Our Marxist Regime and Our Land

by Al Benson Jr.

I recently dealt with how our Marxist Regime in Washington (which is omnipresent regardless of which “party” controls the White House or Congress) feels about the biblical concept of private property. Since the origin of private property is biblically based they naturally hate and loathe it. Any expression of biblical truth must be expunged so “those people” (the Yankee/Marxists) can indulge their lustful desire to play god. After all, what is this desire on their part for a One World Government but a gross magnification of what occurred at the Tower of Babel?

In order to control people, their lives, thoughts, and activities totally you must first take away their guns and then you must control the land (which is always much easier if they don’t have any firearms). Years ago someone gave me a copy of an independently printed book called The Battle of Jefferson Canyon, written by a Don Bowman. Mr. Bowman dealt primarily with much of what has been called The Sagebrush Rebellion. The book was published back in 1996 and similar situations to what Mr. Bowman described in the book are still occurring. The Bundy Ranch situation was one.

Bowman called it a “war” and he was right. It was, and is, first and foremost, a cultural war, just like the war being waged on the South over her flags and symbols. It’s all the same war and Westerners and Southerners both need to start realizing this and getting together and talking about how they can help one another, because we all have the same problem and the same adversary (and just because you can’t see his red tail doesn’t mean he’s not there).  It is to the advantage of him and his disciples to keep us divided. It is to our advantage to sit down and talk strategy with one another, making sure in that process we weed out the agent provocateurs.

Bowman noted in his book a story by writer Lee Pitts that was in a September, 1994 issue of the Livestock Market Digest. Mr. Pitts stated: “You can’t tell a New Mexican family that all the Bureau of Land Management does is to look after the welfare of our federal lands. In July of this year BLM Rangers allegedly shot out their car’s tire, maced the driver twice, kicked one woman, stomped another and broke her ankle and told the other family members they would have their heads blown off. What was this family doing wrong you may ask? Who knows? The BLM Rangers to this day  have failed to file any charges…The driver’s mother tried to help her son but was knowked to the ground by the ranger who then stomped on her leg before handcuffing her. After handcuffing the mother the BLM Ranger went back to the driver and sprayed him again in the face with mace.  All this time the children were crying and the ranger yelled at them to shut up.  According to the complaint the BLM Ranger said he was going to blow their (expletive deleted) heads off. Only the timely arrival of a deputy sheriff and a tribal police officer may have kept the rangers from brutalizing  the family further.” It gets worse, but I could only type so much without gagging at what these so-called “public servants” do to those that pay their salaries. Folks, these are the jack-booted federal thugs that are supposed to “protect” public lands and they seem to do a thorough job of “protecting” them from the public. That give you any ideas about who they think the land really belongs to?

Last week I read an article on http://thefreethoughtproject.com   by John Vibes which stated: “This week militia members have begun a standoff with federal agents after occupying  Malheur National Wildlife Refuge HQ in Oregon. The protesters are refusing to leave and are demonstrating against the impending imprisonment of two ranchers, and the overreaching policies of the Bureau of Land Management, a federal agency that has been appropriating land for their own benefit…In 2013 it was reported that the BLM sold 29 federal land leases which covered more than 56 square miles in northeast Nevada. The agency itself reported that the oil and gas leases in Elko County sold for $1.27 million to six different companies.” Question–If this is public land then why is the BLM selling it off? Where do they get that authority? Maybe, like good old Mao in China they believe their “authority” comes out of the barrells of their guns. Whatever you think of fracking one way or the other, $1.27 million ain’t exactly chump change. Where did they get the authority to sell public land? I thought they were supposed to be preserving and protecting it for “the people.” Well, yes, that may be true, but for what people? Certainly not the American public.

