The Battle Flag and the Gutless Wonders We Elect to Office

by Al Benson Jr.

Another big flap over the Battle Flag. We have a repeat performance like so many that have gone on before. A white youngster kills a bunch of black folks in a church in Charleston, South Carolina and is photographed on the Internet with a Confederate flag in his hand and we are off to the races once again. This so much resembles some of the false flag events that have taken place over the past couple years that I really have to wonder. In this case the Marxist crowd gets to campaign against two of their adversaries, the Confederate flag and guns.

I looked at the picture of this kid on the Internet with the flag in his hand. Pardon me for saying so, but he really looked whacked out. He held the flag like someone had just shoved it into his hand and he wasn’t quite sure what to do with it. It was a tremendous photo op for the left.

And now, in typical Yankee/Marxist “reasoning” its the fault of that nasty Confederate flag that he did what he did. If we are to believe the “news” media it was the flag that caused him to go out and kill those black folks, therefore the flag must come down immediately if not sooner  (yesterday would have been better) and on and on it goes. The folks that follow this stuff know the drill by now. Another shooting done in a gun-free zone where it was already against the law to have a firearm, and still our Marxist-in-Chief calls for more gun control. One difference was that they got this kid alive where most shooters have turned up dead in the past few years. They may have propaganda plans for him.

Now no one in their right mind condones this sort of thing, but, as usual, the media is tugging at people’s emotional heart strings to get the desired reaction. To show how much emotional manipulation is going on with this, I saw a photo of a lady carrying a sign that said “My great great grandfather fought for the Confederacy but the flag needs to come down.” The results of 150 years of government school indoctrination!

What surprised me, and it shouldn’t have, I guess, was how just about all the politicians in both of our major socialist parties lined up to denounce the flag, from the governor of South Carolina right on down the line. They couldn’t get in line fast enough to say a bad word about the Confederate flag. And I fully expect, before we are done, that just about all the presidential candidates in both socialist parties will jump on board, fighting over who will be first in line to shout for the flag to come down.

It shouldn’t have surprised me that all these politicians (no statesmen here) were really just hollow shells, gutless wonders,  who are here to collect the votes that will help them to feed at the public trough, but when a really serious issue comes along, their honor and integrity melt fast than hot butter in July. They parrot the line their handlers have made up for them about the flag only representing “racism” and slavery and they honestly expect people to embrace this garbage because they have. And many will. But anyone who takes the time and effort to look at and study these rank political types will eventually realize that they are all hat and no cattle, that they are quite selective in their condemnation, and that, above all, as I said earlier, they are only out for the votes–no matter what they have to say or do to get them.

Therefore, it shouldn’t really surprise us that the Republicans are lining up to defame the flag. After all, that’s only  a repeat performance of what they did in the 1860s, in case anyone has forgotten. “Lincoln’s Marxists” are still alive and well in Washington and most of our state capitals, North and South. They never really crawled back under their collectivist rocks, they only pretended to.

And Now I have been informed that the Marxist crowd is planning the same game for the Mississippi state flag. Sixty-four percent of the folks in Mississippi voted to keep their present state flag several years ago, but now, some of the Republican leadership there have decided that the state flag will have to go. So you folks in Mississippi had best start to get ready for what’s going on now in South Carolina, because you are going to get it in one form or another soon. The Marxist crowd in South Carolina is close enough to victory that they can smell Southern blood–and they want more!

As hard as it has been over the years (one Southerner said getting Southern folks to work together was like herding cats) the various Confederate and Southern heritage groups will, quite possibly, have to learn to work together on this issue. Various left-wing groups hate each other’s guts and yet they do manage to work together on issues critical to the leftist agenda. Maybe we should take a lesson from that. I would think that the planned cultural genocide campaign against us that is looming just over the horizon is important enough to the preservation of our future in the South that we should be willing to help one another out, at least on this one issue. Cultural genocide will kill all of our groups and our culture in general.

So just maybe we ought to consider helping one another out as we are able in this instance, because we will receive no help whatever from those gutless wonders we have put into office. They have now become the “useful idiots” of the political left.


