Monday, August 15, 2016

Agenda 21, the South, and then the rest!

by Al Benson Jr.

Awhile back I talked to a man that lives just down the street from us. He has bought some property out on the bayou and when he retires he'd like to move out there, put up a little house, and do some fishing. I wish him well, but if the United Nations, our federal government, and their economic "planners" have their way (and unfortunately they usually do) it will never happen.

Their plan for this man, and for the rest of us, is not that any of us own any private property anywhere out in the country or anywhere else no matter how much we might like to. The glorious plan for all of us, unless we wake up, is a little two-by-twice apartment in some big city mega-complex along with everybody else where we are limited to traveling within the confines of the city we have been assigned to. No automobiles or pickup trucks any further than the city they assign us to because if we do anymore than that it strains the "economic sustainability" of our state, the country, and the entire world--and so we must be severely limited in everything we do (and say and think) for the environmental "good" of the entire world. If you are tempted to do a little reading (before it becomes outlawed)  check out some of the sources where you see this term "economic sustainability" on the Internet or in the "news" media and you will be looking at sources, people, articles, that have been strongly influenced by the United Nations Agenda 21 program.

You say you've never heard of that? I'm not surprised. It's not exactly a priority for the "news" people unless they are encouraging different states, cities, etc. to sign up and become part of it. Other than that they seem to "know nothing" about it. In an article this size there is no way I can give you everything. The best I can do is to try to hit a few high spots for you that will, hopefully, encourage you to start checking out just what Agenda 21 is on your own.

I started assembling a file of articles on this United Nations aberration  awhile back. Anything having to do with the United Nations concerns me because this is the group that is supposed to lead the way into the glories of One World Government for the planet. If you want to find out where the United Nations is going check out the background of a man named Alger Hiss on the Internet.

I found a very informative article on from back on March 24, 2014 which said, in part, that: "Agenda 21 is based around the idea that a world-wide system must be set up, to save the planet from humans, which are destroying it with their cars, air conditioners, refrigerators, and all around high standards of living. The planners of the Agenda want to have complete control over all the resources in the world, in order to implement 'sustainable' or 'smart' growth, which includes the reduction of the standard of living of people in first world countries. For this plan to work, people must be made to believe that a reduction of their standard of living is good, and is being done to protect the environment, preserve resources for the next generation, reduce carbon emission, prevent climate change, and other wonderful sounding goals...To achieve the environmental goals of Agenda 21, one of the actions that needs to be taken by governments throughout the world, is to move people off of their privately-owned land and into special collectively-owned communities..." Any of this sound familiar to any of you? It's little more than an updated version of the "workers paradise" they had in the Soviet Union before Communism supposedly fell--and it's all a pile of bovine fertilizer!

No private property, no land, especially no guns, (you won't need them in the city anyway) and no freedom to travel. Your car or pickup truck will have been "confiscated" for the public good because you will have no freedom to travel, actually no freedom for much of anything. Oh yes, you will be totally free to obey all the UN and federal edicts--or else! What a Kountry!!!

The article quoted above is not the only sources for this information. Writer Henry Lamb says in Agenda 21--What Is It? How Did It Get Here  that: "(Agenda 21) is a set of policy recommendations designed to reorganize global society around the principles of environmental protection,social equity, and what is called 'sustainable' economic development. At the heart of the concept of sustainable development, is the assumption that government must manage society to ensure that human activity conforms to these principles." Doesn't that sound warm and fuzzy?

Even an article in The Blaze, which I don't always agree with by any means, got this one right.  It noted that support for Agenda 21 didn't come only from the United Nations.  It also came from "wealthy donors like billionaire George Soros, whose Open Society gave ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) a $2.1 million grant in 1997 to support its local Agenda 21 Project. The financing was used to promote the project in the United States." You have to wonder how much of the UN propaganda is promoted in public schools in this country. Well, actually you don't. Just look up UNESCO on the Internet and see what they do regarding public schools in this country. You won't be pleased. I can recall seeing tons of pro-Un stuff in public school when I went, and that is a long, long time ago. I have no sane reason to suppose  the volume of it has slowed given the Marxist predilections  of our federal government.

