Slavery In Rhode Island–Who Woulda Thunk It?

by Al Benson Jr.

Awhile back now an honest writer named Jeff McDonough wrote an article that appeared in the Jamestown Press  in Jamestown, Rhode Island. It had to do with slavery in Rhode Island. I realize that our current crop of what passes for historians seldom wants to deal with slavery north of Mason-Dixon, the idea being that we are not supposed to even realize that it existed up there. And should it be admitted, which is rare, it will be downplayed almost to non-existence.

So Mr. McDonough’s article was quite revelatory, and you can bet no major media picked up on it. After all, they wouldn’t want to confuse their readers with the facts.

McDonough noted that: “Few people living today in Rhode Island realize that the slave trade was once a vital component of the Ocean State’s economy. ‘The numbers are astonishing’ says Ray Rickman, project director of an exhibit dealing with the slave trade in Rhode Island. In an 80-year period, people in Rhode Island got rich from the slave trade.”

According to Rickman slavery was pretty widespread in Rhode Island. “Slaves worked on South County farms and in the mansions of Newport. But it was the slave trade that was the number one financial activity for Rhode Island from 1720 to 1807.” McDonough noted that many Rhode Islanders were involved in the slave trade and Rickman noted that “Rhode Islanders are poorly educated in school about slavery.” Don’t you wonder why? In the War of Northern Aggression Rhode Island fought for the Union as part of “Massa Lincoln’s” massive army of emancipation (riddled with Marxists) and as the winners get to write the “history” books you can bet the farm that they wanted to portray themselves as looking good and the South as looking bad.

Some may claim the North got rid of its slaves decades before the South did. Donnie Kennedy’s book Myths Of American Slavery  gives the lie to much of that cultural fertilizer. But even so, slavery was still slavery, whether it took place in the North in 1760 or the South in 1860. If it was wrong for the South, then why was it not also wrong for the North? Why aren’t Northerners just as guilty as Southerners? The only difference involved is the time frame and that is not as far separated as we’ve been taught to believe it is.

And as far as guilt is concerned, there’s more than enough to go around and it hardly all belongs to the white Southerner. In his monumental work on the slave trade Hugh Thomas noted, on page 13, that: “If one is looking for villains in this matter, and some are, one should certainly indeed look at royal families more severely than at Jewish ones: I am partly thinking of the rulers of Benin; the kings of Ashanti, Congo and Dahomey; and the Vili rulers of Loango, who sold great numbers of slaves over many generations…” All of these above-mentioned rulers, starting with Benin, were black. That’s one more fact you seldom hear expounded–the fact that blacks captured and sold other blacks as slaves, to whites or whoever would pay for them.

More information is starting to seep out abut this now, thanks to the Internet that Obama would like to censor, but for years, this was a subject that was hardly mentioned. We were led to believe that white slavers just sailed over to Africa and kidnapped black Africans as they could find them. In reality, it seldom happened that way, but if you are a socialist historian with an agenda to press that’s going to be the line you push–true or not. Back in those days whites just didn’t wander around in Africa looking for slaves to kidnap. It was way too dangerous. They always did business with black slave dealers because it was much, much safer.

As time goes on and these little tidbits of information about the slave trade begin to slip out, more and more people are shocked to learn that they don’t really know as much about this subject as they think they do.

If they continue to rely on government school ‘history” books then they will continue in blissful ignorance, as the writers of those “history” books intended that they should.

Bibliography:

Myths Of American Slavery  by Walter D. Kennedy, Pelican Publishing Co.

The Slave Trade  by Hugh Thomas, a Touchstone book, published by Simon and Schuster.

The South Was Right   by James R. Kennedy and Walter D. Kennedy, Pelican Publishing Co.

Lincoln’s Marxists  by Al Benson Jr. and Walter D. Kennedy, Pelican Publishing Co.

The War Between the States–America’s Uncivil War  by John J. Dwyer, Bluebonnet Press.

Would Obama and Congress Deceive the Public on Gun Control?—You Bet They Would!

By Al Benson Jr.
Larry Pratt, head of Gun Owner’s of America has been watching as Congress has played mind games with the American public for decades. They say one thing and by the time the legislation ends up being voted on it is the exact opposite of what they said it would be and ends up doing more harm than good to patriotic Americans. This is not by accident. It is by intent. They think us rubes back home in flyover country are so stupid we won’t be able to figure out their games. Not all of us are stupid in spite of their efforts to force public schooling down our throats. My wife and I would probably qualify as some of Nancy Pelosi’s “low-level terrorists” as we home schooled our kids. Nowadays that’s enough to earn you the title of “terrorist” by our Marxist government’s standards.

The February 28, 2013 issue of The Gun Owner’s, the newsletter for the Gun Owners of America stated quite plainly stated: “Even still, the most serious involves the threat of gun confiscation—as every background check identifies the purchaser as a gun owner and creates the framework for a registration system…In one debate, the anti-gun spokesperson actually said, ‘I don’t know what you’re talking about in regard to registration’ and insisted that nobody was trying to take away our guns. Really? Do gun grabbers actually think the American gun owners don’t realize the gun confiscation agenda that is afoot?” The newsletter then quotes New York Governor Andrew Cuomo where he said that “Confiscation could be an option.” Then there was Iowa Rep. Dan Muhlbauer who said: “Even if you have them, I think we need to start taking them.” In the face of such comments is anyone still dumb enough to think gun confiscation is not the name of the game? If so please contact me. I have a bridge in Tucson, Arizona I’d love to sell you—bargain rates too!