Was the NRA Formed to Arm Ex-Slaves? Not Really

by Al Benson Jr.

Let me start off by stating that I am not the NRA’s biggest fan. When it comes to Second Amendment groups I think the Gun Owners of America takes a much firmer stand and gives you more bang for your buck. If that bothers some folks I’d suggest that they check out the Gun Owners of America and see why I feel that way.

Having said that, this is written to attempt to clear up some misconceptions about the reasons for the founding of the NRA that seem to be floating around out there and that some folks might be tempted to swallow, thus choking of what is supposed to be truth but is really clever propaganda.

I got a phone call this afternoon (August 1) from a friend in Oklahoma who told me he had heard something on a conservative radio show that really bugged him. What he heard was that the National Rifle Association had been formed by “religious leaders who wanted to protect ex-slaves from the Ku Klux Klan.” My first thought was that this is “beyond ridiculous.”

There was some commentary, back in 2008, by a Harry Alford, whose wife, Kay DeBow Alford, was the National Black Chamber of Commerce executive vice-president. Alford, who spoke in Milwaukee in 2008 said: ” I want to thank the Lord for our Constitution. I also want to thank the NRA for its legacy. The National Rifle Association was started, founded by religious leaders who wanted to protect freed slaves from the Ku Klux Klan.” Interestingly enough, the NRA’s website says nothing about any of this.

The NRA’s website says the following: “Dismayed by the lack of marksmanship shown by their troops,  Union veterans Col. William C. Church and Gen. George Wingate formed the National Rifle Association in 1871. The primary goal of the association would be to ‘promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis,’ according to a magazine editorial written by Church.”  This was published on  on June 5, 2013.

Other information given about the founding showed that former Union Army General Ambrose P. Burnside, the “hero” of Fredericksburg, was the first president of the NRA.  Burnside had worked as a gunsmith in Rhode Island and so was a logical choice for the first president. Church succeeded Burnside as president the following year. And Burnside had a legitimate interest in being part of such a group.

Union Army records indicated that Union troops  fired around 1,000 rifle shots for each Confederate soldier they hit. This fact caused Burnside to complain about his recruits during the War. He reportedly said: “Out of ten soldiers who are perfect in drill and the manuel of arms, only one knows the purpose of the sights on his gun or can hit the broadside of a barn.” So Burnside had a bonifide  concern about the marksmanship of soldiers. Some generals attributed the terrible marksmanship of Union soldiers to the use of “volley tactics” for earlier and less accurate smooth bore muskets. As the War progressed rifled muskets became more the order of the day. And so the NRA’s primary goal was to “promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis.”

However, conservatives, in many cases, seem to have a bent towards picking up what we would commonly call propaganda. David Barton, in an interview on the Glenn Beck Show, was guilty of promoting the fable that the NRA was started as a means of “…driving out he Ku Klux Klan and ensuring that blacks…could in fact locally carry a gun.” Since the NRA was originally chartered in New York state, I have to wonder what Klan groups they were driving out there.

There seems to be some of this, what shall I call it–balderdash–that blacks were much better treated in the North than they were in the South. In all honesty, racial attitudes pertaining to blacks were every bit as biased in the North as they were in the South and at that point in time, I can’t picture whites in New York being any happier with blacks carrying guns than whites in South Carolina would have been. In fact, many of the black “militias” in the South during what we euphemistically refer to as “reconstruction” were a major problem because they were a threat to white people, women and kids as well as men. Part of this was the original reason something like the Ku Klux Klan came into being in the first place. I realize a lot of people don’t want to hear that, but get a copy of Claude Bowers book The Tragic Era  and check out what some of the black militias in various Southern states were doing. It ain’t pretty.

Yet, for all of that, this was not the reason the NRA was formed. As far as our situation today, do I think black people should be able to have guns to protect their families and property? Why not? They should be able to protect their lives and property just like anyone else. When it comes to honest, hardworking people, the Second Amendment is truly colorblind. Everyone should have the right to defend what is theirs and those they love. It’s interesting that the gun control advocates seem to expend lots of energy trying to make some of the big cities into basically “gun free” zones when the majority of the population in those cities is black. Are they really working in the interest of black people? Not hardly–but they pretend they are.

