White Paper Is Now Politically Incorrect

By Al Benson Jr.

If ever you needed another reason to keep your kids out of public schools, and even out of some day care centers, this has got to be it. Recently an article appeared on http://www.examiner.com under the byline of Joe Newby of the Spokane Conservative Examiner noting how an “education consultant” has now said that white paper may cause your kids to be racist.

You read that right. White paper just might make your children flaming “racists.” The article states: “According to Anne O’Connor, an ‘early years consultant who advises local authorities on equality and diversity’ it may, reports the UK Telegraph.” The article continues: “Julie Henry writes: Children should be provided with paper other than white to draw on and paints and crayons should come in the full range of flesh tones, reflecting the diversity of the human race, according to the former teacher.” And the Telegraph then adds: “Finally, staff should be prepared to be economical with the truth when asked by pupils what their favourite colour is, in the interests of good race relations, answer ‘black’ or ‘brown’.” In other words, in the “interests of good race relations” they are supposed to lie to the kids. What an educational foundation to build upon!

O’Connor claims this approach is based on an “anti-bias” model of education, “designed to develop children’s empathy and help teachers of young children ‘explore their own conditioning and possible prejudices’.” So now, in addition to lying to the kids, along comes the ever-faithful guilt trip to be laid on the teachers. Do any of them have white or pink or some other light shade as favorite colors? It must mean they are closet “racists” and so need to change their outlook.

If we are now talking about an “anti-bias” model of education, why are we indulging in anti-white bias as part of it? Well, you see, you are not supposed to notice that. Besides, it’s open season on white folks anyway. You can laugh at them, make fun of them and do whatever, but heaven help you if you do it to anyone else. The thought police will arrive shortly.
So you take away the white drawing paper and give the kids black drawing paper. Having you eliminated the problem of “racism?” Well, no, actually you haven’t because now the kids, in order for their drawings to be seen have to use lighter colored crayons and some of them might use, heaven forbid, a white crayon for something, which I am sure would then necessitate a lecture from the teacher on the political correctness of ignoring anything white as evil and only using darker colors on dark paper.

A lady who belonged to a parent’s group disagreed with all this and she made a statement worth reflecting upon. She said “I’m sure these early years experts know their field, but they seem to be obsessed about colour and determined to make everyone else obsessed about it too.” This lady was right on target. They have been taught to be obsessed with color. So who taught them this stuff? If they learned it in their teacher’s schools then they were propagandized instead of being educated.

So now, from school teachers in England we are being taught that “racism” might possibly be caused because the kids have white drawing paper. Up to now we’ve been told that “racism” was the result of Obama being elected president or because the South had slaves in the 1860s. No other reasons are worth checking into according to the politically correct.

Assuming that British educational trends eventually make their way over here, according to the author of this article “One can only wonder how long it will be before the Congressional Black Caucus demands darker color paper in elementary schools.”

Sound far-fetched? It isn’t really. Institutionalized bigotry against whites is part of the politically correct agenda, which must be followed at all costs. White kids in public schools must be taught that black is beautiful and white is horrible and that they must be ashamed of their white history and heritage and embrace all things black. If enough of them do this it will change the culture, I’m not all that sure that is a change I want to see.

Almighty God created all the races and put each person in the racial group He wanted them to be in. Each person should be thankful for where he or she was put and not be taught that some other race is “superior” and that if you refuse to believe that you are a “racist.” Let each race stand or fall on its own merits and quit all this cultural engineering, which is really cultural genocide.

Advertisements

Sherman, a Disturbed Personality

By Al Benson Jr.

In his book The History of the Confederacy 1832-1865  Clifford Dowdey on page 321, made some interesting comments about some of the Yankee/Marxist generals involved in the War. He noted: “The Sheridans, Milroys and Hunters had a different kind of arrogance from the neo-princelings of the Cotton South. They had the arrogance of unrestrained might. Without regard for rights—of belligerents or fellow citizens or even of the so-called human rights.” Let alone the Union—these bully boys had a lust for physical violence and wanton destruction.”