Mr. Pratt made a prescient prediction. He said that Obama and the Congressional leadership realize they will probably not be able to get enough votes for total gun confiscation and quite possibly not even enough to reduce magazine capacity for most guns, but if they can enact a background check and registration bill they will then have what they need for future confiscation and that’s really what they want. This also gives Congress critters the opportunity to cast a vote against total confiscation—at this point—to make it appear as if they are supposedly “pro-gun” which they feel will play well with the “great unwashed” back home while they then vote for the more “reasonable’ measure of background checks and registration. This gives them what they really want—a list of all the gun owners in the country so that when confiscation time rolls around—and it will roll around—they will know who has which guns.

I had read Mr. Pratt’s comments and agreed with them when, lo and behold, an article appeared on http://www.huffingtonpost.com  that bore out his contention. It was posted on 3/19. The headline for the article read “Obama’s Gun Reform Package Loses One Major Provision, Another In Danger.” If you didn’t know better you would almost be tempted to think that most of the steam had been taken out of Obama’s gun confiscation scheme—and that’s what you are supposed to think! As you read the article, if you are not aware of how the prostitute press works, you will envision poor old Harry Reid from Nevada, struggling emotionally because he doesn’t have the votes to bring Feinstein’s gun confiscation bill to a successful vote and so he will probably be forced to jettison most of it so he can at least get “something” passed in the way of gun control, to protect “the children” naturally. About three quarters of the way through the article they throw in the fish hook you are supposed to swallow. It says “Indeed, the fate of that proposal will now determine whether the president’s attempt to reform gun laws will be deemed successful. It will certainly be easier to pass universal background checks than an assault weapons ban or a limit on the size of magazines, but the measure’s success is far from guaranteed.” So there is what they are going for. They know that at this point they can’t get confiscation so they will be willing to settle for a list of all gun owners as mandated by law. After all, isn’t that the “reasonable” approach? That’s what some of your RINO congressmen will try to peddle to the folks back home—“well I voted against confiscation, but I felt it was only reasonable to vote for background checks and gun registration. Don’t you think it is?” No I don’t! Quite frankly it’s none of the federal government’s business who’s got what. They just want you to think it is—until they come for your guns because your name is on the registration list. Once they have your guns they couldn’t care less what you think. They will have the guns and you won’t and that’s what it is really all about.

Feinstein also noted that she “had been promised two votes—one an assault weapons ban, including a ban on high capacity magazines and another on just the magazine ban. Feinstein said it was her understanding that both of these votes would be on amendments rather than on any gun control package introduced by the Senate.” Do you grasp what that means? It means that if they can’t get her bill passed on its own merits they will break it up and add some parts of it as amendments to other bills they need to get passed that might have very little to do with guns, but if you pass these other bills you will also be passing the gun control amendments that have now become part of them. So we have to let our Senators know we are opposed to their voting on any bill or amendment that even contains the word “gun” in it.

Larry Pratt was right on the money with how they are going to try to sneak this background checks and registration through—on a bill if they can but on various amendments if they have to do it that way.

Folks, unless we let our Senators know we are onto this little game and that we will work to unseat them if they decide to play it they will vote for gun registration and background checks as the supposed “reasonable” alternative to outright confiscation—for now. We have to really watch those people in the Senate. Some of them could give lessons to snake oil salesmen!

Archaeology Proves What’s Politically Incorrect

By Al Benson Jr.

We’ve all seen a ton of ‘Civil War’ movies and docudramas that inform us
that the noble Union army was a body of soldiers gotten together so they
could go South and free the slaves held by those mean, nasty Southern
plantation owners. And, of course, everyone knows that, in the South,
everyone had hundreds of slaves that they gleefully beat every morning
before breakfast, because, as we all know, that was how those mean
Southern racists got their jollies for the day. Well, what about slavery in
the North? Oh, that wasn’t really worth mentioning – a manor house here or
there had an occasional black servant, but that was about it. So goes the
standard line of propaganda we have all been fed over the past several
decades.

Sorry to burst the bubble, folks, but the science of archaeology is busily
giving the lie to such hogwash. Archaeologists have been busy digging in
several places in the North, and guess what? They are finding Northern
plantations that were operated by slave labor in the same manner as those in the South were. The “memory hole” is being excavated!

An article by Mike Toner, for The Atlanta Journal Constitution  a few years ago noted of slaveholding in the North that:
“Slaveholding plantations, usually thought of as uniquely Southern
institutions, were deeply rooted in the fabric of ‘free’ states of the North
as well, new archaeological studies are showing. The hidden history of
Northern plantations and their slaves is emerging – one shovelful of soil at
a time – from excavations in and around historic manor houses in
Massachusetts, New Jersey and New York.”

