Remembering Sharpsburg

by Al Benson Jr.

Today, September 17th, marks the 160th anniversary of the Battle of Sharpsburg in Maryland during the War of Northern Aggression. General Lee had marched north with an army of 55,000 and ended up confronting General McClellan with an army of 87,000. The idea of Lee moving north was twofold. One was to give Virginia a little respite from the fighting that had gone on there since the war started and another was to try to win a decisive victory in the north that might have resulted in European recognition of the Confederate States.

Some have noted that Lee’s original destination was probably Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, which if he could have made it, would have put him in a good position to keep federal help from getting to Washington. At one point he had to send a force to Harpers Ferry to capture that so he would have a way to get supplies for his army from Virginia and he could not leave a federal force there on his flank.

Lee and McClellan finally collided near Sharpsburg on September 17th and fought a battle there that lasted all day, with around 12,000 Union casualties and 10,000 Confederate casualties. The battle ended around 5:30 in the afternoon, with Lee preparing his defensive line to receive another attack from McClellan the next day. That attack never came, and so the next night, Lee moved his army back toward Virginia.

I’ve read articles that said the Union won this battle. Wishful thinking! At best, the battle was a draw, and Lee only retreated after waiting for an attack from McClellan that never came. Just a few personal observations here. McClellan had 30,000 more men than Lee did and yet was still not able to defeat him. Not only that, McClellan had gotten a copy of Lee’s orders to his generals and so should have known how to use that intelligence to defeat Lee, yet he did not. So Lee, with 30,000 less men fought him to a draw.

Though the North won the war, it took overwhelming numbers of troops, many of whom were foreigners, to defeat the South. Had the numbers been somewhere near equal on both sides the results may have been dramatically different and the South may well have been able to resist Northern aggression. I never forgot the story I heard years ago about the Union soldier who asked the Confederate soldier “Why are you fighting this war anyway?” To which the Southern soldier replied “Because you’re here.”

Most Southerners didn’t own slaves and so that’s not what they fought over, but they had a bad attitude about being invaded. They didn’t like it. I realize there were people and groups that wanted North and South to fight because no matter who won they planned to put the entire country into political bondage. It was easier to do if the North won, and they are still working at it today. They have destroyed state sovereignty throughout the country and kept people asleep with their federal education establishment and now they feel they are about to put the finishing touches on their agenda. However, they realize people are starting to wake up and so they are in a big hurry to complete their task before enough of us wake up to give them serious resistance.

Actually Lincoln and the Northern Republican Establishment didn’t fight a war to abolish slavery. They fought a war to institutionalize it on the national level. Biden’s crew of internationalists are working on that as I write this. Whether they are successful or not will depend on how many people are willing to resist being slaves to the Establishment.

The Ethnic Cleansers

by Al Benson Jr.

Let’s face it, we now have a government that is at war with its own citizens. We have a thoroughly weaponized “Justice” Department that will go after any American citizen that fails to toe the official government socialist line in any area. Symbols of our history, such as Betsy Ross flags, Gadsden flags, and Confederate flags are now listed in government documents as symbols of insurrection, and domestic terrorism. So if you have a flag having to do with any of the three listed here flying on your flagpole, then our benevolent fascist regime may send someone to pay you a visit or send the FBI to confiscate your cell phone, because even though you have done nothing wrong, they just know you are up to no good. In their eyes the entire citizenry is guilty until proven innocent–if such a miracle would ever happen!

And all those 75 million people that voted for Trump must be domestic terrorists, otherwise they would all have voted for socialist Biden. Anyone who voted otherwise must be guilty of insurrection or terrorism. This is the rationale of what is running the government in our day.

The same principle holds true for those that want to erase our history. While they realize they won’t totally be able to erase it for us, they hope to accomplish that feat with our children. Part of their agenda is making sure the next generation is totally ignorant of its true history and culture, because they have their own version that they want to replace real history with. This is George Orwell’s 1984 writ large.

