The BLM–Agenda 21’s Stooge In The West

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

I have written about the United Nations Agenda 21 program in the past. It is the United Nations thinly veiled attempt at land-grabbing trying to hide under the very dubious cover of “sustainability.” Supposedly there are way too many people in the world (there aren’t) and the UN has to keep all the land “sustainable” by taking people off of it and herding them together in mega-ghettos and leaving untold millions of acres unpopulated and unused for guess who? The political commissars who thought all this up, that’s who. Private property and single family homes will be a thing of the past. You won’t need your cars because there will be no place to go when you are not allowed out of the city limits. Those of you who follow this sort of thing already know the drill.

However, in this country it seems there are lots of folks, most particularly in the West and the South, who put some value on private property, particularly if it has been in their  families for generations. And the Agenda 21 spooks need someone to be able to deal with that sticky situation. It seems, at least in the West, they have found their stooge of choice to help them divest people of their property–and no one is supposed to connect the dots between Agenda 21 and the Bureau of Land Management–an organization that has managed to make itself almost universally despised west of the Mississippi–and not without reason.

I recently read an article by Tim Brown, published on https://sonsoflibertymedia.com back on October 15, 2016. It quotes a Nevada assemblywoman, Michele Fiori, and she labels the Bureau of Land Management a “Domestic Terrorist Agency.” The article observes: “On Thursday morning, Nevada Assemblywoman Michele Fiori stood on the Nevada Assembly floor to point out several things regarding the Oregon occupation, the Bundy Ranch siege and the sheriffs who were involved in both. She also pointed out at the center of both of them was the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and she referred to them as one of several ‘Domestic Terrorist Agencies.’ I stand in support of and know that Blue Lives Matter…But there have been Sheriffs that hand their elected positions over to the Federal Government and some of the outcomes have been fatal. Sheriff David Ward of Harney County did just that. Under his watch a man, Lavoy Finicum, was murdered.” And she noted: “The Bureau of Land Management has become quite aggressive across our Nation,  from continual harassment of our indigenous Native Americans to our Ranchers, who are just trying to protect their livelihoods.” But the ranchers believe in  private property rights and that is becoming a no-no more and more.

Another article, this one by Michael Snyder on April 23, 2014 on https://freedomoutpost.com/agenda-21-blm-land-grabbing-endgame pretty succinctly lays it all out. Mr. Snyder says “Why is the federal government so obsessed with grabbing more land? After all, the federal government already owns more than 40 percent of the land in 9 different U.S. states. Why are federal bureaucrats so determined to grab even more? Well, the truth is that this all becomes much clearer once you understand that there is a very twisted philosophy behind what they are doing. It is commonly known as Agenda 21, although many names and labels are used for this particular philosophoy. Basically, those that hold to this form of radical environmentalism believe that humanity is utterly destroying the planet and therefore the goal should be to create a world where literally everything that we do is tightly monitored and controlled by control freak bureaucrats in the name of ‘sustainable development.’ In their vision of the future, the human population will be greatly reduced and human activity will be limited to strictly regulated urban areas and travel corridors. The rest of the planet will be left to nature. To achieve this goal, a massive transfer of land from private landowners to the federal government will be necessary.” What do you think this will do to our ranchers and farmers in the West, or even here in Louisiana where I live?

And Snyder adds “So the conflict between rancher Cliven Bundy and the BLM is really just the tip of the iceberg. The reality is that the BLM has their eyes on much bigger prizes.” There was the BLM’s attempted land grab along the Texas-Oklahoma border back a few years ago.

Snyder noted that  the feds claim to own 84% of the state. In Utah they claim 57% of the state and in Alaska they claim 69%, and 53% in Oregon, to mention a few.

The federal government flat out doesn’t need any more land. They’ve got way too much as it is. But there is this constant obsession to grab more and more–so the dictates and agenda of Agenda 21 can be fulfilled. In fact, let’s be honest–they want it all and ranchers, farmers, miners, or folks that just want a little retirement place down on the bayou or out in country will just have to go. End of conversation! And besides they will be dispensing with lots of people with independent ideas–and that just won’t float in a UN-dominated environment.

So just remember, when the BLM comes along to wrest your land from you, who they are really working for, and brother, no matter what they say, it ain’t you!

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.

Federal Fertilizer Thrown at Bundys–Part two

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

The judge was forced to admit that the federal prosecutor had really screwed up in regard to the evidence they had “forgotten” to turn over, which just happened to violate the due process of the Bundys. You might be tempted to wonder what was in that evidence. Well, it included–records about the federal surveillance at the Bundy Ranch; records about the presence of government snipers (can anyone say Vicki  Weaver?) and internal affairs reports about misconduct by Bureau of Land Management agents, among other things. There was evidence in six areas they didn’t bother passing along. I just listed three of them here.

