“It’s for the children”—Right? Wrong!

By Al Benson Jr.
“We’re doing it for the children” shout the One World politicians as they seek to further their political (and religious) agendas which do nothing for the children except remove the God-given liberties they and their parents hope to enjoy.

The “shooting incident” in Connecticut at the end of last year was a prime example. I doubt that we will ever really know what happened at Sandy Hook last December, but in the name of “protecting the children” our Marxist president eagerly sought to completely derail the Second Amendment (and probably also sought to derail any potential resistance that might be out there to his leftist program). His “concern for the children” theme rings a little hollow when you consider that he has no problem with abortion which has murdered millions of unborn babies. His much-touted “concern for the children” only seems to rise to the fore if the children he is concerned about can be used to make political hay for him and his handlers.

He is a typical example of the (One) world mentality, which really hates children except where they can be used as fodder for his agenda.
Last week someone forwarded me a video presentation dealing with the population situation in both Europe and North America, which, in spite of all the lies about a “population explosion” is really dire. None of the European countries at present are reproducing their native populations and by 2050, according to this video, most churches in Europe will have been replaced with mosques as the real population surge in Europe is among the Muslims, while native population growth is in wild retreat. It’s no different here. The anti-Christian feminist movement, many of whose original leaders were over on the far left theologically and politically, has taught women in America to hate children. The so-called “me generation” is so busy enjoying themselves they have no time, no inclination to have and raise children—too messy and time-consuming. They have become lovers of themselves more than lovers of God and so they all want to do their own thing—and besides, kids just get in the way.

They don’t want to be bothered taking care of kids now. Who do they think will take care of them when they get to be 75? It sure won’t be the federal government, regardless of all the golden promises these political liars make. But they are too busy “amusing themselves to death” right now to even begin to think about something as trenchant as who will care for them in their declining years—and it sure won’t be all the babies they’ve aborted. They’ve killed off their caregivers by the millions.

Pastor Steve Wilkins of Auburn Ave. Presbyterian Church in Monroe, Louisiana has observed: “We hate babies because we think there’s no room for them. Most people believe that the world is experiencing a population explosion. But, in fact, the opposite is true. We are facing a population implosion. We don’t have too many people. We have too few people—and we are facing the terrible specter of under-population worldwide. Europe is expected to lose almost 300 million people by the end of the century. European governments are offering monetary incentives to couples who will have children. The situation is so bad that the only hope for Europe is to import large numbers of immigrants (and most of the immigrants will come from Muslim countries.” Or as one man said several years ago “Ninety percent of the people live on ten percent of the land and they call that a population explosion.” Needless to say, most people today, thanks to their public school “educations” have bought into all the government-produced problems, from population explosion to global warming to weapons of mass destruction to the planned destruction of our liberties in the name of “fighting terrorism.” What the public has yet to realize is that this administration considers average Americans to be terrorists—and the real terrorists who maim and kill people—we finance them.

Pastor Wilkins also noted: “We hate babies because we no longer believe the Bible. Children are not optional to marriage but integral to God’s for the world. This is why Satan sought to subvert Adam and Eve in the beginning. He was seeking to prevent the birth of the seed. And he has continued to seek the same thing ever since. But God’s purpose from the beginning was that Man fill the earth with offspring (Genesis 1:22). Ruling over the creation is impossible if there is no filling. Thus, throughout the Bible, increasing population is a sign of God’s blessing upon a culture.”
According to Pastor Wilkins “The world hates babies and abortion is only one indication of this hatred. Not only do we kill babies, we don’t want to have them…And Christians have been affected by the pervasive hatred of babies. Even most Christians view babies more as burdens than as blessings. And consequently we are facing a terrible judgment. Unbelief is present-oriented and suicidal and nowhere is this more clearly manifest than in the refusal to bear children. Without children the society reverts to primitivism and barbarism. Expect to see euthanasia laws passed throughout Europe and elsewhere in the West—the unbelieving children of unbelieving parents are not going to be more generous than their parents. Those who promoted feminism and abortion in the 60s and 70s will begin to receive the same mercy they have shown to the children they killed because they were ‘inconvenient.’ We may well indeed be shown new and shocking examples of how “the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.”

Pastor Wilkins feels that if Christians will repent of their hatred of babies and begin having more of them then Christians could be in the majority by the middle of the century. That means the Christians have got to quit believing the drivel that the (One) World keeps shoveling in their faces and start to do some thinking on their own. Pastor Wilkins states that: “Having babies is central in the outworking of Jesus’ victory over Satan.” That being the case, do you now wonder why our Marxist president is so much in favor of sodomite and lesbian “marriages”? Not only do these openly flout God’s Law, which this administration loves to do, but they produce zero children.

If you have ever read any of the United Nations or Agenda 21 material you will note that they play on the population explosion myth and call for massive reduction in population—which means that they don’t seek God’s glory—they seek their own. That tells you where they are coming from. We either believe God’s admonition to “be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it…” or we believe the falsehoods of the leftists who lobby for population reduction. It’s easier for them to control people if there are less of them you know. It all comes down to choosing which God to follow—the God of Holy Scripture or the “god” of this (One) World.

The Real Coup Was in 1861

By Al Benson Jr.

