Folks, We Are The Dirt Under Hillary’s Establishment Feet

by Al Benson Jr.

Us folks who are Hillary’s “deplorables” and “irredeemables” have also now been labeled as “fundamentally UnAmerican” which should show us what this “gracious” woman really thinks of the vast majority of us in this country. As a long-tenured Establishment Elitist, she considers us the dirt under her feet, the off-scourings of the universe.

How anyone could even remotely consider this woman to be “for” any group that is not associated with the Far Left simply beggars the imagination. Anyone who considers her to be anyplace other than in George Soros’ back pocket is simply not paying attention or does not live in the real world.

A small example–According to the book Armageddon by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, on page 51, Hillary was on record as being against drivers licenses for “undocumented people.” In other words, to be a little less politically correct, illegal aliens shouldn’t get them. That was in 2008 when she ran for president and was told to step aside and make room for Obama. Her turn would come later. But now, after eight years of rule under Comrade Obama, in which he forcefully moved this country much further to the Left, often with the complicity of a Republican-controlled Congress, Hillary senses the time is right to flip-flop on this issue. Now she thinks  “state policies” that let illegal aliens have drivers licenses are just great. No doubt she’d love to have them vote, too (the Establishment is working on that) and so would Obama and about sixty percent of Congress–not all of them Democrats. After all, why let a little thing like lack of citizenship stand in the way? When you are an advocate of doing away with national borders and creating a continent-wide mega state for all and open to all no matter what, the concept of people having to be citizens of the country they vote in is hardly worth the mention, is it?

At any rate, “Mother Hillary” has just taken yet another swipe at her disobedient children according to another WikiLeaks revelation. In an article on http://eheadlines.com written by Kristie McDonald, we are told: “In another WikiLeaks reveal, Hillary Clinton told Goldman Sachs in her October 2013 speech to executives that Americans who want to limit immigration are ‘fundamentally un-American’.” Specifically she said “I don’t care where they’re from. They have to be rejected because they are fundamentally un-American.” So, if you don’t care to have a ton of new Muslim immigrants from the Middle East overwhelm your neighborhood, with possibly some of them raping your daughters, because that’s what they do where they came from,  why you are simply “un-American.” You just don’t appreciate the “diversity” of cultures across the world when you should really be overjoyed to have these people living among you in growing numbers. The raping of your daughters is a small price you should be glad to pay  for the privilege of being able to partake of Hillary’s  (and George Soros’) plan for “diversity and multi-culturalism.”  I mean, how ungrateful can you be for not wanting this???

Hillary said in that speech,: “What I really resent about the obstructionists is they have such a narrow view of America. They see America in a way that is no longer reflective of the reality of who we are.” All I can say is–if we ever become what Hillary envisions for us–then only God can help us, for no one else will be able to.Hillary noted in her Goldman Sachs speech  that being “American is not a national identity, but rather an intellectual invention.” McDonald noted, at the end of her article that “Clinton’s declaration seems to echo a sentiment that has been expressed by mass migration enthusiast Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan” who, in my opinion, should never have been entrusted with the job he now has. Paul Ryan is living proof that socialists in both major parties can eagerly work together to fulfill  Obama’s vision to “fundamentally transform the United States” into a Third World socialist utopia along the lines of what we now see in Zimbabwe. That’s their plan for us in this country. Doesn’t it just make you drool in anticipation?

The Congressmen who voted to make Ryan the House Speaker because they naively thought he was “conservative” hardly deserve our vote of confidence, at the polls or anywhere else. What they do deserve is questions from a ticked off electorate asking these Congressmen  “Why in h— did you do that? Whose side are you on anyway?” But then, if they honestly answered that question, I’m not sure many of us would like the answer.

Have you ever wondered how many Republican congressmen think the same of us as Hillary does? The truth would hardly give you the warm fuzzies! In all honesty, we have a government that is utterly corrupt to the core–in both parties, at all levels. We have “conservative” congress critters that, at heart, are really Hillaryites–and they display that more and more daily. The voters really need to start looking at these people and what they do. If you do, I guarantee that, unless you are some sort of socialist, you won’t like it.

If the Establishment manages to steal this election from Trump, even if he wins it, then in all honesty, I have to ask–do you now begin to understand why the Confederate States seceded in 1860-61? Back then it was just the Southern folks that were the “deplorables” along with some of the Copperheads that realized what the game was.  Now it’s everyone that isn’t a raving Leftist! That fact may give you some small idea of how “reconstruction” in this country after the War of Northern Aggression really worked–and is still working.

The Klinton’s October Surprise

by Al Benson Jr.

There is an old Marxist ploy which many of us from the Cold War Era call “Condemn others, elevate yourself.” It’s a simple trick but it usually works because most people have not been taught to think well enough anymore to be able to put situations into perspective. Therefore, if you want to destroy someone’s reputation or credibility or both, you simply accuse him of the same type of thing you have been doing yourself and with the help of a compliant and prostitute media you can usually bring it off and appear to be taking the moral high ground, when actually your “high” ground is usually lower that that of the person you are trying to drag through the mud.

Such is the case with the Trump tape where Trump is heard making lewd and offensive comments about women. Now no moral person condones what he said and I think most normal people realize that, but the whole deal here is to make Trump look horrendous to the public at large right before the next presidential debate, which is tonight, October 9th.  Why they had to hold one of these things on a Sunday is beond me. They couldn’t have waited until Monday? They had to drag this thing into the Lord’s Day?