The article goes on to note that while slavery was abolished in the North
before the War of Northern Aggression, recent excavations are now showing that slavery was much more prolific in the North, and
that during the late 1700s and early 1800s many of what would now be called manors were, in fact, full-fledged plantations and they kept black
slaves under about the same conditions that existed further South.
Cheryl LaRoche, a historical archaeologist with the University of
Maryland has observed: “Historians are stunned by some of the evidence…  The popular notion is that
slavery in the North consisted of two or three household servants, but there
is growing evidence that there were slaveholding plantations. It’s hard to
believe that such a significant and pervasive part of the past could be so
completely erased from our history.” With all due respect to LaRoche, it is
not at all hard to believe that this portion of our history has been
“erased.” All you have to remember is that in any given war the winners get
to write, or rather rewrite, the history books.

Since the North won the War of Northern Aggression and she supposedly fought to free the slaves, it would hardly look very good for them to admit
that the same kind of conditions pertaining to slavery existed in the North, only a few decades earlier than what they were supposedly combatting in
the South.

Therefore, that rather embarrassing part of Northern history needed
to be shoved down the memory hole, to be conveniently forgotten, lest later
generations question why the North didn’t do something about the slavery
problem sooner than it did. LaRoche also commented that: “America was a
slaveholding country – North and South – Over the years that reality has
been lost, stolen, or just strayed from the history books.” Rather than
lost, stolen, or strayed, how about ‘deliberately deleted?’ As I stated earlier, the “memory hole” is being excavated!

After all, it would be a little difficult for the Northern carpetbaggers and
radical abolitionists to flaunt their moral superiority in the South should
it be discovered that while they had been busily castigating the South for
slavery, similar conditions had existed in their own states up until a
couple decades before the war.

Donnie Kennedy, in his book Myths of American Slavery  noted that: “Some states, such as New Jersey, maintained slavery by redefining it as
‘apprenticeship.’ Thus, as late as 1860, the Federal census listed slaves in
New Jersey.” Kennedy also tells us that slavery was abolished in the North
in order to protect white workers from competition with slave labor. He
tells us that Connecticut prohibited the importation of slaves into her
territory because “the increase of slaves is injurious to the poor.” He
notes that: “…pecuniary interests, and not ‘liberty, equality, fraternity’
had more to do with the abolition of slavery in the North.”

And now, what the politically correct ‘historians’ have shoved down the
memory hole for decades is being scooped back out by archaeologists with
shovels and trowels. Maybe it’s time for those self-righteous radical
abolitionist types to admit to the world that they are at fault for slavery
every bit as much as any Southern plantation owner. And if there were still
slaves in New Jersey in 1860, years after the radical abolitionists in the
North started crusading against Southern slavery, why didn’t the
abolitionists deal with the problem in their own back yard first? I recall one scene in the movie Gettysburg where Joshua Chamberlain was telling a group of Union soldiers that the Union army was an army formed “to set other men free.” What hogwash! The only thing “Sherman’s bummers” in Georgia were interested in freeing was Southern property from Southern hands and transferring that wealth into their own hands in typically Yankee/Marxist style. And if you want to find out why I call them “Yankee/Marxists” then read the book Lincoln’s Marxists written by Donnie Kennedy and myself and you will understand.

They didn’t do so because to do so didn’t fit their political agenda, which
was to eventually destroy the South and Southern Christian culture. Slavery
aside, that is what radical abolitionism in the North was all about–and the
Northern abolitionists were not above working with and helping Unitarians
and socialists who shared the same agenda.

Selective “Racism”

By Al Benson Jr.

How many of us have, literally for years, heard the tired old litany that “The Confederate flag is racist and secession was treason”? I have seen this faulty premise promulgated by so-called journalists who either should know better or who hope their reading audiences dwell in abysmal ignorance so they can spread this prejudiced baloney and get away with it.

One of the hackneyed old saws they trot out is “Well the Ku Klux Klan uses the Confederate flag so it must be racist.” Well, the Klan may use the Confederate flag now but they didn’t always use it. For a long time they used the United States flag in their parades and demonstrations. You can go on the Internet and find pictures of Klan parades where there are scores of U.S. flags in evidence and nary a Confederate flag anywhere in sight. Does this make the U.S. flag racist too? Many will say “Oh no.” But if we are going to be consistent we should ask why a Klansman carrying a Confederate flag is racist but one carrying a U.S. flag is not.

Charles Davidson, in an article on http://www.pointsouth.com  has observed: “For example, the Confederate flag as no more to do with the Ku Klux Klan than the Christian cross which the Klan carries and burns or the flag of the United States that the Klan says the Pledge of Allegiance to, yet the media and Hollywood constantly try to connect our Confederate flag to the Klan in their propaganda. However the news media never ask preachers if they are Klan members because they wear a cross around their necks or link the American Legion to the Klan because they carry the U.S. flag. It is time to put an end to this anti-Confederate bigotry.”

The public schools often take part in this anti=Confederate bigotry by banning any clothing with Confederate symbols on it. You can wear a shirt with an image of revolutionary Malcolm X on it and that’s okay, but wearing something with any kind of Confederate image on it may well get you locked up and the key thrown away. This same double standard also applies to anything Christian, especially if it has Jesus’ name on it. That can’t be worn as it might “offend” someone, but all manner of anti-Christian stuff can be worn and the Christian kids just have to put up with it.

The same people hate both Christian and Confederate symbols. That should tell you something. Christians and Confederates, in the name of “diversity” are supposed to become guilt-stricken and hide the symbols of their heritage and beliefs while the anti-Christ crowd can parade theirs openly.