So what does this mean for the South (and for the country as a whole for that matter)? It means that if this monstrosity ever gets enacted my friend up the street can kiss his retirement home out on the bayou goodbye. He will be informed by some federal commissar that he will be much better off living in a miniature apartment in the local ghetto with the rest of the proles. His pickup truck?  He won't need it, he won't be going much of anyplace anymore. His guns? Forget those! The entire country will be one huge "gun free zone" except for the feds and their friends in the underworld. Fishing? Don't make me laugh! Where will he fish--in the gutters of the streets in his ghetto after we've had a toad strangler? His private property out on the bayou will have been "awarded" to some apparatchik from the UN as a reward for keeping ordinary folks away from it.

Folks, maybe you ought to consider checking out some of the stuff on the Internet regarding Agenda 21. A couple good sites to start off with are  and  especially an article by Alex Newman back in May, 2013. Oh you will find some sites out there that will "laud and magnify" the United Nations and all it seeks to do,but if you are discerning you will be able to come up with some of those that tell you the real truth. And as for your Confederate flags and your "Don't Tread on Me" flags--forget those. There will be no place in the local ghetto for such things. In fact if people sit around long enough and work hard at doing nothing, there won't even be a faint memory of such things anymore--and everyone will learn to love Big Brother, whether he lives in Washington or New York, or both.

Saturday, August 06, 2016

Evolution and Spiritualism--Darwin and Wallace

by Al Benson Jr.

I can remember, years back now, hearing a preacher in West Virginia talk about evolution.  He was, as they say "agin it" and he gave some pretty fair country reasons for his position. One thing he said that I never forgot was that the theory of evolution absolves man from any accountability to God for his actions. If man is nothing more than a highly "evolved" animal then he is accountable to no one for his actions, no matter how good or evil they may be. He is just doing what "comes naturally" since he has no creator. If that's the case, you have to wonder why so many people get mad over what Hitler and Stalin did. If they are responsible to no one and to no God then how can anyone condemn their actions? The Illuminist forebears  of the perpetrators of the French Revolution were absolutely shocked at the thought that they might, somehow, be responsible for their actions.The very thought was anathema to them.

So you can see that, among those that do not care to be judged for their deeds, that the theory (and it is only a theory) of evolution would have a particular appeal.

You always hear about "Darwin's theory of evolution" but the "history" books, if such they can even be called anymore don't say much about Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace, who might well be called Darwin's alter ego.

According to an article on  Darwin and Wallace worked together on a theory they had both come up with independently. Darwin started working on his "natural selection" theory in the 1830s and kept at it for about twenty years, during which time he "corresponded briefly" with Wallace. At a certain point, Wallace decided to ask Darwin's help to publish his own ideas about evolution, so he sent Darwin a copy of his theory in 1858, which, "to Darwin's shock, nearly replicated Darwin's own." This is about where most histories stop.  There is, however, a little more information about Dr. Wallace we should all be aware of--and maybe that's why it's usually left out.

According to the informative book To The Victor Go The Myths And Monuments by Arthur R. Thompson, Spiritualism played a part in all this. Mr. Thompson notes, on page 203, that: "Spiritualism began in the U.S. and spread to Britain among the Owenites. One of England's most prominent spiritualists was Dr. Alfred Russel Wallace.  He was the co-originator with Darwin on the natural selection theory of evolution.  Wallace was also involved in socialist theory and activism. His youthful education that started him on this path included reading the works of Robert Owen and Thomas Paine. In other words, there was a socialist influence on the development of the theory of Darwin, and it was tied to spiritualism."

Ann Braude in Radical Spirits, on page 158, confirms Wallace's ties to spiritualism when she writes: "In 1876, Alfred Russel Wallace's defense of Spiritualism from the chair of the Anthropological Section of the British Association made it an issue in the transatlantic scientific community."

Mr. Thompson, in his book, made another interesting observation on page 262 where he said: "Since all Marxists profess a belief in Darwin, it is strange that people do not see through the rhetoric advocating justice for all races embodied in communist organizations' propaganda. How can Marxists advocate equality when they believe in a Darwinian system that says that all men are not equal? It becomes obvious that Marxist leaders are lying about what they stand for in order to enlist the gullible, bleeding-heart activist."