Going back to Bowman’s book we run across Zane Miles, Lander County District Attorney, who had some thoughtful comments to make about the land. Bowman observed: “Citing legal and historic authorities, Zane says  that public lands in Nevada and in many other Western states are not ‘federal lands’ owned by the federal government. According to Miles, the federal government has continued to control the public lands, but only as a trustee for the states. The Lander DA says the United States coerced the people of the territory into an illegal act of ceding the public lands to the federal government.”  And remember, in Nevada, this all happened during the Lincoln administration when Lincoln wanted to get more states into the Union so he’d have those extra electoral votes to beat McClellan in 1864. So would the federal government lie, cheat, coerce, and steal to promote one of its agendas? In a New York minute, Baby!

And don’t forget, they are engaging in a culture (Marxist) war here, so there are no holes barred. And don’t forget also that a culture war is also a theological war. Our total destruction is their agenda, specifically if we are Christian, in the South and West, so we better wake up!

Marxism and the Bureau of Land Management

by Al Benson Jr.

In that infamous document The Communist Manifesto, which the League of the Just (Illuminati) hired deadbeat revolutionary Karl Marx to pen, Marx noted, quite accurately, that: “In this sense, the theory of the Communists may be summed up in a single sentence: Abolition of private property.” In other words, if Marxists of any stripe influence and eventually rule your country–you own nothing. Rather, they own you. Any land you may have thought you owned now belongs to “the People” which, being interpreted, means the State.

It is in that context that you need to begin to look at the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) as an instrument of the Marxist state that has as its agenda the appropriation of any and all land. You may even have a deed “proving” ownership which, to them, is irrelevant. Your deed is really worthless because they have the power to move you off of your land and in a Marxist state such as we now exist in, any and all means to do that are open to them–anything from constant harassment to extermination. After all, if you are in the way you have to go–and the end always justifies the means.

This fits in perfectly with the United Nations Agenda 21 program, whereby people are moved off their land and relocated in nice little mini-ghettos, naturally owned by the State.

Ranchers, farmers and other property owners in the West and in other areas need to begin to realize that the Marxist agenda that is present has as priorities moving them off their land and destroying their culture, lifestyle and worldview. The cultural Marxists in the South are busy trying to destroy the culture and worldview (particularly the Christian part) of the South and, naturally, with that destruction will come the abolition of private property, because the concept of private property is a biblical one and so that has to go.

Ultimately this struggle is as much theological as it is political, but most people, even on the Marxist side, don’t grasp that. Unfortunately, even most Christians remain totally in the dark on this issue. Most folks, Christian and otherwise, have not been able to connect the dots to see where all this is incrementally going.

For instance, there was an article on http://www.inquisitr.com for October 15, 2015, written by Tara West, that stated: “A group of Texas ranchers are furious after representatives from the federal Bureau of Land Management made claims that their land doesn’t really belong to the ranchers, but rather it belonged to the federal government. The federal officials claim that despite each rancher having a deed for their property and having paid property taxes on the land each year, the land should never have been sold, as it is actually federal land.”

There was an article in The Blaze that mentioned one rancher, Ken Aderholt. He got a phone call from a BLM rep in 2014. This “land aquisition”  expert for the BLM claimed that “625 acres of Aderholt’s property actually belonged to the federal government.” This individual said this discovery was made when the government began “redefining” boundary lines along the Red River, which separates Texas from Oklahoma. Aderholt noted that by “redefining” the boundary from half a mile in to the river it significantly affected the size of his property, and even his home place. When Aderholt explained to this BLM worthy that his home place sat on some of the land that the feds had “redefined” this individual retorted “You have reason to be conserned.” Translated into plain English that means “We’re taking your home place and there’s not a damned thing you can do about it. It’s part of our agenda, so kiss it goodbye.”

It’s also a major part of the overall Marxist agenda for the confiscation of private property. Notice they seem to be taking it in increments instead of all at once–at least for now–the old Fabian socialist approach. Do it all at once and folks really get shook up. Do it in smaller increments and they may not like it but they are like frogs in the cool water that gradually gets hotter and they don’t realize what’s happening to them (the Marxist agenda for the abolition of private property).

Folks, the federal Marxist revolutionaries, starting in Washington, want your land, all of your land, just like they want all of your guns. It’s as simple as that! Get a copy of The Communist Manifesto and read Marx’s ten rules of revolution and you will begin to get the picture of what is now going on in this country–as has actually been going on for decades while everyone has slept through it, Christians included.