That the intent of this tape is to portray Trump as the scum of the earth there can be no doubt. And its effect has been demonstrated among the gutless wonders that parade as Republican politicians as they rush to distance themselves from Trump on so-called “moral” grounds. Most of them owe their souls to the Ruling Republican Establishment and so never wanted Trump to begin with, as his candidacy threatened to disrupt the CFR/Trilateralist agenda of their bosses for moving this country toward One World Government.

So let’s attempt to put this into perspective, looking at the situation as it pertains to Trump and the Clintons. For Trump, this is one comment he made eleven years ago. As far as the prostitute press is concerned he might as well have said it ten minutes ago, but he said it eleven years ago.  And he has apologized for it. Not that this makes any difference to the managed media. The comment is touted and the apology ignored.

So you have to ask–is he the same man now he was eleven years ago? Probably not. I know I’m not and I don’t think most folks are. Over the course of a little over a decade people’s views change and, hopefully, mature. I probably understand things now I didn’t have a clue about eleven years ago and many of us probably said things eleven years ago we probably would not say today because we know better. Lord willing, we all grow and learn, at least we should, and Trump is no exception.

So here we have something that Trump said, but it was only talk, lewd locker room talk admittedly, but still talk. Kind of like the talk we hear about Hillary being indicted for her corruption–just talk.

Yet we are now supposed to concentrate totally on Trump’s talk and totally forget all about Hillary’s thoroughgoing corruption over the decades. And we are also supposed to disremember  all things pertaining to her “significant other” and what he did to all those women whose names you all have seen in the news over the years and we are all now supposed to forget how Hillary was basically an enabler for her husband’s activities and how she tried to silence all the women that brought rape allegations against Bill. We are all supposed to forget Monica Lewinsky and the “blue dress” and all that like it never happened. None of that is to be remembered tonight at the debate–only Trump’s eleven year old statement. All Klinton indiscretions are to be forgotten–wiped out of memory as surely as Hillary’s email servers were wiped off and Trump is to be raked over the coals not only by Hillary, but also by the supposedly neutral “moderator” who, in reality, will be the second person on Hillary’s debating team.

If you ever wanted to see and exercise in Marxist doublespeak watch the debate.

And while I surely don’t, in any way, condone Trump’s comments of eleven years ago, I have to remember that they were eleven years ago and not eleven minutes ago.  I hope he fights back–because he is not the most guilty party in this Leftist-engineered scenario. The timing of this Trump tape’s release to the public is no coincidence.

Secession–the Issue That Is Not Going Away

by Al Benson Jr.

When we lived back in Lincolnian Illinois I used to bring up the subject of secession here and there. Many of the people I worked with laughed (admittedly behind my back)  because in their thinking the secession issue was only something I had wild delusions about and no one else was ever going to think seriously about it. After all, the “Civil War” settled all that didn’t it? Sorry folks, it didn’t. Nor did that Supreme Court decision in 1869 that supposedly made it illegal really settle anything either.

When the secession issue burst upon the scene again several years ago with many states sending petitions to Sodom on the Potomac stating that people in their respective states wanted to secede by the thousands, one man who had listened to what I said about it back in Illinois sent me an email and said “You’re a prophet.” Well, not hardly, nor even the son of a prophet, but it wasn’t hard to figure out that the secession sentiment, even after 150 years, was still out there. Just because some federal flunky  informed us that “secession is illegal and you can’t do that” nothing changed.

There are two variations of the secession question that are out there today, not that you’d ever realize it if you were checking your Evening Fish Wrapper or listening to the Communist Broadcasting Service or the Communist News Network. These great purveyors of all the news that fits the agenda will barely admit to one. And when they do that they always seek to portray its adherents as “gap-toothed racists” who are all second cousins to Hitler and whose granddaddies  were all Grand Dragons in the KKK. This sort of drivel is standard fare for our “news” media and most people should be able to recognize that by now, although if you were “educated” in public schools you might have somewhat of a problem figuring it all out.

One version of the secession question says that the original Confederate States that seceded do not have to do it all over again, that they are still seceded and, basically under federal occupation. In other words “reconstruction” never really ended in the South, we were just told that it did. They lied. Unfortunately many were presuaded to believe the lie. In the interim the federal government has stretched “reconstruction” so that now the entire country labors under it–they just haven’t bothered to tell anyone. A slight lapse in their “transparency” I guess.

Author Kirkpatrick Sale, formerly of Vermont but now living in South Carolina, noted in a recent column on http://www.lewrockwell.com that “There are the usual cries against secession: it’s illegal, unconstitutional, and pointless, and that it didn’t work the last time. But although there was a Supreme Court decision of shaky logic and narror jurisdiction in 1869 that some have taken to have made secession illegal, there has never been any law passed by Congress against secession and indeed the one time when such a law was proposed it was voted down.  As to what the Founding Fathers thought, the fact that they had no trouble with three states explicitly stating they would join the Union with the provision that they could withdraw anytime they wanted to suggests that originally secession was assumed to be a taken-for-granted right.” If Mr. Sale is correct in this it just may be that the folks who have said we are still seceded and don’t have to do it all over again have a valid point.