Unfortunately, many, trying to be inoffensive, go along with this. It’s time we quit going along and stood up for what’s right. Parents who have kids that have been subject to this anti-Christian, anti-Confederate discrimination (because that’s what it is) might consider removing their kids from public schools and teaching them at home. In fact I would recommend it. My wife and I taught ours at home and they didn’t end up hating Confederate flags or Christian symbols.

I would encourage folks to check out further articles on this blog spot http://revisedhistory.wordpress.com  on the Internet. In the past year or so I had done several articles having to do with the foundations of the public school system in this country. Those foundations are anti-Christian. Do some homework and find out for yourselves. And while you are at it, check out the Trotskyite origin of the term “racism.”

Is the Result of the “Civil War” Really Settled?

By Al Benson Jr.

There was recently a letter in the Albany Herald of Albany, Georgia stating that, basically, the “Civil War” has “long been fought and settled…The war is over. Slavery has been abolished in the whole of these great United States. The Union has been salvaged.” Really?

If the “civil war” is really over then why is the South, and also the North now, still under “reconstruction?” If you think it isn’t, then you haven’t really taken a good look at The Patriot Act or Obama’s new gun/people control initiatives. If it isn’t then why are we still saddled with a Yankee/Marxist public school system down here that was, and still is, a major part of “reconstruction.” If we are not still under “reconstruction” then why hasn’t the Yankee/Marxist government in Washington removed all of this?

Well you might say, these are all signs of “progress.” Really? The Patriot Act literally eviscerates the original Bill of Rights and Obama’s gun/people control agenda will totally gut the real intent of the Second Amendment, which is to enable us to resist a tyrannical government. And the public school system—if that is a sign of “progress” then all I can say is “God help us!” For more years than I have been alive the public school system has been a tool for denigrating and belittling the history and heritage of the South and seeking to re-educate Southern kids in all the benefits of becoming little wanna-be Yankees with no sense of history or heritage or place—just like they’ve done to the kids in the North.

Part of the agenda of these “educational facilities” is to destroy the culture of the Old South and replace it with some strange animal called the “new South” which, if looked at closely, is no South at all. In other words, their agenda is Southern cultural genocide, which is supposed to be a crime in other places while in the South it seems to be a requirement.

So slavery has been abolished? What about the welfare program? You know, the one that pays people more to sit at home and become couch potatoes than they could get if they hustled and got honest work? You think that’s not a form of slavery? These people know they need to support everything Obama tries to do or the monthly check might not be there. That’s freedom???

Has the Union really been salvaged? How much does what we now live with resemble the original Union? I submit the gap is tremendous. And those wonderful, progressive, public schools have not taught us enough history so that we can make the comparison between what we had and what we now labor under.

I remember, years ago now, someone said to a pastor I know “The war is over and you lost, so get over it.” To which the pastor replied “If it was just the war we would have gotten over it but you tried to destroy our culture and that’s what we don’t get over.” They’re still trying.
They’re still trying with what they are trying to force down your kids’ throats in public school about how horrendous the Old South was, carefully omitting all its redeeming qualities and its Christian-based faith and worldview. Such anachronisms have to go. They are impeding the “progress” agenda.

I submit the War really isn’t over. It has just entered a new phase. In the first phase they tried to destroy us with more men and guns and a scorched earth policy. In the second phase they are trying to obliterate our cultural distinctive and create in us the mindset they possess. It’s more subtle and most Southern folks don’t realize it’s happening, but it is. So as long as they keep doing this kind of thing is the War really over, or has it just entered the propaganda phase?

At this point the Southern states can’t secede—although there is one school of thought in the Southern/Confederate Movement which contends that they are still seceded, that the Southern states are a country under occupation. That would be consistent with the War not really being over and “reconstruction” still being enforced.  But how about cultural secession? That’s something we all need to work at.

Take a Lesson From Tucson—Watch Your City Council

By Al Benson Jr.

Over the past few years I have attended quite a few town council meetings in the town in Louisiana where I live. Once I even ran for the town council. I didn’t win but it was an interesting experience. One thing that bothers me, though, is how few people turn out for town council meetings. There have been times when only two or three others besides myself attended the meetings. In other words, almost no one in town really knows what is going on until after some ordinance has been passed and they read about it in the weekly paper here. Then if they want to gripe it’s too late. The damage has been done.

I should make it clear at this point that I have no problem with the town council where I live. The Mayor and the people on the council are all honest folks and have, I believe, the best interests of the town’s residents at heart. But down the road that might not always be the case—and a recent situation in Tucson, Arizona is a prime example.

It seems that on February 20, 2013 the City Council of Tucson passed an ordinance, resolution 22006, that basically leaves it up to the military to make the decisions for the City of Tucson.

Section 1 of the resolution states: “That the City of Tucson Mayor and Council hereby recognizes and supports the missions and long term viability of Davis-Monthan Air Force Base and the leadership of Davis-Monthan to make the appropriate decisions when balancing National Security and community needs when it comes to their existing and future military mission and assignments.”

Section 2: “The various City officers and employees are authorized and directed to perform all acts necessary or desirable to give effect to this Resolution.