My friend, Jeff Paulk, from Oklahoma, recently sent a letter to one of those tasked with removing Confederate names from any and all military installations. Jeff wrote, in part, “This cultural genocide against all things Southern and Confederate has got to stop. the truth is the truth, and regardless of how hard you people try to erase it, we, the descendants of Confederate soldiers, will continue to proclaim the true accounts of history to our posterity…Those brave warrior patriots whose remains lay beneath the clods of the valley in countless unmarked graves across the land, cannot speak for themselves. These Confederate dead, consisting of black, white, Indian, Mexican, and others, fought to prevent the very mess we find ourselves living in today in this country, under a fraudulent, illegitimate, tyrannical, socialist, controlling, and oppressive overgrown centralized government.” He’s right on the money there.

Jeff continued: “There was an unwritten agreement after the War of Northern Aggression that as long as the Southerner remained loyal to the U.S., he could keep his symbols and his heroes. The South kept that bargain, by providing more military personnel, by percentage, than any other area of the country. The U.S. has broken that agreement by removing memorials and flags from National battlegrounds, and participating in the genocide of our symbols, history, and heritage. It continues that breech of promise with your participation on a committee that is removing the names of Confederate soldiers from military bases, some of whom may have been slave owners, and renaming them with the names of Union soldiers, some of whom were slave owners. What hypocrisy!”

Of course we have to understand one thing here. Hypocrisy from the left is permissible because they deal daily in it. All you have to do is look at their “news” media. Will this situation change? It all depends on how much the leftists manage to manipulate the next two elections. If they get their way it will never change because leftists never relinquish power willingly once they gain it. They will do whatever it takes to hold onto it–legally or otherwise–and otherwise doesn’t bother them in the least. It’s their bread and butter.

I do wonder what it will take for enough of the American people to wake up and realize what is being done to them. I don’t recall where I read it now, but somewhere I read the our War for Independence started out with three percent of the population in favor of it. At this point in our history, I wonder if we still have three percent of our population aware enough of our current situation to try to take some action to-do something about it. And, no, I am not advocating the overthrow of the government. We truly need the Lord’s guidance and protection in the days to come because things are not getting any better. We also need to stand up and defend our history and heritage with the truth. If enough of us were willing to do even that much it would be a big help.

More Ethnic Cleansing In Louisiana

by Al Benson Jr.

Anyone who has followed the news realizes that the attempt to obliterate Confederate history and heritage is still alive and well. Recently we have been treated to federal plans to rename any federal installation named after anyone who was a Confederate during the War of Northern Aggression. It should be obvious that the plan is to do away with anything remotely Confederate–except the slavery issue–which is the only thing they want the Old South remembered for. The fact that you also had slavery in the North is to be swept under the politically correct rug. It may leave a big lump under that rug, but that will be studiously ignored.

So it should come as no great surprise that a state national guard camp here in Louisiana, Camp Beauregard, will also be renamed next year according to https://www.thetowntalk.com There was a town meeting, either in Alexandria or nearby, where folks could come and put their two cents worth in about the name change. Not that it will make any difference. They are going to do it whether you like it or not.

What got me was the comments of a former military police officer who had been stationed there. He said that nothing (presumably anywhere) should have been named after Confederates because the South lost the war. He felt everything should be named after white or black Yankees who served in the Union armies! In other words, all monuments anywhere in the country having to do with the War of Northern Aggression should all be one gigantic testimony to the Union victory and nothing, but nothing else, should be remembered!

How’s that for an endorsement of ethnic cleansing? I know the victors get to write the “history” books, but that doesn’t mean they were right. All it means is that they were stronger than their adversaries and had a compliant “news” media on their side. It also means that the descendants of those that lost, even though they were right, have got to be vigilant about standing up and speaking the truth about what it was all about and what really happened, even if the politically correct don’t want anyone to be aware of that. And they don’t!

Those who will defend Southern history, heritage, and culture have got to keep on keeping on doing what they are doing and if they can find new ways to do that, by all means employ the new methods as long as they are ethically correct. We cannot just leave the battlefield to apostate Yankees whose major goal in life is to bury us and our history.

Did The Apostates In America Have Help?

by Al Benson Jr.