According to an article on 
http://www.theblaze.com
for June 7th Rush Limbugh has stated that Barack Obama and his administration are leading a “coup d’ etat’ to take over the United States. Limbaugh said this on his radio show on Friday, June 7th. Limbaugh noted the recently-discovered National Security Agency domestic surveillance (spying) programs being carried on against millions of Americans, all in the name of “fighting terrorism.” Of course the supposed “terrorists” that this Marxist administration are fighting are those patriotic Americans that oppose its Marxist agenda. After all, doesn’t opposing any form of Marxism automatically qualify you as a “terrorist?” According to this administration it does.

I can somewhat agree with Limbaugh’s rationale except that his timing is off by 150 years. The real (and ongoing coup) took place in 1861, during the early days of the Lincoln administration. All Obama is trying to do is to mop up the residual resistance that still lingers, and this is what his puppet-masters put him in office for.

Professor Thomas DiLorenzo, in a recent article on 
http://www.lewrockwell.com 
on 6/3 noted that: “He (Lincoln) illegally suspended Habeas Corpus and imprisoned tens of thousands of Northern political critics without due process; shut down over 300 opposition newspapers; committed treason by invading the Southern states (Article 3, Section 3 of the Constitution defines treason as ‘only levying war upon the states’ or ‘giving aid and comfort to their enemies’ which is, of course exactly what Lincoln did). He enforced military conscription with the murder of hundreds of New York City draft protesters in 1863 and with the mass execution of deserters from his army;…confiscated firearms and issued an arrest warrant for the Chief Justice (Roger Taney) when the jurist issued an opinion that only Congress could legally suspend Habeas Corpus…” Lincoln’s coup basically changed the form of government to one where Washington decided everything and the State governments became little more than vassals to an all powerful national government. They kept the forms but ate out the real substance and that was enough to fool most people.

Sounds as if Obama has been taking lessons from “Honest Abe.” No wonder they call him “Honest Abama.” After this coup, Lincoln was duly accorded the position of deity by the Republican Party and both parties have continued to promote that falsehood until this day. The point here is that, no matter what Obama is now doing, Lincoln already did it, in some form or other, and since he got by with it and it has now been legitimized in the “history” books, you have to consider that Abraham Lincoln’s coup was successful. It has never been repudiated or reversed. Indeed, it has been affirmed. Indeed, with their wholehearted Lincoln worship, Limbaugh and many other patriotic types have routinely affirmed it and continue to do do.

In the early 1900s Lincoln’s “the federal government should control it all” attitude was picked up by groups like the Council on Foreign Relations, which, since its inception, has labored to make darn sure the federal government controlled it all and that they controlled the federal government.

If you want to do a little research sometime, check out how many CFR members have been in most presidential cabinets since Woodrow Wilson, or how many have been in the armed forces, or the media, or the “educational” field. Their numbers will shock you. These are the One World government boys, the ones that put Obama in office and handed him his agenda (which really is not all that much different than Lincoln’s was).
I can sympathize with Limbaugh’s opposition to what Obama is doing. Honest folks should oppose it, but because most of them do not know or understand accurate history what they end up doing is opposing what Obama is now doing while endorsing the same policies when Lincoln practiced them.

James 1:8 in the New Testament states that: “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.” That’s a lot of our problem today—it’s bad if Obama does it but just fine if Lincoln did it. The coup actually took place 150 years ago—and we don’t know the difference. May God help us!

Good Intentions, Historically Ignorant

By Al Benson Jr.

The advent of the Marxist regime of Barry Sotero or Barack Obama, or whatever his real name is,  awakened many in this country to the menace of a Soviet-style government and some started to realize how perilously close we are to that. Most of these folks had no idea that we were anywhere close to that while the Republicans were in office. We were and have been, but the Republicans were much better at concealing their collectivist actions with a little conservative rhetoric and that seemed to fool most people. The Democrats’ Marxist agenda was and is an in-your-face agenda that doesn’t kid anybody as to the real intent of its perpetrators.

Unfortunately, there are many recently awakened folks that seem to feel that the best way to deal with Obama’s Marxism is to just get rid of the Democrats and re-elect Republicans. These folks need to hang around long enough to learn that just getting rid of our current Marxist-in-Chief and his czarist henchmen will not be enough to solve our problems. Our problems today have to do with both parties and the fact that they are really separate in name only, not in ideology. I once told someone who had implicit faith in the Republicans that they were nothing more than “slow Democrats.” They are headed for the same place but they are content to get there a little slower. That fools more people.

I have been  barraged daily with email messages from all manner of well-meaning and sincere conservative and patriotic folks who, somehow, had  the idea that 2010, or 2014, or 2016 will be the dawn of socialism in America. They feel that, up to this point, this country has been a bastion of free enterprise where someone who was willing to work hard could make it and enjoy the fruits of his labour. They realize what Obama/Sotero is all about and they don’t like it. I surely can’t fault them for that. I don’t like it either. What they need to do, though, is to learn enough history to realize that the problems we have now didn’t start with Obama, or even with George Bush or Slick Willie–they started with Abraham Lincoln.

