over The Minister’s now famously upsetting but—it turns out—deadly accurate use of a metaphor when he said

When they talk about Farrakhan, call me a hater, call me an anti-Semite—stop it: I’m anti-termite. I don’t know anything about hating anyone because of their religious preference.

That statement stands alone as a response to the age-old nonsense that ALL Black leaders who criticize white and Jewish behavior are “haters” and “virulent anti-Semites.”  As we will see, not only is there plenty to criticize, but the utilization of the termite metaphor is so absurdly common in political discourse that one must ask the mischief makers: “Is that all you got?!”

The Minister himself has used the termite metaphor at least two times over his 60 years of divine service—both times are recorded in the Final Call — wherein he was referring to the corrosive effects of adultery and corruption. In neither case was he referring to the Jewish people or the Jewish religion; instead, he was describing a condition of the mind and heart.

It is important to note here that the very core Teachings of the Nation of Islam deal most powerfully with the condition of the human mind and heart. We are taught that the most significant categorization IS NOT a racial one, but a spiritual one. The Most Honorable Elijah Muhammad has said to The Minister: “Brother, the best religion is, ‘Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.’ When you look at all of the teachings of Jesus, you can boil it down to this basic principal, ‘Do unto others.’” One is either a believer in truth or a promoter of falsehood. It is as simple and as complex as God versus Satan. The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan has ALWAYS been dedicated to that principle. Indeed, in his very language in Detroit he was drawing this divine distinction: I am not anti-Semitic—I am ANTI-EXPLOITATION and a defender of my people against ALL who are exploiters. And just as with Jesus, his “hard teachings” have rankled many an exploiter’s feathers.

Minister Farrakhan was obviously and purposely misquoted by a wicked interpreter in order to feed the corrupted hearts of the increasingly desperate Jewish racists, who are only now coming to grips with a destructive and exploitative history that will be covered at length in Part 2 of this article. Their slanderous behavior has made them even more perfectly analogous to the nature and behavior of that little milky white creature, the termite.

Before we move on (in part 2) to debunk Joy Behar’s shocking historical ignorance about the Jews in the African slave trade, let us first clear out some embarrassing hypocrisy. The first to make an issue of The Minister’s self-defense was none other than Chelsea Clinton, the daughter of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, who as senator referred to Blacks, the voting base of her Democrat party, as “super predators,” an insulting animalization of Blacks that lost her the election. Her racism was fueled by the wicked incarceration policies of her husband William, the 42nd president, who during his two terms in office put more Black men in prison than the combined presidencies of Reagan and Bush1. Chelsea, who was so anxious to begin her political career with a racist anti-Farrakhan tweet, has never tweeted about either of her parents’ capital crimes.

Meghan McCain’s only apparent claim to fame is that her father was the recently deceased Arizona senator John McCain, whose white supremacy she has inherited. During the 2000 presidential campaign the senator was asked by reporters why he continued to use the ugliest of racial slurs when referring to Asians: “I hate the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live…” His bigotry wasn’t limited to “gooks”:—he hated Blacks too: McCain supported the rescinding of Martin Luther King Day; he endorsed George Wallace, Jr., a favorite speaker among white supremacists; and he fought to keep the Confederate battle flag flying over South Carolina. Daughter Meghan—like Chelsea—has learned her race hate from the best.

Termites as Political Metaphor

Make no mistake, these women are being pimped from behind the scenes by the Anti-Defamation League/Mossad, which is determined to hide their own hate and racism by artificially creating “black racists,” inflating words, symbols, and signs over the Jews’ long, long, long history of anti-Black deeds. Today they use “termites,” a few months ago they used the 2005 photo of Obama with Minister Farrakhan, and for years their M.O. has been to fill the news with a fake record of recriminations that will stand in history as justification for his planned assassination. But each time the Jews plan (HQ 3:54), Allah—Who IS the Best of Planners—plans, and fewer and fewer people are swayed, and the Jews’ open deception is further exposed.

