Two Kingdoms That Cannot Co-Exist

By Al Benson Jr.

We see in operation today two kingdoms in the world—the Kingdom of God and the kingdom of man (the state). There are few legitimate governments anymore that really comprise the “state.” Most of the legitimate ones are gone, having been replaced with dictatorships, oligarchies, or fake “republics” that fool people with charades they refer to as elections and whose results have already been predetermined long before the “election” takes place. We recently had one of those in the United States.

There is a place for legitimate governments in God’s economy, governments that fulfill their God-ordained duties and functions and do no more than that. When I talk about the kingdom of man (the state) I am not referring to those few governments that do this. I am referring to all those governments run by men who think they are, or wish to be “god” in their own countries and around the world. Such people and governments are at war with God’s Kingdom. As horrendous as things look at this point in history, this is a war that those who seek to be “god” cannot win. They will always, at some point, lose, even if we do not live to see it.

Pastor Steve Wilkins of Monroe, Louisiana has stated: “We have two kings and two kingdoms. Both make similar claims. They cannot coexist. We are being told that the story of the coming of Jesus is the story of the great war between the city of God and the city of man. The seed of the Woman versus the seed of the Serpent. Every man must now choose between Christ or Caesar, the Kingdom of this world or the Kingdom of God.”

This was true in Roman times. The Christians in the Roman Empire would have gotten along splendidly and been able to worship had they only been willing to acknowledge Caesar as lord first. As Christians they could not do this. Jesus is Lord, not Caesar. In fact Caesar doesn’t even come close, nor did Lincoln, Roosevelt, Clinton, Bush, nor does Obama. All of these men presided over governments that went far beyond their constitutional prerogatives as Obama’s does today.

Pastor Wilkins set this in a historical perspective taken from the Gospel of Luke. He noted: “Two Kingdoms are now present, represented by two kings. The great King of Rome had brought peace—but his peace was founded upon destruction. His peace was based upon continual war. By contrast, the young King in Bethlehem will bring peace by giving up his own life and in so doing, giving life to a world condemned to die.” Caesar’s “peace” was based upon continual war. How is this different from where this country is going today. We’ve been fighting wars in the Middle East for over a decade now as we go from one country to the next—from Afghanistan to Iraq—and then if it is Israel’s wish, on to Iran, Syria, and who knows where else. Supposedly we are bringing “democracy” to the Middle East. Hogwash! We are bringing destruction to the Middle East—and creating more resentment, and do you think our national leaders don’t realize this? A century ago we sent missionaries to these places. Now we send armies, tanks, and drones. We trust in military strength to forward our dreams of empire and we seek to be the police force for the entire world, or at least one in competition with Russia, who also wants to run the world. So the kings of this world compete with one another.

But in one area they will work with one another—and that area is the destruction of God’s Kingdom—to be replaced with their own—and once that happens they will fight with each other to see who will end up as top dog. Or maybe the heads of all these governments already have an agenda they will impose of their countries once they feel they have gotten God out of the way—sort of a “United Nations” agenda—Agenda 21 worldwide! But to do that they have to have the privately owned guns! Not to worry, they are working on that.

It would seem that to be loyal to God’s Kingdom most will, at some point, have to draw a line in the spiritual sand and say “Thus far and no further.”
Whatever comes, Christians can not just sit back and say “The Lord’s in control so I don’t have to do anything except be a spectator.” Sure the Lord is in control. To deny that would be folly. But from what I gather from the Scriptures He often used people to accomplish His ends. He could have done it differently, being Sovereign, but He usually used people and I think He will do the same is our day—if we are willing to quit being spiritual couch potatoes and seek His guidance as to what He wants us to do. Moses didn’t want to go back to Egypt but he went. Jonah did not want to go to Nineveh, in fact he tried to go the other way, but in the end he went and the Lord used him. I think it might well be the same today. Our forefathers resisted tyrannical government in Great Britain. Where would we be if they hadn’t? Is our duty less than theirs?

It seems that we need to inquire of the Lord what He wants us to do, how He wants us to oppose the Kingdom of Caesar (the state) and before we take action we need to pray, worship, and get some direction from Him. If we are willing to do this I think He will give us direction—but first worship and prayer. Then let’s see what He has in mind for us.


Are School Shootings a False Flag?

By Al Benson Jr.

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts was the former head of policy at the Department of Treasury and was previously the editor of the Wall Street Journal. His latest book is How the Economy Was Lost. Over the years I have read his columns and always found him to be insightful and thought provoking.