This country didn’t go socialist in 2008 or 2010 or 2012. It had already gotten far down the road of socialism and it started in 1861 with the election of Mr. Lincoln, the consummate 19th century collectivist and centralizer. Lincoln’s program of “internal improvements” and tariffs was socialist. During the War of Northern Aggression he enacted several programs that were identical to those listed in Karl Marx’s infamous ten points in the Communist Manifesto.

Our patriotic folks, the Tea Party and the rest, have got to take the trouble and make the effort to learn some real history and not to depend on the drivel they were taught in public schools. At this point many of them confuse patriotism with nationalism. How many of them would be genuinely shocked if they learned the real roots of the Pledge of Allegiance? Most I’ll bet. They have no concept of where this socialist pledge came from. They just mindlessly spout it at meetings, never having done any homework about it. I took the trouble to find out where it came from. Once I knew that I never said it again anywhere.

Patriotic and conservative intentions are great, but if they are not backed up with accurate history many of the patriotic folks just end up supporting what they should be opposed to and they never know the difference.

Take the trouble to find out when socialism really started in America–and it was a lot earlier than you have been led to believe.

Floyd Is a Girl and Freda Is a Boy

By Al Benson Jr.

World Net Daily posted an interesting article a few days ago. The headline for it was “Official Cross-Dressing Day for Kids Sparks Outrage.” As you can probably tell, we are back to the “gender-bender” thing again (as if we had really ever left it). I did an article on my old and now defunct web site http://www.albensonjr.com several years ago about this. Back then it was new. It has since become more and more prolific.

This time it occurred at Tippecanoe School in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. According to Terrence Falks who is on the school board this activity should be defended. In fact he noted that his own son-in-law recalled similar events years ago in a church school. If that is accurate it means that people have to keep their eyes on even the church schools. You can’t just put your kid in an institution that calls itself a Christian school and then forget about it.

One parent, Sam Ward, said all this does is to teach the kids the wrong lesson about gender. Of course it does. That’s what it’s intended to do. Supposedly this even was “voluntary” but with the peer pressure being what it is in government schools you know how that works.

The World Net Daily article observed: “There is a long history of introducing and teaching highly charged sexual material to children in America’s public schools. Probably the biggest promoter of such concerns is the public school industry in California.” That doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen in other places. Look at this school in Milwaukee. I’d be willing to bet that folks who follow this sort of public school activity could point out dozens of places it has happened around the country.

But, what will be the result of all this? Parents will gripe and moan and may even keep their kids home from school for a day because of it. Big deal! Do you honestly think because you keep little Johnny home today his friends won’t talk to him about what happened tomorrow?

And what about the kinky propaganda he gets the rest of the year—prime time five days every week? This kind of thing is increasing more and more and public schools are defending it and “putting up” with it in spite of parental protests because it’s all part of the agenda.

Do some of you folks get it yet? These aberrations are part of the public school agenda. This is what they want to do to your kids—destroy the sexual distinctions until they no longer exist and it’s all unisex. If the boys are not quite sure whether they are boys or not how will they ever be if they get in the armed forces and are forced to defend the country? Will your national defense depend on whether or not Johnny feels like Johnny today or whether this is his/her day to be JoAnne and therefore he/she can’t fight today. That may sound like a far out example but it’s all headed in that direction.

There is only one way to avoid this and other related aberrations. That is to get your kids out of the public school system and either teach them at home or find solid, dependable, Christian school to put them in. Most people won’t even think about this. They have been raised, and educated, to depend on the public schools for their kids’ “education” and so no other options are available in their thinking. Therefore no matter how bad the local school gets all they can do is to complain, protest, and then make the best of a lousy situation.

Somehow, we have to find a way to break through a mindset that runs in this narrow groove. Our children’s future depends on it.

The same people who have intentionally created the mess we now have in Washington are the ones running the public school system. Folks, connect those two dots.

I have written articles on the history of public education in this country for this blog spot on and off for the past couple years. I would invite you to go back through the monthly files and check some of them out.

Once you begin to see the problems that have always existed with public schools in this country (and others) you may begin to grasp the idea that maybe your kids belong elsewhere to really get an education. And if your conclusions lead you to remove them from public schools and find a solid Christian alternative, then my rantings will not have been wasted.

“Complicity—How the North Promoted, Prolonged, and Profited from Slavery”

By Al Benson Jr.
Recently a friend in Athens, Louisiana lent me a book with the same title as this article. It was written by three writers who worked for a newspaper, the Hartford Courant, in Hartford, Connecticut. I mention that lest anyone accuse me of quoting some “bigoted” Southern source.

From what I can tell the three authors of this book are all quite a bit more liberal than I am and so I am sure there is much we would not agree on. But whatever else they might be, the three authors were honest enough to admit that slavery in this country was never only a “Southern” problem as we have, for so long, been led to believe.

I grew up in New England, went to school in New England, and I have to admit, I never read any of the material they present in any of the so-called “history” books I came across, either in school or anywhere else. We were always taught that all the slaves lived “down South” and that the virtuous New Englanders, among others, had fought to end that evil institution down here.