All I’m saying is that, if we are going to talk about the NRA, then let’s get the history straight and not spread a lot of “feel good” fables. We have a saying in Southern and conservative circles–“you can’t make this stuff up.” Unfortunately, some are trying.

Political Liars Ignore the Fact That Gun Control Doesn’t Save Lives

By Al Benson Jr.

According to an article recently on political prevaricator Nancy Pelosi has “…urged GOP leaders on Wednesday to consider tougher gun laws in the wake of Monday’s fatal shooting at the Navy Yard in Washington, D.C.” Pelosi wants a bipartisan vote in Congress to expand background checks on potential purchasers of guns. So what else is new? These Second Amendment haters never let a crisis go to waste. I suppose she will want more restrictions on “assault weapons” because of this shooting, even though the shooter used a shotgun. She probably figures her public-school-educated colleagues won’t know the difference.

Want to know something? Her (and Obama’s) tougher gun control laws won’t amount to a bucket of warm spit as far as saving lives and they both know it. Their fondest hope is that you, the public, don’t know it.

I wonder if Comrade Pelosi has read a recent study put out by the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy which says that, basically, gun control doesn’t save lives. In fact, in these “gun free zones” where all these shooting seem to take place the absence of weapons probably contributes to the body count. But, after all, that gives the leftist politicians something to prattle about as they pretend to take the moral high ground in their attempts to dismantle the Second Amendment and silence its adherents.

In an article on for August 28th the Harvard study was noted. The article read: “Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy has just released a study of the relative effects of stringent gun laws. They found that a country like Luxembourg, which bans all guns has a murder rate that is 9 times higher than Germany, where there are 30,000 guns per 100,000 people. They also cited a study by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, which studied 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications, and it failed to find one gun control initiative that worked…In fact, in many cases it found that violence is very often lower, where guns are more readily available. The report points to a myth that guns are more easily obtained in the United States than in Europe. That is factually incorrect.” The article goes on to list several European countries where guns are available and just about all those listed have murder rates far below that of Luxembourg.

The article goes on to observe that there is a longstanding myth that Europe’s low murder rate is because of strict gun control laws. And it goes on to note that the murder rates were relatively low even before gun control laws were enacted. It also notes “…their murder rates hit an all time low, before any gun laws were passed. In fact, their violent crimes have risen since they enacted gun control laws. By comparison, violent crimes have dropped in the US over the same period.”

Toward the end of the article it is noted “And during the 1990s, gun ownership grew significantly in the United States, while violent crimes dropped by 30%. In England, after they banned handguns, the rate of violent crimes soared.”

The people who did the Harvard study were forced to admit that the results of their report were far from what they had expected to find, yet they were honest enough to put it out there anyway. Needless to say, our excuse for a “news” media have not been honest enough to report on it to any great extent because it goes against the anti-gun line they are paid to parrot. So they just ignore it where they can.

Do you think the lying politicians in Washington are aware of this report? Of course they are, but they’ll never tell. You are not supposed to know this stuff. You are supposed to have the idea that the whole country is one big version of Dodge City and that Wyatt Obama, for the good of all citizens, is trying to push his “No guns in Dodge” agenda. It’s all so much hogwash, for want of a grittier term..

I’d urge all concerned American gun owners to learn about and support organizations like the Gun Owners of America, the group that was largely responsible for deep-sixing Obama’s gun control initiatives back in April of this year.

To paraphrase an old saying: The shootings will continue until gun control prevails. What freedoms (and they are limited) you still have you probably have because there are millions of guns in millions of homes across this country and Obama and his handlers haven’t figured out a way yet to get them off you without spilling a lot of blood, some of it theirs. But not to worry, they are working on it. To them, your God-given liberties are something to be overthrown, and your allegiance to God and His Son, Jesus Christ are something they need to overcome also, because they want your allegiance to be to them. Go read Psalm 2 in the Bible.

NBC Gives Obama Indigestion—“assault rifle” not used in Newtown shooting.

By Al Benson Jr.