Frank Gaffney

The metaphorical use of termite has been deployed frequently throughout time. Richard Perle was the Jewish Neoconservative that is most responsible for the Machiavellian “War on Terror.” To prepare the world Perle sent out his Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense with anti-Muslim rhetoric like this: “They essentially, like termites, hollow out the structure of the civil society and other institutions for the purpose of creating conditions under which the jihad will succeed.” Frank Gaffney was not run off social media; he writes for the Washington Times and the Jewish World Review. You can find him here, tweeting filthily:

Spero News columnist Father Thomas Collins is a Catholic priest in Virginia who wrote in a similar vein about “The termites that are eating away at America’s soul,” and he assailed the promotion of abortion and sexual promiscuity and the destruction of family values.

Stephen Miller

Some of the most racist language and policies from the Trump administration are the work of a Jewish man named Stephen Miller, who according to Esquire magazine “Is Waging War on … America….from the shadows.” It is Miller who is credited with the policy of separating the families of illegal immigrants. Esquire describes Miller’s political tactics: “He’ll install allies in federal agencies to act as ‘termites,’ eating the structure from within to prevent it from providing services. That’s part of a larger effort to operate in the shadows.” Esquire’s intact account can be found here:

Going back a bit, the 1941 book Scum of the Earth, by the famed Jewish writer Arthur Koestler, contains a quote graphically describing the breakdown in French society after the Nazi takeover:

“…A planter enters his house after an absence of five or six days; everything is apparently as he left it, nothing seems changed. He sits down on a chair, it collapses. He grabs the table to regain his balance, it falls to pieces under his hands. He leans against the central pillar, which gives way and brings down the roof in a cloud of dust.”

Koestler is quoting from Maurice Maeterlinck’s Life of the Termites in order to establish in his readers’ minds a salient political point. Not only does Koestler find the termite to be the most accurate metaphor for society’s decay, but his other book, The Thirteenth Tribe, debunks the claim by the white Caucasian Ashkenazi Jews that they are Jews at all! His careful, scholarly, and historically accurate 1976 study found that the white people we think of as Jews—the Netanyahus, the Jonathan Greenblatts, the Alan Dershowitzes and the rest of them—are imposters with no genetic connection to the holy land or holy people of the Bible; they are not even Semites! Koestler proves that their Caucasian tribal ancestors converted to Judaism sometime in the 8th century. So the charge of “anti-Semitism” constantly leveled at Blacks and their leaders has no actual meaning at all.

The Southern Israelite, serving Jewish segregationists in the Jim Crow South, was using the “termites” metaphor to describe its enemies in a 1940 front-page article titled “Nazi Termites Fomenting Unrest; Press and Radio Subsidized.” It is an eerie foreshadowing of the racist scare campaign that the ADL is running at this very moment through social media.

Rabbi Leon Spitz

The American Hebrew magazine from 1946 followed suit, publishing an article by Rabbi Leon Spitz titled “Exterminate Anti-Semitic Termites As Our Ancestors Did 2,500 Years Ago,” in which he admits just in the title that Jews committed genocide—and he views this with pride.

In 2018, several “news” centers that now feign outrage at The Minister’s use of the word “termite” were using the very same metaphor in the very same way, with no adverse blowback of the Chelsea Clinton variety.

A veteran Environmental Protection Agency scientist profiled in the Washington Post described the Trump administration—or, as the Post called it, “the current regime”—in these words: “These people are like termites, gnawing at the foundation.” The WP Titter page remains unscathed:

David Cay Johnston

Earlier this year investigative reporter and Pulitzer Prize-winning author David Cay Johnston was promoting his new book, in which he makes the very same termites analogy. He has been interviewed and his book reviewed by a wide range of media outlets, including the New York Times, the Baltimore Sun, and Democracy Now, despite the Jewish publisher Simon & Schuster’s description of his book posted on

“Bestselling author and longtime Trump observer David Cay Johnston shines a light on the political termites who have infested our government under the Trump Administration, destroying it from within and compromising our jobs, safety, finances, and more.”

