I’m Getting Tired of Foul-Mouthed Child Media Activists

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

I don’t know about the rest of you, but I am getting sick and tired of listening to potty-mouthed child “activists” chanting about more gun control or seeing them head up marches that call for repealing the Second Amendment and listening to them lecture older folks about how we don’t know much about “using a f—— Democracy” as though they and only they were somehow born to be the fonts of all human wisdom. If you want my opinion, it is all Hoggwash!

This gifted “activist” (useful idiot would be more like it) berates his elders because they supposedly don’t know how to utilize their form of government, yet he can’t even get the proper form of government correct. I wonder if he knows the difference between a republic and a democracy? Did they ever teach him that in this government school he attended? Bet they didn’t.

There was a time in this country when younger folks respected their elders instead of pretending they were all stupid and calling them profanity-laden names. This present generation, and the one before it, seem to think humanity would not possibly have survived if they hadn’t arrived on the scene to explain to all us elder buffoons about how we should live. Some of these “activist” kids are on a gigantic ego trip and they somehow think the world will never make it unless we all listen to them spout all the talking points they were scripted and coached in by the Leftist agitators who pushed them forward because they could serve the Leftist agenda.

I’ve got news for some of you budding socialists who think you are “changing the world.” Once the Leftists and those who finance them get through using you and getting all the mileage out of you that they can, they will toss you on the ash heap of history like so many wrung-out dishrags and that will be all she wrote for you–and you will wake up some fine morning and ponder over why you ain’t “famous” anymore!

I watched a video on the internet of the indispensable Mr. Hogg berating those who disagree with his infinite wisdom. It seemed that about every seventh word out of his mouth was the “F word.” But then, that seems to be a favorite term with the Left nowadays. When they can’t come up with a cogent argument about anything they just “give you the finger” and that ends the debate! Sort of like calling you a “racist.” That’s supposed to end the debate, only it doesn’t anymore and so in their frustration, they resort to the middle finger because, if the truth were realized, they don’t have anything else!!!

In my browsing recently I came across an article by a John Zigler, the headline for which was The Media Should Not Let David Hogg Be Both a Child-Victim And an Adult Activist. That’s an interesting headline, and Mr. Zigler has a point. Mr. Hogg should not be able to be both–either he is one or the other. But the way it is now, he is playing both ends against the middle–literally! He is practicing that old Marxist game of “pressure from above and pressure from below” that I have written about before–a game to make sure that the middle class, ordinary folks, are caught in the middle between those above them and those below them–who are actually working together to squeeze them out!

So I will just say this to Mr. Hogg in closing–You are not “changing the world” as much as you like to think you are. You are being used to change it by someone else who has a totally different worldview than most of us in this country have or want and they are using you to force their vision of Amerika on the rest of us. You may not like that, buddy, but that’s how it really is. And if you really like the words your handlers are putting in your mouth to spew at the rest of us, then you are part of the problem, not the solution!

Sentiment For Separation In The Far West

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

As the “history” books to which government school students are subjected begin to deal with the War of Northern Aggression, they tend to make little mention of those states and territories west of the Mississippi, with the exception of Missouri and Kansas. Missouri, so we’ve been told, was chock full of greasy, “racist, hate-mongering “nativist” bushwhackers, who wanted nothing more out of life than to lie in wait so they could ambush the noble, virtuous, godly abolitionists from Kansas to whom “anti-slavery was the law of God.” Other than their presenting us with this little tidbit of historic fertilizer, they tell us almost nothing of what went on in the rest of the West. Either they haven’t done the homework or they have and hope we haven’t.

I’ve seen lines in some Western movies that talk about the War being an “Easterner’s War” and saying the West had nothing to do with it. Not quite accurate!

Historian Alvin M. Josephy Jr., in his interesting book The Civil War in the American West, has given us somewhat more detail than our students’ “history” books are wont to do. He has informed us of the political situation in Colorado, about which he has written: “In Colorado, where support for the Union was admittedly the majority sentiment, William Gilpin, the Federal territorial governor, wrote worriedly  that 7,500 people, almost one third of the population of Denver and the mining camps, were secessionists.”

The mining camps around Denver were originally started by people from Georgia–something else you were never told about. So there was a definite secessionist presence in Colorado, even though most today have no idea it existed. Josephy also informed us that: “New Mexico, with a reputation for being Free Soil and with only a handful of slaves and a total of eighty-five blacks in the whole Territory,  tacitly supported slavery in 1859 by adopting a code to protect slave owners that dismayed Northerners. Moreover, secessionists were actually in control of southern and western portions of that Territory.

Another little item that Yankee hysterians, oh pardon me, I meant historians, have left out was the racial attitudes of many in the far Western states. At one point, Oregon had voted to ban all blacks, free or slave, from entering the Territory,  and California came  close to doing the identical thing. In the election of 1860, Lincoln took the state of California by a mere 711 votes, and, although he also won in Oregon, he did it by less than 300 votes! Lincoln said it was “the closest political book-keeping that I know of.”

Josephy told us that: “In California, where almost 40% of the state’s 380,000 inhabitants were from slave states,  only seven out of fifty three newspapers had supported Lincoln.” So, you can hardly say he won by a landslide in the far West!

Josephy said: “Congressman John C. Burch called on Californians to ‘raise aloft’ the Bear Flag of the short-lived California Republic of 1845. ‘I was warmly sympathetic with the South’ another congressman,  Charles L. Scott, declared, urging his constituents to establish ‘a separate republic’.”

We have been told that areas around Los Angeles and San Bernadino were hotbeds of secessionist sympathy. So the picture is hardly as black and white as it has been painted. In fact, an ordinance of secession was actually passed by a convention of the people of Arizona at Messilla, Arizona Territory, on 16 March, 1861. The ordinance stated, in part: Resolved,  That geographically and naturally we are bound to the South, and to her we look for protection, and as the Southern states have formed a Confederacy, it is our earnest desire to be attached to that Confederacy as a Territory.