There are others, however, for one reason or another, that feel we do have to do it all over again. The purpose of this article is not to argue with them or to create even more division between the two groups, but to point out that, whichever position you take, there are lots of people out there today that view secession as about the only way left to get out from under the clutches of a tyrannical Marxist-oriented regime that seeks to run, literally, every aspect of our lives–even to how much water we can flush down our commodes when we use them or what kind of light bulbs we can use. They seek to leave no part of our daily lives untouched by their leftist beneficence (and the constant reminder that they have the power and will not hesitate to use it if we fail to tow their line).

Thus it comes as no real surprise that in Texas a Public Policy Polling survey in August of this year found that 61% of those who support Donald Trump have stated that if Hillary Clinton is enthroned in the White House (which is still the plan of the One World Government crowd) they plan to try to get Texas to secede from the Union.It would be interesting to see what percentage of the Trump supporters in other Southern states feel the same way. Personally, driving across the Texas State line from Louisiana into the Republic of Texas when we go there would not bother me all that much.

So we’ll keep our eye on the secession question that used to bring so much laughter to some folks I knew up North. It just may be that some of them are not laughing quite so much at its possibilities now as they did earlier. And after the Brexit vote in Britain–who knows? Is there the possibility of a “Texit?”

Obama to Give Internet Away, Probably to the United Nations–Congress Yawns

by Al Benson Jr.

Within the past five days I read an article by Faye Higbee on http://unclesamsmisguidedchildren.com about how the Internet as we know it will probably disappear on October 1st of this year. Ms. Higbee noted: “On October 1, Obama plans to hand over control of the Internet to a company called ICANN. What’s the big deal? It’s just a company, right? Actually, there is a strong possibility that it could result in United Nations oversight of the Internet…which may limit the freedom we currently have to use it.” This would dovetail with Obama’s efforts to limit our freedom as much as possible before he leaves office. Marxists do this kind of thing.

ICANN stands for Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. They control the mechanism or process which lets you open a domain name when you click on it. This tells your computer where to go and what to do when it gets there (unless it’s like my ancient computer and takes forever to get there).

Ms. Higbee observed that: “ICANN is a multi-national corporation that will need to have an antitrust exemption to operate.Before the hand-off, it was licensed  to US as a government connected company and allowed to be a legal monopoly. Without the US, that will have to come from somewhere else–like the United Nations (specifically the United Nations International Telecommunications Union–ITU).” Higbee has stated, and accurately so, that UN members that run totalitarian regimes are afraid of the Internet and they would dearly love to have control over it.  And our current beloved ruler would, no doubt, love to give them that control. That way when they censor certain areas of truth on the Internet he can’t be blamed for it but he can still enjoy the rather dubious benefits.

In the past few years most folks still able to think have realized that our current “news” (I have to laugh whenever I write that) media have been thoroughly co-opted by the One World Government crowd and they tell us only what they are told to. The material that is really important gets left out and all we find out is who is sleeping with who this weekend and other similar events of “world” importance. Most media people today a nothing more than paid political prostitutes, bought and paid for by the Establishment. And I say “most” because there are a few exceptions–but only a few. The rest are willing puppets on strings like most of the political class are.

Ms. Higbee has noted, and again, quite accurately, that “The UN is ‘politically correct’ AND Sharia compliant. Think about what will happen if the trolls in the UN get control of the Internet and how many websites could be severely impacted.” That’s the idea, folks. Lots of folks I know have blog spots, some with pretty large followings. They, and I, will be severely impacted too once the UN gets around to checking us all out to make sure we are politically correct (culturally Marxist) enough. It may take awhile because there are lots of us, but I am more than sure it will be one of the main items on their “to do” list.

Interestingly enough, it seems that there might be a solution to this Obama-driven dilemma. There are two bills now in Congress, one in the Senate and the other in the House that would prevent this from happening, both called the Protecting Internet Freedom Act. The Senate version is S. 3034  and the House version is H. R. 5418.

Both were introduced in June of this year, but there has been almost no action on either one and they only have a small handful of co-sponsors. Which means that, basically, Congress couldn’t care less whether our Internet freedom is lost or not. I’m told the bills are “in committee” so far. There must be a really lengthy debate going on over them if they’ve been there since June–or does the committee they are in just plan on sitting on them until the September 30th deadline has passed and then claiming they are academic and so why bother? And people wonder why Congress has only a 6% approval rating! Might I suggest that low rating is because people are beginning to wake up to the fact the Congress does lots of things it shouldn’t and not much of what it should.

I mailed letters to my two senators and representative  just this morning (September 3rd) asking them to vote for this bill and to co-sponsor it. I would urge lots of other folks to do the same thing. And I also questioned whether the committee they are in was planning on doing anything with them or just sitting on them in the fond hope they would not hatch. Doesn’t hurt to let them know you are on to their game. If enough people do that, with elections coming up, it just might get their attention.

“Young America”

by Al Benson Jr.

Back in the mid-19th century there was a movement in this country called the Young America movement. Your history books probably seldom mentioned it, if at all. Prior to writing this I looked through several books on my shelves, checking out the indexes of many and could find no mention of it in anything I was able to check. I checked on the Internet and found only a handful of references to it that all pretty much said the same thing.

The one I will quote here is Wikipedia because it’s not all that much different than the mere handful of others I could find.