Both Johnston’s and Simon & Schuster’s Twitter accounts are going strong at: and

White conservative gadfly Michael Reagan, son of former President Ronald Reagan, tweeted his outrage at Minister Farrakhan’s Black use of the “termite” metaphor, attempting to shame Twitter for not “banning” him from its platform. But not too long ago Reagan had this to say about “liberals”:

“If you can think of the liberals, think of them as termites eating away at the foundations of your home each and every day….See, that’s what they do every day. See, we can’t afford to let them keep doing that…”

The man is still tweeting his hypocrisy at

Van Jones

Former Obama official and political analyst Van Jones took great pains to connect the federal government with “termites” wherever he appeared on the air. On CNN he said, “When you’ve got termites eating into every pillar of your government, that is a dangerous thing.”

Over and over, the use of the word termites in an obviously political context has been seen as a very apt and useful metaphor. Where was Chelsea Clinton when Fox News editorialized about her mother’s health right before the 2016 election:

“Before you purchase a house you inspect it for termites, before you purchase a car you look under the hood. Is it too much to ask for a health examination and report of all presidential candidates? I’m no doctor and I truly hope she is healthy but I believe the American people deserve to have Ms. Clinton’s full medical records open for examination.”

The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan has been pilloried for using the termite metaphor with laser accuracy. His extraordinary wisdom and his vast knowledge of world history have made him the most perceptive analyst on today’s racial and religious dynamics that have brought the world to the brink of extinction. When he speaks of this society and its racism using the metaphor of termites, it is best to stop, listen, and then think.

For those who chose to listen that day in Detroit, The Minister went on to describe in its ugly detail the exploitative and damaging nature of the Black–Jewish relationship that began on the slave ships of European Jewish merchants and continued in the Detroit city streets with the Jewish criminal narcotics mob known as the Purple Gang—all of whose crimes infested and ate away at Black life. Significantly, other scholars have made the very same point. University of Sussex Professor Clive Webb, Ph.D, is an expert in the field of Black–Jewish relations and wrote that the Jews traded in socially destructive commodities, such as beer, wine, and liquor. And in so doing, the Jewish merchants “were not so much providing the lifeblood of the black community, as injecting it with poison.”

Now, what insect does that sound like?

By the way, Dr. Webb is still tweeting at


Learn more about termites here:


Part 2: Joy Behar gets a Jewish slavery lesson.

Zionism, Pan-Africanism, For #Black Twitter

Rev. Jackson, Moshe Dayan & The Other Threatening Picture

In his introduction (written on Jan. 23, 1983) to the book Is It Possible That The Honorable Elijah Muhammad Is Still Physically Alive? Brother Jabril Muhammad wrote: “Among the main facts one should know about any communication, especially one of significance, whether it is spoken or written, are (1) the premise, (2) the intention, (3) the context. To put it another way, regardless to the means by which information is conveyed, or given, the more we know of the reason (the ‘why’ or the ‘motive’) for it and the circumstances involved in [its production], the better we can understand and [properly] use the information presented to us.”

That principle should guide everyone’s consideration of the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan’s message, delivered from the Watergate hotel on November 16, 2017, in Washington, D.C.

Part of the message delivered and the context for it involves the Reverend Jesse Jackson. And part of that context also involves Moshe Dayan. Still more, contextually, comes from the writings of Jude Wanniski.

On Nov. 16th, 2017, Minister Farrakhan said, “He [Rev. Jackson] … shook hands with Arafat. Sin. I don’t understand you people—that the President can go and meet with his enemies but if we meet with one of your enemies, who’s not one of our enemies, all of a sudden we are anti-Semitic. Every Black man of consequence was called an anti-Semite. Why do you use that?”

In September of 1979, Rev. Jackson, with the stated purpose of seeking peace, visited Israel. The Prime Minister of Israel at that time, Menachem Begin, refused to meet with him. Rev. Jackson called that decision unfortunate and among other things openly called for recognition of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO). Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the trip, though, was a photograph of Rev. Jackson embracing PLO leader Yasser Arafat. The picture and Rev. Jackson’s support of the Palestinian cause were used for years, prior to his presidential campaign in 1984, as justification for labeling him as an anti-Semite.

(Think over this, in the context of the current hysteria over a beautiful picture taken of Minister Farrakhan and a then-Senator Barack Obama.)