Everyone who knows the score realizes that Obama’s alligator tears over the twenty kids supposedly killed in Newtown, Connecticut are about as genuine as the Clinton Three Dollar Bill.

His impassioned plea to the country to get rid of “assault rifles” is becoming more and more a thinly veiled attempt at gun confiscation and those that have awakened enough to begin to smell the coffee are realizing that. They are contacting their congresspersons and letting them know they do not appreciate the tinkering that is now going on with the Second Amendment prior to the Obama/CFR orchestration of its demise.

In the midst of his gun registration/confiscation push Obama has now been confronted with the fact that NBC (that’s right folks, NBC of all people) has had to admit that there was no “assault rifle” used in the Newtown shooting, or whatever took place there.
Both and among many, many others have admitted: “When the president surrounds himself with children while giving his announcement that reasonable gun control measures are necessary, bear in mind that those ‘assault rifles’ the government is sure to be going after were not even used in the Newtown, Connecticut elementary shooting. As NBC admits in the video above, four handguns were used to carry out that despicable atrocity.” There was a video on the site this information came from which I obviously cannot reproduce here but I did watch it. There was another video also showing the police finding an “assault rifle” in the trunk of the car Lanza supposedly drove to the school, only from people who really know firearms, I was informed that this was really not an “assault rifle” but possibly a semi-automatic shotgun, not that the “news” media would ever pass that along. I’m wondering why NBC finally admitted that there were only four pistols found in the school and no assault rifle. Those who have been following this knew a month ago that four pistols had been found in the building—and no rifle. So it would seem that Obama’s weapon of choice for this shooting or whatever happened was not even involved.

Will Obama moderate his call for gun control/confiscation now that the “assault rifle” was not involved? Who’s kidding who? If he does it will be because his CFR handlers told him to back off for now. If that’s the case then it will probably take another mass shooting or two before he can bring up confiscation again—but not to worry—if another good crises should arise it will be taken advantage of and manipulated into fitting the anti-gun agenda.

It’s no secret that those who exist inside the Washington Beltway are 100% Yankee/Marxists that look down their political noses at us great unwashed hoards of barbarians out here in flyover country. All we are good for is to pay their fat salaries and provide our sons and daughters as fodder for their ever-expanding no-win wars—in the service of the United Nations.

Obama’s concern for the middle class is so much twaddle. You have to understand that, in his Marxist mentality, the middle class exists to be removed, just like the guns. From the middle class you get resistance to Marxist doctrine and so the middle class needs to be destroyed financially and every other way possible, all the while conning them into believing that he is really trying to help them. And he is trying to help them—to their demise—because they are a thorn in the side of Marxist ideologues.

Even Bill Clinton, good old Slick Willy, can see the handwriting on the wall if Obama pushes too hard too fast against gun owners. On  it was noted that Bill Clinton warned a group of Democratic donors at a private meeting Saturday that they should not underestimate “the passions that gun control stirs among many Americans.” Clinton said: “Do not patronize the passionate supporters of your opponents by looking down your nose at them. A lot of these people live in a world very different from the world lived in by the people proposing these things. I know because I came from this world.”

As much as I hate to agree with Slick Willie on anything, he has called it accurately here. Most of us in much of the South, as well as rural parts of the West and Midwest do indeed live in a different world than do those inside the Beltway and their rich friends—thank Heaven. At least in the morning we can wake up, look at the sunshine and thank God for our blessings. The scions of the Beltway want to be God. Had they been in the Garden of Eden when Eve ate the forbidden fruit they would have cheered her on, but then they are descended from the serpent anyway.

So I would recommend that all of us add to Comrade Obama’s discomfort by contacting our congresspersons and letting them know, in no uncertain terms, that we expect them to vote to support and uphold  the Second Amendment when a vote comes up, which it will if Obama has his way. Also let them know that if they decide to vote for whatever registration/confiscation plan (it’s all the same) Obama proposes that you will do all in your power to defeat them in the next election. They took an oath to support and defend the Constitution and the Second Amendment was part of that Constitution the last time I checked, though I have no doubt they will try to neutralize it while keeping the wording so folks won’t catch on. We need to let them know we will be watching what they do.