The late professor C. Gregg Singer, professor of Church History and Historical Theology at Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary noted in his book A Theological Interpretation of American History that: “To reduce secession and the (Civil) war to economic factors and to overlook the intellectual and theological forces at work, is to seriously misread the records of the era from 1850 to 1860. The admission that economic factors were at work does not involve the denial that other, and equally important forces were having a tremendous influence in the sequence of events which would ultimately lead to secession and to war. After 1830 there was a growing philosophical and theological cleavage between the North and the South. While the North was becoming increasingly subject to radical influences, the South was growing increasingly conservative in its outlook.”

Frank Conner, in his book The South Under Seige–1830-2000 has drawn much the same conclusion. He told us that “The key to understanding the current predicament in the South lies in grasping the very nature of the 19th century abolition movement–as it was shaped by the American Transcendentalists. They manipulated that movement for the purposes of waging an ideological war against the Christian South. The war of liberal North against conservative South began in the 1830s, and continues unabated to this day.” The cultural (and thereby religious) war against the South is not, I repeat, NOT over. The continued attacks on Confederate monuments in our day should amply demonstrate that.

The question then arises–why did the Transcendentalists do what they did? Were there other influences at work on them? I noted in a recent article how the sermons of abolitionist Unitarian Theodor Parker “echoed the socialists of Europe in the 1840s”. Historian Arthur R. Thompson, in his frequently quoted from book, To the Victor Go the Myths and Monuments noted that Theodor Parker’s supporters “formed a congregation in Boston and installed him as its minister. Among his flock were Louisa May Alcott, William Lloyd Garrison, Julia Ward Howe, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Samuel Gridley Howe, and William C. Neill. Depending on the source, it is claimed his congregation grew to somewhere from two to over three thousand people–quite a large congregation of ‘Christians’ who had a pastor that did not believe in Christ…Indeed, it appears that many ministers of the Unitarian variety simply used the freedom of their office and responsibility to be free enough to work for socialism and ultimately atheism by one path or another.” No doubt, by now, you recognize some of the names of socialist luminaries in Parker’s “congregation.” How many of you had to read Little Women in school? They didn’t tell you it was written by a Unitarian apostate did they? Christians were not supposed to know that. Or that the Battle Hymn of the Republic that appears in way too many Christian hymnals was written by a Unitarian apostate? Christians should know this kind of thing but mostly that are totally ignorant of it–and some get mad when you tell them.

How many know that Lincoln protege William H. Herndon was in regular communication with Theodor Parker? How many know that, according to Mr. Thompson, Walt Whitman “became known as the man who influenced Ella Reeve Bloor in her youth, on a visit to her home. When she grew up she became ‘Mother Bloor’ within the leadership of the U.S. Communist Party.” And Amos Bronson Alcott, Louisa May’s father was “influenced by the Illuminist Pestalozzi in his educational experiments…Some of the ideas of Alcott are commonplace in American schools today.”

So have we in our day been influenced by the apostasy of the 1800s? And were some of those apostates back then influenced by the Illuminism that came from Europe? You might as well ask if the sun will rise in the east tomorrow.

Apostasy, Transcendentalism, And Illuminism

by Al Benson Jr.

You can’t say that what the Unitarians were doing in this country in the early 1800s was totally unknown to people. By the early date of 1805 the Unitarians had taken over Harvard College, in what has been called “the most important intellectual event in American history–at least from the standpoint of education.”

Samuel Blumenfeld, in his book Is Public Education Necessary? has observed that: “Harvard became the Unitarian Vatican, so to speak, dispensing a religious and secular liberalism that was to have profound and enduing effects on the evolution of American cultural, moral, and social values. It was, in effect, the beginning of the long journey to the secular humanist world that now dominates American culture…It made Harvard not only the seat of liberalism, but also, by necessity, the seat of anti-Calvinism.” Blumenfeld wrote that back in the late 1970s. It’s even worse today.