These folks did a lot of research to put their material together, so the research material is available. It just gets ignored. It’s the identical situation Donnie Kennedy and I found when we wrote Lincoln’s Marxists. The vast majority of the material about socialist and Communist penetration of both the Union armies and the early Republican Party by those people is just never mentioned. It doesn’t fit the current agenda and so it just gets omitted. It’s the same situation with Complicity. The truth about slavery in the North just doesn’t fit the agenda and so it mostly gets left out.

But there is lots of commentary about Northern slavery out there and the three authors of Complicity came up with lots of it. In the introduction it is noted: “Before the Civil War the North grew rich beyond measure by agreeing to live, however uneasily at times, with slavery. Perhaps as a consequence of striking that bargain, Northerners have pushed much of their early history into the deepest shadows of repression.—In the eighteenth century, even after America won its freedom from Great Britain, even after the writing of the Declaration of Independence, tens of thousands of black people were living as slaves in the North. Earlier in that century, enslaved blacks made up nearly one-fifth of the population of New York City.”

And then there was this, which although I lived and worked in Rhode Island, I never heard: “In the century before Congress finally banned the importation of slaves, Rhode Island was America’s leader in the transatlantic trade, launching nearly 1000 voyages to Africa and carrying at least 100,000 captives back across the Atlantic. The captains and crews of these ships were often the veteran seamen of America: New Englanders.” More information that somehow doesn’t make the cut when it comes to our “history” books! The authors note that, in 1760, there were around 41,000 blacks enslaved in the Northern states, which included New England and all the other states down to Delaware.

The authors also observed: “Slaves in the North, like those in the South, served at the whim of their owners and could be sold or traded. They were housed in unheated attics and basements, in outbuildings and barns. They often slept on the floor, wrapped in coarse blankets. They lived under a harsh system of ‘black codes’ that controlled their movements, prohibited their education, and limited their social contacts.” It actually sounds like, in many instances, slaves in the South were better off than those in the North. And “black codes” in the North? All we are ever told about is black codes in the South. They are never mentioned in relation to the North. You can tell that the winners write the history books and don’t hesitate to make themselves look good. The authors made an interesting comment about a man named John Adams, described as “…one of the Founding Fathers who refused to own black people…he paid handsomely for his principles because captive labor (in New England) was widespread, very skilled, and cheap.”

On page 80, in relation to New York City, the authors tell us that “Slavery was the bedrock of the city’s developing economy” in the early 1700s. Census figures showed a population, at one point, of about 4,000 whites and 600 blacks and most of the blacks were slaves.

On pages 97-99 the authors deal in some detail with Newport, Rhode Island and inform us that it was dominant in the state’s first and longest period in the slave trade. The Newport slave traders were mostly involved with the “upper” end of the trade. They owned or bankrolled the slave ships. And they observed that, in the days before the War for Independence the city of Newport was responsible for 70% of all American slave ships. Rev. Samuel Hopkins was one of the few theologians that even dared to preach against the slave trade. Hopkins indicted his own state when he said “The inhabitants of Rhode Island, especially those of Newport, have had by far the greater share of this traffic, of all these United States.”

Hopefully this brief article will give readers some idea of the large part the Northeastern part of the country played in the slave trade, and this went on, to some degree, literally up to the eve of the War of Northern Aggression.
I have seen articles over the years that totally blamed the South for the slave trade and some have even commented that Southerners invented this pernicious trade just so they could keep blacks under their heel. The book these three writers from Connecticut who are, as I said, much more liberal than I, have produced gives the lie to that baseless accusation.

When it came to slavery the North was every bit as guilty as was the South, in some cases even moreso. But then the professional “South-haters” who practice cultural genocide on Southerners and their culture do not want to hear this and so they will probably do their best to ignore this factual book just as they have studiously avoided admitting to much of what Donnie Kennedy and I have written about in Lincoln’s Marxists. Complicity is available at Amazon.com I would encourage folks who are serious about the truth to pick it up and read it. You won’t agree with everything in it. I didn’t. But it is still worth the read.

Sherman’s March

by Al Benson Jr.

The internationalist and dictatorial mindset of the Sherman brothers was clearly evident in the statement made by John Sherman, brother of William Tecumseh, when he said “Nationalize as much as possible (and thereby) make men love their country before their states.” This quote was in the book Donnie Kennedy and I wrote Lincoln’s Marxists, on page 127. You have only to compare this quote with the rantings of former presidential candidate John McCain when he ranted about “country first.” It sounds so patriotic until you stop and think about it. Seems that if I recall correctly, that was the same tack that Hitler took.

However, any similarities between General Sherman and Hitler are more than coincidental. They were both endowed with the same mindset.

One thing most noteworthy of Sherman’s barbarian hordes was their attitude toward clergymen and toward Christians in general. In Sherman’s March  Burke Davis noted: “The Reverend Mr. Connor, a Methodist minister whose parsonage was burned, emerged with a sick child wrapped in a blanket. A (Yankee) soldier seized the blanket. ‘No!’ Connor said, ‘he’s sick.’ The soldier tore off the blanket and threw it into the fire. ‘Damn you’ he said. ‘If you say one more word I’ll throw the child after it’.” Now there’s Yankee charity and mercy at its finest! The Yankee/Marxist mindset in it’s finest hour!