Just this week he did a column called Agenda Prevails Over Truth  and boy was he right on the money there. The article appeared on  For the leftist lap dogs that prevail in what we call the “news” media agenda is everything. Truth is what fits the agenda and if it doesn’t fit the agenda it’s not truth. It’s as simple as that.
Dr. Roberts has said: “Consider the Sandy Hook school shooting. This shooting serves as an excuse for ‘progressives’ to express their hatred of guns and the NRA and to advance their gun control agenda. Few if any of those hyperventilating over the tragedy know any of the parents of the murdered children. They have shown no similar response to the US government’s murder of countless thousands of Muslim children…Suddenly, 20 US children become of massive importance to ‘progressives.’ Why? Because the deaths foster their agenda—gun control in the US.”

Dr. Roberts noted that on the same day as the school shooting here a 36 year old Chinese man attacked 22 children, at a school in China, with a knife. I noticed one report about that and then the story disappeared in the avalanche of “gun control”
hysteria. So how come the leftists don’t howl that China should have “knife control” in that country? Well, because actually, they don’t care what any other country does or does not do as long as their gun control agenda can be forced on Americans. I read an article last night that said “The way to control shootings in America is to take the guns away from those that didn’t do it.”

Roberts then notes that “Agenda-driven news is the reason that apparent inconsistencies in the Sandy Hook story were not investigated or explained. According to some reports, the medical examiner said the children were shot with a rifle, but other reports say the accused was found dead inside the school with two pistols and that a rifle was found outside in the car. The police capture a man in the woods who says ‘I didn’t do it.’ How would a person in the woods know what just happened? Who was the man? Was he investigated and released?…Some say the school was locked and admission is via security camera and being buzzed in. Why would a heavily armed person be buzzed in? Other reports say he shot his way in. Why wouldn’t such a commotion have alerted the school?” Good question—something else we will never know. There are lots of questions that remain unanswered and many even remain unasked and inconsistencies prevail, but that’s okay—the gun control agenda will be well served by whatever happened and for those people that’s all that matters. Roberts observed that “The story is useful to the gun control agenda.” He also noted that the shooting at the theater in Aurora, Colorado is rife with discrepancies that have never been resolved. Don’t expect them to be.

Resolving the problems doesn’t fit in with the gun control agenda and now we are being told that the feds will start fingerprinting gun owners. When Congress convenes in January you can bet the farm gun control will be on the agenda as one of the first things to be dealt with. The “fiscal cliff?” Hey, that can wait—gun control is the real name of the game—or rather people control, because that’s what gun control really is.

The LIBOR Scandal and Two Shooters

by Al Benson Jr.

Just today I read an article by Kenneth Schortgen Jr. about the LIBOR scandal, which up to now I had not paid much attention to. In his article, posted on  Mr. Schortgen noted: “Libor is the internal banking interest rate that major financial institutions determine each day for lending purposes between each facility. This rate is then transferred to the interest rate used for mortgages, student loans, credit cards, and nearly every interest bearing loan in the world. Manipulation of the Libor rate has resulted in hundreds of billions, if not trillions of dollars in fraudulent payments made by billions of customers throughout the financial world.” Sounds like someone is getting ripped off and someone else is making big bucks out of it. You might say “what else is new” and you’d be right, except this situation has some interesting sidelines.

It turns out that the fathers of both of the recent shooters, the one in Newton, Connecticut and the one in Aurora, Colorado were supposed to testify at hearing regarding the LIBOR scandal.

Mr. Schortgen observed that: “The father of Newton, Connecticut shooter Adam Lanza is Peter Lanza who is a VP and Tax Director at GE Financial. The father of Aurora, Colorado movie theater shooter James Holmes is Robert Holmes, the lead scientist for the credit score company FICO. Both men were to testify before the US Senate in the ongoing LIBOR scandal.” Undoubtedly sheer coincidence, right?

Supposedly neither of these kids had a history of any skill with firearms, yet both showed according to Schortgen, “…an expertise many trained military personal could not achieve. This leaves the question of where they got their training, or if there was another plot involved which allowed these young men to perform the actions they did with such precision.” Mr. Schortgen’s article is worth reading. It’s just a little over two pages long.

Another good article I read on this was posted by Short Little Rebel on  also on December 16th. This one is also worth reading. The writer asked several questions as to why the media did not ask more questions. She also noted that there had been talk about a second shooter, but that seems to have been quickly quieted down and now we can expect the Obama administration’s gigantic push for more gun control to follow hard on the heels of this latest event.