Section 3: “Whereas it is necessary for the preservation of the peace, health and safety of the City of Tucson that this resolution become immediately effective an emergency is hereby declared to exist and this resolution shall be effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.”
So, is your town having problems? Just turn over control to the nearest military base and let them start making the decisions for you. Hey, it’s what Tucson just did!

According to http://occupiedtucsoncitizen.org  Lee Stanfield emailed the Mayor and each council member in response to Resolution 22006. Mr. Stanfield wrote: “I am beginning to wonder if I still live in the United States of America! I just read a resolution which states it was adopted by the Mayor and the City Council, who supposedly represent me…and all the other citizens of Tucson. If this document is actually correct in stating that it has been adopted by the Mayor and Council on Feb. 20, 2013…then clearly the Mayor and Council have no concept of what ‘representation of Tucson citizens’ means, nor what constitutes an ‘emergency’! Without any approval, discussion, or even knowledge of its existence by Tucson voters, this document gives the Air Force unconditional approval to use its own discretion…to go ahead with their dangerous plans for Tucson.”

According to an article on http://www.infowars.com  “The Department of Defense initially made the power grab in response to civilian complaints about military flights over the city.” So how are civilian complaints being addressed? Why by adding two-fold to the flights folks are complaining about.

So the Air Force will now “balance” the city’s needs with those of the military. Want to bet which side the scales will be weighted on? To all intents and purposes the citizens of Tucson, Arizona will be under military rule. At that point, why not fire the Mayor and City Council as they will be doing no real governing anyway, having abrogated that responsibility to the Air Force. But then, that might not work either, as the military will have to have a few figureheads up there so the average citizen in Tucson will think he actually has something to say about how his city is run. I wonder how many citizens of Tucson were in attendance at the council meeting where this resolution was passed.

All this proves that if you want to keep track of what goes on in your city or town you better start attending the council meetings, otherwise you may wake up some morning after the last council meeting only to find that you and your rights have been sold down the river because you were not willing to go to the meeting and find out what goes on in your city or town.

They Have to Know Who Has the Guns

By Al Benson Jr.

Recently Larry Pratt, the head of Gun Owners of America, an organization I endorse, was interviewed by The Moneychanger. Mr. Pratt brought out some very interesting observations we need to be aware of. The Moneychanger (Franklin Sanders) made the observation: “In other words, the only thing preventing a perfect police state is that there are 300 million guns out there and nobody knows whose hands they’re in.” Larry Pratt answered: “They don’t know who has a lot of them and that’s one of the plays underway right now…the politicians want to know who has bought every gun. That’s why they’re talking about expanding the instant background check to make it universal. This is not a law enforcement tool. It doesn’t keep guns out of the wrong hands.”

Mr. Pratt noted that, based on a study done in 2000, by the American Medical Association, it was shown that, after “looking at the instant background check for a number of years, that it doesn’t do anything to reduce crime.”

Yet here come the people in government, with straight faces, and probably thinking us “great unwashed” are all totally stupid, telling us they know this doesn’t fight crime, that it doesn’t solve crimes, and that it doesn’t seem to keep guns out of the wrong hands—but we need more of it anyway!

And then Mr. Pratt says: “This universal background check is the very engine that will lead to a registration system.” And once a registration system is up and running, then when all the information is in, will come the confiscation. The Moneychanger made an astute observation when he said: “The very same people who want to confiscate guns from law-abiding Americans were busy putting them into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.” How true, but public school-educated Americans are not supposed to make that connection. These are the dots were are not supposed to be able to connect. He also noted that the media never bothers to report that the shooters in all these mass killings are or have been on some kind of drugs or anti-depressants. And how very convenient that they all end up either dead or unable to testify. Almost makes you wonder, doesn’t it? But, then, it’s not politically correct to distrust your government is it? And this administration is so “transparent.”

The Moneychanger then asked how likely outright gun confiscation was. Mr. Pratt replied: “I don’t think that’s going to happen and I think Harry Reid knows that’s not going to happen. He’s virtually said as much. What I see happening is that the Red State Democrats will be able to vote against confiscating defense rifles, a.k.a. ‘assault weapons’. They will probably also vote against the magazine ban. Then the gun controllers will turn and with a vengeance pursue the instant background checks…That bothers me because if they pull that off they’re on their way to the gun registration of their dreams.” Stop and analyze what Mr. Pratt has just said. At this point the real concern of the gun/people control crowd is to find out who all the gun owners are and to set up a registry. And they may not even try to pass this as a bill of its own. They may well tack in onto some other piece of legislation that is in a “must pass” situation. That gives your politicians a way to vote for it by saying “Well, we had to pass this appropriations bill for $3 billion for the study of German cockroaches and the gun registration law just happened to be part of the cockroach study.”

Mr. Pratt said, straight out, “…every member of Congress needs to know that the rubes back home actually understand that if you vote for any bill that has the word ‘gun’ in it, no matter how benign the context, we’re coming after you come election time, because we know you favor gun control.” This is what we need to tell our congresspersons. I know, right here in Louisiana we have one senator, Mary Landrieu, who would dearly love to vote for anything the Obama administration tries to put over on us, but Louisiana is a hunting state and pretty conservative, so Harry Reid has to give her and others like her some way to vote for gun/people control without appearing to do so.

