Illuminists, Apostates, Spiritualists–the usual suspects–All Interlocking

by Al Benson Jr.

The title of this article should give you some idea of where we are headed. As we look at the Illuminati and its continuing influence, even down to today,  we have to note that much of their effort was (and is) directed at reaching the next generation or two and, through them, continuing to reach into the future. As evil as they were, they had a multi-generational approach to keeping their worldview, their religious faith as it were, alive and well. More Christians should take a multi-generational approach to making sure their children and grandchildren learn the truth. However, the Illuminist conspirators have taken great pains to make sure this does not happen by the way their minions have worked at neutralizing most churches with erroneous information and just plain bad doctrine. So the church ends up being neutered and what should be opposition to Illuminist efforts withers on the vine.

In his book A Theological Interpretation of American History C. Gregg Singer, once on the faculty of Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, where he served as Professor of Church History and Historical Theology, has noted: “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 becoming increasingly conservative in its outlook.” He observed that Old School Presbyterianism had begun to take a strong stand against the abolitionist position, “…not because it was opposed to slavery per se, but because of the philosophy and theology which it represented, and because they clearly saw that if this radicalism were to gain the supremacy in the national government, then there must certainly come in its wake a radical political and social program which would threaten the established order and constitutional government for the nation as a whole.” He took note of Rev. John Henley Thornwell’s commentary on this where Thornwell said: “The parties in this conflict are not merely abolitionists and slave-holders–they are atheists, socialists, communists,  red republicans, Jacobins on the one side and the friends of order and regulated freedom on the other.In one word, the world is the battleground–Christianity and atheism the combatants, and the progress of humanity is at stake.” Thornwell wrote this in 1850. The War of Northern Aggression was a decade away yet, but with amazing prescience, he saw what was coming and he recognized many of the adversaries. Rev. Benjamin Morgan Palmer called the abolitionist mindset “undeniably atheistic”  and he connected it with the French Revolution. These godly men saw the problem and recognized some of those involved, but did they grasp the fact that there was a guiding hand in back of the Jacobins, socialists, atheists and the rest that moved them all to do what they were doing in concert? Whether they did or not, it’s a question we ought to consider, for it is still applicable in our day when we look at some of the groups and individuals that perform radical acts on the contemporary scene.

We can all look at the Black Panthers, Black Lives Matter, the Southern Poverty Law Center and even the Ku Klux Klan in our day and ask the question–where does the money and direction come from for these groups to do what they do, and who behind the scenes that we never hear about gives them their marching orders? Because no matter how you try to cut the mustard, what most of these groups do is not spontaneous.  I watched so-called “anti-war” groups in action on two college campuses right after the Kent State shootings back in the early 1970s, when you had some of the most well-organized “spontaneous” demonstrations you ever saw, complete with propaganda printed in North Viet Nam for protesting American students to carry and hand out. And this stuff came to at least one of these schools by the box load because I brought a box full of it home at the time and went through it. So please don’t talk to me about “spontaneous.” I’ve been there–and “spontaneous” it ain’t!

It was no different after the War of Northern Aggression. Arthur Thompson has noted in his authoritative book To The Victor Go The Myths And Monuments that: “The practice of sending the worst sort of political radicals and members of secret societies as our representatives continued after the Civil War. These men represented the U.S. government, but not necessarily the American people.The Marxist Louis Blenker was appointed our man in Nantes, France. Alexander Asboth, who had served with Kossuth in 1848, was our man in Argentina and Uruguay…After serving as secretary of war and then attorney general under Grant, co-founder of the Order (of Skull and Bones)  Alphonso Taft was appointed U.S. minister to Austria and then Russia…(Carl) Schurz, after supporting a movement to annex Canada to the United States, became active in the anti-imperialism movement.” Makes you wonder if Schurz  was an early advocate of the present-day North American Union movement. Three of the four men mentioned here were Forty-eighters that Donnie Kennedy and I dealt with in our book Lincoln’s Marxists.  Only Alphonso Taft wasn’t–and he was co-founder of the Skull and Bones society which is still alive and flourishing today. Look up Skull and Bones on the Internet. You should find some interesting reading.

If you are able to get Mr. Thompson’s book, and I hope that many will, you will find an amazing list of people belonging to abolitionist, Spiritualist, socialist and Feminist groups mentioned and there are interlocking memberships and directorates in all these groups so that when you learn what to look for you can begin to see a pattern here of a small but influential clique of people belonging to different groups, which often seem at odds with each other, but are really not. You start to see the same names over and over again in the different groups and you cannot help but come away with the distinct impression that you really have one fairly small clique exerting tremendous influence  over many groups, and therefore many people. Such cannot be accidental or coincidental.