The headline for Mr. Schortgen’s article noted that the fathers of the two shooters “were to testify.” Does that mean they will no longer testify?

If that ends up being the case, will we have seen the classic Marxist pattern of accomplishing two goals with one action? Just something to think about.

The “Peace” Movement

By Al Benson Jr.

Back in the days before Communism went underground, supposedly to disappear but actually to assume a whole bevy of new titles and to re-emerge under them, we had what was called a “peace” movement. This consisted of all manner of groups who, supposedly, were concerned about world peace and disarmament. What they were actually concerned about was US disarmament and the “peace” they were so actively promoting was actually the “peace” of no resistance to Communism. That’s the only kind of peace that Communists understand. For them anything else is a state of war. They understand that fully while we mostly don’t.

During the Viet Nam era and on into the 1980s these groups proliferated all over the world and this country had its share of them. Now lots of the folks that joined these groups were not Communists–they were just people whose desire for peace was commandeered by the Communists and used to promote Western disarmament while the Soviet Union remained armed to the teeth.

In this country, one of the better known of these groups was the U.S. Peace Council. Even  has noted that: “The U. S. Peace Council was created by the Communist Party USA and was launched as the official U.S. national section of the Soviet front, World Peace Council at a November 1979 conference in Philadelphia. On the weekend of November 12-13, 1979 the U. S. Peace Council was established in a meeting at International House on the campus of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. US rep. John Conyers twice addressed the conference.”

Back in December, 1982 the old news magazine Review Of The News carried an article called “Reds and the peace movement” written by John Rees. He observed, in part, “Now we know that the World Peace Council was not content to remain only in Europe. By early spring this Moscow front was moving forcefully in the United States of America, through its affiliate U.S. Peace Council and the Communist Party, U.S.A. to promote and manipulate “peace” groups and the ‘nuclear freeze’ campaign. In the early 1980s the Western Goals Foundation published a book called The War Called Peace: The Soviet Peace Offensive. Others followed up and later John Barron had an article in the Reader’s Digest called “The KGB’s Magical War For Peace.”
For his Reader’s Digest article John Barron had interviewed Stanislav Aleksandrovich Levchenko who was a KGB agent who, in 1979, sought political asylum in this country. He explained how the Communists work through front groups. He said: “The trick is to make people support Soviet policy unwittingly by convincing them they are supporting something else. Almost everybody wants peace and fears war. Therefore by every conceivable means, the KGB plans and coordinates campaigns to persuade the public that whatever America does endangers peace and whatever the Soviet Union proposes furthers peace. That’s the art of Active Measures, a sort of made-in-Moscow black magic. It is tragic to see how well it works.”

In another article in Review Of The News (a different issue) the question was asked who is behind the peace and disarmament movements. That question was partially answered: “Would you believe Reds and Rockefellers? Domestically, an arms freeze has been promoted by a group called Ground Zero. As reported by the Wall Street Journal on April 16th, ‘…after a year of organizing effort and the expenditure of $300,000 (much of the money, according to co-founder Earl Molander, coming from younger members of the Rockefeller family) Ground Zero is about to hit the streets.’.”

This is not the first reference I ever read in regard to the Rockefellers helping out the peace and revolutionary movements in this country. Back in the late 1960s a college student named James Simon Kunen wrote an informative book called The Strawberry Statement: Notes of a College Revolutionary. It must have been a popular book. It went through ten printings by January, 1971. He talked in the book about listening to a student give a report on an SDS (Students for a Democratic Society) convention. The student said: “Also at the convention, men from Business International Roundtables–the meetings sponsored by Business International for their client groups and heads of government–tried to buy up a few radicals. These men are the world’s leading industrialists and they convene to decide how our lives are going to go. These are the guys who wrote the Alliance for Progress. They’re the left wing of the ruling class…They want (Eugene) McCarthy in. They see fascism as the threat, see it coming from Wallace. The only way McCarthy could win is if the crazies and young radicals act up and make Gene look more reasonable. They offered to finance our demonstrations in Chicago. We were also offered Esso (Rockefeller) money. They want us to make a lot of radical commotion so they can look more in the center as they move to the left.”

So here we have the so-called “peace” movement being co-opted by big business, which is really on the left along with the peace movement while trying to appear centrist.

So both Moscow and American big business financed the peace movement, which was, after all, only an appendage used to promote one-world government. And all these idealistic kids who thought they were making a difference were only being used as part of someone else’s agenda, because there wasn’t really all that much difference between Moscow, the Rockefellers, and the Council on Foreign Relations which the Rockefellers helped, and still help, to promote.