The folks taking part in the Sagebrush Rebellion need to understand who their enemy is and what his plans for them are and they need to do enough homework to expose those plans publicly.

More on this as the Lord allows.

 

 

Who Was Lavoy Finicum?

by Al Benson Jr.

Like lots of other folks I kept my eye on the situation at the wildlife refuge near Burns, Oregon. I had my doubts that the occupation of the wildlife refuge was something the Sagebrush Warriors should have engaged in. I don’t question their intent or their integrity but I kind of felt this was one battle they should have passed up. It seems like all it did was to give the feds a chance to get even for being made to look so bad at the Bundy Ranch in Nevada in April of 2014. And you have to know, with their current Marxist mindset the feds will not just get mad, they will get even and then some.

However, Lavoy Finicum interested me. He was a Mormon rancher from Northern Arizona and seemed, from what I could see of him in videos to epitomize the Western lifestyle, and I in no way mean that in a derogatory sense. I have spent time in the West over the years. My family and I have camped and hiked over much of the country. I have talked to people who have had problems with the BLM and their confiscatory efforts at “acquiring” land. And Mr. Finicum had had his problems with the feds taking his water and generally harassing him. There seems to be sort of a federal agenda nowadays to get the ranchers off the land many places in the West and you have to wonder what the deal is. Does the land contain uranium  or other valuable minerals that the feds and their corporate fascist buddies would like to make millions off of, even though it isn’t theirs? The fact that it isn’t theirs would pose no problem at all for them. After all, they’ve got the power so they can basically do what they want and if they lean hard enough on the local and county politicians and law officers, most of them won’t fight back. Some will but most won’t.

Anyway, Lavoy Finicum was part of the protest at the refuge in Oregon. He seemed like a mild sort of man, not a troublemaker, but like most Westerners used to be, he didn’t like being pushed around. Like many Southern folks he just wanted to be left alone to lead his life, care for his cattle, and not bother anyone. When the feds started coming after him he made some You Tube videos explaining why he was resisting what the feds were trying to do to him. I watched a couple of those before I wrote this article and watching them and seeing his clear line of reasoning in what he said, I thought “here is a marked man.” The feds don’t like people who resist and who carefully explain to whoever will listen why and what they are resisting. My first thought was that, if they can, they will get this guy–one more irritant out of their way, one more example of the Western lifestyle shoved down the memory hole.

The Westerners have the same identical problem we here in the South have. Their lifestyle, traditions, culture and all the rest are under assault just like ours is. They have become the victims of the current phase of “reconstruction” only most of them don’t realize what it is yet. They and the Southern folks really need to get together because the cultural Marxists have their way of life slated for destruction just as they have ours here in the South. For the New World Order to triumph, both the Southern and Western ways of life have to go.

I sincerely hope some folks in the West who wish to preserve their culture and lifestyle get to read this and that it will begin to make them think. We are all being subjected to cultural Marxism and ethnic cleansing and we need to help each other to find ways to resist.

Lavoy Finicum tried to resist in the way he knew how to. It cost him his life. I also watched the FBI video of when they were pursuing them. They claim he pulled a gun. Others in his vehicle said he was on his way to a meeting and had left his weapons back at the place the protesters occupied. It was pretty hard to tell from the video exactly what happened, and I watched it all the way through twice. It looked  to me, like when he hit the snowbank and got out of his vehicle he had his hands in the air but then lowered them and that’s when they shot him. The police claim he was armed. It would be nice to see a real close up of him on the ground there after they shot him to see if there really was a gun or not. Knowing the feds penchant for “truth” I honestly have my doubts.

But the feds have now atoned for the sin of losing out at the Bundy Ranch in 2014, so we will have to see what ground angels fear to tread on that they will next stomp all over in their campaign to rid the West of real people.

A Forty-Eighter Advises Lincoln About When To Call Congress Into Session After The Fort Sumter Situation

by Al Benson Jr.

Several years ago I read an interesting little book by historian Webb Garrison called Lincoln’s Little War–How his carefully crafted plans went astray.