Now I am no expert on all the in's and out's of evolution. Some folks I know have probably forgotten more about it than I will ever know, but just looking at this background would make the whole proposition a little dicey for me. As a Christian I can't buy evolution because it leaves God and our responsibility to Him out. The church my wife and I attend doesn't believe it either. I realize that, among the "scientific" community that makes us anachronisms or Neanderthals or whatever. Well, that's tough. I've been called worse and I expect to be again--just don't call me late for supper!

When you add all this together--the spiritualist and socialist influence, then this becomes the shakiest of propositions. Anything with spiritualist and socialist connections does not bode well for Christians or for the Church and when you look at the fact that some form of Darwin's theory is, basically, the only theory allowed to be discussed in government schools you have to realize that the fact they are not willing to debate or discuss anything else means that this theory is the accepted socialist dogma they plan to teach your kids. That thought, alone would make me, if I still had school age children, want to secede from the public school system. So think about all of this--and more importantly, pray about it.

Sunday, July 31, 2016

"The Fix Is In"

by Al Benson Jr.

Back in January of 2015 I did an article for my other blog spot entitled "Has the Next President Already Been Chosen?" It went into the fact that the One World Government group, the Bilderbergers, had already chosen Hillary Clinton to be the next president of this country, no matter what the voters said. Their sentiments were/are not important and so the culturally Marxist agenda is for Hillary to be enthroned in the White House--no matter what. That article has gotten more viewership than any other article in the last year and a half so it must have resonated with somebody out there. If it turns out that I am wrong and Trump wins by some fluke no one will be happier than I am and in this one case I won't mind having been wrong, in fact I will be quite satisfied at having been wrong.

That's not to say that I think Mr. Trump is the perfect candidate. I am not really crazy about his vice-presidential choice, though I have to admit it's better than Newt Gingrich who was simply awful, but it's better only by degrees.

Today someone sent me a short message to the extent that Reuters had changed the numbers on a recent poll to indicate a loss of 17 points for Trump, and naturally the "news" ( I laugh whenever I use that term) media has shown a 7 point jump for Hillary. I can't verify the Reuters info at this point, so for me it's just a report, not fact yet, but it wouldn't surprise me if it turned out to be accurate. If Hillary is slated to win, no matter what, then us boobs out here in flyover country have to be psychologically prepared to accept that without too much fuss and what better way to do that than fudging on poll numbers?

At first I felt that I was almost the only one that considered that the upcoming election might be won with "creative voting" techniques. But then, it wouldn't be the first time, would it? How many voting precincts in Pennsylvania and Ohio in 2012 had their votes tallied and showed that Romney never got a single vote in their precincts? And the Republican establishment never once complained? You'd have thought in some of these precincts that there would have been at least one grumpy old man that would have voted for Romney, but, no, it didn't happen--so they tell us. Do I believe it? Do pigs fly? I wonder how many names on the voting rolls you could have found duplicated at local cemeteries. Obama was supposed to win, no matter what--and the Republican establishment went right along with it. They were, indeed, the "loyal"opposition!

Turns out, however, that I am not the only one with a suspicious mind. Today someone sent me an article from  written by Mac Slavo and entitled No One Can Stop Her...And She Knows It: "This Election Won't Be Fair"

Mr. Slavo noted, quite accurately I think,  that: "In a fair election, my best estimate is that Donald Trump would win in a landslide. But this election will not be fair, few of them are." Can't argue with him there, either. Slavo referred to the Democratic Convention and its results as "Hillary's coronation" and he said the entire dog and pony show had been "stage managed to downplay the overwhelming noise from Bernie supporters who are outraged and feel betrayed by Hillary. The entire convention  has had a certain air to it,  a quality that reveals the desperation for power,..." I guess that's as good a way of saying it as any--"a desperation for power." Hillary was told to stand down in 2008 so Obama could assume the mantle of "transparency" and now she feels it's her turn and she means to have it irregardless of anything else.

