Is it wrong for the pot to call the kettle black, if in fact the kettle is black?

Yes it is wrong. Only because this phrase is used as a synonim for a situation when an observer makes critical claims about someone else when they themselves posses the same attributes. (I'm assuming black is just an arbitrary condition of kettles and pots exposed to smokey flames.) It implies lack of self examination witch is a character flaw, IMO. Then again maybe I should check my own flaws before I judge .

Obviously intentent and affect should be considered. If the pot was just making an observation or was trying to help the kettle then it is not wrong. Perhaps "black" is just a form of greeting that fire worn cooking utensils use to "keep it real".:p

Speaking of intent; what was your intent by asking such a simple yet moraly loaded question?

this phrase is used as a synonim for a situation when an observer makes critical claims about someone else when they themselves posses the same attributes.

It implies lack of self examination witch is a character flaw, IMO. Then again maybe I should check my own flaws before I judge .

Obviously intentent and affect should be considered. If the pot was just making an observation or was trying to help the kettle then it is not wrong.

Perhaps "black" is just a form of greeting that fire worn cooking utensils use to "keep it real".:p

Speaking of intent; what was your intent by asking such a simple yet moraly loaded question?

Why is it wrong to make a critical claim if it is true?

Again, why is it right or wrong to say if it is true? Why should the intent determine the moral rightness or wrongness of a true statement?