However, don’t hold your breath waiting for that one to show up in the “history” books. The folks in the West and Southwest don’t really need to know this and that it is part of their heritage and culture–do they? Just ask the historians! Mr. Josephy is honest enough to tell you about it. Most of them ignore it.

There was even, believe it or not, secessionist sentiment up in Montana. How many have ever been told that the mining town of Virginia City, in western Montana, was first named Varina City, in honor of Jefferson Davis’s wife? The name was eventually changed to Virginia City by a local judge who felt that the name Varina City was really pushing the envelope! If you ever get to Montana you should visit Virginia City. It is an interesting spot and they are trying to restore it so that it looks like it did originally.  When we were there, some of the old, original buildings were still standing, unrestored, but that’s a few years ago.

Often, the efforts of the Indians in the far West to preserve their hunting grounds and way of life and liberty were, in some cases, construed as interfering with the Yankee war effort in the East, thus giving “aid and comfort” to the Confederacy.

I am sure that, at some point, some radical Leftist “historian” will point to the poor Cheyenne souls massacred at Sand Creek by John Chivington as “Confederate sympathizers.” The Yankee/Marxist spinmeisters will, no doubt, laugh all the way to the bank about that one!

Of course, after the shooting phase of the War was over in the East, the whole, solidified, consolidated Yankee territory had to be opened up for settlement and the Indians were in the way. By that time, the Yankee/Marxists felt that if the could accomplish what they did against a civilized Christian South and get by with it, war criminals and all, then they could certainly do as much and worse to a batch of “benighted” savages–and so, according to Phil Sheridan, the only good Indian became a dead Indian. Arsonists like Sherman and Sheridan planned for their extermination.

Truly the West was (and still is) deeply affected by the War and its aftermath in a way that has never been fully grasped. The Yankee/Marxist mindset that prevailed in Atlanta and the March to the Sea also eventually prevailed at Wounded Knee, South Dakota, a quarter of a century later–and it prevails in places like Bunkerville, Nevada and eastern Oregon to this very day. Contrary to what the “history” books tell us, this country is much the worse for the way things turned out.

A Little More Jayhawker History Your School Books Inadvertently Forgot To Mention

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

I’ve found it interesting, over the years, as I have perused the internet out of curiosity to see what sites it might contain that deal with Yankee/Marxist atrocities in Missouri before and during the War of Northern Aggression, the first sites that usually pop up in search engines mostly seem to deal with Lawrence, Kansas.

Could you say there was Yankee/Marxist bias on the internet? Heavens to Abigail–who would ever have thunk it??? It seems that if you are going to discover what mayhem the Yankees committed in Missouri during and before the War, you are first going to have a bit of indoctrination as to what Quantrill is supposed to have done in Lawrence, Kansas in August of 1863.

The accounts of what happened in Lawrence vary in intensity, depending on which Yankee source is passing them along. This is not surprising. On a trip through Kansas several years ago, I chanced to run into a woman who was some sort of local “historian” (hysterian might be a more appropriate word). The minute I mentioned history she opened up with a barrage about the  virtues of terrorist John Brown, ignored the excesses of Jennison’s Jayhawkers, and then proceeded to inform me that people like Jeb Stuart were nothing but terrorists! Our discussion ceased shortly after that and I was more than glad to let her go her abolitionist way. Unfortunately, this seemed, at that time, to be rather typical of eastern Kansas. Friendly territory if you didn’t deify John Brown it was not. So why should the internet be any different?

James D. Horan, in his book Desperate Men announced of Quantrill’s men that they “…sacked Lawrence, Kansas on August 13, 1863, killing one hundred and forty men, women and children.” Although Mr. Horan may not realize it, the part about Quantrill’s men killing women and children is the grist from which cow chips are made, and as such, it belongs out in the cow pasture with the rest of the bovine fertilizer. However, Horan does tell us that Quantrill’s men burned 185 buildings and five stores. In the movie Ride With the Devil, which is amazingly accurate in many areas, the first building Quantrill’s men are shown burning down is the local government school seminary. Maybe the movie’s director, Ang Lee, who is from Taiwan, knew something about out history that most Americans don’t, and that might be why the movie was yanked from theaters after only about a three week run, never to appear again except in video form–and you couldn’t get them everywhere.

So, should you decide to hunt and peck around on the internet, you can learn an awful not about what happened in Lawrence, Kansas. This raid, battle, or whatever you choose to label it is one thing mentioned in most “history” books dealing with the War. However, these same “history” books (and I use that term loosely) almost never mention Osceola, Missouri.  In fact, most folks have probably never heard of that town unless they lived in close proximity to its location. It’s one of those supposed-to-be-forgotten places the Yankee/Marxists hope you never hear much about. Although the “history” books continue to give you grim accounts of all that supposedly happened in Lawrence, they will almost totally ignore what took place in Osceola, Missouri almost two years previous to Lawrence.

On September 23, 1861, Osceola, Missouri was attacked by Senator James H. Lane and his infamous “Lane’s Brigade.” This “brigade” was made up of Kansas cavalry and infantry, and was, according to one source, “…a ruthless band of Jayhawkers (plundering marauders) wearing United States uniforms. James H. Lane was known as the’Grim Chieftain’ for the death and destruction he brought on the people of Missouri.”

With Senator Lane, according to Paul Petersen, in Quantrill of Missouri, was the Fourth Kansas Jayhawker regiment and the Third Kansas Jayhawker regiment, the latter under the command of that plundering abolitionist preacher, “Colonel” James Montgomery. Although there were no Confederate soldiers anywhere near the town, and hence the town, as such, was no military threat, some of the local residents had the temerity to fire at the Union “soldiers” so Lane ordered the town to be shelled. After the town had pretty much been reduced to a mass of broken lumber and bricks, nine local  citizens were led to the town square, where they were given a “trial” by a Kangaroo Court of Jayhawkers, and they were then summarily shot. Petersen informed us that: “Banks were an easy target for the Jayhawkers, but the Osceola bank had prudently shipped its funds elsewhere. When Lane found little currency in the  bank, he ordered the stores, warehouses and homes ransacked. His men loaded the loot into government wagons and any other vehicles they could confiscate. Among Lane’s personal haul were a number of pianos for his home in Lawrence.” Just the spoils of war, folks. No doubt those Missouri pianos  would have given aid and comfort to any passing Confederates and so they had to be removed!