According to the Internet it is still available at Barnes and Noble and you can check it out at http://www.barnesandnoble.com  The brief commentary on the Barnes & Noble page says, in part, “This intriguing book by historian Webb Garrison explores how Lincoln’s plans for a small police action soon escalated into the bloodiest war in American history, and how Lincoln sought to absolve himself of any responsibility.” That seems to be a pretty accurate statement, and another author, Frank van der Linden, back in 1998, said basically the same thing in his book Lincoln–The Road to War. I think van der Linden made one error overall.  He seemed to feel the whole issue of the war and between the states, was one of slavery, so he majored on that one aspect. But in his writing as a whole has has come up with a lot of information you don’t usually get from the cultural Marxist “historians” in our day.

In Virginia, before she seceded, van der Linden noted there was a “peace convention” which was devised to try to “patch up the Union” before things went too far and most Virginians, before secession, were willing to wait and see what the outcome of that would be.  They didn’t really wish to secede, but…”they would not be submissionists–a dirty word in the South, meaning those who would submit to anything Lincoln might do. They certainly would  ‘coerce’ another Southern state or send soldiers to fight against their neighbors. That was unthinkable. Lincoln failed to understand the Southerners emotions.” He felt that because, at that point, Virginians were willing to abide in the Union, that they always would, no matter what he did, and he thought of the secessionists as a “little band of troublemakers. His blindness to the masses’ instinctive aversion to any federal coercion  caused him to follow a totally mistaken policy of firmly opposing compromise.” In other words he had the typical Yankee/Marxist worldview–“do it MY way–or else!”

It was noted by van der Linden that after the firing on Fort Sumter, “Lincoln’s aim all along, had been to paint the secessionists as ‘the aggressors’ and present himself as the apostle of peace…Lincoln also knew that those unarmed supply vessels, which he had sent to Charleston, were escorted by warships under orders to fire in case of attack…Lincoln expected a war to result from his scenario, and it did. ‘The plan succeeded,’ he told his Illinois friend, Orville Browning. ‘They attacked Sumter–it fell, and thus  did more service than it otherwise could.” And then he pulled a typical Obamaesque move–he called for the governors of the various states to provide 75,000 militia to enforce the federal laws.  And van der Linden stated: ” As the slim legal basis for his policy,  Lincoln relied upon a 1795 law he interpreted as giving him this authority, which amounted to summoning a ‘posse comitatus’ of record size–seventy-five thousand men–to enforce the federal laws.” So it would seem that, in April, when Sumter fell, he didn’t actually declare war (although in effect he did) and he planned to have the militia ready in Washington to “enforce the federal laws.” When he called Congress into special session, because only they can declare war,  he waited until the Fourth of July for Congress’ opening date.  So why didn’t he do this in April when the crisis was supposedly on the country and the folks in Washington were supposedly waiting for the “rebels” to batter down the gates? On page 280 of his book van der Linden tells us. “Carl Schurz, the brilliant young German devoted to the Republican cause, provided the answer in a letter to Lincoln in early April: ‘Some time ago you told me you did not want to call an extra session of Congress for fear of reopening the compromise agitation.’ Schurz suggested that, after a show of force to defend the forts, Lincoln should call Congress back and then, ‘the enthusiasm of the masses will be great and overwhelming and Congress will be obliged to give you any legislation you ask for.’…Lincoln heeded Schurz’s political advice;…”

So here we have a situation where one of the key Forty-Eighter socialists that Donnie Kennedy and I have written about in our book Lincoln’s Marxists is giving the president of the United States advice, which he followed, about when to call Congress back into session so they will be apt to give him what he wants–a war on the South that will end up destroying  their culture, their faith, their history, and then “reconstructing” all these on a whole new basis. Anyone who thinks these socialists and Marxists had no real effect on the federal government and its policies just hasn’t bothered connecting the dots from them until now.