Of William Tecumseh Sherman Dowdey wrote, on page 374, “He was the executioner of the sentence which the sitters-in-judgment wished to have carried out against the Southern people. He destroyed a civilization. To the South he remains a symbol of the wanton and ruthless brutality of a might which denied all human rights to its victims…All through the reign of terror (Sherman’s march) the coarsest of the Union soldiers displayed the lust to degrade and desecrate the symbols of a civilization superior to anything they had personally experienced. Class hatred had been localized into hatred of a section which represented the pride of the aristocrat. That pride they wanted to humble and, by humbling, establish their own superiority to it…Sherman’s glorified march set back the real cause of union by at least the fifty years he mentioned…Sherman struck the heaviest and most lasting blow for continuing division.” Considering some of the socialist and Marxist generals commanding his troops that should come as no real surprise.

Sherman had with him Brigadier General August Willich, called by his Communist comrades “the reddest of the red.” He also had Brigadier General Peter Osterhaus and Colonel Frederick Knefler. All three of these men are profiled in our book Lincoln’s Marxists. Also present in Sherman’s officer corps was Brigadier General John B. Turchin, the European officer who “turned his back” while his command destroyed the town of Athens, Alabama. Can there be any doubt that such men contributed to Sherman’s lust for the destruction of Southern private property—one of the major tenets of Marxism.

That such men would comprise part of Sherman’s command is borne out by Sherman’s own proclivities toward military dictatorship. In his book Citizen Sherman  published in 1995, Michael Fellman has noted in several places that Sherman was a proponent of military dictatorship. On pages 59-60 Fellman observed: “His rejection of democracy and his semisecret reactionary faith in a military seizure of power deepened through the secession crisis and into the opening stages of his involvement in the Civil War.” His interest in military dictatorship went far beyond the opening stages of the War. After the fall of Vicksburg Sherman wrote to his brother and said: “A government resting immediately on the caprice of a people is too unstable to last…All must obey, Government that is, the executive, having no discretion but to execute the law must be to that extend despotic.” And then he told his brother, who, in his own right, had a dictatorial mindset, “If Congress don’t provide, the Army will’” by which he meant provide a dictatorship.’” Many “historians” would rather not write about this and so if they don’t downplay it they just ignore it. The public doesn’t need to know this if knowing it will interfere with the agenda. I must admit, until I read Fellman’s book, I had never come across this. And Fellman has noted that, although Sherman never made public his thoughts on military dictatorship and kept them private, “…he often acted on those same impulses…As he gained larger commands he imposed his authority with increasing energy.” His threats “…demonstrated Sherman’s willingness to issue repressive orders and his authoritarian bent” and that included censoring local newspapers.

Sherman displayed little of the humanitarian impulse with either Southerners or Indians. Burke Davis told us in his book Sherman’s March that, at a certain point, Sherman was beginning to develop his theory of total war and he sought to make the War to horrible that “…the rebels would never again talk up arms. The Southern people, he said, though they ‘cannot be made to love us, can be made to fear us, and dread the passage of troops through their country.’”

Not only did Sherman have fascist tendencies regarding army control of the country, he had a hard time getting along with his wife also. Fellman stated that: “…the quarrels of their marriage would rigidify into fairly violently expressed rituals of mutual recrimination, punctuated from time to time by protestations of admiration and affection…They were hurt and angry to be apart—being together made them hurt and angry as well.” His wife was a traditional Roman Catholic while Sherman was what was described as a “Jeffersonian deist.” Never the twain shall meet—and they didn’t. Sherman, at one point, said that “I believe in good works rather than faith.” Problem was, Sherman got it exactly backwards. He surely did not display much in the area of “good works” while his bummers were sacking and terrorizing Georgia. But, then, maybe he considered making war on civilians in Georgia and South Carolina to be among his “good works.”

After the War was over and he had successfully burned and destroyed a good part of the South, Sherman then had to deal with those nasty Indians out west who wanted to hang onto their land. His policy was one of indiscriminate extermination. He didn’t care who his men killed, men, women or children. All were fair game for Sherman’s “western bummers.”

In regard to the Sioux Indians Sherman, according to Fellman, said “We must act with vindictive earnestness against the Sioux, even to their extermination, men women and children…I suppose the Sioux must be exterminated for they cannot and will not settle down, and our people will force us to it.” Good old Cump Sherman—the reluctant exterminator! Fellman noted of Sherman: “Yet however mutely or overtly he might express it, genocide was one of the poles of his agenda, one he would never entirely adopt nor completely reject. Extermination if need be; displacement for certain.”