So he will try to give her and the rest some way to vote against gun confiscation and for gun registration, which most of us realize will eventually lead to confiscation. We need to email our senators and let them know we are onto the game and will work to vote them out of office if they even look at a bill or an amendment to a bill that has the word “gun” in it.
That’s the only thing most of them understand.

Religious Humanists Hate Confederates

By Al Benson Jr.

It seems that the professional South-haters up North must be running out of new material to verbally bash the South over the head with so they have fallen back to attacking Andersonville Prison in Georgia again.

A recent article by John J. Dunphy that appeared in The Telegraph in Alton, Illinois trotted out all the old anti-Andersonville stories about prisoner abuse and starving prisoners and what a wretched man Andersonville’s commander Captain Henry Wirz was. If you’ve read this kind of thing once you’ve read it a dozen times. I notice those who roundly trash Andersonville and Captain Wirz have no comments to make about Fort Delaware and its commander, socialist Albin Schoepf, who was one of “Lincoln’s Marxists.” Lonnie Speer, in his book Portals to Hell  tells of Fort Delaware. He says “Albin Francisco Schoepf took over command and served in this capacity until the end of the war. Schoepf allowed his subordinates unrestrained control inside the compound and it eventually evolved into the most brutal POW institution in America.” So the Yankees’ Fort Delaware evolved into “the most brutal POW institution in America.” Gee, wonder how the politically correct missed that little fact. Probably because they weren’t looking too hard and they hope you don’t either. Actually, the miserable conditions Mr. Dunphy talks about at Andersonville existed in just about all the Northern POW camps as well—Point Lookout, Elmira, Camp Douglas—you name it, and most of the conditions at Andersonville were present, which made it even worse because the North had the resources to alleviate such conditions. The South did not.

Back to Captain Wirz and Andersonville. James Ronald Kennedy and Walter Donald Kennedy in their best selling book The South Was Right dealt with Captain Wirz’s “trial” as a Confederate war criminal and brought out some interesting information the lap dog media would just as soon we overlook. Wirz was charged with thirteen allegations of murder “…but not a single murder victim was named! How could a man murder thirteen people in the presence of several thousand witnesses (who were the fellow comrades of the alleged victims) and yet no one could remember a single victim’s name!…One of the unnamed victims that Wirz was convicted of murdering was supposedly killed on February 1, 1864. Captain (later Major) Wirz did not arrive in Andersonville until the following month, March of 1864. In addition, Yankee justice convicted him of the murder of two unnamed prisoners in August of 1864. During the time in question, Wirz was away from the camp on sick leave. Of the 160 witnesses called by the prosecution, 145 testified that they had no personal knowledge of Wirz ever killing or mistreating anyone. Only one could give the name of a prisoner allegedly killed by Wirz. The problem with his testimony was that the date given by the witness did not agree with any date used in the charges against Wirz. The court ‘corrected’ this situation by simply changing the date in the indictment to match the testimony already given!” The Kennedys have observed that Mr. Lincoln’s Secretary of War, the inestimable Edwin Stanton, “…noted that a higher percentage of Southern POW’s died while in Yankee camps than did Northern POW’s held by the South. Still the mythmakers have continued to select only the facts that they wish preserved in their official history.” And history should be in quotes!

A friend in Southern Illinois sent me a copy of Dunphy’s article and as I read, his name rang a little bell in the back of my head. I’d heard that name before, years ago, when I was doing research for a Sunday School class on Humanism that I taught while we were living in Indiana. I had gone to the local library where they had copies of a magazine called The Humanist.

Seems that, in 1983, Dunphy wrote what has been described as an “award winning essay” for that magazine. He made a couple statements that most people other than Humanists are hardly aware of. He said: “I am convinced that the battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects that spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of educational level—preschool day care or large state university. The classroom must and will become an area of conflict between the old and the new—the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism, resplendent in its promise of a world in which the never-realized Christian ideal of ‘love thy neighbor’ will finally be achieved.” Read Mr. Dunphy’s quote again and let it begin to sink in. Another article I found noted that John Dewey, the early 20th century socialist education guru, was also a signer of the Humanist Manifesto.

So Mr. Dunphy views the public school classroom as the new battleground being fought over by “the rotting corpse of Christianity” and the “resplendent” new (it really isn’t new, it’s just been repackaged) faith of humanism. He’s right about one thing, the public school classroom is a battleground between competing worldviews. Problem is that most Christians who choose to put their kids in public schools have yet to realize what those schools are there for—and brother, it ain’t real education. Mr. Dunphy realizes what the public school is there for. Sadly, most Christians have yet to get the first clue.

So it would seem that Mr. Dunphy of Humanist fame and glory also has a problem with anything that is Southern or Confederate-related. Should that really surprise you? How many people reading his anti-Andersonville commentary will even realize that this is the same man who celebrates what he calls “the rotting corpse of Christianity”? Most people won’t make the connection because Mr. Dunphy’s “change agent” teachers have so dumbed them down that they are hardly capable of thinking about anything more remote than the next “Reality show” on the tube. The “teachers” Mr. Dunphy promotes have “proselytized” their students into mindless robots almost totally incapable of rational thought and they still want even more of our money for yet more of this “quality education” they have been promising for decades now.