Then, in a typical Yankee/Marxist humanitarian gesture, Lane set what remained of the town on fire. Of the 800 building in town, only three are reported to have escaped the flames, and no consideration was given to the political leanings of any of the homeowners. Yankee or Secesh; if you had a home in Osceola, it got torched! One might wonder why Quantrill’s men, who supposedly burned 185 buildings in Lawrence, were given so much coverage while Lane’s men, who burned nearly 800 in Osceola, got almost none. You don’t suppose there was some historical bias involved here do you.

The loot these legalized thieves made off with from Osceola included over 300 horses, 400 head of cattle, and 200 kidnapped slaves, along with many sacks of flour, sugar, salt, and coffee. Petersen reported that: “Eyewitnesses noted that the plunder train of 150 wagons was at least a mile long. Property losses were estimated at more than a million dollars.” You have to understand, though, that all this is okay. As long as you are garbed in your new Yankee uniform it’s perfectly alright to rob, pillage, and rape (as Sherman’s men did in Georgia). It only becomes wrong when those nasty “racists” in the dirty gray uniforms do it.

Sound like a double standard? Of course, but how can you operate any other way when you have “racists” and various other “deplorables” to deal with and your mindset is avowedly Marxist? I mean, after all, what can people expect?

An interesting little sidelight to this horrific affair was the 200 “freed slaves.” Petersen has informed us that they “…were taken into Kansas and assigned to work in the fields. Their pay was anything they could steal and carry away from their former owners…” Such a deal! I’ll bet those Kansas farmers just loved to have those “freed” slaves working in their fields and it was even reported later that Senator Lane wanted payment from the farmers for providing them. If I didn’t know better I’d think that almost makes Jim Lane sound like some sort of slave trader! If one were not convinced of the utter truth, virtue and nobility of the Yankee cause such information might make him tend to think that Lane sounded slightly hypocritical. But you have to remember, Lane was a 19th century cultural Marxist and so the double standard is perfectly alright so long as his agenda is served.

You might even, should you have a suspicious mind, as I have been accused of having, be tempted to ask the question–when is slavery not slavery? The answer to that question is–when it is practiced in Kansas by abolitionists instead of in Missouri by ordinary farmers. But having been exposed to a certain amount of political correctness in our day you all how that drill goes–“War is peace; Less is more,” and so forth.

And to top off a grand day for the Jayhawkers, just before Lane’s brigade  left town, most of them got roaring drunk! But again, you have to realize, that’s okay–the Yankee uniform excuses anything–you know: “His truth is marching on” and all that! So should you be tempted to wonder, there were ample reasons for the raid on Lawrence. It was not just a random act of Southern terrorism as has been suggested. And we might well ask the question–if Lawrence was terrorism, then what, pray tell, was Osceola??? Answers anyone? I didn’t think so!

If You Can’t Trust the Government…

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

A poll came out just recently from Monmouth University in New Jersey. It showed that Americans are more aware of the Deep State and its evil machinations  than the Deep State could wish for.

According to an article on Zero Hedge for  March 19th: “Just over half of the public is either very worried (23%) or somewhat worried (30%) about the U.S. government  monitoring their activities and invading their privacy. There are no significant partisan differences—.Fully 8-in-10 believe that the U.S. government currently monitors or spies on the activities of American citizens, including a majority (53%) who say this activity is widespread and another 29% who say such monitoring happens but is not widespread. Just 14% say this monitoring does not happen at all. There are no substantial partisan differences in these results.”

And let us not kid ourselves, the Denizens of the Deep State, elected and un-elected, fervently wish that we were all like that 14% who never got out of the starting gate. That’s why they are so ticked off that Hillary wasn’t able to steal the election in 2016. If she had become president you all know as well as I do that nothing they have done, no matter how horrific, would ever have been revealed. Under Queen Hillary the shafting of America would have continued apace and we would have no idea whatever as to what was being done to us. Hillary is the female version of King Barack the First (and hopefully the last).

An interesting article appeared on http://www.bizpacreview.com  for March 20th, written by Nick Givas. He noted that “MSNBC’s ‘Morning Joe’ was in panic mode Tuesday, after a Monmouth poll showed three out of four Americans believe in the existence of  ‘deep state.’…When the poll described the ‘deep state’ as a group of un-elected nongovernmental officials, 75% of the respondents  said they believe there is a group of power players pulling the strings.” Boy, how right they are! If only they realized the extent of it–and it includes elected officials as well as non-elected ones.

But they don’t want the public even to consider such. That’s one reason we got all this “Trump colluding with the Russians” pig slop thrown at us. It’s a great diversion. According to Givas “Washington Bureau chief for USA Today Susan Page, said the poll numbers are a result of attacks against the government and believes people should trust the government to investigate itself.” Read that last statement again before you fall to the floor and laugh your backside off! She’s got to be kidding, right? The government investigate itself??? Come on lady, you can’t be that naive can you? Or do you just hope the rest of us are? Trusting the government to investigate itself is akin to handing the keys of the chicken house over to Brer Fox because he’s already told you, through his press agent, that he’d protect all those chickens and eggs. After all, why shouldn’t you trust him. You have his word. If you don’t trust his word you must be one of those deplorables or “bitter clingers”, one of those ignorant people who will never realize how good a Marxist government really can be for all of us (especially those at the top).

For all those folks that are now beginning to grasp the fact that there is a Deep State, peopled by both non-elected and elected denizens, whose job it is to turn this country into a third rate banana republic that will easily fit into its slot in a One World Government, I would strongly encourage you to begin to do some homework about the Deep State and who runs it and what their agenda for you and your children really is. Because they have one, whether you like it or not!