Sherman’s bummers treated the Catholics no better than the Protestants. The account is given in Davis’ book about a Catholic convent destroyed when Atlanta was burning. According to Davis: “Father O’Connell led a final benediction. The schoolgirls were kneeling, reciting the rosary, when the chapel door was broken in by ‘the most unearthly battering…like the crash of doom. Drunken soldiers piled over each other, rushing for the sacred gold vessels of the alter,…Father O’Connell led them to a nearby church, from which they saw the burning convent roof collapse into a fiery grid of timbers. The sturdy building endured until long after nearby structures had burned to the ground, but at three in the morning its cross plunged earthward in a cascade of flames and embers. Laughing soldiers taunted the nuns and blew cigar smoke in their faces. ‘Oh holy! Yes, holy! We’re just as holy as you are!…Now, what do you think of God? Ain’t Sherman greater’?” You are forced to wonder how many of the “forty-eighters” marched in Sherman’s columns. Their freethinking mindset would make this sort of abuse of Christians right up their alley. And you can bet that Sherman, who, was at best, an agnostic, would have had no problem with all of this.

It seems that Sherman’s men had a real antipathy toward Christianity and Christians. Davis observed in his book that: “Sergeant Fleharty watched as the village church was attacked: ‘First the pulpit and seats were torn out, then the siding and the blinds were ripped off. Many axes were at work. The corner posts were cut, the building tottered, the beautiful spire, up among the green trees, leaned…vibrating to and fro,…By the use of long poles the men increased the vibratory motion of the building, and soon, with a screeching groan the spire sunk down…and as the structure became a pile of rubbish, some of the most wicked of the raiders yelled out: ‘There goes your damned old gospel shop’.” With some exceptions this seems to have been the mindset of Sherman and those barbarians he commanded.

And in keeping with the Marxist mindset of many in the Union armies Sherman was strongly inclined to a program of “land confiscation.” He wanted to dispossess Confederate leadership from their property. Sherman’s beloved brother, John, mentioned earlier, had said: “If we can’t depend on the loyalty of the white men of the South, I would give the land to the blacks or colonize a new set (of northern whites).” Sherman, himself, since 1862 had threatened to take the land away from Southerners and to redistribute it to Northern white colonists and in 1864 he wrote: “…it may be both politic and right that we should banish them and appropriate their lands to a more loyal and useful population…If they want eternal war, well and good; we will dispossess them and put our friends in their place…” This was Sherman’s mindset, as well as the mindset of his brother in Washington. How different was this from what Karl Marx advocated “Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.” Most historians have yet to deal with the Marxist mindset of many Northern generals and politicians. It’s hard for them to grasp that the sainted Mr. Lincoln was a friend to the Marxists and socialists and had no problem whatever with their mindset or with what they did to the South. Christians have no concept of the depredations perpetrated against churches in the South during the war. That’s another whole subject in itself–another subject that almost never gets touched upon. They have been bemused into thinking Lincoln was a truly godly man because many pastors have told them this. No supporting evidence is necessary, in fact, most of the real primary sources you will run across say exactly the opposite–that Lincoln was really anti-Christian in his outlook. But then, in our day, our Christian brethren are hardly noted for their aggressive search for any truth that conflicts with the “cunningly devised fables” they have been fed, so they just go along to get along and never question anything. Their concern for historical truth is like the Platte River “a mile wide and an inch deep.”

It is rumored that the people of Georgia didn’t forget Sherman’s March for over 100 years after it happened. Who can blame them? I have just touched on a very few incidents here. There were many, many more and some so horrendous as to be beyond description. Until we begin to deal with the penetration of Marxists and socialists into Northern political and military life in the 1860s and before, we will never understand the War of Northern Aggression and the part people like Sherman played in it.

Truths About Slavery

By Al Benson Jr.
If you listen to the current and recent stories about slavery and the slave trade you will be led to think of it as an entirely Southern institution. You will think it was created by Southerners for the benefit of Southerners and that no one else had anything to do with it. This is how you are supposed to think. This is how your public school “education” has programmed you to think. Truth has little or nothing to do with it. You are “educated” to believe “Marxist” truth whether you realize it or not. However, those who have educated your teachers realize it even if the teachers don’t.

Most of the time, though, Marxist truth (whatever supports the current agenda) will be a far cry from reality. This is one more reason to remove your kids from public school.

One small example here, from Donnie Kennedy’s book Myths of American Slavery: “On April 21, 1861, the American slaver Nightengale, affectionately known as the ‘Prince of Slavers” was built in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, fitted out for the slave trade in Salem, Massachusetts, and its captain was from New York. When captured by the USS Saratoga, the Nightengale was flying the United States flag, and had more than nine hundred slaves on board. One of the last American vessels to be captured in the slave trade was the Erie, Nathaniel Gordon of Portland, Maine, commander. It should be noted that these vessels were not bringing slaves into the South.” How come, you might ask? Well, for a couple good reasons—one was that the Constitution of the Confederate States did not allow the importation of African slaves. Another reason was that the Union blockage had pretty much curtailed any importation of slaves into the South. Don’t expect to find this kind of information in your history books. They are usually so full of the “Uncle Toms’ Cabin” sort of fables they frequently have no room for the truth.