Oddly enough, when it comes to apostasy, the church itself has been part of the problem. James Turner, in his book Without God Without Creed that I mentioned in an earlier article noted that some of the problems with apostasy were within the churches themselves. He observed that: “The church played a major role in softening up belief. Theologians had been too unwilling to allow God to be incomprehensible, too insistent on bringing Him within the compass of mundane human knowledge, too anxious to link belief with science, too insensitive to noncognitive ways of approaching reality–too forgetful, in short, of much of their own traditions as they tried to make God up to date…One might say that most theologians had lost faith long before any Victorian agnostics.” In other words, much of the theological leadership, most especially in the North, had come to embrace the heady doctrines of what is called : “the wisdom of the world.” They were going to “explain” God, first to themselves and then to everyone else, and what they could not explain and rationalize, to them, became the stuff of legends, superstition, mysticism, not to be trusted. If their “great minds” could not accept it then it must not have been real!

In that frame of mind they were easy candidates for Transcendentalism, which was kind of an offshoot of Unitarianism. Arthur R. Thompson in To the Victors Go the Myths and Monuments dealt with this when he wrote: “Transcendentalism was a rational, or reason-oriented philosophy seeking truth, but as a reality a transition from Christ to anti-Christ. The early influence came from Voltaire, Rousseau. and Diderot. It was then influenced by Victor Cousin, Fourier, and German Illuminism. Some of the American leaders early on, were George Ripley, an editor at the New York Tribune, William Ellery Channing, John S. Dwight, Margaret Fuller, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Theodor Parker, henry Thoreau, Bret Harte, Walt Whitman, John Greenleaf Whittier, and William Henry Channing.” You may recognize some of these names as being people whose writings you had to read while in high school. Most of them were Unitarians. So if you were like me in high school you were force-fed literature produced by Christ-denying Unitarians. Of course no one bothered to tell you what those people really were. You were just made to read their stuff. If you wondered if this was a subtle form of propaganda you would have been right.

Mr. Thompson continued: “Early adherents of Transcendentalism included Ralph Waldo Emerson and George Bancroft. They were very close to Theodore Parker. He had a disbelief in the miracles of the New Testament and said that Jesus was not the Son of God but a great teacher. This belief has been propagated by many secret societies and occult organizations, but not all. Parker began to deny the traditional teachings of Christianity as a student of German liberal theologians such as Friedrich Schleiermacher, who had tremendous influence on Illuminists , a free lover who held the same basic belief about marriage as Robert Owen, that it was an unnatural bond; …Parker went further. He compares Scripture with the works of Newton, Descartes, the Veda and the Koran. He denied sin and the atonement. He summarized God as goodness, and ‘each man as his own Christ’. His sermons echoed the socialists of Europe in the 1840s.” Parker was both a Unitarian and an abolitionist. So apostasy in this country led people to the point where they embraced the sermons of the devotees of socialism.

Mr. Thompson also noted something I’d not heard before. He wrote: “It is interesting that the Christian socialists have used the doctrine of the second coming for their own purposes since the 1780s and a great deal of their teachings has permeated mainstream Christianity, without the Christian community realizing it, thereby neutralizing opposition to socialism.” Now that is something I have noticed over the years in evangelical churches–a soft peddling of Christian opposition to socialism and communism. A willingness to overlook what the Communists and socialists do while mildly castigating those that point out the sins of socialism and communism. Christians that attempt to point out those sins are told they are not “loving” enough to their adversaries.

So we live today with the results of the apostasy of the 1700 and 1800s and most fail to realize it, and what’s more, some get disturbed if you even mention it. They don’t want to hear it. Which all goes to show that their faith has been tampered with and many are quite comfortable with a tampered-with faith. And the socialists, communists, and Illuminists of our day love to have it so. The Christian Church is their main enemy and they have mostly neutralized it–something we all need to think about.

The Question That Never Quite Goes Away

by Al Benson Jr.

To secede or not to secede. The question often looms just in the background, just far enough off stage that you don’t quite see it, but it’s always there. And it has resurfaced in the state of Illinois–again. An article on https://thenewamerican.com for August 25th deals with it. It notes that three counties will vote next November to try to split downstate Illinois from the Chicago area. And I don’t think that’s a bad idea. We lived in Illinois for several years and noted that the liberal vote from Chicago was often enough more than sufficient to outdo the vote from the entire rest of the state on certain issues that benefitted Chicago, even though the rest of the state voted against them.