Start by going back a few years and checking out a book by an ex-FBI agent Dan Smoot, published way back in 1964,  called The Invisible Government. I believe you can find it on the internet (if they haven’t removed it for your own good).  You can probably read it there for nothing. Won’t cost you a thin dime! From there you might want to try None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen, published in 1976 I think. I think that’s on the internet also. From that you can skip to Gary Allen’s next book The Rockefeller File. That one might also be on the internet, but check Amazon if you can’t find it there. It will tell you how much the Rockefellers had to do with education in this country, and how that will affect your children and their children. Then there is one by Cleon Skousen called The Naked Capitalist.  I’m not sure if that one is on the internet, but check Amazon if you don’t find it there. Most of this stuff you can read via the internet for nothing. All it will cost you is a little time and concentration–and none of it is difficult reading. It’s all written for ordinary folks, otherwise I couldn’t grasp it!

Then, crank up your search engines and check out the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderburg Group. There is quite a bit out there about these groups and some about who is, and who has been, in them. Most folks don’t realize that H. R. McMaster, one of Trump’s advisors, is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. If you can start to work your way through some of this it will be a great start in learning about what the Deep State does and how they do it–and have been doing it for at least a century! You won’t like a lot of what you find. It will make you made like it did me, but you really need to be aware of it.

Reading some of this will begin to show you how the Deep State operates and will even give you some thoughts about what you can start to do about it. I realize that lots who read this won’t do anything about it, but I pass this along for the really concerned minority who has figured out that something is radically wrong with this country and want to do something about it. This material mentioned above, and prayer to God for wisdom and discernment is where you begin. And you can’t just start and leave the prayer part off, because the Lord is the one that ultimately gives the wisdom and discernment as to what you need to do and how you need to do it.

Update:

As if to corroborate what I wrote above on the Deep State, Rand Paul has made comments that appeared on the Zero Hedge site on 3/22/18 in reference to the Deep State. Senator Paul appeared on the Laura Ingraham Show and said: “Absolutely, there is a Deep State. because the deep state is the intelligence agencies that do not have oversight.” In other words, there is no congressional oversight of the agencies–they do what they darn well please. Senator Paul continued:”Only eight people in congress know what they’re doing, and traditionally, those eight people have been a rubber stamp to let the intelligence communities do whatever they want. There is no skeptic among the eight people that are supposedly overseeing the intelligence community.” You can’t say it much plainer than that! The mere handful in Congress that do know what they are doing are just rubber stamps for their “activities.” They are a law unto themselves. They do what they want because they can!

Paul noted that he felt “Obama-era CIA Director John Brennan, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and others used intelligence collected ‘without any judicial warrants’ for political purposes, in addition to ‘trying to bring Trump down’.”

I have to admit, I can’t disagree with Senator Paul. If any of you all have listened to John Brennan since he left office, you almost get the feeling that he is still running the CIA, or at the very least, thinks he ought to be. Brennan is an Obama devotee who converted to Islam somewhere along the line and talks like he thinks he’s running the  government. He even told Trump at one point to “keep your mouth shut.” He comes across as a third rate Islamic political thug!

He recently referred to Mr. Trump as a “disgraced demagogue” and told him he would not destroy America. Problem is, the “America” that John Brennan wants to preserve is one that needs to be destroyed–it is the American version of the Gulag!

Wonder if we should write our Congress critters and tell them we’d like to see more congressional oversight of the CIA and the NSA besides the rubber stamp characters that automatically support these groups presently. It couldn’t do any harm.

 

Those Plundering Abolitionist Preachers (do unto others before they do unto you)

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Should you have chanced to read any history at all dealing with our “Civil War” really the War of Northern Aggression, you must surely have read something about “bleeding Kansas.” I can remember reading about that in my pre-teen “history” books.

Most of what you have probably read goes into some detail (fake history?) about how the greasy, slave-owning, bushwhacking denizens of Missouri spent all their spare time (when they weren’t beating their slaves to death) raiding across the border into that pristine abolitionist wilderness called Kansas, which as we have all been taught, was the home of all loyal, virtuous, pure-as-the-driven-snow abolitionist types whose only aim in life was a holy crusade to free all slaves everywhere from bondage.

If you are like the rest of us, you were probably spoon-fed the historical hogwash that this was the only type of behavior you could ever expect from the dregs of humanity that inhabited Missouri, while those wonderful folks living across the line in Kansas would never dream of engaging in such horrible deeds.

To say that the “historians” got this backwards would probably be an undeserved act of naive charity. Most of them, then as now, got it backwards on purpose because the actual truth was revolting enough that they just knew you didn’t need to be aware of it–lest you should begin to question the veracity of Mr. Lincoln’s “holy cause.”

For all the lofty pretensions of the cause of abolitionism, Kansas was populated by some who felt it was their “holy calling” in life to raid across the border into Missouri for whatever they could get out of it for themselves. It was what some might call “abolitionism for fun and profit.” The fun was burning the homes of Missouri farmers, the profit was hauling off all the loot they could carry away from those homes before they torched them.

In his book Bloody Dawn, author Thomas Goodrich noted the character of such sterling individuals as Kansan Charles Jennison. He noted: “Actually the outbreak of civil war simply lent an aura of legitimacy  to a program Jennison had been pursuing all along.  Jennison has been characterized as cruel, heartless, cowardly, and a moral vagabond.” A charitable description!

Goodrich continued: “Whatever the opinion, Jennison and his regiment became in fact the scourge and salt of western Missouri during the first summer and winter of the war. One by one the towns along the border fell victim to their forays. Stores were looted, safes emptied, elegant homes gutted. Nor was the countryside spared. Night after night the skies over the border were aglow as barns, cabins, and crops were set ablaze. Those hapless farmers lucky enough to escape the torch watched powerlessly while the fruits of their labor were hauled off in their own wagons. Herds of cattle, horses, and sheep were likewise driven west.” And it was all for the “glorious” cause of “preserving the Union.”