Basically, the “peace: movement in this country, whether it realized it or not, was on the Communist side in the Viet Nam War.

I can remember, during the Kent State debacle, seeing college students rioting or demonstrating all over the place. I worked at a college on the East Coast at the time and saw plenty of students rioting, marching in the streets, being taught by their professors how to effectively demonstrate, and all the rest. Piles of “peace” literature came into the area around the college. I picked up a whole batch of it to check it out. To my surprise, although I shouldn’t have been surprised in retrospect, some of it was even printed in North Viet Nam and it was being passed out wholesale on American college campuses in the name of “peace.”

“Peace” is what it was all about–Communist peace–the absence of resistance to the Marxist agenda. That’s what the peace movement was all about–absence of resistance to Marxist goals. I only hope some of those idealistic kids who were gulled into taking part in that have gotten enough discernment in the decades since then that they realize that.

The “News” Media and Exposing Communists

by Al Benson Jr.

It’s no secret that, in this country, what we charitably refer to as the “news” media leans far to the left, politically and in other ways. Their job is not to report the news but to make sure it gets the right spin put on it so that the public does not realize that what they are getting is not news, but cleverly twisted propaganda slanted, always slanted, to the leftist perspective.

This is one major reason that the United Nations has been meeting in Dubai, although they will deny it. They have been given the chore of finding ways to basically shut down the Internet, which is the last channel that people nowadays have for really finding out what is going on. Your newspapers, for the most part, and your slick-paper magazines have for decades parroted the leftist line, but on the Internet you can find all manner of things from both sides and make up your own mind as to what is truth and what is hogwash. Our ruling elite would rather you did not have that option–too many people beginning to wake up while using the Internet, and awakened people are bad for their agenda. So look for restrictions on the Internet as soon as they feel they can get away with it.

Back in 1971 Joseph Keeley wrote a book called The Left-Leaning Antenna  which dealt with left-wing bias in television, but also other places. In chapter 3, Mr. Keeley wrote: “Certainly there is a remarkable uniformity of thought in the output of the major communications media,…” He also noted: “Tolerance for a conflicting viewpoint is not one of the characteristics of some who like to think they are liberals.” And Mr. Keeley noted one of the classic situations of this back during the time when Whittaker Chambers had accurately accused Alger Hiss of Communist involvement and eventually of espionage. Keeley observed: “Chambers described this in his book Witness, telling how he was badgered by Tom Reynolds of the Chicago Sun, James Reston of the New York Times, and Edward T. Folliard, who worked for the Washington Post, virtually a house organ for the Hissites. The program, as Chambers puts it, ‘was enlivened by an unprecedented personal venom…a savage verbal assault and battery on the guest (Chambers) without pause and with little restraint or decency.’ Later, as he drove home, his young son asked, ‘Papa, why did those men hate you so?’ He explained, ‘It is a kind of war. They are on one side and I am on the other side.’” Keeley noted that he was not calling these men Communists, but rather pointing to the fact that to call them objective would be foolish. Objective they were not, For one reason or another, they had all swallowed the left-wing perspective and that’s where they came from and when someone dared to expose that leftist perspective for what it really was they became enraged. It would seem that Communists in high government positions were not to be exposed and whoever dared to expose them was to be defamed and smeared constantly and at every opportunity.

For several years Whittaker Chambers worked at Time magazine. Ralph de Toledano noted in his book Seeds of Treason  that: “From his first day at Time, moreover, Chambers was surrounded by hostility. The large Communist cell which flourished in the Luce empire during the early forties was determined to see him ousted, by any and all means.” No matter what they did, Chambers managed to hang on and eventually got promoted. He was a good writer and could hold his own, to the chagrin of the left-wing crowd.

So, if Time had a leftist perspective back in the 1940s do you think it is any better today? Are any of the big, establishment news organs any better? Hardly! They’ve been on the left for so long now that they don’t know anything else. It would be interesting to see how many in the “news” media have connections to the Council on Foreign Relations and/or the Trilateral Commission. It should be apparent by now that those who trust the mainstream media, whether the establishment newspapers or the major television networks for their news, are not really getting the news. They are getting a leftist perspective on the news. Spin is the name of the game.

People need to check out some of the conservative and patriotic sites on the Internet. Check out WorldNet Daily or or
You may not totally agree with everything on these sites and others, but at least you will be exposed to a more enlightening perspective about what really goes on in the world than you will by listening to the network talking head on the six o’clock news or reading the daily fish wrapper, whose perspective smells just as bad as what you wrapped in it.