The Wikipedia article says: “The Young America Movement was an American political and cultural attitude in the mid-19th century. Inspired by European reform movements of the 1830s (such as…Young Italy and Young Hegelians), the American group was formed as a political organization in 1845 by Edward de Leon and George Henry Evans. It advocated free trade, social reform,…and support for republican, and anti-aristocratic movements abroad. It became a faction of the Democratic Party in the 1850s.” It was promoted by Senator Stephen A. Douglas and other notables of the day. It all sounds relatively harmless unless you know how to read some of this stuff and to do a little homework.

For instance, one of the “movements” that inspired it was Young Italy. Now Young Italy was a political movement founded in 1831 by Giuseppe Mazzini.  Supposedly its goal was to create a “united Italian republic through promoting a general insurrection  in the Italian reactionary states and in the lands occupied by the Austrian Empire.” According to http://www.moneyteachers.org  “Mazzini was born in France and his father was a ‘Jacobin’ (Freemason-Illuminati group that caused the French Revolution)…Even more interesting is Mazzini’s desire to create a ‘United States of Europe’ a century before the European Union came into existence. Globalism is Illuminism and Mazzini was loyal to both…” So this was one inspiration for Young America.Another was the group called Young Hegelians.  Rummaging around for into on this group I found that Karl Marx had once been involved with them http://www.cardiff.ac.uk  Enough said.

With “inspiration”  like these groups do you begin to get a bit of a vision as to where Young America might have been headed? They supposedly supported “social reform.” What exactly does that mean? Is that politically correct terminology for violent revolution?  They supported “republican and anti-aristocratic movements.” Does that mean they supported the overthrow of legitimate government that might have been ruled by kings?  And was their “republican” sentiment a cover for collectivization  and centralization? That’s a big part of what the 1848 socialist revolts in Europe were all about in countries like Germany, which was pretty decentralized. The 1848 socialist revolt there was to centralize the government so one group could control it. Three guesses as to which group that was supposed to be.

Arthur R. Thompson in his book To The Victor Go The Myths And Monuments has quite a bit to say about Young America, more than I have seen just about anywhere else. He said enough that I felt it was worth taking a brief article and dealing with it because even though it “officially” faded out sometime after the War of Northern Aggression, the mindset and worldview that promoted it is still very much with us today, just under different names.

Mr. Thompson notes on page 215 that “The Carbonari’s Young America (YA) reached its ascendancy in the late 1850s and played a key role in laying the groundwork for a future civil war. After the Civil War they faded as a visible organization, even though their ideas have never faded from the American scene, as witnessed by the Spanish-American War and the modern neoconservative movement. YA aims since the Civil War have been generally carried out by the establishment of the major political parties. In other words, the goals of YA became the established American foreign policy without being a visible movement from the Civil War  until 1921, with the formation of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), when their tactics again became obvious, even as a more visible organization than before the Civil War. By the mid-20th century there were several elite organizations promoting the YA goals, all with interlocking directorates and membership.” That sort of brings us up to where we are today. Which brings up again the question I asked in a recent article–who controls many of these groups from behind the scenes?

A few years ago I had a friend up in Arkansas (now deceased) who knew a man that used to work at flying some of these big government and establishment people around from place to place. He told my friend once that the people that really run this country are way behind the scenes and the ones you think run it are nothing more than their mouthpieces, paid political shills, as it were.

But all this proves one thing. Ideas do have consequences and the ideas from over 150 years ago have lived on to affect our lives today and the conspiracies that were around 150 plus years ago have lived on to affect how we think and act–as they were intended to. If the evil these people promoted (and it was evil)  over 150 years ago affects our lives today then it is much more than just “ancient history.” It has become part of our everyday lives and we ignore it to our peril and to the detriment of our children and grandchildren.

Contrary to what many shrinking Christians think, I don’t believe all conspiracies are “unbeatable.” With the Lord’s help and guidance and an electorate that is willing to do the homework, and having done the homework, to fight back, there are a lot of things that could have been and still can be done. Maybe we had best pray and ask the Lord what He would have us to do rather than sitting back and thinking evil conspirators are invincible–because they are not–they are sinful human creatures like the rest of us and with the proper guidance  and effort much of their agenda can be thwarted.  The Lord told us in the Scriptures to “hate evil” and to “resist the devil.” Maybe we need to be about doing just that and a good place to begin is with serious Christian worship–and then informed action!

How About a Little Damage Control?

by Al Benson Jr.

Last week the Democratic Party  was supposedly in a shambles. The web site http://thehornnews.com had an article posted for August 2nd that said, in part, “The Democratic Party is in the middle of a leadership purge that could affect the landscape of the 2016 election. Three more top Democratic Party officials have resigned today in the wake of an embarrassing email hack.”

Ahh, but that was then and this is now.

The Democrats looked pathetically bad, with party officials being thrown under the bus with amazing regularity.

On the same say all this was happening there was also an article on http://www.1776coalition.com by Gabrielle Levy which had Trump saying “I’m afraid the election’s going to be rigged, I have to be honest,…” In light of the Clintons’ reputation I didn’t think that was an outlandish statement, but apparently the Republican Establishment did because on the Horn News for August 3rd appeared an article which was headlined “Traitors! RNC pushing Trump to quit.” This article said, again in part, “The report, from an anonymous GOP source, stated that senior party insiders are so upset and baffled by Trump’s erratic behavior that they are preparing a back-up plan for replacing him on the ballot before the November general election.” Almost sounds like something they’ve had in play for awhile.