Even for all of that, Jennison might have created less furor had he been a bit more selective in whom he burned out, but he was not. He was an equal opportunity plunderer. He ventured out after anyone who had loot he could steal (for the preservation of the Union). Goodrich noted that, because of Jennison’s behavior, many in Missouri who might have remained Unionists, or at least fence-straddlers, became violent enemies of Lincoln’s war effort once Jennison had ministered unto them of the healing balm of abolitionist mercy.

And then, to give holy unction to Jennison’s activties, along came the abolitiionist preachers. Chief among them was one James Montgomery. This worthy has been described as a Bible-toting evangelist, but in his book Quantrill of Missouri author Paul R. Petersen has painted a somewhat different picture of Montgomery’s evangelistic methods. In discussing the depredations of some of the Kansans, Petersen noted: “The people who attacked him were not Missourians;  they were Jayhawkers. These people stole from friend and foe alike, and the group that attacked Quantrill’s camp (this was even before the war commenced)  supposedly belonged to James Montgomery’s band of thieves. Montgomery was a preacher from Linn County, Kansas Territory, and a captain in James Lane’s militia. In the late  1850s he was arguably the most feared of the border marauders,  and even before the war, he led forays for plunder into Missouri.”

Petersen also noted in his book another “interesting” Kansas character, one John Ingalls, who wrote to his father back in Massachusetts telling him of conditions in Kansas. He said: “One remarkable feature of the social conditions here is a total disregard of the Sabbath…” You might wonder, with all those fiery abolitionist preachers running around there why such a situation existed. It would seem that these Kansas “preachers” were so occupied with plundering across the border in Missouri that they just had no time for services on the Lord’s Day–which says a little about the depth of their Christian commitment.

Another really virtuous Kansas character was John E. Stewart. He has been described as an “abolitionist extremist.” He enjoyed association with that saintly old murderer and terrorist, John Brown. Petersen has informed us that: “Even before the war Stewart had gotten a reputation of being associated with John Brown and James Montgomery in their deprecatory raids across the border…Before coming to Kansas he had been a Methodist minister in New Hampshire… His frequent forays across the border resulted in the Missouri  legislature placing a price on his head, and he was suspected in Kansas of ‘entertaining loose notions with regard to property in horses as well as negroes.’ As in the case of all Jayhawkers, his professed zeal for abolition caused a large proportion of the settlers to overlook these activities.”

In other words, as long as you were an abolitionist  it was perfectly alright to steal, kill, and burn. After all, didn’t the noble end of “freeing the slaves” justify the means? These people were the proto-Marxists of their day. Some sources have even reported that once some abolitionists “freed” some slaves in Missouri they brought them back to Kansas, took them south and resold them in New Orleans. But, hey, what the heck.  They were in need of some hard cash so they could buy more of John Brown’s “Beecher Bibles” to kill more Missourians  so they could “free” more Missouri slaves, so that made it all somehow legitimate in the twisted abolitionist mindset.

With men of this moral stripe, often led by preachers of the same moral stripe plundering their state, is it any wonder that so many in Missouri  decided to throw their lot in with the Confederacy?

However, don’t bother hunting for this type of history in your “history” books. Since the winners get to write the “history” books it is much more convenient for their agenda if you are taught to focus on “bleeding Kansas” rather than on plundered Missouri.

Are Free Speech and the First Amendment Under Attack? (Is the grass green?)

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Free speech has always been under attack throughout history, and mostly the attackers have been those in power who wanted to make sure they stayed in power. Regardless of what those who promote censorship and speech restrictions say, this is not about the “public good.” It is usually about hiding the truth, and the censors are usually those who claim that the public, for their “own good” just doesn’t need to know about this scandal or that. What this really means is that the censors already have done, or are in the process of doing something shady (of financial benefit to themselves) and they don’t want you to be aware of that. Does the Uranium One scandal come to mind here? So the doers of these evil deeds either try to sugarcoat them or just outright lie about them, or, if confronted, their friends in the “Fake News” media try to hide it “on page 46 under the obituaries” where almost no one will ever see it.

An article on http://www.foxnews.com for January 25, 2018 observed: “Free speech is under attack on college campuses across the country. The problem is not limited to a few colleges banning radical speakers to avoid a riot. Universities large and small, public and private,  are restricting students’ and professors’ speech or enabling others to silence speech with which they disagree. These restrictions take a variety of forms. For example,  free speech codes at many colleges ban speech that is ‘offensive,’ a subjective standard that allows college administrators to arbitrarily ban speech they find disagreeable.” In other words, under the guise of “free speech” they really get to say who says what and who doesn’t get to say anything! Although this is current, it is hardly a new problem. I have seen colleges in the East, years ago, that had no problem whatever with having an identified Communist speak to their students but wouldn’t, for all the gold in Fort Knox, dream of having someone from the John Birch Society come and speak to those same students. A Communist speaker was just fine and as one college official stated, his school “wanted to expose students to all kinds of thought.” However, that standard would never have included a speaker from the JBS. They didn’t want to expose the kids to “all kinds of thought” that much!

Back on August 28, 2017 an article appeared on http://www.campaignforliberty.org which said: “The Senate Intelligence Committee recently passed its Intelligence Authorization Act for 2018 that contains a chilling attack on the First Amendment. Section 623 of the act expresses the ‘sense of Congress’ that WikiLeaks resembles a ‘non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors and should be treated as such. The language is designed to delegitimize  WikiLeaks, encourage the federal government to spy on individuals working with WikiLeaks, and block access to WikiLeaks’ website…WikiLeaks critics claim that the organization’s leaks harm US national security. However, these critics are unable to provide a single specific example of WikiLeaks’ actions harming the American people. WikiLeaks does harm the reputations of government agencies and politicians, however…” That’s really where the rub is! Too many Leftist politicians are getting exposed for the frauds they really are and people are starting to find out that what some of these Leftist and Deep State turkeys have done has harmed out national security and sovereignty, so they’d rather just sweep all that under the rug so we don’t find out about it–all for “our own good” of course. Or is it really for their own good?