Communist Espionage In Government? Who Cares?

By Al Benson Jr.

Most governments, Communist ones included, are quite concerned if it is discovered that espionage agents from an opposing power have wormed their way into their governmental agencies and are busily passing along confidential information to potential adversaries. However, it seems that quite often the attitude in the United States government has been “whatever will be will be.” So the Communists are stealing top secret information from us—so what.

It is noteworthy that before World War 2, when Roosevelt was in office, this kind of activity was going on wholesale and those who had been warmed of it did nothing. Whittaker Chambers in his informative book Witness  noted that when Roosevelt was told of Communist penetration of the State Department he just laughed. No one bothered to look into anything until the informants became numerous enough that the situation could no longer be ignored.

In his book Seeds of Treason  Ralph de Toledano noted a man named Harold Ware. Old time anti-Communists should recognize the name. de Toledano described Ware as “…a top-notch agent of the Communist International—the Comintern. Ware’s mother was Ella Reeve Bloor—today ‘Mother’ Bloor to all Communists…His brothers and sisters had been weaned on Marxism and he himself was a charter member of the Communist Party.” In other words, Ware and his siblings were all “red-diaper” babies. In 1920 Ware had spent much of his time driving around the country, picking up information about American agriculture to pass along to Lenin. In the early 1920s he organized the first Communist front group in this country. It was the American Federated Russian Famine Committee. Ware made several trips to Russia in the 1920s, attending the Lenin School in Moscow, where most Soviet agents got their training in espionage, sabotage and “revolutionary organization. In this country his wife, whom he had met in Russia, started publication of a slick propaganda organ called Soviet Russia Today. I don’t know if it is still being published or not but I remember seeing copies in the 1970s.

What Ware did in this country was to begin “…the systematic creation of Communist cells wherever possible. Some of these agents were assigned to the colleges, some to the banks, some to industry. Ware, because of a seven-year tenure (1925-32) as a dollar-a-year man for the Agriculture Department was assigned to Washington to direct operations there.” According to an article in Human Events by Edna Lonigan: “Each cell (was to divide) and breed others. Directors of the NKVD (secret police) sat with maps of the ‘terrain’ of the Federal government, and moved their followers to one key position after another. Communists in government and the colleges were ordered to recommend their comrades for all desirable openings. They were told to locate the key jobs, to know when they would be vacant, and to pull the strings. Their people always had the ‘best’ recommendations.” You have to wonder how their people always got such glowing recommendations, seeing that they were Communists, but that tells you a little about the nature of the Federal government and the colleges at that time, doesn’t it?

In late July of 1948 Elizabeth Terrell Bentley testified before the House Committee on Un-American Activities and a few days later, in early August, Whittaker Chambers testified before the same committee. According to James Burnham in The Web of Subversion  “At those hearings in the summer of 1948, Elizabeth Bentley and Whittaker Chambers told parallel and intersecting narratives. Miss Bentley had, she testified, acted for some years (1941-44) as the courier and paymaster of two espionage cells or networks that were operating within agencies of the United States government. From members of these cells she had gathered secret documents, plans, microphotographs, of all kinds of secret and confidential data, and had transmitted these, directly or indirectly, to Soviet representatives.” One wonders just how many of these cells were in operation in the 1930s and 40s. Between them Bentley and Chambers exposed the Ware cell, the Silvermaster cell and the Perlo cell. Though these cells working in the Federal government were exposed, I have heard from some sources that there were some Communist cells operating in Washington in the Federal government that were never caught or exposed. One can only assume that, to some degree, exercising a little caution, they continued to operate.

The high positions in government occupied by these people should come as a shock to many, though it probably won’t because these people almost never get mentioned in our “history” books and therefore, no one knows about them and the fact that they had sold out to the Soviet Union and betrayed their country. The history books would only mention them if they had been somewhere on the political right. As Communists being on the left, they were automatically given a pass.

Let’s look at some of the people in these cells. In the Ware cell there was Harold Ware, son of the infamous “Mother Bloor.” Mr. Ware worked with the Department of Agriculture. There was John B. Abt; Department of Agriculture, Works Progress Administration, Senate Committee on Education and Labor. There were also Nathan Witt, Lee Pressman, Alger Hiss, and Henry H. Collins, who all worked at one time of another for the Department of Agriculture. Alger Hiss, the most infamous of them also worked for the Justice Department and the State Department and was one of the chief architects in San Francisco of the United Nations. Does that give you any inclination as to where the UN was headed right from the beginning? Pressman worked for the Works Progress Administration  and Collins worked for the National Recovery Administration. Alger’s brother, Donald, was part of this cell and also worked for the State Department and the Labor Department. Victor Perlo worked for the Office of Price Administration, the War Production Board, and the Treasury Department.