And this continued on into the twentieth century (and beyond).  Mr. Thompson mentioned prohibition and the  Prohibition Party, one of the founders of which was Alvan Bovay, one of the founders of the radical Republican Party.  He also noted, in passing, the Women’s Christian Temperance Union, “which was run by the lesbian Frances Willard.” Folks, I swear, you can’t make this stuff up!  In closing out this particular chapter, which majored on Leftist infiltration, Thompson noted: “A unit organized under the American Red Cross later served as a cover for American involvement  in helping to solidify Lenin’s Bolshevik  government in Russia.” I bet your history books forgot to include that one.

Those that wish to get information about Mr. Thompson’s book can contact: American Opinion Publishing, 750 N. Hickory Farm Lane, Appleton, Wisconsin 54914. Don’t think that the Illuminati is dead just because you don’t see the name floating around anymore. Rather, look at the myriad of other organizations out there today, no matter what their names, that promote anti-Christianity, One World Government, socialism, and all those agendas dear to the heart of any Illuminist.

If They Carried Both Flags Why Does the Media Only Find One “Racist?”

by Al Benson Jr.

Having followed the ethnic cleansing program of the cultural Marxists for several years it has come as no surprise that they have, again, attacked Confederate flags and symbols with much vitriol in the past six months or so. The shootings in Charleston gave them fresh impetus, a shot in the arm, if you will.

The total removal of anything “Confederate” has long been a part of their agenda, both the  ones on the street and those in board rooms in New York and Washington. Indeed, the ones on the street are little more than “useful idiots” for the ones in the board rooms. They are the cannon fodder for the revolution promoted by those who plan to remake American culture, most particularly Southern American culture, in their own image. These people are the ultimate idolators.

I have noted, for a couple decades now, how the “news” media has sought to connect the Confederate Battle flag to the Ku Klux Klan. This has been an ongoing project. This is one thought they have assiduously attempted to implant into the minds of the American public—KKK equals Confederate flag–it’s all the same, you have one you have the other, so just equate the two and don’t even bother to think about it (because beyond that they’d rather you didn’t).

Even for the media and the leftists, though, there are always some flies in the buttermilk. If you go back and follow some of the history down you begin to find it hasn’t always been that way.  This is what the anti-Southern cultural mind-benders would rather you didn’t do–follow the history down.

We’ve all seen photos of the (what passes for news) media of KKK marches, rallies, or what have you and there are always almost more Confederate flags around than there are people. Hint: this is not by accident. I saw a video tape once of a KKK parade in Northern Illinois that had two flag bearers at the front of the procession, one carrying a US flag and the other carrying a Confederate flag. The media person doing the video inadvertently focused in first on the guy carrying the US flag, and realizing he had goofed, he immediately switched and concentrated on the person carrying the Confederate flag for the rest of the video and you never saw the US flag again. This is so typical. In fact, I was surprised,  that this late in the cultural genocide game you could still see a US flag in a KKK parade. Most had been purged and replaced with Confederate flags. This was probably fifteen years or so ago.

While doing some research for another project, I happened to come across a whole batch of old photos of KKK rallies and marches from back in the 1920s and 30s. And guess what? They weren’t all in the South. One was in Washington, D.C.; another was in Ohio. I even found a picture of one in Minnesota–hardly the heart of Dixie! Turns out, if you do  a little research, you find that, in the earlier part of the 20th century the Klan was very prevalent in Ohio, Indiana and other Midwestern states, more so than in the South. I’m not saying the South didn’t have them, but they don’t seem to have had as many as the Midwest did. And somehow, I tend to doubt that all those Midwestern Klan members  were rabid and racist Southern rednecks. In fact, growing up in the North, I got to know a couple people in New England that had been Klan members in their earlier days. These people were Northerners. They had never lived anywhere near the South. They had been part of that great Northern former Klan population that no one ever mentions (or is supposed to be aware of).

One thing I noted in those old Klan photos–anytime they had a march or a parade you had more US flags on hand than you could shake a stick at. Yet this is never mentioned. Only the present day Klan (which is not nearly as big as people think it is) is ever talked about.  Only the current Klan carrying Confederate flags is ever noted–outside of thinly veiled attempts at making Nathan Bedford Forrest the chief bugaboo of the Klan–forever!