Israeli Foreign Affairs Minister Moshe Dayan, who was in New York at the time of Rev. Jackson’s visit in September of 1979, reportedly said that Prime Minister Begin did not meet with Rev. Jackson because he did not want to legitimize Rev. Jackson’s efforts at mediation between the PLO and the Israelis. Rev. Jackson, who cited how Prime Minister Begin had met with the Prime Minister of South Africa during apartheid, reportedly described Begin’s rejection of him as “a racist decision based on skin color.”

When asked in February of 1984, by Bayard Rustin, to explain why he embraced Yasser Arafat, Rev. Jackson reportedly answered, “They keep running that picture. The pope met with Arafat and they don’t keep running that picture. I met with Arafat one time. When you go to Japan, you take your shoes off before entering the house. In the Mideast, you embrace and exchange kisses. I embraced Arafat; I wasn’t embracing his politics. When I went to see Arafat, I challenged him to fight for a mutual recognition policy with Israel. But that got lost in all the hype.”

Israel Defense Minister Moshe Dayan

Something else still lost “in all the hype” of 1979 is a comment made over a year later by Moshe Dayan (who also famously led Israel’s invasion of the Sinai Peninsula in 1956 and served as Defense Minister during the Six-Day War of 1967). Dayan said, in November 1980, that “most of the soldiers” in the U.S. armed forces up to the rank of sergeant were made up of “blacks who have a lower education and intelligence.” Dayan also added, the U.S. Army “is made up only of volunteers. They have to insure that better blood and brains go to their forces.” Rev. Jackson responded to Dayan with a stiff telegram that reportedly stated, “If these quotes are accurate, black Americans consider such comments unkind, insensitive and an insult. I would remind you that it was Dr. Ralph Bunche, the first black U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, that negotiated the pact that made Israel a legal entity in 1948. For his efforts he won a Nobel Prize.”

Is there a connection between Dayan’s expressed view of the intelligence of Blacks and the refusal of Menachem Begin to meet with Rev. Jackson back then? And what of the view that Dayan, Charles de Gaulle (President of France), Nelson Rockefeller, and Liberace are depicted as having toward the Honorable Elijah Muhammad in a 1964 Esquire magazine cartoon? There, it is framed that Mr. Muhammad should be “liquidated” because he was a threat to their future.

One of the things that made Rev. Jackson so powerful in 1979 was his open threat—in response to Israeli Prime Minister Begin’s rejection of him—that Black political support for the state of Israel was negotiable. The September 25, 1979, edition of the Washington Post reported:

“While repeatedly stressing that Israel can trust the United States and that black Americans will defend the Jewish state’s right to exist, Jackson warned that blacks represent a ‘political reality that Israel should not ignore. We do have 17 congressmen. We do have 15 million eligible voters. We are the difference in presidential elections,’ Jackson declared at a press conference at Ben Gurion International Airport. Pointedly noting that Israel receives more U.S. aid than ‘the whole African continent,’ Jackson said, ‘I would hope that Mr. Begin’s rejection of us does not indicate that he rejects that which we have to offer. We have tax money to offer, we have votes to offer, we have moral support to offer,’ Jackson said.”

Jude Wanniski with the Hon. Min. Louis Farrakhan

Political Economist Jude Wanniski saw Minister Louis Farrakhan in this very context, believing that the Israeli lobby feared it was possible that Minister Farrakhan might one day cause Blacks to become more independent-minded in their political outlook, impacting U.S. foreign policy.

Recounting his first meeting with Minister Farrakhan on December 13, 1996, Mr. Wanniski wrote, “I expressed my belief that Jewish leaders fear that he could lead the black electorate away from the Democratic Party and into opposition of support for Israel.

As to the charge of him being anti-Semitic, Wanniski wrote, “His conflict with the Jewish Lobby is political, not religious or social, which is why Min. Farrakhan can insist he is not anti-Semitic or bigoted or a purveyor of hate, and I can agree with him on that.”

What Mr. Wanniski wrote is very insightful. Yet there’s more that can be expressed about the not so much religious but theological aspect of this conflict. And of the social aspects, it is critically important to note that Black–Jewish relations were deteriorating years before Minister Farrakhan’s involvement in the campaign of Rev. Jackson (more on that in a subsequent writing).