In the Silvermaster cell was Nathan Gregory Silvermaster, the Director of Labor Division, Farm Security Administration, Frank Coe, Assistant Director of the Division of Monetary Research in the Treasury Department. Also there was Lauchlin Currie. Some of you may have heard the name. He was administrative assistant to the President

In the Perlo cell, besides Perlo there was Donald Niven Wheeler of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and Harold Glasser of the Treasury Department. I haven’t listed all the people in all of these cells. Mr. Burnham’s book does list them, but there is enough here to give you some idea of the high government positions these Communists occupied in this country and bear in mind, there were lots more than these. This is the tip of the Marxist iceberg.

Unfortunately, this was not a new trend, even during World War 2. Back during the War of Northern Aggression we had the selfsame problem. In Lincoln’s administration one of the leading lights was a man named Charles A. Dana. He was a friend of Marx and Engels . Mr. Dana rose to the level of Assistant Secretary of War during Lincoln’s tenure in office. Dana was the managing editor of Horace Greeley’s newspaper and the man who, in 1851 hired Karl Marx to be a regular columnist for Greeley’s paper, the New York Tribune..

Walter Kennedy and I, in our book Lincoln’s Marxists  noted, on page 152 that “Prior to the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, no other American did more to promote the cause of communism in the United States than did Dana.”

You can see that we have had a problem with communism for a long time in this country. For those who think it has gotten any better, take a look at the current administration in Washington. This is what the people of this country, with the assistance of some rather unique vote-counting methods sent back to Washington so we could all enjoy another four years of class struggle. We re-elected the man who told the Russian ambassador to “Tell Vladimir (Putin) I will have more flexibility after the election.” Makes you almost want to ask “what did he know and when did he know it?”

Think Communism is dead? Don’t kid yourself. You ain’t seen nuthin’ yet.

The Theology of Marxism

By Al Benson Jr.

In the Holy Scriptures, Jesus Christ speaks in John 14:6  and says “I am the way; the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” That’s a pretty straight forward statement. He is saying that no man ever gets to God, except through Him. Down through the centuries people, not willing to come to Christ, have continued to try other ways. There is a reluctance in men, because of their sin, to accept the truth. They always want to do it “their way.” And often to do it “their way” they will invent new ideologies (which they claim are not religious, but really are) which ultimately destroy the lives of millions. Marxism is one such ideology. Most naïve folks today think that because the Berlin Wall was torn down that communism is dead. I hate to disappoint you, but it ain’t so Marxist ideology (theology) is alive and well on many college campuses in this country and lots of other places and it has a pretty good toe hold in Washington. But, then, that is nothing new.

I read an interesting and penetrating article recently on written by Christopher C. M. Warren and published on Friday, June 8, 2012 called Karl Marx and the Communist Religion of Hate.. In part Mr. Warren stated: “The thesis of this short paper is that Karl Marx, the founder of communism, was a man of profound religious beliefs who formed what basically amounts to an ‘anti-Christian religion’. Why he became anti-Christian is the central mystery of his life. Both Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, the founders of Communism, grew up in wealthy families far removed from a life of poverty and is one of the contradictions to be found in the lives of communist leaders. Their successors—Lenin, Trotsky and the others who led the Bolshevik Revolution in Russian in 1917—became multi-millionaires…As one historical commentator notes: ‘Running left-wing movements has always been the prerogative of spoiled rich kids. This pattern goes all the way back to the days when an over-indulged and affluent young man named Karl Marx combined with another over-indulged youth from a wealthy family named Friedrich Engels to create the Communist ideology.” There is some doubt as to who actually created the Communist ideology and if you look at the people who hired Marx to write The Communist Manifesto you have to conclude the ideas were not totally his but he shared their worldview.

The historical commentator’s quote continued: “The phoniness of the claim to be a movement of the working class was blatant from the beginning. When Engels was elected as a delegate to the Communist League in 1847, in his own words, ‘a working man was proposed for appearances sake, but those who proposed him voted for me.’ It may have been the first rigged ‘election’ of the Communist movement but it was certainly not  the last…”

Mr. Warren has noted: “Marx’s followers pursued an anti-Christian Utopia that—from the beginning—focused on political power, not on meeting the needs of the poor. Like today’s seductive vision of change, their socialist/communist transformation required a ‘crisis’ and a ‘purpose’  that would capture public attention.” Almost sounds as if he is referring to our current “hope and change” fantasy.