Folks, please, start doing the  homework and learning some real history instead of just swallowing the bilge  they taught you in school, because most of what they taught you in school was intended to keep you fat, dumb and ignorant.  If you don’t understand what your past was all about then you have no guideline whatever to help you work toward a better future for your children and grandchildren. One of the great unwritten chapters in the history of this country is the influence the socialists and Marxists had in this country from the years just before the War of Northern Aggression up to an including how. Their influence is much stronger here now because of what they began back then–and most people don’t have a clue.

Why do you suppose you have the Marxist aberation in the White House that this country is presently saddled with?  Think there’s no connection between now and then? I realize it might take time away from the Reality Shows, and that’s a rough go for most folks nowadays, but you all had better start finding out what the cultural Marxists have been up to in this country since 1848 and shortly thereafter–and then start comparing it with what you seen going on nowadays. Then ask the Lord’s guidance as to what you can do about it.

Pat Cleburne Could See It Coming

by Al Benson Jr.

Lately I have been going through my library and checking out books I have not read in 15-20 years and reading some of them to see if I might find more insights in some of them now than I did then.

One I recently did this with was Lee’s Last Campaign by Clifford Dowdey in which Mr. Dowdey dealt at  great length with General Lee’s campaign in the Wilderness and surrounding areas in 1864. I am glad I went through it. This time it gave me a much better understanding of what Lee had to put up with and how well he really did in that campaign–much better than the “historians” give him credit for.

Another one I have just reread is Stonewall of the West–Patrick Cleburne and the Civil War by Craig L. Symonds. Pat Cleburne was an interesting personality, and I mean that in a positive sense. He was killed in the Battle of Franklin in Tennessee in November, 1864 because John Bell Hood was so anxious to attack the Yankees in Franklin that he couldn’t resist a frontal assault across open ground which, basically, destroyed his army. I’ve been to Franklin to see the site of the battle.

Hood lost a lot of his officers in that foolish attempt, and I say foolish because the very next day the Yankees pulled out of Franklin and moved up to Nashville. Hood didn’t need to destroy his army attacking Franklin–the Yankees were on the way out anyway. To all intents and purposes his army, the Army of Tennessee, was finished after that battle.

Five officers killed in that battle were laid out on the porch at the Carnton Plantation house after the battle and one of them was General Pat Cleburne. Pat Cleburne had come to Arkansas as a Protestant Irish immigrant, made his home there and when the War of Northern Aggression started he joined up to fight for the Confederacy. I can understand that, the South was his home and the Southern folks sort of adopted him, somewhat the way they have my wife and I.

Pat Cleburne was no dummy and he early realized what would happen if the South lost the War. At one point he spelled it out quite plainly. He said that, if the South lost, “It means that the history of this heroic struggle will be written by the enemy. That our youth will be trained by Northern school teachers; will learn from Northern school books their version of the war; will be impressed by all of the influences of History and Education in regard to our gallant debt as traitors and our maimed veterans as fit subjects for derision.” Cleburne was downright prescient in his prediction. This is exactly what has happened. Southern children have been taught Yankee/Marxist “history” and we sit back in incredulity and wonder what happened to the kids because they seem to think great granddaddy was a racist traitor for fighting for the Confederacy.

I grew up in the North and my wife and I either had our kids in Christian schools or home schooled them. They never set foot in a public school for “education” since day one. Having lived through part of the Textbook Protest in Kanawha County, West Virginia back in the 1970s we were well aware of where the public schools were coming from and we didn’t want our kids absorbing what passed for education in them.

Back in July of 2015 I read an excellent article by Pastor Chuck Baldwin entitled The Confederate Flag Needs To Be Raised, Not Lowered. He wrote it soon after what many believe to be a false flag event in Charleston that became a rallying point for the cultural Marxist campaign to erase Confederate flags and symbols from all over the South–a campaign that is not over by a long shot. It has spawned everything from ethnic cleansing campaigns to frantic new efforts at gun control and the cultural Marxists continue to try to destroy as much of our culture as they can. For awhile we resisted. There were Confederate flag rallies and new Confederate flags being put up all over the South. Now, in the main, we seem to have gone back to sleep again as the cultural Marxists gird their loins for a new assault this year.