In two tweets I recently offered an opinion regarding the ultimate aim of the misapplication of the anti-Semitic label where Minister Farrakhan is concerned. Here they are:



Cedric Muhammad

March 26, 2018

(first begun on December 9, 2017)


Cedric Muhammad is an Economist and Member of The Nation of Islam’s Research Team

Congressman Rokita and Farrakhan

Indiana Republican Congressman Todd Rokita recently introduced a resolution condemning the Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan, the venerable leader of the Nation of Islam, the strongest and most independent organization in America serving the Black community and oppressed people around the world. Rokita—prompted by a cabal of sinister business and political activists primarily, but not exclusively, in the Republican establishment—has promoted a series of actions designed to discredit and demonize the strongest and most potent voice left in the Black community.

Rokita’s actions were stimulated by the more than three decades-old false charge of anti-Semitism leveled against Minister Farrakhan since 1984, when he rose to international prominence defending the Rev. Jesse Jackson in his quest to become the nation’s first Black president. Jackson, who himself was labeled an anti-Semite for his position on justice for the Palestinian people, had enlisted Farrakhan to promote his candidacy among the Black masses. Because of Farrakhan’s deeply embedded roots in the Black community, the combination of Jackson and Farrakhan ignited a spark in the Black community that shook the political establishment.

At the root of that political firestorm stood the Zionist leadership and their enablers in the ADL, backed by the leaders of the 12 most powerful Jewish organizations of America. Their anger was based on Farrakhan’s statement that not only exposed Israel as a racist settler state, having disenfranchised the Palestinians and sequestered them in a small part of their original homeland, but also revealed the Jewish control of Black politicians, entertainers, and athletes here in America.

Congressman Rokita, born in 1970, was at that time (1984), a political neophyte. He knew nothing then, nor does he know now, of the Honorable Minister Farrakhan’s expanding national and global prominence. Today, however, Rokita has emerged as a rightwing conservative Republican mouthpiece for President Trump and the anti-Black Jewish establishment in the “Party of Lincoln.” How ironic it is that Rokita is the mouthpiece for one of the most vile, racist demagogues ever to occupy the Oval Office, a man the Washington Post says has told more than 2,000 lies over the past year. Consider that, according to the Book of Proverbs, God “detests lying lips, but delights in those who tell the truth.” Yet Rokita seeks to pass a congressional resolution condemning a man who never lies, but is vilified for telling the truth and speaking truth to power. Rokita instead gives a pass to a man accused of a variety of sordid behaviors, ignoble activities, and outrageous policies. He has nothing but praise for a president who seemingly lacks morals, character, and ethics. But a man of faith and integrity he demonizes.

Rokita’s actions are sparked by the anger expressed by the Zionist community about a 2005 photograph that has recently emerged featuring Minister Farrakhan shaking hands with then-Senator Barak Obama as well as pictures of The Minister hugging members of the Congressional Black Caucus. The Jewish community was so incensed that their anger has exploded across the media world that they control. As a result, the image of Louis Farrakhan has emerged all over the internet, radio, television, and social media. Again, he is being touted as a Black Hitler; the smear campaign against him has been relentless.

But the discerning observer, more familiar with The Minister now than they were in 1984, must ask themselves, Why would a little-known congressman from an obscure district in the Midwest be so concerned about the leading Black voice in America? Rokita’s 4th congressional district has a population of almost 730,000 people, of whom only 3.3% are Black. An article written by Jeffrey Blankfort and the words of Ariel Sharon may help put this issue in perspective.

Jeffrey Blankfort is a Jewish anti-Zionist radio talk show host, a radio program producer for KZYX in Mendocino, and a journalist. In a lengthy exposé published in CounterPunch magazine on September 5, 2016, Blankfort described how the Zionist lobby controls the entire Black political establishment. The article, titled “Congressional Black Caucus: Deep in the Israel Lobby’s Pocket,” details how the Congressional Black Caucus’s political parameters are controlled by the Jews. Further, on October 3, 2001, the BBC reported Ariel Sharon, the former Minister of Defense and former Prime Minister of Israel, proudly boasted: “ I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people control America and the American people know it.” Evidently Congressman Rokita knows it also.