You are never told that, in much of the North, slavery was abolished to protect the white population from having to compete with slave labor. Lincoln, contrary to the popular myths about his fondness for black people and how he “grew” into this cherished position, felt that blacks were inferior and he was strongly in favor of moving them out of the country once they became free. He never changed that opinion. Donnie Kennedy’s book states, on page 165,: “Add to these the state of Illinois, which, in 1862 (while its sons were pillaging the South) by an overwhelming vote of the people, passed an amendment to the state constitution declaring that ‘no negro or mulatto shall immigrate or settle in this state.” If you ever noticed, the “underground railway” to free slaves ran all the way from different places in the South up into Canada. It didn’t end in New York or Michigan or wherever, and part of the reason for this was that most Northern folks did not want the blacks living too close to them.

Recently an article by Donald W. Livingston appeared on 
http://lewrockwell.com
which dealt, to some degree, with the slavery issue. The name of the article was Lincoln’s Inversion of the American Union. Dr. Livingston made several interesting points. He noted: “Only around fiteeen percent of southerners even owned slaves, and the great majority of those had holdings of one to six. Jefferson Davis was an enlightened slave holder who said that once the Confederacy gained its independence, it would mean the end of slavery. The Confederate Cabinet agreed to abolish slavery within five years after the cessation of hostilities in exchange for recognition by Britain and France. Southerners were not fighting to preserve slavery, but simply and solely because they were being invaded. And the North certainly did not invade to abolish slavery. Nor should this be surprising considering the Negrophobia that prevailed everywhere in the North. It was assumed by the vast majority of Americans, North and South, that America was a white European polity, and that the Indian and African populations were not—and were never to be—full participants in that polity.“ Dr. Livingston cited a passage from the Oregon state constitution to prove this. Again, where have you read this in your “history” books? Dr. Livingston noted that free blacks in Northern states were “severely regulated.” All you ever see in the “history” books are comments about how Jim Crow laws were enacted in the South. You are never told they had the same thing in the North. That part is just omitted.

And why did the northern states emancipate the blacks who had been slaves there? Dr. Livingston observed: “Emancipation laws in the antebellum North were designed to rid the North of its African population. They typically declared that the children of slaves born after a certain date would, upon reaching a certain age, be emancipated. This meant the adult slaves were not freed and that families could be sold South before the children reached the age of emancipation. Emancipation led to a reduction of the African population in the North, not to an increase, as it did in the South.” And that was the sole reason, in most cases, for African emancipation up North. Sell the slaves South and then complain about Southern slaver holders and the “sin”of slavery. If it was a sin for Southerners to own them wasn’t it also a sin for Northerners to own them? Hush! You ain’t supposed to ask that question! Livingston pointed out that: “Even abolitionists were careful to point out that it was not the slave they loved but the slaveholder they hated, and that emancipation did not at all mean social and political equality with whites.” This is the part you are never told about.

So basically the abolitionists hated the South and Southerners and they used the slaves as a wedge to pry the South apart from its foundations. If you look at the theological underpinnings of many of the abolitionists the reason for this is apparent. Their agenda called for much more than freeing slaves. That was the foot in the Southern door and that’s all it was.

I have never forgotten the story my father told me years ago. When he was a boy he knew an ex-slave. They used to fish in the same river and got talking. The old slave talked about what life had been like before he was free. He told my Dad that the family that owned them always treated them well and they had grown to love them. After the 13th Amendment was passed freeing them, many of the slaves did not want to leave what, to them, was home. One day the Yankee soldiers came and to them they were free and so they should pack up whatever they could carry on their backs and go. One of the slaves, with a little presence of mind asked the soldier “If we free then why can’t we stay if we want to?” My Dad never forgot the soldier’s reply. He told the slave “You’re free to go but not to stay.” How typical of Yankee/Marxist “freedom.” You’re free to do what we tell you to do but not what you might want to do. How different is our “freedom” today? “Reconstruction” still marches on! But, with our public school “educations” we still don’t get the message.

We Don’t Grasp the Yankee/Marxist Mindset

By Al Benson Jr.

There were some leaders in the South during the War of Northern Aggression that watched Northern armies get defeated again and again and they wondered why the Northern government just didn’t give up and let them go and end all the carnage on both sides. As sincere as these men were, they did not grasp the Yankee/Marxist mindset, just as many do not in our day.

They did not realize (and still do not) that the prime agenda of the Yankee/Marxist is to remake the world and all its people in his own image. He can never stop until he completes this task. His combat against those who deviate from his holy agenda is ongoing and never-ending. He seeks to get his own way and push his own agenda—no matter what—and no matter how long it takes. This is the Yankee/Marxist’s “holy” calling—all must be remade in his image and for that to happen all memory of Almighty God must be done away with so that all anyone ever remembers is the Yankee/Marxist “deity.”

He’s not there yet and in God’s economy he never will be, but that doesn’t keep him from continually trying.