According to an article in the Arizona Republic for January 8th “Former acting Nevada U.S. Attorney Steven Myhre, who led the prosecution had urged the judge in a December 29 motion to allow his office to retry the case. Prosecutors said Bundy conspired with militia groups and anti-government protesters to block a lawful round-up of his cattle from public lands…”This is nothing more than yet another full serving of thinly veiled Federal Fertilizer (and a poor grade of it at that) to allow them to keep their jackboot on the Bundys neck.

Recently, a BLM whistleblower, Larry Wooten, I think his name is, blew the whistle on a ton of stuff the BLM had been engaged in that they shouldn’t have been, and as you can see,  concealing evidence that would help the case of those on trial seems to be a problem they have–along with other federal agencies. It might almost lead some folks to question whether they could trust their government or not! And heaven forbid that such a thought would ever occur to the public!

In light of this, the judge was forced to turn the Bundys loose. It  had become quite apparent that the plan was to railroad them.

The judge, Gloria Navarro, (no friend of the Bundys on any count) noted that “One undated BLM report described the Bundys as non-violent,”  And she noted  also, that “since the October 1 discovery deadline, when prosecutors were required to turn over all material evidence to the defense, the prosecutors turned over 3300 pages of additional documents.” So, after their deadline was past, they ended up forking over an additional 3300 pages of evidence, most of which would help the defendants. Sounds like they have been taking lessons from Hillary!

So, while the Feds didn’t win at Bunkerville back in 2014, Cliven Bundy got his cattle back. However, gentle souls that they are, the cultural Marxist Feds never forget a loss and those that handed it to them–and they came back with a vengeance.  What else is new??? But this time, although it took them awhile, it didn’t quite work–and now even more people are beginning to wake up to what the BLM and other rogue federal agencies are doing and more and more people a getting fed up and ticked off with an out-of-control federal government peopled with Deep State Swamp Creatures. And so the War goes on–and make no mistake about it–this IS a spiritual battle.  Politics really has very little to do with it.

If a few more Christians would only wake up and realize that, we might get a little more help.

Federal Fertilizer in the Bundy Ranch Standoff

by Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Most folks may not remember or be aware of it, but back in April of 2014, I did a series of ten articles on https://revisedhistory.wordpress.com about the Bundy Ranclh situation and the egregious behavior of the Bureau of Land (mis)Management. Most folks outside of the West don’t know much about the Bureau of Land Management, (BLM)–ironically with the same initials as the Black Lives Matter Leftist group. Actually, the two groups could probably be comfortably merged into one and, outside of skin color, hardly anyone would know the difference.

Having spent time in the West over tlhe years, I’ve talked to people who were forced to deal with the BLM. For the sake of charity and brevity, let’s just say that, in the West, the BLM ain’t on too many people’s top ten list of popular organizations.

At any rate, in 2014, when the Bundy Family sought to prevent the BLM from killing and/or stealing their cattle, they were accused of leading an armed rebellion against federal agents. There’s the bovine fertilizer part right there.

We have reached a point in this country  where protecting your lives and property against federal aggression  is labeled “armed rebellion.” The Soviet Union had nothing on the “land of the free.” Whether Mr. Trump will be able to do anything about this federal tyranny remains to be seen, but you have to know the Feds will stop him if they can.

Cliven Bundy and his sons and several others were arrested for the high crime of defending Bundy property, and some of them have now endured four trials either resulting in not guilty verdicts or hung juries, but the Feds would love to keep on trying them in their Kangaroo Kourts  until they eventually found a jury that would convict them of something, anything, so the federal prosecutor could carve another notch on the butt of his Federal pistol.

Thanks to evidence that has surfaced, the judge has had to, reluctantly, dismiss all charges–with prejudice–which means that these poor folks can’t be dragged into another Kangaroo Kourt for yet another go-round with the federal bloodhounds. She was forced to admit that the federal prosecutor had really screwed up in regard to evidence they seem to have forgotten to turn over which violated the due process for the Bundy’s–seems there were about 3300 pages of it. No doubt, a minor federal “oversight.”

To be continued.

 

 

 

 

About Those “Domestic Terrorists”

by Al Benson Jr.

On Friday, the 18th of April I believe it was, two politicians appeared on a show called What’s Your Point? on KSNV, which is a TV news station in Las Vegas, Nevada.  One of them was that bastion of honesty and integrity, “Honest” Harry Reid ( I exaggerate slightly here) and the other was a Republican State Senator named Dean Heller.