You don’t have to look too far to find lots of “South-haters” like Mr. Dunphy. What you all need to start doing when you run across them is to do some research and check into their backgrounds. The majority of them will be anti-Christian to one degree or another, which explains why they take every opportunity they can to trash the South and Confederate history.

Before the start of the War of Northern Aggression the South still had a basically Christian culture and worldview, whereas the North had apostatized long before. In spite of the inroads of political correctness promoted by public schools the South still has more of a Christian worldview than much of the rest of the country.

There was an article done recently about a Gallup Poll which listed the ten most religious states and the ten least religious states in the Union. The ten most religious states, with the exception of Utah were—guess where? All in the South. Six of the least religious states were in the North, with a couple others in the Far West. That fact alone ought to tell you why most Humanists, Unitarians, liberals and “progressives” constantly attack the South and try to undermine its culture. As I said earlier, start checking the backgrounds of some of the South-bashers and you will find that a pattern emerges as to their peculiar theologies and worldviews.

Mayor of Birmingham Will Release Money To Pay For Leftist’s Unpaid Funeral Bills

By Al Benson Jr.

According to an article on http://blog.al.com/spotnews the Mayor of Birmingham, Alabama “will release city funds to pay disputed expenses associated with the funeral of the Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth” who died in 2011. The Mayor stated: “As Mayor of the City of Birmingham, I have a responsibility to the great legacy of Rev. Shuttlesworth and a fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers.” The Mayor is working with a local Baptist church as a “fiscal agent for outstanding invoices owed as a result of the Shuttlesworth funeral.”

You have to wonder why the Mayor feels a “fiduciary responsibility” to the taxpayers to spend their money on this man’s funeral expenses. If private groups want to undertake this project that’s fine. They should be free to do so, but why does the city have to expend funds for it, especially after you check out Rev. Shuttlesworth’s background. Years ago I picked up a set of two booklets, parts one and two, entitled The Joint Legislative Committee on Un-American Activities for the State of Louisiana, more simply called “The Louisiana Report.” Rev. Shuttlesworth is rather prominently mentioned in it. The report dealt with an organization called The Southern Conference Educational Fund. This was a Communist front group that was formed by Dr. James A. Dombrowski, who was the Executive Director, and Mr. and Mrs. Carl Braden of Louisville, Kentucky. The question was asked in this booklet” “Have these people ever been identified in any way as Communists?” The man testifying replied: “They have all been identified in sworn testimony as Communist Party members.” So this is Communist Party members who have formed a Communist front group. The question was then asked as to who else took part in the overall management of the group. The witness answered: “Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth, who has been recently appointed President of this organization, replacing Aubrey Williams…”

The witness was then asked about Rev. Shuttlesworth’s background and he answered: “Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth was responsible for the formation of the M.I.A., the Montgomery Improvement Association…In 1941 he was arrested and pled guilty in District Court in the State of Alabama to the illegal distillation of whiskey, commonly known as moonshining.” He pled guilty, and got a suspended sentence. The witness also observed that: “Fred Shuttlesworth has been previously identified as Vice-President of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and has been affiliated with several Communist-front organizations.” On the masthead of the newspaper for the Southern Conference Educational Fund he was listed as President of that Communist-front group.

In Alan Stang’s insightful book It’s Very Simple–The true story of Civil Rights  Rev. Shuttlesworth is also mentioned. On page 101 of Alan Stang’s book, and continuing onto page 102 he has written: “The new president of SCEF is the Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth. Fred Shuttlesworth has been affiliated with several Communist front organizations…The next document is a letter dated September 21, 1960 from Carl Braden to James A. Dombrowski. It shows that Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth, ex-convict leader of the ‘Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights’…was using the Bradens to write his news releases, obviously because the Bradens were, and are, highly skilled professional propagandists…” On pages 112, 113 Mr. Stang noted: The vice-president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference is the Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth. And the Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth is the new president of the Southern Conference Educational Fund (also known as the Southern Conference for Human Welfare—they are the same organization), which is a Communist front, and whose field director, Carl Braden, is a national sponsor of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, which is also a Communist front.”

I could go more into the Southern Christian Leadership Conference but I think those who read this will get the idea. The SCLC had several more lesser luminaries that had Communist affiliations and it was, according to The Louisiana Report stated that the SCLC was “…substantially under the control of the Communist Party through the influence of the Southern Conference Educational Fund and the Communists that manage it.” And remember that Shuttlesworth was president of SCEF and vice-president of the SCLC, so there was quite a connection there.

With that background, we ought to be asking why the city of Birmingham feels obligated to chip in for this man’s funeral expenxes.
We also ought to be asking if men and organizations like this are truly representative of the Civil Rights Movement as a whole. Outside of investigative writers like Alan Stang, almost no one has dared to plumb the depths of this Movement to find out who was really involved or anything about their backgrounds. People have done the same with the Civil Rights Movement as they have with Obama’s amazing lack of availability when it comes to any written records about him throughout his life—they have seen no evil, heard no evil, and in the case of the “news” media, have spoken no evil.

More digging needs to be done to find out where those involved really were coming from and you can bet the “news” media ain’t about to do it so others will have to.