The New American article stated: “Two counties in Illinois, along with a portion of a third county, will vote this November to consider a nonbinding resolution to split the state in two–essentially making the City of Chicago its own entity while the rest of the state follows another path. Brown County in western Illinois and Hardin County in southern Illinois, along with the northeast portion of Madison County in the southwest part of the state, will vote to consider joining 24 other counties who have already voted in the last five years to study the possibility of the rest of the state breaking away from Cook County and the Chicago area to form their own state. Or, put another way, the counties would like to kick out the Chicago area, which dominates state politics. The movement to separate downstate Illinois from Chicago is still alive,” And the mentality in Chicago is light years away from the mentality in Southern Illinois!

In 2019 two state representatives sent a bill to Congress that sought congressional approval that would allow the non-portion of Illinois to become its own state. It seems Congress freaked over that and it never got out of committee. As an aside, Judge Andrew napolitano had an article on Lew Rockwell’s website for September 1 which noted that: “Nullification and secession as ideas were cast aside by the Supreme Court and by the outcome of the War Between the States. But the defeat of an idea–politically, legally or even militarily–cannot always bury the idea permanently. When an idea’s time has come, nothing can stop it.” The judge is right–when the time comes, nothing can stop it.

One of the men who sent the bill to Congress said that “My reason for signing on is that there are two different Illinois in the state. We have to have policies that allow both to compete nationwide. The idea of separating Chicago from the rest of the state isn’t new. It goes back as far as 1840. Many counties have longed for years to separate themselves from what goes on in Chicago. The New American articles notes: “In the 1970s, fourteen counties in west-central Illinois began referring to themselves as the Republic of Forgottonia as a way to protest how their needs and wishes were largely forgotten by the state legislators in Springfield…Downstate legislators as recently as 2011 asked that the rest of the state be separated from the Chicago area after Pat Quinn was elected as governor despite carrying only three counties outside the Chicago area. Downstate citizens don’t feel heard in a state government completely dominated by far-left Chicago.”

The article also notes that: “The Illinois movement to break away from liberal stronghold Chicago echoes other movements such as the Greater Idaho movement, which looks to move several Oregon counties to Idaho, a state they believe lines up with their more conservative values.” And, although it’s not mentioned much in our “history” books, one of the reasons for the South’s secession from the U.S. in 1861 was that the cultures of the two sections were very different and the theologies of the two sections had become different with the advent of Unitarianism and Transcendentalism in the North as opposed to orthodox Christianity in the South.

The New American article concludes: “While these movements don’t have what most consider to be a reasonable shot for succeeding, they are a gauge of how fed up many in rural America are feeling regarding their representation. People in rural America feel they are ignored by state and federal government–and they’re right.” Same here in north Louisiana. Liberal New Orleans gets all the action while those of us in the rest of the state get some splendid rhetoric and that’s all. It won’t stay this way forever. At some point something will have to give and those who laughed at secession will end up crying in their beer.

Things To Dispense With For Educational Freedom

by Al Benson Jr.

I can recall, thinking back years ago now, that my friend and Mentor. Pastor Ennio Cugini, had talked about what needed to be done to ensure real educational freedom in this country. He mentioned two specific things I still remember. He said that you needed to get rid of compulsory attendance laws in the various states. At one point, years ago, the state of Mississippi had done that, but somewhere along the line that got changed so that Mississippi became just like the other states.

I had never heard of anyone else that advocated that except Pastor Cugini. He was ahead of his time, as he was on many other issues. It was and still is a fact that the majority of the property tax in most states goes to find the public schools. I’ve seen some people’s property tax bills here and there and almost without exception, somewhere between two thirds and three quarters of the property tax they paid went to fund the public schools. Pastor Cugini advocated that only those who use the public schools should have to pay this and not everyone else. I agree with him–and neither of us was a big fan of the property tax.

The property tax shows you who really owns the property you live on. Fail to pay the property tax and government at some level can take “your” property away from you. The prevailing theory here is that government really owns it all and the property tax you pay is your yearly rent for the use of some of it.