You’ll recall that “Honest Harry” Reid (about as honest as Honest Abe was) said that the folks out at the Bundy Ranch were nothing but a bunch of “Domestic Terrorists.” Reid may have gotten a bit of flack from the blanket statement because he went on to note that he didn’t mean Mr. Bundy and his family were domestic terrorists–just those folks that showed up to help Mr. Bundy protect his life and property from what many consider the REAL domestic terrorists, the ones operating under cover of law.

Dean Heller said he considered those that showed up to help the Bundy’s patriots, not terrorists.  However, you are forced to look at Harry Reid’s worldview.  In his twisted thinking, anyone that dares to oppose beneficent  totalitarian government in order to maintain his liberties is, automatically, a domestic terrorist. In today’s skewed political situation all who dare to even think of opposing the Obama Regime’s program for the systematic dismantling of American liberty are “domestic terrorists.” Today, in order not to be labeled as a domestic terrorist you must be willing to become a good little Marxist wannabe, carrying a sign with a big hammer and sickle on it, and loudly proclaiming that those that refused to vote for Obama are all blatant “racists.” To be opposed to Obamacare is not yet treason, but it may well be in the future, depending on what Executive Orders get signed.

So it seems that Honest Harry had a big problem with the folks that showed up to help the Bundy’s resist government aggression (oh, excuse me, I meant “assistance”). Reid said: “600 people came armed, they had practiced, they had maneuvered,…they set up snipers in strategic locations…they had automatic weapons.” Is any of this against the law–yet? The thought that such people had the ability to resist government aggression seems to have scared the daylights out of Honest Harry. That armed citizens might just resist government aggression is one reason Honest Harry and Comrade Obama want your guns.  They want no resistance to their plans to merge this country into the New World Order, and armed citizens (patriots, not terrorists) just might be tempted to resist.  As far as snipers go, well, the BLM had them out there before the militia folks did. Several folks attested to that, but, of course, Honest Harry “forgot” to mention that–besides, under cover of law, they were “legal” snipers. The militia snipers didn’t do anything illegal, but we won’t mention that.

I’ve read that about 100 or so of the militia folks remain at the Bundy Ranch because they don’t quite trust the feds to leave Mr. Bundy alone–and why should they? Situations like the one in Waco several years ago show what the feds are capable of if left to their own devices. Many people feel that all we have at this point is a breather, that the feds will return, because, like Honest Harry, they don’t get mad, they get even–and then some.

David Hathaway, writing on http://www.lewrockwell.com on April 21st has said: “The federal response will definitely come. It will likely be in three areas; two of which don’t involve the Bundy’s specifically. First, a multi-faceted attack will be made on the Bundys; second, a broad-front regulatory response against other land users will be made for the purpose of retaliation against the whole group and as a deterrent; and third, new provocateur deployments will probably be made across the West into similar situations.”

This time they’ll probably send so many people against the Bundys that it will be harder to combat them. The federal leviathan has to prevail, no matter how many people it takes. If they can be resisted then their aggressive power will be gone. And, unfortunately, most of the militia people can’t stay at the Bundy Ranch forever, so unless those that have to leave can be replaced by others, they have a problem.

Second, the feds will now engage in an open display of the class struggle technique against the ranchers in the West.  The ranchers will, in essence, become the new “Kulaks” of the American Empire–to be starved out or driven off their land. After all, Honest Harry and his buddies in Red China need the acreage for new solar farms.

And third, the feds will probably set up more situations around the West like that of the Bundy Ranch, while at the same time, pushing a PR campaign, with the aid of the compliant lapdog media, that paints all ranchers and farmers as horrid, selfish people, who want only to protect their lives and property–something that is fast becoming a “class crime” in our new leftist-oriented society.

Mr. Hathaway estimates that it will probably be in the neighborhood of around three weeks before we are treated to a federal response, as the feds work all these factors into their agenda in a way most beneficial to them and most detrimental to ordinary citizens, who, in case you haven’t yet realized it, have now become the new “enemies of the state.”

The public will be conditioned, as they were after Oklahoma City, to be afraid of the militias, to view them with fear and loathing. So get ready, folks, for the next big anti-militia campaign. It’s all coming soon, brought to you by the same folks that gave us Waco, Ruby Ridge, and Oklahoma City.

“Dirty Harry” Won’t Get Mad–He’ll Get Even!

by Al Benson Jr.

Anyone remember the Sagebrush Rebellion back in the 1970s and 80s? In thirteen Western states the federal government controlls between 30% and 75-80% of the land, depending on which state you are in.