That was true during the War of Northern Aggression and it is still true today. If he can’t accomplish his ends one way, he will seek to use another, but he will not quit—not ever. We need to grasp this and we mostly don’t.
The current Marxist administration has sought to remove our Second Amendment rights. In a recent senate vote they lost on all three attempts to do away with those rights. Many pro-gun folks think that was the end of it and our Second Amendment rights are now safe because the Senate voted to keep them. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In a recent article on http://www.infowars.com Obama vowed to continue pushing his gun control agenda, no matter how he has to do it The article said: “…he called the recent failures to pass gun control legislation the ‘first round’ and pledged to keep pushing his agenda” So don’t think we are off the hook because he lost the first round.

While Obama has hinted that he’d like to pass gun control legislation, he’s not above trying to issue an executive decree if legislation doesn’t work. So don’t think you are home free. The gun grabbers will be back, one way or another, by hook or by crook. They mean to dismantle the Second Amendment and if we do not stay continually alert they will do it—anyway they have to.

After all, the world has to be remade in the image of the Beast, er, I mean the Yankee/Marxist and his minions in Washington are not about to deviate from that agenda. The Christians and patriots that seek to oppose this need the same tenacity. Will we have it?

Some Good News Among All the Bad

by Al Benson Jr.

This blog spot has been rather quiet for the month of April. I went into the hospital on April 2nd and was there for 21 days, which pretty much shot April. I am home now and receiving therapy and hope to be a bit more vocal this month, Lord willing.

I did not get much news in hospital. What you see on tv hardly qualifies as news. Mostly it is someone’s spin on the news.

However I did hear, while in hospital that all three of Mr. Obama’s gun control bills had been defeated–all three. I was slightly amazed. I knew that the one banning “assault rifles” would probably not make it and even the one limiting magazine capacity was in trouble. However, most informed folks felt these bills would not make it anyway. All they were out there for was to give the anti-gun senators something to vote for so they could appear to be “pro-2nd Amendment.” What Obama really wanted was to get the one mandating background checks and registration passed. That way he’ d have all the names of the gun owners (he hoped). That one didn’t make it either. I’m told it failed by six votes. I can only applaud the 2nd Amendment groups, like Gun Owners of America, who must have done some really good work in this area and made certain senators feel the heat.

However, the pro-2nd Amendment folks cannot rest of their laurels. Mr. Obama and his gun grabbers do not intend to let folks keep their firearms and their scheme to eviscerate the 2nd Amendment is still in place in spite of this temporary setback.

One wonders how this will all play out. Will we have yet another “lone, crazed gunman”  kill more kids in another gun free zone, with the resultant political rhetoric that guns must be banned? I would not be surprised if such occurred. But if that one is getting a bit stale the anti-gunners may be forced to come up with a new tactic.

Stay tuned. You just never know.

Thirty Nine Years After West Virginia the Government Schools Continue to Subvert American Youngsters

by Al Benson Jr.
Back in 1974 an event occurred that shook the public (government) education establishment to the point where its minions have been racing, double-time, ever since to make up for the ground it lost there.

That event was the Kanawha County Textbook Protest, where parents actually managed, thanks to a gallant lady named Alice Moore, to get a look at what the public schools were planning on teaching their kids. The parents were not happy. They protested, marched, picketed, and shut down the country school system for a month, and the aftermath of this event lingered there for the next couple years. My family and I were there part of this time. It was one of those signal events that made my wife and I understand that we could never send our kids to public schools—anywhere—and by God’s grace we didn’t, though lots of our Christian brethren tried mightily to persuade us to. Try going to a church where everyone from the pastor on down thinks you are crazy for wanting your kids to have a Christian education and you get almost no support from anyone there because most of them are advocates of government schooling. It’s an interesting experience I can tell you.

The Textbook Protest was finally beaten into submission—literally—by the billy-clubs of over-zealous “law enforcement” officers who had been ordered to “break the protest” any way they had to. If you want to read an accurate account of that protest I would recommend Karl Priest’s book Protester Voices–The 1974 Textbook Tea Party. I believe this is still available from Amazon.com. It’s one of the very few books that tells what really happened in West Virginia.

There is no doubt that the Textbook Protest focused a lot of unwanted attention on government schools and they were not as free to pursue their radical agendas for awhile as they had been previously. But that was then and this is now, almost four decades later and socialist and anti-Christian government education has been busy making up for the time they lost in West Virginia—and they did lose time.

During the administration of “conservative” Ronald Reagan we had a federal Department of Education foisted on us, which meant that it was now official that the feds would control all of public education, with a tad bit of lip service paid to the states.

Of course many of the states had their own government school radicals on board. You have to understand one thing at this point. These people do not want to educate your children in the way that you understand education—reading, writing, and math. They have an agenda they seek to force on the kids that will fundamentally change the way they think. They don’t call themselves “change agents” for nothing. Your kids need to be re-educated to think along their socialist, “one world” lines. If you doubt what I am saying here I would encourage you to check the Internet and look up a DVD called IndoctriNation–the Movie. One place you can obtain it is from Exodus Mandate. It will bear out everything I have said and more. And while you’re at it check out Exodus Mandate to find out what they are all about. You can find them with a Google search.