But, in regard to education, I ran across an article on https://fee.org for back on April 2, 2019 by Kerry McDonald that took compulsory schooling laws to task. McDonald is a senior education editor at FEE, with an ME in education from Harvard. She wrote: “Someone asked me recently if I could wave a magic wand and do one thing to improve American education what would it be. Without hesitation, I replied: ‘Eliminate state compulsory schooling statutes. Stripping the state of its power to define and control education under a legal threat of force is a necessary step in pursuit of education freedom and parental empowerment…While it’s true that some parents may have access to government schooling alternatives, many states require private schools to receive authorization in order to operate…Homeschoolers in most states must comply with state or local reporting mandates that is some areas require homeschoolers to take standardized tests or meet state-determined curriculum requirements. Those hoops are for those lucky enough to jump out of compulsory mass schooling.'”

McDonald went into the history of compulsory attendance laws somewhat as she noted: “Indeed, between 1820 and 1840, Boston’s population more than doubled, and most of these newcomers were poor Irish Catholic immigrants escaping Ireland’s deadly potato famine. They challenged the dominant Anglo-Saxon norms of the time, prompting many state leaders to lobby for a new compulsory schooling statute that would mandate children’s attendance in state-controlled public schools.” One editor wrote in 1851 that: “Nothing can operate effectually here but stringent legislation, thoroughly carried out by an efficient police; the children must be gathered up and forced into school ,and those who resist or impede this plan, whether parents or priests, must be held accountable and punished.” Sounds like Massachusetts was operating on the premise that the children belonged to the state rather than to the parents. We have similar situations today all across the country.

And so McDonald concludes that: “The first step to restore education freedom and empower parents with choice and opportunity for their children is to eliminate compulsory schooling laws that authorize state control of education. States could still require cities and towns to provide public schools to those who want them, but the power to compel parents to send their children there would disappear. In its place, a decentralized network of educational opportunities (including, but not limited to, various types of schooling) would unfold, fueled by visionary parents, educators, and entrepreneurs. Parents, not the state, would decide how and when their children are educated…Education freedom begins when government compulsion ends.” I think she’s right on the money. After all, the kids belong to their parents as God ordained it, and not to the state as man tries to ordain it.

How About (Karl)Marxville, Texas

 

Monday, July 30, 2018
12:25 PM

By Al Benson Jr.

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

The first civil war in America continues, and part of the attack plan of the treasonous Deep State that seeks to overthrow the legitimately elected government is the changing of history. Part of that is the changing of names-city names, street names, school names and any other names the Deep State feels are not reflective of their distinctive anti-Christ theology.

And so all of our history must be changed to reflect their anti-Christian bias (which of course they claim they don’t have) and all they despise must go. So what happens if they finally manage to get rid of all they loathe and they have no enemies to fight anymore? Will Nirvana or the Golden Age suddenly have arrived? Well, not hardly, because if they ever get to where they feel they have vanquished all their adversaries on the Right they will end up turning on each other over such issues as who is not far enough to the Left and they will destroy each other. That famous saying “The revolution eats its own” is not all that inaccurate. Just look at Stalin’s efforts in the Soviet Union, or, further back, the efforts of many in the French Revolution who doubted the “doctrinal purity” of some of their brethren. After we are all gone, some of their heads will be on the chopping block, or on the guillotine.

But for now, their war of cultural extermination goes on against those of us who inhabit Flyover Country–a region they thoroughly detest. And, for now, they have to have an issue to throw in the faces of the “great unwashed” that will exhibit their moral purity–and one issue they depend upon for that is the slavery issue.

So they parade forth in all their moral greatness, and in the form of Austin’s Equity Office, in Austin, Texas, where they have now decided, in their enlightened Illuminism, that the name of the city of Austin must be changed because Stephen Austin, the Father of Texas, once opposed an attempt by Mexico to ban slavery in the province of Texas. There are several other things they would like to change also because, whatever they are, they are all named after people who were slave owners. Everyone who understands the theology of the Left knows that, in their “bible” the ownership of slaves was the one unforgivable sin. Every other sin is forgivable except the one. The theology of the Left is okay with rape, murder, robbery, lying, cheating–all these are Leftist virtues–if done for causes that advance their agenda. They have no problem with slavery if Leftist governments do it, but private ownership of slaves is beyond the pale! Private ownership of anything is beyond the pale.