Wesley Pruden wrote on https://www.washingtontimes.com on 4/27/17 that: “The only thing anyone is allowed to hear on campus is a slogan. Thinking is so 20th century (and early 20th century at that). The adults paid to be in charge have retreated to a safe place, where never is heard an encouraging word and the skies are cloudy all day…” Howard Dean, the former governor of Vermont and onetime chairman of the Democratic Party has noted that, where free speech is  concerned, that does not always include “extending it to everyone who disagrees with them.” In other words–if you agree with me and my agenda you get to talk (maybe). Otherwise, forget it because we don’t want anyone to hear what you might have to say.

There has been a lot on the Internet of late about how the big media sites, Facebook, Twitter, and others have been changing their algorithms so that conservative sites that use them get less traffic.

I am not a “technical” person, so I am not sure I understand how all this works, but, however it works, what it seems to do is end up taking conservative and patriotic sites and putting their material on pages 10 or 12 rather than on pages 1 or 2 where it had been previously. That does cut down on their viewership because most folks just don’t have the patience to scroll all the way down to page 10 to get what they used to get on page 2. So, leading conservative and nationalist sites like http://www.infowars.com, the Drudge Report, WorldNet Daily and a host of others will start to see their sites consigned to an internet netherworld, buried somewhere in a hundred pages of listings which most folks will not take the trouble to go into. This is designed to cut way down on the influence they have and the audience they are able to reach. It’s not that these big liberal/Left sites actually remove the material–they just bury it!

I noticed, and also had it commented on to me, how that, in 2017 a number of patriotic blogs had experienced a significant loss of viewership in 2017, compared with viewership in the previous 3 or 4 years when it had been expanding. So you have to wonder if such an occurrence might have been an “experiment” to see how this kind of thing would work for the Leftists and Deep State folks.

You folks who follow some of these sites that now seem to be getting posted three day’s journey from anything might have to start taking some of the important material from these sites and reposting it, with credit, on your own sites and for your own email lists so people can continue to read what the Deep State/Left does not want them to see.

Update: The internet censors have been at work on my article since I first posted it last evening (3/15/18).

When you read it you will notice I mentioned several websites you could click onto as sources for what I wrote. I also mentioned InfoWars and gave their link. When I clicked on their link in my article I ended up with someplace selling homes. I did the same this morning and ended up with an Amazon add, as well as a notice telling me I was trying to reach a “suspicious site.”

So I will type the link in here, again, and see what happens. If you try to click onto this and get some oddball substitute please let me know as then I will know that InfoWars is being censored off my blogs (for my own good, of course). Thanks.

https://www.infowars.com

“Maryland, my (home schooling) Maryland”

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Home schooling is one of those things that scares the living daylights out of the Educational Establishment and the Deep State. Home schooling, and Christian education in general tend to be areas where the participants  do not always (usually) accept the Establishment version of history and/or politics.

From time to time, as they feel they can get away with it, the “change agents” in the educational bureaucracy  seek to remedy this situation by trying to find reasons to enforce new controls that will give them more power and control over home schooling, its curriculums, and its participants.

During the 1980s Rev. Paul Lindstrom, of the Church of Christian Liberty in Illinois, traveled around the country testifying in various court cases that helped and enabled parents to regain their right to home school their children which had been usurped by the Educational Establishment. By the late 1980s, home schooling was legal, in one form or another, in all the 50 united States. That fact did not, and does not, however, prevent the Establishment Education Czars from looking for any chance they can to reverse that trend–and if they can’t reverse it they can at least try to again regulate home schooling almost out of any real existence.

So it was no surprise to me when I came across an article on http://www.thefreethoughtproject.com  by Matt Agorist for March 11, 2018 that dealt with the latest attempted Establishment Educational usurpation in Maryland.

Mr. Agorist wrote: “Under the guise of preventing child abuse, lawmakers in Maryland have introduced a bill that will allow the state to intrude in the lives of innocent families, keeping tabs on them, and destroying their right to privacy. The bill, HB 1798–County Boards of Education–Home Instruction Program–Observation of Instruction and Reporting of Abuse and Neglect,  lays out some fairly ominous requirement that will persecute otherwise entirely innocent families for doing nothing other than teaching their children at home…The bill also lays out the framework for involuntary home inspections in which state agents will enter a family’s home multiple times a year–likely unannounced–and observe and inspect the homeschooling process.”

It seems as though there was a family in California that was guilty of massive child abuse and they were registered as home schoolers. So now the Education Czars in that “Sanctuary State” have automatically assumed that all home schools are probably guilty of those same abuses and need to be constantly regulated so they aren’t beating and starving their kids. It’s the same old bureaucratic “You’re guilty until you prove yourself innocent” routine that is practiced by so many government types in their efforts to gain control over other people’s lives. This is one thing politicians and bureaucrats always seek to do to justify their existence. They have to try to run everyone’s life, down to the minutest detail because, somehow, that seems to give them some sort of power trip. Being control freaks is what they live for. And it would seem that the “change agent” Educational Czars in Maryland have taken note of this instance in California and seen a real possibility in their state to assume more control over the lives of a group of people they only tolerate because the present state law forces them to.

It’s somewhat the same situation you see with all these school shootings. Some Leftist nut, usually on some exotic type of medication, kills a batch of kids and teachers in a school “gun free” zone and the bureaucratic  conclusion is that all gun owners must be potential terrorists and need to be regulated (and their weapons hopefully confiscated) as soon as possible, if not sooner!