So, in two days, we have gone from a Democratic Party in shambles over all of Hillary’s leaded emails to the Republican Establishment planning to replace Trump because of “erratic” behavior. At least this is what the “news” media is telling up. Of course how much actual truth you ever get from them is always up for grabs, but looking at this entire scenario and taking it from Democratic ruin on Monday to Trump’s possible mental condition on Wednesday, it begins to smell to me like good old fashioned damage control for Hillary. They needed something to take the spotlight off of her and to focus it somewhere else so people would, in a few days, forget all about her email indiscretions and have something else to chatter about. And in typical Marxist fashion, if they can pull this off, they will kill two birds with one stone–bury Hillary’s email problems and cut Trump’s political throat all in one fell swoop! And the prostitute press are more than willing accomplices.

Unfortunately, so is the Republican National Committee–but then, if the truth be known, they always have been. Trump was not supposed to win the nomination. One of the other 16 political shills running against him was, and the Republicans weren’t too fussy which one, although they’d rather have had a Bush or a Romney than a Rand Paul, but they’d have lived with a Rand Paul if necessary. No way can they co-exist with Trump and they have been looking for some way, any way, to deep six him since long before the Republican convention. All you have to do to realize this is to have followed their actions and comments and you could have told that the real agenda has always been “anyone but Trump.”

Just because he won the nomination didn’t change their Marxist mindsets–and please, don’t try to tell me all the Republicans are conservatives. Some are, but not many. When you talk like a conservative but vote like a Marxist, then you’re a Marxist, possibly different from the Democratic Marxists only in degree and false rhetoric.

It’s like I have said so many times before–the same leftist Council on Foreign Relations/Trilateral Commission clique in Washington and New York controls both parties at the leadership levels.  The only question we might ask, in light of recent articles  I’ve done, is who controls the CFR and the Trilateralists?  As high up as they are, they ain’t at the top of the totem pole.

So watch what goes on in the next few days. Hillary’s email problems will probably be ancient history and the Republican Establishment will attempt to find a way to replace Trump with yet another political stooge who will make sure it’s business as usual–and that Hillary wins. That’s the real name of the game.

So what will all the folks that voted for and supported Trump end up doing when they find they have no real voice at all as all this goes down?  Probably not as much as we could hope for.

Whether the Cultural Marxists Destroy Your Culture Or Not Just May Be Up To You

by Al Benson Jr.

Recently a good friend of mine in New England sent me a copy of a new book just out, written by Arthur R. Thompson, present CEO of the John Birch Society. I am still working my way through the introduction after skimming several pages here and there throughout the book.

While I think there might be a couple of areas Mr. Thompson and I might disagree about, over all, this looks to me like a book worth reading and as I go, I will probably end up doing an article or two on what he brings out.

What immediately struck me when I got the book was the title, To The Victors Go The Myths and Monuments. In light of the cultural Marxist assault on our faith, flags,  monuments and history here in the South over the past several years, especially in the last year or so, the title of the book sounded almost prophetic.

Over the years we’ve all heard the old remark that “the winners get to write the history books” and that’s true. No argument there. Problem is, that’s not as far as it goes. Not only do the winners get to write and promote their narrative of what happened, if they are vindictive enough (and the Yankee/Marxist IS a vindictive animal) they will try to change your whole culture, mindset, worldview, and not only yours, but also your children’s. If they are successful in erasing your unique culture from the minds and consciousness of your children, then your children, in a very real sense, become “their” children because they have conditioned them in regard to how they should think and reason. So most people in this situation end up losing more than they think.

The heinous onslaught against literally everything Confederate or Southern that started back in June of 2015 shocked so many Southern folks that they literally sat benumbed as it occurred, not sure what to make of it or do about it. The cultural Marxists had a field day before most Southern folks woke up. When some did awaken, they started to push back, and, all things considered, did a pretty good job for awhile. There were Confederate flag rallies and Confederate flag caravans on some major highways in the South, and Confederate flags went up all over the place. More in my area than ever I’d seen before and I have to admit they sure were pretty to look at.

However, the cultural Marxists, being if nothing else, keen students of human nature, anticipated all this. They realized that, after a certain point, their agenda would get pushback, and when it got to that point they stopped, sat down, and took a breather for the rest of the year. They knew what they were going to do. Their opposition mostly didn’t have a clue, so when the cultural Marxists backed off so did their opposition. The flags came down,  the caravans ceased, the rallies ceased, and lots of Southern folks, thinking they’d won a victory of sorts, went home and rested on their laurels. The cultural Marxists had only stopped to take a breather, not to quit. The average Southerner where he was involved at all,  went home, turned on the television and went back to sleep.

Guess what? This Spring it started all over again and if you are prone to watch the “news” on television or in what we laughingly refer to as the “newspapers” you can see, if you are perceptive at all, that this year is going to be a repeat performance of last year–only worse! The cultural Marxists she shifting into high gear again and most of the rest of us have yet to bestir ourselves. Always takes longer to get up and going on the second go-round. Takes longer to get psyched up to do it all over again, and some just never quite seem to make it. So the boob tube and the reality shows claim yet more cultural victims!

Much of this ran through my mind when I saw the title of Mr. Thompson’s new book. It was like I could hear the cultural Marxists telling us all “We’ve got you on the run now, and we WILL take down your flags, your monuments, rewrite your history, change your place names and street names, and when we get through, you won’t recognize anything anymore. Your culture and the memory of it will be erased and you will have no future because you  have allowed us to rewrite your past.”