The Office of Equity in Austin, Texas realizes they will get some pushback, but they defended their proposals as a noble attempt to do away with “whitewashing history.” They realize public hearings will be needed to change street names and such, but “…a name change for the city would require an election in order to strike ‘Austin’ from the city’s charter and have it replaced with a new name.” Of course if they could get a bill passed in Texas to let illegal aliens and non-citizens vote, they just might bring it off. Texans need to watch out for such movements and strongly oppose them.

If they manage to get the name of Austin changed, who knows where they will go next. Could San Antonio become the new Santa Anna City or El Paso the new Engleside (for those who don’t know, Friedrich Engels was Karl Marx’s partner in crime.

For those who don’t grasp all the fine points of this argument, you need to realize one thing. A war, civil or otherwise, on your culture and heritage is a war against you and your children. Your children have a history, culture, and heritage and those who war against you and your country are trying to take that away from them! If you don’t get anything else from this article–please understand that!

For more info on this check out https:townhall.com for July 29, 2018.

Free Muslim Immigration into Europe–the Barcelona Declaration of 1995

by Al Benson Jr

Member, Board of Directors, Confederate Society of America

Maybe I am just dense, but until I got an email from a friend up in Missouri, I had never even heard of this, or if I did it was so long ago I had totally forgotten it. It just goes to show you that the Internationalists, the One World Government crowd, is always at work 24/7 to force their agenda on people who just want to be left alone. However, unpleasant as it is for us. we have got to wake up and realize that the One World Government crowd is never going to let us or anyone else alone.

They have a Luciferian agenda to remake the entire world over into the image of their deity.  The fact that Genesis 3 tells them this will never happen matters not at all to them as their apostles continue to “prowl about as roaring lions seeking whom they may devour.” And one way they seek to devour is through ethnic and cultural genocide.

I came across a site called http://balder.org/euromed-en and the article I found was titled: Free Muslim Immigration to Europe 2. It wasn’t long but it had to do with “secretive European Union-agreements with 10 European and North African countries” and it said “The Euro Mediterranean Declaration was agreed upon by the EU, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey and Israel and comprises:  Comprehensive political partnership, among other things about:: establishing a free trade area and economic integration to begin in the year 2010,…Cultural partnership. The EU offers the populations of 9 Muslim Countries  free movement of goods, services, capital and people into the EU.”

The “Cultural Policy” in all this “must avoid the  popular distinction between ‘them’ and ‘us’…The Danish Foreign Ministry is educating us from our ‘stereotypes and prejudices’ towards Islamic culture.’ Naturally UNESCO is one of the groups involved in this propaganda campaign.

A brief comments about this turned up on http://www.abovetopsecret,com  that said “It seemingly explains the influx of Muslim immigrants into Europe, once again without mandate, it enforces multiculturalism in Europe…with financial reward to participating nations. There are many links on the subject, many citing it as a massive failure.”

Another one I came across is https://www.liveleak.com/  No date on this one but it has  posted two videos. I tried the first one and it was not available so I went to the second one and was able to pull it up. The title was The Barcelona Declaration/ Why Multiculturalism Has Failed in the EU. The man had somewhat of an accent, which doesn’t help with my hearing problem, but he gave a pretty fair explanation of much of what has happened in Europe.

My friend in Missouri gave a rather penetrating analysis of this and he connected some dots that many would not have noticed. I think he is right on the money! He said, in part, “The time of the Barcelona Declaration (1995) roughly corresponds with the beginning of the more widespread attacks on the Confederate Flag. At the time several of us were pointing out that the Flag attack was part of a larger plan that had to do with state and regional sovereignty. A resurgent South was just not part of the globalist plan. Little did I know that the Barcelona Dec was the blueprint for that plan. The Barcelona Declaration began implementation in 2010 of the beginning of  the ‘migrant’ crisis…It is similar to the ‘Open Borders’ policy promoted in the US. It started in Europe but is now in the US and the heart of the globalist plan.”

His insightful comments prove that the last place you go to for “news” is the news media because what they fail to tell you is usually  more important than the bovine fertilizer they spread in front of you as “breaking news.”