Although I don’t always believe everything Wikipedia says, by any means, once in awhile they get it right, and awhile back http://en.wikipedia.org  said of the Sagebrush Rebellion that it was: “An extension of the older controversy of state vs. federal powers, Sagebrush Rebels wanted the federal government to give more control of federally owned Western lands to state and local authorities. This was meant to increase the growth of Western economies.” As for the current regime in Washington, the last thing in the world they are concerned about is the growth of Western economies–unless that “growth” is administered by their friends who will make sweetheart deals with countries hostile to the US, so that both hostile countries and politicians can make big bucks selling off US sovereignty and helping to destroy the middle class. That’s what Marxism/corporate fascism is really all about, and our “public servants”  today abound in it!

Even Wikipedia sort of half-heartedly recognized the Sagebrush Rebellion as, basically a states rights issue. And what has been going on at the Bundy Ranch in Nevada is the same states rights issue. But the feds, as usual, don’t plan to taking NO for an answer. They didn’t at Waco and Ruby Ridge and they won’t here. They will exert their power in any way they have to in order to show that they run things, and if they end up having to kill a bunch of people off, so what? They believe in the Marxist principle  that the end justifies the means. When they incinerated those people at Waco, including the children, it was all for their own good, right? That’s the way those people think–whatever they do has to be good and right–because, after all, they are the go(d)vernment and they know best!

Comrade Reid (aka “Dirty Harry”) had an ominous message for Mr. Bundy and his family according to http://www.foxnews.com when he said: “Well, it’s not over, we can’t have, in America, people that violate the law and just walk away from it. So it’s not over.” What he really meant was that he was ticked off because all the controversy raised by the Bundy Ranch situaton exposed his and his son’s sweet deal with a Chinese solar farm company and made him look bad. He wasn’t all that happy about that. So he and our Marxist-in-Chief and probably his “Attorney General” will have to find some way to get back at those nasty ranchers and make them pay, in spades, for daring to defy “national authority.” Fox News noted Reid’s hesitancy to speak on this issue and said: “That’s perhaps due to Reid’s  reported lobbying of the (Bureau of Land Management) to change the desert tortoise’s mapped habitat, allowing Nevada real estate mogul Harvey Whittemore to build on land near the Bundy Ranch. Last year Whittemore was convicted of making illegal campaign  contributions to Reid, and the Majority Leader’s former senior adviser was confirmed as the new head of BLM just last week.” Is this a great kountry or what?

The site http://thecommonsenseshow.com carried an article by Dave Hodges on April 14th  that noted: “China, allied with Russia, is in the process of taking over the United States, or should I say that our public officials are giving away the country to them…In my previous article, it was clearly demonstrated  that the Chinese are preparing, among other things, to assume control of supplying America’s energy needs at a cost they deem appropriate. It is a simple business proposition. They own our debt, we have defaulted and they are here to be compensated.”

Mr. Hodges continued: “The Bundy affair affirmed the fact that  Chinese are being handed control of solar energy inside the United States and that this is being facilitated by Senator Harry Reid. The takeover of American energy is being manifested on many fronts, but in particular, it is being concentrated on the takeover of the solar energy industry in the new Agenda 21 designation with the so-called ‘Solar Energy Zones’.” So there is a lot more involved here than the habitat of the desert tortoise–the UN’s Agenda 21 project is their blueprint and that bodes no good for the American public.

As if to reassert what much of this is all about http://townhall.com stated in an article on 4/14 that “Outraged over the heavy-handed tactics, about 1,000 states rights activists traveled to Mesquite (Nevada) to support Bundy. Many gun owners showed up lawfully carrying firearms, and local cowboys came riding in on horses. They were afraid they could be the next targets of  a federal government overreach, and felt it was time to take a stand.” Men, as far as you all being the next federal targets–depend on it–the federal drones have recorded who was there, and after the feds get through getting even with the Bundys, they will come looking for you, especially if you own any land they want in the “national interest.”

Sadly, this isn’t over and those governmental Marxist mentalities don’t quit. Part of our problem in this country is that we do quit and they don’t–until they get what they want–and at that point we all begin to experience what the Communists refer to as “peaceful co-existence.”

The question hasn’t arisen much, but I think it should.  Why should the federal government own so much land in so many states? Once a state has been given statehood, the land in that state should belong to that state, not to the federal government. If you have a state, anywhere, where the feds control 75% of the land in that state, is that state really a sovereign state or is it, in effect, still mostly a federal territory with the feds calling all the shots? What states rights do the people in any state have if the feds still control 75% of the real estate in their state?

This should concern Southern folks as well as Western folks. Seems to me we are all fighting the same battle. Folks in the South fought it first, but we are all fighting it now–maybe on different levels depending how much land the feds control in different states–but it’s still the same battle.  Maybe the Cowboys and the Confederates ought to get together.  We have a lot of the same problems and the same people, in many cases, are causing the problems we both experience.  Maybe it’s time for a Cowboy/Confederate Alliance.