There are several county sheriffs around the country that have written letters stating that they will refuse to enforce unconstitutional gun confiscation if it is implemented. We need another 100 or so sheriffs to stand up and do the same thing. May the Lord give more the backbone to see what needs to be done and to do it.

They’re Worried About Public Safety? Hogwash! It’s All About Gun Confiscation

By Al Benson Jr.

On October 16, 1859 abolitionist/terrorist John Brown and his followers (gang) seized the Federal arsenal and armory in Harpers Ferry, Virginia. Brown’s forlorn hope, financed by some wealthy Northeasterners, who did not want to get their hands dirty while spilling Southern blood and promoting slave revolts, did not go well in Harpers Ferry. Interestingly, while supposedly trying to liberate slaves, Brown and his men were confronted by a black railroad baggage handler named Hayward Shepherd. Supposedly Shepherd was a free black. Brown’s men killed him.

The hoped-for slave revolt did not materialize, and what was worse, some of the townfolks there began shooting at Brown and his men. Local militia companies gathered, surrounding the armory and cutting off escape for Brown and his men.

If the federal government in that day had reacted like our federal government today the first thing they would have sought to do “in the name of public safety” was to disarm all the honest citizens in the town so they couldn’t shoot back at Brown’s men. Next they would have disbanded the militias, probably arresting the militia leaders and trying them for terrorism. After all, it is terrorism when you resist evil isn’t it? Our government “leaders” today seem to think it is.

After the spate of recent shootings in gun free zones the government’s answer to gun laws that are already being broken is more gun laws and eventual confiscation. Oh they will give lip service to the Second Amendment all the while they are trying to destroy it “in the name of public safety.”

There was an informative article on  for December 21, 2012 entitled “How to Ban Guns: A step by step, long term process.” Very informative article on how to effectually destroy the Second Amendment. I’m sure the total government types in Congress may have taken some pointers from it, if they didn’t already have a gun control bill sitting on Ms. Feinstein’s desk waiting for the right crisis to come along.

The ultra-liberal Mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg said, in the middle of last December, that Obama should just bypass Congress and issue an executive order on gun control, and that if he didn’t then 48,000 people would be killed with illegal guns. How does he know how many will be killed? Has someone told him?

Columnist Jan Morgan stated: “It seems to me that Bloomberg’s view of America is more like a Communist dictatorship rather than President of a Republic. Of course Bloomberg know the only way dictators can rule lives is to take away their ability to rise up and fight back against tyranny.” Obama knows that too—that’s why he and his handlers in the CFR want our guns—and for some reason they seem to feel that they need to confiscate them right now. Are they planning something they are afraid the public at large will shoot back at them for? Wouldn’t surprise me.

Another leftist mayor, Rahm Emmanuel from Chicago is also taking the same approach. He’d love all the guns all over the country to be confiscated “in the name of public safety” naturally. This from a man who is the mayor of a city that saw 500 people killed with illegal guns last year—and his solution—just ban all the legal guns. That will solve the problem. I somehow don’t think all the gang-bangers will line up in front of Mr. Emmanuel’s office next week to turn in their illegal weapons, and if the truth were known, neither does Mr. Emmanuel. But he’s not really worried about their guns—he wants yours! After all he’s the one that said “Never let a serious crisis go to waste” and his friends in Congress are implementing his advice in the wake of whatever it is that happened in Newtown, Connecticut. There have been so many conflicting stories that have come out of Newtown that who knows what happened anymore? All the supposed “shooters” in these cases either end up dead or mentally incapable of giving any testimony. Had I a suspicious mind it would make me wonder.

We’ve been told that “Newtown will be the 9/11 of gun control.” I take that to mean that there will be some sort of major push for major gun confiscation, again, “in the name of public safety.” It could be that the new gun control/registration/confiscation bill will be the “Patriot Act” of 2013.

Let’s don’t kid ourselves—this is all about doing away with the Second Amendment—gun confiscation. If the Second Amendment is gutted, then none of the other nine are safe—the Second protects the rest and our Marxist leadership realizes this—they just hope they can throw enough bovine fertilizer out there that the public doesn’t.