So we need to ask ourselves–is this the legacy we want to leave our grandchildren? Only we can answer that question–and how we answer it will determine how much of what the Lord has given us we are willing to fight to preserve. So think about it. Pray about it–and do what the Lord would have you to do. And then get out and DO it!

How About “Civil War” Re-enactments With No Battle Flags?

by Al Benson Jr.

This is the weekend for the re-enactment of the tragic Battle of Gettysburg in Pennsylvania. Re-enactors come from all across the country to take part in one army or the other. However, one Pennsylvania politician does not welcome the Confederate Battle Flag. Undoubtedly there are others but this lady is creating somewhat of a hostile environment by her commentary on the flag. Southern hospitality is something that apparently does not abide in her

The lady is Rep. Vanessa Lowery Brown, a Democrat from Philadelphia and she has quite a history. According to a recent article on http://abc27.com  Brown “…recently protested a Confederate flag in a display at the state Capitol…and Gov. Tom Wolf ordered it removed. Brown says its a symbol of hatred and murder which wasn’t mentioned in the Capitol display and likely won’t be on the battlefield reenactment.” She’s right–it probably won’t be mentioned–for the simple reason that it is not true. Whether Ms. Brown realizes that or not I don’t claim to know. Brown said “If they’re not going to tell the story properly, then they should not be displayed and they should not be reenacted unless they are going to tell the truth.” Ms. Brown is a cultural Marxist, whether she even realizes it or not (though I think she does) and what her statement means in that context is that if the story is not told in a way that is compatible  with the cultural Marxist agenda then it should not be told at all or the history should simply be rewritten to fit the cultural Marxist agenda because that’s what most of these “memory hole” Marxists are really all about. Brown just makes the statement that the flag is a symbol of murder and hate. Where’s her proof for such a statement? Black soldiers fought under that flag. Were they murderers too? Ms. Brown is either woefully ignorant of the real history or she fervently hopes those who listen to her inflammatory statement are.

But then Ms. Brown has some interesting connections.  Back in September, 2013 Ms. Brown was scheduled to be the featured speaker at the Coatesville Area NAACP Diamond Anniversary Celebration. I don’t know if she got to speak or not but she was listed to so we can assume she did and we can also assume that, had she not agreed with the NAACP’s cultural Marxist program she wouldn’t have been invited.

Also back in June, 2013, according to http://www.pahouse.com Ms. Brown “…announced the hiring of John Jordan as her chief of staff for her Philadelphia constituent services office…His most recent position was the director of civic engagement for the Pennsylvania NAACP, where he spearheaded the fight against the voter ID law…” Like I said, Brown has some interesting connections and lots of them seem to spell NAACP.

In the process of all this checking, I ran across another article on http://fellowshipoftheminds.com posted on March 17, 2014 by a Dr. Eoywn. The headline for this one was Corrupt Pennsylvania officials caught in sting are all black Democrats. The article started off: “Angela Couloumbis and Craig McCoy report for The Philadelphia Inquirer, March 16, 2014, that a 3-year undercover sting operation by the Pennsylvania Attorney General’s Office captured five state officials  on tape accepting money…” The article listed the five officials, one of which was “State Rep. Vanessa Brown who took $4,000 in exchange for voting against a bill requiring  voters to show identification at the polls. Brown did vote against the bill…” Another representative got $3,500, but said she could not recall taking any bribe. I suppose the Tooth Fairy brought her the money and left it under her pillow at night. Last I read Ms. Brown was still awaiting trial in July of 2015 because she didn’t have a lawyer. Supposedly Brown had signed an agreement to plead guilty but pulled out before she was to appear in court. That bit of into is from http://www.witf.org

Folks, these are the kind of people that are out there denigrating your culture and heritage because they want to replace it with what they have to offer and what they have to offer (cultural Marxism) is not what we want. The assault on our faith, culture, history and heritage continues this year just as it did last year and we need to begin again to resist it this year and keep on resisting it. Ms. Brown displays the cultural agenda that is supposed to replace our culture and history if we give in to those people. Ask yourself–is this what you want? If not, then you need to stand up and fight back.

 

The Southern Baptists Have Had Problems For Awhile

by Al Benson Jr.

Let me start off by saying that I have several friends who are Southern Baptists and I know some Southern Baptist preachers who are good, patriotic pastors for their congregations. My comments here are not directed at them or their congregations. I realize they see some of the same problems I am addressing here as much as I do.

Last week and earlier this week (this was originally written on Sat. June 18th) I did two articles on my other blog spot http://thecopperhead.blogspot.com  about the Southern Baptist resolution to disavow and remove all Confederate battle flags. The Southern Baptists have  been holding their yearly meeting this past week and the anti-Confederate flag resolution was of many that passed by a healthy margin so I am told. The people in the Southern Baptist Convention that pushed this resolution feel that all Christians should show “solidarity” (a good Marxist term) by removing any Confederate flags they have up anywhere. I hope they don’t hold their breath! This resolution denies the legitimacy of the Cause that all Confederate soldiers fought for (which was not “racism” or slavery) and it verbally slaps in the face today anyone who has a Confederate ancestor that resisted Yankee/Marxist aggression, and that includes me. Whatever Confederate flags  I have out  (and I vary them) are going to stay out and I seriously question the “concern” of those Southern Baptists that tell me I am “racist” for keeping them out. Oh, I don’t doubt the politically correct do have a concern–but for what and who? A lot of us here in the South are really getting fed up with the “perpetually offended” who expect us to totally dismantle our Christian culture and heritage just because they claim it bothers them. If I got to the point where I started listing things in their cultures  that bother me we could really have a donnybrook.