In regard to a poem Marx wrote, Mr. Warren said: “Marx was 18 when he wrote these things. His life’s program had already been established. There was no word about serving mankind, the proletariat, or socialism. He wished to bring the world to ruin. He wished to build for himself a throne whose bulwark should be human fodder.” So Marx’s anti-Christian religion was built on the misery of others and on his own personal selfishness. Marx and Engels were, basically, spoiled brats who should have been taken to the woodshed when they were young enough for it to have done some good.

Whittaker Chambers in his informative book Witness  has observed that Communism and Christianity are two “irreconcilable faiths.” On page 712 he gives a quote from someone else—“The problem of Communism is not an economic problem. The problem of Communism is the problem of atheism.” Upon reading that many will think that atheists have no religion, which is not accurate. Their guiding theology is that Jesus is not the Christ, is not Lord. And it would seem that this is the theology that holds sway in Washington, regardless of who we elect to any office. That tells you something. It tells you that even if you vote and elect “conservatives” they will have no influence over the direction the government goes in.

A European Mr. Chambers referred to as “Smetana” once told him “You don’t understand the structure of American society or you would not ask such a question. In the United States the working class are Democrats. The middle class are Republicans. The upper class are Communists.” If you understand those constituting the “upper class” to be members of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission then you are not far off the mark. This is not to say that all wealthy people are CFR members, but the ones with real influence mostly are.

I think, from reading his book, there were a lot of things Mr. Chambers did not realize. He found that, when he tried to expose the Communists he had worked with for years, the government in Washington, as a whole, was not interested. Chambers was horribly smeared by the media, who always defended the Communists and were merciless against any anti-Communist and especially against those who exposed what the Reds were doing in the US government. Communist espionage in the US government was the sacred cow—it was not to be touched and when you started to expose Communists like Alger Hiss or Harry Dexter White and some others then you had to be stopped at any cost. Chambers clearly saw the struggle against communism as a battle between “two irreconcilable faiths” and I can not disagree with him. The Communists today still continue to attack anything they perceive as Christian. In that they carry out the agenda of those in back of them as well as their own. As the Scripture truthfully states that Jesus is Lord so the ruling elite in this country and others will oppose that truth because what they really want is a world that  worships them and their authority. They want to be gods and to accomplish that they must remove God from his throne so there will be room for them on it.

Their only problem is that it will never work,  yet they  have ruined millions of lives and will ruin millions more  in their attempts, both their own disciples and those who dared to oppose them.

I recall talking to a man, probably 30 years ago now, as we sat in my living room over coffee. I told him of my Christian understanding of Communism and that, because of that, I had to oppose it in any lawful way I could. I never forgot his comment to me. He said “ You are going to lose, you know that don’t you?” To which I replied “Whether I win or lose is not the point. It’s a matter of doing what’s right.” He seemed to accept that answer.

Whittaker Chambers felt the same way. He felt that, in the end, he would lose, that, looking at the country as it was in his day, the Communists would win. Yet he decided to expose them anyway—because it was the right thing to do.

You cannot compromise with an anti-Christian faith. You cannot just sit it out and hope it will go away, or just sit it out because to expose it is a “negative” reaction and you don’t want to deal in negatives. Anti-Christianity needs to be exposed. Just possibly in the exposure, some of those who are anti-Christian may be led to repentance and thereby get their lives straightened out. But in all of it we must point to the fact that Jesus IS the way to God and so, in God’s time all the schemes of the Communists and One World crowd will fail and maybe the Lord will exercise His sovereign control by using His people to expose the evil.

Whittaker Chambers and the “News” Media

By Al Benson Jr.

Today, as we look at what we ludicrously call the “news” media any thinking person must realize that those people are  not in the business of giving us real news. What they do is to take current events and give them such a leftist spin that real truth is hardly recognizable anymore unless you learn to, literally, read between the lines.

All you have to do is observe the “news” media as their pundits fawn over our current Marxist-in-Chief, literally giving him a free pass on anything he should be questioned on. They hear no evil, see no evil, and speak no evil about anything or anyone on the theological and political left while they stand in line waiting to bash anyone they remotely perceive as being “conservative.” I’m sure if they realized how markedly apparent their efforts are to many they would take more pains to cover their tracks—but then, maybe not. We may have gotten to the point where they don’t care anymore. It goes without saying that the real news they refuse to deal with is more vitally important than the drivel they spoon-feed us in the hope that we won’t know the difference.