There are some really far-left government school programs out there being used in various states, one of which, unfortunately, is Texas. According to 
http://www.wnd.com
for 1/13/13 “Texas is one of the few states still resisting implementation of Common Core, Obama’s national education initiative, which many feel is a transparent attempt to nationalize education and progressively control classroom content with minimal parental oversight. Implementation of Common Core is known to have been made a condition of school systems’ receipt of federal dollars under Obama’s ‘Race to the Top’ program. CSCOPE recently has come under fire for evidence of what sources claim to be radical content and secrecy. Now new information 
http://www.acahnman.blogspot.com 
of such a radical agenda has surfaced showing CSCOPE connections to Obama mentor and self-acknowledged terror group member Bill Ayers. WND has documented a strong link…between Ayers and CSCOPE heavyweight and common core advocate Linda Darling-Hammond.”

What this amounts to, in plain language, is that the leftist radicals have seized control of what passes for public education in Texas and in most other areas of the country and most folks with kids in the public propaganda factories remain blissfully unaware of what has happened and how their kids are being brainwashed.

Michael Snyder, in an article for 
http://www.prisonplanet.com 
for March 19th noted: “When I was a little boy my public school teachers were still teaching that the founding fathers that were involved in the Boston Tea Party were great patriots that were trying to throw off the vile oppression of the British. But now many public schools are openly referring to them as ‘terrorists’. For example, down in Texas a public school curriculum known as CSCOPE is being widely used. The following is from a CSCOPE lesson plan labeled ‘World History Unit 12 Lesson 07’…A local militia, believed to be a terrorist organization, attacked the property of private citizens today in our nation’s busiest port. Although no one was injured in the attack, a large quantity of merchandise, considered to be valuable to its owners and loathsome to the perpetrators, was destroyed. The terrorists, dressed in disguise and apparently intoxicated, were able to escape into the night with the help of local citizens who harbor these fugitives and conceal their identities from the authorities. It is believed that the terrorist attack was a response to the policies enacted by the occupying country’s government. Even stronger policies are anticipated by the local citizens.” This is how CSCOPE described the Boston Tea Party. Thankfully, there was enough of an outcry about this particular lesson that it was pulled, but how many kids were exposed to this drivel before it was pulled, and what has it been replaced with?

Another little dandy that CSCOPE trotted out there was a lesson to have the kids design a flag for a new socialist nation. Part of the lesson plan read: “Imagine a new socialist nation is creating a flag and you have been put in charge of creating a flag. Use symbolism to represent aspects of socialism/communism on your flag. What kinds of symbolism/colors would you use?”

You might wonder why you haven’t heard more about all this. Part of the reason has been that teachers in public schools in Texas were actually required to “sign a contract that would prevent them from revealing what was in the CSCOPE lessons or face civil and criminal penalties.” So if a parent in Texas comes to a teacher with questions about the CSCOPE agenda the teacher can’t tell him or her anything lest he end up in the slammer! Want to know what your kids are learning in public school in Texas? You aren’t entitled to know! How do you like that transparency? And this is the program that is tied to Obama’s Common Core national education agenda. If this doesn’t bother you it should.

Diane Ravitch is a lady who has been involved in the public school education field for many years. I remember reading about her back in the late 1980s. She has been around for a long time and generally is pretty astute as to what goes on in public school circles. On her blog spot 
http://dianeravitch.net 
she wrote an article on February 26th 2013 in which she stated: “I have come to the conclusion that the Common Core standards effort is fundamentally flawed by the process with which they have been foisted upon the nation. The Common Core standards have been adopted in 46 states and the District of Columbia without any field test. They are being imposed on the children of this nation despite the fact that no one has any idea of how they will affect students, teachers, or schools. We are a nation of guinea pigs, almost all trying an unknown new program at the same time…I have thought long and hard about the Common Core standards. I have decided that I cannot support them.”

Ms. Ravitch lists legitimate concerns. She sees a flawed program being forced on public school kids and she is right to be concerned. However, I don’t think the federal educrats care how this program affects kids and schools one way or the other. It is part of an agenda to tear down and discard whatever of our Christian heritage and culture is left. It is part of an agenda to make sure that our kids hate their history and to, in essence, make them someone we don’t even know anymore. They will, in effect, become more the products of the public school system than they will their parents. They will belong to the state—and that’s where all this is going.

Don’t kid yourselves that this is a situation where the schools just made a few goofs and that your input will ever change any of that in any meaningful way. It won’t. The socialist state regards your kids as theirs and they mean to have them to use as cogs in the wheel of the New World Order. That’s where all this is headed and if you persist in leaving your kids in the hands of the federal educrats you will reap what you have sown—teenage Brownshirts coming to hall you away because you have displayed “reactionary tendencies” against the new “Illuminated Order.”

This is what the Textbook Protest in West Virginia, at least temporarily, disrupted. This is what the Christian and Home School Movements have slowed down by producing students that could actually think for themselves. At some point in the future the public education system will have to deal with these “educational terrorists.”

Our goal should be to make sure they have lots more Christian and Home School kids to deal with than they want to and that those kids, and their parents, are spiritually equipped to resist. That means that Christian parents have got to stop letting their adversaries educate their children and start assuming that responsibility themselves. I realize most of them just don’t want to hear that. My last 40 years of experience have shown me that this is one responsibility most Christians will flee from–yet this is one they should embrace. So let’s think about it while there is yet time.