So Hillary must be allowed to win at all costs (and there will be costs). Slavo noted that even Americans who don't pay much attention to what goes on in Washington or much of anything else beyond the ball scores, have started to notice what GATT, the WTO, and NAFTA have done to their job situation and how these programs have created " entire shift into pseudo-governing structures of globalism that have eaten away at the sovereignty of the United States and devoured the prosperity of its people...And we have all been programmed to take it lying down."

And Slavo then askes: "Can anyone else see that the most rigged and stolen election of all time is shaping up? If the Democratic Party doesn't want Hillary, what makes anyone think the entire country wants anything to do with her. Before you answer that openly, make a strong educated guess about who the next president s going to be...and how many bodies she will have to climb over to get there."

Like I said, I would love to be wrong, but the Establishment has had control of all the presidential candidates since I have been alive, (and probably several before) and so they are not about to allow a maverick to get in there and upset the culturally Marxist agenda at this late point.

You have to know that, with a Hillary presidency, Christians and real patriots are going to face a time of persecution unlike anything this country has seen since the War of Northern Aggression. So get ready.  And don't sit there and think that "the rapture" will get you out of this sticky mess, because I don't believe that will happen. Christians have way too much apathy and complacency to answer for to get off that easy.

Monday, July 11, 2016

The Black Panthers--no hate crime here folks, just move along

by Al Benson Jr.

Just read an "interesting" article on  about comments made by the former header of the New Black Panther Party, Malik Shabazz, where he told a crowd in Charleston, South Carolina that it was time to "finish the mission of killing 'slave masters' and their families.'  He made these comments  at a Save the Black Church rally there. Shabazz was referring to an 1822 slave revolt started by Denmark Vessey where it was planned to kill all the whites in their beds, regardless of age or sex. Shabazz said, quite plainly that it was time to "finish" Vessey's crusade to kill whites.

I thought, as I read his inflammatory comments that, if some KKK leader in this country had advocated the killing of all blacks it would be portrayed in the media nationwide and worldwide as the hate crime of the century. Whether they actually got to do it or not would not have made any difference. The mere suggestion of it would constitute a hate crime that Washington and their prostitute press would never let us forget.

But here is this black Marxist advocating the killing of whites and the media hardly has a whimper about it. It would appear that, instead of being charged with a hate crime, Comrade Shabazz will end up getting a copy of Hillary's "Get out of jail free" card. With a Marxist administration in control of the White (Red) House does that really surprise anyone. It's all part of the Marxist class struggle program now being implemented in this country and when Hillary assumes the royal throne next year it will continue in spades!

If Sabazz said this at a Save the Black Church rally, one has to wonder exactly what kind of black churches he is endeavoring to "save." Black Liberation churches no doubt, churches that already preach Marxist dogma as Sunday morning sermons.

But the Marxists, cultural and otherwise, are nothing if not tenacious and consistent.  In Baton Rouge this past weekend New Black Panther Party leader Babu Omowale was busy urging blacks to all migrate south so they could "form their own country away from racist whitey." From the context of his remarks one would almost get the idea that "racism" existed in the North. Now wherever would he have come up with that idea? He'd better be careful he doesn't deviate from the approved script too far because we've been told for years that all the "racism" existed in the South and now here's Omowale telling his devoted followers to come south to escape from "racist whitey."

And Omowale said his followers should claim five states that should belong to the "black nation" which states are Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina. He figures that if enough blacks move in then whites will start to move out. He says "the end game is land ownership." Only problem there is that when a country is Marxist, ordinary folks are not able to own private property, only the powers that be are allowed that, and they own their property in the name of "the people." He never said who would end up owning the land, but then he probably doesn't want to deal too much with that part of it. That conversation might get a bit sticky for him so just leave it a vague generality.

I said the Marxists were consistent, and they are. This idea of a black nation in our Deep South is one that was floated by the Marxists around forty or fifty years ago now. It didn't go anywhere then, but with national conditions seeming moving to the left maybe they figure it's a good time to try again. No doubt Hillary would love it! Keep your eyes open because in today's volatile situation you just never know what's going to happen. All you can be sure of at this point is that most of it won't be real good.