In reading through Whittaker Chambers’ informative book Witness  you will find several instances where Chambers takes note of where the “news” media was coming from in his day, and it’s no different today except that today’s talking heads in the media are probably not Communist Party members—they only think like them.

Chambers noted, on page 474 of Witness that: “A few days later, a Time writer stopped me in the hall and asked me to join the Newspaper Guild. At that time, and for a long time afterwards, the Time  unit of the New York Newspaper Guild was tightly controlled by a small knot of Communists.” After Chambers told this man he had broken with the Communist Party he noted a distinct coolness on the part of this worthy gentleman and he said: “No doubt he checked at once. A few days later, the smear campaign against me was in full swing.” Chambers observed that at one point, most of Time’s  European correspondents joined in a “round-robin, protesting my editorial views and demanding my removal.” In other words, Chambers’ anti-Communist viewpoint disturbed them no end and they wanted to get him out of the way so the American people would not be exposed to his viewpoint. Then, as now, many in the media wanted a dumb and befuddled public who didn’t know what they didn’t know.

Chambers further stated: “The fight in Foreign News was not a fight for control of a seven-page section of a news magazine. It was a struggle to decide whether a million Americans more or less were going to be given the facts about Soviet aggression, or whether those facts were going to be suppressed, distorted, or perverted into the exact opposite of their true meaning” Just like today. Nothing has really changed

When the Alger Hiss case came along, Chambers saw the same people lining up on the left to defend Hiss and smear him. The thing that amazed him was that most of those people were not even Communists. From the Communists he expected the smears and attacks but he got more from non-Communists. I’ve noticed the same thing today among some evangelical Christians. They question or deride anyone that exposes or comments on anything from the left of the political spectrum while they gently try to tell you that “the hard right has no interest in spiritual matters.” They may be right, up to a point. Many on the right have no interest in spiritual matters while some on the left do—but what is the root of leftist spirituality? It is little more than “Caesar is lord, therefore reject Christ.” That is almost the sum total of left-wing “spirituality” yet many evangelicals buy into it because it seems to “loving.” May the Lord being these folks to the point where, like Whittaker Chambers, they can see the total evil of leftist theology, whether it be Communist or just socialist.

In his epistle in the Holy Bible James noted that “A double minded man is unstable in all his ways.” This seems to be some of what Chambers was dealing with. He said: “They were people who believed a number of things. Foremost among them was the belief that peace could be preserved, World War 3 could be averted only by conciliating the Soviet Union. For this no price was too high to pay, including the price of willful historical self-delusion. Yet they just fiercely supported a war in which one of their ululant outcries had been against appeasement, and they were much too intelligent to really believe that Russia was a democracy or most of the other upside-down things they said in defense of it. Hence like most people who have substituted the habit of delusion for reality, they became hysterical whenever the root of their delusion was touched, and reacted with a violence that completely belied the openness of mind which the prescribed for others. Let me call their peculiar condition which, sometimes had unconsciously deep, and sometimes very conscious political motives that it would perhaps be unmannerly to pry into here—the Popular Front mind.” Again, Chambers noted that most of these folks were not Communists, but he felt the Communists had few allies that were more effective. In other words, to put it more bluntly than Chambers did, these people were what the Reds called “useful idiots.” One might also wonder how many of those people and any connection with the Council on Foreign Relations.

It was, Chambers said the Popular Front mind that dominated American life, at least from 1938 to 1948. He said: “Particularly it dominated all avenues of communication between the intellectuals and the nation. It told the nation what it should believe; it made up the nation’s mind for it. The Popular Fronters had made themselves the ‘experts.’ They controlled the narrows of news and opinion.” Again, just like today. The media people tell us what we should believe, who we should believe and who we should reject, what books we should read and what movies we should see (don’t read The Real Lincoln or
Lincoln’s Marxists, those are just books for those Tea Party kooks. Go back and read socialist Carl Sandberg’s biography of Lincoln because that’s where you will find the ‘real’ Lincoln). And on and on it goes. Many of you know exactly what I am talking about.

There were times when the Marxists and the media had such a grip on the minds of the American people that Chambers often despaired of ever getting the truth out to enough people to do any good. The Communist propaganda is still out there. Just this week there was an article on httpl://  which noted that the Communist Party USA is celebrating the “Obama victory over racist white people.”

However, Mr. Chambers’ book Witness  is also still out there. You can find it on as well as other places. Years ago I saw a bumper sticker that said “I don’t trust the liberal media.” Quite appropriate. The American people should learn not to trust them either.