They have the state flag of Mississippi in their sights early this year and so there needs to be a strong effort put forth to resist that attempt. Just remember, with the cultural Marxists, cultural Marxism is still Marxism and that’s another thing most of our kids have not learned the truth about in school. We here in the South at this point don’t know our history. If we did we would never stand still for our kids saying a pledge of allegiance that has the line “one nation indivisible” in it. This was a “pledge” written by a defrocked socialist minister in Massachusetts in 1892–exactly one generation after the Southern states lawfully seceded in 1860-61. It was an open slap in the face at those in the South that had fought for the Confederacy. And their children were to be taught that their fathers had been traitors and that they were, heretofore, to be ashamed of them. Folks, this is ethnic cleansing and it still goes on in the South today, if anything with more intensity than it did fifty years ago. Pat Cleburn’s prediction has been fulfilled, more’s the pity!

So what to do? Getting your kids out of public school would be a major step in the right direction for those that can manage it.  Home schooling does not have to be all that expensive nowadays. There are lots of home school programs out there. All you have to do is start looking.

You need to start teaching your kids accurate history. This is an area most home school people just kind of pass over and they take whatever passes for history in whatever curriculum they get. Mistake!!! Look around for your history material. I did an article on this a couple years ago, I think on my other blog spot where I listed some of the history material I had found.  If anyone is interested in this information I will try to hunt it up and post some of it here.

Is That REALLY What the Flag Represents?

by Al Benson Jr.

The state of Mississippi  will probably be attacked and subjected to yet another round of ethnic cleansing via its state flag. The cultural Marxists, building on events that transpired last year, seem to feel that they can sound the death knell for Confederate symbols all across the country, and the Mississippi State Flag is one of their main targets.

If possible they will seek to do it without a vote of the citizens of Mississippi. They will seek to do it, if left to their own devices, through a legislative redesigning  of the state flag which will totally emasculate any real cultural meaning from it. They are, after all, in the business of destroying Christian and Southern culture. That is one of the foremost items on their to do list.

So, look in this coming year for a barrage of false accusations regarding the flag. The prostitute press will greatly aid them in this, as they owe their souls to those who want to be rid of any and all Confederate symbols, be they in Jackson or New York and quite frankly, most of them don’t care if they lie to accomplish that or not.

So you will be told that the Confederate Battle Flag on the Mississippi State Flag places Mississippi “out of step” with the rest of the country. It makes Mississippi way too “non-conformist” and everyone should want to conform to the cultural Marxist worldview shouldn’t they? Well, no, actually they shouldn’t. If more people understood the Marxist worldview hopefully they would oppose it. And actually, what’s wrong with being non-conformist? When you look at where some of these states are headed today, like California and New York, do you really want to be “conformed” to that? We are told by the cultural Marxists that we need “diversity.” Only problem is that they get to define what the term means. Real diversity would include those who do not conform to the status quo. But if you understand the cultural Marxists then you realize that’s not really what they mean.

Then they will try to convince you that because the Battle Flag is on Mississippi’s state flag, that shows you that Mississippi supports and endorses slavery. In all honesty, folks, get real! The 13th Amendment passed in 1865 outlawed slavery. It has been gone for over 150 years now. The Confederate Battle Flag was only ever a soldiers’ flag and black soldiers fought under it along with whites, American Indians and some Mexicans. It was never an endorsement of slavery. It had nothing whatever to do with slavery just as the vast majority of men who fought under it had nothing to do with slavery.

The Battle Flag, whether part of Mississippi’s State Flag or not, hasn’t changed, but peoples’ perception of what it was has been twisted and manipulated so most people, black or white, don’t really know the history or the facts.

I will admit that certain undesirable groups and individuals have abused and misused Confederate flags. However, if you understand accurate history, you will realize that what those people have done through their misuse of the flag does not change what the flag was originally all about. All it does is to change the perception. And that is exactly what their misuse was intended to do.