They figure the media has finally got the public worked up to enough of a fever pitch that they will now demand gun control and/or confiscation. Supposedly 58% of the people now favor gun control, and yet we are told that 51% do not want to see assault rifles banned. We are also told, according to  for Thursday, January 3, 2013 that “While gun control advocates are scrambling to label many of America’s rifles as ‘assault weapons’ and ban them (in order to keep us safe) the government’s own law enforcement agency stats prove that rifles are not the problem. According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.”

The real reason for the Second Amendment has never been so Uncle Harry could have the governmental “privilege” of hunting squirrels on the weekend. The real reason for the Second Amendment is so that ordinary citizens can protect themselves from tyranny from their own government. Anyone that tells you it’s all about hunting and target shooting is lying to you. People need to realize what this Amendment is really for because the government is not about to tell you. Did you ever learn what it was all about while you were in public school? I didn’t think so—neither did I!

Your Second Amendment rights (not privileges) are what protect you from a tyrannical government—and just maybe that’s why the sudden push for gun control/registration/confiscation. Would this government like to take away your guns? In a New York, Bloomberg minute they would, and will if they can get by with it. We need to contact our senators and representatives and let them know we want them to vote against any new gun control/registration/confiscation schemes that far-left members of Congress bring up. We need to begin to do whatever we can morally and legitimately do to protect our Second Amendment rights  because we will get no help from this Marxist regime in that pursuit. And once those rights are gone, you won’t get them back. Think about that. Remember, it’s not really all about “public safety.” It’s about taking your guns away.

Gun Control–it’s really people control

by Al Benson Jr.

In the most recent article on Obama and Agenda 21, one must realize that a big part of Agenda 21 is gun control. After all, how are you going to be able to herd people into UN created ghettos unless you have their guns? Some of them just might not want to surrender their private property, homes, cars and other things and might be disposed to resist. But that would prove difficult for them if they are disarmed. Hence, government wants your guns so you are unable to resist their tyranny.

The Second Amendment was never about hunting rights or target shooting rights–it was always all about being able to protect yourself and your family against a tyrannical government. That’s the sum total of the reason for it.

All those nice-sounding folks that try to tell you that gun control is all about protecting the public from crime are throwing tons of bovine fertilizer in your face and hoping you think its chocolate pudding. Gun control has never been about protecting the public from crime and it has always been about finding ways to control the public so they won’t resist government tyranny.

On July 26th Erich Pratt, Director of Communications for Gun Owners of America, an organization I recommend, wrote: “Last week’s shooting in Colorado shows us, once again, the failure of gun control. The Century 16 theaters in Aurora were ‘gun free’ zones, where citizens are prohibited from carrying weapons for self defense…If this sad scenario sounds familiar, it should–as almost every large-scale massacre in this country has occurred in an area where guns are outlawed: Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, etc. In all of these shootings, the victims were disarmed by law or regulation–yes even the one at Fort Hood. They were made mandatory victims by restrictions which never stop the bad guys from getting or using guns.” He’s right. But the restrictions were never meant to stop the bad guys from getting guns–Fast and Furious proved that. Our own government was in the process of making sure the bad guys got guns–and it was all part of a plan to make it look like the guns of ordinary citizens were ending up in Mexico so that the feds could then impose more gun control on honest citizens in the name of “peace and safety.”

You have to remember, with the Marxist clique that presently controls the government no one is considered safe and secure unless he is completely under the control of the “dictatorship of the proletariat” (government). We have to begin to understand the Marxist mindset of those the electorate put into office because they do not think like ordinary people and their “truth” is not our truth. Those dedicated to Marxist principles will never see things our way. There is no use talking to them. Marxist “truth” is all they will ever understand and anyone that dares oppose that “truth” is at war with them. This is why they wage war on the Christian Church, at least those parts of it they cannot subvert. Jesus
Christ, for them, is only a competing God and the Marxist “god”–the state, will brook no competition or opposition.

Gun owners in this country who wish to keep their firearms are considered to be at war with the current Marxist regime that wants to “protect” us all by suppressing us all. So hang onto your guns and don’t for a minute think gun control is about anything except people control.