Unfortunately, the situation with the Confederate flag seems to be a symptom of where the Southern Baptists are headed in the main. I just read an article on http://www.wnd.com  the headline for which was: Pastor to Southern Baptist Convention: Stop push for Muslim refugees.  The article stated: “The Southern Baptist Convention threw down a gauntlet at the feet of Republican nominee Donald Trump and many conservatives, adopting a resolution encouraging churches and families to welcome and adopt refugees into their churches and homes…The resolution did not specifically refer to Islam or Muslims. However, Russell Moore, the head of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Commission has been a prominent critic of Donald Trump and his proposed immigration policies…The Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention is also supporting the building of a mosque in Bernard, New Jersey.” Needless to say, some of the local residents in that area are not overly enthused about the mosque and their concern about Shariah law in their area is a legitimate one. So why is the Southern Baptist Convention even doing this? I could see some of the culturally Marxist churches such as those in the National Council of Churches supporting this because they have been making common cause with the enemies of Christ for decades now, so it would come as no surprise to see them involved. But the Southern Baptist Convention is supposed to be a “conservative” group. Or has the definition of conservatism been changed?

One Southern Baptist pastor, Carl Gallups noted: “What should the Southern Baptist Convention have done about the mosque in New Jersey? They should have stayed out of the situation altogether!  They should have left the matter up to the voice of the local people and their elected and appointed officials…” Gallups made an accurate observation when he said: “…the ERLC would be hard pressed to find anywhere in the scriptures, or elsewhere, where the early church was aligning itself with government entities and ‘interfaith coalitions’ to assist in the constructing of more pagan temples, shrines and altars to Emperor worship in the Roman Empire–in the name of ‘religious liberty’.”

Gallups also noted that this was not the first attempt by the SBC committee at supporting the building of mosques.  The WorldNewsDaily article also observed that: “Gallups also pointed to the history of the ERLC in supporting mosque construction, notably the support of the Executive Director Richard Land for building the ‘Ground Zero mosque’ in 2010.” Gallups said: “I find it very suspicious that the ERLC, just a few years ago, under Richard Land attempted the same ‘mosque building agenda’…Now, only five years later, Dr. Russell  Moore does the very same thing.” Whether he realizes it or not, Pastor Gallups is observing cultural Marxism at work and in living color. The cultural Marxists, whether in churches or out (and there are a number of them within churches) do not deviate from their agenda and their agenda is ultimately anti-Christian, so they will work to get the church, in our apostate day, to support the cutting of its own spiritual throat–all in the name of “love” naturally.

Pastor Gallups mentioned Richard Land a couple times in his comments. So who is Richard Land? Richard Land, who used to hold high positions in the Southern Baptist Convention, is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, at least they have him listed as a member as of June 18th of this year.  So why does a leading Southern Baptist belong to the CFR? There would seem to be a contradiction or at least a major conflict of interest here. A prominent Southern Baptist as a member of the premier One World Government organization in this country, a member of the leading organization that promotes One World secular government! Something smells here and it ain’t in Denmark.

Now I’ve had a few folks over the years my Dad included, who told me I had a suspicious mind, but when you start to see things like this, how can you not have a suspicious mind unless you’ve quit thinking altogether?

I also ran across another interesting article on http://www.texemarrs.com that was published back in 2007 that dealt with the Council on Foreign Relations and Christian pastors that seem to be part of that group. The article dealt with “global spirituality.” It stated, in part, “To achieve this, the Illuminti’s premier political and economic organ, the socialistic, pro-Zionist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), has elevated to membership two key operatives, two men who are at the helm of America’s most influential Christian evangelical groups. I refer to Pastor Rick Warren, Saddleback Community Church in California, and Dr. Richard Land, reigning religious potantate and poobah  of the massive Southern Baptist Convention. For the first time in the almost 100-year history of the CFR, evangelical leaders have been elevated to elite status as members of the exclusive globalist secret society.” I have often wondered about these evangelicals that end up with hundreds of churches following their agenda, whatever it happens to be at the time, and when I found out that Rick Warren was a big supporter of Obama in his first term, I knew I had been right to be suspicious. In regard to Dr. Richard Land, it turns out that he was (is) a big promoter of environmentalism.  It has been said that “Land essentially believes that Jesus died on the cross to save Mother Earth and to save human souls. Land says that the Great Commission includes the preaching of environmentalism just as much as it does the traditional John 3:16 message.”

So, has the CFR suddenly become interested in the Gospel message–or is it more interested in finding usable Christian pastors to push its “gospel” message onto unsuspecting Christian believers? It might be worthwhile and good for Southern Batist believers to start doing a little homework on Dr. Land and this One World Government organization he is part of.  If you want to read about the Council on Foreign Relaltions check out Gary Allen’s book None Dare Call It Conspiracy. It was published way back in 1976 but it is still relevant today. I understand that it is now out on the Internet and so you can check it out there for nothing, and you DO need to check it out.