So we have General Sherman, a man who contributed mightily to the destruction of Southern civilization, who was willing not only to exterminate Southerners and ruin their land and who had the same inclinations toward the Indians in the West, a man who could not get along with his wife, who was basically an agnostic at best, a man who favored military dictatorship over representative government (and he wasn’t the only Yankee general who held those sentiments) and this is the man we are all supposed to consider a hero. You’ll pardon me if I disagree. War criminal yes, hero—no! Sherman worked mightily to ensure that everyone he had to deal with would learn to bow to the “national interest.” The typical Yankee/Marxist–just like what we are forced to deal with today.

And these same people tell us we should forget all this and just put it in back of us yet they are the same people who are trying to tear down our flags and symbols and denigrate those among our generals who actually were heroic men. Problem is, too many Southern folks are willing to go along with all this. They want their “Southern heritage” without any Confederate flags or gray uniforms or streets named after Stonewall Jackson. The word “Confederate” is like a cussword to them—they wouldn’t be caught dead uttering it. Because they are willing to sell out their heritage they will lose it. And disturbed men like Sherman will end up with statues all over the South because more Southern folks wouldn’t stand up and call a spade a spade. Sherman was partly responsible for starting the cultural genocide in the South and his spiritual descendants , even those with Southern drawls,  will try to complete it. Will we let them?

Is Government Declaring War on American People?

By Al Benson Jr.

We’ve been told some of our embassies in the Middle East are being temporarily shut down because our “intelligence” services have intercepted information about “…a significant threat from an al-Qaeda affiliate, a senior U.S. official is providing new details about the communications intercepted from the terrorists, telling ABC News that al-Qaeda operatives could be heard talking about an upcoming attack.” This from an article on http://www.infowars.com for August 4, 2013. The article continued: “The part that is alarming is the confidence they showed while communicating and the air of certainly,’ the official said, adding that the group—Al-Qaeda in the Arabian peninsula—appeared to have a media plan for after the attack.’ So al-Qaeda is planning on attacking some of our Middle East embassies, it’s supposed to be a big attack, and they have a “media plan” for after its over. Part of their media plan must be for the prostituted American media to lie to the American people about what went on. We never get the real truth from “those people.”

As interesting as this article is, one from http://chasvoice.blogspot.com by Dr. Stuart Jeanne Bramhall really adds the frosting to the terrorist cake. Dr. Bramhall begins: “It’s extremely ironic for the U.S, State Department to be issuing travel alerts for US citizens in the Middle East and North Africa the same week we learn that the Pentagon is contracting with Al Qaeda and Taliban supporters to carry out Afghan reconstruction projects…The report reveals (John) Sopko asked the US Army Suspension and Disbarment Office to cancel 45 contracts to known Al Qaeda and Taliban supporters. They refused. The reason? The Suspension and Disbarment Office claims it would violate Al Qaeda and Taliban ‘due process rights.’” John Sopko is the Special Inspector for Afghan Reconstruction.

Did you get that? Official terrorist groups now have “due process rights.” Interesting that there are no “due process rights” for detainees at Guantanamo, or for whistleblowers, or, for that matter, ordinary honest American citizens who are subject to continued spying (they call it surveillance) by the NSA.

Dr. Bramhall observed: “In the last two years the CIA has been caught red-handed funding and training Al Qaeda militants in Libya and Syria. Based on Sopko’s report, Pentagon support for Al Qaeda and the Taliban is official as of August 1.”

And Bramhall asked a pertinent question: “Let me see if I can think this through: the Pentagon is giving Al Qaeda and the Taliban funding, even though Al Qaeda and the Taliban are planning to carry out attacks on US citizens. How can this be happening? It would appear that the US government is at war with its own people.” Now that is an astute observation. That’s exactly what is going on. This current Marxist regime is, indeed, at war with its own people. Why else does it label Veterans, homeschoolers, Bible-believing Christians and supporters of the Second Amendment as “right-wing extremists” and “low-level terrorists?” Mr. Obama has been at war with the American people ever since he told us he planned to “fundamentally transform” the United States of America. That was his personal war cry against us. His handlers in the Council on Foreign Relations have been at war with us longer than he has. We just haven’t had sense enough to realize it yet. A few patriotic and Southern Heritage groups have been trying to tell us this for decades now. Mostly we don’t want to listen—might interfere with our fishing trip next weekend or our poker night next Tuesday and that’s much more important than protecting our liberties.

So right now we are in a war where only a small portion of our side is fighting. The rest are sitting it out or sleeping it off or taking the position that because the Lord is in control (which He is) they don’t have to do anything. If we lose, these are the folks that will howl the loudest “Why didn’t someone tell us?” But it will be kind of late then, won’t it?