Now I realize I’m not even supposed to think of this, but, if the Confederate flag is “racist” because the Klan carried it, does that also make the US flag racist because the Klan carried it? Well? Don’t hear too many replies from the left. Of course I realize that, to the real Far Left, every flag in this country is “racist” except that of the old Soviet Union, that great leveler (with machine guns or otherwise) of society. But I do wonder why it’s okay to portray the Confederate flag as “racist” because certain groups carried it and then to ignore the fact that these same groups also carried the US flag. Maybe it’s not quite time to label the US flag racist in a major campaign yet.

There was a point in time when the KKK switched from carrying the US flag to carrying the Confederate flag. Why?

Margaret Sanger, the KKK, and a socialist worldview

By Al Benson Jr.

In the past few days I have read and heard commentary about Margaret Sanger and her ties to Planned Parenthood, the KKK, and some elusive thing called “the Southern Strategy” which, as I gather from the commentary is supposed to be some sort of a Southern agenda to eliminate black people. I probably wouldn’t have paid attention to it all that much except for the  comments about a “Southern Strategy” which is supposed to indicate some sort of Southern program for racial genocide against blacks.

As far a Margaret Sanger goes, it seems as if she was somewhat your typical run-of-the-mill leftist. Born in Corning, New York, she would hardly qualify as a Southern Belle and her politics definitely were not Southern. Wikipedia noted of her: “Already imbued with William Sanger’s (her husband) leftist politics, Margaret Sanger also threw herself into the radical politics and modernist values of pre-World War 1 Greenwich Village bohemia, where she joined the Women’s Committee of the New York Socialist party. She took part in the labor actions of the Industrial Workers of the World…” And she was involved with such noted left-wingers as John Reed, Upton Sinclair, and “Red Emma” Goldman.

As most folks know, she was one of the leading lights in the Planned Parenthood movement. In 1914 Sanger started publishing a monthly newsletter called The Woman Rebel. That promoted birth control and in which she used the slogan “No Gods, No Masters.” In that, she amply demonstrated, according to Proverbs 8:36, where she placed herself: “But he that sinneth against me wrongeth his own soul: all they that hate me love death.”

I also recently read an article by Paul Kengor from The American Spectator which was entitled: Reflections on Roe: When Margaret Sanger Spoke to the KKK. Dr. Kengor is a professor of political science and the executive director of The Center for Vision and Values at Grove City College. Dr. Kengor noted in his article that Margaret Sanger, a darling of the Left, spoke to a women’s branch of the KKK in Silver Lake, New Jersey. She even admitted this in her 1938 biography, on pages  366 and 367 according to Dr. Kengor. I didn’t get the impression she spent too much time with the KKK other than that, but she did see this speaking engagement as a means to reaching out to other “similar groups.”

It’s really surprising that the Left is so enamored of Sanger and Planned Parenthood because Comrade Sanger was really big  on racial eugenics. In other words, she was what the leftists today call a “racist.” Yet she was one of them.

Kengor had an interesting comment in his article when he said: “Progressives today dare not raise the alarming spector of Sanger’s ‘Negro Project’ or her correspondence with Dr. Clarence Gamble, one of her Negro Project collaborators.  In a remarkable December 10, 1939 letter today held in the Sanger archives at Smith College (I have a photocopy), Sanger urged Gamble: ‘We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population’.” Now this was something the KKK might have been able to go along with.

However, in regard to the KKK here being discussed we have to remember one thing. This was not the KKK supposedly founded by Nathan Bedford Forrest sometime after the “Late Unpleasantness”—that was long gone before this. And whether Bedford Forrest had anything to do with its founding is really open to question. The Klan that surfaced in the early 1900s had nothing to do with the Klan in the South after the War. This new Klan was big and most numerous in the Midwest—Illinois, Indiana, Ohio and, apparently according to Ms. Sanger’s speaking engagement with them, in New Jersey.

So, in light of all this, I wonder how you blame all this on some “Southern Strategy” when the Klan’s biggest operation area was the Midwest. Some will say, “well, the Democrats founded the Klan.” So what? You mean to tell me that there were no Democrats anywhere in the country but the South? If you go back and read your history you will find that there was lots of Democratic opposition to Lincoln in the Midwest before and during the War. You going to blame them on the South too?

And another question—if Sanger and her organization were that interested in reducing the number of blacks in the country, then why do the blacks, especially in Congress, so warmly endorse them? Why does Obama love Planned Parenthood—and how much federal money does that group get while we are trying to blame all this leftist activity on some “Southern Strategy?” Come on folks, do the homework. Don’t just buy what the commentators say, no matter where on the spectrum they seem to be coming from. Look at the contradictions and start asking the hard questions. You’ll be surprised at how quick the subject gets changed or you are branded a “racist” for even daring to raise the questions.