What interest did the Communists have in the Civil Right Movement? You can bet it wasn’t the welfare of black folks. So did they plan to use it as one of their vehicles for revolution in this country–and are they still doing that under different names?

In a Colorblind Society No Whites Need Apply

By Al Benson Jr.

A recent article by Bobby Eberle on http://www.gopusa.com has observed that: “As we strive for a truly colorblind society, it’s quite apparent that the ones who hold us back are the ones that scream the loudest about equality…But, just like Barack Obama plays the race card over and over again, we have another example to point to. This time it’s an elementary school in Denver that offers a tutoring program…unless you are white. As reported by Denver’s CBS 4, the tutoring program at Mission Viejo Elementary School in Aurora has come under fire, because it was not designed, nod did it welcome, all kids. If your child was white and needed tutoring, you were out of luck.”

This is so typical of the actions of the “equality nuts” that it should not surprise us, especially in a public school. It’s the same old story—all the animals in this barnyard are equal but some are more equal than others. The black radicals have, over the decades, complained that people should be judged by the “content of their character and not the color of their skin.” That noble sentiment withers on the vine when they get to the point where they feel they can dominate a society or a particular part of society. So at this school in Aurora (isn’t that where that shooting took place last summer? In the “gun free zone” in the theater?) we now have black, brown, and yellow are beautiful but white is not allowed.

One white lady brought her 10-year old daughter into the class because she needed tutoring, only to be told basically that no whites need apply. This tutoring program was designed for “children of color” so if you are white, get lost! The Mom complained to the school principal. She said “We have come so far in all of these years to show everybody that everyone is equal, that everyone should be treated equally…this is a form of bullying.” You better believe it is lady. Moreover, you better get used to it because in public schools, as in other politically correct institutions this is the way it will be for the foreseeable future.

As usual the blame game got played when the heat was on. The school district said the principal was at fault for this program. Did he just do it on his own? The school district was totally ignorant of this tutoring program? The functionaries in most public school systems today don’t do anything without approval so you have to wonder about this.

The article noted that “This is breathtaking in its stupidity…Just there always need to be an emphasis put on race?…” Yes there does, because for many of these people race is what it’s all about. Let’s don’t kid ourselves. It’s not about equal opportunity or equality—it’s about race—which races will dominate and which will be subservient.
Apparently there was some rather negative reaction to this situation because the principal has now issued a new letter about the program stating that it is open to all kids, even white ones.

This situation is, unfortunately, symptomatic of much of what passes for education in this country. Recently http://www.bizpacreview.com carried an article entitled University sponsors ‘unfair to be white’ campaign. This little bit of white guilt manipulation is being sponsored at the University of Wisconsin—Superior, and it is teaching students that it is “unfair” to be white. The article notes: “A university spokesman confirmed that the ‘Un-Fair Campaign’ was designed to teach students that systems and institutions are set up for us (whites) and…they are unfair. The official website touts the campaign slogan as ‘it’s hard to see racism when you’re White.’” There’s that old Trotskyite term “racism” in there again. All the better to make you feel guilty again.

This group has produced posters featuring a number of white folks with such slogans as “is white skin really a fair skin?” inked onto their faces. It would seem that this sort of thing is part of what passes for education at some “institutions of higher learning.”

Many colleges, like regular public schools, are little more than indoctrination centers where kids are sent by unknowing parents to be schooled in the current politically correct propaganda. I guess we are all now supposed to grovel in the dirt before people of color to show the proper amount of shame for being white—right? That seems to be the way it works anymore.
You’ll pardon me if I don’t play that game. Racially, God made everyone what they are. He chose their race for them whatever it happens to be and no one should feel guilty because he is white, just like no one should feel guilty if he is black.

However the guilt manipulators have no intention of quitting. It’s all part of the “hey, hey, ho ho, Western Civ has got to go” program. Supposedly if you are white you are responsible for all the evils in the world. I wonder how these people would blame whites for the thousands of human sacrifices committed by Central American Indians before the whites ever showed their faces in Central America. Or the blacks in Africa that were constantly at war with one another and sold those they captured to Muslim slave traders. I’m sure if we twist the facts around enough and continue to torture rational thought we can find some way to make it Whitey’s fault.

These folks seem to forget that the whole human race, not only whites but also all other races, are infected with human sin as descendants of Adam. Or maybe they think that only whites have this problem and all other races were born perfect, without sin. If they believe that I have a bridge in the Arizona desert I’d love to sell them—the price is reasonable too.

I recall reading a short while ago about an “education” provider that claimed whites were racist because they ate peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. By her rational then Mexicans should be racist because they eat tacos, but no, it doesn’t work that way in the politically correct world—only the whites are racist and they are racist for no other reason than the fact that they exist.
This is the same game some colleges play with Southern kids, trying to make them feel guilty for being Southerners or talking with a Southern accent. In the final analysis most of this supposed anti-racism (actually it’s nothing more than reverse prejudice) is directed at whites and Christians.

When they want to rid the world of “Western Civ” what they actually want to do is to rid the world of white Christian influence because that’s what they really hate. Unfortunately many Christians seem more than willing to sit passively and let them do it. Again, you’ll pardon me if I refuse to play this game. I remember, years back now, an Episcopal priest I knew in Wisconsin said to me “Al you and I will never be politically correct.” I think he was right.