Friday, July 01, 2016

Reflections on the Looney Left and a Possible Sellout or Co-option

by Al Benson Jr.

Last week was a pretty fair country week. The Brits seceded from the EU and our beloved ruler in Sodom on the Potomac had a couple reversals he's rather not have had. This week has not been so good. Should have known we couldn't have two like that in a row.

The activity of those we refer to as leftists (socialists and communists and various other One World Government types) continues to defy common sense, but then they don't seem to care, as they realize our intrepid and valorous "news" media will continue to cover for them, making sure the public learns as little as possible of what they need to know.

We have been informed that, coincidentally of course, Slick Willie and Comrade Loretta Lynch met in the airport at Phoenix and sat and talked. Now folks with a little common sense might consider this as a conflict of interest, but the "news" media rushed in to assure a hopefully gullible public that all the two talked about were Clinton's grandchildren and his golf game while in Phoenix. Undoubtedly they also discussed current weather conditions in Zimbabwe and who might win the 2028 World Series, but absolutely nothing beyond that mind you! Believe that and you will look for purple cows to jump over the moon at least once a month!

I also ran across an article on  informing us that 67% of Democrats would love to see Obama stick around for a third term--something he'd love to do if he could just find a way to get by with it--but then Hillary might squawk that "it's her turn to shaft the American people and get rich doing it now" and there might be a slight rift in the Democratic Party. I find it hard to believe that even a majority of Democrats would be willing to put up with another four years of what we've had for the past eight years. The thought boggles the mind. If that's really the case, then the public schools in this country have been successful beyond their wildest dreams. They have successfully propagandized a whole generation. The problem here is that, unfortunately, many in the Republican Establishment don't feel too much different. Oh they might not want Obama around, but they're willing to take Hillary in his place--and honestly folks, what's the difference? Same shell game with different players that's all.

But something that bothered me even worse was a couple articles I checked out just today (7/1) that noted that Trump has got his possible VP list down to just two names--Newt Gingrich and Chris Christie. Now Christie wouldn't be my all time favorite by any means but Gingrich is an absolute no-no. If Trump picks him (and I did an article on this previously if you want to check back) then Trump will be picking a man that is the total antithesis of everything Trump says he stands for. Newt Gingrich is the penultimate Internationalist and One World Government advocate and Trump has to know that. He's not stupid. So what goes here? Another sell out of the frustrated and angry public who is now beginning to wake up and realize how they have been shafted by corporate fascism and its friends in Washington? Sadly, it's beginning to  look that way to me, and if that is so then after the election, no matter who wins, it will go back to "business as usual."

And another question--even if Trump is honest (and I always felt he was) what happens if something should happen to him once he gets into office that incapacitates him? Gingrich will end up being president and I  honestly wonder if that has been the plan all along, whether Trump realizes it or not. We might be able to get by with Christie for VP though it would hardly be the best of all possible worlds, but with Gingrich you know you are going to get stiffed. It's not a matter of "if" but "when."

So if Gingrich ends up as Trump's VP choice then you can kiss all the rhetoric about making America great again goodbye because that's just what it was--but maybe Trump was right--it will be great again--for the corporate fascists, just not for the folks that deserve a break. Oh Lord,   how long???

Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Southern Baptists Cave In To Cultural Marxists--so what else is new?

by Al Benson Jr.

Well, on the issue of the Southern Baptist Convention caving in to the cultural Marxists regarding the Confederate flag I can't say that I am at all happy about it, but on the other hand neither am I overly surprised. Most churches today don't even begin to recognize cultural Marxism for what it is--Marxism taken to a whole new level, and what's more, most couldn't care less. As long as they can conduct some sort of a service on Sunday morning they don't much worry about the rest of it.

The Russian Orthodox Church in the Soviet Union conducted morning services through most of the time the Communists remained in apparent power and the church hierarchy was loaded with KGB agents who made sure that the Sunday faithful were fed the Party line. They may have been thoroughly propagandized each week, but they did have their Sunday service, if such it could be called.