So in this coming year, as the deluge of deliberate disinformation about the Battle Flag on the state flag is shoveled into your faces, before you buy into it, take the time and make the effort to find out the truth about the flag. The St. Andrews Cross on the battle flag is a Christian symbol and that symbolism ought to tell you something.

If They Carried Both Flags Why Does the Media Only Find One “Racist?”

by Al Benson Jr.

Having followed the ethnic cleansing program of the cultural Marxists for several years it has come as no surprise that they have, again, attacked Confederate flags and symbols with much vitriol in the past six months or so. The shootings in Charleston gave them fresh impetus, a shot in the arm, if you will.

The total removal of anything “Confederate” has long been a part of their agenda, both the  ones on the street and those in board rooms in New York and Washington. Indeed, the ones on the street are little more than “useful idiots” for the ones in the board rooms. They are the cannon fodder for the revolution promoted by those who plan to remake American culture, most particularly Southern American culture, in their own image. These people are the ultimate idolators.

I have noted, for a couple decades now, how the “news” media has sought to connect the Confederate Battle flag to the Ku Klux Klan. This has been an ongoing project. This is one thought they have assiduously attempted to implant into the minds of the American public—KKK equals Confederate flag–it’s all the same, you have one you have the other, so just equate the two and don’t even bother to think about it (because beyond that they’d rather you didn’t).

Even for the media and the leftists, though, there are always some flies in the buttermilk. If you go back and follow some of the history down you begin to find it hasn’t always been that way.  This is what the anti-Southern cultural mind-benders would rather you didn’t do–follow the history down.

We’ve all seen photos of the (what passes for news) media of KKK marches, rallies, or what have you and there are always almost more Confederate flags around than there are people. Hint: this is not by accident. I saw a video tape once of a KKK parade in Northern Illinois that had two flag bearers at the front of the procession, one carrying a US flag and the other carrying a Confederate flag. The media person doing the video inadvertently focused in first on the guy carrying the US flag, and realizing he had goofed, he immediately switched and concentrated on the person carrying the Confederate flag for the rest of the video and you never saw the US flag again. This is so typical. In fact, I was surprised,  that this late in the cultural genocide game you could still see a US flag in a KKK parade. Most had been purged and replaced with Confederate flags. This was probably fifteen years or so ago.

While doing some research for another project, I happened to come across a whole batch of old photos of KKK rallies and marches from back in the 1920s and 30s. And guess what? They weren’t all in the South. One was in Washington, D.C.; another was in Ohio. I even found a picture of one in Minnesota–hardly the heart of Dixie! Turns out, if you do  a little research, you find that, in the earlier part of the 20th century the Klan was very prevalent in Ohio, Indiana and other Midwestern states, more so than in the South. I’m not saying the South didn’t have them, but they don’t seem to have had as many as the Midwest did. And somehow, I tend to doubt that all those Midwestern Klan members  were rabid and racist Southern rednecks. In fact, growing up in the North, I got to know a couple people in New England that had been Klan members in their earlier days. These people were Northerners. They had never lived anywhere near the South. They had been part of that great Northern former Klan population that no one ever mentions (or is supposed to be aware of).

One thing I noted in those old Klan photos–anytime they had a march or a parade you had more US flags on hand than you could shake a stick at. Yet this is never mentioned. Only the present day Klan (which is not nearly as big as people think it is) is ever talked about.  Only the current Klan carrying Confederate flags is ever noted–outside of thinly veiled attempts at making Nathan Bedford Forrest the chief bugaboo of the Klan–forever!

Now I realize I’m not even supposed to think of this, but, if the Confederate flag is “racist” because the Klan carried it, does that also make the US flag racist because the Klan carried it? Well? Don’t hear too many replies from the left. Of course I realize that, to the real Far Left, every flag in this country is “racist” except that of the old Soviet Union, that great leveler (with machine guns or otherwise) of society. But I do wonder why it’s okay to portray the Confederate flag as “racist” because certain groups carried it and then to ignore the fact that these same groups also carried the US flag. Maybe it’s not quite time to label the US flag racist in a major campaign yet.

There was a point in time when the KKK switched from carrying the US flag to carrying the Confederate flag. Why?