Jude Wanniski with Minister Louis Farrakhan

Slavishly doing the bidding of his Jewish masters, Rokita is sponsoring a Congressional resolution condemning any politician taking a picture, dining, or talking with his own people in the political arena. Some Jews such as Alan Dershowitz, for example, have become so apoplectic that they have threatened to abandon the Democratic Party if Keith Ellison, a Black Muslim member of Congress, were elected to the chairmanship of the DNC. This corrosive bigotry was applied to Black elected members of Congress for their informal association with Farrakhan—and for just being in the same room with him. That corrosive bigotry, however, does not apply to White politicians and their surrogates. White politicians are given a “mulligan” when it comes to dining, planning, talking, and meeting with the man whose organizing genius resulted in calling four marches in Washington, D.C., where over four million members of the human family gathered together to celebrate their humanity. Members of the orthodox rabbinic community appeared at one of those gatherings and actually bowed to The Minister and later referred to him as the Messiah.

However, Rokita and the wily Jews who control him forgot to hold White politicians to the same Farrakhan Litmus Test. A personal friend of Minister Farrakhan, former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, the late Jude Wanniski, invited The Minister to speak to the leaders of the Republican Party and Republican opinion-makers at Wanniski’s 13th annual gathering of Republican executives and investors, sponsored by the supply-side consultant at his Polyconomics Conference. The participants of this Republican economics think-tank did not consider Farrakhan an untouchable. Not only did they give him a standing ovation, the assembled leadership took turns shaking his hand and sought private meetings with him as well. The 1997 gathering of the Republican brain trust included Senator John Ashcroft, Representative John Kasich (now Governor of Ohio and potential presidential candidate), the former vice-presidential nominee Jack Kemp, and Robert Novak, noted syndicated columnist, journalist, television personality, author, and conservative political commentator.

John Kasich

Among the noted Democrats at the Boca Raton meeting were Senator Chris Dodd and UN Ambassador and former Governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson; representing the international community was the Chinese Ambassador to the U.S. Li Daoyu.

The Republicans were enamored of Farrakhan. In a private meeting I had with Jack Kemp in New York City in 1995, Kemp said of Minister Farrakhan’s Million Man March speech, “I could have given that speech.” Kemp was not the only Republican leader who was enamored with and captivated by Farrakhan. Robert Novak, in an article he wrote in the Washington Post on March 6, 1997, titled “Farrakhan and the GOP,” spoke of the respect then-Rep. John Kasich had for Farrakhan. Speaking of the kind regards The Minister had for Rep. Kasich he wrote, “Kasich was startled when his speech here to a closed-door audience was interrupted several times by standing applause from the Nation of Islam leader. As they shook hands afterward, the congressman was floored by Farrakhan’s kind words.” Novak ended his article by saying, “But if they ever got together, the political landscape would be transformed.” That speech was buffered by an invigorating interview Novak had with Farrakhan on his CNN television program, Evans and Novak.

Jack Kemp

Robert Novak

Wanniski reports on his website, Polyconomics, on March 4, 1997, that The Minister spoke for 50 minutes on Saturday morning, and answered questions for another 45 minutes. Wanniski wrote: “The applause he [Farrakhan] received was the most sustained in the history of these events. Of the several Jewish couples in attendance, there was uniform agreement on what I have been advising for the last several months—that he seems a more complex and likeable man than they expected.” After the large group meeting Farrakhan then held small one-on-one meetings with the assembled leaders.

Mr. Rokita would be well advised to study the lessons his Republican predecessors learned from their dialogue with The Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan. The ill-advised methodology he is employing at the behest of The Minister’s detractors will end up as an exercise of fruitless utility. Instead of serving as an obstructionist, Rokita could serve as a broker. He should take the advice of Mr. Wanniski and facilitate a dialogue between The Honorable Minister Farrakhan and the Jewish leadership, or bring The Minister before Congress and let him dialogue with the country’s political leadership and have them talk together as intelligent adults.

By Brother Jackie Muhammad. He can be reached by email at jacrb519 [at]