Has “Civil Rights” Like “Racism” Become Just Another Code Word For Anti-White Discrimination?

by Al Benson Jr.

After observing (and commenting) on this trend for several years now, I have  been forced to draw the conclusion that what has loosely been described as “Civil Rights” has become nothing more than a Marxist vehicle for blatant discrimination against white folks. It is particularly insidious on college campuses, which many of our conservative and patriotic people spend big bucks sending their kids to–so they can be thoroughly indoctrinated in various leftist “isms” that they have spent much of their lives fighting against. We spend treasure and blood fighting against that which we realize is totally evil and then willingly hand our kids over to it for “educational” purposes and then we are shocked at the results. I would like to think that, at some point, our patriotic folks would start to “get it” but, increasingly, I am beginning to wonder if and when that will happen.

I read a brief but interesting article on http://www.truthandaction.org about a black professor who has said we need to “dismantle and demolish whitness.” The article noted that: “The leftist bias of America’s university system is a well documented problem but people often overlook our country’s community colleges when critiquing the stranglehold liberalism has on higher education.” The article raises a point we need to consider.I have talked for years on and off to folks who sent their kids to community colleges because, often not only were they less expensive, but the kids came home at night instead of existing in a dormitory situation, so parents got at least some inkling of what went on. It seems that even that possibility is becoming out of date now.

The article observed that often, professors who can’t get or hold a job at regular four-year colleges end up at community colleges. The article stated: “If you thought liberal propaganda at universities was bad, at community colleges it’s even worse-if you can believe it. Take, for instance, Portland Community College’s James Harrison who is teaching our students that whites are somehow to blame for the sky-high crime rates committed by blacks. This is delusional anti-white bigotry at its finest, and it’s being taught at American schools as fact.” Are you even mildly surprised? Parents really need to start looking at where they send their kids to be “educated.” You need to do some homework regarding the faculty and where they are at and what courses they teach. That would be the shock of a lifetime for lots of folks.

So how does the black college professor plan to “dismantle and demolish” whiteness? I’m sure he has an agenda guaranteed to radicalize the students that are forced to sit under his leftist propaganda without their parents’ knowledge. Further, will he dismantle and cease using all the white inventions that help him in the preparation of his anti-white diatribes every day? Will he quit driving an automobile because it was invented by whites, or will he quit flying  because Wilbur and Orville Wright were not black? What about the appliances in his home–his electric stove, his microwave oven, his television, his DVD player and all that other stuff invented by nasty white folks? In order to be consistent with his plan to “demolish” whiteness he really should quit using all this stuff and go back to what his illustrious ancestors used–right? Actually it doesn’t seem to quite work out that way. I know lots of black folks that constantly bemuse themselves with cell phones, phones that let them take “selfies” of themselves, and all manner of electronic  bric-a-brac, all invented by white folks or oriental folks–none of it invented by black folks. I supposed that’s “whitey’s fault” too, along with those high black crime rates. In actuality, what these folks, most of them leftists, unintentionally or otherwise, really want is all the good things whites have invented and produced–if they could just get rid of us whites in the process!

I have often wondered, who do they think will invent, or repair all this good stuff when we are gone? Ive watched countries like Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia). When they had a white government the country had surplus food to export. Admittedly the white government wasn’t perfect. No government run by sinful humans of any color is. But are the people there better off now? Since Zimbabwe became a black dictatorship (and let’s don’t kid ourselves, that’s what it is) it, they have chased just about all the white farmers out and “redistributed” the land in classic Marxist fashion, to Mugabe’s good buddies, who don’t bother farming. The country is going hungry and they can’t figure out what the problem is. I submit it shouldn’t take a rocket scientist to figure it out, but then, why bother? Lots easier to just blame the white folks for all your problems and if you can’t, or won’t work at feeding yourselves, why it has to be “whiteys’ fault” even if blacks control all the farmland, right?

Same situation starting to occur in this country in cities like Baltimore and Ferguson. How many of the places we have had riots in recently that it’s claimed are due to “white privilege” have black governments, mayors and police chiefs? How do you blame whites for the mess that is now Detroit when they have had a black government for years? Well, all you have to do is to parrot that anti-white drivel to the complaint lapdog media and they will pick it up and run with it.

When we lived up in the abolitionist paradise that was New England years ago there was one city near us that practiced what they called “urban renewal.” They condemned a whole batch of property and took it over and put up all new housing for “the poor.” It was really nice looking when they got finished with it, but unfortunately, “the poor” totally trashed it within five years and it was back to being nothing more than a more modern version of the slum they had torn down to put it up. All “whitey’s” fault I’m sure!

I can see that it will take another article to finish this–there’s just too much material to deal with in one article, but you get the picture. White folks have invented most of the modern conveniences  blacks can’t live without anymore but all their problems are are white mens faults.

It seems that most blacks have unknowingly bought into the Marxist class struggle agenda big time, at least since the start of the “Civil Rights” Movement. There is such a thing as personal responsibility and most haven’t seemed to learn that yet. There are black folks that do work hard and make a go of it and make a place for themselves in the world as Booker T. Washington advocated.  I’m not talking about them. My concern is the ones who continue to play the “Civil Rights” blame game and have, in recent years, taken it to new heights, and my concern also is with white folks who are gullible enough to buy into this Marxist twaddle. You’ve had a black Marxist president for two terms now. How much better off is the country? Please don’t all answer at once–the silence would be deafening!