I often wonder, after a few of the churches we've attended over the years, how much difference there really is. When it comes to what happens out in the world most Christians are totally naive, couldn't care less, and are happy to have it so. No real responsibility for the culture that way except to complain when it gets so anti-Christian they can't stand it anymore. That they might have done something to prevent that never once occurs to them. Churches in this country have been feeding on the tainted bread of cultural Marxism since the end of the War of Northern Aggression and the task of the cultural Marxists in the seminaries and among the clergy has been to make sure they learned to like it. They have mostly succeeded.  And so the decision of the SBC regarding the Confederate battle flag comes as no real surprise. I would have been pleasantly surprised had they voted to leave it alone, but in my heart of hearts I guess I realized that would not happen.

An article in The Dallas Morning News  by Hannah Wise, on June 14th, said: "The Confederate battle flag is a symbol of racism that should not be used, Southern Baptists declared in a resolution approved Tuesday at their national meeting." The original proposal did stir some debate and prompted one call for the withdrawal of the proposal, but that wasn't going to happen. A milder version was floated later on and according to the Morning News it was "...not as strongly worded as the original and calls for Christians to 'discontinue' the flag's display." So the SBC calls for Christians to "discontinue the flag's display." Let them speak for themselves. Whatever Confederate flags I have, and I have several, will not be taken down to satisfy the whims of the cultural Marxist crowd that has as its agenda the total destruction of all Southern, Confederate, and Christian culture, and those Christians that give in to them in the name of "inclusiveness" are helping to seal the destruction of their culture and that of their children and grandchildren. And they will live to regret it someday, but by the time they wake up and realize what they have done it may well be way too late and they will discover that they have sold their heritage for a mess of socialist pottage which quite frankly, turns the stomach and sickens the soul.

I recall, years ago now, that I read where Richard Land, one of the leaders in the SBC at that time had been a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the premier One World Government organization in this country. I have often wondered if what Mr. Land did as a member of the CFR had any effect on his denominational affiliation and its program. You all be the judges of that.

I can't speak for others, but if I belonged to the SBC I would seriously think of looking for another church, one that was willing to leave the symbols of my culture alone--most especially when those symbols have their foundation in Christianity. One has to wonder, given the intellectual and historic softness so apparent in most churches today, when some cultural Marxist person or group will come along and, with a little persuasive language, get Christians to denounce the cross of Christ because of its "non-inclusiveness" in the society around it.

Friday, June 10, 2016

Southern Baptist Convention To Vote Next Week On Resolution To Condemn Confederate Battle Flag

by Al Benson Jr.

That was the headline on the article that a friend sent me just this morning (June 10th). The Southern Baptist Convention is the second largest denomination in the country, right behind the Roman Catholics.

My friend, who is Baptist, is urging all those that are Southern Baptists to contact their ministers and tell them to oppose this resolution. My friend stated that this resolution is: "straight from the NAACP handbook." I don't doubt him for a minute. He has had past experience dealing with the NAACP and realizes that trying to talk reasonably with them is an exercise in futility. They have a cultural Marxist agenda and being reasonable with those whose culture they are trying to destroy is not part of that agenda.

This resolution to have the Southern Baptists condemn the Confederate battle flag has been couched in terminology that is supposed to promote "inclusiveness and healing." Anyone who has read any of these "resolutions" before knows what a farce that is and that racial healing is the absolute last thing all of this promotes--and it was never intended to. That's basically cultural Marxist language for the church to cave in and give into the desires of a small minority of dedicated leftists. This has nothing whatever to do with the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ and with what the church is supposed to be doing.

This sort of thing has been done before in other smaller denominations where leftist radicals try to get churches to condemn a part of their heritage and to completely omit the use of words like "Confederation" because they are deemed too "hurtful" to offended parties. Once the flags or offending terms are done away with the "offended" parties move on to other churches to promote the same cultural Marxist shell game somewhere else. Sadly, most Christians never seem to get it!

So I pray that our Baptist brethren will make a point of contacting their ministers now and tell them to oppose this--as the meeting where this is to be done will be held on June 14-15. Let's hope that enough people will do this that it will make a difference.