Mr. Agorist accurately notes that: “Instead of realizing that the problem of child abuse has nothing at all to do with homeschooling,  lawmakers across the country are using this moment to demonize parents who wish to teach their children outside of the state…The audacity of the state to require that your children be inspected by them to prove that you are not guilty of child abuse is stunning and speaks to the nature of the cradle to grave mentality of the almighty controllers.” If this trend is allowed to continue it could, again, reduce the fundamental right of parents to home school their children back to the status of yet another state-regulated entity. I am sure that possibility has not been lost on the Educational Elite who seek to indoctrinate your children rather than letting you educate them.

Let’s don’t kid ourselves. This, in spite of the Establishment’s pious pleading, is not about the welfare of children–it is about who will control how they are educated and what they are taught. To educate your children is a parental right, and the Educational Elite (a major part of the Deep State Swamp) is not about to allow parents to assume this God-given responsibility  without a struggle to deprive those parents of that right.

“Jeff Secession”

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

In looking at what Attorney General Jeff Sessions seems to be doing in regard to having certain Swamp Creatures in Washington investigated by someone from outside of the Swamp, I would have to commend him for this effort. It seems he has been doing this quietly (probably the best way) but he has been doing it.

One problem Mr. Sessions  seems to have, though, is that he seems to believe the federal government is the last absolute word on anything, and if the feds say do it, then you better do it, no questions asked. In this rash assumption he is off base.

Those who follow what I write know that one source (among several) that I use for information is https://www.infowars.com  There are probably a dozen sites that I check out on a regular basis, but I follow Infowars because they usually get it faster than most others, and they get it right. Their sources seem to be good sources–and they must be doing something right because You Tube, Facebook, and Twitter are all trying to censor their videos and articles. You don’t draw that much ire from “the big 3” unless you are hitting the nail on the head. Of course “the big 3” are trying to censor all conservative commentary they can get by with, which tells me that when you have to censor your opposition–then you don’t have anything!

There is one news commentator on Infowars that I particularly enjoy (not that the others are not good, they are) and that is David Knight. Mr. Knight is a Christian gentleman and is not ashamed to let you know that, but he is also a Christian that knows his history. In that, he is part of a (hopefully expanding) minority. We need Christian people in the journalism and broadcasting areas that know their history and haven’t just bought, hook, line, and sinker, what they were taught in those government indoctrination centers we still charitably refer to as public schools.

On his broadcast today (March 9th) referred to some comments Jeff Sessions made about secession and nullification, and it was Mr. Knight that referred to him as “Jeff Secession.” In referring to the illegal immigration conflagration now so rife in the People’s Republic of Commiefornia, Sessions said: “There is no such thing as nullification or secession.” While I understand that Sessions was referring to states needing to obey the immigration laws, his comment here was a little out of context and did not fit the situation in California (the People’s Republic referenced above).

Sessions, like most of us, was probably taught that the War of Northern Aggression and its result forever settled the secession question once and for all. It didn’t. David Knight correctly noted that our War of Independence (the first one) from Great Britain was, after all, a war of secession. Our Declaration of Independence was a secession document. In effect, we seceded from Great Britain. I realize the politically correct don’t like to think of it in those terms, but that’s what it was. Given that fact, it surprises me no end that so many people today look at “secession” as at least a dirty word, if not outright treason. It isn’t.  There must be something lacking in their  educations. How about Truth? 

Mr. Sessions’ view of the States seems to be that they are nothing more that 50 federal districts that are responsible for carrying out federal edicts at the state level and they have no recourse but to do that. Lots of us disagree with that erroneous viewpoint and if the feds come up with some really egregious agenda that harms the states and their people, then that’s where nullification comes in, or should anyway, depending on how much intestinal fortitude state officials have (and I’ve seen lots over the years that didn’t have much).

Tom Woods had an article on http://www.lewrockwell.com for March 9th that dealt with nullification. Woods noted: “Sessions is making precisely the argument that every left-liberal outfit on earth, from ThinkProgress to the Southern Poverty Law Center, was making not ten years ago, when the modern nullification movement was getting started.”

If you want to read a good little book dealing with this, pick up Ron Kennedy’s book Nullification! Why and How published by Scuppernong Press in Wake Forest, North Carolina, but you might check out http://www.KennedyTwins.com which might be quicker.

Ron noted on page iii that “The current unconstitutional system of Federal supremacy has produced the current out of control Federal government. The remainder of this book explains why nullification is an essential unalienable right and how we can reclaim that lost right.” I seriously doubt that “Jeff Secession” would agree with this, and then I wonder–what would his take on the 10th Amendment be???

Why I Couldn’t Agree With Bruce Catton

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Over the years I have read a bit of “Civil War” history from a lot of authors with divergent opinions on many things. Somehow, though, Bruce Catton’s view of the War was just not one I could get comfortable with. It was sort of like James M. McPherson’s view of the War, and you all know who he was. If you ever read anything I wrote about the War you will recall I couldn’t get comfortable with McPherson’s worldview regarding the War and the reasons for it either. And while McPherson’s books have often been cited on the World Socialist Website in the past, I couldn’t find anything in that regard about Bruce Catton.

However, McPherson’s and Catton’s views appear quite similar when it comes to the notorious Forty-Eighters that Donnie Kennedy and I wrote about in Lincoln’s Marxists.

A friend in New Jersey recently sent me a paragraph out of Catton’s The Army of the Potomac: Glory Road, from page 172 of the book. This is one I had not read, and it probably explains why I am glad I did not make the effort. Even when you research history,  there are times when you can only stand so much propaganda and, though he probably did not intend to do it, that’s exactly what Mr. Catton gave us in this instance. I will comment here on some of what he said in this paragraph.

He started out with: The nation inherited something rich and strange when the German revolutionary movement broke up in blood and proscription lists,  with the best men of a dozen German states hastening to America.   The 1848 revolts in Germany and several other European countries were socialist revolts. That being the case, it would seem that Catton is trying to tell us that the “best men” from a dozen German states were all socialists or communists, because that’s what took part in this revolution. Catton may not be aware of this–in which case you might do well to ask just what else he is unaware of. Either that or his worldview has no problem with socialists. I can’t say definitively either way.

He continues: These Germans were deadly serious about words which Americans took blithely for granted, words like liberty and like freedom and democracy.  It seems as if Catton is totally unaware of the fact that these words do not mean the same things to socialists and communists that they mean to us. When they use such terms they are not saying  what we say when we use them. Lots of ignorant people who eulogize the Forty-Eighters make this grave error. They do not understand how the Leftists use language to confuse their adversaries–and if we are not Leftists, then we are all their adversaries.

Catton says: They (the Forty-Eighters) made up a substantial part of the ground which the free-soil men had cultivated in the 1850s and when the war came they had seen the Union cause as their own cause, with freedom for the black man as one of its sure ultimate goals. This is yet another confirmation that the socialists/communists  saw the Union cause as their own. As for “freeing the slaves” their motives were hardly humanitarian no matter what they said. They were every bit as “racist” as those Southern folks they accused of “racism.” They felt that “freeing” the slaves would uproot the South and cause major problems for the Confederacy and so they endorsed it. The South was the part of the country that was the most Christian and conservative and the most opposed to the socialist designs of both the Establishment in Washington, New York and London.

As Catton wound down in this paragraph he stated:  Their leaders were men who had lost their fortunes and risked their necks, taking up arms for liberty in a land of kings who resisted change, and these leaders called the Germans to the colors as soon as Fort Sumter was bombarded.  Almost sounds as if Sumter was their signal to be up and moving!

What Catton seemed unable to grasp here is that the socialists/communists in Germany, as well as in the rest of Europe, did not fight for liberty for the common man, as we know it. They fought to centralize all the German states into one collectivist entity–with their friends in control of it! The same held true for what they sought to do all over Europe. They fought for collectivization–not liberty. And that’s what they fought for here also. They knew, at least at the leadership levels, where Lincoln was coming from and they knew they had a shot at doing here what they had failed to do in Europe, because they had a leader in Washington that agreed with them!

Until we learn to get this history straight we will continue to make the same stupid errors that we have seen, purposely or otherwise, for the last 150 years. Unfortunately, authors like Mr. Catton who end up glorifying socialists and communists don’t help us much!

The Obama/Trump Gun Control Act of 2018

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

I hate to say this, but it is beginning to look like, when push comes to shove, the Donald Trump support for the Second Amendment is starting to resemble the Platte River in Nebraska–“a mile wide and an inch deep.” Mr. Trump seems about to collapse on every Second Amendment issue now coming up and the socialists in government are just loving him for every minute of it. They are hoping to get the gun control under Trump that even eluded them while their Marxist-in-Chief, Obama sat on the throne.

A headline on Breitbart for Wednesday, February 28th said: “President Donald Trump embraced Sen. Joe Manchin’s (D-WV) gun control bill but rejected Rep. Steve Scalise’s (R-LA) push for national reciprocity during a bipartisan meeting with lawmakers Wednesday afternoon.”

The revealing part of the article was this: “The Manchin/Toomey gun control bill is the same universal background check legislation supported by Barack Obama in the wake of the heinous attack on Sandy Hook Elementary School. It is the very bill that was defeated in the Democrat-controlled Senate on April 17, 2013.”

So Trump is now endorsing a gun control bill that was embraced by Barack Obama. Maybe we should rename it The Obama/Trump Gun Control bill of 2018 because it now seems that Trump the nationalist is willing to support the same thing as Obama the Marxist.

Does anyone see anything wrong with this picture, or is it just me?

And, according to http://freebeacon.com “Major gun-control groups on Thursday heaped praise on President Donald Trump for his advocacy for new gun-control laws during a televised meeting with top lawmakers…Trump advocated for adding proposals like extending FBI background checks to used gun sales between private parties, a ban on gun ownership for those under 21–especially ownership of assault weapons–to a bipartisan proposal to improve the current background check system. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said they were happy with Trump’s performance at the meeting.” They just oohed and aahed at Trump’s “full-throated support of gun violence prevention laws today,…”

Whether Mr. Trump realizes it or not, he is now supporting fully the means that will lead to registering everyone’s firearms of any sort with the federal government, which will lead to eventual confiscation of all guns. He is setting us on the path to eventual confiscation that Comrade Obama could only dream about! You have to wonder if he knows what he is doing. I hope not, but he’s going to do it anyway.

The Deep State and the Far Left have finally give us enough false flag shootings that they’ve gotten to Mr. Trump and he is willing to go along with whatever garbage they throw at him, supposedly to save lives.

Just think of how many lives can be saved when the feds have all the guns and they can just haul us off to the FEMA camps and not have to worry about resistance. The country will be one giant gun-free zone and if you think that will stop the killings I have a bridge in the desert in Arizona I’d love to sell you!

You have to wonder what happened to Trump on this issue. Something did. This is not the same man that spoke to CPAC a couple weeks ago and pledged to defend the Second Amendment–this is a man willing to toss all that away for the praise of the socialist gun-grabbers–so something has happened to him since that speech. We can speculate just what, but that seems an exercise in futility. Better we should spend our time contacting our senators and representatives and tell them to vote against any new gun control measures that come up and if they won’t then we better find someplace else to cast our votes.

Can anyone spell S E L L O U T ???

Just remember one thing–without the Second Amendment you have no way of protecting the other 9!

Update:  According to http://www.washingtonexaminer.com  “Rand Paul…introduced legislation on Thursday that would repeal a 1990 law banning guns from school zones…Paul’s bill would repeal the Gun-Free School Zones act of 1990 and all amendments to that law.” If this bill makes it out of committee and gets passed it will be interesting to see what Mr. Trump will do with it. My first thought is, now that he has been turned, he will find some plausible reason to veto it. From tidbits I heard on the internet today it seems that in some way, Trump has now been compromised and may have to do what the gun grabbers want of him or they will find a way to expose whatever it is they seem to have on him. I hope I am in error, but this is how it looks at this point.